mr. santarsiero: thank you, bill, thank you, brian, i want sentiments, i want to thank especially the young people, college students here at the county community college, as well as the high school students. many of you know that after september 11, i decided to switch careers and ultimately wound up teaching social studies. it is one of the greatest career moves in my life. i love teaching. i saw the promise that next generation has, and it makes me fundamentally optimistic about our future. i also saw the great challenges, in terms of being able to get a good job when they get out of college. it is one of the things that has motivated me to seek office. no matter how this functional it may be at every level, it

matters we have people fighting for that future for those kids. to make sure their jobs will be there making sure they get the benefits. i am very happy to be here and have this debate to have these discussions. this is the most critical election in my lifetime and i echo the sentiment all of us to vote. [applause] mr. pezza: ok. we got that out of our system. [laughter]

mr. pezza: our first question is just one word long. you can respond to this in any way you like. the word is taxes. mr. santarsiero? mr. santarsiero: we need to make sure that our working families -- i think what we need to do is provide tax cuts for our families and we need to fund it by making sure the wealthiest in the country are paying their fair share and we close loopholes. you probably heard from warren buffett about how he should not -- he should be paying less than -- he should not be paying less than his secretary in taxes. just the other night, we had donald trump more or less admitting he has not paid federal income taxes. there is something fundamentally wrong with the system when the wealthiest people in the country can take advantage of those types of access to the loopholes and not pay their fair share.

one thing i've heard from people across the district as i campaign is they think the system's rate, they think every part of our system politically and economically is rigged. it is time we inject fairness into the system and make sure we are doing the right thing for working families and make sure everyone is paying their fair share. at the end of the day, our tax code should be about fairness. i think that is one of the main reasons, you look at someone like trump who admitted he is not doing his fair share. that should cause every american to be concerned and it should cause the next congress to be concerned about it. thank you. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. fitzpatrick? mr. fitzpatrick: i agree the system is rigged by politicians. that is one of the reasons i got into the race.

i saw it was rigged as an fbi agent who spent my entire career arresting corrupt politicians, investigating government fraud. these are the things i saw firsthand and that i investigated and pursued. throughout my career. taxes, i started my career as a cpa. we could use cpa's in congress. people who know how to count, balanced budgets, end deficits. i think most professionals would agree that our internal revenue code is a convoluted mess. they cannot understand the code. you have a system today where the wealthy can afford expensive tax attorneys and are the only ones who can game of the internal revenue code. it is completely

incomprehensible. it needs to end. we have in america the highest corporate tax rate in the free world. 35% corporate statutory tax rate in the united states. our neighbors to the north in canada, 15%. ireland is 12.5%. russia is 20% corporate tax rate. we have a 35% corporate tax rate in the country, and we wonder why we are hemorrhaging jobs in the country. a few weeks ago, ford motor company announced they were relocating all their manufacturing from michigan to mexico. if that is not evidence that our economic system in the country, whether it be taxes or regulations, is broken, i do not know what is. throw all of our unfair trade deals in the mix as well. we need to get the economy moving again and make america a fair place and incentivize people to do business in the country. we will continue to hemorrhage

jobs. if we continue, the unemployment will continue to rise, which means we will have less people paying into the system, lower revenues, and we will not be able to fund of important programs we need, including national security, at a point in time when we are living in a more dangerous world than we ever have. mr. pezza: thank you. one minute to follow. thank you. mr. santarsiero: you know, we do need to cut red tape, especially when it deals with small business because small business is the biggest driver of job growth in the country. it is absolutely true that real wages for the bottom 90% of people in the country have dropped enormously over the last 45 years. we need to turn that around and create an environment more job growth, and that requires investment in infrastructure, education, and job training. if we do those things, we can grow the economy even greater, which will bring more revenue

in, and help us make the system more fair for working families. as someone who has fought to protect the jobs of thousands in the district, i can tell you from day one, that is exactly what i will do is congressman. mr. pezza: thank you. follow? i am sorry, did you say -- mr. santarsiero: no. mr. pezza: our second question. it is an increasingly dangerous world we live in. with so many foreign-policy challenges, one barely knows where to begin. just yesterday, the united states navy launched tomahawk missiles against rebel installations in them and had fired on our naval ships. the nuclear weapons in the hands of leaders such as kim jong-il in north korea is certainly worthy of our attention. i raised this north korean issue with both of you six weeks ago and since then, north korea has more. how proactive should the united states be in preempting the threat? ? mr. fitzpatrick

we need to bek: proactive by working with our international partners in delivering heavy economic sanctions. they have to be delivered and soon. north korea in our last debate, shortly thereafter, they conducted a nuclear test. kim jong-un, a mad man who conducted a nuclear test caused caused a 5.5 megaton earthquake in north korea. a 5.5 megaton earthquake. by comparison, north korea, a six-megaton earthquake. we have serious national security threats emanating all over the world now. north korea was the example provided.

iran, an unbelievable to -- dangerous nuclear agreement that paves the path. even the obama administration acknowledges we handed them $150 billion in assets, previously frozen assets. because of the sanctions, their economy will grow 12% per year. then we have pallets cash being delivered under the cover of darkness and foreign currency and unmarked airplanes. you have russia annexing crimea with impunity. he continues his invasion. in eastern ukraine to the donetsk region. you have china literally manufacturing islands of the south china sea. we live in a dangerous world, which is why think it is critically important, more than ever in our country's history, that if we send people to congress who understand the threats, know where the threats are coming from, how to finance and cut that off, that is particularly true in the area of counterterrorism come boko

have isis, al qaeda, boko haram, al-shabab, hezbollah, hamas, all extending their reach, throughout the middle east into africa, they have attacked copenhagen and munich. they have attacked in brussels. mr. pezza: your time is expired. mr. santarsiero: thank , bill. bill.nk you, the actions are a serious threat to our national security and globals surety. there is no question about that, as is the fact that the iranians have been working toward a nuclear weapon program. i was publicly against the deal not because of how to was back to negotiate with iranians that because i thought the deal did

not go far enough. the fundamental point is we as americans need to be engaged in the international community. we need to have certain goals that we will pursue. one of the most important is nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. it is amazing to me the republican nominee for president has said he is for proliferation, to let more countries have access to nukes. he did not know that russians had taken crimea, and he said flattering things about vladimir putin, that it makes you wonder, ultimately, what american policy would be were he to become president. the fact is that up until about six days ago, my opponent was voting for donald trump. he thought at that point it was ok to give him the nuclear codes. that is an important issue in the campaign because it goes to an issue of judgment.

i do not think the revelations of last friday were necessary for us to understand that donald trump is uniquely unfit to have that responsibility, and i hope voters will understand that on november 8. mr. pezza: mr. fitzpatrick? mr. fitzpatrick: i am stating your position on iran. when you are in the primary debate, your posted originally, but you supported and implementation. that is exactly what you said on the stage and on tape in the primary. i think that is incredibly dangerous for the reasons i mentioned. to give the extent of those accesses -- it continues to flow and we learn more every day to the point where it is being considered a ransom payment. that makes everyone of us less safe because every american who travels abroad now, now that the amended the long policy, that we

do not pay ransom to terrorist, because we have broken that policy, because of the iran deal, everyone of us who travels overseas now has a price tag on our head. isis and boko haram, are everywhere. throughout eastern and western europe. they now know how to raise money. mr. santarsiero: i think what is dangerous is supporting a man, up until just last saturday, who is on record saying he is fine with that eventually would encourage the proliferation of nuclear weapons. i think what is dangerous is supporting someone who will create a religious test for coming into the country, thereby making our ability as americans to fight terrorism and fight terrorism with our arab and muslim allies, that much harder. i think what is dangerous, frankly, is supporting somebody

who has absolutely no understanding of geopolitics. that was your position up until saturday. mr. pezza: i will ask a follow-up. with regard to iran, i will allow you both a minute to respond. wasn't that iran's money, the money that the international community and the international courts have ruled was their money? it depends onk: how you define that. if the money is gained through ill-gotten measures, i do not believe so. the second component is a lifting of sanctions that will allow the economy to grow.

you could argue it is their money but it was money frozen for good reasons. we cannot allow them to continue to enrich uranium, which they are not using for energy purposes. they are using it to build a nuclear bomb. we cannot allow that to happen. it would be the most dangerous thing our world could have, iran having a nuclear weapon. i am telling you the agreement is paving the path to that. there is not a single government official, not a single member of the iranian parliament, not signing on to that agreement. we are abiding by it and they are not and we are fools to do so. mr. pezza: what options would you feel the united states would have if you had a different administration and a congress willing to undo that agreement? what path do we take? mr. fitzpatrick: we continue sanctions, increase sanctions to cut down on their cash flow. like i said, there is not a single member of the iranian parliament, no government official that has signed that agreement. not a single one.

we're the only abiding by it, and we have seen violations on the iranian side of the agreement. they are ignoring it and laughing at us because of it. mr. pezza: thank you. if your comments are that you initially opposed to the agreement support implementation, would you clarify that? mr. santarsiero: money flowing into iran are part from the money discuss here so far this afternoon. for sanctions to a useful and actually have an impact as they did previously with iran, they need to be multilateral. you need to have all of the major potential trading partners part of that regime. by the time i take office if i were elected, this agreement would have been for over a year. it is not realistic to think we can somehow undo it. i would love to be able to, but i do not think it is realistic. what are we left with? we have to do everything we can to enforce this agreement to the letter, and we have to keep the iranians, you know, abiding by that.

to say we cannot do it, it is not realistic. united states could oppose sanctions tomorrow but if the rest of the community does not do that, they will not be effective, and that is the reality. mr. fitzpatrick: may i respond to that? mr. pezza: absolutely. mr. fitzpatrick: steve, they have not signed the agreement, they are not honoring the agreement, they are already in violation. unlike steve, i am not learning about the agreement on cnn. i was behind the curtain and understand the threats. iran getting a nuclear weapon, which they are on the path to do, would be the most dangerous thing the world has ever seen. we cannot allow it to have them. there is a lot we can do. we can cut financing off today if we want. iran getting a nuclear weapon, for us to put our faith in the iranian regime that they will abide by an agreement they have not signed, it is very foolish. mr. santarsiero: may i respond?

mr. pezza: one minute. said, iarsiero: as i did not support this agreement when it was negotiated. we can demagogue this all day, and i do not know what curtain you were behind, but the truth of the matter is, we are left with this agreement now and we act unilaterally, we will not have that kind of an impact. the sanctions were successful before because it was not just the united states. it was the rest of the international community, our allies, the chinese, all of those countries are part of it. for us now to unilaterally moved to do something, it will not work. believe me, i wish it would. i do have concerns about the agreement in terms of what it will do at the backend. but we are not in that situation now, unfortunately. we have to do with reality and that is the point. mr. pezza: we will move on. thank you, gentlemen.

this next question, and we start with mr. santarsiero, recent terror attacks at home have refocused our attention to the use of electronic surveillance to identify threats from our own citizens. to what extent should we engage in domestic surveillance, and how do we build in constitutional safeguards while doing so? mr. santarsiero: i think to the greatest extent possible, there needs to be transparency, due process, we have to always balance, we always have to balance, the need to protect the public and the united states from these threats with our constitutional rights to privacy. that balancing can be difficult at times, but i think the touchstone here has to be to enable people who are potentially subject to this surveillance.

if there is a challenge, that they have due process rights. i think obviously, we want to make sure that our government is pursuing every threat of potential evidence out there to be able to prevent an attack before it happens, but part of that also has to be, we have to make sure we have strong relationships in the communities where the potential terrorists may be coming from. part of that has to be not demonizing muslim americans. we have in donald trump, a candidate who has told the world that he would institute a religious test for the people coming into this country. i have met many times with the muslim community here in bucks county. they are uniformly opposed to

donald trump. if we are really going to be effective and law enforcement will get the information it needs, we need to have good relationships with the folks in that community. i think trump is a disaster in that regard. again, my opponent was supporting him up until just last saturday. i think if he were to become president, it would put us in much greater peril than we currently are. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. fitzpatrick? mr. fitzpatrick: once again on this topic, i am speaking out not as a politician talking about it but someone has actually done it, with one of the premier law enforcement organizations on the planet. the usa patriot act, there was section 215, considered a controversial provision, which came to light during the eric snowden scandal. the usa freedom act addressed the controversial provisions of section 215, a bipartisan solution to deal with precisely what was asked, dealing with safeguards to keep our country safe and also protecting and

preserving constitutional and civil liberties. what the scandal told us is under section 2:15, there were two parts to it, a court order component, where there was mass collection of metadata, and the second was the prison program, the metadata issue dealt with telephone records and what we call information, the location of where you are when you make a cell phone call, and the prison program that with e-mails and social media and the like. the usa freedom act addressed the controversial provisions in a bipartisan fashion, something we need to know -- to do more in different areas, not just in the areas of national security. it is a way to preserve the security of the country while still preserving civil constitutional liberty --

ies. mr. pezza: thank you. anything else? you have got another minute. ok, very good. mr. fitzpatrick: i can if you like. [laughter] mr. fitzpatrick: i could talk about electronic surveillance all day. i will add this. mr. pezza: tell you what, would either of you or both of you just expand on, i am not sure to what extent the general public is aware of checks and balances with regard to the fire the court and when the executive branch is looking to do something in the judicial branch has a role to play, would you just clarify that? mr. fitzpatrick: the fbi has

three essential components, a criminal component, national security, and cyber component. you have heard the concept of the title iii wire tap. that is a provision of the omnibus crime bill where you go before a magistrate. it is a very high standard to three essential components, a criminal component, national tap somebody's phone line. it is considered a last resort from an investigative standpoint . it is considered a very intrusive investigative technique. with the fisa court, that is essentially the wiretaps international security context. what the second circuit had found in manhattan, when they reviewed the case, specifically with the prison program and the fisa court verizon order was that they were abusing their authority. i felt like the usa freedom act struck the right chord is a bipartisan solution to preserve our national security and still preserve civil liberties. mr. pezza: steve, would you like to add to that? mr. santarsiero: i think the main issue with the court in making sure there is more transparency and greater opportunity to have a challenge with respect to what its rulings are.

let's get back to the fundamental point -- making sure we are doing everything we can to prevent acts of terrorism on our homeland. to do that, yes, electronic surveillance is part of the mix. but so is making sure that we have good relations in these communities, that we can get information in a variety of different ways that will enable us to prevent an act of terror before it happens. that, at the end of the day, is equally important and something the next administration and the next congress needs to have foremost in mind. mr. pezza: thank you. the idea of a major job creating infrastructure program seems popular with all parties. we need to build roads and repair and replace our bridges, modernize our power grids, all needed projects. listening to the two presidential candidates this week, i felt like hours watching a monopoly game.

as one said, "i will spend $500 billion," another says, "i will double that and spend $1 trillion." i assume you support and infrastructure program, for many reasons. can we have a discussion about how you pay for it? it is mr. fitzpatrick's turn to go first. mr. fitzpatrick: i view this as an investment and not an expense. we need to invest in critical infrastructure programs in the country. it is not just roads and bridges. it goes to the electrical grid, underground pipes. in many respects, we have an archaic infrastructure program in this country. i think we need to fund it significantly. it is an investment, not an expense. it all comes back to growing the economy. the problem we are in is we cannot afford to fund critical infrastructure programs, the environment, fund education, so we can have the best educated

youth in the world. the reason is because we have a terrible economic situation in the country. we have $19.5 trillion in national debt when the entire value of the economy and our entire gdp is about $18.5 trillion. the interest component alone was i believe the fifth-largest spending program in our country. that is with historically low interest rates. it will soon become the third-largest. that is just to service the debt we have. we're hemorrhaging jobs, as i gave the example most recently with ford motor company to mexico, and you have regulations that are literally strangling businesses. the overall economic climate is strangling distances in every single company i visited in the district is telling me the same thing. they cannot grow or hire new employees because of ever-increasing regulations, burdensome tax rates.

if we could create a program of economic environment, we could afford to fund things like infrastructure, which is critically important. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. santarsiero? you.antarsiero: thank it is a critical issue and one of the things i care very deeply about. and one of the things i have been involved in as a member of the state legislature. we were able to pass a major transportation and restructure funding bill a few years ago. i see my colleague, frank, in the audience. he voted for that as well. you look around now and see roads and bridges being repaired, it is because of that and because a republican governor's bill and equal numbers of us on both sides of the aisle made it happen. i think the f.a.s.t. act that was passed in congress in december was a good start, probably about 1/3 of what needs

to be done. we need to invest not just in roads and bridges, but in our waterways and here in the eighth district, we have a river we are blessed with. we need to invest in i.t. of the structure and to invest ultimately in our energy grid infrastructure as well. that will help us invest in renewable energy sources. how do we do that and fund all of this, the central part of the question. infrastructure bonds are one way to do it. secretary clinton talked about creating something solely geared toward raising money of the capital for infrastructure. we need the congress -- we can put people to work, we can thereby create more jobs and grow the economy while at the same time making our roads and bridges safer and ultimately making us more competitive in the world by having a first-class, world-class we would fund these through

growth. havere indicating that we pay for itnds and that way. reactions? >> it is interesting that i want to grow our way out and steve wants to add debt. >> for decades in this country we funded projects like this by fund issues. that was done by republicans and democrats. i would love to grow our way out of things to but that is not going to happen overnight. the truth is if we are going to have a stronger economy that employs more people, that has wages rising, that brings more revenue into our government, we need to have a world-class

infrastructure. just saying it is going to happen through growing the economy is not the answer. at the end of the day, we need to make sure that we are making this paid priority and it needs to happen on a bipartisan basis. the good news is it happened on a bipartisan basis in harrisburg and it can happen in washington as well. >> thank you. in case you haven't noticed it is rare that the democratic resident of the united states and the republican leadership of congress agree on economic issues. however, they did agree on the transpacific partnership trade agreement. speaker of the house paul ryan has explained that one of the -- one in five jobs is based upon foreign trade. in this campaign, both donald trump and later, hillary clinton said they oppose the agreement.

a problem for me. how can the highest-ranking democratic figure in the country and the highest-ranking republican figures in the country agree in a plan and say this is good for america and to candidates for office from the two major parties say it is bad for america. extent, and your view, is a proper balance between free and protectionism? it is the general concept of free trade. and specifically had did each agreement impact your potential constituents in bucks county? grexit is a critical issue. i think it is a false question .etween the two it is not as if the alternative to these agreements is protectionism. we need to have trade agreements the are fair and

fundamental problem is it is not fair. it does not equal the playing field, it leaves american workers and american jobs at risk because you still have in the other potential signatories to the agreement, systems where they do not have the same environmental protections we have in the united states. they do not have the same worker safety protections we have five -- fought for for over 100 years in the united states. in fact, the agreement would ultimately subject those regulations in the united states to potential litigation and challenge. the issue is not so much whether it be protectionism or the trade agreements. the issue is whether we will have fair trade agreements that attempt to level the playing field so american workers and american jobs can actually compete with these developing countries. that is what we ought to be fighting for. i think we lose that if we think it is just the old question about whether we should gate -- engage in protection. we're done with that era. we need to make sure china's being fair when it comes to how they treat american companies

doing business there, and how they deal with, you know, trying -- steal our intellectual property and espionage against american company interests. those are things we need to deal with in separate agreements. but ultimately, our trade policy has to be governed by the concept of first and foremost. fairness mr. fitzpatrick: i'm , opposed to the ttp for a simple reason. we cannot afford any longer to engage and enters the trade -- enter into trade agreements that are bleeding jobs in this country. it crosses party lines. it was a bad idea with nasa under president clinton, and aftat was a bad idea with c under president bush and it is a problem now with tpb under president obama. the trade agreement would encapsulate 40% of the world

's gdp we have a bad history in . the country of entry into trade agreements because yet again, this year, we will have a massive trade deficit. everyone of the trade agreements are bleeding jobs out of the economy. i have seen it firsthand, perhaps more so than anywhere else in the district. the manufacturing base is being decimated and the middle-class is being crushed and it is due part of parcel to these trade agreements. there are 12 member countries, approximately one dozen. it seems like a very bad idea to me. the main reason is what we have seen and learned from history is when you enter into trade agreements with countries that have lower labor standards than we do, countries that manipulate currency as a matter of public policy, it is time and time again a loser of the deal for the country. it is time to stand up against that. trade is good and necessary. we live in a global economy.

we need trade. but it has to be fair and it has to benefit the united states of america. mr. pezza: you both have a follow-up let me interject before you do. i respectfully have a concern with what other of you have said so far. i want to reiterate the democratic president of united states and the republican leadership of congress have said this is a good trade agreement. they supported it. what were they thinking? are we pandering to populism? i'm speaking nationally, not just of the two of you. i understand the frustration among the american workers. jobs are leaving and we need to blame it on someone and something. what were the leaders of our country thinking who negotiated the deal and said, good deal, let's support it? >> i think they had good intentions. but just because they support it does not mean being against it is pandering. at the end of the day, they have come up with an agreement that is not a good agreement.

i understand what they were trying to do. they were trying to create trade blocs that would also be a counterbalance to china. it makes sense strategically. and just because president obama is in favor does not mean it is the right thing. it is notbalanced, fair and ultimately, it will cause more american jobs to leave our shores at a time when we can ill afford that. >> we have a track record. after it was a wasrtisan agreement, cafta

a bipartisan agreement. i have not delved and completely but what i have seen i do not like it. if -- it follows the same exact path and if we do not learn from our past missions, shame on us. >> thank you. let's discuss health care. without the tired, old, protectable rhetoric, we know the problems and the benefits. let me summarize them. we want to hear your positions moving forward. on the upside, we know that millions of additional americans now have coverage of the affordable care act. on the downside, we also know that costs have risen well beyond expectations. how do we continue to expand coverage while at the same time bringing costs under control? please be specific. mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: the way to expand coverage, and we all want everyone to have health

insurance in this country. i believe health insurance is a right, not a privilege. we need everyone insured. the question is how we do it. what we have seen with the affordable care act, five years after implementation, if you look at a three component to the affordable care act, individual mandate, corporate mandate, and state-run exchanges. what we have seen five years after implementation is that health care costs have gone up and not everyone is insured. in this district alone, five years after implementation, we have roughly 35,000 people in our district that still don't have health insurance. mainly by choice. the way the affordable care act was set up, similar to the social security model, the younger, healthier population would subsidize the cost of the older population. what we have seen, however well intended it was, it collapsed under its own weight take of the younger population are finding it more cost-effective to pay the fine than it is to ensure themselves.

that is the problem. the employer mandate, i have spoken to so many businesses throughout the district, especially in the restaurant industry, which is interesting. a lot of them were told that the affordable care act would only apply to organizations with more than 50 employees. what they did not know, many are filling out the aca compliance sheet for the first time, and you have to aggregate part-time hours. that is putting a lot of these restaurants in a position where they either have to lay off employees or pay a fine, which puts their business in jeopardy. state-run exchanges, what we're seeing time and again is that so many of these exchanges are falling out because they cannot afford it. to answer the question from the start, the way we expand access is to reduce cost. there are ways to reduce cost if we allow out-of-state competition. competition breeds excellence. if you allow competition, costs will go down. portability from one employer to the next, medical liability reform, which mostly tell you is a significant cost driver.

ordering tests that are unnecessary. there are steps we can take but the model has to be reduce cost. if you reduce cost, you expand access. mr. pezza: mr. santarsiero? mr. santarsiero: there are two. -- two fundamental problems. one of them is making sure that people are insured. that is more a respect for younger and healthier people. the cost issue takes two forms as it has played out under the aca. one is the cost of policies. the other is the cost of these highly adoptable policies at -- deductible policies that are out there. as a practical matter, many families who have insurance are paying very high out-of-pocket cost, and we had to do something about that. we have another issue we high cost of project -- but in drugs. -- of prescription drugs. one thing that did not make it but was initial bill

supported by many members of congress is the public option. even speaker ryan supports the public option. the public option would give yet another opportunity for competition with the big insurance companies to help bring the costs of those policies down and ultimately to also bring down the cost of the deductibles. but we also need to look at on the prescription drug side doing things like medicare negotiate for prescription drugs, to bring those costs down as well. we have an aging population in this country. it is not acceptable that the cost of prescription drugs keeps skyrocketing and many are having to choose between their medication and being able to feed themselves. i think those things are changes to the aca that need to be made and i think it have a real impact ultimately both on the scope of coverage, and the cost of bringing them down. mr. pezza: thank you. follow-up? i want to ask a follow-up,

public option. mr. fitzpatrick: i think more competition is good. mr. pezza: malpractice reform, defensive medicine. mr. santarsiero: matt trackless malpractice reform is largely a red herring with the cost of health care. it has not been driving up health care cost. the fact of the matter is, those jury awards are not making health care more expensive. i think we have to be mindful of the fact that what is driving it, frankly, is the lack of competition right now, and the fact that we need to make sure that people have another option. that is why the public option is a critical piece of this. mr. fitzpatrick: i think defensive practice of medicine is a cost driver. steve, i know you are supportive of the trial lawyers, why you have your position, it is a cost driver.

there are not many that look at a problem and don't think that as to the cost of health care. when you're ordering tests as a position to protect herself from liability and your medical malpractice insurance premiums are through the roof, that factors into the cost of health care, absolutely. mr. pezza: what i will say is that when you are injured, you want to make sure you have recourse. at the end of the day, that is an important policy point as well. if there was evidence that this issue was really driving health care costs, we could have that discussion, but there is not the evidence for that. that is just the reality. mr. pezza: thank you. isis is an amorphous enemy. while centered in syria and iraq, it's also in northern africa and parts of the middle east. i would like to think voters are tired of bombastic rhetorical

nonsense and finger-pointing on this topic. they want to hear something of substance. can you identify three specific steps you think we should take to combat isis, and do they include american forces on the ground? start with mr. santarsiero. mr. santarsiero: they do not include american forces on the ground. what they include r, one, working with our arab allies in particular, to make sure they have a coalition that can effectively defeat isis. the good news is, that effort has been proceeding and has been effective. we need to make sure we are working with those allies and not offending them, as donald trump has in the course of his presidential campaign. secondly, we need to make sure that we stay engaged. one of the reasons why i think isis came into being in the first place was that we were

less engaged than we should have been with the iraqi government, which at that time, because it was dominated by shia, was doing things in iraq that was targeting the sunni minority, which provided fertile recruiting ground for isis. isis is the problem today. there may well be an likely will be other met -- radical groups to come in the future. we need to make sure our engagement is constant and consistent so that that does not happen in the future. the last thing we need to do is make sure that we are working with our allies, making our allies outside of the region, particularly nato allies, to make sure we are doing everything we can to combat the threat not just in the middle east, but making sure it does not become terrorism that gets exported first to europe and then through the united dates. -- united states. that means, among other things, having the absolute best

screening process for people coming into this country and making sure the europeans do the same thing so there is not a conduit there for the united states. mr. pezza: mr. fitzpatrick? mr. fitzpatrick: i know the problem well because i was in iraq myself and i interrogated the precursor entity to isis, it was referred to as isi, the islamic state of iraq. the problem started, frankly, by the initial invasion into iraq which was not the best decision, followed by an even worse decision to precipitously withdraw without a status of forces agreement. when you create a vacuum like that in a dangerous part of the world where dangerous people live, it should come as no surprise that isis has risen up. what can we do to solve the problem? this was a fight we were engaged in, i was engage in in a long time up until this year. the first and foremost measure we can take is cutting of the illicit international money laundering which is funding not just isis but virtually every terror group on the planet.

there are ways to do it, we know where the money flows through, we know the culpable countries. those countries do business with the united states. we can use our leverage as a united states government to force these countries to work with the international law enforcement community, which was i -- i was a part of an investigating international money laundering, to cut down on funding isis. just like any other organization or company, just like any nonprofit, terrorists are no different. if you cut the funding off, you cut off the head of the snake. if they cannot purchase the tools they need, they dry up. second is working with our arab allies, in particular the kurds, who have been affected in helping us fight back. third is effective law enforcement. that is something that has taken a hit in recent years. we need to support the national security community, department of homeland security, fbi,

i.c.e, to fight these terrorists here and abroad, as well as our military. mr. pezza: i am hearing a lot of agreement between the two of you. is there an area where you more strongly disagree? mr. santarsiero: i don't know, we will see in the course of the debate but there are lots of things that we have not discussed. mr. pezza: [indiscernible] mr. santarsiero: what i will tell you is this. the other thing we need to be doing here in the united states that will help make our communities safer his passing reasonable gun safety legislation. that is part of the equation, too. it will not solve it all, but there is no reason why we should not have universal background checks and a no-fly, no by bill

-- buy bill. the republican congress has not even entertain that legislation. we need a congress that will bring that up for legislation. it will not solve all the problems but there are reasonable steps we should take in the federal government. mr. pezza: mr. fitzpatrick. your level of agreement between the two of you or perhaps the -- a response to the gun issue. mr. fitzpatrick: i agree, we need to take reasonable measures to end gun violence. the fight against terrorism has a foreign policy component, a counterterrorism component, counterintelligence component, cyber security component, border security component, and a gun safety component. but it is not just guns, all within the terrorists use. guns are certainly on the list and we need to take measures to make sure guns stay out of the hands of dangerous people, including background checks. i've been clear on that. mr. pezza: working with our muslim allies, cultivating

allies, keeping our eye on the ball and remaining engaged, working with our nato allies, stopping the flow of illicit money that funds these guys, giving law enforcement the tools it needs seems to be what we are saying. let send a letter to washington today to clear it up. [laughter] i have stood on the stage for 12 years and asked congressional candidates their view on the millions of undocumented immigrants in america. i have heard tough talk about sending them all back and compassionate talk about creating a path to citizenship, but little of substance has changed in that time. can today be the day that we hear a proposal that is pragmatic, workable, and still respects the rule of law? we start with mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: the first part of any immigration problem is stopping the illegal flow of immigration, which is securing

the border. it's important for a number of reasons. it is no longer just drugs and guns come across the border, it's now people that want to do us harm. we saw this all too frequently in my days at the fbi. once you secure the border, next question is how to deal with the undocumented immigrants in this country. i believe they need to be dealt with humanely, that are becoming of american values. immigration is not a bad thing, it's a good thing. we are a nation of immigrants. i'm a grandson of irish immigrants. i think most of us can trace our lineage back somewhere else other than this country not too far back, but the guiding principle must be that we must not reward bad behavior ahead of rewarding good behavior. people that have done things the right way have come in through the front door, waited their time, and need to begin priority status. that being said, mass

deportation is a silly idea, should not even be discussed. it is not workable or humane. we can deal with them in a humane manner that is becoming of american principles and make sense for the economy. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. santarsiero: this is an important issue and one i feel strongly about as the descendent of immigrants from both italy and ireland. i can tell you, yes, we absolutely have to secure our borders. but the idea that we will deport 12 million people is, one, not workable, and two, not humane, ripping families apart. the good news is, by the way, we came very close a couple years ago to a bipartisan bill to resolve this issue in the congress. it fell apart at the last minute but i believe the next congress will have an opportunity to get it done. what we need to do is make sure those people who are here illegally now who play by the rules, who pay their taxes, who do all the things that citizens need to do as citizens of this country, have the opportunity to

legal status and ultimately citizenship, and that those who do not, those who commit crimes, should be deported. but i think that should be the basis for an immigration reform that we can pass in the united states that can keep families together and ultimately will make our economy stronger, too. because we are bringing these folks out of the shadows, into the economy, being productive members of our country. one of the greatest things about the united states, what sets us apart from other countries, is our rich history of immigration and the fact that for many we have become one. it makes our culture so much more diverse and makes us stronger as a people. that is something we should embrace. mr. pezza: would you like to extend your comments? anything else? thank you, gentlemen.

a person who is 21 years old today would have been in middle school when the great recession hit in 2008. since then, they have known nothing but a sluggish economic growth, uninterrupted war, gridlock in congress, and a painful absence of civility from many public officials, present company excluded. it is not surprising if they are turned off by the two-party system. what can you say to them today about you, your candidacy, or your political party, to perhaps renew their faith? mr. santarsiero. mr. santarsiero: like i said at the outset of the debate, when i was teaching at ben salem high school, i saw the promise of the next generation. i know that they are fundamentally optimistic, even though they are concerned about

the challenges that face them. what i would say as a former history teacher -- and i used to say to them all the time -- we have faced challenges before in our nation's history and we have overcome them when we come together to make that happen. when we divide ourselves into red and blue, into different groups that are either for or against you, it makes it nearly impossible to get those things done. and that, frankly, is what is so disturbing about this year's election at the presidential level with donald trump. because his campaign has been all about division. it's been all about setting people up against each other and not about bringing everyone together. if we are going to solve these problems, we need to do it together, and we can solve our problems. we can invest in education, invest in infrastructure, we can make our country safer, we can reform government, which is something else we absolutely

need to do. whether it is campaign finance, taking money out of the system, whether it is gerrymandering reform so that politicians do not choose their voters, voters get to choose their elected officials. whether it is overturning the citizens united case which is something that i have fought for as a state legislator and i will make a priority as a member of congress as well. all of this we can do. what i would say to them is half faith. -- have faith. look at past generations. it is incumbent upon us who are on the stage now to make sure that we are doing the things so that when we pass on that baton to the next generation, we are putting them in the greatest possible position to succeed. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: sounds like steve read a lot of that off of my website. to the younger generation, my words to you, don't lose faith.

we cannot allow you to lose fish because the future of our country and you are only have right now and this election is about you. as far as fixing the system, watching that presidential debate tells us all we need to know about the brokenness in our government right now, watching the gridlock in congress tells you all you need to know about the brokenness of our system right now. what we have seen, we have this great divide in congress, the likes we had never seen before. part of the problem is dedicated after decade of gerrymandering following the 10-year census where you have politicians drawing the district lines and self-preservation is a strong human instinct, and these elected officials by and large will draw the line to benefit themselves and their incumbency. what you have after decade after decade of this politically motivated line drawing is a situation where you have 435 seats in his country, congressional districts. there are only about 15 to 20

that are legitimate swing districts. we are lucky to live in one right here, things in large part to my brother mark who wanted to keep the county home. when you split counties, you don't have what you have in these other districts where you have 70% of one party registration of one party or another in these districts. when you have that, these representatives, their main election is in the primary, not the general. so they legislate to their base. so you have his growing divide in congress. that is what needs to end in terms of fixing the gridlock in washington. i didn't have time to address the others but i see my light is on. mr. pezza: follow-up? mr. santarsiero: let's be clear, the eighth the district was gerrymandered to some extent after the last elections. i voted against the maps. that was -- those of us who were opposed to it were shut down from any objection.

northeast philadelphia was taken away which was more democratic. the northern part of the camera county was added, a more republican area. the fact is it is still pretty balanced, but there was that attempt here, too. we need nonpartisan commissions and draw the maps, not elected officials. there needs to be national rules that cover that throughout the united states. it is a serious problem, but so, too, is campaign finance reform. citizens united has allowed all of his dark money to enter into these races. it's been a disaster for our democracy. that case needs to be overturned and we need to have campaign-finance reforms that take the money out of politics once and for all. mr. pezza: thank you. i hope someday in the near future we could have a symposium devoted solely to congressional reapportionment and gerrymandering. we will have to figure out a way

to keep the audience awake well we do it but it's an extremely important topic that shapes our congress. we are fortunate to live in a district that is balanced and is competitive. i want to say, before i give these gentlemen opportunity for their final questions, their final statements rather, i think we are very fortunate in bucks county to have two outstanding individuals on the stage today conducting themselves in a professional manner, sharing issues, sharing their information and being informed. it is refreshing to see that. i wish you both the best of luck, and i will ask you before your final comments, the question i always close the debates with. if elected, will you return to this campus in 2018 for another debate? mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: only if you are the moderator, bill. i give the same answer every time. mr. santarsiero: i will absolutely be here. i would also like you to be the

moderator. i would hope those of you in the audience can be there as well. we ought to have more of these debates. one of my real disappointments in this campaign so far is that we have had so few debates. it's important for people to hear where we stand on the issues. today, frankly, there are still a number of issues we have not talked about. we have not talked about gun safety, the issue of choice, we have not really talked about what we are going to do more by way of political reform, which is critical, something we should be dealing with here in the united states. i think this has been a great debate but i would also think that those are things that the public needs to hear about. we really ought to be having more of them. mr. pezza: save yourself the trouble of telling the moderator what he did not bring up today he knows. , we did not discuss russia, cyber warfare, military spending, veterans, energy, job

retraining, education. we will do it after this. take a quick break and then we will stay for a couple of hours. and do that if you like. one at,ing statements, starting with mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: thank you, bill, thank you, steve, for participating. thank you all for coming. chester member what i set up the outset. stay involved. whatever your voice is, let that voice be heard. i wish this debate could go much longer. mr. pezza is a fabulous moderator. there are so many issues and problems facing our world today and we all know what they are in this room. my pitch to you would be that when we are selecting the next representative in this district, to me, there are two critical issues. number one is who has the experience in the critical areas that are facing our country. economic growth and national security. i spoke at the outset. my experience as a cpa and financial services background is very helpful in growing our

economy. second, working in the fbi both nationally here, coast-to-coast and globally around the world, working counterterrorism, counterintelligence and cyber security is incredibly important. and i believe this to my core. the only way we fix our problems is for people coming out of the system. our problems cannot and will not be fixed by career politicians who represent more gridlock and the perpetuation of the status quo. we can fix the problem we have from economic and national security standpoint but we are running out of time. we need to fix them now. mr. pezza: thank you. mr. santarsiero. mr. santarsiero: my 90-year-old dad used always say talk is cheap and you can say just about anything as a candidate but what matters is what you have done. there is one candidate on this stage that has brought jobs into this district, one candidate on this stage that has protected

thousands of jobs for our people. one candidate on this stage has protected a woman's right to choose. one candidate on this stage who has fought for reasonable gun safety legislation. one candidate on this stage the time and again has taught for our community, whether it is flooding, power outages, or even the problem with halfway houses here in bristol township. that is me. we can talk about career politicians and the like, who is an outsider and not an outsider. the fact is, my opponent is as much an insider as anybody else. he would not be running in this race if you are not. if his name were not writing -- brian fitzpatrick, let's say brian wilson, he would still be living in a beach house in california. the fact of the matter is, we can talk about these labels and slogans, but at the end of the day, what matters is what we have done, what our record is fighting for people in this district.

i have that record of a -- accomplishment. i will continue it as a member of congress. i ask for your support, thank you. mr. pezza: as was agreed upon in the rules prior to the debate, if there is a reference to the other candidate and a closing statement, the other candidate may have more time. mr. fitzpatrick. mr. fitzpatrick: it is unfortunate. i will say there is only one candidate that has put their lives on the line for this country and it is not you. i will also say it is highly insulting to criticize someone who leaves their hometown to serve their country the only time they are out of their hometown to serve their country in a national security role to protect everyone in this room, to protect you and your family, to criticize me for that is really unfortunate. mr. santarsiero: make no mistake, i'm not criticizing you for your service. i'm criticizing you for being part of the system -- and i have

talked to many people in this community -- who feel it is rigged to there is one set of rules for most people in a different set of rules for people who are connected. brian, the reality is you would not be running for the seat if your brother were not the congressman. you would not have been given the republican nomination. that is just the reality. it has nothing to do with your service. we can applaud your service, as i do. but at the end of the day, it is about who is working in this community year after year. who has been living here and who has -- knows what people are feeling and the problems they face? i think when people go into the voting booth on november 8, they have to think about who has been doing that, who has been working for them, and who has that record. mr. pezza: we are going to give another 30 seconds each. we have made it up to things -- thanksgiving dinner and now we have dessert.

mr. fitzpatrick: if you want to know the biggest difference between the two candidates on the stage, one is a career politician, the one -- the other spent his career arresting politicians. number two, steve, again, i have seen the rhetoric throughout the campaign to it i wish you would stick to the issues, stay away from the other stuff. don't attack me for my service. i am from this area. i was born and raised in this area. not only have i lived here longer than you, it is twice as long. i am not raising any residency charges with you. i left my hometown to serve the country that i love. mr. santarsiero: if there is a mark of who is a career politician or who is the politician, it is somebody who comes in to a district like this to run, and then, at the 11th hour, jettisons his presidential

candidate to save his own political skin. those comments from donald trump that came out last friday were offensive, but so, too was attacking a federal judge because of his ancestry. so, too was attacking a goal our -- a gold star family area did to, was saying that he was ok with nuclear proliferation. it is awfully convenient now when we are getting close to the election to say now i'm not with him anymore. but this election is about consistency. i think voters need to remember it. [applause] mr. pezza: i want to let the audience know that the press will be meeting with the candidates down the hall privately. i am sure they may want to pursue this discussion further. thank you very much for your attentiveness. please vote. gentlemen, thank you. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]

[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you can see that rally live at 7 p.m. on is -- c-span2. the has 15 electoral votes. 2016ht, live campaign debates starting at 8 p.m. eastern. the wisconsin senate debate between ron johnson and former wisconsin senator russ feingold who senator johnson beat in 2010. with senate minority leader harry reid retirement, nevada has an open seat which republican congressman joe heck running against democrat cortez-mastow. see their debate at 8 p.m. eastern. >> live every day with news and policy questions at impact you. washington examiner campaign

reporter ryan lovelace will talk about campaign 2016 and the growing divide in the republican party over donald trump. the executive director of the sentencing project will discuss the voting rights of gallons. and michael schmidt will discuss the role of the united states in yemen after the u.s. military fired missiles in the country on radar sites operated by rebels. rebels on -- launched failed missiles onto maybe -- on two navy ships. join the discussion. the final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump, we are looking back to past residential debates . this saturday at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span, the 1984 debate between president ronald reagan and former vice president alter mondale.

>> are must understand that we are a democracy. we are a government by the people and when we move, it should be for very severe and extreme reasons that serve our national interests and end up with a stronger country behind us. will not make age an issue of this campaign. i am not going to exploit or -- for political purposes my opponents youth and inexperience. [laughter] debate between george h.w. bush and michael the caucus. >> you have up president who will work with congress and ring that deficit down and build economic growth, build it good, strong future for america, invest in this things which we must invest in, economic .evelopment, good jobs >> i wish he would join me in appealing to the mac and people to a balanced budget amendment.

i would like to have that line-item veto because i think that would be extraordinarily helpful. >> and the 2008 debate with illinois senator barack obama and arizona senator john mccain. sen. mccain: senator obama has never taken on his leaders of his party on the single issue. and we need to reform and so let's look at our records as well as our rhetoric. that is part of your mistrust here. mr. obama: we have to make spending cuts and what i propose , he is proposing a bunch of new spending, but i am cutting more than i am spending. it will be a net spending cut. the key is whether or not we have hired is that working for you. >> watch past presidential debates saturday night at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span.

at 8 p.m. eastern on the c-span radio app. >> watch live coverage of the third debate between hillary clinton and donald trump on wednesday night. preview from the arrestee of nevada, las vegas starts at 7:30 p.m. eastern and the predebate is at 8:30 p.m. eastern and the 90 minute debate is at 9 p.m. eastern. stay with us following the your reaction including your calls, tweets, and facebook postings. watch the debate live or on-demand is your desktop, phone, or tablet. listen to live coverage on your phone with the free c-span radio app, download it from the app store or at google play. >> president obama back on the campaign trail in cleveland, campaigning for hillary clinton at a downtown rally. this is 45 minutes.

[cheers and applause] ♪ president obama: hello, ohio. [cheers and applause] president obama: thank you. thank you so much. hello, cleveland. [cheers and applause]

president obama: i do. the head of the airport here pointed out that in 2012, one of our last rallies was right here. some of you might have been there. i have to say, it was an amazing rally, everyone was so enthusiastic, still fired up. -- it was a beautiful, still fired up. the one thing up at say that since i've been in cleveland, this time, it seems like there is an extra pep in your step. [cheers and applause] president obama: i don't know what happened, exactly. did something happen here in cleveland?

[cheers and applause] president obama: did lebron have something to do with it? [cheers and applause] president obama: congratulations, everybody. could everybody please give jackie a big round of applause? not just for the introduction but for service to our country. we have some outstanding members of congress who are here. marcia fudge is in the house. your outstanding mayor is here. [applause] president obama: although he is campaigning elsewhere in the state, i want to make sure we give a shout out to your former

governor and the next u.s. senator from ohio. ted strickland. [applause] obama: i know, i love you back. thank you. this will be one of the last times i visit cleveland as your president. i will come back to cleveland. i will just go to a game. [cheers and applause] president obama: understand, michelle and i cannot our lease -- our lease was only eight years. now we're making sure we did not break any china, making sure bo hasn't ruined too many carpets. we want to get our security deposit back. we are so grateful, so blessed

to have your support all these years. it has been a great privilege. i remember when i was campaigning here. on the closing day. we were in the midst of a long war putting an enormous burden families, in the early days of what would turn out to be the worst economic crisis of our lifetime, you had all kinds of challenges from health care to climate change where we weren't even pretending to do something about it, we were just kicking the can down the road. i told you then, eight years ago, that i wasn't a perfect person, i wasn't going to be a perfect president, but what i guaranteed you was that i would work every single day as hard as

i could to make sure working families all across this country got a better deal. [cheers and applause] president obama: and you gave me the honor of serving you and eight years later, we have fought our way back from recession, we have helped our auto industry set new records, our businesses have turned job losses into 15 million new jobs. we have slashed our dependence on foreign oil. hang on, young men. come on, sir. come on, everybody. let's do our little chant. [chanting "hillary"]

president obama: all right, i think we are ok now. i noticed this has been happening everywhere. i keep on telling folks, you have to organize your own rallies. if you are confident about the other guy, just go to his rally. [cheers and applause] president obama i feel confident : about my candidate. that's why i'm at this rally. [cheers and applause] president obama: you don't have to spend time over here. go knock on some doors for your guy. that's a better way for you to spend your time. unless you're just being paid to be here. in which case, hey, everybody has to make a living.

where was i? eight years ago when we were in a tough situation. because of your resilience, because of your faith in each other, in this country, we have slashed the unemployment rate in half. incomes are rising again. incomes went up last year by the largest amount that has ever been measured. poverty is falling. last year, poverty went down faster than any time since 1968. 20 million people have health insurance who did not have it before. the uninsured rate is now at an all-time low. we brought more of our brave troops home to their families. we deliver justice to osama bin laden.

marriage equality is a reality in all 50 states. by almost every measure, our economy is better than it was when we came into office. that is not just true across the country, it is true right here in ohio. look at the auto industry. that was flat on its back when we came into office and now is selling the best cars in the world and is doing as well or better than ever before. that means there are hundreds of thousands of folks here in ohio that have benefited. we've been busy. i'm here to tell you -- you want me to tell you? i am here to tell you that all that progress goes out the window if we don't make the right choice right now.

and it shouldn't be a complicated choice because it's a choice between somebody who is as qualified as anybody who has ever run for this office and somebody who has proven himself unfit to lead or represent this country that we love. i've said this before, democrats and republicans have always had their differences, and that's a good thing, that is how democracy is supposed to work. when i was running against john mccain and mitt romney, we had serious disagreements in debates about economic policy and foreign policy and social policy. those elections were close. i thought i had the better argument and i would be the better president. but i could have seen either one

of them serving honorably, not embarrassing us on the world stage. they would have engaged in legitimate debates and normal democratic processes. but that is not the case with today's republican nominee. he doesn't have the temperament, he doesn't have the knowledge, he doesn't seem to have the interest in acquiring the knowledge or the basic honesty that a president needs to have. that was true before we heard him talking about how he treats women. and it was -- don't boo, vote. and by the way, that was true when he talked about how muslims

are unpatriotic or how mexicans were rapists or when he made fun of somebody who was disabled or talked about our veterans and our troops and goldstar moms. you don't have to be a husband or a father to know that that kind of language, those kinds of thoughts, those kinds of actions are unacceptable. they are not right. you just have to be a decent human being. for those of you who did not hear michelle yesterday -- [cheers and applause] talk about what it meant to her, i could not be prouder of her. i said yesterday, this is why i married her, to improve my gene pool. [laughter]

so my daughters would be smarter than me. she was speaking up for women, she was thinking about the lessons we are teaching the next generation, she was also talking on behalf of men who know we are better than this, who don't want to teach our sons the kinds of things we've been hearing on television, that believe that one of the measures of any society is how does it treat its women? how does it treat its girls? are you treating them with respect and dignity and equality? if you believe we are better than what we've been hearing, the good news is there something we can do about it.

right here in ohio, a battleground state. ohio is always close. you can vote, vote early right now. early voting started on wednesday. i know everybody here is early voting. because otherwise, you wouldn't be here. if you stood in line to get in this rally, you have enough sense to go early vote. for those of you who may not be here, you don't even know if you're registered, go to ohiovote.com/locate. you can find the nearest voting site. iwillvote.com/locate. you don't need to wait until election day.

this is an opportunity for you to exercise your right to vote, ,our civic responsibility citizenship. you'd do not need to wait until election day. you have a chance to reject a dark and pessimistic vision of a country where we turn against each other or turn away from our role in the world. you can reject the politics of fear and resentment and blame and anger and hate. you can choose the america we know ourselves to be. a country full of courage and optimism. a country full of generosity and ingenuity. we've got real challenges. when i ran eight years ago, i said we will not solve everything in one presidency. we've got real challenges. there are folks out there who are struggling to pay the bills. there are students still trying

to figure out how to pay off student loan debt. there are parents who are still concerned about caring for a sick child or worried about whether or not they will be able to keep their home. everybody is worried about political gridlock all across the country, people are concerned about the possibilities of increased racial division, there are pockets of ohio and pockets of america where they have not that haven't recovered from -- there are young people who are right about whether they will have the same opportunities that we have at it i have traveled all 50 states. i have talked to hundreds of thousands of people. seen everything that is good and right about america. i see people working hard. kids,teachers teaching taking money out of their own

pockets to make sure they have school supplies. the indigentving and the poor, making sure they have health care. uniformeen our men and serving to make sure we are safe. i have seen police officers and law enforcement and first responders who run into danger instead of running away from it. i have seen young activists who call on us to live up to our highest ideals. i see a young generation that is full of energy and ideas, and will not be held back for what is right now but will seize what ought to be. i see most of all americans of every hearty, akron and a who party, -- background, native american, asians, folks with a disability, that is the

america that i know. there is only one candidate in this race who has devoted her life to that vision of a better america, the next president of the united states, hillary clinton syria -- hillary clinton. her opponent made it clear he will drag this election as low as it can go. he figures if he makes our out you, he will figure have no good choices and you just do not vote. now telling you right hillary is one of the smartest, toughest, most experienced persons ever to run for this job. nothing that completely

prepares you for managing a global crisis or sending a young person to war. but she has been in the room were made.decisions she has been a first lady,, a secretary of state, senator. americanistened to the people. she has done her homework. she has performed. she knows what the decisions that a president makes mean concretely for a soldier or a veteran, for a kid who needs a great education.. for a worker who needs a decent retirement. and she pays cool everybody the proper respect that much people try to knock her down, she does not

ne, orfingers or whi talk about that everything is rigged. she does not quit. that what you want from a president? opponent -- he seems to be in the middle of the game making excuses all the time for why he might be losing. it is always interesting for me to see people who act tough but don't -- but are tough. you don't complain about the refs before the game is even

done. you just play the game. theis out there playing game, she is in the arena for you, fighting to make sure that everybody gets a fair shake. that is what she is doing. there is not a person out there who has been more qualified to serve as our president, that includes me and that includes bill. she will be great at it. she has real plans to address the things she has heard from you. to help more of a share in a company's profits, to make sure that fewer jobs go overseas, to make sure that jobs come back in places that have been abandoned. to invest in our people and put kids in preschool, to pick

people through college without taking on a lot of debt. may be getting headlines for picking fights with everybody in his own party, meanwhile hillary has been talking about what we need to do to fight climate change. taxput forward a child credit that would help millions of families. or wasn't complaining fighting. she was just doing the work. from awhat you want president, somebody who will do the work for you. her opponent, he doesn't make very specific plans. supporters, it

would be hard for them to describe what exactly they were going to do. he said he is great at making deals, but i don't know a lot of andle who operate a casino managed to lose almost $1 billion in a year. wins.y the house unless he owns the house, then it loses a billion dollars. i don't know a lot of successful then avoidople and paying federal income taxes. he said it makes him smart. all it does is it means he is not doing what all of us as citizens should be doing, which is giving back to our troops and our veterans and our roads and our schools and making sure that america continues to be the

greatest nation on earth. that is called citizenship. not trying to weasel out of your responsibility, that's not smart. then you want to lead the country? everybodying to teach how to avoid their responsibility? he alluded to a housing crisis, because he said it might help his business situation? and theny six times stiffed small businesses and their workers that have done work for him and had owed them money. you would rather make a buck off be onir dreams then not the honest side of your deal.

you can't claim to leave your country. you are not fit to be president of the united states. i have to say because he is getting some support from some working people, and i want to guy spent 70 a years on this earth showing no regard for working people, there is no record that he has supported minimum wage, collective bargaining, invested in poor communities. suddenly he will be the champion of working people? , on. -comeon. talking about the conspiracy of global -- he spent all of his time trying to convince everybody he was a

global elitist. bizarrer he is his only -- how luxury us his businesses are. you want to know what somebody has to do, look what they have been doing their whole lives. if you want a leader who values hard work and respects working americans, if you want higher wages and a fairer tax code and equal pay for women and regulations on wall street then you should vote for hillary clinton. you want to know who will keep you safe in a dangerous world, hillary will make sure we finish the job to defeat isis. she will not have to resort to

torture or ban religions from the country. she has the knowledge and the experience and the temperament to be the next commander in chief. you can't have a guy who has insulted pows and if -- and insulted a gold star mom and cozies up to dictators. nottells allies we might stand by unless they pay us first. he may be up at 3 a.m. but is because he is tweeting insults. that is not the kind of president that you want. he is not fit to be commander in fit to lead the world's greatest amoxil. -- democracy. he threatens to silence the

media, who welcomes russian meddling in our electoral ifcess and now suggesting the election doesn't go his way is not because of what he said, it is because he is rigged. some nations to operate that way. tyrannies and their oppressive. world's greatest democracy. we have fought against those kinds of things. around the world we say in a democracy you cannot just threaten to jail your opponent. there are things called due process. in a democracy you can't just press or things you don't like. there is this thing called the first amendment. democracy you have a

contract but if you lose then you say congratulations and you and on, because the country our system of government is bigger than any single individual. do.'s what we it's what we have stood for, something better. i said this last night. part of why i am disturbed about republican elected who know better, but are still supporting him. i said that in part what happened here is over the last eight years republican officials who know better, some of whom i

talked to. they are sane people. what they have done is they have allowed a lot of crazy talk to be pumped out again and again through kinds of media outlets, conspiracy theories, i was born outside of this country, hillary we ares started isis, going to impose martial law and trying to take everybody's guns away. crazier stuff in that. a lot of republican elected officials have just stood by. a lot of house members, a lot of senators, they stood by and they did not say anything because it mount opposition to whatever we were trying to do. the time, because a lot of

hard core republican voters were hearing this over and over again they started to believe it. what allowed donald trump to emerge. he did not build all these crazy conspiracies. republicans who knew better stood by silently, and even during the course of this campaign did not say anything. i know some are now walking away. why did it take you this long? you said you are the party of family values. you warts appalled earlier? degradings saying things about women. when he was judging them based on underscore, a two or a 10?

that wasn't enough for you? -- it wasn't disturbing he wasfor you when saying mexicans who come here are racist or suggesting that people -- patriotic americans of the islamic faith somehow are suspect and should be treated differently, that wasn't enough? that someone said this is really bad. we need to walk away. if you are doing it for political expediency, you say this might get me in trouble. that's not enough. if you say you are about family values, you have to be for family values all the way. if you talked about extolling

reagan and how tough he was with the russians, then how can you nominate a guy who said a guy he admires is the former head of the kgb? if you say you are about the constitution and you are opposed whatat obama is opposed to obama is doing with executive action, that shows he is a says in thehe debates he wants to put you in jail. how does that work? it doesn't work. that's why i want everybody to understand what is at stake. learnedhe things i have is that frog rests is hard. progress is hard. even when you have victories act.the affordable care

two steps forward on climate change and there will be people who try to push it back. that the country is so often divided along party lines it is very hard to get people to compromise. that.y understands all of she knows if you stay at it and work hard good things can happen. she knows that in a democracy we cannot demonize each other. just refuse compromise even when we are right we have to work with other people. she knows you have to listen to each other. in each otherves and fight for our principles. she believes there is common ground out there and she believes that we can and should conduct ourselves better.

that our leaders are not going to be perfect, but we should aspire to express the decency and goodness of the american people. ourselves withct a basic sense of what this country is about, a sense of dignity. that doesn't always grab .eadlines that is not always the thing that will get you on the news. politics doesn't lend itself to that. all -- if we want progress we have to work for it. it doesn't always come right away and we don't always get 100% of what we want. it decades kept at after decade. if you don't believe that, 20

million more people have health insurance today. and the auto workers right here , who have been laid off and bought their plans would shut down and now they are working double shifts. as the proud marines who no , as the younghide person who can get help to pay of their student loans. change is possible that it doesn't depend on one person, it depends on all of us. young people especially out there i want you to know you have been through a lot, you have been through war, recession and change. i have seen in you the best in america. to turnat you don't try against each other, you are trying to look out for each other. i know you care about being open

in the world and not turning away from it. an inclusiven society and an innovative society. and you believe in democracy. i see the same values in you that have always driven this country forward, decency and honesty and hard work and civility. they are timeless values. it is what binds this country together. politicsgh sometimes can seem frustrating, even though sometimes our democracy , you haveean spirited ofhance to reject that kind politics. you have a chance to reject the politics of fear. you can lift up the politics of hope. let's not go backwards, let's go forward. you have a chance to elect a , not aho spent her life

man who says your vote doesn't matter. don't fall for what donald trump tries to do. i promise you that your vote counts. your vote matters. there was a time when folks couldn't vote, when you had to guess the number in a jar of jelly beans to vote, so doubles in a soap bar to vote. folks risked everything to vote. this election what ever issued you care about, it could not be easier for you to vote. if you care about inequality you need to vote. to -- you can vote

for somebody who cares about themselves or somebody who will fight like how for working people. make sure we got equal pay for equal work. you care about criminal justice reform and civil rights. whocan vote for somebody has fought against civil rights for most of their lives or you can vote for somebody who went undercover to make sure that minority kids will get an equal shot at a good education. you care about the environment and climate change, you can vote for somebody who thinks it is a chinese hoax, or you can vote for somebody who thinks there is something called science and that we should pay attention to it. you care about immigration reform and want us to continue to see this nation as one that is a nation of laws and immigrants then you have to get out there and vote.

argumentump's closing is what do you have to lose and answers everything. all the progress we made right now, civility is on the ballot, tolerance is on the ballot. courtesy is on the ballot. honesty is on the ballot. equality is on the ballot. kindness is on the ballot. we made theress last eight years is on the ballot. still on the ballot right now. if you want to send a message make it loud. turn back the voices of aigner is and send the message of

progress, send a message of hope. send a message by voting for hillary clinton, and show our kids and the rest of the world we remain the greatest country in the world. everybody, god bless you and god bless the united states of america. applause] ♪

it's hooke

live campaign 26 debate starting at 8 p.m. eastern a wisconsin senate debate. and with senate minority leader harry reid's retirement nevada has an open seat with joe heck running against former nevada attorney general. see the debate live at 10 p.m. eastern. every four years the presidential candidates turn from politics to