tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN October 5, 2016 9:33pm-11:58pm EDT
exchange of ideas. as such, interjections are allowed provided that all sides get a fair shake. it is the 10th largest congressional district in the country, stretching just north of tucson, taking in much of eastern arizona. 20 after -- 25% of the population is american indian. the seat is being vacated. we now move on to our debate. the candidates, paul that you -- paul babeu and tom o'halloran. mr. o'halloran: every weekend, i
wash my father put together a notebook of what was going to occur with his ability to provide with our family in the coming weeks. the bottom line here is that i had a strong sense of hard work, ethics, and community. what is happening in america today and arizona today is a dysfunctional congress. we have to nature we start working for middle-class families and working-class families of america again, taking into account what our children need. i worked on child protective services, education issues successfully bringing people together and unifying them. moderator: thank you. now we turn to paul babeu. mr. babeu: you may know me as a sheriff of pinal county.
our job is to prote and we have done a good job at that with the largest drug busts in the history of arizona, fighting the cinema with cartel. -- fighting the sinoloa cartel. i served one tour in iraq. ion for enforcing the law securing our border, and protecting america. i do not feel our nation is more secure or safe than it was eight years ago. our economy is struggling. national debt is $20 trillion. we have to fix our country. i will be a part of the solutions for our country of lowering taxes and regulation and putting america first. moderator: thank you. let's get it going. tom, why you for this position and not in? mr. o'halloran: i have represented this district before.
[indiscernible] education, health care. i have a successful record for legislature. i sometimes work against my leadership and with them to provide solutions. and make sure that working families are thought of first. i believe that my skill set and experience in law enforcement and business allen weh to have the perspective to be but to do that. moderator: same question. mr. babeu: this is about jobs in our economy and clearly, i am not -- and a lot of people are struggling to make ends meet. in the government has become too large and too costly evidenced by $20 trillion deficits. we have to cut spending. we cannot continue to think that we are going to spend our way
into prosperity or tax away. that has failed here, that has failed nationally. i am an outsider, not just as a sheriff that coming from -- you look at -- i have asked for more money because i provide a core service. i had an 8% budget cut in the last two years. i have had to keep 53 vacancies in the sheriff's office. nobody could convince me in washington that we cannot cut back, set priorities, and live within our means because this is really threatens not just our economy and it hurts the taxpayer while 95 million americans -- threatens national security. moderator: when you get back to washington, cutting back on spending in general, mr. o'halloran: is it a priority? investing in our future is a priority making sure we live within our means is a priority. i am not going to have as of the cut across the board when we have education issues to deal with addressing our
infrastructure needs, addressing the security of our nation whether it is with our military or our borders -- these are prime areas that we have to invest in in the future. we have to protect the american citizens in my record identifies clearly that i can do that. i cut taxes for business -- property taxes to 20%. personal incomes, $500 million for small businand for our corporations -- so i have that experience and i have that background. moderator: cutting where appropriate as opposed to just cutting? mr. babeu: when you hear these words is invested, that is code for more of the same beardmore of the same as knock when you fix our country, not going to bring trillions of dollars that are offshore back to the united states and grow and bill johnson the united states. how do we do that? we cut taxes.
literacy reduce all these tax practice into three main categories for every taxpayer and also, the corporate tax. this is different. some people say, that is not going to help. we are going to have less money for the government and if you believe in that concept i am not the guy to vote for. i am the guy that says, get government out of the way and allow for the job creators which are small business to create the jobs create opportunity, and that is where too much costly regulation has really strangled our economy and jobs. moderator: someone argued that government was pushed too far out of the way during the last years of the bushing ministration and we went of having an economic crisis. mr. babeu: look at perfect example right here in arizona, when we had nationally on that point fannie mae, freddie mac, and you have seen that all of these loans that are propped up government and you see this housing crash and collapsed take place and our government was the party for this, picking
winners and losers. what i am saying is when you have here in arizona the forest service, the epa that have come in in the name of trying to protect our environment what they have done and a lot of us have talked about it, mine still destroying our environment -- when you see the forest service that, while they are saying that they want to protect the forest, 20% of forests have been destroyed in the last 12 years and we are not able to environmentally safely -- that can also compliment lumber and industry. moderator: response? mr. o'halloran: paul has not cut taxes in his career and i have. i have cut taxes to improve their working conditions of small businesses in arizona. a paul has not had a run a small business like i have in nature that paychecks go out to the workers in that business, making sure that we expand that busyness and i have a lot of experience both in the private
sector and the government sector and making sure that we do not over regulate regulation is across factor. i want to make sure that that cost factor does not pass on to our business is to hinder their ability to hire our citizens -- mr. babeu: i can tell you that what i have not done to cause this is very important because we are talking about going from being a republican and you lost your election because you voted for massive budget increases under governor -- governor napolitano. governor brewer told me, watch out, because 64% increase in our state budget. the reason we had to sell our state capital, the senate, the legislature is because we did not have money and after you left office and so, we have had to live with that, a structurally and balanced budget . the governor's fighting for our and recovery and it is not about spending more money and is much as you like to say you cut taxes, the record shows that massive increases in spending -- sisi 4% -- and that is -- 64% --
and that is the wrong philosophy of 72 washington at the time when we are about to collapse -- moderator: response? mr. o'halloran: i just saw that one of your fundraisers. taxing time. we have almost one million people under this state while i was in the legislature, a 20 7% inflation -- we had to pay to $2 billion worth of funding for our schools in maintenance that had been deferred. we've dealed with a positive $600 million and we put more money into our universities and colleges and rk-12 education system to improve the future of our children and dealt with child protective service reform and the ability of overcharging to be appropriately -- have health care. and many more have -- including $10 million a year into border security. moderator: at the very least
could you use those numbers as the population increases as it did and when inflation increases -- mr. babeu: you are talking to a sheriff who has responsibility for public safety in the fastest-growing county in our state. when the fastest growing in america. my budget did not grow by 64%. it has been cut back. it has been cut back 8%. that is millions of dollars. you cannot just say, our state is growing and we have to increase spending by 64%. that is how we got into this mess. we had to sell all of these government buildings, one of the first since a governor said was this was embarrassing for our state. i want the legislature to buy back the building -- the ninth story tower that even the governor's office was in -- my god -- that is fiscally irresponsible. mr. o'halloran: we cut budgets when they were needed to be cut. we improved our infrastructure in the state, improved our children's future.
the whole concept because governor brewer says that she was in trouble doesn't mean that it was because of what occurred before. we improved the entire -- we went from a rating in the legislature that was in the mid-teens according to the capital times to over 50%. the people that stayed new that things were being done for them and their futures. you can always cut but the idea is to prioritize cuts so you do not hinder the future of america and when you do deal with these mortgages in america -- and the republican senate -- the republican congress, and a republican president should have debt with those issues for six years. instead -- mr. babeu: i can tell you here because you took these thoughts in effect is that when you were fired from your job as a legislator, that they stay, the leaders in our state had to pay off this debt, not just for the buildings -- we had the highest per capita debt per citizen of any state. we all remember the catastrophe
the billions and billions of dollars in california anti-to try to get out of the mess we were in further debt per capita than they were. i do want to raise the issue of cool because it deals with us -- the issue of coal and jobs. generators happen to be in this district could i want to make a credit i will fight to preserve coal as an energy source. we have heard hillary say that she was too close coal mines and unemployed these minors. er.s everybody pays a letter, right? -- everybody paysn we have got moderator: -- let's get to the coal industry and the environment. mr. o'halloran: i do not want the coal industry to pass by.
i have gone around the state saying we're going to protect jobs. it was this regulatory environment put forward without talking to our local communities, without understanding the need of over school districts, without understand the long-term viability of the national energy plan and not as a country whether it has been in the last decade or two decades, investing seriously in clean technology. we need to do those things. mr. o'halloran: you cannot have it both ways did -- mr. babeu: you cannot have it both ways. the last day we were in you just, you said publicly that you supported the epa's plan. mr. o'halloran: no -- [speaking simultaneously] mr. o'halloran: what i have been reporting across the people that represent the factories is that i in against the epa regulatory
environment and just what i said is what i have been -- is a consistent story. mr. babeu: let me share a story. we talked to train conductors and engineers and i don't know if you limberbutt one third of them were on furlough. -- i do not know if you know but one third of them are on furlough. you can ask scott, the union president and they recollect that you told him that you do not trust the republicans to clean up the pollution in the environment and therefore you support the clean power plant. [speaking simultaneously] mr. o'halloran: you had gone there late. that is not what occurred. speaking simultaneously] mr. babeu: almost everyone i am
and that rumor democrats and they voted almost unanimously to endorse me. they gave me a $5,000 check and the reason why is we know you are going to fight for coal as an energy source. mr. o'halloran: every other unit that represents workers have endorsed me and i have -- mr. babeu: you cannot continue to say something in one group and go to a different group -- mr. o'halloran: you say who recollects? the bottom line -- mr. babeu: what were they endorse? -- why would they endorse mr. o'halloran:mr. o'halloran: -- most unions are going to support democratic candidates that i came to speak and it is when the few opportunities i was given to speak to a union and i won them over thomas unanimously in their own democrats because they know that i will fight the epa and i will send to the president just as i did on the second amendment which i understand you have changed your position on the second amendment -- moderator: hold on -- [speaking simultaneously]
mr. o'halloran: i have been endorsed by the nra multiple times. i believe terrorism -- terrorists should not get -- be allowed a loophole to purchase firearms in america today. i believe that felons should not be a lot of loophole. mr. babeu: -- that the henry has unanimously endorsed me? mr. o'halloran: if any little change in the process will --[speaking simultaneously] [indiscernible] mr. babeu: -- president obama face-to-face. anderson cooper called and said, i know you are a critic of president obama. he said, i would like to have the on the town hall with the president and i said, i get to ask the president directly? i came on and i said to the president because he tries to make this argument -- false
arguments. that any executive action or any infringement on the second amendment freedom where you were a police officer in chicago -- moderator: please -- let him respond. [speaking simultaneously] mr. o'halloran: people should be allowed protection in their homes and in their cars. i do not believe that people who are felons and terrorists should have any -- legally to secure weapons and i worked as an undercover officer to make sure the weapons were off the street. mr. babeu: i and scratching my head because you used to be against obama care. he used to have a different position and a questionnaire about the nra, thomas muller and is dark -- tom o'halloran -- moderator: i need a response please. mr. o'halloran: i knew that they were against the little changes.
why fill out a questionnaire that would allow them to do -- moderator: -- mr. o'halloran: again, i am a public safety -- i took and growth of office or public safety. i am not going to do away with the second amendment and i believe -- [indiscernible] moderator: we need to move on because we are running out of time. i want to get to a general question regarding -- it has been brought up to four in this debate. you then became an independent unit are now democrat. why should voters trust that you have a commitment to ideals when you get back to washington? mr. o'halloran: because it is the same ideals that i worked on before. to being able to represent the people of congressional district one. those were never questioned when i was in the legislature. no part of my public policy has ever been question about representing the people before the party with the people before leadership. i lost my chairmanship because i
thought for people. i lost my bills because i fought for people. the idea than i am not going to fight for the citizens of the district is ridiculous. moderator: [indiscernible] mr. babeu: i do not buy that. he did represent a district in a said, we do not like what you're doing and you are fired because of all your taxing, your growing of the budget -- 64% -- you cannot have it both ways and then, then he ran as an independent just two years ago and now the very month he said he were going to run for congress, that is a political opportunist. [speaking simultaneously] mr. o'halloran: you cannot have math and not acknowledge the real math. the real math is 27% inflation. 20% growth in our population -- [indiscernible] mr. o'halloran: the real numbers are, how many children were impacted? [indiscernible] [speaking simultaneously]
moderator: hold on gentlemen. there have been questions about you two. the attorney general having to investigate alleged allegations of deporting a mexican man threatening to reveal details of your personal life -- and now you have the fci looking at the legal funding -- mr. babeu: now, this is the reality of the situation. i had an eight way primary and we spent $4 million and i am merged with all of these candidates talking about these things -- this has gone on for years. the day i win tom and his allies instead of introducing in and what he stands for attack me. listen to my response. mr. o'halloran: your inability to tell the truth about the fact
that you knew everything that was going on -- mr. babeu: well, let me answer that -- [indiscernible] mr. babeu: -- that proves that that is not the case. i was not deposed unit there was no finding of anybody responsible. so, that is the case. this is the democrats tried to say and do whatever they can to win. mr. o'halloran: -- my statements you today. as an investigator -- mr. babeu: -- your state -- mr. o'halloran: -- time and time and time again on cases in alyssa naeher video comes out with a person testified on their own words that yes, i knew everything -- [indiscernible] [speaking simultaneously] mr. babeu: this was a school for students that were expelled or incarcerated. that gives you a sense of the
school. i was there two years out of 30 years. the investigation started years before i was there and concluded after i left. nobody was found -- moderator: the argument was that you were headmaster and executive director. mr. babeu: we talked about that before it here this investigation found nobody -- mr. o'halloran: -- they closed the school. mr. babeu: -- that score -- mr. babeu:mr. o'halloran: [indiscernible] [speaking simultaneously] mr. babeu: you are admitting that you did not even read investigation. what about veterans? moderator: no, we haven't. people are worried about you because you switched parties. people that were about you because of these high-level investigations into allegations.
mr. babeu: how is it a surprise -- moderator: how would you respond to somebody -- mr. babeu: i tell you, people know we not just as a sheriff as an army veteran, why on earth would i get, this year, and award by a committee and arizona, and superintendents, as a year of public education? why with recognized nationally as a protector of children? this is what i have done -- this is why it is such a personal affront me. moderator: i understand that. if you saw somebody else with these high-leveled? the state of massachusetts look at it. mr. babeu: that is different than what you said. they found there was nothing there -- [speaking simultaneously] moderator: the same question goes to you.
how would she feel about a candidate running for office who is picking apart -- mr. o'halloran: i would say this what have they done? if they have taken a look at their party and said, i think you are wrong and i going to nature children are protected -- i'm going to make sure that children are protected -- i would trust that. i would trust my past actions and a need to understand that paul lied. moderator: we have to stop there. each candidate will now have a one minute closing statement. mr. babeu: it is a great honor to serve our community and state to put arizona first in every regard, to put america first. that is what i have done as a sheriff also in the army. served as a private, working my way up to a major, serving in iraq.
i put the safety and security of our nation first. that is not the case by this administration. i want to put arizonans and our jaws first. -- our njobs first -- our jobs first. so, i am on the side of reducing taxes, cutting regulations, part of the paul ryan plan if there is a better way for our country. if you want that if you want a better way into greater opportunity for our country then i ask for your support. it is my privilege to serve you. thank you. moderator: now, tom rendered -- tommr. o'halloran: i am on the side hours with the families. i have improved the schools in arizona until the republicans came in and decimated funding. i have looked at our infrastructure in the state.
i have worked on making sure that our forests are cared for in our water is taking care for. most importantly i have a record that shows i worked with people -- i will work with anybody from either party whoever the president is -- you name it -- for the betterment of the citizens of district one, i will be there for them because they always have been and i want to think the voters and make sure that moderator: thank you so much gentlemen. >> in a moment, the california senate debate. the los angeles times writing the family fight between two democratic senators is a byproduct of the states system. now we take you live to cal
state los angeles for the first and only scheduled debate between, harris and loretta sanchez. >> the race for california's first open senate the in 20 years. abc seven presents the california senatorial debate. moderator: thank you for joining us for the u.s. senate debates sponsored by abc seven. i am mark brown. is th time in these two candidates will be facing each other on the debate stage. let's bring them out right now. attorney general kamala harris and attorney -- representative sanchez. [applause]
moderator: thank you for joining us and think the candidates for being here. adrian albert, dr. ray sonnenschein and the president of the league of women voters of california. here is a quick overview. we will begin with a longform question, i will ask the first question, and the person to whom that is addressed will get 90 seconds to answer and the other candidate will get one minute to respond. and then there will be an additional 30 seconds after that. we will start with a question from a viewer. you will each have a one minute to respond. we will take a break and then we will have rapidfire questions
and longform questions from analysts -- panalists. each candidate will have 90 seconds for closing statements at the end. we begin. yours is the highest profile race since california voters adopted the top two election system in 2010. you are both democrats a lot of -- democrats. what can you say to people to make them actually cast their ballots to you? rep. sanchez: first of all our thoughts should go out to the family of sergeant owiens who was killed in the santa clarita valley. this is the first time in 24 years that the state chooses a
new united states senator. i believe i have the experience to go in on day one and do the job. i have the life experience as a californian, growing up in a working-class family, a daughter of immigrants. i believe i have a legislative experience. i cast the tough votes on behalf of californians and i know how to do it. no on the iraq war, no on the patriot act no on the wall street bailout. i believe i am the only one who has military and national security experience. on the armed services community -- committee. i have been to iraq and afghanistan into the corner of africa. i am married to a retired colonel from the u.s. army and
my youngest son is in the army. i know what it takes to defend this country i am ready for this job and i believe you should vote for the person who can get the job done. ms. harris: i appreciate the point congresswoman made about the sheriff's deputy sergeant. in terms of this election, i agree, it is one of the most important that californians are looking at in terms of the future of california. i am a proud daughter of california. to the point if your question, when we talk about this issue from the context of what it means to be a democrat or republican most issues that californians care about our -- are bipartisan or nonpartisan.
i have never met someone who wakes up with troubles at 3:00 in the morning in the context of whether they are democrat or republican. they are waking up about whether there children will get the education they deserve. they wake up wondering if they will have a roof over their head. they wake up wondering if taxpayers are gettin about what is happening in terms of climate change in the future generation of their family and country. they want a leader who knows how to get things done. moderator: our next question. >> this is about the public attention to the question of police shooting of citizens. local jurisdictions rub the country are weighing whether to quickly release law enforcement video.
would you support a federal policy or guideline on the release of such video? ms. harris: thank you for that question. as you know, i have been a big proponent of making sure we have transparency in law enforcement. i run the death -- california department of justice. i have decided to bust open the criminal justice data understanding there is a crisis of confidence between law enforcement and the communities we protect. there is a need to speak truth a need for transparency if we are going to have trust. i was proud of the attorney general of the california, to create the first implicit bias and procedural justice training. understanding that we have to take seriously what is happening in terms of disparities in the criminal justice system, the reality of racial profiling and
the need to heal and improve the work we are doing. i am all in favor of what we must do and can do to adopt technology so that we are more transparent, including use of body cameras. rep. sanchez: well, i want to begin by saying that we all know that there is a problem out there. as gone down in our country. our communities are looking for leadership on this, that when we discuss body cams, my opponent was absent. when there was a bill before the state legislature to take the evidence and take a look at these shootings that are going on, my opponent said no. retired supreme court justice red nose
-- said this is imperative. i did not get my 30 seconds from earlier, so i would like to take it now. let's talk about what we're really doing. in my district, just one san diego, -- one sunday ago. we brought in our police force to service with our church and we broke bread, because to know they neighbor is to love thy neighbor. the more we convene and the more we do so that we don't have these issues out there, we have to have local and state and federal and community leaders come together and get to know each other again as communities. ms. harris: i think the
congresswoman when she talks about someone being absent should look at washington, d.c., and she is named as number three of the members most frequent in failing to attend meetings. i think it is important that you show up, and that is the kind of leadership california wants. in terms of the criminal justice system, i believe we should be smart onwe need to do the kind of things nationally the we have done here in the california department of justice, focusing on transparency, and i am proud to have done that. rep. sanchez: i would really like to rebut that. moderator: i'm going to give each of you an additional 30 seconds. rep. sanchez: for the first 18 years in the congress, i have a 95% attendance record. come on guys, we are at school,
that is a solid a. when barbara boxer ran as a house member for the senate, she had a 54%, i have a 68%. to do democracy in a large state like california, something has got to give. but i have never missed a crucial vote and i will never do it. moderator: we are trying to be strict with time now. 30 seconds. ms. harris: the record shows the congresswoman missed over 70% of the homeland security committee meetings. the facts speak for themselves. moderator: your question? >> you both talked about the need for comprehensive immigration reform. what changes to the current system specifically would you support? rep. sanchez: comprehensive
immigration reform is the moral imperative of our time. the hispanic caucus, which has always led on immigration reform, put me as one of the cochairs of the tax force on reform. i know a lot about this topic. in fact, i first started working on this when ronald reagan made a reform. at that time, my mother was head of the migrant education group in anaheim, and she saw that lawyers and shysters were taking the money of people replying for -- applying or reform. she started filling out that paperwork. we would be at home and my sisters and i would be filling out the forms of people who were lined around our block as we were helping people come out of the shadows.
people who were our friends people who were her students. what would i do? we have done enough on border control, now we need to give immediate status to those members who are part of our community, they are in our churches, they are little league coaches, we should put them on the path if they choose to be a citizen. moderator: your time has expired. one minute. ms. harris: california has an outside stake in this conversation. we have the largest amount of immigrants documented and undocumented of any state in the country. it is time that congress acts. they need to act in a way that create a pathway to citizenship that also includes a pathway for dreamers, which includes
speaking about our farmers. i am proud to have the endorsement of the united farmers association. we need to have a pathway for our unaccompanied minors. recognizing that these children should be provided a safe place and we should be providing them with leadership in this country that fights for their needs as we have done. i'm proud to be supported by someone who helps undocumented workers who have been the subjects of fraud. i am proud also to have the support -- moderator: your time has expired. rep. sanchez: the other cochair of the hispanic task force has endorsed me. he knows that when he goes around the country and talks about what he needs to do that i was the one that stood up and
fought for you. we put together a six page menu of things that could happen once we lost the opportunity to push through a reform. we went to the president and we said, this needs to be done. that is how the other projects came up. there is so much more we can do. moderator: your time has expired. your question. >> 64 legalizes marijuana for adult use despite that the drug administration classifies it as a schedule one drug. how would you propose to resolve the contradiction between state and federal marijuana laws? ms. harris: we have got to resolve it. i believe the voters will pass
that initiative and recreational marijuana will be legal in california. we have got to move it from schedule one scheduled to. we have incarcerated a large amount of largely african-american and latino men in this country for using a small amount of this drug. we need to end mass of young people in this country. i also want to talk about in the context of the work i've done for a very long time, being smart on crime. we need to stop a criminal justice system that is broken because it focuses only on reaction after a crime occurs in that of prevention. focusing on crime when we know they are going to happen, focusing on young people who for the most part, when we see them in the criminal justice system it is because they are criminal -- high school job out -- dropouts. we need to make sure that kids
stay in school and we give them resources. these are a lot of issues that come out in that regard, but the war on drugs in this country has been a failure, it has criminalized it when it should be a public health issue. rep. sanchez: some people talk about doing things, we actually do things in my district. i have been on the forefront of ensuring that medical marijuana once past, what have some regulation. i have been a fighter in the congress to get marijuana off of schedule one. i have been a fighter because you know what, if you have a dispensary it is all a cash business because banks are afraid to take your money because we have a conflict between federal and state level laws. i have been trying to tell president obama, let california
get this right. in santa ana, we passed an ordinance, we eliminated illegal dispensaries, shut them down put in 19 legal ones, we collected taxes, we hired new law enforcement officers. and we unionized the dispensaries. ms. harris: i think we need to look at the congresswoman's record. frankly, when we look at the record we will see that she hasn't voted for policies in this country that have led to mass incarceration of people. she voted in favor of legislation that would allow a 13-year-old to be prosecuted as an adult. she voted for legislation that would allow mandatory minimum sentences for juveniles. that is not evidence of someone who understands what we need to do to reform the criminal justice system. moderator: your question? >> what measures do you support
to protect americans from acts of international terrorism in the united dates? are current loss sufficient? -- laws sufficient? rep. sanchez: when we look at it from an intelligence perspective, when we look at our threats, when we look at the short term in front of us and what we see from the long-term the short-term one i believe is the lone wolf issue. the issue that terrorism is being hyped -- piped in through those already in the united states. what should we do? we have to eliminate isiswe are working to decapitate its leadership, find its finances and shut it down, and we are doing a lot of quite frankly top-secret work to eliminate that pipeline that comes into
the united states that goes after the lone wolf. there are a lot of issues we need to work on. mental health. we need mental health parity we've not been able to get that out there. we have to look at the gun use in this country and we have to put in common sense gun control so that we can bring down the use of available guns to those who would hurt us. the most important thing is we need our muslim american community with us to help us to get some of this that is coming in from isis. ms. harris: we have to be smart and tough as a country. we need to do in a way that recognizes the emerging threats to the united states including cyber security as a threat in
terms of cyber attacks cartels and transnational criminal change which is a real threat to national security. we need to go where isis exists. it also means of addressing it on domestic level, and that means not laying into the hands of isis propaganda and their recruitment tools, which in particular the congresswoman has helped by calling 20% of muslims inclined to commit ask of terror. that is playing into the hands of isis and all that they are doing to try and recruit young muslim men throughout our country and around the world suggesting that the united states should be an enemy because we do not embrace the muslim community. moderator: 30 seconds. rep. sanchez: that is completely false.
over 20 years of doing all types of interviews on radio and tv of debating in congress, i have learned that your words can be used in three ways sometimes you say something you wish you could take back. sometimes you say something you wish you would have said differently. sometimes you say something that your opponent purposely uses politically against you. that is what ms. harris and her cronies have been doing. moderator: your question from his harris. >> when you drive through the central valley, you will see signs of blaming leaders in washington, d c and sacramento for water problems. what you have to say about the state's farmers about water? ms. harris: i was a just in modesto last week with the farmers there having an
extensive conversation with them. what we know is this we are the canary in the coal mine, and we can be the leader on this issue of water for our country and the globe. we have to take it at a national scale, recycling and conservation. we have to capture storm water and desalination. we are doing work here, we need to do as a nation. we also need understand this is a matter of public health. it is also a matter of jobs and the economy, let's bring the infrastructure dollars back from washington to our state. third, this is a matter of national security. right now, wars are being fought over oil. in a short matter of time, they
will be fought over water. let california via leader for the globe and understand we must have more reliable and sustainable sources of water in our state and we can do that work. we can do as a model for the nation. rep. sanchez: when my opponent was asked, what is your water plan for california? she said one word, conservation. period. when they asked her, what about sites? she said i don't know what you are talking about. let me tell you about my water plan, because water is our economy in california. especially in the central valley in here in southern california. we have taken the brunt of what is happening. conservation yes.
how about water recycling? the largest recycling plant in the world sits in my district. i helped bring in the money to build twe have to store water when it comes to my underground and above. desalinization, which we have done in carlsbad. the largest place to study water in california is uc irvine. moderator: thank you. ms. harris: again, i think there is no question the california can be a leader on this. let's understand that we also have to reject a false choice that on the issue of water, you are either choosing for the state or choosing for the father -- farmer. we can do both. we need more reliable and sustainable choices for water. los angeles is doing a great job
storm water. san diego is also doing some of the best work in the country. this is a matter of jobs and public health. thank you. moderator: it is time for our first question from a viewer. >> my son now 41, was 19 when he committed his first and only crime. the justice system has failed him in several ways and how he was -- [indiscernible] senate bill 261 past, and no proposition 51 is on the ballot. the california prison system is broken. it is called rehabilitation but that is not happening. how do you feel about proposition 57, and what are your thoughts about fixing the
overcrowding in prisons? moderator: due to a technical problem, our candidates could not hear it. we have it written down, so i will paraphrase it. this is from mary, who has a son , he is 41 years old and he was 19 when he committed his first and only crime. in her words the justice system has failed him in several ways and how he was and no one seems to want to correct the problem. senate bill 261 past in 2016, and crop 57 is on the ballot. the prison system is broken, it is called rehabilitation but that is wrong. what you think about the overcrowding? ms. harris: i'm in favor of doing whatever we need to do to bifurcate the prison problem. we cannot have a one size fits all approach to prime.
as it relates to violent and serious crime, there is no question, serious consequences. as it relates to low-level offenses and nonviolent crime we need another approach, one that shuts the revolving door. i have done that work. i created an initiative getting low-level offenders jobs and counseling, so they could turn their lives around and reduce the chance of they would reoffend. i wrote a book back in 2008, you can buy on amazon. [laughter] but we need to do this work, we need to understand we cannot continue to inform public policy on a way that is about fear mongering. moderator: one minute. rep. sanchez: i'm against proposition 57. my opponent wrote the summary of
it that we are reading as voters. she said it was about nonviolent felons getting out of jail. that is not true. she talks a good story on gun control, but did you know that if you give guns to gangs, you can get out of jail free if the proposition passes. if you do a job by -- drive-by shooting, you can get out of jail if this passes. if you discharge guns in a schoolyard, you can get out of jail free. she has failed to lead in supposedly the area that is her area of expertise. worse, she has failed to protect california's as the attorney general. as a senator, she would skillfully and failed to protect us. moderator: we are at our halfway point.
ms. harris: rebuttal? moderator: no, no rebuttal. ms. harris: darn. [laughter] moderator: we may come back and revisit this. you may wish to address it in response to another question. we are and our halfway point and we are going to take a short break. we will be back for the lightning round. >> we are getting this debate from abc seven eyewitness news in los angeles. they are in a commercial break and will return shortly. >> if you missed any of the vice presidential debate, go to c-span.org. once on our special debate page, watch the entire debate, choosing between a split screen or camera option. you can find the content you want quickly and easily.
you can create clips of your favorite moments to share on social media. c-span.org on your desktop phone or tablet for the vice presidential debate. >> the second presidential debate is sunday evening at washington university in st. louis, missouri. what are the live coverage at 7:30 eastern. at 9:00, live coverage of the debate itself, followed by viewer reaction. the second presidential debate, watch live on c-span, and watch anytime on-demand at c-span.org and for free on the c-span radio app. >> our coverage of house, senate and governor's races continues in about half an hour with a debate in the indiana governor's race. now back to cap state los angeles for the second part of the senate debate.
it should resume momentarily. moderator: we are going to allow you to finish a thought. if you are a little bit over, if you're finishing a thought cool, if you are bringing up something else, i will stop you. let us get back to the lightning round questions from panelists. you will each have 30 seconds here it -- seconds. >> to seek the senate seat, congresswoman, why would you give up a 20 year career? and madam attorney general, why would you give up your career? rep. sanchez: when barbara boxer
announced she was retiring, it was my colleagues in the house of representatives, both democrat and republican, who came to me and said, we rely on you. you have been to iraq and afghanistan. we rely on you, you know where the horn of africa is, you are the nato vote in the nato parliament. we need you in the senate. you are prepared and ready to go. moderator: 30 seconds has expired. ms. harris: i believe the california needs and wants and deserves bold leadership. one indication of the indication to be bold is a track record of getting things done. i have a track record of fighting for the homeless, fighting for students, fighting for criminal justice reform, fighting for immigrants. you got to show up. my opponent does not show up. you can have a lot of stamps on your passport, but you have to
show up. my opponent did not show up once. >> would you seek to maintain or reverse the hyde amendment that prevents low income women for using public health insurance for abortions? rep. sanchez: i am in support of choice and the woman's -- ms. harris: i'm in support of a woman's right to choice and am in support of anything that allows her to achieve that. i've been a fighter for a long time on this matter. we have to support a woman's right to make a choice for her own health care. a society that denies that is a society that denies economic health and well-being. rep. sanchez: i have 100% voting record on reproductive rights in the congress.
people know where i stand. i will always vote and push and work to ensure that women are treated equally, and that they have choice in their life. it is unfortunate that in orange county, my opponent actually limited choice for our women. look at the website, women in leadership. you will see that she says one thing but does another. >> if you are elected to the u.s. senate, of which committees would you like to serve and why? rep. sanchez: i have sat on the armed services committee and the homeland security committee in congress. i would like to sit on the armed services committee in the senate. of the money that the congress
moved in the time i've been there, nearly 60% has gone through the military committee. we look at the economy of the united states, we need to have someone serve on that committee. that and the finance committee. ms. harris: i have not thought about which committee i will sit on, i first want to get elected but i will tell you that the reason i am writing in the work i hope to do includes fighting for the immigrants of our state and passing conference of immigration reform, continuing to fight for what we need to do with the reform of the criminal justice system, fighting for our students who know that we are facing an incredible burden in terms of student loan debt. i am proud to have the support of elizabeth worn and folks -- warren. moderator: we have a question from a student.
president of the associated students of california state los angeles. >> good evening. i conducted a survey on facebook about voter cynicism among students. within minutes, the newsfeed was exploding. this shows students care. however, there was a concern about lack of trust for politicians, too much money and politics and feeling their vote does not matter. given these concerns, what would you say to students in order to encourage them to go out there and vote? ms. harris: i think the key is this, as with all people who are cynical and feel they don't matter, the people who are running for office need to see them, need to hear them and need to listen as much as we talk with them. that is the work i have done throughout my work and is read campaign, listening to our students. when you put one dollar
investment california state, you get a return investment of $23. 70% of you are graduating with student loan debt. i know when i've talked to students, that the average pilgrim at its $5,800, but the average tuition at uc is $34,000 per year. i hear you, you deserve to have representatives who prioritized your issues. rep. sanchez: talk is cheap. let me tell you what we are doing where i live in my district. this great community jim is called -- gym is called santa ana community college. this year, entering freshmen are tuition free. we have actually done it.
i carry the tell grant bill -- pell grant bill in the congress to double the size of the grant. i carry another bill that allows the pell grant to be used during the summer, because students don't always just go in the all in spring. i am working with hud to refinance student loans, so that we can do what your parents do when they refinance their loans down to 3%. and community college, it has a for you -- for your programs now. moderator: we are now back to our standard form questions. >> i have to turn a page here. this one is a longer format question.
for-profit universities have been sources of controversy. what action should the federal government do to protect the interest of students and taxpayers? rep. sanchez: i believe that any for-profit, nonprofit, private public, any sch is cheating students were doing fraud should stop existing. but, many of the people i represent and many californians need these for-profit colleges and vocational schools. think about the mechanics, the mechanic is working and trying to feed his family, but he has a dream to become an i.t. expert. he can't just stop and go to a four-year university. he goes to night school, and the
community college does not of fer what he wants. so he goes to the for-profit and earns a two-year certificate. those people who go after with just a brush of all of these schools do not understand the diversity, the diversity of education that we need. my opponent has gone after the entire industry and she is so wrong, because so many people use good schools to get the certificate and their degrees and change their lives. ms. harris: on this point, i will agree with my opponent. i did initiate an industrywide investigation into for-profit colleges, and i will tell you why. because looking at them, i found a college like corinthian, who i
sued because they were engaged in the most unbelievable predatory practices targeting some of our most desperate young people who simply wanted to get an education. yes, we see them and put them out of business. by contrast, yes the voters to have a choice in this election. my opponent has taken thousands of dollars from the for-profit industry and has taken money from corinthian. i put a plan in place that we called freedom to learn. i believe, and i will fight, for the right of students to have free community college, and if you're household income is $34,000 or yes, you get free college or university. it is the right thing to do providing our students with an education that is a pathway to a dream. if we let them be in debt, we will pay for it. rep. sanchez: we are already
providing free education, free tuition at the community college. let me talk a little more about for-profit because my opponent is disingenuous. yes, she went after some colleges but after others had already done the hard work for her. more portly, trump university. the most people who got swindled were californians. she was taking his money in her campaign to fly around in first-class airfare and hotel and taking donald trumps money. her socialite friends in san francisco. moderator: your time has expired. hi there. >> in the last several days, the united states has ended cooperation with russia in the conflict with isis in syria after the bombing of aleppo with
russian backed forces. russia suspended a nuclear treaty with the west. what is your view on america's current relationship with russia today? is this a former relationship gone bad or is russian now an adversary? ms. harris: i believe that russia poses a serious threat to the safety of our country, for a number of reasons. we know they have incredible nuclear capacity. we also have good reason to believe that they have used cyber weaponry to hack into data systems in our country to manipulate the election of the president. and i believe we have to take them quite seriously. it troubles me when people engage, even in the presidential race, with the idea that they would respect putin more than president obama.
russia is investing in the assad regime, which has created one of the biggest crisis since world war ii. syrian refugees, and particularly their children, of the crisis. prices -- russia is posing a concern in terms what they're doing in ukraine. they are asserting aggression and we have to take it very seriously, and i believe that so far we are doing an adequate job but we have to stay on our toes. rep. sanchez: i believe that russia is one of the most dangerous threats that we have. i'm the voting member on the nato parliament. i work with my european allies. i have seen what has happened in ukraine.
i was called recently by some of the generals in ukraine who asked me to go over and see the frontline. they said the little green men are there. i went, on my own dime, to take a look. our national guard is there helping, and we were able to deliver a new surveillance system for the border between ukraine and russia. i have met assad, i met him on the day i had to deliver the news that we were putting sanchez in the congress, and the president had signed sanctions against him. i have been in turkey, i have been on the syrian border, i have been to the refugee camps i have spoken to refugees. the largest humanitarian crisis -- moderator: 30 seconds if you like.
ms. harris: you can have a lot of stance in your passport, but when you do not show up on the antiterrorism task force, that you call into question your commitment to protecting our country's security interests. voters have a choice on this issue, and it is about who shows up and who gets things done. the emerging threats that are challenging our national security include work i have done throughout my career as attorney general and even before. thank you. >> cyber security is now a major issue. how would you strike a balance between privacy rights of americans and the need to protect individuals and corporations transactions online? rep. sanchez: we need to protect our liberties. when the patriot act was voted after 9/11, i said no.
edward snowden showed us what we had given up. i said apple has the right to hold on to its lock on that device. people know where i am on civil liberties. i would like to go back to the savior to lead, because -- failure to lead, because my opponent has insinuated it i have not been to work. the reality is, i work hard every single day, 24 hours a day, seven days a people in my district know that. now, i have passed bills inserted bills into legislation, i've worked across the aisle, on issues incredibly important. women in combat, sexual assault in the military, getting rid of don't ask don't tell.
anti-stalking laws in place. when my opponent has been going around for two years campaigning in california, what she has done is through her own private corporation, in her smarts on crime, her report card is the crime rate. assaults by gun are up. while she travels, we get failed. ms. harris: there is so much there, let's try to unpack it. on cyber security, i am proud of the work we have done in my office that is been focused on prevention, an essential component of what we must do to attempt to be secure. that means urging everyone to encrypt data, we of been a leader in the country on that issue. we had done the work and i have done the work. we've done the work on suggesting only not only
prevention but resilience. after we have been attacked, let's think about our airports, our hospitals, our electrical grids. let's be vigilant, and we also need have leadership to put in place a mechanism to be resilient and get back in the game. my opponent has passed one bill in her 20 years in congress, and that was to rename a post office. let's talk about what needs to happen in terms of leadership. let's also understand the fear mongering is not going to get it done. the paper from your backrday that the crime rate have plummeted. rep. sanchez: 9% increase on gun murders, homicides. 15% increase on assault with guns.
and did i tell you, a 33% increase in sexual assaults? you said that was your report card, and that is a report card you do not want to show to your dad. moderator: we will begin our lightning round. adrian has a question for ms. harris. >> would you support a constitutional amendment instituting term limits on members of congress, and what would the appropriate links -- length? ms. harris: there is no question we need accountability, and i have great respect for all of our processes that require debates and 11 the voters to make a decision, and then if they have done a good job elects them again. the bottom line is they will be
voted out if they don't have a track record of getting things done, and that is what this election is about. the voters of california want to know you show up. rep. sanchez: it is pretty obvious to me that my opponent doesn't understand the congress at all. in this national defense authorization act that we have before us, i was able to put in 17 different pieces of legislation in one bill, that we do in the military committee for the entire year. you don't pass a bill on its own necessarily in congress. you pass it by putting it into the bill. moderator: your question? >> president obama had the first veto override of his presidency for a law allowing survivors of the september 11 attack to sue saudi arabia. it was warned this would have consequences for the u.s.
overseas. how do you think you would have voted? rep. sanchez: i'm sorry, is it for me? sorry. look, this bill is worked on right now, it is being worked on as we speak, many of us have been on the phone, calling and talking about how we change this bill so that it protects our uniformed people in other countries. i believe after the election we will pass it. my husband just retired from the united states army and the youngest son is in the u.s. army, want to make sure that they are protected when they go overseas. ms. harris: as a general matter i support the right that all people who have a grievance should have access to justice
and access to a courtroom and this may present a clear contrast between me and my opponent. she voted in favor of laws that would shield gun manufacturers and officially deny victims of gun violence access to justice. i think that is unconscionable. not only does it deny access to a courtroom for those victims it wiped a california law off the books. moderator: we are at our closing statements. each of you will get an absolute minute and 30 seconds. rep. sanchez: thank you for arranging this debate. i would like my opponent to want to debate more because i think the more we listen, the more information voters have. don't listen to the establishment, the first election i had the democratic party didn't endorse me. that was a very hard election. i went door to door.
a few years later, i received a letter from a truck driver from garden grove. he said, i came home and that election night and i was tired and i thought all politicians were the same and i was not going to vote, and then you knocked on my door and you said i needed to go and vote and that you wanted to help the working people, just like your father. he sent me that letter, and it has been more important to me than any note from a president. he said that he went and voted and he voted for me. he said, i have fought for you,. i have said no to the patriot act, i have said no to the wall street bailouts, even though she really didn't get us more than two cents on every dollar.
and i have said yes to write for minorities yes to rights for women, yes to small business owners who are working hard to make business happen in california. remember this, on election day -- moderator: your time is expired. you have a minute and a half. [laughter] ms. harris: there is a clear difference between the candidates in this race. rep. sanchez: there certainly is. ms. harris: i think the voters will make that decision. but this is a serious matter. this is about electing the next united states senator from the state of california. as a proud daughter of california, i still believe in that old adage, so goes california goes the rest of the country. people still look at us and to
us for leadership and what change looks like. this is an election about who can be a leader, and who has a track record of being a leader. on many issues that challenge us as a stay, i have traveled up and down the state, i've met with folks and work with folks. i'm proud to have the support of someone, or working with elizabeth warren, or united farm workers, working with people every day, i have a track record that is proven what we can do when a leader actually acts like a leader and shows up. it has been the work of providing a path for unaccompanied minors coming through mexico where he give them protection, give them support. it has been the work of siding for climate change laws, some of the toughest in the country. it is been the work of fighting
for criminal justice reform, creating models of what should be done in our nation. moderator: how about a hand for our candidates. please vote on november 8. [applause] >> our c-span campaign 2016 bus is traveling throughout virginia this week, asking voters what question would you ask the candidates at the debate? >> i go to hampden city college. i have a question for both candidates. traditionally speaking, the united states has been amongst the world leaders in graduation rates, but those numbers have diminished. what is your plan for increasing those numbers? >> i am from northern virginia the question i want to ask the candidate is, what are they going to do as far as improving
quality college -- for college students, and making college more affordable. it is really expensive. i am an athlete, but i still feel, i don't want to say the pain, but the price, the toll it takes on my parents. >> i go to hampden city college in virginia. i want to know what the candidates thinks the american interest are the south china sea and how we can protect them. >> i go to longwood university. my questions are, what you think about children born to illegal immigrants? >> voices from the road on c-span. >> treasury secretary jack lew will talk about the u.s. agenda going into the international
monetary fund may call meetings at conversation hosted by the peterson institute for national economics. that is live, 8:30 a.m. eastern. you can also listen on the c-span radio app. our coverage continues. next a debate in the indiana governor's race. we will hear from eric coke on, john gregg, and rex bell. >> good evening and welcome to the second gubernatorial debate of the fall campaign season. the debate is being televised at the university of indianapolis. we have three candidates running for governor. the winner will succeed governor mike pence, a republican and is the running mate of donald trump.
i am your moderator. president of the indiana fiscal policy institute, a nonpartisan non-for-profit that conducts research into the state's tax policies and budget practices. for the next hour, the debates will debate issues. mostly focusing on jobs and the economy. areas of concern for all of us. members of the public, that is you, have the opportunity to submit questions to the debate commission about what concerns you. and most of our questions are drawn from those questions. all of the questions were approved by the debate commission and none of the questions have been shared with any of the candidates in advance. so here are our candidates. rex bell, the libertarian candidate. a small business owner. eric holcomb is the republican candidate. he is the indiana lieutenant governor. john gregg is the democratic candidate. the former indiana house speaker.
the candidates positions on the stage and the order in which they will answer questions were determined by the debate commission. after asking question, each candidate will have the opportunity to respond for one minute. each candidate will also have a 30 second rebuttal time depending on the question. if a candidate exceeds the amount of time for the response i will ask them to stop. before the final question, each candidate will be given an opportunity to address a topic of their choice. this allows them to discuss a topic that they feel is important but has not been touched on in the questions or they could go back at this point and discuss and delve into an issue further. the candidates have agreed to a set of rules that agreed to no props or eric notes. each candidate will have an opportunity to intruders themselves in an opening statement, starting with rex bell.
rex bell: i would like to thank the university of indianapolis at the indiana debate commission for inviting us here. i especially would like to thank the indiana debate commission for acknowledging that there are three candidates on the ballot. that doesn't happen with all of the media outlets so we certainly do appreciate it when we are acknowledged. voters have placed us on the ballot with their votes and we think they deserve to hear all of the options. i am rex bell from hagerstown, indiana. i operate my own business, i have for 42 years. i like to say in spite of the government, instead of because of the government. and we plan on doing that further. and we think we can take my knowledge of operating a small business and transfer that into the operation of the government. thank you. moderator: now we hear from eric
holcomb. eric holcomb: thank you to the university of indianapolis and the debate commission. and all of you who are joining us, here or live streaming at home, soon we will celebrate our 200th birthday, our bicentennial and we have blazed trails over the last 200 years. we have plowed our way through new frontiers and achieved amazing things once thought in thinkable. i will submit to you that there are a couple of reasons why we have been able to make such progress and also that over the last 12 years, we have come further and faster than probably any other 12 your time. it is because of leadership and because hoosiers have come to meet high expectations. so over the course of the last 12 years, i have been so proud to have been a part of the leadership that ushered in that progress. and i look forward to talking
about the issues of 12 years ago and leading up to this point about the issues of 12 years ago and leading up to this point where we are today and where we will be 12 years from now. moderator: next, we hear from john gregg. john gregg: thank you. i would like to serve as our state's 51st governor. tonight you will see there are distinct differences between the candidates. i would like you to imagine, if you would, having a governor that shows respect for all hoosiers. that doesn't promote discrimination. have a governor who focuses like a laser on the economy, on high wage jobs and attracting jobs -- not scaring them away. i'd like you to imagine a governor who takes the politics out of education. who refocuses education on the students. who works for prekindergarten and realizes that teaching is part of the solution and not part of the problem.
imagine a governor who doesn't accept the status quo. imagine. you don't have to imagine, this can be reality. i have the skills to aim higher. to provide leadership and i have the experience and we will work together to take the best ideas of democrats, republicans and independents using my experience as a public, private and academic sector in a written plan to lead us to the 201st year. moderator: thank you very much. now to our questions. the first question from samuel watkins, a resident of indianapolis. >> i believe the only solution to add jobs to our state is to create them ourselves. at the moment our well cared for and educated kids must flee to other states for work. my question is not how you will bring jobs that how you open up the portal for high school and
college graduates to innovate and create here rather than move away. because the jobs are not going to move here. moderator: mr. bell? mr. bell: certainly, that is a concern for everybody. it was a concern for me when my children were graduating. we want to keep the jobs here. we understand the government does not create jobs. what we need to do is create an atmosphere where jobs can be created by citizens and by businesses. we are doing that and our plan is to eliminate the property tax and do the same thing the government does now but when it tries to attract businesses. it does away with property taxes for a very select few and we think we can do away with that for all. we think that we can remove some of the licensing restrictions that stand in the way of small businesses. small business is a main
contributor of jobs in the state. and we think with those combinations, we can create an atmosphere where people can start businesses easily and where businesses will want to locate to indiana. >> while the jobs are coming here in record numbers. i mentioned 200 years before we celebrated our birthday. we are more people working in the private sector than at any time in our history. we have a triple-a credit rating. we live within our means as a state government. first and foremost, that is the most important thing a state can do. make it an attractive place for people who want to work and innovate and choose to do it here. we have started to think about things regionally. regional city initiatives that we addressed in three parts of
our state to try to make our communities vibrant communities. we have been rated on two different rankings with top states for millennials to, and work here, because the jobs are in fact there and because it is a low cost state. so the dollar goes a lot further. so the state needs to make sure we keep our books in order to make an attractive, predictable, credible place for folks to innovate. and it is happening. >> we have a 35 point economic development plan and is much as i would like to do all 35 points, i don't think anyone wants to sit and listen to all of them tonight. so i would encourage you to look at our website. see the 30 top points were we spell it out in detail. we talk about unleashing the entrepreneurial spirit. we talk about focusing on small business growth. venture capital and working with existing businesses as well as attracting new businesses. the truth of the matter in
indiana is that right now we have lost again in per capita income. what is that mean? that means for a family of four sitting down for supper tonight in irvington that they make $7,000 less than the average american family. that is $150 over week. that affect your quality of life, for many hoosier families. so please check out our program. if we focus on the economy and not on divisive issues, we can work to make our per capita income in indiana a better place. moderator: i'm going to ask a question next, and it relates to this directly. my statistic is 36 among the states but that was the measure that was put forth by governor daniels when he first took office as a sign of prosperity. indiana has a clear in its job growth, there is no question. yet the personal income per capita remains stagnant.
ranked 36 among the 50 states. so tell me, what does the state need to do to ensure that we keep up with job development? mr. holcomb is first. mr. holcomb: we need to continue what we are doing, and on steroids. there is a reason why salesforce has just decided to move 800 more jobs to the state of indiana. our dollar goes a lot further in indiana. our low cost of living goes a lot further in indiana than some of the states you are comparing us to. wages have gone up each and every year since 2005, lonely were at $17 an hour where we are now over $21 an hour. and when you factor in those jobs, it is 26% higher than that. so we need to continue to diversify our economy with
biosciences, high-tech -- not just manufacturing -- we are number one in the nation in manufacturing and we will continue to lean in manufacturing. but the programs in place, the workforce development programs they are gaining traction. mr. gregg: hoosiers are working harder and harder and getting less and less. talk to your neighbors. you will see many of them are working two jobs. my background is working for two fortune 500 companies and is a small businessman -- that is when we put together a proposal that focuses on high wage jobs. and that is where i will stay focused. and in five areas we have high growth and high wage job potential. this is in life sciences and biosciences and it is also in information technology. it is in the 21st century logistic and an advanced manufacturing. if we stay focused on those
areas, take politics out of those areas and better align our educational system with the job demands, we can still that skilled job gap that we have and we can move indiana forward. the status quo isn't getting it and that is not acceptable anymore. we can do better in indiana. mr. bell: certainly, when we talk about higher wages, job competition is the best thing we can do. when we attract more businesses, businesses have to compete for workers. that is what drives wages up. as eric holcomb mentioned, we do have a more affordable standard of living in indiana, which is a help and then only raise the wages by drawing more businesses in, it is the best thing we can do and it keeps the government's hands out of it, altogether, that is something we can accomplish without asking the government for help.
without having the government put more regulations on us. moderator: the next question -- and we received many questions on the future of the state forests -- one of them is from the next questioner, samantha. >> there has been a significant increase in the state logging. as a mother, i am worried that our state forests will not be around for my children and their children to enjoy. do you believe our state forests should be managed for public purposes? or to supply the tender industry? mr. gregg: thank you. we have an environmental plan that is one of 12 policy initiatives to address this issue. i've been to many areas in the hoosier state, all the way to the southern part of the state and i have seen some of the
things we have had done. a lot of devastation in our forest area. i recognize the timber industry is a huge industry. and it is a vital industry. i think we have to review it. we are allowing a lot more timber than we had in the past. it has been just relying on 10% of the acreage and now we are relying on 40% of the acreage. and we are selling below-market costs. that is just wrong. we are competing with private interests and that shouldn't be the way things are done. we need to take note of how much we are logging on these states. and quit competing with private business, it is just wrong, what we're doing right now. mr. bell: you know, i think we can do both. i don't think we had to choose one of the other. certainly, there is a need to protect part of that. but we also need to understand
that there is a need to harvest or we end up with trees of eventually growing up and fall down, it is something we have to take care of. as we grow corn, we think nothing about that but because we are in a situation, we don't think in long term it is all right to grow one thing and harvested but not another. so certainly trees, that is something we grow and something we need to harvest. i would agree that we need to be more careful in the park system but i don't think we need to get in a situation where we are saying absolutely nothing out of the parks. i think rangers and people who study that have a better handle on what trees need to go and what trees need to say. >> well, as a state, we can be and we are being stewards on both fronts. we are actively proud of our department of natural resources and our forestry department
within. many folks in the urban areas don't realize that indiana is 83% farm and forest. and we have done a good job from the department of the national resources perspective maintaining and sustaining our private and public land. we also have taken a couple of steps further. over the last nine years, we have had two different independent firms audit our forest reprogram. and we have met the national and international standards. so on this front, i couldn't be prouder of our department of natural resources personnel. moderator: our next question, we had two questioners who brought up issues involving religious freedom restoration act, which was perceived as discriminatory in the states and action on the lgbt rights. so do you think the religious freedom restoration act has hurt the state and competing for jobs?
mr. bell. mr. bell: you know, it was certainly raised, that issue, or there would be a lot of damage done from that. i don't know that we have seen that. i don't agree with passing that. i don't agree we should give certain groups of people rights that other people don't have. you can't discriminate for religious objectives and for others you can't. i thought it was an unnecessary law federal a lot of attention to something that has been overruled now anyway. so it is something i hope we can put behind us and move on from that. i would certainly like to see a state where all people are treated equally. where all people have the same rights. i think we need to understand that. mr. holcomb: well, over the last year i have had the privilege and ability to travel to all 92
counties throughout the state of indiana. and i can tell you that i have received a lot of feedback. there are good people on both ends of this issue, who have differing opinions. contrasting opinions. and what we've witnessed over this last year, during the general assembly, both sides of the issue did not come to a consensus or agreement. we made no progress. in fact, both sides said they would not seek a compromise. and then we had a committee hearing a few months ago and again, it came back that there was no compromise or no inching towards any kind of agreement. we had indiana local ordinances that allow folks to address the economic development side of this with local hr initiatives in local communities. if they seek to, they have been and they seek not to, they haven't been. we have had a record tourism year after we got through this.
mr. gregg: the truth is, this issue has hurt us economically. we need to show respect to all hoosiers. it's more than about economics, it's about respect. we would sign an executive order that would give civil rights protection to the members of the lgbt community who work for the state of indiana. we would also seek for the legislator to park legislature to grant civil rights protection and from hate crimes of members of the lgbt community. and in the economic plan, we tell how we would create a marketing fund to work and undo the damage. and unlike the current administrator, we would hire indiana firms to do this. and the ordinances that we hear about -- those can't happen. they were banned by the legislature. salesforce came to indiana because indianapolis had passed
a local ordinance that that power has been taken away now by the legislature. >> i would like to have a quick follow up, but 30 seconds. today, the seventh district federal court in a separate case, regarding rights, upheld the lower states preliminary injunction, allowing for syrians to be located into the state of indiana. in 30 seconds, which each of you tell me what you think of the programs that governor pence's decisions to stop those programs and what you think going forward? mr. bell: well, i disagree with governor pence's take on that. we could put one group of people, lump them together, one thing libertarians have always looked at is that everyone is an individual.
and when you take a state and say, you have a nationality on a block, that is wrong. we need to look at people as individuals. certainly. if we have somebody who is a known terrorist coming in, we have remedies for that. but to place an entire nation and group them altogether, it didn't sit well. it's something we would look to. mr. holcomb: what is happening in syria is heartbreaking, to the least. isis continues to two americans harm and others as well. so i understand where governor pence was when he made the decision. balancing making sure we are keeping americans safe -- and when you hear the fbi director stand up before the country, and say, we don't know if they are infiltrating this network -- i understand where he came from. but we will continue to honor the court's decision as this
works through. mr. gregg: yes, you know, the lawsuits that the state of indiana filed cost thousands of tax dollars. i'm a lawyer and i don't you and like to see them spend money on stuff like this. it's a waste of our precious tax dollars. this could be decided on a case-by-case basis and it should be, to see if these people are thoroughly vetted. i disagree with what the governor has done. because it is wrong to ban someone based on their religion. i was raised a methodist. what do we do if they decide they will ban all methodists? or the next thing, we banned catholics? it is wrong to ban people based on ethnicity, race, religion or nation of origin. it is just wrong. moderator: our next question comes from stephanie, a small business owner. >> i am a strong believer in the second amendment. and i also believe that all done purchasers should undergo a criminal background check.
where do each of the candidates stand on the issue of universal background checks for all gun sales? mr. holcomb: i believe we have it about right where we are now. my wife, who is with me today is a certified handgun and safety shooting instructor. she became one after we were broken into twice. the last time as we were sleeping. i am a staunch defender of the second amendment. and i understand the reason why it is number two. mr. gregg: i also am a strong defender of the second amendment. i live on a farm and i am a gun owner. i first went hunting when i was 8-year-old. i believe in responsible gun ownership -- which is just called common sense. for the life of me, i can't understand why we would let somebody we don't want on an airplane to buy a semiautomatic weapon, or if someone has mental health issues, to get a
semiautomatic weapon. when someone does like that, it jeopardizes our right to own a gun. and i think we need some common sense. mr. bell: i'm a strong supporter, not only is the second amendment, but also of our natural right of self-defense. i'm concerned when the government comes out and says, you know, going to start doing background checks on somebody that we might believe shouldn't own a gun. you know, that could very well be a criminal but it could also be somebody who disagrees politically. we could very well say, well i'm worried about the libertarians, they don't toe the line like they should. maybe they shouldn't have guns. so anytime the government treads on the second amendment, you need to be very careful. very wary of what they're doing. the best laid intentions could backfire on us.
moderator: thank you. here is a question on regional development. at governor pence's request, the general assembly created a program to spend one at a $26 million in funds for local projects to three different regions of the state. this program was paid for with a one-time tax amnesty payment. do you think this regional development program should continue, and, if so, how should it be funded? if not, what to the state do to ensure that rural, suburban and urban areas enjoy the benefits of economic development? mr. gregg: i want you to hang on. i think the regional cities program is a good idea. [laughter] mr. gregg: and i would be remiss if i didn't congratulate the governor on the plan. but i think we can do a better
job on those, where indiana is lacking -- we put this forward in our proposal for local government. that is about local control. the legislature really started micromanaging all local levels of government. city, town, counties, school boards. they need flexibility on how they spend and use their local resources, which are precious and limited. this legislature has got to realize that the government that governs best is the one that is closest to them. that is why there are county commissioners, mayors and councils and school boards. we have to stop micromanaging and allowing a little flexibility and local control for our communities. thriving communities, as an indiana university study went out, is central to gross in -- to growth in indiana.
mr. bell: you know, when you talk about the government that governs best, well, it might be the one closest to you but we also believe it is the one that governs the least. and what we have with the regional cities development is government taking tax dollars and picking winners and losers. sending money to one region and not to another. we are very much in favor of allowing people to keep their money invested as they see fit. locally they should exist but they should be funded by willing investors, connecting to businesses that want to locate or want to start up. so as far as the government taking our tax money and picking different locations and companies -- we think that is better left to the people rather than turning it over to the government. mr. holcomb: i think a government function best when we work together from a state and local perspective and that is exactly what the regional cities initiative drives that.
also, stellar communities and main street programs, i have been, i think, it is a way of the future. we need to do more of it. this is calling for communities to take an inventory of their assets and liabilities. we understand that we are much stronger together. a study pointed out that no urban area can do it on their own. if ball state is close to a neighboring county, the neighboring county should try to take advantage of all the assets that come with that. i will try to do more of this. this is government working with each other, and it's about a 15-1 return with the local community, the business community, and the states perspective. moderator: i want to follow up.
30 seconds for each of you. what can the state do to ensure that rural, suburban, and urban areas enjoy economic benefits? mr. gregg: we have to emphasize broadband. there are 1400 people in indiana that do not have broadband connectivity. it is so essential for our suburban and rural communities. it is all over the state. you can be 10 miles south of bloomington on i-69, and you don't have a signal, and you are outside one of the states are -- state's premier educational institutions. broadband, infrastructure, good roads and bridges, and a long time plan. moderator: thank you. mr. bell. mr. bell: when we look at the rural, urban, and suburban
areas, those are areas that have different needs and different wants. we start saying when this state is going to step in and micromanage, and that is not what the government should be doing. what the government should be doing is allowing people to make these decisions on their own. certainly, keeping the roads up is something we could do a much better job if we put roads use taxes into the roads. there is so much the government could help by staying out of the way. we believe that communities and cities will make their own decisions. moderator: thank you. mr. holcomb. mr. holcombe: again, i think this was the regional cities initiative to try to create vibrant communities. it was not just a single community, it was a region, but of course, it is about connecting one to the other.
broadband is a fantastic example of not just access, but speed. the question is who is going to pay for it. the federal government has some programs that help on the rural front, but when you get into the southern terrain, the hilly, rocky terrain, it becomes very very expensive. we need to make sure our communities are ready. have questions about indiana's infrastructure. after a bridge gave out, a section of i-65 had to be closed last fall. the governor stepped up spending on maintenance for roads and bridges. the legislature will be revisiting the issue this year. what do you think it will take to ensure the infrastructure can be kept in good repair, and how would you pay for it? mr. bell: i have mentioned before, i think one of the most important things we can do is insist that all of our road use taxes are spent on the road at
the state am a local, and federal level. certainly, indiana does a better job than some states, but not all of the money is always applied to the roads. we see a lot of road use taxes spent on different things, walking trails, museums, that sort of thing, we think the most important thing we can do is apply all the road use taxes to the roads. if we find out it's not enough we can reconfigure from there, but i think we will be pleasantly surprised. mr. holcomb: last year, the u.s. department of transportation rated indiana number one in road condition. just this year, that study had us at number one in terms of our infrastructure. we have invested $11 billion to get to where we are.
we started projects that were sitting on the shelves for years and years, i-69, the hoosier heartland, upgrading u.s. 31. we now find ourselves, coming out of this last legislative session, where we have agreed to take inventory of all of our wants and needs and put everything on the table in order to pay for all those wants and/or needs. i look forward to seeing that report later this year. it was an agreement we had during the session to keep everything on the table. next session, we will address how we are going to pay for it. mr. gregg: i want to invite people to drive on the roads i have been driving. we have the best roads in indiana. the truth is indiana is falling
further and further behind. my running mate christina hale and i put together a 3.2 billion dollar infrastructure plan, 3.2 billion dollars. the money is split into two pots. roads and bridges. the other 60% goes to quality-of-life issues, drinking water, industrial water, storm sewers, industrial water cultural trails, green spaces, broadband. we need to come up with a plan that addresses our infrastructure for longer than two years or four years. this is a huge economic hindrance in indiana. check out our infrastructure planned. no new taxes and it doesn't come out of a bond at all. moderator: mr. gregg will speak first for one minute and be
followed by mr. bell on the same topic for a maximum of two minutes. mr. holcomb will speak on the topic for up to two minutes. then we will close out that topic with a one minute rebuttal by mr. gregg. the other two candidates will then have the same opportunity to speak on a topic of their choice following the normal rotation and format. mr. gregg, you have a minute to open. mr. gregg: thank you. you cannot discuss the economy without talking about education. as the former president of the university, i know firsthand the value of early childhood development, prekindergarten. 42 states have it. the statistics are irrefutable. a student with pre-kindergarten is more likely to graduate high school and get a secondary education, less likely to be jailed or on drugs, makes on average $160,000 more and lives a healthier lifestyle.
this is money invested in the future just like our infrastructure. that is why the indiana chamber of commerce list it as one of our top five goals. i have met with executives at major companies who say we have to do prekindergarten. the time is now. let's quit studying it. let's do it. we can do it i prioritizing existing jobs, using existing dollars, and not raising taxes. mr. bell: i think we need to look at what indiana offers for education now. k-12, anybody who wants it certainly, community colleges, people can attend for a reasonable cost. they can get a two-year or four-year degree.
i think we have come up with that. i think we provide that for people very well now. when we talk about pre-k, this is another issue where government is reaching farther into the family. when you talk about $160,000 a year, that is quite a jump. i don't see it happening. i don't see -- when we talk about pre-k, we will see better results from family involvement than you will from turning your children over at the younger age to the government. this is what we are looking for. we need to make things more affordable so that families can stay home if they need to and want to to raise their children. there are communities, churches, businesses, if they want to help
the families, help employees out with a pre-k, but to put it into the government where it will eventually end up being mandatory, because kindergarten started out as optional and there is a push now to make it mandatory, certainly, the same thing would happen with pre-k. we need to re-examine the proper role of government and get it out of the home right quick. mr. holcomb: i am in favor of expanding pre-k. it's important to recognize at the outset that we didn't even have up high program until -- a pilot program until recently. we have come obvious years with nothing and now we have a program in place where we offered it through the fsa to be available for the most disadvantaged among us. i think that's where we need to continue to expand.
i think we need to move the folks in the back of the line, the folks who need extra help of the most -- certainly, not make it mandatory, the folks at a certain poverty level, we need to make sure we are doing all we can to move them to the front of the line. so, i am all in favor of expanding that program. right now, it is in five different counties. there is a diverse collection of county. we can continue to expand across the state. the question is always who is going to pay for it and how much is it, how much does it cost not to address this? i am all in favor of expanding -- methodically, keeping in context cost and mix. people do not want us to just throw a 500 million dollar program on them and ask them to comply. we need to start ushering folks in.
moderator: mr. gregg, one minute to sum it up. mr. gregg: there are only 1500 students being served by that pilot program. 80,000 four-year-olds in indiana. we have the money. the first year will cost 150 million dollars. we will never get 100% of students because it's not mandatory. the current administration turned down $80 million of federal money because they were upset with the president. out of the 78,500 students, ask yourself, how many of them have lost opportunities? i don't want to look a parent in the eye and say your child cannot go to prekindergarten. we have the money. if we can't invest in our children, what have we become? the status quo is not getting it
at all. i want to do away with the line. i mean, i can't believe it. kentucky has prekindergarten. where i'm from, that's something we laugh over. moderator: thank you. mr. bell, you have one minute to introduce the topic of your choice. mr. bell: the topic of my choice would be why was this country founded. the government we were under it the time was way too big. since it was founded, the one we have now, gets bigger and bigger. you like to say try to name three things that government doesn't tax or regulate. it's hard to do. the government is into every aspect of our lives. and the other two parties now are talking about making government even bigger. one will say we are not going to make it as big as the other guys are going to make it, but it's
still a matter of growth. we believe people are capable of running their on life. we believe they are capable of making their own decisions. that is what we would strive to do. get out of the way of business. get out of the way of parents when they try to educate their children. get out of the way of teachers. we can do a much better job than we are doing now by making government smaller. moderator: thank you very much. mr. holcomb, two minutes. mr. holcomb: attracting talent to the state of indiana speaks right to his point. that is why i am proud that indiana was ranked the freest state in the country. the government is not on our backs. every dollar we take from the taxpayer takes a little freedom away from the taxpayer, so i think we have to be overly
cautious and very deliberate and transparent about what we are spending taxpayer dollars on. we found ourselves pre-2005 spending more money than we were bringing in, and that put us in a backseat position when it came to competing for talent and jobs around the world. i will continue cautious because we are in a very competitive position right now. we need to because it is when government intrudes into our daily lives, and we have been -- over the last two decades. mr. gregg: when i was speaker 16 years ago, we started making changes to the tax structure in indiana that continued onor daniels.
we are now the fourth or fifth best state to do business in but we are 45th in attracting new businesses. we have a laserlike focus on the economy creating high wage jobs. we have to take the politics out of education if we are going to move indiana forward. it is so important to focus our economic activities in these areas that have high growth, high wage jobs. we need to be talking about the economy. we need to be talking about our infrastructure and having a real plan. we have plans on our website. there are 12 of them, 18,000 words that layout in details how we can do this. we talk also about how we need
to focus on work, education, infrastructure, and having an adult conversation on our drug epidemic, something that is destroying the fiber of our community. we need to admit what we are doing is not working. we need to have an adult, or say show in and get law enforcement, mental health people, workforce development people, education people, and sit down and have a discussion on what we can do to stop this that is gripping our whole state. there is a place for government, and this is an area we need to be talking about this very election. that's why we talk about it in our campaign everyday. it's not a drug problem. it's an epidemic. mr. bell: you mentioned that we are the fourth freest state. i would mention that where the federal government is right now, the bar is very low.
i think we need to be the first freest state. i think that's what we should always be striving for. every time someone is spending a billion dollars, that takes $600 from every family in indiana. when you talk about $3 billion $4 billion, $5 billion, that is taking away our money, taking away your freedom, taking away your right to make decisions. it is so important that we get a hold of this government, that we get it pushed back where it belongs instead of running to it every day saying what can you do for me? i need more money. take some money from my neighbor and give it to me. moderator: thank you. mr. holcomb, you have one minute to introduce a topic.
mr. holcomb: i think the second question was a really insightful one about the future of our state. i could not agree more with where you were driving. when we assess what we need to improve on in indiana, one of the main barriers is how do we attract more talent, not just how to retain the talent we groom at our world-class universities throughout indiana, but how do we get that talent to reside and go to work at nestle, go to work at boston scientific, cook and lily. international companies. we have a plan to invest a billion dollars on a front.
these are areas where, if we are going to create separation from us and the rest of the pack, we need to do more, and we are. moderator: mr. gregg, you have two minutes. mr. gregg: our wages in indiana are again growing less than in the state of kentucky. that's nothing for us to brag on in indiana. i worked for two fortune 500 companies. living and working in rural indiana, i know how hoosiers across the state struggle. the first thing we have to do is be a welcoming state, and we are not right now. we have to show respect to all people, and we have to focus on the economy and the infrastructure. we talk about increasing the venture capital tax credit allowing the sale of that, establishing a growth and opportunity fund for entrepreneurs and people of all ages.
i think these are the things we need to be talking about. we need to be focusing on how education and the talent is the key. there is a gentleman in indiana who runs the lumina foundation. he has written a fantastic book that gets me excited. it is called talent. i would encourage you to look at it. he says the state of indiana has the opportunity in the next five years to create 300,000 new living wage jobs. but if we don't have the talent, they are going to leave. and they are not leaving central indiana or indiana. they are not leaving the midwest. they might stop on one of the coasts, but odds are they will cross one of the oceans. we have to focus on the economy going forward. and not just minimum wage jobs. we have to take high wage, high
growth jobs and use the best ideas of both democrats and republicans. using my experience from the business and academic sector, we can move indiana ahead. moderator: mr. bell, two minutes. mr. bell: certainly, the future of the state is very important to all of us, i would hope. how do we make those decisions? they talk about attracting large businesses, which is important. but small businesses are the backbone of the state and where most employees are. i think we can attract all businesses, large and small, by creating a more business friendly atmosphere. that's the kind of thing that will create more jobs. 300,000, not bad.
when you say every business is welcome here and you will have the lowest operating cost because you are not paying property taxes, we can attract business. when businesses start competing, wages go up. it's a win-win situation we should be jumping on. we can do so much and gain by getting government to step back and allow people to develop their own businesses, allow businesses to decide they want to come to indiana. we don't have to worry about one business leaving when there are two waiting to come in. i don't think we need to look to the government to fix this. i think this is something we can fix ourselves and ask the government to step back. moderator: mr. holcomb, one minute to readdress the topic.
mr. holcomb: indiana has a 4.5% unemployment rate, lower than national average. ceo magazine has rated indiana the number one state in the midwest to do business. that's something kentucky can't claim. we are the number one state for small business. that's something kentucky can't claim. i am proud to have the endorsement of the national federation of independent businesses for indiana. they are the lifeblood of our community, and opportunities are everywhere you look. we need to make sure we are continuing to keep our state way out in front when it comes to where folks around the world and around the country are looking to relocate their businesses. and companies will continue to grow when we keep our fiscal house in order. moderator: thank you.
now to our final question of the night. this will be a 30 second response from each of you. why would you be the best candidate to lead indiana into the future? mr. gregg. mr. gregg: because i want to serve as governor, not be governor. i have a servant's heart. i give the credit of that to my wife. given the topics that seem almost impossible to deal with but we have to tackle them that's why i want to be governor. we have talked to people all across the state, hundreds of people, and over 120 people helped us come up with a written plan. i have made a payroll. moderator: your time is up. 30 seconds. mr. bell. mr. bell: what was the question
again? [laughter] moderator: why would you be the best candidate to lead indiana to its economic future? mr. bell: because i have operated a business for 42 years. i know what it takes to run a business. i know what it takes to attract the business. i know what businesses face when they run up against attacks or unnecessary regulation. i believe i have the ability and the knowledge to arrange indiana so that businesses would want to come to indiana, and i hope you will give me a chance to do that. moderator: mr. holcomb. mr. holcomb: well, for the very purpose of this debate, on jobs and economy, i stepped forward and answered the call with the former governor when the state was in a fiscal mess.
we turn things around and got moving in the right direction. we have more people working than ever before in our state history and have a low unemployment rate. i will continue to focus on the things that got us this far. economic development, community development, and making sure we are delivering good government at great taxpayer value. moderator: thank you. gentlemen, thank you for being here to share your views on these important values. and thanks to all of you for watching and listening. we want to give a special shout out to ball state university for hosting this program. and to the league of women voters for keeping the clock. i want to remind the viewer is that you would put to the candidates in the one remaining gubernatorial debate and the one u.s. senate debate that has been scheduled. you can do that at indianadebatecommission.com.
thank you and good night. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the second presidential debate is saturday. watch our coverage for a preview of the debate and then the pre-debate briefing from the audience. at 9:00 p.m., coverage of the debate itself followed by viewer reaction. the second presidential debate watch on c-span, on demand at c-span.org and listen on the free c-span radio app. >> coming up in the morning, a