maximum $15 a day. here in calgary and lots of other cities, parents are paying well over $3000 your for childcare. -- $20,000 a year for childcare. a lot of young people looking at having a family and they look at the cost and it extremely difficult. we would make sure we put more money in their pockets and we would bring in as a model for others and with regard to the other people he would give a race to come a federal minimum wage of $15 an hour. think the housing story is a very positive story in this country. you look around the world where there have knowledge these financial crushes. a lot of them centered around the housing market.

in canada, home ownership is at record levels. now, higher ownership than the u.s. positive canadian story that we should celebrate. how do we in this unstable, global economy continue to attack that? we believe we bring in specific incentives to help homeowners. for instance, the improvements to the home buyers plan, the doubling of contributions to tax savings. things that allow people to invest more in their homes. what we do not need when our economy is threatened by the health of the global economy is tax increases on ordinary canadian families. these are not good for homeowners. mr. harper talks about growth but he has not been able to get it done. he has the worst growth record

in 80 years of any prime minister. we invest in the economy once again. interest rates are low, our debt to gdp is low and economic growth has been flat. we need to kickstart our economy and that is what we going to do so people can get better jobs and a fourth their homes. -- and afford their homes. that mr. mulcair is not making a choice that will allow to invest, they all caps of smoke. we need to announce right now. we need to invest in the future of the country. you like.ke jokes all these are canadians having trouble and you are offering a national minimum wage that will not touch not 9% of people. -- 99% of people.

many -- the: do not least we can say is that it was not a priority for them. childcare --rdable m.p. trudeau: billions of dollars in the provinces kick in. tot: what message do give millennial's today trying to get on the property run? m.p. mulcair: we had a prime minister who thinks a bungalow is totally out of reach. look at the cost of living in major cities. it's out of control. ok, i. harper says it's have a renovation tax credit. we are going to start by putting more money in people's pockets. we will give a raise to over 100,000 people earning the federal minimum wage. they will get more money.

a good signal to the provinces to do the same thing, to bring up a living wage. i think someone who works full-time shouldn't be living in poverty. i have spoken to a lot of people earning minimum wage and you are giving them false hope. you are promising them a national minimum wage. they are earning less than $15 an hour. it is not going to affect 99% of canadians earning the minimum wage. 0 we will come back. canadians have a right to know. m.p. trudeau: you pretend to vote for minimum wage.

eights -- it's a significant thing. it's not going to help 99% of people earning minimum wage. we're also: enhancing the home buyers plan to help families be able to build their first home as we've been able to enhance the first time homeowners by. in terms of rising cost due to the possibility of foreign speculation, we are prepared to act on that if the data shows that the problem. we're doing more than these things to help canadian families. we have delivered the universal childcare benefit and enhancing it. we are increasing deductions. we're doubling -- must -- you: you deliver the same amount of liberals. harper --

m.p. trudeau: they want to continue to send mr. harpers you millionaires.to we are going to stop sending those checks to the people who don't need it so we can send larger checks to the families who do need it and lift 315,000 kids out of poverty. that will make a difference in the lives of people who need it. bidz.com enough money in the budget to fund your promises. mr. mulcair, he said he will raise the corporate tax rate. what economics rather than political reasons justifies your decision? the liberals and conservatives agreed tens of billions of dollars of tax

reductions to the largest corporations was the way to go but that hasn't worked out. we have lost 400,000 manufacturing jobs on mr. harpers watch. it is clear that canada's large corporations are going to go back to paying something resembling their fair share. it will still be less than the average and well below what it was under the liberals but we're asking all canadians to pay their fair share, including corporations but we will start right away. you will start right away to reduce the taxes on canada's job creators. our businesses create 80% of new jobs in this country and we think that's a good idea. you'll also closed stock loopholes because of those are the types that exist for the rich. theirif corporations move money elsewhere, he will lose your balanced budget and revenue.

m.p. mulcair: that's what you have to work against tax havens. we have cases where authorities in other countries have given a list of canadians using illegal taxes and mr. harper has done nothing about that. and we will take the approach to make sure the wealthy pay their fair share. when we made the announcement, we looked out the successive years of promises by liberals talking about millennial goals. -- asountry as well wealthy as canada, hundreds of thousands of children go to school having not eaten. so we will take that money and dedicate it to help lift those children's and their families out of poverty. that is a direct action the other parties have talked about but have done nothing. it is high time they did. their approach has failed and we

will change it. host: mr. harper, you won't raise taxes. how do you raise the federal revenues? p.m. harper: we have cut business taxes and our corporate tax revenues are rising because we have a competitive tax environment. i go back again to what mr. mulcair is saying. he claims he will cut taxes on businesses so why will this plan caused job losses? he raises taxes. they claim they're going to balance the budget and bring in billions in new spending and we end up with job losses. that's what we had in ontario and british columbia and we see the same story in alberta. we had a round of layoffs because of oil prices and no because of the business tax increases. in an unstable economy, we have

competitive tax rates. this is something we need to protect our economy, keep creating jobs. high taxes, permanent deficits don't create jobs. m.p. trudeau: mr. harper is talking about the round of layoffs in alberta and that's why we have a plan to invest in transit and support to invest now where there is an opportunity and thousands of people are out of work who can be put to work in building our country now and in the years to come. on taxes, we feel as canadians, they pay enough in taxes except the middle class should pay less and the wealthiest should pay more. i will do what my opponents will not. i will raise taxes on the wealthiest 1% so we can cut them for the middle class so mr. mulcair lexa talk about fair share but what he will do will do nothing to tax the bank executives who get paid high

salaries because cutting corporate taxes will prevent executives from hiring more people and their economy. you will lose jobs. mr. trudeau's very first vote in parliament was to back mr. harpers taxes. formost recent was to vote bill c 51, which seriously compromises the right and freedoms of all canadians. we stand against c 51 and showed why it was dangerous. that's leadership. m.p. trudeau: we're talking about canadians getting ahead and you're playing the same politics of division and fear mr. harper has. mr. harper wants to talk about terrorists hiding behind every was tod mr. mulcair pretend we are in a police state. both of those are politics of your the liberal party has

refused to accept because we need the votes. connect canadian security and defend our will -- our right to freedom. we have a plan to lift 315,000 kids out of poverty by increasing child benefit payments to families in need it and we are going to ask the wealthiest to pay a little more so we can lower class taxes for the middle class. this is something neither mr. mulcair nor mr. harper will actually do and it's not about politics, it's about doing the right thing. recognizing that with 10 years with mr. harper, there is not been the growth canadians need. canadians with money to spend are going to create opportunities for themselves and community. 20 be clear on what we have actually done. -- let me be clear on what we have actually done. the taxes on small businesses is

down over 40% and will go down further. they brought in tax-free savings account that 11 million canadians are benefiting from. over 6 million adults benefit from that. we are bringing in a home renovation tax credit that millions of people will be able to use. air and enhancing -- we're enhancing registered disability savings. the broadest tax rate you can bring in benefited virtually every canadian. the new york times ran an article that compared the canadian middle-class to others where our disposable income is moving ahead where ours is falling behind probably because we're making sure we have money in people's pockets and we are the only party not talking about raising any taxes going forward or running deficits going forward and this is the kind of plan we need.

not one that comes in and hammers you with a normal payroll tax increase. m.p. mulcair: we just saw that disposable income for families has hit almost hundred 65%. -- 165%. we need the government to create opportunities for canadians by investing in better transit, social housing and childcare spaces, and support for floodplains mitigation, green infrastructure that will create the kinds of jobs going forward we know we need. we have a plan to invest in the future of this country and we are being straight about it. we will run modest deficits because borrowing has never been cheaper because of low interest rates because our debt to gdp ratio is healthy and the economy is flat and canadians need jobs.

we have a plan to kickstart the economy and make it easier for the middle class to get ahead. actuallyhat we are putting forward and right now, neither mr. harper nor mr. mulcair has a plan to do that. host: thank you. largeudeau recently set a number of business owners was tax cheap. i find that offensive. they create more than 80% of the new jobs in our country and they deserve a tax break. that will help create new jobs. i havenot the experience seen with the mom and pop operations. host: thank you to the leaders.

while polluters cut to their breath, he moved to the second part of the evening and this has a different pace to it. in the old days, the electorate used to choose their representatives but as data becomes more sophisticated, politicians are able to choose and ignore keegan their fix -- ignore key demographics. it marks a profound and uncomfortable shift. try to push as i the leaders often there were hers to speaking nose and give them the opportunity to explain themselves more thoroughly and hopefully with fewer interruptions from the others. awill ask each reader question that will be followed by an exchange between myself and that leader before turning it to open debate. the leaders have no prior knowledge of these questions. i will start with mr. mulcair. you with a party that has never

run the country. why should the electorate and the national economy to you? that is a key question in this campaign because after 150 years of being told we have no choice, that we are tired of the liberal sponsorship scandal we have to alternate back to the conservative and only get heart of conservative, there is another choice. bestarty that has the record for balanced budget. duringouglas took over bankruptcy and ran 17 consecutive balanced budgets. i come from a family of 10 children and we had to work hard. we took care of each other. have are the values that guided me as a father, a grandfather, husband. i am very proud of that. we are a party that will make

people our top priority. we brought in medicare and we will bring an affordable childcare. 0 for biography is titled "strength of conviction." your biography is titled "strength of conviction." m.p. mulcair: i've been in public life for over 35 years. i've always served the public. my wife is a psychologist the works in long-term care. our oldest son is a police officer. our youngest son is a college professor and we all serve the public. there is no more noble calling slog want to make sure we do the right thing for people going forward. for my granddaughter goes to university, she doesn't have to borrow at the level done people have to today. edit don't want to leave a

massive debt on the backs of future generations. host: it's something that's a challenge. m.p. mulcair: our fabric understands. at -- we know the only way to bring in something as important as quality, affordable childcare is to build it on a solid foundation, balanced budgets. in 2008, we were in the worst recession. we don't want to leave more billions on the backs of future generations. they don't need the economic debt. host: this is a recurring issue. that is what all of your visions are for this great country. what will you do to build a new economy? m.p. mulcair: one of the things

we will do is make sure it's a knowledge-based economy. the only way to create new wealth is to create new knowledge. when i traveled across the country on a kitchen table tour, a young couple i met and little me between them, they had with hundred 30,000 dollars in student debt. when is that young couple supposed to start a family? that is the reality today and having children is a good thing for the couple and the economy. let's get this right for the future and make sure we get our priorities right. helped canadian families for generations and we want to make sure our social programs are on solid footing. host: let's go to the open floor part. keepsrudeau: mr. mulcair

talking about investing in our future. you cannot put forward a plan for investments like my plan on stephen harper's budget. it takes the optimism we need to invest in our future, to know canadians are capable of building a stronger future and after the low growth we've had, it's time to kickstart the economy. settling myabout kids with a lack of jobs, good infrastructure, a future, because the government didn't want to invest in our country. this is what our plan is all about, building a stronger future. mr. mulcair is putting it off. he cannot give canadians the help they need the way we will. i am being straight and honest. whatulcair's plan is to do we know politicians have done in the past, which is to say we will balance the books and the

numbers are worse than we thought and we will have to break our promises. i am being honest with canadians. we're going to invest in the future canadians need right now. the whole essence of mr. mulcair's plan is he will balance the budget through tax hikes. they left his columbia in a massive deficit. albert's deficit is larger. hikes do not grow the economy and create jobs. they kill jobs and her revenue and we don't want to go down that path. mr. trudeau says we will have greater optimism by spending more. ofdon't measure our level optimism through our level of spending. to make sure we are making investments in the things we need to.

in infrastructure, training. to do that in a way we know we can continue to afford without raising taxes i having a balanced budget and i think in this economy, that's an important guarantee. host: mr. harper, you don't understand canadians that afford to continue to be stuck in traffic because there is no reliable transit. you have been stuck in a motorcade for the past 10 years but most canadians are very aware that the transit underinvestment is a drag and our economy. i have spoken with mrs. valadez -- with mrs. valadez -- with municipalities. they say we have a plan that is exactly what we need. said a planactually for investment is what we need.

the former chair of the bank of canada, a list of the park parliamentary uttered officers. countries that believe in their future are willing to invest in their future. largestper: we have the infrastructure investments in history right now. people see through your games. p.m. harper: the numbers are there. we are doing that without raising taxes. mr. trudeau says it's ok to spend more. those people will always tell you to spend more. you have to be able to -- basedulcair: our plan is

on long-term vision. you know what has to be accomplished. mr. trudeau, you are talking about stephen harper's budget but you have voted for his budgets. i have never voted for one of his budgets and your very first vote as a member of parliament was to vote for his tax giveaway to canada's largest corporations. i can guarantee you jack layton and i thought that every step of the way. i think what we see tonight is an extraordinary -- ofge of ideas between ideas. i want to turn this one to mr. trudeau. taxing the richest and spending

it -- why should canadians up to their eyes in debt the encouraged to buy your message? we are raising taxes on the wealthiest so we can cut them for the middle class. that is the shift we feel we need. mr. mulcair talks about income inequality. except they actually are not doing anything about it. only the liberal party will ask people who have been very successful to do a little more so we can put money in the pockets of people who need it. that is what our approach is because we know that's what we have to do. on top of that and aside from that, we're going to make historic investments in the future of our country because transit, roads, bridges, clean water and wastewater treatment, things it will create good jobs for canadians now as they build them and good jobs and prosperity

going forward as our communities do better. that's what investing in our future is about. that's what canada needs. host: you propose a fairly modest deficit against the national economy. be the you consider to biggest single challenge you face? when i look for the cost of your platform, i cannot add it up. m.p. trudeau: you were the first party to put out a fully cost framework that said we will run three modest deficits over the first three years so we can balance the books in 2019 because what canada needs now is growth. because mr. harper has been unable to deliver, having the worst growth record since the great depression.

you do that by investing in communities, transit, green infrastructure, the kinds of things that will contribute. host: let's go back to your idea of an infrastructure. are these areas that are part of the federal government's role? m.p. trudeau: the federal government's role is to be a partner serving citizens with communities and with provinces. we will respond to the needs canadians have on the ground to improve their quality of life table better opportunities in the cities. that's not what the federal government has been. mr. harper has refused to engage with provinces and has not been the transitner in and infrastructure investments needed and not so we're going to turn around. there's clear sense structural changes happening to

the economy. what will you do, what are your policies to build that new economy? m.p. trudeau: one of the facts we're looking at now are because of the challenges with low oil prices, the of construction and engineering firms here in calgary who were suddenly bidding on local contracts that they've never have the bandwidth to do before. this is the time to invest in your hometown. you need to step up and we need to step up and be there for when unicipalities.- m this is the moment to invest when interest rates are low and our debt to gdp is low and when the economy has been flat because mr. harper has not stepped up. host: let's go to open floor.

mr. harper. p.m. harper: if i could respond to that. you are making record investments in our infrastructure right now, including a federal infrastructure program rolling out across the country. the reason mr. trudeau is running deficits is because he went around the country and promised more money than he had and found out taxing a few wealthy people doesn't cover that is unknown is trying to run saying deficits are a good thing. we did a lot of work to make sure we came out of deficits without cutting social programs. this is a guarantee to people. when we've lowered your taxes, they will stay down at investments we make our sustainable and when mr. trudeau gets us off the anchor of a balanced budget for no reason, that goes on forever and gets worse and that's not a risk you are our economy can afford.

m.p. mulcair: you have run deficits in good years, bad years. the only time you said deficits are not run is in election years. the thought of the matter is you stood on stage is like this, will get canadians three times, and promised not to bring deficits and that's what you've done. -- we are stuck in deficits is because you don't understand giving tax breaks and benefits to the wealthiest canadians is not a way to grow the economy anymore. we of low growth, not the worst job creation record since world war ii of any prime minister, and that's what canadians are feeling. more disconnected from people's reality. you to get this country invested in its own future and that's what you haven't done. p.m. harper: we ran surpluses before the global financial crisis. when the crisis came, everyone in the world run deficits and we told canadians we would run a

massive stimulus program and sustain our economy and it would be temporary and the deficit would fall and we've done exactly that on exactly the schedule we said and we are entering our second year of a balanced budget. m.p. mulcair: on july 19, mr. trudeau give a press conference in which he said he would run balanced budgets not stop. if you weeks after that, he announced he would run $10 billion a year in deficit. he was clearly criticizing the fact mr. harper had run deficits but that's what he's planning to do. the only fair to say when your advisors tell you one thing and another, pick one. you cannot save them both.

your first vote in canadian parliament was to vote for mr. harper's tax cut for the wealthy. m.p. trudeau: i am looking straight at canadians and being honest the way i always have. we are committed to balanced budgets. we will balance the budget in 2019 because canadians need investment and growth now. m.p. mulcair: mr. harper claims he made no cuts to social programs. plenty sat down and announced he would be cutting the funding formula by $36 billion for health care, that's cutting social programs. p.m. harper: let's be clear on the facts. under this government, are transfers have risen from $20 billion -- m.p. mulcair: that number will grow every year into the future and we will hit over $40 billion.

you didn't make -- announcement you are cutting social programs. you like to talk about the fact you vote against business tax cuts. you voted against tax cuts for working people. -- mulcair has talked about health care transfers but he just stepped back from that comment and says balancing the books is more important. move to the final question of the debate to mr. harper. you are going to need some new ideas.

the oil patch resources in general are going to be a smaller part of the canadian economy and it's clear under your watch, canada is no longer an international champion on many different data points. we have record household debt, minimal growth, and in many cases, stagnant wages. why do you deserve more time? p.m. harper: let me be clear. i do not accept what you said. over the past 10 years, we have done better than all the major developed economies. we're living in a terribly unstable global economy. right now, a portion of the economy is hard hit by the following oil prices. that is something that concerns me. we will do something about that but it just just that is all that has been done with our policy is false.

competitive, making sure we are investing in things that we know there's labor demand for, trade, opening markets, access to over half of global gdp. investing in innovation with manufacturers and reforming immigration systems to make it more effective for the economy. that is why i believe the canadians are optimistic. host: let's talk about rate. what do you say to the auto sector as you look at the pacific trade plan? p.m. harper: we know they have concerns. we're entering the final stages of a trade discussion in the asia-pacific that i think will conclude successfully, that will be the basis of the global trade network in the asia-pacific for

the generation to come. i'm not suggesting they will like everything in that but we simply cannot afford as a country to have our auto sector shutout of the global supply chain.we will make sure we get the best deal for that and all of our sectors but we are committed to making sure we don't fall behind and access to a global trading economy. that would be disastrous for the country. host: you know the challenges and problems that come that cannot be predicted. you are facing an economy that demands new thinking. what are you thinking of for the new economy? had we turned this into knowledge and the sharing economy? p.m. harper: i have come to work for seven years in a row with nothing but economic crisis around the world. we now have market chaos in

china, the falling commodity prices. we do have to respond to these crises but we also have to operate on a long-term plan and that's a we are doing. that's not only just about resources but also including resources. i don't want to suggest that we are not going to have a vibrant resource sector. the fact we have unparalleled resources and endowment, one of the highly -- most highly educated workforce is in the world. canada is able to weather the global economic storm's and we are committed to making sure all the sectors move forward together. thank you very much, mr. harper. i will now go to mr. mulcair. one of the questions the prime

minister responded to is in respect to his mission -- vision. what you think we can do beyond the buffeting winds with oil prices? m.p. mulcair: it's possible to build a canada more generous and prosperous. mr. harper tends to believe everyone is on their own and i think we're all in this together. i do come from a very large family and times were tough but i've seen what it is one people work together and try to give each other that helping hand. i also know that it's time people started looking at us differently. i want a democratic institutions respected at home and are international invitation respected abroad. what to make sure every young person gets the opportunities they need and that our seniors get the help they deserve. that's what we proposed to raise

the guaranteed income supplement. host: what do you say to mr. harper's position that the liberals will love for deficit but then there will be slippage? m.p. trudeau: on the contrary. the reason mr. harper has not been able to get out of deficit is he isn't creating growth and he has cut spending to veterans programs. iny are important element building our economy and making sure we are creating proper partnerships and moving our resources and creating educational opportunities for young people across the country by investing in the liberal billion.$2.6 we have a lot we need to do to invest in growing this economy. mr. harper thinks giving tax cuts to the wealthiest canadians will create growth.

talks about the right things but he will not be able to act on them because he has backloaded his promises and he has committed to balance when we don't need balance with low interest rates right now and a declining debt to gdp ratio and a flat economy. we need to invest in our future. that's what confident economies do and that's what the liberal party is proposing. if the right plan to help canadians now. p.m. harper: when it came out the other day that we actually had a surplus last year, mr. trudeau immediately came out and said that's because they cut seniors and infrastructure. spending in those areas has actually gone up and the will rebalance the budget is we increase revenues by cutting

taxes. we're not saying in this fragile global economy everything's great. risks andgnificant challenges. we are making sure we are investing in the things that will cause long-term growth and that will help people to get and higher taxes and permanent deficits is a risk that buys nothing for people. mr. harper was elected on a promise to change ottawa but it ottawa that changed mr. harper. corruption has increased and other what has become a more divisive place. our relationships with the provinces are more divisive and mean. i come out of provincial politics.akes --

it's my job to sit on regularly to work with them on important issues facing them and things we want to bring forward like quality affordable childcare. m.p. trudeau: one of the things i think it's clear is i disagree with these gentlemen on a number of things but the main thing i disagree with is their lack of an vision for our country. mr. harper once you to think better isn't possible. that's not true. talks about making things better but will not act on it. host: there ypu have ot. -- there you have it. the much-anticipated debate on the economy. i like to thank everyone who has joined does and made this evening possible and to the

mayor in calgary for hosting us. you believe in the national debate and i'm sure you agree we got one tonight. a final word of thanks to the three leaders, mr. harper, mr. , we wishmr. trudeau you well and we know you have a common interest in doing the best for canada, just a different way of doing it. stay with us. we are carrying the postdebate later. joint is nothaver to begin the postdebate debate. thank you and have a good evening. [applause] >> the pope's upcoming visit to the u.s. c-span has led coverage from washington. on first stop on the tour wednesday, september 23. a welcoming ceremony on the south lawn followed by a meeting

with president obama. on thursday, the pope takes history on capitol hill, becoming the first to address the house of representatives and senate. follow all of the live coverage of the historic visit to washington. watch live on tv or online. attorney general loretta lynch will speak at the congressional black caucus legislative conference tomorrow hosted by congressman john conyers with a focus on criminal justice reform and policing in the minority community. that is live on c-span two at 11:00 a.m. eastern. at tonight's townhall in rochester, new hampshire, donald trump field with a question from a man who called muslims a problem in this country and that "we know our president is one." here is donald trump's response.

>> is a problem in this country. it's called muslims. we know our current president is one. you know he's not even american. but anyway, we have training camps growing where they want to kill us. that's my question. when can we get rid of them? >> we looking at a lot of different things. a lot of people say that. we're looking at that and plenty of other things. seven years of 0% interest rates in the u.s. and the new york times asks what's another two or three months among friends? that's the conclusion janet yellen and their colleagues reached in their policy meeting when they left interest rates unchanged. the story says 13 of 17 officials continue to expect increases will be warranted in 2015 and with only two fed policy meetings remaining this

year, the possibilities for what they have in mind narrows. presss janet yellen's conference. it's just under an hour. >> good afternoon. you know from our policy statement released a short time ago, the federal open market committee reaffirms the current 0% range for the federal funds rate. since the committee met in july, the pace of drop games has been solid -- job gains has been solid. the unemployment rate has come to -- declined and labor conditions have improved.

inflation has continue to run below the longer run objective. partly reflecting declines in energy prices. recent global economic and financial developments are likely to put further downward pressure on inflation in the near term. these developments may also restrain u.s. activity somewhat but has not led to a significant change in the committee's outlook for the u.s. economy. continues to anticipate that the first increase in the federal funds .ate will be appropriate it remains the case that the committee will come from the

timing of the initial increase based on the assessment of the implications of incoming information to the economic outlook. i will note the importance of the initial increase shouldn't be overstated. the stance of monetary policy will remain highly accommodative for quite some time after the initial increase. i will come back to today's policy decision in a few moments but first i would like to review recent economic developments. it's moving through the realerly volatility, u.s. gross domestic product has estimated to have expanded at 2.25% base in the first half of the year. and notably stronger outcome than expected in june when

committee participants submitted economic projections. andinued job gains increases in real disposable income have supported household spending. growth in business, fixed , heldment was moderate down in part by a significant contraction and oil drilling activity as a result of the this drop in oil prices year. moreover, net exports were on gdp growth in the first half of the year. reflecting the earlier appreciation of the dollar and weaker foreign demand. the committee continues to expect a moderate pace of overall gdp growth even though the restraint from net exports is likely to persist. the labor market has shown further progress this year toward our objective of maximum employment. over the past three months, job

gains averaged two wanted 20,000 per month. the unemployment rate at 5.1% in august was down 4/10 of a percent from the latest reading available. although that decline was accompanied by some rejection -- reduction in the labor force participation rate. a broader measure of employment that includes individuals who want and are available to work but are not actively searching and people who are working part time but would rather work full-time has continued to improve. , that said some cyclical weakness likely remains. all the unemployment rate is close to most estimates, the participation rate is still below estimates of the underlying trend. voluntary part-time employment remains elevated and wage growth

remains subdued. inflation has continued to run below the 2% objective, partly reflecting declines in energy and import prices.by colleagues and i continue ofexpect that the effects these factors on inflation will be transitory. however, the recent additional decline in oil prices and further appreciation of the dollar may mean it will take a bit more time for these effects to fully dissipate. as these temporary fix state and is labor market improves, we expect inflation to go back to the 2% objective.

the committee has taken note of recent declines in market-based measures of inflation compensation and will continue to monitor inflation carefully. this assessment of the outlook is reflected in the individual economic projections submitted for this meeting by fomc participants, which now extends through 2018. as announced in the minutes from the july meeting, we are introducing a modest enhancement to the summary of economic projections by publishing the median projection across fomc participants. these medians provide a concise summary statistic of participant perspectives. they should not be interpreted as a live view or -- as a collective view. teach participants projections are conditions -- each projection is conditioned on the

monetary policy. participants increased their projections are economic growth this year compared with projections made with the june meeting. projection iswth 2.1% for this year and rises to 2.3% in 2016. somewhat -- median growthe projection declined toward its longest rate. the unemployment rate projections are lower than in june. at the end of this year, the median unemployment rate projection stands at 5%, down 3/10 of a percent from june and close to the median estimate of the longer run normal unemployment rate. committee participants generally see the unemployment rate

declining a little further next year and leveling out. finally, participants project inflation to be very low this year, largely reflecting lower energy and nonenergy import prices. as labor market conditions continue to firm, the media inflation projection rises from just four tense of a percent this year to 1.7% next year and 2018.s 2% after the path of the median inflation projections is lower than in june. the outlook abroad appears to have become more uncertain as a late and concerns of that growth in emerging markets have led to notable facility in financial markets. , including the drop

in commodity prices, the further appreciation of the dollar command widening risk spread have tightened financial conditions to some extent. these developments may restrain u.s. economic activity somewhat and are likely to put further .ownward pressure on inflation given the significant economic and financial interconnections between the u.s. and the rest of the world, the situation bears close watching. returning to monetary policy, we recognize there is been a great deal of focus on today's policy decision. the recovery from the great recession has advanced and domestic spending appears robust that an argument can be made for

a rise in interest rates at this time. we discussed this possibility at our meeting. however, in light of the heightened uncertainty abroad and the slightly softer expected that inflation, the committee judged appropriate to wait for more evidence, including some further improvement in the labor market to bolster its confidence that inflation will rise to 2% medium-term. i do not want to overplay the implications of these recent developments, which have not fundamentally altered our outlook. the economy has been performing well and we expect it to continue to do so. as i noted earlier, it remains the case that the timing of the initial increase in the federal funds rate with hunt on the committee's assessment of the implications of incoming

information for the economic outlook. to be clear, our decision will not hinge on any particular data release or on day-to-day movements in financial markets. instead, the decision will depend on a wide range of economic and financial litigators and our assessment of the cumulative implications for actual and expected progress toward our objectives. let me emphasize the specific timing of the initial increase in the target range for the federal funds rate far less important to the economy than the entire expected path of interest rates. once we begin to remove policy accommodation, we continue to expect economic conditions will evolve in a manner that will warrant only gradual increases in the target federal funds rate. compared with the projections made in june, many fomc

participants lowered somewhat their past to the fact that cap -- paths to the federal funds rate. most participants continue to expect economic conditions will make it appropriate to raise the target range for the federal funds rate later this year. although four participants now expect with such conditions, they will not be seen until next your later. the median projection for the federal funds rate rises to and 2% in late 2017 and 3.5% in 2018. 2016 and 2017, the medians are about .25% below those projected in june. the media projected rate in 2017 remains below the rated most participants expect to prevail

in the longer run despite the fact the median and inflation close to the 2% objective. a numbernts provided of destinations for their low federal funds rate projections. particular,ed in the residual effects of financial crisis, which are likely to continue to strain spending for some time, as well as headwinds from abroad. the restraining influence of , ase selectors -- factors the restraining influence of these factors unreal activity dissipates further, most participants expect the federal funds rate to move to its longer normal levels by the end of 2018. i would like to underscore it at the forecast of the appropriate

path of the federal funds rate, as usual, are conditional on participants' individual projections of the most likely outcomes for economic growth, employment, inflation and other factors. but our actual policy actions over time will depend on how economic conditions evolve, which is quite uncertain. if the expansion proved to be more vigorous than currently anticipated, and inflation moves higher than expect, then the appropriate path would likely follow us deeper and higher trajectory. projecteper and hired three. then the appropriate character read -- trajectory would be lower and less steep. the committee's sizable holdings

of longer-term securities should help maintain accommodative financial conditions, and promote further progress toward our objectives. thank you, let me stop there. i would be happy to take your questions. steve, cnbc. madam chair, this notion of uncertainty and economic and global development, is it fair to say that it could be many months before those global developments work their way through the u.s. economic data, and that you would not have the certainty that you are looking for to raise interest rates for many months well into next year? chair yellen: steve, i think you can see from the sdp projections that most participants continue to think that economic conditions will call for or make appropriate an increase in the federal funds rate by the end of this year.

for participants moved their projections into 2016 or later, but the great majority of participants continued to hold that view. of course, there will always be uncertainty. we can't expect that uncertainty to be fully resolved. but in light of the developments we have seen, and the impacts on toancial markets, we want take a little more time to evaluate the likely impacts on the united states. as i mentioned, the inflation outlook has softened slightly. we have had some further developments, namely lower oil prices, and a further appreciation of the dollar, that put downward pressure in the near-term on inflation. we fully expect those further effects like the earlier moves in the dollar, and in oil

prices, to be transitory, but there is a little bit of downward pressure on inflation. we would like to see some further developments. this importantly, could include further improvements in the labor market that would bolster our confidence that inflation will move back to percent over the medium term. -- 2% over the medium term. >> can i ask about the next meeting in october, do you view that as a live meeting even though there isn't going to be a scheduled press conference at that time? kind of developments would you need to see to be confident in moving in the near-term, is it more important in the financial markets or the upcoming data? thank you. chair yellen: as i have said before, every meeting is a live meeting.

, where the committee can make a decision to move to change our target for the federal funds rate, that certainly includes october. as you know, and i have stressed previously, where we to decide to do that, we would call a press briefing and you've toticipated in an exercise make sure that you would know how to participate in that press briefing, should it happen. yes, october remains a possibility. be looking at incoming developments, both financial and economic, to try to make sure we feel that the u.s. economy is doing well. i want to emphasize domestic developments has been strong, we see domestic demand growing at a solid pace, the labor market

continuing to improve. of course, we will watch incoming data to confirm how expectation that that will continue, and we of course will watch global financial and economic developments. i can't give you a recipe for exactly what we are looking to see, but as we say, we want to see continued improvement in the labor market, and we would like to bolster our confidence that inflation will move back to 2%. further improvement in the labor market does serve that purpose, to put the other things we would see that could bolster that confidence, but further improvement in the labor market will serve to do that. gym from the l.a. times. there were a group of protesters out here before the meeting, there was a similar group at jackson hole.

they and others have warned the fed not to raise rates, out of concern that the labor market is not fully healed, wages have not risen fast enough. what impact has had on you and your colleagues and your decision today? chair yellen: we have been receiving advice from a large number of economists and interested groups. that is of course appropriate, and we value hearing the opinions of many differing groups and individuals with different perspectives. but at the end of the day, it is the committee's job to come together to analyze the data that we have on the economy, to decide how it affects the outlook, and to try to deliberate and arrived at a committee judgment about the appropriate path of policy. that is what we did today.

closeaid, although we are to many participants, and the median estimate of the longer run normal rate of unemployment, at least my own judgment -- and this has been true for a long time -- is that there are additional margins, particularly relating to very high levels of part-time involuntary employment, and labor force participation that suggests that at least to some extent, the standard unemployment rate understates the degree of slack in the labor markets. but we are getting closer, the labor market has improved. past, we said in the don't want to wait until we have fully met both of our objectives to begin the process of tightening policy, given the legs in the operation on

monetary policy. kate davidson from the wall street journal. do you think over the last two months that you have gotten closer to or further away from the inflation goals? separately, you have received a congressional subpoena related to the disclosure of information from the said september 2012 meeting, are you any closer to complying with that and have you turned over information to congress? chair yellen: your first question was have we come closer are moved further away from our inflation goal. we have used the same language, which is that we expect to achieve our 2% goal over the medium-term. say, as we say in our statement, recent developments seem likely to put downward pressure. we are after all way below the

inflation targets. but an important reason for that is that declines in import prices reflecting the appreciation of the dollar and declines in energy prices are holding down inflation, well below our target and well below core inflation. we expect those effects to be with inflation executions, we expect inflation to move back to 2%. in the interim meeting. we have seen some further appreciation of the dollar and further downward pressure on energy prices. that creates a bit of further that i wouldtion view as transitory. it is very likely to be transitory. i continue and the committee continues to expect that the

inflation will move back to 2%. this should be a small thing. in the meantime, the labor market has continued to improve. -- tighteror market labor market moving toward full employment, is one that historically has generated a boards pressure on inflation. that bolsters my confidence in inflation. on the other hand, we have had a in which inflation has been running below our objective. i consider it very important that we achieve our inflation objective, and defend against inflation that is persistently above our inflation objective, and also persistently below our inflation objective. only in a have not good degree of confidence that that will occur. we did take note in the

statement of the decline in inflation compensation. it is hard to get a direct read on inflation expectations out of these measures. they can be pushed down by factors pertaining to liquidity, and the treasury, and the tips market, and other issues pertaining to risk premia. but we have taken note. i would say that is something that is caught has caught our attention, and factors we are watching. a littlelike to have bit more confidence, but i would not interpret developments during the intermediate. period as significantly undermining confidence. the labor market is really important, that as it continues to improve, it has and we want to see it improve further, that there is to bolster confidence. you asked about september 2012.

we are working very closely with house financial services committee that requested information to satisfy their request. we are working very closely with them. from the new york times. the economic projections you released today show that members expressed -- expect a three-year time when the unemployment rate will be at its lowest sustainable level but inflation will not rise above 2%. that seems extraordinary. can you talk about why we would expect inflationary pressures one unemployment is at mid-level, why would inflation be so weak, and does it indicate that you are projecting much of the decade will pass without the fed reaching inflation target, does it indicate the u.s. failed to do enough to revive the economy? chair yellen: we have been very

focused on doing everything we andto revive this economy, to achieve our maximum employment objectives. after we took the funds rate know, weero, as you put in place a number of other extraordinary measures, including forward guidance and large scale asset purchases in andr to speed the recovery attain both our inflation objective and maximum employment objective. productionok at the -- projection, you can see that we see sufficient growth to push the unemployment rate. it is already very close to estimates of its learn curb run normal level.

we expect the unemployment rate to fall slightly, but participants project it will fall slightly below that level. if that occurs, we would expect labor force participation, the cyclical component of that, to diminish over time. we would hope to see some decline in the portion of slack that is reflected in high levels of part-time involuntary employment. inflation is going back in our projection to 2%. until 2018 to get there, it is awfully close in 2017, and not terribly far away even next year. fromve very large drags import prices and energy prices. over the next year or so, those and thehould dissipate,

behavior of inflation should mainly, if our understanding of the inflationary process is correct, and if inflation atectations are willi anchored two, if the labor market heels, and if the healing progresses, we will see further upward pressure on inflation. that is what we expect now. it is a slow process. it is characterized by lags, and that is why it takes a few years as the unemployment rate falls, and even overshoots is longer run normal level, it just takes some time for inflation to get back to 2%. helps theershooting cap back faster than it otherwise would. important for us and our credibility hinges on

defending our inflation. from if it rises above, if we would not have over the medium-term that we want to see inflation get over 2%. we believe the policies we are fat -- following are designed to accomplish that end will do so. -- and will do so. >> thank you. from the washington post. i want to piggyback on that question, and bring up the old threshold of 6.5% unemployment and 2.5% inflation, when the fed promised to keep interest rates low. that has assumed, or suggested the fed was comfortable with inflation rising above 2%, but you just said moments ago that you don't want to wait until inflation actually hit your target before you are ready to lift off. and wonder if you could explain that a little bit, is there a

shift in how much inflation the fed is willing to accept? chair yellen: let me be clear, 2% is our objective. we want to see inflation go back to 2%, 2% is not a ceiling on inflation. we are not trying to push the inflation rate above 2%, that is always the objective. ceiling, and if it were, it would have to be conducting a policy that on average would hold the inflation rate below 2%. that is not our policy. we want to see the inflation as rapidlyck percent -- back to 2% as rapidly as we can. but there are lines and the impact of monetary policy on the s on the impact of monetary policy on the economy. employment falls below

estimates of the natural rate, only then did we start to begin "tighten" monetary policy i don't think is right. let me say, just to begin to diminish the extraordinary degree of accommodation for would likelycy, we overshoot substantially our 2% objective. we might be faced with and having to tighten policy in a way that could be disruptive to the real economy. and i don't think that is a desirable way to conduct policy. >> gina from bloomberg news. you mentioned earlier that there is always going to be some

uncertainty in the global economy. that is whatthat kept you from hiking this month. how do you communicate to markets, what is the kind of uncertainty that keeps you from lifting rates, and what is the uncertain you -- uncertainty you can overlook? chair yellen: that is a very hard question. it is why we come together and had very careful of valuations of a wide range of factors. but at the end of the day, we are focused on two things. the path for employment, and whether or not we feel confident we are on the road that will take us to our maximum employment objective, and whether or not we see the risks around attaining that as balance. of course, there will be uncertainty around it. with that, we have reasonable confidence inflation will, over the medium-term, go back to 2%.

it is really through that filter that we are trying to look at uncertainty. of course, there are many uncertainties in the global economy, but we are asking ourselves how economic and financial developments in the global economy affect the risk to our outlook for our two goals, and whether or not they that wenbalanced risks want to wait to resolve to some extent. can you talk about what foreign developments you discussed and what you are concerned about? --assume it might be tied china, are you concerned about the chinese economy slowing, the markets there? do you have concerns about the european economy?

related to stop markets can i ask you feel how -- how you feel about u.s. equity markets, because you spoke about the inmate and you saw that they were generally quite high. now equity prices have pulled back. chair yellen: with respect to global developments, we reviewed developments in all important areas before, but we have focused particularly on china and emerging markets. expected thatg most -- as most analysts have, we have expected to see the chinese rebalance their economy. and iave planned that, don't think there are more surprises there. the question is whether there might be a risk of a more abrupt slowdown than most analysts expect.

i think there were concerns the deftness with which policy makers are addressing those concerns. in addition, we saw a very substantial downward pressure on oil markets. those developments have had a significant impact on emerging market economies that are important committees -- producers of commodities, as well as more advanced countries, including canada, which is an important trading partner of ours, that has been negatively affected by declining commodity prices.

net and players of energies are positively affected, but emerging markets has been negatively affected by those developments. we have seen significant outflows of capital from those countries, pressures on their exchange rates, and concerns about their performance going. a lot of their -- our performance has been on risk around china, but not just china, emerging markets more generally and how they may still over to the united states. in terms of thinking about financial developments and our reaction to them, i think a lot of developments -- we don't want to respond to market turbulence. the fed should not be responding to the ups and downs of the markets. it is certainly not our policy

to do so. but when there are significant financial developments, it is incumbent on us to ask ourselves what is causing them. of course, while we can know for sure, it seems to us as though concerns about the global economic outlook for drivers of those financial developments. they have concerned is, in part because they take us to the global outlook and how that will affect us. to some extent, we have seen a tightening of financial conditions during the interim meeting period. the stock market adjustment, combined with a somewhat stronger dollar and higher risk spread does represent some tightening of financial conditions. in and of itself, it is not the end of things in terms of

policy, because we have to put a lot of pieces together. we are looking at a u.s. economy that has been performing well, and impressing us by the pace at which it is creating jobs, and the strength of domestic demand. have that, we have some concerns about negative impacts from global developments, and tightening of financial conditions. we are trying to put all that together. important, we say in our statement, despite of all of this, we continue to view the of economic activity and labor markets as balanced. there are a lot of different pieces, different cost currents, some street and indeed outlook and some creating concerns, but overall no significant change in

the economic outlook. >> just to piggyback on the global considerations, as you say, the u.s. economy has been growing. are you worried given the global interconnectedness, low inflation globally, all of the other concerns you spoke that, that you may never escape from this zero situation? chair yellen: i would be very surprised if that is the case. that is not the way i see the outlook, or the way the committee sees the outlook. can i completely ruling out? i can't completely rule it out. that is an extreme downside risk of myear the center outlook.

michael mckee from bloomberg radio and television. if the economy develops as bit projections suggest, you will see improvement in labor market, but it won't push inflation of any faster. i'm wondering what the argument is for raising rates this year. even allowing for long and variable lags, you are not forecasting and inflation problem -- problem that would need a faster rate path for at least a couple of years. if we maintain a highly accommodative monetary policy for a very long time from here, and the economy performs as we expect, namely it is strong in the risks that are -- and the risks that are out there

don't materialize, my concern much morebe tightening in the labor markets then you see in these projections. lags will be probably slow, but eventually we will find ourselves with a substantial overshoot of our inflation objective, and then we will be -goced into a kind of stop policy. we will push the economy so far, it will have become overheated, and we will have to tighten policy more abruptly than we would like. slow, steadyving growth, improvement in the labor market, and continued inrovement in performance the labor market, i don't think it is good policy to have to then slam on the brakes and risk

a downturn in the economy. >> one of your colleagues said they would like to see negative interest rates. i did not expect to see that. what do you make a negative interest rates as a potential source of new stimulus if the fed were to do something more? to doing qe, does negative interest rates -- should it be part of the fed's toolkit essentially? >> negative interest rates was not something we considered very seriously at all today. it's not one of our main policy options. committeeipant in the would like to see additional accommodation and is concerned by the inflation out luck and

thanks that we need additional stimulus, additional accommodation to provide him propose doing so by moving interest rates negative. that's something we've seen in several european countries. it's not something we talk about today. i don't expect that we're going to be in the path of providing additional accommodation, but if the outlook were to change in a way most of my colleagues and i do not expect and we found ourselves with a weak economy that needed additional stimulus, we would look at all of our available tools and that would be something we would evaluate in that context. associated press. in july when you were talking to us, you said that you yourself the firstacted to see rate hike before the end of the year.

is that still your expectation? when you talk about the developments in financial markets and what caused the august turbulence -- you mentioned china -- you did mention the prospect of a fed rate increase. do you think that would slow as well? you asked me about my own expect haitians. i would say -- i speak on behalf of the committee and try to explain committee decisions. we do not identify who's who in terms of our projections with the funds rate. i do not want to change that and my personalus be on views on the past. i have characterized the a forecastiew as prevails likely, if it , call for a funds rate increase later this year.

i think that's a fair summary of the committee's assessment of things. i think you've also asked me about uncertainty about our own policies? >> the fact with market turbulence, people concerned about the fed about to raise interest rates. you did not mention that is one reason for the turbulence. the main drivers of the turbulence have been concerns about the global outlook. that is how i read it. of course i know there is uncertainty about fed policy. as i mentioned, we are well aware that there has been a huge focus on the decision today. i would ask you to appreciate that there are a lot of crosscurrents in economic and that wel developments need to take into account in

deciding on what the appropriate course of policy is. not make continuous decisions every single they about our policy. we meet periodically. darndest to pull together the best analysis we intonto exchange views arriving at committee decisions. i do understand during this time that every word that an fomc member has said has been the that for its potential implications for what our decision will be. i think that's an unfortunate state of affairs, but i understand and i think it's natural when you are at a point when conditions may be falling in place for there to be a shift in policy. it's natural that should have been. extent, to some

contribute to uncertainty in financial markets. michelle, bbc news perry and talked about the strong dollar. do you see your policy actions affecting the dollar? is it something you're considering when you make a policy decision? so monetary policy -- u.s. monetary policy -- is directed towards trying to achieve the goals the congress has laid out for us. when monetary policy titans and interest rates rise, it commonly is the case either when it happens or an expectation that interest rate differentials globally do tend to induce capital flows that

have impacts on exchange rates. often hasy policy some effect on the exchange rate . it is not in my view the main channel by which monetary policy works. it's one of a number of different channels by which monetary policy works, but it does have some impact on exchange rates. yes, we need to take that into account. >> greg from market watch. i wanted to see if you would shift gears a little to talk about the housing market. you said in a statement that it has improved. how much are you counting on the housing market for growth going or especially since the committee sees rates rising? thank you. we are envisioning further improvements in the housing market.

depressed.very housing starts are below levels that seem consistent with underlying demographics, especially in an economy that is creating jobs. we had lots of people who are forl double the and demand housing should be there and should materialize as the job market improves and income growth improves. are we counting on it? housing is now a very small sector of the economy. and --ot the driver of ais is my own forecast -- driver of ongoing improvements in the u.s. economy. , butays a supporting role consumer spending is the main by decentstered

outlook for investment spending. but i would continue to expect housing to improve. , ifmber we are envisioning things go as we anticipate, a of increasesl path in short-term interest rates over time to some extent that is already embodied in longer-term rates. on the other hand, as time passes and you move beyond the window and short rates are zero, it will be natural for rates to rise some. we recognize that the housing market is sensitive to mortgage -- market rates. it's an important factor. that is something we are definitely taking into account in thinking about the appropriate path of policy. nancy from market place.

you mentioned you got a lot of unsolicited advice. there's another side that says the fed should raise interest rates because keeping rates so low for so long has actually exacerbated the wealth gap. you think the fed has widened the wealth gap with its low interest rate policy? people say that it mainly benefits the wealthy. iti guess i really don't see that way. it's true that interest rates affect asset prices, but they have complex effects for balance sheets, liabilities and assets. me, the main thing that an accommodative monetary policy does is put people back to work. and since income inequality is by havingcerbated high unemployment and a weak job market that has the most

profound negative effects on the most vulnerable individuals, to back to workople and seeing a strengthening of that has aarket disproportionately favorable effect on vulnerable portions of our population, that's not something that increases income inequality. there have been a number of donees that have been recently that have tried to take account of many different ways actingh monetary policy through different parts of the transmission mechanism affects inequality. there's a lot of guesswork involved and different analyses, with different things, but a pretty recent paper is quite concludes that fed

policy has not exacerbated income inequality. >> thank you. john prior with politico. what would a -- what role would a possible government shutdown play in your vote today? what would you say to lawmakers pursuing the strategy? >> it played absolutely no role in our decision. i believe it is the responsibility of congress to pass the budget, to find the government, to deal with the debt ceiling so that america pays its bills. we have a good recovery in place that's really making progress and to see congress take actions that would endanger that begress, i think that would

more than unfortunate. to me, that's the job of congress. congress charged us with warming and economic outlook that is focused on the medium term taking appropriate policy actions based on that outlook and that is what we've done in the past and will continue to do going forward. >> madam chair, you said in your opening statement that the fed's policy of maintaining a large balance sheet by not starting to shrink the balance sheet by curtailing re-investments and rollovers help set your accommodative monetary stance on top of the near zero federal funds rate. by delaying rate hikes logically are you not also delaying

reducing the balance sheet? one euro ago the he said it would start shrinking the balance sheets until they started raising the funds rate. you areconcern that delaying normalization of the balance sheet? was that an issue you and your colleagues discussed? thank you. been and as was reported in the minutes of our july meeting, we have been discussing reinvestment policy. our normalization principles indicated that we would not begin to either reduce or eliminate reinvestments until after we have begun to raise the federal run -- funds rate. the exact timing of that would on economic and financial

conditions and our evaluation of them. bet guidance continues to accurate. we do not have anything further, but it is certainly true that we to beginitted to wait running down our balance sheet until after we've begun the process of normalization. yes, if we defer, it's not a very large matter we are talking about from a stimulus point of view, but it is to some extent true that if we delay our raising the rate it will maybe delay the timing at which that process will begin. there is no fix. we've not given some fixed amount of time of so many months after we start. we're continuing to discuss what the appropriate timing with the of that policy and have not made any further decisions on that just yet.

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> the federal reserve decided to leave interest rates unchanged. on the next "washington journal," we talk about that in a possible timeline for a rate hike with a member of the financial services committee. the dave bratt on legislative agenda including the september 30 budget deadline and funding planned parenthood. live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. we welcome your comments on facebook and twitter. attorney general loretta lynch will speak at the congressional black caucus legislative con that's tomorrow hosted by

congressman john conyers with a focus on criminal justice reform and policing in the minority community live on c-span2 at 11 a.m. eastern. all campaign law. c-span takes you to the road on the white house with unfiltered access to the candidates, town hall meetings, news conferences, rallies, speeches. your comments on twitter, facebook, by phone. every campaign event we cover is available on our website www.c-span.org. hallnald trump at a town meeting in rochester, new hampshire on immigration, veterans health care, syrian ofugees, and fellow members the republican presidential field. this is about 50 minutes. ♪

song: you're the best around nothing's going to ever keep you down you're the best around nothing's going to ever keep you down ♪ >> fantastic. we love new hampshire. what a great welcome. sit down. relax. we'll be here for a while. -- weow, i said today just got back. as you know we came from mobile, alabama, 31,000 people. 31,000. [applause] then we just left dallas where mavericks the great building, the basketball team, a and marknderful team

cuban was so nice. we know mark. good guy. he said what about using the arena? how long do we have and how many seats? 20,000 seats and they filled it up in two days. is that good? [applause] i then flew from dallas -- always making speeches -- because we have to make our country great again, right? sort of fun. we flew to a very nice place, los angeles. we went to the uss iowa and we were honored by a great veteran group that gave me an endorsement. the vets like me and i love the facts. we have a lot of vets here tonight. [applause] we have a lot of vets here

tonight but that that's on the uss iowa -- that is some ship, by the way. they don't build them like that anymore. but they endorsed me and i flew -- as you know last night, we had a little thing called the debate at the reagan library. it was sort of an amazing thing. we had an incredible time. >> we love you, donald. p: thank you. that was some evening. saidd so well that cnn let's make it one hour longer. can you believe this? that the bay was three hours. it felt like more than that. why did they do that? endave to teach the children to be entrepreneurs. they wanted more revenue from the commercials. is it that terrible?

i think it's terrible. the money should have gone to the vets. right? they've made a lot of money. we had an incredible time. i got such great remarks. look at this. did votes as to who won the debate last night, right? time magazine, 114,000 votes as of 6 p.m., trump 56% -- [cheers] , rubio 7%, ben9% carson 4%, the rest not doing too good. drugdge- we love --donald trump 51% with a total

of 668,000 votes cast. it.k of 51%. second, fiorina much less -- like, much. then rubio, cruz -- i will not mention the next name because i don't like him very much. ahead., way up i like this one. donald trump first place by a lot. reet, donald trump 52%. that's a lot when you have all these guys. it's not against two people. donald trump 52%. then you have slate. we had a great time. you don't read about that much in television. fox has treated me shabbily. but that's ok. cnn a little bit better.

result is people know what happened. it was an incredible time and we are going to do something very special. there's a great movement going on. it's a special movement. people want to see our country be great again. they want to see things happen. he's a great person -- i love winners. we love winners, right? tom brady. [applause] tom is an incredible guy, total champion and did not even want

to tell me about it. he endorsed me yesterday. everybody appear knows about it. when you get tom, you are getting a champ. we have some others, i will not mention them now, but so many people are endorsing. it's a very interesting. coach ditka and people i just don't even know coming out in favor of trump because they want to see the right thing happen. when cnn did a poll recently, they had a few different categories. in leadership, i win -- forget it. so much higher than everyone else. leadership, through the roof. the other thing is a thing called the economy and jobs. nobody is close. the only thing they did not like was my personality. can you believe it? so here's what happened. theent to dallas, mobile,

uss iowa. i making speeches all over the place and we had the debate last night which was exciting. you are no what we are going to do tonight? no speech. let's do question and answer. i'm going to say a few words and then we are going to do question and answer. you can make them vicious, questions.rrible how many cameras are lit? there's a lot of them. aery time i speak now it's lot of them. if i did not get ratings, those cameras would not be on. they would not be on. [applause] when u.s. gore question, remember you are on live television. we're going to talk for just a couple of minutes, we are going to make the military so strong, so powerful. who wants to use it?

you have to have it because what's happening in the world, we need that military, that protection and we will have it if trump is elected president. that i can tell you. [applause] part of that, because i consider it part, but we are taking care of our veterans, ok? they're are going to be so happy. i've been appear many times. times been appear many with my guy? things. to take care of so many vets in new hampshire and they are not treated right. they are not treated right anywhere. two weeks ago on wednesday, they had the longest wait in a waiting room that anyone can remember. think of it. days, four days, five days. it will not happen anymore. it's not that happen.

going to come out with a plan but one of the things we're going to do, when you have to wait that kind of time you go to a private practice, private's private hospital. believe me it will be less expensive and you will get much better service but you will not be waiting in a room for 5, 6, 7 days for a condition that can be dealt with immediately. it's not done a happen. happen.not gonna the only thing i want to dwell on his we're going to build a wall at the border. [cheers] [applause] in people are going to come into this country, but they are going to come in and legally. they are going to be legal.

they will come in legally to our country. so when i announced, as you know -- can you believe i've been a politician for almost three months. i never thought in a million years i'd be a politician. that's the hard part. that's true. we are running this time and it will be incredible. you look not just at the new all of themll but and it's absolutely incredible what we are doing. what we are really doing together. immigration, the politicians are all talk and no action. how many politicians are in this room? these are great, fabulous people. stand up. he's been with me from the beginning, right? what? how about elected officials? stand up.

these are all fabulous people, especially you. so we are going to do something. when the wall gets built, i'm saying mexico will pay for it. mexico.ove i do business with the mexican people and entrepreneurs. i have many, many hispanics working for me, but you know what? whether it's china, japan, mexico, they are outsmarting our leaders and we will not let it happen anymore. we won't let it happen. i asked about a week ago with is with china.it it's almost $400 billion per year. we are talking per year. in other words we are losing almost $400 billion, that's only china.

in japan it's close to $75 billion every year and it's been pretty steady. it's gone up -- of course. we get dumber and dumber so it's getting worse. then we get to mexico. $45 billion and it could even be more than that. i'm competingle against, the so-called candidates you saw last night. some are very nice, by the way. cannot doo me you that. why would mexico pay? they will never pay. why wouldn't they? we send hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into mexico. you have a huge problem at the border with the tremendous job cartels pouring and with drugs and out with money. we're not making a good deal. drug cartelsndous

are pouring in. the numbers are staggering. people say the wall does not work. you ask israel whether or not a wall works. a wall properly done, a trump wall, it works. that i can tell you. [applause] know these guys, the politicians -- they are politicians so i understand. my whole life i've dealt with politicians. you can't get mexico to pay for the wall. it just doesn't work. are losing almost $50 billion. think of it. $50 billion a year on trade. that's just peanuts. they say it's going to cost 10 thosebillion dollars that people have no idea. you will do it for much less, bigger, better, stronger and people are not g