locking the correspondence out. there is the policy of attrition against to be correspondence in china. that is a problem. do you want me to go on? you go ahead. [laughter] marty: this was not part of it. the blocking of access to information -- the united states has generally level ofd the information will accrue to its benefit. he will see how people are living. they will see how society is functioning. accurate information will make its way into the information ecosystem. and to the extent countries can control their internets or block access, then that. begins to fall apart. and these countries have even greater control over what thatens see, and i think

should probably make it more difficult for the united states to exercise its will in the world. people think that is a good thing for us to do. -- i have tos imagine that would be the case. and for americans, it has become an extremely difficult to do their job in these countries. they can be arrested. they can be harassed. they can be prohibited, as the "new york times" has not been able to receive visas for its journalist to go into china. they have been denied visas because the chinese government is upset about very good reporting about corruption there. and that is true in other countries as well. thereof been several questions about the fine line between reporting the news --

there have been several questions about the fine line between reporting the news and shaping the news. when it comes to questions about american power abroad, fox news and msnbc tell different stories. they seem to be trying to shape people's perceptions. is this right? well, yeah. it's not whether it is right or wrong. it is what they see as their audience. msnbc on the left and fox on the right. you can just see it -- on msnbc you can see it with rachel maddow, especially in the evening, all of the host to have a very liberal bents. hosts who have a very liberal bents. msnbc has always felt that it works for them, especially during political campaigns. i can't speak for them. at it certainly works as you go into the political campaign, and again, to watch programs that

reinforce your beliefs, make you feel good. right in the middle and sometimes it struggles with an obvious, although it is doing much better now because it presents itself as straight on reporting. that is the calculation. the senior people at both of those -- that is the calculation the senior people of both of those networks have made about the segments of their audience. whether it is right or wrong, it works for them. tom: marty? have: i do not think they thought about whether it is right or wrong. i think they have thought about whether it is their business model. it is the case that many people, if not most people are drawn to news organizations that affirm their existing points of view. they feel comfortable with it. they feel their views are validated. and they believe that others are just wrong. it's not our business model, for the two of us appear or the

organizations we represent. that's not who we want to be, and we think people come to us for different reasons. tom: related to that is a question about journalists, prominent journalists invited to go on to talk shows. on one hand, that helps the brand of the "the washington and the "new york times," but on the other, you have opinions being formed. do you have around rules that you tell your -- do you have ground rules that you tell your reporters, going into the situations with george will and all of these opinions. how do you tread that line between reporting and opinion when your byline appears in these newspapers? elisabeth: i used to go on television a lot when i was covering the white house. now that in inside the office

all day, quite a bit less so. do notes are, you express opinions and you do not predict. you do not say so-and-so is going to win or whatever. we are also kind of boring. like today. -- i mean, marty and i have both said things that were taken out of -- you know, were just taken and people ran with them. so, you are very careful. it is an issue. you are on the shows because of your suppose it -- supposed expertise. i would say this is what my reporting has told me, and yes on the one hand, democrats say this, but of course, republicans say that. i try to be measured. it's an issue when you're on those shows and you have people like george well, opinion people, expressing strong views and you were sitting there in the middle of this fight and you do not want to take sides, but,

you know -- it is an issue. no, i'm not going to do that. it's too hard. i'm going to tell them no. we have a reporter go on "meet and isss" all the time very careful. you are never as fiery or provocative or interesting as the opinion people on the shows. tom: marty? marty: just to keep it brief, our approach is the same. basically do not say anything on the shows you would not say in the paper or on our website. those are the standards we use. of course it's a difficult environment in which to operate. it is like locker room conversation. so it gets tricky with the risk of getting carried away. bit --st to flip this a should the press be more biased by not giving people -- equal

time to climate change deniers, it anti-evolutionists, etc.? to answer thatnt question. one of the people i edit, davenport, the great environmental writer -- you , our and margaret sullivan public editor is big into this notion of fault equivalency. to be an unbiased reporter you have to say one hand, a vast majority of scientists think that there is clearly i'm a change caused by humans. on the other hand, these other people say, we do not know for sure. we don't do that anymore on climate change. it's 99% or whatever. we basically say because of the established science, humans caused climate change. we don't do that. other issues we do -- that is one where we have moved beyond what i would call the fault equivalency.

marty: we treat climate change as real and serious. that is where, as she said, where the vast majority of the scientists almost unanimously view the science rests. so, we treat science seriously and respectfully. and that is how we write about it. now recently we ran a piece from someone who had an alternative point of view, but that is their job. to be open to all points of view. should the u.n. be open to global agreements, and how can the united states inspire such a global agreement? elisabeth: you are going to answer that one. marty: what was that? internet bethe governed by global agreements? marty: there is a lot of

discussion, i gather, about therer -- as i said -- should be standard rules of behavior for the internet, the way that we deal with space, international laws, the high seas, things like that. be --ould probably certainly a better system than regimesuthoritarian close off the internet, have their own rules for each of these individual states. and we see what the consequences of that are. that is a brutal repression of free speech in those countries. it denies citizens of those countries access to information that is available to millions and billions of people around the world. it is certainly better than a country by country internet. 24 hour news channels.

do they do more harm than good? too polarizing? you talkedwell, about msnbc and fox. i think they are repetitive. you can't watch for more than -- i mean, they chew over the same developments over day -- every day over and over again. marty: brain damage. right.th: yeah. you could go berserk watching them for that long. i don't think they are harmful. they're just really hard to watch. especially sometimes cnn in the middle of the day -- breaking news. they are really shifting the standards for breaking news. developing now is really not. we keep it on in the washington bureau and the newsroom in new york and we keep an eye on it.

you can see the absinthe flows. if -- you can see the ebbs and flows. if they find a plain part, it's a very big deal. [laughter] oh, they found a plane part. you have to watch for a while. ok, marty, this is for you. as expressed by the budget, please compare what was spent by the post in 2015 by decade earlier. come on, mcnamara. marty: i have no idea. i'm sure it is less. about 30 people overseas and 15 euros. not as much as the "new york times," but substantial. a decade ago, we were covering some wars, so it was probably substantially more expensive to cover the wars in afghanistan

, and it was a huge investment of resources of every type. so, you know, it's less, but still substantial. tom: ok, this question is for both of you. and that relates to the coverage of the presidential election for 2016. kennedyrage of the election in 1960 was revealed through teddy white's book "the making of a president," a classic, and another, "the boys about how the press handled that. i wonder how you view the coverage of this current cycle from your two perspectives, and what are the challenges the newspapers face when dealing with this? elisabeth: i am not responsible

for the presidential campaign coverage, but i will talk about the question. you look at teddy white's book -- "the boys in the bus" first of all "the boys in the bus," that changed. inas on the mccain campaign 2008, and things have changed drastically even since '08. first of all, there are girls on the bus. a thousand things that are different. back in those days, yeah, there middle-aged guys covering these campaigns, and they would file one story a day at 5:00 or 6:00 at night. i think they were filing on typewriters -- i guess they must have dictated by phone? they dictated. there was a dictation room at the "new york times" and "the

washington post." copy -- iread your actually did that -- that was how you got your stories in. but the main difference was the resort storage a m1 deadline. now these campaigns are brutal. -- the main difference was there was one story a day and one deadline. now these campaigns are brutal. the mccain campaign -- tweeting constantly, feeding the web, feeding the first draft, which newsletter, morning but it is also received all day long as items from the campaign. there's also 17 candidates. i look at how these reporters work now. you are filing all day long. you are tweeting, filing, posting. at the end of the day, after all of this, you have to come up with an intelligent, thoughtful "new york times" story for later

additions -- for the web and for itions of the paper. it never stops. you was getting to me on the mccain campaign. it is hard to find time to think, i think. in this kind of process. to step back and to write bigger stories about what it all means. i mean, reporters do it. the demands on them are way beyond what it ever was on "the boys on the bus." i actually like the direction of some of the reporting. minute toy-to-day, minute reporting we all do now that we did not have to do in the past. had a way, "the times" dictation room. they were the last to eliminate it. i find news organizations like have decided a lot of our

resources should not be dedicated to following the candidates as they move around, but should stand back and pursue the kinds of stories that should be pursued. there's a lot more investigative reporting. -- we go deep into their backgrounds. we go deep into their financial connections. we go deep into their donors in a way that we should. and we do what we call enterprise reporting. where we are not just the daily reporting. we are actually being enterprising about it and finding deeper stories that require more time and actually break news. not news that the candidate happened to say this or there was this malapropism on the part of this candidate or whatever it might be, but actually much deeper stories than we have had in the past, and i'm pleased

with that on average. coupleere were a questions about radio. is radio still strong, vital, and global? there used to be the voice of america, which reported america's stories and values abroad. does this exist anymore? well, yes. mvr is bigger than ever and has a much stronger resins overseas. here in the united states. i am sure that many of you listen to npr. debate in constant congress about what its mission should be. obviously the voice of america journalists want to keep it completely separate, objective news organization, and there is a move in congress to make it as the united states is coming under siege from all of this ice is propaganda, there is a move in congress to try and make it more reflective of american values and american

foreign-policy issues. obviously the journalists at voa are totally opposed to that. reallyhink npr is a strong presence here and overseas and has continued to grow and flourish. very largeis a organization. they have a difficult relationship with their affiliates all over the country about who should be covering what and how big npr itself should become, which some theirates feel may be at expense. they are working through that situation right now, but they are a very substantial news organization. and i would point out they are very dependent on other news organizations like ours. i you listen to npr, and , you a lot of you listen will hear as guests, reporters from "the washington post," from

"the wall street journal." they do as they are, not have a staff as substantial as hours to do the reporting that we do. they do good work and they do a fair amount of original reporting as well. but they are highly dependent on others, and we are part of that ecosystem. .om: yeah this question relates to elisab eth's comments about "the baltimore sun" closing its foreign bureau and other newspapers doing the same. it is about the second tier newspapers, not the post and the wall street journal. do you have views about these -- chicago, milwaukee him of these kinds of things? elisabeth: like all newspapers, they are struggling with their

print editions and trying to make their digital editions profitable. hit harder and they have cut back the newsrooms quite a bit. has an advantage because of its size and reach around the country. hometownmoving -- my up, wewhen i was growing had two cartons that said "post," and now it's just this little tiny tabloid with what looks like an advertiser. you know, they have all shrunk. locally -- andd in greatnow about this detail -- but there have been a lot of local websites that have really sprung up, sort of hyper local coverage of the cities around the country. but i don't -- -- what paper was

it? i was at a seminar this past papers, aone of the lot of the people who were there ,- the reporters were doing they were self editing. they had no editing staff. and i thought, oh, my god. [laughter] happening atis some of these places as they cut staff. reporters are editing themselves. imagineorter, i cannot that. as an editor, i can't imagine it either. tom: that goes to a question someone had about the vetting. traditional newspapers like "the post" have good sub editors to check the facts. is there any vetting on the web, the news outlets that people read these days online that you know about? marty: when you talk about the web, that is a very big space.

different people have different policies. you know, we have a stated policy of trying to read everything, have at least one other person read something before it is hosted. i am sure that "the times" has something similar. rings happen at such a speed -- i'm sure it is not reviewed as closely as it was in the past. -- things happen at such a speed. they do not get the same level of editing as you had in the past. a day newspaper or twice a day newspaper. now you'll are talking about things being posted 24 hours a day, including at night, all the --e, evan days a week. at seven days a week. if you are not the first with the story, there's a good chance you will not get the traffic. for our editing, the question about writing for the web and posting it online -- we

have a system. i am sure "the post" is the same where you have -- you have 223 editors look at it, edit -- 2 to it, edit itok at before he goes out. then there is a copy editor who looks at it, and there might be another editor if it is a particular important story. there's a lot of pressure to get things up quickly. huge amounts of pressure. so, there is constant tension between we have got to get this out, but we've got to make sure it is right. you know, it can be nerve-racking. the way that we did that in washington sometimes, it's a really big deal story and it has to go right away, but if it's very competitive, we will have to get editors read it simultaneously.

you can have another editor read over his shoulder. but it is still, you know -- the later versions of this story is the day unfolds, developments happen, these tory can change a lot -- the story can change a lot. there's a lot more scrutiny given to the story at the end of the day as it goes into print. can i go back to the previous question about regional papers, if i might? involvedy career was with regional papers. i was the editor of "the boston globe," "the miami herald." . feel very strongly they do face and norma's pressures. -- they do face enormous pressures. i eliminated foreign coverage at "the boston globe" in 2007 or so when we were going through the

great recession. anyone with in a management role , you do what you have to do. you have to make tough decisions. we going to cover our local region? the answer for an institution like "the boston globe" was we are going to cover our local region. there are other places that will cover the world. nobody was happy with that. i was not happy with that. sharply criticized. free much all of the people overseas at that moment left "the boston globe" to do other things. but i think those institutions -- there are still many good newspapers out there. does aston globe" still great job. "the l.a. times" does a great job. and it's critically important that they succeed. we at "the boston globe"

launched an investigation of the catholic church that exposed the sex abuse scandal the church is dealing with even today. tom: you got a pulitzer for it. and if we -- marty: had not done that, that story would not have been done. these newspapers have to be the eyes and ears. we cannot be everywhere. regardless of our size. even if we were double the size, we would not be able to do that. i think it is absolutely critical that they succeed. their financial challenges are greater than ours. there is no question about it. we have the capacity to create national products or as shetional products, was talking about before, how the "new york times" is trying to get international subscribers. newspapers, that is

much were difficult and they face the same competition with google and others for advertising. they just do tremendous work under very difficult circumstances and very often write very important stories that all of us learn from. tom: well said. thank you. i'm going to ask one more before we close. we are getting to the end. before i do, i want to ask both of you if there was something you thought was going to be asked, but wasn't? or should have been. the final question has to do with the future. i wonder if you both can talk about the recruiting of the young journalists in the digital age. what are you looking for. how excited are young people about doing the kinds of things that you do that are so

essential for american democracy? elisabeth: i've got to tell you. you know, given how tough the business is right now, we still get an amazing applicants. we had this fantastic intern this summer in the washington bureau -- he is 22 years old. he graduated from harvard. he just wants to be a journalist. he does not want to go to wall street or finance. he was to be a journalist and he is a great writer. what i find about the young people we do hire, first of all, we hire journalists. the main thing is you hire journalists. some may have more experience than others, some may have more potential. what i find interesting, of all of the efforts we have on the web and the iphone and audience development and graphics and

cool, and that is really and there are all of these young people running around the newsroom now pushing our stories out to everybody, and they are young and they are cap -- so many of them just want to be reporters and write stories. that is what gives me a lot of hope. i think, well, if you are so cool and we are this legacy media. all of these old content providers, right? they just want to be "new york reporter's and write stories. that is their dream. just to do the old-fashioned going out and interviewing people and writing a story. get a huge number of applicants. i have a lot of hope for the future. marty: i would say the single most encouraging thing in our profession today is the caliber of talent. and the single most important thing to our profession is

for five years or something like that. it it's amazing. they have multiple degrees and speak in many different languages. they are smarter than i was. they are good writers. they are curious about the world. they enter the profession for the right reasons. they're not looking for fame or to be a celebrity. they think we survey very useful purpose in society and the world. they want to be part of it. they do that knowing the profession is at a challenging moment and faces risks. they do it anyway. whatever problems existed at the time, they pale in comparison to what we face today.

i have huge admiration for the people who are entering our profession now. i am grateful to have chosen journalism as the place for themselves. [applause] >> tuesday, the left forum conference from new york city. here's a look. >> the democratic party is a set of interest groups that cooperate during election time and represent from groups. are of those groups fighting for things like tpp and things you and i would disagree with.

other parts of the democratic party are fighting to have more rights for unions and increase wages for low income workers and more rights are people who work so that families can be better off. parts of the democratic party in my opinion should be conflated with the other part. carl davidson talks about a six party system and not a two-party system, within that theory, there are four elements to the democratic party. i feel like a part of one of those elements in the bernie sanders is the champion of that faction and i'm going to do what i can to support him because i would like to make that faction victorious over the corporations. c-span, the annual left forum conference from new york city. at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span.

coming up on c-span, a form on the state of naval aviation. presidential016 candidates at the iowa state fair. scott walker, then carly fiorina. later, lindsey graham. >> coming up on washington journal, a discussion on education reform. brown of as campbell website dedicated to education issues. brockovich on the epa response to the mine wastewater spill response in colorado. you could join the conversation with your phone calls and comments on facebook and twitter.

>> our road to the white house coverage continues live from the and state fair on c-span c-span radio as the candidates walk the fairgrounds. this morning, marco rubio at 11:30 a.m. and john kasich at 5:00. on wednesday, rick terry will speak at 11:00. on friday afternoon, ted cruz and on saturday, chris christie at noon and bobby jindal at 1:00. you can join the twitter conversation. taking you on the road to the white house. >> navy entering marine corps officers discussed the state of aviation.-- naval

is just over an hour. our keye to recognize sponsor at lockheed martin. thank you. [applause] is admiralor today prayer. i love the sound of that. he served two presidents as

ambassador to china from 1999 to 2001. pilot forsed attack his first 24 years of service, he spent three years as a test pilot. he has extensive flight and combat experience with over 5600 flight hours and 1000 carrier landings. he was qualified and 52 different types of aircraft and had operational commands, including two aircraft carriers and led the formation of the naval strike warfare center. he was a group commander in the six fleet. our moderator.as thank you for joining us. general john davis is a marina navy aviator. theas flown 4500 hours in

carrier, the f5, and the f-18. copilot, he commanded the the ma and the second marine air wing. he served as assistant air ops in the third in 2003 in iraq. he served as deputy commander of the joint functional component command at fort meade. commanderck as happy of u.s. cyber command. welcome. mike shoemaker is a 1982 graduate of the u.s. naval academy. he has accumulated 4400 flight

hours, serving 20 commands worldwide. he has commanded to fighter squadrons. he currently leads the entire naval installation force. he has served in his current position as commander of naval and air forcesic u.s. navy since january of this year. let's give them all a big welcome. [applause]

joseph prueher: good morning and it's great to be here with you today. you might think that with the introductions the people appear knew what they were talking about area we will see how that goes. my role is to keep things moving. we had the chance to say a few sentences of introduction to set the stage area let me try a few of them on you. lieutenant general davis and mike shoemaker -- vice admiral mike shoemaker our shoulders on which i wrote for a couple of years in the past. they are leaders and aviators and tacticians. they are people of great experience and skill. their charge now and the job

they have now is to have both the people and the machinery of naval aviation ready to go at any time. these missions are to support our nation's objectives as well as to support the troops on the ground. it's a big job. they do this by having people trained and by having up aircraft. these two things go together to give the capability to manner air wings and our carrier decks to respond in the world. this is a big job that they have. in addition, they grapple with , which isition system in the process of delivering an airplane that has been in the works for two decades. the challenges with the airplane are not primarily technical ones. they are bureaucratic ones in

systematic ones. they grapple with that as well. current readiness is what they are about. is whatal aviation does these guys are responsible for doing and for answering the bell each time. they respond to crises in the world. troops and give carrier air wings and aircraft carriers in place where rapid response is required or there are no land bases available. they are very able to do this and what you have here are two committed officers who are committed to the nation's wealth the and they are accountable and responsible for responding and answering the bell for naval aviation in the world. they were going to tell you how they do it today. i will try to mike shoemaker.

mike shoemaker: our time was all over. had a great experience. i have stood in his shoulders, not the other way around. it's great to talk about the future of naval aviation. as you look around the world, i will start with the fact that our naval forces and our strike groups in particular are in high demand. that's across all of our combat commanders. they would like to see more airstrike resins. they understand the value that those carriers and air wings surface forces provide in terms of a deterrent value, the persistent forward presence, the

access they provide. they respond across the spectrum of threats. they respond to natural disasters. even in contested waters, our in thats can operate environment. i will talk about the future air wing, which is our focus today. i will give a lot of credit to one of my counterparts, my right hand man in the pentagon. he is the guy who does all of our programming requirements. he works to that acquisition process to deliver those capabilities that i need and i think the nation needs. .is been charged he spends a lot of time working on last year and that's a great document. he has been in a tight

environment. he has been able to keep our transitions on track. he is been able to deliver those. in terms of the platforms, the payloads, the networks, he's done a superb job in that capacity. it's a very tough environment. we have look ahead, transitioned out of legacy platforms and into the next decade. prowlers. out of where transitioned into the growler which provides the electromagnetic spectrum dominance in our strike groups and air wings of the future. it will provide advanced electronic airborne attack.

are romeo transition is about complete as well. hotelgot the last foxtrot squadron. they will transition and that will complete the transition of that committee from legacy platforms to the romeo platform. the romeo comes with a very capable package. it has a advanced periscope detection system. it's radar. it's infrared radar. it's very capable of electronic rate -- warfare. sierras,at up with our

it's very complementary to the romeo. it works closely with our special operating forces. together, a very potent combination. i got to watch them in action numerous times. electronic airborne aew, we are transitioning. we have two squadrons transitioned and want about to complete. on teddyployed roosevelt. it brings with its advanced radar some incredible capabilities to search and track targets and to command-and-control across the striker. it is essentially the

quarterback for the strike group that comes with some very good at capabilities. world, weike fighter replace. that's been a bit of a slow process, but one we need to make and have happened. hard toworked very ensure that we deliver initial operating capability of that platform in 2018. andill gradually stand up in thethose squadrons middle the next decade. that is the capability we need to get to the air wings right now. it comes with a stealth capability. it can penetrate both air and surface. the most important capability is information, to collect signals that are out in the environment and fuse it altogether and deliver that to the rest of this great group -- strike group through the networking that we

have. it's very critical in future. we passed that information back to the e2, back to our other ships and decision-makers in the strike group to our super hornets, they are the bulk of our wings right now. continue well into the next decade and beyond. they are the workhorses of the fleet. air torry and deliver air and air to surface missiles. they will be very valuable. the triton, one of our unmanned systems, let me back up here. the last of the transitions will be into our unmanned systems. scout,st is the fire

which we have been flying for almost 15,000 hours. we are doing anti-narcotics missions. we will integrate it with our or whatever our lcs the small combatant looks like in the future. that capability is demonstrated in singapore with the romeo and the fire scout operating. the thirdbeen in rotation in a very successful detachment. we've got the triton, which is a the operating in the fifth fleet area we've got those vehicles now. it will provide our fleet commanders with a persistent maritime intelligence

surveillance reconnaissance capability. this will give it multi sensor packages and fuse the information. what willmplement eventually come online. it's a very capable anti-submarine warfare chain. asset, it will kopelman pa. in the unmanned world will be the you class. after going some reviews right now in the building, i think is a former strike group commander, it's clearly going to operate in contested environments and the striker commander information ahead of the strike

group moving in. it's the eyes and ears of a carrier strike group. conduct targeting and feed that information back to the networks. ourit all together in , that will beers the nucleus of our carrier strike group. that platform is very critical in our projection well into the 21st century. when others talk about the value of that platform, i will talk more about forward later. i think when you put that air wing in the future together, within a very capable, lethal combination that can sale in operate in contested waters around the world. about the readiness challenges that we have.

as a tight commander, that's my responsibility to make sure that they are equipped for success. we are challenged. plus ofes from a decade sustained combat operations. it's taken its toll on the force. we are looking at a reset. our optimize fleet response plan, we are just in the throes of getting the final implementation. getink it's going to maintenance done on our aircraft. that, its we move into will give us a regular appointment -- deployment. there is productively for them. think that will allow us to

focus on that reset and recapitalization. proud ofot be more what our sailors are doing around the world right now. represent the united states navy and represent the nation. thank you. jon davis: good morning. thanks for all you do to keep our nation safe. to keep defense at the top of everybody's interest out there. thank you for our foreign partners for being out here. we could not do it without you. i am a very proud naval officer. the first in my family and now my family has a lot of marines and sailors. i am a very proud marine. the marine corps exists for one purpose and that is to be the nations for -- force and readiness.

they fight our nations battles wherever they may fall. exist is ready i aircraft to take the fight to the enemy. bases,a bases and shore the marine corps had a new unique gear that allows us to flow from a sea bass and to shore and back again. it allows extreme agility. it also looks for combat power to strike where need be. are workingmy, we out. we are also no better friend. in thes happen out there world, natural disasters, you want marine and navy forces to come ashore. andou can meant -- move men

material ashore, you can provide food logistics of people need to sustain themselves in their darkest hours. i've got a couple of main focuses. machines, but i invert that. it's more about the people. man,e going to equip the not man the equipment. we are going to give our marines the best tools to go take the fight to the enemy and do it they've got to do. my number one job is readiness. i've got challenges out there. i will talk about that. thethree main jobs for build in future force and combat capability. we are recapitalizing the entire fleet. we are in the process of doing that. we are about halfway through a process we started before 9/11.

we are about halfway through. this is a plan we started back in the late 90's. we are executing that plan now. throughbeen doing that 14 years of hard combat. are still deployed and out there. we're still fighting. we are good if you want to be busy, that if you want to recapitalize. many of our units are at the razors edge of not being able to change the next unit. we are building the future force. we are recapitalizing. we will talk of the platforms we're doing that with. current readiness is the current offf being good stewards getayer dollars, we want to the most out of everything we

own. we are not doing a very good job of that right now. we want to extract maximum value and provide maximum readiness. we have very good combat equipment. it is old. it is good. we can get more life out of it. and we will extract every life out of those platforms. we will be proud to turn those airplanes into the boneyard. they are very good airplanes. we are transitioning into new stuff. least, we call connecting the task force. we are buying very high-end gear. we want to connect that to the most -- taking systems and sensors and capabilities and pushing that down to the man on the ground. fights for thes

task force. we take great pride in that. .e are designed we have been trained from the time we come into the marine corps, it's how we process data. it provides extra combat agility. own joint force in a microcosm. we've got our future gear that we are buying. we are going to connect that. we are moving out of a single mission platform. how do you maximize utility out of everything you have? you make everything multi-mission. every platform is shared. what my talking about? we took a c-130 and we made it into an airplane. airplane is a re-feeler and the other half is a weapons

platform. i can pass gas and shoot at the same time. to great effect in iraq and afghanistan. we could have a tanker up that it's passing gas and have an airplane up there with a sensor that can do convoy escort and watch the roads and do small yield precision weapons. we're going to put a fueling package in. we needed to have it. it's a tremendous combat capability. these.ut assets on board this is the most in demand airplane in the department of defense today. we are producing them off the

production line pretty quickly. we can't train the cruise fast enough at the rates we need to. putting ap 22 on an amphibious helicopter weg a just retired about week ago. a combatirplane had range of 15 nautical miles, we are changing that to 450 miles. it can fly 2000 miles across the ocean. like it's no big deal. going 110 miles per hour? that's about 30 minutes. not a lot changes on the battlefield and a 30 miles. a lot can happen in 2000 miles in eight hour transit. we talked about that lance

corporal as the most important guy out there. getting him his squad leader the information they need to keep up with the changing environment. we've got this disruptive technology. howdy do that? it requires more calm gear. more thought goes into how we push information into the airplane. the customer is not a guy you push stuff too. he is the google generation. people stuff from the information. they want to tailor the information they want. we are doing that right now. we've been doing it for the last five or six classes. we do long-range raids. 22's.feed video pushing streaming into the back of that

airplane. we are achieving great success that. we are employing that operationally right now. v 22 has changed the battle space for us. it has forced us to rethink how we are doing business. it bottom line is replacing with ev 22. that is disruptive technology out there. is marine expeditionary unit enabled by an aircraft like that. command and control is thelenged when you push group and spread it out over 2000 miles. they connect that with c-130s. we do that routinely. we had forces in afghanistan and forces off the shore of africa

and forces in the mediterranean. it was phenomenal capability. we are going to replace our echo with the kilo. we are about 60% through our to the zulu and the yankee. that increases capability, great airplanes coming into the fleet. prowler are the only process of transitioning right now. the next one will be the 211. we already have our trained squadron. marines downtag of there in south carolina. they are trained to fly it right now. us is thatr

fifth-generation platform that is going to change the battlefield much like. giving us access to the contested battle space that we have not had access to before. it will change the marine unit. it will change how they view amphibious units and our forces in such a way that is yet to be defined. for our adversaries, it will be worrisome. for us, it will be great comfort. can gon airplane that from fifth-generation to fourth-generation. no other airplane can go from fifth to fourth and back again. pylons in 2017. -- i cand it up with have an airplane that does fifth-generation stuff.

we can go to the fifth-generation thing again. we talked about multi-mission there are multiple levels of capability in those platforms. we are still growing into it. it has tremendous utility for a marine corps. it gives us that fighter capability and that attack capability that we need in the out years. operationalan inspection to get them ready and it convinced us they were indeed ready to go and be declared capable. they did a fantastic job. the close air support and the army reconnaissance, i will give you the exchange rate. it was really good. zero losses.

there are a bunch of bad guys who would not need to be storied again. interesting most one. we gave them a high-end threat environment. to get in abe able low threat environment. we gave them a high threat environment. foro out there and look structured targets. they're are using the sensors to have an airplane. we gave them difficult targets defined. we give them a difficult threat. in my world, that would be a prohibitive threat. they found a targets and dealt with that and they came back and said we did it. nobody ever asks a student again and we found the targets and killed the targets. out what summit is going to ask you to go do.

never take away a capability from the adversary. we don't want to take away a capability. it's not without its challenges. the bottom line is we are convinced we are in the right spot and going right direction. now for us, it's about equipping the men and women who are going to fly that airplane with the right power tools. the guys talk about doing the flying are doing the fighting. let's not forget the people that maintain that. we will talk at some of the challenges of current readiness. it's not just aging platforms and lack of spares. it's also retaining and training and keeping the right enlisted force out there to keep those guys working on the airplanes with the skill set a need. if there's one thing we haven't done as a marine corps, it's focus on the leader for aviation

platforms and making sure our guys have the right training continuum and valuing the guys with the qualifications. patches. we covet that. what's really cool to me as readiness and how i get -- isess is not having having a confident group that is trained and well read from the lance corporal all the way up to the gunnery sergeant in my barn. we are making sure that we get them and keep them and train them and we retain them. that is a strategic imperative for the marine corps. we are all over that. we retain the aviators and pilots as well. system officers at do this job, it's imperative also. it's not about power tools, it's about the aircraft. about,f people we talk

for the marine corps, everything we do close from sea bass. in the future, everything will be a sea baseball. that is for our plans. that is for the big plans that we have to go support our nation. we go to a sea bass ashore and then back to a sea bass again. more plans than i do afloat. afloat, ashore, afloat for sure. that's what we're working on. challenges readiness , we have way too many airplanes that we can't employ the way we need to. we can generate the readiness we need to. we have to turn that around. we spent all day yesterday at navy supply at defense logistics agency. i've been on the hill.

it's not a real surprise that we , that is not -- that is my problem. i'm accountable to fix that. we have strategy to do that. we have had to outside looks in it marine aviation. we are getting ready to start the third. we are taking those lessons learned and we're going to drive it home. part of that is funding. part of that is the human capital side. it's also how we sustain. to me, at the end of the day, the history books will not remember that we were late. there may be some dysfunction out there in the different zip codes out there around this town. the only thing history will care is are we ready to go, yes

or no? that's all we are going to carry about. joseph prueher: those are a couple of information rich presentations. we are going to do some questions and answers. we will do them as long as you want until 10:00, whichever comes first. a couple of warm-up questions. i think i'm going to forgo mine and if we get a low i may squeeze them in. back there. i am from the renaissance institute in baltimore. my question is this. i would not have come today except that on npr last saturday morning they had a story on from a naval air development facility somewhere talking about how they had developed drones that are

not just drones like normal drones, they send them up in batches of 24 or 32 and the drones themselves pick their own leader. i assume they pick the mission. it scared me to death. i got out of the shower and wrote on a paper towel to come here today. it was a great report. could you touch on that? is that really viable? that's aneher: information rich question. when either of you like to feel that? unmanned systems around are a big part of naval forces future. joseph prueher: i do think we are going to integrate manned

and unmanned with everything we do. jon davis: the bottom line is you are going to hold senior levels accountable for how the unmanned platforms are used. everythingwill do the right way. , there is aen future for artificial intelligence out there. i don't have anything in the works right now on that. peter daly: over there. to questions, how do you see the potential for the 22 with our allies? are we building enough amphibious assault ships to carry the marine corps aviation forces?

jon davis: it's a great airplane. i think probably more to follow in it. people see the utility in that. yes, we need more amphibious ships. we areoemaker: transitioning from our greyhounds that are doing ours. we will bring it into the carrier environment and be our logistics connector. given the things that general davis talked about, it gives us the option to do other things as well. about the support to the marines in terms of amphibious ships. we continue to work inside the building.

we are working that inside the budget. it's a challenging environment. we can support the marines of the ships they need. >> good morning. both of you have touched on the need for reconnaissance. can you elaborate on that? how your integrating your systems? is gettingblem information to the strike groups so they can go in safely. how are your platforms going to integrate that sensor information so you can have the picture you need? mike shoemaker: navy vision is employing that. initialld be our platform.

that environment you just described. poseidon, iton or could not operate in their without an understanding that the you class will provide. it will be able to conduct an integrated picture and targeting of assets. it can do time critical strikes or quick reaction strikes capability. that will come with part of the platform. from a strike group respective, there are other assets we can use. controllede theater or joint air command control. that is something we needed the strike group level. we to be able to operate ahead of the strike group. jon davis: it's leveraging everything that's out there.

when i say platform, it's manned, it's unmanned, it's cyber capabilities, it space capabilities, it's everything we have. challenge is the platform we have. the airplane is a smart player. i will leverage everything fits on it and get it back to the guy on the ground? it's a bandwidth the flow rate they can use and share that. it's a challenge, it's also an opportunity. high, i'm from inside the navy. could you give us some insight -- dohat you think the you see it -- the aviation makes for the future.

mike shoemaker: i'm not sure of the design. that falls into my counterparts lane. and have ourepared acquisition program and the program including integration into whatever that platform may be. that will be the fire scout as well. i am with aviation week and talking about the need to extend the life and the problems of readiness and the problems of the classic cornet, is it correct that the department of the navy plans to bring in f 35

at a slightly less than one squadron per year in the 20 20's? the next part of my question is that leaves us with dependence on been able to slap the super hornet at a very high rate. how can we avoid the problems we have had with the classic cornet's, that's not gone as planned. how do you avoid that trap? had he keep those problems -- squadrons full? mike shoemaker: that's a great question. peter daly: did everybody here the question? we are in the:

situation for a number of reasons. we have delayed the initial integration from the navy side. seven years from when we planned it. that forces us to keep our classic cornet's. -- hornets around a lot longer. extend eight or 9000 hours. that's a significant engineering feat to do that. we did not plan the service life extension program. we did not plan it well for the hornet. the utilization that we have talked about, the utilization of the force, the hours we put into those classic hornets drove those 9000 our limits and forced them to induct them earlier than expected. we've got a backlog. the capacity is improving.

we learned a lot. we have repaired those classic hornets and we will apply that to the program for our rhinos. this is not a problem we solve. general davis has a significant portion of his strikers on our f-18s. we've got to keep his legacy hornets and service for another 10 or 12 years. in theot a few less navy. we are doing the same thing. we have to get them into the middle of 2025 with the things we learned from applying them from the classic cornet maintenance work. i think we've got a good plan right now to move forward and avoid significant reduction eerie -- reduction eerie things in our inventory. it's not an inconsequential

challenge we have ahead of us. we stay focus on it a lot. transition,ow we you have to take care to make the transition. it's a strategic imperative to take care of those airplanes. job toe doing a great come up with a plan to rework our f-18s. believe.us reason to we are making the numbers in our depots now. we have going working a third line to make the numbers we need to get the airplanes back in the line. congress is very good. they gave us replacements. up aallows us to stand little bit early.

part of the way we reduce the isssure with classic f-18 moving out of the f-18. the service is scheduled to shut down in 2030. we have to take care of the old in order to get the new. you mentioned: the chart area and delivers 12 per year and went 20 p. that's where we hope to be. other priorities may drive something between those numbers. we are still on path. i will still work as hard as i can with our leadership in the building to ensure we can stay on the path and get out of classic hornets and replace them with our f 35 as fast as we can. morning.

leadershiponal question. tag andan article on delete select. non-fa in fivea years. this leaves out half of the air wing in its grandson leadership capability. limits the career progression of half of your junior and mid-level officers. it impacts retention of some all the personnel. i'm wondering, what are we doing to make sure that we don't go another five years without selecting one? how can we ensure that this leadership position better reflects the composition of the carrier wing? i read it this morning. it was well written.

some he said you might want to read this before you go over. well done. talent management push right now. he is doing some wonderful things. i agree completely with your article. i look across our carrier force. i look at the leaders. i look at the aviators that are flying. they command and control that joint fight. they understand the missions across the strike warfare. to include our helicopters squadron co's, i've gotten this question twice now. -- i don't think will be long before we find the right helicopter co to come up to the ranks who is capable of leading an air wing. many of the events we do, they

lead those events. the self-defense of the carrier involves those guys. the fullrstand portfolio of what air commanders would do. -- it takes is a little bit we put language and precepts into administrative board. i control those and i intend to take the recommendation and move forward. it was a nice article. >> good morning. i am from the center for defense information. you mentioned multimission. forms which result in multimission people. how difficult it is to train people, how do you find that balancewhere you can --

where you can train people in such limited time? jon davis: one of the things we laid out there, i'm a firm leveraging simulation. have 15 hours a month in an airplane. we drive our systems to make sure they can do that. our manuals support that. i might not be as multi-mission as my sons are. son's two daughters will probably be more multimission when they come around. when you look at the way people multitask, when i was writing a 1994, i memberin people saying that's a helicopter mission, it's too hard to do for a jet. things are moving to fast for a jet pilot.

it might be for us. don't tell that to the captains. that was what our brains thought in 19 94. going on.too much now we are doing it. things change. the more we equip the man, we don't man the equipment. give these kids the tools. we had a bunch of old guys thinking how we are going to use it, we turned over to the young guys and they are using it completely differently. it's coming from the customer in the back of the airplane. think we will man the equipment. we will equip the man. we will push these guys. we have to deliver the training systems that give them the minimum amount of actual flight training out there and then leveraging simulators. i've seen things for entire

units where they go to a simulator to train. i think there is lot more we can do to leverage a major that when that kid does get in that airplane it, he's ready for the a ticket ride. >> good morning. i am one of your growler guys, sir. leads theservice joint force in this spectrum. curious, do you see a need for any structural changes either from a man trained or acrossstandpoint the joint force? to ensure that we can truly

develop this into something we have a unity of effort in the spectrum? the part that is more key to military operations and all aspects of civil life? i can tell you as a growler guide of operating that aircraft that we often show up as the smartest guy in the room and point out how the military plan is not sent for success in a kill chain versus coaching fight against adversaries. we are doing all of that. your community is leading that certainly for aviation. not that they are the only platform that we participate. warfaree some very good capabilities. we are just scratching the surface of what rolla can do.

they have been doing exercises and down at nellis as part of the red flags down there. mike shoemaker: the guys that are going to participate there are opening some eyes to the capability of that platform. we have to keep that at the forefront as we move forward in the cmw world. you said expertise across all naval aviation and across the joint force. rare honor of serving 4.5 years at fort meade. the bottom line is that i do not think it was going to be a complete team ball. i think you need to have everybody in the fight. it is what we call non-kinetic fires just as important to kinetic. jon davis: it requires a lot of thought and planning to make sure we do that right. training changes to make sure we do the things right. i will also say that it is kind warfare.onelectronic

you have to have electronic warfare. you need to have that. every platform i have i tried to strap something onto that airplane with a unique capability, both high threat level appeared my guys on the ground, my trucks, my airplanes and ships -- everything we got, we are try to get that capability. anything to help us out in some of these scenarios. the bottom line is that it requires a lot of thought. and unmanned systems are going to be key players. our man systems have to have the range and payload to be able to do that in the complex ability to do the survivable as well. so they cannot get knockdown. you on a tight schedule, it is a couple minutes after 10:00, but we will shift central daylight time for about five minutes here. two.

-- right behind you. >> i'm an analyst for special operations. two weeks ago, they had a direct energy summit that secretary kendall and mavis attended. the commander of the air force operations command got up and said that one of his highest requirements right now is corrected energy and putting that on the new a c-130 ghostwriter gunship to give it a full comprehensive offensive and defense of capability. mrmade the statement that block 60 is supposed to be 10 years out and i'm telling you right now that it is only a couple of years out that we are going to have that. from your perspective, general have, your case c-130 j's the capability on naval aircraft. askedecretary mavis was the question, he said our focus is not on that. we are working on ground

capability. your comments? jon davis: i'm embarrassed i miss that conference. i had a religious moment with my guys where i was like, how the heck did i not know about that? i would have been there. we think it has tremendous capability and potential. a lot of it is about weight. those systems are pretty heavy. i would like to be able to get up and everything, but hauling around a 3000 pounds train may not be good for my platform. we will push the edge in the envelope to get that capability on land and on the sea as well. absolutely, it is part of the quiver of the future. my counterpart is working hard to deliver that capability to his ship. we talked about that and its ability to generate the capacity about 3.5 times. clearly we can incorporate that technology as part of

self-defense for offensive manner on board. we have got to figure out the smart guys in the room and the engineers to figure out how we can energize the stuff to make it applicable to aviation platforms. as opposed to firing very expensive air to air surface weapons, we can do those directed energies and that is clearly an area we have to keep focus on and working in. >> yes, sir. >> good morning. your air wingker, is understrength the squadron. what is your schedule to bring them back to life? ike shoemaker: i think it is 2016 or 2017. if we look into the budget negotiations and physical reality constraints i have mentioned, we are considering whether we can afford to do that. we have looked at the carrier

planes that we have flown out and one of the reasons we even talked about that as an offset is that there is inability with a little bit of risk to be able to support our 11. we eventually get to 11 carriers. we have got some work to do, but considering you have one typically in a deep overhaul and a reactive core overhaul, and another one in maintenance, i think we have got the ability to do that. is to stand it up in 2017, but again, it was one of the things we looked at potentially as a cost-saving measure in a very tight budget environment that now. >> yes, back here. ricky, george washington university undergrad. there is a recent report that you rejected the navy plan to carry out survivability tests on the second ship of the new class

carriers, which was expected in 2016, which might delay the first deployment for at least half a year. from your perspective, are there any strategic applications of that decision or are there any? i think theer: memory signed by secretary kendall was that we would do the initial shock test before her first appointment. that is what we are working toward and we counted her getting back into the mix and bring us back from 10 to 11 carriers. we will let it play out in the deployment cycle. we have got that guidance and we are moving out. >> yes, sir. i have a larger question to talk about capabilities. state had the advanced military might in the budget of any other state.

this is a great insurmountable obstacle to a nuclear free world. how much should we be concerned about the talk about military capabilities? we are talking about an arms race with the u.s. and russia maybe and china and other countries. to have prueher talk about it. question? just get a [laughter] joseph prueher: if i can paraphrase that as how concerned we should be about the arms race , i think it is something that we all need to be very concerned about, but not stampede on the subject. quotation by thomas jefferson recently about peace being the delightful interlude while the factions are reloading.

the piece we have right now as far is an awkward one with russia, with china, with general dunford's testimony and others on where the big threats are. i think these are things of which we need to be very cognizant and work in our country on those. i do not think we need to stampede into an arms race. i do not see other countries doing that right now. is our business. preventing war is our business and we need to be very ready to do that. so the discussions need to be taken seriously, but not stampeding on it. ma'am, in the front row. eckstein general davis, you spoke about mission icing.

i wonder if the navy has similar plans because you are buying into it and what the conversations are about coming up with a common variant? jon davis: i think they are little different. i think they will use it as a carry on board system. had a number of years operating the airplane and we practice having weapons on it. we put a sensor on their and some precision weapons. package,r integration the long-range communications, refuelinge capability. differentightly mission, but i'm not going to speak for the navy. they will chart their own course. i totally agree and we will learn from the marines. we partner close with them as we bring this capability into the fleet, but i think we'll end up

-- what i promised our country of can't pilots and air crews is that they will be the ones to move into this new platform. range and extended beaten up their range of the platform, but as i mentioned, the logistics connector for the strike, but we will look at other options. we have done a very short demo against two summers ago on the east coast. it was an air boss that shipped to stillhere is lot learn, but they were pleased with how it turned out. a greatit will be capability and we will continue to work and partner with the marines moving forward. joseph prueher: one last question to the patient gentleman over here with the red tie. >> thank you. about thetalk to me

future vertical lift that the army is working on? futureery far out in the , but the companies currently working on that are very keen to bring that forward. with the navy or marine corps ever consider going it alone on future vertical lift? also, maybe taking the valor or the radar? ano could you just ask me site whether you are concerned about lockheed martin's purchase of sikorsky and whether that could affect any of your programs? mike shoemaker: i'm not worried about it. as long as they produce what they are supposed to, i had the and the all helicopter sustained stuff we have got. we will sustain the dh 60's. i'm totally happy. i just expect the business to do well. we are very

interested in future vertical lists and very interested in what the folks are bringing. what is real interesting about future vertical lift is that both variants that they are looking at is a flyby where airplane, which means it can do a lot of things for us in the marine corps. we love to do more and more stuff and have more range and more agility, looking to get much more range of the airplane that we have right now. also, if this flyby wire can be unmanned you could have a challenge. that is for the united states marine corps getting that to a reliabilityth the of that airplane. or it enough reliability can be manned or unmanned optionally, if they build the right kind of airplane with tremendous utility and agility

for platform like this, we are excited about what is in store. mike shoemaker: we obviously porter with that -- partner with that and we deliver with the fleet and they will be around to either the middle of the next decade or so, but that future vertical lift, i think you will see it somewhere to how we did it, but a joint program across all the services to see how we deliver the capability. joseph prueher: on behalf of all of us, i would like to think general davis and admiral you doer for mostly what every day, but especially for being here today and thanks so much for enlightening us all. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] c-span,g up today on road to the white house joins the 2016 presidential candidates at the iowa state fair.

first, wisconsin governor scott walker. then, former hp ceo carly fiorina. that is followed by senator lindsey graham. >> 10 years ago, hurricane katrina hit the gulf coast, forcing more than a million people from their homes and killing more than 1800. today housing and urban development secretary julian briefing onhold a gulf recovery efforts over the past 10 years. 11:00s allied -- live at a.m. eastern on c-span two. later, looking at u.s. policy in the arctic and whether the u.s. has the ships and capability to operate in the arctic region. see it live at 1:30 p.m. eastern, also on c-span2. our road to the white house coverage of the presidential candidates continues live from

c-span, state fair on c-span radio, and c-span.org. as the candidates walk the fairgrounds and speak at the "des moines register was quote soapbox. ats morning, marco rubio 11:30 a.m. and governor john kasich at 5:00. wednesday, rick perry will speak at 11:00. on friday afternoon at 2:30 p.m., it is senator ted cruz. on saturday, republican governors chris christie at noon and bobby jindal at 1:00. join the twitter conversation at #dmr soapbox. campaign 2016 -- taking you on the road to the white house. >> next, republican presidential candidate governor scott walker of wisconsin at "the des moines register" soapbox. the governor was interrupted by protesters during his speech, and following remarks, he spoke

with reporters and the public. his speech is 20 minutes. [applause] thanks.ker: first off, i am going to start with freedom, endowed by our creator, defined by the constitution but defended each and every day by the man and women who proudly wear the uniform of this united states. let us give a big round of applause. if you are a veteran, can you waive so we can thank you? [cheering] [applause] thank you for your service. it is great to be at the fair, great to be in iowa. we will keep coming back. we will go to all 99 counties. we know that chuck grassley and joni ernst have done that and we're going to do that as well. i am here today with my wife and one of my sons, matt. we are having a great time. this is perfect mother today -- not too hot and not too cold.

americaa knowledge that is a can-do kind of country. but unfortunately we have a government in washington that cannot get the job done. i call it 68 square miles surrounded by reality. that is what we are facing now. i've got to tell you that these days i am not just frustrated , with the president and with the democrats in washington, i am frustrated with the republican leadership in washington as well. [applause] they said that in the last election, that if we just elected a repugnant senate, that the leadership would put a bill to repeal obama care on the desk of the president. we are all still looking for that message. people want to send a message. all the timeers around the country and they say we want to send a message to republican leaders of washington that when he make promises on

the campaign trail, we want to see it whether it is repealing , obamacare or standing up against illegal immigration. if it were not for me and 24 other governors who took the president to task and took him to court, that would have gone through to the president, who said 22 times he could not do what he did last november when it came to illegal immigration. it took me and 24 other republican governors. we need leaders in washington who will stand up to the president and say enough is enough. america wants you to stand up to its promises. [applause] for me, that is something i am right at home with. we did not just take the big unions on in wisconsin. we did not just take on the democrats. we took on party establishment. in 2010 in my state, i ran for governor, because after my wife and i thought and talked and prayed about it, we knew, as tough as it is to win in a state like wisconsin -- wisconsin has

not carried a republican for president since 1984 when reagan was last reelected -- we knew we had to do something. we saw the mess that was happening in our state. and for our children, we wanted to do something better. we inherited a $3.6 million deficit and we fixed it. we cut taxes by $2 billion and today property taxes are lower today before we took office. [applause] we defunded planned parenthood more than four years ago. [applause] [cheering] if you are able to work as an adult in our state, you have to be involved in job training and pass a drug test. [applause] we want to make it easy to vote and hard to cheat.

we require a photo id to vote in the state of wisconsin. [applause] we did all these kind of conservative reforms. we got a great field of republicans. probably one of the best since the 1980's. but there is a difference in the candidates. i'm here today to ask for your vote and for you to cooperate with us. what makes a difference is that there are a lot of fighters out there, yet they have yet to win in washington. there have been a lot of good winners and one elections, but have yet to win the fight in recent years. there is only one candidate who has fought and won and gotten results, even in a blue state like wisconsin. and i did it without compromising our commonsense conservative principles. if you are someone who can win and get results and not compromise your values, get him into the white house. [cheering] [applause]

we had 100,000 protesters, some of which are here today. they did it to me at the capital and they have every right to speak, but they cannot drown out the voices of the millions who elected me in wisconsin. [cheering] [applause] [booing] gov. walker: the truth is, things are better in wisconsin because of our reforms. if we can fix wisconsin, we can fix america. [applause] we can fix america. it was not too late for a blue state like wisconsin, it is not too late for america. we can push true reform.

we can take power out of washington and put it in the hands of the hard-working people across this country and in iowa. we need to bring the power back to our people. that is what we did. we took the power out of the hands of the big government special interests and put it back into the hands of the hard-working taxpayers. if we could do it over there, we can do it in washington. [cheering] [applause] we measure success in government by how many people are dependent on the government. we understand that this does not come from the mighty hands of the government, it comes from the power of people to control their own lives and destinies. [applause]

as a kid until i was in third grade, i lived in plainfield, iowa. we moved to a small town in wisconsin. my first job was washing dishes. then we moved to the big time. we started flipping hamburgers at mcdonald's. the only difference is that i flipped hamburgers in the back because i do not have the skills to work the cash registers. i worked in those jobs. my dad was a small time preacher at the first baptist church. my mom was a part-time secretary. my grandparents were farmers. we did not have indoor plumbing until my mom went off to junior high school. my dad's dad was a machinist. i did not inherit fame or fortune from my family. what i got was that the belief that if you work hard and played by the rules, you can do it and do anything you want. that is the american creed, the american spirit. [cheering] [applause]

that is how you save the economy. not with more washington. last year, six of the 10 wealthiest county in america -- they were in and around washington, d.c. we understand that people want jobs, not the government. it is time to get the government out of our lives once and for all. [cheering] we start by repealing obamacare. by repealing obamacare, we will have the -- [cheering] [booing] we have to get the out-of-control federal regulations. we have to work for our family farmers. will work with the epa going

forward. we will pull in all the other regulations that are like a wet blanket on the american economy so we can get the economy working again. [applause] we will have a new energy policy that says we will defend what god has given us in america. in wisconsin, i opposed the keystone pipeline to save the american economy. [applause] in wisconsin, we gave people the education and skills they need to succeed. that will work for more than the minimum wage. in my state, my reforms work. despite what the naysayers said, the facts are the facts. years ago, they said they would be devastated. graduation rates are up now. third-grade reading scores are up. [cheering] sat scores are second-best in

the country. that is because we put power back into the hands of the people. we need control powers at the state level, not washington. [cheering] [applause] , we have toeconomy reform the tax code for individuals as well as job creators out there. notproud to say that we had touched that in our first four years by more than $2 billion. we live on manufacturers, property owners. before we took office, we need world-class leaders in washington to go on going forward.

we grow our economy. if you want someone tough, there are a lot of people that talk that. i am the only one who stood up to 100,000 protesters. [cheering] to fight for the american people. [cheering] [applause] they are warning us that if you want to balance the budget, if you want to satisfy the hard-working people, if you want a better life for farmers and manufacturers, you need me to be our nominee. they know that i just don't talk. i will deliver all my promises. i want you to know that that that going forward. [cheering]

[applause] one more thing about the economy. when it comes to safety, we need a president who has the courage to stand up to anyone and do what is necessary to protect our children and grandchildren. if i am the president, i will take the fight to isis instead of letting them come to us. [applause] i am not intimidated by huge you, sir or anyone else out there. i will fight for the american people over and over and over and over again. you want someone to stand here, i am right here. you can see it. this is what happened in wisconsin. we will not back down. we will do what is necessary to defend the american people going forward. [cheering]

hillary clinton and barack obama have failed this country. we are leaving them behind. we need a president who will stand up, just like ronald reagan did. we need someone to stand up and defend our military against our enemies and stick with strong american values. if you give me the chance, i will not be intimidated here or anywhere else. [cheering] this is why i love coming to iowa. it's not just the media. it is happening right here and right now. if that is who you want for president, you will not back down. but that is the status we have now.