tv American Politics CSPAN May 16, 2010 9:30pm-11:00pm EDT
as we get down the line on this parliament and both of your candidates will have records to defend, how do you see that panning out? >> we are not merging our two parties. we would expect them to put up candidates in that intensely reasonable way that we always do. that is the first thing and it will happen quite quickly. this is not an aspiration -- it will be very early legislation. what the fixed-term parliament, because we think that will make for a strong and determined government that can act in the long term. it has been knocking around in terms of political forums for a long time. i think now is the moment to do that. we want to have -- we have a strong majority together in the house of commons and house of
lords. maybe we can learn new tricks from each other. people will sometimes want to take a stand on an issue. the aim is to have both parties firmly committed to a cologne -- to a coalition agreement that is set out in full detail for the reforms that we need. that is the same. -- that is the aim. >> we have our own traditions and culture in this country. there is a very significant change. in other political cultures, even the idea that parties might cooperate with each other in governments for the good of the country, they would campaign against each other for some of the time. that is the sign -- kind of thing you'll see now. i hope that people find it relatively unsurprising
relatively quickly. as david has quite rightly said, we can only help bring that about by being successful in delivering the good government that we have negotiated in this coalition agreement. >> i thank you all very much. i have to go appoint the rest of this government, the rest of this cabinet so we can get on with doing the work that we are both talking about. thank you very much indeed for coming. >> thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> do you have been watching the first news conference by incoming british prime minister
david cameron and deputy prime minister nick clegg. you can see this again at the state opening of parliament scheduled for tuesday, may 25. you can watch past programs from the 2010 british elections on our web site, c-span.org. >> coming up next on c-span -- a news conference with secretary of state hillary clinton and british foreign secretary william head. after that, john thune speaks to republican state leaders. at 11:00 p.m. eastern, it is q&a "." -- "q&a." tomorrow, a senate homeland security committee hearing on the oil spill and the cleanup efforts. they will hear from janet napolitano and the president of bp america starting at 2:30 eastern on c-span.
>> defending the united states against cyber attacks -- monday, homeland security deputy undersecretary philip reitinger will discuss the role of networks in security. that is on ""the communicators -- the communicators. >> after the formation of the government, they talk about iraq and afghanistan and the longstanding alliance between the u.s. and u.k. this is about 25 minutes. >> good afternoon. i am delighted to welcome secretary hague here for his first press conference in his
new position. i was pleased to have met with him when he was in his shadow stage some months ago. this is not the first time that we have had the opportunity for a substantive discussion about a very broad range of important matters. the election of a new government in the united kingdom and the smooth transfer of power this week were two powerful symbols of the enduring democratic traditions that our two nations share. we're very intrigued by and will follow closely the latest incarnation of this long, democratic tradition. we're reminded again of our common values being that foundation of a historic alliance that really undergirds are common aspirations and our common concerns. the obama administration looks forward to working with the new british government. we will continue to build on the deep and abiding trust that has
existed between the british and american people for a very long time. united states and united kingdom are also firmly committed to the nato mission in afghanistan. we support the efforts by the afghan government to fight corruption and build a stable and secure government and country. we will continue our very close consultations on these matters going forward. we also remain united in our
insistence that iran fulfil its national -- international obligations and prove that its nuclear program is for people -- is for peaceful purposes only. they had not indicated any interest in it or acceptance of to discussng offer of th international concerns over its international program. their senior officials continue to say they will not talk about their nuclear program with us. closely with our partners on a new security council resolution affirming that there are consequences should they continue to flout their international obligations and fail to comply with both iaea decisions and u.n. security council resolutions. we also are discussing the importance of signing an agreement in the middle east peace process. our countries will continue to work together to encourage all
parties to resume the -- resume the negotiations. we think it two-state solution to the israeli-palestinian conflict is the goal of securing a comprehensive peace in the middle east which requires everyone to be at the table. there are so many other issues that we touched upon. we share a mutual interest in restoring confidence in the financial sector in europe and euro zone, as well as the global economy. we will continue to work to restore economic stability. i look forward to a strong working relationship with the foreign secretary. it is a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to begin what will be long, close, and at times intense conversations of the months and years ahead. >> thank you. it is an immense pleasure for me to be here today. i was here as a shadow foreign secretary seven months ago. i always hoped we would have
the opportunity to work together in the government and we now have that opportunity to do so. it has been an extraordinary week. it is only one week since the election vote came in. we have a new government created in a new way. one of the things that has struck the prime minister and i is the warmth we have had in our welcome in the united states. the first person to call me was the president of the u.s. the first person to call me when i entered the foreign office was secretary clinton. vice president biden has had an excellent job on the telephone with the new deputy prime minister, nick clegg. one reason i wanted to come here and have our meeting is to show that we reciprocate that warmth and we're looking forward to the relationship which the secretary of state has been describing. this new british government has
some real ambition, energy, and determination to rebuild our economic strength at home, which is the foundation of any successful foreign policy, but also to deliver a distinctive british foreign policy abroad. i'm aware, coming into this job, of the challenges of foreign policy, which are uniquely tricky. i have always had huge admiration for secretary clinton and the leadership she has provided to the international community as secretary of state. her energy, ideas, advocacy of women's rights, education, development, effective diplomacy -- they are an inspiring example to other foreign ministers and would-be foreign ministers around the world. i pay tribute to her for that. we have very productive talks today that reflected a very wide agenda. we work in partnership on those.
we talked about our joint effort in afghanistan, which the prime minister has made our top priority. we will give the strategies -- the nato strategy and the agreements made at the london conference for time and support -- the time and support to succeed. we discussed the relationship in pakistan, where we share common goals and have started discussing ways to enhance and strengthen our cooperation in what we do. on the need -- we discussed iran, where we agree on the need to secure the passage of the un security council resolutions. we will play a key role in ensuring that there is action by the european union to follow up such a resolution.
we spoke about the middle east peace process, where i expressed my firm and full support for the efforts to relaunch negotiations. as a leading member of the eu, we want to buttress these efforts. we will work together on the crucial issue of nuclear proliferation and the progress that we hope as been made in new york. we discussed developments in europe. i reiterate my determination that the european union should be a firm partner with the united states in meeting our shared at challenges, and the determination of the new british government to play a highly active and activist role in the european union from the very beginning. i want to say a few words about whats the about presidents have called a very extraordinary relationship between the united states and britain. we're happy to accept that description and agree with it.
theunited states is the most important ally of the united kingdom. fundamentally, it is a relationship rooted in our strong national interests. the scope of our corporation is diplomats, -- the scope of our cooperation is unparalleled -- our military, diplomats -- is unparalleled. they work hand and glove together. it is not a backward looking or nostalgic relationship. it is looking to the future from combating violence and extremism to addressing poverty and complex around the world -- conflict around the world. we share common priorities to an extraordinary degree. we will continue to pursue these priorities. we can, please say there is an -- we can confidently say unbreakable alliance. -- we can confidently say there is an unbreakable alliance. thank you. >> [inaudible] we have " time for questions on each side. >> madam secretary, you spent a lot of time talking about
afghanistan this week. forgive me if i switched the subject to iran. there has been a lot of violence in the wake of the elections in iraq -- iran in places which had been fairly quiet recently. is the administration concerned about this? how deeply are you concerned? how might it affect the timetable of the troop withdrawal? >> charlie, of course we are concerned any time there is the level of violence that we've seen and loss of life and destruction that it has caused. we're not worried about the ability of that iraqi people and their institutions to work together to overcome the threat that the extremists are constantly presenting them with. in fact, we also have seen signs much less of a threat -- of al qaeda in iraq becoming much less of a threat overall.
the spate of recent bombings has certainly been heartbreaking for those who were affected. what is heartening to us is that the government and the people seem undeterred. there has not been a reaction that has pitted communities against each other. there have not been recriminations, even in this difficult period of government formation that is ongoing. overall, we are very convinced that iraq is certainly able to deal with these in both the military and police functions that are equally important in their political structures. we see nothing that would in any way interfere with our
timetable for withdrawal of american troops. >> [inaudible] >> foreign secretary, madam secretary, you talked about being intrigued by this new incarnation of democracy in britain. and as your two questions? -- can i ask you two questions? is there any party that is -- part of you that is worried about possible fractures in the coalition government -- something very unusual in britain -- leading to a lack of stability in your relationship? on afghanistan, are you concerned that the surge is not delivering fast enough? president karzai is hardly delivering at all. >> on the first question on the answer is no. i have no concerns whatsoever.
we do not have a formally coalition government in the way that you have formed one in the u.k. now. we have enough of our own internal differences that we have to sort through. i see nothing at all unusual about this new government. from our perspective, it is off to a very strong start. on the foreign policy front, which i followed very closely obviously, we are extremely pleased. this meeting and discussion that was confirmed -- this meeting and discussion confirmed our close partnership and commitment to working together. afghanistan is one of those areas. i would beg to differ with the premise of the question. i think that the actions that our coalition forces -- the nato and i sat -- isaf forces are proving to be effective.
we conducted our own very thorough review when president obama took office. we made three conclusions. number one, what happened in afghanistan was critical to america's security interests. in our own home country and beyond, in the countries of our friends and allies like great britain. number two, the taliban had, after having been driven out of afghanista n, regained momentum. that momentum had to be broken. it was required -- more troops were required on the ground in order to achieve that objective. i am seeing signs of that. the third thing is -- there had to be a very close civilian military partnership -- a civilian-military partnership,
because you do not expect to win a counterinsurgency by military means alone. the military commanders who are in charge of this on our side, general petraeus, general mcchrystal, are taking the lessons they learned from iraq and applying them in afghanistan to good effect. we also know that we have to strengthen the capacity of the government of afghanistan. i would just add four context here -- for context, this country was so ravaged by war and the most intense conflict and depredations that destroyed so much of their history, otheof their infrastructure, that it may seem like it is a long time to us, with our timeframes in the u.s. and u.k., but the k.plus -- eight plus years that have gone by since the rotting taliban have seen
significant lives in -- routing of the taliban have seen significant improvement in the lives of that afghanistan people. -- in the lives of the afghanistan people. there is a creation of a democratic government where there was not one. a number of his the ministers, -- key ministers, many of whom were here to report on the progress they are making in this very critical areas like the economy, agriculture, health, education -- part of what we will begin with our counterparts, the foreign secretary, and others, is to work to review where we are, what more we need to do the, and how we can better coordinate our efforts. our military efforts are very well coordinated. on the other side we want to make sure -- on the the side, we want to make sure we're making the best investments. -- on the other side, we want to make sure we are making the best investments.
this is a big challenge. i'm not going to undersell that. it is in our interests, or we would not be here. we're making progress. with a very clear understanding of how much more we and the afghans need to be doing -- we have a very clear understanding of how much more we and afghans need to do. -- we and the afghans need to do. >> how can we best do that? we need to enhance and reinforce the cooperation between the united kingdom and united states at the highest levels, so that we of a clear perspective on -- we have a clear and shared perspective on what we're doing. on the question about the nature of the new government in britain, i think it is very important for our partners and friends around the world to know that what we've set out to achieve is a particularly stable period in british politics and government.
two of the three political parties have had elections andwe have come together in the national interest, ahead of the party interests. we of created a sizable majority in the house of commons -- we have created a sizable majority in the house of commons. we want to sustain the government over a full five-year term. that has been strongly welcomed around the world. it does mean stability in britain so that we can pursue the kind of objectives we have been talking about. everything i said today about our approach to relations with the united states is an approach shared by the whole cabinet. i am speaking on behalf of the united government. >> [inaudible] -- secretary clinton, you spoke to a chinese secretary on tuesday night. did that conversation bring you materially closer to consensus on an iran resolution? it seems inevitable that the
iranians will try to use this weekend's visit to try to blunt the momentum toward additional st. john -- toward additional sanctions at the council. what have you told anyone in your conversations to try to prevent that? >> first, i did have a very lengthy and substantive conversation with that stain counselor. we covered -- state councilor. we covered a lot of the issues that were pursued in new york. we are making progress every day. this is the highest priority of the united states and of many of our partners and allies, like the u.k. we believe that the cases being made, perhaps -- we believe that the case is being made, perhaps most effectively by the iranians themselves.
when the united states and allies like the u.k. -- they began pointing out that the iranians were not responding to our offers of engagement, including the offer that was made for the reactor approach. it was not accepted. there had been no meetings since the meeting in geneva in october. the iranians unilaterally said they would start enriching at 20% when the undisclosed facility was revealed. the iaea, under the director, issued its report. every step along the way has demonstrated clearly to the ira then -- to the world that iran is not participating in the th inter national arena in the way we asked them to do.
they continue to pursue their nuclear program. we are aware that there will be a meeting in iran. i spoke at length to the brazilian foreign minister. significantly, the interchange between president medvedev and one of his counterparts illustrated that the brazilians are attempting to climb this hill. the brazilians are still hopeful that because of the visit, the iranians will agree to meet with them and accept the tehran research reactor proposal. they hope it will begin to abide by their international obligations. they told her in the context of the visit that they had less than a 1 in 3 chance. it has moved in the same direction.
some have moved more quickly than others. it is in the direction of reforming the 30 -- reforming -- reaffirming the security council and uniting the world in a way that sends an unequivocal message to the iranian leadership. i have told my counterparts in many capitals around the world that i believe that we will not get any serious response out of the iranians until after the security council acts. >> [inaudible] >> there have been several foreign secretaries under the previous government who discussed the iran issue. it has edged ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon. what do you think you can bring to this subject that might be different from the approach of past secretaries? when do you think we might get
to the stage where some sort of strike will be discussed? >> i am not looking for differences from previous british and ministrations. -- administrations. we support the effort of the outgoing labor government -- labour government. there'll be a strong continuity on british policy on this matter. i fully endorse everything that secretary clinton has just said about it. the united kingdom will work solidly alongside the united states to secure the security council resolutions. we will play that role within the european union that i spoke of before. we'll do everything we can as a new government in britain to persuade our partners in europe that it will be necessary to show europe's determination to take some similar -- many similar steps to those taken by the united states to intensify the peaceful pressure on iran.
i have long advocated that the european union should adopt financial sections every time -- financial sanctions of the type the united states has implemented them on this issue. we'll have to get into the specifics once the security council resolution has passed. there is no magic to this approach. it requires persistence and determination. it requires united strength in the international community to tackle this problem. we will buttress that, as indeed our predecessors have tried to do. we are not calling and we have never ruled out supporting military action, though we are not calling for it. it is because we want to see this matter settled peacefully and rapidly that we call for sanctions and support the idea of the security council resolutions. that is our perspective. >> thank you.
>> thank you very much indeed. >> thank you. >> watch this week's hearings on the gulf of mexico oil spill or look back at the exxon valdez hearings from 1989. you can find that at the new c- span a video library where there are over 160,000 hours of programming. search, watch, clip, and share -- every program since 1987 is available free and online. >> this was the meeting with john thune and his remarks on the state of the economy and the country as a whole. it is about 30 minutes. he is introduced by the rnc
chairman, michael steele. >> we want to welcome all of you and thank you for what has been, i hope for you a wonderful day to have -- day of business and information. we appreciate everything that the staff has done to put together this event for us. thank you so much for all of your hard work and dedication. we want to also make sure that we have the opportunity to welcome an old friend who is here with us -- the audibles -- the honorable senator from -- the honorable senator from the great state of arkansas. welcome and thank you for being here. .
him, he is a glutton for punishment. since he was first drawn to public service when he met congressman jim abner criticized his basketball shooting game -- really. i have to share with you my basketball story. the coach said, "son, do not ever do this again." he went on to work for the good senator. like so many of our heroes today, he served in the reagan administration. he worked for the small business administration. like many of you today, john was dean ed and the state party in south dakota. in 1996 he joined it to shake things up in the house after the 1994 revution. he kept his term-limit pledge and went home after three terms.
in 2004, we were cheering wildly. i am sure you can remember where you were on that election night when he took down at tom daschle. [applause] in honor of that great feat, we plan to take down harry reid. [applause] at that time, it was the first time in 52 years a sitting senate leader had been taken out. this man came with his best game d got it done. we look forward to having that great moment again this year. the senator is the head of the politics committee and i have the pleasure of meeting with him and many of the senators every tuesday as they talk about not just the leadership opportunities in the senate but ho as a party, we get through the message. he is number four in leadership
in the senate. his heart is in grassroots. it is important in this time for us because we need that connection. it says that this party is about our grass root john thune is one of those guys who allows us to do that every day through his leadership in his state and across the country. it gives me great pleasure to welcome to the microphone a friend, a family member, and someone who is doing great work for us, the hon. john stone from south dakota. -- john stone from south dakota. [applause] >> thank you all very much. thank you. thank you, michael. thank you for flattering me by wearing those thune stickers.
i appreciate the leaders are presented here in the room, committee women, executives, and i have my delegation here from south dakota. deena, our ed, and as michael said, i was an ed and we look forward to a great year in south dakota and have great hopes with regards to some of the races in our state. i know that is true around the country. that will come down to the peop in our room inspiring and helping to raise resources so we can get that job done. michael has said we go a ways back. we campaigned together when he was running for the senate in 2006. that was not a particularly good year to be running for the senate. i am very pleased that he is our chairman and that race did not work out how we had hoped, but he is serving in a capacity that
is critically important to our party and country. i have to tell a story because you mentioned basketball. we all knew that michael was going to do great things with this position and previous posts that he had hd. after campaigning with him, i happened to run into one of his basketball coaches from his formative years. i had this discussion with him and he said, we knew michael would do great things from a very early age because he demonstrated a great capacity for leadership,ecision making. said there was one game in particular where they were playing this team. the game started and before the first quarter was over, they were down by 15 points. a guy on the other team was just killing them. the coach said he called a timeout and not everyone in a huddle. we needed to do something to stop no. 22.
if we keep letting him getting these shots off, we will be out of this game in no time. showing the great leadership potential tt he had, michael stepped up and said, "i will take canada because i am not guarding anyone -- i will take him because i am not guarding anyone." [laughter] or something like that. there may be a little embellishment there. i appreciate the chance to be here this evening. these are interesting times for our untry. i compare this to a story i heard a while back about a person who wanted to become a locomotive engineer. he went to the ple where you get such training. he had an instructor there. they said if you have a train coming fm this direction at 65 miles per hour, a train coming fromhis way at 45 miles per
hour, what would you do? he said, i think that would call my brother. the instructor said that was a strange answer. my brother has never seen a really bad train wreck before. i look at what is happening in washington, d.c., and it seems like that is the direction we are heading in unless we can change the direction. that is what we are fixing to do in november. that is why iis iortant that everyone in this room is involved in that effort. in 1900 six, two norwegian brothers came to this country in search of the -- elaine 1906. the only words. or apple pie and coffee. immigration informed than they needed to change their names. i think they thought that it would be too difficult to spell and pronounced.
th picked the name of the farm where they worked which was the "thune" farm. that was my grandfather. he and my great of go to work on the transcontinental railroad. they saved enough money to start it came merchandising company -- to start a merchandising company. when the great depression hit, it made it difficult. they went in different directions. they stayed in the hardware business, but my grandfather started a hardware store in a town of its population of 600. the middle son, my father, went on to start at minnesota. when world war ii started, he became a naval avior and was assign to the uss intrepid. in 1944, he was involved in one of the greatest naval battles in
history where he shot down four enemy aircraft for which he received the distinguished flying cross. when the war ended, he came back, married his sweetheart, came back to our hometown. my grandfather's health was not so good. he asked him to take over the hardware store. i thenaid he felt like he had a responsibility to do that. he settled down in our small community and started raising his family. there are five of us. i do not think my grandfather or father would have expected that anyone in our family would go into the profession of politics. as michael said, i had a random encounr as a freshman in high school with our congressman which peaked my interest in politics. it was about the same time that ronald reagan came on to the political scene. i met the congressman in january 1976. as i got older, are registered
to vote for the first time and president reagan ran in 1980. i decided i wanted to be a republican because i liked what he had to say. i was impressed by his conviction and his belie in american exception was a map. i'm impressed by his willingness to confront the communist threat around the world. i was impressed by his sunny optimism, his belief that america's best days were ahead of us, his belief that you achieve peace through strength. all of the things he talked about where tngs that really struck a chord with me. that is how idec interested in politics, and more importantly republican -- that is how i got interested in politics. we were in really tough shape, but it was the principal the leadership that he brought at that time in history which i think brought america's spirit back to let us -- which led us to a whole new standing in the
world. is that kind of leadership that i think america covets today. i remember a story he once told when we were fighting the cold war about a guy in the soviet union who wanted to buy a car. he goes into the transportation bureau and says he wants to buy a car. the guy says you can pick up your black sedan 10 years from today. the guy says, will that be in the morning or the afternoon? the guy at the transportation rewrote says, what difference does it make? he says he has the plumber coming in the morning. ronald reagan had a way of captioning -- capturing what was so unique about the american experience. it is what separates us from so many countries about the world. it is the principle of 1176. -- 1776. as a look at the challenges we
face today, i am reminded of that. i think aut the things that this great party stands for -- a limited role of government, personal freedom coupled with personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, not spending more than you have come a living within your means, and belief that you do achieve peace through strength, the superiority of the individual over the government. those are foundational republican principles. as a the to the challenge we face today, there are no easy answers. -- as i lookt the challenge we face today, there are no easy answers. back in 1970, ronald reagan had the national governor's association proposed welfare reform. it was defeated 49-1. it was not until 26 years later in the 1996 that a republican congress passed welfare reform.
that changed the culture of this country in a positive way of recognizing the digni that comes with our work. it is that kind of bold leadership that will take america to that next plateau. what do people care about in america today? first and foremost our jobs and the economy. if it were president reagan looking at that, he would wonder what the best thing -- the best way to do that is. he would say, do not do any harm. do not pass these programs that rely on a massive tax increases and borrowing at a time where you have an economy in a recession. do not put new punishing energy taxes on people who are trying to businesses. do not raise taxes on capital gains, dividends, and marginal income that are going to happen next year if the leadership here
in washington has its way. do no harm. focus on small businesses. it is ironic to me that we passed a $1 trillion stimulus bill in washington, d.c., but it was all about big government. it had nothing to do with small businesses. who are the job creators? they are the small businesses. we ought to be looking at how do we provide incentives for them to go at and create more jobs. it means keeping taxes low, not putting these burdensome regulations on them, giving them an energy policy that keeps energy rates low. those are the types of things we out to be forced on when we are trying to -- we ought to be focused on when trying to grow jobs. on the contrary, our leadership is more intent on building more bureaucracies in washington, d.c., and a massive spending programs that rely on tax increases. that is not the prescriptiofor
creating jobs. there are no easy answe. when it comes to the issue of debt, i think people are concerned about is that there is a fear, a palpable fear, that this enormous burden of debt that we have as a nation is going to strangle us and bankrupt us to force future generations to have to deal with a lower standard of ling, and lower quality of life than we enjoyed. the federal government last year, out of every $1 spent in washington, d.c., 43 cents was borrowed. 10 years from now, we will spend more on interest on the debt. it is stunning when you look at the trajectory we are on if we do not take steps to change that direction. again, there are fairly simple principles you can bring into this equation. do not spend money you do not have.
we cannot continue to borrow from the chinese and hand the bill to our children and grandchildren to finance this new spending in washington, d.c. we need to get the spending under control. u need to cap spending. with the preparation bills that passed, we increase discretionary spending by 21% at a time when the rate of inflation was 3.5%. we ought to and programs like tarp which have outlived their usefulness. we ought to make sure that the moneys paid back into the program go to pay down the federal debt so it does not continue to grow and become a political slush fund. we need to pass a balanced budget in this country. [applause]
when the south dakota legislature goes home, they have balanced their budget. the constitution says that they have t heren washington, d.c., we continue to borrow and borrow. we passed the bill on to r children and grandchildren. there are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. when it comes to national security, which i think is on the minds of a lot of americans, look at the attacks as recent as last week. you have to be struck by the fact that sometimes here in washington, and particularly in this administration, there is more of a concern with the rights of terrorists with political correctness than there is with preventing that next attack from happening. we have a perfectly acceptable detention facility in guantanamo bay. we do not need to bring terrorists to the united states. we do not need to try them in
civilian courts. we need an administration that understands that what prompts them to admit -- to commit these acts are not psychological problems. it is because they have an ideology, radicalism, extremism that is being taught and permeating this country and exposing us to those kinds of terrorist attacks. we need to understand what the threats are in this country and confront terrorism in the same way our predecessors dealt with the challenges they faced in their generation. there are not any easy answers, but there are simple answers. president reagan once said that the problem with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant. if you think about the vision that they have for the country and how at contrasts with what we present to the american people as we head into the midterm elections, it could not be more striking.
the differences could not be more clear. elections are about differences. they ran on a campaign of change in the last election. i do not think that most of the american peopl thought the change was going to lead to this massive expansion of government in washington, d.c., that takes more power and money from them, creates more jobs for bureaucrats, try it - piles trillions and trillions of debt on to future generations. that is not what i think the american people had in mind. i think the american people are receptive and will respond to the message -- to than that is consistent with this bas republican principles. i think most americans right now are sitting around their kitchen tables, perhaps even right n, trying to figure out how they will make their ends meet, how th book cut their budgets, how they will live within their means. the only place that not being done is here in wasngton, d.c., where it is business as
usual. this is a crossroads election. it is a very important time for america. we are going to choose the vision for the future that consists of more taxes, more borrowing, more spending, more government or we are going to choose a future that is consistent with the principle that build this great country and will continue to make it strong. those are the principles like personal freedom, personal responsibility, fiscal responsibility, peace through strength. those are the types of principles that made this great country what it is today. we are moving on a very different track right now. if we did not change directions, we are heading for a physical wreck, and national-security rack -- a fiscal iraq, and national security wreck.
as i look at my stus s.d. and across this country, people are creating -- as i look at my state of south dakota, people want to elect officials into office who are intent on solving problems. i have a plaque on my wall in my office that is a quote from the president of the netherlands in the 1800's he said that when principals began to win in this your convictions that piece becomes sen. you must, at the price of dearest peace, laid bare your convictions before friend and enemy with all of the fire of your face. it is time for us to be in the arena.
it is time for people all across this country and across our states to get engaged in the political process. if we offer them a vision and future that consists of those basic principles which i think to lead to great outcomes, we will grow our majorities in the house and senate. we will prepare for majorities in the state legislatures all across this country, governorships, and hopefully in 2012 and the president. that is what this midterm election is all about. in 2002, i lost an election. i lost it by 524 votes. it was the first time i ran for the senate. i had to go up or out. i decided to challenge an incumbent from my state who was going down until the very end. it was not known until wednesday at 9:00 a.m.
i remember watching that the vote total flip and losing the election by 524 votes. i cannot tell you how many people came up to me and sd, if i knew if it was going to be that close i would have voted. [laughter] i would have done this or done that. it will always be close. it is a game of inches. it comes down to execution. you all know that. it is why we have to do a better job this time around. when 2004 came around, i remember sitting in my living room after the 2002 election and we were having this discussion. i will tell you that it is sometimes much harder the spouses. she looked at me and said, "i am not going to another campaign unless god himself comes to the do and says you have to run." i do not think that is going to happen, honey. as time passed and we had an
opportunity to process when we had been through, we were sitting in the living room again having a similar discussion. she looked at me and said, "i finally realized that what we went through in losing that campaign last year was not just about winning. it was about the race." that is a pretty interesting observation. which she had concluded was that as much as i was intent on winning, and i am a competitive person, at the end of the day we need to be in the arena. we need to be in the race. .
we are going to change direction and allied more republican senators, more republican house members, state legislators and governors all across this country. if we do that, we can consistent with those core values and principles build a brighter and more prosperous future for future generations. thank you very much. and may continue to bless the united states of america. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> thank you. he will take one or two questions before he goes. if anyone has a question.
if not, this is full bellies, ok. senator, thank you so much and we appreciate your leadership. we look forward to being in the fight with you. [applause] it says here that chairman steel concludes in dismisses so i guess that is the end of the program. [laughter] [unintelligible] enjoy the rest of your evening. [unintelligible]
thank you all. >> monday, campaign rallies for pennsylvanian 12th district. a rally for republican ken burns with massachusetts senator scott brown in washington, pennsylvania. that is monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> and now will look at some of the political primaries from around the country. from today's "washington journal." let's begin with a look at what's happe frong in pennsylvania and some of the latest polling ny tobers a long
tand ge republican switching parties last yr. let's look at the ny tobers. inspector with 40%. another survey showing inspector at 44% and sestak at 4tc and another sgnvey her trying to make sense of those p jmbers, we are j atned by tom fitzgerald. how did this race become so tight? guest: there was always a fairly high undecided and inspector's suppo sp seemed snot gock in the midnd s0's som
when his option become known. there was one peliller add abou the party switch that reminded mem people. it had inspector being endorsed by george w. bush in 2004 and next to sarah palin. ere was clips of inspector saying he had switched parties so he could get reelected host: we have that ad and want to show it to our audience. the gop passed inspector. here is the ad you referred to a moment ago. y i'm joe sestak the democrai d i authorize this message.
>> for 45 years, aryien specter has been a rpewrepubliclica politician. but now -- my change in party will enable to be elected. he switched parties to save one job. job. his, not yours. >> how often has that ad been running? g.> enoug bethat aing toe who watches brocast television is assured of seein that a n 12 orot 3 times now that the campaign is going to a closing spot and transitio frong away from that one to another one that has rating of various
eyeen trying to beat him for 30 years. there's a lot they hold an'tins him. >> this latest add features barack obama who has campaigned for him and attended a number of fundraisers but not with him the weekend beforthe election. why is that? he went for the ging pernor in jersey seeking election last fall. he went out for the democrat caidate in v. tr so froa and lost that governorship. that governorship. the same as scof democrat in massachusetts when obama went in the last weekend.
i think they want to protect his press teeg. obama probably would have been a big list to inspectoris strength in the city he has a strong lead among african american voters. presumably, he could have juiced up tgnn oui di newspapers a degree. >> i want to say a few things about aryien specter. he cast the deciding vote in favor of the recovery act et let's you pelnow he's g atng to ãat ig4t for you.
maing to republicans will kick around. he'll be out of touue wit bewh you say about washington. too much spending. he's sort of said things like the stimulus was too small it would sound worse on the noopwh considering the moopri the mood everywhere in the country is showing up in pennst.sm froa. the concern and weariness about all the changes in washington espep jmalmake s the deficit sp and the accumulatedebt. people are quite worried about it. >> what's the move on ts sunday? y inside that campaign, they
areervous. they figure if people work at norsecter's record and when he delivered and the question of why do you peleep veteran, the will be fine. if turn out isoe sent. eyut if people p7 ple wake up o not goesday with that feeling, they could go downant the tea tarred - as he called it. goatee party assuming that is written tongue and cheek. the primary isn't next deuce day but in june.
mark hop kins is on the phone. thanksor being with us. why is this veteran republican facing a challenge in his own party? guest: in his own version of the story he's become bob 2.0. sanding a tough rough edge of the first two-years in office in doing that, he's disappointing some of the more conservative constituents. host: what does this tell you about the state of the republican party in the country? guest: think it's an interesting guest case in how important the tea party movement and various causes of the right wing party are going to be be. it really is a test of whether bob has lost track of his constituents. host: can you give us political demographics of the district?
guest: sure. really bli republican disstakt has been for many years. carol campbell presented the district. on inc.le took it over from liz patton. gingrich revolution and committed three terms and really leaving and did leave, ran for the senate and lost and went back to private life for a while and then went back into office in the same district when jim ran for senate. >> we saw him endorse a number of tea party type candidates or more conservative republican candidates. what's h political standing. what impact does it have on his own future in south carolina and lindsay graham who is seeking
re-election? guest: sure. senator democrnt is trying accomplish himself in the right wing of the republican partner. it's a litmus test and he doesn't fit this story. the interesting part is of course if he's in trouble, then senator graham will be when he comes up for re-election. because bob inc. less is threatened as much as anything on the basis of tone. he's not as - clearly conservative as some would like him to be. ho host is lindsay graham viewed the same. guess guess i think s guest: i think so. conversion investigations on why mate change and place him as a
more moderate voice than some would like in the state and there's a question of whether that will cost him or not. host: there was a time in this town where there would be by tarty san ship. coming to some compromise on whatever the legislation happens to be. social security. reagan administration or they reach an agreement or taxes as we saw in welfare reform in the clinton administration. is it becoming more difficult for both parties to reach the compromises for what's happening in the primaries. guest: think that's possibility. we're seeing some tests of that now. congressman ingliinglis, he's endorsed by thenra and taking strong anti-abortion condition positions and continues to do that. has taken republican positions that set him with the odds with the standard story of the
republican party. obvious example is when joe wilson yell at the president in joint section of congress. he was one of seven to vote in a favor of a resolution that rebuked him from doing that. doesn't have political consequences but set him at odds with the rest of the republican party. >> as you watch the lead up to the june 8th prior mare what are you looking at in this race? guest: very interesting. much of the race is happening in a way that's very hard to track. the two leading candidates of him and his leading a point solicitor and tray dow have been getting individual contributions. there's a radio station hammering away at the congressman, but the racistn't getting a lot of attention apart from one of the national media.
and so it's very hard to tell what's going to happen. there certainly people out there who are arguing that he should be beaten but he looks solid in many other respects. host: have there been polls in this race? guest: i haven't seen any. i'm sure there is some polling out there. the best we can do is look at campaign contributions and by that metric although there are four notable people in the race. mr. dowdy is his lead opponent and he and congress man inc.les have a couple of 100,000s based on the federal election commission report at the end of march. so you have to suspect it's a relatively close race. there's one more dynamic that's important and that is that we have a provision for run offs, so if congressman doesn't get 50% of the vote he ends up a run
off and that run off is fueled part by the probability that we'll have a run off in a gubernatorial primary as well. host: do the headlines we've follow over the last year, does his own political standing have an impact in the republican p pr any in south carolina? guest: i think very little. he's definitely his own person. he's made some endorsements and his former wife has made some endorsements. notably in the governor's race but you don't have the sense it swings a lot of votes in his case, even less. host: mark is joining congress again if the congress
fails they're out in 2012. andrew is the associated press capital correspondent from will little rock. thanks for being with us. >> thank you. host: blank lincoln expected to win renomination but faced a challenge from the lieutenant governor in ariz arkansas. still up in points. tell us about the why the lieutenant governor decided to jump in this race. guest: former clinton administration server. was in social security administration and basically he gotten into the race after months of lincoln facing criticm from both sides of the aisle. republicans and from some lib calls. lincoln had anglered liberal groups such as move on dot org
and labor issues on a number of issues especially on health care. her very public opposition to a public option as part of the health care overhaul. plus, her opposition to the employee free choice act that has been a priority for organized labor. really motivated a lot of groups that in the past had supported her. the arkansas, cfo supported lincoln's re-election bid. they said after he apposing card shack they soured on her. hall fair was able to take advantage of the situation. he entered race in rch. right at the beginning of the filing period andas really embraceed by a lot of the groups that had grown frustrated with lincoln. served some employees internatnal union that embraced him with their support
and money. has really made this race unlike any arkansas has seen. >> primary is tuesday but the key is getting majority that could lean to run off. exmain the factors involved in tuesdays vote? guest guess even all the attention has been on those two, there's a third candy day. morrison that doesn't have that much money. doesn't have a chance to win the nomination but h really threatened to take away enough votes to causes a stir. a run off. most of the poles that are out right now show lincoln leading halter but still below the 50% to win the nomination out right. halter i traveled around south arkansas this week and had asked him about that and he seemed to indicate that - going to run off would show weakness for lincoln.
incumbent senator getting below a 50% vote is a danger for her. so i think halters campaign would see a run off as not quite a victory but pretty close. >> what's a registered voters in - what do you think the turn-out will be on tuesday? guest: there's 1.6 million registered voters the state secretary expected 30-35 percent of the registered voters which if that holds up that will be the highest turn-out since 1994. from what we've seen so far it's a state that allows early voting and we've had that for the last two-year. it's been very high so far. more than 95,000 people have voted early or cast absentee ballets higher than the 2008 primary as and the 2006 in the last non-presidentle primary
election. host: was the decision to challenge lincoln a surprise? had there been discussions or water cooler talk about that earlier this year? guest: there had been speculation about it. when he had w been asked about it, he had been coy about the plan. one thing that added some uncertainty. arkansas is in an uncertain year. three of the four congressman from arkansas are not seeking re-elections. there's some speculation that halter would run for senate or run for congressional fete in central arkansas. but there had been plenty of signs and a lot of groups like i mentioned the labor unions had been talking him up as can can didate. there's been some uncertainty on whi path he would choose. >> as somebody who's now talking about her political clout in washington is that a
help or hindrance among candidates? >> it's a mixed bag. i traveled with her yesterday in arkansas and she pointed to her experience and stature in washington especially as president the senator agriculture committee. one of the draw backs is she's obviously running in a year where the catch phrase is washington is broken. so, bringing up her experience in washington is something halter is able to take advantage of and halter has been running back as an agent of change and point together lincoln as status quo in washington. in some areas, it does seem to help her. i talked with a cattle rancher yesterday that said, he was sporting lincoln primarily of farming issue and role heading up the agriculture committee. he didn't want to miss the
opportunity to have someo in that position in washington. there's some benefit but it flies in the face of kind of th antiincumbent and establishment move we're seeing them take advantage of wh right now. host: let me share this with you. the "washington post" article, they quote peter hart saying anyone searching for meaning from tuesday races need onlyo look at the grievances building for months and then he says, how many times to we need to tell the same story which is voters are looking for something not in washington right now. guest: i think arkansas will be a good test for that in both primaries. lincoln is two term in competitive bent seeking re-election. on the republican side, the front runer for the republican senate nomination is an incumbent. john boas man. he is a front runner the polls and he still, most of the polls
show him slightly below the majority needed to win the no, ma'am nation out right. this election could be a test of whether or not there is this really deep seeded antiincumbent washington move on both sides. boas man and lincoln have both been fing pretty similar criticism. as man is krit sided by the 7 other republicans running for the gop nominatio who are point together him as part of the broken system in washington. some of that criticism is similar to lincoln and her issues she >> thank you very much for being with us. what do you think? host: we have phoenix and the upcoming primary in that state. doesn't take place until august.
thanks for being with us. guest: thanks. host: news over the weekend your reporting a change or shake up you describe in the mccain campaign. what's happening is guest: that's right. we confirmed on friday that mccain's campaign manager is leaving his campaign as is his deputy campaign manager who was a former state gop chairman and a long-time mccain ally. they're moving out to make way. i understand for a more battle ready campaign manager. they haven't announce who had the new manager will . but i think the idea is, that she ri didn't have enough statewide campaign experience to kind of work in a campan that's going to be as intensive. this one against hey worth. host: h poling numbers show jon mccain is still ahead anywhere from 12-13 percentage points but
a lot of people looking at what's been happening in pennsylvania as the race began to narrow the last month or so of the campaign. could the sh same thing happen arizona? guess guess i think probably lay 12-15 point race. they're internal polling i think shs that. but yeah, i guess it could narrow it. probably mccain's biggest fear. so far. hey worth hasn't been able to get out of the 30's. mccain is struggling a bit too. he's maybe around 50% in the polls a lot of poles show him in the high 40's. and that's normally a sign of potential vulnerability. that might be a saving grace that the others are not picking up either. hey worth hasn't gotten enough
momentum to shoot up the polls. host: this past week. jd hey worth came to talk about the primary challenge towards john mccain and the debate over the debates was front and center and he's arguing that john is ducking from debates and said here is a guy that's run for president and the senate before, has that been an issue? will there be debates? caller: well, mccain said he's waiting for all the candidates to get qualified, which i think the tate they'll be officially qualified is i think june tenth or so. mccain assured everybody once the field is set. he'll have a debate and wants all the candidates and the debate to qualify those for the ballot. there is third republican named jim deacon. much lesser known than hey worth but he's in the race as well and mccain is signalled he wants him to pticipate as well.
obviously a situation that may wo wants to debate so mccain is obvisly not overly eager to have a lot of debate. host: national political from the state where the primary will be held. dan nowicki. i hear some of the ads now top air in arizona. >> home innovations. murder, we're out manned. of all the i legals in america more than halfome through arizona. we got the right plan? >> plans perfect. >> you bring troops. state and county and loc law enforcement and complete the dang fence. >> it'll work this time. >> senator you're one of us. >> i'm john mccain and i approved this message. >> i helped author with senator kennedy comprehensive
immigration reform and fought for it's passage not once but twice. >> hey worth was introdung the first act to support our border. he talks tough on the boarder but what about tomorrow? had enough. endorsed by this one. he's the consistent conservative. >> i approved ts because border security is national security. >> it's a national issue and certainly an arizona issue. was there a change in policy or some may call a flip flop on the issue of the fence? guest: well mccain says, no. some people say it's certainly a flip flop and emphasis more than substance of the policy. he has been for counteracttive immigration reform. his campaign isn't the border security comnents of comprehensive reform. you'll recall that included, you
know several, multiple miles of fencing and vehicle barriers and that thing and benefits like a guest worker pgrams and a pathway to citizenship. there's always been fencing in the mix. i think not enough maybe for some of the border hard liners. like,jd hey worth. now he's definitely focused on the fence and on border security and on the guest worker program and other reforms. he says he still supports them and wants the border secured first and really he isn't eager to talk about them. host: is ate closed primary? guest: it's an open >> up next is "q&a" with author
joyce appleby. then david cameron and nick clegg. then a press conference with hillary clinton and william hague. the senate returns tomorrow to continue work on the financial regulation bill. votes on several amendments are scheduled to get under way at 5:30 p.m. eastern. harry reid should file the closing debate and passage could follow later in the week. the house returns to debate several bills said 6:30 p.m. eastern on tuesday. they plan to return to legislation to reauthorize science and technology programs. it extends tax credits for unemployment benefits