politics that is counterintuitive but when you think about it, it makes perfect sense. that, black people specifically tend to fare better in context with very few other black people. that, black people barackwere shocked when obama won iowa because i went had so few black people. winning iowa was not nearly as hard as when he misses the the. in 1988, jesse jackson won vermont. that has a smaller black population than iowa does you if people do not believe that you are representative of an actual group whose interest they see as antithetical to their own, they're more willing to -- and if you are a marginal number

demographically so they don't feel threatened, then you actually stand a chance of rain taken beyondeing face value. >> i think many of us are aware of this, but this is not simply moral question although it is a moral question. it is really a strategic one. andandidates and parties political actors want to succeed , we will have to reckon this in a serious way. our localcontrol system are the ones that do -- if you want to engage the electorate, that means to vote for you, we need to start turning out a different crop of candidates gloria hinted at this. if you want the policy outcomes

that many of us want, more progressive policies on a range of topics, this is one very clear path to getting it. but thank you all so much. you were wonderful. thank you all for coming. [applause]

>> you will be able to watch this program again later today. congress is out until november 12, but news from capitol hill today. the federal government budget deficit has fallen to $486 billion, the smallest pool of red ink rights the associated press. the congressional budget office shows better results than earlier rejections by both the cbo and the white house budget office. president inherited a joint dollar deficit after the 2008 financial crisis. but the writing figure has improved in recent years as the economy has recovered. last year's deficit registered at $680 billion. are covering we more than 100 house, senate and governor's races from across the country along with candidate ads for the election less than two weeks away.

>> mark pryor is up for reelection. joining us on the phone is andrew demello, the little rock correspondent for the associated rest. his --aking some heat in he's taking some heat in his wrist fonts on the ebola crisis. not doing enough to protect americans from ebola. given a holding answer to msnbc about the negative response on ebola. contents campaign had raised -- had seized on that. given the fact that prior had run an ad that had invoked the ebola outbreak as a way to

criticize cotton. and saidlowed up later that the fact is we have to do everything possible to prevent an outbreak at home. but it is one of those that isns that something the republicans are eager to jump on. host: president clinton was in arkansas rallying folks to vote. the former president has the ability to sway voters in arkansas? guest: he remains a beloved figure in arkansas. he has very deep personal .onnections

democratic voters could have an impact. they are hoping that they will at least be able to reframe the election, refrain -- reframe the event, the messaging that republicans have been able to use very successfully here in previous selections.

very tight been a and very heated campaign. that is the difference that we see. andrew demello, little rock capital correspondent with the associated rest, appreciate your time. >> thank you. >> another key race is in georgia. that is one of three seats that republicans are defending. then a malloy, washington correspondent, is down in georgia. takeaways?he thingst off, the dominant was the crowds. this thing was held at the georgia state fair.

they busted and thousands of supporters. it was almost like a boxing match. a lot of people could not hear what the candidates were saying and they had trouble getting their point across. there was the cheering and jeering. but really, there were tw main things. you had michelle nine, the democrat, going after david purdue, the republic, -- the republican, on outsourcing where in a deposition he said that most of his career was spent in outsourcing. so she hammered him on that. and purdue try to steer the conversation back to barack obama and harry reid. and again to the point where nunn kind of ridicule him saying, you are running against me, not against obama and reid. and he said come absolutely, i am running against reid. >> that seems to be a theme

throughout these senate races. the republican who is running against the democrat, whether they are a sitting democrat or not, saying president obama is on the ballot here and you need to vote against president obama by voting for me. is that working is it working in georgia. >> the polls are showing a tight purdue withow with a decently. i think to a degree, yet, obama's approval ratings have been down in the dumps in georgia. underwater. tiemore that purdue can nunn to him, the better. but on the flipside, michele knight's plan relies on churning plan- michelle nunn's

the blackturning out vote. it is a doubled edged sword. overall, the strategy would seem to work because of obama's low approval ratings here. >> what is the ground game i can georgia? >> we are seeing a lot of activity. the democrats have been more than manyobably more cycles in the past decade. we have seen a surge of applications in voter registration. >> the front page of the atlanta

journal-constitution this morning, georgia sees surge in voter rolls. >> that is what i was talking about kerry the registration deadline was yesterday. so we don't have a full picture yet of the numbers we have. they are through friday. the reality is a lot are signing up. the democrats have spent a lot of money in trying to find an turn out these new voters. their whole theory of the case , the moreat transplants, the more african-american voters, the more other minority and young , they that they can find are this kind of sleeping giant out there. if you look at other states, iowa and north carolina, the obama team went through there to cycles in a row trying to find these folks and nobody is really doing that in georgia. so the democrats are really saying there are some out there

for them to find and get to the polls. but this is still a republican state and a tough slog for democrats. >> part of the strategy now is to jump on these comments that david perdue made about outsourcing. i want to show viewers the ad she put out recently on this. [video clip] >> newspapers have broken the story about david perdue. in a sworn deposition, he was asked, can you describe your experience with outsourcing? he responded, yeah, i spent most of my career doing that. that's right, under oath, he admitted he spent most of his career outsourcing jobs overseas to laces like china and mexico. david perdue is not for you. beennny molloy, have polls taken since this ad came out.

>> we don't have any new polling since the story broke which was only friday. it is hard to say the immediate impact of this. but yes, it is really in line with what nunn has been doing won theg after perdue runoff in july, nunn k maddy me a -- came out immediately inserted bashing him. he was involved with dollar general where female employees face discrimination. romney -- they painted him as this heartless corporate greed guy who doesn't care. in last nights debate, she was asking him about the minimum wage and had this preplanned made more in a

day than a minimum wage employee made in a year. the problem with trying to make perdue look like mitt romney is that mitt romney won georgia by seven points. >> thank you for your time. moment, we will take you to last night's u.s. senate debate in virginia between incumbent democrat mark warner seeking a second term and his republican juncker ed gillespie, the former head of the republican national committee and counselor to president george w. bush. is his first time running for elected office. the debate is coming up next after some of the campaign ads that virginia voters are seeing. >> i [video clip] am mark warner and i approve this message. >> enron, the largest -- industry.

enron paid gillespie and his firm $700,000 to raise utility rates and then it got even worse. >> thousands lost their jobs and life savings. enron, ed gillespie, the million-dollar lobbyist to put enron ahead of you. that either directly through a carbon tax or carbon trade, we will put a tax on coal. >> mark warner and obama want to tax coal which will kill thousands of good paying virginia jobs in our communities. coale obama-warner directive will kill thousands of virginia jobs. my plan will grow our economy and create good paying jobs. i am ed gillespie. i approve this message. >> ed gillespie is attacking mark warner with false as experts called misleading, completely made up.

the truth, mark warner is working to help fix health care and cut the national debt. it is why republicans, including a former governor, u.s. senator, and 40 legislators have endorsed him. >> corporate taxes don't solve problems. working together will. >> i am ed gillespie. i approve this message. i worked my way through college at my parents grocery store and as a per flight attendant. i work from the parking lot to the white house. there is opportunity and dignity in work. today, too many virginians are squeezed by mark warner and president obama's policies. mark warner votes with the president 97% of the time. that is not bipartisan. time for a new direction. where compassion is measured by creating good jobs. chuck good evening, i and todd.

i am chuck todd welcome to the virginia senatorial debate between democratic senator mark warner and republican ed gillespie hosted by the fairfax county of chamber of commerce and of course news four. this airs on all nbc stations across the commonwealth nationally on c-span and streaming live on nbc washington.com. let's begin by quickly covering the rules of the debate. the debate will last one hour and will begin with two-minute opening statements from each candidate and then our panel is and i will pose questions directly to the candidates. the questions are determined by abc news on the panel is and has not been reviewed by the candidates or the fairfax chamber. each candidate will have one minute and 30 seconds to respond in the candidate answering first will also get an additional one minute to rebut. as moderator i do reserve the right to follow-up is needed and

finally we will conclude the debate with one minute closing statement. we will notify candidates of their remaining time and when the time has expired. we asked the candidates to keep to their time limits. let's welcome our panel is aaron gilchrest anchor from news for weekday mornings 13 years covering richmond covering for governors and the congressional delegation. karen talty is a national political correspondent for the "washington post." prior to joining the post you wrote for "time" magazine for over a decade and now let's bring in the candidates republican challenger ed gillespie. [applause] and the democratic incumbent senator mark warner. mr. gillespie you won the toss and you get to begin with you two-minute opening statement. >> it's great to be with the chamber. i look forward to talking about my agenda for economic growth which will be a new and better direction for us than the obama warner policies. i want future generations to have the same opportunities that i have had, my grandfather was an immigrant janitor.

my parents never went to college and i got to be counselor to the president of the united states of america. but i fear we are losing that kind of economic opportunity and upward mobility as a result of the obama warner policies and that's why i have put forward an economic growth plan because the policies coming out of washington today are squeezing hard-working virginians between lost jobs lower take-home pay reduced working hours and higher prices for health care energy and food. and they are making us less safe as a nation. less able to make growing threats to our national security and to our public health and safety. that's why i would seek a seat to restore our military and to stand up for veterans. and i would also want to put forward these policies of mine that will create jobs, raise take-home pay lifts people out of poverty hold 'em health care -- hold down health care costs

and reduce energy prices. my policies will ease the squeeze on hard-working virginians to make it easier for them, for the unemployed to find work and we need that in virginia today. under the obama warner policies net jobs created in virginia to people i've gone on to food stamps. there were 65,000 more women living in poverty today and 250,000 of us will have our health care plans canceled as a result of the affordable care act and obamacare. which the senator still supports. under these obama warner policies the federal government is doing too many things that should be better left to the state and local government and the private sector and failing at too many things that should be doing right. my policies will make things better. thank you. >> senator warner for two minutes. >> thank you todd and i would like to thank all virginians for watching tonight. it's the denigrate us

-- it has been the greatest honor of my life to serve virginia versus governor and now it's u.s. senator. what brought me to public service was the notion that america everybody ought to get a fair shot. we can guarantee success but we ought to get a fair shot. we are going to maintain a sense of opportunity in our country we have to have people in politics or were willing to work together. that's what i did as your governor. we turned a deficit into a surplus in virginia was named best managed state in the best state for business. i brought that same bipartisan approach to the senate. that's why i'm so proud to have the support of the gentleman who held the office before me republican senator john warner and why have more former republican legislator supporting me this campaign than when i first ran. in the senate i worked on trying to take on the challenge of our debt and deficit to make sure patients get the care they deserve bringing jobs back to virginia and making sure young people aren't crushed by student debt. and you know what? on every major piece of legislation i worked on i start

with a republican partner. my opponent has a different approach. he spent his entire career as a d.c. lobbyist and a political operative. he used every issue in the best interest of the republicans. as a matter of fact he went on tv and called himself the partisan warrior. his words, not mine. i have to tell you the last thing washington needs is another partisan lawyer in either political party. in these challenging times the world needs a strong american economically militarily and morally. to make that happen america has to have leaders to work together. thank you. >> thank you gentlemen for both and sticking to the time limits. let's go to the news over the past 24 hours. mr. gillespie gets the first question and of course the supreme court's nondecision to review the case on marriage.

it's legal in the commonwealth of the -- virginia. you personally oppose marriage. can you accept this position by the supreme court? >> let me make a couple of points. i love and respect people for who they are and i believe we are created in the likeness and image of god and as you noted my faith in marriage as between one man and one woman and i believe that. as a senator, i believe it's up to the state to make these determinations and i build supportive federal marriage amendment and the court has as you said world on this. it is the law in virginia today and as i do not believe that a federal law is the proper approach of course i accept the ruling of the decision by the supreme court not to take up this division of the circuit court. decision of the circuit court. >> on this issue my opponent and i differ. i support the marriage

clause. i think it's appropriate and we live in a commonwealth doesn't discriminate. it's something that i advocated as governor when i had the most diverse administration in modern virginia history. i think back on those times even back as early as the early 2000's when companies across virginia including capital one who is here tonight said we need to change these discriminatory practices against members of our community so i think the supreme court did the right thing. i think we will have to ultimately take this issue up but again on this issue my opponent and i have differing opinions. >> would be like to respond? >> as a matter of policy the united states senate while we disagree in terms of whether or not marriage should be between one man and one woman in terms of the role of united states senator is not something i believe that's an appropriate

response but in terms of by the way people should not be discriminated against in terms of job discrimination based on sexual preference or sexual orientation. that was my policy as an employer in the three businesses that iran. >> 10 years ago you supported a federal constitutional amendment on marriage. do you still support back? sub i would have - , i stood for the platform. a federal urge amendment and is chairman of the rnc i said for the platform but as united states senator and talking about my policies on the policies i would pursue as a united states senator. while i believe marriage is between one man and one woman i don't believe it's proper for the united states senate to enact anti-marriage amendment. there are others that believe it is. >> julie has the next question for senator warner.

>> senator warner whether congress shirk its constitutional duties without voting to authorize use of force against isis? your own colleague senator mccain has said he don't ask people to sacrifice their lives until the nation has been made -- debated and committed to the mission. >> i agree with senator mccain. i think congress should be called back into session and debate the issue thoroughly because i believe and i strongly support the leadership on this issue. i'm not sure i believe with the authorization is part of the process. not to be fully debated and amended and dealt with. i do believe sitting on the intelligence committee that isil is a real threat to our country and this is an area where much of my opponent will make charges supporting obama on every policy this is where i differ with the president. i believe we need a more forceful response against syria and iraq.

i think it is very important that we call for stronger actions against mr. putin and and russia. without american leadership as we have seen there is very little that goes on in the world in a world is very dangerous. i will say the president i think has done two things on this issue that are important. one is he has pushed up the maliki government because it was important if we were going to come in and be supported in iraq we have got to have a government that is inclusive of all factions and the maliki government was supported by bush and obama policies. he is building the kind of coalition that includes arab and muslim nations as well as europeans and others because this needs to be a fight that's not just american. it needs to be of the civilized world against terrorists. >> mr. gillespie would you like to respond? >> there should be congressional authorization for the airstrikes in syria and iraq. i believe that would be the best interest of our country and i i think would send a strong signal.

i asked senator if i were senator i would support that. i think it would be a healthy debate to have him up for the senate the senate and i think it's required by the constitution and i believe it would send a much stronger signal to our potential allies and to our enemies that the united states is committed to this effort. one of the concerns i have is i think there may be some fears that the united states is not committed long-term to this effort long-term to the suffered -- to this effort and that causes consternation i believe him on some of our potential allies. i also think we need to be stronger as the military and unfortunately senator warner has voted to cut nearly a trillion dollars over military visit. we are not going to have a navy that is smaller than world war i levels and an army smaller than world war ii levels. we need to have according to the pentagon 300 ships two meters national -- to meet our national security needs. we are on our way to 260 because of these defense cuts. that includes $486 billion in terms of the budget control act and another $500 billion sequestration.

as a member of the senate armed services committee i would work to replace the sequestration cuts to repeal them and to make sure we are more secure as a country and we make our military the proper priorities should be. >> senator warner we have had the sequestration for some time now. >> i call that stupidity on steroids and i find it curious that my opponent has said he would not have voted, my understanding for the budget control act that was supported by a majority of the delegation democrat and republican in virginia and john mccain took took -- said that the alternative was defaulting on our nation's debt throwing us into economic turmoil but no one has been a stronger etiquette -- stronger advocate against sequestration. as a matter of fact i laid out again on mike my opponent with specificity and took arrows from both the left and the right on this in terms of a conference of plan for entitlement reform and tax reform that would have avoid

sequestration but as a matter fact i voted for the republican and democratic plan that would replace sequestration. frankly i was proud to receive the navy's highest civilian honor public citizen service award because of my efforts to try to rollback sequestration. >> very quickly if you can answer this and 20 seconds was a present right to rule out combat troops in this war against isis in syria senator warner? >> i think he should not have ruled it out. i think we have to leave all her military options open. again i'm not supported at this moment of invading in a major way in iraq but i do believe we should draw a red line. >> mr. gillespie. >> i don't believe we should take options off the table and signal to your enemies what you are prepared to do or not to do. as the senator said no one is

recommending combat troops are there and say you are not seeking it and not take it off the table is not the same thing as saying we should insert them but you should not take them off the table as an option. >> aaron hess a question. -- aaron has the next question. >> mr. gillespie is a senator warner has voted 97% of the time for president obama's agenda. senator warner you have pointed out mr. gillespie's work heading up the republican national committee working with the george w. bush white house and helping in the mitt romney campaign. mr. gillespie can you name a specific example of you standing up to your party and senator warner the same question to you, specific example of standing up to the parties. >> again when you are not in the white house my party doesn't have one thing to stand up to right now but i will share with you some things i think i'm probably at odds with members of my party and that is i believe in the early 90s when congress passed mandatory minimum sentences in the u.s. congress that we swung too far and i

believe we need to revisit those and in particular for nonviolent offenders and allow more discretion for judges and frankly more discussion for the states to make determinations in terms of what other proper sentencing guidelines. i think we went overboard in terms of federal sentencing mandatory sentencing. i'm someone who believes in redemption and reconciliation and i also believe we need to look at the process of banning the box in terms of checking if you have served your time and you have paid your price in terms of time in prison for certain crimes and for certain jobs, i don't think you should be required to check the box is a felon which only increases recidivism. i think people have paid their debt to society society needs to welcome them back and make it easier for them to come back in society again for certain crimes and for certain positions.

>> i appreciate you asking the question because my entire campaign has been based on this bogus charge. the 97% charge. independent political analyst have called it both misleading and not reflective of my record. the "the national journal" would say a review all of the votes not just one section brings me right in the center. question, where have i stood up against my party? i support drilling off the coast of virginia as long as would ensure the oil -- i support the keystone pipeline as a matter fact i protested against it in harrisburg. i stood up repeatedly against the president on this foreign-policy choices as we have talked about isil but also in terms of being stronger with putin and russia early in march for these stronger oppositions for his activities in ukraine

and around europe. it's that reason that virginians know my record. it's that reason why a can in this campaign i'm so proud to have the support of more republican legislators that when i ran the first time. if it had merit i don't think that would be the case but what it is this a political soundbite that comes from somebody who spent their careers a partisan operator. >> mr. gillespie do you want to respond to the 97%? >> first of all the independent fact checker i don't always agree with the politifacts were rated it 97% of the time true. secondly senator warner's press releases are a very bipartisan. his floor votes are very party line. let's take the keystone xl pipeline which we hear again he supports but on two different occasions when there is an opportunity to move forward the keystone xl pipeline senator warner voted to block back from moving forward. when there was an opportunity to lift the

moratorium drilling off of her deep sea coast in the bipartisan amendment and bipartisan support for it as there was bipartisan support for the keystone xl pipeline senator warner voted , senator warner voted former it very democratic senator from virginia jim webb voted with the bipartisan side while senator warner sided with his leadership and the fact is one of the reasons he takes arrows from both sides is because he says one thing but then votes another way. >> let me follow-up on this with both of you because the fact is senator warner you have these votes that are partyline. why haven't you fought the party leadership and my question to mr. gillespie we haven't seen many republicans fight mitch mcconnell either. are you guys all hostages of the leadership? >> what it doesn't tell you is most of those were procedural

votes and confirmation votes in what he didn't say as well as when i voted against offshore drilling it was because there was no proceeds coming back to virginia. i've been very clear i've had this legislation for six years. if we are going to go off the coast of virginia virginia ought to get the same kind of royalty stream that louisiana gets. i'm keystone when the science and epa backs it lets make sure we export this kind of oil as well as natural gas which would actually free up europe's dependence on russian oil and gas. these are all things were think we can make changes and frankly strengthen america. >> mr. gillespie had he stopped -- how do you stop the stranglehold on making the senate were? subbot i will have -- make the senate work? >> will it make it easier for the unemployed to find work and if it does not won't vote for. i

don't care what any senate leader says of either party. if it doesn't ease the squeeze on hard-working virginians i will fight against it and promote policies on my agenda for economic growth. there are boats. there are boats -- there are votes. there are votes that make up his 97% statistic. let's look at some of them. senator warner voted for the failed stimulus. he voted for the excessive regulation from the dodd-frank bill that making it hard for small businesses to get loans. he voted for a $7 trillion in new debt and $1 trillion in tax increases. he is not impose a single nominee from this president during his time in the senate and last but not least he voted for obamacare after you told us he would never vote for a health care reform bill. >> let me pause there and karen gets the next question. >> to segue into this question senator warner as mr. gillespie noted in his opening statement and as my own newspaper the "washington post" has reported

as many as a quarter million virginians are going to have to give up their current health insurance policies as a result of the affordable care act. i realize your campaign has disputed these figures but at a minimum thousands of virginians are going to have to give up their current health insurance policies in many cases policies they like. so what do you say to those virginians? >> karen thank you. what i hear constantly from virginians they want us to fix health care. 49 years ago when congress passed medicare they didn't get get -- -- they did not get it fully right at first and they had to come back and fix it. virginia wants to keep parts of the aca and to keep it to keep the fact that people with pre-existing conditions can get insurance and i want to make women are not charge more than men. they like the fact that we can keep kids on a their policy until the 26 years old. my opponents charge in this

figure of 250,000 ahead of the insurance association said that number was completely made up and his attack has been called by the same politifacts simply false. i do think people in the individual market are to be up to keep their health care the way they do in north carolina. as a matter fact this has been moved to a state issue and there said they popped -- bipartisan bill that would allow virginians to have the same rights as north carolinians. i would lobby for that. i have gone further. would changehere i the aca. i would have laid out not with sound bites but specifics on a cheaper options. i've laid out specific idget -- legislation that i would roll back some of the legislative overburden and i've even said let's go ahead and put in place the ability for insurance companies as long as there are consumer protections to sell products across state lines. we need to fix this problem not relitigate it. >> mr. gillespie. >> the fact is we can have reforms that address concerns about pre-existing conditions that make health care more

affordable. i'm going to put forward a positive alternative of my own on friday and talk about refundable tax credits and protections on pre-existing conditions but the 250,000-dollar figure came up in a senate hearing in the state senate and you don't have to go far in the commonwealth to find someone who has had their insurance canceled and lost their doctor as a result of senator warner's support for the affordable care act obamacare. one of those people is with me here tonight linda from chesapeake. i met her about a month ago. she told me about her rare degenerative eye disease in her right i. -- right eye. she has an eye care specialist who is very important to her and found out last year per plan was canceled because of the affordable care act. she and her husband went on line and found another plan and they got higher deductibles and higher premiums but it had this eye doctor the plan so they

signed up for it. she women for next visit and -- she went in for her next visit and they submitted the bill and the doctor was in the plan but they found out only for emergency services not for chronic care. linda and her husband now are paying out-of-pocket and taking a huge hit just like a woman i met. she and her husband both work. she carries the insurance and she has just been notified that her health insurance premiums are going to go up $600 per month as a result of obamacare. >> senator warner where are these fix fix it bills because i've heard democrats talk about it. >> one of the things we need to do in the senate has voted on it and have a more open process. i think both leadership need to move on that and i think they're going to take but let's go to the question here. the 250,000 number wasn't my question. it was actually the head of the

insurance association. by the elected official but the insurance association said the number was made up and yes there are ways to fix that. other states have for at least three years to keep on individual policies and keep the plan delay. we ought to do that in virginia and again in the general assembly right now i hope we join you and lobby for it but what i also feel is obama's health care plan since january . it is now 28 days before the election and we still have no plan and no details. i have laid out ways to fix obamacare. >> julie gets a next question. >> mr. gillespie in an earlier debate you surprise some people in the city bought contraceptive pill should be offered without a prescription. you put it behind the counter like sudafed but i birth control pills

aren't one-size-fits-all. sometimes it's dangerous to some moment women with health -- i would like to know which of the 24 brands of contraceptive should be available and what you think i would be safer? >> that's a determination the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists have made and they are the ones who recommended there is no longer a medically necessary reason for oral contraceptives to be a prescription drug. it should be available without prescription over the counter. my point was i think for adult women behind the counter would be the appropriate step but having available without prescription would make the pill more affordable more accessible and more easily obtainable for women would bring the cost down and i'm not the one to determine what is the right one to make over-the-counter versus prescription. that's where the fda and for the american college of ob/gyn and others to recommend. if they are recommending it seems to me that

is something where we should be able to find bipartisan support. that would be something that women want, doctors recommend, pharmacists would like and to me it makes a lot of sense and would remove this issue from politics and from the constitutional questions relative to religious freedom and it would be a good thing for the country as well as for women. >> on this issue there are stark differences in terms of citrus woman in virginia. what my -- in terms of who trust women in virginia. what my opponent would say about his plan which is really a gimmick being used a number of states existing while right now says froman on birth control -- for women on birth control there's no co-pay. his plan or gimmick would actually charge of average about $600 out-of-pocket for women. his plan as well this nothing in terms of other forms of birth

control. that's because on this issue we have had a different approach. i trust women to make these decisions with their doctors and i don't think government should interfere. my opponent chair the hobby lobby decision would set private-sector employers ideal to decide what kind of health care women should get. he has been supported by the major antichoice groups around the country. he wouldn't wouldn't answer in less debate about whether he wants to overturn roe v. wade. he has not spoken up at all in terms of some of his supporters who have put forward these invasive ultrasound legislations that all of us in the business community, we don't like virginia being ridiculed on late-night shows yet he stood up and spoke out against that. again i look forward to the women of virginia making the decision.

>> mr. gillespie. >> what's interesting is the reason that nonprescription birth control and other nonprescription drugs are not covered is because that is the rule and obamacare. that's the rule that you voted for. it said these plans come i understand but my point is if you replace obamacare with market reforms people could purchase the insurance of their choice and many women would purchase plans that would cover over-the-counter prescription and over-the-counter nonprescription birth control pills and talk about having faith in the women of virginia i have faith in the women of virginia to make those determinations and what is the best plan a policy for them and their medical needs. not to have a set prescription or proscription in terms of what brands you can and cannot buy and we will tell you as the government way you can and cannot buy and your response to improving obama cares to add a fourth plan that you would tell the women of virginia what they can and cannot buy and by the way the women of virginia are

seeing their health-insurance premiums skyrocket and out-of-pocket expenses go up as a result of your vote on obamacare. >> we will go to a quick commercial break. probably paid for by the campaign. half joking. i want to remind you that the data streaming line on nbc washington.com. join us for our hangout after the debate and we will be back with more coming up after the break. ♪ [applause] >> we are back in mclean virginia with the major party candidates for senate. mid -- the majority of americans believe that the clinical outcome will not change washington. as governor, you talk about these bipartisan deals.

bipartisanship is a near impossibility, it seems. number one, why is that an wide you want another term if you have not been able to be bipartisan? >> because i am not willing to accept the notion that somehow, in america, we can't fix problems. my whole career is how you fix things. that ist found anybody in the 8% that feels that hamas is doing a good job. record.ud of my again, i think the record speaks for itself. what we could do to change? there was a court decision today . we ought to do independent redistricting reform. that would be a giant step towards restoring faith. reform campaign finance rules.

i think the supreme court got it wrong. the super pac's support my opponent and super pac's support me. i think we need to get rid of super pac's at all outside money. race just have this between you and me and no outside influences. that would be a step in the right direction. >> do i get to spend 4 million on outside groups like you spend on me? getake sure that -- let's rid of the outside money. at the end of the day, you have to have folks who are willing to check the democrat-republican hack. >> mr. gillespie, do you accept the notion that washington is broken? your super pac has spent $1.4 million attacking me.

>> you had the granddaddy of all. >> i haven't spent a penny. i just find it humorous. i believe we can get things done. one of the reasons i want to go to washington is i want to see future generations and other family -- and to the families see the same blessings i have seen. n immigranther was a from ireland. i got to grow up to be the counselor to the president of the united states of america. most americans today don't believe that we are a country where the next generation can do better than the generation that came before. that does not have to be our past. that can be our future. and he can be with the right policies. if i can get there, i will fight

for those things every day. i have a very simple task and i have shared with you what it is. if democrats are for it to ease the squeeze on hard-working americans as well as hard-working virginians i will work with them. we can get stuff done and i agree with you, mark. mitch mcconnell has said and i take him at his word that he will open up the senate floor to amendments. that would be a healthy thing for the process. i would certainly support that. by wearing a journey i will make sure -- montague can respond if you would like. >> what i didn't hear from my opponent in that response and i think the family has a great story. i'm proud of my story as well. i'm proud of the stories that virginians can all tell in their own families being over -- able able to overcome odds. that's why my public service. i also worry as well and part of my worry is because we have got such partisan gridlock. i have laid out specific

solutions, changing campaign finance rules we don't have all this outside money. the senateup process. ed and i agree on that though what is different is his whole career has been as a partisan lyrical operative terry he says elect me and i will suddenly be bipartisan. for better or for worse if god my record as governor where we got things done and i go back, check my legislation. every piece of legislation i start with a republican partner and will make him back the question around getting our balance sheet that's where i've taken most rows will be front and center and we have to go back to the simpson-bowles type solution to get it done. >> to you senator warner is harry be the best person to lead senate democrats? yes or no? >> we could perhaps do better in both parties. not that i take that as a nomad.

mr. gillespie is mitch mcconnell the best -- >> is the current leader. mod said he would support him? yes or no? >> i like mitch mcconnell and i take him at his word when he says he will open up the senate floor to mimic that would be -- to amendments and that would be good for the process. they have been nine amendments over the past few years. >> karen has the next question. >> mr. gillespie you spoke passionately but their own family story as an example of a kind of opportunities this country has offered immigrants. back in april the attorney general of virginia declared that undocumented qualified immigrants who grew up in virginia who graduated from high school in the commonwealth could qualify for in-state tuition at universities and colleges in virginia. do you agree with this policy? >> i understand it. to state policy and i'm running for the united states senate and in

terms of the notion of granting embassy at a federal level to -- granting amnesty at a federal level for people who are here illegally i think that needs to be hashed out through legislative process. i do not believe we should confer citizenship on people who are here by virtue of having broken our laws. at the same time i don't believe we are going to deport 12 main -- 12 million people and i think we should have a means by which we can issue fresh visas to people who are here if they have not violated any other law or immigration law, if they pay back-taxes and if they demonstrate self-sufficiency, which has always been a hallmark of our immigration system. i believe we have to do this to through the legislative process and i also believe by the way that starts with securing our border. the fact that we have a porous southern border today is not just an immigration concern. it is a national security concern with the growing threat

of isis or isil and it is a public health threat and the public safety threat with the growing concerns about ebola. i believe we need to have a legislative approach that begins with securing our borders and the things we do to keep people from coming here illegally will allow us to welcome people here legally people like my father in a rational system and with visa reforms that address h-1b visas and others as well but also 40% of people who are here legally today are hereby overstaying a visa. we can fix that and that would allow fresh visas for those that are here now. >> senator warner. >> our immigration system is broken. it needs to be fixed. the thing is the senate actually put together a bipartisan plan that would do that.

it took first border security. of more than doubles border security. it takes on the issue which i have worked on in a bipartisan way with senator moran from kansas and how we deal with the question of h-1b visas and how we make sure we have those tech tech -- virginia tech -- it took on as well the question of guest workers. it took on as well the question of what to do with the undocumented in terms of back taxes, learning english, a whole series of other items. back-taxes. the remarkable thing this bill was supported by 68 senators supported by business, labor and faith groups. plus the perfect? maybe not but we got nothing back from a house in what i find curious is that when this bill was being debated my opponent ed wrote and said this bill was both good policy and

good politics. now he said on the campaign trail that he's against the immigration reform bill and i just wonder what has changed that as the policy changed or has the politics change? >> mr. gillespie. >> nothing has changed in my in the the politifacts a set of area looked at my position on immigration reform and said it's been entirely consistent and it has been. i said it needed to have tougher border security provisions that i do believe we need to secure our border and unfortunately when i was an opportunity to do that an amendment on the senate floor to secure our southern border with a fence in 2009 would have had secured by december 2010. 21 democrats voted for that amendment including former democratic senator from virginia jim webb but that bipartisan amendment senator warner voted with harry reid against it. we also had a vote last month in which there was a vote that said after the election because of what the president said in terms of taking unilateral action to

confer making executive decisions as he has done the past they would not be the funding for them to do that to block the president from taking effective action and require legislation to make any changes to the operation status. five democrats voted for that. it failed 50/50 and senator warner voted against it. >> would you have voted for the gang of eight bill? >> i was not in the senate at the time but i would not have voted for the gang of eight bill. the gang of eight bill is dead and i think it's clear we need to secure our border first. there's no doubt about that. no policy is going to take place in the united states senate or house without securing the border then we have the first. opportunity to do that in 2009 senator warner voted against the amendment. >> senator do you support these present acting unilaterally on immigration if there is no bill by the end of the

year? >> i don't know what the president is planning on doing. i think this is better solved legislatively but i'm not going to make a position with the president which i don't know what i think this is better he is going to propose. i think this is better solved legislatively but let's go back to the question. ed says he's for immigration reform. border security and integration will more than double our current border security. it will have a broad breadth of support. if you're not willing to get behind it and tonight he said is not for comprehensive immigration reform. >> aaron hess the next question. >> is a lot of people in the room of the economy in northern virginia pretty much is humming along at this point but in places like danville and lynchburg the unemployment rate is noticeably higher than the statewide average right now. you have been either a governor or senator for the last decade in virginia. why haven't you been able to do

more to close the divide between the economic and geographical haves and have-nots in virginia? >> one of the things i'm proud of is that virginia has consistently done better than the national average in employment. there's nothing more important than having a job or family in terms of self-worth and everything in my career has been about creating jobs the private sector as governor. we were recognized as the best managed it in the best day for business. there has been some good news recently. they had manufacturing jobs and that is partially because we have an explosion of growth around energy which i support all of the energy policies including coal. we have got to make sure we can bring these manufacturing jobs back home. bipartisan legislation would provide incentives to bring jobs back home to america. the way we are going to do that is to do more of what i did as governor. a company that has a presence in virginia cgi when we

brought 700 high-tech jobs to russell county in southwest virginia because we put the incentives in a package together. we will continue that and we have to do a series of things. we have to extend broadband. i've been supportive of that. part of the agriculture bill to make sure monies are going to underserved areas. we have to make sure we consolidate our workforce training programs. job creation is key to moving forward and i would match my record frankly not only gives my opponent that -- >> mr. gillespie you get 90 seconds. >> mark warner talked about his time extensively as governor but governor warner wouldn't recognize senator warner today in a vote is cast in the united states and for job-killing policy after job-killing policy. when you look at virginia right now our unemployment rate has been climbing. it has climbed 77

-- 7/10 of a percentage point over the past four months. as i mentioned since the senator took office for every net job we have created in the commonwealth to virginians have gone on food stamps. i believe that we need to make it easier for people to get off of food stamps and get into good paying full-time jobs. one of the worst things about the senator's policies i believe when you look at obamacare and look at the regulations and he does not oppose the epa ruled whichhis administration , would result in 50% of our coal-fired plants being closed which would mean more lost jobs for coalminers but also higher prices for electric bills and the price of the guests at of the guest of the palm pushes already doubled since the senator took office. i want to create jobs that will lift people out of poverty pulled down health care costs and my agenda would start replacing obamacare as tax and regulatory relief unleashing american energy would do those things.

that's important because we know there's not just economic value in labor. there's human dignity and work there when he teed -- -- and we need more of our fellow virginians to have the dignity and that will fight everyday to make sure they do. >> senator warner you part of cap-and-trade's preview four months ago city were reviewing the rules. where are you on that? >> i joined with 51 senators to extend the commentary so we can get the facts right. what i differ from my opponent and my full response here is that on energy i am for all of the above including coal including nuclear including natural gas but where we differ is i recognize there's also a serious challenge around climate change. i would like to take you to see the rising sea levels that's costing millions of dollars to spend on raising the peers because of the effect of rising sea levels. he refuses to know that. he lobbied against you efficiency standards. i'm not sure that's the approach we need going forward. i would

simply add his economic policies that he championed were two wars on a credit card a tax debt that we can afford an entitlement program that wasn't paid for that drove our country into a fiscal ditch. if that's your plan on much of the country can afford it. >> mr. gillespie you brought up climate change. man-made? >> there is climate change occurring and man contributes to it. i also believe that closing 50% of our coal-fired plants which senator warner took his tough stance to say we should extend the period past the election i can tell you right now i don't think we should close 50% of our coal-fired plants and if we do we are going to force more

production to countries like china india and indonesia that have less stringent air quality standards than we do. if you care about clean air and reducing emissions the last thing you should do is to push into places like that. >> time for both of you guys. i have a three or four lightning round questions. some are yes and no saddam take more than 30 seconds. mr. gillespie model supreme court justice. >> i had the privilege and honor to help guide through confirmation both chief justice roberts and justice alito. i know them both personally and i admire them both immensely and i think they are -- they do their job. >> you are not going to pick one? >> i helped get them both confirmed. >> senator warner? >> on the current court? >> yes. >> i think justice ginsburg is a

good job. >> what's your philosophy? >> my philosophy is and i have had the opportunity to vote on the supreme court nominees. i think you need to look at the judicial temperance, their ability to stay open and i think the opportunities i have had to vote on the nominees met that criteria. >> let me ask you, this is for both of you. senator warner what is president obama's biggest shortcoming in mr. gillespie if you are elected in the u.s. senate what do you look forward to what senator obama -- president obama you look forward to working with president obama on? >> i disagree with the -- interest rates go up 1% and adds $120 billion in additional interest payments. the only way this will get solved is if we have folks that are willing to chop the democrat and republican

half which i have done on this issue and entitlement reform and tax reform. i'm disappointed the person didn't push this harder. -- i'm disappointed the president didn't take this and symbols plan and push it harder. >> mr. gillespie what does the president support that you look forward to working on them with? >> we are in a dangerous time and we face serious threats threats. i served as counsel to the present united states at a time of war and i've been there in the oval office when the commander-in-chief has gotten reports of casualties and death with their brave men and women serving us in the field. i would want to work with him to make sure that he gets the support he needs to prevail in the defeat of isis and isil and frankly i pray for him in that regard. >> the last question 30 seconds for each of you. mr. gillespie will start with you. what's the job of u.s. senator? >> i believe the job of u.s. senators

to work every day. in my estimation is to work every day to pass and enact policies that make sure that we can keep the american dream alive, that we can make sure that as i said future families and other generations can have the same blessings of liberty that i have seen in my lifetime and i think it should be an effective advocate for people and in our case of our commonwealth. i have been on the campaign trail and i would fight every day for the people i've met along the trail. >> senator what is the job description? >> i think it's to solve problems and that is what i've done in my business career and as his governor and that's what i'm trying to do a senator. it's hard sometimes but i would never give in to the dash this is america is not the greatest country in the world and we can't fix the problems. the difference between ed and i at our core is that he sees every problem through the lens of republican versus democrat. i savor problem in the lens of what we can do to move america

forward and that means you have to be bipartisan. >> thank you to both of you. that concludes our questions. mr. gillespie you can have a one minute closing statement followed by senator warner. so by thank you chuck and they give -- followed by senator warner. >> thank you, chuck, and thank you to everyone who is here today. it was a pleasure to talk about my ideas and my common sense solutions that i believe would get bipartisan votes on the united states senate and would raise take-home pay and lift people out of poverty and hold down health care costs and reduce energy prices. that is why was proud to get the endorsement of the national federation of independent business the champion of small businesses in america and they understand my agenda is the agenda that will create more opportunities for my fellow virginians. now i'm getting a lot of support from a lot of virginians who supported senator warner in 2008 because they could see that he was not the senator he said he would be and they are supporting me and they like my agenda and they realize i will fight to create jobs raise take-home pay and lift people out of poverty. most

americans as i said today no longer believe we are the nation where the next generation can do better than the generation that came before them. it must be her future and it can be with her policies and those are my policies and that is why is virginians to vote for me on november 4. >> senator warner. >> thank you chuck. i'm proud of the fact that there are more republican legislators legislators -- i am a real year thaning me this in the past. i am a real optimist about america. i've been blessed to live the american dream. i failed my first abysses but it -- my first two businesses, but it didn't stop me from picking up and trying again. in business and in government it my whole life i've tried to be a problem solver. too often these days we end up seeing the forces of negative political gridlock. i just don't agree with that. i think more than ever we need people in washington willing to roll up their sleeves and get things done. america is the

greatest country in the world. we have to get back to the notion that in america would we see a problem with we turn together and fix fix it and move onto the next problem. as most quintessential aspect of america. if you are higher me that is what i will do. thank you. >> thank you to the candidates. thank you to the candidates, thank you to the panelists and of course thank you to fairfax chamber for hosting this debate. stay with new support for -- with news for for continuing coverage of all month long of decision 2014. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> our campaign 2014 coverage continues with the week full of debates. ,onight at seven, -- at 7:00 live coverage of the

pennsylvania governors debate. , live coverage. of the annoying 17th district debate. and later at 9:00, live coverage of the lenora governors debate. and friday night live at 8:00 eastern, the wisconsin governors debate the twin incumbent governor republican scott walker and democrat mary burke. and live coverage of the u.s. iowa senate debate. eastern,y at 8 p.m. the michigan governors debate. 2014. campaign more than 100 debates for the control of congress. look at some of the live coverage ahead on the c-span networks. our debate coverage in campaign 2014 full severe is a look at

some of the debates from this week, the north carolina senate debate and the montana house debate. >> the problem we have with washington is that it's broken. people are not communicating across the aisle. senator hagan over six years has not authored a single bill that has gone to the presidents desk. that is a problem. we will need people that will bring people together in areas that we don't agree, take time to find policies that can create jobs, versus killed him. 2.5 million jobs with obamacare or the:. thelation that can -- or equivalent. regulation that can improve jobs come a that i can believe in. think doesrty do you a better job of that? but for the house, harry reid has not allowed anything to be

passed. george, you know this better than most people. only a few dozen votes in the house and a few dozen votes in the senate, it's hard to figure out where the differences would be. they are not debating. there is no such thing as regular order. senator hagan has rubberstamped policy, i'mrop -- sure at the request of president obama, to shut down the votes until after the election. delayingto understand, mandates and amnesty are all collection issues on the ballot and you have an opportunity to stop it. >> do you want to ask him your question again? but it's against the rules. you go ahead. >> the keystone pipeline. i disagree with the president on the keystone pipeline. i have voted against ray dales -- trade deals because they are sent to me jobs from north carolina overseas. and i have voted against my own parties budget because they had to deep of cuts for the military.

my opponent would have turned medicare into a voucher program. he would have supported sequestration. he would have supported a government shutdown. and he would have supported a government shutdown in north carolina when that took place. falls the height of our least season out west and our fishing season in the east. that is what speaker tillis would have done. >> 30 seconds. opponent -- my plan calls for economic sanctions against isis. how do you do economic patients against a non-nationstate? maybe you should write a tersely worded letter. the issue is, ice is a danger. you have to have a three-pronged approach. you have to shut down the northern border. -- the southern border is no longer an immigration issue. it is a threat. a nation that can build a panama canal in the 20th century certainly can build a fence in the 21st.

by airnot control isis alone. in the words of general conway, four-star, former commander in number and core -- there is not a snowball chance in hell at air operations will work. and i agree. secondly, limit our ground forces to special forces to supply and support. we make sure that our coalitions that we choose are watched and efficiently trained. and make sure that isis is destroyed. up because nolow one answered how we are paying for this. we've already put two wars on the credit card. would you be willing to support ther tax to support perpetual war that we seem to be in? -- two clearly different approaches on this issue. i'm saying thoughtful and responsible decisions. no, a letter is not going to get the job done.

but this is somebody who called for invading mexico a few weeks ago because we have an american in jail in tijuana. that's not the kind of judgment i want representing me in congress. to the instant reaction president's announcement that we move with airstrikes was, let's send in more troops. he also set a couple of years ago when president announced that women should serve in combat roles in this country, he said, that is nearly certain to cost lives. that is not the judgment we need in congress. j -- howod question, much will this he cost -- will this cost? it needs to be debated in congress. >> you pay for it by having a strong economy. a navy costs money. urges, schools, infrastructure -- bridges thomas schools, infrastructure, it all costs money. medicare, social security.

and john, i know you did not serve, but care must to is a that has been languishing in a mexican prison for over six months. everybody who serves in this country must know that america has their back. and when america doesn't have their back like benghazi, like mexico, what happens is it sends a signal to every veteran fighting that america is not going to be there. i did not advocate invading mexico. i asked the president to do his duty and to do by our mailable means -- all available means to get the marine back. >> you will find that north carolina debate at www.c-span.org. the five candidates for massachusetts governor met last night for their first debate. martha coakley and charlotte -- and charlie baker along with jeff mccormick and scott lively

all took part. current governor deval patrick is retiring. we expect a briefing from the cbc and the department of homeland security on ebola at 4:00 pm eastern. we will show you what we can of last night's debate. >> good evening and welcome to the wbz gubernatorial debate. listening --g our listeners on radio 1030. and on c-span. and welcome also to the candidates for governor, the five people who gathered 10,000 who earnedignatures a place at tonight's debate. they are, the republican , -- ee, charlie baker

-- hated it, welcome to you all. before we begin, i will let you know that i will be asking questions. each candidate will have the same amount of time to respond to questions. we will enter open times of rebuttal and crosstalk where candidates can question one other and engage directly. there are rolling three strict rules. no talking over each other. no filibustering, and total other obedience -- total and other obedience to the moderator.

does that sound fair? >> that's fine. >> you will go first in this sequence, mr. baker. we will go in alphabetical -- our political order and rotate who goes first. the last couple of years of deval patrick administration have been plagued by managerial failures, costing lives and millions of dollars, including oversight of compounding pharmacies, the rollout of medicinal marijuana dispensaries, and tragic errors at the department of children and families. here is my question. what went wrong with executive and how willment you avoid similar embarrassment on your watch? mr. baker, 45 seconds. >> the biggest thing that went wrong was the commonwealth took its eye off the ball. if you think about the health connector problem that we face in massachusetts can it was pretty clear before that was launched a year ago that there would be issues and problems with it. and then health-care connector board went ahead and did it anyway, much to the chagrin of hundreds of thousands of

massachusetts residents whose care was disrupted. and we sit here today still with a broken connector and no idea what will happen next. the medical marijuana problem, again, a function of taking your bike -- your eye off the ball. basic principles of business management were not pursued. step-by-step, that process did not work. the government next will have to have a firm hand on the tiller and follow through and execute. >> miss coakley. but there are a lot of things that have gone right in the last four years of this administration. including education, infrastructure investment, and in a very tough economy we are coming out of right now. the next governor needs to look at those issues and see how we can do better. i've already talked about how we need to change our structure at the department of children and families. i've known that for the last 25 working with kids.

we need an agency that works just to protect kids. and i know we can do it under governor coakley. said under the i marijuana licenses we needed to do a better job and i will do a better job on that. the health connector is on its way to being fixed. >> it's relatively easy to describe the things that have gone wrong and say, you know, if i would've an alert differently if i were the governor. we don't know the different things that will go wrong under the next administration. and what has gone wrong more a question ofis leadership for the governor to be communicating with the public and to say, this is what happened, this is what we know, and this is what we will do about it. and we need to have confidence in the government to do the important work needs to do. on one side or the other, it's almost protectable what charlie and martha were going to say to answer the question. i want to see a different approach that is honest and levels with voters and treat

them like adults. mr. lively. >> i believe this government is too big, that power is centered too much at the top. i think we've been following liberal policies for a very long time that just inherently caused our trouble in the management process. to streamlinebe government, to downsize, to return power back to the localities. the original perspective of the founders of this commonwealth and a government of limited delegated powers. and we instead, have been following a marxist model of ever-increasing, ever more intrusive big government that is doomed to failure. it does not matter who is at the top. >> mr. mccormack. >> john, thank you for your journalistic integrity and having all of us here. i knew with my wife and i'm the father of three. i'm running because the system is, indeed broken. thousands of jobs and companies

that solve the problems. we do not have the technological wherewithal within the state to do this. we need to bring that to the corner office. we know how to use technology to create efficiencies. we would have avoided this whole website integration issue. there is so much we can do if we just break from the status quo. and we are not doing it now. that's why we need an independent voice. rebuttal, mr. baker. >> i think what of the major problems, especially with something like the health connector is one-party government. to have a health connector board that is made up of representatives and the attorney general's office, they are all part of the same team and the legislature is led by democrats. here we sit a year into this and we still have any visibility into what actually went wrong and what can be done to fix it. no one knows what the total value of the price tag is going to be, other than it's going to be north of $500 million in taxpayer money. we are the only state in the

country where no one was -- where no one who was involved in that actually lost their jobs. on the stagely one who sat with kids who had to testify, kids like young woman i met on the case who said, you know, you handle the sex abuse case when i was a kid. i'm 30 now. i have gone to work and got a college degree. i still have nightmares. i still come here to thank you. i fixed things. head of health and human services and one year, reverted to hundred million dollars when he could've been working to make kids safer. >> the first thing i would say is in the 1990's, we hired additional social workers and got the caseload down. and by the way, the child welfare league of america, which is the organization that the governor brought in to do an audit and analysis on what was

actually gave us awards for what we did back then. i'm proud of it. toould not have chosen not fix the agency as opposed to litigate that case. it was filed by children's rights. >> you're going to make up the time, i promise. >> i've been very clear that case did not have a merit. the case was dismissed. what we said was rather than spend early in the dollars on outside lawyers, let's work within on a solution that is a one-size-fits-all to make that happen. that is what we need to do here. i'm the one who knows how to do it. >> ok, go ahead. we are waiting. >> this is a fundamental i'm running. we need to have people that will deal with this issues. what we are talking about our children who have lost their lives and been put at risk. there is an argument going on between the two of you about the with attack ads

aimed at each other. it's being used for political fodder. we should work together on these issues and it's disrespectful to voters, and certainly for those whose lives have been lost to talk about them in this way. >> do you want to respond? >> i agree with him. the super pac that supports charlie criticizes me in doing what was the best interest for the kids. that is not a political football. i'm not going to make it. >> but both of you have had plenty of super pac opportunities to support what you're doing in your campaign. i send out a challenge to both of you in july to say that we should amend the constitution to eliminate super pac's and there was no response from either of you on this. >> we will get back to you. i promise. go ahead. >> i read the brief that was filed in 2010. it's a compelling brief that was written by a nonprofit children's rights group that managed to settle cases with 15 other states and move forward to fix what was wrong and child welfare.

you are absolutely right, evan. there should be nothing more important than making sure child welfare agencies do the work they are supposed to do. and as i said, anybody who read the brief would come away thinking that the right thing to do here would be to fix it and move forward on a settlement instead of litigating it. we are still litigating it. >> go ahead. we will let you respond. >> it is an unmitigated disaster. fors the poster child out-of-control government. it completely tramples parental rights. adjusting a pallet chair -- the casea pallatierre created a national outrage. and that child would still be under dcf control if pressure had not been brought by millions across the country. dcf should be shut down, frankly. >> let's move on to mr. mccormack. >> this is not something that prosecutorial skills or financial engineering will solve. we need roll up your sleeves solutions on this. this has been going on for decades.

i'm the one who put out a plan right away -- this is what we need to do. why? because i listen to people. we need to change the system completely so it serves the constituency that are most at risk in our commonwealth, our kids. >> charlie has read the brief, but i have sat with those families. i have sat for years and i am the one who put out a plan, with all due respect, to say that we need within the agency a division that will just protect kids. i've seen what happens when we don't do it. and by the way, when your administration was cutting caseloads and cutting budgets, we were seeing the uptake in those caseloads in the child abuse unit where i worked in middlesex county. >> rebuttal. >> i would say two things. one is, no one is questioning advocate as a child across your long and distinguished career in the public sector. >> i am. >> i'm not questioning her work.

and all of us she should be proud of. but the choice you made with respect to that case, i simply believe -- and i think that history has borne me out on this -- the massachusetts children served by that department would have been better served if the commonwealth had moved instead to fix what was wrong at that agency instead of litigating that case. because here we sit with an byncy -- i have a plan, too, the way. no one disputes the fact that we need a plan at dcf. but what everyone does agree on is that the agency has major issues and we are still litigating a case we had four years ago. >> final words on this and then we will move on. >> the lawyers from outside looking for millions of dollars wanted to do something one-size-fits-all. it was not right for massachusetts. yielding ones who would benefit work -- the only ones who would benefit from that was the lawyers. >> this is a serious issue, but we are getting into the weeds on this. i think a lot of voters would listen and say, i'm not sure

what they're talking about. i'm trying to figure out what the next governor should be. >> the next governor should be a weed wacker. getting back to your first question, john, we have not had leadership on beacon hill that has -- that gets down into the weeds and onto the front lines we say isre what happening is what is really happening. >> and let's talk about policies. >> go on and then we will move on. >> i don't know how any of you can be talking about caring for children when every single one of you supports the killing of unborn babies in the will. you talk about born babies, how much you care for them, and yet they are being slaughtered by the thousands in massachusetts. and you all support it. >> i will move on now and keep in mind, you can return to this later on in the open time frame. that is your right. you will start, miss coakley. in the most recently -- most recent poll, the majority of

respondents cited the economy and taxes as the issues most important to them. so let's turn to those topics now. when you're governor -- when you are governor, will taxes go up, go down, or stay the same? 45 seconds. >> i think we need to start with priorities and what we need to invest. in early education, and making sure that our workers get sick time, and investing in education, so that as our economy grows and is growing, we are able to supply the skills they need. computer skills, life sciences, and the growth in a particular industry is enormous. we are going where and investing in education for people so they can do those jobs, i have said, let's make sure we increase those revenues, that we look for efficiencies in government. and we need to it invest in our roads and bridges. we will make that decision with

the people of massachusetts and the legislature. >> the government needs more money to fulfill its obligations. you guys were at the bio form. seen the partners advocate that called and were told, you're not allowed to come to the debate. any debate should include all of the candidates. say that youof you will not go to the forum if they don't include all of the candidates? >> go ahead and answer the question. >> i last charlie. if they want to revisit it. >> i'm saying, don't go. >> no, voters have the right to see who they are voting for.

>> i'm talking about as leaders. >> you can get back into this later if you like. governor,elected taxes will go down substantially. i would like to give back every dollar that i'm able to save by streamlining and downsizing government. but i cannot do it as fast as i would like to, because we have $129 billion of debt. and we have a responsibility to pay that down at the same time. i say, for every dollar that we save by streamlining and downsizing departments, and getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse, that we take half the it back toive taxpayers. >> thank you. mr. mccormick. >> the middle class earning power has gone down considerably. to increase ought earned income credits. and i think we also ought to roll the income tax back to 5%, as people voted quite some time ago. but we ought to do it sensitively through attrition.

i think that makes a lot of sense. i have a plan to attract as this is to committees throughout the commonwealth, creating jobs like i've created jobs, by the thousands. we need to do that throughout the commonwealth and you do that through doubling the historic tax credit. we need to get rid of the inventory tax. that's a job killer. there are upwards of 50,000 jobs that can be created there. we need to have specific incentives to move into our gateway cities, again, in the form of a tax break. >> mr. baker? >> taxes under the baker it ministration will go down. we proposed tax cuts for the inventory tax. we proposed tax cuts for small businesses. we proposed tax cuts for hiring veterans and people on public assistance. but the most important thing we have done is put out a very specific, detailed, comprehensive economic development and growth plan. best thing we can do for the commonwealth of massachusetts is to make the best decisions to create jobs for the

commonwealth. my first job as a candidate would be to go to the technology center. i went there because it was a and wasl partnership creating jobs and economic opportunity. we need to do more of that. >> rebuttal, miss coakley. >> charlie's plan is one that gives tax breaks and leaves us with at least a $300 million deficit with the income that we have now. he has not acclaimed where that will come from. importantly, if we don't invest in our education, particularly computer to my science, and then, -- computer science and stem, then businesses will move south. because health care and energy costs are high. to move back a beer because we want be with a good eighth-grade education. >> -- to move back up here because we want people with a good eighth-grade education. health-care coverage is driven by how much it cost to go

to the hospital. since the 1980's when this are emerging and raising prices and acting like monopolists and this is the deal with the partners that the market has tried to get approved, they have been relayed -- raising prices relentlessly. >> he referenced you both. i don't you start, mr. baker? start, mr.t you baker? >> i've been saying this for a long time, that we need to create full transparency around the performance of health care. i cannot think of any sector of our economy with the same service delivered with the same outcome at four different institutions within a couple of miles of each other can vary in price by as much as 300 or four per -- 300% or 400%. transparency around pricing and performance. it bothers me that you can learn more about a refrigerator, a washing machine, then you can about health care. we should get serious about opening up the cloak. >> two things.

it was under charlie baker's administration that partners was allowed to be created with two great hospitals, mass general and purdum wininstall -- brigham women's. one of our studies found that the cost went up unrelated to value. the second thing is that the agreement that we have reached cap costs and lowers cost as opposed to maintaining the status quo that we all agree on. >> the deal you made is closing the barn door after the horses have left. the distortion has already happened. >> go back and forth on this. you have a clear disagreement. take money out of peoples pockets more slowly, but the damage has already been done. but that isn't true. it puts -- >> that isn't true. it puts price caps on what people can charge. it holds them accountable for better quality. it is a better result for consumers also >> i read the deal. i see what you are talking about

as far as slowing growth. but the distortion has already happened. and partners is fresh out of hospital survive. they will continue. >> the problem is systemic. what you folks are talking about is picking up things around the edges. the system itself is corrupt. moste talking about the expensive nanny state, perhaps in the entire world. with the exception of england. massachusetts is just outrageous. we are spending money that we don't have. and the prices just keep going up and up. and we keep asking for more and more taxes. we need to reverse that trend. >> mr. mccormick, you and i work -- mr. mccormick. >> you and i work in health care. you know how, located these contracts are. we need to change the delivery model. we need to emphasize primary care. we need to emphasize community health centers to bring down the cost. we have to proactively manage our health care, because it is

proven that we will save a considerable amount of money and get better outcomes. >> i agree with a lot of what you said. i agree that we need to put more money into primary care. that is in my health care reform plan. i believe the transparency piece can be done quickly and should be done. and every city that has been done show the single biggest factor driving up health care costs in massachusetts is this incredible disparity between and among providers with respect to what they get paid. and friendly, i don't think that can be solved through bureaucratic infighting. whether it is the agreement with partners or the health-care commissioner or something else. this is todeal with make everybody post their prices. i don't think that would be that hard to do. >> final word on this. what are the values that drive you when you are making decisions as governor? i have this question for charlie, because we are talking historically. what do you say to people when you successfully turnaround

harvard pilgrim, but you left 3500 seniors off? you tripled premium costs and salaries. >> let's get one thing straight. i walked into a health plan that employee thousands of people across massachusetts, new hampshire, and maine. in addition to that, it owed hundreds of millions of dollars to hospital organizations and other health care providers .cross eastern mass if harvard program had gone down, thousands in massachusetts would have lost their jobs and a series of important health care institutions would have gone away. the fact that we saved harvard pilgrim -- and it was a week. the raclette he -- and it was we. there were thousands of people involved in that. i believe it had a role in resetting the marketplace. >> and in a not-for-profit, your salary went from over $600,000 to $1.7 million.

how do you explain it to people whose premiums went up? echoe who lost their kerry >> my salary was completely consistent with market salaries overall. -- people who lost their health care? >> my salary was completely consistent with the market salaries overall. i'm so proud of what we did with that organization and the thousands of jobs that came with that. give you just a few seconds. >> where charlie is saying about the prices is going up because of hospital consolidations is true. --s in a attorney general of it is in the attorney general's office. >> you can revisit this in a moment. sip ofbreak and have a water. when we return, the gubernatorial debate will continue. stay with us.

>> welcome back. here.resume our debate youile check -- falchak, will leadoff. here the question that will hopefully give us a little bit of insight into your character. what was the most difficult decision you ever had to make in your professional life? and why did you decide the way you did? 45 seconds. but it was about -- crexendo is a decision that of going about -- >> it was the decision of going about founding a new business career. i believe the system is not representing people. i felt like the way to change it was not just to run, but to build a new party based on the idea that everyone is equal, that everyone's civil rights have to be protected command that the government has got to spend taxpayers allers wisely. we have -- and the government has to spend taxpayer money wisely.

it is a terrible sign in our democracy when the majority of our legislators run unopposed. it is not good for resolving issues. it was a tough choice, but i feel honored to have the opportunity to be a part of this. >> thank you. mr. lively. >> that's a tough question. i've made a lot of career choices that were difficult to make. the one i suppose that was the most challenging in recent years , i closed down a successful law firm in southern california. i was the managing partner. in order to go back on the mission field. , gave up substantial salary and really, a very lucrative business. my wife and i now run an inner-city mission in springfield, massachusetts. we bought an abandoned house in the middle of the lid. called a holy ground coffee house and it serves the most is his bandaged people in our society. peoplemost disadvantaged in our society. but it was worth it. >> i would have to say was starting up a company to treat

als. it was a struggle. areneurological diseases extremely complicated. and in growing the company and going through clinical trials the trial outcomes of that did not make sense to anyone, that was a real gut check moment. about it.d i talked we had two more than doubled down. it was a huge investment. and we felt it was the right thing to do, because not only do we believe it will ultimately patient,-- als but we believe it will lead to breakthroughs with other neural logical diseases, like parkinson's, which other people will take up and carry. >> personal or professional? >> you can define it however you want. >> when harvard pilgrim was in real trouble, we made the decision to exit the rhode island part -- marketplace.

that about thousands of people, hundreds of thousands of members. that was easily the hardest decision i've ever had to make. i'm proud to say that we worked overtime to make sure that everybody who was in act if treatment -- active treatment stayed in active treatment. and everyone was in business with us got paid for the services they rendered. and we did everything we could to make sure that every person who worked for the op -- for the organization had an opportunity for other employment as we went through that process. that was a classic example of andng absolutely no way out no good choices. and we had to make it. to this day, i think it is the toughest decision i've ever had to make. miss coakley. >> the easy decision for me was firm,working in a big making the call to go into public service. the hardest decision was working for district attorney tom riley in the child abuse unit. i wanted to do homicide.

i wanted to be in court and trying cases for victims. this was the hardest job i've ever had and hardest decision. i had not done child-abuse cases before. it was a time that number of cases -- numbers of cases were growing, including physical abuse. we started to cases are him broken limbs and fractured skulls. i worked across a range of cases that made me a much better district attorney and a much better prosecutor in problem-solving around domestic violence and child abuse. >> by the way, i should have noted this was a question submitted by steve in arlington through cbs boston.com. would anyone like to follow-up? justwould like to congratulate you. all of the crazy stuff around the ice by the challenge, i heard the good news of the money that was raised. by clinical trials are ahead three or four years now. that kind of debilitating

disease and what we were actually able to do in massachusetts with our biotech and life sciences, people like jeff or able to invest in it. not only is it an economic driver for massachusetts, but it is saving people's lives. >> isn't it odd that the only one with a stake in this was disinvited from the biotech meeting? >> let's move along. you will start, mr. lively. let's turn back to an issue that made the top five issues on voters minds, according to the latest poll. homeland security. the u.s. supreme court yesterday declined to hear the appeal of a conviction on terrorism charges. meanwhile, an associate is on the fbi's most wanted terrorist list and is believed to be a keep -- a key ice is operative. -- isis operative. these are just names on a growing list of terrorist.

and boston is just one of three u.s. cities where the foe -- the feds are focusing on their recruitment of terrorists. is massachusetts some way a magnet for terrorists? if so, why? and what would you do as governor to proactively identify them before they act out? >> yet, i think massachusetts is a target, because the liberal state. if you look around the world, the place where radical islam are going are the most liberal countries -- the netherlands, england, sweden, and in the united states, they are going to the highesthat have democrat populations and the greatest amount of powerful sub it's because they know they can get away with more in a society where there is not a lot of scrutiny, where people don't have guns to defend themselves. the places they are going are the places where they have the strongest gun laws. they are the places where the government has been concentrated at the highest, so there is no local focus.

>> thank you. mr. mccormick. >> i don't think we are really a magnet other than the fact that we are very cosmopolitan area and we have a lot of influence on what happens in the united states, and in fact, the world. from abroadpeople who want to inflict terror, they want to get an impact. course, they will go to the kinds of cities where they think they can make that and be seen. they will not go to know where. where. they will come to some of the northeastern cities. as governor, we have to work with the federal government very closely. tose agencies don't talk each other very well at all. obviously, neither do our state agencies. this will come down to relentless use of technology and vigilance. >> mr. baker. >> i would agree with jeff's opening comment. i think the cosmopolitan nature of boston and massachusetts has

something to do with it. we have a lot of people who come here to go to school. we have a lot of people who come here to work, to visit. we are a terrific location geographically in terms of someone's ability to get to and from a lot of different places from here. as i think as a result, governor, there is probably no single priority that should be higher than the public safety of the people here. as governor, i would make sure that my administration was in constant contact with federal agencies, city agencies, national security agencies, and i would take a personal interest in making sure that we did everything we could to stay on top of everything going on in the cyber community, the maritime community, and in the community generally. >> thank you. miss coakley. >> i remember like it was yesterday, i was district attorney on the second floor the tallest building in east cambridge on 9/11. and we knew that after the second plane hit that the country was being attacked. , even though the

planes did not come through there, we had to leave that building. and i know this because as this attorney working in the task force,ime since that time at the state level we have improved to indications. we have a state task force and we stay in contact all the time. to look at better threat assessment tools. new york, boston, all of the cities will be targets. and we need to coordinate efforts to deter the threats. respond as we did with the boston marathon command if we can, keep communication going. >> the world is a dangerous place and the government has an important navigation to make sure your -- make sure everyone is kept safe. with the war on terror, our civil liberties are increasingly being encroached on. after the marathon bombing in boston and the heroic work done by the police, as residents of

massachusetts, we were told to stay in our homes. you saw the very militarized police in the streets. this is a worrisome development. and when you think about the words of the national animal -- national anthem calling us the home of the brave, we are brave. we can handle the kind of the threats that exist in the world. but our civil liberties should not be negotiable. >> rebuttal? , on that friday i went to where all of the police were amassed, because we did not know who was at large and where they were. we understand that the judicial system has to control that. i went to make sure we got search warrant. if we were ever to bring a case, it has to be held to the u.s. constitution. he have to have a balance between the way we get information and collect it, but we are dealing now with our borders for the people who are coming out, having information, sharing information, doing assessment under the rule of law. >> more response.

>> the rule of law has interpreted to allow the onernment to sneak -- snoop individual e-mail. >> we need a rule of law and not be subject to terrorism. >> it is happening at the state level as well. we need leaders who will say it will stand up against it. they need to be held to account, but -- i >> i'm going to go to mr. lively. even waiting patiently. ,> something back in the debate which is that public leaders, public officials need to be forthright and public with people, and open with them about the decisions they make. and i happen to think on this particular one, most of the and be like talk to about the issues run surveillance and phone calls and wiretaps and all the rest, the big issue people had was that it was all going on and no one in the government was telling them about it. i also think people are not only brave, but they are old enough and mature enough to have a conversation about this.

that is part of what has been left out. >> i would add that to my regional comments, that's the problem we have with immigration. we need to close the borders from illegal immigrants and we need to stop bringing so many radical islamists into our country through legitimate immigration policy. if you look to see where the radicals are going, they are also going to the places that have the most liberal policies regarding immigration. >> you made that point. rebuttal? think we do need a system that is fair to people, including residents who are here. that means you need the rule of law and the ability to make sure that we have information that we can assess and protect. and there are times, charlie, and i know this, that you cannot tell everyone what you're doing. and i do believe that government information should always be made available at some stage. >> os. >> 60% of the company founded in the commonwealth are founded by immigrants.

this country was largely founded by immigrants. most of us are descendents of immigrants. >> legal immigrants. >> people don't have signed on them. i have friends that come here from all over the world. >> legally, i hope for the >> -- legally, i hope. the best job possible to keep terrorists out of the country, no one would disagree. but it is agencies working together, states working together with the federal government. it is a compensated situation. >> go ahead and then i will move on after this. folks ated to enough the state level to know that the federal government, to follow up on the attorney general's comment, there are situations when the federal government is not even telling people at the state and local level about stuff going on in their own community. i would tell you as governor, i would be all over that. one of the big problems is this huge disconnect between what the feds know and what the state and locals know. that has to change. >> briefly, if you have any more on this man that i want to move

on. that things't be have to be hidden from us if we had not brought so many troublemakers into our country. >> go ahead. >> the challenges we face will not be solved by inciting fear and prejudice in people in massachusetts or the country for the >> i'm not inciting fear. i'm saying we need to be response will for the immigration policy and not just let people slip across the border. >> i'm going to move on. you can revisit this later on as we go along. we spoke about health-care briefly, but i want to return to the topic with a bit different is effective -- different perspective. i will start with mr. lively. if her vulcans -- if republicans win back the white house in 2016, it's entirely possible they may try to repeal at least part of the new health care law. beyou are elected, you will in office as governor at that time. are there any aspects of that law you would encourage washington to change? or are you satisfied with it as

is? 45 seconds. >> i think socialized medicine is a disaster for our country. i would completely repeal obamacare and rebuild for the ground up. -- we haveking about to have agencies to deal with the sorts of things, but let's deal with them on conservative principles and not keep following these far left ideas .hat take us off into lala land >> mr. mccormack. >> i want to pull people together to solve problems. we should have asked for an innovation waiver. we have the most inclusive health care system in the united states and i think we should have tried to perfect that system. we should have emphasized primary care and community health centers. and our large providers know that and are making investments in that area. but with 42% of the state budget, we have to do it much more aggressively than we are now. tohave to take those models

the next level, give people better outcomes, decrease the cost of care mr. baker.bigger -- life the most important decisions that matter with respect to health care and inerage are made by people massachusetts. the main reason i support pursuing a waiver not knowing that the whole thing was going to blow up was because i wanted massachusetts to continue to be in the drivers seat and control its own destiny. people takeat personal. to have the ability to make decisions about our health system work's. ar losing control of that.