and pick and choose the right tools to use depending on the challenge of the city. i think that is why the government should be empowering the states much more than they are to make these choices. the president does not trust us. it is not just me, jeb, or scott walker. he does not even trust him and credit governors to make choices. that is a mistake. it is not helping those who we are looking to lift up. [applause] representative ryan: if we gave out trophies to people who fought against all odds, and lead by example, and showed us how to beat poverty, you would win the lombardi trophy -- the greatest trophy of football. mr. carson: really? [laughter]

representative ryan: you did it. you are beautiful example of overcoming adversity and odds. now, you are aspiring to be president. looking at the federal government, what is it that the federal government is doing that is hurting or putting barriers in front of more ben carsons of america? what would you go at right away, those barriers that may prevent more ben carsons from materializing tomorrow? mr. carson: it really started in the 1920's with the wilson administration, insinuating itself into everyone's lives.

accelerated, by the time we got to the 1960's, lbj, the government said, we, the government, are going to eliminate poverty, the war on poverty, this new great society. how did that work? 19 join dollars later we have 10 , times more people on food stamps, more broken homes, crime and incarceration. everything is not only worse, it is much worse. that is not to say that the government is evil, it is saying that they sometimes overstep their boundaries in terms of what they think they should do. maybe they should read the constitution. i think that would be helpful. [applause] mr. carson: maybe they did read the constitution. they read the preamble and it talks about the duties of government. it says to promote the general welfare.

they probably thought that meant put everyone on welfare. obviously, it means to create the right kind of atmosphere for people. i believe that the real answer for poverty is not government, but the private sector. that is the reason that i have indicated that one of the ways to jumpstart the private sector is look at that more than $1.2 -- 2.1 trillion dollars that is overseas, in terms of corporate money that is not being brought back because we have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. that is absolute craziness. what i would propose is a six month hiatus for that money to be repatriated with no taxes whatsoever, and in the process, require that 10% of it be used in enterprises and to create jobs for people who are unemployed and on welfare.

you want to talk about the stimulus? that would be the biggest stimulus since the new deal, and would not cost the taxpayers one penny. that is low hanging fruit, things that we can do. what happens is the business, the corporations start thinking once again about how we invest in the people around us. we need to get business, industry, academia, churches, all involved in creating the right kind of atmosphere and helping people around them. i have been involved in a lot of nonprofits. particularly, right to life organizations who create these homes and atmospheres for women who have gotten pregnant. when a woman gets pregnant out of wedlock, particularly in inner-city, her education typically ends. that child is four times more

likely to end up in poverty and end up in the welfare system or the penal system which hurts us as a society. they help that woman and provide child care for her so she can get her ged, get her associate's degree, get her bachelor's degree. she can learn to take care of herself. that is how you break cycles of poverty. that is not done by the government. you can put people in places to teach that woman that you are worth something, that jesus christ died for you, and you are a worthy individual or you don't get to hear that when it is a government organization. those are the kinds of things that will help us build the fabric of our society. once again. it is our duty. we are our brothers keepers. [applause]

senator scott: jeb, in the last few days, you rolled out a new plan on expanding opportunities. you want to explain the main points of your plan? governor bush: first, i think what we should do is not just talk about the laboratories of democracy, but mean it, do it. people are stuck, they are stuck in poverty. the notion of some that somehow they want to be there is totally ridiculous, wrong. we will never win elections with that. we will become a minority party. i know people in this room do not believe that. if you start with the premise that the state, if they got the chance to do in the unique ways, each community would do it. the state-federal relationship

would be focused on outcomes -- how may people are getting in poverty, not how many people are staying in it. right now, you measure the poverty programs by how many people are on the rolls. and they grow. that's a measurement of success, sadly. we have to turn that around. secondly, we have to have one income eligibility requirement. when i travel around, i see a lot of people not receiving government assistance, but they are one paycheck away from real disaster, or two. they are struggling, working as hard as they can -- they may be working two jobs. the fact is there should be equity between people receiving government assistance and though -- and those striving to live an

independent life. work needs to be the single biggest requirement. no more waivers, as this a administration has done. there should be real work eligibility. that means we have to transform our education and training programs. right now, we have a skills gap. if they do not have the skills to get a job, that is the first step. all of our workforce programs have to be revamped. certainly, education systems, as well. imagine a system where you were starting from scratch. not the one we have today. if you have the same amount money, but could deliver these programs to help people get out of poverty a different way. you would reward marriage, not penalize it. you would reward work. you would promote, in a dramatically different fashion education so that more and more , of our young people were college or career ready.

only about a third of them are, it is shameful. and, training programs so that you customize it so that people achieve their dreams. those three things, plus strong which they have discussed eloquently in their works in the last two years, that is a we need to do. shift all of this back to communities, and allow those four pillars for an upward mobile society -- a radically different education system, a focus on work, a focus on marriage because that is important, and having education system that allows people to rise up. we can make this happen. particularly when we have a president that is committed to it. the good news, and forcefully the old way has failed. , it is easier to make this case because people know this has failed. look at the number of people who are completely dependent on government they and have no hope. they cannot live life. they are creating strains for

their families and themselves that is unjustified in this great country of ours. [applause] representative ryan: you made work supports an important part of your agenda as new jersey governor. you increased your states earned income tax credit. you focused on the work first progress. tell us, what did you see? how have you been able to measure successes? how would you translate that policy at the federal level? governor christie: we have to really reward the people out there doing it. as the economy got better and more jobs were available, especially in the private sector, we wanted to encourage people to make that transition, like jeb was talking about in his answer.

if you give people the choice of earning more money on the couch the getting a job, that is what people are facing now. i have individual citizens and my state say to me, it does not make any sense for me in my family. if i went and got a job, i would make less than i would write now with all the programs put together. doubling the earned income tax credit was one of the ways of doing that. it is essentially refundable tax credit meaning that when you go to work, even if you are not paying income taxes in new jersey because your threshold is too low to pay, we are going to give you a check that based on the fact that you are earning your income and you will get a check that supplements your income from the government. it is based on the fact that you are working, you are earning your income.

the gap that exists, and i hear people complain about this all the time but don't articulate it completely. they say, people are on the couch, not working, we have to change the system. you are right, but for some of those folks, they are confronted with the ugly truth that if they did get off the couch and went to work, they would make less. representative ryan: in some cases, without it, a person would lose materially if they take the job. the eitc helps reduce that problem. governor christie: that's right. remember, our state is a very high cost state. everything is a bit more extensive than other parts in the country. this gap grows even wider in a state like mine. one of the things that we did not talk about that is a barrier that we have to address and the

federal government is doing the wrong way -- dealing with drug addiction. because, drug addiction is a huge part of this debilitating cycle. when folks lose hope, a lot of them turn, out of desperation, to drugs. then we have a situation where incarceration goes higher because of the policies of the federal government. that is why, in new jersey, one of the things we did, we said, if you are a first time nonviolent drug offender, you do not go to prison anymore. you go to mandatory inpatient drug treatment. this is the disease. if we continue to treat it where you are not a violent prison and making a profit off of it, you are an addict. if we put them in jail, and don't give them treatment, and release him from jail, and wonder why they don't get a job,

they don't play a role in raising their children -- of course they don't. they are suffering from a disease that prevents them from doing it. i believe the federal government has to change its policies toward this. it has been a noble try. it has been 30 years or so of the war on drugs. it has been focused on incarceration and enforcement. there will always be jail cells for people committing violent acts, but we need to get people who are addicts and diseased out of those jail cells and give them treatment. you cannot go to work if you cannot get out of bed in the morning. you cannot get work if you are high on heroin or cocaine. no one will hire you. it is one of those barriers. our policies of the federal government are doing nothing to deal with the real problem that we have which is people can be treated. this is the disease. we can make people better. when we do that, we do what ben was talking about which is

rebuild families. when a father, a daughter, a sister, a brother comes back into a family -- you cannot calculate the positive effect that has on a family or community. we need to do more of that. that is one of the barriers of poverty. the power to treat people, not incarcerate people. [applause] governor bush: it is an important point. 50% are incarcerated for drug offenses. not the dealing, but they use. this is an area where conservatives and the president agreed. the president's impulse is to use the clemency process.

rather than engage with the speaker and the majority leader to deal with something, i think there is broad consensus on. the other point that is important is to give people a second chance. if you believe that marriage is important, and it is, and you believe that work is important, if you have a record, you cannot get a job. increasingly, men are becoming obsolete in lower income communities. we have to make sure that they are empowered to do their job. i think that withholding adjudication as part of the element is a key element. if you are on the road to recovery, your crime, whatever it was, would be wiped out. the employment reforms that some of the larger corporations are looking at -- we have to make sure that people have access to opportunities that exist. other thing, on earned income tax credit, if you are 21-25, you cannot get it.

i think the earned income tax credit needs to be extended to them. and doubling it for all single filers. back to this notion you need to , get men engaged in the workforce again. you cannot have a society where they are obsolete. we see it play out. we see the criminal justice system be overwhelmed. this is an area where there is common ground left and right. i hope you get the president to do his job. [applause] representative ryan: i think there is a common misconception that the eitc is part of welfare. it is not. it is a milton friedman concepts. the problem, the federal level, is there is so much fraud -- we have to go after the fraud.

more ofto make it something that you see in your paycheck. at the federal level it is a , lump sum at the end of the year. you do not see the seal that it makes sense to work. i am losing by going and taking this job. i think there's a lot of reform at the federal level that you get it back to this great conservative idea, which is work pace, welfare is temporary, and when to get myself up and out of it. governor christie: one of the things we did in new jersey was an power the treasure to do a fraud investigation. we eliminated a good amount of the fraud and made an example for those who are doing it. that helped to reinforce everyone's confidence in the program. part of the deal we made was we will agree to double the eitc, but you need to agree to empower the state treasurer to give the public credit and confidence in it credit for the fact that they are willing to step up and help folks, but also confidence that we are not just throwing the

money in the fireplace. senator scott: ben? mr. carson: it may not be a popular thing to say, but the earned income tax credit, any manipulation of the tax system, for whatever good reason, i generally don't agree with. i think we need to make the income tax system very simple and extremely fair, and stop having all these different variations because -- [applause] mr. carson: what those things do, they create bureaucracy. and the need for this agency and this agency. it feeds the system. the system is already too big. we have 4.1 million federal

employees. we have 645 federal agencies and set agencies. we can keep finding reasons to do more things. i think the way that we handled the situation is to begin to teach the populace that if you can stay at home and get government subsidies, or get a minimum wage job, maybe get a little more staying at home. let's teach those people that when you go to work, you meet people, they get opportunities and they are much better off than the person sitting at home receiving those things. that is the can-do attitude that made america great, not the "what can you do" attitude that is taking us down. [applause] governor christie: i'm all for the president encouraging making work something more than just the paycheck that you get. the practical fact of the matter

is when you actually look at the way these programs work and the responsibility for measuring them, the presence rhetoric is not going to make it so that someone will -- that person will not make that decision, no matter how much the president tells them they can go up the ladder, but they say, i'm losing my apartment, i'm not going to put my children on the street. i'm not going to do that, because i'm not going to put my children on the street. we have to be practical. jeb said this before. if we started from the beginning, we could do things a lot differently. we have to be practical about this in this respect. if we say, we are not going to give people that choice, we are going to speak to them about it, and try to convince them. they will not make a choice.

and we will not change what is happening in this country. i'm not saying that every one of these programs is perfect. eitc is embedded in what is already our tax system in new jersey. the bigger problem is we have to figure out a way to reverse what this president has done over the last seven years which is to make people more comfortable on dependents. senator scott: let's stay on the topic of taxes. you talked about repatriation. you out on top of that that corporate inversions have been happening. one way to impact that is lowered the tax rate.

you came up with a tax plan to do that. mr. carson: why does congress have the ability to tax? the back to history, and we see the reason was to be able to run the government. it was not to affect people's behavior. and do the multitude of things that have resulted in a 75-80,000 page tax code. we need to get back to the basics. i want a completely flat tax. everybody pays exactly the same rate. i base that on the bible. i think god is a pretty fair guy. if you have a -- you only triple time. he did not say, if your crops

fail, you do not me anything. so, everybody needs to have skin in the game, and we are compassionate. it is where the 14.9% tax kicks in. below that, you still have to pay a tax. because everybody has to have skin in the game, and it does not make any sense to me for half the people not to pay any taxes, but have a say in how much the others pay. i want complete fairness and a system, but also no deductions and no loopholes whatsoever. people always manipulate everything to find a way to take advantage of the loophole. now, some people say it is not fair. let's say for simplest they say, you have a 10% tax, and the guy

who makes $10 billion payday billion dollars and the guy who pays $10 pays one dollar. that is not fair. the guy who paid a dollars still has my million dollars left. we have to take more of his money. that is called socialism. that does not work in america. as far as i'm concerned. we do not want that. and then there are those who say yes, but my mortgaged actions, i will lose my house. you are not thinking this through. you will have a lot more money. you don't even mortgaged section. then there will be those will say that the churches will disappear because there will not be any reason for people to -- newsflash, before 1913 with a federal income taxes imposed, there were lots of churches. there were lots of charities, all of our country. because the american people are the most generous and terrible people on the face of the earth. an incentive like that in order to be charitable.

you think about what happens as this country was growing and developing, community separated by hundreds of miles, why were they able to grow and drive, because people cared about each other. a it was harvest time and half armor was in a tree picking apples and he fell out and broke his leg, everybody else pitched in. as somebody was killed by a grizzly bear, everybody took care of his family. that is how we used to be as a society. we stay care about each other, we have to reject all of these purveyors of hatred were trying to create division amongst us. and make us think that there is a war on women and race wars and income wars and age wars. religious wars. what a bunch of crack. , -- trength our strength lies in our unity and in our compassion. we are americans and we take care of each other. and when we learn that, we will also have policies that are

fair, that will not pick and choose winners and losers and that is the basis of the tax program that i came up with. >> i went to follow up on the grizzly bears. [laughter] >> i think one thing we have a congress in the society is we have dramatically reduced death by grizzly bears. [laughter] >> there was a big mac up with are talking about which is the poverty trap. it assistance and advising people from going from welfare to work to building their lives. if you look at the marginal tax rates, the highest tax rate payer is not aaron watters and warren buffett, it is the single earning two kids, $20,000-$30,000 to want to go to work who loses $.80 on the dollar if she makes the next

that because of the way the poverty trap is designed. we have to figure out how to ease that, had to reduce those barriers. even if we do that, there is a human component to this. the economics, the numbers, the math figured out, there is still this human components. jeb bush, i want to talk on that. you mentioned corporal punishment at the liberty charter school. >> i did not participate, just for the record. >> we are not endorsing corporal punishment. >> i went to catholic grade school, junior high, i had nuns for most of my teachers. it also developed a healthy fear of nuns within me. i learned lots of lessons, lots of skills. we are talking about drug addiction. there are amazing stories out

there, if you go to san antonio, and visit with patrick garcia and look at his program, which there are dozens of around america, they are going out and administering to drug addicts, particularly harrowing, getting them off the street, in the program, living with them, for months at a time and turning them around and recidivism rates are plummeting. that is harrowing, which if you do it twice, you are hooked. there are these great stories of people actually succeeding and achieving. if they get the math in the economics right, it is the person-to-person touch. people fighting poverty, i die, sold his soul, using passion and religion,church, jack, he did this in the education component, how would ou do that as a federal -- how did the federal government to respect people? to make this kind of connections flourish? we see these things in

spite of the barriers. in spite of the arrogance of washington. how do you change that so we have more of that human interaction? >> like a lot of things in the federal government, scale is the only way that you can access it. you have to hire a lobbyist. you have to have constituencies. to the congress, or you come to the bureaucracies with scale, and you become the incumbent, and that you spend your energy protecting your franchise. not just on social service programs, but across the spectrum, that is kind of how works. disruptors,, the and the social service arena, the social service entrepreneur's have no chance. no chance. they cannot fill out all the godforsaken forms. they can have auditors. if you go to these organizations, these are people who have a spark. this is defining them.

this is how they define themselves. this is they are not doing this because it is a business or an agency. or that their clients are all of this terminology that the modern bureaucratic social service industry talks. they don't talk that way. they talk about acting on their heart and helping people and saving them in ways that are inspiring. i think the better way to do this is to shift as much power away from wall street and washington, d.c.. i'm convinced whether it is medicaid, education, job training, all of these social services, if we could start a new, and create outcome based measurements, that we would have socialmore flourishing service sector were people in the communities could be able to access some of these moneys. the other thing i would think is important -- my brother became president and said there was a faith-based initiative. it was successful, really successful i think and it did mobilize a lot of focus of

turned down barriers to get some of the more grassroots organizations to get involved. it has become different now. it exists, but it is not the same. i think restoring the bottom-up approach as earth -- relates to faith and committee based organizations, to grid a place where they can ease their access into some of the moneys would be important. [applause] >> the person injured his me today was a need a, a fabulous woman who was at one point, when she was a young adult, living in a trailer in florida. she missed two south glen and ashes a billionaire. that's not my point, the point is, -- [laughter] let me get to the question however. the fact is, her success, listening to her over the last 35 years, entrepreneurship, the ability to create and to

innovate is so powerful for those of us who have been mired in poverty, looking for a way out. we look for access to credit, access to capital. today the regulatory environment has been created through. frank, -- -- amid stories like mine far more difficult. gorilla an absolute standing on the chest of would be entrepreneurs. if you look at the poorest communities dropped the country, they lack entrepreneurs. as we fixed that? >> i see this every day as governor because we see across our state, since dodd frank was put into place, closing of communities and state-chartered banks all over. they're either closing completely are they are merging into a much bigger bank because they simply cannot keep up with the regulatory requirements and they are afraid.

they are afraid now that if they make a loan, if they take a risk, that does not go well, that the regulators are going to come in and find -- find them, penalize them, audit them. bankrupt them with hiring accountants and auditors and lawyers. so, what they did in dodd frank, again, is kind of what i said before, the federal government sees a problem and they react emotionally because they want to get on tv. then they take a meat ax to something that they don't even begin to understand or care, quite friendly. what the collateral damage is going to be. the collateral damage has been judgment or secular talking about, to businesses that already started, that are on -- and in little committees all of his country saying that they are having some success. they want to hire some more employees and open up a second shot. they need credit. they are not going to city banker j.p. morgan or wells fargo. to get it. the loans are not big enough and

they are not stable enough to be able to get this place is to give them the money. this is when you go to the guy or woman down the street who runs the community bank who knows you. they like what you do. they're willing to take a risk on you, that is the way it used to be. the way it is now because of the federal government is that the committee banker, more times than not, if they are still there, they say to the entrepreneur, listen i would love to help you, but i have these auditors and these new regulations and requirements and you do not meet all of them. so i wish you the best of luck. this is one of those either cynical and understood collateral damages from dodd frank, or the fact that they did not even read the bill probably for many of them who voted for it. and they did not understand what it was going to do. as president, i think the next president has to look at this and look at these two big to fail banks to have hundreds of billions of dollars in assets, they can comply with some of its

regulation. they, by the way, were the one to created the problem in 2008 with freddie mac and fannie mae which crippled our economy. this was not a small committee bank in florida and new jersey that rate of economic crisis, but we are creating a different kind of crisis now, which is an availability for capital. people trying to take a great idea entered into a great business. [applause] absolutely right. there's an element that is becoming more talked about in the political square and it is a serious issue, which is you cannot be an entrepreneur if you are an a community that has increasing crime rates. you cannot get insurance. you cannot start your business. people do not have confidence. we are seeing increases in crime in the urban quarters of some of our big cities that is deeply disturbing. i think that we need to have a

conversation ashley about how do we support local enforcement so that they can get back to community policing because 99.99% of the time, they are protecting innocent people who feel threatened by the gangsters and by the criminals in these communities that exist. you cannot create an environment where people are going to create jobs in the communities where unemployment rates are really high, or you permanent dependency on government unless you create a streets. [applause] we have two governors have obsolete been very involved in their states and that taken a leading role, you are in education success story in your own right, how do you, at the federal level, six this problem so that as you described, and as your mantra that you, you get people a good education. what do you think we ought to do at the federal level to respect this problem and to treat this problem?

in many ways, it is the evolution of federalism, but go beyond that. that, let mewer just briefly say something about regulations. that i think most people do not recognize. all of these federal regulations come with a price. they cost us in terms of goods of services. it is the most regressive tax. everybody has to pay it. when you go into the store to buy a box of detergent, and it has gone up $.10 because of regulations, who does that hurt? not the rich person, but the poor person. the middle class person will may be noticed when they get to the cash register and everything has gone up a little bit and they do not so good about it. in addition to stifling innovation and entrepreneurship, it is actually hurting the middle class and the poor people in our country and measurably. you have people like bernie sanders and hillary clinton who will say, it is the fault of the

rich. it's not the fault of the ridge, it's the fault of the government who continues to pile these regulations on us which we all have to pay for. of educational policy and the government, the best education we have found -- and i like to base things on evidence and not on ideology -- people who are best educated, homeschoolers. best, private schoolers. charter schoolers. public schoolers. that is not to say that all public schools are back. some are outstanding.

when you centralize things, you take away the ability of the populace and this country is supposed to be of, for, by the people. that's why i think a very large number of federal programs need to be block granted back to the states at 80% and that saves us money at the federal level and we tell the states if you can administer this program and it costs you less than the amount comes you can use the rest. that's going to really incentivize them to be efficient but also make the people pay attention to what's going on and that is especially true in education and a lot o