universal health care, that would with one thing that they wouldn't have to worry about in their efforts. >> the next question will come from lucas and go first to mike key he. >> it seems there's been an increase in online threats made by juveniles against other students in schools, in some cases, businesses. what, if anything, do you think should be done about this coincidentally i had a long conversation with the sheriff from coal co. last night about this very issue. we are struggling right now with juvenile officers across the state in making sure they are and the right position, and we need to make sure we have access to them, because should a young person go online and make some sort of threat, the local law enforcement can pick the person up, but then they get turned over to the juvenile officer. we need to work with courts and lawmakers to make sure we have different penalties for

juveniles that would assess threats, especially against schools and other institutions that create chaos and give the juvenile officers the tools they need once they are turned over to them. that they do not have the right tools in the toolbox. these threats are serious, and a lot of it has to come from supervision. a lot of it has to come from parenting skills and guardians goes there making sure these young kids understand when you were doing this you are affecting a lot of lives and there will be no consequences. >> bill slantz. >> i am saddened about the growth of online threats across the state and across the country. some of them are done by cowards online, not to confronting your opponent and avoiding getting punched in the nose. mike had a good point.

juveniles, especially when you talk about younger juveniles, and i know this is impossible today, supervision and discipline at the local level, at the parent level, at the clergy level can combat this, convincing young people this is the wrong way to go about things, but it is going to happen. >> sorry, i was reeling from my last answer. what was the question? >> there has been an increase in online threats made by juveniles from schools and businesses. what if anything to you think should be done about this at the state level? el? >> just heard a program that said students learn more when they read from paper than they do by reading from an online

tablet. to address the issue, one thing that we need to do in our schools is to return to paper learning because that is the most effective way. and also, the states can do a lot to control the traffic on these conglomerate internet companies. and the need to study that and find ways to control that abuse that is done on the line. >> actually on monday i was in st. louis at an event and i had a middle school or come up to me and asked if she could ask me a question and she started to cry. she said i'm scared to go to school. that very next day in st. louis the high school had to shut down because of a threat. i know right here at home we had to yesterday at an elementary school.

this is a real problem and we need to be listening to our young people about how absolutely terrified they are right now. when it comes to solutions in the space we need to have conversations around actually making sure there are enough law enforcement officers in juvenile officers and that we are funding them. we've had the same folks in charge for 20 years yet we are still under funding and we cannot find enough people to work in these spaces. that is a real problem. we also need to have conversations about mental health care. i have tried to access care and have gone through weeks and weeks of loopholes trying to find someone and actually told that i had to send my family member to california to get them the help that they need. we have a real crisis happening right now not just in our state and country. we need real leaders i will have honest conversations about what is going on. >> the next question from alvin. >> we will stay on school safety you mentioned your thoughts on banning any type of weapon. if we are going to keep school safe, what are your thoughts on

how exactly we can keep students safe in their schools? >> first and foremost, thank you first and foremost, i am serious when i say that it should interfered it should bring local education or education to the local community. we will put that on the local community to police the safety. school houses in the community and not in a rural area we were we had to bus kids in on a daily basis. we had smaller schools with more focus teachers. i think, you know, this issue of school safety would become a lot less invasive. so, i am all about educating the children get i question whether or not the state should even have a mandate against education , but, certainly, we should educate children at the local level. >> paul.

>> all of the mass school shootings have been done with weapon that were registered. so, we need to, as chris was indicating address the mental health crisis that our country is in. that we need to devote more money, more efforts to our mental health, division of the state and so that they can go into schools and counsel students. we need to bar the assault rifle the weapon of choice. and, you know, do more diligence as we are doing about keeping kids safe in the school setting. so, it is important that we focus on, you know, the big picture of white society, why the u.s. society so vicious in our gun activity compared to

others, other countries all around the world. >> chris. >> i had the great honor of serving on the school task force for many years while here in our local community we were evaluating what school buildings needed improvement in what we could deal from a local community level. by doing that i have learned a lot about so many of our buildings across the state that match up with this that are very old. a lot of our kids going to elementary schools that were built in the early 1900s. we can do a lot from an investment standpoint in terms of infrastructure. looking at deductibles and making sure there's a level of entry before somebody from the outside get the inside to the office. a lot of our schools here have moved to that. things like bulletproof glass and et cetera. the reality is, again, we should not be making our schools like a prison for kids to be an and stay safe then. i want to have real conversations about investments with our local law enforcement officers to give them the tools

that they need to be successful. one of the things they talk to me about his kids have access to firearms and there is literally nothing they can do about it. it is about making investments to keep our building safe. doing what we can there but also working with our law enforcement >> one of the fundamental problems with this issue with our young people have lots of respect for life. i think that starting at all levels. that is the number one challenge it has been mentioned here multiple times the mental health issues that we face. i tell people all the time at the number one problem in our country that nobody wants to talk about. all families including my own have had struggles with mental health issues. making sure we have the appropriate professionals to identify kids that need help i think it's very important. i also think the best thing in school resource officers or sros making sure the school districts have those men and ladies available on campus, that they have the appropriate training along with the faculty.

what would happen should one of these unfortunate events come forward. i think we can use technology. we have an incredible advantage right now of technology that can detect various things are coming to school to make sure that we monitor that so we have an advance warning if something unfortunate were to happen. >> we have time for one final question. christine. >> the missouri chamber of commerce has stated that satan faces a childcare crisis because of a shortage of affordable providers. do you agree and what if anything do you propose to do about this. >> paul lehman, you are first. >> we need to enable more people to engage in childcare. i think a couple years ago there were further restrictions on what you could do to take care of children. that is one thing. we need to have universal healthcare so that money can be used to provide childcare and support so that childcare givers

who need to do these things. so, it is, it is broken. we have a broken system that needs to be corrected and we need to value our childcare givers and pay them a decent salary. >> when i first started running for office in 2015 and i asked what on state government was affordable childcare. one of the very first bills that i filed had to do with affordable childcare. i've been working on that ever since. i am really glad that folks in charge are starting to have this conversation. i know people like my mom have been struggling with this for decades. when it comes to what we can do is the state of missouri is drastically going with this. i don't know if you saw in the recent news is the state of missouri is not even paying its childcare provider bills on time we have lost 53 childcare from

promises of what we are payment or subsidies imposter kid. i've been meeting with childcare providers across the state having conversation saying how much are you out hundreds of thousands of dollars these people are taking a personal loans to keep their business afloat. we cannot even meet these basic promises we are doing. i want to have robust conversations but how we can increase access and affordability. making sure they are doing what they promise. >> the state is in a childcare crisis. this is a very personal issue to me. i can tell you as a young man i watched my mother make a decision does she go to work and labor child at home on a snow day so she can make enough money to buy groceries or does she not go to work and not have enough money to buy groceries and stay home with her child. that is the decision no single mother should have to face. the good news is it's

nonpartisan. this is not a democrat or republican issue. this is a missouri issue. $1.4 billion. they want to go to work and cannot get childcare. we want to make sure that this is safe but we have to promote childcare centers to open. options to businesses. they have here in springfield and they have in kansas city. those are the type of outside the box ideas that we have to do to improve access to childcare. i am in favor of the childcare tax credit. i think that that was a good move that we need to get through and as governor will be a priority for me. >> bill. >> it should not be a mandate. the state has no business in the childcare. whatsoever. one of the reasons, or a reason why both parents are unable to stay home is because over the last 60 years, affordability of

living at home has grown eight times. he used to be a single parent income could take care of a 20,000 house without an issue. now 400,000 house has to be paid for by both parents which means the child has to be left alone. the bottom line is childcare should be taking care of it. this local community again and by the home of the parents or home with her grandparents and in some people's cases. >> we will now go to closing statements. paul, you are first and you may begin. >> yes. i want to, first, start by saying that we cannot cover everything today. one of the looming clouds over the state of missouri and over the nation and over the world is the opposition of the united states.

for a cease-fire in gaza and in palestine. it is beginning to spin out of control simply because we cannot force the israelis to come to the table and do a cease-fire. having said that, i want to pivot back to the u.s. what that does is it affects the environment that we live in. the gun violence is in an environment of gun control. so, we had to change the environment and change our attitude about people. stop treating people as the other or someone who is the enemy. someone that we cannot control. that we must control. we need to incorporate people. i will stop. >> first of all, a great honor to be here.

thank you very much for having us. the candidates on stage right now are not here is a get-rich-quick scheme. the four of us standing in front of you are offering their leadership. it is not something that will make us wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. not even something that will make us all that powerful. we are here as virtual volunteers to care for the state and provide you with the best possible way of living that missouri can possibly live in. i will finish with what i started with. i think it is very important for the state to focus on eliminating most of the taxes that we have. personal property tax and income tax need to be given away. we can do that by cutting half of the budget. i appreciate you having me here today. thank you. >> thank you again for the press association and the candidates that would be there.

i spent four years of my career as a small businessman creating jobs and opportunities for missourians and rewarding success, not punishing it. if businesses and people want to do good they should be allowed to do so. i think government should play a role in that. not creating jobs but an environment where good jobs can grow and prosper. that is the administration i want to bring to missourians. we want to continue with the career technical training so they can take advantage of very good jobs with benefits that are out there. first we need to keep our missourians safe. we need to keep our communities safe. that will be the priority for me on day one. we need to make sure that we fund and get the resources all across the state the resources they need to keep missourians safe. so they can walk their own neighborhoods at night without ever having to be afraid. these are the things i would like to do for you as governor and i humbly ask for your vote on november 5. >> thank you again to the press association and the candidates for being here.

i grew up a regular working-class kid. my mom was a waitress most of my life and my stepfather drove almost an hour to get to the factory. because of their hard work and determination i'm the very first person in my family to graduate high school. i got involved in government because there were not enough regular people at the table making decisions. i'm running for governor because we deserve better than what we've been getting. we rank lowest in the entire country. we have crumbling roads and bridges. we have police officer shortages all across the state of missouri and we deserve better than this. instead of investing in things that matter most, what we have seen from my opponent and folks on the other side of jefferson city are the continued government overreaches into our personal lives. whether it's in our doctors offices, what books our kids can read, the focus of what is been coming out of jefferson city is absolutely wrong. as your governor i will get politicians out of your doctor's office it's your personal lives and i will protect your freedom.

thank you guys for being here? >> that concludes the forms for governor. if you stick around 20 minutes we love senate candidates on stage. now is your time to give your plots of these gubernatorial candidates. [applause] ♪ announcer: with one of the tightest races for control of congress are in modern political history stay ahead with c-span's comprehensive coverage of key state debates. this fall c-span brings you access to the top house, senate, and governor debates from across the country, debates from races that are shaping your estate up was because future and the balance of power in washington, d.c. follow our coverage from local to national debates anytime online at c-span.org/campaign, and watch tuesday, november 5 for real, live time election results. c-span, powered by cable.

♪ announcer: friday night, watching c-span's 2024 campaign trail, a weekly discussion. two reporters during each week to talk about the issues, messages, and events driving the week's political news and to take a week -- a look at the week ahead. friday nights at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, online at c-span.org, or download as a podcast on c-span now. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ announcer: listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listening to "washington journal," important public affairs events throughout the day, and catch washington

today. just tell your smart speaker play c-span radio. announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it is way more than that. >> comcast is partnering with the 1000 community centers so students from low income families can get that was they need to be ready for anything. announcer: comcast supports c-span as a public service ong with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible forts caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [ctions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2024] announcer: in colorado's eighth congressional district, incumbent democratic representative yadira caraveo is seeking a cond term against republican challenger gabe evans. the two took part in a debate that focused on immigration, affordable housing a access to abortion services. thnonpartisan cook political

report with amy walter rates the race a tossup. it is about 30 minutes. two lats the major party candidates. congresswoman yadira caraveo, pediatrician turned state legislature. she has both endorsed and condemned kamala harris. the publican challenger gabe evans, former police officer and one term state legislature who wrote donald trump's endorsement to a resounding primary win. this is next presents the race for congress. >> good evening, i am kyle clark. >> please welcome democratic congresswoman yadira caraveo and republican state representative gabe evans. [laughter] -- [applause]

>> that will be the last time you hear applause and any titles used in this debate. you the voters will determine who will hold the title representative. >> the candidates agreed to civil ground rules in advance. we will have one-minute answers, rebuttals and continued discussion at our discretion. we only have 30 minutes so let's get started on the issue of immigration. donald trump will campaign friday in aurora, which he falsely claimed was taken over by a venezuelan gang. he said getting the gang out of and only -- aurora will be a bloody story. aurora police say the gang's presence is small and isolated. nine arrested. trump says he will begin the largest deportation in american history in aurora, colorado removing what he says is 20 million people from the united states. mr. evans, you have said aurora has fallen. do you support trump's mass

deportation plan to remove every person here illegally. given that you have served in law enforcement, military and national guard, what do you think about his plan to use all three forces to do it? >> thank you for the question and for everyone coming here tonight. i have served in the military and law enforcement. there is a couple things we have to do. i have been fitted with my three-part plan. we must secure the border. immigration and customs has we have over 13,000 convicted murderers free in our committees. 99 individuals on the terrorist watchlist in our communities. we have to secure our border. we have to have a path for people who legally want to emigrate that doesn't trap them for decades in bureaucracy. and aggressively target those individuals who are illegally in our communities committing crimes. those are the folks we have to deport. i have never wavered from that. this is something we have to do because we are currently the third most dangerous day in the country. that is a direct result of the

policies my opponent voted for great open border policies, defund the police. policies that make it illegal for police in colorado to even call immigration and customs and i can fix it. >> we want a clear answer to whether you support donald trump's plan to deport every person in this country illegally . he describes that is 21 million people or more. i heard you say people committing crimes. >> we need to empower our law enforcement to be able to deport those folks that are committing crimes in our community. once we start to enforce the laws, then i think what you will see happen is those folks who have cut in the line will step back into the place they should have been all along. my grandfather earned his citizenship to this country with two purple hearts in world war ii as an immigrant from mexico. we have to make sure we are respecting the folks who did it the right way. and not allow folks to cut in line. >> i'm not certain i heard an answer about whether you support the trump plan to deport every

person here illegally. you mentioned your mexican border grandfather you often cite in world war ii fighting the nazis. donald trump echoes the dehumanizing rhetoric of the fascists that your grandfather fought on behalf of this country. trump says immigrants are poisoning the blood of our country. he says they are animals, not people. he invokes genetics, saying recently that immigrants who kill have bad gene, all calling a largely white crowd in minnesota that they have good genes because of the racehorse theory which involve selective breeding. when you hear donald trump whose endorsement you accepted say those things, what you think? >> as a state legislator, i was able to get 60% of my bills passed at the state capital. that is with me being in a republican super minority. 19 republicans to 46 democrats. the reason i got six to present past is because i can work with everyone on these issues. i do that because i focus on policies, not personality. >> with respect, would you

please answer the question when donald trump uses dehumanizing rhetoric about minorities and migrants, what you think of that? >> in the endorsement, from cape may, he talked about securing the border. talked about making community safe, lowering the cost of living. those are the things i am focused on. i condemn any sort of racist sort of speech. i would appreciate if my opponent could join me in condemning some of that racist speech. yesterday was the anniversary of one of the most egregious attacks on the jewish community. i didn't see anything on my opponent social media talking about that. >> just to clarify when you say you condemn racist statements, are you talking about those dehumanizing statement by donald trump? >> i have always condemned any sort of racist statements. >> are you willing to say that donald trump's statements are racist? >> yes or no question here. will you appear alongside donald trump at his rally in aurora if you are invited? >> i found out about that rally last night via the news media.

i had as much information as anyone else in this room. >> would you say yes? >> i have as much information as anybody in this room. >> let's say you say yes, which you correct any false statements in front of donald trump he were to make about colorado. >> i stand for the truth. this is why i have 60% of my bill is passed being in a for minority. two thirds of the mayors in my district have thrown their support behind me. >> mr. evans is running an ad that says the unsecured border is allowing drugs and crime to flow into colorado and you are responsible for all of it. what response ability do you have for the search in illegal immigration during the biting administration and how should the federal government help colorado with health care to education? >> thank you to you and kyle for having this debate tonight. thank you for the audience. it has been my honor to serve as the member of congress for the eighth congressional district the last two years. i do that is the culmination of

the american dream that i have been able to live here with two parents who are immigrants, a. who works in construction 51 years to put four kids through college. i was able to go through medical school and then see the issues that my community was struggling with. immigration is one of the issues that more needs to be done on by both parties pray to spend 40 years since there has been any comprehensive immigration reform . both democrats and republicans have been in charge and's then. i have spoken to kamala harris on that in a resolution. i introduced a package of bills that is bipartisan to look at the issue. and i'm not standing with a racist like donald trump having their endorsement and the really damaging language how they used against immigrants. >> he says you are responsible for all of this. what responsibility do you have? >> my responsibility was introducing legislation, which i did.

that looks at securing the border, making sure we are stopping the flow of fentanyl, that we are funding interior cities like denver, and that we are treating people humanely when they do come to this country. that package has not been moved by the speaker of the house who has endorsed my opponent. there was a bill from the senate that was supposed to be coming over to the house free donald trump decided he would rather run on the issue of immigration then give me the opportunity to vote on it. i would've voted for that package but he decided and mr. evans probably agrees with that immigration is best left to be a campaign issue and not something to be solved. >> it would appear that your views on immigration and border security have changed significantly the last couple years pray three years ago, you called for the defunding of border patrol and ice. this summer you joined republicans in strongly condemning kamala harris specifically and the biting

administration for failing to secure the border. what caused you to drastically change your views in just a few years? >> the country has changed. we have seen a crisis that both parties have set up and not offered solutions for. as a member of congress from a district that is evenly divided, it is my responsibility to portray the opinions of my constituents. i've done that by being the eighth-most bipartisan freshman member of congress. bypassing the first law that a freshman member of this congress passed last year. and i have done that by introducing a bipartisan package around immigration reform. and many other issues. that is the way that i am approaching this issue and many others making sure i am truly representing the eighth district. >> sounds like you are drawing a distinction between what you believe about or the security and what you believe constituents want on the issue.

because of the changes, i will ask about things you supported in the past, if you would tell me briefly whether you still hold those positions. if you want to say i will vote against it anyway because i think that is what my constituents want, say that, but let's get folks clarity. in 2021, you called on the administrator to divest from agencies like ice, is that still your position? >> five constituents do not believe that, so i would vote against that. >> is it your position? >> my job is to represent the eight congressional district and that is what i do every time ifo. >> i'm 2819, you prohibit law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration holds in colorado, do you believe colorado law-enforcement should be barred from working with immigration agents? >> should not be up to local law enforcement. >> sounds like you still hold that position. >> the local police officer should not be enforcing laws the federal government has outperformed. >> -- performed.

-- re-formed. >> is that still your view? >> i will vote in keeping with what the constituents of the eighth district want me to. that is taking a balanced approach to people that emigrate legally and illegally. >> that did not answer the question of all. in 2021, you sponsored a bill that allowed the state to give contracts to people that knowingly employ people who do not have legal authorization to work. >> i have not had a bill presented to me since then. >> you sponsored a bill that opened up taxpayer public housing to people here illegally. that still your position, >> around the issue of housing, made sure am introducing a bill to have the federal government pay for migrant housing, so that local taxpayers do not. >> local taxpayers pay federal taxes, so it is still their money. >> but a disproportionate amount

should not come onto the taxpayers only of denver. >> yes or no before other topics. republicans put together a bipartisan bill in congress. that footage emergency closures of the barber if there are too many crossings and speeding up asylum approvals and denials made that failed after donald trump told republicans to oppose it. you said you would vote for the same bill if it came up again. >> mr. evans, would you vote for the same bill? >> start with yes or no. that bill had bipartisan opposition. >> what is it about that bill that had support from many republicans? >> that bill had bipartisan opposition because it required up to 5000 folks per day to be allowed into the united states under an asylum claim. that allows 1.8 million newcomers into our country every year through the slm program. it does not solve the issues and it takes the border patrol of

the border and moves them into an administrative role. they are filling out paperwork instead of protecting our country.we need more border patrol agents but we need more agents actually on the border securing the physical boundaries of the united states. >> an act would've allowed the border to be closed for emergency reasons. let's move to housing affordability. trump and harris proposed tax cuts but different approaches on affordable housing. neither philippe blame their proposals. the centerpiece of trump's economic plan as across-the-board tariffs. six to present goods on tariffs from china, 20% other important trade last month trump threatened to hundred percent tariffs on john deere. mr. evans, tariffs are passed on to consumers through higher costs for those product paid farmers and ranchers could face a give him a higher costs if trump follow through on the john deere threat.

is that plans more policy? >> when it comes to protecting the economy, we have to cut red tape. we have to reward folks who are taking the risk and doing the work in the united states. we were talking about china, china is in a class all of its own because china uses slave labor and have a communist government supporting their industries. we need to make sure we are holding china accountable for their dealings and in the international community and not allowing them to take over certain sectors of our economy. they are not on the same playing field. when it comes to china, i strongly -- i want to make sure we are holding china accountable. that protects the american workers. we need to cut the red tape. we need to ensure they are able to do their job here without the punitive regulations many of which my opponent sponsored. she brought the most damaging

bill in a decade for farmers and ranchers in the eighth district. >> quick answer about the john deere threat. is that fair to the district if they pay more for the same product? >> we need to create a positive environment in the united states so we won't have to have threats like that. so we can have american industry and economy empowered in the united states. will they cut that red tape? >> that threat is there. miss caraveo,, harris is calling for increased taxes on large corporations and americans making more than $400,000 a year. is that where you would draw the line? who should pay more taxes and who should pay less? >> for a long time, especially on the trump tax credit and tax law, we have been giving breaks to people who make over $400,000 a year and to corporations. more than high time for them to pay their share.

i would approve a plan that increases taxes on those individuals. the next congressperson to serve the eighth congressional district is going to be deciding what taxes will be cut and what taxes will be increased. if my opponent were to have his chance in office, he would be continuing the tax credits that benefit the wealthiest americans. i on the other hand have voted on decreasing the middle class tax amounts. i have voted to extend the child tax reddit -- credit that is $1800 a month to working families. >> $400,000 and less will be paying fewer taxes? >> correct. >> housing affordability now. both of you served in the state legislature. i ask each of you to discuss

something you achieved at the state level to improve housing affordability. something you would look to do in congress to help coloradans afford homes. >> housing was one of the prime issues i look at during the covered pandemic. i had heard stories from many constituents talking about late fees that were exorbitant. fees around trash and many things that have not been delineated in people's leases and later were suddenly added to their bill, sometimes totaling more than the rent itself, especially once corporations were calculating late fees the second the rent was late and daily after that. i passed a bill that lower those fees that major landlords are responsible when they charge fees to renters. to make sure we are making housing more affordable. in congress, i am introducing a bill that will look at

innovation around affordable housing to make sure as a federal government what we mainly can do is find affordability and look at the way different developments are classified, and credits that landlords can use to build. >> mr. evans? >> one of the biggest barriers to affordable housing in colorado's red tape. that goes back to energy. when energy is expensive, it is more expensive to get a load of two by fours and strive that to the market. it is or expensive to put the house together when there is red tape around construction. as we saw in the aftermath of the marshall fire, costs were higher because of that red tape. these things contribute to higher cost in housing. my opponent party has control colorado with majorities in the house and governorship the last six years, and houses are not more affordable. things i accomplished in the

legislature are fighting that red tape. i am endorsed by the national federation of and it -- independent businesses. because i fight for jobs. i fight for small businesses. my opponent voted against those businesses 75% of the time. >> let's discuss access to abortion. mr. evans, two years ago you told the conservative group that you support banning abortion except to save the life of the mother. no exceptions for rape or incest. is that still your view today? >> i know the survey you are talking about. it had two options, one pro-life, one pro-choice. i am pro-life. >> it allowed you to add comments. you did on a question on the same page. if you felt like an exception was appropriate, why not add that in the comment? >> here is my position.

high have said it since day one since i got into the state legislature. my voting record reflects this. i support exceptions for rape, incest, life of the mother and i don't support a national abortion ban. i received pressure from my own party to sign bills that would've taken away those exceptions. i was one of five republicans that didn't sign. nine voting record is clear from day one. so is my opponents record. she voted for abortion up to the moment of birth no questions asked and against funding our military. >> you cosponsored a bill to protect abortion access and supported tax dollars for contraception for people in this country illegally. do you support any restrictions on abortion access, why or why not? >> i support codifying roe v. wade. it was the law 50 years and was taken down by a supreme court that donald trump has said he is

very proud to have set up. my opponent celebrated the fall of roe v. wade. now that he is running for congress he suddenly does not want a national abortion ban, even though he filled out a questionnaire the way kyle described two years ago. he described himself as pro-life as they come. that decision of whether to have a child needs to be between a doctor and a woman. as a doctor who has been in clinics talking to women about this tough choice, that is the end all and be all of what i think abortion law should be, is between a woman and her doctor, not between gabe evans being in your exam room and telling your doctor what to do. >> mr. evans, you support school vouchers using taxpayer money to support religious or private schools. donald trump's plan calls for universal school toys. how would you like that accomplished at the federal

level? >> we have an education crisis. i got two boys. 60% of third are not reading at the third-grade level. 70% cannot do math at the eighth grade level. we need to put parents, students and teachers back in charge of education. what i always supported is an environment that allows parents and families that choice to select the education that works best for them. to me that means parents can see what their kids are being taught and they can select a school that works for them. they are not locked into something that is underperforming. we have seen this succeed in other places. i will always be a firm believer that allowing families more choice, putting them along with teachers back in control of education rather than bureaucrats is the way we move our system forward. >> you are a supporter of the

christian homeschooling movement and a member of the group heritage defense which defends parents accused of beating their children, or as the group described, using corporal punishment following biblical protocol. last year you voted against a ban on corporal punishment in colorado public schools. when do you believe it except a ball to hit a child at home and at school. >> it is in the lower right now. you can refer to the law where it talks about special exceptions that parents and guardians have when they are tasked with up bringing for a minor. we need to ensure we provide a's place for kids to be able to learn in our public schools. >> there was a security exception. this went beyond the exception when people needed to control children for safety reasons. >> i was a part-time school

resource officer for two years at my law enforcement agency. one of the biggest things i hear from teachers -- >> if you will not answer the question, we will use the time. >> you are running an ad about fentanyl that says you broke with your party to back to penalties. -- tuogher penalties. that is not true. you decriminalize small amounts of fentanyl and joined democrats to reverse that in 2022. why deceive voters on an obviously false claims ain't you broke with your party on this? >> that's not true. i broke with my party in congress on various votes including one to increase the number of border patrol agents by 22,000. >> you are referencing nothing of your actions in the state legislature in that ad? >> who won the 2020 presidential election?

>> joe biden. >> mr. evans? >> joe biden. >> if kamala harris wins the 2024 election, will you accept the results? >> we need to make sure every legal vote is counted but i will accept the results. >> as determined earlier by coin toss, miss caraveo. >> thank you to the audience and my opponent for being here tonight. the choice in november in four weeks is stark. i have made sure that i am representing the district in a way that my constituents would be proud of and that is in keeping with being raised as the child of a construction worker, of immigrants, who has been able to live out my american dream. that is what i have worked for everything old day in congress by making sure i look at affordability, health care and making sure it is accessible,

giving the choice of health care back to women and keeping our air and water clean while ensuring we continue to have oil and gas industry in the eighth district. spend the honor of my life to serve as representative for the district and i hope to earn your trust for two more years. >> mr. evans? >> thank you for hosting the debate tonight, for my opponent for having this conversation and to our studio audience. we have a choice between policies that allows fentanyl to flow into our communities and hold drug dealers accountable. between leaving the border open or securing the border. policies that defined law enforcement or that support our police to keep communities safe. we can reward work or punish work. my opponents record is clear. she voted for defunding the police, to lower the penalties for violent criminals who commit crimes with firearms, open border policies, and for

policies that make it illegal for local and state law enforcement to pick up the phone and call immigration when folks are committing crimes. i am a cop, soldier, husband, grandson of immigrants, i served overseas in the combat zone. i know how to fix these things. i have done it in the state legislature. >> 30 minutes flies by. this concludes the only live debate in colorado's eighth congressional district this year. thank you both candidates for continuing the tradition where candidates take on challenging issues and questions and engage respectfully about your differences, as you did here tonight. i encourage you to now join us. [applause] mail ballots, you can vote in person in colorado. you can see this debate in its entirety streaming on 9 news and

on the youtube channel. 9 news is where you will find our continuing series decision 2024. from marshall zellweger and all of us at 9 news, i'm kyle clark, this has been presents the race for congress. [applause] ♪ announcer: with one of the tightest races for control of congress are in modern political history, stay ahead with c-span's comprehensive coverage. this fall c-span rings you access to the top house, senate, and governor debates from across the country shaping your estate apology because future and the balance of our in washington d.c. follow our coverage from local to national debates anytime online at c-span.org/campaign,

and be sure to watch tuesday, november 5 for live, real-time election night results. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics, powered by cable. announcer: this sunday 2024 democratic presidential nominee kamala harris will speak to supporters in greenville, north carolina. e ok political report with amy walter rates north carolina as a top up -- tossup state. it 16 votes could go to either candidate. watch live at 4:40 p.m. eastern c-span, c-span now, or online at c-span.org. ♪ announcer: c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, d.c. live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams of floor proceedings and hearings

from u.s. congress, the courts, campaigns, and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information for c-span tv networks and radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available in the apple store and google play. scan the qr code to download it for free or visit our website. c-span now, your front row seat to washington d.c. any time, anywhere. announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by tse television companies and more, including cox. >> when connection is needed most, cox is there to help, bringing affordable internet to families in need, new text to boys and girls club's and support. wherever and whenever it matters most, we will behere.

announcer: cox supports c-span as a public service along with thesother television providers , giving you a front row seat to democracy. announcer: next to the first-ever assistant tracker -- treasury secretary forth financial crimes who served in the bush administration from 2004 until 2005 delivers a keynote address on evolving cyber security threats to the financial sector. this is about one hour. ♪

>> billions and billions are lost every year to cyber criminals, and well banks continue to fight off these threats and also at the forefront of educating and protecting their customers, cybercrime is still on the rise. it is our honor to present to you one of the foremost experts in cybercrimes, juan zarate. let me provide you a few of his highlights of his career, and i would encourage you to read his full bio which can be found in our mobile app and on the platform. we began the day with undersecretary of terrorism and financial intelligence, but juan was the first a leading create

the treasury's office of terrorism and financial intelligence post 9/11. he led the country's efforts to counterterrorism through aml and sanction regime expansion, helped to develop international standards for aml and cft and supervised the treasury office of asset forfeiture. his early career was a former federal terrorism prosecutor. since his treasury days he went on to serve as assistant the president and deputy national security advisor for combating terrorism from 2005 until 2009 where he was responsible for developing and implementing the u.s. counterterrorism strategy. recently he has served on numerous commissions, task forces and boards to tackle global security challenges.

he has worked with several banks, he has been a security analyst, an author, lecturer, and recently an innovator as the global comanaging partner and chief strategy officer for k2 integrity. he is also a cofounder and chair of the board for an innovative new thin tech. -- fintech. i could stand here and say more about his patriotism and national interests especially as they relate to securing our financial systems, but i think it is time to bring him out so that you can benefit from is significant expertise. please join me in giving a warm welcome to the honor roll -- honorable juan zarate. ♪ mr. zarate: good afternoon.

thank you for the wonderful and generous introduction. i hope we are going to have a great discussion on cyber security threats. first thing i want to do is think ada frosting this conference. i want to thank everyone for joining. for those watching on c-span, you need to know that this conference is the premier conference looking at financial crimes, integrity, and commercial security in the country and you have practitioners in the space today. i am honored to be with you. i want to thank rob nichols who is the ada president. i have been asked to talk about cyber security threats to the financial sector and financial system. in more than happy to do that. for those of you with long memories you may recall that five years ago i was on a state

similar to this at the conference reflecting on that same scene, that same issue. and in many ways we are facing the very same thematic concerns and issues we get back then, but without question we have seen an acceleration of the threats, industrialization of cyber criminality in the space and a deepening of where the financial system and in particular banks and financial institutions find themselves at the center of the cyber storm. at the time we talked about the fact that the banks were finding themselves in some ways swirling in a cyber storm environment. that environment has only grown more complicated, more challenging, and more dangerous. so i am going to talk to you about what the differences are between five years ago and

today, the core threats we are facing and seeing now and into the coming years, and i want to end on some good news, because these kinds of talks get depressing, very foreboding, but i think there is good news that in many ways starts with this community and this group of experts. so five years ago we knew that there was a major problem of breaches. we had gone through equifax. we have seen the chinese sack of the where they stole social security numbers. we saw breach after breach in the headlines, in some ways shocking in terms of the scope of the data being taken. now what we face is an industrial scale consistency of cyber hacking and cyber criminality.

criminality. we know most financial institutions have at the top of their list of priorities the need to protect their infrastructure, their data, their payment systems. we know based on surveys 58% of financial institutions are increasing their budget for cybersecurity year on year or we know the majority of major financial institutions have to protect against attacks day after day. on top of that, as you saw, ransomware has become a principal tool of actors not only to profit but also to gain access to data and to disrupt, and when we talked five years ago, we talked about why the banking system was at the center of the storm, as a source of

money. you are also a source of exquisite and sometimes personal data and you are also systemically relevant to how the financial and economic system works not just in the united states but globally, and so we have seen, then, ransomware actors, both state and nonstate, begin to industrialize their ability to gain access to systems' data, to lock them up and then to profit from it, and this is now at an industrial scale. they have malware for the purposes of ransomware in the ecosystem at one billion pieces. so imagine that. so five years ago, in some ways, we were awakening to the magnitude of the problem. now i think we are dealing with the consistency of the industrialization of cybersecurity threats to the financial system. financial system. second, we understood there were

vulnerabilities in the system itself, payment vulnerabilities for example. we had seen a fairly sophisticated cyber heist led by the north koreans with the bank of bangladesh with an attempt to exfiltrate a billion dollars into the north koreans. fortunately, that configuration and the malware itself was discovered by judicious actors in the bank of bangladesh, so the north koreans were only able to exfiltrate drawer 81 million -- $81 million but it was a clear signal what they are trying to do. they are trying to get into the payment loop into the ecosystem in a way that allows them to access mass amounts of funds and

the payment system itself to profit. fast forward five years to today, what do you have? you have a payment system that is being put at risk systemically at times. you certainly see this in the crypto domain where the north koreans have made an industry and business out of leveraing cyber heists in crypto hacks to the tune of billions of dollars. the u.n. estimates from 2017 to 2023 about $3 billion of profit to the new yorkens based on cyber and crypto heists. another estimate has the lazarus gruen of the hacking groups sponsor and run by the north koreans profited last year to $1.7 billion. the ability to use various payment systems chuck block

chain and crypto systems is part of the norm for the cyber criminals appear cyber act -- and cyber actors. they including ransomware players have discovered how to put entire countries and systems at risks. the ponte group engaged in a rain some wear on 30 institutions in costa rica. basically paralyzed the costa rican government such as they were not able to pay public employees or engage in tax refunds or receiver -- receiv tax systems. that went on for a while and i use that as an example because it is a reflection of act force

that are getting better, smarter and more aggressive in putting entire systems at risk. third, we were all worried about and regulators were starting to talk about five years ago about third party vulnerability vendor management looking at the vulnerability of data exfiltration, assets management. those are all the buzzwords and the concerns in your institutions and regulators. over the last few years layers been more maturation in terms of looking at those issues and worried about insider threat. that was five years ago. what you have now is greater concern with respect to the entire ecosystem of not just data exfiltration and classic cyber hacks but also crypto

software, hardware, middleware vulnerabilities that may exist in financial system or other key infrastructures so now you see government authorities warning and worried about where your chips come from. where your hardware is coming from. where your lap tops are coming from. so it is the vulnerability of the entire ecosystem, software, hardware, middleware that is fundamentally at play not just you have an insider who is going to exfiltrate data for profit. so, that was a third issue. fourth, we were already dealing with sophisticated e-mail business compromise and social engineering. from my own experience we dealt with clients, i dealt with clients personal will i the last five years that have been duped to the tune of seven and eight figures.

and these are not just sort of random folks or companies. these are highly sophisticated c.e.o.'s, highly sophisticated organizations with multiple layers of checks but guess with. cyber criminals using very sophisticated business e-mail compromise, using and understanding of the behaviors of senior leadership were able to get into the decision making process, create a sense of urgency and necessity and then led ultimately to the fraudulent transfer of millions of dollars via the financial system into false accounts or criminally held accounts. in one case, we worked aggressively across borders to try to get access to the stolen assets. i will tell you there was a little bit of laissez faire in the environment five years ago,

what can we do about it? it is too late. well, it is their fault anyway. sort of this attitude. but we were able to work with authorities, with the banks to recover most of the money that was stolen in this particular -- this is weeks after the fact. that was an environment we were dealing with. now, five years later, today, what do you have? you have ai and deep face driving very real risks of not just business e-mail compromise but significant cyber hacks. we saw the case in hong kong where $25 million was defrauded from an organization not because somebody was sloppy but the perpetrators were incredibly sophisticated. they used deep face to mimic

individuals to get people on a video to authenticate the necessity of the transfer. they had figured out how to dupe some of the identifiers for senior employees and were able to mimic would be a normal zoom call that led to the transfer of $25 million. with we are facing now is a highly sophisticated criminal environment that is leveraging new technologies -- ai, deep face -- to work around the controls we have traditionally used to avoid these kinds of problems. last, authorities, i think, were beginning to get their arms around these issues five years ago. there was more intensity certainly the last four years, more intensity of focus on ransomware, what could be done

by government a private sector. technology companies coming up with new solutions. you had early on use of sanctions to a certain extent for dealing with cyber malicious activity. this was president obama in particular with his executive order in 2014. so it feels the early -- it was the early stages of how we use authorities and authorities that touched the financial system to try to protect the financial system. what do you have today? you have under the various programs 311 designations that are cyber related mostly related to russian, iranian and chinese cyber actors both direct and indirect. you have had numbers indictments which often criticize or are seen as feckless because who can

arrest the cyber hacker in pyongyang or hacker in moscow. but the point of these is to reveal what we know about these cyber operations and actors. in particular, the connection between state and nonstate actors and criminal networks. finally, we have seen more regulatory action especially as it comes to the payment domain and crypto domain, to try to isolate elements of risk that presents challenges of fraud and obfuscation. the use of section 311 to go after the class of tumblers and mixers is a great example of the attempt it identify a real risk in the crypto ecosystem that then allows market players to react and respond. often with criticism but an

important measure. so what was an approach that was in evolution is were more aggressive, ambitious and imapplication active of the financial system itself. that was five years ago. where are we today. we have seen the threat actors themselves are getting more sophisticated. they are just getting better at their trade and their trade craft. we have seen this with state actors, iranians and north koreans have gotten better, smarter, more aggressive and more willing to go after elements of the financial system. with the north koreans i have

argued they don't care if they destroy elements of the system. they just want to profit from it. you have these actors that have just gotten better with a dedicated units that are trained to operate the environment and to do so on a 24-7 scale. in addition, we have known for a long time but it is evident now that you have the state actors in this environment fundamentally leveraging nonstate networks and criminal groups and individuals for their purposes. you have activists of all sorts and stripes in the russia-ukraine context some on the ukrainian side and certainly on the russian side in spades but the reality the most malicious states actors the contrarian powers have made an art form of learning these

nonstate groups. north korean with the lazarus. russia with the conte and china with some of the obvious skated units all taking advantages of the botnet farms and other places to their advantage. in the first instance potentially to profit, it maximum terms to put systems at risk. what is interesting in there very different from a couple of years ago you have a very open alliance between these state act force and nefarious actors. much more connectivity beginning to evolve between russia and north korea and iran and even china. the alliance of contrarian powers, abscess of resistance -- access of resistance is not only engaging in other financial and commercial activities but cooperating in the cyber domain.

that is the first thing. the threat actors, state, nonstate, individual and otherwise, are just getting better and they are working together. second, the technology itself is getting more sophisticated, more complicated. but also allows these actors to work at scale and work in ways they have not before. we have seen this with the classic big butchering fraudulent activity where you not only have dedicated groups going after elderly populations and those that are potentially vulnerable using trust and mistrust to their advantage. but they are now using ai and other software to amplify their

ability to follow up on targets and determine social behavior to target points were haven't and weakness where there is miss trust or potential mistrust and we have seen a marketplace emerge like with rain some wear where you have tails lake -- like worm gpt that is available if you want to code your next attack. these tools are more sophisticated, more ubiquitous and allows these actors to operate at scales and for potentially even with greater anonymity. and deep face driving fundamental challenges for how we think about what is true and whether or not we can believe what or eyes and ears are telling us. so much of our world not just the 20th century world but

financial system is built on the idea we can validate and assess and can understand who the human is, the natural person behind the transaction. who is our customer? deep favorite begins to calendar that. the hong kong in some ways the can nearry in the -- canary in the coal mine. so the tech is getting more complicated and increasing the pace of cyber activity. third, we now see -- this is something i wrote about long ago and with evidence then but i think it is obvious to all of us now is these cyber activities, these economic security issues are now a fundamental part of warfare. whether call it high brady

warfare -- hybrid warfare, whatever you call it, we are now in a domain where the financial system itself is part of a geopolitical, go economic landscape and brought into the heart of the conflicts. all you have to do is look at the conflicts between ukraine and russia, what has been at the heart of that even though you don't reads as much as you would seem. but cyber attacks from the russian side. it was microsoft who first identified the initial attacks on the ukraine system and then worked with the ukrainians to quell the effects of the attacks even before the russian land troops went across the border. so, in the russian-ukrainian the

attacks on infrastructure, on banks, on the financial system. you look at israel and iran. for a long time iran has been trying to engage in kaoeurb attacks against -- cyber attacks against the financial system. five years ago i talked about the 2012 and 2013 iranian attacks an denial of service attacks they were engaged in against western institutions the bite back because of the sanctions imposed on tell from the west and through the banks. the iranian hackers have engaged in a number of attackers on israeli banks, ransomware lake but trying to destroy infrastructure and data. the israelis have enormous capability in the cyber domain and has leveraged that. in the israeli-iranian war that issen folding the cyber -- is

unfolding the financial system is at the and if you look at the of china's future potential conflict in taiwan, which here in washington has lots of wargaming going on, there is a question on how cyber enables economic warfare actually unfold. what does that look like? what do? the chinese put at risk -- what do the chinese put at risk? how do you defend against it? we need to understand what kinds of attacks are happening in taiwan or what kinds of things the u.s. would do in defense from guam for example or from hawaii, and so when we talk about cybersecurity, we have to recognize it is now part and parcel a dimension of conflict in warfare.

and that implicates banks in particular. next, and i think this is critical. we talked about this. frankly every discussion i have had at aba has been about this, which is the private sector is at the core of not just the threat but also the solution. financial institutions have often viewed themselves simply as responding to regulations. what do i have to with t be was in the standards -- what do i have to do to be within the standards? all fundamental questions. but largely in a reactive mode. a reactive mode around what needs to be done to respond to requirements. in this environment, it is the private sector that is actually lead agent and what is happening. a lead target, of course, you understand that and see that,

but also a protagonist in terms of how you defend your own data, your customers' data, your payment systems, your counterparties. how you then fit with the rest of the global infrastructure tied to the financial system. that is part and parcel of your responsibility and the role of the private sector. and certainly, we have seen that play out in the war context. i mentioned microsoft's role in ukraine and russia where microsoft stepped in time after time to help defend ukraine and its systems. that has been a microsoft-led effort. questions of connectivity and communication in war zones, war and disaster zones. the question for star link and elon musk. that is a private sector player affecting the environment. and with respect to how the

financial system itself is protected, that is a question that your cto's, your ceos, your boards have to contend with. so that is critical to keep in mind. this also then puts enormous pressure on you internally as well as on the regulatory system. and i want to just take a second on this. i know there are many in the room who are on compliance teams or work with regulators or our regulators, etc. -- are regulators, etc. but this environment creates a lot of stress on the financial system, in particular the regulatory system. in the first instance, how we think about digital identification. what does digital id mean at a time when we are asking of the financial system to understand its customers and its clients

where ultimate beneficial ownership is the long pole and the eml tent around the world with the corporate transparency act coming to fruition on january 1. where all of these traditional methods identify individuals for ownership and control reasons and for cbd reasons. those things are being put to the test. it is fundamentally challenged when you cannot only gain ease -- gate -- gain access to financial systems with ease. and that is now a major discussion at conferences as i will be speaking at one on friday with regulators and tech companies. how do you think about digital identification in an environment where it is harder and harder to validate identification?

and how do you make sure that does not stop or impede the rightful innovation you want to see in the payment system or digital transformations that are happening within institutions in the system? next, how do you deal with greater and greater decentralization? this is a problem that those of us in the room who have dealt with aml for years have worried about the last few years in particular, but it is heightened in the context of the cyber and digital environment we live in. how do we think about validating who and what we are dealing with in the financial system? how do we manage the risk that may or may not be touching our institutions, our payment rails if we have 3, 4, 5, 6 hot before we see the transaction or understand the parties that play?

so in a growing dis-intermediate environment where you have digital payment players playing a more active role were institutions are trying to look behind the curtain at several stops and several hops, how do you manage that risk? i think that is a fundamental challenge for regulators in the system. certainly crypto has been dealing with this for a while. how does the troubled rule applied in a crypto environment? especially in a defined environment where you may not have the original information or the ultimate information flowing with the payment or transaction. . these are fundamental regulatory questions. how do you do all of this when the system seems to be fracturing on a geo economic geopolitical basis? you have china and russia trying

to supplant. you have talking about displacing the dollar, relationships that seem to be supplanting what are traditional norms. certainly there are a lot of tech companies out there trying to be disruptive around the way trad fi works. but then the question is, how do you deal with access to your institution, access to your data, access to your facilities at a time when you are trying to digitize and internationalize or take advantage of these technologies? that is difficult when the environment seems to be fracturing in ways that are not about a broad global system but more about d globalization and fracturing of alliances.

finally, there is something at play here that we talk about a lot. not just in the cyber context, but also the aml and sanctions domains, which is the emergence of a national economic security paradigm, which we are now dealing with and witnessing. in part because of the challenge of china, but also because of the recognition that a lot of the challenge and competition if not ultimately warfare is happening in economic and financial domains. and in some cases, already happening in those domains. so what was once seen as siloed authorities or fanatics or even controls or data systems within institutions are now converging in a fundamental way because regulators and policymakers, certainly in the united states but also in europe, india, australia, elsewhere, are recognizing the financial economic system is either at

risk or is a channel of competition and conflict. and so sanctions obviously have broadened and deepened. anti-money laundering systems have broadened and deepened. we have the anti-fraud, anti-kleptocracy, anticorruption regime that has expanded. export controls are exploding. now people understand what bis means at commerce. people used to ask what is ofac? export controls, right? trade restrictions. now, investment security. not just inbound with the expansion of firma. do we have national security applications for investments or acquisitions in the u.s.? not just land, agricultural land, other things that we have seen state legislatures passed, but also key technologies and

key ip? now we have outbound emerging with legislative proposals. that means restrictions on american capital outbound, restricting what can be invested in, and the restrictions certainly are not allowing or imagining a disallowance or checking of investment in chinese companies and interests in exquisite technology like ai, semiconductors, quantum, lasers, these kinds of things. you now have an entire spectrum of authorities that are being viewed not just singly but as part of a broader environment. what is fascinating about this is not only the fact that policymakers are having to grapple with what are the limits of this? how do you coordinate this? how much regulation is too much?

how do we not become china and russia while trying to combat state authoritarian capitalist system? but also, you have cyber, which is a cross current. what that means for your institutions and the financial sector is you now have to worry about your sanctions controls, aml controls, anti-fraud controls, your investment due diligence controls. and all the cyber vulnerabilities and applications across those domains. right? who is accessing your data? who is getting access to your system? do you know your customer? do you know your counterparty? crypto, cyber, digital payments all are a part of that. one last thing. the fundamental question about data integrity.

right, so at the heart of what financial institutions can and do do is use data by their customers about transactions, about counterparties to create opportunity, to get access to capital, to create connections, to create growth, to do all the things that our systems intended to do and that banks enable. what is key to that obviously is data and data integrity. this is not just an issue for cybersecurity for banks. this is a broader cyber question. how do we think about the integrity of data? how do we test the integrity of data? how do we assess it? how do we ultimately validate it? that is essential if we want to manage risk, whether it is aml risk of investment security risk, or cybersecurity risk. do i know who i am dealing with?

do i know the data is actually accurate? and frankly, how do you do that in an environment where the data lineage -- a lot of the data lineage is not very good to begin with? data integrity is going to become more and more a fundamental challenge, especially then as we deal in an environment of deepfakes and false data, intentionally false data. so that is where we are from a regulatory standpoint. all of this is happening while banks are undergoing digital transformations while working with several banks on some of those projects. everyone is trying to find efficiencies and payments. there is greater attention to block chain and technologies and the crypto industry has regained its sense of legitimacy over the last couple of months, two months. and so we are going more connected, more digitized, more reliant on systems for what we

want to do. that is of course a major challenge in vulnerability. now let me take a deep breath with you. because there is good news. there is good news here. frankly, you are part of the good news. i think versus five user go to where we are now, we are in a much stronger place. i have seen it institution by institution and sector wide with what the government has been doing that we are more mature, more aware. we are more active, we are investing more and cybersecurity. so that is the topline good news. there are three things i think we can continue to do or we can amplify to get better so that five years hence when we look back we can say we reached bau or we are confident in our cybersecurity. we are thinking about cybersecurity in the design of anything we are doing digitally that exposes our data or our

money or our transaction relative or our clients. we are resilient, understanding we will all get hit at some point, but we have plans for resilience. we are cooperating collectively because this is a common defense. we are all getting hit with the same malware, the same actors. and by the way, we sit in the same system as part of a broader geo-economic conflict and challenge and so we have to think creatively. so i think if we were to get there in five years, there are three categories of things we need to do. one we need to keep doing the basics. the blocking and tackling of cybersecurity, the cyber hygiene is essential. despite what i said about all of the worm gpt and the sophisticated things, the vast majority of cyber hacks are still the simple phishing

bad click on the wrong link kind of a problem, right? so if we just continue to build awareness and training and backstops and filters that allow us to avoid those occasions of faulty clicking, and i think all of us have fallen prey to some version of it. you are in a hurry and you click on something. oh, my god, what did i click on? that is basic. in this 2.0 standard sent out, they are good and very strong standards. certainly institutions ideal with use that as a roadmap to test themselves against against standards and industry counterparts. boards, ceos, committees to be on top of the cyber issues and to be testing and probing where an enterprise sits.

keep doing what you are doing in terms of improving your capability with an awareness of where these risks sit. as i sit at the start, these are in many ways the same somatic risks, but they are different. and cybersecurity, you have to worry about not just data exploitation and access, which is critical. you know have to worry about software, hardware, middleware, and how you are thinking about your brought ecosystem. you have to think about the design of your new payment platform or your new app or your new digital tool that is going to make it easier to get a mortgage or to open a bank account. you have to think fundamentally about the design of cybersecurity upfront. so that is the first thing. walking and tackling this 2.0. second, i think we have to amplify what we have already started to see, which is new

forms of public-private partnerships. again with the idea that no one institution can defend themselves alone. and frankly, the defense of the financial system is a national economic security concern as well as a financial and commercial issue for institutions. i think regulators are challenged here because the regulatory and policy instinct has been to put the onus on financial institutions first and foremost for liability. seen this in the u.k. fraud regime where responsibility is on the institution itself to recompense the defrauded actor. in the u.s. context, when there have been major cyber hacks, sort of going after an institution that allowed the hack to happen. that is warranted, but there has to be a different coordination at times that allows for us to think about us all being in the same boat at the same time.

and we are all being attacked, both government and nongovernment, in similar ways. we know nongovernmental institutions, whether it is the major dollar banks, whether it is sony are all being attacked by these cyber hackers that matter from a national security objective. we need to amplify what we are doing on the public-private cooperation domain. we have done that. we have done a really nice job of building the community of interest, sharing information. i think dhs has done a nice job with its industry corporation, some of the work it has undertaken. the shelter harbor initiative out of the treasury department coming from the hamilton series has been important thinking about how you store data in a way that allows for

third-party resilience i got cyber attacks. i have even argued controversially several years ago that we have to think about certain instances where the government and the private sector work together to defend their systems, maybe be to claw maybe to do things especially when we know there is a nefarious state or nonstate actor. some of you may raise your eyebrows. i am talking about authorized cyber privateering, which could derive from the constitution itself which has a provision for letters of market reprisal which comes from the maritime security context in the colonial period were most maritime assets sat in the hands of the private sector and the to include the private sector. sounds familiar. there are things we can do so that we are collectively

defending our systems, institutions, data, and frankly, our citizens and customers's integrity. finally, i think we need to use these technologies to our advantage. and we are. we are. thank god we have the filters on emails that throw into junk email all of these things. if you ever go through the junk email -- i do, by the way, because there are usually one or two important emails caught in the junk email. did you see my note? it is usually in the junk email. the reality is we have systems already that are filtering and identifying nefarious or problematic emails. that is already in existence. we are now at the stage of beginning to use ai to discover where there are cyber vulnerabilities or even hacks and other social engineering happening.

we need to use ai to counteract nefarious ai. at the end of the day, we need a strategy about towers and cyborgs. that is to say cyborgs, which is the automation of some of the defenses, towers where you have the combination of humans and machines looking at the risks and challenging the risks. there are three technologies that i think are incredibly important. i spent a lot of my time on these. one of course is how you think about the triangulation of technologies to identify actors and risks. that is to say it is often the case with geo blockers or other activities that you cannot identify or pinpoint where an actor sits or who they are. but there is enough data in the environment. there is enough digital dust to paint a picture as to who or

what you are dealing with. i think being able to triangulate technology in a way to identify who actors are, where they are, what they are doing is important. and using behavioral analysis in that regard in ai is very important. the second, spent time and founded a company which is the first ever to use federated ai for the discovery and management of financial fraudulence. i am not a commercial here but the technology is important because what it allows for is the sharing of insight without the sharing of data. how does that happen? what happens is the movement of algorithms to and through data allows the data wherever it sits within an institution and an fiu, across borders, without ever having to move, extract, or aggregate to data.

in order to understand risk or what is happening in the enterprise, we have to put in a big datalink. everything has to sit in the same place. that is not only going to be more dangerous in the future, it will grow more and more costly and weighty and possible with localization laws. we have to begin these new technologies like federated ai to interrogate data, to gain access to data in ways we have not in the past, to discover where risk sits. that risk can be financial primers, fraud risk. it can be cyber risk. finally, quantum computing. sounds like science fiction. for many years, i think the questions of the reality of quantum physics and quantum mechanics sort of theoretically at play, and often it was thought this is 20 years down

the road. this is something that will emerge maybe eventually. that is happening now. and i raise that for two reasons. one, financial industries are already playing with quantum technologies. hsbc just announced a quantum project with a quantum computing company i am associated with to look at the use of quantum computing for cybersecurity, fraud detection, and natural language processing. it exponentially increases compute and allows you to begin to do things in ways you would not imagine possible. those capabilities are now upon us. i just want to leave you with this message with respect to quantum that the issue of the commercialization and use of quantum is a matter of engineering. no longer a matter of

theoretic's are science. which means we will live in a post-quantum environment. we all hear god willing will live to see that, which means our day-to-day encryption we live with for the internet, for crypto transactions, for other things, for telecommunications, etc., will be fundamentally at risk. is in fact a theory that part of the reasons the chinese have hoovered up so much data is in the ability to use quantum to crack that data. those of you that have cto's are probably playing with or reading about quantum. i think that is a technology that will be necessary, and it is necessary to begin to think about now. all right, let me end on a high note and a scary note. because i think we are in great shape in terms of cybersecurity.

i think we have the capabilities. i think we have the awareness. i think we understand what the threat vectors are we have to organize ourselves and resource and do this collectively. what i worry about most is the corrosive cynicism in the broader zeitgeist, the broader social environment where we don't know who to trust, we don't know what to trust, or how to interact with each other. and i remember, those of you who are twilight zone fans, and i am gray so forgive me if you don't remover the twilight zone or sterling. there was one about the monsters on maple street. if you haven't watched it, go watch it. the premise of that episode was you had aliens come down to invade and they did not invade with guns or with lasers or with

other direct kinetic means. all they did was disrupt. and in disrupting the systems, they created mistrust in the neighborhood. they created mistrust and maple street, where people love each other and played together and other things. at the end of the episode, because of the systems falling apart and the mistrust created, maple street falls into chaos. that is very much what i think foreign actors are trying to do to the united states. maybe not at that scale. maybe not as creatively, but we have seen with cyber hacks with cyber influenced operations, we have seen the recent revelations of what the iranians were trying to do and the russians were trying to do, the chinese with respect to elections and dealing with socially divisive issues or even natural disasters like the recent storm or the maui fires. these are actors that use cipro

tools -- cyber tools, information warfare to create mistrust. trust is what makes our financial system work. i was just commended to you all, anybody watching on c-span that we work on our trust with each other and we remember who we are. and the resilience of our system is built on that trust. if we keep that squarely in mind, there is no actor that can defeat us, and our cybersecurity will be secure. so with that, thank you very much. it has been an honor to be with you. i hope everyone has a great conference. thank you to those joining on c-span. appreciate it. [applause]

time at c-span.org/history.

♪ >> do you solemnly swear that in the testimony you are about to give it will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? >> what are on court presentation -- watch our encore presentation of american history tv's series congress investigates. we will see historic footage and examine the impact and legacy of key congressional rooms. lawmakers examine events around the 1972 break-in at the dnc headquarters at the watergate hotel in washington. the investigation led to the resignation of richard nixon. watch congress investigates nday at 10:00 eastern on c-span. >> the house will be in order.

>> c-span celebrates 45 years of covering congress like no other. since 1979, we have been your primary source for capitol hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where policy is debated and decided. c-span, 45 years and counting, powered by cable. president biden announced $2 billion in grants for state and local governments to replace lead pipes throughout the u.s.. prior to the address, milwaukee residents talked about lead pipes have impacted their community. the president urges residents in florida to follow safety guidelines established by local authorities as hurricane milton approaches. ♪

>> please welcome alonzo romo. [crowd cheering] >> good afternoon. my name is alonzo romo and i'm a proud labor and member of my union. [crowd cheering]

i also work here in milwaukee. i grew up just north of green bay and graduated high school two years ago. if you would have told me then that my career path would have brought me here to you all today , getting to introduce president joe biden, i wouldn't believe it. [crowd cheering] after high school, i took a class that led me to work with ncl. and my union, local 113. then i went to replace lead service pipes in milwaukee. [crowd cheering] i have helped to move 35. i know we are making great pace. this is hard work but it is rewarding. not only am i getting paid great benefits, but i know that when i'm removing a lead service lateral, i'm helping a family have community -- access to

clean drinking water. [crowd cheering] i'm grateful for the work that president biden, vice president harris, and the administration has done to make the investments that we are seeking in milwaukee to accelerate the lead pipe removal. helping create more job opportunities and ensuring that we have clean and safe drinking water. [crowd cheering] >> good afternoon. i was born and raised in milwaukee. i didn't realize how serious the issue of lead poisoning was until about 13 years ago when my own son was testing positive for elevated blood levels. as a mother of four, it is terrifying to learn about. although my son was one of the lucky ones, meaning he didn't have to be hospitalized, i still

watched him face lifelong learning disabilities and damaging effects of lead poisoning. the worst thing for a parent is to know that something is happening to your child. the fact that my son was lead poisoned and i received very little care, not even lead abatement services in my home, that's what fuels my work today. [crowd cheering] president biden and vice president kamala harris have been listening to our stories and they have followed through and kept their promises. [crowd cheering] under the biden harris administration, milwaukee has responded to more lead cases and replaced more lead pipes than any administration in this nascent history -- nations history.

so we can see the federal dollars working in our city. you can't drive 10 minutes without driving past an infrastructure project. so many of those projects are ridding our homes of lid. growing up, my mother always told me it takes a village to raise a child. well, this administration have been part of that village and have been putting our jobs and our children above all. we are grateful. [crowd cheering] so without further a do, it is my honor and my privilege to introduce and welcome the toughest, most substantial partner in our village, our very own president of the united states of america, president joe biden.

♪ pres. biden: hello milwaukee! good to be back. thank you. it's good to be back in milwaukee. thank you. [inaudible] crowd: thank you so! pres. biden: thank you! thank you thank you thank you. i said that once and there were no seats. the guy looked at me like, what's the hell along with you? before we begin, i want to say we are prepared for another her approval -- horrible hurricane

to hit florida. i'm directing my team to do everything they can to save lives and help communities before, during, and after this hurricane. the most important message today for all those who are listening to this, listen to the local authorities. follow safety instructions including evacuation orders. this is serious. you have to be safe because people are dying. people have died so far. not from this hurricane but from the last one. folks, let's get to today's event. thank you for sharing your family story. you said it all. i know from experience as a parent, the worst thing is something happening to your children. your son, your family, your families like yours exposed to lead poisoning in their water. they deserve better than they've been getting. that's why we are here.

that's why people like alfonso are getting to work removing those leadpipes, delivering clean water. we go back to flint, worrying about what happens then. remember in michigan? providing what's good for our health and our environment is also good for our economy and it's good for jobs. [crowd cheering] the middle-class class built this country and organize labor unions built the middle class. [crowd cheering] in fact, we have some great leaders here today who know who'd -- how to get a job done.

michael reagan. brendan malloy. where are you? he's out there somewhere. we are here today because we are finally addressing an issue we should have addressed a long time ago in this country. the danger that leadpipe suppose to our drinking water. for too long, local communities have known how important it was to deal with this problem. they hadn't been given the national priority to manage them. i'm here today to tell you that i'm finally insisting that it gets prioritized and i'm insisting it gets done. [crowd cheering]

one of the most important things we are doing today is establishing a new rule that every leadpipe providing clean drinking water -- that doesn't provide clean drinking water must be replaced. every single one. not only are we setting a priority, we are showing up as a partner to get it done. over the past couple years, we provided billions of dollars to states and acute -- and communities to address this problem. now i am giving an additional $2 billion. [crowd cheering] grants to states and local communities to get the job done. it matters. folks, people i'll ask me, why do we have lead pipes in the first place? you probably ask yourself that. how did that happen? when they were first put in place a long time ago, lead pipes were incredibly durable and they didn't rust. but since then, we learned they

leaked poisonous toxins into the water that can lead to terrible health consequences, particularly to the development of a child's brain. think about what that does to a parents peace of mind. when i was a senator back in 1986, i supported a lot of stop new lead pipes from being put in the ground in the first place. but that still left millions of older lead pipes already in the ground connected to homes, schools, childcare centers, and businesses including some 340,000 leadpipe services right here in his -- wisconsin. over the years, we've only chipped away at the problem. chipping at the problem hasn't fully solved it. it's taking too long and they haven't been given a high enough priority until now. [crowd cheering]

this is the united states of america for god sake. there's no safe level of lead exposure. none. the only way forward is to erase every line and connect the american people to clean water. no alternative. [crowd cheering] that's why we are the first administration to take on the challenge once and for all and we are delivering. safe, clean drinking water is fundamental to the health of our community. to enhance our economic growth, to basic human dignity. that's why i want to replace 367,000 leadpipe services across america. [crowd cheering] today, nearly one million americans will no longer have to worry about the potential impact of lead in their water.

right here in milwaukee, a nursing assistant protecting the health of others. she's at work right now. in her own home, there was a leadpipe threat to her own health and all of her grandchildren she helped raise there. she was spending a big chunk of her paycheck on bottled water every month because it was too expensive to replace the lead pipes. but three weeks ago, lily got the lead service line replaced for free. [crowd cheering] how? we are investing in america. one of the many reasons we thought so hard to pass the bipartisan infrastructure law, which is over $200 billion, was not only to modernize the nation's infrastructure, but also to get rid of the godforsaken leadpipe's to

deliver clean drinking water to everyone in their homes, schools, businesses. in wisconsin, investing $200 million in placing tens of thousands of leadpipe lines. [crowd cheering] thank you. thank you. today, we reach another 43 in wisconsin as part of $2.6 billion nationwide to support replacing leadpipe services. the federal government can't do it alone. we are providing a single large investment never to team up with states and cities to get the job done together. i mean team up at every level. right after i signed the bipartisan infrastructure law, we announce that our administration had an investors prevent -- blueprint to use every tool at our suppose a to

protect our families from lead poisoning. as a result of that work, i'm announcing the new rule written into law of the environmental protection agency that requires water systems across america to replace lead site -- leadpipe service within 10 years. it must be done. [crowd cheering] i want that into law no matter who was president. it matters. we are seeing a collaboration for the city of milwaukee, replacing all of their leadpipe service lines within 10 years. instead of what was projected to take 60 years to get it done. that was the projection. folks, this is a big deal as someone once said. [laughter] it's about saving families from going through what these families have gone through. saving hundreds of thousands of mothers and infants from low

birth rates and children with lasting brain damage. protecting more than 1000 adults from premature deaths, heart disease, every single year because of lead. it will save lives and also save taxpayers billions of dollars over time. it's about the basics. it's about clean water. to me it's a simple proposition. it's also about fairness. i'm directing half of this funding to go to disadvantaged communities who have borne the brunt of lead pipe poisoning for too long. [crowd cheering] studies show communities of color have been the hardest hit. one study showed black children

were two times more likely to have elevated levels of lead in their blood. we have an obligation to make things right. like all major investments we are making in the environment, it's also about creating jobs, good paying jobs, union jobs for laborers, plumbers. that's why my administration is bringing together the city of milwaukee local unions, educators, employers to create and invest in the american workforce right here in milwaukee. [crowd cheering] sometimes you forget the basics. this is going to help train and connect residents to good paying jobs, replacing leadpipe lines. creating new registered apprenticeships. everyone should have access to these jobs. good paying benefits for themselves and their families.

we are also using the power of example as a global leader helping replace leadpipe's around the world. last month, at the united nations, i was proud that my wife jill and our international aid agency brought together 26 nations. primarily through philanthropy, launching a coalition to end childhood lead poisoning. that kills more people in developing countries than hiv-aids, and malaria combined. folks, replacing leadpipe's is part of our ambitious clean water agenda. [crowd cheering] we are upgrading outdated water mains and treatment plants, making it more resilient to climate disasters. that means less likely to break down after massive floods and still run when the power grid

goes down. we are improving water systems on tribal lands. half the population still lacks clean water. half the population of tribal lands still lack clean water. it's outrageous. we are committed to making it right. [crowd cheering] as part of my cancer moonshot initiative to end cancer as we know it, we are detecting forever chemicals. these are chemicals that are found in many everyday products. they are unsafe and shown to contribute to cancer and other health conditions. we set the first ever drinking water standard to protect 100 million americans. [crowd cheering] including folks across the sick -- this country. folks, what is the government for if it cannot protect public

health? [crowd cheering] the process for creating jobs, for building a better america. clean water is just one critical part. for example, earlier this year i was in milwaukee with your governor and your mayor. announce $36 million for the 65 -- 60 project. during the 60's, urban renewal swept through this country. the destruction of i-94 and i-43. they tore down 17,000 homes and 1000 businesses were lost. displacing residents and businesses all along 6th street. also so the people outside the neighborhood could drive downtown more quickly. with bike lanes and bus lanes gone, speeding and reckless driving increase. crash rates five times of the

city's average. milwaukee people have a lot of opportunities, leaving them isolated from the sobel and -- social and economic life of the rest of the city. not anymore. we will rebuild six street. a future with wider sidewalks, safer bike lanes, dedicated bus lanes to get to work faster. new trees to provide shade. modern infrastructure. [crowd cheering] making it easy for historic black communities and latino communities to access jobs, school, and entertainment opportunities in the city and around the central hub. this will be life-changing. i said i would keep my commitment to insist that all communities have access to investments that improve safety and security.

that's what we are doing. [crowd cheering] giving everyone a fair shot. [crowd cheering] my dad would say, leaving no one behind. folks, there are some folks who don't have any problem leaving people behind. like my predecessor in the white house and his allies in congress . like your senator ron johnson who voted against [crowd booing] he voted against everything i dust talked about. every single thing. in fact, ron johnson called the law a radical agenda. [laughter] i'm going to restrain myself.

[laughter] i don't think there's a thing radical about protecting kids from lead poisoning. [crowd cheering] from -- protecting women from lower birth rates and brain damage and so much more. my predecessor was a senator who rolled back clean water protections. kept polluting our water in destroying our wetlands. they slashed the environmental protective agency's budget and eliminated an important program to guarantee clean water. you may also remember the last guy who was president, he promised infrastructure week every week for four years. he didn't build a thing. [crowd cheering] folks, we can't go backwards. we have to keep moving forward.

protect the health and well-being of our communities and our country. in the process, growing our creon ami -- economy. we can't wait any longer. [crowd cheering] folks, let me close with this. when you see shovels on the ground, all these projects to protect people's lives, put people to work, i hope they feel what i feel. pride. pride in their hometowns making a comeback. pride in america. we can get big things done when we work together. i've never been more optimistic. i mean this from the bottom of my heart. i've never been more optimistic about the future. we just have to remember who we are. we are the united states of america. 7 [crowd cheering] there is nothing beyond our capacity when we were together. let's keep working together and get it done.

god bless you all. may god protect our troops. thank you thank you thank you. ♪

this is about one hour. >> good evening and welcome to the 2024 maryland senate debate. from the irene and edward kaplan

production studio at maryland public television. we are excited to bring new tonight's debate presented by nbc news, nbc washington, wbal tv 11, and maryland public television. good evening, i am chuck todd, moderator for tonight's debate between the democratic candidate angela alsobrooks and republican candidate larry hogan. let's begin by quickly covering the rules for today's event. the debate will last one hour and begin with 90 second opening statements from each candidate. then our panelists and myself will pose questions directly to the candidates. nbc news and our panelists have generated the questions. each candidate will have one minute to respond and he candidate answering the first will get an additional 32nd rebuttal. as moderator i reserve the right to follow-up as needed. and finally he will conclude with one minute closing statements from each candidate. there is a timekeeper who will notify candidates of their remaining time and when time is

expired. in the interest of trying to cover as much ground as possible, we ask the candidates to adhere to these time limits. now let's cover our panelists. tracy wilkins is an investigative reporter. deborah weiner is an anchor at wbal tv 11 in baltimore. and jeff so can is an anchor right here at maryland public television. and now of course the candidates. republican and former governor of maryland larry hogan, and democrat and the current prince georges county executive angela alsobrooks. with that, we begin with the debate. county executive alsobrooks has the first opening statement. ms. alsobrooks: good evening. first of all i would like to thank our hosts for having us tonight. i want to thank former governor hogan for being here as well, and everyone for tuning in. i am angela alsobrooks, the proud democratic nominee for u.s. senate. like many marylanders i am also in member of the sandwich generation. i am the proud mother of a

19-year-old daughter and the proud daughter of a retired receptionist and a newspaper your deliveryman. i grew up in maryland and spent my entire adult life in public service, beginning my career as a demo to violence prosecutor where i stood up for our families and held violent offenders accountable. as the elected prosecutor, i also lowered violent crime by 50%. as county executive i have been one of the top job creators in the state of maryland. we have built 10 new schools and we are breaking ground on an additional eight. in the united states senate, i will stand up for our values, creating economic opportunity for every maryland family. i will also fight for our freedoms like a woman's right to choose, contraception, and ivf. i will also fight to make sure that we are ending gun violence in america. i will work also to hand a majority to my friend and mentor, president kamala harris, to ensure that she will be successful and effective as president of the united states.

thank you so much and i look forward to answering your questions. mr. hogan: thank you, chuck. i want to thank maryland public television, nbc and its affiliates in washington and baltimore. it is a real pleasure to be here. i want to thank all of you for tuning in tonight. i just want to start by saying that i like and respect angela alsobrooks. we got a chance to work together while i was governor. we accomplished a great deal together for prince georges county, and she has got a great life story. i just happen to believe that right now, the reason i am stepping up to run is not to run against her try to defeat her. the reason i decided to run for governor -- senate. the reason i ran for governor is because i was fed up with the taxes. i decided to step up and run for senate is because i have never been more concerned about the direction of our country. what we see today is nothing but

divisiveness and dysfunction in washington, where nothing ever seems to get done. our country is being torn apart by the extreme voices on both sides. we are not going to solve any of the terrible problems facing the country with more partisanship, and one more party-line vote. or just continuing to do the same thing we have always done. the only way we can make a difference is if we find strong, independent leaders who are willing to stand up to both parties and try to bring about common sense bipartisan solutions, which is exactly what i delivered as eight years as governor. >> i want to start with both of your political identities. you and your party have been campaigning against governor hogan by singling out his party affiliation, almost solely more than anything else. is his major disqualification for this office simply that he is a member of the republican party? ms. alsobrooks: first of

>> first i have to tell you that the stakes of the stakes of this election couldn't be higher. we are facing an election where the future of our country and our freedoms are at stake. what we recognize is in this election is that a woman's right to choose is on the ballot. the former governor is a person who vetoed abortion care legislation, and also vetoed important legislation that would have created a simple ban on ghost guns, and would have disallowed long guns, created awaiting period. it the republican party has declared war on women's reproductive freedoms. we recognize that this party of chaos and division that is led by donald trump is one that cannot lead our country, and also has severe consequences for marylanders. unfortunately, former governor hogan accepted an invitation by mitch mcconnell to run in this race because they want to give republicans a majority in the senate. doing so will control supreme court justice nominations, it will also control cabinet appointments over president kamala harris. i do not believe that having majority-controlled by republicans is in the interest

of the state of our country. >> mr. hogan? >> you will hear a lot about this kind of talk all night. i can tell you that that's not what i will do. you will hear nothing but red versus blue. i care a lot more about the red, white and blue. i have been leading voice in my party, standing up to some of the things we are talking about and everything you just said , your entire campaign is based on multiple things that are completely not true. i will support and will sponsor codifying roe, i have said that from the beginning. when i was governor, i promised to support women's access to abortion, and i delivered on that promise for eight years. that bill that you are referring to is about protecting women, because it was rolling back and making it less safe for women to get access to abortion. a loving medical professionals -- for you to lie about something as important as this issue is insulting.

>> miss alsobrooks. >> first of all, i have worked across the aisle. in fact, i worked with the former governor again, $400 million to invest in prince george's county, causing the former governor to call me the best county executive he had ever known. his father was a county executive, and i was the best he had ever known. the thing we know for a fact is that the former governor vetoed abortion care legislation and then refused to release the funding to train abortion care providers, and said that donald trump deserves credit for his incredible supreme court justices after the overturning of roe. just unrefuted facts. >> i want to follow up with something. i use my discretion here. let's talk about your independence. and you are going to be a political independent. these tv ads are paid for by the nrc, by the republican party, can voters believe you will be an independent, if the republicans are paying for your tv advertising? > the voters of maryland know me and i know my proven track record of standing up to donald

trump, to mitch mcconnell, and to the republican party. i have probably stood up more than anyone in america. i have been on your show multiple times. i am one of the harshest critics. the people know that i was a bipartisan governor who got things done by working with a 70 percent democratic legislature, and we accomplished a lot by reaching across the aisle. i am not a maga donald trump, , mitch mcconnell person as my opening would let you believe. >> miss alsobrooks, is there anything in the democratic agenda that you will fight against? >> i support the democratic agenda to codify in federal law a woman's right to choose. i support banning assault weapons. i support middle-class tax cuts. i support the democratic agenda. let me just say this. i stand up to my party. when president biden looked like he was waffling on the fbi, i marched right in there and fought against him, tim kaine and mark warner to get the fbi headquarters located in maryland. and i won. >> thank you.

deborah has the next question. mr. hogan, along these lines of your criticism of former president donald trump, given mr. trump's vow to seek retribution if he wins, could your relationship with him end up hurting maryland? >> look, what we need desperately in washington are people that are willing, that have the courage to put country over party, and to put people over politics, and to stand up to the leaders of their party. i don't think there is anyone in america who has done that more than me. i have never been afraid. and i will never back down. i am one of the only ones in my party who can say that. i just don't think we are going to fix anything by talking about how we will jam things through. everything has to be republican or democrat. i am just down the road from washington and was able to get a lot done by just doing the opposite. we set an example for what exactly needs to happen in washington by working together. i was happy to work with county

executive alsobrooks for eight years to get the spi, and after she became executive, we continued to work together. buy and build a hospital in prince georges as part of the cancer moonshot initiative. we founded the blue line corridor. we have worked together well. i work with people on both sides, that is one of the things i am known for. >> me and the former governor at work together very well. but the fact of the matter is, if he wanted to be an independent, he should have run as one. he did not up to run as an independent. he opted to accept mitch mcconnell's request to come in. mitch mcconnell bragged about his ability to recruit the former governor because he believed that he would give a majority in the senate to republicans, which has huge consequences. the fact is i believe the governor when he said he would like to vote for a roll. but the fact is if the republicans have a majority in the senate, there would be no vote on roe. we have seen how republicans

refuse to allow barack obama's vote on merrick garland. we understand that they would also hand over that gun laws to the nra. we know that no matter what former governor hogan saturday, he would empower a caucus of people who will take our country backwards. putting lindsey graham over the judiciary committee. putting ted cruz over the science committee, who's a science and climate denier, it is that he would empower caucus that is against our values. >> mr. hogan? >> sometimes one voice standing up can make a difference. we don't need more partisan politicians who will be rubberstamps for their party. what we need are people willing to stand up and work with both parties, or criticize both parties when they are wrong. i was governor through three presidents. i worked with president obama, and trump, and biden. when we disagreed, i strongly set up and said i disagreed. i stood up to my party, i will stand up to either party. i think we need mavericks in washington that aren't going to just do exactly what the party bosses tell them to do. >> tracy, next question. >> this alsobrooks, prince

governor hogan and his allies have attacked you for claiming tax credits meant for seniors. they claimed that those tax credits make you untrustworthy for maryland voters. what is your response. >> thank you for giving me a chance to clear it up. i have always paid my taxes, always. and i also stood up for my grandmother. when she needed to leave her house, i took over her mortgage, paid the mortgage until i sold the house until six years ago. i never knew she had a senior tax credit because i never applied for a. when i learned about it, i reached out to the d.c. government. i paid back the amount that that tax credit and i'm working to pay off the interest. i thank you so much for asking that question. >> mr. hogan, your response. why should this matter to voters? >> i am not sure it should matter i think county executive alsobrooks has said she didn't apply for the tax credit.

she said she paid off her grandmother's mortgage. but she also took out her own mortgages and swore an attested on the documents that it would be her primary residence, which it was in. she did get a tax break that was meant for low income seniors. . she is not a low income senior. it was a rental property, not her personal residence. i don't know if people should make a decision based on that. i just think she should have an opportunity to explain herself. >> ms. alsobrooks, he said you are working to pay it back, is that all? >> i paid back the tax credit. again, i never applied for the tax credit and was never notified that i had the tax credit, but when i learned about it, i paid back the amount of the tax credit and i'm working to pay off the interest. >> jeff has the next question. >> umbc released april, this week that found that 89% of marylanders are concerned about inflation. a three-part question on this. who gets the blame for the the wave of inflation that we had? who gets the credit for bringing down the rate of inflation and how do we prevent this from ever

happening again? >> mr. hogan? >> affordability, inflation is a huge problem. as i am out on the campaign trail talking to people, every single day, it's the one issue to hear about, the cost of groceries and housing. a single mom trying to put groceries on the table. a young couple trying to buy their first home that has been priced out of reach. inflation is out of control and there is plenty of blame to go around. this is one that republicans and democrats can both take the blame for because they ran up the dead and continue to cause these problems. i am not sure that when you say it has come down -- the average person does not feel like it has. that is why i ran for governor. i was frustrated that things weren't affordable and my focus was on making life more affordable. i cut taxes eight years in a row by $4.7 billion for hard working marylanders, for low income

marylanders. the earned income tax credit for small businesses. and for retirees, we fought for eight years to eliminate retirement taxes and we finally passed that in my last year. my opponent wants to raise taxes on social security, which is not going to make things more affordable. >> ms. alsobrooks, you have a minute. >> let me just, say, i also have heard from many marylanders, the concern that i share. as the daughter of a receptionist and a car salesman, i understand how the cost of groceries that have gone up 25% since the pandemic affect everyday families. huge corporations who are receiving record profits right now, are doing so and paying fewer taxes than average hard-working citizens. i attribute that to the rising costs. we also know there is a lack of competition. we are going to have to make sure we are holding big corporations accountable, causing them to pay their fair share of taxes. i will cut taxes for the middle-class. and by the way, i don't propose raising taxes and anyone who earns under $400,000. we will have to save social

security. for people like my aging parents, it is a lifeline. by 2025, it is due to run out of money. raising that cap for those earning over $400,000 to save social security is going to be really important. >> mr. hogan. >> this is my main focus. it is why i ran for governor and what i was focused on for eight years and it is why i think we had more success than anyone in america. we took a terrible economy that was the 49th out of 50 states. we had a $5.1 billion deficit and turned it into a surplus and we made like more affordable for average, hard-working folks by cutting tolls. by cutting taxes -- by cutting tolls. >> deborah has the net next question. >> ms. alsobrooks, you are running for the seat long-held by senator ben cardin staunch , a supporter of israel who presided over prime minister benjamin netanyahu's address to

a joint session of congress. senator chris van holland, on the other hand, refused to attend the speech and joined seven other senators in asking president biden to, quote, use all levers to pressure israel over gaza. when it comes to israel and the now one year old war, are you a ben cardin democrat, or a chris van hollen democrat? >> i am neither. i am angela alsobrooks. and i will represent myself in the senate. i have been really fortunate to have the support of both senator van hollen and senator cardin. we have a tremendous delegation who i have worked with for many years. but when it comes to this issue, i will be angela alsobrooks as a senator. let me tell you what i believe. we recognize the horrific attack that occurred on october 7. we have an obligation to make sure that we are getting those hostages home to their families and that we get to a ceasefire, making sure, as well, that we get aid into gaza for the palestinians who are suffering . and we have to get to a two

state solution so that we have peace and security in israel. peace and security and self-determination for the palestinians in gaza. long-term, it will be important that our multilateral relationships with the uae, saudi arabia, jordan is going to be necessary for us to isolate iran. to have the long-term stability that we need. but i support israel and the right to defend itself, and i will continue to support that alliance. >> mr. hogan? >> i will be a strong supporter of israel, as i always have been. i will be like a champion for israel, like ben cardin, rather than trying to equivocate or follow chris van hollen, who is probably the most anti-israel member of the u.s. senate. i disagree with my opponent, who was calling for cutting off military aid to israel and demanding an immediate cease-fire. just this week we celebrated the tremendous loss of life -- the

largest loss of jewish life since the holocaust. we remembered those victims and their families and those hostages still being held. it is moments like this people have to stand up and be counted. we, as a country, have to stand with our allies. and israel is our most important ally. we have to stand up to our enemies. i don't think you can walk down the middle of this issue. i think there is no question we have got to back israel. >> ms. alsobrooks, to follow up, would you have attended the speech if you were senator, with prime minister netanyahu, do you believe he is an obstacle to peace, or an ally for peace? >> i would have attended the speech. first of all, i support the u.s.-israel relationship. i have been to israel. i have been very clear on my support for israel and the right to defend itself. senator cardin, who is supporting me, said he is ashamed of former governor hogan and how he has politicized this issue and tried to use it as a

way to divide us. when we speak of allies, the republicans in the senate has shown they do not respect our alliances, including nato will back out of their leave ukraine to fight for itself. i support our alliances and will continue to support both israel and ukraine. >> we are going to do a couple of foreign-policy questions. let me start with a fresh one for you, mr. hogan. when it comes to tensions between taiwan and china, should the united states guarantee the security of taiwan, even if it means putting american boots on the ground, or essentially indo-pacific? >> i think it is very important for us to stand up for our allies and to our enemies. i believe in peace through strength. right now we have fires around the world. the whole world is basically a tinderbox. . and we are dealing with ukraine and taiwan and china and iran threatening the middle east. the reason i got into this race, the final straw for me was when i watched republicans and donald

trump and mitch mcconnell take the bipartisan deal that was going to secure the border, provide funding for taiwan, for ukraine, most importantly, for israel. they work for those things and then they were told to change their vote. and i decided that night that i would go down to washington and try to do something about it. i think it is important in times like this for us to have people that are focused. we have allies around the world who wonder if they can still count on us or still trust us. and we have enemies that wonder if they should still fear us. >> you didn't answer directly, is taiwan's security so important that if china wants to take it over, it's worth american troops to help fight to -- side-by-side with taiwan? >> well so closely it will not get to that point, chuck. but china threatening taiwan is something we should definitely be concerned about. >> would you support boots on the ground? >> i do not agree to put boots on the ground. >> ms. alsobrooks, do you

support men and women on the ground? >> i do not agree with putting u.s. men and women of the grant for this conflict. the problem the former governor will have is his party does not believe in these alliances. today wanted to back out of nato. they have refused to give ukraine the help that they need . we do not stand up to vladimir putin, who is a dangerous dictator who invaded ukraine. china will invade taiwan. the first thing we need to do is shore up our alliances with nato and our multilateral relationships, to act as a deterrent to china, who is watching. they will see what the united states does with respect to ukraine to decide whether to go into taiwan. we know that vladimir putin's not done. if we don't stand up for ukraine, he will continue to go across eastern europe. poland will be next. our alliances across the country will be important. and the republican party does not agree with this. they would let ukraine fail.

>> would you increase support for ukraine, keep it as is, or is there a point you would decrease support? >> i support ukraine. the amount of it, i agreed with funding ukraine -- will have not asked us by the way, they are a democracy, they have never come to the united states and said put men and women on the ground. they just want the tools to defend themselves. i just want to make sure that as an ally, we support them in defeating vladimir putin. because, again, he is not done yet and he sends a horrible signal across the world. the republicans have not supported ukraine and will let them fail. >> mr. hogan, i know you support ukraine. would you go as far as supporting ukraine's membership to nato? >> here we go again with the republican-democrat thing. i criticized democrats and republicans, who wouldn't support israel and ukraine, and to stand up for our allies. there are plenty of people that are isolationists in both

parties, and neither one of them has a lock on what we should do to keep america safe and keep us as the leader of the free world. when we send aid before the united states data, we sent it from the state of maryland. we needed to be stronger in support of the allies. we have got to bring an end to this conflict. we will be putting boots on the ground if we don't stop putin now because we have to defend a native country. >> would do support ukraine into nato? >> i would support it. >> would you support ukraine going into nato? >> it's a complicated question and i think it should be explored. >> just have the next question. >> ms. alsobrooks, a number of influential democrats are talking about expanding the supreme court from 9 justices to 13. the idea is that if a democratic president could appoint 4 new justices, there would be a majority of democratic appointees on the court. is that something that you would support? >> first of all, i am very

concerned about the supreme court. i think they no longer represent the will of the people. i support reforms. one of them would be to have term limits. i also agree with the notion of expanding the supreme court. i think we will have to do something to reform the supreme court. , again, looking at the decisions they have made, everything from overturning roe, there are ethical problems with the supreme court. this is the place where me and mr. hogan disagree because the supreme court, i think, is awful. he went and said he thought donald trump deserved credit for his appointments to the supreme court and called the supreme court justice who had been appointed incredible. i think they are out of line with the will of the american people and, again, whoever controls us and it also controls people like lindsey graham, will control appointing further supreme court justices.

the supreme court needs to be reformed. >> a quick follow-up. i didn't hear a yes or no on what used to be called packing the court. >> i agree with either increasing the number of justices, or term limits. yes. >> a follow-up for mr. hogan. on the trump nominees to the court in particular, how would you have voted? i think justice kavanaugh got through with no votes to spare . he>> is just adding an additional thing. >> i think, if there is one thing we should not be for politicizing, it is the supreme court. yet it has been politicized by both sides. i think trying to change the rules to jam things through on the party-line vote is not the right way to go about it. i probably have more experience about in this than most people in the senate. i appointed 190 judges when i was governor including six

members of our supreme court. every single one of them, three republicans and three democrats, two african-american women. the most diverse and most inclusive appointments in history. every single one of our supreme court justices was unanimously confirmed by republicans and democrats. in washington they can't even get one vote. both sides are trying to change the rules. what i did was find the most qualified judges regardless of what party they were and that's why we found it -- if you can't find one person to cross over and vote for a democratic judge or a republican judge, i will not support them. >> justice kavanaugh passed with one vote. what would you have done? >> i stood up and called out mitch mcconnell and sent the should have a full and open hearing. i called them out when they were trying to jam through the barrett nomination right before the election which i thought was wrong. >> how would you have voted? >> i don't know how i would have

voted. >> ms. alsobrooks? >> i think he said he would have voted. he said the trump's, quote, deserves credit for his accomplishments in office, including the incredible supreme court justice is that he nominated. i disagree. i would not have supported those supreme court justices who overturned roe. who overturned the bump stock decision. who decided the immunity decision. who decided that chevron decision that will hurt our climate. they are awful supreme court justices, and i would not have voted to confirm them. >> tracy. >> you said your opponent and her party can't be trusted on abortion. he said personally you are opposed to abortion. but now you say you support roe. please detail what abortion access you are prepared to champion in the senate. >> might open it has been, her entire campaign is based on lies. i said this earlier, i have been a guest -- the first day in the

race, she said i would be the deciding vote for an abortion ban, which i have been a guest since 1990 two. when i ran for governor, i promised to provide access to abortion. i would do nothing to change the lung. i delivered on that for eight years. everybody in maryland knows that. when it was overturned, i thought it was a wrong decision. i said when i got to the senate that my first bill was to codify roe. so, no, i don't understand. it is completely false. and back to the thing about the incredible justices. i was in a jewish coalition event where i was very critical of donald trump. i said there are things i agree with him on, and then there was a decision that just came out before that event that was about not discriminating against jewish students when it came to scholarships to go to private schools. i thought that was an incredible decision. but i have called him out on other bad decisions. >> ms. alsobrooks? >> i believe the former governor

when he says he disagrees with trump in person. but he does agree with his policies. this issue is one that is very personal. . as the mother of a 19-year-old daughter, she is facing a world where there are fewer rights than that of her mother and grandmother. when the former governor had an opportunity to stand up for the women of maryland, he didn't. he vetoed abortion care legislation. he doubled down and refused to release the funding to train abortion care providers. this was two years ago. when the supreme court overturned roe, he complimented them. the republican party has declared war on the reproductive freedoms of women. contraception. its mitch mcconnell, ted cruz, rick scott, they all say they would like an abortion ban, and i believe him when he says he has had a change of heart. the fact of the matter is there will be no vote on roe if he

gives a majority to the republicans in the senate. >> she keeps misrepresenting the bill passed. it was to change the law so that it wasn't just doctors and professionals, it would be non-licensed professionals like midwives performing abortions. you can't lie about it and say i was denying access. the funding was for the bill which i didn't agree with because i thought it would be unsafe and a lot of the people in the medical community agreed with me. >> tracy has the next question. ms. alsobrooks>> i have a separate question on abortion. as county executive, we have often testified in writing or in person for state legislation that you support in annapolis. in maryland, they have been bills to protect women's reproductive order to protect women's reproductive rights, access to safe abortions, and also privacy. some county executives have testified in favor of those bills, but you have not.

why? >> i don't know specifically which bill you are referencing. i have been a very vocal supporter of a woman's right to choose. that is unrefuted. i support women's access to women's reproductive care. it's not just abortion care, it is also things like planned parenthood. that is the reason they have endorsed me. i received the endorsement of reproductive freedom for all because of this issue. the support of emily's list, as well as planned parenthood, who are aware of my strong and uncontroverted record on this issue. and i will continue to support women's reproductive freedoms, contraception, abortion, and i.v.f.. >> mr. hogan. >> we will never get everything done in washington if you just attack people who disagree with you. we agree on this issue. i fully funded planned parenthood and abortion every single year while i was governor. this is a very important issue.

to misrepresent what the facts are is really sad, and it is unfortunate. but i have been clear. my record is clear. you and i pretty much agree on this issue. and yet you continue to say that i have a different position. my record as governor is clear. >> go ahead. >> i will say it again, i believe the former governor when he says he has changed. >> i did not say that. >> the point of the matter is, if the republicans are in control of the senate, there will be no vote on roe. we have seen this movie before. when mitch mcconnell refused to bring it to avoid. they have been abundantly clear that they do not decide to codify roe, and that they will be seeking national abortion. if mitch mcconnell or ted cruz or lindsey graham are there, it will not happen.

>> a follow up with you, ms. alsobrooks, i believe vice president kamala harris has, in favor of getting rid of the filibuster in order to codify roe. would you be in favor of that? >> highwood. we have seen the filibuster used as a tool to thwart civil-rights legislation. it has been used in ways that are very destructive and has not been in the interest of the people. this issue is one that is very near and dear not only to marylanders, back to people across our country who do not want -- like my daughter who is in georgia, to have to look out in the country and decide where to live based on where she will have look at where she lives -- i will be working to codify the protection act. mr. hogan: i think it is a terrible idea, and you know who agrees with my opponent is donald trump. she and donald trump agree that we should change the rules, long-standing rules that require bipartisan cooperation, and

change things so you can jam things that are on a party line, partisan vote. you have to be careful what you wish for, because you know who will be jamming things through. i like the idea of finding that bipartisan compromise but i will work with susan collins, lisa murkowski on my side to get that done. chuck: you think 60 votes should be -- mr. hogan: i think making washington more partisan and allowing things to be jammed through by one vote, which she has been complaining about most of the thing, now she says she wants to do it for this one thing, but when the pendulum swings back every two years or four years, everyone will push their other chuck: things. when it comes to lowering the votes, that concerns you? ms. alsobrooks: i talked to senator cardin, and he says whoever is in the majority control of the agenda, and he believes the filibuster has been used in such a way we no longer

have the deliberative body we used to have. it becomes destructive. we really have to form and abolish the filibuster, so i agree that we are going to have to do something. we see the progress has been thwarted. chuck: all right, deborah has the next question. deborah: i would like to talk about gun violence. it was about a month ago when maryland witnessed a fatal shooting, the same week that a shooting in georgia killed two teachers and students. gun violence is the leading cause of death, and do you believe the government has a role especially in the nation's schools? chuck: go ahead, mr. governor. mr. hogan: yeah. absolutely there is a role. i'm for universal background checks. i have always done everything

possible to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill and out of the hands of criminals. i support a bipartisan, commonsense assault weapons ban. as governor, i signed a red flag law to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill. i sighed a bump stop. when there was a school shooting in maryland in great mills, in st. mary's county, i passed the safe to learn act, which requires school resource officers at every single high school in maryland to try to keep people safe, and i committed to fostering that exact thing bill at the federal level. unfortunately, my opponent has pulled the school safety out of schools, and the bill is no longer requiring it. deborah: governor, what is a common sense assault weapons ban? mr. hogan: i would support an assault weapons ban. we need to get bipartisan agreement on getting a bill passed. ms. alsobrooks: let me just correct misinformation, i have not pulled any school resource

officers out of the schools. in fact, "the washington post" just complimented me in their endorsement of me. it is also the case that the former governor complimented me two years ago on my leadership on this issue, public safety, saying i was a leader across the state. the fact that the number one killer of our children as gun violence and that we as a country have done nothing about it is shameful. there is an opportunity, i would be in favor of eliminating assault weapons, removing ghost guns from our streets, and in reality, the former governor did not have the courage come as a governor. he in fact veto legislation that would have created a waiting period for long guns and outright refused to sign the ban on ghost guns. he could have helped us on this issue but instead kowtow to the gun lobby and vetoed a band that would have created that waiting period for long guns and did not support it. yeah.