live coverage of the u.s. senate debate between democratic senator mark warner a republican andand gillaspy -- gillespie.and gillased then a 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, the north carolina u.s. senate debate with incumbent senator democrat kay hagan speaker of the house thom til lis. live coverage of the pennsylvania governors debate between tom corbett and democrat tom wolfe. and live coverage of the illinois u.s. house debate the 17th district between u.s. representative cheri bustos and former congressman bobby schilling. illinoisrage of the governors debate with incumbent governor democrat pat quinn and republican bruce rauner.

friday night, the wisconsin governors debate between scott walker and mary burke. of they, live coverage iowa senate debate with u.s. congress and democrat and state senator joni ernst. sunday, the michigan governors debate and democrat mark shower. more than 100 debates for control of congress. debate forona house the second congressional district. the incumbent faces republican challenger martha mcnally in the rematch of the 2012 campaign. this includes southeast arizona. tomorrow in washington journal, the national journal looks at campaign 2014 key house and senate races.

discussing public policy issues and higher education. and we take your phone calls, facebook comments, and tweets. live tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern it c-span. democratic challenger clay aiken met in their first and only debate for north carolina's second congressional district. they have found the race to be safe for republicans. this courtesy of the north carolina's bakers association and is about an hour. >> election 2014. the candidates for the second congressional district go head-to-head in their first and only debate bothered by the north carolina bakers association. >> thank you for joining us. we look very forward for spending the next hour here at pinehurst with the candidates. two-term incumbent, renee ellmers, and her democratic

challenger, clay aiken. we will talk about a range of issues from jobs and the economy and much more. before we begin, some background on the candidates. >> clay aiken is a raleigh native who rose to fame with his run on "american idol." he taught special education classes and he turned the experience and love of children into the national inclusion project, a nonprofit that sponsored programs, afterschool programs and camps that focuses on including children with disabilities with their nondisabled peers. this is his first run for

office. renee ellmers was first elected to congress in 2010. before her election, she served as a registered nurse for more than 20 years. she was active in the chamber of commerce and planning aboard. ellmers serves on the house energy committee and is the congresswoman of policy committee. ellmers and aiken are vying for votes in the second congressional district which stretches into nine counties. from wake to randolph counties, down to cumberland, covering fort bragg and here in moore county. thanks to both of you for taking time to be here, addressing the issues for the voters of the second district. i want to talk about foreign policy because it has bubbled up in a way we have not seen. the world now has a new enemy, isil, isis. two parts. do you support what the

president is doing thus far with airstrikes in that region of the world? if you were called upon to vote, would you send ground troops? we start alphabetically and start with clay aiken. >> thank you for allowing us to be here. do i support every single part of the president's plan? i would say no because one of the problems is we have seen this as a threat. a lot of people recognize isis as being a threat for quite a while. i believe we need to continue to support those folks on the ground, the iraqi army, and the rebels in pushing back against isis. isis is a threat and not currently a threat to u.s. soil, but we do not want it to be there. supporting them with arms and airstrikes is a very important way to make sure that threat does not come to u.s. soil and we need to encourage those countries around that area to

commit ground troops of their own. i do not believe the u.s. should not be policing the entire world and i do not want to use our men and women in fort bragg or men and women serving in the u.s. as g.i. joe soldiers, where we place them in harm's way. as soon as we see isis is a direct threat to u.s. soil, we need to attack in whatever way is necessary. at this point, i will not support sending grouch rules. >> i do support this idea. let me start off by saying thank you to north carolina bankers association and for being a part of this day. thank you to mr. aiken for this important debate. let's talk more about the foreign situation. this is something president obama has known about for quite some time. his military advisers have been advised him about the threat of

isil. back in 2012, president obama said, we were victorious in iraq and that is where we started. this emergence of this brutal group has come up as a result of that. the united states needs to be there. we are in support of that before we left washington and we voted for the president's plan. we have to remember who we are dealing with. this is the most brutal, heinous group we have ever seen. we have to make sure we are doing everything we can possibly do to support our allies. for the longest time, president obama has been speaking to the world. he went out on apology tour and he basically said to our enemies, we are no threat to you and to our allies, they do not trust us. we have to rebuild the trust. the president will be supported by congress. we will be there for him. we have to protect every

american. there's already a threat here in the united states. to the point of should we be policing the rest of the world? i believe as ronald reagan said, peace through strength. the united states, the best military in the world and being honored with representing fort bragg, we need to be in the world. we have to show strength. >> if called on to vote, would you vote to send troops? >> i would. >> i want to follow up on what you said about policing the world. it seems whether it is al qaeda or a group prior to that and now isis, we take care or we able to prevent those groups from causing more damage and another group pops up. what happens if this country does eliminate the threat from the islamic state? how do we deal with another group that pops up if we are not there constantly in the region?

>> well, you bring up an important part. we never ended the war of terror. that is the question. we are talking about radical islam. we are talking about jihadist. those who believe it is the plan for the future. it has been in place since the beginning. who we have to make sure that we are doing everything we can to keep our allies safe, working with those countries to make sure they have -- we have a presence there. when we leave, when we draw down and say we are victorious in a land we are not, that is one of the groups emerge and we have to

end at that. to the point of the president, yeah, we will be doing everything we can to support the president on this issue, but he has got to stop telling our enemies what we will do and what we were not to do. it is not a plan for strategy. >> there are several things. first, a few weeks ago, she spoke out and said she was not in support of sending ground troops into the region. just a few days ago, speaker of the house john boehner changed course and decided he was not going to send ground troops and now we hear congresswoman ellmers saying she would send ground troops. the men and women should be protecting the united states on our soil. to hear congresswoman ellmers

change her tune is concerning. she went on the record not too long ago saying john boehner was her boss and you do not want to upset the boss. i understand that's her mind set and that is why she changed her tune. the people of her second district is her boss. i am not going to change my tune. i said, i do not believe we should be sending the men and women of the military into harm's way to protect another land. when we have seen credible evidence of which military leaders tell us there is now a credible threat to u.s. soil, we can reconsider it. simply going in and sending our men and women into harm's way because our political leader tells us is not viable. >> you talked about our allies. can we depend on them? >> we have to work within those groups and show support. i want to go back to what mr. aiken has said. john boehner may be the speaker of the house, but the people of district two are my boss and that is why we are here. that is why i am reapplying.

what i want to clarify and this is one of the things that as an entertainer, you are not aware, these things are fluid. when the president asks in a certain way and we gave him our support. i think there was much debate and much concern that was not quite enough. i agree. as of the time, we allow to the president and we voted and came together in a bipartisan fashion to support the president on this initiative. i do believe there will be much more we need to do. as far as policing the world or the threat to the united states, we had a situation in oklahoma where a gentleman, who identifies with islamic beliefs, has done a heinous crime, beheading of americans. is that not enough call to action?

>> certainly necessary to make sure we are protecting americans and i am concerned about protecting people of the second district. you did say that john banner was your boss and i understand if you want to change your tune. you have been quoted as saying that. >> are we spending enough money in the military budget and if not, where are we falling short? >> as you know with the budget we were able to replace the sequester. we knew it was a terrible threat. military readiness is the most important point. that is the main reason we are there at the federal level to keep america safe. having the great opportunity, honor to represent fort bragg, i have to make sure everyone in our military is taken care of. when i had this discussion with our military leaders, they have a plan of action. they know what they need to get the job done. as they will tell me and i will agree, we have the best military

in of the world. they are the most ready and capable. this is what i hear from our military leaders. we are certainly always going to be looking at the budgeting issues and have to make sure we are doing things efficiently. our military leaders agree with that. as you will see, into the future, there will be an action. and are overseas contingency funds available and we will pass legislation to continue to fund our military as we need to. >> mr. aiken? >> we agree about more things than she think we would.

i agree sequestration cuts hurt our military. money taken out of programs important to military members and their spouses and family. congresswoman ellmers voted for sequestration and they hurt people at fort bragg. i think that not acting quickly enough to make sure fort bragg is able to stay at fort bragg instead of sending the money, the plans to another state which is something the military leaders at fort bragg clearly are against. it is one thing to say you are listening to military leaders, but you have to listen to the folks, not just the military leaders. the folks at home want to keep it strong. they want to make sure that for the bragg, where the president comes when he needs members to be activated immediately, we need to make sure they are not unready. >> one more military question. when soldiers return home or retire, they are guaranteed to

certain rights under the veterans administration. we know of the mess the v.a. has been in certain parts of the country. the question is this -- how do we correct what has happened within the v.a. structure so it does not recur? can enough money be found for all of the subcontractors and full-time employees to make it happen? >> i think proactivity is one of the issues. being pro active, making sure we see problems as they began to arise. when you take a look at the delays and disability claims for the men and women coming back from service, coming back from

active duty or deployment overseas, we knew after the beginning of 21st century that we would be seeing an influx of men and women, post-9/11 men and women who went to afghanistan and iraq coming into the system. we knew we needed to do a better job of making sure their claims were processed and their benefits were provided. congresswoman ellmers voted against a measure that would've added processors to process those claims and that is not proactive. instead of reacting to the types of things we see in arizona and reacting to the tragedies we saw in phoenix and waiting for men and women to die, we should recognize that in fayetteville, the head of v.a. says, all she said for a long time was she needed more places for doctors and nurses. that is something she has needed for the longest time. she has one of the longest waits in fayetteville.

no one has acted and done anything. >> we have to do everything we can to make sure our veterans are taken care off. yeah, the situation with veterans health care is of paramount importance. i met with fayetteville v.a. and i went so i can see what was happening. we do hear the stories across the country of terrible situations where individuals have waited so long. we have to take care for our veterans. i believe our v.a. has a plan of action of both short-term and long-term. i have heard both things. i have heard of individuals who had their appointments canceled, individuals who are getting stellar care at the fayetteville v.a. that would not go anywhere else. this is an issue where we have to work together. but because they have a plan of action, i am encouraged. one of the things they are looking at, a number of veterans will be coming back to carolina. carolina is a draw, many want to come back. we do have to do everything we can to ensure this. i will continue to work with the fayetteville v.a. and our veterans affairs committee and all of those involved. one of the other things we have to do for our veterans is making sure they have a job when they come home. i am proud to say this has been the third annual veterans job fair, we have been able to hold

for that purpose. we want to make sure their lives are full and whole. i want to go back to one of the comments mr. aiken made. it is almost as if an entertainer, you believe that you can just go in with a song and dance and change the minds of our military leaders because you are going to impress them so much and the pink slips will be torn up and thrown into the air and everyone will rejoice. that is not the way it is. there are cuts and it started when president obama's budget and our department of defense put forward initiatives. our military believes we have the best and most capable

regardless of what basis. when they make changes like this because of the funding, they see it as a necessity. i disagree respectfully. i think fort bragg has worked so well with our air force reserve so we can have the best collaborative effort. i question their numbers. this is why we have to work together for this. the 440th remain in place. i am concerned about the situation we have a right now and we do not know what will happen and we have to have the most capable and ready military. >> she is good at calling me an entertainer and her talking points. the most embarrassing reality show right now is congress. the most entertaining thing is to hear it you say you worked really hard.

whens he submitted a proposal, months and months after we knew the 440th would be removed, you submitted it late and it did not make it into the bill. we have kay hagan to thank for that because she was able to get it done. you cannot say you are working for the people when you spend months and not getting what needs to be done and when you submit a bill to make sure the 440th stays in place, it is submitted late and does not make it into the final vote. >> mr. aiken is incorrect. i am not sure where you get your high-quality information, but that is not the way it played out. we were aware of the situation from the beginning. >> you go on the senate site and you will see congresswoman's bill was submitted late. >> the senate site? >> the only place. >> i submitted my bill to the house of representatives. >> let's move on. thank you for being so thorough. let's talk about immigration reform. if we can name a policy on

immigration, i do not know what it is. people seem to be all over the place. a couple of things. we hear people talking about securing the border. their border is 1900 miles long. 1000 miles of it is water, river. how -- it number one, do you secure a border? then i want to talk about the children who came through this past summer. we will start with you and you have called for securing the border. how do you do it physically? >> this remains one of the most important questions from a national defense standpoint of what we have to be doing for the country, making sure every american is safe. this remains the top issue. we have continuously voted for legislation to secure the border. there are laws in place that

could secure the border. we have the technology. after 13 years of war, we are highly technically capable of making sure this border can be taken care of. it is just a question of, will the president act? up until this point, we need to act. we called on him over and over again. governor rick perry of texas, i was just an arizona, it is a top issue for them because of the crime element that comes across the border. you talked a little bit about the children. this is also an issue we dealt with before we left washington and something i am concerned about. these children are common from central america. they are being transported and paid for by their families to come here with the coyotes so

they can come through mexico through terrible conditions and being subjected to incredible violence, human trafficking, sex trafficking, drugs. we do not even know if some of them are making it. >> what should we do with them? >> what is happening, they are making their way. it will peak again in january and february. they continue to come. we have called on the president to act. we have passed legislation but it is not gone anywhere in the senate. another bipartisan bill and we have passed 400 bipartisan bills and they are sitting on harry reid's desk. we have got to change that so we got the republican majority. i have a bill. what do we do? by law, we have to educate these children. it is now a problem for our local communities.

our local communities will have to come up with the funding. i have a bill that will take money from foreign aid and actually pay for those issues. >> we will come back to bipartisanship. first, how do we secure the border and what we do with the children? >> i think it is ridiculous we are still talking about immigration reform 30 years after we started this issue. ronald reagan, in the 1980's, provided amnesty for those here and we did not secure the border. we do not enforce the law and here we are, talking about doing next to nothing or not doing anything. this absolutely do nothing congress that we see right now has multiple opportunities and the congresswoman has talked about bills passed in the house, but she neglects to talk about the immigration reform bill that was passed in the senate with a

broad bipartisan support that has not been taken up. she voted to pass immigration reform. i appreciate that. i think she and i have a lot in common on this issue. what frustrates me is her boss, john boehner, who is not her boss, has not allowed that bill to come to a vote in the house. it is widely accepted if that senate bill came to a vote in the house, it would pass. i would love to hear congresswoman ellmers stand up to john boehner. i say, let's put it up for a vote. it would be passed and signed by the president and the house would pass it right now. the bottom line is we have been talking about this for far too long. >> would the bill help take care of the children? >> what would help take care of the children is the fact we have thousandsof children in holding

cells near the border and we have a number of judges here in these immigration cases, it is so few. a few hundred judges for thousands of cases and they are setting these trials for the children into 2017 because we are not providing the resources necessary to make sure we take care of them. >> i know the question on immigration. one of your colleagues, who was a congressman from the 13th district said to me, one thing that was a touchstone for him, anyone who has come to this country illegally, should never be allowed citizenship. that they have broken a law and therefore, again, a touchstone, it should never happen. do you agree? >> this is something i've been talking about for quite some time.

mr. aiken has pointed out ronald reagan passed amnesty. i will be curious to know if my colleague here supports amnesty as well. number one -- one of the things i also want to point out and i would like to answer that because i have been strong with this issue. when we are talking about legislation for immigration reform, before we left washington, we passed a very strong bill that would make sure those children who are coming, they are sent back to the countries of origin. that is where they want to be. the issue with the judges. we pass legislation to take care of that as well. it has not been brought up for a vote in the senate. you seem to be concerned or confused as to whether or not you would take a job in the senate or house of representatives.

you would be in the house of representatives, if you were elected. nancy pelosi, she will be the one you will vote for in the house, who would be your boss. >> i am going to stop you there. nancy pelosi would not be your boss, unlike john boehner would be your boss. whoever the speaker is would never be my boss. it is a shame that you still believe john boehner is your boss. >> let's get back. >> people who are here illegally, should they be allowed a path to citizenship? yes or no? >> what i have worked on, the discussions i have had and that is basically what i have tried to do is bring everyone together for discussion. let's talk about this and use common sense. take the emotion out. what i support is the individuals here illegally, working toward earned legal work status that would not be citizenship. the answer is, no.

this would not be amnesty. these individuals would not be able to vote. they would be able to work out in the open out from the shadow. >> but never allowed citizenship? >> i don't believe that never is the appropriate word. if they are here, they have admitted wrongdoing. they have paid a fine. they've worked toward that goal and they admit it. in time, why not go through the naturalization process? >> mr. aiken. >> i'll tell you something. i don't know. it i don't know the answer as to whether or not citizenship is necessary immediately for these folks who are here. this isn't much for complicated issue. the problem is people don't sit down and talk to each other. people don't sit down outside of their own party caucuses and discuss options. do i believe and agree with congresswoman ellmers? yes. they're not paying income taxes. they are receiving services and

not paying income taxes. they should be paying income taxes. they should be contributing to the same society that they are receiving from. i strongly believe that. i don't believe that they should be deported because that would cost the country billions of dollars. in places -- it would take so much out of the economy. sending people back is not the answer. and whether or not a path to citizenship in any immediate form is the answer or in the long term is the answer, i don't know. i know it's going to happen if people stop talking in their caucuses. democrats are not immune from this not getting things done. republicans and democrats are not talking to each other. and if we don't sit down at the table and figure it out, we're not going to have a solution. >> i want to talk about this, bipartisanship. we hear from people throughout our viewing area constantly saying things like we are sick

of congress not getting along. someone said to me recently, no matter what you buy, car, home, whatever it may be, hopefully with your bankers, you're going to negotiate. you're not going to get everything you want your way. mr. aiken, you have said i'm not a politician. if you're elected, you become a politician. so how would you do this it differently than what we have seen if the past if you have a leader, nancy pelosi shed this when she was speaker that she was not open to what a lot of republicans had to say. she would listen but then it was may my way or the highway. how do you change that system if you were elected and ms. pelosi or someone or another democrat were speaker? >> i'm not -- i spoke to a

congressman from a different district right when i announced a few months ago. he was flying home to his district on a thursday afternoon and he was standing there in -- and another congressman from his same area who is a republican. he said i don't talk to them. i went, what, you don't talk to them because they're not from your party? he said no. this was a democrat that wasn't willing to talk to a republican. this culture of people not talking to each other does discussing. nobody does that in the rest of the world or their communities or neighbors. i think getting up there and forming relationships with people is important. but at the end of the day, i do not subscribe to any sort of notion that i'm there to represent any party or any leader. no one in congress is my boss. the president is not my boss.

the speaker is not my boss. the majority leader is not my boss. the minority leader is not my boss. you need to answer to the people in your district. >> if you don't fall behind the leadership in congress, you can be squeezed out of what you want to accomplish. it may be frustrating but that is part of the way things are done that get done. >> does that mean it's ok for that to be the process? of course not. it doesn't mean that's ok for it to be the process. if i'm representing people in the second district, they're going to send me back. and if i'm continuing to go back and the people who are doing what congresswoman ellmers does, then i'll be there long enough that i will be able to make some change. >> ms. ellmers, it does seem like that leadership on both sides of the aisle -- say i would rather get 75% of something than 100% of nothing. neither sides want to blink first, either the house or the

senate. >> well, and that's the comparison that we have here. the house versus the senate. when we look at what is and is not being done in washington, you know, i do have to respectfully disagree that there isn't bipartisanship. now, maybe that's maybe not what american people see. it doesn't get ratings to have individuals, democrat and republican, on and agree with each other. but that's actually what happens behind the scenes. >> but you just said the senate won't take up legislation from the house. >> but what i'm talking about the house because i represent the people of district two in the house of representatives. you are absolutely right. we have passed over 400 bills out of the house of representatives with bipartisan support. we have worked on legislation. i have a caucus with one of my leagues from california on the smart grid.

we work together. the women in congress -- >> if harry reid decides not to bring up a vote, unfortunately he is the run that runs the show in the senate, we can't change that. we are the house of representatives, and we are working very hard. we wouldn't be in the economy that we're in right now. this obama, aiken economy is just killing us. and yet we continue on. and the senate, harry reid protects the vulnerable submit .democrats by not bringing up issues for vote votes and he protects the president. >> has congress done enough to boost the economy? >> we have voted over and again. in fact, david before we left washington, we culminated a series of bills which we already passed the house with bipartisan

support. in financial services, freeing up money within the banking system, doing what we can. you know, dodd-frank has been devastating to this country and as one of miff friends in washington said in the banking community said, you know, dodd-frank is to financial services what obamacare is to health care. that is very serious. we have done everything we can, whether we're bringing down the cost of energy for every family, whether we're talking about energy production, we're talking about cutting regulation. we want to give certainty to our job creators so they can start hiring again. harry reid refuses to -- >> has congress done enough to boost the economy? >> no. congressman ellmers, you might want to get a new writer because calling it the obama-aiken is preposterous. i have nothing to do with obama. i support the second amendment. i support fiscal responsibility.

i support securing the border. i'm not quite sure which one of those is liberal. i don't support the president on everything he does. i believe the president and the democrats are a part of this culture of not getting anything done and blaming the other side. i don't think anyone is immune from that argument. at the end of the day congress has not done enough because every proposal that comes up if it's presented by a republican, the democrats vote against it, it if it's presented by a democrat the republicans vote against it. at the end of the day when you have either party in congress say that their primary goal is to make sure the other sides, that's the problem. >> what does it seem like the goal is the party wants the victory and not the congress? it's like democrats want to do this, republicans want to do this and that seems to be the mantra.

how did we get there? >> the bills we passed was with bipartisan support. when we see -- >> like job creation that you say are hung up in the senate because harry reid won't move. you can talk about bipartisanship all day long but somewhere along the way senator reid could say john boehner, if you give on this issue 25, 30% we would move forward. >> the senate has the ability to come up with a comparable piece of legislation then we go to the process on it. we have done it in that fashion. the few things that have actually made it to the president's desk and signed into law has been bicameral voting situation where the house has their bills. the skills act, for instance. very important bill for this economy. we passed that out of the house

of representatives. the senate passed their version. they conferenced on it. it made it to the president's desk and was signed into law. i think there's an important point that we need to make. one, when we're talking about republican versus democrat, it's very important to note that for the bills that harry reid is not bringing up for a vote as i pointed out are bipartisan, he is also fighting against his own democrats. and when the president is protected by harry reid so that legislation doesn't make it to his desk, he is also harming democrats in the house of representatives. i work with these democrats. i work with members on the energy commerce committee. i work with them on pieces of legislation. i have a bill on re-authorizing breast cancer funding for young breast cancer survivors.

we work together and it stops with harry reid and the senate, and that is why it is so important we win the senate majority. >> let's talk about the affordable care act. even if there's a shift in the senate in this election, more than likely that shift would come nowhere close to being able to override a presidential veetso. it's the law. it has been upheld by the supreme court. why is it still made a political issue called obamacare put out there to try to shore up the base when the supreme court has said it's the law. if you want to change part of it, if it needs to be tweaked, go ahead and do so, but just accept it. it's here. >> let's talk about obamacare because this is a very important for me. it's the number one issue for me running for office. >> but it's here. >> as a nurse knowing what we need in health care reform it's a law but it's a bad law and it does need reform. this is the thing, when i hear so many say we have voted over and over to repeal it.

we voted on reform for obamacare to make it better for the american people. we heard the president, this was a total deception, david. the president came forward when he was trying to get this legislation passed, he said if you have a doctor you like, you can keep your doctor. if you have a health care plan you like, you can keep it. that was total deception. he knew it at the time. >> but there's also eight million people with health care today that did not have it prior to today. >> how many millions lost their health care plan and now have a sub adequate plan under obamacare? this is what we're looking for as republicans. we know that we can do it better. you are absolutely right. we're never going to be able to repeal this as long as the president, the namesake of this legislation is in office. but we can work with our submit

majority if we win it so that we can put reforms in place. we voted over and over again for patient-centered care where families and doctors are making decisions, not the federal government. >> mr. aiken. >> it's nice to hear congresswoman say we can fix it and get it done. i met a man a few weeks ago who has two businesses that combined together they've got 59 employees together. he's over the employer mandate. he's got to provide hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of health care to his employees. it's hurting him. it's hurting small business owners. i met him back in march and he wanted to appeal obamacare. i saw him again in june. he said obamacare is not going to be repealed and he's mad that you voted 55 times not to fix his problem. he's upset that the employer mandate has been proposed by several bipartisan senators and moderate senators in the senate to be raised to 100 instead of 55. that would increase his ability to make money in his small

business, hire more people and it would save tens of thousands of dollars around this district for people who want to start small businesses or who have small businesses. but 55 times you could have fixed that problem, congresswoman. i'm talking. 55 times you could have fixed that problem and you didn't fix it because instead you took a vote which you just sat here a minute ago won't pass. you're wasting taxpayer money and time by not sitting down and doing things that the senate has already said they're ready to do but you're not willing to do. and that i'm a little frustrated but that frustrates me because that's another symptom of this do-nothing congress that would rather sit and grandstand and people are hurting from this. you're right, david, eight million people have health care. people who were being kicked off their health care care plan are no longer being kicked off their health care plan. but businesses and people are hurting and you're continuing to do something that you admit -- if you've got enough votes in

four years to repeal it, then repeal it. right now please just do your job and stick to their problems today. >> well, after all that theatrics, i just want to inform you, it is not republicans that continuously talk about those votes they repealed, it is the democrats. it is harry reid. it is barack obama, which you support. you support obamacare. and yet we have continuously voted to reform it. that's what we're trying to do. we're trying to make it better for the american people. it's not republicans that have caused these 55 votes repealed. it's democrats. because any change -- now i am talking. >> yes, you are. >> any change to obamacare is looked upon as a repeal by the democrats because it is the namesake of our president and

you are in full support of our president and obamacare. >> again, i've spoken out several times right here today on places i don't agree of the president, places where i don't agree with obamacare. there's several other areas that could be fixed. senator burr came up with a solution that he presented to change the ratio from the most expensive care to the least expensive care, something that not only do republicans and democrats they are willing to vote on but it's not a change in the house. there are a lot of things that could fix people's problems today. you said they're not repeals but you said to david just a few minutes ago that, yes, you have voted to repeal it several times. make up your mind about whether they repealed or whether or not it would repeal. >> let's move on. >> i'm not sure i understand how you say that he's presented it to the house.

he would present it to the house. one against i think you're confused at how the process worked. >> i'm not confused. i'm well aware of civics. i also understand you're talking about the senate not doing anything and they are doing something. >> let's talk about something that is of a concern to every consumer and in this district and the folks with the bankers association in north carolina and that's cyberattacks. it is very serious. consumers, home depot, target, jimmy john's sort of caught everybody off guard as well and then others, national security. the list goes on and on. here's the question, how does the federal government stay ahead of the criminals? do we need the government to hold companies more accountable for protecting people's personal information? >> yeah, we do. it's a pro-active thing. this is a society we didn't have

10 years ago. that's one of the reasons we have congress is to make sure we can pass long when they wee -- when we see issues emerging. we need to make sure companies are not able to require the passwords for facebook and twitter for people when they're being employed. we need to make sure that the kind of information that companies are taking from their consumers without their consumer's permission, they're not able to do that without consumer permission. this is a gray area here and there's sort of a gap between the laws that are in place and the laws that should be in place and we need to make sure we close that gap. >> you can't get power at your house without giving up your social security number. how do we stay ahead and should the government hold businesses more accountable? >> i believe this is a great concern, especially to our young people. they have grown up in the virtual world going on the

internet. their information can be exposed. there again, number one job of the federal government is to make sure that every american is protected and cybersecurity plays into that. we do need to make sure that our businesses are the companies that are utilizing personal information online is being protected. so there are responsibilities to be taken. but this to me is a perfect area for us to build a public-private partnership. you mentioned cybersecurity, that's one of the reasons i helped start the caucus for the innovation grid. this is something that we feel strongly about. but cybersecurity plays into so many other areas because of the world that we live in today. there again, i'll go back to obamacare. one year ago we had the roll out of the failed health care dove. we have now spent over $2 billion dollars fixing that site. my friend would agree this is a

good thing for the american people that we move forward when their very important personal information can be exposed at any given moment. >> earlier today the supreme court said they're not going to take up the issue of gay marriage. do you see a day in north carolina where it will be legal? >> well, you know, david, a couple of years ago the people of north carolina spoke on this issue. >> and probably in 20 years it won't be a issue. do you see it where it's legal here? >> you know, i can't predict the future. i don't have a crystal ball. i've been very strong on this issue. one, that the federal government, although i do support defense of marriage between one man and one woman, i believe that is what our country is founded on.

but i also believe, especially as a republican, that the government can be too intrusive in all of our lives. we fight against that every day. when it comes to civil unions, legal agreements between two individuals, i don't know how legally from a constitutional perspective we can continue to interject ourselves. you asked a very important question. i don't have the answer to that question. >> mr. aiken. >> can you ask the question one more time? >> yes, will we ever see gay marriage legal in north carolina? >> you know i found it surprising that the supreme court decided to continue to leave it in the hands of the state and the regional areas where the appeals courts were. i think my position is pretty clear on it. we spoke against the amendment in 2012. that's certainly not why i'm running for congress. i'm running because people need jobs and congress is doing nothing. i'm running because people need access to education and educational opportunities for their kids and congress is doing

nothing. i do think we will just have to see. i think the supreme court has obviously left it in the hands of the states and the regions right now. >> what do you think is the number one problem this country is facing today and is it mirrored as the number one problem for the people here in the second district? >> it's hard to answer just one because they're tied up. we've seen the economy grow to some extent. i don't think -- i think the problem and i think that's the major problem affecting people's lives but i think the umbrella issue in why we are not seeing the economy grow faster and we're not seeing the employment rate rise faster is that we have people in congress who are not doing anything, who continue this culture of not working together, blaming the other house of congress, blaming the other party, blaming anyone to

make sure they don't have to come up with ideas on their own to fix the issue. >> ms. ellmers. >> the number one issue for north carolina residents and in district two, we've done an important job. our state legislature here in north carolina has done a lot to change that. our unemployment rate has decreased. there are plenty of areas within district two that are not feeling any sense of recovery. we have to continue to work on this issue. when i'm talking to women across the country, they are very concerned with the jobs and the economy, the fact that we are not creating jobs. that our job creators give people uncertainty that they can't open up their companies to new employees. that continues to be an issue. you know, the unemployment rate has decreased but it's because

so many have left the workforce. we have less in our workforce today than we've ever had in history. that is a great concern. >> should congress take any action regarding guns? >> in what manner? >> in tightening of any forms, registration or in limiting -- i don't want to use the word scope but in limiting sizes of magazines anywhere along the line we hear come from -- come up from time to time should congress be involved and take any action? >> i am such a strong supporter of second amendment and the ability to own a firearm. this is a continuing conversation that we will always have. but when does this come up? when does this issue arise? it arises when we have a terrible situation. you know what the real issue is

and something i've been such a huge advocate for is mental health reform in this country. i had the opportunity to have a round table discussion bringing in my colleague tim murphy from pennsylvania who has a wonderful mental health reform bill which will transform mental health in this country and that's the way we need to go. >> i have to stop you there. a quick response if you will, sir. >> i think the congress need to make sure that people have access to guns who are using them responsible. my cousin owns a gun store not too far from dunn and i want to make sure that they don't have any restrictions on their gun ownership at all. but i want to make sure that people who have mental health issues are not getting ahold of them. >> we're at the stage of this debate that we are going to give each of you a chance to make a closing statement. it's limited to 60 seconds. i want to tell you and those watching on television that if i have to stop you it's not being rude. it's because we are on television. but -- tell the voters why you should be elected.

>> thank you, david, and thank you, mr. aiken, for being here and to the north carolina bankers association for holding this important debate. i just believe that the people of district two have a clear choice here. either they can send me back to washington so i can continue the job that i've started fighting for good strong conservative prince -- principles with leadership. this country is striving to have leaders in washington now. there's a clear choice here. my self who believe in conservative principles or my opponent who would be nothing but a rubber stamp for nancy pelosi and barack obama on so many issues. i ask for your vote. i ask for your prayers. i ask you to continue to pray for this great country. god bless all of you and may god continue to bless this great country. >> mr. aiken. >> thank you very much to the

congresswoman and the bankers association. i'm sort of tired already of that. i just want to say i'm tired in general of this sending people back to washington who say the same thing and every two years come back and say it again and then go and don't do it. they go and they don't do anything in congress. and i'm frustrated with this do-nothing congress and the fact that we can't get anything done. and i'm running because i think we've got to kill that culture. we've got to send a message to washington that if we keep sending back the same people, we are going to continue to get the same nothing and the same status quo we have. i'm asking for your vote on november 4 because i'm tired just like you are of nothing getting done and if we don't

send a message that we're tired of it as well, we're only going to be getting the same thing and we're all in trouble. so thank you very much and i appreciate your vote in november. >> mr. aiken, thank you. ms. ellmers, thank you. we thank you for joining us tonight. our thanks to the candidates who took time out of their schedules to come and be with us for this debate. we want to thank the north carolina bankers association. voter registration is tied up in the court. your best bet is to register by october 10. early voting begins october 23. whatever you do, exercise that precious right and vote in the election four weeks from tomorrow. for renee ellmers and clay aiken, i'm david crabtree, have a good night. tomorrow, i'll we look at the

campaign key senate races. and the university president discusses about policy issues of higher education. is liveon journal wednesday morning at 7:00 eastern here on c-span. and in about two hours, the north carolina senate debate between democratic incumbent kay homan and republican to tillis. they have found the race is tilting democrat. right now, our campaign 2014 coverage continues with the live virginia senate debate -- with the west virginia senate debate between shelley capito and natalie tennant. the vote isicates

leaning republican. we will get underway. we will get underway momentarily. >> the 2014 u.s. senatorial debate between republican shelley moore capito and democratic west virginia secretary natalie tennant. this debate is sponsored by news,west virginia metro west virginia press association, and west virginia public broadcasting. here is your moderator. ♪