they can't even pass a budget. even when they agree they find ways not to agree. they argue about arcane amendments to bills that never et passed. it is so removed from every day life. disposable income in this country is down $2300 from the days barack obama was elected, nominated or inaugurated as president. there are 6.5 million more people living in poverty. they're talking about stuff that is completely irrelevant to the lives of people outside of washington, d.c. changing the culture is the first step to getting government back on the side of people that want to rise up and i know how to do that because i did it as governor of the state of florida. [applause] as governor, we took on the civil service system, the idea of lifetime employment that you can just basically ride it out. 40%, pay for federal workers is 40% higher than in the private sector for a lifetime job and you get a lifetime employment

guarantee? no. that's not how it works. in florida we took on very powerful interests and changed our career civil service system so while floridians were creating 1.3 million jobs in my eight years, leading the nation seven out of eight years, the government declined by 11% in terms of the number of jobs because you could fire someone for incompetence and, guess what? government workers, most of them are good people, did better jobs because they knew they had to and they knew they wanted to and the people around them that didn't care got fired. it lifted the morale of the departments and agencies that did important work. we need that in washington, d.c. you know where it should start? the veterans administration. the department of veterans affairs. [applause] i have traveled all across this country talking to veterans organizations, to veterans, to people that have served, and it is disgraceful.

it is disgraceful what we do with veterans. they serve. they sacrifice. their families sacrifice. they have unique challenges when they come home. and we treat them as though they don't care. they are not important. they are important. it is a definition of who we are as a nation, how we treat our veterans. and here's the deal. as president of the united states i won't take any excuses for the scandals and the corruption and the ineptitude that exists inside the department of veterans affairs. we'll start canning people. i promise you it will get better because it has to get better. no more waiting lists for veterans. lowering the waiting list and having bonuses of $140 million going out to people in management without giving veterans care where veterans die and only three people were fired. heads will roll outside that department. i promise you that. because we need to do a better job. [applause] we will make sure veterans have

a card that says they can go to a private provider. i know that is such an unamerican idea to get consumer's choices. [applause] at a town hall meeting two days ago a daughter of a veteran, an elderly man, had to drive an hour and a half to go down to boston to a veteran clinic when her dad was having an illness. at 2:00 in the morning. there are hospitals galore in her community that could have easily taken him. it was not a veteran related disease. it was simply the gentleman was aging. why shouldn't he have a card that says i'm going to go my regional hospital or i'm going to go to my local doctor? that is the fair and right thing to do. [applause] if we change the culture in washington, then we can get about the business of changing the economy of this country to make sure that we have high, sustained economic growth. i have laid out a detailed agenda on how to do that. in fact, for all the wonks in the crowd, any besides me? only one wonk.

wonkette. go to jeb2016.com and you'll see the full agenda to create a 4% growth strategy. i know how to do this because in florida our growth was 4.4% in eight years. we can do this. on't let anybody tell you that we should lessen the aspirations of this extraordinary country. don't let anybody tell you that the new normal is 2% growth. you just have to get used to it. here's the deal. 2% growth? means more people, interdependent, intergenerational poverty. more people stuck. 2% growth means declining income for the middle class. 2% growth means that young people will be correct in their views today, millennials, that believe that the american dream is dead. 4% growth on the other hand will lift people out of poverty, will begin to allow people to have a pay raise for the first time in a decade. will make sure that this country continues to be hopeful and optimistic. where people will embrace the unforeseen because they won't be fearful of it.

they'll opt to economic opportunity over economic security. that means we need a radical departure on what we have today. on day one, i will repeal all of the obama care rules that are work in progress. i will respect the constitution. i believe in the second article 2 of the constitution. i think we need a strong presidency. this president has trampled over the constitution, creating doubts and fear and divides that should not exist. that's what we need to do. [applause] growing our economy will lift our spirits but we also need to recognize that we have to win. we can talk about the conservative cause. man, i've been doing it a long time. i'm 600 years old in political years. some of you may know that. they're like dog years. i can remember in 1964 campaigning as a 10-year-old for that guy right there when he was running for the united states senate. it was george, jeb, neil, marvin.

i don't know if darla was even born yet on an elephant in midland, texas. i've believed in the conservative cause my entire adult life. i have fought for the principles of limited government, personal responsibility, individual freedom that the pursuit of dreams individually in this extraordinary country will create more opportunities, more benefits than any government program ever created. i believe that in my heart and i know you do as well. [applause] but in order for that to come true, for us to embrace that again, to renew our country, we have to win. e have to win. and how are we going to do that? my belief is we'll do that by having someone who has a proven record, who has a record of running to the fire rather than cutting and running. we have a lot of politicians that are gifted now. a lot of them are running for president of the united states. we got a lot of people running for president of the united states. i hope you want someone who has a heart for people. i hope you want someone who has

a spine. who will stand on principle. fight for the principles we believe in. has a proven record to show it. whose ambition is service to others rather than making sure that they're going to look good for the next political possibility. we have the front running candidate for president of the united states in our party right now who's not a conservative. he isn't. he's a gifted entertainer but he's not a conservative. [applause] donald trump gave money to the clintons. bill clinton, hillary clinton, clinton foundation. donald trump said that hillary clinton would be a great negotiator with iran. in less than a decade donald trump's views on the second amendment, on the cause of human life, across the board on the moral and social issues, have gone from extreme left to i don't know what. donald trump proposed less than a decade ago a tax of 14.5% on

the assets of people in this country. that is not conservative. donald trump believes and admires the single payor system. that is bernie sanders' position. that is not conservative. for a republican to win, we need a conservative in charge of leading the charge for the conservative party to take on hillary clinton or bernie sanders. [applause] and we have to do it in a way that draws people to our cause. i don't know about you but i am sick and tired of politicians that divide us up in our des -- disparate parts. that find ways to disparage people to make themselves look strong. it is not strong to insult women. [applause] it is not strong. it is not a sign of strength when you insult hispanics. it is not a sign of strength. it is not a sign of strength

when you say that a p.o.w. is a loser because they got caught. john mccain is a hero. [applause] it is not a sign of strength, disparaging the disabled in this country. it is not. it is a sign of deep insecurity and weakness. [applause] so you all have this incredible opportunity. maybe you consider it a responsibility. maybe it's a burden to you. i hope it isn't. you have the responsibility of reshaping this race in my mind. you certainly have the opportunity to do it if you like. do you want a president that cares for people that are stuck in poverty? do you want a president that believes that the middle class needs to get higher income? do you want president that as commander-in-chief will have a steady hand, that won't say the craziest stuff in the world to create insecurity for us and for the troops that we count on to keep us safe? you can make that choice. you have the chance to reshape

the whole primary. the pundits have it all figured out. they've got it all figured out. they just marvel at all this stuff and the conventional wisdom has converged. they've got it all. they're the smart people. they're not voting. you all are making this decision. i have total confidence in the wisdom and judgment of new hampshire voters that takes the time to ask the right questions, that takes the time to challenge the candidates, make them walk on the hot coals, to do it politely. you make us walk on the hot coals. i have total confidence and belief that you'll make the right choice. i humbly ask for your support and i promise you, should i be our party's nominee i will unite around common purpose and the conservative cause and i will defeat hillary clinton and we will restore america's greatness. thank you all very much. [applause] thank you, guys.

questions? yes, sir. mic is right behind you. >> i have a national security question to ask you. it's about a particular type of nuclear attack called electric -- electromagnetic pulse. >> yes. >> some of your opponents in the primaries have forth rightly talked about this issue and have been pilloried in the press. >> why? >> well, they're called, if you read the "new york times" or "the washington post" -- jeb: alarmists. i don't. >> there are references to people who talk about this particular type of nuclear attack, electromagnetic nuclear pulse forthrightly, as wearing tinfoil hats, craze cray sis, crack pots, that kind of thing. >> got you. >> is this a serious national ecurity issue? >> it is.

i got to tell you an interesting new hampshire story because on my first, i think it was my first trip here, i went to politics and pie. in concord. you guys have great titles for events. i've enjoyed, what was it? politics and eggs, politics and pie. and the first question this lady asked me and apparently she has a -- she tries to find trick questions, you know, to see if you can trip up the candidate. she said, are you concerned about e.m.p.? lectro magnetic pulse? i would not have known that to be honest with you. i had no clue what that was 10 days before but i had just read an article about it. and if you read the articles about what this is, damn right it's an important issue. there's no tin foil problems with this. this is a huge issue. it could actually happen naturally. and the more that we're dependent upon the grid for everything, you think about today, half of the east coast is shut down. if the grid was shut down, it would just paralyze everybody in place. we are totally dependent upon the interconnectivity that exists technologically now. so it is hugely important. a surge inside the grid could

destroy, just freeze us in place. it would be chaotic. if it was an aggressive act taken by a hostile nation it would have a dramatic impact. or by ultimately a rogue nation that believed in the apocalypse. it is a serious problem. it's one of many new challenges that we face as a nation. one of the dangers i think in politics is that we focus on the old battles. look, there are things that we, a traditional army and air force is still important. we need to maintain the traditional force structures but we also need to recognize from a national security point of view that these asymmetric threats of terror are important, cyber security is hugely important. this issue of the grid and its attack, the attack on the grid is important and how we deal with the space just in terms of our capabilities which we're gutting now. i am from florida and have a special place in my heart for the space industry. it's part of our d.n.a. as a nation. but from the defense posture we

are not -- we are, the gap that we have, superiority gap has narrowed. the russians app chinese are totally committed to this and we hold back. so it is not a tin foil question. it's a good question and i think the next president needs to make sure he is vigilant on that subject. yes, sir? right behind you. >> governor, thanks for coming out. i'm from the neighboring state of massachusetts. >> oh, okay. ou don't matter. [laughter] you matter a lot sir. don't take that as a joke. march first is your primary. love to have your vote. >> looking forward to having you come down. many people feel that the greatest threat to national security is the $19 trillion national debt. >> yep. >> and can you give us some specifics on what you would do to get that under control? >> sure. it is a threat. we're weakened economically. it's hard to imagine how we could restore

the military strength of the country. the solution to the deficit or the debt is to reduce the deficit. and the way you would do that is, first, grow the economy, create pro growth strategies as it relates to regulations and taxes, embracing the energy revolution. those three things will jump-start investment in our own country. we've had a recovery that is totally consumer driven, not capital investing. and so our wages have declined and our growth is tepid. 2% growth that is acceptable today. work force participation rates are lower. you lessen demands on government with higher growth and you increase revenue for government by higher growth. it is far better to do that than raising taxes because that is a, you know, creates a lid on economic growth. so growing the economy. secondly, we need entitlement reform and social security reform. i've laid out detailed plans to do that. that saves over 10 years hundreds of billions of dollars. if we don't do it, the growth of medicaid, medicare, obama are, and the kid care program,

the schip program will grow at 6%, 7%, 8% per year, far more than the revenue the government takes in and far more than any other government program. we have to reform these programs. and i've laid out detailed plans to preserve and protect social security but move to a system that is sound that won't create huge drains. similarly with medicare and medicaid. we need to do the same thing. i think states ought to run the medicaid programs. we ought to shift all of this out of washington, d.c. [applause] we need to get rid of obama care and replace it with a consumer driven private sector oriented patient centered health care insurance system that will lower costs. that's the second part. the third part is we need civil service reform. there are too many government workers. we can reduce and i promise you we'll reduce the government work force by 10% just by attrition. my plan says if you want to hire someone in a department you have to have three

vacancies created. we can shrink the government but we need reform so that they can embrace technology and be rewarded for a job well done but it should not be lifetime employment. that creates huge costs. then finally across the spectrum of government as much as possible beyond medicaid, education programs, the delegated authority to e.p.a., transportation programs. washington is not the place where this should take place. they should be providing this money in bloc grants back to the state. and i trust states. maybe it's because i'm a governor. i just think you have the chance to do it the right way from the beginning. you get a far better result if you just, if you didn't have all the infrastructure and all the old elements of it. if you had the ability to say if we weren't doing it this way how would we do it? that is a liberating kind of approach on policy and that's how you get the balance, get the budget to balance. and then the growth of the economy as it relates to debt begins to get smaller. we have to do this.

there is no way for us to grow as a country unless we deal with the fact that government is growing far faster than our ability to pay for it. yes, ma'am? [applause] >> i'm sorry. >> it's yours. you win. [question inaudible] >> i hope you're going to ask me about the student loan program. >> no. i'm going to ask how you plan to identify and root out terrorist threats and national security threats without threatening individual privacy rights. jeb: did everybody hear the question? how do we balance our civil liberties concerns, the right of privacy in our own country, innocent citizens, and protect the homeland? well, in my mind, that's what we did with the patriot act. and the reauthorization of the patriot act was the right thing to do. i would have supported including the metadata program in it. people have no trust right now that the government is not snooping on us because, you know, you see the revelations of snowden and other things like that. there's no evidence. there is no evidence that the

federal government is snooping on innocent people. none. people say it but there is no evidence that's the case. there is evidence that the metadata program combined with other tools of the patriot act have had the ability to keep us safe. and that's the first priority as a government. they attack our freedoms, the people that are trying to attack us, they see our freedom as a vulnerability. the way you protect the freedom is use these tools with all sorts of safeguards in place. the fisa courts, making sure that you have, if there is any case where someone is violating civil liberties you bring the hammer down on people that do it knowingly or unknowingly. we can protect civil liberties and keep us safe. the challenge now though is the trust that has been broken now makes it harder. technology companies are now not cooperating with the united states government. we need to restore the trust between the government and the large technology reforms where much of the conversation in our lives go through.

the terrorists now encrypt their messages and we don't have a back door means by which to identify how that works. that could only happen with enhanced cooperation. other countries no longer believe that the united states is a serious partner because of the revelations of snowden so they've cut off communications. we have to restore this trust. it can't be done by law. it has to be done with a level of cooperation that will keep us safe. thank you all very much. god bless you all. i wish i could answer more questions. come to my town hall meeting. [applause] thank you. [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. 2016]