it space are looking at the u.s. to see how we handle this. >> the upcoming spectrum auction and other communications issues f.c.c. monday night 8:00 eastern on >> next, "newsmakers" with senator jerry moran of kansas. later, q and a. >> joining us on "newsmakers" is senator jerry moran, republican and chair of the national republican senatorial committee. thank you for being with us. >> and reid wilson. thank you for being with us. let me begin with the main question. how do you get sick seats to retake in 2014. what is your target?

>> we want to increase the number of republican senators. i say that because i believe it is important for the country. i am interested in this topic not because i am a republican but because i believe the country needs a different direction. our goal is to make certain that we move in that direction. it would be great if we had more than 50 senators. you do that by reelecting the incumbents, the republicans that are out seem to be in excellent shape. no incumbent republican senator faces a significant challenge in being reelected. our primary responsibility is to make sure that those republican senators are reelected. then you work in open seats and

try to make certain that republicans gain in the elections for which there is no incumbent. there is a great opportunity to defeat a number of democrat senators who are up in 2014. it is about the numbers and they worked in our favor. >> we will talk about some of those. >> there are a number of races where it seems that you have to have a good challenger to get those 51 seats in the senate. michigan,iowa, minnesota, colorado. it also includes oregon and new mexico. there is no top tier candidate out there for your party.

given what history looks like in terms of the sixth year of a president term and what we know about how the electorate is smaller in terms of its demographics in the off years, why is your party not recruiting better candidates for all of those states? >> jonathan, i would pushback on the sentiment that we are not recruiting good candidates. i also think the timing is such, americans and candidates prefer shorter campaigns. this is not too late. we have plenty of time in which it to see a great candidate surface. we are working very closely as compared to reaching down as the democratic committee does to

select a candidate, the candidates they have sought in 2014 have said "no." we are not trying to do what they are trying to do. we are working with republican party officials, state legislatures, organizations, and asking the people with in the state to coalesce around a strong and viable candidate, one that cannot only when a primary but can also win a general election. they can only win a republican primary is of little and no benefit to me. ours is a longer, more methodical process. those conversations are taking place every day. we have republican governors who are interested in helping sort out this process. i think generally americans do not like being told who to vote for. we are turning this process as

best as we can. we are encouraging you to take place in state by people who come together and reach a conclusion that this is a candidate that we all can support and win and a general election. >> todd akin was is own worst enemy. they want you to be more proactive and reached down. if you do not do something like that you will wind up with more on your hands. >> i would disagree with your characterization of hands-off. we are not hands-off at all. we are fully engaged in the recruitment process. i have been traveling the country, spent hours on the telephone talking not only to candidates but more importantly republican leaders, legislators,

chamber of commerce, business groups, former members of the senate to ask of them this process is taking place. it is not hands off. in many instances if the senate campaign committee said this is the candidate that would be a reaction by others that will not tell us what to do, i think this is a maturing process. republicans clearly understand the value of not just selecting a candidate that may be their number one choice, they're perfect choice for them personally, but cannot win. if you cannot win in november, if you do not appeal broadly to the people of your state,

somebody that is nominated is of little value. >> reid wilson is the editor. >> thank you for taking the time. what is different from the last several cycles? a lot of your colleagues have said we are going to be public and do things differently and change the method by which you recruit candidates. i do not hear a lot that is different here. you are saying you want the decisions to be made the state. that is what they were saying last cycle and it did not work out as well. what have you done differently this time around? >> i clearly think that we are pursuing things in a different manner. we have a different staff. the entire management team of the senate campaign committee is

different for the 2014 cycle than it was in the 2012 cycle. i have described the focus of how we're doing things. the real recognition, the topic we're are talking about, is critical. you can raise a lot of money and organizations can put money in, it if you put that into a candidate that cannot win, it is a useless waste of money. while we are clearly raising money, the focus is on candidate. it is the message that our contributors are getting us that do not expect us to contribute to an organization that will not find candidates that can win. we are actively pursuing. the distinction i want to make is, we certainly have ideas about candidates that can win. we want to make certain the people of whatever state we are involved and understand the importance of this nomination and understand that we want them to help us bring people together to a particular candidate.

in many states it is working. in some states it is difficult. let me say in regard perhaps to the last question, anyone who comes about getting the nomination, if they want money, they are now required to be men toward by another senator. we have a team in place. more importantly than that, any candidate who receives money from the nrsc is required to go to boot camp. our candidates are going to be experiencing the necessary education and involvement in the political process that sometimes candidates do not have even though they're running for the senate.

we are focused not just on on how to get the best candidate but to make sure the candidate we have has experience in responding to questions like you present to candidates, difficult question sometimes, and whether they have the ability to respond to the microphone in an intelligent way. we're trying to train a whole new set of campaign management directors. they can surround themselves with the necessary table expertise to have them be more successful. part of it is finding great candidates, working with states to do that, and making sure all of our candidates have the tool to be successful once they are a candidate. >> you are emphatic that the committee will not be hands-off when it comes to recruiting

candidates. you're also equally emphatic that they will not be imposing their will on the states. count me clarify. which is it? are you going to be trying to find the candidate or are you going to be deferential to whoever the states want? >> we are going to be emphatic in our efforts to encourage individual leaders within the state to coalesce around a great candidate. it is perhaps the hybrid of what you described. we are certainly not hands-off. we will have ideas and suggestions about what candidates will be involved in polling and providing that type of expertise as they sort through this. it is important that there be a buy in. you use word "subtle." we are not doing something under the -- >> never. >> they would make no sense for us to publicly say this is the person we want you to nominate because there has to be support for that candidate from somebody in the state. not from somebody in washington, dc. every state is different. there is not a one size solution

that fits all the circumstances. the announced retirement by republicans in places like nebraska and georgia, how we conduct ourselves in a red state like nebraska or georgia will be different in how we conduct ourselves in a more purple state like iowa or michigan. >> let me put west virginia and south dakota. these are two open seats. potentially you could face a republican primary in south dakota with the former governor. let's talk about two specific states. how do you deal with that? >> we have a great confidence in a in the announced candidates in west virginia and south dakota. governor rounds has served a

south dakota well, has broad support. there is the potential of others getting in the race. that has not happened. in my view, as he does his job well in raising the funds, that state will sort itself out. regardless of whether it is governor rounds or another candidate, it is highly likely the republicans gain a seat and south dakota. in west virginia, shelley moore capital has been a great house number. she knows her state. she has brought support. she seems to be clearly on her way toward being nominated as the republican candidate in west

virginia. it is highly likely that it's a state that republicans will gain as it switches from rockefeller the democrat to a republican senator. >> 23 days from now voters in massachusetts will head to the poll. we have seen a small investment from the senate committee, i think you sent for staffers up there. there has been no aggressive commitment like there was in 2010. can you win this seat? will you? >> this seat is winnable. massachusetts is a difficult state for republicans scott brown to do it. there is a great difference between the democratic candidate and our candidate, gabriel gomez. he came here with immigrant parents. it took a love for our country and became a navy seal, regulated from the naval academy, and became a successful

businessman after and advanced degree at harvard. the difference between these candidates is significant. the polling information we have seen is just single digit differences, something between three and six point differences. we are not interested in announcing our efforts in massachusetts. if i told you would tell others or others would hear this. [laughter] we are not interested in letting the other side know the nature of our involvement in that campaign. i personally believe that this is a race the republican can win. >> did you want to follow up? >> no. >> speaking of primaries, there are a few folks already in the senate who could face challenges from within next year. i'm thinking about senator graham from south carolina, senator alexander from

tennessee. is this committee prepared to aggressively defend your incumbent both financial and otherwise next year? >> absolutely. it is our primary responsibility. inc., and republican senators are my constituents. we will do everything we can conceivably do. i do not mean to make a distinction. we are therefore both. i think the premise is less efforts then at least the theory was months ago. our incumbents do not seem to be having challenges in republican primaries. the incumbent republican senators you mention seem to be well on their way to republican nomination and well on their way to reelection in november. >> senator mcconnell put together a web video that included a reference to armor president richard nixon and compared president obama to richard nixon. did you find that unusual that a

republican leader would take aim at a former public and president? >> i did not see the video. i kind of know what you're talking about. it or bad behavior, whether it is a republican or democratic president, when we see misconduct, when we see potential illegal behavior, we ought to point that out and oppose it. people who commit crimes, people who break the rules or laws or act inappropriately, it ought not be about party politics. wrong is wrong. >> reid wilson.

>> let's talk about some of the groups the nrsc have competed against. what can you do to make sure any of the conservative outside groups based here in dc do not meddle in the states that you're trying to avoid. how do you make sure they are not picking candidates who cannot win? >> by law there are restrictions on the nrsc with outside groups. in the time frame in which we have been able to have those conversations, we have done so. here is the point i would make. it is similar to what i said about our contributors to the senate campaign. those organizations are having their contributors deliver to the same message every day. if you want to check with me to support the cause of a republican senate, unique candidates that can be elected in november. those organizations are having the same experience.

i have heard this time and time again. i am not giving any more money to that group until i see the are going to rally around the cause. in some ways, they are interested in trying to help get candidate that can win. it is not just a passive view. there is a real maturing process. i think the rallying cry is here. i think this has cause people who may have a more narrow view of what policy, politics the republicans should be to realize that in that narrow view, if that is all they are willing to support and makes it difficult for there to be a majority of republicans, 51 in the senate, that can help change the direction that the obama administration is taking. >> jerry moran is joining us from the campus of kansas state university in manhattan. he is also the chair of the republican senate campaign

committee. >> let me shift gears here and ask you about one policy or there may be some common ground. that is immigration reform. a lot of senators seem to be interested perhaps already supportive of immigration reform. where are you on the issue? how many states do you think both gop senators support immigration reform bill but fewer house members point it when it goes to the house side. >> the process we have been through in the senate, particularly as it involves senator rubio has been the opportunity to cause republicans to pay more attention and be more interested in finding an immigration bill that can be supported. there is high regard for senator rubio. his background is appealing not

only to the american people but to his colleagues. he has a particularly strong voice. that is not necessarily cause the republican senators to say they are voting for a bill that the gang of eight has represented. i do think the attitude and approach is that there may be something here following the amendment process that can be supported broadly by members of the senate including many republicans. it has been more difficult in the house. i think there is a different attitude or approach at the moment. i would guess that the house bill will be different in significant ways. i am interested in this topic.

i have led the effort in the senate. we are trying to change the immigration laws to encourage the phds on the stem side and trying to create these is for startup entrepreneurs. i am an ag state senator. it is clearly there. at the moment, they are focused on a farm bill. it is something that i think there is an open-minded to. the issue for me is i think i have to be convinced that anything we passed does not encourage more illegal behavior. i am not convinced yet. i also would say my focus in my office and me has been much more on the farm bill. we know the bill has come out of the. there are details. e are studying them.

senator rubio has said there will be significant changes on the floor if this bill is to pass the senate. >> you looked at the polling numbers after 2012. if the democrats and republicans fail to reach an agreement, which party would that hurt the most? >> i have had this fear that there may be democrat strategist who decide that if we can keep immigration reform from passing, if we can change the words and make it difficult or impossible for republican senators to find a satisfactory, then we can keep the issue around and lame republicans for the loss. i think immigration reform, this is me speaking, any think we reform seems to get worse and not better. changes in the laws are better

for our country from a national security perspective and the economic perspective and from a humane perspective. we need a resolution of the broad issues that face immigration policy in this country. i hope it is not the case that there is this effort to politicize this issue even further. on the part of republicans, it

is important for us to be supportive of making changes in our immigration system. i also think it is important for us to reach out to hispanic and other immigrants that have the opportunity for us to connect with. passing a bill, if that is all we do, we will have failed. to own nails that all politics is local. politics is personal. i continue to encourage republican senators to reach out and have conversations with their minority community. >> going back to what you said earlier. what does this say to you about the structure of the republican party? marco rubio and others are looking or a margin for this bill. in the house there is a lot less certainty.

>> i would say that speaker boehner and republican leaders, every piece of evidence i see, are interested in moving an immigration bill forward. the chairman of the house judiciary committee has indicated that the senate bill is not the vehicle to this problem. he has indicated an interest in pursuing it. i do not think you see this we

are not interested at all. what you see is a desire to find a better fix than the one they saw that came out of the judiciary committee in the senate. i would not brand republicans in a negative way. our leadership in the house are interested in finding the right answer to this issue of immigration. >> do you think we will have a bill by the end of the calendar year? >> i am happy to answer any questions you present to me except ones that will predict what happens in washington. that is what you do. it is conceivable that we have an immigration bill. it is way too early to say that it will or not with much certainty. >> i would earn a lot more money if i could predict. >> without making any

predictions, the states are going to have senate elections next year. there are not obvious candidates. states where you have open seats. they see that they have not been competitive for quite a few years. tom harkin has been here since 1984. max baucus retiring. talk to me about those three things in particular. will we see strong candidate on your site? what would be the strongest? >> i will probably decline to mention names in those three states.

we are working closely with folks back in those states. and talking about potential candidates in all three states. we are talking about montana. iowa, michigan. those are real potential for us. montana in particular, you look at the presidential race in which governor romney soundly defeated president obama. a good republican states in the west, iowa is a much more purple states. you have a republican senator from the state. recruitment there matters. it is certainly a focus. we do better in places like michigan and non-presidential years. those three are certainly ones that i believe have potential. it goes back to where we started in the beginning of this program. we are working hard at making certain that we have a good candidate. we have not talked about this, and i generally believe that elections are won and lost at

the state level. how do you appeal to the voters of your state is the most important thing. there are national trends. someone alluded about the six- year of a presidential term. the average number of out of power gains in the six-year of a presidential second term. this is exactly the new year that republicans need. this has arisen in washington, dc. and makes it much more difficult for there to be anything but a move toward the republican side. he wanted to pin me down about recruiting candidates. you certainly can have this conversation with the democrats who indicated that they were going to have been in place for nearly a two-year time frame. the places they talked about,