problematic. our view in the world is not being respected. we have to restore america. to restore america. the only way you do that is to problem-solvers back or part those types of people, not only in washington, councils, youry assemblies and your state houses well. >> scott is -- [applause] scott described the problem really well. as my years went on there, i was so struck and disappointed by the fact that really, most people work so hard to come to congress. they're good people. serve the country. and yet they get there, and they these strangeto almost childish warring teams. and, you know, washington, our in hisresident warned farewell address against the danger of what he called

were political factions, really political parties. he said he worried that future americans would put the interests of the political faction ahead of the interests of the country. really, we're living washington's nightmare today. used to be quite diverse. do thisee if i can quickly. every year, one of the magazines washington rates members of congress in three areas, social policy, foreign and national security policy. ad they rate them, us, on liberal-conservative scale. years, most years, you'd middle, about 20 or 30 people, which was a mixture of democrats and republicans. the last -- recent years, you a democrat who is more liberal than any

republican -- do i have that right? no. the other way around. seepublican who is more -- what an independent i am? you know what i'm saying. it's like warring camps. here's the bottom line. youmain point, are republican, democrat or an american? and obviously you've got to put america first. the second thing is, you've got to be willing to compromise. you can't get anything done without compromising. and i don't mean a compromise of principle. into awhen you go negotiation on a piece of legislation, you can't say i not vote for this unless i get 100% of what i want. okay. get 50%, maybe you'll get 60% or 70%. even better. that's not happening. and i'll tell you, we have some enormous problems. the deficit, the debt, remains enormous problem. immigration is an enormous

problem. the question is, is congress to get together and solve those problems before they become catastrophes? theultimately, you know, as shaw said,e bernard sha the great thing about a get they is people leadership they deserve. >> i love all your quotes. much. them so hearings, youur came in with five or six. >> i appeal to you, say to your candidates, i want you to go down there and do what you think is right to get something done, i disagree with you on that one, because the country needs to solve our problems. >> so is that something you think is still possible? >> yeah, i do. on both are extremists sides. >> i'm hopeful. i'm a glass half full guy. i believe in america. i believe we can restore america. it's a great country.

we have work to do in certain areas. listen, they don't talk. they don't work together. leave at 12:00 on thursday and come back monday night for a fake vote. i was the leader, i would tell them, listen, we're not going home and by the way we're couple of retreats together. we're going to get to know each other and our families and kind of reconnect. [applause] >> all right. we have questions from the audience. one, i think we talked a little bit about. us your best ideas for and equality.ome >> one of the ways we can kind of rise everybody's votes, i believe, starting out, we need to repeal obamacare and we need wet blanket off businesses and individuals, because if you look at the now of -- justt so you know, as i said, my mom and dad were married and divorced four times each. my mom was on welfare.

a lot of challenges. 12.sted at wasn't easy. i remember, my first job at 13 years old, duncan donuts. do you guys have these out here yet? >> they're on the way. my mom struggled to, you know, obviously provide our family. but when you're looking at, how actually get ahead? i remember like it was yesterday, when i was 18 years old and had those challenges, that ronald reagan said, you know what? we're a party of opportunity. one, twou work hard, jobs, you join forces with a friend and you create a corporation, that corporation -- that corporation can actually hire people and can fillexpand and you fill -- fulfill the american dream. i want everybody to have the opportunities that i have, that ronald reagan put in my head, you have to do it by allowing our job creators the jobs.y to create obamacare is a wet blanket. in new hampshire, prices are

this winter. we have a situation with the unelected unaccountable bureaucrats circumventing our laws and putting in more and more regulations. the highest corporate tax rate. i was driving, listening to the talking abouty're tree taxes. so because they can't afford to maintain the trees, they gave it the homeowners. and the homeowners are not having success, so they want to parcel tax. every time you turn around, the government is looking for more money.e if you think the federal government doesn't have enough money, you're wrong. money. plenty of let's find a way to do that consolidating. let's fix the tax code. let's find ways to do it like we our homes and businesses. then if there's a question and we're still short, then come to me. but the only way we're going to address income equality is to to have jobs. and right now it's flat.

>> there's certain sectors. listen. certain sectors doing well but all in all, things are flat. regulatory -- of individuals are very nervous now. >> so i would say and you hear this a lot in washington, that to income answer inquality is to raise taxes. i think that's the wrong answer. system,ook at our tax it's a very progressive tax system. about 50% of our people pay no taxes. and we have something called the tax credit which helps people at the lower end are working to be able to save more. i know this is a slogan but i think it's the truth. way to end income get the economy growing more. >> amen. >> to me, the most significant is have aan do long-term debt reduction plan america, because jobs don't come from governments. jobs come from the private

sector. of the private sector is sitting on an enormous amount of cash. why? because they don't know what's coming. >> they can't get it back. fromey can't bring it back abroad. some of them are sitting on it here because they don't know what the future is. if we create stability,, if we put ourselves on the road to some kind of balance in our federal government, that's to endt thing we can do income inequality. there's one other thing you can that during this last great recession, a certain lost theireople jobs, who will never get those jobs back, because they're not there. to -- and a lot of them are not so old. 40's,f them are in their 50's. we've got to figure out targeted ways -- again, maybe tax business -- to retrain those people for jobs exist. >> someone had brought in our satellite room a question.

on it briefly. senator lieberman, it's talking intruders breaking into the white house. obviously there was one very public event on friday. but there have been others as well. you had the secret service when the vice presidential nominee. do you think the secret service has weakened significantly? happened to it? >> i can tell you that all my relationshiphat with the secret service in 2000 are positive. people.e extraordinary they, as everybody says, put their lives on the line. never forget walking through a crowd -- the first time it happened, i didn't know on.as going i suddenly feel a hand going my belt.back of and it was a guy named mike, my detail, he leaned forward and said i'm just going to hold on to you a while. there's something out there i don't like. he got closer to me, about as

you could get. that's the way they are. that's the way they are. actually it's- been disheartening for me to watch this series of events back to this business with lapses,s and then these in a row. so something has gone wrong there. these are good people. they work hard. but something has gone wrong -- butte to use the word -- the culture of the place. it's not up to me, but i think maybe the secret service is for a new director from outside. and maybe somebody from the who has that kind of -- to shakeperience o it up and make it work again. used to be run by the treasury. now it's run by homeland security. bureaucracyuch involved. >> you know, i don't think that's the problem. i think it's really within the organization. but here's something else, which is that they still have -- the

service still has some historic responsibilities which like they still investigate cases of counterfeiting of money. do toey've got so much to protect the president, visiting et cetera, that that ought to go to somebody like who can handle it, the fbi. let them focus on security. >> joe has much more experience. i'll defer to his expertise on that. >> senator brown, another audience.rom the has the international opinion of the usa improved or declined obama?resident >> i think because of his policy, it'seign absolutely declined. there's a lack of trust, not our allies and the united states, a lack of fear respect from our foes. there's also a lack of trust between the american citizens and government -- i'll just say big government, you know. that includes members of congress.

lack of trust. they're upset about the dysfunction, upset about the lack of transparency, when about benghazi, talking about fast and furious, agenciesre looking at purportedly being used as political arms, the irs, the whatce department, with was happening with some of the targets or lack of prosecution in other areas. said, we live in the greatest country in the world. i'm so hopeful and i know democracy, as joe referenced, is meant to be easy. it's messy. i'm hopeful we'll get it together and have folks who will say, yeah, okay, let's go and just take back our country and get things back on track. >> amen. surprisingly, in the polling i've seen from around the world, we are thought of less well. unusual, because, you

know, when president bush left, wasn't popular in a lot of parts of the world. when president obama came in, was tremendous hope around the world. but that moment is lost. i do think, as scott said, a lot is because we've sent an uncertain message. the fact is, as we see every day newspapers, on tv, et cetera, it's a dangerous world, a world in which if the greatest country in the world, which we are, unless fear us and our allies trust us, the world is more to be a much dangerous place. that's where it is today. i'll just go back to this foreign minister from an asian country. i've heard this over and over. problems have happened in the middle east. but i -- we asked him the other opinion of thehe u.s. in asia today? know, there's great respect for your economy and everybody wants to go to america. really, we don't know whether we can rely on you

anymore. you know, we've got china, which is big and threatens a lot of us. so we watched what happened in syria with the red lines, and we to ourselves, wow, i mean -- and he wasn't from japan -- if the chinese move to japanese islands, what will the united states do? so the president began to turn a speech atin a speem -- the united nations. he said things he should have how five years ago, about there's just some places in the world where you've got to use force to protect your interests and your values. i just hope he sticks with it. 60n i'm afraid in this minutes interview, he said some undercut that. i've been a critic of his. him back then.t i supported my friend mccain.

but we need him to succeed. going to be president for more than two years. these are going to be critical years. he continues on the themes that he struck at the the speechay and in to the nation. >> listen, the speeches are over. people don't want speeches. direction. they want guid guidance. they want action. void that'semendous been left. i understand spending good time in japan. they are nervous. a void. we don't have potentially the ability to respond, because we toe the president wanting cut our military down to world war ii levels. challengesnomic where we have a $17 trillion trillion-dollar deficits. we're at an economic damage. amount of ourair debt. and china's military is building up. what do we have? world on fire. look at israel and hamas. it's the worst relationship since the starting of the state of israel. that relationship is terrible.

happening ins ukraine, with crimea and russia. putin has another two years to the envelope and will do so. you know it and i do. you see what's happening in syria, iraq, afghanistan potentially. fortunately, they signed a status of forces agreement. we see what's happening in africa with boko haram. now, i know and you know there's -- we sent a bill to the committee,ations asking that boko haram be deemed a terrorist organization. hillarya letter to clinton asking them to deem that group a terrorist organization. they did nothing. this constant lack of understanding and comprehending problems are. sending out terrible messages. it's really coming back, hurt usately, to dramatically. >> the foreign policy, there's also growing unrest in hong kong this week, because of the chinese control of elections. wanting to get your about israel and hamas.

is that something that will ever settled? will we ever see peace in the middle east? >> first, about hong kong, this a remarkable moment. it happened in the arab spring, short-lived. these people were rising up for their freedom and economic opportunity. happened in ukraine, when the ukrainian people rose up and said they want to be part of europe. don't want to be part of being dominated by russia anymore. here's hong kong. promise thatbout a china made to hong kong when it essentiallyng kong from britain 20 years ago or ago.t 20 years it was 1997. in 2017, they said the people of get to choosed their president. you'llna says yes, choose your president but we will choose the candidates you

from. [laughter] and they go out into the streets. the is a real test of leader of china. endi'm afraid it's going to up with the government using force. smart, what'sre the big deal? let them choose their leader. on, i could take too long this, but the situation in the middle east, what we've seen in the last three, four years is that, though we were focused on the israeli-palestinian conflict, the larger and more conflicts are nowflicks the modernizers and extremists. but the israeli-palestinian it could be solved, would help everything.

got aust, when you've group like hamas, which still is to terroristted action against israel and the destruction of the state of are nevere israelis going to sit down at the table with them. changed what he said, although not much about israel, and they did sit down at the him. with at least they had some steps forward. it's hard to be optimistic about it right now. it's really part of the larger problem now in the muslim world, because the palestinian leadership is relatively moderate. and we -- i voted to support financially and politically in congress. threatened now being by people like hamas, who really are part of the muslim of the cousinsrt of isis. as long as that happens, there's not going to be anything like east.in the middle >> and israel has every right to defend itself. to wipe israel off the face of the earth. i've been there.

missileshe rockets and lined up at the police facility, facilities. it's no way to live. it's smaller than the state of rhode island. they're under siege from all directions. so i certainly support their efforts. iran think that leads to and what's happening with iran. i never would have allowed that to move forward, without absolute, positive steps for stop enriching uranium. the president has already given them an extension and got nothing in return, once again, it's that lack of lack of that commitment. he should have said, we're immediately putting sanctions in. that's why i'm looking forward to hopefully getting back and leading that charge. hopefullypeaking of going back, i do want -- i know you can't look in crystal balls election is coming up in less than five weeks. i assume that you are confident is going to turn and become republican? >> i'm not confident about

anything. each day. [laughter] i'm not one of those. i'm one of those people who that., oh, this and i deal in fact. i'm going to wait until november 10:00.nd i'm focusing on what i can do to help. i believe that there are certain indications. i'll leave that to the political pundits. my race, you know, i'm either or up four right now. it's going to be interesting. forle are looking, i think, independent leadership versus rubber stamps at this point. so we'll see. >> all right. predictions over here, senator? >> so obviously i'm out. a wildbviously independent anyway. >> huh-uh. >> ha ha! >> so i can't predict. and these races can change quickly. but i would say, bottom line, ae odds are trending toward republican takeover of the senate. and i don't want to go into this right much detail, but now there's 55 democrats effectively and 45 republicans. have to pickicans up six seats to get the ma --

majority. almost everybody agrees there are three democrat incumbents -- states. there are a bunch of states democratic are incumbents in close battles. alaska,rt way out west, colorado, iowa. let's see. carolina. >> arkansas, north carolina, did i sayand new england? no. new hampshire. [laughter] know, i got to find a new partner. so -- >> any day. >> so you've got about seven or that seem to be trending republican. odds. say that's the people thought there were two -- one republican incumbent who might be in trouble. interestingly, mitch mcconnell,

leader.rity but i'd say right now, no. that was the general point of view. is whyingly, and this nobody really can predict, pat roberts in kansas looks like he in difficulty. the independent candidate poll, six points ahead today. so who knows? but if you put it all together, it looks like it is moving. the other thing to notice -- i probably spend too much time reading this stuff -- >> you do. else do i have to do now? [laughter] from the pains, of personal experience, living with me, politics is an incurable disease. [laughter] so there's an interesting factor that you see in some of the which is that commitment to both is much higher among republicans and democrats so far. in other words, if you ask , if you ask people do you intend to vote and how strongly it, it's muchout

higher among republicans. holds, that will favor republican majorities. >> what does that mean? means harry reid is the minority leader. there's upwards of 400 bills and the president's desk. and then we, and you, in the say, mr. president, why didn't you sign that bill on border security? why didn't you do that visa bill about forlking immigration? why didn't you approve the keystone pipeline? and he has to answer and respond, instead of blaming the 60 minutes piece, why he didn't do these things. we have the ability to get things, i think, done. to regular order. how about that, joe? going through the committee appropriations process, getting back to allowing people to file an amendment and actually get it heard. he only brought up seven amendments this year from republicans and only allowed seven. one of them failed. there are good people who have good ideas.

and part of the problem is, when bill, when he files a bill, he files a bill -- he says change thegoing to entire structure of the economy. we're gonna do it in an hour. moves for closure. doesn't allow any amendments except for a couple of his buddies. he forces us to say we're not going to do it if we don't get have some, because we good ideas. we have some great ideas in energy, allowing, modifying, updating our tax code. many things we could do. but he doesn't do that. passedider trading bill, almost 100-0. throughallows us to go the process and everyone is part of the process, it passes. that's the problem. >> let me give sort of a hopeful scenario of what might happen if the senate goes republican and congress is republican. just somebody told me an old

heard for ahadn't long time a couple days ago, -- which relates to what i'm about to say. taylor goteth married for the seventh time, somebody said what that was, was the triumph of hope over experience. [laughter] youo i'm going to now give the political version of that. oure have been occasions in history -- i must admit occasions when washington was not as divided along partisan is today -- when congress is controlled by one is ofand the president another party, they actually end up negotiating agreements. >> bill clinton. >> bill clinton did. >> bill clinton is a classic, right. gingrich brought in the anybody the house -- if said these two people, gingrich and clinton, would be able to

but theyther, agreements like reagan and o'neal. that's the hope here. it will take the president -- remember, the president now is going to be, in the last two years, he's got to be thinking mark have i been able to make in a positive way on this country? to mean is's going he's going to have to separate himself from some in the to negotiatey compromise agreements with the theblicans, and hopefully republicans, in turn, will be willing to compromise and meet middle.where in the >> in the next two years, it will be pretty interesting to see. >> maybe better than we think. >> eternal optimist. leads to the next question. which two candidates would you ine to see run for president 2016? [laughter] >> and why? >> i really think it's too early. you're going to get -- there's so much happening right now.

clintonhink hillary is -- leave thati'll lea -- once again to the political pundits. 2014, are so focused on people really don't care about 2016. we need to deal with the issues right now. that's where my head is at. [applause] >> well-said. i mean, it's too early to say who i think. guess you'd have to say, if you invite me to be a political commentator, that if hillary clinton runs, she's going to get the democrat nomination. she will get the nomination. >> the question is, will she run? >> that's the question. if she doesn't, you will have in the interesting race will be for the nomination. for the republican party, there of candidates. you know, in a presidential primary, it's actually the one time when our parties nationally

themselves. we write platforms for our frankly,parties but they don't mean a hell of a lot. i'm sorry to say that. thethe reality is, when voters come out in the primaries, they decide what kind party they want to have. and the challenge for the republicans, if i may say so as toindependent, will be nominate somebody who is seen as and not anolver will.ist, if you and in a more practical political sense, somebody who can get the support of moderate voters. stunninge of the most numbers, in so-called commit polls, after the last election, was that president obama defeated mitt self-described moderates by thing -- something points. president obama, some people don't think he's a moderate. i think what happened among

moderates is he looked relatively moderate compared to republican, romney. romney actually generally is a moderate. of the perception parties. so it's going to be a fascinating couple of years. run, they doesn't exact same contest will occur in the democratic primaries. no clear favorite. and a real battle for what the party stands for. for what the s for. >> it will be interesting to watch, getting to the selection, and then it is open from there. before we wrap it up, since we are almost out of time, i wanted to ask each of you, since you have had some pretty illustrious editions in your career, what would you consider the highlight of your professional career so far? i will start with you, senator brown. i just had two daughters get married in the last five weeks.

>> wow. [applause] [laughter] that must've been expensive. >> gail and i have been together for five years -- 25 years. being a parent is one of the hardest professions, finding that balance between being a --band, wife, try phrase kit trying to raise kids and giving them good morals. giving them enough room to grow. i am blessed. i would say that. to think that someone like me could be a senator with the background i have, to represent the greatest country in the the 100eing one of people to make that decision, was an honor. i look forward to having the honor again, hope lee. -- hopefully. >> my wife is going to watch this. [laughter] >> my wife is watching right now, right?

>> as we used to say on the floor of the senate, i want to associate myself with everything senator brown said. [laughter] you have the really great highlight coming, ran children. -- grandchildren. i feel privileged. i was in elected office for 40 years. 24 in the senate. 16 in connecticut. what an honor. everything ied by was able to do. of it across party lines. can't get anything done if you don't work across party lines. i was in a position with fred thompson, before he went off selling reverse mortgages. [laughter] i miss him. i love to see him. i see him on tv all the time. at the centerwas

of adapting so much legislation that was aimed at protection after 9/11. greatest personal political thrill of my life and my career was to become the vice president. neither of my parents went to college. middle-class family, my dad had a little store. the gave me the greatest values and motivational support. i never could have dreamed of being a senator, let alone vice president. to have the extra honor to be the first jewish american to run for national office, i found what i have confidence what happened, no people were either for or against me based on my religion, which is what america is all about. do you still keep in touch with al gore? [applause] know, do i still keep in

touch with al gore? only by e-mail occasionally. [laughter] which -- he did invent the internet, you know. [laughter] but i have got to say this, to be fair, the choice of a vice presidential running mate by a presidential nominee is probably the most unilateral exercise of power in american politics. in other words, the president gets to choose who he wants. so, single-handedly you might say that he both the risk of having the first jewish american on a national ticket, but he also had the confidence in the american people to feel that that would not hurt his chances. i will tell you a funny story that he told me the night we went to nashville before -- i am telling too many stories. [laughter] but you will get a kick out of

this one. he said -- i've got to tell you, i decided a few weeks ago i wanted you to be my running mate , but being responsible i had to ask people, a small number of people, is america ready for a jewish person as vice president? i asked some christian friends, some jewish friends, and here's what i found. there was tremendous anxiety among my jewish friends. [laughter] but that all the christians thought there was no problem. so, he said that because i know there are so many more million christians and americans -- in america than jews, i was able to choose you. [laughter] >> well, thank you very much, gentlemen. that wraps it up for this evening and we certainly appreciate both of you being here. thank you. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> tonight, coverage from campaign 2014 as north carolina republican incumbent renee against clay off aiken. we will be showing the debate tonight at 8:00, eastern time. >> our campaign 2014 coverage continues with a week full of debates. tuesday, at 7 p.m. eastern, live coverage of the west virginia senate debate.

also at 7:00 on c-span two live coverage of the u.s. senate between mark warner and ed gillespie. at the same time on c-span three live coverage of the massachusetts governors debate with all five candidates. then at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span, the north carolina u.s. senate debate with incumbent senator kay hagan and the speaker of the house, tom tillis . live coverage00, of the pennsylvania governors debate between tom corbett and tom wolfe. live coverage of the 17th district of illinois. later at 9:00, live coverage of

the illinois governors debate, republicaninn and bruce rounder. eastern,ght at eight the debate between scott walker and democrat mary burke. liveday night on c-span, coverage of the iowa senate debate with bruce braley and jody ernst. sunday, live at 8 p.m. eastern, the michigan governors debate between rick snyder and mark sharp. schauer. >> in the colorado governor's incumbent hickenlooper faced off against bob beauprez last week. this runs about one hour and 10 minutes.

welcome to the, "denver post" debate series, 2014. thanks for watching this live online, thanks for coming. it is gratifying to see such interest in our debate. we like to think that the most important aspects of the campaign season are the debates. it gives you a chance to see the candidates answer what we hope are serious questions without notes or talking points from the staff in the pressure of real-time. tonight you are lucky enough to feature one of the most important races in colorado, the governor's race, with a debate between its current occupant, the governor's office current and his challenger. moderating with me is joey bunch . we ask that tonight that you .uys hold applause

big reaction for after the debate. i understand a little bit of the chuckle or the recognition of acute statement, but if anyone starts to heckle or become tooxious, we will ask them leave. our debate will feature a mixture of four different categories of russians, we will have questions for both ask specifice will questions, we will have a yes or no round of questions and we will let the candidates ask russians of each other. we will forgo opening statements, but then we will have closing statements. we did a coin toss at the beginning. remind me how that worked out, joey bunch? >> [inaudible] >> so, the congressman will go first and he will be the last to offer closing remarks. the a quick introduction of and dates. they are well new -- well known. mr. hickenlooper is the current

governor, for -- former mayor of denver. a pioneer in business before he ran for mayor. rancherprez is a bison who ran for governor against bill ritter in 2006. all right, joey. let's do this. >> gentlemen, we will start with questions for both candidates. you will have 60 seconds to answer the question. should you wish to take it, 30 person to rebut, for the who is the first answer the question. because of the coin toss, we will start with mr. beauprez. mr. beauprez, based on the latest projections, residents

a refund by 2016. do you support using a four state need or returning it to taxpayers? it toould return taxpayers. our challenge in colorado, i think, is to limit spending, first and foremost. i have to note that right out of the chute here on the governors watch state employment has ballooned and within the executive branch within the post it grew by 91%, some 20 million in one year. it looks like an opportunity to reduce spending while we continue to grow the colorado economy. it is not the government that needs more money and opportunity , it is the people of colorado. specifically in the eastern plains. first and foremost we should

constrain the spending on the part of government and give people a chance to recover. >> mr. hickenlooper? all, the washington way -- i'm not sure for that statistic comes from. -- "the the denver post thatr post" -- i'm sure there's a source for that, but that would be a ludicrous increase. giving the money back to the citizens makes a lot of sense, but there are a lot of competing needs and we have been approached by all manner of constituents looking at the ways and places that it might benefit . i think the vast majority of people tend to feel that that money would make a difference in their lives. i think it is important to wait and hear out everyone and what they are saying. not sure that we are

missing an opportunity. there are several different ways that you can refund it to people. , how would you -- >> and i have mice -- my 32nd rebuttal? >> of course. >> i believe the facts as reported in the press. state unemployment in total is at 17%. it looks like the best place to apply for work in colorado is the office of the governor. there are a lot of people in colorado -- let me emphasize, mesa county last year shrunk in economic growth. it went backwards. water.and el paso tread the first thing we have to do after four years of this administration is make sure that all of colorado gets moving. >> mr. beauprez -- mr. hickenlooper, how

would you suggest a state use the money? we are following up on the last question. >> my guess is that the citizens are going to want it returned to them. the question is -- is it done through a basis of income tax and return of income tax in a variety of other ways? different constituencies have already kind of reached out to education, we are still woefully behind on the funding compared toation the rest of the country. k-12 education has made several requests for restoration of some of their funding. i'm trying to think, there was one -- the number of folks on ,he economic development side small and struggling counties have said -- is there not a way to get more support for us?

?> mr. beauprez >> if you return the money to people, the people will figure it out quickly how to get those funds back. k-12 education is struggling? he is exactly right. he put forward a tax increase in colorado that they didn't want. 62 out of 64 counties that they didn't want it. by the majority of to the one the people said they did not want it. he sweptme time forward a tax increase, chuck. what has happened is that colorado has fallen to 50 is based on the census bureau and owned -- and their own statistics, 50th in rank with tax dollars for education. the first thing we should do is get the money back from washington that we sent there in place.st vice -- first

>> the attacks are coming faster. i should be able to answer, at least. think that the reason that those powers of education are almost completely controlled by income levels of population . the majority of those programs reflect that your citizens are .oing well hickenlooper, education -- goes -- i think it

was rebutting. >> we will keep it straight. [laughter] >> commissions are preparing local controls on the oil and gas industry. what is on the table? >> he said that the citizens are doing well and that is why we are not getting this money back ?rom the federal government on his watch the federal government has decreased funding over the last four years, that is how well the citizens are doing. strong localery controls that i went through personally. we went through the normal process, one that existed for decades and decades and decades in colorado and worked extremely well. negotiated between all parties. the citizens were involved. the landownership was involved.

the companies with the leases, they struck with a memorandum of understanding. people came together to reach a consensus of an agreement. wasn't government mandating that laws had to change, our lives had worked well. this has become a stalking horse for a problem we have not had. >> mr. beauprez -- mr. hickenlooper? >> you asked what was off the table, so i will try to answer the real question. there is not a requirement that each person do it or that the oil company doesn't. the key here is that we have two natural rights. people have the right to enjoy their home, and at the same time it is private property. often times people owned the leases before the house was built and suddenly -- you are too close, your mineral rights have no value. i think that that is unacceptable. in terms of what is off the table, i think that we should

look at the value of private property. if we are going to ask the oil and gas industry to reach further back or make certain concessions, then we need to what needs to be done. they are keeping conflict alive, not putting conflict to rest. that is exactly the problem i accused him of. i am glad that the crazy ballot initiatives are gone. by kicking the can down the road, he checked -- he kept the conflict alive. he has kept that? has cap thathe question out there by keeping that issue alive.

-- he has cap that question out there by keeping that issue alive. >> did you wish to rebut? >> that was a rebuttal. [laughter] scrambled onre so the start of this. we will try to do a better job. just be clear, the question now .alls to mr. hickenlooper >> i think it comes to me. >> no. >> that's right. my bad. have entered a weird reality all of a sudden. , over 1000ooper coloradans are expressly permitted to purchase medical marijuana and avoid we cut taxes. should the state tighten these limits? into some very delicate territory, but yes, i think we should. have a that when you system with clear rules, you need to be careful that it does

not get abused. there is a widespread belief that if you look at the relatively small number of doctors who are doing the vast majority of prescriptions and doing it rapidly, i think the challenge here is that we still have to protect and respect the sanctity of the relationship between the patient and the doctor. it is not like you can just go and run willy-nilly saying that this is a problem and we will dramatically change everything. tough thing is, no one has ever done this before, right? this whole notion of a private recreational marijuana market, if the taxes make it too high, it merges backwards on you. we need to tighten up and make sure that this abuse is not continue. >> mr. beauprez? >> i think that anyone who is objective on this understands that it is being abused right now, it is being abused intentionally and that the risk of a lot of evil in our society

-- a lot of people in our society. that is the challenge in front of us. this is now the law. whether we like it or not, and i didn't like it, for the record, we have to regulate it as tightly as we can within the understanding of the law. athad medical marijuana first, now we have an amendment calling it recreational and it is not supposed to be used in public, yet we see it used all around town, including in front of the governor's office in civic square park in public. that is not giving law enforcement or the citizens the support to enforce the law as they passed it. such is the challenge that governors and those of us in elected office have to be able to accept, enforcing the law as it was intended. >> do you have a rebuttal? >> i think we agree on this one. i will save mine for later.

[laughter] , what is yourz definition of leadership, how do you exhibit it, and how would you characterize your opponent's leadership style? >> joey, as i go around the state that is an issue that people bring up. i have known john for a long time. like probably a lot of people watching tonight, i like john. i consider him a friend and certainly a likable guy. waything happened along the between mayor and governor. i hear people asking all the time -- do you realize you are not just the mayor of denver anymore? this is a bigger stake. leadership has bigger farms, including being willing to make a tough decision. ton talks about his desire collaborate. i think that that is the euphemism for kicking the can down the road. whether it is on the energy decision, nathan dunlap, the

security before the gun bills and after the gun bills, the mandate that rural colorado did not want, he signed it anyway and pushed it down their throat. those demonstrate and indecisiveness and maybe even worse, a bit of a 10 year. tin ear. >> i think it was about 11 seconds before the congressman began attacking me, what we see in washington and not always what we see here, i'm not sure that that is leadership. when we had the first -- the worst flood in state and -- state history, we sat down when the rain was still drizzling and we got 2000 permits to get 200 miles of damaged roads and bridges sufficiently repaired so that people could get back to their homes. the congressman was encouraging -- celebrating the shutdown of the federal government, which really shut down rocky mountain national park. we had 24 hours to make a

decision to use state funds to get it back open. just like now, it was the height of the tree season and those small businesses were literally about to go out of business. you don't have a lot of time to make those decisions. we took some risks there, but the system -- citizens needed it. , can youckenlooper talk about the leadership style ?f mr. beauprez >> first he has to rebut. >> well, go ahead and do the intake that. out of the debate came an observation that he gave a full throated defense of obamacare, i am opposed to it. ordoesn't want to endorse even offer an opinion on the xl pipeline because he does not want to upset -- i will clean it up a bit -- someone in washington dc and you know who

that is. he said that coloradans do not know how to take care of our land, it would be better if washington did it. that is the washington way. >> and you characterize mr. beauprez's leadership style? it seems to be speak first, make an attack, take a hard stand and then worry about the details later. >> ok, so back to mr. hickenlooper. what, if anything, would you change about the new drivers license program for those in the country illegally? >> the challenge is that the system was set up and not properly funded in the beginning , so there was only the resource to have the licenses put out in five different locations, which created long lines and a level of frustration. i think it is important to recognize that if you have got people who are driving without

licenses, they don't have any way of driving legally on the roads, they generally are not going to stay around after an accident. they are not going to testify if they see an accident or are involved in an accident and you really lose that ability to maintain public safety on your roads. ?> mr. beauprez >> i was not a fan of the law that he signed. i would be a fan of fixing the place,in the first illegal immigration. that is where governors should lead and that is where i intend to lead. we had a problem where republicans and democrats alike have not addressed it for a long time. for three decades we have had this problem and pretended to wish it away. i think it will be a coalition of governors that will solve this problem, because the states are being so heavily impacted.

this is just one example, but we all know that there are many more. thatnors need to demand washington secure the border, modernize legal immigration so that people can get an answer, enforce employment laws with proper identification that cannot be counterfeited, then allow the people were still here illegally, undocumented, to raise their hand and like to stay here and come out of the shadows. that is what the dignified nation does and what governors ought to be doing. chair of the national governors association and would do many of those same things. those four points are exactly what i said, we should secure the border and make sure we have a nice system that works, that is accountable and have a guestworker system that works. i think that governors can help to play a significant role in finding consensus and beginning to lobby congress to get them to take action.

an answer to the question, what would you change about the drivers license program in >> last year, there was an effort to raise the education through a sales tax increase. it failed. does education need more money, and if so, what do you propose? >> that they get the money that we sent to washington in the first place. we are not talking about small change here. upcolorado would just move instead of being ranks 50th -- check the senses. number 50 right now. we have fallen from number 42 to 50. we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars every single year that aren't being left on the table. that is just wrong, in totality. the federal dollars we have got

a right to get back, transportation dollars, education dollars. get we the dollar bat to are not that big of a donor state. we should be getting our fair share, but we are not for some reason. item, to getirst the money we are due for our kids. >> and how would you pay for education? >> finally we agree on something. clearly, colorado for some 20 odd years has been near the ,ottom, sometimes at the bottom getting less money back compared to what we send you there are just turnulas, but to on the spigot and go get the money, it is a pretty serious case of wishful thinking. back to the question of how do we fund education. the voters want the more smaller, local-based funding for their schools.

what ist to make sure going to happen in the schools. this last year. go up on acan website, and they will be able to see how much money goes into that school. pictures and buildings and the school administration. own will allow parents to their schools and decide where the money should go. part of the issue, but so is performance. saw the scores come back, and the test results got worse again. three years after we signed the act, our test scores got worse. reading proficiency, eight and nine-year-old children already know they cannot do the work here. they want out of here, and we know how that works. on my watch and your new first lady's watch, that is going to end. ladies and gentlemen, we are going to bring opportunity so

every child has an opportunity to learn how to read and gets that chance. >> the same question about higher education. do we need it? how do we raise it? >> it would start with the governor. >> i am sorry. i should pick. >> again, you get back to the issues around how people feel and about ownership. pretty much every study i have study,very demographic the more funding you can put into your higher education long-term, the better the economy is going to do. ,he single closest correlation finding those resources and the higher education. this is a lot in terms of getting federal funding. we have certainly made progress. one issue is making sure we are not pricing kids out of school. week, one who is a

schoolteacher now, and he has $125,000 in debt. we need toa state, step up and find those resources, state resources and business resources to make sure that we can cap the amount of debt. need higher, we education. i am a beneficiary of that, and i very much believe that. in colorado, we are blessed with a fairly diverse higher education system. we need to emphasize more of that. more choices. degreeditional four-year , it does not work for everybody, nor should it. we need to expand career and technical education. that is the new phrase for the old low-tech model. give people more options to actually learn a trade. indiana has done that and made a

universal technical education possible. homenk that is the biggest run ever hit. i think we have to look more about our career training options. the department of education just try to shut one down in colorado. taking some of the young people in denver and giving them a shot at that. regulating them out of business. i think we should have those opportunities. >> go ahead. >> certainly vocational training, one of the problems we have had, and it is not just in our country, and, worst, all of our kids, every single kid from elementary school on, they are taught they have to go to college, and right now, when you mechanical, right is $16 an hour, and

within five years, they will be making $50,000. those jobs matter, as well. are -- i meanthat questions that are addressed specifically to the candidates. the grand junction debate that the colorado economy is doing well compared to other states nationally, but some western states are doing better than colorado. what are other states doing that alvarado should be doing? >> getting the government out of the way. that is the simple, direct answer. there are two pretty notable economists. and i will be glad to supply it. all bunch of economic reports that show colorado is falling in the middle of the pack in economic opportunity. the total economy. what they are doing is not regulating us to death.

in reason we have fallen, their opinion, in just a for your years -- in just after your years to number 22, recent regulatory and legislative changes made by the state. stuff up.aking this that is their analysis, and other reports say exactly the same thing, that the others eight around us, notably all with republican governors, i might add, are finding a way to embrace opportunity, not punish it. >> do i get to read but? >> it was a candidate specific question, wasn't it? >> you have egg knowledge that the economic recovery has been better for some people than for others. what would you do to bridge the disparity for those segments of

the population that have been left behind? >> well, first, let me just say that i think our neighboring states, if you look at the reduction of unemployment as a good basic measure, it is about 2%. 2.2%. our drop has been 4%. it is ridiculous that we're not succeeding compared to our neighboring states. certainly in different parts of the state, and we have looked at a bunch of things to continue. we are doing what we call the ready grant. it allows small businesses that have the potential to higher a lot more people to it grants. the crucial missing bit of capital. and wee of them, announce this about two months ago. and there is unusually high manners.ent, for all

to attract young entrepreneurs. personally believe that an abortion should only be performed in order to protect the life of the mother. would you sign a bill that limits abortion to this effect? >> five states around us, five states bordering us, have better employment numbers than us. voluntarily part-time employment, in those people who have given up and left the workforce. last month alone, 3700 people left the workforce in colorado. 700 jobs were lost in colorado. that israel numbers. question, that is a hypothetical i cannot answer. i will tell you. i am pro-life. i am unabashedly pro-life. that is how we live our life and believe personally, and all the innocent life, whether that happens to be members of our

disabled community, members of the elderly, or it happens to be the unborn, but i know and respect what the law of colorado is, and i know that many people differented -- a decision. i respect their opinion. governor, do you have any regrets about supporting the gun legislation last year given the problems it has cost members of your party and for your reelection campaign? >> no. in the end, when you step back and look at the facts that are there, right, the universal background checks, write? , let me see.12 38 people who read been a victim of homicide who try to buy guns. advocate of sexual assault, 600 20 burglars. more than 1300 people with felony assault, others with a judicial restraining order, not

allowed to see their old spouse or boss, and they tried to buy a gun. 200 36 people, when they came to pick up their guns, we arrested them for an outstanding warned for a violent crime. so those are pretty daunting to -- daunting statistics. are background checks, magazine limits, that? >> there are people with a history of violence that are bad for colorado. keeping guns away from law-abiding citizens and impinging on the right is not good. they were outside his office door, and he said he did not

know that they wanted to visit with him. he talked to michael bloomberg, but he didn't have a chance to listen to the sheriffs. they wanted to tell him that the law that would be enforced would not be enforceable in colorado. it in french on the rights of law abiding citizens. >> you vowed not to run negative attack ads, and organization supporting you are. why have you not told them to stop? >> one of the things i said is that i hate negative ads and that i am not going to do negative ads.

if coke didn't attack ads against fc, pepsi has no choice to do attack ads against coke. -- if coke did attack ads against pepsi. american democracy is the best political system ever developed. it is in history. but it is fragile. the law says that i am not allowed to know or even shout out to the press what any independent expenditure should or should not do, so what i said from the beginning, the one thing i'm absolutely determined and committed to is that we will do positive ads. tothe congressman wants shake hands and have us only do positive ads, i will shake his hand right here. [applause]

>> do you criticize him on the keystone xl pipeline that does not cross into colorado? it has been noted that the direct jobs that that will create are small. what specific benefit that the pipeline offered to colorado, in your opinion? >> i will take a few seconds to follow up on the answer. not hear him say anything about the ads that are running against me right now. there is a different between one that is perceived to be negative and one that is blatantly false and crosses the line of libel. the democratic governors association running against me right now is patently false, and he knows that is true. the keystone xl pipeline is critical to achieving an objective that is key to our national economic security and

our national security, as well, and that is by accomplishing what used to be a dream. now, it is a reality. north american energy independence. that is why it ought to be approved. i believe it is the easiest, yes, that barack obama has ever come across his desk, and today, he refuses to sign it, and this governor refuses to encourage him to sign it. >> you have made your fortune off of alcohol sales, and yet you're critical of legalized marijuana. is this hypocritical? the marijuana people think that i am being hypocritical. i think it is just the opposite, right? started, we were the fourth microbrewery in colorado. it was a dollar per square foot a year. it was abandoned warehouses, and we got everyone to work together

, and we were regulated up one side and down the other. tobacco andnt of firearms regulated everything. now, we have over 260 breweries. two thirds of all of the jobs relate to the beer industry. it is tightly regulated. all i am saying is we need to regulate the marijuana. are regulations where it is going to work, but regulate just as tightly as the beer industry is regulated. >> and a follow-up industry, the beenbis industry, has it professional or an embarrassment for the state? >> it is like any industry. you have some good players and some people who are a bit more reckless, those who try to seize on and say she was in and give the industry a bad name.

like almost any industry in colorado. the vast majority are trying to do the right thing. they ruin it for everybody. >> federal and state judges have found the colorado voter ban to be unconstitutional. will you ask the state attorney general to defend the marriage ban? >> i think the attorney general has done exactly the right thing. he stood up for colorado's law, which right now says marriage is between a man and a woman, but it recognizes that the question needs to be ultimately answered by the supreme court, and sooner than better. they acted absolutely correctly in encouraging the supreme court to take that question up sooner rather than later, and then in senate district courts, and, perhaps, as the governor has justin, recognizing that society might be changing, and society may be changing, but you just cannot ignore some laws and basically

write laws on your own, especially when it happens to be in our constitution, and it happens to need to go to the supreme court to be resolved. i think he has done exactly the right thing. when you take an oath to enforce the laws in the state of colorado, and they enforce the laws of the state of colorado and mean it. >> should you win the governor's race, and should the newly elected attorney general declined to defend the ban, would you hire an outside counsel to defend the ban? i that is a hypothetical, and just don't want to get into hypothetical. you sure did, and that is why i think it is problematic, because you do not know who the attorney general is going to be, what the circumstances are, whether or not the supreme court is even going to take it up. i think i have told you very clearly where i am at. coloradohe state of has made a huge and very positive step, one that i a republican when a

lot of republicans didn't, and that was our civil union, and i think that was a very positive and appropriate step forward, and i support it. if iniety changes, and our wisdom we decide that the definition of marriage in colorado needs to change, i will support the law that the people of colorado and race, but i also want to make sure we are defending our first amendment rights, which would still give churches the right that within that faith community, they can still recognize will be called a traditional marriage between one man and one woman. i think those are important right that need to be defended, as well. granted mer when you from dunlap on death row and indefinite reprieve, you said you wanted dates to study capital punishment and have a discussion. what progress have we made on that front? >> well, we have certainly had a discussion. thank you for that question. let me make a couple of points.

changed myve not opinion over what was said 1.5 years ago. that anp with feeling eye for an i or a tooth for tooth was appropriate, but when you get into it, at least to me, we all deal with our god in a different way, but i do not think the government should be taking another persons life, that two wrongs make a right. he is going to die in prison. when you look at all of the cost $18ifications, it million, all of the appeals for that. the families of the victims are equally divided between those who want execution and those who really don't, and you have got no deterrence. capital punishment or not, it does not change the level of the crime, so we are spending so much money and making the victims so unhappy, dragging this on for decades, to what benefit?

>> a follow-up question, if you were to win the election, would you grant him clemency or have more to prevent his execution? >> the point of it was that we do not think the state should be in the business of taking lives, but at the same time, i respect the judicial process, and it is not our job to pull the rug out from under that legal process. so what we said is that we would give him a reprieve until the state has a thorough discussion, which certainly we are having, and down the road, that decision will get made. hopefully after due consideration and a broad discussion, like we are having right now. on now to a move round of yes or no questions. until we giveait you a call by name, and then answer the question clearly. >> i thought we were going to get buzzers.

>> why didn't we think of the buzzers? maybe next time we will have some of those. you know, we are not tv. we are a press newsroom. so i believe it is your turn. but you guys both have to answer the same question. defining unborn human beings as persons in the criminal code for the amendment? >> yes? >> no. >> do you favor labeling genetically modified foods, proposition 105? in colorado? >> no. >> no. support proposition 104, which would make school board negotiations on collective bargaining for teachers opened

to the public? >> yes. >> yes. >> do you support the athena style gambling at racetracks in , asahoe county and others amendment 68 would do? >> no. >> no. increasingou support colorado's minimum wage from eight dollars an hour to the $10.10 per hour president obama has set for federal contractors? >> no. >> yes, sure, yes. that is the first time we have been asked the question. >> would you support more gun control legislation? .> it depends on what is again, that is a hypothetical. >> yes or no? >> right now, no. >> no. >> do you believe humans are contributing significantly to climate change?

>> no. >> significantly? yes. >> do you think it can be reversed, climate change? over a scale of time, yes. >> ok, each of you has 60 seconds to elaborate on one of those or use the 60 seconds to elaborate on more than one if you choose, and we will start. think that to reverse climate change, it would take a concerted effort, not just on the part of the united states, but worldwide, and i think that will, and that collaborative effort -- but certainly, every mathematical model that we look at continues to demonstrate that there is a potential for harm to .he world weather systems

it is a mess, and certainly in been out a have couple of times, and we look at the model, and almost every model seems to suggest that we can be or will likely be in a rain shadow. it is a lovely summer we have had with all of the rain, but i think that is a challenge that we have to keep in mind. we have to do this remotely and carefully, but we have got to adjust the issue of how much carbon is going into the atmosphere. >> notably in your question was the word significantly, and there is people who want to believe that we are the problem. i think we are the solution. we have cleaned up the air. we have cleaned up the water. we are reducing carbon emissions, and we should continue to do so. you are looking at someone who is a farmer and rancher. i was born into that. have toand ranchers stand up and say that we are the

original conservationists. we are the ones who live off of the land and want to pass the land onto the next generation. we are the last people on earth who want to destroy it. should we do everything we can to reduce it? of course, we can't. long-term climate change, can we reduce our impact? yes, but are we going to end or alter the path of earth's evolution that it is going to take? i don't think so. i think the earth has already figured that out, and powers greater than us are going to figure that out. addressed toons both candidates, with a 32nd rebuttal that is optional. we will begin. gas tax is $.22 a gallon and has not been raised for years. should the state gas tax be increased to support the repair of roads and bridges? >> it is a declining revenue. we have known that for years and years and years.

fewer cars are using gas, and they are going farther on a mile, a gallon of gas, so it is a declining revenue stream. what we need to do is address a sustainable and actually a growing funding source as our economy and our needs grow. and this is what we had eight years ago. two biggest proposals that are out there, the vehicle miles tax. be eliminating our gas tax and going on to the sales tax. i think both of those are worthy of discussion, and as governor, i will lead the effort to get us on a sustainable funding source. >> if you look at the next four or five years, the improved mileage requirements of all of the vehicles that are coming out of the factories, that they are going to have, there will be

less and less money coming from the gas tax. forhould right now, even just maintenance. so either we have to use some sort of a vehicle, miles traveled report, and there is something that are working on now that we will try to do it a little differently, maybe a little better, and how would you compensate? one of the reasons people are so upset, i think they are calling it a use fee for miles traveled. onhas an unfair impact colorado. there are ways to mitigate that. long-term, that private-public partnerships also have great promise. >> did you wish to respond? >> well, the vehicle miles tax, for the trucking industry, the

transportation industry, they think it is very unfair, and i think they make a pretty strong point. i think we need to get on with it. geteasing the gas tax, to onto your original question, it perpetuates the system already, and that is why i am not interested on increasing taxes, and certainly not that one. i am for finding sustainable funding sources for a transportation system that has fallen to almost 40 years among the states in terms of funding right now. >> what is his best idea? >> that would be so much fun to have fun with. it would be totally inappropriate. no, i would never do that. you know, i think that simply transportation, his willingness to explore all options. it says a lot. he clearly wants to reduce regulation. have over 1500 regulations.

that we havegue already done what he is arguing for. but he is on the right track, right? there are some out there that are not red tape or bureaucracy. but this maintains the quality of life. and this is in the most frugal way. >> mr. beauprez, what about mr. hickenlooper's good ideas? as brewing beer. i'm a big fan and have frequented his establishment in the past will stop so congratulations, john. he was on the right track or at least had the right subject in reducing regulations, but i have to admit as i go around the state and keep asking groups

which regulations did he illuminate that are beneficial to you? i'm waiting for someone to come forward. he also said, i think according to sean boyd here at channel four, implemented 2000 new regulations in the last few years and is what i'm hearing from people. ones,nice little inconsequential, they got reduced, but the 2000 that we now live under. under john's watch, his administration, we've got about 100,000 pages of regulations per year. does anybody think the a challenge -- think the challenge in getting the economy moving is that we have been under regulated? i don't. >> mr. hickenlooper, do you have a rebuttal? is your beer good? [laughter] >> i wish i could take credit for, but i sold out of my part of the interest a long time ago. i will say the regulations we industry, -- in any

you have certain companies that are outliers that are reckless for whatever reason, trying to get a little extra margin. that's what the regulations are for. it's why we work so hard when we did the methane regulations to make sure you cap the red tape out of it. every dollar spent is going to make sure the air is cleaner and that's why we have industry working hand in glove with the environmental community to get those regulations. >> one more question to both of you and that starts with mr. can the statew address traffic in the denver area and at the eisenhower tunnel? >> we have got an opportunity in front of us, and one i think we better get serious about. bonds that were used with great effectiveness by governor a ones are about to be paid off. we could refinance them today and wrap the remaining debt and take advantage of low interest

rates that thankfully are still out there in the bond market and refinance the trans funding and probably more. 3.5ught to be looking at billion dollars to $5 billion of trans funding and take advantage of the low interest rate and get ahead of what has been a continuous escalation in the cost of construction and get serious about solving some of the priorities. i 70 trust is one that has to be at the top of the list. his department of transportation and every department of transportation has a list of i-40's. we ought to fund as many of those as we could and get on with not only building new roads but improving the existing infrastructure that is badly wanting. >> the trans bond would generate about $1.6 billion or $1.8 billion. i don't think it's more than $2 billion. $3.5 billion is the trans bond? >> we could do $3.5 billion now

-- instead of doing the gas tax, we could do as much as $5 billion. >> i will have to look into that. >> i will send you an invoice for the idea. it, think when you look at you might be looking at a fairly significant tax increase. we have been trying to do more with less. on i 70, during the rush hours, we will have the second twin title completed in december. we are going to harden the shoulders so that during rush hour friday afternoons westbound and saturday morning westbound, they will be able to use the third lane to ease congestion. same thing coming back on sunday afternoons or mornings. using hardened shoulders with the extra added tunnels would be the first improvement in capacity since i 70 originally opened. now tore going to move candidate questions. each candidate gets to ask his opponent to questions. the opponent -- one at a time,

preferably. and the opponent has 60 seconds to respond. i believe i've kept track and the first round of questions goes to mr. hickenlooper. >> congressman, you have switched on personhood in this election, but you are still convinced abortion even in cases of rape and should be illegal. i'm not sure he would prosecute the woman or the dr., but we agreed abortion is a bad thing. we have reduced abortion by 35% for young girls and teenagers over the last four years. would you support using public contraception, long-term reversible contraception to diminish teenage pregnancy by 40% and abortion by 35%? got a lot in that

question. i am opposed to the personhood amendment. >> you said that. >> you said personhood. that's a big difference. i believe personhood refers to the life begins at conception. i do believe life begins at conception and i think the personhood amendment, just as the archbishop believes, i'm a pretty strong defender of life. the personhood amendment was a wrong solution. i have no problem with people using contraception. i have a big problem with publicly funding contraception that are actually abortion. our citizens have said over and over they do not want taxpayer funding of abortion. the devil might be in the details, but it's an important distinction to draw and therstand, to respect taxpayers will and the technology you refer to. did i answer your question? >> we are talking about implants

.nd iuds >> an iud is an abortifacient. >> second question. youecond question was wanted to send the national guard, the colorado national guard to the texas border to i'm nots against -- sure immigrant children, encourage 11 counties to secede even when it was clear that was unconstitutional. now you suggest colorado takeover the federal lands, the national forest service. where are you going to come up with the $200 million or $300 million to manage those lands and protect them? more importantly, what are you going to say to the hunters and hikers and people who are fishing in colorado who cherish the open access of those lands? >> so much for not going you havewill stop

violated several things in that question. suggested our troops go to the border for some kind of military exercise. as you must know as governor, we've got agreements with other governors that if there's a humanitarian crisis as there has been on our southern border, some of the best people and resources we have to address a humanitarian crisis is our national guard. that is the answer i gave -- to go down and resolve a humanitarian crisis invited by the failure of will and your friend barack obama to address the situation on the border for quite some time. you've also taken grossly out of context my comment about federal lands. we've got about 8.3 million acres in colorado that is mostly used -- that is multiuse land.

the 60 seconds. >> i would be happy to give him another 20 seconds to answer. >> ok. he's the governor, folks will stop -- folks. [laughter] >> you are talking about a guy who has made money farming it, ranging it and using the natural resources on it. the federal government denying us access. to suggest somehow bureaucrats in washington dc know how to better take care of colorado land then coloradans is in insult to coloradans and that's why 11 counties said they weren't getting in here from you -- getting and hear from you. , your questions. >> john, you know i'm not a fan of obamacare. let me be clear about that. i found it very curious that

says allbamacare health-care policies issued under obamacare's had to be compliant with that law. , independently, without a vote on capitol hill, the president independently said we will just kick the can down the road as some are want to do. aca compliant- plans to be renewed in 2014. saidinsurance commissioner that would violate the law in colorado. i think she was right. because it's a law that you sign that said every plan sold in colorado said it had to be aca compliant and magically, a short while later, somebody reversed the opinion within your administration and said we will ignore the law you signed and go ahead and allow those plans to be renewed. why did you rate the law that you signed? >> is that negative? probably not.

certainly, i would have done health care in a different way of it was up to me. i think it's worth waiting out that there are now 411,000 people in colorado that have insurance that did not have insurance before. 33 100,000 people with existing conditions who could not get help here. there's no question -- we got the numbers for the increase this year in health-care plans and we've got hundreds of plans on our exchange. we have 20 different offers, one of the most robust health-care exchanges in the country and one of only two created by republicans and democrats working together. we did extend the time by which people can get their plans into compliance and let those people if they want to stay with her plans stay for another year and a half. the increase of those entries after years of double-digit was 71, less than 1%. for small businesses, 2.5%.

that's amazing progress. [applause] intrigued to hear you had not changed your addition but in fact you have a night you say you reaffirm even know you told cnn that hypothetically, to grant clemency, you would consider granting clemency to nathan dunlap will stop let me ask you straight up. james holmes, the aurora theatre shooter is on trial now. if the jury were to convict james holmes and sentence him to you grant a temporary reprieve there as well? >> as you have been saying all evening, that's a hypothetical and there are so many issues in their on not sure how i could answer that. .> meaning you won't answer >> again, how the jury process works --

>> let me answer. you are so eager to make sure nathan dunlap gets executed as quickly as possible -- when you wait in there and read all the information in their, it took us months to go through it and talk to all the families of victims and talk to the prosecutors and to go through the whole process, to look at this mental condition that never came out in the trial, it turns out that a didn't find out until long after all the appeals that he was severely bipolar. 12 people, a endless jury to convict someone to death. three of these people wrote affidavits saying if i'd known this, it would have changed. executingt to support people who have mental illnesses? it's a valid question to be asking. an extra 20d you seconds, would you grant him an extra 20 seconds? >> keep talking. >> would you like an extra 20

seconds? >> i could lay out the complexities -- in terms of other killers at trial right now, i still think government should not be taking people's lives will stop -- people's lives. the old testament is i-4 and i and the new testament is about forgiveness and only god has a right to take a life. that ought is worthy of discussion, to really look at whether government should be in the business of taking people's lives will stop >> we move now to closing marks. andbeauprez won the toss has chosen to have the final word. >> by any measure, some of the things you are that she is referring to is her -- is written -- is funded by republican donors. colorado four years ago was 40th and job relation and now we are forth.

the kauffman foundation found few look at a per capita basis for startups, technology startups, for the top 10 metropolitan areas in the country are for colorado. we have the number one workforce in the country and the number one fastest-growing economy. these are national recognitions. ofhave done this in the face 13 disasters, the shooting in aurora -- the state has shown a resiliency and capacity. look at the employment rate, look at where they started and where they ended. we are outperforming the averages and literally every other state but one. we have got to continue colorado's growth and not just in an economy way but in all the ways. , take us home. >> gladly. thanks to joey and check and the "denver post was quote for

providing this forum. this is exactly what colorado needs -- a healthy debate on the issues. here is something he did not say. reason for somebody to decide they are opposed to the death penalty -- there are good moral, ethical reasons for taking that position and i understand that. there will not be rejoicing when i is the next governor enforce the law and colorado and see justice served. if he has come to the conclusion that government should not be in the business, he alone has the power to grant clemency and would not do it. thus the problem people have with john hickenlooper. he cannot seem to make the tough calls. if he won't lead, ladies and gentlemen, i will. i know where i want to take this state. to be a full implanted state again and we are still a couple of hundred thousand jobs away from that. i want us to be a robust economy

again. i've got a problem with that. if he won't lead come a ladies and gentlemen, i will. >> i'm sorry. we are out of time. >> do i get the 15 seconds? >> i'm sorry, chuck. >> we have this -- we have to balance the people here tonight and time is up and we are going to honor it. thank you, gentlemen for attending with us. inc. you guys very much for coming out. -- thank you guys very much for coming out. it takes a lot of guts to get up there. [applause] x tonight, coverage from campaign 2014 as north carolina incumbent renee ellmers who is running for a third term faces clay aiken in a debate for the second district. posted by the north carolina bankers association. we will show that debate tonight at 8:00 eastern time.

>> our campaign 2014 coverage continues with a week full of debates. on tuesday at 7:00 p.m. eastern, live coverage of the west virginia u.s. senate date between republican shelley moore cap go and secretary of state natalie tennant. , live0 on c-span2 coverage of the democratic senator -- as the virginia senate debate between democrat mark warner and republican ed gillespie. governorsassachusetts debate with martha coakley, charlie baker, evan doll check, scott lively, and jeff mccormick. at 9:00 eastern on c-span, north carolina u.s. senate debate with incumbent senator democrat kay hagan and the state speaker of the house, republican tom tillis will stop -- tom tillis. then the pennsylvania governors debate between tom corbett and tom wolfe.

then live coverage of the illinois u.s. house debate for the 17th district between u.s. representatives and democrat cheri bustos and former congressman republican bobby schilling. then live coverage of the illinois governors debate with pat quinn and republican bruce browner. friday night, live at 8:00 eastern, the wisconsin governors debate between scott walker and mary burke. saturday night on c-span at 8:00 eastern, live coverage of the iowa senate debate with ruth raley and joni ernst. governorse michigan debate between republican rick snyder and mark shower. c-span campaign 2014 -- more than 100 debates for the control of congress. morning, the u.s. supreme court declined to hear cases from five states on the issues of same-sex marriage. joining us on the phone from new

york is ashby jones. what was the significance of what the court did today? fax i think most commentators that the supreme court would take up one of these cases and settle once and for all other bans on same-sex marriage in states are legal. what the court did today as they said we are not going to hear these cases now. essentially, what that does is it leaves in place all the lower court rulings, most of which were all of which have said same-sex marriage bans are illegal or unconstitutional. it basically says all of those rulings from before can stand and we are going to see more states as a result that have legalized same-sex marriage. >> these three circuits -- the fourth, seventh and 10th include north carolina, south carolina, kansas, wyoming, west virginia

and colorado. specifically,es what does it mean? >> there are two categories of states here. not to get too much in the weeds, but there were direct challenges from five states will stop i don't have the list off the top of my head, but those states, same-sex marriage will be legal in those i states and the -- five states immediately. a number of other states were covered by the earlier rulings. rulings arising out of the federal court of appeals and that covers a number of states. the rulings that arise out of one state often cover a number of states all stop -- a number of states will stop so that will likely mean same-sex marriages legal. in those states you mentioned, it might take longer for the legal procedural niceties to work their way through, but it does mean that at the end of the day, about 30 states plus washington dc, same-sex marriage

will be legal as of today's ruling. >> we do not know how the justices voted on this issue behind closed doors, but can you give any hints as to how they reached this decision? >> we don't. case, theo grant a nine justices, four of them have to agree to hear them and if four of them say yes, then the whole court hears a stop all we know is that in none of the cases did for justices say yes, we want to hear this case. much. that, we don't know the other thing we do know, a couple of weeks ago, justice ruth bader ginsburg at a speech in minnesota said in her opinion , she did not think the timing was right to hear these cases because there was not a lower court split. have gone cases that on to lower courts have struck down same-sex marriage bans and the supreme court typically waits until it has a split

before it jumps in on an issue. reading from justice kim berg's -- justice ginsburg's comments earlier -- that's one vote. but in terms of the others and how they lined up on we just don't know. >> this does not necessarily settle the case and the court down the road could take it up in the future, correct? >> that's right. just because they are not going to get involved now doesn't mean they won't get involved later come a even later this term. if we get one of those rulings that says a ban on same-sex marriages legal, then we have a circuit split and we would have the conditions necessary in justice ginsburg -- justice ginsburg's thinking at least. we have a case going on in new orleans for the fifth circuit which could go the other way, which could come out in favor of the states will stop we've got one at the sixth circuit which could come out the other way.

we will be paying close attention to those court rulings going forward and seeing if they do provide the necessary circuit split. >> what kind of reaction has it received from those who support the ban on gay marriage and those who oppose it? >> nobody is happy. really, nobody is happy with this. i shouldn't say that -- i think there are big swaths on either side of the debate that are not happy. obviously the people who are not in favor of same-sex average don't write -- don't like that this tape the way for same-sex marriages to begin an 11 states. the people who do like it, while i think they are happy partly, they are not entirely happy. they were hoping for the supreme court to weigh in on this and bansmably rule these state are unconstitutional and basically pave the way for same-sex marriage to happen across the country.

there is a little but of frustration on both sides, but it's a bigger win for those who favor same-sex marriage. >> as somebody who has been covering this issue, and did this announcement surprise you today? >> it really did. -- supreme court in the past typically they do wait until there is a circuit split to jump in on something. but it hasn't stopped them from jumping on highly controversial issues in the past. gore inthink of bush v 2000 -- there was not a circuit split and they did not hesitate to jump in and settle a highly polarizing and controversial issue. i was surprised and two years ago, they jumped in and took up two cases that dealt with the same issue. they have shown a willingness to get involved, so i was surprised they did not get involved today even though there is not a circuit split they like to see. i think a lot of commentators were surprised also. whether it's the end of the

story or shoes off for another day, we just have to see. jones, joining us from new york city, we appreciate you being with us. >> inks are having me. -- thanks for having me. >> for candidates in the race for the arizona governor's seat held a debate. they discuss the immigration crisis, the state k-12 educational system, and the state's budget crisis. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> good evening, and welcome to the special vote 2014 edition of arizona horizon. tonight's show is a debate sponsored by clean elections. we will hear from candidates looking to leave the state as the next governor.

this is not a formal exercise. an open exchange of ideas. an opportunity for give and take for this top office. interjections are allowed provided that all sites get a fair shake and will do our best to see that that happens. or candidates are competing for chief executive. they are republican state treasurer in businessman ray ducey -- doug ducey. each candidate will have one minute for opening and closing statements. we drew numbers to see who goes first and that honor goes to fred to ball -- duvall. >> good evening. i love arizona. i grew up here and we love this place. i am running for governor as we are worried arizona is headed in the wrong direction and our children are losing out.

the deep cuts in education have been too severe. we are losing jobs and opportunities. i will stop the cuts to public education. i will use the veto if necessary, but no more cuts. not another dollar, not another penny. the voters have a choice. the supreme court has recently made a decision that the voters instructed the legislator to invest in children school. i believe we should enforce this immediately and reinvest in our children's schools. doug and other candidates disagree with that. i think the most important thing we can do to turn the economy around is to invest and the children school and invest in the future. >> was the next opening statement we turn to john mueller. >> i am an independent constitutionalist.

here is my opportunity. i agree with fred about the education being in need of heavy repair. i detail away to play for this. we need to increase revenue. i truly believe arizona needs to run arizona. no longer special interest groups out of the sea come a which happened to be both parties. i am the independent and would like to serve you as governor. >> thank you. my name is doug and i want to be your next governor. my wife and i have been married 24 years this october and we have three sun. jack, joe, and sam. i am running on real world experience as a small-business owner of cold stone creamery, chief executive officer in current treasurer managing 12.5 billion dollars of arizona state tax.

i will have a clear agenda as your next governor. i want to kickstart the economy so there are more jobs for hard-working arizona's attorney into hard-working careers. i want to restore the educational system to the level of excellence we expect to better serve teachers, students and parents. i want to take charge in the direction of the state. i want to be an independent voice and am proud to announce tonight to endorse the democratic state legislator -- that i have been endorsed by the state democratic agenda. i have reached out to catherine. she has joined the campaign. i am running to be governor of the people. >> final statement, we turn to barry hess. >> as you can artie tells, i can tell you what is going to happen. the democrat telling you he knows how to spend your money, raise and ede