tv The Republican Presidential Debate Your Money Your Vote CNBC October 28, 2015 6:00pm-7:16pm EDT
him. i don't know if he can pull that off. it is a big debate for kasich and for christie. >> this is a big debate for chris christie. >> the donors are in a bad mood. >> here is the thing. we are getting getting down to crunch time. it's almost november. we have two months before people go to the polls. >> the big piece today the journal and we talked about it earlier, there's still time at this point. >> it's early. >> but people are still thinking sooner or later the republican party comes back to someone who's had some experience. >> no. no. >> and you said "don't assume that will happen with donald trump this time." >> i'm sorry, that is correct. look, i was wrong, a whole lot of people were wrong. i thought the experienced governor would eventually come through. and i thought no more experiments with half a first-term senator. so far the public is saying something could give me an outsider. >> -- but the thrust today is sooner or later they will come back. >> here's the thing. we are going to winnow this race
down to two or three candidates and when that happens, whoever the last establishment candidate standing, i think does have a higher likelihood of being the republican nominee than one of these outsiders. in a one-on-one race, the establishment candidate, i believe will win. >> who is that candidate right now, jim? >> listen, if people keep assuming that the first two -- carson, trump -- then in a way bush is not in a horrible position. it's him, it's rubio, cruz right behind. you can see you decapitate the field and then it's back to sort of a regular race. and i'm sure that's what bush is hoping the race will come back to him. >> you can see candidates taking the stage as they begin -- as we begin to assemble, there's all four of them, larry, we'll begin in a few moments. >> it's interesting the dynamic here is ted cruz. he's an underrated guy. look at his polls, holding up, coming out with a big bang economic growth plan which at least free market guys like me
will favor. i think the rubio/cruz -- look, those guys are establishments but they're outsider establishment. they haven't been around that long. that part interests me a lot and that's why tonight's debate is going to be so important. >> i think you're right about ted. he's enormously skilled. i worked with him in the early bush campaign in 2000. but what he isn't is an optimist and i think that that really hurts him. he is going to have to, you know, break ahead and eventually become much more forward leaning and optimistic for the country. >> what about the four men on stage here tonight, jim? who will you be watching the most? >> i think two who could potentially break out, is one is -- bobby jindal. i think people are surprised he's not doing better. super smart guy. that's his brand. what's the jindal brand? smart wonk, smartest guy in the room. but he's been kind of a
flamethrower kind of guy. that's not who he is. and that -- if he came up with a big policy idea, he's come out with plans, he had a tax plan out and loses ten trillion dollars, no at great plan. >> who else? >> santorum. that's what i was saying. santorum should come out and be the different kind of republican. >> but you think he should go after wall street and say "i'm here to break up the banks." >> yes, how can you differentiate yourself? he's already played with the idea and there's plenty of anger at wall street among tea party people so be that guy. >> the republican party is not going to win by bashing wall street. the republican party -- >> the "wall street journal," if you read it a day or two ago, what did it say? bank of america or city group should follow the lead. >> i don't disagree with the beakup idea as long as it's not in the private sector. >> that was the highlight of stephen colbert along with hillary clinton the other night. what is wrong with you? >> i didn't believe her answer.
>> growth! growth, growth. let them talk about growth. >> i would say middle-class, middle-class. if you've watched this debate as a regular person, what policies have republicaned talk s talked other than tax plan which is will lose ten trillion dollars. >> it has to be believable. >> the top issue is tax reform. have you ever heard that before? the top issue is tax reform. >> we have a unique audience. >> it's emblematic. >> to jimmy's point, though. i'm favoring a business tax cut for large and small according to your think tank aei the biggest beneficiary would be the middle-class wage earners. that's the way to sell that thing. that's what they're not doing. >> for everybody wondering when we're going to get to this presidential debate, we're about to do it right now. you saw the four candidates down there taking the stage in boulder, colorado, for part one, as we're calling it, larry, jim, sara, thanks for-to-all of you.
we'll have more right after this. joe and i will be back, take you through the highlights from what we're about to watch and get you ready for part two of the debate which will be from 8:00 to 10:00 p.m. eastern. the cnbc republican presidential debate begins right now. the american economy at a cross roads -- >> jobs a big part of the story today. >> trading was chaotic. >> frantic on the floor. >> this is the new normal. >> burr business, your investment, your job at risk. >> it's time for america to come back. >> we will shrink government, we will reduce spending. >> washington politicians believe they know better than us. >> it's time to fire everybody. >> tonight, the candidates chasing the republican nomination for president square off for a debate exclusively focused on your money. the best team in business has a lot to tackle. stocks, the global economy,
housing, the cost of college, your taxes. everything that impacts your money, your vote. live from the university of colorado in boulder, the republican presidential debate. [ applause ] good evening, everyone. i'm becky quick along with my cnbc colleagues carl quintinilla and john harwood. some experts on markets and finance will be here with us as well but let's get to the rules. candidates get 30 seconds to answer opening questions and 60 seconds to answer a formal question. they'll also get 30 seconds for rebuttals and fold lowups. this comes as the discretion of the moderators. we want you to weigh in from home or wherever you are. if you check it out on the bottom of the screen, you can see your tweets right there using #cnbcgopdebate.
you can go to cnbc.com/vote throughout the night to tell us where you stand. first up, let's get to the candidates for tonight's republican presidential debate. i want to run you through the line on the stage from left to right. first up, governor bobby jindal. [ applause ] senator rick santorum. governor george pataki. [ applause ] and senator lindsey graham. obviously we have a lot to cover here tonight so let's get this started. my colleague john harwood has our first question. john? >> we'll pose this question to all candidates and go left to right starting with governor jindal. a majority of republican voters at this point in the campaign made clear they prefer someone from outside the political system. in 30 seconds, tell us why your experience inside the system would be more valuable than the fresh eyes an outsider would bring. >> i think the reason voters are so frustrated is nothing seems to change in d.c. over the next several hours,
you'll hear several republicans all tell you they want to shrink the size of government and grow the american economy and it sounds great and we've got to do it. here's the truth -- of all these folks talking, i'm the only one that has cut the size of government. there's not two of us, there's one of us. the rest of it is just hot air. when politicians talk, we need to pay attention to what they do, not what they say. i'm the only one that's reduced the size of government. let's shrink the government economy and grow the american economy. >> thanks, governor jindal. senator santorum? >> i think it's one thing to shrink the size of a state government but another thing to get something accomplished in washington. it's a much tougher field and i'm the one in the -- on this stage and, frankly, on both stages that has actually gone to washington, said we would shrink government, said we would shake things up and actually delivered for the conservative cause. everything from welfare reform which was the largest most significant accomplishment in the last 25 years for conservatism. i authored the bill when i was in the house of representatives, i managed the bill on the floor of the united states senate.
you need a conservative who can deliver and that's what i bring to the table. >> thank you, senator. governor pataki? >> we need an outsider to run our party and to win the next election. washington has become a corrupt insider game and everybody talks about how they'll change the taxes, grow the economy. nothing seems to change. by the way, bobby, i shrunk the size of new york state's government when i left. we reduced the employment by over 25,000 and cut taxes but i understand the that to change washington you have to understand government as well. you can't just be an outsider. you can't just be someone who throws stones at washington. you have to be someone who can bring people together across party lines. i can do that, i will do that if i have the chance to lead this party. >> thank you, governor. senator graham. >> number one, thank you for having me here tonight. how about a round of applause for boulder, colorado? this is a beautiful place. [ applause ]
looking at their academic standards, the only way i could have gotten into this university is to be invited to this debate tonight. [ laughter ] but here's my take on things. without national security there is no economic security. without the sacrifice of the veteran, all of our hopes and dreams are at risk, just a few days ago, hillary clinton said that the problems with the v.a. are being exaggerated by republicans. they are not. they are real. [ applause ] >> senator graham, thank you very much. >> governor jindal, just a few hours ago the republicans and the democrats in the house voted on a budget deal that will increase spending by about $80 billion over the next two years. you, however, have called the republicans who have been willing to work with the democrats to do things like this the surrender party of the republican caucus. would you have shut the government down instead? >> i think that's a false choice. i think this was a very bad deal. whenever they tell us in d.c. they'll cut tomorrow that means they'll never cut.
tomorrow never seems to happen. instead why won't we follow our conservative principles? why not insist on structural reforms? why not cut spending? i don't mean shrink the growth rate, i mean spend less. why not a balanced budget amendment to the constitution? why not a supermajority vote before they grow our taxes, before they grow the government faster than economy? let's be honest, $18 trillion of debt, record low participation rate in the work force, record number of americans on food stamps, we are going the way of europe. the left is trying to turn the american dream into the your feel nightmare -- >> but, governor, if you didn't have a choice, if you didn't control things in the house, would you take the choice of shutting things down or go ahead and agree with them? >> i think that's a false choice. if i were leading, we would pass a conservative budget, challenge the president to do the right thing. here's the problem, republicans never want to fight. give pelosi and reid credit, they forced obamacare and socialism dun our throats. why won't the republicans fight half as hard for freedom and opportunity? this was a bad budget. >> governor, thank you.
>> becky, can i comment on this question? >> hold on, governor pataki, we'll go to senator graham because we believe you are likely to be the only person on this stage tonight who support this is budget deal. you just heard governor jindal say that it's a phony deal, doesn't do anything and people like you are surrendering rather than fighting by supporting it. why is he wrong? >> let me tell you what is real -- the threat to our homeland. i've never seen so many threats to our homeland than i do today. barack obama is an incompetent commander in chief. there are more terrorist organizations with safe havens to attack the american homeland than any time since 9/11. we here in the process of reducing our defense spending by half. i am looking at this budget with one view in mind -- will it restore the ability to defend this nation? we're on track to have the smallest army since 1940. the smallest navy since 1915. this budget, if it is paid for, will put $40 billion back into the department at a time when
need it. the number one role of the federal government is to defend this nation. i intend to be a commander-in-chief that can win a war we can not afford to lose. >> john, can i quickly comment on this? >> governor, we'll get to you in just a moment. >> i want to speak on this issue, though. >> question for senator santorum. you have advocate add plat tax so we'd like to ask you about fairness. why is it fair to tax all americans at the same rate as opposed to taxing more affluent americans at higher rates? >> well, if you look at my flat tax it takes the best of what steve forbes and many have been advocating for a long time which is a very strong pro-growth tax code, very simple. and it adjusts it to make sure it is not regressive. we have a $2,750 per person tax credit. that's $2,750 off taxes due, not a deduction, a credit. and, in fact, if you run the numbers, no american who is going to be more taxes under our propose sool we've accomplished
both. we have a system that has a low single rate but we take care of american families. $2,750 per feperson. a family of four, that's a $11,000 tax credit. if you look at the "wall street journal" today and so many other publications that have been out there, they talked about how the biggest problem of the hallollog out of the middle of this country is the breakdown of the american family. a liberal said that on the "wall street journal" today. the key to poverty is families. so we put forth a pro-growth steve forbes plan, combined it with a pro-family plan and that's why i think it will work effectively. >> senator, thank you. john? becky? >> governor pataki, let's get to your point. you wanted to make a comment on the budget. you want to get in on the idea of what would you do if you were in washington. would you compromise? >> it's a bad deal but i would have voted for a very simple reason. barack obama is the first president in american history to hold our military hostage. he knew that needed funding for
overseas contingent operations. $40 million that would support our troops and was prepared and had vetoed it unless this deal went through. i have two sons. they both served overseas, one in iraq and one in afghanistan. and i understand that we have got to do far more to help our military, help our veterans and help protect our security. this is a bad deal but to protect our military i would have signed it. it's not going to be the case if i have a chance to lead this country. we're going to reduce the deficit, shrink the government, lower the tax burden and grow the private sector because that's how you solve deficits. >> governor pataki, thank you. john? >> governor jindal, a question about fiscal policy, especially since you noted that this deal doesn't solve the long-term debt situation. when you came into office with a budget surplus in the state of louisiana, now years later the state legislature faced a $1.6 billion budget gap and the republican state treasurer
called one of your approaches to that problem "nonsense on a stick." quoting him. are you going to do for the federal budget what you did for the louisiana budget? >> absolutely, john. what we did is cut state spending. we cut our budget 26%. according to k ing ting to cato analysis. look, the left always complains there's not enough money for government. we have 30,000 fewer state employees than the day i took office. eight credit upgrades, we're a top-ten state for private sector job creation. we have a choice. do you grow the government economy or the american economy? when i became governor, we had 25 years of outmigration, we were coming back from katrina. seven years in a row more people moving into the state than leaving the state. we have more people working than ever before earning a higher income than ever before. we've reduced the size of government, that's what we need to do in d.c. in d.c., the republicans claim victory by slowing the growth rate, that's not enough.
we are running off of the cliff. we'll be the next greece. we can rearrange the chairs. over $18 trillion of debt, no wonder our economy has been stagnant. we haven't had growth. if you're a young student, you've not seen a robust american economy. >> but, governor jindal, as you know, many republicans are opposed to the approach you've taken in louisiana. they complain that you have tried so hard to avoid anything that could be called a tax increase so that you could rub for president saying you'd never raised taxes. david vitter, the republican who's now running to succeed you has told voters "i won't be like jindal, i'm not using the governorship as a steppingstone to higher office." >> not only did we not raise taxes, we did the largest income tax cut in the state's history and i'm proud of that. that's the leadership voters want in d.c. if you want a republican that will grow government spending, if you want a president -- a candidate who will increase taxes i'm not your guy. if you want somebody that will do and say the things that can't be said, can't be done, i'm
asking you to vote for me to join my cause, that's how dangerous these times are. these are dangerous times for america. i think we have a chance to rescue the idea of america but if we don't do it now, four years will be too late. so i'm proud we cut taxes and spending. 30,000 fewer state government bureaucrats than the day i took office. i absolutely will do that in d.c. >> we'll take a quick break. the republican presidential debate continues live from boulder, colorado, in a moment. [ applause ]
"how to make your smartphone smarter." step one: bring us your 4g lte smartphone and keep your network and number for a lot less. step two: there is no step two. so...dance party? introducing the new bring your own phone program from tracfone. get one of america's two largest and most dependable 4g lte networks for less. now that's smart. 90-day no-contract plans with unlimited carryover start as low as $19.99. tracfone. do everything for less. i just had a horrible nightmare. my company's entire network went down, and i was home in bed, unaware. but that would never happen. comcast business monitors my company's network 24 hours a day and calls and e-mails me if something, like this scary storm, takes it offline. so i can rest easy. what. you don't have a desk bed? don't be left in the dark. get proactive alerts 24/7. comcast business. built for business.
this bale of hay cannot be controlled. when a wildfire raged through elkhorn ranch, the sudden loss of pasture became a serious problem for a family business. faced with horses that needed feeding and a texas drought that sent hay prices soaring, the owners had to act fast. thankfully, mary miller banks with chase for business. and with greater financial clarity and a relationship built for the unexpected, she could control her cash flow, and keep the ranch running. chase for business. so you can own it. welcome back to the republican presidential debate live in boulder, colorado, on cnbc. we resume our questions now with jim cramer, the host of cnbc's "mad money." >> thank you. governor pataki, in the wake of the sony hack last year you said "at the very least we should declare cyber war on north korea." what does a cyber war look like?
and if our companies are getting attacked by foreign governments, do we need a military response? >> no, i don't think we need a military response but we need a coordinated response and i have to say that i think the obama administration has been completely lax to say the least in dealing with these cyber attacks. not just by governments like north korea but by particularly chinese and other companies. and what i would do is put in place a policy where if we know a company, say a chinese company, is hacking into american companies, stealing trade secrets as we know they do everyday, we will retaliate against that company and say that that company is not going to be allowed to continue to do trade with the united states. i would also look at what we're doing at the federal level and put in place what israel has done -- a one federal agency dealing with cyber security and charged with working across silos to make sure we have the best technology. and, jim, i have to tell you something, talking about cyber security, hillary clinton put a
server, an unsecure server, in her home as secretary of state. we have no doubt that that was hacked and that state secrets are throughout to the iranians, the russians, the chinese and others. that alone should disqualify her from being president of the united states. [ cheers and applause ] >> senator graham, you're a hawk, was that tough enough? >> here's the problem. we're being walked all over because our commander in chief is weak in the eyes of our enemies. do you think putin would be in the ukraine today if ronald reagan were president? why are the chinese stealing our intellectual property, hacking into our system? why are they building islands over resource-rich waters? because they can get away with it. at the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, the foreign policy of barack obama needs to be replaced and the last person you want to find to replace his foreign policy is his secretary of state. so to the chinese, when it comes
to dealing with me you have a clenched fist or an open hand. you pick. the party's over to all the dictators. make me commander-in-chief and this crap stops. [ applause ] >> thank you, senator. >> senator santorum. we know a troubling amount of air pollution on the west coast comes from china. should we enact a pollution tax on products imported from china and give our manufacturers a level playing field? >> what we should be -- we shouldn't be putting tariffs on anything. that hurts working men and women in this country. what we should be doing is making our manufacturing more competitive. one of the reasons i introduced the 2020 plan, 20% flat tax on corporations as well as on individuals is so we can be competitive so we can bring the manufacturing jobs back. you want to talk about cutting pollution? you do a little back of the envelope. we produce per dollar of gdp about one-fifth of the co-2 and
other pollutants that china produces. so we're five times more efficient in producing goods here as far as the environment is concerned. why don't we -- if we really want to tackle environmental problem, global warming, what we need to do is take those jobs from china and bring them back here to the united states, employ workers in this country. we've lost two million jobs, two million jobs, you should this administration in manufacturing. 15,000 manufacturers have left this country. why? because of bad tax policy, bad regulatory policy and, yes, bad trade policy. we need to have a president that's going to pledge, as i have, i'm going to make america the number-one manufacturer so working men and women can have good paying jobs again in america. >> thank you, senator. john? >> governor jindal, senator santorum raised the issue of corporate taxes and cutting corporate taxes is very popular in your party because our rate at 35% is one of the highest in the world. but nobody has figured out how to identify a set of loopholes
that would allow that tax rate to be lowered. so can you tell us specifically what loopholes you'd do away with? >> i'd go further. my tax plan, like everybodies, like a lot of remembers, i'd get rid of the death penalty and marriage penalty and simplify the brackets to 25%, 10% 2,% so an average middle-class fami family -- >> i'm talking corporate taxes. >> i'll get there. 25% today, would pay 10% under my plan. but my plan does three things different from other plan. remember i said 2%? i think everybody should pay something even if it's only 2%. that's the most important 2% of my plan. i know a lot of republicans brag -- y'all can clap, it doesn't scare me. i heard some people. there are millions of folks that wouldn't pay taxes in jeb's plan and trump's plan, that's a mistake. in terms of the corporate tax, secondly i'd get rid of the corporate tax. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world. i'd get rid of it and the corporate welfare, make the ceos pay their same tax rates the way the rest of us do and, third,
i'd purposely shrink the size of government. you know, that's intentional feature of my plan. we've got a choice -- do we grow the government economy or the american economy? i say get rid of the corporate tax, bring those jobs and investment here to the united states, stop sending jobs and investment overseas. >> thanks governor, becky? >> governor pataki, let's talk about what's happened on wall street. some of your colleagues in the republican party, including people on this stage, have bashed wall street. they say it was largely responsible for the financial crisis. you're a former governor of new york and you rely heavily on wall street for income. do you think they've gone too far? >> i think they have gone too far. i think we've seen wall street really blossom and do very well while the rest of the country is struggling. and it's because we have this corrupt connection between wall street and washington. and, john, you were just talking about what loopholes would you get rid of? i would get rid of every one of them. they cost american taxpayers $1.4 trillion a year.
i would throw them all out. >> so the tax credit right now that we have for domestic manufacturing which manufacturers say -- you'd get rid of that? >> no, i would keep -- yes, but what i would do is i would lower the tax on manufacturing to the lowest in the developed world, 12%. we all have plans. i have a plan. we all have plans. my plan, the tax foundation said would create 5.5 million new jobs over the next decade. the difference, though, is i will get my plan enacted because when i was governor of new york i passed sweeping tax cuts in a democratic state with a democratic legislature. bobby, you're talking about your tax cuts. i cut taxes more than everybody on this stage, more than everybody on the next stage combined by more than the other 49 states in new york state. i don't just have a plan, i will enact tax cuts, get rid of the loopholes and make the system fairer for all americans. >> governor pataki, thank you. >> thank you. >> senator graham? >> you have said you believe climate change is real.
you said you accept tax increases as part of a budget deal with democrats. you've co-sponsored a senate immigration bill providing a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally. are you in the wrong party's debate? [ laughter ] >> no, i think i'm trying to solve problems that somebody better solve. now, you don't have to believe that climate change is real. i have been to the antarctic, i've been to alaska. i'm not a scientist band i've gt the grades to prove it but i've talked to the climatologists and they tell me that greenhouse gas effect is real, that we're heating up the planet. i just want a solution that would be good for the economy that doesn't destroy it. i want to fix an immigration system. i'm not going to tell you if you like your doctor you can keep him, if you like your health
care you can keep it. i'm tired of telling people things that they want to hear that we know we won't do. we won't eliminate corporate tax, but we can make it lower. we're going to fix immigration only if we work together. i want to secure the border because if we don't we're going to get hurt and hit again. i want to fix a broken visa system. i want to increase legal immigration because we'll have a shortage of workers over time. as to the 11 million, i want to talk about fixing the problem. we won't deport 11 million people and their legal citizen children. but we will deport felons. and those who stay will have to learn our language to stay. because i don't speak it well but look how far i've come. at the end of the day, folks, i am trying to solve a problem and win an election. i am tired of losing. good god, look who we're running against. the number one candidate on the other side thought she was flat broke after her and her husband were in the white house for eight years. the number two guy went to the soviet union on his honeymoon and i don't think he ever came back.
quewelcome back, everyone, s is the republican presidential debate on cnbc, live from the university of colorado. senator santorum i'd like to go to you. you have talked about how you want to protect american jobs by limiting the number of immigrants who come into this country. very recently the ceo of toll brothers told us he can't get by without immigrants because they make up more than half of his work force at this point. we're not talking about people who make minimum wage but he can't find americans who want to do these jobs, for $20 an hour plus jobs.
what would happen if your plans are successful? what happens and how do we fill that hole in the economy? the gap that's created? >> as you know, we have the lowest labor participation rate in 50 years. we also have the slowest growth in wages in any 20 year period. the last quartered that lowest wage growth ever recorded so you look at the fact we brought in 35 million, 35 million legal and illegal immigrants over the last 20 years, more than any period in american history, we have low wages, low participation rates, maybe there's something going on. like we aren't -- we aren't -- we don't have the right match, right? we aren't giving the training and the investment in our workers and we're bringing in people to compete against low-wage workers. that's what's happening. we have an immigration policy that senator graham supported that brings in even more low-wage workers into this country. he says he wants to solve problems, that's great. but you're not solving problems for american wage earners.
you're not solving problems for workers in america who have seen their wages flat line and have been disaffected enough to leave the workplace. we need to get better training and better skills including vocational education and training in those -- in community colleges but the bottom line is we have to make sure that we are not flooding this country with competition -- >> senator your minute is up. mr. graham, yes, that was a question to you, too. 30 seconds. >> the first thing we have to come to do is come to grips with the reality that we're facing as americans. in 1950 there were 16 workers for every social security recipient. today there are there's three. in 20 years there are two. i want to make sure that no american company leaves america because you can't find a worker. american workers always get the first preference. but if you can't find an american worker after you advertise at a competitive wage, i don't want you to be at lost,
bring people in based on merit. let's take a broken immigration system -- >> senator graham, thank you, that was 30 seconds. >> -- make a merit based immigration system that helps our economy. >> senator graham, thank you. >> hold on, that's -- becky, hold -- >> let me try to get a word in edge wise. in washington they talk over each other. >> that's not what happened. >> they're used to that but i'm not. >> senator, let's let governor pataki have a chance to speak. >> you guys talk over each other in washington all the time. i'm not used to that. i listen when people talk. we have a skills gap. you mentioned the construction company. the construction industry says one of the biggest problems is they can't find the craftsmen to do the work. what we have to do in america is honor blue-collar work again. we have to honor the carpenter, the plumber, the electrician who can actually build something and instead of just saying that a college degree delivers prestige, let's celebrate those who do things with their hands and elevate their skills using
training and high school and community colleges. >> governor pataki, that was a minute, zblir we can have a better-quality work force -- >> governor pataki, sorry to talk over you, that was a minute. carl? >> my question for governor jindal. paul ryan says he would take the speaker job if it did not take away from his family time. the department of labor says 13% of american workers are eligible for paid family leave and the u.s. is the only developed nation in the world not to have guaranteed paid maternity leave for new moms. should the government work to change that? >> look, i think the government should work to change that but that doesn't mean i'm for the government mandating that. we already have too many government mandates out of d.c. do i want people to have paid leave? shower. do i want people to have higher wages? sure. do i want them to have better benefits? sure. the government can't wave a and with and make that happen. over the last seven years, president obama is trying to teach the american people that government the the answer to all of our problems. where has that gotten us?
we're on the path towards socialism. the way folks can get better paying jobs with better benefits is if we have a growing any. that mean we repeal all of obamacare, that means we have an energy plan that makes sense. that means we embrace an all of the above approach to energy. those are good paying jobs, $90,000 a year jobs with benefits but this president won't let us produce more energy on our demidwest i can federal lands and waters, won't allow canadians to build the keystone pipeline, an epa doing everything they can to kill private sector jobs in america so, yes, i want families to have better paying jobs and benefits but we won't get with a government mandate, we'll get that with a growing economy. [ applause ] >> governor, thank you. john? >> senator graham, americans have gotten used to seeing headlines about more and more big corporations relocating overseas to cut their tax bill. now, many in washington think the way to stop that is to lower our corporate tax rate but as we've seen, tax reform takes time. hasn't happened yet. in the meantime, do you fault
those companies for leaving? do companies owe anything to their country as well as their shareholders? >> we owe to every business person and worker in america the best environment in the world to create a job. we owe that to american business. 35% corporate tax rate is the second-highest in the world. we need to lower it so they don't leave. the goal is to help the middle-class. we can talk about corporations all day long, but my goal is to help the middle-class. somebody who makes too much to be on government assistance but still lives paycheck to paycheck. when the kid gets sick you don't go on vacation. that's the purpose of my presidency, to grow the economy here. and let me tell you, our democratic friends a list a mile long of more government. that won't grow the middle class, that will create a burden on your children which they're already overburdened. the best way to grow the middle scla
class is to make it a good place too build a job. you know why boeing came to south carolina? we wanted them. we had a low-tax structure. a permitting structure that allowed them to build the building faster than they thought they could build it. we welcomed there. i'll take the south carolina attitude -- >> i want to remind candidates, you have a one-minute limit on the response but i want to follow up, senator graham. four years ago, the nominee of your party said corporations are people, too. if that is true, the question is, do they owe any obligation to the country? >> i think everybody owes an obligation to the country. the ones i'm most worried about are the 1% of americans in uniform who have been fighting this war for 14 years. they need a commander in chief who knows what the hell they're doing. my first job as president of the united states is to rebuild the military. admiral mullen said the debt is a big threat to our national security. he's right. but people go when they're welcome when it comes to job
creation. if i'm president of the united states you will be welcomed in america. >> senator graham, thank you very much. we're moving on. >> if i'm president of the united states -- >> you guys are making this just like home. this is just like our show. >> i'd like to bring on my colleague. rick? >> thanks, john. governor pataki. >> hey, rick. >> how are you doing tonight? >> i'm doing great. >> america's central bank, the federal reserve, they've kept interest rates near zero since the 2008 financial crisis. and, by the way, they had a meeting today, you think they raised rates? no. shocking, isn't it? >> not at all. >> listen, it's been a rough ride for american savers and retirees, they rely on this interest income and it's been a bonanza for the stock market. a bonanza. and for investors that like a little bit more risk it's been a bonanza for them as well. so i guess what i'm asking is do you think this policy is fair and do you support it? >> no, i don't support it. but let me go back a little bit here. we need to grow our economy
faster. we've had the worst economic recovery since the great depression. and it's because of policy in washington. >> governor, if that's true, why was our economy limping six years ago and now it's the strong nest the world? >> john, no question barack obama inherited an economic disaster in 2009. but what did he do? instead of focusing on perot growth policies in the economy he ran through obamacare, the worst law of my lifetime that hurt small businesses, hurt companies, raised taxes, and almost completely eliminated one industry because of its taxes. the fed had to act. and the fed did act appropriately in reducing interest rates but they've reduced them for seven straight years, that's never happened before. they've been zero for way too long. they should raise the rates, the fed should get out of manipulating the market and the fed also, by the way, should
reduce its balance sheet, $2.7 trillion. let some of those bonds mature and put the money back into n the banking system to our economy can grow. >> thanks, governor. senator santorum, in the 2012 presidential debate you were for the export/import bank which facilitates government funding for u.s. exports. american companies like ge and boeing are among the beneficiaries. but you said that killing the bank here -- and i'm going to quote you -- "is the last thing a true conservative should be doing." i don't know, government-backed funding isn't normally what i hear from true conservatives so why is this situation different? >> a true conservative wants to create a level playing field. that's what government is supposed to do. they're not supposed to favor one group over another and when it comes to our manufacturers, the level playing field is not in the united states. it's international. so the federal government should have laws, tax laws, regulatory laws, and, yes, finance laws.
there's 60 other xm banks all over the world. every major competitor for the united states manufacturing dollar has one of those banks. and guess what? they use those banks a heck of a lot more than the united states of america does, number one. so in order to have a level playing field, which is what conservatives talk about all the time, level playing field, then we have to have export financing and here's why. because export financing doesn't help boeing or ge. ge just lost a contract. you know what they did? they went to france, they got the xm bank in france to support it and what did they do? they moved manufacturing out of south carolina, out of texas, moved it to hungary and to france. ge is still making money, ge is still doing well but american workers are out of jobs. that's why we have to have this level playing field so we can compete with the rest of the world. >> thanks, senator. >> thank you, rick. cnbc's coverage of the republican presidential debate continues live from the university of colorado after this short break.
welcome back to the university of colorado and the republican presidential debate on cnbc. [ applause ] a question for senator santorum. people in this state have loved coors beer since it was founded in 1873. [ cheers and applause ] >> and for good reason, i might add. >> the brewer later became part of sab miller but now sab may be bought by inbev. is it right to have brewers bought by one company and do you fear they will have too much power over consumers? >> first, i want to thank the people of colorado because four years ago you gave me the honor of winning the nomination out here in the state of colorado and on a night where won three
states and it catapulted us and i want to thank you for that support and in response to that i do drink a lot of coors beer. i try to help. the answer is pretty simple. the answer is simple. there are no shortage of breweries around the united states of america. i do -- as i travel around the country, i do pints and politics and i go to breweries all over the place and there's almost no town in america anymore that doesn't have a brewery so i don't think we need to worry too much. they're obviously -- if there's some anti-competitive issues, we have agencies to look at that but, no, i'm not concerned that americans are not going to have choices. >> let's get to that. another example, for example, is walgreens. >> and i care about, by the way. i care about choices. >> walgreen/rite aid. big deal, consolidation in drug stores, semiconductors, food. what is the line at which something becomes anti-competitive in your view?
>> well, i would say this, what you're seeing in health care is you're seeing consolidation and that's occurring because of obamacare. you're seeing in the an area that i am concerned about and that's in health insurance. you're seeing big health insurance companies fold up, you've seen obama try to creede health insurance companies. why? because we have a system that make it virtually impossible for a small insurer to operate effectively. and this was the motive behind obamacare. this wasn't incidental. this was deliberate to make it so impossible for small insurers to survive that they consolidate into a small group, then the left can say "there is no competition, we need single payer. that's why we have to repeal on care." [ cheers and applause ] >> becky. >> governor jindal, i want to go back to what you mentioned before, i know you pwant to puta 2% tax on all pham leads but every working american pays 6.2%
when it comes to social security taxes, they pay another 1.45% in medicare. isn't that skin in the game? >> you're talking about payroll taxes that fund programs. people pay for their medicare and social security. i want every american to worry and care about how those folks in d.c. are spending our money. if $18 trillion of debt, they're misspending our money, earn success is so much more fulfilling than unearned success. i don't want us to continue to create one class of americans that pays income taxes, that pays for government, another class of americans that's growing more and more dependent on government. that's what we have today. social schism bad not only for taxpayers but people that they say they're trying to help. there's dignity in work, dignity and self-sufficiency. our previous president said this "the problem is that tax rates are too high, government income revenues are too low." he said "paradoxically, lowering tax rates now the best way to produce higher government revenues later." no, that wasn't president reagan, as many are probably guessing at home, that was
president kennedy. i think you know the answer. that was president kennedy. imagine if he were alive today at la last democratic debate imagine if you tried to say that in a party veering toward socialism, that wouldn't be welcome in today's democratic party. >> governor pataki, you indicated you believe climate change is real and caused at least in part by human activity. in 60 seconds, tell us what the federal government should do about it. >> absolutely. one of the things that troubles me about the republican party is too often we question science that everyone accepts. i mean, it's ridiculous that in the 21st century we're questioning whether or not vaccines are the appropriate way to go. of course they are. and it's also not appropriate to think that human activity, putting co-2 into the atmosphere doesn't make the earth warmer all things being equal. it does. it's uncontra verdicted. i think part of the problem is republicans think about climate change and say, oh, my god, we'll have higher taxes, more obama, more big government, the epa shutting down factories.
that's not the collusion that i see. i want republicans to embrace innovation and technology. you know, there's one country in the world that has fewer greenhouse gas emissions than the rest of the world. you know what that is? the united states. our emissions are lower than they were 1995. not because of a government program but because of fracking, private sector creation. >> is there a role for government? >> government's role is to incentivize innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit in america. we could have far more clean energy. we could have next generation nuclear, reactors that have no risk of healthdown. we ha -- healthdown. >> so subsidies for those programs? for those alternative sources? >> r&d credits. let the private sector do this. develop this innovation. not only would we solve our problems, we would have clean energy, cheaper energy here. we could export those technologies to places like
china and like india so we would grow our economy, have a far greater impact, have a pure domestic source of energy and cleaner healthier air. that's the solution. embrace science, embrace innovation and change. >> thank you, governor. carl? >> question for senator santorum. >> can i say something about that? >> after this question maybe. [ laughter ] >> the 2015 nobel prize winner for economics argues that slow growth causes poverty and that leads to inequality. what would you do to ease inquality and what would you do to solve poverty? by the way, thanks to larry kudlow of cnbc for this question. >> if you look at our plan that i introduced, the 2020 clear vision for america, we increase growth by 10%. 1% a year. so we go from 3. -- 2.3 to 3.3 in repealing obamacare, that's a number of .7 so you're looking at 4% growth according to the tax foundation and unlike donald trump and bobby jindal, we don't
add $10 trillion to the deficit. in fact, our plan while it creates as many jobs as their plan does and grows the economy as much as theirs does, we are a revenue neutral plan because i believe that we need to reduce the size of government, yes, but we also need to reduce our deficit and we need to get to our budget balance so we can start paying down this debt and adding a trillion dollars with a tax cut and getting no more growth is not the way to do it. but that's only half of it. the word "economy" comes from the greek word "oikos" which means family. family is the first economy and the one thing we don't talk about enough is how stable families have vitally important for the middle of america to be prosperous and to grow and be safe. and i will have policies, not just tax policies that will make sure that families are strong again in america. >> governor jindal, i'll give you 30 seconds on this. >> thank you. look, if senator santorum wants to concede the tax cut wing of the republican party, i'm happy to fight for that side of the republican party. he's right, i explicitly want to
shrink the size of government 22% over ten years is not too much. we've got our state budget 26% in eight years. this is a fundamental choice. we mustn't become a cheaper version of the democratic party, a second liberal party. we need to proudly say we're willing to cut taxes shrink government, grow the american economy. president kennedy said it to the democratic party, why can't we say it to the republican party? let's cut taxes. >> if you cut spending and taxes so much, why did your budget have such a big deficit? >> our budget is balanced. yeah, we've had to cut spending. we privatized or closed nine of our ten charity hospitals. we did statewide school choice. >> $1.6 million budget gap. >> you're quoting an old number from the beginning of the year. we closed that gap. just like d.c. government is the only place where if you give them less money than they wanted they count it as a cut. they take last year's budget, call it a baseline. we need to say just because you didn't get that money last year,
we balanced our budget, in eight years we've never raised taxes, we cut taxes, our tax code -- >> thank you, john. senator graham, one in every four workers has saved less than a thousand dollars for retirement. millions of americans rely on their social security benefits for the majority of their retirement income. now, you've called for reforms to social security, but what would you do to fix the other part of the problem for future retirees and get people to save more? >> well, number one, social security is not just a concept to me. i know why it exists. 50% of today's seniors would be in poverty without a social security check. i promise you, if you make me your president i will save social security because i know why it exists. now, if you're looking for good beer policy, i'm your best bet,
my dad owned a bar. i know beer. we grew up, my sister and myself, in the back of that bar in one room with my mom, my dad, my sister who's nine years younger. when i was 21, my mom was diagnosed with hodgkin's disease, neither parent finished high school. she died within a year, we were wiped out from the medical bills and if it wasn't for social security survivor benefit check coming into my family we would haven't made it because my dad died 15 months later. >> but -- >> wait a minute, please. so i'm 22 and we're wiped out. i am 60. i'm not married, i have a military retirement, i'm in good shape. i would give up some of my benefits to help those who need it more than i do. to young people here i will ask you to work a little bit longer because we have to. the purpose of my presidency -- >> thank you. >> -- is to save this country and save social by working across the aisle just like
ronald reagan. >> thank you, senator graham. governor jindal, you've been a strong supporter of for-profit colleges, institutions that educate many veterans, minorities and working institutions that educate many veterans, minorities and working class americans. they make up about 11% of the college population at these schools, but they account for 44% of student loan defaults. should for profit schools be held accountable when they take taxpayer money and leave students deep in debt? >> absolutely they should be accountable. they should be accountable to their students due to market. you either trust the american people to make their own choices or don't. the left thinks we need to be protected from ourselves. president obama is trying to limit competition to the higher education market. as a result, you're going to see tuition prices continue to go up. we've had $1 trillion of student debt and counting. and he wants to apply only to the for profit market. for some reason, the private sector is a bad word to this
president. it's not in the real world. in louisiana, we fought so that the dollars follow the child, and so the child following the dollar. what that means, k-12, parents and their families can decide what's the best way for their children to be educated. higher education, we have a tops program. where, again, we will help if a student maintains a 20 act, 2.5 gpa. you either trust the american people or you don't. . i know the left doesn't. that's why you get obamacare. they want to tell us what kind of insurance to buy. common core, they want to take away our gun rights and religious liberty rights. yes, there's accountability. accountability to students through choice and competition. we don't need the nanny state to protect us from ourselves. >> thank you, governor jindal. >> thank you. live from boulder, colorado. we'll be right back.
is that it will be absolutely fantastic. so, if what i tell you appears absolutely unbelievable have you any chance of visualizing the future as it really will happen. ♪ this bale of hay cannot be controlled. when a wildfire raged through elkhorn ranch, the sudden loss of pasture became a serious problem for a family business.
faced with horses that needed feeding and a texas drought that sent hay prices soaring, the owners had to act fast. thankfully, mary miller banks with chase for business. and with greater financial clarity and a relationship built for the unexpected, she could control her cash flow, and keep the ranch running. chase for business. so you can own it.
welcome back to boulder, colorado. and the republican presidential debate right here on cnbc. gentlemen, this is our lightning round where we have some questions for you we hope you can answer in 20 seconds or less. and we'll go right down the line on this. governor jindal, we're wondering, what are the three apps that you use most frequently on your cell phone. >> i was just saying to my colleagues, i may be the last person in this audience without an iphone. i'm one of the -- i still have a blackberry in my pocket. and i basically use it for scheduling, keep up with my wife and three kids at home. the only games on that phone are bricklayer. i use it to keep up to the news to the internet. i may be the last american out there -- >> no, i'm with you. i still have a blackberry, too. senator santorum, how about you? >> mlb, nhl, i'm a big sports fan and the "wall street journal." those are the three i use the most. >> the one i use the most is uber.
i used to get driven. when i was governor, i had a driver. i don't anymore. >> it was sweet, wasn't it? >> and it's an example of what millennials are doing to change america for the better. and i tweet a lot, too. so uber, twitter and i communicate with my family. >> thank you, senator graham? >> well, number one, the only reason i have an iphone because i gave me number to donald trump. don't do that. my technology and my whole staff. number one, fox news, sorry about that. we're in a republican primary here. >> thanks. thanks a lot. >> we take your time back. >> yeah. >> time's up. >> cut his microphone. >> we've got one more. >> one more lightning round. governor jindal, should the day after the super bowl be a national holiday? >> absolutely. when the saints go back to repeat, we're talking about beer
sales earlier, all those folks being hung over in louisiana for drinking and celebrating drew brees winning it. i think it'd be a great day to take off. no, look, on a serious note, i do want to say this about the super bowl and our athletes. they can be great role models for our children, and i'm a saints fan. drew brees and his wife, great role models, great christians. yes, it should be holidays. >> senator? >> well, since we're usually in the super bowl, the pittsburgh steelers. steeler nation. >> i know. >> no. >> i was in kansas city over the weekend to watch the steeler game and about a third of the crowd were steeler fans. i'm usually not alone when i call out steeler nation. but we are used to being in the super bowl, so, actually, it is in pennsylvania already. >> governor? >> i am a long suffering jets fan. so my answer is obviously no, there's no reason to take off the day after the super bowl. but let me just add this, the mets are going to win tonight. let's go, mets.
>> finally, senator. >> well, i think a national holiday would be the day that commander in chief barack obama doesn't have that job. but, unlike these other three, i want to win new hampshire. go, tom brady. sorry. colorado's -- >> okay, now we're at this point of the evening where we're just about to give our candidates a holiday from this debate, but not before they tell us in 30 seconds they're closing statements. senator graham, you're first. >> somebody said or maybe i saw it on the bill of a cap that let's make america great, again. america is great. i intend to make america strong, again. i'm going to be the champion of the middle class where i came from. if you make me your president, our best days are ahead.
i'm ready to be commander in chief, ladies and gentlemen, on day one. i intend to win a war that we cannot afford to lose. i will be a commander in chief worthy of a sacrifice of those brave americans who have been defending our nation. they have had our back, god knows they have had our backs. i intend to have their back as commander in chief. make me commander in chief. >> thank you, senator graham. governor pataki. >> thank you for the opportunity to be with this great audience tonight. i'm a limited government conservative. and i mean not just when it comes to economic issues, leaving them to the state, but social issues, as well. and that i differ from every other candidate seeking the republican nomination. i take the 10th amendment very, very seriously. i'm a republican who embraces science and understands we have to work with the next generation of millennials to have the innovation and technology so that we can grow a 21st century
economy. and i'm a republican who understands in washington, when you're a leader, you have to put aside partisan politics to do what's right for the people. we are one america, we work together across party lines. there's no problem we can't solve, and the 21st century will be america's greatest century. thank you very much. >> thank you, governor. senator santorum? >> i grew up in a steel town of western pennsylvania. outside of pittsburgh, and when i announced for president, i announced from a factory floor. when i talk about making america the number one manufacturer, again, in the world, it's not just talk. when i talk about the opportunity for people to rise, again, it's not just because it polls well. i represented the ole steel valley of pittsburgh, 70% democratic district and won with 60% of the vote. why? because i aligned myself with working men and women who feel that neither party, and certainly not washington, d.c. cares about them. you are like me. we will get american workers on the side of the republican pa y party, and we could not be stopped if we do.
>> senator santorum, thank you. governor jindal? >> my message is to conservatives. this our hour, thanks to the insanity, incompetence of the democratic party, the american people are ready to turn our government over to us. it's not enough to like just any republican, however. the reality is, the idea of america is slipping away. as christians, we believe that the tomb is empty. as americans, we believe that our best days are always ahead of us. and they can be, again. we must win this election. we cannot allow hillary clinton to take us down this path towards socialism, further down this path. i've got the courage to apply our conservative principles. i can't do it along with your help, with god's grace. we can save the idea of america before it's too late. >> governor jindal, thank you very much. >> that concludes our first part of the evening. we're going to get set up for our next round. in the meantime, cnbc's kelly evans and joe kernan pick up our continuing coverage.
>> thank you, carl. wow, joe, that was fun. >> impressed. i'm impressed with how our people did, obviously, but also how the fabulous four did. the first debate was great, the second debate is going to be unbelievable. >> a ton at stake for the debate we listened to. one of those four candidates trying to break out of the bottom of the polls, maybe making it to the next stage, maybe hanging in altogether. did any of the four to you jump out as doing that convincingly? >> if i were to pick one, right up to the top tier, i'm going to let -- i know who they're going to say and he does have a great sense of humor, does he not? but joining us, again, sarah fagan and lindsey graham did well. >> he ate his wheaties this morning or something. he had more energy than i've ever seen out of him. >> will it make a difference? >> i think he had one good sound bite we'll see over and over again in the news, depends on
what happens in this 8:00 debate. but, it's still very hard for any of these four candidates to break into this -- >> are you talking about the hand in the fist? or a different? >> that was good. it was when he said, elect me commander in chief and i'll stop this crap. i think it was the first time he used the word -- >> bingo. lindsey graham, i think he won the debate, but lindsey graham has a national security talk is sending messages that they should all listen to. i love the commander in chief stuff. i love when he says we can't decimate the military budget. and i also love what he said, we have to have prosperity in order to finance the military budget. we need to think about this. i don't see the serious discussion yet regarding our deteriorating foreign policy. >> again, let's take a listen to one of the most engaged moments in the debate according to users on facebook and cnbc.com/vote.
not just our guest here. this was the moment from senator lindsey graham. >> the end of the day, folks, i am trying to solve a problem and win an election. i'm tired of losing. good god, look who we're running against, the number one candidate on the other side thought she was flat broke after her and her husband were in the white house for eight years. the number two guy went to the soviet union on his honeymoon and i don't think he ever came back. if we don't beat these people, who are we going to beat? >> that's not what you were referencing there. >> but it was funny. >> another compelling moment. >> and it's hard to have humor in these debates. and he was very humorous tonight on many occasions. >> what did he do there, notably? he was going after the democrats, larry, that's a strategy we've heard from the gop saying they don't want it to be about attacking each other or the front-runners, contrasting with the other party. >> okay. you're dead right. but let me add one point. besides national security and
commander in chief, lindsey graham is immigration reform. and i think he made a good case, the republican party has to be open to immigration reform, okay? i'm not saying he's -- he makes a point about social security. we're going to need to add to the workforce. in general, more workers if they have this skill, and he called it merit based. if they have the skills will help the american economy. i like the fact that lindsey was not afraid to say that. >> yeah. >> here's the challenge, though, with the four candidates, if you think about the first debate where carly fiorina had her first moment. she had it because she took it to hillary clinton and took it aggressively. and i didn't hear a lot of that by these candidates. they were differentiating each other with the parties. but no one came at her very, very aggressively. and i think they missed an opportunity. >> larry, did anybody float your boat in terms of growth policy? >> no. >> not enough. we tackle climate change quite a bit. >> a lot of cli