to defeat an incumbent democrat. so at the age of 30 i am off to washington. and my mother is saying, johnny, what are you doing? what is going on here? so i went down there and i got on the defense committee. i was there for a very short period of time, and i met this colonel at an airbase, and he was getting ready to retire. he pulled the hammers and wrenches and screwdrivers out of his desk that cost tens of thousands of dollars, and we were all aghast. remember that, folks? i went down to washington and i took this toolbox, and there were other congressmen who found the same thing, and i became a defense reformer. strong defense, but no waste. if they waste it in welfare, we clean it up. if they waste it in the pentagon, we clean it up. nobody should be immune to having things work. you can clap for that, sir, that's ok. [applause] so for 18 years i serve on that defense committee.

guess who was on that defense committee that i got to work with? barry goldwater. john tower, one of the great minds. gary hart, democrat, one of the smartest people i ever worked with. people who had been basically given their limbs in world war ii. so it was a great experience, learning about threats and systems and spending and reform and all that. and then six years in i was able to get on the budget committee, which is what i always wanted to be on because i learned -- i haven't told the story -- when i ran for the state senate, i said there were two things we shouldn't do. we shouldn't raise our pay because i wanted the legislature to be part-time. the second thing is i won't vote for any tax increases. so republicans win the majority and they decide to raise taxes, and raise their pay. so i turned the pay down, which

i came to learn later most people thought i was nuts. the other thing is they wanted to raise taxes, and i said i am not voting for it, and they said i was irresponsible. so guess what i did? i wrote my own budget in the legislature. i learned that knowing the budget means you know every operation of the government. it is like unlocking the secret to what happens. and so i offered my budget, i got killed. nobody voted for it. but a number of the ideas carried on forward. but i learned something valuable about that. by the way, when i was doing it, people were sneaking into my state senate office, like 11:00 at night, telling me little secrets about how things really work. so i got on the budget committee six years into congress and i offered my first budget -- trying to make this short. we had a vote on my budget. there was the president's budget, the democrat budget, the black caucus budget, the kasich budget, and the vote on the

kasich budget was 405 no and 30 yes. how'd i do? [laughter] but there were 25 other people -- 29 other people who thought we were onto something. year in, year out, i would offer another budget, and the numbers would grow. girls, another story here. believe in something as long as it is rational, and it is amazing how it can happen. john sununu comes to congress and he works with me, and after 10 long years of fighting to balance the budget, why did i want to do it? one, we shouldn't mortgage our children's future. secondly, running in debt is not good for people, states, families, government, the federal government. so in 1997 -- [applause] so in 1997, along with senator domenici, i became the chief architect of the budget, and we got it done, and we head out the

largest amount of publicly held debt in modern history, and the budget hadn't been balanced since we walked on the moon and it hasn't been since. you know what i learned in these town hall meetings? when i tell people we balanced the budget, you don't really believe it. you don't believe it, but we did it. we were in balance for four straight years, and when i left washington at the end of all that, we were running a $5 trillion surplus. so the idea that we can deal with our problems today, we can. we can't play politics, but you can get it done. i left government, i accomplished what i wanted to with the budget and defense and i announced i was leaving, and nobody could figure out why, but i did and i went out in the

private sector and i was a banker, worked at lehman brothers, i was at fox news -- you all remember when i was at fox. i was huge. you remember. that is why o'reilly still doesn't pronounce my name right because i did such a good job hosting his show. [laughter] so that was a lot of fun. but i want to go back to something. i want to cover two quick things -- if we have to run over, fine. here's the thing. we are made for a purpose. this is what i believe. i think we are made for a purpose. and i think each of us are given gifts to do certain things in this world, positive gifts, to do positive things. some people never find them. but i think the key to satisfaction in life is to find those gifts and purpose and to do it. so i'm having a great time making speeches, they were paying me, i mean, it was unbelievable. but i got a nagging feeling that i needed to go back.

i told my wife, i think i've got to go back into politics. she said, "i thought we were done with that. 18 years, 4 years, enough." i said, sweetie, i've got to do it. she got behind me and i was the first person to defeat an incumbent in ohio in 36 years. i inherited a state that in some ways was as bad as the federal government. our credit was going to be downgraded, and people were hopeless. now after 4.5 years, the $8 billion is a $2 billion surplus. we have cut taxes by the largest amount of any sitting governor, $5 billion. we killed the death tax, basically all income taxes for small business, because we believe in small business. our credit is rock solid. we are up to 350,000 private sector jobs created. and no one has been left out. if you are drug addicted, we

help you. if you are mentally ill, we help you. if you are developmentally disabled, we want to mainstream you. if you are autistic, we want to get you insurance. if you are in a minority community, we want to create entrepreneurship and be helping. i ran for election in ohio. that is the state where we found the election results two days later. i won 86 out of 88 counties including the county where barack obama won by 26 points, cuyahoga county. 26% of the african-american vote. i was able to get 51% of union households and 60% of women. it was the second largest electoral win in the modern history of ohio. why did it happen? first of all, i have a great team. i am just the orchestra leader. i have a great team and we are creative and innovative. two things -- you want to go to

work, we have raised the hope factor in ohio. we will work to create an environment where jobs can be created, because that is our greatest moral purpose. but the second thing, i try every day to communicate a message that you are not left out, that you have a chance to get your life, that you have a chance and opportunity. and what could be greater than that? to help people get on their feet, to reward people who risk-take and work hard and not punish them when they create jobs and they are successful. that is what it is all about. then i decided after a long time i would run for president, and i would do it for a couple of reasons. one, i have a record. when i talk, it is not about what i'm going to do, it is what i have already done, and what we need to do is get on the roadmap to balancing the budget, rebuild our military, infuse citizens with the idea that their lives matter and they can make a

difference. these are all things i would do. this is not just -- here is in theory what is going to happen. i have been able to do it. secondly, i do understand the frustrations americans have about losing their job at 51, kids not being able to get a job, huge college debt. there are solutions to this. but the other final thing i want to say to you -- it sounds like a sermon. over the weekend i was reading about these two young people who were trying to fly to syria to join isis. they live in mississippi, in a beautiful little town. mississippi state is located there. did you read the story? it was after i read the story of isis taking 12-, 13-, 14-year-old girls, putting them in the sex slave business, passing them on to fighters and having it acceptable to rape these little girls, that is an

that is in his on western simulation. yet, i am reading about these two people who want to go join them. how is it possible? thesehey offer, lying savages offer family,romise of friends, and purpose of how you will get to paradise by commandeering and joining us. what about us? how could two people from , and doctors who live in london, successful professors, and these people -- i tell you i think. , we in ther time west, we pursue to things too much of the time. i want to be happy and free to do whatever it is i want to do.

leave me alone. when that is all you do, your life lacks meaning. you can find meaning only by searching for happiness. you have happiness by having meeting. aning. we are meant to be bigger than ourselves. we are meant to have a purpose. andre meant to have justice healing, in whatever way we can. if it is working with the kate to get them to not do drugs, or venturing a kid in school, or helping a senior citizen, when we do things to help other people, we feel good, and i think we get a reward for it in the long run. that is the trip we want to take to paradise. it is a political campaign, right? i find it more important to be a

movement. we all have to rise up again as americans, and realize that what we do makes a difference. figure out what you will do. you will find satisfaction and happiness. enough of all that. what do you want to know? [applause] >> [indiscernible] know, what will you do to prove to me that you are taking this threat seriously. our current president and his a administration has neglected to do so for the last 2-3 years. they are using money that we have sent over to the middle , to fund theira soldiers over there. what will you do to take care of this? john kasich: i said that we should get together -- all of western simulatio civilization r

attack. we should all be part of a coalition. we can include the saudis, and the jordanians, we need to put those on the ground and destroy isis. that is what we need to do. [applause] look, i to do that -- .oted on war i voted on the first gulf war. i voted to not be in lebanon, because i do not think we should civil wars.in we need to have a very strong military, but we need to reform the pentagon so that when we spend money on defense, we get our money's worth. i was asked a question by o'reilly here and what if the people don't support it? first of all, i think the president has to make the case. .econdly, we have to do this sometimes you have to lead. that doesn't mean that you get

so far ahead of the crowd -- look, i have been ahead of the crowd, and they have doubted me down. it will not keep me from leading. sometimes i have to do things as the governor of ohio -- look, after my first term in office, i had 20% approval. you have to work hard to be that unpopular. it was not my job to win a popularity. it was my job to fix ohio, to walk and lonely road, and take the heat. that's ok. guess what, i won that unbelievable reelection. their legislators -- there are legislators who are afraid of their own shadow. across the country. you are in politics to die a deaths.d you can die over and over again, and come back. that is why i love sununu.

.ununu doesn't say around or, gordon humphrey. back we ought to send him someday? i can think of someone he can defeat. gordon is saying no. come on. of business,care come home. it is still a fertile ground over there for radicalism. if we are not able to convince people in the west that we are the past to real meeting in life aning in life. yes. >> thank you, so much. john kasich: since you are joining my team, make this easy. to retirementose age -- as if you couldn't tell.

i would like to know when you are going to do to ensure the forility of social security future generations so that very pretty 22-year-olds over that will have something to look forward to when they are my age. we are not putting you out to pasture, by the way. here is the thing. and 1999, whatever, i wrote a social security plan. it would have taken some of the surplus and used it so that young people could get a couple whereasprivate account, when the economy grows, they would grow. baby boomers would start at a slightly lower levels, and seniors would be protected. i was offered 16 years ago, and what has stabilize the system for 100 years. they never voted on it. they didn't care about it.

those principles are still pretty much intact, but we don't have the $5 million to pay for the accounts. cap have to work through all this. here is where i will tell you. i have reformed a lot of entitlements and m in my life. we have taken medicaid and we are managing the program. we pay bills exactly, and not them them off -- round off. we let people stay in their homes if they want to be in their homes and not a nursing home. all of these things have come when we did work -- the balance budget, we did some changes to medicare. pay forthe wealthier some of the premiums. i don't want to turn social security into welfare programs. the reason this has all worked is because people thought the

problem and came together. any social security plan, medicare plan, we will do in this country, has to have some bipartisan support. if you don't, you get a demagogue that doesn't pass, and you are farther in the hole. the same is true for immigration. he will not fix the immigration problem without having both parties agree to fix it. the principles i have laid out for you is what i would follow, but we have to make sure to work some d democrats in so that we can pass something. the same is true on immigration. fists andnd our say, we will do this and this. did you ever notice that people when they become president, they don't keep their promises? i will take a different approach. i will tell you what is practical in what we can get done. i am a conservative with

conservative principles, but we can't do it alone. can we fix this problem? yes. when we reduce the growth of medicaid in my state, no one complained. it worked out better. we live in a culture today where sometimes and reform means we can get a better product at a lower price. we have to stop thinking that just because it is government, it operates like the flintstones. government can work more efficiently and more effectively if we think outside the box. i was talking to somebody here in new hampshire. i don't know this will work, but a member of the legislators said, we want to put this fancy new system in so we can pay our bills and manage the system better, but we don't have money to invest in the system. i said, why don't you try and earn out? ?e said, what's an earn out

you put the system in, and tell them they will get paid on the basis of what gets saved. did you ever think about that? why not? that is thinking differently. i have been told we have a lady here, in bernie sanders supporter, who wants to ask me a question of your will go right to her right now. what do you want to know? >> i want your views on expanding social security and scrapping the cap so that these people out there pay more on payt they are supposed to -- their fair share, as we all have

done, so that our children and grandchildren can all benefit. john kasich: got you. he is cutting me off very quickly. i want seniors to understand that too. wehave -- everybody thinks are broke, we will have social security, but you know what, our government borrowed trillions of dollars for that find to pay for tax loops during bush's time. i'm not going to pay for that anymore. , want to see what is your plan i admire you, i like you. john kasich: how about a handshake and a high? ?- hug she steamed up. i don't blame her. when we were running the surpluses, we were borrowing from the social security fund. we had surpluses and many of the

accounts, which is hard to believe you're here is the problem. the amount of money you pay into social security determines the amount of benefit you will get. people pay more money, and they get higher benefits. scrap the cap, the people at the top will get more elinkits, unless you d-l the benefit, and that turns into a welfare program. if you are on social security or close to it, we will not take from you. the reason we won't take from you is because people are vulnerable. there are many people in this country that depend on that social security check every month. you can't take it away from them . we are looking at all of this. want to say, we will do this, or do that. one thing maybe we can do is early retirement. we are looking at everything that can get us stable, but we can't do it by just republicans

jamming their stuff through. then it becomes like obamacare where everyone runs away from it. there are principles. the principle is if you are on it or close to it, we don't take anything away from you. and determining our initial benefit -- it is the chairman by something called wages and prices. either wages or prices, and that is where it begins. that means i would start at a lower level, which means i would get less over my lifetime. for young people, i want them to note private accounts -- total, but some private accounts like federal employees have. raising the cap will not fix it. fixing it is what are the most creative things we will do, and what do we do for those who are not close to being on it, where

should they start? i am working right now with people who work in washington. i working with him tenure, he used to be a democrat, now he is an independent. let me explain why more time. there are people who have no other source of income, and we our backs on poor people. you know, i don't do that in my state. we will not tell her seniors, tough luck, you are out of luck. we're not going to do that. i don't know what other people are going to do, i tell you where i'm going to do. i don't make promises that i will not keep. that is why you have to have a transition, so that people can plan. in terms of loopholes -- i created this thing called the task force on corporate welfare. i don't think it is right for

.ig companies to get benefits it is corporate welfare. i don't support it. i have this task force. you wouldn't believe how many liberals would run away so that they would not be part of the task force. we made some progress. pharmaceutical companies in puerto rico. i will tell you a funny story. i was on, i think, "meet the and bill bradley is ranting and raving about the corporate loopholes. i said, i have a suggestion, why don't we take the tax preferences away from the pharmaceutical companies in new jersey who put their operations in puerto rico. he neverke rejecting -- got heard from again in the show. we have to look at all of these things. we have to look at all of these things that are out there. when we say loopholes, you have to be careful that what is

described as a loophole isn't something that literally help someone keep a job. i will tell you one other thing i'm not happy about. i am for free trade, but i'm not for trade where people come in here, dump their stuff in our country, and destroy our jobs. it takes like two years to figure out -- the u.s. makes a billion-dollar agreement, and then the koreans put our people out of work. baloney. we should have a system that immediately takes into account that is happening. [applause] the american worker matters. carriedp -- my father mail, my uncles worked in steel mills. they were not white-collar. we have to have fairness for everyone, and give everyone --

the middle class and lower toome folks -- the ability have the tools. my mother never went to college. my grandma lived with us, could barely speaking this, my father's father was a cold minor, and i might become the president of the united states. why? that is america. [applause] ok. yes? >> it is not an entitlement. john kasich: i hear you. young lady? is this about college cost? >> no. john kasich: what do you want to be? .> and environmentalist you have made a moral case for medicaid, education.

the pope has said that morley we are failing the planet because we are not acting on the climate. how is it moral to kick the can down the road for climate change? fairy good. let me talk a little bit about this. i think the pope is onto something here. i don't like what the pope says about economics because free enterprise and the free market has freed more people from poverty than any system, but maybe what he is saying is that we shouldn't worship at the altar of materialism. michael novak, the great that ac theologian, said company without values is bankrupt. when he talks about the environment, he is in agreement with francis of assisi's.

any catholics in here? francis of assisi's. he called the birds have little friends. francis schaeffer, who was an adviser to ronald reagan, one of the great theologians in modern time, he talks about the environment and ecology. god created us, human beings. part of our responsibility is to be good managers and stewards of the rest of his creation, which includes the environment. he does not want us to worship the environment. that is called pantheism. he wants us to respect the environment. to make sure we now it's between economic growth and the ability to have a clean environment. i think it is achievable. i do. and my state, the legislator mandated 25% of our energy to come from renewables. here's the problem. we can't meet the number.

this was a bunch of politicians who plots the number out of the air and said, this is what we will do. we can't meet the number in ohio. we have to buy energy somewhere else at a premium, a high price. you want to bring manufacturing back to america. there are three things we could have going. slower transportation costs, wages that are competitive, and cheap energy. we weren't going to be in a position where we were going to go out of state and drive up the cost of manufacturing in ohio, and put people out of work. what i told the legislator is i believe in solar, wind, i also happen to believe in nuclear, by the way. [applause] we need to come up with a number

that will fit our economy that will work. some of the legislator want to basically forget the renewable program. i said, that is not acceptable. now we have a group that is working on resetting the number so we can develop renewables, and yet, make sure we have economic growth. there are some things that are really exciting. the cost of solar energy -- the costs have come down. and largey is by larg subsidies. company there is a building at now, we will see how that goes. we believe in geothermal, and all those things. they have to fit in. battery development is exciting. . friend has a tesla it is the craziest car. you try to figure where the find is, and you can't

one. yet lady, what i want to tell you is i want to compliment you on carrying about this and coming here today. you know why? you have to stand for something. when you are fighting for a cleaner environment, you have aning in your life. and, you are onto something. i tell you, i'm committed to this. i have 15 year old girls. lake erie, we have to fight with everybody to make sure we didn't anure in it to create algae blooms. cap to do it with reason, carefully, and consistent with people doing work. is right.ke the price you were so excited. come on down. i am from new hampshire.

john kasich: i was just there. is if you are pro-life, and you become president of the united states, what will you do to stop the holocaust that is happening in the united states right now in the killing the unborn and dismantling of the baby five? -- baby pot? aghastsich: people are at this. >> god bless you. john kasich: i have always been pro-life. i do believe in exceptions of in says, and the life of the mother. what you have seen here with planned parenthood is

unbelievable. no one is supporting it. now there are efforts to work through how you support family planning without supporting the organization. we are working on it in the state of ohio. >> would you give money to planned parenthood? i wouldn't be. we shouldn't give government abortion.upport bus >> i would like to ask if you can respect the row versus wade decision. i ask because i'm a lifelong libertarian and i looking for a candidate that is both a fiscal conservative, but not a threat to a woman's right to decide over her body. : obviously does the law of the land. we live with the law of the

land. >> how would you approach the gun law in getting assault weapons off our street? in 1 19i-4, i supported the assault weapons ban. i am a supporter of the second amendment. i think we should have tough laws, but people should have the right to protect their families, hunt, and one thing i worry about are the checks we have against those with mental illness. we don't want them buying guns. we know there are holes in our system when it comes to sending a warning to people when they come in to buy a gun. we have seen it over and over again. that is why it is so vital that we treat people who are mentally ill, and have a place for them

in an emergency situation to be hospitalized. fundamentally, the second amendment ought to be upheld. , have you hadring a chance to look to the recently negotiated iran deal? what is your opinion? john kasich: i will really shock you, i'm not for it. [applause] i have so many concerns about it. i'm not need jerking against it just because you have to if you are republican. i want to praise senator schumer for his kurds. people talk about taking away his position because of the spirit god bless them. all, we are going to let up the economy of iran. i'm not convinced that we would have regime change. i want those young people to be very unsettled in iran, to stop listening to those ayatollahs.

if we were to let their economy rise -- and then they will have more money to fund groups like , it is veryzbollah bad. in addition to that, we just met isis using chemical weapons against the kurds. can you imagine what it would be like if they have their hands on this nuclear material, what they might do with it? what they might do with it in a harbor in one of our cities? it is just unbelievable. i hope the senate will turn it down. here is what has happened. i think the president and the administration felt they needed a deal. i don't know if you have ever something, but

when you fond love with what you have to buy, you end up paying more than you should. buy the iranians can ballistic missiles after five years. the whole thing is really bad. let's see how this whole thing turns out. onwith regards to the ban assaultnt weapons -- weapons. that seems to be where the majority of the killings have been. it is really just the assault weapons. i have been there already. it doesn't work that way. you pass laws -- look, at the end of the day, people want to be able to protect themselves and their families. i'm for that. i'm not for unloading the second amendment. right here. i understand art current

president has never signed a uinget, we just do continu resolutions. would you have a budget process in the grand bargain we have? it is what iif have been watching washington, i don't want a grand bargain. you are a financial planner, and you know whether it is overregulation, obamacare, debt hanging over our heads, strangled which has community and midsized banks -- all of this has led to economic slowdown and the lowest job creation since world war ii. we need to repeal many of these things that are killing us in terms of job creation.

we need to get on the road to a balanced budget. we need to provide some corporate tax relief. we need to make sure we aggressively engage in workforce training. all of these things added together. bring the profits of these companies from europe to the united states. all of this will help us be in a position where we can have effective job creation. that is our moral purpose. >> you have mentioned the .edicaid program at least twice as a medicaid consumer and someone who serves on a medicaid policy advisory board, i have figured something out. simply doesn't work. the answer is to allow states to opt out and create some sort of

voter system that would go across state lines so that i would be able to purchase my own plan, with the help of a case manager. the state of new hampshire could opt out if it chooses to, but we would still be on the hook for and the millions of dollars would stay in washington. what do you suppose -- what i would do, in a nutshell is i would take the medicaid program and empower the states to design a program for the people that live in their state so that people who are poor and is a bandaged can have somodel that fits them -- that people who are poor and disadvantaged can have a model that fits them.

>> [indiscernible] john kasich: i would say this. medicaid money shouldn't be used to pave roads. it should be used to treat poor people. that would be the one requirement i have from washington. we wouldn't take that money and use it for a purpose other than what is intended here. >> you had an interesting point on corporate welfare. can you elaborate on what you might do about ethanol? : the ethanol program and all those subsidies will run out in about seven years. it is all part of this business of renewables. what you don't want to do is continue to subsidize programs like that.

in the meantime, where we are on the is fine. you can have a big fight over it. opinion. win it, in my at the end of the day, the way they haven't set up and the timeline makes the most amount of sense. right here. then i will, p are to the come up herei will to the lightning. e at every town hall. i love it when you come. what is your name? >> chase. john kasich: i love you. ismy concern with our budget mandatory spending interests are eclipsing the budget as a whole. what policy changes would you make to reverse that? like what we did

with medicaid in ohio to slow moved mostrate, we people into managed care where they have a shepherd to take system.ough the we got the people who provide the services. we shrunk the numbers so they competed for a larger part of the territory, which also brought about greater efficiency. we paid the bills exactly. we turned on technology and computers that allowed us to be more efficient. we allowed mom and dad to stay home, if they wanted to, instead of being forced into a nursing home. in the middle of all that, we were able to more aligned our nursing home reimbursement with what is happening across the country. now, we have a program that i think as a replacement for obamacare, and that is to and power primary care physicians to work with the providers and the drive ae companies to

positive outcome in terms of quality medicine at a lower price. i will give you one example. in our community, the children's hospitals made an agreement with the insurance company around child asthma. asthma is one of the big reasons why children are hospitalized. they have developed protocols so that children would be healthy and don't have to be hospitalized. guess what? ,hey are sharing the benefits so the insurance company doesn't get as much profit and the hospital gets part of what they have lost. the kids are healthy, and they don't have to be hospitalized. we need to move to quality medicine rather than quantity medicine. he gets the last one. think the supreme court should have televised their hearings?

no. kasich: i am all for openness, but let me tell you. answer to that is no. i think the supreme court ought to do it the way they do it. i was going to make a comment about congress, but i won't. what you don't want is people playing for the cameras. some of these decisions are very important. not everything has to be televised. there are jury decisions where they ban cameras where appropriate. i would say no. you could maybe make a case and change my mind, but for now i say no. thank you very much. god bless you. [applause]

john kasich: everybody wants to know about my tattoo. fair -- the iowa early you are elected -- childhood development? kasich: [indiscernible] >> do you support a flat tax? it gets very complicated. you have to figure out how to get there. just to say yes wouldn't be there.

>> [indiscernible] john kasich: i don't worry about that. thank you. mindnow what, i don't doing it. pen?i use my own what did you think about a-rod getting another grand slam? >> [indiscernible] how are you? >> can you take a picture real quick?

john kasich: larry, we will call. i have to go to another meeting. ok. john kasich: i'm having a ball. be arising in new hampshire. it is working out. do you ever play golf? golf, you don't watch what the other person is doing. you play your best game. >> [indiscernible] kasich: i don't change --

first of all, i don't have talking points. i say whatever comes into my head. >> [indiscernible] kasich: there are restrictions we have put in. we have done a lot of things in .hio, restricting abortion when the court makes a ruling, they make a ruling. i think there are legitimate and constitutional restrictions that can be put on it. >> [indiscernible] i think birthright citizenship is part of the constitution. that is throwing a wrench in what we are trying to do. there is no debate, you are going back. and, guess worker program -- a program.ker

you look at these are 11 million, 12 million, if they have not violated the law, they can have a path to citizenship. >> you don't think it incentivizes illegal immigration? and donech: i'v with that question. thaty do you think it is jeb bush has not been able to consolidate that part of the party? think i'mh: if you going to answer that question, you are nuts. the governor of alabama calls me up and says, i want to support you for president, and let me go the kidshurch where were blown up in the 1960's. i had a great time with the governor of alabama. we have a great endorsement

here. i have the former speaker in iowa. charles barkley is talking nicely about me. it is really interesting. .hings go up and down she asked a question about isis. i was talking about that because that has been in my head for a while. the i read the stories of rate of those girls and they said i will be closer to god by raping you, i couldn't believe it. that was on top of the executions and the headings. there was a great piece in "the new york times" on saturday that talked about what is happening in western civilization. i called him yesterday, and i sent my thing, and he said his. who livethat folks

next door to us are interested in isis, it is because some of them have lost meeting in thereby, and it desperately. we have to destroy isis and the radicals on the battlefield, but the battle of ideas goes on. the west has to be clear about what we are all about, what meaning in life means, that there is happiness that comes healing, andand the path to paradise is through that, not the path of rape and murder. i want people to hear this. figured that out? i just do these things because i think people need to hear it. whether i win or lose, i want to do some good out here. i would actually like to do some good. i don't change things, but i'm not like stuck anywhere.

i don't have a teleprompter. i don't have talking points. ib, i study issues. people used to say, he is undisciplined. i intend for -- i am tied for second place in new hampshire. . want to do good so, if i don't end, i will feel that i have contributed something to my country. >> you have done 14 of these so far. i'm wondering, what have you learned about new hampshire voters and what they care about that you didn't know before? john kasich: they're just like ohio voters, and voters everywhere i go. they're wondering if the system works, whether they get fair treatment. there was a lady at wendy's the other day, and i said, what do you do? she said, i was training someone

to do my job when they outsourced my job. you know how she felt? i couldn't believe it. she said, i know people who have committed felonies in their use, in their yon't -- get jobs.hey can't these are concerns that people have. people want to be hopeful and optimistic. what i learned more than i ever knew before is that your record matters. when somebody can deliver, when has can deliver, it unbelievable power with the voters. they are tired of having promises and not seeing results. >> [indiscernible]

john kasich: don't take advantage. luck.d >> thank you very much. john kasich: thank you. >> [indiscernible] kasich: i have answered that. >> in our road to the white house coverage, we had to south

carolina tonight with bernie sanders. he is in columbia, south carolina for a town hall meeting. we will have a live at 7:00. bernie sanders will join us to take your phone calls after that. there, is a lot to watch on c-span this weekend. coming up tomorrow, we will be .ive on c-span at iowa this will be the iowa state fair soapbox. that continues. you can see some guests there. that includes bobby jindal and governor christie. on c-span two, i'm book tv, we will be by the mississippi book festival. reel america is on at 4:00 eastern time.

you will see in 1971 short film about a pilot program to improve community and police relations in washington, d.c. all of that this week and on c-span networks. "q&a," aunday night on college student has been visiting the grace of presidents and vice presidents since he was nine and documenting his visits on his website. he talks about those visits and his interest in history. great site that is hard to get to is the rockefeller site. how did you do it? walked farther down the perimeter and saw this gigantic tree had fallen and crushed a fence. he went in and saw nelson rockefeller's grave and saw that

he would have to get me there quickly after that. sunday on c-span's "q&a." >> and still, a look at political and economic challenges in brazil admits protests. some call for the impeachment of rousseff.ent dilma it is one hour and 40 minutes. >> good morning. welcome to all. thank you for joining us this morning. you may be thinking to yourself, ?hy another event on brazil especially in the latter part of august. has dialogue is organized -- organized a few events recently. i think there are two reasons.

first, there is a lot happening in brazil. it is all taking place at accelerated pace. it is important to keep track of developments as they on hold and figure out what they mean. there is a great deal at stake as far as what happens in brazil, not only about america's largest country, but also a regional and global power and actor. i don't think anyone, least of all our speakers here this morning, with think that the rousseff'silma second term would be easy, but it wasn't anticipated how difficult it would be for her. a slumping economy expected to shrink about 2% this year, and scandals,corruption bras,notably with petro

reflected in the president's low a proven levels. insecurity as with problems. it happens street protests, the last one on sunday, demanding dilma rousseff's impeachment. i understand that there are marches planned for tomorrow in rouseff.f while it is easy to point out the country's woes, there aren't the judicial branch and independent prosecutors taking a different role, and less

and less people tolerating corruption that before. we have with us three of the most respected brazil analyst in washington to share their insight and perspective on the evolving situation. we hope they will not only focus on predictions about what will happen, though they are welcome to do that, if they wish. rather, what i hope they will do of theto make sense out current situation, how we should understand it, how serious it is , if there a truce government hanging by a thread, or are there bases for some foundation to the government? second, what we should look for both in the short term and the longer term over the next couple of months. what are the most important

factors that will shape the drive brazil's scenario. the role of different political leaders, parties, the business community, and the like. we are fortunate to help us lead through this morning, we have three silver analysts. sugusto de castro neves is latin americae grew. he has been in washington for the last five years. he has worked at various think inks and consulting firms brazil and lectured at many major university. -- major universities. sotero is the director of the brazil institute at the

woodrow wilson international center for scholars. worked many years ago in a magazine. he is a frequent commentator on many media. you hear his voice and see his face frequently and he is a prolific writer on brazil and other issues. he has also lectured and taught here at washington d.c based universities. finally, peter hakim is president emeritus of the inter-american dialogue. the othersatter what say, he will offer a contrary view. [laughter] brazilian, but nobody is perfect. he is obsessed with brazil and tracks what is happening with

intensity, interest, and great passion. he writes as well for brazilian newspapers and is interviewed frequently by the brazilian press. we are very pleased to have the three of them with us at a very critical moment to talk about in a veryppening significant country in latin america. 10h of them will talk about minutes or so and then we will open it up for comments. thank you for coming on this august session at the dialogue. , why don't we start with you? castro neves: it is always a pleasure to be here and risky to talk about brazil

without the news. , on the ground, things move so fast, it is hard to have a comprehensive view of what is happening in brazil. i think what is interesting here is to do the exercise, take a step back, and make sense of what is happening, and where without using percentages. my idea here is to give some may stillsome of them be very incipient and rock, aw, given that there are a lot of different hypotheses in brazil. when i come to previous questions in brazil -- and there have been many over the last 20-30 years -- i do not think

brazil is going through an institutional crisis. i think it is a political crisis . it is a deep economic crisis as well. i think it is the contrary of an institutional crisis. in fact, part of this is that institutions in brazil work. the fact that you have an independent judiciary and prosecutors with enough autonomy to investigate, there is not a lot of political interference in their work. that is the side that institutions are working. of course, there is no quick fix or easy way out. the problem that brazil is facing now proceeds the current recedes the current corruption scandal. when you look at previous

demonstrations, you had success growth.s of economic basically, brazil benefiting from the commodities boom, that boom cycle that we all know about, but the growth model that in put in place by the pt brazil, that worked quite well, it reached an exhaustion point, even before the corruption scandal started. year would be lula 's last year in office. then, you started to see a slowdown. commodity prices came down. you have this consumption led brazilmodel that implemented well not being enough to keep the ball rolling. basically now the challenge has been for the last few years to transition from that model, that

consumption led growth model withworks quite well credit expansion, a new middle leds to an investment growth model. it is the opposite challenge that china is facing today. this is kind of the backdrop of what is happening in brazil over the last five or more years. a model that works quite well for some time, but needed changing. what the corruption scandal that started almost a year and a half them moremade visible. the fact that you have part of that boom driven by natural resources. in a lot of latin america, i mining and oil.

brazil, colombia, others were oney.ed with m once that started to reseed, corruption scandals or schemes became more visible. it is not just a coincidence that you had corruption scandals pop up like mexico, brazil, chili and argentina. there is a common denominator. so looking at the crisis now and what rousseff is dealing with now with petrobras -- given the magnitude of it and how intricate and systemic it was for the last 10 years it started early on and it shows that there are a lot of chance for corruption in brazil and now that the tide will have receded in brazil will face less favorable winds from the global economy that challenge will

remain and will force any government, a rousseff or whoever, it will allow them to implement that new economic model. i start by staying this that means if she stays or leaves it is not a quick solution to the other problem where the challenge for brazil is to reassess what brazil was to be in the world and their economy. what is the importance of their economy as a huge natural resource rich country. given that the economic and global economic wind will be less favorable than they were, so i don't think that rousseff will be impeached. i think she survives and the reason why i think she survives to the end, despite a deepening crisis in the near term, is that the crisis hasn't peaked yet.

i think it will probably peak over the next six months and we think there are a lot of incentives for prosecutors to continue digging deeper, but at some point things will saturate early next year and i will just give a few examples. given the economic backdrop of recession and employment, popular support for investigations will start to diminish. prosecutors will not be -- the lack of facts that will make investigations slow down, it will be a lack of human resources. meaning prosecutors have to choose what they want and can investigate because they cannot throw a wide net and paralyze everything. finally, there will be a backlash within the judiciary, as well, in terms of the tactics of the judge handling the case.

i think there will be a backlash within the judiciary that will eventually slow down the pace of investigations. so for that reason, i think the crisis will still peak in the coming months. it will stabilize next year. but rousseff will remain for four reasons. there are four conditions that need to exist for her to be impeached -- to be removed out of office. one is a very low approval rating. we have that and we will continue to have that for the time being. for the remainder of her term. the second variable is political isolation, meeting that she needs to lose support from social movements and the core of

the pt. that is different from low approval rating straight the protest that we have tomorrow -- they are anti-austerity and anti-impeachment meaning they are against the austerity package but anti-impeachment. i have a hard time seeing these movements breaking apart, breaking away with rousseff. even if there is more concrete proof but the risk there is whether or not the investigations will get closer. that could lead to hurt political isolation because the reaction function and instinct of survival is to move to the left to radicalize to move to the base. while her instinct of survival is to move to the right and double down on austerity. that kind of disconnect creates a risk and she becomes like the president in 1992 who was impeached. the third variable is that to be

alignment between the largest arctic congress and the main opposition party for the impeachment and that is not trivial given the fact that there are different interests within the pmdb are under investigation as well. even though we can say the leader is not personally involved, the -- if you remove the pt, then the pmdb will be next in line. depending on the impeachment process you have it benefits the two parties differently. say that the pmdb leader resumes, that is bad for the psdb.

finally, the fourth condition is the smoking gun. more concrete evidence of wrongdoing. even though understanding and considering that impeachment is traditionally the political process, keep in mind that the president who resigned in the middle of the impeachment process was acquitted by the supreme court two years later. i do not think all of these conditions will coexist or in the government is very -- i mentioned this before to the

press, that she is close to the brink and will remain close to the brink, but there is no one willing to give that final push because the next government where it takes office will have to implement a similar recipe of governance. the economic crisis will continue to exist. the political challenges of forging a new coalition will continue amid ongoing negotiations because if she steps down that is not going to stop investigations and if the proof is not concrete enough it will bring for the question of legitimacy that could underline the wiggle room and the maneuvering room for the next president to govern. for that reason she is likely to remain but will be weak, kind of managing crisis from now to the

end of the year. >> on a final note, to conclude, the psdb always complained that the pt always took credit. it was crisis management mode. when lula took office he benefited from all of that and took the credit for it. will happen now is the pt will return to favor. they will return to government and will return for a government that will take office after 2018. >> thank you for getting off to a great start. paulo, lots of issues. paulo: thank you for the invitation. it is great to be with you here. keep in mind what he said about the institutional character of what is going on in brazil. what we are seeing here is the result of reforms.

the changes that took place in brazil over the past few years. for instance, one of the main instruments of the investigations under the so-called lavas acto, was activated. put into law after 2013's massive rallies. it is the plea bargain. for that i think brazil is probably thankful to the inventors of that device. the plea bargain agreements that have been instrumental in deepening this investigation and revealing for the first time something we always knew that the system was very corrupt but now we have the x-ray and this

is important. you understand how corruption works in detail. >> the second thing is just about the people in brazil -- including experienced analysts in brazil are very perplexed on what they are seeing. some say we have never seen a crisis of this dimension in half a century because it is political and economic and people that are very experienced and normally share their periods but what is going on are saying, this one is difficult to call for some of the reasons he had already pointed out. let me go to the topic here, can she weather the storm yucca -- can deal a -- can dilma weather the storm. the continued allegations of the petrobras case, the continued

plea bargain agreements, the continued increasing of imprisoned people that you would not expect in the country of brazil, that has the tradition of impunity for people in high places. this is one of the things changing. the expectation of impunity that one sparked popular belief in brazil is giving way to the expectation of prosecution. people are really expecting now that there will be justice and this changes. this is society maturing and changing in brazil. there will be a competition factor. the recession and full bloom

will continue at least until next year and it may continue longer depending on how we react now and what measures we implement to face it. given the efforts of the government by attempting to resolve things by intervening. there is news this morning that there has been intervention from kaiser economic to help some companies. with kaiser providing public money to accommodate some companies. so this contributes to the public deficit in one way or another. there are a lot of factors that are important. recession will continue and thousands are losing their jobs. this will happen in the discussion.

this is an important factor in we had not seen this kind of phenomena for a while. we have not seen it with the public as mobilized and as informed as i think brazilians are today. there is in brazil a week opposition. this is something that favors the scenario that joao just described of the president surviving the storm. there is now, underway, talks of a big agreement with big accommodations that involves president lula, the president of the senate and some political

leaders of the federation of industries and the business communities. people afraid of what is going on in the economy, the economy is in a freefall enter try to prevent that and to find a measure of stability and this is going on and this has different aspects to it. one of the most immediate that we can see is that this could prevent the general accounting office in brazil. a rejection of president gilman's accounts for last year. if that accusation is approved by the tribunal and like here, gao reports to congress. if that stands, you would have a

crime of responsibility to a cause for impeachment. so political judgment remains to be seen, but this seems to be the direction of this effort. there is also talk of advancing the austerity measures and congress. part of this big agreement would be to create space to do it. he has not been able to do as he wanted to advance austerity adjustment measures in fact the government just came up with something new which is we are not going to talk about fiscal adjustment now the name is restructuring. rebrand the thing to see if it flies. will this give the president salvation? it could. i would not at this point bet on it. i think she does not bet on salvation at this point. much more has to happen.

i think we have to continue to expect a lot of mobilization on all sides. a lot of noise especially if acordon leads to efforts to undo the larger operation. we will see this in september the former president putting together the acordon. they are both under petrobras-related criminal investigations. as i mentioned their sectors of the business community but the people investigating are really not very concerned that this is the present of the senate. this is a very popular

ex-president of brazil. if they find facts there that would lead to indictments these people would be indicted. the director general said so much when he was asked whether president lula could be targeted. he said we do not investigate people we investigate facts and we go where they lead us. he was also asked i think it was president lula who said the ministry of justice had lost control of the federal police in brazil like in the united states were i believe the department of

justice supervises the fbi in brazil the same happens. and the gentleman, director of federal police in brazil said in fact the minister does not control the federal police. he has administrative responsibilities but we are controlled by the constitution. and i thought that is a meaningful statement. it shows the institutional change. there is another important fact in september. the chief federal prosecutor is up for confirmation he has just been renominated to stay in that position and he is a key actor in this investigation and he is up for senate confirmation. i think he will be confirmed. not confirming him would be a high political risk for the senate and the other people involved. i think he probably feels protected right public opinion

in brazil. the federal judge marcel, from -- he is a federal judge. he has assisted the federal court of appeals with the president of the support. he will be the reviewer of the decisions by the federal judge who leads the investigation. what will he review? the me give you some numbers of him so far. there happened 18 phases of the investigation.

it started in march of last year. there have been 476 individuals and 16 companies under federal criminal litigations. among them the speaker of the house, eduardo pena, and the former president who is back as a senator. 143 people were accused of committing 31 different crimes. 105 were arrested. including people we never thought were arrestable. traditionally prisons are for black people, poor people and prostitutes. there is diversity in the prison population. [laughter] 30 were found guilty and sentenced so far from a total of more than 225 years in jail combined.

it is an important average if you think about this. even an united states, the average sentence for time served for white-collar crimes in the night states of america is 18 months. there are dramatic cases of people who were in the camp for 25 years but the average is that. 28 people that have been indicted signed the bargain agreements with the prosecutors and the judge and are singing with more to come.

there have been 3300 search and seizure orders executed in brazil. 53 requests of international cooperation made by the federal judiciary. according to the information produced by the investigations there have been 6.2 billion reals recovered -- let me go to the last observations here. i mentioned at the opposition is divided about what to do. not only because the opposition is quite weak and inarticulate, it doesn't have a clear leader

with a political sway and lyrical mende. the main political figure is the foreign president cardoza. founding member of this institution the founding member of the latin american program. president cardozo has resisted calls for impeachment from his party for the peak in a president rousseff. saying impeachment is not a philosophical thing. and the causes are described by

the constitution of brazil. he was finally able yesterday to unify a little bit by calling the leader of pstb and they were able to abandon this by attending the cancellation of last year's election. it was not viable from the start because there is nothing particularly wrong with the way the president was elected. but he says it was completely rigged with corruption. and has not been produced so it should not be pursued but after the rallies that took place sunday had about 800,000 people in the streets the rallies did not create new momentum for impeachment or anything of the sort but are very important. they kept the pressure on. there was enormous

manifestations of support for the judge and the prosecutors for the first time you had little puppets of former president lula dressed as a prisoner. it is really meaningful because he was at one point the most popular leader in brazil's history. president cardozo will finalize his statement on monday. a very important statement. the most significant part of the demonstrations, such as the one that took place yesterday is the persistence of the popular sentiment that the government,

albeit legal, is illegitimate. it is lacking a moral base that has been eroded by the shenanigans of lulopetism. similar to the methods of the doll dressed as a prisoner. even though our president can personally protect herself, she suffers confrontations by the misdeeds and continually loses the ability to govern. at this point, collusion behind

closed doors is only increasing the negative reaction of citizens and does not return legitimacy to the government, which is the acceptance of its right to command and lead. this is an important reference to the acordon that i just mentioned to you. if the president is able to make a gesture of greatness which would be to resign from office or frankly to admit that she made mistakes and offer the path to be taken for national recovery we will witness the growing this articulation of the government and congress. taking hits from the scandal. >> that is until a leader with moral strength and here he mentions, ulysses guimaraes.

as he addressed the then-president collor and said, "you think you are the president, but you aren't anymore." this comes from president cardoso, a very experienced leader who has refrained and reprimanded people from his party from insisting on impeachment of president that so far has not been accused of committing any impeachable offense. but i think it is a very important element of this discussion and i wanted you to leave with this. this statement obviously was

widely distributed in brazil and we will continue to focus on this discussion. there is a problem in brazil that although the crisis and the manifestation of the crisis is economic it is a deep political crisis of a system that is slowly unraveling but it is unraveling and a way they can be productive. you are not going to see a rupture in brazil. the objective has to be economic stabilities. sustainable growth and i would say it won't happen if brazil does it in less they revise some of the tenants of our system one of them, i don't think investor confidence in brazil will return if we don't start to open up our economy and if we do not use the lessons to improve corporate

governance in brazil. i think those are the immense opportunities that we have and i think people are aware of that and there are people who do good work and all of those areas. including businessmen, research organizations, etc. >> think you very much, paulo. peter? anything to react to. peter: i would just like to say -- wow, we learned a lot. what you have in brazil is huge uncertainty. unpredictability. almost anything you hear today is in discussion. there is no sure path out of this crisis or the corruption. so i think that a prediction will be sort of shifted and he said this earlier, what is in the news this morning -- we