just as we need in a rock, a pluralistic government that can represent all the people of that country, so in syria we need a transition to a government that can represent all of the people in that country and stop brutalizing them. >> part of my argument is you need that mixture of intelligent politics, diplomatic pressure, long term engagement and a asprehensive plan, as well the potential for military or other more aggressive action. you need all those things to solve this problem. that will be the case with syria as with iraq. let's have the gentlemen here. you have been asking other countries to pledge to go back to defense spending. the think tanks say britain's defense spending has dipped to something like [indiscernible]

next year. did you make any commitments? >> we are above 2%. we are one of only four countries. estonia, greece, and britain in the european union, and america, four out of 28. we have stayed above 2% even at a time when we have one of the biggest budget deficits anywhere in the world. i think that is important. i think it is worth looking at what the declaration says pretty what is remarkable is there has always been the 2% pledge in nato, but it has never been set out as clearly as this. clear what has been signed up to. it makes a differentiation. 2% shouldose meeting aim to continue. some year after year have not been spending 2%. it says allies whose current proportion of gdp spent is below

on this level will default any toward [indiscernible] an aim to move toward the 2% within a decade. i would give -- argue there's a lot that has been achieved. proper training missions that will go to countries like jordan and georgia and iraq. here an important breakthrough in terms of getting other countries to bear the burden britain and others have been bearing. we will set our budget at the time of the next election. i am proud of the fact that even in a difficult fiscal environment we have frozen the defense budget in cash terms, 35 billion pounds, a top five defense budget anywhere in the world. because we have made difficult choices, we have the aircraft carrier, the destroyers,

frigates, and all the other hardware i mentioned. we have talked about that a lot today. tom? minister, john kerry was forthright in his views on how to tackle isil and what was needed. i wonder if you agreed with him in three specific areas. one, that it could be a last to fight up to three years. seekthat he would like to you an authorization as early as the end of the month at the general meeting. and third, it would take real military commitment from the air and coalition partners. i agree with the sorts of points he has been setting out. the issue about the time this will take, i would not put a specific time on a specific problem like so-called islamic state. it arose very rapidly.

i believe it can be squeezed effectively. i would not want to put a time on that. but i have said many times this is a generational struggle. we have been fighting against islamist extremism around the world. one thing i try to get across at the conference is i think it is theg to think the cause of problem is the particular fracture in a country like syria or iraq. the cause of the problem is the poison of islamist extremism. wherever there are fractures, civil wars, conflicts, it bubbles to the surface. that is why you have seen it in somalia, nigeria, afghanistan when it was controlled by the taliban. and tragically in syria and iraq . the struggle we are involved in is a generational struggle. i think of the u.n., the more the human can say to back and support hopefully a new iraqi government and condemn

islamist extremism, i think the better. in terms of military commitment, solving this problem has already taken military commitment. britain has been dropping eight out of military planes. flying over fine -- iraq. we have been supplying the peshmerga with arms. clearly military commitment is involved -- required. anything we do must be part of a comprehensive plan. we must be working with allies. we must help those on the ground involved in the fight. i would put front and center the need for an iraqi government that can represent all its people because of the heart -- the heart of this problem is in iraq itself. if you ask who is responsible for running an iraqi state that is not extremist, that is not backed terror, that supports all people, that is the job of the

iraqi government. you cannot overestimate how important that is as part of the comprehensive plan to deal with this problem. andy? understanding the 10 countries at the core coalition, that they are the countries prepared to take military action? if they are not, what does this amount to? of the danger of repeating myself, there was great unity at this conference about what needed to be done, about making sure we are backing those on the ground, helping the locals in the region and the rest of it. part, we don't rule anything out. we will act in our national interest. the sort of decisions you're talking about, we are not at that stage yet. i think it is partly -- important we do it as part of a

company is a plan. one more. why don't we have at the back over here? in two weeks, scottish voters will be deciding whether to stay with the u.k. or leave it. how will you explain to your partners in nato if there is a yes vote that one of its major allies is breaking up? the pledgehether would mean an independent scotland would have to agree to the 2% target as a condition of entering nato? >> i will be consistent as i have been throughout this campaign that all questions for what a separated scotland would reve to do our -- a effectively questions for alexander to answer. i don't think he has entered them --answered them effectively at all. kingdm,i united

i can answer this. on nato questions and the rest of it, you have to ask him. there is total confusion about whether a separated scotland have a place in the european union, nato, or the rest of it. in terms of the last two weeks of this campaign, what i will be wanting to stress is what a vital and important question this is. it is a question for voters in scotland to consider for their future. loud take a very clear, message from the rest of the united kingdom, which is that we want you to stay. we care passionately about our family of nations. scotland can make a different choice. the scottish people are sovereign in this matter. this should be no doubt that the rest of the united kingdom wants them to remain part of our successful family of nations.

when you reflect on the dangers in our world, i don't think there is any doubt with live in a dangerous and insecure world. i would have thought one of the strongest arguments those of us who want to see the united togdom stay together is make in that dangerous world with terrorist threats, isn't it better to be part of a united kingdom that has a top five defense budget, some of the best security and intelligence services anywhere in the world, that is part of every alliance that really matters in the world in terms of nato, the g-8, the g 20, the european union, a permanent member of the security towns on the u.n., to have all those networks and abilities to work with allies to keep us safe, isn't it better to have those things than to separate yourself from them? those are some of the arguments we will be making in the weeks to come before this vital vote. let me stress again it is a decision for the scottish people. but i want them to know that as

they make that choice, the rest of the united kingdom cares passionately about our family of nations and wants them to stay. thank you all very much for coming. i hope you have enjoyed being in wales as much as i have for this summit. let me say again, a big thank you to everyone, the police, our armed services. i think they have performed brilliantly. above all, to the people of wales who have given such a warm welcome to the world and have done the united kingdom absolutely proud, thank you. >> risch foreign minister david cameron, one of several nato leaders speaking to reporters as the nato summit wraps up. members agreeing on plans to position several thousand troops in europe that could quickly mobilize if an alliance country in the region comes under attack. today's action is in response to russian aggression in eastern ukraine. but news today ukraine and russian backed rebels have

signed a cease-fire deal that took effect about 10 minutes ago at 11:00 eastern. also from the nato summit, they agreed yesterday they would form the american allies and the u.k. and other nato countries would form an international military coalition to help fight the growing threat from isis, the islamic state militants. that is some news coming out of the nato summit. we expect to hear from president obama shortly, his own news conference with reporters. we will take you live when it gets underway. we will take you back to thoughts from "washington journal" viewers on this morning's program. jobs? caller: i have a business i run and my wife and i also drive school buses. host: do you feel comfortable economically? caller: yes, i do, but i do not consider myself independently

wealthy, obviously. host: do you consider yourself middle-class? caller: that is what i would consider myself. host: does the term class in america -- what you think? mindsetit reveals a that bothers me in this country. we are supposed to be a capitalistic nation and in my opinion, income equality says more of a -- has more of a socialist dimension to it than it does a capitalistic mentality. therefore -- therefore, i think expecting incoming quality is unless you want a system that does not reward people for the efforts that they put forth. host: you mentioned you have a

couple of different jobs, one of them driving a school bus. noblesville is pretty affluent, isn't it? caller: it is in a county that is very affluent, yes. resent those who may make more money? caller: absolutely not. do you feel upwardly mobile? mid 60's.am in my i am beyond that point in my life. if i were younger, right now, i feel limited in my upward mobility. host: what is your education level? caller: i have an undergraduate degree. you, sir.k we appreciate it. this is from the urban institute and the brookings tax policy center -- who pays taxes?

projections 2014 since 2014 isn't over. if you may more than a million dollars a year, and there is only about 400,000 or so tax filings at that level every year, 25% of all federal tax is paid by those who make over $1 million a year. over $75,000king and up, 78 percent of all federal taxes are paid by that income group while those making ofand under pay about 13.5% all federal income taxes. under 25,000 dollars, milford, connecticut. caller: good morning. theink we need to look at

broader picture. you have to wonder how much a loaf of bread my cost if we had not created all of this technology. supermarketsg in -- you have one employee doing 10 work of what used to take . cell phones, atms, containerized shipping, satellite tracking. when i was a grammar school student, the picture of the future was bright. we would all be on the golf course and the robots would be doing all the work. if you own a supermarket and you of afford to buy a couple self-service checkout machines, you control the means of production to a point. sorry, i was just distracted for a moment. au have to wonder how much gallon of milk would cost of all of these things had not been invented. a lot of it is military technology paid for by taxpayers, studies in public

universities. is the cause of our higher education going up so far. another 20, 25 years, people are going to be priced out of the education market. it is only going to get worse. come up with some laborsaving technology that you should contribute something to give back for all of the jobs that will be eliminated. i am not anti-progress, there just needs to be some balance. they are not building railroads and bridges anymore. they are just providing services or shuffling information around. 25t: you are calling on the and underline. do you work? caller: i am afraid i am disabled. host: your payments are government payments, just disabled payments. caller: pretty much.

have givene group, i up any dreams of travel or retirement. i would not even consider myself a normal consumer. host: thank you, sir. gaithersburg, maryland. another d.c. area resident calling in at over $100,000. haver: i am married and two kids. about 15 years ago, i hit my $100,000 a year mark with salary. in the meantime, i had investments that were making that. at the tax situation, i was paying so much in taxes from i putge, i thought if more time in the investing end of it, maybe i could make it work. basically, 15 years ago, i stopped working and spend more time with an investment and my taxes went way down.

that has worked. i have two kids in college and i told them, we have money saved for them, but look at it. both of them ended up going to community colleges, got full rides and ended up continuing on in-state school. they had everything paid for. the money we save for them will help them get the down payment on a house. the whole thing was that i always thought you would really means, live beneath your -- i understand if you are making a certain amount of money, but no matter how much money i made, i always used that philosophy and it has worked for us. >> your income comes from investments? caller: that is correct. host: do you feel financially secure? caller: absolutely. are: do you think there

class warfare issues in this country? caller: it is dividing us all. we are all in the same pot. everyone has to focus. i talked to my son's friends. they are going to college. they are not focused on what they want to do. they are taking out all of these loans and they have no idea how to pay them back. graduating,ng to be 23, 24, and have 100 grand over their heads and the degree they will not be able to use. it is a lacking of the parents supporting the kids and guiding them from a young age on how to control money and if you go through the school system, they teach them everything. time teachingpend them some type of budgeting program. the new slavery is dead. if you can get away from the

debt and never borrow, then you basically can enjoy life. if you have that debt over your head, it does not matter if it is a house debt or a card that, that is what controls you -- or debt, that is what controls you. news you probably saw the nnell's protests that were happening. protests that were happening. unions want it their way. organized azers series of protests against fast food restaurants, demanding a doubling of the minimum wage to $15 an hour. want that,ot even without fries?

in business to sell meals at the lowest possible price to suit families. these franchises are often owned by small business owner. labor represents the greatest cost on the ledger. doubling that would turn the dollar menu into the $10 menu. nobody would pay $10 for a big mac. $15 ansinessman must pay hour to each employee, cutting the number of employees would be the only way he could hold down prices. in europe, mcdonald's has replaced thousands of cashiers was 7000 touchscreen ordering pads. there is no other way to make a profit in the european welfare state. the hourly minimum wage is raised to $15, 20 six dollars, or $50, teenagers with

no experience will be hurt most and black teenagers most of all. a 34 .9% unemployment in the obama economy. atthey are not being hired seven dollars 25 cents an hour, who can hire them at $15 an hour, to say nothing of what six dollars an hour. -- of $26 an hour. we have a problem in this country. -- if you do not have money, you cannot run for president. i lost my house, everything because i could not get any work. here is the problem -- the problem is the media. it is owned by the politicians. they fired dan rather's for --orting that george bush

they fired dan rather for reporting that george bush never showed up for the national guard. not one democrat or republican said one thing about it. it was never on the news. this is why the country is going down the tubes. they let millions of illegals in this country. they make trade deals that -- we pay a tariff to china and china doesn't pay anything. we have a trade deficit with mexico. a $400 -- a $400 billion trade deficit to china. host: tie that into your own personal situation. caller: that is the problem. the people running this country, all they care about is themselves. host: thank you for calling in. the president has spoken about , economic inequality several times. [video clip] >> it is not surprising that the

american people's frustration is at an all-time high. frustrations run deeper than these most recent political happenings. to make ends meet, to pay for college, to buy a home, to save for retirement. it is rooted in the sense that no matter how hard they work, the deck is stacked didn't them -- the deck is stacked against them. it is rooted in the fear that their kids will not be better off than they were. they may not follow the back and forth in washington or all of the policy details, but they experience, in a personal way, the relentless decades-long want to spend time talking about today. that is a dangerous and growing upperlity in the lack of

mobility that has generalized middle america's basic -- great if you work hard, you have a chance to get ahead. this is the defining challenge of our time. making sure our economy works for every working american. that is why ran for president. it was the center of last year's campaign. it drives everything i do in this office. this issueve raised before and some will ask why i raise the issue again now. i do it because the outcomes of the debates we are having right now, whether it is health care or the budget, or reforming our housing and financial systems, all of these things will have practical implications for every american and i am convinced the decisions we make on these issues over the next few years will determine whether or not our children will grow up in

america where opportunity is real. host: there are the phone numbers on your screen. make underf you who $25,000, dial the top number. over 100,000 dollars, start dialing and if you can get through. if you cannot, you can send a tweet. you can make a comment on the conversation going on on our facebook page. send us an e-mail. lori, sioux city, iowa. $26,000 to $50,000. how much money do you make a year? me and mytween husband, around $42,000, but now i do not have a job anymore. we do not have insurance anymore either. around $60,000 a

1990's. in 2000, i lost my job. i got another job that only paid half of what i was making. , six years later, he lost his job. he was 60 at the time. he has been working seasonal, part time jobs. host: are you at an age where you can collect social security? he is. i am not, but he collects social security and works a seasonal job. i am 56. host: do you feel economically secure? caller: no. lifestylejusted our every single time and we have nice,ur house and lived

but we do not take vacations. we watch every penny we spend. we are going to be ok until i find another job. i got three rejection letters last night on e-mail. it is hard to find a job that , you know, to really make it. host: what kind of work has you done in the past? caller: i was just at a corporate office for a retail chain and i was in the accounting department, accounts payable assistant is what i was. and i worked there for 9.5 years. i worked under a supervisor for

nine years that i worked really well with. she took a promotion and the supervisor they put in to replace her hated me for the whole nine and a half years. things got really bad and i had to quit. host: would you consider yourself middle class, lower middle class? right now, lower middle class. i used to think we were middle class, but it is going down. know,ice of things, you they are really bad. aboutwhen you think income inequality, is it -- should it be a goal in the u.s. to try to make incomes more equal? caller: yes. host: why? caller: i feel like i worked -- theyard, but it was

treat the people really badly and -- i do not know. you work for millionaires and they just do not care about what it is like for other people. i think it is really bad. host: what are your politics? i usually vote democrat, but i do not agree with everything on all sides. there are some things i agree on both sides. right now, i am not really sure. host: thank you for sharing your story with us. dana, crofton, maryland. what do you do for a living? caller: i work for the social security administration. i know a lot about the disability benefits some callers have mentioned they rely on for their income. low class family.

we barely made ends meet, but my parents never took any handouts from the federal government. be middle myself to class at this point. i work very hard and have learned a lot of lessons in terms of credit usage and economics. one gentleman mentioned living beneath your means. that is something i try to tell as many people i can about. i also have a real estate license and have experience in properties. every client i work with, i cautioned them about living above their means. think ahead, in case life changes. relationships change, economic status changes. right now, i am lucky enough to have a good income. i received a promotion after trying for nine years. i have to say, part of that was

because i am a recent graduate. while working full-time, i worked overtime to pay for my education because i did not qualify -- i could not get loans. i could not afford to have loans because i was thinking ahead. i did not qualify for scholarships and stuff, so i saved my money and paid for my classes in advance. class, a lotining of people who went to college right away and did not worry about the debt that they were going to walk away with and they wanted to get the piece of paper, that piece of paper costs money. they were relying on getting a government job in some cases. some people also believed that they got the government job, the debt would be wiped off or wiped away. i have two children about to

enter college, one is actually in college. i try to teach them about budgeting, how much it costs to live and pay rent. areas,k at the gaithersburg and a d.c., you might be making more money, but the cost of living is much higher. line is that people are living above their means and with easier access to education, because it really is for lower income people, they need to be motivated to better themselves. that is one thing i have noticed in my children applying for college and paying for college is that it is easier to get an education when you have no money, your parents have no money. am not in favor of redistribution, i think that is

done enough in taxes. the redistribution of assets and more federal and states handouts -- even though there are many methods for those in a lower class to better themselves through education. also, the value of every employee is different. you mentioned inflation regarding mcdonald's. the value of a person doing specific jobs is lower, especially if you have no previous education or experience. you do not want to pay a high dollar salary to someone who does not have documentation of their work. the way that our society is and theseomics

agencies that hand out money and , withintlement programs the next two years, people on disability, they will not be getting what they get now. money is not there. that is another issue that needs to be addressed by our legislation. host: are you on your way to work? caller: i am about to walk in. host: we appreciate you listening to c-span radio. anks for sharing your story with us. cynthia, good morning. caller: i am calling because i want to share my story and also some thoughts about this issue. i am happy you are addressing this today. i grew up very poor and i have

worked my butt off for years, getting myself my masters degree. i was a teacher for 18 years and i am operating a business with my husband today. it is a small, but successful business. talking about money and redistribution of income is not the correct approach. peoplees the buttons of who are scared about the idea of socialism. and communism. it is a flashpoint. it makes people feel like we're going to turn into a communist country or we are going to become socialists, when indeed, we are a mixed economy with a lot of our programs. it is not about redistribution of income. to me, it is looking at how things have developed over the

past 30 years and beyond that. a lot of people do not know or do not remember that under dwight eisenhower, the tax rates for people like me was 85%. have an interstate system that was built during the cold war because people were paying high taxes. highwayshy, today, our , bridges are collapsing. nobody wants to foot the bill for maintaining the infrastructure in our country. it is so interesting to me when i hear people talk about they are being taxed too much, they do not have enough. yourave to live below means. there is no way i could earn what i earn today, no way i could have what i have today if i had not work 24/7. i used to have my teaching job,

plus i would work in my business. now, i just work and my business because i can do that. you have to be willing to dedicate yourself to being successful for your entire life. you cannot take out a lot of loans. work, put yourself through school, make it happen. on top of that, people need to accept the fact that we are going to have a disintegrating economy, a disintegrating infrastructure, everything in our country will continue to disintegrate, grow old, collapse, if we do not pay for it. payonly way we are going to for it is taxes on the individual. corporations, even though they are individuals under the eyes of the law, they are not paying their fair share. pay their fair share and corporations have to pay their fair share. host: do you feel you pay a fair share of taxes?

caller: i don't think i pay enough. my corporation, because it is less than 5 million, i have a very hefty corporate tax rate. my corporation is paying a high amount of tax. me as a person, i do not pay much at all. i get a huge tax return every year. this -- looku see at this chart if you have your tv on. this is from the national taxpayers union. they say in 2009, the top 1% of 37% ofpayers paid nearly all taxes. the top 5% paid 59% of all taxes. do you think that is -- the bottom 50% paid 2.25% of all taxes.

do you think that is a fair distribution of taxes? caller: no. the top 1% should be paying 80%. they do not need that much money. they really do not. to think theys have to acquire. we are such an acquisition all society-- acquisitional that we believe the only success we have is through the acquisition of material goods. we do not take value in what we have in just being alive. instead of having so much money in your pocket so you can buy a and ago andcedes have -- and go around the world for two months every year, really, isn't it more about a

community? isn't it more about helping our neighbors? it does not mean you're going to give them -- i'm going to give you $25,000 so we have the same income. what people think redistribution of income is. that is not the approach we need to take. rightliticians on the have used this language in order to brainwash us into thinking this way. it is totally wrong. host: thank you for sharing. tweets we have been receiving throughout the morning. let's look at some of these. america's middle class is getting murdered by income redistribution. to the 1970's, someone in the bottom 20% more likely to remain in20%, than bottom whole life.

system ofys our classes not sustainable as rich gets richer, poor get poorer, and middle disappears. rich destroys its customer base. here is a report. the 1%al bailouts of since great recession have come at the expense of the 99 percent exacerbating class stratification in america. stella says dependence on government handouts had not helped. why work and contribute if daddy government will do it for you? >> chris in massachusetts. west yarmouth, massachusetts. chris, where is your income derived from? at don't have any income the moment. host: how do you survive?

the r: i live off of savings. why do you not -- caller: i was a dentist. destroyed by a corrupt licensing board. >> when you were a dentist, how making?e you >> about $50,000. it was really low. but i had a small practice and reinvesting a lot of it in the office and buying new equipment and things like that. right, so class in america. what does it mean to you? a huge factor. believe the middle class is shrinking more and more. much dental treatment, people have to pay out of pocket for it minimal.nsurance is so that had a big impact on my profession. my generation, i lost my license

on the board blamed of me doing something by omething done by the board members. >> you lost your license to be a den theist? i lost it because we didn't have office. the licensing board reneged on me.agreement with >> what's next for you. medicaid many cases, offices. patients don't show up. you don't get paid very much if it's on medicaid anyway. so if i don't -- if i'm working in an office and the patient up, that means i don't get what's set aside for that person. where iently left a job to to drive an hour each way

get there. i'm driving an hour each way to work a half a day or less. and the patient was minimal. to pay for malpractice, >> ladies and gentlemen, the press conference will begin in approximately two minutes. >> we are waiting for the press conference with president obama. the nato summit has wrapped up. we have heard from david cameron and next, president obama live on c-span.

wales waiting in to hear from president obama as the nato summit has wrapped up with the members agreeing on several position thousand troops in eastern europe that could quickly mobilize if an alliance country in the region comes under attack. the news accompanying today that ukraine and pro-russian rebels have signed a cease-fire deal that took place about -- went into effect about 45 minutes ago. we also covered the news conference today with david cameron, the british prime minister. we expect to show you more or all of that later on in our program schedule.

>> as we wait to hear from president obama, news coming out from the pentagon. they have confirmed the death of the leader of the al-shabaab terror group in an airstrike on

monday. the pentagon's press secretary confirming the death in a brief statement today. the statement calls the death a major symbolic and operational loss for al-shabaab.

>> waiting for president obama in newport, wales. the nato summit wrapping up. the french president had his own news conference earlier. he said his country is ready to join a coalition to take action against the islamic state group if iraqi officials requested and the u.n. approves. >> good afternoon. let me begin by thanking my good friend prime minister cameron and his entire team for hosting this summit and making it such a success. i want to thank the people of newport, cardiff, and the people of wales for welcoming me and my delegation so warmly. it is a great honor to be the first sitting u.s. president to visit wales. we have met at a time of transition and testing. after more than a decade, nato's

combat mission in afghanistan is coming to an end. russia's aggression against ukraine threatens our vision of a year that is whole, free, and at peace. in the middle east, the terror threats from iso-pose a growing danger. alliance hast, our summoned the will, resources, and capabilities to meet all of these challenges. first and foremost, we have reaffirmed the central mission of the alliance. article five enshrines our solemn duty to each other. an armed attack against one shall be considered an attack against them all. this is a binding treaty obligation. it is not negotiable. in wales, we have left no doubt we will defend every ally. second, we agreed to be resolute in assuring our allies in we fleshed eastern europe,

increased rituals over the baltics will continue, rotations of additional forces throughout eastern europe for training and exercises will continue. naval patrols in the black sea will continue. all 28 nato nations agree to contribute to all of these measures for as long as necessary. ensure nato remains prepared for any contingency, we agreed to a new readiness action plan. the alliance will update its planning. we will create a new highly ready rapid response force that can be deployed on short notice. presencencrease nato's in central and eastern europe with additional equipment, training, exercises, and troop rotations. the $1 billion initiative will be a strong and ongoing u.s. contribution to this plan. fourth, all 28 nato nations have pledged to increase their investments in defense and move

toward investing 2% of their gdp in our elective security -- collective security. nato investing critical capabilities including intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and missile defense. this commitment makes clear nato will not be complacent. will reverse the decline in defense spending and rise to meet the challenges we face in the 21st century. fully our alliance is united in support of ukraine's sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity, and its right to defend itself. to back up this commitment, all 28 nato allies will provide security assistance to ukraine. this includes nonlethal support to the ukrainian military like body armor, fuel, medical care for wounded troops, as well as assistance to help modernize ukrainian forces including logistics and command and

control. in wales we also sent a strong mission -- message to russia that actions have consequences. the u.s. and europe are finalizing measures to broaden sanctions across russia's finance, energy, and defense sectors. we strongly support president oshenko's-- por efforts to find a peaceful resolution. this can advance the goal but only if there's follow-through on the ground. pro-russian separatists must keep their commitments and russia must stop its violations of ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. beyond europe, we pay tribute to mission, from our including more than 2200 americans who have given their lives for our security in afghanistan. ino's combat mission ends three months and we are prepared to transition to a new mission

to focus on training and assisting afghan security forces. both presidential candidates have pledged to sign the bilateral security agreement that would be the foundation of our continued cooperation. but as we all know, the outcome of the election must be resolved so we continue to urge both candidates to make the compromises necessary so afghans can move forward together and form a sovereign, united, and democratic nation. finally, we reaffirm the door to nato membership remains open to nations that can meet our high standards. we agreed to expand the partnership that makes nato the hub of global security. we are launching a new effort with our closest partners, including many that have served with us in afghanistan, to make sure our forces continue to operate together and will create a new initiative to help countries build their defense capabilities starting with georgia, moldova, jordan, and

would be a. -- and libya. i leave here confident nato allies and partners are prepared to join in a broad international effort to combat the threat posed by ice salt -- isil. already, allies have joined us in iraq or we have stopped isil's advances, equipped our partners, and help them go on offense. nato has agreed to play a role in providing assistance to those on the frontlines. key nato allies stand ready to confront the terror threat through military come intelligence, and law enforcement, as well as diplomatic efforts. secretary kerry will travel to the region to continue building the broad-based coalition that will enable us to degrade and ultimately destroye isil. the progress we have achieved in wales makes it clear our alliance will continue to do whatever is necessary to ensure our collective defense and protect our citizens.

with that, let me take a few questions. i will start with julie pace from the associated press. >> i wanted to go back to the situation in ukraine. if the cease-fire does appear to be holding, would you and your european counterparts back away from the sanctions you say you have prepared? do you feel it is important to levy the sanctions regardless of the cease-fire agreement? can you say specifically what u.s. contributions will be in terms of troop numbers and equipments? is it beyond the proposal you announced in warsaw? >> with respect to the cease-fire agreement, obviously we are hopeful. but based on past experience, also skeptical that the separatists will follow through and the russians will stop violating ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. i know the europeans are

discussing the final shape of their sanctions measures. it is my view that if you look at president poroshenko's plan, it will take time to implement. for us to movee, forward based on what is currently happening on the ground with sanctions while acknowledging that if in fact the elements of the plan are implemented, then the sanctions could be lifted is a more likely way for us to ensure there is follow-through. we will is something consult closely with our european partners to determine. i do want to point out the only reason we are seeing the cease-fire this moment is because of both the sanctions already applied and the threat of further sanctions which are

having a real impact on the russian economy and have isolated russia in a way we have not seen in a very long time. russia to rejoin the community of nations that respects international law is still there, and we encourage president anputin to take it. the unity and firmness we have seen in the transatlantic alliance is supporting ukraine and applying sanctions has been a testimony to how seriously people take the basic runcible e the big countries cannot stop a little countries or force them to change policies and give up their sovereignty. i am very pleased with the kind of work that has been done

throughout this crisis in ukraine. and inc. u.s. leadership has been critical throughout that process. the rapidct to response forces and the action plan we have put forward -- warsaw announced $1 billion in our initiative. a sizable portion of that will be devoted to implementing various aspects of this readiness action plan. we have artie increased our ersonnel, and the baltic states, for example. we have the air police saying and we have activities taking baltic and the black sea. this allows us to supplement it. it allows us to integrated and coordinated further with contributions from other partners. what is signified is nato's

recognition that, in light of these russian actions -- we want to make it crystal clear. we mean what we say when we are talking about article five commitments. and, an increased presence serves as the most effective deterrent to any additional russian aggression we might see. angela? bloomberg -- your specific expectations for what regional actors like saudi arabia, yemen, legitimatelyan provide to a coalition against the islamic state? is there a rule therefore iran as well? he expectserry says the allied countries to coalesce around a specific plan by the end of september. do you agree with the timeline he set out? what commitments are you leaving

this summit? >> let me start with a general point. was unanimity over the last few days that isil poses a significant threat to nato members. and -- there was a recognition that we have to take action. i did not get any resistance or push back. notion that we have a critical role to play in pushing back the savage organization that is causing so much chaos in the region and is harming so many people and poses a long-term threat to the safety and security of nato members. so, there is great conviction egradee have to act to d

and destroy isil. i was extremely encouraging. beyond that, what we have already seen is significant support from variety of member states for actions we have taken in iraq. we have taken 100 strikes in iraq today. had a significant impact on degrading their capabilities. and --making sure that we are protecting u.s. citizens, critical infrastructure, providing space for the iraq e-government to form. our hope was that the government is actually formed by next week. that then allows us to work with them on a broader strategy. and, some of the assistance has been in the form of airlifts, humanitarian assistance. much has been providing iraqional arms to the

security forces. there has been logistical support, intelligence, surveillance. and so -- a variety of folks with different capabilities have already made a contribution. i am confident that we can build on that strong foundation. and the clear commitment -- and have the kind of coalition that will be required for a sustained effort we need to push isil back. now -- john kerry will be traveling the region to have further consultations with the regional actors and players. i think it is critical that we have arab states and, specifically, sunni majority state that are rejecting the kind of extremist a nihilism we

are seeing out of isil. they are saying that is not what islam is about and are prepared to join us actively in the fight. my expectation is that we will see friends and allies and partners in the region, prepared to take action as well, as part of a coalition. will be totasks build capability. what we have learned in iraq -- is -- isil has significant capabilities. they combined terrorist attacks with traditional military tactics. they have significant effects. part of the problem also is that we have not seen as effective of a fighting force on behalf of the iraqi security forces as we need. we're going to have to focus on the capable units that are already there, bolster them,

bolster the work that they're doing, and support them from their. ultimately, we need a strong ground game. we will also be the sunni tribes -- we need than 20 recognize that their future is not the fanaticism that isil represents, so they start taking the fight as well. that will require the sort of regional partnerships that we are talking about. in terms of timetable -- we are working deliberately. if you look at what we have done over the last several months, we have taken this in stages. first stage is to make sure we were encouraging the government's formation. second stage was making sure that we were building on the intelligence assessments we have done. we were in a position to conduct limited airstrikes, protect

their personnel and critical infrastructure, and engage in humanitarian activities. the third phase will allow us to take the fight to isil, prolong the effort, and our goal is to act with urgency, but also to make sure we're doing it right. that we have the right targets. there is support on the ground if we take an airstrike. we have a strong political coalition, a dramatic effort it, a stronging strategic effort. we are discouraging people from thinking that isil represents a state, much less a caliphate. so, all of those things will have to be combined. and, as i said, it will not happen overnight. we are steadily moving in the right direction. we will achieve our goals.

we're going to degrade and ultimately defeat isil, the same way we have gone after al qaeda, the same way we have gone after the al qaeda affiliate in somalia. we released today that we have in fact killed the leader of al shabab in somalia and have worked to degrade their operations. systematic andry methodical in going after these kinds of organizations that made threats to u.s. personnel and the homeland. and, that the liberation allows us to do it right. but -- have no doubt, we will continue. i will continue to do what is necessary to protect the american people. isil poses a real threat. i am encouraged that our friends and allies recognize that. julie davis?

>> thank you. i want to follow up on what you were saying about isil. and ask if you think that they are destroying and degrading th em -- are those the same things in your mind? secretary kerry there is no containing them. is the goal ultimately to annihilate them? you talked about the importance of expertise on the ground and building up the capacity on the ground. since airstrikes will not do it here, if action is needed in syria, can you expect a free syrian army to do what is needed on the ground to destroy, not just push back, isil? >> you can't contain an organization that is running roughshod through that much territory, causing that much havoc, displacing that many people, killing that many

innocents, and slaving that many women. the goal has to be to dismantle them. and -- happenedok at what with al qaeda in the fatwah, you ultimately pushed them back. ically degrade their capabilities. you narrow their scope of action. shrink the territory over time,ay control they are not able to conduct the same types of terrorist attacks that they once could. as i said in my last press conference, given the nature of these organizations, are they

potentially remnants of an organization that is still running around and hiding and still potentially plotting? absolutely. and we will continue to hunt them down the same way we are doing with remnants of al qaeda. we're -- we are doing with al-shabaab. what we can accomplish is to dismantle this network, this force, that has claimed to control this much territory. so that they cannot do us harm. and that is our objective. there isi said before -- unanimity among our friends and allies. worthy goal and they are prepared to work with us to a compass cycle.

with respect to the situation on the ground in syria, we will not be placing u.s. ground troops to the areas that are part of the conflict. i do not think that is necessary to accomplish the goal. will influence our partners to push back on the goal. this is one that we can work with. withve experience working them. they have been outgunned and outmanned. that is why it is important for us to support them more effectively. when you have u.s. forces, other advanced nations going after is

il, it is pretty remarkable what ground forces can do. were oninitially they the defensive against isil. that is a developing strategy that we are going to be consulting with our friends and allies and regional partners. we will do what is necessary to make sure that they do not threaten the united states or our friends and partners. one must question. wall street journal? >> thank you. some senate democrats who are facing tough races have asked you to delay actions on immigration. how are those concerns influencing your thinking? do you see any downside to delaying until after the election? >> i have to tell you, this week, i have been pretty busy,

focused on ukraine and focused isil and making sure that nato is boosting its commitment at following through on what is necessary to meet 21st-century challenges. holder haveand eric begun to provide me some of those proposals and recommendations. my expectation is that fairly soon, i will be considering what the next steps are. what i am unequivocal about is that we need reform. by overriding preference is to see congress act. the house republicans have sat on this for over a year. this has damaged the economy. it held america back. it is a mistake.

congressional of action, i intend to take action to make sure that we are putting more resources on the border. that we are upgrading how we process these cases. and -- that we find a way to encourage legal immigration and give people some past so they can start paying taxes, pay a fine, and learn english, and be able to not look over their shoulder, l, since they have been living here for quite some time. so, i suspect that on my flight back, this will be part of my rating. taking a look at some of the specifics we have talked about. i will make an announcement soon. i want to be clear. my intention is, in the absence of action by congress, i'm going

to do what i can do within the legal constraints of my office, because it is the right thing to do for the country. thank you very much, people of wales. i had a wonderful time. ofpresident obama at the end his flight home. he returned to the nations capital later on this evening. the house and senate return on monday and they will take up the issue of isis in hearings. the house foreign affairs committee is hearing from a secretary kerry on tuesday. the house and senate are back on monday. the houses live here on c-span, the senate on c-span2. the labor department today announced job numbers. unemployment fell a little to 6.1%. the associated press says and lawyers added 142,000 jobs in august, snapping a six-month streak of hiring above. some reaction from capitol hill,

this from the speaker's office. this is what they had to say -- today's disappointing report, coupled with last year's bleak economic forecast, shows a pattern of weakness in the obama economy that has too many americans asking where are the jobs? talkingker will be about an economic plan that house republicans are coming up with. he will talk about the american enterprise institute on september 18. reaction also from the council of economic advisers. isor at the white house says that although the pace of job gains was below recent months, the broader trends are moving in the right direction. the president will act wherever he can to create good jobs and make sure that hard work pays off with higher wages. well, next up on c-span, more of our campaign 2014 coverage. the first of potentially only california governors debate between jerry brown and his

republican challenger, neil cache kari, took place last night. has asked for up to 10 debates, but the brown campaign has said they will not participate in any additional debates beyond last night. governor brown also served from 1975 to 1983, and he is well ahead in the polls there. >> the california channel. cosponsored by kqed-tv. now the california debate, race for governor 2014. >> the first meeting of the two candidates for governor of california. tonight, the california debate. good evening everybody. i'm john myers.

i am the moderator of this one-hour debate. the two men and our studio are the only candidates, the democratic governor jerry brown and the challenger neel kashkari. let me introduce the journalist asking questions with me. this debate is being presented by the california channel and its cable tv partners, along with kqed-tv. the rules are very simple. opening and closing statements are 60 seconds each. 90 seconds to answer a question. the other candidate is given 30 seconds for her bottle. i will step in and make sure they stick to the topics. both candidates have agreed to the debate rules.

we tossed a coin. neel kashkari won the coin toss. he chose to end the broadcast with a final statement. let's begin. our first opening statement from the incumbent. good evening. >> thank you. a lot of people forget the mess california was in four years ago. there were a million jobs that have been lost. our budget deficit was astronomical. $27 billion. we didn't have a budget on time in 10 years. there was bickering in sacramento. $27 billion. i rolled up my sleeves and cut that budget. the legislature me one that wasn't tough enough. i sent it back. i've veto the first budget in the history of the state. it sent a powerful message. we started doing right and making the right decisions.

that budget in three years from $27 billion in the red is now in the surplus. jobs, all the jobs we lost in the recession, we got back. 1.4 million jobs. our schools, we are now increasing by 30% the funding available for the kids. >> 60 seconds. thank you. neel kashkari your statement. >> thank you. thank you for tuning in to the two of us rather than the packers and seahawks. i'm running for governor because i want to rebuild the middle class of california. governor brown means well. his 40 years in government has left them out of touch with the struggles of working families. he has declared a governor -- a california comeback. it is not only go we have the had the best schools in california. today's schools are ranked 46th out of 50 states. we used to have a vibrant job

market. today it is 44th out of 50 states. we are number one in poverty. i know we can turn this around. i didn't come from a powerful family. i was a middle-class kid. i have lived the american from because i got a good education. i was able to get a good job and work hard. we can rebuild the middle class if we work together and aim high. i got the plan and the experience to get it done. >> thank you. let's get to the questions if we can. the first, this is not a surprising question. the new field goal has you 16 points behind the man beside you. if you days ago the mayor of fresno, a republican, said she is not sure she is voting for you. how can you win if a prominent republican isn't even sure you should be governor. >> i think actually is going to make a terrific comptroller.

i'm going to vote for the republican ticket. we have great candidates running this cycle. she and i don't agree on everything. we have different opinions on the high-speed rail. we don't have money. it doesn't grow on trees. governor brown wants to spend $70 million on i high-speed train. as a result of that governor brown has said no, we cannot afford a school bond. republicans say we should be investing in schools. if we are spending $70 billion on the train, it crowds out the other investments. no two candidates are going to agree on everything. my commitment to the people of california, i'm going to cancel the high-speed train and invest in water in a real way. governor brown's own father led a major infrastructure investment in water around the state. pat brown understood how critical water is. if i am elected governor i'm

going to invest in water, not the train. water in schools have to come first. >> i think the question was how do you expect to win? you don't have expectation to win because things have been -- accomplished in sacramento. they're calling california a failed state. another greece. it is a serious surplus. that is impressive. they jobs, we are cutting arts programs in science, and now we have injected $2000 per student because of proposition 30. i think people know california is not perfect. we have our problems. what momentum do we have now. >> the next question is for governor brown. >> governor brown, many parts of california depend on the water that comes from northern california. the federal government said your

plan for new tunnels will break the law. what will you do? >> thank you for bringing that up. i have lived in southern and northern california. it is true, the water is from the north and the people are in the south. my father passed opposition want on the 1960 ballot. it is been a marvel for california. it is made california number one in fruits and bouts doubles. we have a problem. we have a delta system that protects the fresh water that goes to the farms, that salt water is only protected by dirt levees. we have to find a way to make sure to convey it through the delta.

that is why for 50 years people have been trying either a canal or tunnels, or some other conveyance. we have a plan. the plan is going through the environment impact process. 75,000 pages of analysis. it is not cooked yet. we are taking comments. we will go over that and look for it. if anyone has a suggestion, but i am telling you the way we protect the mother in cal -- the water in california by balancing what is right for the north, it is when you take something like proposition one on your ballot. i hope people vote for it. likes governor your time is up. >> i'm concerned about the tunnels. $25 billion for these tunnels and the obama administration has concerns. if you look at the bay bridge, many million dollars over budget. if that is the tract record, i'm an aerospace engineer.

when i look at a big project that is over budget, i have concerns about mismanagement. i'm not going to plow ahead with $50 billion and tunnels. we are one to put a brake on that and make sure we get it right. >> no tunnels. >> this has been on the table for 50 years. if that saltwater intrudes half the water to silicon valley will disappear in a matter of days. that'll be a catastrophe. >> the obama epa is saying it is flawed. that is your own president saying that. >> thank you gentlemen. >> it is accompanied issue. let's move to another question. this comes from jim newton of the los angeles times. >> the governor of nevada and the head of tesla announced the battery factory is going to go

to nevada. you believe governor brown did enough to keep tesla here? would you have favored tax benefits or relief to get that factory? >> i don't think governor brown did enough. he says businesses, and go. it is tesla, toyota, nestlé. they are all going. there is a problem. in the four years he has been governor we have been ranked 50th out of 50 states for business climate. if you look at wisconsin governor walker has been governor for the same term. today they are 17th. that is real progress you can make in a few years. governor brown hasn't done the work. he is said we need reform. environmental laws stymieing business investment. you try to get one off deals to big companies that hire lobbyists.

my whole plan, read my jobs plan, bring the expedited informants will review to all businesses. not just a tesla, to big businesses, small businesses. we need to improve our economic client so that all of our job creators can do their best, can put california families back to work. we have to rebuild. we need to bring could jobs to california. tesla is one of many examples. >> 30 seconds. >> it is clear what happened. we fought hard for tesla. tesla wanted a massive upfront payment that i don't think would be fair to the taxpayers. we wish them well. when tesla was to build an electric car, they built it in california. electric cars are a big part of our future.

we have a million electric cars goal in california. we are going to meet it. i wish them well. california is the leading state for renewable energy and electric cars. we have 30% of the electric cars. >> thank you. i'm glad you asked about cars. the next question is for governor brown. you are a strong advocate of california's 2006 climate change law. or the effort expands to include new roles on the production of fuel. everybody believes that that is going to raise gas prices in 2015. how do you defend and increasing gas prices to hard-working families who may be struggling? >> these are the same scare tactics the automobile companies used. they fought it. i had to go to court against the big detroit automakers to get it. they cap saying the sky would

fall it california raises the vehicle mile standards. what happened? obama stepped in and the california standard is now the national standard. we have a cap and trade program. climate change is a global challenge. it is an exit stencil threat. -- existential threat. and the other fossil fuels affect the asthma rates, respiratory diseases. we have a cap on the carbon oil companies can it net. if they don't meet that, we need an allowance. they provide that allowance. we buy transit, we buy green buildings. >> but the question was, the air resources board also says gas prices will go up. >> today i would than the internet and saw a variation of $1.50.

oil companies can have their own pricing strategy. oil prices have varied $.10 23 times. i can't tell you what their prices going to be. chevron had 21 billion last two. all these companies are threatening the well-being. look at the forest fires in the rising sea level. >> that is time. thank you. thank you. >> make no mistake, i'm an aerospace engineer. i believe climate change. his plan is designed to raise the cost of electricity for working families, to raise the price of gas. it is not fair to wallop working families by raising gas and utility prices. he is taking the money from that program to fund his high-speed train which will not do a thing to help climate.

if i am governor it is not going to happen. >> let's move to another topic. the next question is for neel kashkari. >> 58% of california voters think you should support and give shelter to a document -- undocumented immigrants coming into the united states. last month you said that when it comes to the use -- these children wishes in the back home to send a message. do you continue to stand by your statement in light of the 15% of californians disagreeing? >> im the son of immigrants. immigration adds value to our country. it is personal for me. my heart goes out to the kids who are coming here from distressed countries.

kids in asia who are suffering, given africa who are suffering. the solution to the world suffering kids is not an open border in america. when he did treat the kids with compassion and care and respect, and we need to send them home. then when he to work with the state department and our aid agencies to improve living conditions around the world. kids in california are suffering. what about the kids in california? nine kids in california sued governor brown for violating civil rights. what about the kids in california? we have finite resources. who is when a sign of -- i'm going to fight for california kids. >> you stand by the statement. >> of course i stand by the statement. is the answer to the world's needy kids and open border in america? we have compassion. obama has said we need to keep

them with compassion. hillary clinton has said we need to treat them with compassion and send them home. we can't solve all the worlds problems with open borders. we need sensible immigration laws and embrace immigrants. when he 24's are laws and take kids -- we need to enforce laws and take care of kids in california. >> this is a tragedy. i disagree with mr. kashkari. the law that they came in at under george bush gave these kids a hearing, i don't think we ought to change that. they ought to get a decent hearing. some of them are facing games and murder, girls being put into prostitution. they came here all the way through mexico unaccompanied by adults. the least we can do is follow the law of california. >> let's move forward.

the next question, i think we maybe anticipating this. >> as you know, it's been alluded to, teacher tenure in california for teaching is grossly ineffective and the result of such poor teaching shocks the conscience. when i would like to hear from you is whether you dispute those conclusions by the judge. whether factual you disagree with the judge. >> i am appealing because the constitution requires the court of appeals to invalidate the laws of california. why think there is a problem in the inner cities with the 1.6 billion kids who speak no english at home, the kids who are homeless and poverty, yes, i do. i cared about kids. i started charter schools.

at the oakland military school we had 10% of kids almost. most of the parents were single. they were not married. there was gunfire in the streets. i appreciate the challenges. california has knowledge opted -- california has adopted educational reform that puts money into those classrooms with the challenges our toughest. california is acting where we need it most. they have no place in the classroom. if it is not enough we will do further -- [inaudible] >> do you think teacher tenure affects that?

>> obviously it has some impact. the lack of language, the like of income, the lack of disproportionate funding, which we are now doing goes to the major factor. in my charter schools -- >> the judge got it right. this is one of the most important civil rights cases in years. nine kids sued governor brown and said their civil rights are being violated by a failing school. you side with the union bosses per you should be ashamed of yourself. i'm going to fight for the kids. >> that is so false. >> it's absolutely true.

>> gentlemen. gentlemen. i do link we're going to agree on this issue. -- i don't think we are going to agree on this issue. you can address it in your closing statement. this is a question from me. i was a talk about you. california voters don't know you well yet. you champion the 2008 bailout of america's biggest banks known as tarp. you took a job with pimco, a company that may a direct profit from tarp backed securities. is tarp an asset? >> it is an asset. two presidents, bush and obama asked me to help lead the response. we hated the financial crisis. we wanted to let the banks fail.

no one owed them anything. when our economy was on the verge of collapse, that is when president bush and then president obama stepped in and said we need to stabilize the economy. the experts say you can't get it done, you can't do big things. we rejected the experts. we got george bush and obama to work together. we got nancy pelosi and john to work together. we work to stabilize the economy and then we rejected the taxpayers. we got every dollar back. we made a $13 billion profit. governor brown praise president obama's leadership for his role in stabilizing the banking sector. thank you for the compliment. i am proud that we got democrats to work together.

i know we can get them to work together in sacramento for the people of california. >> governor brown. you can get everybody to go along. >> the system will stabilize. the bonuses that were given after the bailout, $32 billion, talk about distorting the middle class. that exacerbate it the unfairness that wall street has integrated to with the home foreclosures and unemployment. let's bail them out. don't give them a bonus on top of the money the taxpayers have to pay. people who caused the problem got rewarded. >> i give you a slight extra bit. >> governor brown, you are being sued for rating [indiscernible] you spend it somewhere else i

know you're being sued by home profits. >> different topic. >> it is exactly related to this. >> it is true. >> gentlemen. >> hundreds of people -- >> it's a good clash. let's go to the next question here coming from the studio of the california studio in sacramento. >> governor brown, one of your biggest programs has been realignment. some of them have committed new crimes, and crime rates are going up. is realignment a success or has it moved the problem from the state to the county? >> realignment is the biggest change in 40 years. anything in government takes time. this is a long-term process of realigning what the counties do,

and what the states do. we say the lower offenders should not come in at out-of-state prison like a revolving door. over the last 30 years, california increases prisons by 500%. they didn't put any money in it. the conditions were crowded. the supreme court reduce the population. in order to do that, [indiscernible] we need mental health services, drug treatment, monitoring by gps, and with proposition 40 we guaranteed billions of dollars for local counties to pay for the program. it is working. the people who carried it out

endorsed my candidacy. this is an important measure. it is by no means perfect. there have been in some places spikes and property crime. i would say the first two years is a success. >> thank you. 30 seconds. >> the program is a failure. governor brown is not going to release dangerous criminals. a 39-year-old man went on and robbed and raped his own grandmother. these are dangerous people being released. if i'm elected governor i'm going to keep them locked up. we are going to rent more bad else. releasing them is not a way of making us safer.

>> we are when a fight the courts to do that. if the choices release them, the is a stop -- unacceptable option. >> i want to return to something you mentioned. both of you have argued for the need for summer form -- for some reform. it also has been a mainstay of environment protection. my question is, what reforms do you envision specifically that would speed up development and growth and would not do that at the expense of the government -- environment? >> when the kings are going to leave, and they look at this and said a ghost through the normal process, it's going to take years extra and millions of dollars of extra cost.

governor brown signed and expedited review and said we are going to speed that process up and limit the losses so there is a review. we are not checking the environment to rules. let's make it reasonable and predictable. that's a good plan. instead of giving it to those who were politically connected like the kings or big businesses, why do we adopt that new standard and make it available to everyone? big businesses, small businesses, anybody who wants to invest in california? all of these policies are well meaning. this is why jobs are leaving the state. we have the highest poverty rate in america. how can that be? this great state. we have done this to ourselves. well-meaning policies that make the state not jobs friendly. 50th of 50 states. jobs leave and poverty goes up. let's not talk all regulations. let's have sensible regulations were businesses can invest and bring jobs back here.

>> governor, a response? >> i have been fighting for the reform since i was mayor of oakland. there was political pressure. very hard to get it across the board. if we can we will. there are reforms you can make. it has been quite a challenge to reform it. that is not what is holding california back. we created 1.2 million jobs. we have extended health care. instead of having 22% without health care really have 11 percent. this is the place of google, of dreams, big best agriculture in the whole country. i know we are hearing california is run down, and no jobs. that is not the picture of california i know a love.

i love this state and i know it works. we have not solved all the problems, but what momentum we have. >> thank you, governor brown. the next question for you, sir, the incumbent here and it is from me. governor, we all know and should make it clear, you did not create the high speed rail project it existed before you came back in office but you have become its biggest champion. republicans keep telling you california is not going to get the $38 billion from washington that that project anticipates. can you tell voters right now will high speed rail be built if the feds do not give you the money? >> it will for a simple reason. it is cheaper than building highways and airport runways. there is something a lot of people forget. to expand and meet the 10 million or 15 million new people we have to expand interstate 5, build more freeways, more airports and more runways.

if we take part of that burden and put it into high speed rail it will be cheaper, cleaner. we will not burn oil. we will use the sun and wind and it will help where we need jobs the most. that high speed rail is starting in the central valley and that is why the mayor of fresno supports high speed rail. we are investing $2 billion of state money. $3 billion of federal money on the first phase and that will be $8 billion of impact economically. it is good for california and helps lower the carbon footprint. >> we have a bit of time. i will give a minute because mr. kashkari calls it a crazy train. governor, is it a crazy train? >> i think he is more familiar with the gravy train in washington that paid out $30 million in bonuses. this train makes a lot of sense. 14 other can countries have high speed rail. china which on a per capita basis is poorer than america or poorer than california just built 5,000 miles and they will build another 5,000-miles to get

to tibet. we can do it. just like they said you couldn't build the panama canal. >> we did it within the 90 seconds almost. he is raising your gas prices to fund what i call the crazy train. they talk about creating jobs. you know what else creates jobs? building water storage around the state. not one dam. a real infrastructure investment. invest it in water. the construction projects both create jobs but let's have something useful that can feed the state for the next several decades by investing in water in a real way not one little project like the water bond. it is the crazy train and even your own lieutenant governor said this makes no sense.

we have to cancel the train and invest in higher priorities. we have other investments to make, not the crazy train, governor. >> move another topic here. the california debate, the raise for governor 2014 from the studios of the california channel. your question next is to mr. kashkari. >> mr. kashkari, six years ago, california voters approved a ban on same-sex marriage proposition 8. you were one of the 130 conservatives who signed a brief urging that the u.s. supreme court to overturn prop 8. how do you explain your position to the people of california who supported prop 8? >> i want the government out of our lives and like governor brown i thought that that law was wrong banning same-sex marriage. if two people want to get married that is between the two of them and god and god bless them and i hope they have a wonderful life whoever they are. my focus is on rebuilding the

middle class. the government should stay out of our lives. i applauded governor brown and the attorney general for exercising discretion in not appealing the case which flies in the face of what governor brown said earlier today. he exercised appropriate discretion and i applauded him for doing that in not appealing the prop 8 ruling. i wish he could use the same discretion in fighting for poor minority kids in california. >> jerry brown, 30 seconds. >> when a salesman. you learn that on wall street when he sold all that stock and went sour. i care a lot about poor kids in the state. i did create a charter schools in oakland and i went to be mayor of a tough hard scramble city and created the local control formula.

i think the only state that spends a significant extra amount to go to the schools where they have poor kids and kids that don't speak english. this is the real answer. bad teachers in the schools of california and certainly not me. if that doesn't go far enough we will take more steps at the next legislative session. >> we both pivoted there off the topic but i appreciate the about objection here. the next question in the debate is from jim newton for the incumbent jerry brown. >> governor, you have called california's unfunded pension debt enormous and ever growing. what can and will you do in the

fourth term as governor that you haven't been able to do in your third term as governor to turn around the pension situation? >> let's see because there is some of this imaginary here makes you wonder is this california or in arkansas or mississippi? this is the eighth largest economy in the whole world. before i became governor it was the ninth largest. we are making progress. 1.4 million jobs. a deficit $27 billion. a wall of debt, $32 billion. we paid down the deficit. we paid down half of the wall of debt and did pension reform. we stopped spiking. we raised the age of retirement. made employees pay 50% of the normal cost of pensions. in addition to that we put a cap on the pensions themselves. we have now funded over the period of decades our teachers' retirement that was on the course to go bankrupt. is it enough? no. i can tell you i have been in government a fairly long time. things don't get done with a press release or glib statement. they take many, many years. the first pension reform probably in california's history

i enacted last year. we got republicans as well as democrats. we will do more. this is not easy. in the next four years we will go further in the pension, we will do something about retiree healthcare and most importantly we will keep paying down our wall of debt. arnold schwarzenegger borrowed. it was really a credit card. when we pay that off, less debt service and then take time on other bills. >> you like to say that we are the eighth largest economy. when you were first governor we were the fifth largest. we need to turn this around and rebuild the middle chas. the governor is not being honest with us about pensions. the total liabilities is $500 billion. the first thing he did as governor is throw people off the boards of the agencies that were fighting for honest accounting and right now they are predicting the stock market is going to go to the moon for the

next 20 years and governor brown's own budget doesn't call that into question. the first thing i will do as governor is appoint people to the boards who are committed to honest accounting to be honest with you the people of california on how much you and i we are on the hook for and that is how we bring people together. be honest about how big the hole is and bring people together and start a real process. not just tinkering around the edges incrementalism. we can get it done. >> next question for you, mr. kashkari. you called obama care "a jobs destroyer." no state has done more to make it reality other than california. a lot of it under the man sitting next to you. if elected would you try to dismantle it in california, the exchange, all of it? if want to fix it. obama care is personal for me. my plan was condition selled, true story under obama care. my premium went up 27% and now i can't go to the old doctor i went to.

the good news is i can enough money i can afford it so i'm okay. i have good health insurance. i have concerns when 16% of californiaians, 16 percent of californiaians either have no job or stuck in a part-time job. he says we are not talking about real california. you at home, do you think we are back? do you think that you have the job that we want? hang on for a second -- i'm coming to it. >> thank you. >> we have a major piece of federal legislation that incentivizes reducing worker hours and reducing the number of full-time employees. i have big concerns about obama care through what it will do to the job market when it incentivizes employers to cut back on workers. we need a healthcare plan in california and nationally that incentivizes job creation. if i was governor this is the federal law of the land. i can't unilaterally change and

redesign it. >> but you won't cancel the exchange? >> i'm not going, to but we need to fix it and put californiaians back to work. that is my highest priority. >> governor brown, 30 seconds, please. >> so much glib statements that don't comport with reality. i feel like i'm getting a sales pitch from i don't know who. >> neel. >> learned your job well there working at goldman, sachs and the rest of the people who wrecked the economy. bailed them out. like the arsonists putting out the fire. >> california is doing the best job putting obama care into practice. you have two parties, two branches of government or rather two houses. but we are making real progress and what i'm most proud of that the number of uninsured is going down to 11% and used to be closer to 25%.

so that is good. and that is when we are trying to do. by the way, when you talk about the poor people, i'm the one who is raising the minimum wage to 10 bucks and gave latinos drivers licenses so they could legally drive to work. there are millions who aren't documented who are picking our food and working in our factories. >> as we move on here into what i call the home stretch of the debate, a question close to the issue. >> governor brown, now this you mentioned the illegal immigrants is around 1.4 million undocumented immigrants that are getting ready to get the driver's license that you just mentioned january 2015. unlike normal california driver license they will get one with a marking and show and indicate to everybody their undocumented status. could you have a plan to ensure profiling will not become a problem with the new license?

>> the california highway patrol will protect the rights of all california drivers and we are still foyting with the obama administration to get a mark that we feel will not lead to discrimination. but the most important thing is so many people over a million people will be able to legally drive to work and that has been really a shock thing that we depend on labor but won't let them legally get to the job. we will not let the difference and it is a difference because the federal law requires an indication this is not good for federal identification purposes. it is only good for california. but that is a big thing. there were people who were getting arrested, taking kids to school, go together job site or going out to the farms. i think the big thing is california is empowering so many good hard-working californiaons and its really in the face of no action in washington, gridlock like we used to have in sacramento before i got there. places in shambles.