things we can do to help the mexican government is doing all dry up the demand for illegal drugs by recognizing that the demand that drives much of the controversy is within the united states. the second thing we can do to help secure the border is to recognize that when people are less desperate, they don't crash borders. they go places peacefully to emigrate. that process has to be affordable, it has to be understandable, and it has to be prompt. we should give people who come to the united states because they love our opportunities, committed no crimes, and of tried to live here without documents a pathway to complete

at the last debate he said congress was too dysfunctional to do anything then focus on border security. is worker visa program antiquated and leaving out a solution to do with the 11 or 12 million illegal workers. all of them are connected. what he does not appear to know is all the illegal immigration in this country is a result of people overstaying the visa program. you cannot deal with the situation by focusing as he wants to on the border only. also what he has to understand or should understand, in order to secure the border you will have to get a compromise. democrats and republicans in the senate and house -- we have a compromise. in the senate and enough in the

house to pass immigration reform. ll notane or -- boehner wi bring it up to vote. had a program and the right wing is supporting m actually torpedoed it. his approach is to do nothing only by closing the border and not doing anything else on the other aspects. this was a question related to border security. i want to hear what you have to say about supporting any variation. if so what would this include in why and if not what other specific action would you take and why and let's start with mr. watson.

>> i like this designation, it is a class that can be defined and limited to what benefits we provide eerie at it is a first step. we have this middle ground straight to legal resident of some sort erie it we need another intermediary step and that is being evolved right now. this has the potential to them at the benefit. you are in this first stage before you get to the second stage. good evolution of law and a different class we need to work on the benefits that are much less so not everyone is instantaneously eligible tomorrow and then you can move to a legal status at .12 show youuture have five years of a good record and good work. this two-step process may be a pathway to find compromise between the two parties because you can limit the benefits in -- step. step erie it

what peoplet hear try to do and candidates seeking office when they begin their sentences [inaudible] believe that what we need to do is ensure that the government is ensuring its responsibilities and they want to move onto a host of other issues. knowledge, economy, and i.t. workers from across the globe create certain kinds of conversations, conversations about a pathway to legal status. we are an image a nation of laws. about aersation

pathway to legal status is a conversation that nebraskans want to have. they do not want to have the conversation until washington has done first things first. this is a conversation that they are open to. they literally cover the full range of the spectrum. and so he's -- when he says he is listening to people he is not

listening to those folks that want comprehensive immigration reform erie it he is to the far right and by being at the far right he is taking a position that will undermine our economy forwardrmine any progress on immigration. he will continue to advocate for gridlock which is where we have been as mr. watson pointed out for the last two and a half decades. question.t >> children who crossed unattended are not in nebraska. should they be allowed to cross the border and stay or should they be sent home? >> they should be allowed to cross the border and stay until there is a legal adjudication about whether they are as they appear to be an claim to be

refugees. a refugee is not an immigrant. that is a matter of settled law. the u.s. has treaties for the countries for which these children have come in central america. we have signed the un charter. we abide by the international law to which it subscribes in which it legislates and for which we have voted. there is a definition of refugee . there is a legal procedure we have agreed to administer as a recipient nation about how to deal with refugees. those children are entitled to the protection of the nine states come of the welcome -- and due process of law long before anything else about the discussion happened. -- circumstances were so bad that their mothers and fathers were willing to trust them to criminal elements to get them out of their own neighborhoods.

if that does not tear into the heart of every american and nebraskan and invite us to engage in the rule of law and the due process of law, we are a nation that has lost its soul. >> it is a tragedy and we can resolve the issues surrounding 55 to 65,000 unaccompanied minors. according to the u.s. intelligence data center out of el paso, 94% of those teenage kids being interviewed at the border say that the primary reason they are here is because they believe there is automatic and -- amnesty and emily reunification. this is a tragedy and nebraskans ornot begin as republicans

democrats. they are worried about these unaccompanied kids at the border. parents who are spending this money to pay coyotes to transport their kids are doing something dangerous and we need the president of the united states to go and speak unequivocally to central america and clarify that the u.s. does not have a policy of automatic amnesty and stop the bleeding. then we can deal with the problems and the challenges of the 55,000 to 65,000 kids. god loves the kids very much. the love to talk about them in large groups. these are individuals in the eye of god and they all have different stories. that god created and ordained the family as a primary institution. if we can get them back to an extended family or a family, i would say we need to get those kids reunified back at home with their family. if that situation is violent or

president i think the of let the kids come to me and we need to find a solution to make sure those kids have a good --nce at life that are not lives are not in danger and we send them home. i wish we had one blanket statement but we are all individuals and we need to care for his creation. are ready to move on to domestic issues. you are watching to nebraska's u.s. senate debate. in cooperation with the broadcasting association. we move down to domestic issues. >> 14% of americans approve of how congress is handling its job. this is lower among those who consider themselves people who pay close attention to national altaic. you talked about this in some

way or another. all of you talked about this in your campaigns but i would like to hear specific examples of how you would conduct yourself and conduct this as a way to rebuild confidence. >> it is about treating each other as humans. the pell penst and how our wives were doing. it is how you treat people and in building people up we demonize again god's creation for political gain. it is selfishness and greed and this serves the citizens of this country. there are principles we need to stand strong on but i would argue that 85% of the issues we can work on, they do not violate the constitution and in my case they do not violate a moral code findit a percent we can

agreement on and you will never win on everything. 70% among 65, 75, that is a win. that is why i have been called a pragmatic conservative erie it i believe in moving right manically forward. these lines in the sand to get everything you want do not work as we have seen. ultimately i want to start with your original point erie at 85% are frustrated. challengenges -- the is on the voter. why are we still listening to the money? why are we still listening to the propaganda, who is buying .hat might is not you i do not take the money. i do not listen to the money because i care what we are going to mean -- move people forward together. >> answered to this is an

attitude but in part on identifying where a u.s. senator can agree and disagree with people on his own and do that intelligently. it is also a matter of identifying problems of common interest and concern especially with our neighbors. they will have new united states senators. we have enormous problems with the missouri river affecting those three states. are big engineering problems and they will cost enormous amounts of money if we do not address the simple matter of the fact that the dam is full of mud. that is something we can work on. we are trying to clean up from the 2011 flood. there you grow it out to another issue, another subject and the careful to speak only when there is something to say. it is so important i think that

a new united states senator from nebraska appeared to be thoughtful, informed, interested in all points of view. willing to accommodate them and express himself on behalf of the people of nebraska only when there is something to say. avoidingires extremism. and extremism can be easily detected in the campaign process erie a day can be seen by looking at sources of funds or who comes to the state to campaign on behalf of the candidate and we have seen extremism already. >> my campaigners have been talking about the gridlock and the dysfunction. we need fresh new perspectives and that is why decided to run as a nonpartisan candidate. i am the only candidate who has caucus withuld not either the democrats or the republicans but instead work to find common ground with

republicans and democrats on all the issues that republicans and democrats have kicked down the road. will produce a budget on time this year. we are not addressing the deficit. we walked away from both parties , from both simpson. the problem. you will not hear any of the other candidates talk about some symbols. tax reform, because of the plagues that one of the candidates signed, very goodcult to get negotiations. we have heard the debate on immigration. it has been kick the can down the road the entire time. for a bipartisan leadership or committee similar to what we had in the as is ledger which would ask congress to pick the top 10 issues every single year on a bipartisan basis to address and address those issues within two years.

we need to advocate for and leadershat political stop the excessive partisanship and come to the middle where all the solutions inevitably happen. >> my family have been encouraged as we have been living on the campaign bus most of the time. we put 4200 miles on the bus the time we blew the transmission and had to take a few days off but we are spending time in all 93 candidate -- counties. people are pessimistic about washington. about the vacuum of leadership and the people we send there who believe washington can solve all of our problems with more taxes and regulation and mandates. nebraskans do not believe that the they are optimistic about this nation. is that weeritance received and they want to pass on to their kids but they want a washington that is humbler. they want a politics that is humbler and tries to do fewer

things but the more important things more urgently, more transparently, and with less screaming and that starts by telling the truth about a house that is not in order. the former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff believes the -- greatest military threat is the growing red ink. it is not good enough to say who but when you, travel across the state, and i have 11 times as many donors as all three of the other candidates combined and theye are spending believe deeply in america. they want a more humble washington. hink i started. >> we have to move on. that answer.

>> it is the job of agencies to enforce the law that are written so what needs to happen to make sure that these agencies do not overstep their bounds and create their own policy? >> the most important thing that the u.s. congress can do is to write intelligent laws that defined the remaking authority. no agency has rulemaking authority unless it is given by congress and it has to begin by express fiat. they can pass the generalized law and default. that is a choice that is made by a bill. the former choice is usually the better choice. it has not been done very often and the reason is that we have had too much partisan gridlock.

that creates an enormous problem. that problem mr. manically that creates a revolving door between the agency and the private sector and encourages agencies to deal with those they are supposed to regulate in a way that is not objective and is not distant and it holds out into people who seek nothing more than to get elected erie it that is the holy grail of money for campaign finance. those are the problems. they were not conflicted with regulatory bills. it happened when industry took over regulation and congress let it happen. that is the problem. >> i spent a week in washington

and some members told me that over 50% of candidates' time are spent raising money. raising any from special interest groups. lobbyists that truly hijack our system. i am not against lobbying. it is necessary that various groups have influence. i certainly lobby congress. when you can have him bring in millions of dollars from organizations or senate freedom foundation and use that the first million dollars in the door, use that money to bring his campaign up to speed. the fact is i am on the receiving end of a $2.7 million ad campaign and when some talk about all the

-- the bottom line is your questionswer on regulation. the iris is one of the most urgent some regulation that we face as small-business people. there is 100% consent that we need to address and reform and modernize the iris. neither party has taken any steps to simplify the tax code and make it easier for all the citizens despite it being one of those bipartisan issues that all of us understand need to be addressed. will move on. i will speak to this first. to my right has 20

donors in nebraska. i have 3200 nebraska supporters i do not know what all this stuff is. e 3000 200 nebraska supporters and other have a couple dozen. speaking to the question that was asked i am proud to be billrtive of the farm which is the largest grassroots organization. they endorsed me because they say they need a fighter against the regulatory overreach. osha and epa are trying to do things that make no sense on farms. it has statutory authority for one third of the areas where they are writing the rules. this is when the president says things like, i have a pen and a will unilaterally write laws. we need a partisan opposition to that and a defense of a constitutional system where the

first branch of government, the congress who is accountable to the people every two years in the house in six years in the senate has to come home and explain why they are doing the things you're doing. the epa is trying to do things such as the waters of the u.s. role that are absolutely asinine. people have never been on a farm or ranch trying to write rules to micromanage these details. we need to use the powers of the purse and we need a much more robust oversight process. to be sure that washington is more humble and the rules flow from statutory authority. i am proud to have the amount of money. i do not have these beholden interests to happen to. starting a church. they do not think you will be able to build it and when. most of you did not know about me and now you do.

question, i want the citizens to look at the federal reserve. it is unconstitutional. everyone wants wall street's money. they have a role to play. that is unconstitutional. how we do capitalism the last hundred years erie it that works and rises the tide for everybody. i bring that up because the irs was created the year the federal reserve was passed and that is relating. you did not have to have an income tax before the federal reserve and pay attention to that. we will reform the tax code and will not have a need for the irs. the epa is a different story. wayway restrict it is the you do the budgeting.

the epa is acting out of control . i agree, the waters of the u.s. are atrocious and a massive overreach erie it we need regulators if we happen to work with the private sector and not the against them. >> we have a couple more questions erie it our next question goes to colleen williams. >> accourding to an fbi crime report nearly 81% of homicides were caused by firearms. do you think the my stance on even the most minimal regulations like no background checks at gun shows is what is best for the state or safety of everybody? >> i am happy to be the nra

endorsed candidate erie it i believe strongly in the second amendment. our founders understood the government did not -- did not give us rights and we come together to secure those rights. government is our shared project to defend our rights. dad and husband to defend my family and property predate government so i am happy to be a pretty -- to be a robust defender. one of the things about being a non-politician is i am comfortable admitting what i don't know. i do not know this particular issue you are flagging but we need more robust defense of the extant gun laws. most of the crimes that are committed with guns in this country have a bunch of prosecutorial neglect and we need to make sure we are robustly defending all the extant gun laws.

you named another. i don't know what that means and show loophole is a journalistic category. what is often called the loophole is readily about family to family transactions and i do not believe the government needs to regulate the sale of guns between fathers and daughters or sisters and brothers. there is a bunch of technical issues that we can unpack. >> thank you. the nra position is over the top. i do think what works for cabela 's works for private gun shows. there should be universal background checks. while he must have been about the nra if he does not know about the gun show loophole and he does not know about the note changes in the position of the

organization that endorsed him he is not worthy of the endorsement. i also think that it is clear that the american people have had enough with the nra. the nra is over the top. the nra stands for the idea that we should make no change of any kind in the interest of the people of the united states. where the states because of the absence of federal action have taken some steps in the direction of regulating the sale of handguns alone, the number of women killed per year is down 38% state-by-state. i am in favor of reasonable regulations. no one has enjoyed shooting more pheasants that -- that i have in my lifetime. i love owning a gun and i do now and i am happy to have there been no that i own it and to have anybody who do not -- wants to buy it be checked before they can buy it for me. >> we do have to move to

the end statements. the question is very basic, why be nebraska's next senator? each will have 90 seconds erie it >> i've lived here all of my life. educated, raised here, here, all in the public schools, didn't leave for an education somewhere else. didn't take a position in administration in washington. purposeome back for the of grooping myself to run for senate.ed states i'm here because i'm a nebraskan. ofant to serve the people nebraska. i understand our agriculture, i understand our commerce, i've life working in it. i understand our business need. i'm a businessman, i started nurtured businesses, sold them. i understand our markets.

menpresented the cattle across the united states and in nebraska as they've sought and markets.r fair i understand our water problems. i also understand that there is an attempt made sometimes to subvert our attention with a humbler politics. not humbler in politics to accept seven-figure amounts of money from outside the state committed to never adopting a farm bill. want tot humbler to take the social security system away from its present safe administration and give it to the bankers who brought us 2008. it is not humbler to dismantle the medicare system or to breach our veterans. those are arrogant things. nebraskanshings didn't stand for, and anybody on this purporting to represent a political party, who stands for

those propositions, misrepresents the party. >> thank you. our next closing statement comes candidate jenkins. >> thank you to my fellow candidates and all of you who are viewing this debate. been enjoyable, the campaign has been great. some of my family members may have second thoughts, but overall it's been a good time. we are facing a real important here.on we as a nation have to decide whether we're going to incentivize partisanship, by, money, ininsendivize enforcing highly partisan primaries. there's no secret as to why congress is not getting along and has a local approval rating. it's because we continue to most partisan people. to thethey don't hugh position of their party, they they lose their funding or lose their committee

assignments. is diverse.p i've spent the last 18 years since coming back to nebraska, i jobs,ised here, building building companies. i've created jobs. i've been on the receiving en of government regulation. and despite mr. sasse having a bureau endorsement, i am the one candidate who has run for this office over the last 30 extensivehas agricultural, food, and alternative energy experience. i have a very diverse resume, i'll well-known throughout nebraska. the confidence of two republican governors who appointed me to a statewide i've really am looking for nebraskans to rally me to support this common sense centrist approach to politics that we so badly need washington. >> thank you, mr. jenkins. statement. >> i'm running for office because i'm a dad and i care kids my kids and grab inheriting the great and free

toion that we were blessed inherit from our parents and grandparents. i don't think washington is the think we life, and i need more people involved in politics who believe that the center of life is north platte. kimball and oshkosh and o'neil and freemont. near norfolk and raised in fremont, and we're raising our kids about a mile it is are i grew up and wonderful blessing. and i'm also proud to be the republican nominee in this race, it's come up so many times tonight i'd like to speak to it. of proud to be in the party our -- a republican for reasons that are afternoon caricatured in the national media. don't care very much about the marriage natural tax right of the richest americans. i believe robustly in limited government and defined constitutional freedoms, because i believe the center of life is nebraska communities. families and churches and civil societies and mediating institutions and the way they another. and i am happily a proponent of

politics where washington tries to do a more limited number of things but the more important things more with less shouting. and i've been blessed to spend this year across our 93 counties and to have support not just from republicans but from democrats and independent as counties.e it's been a great time and i would hummably ask for your vote. we hear from todd watson. >> god gave me skills and gave you skills and i fundamentally care about the nebraska people. i want to see your tide rise. simple.t i love you guys, i really do. but you ask me to take an oath will take thati oath with pride. theve to defend constitution from threats foreign and domestic, and the things.tion says five establish justice. i will not create inequality for donors, for elected officials. lawuse equality before the is about justice. i will ensure the domestic

tranquility, i'll be a peacemaker between two warring parties. thee, i will provide for common defense, securing the border cannot be prolonged more than 28 years. provide,l promote, not the general, not corporate, welfare. and lastly, when i end my oath help me god, i will mean to it the bottom of my heart. and i will seek to ensure the blessings, which is a gift from god, and we the people need to get back there, of liberty, bigh is not big banking or government, for ourselves and our posterity, which requires us deficits, debts and liabilities for the next generation. your hands ins in november. same thing doing the over and over and expecting

results. >> thank you. we have an audience on hand that very polite and very attentive, first of all i think show theiro appreciation to our candidates this evening. [applause] so thank you very much to our candidates and our panel of journalists. to thank north platte high school for letting us take over this great facility, wonderful to work with. thank to you the nebraska broadcasters association which partnered with net to bring you this event. we're airing on a number of radio and television stations state this evening to share the views of these candidates. thelly, our audience in auditorium, thank you again. we will again team up with the broadcasters,ska to host a gubernatorial

candidate debate on thursday, october 2 in our studios in lincoln. that debate will be broadcast live on net radio and television, and streamed autopsy line as well. it will be available on many of those nba partner stations. i'm bill kelly, i've been your moderator this evening. of theou for being part event and good night. >> the atlanta council hosted a discussion monday with general philip breedlove. a look at some of the general's review of the recent nato summit held in wales. see this entire event at c-span.org.

those are the vision thanks we continue to hold for the future, despite the challenges that we see out there today. to our naval cadets, this is your worst nightmare. a speaker. you're standing in front a crowd where literally two-thirds of crowd are qualified to grade my paper, okay. then second arely you stand the nation'swo of greatest leaders who have had your scrb before and nay know

right looks like, and they're grading me every day about whether i'm doing it right. a privilege to be in such an august group and a group thishas the expertise that group has about the atlantic alliance and our relationships and, sirs, thanks to both of you as you all helped me as i moved of the greatest jobs in the world. it is right now quite a quite aing job, and let's say there's not enough hours in the day to get to everything that we need to do. we arc of instability that see to our south and now instability that we see in a place where in we just would never have naught the past, these are challenges that not only my us you're payne command hat gives us a lot of work to do, but certainly for the nato alliance is a challenge that comes already in a very busy time.

veryon't have to think hard about the fact that we still have a lot of work to do afghanistan. getting this change of mission fire from -- matter.no small we see issues in our south from the mediterranean, eastern and that is africa area clearly still very much on the southern nato alliance. so there's a lot of things that need to an dressed and i'll talk little more about that in a minute in our southern area. course right now we are, have just come out of a summit lot of focuses, a lot the air, but one of the central plates in the air is address this russia. how do we address a nation that

those worldbroken using force to change international boundaries. something that we thought was over maybe with what happened in georgia, and now we see that not the case. our mission remains the same in nato. and we embrace that, quite frankly, at this summit. and we also at the summit began is it that makes our way forward so important. back to shared values. shared vision for a europe whole and at peace. and that sometimes rings a little hollow because it's said so many times. quite frankly, that is still a centered guiding position for want to see. and i will say something that may be a little bit introversial right now, but don't think we can ever arrive ata europe whole, free and

peace without russia as a partner. last 12 years we've been trying to make russia a partner. making basing decisions, for structure decision asconomic long the fact that russia would the constructive part of future of europe. and now we see a very different situation. to address that. of course what i'd like the talk a little about today and i'm roll a few grenade out on the table and we'll see where you pick up the pieces and we i would like to talk about some of those very important results from the summit. readiness action plan. our expectations going into this summit for the readiness action plan were measured. to makethat we needed some change. we didn't know how much change affect. i'm happy to report that quite frankly we got just about

do.ything we wanted to and now if we are able to implement the changes we made in the readiness action plan, or the rap as we call it, i think we can reset this alliance for this new challenge that we see in eastern europe. we will makees will also give us adaptations that will better position us for problems we see in the south. and this is important to our southern nato alliance members, just about thet north and the east. addressing all of our alliance. responsiveness. a magnificent n. r.f., well engineered across the ages, it did all the things that we asked it to do. look at it it, we hard and it meets every expectation that we set for it past. so one of the things we try to

make sure people understand is are not disen heart earned by what the n. r.f. did in the past, it met what e we wanted it to meet. to the it is inadequate task for the future requirement on our forces and capabilities. that's why the readiness action plan will look at a series of that n. that will adapt r.f. responsiveness, not readiness. exactly with as we ask it. now we ask it to tweak its make major changes to responsiveness, and we'll that.bout i'm often asked, are you tryingg assure? or i give a simple answer. yes. both.trying to do we needed immediately to assure allies when ukraine first kicked off with crimea, but

the russianen forces came across the borders into eastern ukraine. assure our alliance posture. anow me as an airman to use air force example. ourours from go to show, aircraft left lake heath, landed in estonia and were flying caps 14 hours from go to show. assurance. this is nato pair, not just air power assuring our allies that we're there and rapidly ifhere required. we brought assurance to those four nations. now, of course, as you know, we a.c.o. were tasked to bill, as the general mentioned, a are air, measures that land and sea, north, center and south. alliance did a magnificent job of doing that.

immediately, the land elements and the naval elements took a little bit more they were very quick. and they are very visible and to our nations. i think we hit, in sports terms, a 440-foot home run with natoing quickly our allies. do we deter? i will allow you to enter that debate and if you want to talk about it in q and a, i think it's a good question. clearly, when mr. putin now looks across the borders of northern nations, he sees a nato alliance represented forces that are there preparing all of the things that we need to do should actions ine to take those areas. credible, persistent presence with capability that is

very visible. not only to the nation we wish to assure, but to any aggressor deter. wish to so, we looked at nato and asked we see this new situation, where you have a that will assemble a large force on a border, completely equip that force, bring all of the elements of thaters to that force makes it credible, bring forward both operational and in some cases strategic resupply for that force, all in the name of and then boom, the exercise goes across and internationally respected border portionxes by force a of a sovereign nation. so how do we react to that? to thewe react possibility of that same future. in the so we looked at what a pilot

stool, andee-legged it lays out like this. why would i call it a three-legged stool? it's to make a point that a three-legged stool if you take away, what happens to it? it falls over. interrelated, interconnected requirements. the first leg of that stool is theire need to change responsiveness of the n. r.f. like we talked about before, the n. r.f. does what we ask it to do now. but what we ask it to do is to the newto task threat that we see from this concern are why that i described respectingion not borders, and changing borders by force. so the first element is that portion of the n. r.f. will rapidlyuch more available for use. how much? that's a discussion now that we'll work on. we put forward some ideas, 48 five days for some of that force.

and now we will begin to look at the details of will that work. i now have another sports analogy. i talk about the goal post. whatever we do with this force, through the goal post of being affordable and sustainable. if it's not affordable and sustainable, it's not credible for the long run. afor something that looks good for six months and then falls apart. thathas to be something remains with us. so the first leg of the rap is changing the responsiveness of a r.f., and i'lln. be happy to talk about some of the particulars on that if you want later. piece is, again, it sounds a tiny bit irresponsible, but for 12 years we've been as a partner.a so on a day-to-day basis, we don't have any what i would call operational or tactical level headquarters in nato that is

article 5.out thinking about collective defense, the ability to defend an ally. clearly in my headquarters we talk about it and think about but we're not an operational or tactical level headquarters. need a headquarters element of ability, i think, at level that will be focused every day, 365 days out hours a day, on collective defense, article 5 theonsibilities for alliance. this is primarily of course aimed at the north and east, and i'll talk about the rest of the alliance in a minute. of thisecond leg three-legged stool is a feelsarters that alliance foro the article 5 collective defense all day every day. that is their mission. will be their -- it won't be their only mission,

but it will be their primary mission. that's the second part of the stool. a command and control capability tasking,with collective defense article 5. third piece is the harder more controversial piece and the one you hear talked about in the paper so much and that is some forward presence in these that does multiple missions for us. forward time, that presence prepares the battlefield, looks at where we forces, works on those infrastructure requirements that allow us to rapidly receive forces, put them in field to fight if required. day-to-day, exercises with the thosenation to bring up processes which makes nato much required. react, if works to preposition materials, works to establish local understandings that would allow

had toforce if it rapidly respond to quickly come to mission. in that worst case scenario where we needed it, headquarters would be the rapidlye on which reacting forces from the new n. r.f. structure would fall in onto rapidly constitution combat the for area if required. so how do we define this forward presence? do we define its missions, theroles, how do we finance requirements of forward positioning equipment, et cetera, these are all the now to be worked out. but if you think about this three legged stool i talked a rappedly available n. controlcommand and structure that is at speed and ready if required, and then a oneiving force that day-to-day is exercising,

foraring, setting the stage rapid acceptance of combat power that comes from that newly structured n. r.f., if required then to constitution combat area.in the forward these are the three legs of the school that the rap is based on, the detailse now that we'll begin to work out and already written a paper to lay out for the chiefs of theyse to consider here as come to vilnius next week to these concrete pieces. legs requireree each other. some would argue, can we do it without this or can we do it without that? the answer is sure, but it may work. i think we third all three of the legs in the stool. again, very encouraged by what happened at wales, very encouraged by the solidarity alliance, andthe

i would hate to iercharacterrize, because don't want to be sound too positive, but what we thought be the ceiling of what we could get at wales became the floor of what we can the future, because our nation's truly embraced the change and now the deal is working out the details to hit post.al affordable, and sustainable for the future. so i think that's the end of my prepared remarks, and now we'll enter into the more fun part of conversation. and i'll ask for help in choosing who is going to get to me first. [applause] >> in this spirit i'm happy to well.as

we'vesee how well constructed the stage. first of all, i really want to taking this time. i think we've all been impressed your voice in this crisis in this moment of history and the clarity your op ed in the "wall street journal" was brilliant. one thing this three-legged address is what does nato do, what does the alliance do toward what one would call gray areas? and let me ask this in two parts. first of all, give us our assessment of what the situation the momentround at in ukraine. what are you seeing during the cease-fire, et cetera. and then if you could take it to a generale question of are we drawing new in europe, or can we avoid that.

>> so many of you have served with me, i see more and more crowd of people i've worked with in my life. and i would hope that those who would beed with me quick to say that breedlove is almost always an optimist, am.use i i'm well over a glass half full on all manner of things about nato. about the progress that we made at wales, about the solidarity see in our alliance, about this i'm telling you rock steady commitment to our article 5 allies.of nato some things are just incredibly, well overositive, half full. thatl tell you that in vein i'm a glass less than half full on what's happening in ukraine. than get into a long discussion of what we all understand russia's actions have been in the east, they have now

been series of days reducing their force press thens the east, but they've left behind some very capable and taylored force in the east that allows them to bring continued pressure on the president and the leadership of that pressurehat allows them to do is completely shape what i think is sort of the geo strategic context of eastern ukraine for the future. i've been quoted assaying and i'll say it again that i think this cease-fire, while it has done many good things, like stop the loss of life, what it allowing ang is situation to be built in eastern ukraine that that could easily into another frozen conflict. and that worries me greatly in eastern ukraine. and i think i'll stop there. areas, we,hese gray as i said before, we have a a rockommitment and solid commitment to our nato

means.and what that but clearly there are other nations in europe that are not nato allies. and i think the western world come to grips with what is it that is going to happen in outsideates that are the alliance, and between the alliance and russia. and how are we going to, what of the expectations nationings for how nations will conduct themselves in these states. in the future. i think this is work that i the atlantic council and others to begin to ponder, to theses the approach nations that are not in the alliance ask may come under appreciator in the future by try to exploit some of it. >> today the senate armed examinescommittee president obama's plan to combat the terrorist group isis. defense secretary chuck hagel and joint chiefs chairman martin

testifying, start, at 9:30a.m. eastern. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. according to the world health ebola outbreakhe is in five countries, guiney, liberia, nigeria, sierra leone congo. at a dr. bratly testifies hearing on the outbreak. 2:30. at the 2515 student cam video competitions under way, open to all my expel high school to create a five to documentary on the theme, the three branches and you.

there's 200 cash prizes, totaling $100,000. for the list of rules and how to get started go to student cam.org. now the day between candidates kansas. senate in incumbent republican pat robert faces independent challenger orman. democrat chad taylor has withdrawn from the race but is included on the ballot. ksn tv policy has the race in a tie. at some of the ads running in kansas. >> so who is greg orman really, he's run against the democrats before. he's given 38 grand to liberal democrats. orman gave thousands to hillary clinton, harry reid and barack obama. like obama, greg orman will say elected.to get even pretending he's a

conservative, like pat roberts. senator roberts. i agree with the senator. i don't disagree with the senator. senator roberts. by the way, just so we're clear, i agree with the senator. want to know when you're going to take abe stand and tell us what party you're with.to conference [cheers and applause] are you going to be a republican one day and a democrat the next and a democrat one day and a republican, where are you going to be? ormanny politicians like and obama are the problem. principled conservatives like are the solution. >> i'm pat robert. message. this >> if we want to get things done in america, we need to have true in washington. people who are willing to stand regardlessbest idea, of what party it comes from. our system is broken. aoblems that we have as country aren't getting solved. i'm a businessman who solves problems every day. can become thewe place you go to start a

business, that we can become the nation.on but we can't do that with the current leadership we have. i'm greg orman and i approve this message. washington is broken, we all know it. of that threatens the future every kansan. i'm a businessman who solves problems every day and i believe we can have another american century. if we elect problem solvers, not partisans. i'm greg orman, the independent approve senate and i this message because regardless of party labels we are all rise or fall we'll together. >> good morning, once again kansas statee fair. hutchinson as we bring debate.u.s. senatorial wibw radio andh kansas radio networks, serving

moderator for the u.s. senatorial debate. i want to introduce the folks be asking the questions. the new media member panel is montonyo with the kansas in topeka and two people -- michael swanker and nick swain. our time keeper is todd director with radio in salina. two candidates will have 90 seconds for an opening and closing statement. minute tohave one respond to questions and the candidate who answers first also will have 30 seconds of rebuttal time. listen to not here to me. you're here to listen to the candidates. on to our candidates. first off, greg orman, the candidate.

olathe, kansas, businessman, involved in several thenesses and he co-founded common sense coalition in 2010. mr. orman, your opening statement. morning. my name's greg orman. parentup in a single family -- good morning. orman, i grew up parent --e shhhhh. come on, folks, settle down. morning. my name is greg orman. i grew up in a single parent brothers andive sisters. i learned how to solve problems at a young age, having to share bathroom sort of guaranteed that. i watched my mom struggle every bills and maker ends meet but with the help of dedicated teachers, great public

schools, i was able to go to college and ultimately start my while i'ves and lived the american dream, i realize all is not right with america. is system of government broken and we all know it. we're sending the worst of both there, bitter partisans pleasingmore about extremists than solve be problems and we have serious problems to solve as a nation, from healthcare and higher affordability to stagnant wages to living within our means as a country. if we don't solve these status in the world, our standard of living and the very existence of the middle class in america is at risk. i've tried both parties and like of kansas, i have been disappointed. that's why i'm running for the united states senate as an independent. i realize it's sometimes

to know what to think about a non-partisan candidate. my opponent would like you to believe i'm a liberal masquerading as an independent while some democrats are starting to call me a conservative. i guess they can't even agree on that. what i am is a fiscally responsible businessman who will work hard to go to washington not play problems, party politics. only to you,olden not to party bosses and not to special interests. >> u.s. republican senator pat completing his third term in the united states senate. he's served in the house of 1981 totatives from 1997, serving as chairman of the house agriculture committee and has served as chairman of the senate intelligence committee. he is the senior member of the committee.culture senator roberts, your opening statement.

you.ank thank you, greg. sponsoringibw for this election year event. it's a great day. cats! this is a crucial election both can sans and our nation. me, heb dole endorsed said when the world is on fire and we have chaos we must have experienced ourership to safeguard security and get our economy on track. candidate herene today with that experience in leadership. i have a proven record and as a senate agber of the and finance committees i look forward to what we can under a newogether republican majority. we must, we must stop the obama

agenda but before we can do that reid's to break harry stranglehold on the senate. passed over 350 bills all of which are stuck in senate where now good legislation goes to die. the choice is clear. on this only candidate stage that will vote to put andy reid out to pasture break the gridlock. opponent wants you to believe he's an independent. he is not. liberal democrat by philosophy. thousands of dollars to barack obama, hillary clinton, and -- listen to this -- harry reid. kansans know better. they won't be fooled by opportunism or misleading rhetoric. forirst vote will be

republican majority in the u.s. senate. that is a vote for kansas and you can count on it. time, please. to ourre we get questions and i echo kelly's thoughts. seene the enthusiasm we've here so far this morning but a reminder, please be courteous in responding to each of the please refrain from responding until they have completed their statements. truly, hasor, yours the authority to add time to a candidate if they feel their response has been interrupted by audience members. you didn't come to hear me. the candidatesr and we'd like for that to happen undecidedose who are in their rote -- vote for november 4. question from liz montonyo with the kansas radio in topeka to senator roberts. >> thank you very much. actually my question is for

you to answer but senator, the epa and the army corps of engineers have a proposal to dramatically expand jurisdictions of waters under the clean water act, a plan under sharp criticism from municipalities, agriculture and business. critics claim the waters in already regulated at the state level and the plan is nothing more than a government overreach. you support the proposal? why or why not? the proposalupport of the government taking over the u.s. waters. on the last day, on the last day withe congress, we met secretary gina macarthy, nine to her howd said much damage this is going to do to farmers and ranchers. proposal started out as two pages. the there's 88 pages in federal registry, 363 pages if

read it and yet we're supposed to be exempting farmers and ranchers. what we're talking about is farm ponds. farm ponds are supposed to be the farmers atll 5:00 can swim in the farm pond. that's ridiculous. that no self pond respecting duck would ever land on. itold yeana macarthy and showed her all those pages of paper, no farmer, no farm organization, nobody could that out and we urged her to back off, let the state control this. our governor has a 50-year water plan. that, let's keep the federal government out. we might back off, we might back off. >> time. i think we will back off. i think she will back off until the election. out.look >> mr. orman, you have one

minute. >> i agree with senator roberts. farm ponds shouldn't be regulated by the epa. a businessman, i have to face regulations every day. father, who's owned a furniture store in stanley, for 41 years, refers to this as the beehive of regulation. up facing regulatory burdens from state, local and agencies and i agree those burdens are inappropriate and bad for business. the i will say is i think senator could demonstrate more leadership here and could changes to thee rules that make it explicitly notr that the epa is regulating farm ponds and i think that's what he should have so thatis staffers do there can be clarity for farmers kansas.tate of >> senator roberts, 30 seconds rebuttal time?

i've already done that. we already have a bill and it's and it asks bill the secretary of epa, gina wearthy, the very person were investigate -- visiting with, back off, and as i tried to say, i think she will until the election. record oft has a voting for barack obama, running against me as a democrat and to harry reid. if we didn't have harry reid in we could consider that bill by senator barroso and it.ould take care of >> the next question is from swanky from wichita to mr. orman. >> this is for both and i think we have to address it because it's been a little crazy in the last three days. we were supposed to have three

last three days. in the last three days we've learned that the democrat in the has decided to take himself out of the race. mr. orman, you said the news is unexpected. senator roberts, you said it was a corrupt bargain between orman and national democrats. change the race? >> if that question is addressed will say is and repeat what we said in our statement, it was unexpected by us. i have been asked by a lot of people, did you have anything to do with it? is, i thinkn say our progress in the polls was obviously something he had to take into consideration. i think the fact that our resonating with kansans really do believe washington is broken, we'reeally do believe sending the worst of both parties to washington and that if we want to solve our problems nation, we're going to have to get back into the serious problem solving

instead of simply positioning to re-elected. and ultimately that's what our campaign is about. led over 11,000 petition toign a get us on the ballot. >> senator roberts? first timeis is the i've ever seen national democrats work very hard to get ballot.at off the with claireked mccaskill across the aisle in a got tosan manner but i tell you, when claire mccaskill calls the democrat candidate and him to get off the ballot, you know something fishy is going on and i have a message we have --acaskill,

we've had a lot of people from missouri come across the border. think of quantrill. stay in missouri. to fiddle around with kansas politics. again, my opponent has a record obama,ng for barack running against me as a democrat and donating to harry reid. if you want to make change in washington, get rid of harry reid, put him out to pasture. i'm the only candidate that can do that. >> mr. orman, 30 seconds rebuttal. this does sort of create a really unique situation. i think it's the first time i've a republican complain about disenfranchising voters.ic want to go to washington to all partisanship and focus on problem solving and about.all this is

>> the next question comes from the hayes daily news and this question will be senator roberts. residencymi permanent matter for a senator or congressman? what are the pros and cons are tourning to the district live and work when congress is not in session vs. maintaining residence in the washington, d.c. area? thanknow more about kansas anybody else on this stage. i have walked with families in rubbles of greensberg, you stood with farmers during the dust in the recent drought and have been in fields of water the missouri fields have flooded. i have been corner to corner and

border to border. i have been in all 105 counties many times. i have been on more main streets public official. as a matter of fact, as a matter fact, bob dole just called me and said he's out here trying to catch up. am a fourth generation kansan, i was born here, educated here, done my life's work here. from tell me i'm not kansas. the people of kansas elected me to go to the u.s. senate. the u.s. senate is in washington. my home is dodge city and i'm it. proud of >> mr. orman? i suspect, senator, i have been to dodge city more have.ear than you >> how many times? timesave been this four this year. >> five? >> i have been there four. >> i have been about 7 so you're wrong on that.

thank you. >> i'll look for the camera roll on that. and i probably lived more of my adult years in kansas than you will say to be perfectly candid is i don't think it matters. it matters where someone lives. i think it matters how they vote and when it comes to voting for kansas and standing up for kansas values, senator roberts has taken a sharp turn to the right. he voted against the farm bill. against veterans benefits, he voted against funding for n-bath and ultimately maybe the most egregious thing is, when the bill came up, he didn't bother to vote on it and i think that's an affront to all veterans. senator roberts, 30 second rebuttal. >> i've worked very hard for day that i've had the privilege of public service. i stood up to the president,

keeping terrorists out of kansas. brought the big red wand back to fort riley. ensure thatght to the world's biggest tanker atfueling fleet will be mcconnell. i'm responsible for the lewis and clark center being based at leavenworth, the finest military university in the world. father of n-bath in manhattan, real jobs, real will transform our economy and i protected and improved province for kansas farmers. here's a classic example. the farm bill. >> time. next question is from liz montonyo with the kansas radio networks in topeka directed the first towards mr. orman. action should be taken by congress to curb the growing

intensifiedcrisis by influx of unaccompanied children fleeing central america? question. and the immigration crisis in of what's an example wrong with washington. when my opponent went into the house of representatives we had undocumented people in this country. today we have over 11 million. had anh parties have opportunity to solve this problem. both democrats and republicans it. failed to solve what i've said is, for immigration reform to work, it tough, practical and fair and by tough i mean we need to secure our borders, we need make sure that we continue our commitment to border borders.and secure our by practical i mean i think it's absolutely impractical to think we're going to find and deport 11.5 million people and i advised.s frankly ill there are whole towns in western kansas that would go away. agricultural industry, the meat packing industry would go away.

how do we make it fair to taxpayers? if you're here on an undocumented basis, you should fine, obey our laws, hold down a job and pay think youthen i should be able to stay here but let's be clear, this is a problem both parties have failed to solve. >> senator roberts? border.e the no amnesty. the biggest problems we're going to face right away when i go back to washington is the president of the united he will declare by executive order an immigration policy with amnesty. know i think it's ironic. i think it's ironic. we wouldn't have this tremendous the border unless the

the united states two years ago told people 16 years and under they would not deported. as a result, we've seen thousands come over the border. have to secure the border. it is a humanitarian problem that has to be done. ladies and gentlemen, we this problem if we didn't have barack obama and senate.id in the and every day i am fighting to undo the damage that my opponent with his support for obama and for harry reid. time. mr. orman, 30 seconds rebuttal. >> this may surprise some people agree that president obama taking executive action on immigration and bypassing right thing't the to do. i believe that we are a nation of law. and as a result of that i really

that we need to solve this problem legislatively but failure lies.he both parties have had an opportunity to solve this problem and both parties haven't the political courage to address it. >> the next question comes from kwch-tv innky with to senatordressed roberts. >> kansas continues to lag behind other states and the comesal average when it to job growth. if elected, how will you specifically support job growth new business development in kansas? shows -- make it rain. greg, can i have a little help here? >> ladies and gentlemen, please. we said, we want you to be courteous. let the candidates answer their

questions. to the respond candidates but we want both sides to be fair on this to be able to do that. >> i think the business climate that people such want to know how to plan ahead. they want certainty. all thist want tremendous overflow with regulations. a comprehensive bill on regulatory reform. i have every republican vote and 10 covert democrats because they didn't want to tell harry reid. even let usould not vote on it but look at the record. look at the record. when werought jobs back had the tanker base at mcconnell, when we have the biggest university in america the world up at leavenworth, theintellectual center of army, the big red wand moving back to kansas and n-bath will be $3.5 billion to the kansas economy. father of n-bath. we will get it done this session and it will be the jewel in our

the animal health quarter which will help economy. our kansas >> mr. orman? senator's with the statement that we need to have certainty but what certainty startis congress needs to getting its business done. barry flinchbaugh dr. flinchbaugh said we would have significantly more growth in the ag sector in created certainty in our immigration policy. i think we would have significant additional growth in in congress just got their act together and let american businesses know that we're going to solve our crisis that we have in this country and so i think congress getting their act foremostis first and what we need to do. the other thing i will say is, businessesand grown my whole life. i've traveled the state of kansas. industry into build kansas is going to require a

very diverse approach. in western kansas isn't the same thing we need in manhattan and isn't the same need in the kansas city area. and so i think we need to take a to take a very distinct approach in order to create jobs and growth in the state. [applause] >> senator roberts? 32nd rebuttal. 30-second rebuttal. >> getting business done. really. getting business done in the united states senate. really. 300 bills have come from the house and our gathering dust in the senate. this is where good legislation goes to die. it is because of harry reid, who will not allow any amendment, republican or democrat. he does not want to put his democrats online.

i am the only one on this stage that can make a republican majority, put harry reid out to pasture, and get things done. [applause] >> the next question comes from nick, managing editor of the hays daily news. it will be addressed to mr. orman first. >> the winner of this election will likely play a significant role in the development of the next farm bill. tot do you see as necessary feed a growing and hungry world? >> first and foremost, the farmers i have talked to around this date -- the state say it is the crop insurance policy be they need to be able to plant their crops with certainty. we have significantly more uncertain weather patterns. i think that is vital to the inelopment of the economy

kansas and the farmers in kansas. the other issue we face is water. thetor roberts referred to 50-year water plan. we also have to look at the farm bill and make sure we are not inadvertently encouraging or discouraging the planting of low-water-intensity crops. in kansaso farmers who said they would like to plant more, but the cost of insuring it is significantly more expensive than planting corn. milo consumes half as much water. we have to make sure that our federal farm program encourages water preservation so that we that resource for western kansas. [applause] >> senator roberts. >> i think my opponent for bringing up crop insurance. bob gary, a democrat from

nebraska, pat roberts of kansas, forged the crop insurance program some time ago. i a father of the crop insurance program. in this farm bill, it was tough because there were enemies of crop insurance. i protected it and saved it and we improved it. he says i voted against the farm bill. number one, it goes in the wrong direction. many of these farmers are not worried about low intensity water. beany rate, farmers will now planting for the government instead of making the decisions themselves. second, more regulations -- and goodness knows, we do not need any of that. lastly, food stamps. if there was ever a program that thes for reform, both for taxpayer and those who truly need it, it is food stamps. on the basis of that, i voted no on the farm till, but we

protected and improved crop insurance. [applause] >> mr. orman? >> senator roberts raised food stamps. there is no question that while it is harder than ever for the average american to get ahead, easy paradoxically equally to do nothing important with their lives. we have to look at the programs being abused and figure out a simple question. are they promoting upward mobility or are they promoting complacency and dependency? promoting complacency and dependency need to be changed. [applause] >> the next question comes from liz, kansas radio network in topeka. this question will be directed first towards senator roberts. >> military budget cuts have our troops,ng

especially following the drawing down troops in iran and afghanistan. they have a mission to fight for our nation and respond to disasters at home. what will you do to ensure national guard troops get the needed funding to train for both war and to mistake -- and requests? >> the first thing we do is exempt the military from this request. we are at lower levels than we have been since world war ii. obligation when we go to washington is to protect our individual freedoms. as a senior marine, i sure as heck know that. say that our military security, our national security strategy can be summed up with the president saying, "we don't have a strategy." we have to have a strategy. with isis, the latest terrorist group that intelligence services

have told us will make an attack on america, we must main vigilant. i will be supporting the military. always have. as a senior marine in the congress, that is where i am. we take that bill. >> i agree with senator roberts. sequester is a problem. let's remember what sequester is. it is the greatest example of washington's failure to get their act together. [applause] as part of a debt ceiling agreement, we were supposed to put together the supercommittee, supposedly, of the best legislators from both parties and they were supposed to come up with cuts to help get our budget back under control. provision thathe was never supposed to happen. as no greater example of our inability to get things done in

washington, we have sequester. i agree, it is a real problem when it comes to our military. i talked to general maddox and he gave me a very detailed briefing on what sequester is going to do to troop levels, readiness and preparedness. it is a huge problem that needs to be addressed. [applause] roberts, 30 seconds, rebuttal. >> it was thought up by jack lew and president obama, the man you supported and the man that you voted for. we would not have this kind of a problem with this administration making such bad cuts to the defense budget. with regards to the sequester, they exempted -- they, meaning the democrat majority -- they exempted all of these programs and targeted the military, thinking that republicans would never go along with it.

well, republicans surprised them because we have $18 trillion of debt. so we wanted everyone under sequester or not. note, as well, if you want to go back and listen to this debate, you can go to our website. wivwnews.com. if you did not dvr the k-state game, i am sorry. i cannot help you. >> the score is 31-21. >> the next question comes from michael and this will be directed towards mr. orman. >> senator roberts touched on this. havemerican journalists recently been executed by the group isis. do you agree with the president's actions thus far? what has been done right and what has been done wrong?

how do you think the u.s. should deal with isis? huge issue. we spent thousands of lives of americans, tens of thousands of people were injured, hundreds of billions of dollars trying to prevent muslim extremists from having a stronghold in a middle eastern country. the vacuum that we have left has allowed them to form. i think we need to do everything in our power to make sure that isis cannot stand. in terms of airstrikes, absolutely. in terms of providing military advice and counsel to the iraqis , i think that is absolutely necessary. and i think we are going to have to take further measures to address isis. one of the things that we need to consider here is that we don't have a properly-functioning iraqi government. ultimately, to solve the problem in that region, they need a properly-functioning iraqi government.

that is probably, at the end of the day, the biggest single issue that we have to deal with if we are going to address the isis threat. [applause] >> senator roberts? >> the president has known for over a year on his daily briefings that isis was growing as a threat. and yet we refuse to call the war against terrorism a war. -- osamaber the mantra is dead and the terrorist threat is over, etc. that is not correct and the president knew that. then he says we do not have a strategy. folks, we have got to have a strategy. we have got to have a president who will stand up to the american people and demonstrate exactly what the dangers are to our national security. that said, here is my strategy. come to the congress and seek authorization. i do not know if i am going to

support that or not, depending on what his strategy is. we do not even know that yet. but i know one thing -- i have serious doubts that might -- that this president has the will or the ability to conduct any military operation. he has a view of america, of leading by following. leading by following has caused all of these voids and bad people have filled these voids. >> time. 30-second rebuttal. >> we can go back to the beginning of the iraq war and say that mistakes were made. mistakes were made on both sides of the aisle. i think mission accomplished was a mistake. it was clear that we had not solved our problems at that point in time. i do not disagree with the senator that, as a senator, when the president comes to you with a plan, you have to consider it.

i am happy to hear senator roberts said he would consider it has previously, he said he would fight president obama at every turn and i think that is a much more reasonable position to take. [applause] question comes from the managing editor of the hays daily news. it will be directed towards senator roberts. >> where do you stand on the issue of legalization of marijuana in the u.s.? >> that is not a federal issue. that is a state issue. a rocky mount get high, go west. that should be for the kansas legislature and the government to decide, not federally. >> we have had a federal policy in this country since the nixon administration.

bet does not seem to working. we have spent over $1 trillion on it. with that said, as the senator has mentioned, we do have states that have started to work with different policies as it relates to legalization. i think it would be prudent for us to take a step back, watch what happens in those states before we determine how we want to change federal policy. [applause] like ator, would you rebuttal on that? >> i don't care. >> the next question comes from kansas radio networks into peak appeared this will be directed first towards mr. orm an. >> the patriot act was hammered out in short measure following 9/11 and is believed by many to be an overreach by the federal government which unduly infringes on the rights of law-abiding citizens. isyou feel the patriot act

appropriate as is or does it need modification? please elaborate why you feel as you do. >> obviously, we passed the patriot act at a time when our country was under attack i terrorists. and we passed it with great intention and ultimately with the belief that this is what we needed to do to protect our citizens. i think it is a very fine line that we walk between protecting our citizens and infringing upon their legitimate rights of privacy. what i will say is this is going to be an ongoing debate in our country. it is not going to be resolved in one election cycle. the patriot act will likely evolve, but it will have to evolve as threats evolve. right now, given what is going on with isis and the fact that we have named them as a terrorist organization, we have to make sure we have the ability to protect the homeland,

particularly if they are able to gain a foothold in the middle east. [applause] >> senator roberts? >> he is right. keep the patriot act because of the terrorist threats that are growing. this is a delicate balance between civil liberties and our safety in america. he mentioned the irs scandal. among the finance committee, we have been investigating the irs scandal. all of a sudden, lois lerner lost her hard drive and then there were six others. we refused to sign the democrat report that said, well, we have done enough. get the communications to the white house. i want to tell you, there is a ,ember of the finance committee i said no, i am not signing that final report. i said i will go to the floor of the senate and talk about it. side, we saidcan we are not going to sign that report until we get to the

truth. the first vote that i will have when i go back to washington is an attack by harry reid, of all things, to change the first amendment. to change the first amendment. and i have five minutes to talk against harry reid. ins is the man he supported regards to the obama administration. he is not independent. he is a democrat. >> 32nd rebuttal. >> i think we do not live in the information age so much as we live in the misinformation age. and i think what senator roberts point to very small facts and distort my records. the facts are, i supported both parties. i have been a member of the republican party.

i have been a member of the democratic party. i have supported candidates of both parties. candidly, i have been disappointed with both. [applause] >> the next question comes from michael. it will be directed first towards senator roberts. our viewers often voiced frustration with campaign finance laws, the amount of money involved in these races, and the ability of outside interest groups to fund certain candidates for issues. what is your opinion on candidates receiving money from those outside groups? >> since i have not received any -- i think the biggest issue of all

is transparency. if people know where the money is coming from, that is the biggest issue we can make. under the united states supreme court ruling, they have ruled everybody has the right. that is the reason why harry reid is going to try to amend the constitution. he is worried -- he is. you can holler all you want but he has that amendment. congress will determine how much money we can all give and congress will determine what is reasonable. that is ridiculous. the congress cannot do a thing with harry reid at the helm. >> mr. orman. >> i have heard you say the read -- the words harry reid and obama a lot, but i have not heard from you -- >> he is your body, man. he is your buddy. x what i have not heard from you is how to solve problems.

[applause] what i have not heard from you is what you are going to do to get things done. is what the voters of kansas need to hear from you. in terms of special interests, i have vowed that i am not taking money from pac's because i want to go to washington and represent the citizens of kansas. i do not want to go to washington and have to worry about what the pharmaceutical industry thinks about what i might be doing. i want -- i do not want to have to go and worry about what the oil and gas industry thinks about what i am doing. i want to go and worry about what is in the best interest of kansas and i want to solve problems for all americans. [applause] >> senator roberts, 30 seconds rebuttal. 40 bills, 40 have

pieces of legislation covering every part of the kansas economy that is being over-regulated by this administration. the administration that my opponent is responsible for. 40. 40 pending bills. i cannot get them addressed. no republican can offer an amendment in the senate of the united states. we have not had a budget in the senate for five years. we do not do any appropriations bills. that is harry reid. he is a one-man rules committee and it is a fact that you have given to harry reid, hillary obama -- whyident should anybody believe that you are independent? >> the next question comes from , managing editor of the hays daily news. this question will be first directed towards mr. orman. >> what is your stance on gun

control in the u.s.? is there too little, too much, or just write right now? >> i am a gun owner. i believe in the second the righti believe in of people to bear arms. when i got my gun, i had to go through a background check. it was a relatively quick process. it took five minutes and i was able to buy my guns without delay. i do not think that having a loophole that allows people who could not get guns at a legitimate gun dealer to get them otherwise as sound policy. [applause] so i would be open to addressing the gun show loophole. getsu think about who prevented from buying guns, they are people we do not want having guns. that does not mean they are not going to be able to figure out how to get them through the black market or somewhere else, i just don't think it makes sense to make it easy for a

under ad felon, someone restraining order for domestic abuse, to be able to walk into a gun show and easily get a gun. [applause] >> senator roberts. >> well, there you have it. there you have it. amendment,he second but -- federal controls and requirements. i am for the second amendment. of thepoint out, many things that my opponent has talked about our in washington, d.c. washington has the strictest gun-control in america and one of the highest crime rates resulting from guns in america.

rightsmess with people's to bear arms with any restrictions. that is what president obama does each and every time we talk about a crisis. that is what is going to come from the obama administration. that is the man he supported. that is the man he gave money to. >> mr. orman, 30 seconds rebuttal. >> shocking that we did not hear the name harry reid in that. [applause] it might be -- >> i just missed the opportunity. i am sorry. >> it could be because harry reid sided with you and voted against expanding background checks. i guess we only talk about it when he does not vote with you. ultimately, there has to be reasonable restrictions. with not want people automatic weapons.

those are things that everybody agrees are reasonable. i think that making sure convicted felons do not have guns is probably a good thing. [applause] >> the next question comes from .iz it will be directed towards senator roberts. >> social security is the biggest program run by the federal government. it is a program affecting someone in virtually every family in america. the financial stability of the program continues to be in question with its trust fund exhausted in 2030 six. what action would you push for to protect social security for today's seniors and strengthen it for future generations? >> i am not going to take away your social security, do not worry about it.

anyone over 55 does not have to worry about any reform made you do not have to worry about doing security inh social the part of this session. harry reid will block that real quick. it is not only social security that is broke. the united states is broke. debt andion worth of at some, at some point, place, we are going to have to address all of the entitlement programs, social security, medicare, and medicaid. i will tell you one thing -- with obamacare taking money away from medicare, that is a mistake. the medicare reimbursement to our health care providers has caused a crisis to the health care delivery system. we have to save medicare. we must honor the commitments of social security and we have to fix medicaid. i know that. but it is not going to happen now. it will happen when we change

the congress to a new republican majority and we can make a difference. >> mr. orman. >> just so we are clear, i agree that both chambers of congress overly-partisan ways. i agree that harry reid is stopping progress on lots of things, but so are the republicans in the house. with the question of social security -- and i like the fact that senator roberts was talking about our $18 trillion debt -- but let's not forget, in the last decade, senator roberts voted for almost every spending bill. in presidential election 2000 was the only election in my lifetime where we were talking about what to do with surpluses. roberts and harry reid -- [laughter] spending, wegh

spend trillions of dollars in the first half of that decade taking surpluses and turning them into deficits. -- thatdea that your you are fiscally conservative is not necessarily demonstrated by the evidence. [applause] >> senator roberts? 30 seconds rebuttal. >> my opponent seems to have forgotten the $.5 trillion cuts that i have proposed since obama came into power. that is a fact. you know parties are not perfect. everybody knows that. but there are some things you cannot compromise on. you just cannot waffle. you cannot compromise terrorism. you cannot compromise on your kids. you cannot compromise on the future and the fact that you have to get this senate turned around. i just want to know when you are going to take a stand and tell towhich party you are going

congress for pete are you going to be a republican one day and a democrat the next? where are you going to be? >> we hate to end on that no, but we do need to get to the closing statement. restraints one what we are allowed to do. we have to get to the opening statement. mr. orman, you have the first closing statement. a thanks to the panel for terrific debate and thanks to senator roberts for being here and for everyone who took the time to be here or listen at home. a special thanks to my wife and my family for all of their love and support. we are all kansans. we believe in the value of hard work, account ability and working together to get things done. it is time to elect a senator that shares those values. we are a country that put a man

on the moon, that figured out how to harness the power of the atom, that figured out how to take computers that used to fill a room and put them on the head of a pin. i believe that that country and those people, when they worked together, can solve any problem. i am running as an independent to reject the false choices that the two-party system has presented us with. i believe that we can have affordable and high-quality health care. i believe that we can have secure borders and a humane immigration policy. i believe that we can balance our budget and meet our commitment to our seniors and i believe we can have a new , but we won'try get there if we keep electing partisans instead of problem solvers. i look forward to going to realngton to start conversation on how we solve our

problems. i am asking for your vote in november to finally get washington back in the business of solving problems for all americans, regardless of party labels. regardless of party label, we are all americans and we will rise and fall together. >> ladies and gentlemen, we are going to run out of time. senator roberts, your closing statement please. >> elections determine the future of our country. kansas needs someone in washington with conviction and a backbone. i do nothing my opponent has either. he is republican. then he says he is a democrat. just this year, he becomes an independent. wills and gentlemen, what greg orman be next year? do you really want to risk our children and our grandchildren's future to that? kansans know me. of fighting record

for kansas. that fight must continue. i have voted against obamacare every time and i will continue that fight. [applause] we must stop president obama from implementing amnesty by executive order. this is a humanitarian crisis. we must secure our border. i will continue that fight. my record is clear. opposing nearly $.5 trillion of spending cuts since obama came to power. i will continue that fight. i will continue to protect our state's role in national security. again, i am the proud father of real jobs and real growth. my vision is our vision. i will fight to restore the freedom of kansas families to choose their own health care, their own doctors. i will fight to pass the keystone pipeline to help lead us into energy independence. that means real jobs for kansas. most of all, i will fight every

waking minute to restore our faith in government, restore individual freedoms. i am the only one on this stage that can be trusted to change the senate. i ask for your vote. >> ladies and gentlemen, that concludes

there's 200 cash prizes 0,000.ng $10 >> next, the debate between the candidates for governor for kansas. sam brownback and paul davis took to the stage for their first debate at the kansas state fair. the political