>> the first point about the republican primaries in finding ways against folks who are aggressively flexible. in regards to the democratic party first, they walked away at the federal level. that has led to our involvement in the republican primaries. in georgia, we backed kingston in the primary. we surveyed our members in the state of georgia and advice to us was that we stay neutral in this race. we should be measured by what we do not do. we're going to reflect the will of our membership, who has more board members than any other state.

>> there's a possibility that georgia could go to a runoff. do you see any chance of rethinking a decision not to endorse purdue? >> we look at each race individually, whether it is a primary or runoff. so we will sit with her membership and get their views and opinions should go to a runoff. >> you mentioned louisiana. you endorsed mary landrieu in 2008. there are some reports over the summer that you might endorse

her again this year. what happened? >> the threshold for incumbents is at 70%. senator landrieu 73% rating with the chamber, she slid to 68%. below our threshold. if you look at georgia and louisiana, it is an example of being measured what we do not do and the direction to us was to stay neutral. >> we talked about the louisiana race, he talked about the stats on decline of the democratic endorsements. how has your increased involvement on behalf of republicans affected your ability to work with democrats?

>> what is clear is that this administration -- senator reid and former speaker pelosi -- have pushed the democratic party far to the left. like fixing health care law. there are very few days that i wake up in the morning and agree with senator warren, but with this issue, the medical device tax, we have a commonality on that particular issue. s o the democratic party, under this administration and under harry reid and his obstruction of the senate, have led us to this place. our threshold is 70%, which is a c- or i went to school, and we're hopeful that they will take a lesson from president bill clinton. i was speaking at the library last week and the theme of my speech was reestablishing the middle in the u.s. senate and house. that is the way it needs to be. when newt gingrich and president clinton got together and do big things, and tax issues as well -- i hope that the direction the democratic party chooses to take as we get past the selection -- because the american people are

tired of this in the senate and are ready to send a clear message on november 4. >> can i clarify your point on health care law? you noted to fix it. you want to fix part of it that don't work, that is your goal? >> right. i think it is unrealistic at this time to say that the president will repeal. it is deeply flawed. the look of the number of people who are promised to keep the doctor -- the website, the rollout -- has been a disaster.

we agree that people with existing positions be -- condition should be protected. in a place where democrats and republicans agree that this is an onerous commitment. also, the hit tax needs to be repealed. not only have we had some time to live with the law, the public opinion will move to a place where we can fix this law. >> can you work with senator elizabeth warren, for example, and being in favor of repealing this tax when you have so aggressively gone after not only your colleagues, but her? >> our goal is to work with members of both parties to get things done for, from our perspective, the american public. we're also going to aggressively hold members of congress accountable that impact our membership. that ms. praising folks from

both political parties. we have endorsed, probably, six democrats in the house, but actions, not words is what matter. to send a message and we believe the american people demand that members of both parties will demand this gets fixed. i think there will be more agreement and people that will see issues like the keystone pipeline as a bipartisan issue. it is time to come together to support, which translates to specific jobs. there is bipartisan agreement -- the oversight committee. i think that that is the start to begin to reestablish a bipartisan approach towards government. that is the central tenet and theme of our political effort. but the political effort at the chamber is not an appendage, it is an integral part of our overall goal which is to reestablish the middle so we can get things done in anticipation of the presidential election in

2016. >> i hate to dwell on this one particular thing, but senator elizabeth warren is talking -- she and other democrats who might align with your particular issue -- have they been willing to work with you despite this real, sort of, confrontational confrontational issue that you have towards them? >> we do value their role in the public debate. whatever money we're going to spend is going to be a fraction compared to what mr. stiers this spending, but we believe, fundamentally, that we are on the right side of the issues. the american people are going to speak plainly and clearly and

senate and house races. we think they have done that to the course of the primary elections. we have been fortunate with the board of the directors to be successful and 14 out of the 15 primary elections, including two special elections in alabama and florida. we believe that the people have spoken with the plane voice in the primary season, and that will be two in november, but success is not only defined by winning an election. it is determined by democrat and republican to king come together when the dust settles -- can come together when the dust settles. >> you talked about reestablishing and governing the middle. republicans and democrats coming together. one of the few examples in which that occurred in this recent congress was in the senate on a bipartisan copperheads of immigration bill.

that bill stalled in the house. a number candidates that you have endorsed by strongly opposed to that immigration bill. how do you see that playing out? >> the fact is, today, with regards to our immigration system, we have amnesty. i have been to 68 press conferences across the country and a number of different house races, as well. what i know and what i believe in my private discussions with 150 candidates is that there is a recognition from both political parties that we have a problem and it is to be fixed. there are different solutions, there are different perspectives, there are

different constituencies, but our plan is simple and straightforward. in the constitution requires us to address it, and the first issue is to secure the border. democrats and republicans agree that we must secure the border. second, we need to begin to retain the talent that we are educating right here in the united states. so we need to expand the number of h1 visas. and we need to roll up our sleeves and deal with the tough issues that do not lend themselves neatly to a 32nd television ad. i would make one point, imagine if the inverse is true. imagine if america was an amended that you people to better their circumstance, to come here live a better life and have a better education for themselves. many serving military and we

respect that deeply. so it is an issue that we need to deal with. we are confident that will continue to advocate strongly for immigration reform. >> the bill came out last june. strong bipartisan support. talked about issues that you just mentioned -- dealing with the 11 million that are here illegally. that bill died at the end of the session and everybody has to start all over again. people who are coming in, if they are elected to the senate races, are strongly opposed to it. how do see that getting done in 2015? >> that bill is going to perhaps die. there are over 40 jobs bills, by my last count, that have died in

the senate. this is a situation in reason why we have identified the need to back republican primaries that have the ability to win an election and are encouraged to do something when they get there. we're not going to waiver from our support from immigration reform. we will work with a number of different coalition partners on both sides of the aisle. >> the chamber president tom donahue said that if republicans do not get behind immigration reform in a very significant way and act now, then they, essentially, risk losing the presidential election in 2016 because they have given up on the issue to democrats.

do you think that is the case? if so, what do democrats have to do? as donna sort of suggested, for this lame-duck session to end. >> tom is a fierce advocate for the policy. this is why the chamber has seen unprecedented growth and we don't walk away from our fundamental beliefs that the immigration system in this country needs to be fixed, but we also need to measure that against, also, priorities like a preventive approach to american energy. we cover over 300 issues, so it is finding the opportunity with the right elected officials in the house and senate that have the courage to govern on these issues. i believe that immigration will be a significant component of the presidential primary season. and i think that you will see us -- even though we don't get

involved in presidential politics, we do get involved in presidential policy -- we will also fiercely advocate for the other issues that i have outlined this morning. >> can a republican candidate -- in your judgment, would it be a bad thing for a republican candidate to win the presidency in 2016 who opposes immigration reform? >> i think the president has to do with this issue. thomas been very straightforward on this particular issue, and we stand by that. it is also called upon those on the left to come to the table and fix issues like i have discussed -- the healthcare policy, the labor policy. these are issues that have to be dealt with. before you move forward, you have to mitigate the effects that has been coming.

over the course of the last several years, it has taken shape in the regulatory arena with a massive over regulation. so let's establish certainty first. that is a short-term goal. then we begin to address these tough issues, but let's start with areas we have commonality. immigration fit in that category. >> how important is mitch mcconnell to this though you've laid out? >> kentucky, we are up right now. i think we have run five television ads, so a massive digital footprint has been the centerpiece of our digital and social media efforts. he is somebody that fits squarely into the category of someone who has the ability to win an election and the courage

to do something, you know, in his new role as majority leader. he is a friend and someone that we look for to working with. >> why is that race is tight as it is? >> kentucky is a state that is very competitive and there are several issues at play. if you look at the top 10 races in the country, i saw that mcconnell was up. >> you talked about all of the races and i gather that you are optimistic that republicans will take the senate. what would you like to see in the first hundred days of an all

republican congress? >> i think there needs to be a sequenced approach to government. i think some of the things that we are going to support leon are areas where we do have that commonality -- support early on our areas where we have that commonality. mitigating the regulatory issues like the rapid act issue are towards the front of the list in my judgment. and i would start with the healthcare law in areas where there are agreement. if we are able to gain some momentum, for able to have an reestablish -- because a governing middle -- the american people are going to speak with a clear voice and demanded -- if we can gain momentum on those issues, then it will be more likely that we can bring issues like immigration reform into the mix. i think we can also deal with tax reform. complex as it is, it is

competitive around the world. so we have to become more competitive because 95% of the world's consumers live somewhere else. we also need to be more aggressive with our trade policy. that is something that president clinton got right. where democrats and republicans come together, representing america, and selling of goods and services across this country is a bipartisan issue. trade could also be an issue. legal reform as well. then we can move to comprehensive tax reform. we do not deal as a country -- republicans and democrats -- entitlements will consume the entire federal budget and 30 years. so let's start where we agree. especially as we move into a presidential election where, i think, it will be the most consequential election in a

generation. >> we have talked a lot about the amount of money that you guys are spending in these races. i wonder -- this is the first time that you have played big in primaries. is there any chance you would play a bigger role in the presidential race in 2016 or beyond? >> for 102 years, our board has been very clear with us. we are going to have a united front on these issues, so our judgment has been not to take a role in presidential elections, but to be rigorous with our views on respects to these issues we have discussed here today. we will continue to do that in the context of a presidential election. i mentioned i was with the

clinton library last week. senator paul, governor romney, all opposed our campaign because they are messengers on issues we find ourselves discussing and debating. we're going to focus on the local impacts, the federal issues, and work with members of both political parties to help move that agenda. if we can gain momentum, we believe that in the first hundred days of the next president, we have an unprecedented opportunity to reestablish that and we start this engine of economic growth. >> you talked about the realization of the bank -- what happened? >> i have been vocal in the press conferences. senator jody earns in iowa is also of one example that has

come out in support of that particular bill. so we will continue to talk about that and there will be continuity between the footprint and the political space. what it means is that we are moving towards governing in the first hundred days. our issues do not align a partisan basis, such as issues we have noted here this morning. i think the american people will demand by person in the elections. we're going to vigorously push in the first hundred days, as well. >> talking about all the money you spent in the electoral states, there has been a lot of focus on the shift in money and power away from the political parties on both sides to these independent groups. how do you think -- do think that is occurring? and how has it affected our politics and

governing? >> i think that the us chamber and the amount of growth we have experienced since 1997 with mr. donahue is reflective of the will of our membership to get back on offense and create jobs for this country. we think it is a good thing that the voters are going to the polls with information and facts. a lot of candidates claim to be pro-business, our job is to help validate that. we think that the american people knowing where the candidates stand is very healthy. >> do think the party has lost power? >> there have been aggressively involved in the elections. both the rnc and the dnc are vigorous and aggressive in various ways in this election and i think, you know, the role in the public

debate is to be valued. >> as campaign 2014 enters its final days, thank you very much for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> newsmakers is back. our guest this week was rob engstrom. this election is on track to be an estimated $4 billion-$5 billion in campaign spending. we have a snapshot of one of these groups that are spending a lot of money. and what can public take away

from this? >> one of the things he tried to get was the shift in power. there is all this money being spent. what's new is that the share of the spending being done by these outside groups is quickly approaching, and in some cases even surpassing these expenditures by the candidates themselves. it is reasonable to assume that the chamber and other groups like it will have great sway in the next congress in sort of affecting the government. we talked about the debt ceiling in the 2013 government shutdown. they were unable to rally the votes necessary to pass a billto raise the debt ceiling. the chamber was sitting on the outside, very upset by this, but do not really have the clout to draw these members, to help

broker the compromise. now we will see, after a cycle in which they have been very active, if they do have the clout. >> ken makes a very good point with their spending -- with the outside spending. i think the outside groups have been able to define allison grimes -- mitch mcconnell's opponent. that has gone a long way in determining the outcome of that particular election. leading up to this, the chamber's clout had been in question on the hill. a lot of the business groups had been taking a number of hits, whether it was on immigration or treaty. so it will be interesting to see now after they now after they have invested some 15 million dollars and primaries, but $15

million as well in the general election -- whether that business agenda will carry through into the next congress. >> we should note that there are groups that are spending as much if not more in republican primaries than in the general election were conservative, but take a very different position on a number of key issues. the fight is not necessarily between republicans and primaries, but outside groups and tea party groups. on the other side, we will see a little bit of tension headed into 2016. some of the more business friendly interest that are already aligning behind clinton. had you see the democrats willingness to listen to the chamber agenda?

>> that is going to be interesting to see. there were a number of democrats who are targets of the chamber and survived. they are going to follow their constituents and their own interest. that may overlap with the chamber agenda. it may not. >> any thoughts on that? >> i think it will be difficult for the chamber to work with some of these liberal democrats. elizabeth warren has made her political reputation out of challenging big business and wall street. i think when the chamber comes out and aggressively goes after her colleagues, it is going to make her even less inclined to come to the table on things like the medical device tax. >> i want to say thank you for

being here this week. thanks for your questions for our guest and your time. >> my pleasure. >> a few of the e-mails we recently received. --n wrote christine sent this e-mail --

and robert wrote -- and continue to let us know what you think about the programs. call us at -- e-mail us at -- or send us a tweet at -- join the conversation and like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. of campaignverage 2014 starts with the last debate in the georgia governor debate.

this is getting underway now. [no audio] >> from channel 2 action news, and this is the debate for georgia fat. -- georgia governor. here is your moderator. togood evening and welcome the debate for georgia going there. it is one of only three debates. we want to welcome all of you watching our live stream. and around the nation tonight on c-span. please do not forget to tweet us questions using our #. position by podium drawing. state senator jason carter

representing the 42nd district indicator. the incumbent, governor nathan deal. as a libertarian candidate, andrew hunt. he is the founder and former ceo of a leading nanotechnology company. panel.ined by our the assistant program director for a radio station. and a political reporter. in channel to political reporter. they will have a one minute for response and 45 seconds for a rebuttal and these are loose guidelines and certain conversations may warrant more time. my first question and thank you for being here, georgia's economy. both use statistics to make your argument about the lack thereof of our economy. the question to each of you, will you please offer a couple of specific moves you would make as governor to enhance georgia the company?

>> -- georgia's economy? -- >> we have been one of the leading states in growth. last year, we created more jobs than 44 other states in this country. as of tomorrow, we will be able to announce 1800 new jobs in the last two weeks. iselieve what we need to do continue and not raise taxes on our citizens, to make sure we follow-up on career initiative programs that will be able to train our citizens for the jobs that currently exist. we are doing that would 100% scholarships for those who go to our technical schools and to be trained for the jobs in our state. i will not raise your taxes. with actually cut taxes. we eliminated the marriage tax penalty was that we eliminated the estate tax. we need to stay the course. carter, what specific

things might you do? >> thank you for being here and your question. i am honored for this opportunity to share with the people my vision for an economy that works for everyone. i am running for governor because i know this state has -- a ingredient to be in powerhouse. the current leadership has taken this data to the bottom. we are dead last in unemployment. every other governor is doing a better job than governor deal. we are dead last and how fast we are recovering from the recession. every other governor in the country is doing a better job at managing the recession than governor deal. we cannot continue down this path. middle-class families and small businesses are being left out. my plan calls for ensuring those small businesses that do the same tax credit and a cause for ensuring we build an economy based on educating people with high paying jobs and not the lowest possible wages.

under the governor's plan, the middle class has been left behind. >> your response? >> we have not left the middle class behind. in terms of the jobs created, the average salary is 40 $7,000. we are not doing worse than other states, we are doing better. we have seen our job growth in revenue from people paying taxes and tax withheld has grown by over $90 billion. the other states have a lower unemployment rate have seen their numbers of workers shrink and workforce not growth and they have not created a number of jobs that georgia has had. we are doing a good job in that regard and we will continue. we are focusing on the middle class and that's why we have a nonder percent -- 100% tuitiio for those who will attain a middle-class economy.

hunt.will get to you, mr. >> would've debated several times and that's the first time the governor hasn't mentioned the middle class. the average family makes 1400 unless then they did when he took office. losttate, last month, 15,000 private sector jobs and he is going to brag about 600 being created tomorrow. we need a governor that will focus every day and understand out ofusiness create two three jobs. he will cut the ribbon above will not support small businesses stop we have to make a change. >> we will get to our panel. >> the key issue is the jobs being created right now are not today's job but counted in the future jobs. we need to jobs now and not over the coming years. we are losing mass quantities as mr. carter pointed out and we

have to replace with the jobs now. we need a program where government is not creating. that is what mr. deal is talking about. we need free enterprise created jobs where there is a level playing field and they do not only go to the large corporations. >> to our panel. want all three of you to answer this question but i want to focus on education. senator carter, you have criticized governor deal on educational funding. you say you will cut some government pork yet you have not been specific. can you give me three areas, three programs or agencies where you see the port you can cut to make up for hundreds of millions of dollars? >> thank you for your question. education has to be our most important priority, every single year. the governor's record on

underfunding education is extreme. we have seen $8 billion cut from fewerassrooms and 9000 teachers today that when the governor took over and more students. all of you know and can walk into your local school and see some of the kindergarten classes have 26 students. ande cuts have consequences undermine not only our students but our economy's future. education is economic development. we could have a separate budget for education. revenue ande that greater proportion than the governor has. there was $100 million in waste and the food stamps program last week at europe seen other states that have tackled waste in their government by partnering with the private sector and cut hundreds of dollars -- hundreds of millions a year. we can do it. right now, we do not have a governor looking for answers.

his position is there is not any. >> can we have your view? >> your question has not been answered. we get the same kind of rhetoric. we have increased education funding to the highest level of any governor in 50 years. the highest level was this $535 milliont from and senator carter voted against it. he said people will be held accountable. we are holding you accountable tonight is a question more he just asked and all of us are going to continue will stop -- we are hold you accountable tonight and the question lori just asked and all of us are going to continue. you have never indicated how you would do that. these are simply hollow rhetoric that has no reality. certainly, he knows that.

he would've introduce at least one amendment and the tilling -- and the budget and he has not done so. what you have heard is governor deal passing the buck for his cuts to education. the governor present and signed the budget. this year, the budget underfunded education by $750 million and the governor calls it an increase. we are not doing right by our schools. i have one issue that has been neglected by the governor its uncollected taxes. right now, there are hundreds of millions of dollars a year that are being lost by taxpayers because we are not properly collecting our state sales tax. the governor had ignored it. you have seen repeated references to the fact that the governor believes there is no waste. everybody knows that is not true.

thoughtagain, if he there was such a waste, don't you think he would've introduced one amendment to pointed out? he has not done it. we are collecting taxes and we have acted more people over the period of time. we are doing a very good job of collecting the taxes. what it boils down to is in order to do what he says he wants to do, he will have to raise taxes. he does not want to admit that. the reason he cannot answer that, that is the only source available to do what he claims he wants to do. >> when the hope scholarship started -- >> dr. hunt? >> we heard a lot of discussion about how we get a different money into the education. what we need to look at is how we cost effectively educate the people and educate them correctly. we have a major issue that want -- that both of them want to

continue a failed system. i say we have school choice. 70% of the people want school choice whether democrats, independents, or republicans. let's give it to them. let's not have people and up in of poverty just because of their zip code. the best way to end poverty and without some the highest in the nation is through education. we need to do it more cost effectively. we rank 25th and it the world -- in the world but we spend the most. we need to change that. we need to really turn things around. >> staying with education funding and budgets, the georgia corporation is saying the percentage as of 2013 from 34% when you started to hope is now 25% so it has been a decline of

9%. is the money there to restore the hope to the higher percentage once again? >> i do not think that is the question that needs to be answered. to fund the able programs that hope is in charge of? through oursively lottery program. with had the highest revenue increased over the past years that will be dedicated to the hope programs in our state. other states have tried to follow the formula of ratcheting up and ratcheting down the amount of payouts have seen disastrous results. they have seen fewer people playing and participating in their lottery and the net result forhat there is less money the education programs that the moderates support. we do not need to do that. we have the most successful lottery program and the united states and we'll produce with

even more money with that successful lottery that is going to our programs and hope. >> dr. hunt? >> we need to ensure all of these lottery funds are going only and to view hope programs and we do not have people -- things put to the side. we have special allocations for different and and if we want early childhood education that helps working parents and when the child's brain is developing the most am a why not include isseracing in the mix -- developing the most, why not include horseracing in the mix? that is our future. once again, poverty, we are going to through -- we are going to end it through education. we can have stem schools and that will feed into college and blended schools that feed into our colleges so well. then have it so people can leave college with all of the debt.

let's have educational savings that follows the children so when they graduate, they do not have to of mass so much. >> senator carter? >> you have seen in this state the promise of hope be broken. our was the first time in state because of the governor's cuts to the hope scholarship, the high achieving, hard-working students that earned the went to college, many of them, are not able to go to school because they cannot afford it. that's the opposite of what we need. as a result of governor deal's policies, there are 80,000 fewer hope recipients. 80,000 people. i met one yesterday who was going to be nurse and was going to school and as a result of governor deal's cuts had to drop out. deadr life, she is not ahead in the way that she should. that lottery fund is being

mismanaged. there are $360 million in a right now that is going on used unusedte -- unussed -- and waste and should be maximizing the number of people to go to school on hold. i am the only candidate with a plan to expand. >> do you agree that it is being mismanaged? >> absolutely not. you would not be seeing the highest return if it was being mismanaged. the statistics he repeats are statistics that the commissioner of our tentacles will system -- technical school system says is untrue and he continues to say it because it sounds good. in a the three years since i came into office, we have seen a ourincrease and those in technical colleges system will complete their courses.

that is what we want. students will finish so they can get the job. if he was concerned about a young lady, he should've voted for those high demand career initiatives which included 100% tuition for those for a nursing degree. >> governor, the average technical college student in this state as having a hard time paying for it. we both know that. what you see out there, the average student is just like the woman i saw yesterday. a 28-year-old woman with kids. if you believe it is getting easier for people to go to technical school, you are not in the state living the life people are. we know it is getting harder. under your watch, the cost is rising faster here than any other state. those are real numbers. and we cando better and i am the only candidate that has a plan to expand the hope

scholarship for the middle class. we have to do it. the rhetoric you are providing is not going to get us there. >> we need to circle back but we will move on. the georgia lottery is always searching for new ways to raise revenue and keep up with demand for the hope. would you ever so port casino style gambling -- support casino style gambling? i do not favor racing. we have allowed the use of online purchasing of lottery tickets and lottery proceeds and we think it will produce additional revenue. we have seen the machines in many convenience stores across the state brought under the auspices of the lottery system and that is producing additional revenue. i think we have to be very cautious in our constitution as that put a rest

restriction on what we could do on gambling type devices. has done a good job. they produce the highest amount of money in education in the history of the lottery. i think they are doing a very good job. >> dr. hunt. >> one of our issues is not just the income coming in and how we allocated but the cost of our schools. what we have is, the state that had the second-highest cost increase of all of the states in college over the past four years. we have to look at the total cost, all of these extra costs .dded beyond just the tuition extra fees that is costing the people and we need to have it so people can leave college with little or no debt. that puts a big burden on them. we know how big our national debt is in this area and it can

be an economic hit just like the mortgages were. we have to watch our policies and how much of the cost is of college. we need to have hope so more people can qualify. we need to make sure that harder school have a different gpa level to keep hope dental schools that are easier. >> governor deal talks about the lottery corporation doing a great job. the fact is even when the lottery commission deposits rucker avenue's for education on it is not being used in pre-k. there are $360 million in wasted today above the required reserve. there are 80,000 fewer hope recipients today. everything has to be on the table. i am skeptical of casino style gambling, but i would work with the legislature to explore those

options. in the legislature, i am the one who fought to ensure when the government took over those machines, the video poker machines, i am the one who ensure that money would be put into the lottery for education fund. we have to ensure at the end of the day if we are doing anything, we are using the money wisely and investing in our people. we are not getting that right now. >> you say all things are on the table, what about them, cap of 140,000 -- income cap a wonder $40,000 that you were and -- cap of $140,000 that you were in favor of and a family that made the and their child would not qualify for hope? >> we have to expand and make sure we are investing every penny out of the lottery for education fund into the hope

scholarship to maximize the number people able to go to college. i believe that means we have to consider knees. we have to sure there are folks out there that need it the most. the middle class and there are getting left behind. the woman, we cannot afford to go to school, that is a loser for our economy. supportto have those as them. if you cannot afford every body, we have to sure maximizing the number of people go and the middle class is taken care of first. i will work with the legislature to find a balance way to consider needs and make sure we are giving the hard-working people who qualify, who get into college a chance to get ahead and not have the door closed. >> yes or no on an income cap? not.solutely he has admitted his plan would not work as he did so a couple of weeks ago. if we waited back several years 2012, it would've been a

bankrupt long ago. tonight for him to advocate dipping into reserves, that is where we got into trouble in the first place. 2009,ssed the line in dipping into reserves for the first two years before i got into office. we have now built up a reserve. >> your mischaracterized 2 things. we're not talking about dipping into the reserve. were talking about money over in the phone. is he is lying about my record. i have always been in favor of finding an appropriate weight to consider expanding the -- i've always been in favor of find an appropriate way to consider expanding the middle class. >> if he believed in that, he would've voted for this year's budget for students to that a rate.rcent interest

he voted against it. >> we should not have a cap. it is the wrong type of thing. the people paying the most taxes and never given benefits back. we need to take care of the low and middle class without a doubt. we should increase the base level for our income tax rates start. it should not start at a few thousand at $20,000 or higher. that is where we need to give them a break. every middle-class person. deal, thousands across the state and counties have cast ballots in this election was a sunday voting -- election. sunday voting. many in your party said they would eliminate a you said you expect lawmakers to bring some degree of uniformity to election law .

isn't the best solution to 150 nineat all counties, every eligible and interested voter has an opportunity to participate in the state support that? every eligible and registered voter exercise their opportunity to vote. i think is going to be an issue that the general assembly will look at. there've been complaints from county to county for those who allow sunday voting and those who do not. i want to make voting as easy as possible and i believe this is an issue that deserves to be debated. it isn't ported the as him -- important that we have uniformity as where you are allowed to vote and when and should not depend on the county in which you live. >> to each of you. >> i support sunday voting. it is an important exercise and democracy and i will be on the side that says if we maximize the number of people that

participate. it was wonderful to see the long lines outside of the polling weres and i wish there more machines. i love the excitement out there. i embrace it. it is a great a thing. i do not think we should restrict people. >> i concur with both of them. i want to add being an engineer and nanotechnologists, we need to bring the game up to a higher level. we need to have a recordable trail on voting. different waysof we can do with electronic transactions of large amounts of money which could be applied to voting. there's also an audible trail. our current voting machines have no audible trail. you take the number and they're all talented up and a number at the end and you cannot go back to individual ballots for the not knowing which person, but you have a written record to

verify that our systems are working correctly. you need to have those. >> some of you are watching this debate on channel 2 and you are sending us russians on twitter. we would have one of the questions. -- sending us questions on twitter. what is your plan to secure a bright future for the agriculture industry in georgia? >> as many of you know, my family has farmed the land of generation -- of georgia for generations. n southwest georgia. there is a dynamic future for georgia's economy and agriculture. what we needed to see is investment and expansion of processing the distribution of the agricultural commodities. we produce more blueberries that almost any other state, yet we to be huge number

distributed. if we want a vibrant agricultural economy, we can do that by investing in that process and and distribution infrastructure. given the fact will have the biggest on the east coast and will allow us to ask for it at our infrastructure israel environment -- is real and vibrant. >> governor deal? not grow up in chicago, i grow in middle georgia. i lived on a farm and i was active growing up. i understand what farmers are faced with. beene family that has forms for generations. the important thing you should notice is the general's -- the general simply has worked with me and we have -- the general assembly has worked with me. created a low

interest loan program for small farmers who can go as part of the process and get a loan where they might not be the to receive traditionalhrough a banking restitution. we are very cognizant that agriculture is the number one industry in the state of georgia and one of the major exports through the port of savannah and i want to keep it that way. >> dr. hunt, please. >> we have an overregulated industry. we need more fairness and freedom. there are certain plants that would be great for alternative energy and new fiber sources that are illegal here the legal and other states because of the name of the plenty being the hemp plant. it has no hallucinogenic or drugs or anything related. a great plan that grows with you on the chemicals that are needed.

you have local farmers not being able to do things. urban farmers and small scale that cannot meet the regulations and standards put out on the large corporations in our agricultural centers. we needed to have these people that want to do the natural type of farming be more honored and free to put out their product. we have too much government regulation and many areas that hurt our industries and i cannot [applause] -- >> we're going to take a brief rate, but you are going to want to come back with this as we tackle more issues. the candidates will have a chance to question each other. we are back after this. a break here in the georgia governors debate. it will continue live on c-span in a minute or two. on tomorrow morning's "washington journal," james

looks at a state of judicial elections for this year. subject the claims of candidates and outside groups from this year. the effect oft the election on defense legislation. you can join the conversation on facebook or twitter or call. we are live every morning starting at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. the cook political report the georgia governors race as leans republican. the candidates are democrat jason carter, republican nathan deal, and libertarian andrew hunt. the debate is courtesy of wsb tv. now back to atlanta. it is sunday evening, and welcome back to the action news deba f