tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN October 26, 2016 7:40am-12:01pm EDT
>> the fact that ice set out that we are spending record level is absolutely right but we recognize there is more for us to do in mental health. >> thank you mr. speaker. there's not enough help for mental health workers and i welcome the commitment to more research on mental health. when i ask what steps she is taking to make sure the funding for mental health are received. >> i'm pleased to say that's what we see, far from some of
the questions. more people are accessing talking therapies and mental health services every day compared to 2010. my friends who have interest and expertise in this area is right that we need to do more and that is why we are continuing to invest in mental health services and continuing to increase the standards that we provide. >> just 20 children are diagnosed with inoperable brain tumors as a result of sclerosis each year. they turned it down for funding. will she meet with me to discuss how we can get through this blockage and get the treatment that these children need.
>> i'm very happy to look at the issue that the honorable gentlemen hasn't raised and look at what can be done to take that forward. >> order. >> here on c-span2 we will leave the british house of commons as members move on to other business. you been watching prime minister question time. a quick reminder that you can see this session again sunday
nights at nine eastern pacific on c-span. for more information go to cspan.org and click on series to view every program that we've aired from the british house of commons since 1989. we invite your comments via twitter using # pmq's. >> here's a debate between the candidates in maine second congressional district. they answer questions on topics like campaign finance reform, gun contrite, opioid abuse and the economy. maine public broadcasting network host the debate.
>> good evening and welcome to the second district congressional debate. this contest between bruce poliquin and emily kane has garnered national attention. we will hear from both candidates in the formal debate format. emily kane moved to maine from new jersey from her family when she was 17. she studied music education at the university of maine and holds a masters degree from harvard school of education. in 2004, at the age of 24, she was elected to the main house and became the chair person of the committee and minority leader in 2010. she later worked for a decade at u of maine. the man who won that contest, bruce was born in waterville and
built a career in investment management and later returned to live in midcoast maine where he has been in the real estate business. after losing a bid for governor in 2010 he served as state treasurer and won his first term in congress two years ago. thank you for being here. the coin toss says that emily cain is first. why are you the best candidate to served the second congressional district. >> thank you and i'm honored to have this opportunity to talked directly to the people of maine about the choice they have before them in november. i served as the appropriations chair balancing budgets during the recession. i left my party and worked across the aisle to help bring about the largest tax cut and lower energy caught costs and
bring jobs back. it's about putting us back in our charge of our company. many know my legislative background but they don't know about my dad is a shoe salesman and my mom's assignment which interpreter and interpreter and a teacher. i'm the oldest of three girls i learned about good jobs and hard work and getting through tough times watching my parents provide my parents worked hard to manage the ups and downs of the economy. sometimes being forced to move our family or change jobs under difficult situations. i'm proud that i learned from them the value of hard work, the value of staying at a time and again. that's what i did and that's what i want to do in congress. the problem is we have a congress that's not looking out for a spread we have a congressman's part of that problem. a congressman who's out for himself and the wall street funders who fund his campaign. this election is about who's going have your back and who can fight for you effectively. i'm ready to do that but my record to work in congress. thanks for having me. >> thanks emily.
bruce poliquin why are you the best candidate to serve. >> thank you for the opportunity to be here. first i think it's important to have someone like myself who grew up in maine. i'm from central maine and i was born and raised here and mom and dad were born and raised here and my grandparents are also from central maine. in order to share the values of the people you represent, it's important to make sure you understand the people and the community that you representing. the key issue before us in this election, in our district is jobs. we need more jobs. we need better paying that chops so our kids and grandkids can stay here rather than being forced to go out of state. my whole career has been to create jobs. i understand how the economy works and how to create jobs. this is something i've been doing since i became state treasurer.
emily says that i'm out for myself. first of all, i sleep in my office on a pullout bed. i come back just about every weekend to stay connected to the people i work for. i also refused cadillac health care plan that's provided to members of congress. i my own health care plan that i've been paying for for quite some time. i also refused the savings plan that's offered to congressman. i've had a career and i have a wonderful son who is 26 and doing well. mom and dad are doing great. this is what i've done to get back. i've given back my belief that job skills in congress, we have too many career politicians. in emily's bio, she grew up in new jersey and went to the university and she's been running for political office for a dozen years ever since. she has political skills but we need job skills and is the skills. we have too much bickering and
fighting down there and that comes with career politicians doing anything to get reelected or elected. i'm a business guy. >> the first issue question goes to you bruce. the opiate epidemic is worsening it's up 31% in one year. what can be done about this epidemic? what is the role of congress and what would you suggest they do about it westward. >> this is very personal to our family, jennifer. we dealt with this in our family for 35 years with my brother. he was a great guy with a big heart and one heck of a musician. wrapped up in the stuff is no longer with us. i understand this issue very well and we have been doing everything possible at the federal level to help the state of maine. this is all hands on deck. this is federal, state and local. first thing, we cannot give up on these young adults. in cases they are answered and
uncles and parents. the folks that are addicted to heroin, we can't give up on them. they are trapped in this poison. if someone has a problem with addiction, you have got to go and tell someone. don't be embarrassed or ashamed, go tell someone. next, we need to make sure we have folks who are recovering. once they recover we need to hold the individuals accountable for healthy behavior. some of the most wonderful experiences i've had over the past couple years is working with recovering addicts. it's very hard on them and their family but it can get better. >> you said there has to be more beds, who pays for those beds? >> we have voted for an expanded additional funding at the federal level to fund this so states have additional resources to deal with this. this has got to be done at the
local level. everyone has to be involved. federal government can be involved to make sure we secure our borders. 90% of this poison, heroin, is coming over the mexican border. we need to make sure we secure our border. the funding will come from the state and federal level and that's what we've done. >> what can congress do to help staff the opioid epidemic in maine? >> there are too many families in maine that have stories like you just heard. too many families that are being ripped apart by substance abuse and drug addiction. too many businesses that are being unsettled by workers who are dealing with addiction and need help. i believe we need treatment. we need education and we need enforcement. treatment because addiction is a disease in people need help on their sick. we need education to break the stigma so those who get through and get sober can get back to work and get back to living a full life, and we need
enforcement. we need to make sure our law-enforcement officials have the resources they need to crackdown on those who bring drugs to our state and those who sell drugs in our state. it has to be in all of the above situations. this is something that should be no partisan disagreement on. this is everybody's challenge and everybody's obligation to dig in and help. when it comes to funding, i know congress has passed a small amount of funding at the start but the full request is over $1 billion. i don't think congress can fund it all the way through. if we don't take action, if we don't get our law-enforcement, our treatment professionals in our community the support they need it will only get worse. i'm ready to partner with democrats, republicans and anyone who is ready to work on taking on this terrible crisis across our state. >> during this campaign season, each of you has been the beneficiary and the victim of a lot of advertising funded by super pac money.
given that, do you believe campaign funding system needs reform and if so, what needs to change? >> no, the real problem is all of the secret money in the big money in politics right now. it's terrible. we see, whether it's negative ads or money you can't see where it comes from, this is something that the congressman and i fundamentally disagree on. i believe in transparency. i. i believe that those were making contributions to super pacs or any of these organizations need to reveal their donors. i believe we need to overturn citizens united which has really taken the voice away from people. i am proud that in my campaign, more than 3500 people have stepped up and made personal contributions. my people powered and people funded campaign is what is making me able to reach out to so many across the state. i contrast, the congressman voted to say that those big super pacs can keep their donors secret. when the donors are secret, that that means for money could be
coming into our state and speaking louder than the voices of the people. that's wrong. i would never take a vote like that. it's time for us to put people back in charge of our political system and get this big money to get this dark secret money out away. >> do you believe the funding system needs reform and if so what needs to change. >> jennifer, this is apsley absolutely horrendous spread we have seen millions of dollars poured into our state with these super pac funds. there are five or six of them that are falsely criticizing me and attacking me of who i am and what my record has been. there is a super pac called and citizens united. they have come up to me to support my opponent, spend hundreds hundreds of thousands of dollars attacking me and there's dated purpose is to get money out of politics. they have been appear to attack me.
i'll give you an example. there's an out-of-state group that claims to be someone from maine saying i voted to cut billion dollars from the epa. i voted to increase funding to the va by $4.6 billion. there's a big difference from cutting a billion dollars or claiming to cut a billion dollars and voting to increase it to make sure veterans get the healthcare they need. that's the example. people are sick sick and tired of this jennifer, and they're turning it off. i'm for transparency. i believe in complete transparency. >> but you voted the other way. >> another thing that is really important, jennifer, jennifer, is this campaign has been going on forever. emily has been campaigning for this office for nearly two years i won the election in 2014 and
in three or four months she started campaigning again. that's the difference. i represent business skills, job creation, hiring people, that's what we need, not more career politicians who just follow nancy pelosi super pack lines. >> you can respond. >> yes, i think it's interesting when you hear him mention these out-of-state super pacs or politicians that he's just trying to distract from the fact that i have a strong record when it comes to doing the right thing for mean people. i have a strong record of focusing on transparency. two years years ago when the state of maine got a terrible grade for ethics and transparency, we passed legislation to improve transparency right here in maine government. the truth is, they voted for a budget that was $1 billion short of what the request is. that's true. it was a billion dollars short. it shortchanged our va by $1
billion. that's not okay. when you look at the record, the record is clear. my campaign is funded by individuals across the state of man care about our future i want to see the driver's seat put back in their hands when it comes to our economy. we have a congressman who was one of the top recipients of wall street campaign money in the entire congress. that means more than new york or california. that is shocking and raises the question who are congressman is looking out for and his voting record tells the story. time and again he voted to loosen regulations on wall street and give tax breaks to those at the top and moving the working class and middle class behind. >> that's a great set of talking points emily, but i hope everybody in the state of maine is listening to this because what you heard was someone who just said cut and then someone who said fell short of funding. that's the doubletalk we here in washington. if you increase funding to the
va by 4.6 billion dollars, that's an increase. it was a 5.6% increase. that might fall short of what someone's opinion of what the funding should be but that's congress' job to do that. i want to talk about how i can help maine families. what i have done to help our second district. let's get an example because emily brought this up. i don't believe in her idea to impose a huge new tax on carbon. here's why. when you tax carbon, you drive up the price of energy. you drive up the price of electricity. the reason we have been having so many problems is the high cost of electricity. when they make paper or shoes, they use in enormous amount of machinery. her plan to increase the carbon
tax would drive up the cost of electricity, kill manufacturing jobs and drive up the cost of heating oil. we have very cold winters here and that hurts our seniors. it would also increase the cost of gasoline and diesel. that will kill jobs and that's the experience emily cain has brought. >> emily i will let you respond to that. do you support a carbon tax? what other subsidies or plans would you have to change maine's energy feature. >> no one wants to increase the cost of energy. in my time working in legislature, i've worked hard to look across the aisle and work with republicans to expand access to natural gas. this is something i take personally. i was at the lincoln mill the day it opened the national gas line to try to keep that mill going. i was also there the night after
the boiler exploded and hundreds and hundreds of maine workers lost their job. energy workers need -- energy cost need to come down. we need to focus on the renewable resources that we have right here in the state of maine. it's one part of the puzzle when it comes to creating good jobs right here in maine. there's an opportunity in maine, because of our natural resources, and because of the fact we can put our self in charge of that energy future if we focus on expanding access to natural gas and making sure we are doing everything we can to keep the cost of energy down which includes hoping those with over older homes winterize their homes. i had lunch with some wonderful seniors who talked about the struggle they had affording their heat in the winter because their houses need to be winterize. this is how we get our energy and how we use it. even companies like exxon mobil are saying we need to change the way we think about energy. that's where we are as a country
and a state and i think maine is well-placed to be a leader and this can be part of how we grow good jobs. i also want to touch on taxes. i am happy to talk about taxes all day long because my record is clear. i was part of negotiating the largest tax cut in history. the congress men on the other hand was paying his taxes late 41 times including while he was state treasurer and a member of congress. he's also made headlines for years. he avoided paying thousands of dollars in taxes by abusing a tap tax loophole. this is not the kind of leadership we need when it comes to paying our taxes and my record of lowing taxes for bipartisan work is the kind of leadership we need now in congress. >> back to energy, do you support any type of subsidy for solar, biomass, wind? >> i do have all kinds of energy
in our portfolio mix and believe it needs to be lowered. let's go back to this. we just heard of a whopper. i will tell you flat out the truth, i have always paid all of my taxes in full, always. the reason emily cain wants to pivot on something very personal that i take very seriously is because her record on taxes is one of hurting our families. let me give you an example. she just said wanting to lower the price of electricity. by wanting a carbon tax, that drives up the cost. she also helped to push through a new sales tax on 102 items that have never been taxed before.
create more jobs. many millie cain has -- emily cain has zero experience running economy. zero experience. in state legislature she voted 71% of the time against maine businesses and workers. this was scored by nfib, national federation of independent businesses. they have endorsed me. they are a non-partisan group. >> i want to get to bottom of what all the ad campaigns have been. are you saying you did not put any land in tree growth tax abatement program, any waterfront land into that program? >> what i am saying yep per, i paid every single tax i have owned always in full. >> lower tax because you took advantage of that program? >> jennifer, i'm in the real estate business. i have properties in the different parts of the state. when i get a tax bill. i look at it. i scrutinize it. my business manager does it with me.
property is taxed different ways depending on the parcel it is. this happens to be a parcel along the coast. there are other parcells at that are not. i made every dollar i owed in taxes always. i'll tell you issue when it comes to taxes, jenner if. is not individual attacks that have been levied against me. i have been paying taxes longer than emily cain has been alive. it is taxes she raised on hard-working families, sales taxes. hated income tax cuts that weres pad. now a huge new carbon taxes. those are taxes that impact our lives here in maine. >> emily cain. >> jennifer, thank you so much. i'm happy to respond to that. when you hear bruce mening my age, you hear him discount my experience. i'm proud that i served people of maine in house and senate. lowering taxes working across the aisle to do it. i believe if you want to serve in congress you should be proud of public service.
that's why i'm so proud, pretty much a cheap shot to talk about my age, when really i come with more experience than anybody else in this race. i'm proud to talk about my record on small business. in fact two years ago i earned a national award for supporting small business because i worked across the aisle with then senate president kevin raye, to create a program that led to rural investment in our communities, including the bailey bill where they added 80 jobs. like the congressman led to ban export-import bank with 80 jobs that didn't come to bangor. when we talk about the 2011 we talk about the facts and timeline. the one proposed governor, questioned in the ads, it was full of tax cuts for rich. throwing mainers under the bus. i believe the best budgets are bipartisan. i stayed with the table at my caucus, many of my party hated
those tax cuts but i talked tald about that but i didn't. my definition after success was balanced budget that lowered taxes. i've been a every bipartisan effort to do that that is kind of work i bring to congress. we get results and lower income tax like we did in 2011. >> we'll move on to another issue. both of you criticized president obama's decision to use an executive order to designate a national monument in maine. now the woods national monument is reality. what do you think of the best path forward and future of the parks and communities near it? >> thank you. no question the monument wasn't enough after guarranty. why for me in congress i will be holding the national park service accountable. i will hold the department of interior accountable to make sure promises made are about hunting, fishing, snowmobiling and local access. those promises are kept and
funding supposed to come to the region will be there. i'm ready to work with local landowners to make sure that relationship is positive so we keep the woods working in the region and make sure as member of congress i believe it is my job to bring people together. to bring together local and state, federal officials as well as financial institutions, educational institutions and local businesses, i was just up in milinoket. i heard a great story of a local bed and breakfast that has been full since august. that is good sign but not enough. we need to build infrastructure out so we're ready so our economy in the area is not just about the mon you end but a year-round economy where we build things and make things and grow things to create good jobs. the kind of jobs that used to be there the at mill. a good job, jennifer where you work one job, earn enough money to pay your bills. you can own a house, have a car, save to help your kids go to
college for retirement and go on a vacation every once in a while. that is not too much to ask. that is my definition of the success for the region. it is bringing back those year-round good jobs. i'm ready to be a part of that. bruce poliquin, now that the monument is reality what is the best path forward for the region? >> we need local folks involved for access to the land and recreational uses and hunting, camping, fishing, kayaking, what have you but we also need to protect 4100 careers jobs supported by forest. i object to any president having sole authority to come to maine, stick a flag in the ground, this is now federal land, we own it. so i objected to that. he made that decision. he had the authority to do it. now we need to work with everybody to make sure we protect those jobs. also, i might say, we need to welcome recreational jobs. work with everybody. that is it why our congressional
office has been very involved to make sure national plan for national park service is working out. we protect the jobs and invite other jobs. i want to loop back thing if i can. emily mentioned her ability in the legislature to balance budgets. first of all you have a constitutional requirement to balance budget number one by law. second of all, she voted repeatedly to expand welfare. what happened is we end under up in huge 500 million-dollar debt to the hospitals because the state simply didn't pay the hospitals for welfare expansion that she voted for. that is a gimmick. since i've been down in washington i push ad balanced budget amendment to our constitution. i voted for a budget that balances over time, and does it without raising taxes unlike the president's budget, jacks up spending, jacks up debt and taxes. we need to make sure we grow an economy where our kids can stay
here and have opportunity. that means businesses need to be more competitive, not a huge new carbon tax. we need energy -- >> emily, i want you to respond. >> thank you very much, jennifer. in the 24 bipartisan balanced budgets i was apart of during my 10 years in the legislature we not only paid in full those hospital bills, something i personally worked on, stayed late nights and literally is the sunrise from room 228 in the statehouse to make sure we got it done. paying our bills is important. making sure those who need help can get it when they need it and make sure we do that without sacrificing education or sacrificing health care for seniors. by comparison in congress, the congress's version of successful budget, last year the congressman was excited to vote for a budget that cut social security, turned medicare into voucher program and cut pell grants which means that working families who need help sending their kids to college would have less. that is not my definition of success when it comes to
balanced budget. what is making sure that we hold people accountable on public programs. i've been there to make sure we hold our welfare recipient accountable and make sure that those programs are working well for us. so we can save money and put more people back to work. >> we do have to go to a break. >> i might respond to that. >> after 30 second break, we'll be right back. ♪ >> more information about the issues and candidates in this fall's election, go to mainpublic.org/news. you find candidate profiles, links to news stories and schedule for televised debate on main public. ♪ >> welcome back to the second
district congressional debate between republican bruce poliquin and democrat emily cain. before the break emily cain was talk abouting your recent votes on social security and medicare. you would like to respond. >> i certainly would. that is another falsehood and a big one from emily. i have always voted to secure and protect social security and medicare. and the guaranties for those benefits are always there. that is the way i have voted. i will continue to vote. my mom is 88. my dad is 86. they paid into these programs their entire lives. we have oldest average age in the country. we need to make sure we secure these programs. if we could have some truth in this discussion that would be helpful. in another example -- >> keep that brief because i really want to get to -- >> i would like to have opportunity to respond to a false accusation that emily made. she said i voighted to cut pell grants. that is completely false, jennifer? >> okay.
>> in the budget i voted to extend pell grants including maximum $5800 per year grant and also save them for kids most in need for the next 10 years. i was scholarship student. i scrubbed toilets to get through school. i paid off student loans. to is a i cut pell grants are completely false. these are things couping up in the campaign which are completely false. >> you opposed affordable care act, obamacare. what is your plan to provide health insurance for millions of americans who did not have it before the inception of the affordable care act? >> i was one of three republicans who the house that voted last year not, not, to replace the affordable care act, rather not to do away with the affordable care act because there wasn't replacement. i'm a business person trying to find solutions. now, what we need to do is we need to keep what works jennifer, and replace what doesn't. we now have replacement plan.
i took experience from maine and other states and i pushed for this and we got it through as a plan, a proposal in the house of representatives. let me give you an example. we need to keep preexisting conditions. my son is as mat i can. i think sammy ought to have the opportunity to buy a health insurance policy he can not only take from job to job but insures him for the preexisting condition but at the same time we need to make sure we do away with pieces that kill jobs, like the 50 worker threshold or 30-hour work week, both which convince small businesses not to hire more. what is really important, tied between medicare and the affordable care act is emily cain has supported the affordable care act, obamacare, since inception. in order to fund obamacare, there was $750 billion that was cut from medicare in order to fund obamacare. that is wrong. second of all, i do not believe
in emily's position that we should have a complete 100% government takeover of our health insurance industry. everybody, listening to night, you have seen the premiums go through the roof. your co-pays, your deductibles. i have a health insurance policy, jennifer, that i have been paying for years. my policy was canceled on september 15th, from anthem, my premium went up 45%. other families experienced same thing. when you have complete government takeover of our health insurance industry, which is what nancy pelosi and emily cain want, you will see premiums, co-pays deductibles go through the roof and you get less care, less coverage. >> emily you support the affordable care act but clearly it is imperfect. how would you fix it? >> the affordable care act needs to be fixed. i was wondering which position the congressman would take tonight because he took that vote he mentioned. just weeks later voted multiple times to repeal the affordable care act. and that's tough because that's
not what we need to do when it comes to the preexisting conditions and those people who actually have been helped under the law. no he question it is broken. that is why it is so frustrating congress time and time again focusing on repealing it. small businesses i want to want to do right by their employees. it is a maze and challenging. individuals following the rules trying to get insurance on the exchange see their premiums go up. so we have issue of prescription drugs. it brings us a little bit back to medicare because medicare, congress prohibits medicare from being able to lower cost of prescription drugs by negotiating prices down. that is part of fixes cost of health care too. i have done this before. i have taken on insurance companies. when i was in the senate i learned if you got cancer and need ad certain type of chemotherapy, and you had private insurance they wouldn't cover it. costing maine families, thousands and thousands of dollars every single month. that was wrong. it took two years. ultimately after bipartisan work, the legislature
overwhelmingly passed parody so those who need oral chemotherapy could pay just a co-pay. that helps families every single day. we need someone to take on insurance companies. i am so proud just two years ago the national committee to preserve social security and medicare came to me and endorsed susan collins. this year the national committee to preserve social security and medicare and looked at congressman's record and looked at mine and endorsed me. that is kind of champion maine seniors need and maine businesses and individuals need when it comes to lowering the cost of health care. >> emily cain endorsed party nominee's hillary clinton. do you endorse your party's nominee for donald trump? >> you know, this is something, jennifer, you foles in the press, not jennifer, not mpbn, but the media is so consumed with this frenzy, media circus around the presidential election. the people in the second district hired me to do a job, build a stronger economy and more jobs and business skills
down to washington. that is exactly not what i'm done. i'm not getting involved in media frenzy. i know it upsets people in media,. >> your constituents are not asking you? >> my constituents are saying following, bruce how you do help us build a stronger economy, more jobs. give you example. we had great victory jennifer, i don't think broadly, i think your audience not heard it. we convinced european not, rather to abandon the their plan or their idea that process about not allowing us to sell lobsters in europe. this is huge deal. we have 10,000 jobs on the water in maine. folks that drive or campaign their lobster boats and stern men. there are thousands of others that sell bait and rope and buoys and traps. we engaged delegation to work with susan collins, with angus king and shelley kingry, i worked together with everybody
in bipartisan way we asked university of maine to get involved and provided terrific research. pushed against the united states trade representative, white house, convinced european union to drop their plan not allow us to sell lobsters. >> the question is about donald trump. you're not going to state whether you're endorsing donald trump? >> here is why this is important, 25% of the lobsters that we sell, we sell to europe. this is a big deal. i'm trying to answer your question jennifer. this is what the people of maine hired me to do. use my business experience, not political experience, business experience to help save, protect and create more jobs. that is what i'm doing. i'm not getting involved in this media frenzy. >> you're not going so say whether or not your party's presidential candidate? >> i can not control who will be the next president. here is what i can control. working with everybody to have a strong voice in congress for more jobs, better economy. my opponent is career politician. she has no experience in that area. that is what i'm focusing on.
>> jennifer, you know what is interesting? what we have in common between, there is not always a lot in common when it comes to governor lepage, senator collins, senator king, congresswoman kingry, me, we don't always agree. we disagree a lot in fact. one thing we all agree on that question you're asking who you're supporting for president is not about confrontation and not about media circus. it is about telling the truth. it is about being clear and honest. it is not about whether we always agree. it is about whether or not we can be trusted to speak up to tell the truth where we stand on fundamental questions about the direction of our country. >> emily cain have you broken from the leadership from your party on significant issue, if so, what issue and why? >> absolutely several times, in fact. for me in the legislature it started with my work on that 2011 budget. where i stood as democratic leader of my caucus, looking my caucus in the eye, saying, it is time for us to step up.
it is time for us to make good on all the types we talked about lowering the income tax. it is time to make sure that we do it in a way that helps working families. that work i'm proud of. it was difficult k i took heat in the press. i took heat from members of my own party. in the past when i ran in democratic primary, that exact vote was thrown in my face, telling me i talked like a republican. i'm always willing to take the slings and arrows when it comes to doing right thing for working families. that vote, that leadership, that i was able to show, that steady, principled leadership about doing the right thing was a very difficult time. it was a pretty terrible budget when it started. but in the end, that final vote was 147-3 in the house. because that is the kind of measure of success we need. it took standing up to my own party to get there. >> bruce poliquin, have you broken with the leadership of your party on what issue? if so, what issue and why? >> i do this all the time. i have a independent streak.
i don't work for the republican party. i don't work for the democratic party. i don't work for lobbyists or wall street as emily likes to say. i work for 650,000 people i represent in the second district. shortly after i got down to washington, i realized pentagon, largest bureaucracy, jennifer was not issuing 100% american-made athletic shoes to our men and women in uniform when they start basic training this is flat-out wrong. you need to u.s. taxpayers dollars to buy u.s. manufactured goods. that happens to be a long-standing law going back 70 years. so i worked with niki tsongas. she is democrat member of congress from massachusetts. we worked together. we ushered a new bill through the house of representatives, never been done before, saying the pentagon must issue 100% american-made athletic shoes to our men and women in uniform going to basic training. here is why it is so important.
those athletic shoes are made in maine. 900 of best shoemakers in the world work for knew balance. we have three factories. niki tsongas in her district has two. >> you faced opposition from -- >> oh, my goodness, are you kidding me? nike, largest i believe athletic shoe maker in the world pushed against me. leadership pushed against me. once we got it through armed services committee, 65-0, i lobbied everybody, republicans democrats to get that through with niki tsongas. i had to beat back or fight back, floor vote from member of my own party mark sanford. we won 255-155 on floor. the leadership in my party didn't want this done. we did it. we did what was right and we secured 900 issue-making jobs at new balance. one more thing i might add. the senate took this language and senator king and senator collins helped usher that through the senate. now we have passed the house,
first time ever, first time ever, passed senate, hopefully stay in the defense funding bill. president will sign it. we have more security and more jobs. that is exactly what the people of maine hired me to do. >> maine nices five citizen initiatives. i like to find out your stance. i am hoping not take up rest of the hour with answers. quickly with question one. bruce poliquin, question one would legalize regulate marijuana for recreational use. how do you intend to vote on that? >> i think i told you that. we had experience in our family substance abuse long period of time. this is personal to me, jennifer. i seen reverend up did the way it worded might be a problem for kids getting ahold of pot if this goes through. but i'll tell you, i'm joining forces with senator susan collins who, i'm not going to tell the people how to vote. we need to make sure we balance rights, constitutional rights to consume products that we want but at same time it is public health issue.
people of maine will decide this on november 5th. i agree with susan collins. won't tell people of maine how to vote? >> say that every question? >> let's go right down them. >> emily cain, how will you vote? >> you find me clear and consistent, straightforward on referendum questions. i'm voting know on question 1. my focus breaking addiction problem around the state of maine. bringing resources for education and enforcement. >> question 2 imposes 3% tax on incomes above $200,000 to fortify student funding on question 2? >> voting question on question 2, i believe we need more funding for teachers an students. time for the top to pay fair share? >> bruce poliquin, how are you votes on question 2. >> 3% surcharge, top rate of state of maine to 10.15%. second highest in the country along with california and new york. we have a state right beside us, new hampshires, that has zero
percent personal income tax rates if that happens in maine, we have to think about long and hard. people of main will make decision. >> you will not say oppose it or support it. >> i will not tell the people of maine how to vote. >> what about question 3, background checks on private sales of handguns. >> second amendment has been very clear on day one. i'm endorsed by sportsman alliance of state of maine and campers and hunters and kayak and so on. we need to make sure we understand this is one of our constitutional rights. at same time we need to do everything humanly possible to keep firearms out of hands of terrorists, criminals and those mentally ill. again the people of maine will decide this on nope 8th. my position is very clear. >> very clear you're opposed to it? >> i will not tell the people of maine how to vote. they didn't hire me to tell them how to vote. >> emily cain, question three would impose background checks on private sales of firearms.
how would you vote? >> second amendment is fundamental who we bear arms as country and state. this is something i have a lot of experience working with gun owners in augusta. whether has been with the nra, local gun owners, protecting privacy rights when it comes to concealed carry permits. we protect gun owners rights to keep and story guns sailly where they want to. i worked with the sports alliance of maine and many maine hunters to expand access to hunting which is key part of who we are as state. i am voting yes on question 3 i believe we need to make sure to do everything we can to keep guns out of hands of dangerous criminals and serious illness and domestic abusers. >> question 5 changes maine elections for ranked choice system, office of u.s. congress, governor, state, state senate and. do you support ranged choice, emily? >> i vote yes on question 5. i don't think it is perfect solution to politics.
there are a lot of other things we need to do. ultimately question 5 gives more voice to people at ballot box. >> i realized i skipped question 4. i come back to that. bruce poliquin, ranked choice voting system. how would you vote on that? >> constitutional right an responsibility to vote. this is very complicated issue the way the process would take place. i encourage everybody to look at this very carefully but i'm not telling people of maine, ask the people of maine go vote. it is your responsibility to vote but not tell you what type of voting process will be passed at ballot box. they can decide that. that is their job. >> question 4 raise state minimum wage $12 an hour by 2020? >> i'm focusing on career, high-paying jobs. jobs in the manufacturing sector. jobs on waterfront. jobs in wood products area. that is what i'm focusing on. i'm not consumed with this issue about not, about forcing a
specific wage on businesses. you know, we need to make sure that we don't raise the labor cost in maine so it kills jobs. we need to make sure we protect entry-level jobs, minimum wage jobs and everybody wants a fatter paycheck, a bigger paycheck. but we've got to do this by growing career jobs. that is what i'm focused on. that is why i believe we can not stand a huge new carbon tax that will drive up the cost of electricity and kill manufacturing jobs. >> i asked you about minimum wage. >> i will not tell people of maine. i will never tell people how to voight. that is their responsibility right to vote. >> emily cain, question 4 raises maine's minimum wage to $12 an hour by 2020. >> i'm voting yes on question 4. important we put something in place predictable and sustainable for small businesses where we grow the good jobs across our state. i hope it is clear to those
watching at home, i hope it is clear to those listening at home what the difference in last five questions. i've been straight with you. i've been up front with you and direct with you where i stand. i think it is important to be truthful. it is important to be honest. it is important to be direct. . . >> there are no working towns on the river. the people who worked in the link in the and the old town the army friends. my friend roger worked there for decades. he had to make a tough decision after lost his job to either
stay here and try to cobble together a take a job out of state. it was a terrible decision. he wants to come back and work at home. it makes you think of a guy i met whose a sheetmetal worker who goes to work every week on mondamonday morning but has a wn main and four years he works out of state what he can fix things. my dad used to leave every week for work. used to leave compact is banks and leave monday morning. i was in for people like m my dd who work harder than ever to tragedy right by the families and bring those good jobs back. my focus will be to grow our economy i investing in ourselves and our natural resources. the biggest what of those as a hard-working people, people i meet who are working harder than eveever and just wanted against. i will be focusing on farming and agriculture, fishing, on manufacturing so we can make things in maine but they will want all over the world. we do that by connecting the dots.
focusing on transportation, focusing on internet access and cell phone service. we're trying to run small business if you can't connect auricular cell phone service dropped you in trouble. my definition of success is an economy built on small businesses owned by us. we can be in charge of our destiny when it comes to our economy. i have a record of doing that by lowering taxes, supporting economic development are working across the aisle to the tough decisions. i'm ready to work for you, not for wall street. ready to go to congress to work for growing our economy now growing more jobs someplace else. i'm going to stand up to bad trade deals that send our jobs overseas. >> bruce, hundreds of jobs lost to the closure of meals. what is your plan to help a towns and communities devastated by these job losses? >> i things we have to do to make sure we bring these high-paying career jobs back to
main. first of all we need business skills, not career politicians who have no experience quitting jobs. second of all we need to make sure we lower the cost of energy. this now carbon tax emily is supporting is not so it's a long way to go. it will drive up the cost of electricity and kill more of our manufacturing jobs. we need low energy calls. we need to make sure regulations are for unpredictable. 850 jobs, help to make sure the biomass regulations went up so punitive that it would cost them so much money that it would jeopardize the future investment. we need to make sure taxes are lower. if you talk to all the folks that run these mills, high cost of energy, taxes, regulations and also by the way unfair trade. that's what i've always stood up to make sure trade is fair.
when i was a kid growing up, my grandmother worked at halfway sure company. my best buddy across the street whose dad was a machinist at scott paper company. i worked the night shift. my brother worked at the cascade mill. we've seen all of these mills go under. the reason is because of this drip, drip, drip. high energy cost, high taxes, punitive regulations and trade deals that are not there. i have the knowledge to deal with those and emily cain does not. >> i'm going to take a page from the presidential debate and ask you to finish up your bruce poliquin, can you please tell me what you would admire of the emily cain? >> emily has made a decision to pursue a career in politics. she came from new jersey to go to the university, and after graduation she's been campaigning for public office ever since. that's not my career. micah burgess been job creation, hiring people and growing the
economy but that's her career and she's made that decision and i salute her for having a passion. it's not what we need in maine are in washington but i salute her for having a passion. >> thank you so much. i admire bruce because he's a good dad. no question about that. i haven't had the chance to meet sammy i know bruce is a good father let's be clear when bruce talks about my background, fact and move around when i was a kid, he's attacking my family and that's something i would never do to the congressman. i would never question his family or his background. and he takes cheap shots at the that when i was a kid my parents had to move now to find good jobs, it's not fair and it's not right. working families now that's disrespectful to the kind of work they do and the tough choice of ethnic every single day. bruce is a good debt. my dad was a good dad but in order for him to make ends meet for us we had to move so times when i was a kid. i'm proud of that. that's how i understood the tough choices many families make
everyday. >> this debate has been heartening public comprehensive coverage, your vote 2016, everything is online admin public.org. all the stories, all the episodes, all of the debates. you can find it all there. emily cain, bruce poliquin, thank you for being here and thank you for watching. this program will be repeated on maine public television and radio several times. for times and schedules go to maine public/your vote. good night. ♪ ♪ ♪
former president as first gentleman? learn more about the influence of america's presidential spouses from c-span's first ladies now available in paperback. it gives readers a look into the personal lives and impact of every first lady in american history. first ladies as they continue to c-span's well-regarded biography series and features interviews with the nation's leading first lady historians to each chapter offers brief biographies of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. first ladies in paperback published by public affairs is now available at your favorite bookseller and also as an e-book. >> now the debate between the candidates for indiana governor. attend governor republican eric holcomb faces democrat john gregg and libertarian rex bell. this is hosted by the indian debate commission. >> good evening and welcome to the indiana debate commissions
third and final gubernatorial debate. this debate is being televised from the performance center at the university of southern indiana in evansville. three candidates tonight want to succeed governor mike pence, a republican who is donald trump's vice presidential running mate. i'm mizell stewart at the "usa today" network and it is my pleasure to be your moderator this evening. it's also great to be back in evansville i served as editor of the evansville courier press from 2007-2012. our first debate focus on education. the second was on jobs and the economy. we are now turning our attention to health and social issues. for the next hour the candidates will debate issues mostly focus on those topics. many of the questions are drawn from those submitted by you, members of the voting public throughout indiana. some of the ask in person here by members of our audience.
none of the questions have been shared in advance with any of the candidates. here are our candidates. eric holcomb is the republican candidate and his indiana's lieutenant governor. john gregg is the democratic candidate and is a former indiana house speaker. rex bell is the libertarian candidate and owns a small business. the candidates positions on the stage and the order in which they will answer the questions were determined by lot conducted by the debate commission. after i ask the question each candidate will have one minute to respond. each candidate also will have a 30-second rebuttal opportunity depending on the need. before the final question each candidate will be given an opportunity to address the topic of his choice. this allows candidates to discuss a topic they believe is
important but hasn't been touched on in the questions or they can choose to elaborate on a topic discussed previously. at this time each candidate will make a one minute opening statement. we will begin with mr. holcomb. >> thank you, mizell, and thank you to -- it's good to be back on the campus briefing to the indiana debate commission for hosting author of the debates and thanks even to the cubs fans are tuning in before the first pitch. i'd like to set the outset indiana has never been any more prosperous position to our unemployment rate is 4.5%, lower than the national average. we have more people working than ever before in our 200 euros to of the state, healthy savings account and a aaa credit rating. we have become a leader nationally and internationally come in logistics and biosciences and manufacturing. to take us to the next level i believe we will have to focus on
our people, our people, our people. if we equip our youngest people in the pre-k age of high school, graduation level, when you have a ticket to their success going into a college or career we will, in fact, take indiana to the next level. >> now we'll hear from mr. gre mr. gregg. >> i want to thank both my opponent for the civility of which we conducted these debates. it's not at all been like the mood within going on out of the national level, and i would shortly be remiss if i didn't congratulate them for the conduct. i want to serve his indiana's 51st governor. i believe indiana can do better. i know all hoosiers deserve better. as governor i will focus like a laser on the economy, on highway growth jobs. i will focus on attracting businesses, not scaring them away. in education as governor we will stop teaching to the test. we will see teachers as part of the solution, not the problem,
and working with glenda we will have prekindergarten for all students. i feel as a former president of the university and speaker of the house and businessman i'm ready to govern and i'm ready to learn. check out our positions at a great for governor.com speaker next we'll hear from mr. bell. >> i'd like to thank the in the dash to india david commission for including us and thank usi for hosting this debate. i've got a connection your. my two oldest children graduated from usi more years ago than i like to think. my plan for indiana is to get government out of your way. there's things we think individuals can do better than what government can do. certainly would like to attract more jobs and better paying jobs to indiana. we feel we can do that by eliminating the property tax oath for businesses and individuals.
this is what government does to attract jobs already to just a few select businesses. we think we should do it for all businesses so we would have more businesses and jobs locating your then we can keep up with. we would like to see all of our revenues taxes spent on the road. would like to return control of the schools to the parents and teachers in the local boards, get it away from washington and the state, that their people who care most about their children do it. >> thank you. now on to our questions. our first question will be asked by daniel nourse and web developer at the university of southern indiana. >> government which is for the expansion of needle exchange programs, and how would you assist the increasing number of hoosiers who are dependent on illegal and prescription drugs? >> first response from mr. holcomb. >> yes, this is an issue that is strangling not just our families
and communities across the whole state. in fact, across the whole nation. we need to continue to explore every way that we can do not just solve the problem for one community, but to really tell the whole drug epidemic itself. we are going to focus on making sure we are preventing, that we are enforcing and that we are treating most importantly the families and individuals that are caught up in this scourge. yes, to the new exchange program. we need to make sure that's more efficient. if we had to change the law we will and that will require legislative action. it will require action to make it so that locals can more quickly identified and act on the problem and not wait on the state to make sure that they get the resources that they need. this is an all hands on deck effort, and it is a top priority in my administration. >> now to mr. gregg. >> again, if you check out, we
have a seven-point public safety plan in the first it mentioned is about drugs and it's about that crisis. indiana's first in methamphetamine and fifth in heroin and 15th in overdose deaths. i've been traveling the state listing hoosiers talking about this and yes a sport the needle exchange. the truth of the matter is we've got to change the way we look at drugs for the dealer and the trafficker. they need locked up. to violate criminal they need locked up. but too many hoosiers we need to realize this is a medical issue when he to treat it as such in we need to realize that rehabilitation works for every dollar we put in, we save $4 in public health dollars and $7 in the criminal justice system. we can do better. we cannot afford just to continue to build prisons. rehabilitation works and check out our full program.
>> thank you mr. gray. now mr. bell. >> if we look at what we've accomplished in the last 50 years of the drug war we have to say nothing. the addiction rate is the same as it was 50 years ago. so what are we doing and how are we going to continue the same thing? i say we need to make a change. we need to stop treating drug addiction as a crime. we need to treat it as an illness. we need you decriminalize a lot so when people who need help they can step forward without fear of being arrested. thin-heeled exchange program, a lot of political input of that, a lot of play from both sides but when you stop and look at it, it's not something that can be done privately. needles cost 7 cents. we seeing the instances in west virginia in different states around where private individuals and private organizations have
set up new exchange. at the local pharmacy but it's something we can do. there's a lot we can do that doesn't involve government for force. >> our next question will come from the audience and will be asked by amy kelly of seymour, the regional director for the mentor network which provides residential community-based services for workers with disabilities. >> the unemployment rate for people with disabilities is 80%, although many people with disabilities can and want to work. what we do to great employment opportunities for people with disabilities to access to job training and careers that will increase the independence? >> we will start with mr. gregg. >> the first thing when you do in indiana is to take a loo loot how we're doing our training right now. as i've traveled the state-employers tell me that they never talk about taxes but to talk about needing employees. right now we are doing training
for the governor's office, some to the workforce development office, something what's called the boards which are federal. some through tech, there's not a lot of communication. i think we can do a much better job if we of all these groups talking to one another so we find out what is working, what's not working, and what we are training people for. another thing we mention that we think is right important is the states bidding process has been changed over the last few years would be really work to a detriment of small business owners, particularly people with the development of disabilities and minorities an and veterans. the bids are much too big and too large for startup companies to bid on. so we talk of making them much more easier for those folks to access. >> mr. bell, it is your turn. >> when you talk about unemployment, and we look at it when everybody is involved, and
the people, people without disabilities have a leg up on be able to get that job. what we need to consider is are there enough jobs out there, what can we do to create more jobs? if we did away with a property tax, attracted more businesses to the state, it would be more jobs. we would have businesses competing for workers instead of workers competing for the jobs it i think that's something that we need to consider. best thing we can do to help everybody, whether you're disabled or not, is make a situation where there are more jobs available and i think we can do that, as i say with doing away with the property tax, going to solve a lot of problems that we are looking at indiana in trying to figure out another way to fix it. i think we already have the answer if we just take it. >> onto mr. holcomb. >> i agree with both on the two
issues. one, people are not talking about taxes because we have them at a very reasonable level in indiana. i take that as a consummate. number two, mr. bell is correct in the sense that what we have to do is make sure that we are building an economy in the jobs market maggot that lifts all boats. specifically when it comes to those who are disabled, we need to come our work will never be done on this front. we need to make sure focus on what they're able to do and transfer me our department of workforce development can go a long way on this front. we need to make sure our local providers like the teaching hotel that are providing skills to those are disabled create ways to get folks into the job force. with the department of workforce development and with local partnerships this will go a long way. >> thank you. let me remind you that tonight's debate focuses on health and
social issues facing hoosiers. our next question was submitted by mitchell smith, graduate student in indianapolis. indy and is ranked 48th in public health funding at just $39 per person. indiana is ranked 41st in overall health and also ranked high in the percentage of people who are obese and diabetic. indian is also ranked 47th in air quality. given all of this what do you plan to do about investing in the health of hoosiers? let me remind the folks watching via television and live stream that this is a question that has particular resonance here in southwestern indiana between local health indicators in the presence of coal-fired power plants. so on this question we will turn first to mr. bell. >> there's a lot of parts to
that question. certainly, you know, we expect the government to protect us from fraud. if someone is polluting the air we need to step up and put them into that. as far as the obesity problem, that's something where to look at and say is that the proper role of government or is this something that we can handle as a society? isa as a society we have a better shot at henley that type of thing. a lot that is what we need to do is consider how we can steer society towards these areas. certainly whenever we have a company, corporation coming in with jobs and they wanted to keep a healthy workforce that they are investing in that type of a situation, and that's what we need to work for. other than government protecting us from somebody forcing something on us, we need to step back from the.
>> now to mr. holcomb. >> yes, there are many, many parts to that question. some concern behavior and choices that we make. if we're talking about obesity, we need to make sure there are no food deserts and that's a local issue we need to really get at the folks, they are not restricted to healthy food options. we need to make sure that our communities are connected. we made huge progress in 2005 building on our trail systems all over the state. this was a big part of original cities initiative to make sure our communities were vibrant, communities that encouraged staying in shape, keeping in shape. if you are smoking we know there is in adverse connection between smoking and obesity. i would encourage folks to take advantage of the 1-800-quit-now. there are all kinds of resources available at our family of social service agency and i
would encourage people to call if you're under the grips of smoking, 1-800-quit-now. >> finally mr. gregg. >> indiana does rank so bad, so badly -- speak proper at a university. indiana ranks about it when it comes to public health that you can directly relate that to the priority we put on it by being one of the five lowest states. we see that in the obesity. we said in the diabetes and all the other issues. i briefly met with people from riley children's hospital and talk about the problem having indiana that in some cases just basic education would go a long way in helping with the infant mortality rate. sometimes it's education, sometimes it's telling others not to sleep with her children and sometimes it's educating them not to smoke. we see problems in indiana caused by public health by the lack of priority we put in this area, like our caseworkers
supposed to just be giving with one with just 12 cases but in reality they're dealing with up in the '20s and higher. and adult protective service person you with over two to 300. this is no way to take care of our population. >> we received many questions on keith cooper, a man who was released from prison after witnesses recanted and dna evidence cleared him. governor pence has refused to pardon mr. cooper and has instructed him to go back to the courts. how do you believe that the power of the pardon should be used, and would you use it in mr. cooper's case? we will start with mr. holcomb. >> reviewing what i have on this case, which as how i'm not governor yet, i want to make sure that i actually can talk to mr. cooper and review the facts of the case. i understand what governor pence is coming from. this would be an unprecedented
pardon. having said that, attacks as i do now in wanting to accumulate more, i would look forward to quickly accelerating, particularly pardoning, swiftly, if the facts bear that out. >> be based on what i read i would pardon. i would pardon him immediately. i have traveled the state and this has been a huge a news item and a concern. i think any government would realize that this is something you need to do on a case-by-case basis and know the facts much like my friend mr. holcomb said. but there comes a time when you can make a decision and the facts in this are pretty clear. i take this charge real serious assembly seeking office of governor tom and i think these discussions with members of the indiana state police alliance, the organization of our state troopers that have endorsed become and a very proud of that endorsement, as also the members of the fraternal order of
police. i take tried in law and order series but when the system is made a mistake we need to correct it immediately and move on. >> yes. you know, i think he should be pardon immediately. i have followed this case india to take a look at it and say whenever something like this comes up, but definitely the burden of proof should be on the state always. and if there is any question at all, and certainly in a case like this where there is no question the man was innocent, he needs to be pardon. i can't understand, it's one of those situations where we are saying we need to protect the government instead of protecting the individuals and we shouldn't be doing that. the individuals should always be first and if we start worrying about we are worried about the protocol, this happened before, what kind of precedent it would said, if we set a precedent for releasing innocent people from prison i would say that would be
a good one to set. >> thank you mr. bell. we are now going to turn back to the audience. brett, and evansville attorney will ask the next question. >> what role it will your faith play in your decision you make is governor quits where to draw the line between your own religious beliefs and what is best for the interest of all hoosiers? >> mr. gregg will respond first. >> i am a person of faith, and like many people in our nation i happen to belong to the christian faith. but i also realize there are people of other faiths and some people of no faith, and i respect of that. i think that is the same way you will find that i will govern the i will respect all peoples. i think that is what we are called to do. i'm going to take an oath to respect people and uphold our constitution and to treat people equally. whereas my faith is something that is very important to me
your i'm not running to force my ideology or my faith in someone else. rather than stand on the street corner, i will use a biblical analogy, rather than stand on the street corner and offer public purse i would rather people know that i'm a person of faith by my actions. >> very good. next, mr. bell. >> certainly my faith is important to me but if you do any reading at all of the libertarian party as a we are all about. we look at the individual. every individual has rights. if you get bored individuals together, it don't have more rights than a single individual. so for me to decide since the bulk of the nation is a christian nation that we should follow christian teachings, that's not for me to say. that's not for me decide for you. so certainly we would separate
our faith from our governing ideals. and i hope everybody would do that. >> mr. bell, thank you very much. mr. holcomb, bring it home. >> as governor i will respect all faiths and those of no faith at all. i consider myself a matthew six christian, and someone who tries to live out my faith. i think there are many lessons in the good book that instruct me privately, and i will continue to take that approach as governor. but one that would actually try to limit -- try to live it and not professor. i understand the power of witness but i think you can do that in watching a summit actually lived their life. >> thank you mr. holcomb. speaking of expressions of faith and values one voter asked about indiana's ban on the sale of alcohol on sunday. would your administration
support modifying or eliminating the ban, why or why not? we will start with mr. bell. >> well, i've always maintained that anything that is legal on saturday should be legal on sunday. [laughter] regardless, regardless of how i feel about it, and i'm not a drinker, i'm not going to buy it on saturday and i'm not going to bite on sunday but if somebody wants to, this is left over from the blue laws of years ago. you couldn't sell cars on sunday. you can't sell, you can so maybe cold beer in one situation and in another situation you can't. you get into situations where a person, a star can legally be selling warm beer, and if the power goes off and he goes out and the bear gets two gold from all of a sudden he is breaking the law. i think that's something we need to look at and do away with the
blue laws, and certainly allow sunday sales. >> thank you mr. bell. mr. holcomb. >> well, i don't favor it. i think alcohol is still a legally controlled substance in the state of indiana. we need to make sure we're able to do that, and making sure that our excise police have the resources to cover the territory they need to. i think it doesn't put an undue burden on folks who need to have a drink on a sunday. i think they can plan accordingly six days prior. >> all right. and no mr. gregg. >> well, i plan for this, i plan on a lot of questions but that was the one i thought we would be asked about. [laughter] people would decide that a vote for governor. i would want to see the piece of legislation. and let me tell you why. it is a controlled substance, and just the idea that anybody
can sell it without having the proximity is an all, there's some concerns on that. i think if the legislature sent me a bill to allow sunday sales i would very likely sign it. having given it a lot of thought, i would want to see how that debate played out and i would want to listen to retailers and consumers. contrary to what my mother is going to say, and she's here tonight, she's not going to like my answer i would very likely sign it. >> thank you, mr. gregg. we will continue on the theme of controlled substances with the question from jason, retired air force nurse in the indianapolis area. jason wanted to know, why is it that we are not allowed cannabis to be, a medical treatment for children with untreatable diseases? we allow medicines such as ketamine, a derivative of pcp to be used in pediatric -- pediatric surgery.
methamphetamine to be used to treat adhd, and oxycodone for paying. but we won't allow patients to even try cannabis. the question is why. we'll start with mr. holcomb. >> because having a discussion about legalizing drugs at this time seems to be off key. when you read about the story after story after story about a drug bust that are going to that marijuana and heroin, this is of great concern but i understand the distinction between medical marijuana and legalizing it wholesale. i would want to talk a lot more with the medical professionals who say there are no other alternatives for these children, nature the children are receiving the treatment they need, and it's only medical marijuana could suffice, then i would be, i would entertain it as an option. but right now in the world we're living in expand or legalizing drugs of this nature isn't on my
list. >> very good. now to mr. gregg. >> this is a very serious matter and i would support as it did back in 2012, i would support medical marijuana. this is something it would be a benefit to a patient they should be allowed to use it. since the last election i lost my father to cancer of the esophagus, and it was a very painful death and not a fun one to observe in the last year of dad's life. the doctors never said anything about cannabis for medical marijuana, but had they hadcome we should have the right to let my dad used that to alleviate pain and suffering as i believe we should do. and i would support medical marijuana as they did the last time. >> thank you. now to mr. bell. >> yes, i would support medical marijuana, and i think we are going to see after this election
is going to be more states that are supporting it already, allowing it. it's a matter if indian is going to do it, i don't know exactly when but eventually we're going to allow it. is something we just stepped out of an of and get it done. there's so much that we can do, not only helping people that need it through sickness, it's been proven to be a help in alleviating some of the opiate addiction that is going on record that we having so much trouble with. so there's more than one reason to legalize it. as i say, along without, even with the industrial hemp that we need to bring back in. it's a plant that has been made illegal years and years ago and we need to legalize spewing mr. holcomb, which is like a 30-second rebuttal opportunity?
>> i remain where i originally stood. i have not flip-flopped. >> all right. thank you very much. our next question was suggested by a resident of indianapolis. recently a federal judge put on hold -- the most restrictive antiabortion bill to come out of the state legislature. what is your position on abortion and birth control? we will start with mr. gregg. >> i have always been a consider myself a pro-life democrat. with that said i cannot believe it's my business to interject myself in issues between a woman and her physician. i don't believe legislators should be practicing medicine. i have always supported the funding of planned parenthood even though personally being opposed to abortion, because the truth of the matter is, all of
the money that they get from taxpayers ghost to provide birth control and health screenings, and is cutting down of stds and mammograms. i mean, that's what the money is for. if we are talking about birth, the problem is the unwanted children. we need to make that more accessible. i would veto that bill. there were many, many members of the legislature to attend pro-life candidates for years, got up and spoke against it in a bipartisan fashion. that bill goes above and beyond, it stopped indiana university from $140 million worth of research on alzheimer's and cancer and things like that but it's just wrong. >> very good. now mr. bell. >> serving the bill was too restrictive i am opposed. i also understand that it is a problem that will never be solved politically.
i think being in a situation like this bell -- bill, between a woman and her doctor that was wrong. i think one of the best things we can do about abortion is make sure that we keep the federal government out of it. allow the states to make these decisions. i don't believe all states will decide the center i believe if a person is one of% pro-life are 100% pro-choice, they will never be satisfied by decision handed down by the government. but we do need to take back to the states and individuals and keep the federal government out of it speaker we will conclude with mr. holcomb. >> well, i am pro-life. i understand this debate has been going on for decades and there are good people on both sides. however, having said that out of which i personally have the right to take another innocent life. while my agenda will focus on
economic development, community development, striving for excellence and to education and to live in good government and taxpayer valued if legislation does come down the pike and make its way to my desk i will be working with those legislators long before it arrives so that totally we can avoid any misimpressions that may have occurred along the way. >> thank you very much. now we come to the segment of our debate in which candidates can speak on a topic of their choice. mr. holcomb will go first, and then talk for up to one minute. mr. bell will follow on that same topic for a maximum of two minutes. mr. gregg will also speak on the topic for up to two minutes. then we will conclude the first round with mr. holcomb who can close out the topic with up to one minute of rebuttal. the other two candidates will then have the same opportunity to speak on the topic of their
choice following the normal rotation and format. so we will start with mr. holcomb. >> my topic and calls public service. i have long appreciated serving a cause greater than myself that may have started when i signed up to join the united states navy that took me to service at home and abroad i later then went to work for other strong leaders, including former governor mitch daniels, including united states senator dan coats, and our governor mike pence. when he called i wasn't seeking this job, when he did call i jumped in a nanosecond, put aside what i was working on at the time to help a cause greater than myself. because of public service were able to do so much when we're focused and working with these leaders throughout my entire life. i've learned a few things but i've learned to focus and have learned to prioritize what needs to get done. that's what i am so laser
focused on my four-point plan to make sure that we get indiana to the next level. >> mr. bell, you have two minutes. >> certainly i think a lot of what we need to do is public service. is to guide government in a position where it's helpful to everybody, not a matter of transferring wealth from one citizen to another and not transferring wealth from citizens to selected companies and not making our moral decisions for us, not making our educational choices for us. i think one of the best things we can do as a public servant is to leave government out of people's way and that's what i will try to do. i understand the people of being involved in politics their whole life. you get into a situation where it's the same group of people making the same rules, and basically i believe we shouldn't
be making rules. we should be removing rules. there's not a lot that protects people from force and fraud big it should be on the books. >> mr. gregg, two minutes. >> thank you. i believe in public service. i'm very proud to have been a candidate for governor in 2012 and this time, and i'm proud of the service that many years ago when they serve in the indiana general assembly. but i'm equally proud of having been a small businessman and made their role and been president of the university. but i learned that when i was a number of the indiana house of representatives, that not one party has the best ideas. the best ideas should be called democrat or republican. they should be called good or bad. i served as speaker of the house, residing officer for six years. during two of those six years we were tied with 50 democrats and
50 republicans. almost all politicians here say i can work with the other side of the aisle. trust me, when you were tied 50/50 of work with the other side of the aisle. the whole time that i was speaker, the senate was controlled by the republican party, so every piece of legislation, cutting the inventory tax, cutting excise tax, funding schools and infrastructure. those alleged on the governor's desk with democrat and republican support. i'm very proud of that. as i've traveled the state and i've listened and i've learned from hoosiers all across the state, they are tired of partisan politics, and i had a record like a set of reaching across the aisle. and i'm very proud that in my last term as speaker of the house i won a national award by governing magazine for being a public official of the year. i shared it with brian bosman is now the republican speaker of the indiana house of
representatives come and we won the award because we worked together in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation on tax restructuring and doing away with indiana's excise tax. >> thank you, mr. gray. mr. holcomb, you can close it out speed of one of the things i'm most proud about in my state government public service coming to state government in 2005 was i so people who used to be cynics, used to believe things just couldn't get done. started to believe because they were driving on the ipo but i-69 to get down here today. we have person after person after person say they never saw i-69 would get done in our lifetime. we have made record investment in education to the last budget we increased education spending by 474 million. we have made record investment in infrastructure. we have made record created innovative investment in the
health care ensuring over 400,000 of the neatest hoosiers under are helping indiana plan to point out, these are the things we've been able to do over the last 12 years and in a bipartisan way and get this thing moving again. >> our next round will begin with mr. bell. you have one minute on a topic of your choice. >> i guess i get to use the microphone now. the topic of my choice always goes back to the same thing. everything that we do as a government, we need to look at them is it the proper role of government? as i pointed out before, should government be taking money from one citizen and forcibly giving it to another citizen? should government be taking money from citizens and giving it to business as? we say though, that the decision people should make, which business they want to support,
which charity they want to support. by eliminating the property taxes, we can allow people and society to attract businesses which is what we should be doing. we should eliminate incarceration for victimless crimes. thank you. >> mr. gregg, you have two minutes to respond. >> i understand mr. bell is concerned about government but there's a very specific role for government in many areas of our life and one of them is our state infrastructure. indiana has a public and our states infrastructure and we all know what. you don't have to travel to evansville to tell you about roads. the truth of the matter is we're running about $300 billion a year behind what we need just to keep up. that doesn't include finishing anything else on i-69.
my running mate and i put out a detailed program with specifics when we go to the next generation trust fund which is $500 million we leverage that money now by mike s. at an all time low to come up with over $3 billion additional funds for the cities, towns, states roads and bridges and it creates 56,000 jobs. this is so important we do that. one in five bridges in our state is going to be obsolete, not going to be able to used -- be able to be used to just 18 years. years. we take a second pot of money to create the hoosier state infrastructure bank. because there are some other things that are real important thing the water, and osha water, wastewater, storm sewers, green spaces, broadband connectivity. spend this money so local communities can borrow money. this will allow them to use this
to improve the quality of life and to attract and retain talented i am concerned about our states broadband. 14% of the people indiana don't have dependable self-service or height the internet and we cannot operate like that in the future. we need money for infrastructure and our plan will put money aside so we can start talking about that fourth port, double tracking the south shore from south bend to chicago. we can talk about finishing i-69, and we can talk about the new bridge between evansville and henderson. >> thank you, mr. holcomb the mr. bell, you can close it out speed of i mr. gregg. i finished. we've only spent about $10 million -- spin and see what happens when i look at my notes. mr. holcomb. >> i'm the tall one last night. >> and time for hair challenged one. [laughter]
>> high-five. [laughter] >> if i may speak with you may absolutely spill i think mr. bell brings up a great point and tried to book a state we want to be in, what ruled the winter state government to play in your daily life. one of the things i'm most proud of is i kicked through some of those statistically about our rankings in the country. it doesn't just represent numbers but it represents opportunities for hoosiers and we been able to make so much progress at the very same distance in time within every state. we are ranked the fourth freest state in the country. that is something to be said, something to be said for that. and that the very same time we've been providing this government service, we have done it at a 1975 state employee level. so we are leading a and cleaner and much more efficient in what we do. absolutely our infrastructure is part of the states responsibility, and how are you
going to pay for it? we have an honest disagreement, mr. gregg and i, and how we are going to pay your i don't want to simply reflectively raid a fun. we work hard to create the major move program that was three-point $85 billion for such a program that took us from talking about i-69 to actually building i-69. took us of talking about completing the hoosier heartland, to bridges in jeffersonville, not the new bridge in madison and projects can local projects all over the state that sat for decades. i-69 was talked about during the korean conflict if we finally found a way to not just talk about it anymore but to do it. so absolutely we need to focus on a long-term data driven sustainable infrastructure program that puts us out not just reading a fun and borrowing. we're still think on some bonds
that were left to was from the time that former speaker was in office. i don't want to just go down that route. i want a comprehensive data driven not political driven program. >> and mr. bell. >> i think a lot of this comes back into the proper role of government and to talk about bonds we're still paying on. when they tore down the hoosier dome and the old moron at a cost to build in the first place. it's a matter of when government steps in, things they shouldn't be involved in. we talk about the road constantly of what he wants good roads and bridges. but we can acknowledge that by making sure that we have on one of% of the road use taxes to the roads. we don't need to be taking road use taxes and building walking trails. we talk about infrastructure and downs for water and sewage. certainly that's a nast nice idt it's something that's died in politically of people are afraid to raise the rates to actually pay for the water and sewage.
that's something that's wrong. instead of running to the state government to get money for it, these companies should be taking care of that on their own. as far as broadband goes, for the government to step in and say will take care of this, ok okay. >> thank you, mr. bell. now for our final round we will start with mr. gregg. >> thank you. thank you for recognizing me las.[laughter] >> you hear a lot about indiana and the state of indiana. i'm not one that except the status quo. i will grant and conceded both my opponents that indiana's has low unemployment, but it's nothing to brag about. let's talk about the real actuality. the climate is we don't real unemployment at the actuality is we have now dropped to 38th in per capita income the weapons were found at the fort in princeton or fort wayne, they
make $7000 a year less than the average american family. we can do better than that. our wages are growing slower than the rate of inflation and slower than what they are in our neighboring states. they are going slower than what they are in kentucky to the south of us. we need a plan that is in writing and detailed that focuses in five main areas which i will explain at the end. >> now mr. holcomb. >> well, the status quo is in large part by governor mitch daniels not elected in 2005. i don't think the reforms that were brought about that i was associate with, proud to have been part of that crew that came into the state government, we are operating in a sea of red ink, drowning in in fact that the status quo was pushed aside and we set out for ethical reforms. we set out for infrastructure
reforms. to get it turned around and we ushered in a come back. because of reform, some of which were very controversial at the time, but back to the cynicism point i made earlier, after used for building the roads and have paid cash for them, not borrowed, not bonded, not less for a future generation to pay for, but we have the ability of the economy down into the point that we become a magnet, we are outpacing the national average in terms of high-tech jobs. we're tripling the national average. with companies like salesforce who are saying we are going higher and other 800. evansville, indiana, which is experiencing this renaissance of downtown. these are the things are happening because were not operating in a status quo mentality. >> now to mr. bell, two minutes. >> you talk about the status quo, we have been in the status quo with some minor changes for several years.
we talk about the roads and what each administration has done, and maybe one does a little better than the other but we are still in a situation, excuse me. i forgot to pick this up if we are still in a situation we are not doing all that we can. we talk about in the fourth freest state in the country. i think we should strive to be the first to freest state in the country. would talk about jobs and the wages being lowered. a lot of that has to do with not having enough jobs and not having companies have to compete for workers. certainly if we do away with the property tax and attract more businesses here, we are going to have more jobs, we will have people, not enough people to fill those jobs. that just naturally drives wages up so that's something we can do that way. as far as having and lower wages helping indiana, we need to a number also that we have a lower
cost of living in indiana. my son got a mention that graduated from usi moved to san diego, california, last year. he was down in mississippi at the time and he told me he went from being one of the richest men in olive branch mississippi to be one of the poorest in san diego, california, and that can happen. we need to take a look at what we have in indiana. i'm very proud of the fact that we can live cheaper here than we can in other place at the certainly we want to raise wages every chance we get but i think we need to keep in things in the mind in proportion as to where we are spent thank you. >> hoosiers are working to entry jobs to get by the number of people are working two jobs is because would not focused on high wage paying jobs in indiana. information technology, life in
biosciences, 21st century logistics come advanced manufacturing and unbelievable changes in agribusiness. if you look at our detailed plan you will see we've got one with great details. we talk about establishing a growth and opportunity fund to unleash the entrepreneurial spirit for people who need capital and seed capital can come to get money. recertified venture capitalists. we also allow that credit to be increased from 20 to 40% like tennessee and kentucky have recently done. we allow the transfer in sale of that credit. there are so many things we can do. study that taxes as how they affect our small mom and pop businesses. the indiana chamber of commerce, the one thing we got to do is be a welcoming community and i'm intuitive to pass civil rights protection for members of the lgbt community. >> thank you very much, mr. gregg.
one of the great joys of my life in addition to being a journalist is serving as president of the american society of newspaper editors, and one of our organizations -- open government into this question is right up my alley. indiana governors of both parties have considered open government records and meetings as vital to our society. a recent indiana supreme court decision is refusing to wait in. ..
having said that, i want to make sure if that constituent finds a privacy authorization form and doesn't wish for their private information to be known, there in lies the balance, but certainly if we are using public property to conduct public business than the public deserves a right to see. >> our next response. >> certainly, this goes back to the pardon we talked about earlier. the burden of proof should always be on the government anytime a citizen asked to know something about the government. it goes back to who's in charge. certainly the citizen should be in charge and not the government. i can't think of very many
instances where the government would have the right to keep something secret from the people who are paying the bill. >> thank you. >> the second policy initiative we put out was on open portal, open door to those, i100% support it. i believe more more people know about government, the less they will fear about it. they ought to be able to see the tax dollars, and in and the tax dollars going out but they ought to see the contract and government business in real-time. there's a great book called innovative state. if you like reading about wide open government, take a peek of that book. it's not the easiest read but i think you'll find it enjoyable. >> now for our final question of the night. voters who have been following these three debates now have a good idea of where you stand on various issues. as we conclude these debates, tell us the most important thing
about yourself that you want voters to remember as they cast their vote. each of you will have 30 seconds to answer. mr. bill will go first. >> first fall, i would like this am glad to hear were not going to have an open records problem anymore. it sounds like everyone wants to take care of that. the most important thing that i can tell you about myself is i believe in you. i believe in limited government. i believe you can make decisions for yourself, you don't need the government making them for you. i want the government to protect from fraud and performance constitutional duties and otherwise i want to let you lead your own life. >> it will be each and every day that i will serve as if i'm looking through your lands, through the taxpayer lens. i take a job very seriously. i take the job of every dollar
in your pocket seriously. i strive to be the best governor >> i would like voters to know i have a passion for indiana. that comes from traveling the state. our plan is based on indiana not ideology. i can assure you i will be a uniter and i will never embarrass the citizens of indiana. >> gentlemen, thank you for being here.
[applause] thanks to all of you for watching or listening. we want to give special thanks to the university of southern indiana for hosting this debate. the league of women voters for keeping time for the candidates. on behalf of the indiana debate commission, i hope you further participate in the electoral participant by getting out to vote for the canada of your choice. good night. [applause]
cspan coverage of state races continues with debates today starting with candidates from the senate seat being vacated by our brother mikulski. chris van hollen faces kathy show leg up. in i was third district, david young meets jim mauer. and then in california, see it at 10:00 p.m. eastern. >> bobby kennedy's last words before he got off the stage were on to chicago. the next day he was due to go to
chicago and meet with bailey. his son who was chief of staff to barack obama tells me there was a 70% or greater chance that his dad would have an endorsed bobby kennedy for president during that trip to chicago. >> sunday night on q&a, he discusses his book bobby kennedy, the making of a liberal icon. >> had bobby kennedy beat richard nixon the way i think he would have, america would have done been a different place. some of the issues were revisiting today, racial tension and international discord might be a little bit different if we had tried to address them 50 years ago. >> the debate for california's seventh congressional district.
good evening. in a few weeks voters in the seventh congressional district will select the next house representative. incumbent ami bera faces scott jones. tonight's debate, starting now. the ami bera 2167th congressional debate sponsored by public television, community college district and the sacramento bee. >> thank you for joining us in sacramento california. i'm jason from the video lap.
i'm honored to be moderator for tonight's debate. i'm joined by panelists and the journalists. also during joining us, a studio audience and they have been asked to refrain from applause during the debate. be on television broadcast audience, welcome to those watching the online live stream or listening via the radio. if you are sharing your thoughts about the debate, please use # ca 07. let's start with ami bera who has represented the district and scott jones, county sheriff in 2010. welcome. >> both men have agreed to the rules had a time. each candidate will have one minute to respond to questions from the panel followed by
232nd follow-up replies. first we will turn to our panel. i should note only the panelists and myself have seen the questions. by coin toss, the first question goes to sheriff jones. dan smith has the honors. >> thank you. sheriff jones, a lawsuit for women filed against the sheriff department including a deposition from a female deputy, she alleged a series of intimate encounters with you. you have denied her claims but a judge has not weighed in on the allegation. how do you explain the golf between her story and your story. is she lying? >> well, yes, she is lying. i'm glad you asked that question. thank you thank you for being here. it's pleasure for me to be here as well. first let me start by telling you, the app allegations are
untrue, unequivocably false and i deny them every chance i have. these allegations first came to light in any form about a year ago. her conduct that occurred 13 years ago. i did the only thing i could do and it was on related lawsuit where these were brought out i went under oath and i deny the allegation in the strongest impossible. when they were brought out during the course of this campaign, i again again denied them and i've denied them ever since. i can tell you in every election i've ever had, including this one, i have opened up my personnel records even though the law protects them, and i have not had any internal complaint of any kind for any reason in my entire 28 year career. >> these are allegations that were widely reported by most ed outlets. i read through this 26-year-old deputies testimony. it's pretty disturbing.
she under oath, said you sexually harassed her over 30 times and you made her life miserable and she was afraid of retaliation. it was pretty shocking. we don't have to guess what happened. this came out in a lawsuit that four deputies brought against your leadership. a jury didn't believe you or your leadership and they ruled against you. now we are on the hook for over $10 million. this is pretty disturbing and pretty shocking what was going on. no woman should ever have to face this type of harassment. it's just unacceptable. >> sheriff you have an opportunity for a 32nd rebuttal. >> the lawsuit being a different issue and i hope we get a chance to explore that and i suspect we will. the allegations, allegations, i don't know why her value under oath is any more valuable than me denying them under oath. i've denied them, you hear me denying them, what you don't
hear is anyone coming out supporting them including the alleged victim. what you have here is they came out under oath who could go through the depositions and take whatever was most beneficial for the motion. the true measure of what i've said by both her and i will be found in the depositions which are still under seal. >> 30 seconds. >> here's what we know. even under your testimony under oath, you admit that you kissed. under oath you admit that you asked for her to be moved under your supervision. we know from what came out in this court case that several years later you reached out to reestablish relationship and she ran away. in the email she responded to you saying she didn't want anything to do with you that the relationship was toxic and you took advantage of her at a vulnerable time in her life. it's pretty shocking. i don't believe you. >> we need to move on to our next question and that goes to bob moffat for ami bera.
>> friend and family donated to your campaign and were reimbursed by your father more than a quarter million dollars. you say you didn't know that he, your friends and family were doing in that time. he was sentenced to prison time. how do you expect people to believe you were unaware of this and why didn't you attend his sentencing. >> it's sad about what my father did. the u.s. attorney was pretty clear. they do thorough investigation and were consistent that i was never the target of this investigation. they were consistent that neither i or my campaign had any idea what was going on and that's why they close this case. my father made mistake and he shouldn't of done this. it's not a criminal but he broke the law. he is facing the consequences of it. when i first learned of this, i was shocked and that's why we fully cooperated with the u.s. attorney and they been clear about that. my dad, if he had just reached
out and said something to my campaign or to me we would said you can't do this, this is against the law. this this many ways you can help the campaign. this will be a tough year for janine and i. we will try to get through this next year with my parents but it will be tough. my dad made a mistake and this is the consequence of that mistake. >> sheriff, you have an opportunity for one minute. >> this is a tough issue for me and i take no pleasure talking about it. i've been hesitant to comment on it during the campaign but supporters of mine say i have to pounce on this issue and i've declined to do so. i've declined into areas, one when asked if his father should go to prison, i said no i don't think he should go to prison especially in light of who were letting out of prison in california. the other thing i didn't render an opinion on was whether or not he knew about it. i do thinking about it, but that's my opinion. from my law-enforcement lens, to believe he didn't know about it you would have to believe one of two things. number one, either the 90 friends and family of congressman ami bera who all
knew what was going on in gay to in the conspiracy for four years to keep it from him or he didn't have any substantive conversations with those 90 family and friends. that is why i base my opinion that i believe he knew about it. >> how do you expect folks to believe that you didn't know about it. >> i was shocked when agents approached us. we fully cooperated with investigators. the u.s. attorney's office has been crystal clear that we fully cooperated with them and gave them whatever access we had. there clear that either i nor my campaign knew what was going on and that's why they close this investigation. >> my dad made mistake. this is a grave mistake and he's facing the consequences. this will be a tough year for our family. my mom and dad are in their 80s, trying to get them through this next year will not be easy. >> sheriff you have an
opportunity for a thirty second rebuttal. >> i disagree that the u.s. attorneys said they didn't know anything about it. they said they can find any evidence to show that they knew anything about it. that's a proof issue. usually the person commits the crime receives the benefit but here the person who committed the crime is going to prison and the only one to receive a benefit was ami bera by getting elected to terms. >> according to a recent field poll, 60% of voters support prop before for legalizing marijuana in california. federal law states that medicinal and recreational uses still illegal. you support prop 54, and if it does pass, we you fight to protect the rights of californians against federal prosecution. >> a couple questions. i do not support proposition 64. i think that would be a horrible
thing, not just for this generation but for future generations. the problem is, the potency of marijuana these days is nothing like the marijuana of 20 and 30 years ago for which people might seem ambivalent. usually california is the tip of the crazy spear when it comes to legislation but in this case we have other examples to look for. we can look at colorado, washington and the horrific results that have resulted. our initiative was on the california model. if you look at the increase of emergency room visits of young people and driving while the under influence of marijuana, all voters voters have to do is see what happened in colorado to predict what will happen here. because of the population here it would be a much grander scale. one of the immediate problems, there's no dosage. it could be an eighth of a cookie but it takes an hour or two for the marijuana to take effect so children are eating the entire cookie before they feel the effects of it and they overdose. >> thank you for your question.
on the issue of medical marijuana, as a doctor, i certainly supported their. for end-of-life care we have used it. with regard to legalization, i do have some health concerns in terms of addiction, et cetera. that said, part of your question was if the voters pass 60 prop 64 what i be in support of it, yes, i would be be in support of what the voters say. i do have some concerns about the addiction potential here. what i do worry about is the criminalization of folks who have filled our jails because of possession of marijuana. i do think we need criminal justice reform. >> the second part of the question is would you fight for the rights of californians if it does pass. >> first of all, i would would say there's no one in my gel for profession of marijuana. second of all, we are a nation of laws and i've spent my entire
life enforcing laws. if it were to pass, i would enforce the law. i wouldn't try to not enforce the law that was passed by the voters. >> congressman, same questions. >> this is up to the voters. that's why we have ballot measures like this. if the voters pass it than they have spoken. >> let's move on to national security and dan smith. >> ami bera we asked some of our readers questions and they want to know why did you support the iran nuclear deal and why did you vote to allow cash payments to iran which could be used to underwrite terrace. >> the iran nuclear deal was a difficult negotiation. i'm a member of the foreign affairs committee and we had a dozen or more hearings on this. both classified and unclassified settings where we talked our military leaders and diplomats. at the the end of the day, the goal of the deal was to reduce the nuclear threat in the middle east.
we wanted to make it much more difficult for iran to have nuclear weapons. i supported it because most the experts believed that for the next decade it would reduce the nuclear threat. i knew i would be getting a tax cut as i have been on television for a tough vote like that, but it was the right vote. we don't want to get in the middle of another war in the middle east pretty was the right boat, it was a tense vote, tense vote, but it was about that even folks like former secretary of state colin powell said it was a pretty good deal. >> we miserably missed on both counts. we done nothing to put off the inevitable and allowed iran to achieve nuclear weapons capability at the end of this deal. the best predictor of future conduct is past conduct. i don't know why we can treat them like a friend when they could make good on, says that
they haven't done in the past. they are working under sanctions so they obviously have not followed the rules under this point. even since the deal, they have fired off missiles, they fired off missiles that say israel must die, they've done drive-bys that their state-sponsored terrace actors have fired missiles at our battleships. they are never going to comply with the deal and number two, this is a horrific deal, perhaps not for the next ten years but i doubt that very seriously, but certainly for the next generation that will have to clean up the mess this made. the second question i hope we get a chance to explore is the congressman's committee. >> he called it a horrific deal. you have dirty second. >> the goal was to get them to the table. it wasn't a perfect deal but it was the deal we had in front of us. the goal was to reduce the nuclear access.
they continue to do bad things and we keep a strong foot on sanctions. >> we have a no hostage policy and our jail and it keeps americans safe. this bill was designed to stop those cash payments done in secret, in the middle of the night and this would've prevented that in the future. it was a by partisan support and he still double down on support for iran and voted against that bill. >> next question from bob moffat >> sheriff you impose legislation preventing people on terrace watch lists from purchasing firearm. polls show the public's support
this. you suggested other strategies. why is the no-fly know by such a bad idea and what ideas would you push. >> it's not a bad idea. in theory if you have a no-fly list they shouldn't be able to purchase firearms. when i came out with was against diane feinstein's version because it was invested entirely, the control of this list was done by a political appointee. i have very little confidence in this administration's ability to bet anyone let alone those on the no-fly list. there are spectacular failures that are well documented. i was not allowed to check in online, i had to check in and verify, i don't know what list i was on, but by the same on explicit reason, i was let off that list. there are enough oddities and incorrect results from that list that i would want to see a better list them and theoretically, you're on a no-fly list you should be able
to put purchase of firearm. >> simple legislation, for not going to let someone get on an airplane, we ought not let them go buy a firearm. no-fly, no-buy. that's why we have the sit in on the house floor. let us vote on that. we know the overwhelming majority supports this. someone may get on the list, but there's mechanisms by which to get off that list in this ought to be how to protect our community, how do we make sure guns don't end up in the hands of the wrong folks. no list is perfect but this is a good list. were not allowing you to get on an airplane so why would we allow you to get an assault weapon. it just doesn't make sense. >> what antiterrorism steps would you push? >> that's a loaded question
because i don't think were doing anything to fight terrorism. i hope we get to explore that a little bit further. we have to win the war against terrorism. it doesn't mean we have to do it alone but we have to be a leader against this fight against terrorism and take it seriously. get me a better list and a better piece of legislation and i will support it. >> tell that to the 600 special forces that are right outside mosul right now helping fight terrace and eliminate isis and retake iraq, helping the iraq forces. we have men and women out there every day. when you say were not doing anything to fight terrace, you are insulting those folks. we have folks and homeland security and the fbi national intelligence community. don't insult them. they have a hard job. it's not to to be easy, but what we have to do is certainly work overseas. here at home we have to do a better job fighting the loan will terrace as well. >> we move on to our next
question. >> ami bera, the obama administration accuses russia of interfering with the election through cyber attacks. the flipside is the u.s. government would like to see any data in our cell phones. what should the response be to foreign countries hacking our information and should the u.s. government have the ability to hack this data? >> that's a great question. first, we have to take the cyber security threats very seriously. what russia is doing, i don't think we have to guess because our intelligence folks have said it's pretty clear that russia is doing this. it's a cyber attack against us. it's espionage and we have to fight back with the tools we have. that's different than what we do with our own citizens here. we need to have a robust debate about protecting ourselves versus the privacy. we don't want to trample on the constitution with our privacy.
only under the worst of circumstances, when there's eminent threat, should our personal privacy be compromised. >> following up on the question, do you have specific ideas on what our response should be to russia. >> you have to have a proportional response. you have to send a message back but this is not okay, particularly because it does seem there is direct evidence that they are interfering with the presidential election. >> you have a minute to reply. >> the sheriff department is the regional host for the high crimes task force. we are fully aware of the threats that are out there and it's a growing threat. it's been identified by the fbi is the number one emerging global threat as internet crime and hacking and things like that. we have to fight it. we have to draw our line in the sand. we had to be prepared to back it up with sanctions or reciprocal sort of stopping visa, stopping
travel, whatever we have to do, we have to stop it. i don't remember the first part of the question, i'm the question, i'm sorry. >> the first part was regarding russia and what the response would be. the second is how do you balance privacy. >> thank you i appreciate that. i agree, it's a robust discussion. it's not an easy answer. it's a balance between the emerging threats that are ever-increasing in technology and law enforcement's ability to be able to respond to those balanced against people's privacy. i suspect it will be, before 9/11 everyone would object to taking their shoes and socks off but we live in a different world now. >> you have 30 seconds. >> the cyber threat is very real they are having hard time hiring folks within the government who have those special talents. we recently introduced a bill called tech support to help minimize the cost of college for folks that are getting these skills so they can work for the government in these critical areas where we can hire folks. we will help defray and make
college free for them. it's a bill that we introduced and we hope it passes. we have to get that talent in the government. >> i just want to address the part about the presidential election. i don't care what the purposes for whose doing the hacking, it's illegally needs to be stopped. it has no place in partisan politics on either side. it is what it is and it's a crime and should be addressed as such. >> let's move on to our next question from dan smith for sheriff jones. >> what would you do to overhaul the nation's immigration policy, policy, specifically what we want to know, do you agree with donald trump's plan to build a wall on the mexican border? >> that's a great question. i think most of you probably know the challenge for me and running for congress was that one of my deputies was killed by someone who has been removed from this country on four different occasions. we absolutely need to resolve immigration problem once and for
all, not just deferred action or amnesty. you do that two ways. more security. you have to have secure borders. it does not mean a 2000-mile mile wall. it does mean accommodation of people there to enforce it and some fencing in technology but there has to be consequences for any entering our country illegal. our country should know who is coming in and leaving our country. i don't think that's unreasonable in every other country has that. that should be our understanding once we have a meaningful immigration plan. i would advocate pathway to legal status for each and everyone of them if they can pass a background track for those already here. >> a comprehensive immigration would bill would be a starting point. to pass the senate overwhelmingly with over 80 votes bipartisan. the republican leadership would not allow it to come forward for
a vote. the me tell you what was in that bill. it starts with protecting our borders and it addresses the 11 million people who are already here, undocumented. the vast majority majority who are contributing to our economy. it creates a way for them to come out of the shadows. it then addresses a way to get the best and brightest to come here, get their education and build companies here. that's what we ought to do but i will go back to that comprehensive immigration reform bill. it has broad support. lindsey graham is a pretty conservative republican senator and he sang in the next congress we should start their. it's one of sec. clinton's priorities. >> whatever we've done so far hasn't worked because we don't have immigration reform. it's not just a problem in this administration, it's been for decades we have not had reform. my position is that if everybody here can pass a background check should be given legal status is
unpopular. we need to secure borders with absolute consequences once a program is in place and that's not popular with him either. this satisfies neither side in its entirety which probably means it's pretty good bill. >> thank you both. now it's time to give our panelists a break. you can catch your breath and it's time for candidate to candidate questions. what we have is each candidate will have ten seconds to ask a question. sheriff jones gets to go first. the answer is 50 seconds for an answer and 30 seconds for rebuttal. >> over the past for campaigns you've run for congress, you been very negative and viciously attack your opponent. on november 9, are you going to look back whether you win or lose and be proud of the campaign you've run. >> campaigns are about choices. there are about the candidates that are running and the ideas
we have, but they're also about the character of the individuals that are running as well. this is difficult. i've heard you talk about this and i didn't expect it to be as hard as it is. it's got to be hard. we are running for one of the highest offices in the country. we are making critical decisions about whether we send our men and women into harm's way. it has to be hard. the voters that are out there have a choice and when they are choosing who they're going to elect as the representative, it's going to be about character and a track record. i'm practicing behind my track record with the thousands of people we have helped here, the fact that i'm working to break the gridlock in congress and working across the aisle to pass bills. this is about moving this country forward, not democrats and republicans. campaigns are about choices.
>> sheriff you have an opportunity for a 32nd rebuttal. >> i think it's important to educate the voters about the different types of commercials that, on board. we. we have the commercials that we approve and i have pay for and folks that put out commercials on our behalf that we have no control by law over what content is. i committed early on that all my money, all my commercials when you see scott jones, i approve i approve this message, they will be positive messages talking about issues. i can tell you on november 9, i will be extremely proud of the campaign i ran. >> scott, in three weeks we are going to make one of the most important decisions. we will pick the next president of the united states. it's either going to be donald trump or hillary clinton. who do you want to sport is the next president of the united states. >> i think i been clear on my support of donald trump. i have taken a lot of heat for the past year because i've supported, i said i would vote for donald trump and i never
endorsed him and i came out against him on various issues but i think i'm not alone in america that no matter which candidate you choose, there will be a certain amount, we have to separate the character of the candidate with the policy they will advance once they get in office. for that reason alone i've been able to overlook character deficiencies until recently. what has changed is that the video that capture the conversation on that bus, whether true or not and i'm not telling anyone else how they should vote, but for me, he was talking about things we have arrested people for and i had no discretion and i had to depart from him. >> it didn't take me a year and a half to understand his character did not make him fit to be president of the united states.
when he was insulting our families, a family family that lost their son protecting our country, that wasn't enough? when he was making fun of disabled people, that wasn't enough? when he was making, after, disparaging women, that wasn't enough? he doesn't have the character to be president. it was only a few weeks ago when his poll numbers tanked and you tanked with him that you came out against him. >> we need to move on. thank you for the candidate to candidate question. the format of the debate allows only one rebuttal on those questions. we are going to touch on the economy and turn it over to dan smith. >> tran4, the clinton tax plan calls for increases to high earners. the tax policy center has estimated that could raise a trillion dollars over the next ten years. has no impact on 95% of american taxpayers. do you support her plan, and don't you think it's time that middle income taxpayers got up tax break?
>> absolutely. if you look at these who are suffering, it's the middle class. we need to have tax policy that addresses income economy but also starts to rebuild the middle class and that starts by reinvesting in ourselves, our schools, making sure that those who want to go to college can afford it. also, when they get out there they are able to find jobs and pay it forward. there is a small segment of the population that has done really well. how do we get them to pay their fair share as well? that's what the country is built on. how do we pay it forward? the middle class hasn't had a big tax break in a while. we have talked about that with republicans and speaker ryan, how do you do comprehensive tax reform and business tax policy and individual tax code. >> the lip side of that is
donald trump's plan that calls for massive tax cuts but there is concern about the impact on the deficit. >> you have people, especially the middle class. the divide is growing ever wider because the middle class is disappearing. i'm middle-class, my family, all, all my friends at middle class. i get it. when i talk to people, that is the second most thing they are worried about beside their personal safety. there's a way to improve this economy which is the slowest recession rebound that we've ever had. we need to simplify the tax code and give middle-class persons and family a break. number two, regulatory reform. the regulatory explosion in this administration and spectrum has been untenable. it doesn't allow small businesses to survive and thrive and it discourages new businesses from starting and they're not consistent with each
other. third, you need job retraining. you have a lot of people in jobs that they are overqualified for. we need to be able to train folks for new and emerging industry such as our energy market. we need a job pool for tomorrow's market. >> how do you give middle class taxpayers a break. >> that is happening for the top 1% etc., making sure they're paying their fair share. that's what sector clinton is talking about. the other thing, middle-class doesn't always fill the benefit when you look at the affordable care act. they don't get subsidies or more formal healthcare insurance. their kids don't qualify for better tuition and student loans. they don't qualify for better mortgages. we ought to do enough policy to allow the middle-class access those programs as well. >> to support donald trump's plan? >> i don't know enough about it and i'm certainly no economist but i do know what drives the economy as business, small and
medium-sized business. i grew up with these conversations around the dinner table about the burdens and the difficulties of small business and it's only getting worse. the job creation and all the economy is driven by small and medium-sized businesses. we need to do everything we can to encourage and keep jobs here in america that are shipping overseas. >> thank you. let's move on to healthcare. >> sheriff, un ami bera have both set obamacare is not how you would've gone about putting 25 million people on the list of insured. would you scrap it now? and, what would you do to change the system. >> first i think you need to identify the problem. i don't anyone would disagree that the affordable care act is an abysmal failure, except in the sense that we've insured 25 million people that didn't have insurance. that's a good thing, but at what cost. we have many exchanges now that only have one choice.
we have a lot of people on the seventh district that aren't on the affordable care act but they've seen their rates go up every single year as a result result in some as high as 60 or 70% are slated to go up. it's untenable and it's a trajectory that cannot be sustained. something clearly has to be done. your question is whether it's got the whole thing. i do think so. i think there's facets of the affordable care act of ensuring the uninsured that are worthwhile endeavors. my preference would be to build upon what is there and do a course correction. the earlier you do a course correction the less you have to correct. we need to get on this right now and use the affordable care act to go in a different direction. >> the other question is should it be scrapped and what would you do to change it. >> you're right. it's not what i would've done to start off with but it is now lost the let's take this long make it better. what it did is gave 20 million people access to care. the most urgent thing we need to do right now is address the cost of healthcare and make it affordable.
we can do that in a couple of ways. in certain states like california, you do have a robust exchange but you don't see that all over. you've got to have more than one insurer to create competition. we've all seen that drug prices are out of control right now. you have to bring drug prices down. we have to move away from rewarding fee-for-service. we have to start going toward rewarding quality and efficiency the problem with congress right now is the democratic side, they are not addressing the fixes and on the other side its repeal repeal repeal. we have to break the deadlock and have adult conversations. >> i don't disagree with what he is saying. i think it's an indication that democrats and republicans need to transcend.
nothing drives down price like competition. having more competition will drive down cost. >> we can agree on things. this is about competition and giving people choice but it's also about doing things. we are making great advances in medicine. i know that as a doctor but how are you going to afford these. we have to address the cost of pharmaceuticals and the epipen scenario. epinephrine cost pennies. how is it that they think it costs $600. >> the total u.s. student that is $1.2 trillion $2 trillion. increasing cost of higher education deters some from pursuing it all together. what would you do to alleviate
the financial strain on young adults. >> this is going to sound shocking. i paid $393 a quarter to go to medicals will. i could go to four years of undergrad and four years of medical school and graduate with less than $10,000 that. we have to get back to that. yes it's important addressing the interested answer paying on student debt, but the more important question is how do students get into such debt. that will require us seeing if we can get students through college on time and i'm all in favor of free community college because that's not just for the recent high school graduate, that the folks were they can go to get new skills so that something we ought to all get behind. we have to think about new ways of teaching and online techniques that are about 16 the cost. increasing class sizes and the
faster you go, the quicker you can graduate. you should have have the ability to get the courses you want. >> what would you do to relieve the financial strain. >> right now i have a daughter who's a sophomore in san diego. i will pay 22 - $25000 for her go to school. there's two ways ways to reduce debt. one way is looking at the front and in the administrative cost and overhead cost. right now janet makes $575,000 in salary plus hundred $42000 to help her move and free housing and gets a $10,000 car allowance. allowance. that's just one example. let's not forget to look at cutting out excessive spending in when were looking at the cost of tuition. on the back and you have student debt and you have to look at that as well. it would be my preference to be
able to have your college debt payments and have that be tax-deductible. >> i would be supporting supportive of that. the more you make, the more you can pay back. i also think we ought to address the cost so you guys are graduating with so much debt. this is about paying it forward. the fact that i didn't have that that allow me to be a doctor and allows me to pay it forward. we ought to be paying forward into your generation. that's an investment that you will pay back. >> may be politically unpopular but the problem with free education is it doesn't occur in a vacuum. somebody pays for that. if half the people are going to college for free, that that means it will double for everyone else. for people like me, i'll be
paying 45 or five or $50000 for each of my four kids to attend one year of school. while it's easy to say that people should be able to graduate debt-free, you have to look at it. it doesn't occur in a vacuum. the money has to come from somewhere and therein lies the rub. >> the next question is from dan smith. >> sheriff jones, there's a growing scientific consensus that rising temperature is linked to the burning of fossil fuels and intensified our drought. what will you do in washington to fight climate change? >> climate change, human caused climate change, those are political buzzwords and topics. they have created a lot of discussion. i prefer to look at it in terms of what the consequences are. in other words, whether climate change exist, doesn't exist and to what extent humans are impacting that does not matter. the goals to mitigate it are
worth while. to our carbon footprint in our dependency on petroleum product and to create cleaner, safer energy sources for generations to come. i support all of those for those purposes. >> all we have to do is look at the temperature every year. look the mountains. we have lost our snow path. we have to get ahead of this. let's acknowledge that climate change is real so we can one day turn this back. it is a real issue and when we talk about the drought, that's that's real. we talk about these wildfires that are now the new normal, we could do a couple things. let's start moving in a smart way toward renewable energy sources. that will create a bunch of jobs and were starting to see it
sparked the economy. i support president obama's move >> i think it's important to point out that everything should be about balance and it's not at the expense that human beings on the planet need right now. while i support renewable and cleaner energy sources, i support the existing : petroleum and natural gas and using those resources as well as we move toward a new cleaner energy paradigm. >> let's move on to public safety and gun-control. >> would you rather have someone on campus with the.
the issue is broader that as a clinician. they won't let the cdc go out and collect data. what is the impact? maybe it does make it safer, maybe it doesn't. what is the impact of laws like this? we ought to be studying it. right now, congress, particularly the republicans will not let us pass a bill to allow us to collect data and allow the cdc to study that data. fortunately california stepped up to the plate. the state legislature is going to start doing that study and we have the best scientists and doctors locally. let's what we need to do to keep our community safe.
>> they issued 8000 concealed weapon permits insect mental count me. would we all be safer. >> while 8000 people would be safer. it might need someone to conclude that i want to put a gun in everybody's hand. nothing is further from the truth. last year we took hands out of the bad guys and that's a strong interest of mine. i screen everybody and that them as well as i can. they have to go through courses and safety much lace like a driver's license. you have to demonstrate all those things to get a drivers license. than if you depart from that course of good decision-making or conduct, then your driver's license will be revoked and i will revoke revoke them as well. i'm one of the few that continue to monitor folks for good decision-making after they get their permit which is why we
revoke so many. at the end of the day i gave 8 million people the ability to protect themselves and their family in an increasingly dangerous world and i'm proud of that. >> you talk about revoking 400 concealed carry weapons. i'd be curious how they got through the cracks. you also talk about background checks. i think we ought to do background checks if someone is going to go out and buy an assault weapon. a weapon that can be used for mass killing. we ought to be doing smart policy like that that keeps us safe. this is an about the second amendment and law-abiding folks that want to own a gun. those folks are probably perfectly willing to wait five days or six days to go through a background check. we ought to do the same check for folks getting concealed carry permits for assault weapons. >> i do revoke two or three a month. sometimes zero, sometimes five.
i've a process where i continue to monitor people "after words" and much like a drivers license, i can only make the decision based on the information i have. if they can demonstrate that they want one for personal safety and are following the law. that doesn't mean it's a carte blanche. i take the responsibility to issue permits seriously and i will be quick to revoke them. >> unto her next subject. >> sheriff jones, you have expressed reservations about releasing body cam dashcam video. do support the release of officer involved shooting and what have you done to make the sacramento sheriff's department more transparent in this regard? >> first of all, we are doing testing, we have several manufacturers and body cameras deployed in our department right now. you're right, i do have some concern that body cameras. the government and legislature needs to stay out of this. it will happen is a natural
evolution of law-enforcement without the need for legislature to intervene. the problem is multi fold. it's very expensive. that doesn't occur in a vacuum either. it means fewer vacuums i can hire. the other problem is whether they are public record or not. it's generally not but there's a lot of noise on both sides that they wanted to be private as part of exempt of a criminal report or open. until that question is resolved, it's going to be very difficult for me to go to a body cam. i think people deserve a right of privacy. >> i'm all in favor of body cameras. i'm all in favor of dashboard camera spread the more information we have, the better. the men and women that are out
there protecting us have a very difficult job and we have to make split-second decisions. they could get it right 99% of the time, but that, but that 1% of the time, we have to be transparent. we have to learn from that. that's what we do in the medical profession. you may get everything right 99% of the time, but that one mistake, you have to be transparent and you have to learn from it otherwise you start to erode the public trust. that's what bothers me. we just saw what happens. this is really disturbing. it very much appears that there was a circle of the wagon mentality in keeping information from coming out. that's exactly the wrong thing to do. let's look at this and let's learn from it so we can prevent the next accident. >> it sounds like ami bera has a slight difference difference in opinion in releasing the body cameras. >> we have the burden of maintaining the integrity of an
investigation. it's not just what our emotional sense would have us do. for example while it might be beneficial for the department for people who are clamoring for recent video in one case should not make policy. the policy should be for the entirety of the profession, not simply for what ails good at a particular time. the video should be released but the integrity of the investigation should be maintained. >> very good, we have time for one more question and we will modify the time allowed the answer so we have time for closing statements as well. that question goes to bob moffat >> billing one of sheriff jones deputies. in your opinion should the death penalty be allowed in california should capital punishment be left to the federal government. >> i've gotten to know danny
tool but it does need reform. >> i agree with scott, the death penalty as it exists is broken. people sit on death row for years. part of the reason i look at reforming the death penalty and look at life in prison without parole is i do think it will help families find closure and bring resolution much quicker :
sheriff's department in charge of 2000 men and women, have a billion-dollar budget. i come in at or under budget intended millions of dollars in wasteful spending and operating costs, created the first community relations unit in that time and came up with innovative programs that were first of their kind in the nation. during that time i used my political platform to stand up as an independent, and against the president, and never got a bill out of the committee, including committees he said on. and future performance is past performance. a demonstrated record of success and leadership that i will take with me to washington. with that i thank you for
hosting and thank our sponsors for asking questions which i think my wife and daughter and two sons for being here. i look forward to earning your vote on november 8th. dirksen senate office building 0>> moderator: you have 20 seconds. >> campaigns are about choices and there are two clear choices in this campaign. the sheriff talked about saving money but what about the $10 million in lawsuits? four female deputies, the jury didn't believe you had ruled against you. we have seen repeatedly, yesterday we saw another lawsuit that was settled, last week we saw a lawsuit that was settled. there was a pattern here. i am proud the four years i served as your member of congress in 21 years i have been a doctor serving our community.
what we accomplished was pretty remarkable and we are trying to break through the gridlock, get democrats and republicans working together in the democratic cochair, we have grown that caucus, hundreds of members of congress, democrats and republicans, we want to work together and proud of the work we have done in the district. that is where our focus has been. we topped 7000 individuals, seniors, veterans and others get social security benefits, medicare benefits that help recover $3.5 million. it is about making a difference in people's life. it is an honor to be your member of congress for the last four years. it would be my honor to have your vote on november 8th. >> thank you for sharing your views with us. we covered a lot of ground. i'm sure you at home would agree and thanks to our studio
audience for remaining quiet this entire time. if you want to apply now is your chance. [applause]>> moderator: thank you for sharing your questions with us this evening and thank you to everyone at home watching online and on the broadcast and listening on the radio. election days three weeks away and your last day to register in california is monday, october 24th. thanks for joining us, good night. ♪
reports, bringing us an election forecast today at noon on c-span2. we are back with democrat hillary clinton continuing her effort in the battleground state of florida. rally is live at 2:45 eastern on c-span. republican vice presidential nominee mike pence, the indiana governor in another battleground state in utah you can watch at 5:30 eastern on c-span2 and yesterday we spoke with the trump/pens campaign manager on the state of the race. >> joining us from new york is kellyanne conway, campaign manager for the trump/pens ticket. thank you for being with us. on sunday you told chuck todd on meet the press we are behind with two weeks to go before the election. how do you get ahead? >> we are behind a few points and statewide polls, up in a few
others where barack obama carried it. we feel good about that, states the john mccain and mitt romney did not carry and donald trump is putting together some good numbers and the way we get ahead is for mister trump to keep doing what he has done all along, roundtables, taking message directly to people, he can't wait to get many in the mainstream media to give him fair coverage. nothing on the scale hillary clinton has, she is running a more conventional campaign and an unconventional candidate like donald trump demand an unconventional approach. lots of folks think the crowd at these rallies don't matter. the enthusiasm and momentum never abates, no matter how many victory laps hillary clinton and her friends are taking, folks are showing up 10, 15,000 strong
for each trump event. all those folks if you are waiting on line for hours and hours to say you were there, you are part of a trump movement which is more of a movement than a campaign, you will go out and vote. and returned in early voting that we see in places like north carolina, iowa, ohio and cursing on the are in c helping tremendously, balloting in place, the data operation, incredibly helpful in helping those aspects of the campaign and see the fruits of that when early returns are coming in. >> real clear politics average in states like florida, pennsylvania, and new hampshire give the edge to hillary clinton, ohio, donald trump only up one percentage points in the art margin of error.
>> that is what campaigns are for. the national polls, the more credible ones, a tighter race, new nbc poll five points nationwide, 5 points nationwide, hillary, 50 in the state polls, if you are incumbent and represent the system, represent the status quo, more of the same, unlikely those undecided voters will vote your way. what are these undecided voters going to learn about hillary clinton between now and election day they don't know? something is holding them back so for those voters many decided i am not voting for hillary clinton and they want the closing argument to vote for donald trump. he did a great job in gettysburg and since then multiple stops, florida the last couple days,
talking -- a very meaty plan, specific. they can go to twitter feeds and look for themselves. over ten years, energy investments, defeating terrorism. respecting law enforcement, obamacare, obamacare is a very bad deal, you have a 25% premium increase from one of the largest insurers, that -- what we always said about obamacare, the best example of how invasive and intrusive and expansive the federal government has become for many americans. >> the number one criticism of donald trump is he has not been disciplined enough is the gettysburg speech, talked about the at&t time warner merger and accusers stepping on his major
policy speech in his first hundred days. when you talk to mister trump what do you tell him about that? >> he has a right to defend himself. it has to be his choice, preeminently respectful of that. secondly i think donald trump is at his best when he sticks to the issues. that is what they want to hear. he has an advantage over hillary clinton. one of the issues are in his favor, she cannot say obamacare has been a great deal for most americans, many people feel lower quality, fewer choices, less access, she can't say that contained or stop isis from expanding. she can't disavow her own record, the issues that benefit him, second thing he has going is she doesn't seem interested in talking about the issues.
negative ads her entire campaign is all about donald trump. not a campaign of ideas or optimism, nothing uplifting, just politics and personal destruction and any voters will reject that. donald trump outperformed a number of his polling averages in the primary and last-minute folks are saying who am i? i am telling pollsters i want to take the country and washington dc in a new different direction, here's my chance to do that so i will leverage that chance and vote for donald trump. >> on wednesday governor mike pence will be in salt lake city campaigning. this is a state that has not voted for a democrat since 1964 when lyndon johnson won in a landslide. are you worried about utah? >> we want to make sure an independent candidate does not win use our, instead of running
for president it is more like running for governor of utah spending a lot of time there, never trumpeters who put him in that position just want to choke off the trump/pens through utah which has been a state -- to get a candidate who shares a lot in the state with the people of the states to run in the state almost exclusively you can get them up to 21, 37% and anybody can win 32, 33, 35% of the vote. it is also a state where mike pence have a friend in senator lee and recently talked about education reform, on his way to colorado, nevada, utah, i take nothing for granted. that is my job. my job is not shape every promising statewide poll, deploy our best resources meaning mike
pence and mister trump so we are trying to do a tighter electoral map than republican candidates have done in the past. i look forward to the obama 2012 effort as a partial model even those in states that obama and his team looked like they had more looked much better for him as time wore on and started to improve against mitt romney. they kept him competitive and wanted to seal the deal. a smart strategy for a future president. >> "saturday night live," a skit on you, kellyanne conway's day off. your reaction to what "saturday night live" did? >> it was very flattering, and adorable. it is supposed to be a parody. by cousins said they follow you around for three days. on the family side it captured my life and my cheerful chaos and my blessings of four
children. saturday night live is doing a nice job transferring her skills between hillary clinton and me. it was done with good humor. we had a good laugh over it. >> what about alec baldwin playing your boss? >> he is a meaner donald trump. donald trump is a little bit -- a little bit more the donald trump that i know. the kate mckinnon as hillary clinton character is supportive of hillary clinton in real life and alec baldwin is not supportive of donald trump so there's something to that when portraying someone. i think the comedy writing is really good. if people could see the gracious donald trump, the funny humorous donald trump, and they do. people who get to know him and
listen to him, they do see that. the media coverage, his 45 minute speech, what jokes did he tell that were really funny, how much time was spent after the rally shaking hands, he loves that, that is his oxygen, the lifeblood of his campaign, enjoys mixing it up with people. that is everything a candidate should be. when people cover what he said that day i hope in the cacophony folks are getting the essence of donald trump. >> kellyanne conway, manager of the donald trump campaign joining us on the phone it from new york, thank you for being with us. >> all the best. >> an update from the washington post on trump's campaign fundraising, donald trump has no further fundraising events planned for the remainder of the campaign. dealing another serious blow to the gop effort to finance his
get out the vote operation before election day. read more at washingtonpost.com. >> c-span brings you more debate from key us house and senate races. today at 7:00 live on c-span democratic congressman chris van holland and republican debate -- for the senate seat. live on c-span the iowa third district congressional debate with republican representative david young and democrat jim mallory and at 10:00 on c-span a debate for the florida senate between marco rubio and democratic congressman patrick murphy. thursday night, republican senator kelly ayotte debating for the new hampshire senate seat now until election day. from house, senate and governors race is on the c-span network, c-span.org and listen on c-span radio apps.
c-span, where history unfolds daily. >> defense secretary ash carter is ordering suspension of reimbursement collection from the california national guard soldiers vote as soon as practical after the la times reported over the weekend the pentagon demanded some soldiers pay their enlistment bonuses after audits revealed overpayment by the california national guard. next up, here on c-span2, a discussion on ways the us military and nasa could develop and exploit relationships with the private sector, deputy assistant secretary of defense for space policy joined by representatives of firms working in the commercial space exploration field for the center for strategic international studies.
[inaudible conversations] >> thank you for joining us. we have 10 minutes here. that is a testament to the great panelists we have here today. i am todd harrison, director of a new initiative on aerospace security project and instead of me droning on describing the project which should take 10 minutes we have a short video we are going to show and i apologize in advance for the narration but i will let the short video do the explanation and we will move into the main event today. >> airpower has revolutionized the way the us military operates, the global economy
increasingly reliable and secure access to space systems. the aerospace security project examines the technological, budgetary and policy issues affecting air and space demand. our research focuses on three areas, space security examines the evolving military use of space and how the lack of this behavior can affect escalation in deterrence, explores how alternative architecture and new space capabilities enhance the resilience of us military air dominance, long-range looks at the future of air and missile, in a contested operating environment. and unmanned systems, how these capabilities with operational concepts for air and ground-based. commercial and civil space, international partnerships for the cost of launch, advances and policy issues that affect
commercial space programs. the goal of the aerospace security project is to provide innovative, timely analysis to educate and inform decisionmakers as threats and technology emerge, smart policy decisions can ensure the united states continues to lead, welcome to the aerospace security project. >> all right. now i can say there is something worse than watching yourself on video, it is watching yourself in front of other people. now we get that out of the way. everything will start getting better from here. a great group of panelists assemble here today, the topic for discussion which is very timely is how the us military can leverage commercial space capabilities, in the future and i asked each of the panelists to
prepare opening remarks, go down the line, introducing each of them, letting them have their opening remarks and after that ask if you follow questions and we open up to the audience for your questions. i will start to my left, deputy assistant secretary of defense for space policy so he has been in the middle of this for many years. i will turn it over to you. >> thanks very much. apologize for being a little bit horse. i am nursing a cold. they can share my pain. thanks for being here. i want to thank todd for bringing this together. i don't think there are that
many surprises you will hear from me today but an enunciation of the things we are talking about and starting to do which is the good part. let's talk about the challenges we face and why these challenges are fundamental to what we need to do between the military and commercial world. the challenges we face are pretty understandable. there are people who want to take space capabilities away from the us and we don't worry about that because they take the space capabilities away but they take away the leverage we get from space capabilities. many of you have seen that inaction in your lifetime, war has transitioned from a war that was constrained to ao are to ones that were worldwide and fought on a global basis. when you have people going ahead
halfway around the world, places like las vegas or nevada you can understand how space plays into the lowest level of combat, taking out individual targets versus organizing an entire campaign so space is fundamental to everything we do in connection war, everything we do in nuclear war as well, space is fundamental to that as well so we depend on space capabilities like no others. you heard me say this, people are trying to take that away from us. clapper testified on what we are trying to do. we have to figure out how to make that not happen. we could go ahead as some people suggested previously, try to fight wars without space but quite frankly that is not an attractive notion. doesn't mean we should not practice what happens when you lose space for short time during
a battle but to fight the war the way the us wants to fight the war without space is anathema to us because it means our soldiers, our sailors, our airmen are put at risk and we don't want them to be put at risk, we want them to have the best advantage they can have, so we have to figure out how to maintain that advantage. we could try to do it by building more resilient and more numerous space systems all by ourselves by the us government, that is fiscally responsible, nor quite frankly operational responsible. if you do that they all have the same building vulnerabilities. if you figure out how to bring a diverse set of space capabilities together, that is a much more resilient capability to have because everyone has different week points, vulnerabilities in different advantages to be used in different ways and quite frankly
they bring with them a different political dynamic as well as a different resilient dynamic to the equation so we want to figure out how to ingest commercial space capability into an overall architecture. clearly we have been doing this for years already in the commercial satellite communication regime. 70% of satellite communications we use in combat today are commercial satellite communications but that is not being viewed from a resilience standpoint or surety standpoint. it is being done from a pure throughput standpoint, we don't have enough capability to do that on military satellite communications but if we really want that to be an operationally resilient ability we not only need to use those capabilities but figure out how to integrate them into true operational responsiveness through network operations so we can go from one
communication network to another. similarly we see a great birth of remote-sensing capabilities in the nation and we buy those images one by one today. if you want to knit them together into a truly robust, resilient framework you have to do more than just by images. you have to figure out how to go ahead and process them, figure out how to fuse things together from many different sources so we are not just talking about leveraging commercial services but integrating these commercial services, not just communications and remote-sensing those those are the predominant ones we see today. we see a big rise in situational awareness, and those complement through the kind of capabilities
we have today, not just sensors but ability to fuse that information in new ways and new manners we would not think of in a monolithic arrangement. we get from the commercial world, diversity of vulnerability, diversity of use cases and diversity of the way of supplying that capability more than you get from a simple monolithic government approach to a problem which is what we had in space today. we think if we do that and do that well we can go ahead and create more resilient space capabilities than we have today. some people ask me couldn't an adversary do the same thing? i typically answer not easily. the reason is almost all commercial space capabilities,
the new entrepreneurial space capabilities are almost entirely us-born. we want to keep it that way. we want people to stay in the us and that is how we as a government go ahead to, and able us to get more commercial satellite services, commercial space services, that means we go ahead and change policies with regard to licensing to make it easier for people to go ahead and invest in advanced space capabilities in the us. the entrepreneurial spirit in the us would allow new space services to come to the market more quickly, rapidly, we see one of the most agile sectors of the market in space servicing missions, a capability the us government would almost never develop. even if we did it would end after one year and we wouldn't fund it. as opposed to if it is done commercially, create the right
licensing structure it becomes a self-supporting capability we then can utilize for government usage. we have to figure out how to integrate these capabilities, not just leverage them and figure out a way to work with them as they evolve moving forward. these are the things we want to do, encouraging commercial space to move forward, the kind of things we need to make sure space services are always available to our war fighters, there are too many sources from too many strong points versus weak points, we can assure soldiers and sailors the use of space capabilities going into the conflict. more on the question and answer. thanks very much. >> next up, scott pace, director
of the space policy institute and professor at george washington university elliott school of international affairs. doug gave us the military perspective, give us a broader policy perspective. >> one of the first things i would say is why would a professor of international affairs despite being a long-time space cadet why would he talk about this issue, one is the most interesting problems in turn international affairs these days are those beyond international sovereignty, things like events on the high seas, cyberspace, outerspace, arctic region, antarctica, all these areas we have shared interaction with other countries but no one is claiming sovereignty over those areas and we are faced by a number of pressures against the international order we tried to
build since world war ii, the institutions the us helped create and these pressures coming from state actors who are looking to practice traditional spheres of influence, don't look at the we tried to promote. a particular case of something like isis, a throwback to another form of government where we are not a nationstate. the way we behave in places like outerspace reflects how we behave and others think they will behave in shared areas. russian behavior in ukraine and eastern europe and the south china sea should give us pause about the degree to which we can rely upon them to follow other areas of international water.
in the political science world we talk about signaling and in the case of the aftermath of world war ii much to our resistance we had to accept the signals & was sending about what he was doing. in the early days of the filing of the cold war there is skepticism of gorbachev but we took the signals he was sending, found ways, their attention has changed, they undertook some costly steps. today, facing some resistance because we like to think the world is reasonable and americans can work everything out, the signals we are seeing from russia and to a lesser extent china, they don't buy into the assumptions we had over the last decades of the world is becoming a more dangerous place and how we behave in space is cause for concern. if you look at space areas there is a tendency to think in terms
of stovepipes. this is what nasa is doing, giving up speech, the school launch a private company is doing. there is not a tendency to look at space activities the way the chinese might look at it, comprehensive national strength. and we don't treat it in an integrated way to advance our interests. that is the space community's own fault. the usual answer is human spaceflight, what was the question? as opposed to human spaceflight and exploration as an answer to a question with one of the things i try to say is space policy is a derivative policy that comes out of us economic and national security and to some extent moral imperatives. what we try to accomplish in
space derives from under lying interest and we use space to enhance those interests. you have to look at where geopolitical interests are, economic interests, symbolic interests we want to model and i think if you want to be optimistic, the glass is half will, we have some great assets and people thinking about them, the glass is half empty in the sense we have not been able to bring that together. in particular if we look on the civil space side, lack of a clear path after the end of the space station program is a very serious threat not simply because space enthusiasts are wondering where they are going to go, but because we have an international partnership, not just the us partnership and international partnership with closest friends and allies and we are not able to say what comes next and you know how long
space programs take so if we are not planning on what is coming next what you are planning on doing is going out of business. the chinese are commenting on this. they know the space station will end in 2024, they will have their station up around then. they are open to international partnership and to some extent that is fine but i don't mind the chinese being in space but i do mind them being up there without me because space is not simply something where we send our machines or send people for photo opportunities, but a reflection of what we value. the us is the most space reliant country in the world. our security, our economy, our self-interest depends on this, yet we don't treat it that way. we are looking at the world where as space becomes more important, who will write the rules for those norms? who will shape the international order and the regime beyond
traditional sovereignty? rules are made by people who show up, not those who stay behind. if we are not partnering with other people and shaping those rules we are staying behind. many of you know that i am a critic of much of this administration's human space expiration policy. i want you to know the current national space policy is quite good and i hope we don't see a dramatic change in it the way we saw in 2010. however, if i could surgically change one thing about that policy it would be about human space exploration blues not merely because i am a moon enthusiast as some of you may know, but because the current approach doesn't provide a lot of opportunities for partnerships with the commercial sector or international partners as much as we would like and it lessens our ability to shape and
mold the direction of the space environment as we might like. it is an old-fashioned space policy which is looking at what can the us due by itself whereas leadership today is about what can we get others to do with us, get people to do things with us, we need goals and objectives, civil exploration, military, they can partner with us on. i look forward to a discussion not only of how can the commercial sector support the military, but how international partnerships with our security and economic interests shape global rule-based order that we would want to live in rather than the one we are heading toward. >> the last three panelists are all industry related. we start next with don arms, vice president of global sales
and marketing, boeing satellite systems international and among her many responsibilities she does strategic planning for commercial satellite programs. if you could give us briefly a perspective from the boeing, commercial space side, particularly if you are one of the redemptive tentative -- representatives on the panel who builds satellites. with that i turn it over to don. >> boeing has been in the commercial satellite business for more than 50 years beginning with the first satellite that was launched in 1963. since then we have built 170 commercial satellites, 50 different customers, 20 different agents, very global business. we also built numerous
government satellites for military customers. what are those technologies we might leverage in the commercial sector to the government sector? there are many but i will tell you a little bit about what we are doing in terms of technology development and you can help find common ground. one of the most requested requirements from our commercial customers as we go through a period of strong, innovative changes like we have never seen in 25 years i have been in business, is flexibility on orbit. what does that mean? everybody wents to future proof their business plan. any asset in space for 50 years, technologies can as business plans change, requirements change, what does that mean for
a manufacturer. what we have done and have been doing over many years is developing digital requirements, digital technology, the digital processor at the core of digital payloads sincerely 90s, the initial development of generation one processor. subsequent to that there was the dot.com period, a mobile system and i go -- and then the wideband global satellite system that took on more higher-level processing capabilities. we leveraged that over time, the
current block 2 system, and sold it commercially and since that time we have been sort of disrupting ourselves with technology every two years. this is what we need to do and what customers are demanding. we couple the core of that technology with phase array technologies, you can virtually change the bandwidth, change the coverage on the ground, reconstitute the business plan. that is what we are doing in commercial space. there has to be some application for the government side as well. other things we are doing, where we can use them on wideband platforms into any frequency,
spectrum technologies we are developing the capability to operate high throughput with noninterference based, enabling more systems to coexist. just as important as the technology, we are trying to find ways to use commercial contracting processes on the government side. something we can do to simplify the government contracting processes. what are the things we can do to leverage our capabilities and be able to affect policy changes, one of the biggest issues we see is budgetary period, where we believe the funding should look
at longer-term commitment. currently it is an annual budget. extremely helpful for companies like boeing and other manufacturers looking at investments in technology. it is hard to make strong investments capital. we have also heard the reason for the hesitation by the department to enter into a long-term contract because market conditions could change and rates would fall, at a higher price, the commercial market has addressed that. there are ways to build contracting language to address that type of concern where you would adjust the rates based on
market condition. the last thing i would like to bring up is the spectrum aspect of the spectrum is a scarce resource, the ability to work with the government spectrum and have federal governments allow commercial users to do that on a noninterference based, be helpful for every one. the rest of the questions come later. >> thank you very much. next up, marcy steinkey, with digital globe. you have a satellite. >> a beautiful ocean view.
indeed. i have been here almost 5 years, in the air force on the operational side. a dual perspective. a couple things i want to address, how the government can better leverage commercial and policy needs changing to make that happen. as an overview there are three things i want to talk about, first is delivering actionable insight from a multiple source platform. the second is looking beyond acquisition to integration. the third is minimizing barriers. from a policy perspective i will touch on regulatory modernization on and management so we will start by talking
about deliverable actionable insight. for those that don't know, the old guy in town, not flexible but we understand you do not exist by patrol alone. if you look at our plan and what is already in action, the platform and services which is analytics, that is the three lane highway of the future so to make that happen you need a number of different things, which we are using. first is data. the data has to be accurate. that accuracy impacts a number of things, not just the quality of the image but the metadata and actual picture. using that good information gives you better analytics and services on the back end.
we have right now 70 terabytes of data, the feature plan bringing 120 terabytes of information, stores around 100 petabytes. i am telling you because we use that for that information. along with that information you need algorithm so digital globe has a great team, and the wisdom of other folks building algorithms, we have a program, what we call it, is a platform that is not just information in the long 15 plus year archive of information but a variety of sources of information, and ecosystem we build around, north of 30 commercial customers and
government customers. we invite folks to bring in your algorithm for the platform to get the information you need. believe answers is the future. we also believe leveraging, crowdsourcing, in that platform we built machine to machine learning, helping narrow search bases so you can give that information to the analyst and they cannot spend their time spending hours and hours finding the needle in the haystack as needles. so that becomes a predictive analytics as well. a couple other things i will
mention. partnering with really great 3-d imagery comes with an and a couple other things people may not be aware of, this goes to a number, we use human landscaping and not just the physical imagery but the cultural information that comes with it. there is a program that is built and helps identify not just borders of countries but tribal alliances and how medical or water fit in different areas so a number of things use that information. one aspect that can be applied in a military environment is a supply line or supply hub somewhere taking that information into consideration so you know who you are negotiating with, limit the number of tribal leaders in less
safe areas, or another warlord because you have taken those things into consideration. a couple things, if we look at going beyond acquisition to integration, one thing we would like to do is ingrain through new capabilities. if you take the schoolhouse dod training, they are still using -- if it is not 60 years old it is almost 16 years old and still better quality than the other stuff that is out there right now but there it is a lot up for grabs and having leaders understand what the capabilities are starting at the ground level, a program called global
dd. and 5 or 6 clicks, looking at whatever part of the planet you want to look at, the most current information we have imaged or rectified on a website in 11 minutes. average is around a couple hours but if you are on a board operating base and want the most current operation it is not just the most current picture but the archive, changes as well so that is out there and i am certain that is not being disseminated. you need to work to disseminate that. besides major combatants we have used that for humanitarian assistance or natural disasters. we can get into greater detail to touch on the policy changes that would be really welcome.
no surprise, we have been pushing regulatory modernization as well as responsible space lately. regulatory modernization is slow, restrictive and cumbersome. there are a lot of people working on it but a lot of benefit with come with improvements in that process. the slowness of it, i am sure we will agree on this, the slow and cumbersome process pushes customers to international competitors. and they use the cumbersome process of the us government as a reason not to go at times. on space traffic management, a conversation that definitely needs to occur but for the last year and a half it has grown but it is an area that needs to be
discussed. a number of areas we are looking at of different altitudes for maneuverable satellites particularly if you are at an eighth grade class, let's learn but let's make things trackable so that we minimize the potential for space debris. things need to come down more quickly as it stands right now. >> last panel, the vice president at formerly planet labs, has the name change officially taken place? >> it is a branding. we are still planet labs.
>> i turn it over to you. you are in the imagery remote-sensing part of the market but different from digital globe. >> nice to see everybody, challenging to be the last one of the panelists. insightful, smart people because you wonder what i am supposed to say after everyone had great things to say but i will try to abstract out a little bit so i won't necessarily talk about planet labs specifically, we went to revisit across the globe, we got that out there but it is interesting, boeing has been in the space business for 50 years, planet has been in the space business just over five years. you are seeing an industry, companies that range emerging to established, working on space-age platforms that range from small to medium to large,
constellations of single to dozens to hundreds 2 multiples of hundreds of satellites in many orbital regimes. what that is doing is creating a diversity generated about the planet in real time, fed through the tools and devices marcy mentioned for machine learning and algorithm development and creating what can be called information infrastructure, about the habitability and change and sustainability of the planet we are living on. in addition to the ways we see diversity in the space segment there are many portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. all this activity generates an interesting perspective in response to what scott said. historically state policies have
been a derivative policy by national security and civil means but the evolution in what we are seeing is pushing a different perspective which is commercial space industry is now a partner leg of the stool to our national space capabilities to national security in a way that is more than just being the industrial contractor base which it had been so critically for so long. i think that pushes on the question of what could be done, new and interesting in the area of policy your plans for the government to take advantage of what you are seeing in the space companies, use the faster development times and aggregated systems and companies that planned short orbital lifetimes
for satellite with the intentional replacement capabilities and people intentionally doing graceful do your bidding and graceful degradation. if you have the overview of what you are seeing in these categories before you can get to questions of integration from the data or insight side or the space side in terms of what hardware can do for you, you have to have a bit of a period of demonstration and exploration. industries doing things differently and quickly. i would say government, military, doesn't matter, you find a way to do rapid demonstrations and get data and information what capabilities you can bring. the data and information from those demos inform planning and a new kind of way. we are all used to the historical process of analysis of alternative, receiving all
kinds of information about sensitivities around new developments but if you can complement that with rapid demonstrations from an industry that can respond in 12 to 18 months you can have greater confidence in decisions in the planning you might make when it comes to how you might choose to design future architecture. would you choose a single point solution? where would you fall to make the decisions or the aggregating network? that demonstration period gives confidence to have a decision how to be flexible, gives you confidence in how quickly or what speed you can execute a change in the architecture or an update to the architecture and gives you speed and confidence in how much has to be a serious decision associated with satellite or decision associated with product and services that derived from satellite and other data that can be provided by cloud services.
last thing it does, gives folks in government positions the idea that play with subtlety. how do you choose to go with government only versus more service based decision for some kind of things. and architecture, how to choose those things rapidly in a consistently it a rate of, associated with which part of the architecture are the ones you care most apart and respond aggressively where you are willing to tolerate the kind of risk, which are the ones you might be more willing to consider integration from commercial or international level. ..
i will close with this, but we are seeing them talk about the things you can bring to the table. what we are seeing in industry is the evolution of just data to information, insights, indicators and instruments to do something based on the indicator you received. that's happening across many market verticals and it's the same set of trends and movements happening in the government decision-making. if we are both seeing that we may have a different and what those instruments are but we
might as well find ways to work together on the process. >> thank you all of the panelists. those are great opening remarks and we have set the stage for good discussion. while the audience is getting their questions ready, i wanted to start the discussion, doug, i'll go to you first. from a military perspective, if you could reach out to the commercial space industry and direct how they are spending their money, if you you could magically make them invest more or less in certain areas, what would you do? where would you like to see commercial companies putting their investments and where they're going in the future? >> first of all, let me make sure we understand this is your question because i would actually do that. seriously, i think the big issue
that the government is going to look at as we try to ingest commercial space services is cyber vulnerability. that is the key. we have seen the much valued experiments that people are doing in satellite activity across the globe, but quite frankly, the soft underbelly is the cyber vulnerabilities. this is not just a military statement, but industry statement as well. if you are going to rely on satellite services, they are depend on the security that you can bring to the network that connects to it. that has to be a key area where we need to be concerned about. will be very hard for us to rely on space services fielded through the commercial practices
that don't have good cyber security link to them, to add that on later. that's something you have to address from the get-go. it's also fairly expensive when you do that. what's interesting is if you are a satellite manufacture, you might not want to guard against a satellite attack because the likelihood that your satellite gets shot by some sort of a set is quite low but the likelihood that your network is attacked in a cyber attack is quite high. that is something from the commercial world and the government world should be concerned with. whether it's commercial, civil, government, entrepreneurial, international, how do we make sure they're depended again cyber attack.
>> todd, next i'll go to you. in in your decades of experience in this area, i know you may have had a hand in previous laws and policies that are enacted here, what has changed fundamentally about the commercial space industry and what does that mean in terms of updating government laws, regulations, policies? what do you think needs to happen right now? >> i think one of the things that happens is some of the visions that people had in the reagan administration, early bush administration have come to fruition. there is the thought that if we had more commercial activities in space, not only with that spur innovation but provide pressure on the communities who otherwise would lock in two ways of their own ways of being and achieve talk with each other and then not move.
the idea of injecting in another innovative forced from the private sector was certainly something we thought about back in the 80s. one of the things that that happened was in the '90s, you started to see the integration of space with information technologies. from a nerdy perspective, you realize this makes a lot of sense because they have an advantage of moving information. you saw what the drop of tts prices which are seen today in remote sensing system fusing together. even on the threat side, they have a high degree of overlap with each other. there has been not integration which has been a big change. the other change has been the rise of private equity finance and venture capital financing
which, in part, people have people have debates about this, part has been driven by the quantitative easing that has been done since the financial crisis. as people search for yield they go into higher risk areas. the private equity and venture capital portion of activity has been surprising to me now because people are interested in space and it things but the range and depth but this has gone on, in part driven by macroeconomic conditions as well looking forward to the future, what might come out of this is that the increasing secular trends in the budget of mandatory spending being what it is in the pressure that's putting on all non-defense discretionary spending, we can argue about variations between this or that you between the white house and congress and
what parties are to move or not move but the budget allocations and budget caps and the overall structure of the budget is going to be the grinding pressure point. like a glacier coming south and pushing all before. in that environment, the political community is going to find itself dealing with that front and foremost. the operational community of the space side commercial side are going to be looking for how do they get the most out of the limited resources they have. this will drive deeper questions about what should be done in-house, what should be sent out, what intellectual capacities do we need to retain in government and which ones are we willing to let go. we can argue about particular projects. the difficulty for the commercial community in responding to that will be how realistic they are with
themselves as to wears their new demand coming from and where is it simply government privatization. some of the colleagues here, their market segment has seen amazing growth in ways i didn't predict or see back in the early '90s because in the last decade, what we have seen his location -based services and people like google and facebook bringing new demand to the market, not just government demand repurposed, say the way nga might be doing it, but brand-new private-sector demand. that sector is a very different kind of beast than what's happening in launch for the government is still primary driver of this activity, although there's a lot of new stuff that is potentially coming along.
>> the last question for the three industry panelists, you can answer in whatever order you wish, several of you hinted at this and said some changes you would like to see on the government side in contracting and licensing regulations, but there were some specific areas you think there could be some quick wins, given this is a presidential election year with changes in administration. are there some quick wins for congress and the new administration next year where they could update laws and change practices in a way that would both benefit commercial space industry and also the government? >> .forget your microphone microphone. >> we will tagteam this, probably. so i would say, actually,
congress has made great strides in trying to address the issues that are cumbersome and weigh upon commercial remote sensing. we are incredibly thankful for that. there is a path forward and we hope it continues with the new administration and the new congress. i believe that it will. some of the things they're looking at are just the right regulatory oversight, probably when it was set up 25 years ago made sense when every satellite was a classified government satellite. now that the world is different, we need need to look at what do they really need to see and what can we let go. that conversation is ongoing, but i hope 2017 is a year that the answer comes. there is a lot that can be let go. we need to focus on the things that are really monitoring what the companies are doing, much like the fcc overseas commercial
satellite. when there is truly a unique security implication that we don't disregard that. >> i don't have anything specific on that one, but i wanted to steal your thunder from early when you mentioned strategic management. going to answer the question slightly different when it's an area where we should be aware, be a little cognizant of the potential downsides of trying to go for quick wins. looking at space traffic management is an important area because there are lots of questions unanswered about how authorities might be evaluating debris or conjunction our collision risks associated with new emerging large-scale
constellations and different orbits. there is clearly an emerging need, but if one responds a little too quickly, one could begin a solution that's not quite right and creates more headaches than if one took a little bit of time. i think one of the things the government has a great power to do and before he could choose to regulate or do any oversight function is to have a convening function and stand there with the warning and say hey, if we don't see certain things evolved we might have to step in and regulate and then within say what can new industry due to establish your own rules of the road or behavior that is relevant to the issues we are going to associate with traffic
management and orbital debris that could alleviate the pressure to move on the legal or regulatory side but doesn't take away the time in the sense of urgency to make smart decisions. >> i would agree with the debris mitigation. we would be happy to participate in something like that. also, were looking for a model, something to get some of these things moving. we feel the process should be simpler and doable in these cases. regulatory -wise, not to give away satellites breakdown, space spectrum to give it to satellite
and keep it terrestrial would be annoyed. >> in terms of things for congress to suggest, going back to doug's point of security and it, this administration administration has put the funding in for resilience activities which has been a positive development i think the masks administration would be well advised to continue that work. the second thing i would say regarding regulations, there are constellations that richard referred to. i've been participating in un discussions on long-term sustainability of space activity and 12 of 16 guidelines reached consensus last june. sometimes activities like watching paint dry. when it comes out and they actually have consensus and it
gets out, it's fairly powerful. i'm reminded of this because of the convening function, some of the -- if you're going to regulate, please talk to the industry are going to regulate and talk to the industries that might be involved in doing this. think about cost-benefit. this stuff sounds really basic, but getting other countries to buy in and say yes, that's something we need to do is particularly important for space. any one bad actor can make things really harmful. i want to get back to the spectrum issue. they don't have access to their
own structure. there's a split between the fcc which responds to itself as an independent commission and the agency response. you have a separation of powers going on which makes getting into avenue to be synced up which is especially hard. there's a lot of money running around in broadband and that pressure is immense. space provides very unique capabilities that aren't always recognized or realized by the commission and when it makes these provisions, not just, these are all things, if they were missing it would be just as devastating if we were attacked by a foreign enemy. making sure that that doesn't mess up, this is a spectrum
issue because it touches their abilities. >> with that i will open it up for questions from the audience. i think we have a microphone in the back. >> you mention the need to leverage capabilities, do you see any roles for our allies or platforms that could or should be leverage for national security. >> normally my stump speech includes commercial and international but since this is mostly commercial, i left it at that, but absolutely. if you look at the nations on the planet, most of them tend to be partners or allies of the
united states. we have many partners in military space. we began a formal instantiation of that called the combined space operations unit which includes five of our allies right now and will expend more in the future. we been playing wargames with our allies. every one of these nations brings their own robust to the floor. i like to remind people that the
spectrum belongs to our allies in the uk and france opposed to the u.s. there are credible capabilities out there and all missionaries, whether that is in the missionary area, all all that you can think of, there are capabilities that can be easily shared and incorporated. we have not thought about doing that in the past and that needs to be changed. it has been our habit to use us-based capabilities and that makes no sense at all. makes more no sense so it's 100% that we are looking at that.
>> have talked about how he sees a role for reusable racket tree for military use. unfortunately it seems like the air forces range are stuck in a 20th century mindset where they only launch every few months or so and it's an expendable vehicle. i wonder if you see that as a problem and what you are doing to nudge the air force forward to more innovative range practices? >> i don't know that i would call it a problem, i would call it a condition that we have right now. that condition is predicated upon the fact that we have not found an economic use in military yet.
exciting for those of you have sat at the launchpad, it's a very exciting time for that excitement tells us that's the most important part of the space mission. it's not. that is a trucking operation, quite frankly. it's a very high horse powered truck to get things into orbit. if what were bringing to orbit. i view we have a condition of launch that exist today that reflects architecture that we have. we don't have a condition of launch that reflects the fact that we can't do something, it's that we don't need to do something. the minute we need to do it, and we might need to do it either commercially or militarily, the the minute we need to do
something i'm fully confident that the creativity that we've seen, i think the solutions will be brought to bear. i am far less worried of our architectural needs than how our architectures can evolve to meet our military needs. they will get there on a state-funded launch base which is how airports compete but i think that's a much better model than the way we compete on launch heads today. >> i when asked the same question down the road and see if other panelists want to respond regarding the launch
market, reasonability is really a means to an end. the objective we are going after is higher launch rate, more responsive launch and lower cost launch. would any of you like to comment on how that affects your business and the capabilities that become economically viable. >> the low cost launch is imperative. i think that is attractive to our customers and spacex and others are working on that. as far as constellations go, i think it's imperative. >> he say reusable, but i think part of what you might be thinking there is responsive or readily available or some
combination of that and i think what you care about is the opportunity to have better predictability in your schedule, the idea to control where you go and to be able to do that in a cost environment that's affordable. right now the smaller community has to mostly be secondary payloads and opportunistic and getting rides to orbit which are the greatest utility. i do think some of the companies that were mentioned in the evolution of the smaller launch capability that have these advantages of being responsive, potentially reusable and flexible for scheduling and so forth will only further in a
able the architecture based on those satellite architectures that can utilize that type of capability. there is a feedback mechanism between the two. >> clearly how we have launched in the past is not necessarily how we will launch in the future. you have to look at all options so we will be looking at a lot of different options if we go forward. we met there. >> if every launch is hundred million dollars, and that would be cheap, quite frankly, then you tend to maximize the ability on any system and you make those systems last longer and longer.
there is a feedback loop and it is a question, i view it because numerous like the, but some think that neither end is the correct end. you have to hear from both end. there will be an evolution along both sides as we see cheaper satellite manufacturing you will see us strive for cheaper launches. there's an interesting feedback that were seeing on both ends of that spectrum that the government will take advantage of on both ends of the spectrum. >> i'm toby from bloomberg view. this is for doug initially and then anyone else.
a number of people in this room were at the event this morning with the three service secretaries. they were unsurprisingly asked what is the most pressing military issue for the next president. i was surprised when therefore secretary said that over the next four years there are number of monumental decisions that need to be made. she did not get any details. you want to say without reading her mind what she had in mind, and particularly, things that may involve industry as well? >> that's the second team time in about four days that i've been asked to read the secretary's mind. terry james is obviously this spoke space advisor. certainly, space is on her mind. i have not talked to her about the most pressing policy policy
issues that she sees. thank you for advising, i probably will go see. i do think, if i look at them from my perspective, and i haven't spoken much about policy here today, but let me talk a little bit about policy. we talk about them somewhat already. regulatory reform and relaxation is clearly something we need to deal with. i see that when i'm only looking out one portion of the environment which is how we regulate capabilities. we also need new regulations in area we don't have regulations. i think there's a regulatory agenda not just for the good of all america but the good of all nations, how will we go ahead
and regulate that to the advantage and make sure that it doesn't disadvantage our companies are our activities. number two is the ability, and this is a defense department, how do we integrate non- government owned space and services into our government missions. let me give you an example. if we drop a gps guided bomb but we got it from galileo system and it hits the wrong target, whose viability is that? how have we accepted liability for a galileo signal for gps signal? we control gps and can bring lethal lethal force to bear on a target because we can trust guidance to the extent that we own it. can we trust non- u.s.