the majority in lawrence through justice kennedy, referring to the office of the due process clause wrote that times can blind" us to certain truths. and later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper serve in fact only to oppress. so in our case as well we should remember that over the course of history, on occasion, we as a society have lost our footing area and our humanity. eventually we write ourselves. constitutionates gives us the backbone and a lodestar in an ever-changing society. it was written for all citizens for all time. itis simple, it is genius, is dynamic, and most of all it is humane. it can and must be interpreted to acknowledge a changing society.

an emerging recognition that some laws to discriminate against the marginalized, the in this case,, the most vulnerable members of our society. we know better now. there is no reason to treat people this way. we ask that you affirm. stanyar. ou ms. just a few quick points, your honor. our society has a mechanism for change. that is the amendment process. due process is not a mechanism for change, it is a mechanism for preserving things that are deeply rooted in history. there's the amendment process that is available at the federal and state level. that is -- for example, there are six things on the ballot in 2012 through the initiative process. there are six different measures. that goes to the point that there is a state that is

conferred. repeatedly, in discussing the dignity better than conferred, talks about being a dignity conferred by the state and that goes back to the point about democracy. the people confer that dignity by voting for it hurts the right process, if there's going to be change in this area, is not through the courts but through the people. her example in maine, maine went one way in 2009 where the legislative pass a law. people rejected it by referendum in 2012 and reversed course. >> may ask if you have any idea how long it would've taken in the south of the supreme court had not come and what a shock that was down there? >> loving again violated the equal protection clause itself. it imposed invidious racial discrimination. loving case talked about the fact -- white supremacy. >> you told me that fact before. there is a point to be made that

the reason that there hasn't analysis in the way of of discrimination against gay and lesbian people is because up until just 11 years ago, their conduct could land them in prison in many places. so you can't say it is not deeply rooted that they have a asideto marry, because from the right to marry, they might have had the sheriff in the hall outside the bedroom trying to find out what they were doing in privacy in their own homes. >> if the question is whether it is a right to marry or the right to same-sex marriage, i think windsor answered that question. it talks about the history of same-sex marriage and recognizes that it is not deeply rooted it gain, --

>> the conduct at the basis of same-sex marriage was, until 2003, potentially criminal. any that not make difference at all? then the supreme court told us that in fact it shouldn't be considered criminal. where i have heard people refer to it as a tsunami of action that occurred. it was back in the beginning of that. when we had the michigan marriage amendment, was it not? i thought we cleared that up. is correct, your honor, but again, lawrence was about substantive due right to privacy. it is not about -- >> it was about the fact that that conduct could no longer be considered a crime. it could no longer jeopardize engage in that

conduct with a prospect of going to prison. >> that is true, but the court also recognized for example and justice connors conference in applying the same analysis to marriage, there is a difference between prior conduct and public recognition. this court has to look at the guidepost that the supreme court has recognized. the reason for that goes back to the importance of democracy in our system. the system being for the basic right we have as a people. that is to decide what is right on our own. but should be up to the people and not to the courts to take this out of the hands of the people. this seems particularly interesting here where there does seem to be a particular trend that society is moving in. this may be one of the points in windsor, but recognizes that a victory that is earned through the political process is a truer deprives where

the courts have decided, it deprives the people of an honest victory and honest to feed. under our constitutional system, it is rational of the people to have continued -- to continue to promote the idea that in general it is a good thing that children have a mother and a father. we would ask you to recognize the fact of the decision taking the side of the people's hands undermines democracy. it says this is not an issue that people of good will and reasonable people of good will can disagree about. i think this is an issue that reasonable people can disagree about as you can tell by all the voters in the sixth circuit that have weighed in on this issue. lindstrom.u, mr. thank you. the clerk may call the next case. theext, a debate between candidates in the virginia senate race. then some of the speakers at the

western conservative conference. after that, the federal communications commission open meeting. >> this week while congress is in recess, watch american history tv in prime time, each weeknight at eight eastern. american history tv will feature a variety of topics in the early american republic, jewish history, world war ii and sports history. let us know you think about the programs you are watching. 202-626-3400. conversation,n like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences. and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, created by the cable tv industry providers ago

and brought to as a public service by your local cable or salad provider. watch is in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> now, a debate between the major candidates in this years virginia u.s. senate race. incumbent democratic senator mark warner and his republican edllenger, former rnc chair gillespie face off on a range of issues. they discuss same-sex marriage, immigration, and the border crisis. the health care law, and employer-sponsored contraception. the event was cohosted by the virginia bar association and pds news hour and held last month -- >> i am delighted to be year, i am honored to be here, i want to thank the virginia bar association for sponsoring this, for inviting me to be part of it. i want to thank senator warner, ms. could -- mr. glass before participating. i want to thank the greenbrier and the state of west virginia for hosting us. i think maybe we will set a new trend, holding debates in the

state next door. have agreed to a format that gives them as close to equal time as possible for my and we're going to do our very best to stick to that. i'm happy to say the pbs news hour is live streaming this debate, along with the vba. we expect a large audience to be watching in virginia and across the nation. if you miss it, it will live afterwards at our website, that is cbs.org/news hour. now, let's begin. before we go to questions, each of the candidates have a two-minute opening statement and we will begin with you, mr. gillespie. >> thank you, judy. thanks to the vba for hosting us. mark, its good to be with you today. i'm running for the senate because i want future generations to have the same opportunities my family has seen. my father came to america from ireland because my grandfather found work here as a janitor. my parents did not go to

college, but insisted that i do. i took out student loans and worked a lot of different jobs. i was even a senate parking lot attendant to earn my degree. over time, i became a counselor to the president of united states. what a country. but i fear that we are losing that kind of economic opportunity and upward mobility as a result of president obama's and senator warner's job killing policies. our economy shrank by new three percentage points last quarter. every matchup created, three people leave the workforce entirely. more businesses are closing and opening. his is not somehow a matter of faith, it is the result of the governor that ashe of a government that is going to bake, squeezing too many virginians between lost jobs or stagnant wages and higher prices for health care, energy and food. i appreciate senator warner's service to our commonwealth am a

but unfortunately his votes in the senate have tightened that squeeze on hard-working virginians and made it harder for the unemployed to find work. in voting with president obama 97% of the time, he has not been the senator he said he would be. instead of being an independent voice for us, he has been a blank check for president obama. i will be a check on the president. i will have a simple test for every senate vote i cast. will this ease the squeeze on hard-working virginians if it does not, i will not vote for it. have a five-point economic growth agenda to create jobs, raise take-home pay, lift people out poverty, hold down health care costs and reduce energy prices. i look forward to an opportunity to fight for it and for us in the united states senate if you give me that chance. thank you. >> thank you, mr. gillespie. senator warner. >> thank you, judy. friends at the virginia bar. ed, it is great to see you again. is been the greatest honor

of my life to serve virginians. like ed, i was the first in a family to graduate from college. i first two businesses failed. the third went pretty well. the plumbing to public service was a recognition that in america everybody ought to get a fair shot. we can't guarantee success, but in america everybody ought to get a fair shot. that is what i have tried to do my public life. first as governor, where with it two-one republican legislature we managed to turn deficits into surpluses and virginia got recognized as the best managed state for business. in the senate i've tried to bring the same approach, whether it is wrestling with issues around debt and deficit, whether it is trying to advance policies that will bring jobs back home. it is my recent work on trying to deal with some other crushing amounts of student debt. on these issues and many others,

i have worked in a bipartisan fashion in a town where it is not easy to do. my opponent has a different approach. he spent his entire career as a d.c. lobbyist and a partisan operative. he views every issue through the lens of republicans versus democrats. he even went on tv and called , hislf a partisan warrior words, not mine. i worked there. the last thing washington needs is another partisan warrior. virginians want leaders who are willing to work for the common lineswork across party and get things done. that is why have done throughout my whole career. if her jeans give me the honor of rehiring me, that is what i will continue to do. , senator warner. we will return to questions by drop. the first question does go to senator warner. you have voted with president obama most of the time in the

senate, including for the affordable care act. your opponent, as we just heard, says this proves that rather than being an independent voice for virginia, you are in lockstep with the white house and you bear responsibility for the problems with obamacare, especially since you vowed not to support a measure that i quote you, takes away any health care plan that you like. how do you answer? >> judy, let's set the record straight on the statistic that is used. independent political observers have called it misleading and not revert -- not representative of my record. in national journal ranks me the center. one of the reasons why senator john warner had this job for 30 years. when i disagree with the president, i stand up with him. whether it is on oil or support for the keystone pipeline, whether it is supporting tort reform and that is a hard thing

to say in front of a group of lawyers. i've taken arrows from both the left and the right on my efforts to deal with the debt and deficit. on health care, what i hear from virginians is that they're tired of this issue being used as a political football. they actually want to see it fixed. they don't want to go back to the days when people with pre-existing conditions could not get health care and women were charged to from even men, or when seniors appear higher price for drugs. the obamacare -- i wait out for plans and how we can improve it. it cheaper plan called the copper plan. working to try to get rid of some of the overly bureaucratic regulations, a plan that has been supported by a lot of small businesses, including all the national retail federation. we allow insurance companies to ensure with appropriate consumer protection to sell products across state lines. what virginians want is get this health care working in a way that is fair and efficient.

>> a couple of things. first of all, independent fact checkers have declared a 97% figure accurate and true. what it comes to offshore drilling, senator warner just said that he supports it. i know that he is said that, but for012, there was a vote drilling for more oil and gas throughout the outer continental shelf. five democrats voted for it, including jim webb. senator warner voted against it. for012, despite saying he's the pipeline, there was an amendment to move it forward for approval. it,n democrats voted for including jim webb, his own democratic colleague from virginia, and senator warner voted against it. on health care he voted to kill an amendment that would've prevented cuts to medicare advantage, which over 170,000 virginians are enrolled in. senator webb afforded against killing that amendment and senator warner voted for it. it is part of a pattern. as part of a pattern of not

being a senator he said he would be. his press releases are very bipartisan, but his floor votes are very partisan. that is a difference. i will make sure that we replace obamacare with policies that work, that allow us to keep the insurance we like, that make health care more affordable, does not kill jobs and when it comes to energy of a part of my five-point economic growth agenda is to unleash american energy and actually fight for lifting the moratorium on our drilling off of our deep sea coasts and to make sure that we do get the keystone xl pipeline approved, along with the number of other proposals in that plan. >> senator warner. >> i think my opponent has to get his facts straight. keystone, i support that. i got protested against in harrisonburg. i have had, legislation for that for years. i believe virginia should have a share of the royalties. the bill that ed mentioned did not include that. the question that we didn't

hear, we have heard my opponents criticism of obamacare, but we don't hear a lot of talk about before obamacare and before romney care, there was gillespie care. book, lobbyist and in his my opponent was a big supporter of the individual mandate. it is key to the obamacare approach. somehow he seems to have forgotten that. fun --day, the richmond richmond times dispatch has said that my opponent has said he is against obamacare but not laid out specifics. i laid out specific areas where we can fix this law. i think that is what most virginians want. >> can i give an additional 30 seconds? >> that is not true. i never lobbied for an individual mandate. fact checkers have disputed that as well. i fought obamacare every step of the way. senator warner did not just voted for it, but he strong-armed his colleagues to

vote for. i said it was going to end up killing jobs, raising the costs of higher premiums and harming the quality of our care. on one of the most important i was right. senator warner was very wrong. move onto the next question. this one is to mr. gillespie. you are running on a progrowth economic plank. he championed more tax cuts, less regulation, no increase in the federal minimum wage. in today's economy and the current tax system, corporate s are booming. wall street is enjoying record success. in a working-class americans, as you say, still struggling. could it say your plan is basically a reprise of the policies of george bush under which the census bureau shows median household income declined

, poverty increased and childhood poverty increased even more. are they right? judy. the me share with people what i'm talking about when i talk about e.g. squared, which is that gillespie's agenda for economic growth. if you're for growth, you are for me. losses as ahe job result of obamacare, which senator warner work to pass. it will mean 2.5 million fewer workers in our economy over the decade as a result of our disincentives to work built into that legislation. i believe having the highest corporate tax rate is responsible for having other companies go overseas. i believe we need to simplify and bring down the highest corporate tax rate and incentivize american companies to bring profits from overseas and invest them here in the

united states. to believe policies like unleashing american energy, replacing obamacare with market , educationforms reform which i believe is progrowth, and cutting wasteful spending could result in a doubling of our economic growth rate, which is low after a recession. if we doubled our growth rate for percent on average, it would mean 10 million new jobs in our economy. ableuld mean we would be to reduce our deficit by one third. >> judy, there's no issue more important than getting our country's balance sheet right. 17 trillion in debt was a 3 billion a night. perfect, buts, not i built a bipartisan group that would have taken on entitlement reform, tax reform and would've done more for job growth than any single program. you did not hear from my opponent was any acknowledgment

of the fact that he was a cheerleader for the bush/cheney economic policies, policies that put two wars and the credit card, that added to entitlements, that provided tax cuts it can be paid for, that if thatd the debt 86% is my opponent policy, i'm not sure we can afford e.g., much less e.g. squared. >> when senator warner first ran for the senate, he said he supported balanced-budget amendment. office, was elected to he voted against it. 10 democrats voted for it, including senator joe manchin from west virginia. again, bipartisan press releases, partisan votes on the floor, i believe that we can spur economic growth, but not

with the kind of intrusive government regulation and mandates and taxes at senator warner has supported, again, nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases since being elected. andrillion in new debt support for mandate after obviously,cluding, the mandates an epa rule that i believe will result in devastating our coal industry further than it has artie been devastated in southwest virginia. them a chance to respond in the last round. >> what i find is a full two had to pay for the balanced-budget amendment, it is usually people that don't have a plan. california, new york, their balanced-budget amendments. if anyone here thinks that is how they got balanced budgets, i don't believe that is the case. on this issue, we have a record. i was governor. i turned deficits into surpluses

. he was part of an administration that turn surpluses into deficits. >> we will move onto the next question. this is for senator warner. it is on the environment. both of you have artie raised. as you know, there are trade-offs between protecting the environment and economic growth. the obama administration's environmental protection agency has proposed new carbon emissions regulations at the chamber of commerce charges would cost thousands of virginia jobs, would force the closure of existing power plants in the state, and cost consumers at least $200 a year. to these proposed regulations go too far? >> judy, one of the great success stories of the last explosion ofen the american energy sources. we are the largest provider of oil and gas. i have supported consistently and all of the above approach to energy.

renewables, fossil fuels, conversation -- conservation. that includes use of coal. i do believe we have to find ways to use it cleaner. that is going to come about from american innovation and american technology. regardless of what we do, there will be 800 new coal plants built in china and india over the coming years. they ought to be using american cleaner coal technology. on these new regulations, they're in the midst of a --. period. we ask for that additional time and they should give it. my opponent has never been willing to acknowledge the science around climate change. and that man has an effect on it. i would love to take my opponent the navy has spent tens of millions of dollars just raising iers. my opponent does

have two energy credentials. he lobbied against increasing fuel efficiency standards. and as a chief lobbyist for enron, lobbied for regulations that basically allowed enron to gouge consumers all over america. example wherether senator warner is not being a senator he said he would be because he says he's going to stand up for coal miners and are very important coal sector in virginia, yet when there was an amendment to offer on the senate floor to prevent the epa from regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, high democrats voted for it. jim webb cosponsored it. once again, senator warner voted with his party leadership against the interests of virginians. southwest out in virginia as i often am, campaigning. i visited with a gentleman my was telling me about

the difficulties he has found since being laid off his job as a minor. and fact, he is not helping to support his family. he has three children like i have. he's now mowing lawns and doing odd jobs to help support his family. i respect him immensely. for doing that hard work. the wages he is making our far cry from what he was making as a minor. we are seeing all across southwest virginia the damaging effect of senator warner's policies in support of president obama. agree we need to clean energy and cleaner air. we are all for clean air. when you shut down one third to 50 percent of her coal-fired plants in virginia and you force production overseas to places like china, india and indonesia where they don't have the same high air quality standards that we have, you're not going to enhance air quality, you may damage it. >> again, i'll go back to what i said. i support and all of the above, including coal. to handle the enormous

challenges. have a coal industry that leads the world in cleaner coal technology. in carbon capture and increased -- i think it is a smart pro-business approach. what i'm curious with my opponent who talked about the gentleman who are know is had his circumstances changed, a lot of the folks who circumstances change are now on minimum wage. my opponent made some comments about minimum wage recently. he said minimum wage is a place where you learn the social aspects of work and afterwards you go play softball or drink a beer. otto, there are an awful lot of folks around virginia that are on minimum wage. more women than men. we can debate the statistics, but most folks say about 20% of minimum wage earners are the breadwinners for the family. i don't understand why he

refuses to acknowledge we have to increase the minimum wage. he can debate time and implementation, but i do think his comments are disconnected. >> i believe the senator knows a context of his comments because i said a lot of first-time jobs at minimum wage jobs, which they are. i'm sure there are many people in this audience whose first job was minimum wage. what senator warner supports is destroying between half a million jobs according to the cbo and up to a million jobs. are 20%,ght, there little bit less, of minimum age earners who are head of the household and responsible for the family. i agree with you, we need to make sure that people were working full-time can support their families. i don't think we should do it by making the working poor the nonworking poor. i would support a work incentive tax credit that allows people to keep their jobs and get the supplement -- to supplement

their income so we can help people have a livable income as opposed to increasing minimum wage in a way that kills jobs and continue to work. work is human dignity and -- in work. more people to experience that. , when iinimum wage started it was one dollar and -- it was $1.70. -- there's less purchasing power at seven dollars and $.25 today. >> first, mr. glaspie, do you believe that science proves that climate change exists echo >> i believe there is ample scientific evidence of -- that contribute to climate change. where don't believe it is i'm not entirely dismissive and sneering against those who have a different point of view and have different evidence. in my view, the evidence i've seen is that there is climate --

only --rfolk is the with rising sea levels. years.ndisputable, 2.5-5 we need to help norfork and the region adapt to that and deal with that. >> senator warner, a quick follow up. toohose epa relations go far? >> i'm not sure if my opponent agreed that man is a contribute to climate change. i think science overwhelmingly says yes. i think we need to go decides. we ask for additional time so we can try to get them right. i think one of the key things administration said it is are they going to use 2005 baseline or something else. all across the state, we are both ends of the -- where do believe is, part of the energy mix in america and the world going forward is going to be cold. let's find ways to use it cleaner.

>> the may be clear, the epa relations go too far. next question for mr. glaspie has to do with immigration. in 2012, president obama gave some undocumented children in this country a shield from deportation. 2007, ife therefore they had a clean work record, and had graduated from high school, they were given work authorization. now, senator ted cruz of texas is proposing to overturn this executive action. if elected, would you vote with senator cruz to repeal the protection from deportation for these so-called streamers? >> it is an executive order. i think it is an executive order. by acting you -- unilaterally as a president has come i believe he is contributed to the crisis we are seeing on the southern border today. what we're seeing there is because people in guatemala and

honduras and el salvador and other countries saw the and it created a spike in people coming to the border. i believe we need to secure our border. we need to enforce our existing laws. the something senator warner said when he was running for .his job six years ago unfortunately, when there was an amendment brought to the senate floor, after saying we need to secure our border in 2009, senator warner posted -- voted against the requirement of a fence to be completed by 2013. 21 democrats voted for it. jim webb was one of them. senator warner, after saying it should be the first priority voted against it. i do believe we need immigration reform. my father is an immigrant to this country. i'm proud to be the son of an immigrant. i believe that the reform that -- the reforms we should enact legislation that would allow us to keep out those who don't want to enter illegally or allow us to bring in people that we do

want to come in legally. >> would you vote with senator cruz? >> i have not seen the bill. >> he would repeal or overturn what the president signed. i have not seen senator cruz is bill, but i think that whendent obama overreached he issued an executive order in this regard. i think we're seeing the consequences of it today. >> i think the tragedy at the border is an example, one more example that our current immigration system is broken. in a bipartisan fashion and a bill that was fashioned by john mccain and lindsey graham, the senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform. that would've doubled border security. my opponent says they're not tough enough on the border, but we want to put in

place a process that would deal with guestworkers and dreams and others. it was probably supported by , not as, by labor groups circumstance in central america we need to do two things. we need to speed up the processing of these children. that was going to require additional judges. many of these children will be sent home. we need to intervene, stopping the flow. ambassadors isse weak. we said you have to tell you people not to come. cut out the drug smugglers and coyotes. again, what is curious is, a year ago, a bipartisan bill passed in the senate. my opponent said it was good policy and good politics. i do know what is changed. is it that politics now? why were you for it then against it now? >> i said it was a good approach. i also said as you know, the time, that we needed more border security provisions to be added to it.

steps by these house as well. my position has been consistent on this. red river disagreement in terms of policy here. senator warner believes that in addition to the reforms, some of which we agree on in terms of the reforms of immigration system going forward. i do not believe as a son of an immigrant who came here legally, was processed to ellis island, that it is in the country's best interest to grant citizenship to those who are here by virtue of having broken our laws. it is not fair to those who play by the rules. the same time, i do not believe that we will deport 10-12,000,000 people who were here in this country. i favor a reform of our visa system that would allow them to have fresh fees is after meeting some criteria, for example criminal background checks and self-sufficiency and other measures. my position on immigration reform has been consistent throughout. >> ever follow up for both of you.

it now there are about two dozen undocumented immigrant children being house about 100 miles from here in stanton, virginia at a juvenile detention center. some of them came in from central america just in the last couple of weeks. should these children be deported? , 20%think these children of these kids under 11. -- the process to go through the border with a get health checkups, immunizations and other things, i think they are due somewhat of a process. that process will result in sending some of us kids back, but they are teva process. i've been concerned with the administration's approach. they didn't inform the community and i said we shouldn't do this. i believe there is a humane, appropriate process. that will require conference of immigration reform.

judges soquire more children can be processed, many of which will be sent back. childrenaspie, these in stanton virginia. >> this is heartbreaking, there's no doubt about it. i can imagine. my father king at the age of eight and a two-week boat journey from ireland. but with his mother and brothers and sisters. the notion of turning a child over tricky are the -- coyote to go through churches territory to come to this country, can american should -- imagine with his parents go through in this children go through. the compassion responses to make clear, don't keep doing this. don't keep sending this children are because you're not going to be afforded american citizen ship as a result of that. we do need to get resources for more judges, about 40 more from what i've heard. i support that. again, let me be clear. the most compassionate thing we and afforded a

process under the expedited, the need to be returned. theext the format is candidate question. mr. glaspie has a question for senator warner. >> it has to do with health care. is, as obamacare was being debated, use of the most important reason for it was to bring down costs. he said you would never vote for a bill that would mean losing our insurance if he wanted to keep it. we learned this week again that premiums in virginia will go up our double digits again next year. virginians are losing plans a like for plans they don't. a court struck down subsidies for states without exchanges, which could affect millions of virginians, and the congressional budget office says there will be 2.5 million fewer workers and the economy as a result of disincentives to work in this bill over the next decade. , would what you know now you vote for the law today?

cases,he dueling court you might not be surprise, i support the virginia court. my opponent supports a d.c. court. believe when i voted for obamacare and still believe is that health care -- when health care was 18% of our gdp and going up. almost twice as much in america is all most every other industrial country. as someone who started the virginia after foundation to provide health care for the close to one million uninsured virginians, this spoke to me. people don't want to go back to the days where pre-existing conditions could disqualify them or women were charged for the men. they want us to roll up our sleeves and fix it. seven months into the campaign,

he is criticized the plan and not laid out any specific alternatives. given ideas.- i've i am open to more plans. all we have to do is provide health care, fairly and more efficiently. >> mr. glaspie. so, yes. that is a concern, obviously. we do know a lot of virginians do know the damaging effects of this policy. by the way, i knew that it would have this effect when you are working to pass it. i was warning against its negative impacts and i said it was going to kill jobs and raise our premiums and harm the quality of our care. that say, i am right about and you were wrong, but more importantly, wrong about what to do going forward. i do it to replace it. i prefer specifics of my energy plan is part of my five-point

plan for growth. i listen to virginians and talk to virginians. the woman i spoke to last week from danville who provides insurance for her family. both she and her husband worked. they have six children. up $600 ams have gone month. $7,200 a year. i said how are you going to accommodate this. ? she said i don't know. she is scared. we need to replace this bill and policies that work protect people who are being harmed for his seriously but the negative impact you voted for. >> this question goes to mr. glaspie. most virginians have a pretty dismal view of washington dc, which they believe is controlled by special interests. you have spent your dull life in washington, part of a recent life as a lobbyist, etc. -- as senator warner mentioned. from enron, many others, a group

called the cayman islands financial services. i looked at the website. you have worked for closely with karl rove, the political action group, american crossroads. is it does -- does this make it harder for you to capture this anti-washington sentiment out there? >> judy, again, senator warner has said here in virginia many things that he is not done in washington dc. i believe my experience, 15 years working on capitol hill in the white house, in the private sector as chairman of my party here in virginia, as senator warner was chairman of his party here. -- a a congressional aide top congressional aide and so was he. i believe that those experiences of having worked on capitol hill, having been a party chairman, having advised private sector people how to get things

done with bipartisan support in make meon can actually an effective senator. it would allow me to stand up to special interest groups, to stand up to senate leaders, to stand up to the white house for virginians, and keep my promises to the people of virginia. i believe my experiences would make me effective on day one. that all thesay jobs i've held, people have felt that i have performed them very capably and very well. i promise i will fight every day for hard-working virginians and virginians who want to find work heard >> senator warner. >> judy, i think you asked a good question. a lobbyist,you're it is who you lobby for. enron. lobbying against fuel efficiency standards, against financial regulations that might have stopped the financial crisis.

washington is broken. it is broken because of the absolute partisanship on both sides. has got amy opponent long and illustrious record, but it is a record as a lobbyist and a partisan operative. everything is viewed use up the nose down, republican versus democrat. want another partisan warrior in washington, user guide. but as i have stated when we dismiss the so-called attack city uses, which are misleading and not reflective of my record, i didn't bring that in. i wouldn't have john warner support. i wouldn't have more former republican legislators supporting me this time than when i ran into thousand eight. on virtually every major piece of legislation i worked on, i start with a republican partner. that is where you get things done, from the middle out.

that is why that is what i believe we need more of. >> judy, the fact is that of senator warner had been the senator he said he would become i would not have 47 of his former donors giving to me because of their frustration with his time in the senate. look, governor warner would not recognize senator warren today thomas atlee. in terms of being -- i believe the phrase i used was happy partisan warrior, is what you do when your chairman of the republican national committee chairman of the republican party of virginia. our current governor is a former chairman of the democratic national committee, your colleague in the senate is a former chairman of the democratic national committee. chairman of the democratic party of virginia. that is your role. whenis the role you play you're in those jobs. the role of a senator is different. i understand that. i believe i would get bipartisan support for commonsense economic growth proposals and policies that i have.

i believe you can reach across the aisle. reaching across the isle is not an end in and of itself. you have to pass bills. beene entire time you're there with a democratic president and a democratic majority, senator, despite all andpress releases and gangs bipartisan talk, your past two pieces of legislation. one that is a unanimous consent request and another is a recent bill that i suspect senator reid wanted to make sure got moved after i announce my candidacy for the senate. i'm proud of what i've been able to get done in a pretty broken place. two pieces of legislation about government transparency. one bill that has government agencies underreporting programs. the other bill, the data bill. my partner was darrell issa. it was called one of the most important bills of government transparency since to freedom of information act. you have to be able to follow the money. i feel very proud about the work

we have done. the gang of six and the broad dialogue we started their. i've done things that don't make the news in terms of helping everyday virginia families and businesses. initary families were inadequate housing. just recently, the whole -- funding of the george washington. the 11th terror in our fleet to make sure national security and thousands of virginia jobs? i'm proud of my record. myud of my partner -- bipartisan approach. >> there is an issue that potentially affects jobs in virginia. you're on the senate banking committee. your support the governance does the government's export/import bank. your opponent charges it engages in crony capitalism, disproportionately held large corporations. we vote for its refunding? if so, how do you justify? >> i absolutely support the

export/import bank. this may not be well-known, but it supports american businesses in a global economy, giving financial backstop. with two hundred million dollars of support for virginia companies large and small. it is been extraordinarily bipartisan supported. a certain tea party wing of the republican party moves further to the right and my opponent embraces that agenda, it is way out on the mainstream, but now the small group of folks are opposing this institution. the national association of manufacturers, the u.s. chamber of commerce, every business group in america says this is what we are to keep the toolkit. there may be some ideological argument that says we shouldn't support exports, and i'm not going to unilaterally disarm the american businesses when canada

and brazil, country smaller than ours, have a greater percent of export support. this again is a litany of where we go from export/import bank to questions about how we do real ful tax reform. the approach of someone on the far right is way out of the mainstream. unfortunately, that is where my opponent is landing. >> judy, i don't recall seeing crony capitalism in my remarks about the bank, but i do believe that we have to evaluate every program. it is at a point where going to equal over the next few decades our entire gdp. needs to every program be subject to scrutiny.

i agree we need to open new markets exports for our american goods abroad, in particular are agricultural goods here in virginia. we haven't had a new trade agreement since his administration took office. i think that is a mistake. we should fight to open new markets for our products and goods and services. look, if we are going to get control of federal spending, we have to find bills were even our friends support them. i have a lot of friends who support the bank. i hear their arguments. you can make a case for any federal program, but i think it is an area where we can get some savings. the broader effect of reducing the drag of the debt on our economy, along with other areas and programs that need to be subject to reform and , offsetson and cuts the long-term benefit. that is hard to do. i understand that. i notice hard to stand up to the chamber of commerce, but that is the job of a senator, to stand

up for what is in the best interest of the country and our commonwealth. i believe in this instance, as hard as it would, i know i have a lot of members of man party you do not agree with me on this, i understand that, but i think when you come to a conclusion that this is in the long-term broader interest of the country, you need to stand up on principle and fight. might -- what my opponent didn't mention was that this bank is that cost the taxpayer dime. it earns money each year. why would america unilaterally just -- disarm in the economy? provide ouroing to businesses with the same tools that other countries have. debt and deficit. spendis no issue that i more time on. we need to make more progress. i've have taken more arrows from the administration, from the left and right, because of laid out significant corporate and individual tax reform.

i've laid out entitlement reform. i've been getting that -- i think getting that right is the single most important thing our country can do. what i've heard from either opponent are platitudes. when you're been in the trenches actually fighting for this, you realize it is hard, it is the most important issue facing our nation. >> rate brief rebuttal. >> first of all, we're going to have a figure of dispute over whether or not the bank generates money or doesn't. cbo says it is not. the experience of the senators talking about is worth revisiting. fact is, when i was working on capitol hill, i was just a step or -- just a staffer. i was for involved in the room. was a first balanced budget with a republican congress and a

democratic white house. we can do it again with the right priorities in the right leadership. i think it would be helpful to have a balanced what did the judgment -- a balanced budget agenda -- amendment. the house is move forward with amendments to provisions to do that. sevennator has voted for trillion dollars in new debt, despite the fact that he says he wants a balanced budget. ed, you're been ranked as one of the top d.c. lobbyists and described as the ultimate washington insider. you are the lead lobbyist for enron who committed the greatest corporate fraud in modern american history. you and a lobbying firm made more than $700,000 and helped enron avoid the kind of regulations that allow them to gouge consumers with higher electric bills.

, youalk about job killers are an executioner. knowledge jobs, but folks pensions and savings. fair for youry firm to take so much when so many folks lost so much? >> a couple of things. one, my part -- my part partisan firm which has been most effective in advising major employers and how to get things done with bipartisan support, and enron approach our firm to be a client and represent them, they had been on the cover of either fortune or forbes, i'm not sure which. one of those two magazines as for the fifth year in a row the most innovative company in the country. that was a perception. perceptions aren't always reality, i would say. the fact is that what we saw with this company was that they were cooking the books in a way that nobody knew. one of my partners at the firm

joined a class-action lawsuit against them because even a said he was hoodwinked about what was going on. the supposed be year-long contract but it was only 10 months. after -- two days after ken lay pleaded the fifth, we said this is not the company we thought it was. clearly, we were not hired to do this work. we left them. i'm very proud of how effective our firm was. ed firmshe best reputation in the business. i think i can get things done with bipartisan support. >> we didn't hear from my point was whether it was fair for him and his firm to make $700,000 being involved with the biggest corporate scandal in modern american history were 20,000 folks lost their jobs. he didn't also mention was that even afterwards, he lobbied against additional regulations that might prevent future enron

scandals. again, i think the record speaks for itself. a final round to of questions. i want to start with foreign policy. this first question in this lot goes to you, senator warner. ukraine. president obama invoked limited economic sanctions against russia after their initial aggression in ukraine. watching, even after this horrible shootdown of the , almostn passenger jet certainly by russian separatists with russian help, resident lieutenant -- president vladimir putin is are backing off when father. he is shooting down ukrainian military planes, russian all charlie batteries are shooting across the border into ukraine, what should be done now to stop president putin. has president obama been too

weid on the seattle >> judy, live in an extraordinarily dangerous world. i think the president should have acted sooner and tougher on sanctions on russia, started calling for the sanctions about bipartisan, back in march. i've heard from american businesses who have said if there are not european sanctions as well, all we are doing is treating american contacts for german or british or french contracts. i believe we need to have firmer sanctions. this is an extraordinarily important time for nato and the west to stand up to this kind of activity and aggression. that is an area where i differ from the president. i think we ought to be liquefied natural gas. help cut europe's reliance on russian gas.

they can have a little more back on. it is one reason i support keystone as well. sending the signal to europe to you can look elsewhere for your energy supplies. but i also believe it is going to require the europeans as well. the president needs to ratchet these up. i believe he should have acted earlier. >> mr. glaspie. >> i agree, he should've acted sooner. i agree we should stiffen the sanctions. toould say we should give the ukrainian army and the military government, the government, the help that looking for in terms of arms. >> lethal weapons echo >> yes. i believe they need the right to defend themselves as a nation. i also think that what we're seeing here is the long-term effect of what has been described by this administration the aussie leading from behind. there's another word for that is following. receivesunited states

from leadership, the world becomes a more dangerous place. ofuld lift the ban on export domestic liquefied natural gas. we should also lift the ban on export of domestically produced crude oil as well. in the same way that the lng diminishn relief would vladimir putin's leverage over western european countries, the lifting of the ban on domestic crude would diminish iran's governments leverage internationally as well. >> mr. warner, are you describing the most immediate things that could stop resident putin? >> i think we need to send the energy signal. to say, bute pc give europeans more backbone. stand up more. we as well. any reality in the

21st century, we need to stop that. these are actions we need to take now. opponent criticizes the president, that he was part of .he bush cheney administration with an advocate for the , they said into iraq saddam hussein had weapons of destruction. that it would be a quick in and out operation. wrong, wrong, wrong. >> you want to answer? >> a wrong assumption or assessment shared by an awful lot of people and not just the bush administration. it was also the view of the clinton administration and the majority and senators on both side of the aisle believed that

was the case relative to iraq. we should obviously learn from mistakes of the past. we should also recognize that , but so are bad mistakes of omission. when president obama very early in his administration made a decision to negate the agreement with the czech republic in full on in terms of missile-defense agreements that have been made him a that sent a strong signal putin to vladimir putin -- strong signal to vladimir putin and russia. it embolden them. mistakes of omission can also have negative ramifications for our own national security. >> i believe some of that goes back to the bush administration when russia invaded georgia. >> we will move to the next question. this is for mr. gillespie.

if a satisfactory nuclear deal cannot be reached with the iranians as the israeli prime minister was saying, will you support u.s. military action to take out iran's nuclear facilities? >> well, i believe that it is important that the u.s. never takes that option off the table. oversee the preferred approach is one where you have a negotiated agreement and that is not necessary. my view is that we have to watch very closely what they are doing. time is their friend in a ron -- iran. when the president set a deadline and we don't enforce that deadline and negotiations they will use of the sanctions anyway, there is a bill being introduced that would stop the president from using sanctions prematurely, i would

support that. i know the senator had bipartisan efforts to increase sanctions on iran and have expressed concerns about this. i think it is important in terms of the principle of u.s. policy and foreign affairs that you not take off any options on the table. >> on this issue, think my point and i generally agree. i think no option should be taken off the table. i think we cannot allow iran to have the capacity to build a nuclear weapon or have a nuclear weapon. i believe we have to be very careful in terms of the sanctions. i think we need more visibility in terms of the status of our ability to view the iranian facilities at this point. i think we need to stand shoulder to shoulder with our most important allies both in

terms of making sure iran doesn't move forward, but also we have seen since 9/11 things in the middle east are always challenging. i believe israel has a right to defend itself. as we see these horrible pictures -- remember that thomas hamasshamas -- protect citizens to missiles and israel uses missiles to protect its citizens. >> you want to comment on that as well? you both agree on iran. we want to comment? >> no. that is a unique area of some agreement today. mark is right. as benjamin netanyahu said come

israel uses its rockets and missiles to defend is innocent civilians. usestunately, hamas civilians to defend its missiles . israel has a right to defend itself. ensure thato to this doesn't go on in the future? , we need toime stand by our most important ally in the middle east. >> is there anything else the u.s. should be doing right now? mr. gillespie and then mr. warner. the secretary is there. i think he is still on the ground now. one of the things that i think doesn't help in the negotiating process is undercutting the israeli government in the process. >> are using that is what is going on? >> i am saying i'm concerned

about this administration's approach in that regard. >> mr. warner? think we need to continue the pressure on the europeans. the challenge with iran and i think you have to keep all the options on the table. we were sanctioned. sanctions were working, but only working because they were done with the p5 + 1/ -- + 1. about the left and the right, the increasing isolationism that seems to be raising a. we live in an extraordinarily injurious world. we have the circumstances with isis and the situation with russia and china.

we need and the world needs a stronger america. >> all right. we will move on. i will give you a chance and the question -- this one is for senator warner. china is increasing its defense budget. it is up more than 12% this year alone. is aggressively threatening vietnam, japan, and other asian neighbors over disputed islands. should china be considered a major adversary of the u.s.? does obama administration reflect that? >> i believe the administration's tilt toward asia was an appropriate position. what we couldn't have predicted for the other eruptions in the middle east, europe, and elsewhere. verynk we have been

guarded with the chinese. i'm not prepared to say this is an adversarial relationship, but i do think we need to do more to promote activities with vietnam that are nations anxious for the u.s. to take a bigger -- -- itings back to my mind sounds like i am repeating -- but the deficit issues. 17 chilean dollars in debt. llion in debt. in english, that means education, or infrastructure, research, and development. if we're going to have a strong america economically, that is not where we should be cutting. if we're going to have a strong economy and military, we have to

make savings, but the stupidity of the sequestration shut down the government. got tos out you have have people who are willing to be bipartisan up there. that goes to how we deal with china. >> mr. gillespie on china. again basedembolden on the approach of this administration. that inagon believes order to secure our national security needs, we should have a 3565 ship navy. we are moving in the wrong direction. i agree with it. we need to have the right priorities. what we disagree upon are the priorities. the reason we are seeing that going on is because this

administration is slashing the navy to pay for more obamacare. no doubt about it when you look at the budgeting here to that is one of the reasons we see china, terrorists,, the isis, and iraq emboldened. interveneo militarily? that is not the case. on this particular comment, we have a hard time protecting the american strength abroad when we are weak at home. that is why we need to unleash economic growth and double our economic growth rate. it will help us project strength abroad. >> he makes the same charges over and over again like a broken record.

doesn't mean that is true. on this very important question, i believe we need to be strong militarily teared we need to be strong economically as well. the rhyme budget my opponent has approved would cut investments in education, infrastructure, research and development that are already at historic lows. party youre which belong to. but it will not allow us to be strong. i would never invest in this enterprise. we should be for government, infrastructure, r&d. there needs to be specifics. i have been protested against. yelled that.

-- at. we need smarter ways to cut. >> i'm not sure which was not true. china has been embolden by this administrations approach? i'm not sure, but i will leave that to you. the policies and putting forward great jobs, great take on pay, live people out of poverty him and reduce energy prices. the price of a gallon of gas has tooky doubled since he office saying you would vote for policy the bring down the cost of energy. we is to be able to fill a $15 tank on $20. nearly -- now it is nearly double that did most don't even fill up the tank. we try to squeeze out from the dump as much as we can.

that is why people are feeling squeezed. to this skyrocketing insurance hasiums and the virginians resulted in that all across the commonwealth. say the rhetoric doesn't match the record. if you are concerned about gas prices, why are you lobbying gets higher fuel or standards? -- why are you lobbying against higher fuel standards? how do we deal with china? we need a strong military, we need a strong economy. we need a business plan that takes down this $17 trillion in debt. the former joint chief of staff deficit -- if my

opponent has a different plan, let's debated. >> the next question is for mr. gillespie. it has to do with afghanistan. party like senator john mccain won u.s. troops to remain in afghanistan indefinitely or at least for quite some time to come. others say to bring the troops home as soon as possible. are your views closer to those of senator mccain or senator paul? tomy view is that we need keep our troops there for as long as they are serving the needs of our national security interest and we have national security interest in afghanistan. we know that. i think we need to make whether -- based on

the does the pentagon, state department, what does a homeland security department believe? do they need to be here now? what size do we need there to make sure we don't have happen in afghanistan what we saw happen in iraq? troops over the objections of recommendations of are notrs in the field getting a status enforcement agreement. that is what we are seeing go on. that is long-term. this is a threat to our homeland security. my point is i don't think we should make arbitrary decisions either for president or from the

fellow republicans. i think you make a decision on that east on what is the best assessment of our national security interest. given the recent election in afghanistan and what is going on there on what is going on in iraq that it would not be in hours interest to bring them home now. that is not to say i believe in an indefinite presence. >> i think the circumstances in afghanistan are complicated. you have got to candidate still two candidate still bickering about the votes. i would be open to leaving the forces longer. curious on little that no president ever has left american troops.

amines american troops could be subject to -- >> that was my point. >> let me finish. when i think about how angry i iraqi troopsaw know the way at the first sign ouresistance, we offer them deepest treasure, our men and women. we offered them a chance in afghanistan and iraq. people in those countries need to show a willingness to defend their own country and a willingness to actually form governments that represent a true cross-section of the respective country's population. or thein as a one set other simply the middle of a civil war is -- we have seen

history of that. >> mr. gillespie. >> i don't think i disagree with that. as long as we have the maliki government, we need to make sure he is inclusive of the kurds and the sunnis and the shia as well. that was one of the big factors of melting away the army. it is dispiriting. i believe we need to bolster the iraqi government in baghdad and make sure we don't allow for isl to make further progress than they have. at a time when the american people seem to be leery of military engagement abroad, how prepared are you believe this country needs to be to engage in or future whether it is iran

remaining in afghanistan and going back to iraq, even syria? there are many other countries we could mention. >> the american people are weary. i understand that it unless it is in our national security interest, we shouldn't interfere militarily. but again will be a mistake of omission rather than co-mission. so, we have to be as always thought full -- thoughtful peer at one of the most important votes we could cast as u.s. senators to vote to put american men and women in harms plate -- that have to be weighed very

carefully. the world is unstable right now because of a lack of american leadership. we are the country the world looks to and we are not providing right now. thatyou make an assessment the national merrick and interest is at stake, you have got to make that with the american public. >> senator warner. >> i think he got it right. if you break it, you own it. >> i'm here to help. [laughter] i think that is a lesson. when america national security interest is at stake, you have to be prepared to intervene.

it is an enormously interconnected world. there is military and economics. i think the american people are weary. paying for defense not on for america, but for the whole world. basically our navy that protects the whole world. i'm very disappointed and think we need a more aggressive and bipartisan approach to allies around the world. .hey need to step up as well this both do domestically and our allies to step up as well. >> final two questions. did the senator warner u.s. military, we have been talking about it, but this is a

question on sexual assault. says womencorps victims often don't come forward because "they don't trust us, they don't trust the command." you voted to leave prosecutions as they are within the chain of command. so as not to disrupt order and discipline. many other countries come including israel, have independent prosecutors in military sexual assault cases. why shouldn't the u.s. military be the same? >> i have heard some of those horrific stories. i have had female veterans and males talk. we should not accept any harassment whether it is in the military or bipartisan legislation i'm working on now on college campuses. what you didn't ask is in the legislation that we passed, there were 30 additional changes

for the prosecutions and trying to ensure the sun had -- that his son had an harassment, they would go to an outside prosecutor. make sure that whistleblowers were protected. i thought long and hard about this. the proposal that was put forward doesn't just include sexual harassment. shoulduded all felonies measure taking out the chain of command or someone stole another soldier's wallet out of the believe thattill the best way to keep the chain of command -- we have got to see progress in here. >> mr. gillespie i agree -- mr. gillespie. >> i agree.

obviously these are crimes and should be treated as such. hope that the steps we are taking to improve the process improves the process. i would be willing to revisit it if that was the case sheared a kind of behavior and those kinds of activities cannot be tolerated and need to be stopped. chain inul that the the legislation would do that. >> you believe he is wrong when he says women victims don't trust the commands? >> i have heard an extraordinary amount of conflicting testimony command.within the we cannot have this culture. i think we took major steps forward.

if we don't see results, needs to be revisited. >> i don't doubt the general in that regard. afterpeful that they will reforms are implemented and that that will change. if that is still the case after we have implemented these reforms, yes, they need to be revisited. >> final question for mr. gillespie. do you for virginia -- believe the commonwealth of virginia should join 19 other states that have recognized same-sex marriage as legal? yes or no? >> well, i believe -- first of all, i respect and love people for who they are. i have a lot of friends who are not on agreement on this issue. i also believe as a senator, it

is not my will to legislate on it and i believe the appropriate venue for it is the states. the states are working this out. the state of virginia doesn't recognize that. maybe it will be visited at some point. the voters will decide. >> do you believe the state should not recognize it? >> my vote would be no. but i do not believe in government sanction of same-sex marriage. >> i'm sorry. could you elaborate? >> i believe marriage is between one man and one woman and it is up to the state to vote on a referendum in virginia. believe it is a state issue. >> i support marriage equality. i think it is the right thing to do and the fair thing to do. i also believe that it is a

smart business thing to do. i have lots of employers. we want to iron everything regardless of who you are. i respect his religious view, but we have very different views. thatpports an amendment would ban certain forms of contraception. some of his biggest supporters were the architects would butt of aas the late-night jokes because of the invasive ultrasound. i trust the women of virginia. a for-profit corporation should be able to interfere in an employees health

care choices. where weis is an area have a very different approach. there are very large differences between the two candidates. >> this is an area where you're making up my views. [laughter] please provide the documentation. i am caf auct is c.it -- i am catholi i went to the same catholic school. your democratic candidate is a caf au lait. -- catholic. i can also send you a copy of john kennedy's catholic speech. college ofmerican

obstetricians and gynecologists that there is no medical reason no reason, there is for the pill to be a prescription drug. it should be available by the counter. i support that. but that would make it a lot easier for women. even when obamacare passed and you're making the case we needed to enact it because there were millions who are uninsured, when it is fully permitted, there million who get insurance and 30 million that aren't. we would disrupt the insurance of people to ensure those people, but are still 30 million that aren't. they should be able to go to the drug store, grocery store and purchase the pill without a prescription. it would make it more affordable and acceptable. it would move this debate over the first amendment and

employers in all that and i think it would be good for the country. it would make it more accessible and affordable. that is the way to go. that is the way i would approach my policy as senator. >> can i clear this up for the record questi? >> this is not a vote. >> did you not also support an amendment? >> no. when did i support that amendment? other]g over each >> would you vote to overturn roe v wade? the folks who endorsed -- >> the folks who endorsed me -- [talking over each other]

>> we are now at the moment of closing statements. first.lespie, your -- you're first. >> i have laid out my agenda as i have all across the commonwealth. i want virginians to know. i want voters to hold accountable on the same where i'm asking them to hold mr. warner accountable for saying he would be an independent voice, but voting a majority of the time of president obama. for said you be a fiscal moderate, but voting to increase our taxes. a for him saying he would be fiscal moderate, but voting to increase our taxes. and for saying he would never bow for a bill that would make --lose our insurance if we that he would never vote for a

bill that would make us lose our insurance the money to keep it, but he voted for obama care. and i can understand that, but governor warner would not recognize senator warner today. that is why many virginians support me who have supported him in the past. he is not comfortable defending the votes he has cast. he talks a lot about the jobs he had before this campaign trail. i'm proud of my career. mark is proud of doing a job that makes of the richest member of the senate. my time in the private sector will enable me to stand up against special interest groups, senate leaders, and the white house and keep my promises to virginians. virginians have a clear choice in november. we can keep on the path we are on, where we are losing jobs,

wages are stagnant, debt is mounting and prices are rising, we could have a progrowth policy agenda like mine did great jobs and lift people out of convert and reduce energy prices. we could easily squeeze, bolan of the change of policies in washington. thank you for watching. i would like your vote. >> thank you, senator gillespie. now senator warner. >> thank you. i think we saw this morning two very different approaches to the issues important to virginia. i am very proud of my tenure as senator. transparency. whether it is moving forward and building that national consensus --get our allen sheet right

balance sheet right. i'm proud of it that when we heard those awful stories of the cemetery five years ago, rolling up our sleeves i come up with an innovative approach. i'm proud that we heard the challenges around our utterance program. i wanted to make sure it female vets richer did same as their male counterparts. process there -- the v.a. claims in a faster way. there a lot of ways to get things done. repeat, repeat, repeat like a broken record. that is what political operatives do.

actually, more republican legislators this time than when i ran into thousand eight. my opponent has a very -- in 2008. my point has a very different approach. he sees a very -- things in a very partisan lines. who is up and who is down. -- happy himself partisan warrior. you think what washington needs is another partisan warrior, you have got your candidate right here. if you want folks who can work across party lines and bring a business minded approach to government, i would like to have your vote. i promise i will continue in that style going forward. thanks so much. >> thank you very much for the

spirited debate. we thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> that was lively. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> next from the western conservative conference, we hear from senator tim scott and representative coffman and ralph reed and a panel on the tea party's influence on the republican party. >> on the next "washington journal" the latest on u.s. military strikes on isis forces in iraq. and a discussion on the investigation into the irs exempt organization division.

and a talk on the doctor shortage and the impact it could have on patients. we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" live at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span. while congress is on break, c-span's primetime features a wide range of political views and topics. this a come a debate on america's greatness, better and cdc -- veterans health care, the cdc, we take the history tour. since then primetime monday through friday at 8 p.m. eastern . let us know what you think about programs you're watching. call us at the number on your screen or e-mail us at c-span.org. junta c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter.

join the c-span conversation. unlike us on facebook, follow us us ontter -- like facebook, follow us on twitter. >> republican senator tim scott addressed the western conservative summit in mid july. he talked about school choice and the economy. he is running in the 2014 special elections to complete a term of jim demint. he is introduced by mike coffman. the event is hosted a by the christian university. this is 30 minutes. >> thank you. my fellow conservatives today, as many of you know, i am the number one target for the democratic national congressional committee nationally. they are going to find out that taking on a united states marine corps combat veteran will be a lot tougher than anybody ever thought. [applause]

it is an honor for me to introduce a former colleague of mine, senator tim scott is the epitome of conservative values and principles. he grew up poor in a single-parent household in south carolina. he learned the importance of faith, hard work, and family. he started from humble beginnings to build one of the most successful allstate agencies in south carolina. prior to being sworn in to the united states senate in 2013, tim scott served in the united states house of representatives from 2011-2013. he was a member of the house leadership assets of debt and sat on the influential rules committee.

he had four terms as council chair. he was a member of south carolina house of representatives and was elected chairman of the freshman caucus. today, senator scott works to promote conservative causes. where he has worked with senate colleagues to introduce a balanced a budget amendment to strip the power away from congress to spend money that we do not have. he also was an original cosponsor of the bill that would permanently ban the wasteful earmark process. tim scott agenda will empower america for freedom and education. he is dedicated to working with anyone committed to building a better future to develop bold ideas that break away from this

country's past failures. please join me in welcoming and giving a warm colorado welcome to senator tim scott, a true conservative american hero. ♪ [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. i am sure that those of you who live in the district will be sending mike coffman back to congress. [applause] we need some help in the united states senate. anybody realizes that? everybody realizes that. i want to talk about how we can

make sure in 2014 we take back the majority in the senate and in 2016, we have an opportunity to make sure there's a republican in the white house. we need a republican in the white house. and when i think about the challenges we face, i always go back to "amazing grace." anybody know that song? [applause] i like that song a lot. i once was lost but now i am found. i was blind, but now i see. i thank the lord he saved my soul. yes, he saved a soul like me. that is my story. i am not sure if it is your story but it is my story.

i think about how amazing the good lord is and how amazing america is and how the combination of a strong god and amazing nation makes a guy like me even possible. that is the story of the grand old party. it is the story of the great opportunities party. let me share my story with you and explain how the conservative principles have made being possible. want up in a single-parent household, my parents got divorced when i was seven years old. i started drifting. drifting in the wrong direction. by the time i was 14 years old, i was flunking out of high school. i flunked out of high school. please do not do what i did. as a freshman, i failed world geography. i may be the only senator to ever fail civics. [laughter] i felt like i was comfortable

because a lot of the guys on the other side failed civics. [laughter] amazing. i also failed spanish and english. when you fail spanish and english, they do not call you bilingual, no. they call you bi-ignorant. i had two major blessings. one was a strong mama. i've got to tell you, i am a mama's boy. my mother worked -- [applause] give all mamas a hand. especially if you are sitting next to the one you are married to. i saw one up front who was

shaking his hand and saying, praise the lord. he wants to go home alive tonight. anyway, you have to have fun when you are on stage. that's all the fun i get to have. you might as well join in with me. my mama was an amazing and is an amazing woman. she worked 16 hours day as a nurse's aid making sure we stayed off welfare. she believed she needed to set the example for her boys to follow. she worked hard at it. when i flunked out of high school as a freshman, she was not too happy with me. she believed love sometimes had to come at the end of a switch. a switch for those of you do not understand is a southern apparatus of encouragement. flies from your belt line to your ankles. applies from your belt line

to your ankles. my mama encouraged me a lot. the second blessing that came my way was a small business owner. a conservative republican. i didn't know it at the time, the chick-fil-a operator was a conservative republican. all i know was that john showed up at the right time. he started telling me some very important lessons. he started saying, tim, you do not have to play football or be an entertainer in order to be successful in america. you can think your way out of poverty. i thought the only way out was playing for the dallas cowboys. i know this is denver's territory. i understand that. [laughter] my chief of staff is from colorado. my deputy chief of staff, colorado. [applause] my director from colorado. [applause] it pains me to see all of the orange in my office. [laughter] this is not part of the speech i

apologize for having a commercial break. i decided during football season last year to make a bet. this is simply -- i made a statement. if the denver broncos can beat the cowboys in cowboys stadium, i would wear a broncos tie. when tony romo threw the interception and we lost 51-48, i told my pastor said i want to know if it was ok to violate my statement. he said, i know you are a politician, so you guys do it all the time. however, you have to honor your word. i said, i am frugal, sir. tie? you buy me this he bought me this beautiful denver broncos tie and he is,

too, from denver. [laughter] i had to wear the tie. now the commercial break is over and back to the presentation. that message is brought to you by the western conservative summit. and john andrews. god bless you, john andrews. [laughter] [applause] john, my mentor, he was teaching me some very valuable lessons and you started teaching me that if you have a job, you have done well. but if you create jobs, you're done extraordinarily well. if you have an income, you can support yourself. if you make a profit, you can change the life of your family and your community. and this became the very fabric of my journey towards conservatism. as a 15-year-old kid learning these very basic business

principles that the free market, four letter word, and making a profit is an amazing journey and experience in america. i will tell you i bought it full. it took me four years to get it. when i was 19 and john was 38, he died. it is changed the course of my life. the positive impact -- a message of hope and opportunity being john's lessons of financial literacy. i went toward business. it can change your life. we grew up living with my grandparents. me and my mother and my brothers shared one-bedroom. i do not like either one today.

my grandparents had the other room. john said you can change all of that through business ownership. he was so right. one of the reasons why as you uncover my opportunity agenda in washington, d.c., i focus so much on the entrepreneur is because i've experienced first-hand that when the government steps back and entrepreneurs step in, all things change. [applause] a good economy makes all things possible. and the question is, what makes a good economy? how do we create a good economy? we all know that tax reform is necessary key ingredient to that good economy. i cannot hire more people and face higher taxes and have higher regulations at the same time. i can do 2 out of the three. if you want me hiring more people, we have to reduce the cost of doing business.

i know you are fans of obamacare. [laughter] good, good, good. obamacare spends too much and taxes too much, and destroyed the best health care system in the world. [applause] i like my friends who say about what about a balanced approach. just look no further than obamacare. over $800 billion of new revenue, higher taxes, the destruction of the relation -- relationship between a doctor and a patient -- look no further than obama care for all of the challenges that we face. in obamacare, we see a couple of things. not only higher taxes and higher regulation of but we also see this on march towards centralizing the control of all

the major decisions. taking over another part of the economy and presented to the american people, a clear decision. do you believe in redistribution or do you believe in the private sector? do you believe in entrepreneurship? do you believe in the power of 300 million americans? or do you believe in the intellect of 535? let me tell you if you're looking for the answer, it is not to be 535. we will have to have something to be for as we face the facts that we are clearly going to have to stand against. let me do a survey. how many of y'all, you can say yes or no, do you think obamacare is a good idea? >> no. >> good. [laughter] do you think the president is

handling the border situation with the guatemalan kids in a good way? >> no. >> how many of you think he is handling the syrian situation in a good way? >> no. scandal?s >> no. >> the economy? >> no. >> the v.a.? >> no. >> all of the things going wrong, we should be winning every single election. we should. [applause] and somebody asked this simple question, why are we not winning elections? i think this is an important part. people do not care how much you know until they care, they know how much you care. it is a very important key to our success in 2014 and 2016. one of the reasons i am so excited about you bringing cory gardner to the ballot is that you cannot see cory and not smile.

he is always smiling. i mean, cory says, hi, obamacare stinks. yes, it does. one of the keys to success is making sure that our candidates are likable. that our candidates are armed with the right message. we know what we are standing against. we are standing against spending money we do not have, buying things we cannot afford, and the rest of the world seems to be unimpressed. when you have a $600 billion annual deficit in may see even usit makes it easy for to stand strong against the challenges that the left are bringing to our country. that is the easy part. we have to answer the question, what are we for? as we answer that question, i believe that we will start winning elections everywhere.

because standing up and saying, no, is good. it takes us through october. the election is in november. for us to get through november, we have to have a positive policy agenda that attracts a diverse a group of voters to take a second look at the grand old party and start thinking of it as a great opportunity party. my opportunity agenda does just that. there are two pillars to the opportunity agenda. the first is education and the second pillar is how do we build a good economy? let's talk about education. one of my first bills in the senate was the choice act, creating hope and opportunities for individuals and communities through education. as a guy who did poorly as a freshman, my mother beat me -- i

mean she encouraged me and to summer school and helped me catch up with my classes and finish on time and earned a football scholarship. went to college. finished in 5 years. i have done pretty well since then. the foundation of which is education. as we look at the centralization of education, we come to one simple conclusion -- it is not working. a classic example embedded in the choice act is the notion of school choice. i am a big believer that parents deserve more choices so their kids have a better chance. and the choice act helps us to get there. in d.c., the cost per student is $21,000. i know that sounds like a very low number to some of you. this side, said wow.

i will talk to them, hmm. i will talk to them hmm for a few minutes here. for $21,000, 56% of the students graduate and very few of those go on to get a two-year or four-year degree. the choice act embedded is a d.c. opportunity scholarship that allows for school choice in d.c. here are the results of school choice. i will be right back. i will be right back. for the wow factor, the scholarship costs $8500 per student. 21,000, typical education.

93% graduate. versus 56% graduating. 91% go on to a two-year or four-year institution. and in 93% of the parents are happy. if we are looking for a way to change the dynamics in who votes for us, the issue of education can not owned by the democrats. [applause] cannot be owned by the democrats. and will we do our part, i will tell you, the results are amazing. i am taking this agenda and i am telling the truth of a love it. all people love this concept of

choice, so much so, i've noticed a couple of things in d.c. when in the people start liking something, the federal government sues. there seem to be a correlation relationship. i do not really know what it is. in louisiana, they decided to go forward with the agenda and the department of justice decided, you cannot help poor kids get a better education. unacceptable. it will hurt public education. i assume that is what they said. do not quote me on that one. they said something like that as they attacked public education because of school choice. i believe the way you improve public education is to decentralized public education from washington, d.c. and send the control, decision-making, and money back to the states. [applause]