wage, our competitiveness is there, and that would help all families. >> i have a two-parter as well. to point to successes in other states, but sam brownback cut income taxes in an moret to make the state business friendly, and now it lags behind the rest of the country and has to cut funding. explain how your plan to lower taxes would have different incomes -- outcomes in illinois. senator, you have rejected the plan to expand sales tax on services, even though it could avoid being regressive. why do you oppose what many see isn't needed change to make it stable in the future? >> governor quinn today is playing political football with this issue.

in the past he has supported a sales tax on services. >> i would like you to address the cuts in kansas and revenue issue. tax don't agree with the policies put in place in kansas. i have advocated we look at our entire tax code in illinois and reform our entire tax code to make us more competitive. we have got to grow our economy. bycannot solve our problems raising taxes on families. we need to grow. we need a progrowth tax code. rapidly growing states have a broad base and low rates. i believe we should keep the rates down but rod in the base. we should expand sales tax to include services that are more business oriented rather than on low income families. we need to close tax loopholes. we need to modify

ontaxes should be available ability to pay. , everyday people are going to have to pay a tax on garbage pickup, or does they adopt a child. those are on their taxes. -- myople who are not opponents plan will give himself a $1 billion tax cut. it will shift the burden. that is not right. we ought to have a fair tax system that invests in education. my opponents plan will cut $4 billion out of education. how do you grow jobs if you are cutting 1-6 teachers in illinois?

our kids need to learn. we need a proper education god education budget. suggestedampaign you are trying to buy the black vote. how is that any different than announcing taxpayer-funded construction programs like the neighborhood recovery initiative? >> i was -- i believe in competing for everyone's votes. i have been to washington, illinois after several occasions. i think it is important our state rise to the occasion. with respect to the violence that has occurred in chicago, it is important that we act. i will never apologize for

making sure we help keep families safe and kids on the right track. i'm happy with the jackie robinson success. parents work together what their kids for a common good. great things could happen. >> then can you explain why you haven't made an investment before running for office? if you're elected as governor do you plan on continuing to make those investments? >> i am using why personal money. money been using taxpayer , dropping it in certain communities to try to give voters influence.

we have been involved in the african-american community for decades. to earlyjor donors childhood education in the black community. my wife and air care deeply. we have been involved for decades. it is not politics. i learned about this credit union on the campaign trail. someone brought it up to me at an event. i made an investment there. i'm honored to have done it. businessking to leaders across the area, the express concern over workers compensation and the tax rate.

bill whichupport a establishes a state fund for employers to purchase cheaper insurance policies? >> eyes i have traveled the state,, in every county meeting with tens of thousands of voters, small business owners have told me their problem is the workers compensation system. brokenrogram -- it is and full of abuse. the concept that you have laid out here in your question is interesting. i don't know enough to say for sure that is the problem i will pursue. it sounds appealing based on what i have heard. i know we can drive reform by looking at what other well-run states do. our politicians in springfield, including governor quinn, said they get workers comp reform a few years ago. it wasn't real reform. a reduced rates a small bit.

even today the ceo of caterpillar is trying to wrestle whether to build headquarters here told me workers comp costs five times more today in illinois and as indiana. they are growing jobs out of illinois. we have to change that. >> we haven't had reform in a bipartisan way. i work with the illinois manufacturers association. the reforms enacted have reduced the money paid for work wisconsin by $450 million. 19% reduction. we are always interested in working more. i got that done. my opponent talks. we get it done. he just mentioned about the african immediate -- american executiveshe has 51 at his investment firm. not one was an african-american. i don't think that is right. if you really care about the

community of illinois everybody should be in very nobody should be denied to work. there are many qualified african-americans. it is important to understand our state goes forward because of our diversity. we have a diverse population. i don't think it's right to leave folks behind. that is what my opponent did. >> would you support a competitive marketplace for cheaper policies? >> we need as much competition and workman's comp as possible. more competition the best rates we can get. >> would you support that? >> it sounds like an appealing program. i would have to study it. something like that could make a lot of sense. supportedr quinn, you custom medicaid that were supposed to save billions.

they have failed to meet targets. he opposes the medicaid expansion under the affordable care act but in some states a third of the residents are currently uninsured. how would you ensure the poor have access to medical coverage while keeping medicaid from squeezing out funding from other areas? >> we did have to restructure medicaid. it was difficult. we passed a bipartisan bill to do that. this past year we rebel to restore a number of the programs . our economy is doing much better. having said that i did sign the bill to make sure that we got money from washington to ensure that many more people aware in our health-care system. 685,000 people have received health coverage under the affordable care act. my opponent would have denied

that funding to our state. thousandsave sent to of families who have now had health insurance under this law that he would have denied that did them like they did in texas and indiana and wisconsin. >> how do you plan to keep the costs in check. >> the reforms we have enacted have done that. they are good reforms that keep the cost to a reasonable level. we have received more money for washington to cover more people. my own it would have denied that. 400,000 people. >> as i have said i would not have expanded medicaid under the affordable care act the way it was done. it is the lawn now. it is here. i don't advocate rolling it back. i do advocate eliminating the waste and fraud.

it is a mismanaged program under governor quinn. i've met with nurses who work inside the department and deal with medicaid. they told me they wanted to meet in private because they were worried they would be fired. the waste and fraud is out of control. some of that came to light when it was a private investigation required under legislation. they were finding that as many as 40% of and royalties -- enrollees were not able to get that program they were enrolling in. there was waste and fraud. i support a substantial high-quality well-funded medicaid program. but we don't have that. we have mismanagement. >> amanda. >> both of you like to tell your accomplishments, and i don't blame you.

some of my colleagues have done a good job to display your failures in your leadership positions. you as the ceo of the state, what is your biggest regret? have a ride in our accomplishments. business, not in every company succeeds. that is unfortunate. i wish that were true. that is the free enterprise system. capital, it is extremely risky. not every company succeeds. executivesy some engaged in bad behavior. that is unfortunate but it is a fact of life. where we have found that to be true we have taken action to correct it. overall our track record of success is outstanding. one of the top of any firm in the united states. we have invested on behalf of

illinois pensions and in 22 other states. we have generated double stock market returns. we were honored to work for teachers in illinois will be generated when he 5% compound annual link. we have manage money for corrections officers, police officers, and government workers and have done a outstanding job. >> i'm deathly not perfect. i don't think any human being is. one regret along the way as governor, i suspended the pay of legislatures and my own pay to get important fiscal reforms to move our state forward. if i had to do it over again i would have done it earlier. it would have saved more money. it is important that responsibility of anything going in the wrong direction. you have to take responsibility and act very you put in reforms. i tried to do that in every challenge i have had as governor. by contrast, my opponent never takes responsibility when things

that went wrong in his empire. the nursing home scandal what people lost their lives, $1 billion worth of verdicts for wrongful death of seniors killed in their nursing homes. all he does is think of the money. he never took responsibility or straightened it out. same thing with all these businesses under his watch. it is important to understand that six of his executives are now in jail for bad behavior. state services does illinois need to reduce, eliminate, or privatize in order to help the state meet fiscal constraints. be specific. >> privatizing, i think you have to be careful. public the work of our employees. is i honor and all those who are firefighters, police officers. those are work for the public. it i'm not for privatizing our

teachers. all of this about the charter schools. i believe in public education. that is a we should invest in. it is important to understand that tonight, my opponent took in $53 million in one year. he is not for raising the income tax on millionaires like himself. what he wants us to have the same tax rate that he has for minimum-wage workers. >> what service would you cut? >> we have cut a number of services. $5 billion in our state and i have been governor. today is thatel 2008 levels. i have had to close 50 facilities. it is difficult. my opponent says to reopen the facilities. that is no way to save money. under governor quinn illinois has been one of the worst run states in america. we have rampant misspending of taxpayer money.

massive waste. one large example is the department of central management services. it is the bureaucracy that is supposed to run the state government. his own people have said there is over half $1 billion of wasted spending in the procurement process inside central management. he doesn't do anything about that because that is part of the that isl of cronyism endemic in such our state government. he relies on that for his election and for campaign cash. that is rampant throughout the department. he has been caught hiring illegally inside the department of transportation, changing patron is can save a lot of money. experts estimated that we pay half billion dollars in a corruption tax because of the bad behavior the governor has engaged in.

>> changes to retirement benefits aside, should the state continue on the payment schedule or should the state consider it into the future to lower the not it has to pay. should they lower funding level from 100% to 70% to ease the strain? >> could you repeat? >> should the state continue on the pension plan that we have on the schedule or should we extended refinancing the debt and taking the pressure off? should we look to 100% funding 80% level to0 or ease the strain? >> i believe the right answer for the pension is to create a second pension plan for the future. that is constitutional, it is fair to workers. >> benefits aside, when we make payments now, should we change

that? >> here is the problem. politicians in illinois have been playing kick the can down the road. we should not do that anymore. it is not fair to workers or retirees. what our policy can do in illinois is make promises to workers and then don't honor the promises by paying in. we have to change that. ,e should freeze the system honor the obligations that have been accrued and create a second plan. it can have options for employees. more the find contributions. it should be different than the one that has been a starkly done. -- historically dumb. what's governor quinn? >> paying the pension amount every single year i have been governor, i'm the first in memory to do exactly that. previous governors did not pay the proper amount.

liability grew to $100 billion. we passed the reform bill. it is not before the court. this time we pay the appropriate amount every year. i am not for what my appropriate -- what my opponent is advocating. he wants a risky for a one key system that1(k) will cause great harm to public employees and people of illinois. wererowd at wall street the ones coming up with these games. >> should we reconsider the schedule? >> i'm complying with that. i pay the proper amount. the first governor doing it. you have to do that for public employees. but also for the taxpayers. we enacted some reforms. they will be best for the people of illinois. governor, i know that you

proposed a balanced budget that relies on an extension of the current income tax level. that didn't happen. you called the spending plan submitted by the general assembly in complete and said it postponed tough decisions. you signed into law nonetheless. why did you not veto it? did that have anything to do with this campaign for reelection? >> a bit -- a budget is a 365 day exercise. we have to go back to this fiscal year when they resume in springfield. what i wanted to do is make sure schools are open and everyone was seen with proper health care. i believe our budget that i spoke of is the best one for illinois. said itit rating agency

was affordable and will pay our bills. , helpl probably invest veterans, and get illinois to a good spot. using the income taxed to fund the government is the fairest way to go. my opponent has a tax on services like picking up your garbage. that is what billionaires do. they take tax breaks for themselves. that is not right. budgetcourse of this year we have got to get a fair budget that is properly investing in schools. >> feel free to address some of what the governor has said. outside of your own campaign no one seems to make the numbers in your blueprint at a. you want to give more money to state parks, and education, at the same time cutting revenue and rolling back the income tax to 3%. let's try again to make that add

up. >> we have got to set our goals and priorities and then manage them. we need a competitive tax code. we will get there. we need to reduce the tax code. we will get there. we need to grow our economy, we are failing miserably under pat quinn to grow our economy and create jobs. nothing else will get fixed until we are growing and creating jobs. here is the tragedy in illinois. we have been controlled now for 12 years by a group of chicago .achine political leaders those three has controlled our government for 12 years. it hasn't led to massive debt, taxes, and the worst run state america. we need big change. we have to come at this on a bipartisan basis with outside

the box thinking and drive real results. we can't fix our problems just by raising income taxes on families. that won't solve our problem. >> the next question is from h wayne wilson. >> you have proposed reopening prison. what do you propose to truly rehabilitate inmates to reduce recidivism? >> we need to perform our corrections system. it is broken. it is badly missed manages -- mismanaged. we have a tragic situation in illinois. on safe prisons. we have corrections officers with their lives and safety and risk. we have inmates with personal safety at risk because we have not properly staffed and invested. we incarcerate nonviolent

offenders very often here. we do a poor job for providing alternative routes to deal with nonviolent offenders that they are more likely to receive help and avoid falling back into life of crime and helping them find ways to get back in society be productive citizens. we don't think outside the box. we have got to change our system. governor quinn is failing on this. our corrections officers and inmates are at risk. haveion representatives endorsed me, not him. with respect to our corrections system we have reduced the number of repeat offenders. one thing we use is a bill -- adult redeployed. alternative ways of punishing people for bad behavior. so they don't have a life of

crime. we have invested in that. my opponent is wrong about that. when people do come out of prison we have programs of reentry to help people that made an offense, paid their debt to job, and then we are able to do that as well. we have invested greatly in that. bills to give tax credits to higher offenders. i think those are important things. in the area juveniles we have reduced the number of juveniles incarcerated by using these techniques. my opponent is wrong. he is proposing to make radical cut. >> the candidates are going to make closing statements. the order was determined by earlier drawings. governor quinn with the closing statement. >> i appreciate your virginity to be here. i thank everyone for being here.

-- i appreciate everyone for being here. the heart of illinois, the heart of america is the heart of a volunteer. we have had lots of people volunteer to change direction in illinois. when i came into office we were going in the wrong direction. we are not going in the right direction. we had an appointment -- we had an appointment go down faster than any time in 20 years. jobs or upgrade that is what we want to have. my opponent is a job outsourcer. he has laid off people and outsourced jobs, american jobs to foreign lands. he is opposed to raising the minimum wage and wants to cut education. i don't think that is the right way to go. i want to the future for our kids. that is the right way to go.

>> i'm honored to be here with you tonight. thank you for all of you here for hosting us. i look forward to going to work for you. i love illinois passionately. this is home. we raised our six children here. i have built here. i love illinois. they't stand to see what have done to our home. our homes are at risk. the future for our children is in jeopardy under the failed leadership, the corruption, the cronyism, the job losses, the high taxes. we are failing as a state. i won't let it happen. we need bipartisan solutions, real leadership. we can make illinois the greatest state in the greatest nation on earth. i can drive that process. people in illinois are fantastic. we have the most fertile farms. we have the best location. we are the heart of america. we can drive with strong

leadership that solves problems on a bipartisan basis and brings integrity back. and to go to work for you. >> this is a terrific audience. you have held your applause. but give a big round of applause. [applause] >> thank you again. we appreciate time tonight. .e want to thank our panelists this is a production of illinois public broadcasters and a partnership with the league of women voters.

>> coverage continues. c-span liveht on coverage of the iowa senate debate with bruce braley and joni ernst. live it 6:00, the michigan governor's debate between rick .nyder and democrat mark shower 100 debates for the control of congress. >> in oklahoma, james lankford is running against connie johnson for the state's open u.s. senate seat. .om coburn is retiring this debate comes to us courtesy of oklahoma state university.

>> oklahoma state university, i'm a professor of political science here. it is my pleasure to moderate the u.s. senate debate. this has been a joint effort between the is league of women voters and oklahoma state university. ty. let's introduce the candidates. and jamesnson lankford. [applause] welcome. as you all know, a campaign has a long job interview. we will be approaching this debate as an interview. we have selected a series of questions dealing with the most salient issues of our time and

we will hear where the candidates stand. is going to be that each candidate will have two minuss for a remark, two -- two minutes for a closing statement. all of the questions in mind section of the process were selected by me alone. we will take some questions from the students in the audience. we have ushers walking through now reading paper. we asked students write their name in the year they are here at osu. is that willn it review those questions and bring me the top three. with that, let's start with our opening statement. based on the coin toss, the state senator connie johnson will be going last.

start withord will your opening statements. >> thank you. it is my honor to be here. the folks that are here in this room. it is a privilege to be here. we carry a responsibility to our state and the nation. 22 years i served in ministry working with families. school andm high college-age students. it was my joy to do that. four years ago my wife and i were called to serve in the house of representatives. this is still serving families. this is still doing what we have always done to do a weekend with our time and effort to make the best difference that we can for god and our state. i have to tell you four years ago walking into the house of representatives it was more like walking back on campus at middle school at lunch because middle school lunch private self on

insulting each other and saying crazy things. i thought that was exactly what congress is. a big middle school lunchroom. trying to reset a tone an example of how we pay respect to each other, even when we disagree, how to set up parameters and say this is the thing we consider best in the nation. how to begin those things accomplished? to move us from complaining to solving the issues. we have all kinds of educational issues as a nation. all kinds of opportunities that are not one out for the youngest generation as they come out. we want everyone to have those great opportunities. we have income inequality. it is essential to us that we take those things seriously and work together to find real result. i strongly believe conservative solutions when out. those options and ideas when in every town in our state across america. if we will honor each other as

we walk through the process. all before the conversation tonight. >> thank you. senator johnson. .> thank you good evening everyone. it is my honor and cleverest -- privilege to be here this evening to present my feelings and thoughts, to see how those issues resonate with you as voters in oklahoma. congressman langford it is correct, it is time to have a conversation about economic equality, about fairness in our economic system, about taxes, about health care, about women's reproductive freedom, and about privatization of social security and what that means for the well-being of the majority of all, citizens who are baby boomers now. it is a time for us to have a

conversation devoid of labels, democrat.ervative and it is time to talk about the people of all, and what issues concern them. what issues government should be addressing and what issues you should be addressing as individuals. my campaign has been for the people. i have traveled the state. i've heard you talk about the need to strengthen public education. that areto create jobs meaningful and pay a living wage. perhaps increasing infrastructure. i have mostly heard you talk about the need for the government to get out of our business, to let people live their lives, to let people make choices and individuals of the government shouldn't have anything to do with. i come to tonight with 33 years of experience in the oklahoma state senate having resolved problems with citizens and written policies that made a difference in lives. i'm asking for your vote to go

and do the same thing in washington. herehappy that you are tonight. i look forward to the conversation. >> all right. thank you. [applause] >> i did or did to mention we have lost -- ask the audience to hold applause until the end of the debates we can focus on answer is. thank you. it is time now for the questions. the first question will go to you, congressman langford. i set it up for the question that a campaign is a long job interview. let's talk about campaign finance reform. this is what takes place for members of congress run for public office. using you think the money spent on campaigns is a problem and do you support a constitutional amendment to curtail it?

>> thank you. i would not support an amended to curtail it. the first amendment was set up to protect political speech. the last thing the finals -- founders wanted to have with a keen stepping up and telling everyone how to talk about things, what they could talk about, and we have students not protesting in hong kong because the leadership in china is stepping in and saying we have a few changes we are going to make and help select the group of leaders and try to alter some of the system. we should allow the free conversation that is happening. beis a great frustration to able to walk through the campaign-finance issues and make sure you do everything correctly. appropriate toy have the transparency needed in that process. as many people would know, if you're going to have a commercial on television, they don't do that for free. if you're going to have a sign in a yard that does cost money. , the fundraising

that happens doesn't go to the candidates. it goes to get the message out in the campaign. when i go to someone and say i would like to have your help to get the message out they can make a decision on who they believe in and what they're going to do. transparency is important. we have that. they can see every donor out there in the race. that is entirely appropriate. i don't like you thought of silencing clinical stage. -- political speech. >> if in fact the cost of running a campaign is 10 times the cost of the salary that i would expect to receive, i'm on minimum wage. we are a grassroots campaign. those are the only thing that trumped dollars. we have enjoyed traveling the state in my car, using gasoline, paying food for my health.

the cost the campaign should not outweigh the value of the campaign. what we have today with decisions like citizens united where untold amounts of cash are being funneled into campaigns by private corporations in ways that employee policy makers to make decisions that are not always in the best interest of the people. those of the concerns we are speaking to when we talk about campaign finances reform. that court hearing has been upheld. it doesn't leave us any better place when it comes to how we fund our campaigns and get our message out to people. i appreciate this opportunity to and talk to the students those were watching us online. this is one of the free opportunities economic reason to. thank you.

>> the islamic state, with airstrikes taking place in syria and iraq, should congress vote on authorization of military action? how would you vote? >> that is a conversation that needs to be had. this ongoing crisis in the middle east, the 240 skirmishes that have occurred in the world since world war ii are an example, and the united states has been involved in all of them. examples of wars that are basically founded and based in religious issues. we keep trying to put a political military solution on a religious situation. we can see that it continues and it is not being successful. atould take a long look whether we send our troops into harms way again, into situations that we have not been able to resolve because of the nature of

the situation. taken.t has been there are alternatives though. we need to look at peaceful resolution and get our house in order in terms of how we are spending money for things overseas versus spending money on soldiers when they come home. for is the big challenge me. we have be prepared for when they come back we don't need to be going in towards the first place. >> thank you. >> the islamic state is not under the previous authorization for the use of military force. theress voted to approve execution of military force for those directly connected to september 11, 2001 attacks. the president is saying that he still has authorization to move into syria based on that .uthorization he doesn't. that is not an accurate use of

military force. in the 2002 authorization it was connected to iraq. he is moving forces into this. the issue is, this is something that congress has to resolve. this is the way the system was set up. if you go back to the federalist paper you will determine all these different amendment and where it came from. finds the power and shows how different war power is from the previous king of england. he could call up his army and then go execute the army. he could work at unbeatable to have the war. the president will not have the same authority. he can't call it the army and then be commander-in-chief. he is commander in chief after congress has approved that. that was the american people would be engaged in a conversation. when we feel threatened and understand there is a real threat the american people through their elected representatives would say it is time to engage.

we are willing to put our sons and daughters at risk. the president should come back. >> thank you. this next question deals with ebola. it is in our backyard. texas governor rick parry is calling on officials to permit screening positional's -- officials at all points of entry. they would take temperatures and determine overall health. if elected would you support those moves? >> we have procedures in place in the president is doing a decent job of trying to do some changes in that process. what needs to happen now is verified everyone coming from west africa. did you contact and not just .ssume sometimes they know, sometimes they don't. the gentleman in texas was fully aware he had contact with ebola and he lied on his form. first check, it needs to be

every individual that comes from that region. when you talk about one person in the united states, that is a dramatic thing for us. and west africa, 7500 people right now have ebola. their system is completely overwhelmed. the cdc estimates i january there may be as million -- as many as half a million people. while they take this very seriously the need to take ebola seriously and understand people halfway across the world are in desperate need of engagement. this disease will spread if the united states doesn't engaged in there is no other place in the world better but then we are at dealing with this disease. it would be wrong to back up and say we are going to allow half a million people to die because we don't want to engage. we should lean in and help. we are equipped to do that. we should pay attention to ports of entry to verify we are doing basic screening.

>> state senator. >> i believe this is the most dire world health issue of our time. it was just a matter of time before it came to america. , agree with the congressman the majority of these cases are centered in west africa. with a highly mobile society of today people travel from africa to china to japan, to new england. those areas are just as likely and just as capable of exposure as any other place in the world. for ourhensive system ports would cover anyone who comes from overseas. the method of screening is noninvasive. is screened, i don't think anyone would consider it a hassle. it is something we all as

citizens of the world have to be committed to. until we can get this under control i don't think any measure is too extreme. screening in of itself is not a difficult process create it is available, it can be instituted immediately. it is one that people don't mind having to go through. >> thank you. we will start with you state senator. marriage equality. the debate is on the heels of the supreme court decision to reject the report appeals inrturning same-sex marriage five states including oklahoma. there are 20 states that ban same-sex marriage. my wife and i moved to a state would recognize our marriage. if a same-sex couple moved to a different state they will not be considered married.

should congress step in and make same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states? should we leave this to the states? >> i'm pleased that this debate comes on the heels of that decision. i celebrated yesterday with my ofends in oklahoma who are different gender orientation. i understand their challenges. i understand them as humans first and foremost. how we treat human beings differently from the way we would like to be treated. this question of same-sex marriage was voted on in oklahoma 10 years ago. since that time our demographic has changed substantially. dohink people who choose to and are differently oriented, they have the same rights as those of us who are oriented the way our. i don't think there should be an opportunity for states to decide.

just like interstate commerce, we ought to be able to have that freedom to go from state to state and people be able to keep their values and lifestyles intact without government interference. i believe in the united states were to take on that issue it would be a useful discussion when we see we are have five states so far. that attitude is changing as our state grows older and our nation becomes more mature. we have a basic duty to respect humanity. >> congressman langford? >> every person is created in the image of god. every person has value and worth. the united states constitution clearly leaves the authority for marriage to the states. i would say it is because it is clear from the 10th amendment,

all things not reserved are reserved to the states. over and over again when any issue on marriage came up supreme court said that is a state issue. that is not a federal government issued. the federal government should not be engaged in a marriage issue at all. as recently as last are the the hearing that occurred when the final piece cannot think of federal government involved in this argument, this is a state issue. states alone can make the decision about marriage and how to define marriage. what's interesting was yesterday the supreme court said we are not going to hear a case and their interpretation was either states make the decision or a single federal judge in a state can make that decision. they literally conflicted against their own argument from a year ago in their own opinion. if you read through and see what happened versus what they did

last year, it is amazing the separation between the two. this is uniquely a state issue. individuals are to be respected. think the definition of marriage we should maintain. but the stakes make the decision, not the federal government. >> thank you. this question comes back to you. dealing with veterans, the decision to send troops into hostile situations can and should be a difficult one. the debate over how to care for those trips when they return from war for many is simple. serve your country and receive support when he returned home. multiple reports have highlighted deficiencies. do you support increasing veteran health care? what's i support the veteran being able to make the decision on where they go for health care. capability.ave that

multiple others continue to bring up the same issue. if a veteran isn't woodward oklahoma why do they need to drive to a veteran center? past five or six good hospitals on the way? their family has to make that trip and get in line at the v.a. center to be able to go to the process. is not right. it doesn't treat them with respect. the first thing is to not look at just the finance side. to look at the process issue. allow veterans to choose where they go for health care rather than force them to certain locations. we passed the bill through the house of representatives that gives veterans the first opportunity. miles, wewithin 40 took the first of the city want to allow more opportunities. we hope we can flip the senate

and open that up to a greater group of people and allow veterans to choose. that is an essential part, to honor the promise that has been made. you may change things for a future person signing up you don't break the promise for those who have already served. >> thank you. >> thank you. as a former member of the house, the senate veterans committee, it is usually will have a lovefest when it comes to veterans. i really agree with everything the congressman has said. regarding the need to care for veterans once they return from war. deeper when you talk about not only the health care setting but every day when they are jobless, when they are sometimes incarcerated. record numbersm are committing suicide because of ptsd.

we are not listening to our veterans in terms of help they say they need let alone providing services they need. as your senator i will fight just as hard for veterans as i have at the state level. i believe veterans have given up everything they have. you drop what they were doing and went to war to protect our freedom. when they return home we need and we deserve to give them the best they can afford. i was privileged to witness the honor flight coming through the airport in washington dc. we were having a celebration tonight in oklahoma city to honor those veterans. the pride i saw on their faces for what they did to our country will never leave my memory. to bes what will drive me of service to them further. >> thank you. >> one of the most important

responsibilities in the u.s. and is the power to confirm supreme court nominee is. would you confirm a nominee who was more politically progressive or conservative than yourself. whod you confirm a nominee holds the opposite position you have on issues like abortion, same-sex marriage, or stem cell research? >> the positions appointed by the president are vetted pretty well. with president obama in place now, i don't think i would have to worry about the type of nominee that he would send. the question is whether i would support someone who has different views. if the majority of the committee votes for that it doesn't matter what i support but i would continue to be the voice questioning that person about their views. we are concerned about the supreme court ruling on marriage equality. the same supreme court struck

down section four of the voting rights act. the supreme court is potentially all over the place. we estimate the representatives of the people have to use our voices to make sure we that them in ways that guaranteeing that we can expect them to perform in their capacities and for them to uphold the laws the land. the laws of the land what will be the ultimate test and the ultimate judge of who gets elected to be a supreme court justice. mythe first test is not preference. court is a co-equal branch of government. people lose track of that. there is a perspective that the president is the ceo of the government. the design is there is an executive branch, judicial branch, and legislative branch. they are co-equal. the checks and balances are just on one or the other.

they are in place so that no one branch can infringe on individual rights of a person. it is not just that they compete with each other, they are watching each other to make sure the individual is protected. my first litmus test would be do you follow the original intent of the constitution? a few look at the design come our you falling that as a guide or view goal by his is a living document that can change? if it changes without amendments that is not consistent with the constitution. there is a way for the constitution to change through an amendment process. if they follow a strict instruction of the constitution i could become bullet that person. they are determined to make cultural references or political preferences rather than following through the law, i would oppose them. >> thank you. this question builds on your discussion of the constitution. base in the supremacy clause of the constitution federal laws

trump state laws. there are several states in violation of federal drug enforcement laws regarding marijuana. should congress follow the leads of those states and legalize marijuana nationally or should federal law enforcement getting the legalization of marijuana in states like kerala -- colorado? many areasone of the the president has spoken to the justice department and said do not enforce federal law. i am aware it is federal law but do not enforce it. picktive prosecution to which laws need to be enforced. that is a problem. the president takes the oath of constitutionor the and to protect the laws and be able to execute faithfully the laws of the land. we have a law on the book. if there is a need to change that law there needs to be a vote taken away, not just the president stepping up to say i am not going to enforce a law and ignore it. that should not be an option.

as recently as yesterday the governor of colorado, one of the greatest governors in the nation, he made the statement that he believed that colorado was reckless when they legalize marijuana. this is the democratic gornor of colorado. because of what is happening now in colorado and what he sees in the damage it is doing. he wish they would have had more research and more data before they made this decision as a state. -- part of it is my perspective. i work with teenagers for 22 years. itave seen the damage that has done to families when teenagers get involved in drug use. itadults use drugs they pass onto them. i have a hard time saying the best thing we can do is to get their parents to smoke more marijuana and for that to be legal. >> state senator johnson? ask the question was more so about the federal law trumping

the state law. the president having issue basically, a hands-on position about what is going on in colorado and washington. as many of you know i have been the legislator who has promoted reform of marijuana policies among other sentencing policies in oklahoma because of the unsustainability from an economic perspective. from a medical and human perspective and the perspective of our economy, our agriculture, for ak it is terrible child who is suffering from , it is just as bad for us to allow the children to die without having any concern for the fact that we have a natural substance that was created by god that would address those

seizures and has been shown to be the only thing that addresses those seizures. those children dying are no different than the children dying are no different than the children dying in the streets because of prohibition. but at the end of the day oklahoma is the state where it's an indigenous plant and our agricultural community can benefit and make products from suntans to lotions to papers to clothing and those are the issues we should look at and weigh more so than what we're talking about in terms of checking state laws right now. >> thank you. surveys have shown the younger generation and perhaps even some of the students sitting in this audience think it is more likely they will see a ufo in their lifetime than a social security check. what reforms to social security if any would you push for? >> i would push against privatization of social security.

social security is that thing that, yes, we hope our younger generation will be able to benefit and share in what i hope to share in one day. but at this point there are efforts in congress and at the national level along with other areas of our lives to privatize that system in ways that will put a lot of people, women in particular, who have a difficult time getting a job making equal pay for equal work, thrust into poverty if we allow privatization schemes to come in and take over our social security system. the system, i believe, is working as it is. we should do some things to shore it up. but in no case would i support a change where we would privatize social security. it's just as bad as privatizing education, privatizing other pensions, privatizing child welfare in oklahoma. privatization means profitization, profiteering. that's what we're seeing. people deserve to profit over

private interests. social security is a system that is there. it has been there. it serves people who have worked all their lives and in their twilight years deserve to have a reasonable income and some security that keeps them from being poor. >> thank you. congressman lankford? >> first off it's probablely more likely in oklahoma they'll see big foot than a ufo. ufo's typically land farther west of us apparently. the big challenge that we have is really making sure social security does what it was designed to do. social security in its birth was designed to kick in at age 65. at that time the average life expectancy was between 62 and 65. it was an emergency plan put in place that if someone out lived their own retirement and past their life expectancy there would be something there as an emergency backup so people didn't end up on the street. it is a compassionate nation that said we want to be able to come alongside the disabled,

those that can't work anymore, and have some emergency backup but has now risen to be something people say will pay for all of my retirement. people are slowing down actually saving for their own retirement. people need to save for their own retirement and make plans big or small. some people can only set aside $10 a month. set it aside. start a plan to get that going and know social security is a backup on that. one of the things we struggle with right now, i hate to bring his name up but harry reid has said many times publicly social security is not something we have to deal with right now. it doesn't go insolvent for 20 years. we don't need to deal with it. i adamantly disagree. we do need to deal with it when you look at the whole process of social security and to evaluate how it is done if you go back to tip o'neill and ronald reagan in the 1980's they made a plan to save social security. it is now just being birthed and implemented. it takes decades to get it going. you have to start early. very important we do this debate now. verage thank you.

congressman repealing the affordable care act also known as obama care has been a reoccurring topic in congress. instead of discussing why or why not obama care should be repealed let's get to the central topic of of the debate. do you believe quality health care is a right or privilege in the united states of america? >> well, it is both as strange as that sounds. it is something actually given to every individual. if anyone walks into a hospital right now, with severe injury, they are given care. every emergency room in the country does that. every single entity. we have backups, medicaid for those that are in poverty especially moms and children. but our system is set up for individuals to be able to engage and take personal responsibility. for individuals that decide i'm not going to take personal responsibility for their own life then there is a tremendous push back on that. so what are you going to do to be able to step in and take responsibility for your life? so each family has responsibility for their own family. employers have taken that to be able to push that and say i'll

provide health care coverage for individuals or employees but i can tell you the wrong way to do that is to federalize it. now, i've said it like this with multiple people. i run into very few people that i meet that say this system is really not working well. i don't find anyone that says the health care system is working well right now as far as the payment system. you know what would really make this work better? let's give it to washington because washington seems to fix every private problem much better than the private sector did. the problem is not that it's going to get better with washington. it's going to get more complicated, more expensive. it decreases the amount of access. we've seen premiums go up, folks now struggling to be able to find access to the care they want while others are receiving care. there is a better, simpler way to do this. our community health clinics, both of us have been very engaged with, is a better model to help in different areas of poverty. our medicare system in other ways but not like this, not a takeover of the whole health care system. >> thank you. state senator johnson?

>> whether health care is a right or privilege is the question. and i agree with congressman lankford. it is both. however, we have a health care proposal for the first time in 50 years that is actually making a difference in the lives of people who were heretofore unable to afford insurance but to have access to meaningful, affordable, quality health care. the affordable care act means that people who were not insured before, millions are now insured. the fact that we have a congress that has continually, 54 times, voted to try to repeal a law that has been passed, that has been upheld, that has been implemented, says that we're wasting money and killing people. and that's the priority. i believe it's more important for us to look at what is going on with our health care system when people can't get the care they need, when our systems of government, our systems of care

are overloaded but people's health care conditions are continuing to decline. i believe oklahoma is rated 48th in health care. that says to me that not only should it be a right, not only should it be a privilege, it should be a necessity. government exists to provide those things that we can't do individually. health care, when you have your health, you have everything. when you have your health, you have a better worker. when you have workers who are respected, you don't have employers trying to direct their health care services. >> thank you. state senator, the fact is that most voters will cast their ballot consistent with their party i.d. there is, however, a growing population of independent voters. why should an independent voter vote for you? >> the platform that i have spoken to throughout this campaign in terms of strengthening public education,

creating meaningful and living wage jobs through investment in our infrastructure, those are things that resonate i believe not only with democrats but with republicans and certainly with independents, but the third area of this campaign which talks about protecting civil liberties, protecting civic freedoms, that i think is the area that resonates with independents because in a sense independents have gench up on both parties. because of the party positions on things that impact them individually. i think in addition to independents we have a lot of libertarians who are concerned about this overreach of government, where government is spying on us on our daily lives n a daily way. where we are incarcerating for profit people who have been caught or convicted of possession of nonviolent. where women's right to choose, to make decisions about their own reproductive health care

are challenged and constricted and even to the point of limiting women's rights to contraception. i think those are the aspects of my campaign that resonate with people who are outside of either party but who want to see a change, who want to hear a voice that will speak differently and that will speak truth. >> congressman, why should an independent voter vote for you? >> i reach out to republicans, independent, and democrats. we're one state. there are 4 million of us. we do not all agree. not all republicans agree about everything. not all democrats agree about everything. not all independents. i have four members in my family. we struggle to pick a restaurant after church on sunday and try to find agreement among the four of us. we don't all agree on every issue but we can get a chance to respect each other as we talk through the process. so what i bring to an independent is this. i do have a very conservative perspective. i believe in the constitution. i believe that system actually helps us. i believe the economy really can grow if government is less

engaged in the day-to- day operation of the economy and we can get back to the growth of individual lives and their families and allow people to live their lives on their own and make their own choices. i would also say one of the things, i meet a lot of independent, they're very frustrated with is rhetoric. they want to see people treat each other with respect. my christian role i come to you from, working with families for years, there will be people i disagree with but i treat people with respect. i want to listen to all people of all backgrounds and hear it out. george will makes a great statement. i've always appreciated it. truth is not responsible for its owner. i think it is pretty wise to be able to listen to that. there are people i may disagree with on other issues but i'll agree on that one. it demands that you actually slow down and be able to listen to people in the process and get to know folks and it also demands i turn around and say this is what i think and we have a reasonable conversation. >> thank you.

congressman the debate is based on beefing up border security. is border security key to illegal immigration? >> no. it is much bigger than that. i come from a couple different perspectives. one is i believe every person is created by god and has worth and is worthy of respect. the second thing is i really do believe that there is a responsibility that every person has to their own nation. i am a citizen of this country. in this country i have unique rights and responsibilities. in every other country i'm a guest. that is the same for anyone else. now, if the conversation is about just build a fence and that's going to fix it, well, there are areas where we actually should have a fence and a strong fence. but down the texas/mexico border, the international border is actually the center of the rio grande river. you're not going to build a fence down the middle of the river. neither are you going to abdicate to mexico that river and the boundaries? how do you deal with it? border security is essential. we should have good policing

along our borders and make sure the north and south border and maritime coast, that we're watching who is coming in. we should work with the governments of mexico and the other three countries, realizing that we have 11 million people here illegally. 10.5 million of those folks are from poor countries. mexico, guatemala, honduras, and el salvador. well, if they're going to come from central america they have to cross the mexican border coming through guatemala into mexico. we should work with me with mexico to control that border enforcement as well and should have a policy that allows individuals to apply, come work for short periods of time in the united states, with absolute standards and make sure that occurs. the only way that happens is enforcement actually at the workplace. so multiple areas to do it right. >> thank you. state senator johnson? >> thank you. people were talking about immigration and the congressman has pointed out that a majority

are coming from areas south of america. i think we have to also realize that we are all immigrants in america apart from the indigenous people. we all came to america in one shape, form, or fashion. my people came over in the bottom of a slave ship. and so the process for people coming into america is what i think we need to look at more so. when we establish a system that has checks and balances, that people want to come to work, that's fine. if people want to come and make america a new home, if they're willing to abide by the rules, to do test, to become a citizen and pay the money, frankly, then we should be open. because again, we all came here from somewhere. i think our policies about immigration are in need of repair. i think the president has been proposing some solutions that congress has yet to act on. as your next u.s. senator, i would be open to all aspects of the issue of immigration.

i would definitely be open to the things that i think ensure that people again who come here, who abide by the rules, who do what's necessary, and they begin paying taxes, and they actually contribute to society, america is a better place when we have diversity. the food that we get, the inventions that come our way, the technological advances that are coming to america, all of those things come about because we are inviting people into our space. >> thank you. well, it's time now to hear from oklahoma state university students. a panel has reviewed the questions that were submitted by students in the audience. and the first question comes from kenneth wang who is a senior. his question is to you, state senator. do you support the policy of using drone strikes to kill suspected terrorists, including u.s. citizens? >> the policy of using drones is typical of america's foreign

policy to date. and that is military solutions to basically what are religious conflicts around the world. i think the policies regarding the drones are under review. i don't agree with that use of that technology. i do understand that it's been useful if in some settings but i think there are other ways for us to resolve our differences. and the use of extreme measures like drones ought to be the very last consideration in our policies. >> thank you. >> this is a difficult issue in a lot of ways. it's a war time. we are at a status of war and the use of those have been individuals that are directly connected to al qaeda typically. so this ongoing conversation that's happened for about the last 12 years, president bush used drones in some of the strikes. president obama has accelerated that. but i ask the question, it would be interesting for you and i to have the conversation maybe after this is over. is there a difference between an f-16 launching a missile,

between an apache launching a hell fire or between a drone being able to launch something? some individuals would say yes they don't like a drone. they want a pilot in aircraft actually launching that rather than a pilot being a thousand miles away in a safe, secure room. i would say really in a war time experience there is no difference. when you deal with the issue of what happens if that's an american on the ground there, well, americans have rights that are different than other individuals. we have constitutional protection. if an american commits a trees anonymous act and is at war with the united states with their own country, if there is any way to be able to capture that individual they should stand for trial. if there is no way safely to be able to arrest that person and they are in a battle field situation in preparation to attack the country with the enemy, yes, we are justified. that is no different than a police officer standing on the street, an american citizen draws a gun and says i'm about to shoot you for a police officer to be able to respond to that. it may be difficult to process, but the president of the united

states has a very difficult responsibility. that is to protect america and to protect our country from all enemies foreign and domestic. though the president and i have disagreed on many issues this is one that requires oversight. it is one area i do not disagree with him. we should protect america. >> thank you. congressman, this next question comes from kelsey hull who is a sophomore here at osu. where do you stand on the issue of religious liberty particularly applied to the islamic faith? >> i am absolutely adamantly protective of religious liberty. it is one of the issues i talk about on the house floor and openly to a lot of people. because i come from a ministry background a lot of people come to me and say you need to tone down your conversation about god because you are in a secular role now. i always smile and say look at article 6 of the constitution. it says there is no religious test for any o officer of the united states. you don't have to have a certain faith or put your faith away to be able to serve the united states.

that is the same for every single american. every person that's in this room, you can have a faith, live your faith out, or choose to have no faith at all. be a christian, be jewish, be islamic, buddhist, hindu, sikh, whatever you choose to be, this is the united states of america and we're different. so we should protect the religious liberties of every individual and i would stand up as an individual and say regardless of your faith background we do need to protect those rights. let me give you one caveat. there are some in the islamic faith that cannot practice their faith apart from the government also being in line with their faith. literally their faith drifts into shaharya law to say for me to function i have to also control the government. i have to control the community. that's not all that are in the islamic faith but there are some. that's the way they practice. we in the united states absolutely honor those that have religious faith but you cannot be an individual that would try to undercut the united states government for the practice of your faith. the government exists to protect all faiths not to allow you a vehicle to take over a

section of any part of the government. >> thank you. state senator? >> thank you. this whole issue of religious liberty believe is one that is very concerning to many voters and it comes under that whole title of what does the government do and what does the government not do? what should the government do with regard to people's lives, their liberty, their pursuit of happiness? i believe that religious liberty is essential and that for the government to try to interfere and determine who is supposed to do what is an embarrassment. it is actually a slap in the face to people who choose to be different. so that in our country when we have a condition of religious liberty being questioned or being constrained, that is not the best possible situation for us. i believe that in this -- in these days and times we have extremists in every faith. those of us who would only

adhere to the old testament in the christian faith versus being under grace in the new testament, sometimes we can be just as rigid in our views to the extent that we are infringing on those territories similar to what other extremists religious might be doing. religious liberty is a personal issue it is an issue that the government should not be addressing. it is an issue that the united states was founded on. we came here seeking religious freedom and for us to change now and try to constrict one group one way or another is unacceptable in my opinion. >> thank you. well, state senator, this question comes from derek wieldman who is a junior here at osu. which of the senate commitees do you feel you are most qualified to serve on? >> thank you, derek. these osu students are deep thinkers. i appreciate that. i've got a daughter who just

graduated from here. i have served significantly in the area of health and human services. in fact, for the last 33 years. i've been in the area when we reformed medicaid, when we've reformed the health care authority in the state of oklahoma. but i've also focused on criminal justice reform. how do we reform our criminal justice laws in ways that are productive and that don't cost us a lot of money? i've enjoyed serving on the veterans committee. i really got a big lesson when i served on the transportation committee because i know that roads and bridges are the key to recovery for our society in terms of economic principles. so i think i know i would like to stay in health and human services but i have a heart for the veterans. i have an economic interest in transportation. i've enjoyed serving on energy. i would be available to serve wherever i'm best suited to

serve, wherever my leader thinks i should serve. i would serve in that position, do my best, and then as i gain seniority, i would branch out into other areas that continue to expand my expertise in order to better help citizens of the state of oklahoma. >> thank you. congressman? >> i currently serve on the committee called oversight and government reform in the house of representatives. i'm a subcommittee chairman on that and have oversight for energy, policy, health care, and entitlements. i work a tremendous amount with things like social security and disability but i also work a lot on the issues of oversight of government. duplication in government. now that's never -- it's maybe a shock to you but at times the federal government can be fairly inefficient. shocking, i know. the committee that has the greatest jurisdiction on that in the senate is called homeland security government accountability. that committee, itself, allows me to be able to step in and continue the work i've already done the last four years in the house of representatives.

how do we do greater oversight? it's not a republican/democrat issue. bureaucracy is bureaucracy. it doesn't matter who is in the white house at that point. you deal with duplication in government. one bill i currently have that we passed in the house of representatives is called the taxpayers' right to know and forces every agency to list every program they do, how much they spend on it, how many staff are assigned and how they eval yacht the program if at all. that has passed the house of representatives overwhelmingly bipartisan. i'd like to take it over to the senate and try to get it passed. that is one thing i could actually implement on the homeland security government accountability so we can require the agencies to provide that list and look for the areas where we have duplication. why do we need 50 programs across ten different agencies that do the same thing? we don't have money to spare. if you haven't noticed we're over $17 trillion in debt which is the big issue we face. we have got to get our government back to a greater efficiency. >> thank you. that'll have to be our last

question. it's time now for closing remarks. once again based on the coin toss, congressman, you have two minutes. >> thank you. thanks for the conversation. i'm glad you're all able to be here. for those that endured to the end online as well i appreciate the conversation for your engagement to stay involved. it is extremely important that people don't make decisions based on a sign or sticker, that people make decisions based on real insight. i appreciate you all are engaging to do the research. i would ask if you would like to do additional research on me and my background, what i think about issues go to james lankford.com and would be able to find out what i believe and what i am all about. this is an issue about trust. as you said earlier, this is a long job interview. actually said that a lot as i traveled around the state. i don't come from a political background. i treat this like a job interview. i go to people and say here's what i believe and what i'm all about. i don't run down other candidates. i don't try to do compare/contrast stuff.

i say here's who i am and people can make a decision about who they want to be able to hire in this role. but i would ask for your vote and your trust. my family and i worked and prayed very hard for our nation and we do stay engaged. we're committed to serving all 4 million oklahomans in every community in every town in every city and every small, rural village. we're going to stay engaged and trying to listen. i can also say to you even when i listen and do my research, at the end i have the responsibility to be able to make a decision. the issues we face right now in america are serious. they are difficult. anyone who comes to you and says we can fix all this if we will just -- then they fill in the blanks -- is over simplifying some of the issues we deal with as a nation. this year we have $500 billion in overspending. now, four years ago when i came to the house of representatives and joined the budget committee we were $1.4 trillion in overspending that year. through the budget fight for the last four years we've been able to get it down to 500

billion. we have many difficult issues to go. we have to balance and we have to deal with the issues of every day americans and oklahomans. i will listen. i will research. at the end i will lead to be able to make the decisions to help us in the nation. god bless you. look forward to our ongoing conversation the next 28 days. >> thank you. state senator? >> thank you. it's been a pleasure to be here this evening and to share in these conversations about the issues that most affect us as people. we've talked about veterans. we talked about immigration. we've talked about defense and health care and social security . as you think about those issues i encourage you to ask the questions, what have you done for me lately? what have we done to make a difference in the lives of you and you and you? versus the lives of the special interests who seem to take over our government right now? as your next u.s. senator, i commit to you to always be a voice, to always be an ear that

will listen to what is of interest to you. what are the challenges that are facing you in your lives? i've always been an advocate of voting. i challenge you tonight to believe that this election is the most important election that we will have in the next ten years. this is the election that they don't think anyone will vote in. i'm encouraging everyone. go out. use your votes. make your vote your voice. that is the only way we get to a government that really meets the needs individuals versus the needs of the few. as your next u.s. senator it will be my privilege and my honor to represent you in the areas that matter most like education, strengthening our health, our public education, schools, and systems. i like creating jobs that are meaningful jobs that pay a living wage. but mostly, making government do the things that government is supposed to do for us as

people and not in our lives as individuals. those are the challenges. those are the opportunities that lie before us today. i want to say thank you again for having us here. i want to say my family and my supporters who are here with me this evening, thank you. this has been a privilege. i appreciate you. god bless you. vote for me. 2014, november 4th. you can visit me and get more www.cj 4 n at okay.com. thank you. >> thank you. and that concludes the debate. i would like to thank state senator connie johnson and u.s. representative james lankford for a very informative and also very cordial debate. i also would like to thank the student volunteers who helped with the event today as well as recognize the partnership between the league of women voters of oklahoma and oklahoma state university. be sure to vote on november 4th. have a good night.

>> i'm mitch mccould be nell and i approve this message. >> alison grimes says this election is not about her support for barack obama and his failed policies. not barack obama. >> but obama himself says a vote for alison is a vote for his policies. >> i'm not on the ballot this fall. but make no mistake, these are on the ballot. every single one of them. grimes. needs and kentucky needs mitch mcconnell. der greenson lun approve.d i approve.

>> where was he, he didn't show up on votes when he was on two tv shows, skipped a meeting on rural jobs but toasted the chinese vice president for china's great achievements. and the rest of the time, he created krid break. live coverage of the kentucky senate debate, monday at 8:00 p.m. around here on c-span. last week the australian government approved air combat

operations in iraq, to fight isis. ande minister tony abbott cabinet members took questions issues.nal security here's a portion of that, australia's public affairs channel. >> thank you, madam speaker. my question is to the prime minister. updatee prime minister the house on his visit last

week, and how is the government deepening its engagement with australians. >> well, madam speaker, i thank the member for his question and place of greatis honor in our country's history. memberfirst indinl us in of the house of representatives. as many speaker, members would recall during last year's election campaign, i to spend a week in the keptry, and last week i that commitment. along with the minister for affairs, along with , we spent five joined days, and we were at different times in that perfect by the minister for minister for the health, the minister for

finance, veterans affairs, and minister forstant health, the aassistant minister of infrastructure and of course haslock himself were there. so ad am speaker information the best part of a week, indigenous affairs was a key focus of government. in is a very good way of demonstrating to indigenous that their concerns have not been lost amongst those of community. and madam speaker, on indigenous government's provide for is is crystal clear. toget the kids to school, get the adults to work and keep communities safety. and i wish to acknowledge the commitment of the people to education, i wish to acknowledge their determination to ensure that their land is an economic cultural and as a

spiritual one. acknowledge their yearning, along with the people blacko many and white right around australia for indigenous recognition in our constitution. this is a fully bipartisan cause thank the leader of the opposition for the constructive die local we've had subject. to thankof all i wish him for the hospitality he my colleagues.d he is one of our country's greatest ever indinl us in leaders, and i'm actually the that galaroyister galaroyt

has dealt with. i plenty to do what i can to build on their good work. i should also thank the army for providing me and my colleagues with a combination of catering, and i do plenty, madam speaker,

myself, to spoin continue to spend a week, a year, in an indigenous community as long as i remain in public life. >> today our cabinet has authorized australian air strikes in iraq, at the request of the iraqi government and in support of the iraqi government. also, subject to final legal documentation, cabinet has authorized the deployment of forces intopecial iraq to advise and assist iraqi forces. it is an essentially humanitarian mission to protect people of iraq and ultimately the people of murderousfrom the rage of the isil death cult. isil must be disrupted and degraded. isil must be disrupted and degraded at home and abroad. is absolutely in australia's national interests this mission go ahead. >> thank you. my question is to the prime minister. will the prime minister inform the house of the importance of to new york for a meeting with the united nations council. speaker., madam later this week i will be in new

the for discussions at united nations security council on the issue of foreign fighters. question has been convened by president obama who nowmates that there are some 15,000 foreign fighters operating with terrorist groups in syria and iraq. i've previously told the house, there are at least 60 of whoians that we know are currently fighting with syria andgroups in iraq, such as isil. there are at least 100 know of whothat we are supporting terrorist groups such as isil, more than 20 australians are estimated to have already returned from such as with groups isil. and madam speaker more than 6 # had pairns have passports canceled on secure advice to prevent them from the middle east to join terrorist groups such as

isil. madam speaker i want to make it again,ely crystal clear, that fighting with a terrorist underis a serious crime australian law. so the point i make to people is with a you fight terrorist group, if you seek to return to this country as far as government is concerned, you will be arrested, prosecuted, and you will be timed for a very long indeed. madam speaker, legislation is before this parliament, this week, to make it easier to deal with this problem of returning fighters. and again i want to thank the leader of the opposition, and i thank the shadow attorney general for their constructive support and broad bipartisanship on this particular issue. madam speaker, this is a global problem. there are many hundreds of

fighting withns terrorist groups in the middle east. there are hundreds of french citizens, there are hundreds and hundreds of people from southeast asia who are fighting with these terrorist groups in east.ddle these are peel who have been andcalized and brutalized, could become potential terrorists in their home country. so this problem needs to be tackled. both here and abroad. and that's why australia stand ready to join an international coalition to disrupt and degrade inside iraq tons remove this magnet, to remove this magnet for potential terrorists from around the world. speaker i stress, as always, this government will do to keep we humanly can australians safe. everything we do at home and abroad is directed against terrorism, not religion. i urge australians to go about

ther normal lives because whole point of terrorism is to prevent us from being ourselves. >> my question is to the minister of foreign affairs. update thenister house on the contribution other countries are making to combat isil and other terrorist iraq and syria. >> i call the honorable minister affairs.gn >> thank you, madam speaker and i thank member swan for his question. the actions of isil are theiredented in brutality. it is killing civilians committingately and atrocities, executions, beheadings, rape, torture. unspeakable violence has -- unspeakable violence has highlighted the need for an international response. under the strong leadership of states, over 60 nations have made a contribution

to or ebbs pressed strong support for international efforts to combat isil and other terrorist organizations in iraq and syria. as the prime minister has confirmed, australia has committed to supporting the iraqi government to defend its own country. as the prime minister of the u.a.e. said yesterday, not a single politician in north or asia europe, africa can afford to ignore events in the middle east. threat requires a globalized response. the international coalition has almost 300 air strikes begins operations commenced last week. these air strikes are denying isil a safe haven and are ability to operate across the region. making are contributions, saudi arabia, qatar, all participated in the recent strikes. leadershiptaken a

role in conducting air strikes. voted --d king doll voted to support the strikes. these military actions have been provision ofby the military equipment and training of the iraqi security forces. in addition to australia, germany has provided weapons and deployed 40 paratroopers to iraq. canada has delivered military iraq and has deployed its personnel for the of military training. hungry, estonia, italy and the eitherrer land have contracted equipment to address isil andat posed by other organizations. so the international community is working cooperatively the starve isil of funding and weapons and prevent the flow of foreign fighters. resolute international effort have been directed at seeking to

prevent the unfolding disaster.an austria, ireland, japan, kuwait, luxembourg, spain, sweden and switzerland have also packages of assistance, as has australia. the grave threat posed by isil and similar organizations both beyondmiddle east and means a decisive international action is essential, the international community is uniting to combat the terrorist threat in iraq and syria, australia will play its part. >> there are an estimated 60 are fightingho alongside islamic state in iraq are some whoere have already returned home and terrorist threat that's being taken seriously by authorities here. terror threat level has riz tone high for the first time. planned-terror laws are

. >> thank you, madam speaker. my question is to the minister of justice. on the government's actionings to give federal law enforcement and our security agencies the need to combatey the terror threat. >> i think you for that question and commented the work that it house. this the government is backing a innificant investment counterterrorism. previously announcing $60 million as a response package, and -- 630 million as a response package, and today they announced that 196 million of will go --

further, the government is giving our security agencies the frameworks and powers that they need to do their job of keeping us safe. we saw earlier on today, the of this legislation pass through the house. legislationproves governing the activities of the australian intelligence community. this legislation has been put through a very significant amount of community consultation, including two bipartisan reviews, by the parliamentary joint committee on intelligence and security. recommendede targeted improvements to enhance oversight, accountability and other safeguards and the government accepted all of these recommendations. by thend the work done chairman of that committee and the member who previously chaired that committee before

the government changed. allpreciate that not members in this case support the passage of this legislation and they are entitled to express their views. not acceptable, madam speaker, is to engage or encourage conspiracy theories and the law enforcement intelligence agencies in this country somehow included with the government about the timing operation. this is untrue. and it is deeply unhelpful at a time when every member in this place should be mindful that their comments will be extensively reported to the australian community, and we all stand together with other enforcement intelligence agencies in the work they do to keep us safe. earlierad the privilege today of joining with the prime minister to announce that colvin will be recommended to the governor general as the next police australianr of the police. he's a man of enormous

willrity, and the country be very well serve by his steward subpoena of that organization at a very time.nging appointment of mr. colvin as commissioner of the australian --eral police >> will the minister outline how withovernment is working australia's diverse communities to ensure the security of all australians? why is strong leadership across community soof very important.

>> thank you, and i thank the question,d for his question,

but i think him for the strong leadership he is showing in his community aat present and assisting his constituents who are deal with very difficult issues at this time and he is providing that leadership. i particularly in this place today want to affirm the strong provided byadership two men who are known to the members of this house, brave and

courageous men who were standing up as strong and passionate australians. weeks ago i had the opportunity to join jamal and and i, in a community proclaimingich was their passion for this wonderful nation. and person after person came up me from young children to older people to mothers and expressing their passion for this country and the having, let's not mandus brother, his son, haveboth become those who fallen into the terrorist snare mandu and his own family has had to stand up to that. enormous courage, enormous sacrifice, and gentleman natural has done exactly the same in his community. we need to aconfirm these leaders and people from across

in the media, from other faiths, other religions, stand with them. >> tonight wisconsin governor debate hisr will democratic challenger, mary burke. we'll have live coverage at here on c-span. here are some of the ads airing race. walker.'m scott i'm pro-life. thee's no doubt in my mine decision of whether or not to end a pregnancy is an agonizing one, that's why i support legislation to increase safety and to provide more information considering her options. the bill leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor. though reasonable can disagree our priority is to protect the health and safety of all wisconsin citizens. coming back.t is >> the economy is improving,

significantly. >> minnesota's unemployment numbers are down, and job numbers are up. >> michigan's economic recovery to outpace all 50 states. >> but in wisconsin, scott taxes for the top, slashed public education and we midwest job last in growth. >> wisconsin lags behind most of jobcountry when it comes to growth. >> tax cuts for the job, dead last in jobs, scott walker is for you.ng >> i'm scott walker, thanks to our reforms the average family have been extra $322 to spend. what do you do with your savings? >> we're going to buy more clothe and school supplies. >> 96-gallons of gas. a trip to seeg the grab kids. >> new tires for my truck. over 2700 diapers. >> my opponent criticizes the comeback, she wants to .ndo our reforms >> what's $11 buy you in wisconsin? how about a pizza.

well, scott walker thinks $11 buys your vote. plan, theder his tax afternoon wisconsin taxpayer got just $11 a month. but corporations got cuts,illion in tax million areas got at least $1400 per year. enjoy your meal. them,walker, millions for pizza for you. >> you can watch live coverage of the wisconsin governors debate tonight at 8:00 ear on c-span. director of northrop grumman the white house cyber security coordinator and the technology grul munof northrup cyberat an event on security.

>> is the wire covering my tie? [ laughter] everyone. it's great to see you out here today. scott did a good job on acknowledging a number of folks we want to thank. i'll do a quick repeat of that. again, our thanks to the center for national policy. as scott mentioned this is our second event we're doing together. hopefully it is the first of many more to come. also, a great thanks to northrop grumman our sponsor who really makes this event possible and intelligent conversations move forward. speakers oned our were delighted to have our guests. they will be part of a panel discussion that i think is quite remarkable and informative. a little promotion the monitor has a big announcement today. we are pleased to announce the debut of a new csm initiative called pass code.

we call it the modern field guide to security and privacy. we realize on a global network of monitor reporters from around the world led by mike farrow our editor and our deputy editor, both of them are here today and would be happy to talk to you more about the monitor's new initiative. we intend to provide deeply reported, solution oriented, nonfear mongering coverage that moves your understanding and the discussion forward. again you can find us at csm pass code.com. this is the debut so stay tuned between now and january when we do our formal launch. so we're here today to talk about cyber security. an important it topic. one that the monitor's office obviously is investing resources in. why is that? well, primarily, it's a big story. it's a big, complex story that

touches a lot of lives. more people than ever are impacted and concerned about both privacy and digital security. much of the discussion often times to a degree focuses on fear, uncertainty, and doubt. nd so what are the monitor values we're bringing to this discussion? well, 107 years of journalism that is deeply reported and global. we'll admit to our biases. we are constructive, progress minded, and solution oriented. these days media companies have to decide where to invest and what to cover most particularly. one of the areas we're investing in is cyber security. pass code is how we're doing it. d so remember csn pass code.com. introduce asure to

vern doyle. one of my colleagues is describing him as the rare bead that is a technologist that can speak english. [ laughter] >> i immediately tried to hire him. vern is director of technology for northrop grumman's cyber division and his team leads -- he leads an advanced cyber technology team responsible for understanding emerging problems and solving those problems in advance for customers worldwide. vern will introduce a vision for a new paradigm for cyber security thinking with the goal of making our systems more resilient. after vern finishes we'll take some q & a and with that, vern, the floor is yours. >> thank you. >> good morning. thank you for having me. so i'm here today to start a new conversation, a conversation about looking at

cyber security a little bit differently with the goal of making our systems more resilient. my hope is that this conversation can move us past the age of the high profile breach. many of the breaches are very well known. they're very personal. like the home depot breach, the target breach, this week the jp morgan chase breach was in the news front and center. these are very personal to us. because they're criminal in nature and the idea of money coming out of your wallets is a scary thing. but there are also other high profile breaches that in some ways are even more disturbing. but that aren't always as well known. shomun attack on saudi sometime ago. this was an attack on a national critical infrastructure provider. and you have the issue with the french and british navy back in

2009 with the virus. and these attacks were aimed at disabling those organizations' ability to conduct their primary mission. you can imagine the military unable to perform its mission as a result of a computer virus. this is a very real potential problem. then you have the insider threat. we're all familiar with the snowden case. you have the cyber vigilantes like anonymous conducting espionage, disrupting systems for a wide variety of purposes. so this is a global, borderless problem, and it's not going away any time soon. the real question is, why is it so easy for the attacker and seemingly so hard for the defender? how is it that they seem to march in and out of these systems as if nobody is watching? and you'll get a lot of different opinions on that. people spend their careers trying to figure that out. but when you blow away all the smoke, i think