way that makes sense. >> do you still want universal health care? >> yes. and i say that because it is s about being able to have access to quality health care. everyone should have the opportunity to retire and live a fruitful life. i think the concept of universal health care, everybody would agree we want that to happen. and we do have that in play. this is where if you are blind to politics will jump into something that we do not need, and that is the affordable care act. there are a lot of good things about the affordable care act has accomplished what it needed to accomplish? . think the answer is no and in the long run, it will cost us a lot. how do we change that? it is a federal issue. it is a federal issue.

we have to be smart and who we represent as our electives for our congressional delegation. i will put a plug-in in for charles, somebody that i think must get elected. because we need the balance in our congressional delegation also. just like how many balance in state government. >> absolutely. i applaud and appreciate the efforts we have had in the past to have prepaid health coverage to ensure that everyone in hawaii can be insured. every time i hear people express support for that, i wonder why the legislature order to approve the federal funding to start the hawaii health connect system. i would ask for an opt out, a waiver. we cannot do a by 2017. behink we need to see supportive to the companies i cannot provide this because we have had a model and how we take care of people. we pope ebola insurance program

to help you consider that. this is where the hell is the -- people on insurance programs. >> a little more on the s uperferry. expensive for labor islands and my home. talking about visiting the island very. published extra money when you -- how to the project? much extra money would effectively project? forms ande unsightly i do not in timeout -- children ande my

grandchildren with a tax bill that will only increase as times .o unless we have the specifics of the details -- and i welcome him to talk about that -- i would support it if it is solid and financially viable and we can make it happen. i have been flying a lot to the neighbor islands, and i can tell you right now that you are right about the interisland cost, it is fairly expensive. i think my colleagues would agree with that. it is the same old, same old type of comment to hear from politicians. if you cannot do a job that the people want, they blame it on the fact that we cannot afford that. then they put out a plan that i said to duke. number one, we need a collaborative process to make this happen. the four county mayors and the governor working together. i intend to go to the department of transportation's maritime administration. that is where the funds are for

shipbuilding. it is where the funds are to provide loans and grants to do this. i know my way around the department of transportation does that is how i was able to get rail funding with the help .f the congressional delegation at the end of the day, i support the jones act, because it has to be done with an american bottom to get grants. and there is interesting shipbuilders will talk to me and mr.rs at a conference that ige and mr. aiona did not attend. we talked about building a coalition of business and government and labor to make that happen. i, too, have been traveling a lot to the neighbor islands, and i feel your pain. before i decided to run for governor, i had not made a whole lot of trips to the neighboring islands. this is one area that i do not believe in the whole priority of things before the state

legislature, i cannot see taxpayer funds going to fund erry.hing like the superf it is a very, very expensive enterprise. isthere is a business that willing to do it, if there are federal funds are other sources of funds to fund such a project, i certainly would be willing to be a partner in helping develop it. the rules,we follow complete all of the environmental impact statements required, and complete all of the committee the engagement that would be required of a project such as this. i think that would be very important. unfortunately, i do not think of the general taxpayer today can add that on top of all of the schools, libraries, and other facilities that are so needed. alo, candidates, we will give you a chance to breathe. we are live from the conference center. from hawaii news now and the

," youulu star advertiser are watching the race for governor. news over the budget headlines were making recently. with the athletics underfunded and in the red, do you think it is necessary for the state to contribute to the athletics program? ini'm a passionate believer sports, someone who has been involved in many sports activities and organizations and bringing them to the state of hawaii. this is our major university athletic program. i would like to see the state be much more supportive, much more creative in the sharing of revenues, making sure that in events you are using the sponsorship of our athletic teams. typet to ensure that that

of marketing creativity is at work at the university of hawaii in that regard. when we have athletic programs, is if the community like no other. i want to see that with every sport, across the board. i believe that if we have a governor that understands and has an ability to reach out to the private sector, which i will -- there's a lot of interest in asia. asian, ms. love hawaii. -- asian companies love hawaii. reach out ando either proven track record of doing business in the asia-pacific to make this happen. there would be no starter champion the knife i was elected governor. >> as mentioned, we have uhs president david sitting in the front row listening to the answers. >> thank you very much for that question. i'm an alumni of the university of hawaii three times. i started up he committed the college, got my bachelors in

electrical engineering, and then an mba from the college of business. at the community college, got my bachelors in electoral engineering, and then an mba from the college of business. this really is a decision for the university president and the regions to make. -- regents to make. we give the university about it and give them flex ability on how the dollar should be distributed among the various programs for the university. before, i do not believe you want legislators getting in and trying to decide how much fun should be spent for the program. that said, i am a great athletics.f uh i dig it is a powerful message. i believe that athletics is so important for young people because it gives them the opportunities they were not have academically. are going to identify how we are related to the university and sports, i have

been a supporter for 30 years. there you go, i got mine in. when it comes to something of this nature, the legislature and the governor, we should be supporting the university of hawaii. i have said this from the very beginning, president, the very beginning when we started our campaign. i said the problem that we have at the university of hawaii is that politicians insert themselves every time there is just a little issue going on. you are the fourth president in 10 years. your election process was not without criticism, was not without intervention, it was not without controversy. why is that? we have to allow the leadership at the university of hawaii to root. and wants that happens, begin to the decisions making where it should be made. the legislature and the executive branch should do just that. .e should support them if there something they need, we will address it at that point in

time. but right now, we need leadership to address those problems. ige -- senate for ige, a question on farms. >> would you support subsidies for local farms to help make us more self-reliant as opposed to importing food? >> when i started this campaign, more than a year ago, i had superficial knowledge of agriculture and hawaii. .- in the hawaii over the last year, i've had the opportunity to meet with many farmers across the state to talk andt the challenges opportunities, their vision of how we can grow more of the food we eat. i am very bullish on the future of agriculture. but it is about being sustainable. and it is very interesting, the techniques and mechanisms of farming today are so different than they were a decade ago.

i did visit a farm on the big island, a pig farm. they are into the natural we wereprocess, where standing in the middle of a pig farm in it did not smell like a pig farm. -- and it did not smell like a pig farm. need to be proactive and support farmers in a sustainable way. aiona, should we subsidize hawaii farmers? >> i believe the number is a were from 80% of our food is imported from outside of hawaii -- anywhere from 80% to 85% of our food is imported from outside of hawaii. absolutely read it if we can cut dependence by 10%, that would be an increase of about $300 million in the state of hawaii. i am for it all the way. i want you to know that right farmer, theii, the

rancher, the average age is 59. need to beef up our educational programs, and i believe that the university of hawaii is prime for that. diversifying in bringing in industry, agriculture is that. we also less diverse location we could have an agriculture, and farming is a big part of that. no one has been stronger in support of agriculture. i believe that the best years are ahead of us in agriculture and i do not live in the past. it is important to recognize that the department of agriculture has to be strengthened. only 7% of the budget goes to the department of agriculture. take or small, they need to have access to land, --big or small, they need to have access to land, which the government can help. they need to have access to financing and low-interest loans . the need access to water and help with invasive species.

-- they need access to water and help with invasive species are it there are not enough inspectors to a proactive with that, we have a fire at problem. problem last but not governor need a that can market. we have kona coffee, that is magical. we need to go around the world to create the brand name. >> we have another multiple-choice candidates for the presidents. -- candidates. she's one of the three statements. but unions have too much power, the rightons have amount of power, or public unions do not have enough power. public unions have too much power, public unions have the right amount of power, or public unions do not have enough power. a.it is

too much power. at the history of hawaii and the development of the public union, there is no question that it was designed and it was developed and it was incremented for the right purpose. but we have got to that point right now where he has gone too far. as a result -- it has gone to bank far. far.o as a result we have special interest running the state of hawaii. there was an editorial by richard in which he quoted an executive with the public union that it was about the public health hospital and where it is right now. as mr. ige mentioned, they were trying to fix the problem, and he said that we stopped at bill and we are dam proud of it -- that bill and we are proud of it

. he says of the also, but it shows you the arrogance and power that the public unions have. >> this is our goldilocks question. >> it depends on that leader. if he is weak and indecisive, they cannot have too much power. but if you do when i try to do in honolulu, strong but fair, honest in dealing with them, , never askedle them to take pay cuts without doing it yourself. we were the first industry in before thef hawaii collective bargaining was going to ask for a 5% pay cut, i asked my appointees to take that cut up. i think that is what is important. recognize, as i do now, that we need the private and public partnership on the state hospitals. some of them have a tough time accepting that. i will argue for patient centered health care.

we need to do something about the doctor shortage, 750 doctors, we need to double that. and most important, recognize that it is for all of the people of hawaii and noticed a jobs issue. -- not just a jobs issue. >> i believe the unions have the right amount of power. we should look at the result of the union elections and who the union was supporting and who they were not and who actually won the election. our primary election was a historic victory. we were outspent 10-1. we had only one endorsement and my opponent had the lion share of everything else. -- lion's share of everything are aboutlections people, about community, about you caring enough to become active and challenge candidates and find out who you believe to be the best person to represent you. and i do believe that hawaii is

still about community. it is really about you being able and willing to spend the time to learn the candidates and make a difference. >> we have that big storm spinning our way right now. o tould like to say mahal the cruise that could be working overtime to keep the lights on. that being said, on the policy level, do you think that hawaiian electric has been a barrier to the development of alternative energy in hawaii? >> despite their best intentions to convince us otherwise, i do. i really believe that they are too dependent on oil. we need to wean ourselves away from oil. the public utilities commission came out with a report, coupled with the other report, saying that there is too much focus on yesterday's solutions for tomorrow's problem. that is why i am the only

candidate running for governor who has come up with a detailed program and platform to remove our dependence on oil. we need to embrace geothermal. and yes, i will seek a private partner, because it is working and 23 countries around the world, eight states, and over 700 projects in 76 nations. theill allow us to move needle towards 100% renewable energy. we need a smart grid technology also to do that. that will require money. i do not believe hawaii electric is in the position to do that. thatdo not believe hawaiian electric has been a barrier, but clearly we have created a process, and the state has not been leadership necessary to really move forward and a lot of important areas. -- in a lot of important areas , we did restructure the public utilities commission because we thought they were moving slowly.

we created a new director so that you could have a professional managing the process. this committee weighs all the issues involved in your rooftop. there are real, engineering, technical problems about reliability. utility engineers like to over engineer, they like to be safe. they are going to air on the one of being safe -- err the side of being safe. they need to be driving the utility to allow more pv for our community and we have given them the tools to do that. >> to say that the hawaiian electric is the barrier to where we are right now with our costs, or energy costs, would -- our energy cost, would not be accurate. it is a combination of adjusting to a policy that was historical, the hawaii clean energy

initiative, enacted in 2008. it was historical and shifting hawaii away from what we have been known to have for decades -- in that shifting hawaii away from what we have been known to have her decades, our reliance on fossil fuel. now we will be relying upon efficiency as well as renewable energy, and it is difficult. we had a lack of leadership. if a lack of leadership in the last four been years in the legislature, the executive branch. that is why my platform, which will be coming out very shortly -- within the next few days -- will show you that it will be about leadership. making sure that the overriding principle is to lower the cost of energy. >> thank you. for the chance candidates to ask each other a question on any topic. >> mr. ige, we will get your question for mr. hannemann. you will have one minute to respond and then a 32nd rebuttal. rebuttal.nd

>> in a unanimous ruling, the supreme court claimed that you were lives. you claimed no involvement, but an official testified that, as the mayor, you were consulted and agreed with the decision. the you agree with the supreme court decision now? >> david, this is the second time you have asked me this question. clearly you are losing the battle on who has the most executive experience for this job. you want to go to my character? that is fine. the incident that he is referring to, i had no direct involvement. the decision to suspend these workers was made by the corporation counsel, the department of enterprise services to make that recommendation, as well as the union of the too employees -- ewm employees. -- two employees.

.e were the ruling went our way on the lower levels. i stand by my character and my integrity but i wish you would've asked me a question about my record in city hall are why i am fit to be governor as opposed to engaging in character assassination again. thank you. >> you know, i am just itching to the facts. the hawaii supreme -- sticking to the facts rid the hawaii supreme court looked at the issue and did conclude that the mayor had overstepped and reversed this and remanded for action to decide how these two people should be compensated for the fact that they were blacklisted and their careers destroyed. it really is about the facts, and encourage all of you to read. election is about leadership, leadership style. >> time is up. >> we have to move on mr.

hannemann. aiona.ion for mr. duke, i should say. you have said that government should get out of the way and let business do its thing. the other hand, you've heard me talk about public and private partnership to save hospitals, and now you say that you embrace that, which means government and business working together. it seems you are talking out of both sides here, so what is your view you actually hold to? government getting out of the way for all things and taking care of business? or a public-private partnership? over sympathized the general statement in regard to getting out of the way of business. obviously, a public-private partnership is limited to certain areas that you can take advantage of. but when i say government get

out of the way of business, i mean just that. there are too many times in which government is putting up barriers for businesses so that they cannot thrive. a good example of that is the permit process that we have in the state of hawaii. i've heard it time and time and time again, that the permitting process is long. industry,struction they started project today, start planning for today, it is not done until six or seven years down the line. that is something the government has to get out of the way of. part of it is the way that we administer it. that is the concept behind getting out of the way of business. >> 30 seconds, mr. hannemann. >> duke, all have to say is this. york made very clear that you believe that government should just get out of the way and let business do its thing, you cannot have it both ways. that is what gives politicians a bad name. that is like senator ego saying that he has not -- senator ige

thing that he did not vote to raise pensions. senator ige in the coming governor aiona need to be careful with their words -- and lieutenant governor aiona need to be careful with their words. taxes,ing about pension how should the people of hawaii georgia leadership ability when you have pu -- when you flip up on set -- the top on such serious issues as pensions and flop on issues like pension and childhood education. >> let me get the facts straight . i was the chairman of the ways and means committee, and i had a responsibility to deliver a balanced budget so that, unlike the aiona administration, we ended up in the wred.

i take responsibility for the fact that when i became chair, the deficit was 200 million. within three months, it had grown to $1.2 billion and a $5 billion budget. it was clear to me that we had to look at all options are it i did look at the pension tax is an option. options. i did look at the pension tax as an option. at the end of the day, it is about walking the walk. we found a way to balance the budget. aiona, i understand that you do not want to see more questions. >> i believe you forgot the question. the question is about flip flopping on pensions and early childhood education. he was in favor of early childhood education. .> that is our debate

gentlemen, candidates, thank you so much. lo for your dedication to be here. thank you to the students and the community leaders. we hope that you learn something. >> a reminder, the general election is 20 days away. we'll have complete coverage leading up to it. x november 4, it is your civic duty. -- >> november 4, it is your civic duty. >> c-span stamping 2014 is when you more than 100 debates for the control of congress -- campaign 2014 is bringing you more than 100 debates for the control of congress. follow us on twitter and like us on facebook. continuesour coverage with the georgia house debate between john barrow and his republican challenger rick

allen. and not a clock p.m., the pennsylvania six district debate during republican ryan costello on c-span2. c-span, it will politifact editor fact checks claims made by groups. and then the illinois senate debate. >> here are just a few of the e-mails we have reason we received from viewers. gene from north carolina wrote. c-span provides a most viable service to the american people by providing focus and coverage of the most important issues facing our nation. the government needs constant talking and monitoring, is only available on c-span.

great -- "tv" is also great for the seriously reflect informed. -- >> christie from cornell university -- christine from cornell university sent this. robert joan sent. and continue to let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. us, or you can send us a tweet.

.oin the c-span conversation like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. now, an update on the kansas senate race between incumbent republican pat roberts and independent challenger greg orman. >> back to campaign 2014, eight days until the election. let's take a look at the kansas senate race. we are joined by steve, the political correspondent for the "kansas city star." steve, thank you for joining us. we look at the race between greg orman and pat roberts did where do things stand? eight days out. guest: it is a very close race. the latest polls that we are looking at here suggest that orman might have a lead of a point or two. but obviously that is within the margin of error in these polls.

very very tight race. , there is no question about it. host: last week, the roberts campaign brought in the big guns. bringing in mitt romney. who else has come in to campaign for the senator? test: at this point, about half of the u.s. senate has been out here to campaign for pat roberts. john mccain has been here. rand paul, ted cruz. one senator after another. tom coburn from oklahoma has been here for him. today, as you mentioned mitt romney, he will be in the kansas city area suburb on the kansas side. and i think he will draw a pretty good crowd of. mitt romney is still a big name in american politics. that is why send the roberts is -- senator roberts is bringing him out here. it will be fun to see what happens.

host: what has the get out the vote effort been like? orman is an independent. who does he rely on? the democratic party is not there for him. guest: that is one of the big questions that surrounds this campaign as we head towards election day. who does greg orman count on to get the vote out? he doesn't have very much get out the vote effort in the traditional sense that we judge these things by. as you point out he is an , independent. the democrats are reluctant to help him. they don't want to be caught helping greg orman and tie him to the democratic party. that has been one of the big arguments throughout the campaign from the roberts side. which is that orman is a liberal democrat, a democrat who has been hiding behind the cloak of an independent candidate. they want to avoid that kind of association.

orman is from what we can tell on his own when it comes to getting the vote out. and you wonder how that will affect him. have advantage of a long established republican machine behind him. very well-known for its get out the vote apparatus that helped sam brownback so much for years -- four years ago. it should help them this time around. roberts will be able to bank on that kind of support. orman it doesn't have that kind of machine behind him. you wonder how that will affect the final vote on election day. host: lastly, and i mean this in the most serious way. you only have an election, you also have the world series coming back to kansas city. is there any interference with the world series being in kansas city? does it interfere with getting airtime? just: if you watch the world

series out here, you are seeing lots of ads for orman and roberts during the world series games. i don't think there has been any impact. we have noticed research that suggests that if you have a successful home team in any sport, it tends to five or -- favor incumbents. going forward to election day. how big of a factor that is, i doubt. but the research out there suggest that there is that tie going into election day. host: we will find out this week. one of those pieces of it, anyway. steve kraske is with the "kansas city star." thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thank you for having me, bill. >> now, and evaluation of statements made by political candidates this campaign season. this is 40 minutes.

>> and she is the editor for political act, a publication that looks at campaign -- ng is itifact, a for pol publication that looks at campaign ads and evaluates their correctness. she is here this morning to talk about politics in campaign 2014 and the big whoppers told on the campaign trail, as judged by politifact. one of 14, we are a week away, it these away from election day. away,4, we are a week eight days away from election day. if you are to look at one big issue that he's popping up, what would that be? guest: we have seen diversity in different races and different states, but if we had to pick is, what we have been seeing the claim from from republican challengers against democrat

incumbents that they voted for president barack obama. usually what they will do is they will cut political ad that say, so-and-so voted with obama 99% of the time, 95% of the time . a lot of these advertisements are somewhat accurate. we have given some true to mostly trues. in some cases, that has been left true and we have given some half-truths or mostly false is. -- falses. but that comment has been repeated on the campaign trail. host: where are you based in how are you sure that what you are researching is nonpartisan and how do you decide what to fact check? guest: right. politifact is a team of journalists. "the tamparted by bay times" newspaper, the largest newspaper in florida. we have expanded and it is a network of news organizations. so we are journalists and what we do is politics fact checking. every story on our website is

about politics fact checking. we started back in 2007 because we just felt there was not enough fact checking in political journalism. since then, we have been doing our best to match up the rhetoric with the reality. our reports go online. it is a database so people can go to our website and look up different topics and different people and different races. and also because it is online, we also get to print our sources. every report that we do we , explain our reasoning. we say who we interviewed and what documents we looked at, we link to documents whenever possible, and then we have our rating at the end with our true -- truth-o meter and they go - from true to mostly true. we have half true, mostly false, false, and when something is false and ridiculous, we rate it "pants on fire.

host: where did that term come from? in 2012 -- guest: back in 2012, we knew we wanted to do ratings because it is a helpful service and you help know where reporters are coming from. we wanted a funny rating, and one of the reporter said, how about pants on fire? we went with it. host: how do you decide on a day-to-day basis what you will research? guest: we use our news judgment , think about what is being said in the campaigns. and we think about what our readers want to read about. the main goal is to give people the information they need to govern themselves in a democracy. we think about what the important issues of the day are. we tried to mix in a few fun ones and we do not try to take ourselves too seriously. we try to check across the political spectrum and make sure we're looking at all sides of the debate. host: we want your calls and comments on what you have seen. -- what you are seeing in terms of campaign ads and issues and what you may judge as truthful or not or pants on fire.

you can reach us on twitter. of the ones that you have done, do you ever go back and say, we were wrong on this and we misjudged it? we are changing the rating? guest: every now and then. i have to say does not happen very often. we are human beings and we do have to make corrections, but for the most part, we have a really good process. we try to look at everything we can find in research, we interview experts, we have a process where three editors read every fact check, and then we have a meeting and we actually vote on the ratings. that is how we set the ratings. host: you are in florida, based in tampa. and so one of the most recent issue that came up was the issue at the florida governor's debate a couple of weeks ago, the issue

of the fan under former governor governor crist's podium. i want to take a look at that. plenty of people were befuddled and it seems even the people moderating the debate in terms of what the rules were like. let's take a look and find out what politifact thought. >> we have an extremely peculiar situation right now. we have governor charlie crist. [applause] florida governor rick scott, our incumbent governor and the republican candidate for governor, is also in the building. governor rick scott, we have been told that governor scott will not be participating in this debate.

now, let me explain what this is all about. governor crist has asked to have a small fan placed underneath his podium. the rules of the debate that i was shown by the scott campaign say that there should be no fan. somehow, there is a fan here and for that reason, ladies and gentlemen, i am being told that governor scott will not join us for this debate. [laughter] >> boo! >> ladies and gentlemen, this is a debate. rosemary, what can we say? >> well --

[indiscernible] [applause] >> wow. >> yes, it is. i am sad the people of florida are not going to get to hear -- >> we are not asking you a question. i am asking rosemary about the situation we find ourselves in. >> governor, do the rules say that there should be no fan? >> not that i'm aware of. >> so the rules that is not campaign just showed us that s cannott no electronic be used -- >> are we really going to debate about the fan or are we going to talk about education and the environment and the future of our state? i mean, really. [applause] host: angie, people outside of florida may have known what happened. what was the ruling having a fan there in the debate? >> this is the funniest thing.

i am based out of "the tampa bay bureau, so igton bur was watching this on the tv. in florida, we fact check in partnership with the miami herald. the reporter was down there in the debate. we had never seen an opening like this. we were just as surprised as everyone else. we looked into the rules of the debate. if you noticed, he said, not that i'm aware of. what we found was debate organizers had put out these rules ahead of time that the campaigns had to sign off on. and one of the elements of the rules said no electronic devices, including fans. amusingly, after we published our report, we had some readers that would say a fan is not an electronic device. we could talk about that, but the crist campaign, when they sent in their rules, they had handwritten an asterix that said, as long as including a fan -- as long as the temperature in the hall is addressed, including a fan it needed.

-- if needed. reporters covering charlie crist, he is known for bringing a fan with him wherever he goes. he apparently likes to be cool. host: it is florida. guest: it is florida. it is very warm down there. that there was a fan was not such a surprise to those of us who have been following him for many years. the opening of the debate, him not coming out, but he did come out, and they talked about jobs and education, and we fact checked it. but it did start with that pretty funny. host: politifact, we will look at some of the big whoppers in this campaign. more than one who should we covered in the camping 2014 season available on our website or let's get to your calls first before we get to him of the whoppers. in florida is jim. go ahead. caller: good morning. the first thing i would like to just say is you always oppose republicans.

you always say the dog whistle of the koch brothers. let's get something straight about politifact. it is a far, far left, far left as an organization. my question, basically, when was the last time that her paper endorsed a republican president? because it just points to the fact she is very far left and you cannot trust them. host: let's ask this, is or a --l before -- between what is there a wall between what you do at "the cap abbe times" and the tampa bay times" and what you do online?

guest: the news organization of the "tampa bay times." from time to time, we get questions like this. we are independent journalists. we come out of the newspaper journalism tradition. our reports are all online. anyone can see them. they can see our reasoning. they can see are evidence. they can come to their own conclusion. maybe they agree with our rating or maybe they do not care. we fact checked republicans and democrats. and we have scorecards for all the candidates so people can look up and go to a website and see president barack obama's scorecards and all the falses we have given him. so we try to call it as we see it. we do not balance our ratings and try to say, we had a false for the yankees and now we will try to get a false for the red sox. we just call it like it is. and we do our journalism and we feel like people who are open-minded and interested in the facts will like what we are doing. host: and last friday, politifact published opnline the nine biggest whoppers in the 2014 campaign, we will go

through all of these through the segment. number 10, isis fighters were not caught at the border. guest: this is a statement from a congressman who said 10 were caught at the mexican border. we looked into this. we could find no evidence to support this. they contacted the congressman's office. we always contact the person we are fact checking. evidence was news articles that were anonymous. that is not concrete 2.2. in texas, it was said there was nothing to this. host: new york. is on our democrat line. caller: i just don't seem to understand how you guys come up with these different percentages on how the president is doing and how the governor is doing. because, see, i as a democrat believe the president is doing a great job. i do not seem to understand how you all get to these facts that he is not doing this right and he is not doing that right.

you're not explaining anything to me to show this man that he is not doing the job he is supposed to do. when you call me and asked me how the president is doing, i believe he is doing a great job. host: politifact is not a polling organization. is not a polling organization. do notit is not and we make endorsements barely look at what was said. we do not check everything we -- that was set. are not a size organization. our scorecards show that when someone says something we found newsworthy and interesting and retract mints to statements that were found wrong. he wants to correct the record. someone says 10 things and nothing is -- and one thing is not right, the fact checkers will focus on the things that are wrong. what is your reliable source in checking a fact? guest: an interesting question. onlook a lot -- we do a lot what laws say, people say this

law will do this or that. of the lawe text itself and we go to report from the nonpartisan congressional budget office. that is a source we like a lot. there is a group, the congressional research service, a nonpartisan report for congress on a lot of the issues of the day. we also talked to a lot of experts and we try to talk to experts across the political spectrum on the toughest issues. so that we can see where there is consensus and where there isn't. -- inis a lot of room for politics. but what we are trying to focus on are the fact. and let me know and what can be proved. here is john in georgia. independent line. do you think this thing about co2 is real? six of these five machines, and none of them show a problem.

of the issues you address is you say, no, global warming is not a hoax. what is i met and what do you find out? a statement made from a common in louisiana, where i am from. she said that global warming is a hoax. we looked at the global warming issue many times and it is not a hoax. .here is firm science there the scientific consensus is brought. i know, because we fact checked it for my candidate for congress, some people are saying global warming is not real but every time we look at it, the evidence is more and more broad and concrete. one of the common today's we have covered on c-span is mitch mcconnell in his campaign and he referenced fact checking in a segment of that debate. here's what he had to say

regarding alison grimes's claims on mitch mcconnell. >> the outrageous issue that somehow my wife and i profit from anti-coal activists, it was , the only pinocchio's person i can think of who has been given for pinocchio's is the president, who said if you have -- if you like your policy, you can keep it. host: have we heard many candidates referencing fact checked by political -- by politicized? he mentioned a column in the washington post. it happens from time to time. i thought it was interesting you mentioned that. all kind of watch each other and we often fact checked the

same things. most often, we reach the same conclusions. we looked at the question of mitch mcconnell's wealth. it cametisement implied from fighting against coal, but that did not seem to be the case all. it did seem to be inherited money. we seek candidates referencing times,t checks at sometimes in the base. sometimes they say things we did not say and sometimes their correct. we often see our fact checks referenced in political advertising. most political advertisements, if you look, you can see fine print at the bottom and sometimes they will reference as evidence.cts host: have you ever had a fact check you have rated something it comes out completely opposite of what you found?

>> not completely opposite. i do not think that is ever happened here sometimes, we fact checked different aspects of the same topic. some political statements are complicated and have different parts of it. one of it -- sometimes one of us will focus on parts that are more accurate and some on parts that are less accurate. campaign's,y, the who do not like us fact checking them, they say, the fact checkers do not always agree. we usually agree, and we especially agree on the most important topics. we are all looking for evidence, we are all looking for logical arguments. we are following the same method of verification. go back to calls. walter on the independent line. question onve got a what governor scott is saying on the debate. he said governor chris, he lost

it hundred 7000 jobs. from what i understand, all of -- theseovernor bush president bush by his policies, and also, we blame the high insurance rates -- that governor cap -- governor scott peopleying, causing the in state of florida medical policies to go up higher, losing his notlicies, based on excepting the aca. am i correct? governor rick scott has said as many times, that there were 832,000 jobs lost under governor charlie crist.

crist was the governor before scott and he served one term. we believe this is half true. the rating means it is partially accurate. time, that many jobs were lost in florida because of the recession. the blame forerve that? it is a much more complicated question. we talked with economists for the fact check and financial advisors. hard to pin is those job losses on charlie aist because it is part of national banking crisis and a housing prices. the flipside is they also tell us it is hard to credit governors with job gains. if you are in a state where the jobs doing really well, a lot of times, that is because of the

national forces as well. for a governor to have done that, youto impact have to point to a specific policy. job losses under crist, it was jim and more by these national economic forces. host: referring to the fan incident in that early debate, a tweet -- richard nixon probably wishes he had a fan at that debate. judy is next on the republican line in florida. make sure you mute your television or radio and go ahead with your comment. republican, but i am an american. i wish america would stop arguing and fighting with each other and get back to loving each other instead of fighting and feuding. no month -- no wonder the people

do not want to vote anymore. they do not know who is telling a lie and who isn't. we need to get back to the bible. i get back to where we are supposed to be. that is why the country has fallen. do not do right, he ain't going to help us. i do not know what number this is -- seven or nine. 3000 murderers have not resulted from lacks border security. one of the candidates for governor said this. when you pull it apart, they were looking at not murders but homicide charges against people who are being detained for immigration. evidence for those

who came across the mexico border. there could have been legal noncitizens or they could have come in on airlines. a number of fact checks where we look at how many will come into tourist visa and overstay their visa. that is not a border issue. was one of the biggest whoppers of 2014. host: next up in south carolina, walter. caller: how are you doing? are you there? go ahead. of the biggest whoppers i've heard since the republicans come out, they're all about the trickle-down effect. they want to send everything to the top 2%. out, there wasme 317 amendments added to it by the republicans. only one republican voted for it. when this republican asked why -- was asked why he voted for

it, he said it felt like a great deal for the american people. you didn't dowhy this and he said, we were stupid. people have to understand that having insurance is a great thing. it is not something democrats should run from. those that are in there are just pushing it to the point where, you know, people think is a bad thing and it is not. host: you must have done a lot obamacare.cking on do you continue to do so? guest: we have been fact checking health care since basically the campaign proposal in 2008. it is our most fact checked topic, health care. one thing we have been fact checking lately is that fromcare cut $700 billion medicare to pay for obamacare. we usually rate that a half

truth here at some people and up the rhetoric and it gets a lower rating. that is a case where complicated public policy is not so easy to explain. what the federal law was trying to do was make medicare more efficient. they were trying to make hospitals reduce readmissions and trying to do cost controls on medicare advantage. medicare budget was still increasing every year into the future, but they were using some of the cost savings to count against spending they were doing in the health-care law. i also want to go back, because this caller and the earlier caller talking about it is an extremely partisan time. we mentioned at the top of the hour fact checks about the democrats who vote so often with the president's position. our reporters have been showing that that has increased. democrats and republicans are really going to separate corners often fun votes come on policy

see a lot you do not of crossing party lines the way you did in earlier decades. for the viewers who feel like the partisanship is on increase, i think they're absolutely right. many of our fact checks show that on the numbers. letters to the editor or comments on article you may post. guest: we have a mailbag feature. we run it when we get enough feedback. it is not scheduled. but we certainly run reader e-mails. the e-mails we get. we cannot respond to all of them but we read them all. host: we have been focusing some on florida. ofk to the biggest whoppers 2014. no, governor rick scott did not close 30 women's health centers in florida. i do not know if you addressed that earlier or not. guest: no, that was a

guest: this was a fact check on a democratic congressman who signed off on a fundraising e-mail. that was something that i got in my e-mail box. i just thought, "i hadn't heard of him closing 30 women's health centers. that doesn't sound right. i think that would have been in the news." we looked into it. we contacted the congresswoman's office and the crist campaign, and it was totally wrong, so we rated that "pants on fire," and it made our top whoppers list. next call, dave, hello. let me kick off a few facts to you -- ronald reagan was the one who gave amnesty. wass a republican, and it

10 million. ronald reagan tripled the deficit. these are facts. ronald reagan sold missiles to iran. why is ronald reagan considered such a great president? and that's not only -- let me tell you the reason why. it's because so many white people voted for him back during the day. president obama won the election with twice the votes that ronald reagan -- he got over 51%. two times. no president since eisenhower has done this. did me about the facts -- ronald reagan grant amnesty, a republican? dave has put out some historical issues. do you ever do that, look at historical statements made? guest: we have fact checked several statements about ronald reagan. he is kind of invoked from time

to time for people to make their political point. on the question of amnesty, there was the landmark immigration legislation that did gived sign that legal status to a lot of people who had been in the united .tates illegally at that time today, a lot of people, you know, look act at that time, you know, it has become a point of contention among republicans. they point to that as something that failed, failed legislation. piece published over the weekend in "the washington post," then bradley, the late -- theye editor republished a post he had written in his own words, and he writes about telling the truth or getting the story right. he says that newspapers do not tell the truth under many different and occasionally innocent scenarios, mostly when they do not know the truth or when they quote someone who does

not know the true. more and more, when they quote someone who is spinning the truth, shaping it to a preconceived version of the story that is supposed to be somehow better than the truth, omitting details that could be embarrassing. finally, when they quote someone who is flat out lying. there is a lot of spinning and lying in our times and politics, government, sports, and everywhere. it has gotten to the point where if you are like me, you no longer believe the first version of anything. it was not always that way," writes then bradley -- ben bradley. in some ways, you're getting a chance to get the facts right, i guess. >> at that that was really interesting, too. there is a lot of speed -- spin. one of the things i like about our ratings as there is a spectrum because not everything is completely accurate or completely false because there's a lot of gray area, especially in politics and the most important issues of the day. i think that fact check in journalism as a movement has

come out in recent years to really address what he is talking about, that there has not been enough journalism that really looks at what we know and what we do not know, and i think that is the role of politifact and other fact-checking organizations, to try to highlight more. up, madeline from california. welcome. republican line. caller: good morning. i am an old l.a. newspaper reporter, so i am looking at things a little bit different way, and what i am seeing is basically the easter network side of things. i do not see california being looked at. i know we are a little different out here, a little more relaxed, and a little more independent, different,are quite and what was said in "the washington post" i think is very true, bradley's remark.

things are very different. so much went on that change people from being republicans and turned them into democrats, but what do you find as far as california is concerned? i'd like to think california brought up -- we have water needs. we have electrical needs. very important disaster needs. the east coast gets help. the west coast does not get help. what do you say on that? guest: we have more fact checking in the states where we have politifact partners. we do not have a partner right now for 2014 in california, but i am hopeful. we are not fact checking everything -- we cannot, but i do think there's a lot of interesting things in california politics that should be fact checked, certainly the issues the droughts, around

wildfires, the environmental regulations, and, plus, it is one of our largest states. host: thanks for your call. we do have a piece here about the alaska senate. candidate dannate sullivan did not approve a shorter sentence for a sex offender who was then charged with murder." guest: this was an ad that surprised me in that there was nothing to this. it was an attack on dan sullivan -- host: he is the republican in that race he acted guest: he is the republican. said that sullivan was involved when this lighter sentence for someone who went out and then was charged with murder. a very serious charge. there was a mistake that happened that let this person get a lighter sentence. sullivan was not even the attorney general when that decision was made, so it was

just -- to suggest he approved it was totally wrong. that got a "pants on fire." what we have been focusing on are these tossup senate races. our national staff have been fact checking, particularly in alaska, arkansas, iowa, these states where there is a tossup race. there is not a tossup race in california. if there were, we would be giving it more attention. a tweet fromt: bob, who asks why groups will not say who they are truthfully instead of trying to spin their true thoughts. andsume he means pac's other political groups. >> that's an interesting question. as we have gotten closer to election day, we see more ads from the official campaigns, but earlier in the year, we were fact checking a lot of ads that ran quite early -- january, february, march -- from these outside spending groups, and it

can be very difficult to track who is behind these ads, although having said that, i will say you can often get a general idea. some of the traditional doneical journalists have great work uncovering how some of this spending works and how these groups work together, but with the campaign finance laws, they do not always have to disclose who their donors are or who is really pulling the string. next call from boston. we say hello to maggie on our democrats line. hello. i'm calling because i would like angie to elaborate on why politicians are saying that democrat politicians are voting ,or president obama's agenda and they all have the same constituents, the democrats. why are they saying that? they should not follow the president's agenda? >> we had an interesting story where we looked at these ads and

why it is happening. we talked with some political scientists, and they say they are hoping to influence who are maybeters not really happy with the president right now, but maybe even more than that, they want to motivate their own base. some of these ads are aimed at trying to get their own republicans to the polls. watch politics just like anybody else. i am interested to see how these campaigns do with turnout on election day and with early voting. that is when we will see a lot of this political messaging and whether their core supporters turn out or not. host: you started the segment talking about one of the issues you have seen coming up on running with the president's record or voting with the president 99% of the time. this is a headline from "usa today" -- mcconnell relying on obama's unpopularity.

on the when a president's approval rating falls below 43%, it becomes difficult for the president's party to win in senate battleground states and hold the majority, and he looks at a number of the states. you can find more to it at usatoday.com. tom, good morning, independent line. caller: yes, i've got a couple of comments and a question. first of all, george h.w. bush in 1991 overturned [inaudible] kidnap, i suppose, is the best word, and then well noriega -- menu well noriega -- manuel noriega. noriega has set imprisoned for 23 years now, and he cannot be .harged with anything the second comment i have is george w. bush blatantly lied to

the congress to get us to go in .nd destroy baghdad again, not the first time we have done that, but why has never been called up on charges when we bring professional athletes out there constantly who lied to congress? any thoughts? first, i would say we have not fact checked noriega, so i cannot say anything there. on george w. bush, we're often asked if we can go back and fact check the bush administration, and we generally say no, we will put our resources and what is happening today. i do think that those issues around what weapons iraq had would be very difficult to fact .heck

foreign policy is always , what foreign governments are doing is very difficult to independently verify. of your facte bulk checking happens domestically, looking at issues happening in the campaign. ofst: we fact check a lot domestic issues, but we do publish some foreign policy fact checks were people say things that are just demonstrably wrong. you do not have to figure out what a foreign government is behind the scenes. you can just look and know and say this is inaccurate. >> that caller mentioned george w. bush, front page of "the new york times" -- whether tosh decides run for president, there will be no family meeting, no gathering at kennebunkport to go over the pros and cons. "i do not think it will be a big internal straw poll," said his son, but if there were, the results of the polar pretty much in. as mr. bush -- talking about jeb

bush -- there's a decision to become the third member of his storied family to seek the presidency, the extended bush clan and its attendant network, albeit with one prominent exception, are largely rallying behind the prospect and pulling the old machine out of the closet. you can find more at nytimes.com . morning.ont page this let's get one more call from brett in arkansas. go ahead. >> i want to talk about jobs, but before i get there, i think it's pretty pathetic we live in a country where so many people make a good living off of telling us who lies and who does not. that ought to tell you a lot about the character of american people these days. we have a new ceo in charge of general motors, and she has been grilled in front of congress over and over and over about the problems they have had. if you notice, we have never heard the words uttered out of her mouth, "i inherited a mess." she has taken responsibility, never blamed anyone else, and she is a true leader.

can we say that about our president? presidents do not create a lot of jobs. they can create conditions, but they do not create jobs. i just started my own business, and i'm new to arkansas. it is the individual american people that create the jobs, you know? on the health care situation, i was told my health insurance would go down $2500 a month. it has not. my brother owns a business in louisiana. he lost his coverage and had to get on the obamacare exchange because of this. itsident obama said if were not for obamacare, our insurance would be $1800 a year higher than now. we looked at that campaign promise and rated that promise broken. we had a whole other part of our website we did not get to talk about where we rate campaign promises. er, and it the obamet

do remember that when getting a "promise broken." host: angie drobnic holan is an editor at politifact. you can go to politifact other >> here are a few of the e-mails

we've recently received from our viewers --

>> continue to let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. call us, e-mail us or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. > be part of c-span's 2014 coverage. follow us on twitter and like us on facebook to get schedules, debate pree views 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. . ay in touch and engageed

the illinois seat is listed as safe for democrats. abc seves presents vote 2014 -- debate in the race for u.s. senate. >> good evening. welcome to the race for u.s. senator of illinois. the debate is presented by univison chicago. our candidates are dick durbin and mr. jim oberweis.

asking questions of our candidates tonight is charles thomas. odriguez,r enrique r and lauarra washington. your responses will be limited to 60 seconds for each question and 30 seconds for each follow-up. you 11 opportunity to ask a question of each other. we will have one minute opening statements and by random draw, we begin with senator gurdon. durbin. >> thanks. it is great to be with you again. i want to say first a good political campaign focuses on the future. that is what we need to discuss. primarily come of the future of working families across the state of illinois. we need to strengthen the families and give them hope for the future which means writing a tax code that will keep companies here in america. also, provide incentives for good companies in america to

grow good paying jobs for families across illinois. secondly, we need to get every family the peace of mind of affordable quality health care coverage. we know now that some 7.2 million people across america benefit from obamacare as some call it. we want to make sure those in illinois have the opportunity for the peace of mind. we have to make sure that future generations have their chance to succeed. that is why i favor renegotiating college student loans so the students have lower interest rates, able to pay off their loan sooner and get on with a good productive life. together, we can make this a stronger working-class. >> thank you. >> good evening. the senator will be talking about an array of issues like minimum wage, reducing interest rates on student loans and equal pay for equal work. you will be avoiding talking about his failed economic record. i want to keep calling attention to that because i think that is one of the most important

things. he is a 32 year career politician. he spent 32 years in washington. he is a very smooth talker. it theto ask why is average illinois family today earns $5,000 less than the earned just six years ago? are we experiencing the worst economic recovery in the history of this nation? why are so many poor kids trapped in failing schools? will offer a different way forward. a way to create more jobs and better paying jobs. a way to help get the kids a better education through better schools. and, an opportunity to discuss these issues -- i'm looking forward to that very soon. >> thank you. over like to start with a question about washington gridlock. bipartisanship has become a dirty word in washington. dysfunction has become the norm. polls show that less than 30% of americans think this country is

headed in the right direction. it is never measured a lower level of trust towards the federal government. if you go to washington, how can you change that? >> i have spent two years serving the illinois senate. if you ask my colleagues, you will find i have tried very hard to work with the other side. i have not deviated for my principles. received a 100% rating for my voting record and from the small business group. but, i have been able to work with the other side. we were able to pass legislation to increase the speed limit on illinois highways. i was told it had no chance of passing. by sitting down with my colleagues, talking logically about the bill and getting them to work with us on a bipartisan basis, we were able to get that passed. will tell you while i won't compromise my principles, i certainly will make every effort to work with the other side to

stall things in advance. ronald reagan ansett o'neill had different issues but they were able to work together. that is my role model and that is what i will try to do. , what wouldnm you say to voters that say you are part of the problem? >> what it comes down to is this -- my spirits in the senate has helped illinois bring good pairing jobs -- paying jobs. it is no accident we are receiving a larger share of federal funds for highway expenditures and then we have in the last 15 years. i use my position in the senate to bring federal dollars home and it is no accident. illinois won the national competition for the digital manufacturing effort in this state. we believe it will create 75,000 good paying manufacturing jobs in the near term. we are engaging the whole state in this effort. experience, that simon washington has resulted in

better results for families across the state. thisn't achieve any of without bipartisan cooperation. senator john mccain was my partner in reform. senator l'amour understand alexander bringing business all across the state. i work with republicans and we get results. the senate could change hands in this midterm election meeting the gop would control the house and senate. how will that change the landscape in washington? >> that is a great opportunity for our legislature to work, the congress to work. if that happens, we will have a real opportunity to pass the 380 bills that have been blocked by senator durbin and senator reid. congress can then pass those bills, go to the president so he can approve them if he likes them or veto them. be forcedhat we will to work with the president going forward to get the best legislation. i believe a bipartisan legislation is the very best legislation we can pass.

worked together on bipartisan basis to create a comprehensive immigration reform bill and passed by 68 votes in the united states senate. the house of representatives refused to call the bill. it took them three years to pass a bipartisan farmville which every farm group in illinois supported and i voted for. we signed legislation that will help businesses across that were bottled up by the tea party and the house of representatives. >> we will go for a question and follow-up. >> welcome. theill talk a lot about possibility of a republican-controlled house because i think -- senate, i am sorry -- that would affect how each of you might legislate if you should be elected. particularly, to use senator, as the republican-controlled house repeatedly votes to repeal the affordable care act, what would

be your strategy as a leader in the senate to defend obamacare, particularly if your party should lose the majority? >> let me say i voted for the affordable care act. almost 700,000 people in illinois now have health insurance in the first year and is bringing down the rate of growth in health care costs. the house of representatives has voted 54 times to repeal obama care. it is not going to work. if they want to sit down and work to make it a better bill, i am ready to do that and we should do that on a bipartisan basis. that is the way to move forward on that issue and many other issues. for the record, any repeal of obama care is never going to get through the white house with this president and it takes 67 votes to override the veto. is an opportunity and challenge should the senate change hands for us to work on a bipartisan make it to make it an even stronger bill. i do not favor repealing obama

care. i wouldn't want to impose additional costs on senior citizens and exclude 125,000 young people in illinois from health-care coverage. how would you vote on repealing obama care should a bill such as that makes it to the senate floor? >> i think there are some good things about obamacare. i think keeping young adults on their parents policies until 26 makes a lot of sense. think finding a way to to get past pre-existing conditions makes a lot of sense. it is important for us to buy insurance across state lines. i believe this was something that was rammed through by democrats. i believe very strongly in bipartisan legislation and working with the other side. i would like to see a combination repeal and replace at the same time the obamacare plan with a plan that would cover more people and provide

better coverage but with more choice. floor ofor said on the the u.s. senate that if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. i guarantee it. those were his words. that didn't turn out to be a very good guarantee. then ofme a thumbnail how you would replace obamacare. what would you suggest would be the way to do that? >> we should allow the free market to offer plans across state lines. i think we do bring down the cost of health care by avoiding frivolous lawsuits, allowing the reapplication of american-made drugs from other countries. bringing down all those total costs and make a plan that would be available through the free market without the government telling us this is a plan you must buy. the should be a greater choice and people should have an opportunity to choose their doctor and health care plan rather than the government tell us what health-care plan we can buy. >> sender, i know you've spoken about how the republicans have used the filibuster.

can you envision the democrats using the filibuster as frequently as republicans? should the democrats and up in the minority? >> i sincerely hope and never comes to that. we have seen gross abuse of the filibuster under the current situation. over 130 times in the past year. we need to work constructively. when you ask him for a replacement, he calls the free market. you know what he said in the previous campaign? he wants to eliminate employer-provided health insurance. half the people in illinois get their health insurance through their employers. he believes let's make it a free market. let's turn the workers in illinois to the loving arms of the health insurance companies. that is no guarantee they will get any coverage. >> the next question and follow-up comes from laura washington. >> during the campaign, there has been a controversy about your wife who lives full-time in

florida and allegations you have used that status as an effort to dodge taxes. are you dodging taxes? >> absolutely not. i am one of the top illinois taxpayers. i support women. i thought democrats did, too. have choices to have live lives on their own -- it works for us. to does not live there the whole year in florida. do some things in florida and has a life down there. i don't think we need to tell her that she is not allowed to do that. my tax bill went up when she made that decision. in the few seconds i have left, i want to go back to what my opponent raised when he said it wanted to eliminate health care for the workplace. all i said is i want to equalize it. individuals should have a deduction for it. if they don't, company should not.

if we have a plan that is covering all people which would be our goal to make sure everybody is covered and has axes to good health care, does not have to be solely through the workplace. >> are you satisfied with his answer? >> i still don't understand it. 010, my opponent decided to give up his permanent residency in the state of illinois for tax purposes. he claimed illinois as his permanent residency until that point and until then, he has no permanent home for tax purposes in illinois. when he was asked by the times, he said he did it for tax advantages. i don't know what that means. you may be the first illinois senator on record who claims a residency in illinois but claims residency in florida for tax purposes. i think you may have set a new standard. live in therd, i same home in springfield, illinois with my wife that i've lived in since the first day i announce my candidacy for public office.

getting a tax advantage by having the situation with your residency and your wife's residency so you may be supporting your wife but you are getting a break on taxes, aren't you? >> no. he apparel he doesn't understand the laws of the state. if my wife has a home in another state or anywhere and claims that for a homestead exemption, i am no longer allowed to have that. i have lived in the same home for 37 years. three of my five children live within a few miles of my home. i don't intend to ever leave that home. for him to say i am not a resident is absolutely ludicrous. >> laura. >> i still don't hear you clearly in terms -- do we know -- you said your taxes have gone down. the you know what your taxes are? can you give us figures? >> i have released my state of illinois taxes.

>> including the schedules? >> i paid approximately $50,000 in illinois taxes. lost my illinois exam's and, my illinois tax bill actually went up, not down. >> i just don't get it. if i am wrong and anything i said, it is because i quoted him. that hethe sun-times did this because the tax advantages of florida. maybe he can explain that. to pay more ing taxes, why did you give up your residency in illinois? he used to claim a home in buckingham and he gave it up in 2010. the only permanent residency is in florida. a penthouse condo. i still don't understand why anyone who aspires to be the united states senator from illinois has to declare a residency in florida for tax purposes. that does not make any sense to me or most of the people that are proud to live in the state. >> question number four comes from enrique.

>> good evening. let's talk about immigration. the immigration policy center says that recent studies demonstrate that the higher earnings of legalized workers has more consumer buying power and more jobs. government hasl failed to have a comprehensive immigration reform. there are over 2 million undocumented immigrants. many of them with us-born children and with technical immigration violations have been deported. senator durbin, if you are elected again, out of we know that you will be successful? there is a very good probability the republicans might take control of the senate. >> it is true the house republicans have stopped comprehensive immigration reform for more than a year and a half. there are estimates that passing that bill will reduce our national debt by $1 trillion over 10 years.

if 11 million people become registered in the united states, become part of america, work in america, pay taxes, learn english, buy homes, start businesses, we are going to see a lot more economic activity and people will be treated more fairly. i don't know why the republican party has opposed comprehensive immigration reform. refuses to even call it. it was supported not only by the u.s. chamber of commerce, but by the business and labor. they both knew this was good for creating jobs and wealth in america. my opponent comes up with the word amnesty on this. whenever you hear a politician use the word amnesty when it comes to immigration, it is clear they are never going to vote for copy hands of immigration reform. this is not a amnesty bill. >> many latinos have in the back of the mind the commercial you aired 10 years ago. in a helicopter, talking about how legal immigration takes

everybody's jobs. why should latinos vote for you when you don't support immigration reform? >> i believe very strongly and support immigrants and legal immigration. fair tobelieve it is give advantages or move people to the head of the line ahead of those who have applied properly for immigration. i understand that people are looking for the american dream. our country is formed by immigrants. immigrants generally are risk takers. i certainly identify with those type of people. it is important that we do it in a way that follows our law. who refute what the senator said -- he is very smooth. very smoothsound but democrats have total control of congress for two years but did not past immigration reform.

i believe the voters of illinois send me to washington, i have a better chance to actually pass a real immigration reform because i can bring the two sets extreme instead of an position like senator durban. >> you were critical in passing the dream act. however, does not grant legalization of citizenship. what would you do differently this time around? comprehensive immigration reform and a path for citizenship. i want to congratulate my opponent. he changed his position and says he now supports the act which i introduced 13 years ago. i hope more republicans will come forward and do that. when he says that this comprehensive immigration reform people in new the front of the line, he has not read the bill. they have to wait 10 years and then go to the back of the line for citizenship. it is 13 years before citizenship.

>> mini may be wondering now that you support the act, does it support the parents but not the students? >> in this country, we generally do not believe in penalizing kids for mistakes the parents made. that is why i support a path to citizenship for kids that grew up and became part of our culture. when it comes to parents, we don't want to break up families. i believe we can provide them with a nonimmigrant these at which will allow them to stay here legally to work in this country, pay taxes, to return home and come back legally. i think that is a reasonable middle ground position that i can bring people together on. >> the next question comes from charles. third run forr the u.s. senate. the previous campaigns failed. you have run for governor, congress unsuccessfully.

you want a seat in the state senate two years ago but already you are running again for the u.s. senate not having served a full state senate term. statewide, illinois voters have rejected you repeatedly. what is new or different about jim oberweis now that makes you think you can win and serve now? me pointof all, let out that in all the races i have run -- i have one half of the races if you count primaries and general. i never come in below second and that is in races where we have five candidates, nine candidates and so on. the voters have continued to support those campaigns at different levels. i believe as and onto for newer, i make mistakes and i admit that. entrepreneurs learn from those mistakes and they do better. >> what have you learned? >> i learned it is very important to carefully communicate your positions because people like senator durbin are much smoother

talkers than i'll ever be and he will distort those issues like he tries to do with my home where i have lived for 37 years. i never said that was not my permanent address. under the law, i had to allow only one home exemption. it is not a homestead exemption, it is still my permanent address. regardless of what the senator said, he can smooth talk things but he will never change the facts. do you thinkhat about some comments you have drawn him and this may be an easy campaign? >> at think every camp -- i take every campaign seriously. i've lost a few campaigns on my way to the senate. i will just say this -- it is the tea party that is wrecking capitol hill and my opponent has embraced it. at a of this year, he was tea party rally says you want

the tea party to take over the illinois republican party. the only republican party has a proud history. this chapter of the tea party is one the need to put behind them. they need to be constructive and conservative. the tea party is ni ether. my opponent has embraced those positions. he changes his spots by each political campaign. i don't think that makes a more appealing to the voters. we are looking for someone who is dedicated to helping working families and the state move forward. my opponents position will not do that. >> have you embraced the tea party? >> i am absolutely disgusted the senator would use that type of language. here is a situation where we had the senator involved in the middle of an irs scandal. >> what about the tea party? >> i am coming to that. he uses the irs scandal to attack political opponents such

as tea party groups. at think it is totally disgusting and to use his own words six years ago to talk about people who use complaints against their opponents. as far as the tea party goes, yes, this is a group that addressed his comment about -- >> time. your response. >> april 16, daily herald. they reported this crystal lake rally where he stood up after the crowd had booed one of the statewide republican candidates and boot of the incumbent republican senator from the state. he said it is time for the tea party to take over the illinois republican party. does that sound like he is an outsider? perhaps when he was giving away ice cream cones at the tea party golf tournament in 2013. he seems to be very comfortable until he has to answer for these positions. >> senator, did you say the illinois tea party should take over the republican party?

-- people what i said were complaining they did not have a voice in the illinois republican party. they were disgusted with the party. i suggested to them to become a party. your views are more widespread than those of other organized republicans. over thetake republican party and become the republican party. i stand by that 100%. get involved. do not sit and complain and talk about other things, get involved. work and if you are good enough, so be it. >> i think the record is pretty clear and i will stick with the democratic party. what is happened with the tea party in washington should be an indicator that people across the state of illinois, the tea party faction is taking extreme positions on issue after issue. they want to eliminate the mass transit subsidy in the federal law. what that would mean to us in chicago where we depend on mass transit so much to make sure we

don't have more highway congestion, it is one illustration of the extreme positions they take. my opponent seems to embrace them when the cameras are not in the room but now says he has second thoughts. talk a little to bit about the veterans the administration. the v.a. has been plagued by mismanagement and problems across hospitals across the nation. what reforms would you recommend that would work to adequately serve veterans? >> we have a new leader from arlington heights. he is excess has full -- he is a successful businessman. 45% of veterans who served in iraq and afghan dan and afghanistan -- and afghanistan. you add to that those who were exposed to agent orange, gulf war syndrome and bringing those folks that have ptsd in previous conflicts in for help.

we have to do better. far away from the v.a. facility, you can go to a hospital near you and bill them. that is a temporary approach. the v.a. has a new challenge. we have the keep our promise to veterans. we said to them if you risk your life for america, we will stand by you when you come home. i believe our veterans have risked their lives, we owed them a great debt of gratitude. he said the hand, v.a. hospitals were an example of how our health care system should be operated. that was before the scandal came out and we found out people were falsifying records. now, he takes a different position. he likes to talk about the veterans but this is the same senator who talked about a comparison of our military with the noazis. this shows a total disregard for

people who really care about serving our country. who risk their lives for our country. i believe that a v.a. hospitals are doing a good job for veterans, that is great. if they are not, the veterans ought to have access to good health care on a convenient basis. >> we would like to hear more from both the you. more than a quarter of veterans in the country are homeless and they are homeless because many of them have not been able to get adequate services. going for it, you say you were looking at the future -- what reforms -- what new programs, new initiatives would you push for to address this? >> i joined the mayor in the south side of chicago. 100 residencies for veterans and their families were opened. these were for formerly i was veterans to stay safely and get counseling. we know why many veterans are homeless.

need to give them that counseling to get to the under issues that they face and give them a safe place to live. i think we need to continue to move on these homeless veterans and i will do everything i can. >> you will push for -- we are talking about big money, additional funds to create more like this. >> i would. president obama over the last five years has reduced the homeless veteran population by a third. we will not be satisfied until it is reduced to zero. the mayor said in two years we want the city of chicago to not have a single homeless veteran on the street. him completely. >> all of us want to make sure the veterans are taking care of and not homeless. yet, he has been a washington for 32 years and has not fixed the problem yet. what makes us think he will in the future? the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

if we send the same senator, we would expect the same results. >> what would you propose specifically? >> the senator is very free to throw around taxpayers money and will. i have actually use my own dollars and i have gone to help build homes for the homeless. we can do that in the united states for approximately $10,000 a home. i have a friend who started a business not-for-profit that does that. wife andne it, my daughters have done it. if we get private citizens involved, we can do much more. >> you wouldn't recommend additional federal funding to address it? >> i didn't say that. we would like to fix the problem. i would like to see what we can do privately first but i would deftly support the government stepping in when necessary. >> milley 60% of all americans in the state were two women and

two men can legally marry. the u.s. supreme court just rejected appeals from five states trying to uphold gay marriage bans. would you support a federal law that permits same-sex marriage? >> i think that is well-established. i think the court has said that is approved. there is no argument. at this point, i would say yes. >> you would support a federal law that makes equal marriage? >> i would prefer to see a determined by the states but again, we are past that stage. >> marriage equality is something i support. announced his candidacy for the united states senate at a rally against marriage equality in springfield, illinois. why he chose that venue? he can explain. we believe loving couples should be able to marry in every state. you see historically, has been a matter of state.

what we are finding in the federal level, the courts have said there are certain constitutional principles that rule against the states that don't allow it. we now have 30 states with marriage equality, including illinois. a want us to see all states reach that same conclusion. i think a federal standard is not unreasonable. >> president obama believes the eagle protection clause of the constitution does in fact aaron t same-sex marriage -- guarantee same-sex marriage without a federal mandate. what is your view on that? >> we didn't get a chance for a rebuttal. want again, the senator was very loose with facts when he said i announced my candidacy at some rally. he is obviously not knowledgeable about that and continues to throw those facts out there. >> you did vote against the illinois marriage equality act. >> i did. i thought it was a state issue. i was raised as a catholic and i believe in traditional marriage, but i think we are past that. i support the law and

constitution. >> you believe at a state level, you look at it differently than the federal level? >> time has passed. that is the law and i will uphold the law of the land. >> i president obama standard is the right standard. they're using that to knock down laws that prohibit marriage equality. when it comes to this issue, we need to do more as elected officials to ask for acceptance and tolerance in this country. group, whether it is hispanics or african-americans or those of different orientation. that is not what america is about. this is a land of opportunity. we still have the rights for established religions to have their own standards for marriage. >> we have not reached the point of this program where you each have the opportunity to question the other.

>> thank you. the senator says that he supports women, but he pays women 11% less in his office. return $38,000to of campaign country visions linked to the worst case of sexual harassment and u.s. history. he has released an internal investigation into the abuse alleged against women in his office. by his own chief of staff. i would like to ask you tonight if you will release of that report that was generated so we know it is not a whitewash? >> there is no allegation of sexual harassment by the employee involved during the time she worked for us. to left and came back. we took a close look at it and take it very seriously. when i heard about some of the things that were alleged, we set new standards in the office and every employee knows what those standards will be.

my chief of staff and chicago is a latina woman. i am very proud of her. we have the top 10 paid positions -- six of them are filled by women. on average, women make $4000 more a year than men on my staff. i've asked you repeatedly -- tell me about the women working for you and what you are paying them. tell me about security. how many women are working there and what are you paying them? he refuses to do it. he just throws his charges at me and refuses to face the music. he tells the women of the state the reality and the record of his own office. take a look at his record on women issues -- he voted against equal rights amendment. in the 21st century, you oppose the people writes amendment? what are you thinking. >> once again, he is very smooth as i said and he will try to divert from the issues.

i asked the question. i am looking for a yes or no, will you release the report? we would like to see it so you are not whitewashing this particular issue. i've mentioned to you and you disregard the facts. i told you the highest paid individual is not a family member. it was a woman. four out of the five top managers were women at one point while i was involved in the company. i'm no longer involved in either of the companies. we support women within the businesses. >> it is your opportunity to ask a question. >> we will have a chance in a few days to work on some important issues on the ballot in illinois. let me bring three or four them to your attention. first, a chance to increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour -- i am voting yes. we are going to have a proposition on the ballot to raise income taxes on

individuals like yourself to provide more money for our schools. i am voting yes. we are going to have a provision that says no employer can dictate to a woman whether her health insurance includes birth control. i support that. im voting yes to make sure that does not happen. on voting yes on all three. how are you voting? >> once again, the senator does it one more time. at very smooth and tries to divert the issues. --se issues are traveli totally irrelevant. the issue that would've carried the weight of law would've provided term limits that would allow voters of illinois to make a constitutional amendment that would of limited servants in springfield for state legislators for a time of eight years. that is something the majority of illinois wants. they don't allow us to vote on that. a politicalis is process trying to energize the

democrats. that would like to vote on issues that really make a difference. i am sure we will have a chance to talk more about minimum wage. i've proposed a bill that makes all kinds of sense. that is a copper mise bill that would provide a hider minimum wage of $10 an hour in illinois for those aged 26 and older. like to talkt about the rights of women. he not only voted against putting the advisory referendum on the ballot. were we can speak as estate whether women should have the last word when it comes to birth control and their health insurance policy when the hobby lobby's decision came out -- you cannot wait to tweet to the world how happy you work it to go away the rights of women and their families to have access to birth control. i think that is wrong. we have to respect the rights of women. you have not done that when it comes to this referendum. you are telling me now you are not going to vote for it. >> the next question comes from mr. rodriguez.

>> thank you. i am assuming education is important to you, right? hopefully, you can give me a specific account for the bowling question. they are offering a fellowship to eight latino students who are here tonight watching the debate. as you can imagine, the extreme the concerned about the $1.2 trillion in student debt. they want to know what you would do in the future to pressure universities to make college more affordable? we know what you have done but what would you do differently this time around? >> i would support the suggestion that universities should not be receiving pell grant funds until the students have completed the course. that makes the university engaged in making certain that the student does not drop off before receiving the money. i would go after the for-profit colleges in our state and nation.

they taken 10% of the students out of high school and account for 46% of student loan defaults. nd.t has to ebn i want the police that sector of higher dictation were closely. i support renegotiating student loans. up told save families $2000 per family. we now have a terrible situation. our students are too deeply in debt and their lives have changed because of it. >> you are a former teacher. what is your strategy for this? >> students are paying too high in interest on their loans. i support refinancing but let's face facts -- those high interest rates are set by senator durbin and is a administration. he has been there for 32 years. >> what would you do? >> we should lower the interest rates so they are competitive.