we have the strongest military in the world. and we are not going to let isis or any other terrorist group cause the collapse of this country. >> so was it a mistake for the president of the united states to take ground troops off the table? >> well, again, i think we're building an international coalition. you know, my opponent says that our allies don't trust us. but, in fact, we've got a coalition that has over 60 partners. we are engaged in airstrikes with not just our european partners, but arab countries. we've already taken out hundreds of isis fighters. we're also going after the financing of isis. we're going after their recruitment efforts. and, again, i don't think we should be putting tens of thousands of american troops back in as an occupying force. and we should also not be talking about isis in a way that spreads fear and panic among our population. that's just political grandstanding.

what we need is serious people to talk about this issue in a serious way that is going to address the challenge. >> and let me just let her answer the question, was it a mistake for the president of the united states to take the option of inserting u.s. combat ground troops off the table? >> it's not a mistake to take it off the table right now. and general dempsey said just within the last two weeks that he doesn't recommend putting ground troops into the middle east right now. and i don't think the american people want to see tens of thousands of american troops back in the middle east. but if we are going to authorize the use of military force in the middle east, we need to have the president come to congress and make that request. and we need to have that debate. we owe it to the people of this country and we owe it to our fighting force, our military men and women. >> all right, go ahead. >> well, with respect to the senator, she still hasn't answered your question.

she didn't answer in the last debate, as well. and that's part of the problem. she's so tied in with president obama and his failed policies on this issue. the question was, would you agree with the president to send ground troops or not? the bottom line is, he's already taken it off the table. he's taken the greatest fighting force off the table. and we have an opportunity -- there's no one talking, by the way, about occupying forces. we're talking about a transitional force, as we've done in other countries. we're not occupiers. we were there to assist the iraqi government to make sure that what happened wouldn't happen. and it's that type of lack of leadership -- >> well, we're there -- >> that our allies -- >> where our allies -- >> the iraqi government. >> where our allies don't trust us right now. >> and we're assisting the kurds. >> senator, senator with respect, the kurds are hanging on for dear life. they're in trouble, the iraqi government is in trouble. isis is the size of new england right now and you and the president have taken ground troops off the table, which is

the worst thing you can do when you have the greatest fighting force in the world. you take them off the table. and that's part of the problem. you're so supportive of this president, you can't even say if general dempsey and others say we need ground troops, you won't even say right now that yes, we have to do it. their goal is to put a flag in the white house. our goal is to make sure it doesn't happen. and right now because of the -- and as you know -- if you don't believe me, secretary panetta said he advocated for it, and the president rejected each and every opportunity to make sure we could have a transition force -- that was a mistake. but not for that effort, we would not be in this position. >> well, i've called on the president to come to congress to ask for an authorization for the use of military force so we can have this debate. i've said if he's not willing to do that, i'm already working with the chairman of the foreign relations committee to do that. but what's not responsible is for politicians to repeat isis

talking points like they are planning to plant a flag on the front steps of the white house. what's important here is that we address this threat. we're doing that by building an international coalition, by supporting the fighters in iraq and the kurdish fighters who have a lot at stake because it's their country. we should be supporting them. we should be going after the financing, but i'm not ready to say we need to send troops in today. >> all right, senator shaheen, senator brown, i want both of you to stand by. we have a lot more coming up, many more questions including president's obama's role in this senate race here in new hampshire. do both candidates have some explaining to do about voting with president obama? we'll be right back. welcome back to debate night. we're in concord, new hampshire, with the senate candidates on one of the closest and most important races this mid-term election year. let's get right back for the

questions. senator brown seems to be a few different wings of the republican party, the john mccain republicans, when it comes to foreign policy very often anxious, willing to go ahead and intervene internationally. on the other hand, the rand paul republicans were much more reluctant to intervene internationally. you've campaigned with both of these senators. whose foreign policy are you more closely aligned with, john mccain or rand paul? >> i think that both play a valuable role in our party, and i respect both of them greatly. that's the beauty of being an independent republican like i am. i was the most bipartisan senator in the united states senate, unlike senator shaheen, who is voting with the president's policies 99% of the time. so as an independent republican, i can work within my party and still find common ground. there's not a one size fits all approach, and i will continue to listen, learn, do my own research and make my own decision. that's what it means to be an independent. >> are you with rand paul when

he says he would like to eliminate all foreign aid and eventually even u.s. aid to israel? >> no, of course not. israel is our greatest ally. look what happened this summer with hamas lobbing rockets and missiles at it. i've been there. the stress that they're under right now is unbearable, but i do think that we have an opportunity and an affirmative obligation to do that review of each and every dollar we give other countries. i believe there is an affirmative obligation to keep our citizens in our embassy safe. the fact that what we had happen in benghazi under the obama administration right now was unconscionable. i felt that there is an affirmative obligation with those dollars that we give that government to make sure that those types of things don't happen. >> senator shaheen, you've voted with president obama 99% of the time, according to the non-partisan "congressional quarterly." so here's a question to you. how is a vote for you not a vote

for president obama and his policies? >> you know, my opponent talks a lot about that survey that he's always quoting. in fact, he's built his whole campaign on that. but the fact is, i work and i vote for new hampshire. that's what i've always done. if you look at that survey and we've got it posted on our website so you can take a look at it, i'm proud of my record, and take a look at the votes that are in that survey. one of those votes is the defense bill. well, i'm on the armed services committee. i worked hard on that defense bill. it's got provisions in it that help our national guard, that help the portsmouth naval shipyard, that help the 157th air refueling wing down at pease. i voted for that. not to because the president supported it, but because it's good for new hampshire. another one of those votes in that survey is the fair pay act. i sponsored the fair pay act. it would provide equal pay for equal work for women. my opponent voted against that. not once, but twice. now, i work for new hampshire, i put new hampshire first, that's what i've done my whole life, that's what i want to continue to do as your senator. >> you want to respond?

>> yes, yes, well thank you very much. the president's not up for re-election, but his policies are. he said that. and senator shaheen is his number one foot soldier. so if you want to make sure that harry reid's not the majority leader, we can take over the senate and make sure that that doesn't happen. that being said, she referenced two particular items that she's working for new hampshire. well, with respect, senator, you have a zero rating with the national federation of independent businesses. that's not working for new hampshire businesses. with regard to the fair pay act that you've referenced many times, senator ayotte and i both voted against that bill, and with respect once again, i pay women in my office $1.21 for every dollar a man makes, while you pay 95 cents for every dollar a man makes. i not only believe it, i live it. >> go ahead and respond. >> well, my opponent's quoting a right wing survey that doesn't really even understand what the equal pay act does, but the fact is he talks about the national federation of independent businesses. well, what my opponent has done

in washington, he comes here to new hampshire and he says he supports small businesses, but look at his record in washington. because what he supported in washington were the corporate special interests, big oil, giving $19 billion to the big banks, and outsourcing american jobs. well, we don't need to import a candidate who's going to outsource our jobs. >> with further respect, i've been fighting for small businesses forever. i have an a rating with the national federation of independent business and an a rating with the chamber of commerce. those are the two premier groups that rate us. we have ratings. and in addition to her saying that she doesn't vote with the present 99% of the time, i believe it was yesterday the congressional quarterly also came out with a new survey saying that when the president lets us know what he's feeling, which is rare but he does do it, 118 times he did it this last session. senator shaheen was with him 116 of those times. so even though she was being criticized for voting with the

president 99% of the time, she continued to support him over and over and over again. and it's like we have two senators here, president obama is not only president, he's actually acting like the senator of new hampshire. >> ok, i'm going to give you a quick chance to respond, then i want to move on. >> well, again, there's a big difference between my opponent and me, because i support new hampshire small businesses, i've done that as governor, now in the senate. i voted for the small business jobs act to help our small business. my opponent voted against it. i voted to provide tax cuts for over 30,000 new hampshire businesses. my opponent voted against it. i voted for the travel promotion act to help our tourism industry so that we could attract visitors from outside the united states. my opponent voted against it. he comes to new hampshire and he says he's for small business, but look at his record in washington. >> with further respect, facts are stubborn things. i have an a rating with not only the nfib, but the chamber. >> but it's a koch-funded organization -- >> the chamber of commerce with respect --

>> koch-brothers-funded organization -- >> i was with a business yesterday, it's been in the family for generations. they've been a member of the nfib for 50 years and they're just trying to make a living but because of the policies pushed forth by president obama and you on energy being the deciding vote on obamacare with the business mandate coming in after the election, you have a zero rating. i'm not quite sure how folks get a zero rating and then say they are out fighting for small businesses. it just doesn't add up. >> all right, well, let's move on because we have a good question for senator brown. now, you've criticized senator shaheen for voting with president obama 99% of the time, but we went back to the "congressional quarterly" analysis, and your last year in the united states senate as a republican senator for massachusetts, cq, the congressional quarterly says you voted with president obama 78% of the time. how do you explain that? >> well, when the president does something right, i'll support him, when he doesn't do

something right i will make sure i let him know that. that is a huge difference to be an independent senator. i voted with the my party and the other side about 50% in my entire career. that being said, as an independent senator, i can do that. so when we work together with the president on an insider trading bill, my bill worked forward, we got it done. i worked with democrats to bring them over. and we were at the signing ceremony, the hire a hero veterans bill, the ability to give veterans jobs and employers the ability to actually get a little bit of a tax credit. the arlington cemetery bill -- worked with a democrat to make sure our heroes were buried properly. one person in one grave, three people in another grave, body parts in a mulch pile. i think senator shaheen even voted for that. we were able to get it done. so there are times, certainly, because if you want gridlock, then send senator shaheen down there. if you want someone who's an independent problem solver, has a history of working with both sides and has also been named, wolf, as you can also reference, as the most bipartisan senator in the united state senate, then i'm your guy. >> you want to respond. >> yes. my opponent again talks a lot about that survey, but what he won't tell you is why the koch

brothers are spending $2.6 million in new hampshire to support his campaign. i don't think it's because they think he's going to go down to washington and support small businesses. i think it's because they know he's going to go to washington, he's going to continue to support subsidies to the big oil companies. the five biggest oil companies last year made over $90 billion and he wants to give them over $20 billion in subsidies. i don't think that's good for new hampshire. >> wolf, once again she's distorting a bill that not only senator ayotte voted against, but democrats voted against. and if you want to talk about money, we're both raising money the same way. she has her groups. we have our groups. they're doing whatever they want. i'm scott brown and i approve that message. those are my messages. i have no control over any other messages. that's being said, we have an opportunity because the people of new hampshire are smarter. they're very sophisticated being the first in the country presidential. they understand that senator shaheen has not held town halls. they understand that when she

went to washington, she changed, and she's not focusing on small business. she has a zero rating. with respect, i have been down there fighting for small businesses. that's why i have an a rating with the national federation, and also the united states chamber of commerce. >> quick response? >> well, again, the national federation of independent businesses has some members here, and i appreciate what those members do, but the fact is, like his support in so many other ways in this campaign, they are funded by the koch brothers. we need somebody in washington who's going to really support our small businesses. that's what i've done my whole career. that's what i'll continue to do. >> senator shaheen, former president bill clinton came here to campaign with you. hillary clinton is coming next weekend to campaign with you. elizabeth warren, she'll also be joining you on the campaign trail. here's the question. why don't you want president obama to come to new hampshire and campaign with you? >> well, i never said i didn't want president obama to come and campaign. the fact is he's busy in washington. he's dealing with the ebola threat.

he's dealing with the threat from isis. i think he's exactly where he needs to be. but again, the fact is that there are big differences in this race between my opponent and me, and it's not just about the president. he would like to be running against the president in new hampshire because he doesn't want to talk about the issues that are important to new hampshire. who's going to go to washington and support our middle-class families here? who's going to support for affordable student loans so our young people aren't facing years of debt because of the student loans they've taken out? who's going to fight to make sure that we don't outsource our jobs? because right now new hampshire has lost more jobs to china than any other state in the country. that's what i've done my whole career. that's what i will continue to do. and what my opponent did when he represented massachusetts in washington was to support the corporate special interests. he was a rubber stamp for the wall street banks. he was a rubber stamp for the big oil companies. >> so let me just be precise.

the president in recent days has gone out and left washington and he's campaigned for candidates in illinois and maryland. do you want him to come here in these final days and campaign for you? >> we have a lot going on. i don't think it makes sense for the president to come to new hampshire. >> well, if i may, the reason that she does not want the president here is because he cannot explain why he pushed on us a health care bill that's destroying businesses right now with the business mandate coming in. he apologized for pushing that. senator shaheen has yet to explain why she was the deciding vote and why she has misled our citizens on that very issue. we all have surrogates coming in, by the way, but the people of new hampshire, they're going to make the decision based on town halls, which i've held. she hasn't. and by the way, the president also said that he doesn't need to be here because all his policies are on the ballot. i agree with him. he also said that, hey, i don't care if they don't want me. i don't care if they hide from me because i know when they get reelected they'll be there for me. and that's what senator shaheen

will do because she's done it for six years, folks. sometimes she votes 100% with the president. that's not independent leadership for new hampshire. >> well, let me just respond on a couple of points. first of all, on the affordable care act, i believe everybody in new hampshire should have access to quality, affordable health care. that's what i voted for and that's what i continue to support. do we need to make changes to it? yes. there are fixes that we need to make. but we have 90,000 people in new hampshire now who have access to health care who didn't before. people like steve white, who's a realtor from londonderry. he didn't have health insurance because he had a preexisting condition. finally, his daughter got him to enroll in the affordable care act in the exchange. two months later, he had a quadruple bypass. without the affordable care act, he would have been in financial ruin. it's doing great things for so many people in new hampshire, and my opponents wants to repeal it. he doesn't have a plan to replace it. >> you want to repeal it?

>> of course. i've already voted five times to repeal it. she was the deciding vote. when she says she wants to -- >> there were 60 of us. everybody was a deciding vote. >> excuse me. every democrat voted, and, yes, every democrat was the deciding vote for a terrible bill that's crushing businesses. right now after the election, folks, the business mandate's coming in. deductibles have gone up. costs have gone up. coverages have gone down. i was just up the street at a pizza place. they can't afford obamacare. they can't afford insurance. and to think that i don't want people to have insurance? i have a plan. you repeal it. you put in place something that works for new hampshire, that respects our rights and freedoms, that is affordable, that has competition. let's not forget. when the senator was governor, she forced the insurance companies up to the point where they said they were going to leave. we now have one. >> you're shaking your head. but after the election, we're going to have more. >> that's just wrong. what my opponent wants to do is to kick tens of thousands of people off of their health care plans without anything to replace it. so he wants to go back to a time when insurance companies could

deny people health care because they had a preexisting condition, when if you reached your annual limits you could get your health care cut off, when if you were 26 you couldn't stay on your parents' plan. if you were on medicare, you didn't get those copays. the fact is the cost of healthcare has stabilized. it's at its lowest rate in 50 years in terms of the increase in cost. and what we're seeing now is that rates are only going to go up less than 1%. >> i want to get paul steinhauser into this. paul, you have another question. >> thank you, wolf. and shifting gears here, senator brown, this question is for you. we know that you want to secure our border, but the department of homeland security estimates that there are currently 11 million people in this country living illegally. what do we do with those 11 million people? >> whatever we do with the people who are here illegally, i cannot support a bill or any effort to provide them ebt cards, preferential housing, and other benefits that they have not earned. a huge difference between senator shaheen and me and president obama is about border

security. it's about immigration. she supports the dream act. i don't. she supports the president's enhanced use of his executive authority. right now he's preparing by all accounts to actually legalize people that are here illegally who are not entitled to the protections and or the rights and privileges that have been earned by our citizens. and what about the 4.6 million people that are actually following the law? what do you say to them? it's wrong. we need to make sure that we step in. we have an opportunity, folks. we can actually take over the senate, go after the funding source to make sure the president can't do that. so whatever plan we have, whatever we do, i can't continue to provide benefits and reward that illegality. is there a process? potentially. but until we're absolutely sure that they can't get those benefits, to continue to reward that illegality, i can't support it. >> quick response? >> well, first of all, people who are here illegally don't get preferential benefits. and the fact is if you want border security, then you should

support comprehensive immigration reform. this is a bill that has bipartisan support. it deals not just with border security. it deals with the people who are here illegally, and it deals with our broken visa system. my opponent, when he was in senate, he was on the homeland security committee. and not only did he vote to slash the homeland security budget when he voted for a republican budget, but he missed all six hearings on border security when he was on that committee. if he's really serious about immigration reform, then he should support a comprehensive bill, as i do. >> i'll give you a chance to respond. >> thanks, wolf. with respect, i spent 35 years in the national guard, colonel, served at the pentagon. i don't need anyone to tell us that the border is porous and that people are coming over the border. they're coming over the border. it's real. there is a rational fear from citizens in new hampshire and throughout this country that people are coming, either criminal elements, terrorist elements, people with diseases coming through our border. so with respect, i don't need to

attend those hearings and did not need to attend those hearings, and i did not slash the budget for homeland security, with all respect. >> that's what you voted for. >> but let's talk about hearings. when isis was percolating, senator shaheen, as a member of the very important homeland -- excuse me, foreign relations committee -- she missed a very important hearing on isis. and then she's been silent up until recently when we had a tragedy on this issue. once again, falling in lockstep with the president and his failed policies, his incoherent, his half steps and missteps, as secretary panetta did. >> go ahead quickly because we have to take a break. >> my opponent's just wrong. i attended 16 hearings on isis on the foreign relations committee and the armed services committee. and the fact is i was asking questions about isis before my opponent ever moved to new hampshire. >> senator shaheen, senator brown, both of you stand by. we have more questions. what kind of tradeoffs are these candidates willing to make to push through their polices with new hampshire jobs on the line? we'll be right back.

welcome back. it's a debate night and we're here in concord, new hampshire, with the u.s. senate candidates. this is one of the races that could decide control of the united states senate less than two weeks from now. remember, you can go to bing.com/cnn in real time to vote on which candidates' answers you find the most or the least convincing. let's get back to the debate. senator shaheen, you spent support raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. but the non-partisan congressional budget office estimates that a half a million american jobs would be lost nationally if that happened. is the trade-off worth it? >> well, there are a number of other analyses that say that we would actually create more jobs if we raise the minimum wage. the fact is about 2/3 of minimum wage workers are women. i think we need to make sure that they can support their families. we also know that if we raise the minimum wage it will lift

about a million people out of poverty. and it would help reduce other government expenses because they would no longer be dependent on our pro - government programs. but, again, this is one of the issues that distinguishes me from my opponent, because i have been supporting middle-class families here, wanting to -- supporting raising the minimum wage. my opponent has said, well, we don't know exactly where he is, because he's been on both sides of the issue. one of the things about that nsib survey that he keeps talking about is that he got 100% rating on it and one of the issues on it was that he didn't support raising the minimum wage. so i think it's now clear that he doesn't support that. i think it's good for our families. we should support that. we should make sure that people can make a living. >> all right, well, let's ask the senator. right now the minimum wage, it's $7.25 an hour, about $15,000 a year. do you support raising the minimum wage? >> well, since the senator is confused about my position, let me restate it.

i remember working at minimum wage jobs. my first job was at dunkin' donuts cleaning the grease trap. i still remember what the smell is. my mom had a minimum wage job. here -- and i've supported minimum wage increases before. but here's the key. everybody was at the table. what's happening right now is another effort by the obama administration, as supported by senator shaheen, to just dictate to businesses what they're trying to pay. -- what they're going to pay. they're not even being asked, hey, can you afford to increase wages for folks, because when you look at the high corporate tax rates, you look at medical costs as a result of obamacare and her deciding vote to increase those costs, with the high cost of energy, folks who've gotten the 50% to 100% increase notices already, state profit taxes, all the challenges. all i have ever said, if we're going to have that conversation, because i have done it before, is to make sure the people who are actually writing the checks and actually paying people have

a seat at the table and they don't. and here's the real key. we need to make sure that whatever we do, whatever we do, it takes into consideration every aspect of that important decision. >> so i just want to move on. you support raising the minimum wage? >> i've done it before and i've made my position very clear, that in order to have this conversation, it can't be -- >> all right -- >> dictated by the president. it needs to actually make sure that the people writing the check, because they want to pay more -- >> all right -- >> than minimum wage. they want to retain these good, hardworking people. they want to keep them there, but with a -- >> can i respond to that? >> excuse me, with the strains and stresses, with all of the - all of the regulations and all of the additional burdens that the president and senator shaheen are putting on them. that's why she has a zero rating business. so just hold on to your pocketbooks and wallets, folks. >> all right, very quickly. 10 seconds. >> you know, my opponent, when he's talking about raising the minimum wage, needs to bring people around the table to see it they can all agree. he didn't have that concern when he was willing to support over $20 billion in subsidies -- >> all right -- >> to the oil companies and $90 billion in subsidies in a giveaway to wall street banks. >> all right, let's take a quick break. we'll resume this conversation.

just ahead, it's more than a state motto, it's a way of life. are these candidates living up to it? we'll be right back. welcome back to debate night in concord, new hampshire. paul steinhauser, you've got a good question for the new hampshire people to absorb. >> thank you, wolf. this question is for both of you. and as you both know, our motto up here in the state of new hampshire is live free or die. how in your life do you live by that motto? and, senator brown, let's start with you. >> well, thank you very much. i live that and believe it because i think we have too much government control in our lives right now. we have a situation right now where the president and senator shaheen are actually trying to outsource our second amendment rights to the united nations. that's too much government in our lives. we have a situation where the government is mandating what we can and can't do with regard to health care. that's why i want to bring it back to the states and let us be part of it. senator shaheen is also in favor of common core.

common core is something where our local families and school boards should actually be able to make those decisions themselves. i'm not. so here's the problem. in our state, live free or die means more to us than other people throughout the country, to make sure we have little or hardly any government intervention. that new hampshire advantage is being chipped away over and over and over again. then you throw in the regulations, the costs, the taking of our tax money and not using it properly, we can do better. >> senator shaheen? >> well, i'm very proud to have represented the live free or die state as a state senator, as your governor and now in the united states senate. and there is a fundamental difference between me and my opponent in this race, because i have been fighting for our small businesses, for our middle-class families, to make sure that students can go to college and not be facing decades of debt. and my opponent went to washington representing massachusetts and fought for the corporate special interests. >> all right, we've got to leave it right there.

but i want to thank both of you for joining us. >> thank you, wolf. >> paul steinhauser, thanks to you, as well. thanks to our host, nh1, the political director and anchor, paul steinhauser. please be sure join us for election night on america right here on cnn on november 4. for all of us at cnn and nh1, i'm wolf blitzer. thanks very much for watching. good night. c-span is bringing you more than 100 debates. senate'sastern, the second-ranking democrat faces jim oberwise. then a debate between martha coakley and charlie baker. here's a look at some of the ads. >> years ago wall street gamble destroyed soy and

many lives. we cannot let that happen again. for corporations, not much for the rest of us. equald an economy for an shot for the rest of us. i want to be a governor for you. >> democrats and independents across the state are supporting charlie baker for governor. that is because aker delivers. delivers.- baker creating jobs. madeie baker massachusetts first in jobs. moveie baker will massachusetts in a new direction. >> she has been a powerful advocate for women and kids and is one of the toughest opponents wall street and big tanks have

ever seen -- big banks of ever seen. investments in loans, and mass transit, and creating regional economies. so every area of the state can drive. martha coakley, not the insider's choice. she is ours. we made massachusetts number one in job creation. totally pro-choice and bipartisan? >> we can make massachusetts great and create jobs by controlling spending, lowering taxes come and requiring work for welfare. i have done it before. the massachusetts governor's debate is tonight on c-span

tonight at 8:00 eastern. at 9:00, on the senate race in georgia, david purdue debates michelle nunn. and then we had to minnesota al frankenfranken -- is seeking a second term. he is debating mike mcfadden. >> be part of campaign 2014 coverage. feel clips of key moments, previews from our politics team. c-span is bringing you over 100 debates, and you can instantly share your reactions to what the candidates are saying. the battle for control of

congress, stay in touch by span,wing us on twitter @cpsa and liking us on facebook. >> steve king has represented iowa's fourth congressional district since 2003. this year his democratic challenger is jim mowrer. they debated last week. this is an hour. hasor decades, iowa press brought you political leaders from across iowa and e.on, celebrating more than 40 years on statewide public television, live from the campus of buena vista university, this is a special debate edition of "iowa press." [applause] >> welcome to buena vista university, anderson auditorium.

we are in iowa's 4th congressional district. that is the northwestern counties, by and large, including a region from ames to mason city, westward to denison and sioux city. 39 of iowa's 99 counties. republican steve king is the incumbent here. first elected in 2002, seeking a seventh term. although the congressional boundaries change with the redistricting every 10 years, republicans have represented some counties in what is now the 4th district since the 4th district since the mid 1960's. democrat jim mowrer is campaigning to change that. he is an iowa national guard iraq veteran. he also served as a civilian in appointments at the pentagon. welcome to "iowa press." i feel like i am masquerading

here in another body, but this is me, but not my voice. we'll get through it together. you are both familiar with the traditional "iowa press" format, but we are in a different setting with a live audience. in addition to the television viewers, those in the audience have agreed not to cheer during the one-hour debate. we are following the regular format with which you are familiar, and that is no preset debate rules, just an exchange of ideas and issues. i will be moderating, and questions will be coming from political journalists, dean borg, kay henderson, and kathie obradovich. >> congressman king, what do you point to as your signature accomplishment in congress?

>> i think that those accomplishments come down to the bad ideas that have been killed or stalled. i want to recognize that my fight against obamacare -- i do not think that anybody fought as strongly as i have. but in the middle of the gridlock, we passed a good farm bill that will be here for the next five years or longer. we'll see the foundation of agriculture in iowa be stronger because of the risk management program in this new farm bill, too. we have seen an increase in value in a $2 billion in farm land value. that does not include a property, grain in the bin. i have enjoyed the support of all the major agricultural groups in this campaign and others. >> mr. mowrer, this district is a republican voter registration edge. if you were elected, you would

be a part of a minority. what is your argument for how you would be an effective representative? >> the one thing i hear the most when i travel through the 39 counties is that they understand that congress is broken. it is not getting the job done. we have representatives who has a record of not working with anyone across the aisle. we need to send more representatives with a record of pragmatic results who want to get congress moving again. >> my opponent has no record. >> i have a record of saving my money and saving taxpayers billions of dollars at the pentagon. >> you have a look on your face as if you do not believe that. >> i've heard many things biggest campaign that i do not believe, and that is one of them. the statement that my opponent established the office, i voted for that.

it passed the house and senate and was signed into law october 22 of 2008. the gentleman arrived in pentago in january, or even february of early 2010. the office of business transformation was done by congress at the hand of john mccue, now the secretary of the army. i served with him. >> i served under secretary mccue, and the under secretary of the army, and the chief of the army. when i entered the pentagon, i was tasked to oversee setting up the office of business transformation, and worked closely with secretary mccue, a former republican congressman from new york. >> congressman king, i've heard it said that you have never accomplish anything by working across the aisle. do you dispute that or is that true? you are an outlier.

you are a person who says things that are outside the traditional republican line. >> an outlier is someone that sets a trend. if you talk about working across the aisle, that is how we got the farm bill done. that is why were able to get a bipartisan vote. we got a good farm bill with bipartisan support. i was engaged in all of that, 3 1/2 years just to get to that point. >> gentlemen, here in storm lake, this is the most racially diverse county in the state of iowa. the "register" reported recently that 80% of the kids in school are nonwhite and 18 languages are spoken in the school district. congressman king, you fought to

make english the official language of iowa. do you think that the diversity here is something to be embraced or something to be resisted? and how will you support that in congress? >> i think that if one looks back on my record, we succeeded in establishing english as the official language of the state of iowa. and i am a lead sponsor of english legislation in congress. when the moment comes for us to pass that, i hope to move better, because a common language is the most powerful unifying force known to humanity throughout all of history. it is a common language, a language of success and achievement. i just congratulated a young man back in the restroom was an american citizen who arrived here from somalia. i have been a great cheerleader for legal immigration, and

i congratulatel all citizens who respect our laws. >> it is interesting to hear him speak that way because we are used to hearing him use hateful and divisive language when talking about immigration. he is not leading, he does not have plans to fix the broken system, and every time i hear him use the hateful and divisive language to talk about immigration, i think of a friend of mine that i served with in iraq who was not american citizen and received his citizenship in iraq. congressman king claims to be a leader in congress, but i think if he would turn around -- >> how do you define hateful language? >> i think that most people heard congressman king's language in the press. that does not move the conversation forward. we have a broken immigration system in this country. i support the competence of immigration law that passed the senate. it would put additional boots on the border. it is supported by the farm bureau and the chamber of

commerce. it would cut $1 trillion from the deficit. congressman king does not have plans. he just has empty rhetoric. >> it is not the system that is broken, it is the administration that refuses to enforce existing law. i have brought a number of pieces of legislation forward that improves the system that we have. you have to have the will to enforce the law before you will have an effective immigration system. i am for building a fence and a wall in a fence along the southern border. just until they stop going around the end. i am the author of the most important piece of legislation that we could pass, i generated the idea and wrote the bill, which is called the new idea act, which eliminates the federal deduction for benefits paid to illegals. that helps us to secure the borders. these are ideas that all republican candidates have endorsed in the last presidential election.

>> even governor perry of texas has said that building a wall is not the right approach and that people that advocate for it do not understand the challenges we face. that is a 20th-century solution to a 21st-century problem. >> before we go on, there are challenges that come from the diversity that we have in communities like storm lake. you are embracing a freer flow of immigrants into the united states. how would you help communities like storm lake to address the issues like challenges in schools and social services? >> we are a country of immigrants, and that is why we need conference of reform to fix the broken system. helping people integrate is a big piece of that. >> the difference is, i have read the bill.

the bill dumps money down to the border, but it does not secure it. but it lowers the legal standard to 90. it is perpetual and instantaneous and retroactive amnesty and destroys the rule of law. we cannot have a country if we do not have a border. >> no one is proposing amnesty. obviously he is mischaracterizing the bill or has not read it. someone who has advocated for a bush as an official language has never looked up the definition of amnesty. >> amnesty is to reward lawbreakers with the objective of their crime. i have read the bills and the gentleman has not. >> how do you define amnesty? >> the immigration bill that passed the senate with a bipartisan majority provides for

a decade-plus corrective process that includes paying a fine and meeting a host of requirements. that is not amnesty. amnesty would be free and clear. >> congressman king, last word. >> if you're going to lower or eliminate the penalties, that is amnesty. you do not get to change the rules after the game. >> congressman king, you worked on the farm bill. if you get a bigger republican majority in the house and get a republican majority in the senate, when you write the next farm bill, should iowa farmers plan for no federal support? >> not at all. not at all. i have been a strong advocate for a stable farm bill, and that means -- remember, 80% goes to the food stamp side and nutrition side, but we're talking about a 20% going to agriculture. that means a good risk management program, good federal crop insurance. that is the stability that we

have to have, and we need to have equity in there so that iowa farmers are paying premiums that reflect the risk along with the folks in texas and florida that are getting a better return on their premium dollars. that is where i would look for adjustments. but we got to have a farm bill because -- simply this -- we cannot afford to have all farmers go broke in the same year. >> but what you say to republicans in your own party who say that they do not want to pay farmers? >> you deal with the circumstances then. we are five years down the road. what i would say to farmers that are listening tonight that we asked for their advice three and four years ago, things were goign tood, it was hard to get their advice then. hard times will give you more advice. let's shape it with the input of all of our agriculture groups. >> why should a small

businessman who is a farmer get subsidy from the government while a small businessman on main street does not? >> because agriculture is a priority. we cannot do anything without it. it is a foundational issue. agriculture is the foundation to our economy and the world's economy, and we cannot do anything without it. to hear his characterization of his work on the farm bill, it sounds like a singlehandily got it passed, when in fact, the senate passed a majority bipartisan bill, went to the house, and was delayed because king was obstructing the passage. when i finally did pass the house, a republican senator refused to vote for it. >> driving to storm lake late last night after dark, i could look for miles out in this largely agricultural area of iowa. the lights of the harvesters

were out there during the night, harvesting. and it came to me that this is iowa's granary, if not a large section of the midwest granary. the emphasis is on grain farming. recently, i was speaking with some bankers and farm lenders who are bemoaning the fact that the price of corn, right now, the corn that was being harvested when i drove along last night is about half of what it was a year ago. they were predicting and anticipating that there is a great economic fall ahead for iowa's farmers and midwestern farmers. and saying that, this time, it will not be the bankers, it will be farmers by themselves who are overleveraged right now. and that agricultural communities are going to be even further decimated. that is the countryside of the

4th congressional district. if that occurs, and it could be within the next 12 or 18 months, what are you prepared to do if you are reelected to congress? what are you prepared to do to mitigate and to assist iowa's rural communities from taking that hit? >> that was a grim question. i have to say, before i respond, that my opponent's previous statement was baseless. i lived through the farm crisis of the 1980's. i know what it is like to pay 22% interest, and i know what it is like when the fdc locks the bank up. i had two pennies to rub together and customer accounts were frozen as well as mine.

i remember seeing $26 billion get dumped into the farm program in about 1985, and i river remember remember seeing 14 new pickups parked at the restaurant after that. we are in a better shape than we were in the 1980's, a lot of the land is leveraged. the $2 billion of value that i mentioned earlier, that will bridge us through. if there is a drought or disaster, we sit down and figure out how to deal with it. there are reasons to be optimistic. >> are you saying that you are optimistic and that we have in the federal government a safety net? >> we never know if it will be enough.

if congress has to supplement that in some way, i will hear from the farmers. >> what are you prepared to do if that dire prediction comes true? >> i am prepared to be a tireless advocate. i will work with democrats and republicans to get the job done. unfortunately, congressman king has been in congress for 12 years, and, if he had not pursued a selfish tea party agenda, would be next in line for the agriculture commission. instead, a congressman from texas will be the next chair of the agricultural committee. days ago, he said he was against the renewable fuel standard and a farmers would have to take a hit. >> since i went to congress, there has never been a better 12 years to be a farmer in iowa, or an iowan in iowa.

i am the guy that has long said no. i said it earlier today. it is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit. >> it may be great to be a farmer, and yet farmers are still complaining about things, including regulations dealing with the environment. what do you think -- is there an appropriate level of federal regulation dealing with farmers to ensure clean air and clean water? >> there have been better times to be a farmer than this year, i will make that point. the markets have dropped more than 50%, corn has dropped 60% from the highest. but what do we do with the epa and their overreach? in particular, the waters over -- of the united states and the legislation that they have written if it is a significant nexus, they can regulate. they can regulate everything up to and including the kitchen sink. we cannot have a federal government that will change the rules.

now it requires permission to do normal farming practices rather than prohibition on certain farming practices -- >> my question is, is there appropriate level of regulation, or do you want them out altogether? and if so -- >> but there is an appropriate level. there was a time when we needed the clean air act, the clean water act, and the endangered species act. >> we do not need them now? >> i think we need them now, but i think the epa has overreached in congress has to step in. that is why i introduced legislation called the sunset act, which will, incrementally, 10% a year, brings all the 10% a year, brings all the regulations up for an up or down vote, so we have a voice and and make congress take responsibility for the executive branch decision. >> are there areas right now

where you see the federal government overregulating government overregulating farmers? and how about the level of oversight on cities, especially runoff from fertilizers on loans and wastewater treatment plants? >> there are things on the epa that we need to cut through red tape, but conservation is important. we need to ensure that our children can continue to farm the same land in the future. congressman king stated that he does not care who gets the credit. the reason that he says these things is that, after 12 years in congress, he has never passed real legislation, but anything to iowa. he is not getting the job done. he will say that he has proposed things, worked with people, he does not care if he gets the credit, and that is because he will never get the credit. >> this gets really tiresome. really tiresome. [laughter]

just let me talk. the very first bill introduced in congress established the credit for small ethanol producers. and that became law. there was also a provision to enhance biodiesel production. that became law in 1985. i thought it was going to be easy, it is not that easy. you put your name on a bill, nancy pelosi sees it, she does not want to see that go further. so instead i brought amendments to the floor of congress, and other people, and there are only two that have offered more. i believe i am third in the most amendments offered, and number one in the most that have been passed. that will tell you something, when you put judgment on the floor and require someone to vote on if they agree with me, i have the highest percentage of success on agreements. -- amendments. >> that is simply not true. claiming that amendments and proposing legislation are the same is untrue.

>> i will let you answer something that the other is saying. like most campaigns, you are using television advertising to tell voters some things you believe that they should know about your opponent. we have a couple of examples. mr. king, a commercial that you are airing. [video clip] >> in iowa, we tell it like it is. i have been telling washington over and over about threats building outside of our country because of ignored border security. and financial threats from within due to obamacare and our stifling debt. on the other hand, my opponent is for amnesty, for obamacare, and for nancy pelosi. and that is telling it like it is. >> mr. mowrer, that is talking about you.

if that is something that mr. king wants the public to know about you -- >> it is blatantly false, but i'm glad he used the pictures of me. the claims are simply false, and he does not say anything. he says i support amnesty, we've talked about that. the ad is trying to scare people, trying to invoke fear in people. he says there's a thread on the border from ebola and isis, which is simply not true. there is no evidence. he is using fear, he wants voters to be scared so they will vote for him. >> we know that halloween is around the corner. are you trying to scare people? >> i've heard my opponent say that if he was elected to congress, he would vote against

nancy pelosi. i've heard him say that he does not support obamacare. i think that he has said that i do not understand what amnesty is. i leave that to the voters. i defy amnesty, that is out there and clear. >> the commercial that your campaign is erring is about congressman steve king. [video clip] >> elections are about races, and jim mowrer served in iraq. but in washington, steve king put his party first and shut washington down. jim mowrer voted to raise his own pay about $20,000 a year and take perks like free health care for life. those are their choices. what will yours be? >> jim mowrer took credit for that, you just heard, "i approve

this message." you asked them to remove that from the airwaves, saying he would not even sit beside him at this debate if he were not take it off the air. >> i asked people to go see the website, mowrerlies.com. first of all, no congressman that i know of gets free health care for life. no congressman got to vote on a raise. i had one opportunity to freeze my pay and i did that. my pay has been frozen since 2009. there are only cost-of-living adjustments. there were times when we had the opportunity to go to freeze it. i did that when there was a clear standalone vote. when it was cluttered with $410 billion of spending, i voted against that. if you do the calculation on his

and myle, not $20,000, pay has been frozen since 2009. many of those statements are completely, blatantly fabricated from thin air, false. >> mr. mowrer, when he asked her to take down the ad, why didn't you? >> these are real votes that he made. he can say that he voted against them for whatever reason, and you can go to my website to see these votes cited. he voted to have his pay raised by $20,000, and during that time, thousands of iowans he does not dispute the fact that he opposes the minimum wage, while, again, voting for these perks. he voted to raise his own pay, but only 24 members of congress -- it was 398 to 24.

the des moines register reported on that vote as well. >> there were 21 republicans who voted no on that, the most conservative ones. it was not a vote to raise the pay. it was an amendment that went into the rule the night before. they usurped the rules. $410 billion in irresponsible nancy pelosi spending. everyone knows that is what i voted against. congressman, in one of your ads, you say "i ruffle feathers." and is the value for iowans your ability to ruffle feathers? >> i think if you get along, that is the problem with the poll in washington. some of us have stood on principle. people come to me continually across this district, all 39

counties and all 382 towns and they say, stand your round. keep doing what you're doing. we need more iowa values in washington, not less. this will save the heartland of america. they are coming together and saying, what did they think in iowa? if we fail in iowa, our country falls apart. >> in regards to the ebola outbreak, there have been democrats and other races who have embraced the idea of at least considering a travel ban. is that something you could countenance, people coming into the u.s. from the three african countries where the outbreak is centered. >> i think all options should be on the table, but what i am hearing from medical experts is that is not the right approach. we need to confront this in a deliberate, calm way. we need to stop it spreading. we need to confront it at its

source in africa. but there are people on tv telling people they should be afraid, they should panic. that is not what real leadership is. the greatests nation on earth because we have reacted calmly and deliberately. president bush told us we should not be afraid after the september 11 attacks. i joined our military. i have not been afraid. the american people should not be afraid. >> last week, you said the senddent's order to military troops into those three countries in west africa was not something you would support. you think soldiers should volunteer for that. why? >> i do not believe they should be ordered into two face an unseen enemy we do not understand, the silent killer of ebola. it should be a volunteer, everybody who goes over there. our health care workers over ,here, the doctors and nurses

from the united states, contracting ebola, even though they know the best ways to protect from it. i am not convinced we know how to do that well enough to send 500ps into will say the that will go there -- who will say none of them will come back with ebola? american soldiers scatter out amongst the liberians in a hotel, and this is the article -- the protection as they do not sometimeske hands and they get to wipe their feet on a chlorine mat. that is not enough. >> as a soldier, i understand that you volunteer when you raise your right hand. soldiers follow orders. this is a job that needs to be done. >> would you like to respond, congressman? >> i think his judgment to do this debate will speak for

itself. >> what you mean by that? elaborate. >> i decided not to do that. >> not to? >> elaborate on my response. >> soldiers volunteer. on desmond king does not understand that because he is not a veteran. veterans understand soldiers follow orders. this is a job that needs to be done. >> he doesyou mean? not understand because he never served in the military. veterans know when there is a job to be done, even if it was her life in danger, you do it. >> soldiers are asked to volunteer when it is a suicide mission or if it is a very dangerous mission. you line him up and you say, who wants to go on this? there are plenty of soldiers willing to volunteer to fight ebola. they should be the one to have the opportunity to go. with the mothers and families

and soldiers ordered into this place in west africa to an unseen, unknown enemy, when we cannot even tell the output, when we have a centers for disease control later, he makes a statement, two leaders it is wrong, the president's statement is wrong, we cannot order people into a scenario like that without telling these people how they contract ebola. congressman, we understand the point you're making on ebola. i want to go back to the statement you made about congressman king never having served in the military. relevantaking that a point in your campaign? >> i am pointing out the fact. he does not understand. that is ok. that is not part of his record. i am pointing out as a veteran, i understand if you volunteer for the military, you understand.

i spent years in a war zone for my country. are notto be clear, you saying he is not a qualified candidate. >> absolutely not. does notan king understand that soldiers volunteer at the beginning and that means you follow orders. idea that soldiers have to agree with orders to follow them is just false. >> i applaud my opponent for his service in the united states military. that,ess you for doing jim. but i am not convinced that will qualify you for this job. >> i have a record of saving taxpayers millions of dollars. i have had top-secret security clearance program decade during intelligence group -- work. i have gone line by line in the federal budget. has everthing he accomplished in this congress is shutting down the government. to move on here. we talked about ebola. i would like to go on to health

care now. hisressman king has made it mission for a number of years to try and repeal all, care. you'd -- repeal obamacare. you have said that you have problems with obamacare. but you personally feel you have benefited from obamacare. how would your family be affected if it were repealed? >> i think it has been very clear from the beginning there were things that were not dr.ing when you look at relicensing, taking doctors away from patients to go through relicensing procedures and other mechanisms. i do not think that is the right approach. this.think we need to fix we need representatives to care deeply about our health care system and making sure to get the care they need. congressman king has voted to put the insurance companies back in charge, to take health care insurance away from people with

pre-existing conditions, like my son, as you stated, he has voted to allow insurance companies to charge women more than men. >> [indiscernible] >> this is where public policy intersects people's lives. my son has a serious pre-existing condition with no treatment and no cure. if we go back to a time when people with pre-existing conditions can be thrown off their treatment, that would be bad for my family. >> congressman king, if you are successful in repealing obamacare, what is your answer for families like those who are relying on the law? >> ok, it seems to me there have researches on my record and it surprises me they do not get back to my time in the state senate where we established health insurance for children in the state. by all measures i can uncover, his measures would be qualified

for hawkeye, and that exists, along with the high risk will be established. we buy down the premiums for those with pre-existing conditions with state taxpayer dollars. i chaired the committee that manage that program and the font. the important thing for people is aderstand is obamacare disaster. it is a usurpation of our god-given right to manage our own health. takes away from us the ability to make our own decisions and command us -- commands us to buy policies approved from the government. premiums have gone up from most everyone in the united states of america, including me. before the bill passed. now it is an additional $4400 a

year, my obama increase. being without it is a lot better. >> if the next congress fails to repeal obamacare, what is your fallback position? how long are you willing to fight? >> i will put the repeal on the next president's desk then, and i look forward to january 20, 2017 when we elect a new president who will sign a repeal of obamacare and i want to be there when it happens. for theed to govern next two years. congressman king wants to wait. we cannot wait. he is an obstructionist. he has said that before. he wishes he was a better obstructionist. he wishes there were more obstructionists like him. >> i wish i killed obamacare when i had the chance and i will keep trying. --our neighbors to the north canada has an act of terrorism on their own soil. what should be our response?

saying congress should come back, have a debate, and vote on u.s. intervention and what the middle east should be. how would you vote and what would you want to see is a plan? >> eyes of work the amendment -- i support the amendment and the priebus appropriations. the president asked for 500 million dollars to train the free syrian army. i am not particularly optimistic about that. i would empower the kurds. i would give them all of the weapons they could use. i would put our special forces on the ground. i would do all those things. but for the president of the united states -- and i will disagree with a good number of my republican colleagues -- i believe he has the legal authority to intervene in isis in that part of the world under the 2000 one and 2002 status of forces agreements passed by congress. but i think he should be -- come back to congress so he has the support of congress and the people of the united states of

america to defeat this enemy the president says he wants to destroy and a grade. i think you add the word defeat to that and we should go forward. >> you had concerns about arming the rebels in syria. why? >> congressman king's answer shows he has a complete lacked of understanding of what is going on the ground and that is ok. i spent many years on the ground. the sunni muslim rebels in syria are the same extremist groups we were fighting in iraq, that i was fighting with the iowa national guard, and now the obama i thinking plan to arm the sunni muslim rebels in syria is exactly the wrong approach. produced a report saying it is not the right approach. it is not going to work. talking about arming the kurds. that might be the right approach. however, congressman king is not understand the complexity. our nato ally in turkey is in kurds.t with the

>> congressman king? seven that is the first time i ever heard anyone say the obama-king planned. this has gone into never never land in this debate. ridiculous.ularly the gentleman has been to iraq. god bless you for serving. but i have been there. i have looked erdogan in the eye. i will be back there again before thanksgiving. i have been all over that part of the world and met with the leaders. when i received briefings from our president of the united states -- excuse me from his cabinet members -- speaking directly to the secretary of state and also james clapper, after benghazi, and we get false statements made and classified briefings, we have an administration that is awfully hard to fight a war with. i am giving the president the one thing he's willing to do and that is train the free syrian army. >> are you prepared to go

further in iraq if it is needed in the middle east and syria? >> yes. and the biggest difficulty is how do we win a war with this president? >> let's talk about wanting to invade iraq -- >> not what i said. it cannot be seen as the united states versus isis. this is a broad, international coalition. that is the right approach. this is a counterterrorism mission that requires a counterterrorism approach. >> u.s. military forces are at the lowest levels in decades and because of the 2011 expected ton, are go even lower. if more money is not put into the pentagon. americanlieve the military can operate and protect the country at those levels, and what would you do? operations at the pentagon

are taking a significant toll. we need to shift toward future conflicts. with the sequester in place, it is not properly resourced to get the job done. we do need to find a fix to the sequester. we need to realign our forces including a pivot to asia and full cyber security offensive. >> mr. king, is the american military too small right now or should there be automatic cuts are allowed to go into effect? >> i voted against the sequester. i thought it was a bad bargain to put our military on the auction block. i don't think we should've done that. i think we should have maintained the capability to fight a two front world -- two front war. we need to do some of these things to operate in multiple places simultaneously. the operation going on and isis and that region where they have created their caliphate. that is not just a special

operation. they have invaded iraq. we have to turn them back. the people capable of doing that are on the ground now with the kurds. >> how much money would bring the ground forces up to where you think it would be appropriate? >> i do not have the number. one of the difficulties in getting it would be getting straight answers out of this administration. i have long been a supporter of our military and keeping them effective. agreei hear both of you that cuts in the u.s. military should not be allowed to continue? >> it took a while to find an agreement here, but you did it. [laughter] many iowans do not remember but there was a time when there was not electricity in iowa and launchedal government a program to electrify rural parts of the country. congressman king, broadband is seen as the utility that is vital to business interests than the farmers. does it fall to the government

to do for broadband what they did with electricity? >> here in iowa, we used to have 142 individual telephone companies and that was a pretty good measure. it brought a lot of good resources to the table and deployed a lot of infrastructure. the biggest risk to broadband deployment where it needs to go is if the universal service fund is rated by the urban countries in the -- the urban areas in the country. they see that money. we need to protect that for our rural areas and we can get broadband out to everybody. >> cannot pass congress though? fewerou have fewer and rural representatives? >> it gets difficult. you need to be more aggressive and vigilant. i appreciate the input that comes from our local telcos that keep me and my staff on top of it. >> how do you expand broadband service to rural areas that do not have it right now? >> we have to invest in

infrastructure, and that means roads, bridges, schools. that is great for the real economy. investing in broadband internet access, that is a step forward. when the greatest generation came home from work, they invested in the future of this country. that is our inheritance, the greatest nation on earth. congressman king has an ideological conflict with investing in the future of this country. a lot of my campaign is based on infrastructure. congressman king opposes investing in any way in our future. >> i am going to double back to the subject of ebola just for a since we started this debate, the news has broken that another case of ebola reported in the united states now, in new york city. king,hat, congressman change the mind you have of how we fight ebola that more money ought to be given to the

national institutes for health and the centers for disease control in atlanta and maybe they have been underfunded? does this change your mind? >> i am going to start out the we have a four-lane highway that we will get connected to the city. now to your question -- we have extended funding to the centers of disease control significantly each of the five or six years at least. it was not lap of funding that got ebola in this country -- lap of funding that notable in this country. it was lacked of vigilance. pieces in place that will combat a bullet. we do not need to flights coming to the united states with passengers that originate in ebola affected countries. we need tsa to set up a no-fly list. they can put that in their computer system and he people off the planes coming from those kinds of areas.

it is time for tom friedman to step down. his intentions were good, but he no longer has the credibility. and then chased down each threat of ebola and do the quarantined so we can stop the disease in this country. it is not a matter of spending money as much as it is getting containment on the issues we have here. wasll i heard then again fear and fear mongering. our medical experts in our transportation experts have told -- we need to react calmly, deliberately, invest in our cdc and nih. funding has dropped significantly. >> let me interrupt. are you saying as more cases are responded here that we are doing just fine with the system we have? >> no, we need to invest in it. again we would be in a much better position if funding had

not been cut. if you look back at the government shutdown congressman ihng led, for two weeks the n was shut down. int is why we need to invest those areas. >> i voted twice to keep the government open. it was the president that ship the government down. i said i was not going to find obamacare, and we funded everything except obamacare. i wanted to open the government up. i physically open the government up. i went down to our mall where the president had taken people off for low and said, at least essential services -- i cut the ribbon, iceland the barricades open, i went -- i opened up the government. >> congressman king did not tell the veterans he put those barricades in place. the day that they shut down again, you said it was the best

thing in washington. right, let me ask a question about the role of government. are there any aspects of american society where you see ?e free market does not work >> the military, for sure. that is what we do best. >> anything else? >> i imagine i could think of a few. carrying the mail would be another. education for competition purposes would be another one. research is another one. private industry does not drive it. there are multiple areas where the private sector does not draw enough confidence. what about the manhattan project ? would we have won world war ii without that? . number things this country for well that is necessary the survival and preeminence of the united states of america. >> are there things that the government does that would be

by the private sector? >> we have a capitalist economy. we need to continue looking hard at what our government is doing. if you look at the unintended consequences of legislation -- >> something that would be better of privatized? >> if you look at the eva permitting -- epa permitting regulations need to be cut. >> congressman king supports construction of the xl pipeline? do you question mark >> i do. >> there are people in northwest iowa who are concerned about this transmission line that will take wind energy from iowa to chicago. do you think that line should be built? >> yes, i do. i have a concern and that is that we respect the property rights on the way. i say to the proponents investing the capital and

putting a plan together, go sell this. put your money on the table to secure by negotiation the maximum number of leases and let's not go down with eminent domain unless it is absolutely , unless there is a consensus established by raining leases. >> same-sex marriage has been legalized and third tuesdays. >> 4.5% of people in this -- try have voted in favor >> but people are allowed to in 32regardless of sex states. can it be rolled back? >> i don't know. we voted justices off the bench

and merely because they made a bad decision. here is what i want to say. i want to see the voice of the people. if it is the people from decision i will support the people's decision. if it is a judge made law that is not based on constitutional i have written positions that would support that. >> would you do anything to protect religious institutions and people concerned about their own morality from being forced aid marriages if they do not wish to do so? >> we have freedom of religion in this country that needs to be protected very carefully. imposing any kind of requirements on religious institutions is something i would fight. >> what about private businesses? >> i think that is an equal protection issue. everyone deserves equal protection under the law. >> we have a magic wand and you only have 15 seconds each.

would you get rid of? >> all of the federal income taxes and replace with a fair tax which would he a national tax on personal consumption. that would do everything good that is good. it would do them all and all better. hr 25. >> i think we can lower effective tax rates if we close loopholes for billionaires and corporations. plan has beenng's laughed out of the room -- suffer not by alan greenspan. priority? your 15 seconds. >> i think the most important thing we can do in iowa is have the leadership that will help bring forward the best possible president of the united states who will carry him or her the place of the platform to go to the white house.

>> i will go to congress and get something done, which is passed the minimum wage increase to get 300,000 working iowans a pay raise. i believe there is dignity and work and if you live -- if you work 40 hours a week, you should not live in poverty. >> thank you for being here. there have been lots of talented people and truckloads to accomplish what you have just seen. for our friends who have supported and the entire iowa lifec television crew, from anderson auditorium, imd gored. thanks for joining us today. >> election day is eight days away. i had of the missed term election, c-span has brought you more than 100 debates from house and senate and governor races around the country. check www.c-span.org for a

schedule of debates and debates we have already covered in our video library. you can follow us on twitter and .lso facebook one of those debates is from illinois where the second ranking democrat dick durbin faces jim oberweis. you can see their debate right here at 7:00 p.m. right now some ads from that race. >> i was watching the news that day and i heard a report about taliban claiming the responsibility for the helicopter being shot down in afghanistan. my husband and his gunner were the only survivors. tony had a brain injury. there is really not much about our life that is the same. senator durbin passed a law that provided me with the resources and the training so that i am able to take care of tony at home. durbin is not

about politics. he cares for veterans and their families. i believe absolutely it is a blessing i am able to take care of tony in our home with our .hildren where he feels loved and that has meant the world to us. >> i'm dick durbin and i am proud to approve this message. >> jim oberweis -- if you like his ice cream, you will love him in the senate. rate,erweis, a lower tax more jobs. many americans are confused about how to fill out their taxes. jim oberweis believes this can be solved in will do anything to solve it. this is why jim oberweis would be perfect for the senate. ♪ >> $66,000.

>> $100,000. isthe high cost of college weighing down america's middle class. that is why i am fighting for a loss so college loans can be refinanced at lower finance rates. all, if you can refinance a car loan or a home loan, why can't you refinance a student loan? i am dick durbin. illinois's middle class needs a break. >> gridlock, politicians getting richer on your dime. dick durbin has been in washington for 32 years putting millions in his own pocket. career politician dick durbin to target political opponents. the master of deficit spending. broke washington. it is time to throw him out. >> the illinois senate debate

between dick durbin and his republican challenger jim oberweis tonight at 7 p.m. eastern. and then at 8:00, the massachusetts governor's debate between charlie baker and martha coakley. and then republican david purdue nunn, thechelle daughter of former senator sam nunn. here is a look at some of the ads in georgia. >> after four years as governor, nathan deal is worth millions. how did he get rich? sold his land for $3 million. the company still does cindy $4 million. inhan deal, putting money his pocket, not hours. ambitions, but his big

promises fall short of the truth. he claims to be for education and the middle class, but jason voted to restrict middle-class access to the hope --olarship and lands on plans on higher taxes for small business in the middle class. jason carter -- falling short. after five more years, we had henry and then two years later we had thomas. he is the best. they love him. he is a parent teacher at preschool on friday. he reads to them. i do not have the stomach for politics, but jason is very courageous and strong and unafraid and he is never afraid to do what he thinks is right.

the pinnacle,, number one. how do we get there? governor nathan deal lower taxes on job creators and build a skilled new workforce, giving georgia families a real future. he brought real appeal to our new jobs.reating now georgia is leading the nation. georgia the nation -- is the number one place to do business. hello, georgia. i am andrew hunt, libertarian. i want to represent you as governor. voter turnout below 20%. why? tired of politics. you need to go to take the government back. we want government out of our life. which will reduce regulation, georgians backt to work.

andrew hunt for opener. ads in thee some georgia governor's raise. you can see that debate at www.c-span.org. minnesota where al franken is seeking a second term. mikebates republican mcfadden. then at 11 p.m. eastern, we go david igewhere debates duke aiona. >> be part of c-span's 2014 campaign coverage. follow us on twitter. from oureviews politics team. c-span is bringing you more than 107 senate, house, and governor debates and you can instantly share your reactions to what the candidates are saying. the battle for control of

congress. stay in touch and engaged, like us on facebook. democrat nick rahal has represented west virginia. the rothenberg political report reads this contest a tossup. up next on c-span, a debate between the congressman and his republican challenger state senator evan jenkins. [applause] >> so much for that instruction. ok. our opening

statements and questions, please try to control that. ok? thank you. first, i would like to tell you a little bit about our candidates. on my right, nick rahal, the democratic candidate in this contest. his 19thrently serving term in congress, the representative first being elected in 1976. he is the ranking member of the transportation and infrastructure committee, which has jurisdiction over highways, airways, it airports, seaports, pipelines. as well as the appalachian regional commission, the army corps of engineers, and the federal management agency. before his election to congress, he was a businessman and served as a staff member for the late senator robert byrd.

he has three children and three grandchildren. my left, state senator evan jenkins, the republican candidate in this contest. a huntington native, he has served in the west virginia legislature for two decades. he was first elect it to the house of delegates in 1994 to represent pallid and wayne counties. he was elected to the state senate where he is now serving his third term. his committee assignments in the state senate include education, and rolled bills, government organization, judiciary, military, and natural resources. theddition to serving in legislature, he is the executive director of the west virginia he association, a physician-based organization focused on public health issues. mr. jenkins and his wife elizabeth have three children. i would like to talk a little bit about the format we have this evening.

each of the candidates will have three minutes. then they will have questions from our readers. each candidate will have two minutes for a response and then one minute for a rebuttal or clarification to each question. through theeed questions in that manner, with andidates alternating answering questions first. after we have completed the questions, each candidate will have two minutes for a closing statement. we have a timer to help us keep track of the time limits we are trying to adhere to this evening. shane harrington, our business reporter at the herald dispatch -- raise your hand. thank you, shane. shane has three signs in his possession. one says one minute, another says 30 seconds, the third

says,. he will flash the signs to indicate to the candidates how much time they have left for their opening and closing statements as well as the answers to questions and rebuttals. any questions from anyone? set.nk we are all ok. i want to remind the candidates. each of you have three minutes for your opening comments. we will begin with congressman rahall. >> thank you. i would like to thank the herald dispatch for sponsoring this for them and your participation in our political process. too many veterans have fought and died for the freedoms we enjoy in this country, one of which is the right to vote. we all have a duty to vote. as i have been in congress working hard for you, i feel we have a duty to work together. southernity and across and west virginia. that is how we have made progress on so many fronts. by working together you and i have been getting things done.

through my leadership position on the house transportation committee that has meant numerous projects across southern west virginia, whether it be marshall university, the city of huntington, india throughout the southern coalfields. this race is coming down to really one thing. one thing, my friends. who can you trust to stand up for the working values of our families and west virginia? who can you trust? who will be on your side of our working men and women? i have always been a fighter for west virginia values, whether it is working with republicans and standing up to my party, to stop the overzealous epa agenda, or diversifying our economy or working personally for you on problems he may have in cutting through government red tape such as government benefits or black lung benefits. i am proud of what we have been

able to achieve in washington by being able toer, cross party lines. i chaired the house prescription drug abuse caucus with my good friend from across the aisle and across the river, how rivers, the chair of the house appropriations committee. we have been able to secure millions of dollars to fight drug abuse. another example -- i have led the effort to secure funding for home and square in huntington, the development of the heartland toridor, so important southern west virginia. i could go on down the list. whether it is the highway, rap canyon, and our top priority will be to finish route 35. we must create long-term solutions for our state. when we look at the long-term legacy of robert byrd and the fact that this president will not be in office for two years, we have to think long term for the best interest of our state and what it means for a small

state like west virginia to have seniority in the halls of congress and to be able to work across party aisles. this election comes down to one thing. who can we trust to fight for our west virginia values in congress. i have and always will be a champion or our working families, our economy, and our independent mountaineer spirit way of life. you have honored me in the past. i am asking for your vote again. thank you. >> thank you. senator jenkins? set up thank you to the herald dispatch. in cuba this tremendous turnout. for those of you watching us on the webcast, hello. i hope you have an informative evening tonight. this is a great night. candidly, i have been looking forward to a debate to talk about the issues. i issued a statement to the congressman the night of the primary and it has taken until now before he is willing to stand on the stage with me and

talk about the importance of the issues of west virginia. i was born and raised here and i have represented cabell county and wayne county and the state legislature for years. my daughter olivia, my son charles, and one off to college. it is about our children's tutor. why am i running for congress? i am running for congress because i think we need a change of direction, not a change of pace. i am telling you, folks, people are hurting and west virginia. it is the policies of barack their nancy pelosi and faithful foot soldier nick rahal that have caused despair and west virginia. it is time for a change. we have someone who has been in office for 38 years. we have done a lot of good things here and cabell county. autism coverage for

children and west virginia, standing up to the insurance industry's. we fought the drug abuse crisis. i was a lead sponsor of the taxpayers bill of rights to make sure you got your response in a timely fashion and if you did not, guess what? the tax department has to pay you interest. i got an e-mail today. he said, you know, there has been a lot of talk about coal, a lot of things that are critically important. he said, do not forget. this is the house of underscoringes, representatives. this is about who will be your representative. i am proud of our record. a staunchn rahal was supporter of barack obama twice. raised costs for seniors. i am telling you, folks. west virginians are hurting.

i am looking forward to the discussion tonight about those policies, about those votes. secondslose my last 30 in the interview with keith olbermann, this is what the congressman said -- i keep on with my endorsement of obama because i am looking at the long-range bu of what is best for our democratic party -- long-range view of what is best for our democratic party. he puts his party first. i want to put west virginia first. i want to put west virginians back to work. i want to stand up to barack obama. i would be honored to have your vote. >> thank you, senator. evening, question this which will be addressed by mr. jenkins first, has to do with energy. as you are fully aware, coal has been a big topic in this campaign. you have both stated your commitment to sustaining coal. i want you to put this in the context of an overall energy policy.

will you explain what kind of energy policy you think the nation should have and what specific steps you would take as a congressman to steer the nation toward that policy. >> west virginia is an energy state. we are proud of our coal history. we have made the manufacturing of this country based on coal-fired plants around the country. of the energy in west virginia is coal-fired. we do have an oil and gas explosion as well. need to do both, have coal as gas in oil and natural west virginia. we have an opportunity to leave the country and energy independence. we need to free up our coal miners and make sure they can coal.he you cannot be pro-coal and vote

against the reins act as nick rahal has. you cannot be pro-coal and vote for nancy pelosi for speaker six times he wants to kill coal. you cannot be pro-coal and vote for a carbon tax like neck rahal as. i am telling you, folks. these policies are devastating industry.l he voted against the keystone pipeline. we can go on and on. he gave the epa the biggest historyncrease in their with specific instructions to come up with policies related to greenhouse gas regulations. guess what? those policies are coming home to roost. we cannot continue in this direction. jobs.s killing our it is limiting our ability to grow and prosper in this state.

at i will be 100% pro-coal. i will be pro-coal miner, and i will make sure communities can get on their feet and make sure our companies get back to work. rahal?ressman >> coal is a way of life and west virginia. it literally keeps our lights on. it is not just a business or job. it is who we are. it is in our veins. coal is everything to our state. i have always stood for call, -- stood for coal, am standing for coal, and will stand for coal. what is important to keep in mind, we need an energy policy that embraces all of the above, as long as they are domestic resources. in westhave oil and gas virginia. we have other energy sources as well as this nation. as long as they are to messick,

we need to use those resources. -- as long as they are domestic, we need to use those resources. billionaires popping up my opponent, they did not make their money and coal. they made their money and oil and gas. while information age, coal is not generating 50% of our electricity more, it is still 35%. coal will be here. i do not care who the president is, i do not care who the speaker of the houses, which party controls either one, coal is not going away. naturall is a valuable resource. you know that as well as i do, my friends. our coal miner is the most precious resource of all. i have stood in the well of the house and file for lower dust levels. i have fought for coal miners' health and safety and pension

benefits. i am proud of my record working on behalf of coal. i do not think the koch brothers or the tom blankenship for the karl roves of the world are going to change west virginians knowledge of nick rahal's ability to work for coal, because that is who we are west virginia. it is our way of life. .> thank you senator jenkins, any clarification, rebuttal? inlet's talk about one vote particular. nancy pelosi, long before obama came on the scene back in 2007 said we need to green the capitol, and guess what? nick rahal introduced legislation, sponsored legislation giving direction to the architect of the capitol to reduce carbon emissions. guess what? the united states capital was fueled with coal from west virginia. and here is a guy who sponsored

legislation to say, no, we're going to stop using west virginia coal in fueling the capitol of our united states. >> congressman rahal? metriends, you have never johnny-come-lately until tonight. he is on the stage with me. [laughter] has been 20 years he in the senate of west virginia. ask his colleagues. pro-coalen at the rallies, the anti-epa rallies i have been at, testifying against the epa? mr. johnny-come-lately, welcome to the battle, evan. i am glad you finally recognized what coal means to our state. is whatever voted is the reference, let's look at the facts. we used to be friends. i hope we can be friends after this. evan and i, i am happy to say, is a past supporter of mine.

he gave my campaign in 2010, after barack obama was elected president, after the affordable care act was signed into law, after what ever vote it was that he quoted back from 07, after all that he was a supporter of my campaign and i appreciate it. >> thank you. the nexto onto question now, which also has to do with the coal mining industry. virginia is the second leading coal producing state in the nation with thousands of people employed in what is a dangerous occupation, do you think steps taken by the have been sufficient whatep minors safe and additional steps should be taken to keep minors safe in the minds ? and what is being done to protect those minors from black lung disease?

>> short answer -- no, no, and no. we're not doing enough to protect our coal miners. i was the first official that when thatat ubb disastrous explosion hit on 2010. i was with those widows, soon to be widows waiting for word on their loved ones. we passed a mine safety bill, but it did not go far enough. we need to pass the roberts c. legislation that will provide additional protections for coal miners. we need them to have a number where they can call to report unsafe conditions and not be afraid of losing their job. we also need to step up to the plate and protect the health and safety, as i said earlier, of our most precious resource in this state, our coal miner. i will continue to do that.

i think -- we are not going to be 100% safe. coal mining is a dangerous job. i have been in the coal mines and i just wish my opponents and their backers would have taken up my earlier invite this year to go in there and going to our --l mine and see where it what it is like. maybe they would get there to hundred dollar manicures a little dusty, but at least they would learn what coal mining is really like. this is what it is about. being with her coal miners and whose side are you really on? being with our working families in the state, whose side are you really on? i am proud of my record. i am proud of cecil roberts standing up with me. i am proud of suited her joe manchin standing beside me, calling nick reed hall -- nick rahal a straight shooter and same baloney to these ads -- with all due respect to baloney. i like the meat.

but that is what these ads are all about. outsiders running their own hidden agenda. >> senator jenkins? >> i wonder if nick ray allin he was with those widows -- nick rahal when he was with those widows and first responders at ubb, that tragic incident, the ubb explosion, while they were still in search and recovery, nick rahal went and sold his corporate ownership in massey. ubb day after the explosion, it nick rahal, instead of consoling the widows, instead of helping the first responders, it must've been his first call, was to sell his ownership interest in massey. this is the gentleman that in

cut, reduced, changed the criteria for black lung officialthat the umwa said the worst vote, the worst bill in the history of coal miners. it looks to me like we are going to have a fun night with a lot of cute comments and a lot of funny gestures. but that is not going to do a our hard-working west virginians back to work. ubb that the people at you sold your corporate ownership's the day after the disaster? i bet not. he likes to talk about this .oney he talked about a 500 -- a $500 contribution i made to him. guess what? he tried to make a $2000 it

legal contribution to me. so, what i did with the maximum limits in west virginia, i sent him $1000 back and kept the $1000 he sent. [laughter] >> congressman rahall? >> first, if evan had been at disaster, he would have known cell phones didn't work in that area. that isay, in addition, the contribution he gave me was $500. i don't know about this money shenanigans that he's talking about. you know, since he brought up the issue of money, all we have follow the money. follow the money, my friends. look who the big backers of his are.ign don blankenship. brothers, each one and their wives have personally maxed out to him. follow the money. you whose side he's on and who is expect -- who

he is expected to respond to after the election. so let's look at the facts of who race and let's decide is in the best interests of west virginia. ouris there fighting for west virginia values for the working men and women, to make sure? fighting for our coal miners? uwaa'm proud to have the endorsement? do you think they would endorse against black lung benefits? don't think so. did not denyd he selling his corporate ownership. you notice that? deception there. pretty quick -- 38 years in congress apparently teaches you a lot of tricks. you, what anng outrage, before he took a personal financial hit, he ran. and he got out of it. we're going to talk, i'm sure, a about the cokes.

he likes to talk about history. you he took money from coke industries several years ago. everbefore they were involved in running ads for the prosperity.r nick rahall took money from the cokes. don blankenship doesn't like me. against me in a number of my campaigns. one contribution back in race.ar 2000 in another we've gone 14 years since then. and he's worked against me, and support me. >> okay. thank you. >> we'll go on to our next question. has to do with health reform. the affordable care act has been the subject of much debate since it was passed in 2010 and be now, a year after its implementation. far, about eight million people have been enrolled