air. thank you. guest: something they're seeing more and more, people being turned off by their government. guest: this is the mark rubio thing i was talking about where his party came in to support the opponents and backfired and one reason the candidate recruitment is such a tough job, robert jesmer was the former chief strategist the last two games and he said look, i'll travel across the country and meet with these candidates and wives and convince them to run. they wouldn't meet in a main plaza downtown but a small diner far away from town to avoid media scrutiny so it wasn't seen as pick of the party bosses. it's not a positive thing these days. washington is disliked. we mentioned at the top colonoscopies and where congress rates in terms of popularity. folks don't want to associate with washington. host: they want the money and support. they want the money and support. karl: they don't want to be i.d.'d as the party bosses.

it's a dance for these committees bause they don't want to weigh in heavily because they're not popular. host: we'll go to kevin now from our democratic line. good morning. >> good morning. thank for you c-span and want to thank your callers that call in and seem to me like they're all very intelligent and highly n-. it seems to me like the system of government we have here, this republic, is not working very well. you know, what is this, the senate, the house and president that basically makes the rules for us. i think if everything was put to a vote and the american people were allowed to vote on how they wanted things done, it would be completely different. i mean, all republics basically throughout history have failed. and i think it's easy to see why. and i thank you very much for taking my call. him host: talking about basically the idea of a referendum or balance measures. host: i covered politics before

coming out here and you have their own problems with voters split different ways and make different rules and the same group that spends money on campaigns spend money on ballot majors and flood the airwaves with television ads and if you were in maryland, quite a bit of advertisements about gambling measures the public had to vote on and tens of millions of ads on those measures. > gene goldmacher, author of why would anyone want to run for congress on the 18th edition of "the national journal." thanks for joining us today. guest: thanks for having me. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp.2013] >> the seat is open because

congress tim scott was appointed to the senate seat vacated by the republican jim demint.

>> it looks like they're having bad weather in south carolina's first district where we expect to go live to the debates between former governor mark sanford and elizabeth colbert busch. bloomberg holds a summit to mark 100 days in president obama's second term. we talk about the legacy of the foreign crisis and hear the forum from the government official, c.e.o. and lawmakers and economists and our live coverage starts at 8:30 a.m. eastern over on c-span 2. also tomorrow, former president bill clinton speaks at georgetown university on the people, events and principles that influenced his career in public service, live at 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span.

and we are waiting for that debate to begin. our live coverage of that, of south carolina's first congressional district. that district runs from charleston south to the resort of hilton head island. the debate is being held at the citadel and sponsored by patch news service and is expected to begin shortly. we are going live now to that debate for south carolina's first congressional district between republican former governor mark sanford and democrat elizabeth colbert busch. >> we begin tonight with opening remarks framed around the question, what do you

consider your greatest professional accomplishment and why? you have a few minutes. >> first i'd like to thank patch.com, south carolina radio and the citadel for inviting us tonight for this very important conversation, and to you moderators, thank you very much for pulling this together for us. thanks very much. can you all hear me all right? >> yeah. >> all right. what is my biggest accomplishment? 27 years ago, i began my career in business. and during that career, i started off making $6 an hour. when i was making $6 with three small children, 3, 5 and 7, i knew that it was not going to be what i needed to have a successful life for me or for my children to be able to provide for my children. so what did i do? i went back to school. i finish mid education. and when i finished that education, i found myself working at one of the top 10

global ocean carriers in the world where i rose in the ranks from clerk to director of sales and marketing and was responsible for 20% of the north american profit and revenue and it was an incredible, incredible journey. what that did, though, what happened after that was it opened these incredible doors for me. i was recognized and became the first woman chairman of the south carolina maritime association. and i was also named the top 20 influential women in transportation. i did that by understanding business. i did that by understanding business plans and profit and revenue. i will take that tough, independent businesswoman, business career, and i'll go to washington with the help of all of you. thank you. [applause] >> governor sanford, the same question. what do you consider your greatest professional accomplishment and why? >> i would echo elizabeth's

thanks for every one of you being here and participating in this and to each of you as moderators and the citadel at large. i would say when you look at professional accomplishment, i would have to zero it in to a 20-year track record about trying to do something about the way the government spend, and in particular, leadership on that front. i think a lot of people talk about it but all too few folks will actually lead on this sort of relentless pursuit the government has for the pocketbook or your wallet and its implications on every one of our lives on the job front or finance front. i look to my time in congress. there's a short patch out of 40 years in history, a very short window wherein budgets were actually balanced in washington, d.c. and i happened to be part of the class of 1994 that was instrumental in bringing that about. when i came into the governorship, there was a billion dollar shortfall and we were able to close it through a whole lot of work with others. and you combine all those

efforts and what they add up to is what the national taxpayers union talked about rating me number one in the entire united states congress in efforts to limit federal spending and limit federal taxation. [applause] >> it adds up to citizens of government waste rating me the same in all the united states congress. it adds up to the cato institute rating me as financially most conservative governor of the united states of america. it adds up to being the first gotschor of the united states of america to actually turn back stimulus money at a time when it was anything but popular. [cheers and applause] >> i simply make those points to underscore a larger point which is i think if we are ever going to get our hands around a whole host of issues in washington, d.c. is what we need is leadership and what has been shown in my time in washington and columbia is a consistent willingness to lead on financial matters. [applause]

>> thank you both very much. the first question is on the topic of immigration and goes first to you, governor sanford. and then you'll have a chance, also, to answer with one minute each first. senator lindsey graham and the bipartisan gang of eight has offered an immigration plan that offers a path to citizenship, awards workers and researchers who have advanced skills, while mandating increased border security. would you vote for the graham bill? why or why not? >> i would not vote for the bill in its present form, and here's why. i think we all can learn from history. it's that constant process of course correction by which we get things right. if you look at the last big immigration bill of the united states it was the missoula-simpson bill and offered amnesty for three million workers in the country at that time for the tradeoff of enforcement down the line. ronald reagan signed that bill

into law in 1986 and unfortunately, the enforcement part never came. as a result, here we are having a conversation years later with 11 million additional undocumented workers here in the united states. i think you simply have to reverse it which is to say you have to begin with enforcement first before you begin any conversation on amnesty. i think there are really simple nuts and bolts type of things you can do. there was a -- i guess a 52-mile segment of the 2,000 mile border that was approached with a high-tech border fence. think a simple border fence, not high-tech, is the first defense and a whole host of other things we could do that i think would impact the degree to which illegals are wanting to come here. >> ms. colbert-busch. >> i am in full support on the chamber's support of

immigration. it is important to understand we have 11 million people here and with our financial position right now in the country, we can't afford to send 11 million people back home. what we need is really tough, fair immigration reform and that means you pay your taxes, you pay your fines, you learn to speak english, and you get in the back of the line for the pathway to citizenship. cheers and applause] >> that would mean, also, you would vote for the graham bill? >> i would be supportive of the graham bill. i would like to look at it in detail because i've never been in politics but would support what i've heard about the bill, absolutely. >> would you like to add something to that, governor sanford? >> i would say this is part of a much larger national debate. i suppose i'll make this point in several different ways. i think that one of the problems here is looking at the

nuts and bolts of what works or doesn't work with regards to immigration. if you look at the high-tech worker component within the immigration bill, i would be completely supportive of that component. the idea of american tax supporters come to here through the h 1-v visa program and then sent them back home does not make sense but to have a more robust program in guest workers to om 1961-1964 program the 1980's in the posarra program is something that needs to be done but think it needs additional tweaking. >> the question as a matter of follow-up, when it comes to the need for workers and guest workers, you have a plan in place as well? > as i just mentioned from 1946-1964 through the posaro program in this country, we had a robust guest worker program. ultimately labor unions shut that down. i think it was a real mistake with regard to what we then saw in terms of illegal immigration

in it country. what i'm saying is i think we need to go back to one, enforcement first, securing the border and, secondly, looking at the drivers of illegal immigration which would include where we are now with the worker program. >> ms. colbert-busch, do you agree or disagree with the union's role in that? >> what we need to do is secure the borders. if i may repeat myself, we need a tough and fair immigration reform, especially when we're talking, the chamber of commerce is very concerned about seasonal workers and the chamber of commerce is very concerned about students that come to this country that we teach and then they go home. it's about keeping the best and the brightest. we need to support the chamber of commerce in this effort and that's what we're going to do. [applause] >> our next subject is the port. i want to talk about the port of charleston a little bit, such an important issue to so

many people that depend on it. the port of charleston has been named a priority to the president's budget. both of you said it is critical to the state's economic future. how would you convince a congressman from iowa, some other place in the country, to vote in favor of funding the deepening of the port. we'll start with you, mr. colbert busch. >> very happy to answer this question after 20 years with the maritime industry. this port is a huge economic engine for this state and is a huge economic engine for the country. we're getting ready to open the pan malkinal and these ships will come through that have to go to a natural deep seaport that can take the ships and we have to be prepared. we have to make sure we dredge and make sure our infrastructure is in place. what we want to do is convince our colleagues that this is important to us as a country and as a nation. we are going to be ready to accept those ships, we have to be ready for the global growth that we're going to experience. and i'd like to make note that

mark sanford, my opponent, voted against dredging for the port, voted against the bridge, and voted against everything, and he was the only congressman to do that. ['s applause] >> governor sanford? >> i would just humbly suggest on that one, if it was not simply a political statement at this moment, i don't think that you would have written me a $500 check after i left the united states congress as i begin to run for governor. cheers and applause] >> your response, though -- >> what i'm saying it must not have bothered her that much in the fact that she wrote a $500 check and supported my candidacy but get it bothers

her now. my simple point would be this, with regard to the port, you know, i take the exact position tim scott does, which is to say, you know, what we ought to do is recognize that this is a natural resource. there are only four ports on the entire east coast that go past the panama depth and charleston has the cheapest price per 1,000 of customer weight value, 27 cents, which is half or a 1/3 of the cost of some of the ports up and down the east coast. this is a natural resource. and one of the things i think i would bring to bear is seniority. as a foreman of the congress you step in front of 60% of the republican caucus which could make a real difference come 2015 in trying to make the argument before others in this nation on the significance of the charleston port. >> i'd like to rebutt.

>> 30 second. >> you know, mark, i'm really glad you brought that up. i was hoping you would, ok, because you and i both know we've known each other for many, many years. you knew what my role was at o.c.l. and knew i was responsible for the industry and what i did and what my role was in governmental affairs with the company. so you and i met on a number of occasions. you said you would support trade. you said you would support the dredging. you said you would support all the things we needed. and in fact, you didn't tell the truth. you turned around and did the pposite. cheers and applause] >> well, if i remember right, this was about -- now think about this. i was in the united states congress. i voted exactly as has been roughly described, not quite but roughly described. what's interesting is in the wake of that, if it really

bothered you, why would you write a campaign check in sport of my candidacy in running for governor? >> ok, mark. yeah. yeah. >> move on to the next topic. >> next one. >> thank you. we'll move on to the next topic. >> sure. >> we'll start with governor sanford. the question is on health care. the supreme court ruled last june on health care. both houses of congress voted on the affordable care act and the president signed it into law. what specific aspects of the bill do you like and what would you change? >> let me be clear, i don't like the bill and would vote against it. we're a member of congress and would vote to defund it if i moved to become a member of congress. and i say that for a couple different reasons. i'd say one, if you look at the government accounting offices it will add $6.2 trillion to

the national debt. and the congressional budget office numbers have already shown a doubling in its cost. there are 20 new increases in terms of tax with regard to obamacare and i think what is really significant is it turns upside down the hole hippocratic oath and the whole reason why we have health care in this country the way we do as around the globe, there is a direct response between the doctor and patient and we would be turning that upside down in terms of the hippocratic oath and who the doctor really works for. i would say secondly, or thirdly, it is really turning aside this larger american tradition we have wherein government doesn't tell you which products you're supposed to buy. in this case, you have a mandate in terms of american citizens being required to buy a product, a good or service, in a way they never have before in this country. so for a whole host of reasons, i'm opposed to the bill, actually. [applause]

>> mrs. colbert busch, what specific aspects of the bill do you like and which ones would you change or vote against or overturn if given the opportunity? >> obamacare is extremely problematic. it is expensive. it is a $500 billion higher cost than we originally anticipated. it's cutting into medicare benefits and it's having companies lay off their employees because they're worried about the cost of it. that is extremely problematic. it needs an enormous fix. what's good about it? you can't be denied for pre-existing diseases. your children can stay on their health care until they're 26. you can't charge a woman more for their health insurance based on gender. and in final point, i would also again fully support the hospital association and the chamber of commerce who support medicaid expansion. it's good business.

it creates jobs, and we need it. >> governor sanford, to add on to what you said or to respond with what mrs. colbert busch said. >> let me respond to what she just said. this is the reason so many of us in the first district have been wanting to have a debate on these issues. because while i hear what you're saying, in this case, if i go -- i wasn't there but the washington fundraiser that was done for you was hosted by 37 democratic members of the congress. every single one of them supported and voted for obamacare. and if you look at the d.c.c. commercials now running on airwaves across the low country, it's done in support of people that push for, advocated, and brought about obamacare. nancy pelosi is running hundreds of thousands of dollars in ads -- it's an important point.

[crowd booing] >> hundreds of thousands of dollars in ads, and what's interesting here is that she has been a major force in the advocacy of obamacare. it's not believeable to me someone will put a million dollars -- >> i'll come back to the point. governor sanford, could you talk about what you would do to deal with the problem of health care in this country? >> absolutely. i mean, for instance, one of the things i think is wrong with obamacare on this front is, for instance, you cannot charge a young person less than three times what you charge an older person as part of the actuary tables of obama. it means actuarily it will blow up and there will be a big tax down the line for all of us. what i believe, you have to go back to what i tried to do as governor, which was to actually empower individual with health savings accounts. you go back to the wage and price controls of world war ii, it was at that point employment

and health insurance became linked. i think you have to delink those and move more to a primary payer system if you ultimately want to fix health are and inflation. >> may i rebutt? >> now, mrs. colbert busch, you have an awful lot to respond to there but you only have 30 second. >> make it fast. >> choose which you'd like to respond to. >> first of all, i want to be very clear, mark, nobody tells me what to do except the people of south carolina's first district. and secondly, if you've been looking at the commercials and paying attention, i'm a fiscally conservative independent tough businesswoman, ok? and then if you also notice one last point, i push back on the obama budget. so let's talk about independent reach across the aisles and being reasonable. thank you.

>> and what i might say to that -- >> no. >> and i would ask that you show respect to both candidates. and for fun, let's talk about entitlement reform. this question is first for mrs. colbert busch. most experts agree in order to cut the federal debt there needs to be entitlement reform, other than reducing waste, fraud and abuse, what are specific ways you would suggest to lower long term costs to ocial security and medicare? >> first let's talk about social security that still will be solvent in 20 years. what we need to do in reaching across the aisles, does it have a bipartisan approach like tip o'neill and ronald reagan, to come together as the parties to

talk about how we'll move this forward and openly have a dialogue about it. social security is still solvent 20 years and we need to address that. when we're talking about medicare, again, we have a grave concern. medicare is not even allowed to negotiate pharmaceutical contracts like the v.a. is. that's $24 billion to our bottom line that we can negotiate and level out that playing field. we need to address those costs. we need to address overbilling and need to address the impacts obamacare has to cutting medicare benefits to pay for obamacare. it is a complicated issue, obviously. >> governor sanford, same question. >> i think you need to move to a block grant system in regards to medicaid and i look at dr. garvey and what he can tell you at the children's hospital, the way money comes in from washington, d.c. is he's

handcuffed in trying to do what he's done over the years in providing for young folks. so i think that he did that with welfare reform and was a member of congress to help bring that passage about. i think we need to do that with medicaid dollars as well because at the end of the day, i was governor and saw firsthand the degree to which our health care needs can be quite different in south carolina than those in california or nevada or other places around the globe. i think we need to move to a block grant system with regard to medicare. i think a premium support program makes a lot of sense and with regard to social security, i think we may also have to move to a system of individualized accounts because fleming versus nester said in 1960, a supreme court decision, none of us have any legal claim whatsoever to our own social security money, and what that means is the social security so-called trust fund has been robbed from for a long while now and i think that money needs to be protected.

>> i could not disagree more. i would not at all be in favor of privatizing social security. if we had privatized social security in 2008 with the huge economic crash we had since the great depression, our elderly would have lost half their investments. that would have been devastating. >> i would respond that just as commercials don't make it so, i would say what you're saying doesn't make it so. i say that respectfully in this way, if you actually look, prior to 1983, at the county government level or state government level, you in essence -- essence could create your own plan, if you were to go to a county in south texas, they created their own plans and would not let people take direct stock market risk to your point and only could go in an annuity. and if you look at the rate of return for those counties in south texas, they've done consistently better in terms of rate of return and the money has been protected and not raided from from washington,

d.c. >> thank you. >> our next topic is federal spending. last week's sequester-related furloughs caused major delays in air travel, as we all know. however, congress voted to offset these cuts to the f.a.a. how would you have voted considering there are low income and military families being impacted by the other aspects of sequestration. governor sanford? >> that vote was ultimately a the f flexibility within federal transportation authority. i mean, what was wrong with what happened with t.s.a. is 4% cut led to impacting 40% of the flights and there was a whole host of articles around the country talking about, wait a minute, this is in essence bure ok asy gaming the system for maximum impact to try and produce a political result. i absolutely would have voted for the flexibility entailed in that bill. >> mrs. colbert busch, how

would you have voted? >> i think the sequester was poorly executed. let's start at the beginning, when we look at very basic cost cuts and spending, look at medicare with $166 billion in waste, fraud, overbilling and inability to negotiate our pharmaceuticals. the sequester was $85 million. when we're talking about getting our fiscal house in order by need to look at everything from cutting spending to what are our costs? so during the time when we're having all this fiscal spending, fiscal cutting and back to the days where everybody had a furlough in the state, everybody was losing their jobs, and we were pulling our belts in, when we talk about fiscal spending and we talk about protecting the taxpayers, it doesn't mean you take that money we saved and leave the country for a personal purpose. [crowd booing] >> she went there, governor sanford.

>> i couldn't hear what she aid. repeat it. i'm sorry. >> answer the question. >> what was the question? ok, but anyway, on the sequester? i'll go back to sequester. here's the problem with sequester, which is, i think it's a real problem to not be specific on spending cuts because all the people supporting you, those 37 members of congress consistently fought against me when i tried to infuse spending discipline in washington, d.c. i mean, with all due respect to nancy pelosi, whose name i will raise again -- >> not here. >> she is, she spent $370 million here in the congress at district. they have not pushed forher financial discipline in

washington. make great sense. at the schooling responsibility, and i have been specific, and one would be duplicative services. there is $150 billion in duplicative services. data centers for 12 agencies. we have to look at cutting costs. i have been very specific. >> the next topic is education. the performance of america's students trails that of most other countries. do you think of what is needed is a change in the approach to funding, or perform to the way our children are taught?

>> i am a proud parent of children who went to public school. public school is critical to the success of this nation. american way to the dream. we cannot turn our backs on public schools, and parents need to have choices. i would disagree with mark. i would not support the voucher system, because you get a voucher, you're taking the funding away from the public schools and leave them with the financial responsibility and impact of doing that. we need to focus on science, technology, engineering, and math, and we need to teach our children all the way through high-school and college. it will be the focus of the 21st

century, and we need to drive that, and there is a program at the citadel that i have been a part of. [applause] you, and iftion to you would like to speak to vouchers. increase that base student cost the public schools, because that is the underpinning to health books get educated. it is the vast preponderance of how people get educated in this country. we pushed for the first charter school built in the country. we pushed for the first of its kind in early childhood education. we are promoting a program because the reality is god makes us different. some people may have an aptitude in working with their hands. they should not be treated as

second-class citizens. let's celebrate that. if you get your plumbing bill, you know they are not second class. we pushed for an array of different races, and at the end of the day i go to what i know as a parent, which is we have loved our boys equally, but each one of them was different, and to have an array that reflects the diversity of different kids out there is something that makes sense. [applause] and howiversity children are, where the public schools come in, but when we have a supreme court that says our competition provides a minimally adequate education for our children and we are setting our -- sending our tax dollars to washington that are coming back here and we turn them away, there's something wrong .

[applause] >> governor sanford, could you speak to your feelings regarding the department of education. >> i want to address what she said, which is there is something wrong in believing we can solve a problem with too much debt with more debt. -- weentally, that debate have a $16 trillion debt, arguably a $50 trillion debt, and the idea of let's borrow more money from the chinese so we can send money to south carolina or other states is not something that made sense to me. i think we have been vindicated based on employment numbers in the way it did not create the numbers of employment that a lot of people thought it would bring about.

added the thunder 40 fax. i want to talk about workforce development. local companies are saying, having a difficult time for qualified employees. what role do you think the government should play in preparing citizens for the 21st century economy? mentioned, the government has a real role in helping people have the tools to be competitive in the 21st century. i have talked about a flat world and the way in which we are in a global competition for jobs. ways ofre only two re raising productivity. matter, s gray intellectual capital. we have pushed hard to offer an

array of different job-training programs that would help folks to be told for what is going on in south carolina or whether it is a school up in berkeley county. in my time as governorship, there was more investment in south carolina than at any other time in our history. i think this was tied to the larger notion of giving workers more of a way in options. about privaten is companies. jobs are made by private companies and small businesses. the role of federal government is to create conditions for infrastructure that will help private companies, will help entrepreneurs develop p,chnology, develop their i. and create jobs.

when we talk about government creating conditions to support growth, i want to remind everyone began, and, mark, you voted against the bridge, the dredging come out against job training, and all those things are needed for job creation. this is what we have to do. that is the role of government, to help private companies and help entrepreneurs have the conditions and the infrastructure to be successful. >> is the federal government doing enough to support that group? >> i think we are lucky, and that is why we are so lucky, and we are in a unique position for job creation, which education, which the public-private partnership, and i will be happy to address that leader. >> governor sanford? >> it would be a gross --carriage could cassation mischaracterization that i have

voted against those items. i did not disagree with the idea of getting money to the bridge. that is an important distinction, because i was against your march before being against earmarked was cool. with regard to helping small businesses, and i have to say this with due respect, you want to help small business, get government out of its way, from a regulatory standpoint -- from a tax standpoint. when i talk to small businesses, but they tell me most often is these increasing taxes that policy and friends are trying to pelosi and friends are trying to level on the people is helping -- is hurting us. >> job creation, i know job

creation, and, mark, when you're governor, 98,000 jobs were lost in the state, and 37% of our tribeca to the port, went somewhere else. that is not job creation. [applause] and i wouldisagree say this -- if you look at the numbers, our state was 15th in the nation in employment growth during might governorship. i would stack it up against some many different states out there with regard to where we were on the front and the investment against $24 billion, more investment than any time in south carolina history. i think we've worked hard at job creation and i would go back to job creation. there were things we work on in terms of the first marginal tax

cut in south carolina plus history. the first of its kind workers' comp reform. a lot of things were in else's building blocks to a better plainfield for businesses. >> thank you, governor sanford. would you like to reply to that? >> we are going to stay on topic of job creation. this -- boeingh is bringing in more than 8000 jobs into south carolina, so here's a question. . nlrb overstepped its bounds when it tried to block boeing's approach to expansion in south carolina? yes or no and why? but yes. this is a right to work state and they had no business telling a company where they could

locate. [applause] would you like to respond? >> this is an interesting answer. $70,000 fromn labor unions, and i think it is important whether one does or does not, what is important is when you were accepting this checks and you said i want to be the voice for labor unions in washington, d.c., to meet it is not exactly decrying where nlrb is on the issue, that issue critical for job creation in this first congressional district. mark, what you, are saying is not true. things can be taken out of context. proud to support and live

in a right to work state, and i am proud of everyone who has supported me. what you are trying to do is divert the attention away from your platform when you know this is not true. >> so you would this about your words? >> no, i would not. i am proud to represent everybody in this district. the first pledge to congressional district, to represent everyone, mark, everyone. i totally agree. to thect that and i want sand, but here's the problem -- there are certain issues where you have to go yes or no, and that bringsb, union the suit before the national labor relations board that would have shut down boeing, gives you

a $5,000 check, i would say i want to represent everybody, but i do not want to represent a union that wants to represent ston.g in charlott >> the second part of the question goes to the governor, and you will have a chance to respond. local officials were critical in negotiating the deal that brought boeing to charleston. one of the common criticisms of government is it should not pick winners and losers. boeing has received more than $200 million tax payers to help it move here. how is this not a case of picking winners and losers? >> our primary focus has been on the underlying conditions. that is why there was a marginal income tax cut in south carolina history. that is why there was the first

of its kind tort reform, employment security commission reform. i could go on a long list of things that could good for businesses, large, medium, small. you want to go after the elephant in economic the a lot, and we did that because i was in the governor of's role, there are tools in the toolkit, the department of commerce, and i to god up with others after economic development, and we see the successes which is $24 billion. i want to single out a friend. i dealt with him in early negotiations in a deal along with others, and those guys made the original $600 million investment that i would argue is the reason boeing is here in the first place. [applause]

incentives are an important economic development, and when you have competition around you, you have to consider incentives. the incentives that were given to boeing will return to tenfold in employment and jobs and revenue. that is important, and i mam am supportive- i of incentives. we will have that discussion later. >> a few seconds, if you would like to respond now. well, we have had a series of different forums and debates, and we had a lengthy conversation.

i see jonathan here, one of the different contestants and that, and what we talked about is where we stood on reports if the structure, and i think was little in way of exception, all of us were supportive. i had conversations with people at the harbor pilot about the issue of port deepening. is something i believe in because it is part of the life flowed to make sure that trade comes in and out come economic development across the state as a whole. governor sanford, let's talk about incentives of a different kind, as the survey, incentives that representatives of the house and senate receive. our structure in that area seems screwed up. special interests play an outside role in funding candidates and pushing for

legislation. do you think there needs to be campaign finance reform, and how will you ensure special interests that supported your campaign cannot disproportionately influenced your vote on matters? >> i respectfully point to the direction of your question to my opponent, because she has received more than $1 million in special interests, democratic special interests, across the country. some of those are specific in their focus, whether that is congressional committees, whether that is nancy pelosi's ic, whether it is act blue, think those are a host of specific interests that are not ultimately aligned with the where people are aligned with in the first congressional district. campaign finance reform, that is something that i have fought for. prior to becoming governor, my

predecessor had vetoed the bill twice that made sap carolina the wild west. you could give unlimited amounts to a political party or office. when i ran for governor, if i got elected i would support changing that. we ultimately were able to change that. i have believed in campaign finance reform, and this idea of disclosure, of letting people know where your money is coming from, which is relevant where she has more than $1 billion coming in from outside groups. can you speak to your feelings on campaign finance reform broadly and to the role that you'd think special interests play or did not play? >> this will be a short, sweet, quick to the point answer. you ready? i have made only one pledge. i have not signed any pledges to anyone, filled out in the

questionnaires. my only pledge and my only special interests are to the people of south carolina district one, period. can younor sanford, speak to the issue of -- [no audio] would have to say, i do not think nancy pelosi is $370,000 expecting her not to vote for speaker. [no audio]

i would say this -- i firmly believe -- [no audio] i would gladly sign a pledge not to go in the opposite direction. i have a 20-year history where i was raided -- [no audio] there's no surprise that i would sign a pledge not to vote for a lot more in the way of spending. audio] honest has been very today. he signed a pledge. >> we will talk about a social issue. in june the supreme court is expected to rule on two cases related to gay marriage. how do you hope they will, and that the house subsequently attends a constitutional amendment, to reinstate the defense of marriage act, how

would you vote? i first, i want to say that am a supporter of full equality. [cheers] this is a matter of civil rights and equal protection under the law. that is what this is. freedoming dick cheney, is freedom for everyone. [no audio]

it really has to do with the tradition of our country and not letting washington decide things for us. it is interesting, nine states plus the district now condone gay marriage isn't that the way it is supposed to work in this country, to say we are 300 million folks strong, we're not going to let judges out of washington decide a host of controversial issues. marriage has been the purview of states, and the idea of letting states decide what they want to do or not want to do is consistent with federalism and the tradition of this country. >> governor, when you work in congress you voted for the defense of marriage act and to impeach clinton for an extramarital affair.

would you vote against -- >> i would reverse the question to you and i would say this -- do you think that president clinton should be condemned for the rest of his life based on a mistake that he made in his life? [cheers] >> one month ago you tweeted to support both pro-choice and in very ad -- favor of marriage and quality. do you believe that? if so, why was it the lead it? >> i already answered the question on marriage equality. what theon this is concern is. this is an incredibly delicate, sensitive, personal question that is between a woman, her

family, her doctor, and her god. . >> i go back to the question you raised which is why would you delete things that were on your website if you believe them? i go back to the notion regarding campaign finance reform, which is a conversation about transparency. the idea of saying i will take off things that work in the web page now that the primary has with the inconsistent idea of trance. -- idea of transparency of government. >> this question is for the

governor on the topic of gun control. earlier bill that would have prevented someone like alec baldwin from getting a far more was defeated in the u.s. senate. this happened despite the fact that an overwhelming number of americans and people in this district, including the gop-led legislature, favre improvements to a background check wall. how would you have voted on background checks? >> i think you got to look at context. there are 88,000 folks that failed that criminal background check last year. 40 were prosecuted. we have a fundamental problem with prosecuting the existing law on the books that then raises a larger question, if we're not prosecuting current law, why are we creating another? i would say i would have voted no, which have supported the coburn amendment. i think tom coburn's and then it made sense to avoid a national

registry. anytime you talk -- i would have supported lindsey grandpa's proposal, which was specific to either cases of involuntary mental institutionization or the case of alex ball one where she threatens the president of the united states and then declares insanity as a reason to avoid incarceration and the later goes out and buys a gun. what was proposed made sense. but i do not think is we need another bill that impacts the second amendment. thank you. i am a proud defender of the second amendment. this is our culture, our dna. i support expanded background checks. we have got to keep guns out of the criminals and the mentally ill. we have to do this. this expanded background check

was for commercial sales, and it would be fair if you're one company that has to do the background check, shouldn't it be fair across the board for all companies doing commercial sales? that would be a bill but i would support. >> would you like add anything? against the bill, but you liked a piece of it, is that right? >> specifically what was proposed, i would like the coburn amendment, i would have voted no on the overall bill, because at the end of the day, i do not think the second amendment is there to shoot a doctor. is the teeth behind every other right we enjoy as americans and you need to be very careful on treading upon rights that were guaranteed by our founding fathers. >> would you like add anything? the am a proud supporter of

second amendment, absolutely. this is about our right to bear arms, and i would never vote against the second amendment, but we need to expand background checks, need to address issues, to protect our children. >> can i interject, though? the problem with some suggesting that is the 37 democrats that supported your candidacy, all war against what you're saying with regard to second-amendment issues. the group's funding your campaign, are against those issues. , i cannot understand how one can come on the one hand, say you are defending it, and on the other hand suggest i am not going to listen to what they have to say. their funding my campaign. >> mark, you're not listening what i have to say. i am an independent businesswoman and i will reach across the aisle.

>> thank you. sanford, your running for an office to be part of a group of people that are among the most unpopular in the country. in the most recent poll, only 15% of citizens of south carolina approve the job congress was doing. what would you do to improve the effectiveness of congress? >> there is a lot plan to go around in one issue 10, and it is a difficult job, but the most important thing to do is we have to realize we have to talk to each other. we have to reach across the aisle. we have 25 years of business experience, negotiating contracts, being responsible for millions of dollars. he did not go to a negotiation table wanting to get everything on your side. you negotiate, cleverest --

collaborate, so at the end of the day, when the negation is over here and you have cut a deal, their body feels it is a win-win for your state, district, and country. on one level i would continue to do what i have done, which is when i was in congress i worked on social security reform, and we worked hard on a bill together. when i was governor i've worked with the governor of montana on a bill. we found common ideas that we believe in. there is a democrat from rock hill was governor, and we worked very hard on trying to sustained vetoes. we saw more vetoes sustained in my last year than any other

year, and i have tried to reach across the aisle. the sierra club endorsed me in my second run for governor because of what i had done in reach across the aisle on land conservation. five secondsdly -- -- i will come back to it. >> if you could talk about what would govern in your decision when you think about when to compromise and when to stand your ground. >> when it is in the best interest of my district, state, and country. we have got to be unreasonable with each other. it is about reaching across the aisles, collaborating, making sure that our district, our state, our country, our constituents are not impacted by behavior of people in washington, d.c.

>> finished their previous thought? >> the second part of what i think would i would bring to bear, you did not go through the experience i had in 2000 i without a greater level of humility. thati would say is willingness to sit down with a republican and democrat alike and say i know i believe, i believe what i believe, i believe what the facts say i am suggesting, that me sit down with you and understand where you're coming from, it is incredibly important for forging conclusions in washington, whether it on the democratic or republican side. that concludes the questions portion of the debate. you now have two minutes to make your closing remarks. -- we are aty this

8 to the point as a civilization, and if we do not get spending right in washington, there will be consequences in terms of the value of the dollar, inflation that has been the silent robber of the middle-class, real consequences in terms of the american dream and the opportunities it has afford it. i have gotten into this race with the hope of taking what i have learned on my way up and down, all that and applying it to what i believe is the debate of our civilization, which is how do we get our financial house in order, because if we do not, there will be consequences for every one of us. i would say that it does matter how we fund our campaigns, and this notion of a million dollars coming in from different groups across this country that our democratic and left-lane in nation, to support my opponent does matter, because what it says is whose voice will you

carry to washington, d.c.? i have a record of trying to tand up for the taxpayer, and there is taking whole host of merit badges in my efforts to do so. when you think of whose voice will to be carried, will it be nancy pelosi boss' voice, labor unions, a whole host of folks that have come in at an unusual level to find my opponent bus campaign, it has to raise a larger question of how do we get our financial house in order in washington, but his voice will be carried as we do so? thank you again for your time tonight, and i would ask for your vote. i would ask for everybody pause vote, consideration, and i appreciate the time that you took tonight to come out. thank you. [applause] and two minutes for your

closing remarks. >> thank you for the chance to talk and think you to the and southd patch.com carolina radio. there is a fundamental difference -- this is not end of our time as we know it. our best days are ahead of us. here is what we have great have been around the district and everybody has different issues, everybody has different concerns, everybody has the need they want to move ahead. we're not want to look behind us. we will look to the future. the three things that have come up around the district are three things -- they want to get the fiscal house in order, absolutely. it must be done. to get that done, i want to tell

you all tonight that i will take a 10% cut in my salary when i go to congress and hand it back to the taxpayers. [cheers] thank you. secondly, is still about the economy, about job creation. this is what we do, this is what we know, and, third, everybody says they need somebody they can trust. what will we do? we'll get our fiscal house in order and we will prioritize our dollars, invest in our community with the assets that we have, and they are accountable. they are at it haitian -- they are education, coming together for the 21st century. we have the citadel, the college of charleston, which have the support the harbor, we have the university, we have all these things that can create a knowledge-based economy to support private industry, to

support entrepreneurship, support the creation. our best days are ahead of us. please, ion may 7, would be honored to have your code, and let's move to the future. [cheers] >> that includes the night's debate. [indiscernible] try that one more we would like to thank the citadel, and everyone who joined us on person and online, colbert-sanford, ms. busch, thank you.

9:00 eastern,t first ladies examines the life of eliza johnson. the number of women in senior management positions in technology companies has remained unchanged over the past decade. the number of female computer science graduates has dropped. up next, chelsea clinton moderate a panel of women entrepreneurs. this discussion from the daily beast fourth annual women in the world summit is about a half-hour. >> my family is a huge. >> this household there are

eight children. it is a busy life. >> my father was working 15-hour days. my life was difficult when i lived back in brooklyn. things were had. we did not have much money. i was in the library and the libraryian came up to me and said i think you would be a good fit for this program. it said girls and code and something clicked. i learned everything from robotics and web design. we learned programming languages. being involved in tech nogs -- technology has changed my life. i want to double major in math and physics. tojulia is an inspiration the whole family. >> what i learned from the

program i'm using it to teach my family and my dad. >> i consider her to be a ground breaker because there's not a lot of women in this field. >> there's a whole mess of jobs in technology and computer science. i'm going make it better and no one is going to stop me. >> we have julia in the audience today. before we start julia will you stand up? thank you. i think julia needs to be accustomed to applause and recognition.

this is the perfect segway from my mother's speech earlier. she talked about the unfinished business for women and girls here in the united states. perhaps, nowhere is that more clear than in the field of science, technology, engineering and math. sadly, there is an arena that girls and women have lost ground in the united states. in the mid 1980's, about the same time i got my first computer for christmas. girls were at least 35% of the computer science graduates. in 2006, that dropped down to 20% and last year it was 12%. clearly, not only what we're doing is not working but we're failing. but there are many bright spots

that illuminate a different way forward. talks what we're going to about this morning. joining me is the founder for girls. we have the founder of task rabbit, which i'm sure many of us in the audience use. esther, the senior vice president of brand marketing at at mvend t. and the founding partner of partner venture that invests in start-ups. i want to start with you. the u.s. department of commerce said we need a million more graduates in sims that is on track to fill the jobs that will exist in 2020. you hope to touch a million girls and women probably not a coins denal number to ensure more girls and women are in

science. how are you going to do that? >> we need to find a million for julias and they are out there. it starts with acknowledging that girls and boys are good at math and science about the same. we live in a culture that tells girls that math and science and computers are not for them. i can walk into a for ever 21 and buy a t-shirt that says mat sucks. >> can you buy a shirt that says math is awesome? >> yes, we should make those soon. for everyone to tell the young girls in their life to go into computer science. secondly, julia wants to