>> continue to let us know about the programs you're watching. call us at the following number on your screen. e-mail us at the following e-mail address. you can send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> we are going live to portland, oregon, for a debate between incumbent governor john kitzhaber and his challenger, dennis richardson. the political report lists the race as likely democratic. it comes to us courtesy of kgw tv. >> oregonians have a choice this november. should democratic john kitzhaber

get four more years leading the state? or is it time for a change with republican dennis richardson? both candidates have long political records and are trying to position themselves as leaders who can grow the economy. kitzhaber was an emergency room doctor before entering politics and campaigns on his leadership with health care policy. goodthink we have done a job together over the last three years but oregon will not be a good place for us to live on less it is a good place for all of us to live. -- iskitzhaber salai get elected, he would be the only person in oregon history to serve for terms as governor. to makeon wants sure that does not happen. he is well-known in salem and has worked to build his image. >> i'm concerned about our state in its future. i'm concerned about the ability to work and the ability to have estoreand to have a r

our legacy given to us by our pioneer forbearers. >> you will hear from richardson and kitzhaber as they are pressed on their positions by a panel of journalists from kgw and "the oregonian." this is decision 4014. a debate -- 2014. a debate for organ's governor. >> welcome to decision 14. areoregonian and kgw candidates.e two we plan on covering a large range of topics that we have to address the revelations of the past week. we want to focus on the role hayes plays in the

office and if that represents a conflict of interest. >> when did you first learn hayes' plan to grow pot in 1997? what would you say about the people you have chosen as advisors? >> i have received a lot of new weeks.tion over the last some of it is hard to assimilate. herears ago, before i knew and she knew me, she was involved in illegal activities. i don't condone a. i wish it has not happened, but it did. assumed responsibility and is willing to face the consequences. the fallout of those set of activities and how we deal with that fallout is a personal matter between cylvia and myself. >> have you decided if you will keep cylvia hayes on as an advisor in your office, and what

do you say about her role to benefit her private business? >> i do not believe there was a conflict of interest and i believe we have met the letter and spirit of oregon ethics laws. i am concerned about the perception which is why i asked my office to turn over to the ethics commission all the relevant contracts, of which there are only three, and the accompanying conflict of interest forms and ask the ethics commission to review our processes and procedures and make sure we are within the bounds of our ethics laws. >> representative richardson, which you like to weigh in? >> i think it is interesting. we should not be focusing on what happened 17 years ago because that is between cylvia hayes and law enforcement. it is a character issue and it plays into what is happening presently. we have a governor who had an hiscal -- a letter from chief of staff and chief legal

advisor, and it did not seem to fit with what cylvia hayes wanted so it was rewritten. my question is, governor, did you know that the ethics advice you are given is that she was violating her ethical responsibilities by using staff was itng her title and your direction that actually told your staff to change the ethical opinion so it would allow her to continue to do those things? >> would you like to respond? >> as i said, when we, when she came into office, we have the obvious issue of the first lady and we set up procedures and processes. it was multilayered. we worked very hard and diligently to make sure her activities fell within the spirit and the intent and the letter of oregon ethics laws. i believe that they did and do. of thell ask on behalf voters, looking forward, i think there are people who would like

to know what role you see her playing if you are reelected. she had mentioned she would maybe like a bigger role as one of your advisors. think ballots will be arriving tomorrow. what will they expect? taking personal time to address these issues herself and does not have a role in the administration. will not have a role until all of the relevant questions are answered, particularly the conclusions of the ethics commission concerning the relationship between her activities and any potential conflict of interest. let me say again that i don't believe there was a conflict. >> we don't really know until that report comes out. >> as i said, time will tell. there are a lot of questions that need to be answered before we define a role. >> it does not address the reality that last year, the governor's chief of staff and

legal representative said that cylvia's actions were illegal, unethical. and then they changed that opinion so that she would sign a new document that said that she could utilize the resources that she had in her position and still conduct your business. i don't think that change would have taken place unless the governor instructed them to change that. complicitknow, is he in asking his legal authorities in chief of staff to change their opinion on oregon ethics to comply with the desires that he has named of the first lady? >> the answer is no, of course not. we reviewed each of the contracts several times, through several lenses, and modified them so that in the end, the final contact, of which i will remind you that there are only three, complied with ethics

laws. amount ofan abundant caution to make sure we met the intent of ethics laws and that is why we turned it over to the ethics commission to review those procedures. >> those contracts were signed before they change the opinion. >> we will move on to other topics. i am sure it will come up again. i want to let you know that joe donnellan will join us with questions sent in by you, the readers and viewers of kgw and "the oregon." and we tweet it to us will pick up some of those sections in the social of the debate. now, let's get to the rest of our topics. i want to your my do of our panelists. you of ouro remind panelists.

christopher carey, who i don't do a debate without, an associate professor at portland state university. tile, you have a question for representative richardson. in the polls and critics say you are out of step with the majorities of voters in oregon's biggest cities. what you say to voters who do not support you now to reconsider? >> they need to consider that governor kitzhaber is not running for governor. he is running for a fourth term and he does not deserve it. unemployment is higher than national average and has been for 18 years. our education system is a dismal failure. we are next to last in graduation rates. our trust in government has never been worse. we have wasted $300 million on cover oregon, $190 million on the crc bridge, and $70 billion just on a recent department of human services modernization program.

up. is $561 million burned we have nothing to show for it, except a lot of people on medicaid, which we would have done either way. the governor has to deserve a fourth term. by his actions, the dismal returns we have had for the last 20 years, it has been bringing us down. we need a governor who will turn the arrow up so we can restore jobs, the economy, education system, and trust. >> governor, i will give you a chance. whatsentative richardson, about being out of step with the majority of voters in the metro area? does that ring true for you? >> well, not exactly. certainly my views on some of the social issues happen different than media buzzers. as governor, i take an oath to enforce an honor the will of the people. i will do that. that is my commitment. we have discussions about issues. we debate, we passed laws.

the courts make their determination. once that is done, we will enforce the law. i'm glad that those things are behind us because we can focus on the economy and education and trust. >> first of all, i think values is a part of this race and we differ fundamentally on key value. a woman's right to control her givingctive health, workers strong voices in the workplace. we have added 100,000 jobs. freeze the first tuition in 14 years and 95% of oregonians now have health care coverage. tens of thousands for the first time. i am happy to run on that. >> your message in seeking a fourth term pretty much boils down to we are not done yet. if you are elected, can you tick off three areas where the middle class in oregon could see some improvement in these next four years? >> the recovery has been spotty.

we neeto lean in to make sure that the recovery picks up people in rural oregon. we need to fully implement health care reform efforts to move to the private sector, which could be a game changer in terms of costs to businesses. we need to continue to implement goals,onal reform especially around early and third-grade reading and reconnecting high school students with current technical education and computer science. >> this is ignoring the reality the loware facing economic growth and so forth because of the governor's programs the last 20 years. our current unemployment rate has gone up. it is 7.1%. we have lost in the last month several hundred jobs. nationally, 248,000 new jobs have been created and the unemployment rate is down to

5.9%. we are still going down in the wrong direction. >> you have issues on several issues, including standing against gamers. now that it is legal, what will you say to gay couples of called to defend same-sex marriage? >> congratulations on your marriage. these issues have been discussed but that is behind us. i say congratulations. i'm happy the issue of marriage has been resolved once and for all. we can move on. this is about free agency for individuals. the decisions have been made. i had my arguments, other people had their arguments. i trust the people on both sides. people have heartfelt issues about the -- feelings about these issues. they have been resolved. what i have to say to couples now married is congratulations. >> i commend representative

to allow view oregonians to -- it took a while, but congratulation. >> graduation rates remain stubbornly low. what you tell oregonians looking for improvement now? >> there is no one lever you can switch to change graduation rates. there are things we can do over the long-term, which require systemic and intentional investment strategy. the work we are doing in early learning can get every child in the state reading in the third grade within five years, which means we are not sending kids behind the curve into the school system in the first place. reconnecting kids with computer science gives them a reason to stay in high school and we will have a package of incentives and budgetary recommendations to actually add that to our makes going forward.

i think that the challenge and issue is there is no quick fix. you have to have a very intentional strategy and that is 40-40-20 really is. it ensures that our kids graduate from high school and they get at least two years of post secondary education or a baccalaureate degree and we are back on track. >> 20 years ago we heard the same story. by golly, we will be top in the world by 2010. guess what? it did not happen. it is more talk. the reality is our achievement level has gone down. graduation is going down. the future of a child is determined by the zip code their parents live in. that is wrong. it is not about more talk. it is about what we can do to change the course of education to restore it. we have school districts in our state that have almost 100% graduation rates and we have school districts that are almost

50%. what we need to do is learn from the best, implement them. every student needs a mentor. we need to have shops and opportunities for kids that are not going to be going to college and that can be done with a change in our approach and not just more promises. richardson,ative you have said that you oppose common core, the language, arts, and math standard set for students around the country. what specifically do you oppose? >>, and core was offered by the federal government. if you accepted it, the federal government said we have $4 million of stimulus money that we will give to early adopters. the mission statement sounds great. students -- we want all students to do well. the devil is in the details. we are having the teachers teach

you a test. i know teachers they have quit who have said i will not be a class monitor that is teaching to a test. i am here to teach. it takes away from students, from parents, and from teachers and school districts any control over education. it comes from washington dc bureaucrats and not from those who know the students the best. i think we need to restore greater control by those that know and love the student's best, and that is the parents, teachers, and local school board. , and core standards recognize it oregon kids are not going to be competing with other kids -- recognizee standards oregon kids are not just going to be competing with other kids from oregon. they will be competing around the world. we measure it. we have gotten rid of all the tests. we got a waiver last year to give us another year to connect state testing to student assessment so we can implement

our homegrown assessment process that has been collaboratively built by the oregon education association. we have heard a lot about cover oregon and critics have been quite critical of you. you promised more accountability in the future and this past week we learned that cover oregon asked a top consultant not to formally submit a report in order to keep things secret. why should voters believe cover oregon will be held accountable when we hear a still a lot -- when we still hear about secrecy? >> this is between the state of oregon and the department of justice. it was about the release of information would jeopardize the court case against organ. it was determined it was not and the information has been redacted and the report has been made public. the keeper of the report basically cleaned up cover oregon. he believes this could

continue as a freestanding entity. i don't. i believe once we deliver a functional website in november, which we will, the remaining functions of cover oregon need to go into a state agency, the probably the department of insurance and finance where we can have direct oversight. we never took our eye off the ball. now have only 5% of oregonians without health insurance coverage. that is a huge victory for working-class people in oregon in general. i am very proud of it. >> he is really proud of it. i can't believe this. cover oregon is an abysmal failure. $300 million burned out. we can imagine what they would be like if it was piled and you put a match on a. he talks about signing up 350,000 oregonians. the majority were signed up for medicaid. we were signing people up for medicaid before cover oregon. you have 95,000 that were signed up for individual policies. those policies and individuals will be completely reenrolled by

the federal government. there is nothing to show for it, except it has been covered up before, it has been hidden, and the history of the report has been hidden as well because he does not want to admit it is an abysmal failure and it has been that way from the beginning because he chose the wrong people to go over the project and it was mismanaged from the beginning. i read one of your proposals that was especially interesting, to create a lieutenant governor position to foster international trade and open trade offices overseas. can you name three countries forming where you would like to see offices opening and what we would promote their? >> certainly. we have offices in some right now. number one would be china and japan and malaysia. these are countries that care about oregon. oregon is a gateway to the asian countries.

what we want to do is ensure that we have someone who has status to go over and work with the people to help prepare us to sell our products and services to a larger degree. that is how you create jobs. you create jobs by expanding demand for products and services. >> what do they want to buy? >> what they want to buy from us is everything we've got, from hazelnuts to wheat to technical, technologyigh equipment and chips and so forth. we have many things that we offer. we have drones and aircraft that can be sold. what we need to do is have someone over there because to expand our economy, you have to have people that want to buy oregon. that should be the ambassador for oregon products and services. if you have a lieutenant governor over there is setting up office oversee, laying the groundwork so the governor can go and close the deal. >> oregon is a trait-dependent

state. over the last three years i have missions to shanghai, berlin, amsterdam. the job of the governor is to represent the state. need a lieutenant governor. it is the job of the governor and i have been doing it. >> i don't think there have been any trade missions in the last two years and he spent more time in boot tan than he has in either china or japan, more than our two major trade partners. talk is cheap. >> i have nothing to add. >> you have said building a new i-5 bridge between oregon and washington remains a critical issue. what specific steps you take to get the bridge built? >> first of all, it would be delightful to see the election change the makeup of the washington state legislature. tea party senators

essentially tanked the project. if that does not work, the next question is looking at public-private partnership along the coast of west coast infrastructure exchange, which find private capital to fund public infrastructure. we cannot rely on the federal government to rely those resources. they cannot even keep the surface transportation fund solvent. we have dealt with washington and california and if we cannot do it to action, joint action by oregon and washington, we would have to look at that. it is a critical issue. everything from oregon goes through it. it is our portal to the global economy. is on the failure feet of the governor. we could have a bridge being built presently if it wasn't his determination that we would have light rail over this bridge that was going to a community that did not want it. once again, he is blaming others

for his failure to understand how things should really work. inwe work with legislators both states and governors with both states and were open and could have awe bridge presently. oregon said here are the parameters. they were not met. the project was stopped. his responses i will go it alone. he does not go it alone. yesterday has to execute the laws and decisions made by the representatives of the people in the legislature. the idea of doing what you want has hurt us and it is heard us again. >> you don't understand the financing mechanism. a hundred $50 million of financing was built around light rail. if that went away, the financing for the bridge went away. you can understand -- you have to understand how the bridge would be financed it you criticize me for what happened. >> governments build bridges. infrastructure is a basic thing that governments do. campaign, youthe

talked about a proposal to build a freeway through the middle of the state onto ontario. how do you justify that kind of expense, especially for commuters in the portland metro area that are stuck in traffic each and everyday? we haveof the reason such congestion up is because there has been a failure to and the commuting utilization of vehicles is an important aspect. the governor has stated to a group of mayors that we have to deal with climate change. we have to force commuters into public transportation. that does not solve anything for the rest of the state. we need to open up our state and by having a freeway system, and it will take 10-20 years to do this, but you have to start somewhere. by doing this you can have a vibrant economy on the coast, open up the depressed area county,usco to -- koos

and go across eastern oregon to ontario and you can take a tremendous amount of traffic that can just the portland area and give them a direct route to eastern oregon in a way they do not have presently. it will help congestion and it will help expand the economic aspects of our state in the central part of our state. you are't know how going to pay for it. what's we want our transportation future to look like in 2025 and how will we pay for it? we have a vision process being led by larry campbell. to finance it, we will have to look beyond the gas tax. it is not a sustainable way to finance the infrastructure. as people start to use mass transit, to do with congestion and to reduce the capacity needs on the road, we have to look at vehicle mile travels. if a righty innovative ways to

finance highways. what do we want our infrastructure to look like? what are the demands? how will we pay for it? >> this question for both candidates. i will give you equal time to respond. governor, perhaps you would like to answer it first. a generation ago, oregon was known as a national leader. policies like the bottle bill in the ocean opened beaches. what is your vision to returning oregon to the national forefront? >> i will give you a couple of examples. the coordinated care model, in which a million oregonians are now in, which is providing outstanding health outcomes and growing at a rate that is slower it than the growth of state revenues, is one incredibly innovative model that i think will be expanded nationally. i think the work we have done on the force collaborative in northeast oregon, figuring out a win-win between the timber industry and conservation community with the tenure stewardship contract that is

keeping a mill open in the john day and adding jobs and a second one. the west coast infrastructure exchange which i referred to, which is a creative way to figure out how we can do with the huge infrastructure gap along the west coast in absence of the federal government would be another example. i think we will see a model in byly learning hubs fundamentally changing the way we approach early learning and childhood development. >> part of the reason we don't have that innovation now is the policies that have been implemented by the governor for the last 20 years. he was in charge of the senate and his first term in governor, he was not fighting for allowing us to use natural wrister source -- natural resources in a proper way. we have 40,000 jobs lost in the forest industry. he is not fighting to have us have greater influence over there. we have presently, the liquid natural gas project.

this is a $7.5 billion project. that kind of money, you can have innovation. you can have growth. you can have development and entrepreneurs. without being willing to help to get a better economy when you have opportunities such as liquid natural gas, but we do is we destine our state to flounder along with low income, bad education, and lessens the likelihood we will have innovation, entrepreneurship, and growth as we have in the past. >> you have embraced the green energy sector. solar and wind companies have not created as many jobs as expected. do you see tax breaks for greener energy companies as a good investment for the state of oregon? >> it is not a long the lines of the former betsy, which was overgenerous and created issues. there is a role for tax incentives for renewable energy.

if we internalize the cost in that wind, i think solar, and other renewable energies would be competitive on the market. we externalize the cost of burning fossil fuel by simply dumping the carbon dioxide into the public air, if you will. the epa ruled that is going to address carbon emissions and the energy transportation sector will force us in that direction. productive conversations with pg&e and pat ryden from pacific court to figure out how we can collaboratively move in that direction by reducing carbon, increasing renewable energy without creating a burden on either ratepayers were industry. >> i think part of it depends on who the senior advisor is going

to be. in the past you had a senior advisory who tripled her income between 2012 and 2013 by working for companies that wanted energy contracts while she had influence with the governor's office. and so it's suspicion as to what -- where we've been in the recent past on energy -- on these energy projects and decisions being made. having said that, wind is important, solar is important. the challenges, wind isn't always blowing and the sun isn't always shining. we need to make sure that we have an energy package that provides the energy resources so we can attract businesses and expand businesses that we have because that creates jobs and restores a more prosperous deme. >> i'm a little bit confused. is that a yes or no to the tax breaks for green companies? would you -- >> it would fend on what they are and it would depend on who's recommending them. if you have an advisor that's on

the take, you don't know if you're getting real advice or if it's self-interest device. >> nothing? >> i won't respond to that. or dignify it, actually. >> you support transporting coal through oregon for export to asian but acknowledge that humans play a role in climate change. how do you answer the question that asians burning in cole that passes through here is having an impact on us here. >> whether they get it from some other location where they're not as concerned about the environment as we are or that we use environmental safeguards to provide it to be transported in a safe and environmentally sound way while we create hundreds of jobs, investment of money into our economy and a self-assessed

tax that will provide money to schools. i think it makes sense 230r us to be leaders in this and also accept the reality that people need to have heat. they need to be able to cook their food. in asian countries they're using coal to do that. we can set an example. for us to dictate what's going to happen there is to merely say we're going to have personal philosophy and which an extreme group of con certificate vegasases -- conservationists. >> governor. >> i oppose it for three reasons. as a governor it makes no sense to subsidize the burning of folve fuel in asian. i oppose it as a physician, because the jet stream flows from aving this way and we are going to get the particulate, the mercury and all of that stuff back in our backyard. i oppose it as a father. i want my son to be able to take

30. sh breath when he is it is the dirtiest form of fuel and i do not export it. >> we're going to wrap up this portion with one last question. although representative richardson i think you've hit on this a little bit already but the question is for both of you. could you tell us why you think your opponent is the wrong choice for oregon? >> starting with me? >> sure, go ahead. i believe that john is a nice person. we've worked together. that's mott the point. oregon needs leadership and we have 20 years of a downward snirle our economic environment. we have unploiment. we have a floundering of our economy. we have other states around us growing while we just bounce along on the bottom. we can't afford four more years of john kits hoffer. he said it's going to be better

in the future but in the meantime we're losing a generation of our kids. we can't afford four more years of promises made and promises broken on being an education governor and we can't afford the distrust, the failure to be open and transparent in our government. we need to have a government that is open, hons, transparent. esn't hide the ball, doesn't hide reports and doesn't continue to bring close to the governor those people who are not competent or they're not credible. >> we want to make sure that the governor gets same time to answer this. you could tell us why you think your opponent is the wrong choice for oregon. >> i am very fond of richard and we have worked well together in the past. i simply believe that, a, our shared values are fundamentally different. i do believe that it is important for women to have control over their own reproductive health choices. i think it's important for oregonians to be able to marry

the person they love. i think it's important to form a union and collectively bargain. this is actually a job that requires some experience. it's -- experience and perspective matter. it's not like i'm doing heart surgery and someone says, you haven't done this before. go ahead and take orr. just don't grab the sharp end of the scalpel. i've had the opportunity to serve in the legislature. i think that actually matters and is a factor in the decision that voters will be making in three weeks. >> all right. thank you, gentlemen. for this next section we're going to welcome joe who has some questions for our viewers and readers. >> lots of them coming in on witter and facebook. we'll share some of those. the candidates will each get 45 seconds to answer these questions. the first one, we heard from several people. they told us they were not

inspired by either one of your campaigns. no offense. >> no offense taken. >> so what do you say to voters who are not satisfied with either candidate? and we begin, i believe, with the governor. >> i would say vote at the open primary. that would address some challenges we have with the two party system. this is a voice between two fundamentally different philosophies and visions of oregon's future and hopefully within the next 30 days -- we have one more debate -- there will be an opportunity for people to sort of sift out the differences between representative richardson and myself and make it an informed choice. i encourage them all to vote. >> we haven't spent the money that's been spent in the past. our budgets are about a fourth of the money spent in 2 last election, so you're not seeing as much on the air. when you have those commercials and things like that, they're unhappy. >> we're never unhappy.

>> some people aren't happy. . some not so happy. this is the last three weeks. it's important for people to become informed, to go to our websites, to see what we stand for. to look at what the past has been it's not about a republican versus a democrat. it's about the past versus the future. i say three terms is enough, because we haven't gotten where you're going to go so why four more years of four more years? it's time nor a vision that will improve scombrobs, the education system and restore trust. >> this question came on on twitter. >> there's two parts to the g.m.o.'s. one them is we're coming up on labeling. i think people should have a full knowledge and understanding of what is in their food. so i support that. whether g.m.o.'s are a

lifesaving measure or they're a poison for the people, i know that we're both concerned about the answer to that and i actually like the fact that this governor has set up a task force to study that. because the state has the ability to bring in the experts what the real science is. the decision needs to be made on rational science and not on a motion. >> governor. >> i'll probably vote for the measure but i think that is the wrong issue. i think the international markets are going to determine that for us. they want non-g.m.o. products in ace ya and in the european union. we have a huge and important part of our industry that depends on g.m.o. products and a part that is non-g.m.o. the task force i put together is to find out what that looks

like. they are completing a report to me and we'll meet again before the session to see if we can develop a package or set of policies that will allow that to appen. > i would say 10-year energy action plan which we developed in 2012 was a huge part of that. the emphasis on trying to make the change to policies like the west coast action plan between california, british columbia and the state of washington is another. our major initiative on the environmental front in the next four years will be working lands, essentially how do we maintain our agriculture and timber land base in production for agriculture and timber

while getting a contribution lift at the same time. >> i believe that we need to first look at what conclude done immediately. e all have responsibility. we need to understand that there is a need for a statewide policy . because we don't have a stayed wide natural resource policy, in a couple of days this nullifies everything we do in portland. we need a statewide approach and not just a piecemeal approach. >> representative, this question name. how big a priority is leaving traffic congestion in the portland metro area and what do you plan to do about it? >> i think it's a tremendous

priority. i am look out my office window and i see the bumper to bumper .raffic morning and night it's social engineering. it's his philosophy to force on the people by making it so that traffic jams also make people want to go to public transportation. it wasn't working. people are doing it -- weren't doing it, were let cyst ent what we need to do is look at the outcome we want to do which is to be able to move commodities and commuters across the bridge and around our community in as little time as possible. so we need to be looking at speed limits, plans for more traffic -- inner traffic flow and more rhodes roads as necessary. >> governor. >> three things. we need to find a new way to finance our transportation infrastructure, not just driving on the road but mass transit, perksd and bicycle.

very important. i talked about that earlier. slicked, we need to focus on mass transit. we need to give people other alternatives to get to and from work. we could look at staggered work hours to relieve some of the capacity on sunset highway. sometimes it's empty and sometimes it's full. finally, smart technology. the boards going up across the country help consumerers figure out the best route to and from. >> yes or no, governor, do you favor raising the speed limit in oregon? several people asked this. >> i do not favor increasing the speed limit unless we can increase the number of oregon state place to patrol the roads fments >> i think it's important to do that. it's not citizen's problem. tights law's problem. >> this question comes in from the reader kate. she sks, what ideas do you have

to keep children safe from gun depths and -- deaths? >> i believe that we should have greater training and utilization of firearms. i think that when the government starts dictating what is going to be done and how they're going to be held, we immediately start violating the individual and the privacy rights and secondly,ing the rights of the citizens. but what we need is to have greater training on safety. we shouldn't avoid guns. guns are a tool, something that we use in target shooting and in hunting and for personal safety. we need to make sure that the use of fire armings is safe and rational. i've trained all of my kids. i've got one son and eight daughters. we've done target practice. i've got one daughter who's a dead eye. she's such a better shot than i am. the main thing was learning how to use them and use thome safely.

>> i believe we need a more stringent background he can in the state of oregon, close the loop tholes make sure that people who shouldn't have guns, don't have access to guns. gun owners -- could commit a crime or injury. finally, i think we need to recognize that this is a larger societal issue and we need to look at the front end, which is what we're trying to do with our learning, to try to identify kids who are at risk, who have mental health issues or need some family support to actually address the problems of people who might end up misusing a firearm. >> some people on twitter are asking if you are sure that no laws were broken sylvia hayes and why won't you ask a special

prosecutor to investigate? >> i do not believe that any laws were violated, period. secondly, i do not believe that we have violated the intent for spirit of the ethics laws, as i've indicated, but because the perception and the nagging questions around this. as i said, we've given all the relevant information to the ethics commission to vet and review. >> and the question is why not ask for a special prosecutor? >> because i don't believe this is a pros cue torle issue. i believe we need to -- pursue their professional career . >> we have a clear understanding of the people that it's corrupt when a person receives money from companies that have an input to the government and giving it to someone who has influence in government. we have statutes on that. for the govern to say that he doesn't see that that's the

problem, he doesn't see corruption that's obvious to the rest of us. it's a blind spot because it's his fiance. either way, it's not helping our state or the example that's being set for us to have a governor that doesn't realize that it is wrong to take money in a government position as a senior advisory. >> governor, give me 15 -- give you 15 seconds to respond. >> there's no evidence that happened. a lot of it is smeck las vegas, the conclusions of which i disagree with. we will find out when the ethics commission has a full review of the policies that we put into place to anticipate this. again, i welcome the review. >> which doesn't meet until after the election. >> we have this for you, how do you plan to keep your personal convictions separate when they conflict with the majority vote of the people. >> i've been a lawyer for over 31 years. many of my clients did not have

viewpoints in line with mine but that didn't stop me from representing them. i have the ability to have my own opinion about things. i will take seriously my oath to abide by the laws of the constitution. i won't come into office and change my mind as our current govern has. i believe that since we have made the decision that on the social issues that those are off the table, i will enforce them gladly. i'm happy that they're off the table because it allows us to stop setting off on those kinds f tangents when we should be concentrating on jobs and education and i can make that happen. >> i think there's a basic in consistency with that. forgive me. the voters have voted several times on whether to allow a woman the right to control her own health choices and yet you introduced 10 individual in

your 11 tpwhills the legislature which would restrict a woman's right to make the choices. i think there's a fundamental inconsistency. i think it's streept move the focus off of that issue. but it is what it is. >> can the bill being mentioned over the years does not prove a point. i do not agree that they limit the reproductive choices made by a woman. they may have been bills that had different aspects of it like dealing with the fact that there's emotional trauma and that kind of thing. >> honest question, why should we care about this election. >> i think that -- i think that's a sad question. this country depends on an active engaged citizenry. i was around when we worked to give the 18-year-olds the vote. when i was in college you could get trafted at 18 but you

couldn't vote until you were 21. voting matters. democracy is not a spectator sport. it requires active engagementment and the energy to research the issues and vote. that question concerns me and i hope whoever asked it will refleaktflect on the time and the plood and the history of this country to protect and expand the franchise to vote. >> representative? 22,000 miles and many of them died on the path. there was tall timber and 2k50e7 topsoil and wide rivers and a coastline and big fish. they wanted a legacy, they wanted opportunity. what do we have? it's about eligibility and qualifications and the government, you know, are you able to qualify to have the special deals that are offered to some companies and not to others. this election is about changing the course of our future.

i have a vision that would enable us to have a greater expansion of our economy with better respect for our environment, a better education system that will help the students of our farmlies have a chance for a 21st century job. >> representative, my wife is an undocumented immigrant and able to change her status. without measure 88, my wife won't dablete be able to drive legally. do you think our communities will be hurt if moms and dads can't drive? what is your solution? >> this is a difficult issue. i know there are families affected by this. my heart goes out to them but to say that question should avoid the rule of law and make special elections on -- for people because we feel like that's a compassionate thing to do is to violate the very basis upon which our country and our state is based. we have immigrants that have been here, that we came here

legally and we followed the rule of law and to say that we're going allow special exceptions for people who are here illegally, it stroilts law and it's a slap in the face of the immigrants who have come here and done it according to the law. >> it's not just about safe roads. it's about people who are in our community. they are our friends and neighbors and co-workers and they deserve the right to drive safely to and from work, to take their kids to the doctor, to go to church. if we believe in the pursuit of happiness, that must include being able to take care of your family. this is part of the larger commitment to equity and sexunte opportunity in this state these people are taxpayers. they work in the state of oregon. they contribute to some of our most porch fundamental industries. i'm not willing to turn my back on them. we need a state who welcomes all

residents. >> if they're here illegally, they're not taxpayers unless they're using someone else's social security number. let's be reasonable. >> the time is ticking down. we chose the order of who would close and governor, you will give the first of our closing statements. you have one minute. >> the choice is about two things. it's about values and the ability to deliver. my opponent and i differ greatly. we differ on the right of women to control their own reproductive health choices. we differ on the right of oregonians to marry the person they love. we differ on the importance of our environment as the foundation of our identity and economy. this is a fundamentally better place than four years ago because we came together and found solutions to difficult issues. we erased the budget deficit, started a kindergarten.

we have the first television freeze in 13 years. organize abs have health insurance coverage, many of them for the very first time we've pulled the state back together. we delivered for oregon. this race is about values and this race is about the ability to deliver. the choice is very clear. i'm proud to be your governor and i ask for your vote on november 4. thank you. >> you get the final word of the night. >> friends, oregon should be a center of excellence where you should be known for this jobs, high incomes, for natural resources and pioneer spirit. sadly, this governor has made oregon a national joke, scandals, cover-ups, investigations, wasted funds, and watch for the next three weeks he's going to vilify me to destract you from paying attention to his breaches in ethics. we deserve better. together we need to reboot oregon's economy and create jobs

and respect our environment. we need to better education by informing parents, teachers and opportunities. we need to restore filibuster our government, protect individual rights and no one should be above the law. we can clean up this government. but not until we vote out this governor and his croneys. we can give organize -- give oregon a better governor. oregon deserves a governor that we can be proud of. i end by asking you to vote for dennis richardson for your next governor. thank you. >> thank you both. we covered a lot in a short time period. but i think it's really great for the voters and we really appreciate you being here. thanks to our panel, to our timekeeper as well. certainly to all of you at home w4506 joined us. if you'd like to watch the debate again, we're going to put

the full video up on our website, kgw.com. you can check it up. there. ballots go out this week, so please take the time to vote. >> you can see this and other debates on our wibet c-span dorl. here's a look at the ads in the regon governor's race. >> we've tackled some tough challenges and we're stronger for it. >> johnities hobber has fought to get our state back on track. 10's of thousands of new jobs. health care for hundreds of thousands. >> we're not done yet. we can create an economy that works for all of us. improve our schools to give

every oregonian a chance to get ahead. >> the same independent spirit that drove oregon's pioneers joins dennis -- drives dennis richardson today. a decorated helicopter pilot dennis richardson carried injured soldiers off the fields of vietnam. he became a bipartisan neared the oregon state house. oregon's road to a better future begins with leaders who have a new vision. >> my brother-in-law was shot and killed in the mall. it's the worst moment of my life, having to tell them that he was dead. i'm a gun owner. the majority of gun owners want background hex in place. we need to keep the guns out of the hands of folks that shouldn't have them in the first place. this election, i'm majoring john or governor.

-- supporting john kits has beener for governor. -- kitzhaber for governor. >> c-span's campaign 2014 is bringing you more than 100 debates for the control of congress. stay in touch with our coverage and engage. follow us on twitter at fawn. ike us at facebook.com/c-span. >> coming up, louisiana senate debate between incumbent

democrat mary landrieu and her republican collegers, congressman bill cassidy and menace.army colonel rob -- men is. later, the keebt between up come bent jim rish and democratic opponent else in missile. >> coming up on the next washington journal, jean ross, co-president of national nurses united discusses the texas nurse who tested positive for ebola and calls for new standards to protect health care workers for the disease. then a look at the 2014 midterm elections with tim phillips, president of americans for prosperity and his group's push to make the affordable care act the number one issue. washington journal is live every morning at.

join the conversation on face book and twitter. >> c-span's competition is under way for middle and high school students will award 150 prices. create a five to seven-month documentary on the tomich, the hree branches and you. . go to studentcam.org for more information. grab a camera and get started today. >> now from earlier tonight, the first debate for louisiana's u.s. senate seat between mary landrieu mayor and her two republican challengers, congressman bill cassidy and rob meanest.

>> good evening. i'm beth courtney. welcome to the campus of centenary campus in shreveport, louisiana, for the first statewide televised u.s. senate debate. this debate is presented by louisiana public broadcasting and a council for a better louisiana. we thank our partners statewide s well as wjbo in baton rouge, wtbs in shreveport and others for sharing the program with viewers and listeners.

ofi'm barryer win, president a council for a better louisiana. we'll delve into important issues. >> participating tonight are congressman bill cassidy, retired colonel rob maness, and senator mary landrieu. thanks to all you or being here with us this evening. >> our panel of journalists include shauna sanford, alan english, editor of the times shreveport. e in stephanie grace and germany alford. we drew names to determine the seating and order of questioning. this is designed to learn more about where the candidates stand. our format is pretty simple. our panel of journalists will pose questions to the

candidates. each candidates will have a minute to respond. the panelists reserve -- panelist reserves the right to ask follow-up questions. and then there will be lightning round. >> many thanks to all of you. we had hundreds of questions for candidates via e-mail and twitter. you will hear some of them tonight. we begin with an ice breaker question. public opinion polls track a national unfavorable view of congress. the very notion of public service has been questioned in increasingly bitter election battles. would each of you tell us when and why you first decided to run for office? we begin with congressman cassidy. >> it was in 2005, katrina hit louisiana. there was a sense that our leadership had failed. there was a whole city that was unable to evacuate out of a category iv storm at first and

then as it turned out, leadership after the storm failed and later on it turns out levees had failed. i think many people chose to step forward. for the last 24 years i've worked in a hospital teaching young doctors, students and residents how to be better doctors but treating the uninsured patient. after katrina i led 300 people to stand up a surge hospital to welcome the folks fleeing floodwaters in new orleans. i think that experience at that time of my life led me to begin to run for public office. i consider it a continuation of the life of service i've done as a doctor working in a hospital for the uninsured. >> thank you. colonel. >> it was in late 2012 after i'd been out of the military for about a year after retiring from 32 years. i saw that my country may be on

a policy pathway that would lead us to an america that my grandson wouldn't recognize. i wore the uniform of this country for 32 years. i fought terrorists over the skies of iraq and afghanistan. i did that because i love america. i love freedom and i revere our constitution. america is the last great hope on earth. in this -- this election to me is not about power. it's about restoring our country. i believe that louisianans deserve to vote for a conservative this november. as mark levin said last nice i am the conservative in this race. that's why he endorsed me and that's why i'm running. thank you. >> senator? >> thank you so much. and lpnb for having us tonight. let me say that it wasn't until after deleage i thought about running for public office of course, i come from a family

that served for many years and i think honorableably and well in this state. i'm the eldest of nine children. five girls and four boys. my mom stayed home and raised us for 30 years. i looked at the two, mom and dad, and i said i think maybe i'll go into tub b public office. so after college, i ran for the legislature, didn't have much of a shot to win but won and continued to take one step in front of the other. i'm interesting that one of my opponents, congressman cassidy said after karena because in six years in washington he voted against disaster aid for isaac when it hit his own district. i'm proud to represent this state honestly, effectively and passionately to bring aid to survivors to fight for new energy policy, for our country and a whole host of things that are important for leaders to support. >> thank you all very much. now we're going to turn things over to our panel of

journalists. the first will come from shauna sanford which will be posed first to colonel. >> our first question is about medicare. we received lots of questions about this topic. like the rest of the nation, louisiana's population of baby boomers is close to retirement age. medicare will be under enormous financial strain due to the rising cost of keeping older adults healthy. how would each of you put medicare on stronger financial ground and protect today's seniors and future retirees from rising health care costings? >> thank you. the first thing we need to to do is restore the money taken from medicare, first by the barke bill that senator landrieu voted for and then the measure that congressman cassidy voted for. the facts of how much you did or didn't work for louisiana are

borne out that when will we say you're the senate for washington, d.c. we have time to get solvent. the board of trustees shows it's going to be solvent for about 20 years. so we've had the time. we need to come to the table together and develop solutions that will work for the people of the 2 st century. thank you very much. >> can i follow up with that? do you have a solution to put forth? >> we need to come to the table together and find solutions to make that a fair volume vent and we have time to do that as a nation. >> senator landry. >> i support the program as we know it. it's a very important program for safety, for our seniors. my opponent has no plan, as you just heard and congressman cassidy voted to end medicare as we know it, not cut it but end it and go to a 1r0u67er program.

he's voted for that consistently. it's one of the reasons why he's just showed up the first time to this debate because for 18 months he's been running away from his record. i voted for $700 million in dirkses for the medicare program, the same vote that john mccain took, who was campaigning with him yesterday, put that money back into the medicare program to strengthen it and extended the life of the trust fund by about 12 years. you're right. there's still strain on the medicare budget. but i support the program as it is and i also believe other people, particularly people that work that are under 65 deserve health care and we'll talk more about that later tonight. >> congressman. >> i'm a doctor who's been working in the public hospital for the uninsured. lots of time the only coverage my patients had was medicare. my mother lives us with -- lives with us. i know the importance of

medicare. obama cast a deciding vote for obama care, it didn't put it back into medicare. we'll be posting on our website. documentation for what i'm saying. it took 700 billion out and spent it else where it did not return into the trust funneled. on the other hand, 20 years ago john breaux came up with a bipart sedan plan to save medicare. others dusted it off, brought it back up. it isn't a voucher system. it's like medicare part d. 85% of seniors like medicare part d. if you want to keep it, you can, but if you wish, you can choose another plan of your choice. it will save money for bishies and the trust fund. it's a good bipartisan john breaux plan.

>> alan khgip, -- english, you have a ge. >> we're glad to see y'all here. thank you for being here. ryan is one of the many viewers who submitted questions tonight and one centered on foreign security. here are three tacked together as one question. they could be yes-no but we want you to explain it. one, do you believe president obama's military strategy towards isis. second, has the president overstepped his authority and third, will you authorize the use of ground troops, if that comes to it? >> isis should be destroyed. it's a very, very serious threat not only against the united states but the region, which is an important region of our interest. secondly, i do support the air strikes against isis and believe all presidents should have the

authority to act when they believe that america is in danger. and thirdly, i would support the use of force. i think i would stop short at this point for boots on the ground. i think that we have made such an enormous sacrifices in that part of the world. america must continue to lead. we have to be strofpblgt we've got to work with our coalition partners. but i would support the use of force. isis is a threat and it must, must be eliminated. >> yes. first, the president has not presented a strategy. and the president so far has failed. he pulled troops from iraq even though he was suggested by his general that he keep them there. as isis, he missed the warnings a year and a half ago of the gathering isis strength. as it began to invade iraqi he called them the j.v. team. then when they captured a weapons depot, instead of immediately bombing the depot, he waited, allowing isis to

distribute the weapons across the hoig region. he has no strategy. what we have presented to us is the beginning of a plan. i support this plan because it's the only one out there will. i'm not sure if it will be sufficient. they flew 2,000 sorties in one day in iraq. i don't trust this president. i think he's a poor commander in chief. before i commit our men and women overseas i'd like to see what his strategy actually is. >> do you think he's overstepped his authority? >> so far what he's doing now was authorized by congress for the initial steps he's tone. he goes forward, i would expect him to come back to congress for additional authorization. >> colonel? >> i knew in operation desert storm and that was an air cam that was part of a larger wartime strategy. we need to have an air campaign

connected to a strategy. this president has not presented us with a strategy. he's not defined the objectives of his operation. he has not defined success and he has not defined an exit strategy and that puts american sons and daughters in the great danger while they're in harm's way. he should be engaging congress. center congress has given him a blank check to fight an undeclared war. the people sitting next to me should be back in washington calling for debate instead of allowing a recess to occur. a declaration of war needs to be satisfied or not and we need to figure out how to pay for that war because we can't continue to put these things on a credit card. would i authorize ground troops? if the president could satisfy all those questions and address the exit strategy and address the need for it and show how he's put a coalition and maybe the arab nations will step up,

maybe the occurred will step up, but eventually ground forces will be needed. thank you. >> we turn to stephanie grace and she'll pose a question to congressman cassidy. >> we heard from a lot of viewers also about health care, not surprisingly, including mr. david linden felled. this is specific to congressman cassidy and colonel menace. it includes popular provisions such as required coverage for preexisting conditions. do you favor this coverage and if so, how do you propose to pay for it. ? for senator landrieu, you've defended your vote for the affordable care act. what portion would you change? >> as a physician, i oppose the affordable care act. i find when the patient has the power, the system lines up to serve the patient. however, when a bureaucrat has

the power, it lines up to serve the bureaucrat. as it turns out, as a bureaucrat telling people what they must purchase. here i have a rate sheet. t was from $725 per month to $ 1,200 per month. a 66% increase. now blue cross this past week increased rates by 20%. so clearly this is the unaffordable health care act. republicans propose that everyone in the nation will get a tax credit, only to be used for purchasing health insurance. people would be required to give everybody of the same age the same rate. i don't doesn't matter if you get a liver transplant, you get the same rate. by the way, different from the health care law that senator landrieu was the deciding vote for.

>> colonel? >> i've said it before and i'll say it again. the affordable care act, obama care is an abomination. we need to pull it out by the roots. my plan turns to the free market for solutions. first of all, consumers should be ok and allowed to buy insurance that fits their stage of life and what they need. a man who's not going to have a baby shouldn't be forced to buy maternity care insurance. state programs before obama care came into existence were responsible for health insure ans and we should return to that. we should be able to cross state lines and purchase insurance. that increases the market, increases competition and drives costs down and keeps costs low. finally, we need portability with insurance policies, so policies stay with the individual and you don't have to worry about going from job to job and losing your insurance. that will address the preexisting condition for most

americans. thank you very much. >> senator landrieu. >> thank you for your question. first of all, congressman cassidy introduced a version of the affordable care act himself under his name when he was a legislator in louisiana which he doesn't want anyone to know. and he mandated that businesses even under 50 employees could provide direct coverage. he will not fess up to that and all he talks about is president obama. he has some answering to do for his own record. number two, our country has struggled for 60 years over the question of how to provide affordable coverage and quality coverage to people in america who work 40 and 50 hours. it is unjust, unfair, and wildly expensive for our nation to have to treat people in emergency rooms when it costs everybody so much more money because we can't figure this out. the affordable care act is not

perfect. it needs to be fixed two ways. a plan could make it more affordable. raise the subsidy for -- raise the additional subsidies. then also allow insurance agents to sell. there are ways to fix it. not perfect but we have to keep it and not under any circumstance repeal it. >> thanks. >> jeremy, your question for the colonel. >> let's turn our attention to campaign finance for a moment, the money that fuels application. there are third party groups, most notably, super pxa that are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. how do each of you feel about that system? also, if you could change one campaign finance law right now, what would it be? >> colonel? >> it's a great question. application, from what i've learned from -- politics is a racket for sure. there's too much money involved.

but federal government shouldn't get further involved by limiting our free speech. agree with the citizens standing for what things are right now. i wouldn't make any changes to current campaign finance law. >> senator? >> well, the coach brothers and bill cassidy have literally ork straight a $25 million beau cuss -- bogus campaign run on television. that's the -- this is the first debate he's agreed to show up. maybe he just wants to use the power of unlimited, undisclosed bogus television ads to sneaks his way to the senate. corporations are not people. they should not be given unlimited rights to speech. the richer you are, the louder you get to speak. our democracy is based on one

man, one vote, one woman, one vote. the power belongs to the people. not that the rich have the power but all power equally. this distorts our democracy. you can see it playing out in this exact race in louisiana. i don't -- i want to run on my record of 18 years. it's hard to get your voice over those bogus ads. something needs to change. >> congressman? >> it's ironic. they're spending our campaign -- outspending us about 5-1 before labor day. mayor mike bloomberg is all about gun control put about reid's p.a.c.arry you didn't know it was senator reed. they're doing whatever weck they can to get senator landrieu re-elected because mayor

bloomberg likes her. the n.r.a. has third-party money coming to me but you know who they are, they're the n.r.a. not the person who has mayor bloomberg's endorsement. i like transparency. when harry reid pays for an ad, instead of hiding behind some tea party name, put, hey this is hear read. that would be the kind of change i would like. can we put that into law? >> that's an interesting one there. moving on to shanna sanford. this will go to senator landrieu. >> well, pay equity is another important issue that has the attention of our viewers. pay equity. a lot ha has been written. the richest 1% now earn more wealth than the bottom 90%. this is a three-part question. are you curned about this, would raising the anybody mum wage

help the working poor which so in fer many in louisiana belong to that category. it's not -- if not, what policies should congress adopt o address gender and pay inequality in general. senator landrieu, we begin with you. >> i'm very concerned about the inequity in the population of the united states and we all should be. this country is founded on a strong middle class and we've really got to think carefully about how to grow this middle class. this president has chaired the energy committee and is a leader in many areas. i'm looking forward to using my clout to help build a stronger middle class. i support pay equity. my opponents do not. i support paying women the same amount of money for equal work. i support raising the minimum wage. my opponents do not. the there's so many women that children depend on their salaries as well as their love and support. they depend on the money they

bring home for their well being. i think it's almost detail my opponents will not support the increase in the minimum wage. i support pay equity. it's -- women are still making about 67 cents on the glar. for african-american women it's even lower. these are things we can do now to hem strengthen the middle class. >> thank you. >> congressman cassidy. >> of course. this president income inquality has increased. if you've owned stock with this president, you've made a lot of money. under barke, it's clearly established that low-income workers, the bottom fifth, if you will, have had their hours reduced from 40 to 30 or even laid off as employers have worked to avoid the penalties of obama care. in lincoln parish, 400 lower wage custodial workers were

converted from full time to part time because the school did not have the tax twice faye penalty of obama care. if we want to do something about income inquality we should repeal obama care. the best way to increase wages for those who are less wealthy is getting out of the way, use our energy resources, create good-paying energy jobs. >> first of all, there these guys go again. that last question, they're both complaining about the corporate dollars in their campaign war chests and i'm supporting by 41,000 individual donors. pay equity. i'm proud to serve with tpwhim the united states air force for 30-plus years that got equal pay to me. i absolutely support equal play pay for women and equal pay for

equal work. that's not the issue here. we have a law on the books that needs to be enforced. the equal pay act needs to be enforced. i'm not for a national minimum wage raise. i've stated before that i believe that should be at the state level and elected leaders at the state should be able to experiment with setting a minimum wage under their conditions. that could help the working poor in this state. thank you. >> congressman cassidy, you're on record as voting against the better fair pay act. >> yes. >> why? since you say you believe in pay equity. >> the 1936 pay equity bill and the 1964 civil rights act outlaw discrimination on gender and race on how you pay something. the act is a trial bailout bill. a woman who will waut her business from another can be

sued decades later for things that allegedly occurred under a previous owner. it is wrong. i oppose that bill. >> thank you. >> our next question, allen, you have it. >> as we sit on centenary college campus tonight, we can't ignore the pressing issue of student loan debt. certainly is the intention of michael buyers and others who submitted questions, in the budgets of colleges, public and private, they're under strain and stress. consequently, students are paying higher television and the costs are causing them to graduate into debt. how are you going to address this problem? >> dr. cassidy. >> am i first? >> you're first. oh. i still teach. on tuesday mornings when i'm not involved with official duties, i teach. i'm aware that student loan debt is a major problem. part of it is that as the amount of money available increases, universities increase their

television. the other -- and that's been well documented. the other part, there's a lot of fraud in funded programs such as the pell grant. over a billion dollars a year is thought to be lost in fraud due to pell grants. we can somehow figure out how to keep the universities from always raising the bryce whenever more money becomes available to borrow and secondly eliminate the fraud, we can redirect those dollars to those that need it. now, but we also have to say, part of the problem as well, is these students are graduating into jock markets which are awful. they can't pay back their loan because they can't earn money. we need a better economy than the obama economy. it put a wet blanket over the economy. >> colonel? >> insolvent rates for college graduates are sky high.

the only solution to the debt problem for college loans is twofold. create the jobs. we need to pull obama care out by the roots. i talked to business owners in every parish, all 64 parishes in our state. the mall business owners that have less than 100 employees tell me the same thing. they're struggling to meet the requirements of obama care. they're struggling to redefine full-time job employees down to part-time employees and that's a disaster. our college graduates need jobs that they can graduate from college and go into those jobs that are sustainable long-term jobs. if we unleash our energy sector we would create jobs not just in certain part of the state but all over the state. that's what our college graduates need. i've supported the hero act that will spread accreditation decisions outs to the states and increase the market and

competition and drive costs down. >> you're out of town. senator? >> i have two bills. i'll talk about those in a minute. that will be very, very helpful, i believe. o the public. it is a public good for people to have strong education. what frightness me the most is to think about one or two of these gentlemen being in the senate and standing in line with governor jindle who has cut higher education in the state by $700 million, the largest cut any state in the union. i fought against those cuts and i've done a lot to make sure that at least we counter by supporting hundreds of millions of dollars through our hbc use which i'm very proud of. it would mandate the student loan. you should be able to refinance

the student loan saving each student $8,000. double pem grants are now worth less than 30% of the value when they were first passed. neither one of them should support it. they should. looking a student in the face who is trying to decide who to vote for here, what can you do for me tomorrow or in the first year to help me without milone stress? >> i find that young people want freedom. they don't want their future mortgage by deficits which is paying for it. their motivation for freedom. i don't mind somebody refinancing their student loans. i just don't think the taxpayer should have to pay for it. taxpayers are struggling as these students are. are we going to ask them to struggle even more for a tax pay

orrefi? if they can get a better deal they should. i just don't the taxpayer should pay for it. >> we'll go to the colonel. >> common quaries become a controversial issue in louisiana nd around the country. our governor contends that the initiative represents federal overreach. regardless of where you stand on that point should the federal government play a role in education? and what should that role be? colonel? >> thank you, stephanie. >> the constitution has no role for education in k through 12 for the federal government. and i believe the department of education in the federal level should be dismantled and common four which i'm opposed to completely is something that the federal level with the national

testing stan darledssunl acceptable for the parents, teachers and local elected officials and that's where if the federal government wants to play a role block grant the dollars down to the state, local and officials and appearance to use those dollars as they see fit to help their children in their education. >> the federal roll is very important but it should be secondary to state and local contribution and it is. it represents less than 20% of the funding but as you know there's such discrepancy and zip codes around the country. your zip code shouldn't affect it. they have equalized opportunity. not guarantee success but guarantee opportunity to succeed that's why the federal government got into the business of funding. i work with george bush, not a democrat, a republican to help bring accountability to funding

to our public school system and will work with all presidents of all parties. since i've been there three presidents now and six governors. i support state based standards which common core is. it's not a national mandate. in fact, our government is a supporter of it before he decided to run for president of the tea party which ryan maness is a part of. yes, i support common core. they are local standards. >> thank you. >> congressman cassidy? common issue. now, we've worked and my daughter's doing fantastic. but do i think one size fits all? no. that said if a state wants to fight among themselves, i also believe in federalism.

the state can fight among itself and don't common core. the federal government should not force common core upon states. they just shouldn't. with a state initiative to begin with us the sort of obama, my god, the federal government is going to tell us how to live our lives. they are going to require the state to don't common core if they're going to give any federal assistance. i oppose that absolutely. the federal government should not be forcing this upon states. >> thank you. i think stephanie had a problem -- >> what roll do you think the federal government should play in k-12 education? >> is that mine? >> yeah. >> he who governs best is the one that is close toast the child. it should be the mother or the father who makes the most decisions about the child's education. the federal government should merely play a roll of making sure that the federal funds are dispersed upon the state is not

fraud and be a model. and the federal government will pick and choose what programs it will endorse, i think that's wrong. >> jeremy, you have the next question and we begin with senator landrieu. >> senator some of the most contentious issues on the hill involve spending bills and the federal government. what are the key federal funding areas for louisiana that need to be protected? also if it comes up in the next term and it looks like it very may well, would you vote in favor or against raising the debt ceiling? >> first of all, disaster funding is very important. and i've been the leader of disaster funding in the congress both for our recovery here in the gulf coast and for help with sandy as well and other disasters around the country. my opponent, congressman cassidy voted against funding for his own district when isaac hit.

he sided with the republican party in the republican study committee budget which said, sorry, we can't afford disaster aid for isaac. we can afford no off-sets for people that make over a million dollars but not for disaster aid. so i fight hard for the state that is in the bull's-eye of disasters. and it affects, south, middle and north. i also think that revenue sharing is an important thing to fight for. i have secured it as a scrune ormember of the energy committee. i'm now chair of the energy committee. that funding must be protected. we need to save our coast. we need to build energy jobs and that's what at state in this election . >> thank you. would you vote for the debt ceiling? >> i voted for america to pay its bill. he voted for the government to shutdown. i did not. that's a big difference in our

record. >> dr. cassidy? >> i voted for hurricane sandy but i didn't vote for $30 billion. what i didn't vote for was related on that which wasn't related to hurricane sandy. that's not quite the best use of taxpayer dollars from louisiana. and the disaster relief she speaks of, isaac was not mentioned in that disaster relief bill that says as we're going to speak about revenue sharing, that was pete domici's bill and bobby jindle worked on in that bill. i actually passed a bill until the house of representatives that would almost double what louisiana would receive from revenue sharing. it was bipartisan from drilling on the intercontinental shelf. it wasn't even considered. senator landrieu's bill she didn't bring it up either. harry reid and the administration were against it and it never came to vote.

if she would have signed my bill and pass it it would never even come into law. i've said before to mihm constituents and i i'll say again i'll vote for any debt ceiling tcheel actually begins to address the debt ceiling problem. if it lowering our indebtedness, the ceiling.or >> colonel? >> i'm not going to vote to raise testimony debt ceiling. we're $17 trillion and that's at national crisis levels an both of minute opponents have voted to raise it consistently previously. but as far as disaster funding goes, absolutely we should make sure that disaster funding gets taken care of. dollars would flow immediately to disasters so there wouldn't

be a debating like what happened to the katrina bill which had a $50 million indoor rain forest for iowa. now why did the people of louisiana have to wait to get aid because of that? there is no reason that anybody can justify for that waiting time. so let's get a outstanding disaster fund together for the people of louisiana and make sure that they get their aid immediately. as far as protecting our coastline, louisiana's coastline is the mogse important in the nation and you know what, senator landrieu, the president's policies are on the ballot and they're on your person. we talk about energy jobs a moment ago and they're hurting energy jobs. thank you very much. >> we're out of time. all right. >> all right. to shauna now for the next questions. >> you're asking four questions in one. it's really hard to get them all in one minute. >> you're doing very well. [laughter] >> shauna gets the next question and it goes to congressman

cassidy? >> nearly all residents 65 or older receive social security. it promotes $32 billion for louisiana. yet year after year the social security trustees tell us that the program faces financial challenges. how would each of you protect this vital program for today's seniors and strengthen it for future generations? congressman cassidy? >> my mother lives with us. she's 92 years old and is aware of the importance of social security. if you're currently on social security your benefits will decrease. your current benefits will decrease by 25% to 30%. those are for folks who are currently receiving whasm tip o'neill and ronald reagan did 30 years or so, they gradually increased the age of eligibility to preserve benefits for those

who are on and those who are about to be but those who have strength in the program. ideally you do it as low as possible as someone who is not yet born. i am committed to preserving benefits, social security benefits for those who are on it, those who are soon to retire and those who are going to be in the future. we can do that by gradually increasing the age. endorsed ndrieu has that and will post it on the website. >> most of us expect to get that. let's talk from a principled perspective first. congressman cassidy, you have voted to raise the retirement age at 70. i've worked with folks out in the field for many years and there's no way that a lot of these skills could be done up until age 70.

so i disagree with that. and we shouldn't demand that current recipients of social security should take reduced benefits. so we have to protect that and that will comb one of my principles. >> the other thing that we've got going is the congressman mentioned is we've got time. and the guys that are about 10 years out and have their benefits protected too. where we really need to go to work is in the disability social security fund. it's increased dramatically for folks who are on sability and it's hard to imagine with the way safety standards today that there are that many injuries on the job and we need to look at it and that will run out in about two years. >> senator landrieu? >> there are about 550,000 people in our state on social security and some additional on disability. i agree with colonel maness. i don't think we should raise the social security age like

congressman cassidy did to 70. there are some people who are very hard and people cannot work until 70. i think that is a very bad policy. that's one of the things that's at stake in this election. now i -- let me finish, please. i also believe that social security is not an entitlement. it is an earned benefit. people work hard their whole life and pay into the fund and they should be able to take it out. ow, in madison parrish african-american's life expectancy is 71 years old. so when people say people are living longer. maybe people in connecticut. but i've got plenty of people in my state that are not living very long because medicaid is -- is very ole. >> congressman cassidy, i would like for you to respond to that

about you wanting to raise the age to 70. >> the fact that people don't talk about it is because it didn't hurt anybody if you pick an age and someone would say 40 now and they would become eligible at 67 in a month. if they're 39 they become eligible at 67 and two months. you see where i'm going with this, down to 30 in 67 in 10 months. they have time to plan for their retirement. those who are about to be be, nothing changes. it preserves the program as opposed -- >> i think we're out of time. sorry about that. >> here's a question. allen, i know that everyone would probably want to answer, right? >> yes. >> since this debate is being held in the bow sure city area home of the air force base, what will you do to keep the naval

bases all critical to louisiana's economy viable and off the base closing list? and let me add as safe as you might feel any one day, the next day you could be the target of a budget cut. so -- >> colonel maness? >> that's a great question. well, what i've actually done for barksdale is help build global strikes command as director of programming and requirements. so i'd help establish the first budget and shepard it through the approval process. my team wrote the first 25 years that it's operating on today. i've done that work on the ground and as a wing commander in the air force and work with delegations and local government and local committees to keep a base viable so that its missions are appropriate to the national security of the united states. and that's the key. we have to constantly be working with all of the bases and the

department of defense to insure there are viable missions to the base. it requires a lot of hard work and coordination within not just the department of defense but all of the local governments and local community leaders that aren't in government that want to stand for keeping their bases viable. >> all right. senator? >> thank you. as the first democratic woman appointed to the armed services committee, i've been a strong supporter of our military for many, many years. i served for 12 years on the military construction committee and have supported literally, allen, millions an millions of dollars of construction for barksdale and bell chase specifically help to land has the leader of our delegation the global strike command which is -- and we're going to get a

three-star but a four-star general. and we protected it. and that will be announced very soon. so it's exciting. barksdale was so successful, we created the pro-guess that literally saved 5,000 jobs at fort polk. our military is very important. that's why we need leadership and strength in washington to protect these bases and sendsing a rookie to the senate is not going to help. not s short answer was much. now that said i'm quoting john mccain. the deficit is what is killing our defense budget. and there's something called sequester which is automatic budget cuts to put into place. house republicans on two occasions advance bills that would end these automatic cuts

restoring money to polk, bellchase as well as barksdale. harry reid never took these up. now we know why. leon pennetta says the president wants to cut the military. as long has harry reid is senat majority leader these bases will be in danger. senator landrieu said that her first vote would be to re-elect harry reid. he is a rubber stamp of barack obama. it shouldn't surprise us senator landrieu supporting president obama 97% of the time if you want to save those bases, elect bill cassidy. >> we are short on time. >> this is actually going to be our last question. it goes to stephanie. >> fair warning another multi-part question on climate change this time. do you believe that climate change is real and that it's a threat to low lying areas such as south louisiana? what should any policies should

the federal government pursue to combat change? >> yes, i do believe our climate is changing and i do believe that humans contribute. however, we have to be very careful about the policies that we promote. i'm a strong supporter of fossil fuels. yes, natural gas particularly because it is a 50% cleaner burning fuel. we have 200 years of it. america could do a great service and great security by promoting more domestic energy exploration production. i've been a strong supporter. i opened up eight million new ackers in the gulf. i've secured expedited permits on western land. i do not agree with president obama on his energy policies. i do not -- i've now served with three presidents and six governors. i've had disagreements as well as support for some of their

policies. we have to be careful about what we can do. we can build a strong energy ture with canada, mexico and the future candidates. >> we are lose our coastline but that is relative sea level rise. if you compare -- that's related to our levees on our river taking needed sedyment from restoring our coast as well as other factors that cause the land to sink as much as water rising. or example in florida they haven't seen the water rising. if you want to preserve our coastline i'm not sure climate change is the issue as much as getting that sedyment into the mississippi river and putting it in the marshes which preserves it. i'll point out that our first vote is for senator harry reid.

he will never allow a pro oil and gas bill to come tom the floor of the senate. she's already said that would be her first vote. >> all right. >> well, it's evident that warming around the globe has occurred over the last 100 years. but there hasn't been anything seen in the last 16 years, some say even the last 19 years or even 26 years. so i think we've got a lot more to learn about climate and what makes it change. i know the president and senator landrieu's policy is that we need urgent action on climate change, but you know, if we don't really know how the climate changes and we're not seeing any warming, i think that leaves that in doubt. and there are much more urgent priorities like eliminating isis. energy independence and getting our stagnant economy going again so our college graduates actually have sustainable well

paying zwrobs go to to pay off those student lones. thank you very much. >> all right. we have time for just a few yes and no lightning round questions , one word answers an we have a lot of them. we're only going to give you three. and we're going to begin with you, dr. cassidy. are you in favor of legalizing marijuana for medicinal purposes? >> medicinal purposes, yes. >> what did you say? >> yes. >> maness? >> no. >> landrieu? >> no. >> is health care a fundamental right? >> no. >> you said no? >> yes. >> do you favor a balanced budget amendment? >> absolutely. >> of course. >> not an amendment but a budget balanced. >> all right. this is the last one. i want you to rate on a scale of

1-10 two people. president obama and governor indle. [laughter] all right. cassidy? two people. president obama and governor jindal? >> no. >> no, you won't do it? >> ok. >> obama's a zero. o bam's going to go down as one of the worst presidents? governor jindal, he's taken some tough licks. i give him a seven. >> ok. maness? >> zero and five. and he has taken some hits. >> all right. and senator? >> i would give governor jindal barely a three. i work now with six governors. >> three. >> and i would give president obama six to seven. i think he's had some really tough issues to deal with.

>> thank you very much. it's time for us to move to cleesing statements as -- closing statements as we did before. we'll start with senator landrieu. but we're down only minute and a half of this closing statement because of timing. but our clothing statement from each candidate starting with senator landrieu. >> i want to thank the coalition for hosting this tonight and for being back at senity nair. i've had the pleasure of representing the state for 18 years in the united states senate. and while president obama is not on the ballot, the future of louisiana is. and electing a senator that can get the job done when it comes to energy, building a middle-class in our country and in louisiana, supporting more domestic production, supporting and capstonal pipeline,

25,000-plus people with natural gas. using my influence and apply clout which is really the people's influence and the people's clout in louisiana. i think fighting hard for our state when it comes to disasters, disaster relief both lone forgiveness, supporting our universities and bringing billions of dollars to the state when it was necessary. i also believe supporting our seniors, not raising the retirement age to 70, keeping medicare as we know it. supporting health care for people that work and let's not repeal the law,. let's improve it. i have some suggestions to do so. finally coastal restoration. whatever we do in louisiana won't be worth anything if we can't save our coast. the revenue sharing bill that i passed the sustainability efforts are paying offer. let's keep -- efforts are paying for it. i skl for your vote. >> she's not sure their family

can pay their bills. she's seen her gasoline, her groceries, her utilities all those bills going up and now a 20% increase in her health care premium due to the affordable care act. this is not in spite of president obama's agenda. agenda. ause of that an agenda that senator landrieu supports. for 21 years i cared for families who had nothing. i set up a vaccination program to vaccinate children at school 38,000 against hepatitis b so the mom would haven't to miss work nor the child miss school at no cost to the child or to the school system. that i have been serving families like that for 25 years. when you walk into the voting booth, november the 4th, think about that family. it might be yours. do you want senator landrieu tom

complete barack obama agenda? if so, vote for her. if you want someone who's going to push and repeal obamacare, who's going to push for an energy pomsi to create better jobs and better benefits so that family has better wages, if you want someone to serve washington instead of you serving washington, d.c., then vote bill cassidy. thank you. >> colonel maness? >> i would like the coy litigation and the broadcasting to participate. i've never run for office before. so many louisianaans don't know me. at 17 i enlisted myself. i rose through the ranks. i went tonight school and became an officer. i fought in the skies over iraq and afghanistan. i've chased terrorists on secret missions in countries i can't name. i've commanded america's finest young men and women until life and death situations.

and our country honored me with a bronze star for leadership. but our future is in danger from poor leadership by career politicians. if our leaders could anchor themselves more to the people they serve and be more devoted to our constitution, we could put america back on track. stead of decline, we could claim an american renaissance and a new century of greatness. my belief that america is our last best hope sustained me throughout my years of service. and i believe that our best days can still be ahead of us if our people would just rise up and make their voices heard. i'm offering my service and asking for your vote to create a government that's once again worthy of the american people. i love you. i love god. god bless louisiana and these united states and thank you very much.

>> well, thank you all for participating. thank you panelists, thank you audience at home. thank you very much. on behalf of l.t.d. and louisiana public broadcasting, thank you very much for joining us. c-span's campaign 2014 is bringing you more than 100 debates for the control of congress. stay in touch with our coverage. like us on facebook.com/cspan. >> coming up next, the arkansas senate debate between mark pryor and tom cotton. then, the idaho senate debate between income and republican jim rich and mel mitchell.