fine. they should just have higher standards. call them sunshine state standards. call them what you want. the fact is we have dumbed down everything over a long time. this is not a new thing. as we have dumbed it down and have the politically correct curriculum, we have 80% graduation rate in high school. that is pretty good. it has gotten better. a third of our kids are college or career ready. who is fooling whom? we are giving people a piece of paper that says you are a high school graduate. then they go to the community college and find out sorry, you have to retake high school reading and high school math. who is fooling whom? are we going to be a great nation that has higher aspirations for people, or are we going to say it is someone else's fault, kids in poverty can't learn. too much bureaucracy. we should put away the excuses and recognize kids have the

talent to do this. they have the talent. we have the teachers to do this. an element that is important as high standards. high standards matters a lot. i hate the poisonous environment that common core has brought because the we ought to be focusing on is higher standards, accurate assessments, robust accountability, school choice, ending social promotion advancing the cause of rising student achievements, and that is my passion. i am all in on that. and i am not backing down because i have seen what happens when you do this, when you implement this. i have tire marks on my forehead doing this. [laughter] they can tell you the stories of what it was like. it wasn't easy. the unions, i tried to find common ground. we couldn't. i was their poster child in the reelection. the campaign was about these bigger ideas. i won reelection but it is hard to get through these things.

you have to stay the course and make it work. florida's gains are real. no one can deny them. we have these reforms that really work. thank you for asking that. >> you talk about iowa leading innovation and technology. which states are lacking? [inaudible] governor bush: i have been on a lot of business tours in my real life. agriculture in general doesn't yet -- get the recognition of how innovative and how technologically driven it is whether it is the biotechnology that allows for having crops grow in a drought resistant way, or the yield increase, farmers

have increased their productivity tenfold since the 1950's. it is an amazing story. technology normally means this area around here, so the new hampshire, massachusetts, all those places. technology is across the board in every sector of the economy. there are great companies in florida. i feel compelled as a former governor to toot my own horn. there is incredible stuff happening. i went to see the guys that run

uber. he pulled up his computer and showed me the uber cars running and it showed me the people violating law at miami international airport. we have a clause that prohibit s these type of activities. eventually those will go away. we are living in a world of opportunity and innovation. the question is -- are our children going to be overwhelmed by it? our system of government needs to be fixed so that we start building for what the future looks like so it is to our benefit, rather than our detriment. yes ma'am. are you a reporter? >> i am, sir. >> later. [laughter] >> citizen of new hampshire. >> we will speak with you guys later. >> as president, how would you

address ensuring our economic and climate security? governor bush: the question is how would you balance the answers to both? the role of the federal government needs to be narrowed to one specific field only the federal government can do, which is basic research. the federal government cannot -- should not have a venture-capital arm inside the energy arm, picking winners and losers. we saw how bad it was. two disrupts the advances of technology and energy in the long haul, beyond that, we need to encourage the marketplace.

it works far better. the best example is the obvious one. a decade ago, 12 years ago natural gas prices were double-digit. the end was near. we had less than 10 years of supply. you may remember there was an import facility being built for billions of dollars to bring expensive liquefied natural gas to supply our natural gas need in this country. those are abandoned. the three or four that were built our -- are gone. a guy name george mitchell and a private company, through trial and error, took two existing technologies -- hydraulic fracking and drilling, and created a revolution. we've gone from 10 years of supply to over 100 years of supply. the price has gone from double digits down to $2, $3. significantly lower than the price for oil.

that is america at its best, where people pursue their dreams, some of them succeed some of them don't, and it creates opportunities for all of us. the oil and gas sector has created enormous economic opportunity for this country. and it will continue to do so. it also has another benefit, which is not only has carbon reductions been reduced because of this, which it has -- many countries in europe are flat lining in terms of their production. we have seen a significant decrease because it has less c02 in missions. -- emissions. it has also created a n opportunity for us. we could be energy secure within

five years if we are serious about it. we would have the lowest cost of energy. the benefit of that is that we could really industrialize the country to create middle-class jobs. it would allow us to not have a heavy footprint around the world. then our foreign policy be based on our values and national security interests. it would also allow us to use natural gas and oil as a tool to deal with the instability in the world. i don't think we need industrial planners telling us what to do. i would rather have a thousand george mitchells creating the kind of innovation that allows us to continue forward. limit government's power, and to let the market place work is probably the best approach. yes ma'am?

>> we lost some to isis. to new hampshire it was terrible, to america, it was a wake-up call to the danger of islamic terrorism. my limited understanding is that right now, because of obama, our order is far more wide open -- border is far more wide open than it has ever been. my question is, what would you do if elected president, but beyond that, 2 years is a long time to have that order open. -- border open. what can we do? governor bush: congress needs to prioritize spending on the border. and prescribing through the budget a strategy to be effective on that. secondly, there needs to be more

money and a strategy on the part that should give you concern which is that 40% of illegal immigrants come with a visa and then don't leave. there needs to be a much better mechanism of when the visa expires to either have it be renewed, or for the person to leave. that needs to be the first priority. there is no trust, especially in the obama administration to do anything else until we are serious about that. whether it is public health threats, not as national -- as serious as the national security threats, and the basic concept of the rule of law, this has to be a high priority for sure. then you can get to the broken immigration system, which makes it more economically driven. we have a system today where 80% of all legal immigrants, through family petition. it is a noble thing, don't get me wrong. we have the broadest

definition of what family is. like every country, we have adult siblings and adult parents. we put quotas by country. that result is, we don't have an immigration system that is strategic as it relates to the possibilities of economic growth. we have a noble immigration system that is legal, that is fine. but i think we should narrow it down to what other countries have. we should create the first 500,000 first round draft picks, if you will. the people that will create economic activity for all of us. we will not get there until we but the rule of law is being -- until we are confident that the rule of law is being applied consistently and that the borders are enforced. >> governor, i am a veteran and work at the va in a venture. last year, we heard about veterans not getting proper care. what is your mission to ensure that veterans get better care? governor bush: do you have the

same issue like in manchester? >> we have never had a secret waitlist or anything. i'm not saying it is a perfect facility, but we get positive remarks. governor bush: it has been a serious problem. you know you have bipartisan support when you have john mccain and bernie sanders agreeing on a bill. [laughter] one of the few laws and bills that actually turned into a law in the last 4-5 years. it was an effort to begin the process of reforming, i don't think it is the full comprehensive reform that is necessary. one of the things that they did, and you may not agree with this since you are working at the va hospital, but i think it is essential given the uniqueness and need to customize the health care service for

veterans. you have health challenges long-term disability issues, you have issues of iraq and afghanistan where they are different from vietnam. all of that leads me to believe that we should empower veterans to make these decisions. where they have the chance to pick the place and the health care provider that they want. in this law that passed last year, it allows for -- i have to call it a voucher, i don't know what else to call it. i am all into the voucher thing. say that you don't want to go to manchester, but you believe your health care provider can provide what you need, why would you have to travel to manchester to get medical care?

you are giving someone at the choice to go themselves. they can go to the veterans hospital, no one is suggesting we shut down the va system. the number of people taking advantage of this is very low. i think there should be much more outreach to give people a chance to go to private hospitals if necessary if they what to see their own doctor. -- want to see their own doctor. this has to be a long-term commitment, for sure. there is no argument in terms of budget. there have been a dramatic increases in the budget. it has probably flatlined now given the sequester. but i totally agree that this needs to be a high priority. >> for the record, whoever can get the most efficient and timely treatment, regardless of where they can go. >> any ideas about how to reduce costs in obamacare?

governor bush: the obvious way to reduce utilization is to have people be healthy. the system we have pre-obamacare and in obamacare is not a health care system, it is a sick care system, in effect. ultimately, i think we need to move to a plan that has hhas high deductible premium coverage, where coverage is on catastrophic coverage. the rewards either way is about preventing illness. sometimes you have services that are preventative, and sometimes you don't. if you added the economic

incentive to this, which is keeping the money that rolls over tax-free, so that you are building up a nest egg to deal with harder, more costly health care needs, you are going to bend the cost curve of the system. i think we need to have tort reform. in florida, we fought hard for this. it was not easy. i don't know how it is here. it is obviously a driver, the uncertainty of lawsuits create a lot of defensive medicine that we don't need. there is a whole range of things. but the insurance part needs to be focused on moving back to a high deductible, lower premium hsa attached plan. the other thing is, i have this,

this is prehistoric -- this is a pebble. [laughter] i can do my strides, my pulls, i can know how long i am sleeping, i put it on after i wake up. but these devices -- apple just announced their device this week -- these devices and many others, much more sophisticated than this thing, will allow us to monitor our own health care. we will be able to wirelessly send messages to your health care provider because you didn't ingest a pill at the right time. 40% of all prescription drugs are taken in the wrong way. we need to recognize that the best system is where everyone is engaged in their own health care decisions. that is the american way. as we move away from that, our health care costs have gone up and health care outcomes have been worse.

technology gives us a chance to move back where we are engaged in all this. mayor? >> i am a small business owner with my two brothers. i pooled my employees to see what they wanted me to ask you. >> one question with two parts. >> the first one will be on the affordable care act. we want to know where you stand -- are you on a full repeal, or do you want to take it with -- and fix what's broken? the second question, where do you stand on minimum wage? governor bush: i don't think we need to raise the minimum wage at the federal level. as it relates to the affordable

care act, i would like to repeal and replace. it may end up in the same place where some of your employees would want, where you have the pre-existing conditions of any plan. what is popular, it is a small number, but for young people to stay on their parents plans until their 26, i don't have an argument against that. i am not passionate one way or the other. there are things you can have in a new plan. the idea that the federal government, through these massive subsidies, is going to be -- and exchanges where there are all sorts of employer mandated services that increase the cost of insurance, if it is going to work over the long haul, i find it flawed to the core. what i describe is a better plan is the replacement plan. >> thank you. >> governor, i find the most

chilling parts of the united states is our indebtedness. do you have a plan to control that indebtedness? governor bush: the debt is not a problem in the here and now of washington dc. don't take out of context. [laughter] that is a comma. because we have lowered interest rates to zero and we have we have shortened the maturity of the doubling of the debt in six years. under the president, we have doubled the debt and shrunk the maturity so that something like 60% of all that comes due in 3 years. as you shrink the maturities there is no interest. the debt service today is lower than it was 12 years ago. it is kind of like passing the

bottle of berman and giving -- bourbon and giving the keys to the maserati to a 14-year-old. [laughter] it is no real efforts to change this. what happens if interest rates go up after historic levels? you have to renew the debt if you can, interest rates will grow exponentially. it will crowd out all of the things -- national security, veterans affairs infrastructure. everything else will be squeezed out. first of all, we should restructure our debt to make it long-term rather than short-term. secondly, we ought to create a high-growth strategy above all else. the idea that we will grow at 2% per year over the next decade will make it harder and harder for us to truly service the debt. if we grew at 4%, which is historically where america has grown, and there are discrete, important things to make that work.

more importantly, our regulatory system needs to be brought into the 21st century. our tax code is creating incentive for investment overseas. embracing the energy revolution. all of those things will help us grow at 4%. if you compound out the 2% difference, i did this once when i was stuck on the tarmac, i wasn't a big math guy, but take 1.02 times 18, in the 10th year, we would create an additional germany of additional activity. and an additional germany creates $1 trillion of revenue at the state, local, and federal level based on the current level of taxation. that is a far better idea than any exotic form of taxation barack obama would like to impose on us. high growth is the first step to

dealing this fiscal, structural problem. and it is structural. secondly, we have to go to sound budgeting practices. the federal reserve, because of the legislative environment, it provides the treasury something like $70 billion of profits. that is not revenue that will stick around. because of the size of their portfolio, there will be losses, and when those losses take place, it becomes part of the deficit. whether it is freddie and fannie, the loan processes, all of these things related to the federal reserve and accounting problems we have, it all benefits the government. let us be real about it. you will begin to see pressure for people to spend less, which is ultimately what we need to do. spending less will be a huge

problem if we don't fix our entitlement problems. you can talk about how efficient government is -- it's not -- but the entitlement challenge will overwhelm everything else. the deficits we have today will hailed by comparison to when we get to the baby boomers all being retired receiving social security and receiving medicare. the expansion of our medicaid population is explosive for our debt. we have to deal with that issue while creating a high-growth strategy. thank you. >> governor, our foreign policy -- well, i don't think we have a foreign policy. governor bush: we do. >>our foreign policy is one of retrenchment, disengagement, one that thinks that america's

presence and powers in the world is not a force for good. i love reading books about history particularly. if you take a pause at our own history, we have been a force for good consistently. the idea that we are not is quite dangerous. as we pulled back, voids are filled. the two things that matter in foreign policy is that our friends know that we have their back. and that our enemies fear us a little bit -- not a lot, but just enough to know that the consequence, if they behave in a way that is dangerous for the region or the world, that will result in consequences. our consistent friends don't believe america is reliable.

this is a test i do all the time. you're going to go first. [laughter] name a country where the american relationship is better today than when barack obama came into office. >> hard to do. >> cuba. governor bush: congratulations. i don't know about north korea. miramar perhaps. but not canada, absolutely not. not latin america. not israel. not egypt. not jordan, not turkey, not saudi arabia, not the entire middle east, not the african countries either. the simple fact is that disengagement creates so much uncertainty and doubt that people do not know where we stand. restoring america's presence in the world would be a powerful first step

two creating a more secure world. we have to reengage in a way to deal with the threats that are amongst us, isis being one of those. russia now moving with great authority and aggressively into eastern europe and perhaps the baltics. challenging whether article five of nato is a viable treaty. people began to have doubts about that. the emergence of china aggressively pursuing their agenda in asia. all of these things are serious threats. then instead of negotiating with iran to legitimize the regime, we should have kept the sanctions on them. they would have come to the table. $45 a barrel for oil over a year in iran would have changed the dynamic. instead of negotiating downward to a deal that will create permanency for the regime, we could have created a policy that

would have weakened iran in their support of surrogates in the region and prohibited them from gaining power. yes sir? >> i would like your opinion on whether the house and senate should have fully funded homeland security without dealing with the president off, i believe illegal order dealing with immigration. governor bush: i think you are correct, the president did not have authority in either case. he used this concept of prosecutorial discretion. which i read in tradition, by and large as saying that you take these case-by-case. there are a lot of unique cases in immigration. he used it for 3 million people. i don't think he has the authority, nor does the federal judge. my guess is that this will ultimately be ruled

unconstitutional. my hope, to be honest and clear, i think congress needs to pass a budget. put the priorities, conservative priorities on the table. get consensus among republicans first, if you need to do that, get the 50 votes to pass the budget, use the power of the budget, which has more power and impacting policy than any other bill, pass a budget for crying aloud. this is the fifth year we haven't had one. there are a lot of things in language and things that shouldn't be done that continue because of the resolution approach. in that budget, there are ways you can show the opposition to the use of executive orders. i would fully fund the homeland security. to your points -- how

else are we going to secure the border? this is the only way we can do it. there is a time for making a principled opposition to the president. then there is a time to govern and lead. republicans need to start showing that we can govern and lead. i'm totally convinced that we can. democrats have control of the congress. and no budget passed, a stimulus passed, beyond that no budget. we reached a crisis, and the budget created through the sequester rather than a normal way of putting priorities on the table. we need to increase spending on defense and homeland security and reduce costs in other areas. other members have a different view. let the process work again, that is what is missing. every state government sometimes ugly, sometimes clean, has a balanced budget requirement.

every state government, at the end of the day as crazy as it is, at the end of the day, those states pass a balanced budget. washington needs to do the same thing. products i think you look plenty -- >> governor, i think you will have plenty more opportunities to take questions. i certainly hope that will be the case. thank you for being here tonight. you did a great job. [applause] [indiscernible] [chatter]

governor bush: for those who were concerned that if you kill obamacare and have no support for me to put those things in a new law. that is something that makes sense if you're trying to create a robust exchange, the

pre-existing condition needs to be looked at. >> do you know where you are in your decision-making process? governor bush: wandered around learning a lot. how it would be for the next two or three years. >> how are you going to separate yourself from your mother and her father? governor bush: going to events like this.

>> you said you do not support the minimum wage? governor bush: it makes it harder for businesses to automate and harder for people to find jobs. we want more social economic mobility, not less. >> something democrats are arguing that you decided -- governor bush: i didn't decide. the governor's office, the general counsel was part of that. this was based on the law itself. we complied with the law. all during this time, we have complied with the law, even in my post governorship. >> regarding no child left behind, do you think house republicans should push forward with the reauthorization? governor bush: i think so, yeah. any chance on a policy initiative where the house can pass their version and the senate can get 60 votes and go

to conference and present it to the president, as many items as possible to show that democracy works. let the president decide if he wants to participate or veto it. >> but this has been delayed partly because of conservative members of the house. governor bush: what i suggested is the proper thing to do. if you are concerned about the proverbial districts, then put in the long provisions -- in the law prohibitions on what the federal government can do. >> an interest group in washington this week says that this is not working for them. would that cause you to take a second look at the rff? they said this week they would like congress to take a look at it. governor bush: how would they

reform it? >> the president said that they would like a legislative thing. governor bush: if the epa doesn't do with the law requires them to do, then congress should change it? i have no clue. >> governor, on the affordable care -- >> how do we get things done? governor bush: leadership. we had a pretty good run here. we have had more difficult time s in our country's history than wars, the great depression. consensus seems to be forged during difficult times. we can do it again. it does not to be a perpetual food fight. if i'm going beyond the possibility of running, this is

a campaign issue to say that i understand why people are angry. i think going forward we have to understand why they're angry. we also have to begin to forge consensus to solve these problems so people aren't as angry. that has been missing in the political discourse. it may be beginning in a campaign. certainly this president doesn't consider it his priority. the next president, whoever he or she is, needs to make it that. >> who is your running mate? >> that's a wrap, we have to get out of here. >> coming up next, your calls

and comments, live on "washington journal." been a -- then a panel on real in transit funding. after the senator lindsey graham at a breakfast. >>? here are some of our featured programs on the c-span networks. live from arizona, featuring discussions on race, politics, with colin's from authors -- ca ll-ins from authors. we're also live from the

16th annual civil war si eminar. find our complete television schedule on c-span.org. let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call list, e-mail us, or send us a tweet.

host: historically black university to talk about criminal justice reform. this morning on the "washington journal," the