about the candidates. host: you can see karen tumulty's stories and postings at the washington post website. thanks for being here. guest: thank you. >> mitt romney, rick santorum, ha. the in wisconsin, md., and washington, d.c.. we will show you a mitt romney town hall event at the oil co. in milwaukee. in june to c-span for election night coverage with voter results, your reaction, and speakers from the candidates. it all begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. and you can also watch online at c-span.org and listen on c-span radio.

>> of the 2012 local content vehicle cities to work takes both tv and american history tv programming on the road the first weekend of each month. this past weekend featured little rock arkansas. he collected photographs and is particularly interested in the nineteenth century. the civil war, particularly. these are friends, you get that confederate that merely to other prior to the civil war, fought against each other, survived, and made friends after the war. here they are at age 100 talking about the old days. >> and talking about the japanese internment camps. a >> a wonderful book, and at surviving the of survival for them.

she talked a lot about how arts and crafts or how they kept their sanity. and they gave them something to do. and about how depression was so camps,a lot of the there was a high incidence of suicide. people make these little things to give to each other as a way to say, we support you and care about you. >> the tour continues the weekend of may 5 and 6 in oklahoma city hall. >> hit a few moments, the press conference with president obama, mexican president calderon, and canadian president harper. and the republican campaign with governor met ronnie - -mitt r -- mitt romney.

president obama, mexican president calderon and canadian president harper looked issues facing north america. at the white house, they spoke with reporters for a little less than an hour. the lin >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied by the president of mexico and the prime minister of canada. >> please have a seta. at. good afternoon, everybody. it is my pleasure to welcome a couple of great friends and partners. president calderon from mexico

and prime minister harper from canada. i have worked with them from ape c to the g-20. we remember phillipe's hospitality and remembering some very good mariachi and tequila if i am not mistaken. i can't reciprocate the music, but we are proud to welcome the awhyou here today. between us, we represent nearly 500 million citizens. from the canadian north to southern mexico. diversity of our people and culture is extraordinary. they wake up every day with similar hopes. to provide for their families,

to be safe in their communities, to give their children a better life. the daily lives of our citizens are shaped profoundly by what happens in the other two. today, we focused on our highest priority, bringing jobs to the people. our businesses have created nearly 4 million new jobs. confidence is up, the economy is getting stronger. but with lots of folks still struggling to find work and pay the bills, we are doing everything we can to speed up the recovery. that includes boosting trade with our largest economic partners. we made it a priority to increase our exports. exports to canada and mexico are going faster than the rest of the world. last year, trade in goods surpassed $1 trillion for the first time ever. it supports 2.5 million american

jobs. i want them supporting even more jobs in the future. prime minister harper led us in a very good discussion and how the countries can improve competitiveness. we continue to make our borders more efficient, more secure, faster and cheaper to travel and trade. we are expanding cooperation to create clean energy jobs and combat climate change. an area in which president calderon and mexico has been a real leader. the three nations are launching an effort to get rid of outdated regulations that stifle job creativity. our effort to cut red tape and insure smart regulations for benefits, businesses, consumers in our country of more than $100 billion. we're working to streamline coordinations with canada and mexico on a bilateral basis so

the three nations can sit down together, go through the books, and eliminate more regulations to make our economy stronger. this is important for the small and medium-sized businesses. when they start exporting, it will start with mexico and canada. it will be on track to beat my goal of doubling u.s. exports. i reiterated my commitment to immigration reform that will be good for workers and businesses. i am pleased that canada and mexico have expressed interest in joining a partnership. consultations with partners are underway on how new members can meet the high standards of this trade agreement which can be a real model for the world. i very much appreciated president calderon updating us on the next g-20 summit. the other major focus today was the security and our citizens

deserve. criminal gangs pose a threat to each of our nations, and we have responsibility to meet that threat. in mexico, president calderon has shown great courage, and we have sped up assistance to support those efforts. here in the united states, we have increased cooperation on the southern border and dedicated new resources to reducing the south-bound flow of money and guns and to reduce the demand for drugs in the united states come out which helps to fuel this crisis. to date we reaffirm our commitment to meeting this challenge together, because that is the only way we will succeed. we are teaming up with defense ministers, meeting last week as a group, and we will coordinate our efforts, especially when it comes to supporting central

america's new strategy, which will be discussed at the summit of the americans next week. i want to thank stephen and felipe for being here. that is what we have done, and it would not have been possible without the leadership that these outstanding leaders have brought to all our efforts, including our efforts today. as a result, our nations and citizens will be more secure, prosperous, and in a better position to give their children alive as they deserve. with that, let me turn it over to president calderon. >> your excellency barack

obama, right honorable stephen harper, ladies and gentlemen, of the press, misters ambassadors, friends, first of all, i would like to thank president barack obama for his extraordinary hospitality and that of his government in hosting this summit of the leaders of north america. briefly, i would also like to express on behalf of the government of mexico, the people of mexico, my family, and on my own behalf, my most sincere sympathies to the family and relatives of former

president for his lamentable loss yesterday. tomorrow we will homage to him in mexico. the reasons we are here today at this summit of the north american leaders at president barack obama and the prime minister of canada, have come through a work day that has been fruitful and fluid with an exchange of opinions and progress to the benefit of our respective citizens. i am also thankful to my two colleagues for the openness with which we have broached some very complex items on our agenda. i recognize and value their commitments to our common region. the leaders of north america share a vision of a strong, solid, safe, competitive region that is able to successfully face had it on the challenges of today. we agree that our common

challenges can only be faced together, and therein lies the importance of having a dialogue, strong dialup, among our three countries. the data the president has given us is important, that our trade has exceeded $1 trillion for the first time, and i think that is not separate from a reality that has to be underscored in this complex world full of economic problems and severe crises. our three countries are countries that are growing right now and generating jobs today, and that growth and those millions of jobs, many of them have to do precisely with the greatest trade exchanges that we have ever seen amongst these great nations. i would say the potential of

north america is such that within our own nations we have a great deal to do to make the most of these opportunities for greater exchanges amongst our peoples. today we have progressed on various subjects. we have advanced on deregulations in our countries as amongst our countries. we have progressed in harmonization of standards that facilitate trade. we have progressed in our case in the bilateral relationship, the border infrastructure, and all this has met to the benefit of canadians, mexicans, and american families. another line of the ideas i would also say that the three nations have renewed their decision to strengthen cooperation at the international level, particularly in issues as sensitive as the security of our citizens. we have reiterated the values upon which our societies were founded -- democracy, liberty, justice, the respect for human

rights, and today, the political dialogue amongst us is perhaps stronger than ever. we have renewed certain principles of our existence and of our challenges. the principle of shared responsibility, the exchange of information, and especially the strengthening of our institutions that has to be the guide of our corporation. clearly i expressed to president obama and the prime minister harper that the fight that mexico is experiencing for a safer north america also requires a strengthening of national actions, amongst other things to stop the traffic of weapons, to combat with greater strength money laundering, and of course, to reduce the demand for drugs that strengthens criminal organizations. i also expressed to the prime minister and the president that mexico recognizes the commitment they have undertaken

to progress along those lines. it is necessary to strengthen the regional security focus, and in order to do this we need to include our neighbors in central america who are facing serious problems and who need our solidarity. the three countries have agreed to establish a joint dialogue mechanism with the central american integration system in support of the efforts undertaken by central american nations to fight organized crime and in favor of regional security that benefits us all. in this meeting, we have broached the topic of the regional economy. the leaders of north america agreed the united states, canada, and mexico must continue to delve deeper into our successful economic relationship so to generate more jobs and greater well-being in all three countries.

our governments recognize that it is absolutely necessary to continue to fully comply with nafta as well as to restore the means of strengthening regional competitiveness. i'm convinced if we work together, we will become much more competitive than in many areas of the world we're competing with today. mexico's position is not a return to protectionist practices that only isolate countries, reduce competitiveness of economies, and send it investment scurrying. that is part of the problem, and part of the investment we need to see in the economy to see it delving deeper into our economies, and making most of our advantages that show our economic complementarity in terms of investment, technology, natural resources,

and only then will we be able to be successful in a world that competes forces agreed to countries have renewed our commitment that it will be even more interconnected, supporting the small and medium scale companies. mexican exports to the world represent 37% of american content. in other words, american exports are american exports, and they generate millions of jobs for the region. and that lays the need to work even more in this region on a clear trilateral deregulation. for instance, in nano materials for some vehicles. to date we also agreed to work in a coordinated fashion on

action that we will be adopting to modernize infrastructure and for border mansion. after 10 years, the last two years we have seen three new crossing areas between mexican and united states after 10 years after not having seen one new route, and the continued to work to make our border more dynamic said it is a border of opportunities. tomorrow in washington, our ministers of economy and of trade will be meeting within the framework of the free trade commission of nafta to continue to work toward achieving these objectives. today we have seen prosperity depends on a greater integration, with respect of sovereignties, and i would like to reiterate the interest of my country to join as soon as possible the tpp and its

negotiations because we know mexicans can contribute to a quick and successful conclusion of this project. if we joined forces in this region, we will see the greatest growth in the world and generate benefits for our families, our workers, and also substantially improving the competitiveness of the three countries in this context. we are convinced that the experience and participation of mexico will enrich this free trade project of a later generation that encompasses countries in asia, oceania, and america. our country has a clear commitment to economic freedom. we have the support of the private sector to enter into debt tpp. we are a nation that believes in free trade as that tool to foster growth and development, and we have acted as a result of this. i would like to thank the united states and canada for

renewing their support to mexico. as you know in june, mexico will host the summit of the leaders of the g-20. we are convinced over and above the topics we are dealing with there, the complex international environment needs to be an opportunity so the world can redefine its development model with a commitment to the well-being of peoples and care for the environment. ladies and gentlemen, in the summer, the representatives of the united states, canada, and mexico have undertaken a constructive dialogue. we have talked about the enormous challenges facing us to work together in a globalized world, and we will be working on building a new era that consolidates the right conditions for development in north america on the basis of a successful partnership as we

have seen so far today. president obama, thank you for your hospitality. >> i would like to begin by thanking you for so graciously and warmly hosting us here today. i would also like to begin by offering my sincere condolences to you, felipe, the people of mexico on the passing of your former president, who i gather had much to do with the nafta partnership we enjoy today. canada places the highest value on the french and partnership among our three countries. we form one of the world's largest trade free zones which has been of great benefit to our nation's. we are effective collaborators in the g-20, respond to the challenges of the global recession, and the stability of

the past few years. [speaking in french] our government is focused on creating jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity for all canadians. [speaking in french] i am especially pleased the united states has welcomed canada's and mexico plus interest in joining the trans- pacific partnership. we had discussions on continued operations in managing our borders, streamlining regulations, securing supply chains, and advance to clean

energy. in addition we have announced a plan for north america, prepared this and a new dialogue of security to fight transnational organized crime. finally, we discussed the agenda for the upcoming summit of the americas in colombia, and we look forward to work with the united states and mexico. once again, i look forward to continuing our discussions in cartagena. >> we have questions from each press delegation. >> thank you. after last week's argument that the supreme court, many experts believe there could be a majority to strike down the

individual mandate. if that were to happen, how would you guarantee health care to the uninsured and as americans who became uninsured as a result? also, over the weekend, mitt romney said the u.s. needs to promote free enterprise around the world. he said, "our president does not have the same feeling about american exceptional is and as we do, and some people around the world have begun to question that." my question to both of you is whether you think american influence has declined of the last four years, and, president obama, if you would like to respond to that, too? >> well, on the second part of your question, it is still primary season for the republican party. they will make a decision about who their did it will be.

it is worth noting that i first arrived on the national stage with a speech at the democratic convention that was entirely about american exceptional listen. my entire career has been a testimony to american exceptionalism, but i will cut folks some slack now because they're trying to get their nomination. with respect to health care, i am confident the supreme court will uphold law, and the reason is in accordance with precedent out there, it is constitutional. that is the opinion across experts in the ideological spectrum, including conservative appellate court justices he said this was not a

close case. it is important -- as i watch the commentary -- to remind people that this is not an abstract argument. people's lives are affected the lack of availability of health care, in affordability of health care, their ability to get health care because of pre- existing conditions. the law already in place has already given 2.5 million young people health care that otherwise would not have it. there are tens of thousands of adults with pre-existing conditions who have health care right now because of this law. parents did not have to worry about their children not being able to get health care because they can be prevented from getting health care. that is part of this law.

millions of seniors are paying less for prescription drugs because of this law. americans all across the country greater rights and protections with respect to their insurance companies and getting preventive care. that is not even speak to the 30 million people who stand to gain coverage once it is fully implemented in 2014. i think it is important and the american people understand, the justices should understand, in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure people with pre-existing conditions can get health care. so there is not only an economic element and a legal element, but a human element to this, and i hope that is not forgotten in this political

debate. ultimately, i am confident the supreme court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress. i would just remind conservative commentators that for years, what we heard, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. well, this is a good example, and i am pretty confident this court will recognize that and

not take that step. i'm sorry. you know, as i said, we are confident that this will be upheld. be confident this will upheld because it should be upheld, and that is not just my opinion. that is the opinion of a whole lot of constitutional law professors and academics and judges and lawyers who have examined this law, even if they are not particularly sympathetic to this particular piece of legislation or my presidency. >> your question was a little local for me, so i am glad the president of the united states entered it.

i would take advantage of this moment to say that after the increasing the budget line for the full insurance sixfold and after having built more than 1000 new clinics in the country, we're getting close to recent price reaching universal coverage of health care, full, free care coverage for all people up to 18 years, including cancer coverage of the 112 million mexicans, that 106 million will have the effect of health care coverage. i would to say that i would hope that one of the greatest economies in the world like the united states could follow our example in achieving this, because it was a great thing. >> i do not think you expect me to enter into the u.s. presidential election. let me just say this. this is something i think

transcends governments in canada or administrations in the united states. for canada, the united states which is and always will be our closest neighbor, our best friend. i believe american leadership is at all times great and indispensable for the world. i think of the past few years we have done great things together in terms of the response, both through the g-20 and bilaterally through the recession and recovery. we have under your leadership, a successful intervention in libya. it is been a tremendous partnership. >> somebody from the mexican press corps. >> good afternoon. for president calderon, we would

like to know what president obama said what would be done to stop the trafficking of weapons. president obama, what plans does your government have in the presidential election process in mexico what was discussed in terms of the interviews with candidates and mexican city, and i would also like to know, for the government of the united states, there is a threat for the country in a sense on weapons, mr. president. weapons have come into the country, leaks of letting the arms prepared for prime minister harper, is that requirement going to be removed for mexicans? thank you. >> my position on this subject is very clear.

let me broach it from another angle. it has been shown that when there is an excessive availability of weapons in any given society there is an increase in violence and the murders that go on many years after this phenomenon took place. in many places in africa, we have seen it in el salvador, guatemala, eastern europe, kosovo, bosnia. has taken place in many different areas of the world, and we sustain that the expiring of the band in 2004 coincided exactly with the beginning of the harshest period of violence we have ever seen.

during my government, we have seized over 140,000 weapons in four years. i think that the vast majority have been assault weapons, and many were sold in gunshots in the united states, along the border. there are approximately 8000 weapons shops. that means there are approximately nine weapons stores for each walmart that exist in the united states and mexico. a good deal of our discussion did touch upon this, but i recognize at the same time the administrative efforts undertaken by president obama and his administration said the agencies control the export of

guns to mexico. we have seen a more active effort in this sense than any time in the past. i had a great deal of respect for the u.s. legislation, especially the second amendment, but i know if we do not stop the trafficking of weapons into mexico, and also if we do not have mechanisms to forbid the sale of weapons, such as we had in the 1990's, or four registry of guns, at least for assault weapons, then we are never going to be able to stop the violence in mexico or stop a feature turning of those guns upon the u.s. i am against the traffic of weapons and mexico and everywhere. government of mexico will never be able to accept anything that

has to do with opening that appeared president obama has been clear on the position of the government. we understand the work being done by the agencies to stop criminals, but this cannot be an obstacle to the cooperation we have to have a month in mexico and the united states to stop criminal activities that underlie this issue and which is one of the greatest obstacles and problems for mexico. i understand the internal problems from a political point of view in the united states, and i mention this ad in public. i said things exactly the way i believe them. there is a great deal discrepancy between points of view, but the very complex political issues, but it is important underscore it. and i believe that is the only part of the question that i can answer, and i would say what

president obama has already answered was very well done. >> briefly, what with respect to the presidential elections in mexico, vice president biden met with the candidates to express sentiments that are similar to the ones that stephen just expressed, and that is the friendship between our three countries come off the partnership with our three countries, extends beyond and is more fundamental than any particular party or any particular election, and that is the message we have to send with respect to mexico. i have had an excellent working relationship with felipe. i expect to have the same excellent working relationship with the next president, because the underlying interest we have the economically, socially, the people-to-people relationship is so important it

transcends the partners and politics. with respect to the issue of guns, i have made clear in every meeting i have had with felipe we have put into practice efforts to stop illegal gun trafficking north to south. it is a difficult task, but one we have taken seriously. we have taken the unprecedented steps. we will continue to coordinate closely with the mexican government because we recognize the toll it has taken with respect to families and innocent individuals inside mexico. this part of our broader comprehensive cooperation in weakening the crypt of narco trafficking within mexico, and we recognize we have a responsibility to reduced demand for drugs, a responsibility to make sure drugs -- not only guns, but cash is not flowing into mexico.

the president takes his responsibilities seriously to apply proper law enforcement in mexico. we will keep on partnering together to continue to make progress on this important issue. >> asked me about the visa requirement. the visa requirement is really the only effective means in canada we have today to deal with large scale bogus refugee claims under our refugee determination system. legislation being implemented before parliament to enhance those changes -- that legislation will in the future and in years to come give us tools other than the visa requirement to deal with that particular problem. as of today, that remains the

only tool at our disposal. >> hello, gentlemen. i have a couple of questions on two critical issues, trade and crime perry, on trade, prime minister harper, why is canada's position at the negotiating table on the transpacific partnership so important to canada, and secondly, to be a player, are you willing to give up as a precondition our supply management system? president obama, you said there needs to be high standards for a country to be there. do you think yes, canada has met those high standards, whether you want us to drop our traditional supply and management system? in crime, we in canada read about the challenges mexico has on the drug cartels and the violence that occurs down there, perhaps it is possible many convenience and even americans do not see this as affecting their lives, or affecting their communities.

why do you three gentlemen think a three-country coordinated approach is necessary to protect our citizens? prime minister, keeping the only people who can see both english and french, if you could speak to that, please. >> in response to the question on the transpacific partnership, this is our desire to be part of that negotiation is part of canada's ambitious trade negotiations. we are in negotiations with over 50 countries around the world. this is an extension of our government's desire to broaden our free trade relationships around the world. canada's position on trans- pacific partnership is the same as our position in any trade negotiation. we expect to negotiate and debate all manner of issues, and we seek ambitious out comes

to free trade agreements, and those negotiations, canada will attempt to promote and defend canada plus interest, not across the comic, but in individual sectors. on the question of security -- look, the security problems, the security challenge, particularly around the drug trade is a serious regional problem throughout our hemisphere that has real impacts, not the kind of governance and security impact we see in central america, but has a real serious impacts on the health and safety of communities and our country as well. as these criminal networks are trans-national, it is important

part tends to fight them are equally trans-national. is why we work together on these initiatives. [speaking in french] [speaking in french] [speaking in french]

>> with respect to the tpp, as is true of any process of arriving at a trade agreement, every country participating will have to make some modifications.

[speaking in french] that is inherent in the process, because each of our countries have their own idiosyncrasies. certain industries that have in the past been protected come certain practices that may be unique to that country, but end up creating disadvantages for

this from other countries, so it is a process of never getting making adjustments. canada will not be unique in that. are there areas we would like to see some changes in terms of canadian practices? of course. , i assure you canada will have some complaints directed at us, and every member of the trans- pacific partnership will have to make some modifications in order to accommodate the larger interest of growing the overall economy and expanding trade and ultimately jobs. i do not anticipate there's something unique about canada that would not be true for any of the other aspirants to forming this transpacific partnership. with respect to the transnational drug trade, first and foremost we should be

concerned about what is happening in mexico and central america because when you have innocent families, women, and children being gunned down on the streets, that should be everybody's problem, not just their problem. there is a sense of neighborly regard and concern that has to be part of our calculus and foreign policy. more practically, united states shares a border with mexico. if you have this kind of violence and the power of the drug trade as a whole expanding in countries that are so closely affiliated with us in central american countries, if you start getting a larger and larger space in which they have control over serious chunks of the economy, if they are undermining institutions in these countries, that will impact our capacity to do business in these countries,

could have a spillover effect in terms of our nationals living in those countries, tourists visiting these countries. a could have a deteriorating effect overall of the nature of our relationship, and that is something we have to pay attention to. as i said, i think the mexican government has taken this very seriously, at great cost to itself. we have an obligation to take it just as seriously because we are the ultimate destination for a large chunk of this market. stephen and i were trading notes, in places like united states and canada, this is not just an issue of -- traditionally it was very urban. this is disseminated across our communities. in rural communities, you have methamphetamine sales that are devastating young and old

alike, and some of that is cordially sourced in mexico. even in the remotest, most isolated parts of canada or the united states, they are being impacted by this drug trade, and we need to work cooperatively in order to deal with it. >> i would like to look at it from another standpoint. the security of north america is absolutely tied to each of its member states. there cannot be full security in this country or in canada or in mexico if we do not have a system that actually enables the cooperation mechanisms are transnational by and their nature, and these threats are not just tied to drug

trafficking. i will give two examples of success stories. one, the attempt to take one of gadaffi's children to mexico. this implied a north american operation, because it was headed up by a canadian person, and this multinational operation would not have been of what it without the international security mechanisms that we did not have before, but now we have. also, being able to avoid the assassination of the saudi ambassador in washington would not have been possible without mechanisms of cooperation we have today. thinking about what happens in

mexico does not have anything to do with the security of the citizens of this country or of any other citizen of north america is a mistake. we have to understand that we are all tied to one another. now, security understood in the regional cents, in order to understand that, we have to understand where the greatest threat to security actually lies. united states has a clear understanding of its security priorities, the threat of terrorism, of international terrorism, terrible attacks on the u.s. people, and another threat is in the power of transnational organized crime, which i insist is not crime a organization that is strictly mexican in nature. they do not have a nationality.

they're probably operating right here in this city, in washington, for instance. the number of homicides per 100,000 inhabitants is higher by more than 10 or 20 than the largest cities in mexico. these are international organizations that are growing in a destructive capacity, well beyond borders, and threatened everyone everywhere. it is true the efforts we undertake clearly make it possible to contain that threat, and to prevent it from acting in society, not just in united states and canada, but also in mexico, and that explains why last year and 23 million tourists came to our country by plane, plus another 7 million in the cruise ships. that is also why there are 2

million mexicans living comfortably in mexico and many living here who came to visit us here and wanted to see us in the white house, and that is why 1.6 million canadians come to mexico every year. that is 5% of the canadian population that travels to mexico every year, and that also explains why, despite the fact that a state such as texas recommend that none of its young people should travel to anywhere in mexico, that is why there are hundreds of thousands of young texans to go to mexico and enjoyed it and why we have not seen one single incident with spring breakers this past spring. great concern, because these are multinational criminal organizations, and the

mechanisms to defeat them have to be multinational. in addition to the solidarity, and expressions of solidarity, of president obama, he says he cannot jump aside from the expressions of threats that is facing a neighbor, the vulnerability from the institutional issues in mexico, also jeopardize the citizens of south america. >> thank you very much, everyone. [unintelligible] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> in a few moments, a wisconsin campaign event with republican presidential candidate mitt romney. the election as tomorrow along with maryland and washington d.c.. and then a little more than an hour, someone from the washington post. and the harvard university forum on race and the 2012 campaign. the american society of news editors continues the annual meeting from washington tomorrow. we will hear about the international monetary fund's agenda with christine laguard. on cspan tomorrow, they will hear from president obama, remarked scheduled for 12:15

p.m. eastern. in his final campaign event before the wisconsin primary, mitt romney held a town hall meeting in milwaukee, joined by house budget committee chairman paul ryan who endorsed him last week. this part of the event is a little more than an hour. [applause] >> offense you very much, scott. thank you for coming here today to hear the next president of the united states and answer some of your questions. when i decided to cast my vote in tomorrow's primary, i looked at the candidates have asked myself to questions. which you should ask yourselves

and to spend the next 24-hour is spreading the word. who would make the best president if elected? and who is the best person to defeat barack obama? if you thought the last three years was about, just think of what would happen if reelected and can't face reelection after two terms and will be able to go hell that wherever he wants to go, not where the american people or you or i want to go. that is why mitt romney is the best person to lead our party. the best person to be elected president and the best person to be the president for the next four years.

my job is to introduce congressman ryan. let me say that wisconsin has a record of the elected republicans that are not afraid of coming up with problem- solving issues, and taking the fight from the people that one of the status quo. -- that want the status quo. we have republican office holders that have stepped up to the plate, had the guts to do the right thing, had sold the right thing around the country. paul ryan is the latest one of them, he came up with the only budget that gets a handle on the deficits and our debt so that we don't become like europe, and particularly, like greece. he is a leader. he has people following him.

it is my honor to introduce my little brother, congressman paul ryan very aho. ♪ hey, mitt romney, too! thanks, jim. >> hey, everybody. isn't this awesome? pretty cool, isn't it? this is awesome. thanks, sir. thanks, guy. i brought somebody out here with me. >> your father. >> my father. jim stenson claims to be my father. thanks, jim, i appreciate that. we have a great opportunity tomorrow and wisconsin. the opportunity we have is to

upset the country back on the right track. how many times have you looked at the television and got angry at the politician that said one thing in the campaign and didn't do a? -- do it? look at where we are now? look at the promises made about tackling the big issues. about confronting in solving these things. member we are not the red stains or blue states, but the united states? look where we are now. we have a nation that is deeper in debt and with economic stagnation, and that is being bitterly divided. we need another path forward. the good news is that it is not too late to get america back on track. [applause]

the president has given us for budgets and four times he has been complicit with the idea of giving us a trillion dollar deficits. he has been complicit with the idea of taking more from small businesses and more from families to give more to washington and put us deeper in debt. he seems to gravitate to this philosophy that if we just give more power to the federal government, more power to unelected bureaucrats, then they can organize our lives, organize our economy is, run our businesses, seamlessly make society run better. it is a philosophy they have been pursuing for a long time. do you know what it is doing? it is putting us on the path to debt and declined. one of the most of the cold economic crises we've ever had in this country is a debt crisis. we are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend.

our debt is bigger than the economy today. and we know what happens when countries go on this path. turn on the tv and look at europe. that is what is happening to them because they are in a debt crisis. if you wait until it is too late, then you have to cut programs for people who have already retired and who relied on those promises that are now broken promises. you slow down your economy. that is what bitter austerity brings you if you keep kicking the can down the road and up from making the key decisions that need to be made to save your country. that is the future we have in front of us. about as the future the president is giving us with his health care law, his arwin, his death, his tax increases. we are in a business that employs 70 people. and this business is successful because it is competitive. in this business files its taxes as if they were an individual. and the president is saying in

january he wants the tax rates of this business to go above 40%. [boos] overseas, which generally in wisconsin we know as lake superior, but canadians have just lowered theirs to 15% we do not leave our kids with a better future if we keep taxing businesses a lot more than our foreign competitors? there's. we have a big choice to make in this country -- that our foreign competitors tax theirs. we have a choice to make in this country. this is huge. we are in the midst of deciding whether we want to renew the american opportunity. do we want to say that we are beyond economic freedom and opportunity. we want a european society where people are stuck in their

station of life. that is not who we are. that is not the entrepreneurial field of this country. that is not the get up and make something of yourself nation that you -- we have become. we are on the wrong path. we have a choice to make. and the choices that wisconsin whites make on tuesday will help determine who we ask -- the choices that wisconsinites make on tuesday will help determine who we ask to lead us there. we can help make a decision as to who our nominee will be. and then we can go to the country with an affirming mandate, give us the ability to get america back on track. let's reclaim those founding principles that made us great in the first place. let's reject this partisan agenda of denying the problem, passing them on to other people, of pointing fingers and driving us deeper into debt and decline. in my humble opinion, the best way we can do that is to vote

for mitt romney tomorrow to be our nominee. [applause] and the way we are going to do this, we are going to do this tomorrow and then we come back here in november and we in wisconsin will send the next president -- will decide the next president of the united states. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, guys. what a generous welcome. your a boisterous group. there is a lot of energy in milwaukee. this is great. you heard the other morning. it was not quite so boisterous. we had a pancake special note -- breakfast scheduled for around

noon, a branch. my staff said not many people are showing up. i said, 100 people? well, no, more like 50. the black curtain over there, they always said that up before hand. they have on the floor the tape where each of us is to stand. they have the congressman coming out, first congressman ryan. senator johnson was next and then i was the last one. the congressman goes out and introduces me and goes through the pitch you just heard. a little applause after each applause line. not a lot of applause, but little bit of applause. finally he introduces me as the next president of the united states and i come walking out, and there is nobody there. [laughter] a big empty room, and the tables, a couple of members of my staff there with cameras. and for how fesai can i go, this is going to look terrible on the news. [laughter] it turns out it was april

fool's. these guys got me good. [applause] come to wisconsin and they pull one like that on you. then we went upstairs and it was a cake -- great group and we had a pancake brunch and a chance to chat. this is billed as a town meeting, by the way. what that means is you get to ask questions. after i take a little while here, we will turn to you and let you ask any question that you like and i will answer most of them. [laughter] and i'm also going to have a congressman and his thoughts to the answers to the questions. unless you would like to ask him directly. and you are welcome to do that as well. and congressman sensenbrenner of there, he says, i'm just watching. i answered questions all day long. i just want to tell him how much i appreciate his vote and his vote of confidence that he described a moment ago. he is a great leader that for many years has led the people of

wisconsin and america. i appreciate his work. thank you, [applause] congressman. -- thank you, congressman. [applause] and i also appreciate the team that has cleaned out a little bit of space for us. are not sure what in those barrels, but do not smoke in here. i would like to see esther a better job of getting more of the stuff that they put in those barrels, but i will get back to that in a moment. [applause] they used to deliver that stuff in just regular trucks. now they have to go around in armored vehicles when they deliver that, the price of oil has gotten so high. i want to tell you how much i have enjoyed what i've been able to do over the last few days, and frankly, over the last year, which is to go across the state and across the country and meet

people across america. if all that you get to do, which most of us get to do, is the america by virtue of the evening news, you might be a bit saddened or discouraged. by and large, the people who make the news are doing unusual things, typically, not good things or they would not make the news. but i have been able to meet people who aren't living american lives -- are living american lives in a way that we do. i come away with extraordinary confidence because there are some features in america that are still there. we are hard-working. we believe in greater purposes than ourselves. we are very patriotic people. at the same time, people recognize that we are going through tough times. and as i speak to people, rarely do i find someone who says things are great and i have no worries about the future. i'm very confident about what the future holds. most of the time people say things are ok.

they are facing tough times, but they are concerned about the future for their kids and for their kids, and sometimes for themselves. i was in appleton and met a couple there, has been and wife now, both in sales. the one in the department store -- she sells fragrances. but she says, sales are down, so she can not be as confident in keeping her job as she would like. her husband works in an industry like this that sells industrial products. he said the company is small and he has had to reinvent himself more than once. he is in his 60 posing hour-and- a-half found ways -- he is in his 60s now and they have had to find creative ways while nearing retirement. there is more anxiety than they thought they would be experiencing in their 60s. i met a guy in st. louis who was

working in an advertising agency. he left, and start of making amplifiers with his son. they had a couple of employees, but the implored -- the obama economy has been tough, so they laid off the employees and have been doing it on their own. they're confident that the future is bright. another guy worked for the city, i think in the landscaping division. he decided to leave because he knew enough about mowing lawns to start his own business. i think he said he has 200 employees now, cutting lawns, using snow blowers. he said he did i use those much this winter. -- he did not use those much this winter. [laughter] he said the price of gasoline has made it difficult to go from home to mom. and he's worried that the epa will start regulating carbon emissions on his lawn mower.

he said, there is no way, given the thin margin that exist in his business, that he could go out and buy all new equipment that the government might mandate. the people i've seen are optimistic, hard-working, patriotic, but at the same time discouraged. one that was inspiring -- i met a guy named cc sive and he mentioned that he came to this country from cambodia. he worked in a restaurant and then worked as a cab driver in new york city. he saved his money and was able to get a business school degree. he began working in government and got to know some of the political leaders. lo and behold, about 14 years after he became a resident of the united states, having come from cambodia, he is named the united states ambassador to the u.n. can you imagine that? he said, you cannot imagine the

kinds of feelings that would go through my mind as i would stand before the nations of the world, and say, here speaking on behalf of the united states of america. he said, what a nation. what a country that would offer opportunity to someone who did not speak the language, cabdriver and then becomes ambassador. i love america. i love the people of america. [applause] this president made a number of promises when he was running three years ago, four years ago. he said he would cut the deficit in half. he has doubled it. he said he was going to cut taxes for middle-income americans. he has not when you consider the extra taxes you are paying that

he has put on businesses, he has raised taxes on middle income americans. he also said he was not able to turn around the economy in three years he would be looking at a one term proposition. we're going to collect. [applause] and he points out that he did not cause the recession, and that is true. but he was the one we looked to to end the recession and to lead a recovery, and he did not. today, we have a record number of people on food stamps, over 45 million. we have a record number of home foreclosures, 2.3 million. 30% of single moms and their families are living in poverty. record levels of poverty in this country. unemployment, he said he would keep it under 8%. that is itself a very high level, 8%. he said he would keep it under

8% if we let him are $177 billion. it has not been under 8% since 37 months ago. his policies have not been the result -- of a turnaround, but instead, they have made it difficult to come out of it. his economic strategies are a bust. one of the reasons we are going to take over the white house is because he does not know how to make this economy work, and we do. [applause] these little ones over here have learned about politics and a very young age. they have learned how to shout and scream at the right time. mom, you are doing a great job teaching those kids politics. i need them to come with me to every rally i go to commodified? thanks, girls, and son. [applause] the president said something

over the weekend. he said, in an ideal world, government can spend as much as it wanted. in his ideal world, spending more and more money and building bigger government is the object. in my ideal world, governments spend less and the government is smaller. it is a very different vision for america. [applause] and both congressman sensenbrenner and congressman ryan indicated this is a time of choice for america. i hope all around the country people understand what is at stake in this election. this really is a vote about the nature of what america is going to be over the next four years and probably over the next century. we will have a choice of what kind of america we will have. on the ballot will be economic freedom, religious freedom, america's greatness, our military might, whether we are going to pass on to our kids

massive debts that we will have left for them, knowing that we cannot possibly repay them ourselves and we expect to repave the interest and principal over their lifetimes. this is a love -- a lesson for the america we will leave it to our kids. today, government at all levels consumes 38% of the economy. 30%. and if we let obamacare stand, -- 38%. and if we let obamacare stand, it will consume almost half of the total economy. and with the intrusiveness of regulations in places like energy and automotive and health care and transportation and so forth, you would have a government that either directly or indirectly controls well over half of the economy. if you have to ask yourself, do you want an america where free enterprise is very much in question?

an economy that is led by government, is that where we want to take america? >> [crowd yells "n1"] we also have a trillion dollar deficit. the first president to break a trillion dollars. we are adding trillions of dollars in debt. i have a different view. we have to cut federal spending. not just slow down the rate of growth, but cut federal spending. and finally, balance the federal budget. [applause] and so, freedom, and economic freedom. and by the way, congress mentioned something about taxes for small enterprises. economy built america's over the years? why is it our income per person

in america is 50% greater than the income per person in europe? what is it that makes a difference? we have in this nation a commitment to the principles of the founding, which is that we have been endowed by our creator with our rights. not by the state, but our creator. and among them are life, liberty, and a pursuit of happiness. in america, we are free to pursue happiness as we choose. instead of a government that is directing our lives, and directing our economy, individuals create enterprises small and large and the success what billumj america. and what this government is doing is that regulation after regulation, tax after tax, they are killing a dream.

i want to return to the american people the right they have to economic freedom, for onta bring your ship, for innovativeness. i want america to be the most attractive place in the world for entrepreneurs and job creators. why? because i want economic vitality and we are going to bring it back. [applause] in the president's government centered society, he believes the government can't do a better job running the economy, government can do a better job -- can do a better job running the economy, government can do a better job of picking the winners and losers, and government can do a better job than you can in guiding your own life. there are few things more personal than deciding what kind of health insurance you're going to have and what kind of

treatment you will have for a condition that you have. there is no question in my mind that with obama leading, it is telling you not only what you have, but what you are entitled to. if i am president of the united obamacaree will stop thank yo in its tracks and repeal it. [applause] i am just going to mention one of the differences before you get a chance to ask a question or two. and that is come out with relation to our military. i do not think the world as a safer place today. i think it is a tumultuous place. i have to describe that -- to describe to what reagan thought, that america has peace to our military.

this president has spoken of reducing the size of our navy further, reducing the number of personnel that we have. my view is entirely different. i would add to our military. i would increase shipbuilding. i would add to the purchase of aircraft. i would add active duty personnel. and i would make sure that the veterans get the care that they deserve. [applause] this is a question about a vision for america. we're going to have to ask ourselves who we are as americans. do we believe in free enterprise? do we believe in economic freedom? do we believe in personal freedom? do we believe in larger deficits and massive debts? these are the questions we will have for 2012 and for 2016 and for the years after. were going to have to ask if are going to be true to the

founders of this nation in passing and america to us that is stronger for the next generation. i believe we are going to do that. i believe we are going to stay true to those principles. i believe we will take the next step here in wisconsin, which is, on tuesday i need you to get out and vote and get your friends to do the same thing. keep the america that we know and love. [applause] with that rather lengthy introduction, i'm going to turn to you for questions that you might have. are you raising your hand? yes, please? >> [unintelligible] i was getting back from a trip, from a scouting program.

we heard that on tv they said something about the boy scouts, private stuff on the boy scouts. there when to the court -- they went to the court. they got $99,000 from the court. >> i did not see that story. i cannot comment on that story. but i can tell you this, i was not an eagle scout. i wish i had learned the lessons that eagle scouts learn. we would all benefit from that. but i have three sons who were eagle scout. [applause] you know i have five, and that means the first two did not get eagles. the reason for that is that mom

and dad did not know how important was -- it was for mom and dad to help them get their eagle scout and get out there and do their service project. but we learned after the first two and got it right for the last three. i love the scouting program, the principles of scouting. i love that young men learned person responsibility, respect for the fly, love of the country. -- respect for the flagging, love of the country. those principles are very much in viewed in my boys. did you make eagle scout? >> and no, i did not. i made it to bear. we spent the night in eagle cave. does anybody hear no evil cave? about 250 kids and their dads in a cave overnight. the day after, you could not see a speck of trash anywhere in

that cave. [applause] good people, good ethics, good morals. it is a fantastic thing. >> does that say sooners in? oklahoma sooners? how do they let you in here? you guys have a border problem here. [laughter] >> i'm actually from l.a., but my family is from oklahoma. first, i think you both are outstanding. [applause] imad automotive technician. i have worked at several dealerships around milwaukee. with the person that is currently in the white house kind of waging a small war on cars by requiring them to get certain fuel economy and with ethanol and stuff, i'm wondering what you are going to be able to do to help, number one, sales of cars go back up from where they

are right now. they are all down because of his effect on the economy. i wonder what you can do for small businesses. my wife owns her own small business and they are struggling under the things that obama has done. >> i will turn to the congressman. i love cars. when you grow up in detroit you think the whole world revolves around cars, and then you realize you are right. [laughter] i happen to have a great deal of affection for the people that work in that industry. i want to see it thrive and grow. there is no reason we cannot be the leader in the automobile industry globally. there are some people who feel that america cannot compete. the truth is, america can compete. there is no industry that we have aspirations to be a leader in that we cannot be a leader

in. what has happened over the years is government stepping in and trying to guide a political agenda, or perhaps trying to be more popular with our friends in europe has made it harder to compete in some respects. and management has made huge errors. and in some other cases, i think the uaw ask for too much, and i think the management gave too much. they began putting into effect legacy costs', retiree costs that were so large that america could not compete with the foreign cars that came here. and we started losing market share. they started to cut corners to keep up with the huge costs. i felt that some of them should have gone through bankruptcy. i said that early on when the executives came to washington. i said, do not write the checks. they need to go through bankruptcy and get rid of the

excess costs. and they finally did. [applause] i'm hoping it will come back. i get nervous when i see what is, apparently, the president's team trying to influence what is happening in the companies. if you want to have an american company that is successful, they need to understand the needs of the marketplace and a tune themselves to those. i'm not sure america was ready for the chevy volt. i hope it is. i do not want to disparage any product coming out of detroit. but i do not think we should let politicians tell us what kind of cars we want. we need to let the market decide that. i was generally disturbed to hear the head of coca-cola say that the business environment was friendlier in china than here. and he was not just kidding. when you look at the tax rates here, when you look at the regulatory environment here, when you look at the heavy hand of government trying to pick

winners and losers, the people of this country are saying the business environment here is pretty tough. when you add on to that obamacare, which says to small businesses in particular, i will be stuck with new health care costs i did not anticipate. and then if you have an administration trying to force unions into businesses where neither the employees at nor the management want them, you feel like you are under attack. i mentioned to the guy who began the amplifier manufacturing business. he and his son. they did a calculation and they added up what they pay in taxes. it was their corporate income tax, federal, state income tax, fica, gasoline taxes, and real estate taxes. they said 65% of what they make goes to government. when you consider the regulations and taxes, the cost

of high energy here. because we do not have a and energy policy that makes it good for businesses here. the number of small businesses that have dropped -- that have started per year has dropped by 1000. we have to have a president that recognizes, as i do, that the right way to get the economy going is to make america the most attractive place for small businesses to mantra for doors, no bidders. -- for small businesses, for entrepreneurs, and we've got to get jobs going again. >[applause] >> we got a dog and we liked it brother, so we got both of them.

here is what i would say. the president likes to think that he can manage -- micromanage every aspect of our economy from washington. if we take more power from our communities and give it to smart technocrats, they can't michael might -- micromanage life better that -- they can micromanage life better than you can yourself. i represent janesville, kenosha, a creek. there are four of our manufacturing plants that we lost. practicingnt isn't cash for clunkers economics. -- is practicing cash for clunkers economics. cash for clunkers did not work. take money from successful businesses. take money from families. ascended to washington, swish it around the bureaucracy, -- send

it to washington, swish it around the bureaucracy. what happens when you do that? you end up with the corporate welfare, cronyism. you end up with bankrupt solyndra firms. that is not entrepreneurial capitalism. that is crony capitalism. we do not want that. we want to get out of the way of -- of businesses so they can succeed. nine out of 10 of our businesses in wisconsin are not corporations. they are successful small businesses. they are the businesses that pay their taxes as individuals. the president is promising, if reelected, in the budget he has been calling for, that the top spot -- the top tax rate on businesses goes as high as 44.8%. how do you compete in a global economy when you are taxing your employer twice as much as your competitors are being taxed in

their countries? you do not. the genius of america is the individual. it is the family. it is not the government. that is a philosophy that we have to repudiate this fall so we can get the american economy back on track. [applause] >> they've got a microphone for you. watch this. >> dhhs mandate, governor, congressman, what do you think is the motivation behind this administration doing this? the health and human services mandate. >> the obamacare mandate? >> and not just the obamacare mandate, but telling churches and religious organizations what they can do and what they cannot. i think -- >> i think there is in this country a war on religion. i think there is a desire to

establish a religion in america known as secularism. and based on these reports, the obama administration gave us a lot of discussion. this was not a side issue. they gave it a lot of thought. and what they decided was in this country, the church, in this case the catholic church, would be required to violate its principles and its conscience and required to provide contraception and boring after pills to employees of the church. -- morning after pills to employees of the church. it came as a shock. those that are people of faith recognize that an attack on one religion is an attack on all religions. it is a reason why we need to get rid of obamacare. it is also a reason why we need to get rid of obama. [applause]

>> speaking as a catholic, i've got to say how proud i am of tim dolan. [applause] it is critical to see the red hat on it -- on him, is it? it is kind of small on him. he is a good guy. jim and i debate this in congress all the time. the ways and means committee, which is the primary committee that wrote this, it is this belief that our rights and do not come from god and nature, like they say in the declaration of independence. they now come from government. to have this new philosophy where we have government granted rights, it is a new philosophy that says -- a treat our constitutional rights as were vocable by the government rather than the inalienable rights that our government protects. in this case, held and disease

prevention -- it is called preventive medicine. our first amendment rights, like freedom of liberty, freedom of conscience, a trust that. if the president is willing to do this controversy will mandate, which they did get lot of thought to the -- they met with time -- tim dolan several times. he made it really clear, you will shut down churches and schools. you are making people violate their own religious teaching. if that is what this president is willing to do in a tough election year cannot imagine what he will do after the election if he never house to face the vote -- face the voters ever again -- if he never house to face the voters ever again? it is unbelievable, isn't it? this is a moment where we have to reassert our constitutional

rights, our rights that are ours as individuals before the government. if we embrace this philosophy that president is asking for, then we are giving him our power as individuals. we should never give government that kind of power. [applause] >> governor romney, thanks for being here in wisconsin. my buddy and i both sold our businesses last fall. i started up a new one. health care costs have skyrocketed in the last few years. my biggest concern as i seek to hire employees is how to afford that for them. i know we will repeal obamacare. but my question is, how will you help small business owners in this way? >> we have a strange health-care system in a lot of respects.

the issue that obamacare should have dealt with, the high cost of health care, and he should have dealt with malpractice. instead, he focused on something entirely different. in my view, we will have to do in health care to get the cost down is get health care to be a more consumer driven market as opposed to a government dominated and driven sector of our economy. health care in america is about 18% of our total economy. in the next highest country in the world, it is about 12%, switzerland. it is a huge difference in cost here. why is that? it is in part because we are running health care like we run other things that the government runs, amtrak and the post office. not terribly well. if you want things in america to be lower cost with better quality, then you try to get them to work with the kinds of principles that exist in a consumer market.

why do i say that is not the case in health care? i will tell you. if you are unfortunate enough to get a very serious condition and you have the insurance most people have, which is, you have a deductible. you pay a deductible and after that it is free. you will go to a doctor or a hospital and you never think of asking how much is going to cost because you do not pay the bill. the insurance company does. in other countries -- and by the way, in switzerland, they have to pay 20% of the bill for elective surgeries. if it is an emergency, they do not. it gives you the chance to shop around. i was with a doctor, an orthopedic surgeon. he said, i found that with people with health savings accounts, meaning they will pay a share of the health care costs, when i tell them that they need an mri, they say where can i get one at the best price. he said when they do not have a at -- a held savings account,

they just ask for the closest one is. we need to bring in an incentive for people to shop around and find the best job at the lowest price. i would like to see state-by- state an experiment for ways to make that happen. part of making that happen is to allow people to buy insurance themselves and to own their own insurance, rather than have their company by for them. right now, companies get a deduction if they buy health insurance for you. but if you want to buy yourself, they do not. i would like people to have the same treatment, whether they buy the policy themselves or the company buys it for them. let them make that choice. let them buy from places across the country. let them have a health savings account. if you have these kinds of market principles, in my view, you will get health care to start coming down like everything else in a free economy. when america has challenges, you

look to see if you can make it act more like a supermarket economy. i am not naive. i do not think everything can be solved by free-market principles. but i'm also not naive enough to think that government can do it. [applause] >> i got leia 6 surgery -- leia 6 surgery 10 years ago. -- lasik surgery 10 years ago. it now costs half as much today and the techniques are much better. 300% average price disparity in health care in just the milwaukee area. we want those doctors, the insurance companies, hospitals competing against each other for our business, based on price and quality, so that we are the

nuclear portion of the marketplace, not the government. the one reason i want to say that is because i saw it -- ted, where did it go? canada's. -- cannabis. he is the chair of the rodney for wisconsin campaign. -- the romney for wisconsin campaign. i just wanted to mention that. thank you, ted. [applause] >> i've got a dunham and over here. -- gentleman over here. >> you talked in your earlier remarks about calling beyond yourself in the run for presidency. obviously, that is not a light decision. i'm assuming you had a discussion with your wife, ann. could you tell us some of your

thoughts and her thoughts in this? >> ann played a big role in this. she is the best. she is absolutely extraordinary. i fell in love with her in high school and i'm still passionately in love with that woman. she is a fighter. and she has ms and has done a great job overcoming that. she has also battled breast cancer successfully. she is a champion and cares about people who have real challenges. two years ago when we were thinking about this, i said, ann, let's talk about the pros and cons. she said she wanted me to run again. i said, let's talk about this and she said, talk to the hand. you have to run again. in her view, having spent my life in small business, then a bigger business that got in trouble and i helped turn around -- having spent my life in

business, i understand how the economy works at the level of business. and by the way, when people talk about the economy, everybody, liberals, conservatives, they want a strong economy. liberals, however, do not like business. what they do not understand is the economy is simply the addition of all of the businesses in this country. you have to like the businesses as well. [applause] i know a good deal about businesses and what is hard in a business and why you worry about hiring and when you have to have a business shrink, how painful that is. it is a tragedy. i know what happens when government makes a decision, for instance, about the steel industry, and it causes us to lose all sorts of facilities and jobs in this country. i understand that firsthand, having spent 25 years in business. that experience, i believe, is essential if we are going to get

our economy going again, get people back to work. >> at this time of the year, most of us are struggling with the income tax. as you know, we have one of the biggest, largest, convoluted tax returns in the world. i would like to see you in one of your platforms to simplify our tax code. it is ridiculous. people cannot do their own taxes. [applause] >> i have heard the congressman answer this question better than i can the last time we chatted. i will just have him describe for a moment his plans on the tax code, which are very similar to my own. do you remember vols-since and, by the way? a republican and a democrat came together and talked about changing the tax code by lowering the rates and changing some of the deductions. the philosophy of my plan

and the congressman's plan. today, we have the highest corporate tax rates in the world. that means we will lose employers. they will go -- and elsewhere over time. ratesgot to keep our down, so we can keep businesses here, and we do not overwhelm them with the complications of our tax code. mention the g story. that was amazing. >> p.g. is a big employer in this area and eight -- ge is a big employer in this area and i had a great job on my committee. this is the committee that gives you all of the loopholes over the years. what we're saying is, clear up the loopholes and tax shelters. on businesses, when it comes to corporations, as the governor just said, we have the highest in the world. general electric did not have an

income tax liability last year. they still made a lot of money. that was legal. he literally did not hot -- general electric legally literally did not have a tax liability last year. how is it that you did not pay income taxes last year, i asked him? he said, it was complicated. we had a lot of write off some things. i said, how much was your tax code? 57,000 pages. have you ever heard of this? you cannot make this stuff up. like i said, they get it legally. there is nothing legally wrong with this. government did this engaged in this kind of tax code so you can control your business plan and fit this kind of thing. but look at another business we are proud of, ubs.

they paid 34% effective tax rate last year. but a german company paid 24%. bring g e up to 25% and bring ups up to 25% and make it equal and fair. [applause] so they do not spend all their time in washington trying to get some kind of special car out, some special tax break. give up all that stuff. do not spend millions filling out forms. get washington out of the business of picking winners and losers and help us grow our economy. that is what we are proposing. [applause] >> my name is robert. it is an honor and a privilege to be addressing you two today.

governor romney, you spoke in the past about the economic necessity of reforming our naturalization and citizenship system in the past. my girlfriend is from spain. she is studying at the university of maryland getting a master's degree. in the middle of may, her welcome into the country is going to be taken away and she is going to have to go back unless she can find a job to get a working be at the -- visa. that is not so easy. restrictions are more difficult on companies if you're hiring a non-american worker. how much is this for you to actually get reform done? and the second part can also be answered by rep ryan. and how would you go about this specific legislation? what would you be looking for? >> first, let me note something that will hopefully not be lost

upon the people that have come into this country legally and illegally as immigrants. that is, this has always been a priority for the president he chooses to do nothing about. he campaigned saying he would reform immigration laws and simplify and protect the border and so forth. and then he had two years with a democrat house and a democrat senate, a super majority in each house, and he did nothing. let the immigrant community and not forget that while he uses this as a political weapon, he does not take responsibility for fixing the problems we have. my own view is our immigration policies are upside down. we make it very hard for people who have the skills that we need. education and english speaking, and workplace skills, would make it very hard for people to come here and to stay here. on the other hand come some are

often able to overstay their visas and remain in this country indefinitely. we have got it backwards. if someone has a degree from an institution of higher learning, a master's degree, a ph.d., stable and green card to their diploma. -- staple a green card to their diploma. we want those people in our country. and we want to stop illegal immigration so we can protect legal immigration. we like it when people come here legally, particularly that speak english and can work in jobs and create new industries and be innovative. they do not come here for a check. they come here for opportunity. these are our voters. i want to work on an immigration policy that secures the border and also works on a simplified legal immigration process. that is something i will not just talk about during his

campaign. this will be a priority of mine if i become president to make sure that we finally reform our immigration laws step by step, secure the border, and improve our legal immigration system so that we can keep people here and welcome people here that will improve our nation. [applause] >> one of our foremost immigration leaders is jim sensenbrenner. i would also say that we have to work on identity theft. this is an issue that has to be dealt with so that people who come illegally can do so with identity theft. the primary victims are people with of hispanic surnames, legal immigrants. we need to address the rule of law, the border, identity that, and then fix the legal immigration system so that it works and we make sure we do not have any immigration problems.

this is a president that has -- clearly not made it a priority. we have a system that we have to go back and try to fix every 10 years. we need to fix it once and for all. i agree with or you said, governor. >> thank you. [applause] i am told that you have been here for a while. i just want to say a couple of things and then get a chance to shake up a love hands. i got a message from the governor this morning. [applause] what a guy. [applause] you are a state of champions, by the way. you have great leaders who take on tough issues and make you proud and serve the country well. he heard me speak the of the day and he said, keep talking about the olympics and your

experiences there. i want to tell you why i am so confident in the future of our country. this does relate to an experience i had at the olympics. as you know, i had the occasion to help organize the olympic winter games of 2002. at the closing ceremonies, the vice president, dick cheney, asked me to choose an american athlete to sit with him to represent all of the athletes of america. i chose a fellow named derek para. he was born in los angeles. he is an hispanic american. he is a roller bladers. he tried ice skates and he was fast. he worked at it hard and long and competed with some big guys, i imagine, what from wisconsin and minnesota and michigan, where i come from the originally. and he competed at the open --

the olympic speed skating team. he came out and got a silver medal. that was in the 500 meters. then a gold medal in the 1,500 meters. the fastest man in the world on the ice. i cannot imagine being the best in the world at anything. i invited him to sit by the president. he came in and i said, what was the most meaningful experience of the games? it was not the gold or silver medal. he said, it was being asked to carry the flag above the world trade center on september 11, 2001. [applause] he explained he was one of the aid athletes chosen to carry the fight. it is about 8 feet by 12 feet and is torn and burned. you cannot put it on a flagpole. you have to carry the war is on a lake, which they did. he said, when they came into the

stadium he expected the audience to burst into cheers. he said, instead, it was total silence. total silence and respect. the flag holders were surrounded by the members of the port authority police. and the police and firefighters of new york. and he said, we stopped in front of the choir and they began to perform the national anthem. and he said it was hard to hold on to my motion as i was holding that like and they were singing those words. -- holding that flag and they were singing those words. and then he said the choir did something unexpected. i knew this was coming because i got to choose the version of the national anthem the choir was singing. i chose the version in the 1930's are raised by robert shaw where you repeat the last line. one active higher for the choir.

oh, say does the flight yet wave o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave. and he said a gust of wind lifted it and blew it up in their hands. and he said it was like the spirit of all of those that had died were lifting the fly. and tears ran down his face. i thought then and i think today that passion for america, the patriotism that we have for this country, our conviction that this is the greatest nation in history of the earth, our affection and appreciation for those who have gone before us and have sacrificed with their lives for our freedom, that conviction convinces me that america will rise to the occasion. the challenges that we face, the deaths that we have, the government out of control, a

government increasingly intrusive in our lives, iran trying to go nuclear, we can overcome those challenges if we have leaders who tell the truth and live with integrity, who know how to lead. who actually have led before and will also draw on the patriotism of the american people, and i intend to be one of those leaders. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] ♪

♪

>> the road to the white house coverage continues tomorrow with the wisconsin, maryland, and washington d.c. primaries. we will bring results and speeches from the candidates. join in the conversation by phone, on facebook or twitter. watch all of our road to the white house coverage online.

more now on tomorrow's primary elections in wisconsin, maryland, and the district of columbia. this is 40 minutes. guest: a lot of people are anticipating that if mitt romney winds wisconsin, there are three primaries tomorrow. wisconsin is what everybody is watching. if he wins that state, there will be a lot more pressure on rick santorum to stand back and let mitt romney move on to the nomination. a lot of republicans believe that this race is be going to --

is beginning to go on too long. ultimately, if it is continued, it could hurt their nominee for the fall. host: as far as numbers are concerned, any way to catch up for new gingrich or rick santorum? guest: there is no way for any of the others to catch up with mitt romney. what they could do, potentially, and even that is looking like it will deny him the 3400 delegates he would need -- the 1144 to say, i have this wrapped up. it would be centrally -- essentially to have it as a contested convention. i think that hope is fading as well. host: if you look at the front

page of the baltimore sun, they are specifically looking at maryland. the headline says there is little interest in the primaries. interest overall as far as the contest you have seen. talk about the interest you're seeing. guest: you look at a state like maryland and is one of the most liberal in the country. the republican base is a fairly moderate. there is not a lot of suspense as to how that race will co when people talk about voter interest, what really brings voters out is a good, close, fiercely fought race. host: terrance a multi is our guest, here to talk about -- karen tumulty is our guest. if you want to ask her questions, you can do so via our phone lines.

send us an e-mail and you can also send us a tweet. from a reporter's point of view, what is the untold story? what you think might be of interest for our viewers that does not reported often? guest: these primaries are playing their role. it is a testing ground for the candidates. giving voters a sense of how well they would perform in the fall against president obama. what we are all struggling to get our arms around is the outside forces this year. it seems like the parties have become less and less meaningful, in part because people are dissatisfied with the political process but also because there are so many outside forces that

did not used to exist. chief among them is the super pac. i think there are other ones as well. host: is this going to be the most high-spending cycle that we have seen it? guest: it is on track to do that. we have never seen these outside organizations spend much as -- spend much at all outside these primary races. the other thing that super pacs can do is bring a negative message in a way that candidates would not dare talk about a member of the other party. they turn this race more negative than it might has been. it is a pale preview of what we will see from both sides in the fall. host: in wisconsin, a recall effort for its governor.

how much does that play into the primary process? guest: independents can vote in the republican primary. that may be bringing some voters to the polls to would not already be there. most of the intensity is less. it could increase turnout overall. host: wisconsin, d.c., and maryland up for tomorrow. our guest is to talk about that. our first call is from massachusetts. good morning. caller: i would like to know why the candidates are not telling the truth. their nose is going to grow so big if they do not stop telling us lies. we are not stupid and ignorant. we want the truth and want us to stop telling us how good they live, how bad they live, everything else. they all have a problem, one thing or another.

nobody is above having something wrong. why can they come out with the truth? stop lying. thank you. guest: one thing that has happened, especially in the last few cycles, most major media organizations made a greater effort than they had in the past in fact-checking the candidates. we at the washington post had one of my colleagues run something called the fact- checker. he takes the candidates' statements and puts them right up against the record. host: what is the influence to that thought on the information available on the internet, especially from people of different political structures? guest: it is intensely debated on the internet. a lot are coming from either the

left or right perspective. what they're doing is firing up their own partisans. it is a new role of the major news organizations to be more aggressive about fact-checking. host: this is a call from idaho on the republican line. caller: i'm calling regarding the hard generalizations to the gop nomination. i thought she was calling into question the truth of the nominees. one of them is a clearly consistent good voter who does not have things against him. that is a really unfair generalization. they were saying with the sports, some students in idaho, i love school and i love my colleague -- i love my college. there are no -- there is no

reason for me to drop out and come home. host: what are you trying to say? caller: the first lady saying that the nominees are not truthful is erroneous. it is out of question. host: charles from the republican line. caller: i am very interested in this subject. i am curious as to why candidates do not discuss the fact that millions of retirees like myself are not millionaires by any stretch of the imagination, but we rely on the dividends to supplement our social security because i just cannot live on social security to.

the democrats want to raise the taxes on the dividends, saying it is for millionaires. gosh, it does not make any sense for a guy like me. i work hard and i invest in stocks to pay dividends. i do not think i am alone. i think there are millions of people like us. would you comment on that please? guest: cutting the capital gains rate is another thing the republicans have talked about. what the democrats would argue is they are basically talking about tax increases on individuals depending on the number. 200,000 and above. again, we have had a great deal of discussion in this election about what it is that qualify as

a person for being rich. host: on the other side, the vice president faced the nation talking about the election and particularly directed comments towards mitt romney. here is what he had to say. video: >> i think governor romney is out of touch. >> he argued about, let detroit go bankrupt. now they are hiring hundreds of thousands of new people after losing 400,000 jobs. general motors is the largest corporation in the world again, 24 straight months of economic growth. america is going back to work. the unemployment rate dropping by about 1%. host: a larger role that the vice president plays these days. guest: you can tell we are

getting into campaign season because we are seeing a lot more joe biden. he has had difficulty connecting with blue-collar and middle- class voters. this is what the white house and presidential campaign believes is the strength of joe biden. he can connect with joe lunch bucket out there in scranton. caller: hello. this is really ridiculous. facts are -- the fact that she is talking about are irrelevant. talking about where the country is going to go. we have an import-export ban that gives money to buyers in order to buy products here. who says that they do not set up fake companies on both shores and milk the taxpayer? $140 billion. $52 million they want.

the media does not get it. we see all of this. we are not interested in these small facts that are not relevant in this election. the captain -- whether the capital gains are 15% or 25% is totally irrelevant. host: what is most relevant to you? caller: the fact that the government wastes tremendous amounts of money. we do not know where the government is going. they have all sorts of little corporations and agencies set up. whoever heard of such a thing as loaning foreigners' money? guaranteed by the taxpayers so that they can buy products from america. this is ridiculous. and the state department, $52 billion for the state department when we have at war after war after war. hillary clinton has got to be the most bloodthirsty woman and

the entire world. host: why don't we end there. i guess it is the idea people may vote on how government operates these days. guest: that's true. but what is great about this show is two calls ago a gentleman said the tax rate is the most important issue, because he is a retiree living on the income from his investments. and this woman is very upset about what the xm bank is doing. its greatest supporters are corporations in this country that are very export-oriented. so there are many levels to the government. i think people are fed up with all sorts of things. host: is this election different as far as how people vote? guest: i think people are much more aware than they have been

in past elections of the level of our debt, of the level of our spending, and are much more fearful about the future and what this means for their children. i have covered a lot of elections. but i really think i hear people talking about the debt and the implications for their children and grandchildren much more than i have in the past. host: st. louis, missouri, fred, hello. caller: hello. thanks for taking my call. i have english as the official language for my platform, like rick santorum. i ran on that years ago. the house passed by a larger

margin than the senate, they screwed around. [unintelligible] the house passed it. host: your question, sir? caller: i want to know why these candidates don't take a nickel out of every lottery ticket and put that toward social security. host: his concern is social security issues. guest: entitlement programs, especially for the baby boom generation beginning to retire, are going to be under a great amount of stress. even in worse trouble than the social security system is the medicare system. host: there's a blurb in your paper this morning when it comes to the campaign. it talks about mr. romney has supporters running in the state --

foreign policy as far as the candidates are concerned, where has that been in the campaign? guest: it has taken a backseat except for a few issues. there's a lot of talk about iran and what this country's role should be in preventing iran from becoming a nuclear power that could threaten the survival of israel has been probably the main foreign policy discussion. but maryland is an interesting state, as the article indicates, because it is right next to the capital, we do have a lot of people who have made their careers and often retired from the foreign service. i think people in the capital area, there are a lot of people extremely concerned about foreign policy. host: a story says mitt romney will probably articulate more foreign policy speeches. guest: we don't know what sort of external events are likely to happen, what the situation will look like on the ground in afghanistan.

now we are seeing there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the way the war is going and whether it was worth fighting in the first place. in the 2008 election everybody portrayed afghanistan as the war that was more justified than iraq. those kinds of questions are also going to come more to the foreground. and they will be framed as pocketbook issues as people look at the enormous investments. host: regarding the level of non-policy overall amongst the candidates? guest: particularly in parts of the country like nevada, the upper midwest, and florida, where people, their mortgages are run under water, at this point i think it. has really taken a back seat. host: texas, on the republican line. [dial tone] let's go to charlie in raleigh.

caller: i will ask a question concerning the first caller, the woman who said that candidates are all saying untruths. she indicated the press is not doing its job revealing this. i have a question. in the last several years we have seen our news information multiply exponentially. people get news from many sources, including the internet. growing up as a boy, i saw three news networks at night or one of the three, 15 minutes and that was all. no comments, no cable commentary, no internet. i want to ask how that has tasked the "washington post" in this new climate?

and is the newspaper suffering because of this exponential rise of information sources, many of whom are probably soft? guest: i think the entire newspaper industry is under a lot of pressure in part because of the business model, which in the past ran on advertising. if you were looking for job, the first place and you would go is classified ads. now you go to a monster.com. so newspapers are struggling across the board. we have a lot fewer people to cover the news than we used to. you have seen newspaper's closing their domestic bureaus and closing a lot of their foreign bureaus. at the same time, the amount of information we are being called upon to produce has grown exponentially. you don't wait for the next day's paper anymore. you have to have things out on the internet and have the video to go with it and the facts checked behind it. we are all trying to sort out what the business model is for

the future and what our roles will be. i don't think we have quite figured it out yet. host: how does it change your day-to-day? guest: it is interesting. i've been with "the washington post" a couple years, but before that, i was 15 years at "time" magazine. when i got to "time" magazine we had one deadline only. we would produce one magazine per week. we had a bureau in washington of well over 20 people. by the time i left them, the bureau was down to about seven people and we had closed all the domestic bureaus. at the same time we were not just putting out a weekly magazine. i was blogging, tweeting, writing stories for the internet. we don't get the time we used to for the third or fourth phone call to check a fact, or the thoughtful pieces that used to be everyone's favorite thing to work on. host: in the gallup poll this morning, there is a piece in the "usa today" looking at men

and women and how they approach this election. it says when it comes to the top issues for men, it is the deficit -- is there anything there that could be reflected in your reporting particularly on how men and women look at the campaign? guest: we have seen in recent weeks a surprising amount of discussion on social issues. contraception, which is a fight that i think most people thought was pretty well settled decades ago. and there's some thought that there's this great battle for the women's vote. when i am out in the country talking to people, when i talk to pollsters, they say women are sort of confused on these issues. they don't understand why we are talking about this.

my house is burning down economically, so why are we discussing these sort of side issues? host: economic issues are supposed to be at the forefront. guest: that is a reflection of how long the republican primary has lasted and this is a way in which the candidates themselves distinguish themselves from each other. this is how mitt romney distinguishes himself from rick santorum. host: high-level nominations or at least backings of mr. romney over the last couple days, does that indicate the end is near as far as an eventual nominee? guest: i think so. some of the people he has gotten -- the mistrust of romney has come from the right of his party. some of the endorsements he has gotten are attempting to act to

shore up people's trust from the right. paul ryan in wisconsin, the chairman of the house budget committee is a huge one because he is a hero to many conservatives. host: president george h. w. bush, marco rubio, and others. guest: and ron johnson, a tea party favorite. host: we have scott the independent line. caller: good morning. i have a question and i would like to somebody to explain it to me. if we borrow 42 cents out of every dollar as a federal government, how can we borrow money to give to other countries and then we have to pay it back and they don't? and then you tell us here at home, cut back, cut back, cut back. hillary clinton wants to give $100 million to tunisia, billions to egypt. and we are borrowing this money?

host: relate that to the campaign. caller: we are pretty much screwed no matter who we get. left and right are in it together. guest: foreign aid is always unpopular, but it is a very tiny portion of the budget. the real fiscal problem comes in the entitlements -- the fact that my generation is going to put a real stress on the system. people who support foreign aid will tell you that by spending this money in parts of the world we are attempting to create stable government institutions there, we are trying to lift people out of poverty that also leads to economic and political instability. and so, they will argue -- and it's not a popular argument -- but they will argue these are

investments in a more secure world that will perhaps less and the external threats to this country. host: peoria, illinois, susan, independent line. caller: good morning. i would like to backpedal a little. a minute ago somebody talked about the bailout of detroit. i hear this all the time. nobody ever mentions the fact that every single stockholder of general motors had their stock confiscated while their taxes were going to bail out the company. when they say then that the company has paid back everything, every stockholder is still at a total loss for any shares they had. host: are you there? what is the question? caller: my question is, how can they claim this to be such a great coup for the democrats

when they have done something this country has never done before, which is confiscate private citizens' property without so much as even saying so. guest: well, i think that what general motors went through was a sort of managed bankruptcy, which happens a lot to companies and especially in this kind of economy. and often when a company goes into bankruptcy, people who suffer are the stockholders. when people buy stock, they are putting their money at risk. there certainly has been a lot of criticism particularly from the right as to how this played out. but i think that, in the end, general motors is indisputably a stronger company. at that point, people look at the workers and they look at the economy of michigan. host: ron paul asked about the future of the campaign on the sunday shows yesterday. [video clip]

>> i like mitt romney as a person. i think he is a dignified person. we have no common ground on economics. he is not worried about the federal reserve or the foreign policy. he does not talk about civil liberties. i have a hard time to expect him ever to invite me to campaign with him. >> would you vote for him or support him? >> i've not made that decision yet. i'm still campaigning. host: if mr. romney becomes the candidate, the other three and how they come along as far as supporting or what that means generally for republicans? guest: that guy ron paul is the guy to watch most closely. a few weeks ago i was interviewing grover norquist, the activist, and he said how they handle ron paul is going to be one of the most important questions, because there is such

energy behind him, such enthusiasm behind him. four years ago of the republican convention, ron paul was such an outcast that he had to have his own convention in the minneapolis area. i guarantee that is not going to be the case this time. he is going to have a very prominent role and probably a prime-time speaking spot. because what they want is for ron paul to say to his supporters, "all that energy that you brought to my campaign, it's now time to put it behind a republican party." host: irene is on the republican line from florida. caller: i would like to ask the lady why is it the people in the u.s. cannot open up their minds and listen to what has been said. there has been such a

difference between what romney did in massachusetts and what obamacare is. and, also, why is rick santorum being so hateful about running? he's not going to win. for him to say what he is doing and saying is hurting the party and it is hurting mitt romney. i am a romney supporter. i do believe the longer this goes on, the worse it is going to be for the republican party. i wish it was over so we could get on with the business. host: before you respond, i want to listen to what rick santorum said about his campaign on the sunday shows yestereday. [video clip] >> it is not the longest of long shots. so many of the delegates coming to the convention are unbound delegates, provided that romney

has all the delegates and a big lead, the numbers don't bear that out. >> would you acknowledge he is the most likely nominee, as newt gingrich did this week? >> he is ahead right now, but less than half the votes -- less than half the delegates have been selected. go back your years ago, governor romney was still in the race at this point and he was not doing nearly as well as we are. i just think we have a lot of panic out there among the establishment, because the establishment has tried to convince the republicans across this country and conservatives that they need mitt romney shoved down their throats and they're trying everything they can. they're not making the sale on the money or the endorsements or the policies or what he stands for, because he's all over the map. so they have to make the case of inevitability. host: there was his take on the campaign. relate that to a the caller's

interest in getting on with this business. guest: that was pretty much a direct answer to her concerns. the fact is rick santorum is talking delegate counts, but the primaries all happened much earlier last time. so by this point in the race it was looking like things were clearing out for john mccain to get the nomination. the first point the caller made it is a point that you will hear from a lot of republicans, which is trying to stress that what mitt romney did with health care in massachusetts is very different from what president obama has done with health care nationally. the fact is the two programs structurally look very much alike. governor romney even four years ago when he was running said that massachusetts is good for massachusetts but that he never intended it as a national model. whether that is going to be sellable, i don't know. host: there's a story looking

at mr. romney, specifically. where do we expect to go as far as a pick? guest: he will have to go with someone very conservative. there's a real question on whether he would choose someone like marco rubio, who would bring a lot of pizzazz, the florida senator. or whether he chooses someone like rob portman from ohio, which would be a safe tactical pick that would help bring ohio over in the fall. everything we have seen from the romney campaign so far shows that they tend to be fairly cautious in pretty much everything that they do. often when a candidate picks a running mate who has a lot of pizazz it is because that candidate really feels their campaign is in trouble. host: little rock, arkansas,

faye on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. if the republicans go into -- the american people need to wake up, they will do away with your social security. it will be privatized. they said that. and the medicare. so the older people and the women better wake-up and see what the republicans have done to this country and to the people, the workers out there. and if they do go in, the people will be sorry that they did not get that obamacare. it is good for us, the older people, and the younger people. but the republicans will continue to destroy this country as we know it. thank you. host: how does the decision the

supreme court will make in june play on the elections this year? guest: you hear people arguing about it. if the health care is struck down in whole or in part, this will be a setback for the obama administration and for his re- election bid. people in washington argue about the courts as being very politicized and divided between left and right. but i think most of the country still views the supreme court -- a lot of people in the country could not name two justices, but they do see the supreme court as they are supposed to play this role. but if the health care law gets struck down, i think the republicans will make the argument this is proof of this was some kind of overreach on the part of the democrats.

host: this is edgewater, maryland. susan, the republican line. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment in regard to the race. the news media is controlled by institutions that are controlled by the shadow governments. we don't have free media. and the other thing i wanted to say is, i as a republican am horrified by the field of politicians running. newt gingrich was talking in one of the debates about palestinians are all terrorists. that is basically what his comments were. i am disturbed by that because i think people like him should not be making statements like that. it is very ignorant, in my opinion. the other thing is dan inouye, the senator from hawaii, many years ago talked about the true

power is not our politicians, it is a shadow government, the new world order. host: who do you plan on voting for tomorrow? caller: ron paul, because he is the only one in the republican field that i feel is telling the truth. he has talked about the federal reserve and foreign policy. he is the only one that is addressing the real problems. it is militarism, constant aggression. i am a republican. what i want to do is change the policy. i want peace on this planet and i want some consideration given to other nations as well as the environment. i am horrified when i hear republicans talk about the environment and how ignorant they are about it. it is insulting. host: thanks. guest: this caller speaks to the passion i was talking about a

few minutes ago that we hear from ron paul supporters. this is -- the real question going forward is whether this is going to be a passion that is outside the republican party or if some way the party can figure out a way to bring those people into the fold and make them enthusiastic about republican politics, as this caller is not? host: this is newt gingrich from yesterday's shows talking about the state of his campaign and party support for the nominee. [video clip] >> governor romney says that he has to earn 1144. we will not concede that to him. kansas last night set the second record for coming from behind. they were down nine points at the half. that is the second biggest margin to come back from in the final four series. i will choose kansas as a model. st. louis last year was 10 games

out. that was a painful lesson as in the land to a braves fan. if governor romney gets to 1144 not counting disputed delegates, he will be the nominee. >> will you endorse him? >> absolutely. and if rick santorum becomes the nominee, i will help them. we are all committed to defeating barack obama. we think his re-election will be a disaster for the country. host: you talk about how the romney campaign treats ron paul. how does the romney campaign treat newt gingrich? guest: there were reports there's been a recent meeting between newt gingrich and mitt romney. we don't know a lot about what transpired in that meeting. but certainly we have seen many faces of newt gingrich in this campaign. i think we see him back to being kind of the elder statesman newt gingrich. in part i think it is because he wants to -- at this point he has pretty much given up on the idea he will be the nominee.

he will want to retain influence in the party and remain a strong voice in the party. i think that is what we hear him kind of transition into. host: binghamton, new york, kevin on the democrats' line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i have a question for karen. ron paul and barney frank have backed an initiative to throw out the illegality of cannabis under the 24th amendment. a medical dispensary in michigan is going to the supreme court, where they may discuss that issue. in new york state, the republicans supported medical cannabis. andrew cuomo, the governor, refused to sign it, unlike his father. and laguardia in the 1940's did his own study which supported cannabis.

my question is, when it means $2 billion in medicinal sales per state and $1 billion in recreational sales, why is there not more talk even from the ron paul and other candidates about this issue? guest: because i have heard probably more about this issue this year than i think i have heard since the 1960's. so there's more talk about. but at this point it is still very much -- the caller's view is still out of the mainstream with the republican party in particular. so we did have ron paul during the debate and once again he affirmed his support for legalization. host: one more call, tennessee, independent line, dan. you are on the air. one more time for dan. good morning. we go past tuesday.

where do we go from there? guest: the next big race will be pennsylvania later this month. if rick santorum cannot carry his own home state it will be very hard for him to make the case of that he is a credible candidate going forward. host: what is the likelihood? guest: he was ahead in the polls and now it looks like a very tight race. there are number of southern primaries in may where he could -- where they look very much like the profile in states where he has won. i really look forward to writing more about the voters and less about the candidates. host: you can see karen tumulty's stories and postings at the washington post website. thanks for being here. guest: thank you.

>> in a few moments, a harvard university forum on race and the 2012 campaign. in less than 1.5 hours, the un resolution on syria. and then, today's news conference with president obama, mexican president calderon, the prime minister of canada. on "washington journal," we will be joined by delegate eleanor holmes norton. you can call in with your questions about the corporate and individual tax code to alex brill of the american enterprise institute. and we will look at the role of the federal reserve with jon hilsenrath. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 eastern.

now, a harvard university forum on race and the presidential election. voter i.d. laws, the black vote, and the response to the martin shooting by president obama and those republican presidential candidates. this is a little less than 1.5 hours. [applause] >> good afternoon, everybody in. i am the director of the institute of politics at the kennedy school. we want to welcome everybody this afternoon, the john f. kennedy jr. forum to kick off the politics conference. i am pleased to introduce one of the organizers, gabrielle wyatt. she is specialize in her studies in k-12 urban education reform.

she has chaired the leadership conference and is the code-share of the keynote -- co-chair of the keynote conference. >> thank you. welcome to the eighth annual black policy conference. today we have the pleasure of being against the backdrop of the john f. kennedy school forum to celebrate heritage and horizons, the innovative solutions rooted in shared experiences. it is our hope that our conference presents generate innovative solutions to approach the world's challenging problems. without further ado, we would like to begin that discussion with our moderator. thank you. >> thank you so much. i am thrilled to be here with you. i am one of the current fellows

at the institute of politics here at the kennedy school of government. i am having a fabulous time doing it. i want to introduce my panel. starting with the gentleman to my immediate left, our third date -- artur davis. he is a four-term member of congress, representing alabama's seventh district. he was named as one of the 10 best congressman in america. he graduated from harvard university in 1990, which i also did, oddly enough. and harvard law school in 1993, which i did not. in 1992, he was named best oralist. to his left, we have april ryan, the course on for urban radio networks and the host of the -- she is a member of the national

press club. she began her career in baltimore md., my home town. she served as director of to her left, we have ron christie, who i do radio with. it is a small, colored world. he is the founder and president of christie strategies and a veteran senior adviser for both the white house and congress. he served as a resident fellow at the harvard institute of politics last soon. -- last term. he is also the professor at the graduate school of university management. to his left is callie crossley, host of the wgbh show. she was an academy award nominee

and emmy award winner as a producer on the documentary series eyes on the prize. she was a panelist on meet the press -- beat the press. let's get a round of applause for this panel. so we can look at the interconnections between us as people who we knew, but it is kind of a small, colored world when it comes to political journalism and political punditry when it comes to african-americans and a lot of people of color. to what extent is that an advantage or disadvantage, that you know so many of the players? you are dealing with some of the daily issues of the presidential campaign, so i will start with you. >> is an advantage that you know the players.

it is such a small number of us that are seen daily that have the ear of the president, who are called by name by the president. because of that, when there are issues, particularly for the black community or people of color, then make sure that they target you. for instance, during the bush years, i did not even have to raise my hand. president bush knew, next question. some issues during this presidency, barack obama says particularly with the black farmers, he knew i was one of the ones raising the issue. because there are so few of us, there is an advantage. at the same time, it is a disadvantage because mainstream media is always there. particularly with this

president, it is and everyone approach. they want to make sure that they touch black media. it is a fine line to walk for every president, not just this president. they do not want to be perceived as trying to pander to an audience. at the same time, they want to make sure the audience hears their message. >> ron, you do tv, radio, you teach, you run a strategy company. there have been many times that many african-americans and other people of color have said to me, be careful, do not get put in the black box, meaning you are only called upon to talk about race. if you have had a career in republican administrations where you transcended the black box in many ways.

how do you act responsive to the inevitable questions of race in america and make sure you are heard on other essential pieces? >> is interesting that you say that. when i joined the bush administration, i was initially the deputy domestic policy adviser. you go there and you think, i am going to be the best policy adviser there is because i am smart, i am a lawyer, and you look around and recognize there are not as many folks who look like you and you feel an obligation, particularly in the bush white house, where i felt there were certain areas they could have been more sensitive on issues of race. if you do not speak up and offer your voice, it is an opportunity missed. for me, i went to our chief of staff right after trent lott made his infamous comments about the former senator strom thurmond and the insinuation was that it strom thurmond was

elected president, perhaps a lot of us in this room who look like those of us on the stage would be in a different place. i was so angry when that happened. i thought, special assistance for the president do not march over to the chief of staff and say, we are blowing it. we are missing an opportunity. i wrote him a four-page letter and went through and said, i cannot rationalize this for myself or my family and anyone outside of these dates if we remain silent and do not address this issue of racial insensitivity. when he called me, i thought i was going to get fired, but instead, it opened a dialogue. it is a double-edged sword. it is good in many respects because people are looking to you. it is bad because people are looking at you. >> artur, as a congressman

serving in alabama, you have been able to see many of the commonalities and divisions that typified american politics. and your work here at the iop is a blow by blow of what it takes to run for president. how do you see -- what did you learn from your term in congress about the issues of race and how they play into politics? which of those lessons apply to the current presidential race? >> let me put it into context. the conversation you talked about, getting put in the box. i was in congress for eight years. it was a pretty good eight years for african-american members of congress. at one point, there were seven african-american members who were chairman of committees,

another seven who were chairmen of the subcommittees in. about 15 or 16 of us walking around as mr. chairman. you want to be mr. chairman if you are on the hill. it is a good thing. what was always interesting, wherever there were subjects of jurisdiction or controversy, it was amazing that the mainstream press never seemed to call on them. in a previous lifetime, i used to watch a lot of shows on sunday morning. i do not do those things anymore. the voice and things like that. i would always be struck. they would talk about tax policy. weirdly, there was this guy, i think his name was rangle, who knew a lot about that and became the chair of the committee and was a ranking member before that. i would never, even before this started, i would never see charlie rangel talked-about tax

policy. we would not see eye to eye on a lot of things, but benny was the chair let -- the chairman of the homeland's security committee. homeland security is a big, broad topic. we talk about it every 9/11, when there are terror alerts every few months. i would never see bennie thompson, the ranking member of the committee, the chairman of the committee, ever talking about homeland security. i could keep on going if we had enough time. you get my drift. i thought it was just pundits or talking heads, those of us who write blogs or that kind of thing. it is not just those of us who are talking heads, it is elected people and people who have

proved their spurs by becoming committee chairmanships. we are going to talk about all of these things about race and politics and probably something that happened in florida that happened a week ago, maybe you have heard something about it. and we have heard -- and we should talk about that. it is very important. but we have started on exactly the right note. by asking the question why are voices of color often put in a particular, limited context. my final point, i do not want to leave harvard out of the equation. i win here as an undergraduate and law student. it still looks good on a resonates. -- a resume. i remember being in a class that i like very much.

the guy who ran the session was a good guy. he would do a review on politics. i happen to be here -- he was decidingfor president a third t? marion barry got into some stuff in d.c. he would call on me and he would say, artur, what do black people think about the situation? what do black people think on him running a third time? the first couple times -- the first time, it hurt my feelings. the second time, it's good being offended. the third time, i thought, the chance to say what artur davis thinks. it is an incredible challenge

that everyone who is black or brown or yellow or indian has to appreciate. there are a lot of people who are going to look at you and decide, you are smart, but i'd bet your specialty is this. i think it is a normal problem, it limits us. >> callie, let me dig into media. you and i are both people who continue to persevere in what some people think of as a dying industry. of course, the level of competition, the mergers, the shrinkage, my first job was at newsweek which is no one but the daily beast -- which is now run by the daily beast. how does that affect the ability to have a good strong coverage during a political year, which

includes important racial topics? >> it means that stuff gets overlooked. i say all the time, there are many perspectives. what happens when you do not have the many voices in the room to talk about what is the central issue of the day -- you have lost something in terms of understanding what the issues are and how they impact all of us in a community. i see it over and over again. for those who say there is only one way to look at it, i have been in so many discussions. i have raised my voice to say, but what about -- it is a huge loss. back to the double edge sword, sometimes you are in the uncomfortable position of being the only voice to raise it. it does not just have to be about race, but a different way

of looking at something that may be informed by the fact that i am a person of color. i look at things a little more broadly. just by the nature of my experience as a human being and a journalist. i cannot say how valuable it is to have those other voices in the room. even those of us at this panel are weary, do i have to say it one more time? there is always somebody new in the room. >> speaking of an issue with one truth that many perspectives, i am going to go to the case in florida. trayvon martin's death. it has become a media firestorm. we are getting to the point where we need to focus in on what some of the central issues

are. to me, this is my personal opinion, we have a very bad law that is influenced by lobbying patterns in america. it is not just an issue of justice 41 young man, it is many unarmed people. i want to take this into the presidential carina. we are supposed to talk about the presidential race. president obama said if i had a son, he would look like trayvon. recently, robert zimmerman said i never foresaw so much hate coming from the president and the naacp. mitt romney says it is a tragedy, there needs to be a thorough investigation. rick santorum said that stand your ground is not doing what this man did.

newt gingrich said the district attorney had done the right thing and of zimmerman he said it was a guy who has a hobby that is dangerous, armed neighborhood watch. side from zimmerman's father, you see some unanimity of critique. what impact does the trayvon martin case and these aha racial moments have on political races? go ahead. >> it has a lot to do with the presidential campaign. if you are president, you are president of all america. everything goes to the white house, from war to peace. trayvon martin is part of the white house. the president talked about his

son. the white house had been working on crafting some kind of response. the justice department was working on crafting some kind of response. what do you think about the trayvon martin issue? i said, i know you do not want this in your lap. there was a big mistake made with the henry gates situation. the new head -- then you had the shooting. they had to craft a statement that was general but with ownership. at the same time, the republican candidate for president, i am going to be blunt, it is not on

the radar. we have seen it. numbers of black americans going to the polls during the primary and not even measurable. >> all of the candidates -- >> they had to. the president spoke. that forces them to say something about it, particularly in light of gun laws. they are strong proponents of the nra. they are courting the hispanic vote, not necessarily the black vote. they had to prepare something that would not push them out of the way, make it tea party like them -- make the tea party dislike them, something broad enough that whatever happens, they would be ok.

with something of this magnitude, they had to come in and step in. they are the moral leaders of the country. they set the tone in so many respects. >> 3 worth that april said, setting the tone. i think the president did not set the right tone. i think he should have gone further. the thing i took exception with what he said is that he said, if i had a son, he would look like trayvon. what does that have to do with the price of tea in china? you could say, and a father. -- i am a father. i was upset he did not say,

people need to chill out. this is a sensitive issue. we need to learn what all the facts are. by him saying, we need to have a soul-searching moment -- we do not know what the facts are. the only thing we know is that a 17-year-old boy was shot dead. he was shot by a neighborhood watch person who was armed. that is all we know. he was told to stand down. the fact that our president said, if i had a son, he would look like trayvon, it only added a little more kerosene. see, it is a racial issue. folks need to get riled up on issues of race as opposed to being more compassionate. >> artur. >> there are 1000 things to be said about this. this is one of the big concerns

i have about the trayvon martin controversy. one of the two eyewitnesses -- no one knows what happened. having said that, if it turns out that george zimmerman is telling the 100% gospel truth, if it turns l. that trayvon martin did slammed his head to the ground, if zimmerman's version is vindicated, it does not excuse the fact that all kind of people who look out of place, if they are not getting shot, they are getting detained. the of getting questioned. they are getting analyzed. they are getting profile. on the flip side, if it turns

out that somebody comes forward and says, i saw this thing and what zimmerman says is 100% false, if he is convicted and black folks are jumping up and down the street, that is not going to solve the fact that some other black kid is going to wander into the same situation. every time i hear us obsessing about one controversy, i do not care if it is this, if it is rodney king, i was a student here when that happened, we get so worked up over one person. of course we ought to care about the tragedy. we forget the fact that the resolution of that one person's saba still leaves us with the same problems. elected in a black president did

not lift race off the backs of the american people. that is a reality. my final point, i will follow ron's instinct, you have to say something controversial. this does remind me of one of the thing, may i use the we in the literal sense, meaning the folks of color. we have to be very careful about over-invoking racism and race and racial injustice. i will be very candid with you, we love to do it. african american politicians under investigation, we love to talk about a number of african american politicians under investigation. we love to talk about patterns.

we love to invoke racial injustice. we love to say that every time a new measure is passed that says you have to do one extra thing, that is the ugly and of jim crow. it sounds good. it makes you feel nice and warm. the only problem is, as good as it sounds, and eventually the real wolf does come knocking at the door. when the real wolf shows up at the door, if it turns out that zimmerman is lying, that is what happened. then it sounds like what we are saying, it sounds like it is what we have said, and how we have said it before. it does not resonate the way it should. i will make those two cautionary point. do not think it is going to solve anything or and anything

-- end anything and be careful about how we talk about walz being at the door. -- wolves being at the door. >> recently a participated in a forum in new york. the african american studies library in new york, on the panel was randall kennedy. in the process of conversation, one of the things that came out was that, although we have this black president, president obama, in some ways, he is perhaps the least equipped to deal with structural racial injustice. it is a third rail for black politicians. inject whatever else you feel, do you think that in some ways

there is a structure against black politicians? the wolf could be at your door 10 times in one night. the wolf could be at your door one time. it could also be 10 times. it could be the wolf. under what circumstances can you challenge structural injustice, not just sporadic in justice? >> as a black politician, not very much. as leader of the free world, he has the justice department. it is under his power to say, let's go see what is going on in florida. that is what he can do. it flies back in his face. people are going to say, in this polarized -- i cannot call it a dialogue, discussion, ranting, that is going on in this country, if you bring to the

table that you are black and speaking about race, it is translated into racism. i want to pick up on something that artur said. the last person in the room that wants to call it racism is the black person. i do not want to be the person to say, did she not wait on me because -- i want to think of anything else but that. the way this gets translated it is that people imposed upon us, saying we scream racism. we are the less people who want to call it up. we want it to be anything else but that. when it is there, let's face up to it. that is the frustrating thing around the trayvon martin case, the negativity we have seen that

is racially based, directed at president obama. i hear no other voices except black people saying, come on, y'all. recognize this. to the extent we are still operating in the context, we are operating in the context of, this is going to go on today and tomorrow and the next day, we have to figure out how we are going to go forward. your point, that is what president obama said that trayvon could be my son. the undertone is about the ongoing racial conflict. to not say anything about that in the most carefully crafted way he could is disingenuous. i really do think so. >> let me respond and go in a different direction.

we have a short attention span as an american community. we remember what happened this morning and yesterday. i remember an episode about six months ago, i will not pick on the college by name, he is a prominent figure for the civil- rights community. he was talking about the phenomenon of "racism" and the response to barack obama. i think he made some points that were very good. he took one point too far. he said, two years ago, i am quoting him, "when the tea party folks were out there and they were holding up the signs showing obama with the hitler mustache, can you imagine a caucasian president being

treated in a disrespectful way ?" the host of this show paused for a moment. he said, i want to show you something. he put up a clip of george bush with a hitler mustache and dick cheney with a hitler mustache. a lot of ugly things have been said about barack obama that a disrespectful, that a dumb, that have no basis. news flash, being president of the united states entitles a lot of people to feel they can say dumb things about you. i have this memory of another guy, he was once called the first black president until we got the first black president. his name is william jefferson clinton.

at one point, people said that obama was a muslim. what was his name? pastor wright looked anything but a muslim to me. that continues to float around. that he used to be the biggest drug dealer in arkansas and run drugs at of a pout of a private airport. that he had his white house aide it killed. that he had raped a woman, two. i will not even repeat some other things that were commonly said. i could go back through the charts. none of them -- there are some

people who dislike barack obama. so many people walk around with race at the core of their heart, there is no reason to think it would stop. we have to be mindful of this. we live in a time where contempt towards people would disagree with is a common political play. it is awful. the notion that if we do not agree with someone's politics, we ought to tear them down. that if someone does not think like us, there is something wrong with them. the left things, if you do not agree with me, there is something wrong with your brain. the right says, if you do not agree with me, there is something wrong with your soul. if we can get past the politics, i think it will be a lot better off.

>> i have to it jump in here. we are in the q&a time. we did not even get to big issues like, before we wrap up, we will go through it speed read on. -- a speed round. there was a poll that said his approval ratings have inched over the 50% mark since last may. there were others that were lower. the same poll said that if the general election were held today, president obama would win handily. there is the issue, another issue i find troubling, which is the black unemployment rate being double -- it rose, the

overall unemployment rate stayed stable, the black unemployment rate rose, it is at 14.1%. i hope some of the wise people will be able to craft questions. we have microphones here. i will give you the drill. all questioners must identify themselves. one brief question per person. no speeches. questions and with a question mark. >> good afternoon. my name is michelle wilson, i am from the epa. my question has to do with voter suppression, what you all believe will be the effect on the election of these laws and how we should, as a group of

people of color, what should be our strategy to deal with these ideologues and their intention of reducing the number of people of color at the polls? thank you. >> the assistant minority head, on the hill, he is also the head of the anti-voter suppression effort. he said, it is going to happen. the fact that you are going to have to have your id card. everyone needs to make sure that you get some kind of state id so

that you can go to the polls. you do not just have that. you have the issue of the fact that this is not going to be the big one. you will never have the big moment. there is an issue, the intensity, it did not just have the voter-suppression issue, you have the intent to the issue. 90% plus went to the polls for obama. obama is concerned about intensity. factoring in the unemployment numbers, the fact that black people -- i think some of this trayvon martin issue is a culmination of so much. there are so many african americans who are disenchanted by so many things. they are scared to speak out. they fear it could hurt the president.

this trayvon martin issue has evolved into a lot of things. this placed anxiety, the perfect term. -- displace anxiety, the perfect term. there are several factors that black america needs to face. why am i going to the polls? the big moment is gone. this is what black america have to deal with. >> let me ishaqi by saying something about voter i.d.. -- let me shock you by saying something about voter i.d. it does not bother me. let me say why. whenever i hear somebody say that and i d requirement is oppressive, i have to ask the

question, how many times are we asked to present id in the course of citizenship? the department of justice is challenging voter i.d. laws. you cannot get into the department of justice without a photo id. it so happens that you cannot get into a lot of private buildings in washington and new york without an id. if you try to get on a plan without an id, they have to make a whole bunch of phone calls. if you happen to be an arab person -- i have not seen any of those factors in vogue at rage in our society. whenever i say that, people say, the difference is we have a right to vote.

britain not have the right to get on a plane. -- we do not have the right to get on a plane. you may discover you feel you do have a right. there is this interesting notion that if you have a right in this country, that nobody can attach a burden to it. that is at the heart of what people say. they are saying, because i have a right, you cannot put a burden on that. when you turn 18, you do not become enrolled to vote. i did not see anybody saying that you should be auto-enrolled to vote. we have a registration. registration does not happen -- you have to fill a form out.

you choose to vote. you have to stand in line. you have to get someone to notarize your form. do you have a right to vote absentee? you bet you do. you have to jump through some groups. -- hoops. if you register people to vote and you are active politically, that is okay. here is how you handle the worry. make sure that folks have an id. you get out and register them. >> i have a feeling that other folks want to follow up. i am going to go to the next question. >> i am and alumni in the public policy program. it is interesting that black people talk so much about

having our points of view heard and discussed and what we do not do is to make our thoughts heard affectively. we do a lot of talking, when it comes to voting day, we are supposed to show up. we are there, registering our opinions as we were given the right to do and our forefathers blood so that could happen. we are not there. what is it about us that keeps us talking and raising the good fight philosophically, but we did not take care of business? >> callie? >> people have to feel the vote is connected to their lives. when they do, they vote.

it cannot happen for barack obama, people felt -- the turnout happened for barack obama, people felt it was connected to their lives. the inauguration -- he never gets up to do nothing. he felt connected. for pookie and many other people, the question is, will it make a difference if i get up? i did not see it will make a difference. he is not able to go to a federal building. he is part of the 25% without any government issued id. 70% of the elector for all votes

are held in states with photo id laws fo. that is a political situation. whatever it is, it is a reality. some laws are still yet to be enacted. i have to enter this about the photo id thing, there has not been demonstrated fraud. i am ok if you demonstrate there is fraud. that every second person is fraudulent. all right, let's take them through all the hoops. that is not the case. somehow, the story has to be connected with the folks who are not voting to make them understand that there is a lot at stake in this election and every election. itmore alexian's than most, is going to provide a stark contrast about policy.

people need to be paying attention to that. >> we have two questions appear. i am going to start on the right. >> i'm a sophomore at the college. this is a follow up. race plays a different role in the democratic and republican party iies, he may disagree with me. this might be controversial but, i wanted to ask, to what extent the believe that race is used as an instrument in politics. >> when we talk about the voter i.d. and voter suppression, it is being used as a wedge issue against republicans. somehow, republicans want to

suppress the vote of the people of color. they are putting together this new jimc rowe era -- jimc rowe era poll tax. it is nonsense. you cannot exist without an id. >> you can. i am if field reporter who goes out to those tons with there is nothing but a corner store at the intersection of tree and rock. >> i am only looking at my own example, my relatives. miraculously, my 98-year-old grandmother has a voter i.d.. it is nonsense that republicans are seeking to divide the country on race -- it is nonsense.

the plan to the point that there is no proof that this is a republican witch hunt, that is where i am going. you look at the election in minnesota. the congressman who had the seat, it is proven there are more folks who were legally registered to vote to cast their vote. i need to go no further. in minnesota, it is not a place where you a trying to suppress the minority vote. there is one instance where it is false to say it never happens and an instance where the democratic party is time to stir up interest by some republicans are racist. but -- saying republicans are racist perry >> there ought to

be one of every two people are fraudulent voters. there is not that. when everybody leading the voter i.d. campaign is republican, well, people say, what are you doing? and why? the only state where i know there were black people part of the discussion, was rhode island. rhode island has a voter i.d. law. there are black lawmakers who feel strongly about it. the rest, they a democrat. it was the black democrats involved in supporting the law in place in rhode island. everyplace else, i do not know. >> let me jump in. 15 seconds on this point. the guy who served in congress before i did, in the democratic primary in 1992, he got 130

votes, in the run-up to got 13,000 votes -- run-off he got 13,000 votes, you do the math. in a governor's race in louisiana there was a minority running. he was not a black person. he was an indian-brother. five days before the election, his opponent cichlid a fly air -- circulated a flier that showed him with long hair. they darkened the photoperio. the only place they want to hand out the photo was the george wallace area. that is where they handed out these fliers.

his name was bobby jindal. he came back and won. he had a five point lead before they went had the race on him. the day was the democratic party. -- they was the democratic party. jindal is a republican. there are folks in both political parties who use race when they feel like it as a political instrument. there are democrats who are as happy as republicans. there are some republicans who have a history of doing it too. it is not a partisan thing. >> i am a freshman here at the college. i would like to ask this question on behalf of the jfk forum.

i am aiming this at mr. christie. could you describe what role your race played during a time in the white house? do you feel you were treated differently, is the positive or negative, as a result? >> it is great to see you again. jacob was a but this event in my study group. -- a participant in my study group. it is great to see a friendly face. i will tell you a story. it is in the book. it upset me. it related to the ways we could have been more sensitive. i was ecstatic to be in the east room of the let us when coretta scott king presented president bush with a portrait of her husband. he was very fired up.

he said, i can hardly wait to hang it. i waited a couple of weeks and there was no portrait. i went to the east room, the west wing, i cannot find it. i went to the chief of staff and said, what happened to the portrait? he said, i do not know. someone had put it in a box and ship it to a federal facility. the portrait came back. the chief of staff said i want it back. i said we should hang it in the east room. perfect. hung up on the wall. two weeks later, yangon. it disappeared. i said, how is it that we have white house staff where we have been given a portrait of doctor martin luther king that someone continues to take this thing and put it somewhere -- is that with

this is going? -- where this is going? it goes back to my earlier commentary, no one else seemed to care that this portrait was not there. if we cannot even hang a picture of doctor martin luther king in the white house, what else are we doing wrong? that started my crusade in the white house to speak out and to be a focal figure -- vocal figure. >> the bust is still in the white house. it is still there. he is in the oval office. >> a good spot to be perry >> he is on the move. >> i am a freshman at harvard.

we have talked a lot about the problems rub in politics and the issue of race, what can be done on capitol hill and on a personal level to try to rectify the problems as much as we can? i you optimistic that change will come? >> i have been at the white house for 15 years. bill clinton, the eight years and to which the the bush, to this president. -- the eight years of george w. bush, to this president. no matter what your agenda item is, your idea is grade -- >> can you explain to a. philip randolph is? >> a pullman porter. >> i need that explained. [laughter]

>> i am time to give a synopsis of a synopsis. -- i am trying to give a synopsis of a synopsis. he was told, i think your idea is great. you have to make me do it. that is what we have to do now, to make congressional leaders take notice. to make presidents take notice. i have not seen, i am saying we as a people, we do not have the it-ness. witnes-to- change is still ongoing . people do not want to stand at the white house. i am telling you, the aggravation, the tension, for people to look at, that is what will bring change.

in my opinion. >> i have to say, and industry. i worked in the technology industry. i have doubled and technology since 1995 have 1995dabbled -- have dabbled in technology since 1995. when i worked at a biotech company, there were no black voters -- at a tech company, there were no black coders. you do see stratification. white, black, asian, native american, very different outcomes, sometimes it has to do with race and ethnicity. some of it has to do with, what i call, the social aspect of

hiring. people conform to stereotypes about who is hirable. based on that -- if you want to put together a startup team, there are reasons why you want a homogenous team. you want people who you can spend 23 hours a day with. when to start growing that, you should not have the homogenous company. we need to start looking at things from the industry's perspective which cycles back to the issue of jobs. >> can i say something quick. it is relevant to everyone who is here. this is the world we live in. washington, d.c., new york city are the two hubs of the legal world. an average major law firm has 1000 people.

do you know how many black partners are at those firms? you would be lucky if you had 10 to 15. that is fractional. we have not had an african american considered to be on the u.s. supreme court since clarence thomas. as not one of those three individuals, not one of them has interviewed anybody black for the u.s. supreme court since 1991. that is the reality. does that mean there are no qualified jurists who are african american? look at the appeals court. this is a problem that works its way through our system. how many times when african american candidates want to run do we hear the question, is he

electable? when barack obama was running for the senate in illinois, all the major democratic players in d.c. said he is a smart, a young man. he is very capable. we just wish she was electable. i did not hear anyone asked if a white guy is electable. >> i'm a student at the business school. my question concerns a longer- term view. can you discuss the impact that growth in asian and latino populations will have? >> that would be huge. [laughter] >> could you repeat the question? >> he said what about the demographic impact on asian and latino populations on electoral coloring. my answer is it would be huge.

we are talking in generalities. the asian community is growing too letter in larger political power. latinos have numbers. they are prepared to flex the numbers. >> [inaudible] >> we vote more than you think. 76 percent of blacks voted in alabama. there is this myth that blacks do not vote. blacks are voting. >> african americans have slightly lower floating rates than white americans, but above latino americans -- lower voting rates than white americans, but above latino americans. florida is different from massachusetts. >> i talked to michael steele

before i walked in. he said, the black population is not even a consideration anymore. in the republican party, they are going gung-ho for the hispanic population. when nixon became president, 40% of african-americans voted for him. when george bush became president, it was 9%. the former black congressman said to me -- republican congressman. [laughter] he never went to a meeting. >> i did not go to a whole lot. [laughter] >> yeah right. [laughter] he said to me, when president bush got in he said, i can see black america voting for a gop candidate, i can see that coming.

now, the numbers are not measured at all. you cannot measure them. they said, forget the black population. they of the win for the hispanic population. the obama administration -- they are go in for the hispanic population. the obama administration is also going for the hispanic population issa . >> mark rubio coming out to say he felt the republican party was losing the young latino voices. it was an opportunity for the republican party. because he is an attractive candidate, a vice presidential contender, to address immigration issues head on. let's let me point out a fact that will play something about -- >> let me point out a fact that will tell you why the

latino demographic is so hard to point down. cuban-americans, 91% ofn a a certain age said they were white. in the 2010 census, 41% of the children's generation said they were white. race is something that is a perception and ties to the motherland or fatherland depending on whether you are an immigrant or second or third generation. to a great extent, we may not know how the latino cravaack dedemographic evolves. do you think the republican party has given up on black people? >> no, but we have done a terrible job.

we lost a golden opportunity. in april, it was 10% in butch's first election. you think, that is it? what are we not doing that a significant portion of the electorate are saying, i have written off the republican party. i think you have to start small. when i was the policy director for george allen, i said, you have to make an effort to go to committees of color and go in there and keep your mouth shut. -- to communities of color and go in there and keep your mouth shut. politicians love to talk. the opposite of talking is listening. in politics, the opposite of talking is waiting to talk. [laughter] the people of the republican party, a thinking what they are

going to say. stop and listen. go to committees of color and listen. say, what is on your mind? what can i do better? we show up, hey, come vote for me. we go to the church. see you later. >> can i make one quick point. i want to be respectful. in the interest of fairness, there would not be a tim scott -- he is the only black member of congress who represents a predominantly white district. there are only two african american members of congress who represent predominantly white districts. i used to be the recruitment share for the democratic party. this is african american -- if

an african american candidates in the democratic party surfaced it was always in a black district. the staff took a look at it and said, he is a good chap, but he is not electable. 20 and 25-year-olds are going to figure that out. and eventually they are going to figure out that there are more of them advancing in the republican party today in predominantly white environments then black democrats are advancing in predominantly white environment. -- environments. >> i do agree with the. we have to try to get all the

voices in. i am going to ask each of you to speak back-to-back. we will answer both of your questions. please introduce yourself and ask a question. >> thank you. thank you for all coming out. i'm a first-time legislative from minnesota. -- a legislator from minnesota. i wanted some clarity on a comment i heard. it was a republican supreme justice that determined that there was no fraud in the election. 133 have been found to have committed fraud. but of those, -- out of those, they thought they could vote. fraud is not happening at all.

if it is not fraud, the voter i.d. deals it is a national agenda, if it is not fraud, why do you think we are attaching an id to your right to vote? >> i am going to take both questions. >> as a citizen of this of the congressional district, i felt some obligation to ask a question. [laughter] i do appreciate, you alluded to my question, talking about democrats and republicans and having african americans representing the district's with the majority are not african american. i observed the same thing. not being the chairman of the committee.

as someone who observes politics. how does the democratic party thickset moving forward? we have made efforts towards that -- party fix that moving forward? we have made efforts towards that. >> the democratic party needs to live up to its progressive ideals on racial inclusiveness. i am amazed how many democratic politicians talk a wonderful game. i am amazed how many white democratic politicians can get a little bit of rhythm. i can even do it. when you asked and the question, are you willing to get behind an african-american candidate for something behind a black district, it will be 50 reasons why they will not. -- they will give you 50 reasons why they will not.

it is not just crosslartur davi virtually all of these states in the last several years, if you are thinking harold ford is an example, let me tell you, they tried very hard to get the governor of tennessee. folks who ran the democratic party did not want him. i would love to see some good old white democrats stepped up and say, here is an african american politician we think we can get behind. >> we do not have time. what i want to do is get a response to our first question there. and then i want to do a speed run. a speed arouround.

does anyone want to get to the fraud question? >> the question of the matter is there was allegations that there was fraud. it did go to the court system. it was stolen by people who are not legally eligible to vote. the way it was adjudicated is the right way, going through the court system. for those who say it did not happen, that is one case. >> speed round, who do you think is going to win the presidency? >> i do not have a clue. barack obama should worry about, if the health-care log it struck down and the whole conversation is about what the next lot is going to look like, that is not good. >> that is artur davis, a fellow at the iop, and a former

congressman from alabama's seventh district. >> there are eight months. it is a long time in politics. anything can happen. president obama could be up. next week, he could be down. you never know. ithe economy, the economy, the economy. on health care, if one provision is struck down, he is all right. if the individual mandate is struck down and everything else safe is in tact, he is all right. >> could we get a prediction?

i asked for a fortune cookie. >> you do not know what i am going to say. wi-fi thing peggy noonan -- i think pay the sum it up when she said, barack obama can lose but only if the republicans to feed themselves. he should be easily beatable, but the republicans have a remarkable propensity to blow it. do i think romney is going to win? i do, but do i did we have an extremely odd way of losing it and sells the struck staying -- self-destructive? yes, but i put my money on governor mitt romney. >> thank you so much.

>> you will not be getting a prediction from me. here is what i would say. >> you are afraid if you make wrong prediction, he will not make it to the white house. the white house and -- >> this is such an interesting race if the presumed candidate is mitt romney. what i said before about a stark contrast of policy is really going to be on the table, so that is the starch. for both parties, there are reasons for people to stay home. maybe the black people who are they are just

done with him. good on the republican side, i did not want mitt --those are their reasons to stay home. on the republican side, i do not want mitt, but hey barack obama, so he has got to go. listen to the stuff going on. i have got to get up and defend, so there are reasons on both sides, so this would be a very interesting race i think. one of the most interesting we have seen in a while, and eight months is a long time. >> final words with kelly cross, who is the host of her own show, and i want to thank calais, --

kelly, ron, april for a thrilling panel. we will see what happens. thanks so much. >> in a few moments, an update on the un resolution regarding syria. in a little more than half an hour, monday's news conference with president obama, cal barone, and canadian prime minister harper, and after that, mitt romney campaigned in wisconsin. the american society of news editors continues its annual meeting in washington tomorrow. they will hear from the imf managing director christine dugard. also, later tomorrow, the

editors will hear from president obama. his remarks are scheduled to begin at 12:15 p.m. eastern. >> c-span paucities tour takes are booktv and american history tv programming on the road. this past weekend featured little rock arkansas. >> the high school collected photographs, and he was particularly interested in the 19th century, the civil war in particular. these are a team of your friends, union and confederate, who knew each other prior to the war, who fought against each other, survived the war, and made friends after the war, and here they are, age 100, sitting on the porch talking about old days. >> low that lives in a world war

ii japanese internment camp. -- a look at life in a world war camp.panese internment a >> she talks a lot about how arts and crafts gave them something to do and about how depression was so bad in some of the camps and there was a high incidence of suicide, people would make these things of beauty to give to people as a andto say, we support you care about you. >> hour to hour continues -- our tour continues on may 5 and may 6 from oklahoma city. good >> kofi annan has asked the united nations security council to support a peace plan force. that calls for a ceasefire and meetings between the government

and opposition leaders. the u.s. and syrian ambassador to the u.s. and spoke to reporters for about a half-hour. >> good afternoon, everyone. let me provide you with the readouts in which the council meeting this morning with kofi annan. the joint special envoy it reviewed his efforts to address the crisis in syria. he expressed gratitude for the recent presidential statement and for security council unity it represented. joint special envoy annan said in his discussions with the regime, he emphasized the urgency of the situation and press the government to cease the use of heavy weapons and pull out of population centers.

he reported to the syrian foreign minister sent him a letter yesterday in which he said the syrian military will begin immediately and by april 10 will complete the cessation of all forward deployment and use of heavy weapons and will complete its withdrawal from weapons centers. mr. m annan said he wished he had this sooner, meaning that he wears the april 10 deadline would have been earlier, -- he wished the april 10 deadline would have been earlier, but he urged the government to make sure forces moved no further, and that commitment was provided by syrian authorities. he reported he is expecting details from the syrian

government very shortly on the other aspects of his six-point plan, including humanitarian access, as well as access to the media and the political process. his deputy has also had constructive exchanges for the opposition to urge them to cease their operations within 48 hours of a complete cessation of government abilities. mr. annan said the the team joined by some of his staff will trouble again to syria this week -- will travel again to syria this week to continue the supervisory mission. finally he asked the security council to support the deadline, and given the urgency of the situation, to begin

consideration of a potential monitoring mission. under the secretary general and brees in short terms early stage contingency planning for such a mission. all members of the security council expressed full support when called for business and political process but leads to a transition to democracy, reiterated more than once by the joint special envoy. some members expressed concern the government not use the next day's to intensify violence and expressed some skepticism, but in general, council members expressed willingness to

monitor a cessation of violence is achieved. i am happy to take questions. drugs can you give me an idea of -- >> can you give us an idea of how difficult it would be? >> i think they can provide the details they are thinking. they are looking at an approach with the aim of trying to get in a small core of monitors said might be drawn from some of the nearby regions. it will take some time to ramp up to full strength, and i think it would be better to give them the opportunity to give the details of what they are thinking. >> was there any discussion of the announcement that they would begin to play salaries, and can

you also said the u.s. offered to provide communications equipment? would you specify what safeguards are in place? >> if i am not mistaken, only one delegation raise that issue. most were focused on the contents of the joint special envoy a briefing. as you know, we announced our readiness not only to increase our humanitarian assistance now to $25 million but also to begin to provide assistance to the opposition, including in communications equipment. that is non-legal, and we will

continue to work with other partners as was agreed to strengthen our efforts to support the effectiveness and coherence of the opposition. you clarify who is going to be monitoring these properties, given that you do not have a mechanism for peacekeeping on the ground, and can you clarify a if there has been any conditions have to this agreement for the deadline? >> joya special envoy -- joint special envoy did not specify preconditions, nor were they aware of planned preconditions.

the action was to have begun yesterday on april 1 consisted with a commitment the joint special envoy received and would be implemented over the course of 10 days. in terms of monitoring, there is no independent monitoring on the ground, because that has not been permitted by the circumstances, by the lack of violence and by the posture of syrian authorities. we will need to rely on the same sources of information we have been relying on for the course of many months to assess the degree of implementation. advice it said yes, there is no

hesitation in regard >> as i just said, as it was grieved to us, -- briefed to us, there were no preconditions specified for implementation of the commitments it had made some days prior to april 1. be realistic. we have seen over the course of many months promises made and promises broken. we have seen the amendments -- commitments to end the violence, so the united states would look of these commitments and say the proof is in the actions, not the words, and past experience would lead us to be skeptical and to worry that over the next several

days we might yet again see an escalation of violence. we hope that is not so. we hope the authorities will implement a commitment they have made without conditions, and should they do so, we would expect the opposition to follow suit within 48 hours was specified by joya special envoy is. thank you very much. that i am in your hands. >> the you feel your government is actually coming around to his

way of thinking in terms of the proposal he has made? you have heard skepticism as to whether the governor is going to implement things that have been proposed. how do you respond? >> my government is committed to the success of mr. kofi annan's mission, and we are doing our utmost to see this successful. he has been interacting with my government officials almost on a regular basis. both sides have a common ground for working out the best the

elimination of the six-point plan. >> was it your suggestion or kofi annan's? >> it is by common accord between our minister and mr. kofi annan. >> the commitment was yesterday' with the mission? >> we are speaking about the six-point plan. the syrian government is committed to making the implementation of this plan a successful one end of the sovereignty of syria. the syrian government is committed, but we are expecting mr. kofi annan and some parties

in the security council also to get the same kind of commitment from the other parties. plan would not be successful unless everybody was committed. so far the syrian government said it is committed, and we are expecting mr. kofi annan to get in touch with the other parties, those who are involved in initiating, sponsoring, and in order toroup's make the stopping of violence relevant to all parties. >> [speaking foreign language]

>> [speakin gforeign language] [speaking foreign language]

[speaking foreign language] >> [speaking foreign language]

>> have you excepted to implement without preconditions to implement pulling the troops, and then 48 hours later they would start demanding of the opposition to: track? are did you except about, or are you having preconditions? is this new a precondition you are added to your interpretation? but what i said was not a precondition. what i said was to clarify everybody should i from the basis of good faith and good intentions. we are in the process of diplomatic negotiations of the highest level represented by mr.

kofi annan, and we are dealing with him accordingly. in diplomatic negotiations, use it up a table. you raise your concerns. you ask clarification, and you make a commitment. this is what diplomacy is about. it is not imposing any preconditions. it is about our sovereignty. all the details will be about the final commitment of everybody, not just the syrian government curiosa -- the syrian government.

the trucks could you comment on the announcements by some countries in the gulf today and sent to start paying salaries on u.s. opposition and that they intend to provide communications? >> the so-called enemy is in itself a violation and contradiction of mr. kofi annan's mission. this is set up by the enemies to compete with his mission, not only to compete, may be to undermine this mission as of all -- as a whole, so all the parties sponsoring armed groups

should bear the responsibility including whether the saudis are doing, including what turkey is doing, including what all these people who attended the meetings in istanbul. everybody should bear the responsibility. the question should be to these people who are undermining the mission of kofi annan. >> what about the communications equipment. the united states says it is going to provide communications equipment to opposition triggered strikes every single act of -- communications equipment to opposition. >> every single hour that is not in agreement with the mission,

including claims of providing communications and other supplies. for those who said publicly they would like to send money and salaries to these armed groups in syria, somebody should put them at a seat in the security council announced why they are doing that. and this is not only of violation of the charter. this is a violation and declaration of war against syria. >> will the syrian government go ahead with completing these elements? is the opposition's leading up to april 10 does not take similar steps to stop fighting, will you go away with that even

if there are not spots on april 10? >> we are working very carefully the relevant details of the mission. there is no if. >> wouldn't be possible to withdraw from all of the centers if there was still under arrest or fighting going on? as a commitment to withdraw by april 10 supercede, or are other conditions -- are there conditions? >> the plan is six points, not only one, and we are working with him and technicians on all 6.0 yard points.

>> [speaking foreign language] >> [speaking foreign language] >> you are calling them enemies. i want to ask, turkey is

hosting 20,000 refugees from stereo -- syria. you know there is a kinship between the countries. you are calling these people who are hosting. >> when a government hosts a meeting where acting against the sovereignty of another country, this is a diplomatic -- a declaration of war. turkey should have consulted whether it was willing to or not. they are calling for a change of

regime around the clock. this is not the reaction from a neighboring government triggered thank you 3 much. -- thank you very much. >> this year we asked students to create a video telling us constitution was most important to them and why. reader. why did you choose to focus on the 26 amendments? >> we really wanted to take one related to use, so we wanted to go with the youth vote amendment.

we wanted to empower people to get out and vote. we wanted to empower them to use that right to vote. >> what did you learn from the mayor? >> he had a lot to teach us about the amendment and the fact that youth do not know enough yet to make informed decisions, so we wanted to empower them to vote. >> you interviewed two college students. what perspective did they add? >> he is studying the field so

we could use a youth perspective to get it across, because he was well versed and knew how to relate to viewers. using a college student like enter was really great. -- like andrew was really great. the other one was really involved. she noticed when she met different people. she understood the power they could have to vote and the fact they need to be educated to do . they were really involved. did you learn about the impact youth voters can have on the election?

>> we learned about how integral youth are. the turnout is increasing each year. we wanted to get the message across the one vote could make a difference. >> what is the most important thing you can take away from this experience to? >> the power of collaborative effort is enormous. we have not worked together before, and there are three team members, so we had to work through creating a documentary. it is amazing to us. it was unlike anything i have done before. a brief portion

of the documentary. >> i think educating youth is really important. i really see potential, the drive, the passion they have and their willingness to make a difference in the world, and i think being educated, they can find new ways to engage with our country. i say there are two great equalizers, education and the internet, and combining those is the way to go in educating young voters. i think there needs to be campaign around using the education and using internet. capacity to go online and influence things.

>> you can see this entire video and other documentaries on studentcam.org. >> this year's competition allows students what part of the constitution is important to them and why. a third prize winners selected the 26th amendment. >> higher. good >> i am jacki. >> i am catherine. >> i voted. >> i voted. >> i voted.

>> i voted. >> and i voted. >> youth were granted the right to vote in 1971. this was a response to the argument that an 18-year-old was die in vietnam and ought to be old enough to have his or her voice heard. >> they were in the military service in being sent off to fight in the war. donsomebody without the right to elect a leadership that dropped them there. they felt it was unfair to be put into the military service and put their lives on the line and not be able to elect the

president was going to be their commander in chief. the 26th amendment was very important at that time. >> the amendment is really important to me. it shows youth have a voice and matter. elected officials had to direct their campaign to people in the workforce or retired and how things impact social security or medicaid. a lot of times, the importance of youth is overlooked. there the next generation of leaders. they will be taking over the jobs and leading the country in the future. >> i just graduated high school. i am going to college. i think this amendment allows me to express my beliefs and what is best for my interests as a college student. about what is going on in the country than the people in the news media. some say an 18-year-old should not be able to vote because they vote with their heart and not their mind.

>> other candidates have noticed the younger voters do not vote until there are efforts to tap into that potential pool ofwe see a lot of different efforts like rock the vote or other efforts to appeal to young people to get them to cast their votes. >> the voting age changed. elections and the involvement of youth. the 2008 election was the first time they saw such a large movement around a campaign and candidate. that shows youth are looking for more ways to engage. >> in 2008, it had increased just two percentage points. there has been a trend of

towards greater involvement. >> we have seen turnout go up. the percentages increased. the percolation -- population has also increased. this is the largest group of young people and our country has seen -- that our country has seen. >> we need to do a better job of teaching students our history and why our government is the way it is. >> i definitely think educating youth about political issues is incredibly important. when i interact with them, i see the potential, the drive, passion they have. their willingness and an initiative to make a difference

in the world. by being educated about what is going on in the political scene, they can find new ways to engage with the country and progress it to be better in future years. i think there are to have great equalizers in life. education and the internet. -- i think. two great equalizers in life. education and the internet. combining those are the way to go to educate young voters. the need to be more campaigns around using education and the internet. people have the capacity to go online to access resources. that will be the best way to impact the most people and educate the largest number. >> i want to always give examples that your vote does

count. it is going to be tough for one person to change the outcome of a presidential election, but after a local school board races or smaller local races, one vote really can make a difference. i try to teach people that. do not think your vote does not count. it absolutely does. >> nobody gets to write your destiny but you. your future is in your hands. your life is what you make of it. nothing is beyond your reach so long as you are willing to dream big, work hard, and stayed focused on your education. there is not a single thing any of you cannot accomplish, not a single thing. >> youth are the future of america. greater understanding will empower each of us to play an active role in shaping the course of our future. the 26 amendment granted youth the representation they deserve. now it is us to utilize the wide array of resources and opportunities available to us. just one young person testing one vote on one measure in congress is enough to drive

legislation that will directly impact the issues we care about. we are the future of america. our vote, our voice matters. >> i care. >> i care. >> are care region i care -- i care. >> i care. >> go online to watch all the winning videos. continue the conversation at our facebook and twitter pages.

tonight it is book tv. "liberation square" examines the egyptian revolution and the future of the country. then "the invisible. >> we take our both tv programming on the road. this past weekend featured little rock, ark., and with a high-school collection at the university of arkansas. >> he was interested in the 19th century, and the civil war in particular. these are two friends who knew each other prior to the civil war, who fought against each other, survive the war, came out alive, and here they are talking about the war days.

>> there is a wonderful jokes region -- wonderful book, and she talks a lot about how arts she kept herre wherhow sanity and about how the depression was so bad, and there was a high incidence of suicide, so people would make these little things as a way to say, we support you. >> aren't sure continues from oklahoma city campaigns in

wisconsin, then then a harvard university forum city -- our coe continues on may 5 and sixth in oklahoma city. >> in a little less than an hour, mitt romney on race in the campaign. the american society of senator -- of news editors continues. we will hear from the imf director christine dugard. also later tomorrow the editors will hear from president obama. it is remarks are scheduled to begin at 12:15. they spoke with reporters for a little less than an hour.

>> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states accompanied biogen the president of mexico and -- accompanied by the president of mexico and the prime minister of canada. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> it is my pleasure to welcome to great friends and partners. i have worked with them on many occasions. we join our international partners from a peg to the g-20. from our last segment we remember hospitality and that of the mexican people, including

marriott she and some tequila -- mariachi and some tequila. i cannot reciprocate the music, but we are honored to welcome you today. we represent nearly half a billion citizens from the canadian north to southern mexico. between the diversity of our people is extraordinary. they wake up every day with similar hopes to provide for their families to be safe in their communities, to give their children a better life, and each of our countries, the daily lives are shaped profoundly by what happened to the other two, and today we focused on our highest priority, creating jobs and opportunities for our people.

our businesses have created nearly 4 million new jobs. the economy and getting stronger. with lots of folks still struggling, and we are doing everything we can to speed up the recovery, and that includes boosting trade with our largest economic partners. i made it a priority to increase our exports, and i am pleased they are growing faster than to the rest of the world. last year trade in goods with our neighbors surprise one trillion dollars for the first time ever. this trade supports 2.5 american -- 2.5 million american jobs, and i wanted supporting even more jobs in the future, so tonight prime minister harker let us in a good discussion about how to increase competitiveness. we agreed about making it more secure so it is faster and cheaper. we are expanding cooperation to

have clean energy jobs. i am pleased to announce our three nations are launching a new effort to get rid of outdated regulations the stifel job creation. here in the united states, our efforts will help achieve the benefits to businesses and consumers of more than $100 billion, and we are working to steam line -- to streamline on a bilateral basis, so now our nations are going to sit down together and have more regulations but will make our joint economy stronger. for our joint and medium-sized businesses, they often start with mexico and canada. it is going to keep us on track

with a goal of doubling exports. i reiterated my commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, which would be good for workers and businesses. i am pleased canada and mexico have also expressed an interest in joining the partnership. consultations are under way about how new members can meet the standards of this trade agreement, which can be a model for the world. i'd appreciate updating for the next summit she will be hosting in june. our other major focus is the security of our citizens deserve. each of our nation has a responsibility to meet the threat. in mexico, president calderon has shown great courage in standing up to the cartels, and we have sped up delivery of equipment and assistance to

support those efforts. we have increased cooperation on our southern border and dedicated new resources to reducing the flow of money and guns, and today each of us reaffirms our commitment to meeting this challenge together, because that is the only way we are going to succeed. beyond our borders, these cartels pose a threat to our central american neighbors, so we are teaming up. we are going to coordinate our efforts more closely than ever, especially when it comes to the new strategy on citizens' security, which will be discussed next week, so i want to thank steven and fully paid for being here. go and when i came to office region when i came to office, i

pledge a shared responsibility built on mutual interest and respect. that is what we have done, and it would not be possible without the leadership of these outstanding leaders have brought to all of our efforts. i believe our nations and citizens will be more secure, a prosperous, and in a better position to give the children alive they deserve, so let me turn it over to president called .arone -- president calderon >> your excellency, president of the united states, right hon. stephen harper, ladies and gentlemen of the press, ambassadors, and legislators, friends, first of all, i would like to thank president barack

obama for his extraordinary hospitality and five of his government in hosting the summit, and briefly, i would also like to express on behalf of the government of mexico and people of mexico, my most sincere sympathies to the families and relatives for his lamentable death yesterday. tomorrow we will render homage to him in mexico. a reason for which we are here today for this summit with president barack obama and the prime minister of canada, we have come through a workday that has been very fruitful with an exchange of opinions and progress to the benefit of our

citizens. i am very thankful to my colleagues for the openness with which we have approached some very complex items on our working agenda. i recognize and value their enormous commitment to our common allegiance. the leaders of north america share a vision of a strong, save, competitive region that is able to successfully face the challenges of today. we agree are common challenges can only be faced together, and therein lies the importance of having strong dialogue amongst our country'ries. the dialogue is important that our trade has exceeded one trillion dollars for the first time, and that is not separate from a reality that has to be underscored in this complex

world full of economic problems and severe crises, canada, the united states, and mexico are part of three countries but are growing and generating jobs, and that growth and millions of jobs, many of them have to do precisely with the greatest trade exchanges and we have ever seen a muncie's great nations. i would say the potential -- we have ever seen with these three nations. i would say the potential between these countries is such but within our nation and we have a great deal to make the most for these opportunities for greater exchange between our peoples. we have progress on various fronts. and we have been spent on the regulation -- deregulations in our country. we have regressed in certain

standards that facilitate trade. we have also been thrust on the bilateral relationship -- have regressed in the bilateral relationship. another line of ideas i would also say the three nations have renewed their decision to strengthen cooperation of the international level, particularly in issues as sensitive as security of our citizens. good when we have reiterated democracy, justice, respect for human rights, and today, the political dialogue is perhaps stronger than ever. we have renewed certain principles of our existence and challenges. to the principles of shared responsibility, the exchange of

information, and a strengthening of our institutions the house to be the guide. clearly i expressed to president obama and prime minister harker the fight mexico is experiencing for a safer north america also requires strengthening actions to stop the traffic of weapons, to combat with greater strength money-laundering, and to reduce the demand for drugs but strengthens criminal organizations. i also expressed mexico recognizes the commandment they have undertaken to progress along those lines. it is also necessary to strengthen regional security focus, and in order to do that, we need to include our neighbors and central american partners, who are also facing

serious problems and who need our serious support. they have agreed to set up a joint mechanism in support of the efforts undertaken by central american nations to fight organized crime in favor of international security the benefits of salt. we have approached a topic of regional the economy. the leaders of north america agrees that the united states, canada, and mexico continue to delve into our successful relationship to generate more jobs and greater well-being in all three countries. our governments recognize it is absolutely necessary to continue to fully comply with naphtha as well as to avoid new means of strengthening regional competitiveness, and i am convinced if we work together we

will become much more competitive than many areas in the world we are competing with today. theco's position is economic situation solution is not a return to production of practice as the only isolate countries, reduce competitiveness, and send investments for rehearing, but that part of the problem and part of the investment we need to see delving deeper into our economies and making the most of our advantages that show our economic complementarity, and only then will we be able to have success in the world but competes ferociously by regions. three countries have renewed our commitment to broaden the supply chains of the region but will be