mississippi to $68 in vermont, to give you a range. there are very wide ranges in how easy it is to get access, wide ranges and what they will pay for. almost no correlation of anybody stopping to say what is the outcome of that? this is a field -- i helped found a center for transmission is ago -- it is us dodging for me that one of the greatest problems that we have as we get involved in budgeting cycles that don't have any kind of accumulation. you walk in and say "we have a medication program that also has combined with it training so that people are both training their brain and it the same time they are reorganizing their brain medically." dollars.s x number of the legislature will say that we

don't have that kind of money this year. so that person ends up maybe being a prisoner who doesn't fully recover, who ends up back in prison, so we pay 200 times as much money keeping them locked up as he would have paid -- we would have paid. the mental health money is over here and we don't have the mental health money. we cannot figure out that doing -- right interventions today we did a tv show, and they had somebody remote from another town who 30 years ago had become a recovering addict. all of you this business know that you never recover, you are recovering. it is a lifetime journey. he overdosed,imes and four times they brought him back. the fourth time, he finally got it. he went through the process, so helds now for 13 years

down a job and is living a full life as a citizen. how do you measure all of that? if you do it based on an annual budget, it is cheaper for them to die. i once had a direct of the budget to me that that there was a real problem with people living too long. and i said never ever go on television. --t we discovered the study governortudy -- every and every legislature should benchmark themselves against the medically appropriate standard, and ask themselves how many of their citizens are they willing to have die because they don't want to go to the appropriate modern system? the numbers on that are very striking. i may be getting them slightly wrong off the top of my head.

essentially, today, 80% of the people who wants to be in recovery don't get treatment. of the 20% who do get treatment, of the total population seeking treatment gets a medication based, sophisticated modern treatment. if i told you that about diabetes or cancer or about kidney disease, you would say that is outrageous. we have always had a lagging indicator, i think for .ery practical reasons for most of the last couple hundred years, we have gained more and more and more knowledge about every element of the body accept the brain -- accept the ept the brain.

we have the capability now to watch living brains. before, we literally couldn't -- the brains a study were dead. this model of theoretically trying to understand what might be happening in your head without really knowing. now you have at the cutting-edge these amazing breakthroughs, down to the level of study of what sinuses are doing -- synapses are doing and neurons, it's a most magic. it is understanding that the brain is integral -- the truth is, the brain is at the center, the way we are organized as an organism. depression is the most common single health problem in america, and a surprising number of health problems are a direct function of depression. because we are only beginning to

enter the age of the brain, all of our political behavior and all of our bureaucratic behavior is still locked in an obsolete that says anything to fix or cancer. as opposed to this addiction problem, cancer is a biological -- this addiction problem is about how chemicals organizer on the brain interface. abouttel: you're talking differential treatment at the level of the hospital and clinic . it is true, even medicaid in its states, there are duration limits on how long you could be treated, the dosage preauthorization. this takes up so much physician time which is time they should

be spending with patience. -- patients. big insurance company has now dropped its pre-authorizations. this was under pressure from eric schneiderman, who is the attorney general of new york. maybe there is a role for attorney generals. there is a huge role for attorney generals as consumers and patient advocates cannot get rid dress for the violations of the parity law, denials of care and the like. if we join together, we can appeal these denials to the attorneys generals and the various states who are really consumer protection. they are protecting the contract law aspect of this. people are paying for insurance that are not getting the coverage that they are actually paying for. we feel this is going to be the most expeditious way to advance the implementation of the mental

health parity. to this date, most think that we are going to get appeals one at a time. we all know the best someone can get is there care paid for, often when it is too late. you need to be a harvard phd to understand how to do these bureaucratic appeals, and the insurance industry knows it and are counting on that. we need to have a public movement that takes our grievances directly to the attorney general and let the ag take on the insurance industry on our behalf as consumers. when you add up all these families i am seeing around the start a we are going to consumer revolution in this country, and i hope the insurance industry knows what they are in for, because we are going to start taking these stories to them and require that they not only follow the law, but they take care of the people who are suffering from these

brain related illnesses as they are required to by law. ms. satel: van, you mentioned drug court a while ago. i worked at the d.c. drug court a while ago. those were not familiar with the drug court, they kind of bring the medical and moral model together and that these are for folks who have been arrested and put into an intervention type program. if you complete it, your record is expunged. what happens in a drug court is the participants go through a treatment program, and they also are monitored pretty heavily in that swift, certain, but not arere consequences administered of someone misses an appointment with their counselor or does not show up for some appointment, or gives urine that is positive.

the consequences are not severe. they may have one day of community service. they do escalate if there are continued infractions. 101.is behavior you respond to some sort of event that you want to change behavior immediately. mr. gingrich: airline cut -- mr. kennedy: airline pilots and physicians have recovery levels over a five-year. that is because they have accountability and a lot to lose. ms. satel: when i was doing it, that was the cocaine era, and there were no medications then. but now, with all of these those junk courts in the criminal justice systems in general. every week, you go over the patient's and you say they are

all in jail -- that happens a lot. in the d.c. jail, they detox people. in virginia, they don't. some jails even keep people on methadone, which is very constructive, because you lower your tolerance while you're in again, that you use is a prescription for overdosing. i should be letting you speak. what is the potential for all of these medications that we mentioned earlier in the crystal justice and -- in the criminal justice system? mr. jones: one of the big myths about change is people learning new things, but earnestly -- honestly most change happens when you unlearn the old things first. what the problem is is an old way of looking at addiction. the good old 12-step model, the if youok, the idea that

are addicted to something, it is because you have some moral failing and you need moral redemption. you have had a lapse of willpower and need to get your willpower together. hugh at a higher father -- higher power you and a higher power -- there are people who can give testimony about the power of that approach. the challenges 50 years later are when you are not talking merely about alcohol, you are talking about complex substances . it turns up that is about half. on the other side, until we get to the point where we see the biological side of it as shame free, stigma free, so that we can act intelligently, we are

going to continue to stumble. i've never back in the -- i remember back in the 1980's during the aids crisis, the thisnment, we knew that was a medical emergency, millions of people affected, but there was a slowness to response . public concerns were going up, but there was a stigma associated with hiv and aids that was rooted in homophobia primarily, but also just a lot of deer and agreements -- fear and ignorance. finally, we said enough enough -- enough is enough and people of all races and genders, from both sides of the aisle, said that america has to do better. hiv is considered a chronic condition. there is medication available. nobody once to have

hiv, but it is nowhere near the way that it was. -- we have pathway to unlearn a whole bunch of stuff to treat this just like a disease. we are to have to have the same approach now. , your children, your grandchildren, are being thrown out into a world where people apparently are bringing elephant tranquilizers to parties. in, is not the world i drop that is not the world you grew up in, but that is the world now. -- and kind of a world frankly, kids are going into your med -- your medicine cabinet and taking your leftover medicine cabinet -- your leftover bike and -- of vicodin. we are dumping these kids into chemicals and

opiates that can really change their brains. we have to have a different approach. you talk about the criminal justice system. up until very recently, it was if you do some the bad you should go to jail. if you break the rules, you should go to prison. it turns out that is about idea. so many people have gone to prison that the stigma of going to prison is not even there anymore. you look at prison, and it turns out a lot of people and there have mental health issues at addiction issues per you have not solve the underlying issue, you have just spent a lot of money hurting people who are already hurt. thatpe is going forward the criminal justice system can start being data driven, evidence-based, outcome oriented. getuld love to see wardens paid based on how well the

people in their custody do when they leave. paid based on get how many come in the front door and stay with you. if 20 more calm, you get more money. that is a bad business model. i would rather for them to get are there,on people i gave good care, i don't with mental health issues, they did issue -- i did well with mental health issues, they did well. it's the outcome oriented. we have to rethink these systems. we have to have the political will to do so. i think this is kind of a challenging question. this scenario in some places takes place with the same person may be 10 times and a three month. -- in a three-month period.

a lot of sheriffs and a lot of , one state senator in new york in particular, is so concerned about this, that he is thinking or perhaps has introduced legislation that would say pretty much if there is a consistent pattern of overdosing, someone has to step in. you mentioned someone overdosed four times. it could have been he never got to four after three. saying sevenhere or eight or nine. i must say, as someone who has worked in all the kernel justice and treatment elements of this, there is something to this. he is thinking about arresting for possession, but diverting to drug courts, diverting to treat ment. it is a more paternalistic, aggressive strategy that one

medicale with a regular disease. it seems kind of reasonable a thing to think about. how do you see it? i got up -- mr. gingrich: i got into a lot of trouble when i first became speaker. i've been influenced by someone who would been secretary of labor, and she had been in new york city dealing with drug addiction, and she described a woman who was an addict, and her boyfriend was an addict, and her boyfriend had abused her three-year-old, but the three-year-old had been returned because the presumption was that the mother was the best place. then the boyfriend got mad when evening and kilter. the question was -- and killed her. the question was what do you do? and i said very unwisely that we

might have to seriously look at taking children in those kinds of circumstances and putting them in or from -- and putting them in orphanages. and of course the left went crazy and said we wanted to take them away from their mothers. [laughter] mr. gingrich: that i forgot to go on the tnt and introduce boys down. was that we later need cap schools for the poor -- prep schools for the poor. if you are rich and you send your child to a prep school, that is fine. we'll have any good models in the foster care system -- we don't have any good models any foster care system. deeply anti-addictive drug use, and deeply anti-to drug use

because i believe in freedom -- anti-addictive drug use because i believe in freedom. if you are an addict, you have given up your free will. i have a great deal of sympathy for the civil libertarian argument that you're right to be saved 10 times in a row means that the rest of us have to pay for the ambulance to come once again to save you the last possible second until the time we don't get there and you die. it does strike me that there has to be some ability to look at patterns of behavior -- and you could make a cautionary argument that if you overdose once, that is a sign that you are truly stupid and we will give you a pass. if you overdosed twice, at that point, you clearly are out of control of your life, and therefore we have an obligation as a society to help you get

back into control of your life so you can go back to being free. that is coercion. this is a very serious national dialogue we have to have very i am very cautious about it because of some of the issues we have had with homeless people. there are a significant number of homeless people who are homeless because they want to be . those of you who drive over by union station know that there is a homeless shelter, and for most of the year, if you drive by their, you'll see some are between 10 and 30 people who are sleeping on the street outside the shelter. they go to the shelter to eat and that they go back outside because they don't want to be in the shelter. they don't want to be controlled by anybody. that makes you uncomfortable, but on the other hand, if you believe that as long as they are in control of their life and making the decisions, i favor their freedom to be goofy.

a person who shows up like this 2, 3, 4, five times, they have lost control of their life. this person is relying on society at large to save them. i think we owe them more -- in this goes back to the point about the brain -- we have to do enough that they can stand up to their brain that is still addicted. exploringvor states -- again, i keep this at the state level, because we need experimentation, not some federal law that alters reality -- we need communities to figure out when they could get people to return to society as a complete person. that is my bias. mr. kennedy: i see it slightly differently and that i just don't have a good answer. -- bias is that we

should do what works, and if a work, ifmodel does not a coercive model is telling somebody that you are going to have to get clean right now on a government timetable because we are sick of you, if that does not work and makes things worse and drives people underground it makes people less blood to call for help -- less likely to call for help. newt and i actually share some vices as well, and that i am a thousand times against -- 1000% against the use of addictive drugs. up in a family in which all the men in my family are incredibly hard workers, but at least until me, hard workers,

hard smokers, and hard drinkers. lives,und up with good good middle-class lives -- my dad was a cop, in the military, and became an educator -- but also impacted by alcohol. my father also died of lung cancer. i made the decision when i was young that i was not going to drink or smoke. i can set 48 years old, i have never had a sip of alcohol. i'm extremist in all regards. me, i look at any addictive behavior with some real horror, because i know my own family shows a very strong pattern of that. i live in california, but i am not one of these prodrug, drugs or freedom -- no, to me drugs or slavery. they are the opposite of freedom in every way.

my life is bad but i like my drugs, why not you stick your life? in that regard, i think we are similar. i just worry that if you get overly coercive, you have unintended consequences. we only have about 10 minutes. my plan was to ask this one last question, which is another tough one, but follows along. talk, and iot of certainly understand it, about reducing stigma. sometimes i wonder, and others have wondered, in a way, how realistic that is. i am thinking of that photo that went viral last month in ohio,

these two adults who were overdosed in their car with a and itar-old in the back was the grandson of the woman. the two adults were arrested for child endangering. the way the debate has been set up as i watched it, and not as presented by you, but just by watching in general, is that we have brain disease on one side and moral failing on the other. when you say brain disease, what that conjures up in many people's mind is that the baby -- the behavior is completely voluntary, hence no responsibility at all. people take responsibility only time. patients coming to our clinic only time because the wife is going to leave them, because consequence just got so much.

complicatedle more than just having epilepsy or multiple sclerosis where, if i put you in a drug court with some sanctions, if you don't keep his appointment time going to -- you would respond. autonomous, it does not respond. but addiction can. -- can social disapproval of addiction -- i know everyone knows this is suffering and that my personal areas of the self-medication for misery -- but the point being that social disapproval of addiction coexisting with compassion and greater access to treatment. mothers against drunk drivers has made great progress with stigmatizing drunk driving.

i think you after how we frame this issue. i think we have not made the progress in illuminating race and bigotry in this country. -- 1965 voting rights act and fair housing and employment, we had done our job to try to outlaw discrimination. matter what you think, you just cannot act in a discriminatory way. that is my view is how we move this forward on making sure we get people treated. we are still going to be arguing if this is a moral failing or a medical railing and another 10 or 15 years. i wish i could say i had greater faith that we overcome our come atnd prejudices all the sudden that would mean insurance companies would pay and we would fund and treat is equally and integrate it with the rest of medicine. i don't think that is going to happen.

i think we need to enforce the law, and i think we need that moment of clarity that those of us who have been suffering from addiction and have had some chance to get some sobriety have faced. as society, we need a moment of clarity. we have 47,000 people dying of overdose, we have 42,000 taking their own lives every year. this is a public health epidemic. is ourike "hello, where response?" we are collectively stop -- stuck in a time warp, not collectively understanding that we can do something about this. i think we get away from having these debates and get about actually enforcing the law. if we enforce the law, more people will get treatment. mr. jones: i don't think people are as smart as you want us to be.

more time the law you want us to enforce and why that would make everything different. mr. kennedy: the law i want to enforce is the mental health parity act that says the brain is part of the body. you treat illnesses of the brain the same as other illnesses inpatients, in network, out-of-network, outpatient. at the primary care, secondary and tertiary levels of care. in other words, the whole spectrum. we only treat addiction as a stage for illness. how do we address that gentleman who needed four times? you wouldn't in the future let that person get that are because they would have grown up in a household where you would have known their parents had addiction, depression, anxiety. you would have known they had exposure to violence, deprivation, other causes of trauma, and you would know that they ran a higher risk so we can

personalize medicine to them. the future is avoiding having to use the medicine because we are waiting too long. that is not the paradigm we should be seeking. more advanced directives and treatment although i note today having been guarded to my mother there is near-term reality the futurel with let's keep in mind is let's move upstream into the problem as stage one illness or people who are at risk for the illness and then you rap around. to your point, you are risk for this and your family, you had no help from your medical system, intervening and same tell us about your family history of our tolerance and addiction. you made in your personal -- we in the future need medical

consulting to say, like cardiovascular and cancer disease what are you at risk of? do to curbwhat i can the chances of getting cancer or having addiction. i have that on my medical records we should be treating this as something separate from medical care, which is what we separate, weem all have a chance of changing the course of the illnesses to the benefit of our criminal justice is, our health care system the whole country we live in today. . thank you so much. >> here is a question.

anonymous asks when parents are able to get into treatment programs of their kids two thirds of them complete the program. shouldn't such programs be prioritized? i would just answer that and say yes. i'm sure you all agree. those kinds of treatment programs are excellent. complaining is about all these rogue rehabilitation places that dry you out and you are relapsing in.

then put more evidence-based treatment programs internet work mr. richards company and stop complaining about the rogue bonds -- wants. right now i can't get access to treatment in your network. you cannot complain about how we by hanging your shingle's and say you are for recovery in all you are doing is collecting the insurance premium. you help us pay for what really works you will be stuck paying for what doesn't work, which is the problem. >> as an example of a brilliant program on will for reform -- it was created under mario womble. it was founded right to former social workers. and contract with the state

they all get paid if the person that they help is still on the jobs later. if you are an insurance contract in thing we will pay a base rate to this point by you don't get the bonus bless the bonus plus a person is still drug-free a year later. you build in a huge incentive. .his worked brilliantly it is still around and doing great job. program at the best taking unemployed people and moving them into jobs because at america works the bonus when they are at work six months later. the problem they are is not any continuity here and you have someone and nation and they are referred, there is no action to the outpatient and we wonder what he will fall through the crack's. into addition to them getting beo ers and having to

revised and they get no aftercare. >> basically you are talking about sentence. -- in incentives. drugs we areabout talking about sanctions and negative but positive -- the caret, there -- are issues on what is called contingency management. the better they do they get rewards or more freedom, they don't have to root for as often .- report as often the better they did the more they allowed them to work and had wonderful results. these are expensive programs. incentives can work very well. we use them in the methadone

phrenic. best clinic. isn't there a risk for addiction themselves what tools do we need to ensure there is another problem. >> the long-term goal would be behelp the person initially able to cope with the physiological effects of the brain having been rewired and then over time so through the change andprocess of be weaned off. the current system where we detox you that you will be up a is proven to be a guaranteed failure. worldd like to live in a where nobody was didn't help he needed this kind of help but that does not this. can you find a medication some

or which enables you to then go through what may be a several year process. it may not be a six weeks or six month process. you have to actively participate that is why it is so hard for practitioners to prescribe. they don't have that kind of backup. the state of massachusetts adopted this. mandatory two-week detox. you will see death rates rise in massachusetts. not the policymaking. at the height of this crisis we are not following what the science tells us to do. another inch or two of global warming and we don't appreciate it. this is like for those of us

-- you think if we had more detox centers they would go and get detox. everything would be fine. it turns out that his true. people are at great risk. people are at very great risk. after a shot more detox their brain has begun to heal a little bit. and here they are back out there in the world and don't have aftercare or any other medicine that they can rely on. what test to happen is they go back and they say what was i relying on before and they take that before got them high and that same doses

gets them then. -- it turns out to be a springboard into the more. we are fighting for the wrong thing. we are not paying attention to the science. thesens out for a lot of step. there is a 13 and that is getting some medical support and keep telling people 12th debts in detox we will be going to more funerals and not fewer. >> this is from alex. you have any policies solution jew can offer to legislators looking to respond canhis crisis that you offer to legislators looking to risk that response to this? when someone is ill on the system and all the cost that a crew versus someone has the

treat and access and is able to then be are docked -- and are able to be productive. withwe saw in miami-dade the judge reengineering the system to incentivize peers support medication assisted treatment, research of his him has commented. and the county has more money. and people are doing better. it is like the trifecta. what do we do? don't have that model easily ruffled double because no one is going around the country saying, here is the step i step process to get this change. here is what you do. tanks't the aei of think in the stateoadmap

legislators. and it that roadmap needs to be available so they know what to do >>. something that we worked on in terms of criminal justice reform. you do see a wave going across the country of criminal justice reform that is having a positive impact. people who are not violent criminals or a danger to society would be reintegrated back into society. georgia has been a leader, texas, south airline it, mississippi. it is breaking in by taking people who were nonviolent and turning them into criminals and taking them out of the

community. the result has been encouraging. if you can have a wave of , you might well find a lot of state legislatures in the next few years who are prepared to do those kinds of changes in medicaid particular that could be very powerful. >> i have run out of questions on that. up -- you are with the v.a. at one time? >> this is a huge problem among veterans, suicide is related to homelessness.

veterans can also show us the way to fix the problem. the best thing is that you talked a lot about the attitude about addiction. there is a percentage of the population that doesn't feel that way and that feels very differently about this. .here is no communication this is an issue that we need the kind of dialogue somehow you do those who feel as that this is a medical problem and there are medical solutions, narrow plasticity where the

brain recovers and others who are and still feel that it is a moral issue. probablyeterans are one of the centers of concern because of the combination of different caps on their lives and because we're worrying about the suicide and addiction rate. not quitee time, i am sure one has a dialogue. the point we were in terms of somebody as we just pointed out who is in their 10th recovery from overdose, i am fairly comfortable saying that's bad. see --omebody wants to say that is a morally -- that we shouldn't prejudge it.

there is a difference between addictive drugs that take control of your life. there are certain things you take that rewire your brain. you are walking around with your brain telling you that the choice has been made because you have aen rewired and you genuine desperate hunger. free -- i do being think we have to have a national dialogue. patrick made this -- did a beautiful job of saying it. hostilepared to be very to the idea of becoming addicted at the same time being very simple that it and open to a person who is trying to deal with their addiction. toant to encourage somebody

come out into the open and say i i have twoblem grandchildren and i want to intensely discourage them from taking that it is an acceptable gamble to see whether or not they will become habits. i think that would be a horrible thing to happen. that is my bias. the right mix of carrots and sticks? what i most appreciate about your interventions patrick is to try to help us think about it afresh. i don't think any of us are ever going to be convinced that being

a slave to addiction is a good outcome. at the same time coming out of the society we have lived in that is so judgmental and so lacking in empathy as you point out there is some real learning that we have to do. there is some new place we have to arrive at where we want people to live full lives and were willing to fight for that, and at the same time we are right causal factors in choice in genetic medicine and we cannot escape it. this will get bigger and bigger.

dragged into a different conversation. i can't tell you how much i appreciate this. issue that when you guys have your primary this last, and i saw your protege john kasich with tears in his eyes going around in new and it wasn't from the point of view of anything but hurt and concern and a desire to help people i said that opens all whole different thing i feel for bipartisan cooperation. about the opening of this being created. but i don't feel strong yet in all of the concept. forhe point about veterans

times more likely to die of opiate overdose. the challenges here. but they have not only feeling was that the a and trying to act as care. -- access care. most of them get there cap care through their employer-sponsored health care. we need to make sure that the parity is out there for patriot because if they encounter their own networks through their employer and cannot get treatment for their signature wounds of war, ptsd, that's on all of us. after the phoenix v.a. debacle weerans -- the weight carried and they monitor v.a.'s around the country and how long it took for them to get their disability claims adjusted -- we need to do the same for primus -- private insurance.

we can tell the insurance industry you are denying the run-of-the-mill person with vista's these you're also denying those who served our country. . that should get their attention there is a certain moral hazard to the insurance company continuing to deny treatment and the way they would not a knife for canceler or any other illness. i appreciate you bringing this. i think we have to end now. i apologize, i. wanted to thank all of you your comments about my part to her comments have been great.

c-span's road to the white house coverage, hillary clinton campaigning in manchester, with elizabeth warren. here's a look at some of the the >> junior senator

at the rally. donald trump is aggressively disrespects more than half of the human beings in this country. he thinks that because he has money that he can call them in fat cakes and bimbos. he think because he is a celebrity that he can rate women's bodies. he thinks because he has a mouthful of tick tack said he can force himself on any woman with an groping distance. donaldnews for you, trump women have had it with guys like you. [cheers and applause] women have really had it with donald trump.

get this donald, nasty and are tough. nasty women are smart. and nasty women vote. [cheers and applause] 8, we nasty women will march are nasty feet to you our nasty float to get out of our lives forever. watch the campaign with elizabeth warren tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. on election day november 8 to nation decides our next president and which party controls the house and senate. stay with his band for coverage

of the presidential race including campaigns thousand hillary clinton, donald trump and her surrogates and follow key house and senate races. c-span where history unfolds daily. live tonight at 7:00 and debate in pennsylvania for the u.s. senate seat between pat toomey and katie mcginty. tossupe -- the race is a . 7:00 tonight on c-span area --. tvand american history exclusive. loveities tour visits love, quality. for five years we have traveled to these across the u.s. to explore their literary sites. you can watch more and c-span. work/cities tour. >> we are at the steelwork

center of the west in pueblo, colorado. our mission is to interpret the colorado fuel and iron company which was the american west largest industrial was headquartered in main steel mill was it relied havelo mineral resources. in the mines were located all over colorado, northern new mexico, eastern wyoming. they had other mining after rises in other western states as well. most of the mines were located here in southern colorado.

beganm jackson palmer company colorado: iron company in 1872 history and was to make him a rope line that connected denver all the way so into way to do this economically in the 1870's was to build the rails himself. of thee 12 low because geographic location to all of the resources needed to make the steel for making railroad tracks over the next couple of years his company experience competition for the cold resources that he was mining. his competition was a man by the his of john cleveland said

company was called the colorado fuel company and its primary job was to mine coal for domestic company and osgood's company were rivals same source. throughout his hands and realized that after a number of labor problems with as well as the competition he was experiencing , the two companies merged together. the colorado: direct company and the colorado to company to become the colorado fuel and .ron company following the merger, walmart decidedto get -- palmer to get out of this dealmaking part of the business and focused his attention on developing the

city of colorado springs. became explore for coal for locomotives when he discovered hold in colorado and massive amounts of it. he started his own, the colorado fuel company. osgood in many companies wanted to be a coal baron. he built what was considered a model town. this is near aspen in the mountains. he had offices in denver. he began to develop a model all caps. as part of the model coal cap they had company stores and company provided working -- housing for the workers. he pioneered a number of social aspect, social engineering for the workforce in the coal mines.

he adapted his concept of the company stores. also in 1901 created the sociological department. this was run by dr. richard -- who had been brought out by forer as the chief surgeon the company. he had groundbreaking ideas in the fields of modern medicine. he took those concepts and apply them to his job. some of those you will see in this building. in isilding that we are the first point of contact for the workforce. it is where workers would come in for medical exams.

medical. care for their workers. in the room across the hall we have one of the original x-ray rooms. also it has a hearing machine, hearing loss was very common in steelal mill -- in the mill. >> about half of our visitors to the steelworks museum are former employees or children of former employees and they loved to come in and visit the museum and look at the photos and the artifacts and relive the memories. a new generation of people are visiting the museum.

maybe the grandchildren or the great grandchildren of the steelworkers and minors and they want to know more about their family history and about the work that was done by their relative. this is the shift change was subtle. many generations of children learned how to tell time by the. it blew four times a day signaling the end of each shift. in the morning, new, 3:00 in the afternoon and 11:00 at night. many children new that when they heard this whistle it was only a matter of minutes before dad was going to come home and they could spend time as a family. in our exhibits we also have the tools and things steelworkers as well as minus

what have you seen in everyday life. things is a lunchbox. richards and hammers and electrical else, things that they would have needed on the jobsite. family, the rockefeller purchased the majority of the shares of the colorado fuel and iron company from posted. family operated the company until 1944. experience aime, lot of ups and downs primarily with their labor. the most significant labor unrest problem that the company in september of 1913 and finished in december 1914. it was called the colorado coal field wars, the ludlow massacre. this happened cf&i within mining

communities. it was a very long strike and , as thekefeller junior owner of the company had a lot of modern day terms -- public relations problems because of the effects of the strike. , as the withinf theto rebuild his repun the united states eyes, he and another man named mckenzie keene started the employee representation plan and it was the first of its kind in the united states. it was a method to increase communication between labor and management. this plan helped to pave the way for our modern-day labor laws that everybody works under tonight. a few of the things that came

out of the plan that we all enjoy as americans workers today in clued and eight hour workday. things such as paid vacation, paid sick leave. no forced overtime in many different professions. things such as on a limit insurance. insurance were begun as a result of this plan. this is a rare collection. bankrupt aarge is go lot of times they purge their archival collection. they never did that. this collection documents the entire lifespan of the company from earth through many ups and downs with the company through the final days in the early 90's of the company bankruptcy.

>> we are past the -- aircraft museum. it is located at what was the site of the world war ii weblog airbase. ii,he opening of world war there was a need for training americans. even prior to the bombing of pearl harbor pueblo have been looked at and identified as a potential location for a training facility. that'slate in 1941 civilians began here in pueblo -- just located to the east of the airbase.

airplanes we would see coming in and out of the base were transport type aircraft bringing and personnel. b-17s started training here. you would see these over the city. we had bombing ranges set up. the flights that went out of for the crews that were arriving to learn how to fly the they hadalso navigation flights in pueblo and

many of the flights would go down to the gulf of mexico, for example. other flights -- practice bombing from the golden gate bridge. in practice bombing runs. it was navigation, all facets of warfare were trained here at the .ase they had bombing ranges, , learning howghts to do them properly. b-17 was the first aircraft that i saw flying out of web low. it shifted to the be 24 liberator. bulk of the. of time that the airbase was in

operation it was the b-29 liberator. we would be able to see these aircraft coming in and taking off during the day and even into the night. towards the end of the war we were surprised when the be 24's -- in the b-29 started flying out of the ludlow. -- paul weblog. the intention that we were training trainers here at the expectation the was extended war

we would have to have more training facilities throughout the united states. the groups in pueblo were intended to be training groups to set up other training programs around the world. around the country. the the end of the war, planes rapidly disappeared. this is a super fortress. it was originally thought that british or not going to be successful in their fight with the germans during world war ii. the aircraft was designed to be capable of flight conduct a bombing mission and return to the u.s.. it was named the euro bomber

as.ar this aircraft was only on the drawing board isn't was capable of missions flying those great distances that were required over the pacific. chinaprimarily out of they could reach the southern portions of the home islands of japan. this aircraft never quite made it but it was heavily utilize after the war as a sea surveillance or reconnaissance or when. once we got it we had to put it back together again. these rivets are raised. this tells us that this was an

after market modification. these are the original factory rivets. the difference is these are flush. this allow the air to go smoothly over the aerodynamic body of the airplane. these are raised because we did not have the capability of flush riveting. that hadorce found they left these rivets of that would have slow the aircraft down by 30 miles an hour. these airplanes were never painted. if you painted this airplane, you just added 4000 pounds of weight. right now, we are in the nose section of the b-29 "peachy." this airplane has a number of different stations. all the way in the nose is the bombardier.

he has the bomb site, and his actual work in a 16 or 18 our mission lasted five or 10 minutes. when you move back a little bit, to the left, is the pilot position. this is the seat where the pilot would've been sitting during his mission in august of 1945. to his right is his copilot. in the event the aircraft commander or pilot needed some relief, the copilot would take over. he was also very competent and capable. directly behind the copilot is the flight engineer. this is one of the most important positions on this airplane. the flight engineer monitored the performance of the engines and the systems within the airplane.

this was the one job that never got any rest. he was constantly on duty. since he was the flight engineer, he was also crew chief, which meant any work or post mission repairs it had to be done were also his responsibility. our docent says he probably got sleep maybe eight hours out of every 48 hours during a mission push. i'm sitting at the radio operator's position. the radio operator communicated for both his airplane and possibly a whole section of aircraft. he was also responsible for assisting the navigator, whose position is directly across the airplane, on where they were in at any given period of time. what we have here is a 1942 indian motorcycle.

as you can see, this was configured to be a security vehicle. should the operator of this vehicle -- when he is doing his normal perimeter check, driving this motorcycle around the airfield -- should some have attempted to come in, he has a thompson machine gun with which he would dissuade the person from entering. he had extra ammunition. this vehicle is on loan to us from a gentleman who has an automotive private collection in trinidad, which is south of us here. the vehicle does operate. and we get a lot of guests who desperately want this motorcycle. it's ours, since this actually served here at the air force base during the war years.

the display cases behind me are artifacts brought home from conflicts past by our fighting forces. back then, you could bring home war trophies. it's pretty much forbidden nowadays. you can't bring things back with you. back then, you could. the biggest thing that people notice is the large nazi banner that is hanging from the wall. this banner was taken by one of the infantry divisions when they were clearing a germantown. they were made by the nazis by the tens of thousands. they were draped everywhere throughout germany during the war. one of the commanders of the infantry division said, tear it down. a g.i. tore it down and folded up and put it in his backpack and brought it home. somehow, it made it here. we've had it cleaned once.

the folks at the clean establishment said, never bring this back again. not because they had problems with it. it was so inexpensively made and it was so fragile, they said the next time you run through the washer, we may tear it up. we don't want to do that. she will be displayed as she is right now. i think the pueblo army air base reflected a community support. the level was so great. part of it, i think, is because of the diversity of this community. we had italians, we had slovenians, we had slovakian's, hispanics, we had whites, we had germans, we had everything. pueblo was a real melting pot. but the people were puebloans. they were americans. i think we had a pride in the

city. i think we put up against any community. no community could've worked harder or cared more for the i think we put up against any betterment of america and this united states. >> it got started in 1842 as a commercial enterprise. small groups of people coming together to see the success that people were having on the santa fe trail and tahoe trail. they decided to form their own adobe trading post here at the confluence of the creek in the river. there have been people here for thousands and thousands of years. it is not that pueblo just gets its start when european settlers moving. there are cheyenne, arapahoe, all in the area for thousands of

years. they recognize the utilities of the place and having those two large bodies of water come together. when the founders filled it, they sort of see this excess of previous decades and they want to capitalize on that. they want to make money while they still can. all different types of people going from santa fe to st. louis. they follow these wagon trails, these horse trails, they need places to stop at. to get the things that they need and be on their way on the trail. in colorado the biggest one of those trading posts was a very large trading posts were all sorts of goods were being traded between all different types of people. native american tribes like the cheyenne, the arapahoe. you had european trappers. you had spanish-speaking traders

coming up from the south. it is almost like a truck stop where people can stop, rest, get the things that they need him continue on their trip. probably what we have here is an offshoot, but people see the success of bends fort and they want to capitalize on that. it had passed but the time it came into fruition. people are still trading furs, but the trade is on its way out with developments in silk making and things like that. what they do continue trading our buffalo robes. those are one of the main items

that are traded. they would grow corn and they would trade that with the natives. they would grow their own food, bring things up from taos. then the natives could bring things in. the main thing i would say that would be traded would be whiskey. and buffalo. it lasts from 1842 to 1854. ultimately, what happens is there is a conflict between the ute and the people living at the trading post. what we do know is that on christmas day of 1854, almost everybody in the trading post has been killed. after that it is abandoned and people don't live there. it ultimately gets washed away deep underneath the ground until eventually people don't find it until the late 1980's, early 1990's. the city itself doesn't start to

be inhabited again until the mid to late 1860's, when the railroad starts coming in. it's a natural place to get everything that you need to make steel. it's really the railroad and steel industry, the coal industry, that bring it as a city to where it is today. i think it sort of speaks to how this is a natural place to settle. people still keep coming back to this place because it is a natural place to build the city. >> we are in the children of ludlow exhibit, which commemorates the 100th anniversary of the ludlow massacre. this exhibit really resonates with visitors today, even though this story is over 100 years old. it still touches so many issues

that we think about today. they are issues of gun control and gun violence, issues of labor. there are issues of immigration. all of those come to play in this exhibit. there are many ways in which the public comes in and finds an immediate modern-day connection to that. >> the ludlow massacre was a horrific time in american history. men, women, and children were killed in their defense of the ability to earn a living wage. >> one of the important aspects of the story is children. children died in the massacre, children where victims. they were part of the story. we chose to tell the story of the ludlow massacre from the children's perspective.

another important piece of that is that truly, the miners were fighting for their children. one of the things that they would like to note was that this was not about foreign-born miners fighting for wages. it really was about fulfilling the dream of america for their children. throughout the exhibit, you will see photos of children's faces. the union deliberately took photos of children, partly as propaganda to say, this strike is not about foreign-born miners, but about america's children. we thought that would be a really interesting way to tell the story. right behind me, you will see a great photo from the united mine workers that captures many of the faces of children living in the colony.

i would like to point out this little young man with a look of worry on his face. the overwhelming uncertainty that these kids faced. they were not in school at the time. they did not know when the strike was going to end, because nobody knew. they did not know when the harder way of life was going to go away. i think it really captures that feeling that little kids had at the time. one of the things we did as part of this exhibit was to create a sense of being in a tent. people were living in canvas homes. we are in the middle of a tent that looks at the life of children before the strike and during the strike. over here, we've got this great

photo of mother jones, marching children down the streets of trinidad, as one of the techniques they used to gather support for the coal miners strike. here, there is even a sign that says, a bunch of mother jones children. one of the aspects of the story is that children really are used as a rhetorical technique to help the country at large really feel compassion for the miners cause, and this is one example of how they used that. over here, we talked about this lesson. this text panel i think is one of the best stories. we've got an oral history of a young man who talked about how the company really felt like the life of a mule was more

important than the life of the people and children of the mine. it would cost the company money to replace a mule, and it cost the company nothing to replace a worker. the mule was more valuable to the company than the people working there. this part of the story is often misrepresented. people thought the miners were fighting against children's labor, and that is not one of the causes of strike at all. families really encouraged the young men to go work in the mines, because they knew that that was a pathway to better wages and a better life. and they knew that the young man who started in the mine earlier were going to be much more productive by the time they became adults. so we've got some interesting stories about what it was like

for young men. sometimes, they would start out working the trap door in a mine. they would have to listen for the sounds of a mule or a car. then they would open the door to let them out, and they would shut the door very quickly. it was a very important job, because this is how they kept the air patrol within the mine. if someone did not do a good job, there would be an air explosion. it was a very important job. young boys would have to sit in the dark and do it. if you can imagine being maybe a 10-year-old boy, sitting in the dark for hours on end, it was a pretty hard way of living. but the families actually encouraged it. there is a great quote here of a

here of's a great quote a young man who says, mother, i don't want to go into that dark hole. i'm afraid. anything if i didn't have to work there. and, again, we've got some of imagery taken by the united mine workers of the faces of these young men the strike. reallyre, we have some interesting bulletins from the sociological department of the and iron company. and they would print these out to -- these in particular are for the women, miners.s of the want to idea that they impart an american way of being. in fact, children at the time were given grades based on how theirtheir mothers kept homes. the principal would go to the home and assess a child's living conditions. and the child was graded upon that at school.

so this was all part of this build to americanize and a future workforce for the company. the impact ofbout young women in the strike. and what's interesting is that during the strike, the men aren't working. the young boys who worked in the coal mines aren't working. their fact, the women and daughters, the workload for them greatly, because they now were trying to keep things clean. they were trying to keep people fed with very little resources during the strike. can imagine canvas tents out in the middle of mud and the amount of the amount of filth, it was very their living quarters clean. and so actually, the girls and impacted the most by the strike on a daily basis. here, we show a

victorian doll. it may be hard to see, but there is a great picture from one of company's journals about christmas and kindergarten. every year, the sociological drumsment would hand out to boys and dolls to girls. we've got archeological evidence had these that they toys at the ludlow site. this was part of the ability to insert influence over to thatdren and add americanized way of thinking. to separate children from their foreign-born parents of impart this american way life on to the children. so, in an interesting foreshadowing of events that the ludlow massacre,

at thetragedy occur forbes tent colony. tents was one of the other colonies that were part of the colorado coal strike where miners, again, were living in tents as part of the strike. it was a much smaller tent colony, however. -- a womant the tragically gives birth to twins who die at birth. so the tent colony, as close as they are, they all go to to bury the twins. but emma is too devastated and actually stays on at the tent colony. when the militia comes and they everybody had left, they assume that everyone had gone, that the tent colony was completely empty.

so they start trashing tents and setting them on fire. they come to the tent and they discover that in fact, the was not empty. find emma in her tent, devastated from the loss of her mourning and not well. evictf the militia try to her from the tent so they can ransack it and burn the tent. one, you know, kind-souled militia man stands in front of the tent and eventually says, dead body will you do this to this woman. remain. allow her to it is the only tent that survives that fire at the tent one lefthe only standing. and we have the furniture here att actually was in the tent the forbes tent colony. the only reason we have this the

wasiture is because it saved that day. and emma told her family that of the rest ofy her life, she said a prayer of the one man who stood up for her and allowed her to remain. so it is april 1914. at this time, the company is very tired of the strike. put an ende eager to to it and get the miners back to work. begin escalating tension with their militia and making even harder for the miners. and so the massacre story begins the day before 1914.ssacre, on april 19, later on that day, they are looking for luis tekas, who was a greek immigrant and one of the strike leaders, one of the union leaders. him of doingse

something that there's no evidence that he did. and so this, again, escalates the tensions. so, when they wake up the next day, on april 20, tensions are at an all-time high. or how butknows who shots ring out. they don't know which side they from. but at this point, everyone is armed and ready for a battle. and as the day goes on, a battle ensues. and louis tekas is brought into custody and he is executed by the militia. his body is left, where it fell, for three days. a number of other union leaders killed. after the battle dies down, the fire to thend set tents. and in probably the biggest the day, there are

women and children in a tent cellar. and they are trapped under a burning tent, and they die of suffocation. 11 children and three women. in there, and they theire, but all of children perish. some families, the entire family this day.on the costa family, charlie costa was killed in the gun battle and very pregnant wife and their children are killed in the tent cellar. this storyheros of is mary patrucie, and she the tent cellar. but she is holding her infant at her otherand two of children are in the tent cellar with her, and they all perish in this tragedy. and so that really forms what we

call the ludlow massacre. opened, aexhibit woman came in and looked at this large picture of children and mother.ed her and so one of my very favorite is that this exhibit this really is a story of people of southern colorado. still live here today are the descendants of this story. we have so much to owe our ancestors, because they really came, and so much of this story is about what kind of america to live in, and we are the beneficiaries of that.

>> we're at 330 west d. street in pueblo, colorado. this is our maintenance shop. work.s where we we bring everything over here to and repaired and then go back over to the main museum. keep your locomotives here and these high-speed test they stayind us, here, because there's nowhere else to put them. the one right behind me here is the aero train, designed in paris, france. man that built the aero hovercraft, he built those. and this was designed there and built in chula vista, california, and it was brought here to the test rack out east of town. it was tested, and when they got through with it, they didn't want it anymore. so it went to the aircraft museum. failure.ccessful it did everything it was supposed to do, but it cost too and too much to run it. it cost $16 million to build this thing.

and it is a montreal hovercraft. runs on a monorail. when it comes up on the air put your hand can on it and push it. it's that lightweight. really weighs about 50,000, 60,000 pounds but up on the cushions, it weighs nothing. it has a top speed of 175 and beforet it up to 150 they finished testing with it. another thing that made it a ailure is they had to have substation for electricity every five miles. 2700 kilowatts of power to move this one at one mile of speed. called the grummond. on the side of it "federal railroad administration." it had nothing to do with the train whatsoever. when we were trying to get it city, i had to get proof of ownership of it. guy int ahold of a

washington, d.c. he asked me, he says, how do you know about that? standing, looking at it. he says, how did you get in the building? i said it's not in a building. it's in an aircraft museum. and he about had a heart attack. sentter i talked to him, i him a picture of where it was sitting and everything. they declassified the machine not the results. he told me just a wee bit of information that was verified by the smithsonian and verified by men that worked on it out here at the test rack. used for ai aerodynamic the space shuttle. it ran about 300 miles an hour. three jets on top, the propulsion jet. there's another jet on the for the -- to levitate it. to bring it up. on a channel of concrete, kind of like this. it ran in that. kept it off pieces the walls and then the ones on the bottom lifted it up.

garrett.alled the it ran on linear induction motors. says magck end, it lev. it never had anything to do with mag lev. theas borrowed from aircraft museum for that initiative. but what it did, they were you couldsee how fast run on rails without coming off of them. for a long time, this held the record at 254.8. and it was down out here at the test center. all three ran at the test center in the early 70's. to stop this thing was really funny. a reverse tail hook up on the back. at thent under a table end of a run, and when it grabbed the cable, it was pulled of anchor chain on either side of the tracks. down. how they slowed it all three of the machines are one of a kind. onlywere only -- they built one, only tested one, and no other ones were built, except

-- when you get one of a kind, that makes them even more special. >> our visit to pueblo is an american history t.v. exclusive. today toowed it to you to c span's cities tour. we've traveled to cities across the u.s. to explore their history and unique sites. >> our campaign 2016 debate withage continues tonight the pennsylvania senate debate. that debate here on c-span. meanwhile, t.v. station ktvb in , idaho, is reporting that crapo reendorsed

donald trump after previously rescinding his endorsement. he endorsed trump in may and earlier this month, after a tape bragginghe nominee about groping women, the idaho rescinded his e endorsement. is today he said the race between donald trump and hillary and he said, quote, i will vote ticket.republican senator crapo is up for re-election this year. debated democrat challenger jerry sturgill. anir debate in boise is half hour. idaho reportsn of on idaho public television is the possible through generous support of the laura moore cunningham foundation, to building the great state of idaho. publicfriends of idaho television and by the corporation for public broadcasting. seekingike crapo was his fourth term in the u.s.

senate where he's a senior member of the banking, housing and urban affairs committee. he's been in public office since 1984. sturgill is ary fifth generation idaho with degrees in english, economics from brigham young university. he now works as a businessman in boys, where he lives with his chris. tonight we sit down with both candidates to discuss the issues vote.y they deserve your idaho reports starts now. >> welcome to idaho reports. let's get right into it. senator crapo, jerry sturgill, joiningu so much for us. first question for senator crapo. un-endorsd trump last week, made national headlines doing so. you called his comments and unacceptable. and you called on him to step aside. but that hasn't happened. who are you going to vote

for? >> listen, i haven't decided yet. what i can tell you is this. the rest of my statement, after i indicated that i could no trump, wasrse donald that we need to elect a conservative to the white house. for very critical reasons. is not the least of which that if hillary clinton were elected to the white house -- and i can tell you this. i cannot and will not vote for hillary clinton. reason is because if she were elected to the white house, we would see the supreme court turned activist. we would literally, i believe, lose the ability to protect the foundation documents of our nation. we'd see, for example, the second amendment right to bear quickly be dramatically reduced. we would see an explosion of spending., more i believe, as i said, a much individualort of rights. and frankly, a continuation of consider to be the international or foreign policy

appeasement policies that we her seen so far under leadership as secretary of state. and she too has issues with her personal situation with regard to, for example, the wikileaks,e benghazi, the clinton foundation -- >> but there are other candidates on the ballot like evan mcmullan, like gary johnson. voting forled out trump? >> as i said, i haven't made a decision yet. believe that the country is conflicted over this, that aree have choices frankly disappointing to the country. same kind ofg that decision myself. but i'll tell you, i really want to come back to what i was a minute ago, because there's a tremendous amount of discussion today about donald trump, because of the tapes that came out last week and the number of those kinds of issues. saying, i believe that we need to include hillary clinton in this discussion as in my opinion, there are not only issues

relating to her honesty and the conducted the clinton foundation and so forth, in thet will happen governing of this nation if we elect her? tell you, again, is i cannot and will not support for president. i'm evaluating the rest of the race. frankly, i think we need to watch for a while. regret not calling on trump to drop out and move aside conservative candidate when he made his comments on museums, when he -- when he made his comments on prisoners of war, star family? >> no. i strongly focus on the fact that we face in this country a critical decision point. literally, if you think about it, all three branches of the federal government are on the election.is the presidency obviously, the united states senate is on the that's a debate we're having here tonight. and frankly, the outcome of those two races will determine -- or those two

battles -- will determine the future of the united states supreme court and the constitution itself. and so i believe those issues are the kinds that we ought to facing, veryth and straightforwardly, not only in this debate but in the rest of the decision making that goes on throughout this election. haved mr. sturgill, you attacked senator crapo for his d.u.i. that he got a few years ago. at what point are people's personal lives and past indiscretions fair game for a campaign, and how much do the hasrs care if senator crapo apologized? >> well, melissa -- so, by the you for hosting this debate. and thank you for being here, crapo. it's great to be here with you. and i'm grateful to those who this tonight. i think the larger issue is that government is broken, that we have people in government who allowed washington, d.c. to

influence their decisions. flow allowed big money to into our government that's caused what i believe is conflict and compromise. politicians who are making decisions for our country, they've accepted massive sums of money. and it's obvious to me that a toxicon, d.c. has had effect on our politicians. respect, il due think it's changed you. senator crapo, would you like to respond? >> i would like to respond to that, because i believe my of idahofor the people has remained constant and consistent. that.will reference but with rard to the -- with regard to the d.u.i., as you a terribleit was decision. and that time of my life was myerally the worst part of service in the united states senate. apologized. i have fulfilled my complete obligations to the law. i have worked hard since

then to try to regain the confidence and trust of the idaho.of but in terms of the allegations iat are made that somehow have become a part of the system d.c., ington, completely reject that. i mean, the fact is that i have i first was, since elected to office, been one of those fighting in washington, and to make the changes that we need. and iservative record -- am a conservative -- my conservative record has stayed all the terms of forth.s, rankings and so you can't say i have changed in my voting or in my advocacy. do believe i've worked to break that good luck, which is the very problem people are so frustrated with. i have a very good record of working to find solutions, whether it's the violence act, which was a bipartisan effort and which i'm lead republican on

the national scale on that issue. and the simpson commission, where admittedly, we solved everything but we have put one of the best plans for dealing with our national debt out there, a bipartisan plan. we're still working to achieve different parts of that. and the list goes on. here in idaho, a bipartisan effort to break past and buildluck solutions. i can continue to talk about it. that ront fire issues and jim and i are working on, and the trevor's law with regard cancer treatment. i think my record is solid. so i stand on that. i --t >> mr. sturgill, i want to ask you a question, because you indicated that you feel that changedon, d.c. has senator crapo. but we went on to the secretary westate's website and couldn't find any indication that you've donated to any campaign, state or federal, except for walt's campaign in 2008 and romney's campaign, also 2008. we also couldn't find that you

had voted in more than one 2006ry election between and 2014. so if idaho only has two u.s. only hashe 100 senators, should it be moreody who has been civically engaged? this is your first time running for public office. time runningirst for public office, but i have spent my life in business and in community service. i've run companies. i've worked with working families. i've been responsible for employees and their families. i've spent a lot of time in service in idaho. i've been involved with conservation,with with culture. the museumlly on board for a while. also also served in my church. i've worked with people onuggling to make it security. i've worked with people who are homeless, refugees, families who had to suffer with suicide.

i'm angry for those families, because government isn't helping those families. government has failed to help those families in idaho and elsewhere. and i think people are just fed up. they're fed up with government. up withink they're fed the fact that our politicians have allowed themselves to become compromised by massive money that have flowed into their campaign coffers. i started this campaign and had to raise money, of course. and you started with $5 million, i was told. in fact, people told me it would be impossible to win because of the amount of money that you had in your campaign coffer. thought, you know, that's run, because to that just doesn't seem right, that regular people cannot engage in government and serve government, because incumbents, who have been there for as long as you have, run, bo much money to fend off the opposition. >> but you've spent your career in the legal sector and also in the banking sector, most

at headwaters. topw years ago, three businessmen were suspended related to regulatory documents. so you talk about connecting to everyday person, you talk about being able to get big ofiness and money out campaigns and out of d.c. to are you going to be able make policy that doesn't benefit the people that you've worked your entire career? >> well, i -- i'm not sure i referring what you're to. if you're referring to sanctions my firm, headwaters, minor, minor violations. i had nothing to do with that. frankly, it's -- it's a fact that we do arestment banking and regulated in a way that affects

larger banks, not smaller banks. this is to me another breakdown in our regulatory system, that larger banks are regulated across the board, and there is thea separation between regulation for big banks and small banks. there's not a separate -- there's not a distinction made business andess small business. so small businesses are crushed with regulation. respond?i >> if you'd like to. >> on that specific issue, i agree. we agree on that. of those inm one washington who is fighting hard reform dodd frank so there isn't a distinction between the regulatory burden we put on them, because they are getting just literally squashed by the regulatory bureaucratic morass them.s upon we do need to have that kind of distinction. but, you know, the argument has been made that because i have in raisingsful

support, that that somehow means i am changing the way that i advocate. the fact is that i do have across broad segments of the economy, across this country, and here in idaho. contributorsnds of and supporters. >> you have thousands of contributors and supporters, but majority of your money does come from securities and banks and quite frankly, businesses that would benefit from deregulation. >> but look at my record. and the fact is, that -- you can say that, but the fact is that is broad across the economy. and the reason that the support comes from all parts of the what i wass back to talking about earlier. and that is, there is a huge the country today about what direction we take, whether the government i or less of the government. and i am one of the advocates government, for lower taxes, for strong focus on for adual freedoms and

strong national defense. and, you know, you can say these point tout you can't anything in my record that shows anything other than that i'm the smallo protect businesses and fighting to protect in the financial banks.ty, the small i am literally leading in washington on the effort to that we canfrank so create that distinction between our large banks and our small banks. you in favor of more regulation for the large banks? a actually, i think we've got very aggressive set of regulations in place, and we are now looking at increased decisions relating to the larger banks. i believe that that will come way that willn a help to strengthen the system. >> but you voted for the repeal of glass steegle, that basically removed the protections that favored consumers and protected banks, and created an environment where we suffered the the mortgage crisis and great recession, which has

caused the largest transfer of of ourin the history country. >> that was a vote that took place in congress years and years ago. understand the argument of the folks that would stegallblame the glass legislation on this current crisis. the fact is, what happened in is that the crisis housing market collapse and mae and freddie mac were like largeperating hedge funds for low-quality majors. $180ded up costing a billion bailout by the federal government. again, i disagree with congress fannie and freddie do those kinds of things, because congress drove a lot of those of decisions. i disagree with the government in encouraging more and more financialcontrol our system, and although i agree that we need to have strong forlatory protections safety, for soundness and consumer protection, i don't alleve that the answer to of our problems is just more

government. and that is the solution that is promoted by your candidate for president. it's what would be promoted by your side in the senate, if you were able to change the leadership. >> how do you know who my president is? >> maybe we should talk about that. >> well, i -- i'd like to talk about the banking committee. about -- >> since it has come up, who are president?ing for >> well, i'm not supporting donald trump. i agree with you on that. angerdo understand the that people feel in this country. i understand the anger that has brought out the voters to favor donald trump and bernie sanders. but, you know, it's not just your party or my party. it's the whole government. i think the poison in government that our with the fact current government has allowed big money to flow into government. control decisions.

and you can say you're objective but you have collected so much especially from the financial sector. >> well, you can't -- >> you've been on that committee. that committee, and the consumer finance protection bureau, fargo. in wells you're questioning wells fargo. you received money from wells fargo. >> and i want from wells fargo. >> would you bring back glass-steagall? do you support more regulation? mr. sturgill: i would support efforts to regulate the banks and protect consumers from the fraud that's occurred at wells fargo. the executive -- the point is, the point is, is it regardless of all these issues, the point is the big money has been allowed to flow into our government. how do we fix that? >> i want to move to a point you brought up when you were talking your concern over who gets to be in the white house and the next supreme court justices. you have the second amendment,