, and i get that with my family. but i would say is you have to be a really good listener. i get a lot of information from listening to people in this state, what is on their hearts and minds and that shapes a lot of what i do and how i view the issues. >> most of the reading i do is philosophy, believe it or not. guy.d was a philosophy he had a large library of philosophy books and he recommended a lot of them to me. that's a kind of reading i do. i watched the cable news networks and i enjoy them. i tried to watch a lot of news. that is mostly what i watch on television. the last documentary i saw was about the 13th amendment, and i recommend it to you all.

i do love to talk to people as i said earlier. i get a lot of ideas from debating all kinds of issues with people. >> the national debt is approaching $20 trillion. it grew because of deficit spending. how would you address the budget deficit? >> in a short time, we will be back to a trillion dollars a year deficits. it is only a matter of time before we are going over a cliff. if we do not do something about it soon, the country will be in huge trouble. that weighs heavily on me to think about our kids and grandkids. i think what you have to do is, two thirds of federal spending is mandatory spending.

we half to reform those programs to get them on a sustainable level if we are going to deal with the debt. that needs to be job number one. we need the political courage and will to figure out how we will address and reform entitlement programs. second is economy -- economic growth. we have to start growing our economy. that makes the deficit look smaller by comparison. moderator: mr. williams? mr. williams: we need to understand how the debt got here. when republican president bush took over, he had a billion-dollar -- eight years later after tax cuts and two wars, he gave president obama a $1.4 trillion deficit. he has cut that from -- he attended by two thirds.

that is been done with spending cuts. if we went to address the debt, it is 0% interest so it is not is big issue as it could be. we need to pay for the things we have. we need to pay for them. it is not just spending cuts. president obama had a bit of help -- if present a obama had had help from the congress, he couldn't cut it further. -- could have cut it further. moderator: beginning with tax policy. what changes do you favor in the federal tax code for individuals and corporations? sen. thune: the tax code needs to be reformed. i know a lot of people would agree with that area in needs to be simplified and it needs to be about growth.

i not talking about growing the government, and talking about growing the economy -- i am talking about growing the economy. coming out of recession, it has been 3.7%. .e have sluggish, anemic growth a lot of that is because our tax code is completely integrated. we need to broaden the tax base, make it about economic growth. we want to get growth back to the 3.5%. looksficit picture dramatically smaller by comparison because for every 1% growth it generates $100 billion of revenue. >> i would agree that our tax code needs revision.

so that multi billionaires like donald trump can take billion dollar losses and not pay taxes at all. we do need that kind of reform. ever since the 1940's, if you look at the treasury department, every time we have a tax cut, we have left -- less revenue as you would expect. tax cuts are not the answer. we need to do really fair tax so that people at the upper end, the 1% that has all the money pays just like the rest of us regular americans. we can pay for our deficit and start bringing the debt down. that is the real problem we have, that the republicans want to cut taxes. when we cut taxes, we get things like the stuff -- sequester that hurt everybody. we need to be smarter about that. we will talk about that later.

moderator: you mentioned to swo thirds of those entitlement go to cutting the budget. what changes would you make in the funding of those entitlements, changes in the benefit payments and benefit eligibility? sen. thune: i do not think you can tax your way out of the problem. what we need is faster growth. you have more people working and paying payroll taxes, that is how you solve it in the long term. when you look at specific suggestions, one thing that has been talked about that does not contact anybody retire today or nearing retirement age is we can gradually phase and an increase for workers. if you're not retired or 55 and older, you would not be affected

by that. but for medicare and social security, we have people living longer and more productive lives. that would be a way of dramatically extending lifespan of those programs. in respect to medicaid, i would like to see more medication to -- medicaid shifted to the state. ,et a lot more efficient effective and accountable programs. trust their state government but do not trust the federal government. mr. williams: first of all, for social security, it is just to take the artificial caps off the payroll tax. the payroll taxes capped at -- about $120,000. people who pay that are ns.d-working south dakota ends if we took that off, we could

fund social security into the future. he says that we should raise the age for social security. he has never worked in a manual labor type job. if you spent your entire life out there swinging a hammer and working hard, by the time you get to 62, your back is 85. raising the age of social security is not a good thing for the regular, hard-working people. the manual laborers. i am not in favor of that. we can fix that just by making everybody pay their fair share. towith two thirds going entitlements and paying interest on the debt, that leaves one word that the congress has discretionary authority over for year-to-year. in broad terms, where is the federal government spending too much money and where is the federal government funding to little money? sen. thune: of that there and that is left, you have about one

third of the pie last and one half of that is defense and the military. right now, we have to to rebuild our military. i would like us spending 4% on our military. we live in a increasingly dangerous world. we are dramatically underfunding american military today. you can talk to any of the service chiefs, any one you talk to you in the military today will tell you the same thing. in terms of other places you could find saving. we have a huge bureaucracy and washington, d.c. we had agencies proliferating regulations and driving up the cost to do business. it is making it harder to grow the economy. i could start naming names, but i am out of time. [laughter]

mr. williams: there are a lot of things we can do about that last third of spending. we can look for the waste and fraud in government spending. right here in south dakota, certain programs are right with fraud. our federal representative should be paying more attention to the federal funds to come to our state make sure there is no fraud in them. we have the best military in the history of the world. putting more money and it right now is not a good idea. our military does not have the means to be audited. shockingly, 6.5 trillion dollars of dollar in army expenditures cannot be accounted for. that does not mean it is stolen, it does not -- a means they have not -- do not have a way to audit the military. we should be auditing that military spending to make sure there is not a lot of fraud and waste. i am a military veteran. there are things that are wasted in our federal budget in terms of military.

that is one place we could look, and look hard. moderator: how would your proposals for taxation for federal spending and any changes in government regulation, how would that help create jobs and promote prosperity? sen. thune: it does not matter where i go in south dakota, small town, big town, ranches, small businesses, financial services, the thing i hear the most is the cost of federal regulation is like a wet blanket on the economy. is costing us more and more each day to comply with regulations. there were 600 what they call major new regulations in the last eight years. this is $100 million a year of impact or more.

i think we need a process where if you create a new one, there ought to be one in one out. we should require congress to we should require congress to vote on every new major regulation. every regulation has $100 million impact on the economy or more. the cumulative effect of that over the last eight years is about a trillion dollars or $2000 per family. mr. williams: he talks about regulations. this is the way the administrative branch of the government carries out the laws passed by the legislative part of the government. when congress passes laws, we will have regulations. those regulations do not happen by accident. there is a lot of time and energy. if we really want to grow the economy. we need to use the federal government to use infrastructure projects.

we need to use the clean energy we have right here in south dakota. south dakota has a lot of wind but cannot harness that wind power because we do not have the infrastructure. if we spent federal money on infrastructure, we could grow the economy and create new jobs. we would have a much better world and a cleaner world. that is something we need to do with clean energy. we need to move to clean energy immediately. it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when. moderator: your platform regarding foreign policy and international security. specifically as it relates to the middle east, the threat from isis, and the humanitarian crisis in syria, iraq, and elsewhere. sen. thune: there are so many missteps along the way in the last eight years. the premature withdrawal from iraq, not enforcing the red line in syria, and agreeing to a bad nuclear agreement has put us in

a place where we do not have good options. what i will tell you is, and order to defeat isis we have to take the fight to them. there is a fight going on led by a coalition partners. hopefully, they will be successful. we have to defend the homeland. we have to vet people coming into the country. that means we need more aviation security measures. that is something i've worked with. we need to give our intelligence community that told they need to find these people, root them out . that is what it will take to defeat this enemy. mr. williams: there have been many missteps in the middle east.

those missteps began with president george bush, who decided it was important to use our military to invade iraq. that was at a time when iraq had a bad dictator. that i cannot do anything. we had him totally contained. the republican president decided he should invade that country. our military did it. they went through there like a knife through butter. after that, more mistakes. the government -- the administration decided to use its own people instead of iraqis to rebuild iraq. have the mess we have in the middle east. so we do have to address it. we have to address what is going on in the middle east. we are doing a great job right now. we are working with coalition members. we are providing air cover and drone strikes. isis is being pushed back. it was president obama who got osama bin laden.

so we're doing the right things, and we need to continue it. moderator: you brought up military spending, let us take a closer look at that. what is the level of military spending needed to ensure we have the proper strength and readiness for military forces? sen. thune: a good benchmark is 4% of gdp. if you cannot protect the country -- we think that's not just in the middle east. iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear capability. russia is increasingly offensive. asia, if you look at the threat matrix we face, there are threats all over the world. the world is a dangerous place. united states half to be

prepared -- has to be prepared. american leadership is essential. the world looks to us to lead. if we do not have the military capability to lead, we will not be the leaders of the world -- that the world needs. national security is a critical issue. military readiness is a critical issue, especially now when we live in a increasingly dangerous world. mr. williams: i am a veteran so i watched the navy pretty close. we have the most powerful military in the history of the world. just our navy, we have a loving -- we have 11 carrier attack groups. three of them are deployed around the world. three are on the way to relieve them, and the other five are our &r, preparing to go back out. we have a very strong military right now. a lot of our military spending has gone from weapons -- weapon systems that are wasteful.

just arbitrarily increasing military spending is not a good idea. we do live in a dangerous world. we have to spend our resources on the cia and undercover guys going out and finding out what is going on in the world. we cannot send in aircraft carriers to the middle of syria. we do have planes we could send in. our military is plenty strong to defend us. moderator: you both agree this is a dangerous world. how worried are you about the increase and spread of nuclear weapons? sen. thune: very worried. that is why i say we have to modernize our nuclear capability. the triad, a lot of our nuclear weapon delivery systems -- we need the next generation bomber. hopefully that will be that down at ellsworth air force base. they are currently working on

that today and the dull -- developmental stage. we have to be prepared to use that as a believablee a deterrent. i'm worried that a rogue nation nuclearn acquiring capability, which they are on the path to have, and that creating nuclear proliferation in the middle east. everyone will want one. you already have a crackpot in north korea, firing nuclear weapons. you might aim at alaska and hit seattle. we need to be worried about what is happening with the threat of nuclear weapons, and we need to be prepared for that. mr. williams: the spread of nuclear weapons is probably the most serious threat we face today. the last thing we want to see is a terrorist group get a nuclear weapon in their hands. just a few years ago, everyone was saying iran would have a

nuclear weapon and one year. the head of israel came and talked to congress and said iran would have a nuclear weapon and -- in one year. the u.s. negotiated with iran and got them to give up that nuclear capability for 10 years. he's -- if i had done that as a nibble officer, i would have been court-martialed. iran is not going to have a nuclear weapon for at least 10 years. after 10 years, after negotiating with us, i think you'll find that iran will be our friend and will not have a nuclear weapon.

sen. thune: he went after me. this is a bad deal. we gave $150 billion in sanctions relief to the world's leading state sponsor of terror. iran is on the way to acquiring a nuclear capability, make notes is -- no mistake about it. i was a bad deal. the reason the letter went was because the president did not want to go to congress. he went to the united nations. this president wanted to circumvent congress. he went to the united nations before the congress. mr. williams: we gave iran -- it is not a bad deal. it would have been a bad deal if we did not have a bit -- a deal. that is not the way we should do things. moderator: what is your assessment of u.s. trade policies? specifically the north american free trade agreement and the trans-pacific partnership?

sen. thune: as a member, we deal with these issues on a regular basis. i with the administration on a regular basis. dealing with trade relationship with places around the world. tp with places around the world. trade deals that have been initiated in the past, we have negotiated those. when we negotiate these deals, agriculture has a seat of the table. it is critically important to american agriculture that we open up markets, increase our exports, and get the prices back at a better level for farmers in south dakota. that means good deal negotiated on the front end. we cannot disengage from the global marketplace because it is too important. mr. williams: i agree.

i believe that the tpp -- is good for south dakota. i think that is good for us. in general, i believe in free trade. we are becoming a global economy. we have to work together. the trade policies we have in place today, global extreme poverty has gone from 30% to 12 -- 10%. as a people of the world, it is really a good thing. i am in favor of free trade. the question i have, if president obama negotiated the tpp deal, why is it that it has not been approved? the reason is we have a dysfunctional congress that will not get along. i am for free trade. it should have been approved.

moderator: let us take a deeper look at agriculture. you are generally an agreement on trade policy. what is right and wrong with other u.s. policies and regulations regarding agriculture, which is our state's largest industry? sen. thune: one thing i would argue, pertaining to the europeans and it would pertain to asia. that is why we are trying to negotiate these agreements. there are various barriers put in place. 90% of the crops in south dakota use gmo seeds. there is nothing scientifically wrong with that, but we have countries around the world in europe and asia to block american exports over that issue. that is one example of what i

would call eight nontariff -- i would call a nontariff barrier. the trade agreements are to open markets for american producers and businesses. we already have the most open market in the world to other countries. that is the purpose of all trade agreements. tear those barriers down and give us access to markets. mr. williams: we are in general agreement on trade. we have had things happen that have been blamed on trade. country of origin labeling for our product. we rescinded that, we do not have that anymore. i think that is a real problem. i think most people when they go to the supermarket and look at the beef, if they see that beef dakota,brazil or south they will choose south dakota. they will do that because they know when they buy these from south dakota, they know the quality they would get. they do not know the quality of brazil.

i don't mind brazil solyndra beefier. -- i don't mind brazil selling their beef here. i think consumers in the united states should be allowed to know the difference. those are the things we have to make sure our trade called do not affect and a net -- in a negative way. i am for to -- free trade. moderator: is global warming a real threat to our planet? is it an uncontrollable act of nature? or could it be addressed with environmental and energy practices? sen. thune: the climate is changing, it is changing all the time. it has been changing for thousands of years. the question of whether or not human activity contributes to that, i do not know what level, but i will concede at some level it does. the question then becomes what do we do about it and at what cost? in my view, the best way to get a change in behavior is to

provide incentives to change behavior. we have tried through a lot of energy policies as been involved -- policies i have been involved with. we are trying to move in a direction where we are less dependent on fossil fuels. i do not support the national energy tax. it would he -- particularly in the midwest, it would increase electricity costs by 50%. that is not the right approach. mr. williams: we have another disagreement. he believes he is not sure what humans are doing to cause global warming. myself and all the sciences and the world every we are doing something really significant. 1900ing in 1902 today --

to today, we have warmed one centigrade. that is a lot. that is continuing to go up. the last three months, september august were the hottest months on record. 2016 is going to be the hottest year ever. we have to do something about it. we have to do something now. it is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when. it is going to be more expensive and harder to do. it is great president obama is trying to address this issue. the worst thing we can do is say let's just wait. moderator: we are about halfway through this debate. we are going to reverse the speaking order. we will let mr. williams answer first. should construction of the dakota access type line be receive underneath

the missouri river? do you for see a peaceful resolution to the protest and standoff near the standing rock indian reservation? mr. williams: i foresee a peaceful resolution. i think the protest are a hallmark of the united dates. the dakota access pipeline is an example of fossil fuel that we do not need. we can move that by trucks or rail. some people say that is more dangerous than moving it by pipeline. if you put a pipeline underneath the missouri pipeline and there is a leak that they do not discover, i think the dakota access pipeline is a bad idea. i think we should stop construction of it and concentrate on infrastructure that will take us from fossil fuel to clean energy. that is the future of our country.

that is where we have got to be. -- that is my position on the pipeline. sen. thune: the pipelines are safer than rails and trucks. they are the safest, cleanest and most efficient way to move this product. we will not get rid of those products overnight. i'm all for moving away from our dependence on fossil fuels. for the foreseeable future, we need those. if you are going to bring a pipeline to this part of the country, you will have to go under a river. there are 100 pipelines under the missouri river. there are millions of pipelines -- millions of miles of pipelines in this country today. it is safer, more efficient, more cost-effective when you're moving those types of product. with respect to what is happening up there, i hope they resolved peacefully. i hope they can deal with this

in a way where people are respectful of the right to protest but also respectful to the laws of the land. moderator: how do you assess the condition of indian country, and what do you see as the federal government -- in dealing with sovereign nations and their people? mr. williams: this is one of the major issues that faces us in south dakota. the nine tribes in indian country, we have the two poorest counties in south dakota. that is not right. that is not how it should be. the federal government has been trying to deal with this forever. since i was in high school, they have been trying to deal with it. they have not found a way to do it. what we need is to get rid of the traditional politicians, the career politicians running our congress today and put in guys

like me who can bring new ideas and new ways to relate to our native american population in south dakota. they make up 9% of south dakota. we need to take a new look, go in and find leaders in the native american population and help them find the kind of projects they can get behind and champion for the rest of us, like going from fossil fuels to clean energy. sen. thune: well, the long-term solution -- by the way, i consult with the nine tribes here in south dakota multiple times a year. i meet with tribal members and leaders. the thing that will change the way of life on reservations, improve the quality of life, is a private economy.

we have to have a private economy that creates jobs and allows people to create wealth. right now, there is not much of a private economy. there are a few is this is on reservations, but by and large, you're talking about -- by and large, you are talking about an economy completely dependent on the federal government. that does not work. meantime, honor treaty obligations with health care, education, the best bridge for the future of kids on a reservation, trying to get kids into higher ed. and like i said before, we have to have security. people need to be able to live safely on reservations. there are elderly people and kids on reservations today who are constantly living in fear. moderator: what aspects of obamacare, the affordable care act, should be retained, and what should be scrapped? mr. williams: the affordable care act is really a major milestone in the united states.

since 1948, we have been trying to get a national healthcare policy. finally, with the passage of affordable care act, we did it. does it need improvement? the biggest room in the world is the room for improvement, according to my high school band instructor. but the worst thing we could do is repeal it and start over. the affordable care act is using private health insurance to implement health care, and it has done a lot of great things. you cannot be on your health insurance and get really sick and suddenly find that you have lost your health insurance. pre-existing conditions do not exist anymore. it has done a lot of great things, but there are things that need to be done, and we can certainly do them. we need to work together to improve the affordable care act instead of repeal it, repeal it. that is one of my problems i have with the congress. sen. thune: this is a problem of

liberal economics. this is central planning by government. we are going to the fine would insurance coverage is for the entire country, and it has not worked. there are still 30 million americans without insurance. the goal was everyone gets covered, and there are still 30 million americans today without coverage. now there are more losing coverage because of obamacare. blue cross blue shield pulled out of individual covers in south dakota. there are 8000 people and i talked to a bunch of them who are losing their coverage. bill clinton has said that obamacare has doubled premiums for people -- he says it is the craziest thing i have seen. and the liberal governor next door in minnesota said the affordable care act is no longer affordable. this does not work, folks. that is why we need it repealed and we need to put reforms in place to drop the costs and make it insurance coverage in this country more accessible and more affordable.

moderator: what is your stand on u.s. immigration policy, border security, enforcement, deportation, and amnesty? mr. williams: i would like to make a quick comment. 15 million more americans have health insurance. it really is working, but it could work better. in terms of immigration, we are a country of immigrants. that is what makes us great. we're heterogeneous. we have people and religions and cultures from all over the world, and they join together to make the greatest country the world has ever seen. so immigration is a good thing for us. do we need to make sure the emigrants that come here are not wishing us harm? of course, we do. 9/11 was caused by people who were not u.s. citizens, but they were here legally. what we really have to worry about is the hate now being festered up in the united states.

that is the real danger to us. down in kansas last week, a hate group was going to blow up an entire somali community. that is a real problem. so immigration is a good thing for the united states. sen. thune: my grandfather and great uncle came here in 1906. this country is a nation of immigrants. we have always been a welcoming nation. i don't know about the hate that you're talking about. i know that people who come here need to follow the law. that is why any discussion of immigration has to start with enforcement first. we cannot talk about people who are here illegally until we convince the american people that we can secure the border. so it is securing the border, creating a biometric exit/entry program so that the people who are here are on visas so we can track them. and we have to have a vetting system for people, particularly the refugee population coming

in, that can certify that there are people that will do us harm. it is enforcement first. i know a lot of people here are employers, and we want to have an e-verified system in the workplace. we are a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants, and we have to figure out how to strike that balance. you have to enforce the laws on the books first. moderator: looking at refugees from the middle east, including from syria and those caught in the humanitarian crises around that region, including what is happening in aleppo. mr. williams: will you repeat the question for me? moderator: certainly. i hope that was not too confusing. what about the acceptance of middle eastern refugees? mr. williams: well, we are a nation of immigrants, and refugees is a strong tradition of the united states.

in the 1956 republican presidential platform, president eisenhower, one of the planks was to do what we can to accept refugees. i think we need to do that it we -- need to do that. we do not need to be afraid of women and children, which is what most of these refugees are. and we already have a great vetting program for our refugees. we have not had any refugees that i know of that have done any kind of terror attacks in the united states. so i think it is important that the united states does accept refugees and do what we can to help them. that is the character of the united states, to help those really in need. refugees are people sitting in war zones and are being bombed, and they cannot live in their homes anymore. the united states is a place of last resort for them, and we should do what we can to help refugees. i am in favor of refugees. i agree they should be vetted. sen. thune: we accept more refugees into the united states every year than all the other

nations in the world combined. we are a welcoming nation. we have to make sure, in light of what is happening in the middle east and in light of what is happening in terms of radicalization of people in this country, that when people come here, particularly from a region of the world with terrorist organizations that are operating and active, that we vet them carefully. the head of the dni, the department of national intelligence, the department of homeland security, and the fbi director have testified in front of congress that there are gaps in our system. they cannot certify when people come here that we have a vetting system that will ensure that there are not people in that population that will do us harm. we need to make sure that they can certify that and that we are vetting people in a way that we keep the american people away from somebody who might want to come into this country and do us harm.

moderator: as the cost of higher education has spiraled in the past decade, student loan debt in the united states has grown to $1.2 trillion. should access to free public education extend beyond high school, and what, if anything, should the federal government do to address soaring student debt? mr. williams: i first want to attack soaring debt. citibank or any of the large banks, they borrow money at a little under 1% interest. if a student wants to go to college, they have to pay it at 7%. the first thing we can do is

lower the interest rates for our college students today. is lower the interest rates for our college students today. as far as free public education, that is another great american tradition. we have had free public education, k-12, forever, and it has worked really well. california had free higher education, and i believe kentucky is starting to do it. i believe a high school education is not quite enough in today's job market, so i think it would be a good idea to consider free public education, at least in terms of tuition, to extend beyond high school. how far? two years seems reasonable to start, but maybe we would go to four years. education is what is going to drive our economy and drive our country into the future. sen. thune: well, you want to make college education really expensive, make tuition free. [laughs] costs will go up -- wait and see. the interest rate on student loans, a result of legislation in congress, 3.76% this last year. i am somebody who came up the hard way and you asked earlier

about characteristics of yourself -- part of mine is work ethic. i am somebody who appreciates work and effort and earning your way, and i think those are things that are important about this country. so free college education strikes me is the right -- strikes me as the wrong approach. anybody who is willing to work hard deserves the possibility of a college education. that is why we have to provide as many incentives as we possibly can. affordable student loans. there are programs like the perkins loan program that i helped to get reauthorized at the end of last year that helped 4000 low-income students and south dakota students get up to $5,500 a year for their education. the idea that we make it free for everybody, i think that goes against what we are as a culture. moderator: if and when you vote on a presidential nominee for the u.s. supreme court, what criteria will you use to reach your decision?

mr. williams: first of all, if i am elected to the united states senate, i pledge that i will provide the advice and consent that the constitution requires. i will not say we will wait for the next election, as the current congress and senate has done. what i am looking for is a man who is a fair-minded person. i do not think litmus tests are good way to go for a supreme court nominee. you cannot enforce it. once they are on the court, they are on the court for life. you cannot enforce litmus tests. but you can say, is he a fair man? does he listen to the arguments? what are the decisions he has rendered? do those decisions make sense? that is what i would look for in a supreme court justice, no matter whether he came from a republican president for democratic president -- republican president or democratic president. it has not happened with merrick garland, president obama's

appointment. sen. thune: when it comes to the supreme court, it is important that we have people that are constitutionalists. i want to -- constitutionalists. i want to see people nominated to the supreme court who are going to exercise judicious restraint. i do not want judges on the supreme court that are there to accomplish some agenda or legislate from the bench because they are unable to get some -- get something through congress. activist judges are dangerous to the country. i want to see so many that will exercise judicial restraint, that will be a constitutionalist, and some of who will worry about enforcing the constitution and the laws of this country and not become somebody trying to use the court as a way to legislate some agenda. moderator: the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the second amendment. what, if any, limitations should be placed on the ownership and possession of weapons and ammunition?

mr. williams: i am a big believer in the second amendment. i think americans do have the right to bear and own arms. i am for that. but we're not allowed to own anything we want. you cannot own stinger missiles. since 1934, if you wanted to on -- wanted to own a machine gun, you had to pay a fairly large tax and register. some kinds of weapons we need to keep track of. unfortunately, that is the position of the nra, keeping it open, and the nra has a strangle hold on our congress. i believe there are things we can do, technology things, to make guns safer. 33,000 americans are killed with guns every year. with a little bit of technology, we can maybe cut that in half. i believe guns need to be regulated in the sense that we can use technology to make them safer. keeping them out of the hands of

the mentally ill, that is very well and good, but we cannot stop them from stealing a gun and using it. we have to use technology. sen. thune: too many people are just too many people in this country that are lost -- too many people in this country that are lost to violence, and many of them are suicides. it is still way too many. we have to make sure we're doing everything we can as a culture to address the fundamental problem. jay mentioned mental health, and that is something we agree on. in many of the cases of mass violence, these are mentally deranged people. you will not find common ground on more restrictions. i think that nobody that is a suspected terrorist, anybody on a watchlist or no-fly list, should be able to buy a handgun without the fbi having some say so about it. but there are things we can do in the area of mental health. that is where we should focus. i think this is a second

amendment right. it is guaranteed under our constitution, and people in this country have a right to defend themselves. we should not trifle with it, but we need to address the fundamental problem, and that is mental health. moderator: the first amendment protects freedom of expression. is the bill of rights too allowing what some people consider to be offensive, hateful speech and unpatriotic forms of protest such as flagburning? mr. williams: i do not believe the bill of rights is too permissive. i believe it is a fundamental part of america. this fundamental rights have to exist. one of those things is the right to protest. even though it may not be likable to me, like i do not like to see somebody burning a flag, but i believe they have the right to do that kind of thing. our country is based on the freedoms that we get from the

first 10 amendments of the constitution, the bill of rights. the second amendment, i agree on that. the first agreement -- the first amendment, i agree on that even more. the free press that we have, the idea of trying to sue journalists for doing their jobs and that sort of thing, i am against that. i think freedom is what we are all about, and the first amendment is the first of our basic freedoms. of course, you do not have unlimited freedoms to yell fire in a crowded theater, but you have the right to do peaceful protests. sen. thune: i think that is what another amazing thing is about our country, the first amendment, the right of speech, expression, free press. those are things that make america the model and the envy of the world when it comes to our democracy. yeah, i think we need to make sure that people will protest in a nonviolent, peaceful way. we need to make sure that law enforcement respects the right

of people to protest. those are both things we need to ensure are happening in this country. but there are some things, for example, flagburning, i have worked with the vfw and the american legion for years on an amendment to the constitution that would ban flag burning. i realize it will be very hard to make happen, but that is something that is so sacred to the people who have defended our country and our freedoms. that is an area i think could actually be a restriction. moderator: both of you have been vocal critics of donald trump, yet john thune, you have said that you will still vote for mr. trump. jay williams, you have been an enthusiastic supporter of secretary clinton. how does your choice online with your values, your policy positions, and your vision for the country -- how do your choices align with your values?

mr. williams: secretary clinton spent her entire adult life working for women and children. she has been secretary of state under president obama. there have been seven or eight investigations of the end of the tragedy, two of 9/11 -- there have been seven or eight investigations of the benghazi tragedy, two of 9/11. they have tried to vilify secretary clinton. after all of the investigations, they found nothing. senator thune said that fbi director comey said his underlings recommended the indictment. quite the opposite is true or -- opposite is true. the fbi investigated secretary clinton and found she did no wrong. there has been a lot of vilification of secretary clinton. i believe she is a principled woman, and she is not donald

trump. [laughter] sen. thune: i said there was sen. thune: i said there was reporting that there were investigators and the fbi who disagreed with that decision. the point is, hillary clinton, whether you think she is a role model or not, did destroy 33,000 e-mails after they had been subpoenaed. she literally took a hammer to two of her blackberries and crushed them. fbi director comey was extremely careless with classified information and no other normal person would do the things she did -- fbi director comey said she was extremely careless. she has lied over and over again. nobody here will win a character contest. it is about whose policies will be best for south dakota. on that issue, hillary clinton would be terrible for south dakota when it comes to economic

policies and judges she would put on the court, and these are the choices we are left with. moderator: these are divisive times in our nation. are you optimistic or pessimistic about the future of these united states? regardless of the outcome of the presidential election, are you hopeful that the polarized american electorate will accept and unite behind the new president? mr. williams: as you probably can tell, i am an optimist. i am optimistic about the united states of america, which i love and think is the greatest country in the world. polarization, that is the crux of the problem. our congress is populated entirely with career politicians.

that is what i am not. i the opposite of that. i have never been elected to a political office. but i am here offering myself to go to washington to try to change that gridlock that exists there. that is a problem, when we polarize, and it is both sides, when we say my way or the highway. that is not a good thing. i'm not beholden to special interest groups. i am beholden to the voters of south dakota. i think if we can elect representatives like me, we can address these problems and make the united states better than it is now, despite the fact that it is the greatest country of the world. unfortunately, the republican presidential nominee does not agree with any of that. sen. thune: we are a great country made up of great people, and with that the right policies, and can be even better in greater. i hope when the smoke clears in the dust settles, we can sit down and work together. i will do that. i have done that my entire time in office. i have stood up two presidents who i thought were doing things that were bad for south dakota. i have worked with presidents when i felt like they work doing things that were good for south dakota.

we need people that are willing to build bridges and build relationships and get results. my career has been built around getting results for the people of south dakota. i have chaired the commerce, science, and transportation committee. the ranking democrat on my committee join me last week, and we visited the underground lab in rapid city. we worked together to pass numerous bills through congress in this last year, and it is because of the approach we bring. the committee could be a model for a lot of other committees in congress. but the challenges are too great, so we have to work together for the good of the american people. i will do that, always have. moderator: we end with two-minute closing statements. we have discussed 24 different subjects.

based on what you have expressed an would you have heard your opponent express, why should the voters of south dakota elect you to serve in the united states senate? mr. williams: i have to thank you, jack, and the rotary club here, and senator thune. i am a fourth generation south dakotan, a u.s. navy veteran was service in the vietnam war. as a navy pilot, served in europe and in the u.s. i am a veteran of the peace corps. i served in south america. i have a ba degree from the university of wisconsin and a master of computer science from northern illinois university. as a high-tech software engineer, i work for texas industries in dallas, texas, and -- texas instruments in dallas, texas, and for two different high-tech software companies in silicon valley during the computer revolution.

30 years ago, my wife and our three children and i moved back to south dakota for a high-tech business right here. i have been operating the business and serving my community in various ways. on the school board, i was actually president of our rotary club. i do love rotary. if you can tell from my experience, i am not a career politician. quite the opposite. i have a lot of background. almost everybody who i need i can find something in common with. that will allow me, if elected, to go to washington and work with other people and to get things done. it is a real problem we have right now with this polarization in our country. i am not beholden to the democratic party, certainly not the republican party. in the 1990's, i was a republican. i am the kind of guy who works with lots of different ideas and thoughts. i can work with people, work together, so that is why on november 8, you should vote for me. if you are early voting, vote for me, as well.

i appreciate the opportunity. i look forward to another debate with senator thune tonight. thanks again. sen. thune: thanks, jack, thank you to the rotary, thanks, jay, for the opportunity to discuss the issues. every election is about the future. some of you heard i just had a granddaughter about five weeks ago. it makes you even more keenly aware of the things that we do, the decisions we make, and what we do to shape the future of those kids and the grandkids. elections are also about differences, and we have some stark differences in how we approach issues. the one thing i will tell you is we have great challenges facing this country, on the economic front, domestic front, national security. we are going to need a strong voice in washington, d.c. i have proven in my time in office that i am somebody who knows how to get things done. i chaired the commerce, science, and transportation committee in congress, and i serve on the finance committee which has

jurisdiction over health care, taxes, trade, and i serve on the ag committee, our states number one industry. i put policies and legislation in place that are good for south dakota. we have seen a lot of success. in this toxic environment that everybody talks about, we get -- talks about, when you get past the cable news anchors shouting each other, we passed the first long-term highway bill in a decade, the first freight rail reforms in two decades, aviation security reforms, a pipeline safety bill, technology bills. that was all past the house into the president and signed into law. we are getting results for the people of south dakota. there is a lot more to do. this economy is stagnant. we need faster growth, better paying jobs.

we do things well here in south dakota, and thankfully to a lot of people in this room, we need to take that same kind of common sense to washington, d.c., and get this country moving in a different direction. i am asking for your vote on november 8. thank you. moderator: for their commitment and desire to serve our state and our nation, please join me in thanking the candidates, republican u.s. senator john thune and democratic u.s. senate candidate jay williams. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> on election day, the nation decides our next president in which party controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage, including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump. follow key house and senate races with debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily.

>> tomorrow on the road to the white house, donald trump makes a campaign stop in springfield, ohio, live it 1:00 p.m. eastern. first lady michelle obama will join hillary clinton at a rally in winston, and salem -- winston-salem, north carolina. now back to our coverage from house, senate and governor's debates. from i was the congressional young and jimd our -- jim mowrer. ♪ [applause] >> i was third congressional -- more than half a million residents, it includes ankeny, des moines, indianola

and mount air. .estward to council bluffs even with that geographic diversity, the candidates are the des moines central iowa part of the district. 48-year-old republican david young calls than meet her home. -- calls vanmeter home. rer ran unsuccessfully two years ago against steve king . welcome to this special edition of iowa press and western iowa. forward to seeing areas of agreement and your campaigns as well as the contrasts. we'll be going an hour as you know. and because this is an iowa election special edition, we have an audience here in the iowa western community college arts center. they're watching and listening

and not cheering or otherwise distracting from our discussion. we have expanded this program to 60 minutes to accommodate additional issues and questions. across the iowa press table, "des moines register" political columnist kathie -- and radio iowa's news director. >> you have been a supporter of the affordable care act. as you have been seeing the double-digit increases in some states, even doubling the cost of buying insurance. it andt time to junk start all over again. >> i appreciate the question. i want to thank iowa western -- and thank my wife chelsea for her support. i want to thank my two sons, carter and jack. hopefully they are in bed. speaking of my two sons, jack

suffers from a rare neurodegenerative disease. there is no cure. it is never going to be affordable for an insurance company to provide him with insurance. the affordable care act has done a lot of important things, a lot of steps forward. one, ensuring that kids like him with a pre-existing medical condition can get health insurance. they can't be discriminated against. you can have your children under your health insurance till the age of 26. we have the highest insured rate we have seen in this country, over 90%. we have taken a lot of steps forward for the affordable care act, but on the affordable front, we do still have some challenges that remain and we need to address and fix those. and so, i, in congress will look for those fixes. i believe that there are things that do need to be fixed. >> such as? mr. mowrer: you look at the cadillac tax placed on folks

with health insurance that are too generous. i disagree with those things. we need to address the affordable side of the affordable care act but the wrong approach is repealing the affordable care act which would take away coverage for millions of americans. they would go back to a time when being a woman was a pre-existing condition. >> mr. young, when you were first running for congress, you said that you thought that they -- that the affordable care act was here to stay, at least while president obama was in office and you would be at the table to fix it. where is that table and what have you done to try to fix it? rep. young: first off, thank you for the opportunity here and iowa western committee college and jim, i want to thank you for being here today and getting in the race. i want to thank you for your service, for putting on the uniform and fighting for our liberties and freedoms. thank you for that. i've always been consistent with my stance on the affordable care act, the president's signature health care law.

it is not working. it is causing people's premiums to go up dramatically. it will be about 30% will be the average next year in iowa. people have lost access to their doctors. insurance people have lost insurance. i spoke to a gentleman, got an e-mail from him where his premiums are going up from $342 to $1390. some of these premium increases and where they go, that is where a mortgage payment is at right now. this is really squeezing iowans. there are some things within the affordable care act that i would keep. some of the wellness provisions, making sure that folks of pre-existing conditions were not kicked off. if you're up to the age of 26, staying on your parents insurance. but we need to empower iowans to make the decisions they need for their families and transparency is an issue. we need to know what we are paying for before we are going

into a provider. that can create quality health care through competition. >> are you prepared, now that we are this far down the road, yes we are going to keep 26 year olds, but kickoff everybody else? are we too far down the road to go back now? rep. young: time will tell, but it is falling apart now. even president clinton says this is a circus. governors on both sides of the aisle are seeing what is passing with the affordable care act. it's causing people great anxiety and economic hardships. moderator: the basis of kathie's question is what you have in that letter. what are you writing back to that gentleman whose premiums have increased three fold? what are you going to tell him?

she's really asking, what are you doing? rep. young: we were in -- we had a conversation last night on the phone for 45 minutes. i told him, first of all, i opposed the affordable care act. and where there are areas, where things can be fixed, i'm going to do what i can for the people of the third district. we have had some opportunities in the last congress to make some fixes. i want to help relieve the burden to the folks in iowa, but i think it is falling apart. i think you have to start all over. >> mr. mowrer, would you support universal health care? mr. mowrer: good news is that today we have 90% of america who have health insurance which is more than we have ever had. what we need to work on is making the affordable care and trying to make it more affordable. >> how do you address the premium increase that the gentleman, that congressman young referenced? mr. mowrer: the good news is if you look at folks on the