tv CNNNYT Democratic Presidential Debate CSPAN October 20, 2019 12:00am-2:58am EDT
minister questions from the british house of commons live, wednesdays at 7 a.m. eastern on c-span two. or watch sunday night at 9 p.m. eastern and pacific here on c-span. to c-span.orgo and find video of past prime minister's questions and other british public affairs programs. ♪ >> c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. morning, author and resident fellow at the american enterprise institute talks about , "how american political parties change in how they don't." an author frank bowman investigates the history of impeachment in his book "high crimes and misdemeanors." live atshington journal 7 a.m. eastern sunday morning. join the discussion.
>> ohio has backed all the two winners in every election since 1896. >> the top candidates are at their positions behind the podium. this is a record number of candidates, so to a comment the large group, there are no opening statements tonight. >> before we begin, a reminder of the ground rules. you will each receive 75 seconds to answer questions, 45 seconds for responses and rebuttals, and 15 seconds for clarification. from interrupting fellow candidates is that will count against your time. >> and we remind our audience to be respectful of the candidates. let's begin. in thehe last debate house democrats have officially launched an impeachment inquiry against president trump with all the candidates on the stage support. saidor warren, you have there is already enough evidence for president trump to be impeached and removed from office.
but with the election only one year away, why shouldn't it be the voters who determine the president's fate? >> sometimes, there are issues that are bigger than politics and that is the case with this impeachment inquiry. when i made the decision to run for president, i did not think it would be about impeachment. but when the mueller report came pages andd all 442 when i got to the end i realized fairlyeller had shown well that this president had obstructed justice and done it repeatedly. so at that moment i called for opening an impeachment inquiry that did not happen, and look what happened as a result. donald trump broke the law again in the summer, broke it again this fall. of and a constitutional that is that no one is above the law and that includes the president of the united states.
impeachment is the way that we establish that this man will not be permitted to break the law over and over without consequence. trump, butut donald understand, it's about the next president and the next and the next and the future of this country. the impeachment must go forward. >> senator sanders cannot do democrats have any choice but to impeach president trump question mark >> know they don't come in my judgment. he is the most corrupt president in the history of this country. it is not just that he obstructed justice with the mueller report. i think the house will find him worthy of impeachment because of the emoluments clause. this is a president who is enriching himself while using the oval office to do that and that is outrageous. i think the terms of the recent ukrainian incident, the idea
that we have a president of the united states who is prepared to hold back national security money to one of our allies to get dirt on a presidential candidate is beyond -- comprehension. so i look forward to not only a speedy impeachment process, but mitch mcconnell has got to do the right thing and allow a free and fair trial in the senate. >> during the clinton impeachment proceedings, vice quoteent biden, you said american people don't think they have made a mistake electing bill clinton and we have to be very careful. with the country now split, have democrats been careful enough? >> yes they have. i said that if trump continues what congress is entitled to know about his background and all the accusations in the mueller reports, if they did that, they would have no choice but to
begin an impeachment proceeding which gives the more power to seek more information. , agree with senator sanders this president is the most corrupt president in modern history and all of our history. ast is, he has gone so far to say since this latest event that he will not cooperate in any way at all with any witnesses or provide any information, will not do anything to cooperate. they have no choice but to move. , nancytor harris pelosi's has says members of congress have to be fair to the president and give them a chance to exonerate himself. you have already said that you would vote to remove him from office. is that being fair to the president? >> it is just being observant. he has committed crimes in plain sight. it's shocking, but he told us to he was. my angelou told us to listen to
people when they tell you who they are. donald trump told us he could shoot some the on fifth avenue and get away with it. and he has consistently been selling out the american people. he has been selling out working people, values, and national security, and on this issue our democracy. our framers of imagine that this moment, a moment where we would have a corrupt president. our framers then rightly designed our system of democracy to say there would be checks and balances this is one of those moments and so congress must act. but the reality is i don't think this impeachment process will take very long. as a former prosecutor, i know a confession when i see it and he did it in plain sight. he gave us evidence and the try to cover it up and there has been a clear consciousness of guilt. this will not take very long. donald trump needs to be held
accountable. . he is indeed the most >> corrupt president we have ever had you have -- he is indeed the most corrupt president we have ever had. >> we must be fair. we are talking about ongoing proceedings to remove a sitting president from office. this has got to be about patriotism and not partisanship. i share the same sense of urgency of everybody on the stage i understand the outrage we all feel. but we have to conduct this process in a way that is honorable and brings our country together, does not rip us apart. anybody with criticisms about a process that is making all of the facts the bear before the american public, that's what this nation needs in what is a moral moment and not a political one. i swore at host to do my job as a senator. this president has violated his, i will do my >> take you,
senator. , what do youchar say to voters who say impeachment is a distraction from the issues that impact people's lives? >> we can do two things at once. that's our job. we have a duty to pursue impeachment but we can also stand up for america. this president has not been putting america in front of his personal interests. he has not been standing up for workers in ohio are farmers in iowa and i take this a step further. when he made that call to the head of ukraine, he was digging up dirt on an opponent. that is illegal conduct, that's what he was doing. he did not talk about the russian invasion, he talked about that. so i'm still waiting to find out how making that call and trying to get him involved makes america great again.
i would like to hear from him about how leaving the kurds for slaughter where russia then steps in, how that makes america great again. and i would like to hear from about how coddling up to vladimir putin makes america great again. it doesn't make america great again, it makes russia great again. that is what the president has done. whether it is workers are farmer issues, he has put his own private interests. >> is impeachment a distraction? >> not at all. we can walk and chew gum at the same time and all of us are out there every day talking about what we will do to make sure more people cross the graduation stage, have great health care, and are put to work in places like ohio or donald trump has broken his promises.
these areas have lost jobs, not gained them. and we have to recognize that not only did the mueller report point out 10 different instances with the president obstructed justice or tried to and he made that call to president zelensky. -- but heon going the is, in an ongoing way, abusing his power. impeach this president and a majority of americans support impeachment and removal. buttigieg, you have said impeachment should be bipartisan. there is obviously very little bipartisan support. is that a mistake? >> it is a mistake on the part of republicans who enable a present to the fence -- whose actions are offensive to their own supposedly values. he has left congress with no choice. it's not just about holding him accountable for the
investigations but actions he has confessed to on television. it's also about the presidency itself. ,0 years or 100 years from now a president look back at this eitherand conclude that no one is above the law or that a president can get away with anything. but everyone on this stage is competing to be a president for after the trump presidency. , thisy or the other presidency is going to come to an end. i want you to picture what it will actually feel like in this country the first day the sun comes up after donald trump. it starts out feeling like a happy thought. this particular brand of chaos and corruption will be over. but really think about where we will be. vulnerable and even more toward apart than we are right now. and these big issues from the economy to climate change have not taken a vacation during the impeachment process. i am running to be the president
to can turn the page and unify a dangerously polarized country while tackling those issues. congresswoman gabbard, you are the only sitting house member on the stage. how do you respond? >> if impeachment is driven by these hyper partisan interests them and will only further divide and already divided country. this is what we have seen play out in polls which began shortly after trump won his election. us,nhappy as that may make he won that election in 2016 serious issues that have been raised around this phone call and many other things the transpired around that are what caused me to support the inquiry in the house. it should continue to play out together. provide all the information to the american people, recognizing that is the only way forward. impeachouse votes to
and the senate does not approve donald trump, he walks out exonerated, further deepening divides. >> you have been calling for impeachment for two years. does there need bipartisan support? time on they first stage so i want to start by reminding everybody that every candidate here is more decent more coherent them and more patriotic than the criminal in the white house. [applause] but i also want to point out that anderson is right. two years ago, i started the impeachment movement because i knew there was something desperately wrong. that we did have the most corrupt president in the country and that only the voice and the will of the american people would drag washington to see it as a matter of right and wrong and not political -- expediency. so this is something the american people are demanding. that's who i went to.
you think there is enough evidence to impeach the president? >> i support impeachment but we should not have any illusions that impeaching donald trump. will be successful or a >> race the problems that got him elected we are standing in a new place of ohio. why did donald trump when your state by eight points? because we got rid of 300,000 manufacturing jobs in your towns. how many of you have noticed stores closing where you work and live? raise your hands? it's not just you. amazon's closing 30% of america's stores and malls while paying zero in texas. are the problems that got donald trump elected, the fourth industrial revolution. that will accelerate and grow more serious regardless of who is in the oval office. when we talk about donald trump, we are losing. we need to present a new vision. >> congressman o'rourke, please
respond. >> i think about everyone who has ever served this country in uniform. we have two examples here on the stage tonight. those who have willingly sacrificed their lives to defend our country and constitution. we are the inheritors of their service and their sacrifice and we have a responsibility to be fearless in the face of this president's criminality and lawlessness. as a candidate, he invited the participation of a foreign power in our democracy. as president, he lied to investigators and fired james comey and tried to fire. -- mueller. he then invited president zelensky to involve himself in our politics in exchange for favorable trade for -- terms. if there is not justice, not
only have we felt this moment and our country, we have failed everyone was live the lies down on the line. who has laid their lives down on the line. >> the impeachment centers on president trump's attempt to get dirt on vice president biden and his son. president has accused your son of doing something wrong motive -- while working on a board. i want to point out there is no evidence of wrongdoing. that if you were president, nobody with you will be involved in any form the. -- foreign businesses. okquestion is, if it's not for the president, why is it ok for your son as vice president? look, my son did nothing wrong. i did nothing wrong. of theed out the policy united states government in rooting out corruption ukraine. that's what we should be focusing on and what i want to
make a point upon them and my sonspeaks for himself, my speaks for himself. what i think is important is important as we focus on why it is so important to remove this factrom office for the that george washington the word on the first time he spoke after elected president that what we had to worry about his foreign interference in our election. it was the greatest threat to america. this president on three occasions has invited foreign governments to get engaged altering our elections. the fact is, it is outrageous. rudy giuliani and his thugs have already proven that they are lying. what we have to do is focus on a donald trump. he does not want to be the candidate and is going after me because he knows that if i get the nomination i will beat him
like a drum. >> mr. vice president, as you said, your son gave an interview and admitted he made a mistake and showed poor judgment by serving on that board. did you make a mistake by letting him? >> look, my son's statement speaks for itself. i did my job and never discussed a single thing with my son about ukraine. no one has indicated i had. we kept everything separate, even when my son was the attorney general of delaware. my son made a judgment, i'm proud of the judgment he made. i'm proud of what he had to say. let's focus on this. the fact is that this is about trumps corruption. that's a we should be focused on. >> senator sanders, your response? >> i think it is imperative we go forward with impeachment and i hope he is impeached.
but what would be a disaster is if the american people believed that all we were doing is taking on trump. we are forgetting that 87 million americans are under insured. we are forgetting the existential threat of climate change. we are forgetting that half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. so we have got to end this set a precedent for future history that says presidents like this cannot behave this way. but we cannot and must not turn our backs on the pain of the working class of this country. >> we want to move to the economy. warren, we have proposed -- you have proposed sweeping and you have said how you
are going to pay for those plans. but you have not specified how you will pay for the most expensive plan, medicare for all. raise taxes on the middle class to pay for it? >> i have made clear what my principles are. that is that costs will go up for the wealthy and the big corporations and for hard-working middle-class families, costs will go down. is i havesee this been out all around this country. i have done 140 town halls now. 70,000 selfies, which must be the new measure of democracy it gives people a chance to come up and talk to me directly. i have spoken to the family, mothers and daughters diagnosed with cancer. i spoke to a young woman whose mother was just diagnosed with diabetes. -- spoke to a young man
with ms. they all had great health insurance at the beginning. really needed it and the costs went up, the insurance company pulled the rug out from underneath them and they were left with nothing. the way i see it, it's hard enough to get a diagnosis that your child has cancer. think about the changes in your family if your mom has diabetes. what you should not have to payy about is how you will for your health care. you have endorsed senator sanders plan. should you acknowledge it? is abouty i see it, it what kind of costs middle-class families are going to face. but maybe clear. clear.- but let me be
costs will go up for the wealthy. for middle-class families, they will go down. i will not sign a bill into law that does not lower costs for middle-class families. , you saybuttigieg senator warren has been quote even face is about how she will pay for medicare for all. what is your response? >> you heard it tonight, a yes or no question without a yes or no answer. this is why people in the midwest are so frustrated with washington in general and capitol hill and in particular. your signature is to have a plan for everything except this is no plan has been laid out to explain how a multi-trillion dollar hole in his medicare for all plan is going to get filled in. the thing is, we really can deliver health care for every american and move forward with the boldest transformation since the inception of medicare health. ish the way to do it
medicare for all who want it. we take a version of medicare and. let you access it if you want to and if you prefer to stay on the private plan what you can do that. that is what most americans want. trusting you to make the right decision for your health care. and family >> senator, your response? >> let's be clear. whenever some teachers the term medicare for all who wanted -- want it, it is medicare for all who can afford it. that is the problem we've got your medicare for all is the gold standard. it is the way we get health care coverage for every single american. including the person whose shot was diagnosed with cancer or an ms diagnosis. sure everyoneke gets health care. i have laid out the basic principles. costs are going to go up for the
wealthy and big corporations. they will not go up for middle-class families and i will not sign a bill into law that raises some costs. costs are what people care about. >>. >> thank you, senator i don't think the american people are wrong when they say that what they want is a choice. of medicare for all who want it allows you to get that health care. is just better then medicare for all whether you want it or not and i don't understand why to believe the only way deliver affordable coverage is to obliterate private plans kicking 150 million americans off of their insurance when we big boldieve the same goal. we are competing to be president for the day after trump. our country will be horribly
polarized. after everything we are about to go through, this country will be even more divided. why divide this country over health care? >> senator sanders? >> as somebody who wrote the dam bill, let's be clear. under the medicare for all bill i wrote my premiums are gone. copayments are gone. deductibles are gone. all out-of-pocket expenses are gone. we are going to do better than the canadians do and that is what they have managed to do. at the end of the day, the overwhelming majority of people will save money on their health care bills. but i do think it's appropriate to knowledge that taxes will go up. they will go up significantly for the wealthy and for virtually everybody, the tax increase they pay will be substantially less than what
they were paying for premiums and out-of-pocket expenses. , will you warren acknowledge what the senator just said about taxes going up? and what ion this have committed to his costs will go down for hard-working middle-class families. i will not embrace a plan that medicare for all who can afford it. that will leave behind the cannot and will not embrace a plan who says that people have great insurance right until you get the diagnosis. we are not covering your expensive treatment. >> senator klobuchar? >> at least bernie is being honest in saying how he will pay for this and that taxes will go up. i am sorry, elizabeth, but i think we owe it to the american people tell them where we will send the invoice.
best idea is not trash obamacare what to do exactly what he wanted to do from the beginning. public option a that would bring down the cost of the premium and expand the people covered and take on pharmaceutical companies. is what we should be doing. i am tired of hearing whenever i say these things that they are republican talking points. are making republican talking points by coming out for a plan that will do that. that will better way cover more people and it's the one we should get behind. >> senator warren? >> i spent most of my time studying one basic question. that is why hard-working people go broke. one of the reasons for that is the cost of health care. in fact when i was studying, two out of three families that ended in bankrupt had health
insurance. the problem we have is the overall cost of health care. you can try to spin this anyway you want, i have spent my entire life working on how america's middle-class has been hollowed out and how we fight back. i put out nearly 50 plans on how we can fight back and rebuild america. that is we have to stop americans from going bankrupt over health care. >> senator klobuchar, do you want to respond? >> i appreciate elizabeth's work , but the difference between a plan and a hyperion is something you can. actually get done we can get the public option done and take on pharmaceutical companies and bring down prices. but what bothers me about this discussion that we don't talk about the things i am hearing about. is long-term care. i once called it a silver
tsunami. someone told me that was too negative. the aging of the population. we need to make it easier to get long-term care insurance in ohio that has been hit by the opiod epidemic, we need to take on pharma companies and make them pay for the addiction they have cause and the people they have killed. those are the issues i care about. --let me bring you be here you in here, vice president. are they being realistic? plan we areall, the hearing discussed is the one i put forward to build on a public and at option. i think it is awfully important to be straightforward. the plan will cost at least 30
trillion dollars over 10 years and is more on a really -- yearly basis than the entire federal budget a study recently came out showing that it will reduce costs but for people making between 50 and $75,000 year, or taxes will go up $5,000. the fact is, they will pay more in new taxes. if a fireman and a schoolteacher are making a hundred thousand bucks a year, their taxes will go up about 10 grand. that is more than they would possibly save on the health care plan. we have a plan put forward that will work. >> senator sanders? >> i get a little tired, i must say, of people defending a system which is dysfunctional and cruel. 87 million uninsured. 30,000 people dying every single
year. 500,000 people going bankrupt. for what reason? they came down with cancer. i will tell you the issue. the issue is whether the democratic party has the guts to stand up to the health-care care industry which made $100 billion in profit. tother we have the guts stand up to the price-fixing on the pharmaceutical industry fashion industry. and if we don't have the guts to do that and all we can do is take their money, we should be ashamed of. -- ourselves. >> this is the sixth debate we have had in the cycle is not nearly one word with all these discussions on women's access through productive health care, which is under full on attack in america today. it is outrageous. there are states that have passed laws that will virtually
prevent women from having access to reproductive health care and it is not an exaggeration day women will die. poor women and women of color will. because the republican legislature in these various states who are out of touch with america are telling women what to do with their bodies. people need to keep their hands off of women bodies and let women make decisions about their own lives. and let's talk about that. it is a significant health care issue in america today. a quarter of jobs american jobs could be lost to automation in the next 10 years. ohio is one of the states likely to be hit. senator sanders, you say your federal jobs air t is part of threat -- you say the federal jobs plan is part of the threat. what you have a job for every
sin one of those americans? >> dam right we will. if you look at america today, we have a collapsing infrastructure we could put 50 million people to work rebuilding our roads, bridges, water systems, wastewater plants and airports. furthermore, and i hope we will discuss at night, this planet faces the greatest threat in its history from climate change. the green new deal that i have advocated will create up to 20 million jobs as we move away to energyl fuels efficiency. we need workers to be childcare, we need teachers to come in the school systems which don't. wee the teachers we need -- need more doctors, we need more sheet-metal workers. all we talk about making candles
and tuition free, we will give those people. the opportunity to get those jobs. . mr. yang, your solution is a universal basic income. why is giving people thousand dollars a month that are then sanders plan? >> i am for the spirit of a federal jobs guarantee what you have to look at how it would materialize in practice. what are the jobs, who manages you, what if you don't like your job, what if you are not good at your job? fact is, most americans do not want to work for the federal government. saying that is the vision of the economy of the 21st century is not a vision most americans would embrace. and senator sanders, it does not take into account the work of people like my wife who is at home with two boys, one of whom is autistic. we have a freedom dividend of thousand dollars a month, recognizing the work happening in our families and communities. it helps all americans.
you know this in ohio. if you rely on the federal government to target its resources in the u.n. up with failed retraining programs and jobs that no one wants to when we put the money into our hands, we can build a trickle up economy. it will enable us to do the kind of work we want to do. this is a positive vision that we have to embrace as a party. >> senator booker, a federal jobs guarantee or $1000 a month. are those the best solutions? >> first of all, happy to get in, finally. i'm having deja vu all over again. first of all because i saw this in 2016. using donaldlly trump slides in the second issue we cover is elevating alive and attacking estate -- a statement. the only person sitting at home
was enjoying that was donald arep seeing that we distracting from his malfeasance. and i'm having deja vu all over again because we have another health care debate and we are not talking about the clear next central retina in america but we are in a state that had to planned parenthood's close. we're seeing all over this country reproductive rights under attack. god bless kemal a -- kamala, but women should not be the only ones taking up this cause. >> it is because women are people and people deserve to control their own bodies. >> we are going to get that issue later on tonight. senator warren, you wrote that blaming job loss on automation is quote a good story except is not really true. should workers in ohio not be worried about losing their jobs automation? the data shows that we have
had a lot of problems with losing jobs but the prince will reason. has been bad trade policy. . -- reason has been bad trade policy. giant multinational corporations calling the shots that have no loyalty to america. they have no loyalty to american , to american consumers. they have no loyalty to america is. -- american communities. they are loyal only to their own bottom line. accountable capitalism says you want a giant corporation in america, by golly, 40% of your board of directors should be elected by your employees that will make a difference when the corporation decides we could save a nickel moving a job to mexico. when are people in the boardroom saying, you know what that does to our community and our
workers? we also need to make it easier to join a union and give them more power when they negotiate. they need to restructure strengthen this economy and that's where it starts. , what is yourtro response to the claim that automation is not true? >> what folks have said is that is only part of the issue. i believe we need to address communities being impacted by automation. i think we need to focus on making sure we spark job opportunities for people across the country. ,s i mentioned, here in ohio ohio was losing jobs under donald trump. he has broken his promises to ohio. infrastructurein and a green new deal to unleash millions of new jobs.
i was in iowa at a manufacturing facility that makes wind turbines, putting hundreds to work. totop of that, we need support working families and invest in things ike child--c -- child-care. >> i have is being to americans around the country about automation and they are smart. they see what is happening. they see a self-serve kiosk in every store. driving a truck is the most common job in 29 states. three-and-a-half million truck drivers and's country. and my friends in california are piloting self driving trucks. what does that mean for the 3.5 million truckers or the 7 million americans their work and truck stops or diners who rely upon them.
this is ignoring the reality american see around us every day. i understand that what we are all looking for is how we strengthen america's middle class. think the thing closer to the universal basic income is social security. it's one of the reasons i put forward a plan to extend the solvency of social security by and add $200 for the payment of every person who receives social security and who receives disability insurance. that 200 dollars a month the lift nearly 5 million families out of poverty. fitted shirt loosen up the budget for a whole lot more. it also has a provision for your wife, for those who stay home to do caregiving. it creates an opportunity for them to get credit. work,a lifetime of hard
people are tired to retire with dignity. i just want to understand the data on this. >> your time is up. i want to give congressman gabbard a chance to respond. >> really, what this is about is getting to the heart of the fear that is well-founded. as people look to the automation revolution, they look to uncertainty. they don't of how this will affect their jobs or everyday lives. i agree with my friend andrew yang. i believe universal basic income is a good idea so that people can have the freedom to make the kinds of choices they want. this has to do with a bad trade deal we have seen in the past that has also driven fear towards people losing the way that they provide for their families. what we need to do is look at how we can best serve the interests of the american people. i do not believe a federal jobs guarantee is the way to do that.
the value someone feels in themselves on their own lives is not defined by the job they have but is intrinsic to who we are as americans, whatever we choose to do and we can't forget that. one of the industry's most at risk from a changing economy is the auto industry. general motors used to be the largest employer in ohio, now it is 72nd. thousands of gm workers across the country are on strike. all of you on the stage have voiced support for these workers. , one of theer latest impasses in the negotiations involves bringing jobs back from mexico. as president, how would you convince gm to return production. >> the point i wanted to make and i hope andrew yang will come out for this, doing more for workers would just be raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.
it would put more money in people's pockets then giving them $1000 a month. we have to start putting the dignity back to work. number one, you start having trade deals but not the thing the president is trying to push through congress that gives and doeson benefits not put workers at the center of every trade deal. we must be sure we're not giving tax incentives to move jobs out of the country and start but the worker at the center of that and make sure they have the resources. we are seeing this trend all right now,untry unions and america's are under attack. as union membership has gone down we have seen a stratification of wealth and income. the other thing i will do is to begin to fight to see union strength spread. to make sure we have sex oral bargaining -- sectoral
bargaining to improve conditions and make sure every american has a living wage. >> thank you, senator. congressman o'rourke, same question. how would you convince gm to bring production back? with members of uaw or striking outside of facilities in cincinnati in ohio, which has been devastated by gm paying effectively zero in taxes last year the people of ohio invest getting millions in the infrastructure around there. what they want is a shot and fairness and how we treat which they are not receiving today. part of the way to do that is through trade deals making sure are allowed workers
to join unions. not only is that bad for the mexican worker with the american worker at a competitive disadvantage. , we can get behind our world cast public school educators. if we make sure cost is not an object to attend college and we elevate the role of union's and create more than. 5 million apprenticeships will make sure that every single american will have a shot. they don't want a handout, they just want a shot. income inequality is growing in the united states at an alarming rate. the top 1% owned more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. senator sanders. when you introduce your wealth tax which would tax the assets of the wealthiest americans, you said billionaire's should not exist. is the goal of your plan to tax billion is out of existence? >> when you have half a million
americans sleeping on the 87eets, when you have million people uninsured or underinsured, when you have hundreds of thousands of kids who cannot afford to go to and millions struggling with the oppressive burden of student debt and you also have three people owning a more wealth than the bottom half of american society, that is a moral and economic outreach -- outrage. the truth is, we cannot afford to continue this level of income and wealth inequality and we cannot afford a billionaire class whose greed and corruption has been at war with the working families of this country for 45 years. so if you are asking me, do i think we should demand the wealthy start paying their fair
share of taxes so we can create a nation and government that works for all of us, yes, that is exactly what i believe. [applause] >> thank you, senator. you are the loan billionaire on the stage. what is your plan for closing the income gap? >> let me say this, senator sanders is right. there have been 40 years were corporations have bought this government and meant a 40 year attack on the rights of working people and specifically organized labor. the results are as shameful as senator sanders says. both in terms of assets and income. it's absolutely wrong and undemocratic. i was one of the first people on the stage to propose a wealth tax. i would undo every republican tax cut for rich people and major corporations. but there's something else going on that as shameful.
people. when i talk about is getting things done. the way to get things done is to take a look at the tax code now. we have to start rewarding work and not just wealth. i would eliminate the capital thes tax and raise it to highest rate of 39.5% and double it. why in god's name should somebody clipping coupons in the stock market pay a lower tax rate than somebody who is, like i said, a schoolteacher and a firefighter. secondly, the idea that we engage in the notion that there -- there are 1,000,000,000,647 by dollars in tax loopholes. you can't justify $600 billion of that. we could go into detail. to do is go out and make it clear to the american people that we are
going to raise taxes on the wealthy. we are going to reduce tax burdens on those who are not. this is one of the reasons these debates are crazy. everybody tries to squeeze everything into every answer that is given. fact is, everybody is right about the fact that the fourth industrial revolution is costing jobs. corporate greed is not investigate employees. they are buying back their stock. >> thank you, mr. vice president. >> senator warren? >> this is about our values as a country. show me your budget and tax plans and we will know your values right now, in america, wealth,1% have so much understand this. onwe put a two cent tax their 50 millions -- 50
millionth and first dollar and that, we would have enough money to provide universal childcare for every baby, universal pre-k. childthe wages of every care worker in preschool teacher in america. provided universal, tuition free college. put $50 billion into historically bad -- black colleges. debtanceled student loan for 95% of people who have it. my question is not why do bernie and i support a wealth tax, it's why is it does everyone else on this stage think it is more important to protect billionaires than it is to invest in an entire generation? >> mayor buttigieg, your response? >> i am all for a wealth tax. i'm all for just about everything mentioned in these answers.
let me tell you how this looks from the industrial midwest, where i live. washington politicians, congressmen and senators saying all the right things. offering the most elegant policy prescriptions and nothing changes. i did not even realize it was unusual to have empty factories that i would see out of the windows of my dad's chevy cavalier. i do not know that was not every city until i went to college. chevyjive -- drive my own which used to be built right here, one more symbol of the broken promises this president has made it to workers. why did workers take a chance on this present in the first place? it's because it felt like nobody was willing to actually do anything. and while he has unquestionably made it dramatically worse, it's time to realize we are paying attention to the wrong things. we're paying attention to who sounded better. klobuchar, willie
wealth tax work? work?l a wealth tax >> i am for it, but i want to give a reality check. nobody wants to protect billionaires. not even the billionaire wants to protect billionaires. your idea is not the only idea. when i look at this, i look at whose taxmp, the guy bill passed and guts together with his cronies and said guess what, you guys all got a lot richer. that was the one time in his presidency he told the truth. i would repeal significant portions of that tax bill that help the rich, including what he did with the corporate tax rate and international taxation. added all up, you've got a lot of money that house pay for chapter and protects the dignity of work. it makes sure that our kids can go to school. it is not one idea. >> senator warren, please respond. >> understand, taxing income
will not get you where you need to be the way taxing wealth does. the rich are not like you and me. the real billionaires are making money off of their chelated wealth and it just keeps growing. we need a wealth tax in order to make investments in the next generation. hard,rstand that this is but if democrats, we are going to succeed when we dream big and fight hard, not when we dream small and quit. >> i would like to respond. you havecause different ideas does not mean you are fighting for regular. i would not even be up on the stage if it were not for unions and the dignity of work. if my grandpa did not have unions protecting him in those mines that he would not have survived. my mother did not have unions as a teacher, she would not be able to make the wages she made.
just because we have different ideas and get to the same place in terms of beating donald trump in taking this on, we are in ohio. we can win ohio in the presidency. but only if we unite around ideals and.gov fighting against each other and instead take the fight to him. senator harris, you want to give working families a tax credit to help close the income gap. is that a better solution than a wealth tax? >> peers how i think about it. when i was growing up, my mother raise my sister and me. we would come home before she came home from work and cooked dinner. she would sit up at the kitchen table trying to figure out how to make it all work. when i think about where we are right now, i do believe justice is on the ballot. sans the ballot in terms of impeachment and economic justice , health justice, and so many
other issues. when i think about the issue, i think about that dad sitting at his kitchen table after everyone has gone to sleep with his cup of tea tried to figure out how he will make it work. he's probably sitting there deciding that on that minimum wage job that does not pay enough for him to meet the bills , he will have to start driving and hoover. that means that with those two jobs, he will miss his kid's soccer game. that's a reality for americans today. that's why when i get elected which willis bill give the american family a tax credit of up to $6,000 a year to take home, that will make a real difference in that man's life. and don't tell him that not a big deal. >> mr. yang? >> senator warren is 100% right
that we are in the midst of the most extreme winner take all economy in history and a wealth tax makes sense in principle. the problem is that it has been tried in germany, france, denmark, sweden, and all the countries ended up repealing it because it had massive problems and did not generate the revenue projected. if we cannot learn from the failed experiences of other countries what can we learn from? we should not be looking to other countries mistakes. instead, we should look what they still have a value added tax. if we give the american people a tiny slice of every amazon sale google search, robot truck mile, we can generate billions and put it into our hands because we know best how to use it. youongressman o'rourke, do think it will tax is the best way to address income inequality? >> it is part of the solution. we need to be focused on lifting people up. sometimes, i think senator warren is more focused on being
punitive or pitting some part of the country against one another. instead of lifting people up and making sure this country comes together around those solutions. i think of a woman i met in las vegas, nevada. she is working for jobs raising child with disabilities. how hard is knows to make it and get by in this country already. jobs, she wants to know how we are going to help her to make sure her child has the care she needs. she just has to work one job because it pays a living wage. senator warren said to show me your budget and you will show me your values. she has yet to describe her plan and whether or not the person i met see a tax increase. administration, if you make less than $250,000 a year as a family, you will not see a tax increase. >> i want to give senator warren a chance to respond. >> i'm really shocked at the
notion that anyone thinks i am punitive. look, i have a beef with millionaires. my problem is you made a fortune in america. you had a great idea and got out there, great for you. but you build that fortune in but you built that fortune in america. i guarantee you built it in part using workers all of us helped pay to educate. you built it in part getting your goods to markets on roads and bridges all of us helped pay for. you built it at least in part protected by police and firefighters all of us help pay the salaries for. and all i'm saying is, you make it to the top, the top 0.1%, then pitch in two cents so every other kid in america has a chance to make it. erin: senator, thank you. senator castro, your response? mr. o'rourke: --
-- castro: i just mr. o'rourke: i just want to make sure that we're lifting up those families who are working and need help through an expanded earned income tax credit or child tax credit. sen. warren: that is the point. this is universal childcare for every baby in this country, early educational opportunities for every child, universal pre-k no matter where you live for every three-year-old and four-year-old. mr. o'rourke: but in addition to that, will they see a tax increase? sen. warren: raising the wages, no, raising the wages of every childcare worker and preschool teacher in this country. this is about universal college, about investment in our hbcu's, about making sure that we get rid of the student loan debt burden that is crushing. erin: i want to get secretary castro in here, please, congressman. go ahead, secretary. mr. castro: thanks a lot, erin. and you see that everybody has their own plans. and let me just say that the way that i view this is born out of my own experience. i grew up like i bet a lot folks in this room grew up, and folks that are watching on tv.
i grew up with my twin brother, joaquin, in a single-parent household where my mom was working hard to support us and also her mom, my grandmother. and we knew what it was like to wonder whether we were going to be able to pay the rent at the first of the month or sometimes have the electricity turned off. and when i was a kid, to look at the grocery list that seemed to get shorter and shorter, and that's what's happening to a lot of families these days. i was in las vegas a few months ago, and i visited people who were homeless, who are living in storm drainage tunnels under the las vegas strip in the shadow of hotels and casinos that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars, where people from around the world are spending so much money on vacations. we can do better than that. i believe that a wealth and equality tax, as i've proposed, is part of the answer, but also i've proposed an inheritance tax, raising the top marginal tax rate. and investing in things like universal childcare and affordable housing. erin: senator booker, please respond. sen. booker: well, first of all, i just want to be respond by, you know, we've got one shot to make donald trump a one-term president, and how we talk about
each other in this debate actually really matters. i've had the privilege of working with or being friends with everybody on this stage, and tearing each other down because we have a different plan, to me, is unacceptable. i have seen this script before. [applause] sen. booker: it didn't work in 2016, and it will be a disaster for us in 2020. i have a different plan than elizabeth warren. i have a different plan than many people on this stage. and it involves, again, fair taxes for the richest. we have a lot of work to do there. but we've had 20 years of presidential debates, and we have never talked about the violence in america of child poverty. we have got to begin to talk more eloquently and persuasively and urgently about doing the things not just to make sure fair taxes are paid by people on the top, but that we deal with the moral obscenity of having the highest levels of child poverty in the industrial world. my plan will focus on that, and these are some of the issues we should be talking about, not defining ourselves just by what we're against, but we need to win this election by talking about who and what we are for. erin: thank you, senator booker.
[applause] anderson: we've got to take a quick break. the cnn-new york times debate live from otterbein university in ohio will be right back after this. anderson: and welcome back to the cnn-new york times democratic presidential debate live from otterbein university in westerville, ohio. i want to turn now to foreign policy. president trump ordered the withdrawal of all american forces from northern syria, abandoning america's long-time kurdish allies. as a result, turkey has now evaded syria, isis detainees have escaped, and the kurds have announced a new deal with the government in damascus, a victory for syrian dictator bashar al-assad, and russia, and
iran. vice president biden, we know you would not have withdrawn troops from northern syria in this way, but that is already in process. so would you send american troops back into northern syria to prevent an isis resurgence and protect our kurdish allies? vice pres. biden: i would not have withdrawn the troops and i would not have withdrawn the additional thousand troops who are in iraq, which are in retreat now, being fired on by assad's people. and the president of the united states saying, if those isis folks escape from the prisons they're in, they'll only go to europe and won't affect us. it has been the most shameful thing that any president has done in modern history, excuse me, in terms of foreign policy. and the fact of the matter is, i've never seen a time, and i've spent thousands of hours in the situation room, i've spent many hours on the ground in those very places, in syria and in iraq, and guess what? our commanders across the board, former and present, are ashamed of what's happening here. what i would do is i would be making it real clear to assad that, in fact, where he's going to have a problem, because turkey is the real problem here. and i would be having a real lockdown conversation with erdogan and letting him know that he's going to pay a heavy
price for what he has done now. pay that price. anderson: just to clarify, mr. vice president, would you want american troops back in northern syria? vice pres. biden: i would want those thousand troops to be protected by air cover, those thousand troops that are being, having to withdraw under fire, make it clear that they're not going anywhere, and have them protected, and work my way back toward what, in fact, needs to be done, protecting those kurds. they lost their lives. this is shameful, shameful what this man has done. [applause] anderson: congresswoman gabbard, last week you said that american troops should get out of syria now. you don't agree with how the president handled the withdrawal. what would you have done differently? how would you have pulled out troops without the bloodshed we're seeing now? rep. gabbard: well, first of all, we've got to understand the reality of the situation there, which is that the slaughter of the kurds being done by turkey is yet another negative consequence of the regime change war that we've been waging in syria.
donald trump has the blood of the kurds on his hand, but so do many of the politicians in our country from both parties who have supported this ongoing regime change war in syria that started in 2011, along with many in the mainstream media, who have been championing and cheerleading this regime change war. not only that, but "the new york times" and cnn have also smeared veterans like myself for calling for an end to this regime change war. just two days ago, "the new york times" put out an article saying that i'm a russian asset and an assad apologist and all these different smears. this morning, a cnn commentator said on national television that i'm an asset of russia. completely despicable. as president, i will end these regime change wars by doing two things, ending the draconian sanctions that are really a modern-day siege the likes of
which we are seeing saudi arabia wage against yemen, that have caused tens of thousands of syrian civilians to die and to starve, and i would make sure that we stop supporting terrorists like al qaeda in syria who have been the ground force in this ongoing regime change war. anderson: thank you. rep. gabbard: i'd like to ask senator warren if she would join me in calling for an end to this regime change war in syria, finally. sen. warren: so, look, i think that we ought to get out of the middle east. i don't think we should have troops in the middle east. but we have to do it the right way, the smart way. what this president has done is that he has sucked up to dictators, he has made impulsive decisions that often his own team doesn't understand, he has cut and run on our allies, and he has enriched himself at the expense of the united states of america. in syria, he has created a bigger-than-ever humanitarian crisis.
he has helped isis get another foothold, a new lease on life. i sit on the armed services committee. i talk with our military leaders about this. anderson: thank you, senator. sen. warren, i was in iraq and went through the neighborhoods that isis destroyed. anderson: thank you. sen. warren: we need to get out, but we need to do this through a negotiated solution. there is no military solution in this region. anderson: thank you, senator. mayor buttigieg, like many of your fellow candidates on the stage, you've been calling for an end to endless wars. what's your response on syria? mayor buttigieg: well, respectfully, congresswoman, i think that is dead wrong. the slaughter going on in syria is not a consequence of american presence. it's a consequence of a withdrawal and a betrayal by this president of american allies and american values. look, i didn't think we should have gone to iraq in the first place. i think we need to get out of afghanistan. but it's also the case that a small number of specialized, special operations forces and intelligence capabilities were the only thing that stood between that part of syria and
what we're seeing now, which is the beginning of a genocide and the resurgence of isis. meanwhile, soldiers in the field are reporting that for the first time they feel ashamed, ashamed, of what their country has done. we saw the spectacle, the horrifying sight of a woman with the lifeless body of her child in her arms asking, what the hell happened to american leadership? and when i was deployed, i knew one of the things keeping me safe was the fact that the flag on my shoulder represented a country known to keep its word. and our allies knew it and our enemies knew it. anderson: thank you, mayor. mayor buttigieg: you take that away, you are taking away what makes america america. anderson: thank you, mayor. mayor buttigieg: it makes our troops and the world a much more dangerous place. [applause] anderson: congresswoman gabbard, your response? rep. gabbard: yeah, absolutely. so, really, what you're saying, mayor pete, is that you would continue to support having u.s. troops in syria for an indefinite period of time to continue this regime change war that has caused so many refugees
to flee syria, that you would continue to have our country involved in a war that has undermined our national security, you would continue this policy of the u.s. actually providing arms and support to terrorist groups in syria, like al qaeda, hts, al-nusra, and others, because they are the ones who have been the ground force in this regime change war? that's really what you're saying. mayor buttigieg: no, you can embrace, or you can put an end to endless war without embracing donald trump's policy, as you're doing. rep. gabbard: will you end the regime change war, is the question. what is an endless war if it's not a regime change war? mayor buttigieg: what we are doing, or what we were doing in syria was keeping our word. part of what makes it possible for the united states to get people to put their lives on the line to back us up is the idea that we will back them up, too. when i was deployed, not just the afghan national army forces, but the janitors put their lives on the line just by working with u.s. forces.
i would have a hard time today looking an afghan civilian or soldier in the eye after what just happened over there. and it is undermining the honor of our soldiers. you take away the honor of our soldiers, you might as well go after their body armor next. this president has betrayed american values. our credibility has been tattered. i will restore u.s. credibility before it is finally too late. anderson: senator sanders, is turkey still a u.s. ally? should they remain in nato? sen. sanders: i'm sorry. say that again? anderson: is turkey still a u.s. ally? should they remain in nato? sen. sanders: no, turkey is not a u.s. ally when they invade another country and engage in mass slaughter. the crisis here, as i think joe said and pete said, is when you begin to betray people -- and in terms of the kurds, 11,000 of them died fighting isis, 20,000 were wounded. and the united states said, we're with you, we're standing with you. and then suddenly, one day after
a phone call with erdogan, announced by tweet, trump reverses that policy. now, you tell me what country in the world will trust the word of the president of the united states. in other words, what he has done is wreck our ability to do foreign policy, to do military policy, because nobody in the world will believe this pathological liar. [applause] buttigieg: what this president has done shows that american leadership shapes the behavior of our allies, or sometimes allies, too. remember, the problem right now is not just with our competitors. for example, a place like china, the people of hong kong rise up for democracy and don't get a peep of support from the president. it's just not the behavior of adversaries like russia. but our one-time allies, like saudi arabia, which the cia just concluded was responsible, as we all knew, for murdering and dismembering an american resident and journalist.
and turkey, which was an american ally. that's the point. we had leverage. but when we abandon the international stage, when we think our only choices are between endless war or total isolation, the consequence is the disappearance of u.s. leadership from the world stage, and that makes this entire world a more dangerous place. anderson: senator klobuchar, should turkey remain in nato? sen. klobuchar: we need to work with our allies, to work with turkey and bring them out. this is an outrageous thing that happened here. i think we need to talk about this not only in terms of the horror of what happened here with turkey, but the fact that our president blew it and now he's too proud to say it. and what do we do now? we continue that humanitarian aid, but then we work with our allies to say come back, turkey, and stop this, because what mayor pete has just said is true. think about our other allies, israel. how do they feel right now? donald trump is not true to his word when they are a beacon of democracy in the mideast. think about our allies in europe when he pulls out of the iranian
agreement and leaves them holding the bag and gives the power to china and russia. anderson: thank you, senator. sen. klobuchar: think about the nuclear agreement with russia that he precipitously pulled out of. this is part of a pattern. it's not an isolated incident. anderson: thank you, senator. senator harris, given that the u.s. abandoned our kurdish allies, what would you do as president to convince the rest of the world that we can still be trusted? sen. harris: that's a great question, anderson, because the commander-in-chief of the united states of america has, as one of her greatest priorities and responsibilities, to concern herself with the security of our nation and homeland. i serve on the senate intelligence committee. i have, over a period of time, received classified information about the threats to our security and hot spots around the world. what has happened in syria is yet again donald trump selling folks out. and in this case, he sold out the kurds, who, yes, fought with us and thousands died in our fight against isis. and let's be clear. what donald trump has done,
because of that phone call with erdogan, is basically giving 10,000 isis fighters a get out of jail free card. and you know who the winner is in this? there are four, russia, iran, assad, and isis. this is a crisis of donald trump's making. and it is on a long list of crises of donald trump's making. and that's why dude got to go. and when i am commander-in-chief, we will stop this madness. anderson: secretary castro, your response. [applause] mr. castro: well, i mean, you asked the question of, how are we going to get people to trust us again? the first thing is we've got to boot donald trump out of the oval office so that people will trust us again. you know, i also want people to think, the folks this week that saw those images of isis prisoners running free to think about how absurd it is that this president is caging kids on the border and effectively letting isis prisoners run free. [applause] castro: he has made a
tremendous mistake, a total disaster there in syria. and just to connect the dots for a second, if you're kim jong-un, for instance, why in the world would you believe anything that this president says to contain your nuclear weapons program, when he tore up an iran nuclear agreement that we just signed four years ago, which was the strongest agreement to contain iran's nuclear weapons program, and now he's abandoned the very people that we gave our word to? i would make sure that we work with our allies to pressure syria to stop the aggression, and i support efforts at stronger sanctions than this president has announced. anderson: thank you, mr. secretary. marc: senator booker, the american intelligence community says that russia is trying to capitalize on the power vacuums around the world as we're seeing right now in northern syria. what specifically would you do as president to check vladimir putin's power on the world stage? sen. booker: so, first of all, understand that this president is turning the moral leadership of this country into a dumpster fire. we literally have great generals
like mattis, who said on the world stage, the united states of america, there can be no better friend than the united states of america and no better -- no greater enemy than the united states of america. this president has turned that upside down and now is doing things to undermine our critical alliances and partner with russia. and so clearly, to your question, number one, we cannot allow the russians to continue to grow in influence by abandoning the world stage. we cannot allow russia to not only interfere in the democracies of the ukraine, and latvia, and lithuania, but even not calling them out for their efforts to interfere in this democracy are unacceptable. russia and putin understand strength, and this president, time and time again, is showing moral weakness. he makes promises to the american people that he's going to protect this nation. well, instead of doing something to defeat isis, he's now given them a foothold again. this is an american president that even right now is lying to the american public and saying
he's bringing our troops home, at the same time he's increasing troop presence with the saudis, while they're involved in an unjust war that is killing tens of thousands of children in yemen. this president is making us less safe. he is partnering more with putin than he is with merkel and macron. and as president of the united states, i will stop this and restore american integrity abroad. marc: thank you, senator. vice president? vice pres. biden: it doesn't make me any better or worse, but jaime be the only person who spent extensive time alone with putin, as well as with erdogan. and erdogan understands that, you talk about should he stay in or out of nato, he understands if he's out of nato, he's in real trouble. but the fact of the matter is, we have been unwilling in this administration, because we have an erratic, crazy president who knows not a damn thing about foreign policy and operates out of fear for his own re-election. [applause] vice pres. biden: think what's happened. the fact of the matter is, you have russia influencing and
trying to break up nato. what does the president do? he says, i believe vladimir putin. i believe vladimir putin. i don't believe our intelligence community. sen. sanders: you're suggesting i'm vladimir putin here. vice pres. biden: no, no, i'm not. [laughter] sen. sanders: i know. vice pres. biden: but here, look, but here's the deal. think what that did. he turns around and he questions whether or not he'll keep the sacred commitment of article 5 for the nato members. if he is re-elected, i promise you, there will be no nato. our security will be vastly underrated, under, we will be in real trouble. and with regard to regime change in syria, that has not been the policy, we change the regime. it has been to make sure that the regime did not wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocent people between there and the iraqi border. and lastly, and i apologize for going on, but lastly, what is happening in iraq is going to, i mean, excuse me, in afghanistan, as well as all the way over to syria, we have isis that's going to come here. they are going to, in fact,
damage the united states of america. that's why we got involved in the first place and not ceded the whole area to assad and to the russians. lacey, thank you, mr. vice -- marc: thank you, mr. vice president. congressman o'rourke, senate democrats put out a report last year on russia's hostile actions around the world. they suggest the next president could fight back by publicly revealing what the u.s. knows about putin's corruption and work with allies to freeze his bank accounts. would you take either of those actions, even in the face of possible retaliation? mr. o'rourke: yes. we must be unafraid in ensuring that we hold russia accountable for invading the world's greatest democracy, and being able to do it thanks to donald trump functionally with impunity so far, so much so that they are invading this democracy right now as we speak, still at the invitation of this president. so if there are not consequences, we will continue
to see this problem going forward. but in addition, to answer the previous question that you asked, how do we stand up to russia on the global stage, we do that by renewing our alliances and our friendships. that is what makes america stronger. there isn't enough money in this country, there aren't enough servicemembers as brave and courageous as they are to do everything that we want to accomplish militarily around the world. and the kurds are case in point. in fact, because we turned our backs on them, those kurds who fought for us in syria, helped to defeat isis not just for themselves, but for the united states of america, it makes it more likely that we will have to send another generation of servicemembers to fight those battles there. and then lastly, as general mattis, who was invoked earlier, has said, we have two powers, one of intimidation and one of inspiration. we need to now focus on that latter power and make sure that we invest in diplomacy and our state department and peacefully
and non-violently resolving our foreign policy goals not on the backs of 18-year-olds, 19-year-olds, and 20-year-olds anymore, but making sure that our diplomats are invested in, have the focus necessary by this next president to make that they can accomplish those goals for this country and for the world. marc: thank you, congressman. mr. steyer, would you publicly reveal what the u.s. knows about putin's corruption or work to freeze his bank accounts? please respond. mr. steyer: absolutely. as far as i'm concerned, mr. trump's america first program, which involves having no plans, having no process, and having no partners, has proved to be a disaster in syria, it's proved to be a disaster in terms of our response to russia's attacking our democracy, and more than that, when we look at the problems around the world, the idea that the united states is going to act unilaterally against a country without the support of our traditional allies makes absolutely no sense. let's go to the most important international problem that we're facing, which no one has brought
up, which is climate. we can't solve the climate crisis in the united states by ourselves. it's an international crisis. i've been working on it for 10 years, taking on the corporations. but we have to work with our allies and our frenemies around the world. so if you look at what mr. trump is doing, of course he's been bought by the oil and gas companies. but any problem that we're going to do, but specifically climate, we're going to have to lead the world morally, we're going to have to lead it technologically, financially, and commercially. this is the proof that this kind of america-first, go-it-alone, trust nobody and be untrustworthy is the worst idea i have ever heard, and i would change it on day one in every single light. marc: mr. yang, your response to putin and russia. mr. yang: of course. we have to look at the chain of events. how did we get here? the fact is, we were falling apart at home, so we voted in donald trump, and he's now led
us down this dangerous path with erratic and unreliable foreign policy. we have to let russia know, look, we get it. we've tampered with other elections, you've tampered with our elections, and now it has to stop. and if it does not stop, we will take this as an act of hostility against the american people. i believe most americans would support me on this. but russian hacking of our democracy is an illustration of the 21st century threats. artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, climate change, loose nuclear material, military drones, and non-state actors, these are the threats that are going to require our administration to catch up in terms of technology. we all know we are decades behind the curve on technology. we saw when mark zuckerberg testified at congress the nature of the questioning. as commander-in-chief, i will help pull us forward. marc: thank you. sen. klobuchar: i want to respond to mr. yang. i don't see a moral equivalency between our country and russia. vladimir putin is someone who has shot down planes over ukraine, who has poisoned his opponents, and we have not talked about what we need to do to protect ourselves from russia
invading our election. this wasn't meddling. that's what i do when i call my daughter on a saturday night and ask her what she's doing. sorry. this was much more serious than that. this was actually invading our election. so to protect ourselves in 2020, what we need, one, backup paper ballots in every single state. that is a bill that i need, and we need to stop mitch mcconnell from stopping that from happening. and then we need to stop the social media companies from running paid political ads, including ones last time in rubles, without having to say where those ads came from and who paid for them. that's the honest ads act. that's a bipartisan bill that i lead, and we can't wait to become president to get that done. we need to get it done now. marc: thank you, senator. anderson: we want to turn back to domestic issues and the epidemic of gun violence in this country. we're less than 100 miles from dayton, ohio, where two months ago a gunman killed nine people using an ar-15-style weapon with a high-capacity magazine. congressman o'rourke, in the
last debate, you said, "hell yes, we're going to take your ar-15, your ak-47," but when you were asked how you'd enforce a mandatory buyback, you said police wouldn't be going door to door. so, how exactly are you going to force people to give up their weapons? you don't even know who has those weapons. mr. o'rourke: look, we're going to make sure that the priority is saving the lives of our fellow americans. i think almost everyone on this stage agrees that it's not right, and as president would seek to ban the sale of ar-15s and ak-47's. those are weapons of war. they were designed to kill people effectively, efficiently on a battlefield. you mentioned the massacre in dayton. nine people killed in under 40 seconds. in el paso, texas, 22 were killed in under three minutes. and the list goes on throughout the country. so if the logic begins with those weapons being too dangerous to sell, then it must continue by acknowledging, with
16 million ar-15's and ak-47s out there, they are also too dangerous to own. every single one of them is a potential instrument of terror. just ask hispanics in texas. univision surveyed them. more than 80% feared that they would be a victim of a mass terror attack like the one in el paso that was targeted at mexican americans and immigrants, inspired in part by this president's racism and hatred that he's directed at communities like mine in el paso. anderson: congressman -- mr. o'rourke: so i expect my fellow americans to follow the law, the same way that we enforce any provision, any law that we have right now. anderson: ok. mr. o'rourke: we don't go door to door to do anything in this country to enforce the law. i expect republicans, democrats, gun-owners, non-gun-owners alike to respect and follow the law. anderson: congressman, just to follow up, your expectations aside, your website says you will fine people who don't give up their weapons. that doesn't take those weapons off the street. so, to be clear, exactly how are you going to take away weapons from people who do not want to give them up and you don't know
where they are? mr. o'rourke: if someone does not turn in an ar-15 or an ak-47, one of these weapons of war, or brings it out in public and brandishes it in an attempt to intimidate, as we saw when we were at kent state recently, then that weapon will be taken from them. if they persist, there will be other consequences from law enforcement. but the expectation is that americans will follow the law. i believe in this country. i believe in my fellow americans. i believe that they will do the right thing. anderson: thank you. mayor buttigieg, just yesterday, you referred to mandatory buybacks as confiscation and said that congressman o'rourke has been picking a fight to try to stay relevant. your response on guns. mayor buttigieg: look, congressman, you just made it clear that you don't know how this is actually going to take weapons off the streets. if you can develop the plan further, i think we can have a debate about it, but we can't wait. people are dying in the streets right now. we can't wait for universal background checks that we finally have a shot to actually get through. we can't wait to ban the sale of new weapons and high-capacity magazines so we don't wind up
with millions more of these things on the street. we can't wait for red flag laws that are going to disarm domestic abusers and prevent suicides, which are not being talked about nearly enough as a huge part of the gun violence epidemic in this country. we cannot wait for purity tests. we have to just get something done. anderson: congressman o'rourke, your response. 40,000 of our fellow americans every year to gun violence. this is a crisis. we've got to do something about it. and those challenges that you described are not mutually exclusive to the challenges that i'm describing. i want to make sure we have universal background checks and red flag laws and that we end the sale of these weapons of war, but to use the analogy of health care, it would be as though we said, look, we're for primary care, but let's not talk about mental health care because that's a bridge too far. people need that primary care now, so let's save that for another day. no, let's decide what we are going to believe in, what we're going to achieve. and then let's bring this country together in order to do that. listening to my fellow americans, to those moms who demand action, to those students who march for our lives, who, in
fact, came up with this extraordinary, bold peace plan -- anderson: thank you, congressman. mr. o'rourke: that calls for mandatory buybacks, let's follow their inspiration and lead and not be limited by the polls and the consultants and the focus groups. let's do what's right -- anderson: mayor buttigieg, your response? mayor buttigieg? mayor buttigieg: the problem isn't the polls. the problem is the policy. and i don't need lessons from you on courage, political or personal. everyone on this stage is determined to get something done. everyone on this stage recognizes, or at least i thought we did, that the problem is not other democrats who don't agree with your particular idea of how to handle this. the problem is the national rifle association and their enablers in congress, and we should be united in taking the fight to them. [applause] mr. o'rourke: that's a mischaracterization. anderson, i've got to answer this. never took you or anyone else on who disagrees with me on this issue. but when you, mayor buttigieg, described this policy as a shiny object, i don't care what that meant to me or my candidacy, but to those who have survived gun
violence, those who've lost a loved one to an ar-15, an ak-47, marched for our lives, formed in the courage of students willing to stand up to the nra and conventional politics and poll-tested politicians, that was a slap in the fact to every single one of those groups and every single survivor of a mass casualty assault with an ar-15 and an ak-47. anderson: thank you. mr. o'rourke: we must buy them back. anderson: congressman -- mayor buttigieg: what we owe to those survivors is to actually deliver a solution. i'm glad you offered up that analogy to health care, because this is really important. we are at the cusp of building a new american majority to actually do things that congressmen and senators have been talking about with almost no impact for my entire adult life. anderson: thank you, mayor. mayor buttigieg: no, this is really important, ok? on guns, we are this close to an assault weapons ban. that would be huge. and we're going to get wrapped around the axle in a debate over whether it's "hell, yes, we're going to take your guns"? we have an opportunity -- anderson: thank you, mayor. your time is up. mayor buttigieg: to deliver health care to everybody, and some on this stage are saying it doesn't count unless we obliterate -- anderson: i want to give somebody -- i want to give other -- i want to give other
candidates a chance. senator booker, what's your response to mayor buttigieg? sen. booker: well, look, i again, worry about how we talk to each other and about each other and what this last week has shown. there was a young man in my neighborhood, i watched him grow up. i lived in some high-rise projects with him named shahad, and he was murdered on my block last year with an assault rifle. i'm living with a sense of urgency on this problem, because when i go home to my community, like millions of americans, we live in communities where these weapons, where these gun shots are real every single day. and i know where the american public is. this is not about leadership. this is why when i talk about things like gun licensing and point out the differences between us, i'm not attacking people or their character or their courage on these issues. we all have courage. but it's frustrating that when the american people, 77% of americans agree on licensing, we don't need leadership right now. we just need folks that are going to stand up and follow where the people already are, because there are millions of americans where this is a daily nightmare, where we're surrendering our freedoms -- anderson: thank you.
sen. booker: to fear in this country. this is the first time in american history, this fall, where we have sent our children to school, the strongest nation on the planet earth, and said to them, "we can't protect you" -- anderson: thank you, senator. sen. booker: "so in school, we're going to teach you how to hide." there are more duck-and-cover drills and shelter-in-place drills in america now than fire drills. anderson: thank you, senator. sen. booker: if i'm president of the united states, i will bring an urgency to this issue and make sure that we end the scourge of mass violence in our country. anderson: senator klobuchar -- senator klobuchar, senator warren -- senator warren supports a voluntary -- excuse me, senator klobuchar, you support a voluntary buyback, if him him i'm correct, right. what is wrong with a mandatory buyback? your response. sen. klobuchar: i just keep thinking of how close we are to finally getting something done on this. i'm looking at the mayor of dayton. i met one of the survivors from that shooting, 30 seconds, nine people killed. the public is with us on this in a big way. the majority of trump voters want to see universal background checks right now.
the majority of hunters want to see us move forward with gun safety legislation. well. why not a mandatory one? sen. warren: so, look, i want to get what works done. i want to use the method we used, for example, with machine guns. we registered them, we put in a huge penalty if you didn't register them, and a huge tax on them, and then let people turn them in, and it got machine guns out of the hands of people.
but the problem here that we need to focus on is, first, how widespread gun violence is. as you've rightly identified, it's not just about mass shootings. it's what happens in neighborhoods all across this country. it is about suicide, and it is about domestic violence. this is not going to be a one and done, that we do one thing or two things or three things and then we're done. we have to reduce gun violence overall. and the question we have to ask is, why hasn't it happened? you say we're so close. we have been so close. i stood in the united states senate in 2013 -- anderson: thank you. sen. warren: when 54 senators voted in favor of gun legislation and it didn't pass him because of the filibuster. anderson: thank you, senator. senator -- sen. warren: we have got to attack the corruption and repeal -- anderson: senator harris?
sen. warren: the filibuster or the gun industry will always have a veto over what happens. anderson: senator harris, you disagree with senator warren. you think the buyback should be mandatory. please respond. sen. harris: five million assault weapons are on the streets of america today. during the course of this debate, eight people will die from gun violence. the leading cause of death of young black men in america is gun violence, more than the top other six reasons total. this is a serious matter. i have personally hugged more mothers of homicide victims than i care to tell you. i have looked at more autopsy photographs than i care to tell you. i have attended more police officer funerals than i care to tell you. i'm done. and we need action. and congress has had years to act and failed because they do not have the courage. when i'm elected, i'll give them 100 days to pull their act together, put a bill on my desk for signature, and if they don't, i will take executive action and put in place a comprehensive background check
requirement and ban the importation of assault weapons into our country because it is time to act. anderson: senator biden -- vice president biden, your response. [applause] vp biden: i'm the only one on this stage who has taken on the nra and beat them, and beat them twice. we were able to get assault weapons off the streets and not be able to be sold for 10 years. recent studies show that mass violence went down when that occurred. the way to deal with those guns and those ar-15's and assault weapons that are on the street -- or not on the street, that people own, is to do what we did with the national firearms act as it related to machine guns. you must register that weapon. you must register it. when you register it, the likelihood of it being used diminishes exponentially. i'm the only one that got -- got -- moved the -- to make sure that we could not have a magazine that had more than 10 rounds in it. i've done this. i know how to get it done.
if you really want to get it done, go after the gun manufacturers and take back the exemption they have of not being able to be sued. that would change it. [applause] anderson: thank you, mr. vice president. secretary castro, the vast majority of homicides committed with a gun in this country are from handguns, not assault-style weapons. what's your plan to prevent those deaths? sec. castro: thank you very much for the question. you know, i grew up in neighborhoods where it wasn't uncommon to hear gunshots at night. and i can remember ducking into the back seat of a car when i was a freshman in high school, across the street from my school, my public school, because folks were shooting at each other. you know, in the neighborhoods -- let me answer this question about voluntary versus mandatory. there are two problems i have with mandatory buybacks. number one, folks can't define it. and if you're not going door to door, then it's not really mandatory. but also, in the places that i grew up in, we weren't exactly looking for another reason for cops to come banging on the door. and y'all saw a couple days ago what happened to atatiana jefferson in fort worth. a cop showed up at 2:00 in the
morning at her house when she was playing video games with her nephew. he didn't even announce himself. and within four seconds, he shot her and killed her through her home window. she was in her own home. and so i am not going to give these police officers another reason to go door to door in certain communities, because police violence is also gun violence, and we need to address that. [applause] anderson: secretary castro, thank you. marc: turning to another key issue here in ohio and around the country, the opioid epidemic. senator klobuchar, cnn reached out to ohio democratic voters for their most pressing questions. brie, a teacher in proctorville, asks, "in rural ohio, the opioid epidemic has affected our communities and schools. i have many high school students who have lost one or both parents to heroin. teachers are on the front lines daily, witnessing these tragedies. how will you tackle this problem in general, but specifically
what will you offer people in rural communities where rehabilitation is not easily accessed and access to jobs is difficult?" sen. klobuchar: well, i want to thank her for this question. this is something that should never have happened to begin with. i remember, when i was a prosecutor, these were not the kind of cases that were coming in our door. and it's gotten worse and worse. and we now know why. as the evidence is coming out of those lawsuits, probably one of the most horrible things that i saw was the e-mail from one of the pharma executives that actually said, "keep pumping them out. they're eating them like doritos." so my first answer to that question, and which is included in my plan, is that the people that should pay for this, that should pay for the treatment, are the very people that got people hooked and killed them in the first place. and that is the people that are manufacturing these opioids. that's the first way.
and you can, with a $.02 per milligram tax, bring in the money, plus with the federal master settlement, to help rural areas where they're so isolated, and also in urban areas, where it's, by the way, not just opiates. there are still meth health -- still meth issues and crack cocaine issues. this is personal for me. my dad, he struggled with alcoholism his whole life. and by his third dwi, they said to him, the prosecutor, you've got to face jail or you got to go to treatment. he picked treatment, and he was pursued by grace. and he has been sober ever since. and now he's 91 and in assisted living, and he said to me last year, it's hard to get a drink around here, anyway. but he still has an aa group that visits him there. and so for me, i believe that everyone in this country, including the people in rural america, have that same right to be pursued by grace. marc: thank you, senator. mr. steyer, how would you address the opioid epidemic that exists here in ohio and around the country? please respond. mr. steyer: well, i think this is one of the most heartbreaking experiences that america has
had, 72,000 people died of opioid overdoses last year, and that's not only a tragedy for them, it's a tragedy for their family and their communities. and so i think we have to treat this as a health crisis. we have to move the resources and the support there to try and help people. but i think that senator klobuchar makes a good point. the reason i'm running for president is that we have a broken government. and we have a broken government because corporations have bought it. and every single one of these conversations is about that broken government. it's about drug companies buying the government and getting what they want. it's about the gun manufacturers buying the government and get what we want. we need to break the corporate stranglehold on our government. i've put forward actual structural changes, including term limits, a natural -- national referendum, the end to the idea that corporations are people and have the rights of american citizens politically, and make it a lot easier to vote. these corporations have taken over our government.
and 72,000 deaths -- marc: thank you, mr. steyer. mr. steyer: last year are the tragic result. marc: thank you, mr. steyer. mr. yang, you want to decriminalize the possession and use of small amounts of opioids, including heroin. how would that solve the crisis? mr. yang: that's exactly right. and we have to recognize this is a disease of capitalism run amok. there was a point when there were more opiate prescriptions in the state of ohio than human beings in the state of ohio. and for some reason, the federal government thought that was appropriate. they ended up levying a $600 million fine against purdue pharma, which sounds like a lot of money, until you realize that company made $30 billion. they got a 2% fine, and they killed tens of thousands of americans, eight an hour. so if the government turned a blind eye to this company spreading a plague among its people, then the least we can do is put the resources to work in our community so our people have a fighting chance to get well, even though this is not a money problem. we all know this is a human problem. and part of helping people get the treatment that they need is to let them know that they're not going to be referred to a prison cell. they will be referred to
treatment and counseling. i talked to an emt in new hampshire, and he said he saves the same addicts over and over again, because the fact is, after you save someone who's od'ing, you just bring them back to their house, and they od again the following week. so we need to decriminalize opiates for personal use. we have to let the country know this is not a personal failing. this was a systemic government failing. and then we need to open up safe consumption and safe injection sites around the country, because they save lives. marc: thank you, mr. yang. congressman o'rourke, is decriminalizing opioids part of the solution? please respond. mr. o'rourke: yes, it is, for many of the reasons that mr. yang just described. and also just from some personal experiences i've had as a member of congress, where constituents of mine have come forward, in some cases publicly, at a town hall meeting to describe their addictions. i remember a veteran telling me that he bought heroin off the street because he was originally prescribed an opioid at the v.a. now, imagine if that veteran, instead of being prescribed an opioid, had been prescribed
marijuana because we made that legal in america, ensured the v.a -- mr. yang: yes, preach, beto. mr. o'rourke: could prescribe it, expunge the arrest records for those who've been arrested for possession, and make sure that he was not prescribed something to which he would become addicted. i also want to agree with senator klobuchar. until we hold those responsible accountable for their actions, purdue pharma, johnson & johnson, we're going to continue to have this problem going on again. so that veteran that i met, and anyone with drug addiction today, is not a problem for the criminal justice system. marc: thank you. mr. o'rourke: they're an opportunity for our public health system in america. marc: thank you, congressman. senator harris, you want to hold the drug manufacturers that fueled the crisis accountable. are you in favor of sending those drug company executives to jail? sen. harris: i am. and i will tell you, as a former prosecutor, i do think of this as being a matter of justice and accountability, because they are nothing more than some high-level dope dealers. they have been engaged -- [applause] and i've seen it happen before.
i've taken on the pharmaceutical companies when i was attorney general of california and led the second largest department of justice. i've seen what they do. the biggest pharmaceutical companies, the eight biggest pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies last year profited $72 billion on the backs of people like the families that we are talking about that have been overwhelmed by this crisis, which is a public health epidemic. and they knew what they were doing. they were marketing false advertising. they knew what they were pushing in communities and states like ohio, without any concern about the repercussions because they were profiting and making big bucks. and, yes, they should be held accountable. this is a matter of justice. and so as president of the united states, i would ensure that the united states department of justice, understand that you want to deal with who is really a criminal? let's end mass incarceration and end that failed war on drugs, and let's go after these pharmaceutical companies for what they've been doing to
destroy our country and states like ohio. marc: thank you, senator. secretary castro, are you in favor of sending those drug company executives to prison? please respond. sec. castro: yes, i am. they need to be held accountable, not only financially, but also with criminal penalties. and, you know, you can draw a straight line between making sure that we hold executives accountable, whether it's these drug manufacturers or wall street executives that should have been held accountable a decade-and-a-half ago. marc: thank you. erin: now to the issue of candidates and their health. senator sanders, i want to start with you. i want to start -- we're moving on, senator. i'm sorry. sen. sanders: i'm healthy. i'm feeling great, but i would like to respond to that question. erin: i want to -- i want start by saying -- [applause] sen. booker: and senator sanders is in favor of medical marijuana. i want to make sure that's clear, as well. erin: senator sanders, this debate does mark your -- sen. sanders: i do. erin: this debate -- sen. sanders: i do.
i'm not on it tonight. erin: this debate -- this debate, sir, does mark your return to the campaign trail. go ahead and finish your point and then i'll ask my question, senator. sen. sanders: i'm more than happy to answer your question, but i wanted to pick up on what kamala and cory and others have said. let's take a deep breath. take a look at this opioid epidemic. you have executives, ceo's of major pharmaceutical companies, making tens of millions of dollars a year. and in this particular case with the opioids, they knew that they were selling a product to communities all over this country which were addicting people and killing them. and last year, the top 10 drug companies made $69 billion in profit. this is what unfettered capitalism is doing to this country. and it's not just the drug companies. right now, the ceo's in the fossil fuel industry know full well that their product is destroying this world. and they continue to make huge profits. erin: senator -- sen. sanders: that is why we
need a political revolution -- erin: thank you, senator. sen. sanders: that says enough is enough to this behavior. [applause] erin: senator, we are all very glad you're feeling well -- sen. sanders: thank you. erin: as you just said. but there is a question on a lot of people's minds, and i want to address it tonight. you're 78 years old, and you just had a heart attack. how do you reassure democratic voters that you're up to the stress of the presidency? sen. sanders: well, let me invite you all to a major rally we're having in queens, new york, berniesanders.com. we're going to have a special guest at that event. and we are going to be mounting a vigorous campaign all over this country. that is how i think i can reassure the american people. but let me take this moment, if i might, to thank so many people from all over this country, including many of my colleagues up here, for their love, for their prayers, for their well wishes. and i just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. and i'm so happy to be back here
with you this evening. [applause] erin: vice president biden, if you're elected, you will turn 80 during your first term. last month, former president jimmy carter said he could not have undertaken the duties of the presidency at 80 years old. why are you so sure that you can? vp biden: because i've watched it. i know what the job is. i've been engaged. look, one of the reasons i'm running is because of my age and my experience. with it comes wisdom. we need someone to take office this time around who, on day one, can stand on the world stage, command the respect of world leaders, from putin to our allies, and know exactly what has to be done to get this country back on track. it is required now more than any time in any of our lifetimes to have someone who has that capacity on day one.
that's one of the reasons why i decided to run, why i decided to run this time, because i know what has to be done. i've done it before. i've been there when we pulled the nation out of the worst financial recession in history. i've been there, and i've got so many pieces of legislation passed, including the affordable care act, as well as making sure that we had the recovery act, which kept us from going into a depression. i know what has to be done. i will not need any on-the-job training the day i take office. and i will release my medical records, as i have 21 years of my tax records, which no one else on this stage has done, so that you can have full transparency as to my health and what i am doing. erin: just to be clear, mr. vice president, when will you release those records? vp biden: before the first vote. erin: before iowa? vp biden: yes. erin: not by the end of this year? vp biden: well, before iowa. i mean, look, i've released them before. i released 55 pages of my -- i'm the only guy that's released anything up here.
erin: senator warren, like senator sanders and vice president biden, if you win the presidency, you would be the oldest president ever inaugurated in a first term. you would be 71. 40% of democratic primary voters say they think a candidate under the age of 70 is more likely to defeat president trump. what do you say to them? sen. warren: well, i say, i will out-work, out-organize, and outlast anyone, and that includes donald trump, mike pence, or whoever the republicans get stuck with. >> [laughter] sen. warren: look, the way i see this, the way we're going to win is by addressing head-on what millions of americans know in their bones, and that is that the wealthy and the well-connected have captured our democracy, and they're making it work for themselves and leaving everyone else behind. and political pundits and washington insiders and, shoot, people in our own party don't want to admit that.
they think that running some kind of vague campaign that nibbles around the edges of big problems in this country is a winning strategy. they are wrong. if all democrats can promise is after donald trump it will be business as usual, then we will lose. democrats win when we call out what's broken and we show how to fix it. democrats will win when we fight for the things that touch people's lives, things like childcare and health care and housing costs. democrats will win when we give people a reason to get in the fight. erin: thank you, senator warren. congresswoman gabbard, you're 38 years old, and you would be the youngest president if elected. should age matter when choosing a president? rep. gabbard: i'm glad you asked, because i was going to say it's not fair to ask these three about their health and their fitness to serve as president but not every other one of us. i am grateful to have been
trained very well by the army and do my best to stay in shape. but here's the real question i believe you should be asking is. who is fit to serve as our commander-in-chief? this is the most important responsibility that the president has. what donald trump has been doing in syria and what we have just seen with him, inviting turkey to come in and slaughter the kurds, show what an unfit president looks like. it highlights how critical it is that we have a president and commander-in-chief who is ready on day one, bringing experience and understanding in foreign policy and national security. bringing the experience that i have, both serving in congress now for nearly seven years, serving on the foreign affairs committee, serving on the armed services committee, subcommittees related to terrorism and upcoming threats, serving on the homeland security committee, the experience that i have as a soldier, serving for over 16 years in the army national guard, deploying twice to the middle east, being able to serve in different capacities, joint training exercises, training the kuwait national guard.
i understand the importance of our national security. i am prepared to do this job, to fulfill this responsibility as commander-in-chief on day one. erin: thank you, congresswoman. rep. gabbard: i'd like to ask our other candidates this question. i'd like to start with senator warren -- erin: sorry, congressman, i'm sorry. rep. gabbard: what her experience and background is to serve as commander-in-chief. erin: i'm sorry, thank you. we're going to take another break now. the cnn-new york times debate live from otterbein university here in ohio will be back in just a few moments. [applause] anderson: and welcome back to the cnn-new york times democratic presidential debate. mark lacey from the new york times starts off our questioning. marc? marc: thank you. let's turn to the growing concerns over the power of big tech companies. mr. yang, senator warren is calling for companies like facebook, amazon, and google to be broken up. is she right? does that need to happen? mr. yang: as usual, senator warren is 100% right in
diagnosing the problem. there are absolutely excesses in technology and in some cases having them divest parts of their business is the right move. but we also have to be realistic that competition doesn't solve all the problems. it's not like any of us wants to use the fourth best navigation app. that would be like cruel and unusual punishment. there is a reason why no one is using bing today. >> [laughter] mr. yang: sorry, microsoft. it's true. so it's not like breaking up these big tech companies will revive main street businesses around the country. and as the parent of two young children, i'm particularly concerned about screen use and its effect on our children. studies clearly show that we're seeing record levels of anxiety and depression coincident with smartphone adoption and social media use. breaking up the tech companies does nothing to make our kids healthier. what we have to do is we have to hone in on the specific problems we're trying to solve and use 21st century solutions for 21st century problems. using a 20th century antitrust framework will not work. we need new solutions and a new toolkit. marc: thank you.
senator warren, is mr. yang wrong? your response, please. sen. warren: look, i'm not willing to give up and let a handful of monopolists dominate our economy and our democracy. it's time to fight back. think about it this way. when you talk about how it works in competition, about 8%, 9% of all retail sales happen at bricks and sticks stores, happen at walmart. about 49% of all sales online happen in one place, that's amazon. it collects information from every little business, and then amazon does something else. it runs the platform, gets all the information, and then goes into competition with those little businesses. look, you get to be the umpire in the baseball game, or you get to have a team, but you don't get to do both at the same time. we need to enforce our antitrust laws, break up these giant
companies that are dominating, big tech, big pharma, big oil, all of them. marc: thank you, senator. mr. steyer, your response? mr. steyer: look, i agree with senator warren that, in fact, monopolies have to be dealt with. they either have to be broken up or regulated, and that's part of it. but we have to understand that mr. trump is going to be running on the economy. he's going to be saying he's the person who can make it grow. i started a business from scratch -- one room, no employers -- and built a multi-billion-dollar international business. we're going to have to show the american people that we don't just know how to tax and have programs to break up companies but also talk about prosperity, talk about investing in the american people, talk about harnessing the innovation and competition of the american private sector. in fact, if we want to beat mr. trump, i think somebody who can go toe to toe with him and show him to be a fraud and a failure as a businessperson, and a fraud and a failure as a steward of the american economy is going to be necessary.
he is one. his tax plan's a failure. his trade war is a failure. i would love to take him on as a real businessman and show that, in fact, he's failed the american people, and he has to go. marc: thank you, mr. steyer. senator booker, how do you respond? would a president booker break up big tech companies like facebook and amazon? sen. booker: anybody that does not think that we have a massive crisis in our democracy with the way these tech companies are being used, not just in terms of anti-competitive practices, but also to undermine our democracy -- we have seen it in the 2016 election practices being used that have not been corrected now. we need regulation and reform. and antitrust, i mean robert bork right now is laughing in his sleep. we have a reality in this country where antitrust, from pharma to farms, is causing trouble, and we have to deal with this. as president of the united states, i will put people in place that enforce antitrust laws. and i want to say one last thing, and i feel qualified to say this as the vegan on the stage.
going back to the fact that we -- it's rich to me that we asked three people about their health when looking at this stage, we know that the most unhealthy person running for the presidency in 2020 is donald trump. [applause] marc: thank you, senator. congressman o'rourke, you say you're not sure if it's appropriate for a president to designate which companies should be broken up. so what's the proper level of oversight here? mr. o'rourke: yeah, we need to set very tough, very clear, transparent rules of the road, the kind of rules that we do not have today, that allow these social media platforms, where we, the people, have become the product, to abuse that public trust, and to do so at extraordinary profits. right now, we treat them functionally as a utility, when, in reality, they're more akin to a publisher. they curate the content that we see. our pictures and personal information that they share with others, we would allow no publisher to do what facebook is doing, to publish that ad that
senator warren has rightfully called out, that cnn has refused to air because it is untrue and tells lies about the vice president, treat them like the publisher that they are. that's what i will do as president. and we will be unafraid to break up big businesses if we have to do that, but i don't think it is the role of a president or a candidate for the presidency to specifically call out which companies will be broken up. that's something that donald trump has done, in part because he sees enemies in the press and wants to diminish their power. it's not something that we should do. so tough rules of the road, protect your personal information, privacy, and data, and be fearless in the face of these tech giants. marc: senator sanders, your response? sen. sanders: when we talk about a rigged economy, it's not just the grotesque level of income and wealth inequality. it is also the fact that in sector after sector, whether it is wall street, where you have
six banks that have assets equivalent to half of the gdp of the united states, whether it is media, where you have 10 media companies that control about 90% of what the american people see, hear, or read, whether it is agribusiness, where we see merger after merger which is resulting in the decline of family-based farming in this country, we need a president who has the guts to appoint an attorney general who will take on these huge monopolies, protect small business, and protect consumers by ending the price fixing that we see every day. marc: thank you, senator. thank you, senator. senator harris, to you, facebook ceo mark zuckerberg says that splitting up big tech companies will make election interference more likely because the companies won't be able to work together to fight it. could breaking up these companies make the spread of disinformation worse? sen. harris: no, i don't agree with that at all. and serving on the senate intelligence committee, working with amy klobuchar on what we
need to do to upgrade the elections infrastructure, knowing that russia needs to be held accountable for the fact that they interfered in the election of the president of the united states and will attempt to do it again, that's -- that's a ridiculous argument he's making. but i do want to also say this. what we're talking about is a grave injustice, when rules apply to some but not equally to all, and in particular when the rules that apply to the powerless don't apply to the powerful. and so, senator warren, i just want to say that i was surprised to hear that you did not agree with me that on this subject of what should be the rules around corporate responsibility for these big tech companies, when i called on twitter to suspend donald trump's account, that you did not agree, and i would urge you to join me. because here we have donald trump, who has 65 million twitter followers and is using that platform as the president of the united states to openly intimidate witnesses, to threaten witnesses, to obstruct justice, and he and his account
should be taken down. we saw in el paso that that shooter in his manifesto was informed by how donald trump uses that platform, and this is a matter of corporate responsibility. twitter should be held accountable and shut down that site. it is a matter of safety and corporate accountability. marc: thank you. senator warren, you can respond. sen. warren: so, look, i don't just want to push donald trump off twitter. i want to push him out of the white house. that's our job. sen. harris: well, join me -- join me in saying that his twitter account should be shut down. sen. warren: but let's figure -- no. let's figure out -- sen. harris: no? sen. warren: why it is that we have had laws on the books for antitrust for over a century, and yet for decades now, we've all called on how the big drug companies are calling the shots in washington, big ag, how the gun industry, big tech -- you know, we really need to address the elephant in the room, and that is how campaigns are financed. sen. harris: you can't say you're for corporate responsibility if it doesn't apply to everyone. sen. warren: i announced this
morning -- i announced this morning that i'm not going to take any money from big tech executives, from wall street executives. we've already agreed, bernie and i, we're not taking any money from big pharma executives. you can't go behind closed doors and take the money of these executives and then turn around and expect that these are the people who are actually finally going to enforce the laws. we need campaign finance rules and practices -- marc: thank you, senator warren. senator harris? sen. warren: that support us all. sen. harris: you -- it does not represent a system of justice to say that the rules will apply differently to different people. this is a matter, you are saying, of holding big tech accountable. sen. warren: yes. sen. harris: holding big tech accountable because they have an outsized influence on people's perceptions about issues, and they actually influence behaviors. we all have to agree this is their power. it is immense. marc: senator klobuchar, let me bring you in here.
marc: your response? sen. harris: i'm not finished. i'm not finished. and so what i am saying is that it seems to me that you would be able to join me in saying the rule has to apply to twitter the same way it does to facebook. sen. warren: look, i think all of the rules should apply across the board. i don't have a problem with that. sen. harris: so you will join me in saying twitter should shut down that account? sen. warren: what i do have a problem with is that if we're going to talk seriously about breaking up big tech, then we should ask if people are taking money from the big tech executives. if we're going to talk seriously about breaking up big drug companies, we should ask if people are financing their campaigns by taking money from big drug executives. if we are going to talk about wall street and having some serious regulation over wall street, we should ask if people are funding their campaigns by taking money from those executives. marc: thank you, senator. senator klobuchar, let's bring you in here. sen. klobuchar: i would like to have a different take on this. i was in the private sector for
14 years, represented companies that were fighting to get into the telecom markets. i had a life before government. and what i saw was when we got more competition there, the prices went down in a big way in the long distance market. well, right now we have another gilded age going on, and i am the lead democrat on the antitrust committee. i have the lead legislation, which means, one, changing the standard so we can do a better job of doing just what we've been talking about here, is breaking down some of this consolidation, and also making sure that the enforcers have the resources to take them on because they're so overwhelmed. but the issue here is this. start talking about this as a pro-competition issue. this used to be a republican and democratic issue, because america, our founding fathers, actually wanted to have less consolidation. we were a place of entrepreneurship. we are seeing a startup slump in this country. marc: thank you, senator. secretary castro, would you like to weigh in? sen. klobuchar: and this means everything from tech on down. marc: please respond. sec. castro: yeah, i think that
we're on the right track in terms of updating how we look at monopolistic practices and setting, as congressman o'rourke said, rules for the road that match the challenges that we face today. and, you know, whether that's amazon that is leveraging its size i think to help put small businesses out of business, and then at the same time shortchanging a lot of its workers, not paying them as they should, not giving them the benefits that they should, or it's a number of other companies, big tech companies. we need to take a stronger stance when it comes to cracking down on monopolistic trade practices, and that's what i would do as president. marc: thank you, mr. secretary. mr. yang: the best way we can fight back -- the best way we can fight back against big tech companies is to say our data is our property. right now, our data is worth more than oil. how many of you remember getting your data check in the mail? it got lost. it went to facebook, amazon, google. if we say this is our property and we share in the gains, that's the best way we can balance the scales against the big tech companies. erin: thank you, mr. yang. rep. gabbard: there's a bigger
issue here -- erin: turning to women's reproductive rights, ohio is now one of several states that has banned abortions after as early as six weeks of pregnancy. many women don't even know they're pregnant at that time. the ohio law, like many others, is being challenged in the courts and has not yet taken effect. senator harris, if states prevail on restricting abortion, what's your plan to stop them? sen. harris: my plan is as -- as follows. for any state that passes a law that violates the constitution, and in particular roe v. wade, our department of justice will review that law to determine if it is compliant with roe v. wade and the constitution, and if it is not, that law will not go into effect. that's called pre-clearance. because the reality is that while we still have -- as i said earlier -- these state legislatures -- legislators who are outdated and out of touch, mostly men who are telling women what to do with their bodies, then there needs to be accountability and consequence.
[applause] but, you know, i'll go further. you may have seen it. i questioned brett kavanaugh when i was a member of the senate judiciary committee and asked him as a nominee to serve on the united states supreme court, could he think of any law that tells a man what to do with his body? and the answer was, uh, uh, no. the reality of it is, this is still a fundamental issue of justice for women in america. women have been given the responsibility to perpetuate the human species. our bodies were created to do that. and it does not give any other person the right to tell a woman what to do with that body. it is her body. it is her right. it is her decision. [applause] erin: senator harris, thank you. [applause] erin: senator klobuchar, what would you do to stop states from prevailing? your response? sen. klobuchar: i would codify roe v. wade and make it the law of the land. but what i want to do right now is just say, what if donald trump was standing up here on
the debate stage with me? you know what i would say to him? i said, you knew -- you said you wanted to do this in your race for president. you actually said that you wanted to put women in jail. then you tried to dial it back, and you said you wanted to put doctors in jail. that is exactly what the alabama law is. it put doctors in jail for 99 years. you, donald trump, are not on the side of women. you are not on the side of people of this country, when over 75% of people want to keep roe v. wade on the book, when over 90% of people want to make sure we have available contraception. you defunded planned parenthood. i would fund it again. erin: senator, thank you. [applause] erin: senator booker, if states prevail on restricting abortion, how would you stop them? please respond. sen. booker: well, first of all, let's be clear about these laws we see from alabama to ohio. they're not just attacks on one of the most sacrosanct ideals in our country, liberty, the
ability to control your own body, but they're particularly another example of people trying to punish, trying to penalize, trying to criminalize poverty, because this is disproportionately affecting low-income women in this country, people in rural areas in this country. it is an assault on the most fundamental ideal that human beings should control their own body. and so the way as president of the united states i'm going to deal with this is, first of all, elevating it like we have with other national crises to a white house-level position. and i will create the office of reproductive freedom and reproductive rights in the white house and make sure that we begin to fight back on a systematic attempt that's gone on for decades to undermine roe v. wade. i will fight to codify it, and i will also make sure that we fight as this country to repeal the hyde amendment, so that we are leading the planet earth in defending the global assault we see on women right now. erin: thank you, senator. congresswoman gabbard, your response? [applause] rep. gabbard: this is often one of the most difficult decisions that a woman will ever have to make, and it's unfortunate to
see how in this country it has for so long been used as a divisive political weapon. i agree with hillary clinton on one thing, disagree with her on many others, but when she said abortion should be safe, legal, and rare, i think she's correct. we see how the consequences of laws that you're referring to can often lead to a dangerous place, as we've seen them as they're passed in other countries, where a woman who has a miscarriage past that six weeks could be imprisoned because abortion would be illegal at that point. i do, however, think that there should be some restrictions in place. i support codifying roe v. wade while making sure that, during the third trimester, abortion is not an option unless the life or severe health consequences of a woman are at risk. erin: thank you very much. the supreme court is currently made up of five republican-appointed justices and four appointed by democrats. the court just announced it will hear arguments in a case challenging some abortion rights.
vice president biden, the constitution does not specify the number of justices that serve on the supreme court. if roe v. wade is overturned on your watch and you can't pass legislation in congress, would you seek to add justices to the supreme court to protect women's reproductive rights? vp biden: i would not get into court packing. we had three justices. next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. we begin to lose any credibility the court has at all. i want to point out that the justices i've supported, when i defeated robert bork -- and i say when i defeated robert bork, i made sure we guaranteed a woman's right to choose for the better part of a generation. i would make sure that we move and insist that we pass, we codify roe v. wade. the public is already there. things have changed. and i would go out and i would campaign against those people in the state of ohio, alabama, et cetera, who in fact are throwing up this barrier. reproductive rights are a constitutional right.
and in fact, every woman should have that right. and so i would not pack the court. what i would do is make sure that the people that i recommended for the court, from ruth bader ginsburg to elena kagan, who used to work for me, to others, that they, in fact, support the right of privacy, on which the entire notion of a woman's right to choose is based. and that's what i would do. no one would get on the court. and by the way, if, in fact, at the end of this -- beginning next year, if, in fact, one of the justices steps down, god forbid, in fact, i would make sure that we would do exactly what mcconnell did last time out. we would not allow any hearing to be held for a new justice. erin: thank you, mr. vice president. mayor buttigieg, you have discussed expanding the court from nine to 15 justices. what's your response to the vice president? mayor buttigieg: that's right. when i proposed reforming the supreme court, some folks said that was too bold to even contemplate. now, i'm not talking about packing the court just with people who agree with me,
although i certainly will appoint people who share my values, for example, the idea that women's reproductive freedom is an american right. what i'm talking about is reforms that will depoliticize the court. we can't go on like this, where every single time there is a vacancy, we have this apocalyptic, ideological firefight over what to do next. now, one way to fix this would be to have a 15-member court where five of the members can only be appointed by unanimous agreement of the other 10. smarter legal minds than mine are discussing this in the yale law journal and how this could be done without a constitutional amendment. but the point is that not everybody arrives on a partisan basis. there are other reforms that we could consider, from term limits -- don't forget, justices used to just retire like everybody else -- to a rotation off the appellate bench. erin: thank you. mayor buttigieg: i'm not wedded to a particular solution, but i am committed to establishing a commission on day one -- erin: thank you, mayor buttigieg. mayor buttigieg: that will propose reforms to depoliticize the supreme court, because we can't go on like this. erin: thank you very much, mayor buttigieg.
secretary castro, he's talking about making the court bigger. your response? is it a good idea? sec. castro: i don't think it is. i wouldn't pack the court. you know, i think the plan that mayor pete mentioned is an interesting one, but i actually believe, if we were selecting from one of those things, that the smarter move might be to look at term limits or having people cycle off from the appellate courts so that you would have a replenishment of perspective. i would also make sure that i appoint as president people who respect the precedent of roe v. wade, that we codify roe v. wade, and that we do away with things like the hyde amendment, because you shouldn't only be able to have reproductive freedom if you have money. we have to think about people who do not, people who are poor. and we have to concern ourselves not only with reproductive freedom, but also reproductive justice and invest in the ability of every woman to be able to make a choice and to be able to have her health care needs met. erin: senator warren, would you consider adding more justices to the supreme court to protect roe
v. wade? your response? sen. warren: i think there are a number of options. i think, as mayor buttigieg said, there are many different ways. people are talking about different options, and i think we may have to talk about them. but on roe v. wade, can we just pause for a minute here? i lived in an america where abortion was illegal, and rich women still got abortions, because they could travel, they could go to places where it was legal. what we're talking about now is that the people who are denied access to abortion are the poor, are the young, are 14-year-olds who were molested by a family member. and we now have support across this country. three out of four americans believe in the rule of roe v. wade. when you've got three out of four americans supporting it, we should be able to get that passed through congress. erin: senator, thank you. sen. warren: we should not leave this to the supreme court. we should do it through democracy, because we can. erin: thank you very much,
senator. anderson: as some of you have indicated, the differences between all of you on this stage are tiny compared to the differences between you and president trump. there are, however, fundamental differences between many of you on this stage. vice president biden, just on either side of you, senator warren is calling for big structural change. senator sanders is calling for a political revolution. will their visions attract the kind of voters that the democrats need to beat donald trump? vp biden: well, i think their vision is attracting a lot of people, and i think a lot of what they have to say is really important. but you know, senator warren said we can't be running any vague campaigns. we've got to level with people. we've got to level with people and tell them exactly what we're going to do, how we're going to get it done, and if you can get it done. i'm going to say something that is probably going to offend some people here, but i'm the only one on this stage that has gotten anything really big done, from the violence against women act to making sure that we pass the affordable care act, to
being in a position where we, in fact, took almost a $90 billion act that kept us from going into a depression, making us -- putting us in a position where i was able to end roe -- excuse me, able to end the issue of gun sales in terms of assault weapons. and so the question is, who is best prepared? we all have good ideas. the question is, who is going to be able to get it done? how can you get it done? and i'm not suggesting they can't, but i'm suggesting that that's what we should look at. and part of that requires you not being vague. tell people what it's going to cost, how you're going to do it, and why you're going to do it. that's the way to get it done. presidents are supposed to be able to persuade. anderson: just to clarify, vice president, who are you saying is being vague? vp biden: well, the senator said -- she's being vague on the issue of -- actually, both are being vague on the issue of medicare for all. no, look, here's the deal.
come on. it costs $30 trillion. guess what? that's over $3 trillion -- it's more than the entire federal budget -- let me finish, ok? anderson: you'll both get in. vp biden: if you eliminated the entire pentagon, every single thing, plane, ship, troop, the buildings, everything, satellites, it would get you -- it would pay for a total of four months. four months. where do you get the rest? where does it come from? sen. sanders: two things. let me explain in two ways. anderson: senator sanders, respond. sen. sanders: joe, you talked about working with republicans and getting things done. but you know what you also got done? and i say this as a good friend. you got the disastrous war in iraq done. you got a bankruptcy bill, which is hurting middle-class families all over this country. you got trade agreements, like nafta and pntr, with china done, which have cost us 4 million jobs. now, let's get to medicare for all. let's be honest. we spend twice as much per person as do the people of any other major country on earth. and the answer is, if we have
the guts that i would like to see the democratic party have that guts, to stand up to the drug companies and the insurance companies and tell them that the function of health care is to guarantee care to all people, not to make $100 billion in profit. anderson: thank you, senator. sen. sanders: if we stood together, we could create the greatest health care system in the world. anderson: vice president biden, you can respond, and then senator warren. vp biden: we can do that without medicare for all. we can do that by adding a public option. sen. sanders: no. vp biden: we can. sen. sanders: no, you can't. vp biden: and we can afford to do it. sen. sanders: you've got to take on the greed and the profiteering of the health care industry. vp biden: by the way, the greed and -- anderson: let him respond. mr. vice president? vp biden: the greed and profiteering of those insurance companies, they are as much against my bill as they are anybody else. they were strongly against obamacare. they know it cost them. and it's going to take away the right of people to choose, the 160 million people out there who've negotiated their health insurance, and they want to keep it. they should have a right to keep it. anderson: senator warren, your response?
sen. warren: so you started this question with how you got something done. you know, following the financial crash of 2008, i had an idea for a consumer agency that would keep giant banks from cheating people. and all of the washington insiders and strategic geniuses said, don't even try, because you will never get it passed. and sure enough, the big banks fought us. the republicans fought us. some of the democrats fought us. but we got that agency passed into law. it has now forced big banks to return more than $12 billion directly to people they cheated. i served in the obama administration. i know what we can do by executive authority, and i will use it. in congress, on the first day, i will pass my anti-corruption bill, which will beat back the influence of money -- anderson: thank you, senator. sen. warren: and repeal the filibuster. and the third, we want to get something done in america, we have to get out there and fight -- anderson: thank you, senator. sen. warren: for the things that touch people's lives. anderson: mayor -- vp biden: i agree. let me -- she referenced me.
i agreed with the great job she did, and i went on the floor and got you votes. i got votes for that bill. i convinced people to vote for it. so let's get those things straight, too. [applause] anderson: senator warren, do you want to respond? [applause] sen. warren: i am deeply grateful to president obama, who fought so hard to make sure that agency was passed into law, and i am deeply grateful to every single person who fought for it and who helped pass it into law. but understand -- vp biden: you did a hell of a job in your job. sen. warren: thank you. >> [laughter] sen. warren: but understand this. it was a dream big, fight hard. people told me, go for something little, go for something small, go for something that the big corporations will be able to accept.
anderson: thank you, senator. sen. warren: i said, no, let's go for an agency that will make structural change in our economy. anderson: senator, thank you. sen. warren: and president obama said, i will fight for that, and he sometimes had to fight against people in his own administration. we have -- vp biden: not me. sen. warren: we have to be willing to make good, big, structural change. anderson: mayor buttigieg, which is the right vision for a democrat to beat donald trump? that's the essential question. mayor buttigieg: if i had a buck for every argument that i've witnessed like this, i could pay for college for everybody. we need to move past what has been consuming this whole political space for as long as i've been alive. we're being offered a false choice. i don't agree with the vice president that trump is an aberration. i don't agree that there's any such thing as back to normal. because here in the industrial midwest, definitely where i live, normal didn't work. that's part of how we got here. that's part of how a guy like donald trump managed to get within cheating distance of the oval office in the first place. but i also don't agree with
senator warren that the only way forward is infinite partisan combat. yes, we have to fight -- absolutely, we have to fight for the big changes at hand, but it's going to take more than fighting. once again, i want to take you back to that day after trump has stopped being president. think about what the president can do to unify a new american majority for some of the boldest things we've attempted in my lifetime -- medicare for all who want it, actually getting something done on immigration for the first time since the 1980's, an assault weapons ban, which would be a huge deal, making college free for low- and middle-income students. yet there are some here on this stage who say it doesn't count unless we go even further, free college for low- and middle-income students isn't good enough unless we're also paying for the children of billionaires. immigration reform isn't enough unless we also decriminalize border crossings. we have an opportunity to do the biggest things we've done -- anderson: thank you, mayor. mayor buttigieg: in my lifetime -- anderson: senator? vp biden: i did not say back to normal. anderson: thank you, mayor. senator klobuchar? senator klobuchar? sen. klobuchar: thank you. you know, this isn't a flyover part of the country to me. the heartland is where i live. and i want to win those states
that we lost last time, and i have bold ideas to get us there. and i think just because they're different than elizabeth's doesn't mean they're bold. but we can't get any of this done on climate change or immigration reform unless they win. and what i have done is win and the only one up here, time and time again, the reddest of red districts, michele bachmann's, i -- i won that district three times, rural districts that border iowa and north and south dakota. and i do it by going not just where it's comfortable but where it's uncomfortable. and that is why i have been in pennsylvania, and in michigan, and in wisconsin, and all over ohio, and in iowa, because i think we need to build a blue democratic wall around those states and make donald trump pay for it. anderson: thank you. senator warren, she referenced you, so you can respond. sen. warren: now, people who are struggling to pay health care are fighting today. people who are getting crushed by student loans are in a fight today. people who are getting stopped
by the police or paid less because of the color of their skin are in a fight today. and anyone who doesn't understand that americans are already in these fights is not someone who is likely to win them. for me, this is about knowing what's broken, knowing how to fix it, and, yes, i'm willing to get out there and fight for it. anderson: senator sanders -- mayor buttigieg: there's a missing piece and that is -- , anderson: senator sanders, why is your approach more likely to beat president trump? sen. sanders: i'll tell you why. anderson: please respond. sen. sanders: and here's the radical reason why. it's what the american people want. sen. warren: yes. sen. sanders: all right, the american people do not want tax breaks for billionaires. they want the rich to start paying their fair share of taxes. a poll came out yesterday, 71% of democrats support medicare for all. the people of this country understand that we've got to make public colleges and universities tuition-free. and more and more americans, including republicans,
understand we need bold action if we're going to save this planet for our children and our grandchildren. the way you win an election in this time in history is not the same old, same old. you have to inspire people. you have to inspire people. you have to excite people. you've got to bring working people and young people and poor people into the political process -- anderson: thank you. thank you. sen. sanders: because they know you stand for them, not corporate america. [applause] anderson: congressman o'rourke, is political revolution what the american people want? your response. mr. o'rourke: there was some talk about getting big things done. when i was first elected to congress, i found that el paso, texas, had the worst wait times in the country to see a mental health care provider at the v.a. i don't know how sensational or exciting that was to everyone in the country or even most people in el paso, but it was important to those veterans who i serve. so we set about turning around the v.a., hiring up the psychiatrists and psychologists and therapists to take care of those women and men who had put
their lives on the line for this country. and we were able to do that, and we took what we learned, and we applied it to a national law as a member of the minority working with republicans and democrats alike to expand mental health care access for veterans nationally. and then in texas, one of what was thought to be the reddest states in the country, going to every single county -- anderson: thank you, congressman. mr. o'rourke: talking about this progressive agenda, and winning more votes than any democrat has ever won, that's the way that we defeat donald trump in november of 2020. anderson: congressman o'rourke, thank you. we have to take a quick break. the cnn-new york times debate live from ohio will continue right after this. [applause] anderson: we are back with the cnn-new york times democratic presidential debate. we have time for one more question that we would like all of you to weigh in on. last week, ellen degeneres was criticized after she and former president george w. bush were seen laughing together at a football game.
ellen defended their friendship, saying, we're all different and i think that we've forgotten that that's ok that we're all different. so in that spirit, we'd like you to tell us about a friendship that you've had that would surprise us and what impact it's had on you and your beliefs. secretary castro, let's begin with you. mr. castro: well, first of all, thank you to marc, thank you, anderson, and thank you, erin, and cnn, and "new york times" and everybody who is here tonight. you know, some of the most interesting friendships that i've had have been with people different from me, either people older than me that had a lot to teach me, or people who grew up very different from me. also, teachers, as i was growing up, people that had a life experience that when i was growing up was beyond mine. and sometimes also -- and this goes to the heart of your question, i think -- people who thought differently from me, folks that i considered and have considered friends, and i think
that there's a value to that. i think that that should be reflected more in our public life. i also believe, to just speak about the incident last week with ellen and george w. bush, i completely understood what she was saying about being kind to others. i believe that we should be more kind to other folks. i also believe that we should hold people to account for what they've done, especially public servants who have a record of having done something or not done something. and i think that we can do both of those things. i think that we can be kind to people and also hold them accountable for their actions. and there are people, whether it's our former president, george w. bush, or others that should be held accountable. just as we should be kind, we shouldn't be made to feel shameful about holding people accountable for what they've done. anderson: congresswoman gabbard? rep. gabbard: thank you. you know, where i come from in hawaii, many of you know, we greet each other with "aloha." it's not a word that means hello and goodbye. it actually means something much more powerful than that. it means i come to you with respect and a recognition that
we're all connected, we're all brothers and sisters, we're all god's children. so i've developed friendships that some people may be surprised about within the washington circles, especially, with republicans, like trey gowdy, for example. he and i disagree a lot and very strongly on a lot of political issues. we've developed a friendship that's based on respect. and he's been there for me during some personally challenging times. the challenge before us today is that our country is very divided. donald trump must be defeated. but we must do more than just defeat donald trump. we need to deliver a win for the american people. we must stand united as americans, remembering that we are all brothers and sisters, that we are all connected. this is the kind of leadership that i seek to bring as president, inspired by the example of presidents like abraham lincoln, who talked about how we should have malice for none and charity for all. when i look out at our country, i don't see deplorables, i see
fellow americans, people who i treat with respect, even when we disagree and when we disagree strongly. i will work to restore a white house that represents light and compassion and respect for every american regardless of race, religion, orientation, gender, or political affiliation. so i want to ask everyone to join me. join me in bringing about this government of, by, and for the people that serves all the people of this country. you can visit my website, tulsi2020.com, for more information. anderson: thank you, congresswoman. senator klobuchar? sen. klobuchar: for me, it's john mccain, and i miss him every day. i traveled all over the world with him. and he would sometimes, when we were seated with world leaders, and they would look away from me, he'd say, "senator klobuchar is the lead democrat on this trip, and she will go next." and i still remember being there at his ranch. john and i went to visit him and cindy when he was dying.
and he pointed to some words in his book, because he could hardly talk. and the words say this: "there is nothing more liberating in life than fighting for a cause larger than yourself." that's what we're doing right now. and while we have had major debates about policy, we have to remember that what unites us is so much bigger than what divides us. and we have to remember that our job is to not just change policy, but to change the tone in our politics, to look up from our phones, to look at each other, to start talking to each other, because the way we win -- and not just win the presidency, but take back the u.s. senate -- is by winning big. and the way we win big is with that fired-up democratic base that's out there today, but it is also about bringing in independents and moderate republicans. i can lead this.
and i ask you to join me because i've done it before and i will do it again, amyklobuchar.com. join our team. thank you. anderson: senator, thank you very much. [applause] anderson: mr. steyer, tell us about your most surprising friendship. mr. steyer: so i'm friends with a woman from denmark, south carolina, named deanna berry, who's fighting for clean water and environmental justice in her community. she's a different gender. she's a different race. she's from a different part of the country. but she reminds me of my parents in terms of her courage and her optimism and her honor. my mother was a schoolteacher in the new york public schools and in the brooklyn house of detention. my father was the first generation in his family to go to college. my grandfather was a plumber. he interrupted his law degree to go into the navy in world war ii and he ended up prosecuting the nazis at nuremberg. and when i asked him what that experience meant, he said, when you see something wrong in your society, you fight it from the first day and every single day after. and that's why i started the need to impeach movement two years ago, because there was something terribly wrong at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. and over 10 years ago, i saw that there was a terrible threat to the safety and health of every american in terms of the
climate crisis. and i've been fighting those companies with the help of the american people ever since successfully, and that's why i'm running for the president, because our government has failed, it's been bought by corporations, and it's absolutely essential to return power to the people. i have been doing exactly what my parents taught me to do, which is to take on the biggest problems in america directly and fight for them every single day. anderson: thank you, mr. steyer. [applause] congressman o'rourke? mr. o'rourke: i've always tried to bring people in to the solutions that we have to our common challenges, regardless of the differences. i did that as a small-business owner more than 20 years ago, making sure that we could get a small tech company off the ground in el paso, texas. did it as a member of the city council, where i saw my colleagues not as republicans or democrats, but my fellow el pasoans who had a responsibility to deliver for our community.
as a member of congress, i remember being in san antonio. i was visiting the v.a. there, march of 2017. found that my flight had been snowed in, in washington, d.c. i happened to be in the elevator with a republican member of congress, will hurd. and on a whim, i said, do you want to just rent a car and drive from san antonio to washington? and he called my bluff. we got in that chevy impala, last car on the lot. it was spring break. drove 1600 miles across the country. live-streamed the conversation, a republican and a democrat finding out what we had in common. by the end of that trip, not only had we formed a friendship, but we had formed trust. we worked with each other on each other's bills. i got will to work with me on an immigration bill, showing party leaders from either side that republicans and democrats could work together on an otherwise contentious issue. and then across texas, i mentioned winning more votes than any democrat. we won independents and republicans in record numbers, as well. i will bring people in and together to face the common challenges that we have and to make sure that america rises to this opportunity.
anderson: senator booker, tell us about your most surprising friendship. sen. booker: well, look, i have so many, i don't even know where to count. i was the mayor of a large city with a republican governor. he and i had to form a friendship, even though i can write a dissertation on our disagreements. when i got to the united states senate, i went there with the purpose of making friendships across the aisle. i go to bible study in chairman inhofe's office. he and i pass legislation together to help homeless and foster kids. i went out to try to invite every one of my republican colleagues to dinner. and let me again say, finding a dinner at a restaurant, agreeing on one with ted cruz was a very difficult thing. i'm a vegan, and he's a meat-eating texan. but i'll tell you this right now, this is the moment in america that this is our test. the spirit of our country, i believe in the values of rugged individualism and self-reliance, but think about our history. rugged individualism didn't get us to the moon. it didn't beat the nazis. it didn't map the human genome. it didn't beat jim crow. everything we did in this country big. and, vice president, we have done so many big things.
the fact that there's an openly gay man, a black woman, all of us on the stage are because we in the past are all inheritors of a legacy of common struggle and common purpose. this election is not a referendum on one guy in one office. it's a referendum on who we are and who we must be to each other. the next leader is going to have to be one amongst us democrats that can unite us all, not throw elbows at other democrats that are unfair, because the preparation is being the leader that can revive civic of grace in our country, teach us a more courageous empathy, and remind america that patriotism is love of country, and you cannot love your country unless you love your fellow countrymen and women. and love is not sentimentality. it's not anemic. love is struggle. love is sacrifice. love is the words of our founders who said at the end of the declaration of independence that if we're ever going to make it as a nation, we must mutually pledge to each other -- anderson: thank you.
sen. booker: our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor. i am running for president to restore that sacred honor. anderson: thank you. sen. booker: and if you believe in that like i do, please join me by going to corybooker.com. thank you. [applause] anderson: thank you, senator. mr. yang? mr. yang: first, i want to thank all the voters tuned in at home. and if you don't feel like you got your question answered tonight, it's understandable. there are 12 of us. i'm going to be answering voter questions for 10 straight hours this friday. my website, yang2020.com. and if you ask your question tonight, there's a better chance i'll get to it. my surprising friendship, it's been so much fun running for president, because i've gotten to meet so many americans i never would have gotten to meet otherwise. the friendship that sticks out for me is a guy named fred, who's an avid trump supporter, a trucker. he let me ride in his truck for hours. he spent some time in jail. i heard about his experiences trying to get other people off of drugs. and i'm happy to say that, after our ride together, he actually said that he would move from donald trump to my campaign, which was a thrill for me. and we remained in touch ever since. the truth is that what happened to the 4 million manufacturing
workers here in ohio and michigan and pennsylvania and wisconsin and iowa did not care about our political party. the fourth industrial revolution is now migrating from manufacturing workers to retail, call centers, transportation, as well as to white-collar workers like attorneys, pharmacists, and radiologists. it does not care about our party. donald trump had a set of solutions in 2016. what did he say? he said we're going to build a wall, we're going to turn the clock back, we're going to bring the old jobs back. america, we have to do the opposite of all of these things. we have to turn the clock forward. we have to accelerate our economy and society as quickly as possible. we have to evolve in the way we think about ourselves and our work and our value. it is not left. it is not right. it is forward. and that is where we must take the country in 2020. [applause] anderson: mr. yang, thank you very much. senator harris? sen. harris: thank you. probably rand paul. he and i -- actually, i invited him to join me on a bill to end
the money bail system in the united states. he and i agree on almost nothing, but we agree on that. and after we joined forces, he said to me, "kamala, you know, appalachia loves this." and it really made the point that the vast majority of us have so much more in common than what separates us. and i guess that's why i'm running. i do believe that to beat donald trump, but also to heal our country, we need a leader who has the ability to unify our country and see that the vast majority of us have so much more in common than what separates us. and i'll tell you, my mother was 19 when she left india alone. and she wanted to travel to learn science because her mission in life was to cure cancer. and so she arrived in california. she got -- you know, she was supposed to have an arranged marriage, but she got involved in the civil rights movement, she met my father, and that produced my sister and me. they got married. but when i was five, that marriage ended.
but my mother convinced us that we could do anything. and so i became the first woman attorney general of california, the second black woman elected to the united states senate, and i will tell you, that's part of why i'm running, because donald trump, if he had his way, my story would not be possible. and i am running to make sure that that dream, the american dream, american values, american ideas will always hold true. and so that's what is at stake in this election. and i believe i am uniquely able to see the commonalities among us and to speak the story of the american dream and the need to reclaim it. [applause] anderson: thank you, senator harris. mayor buttigieg? mayor buttigieg: well, i think about the friendships that i formed in the military, people who were radically different from me, different generation, different race, definitely different politics. and we learned to trust each other with our lives. when they got into my vehicle
and when we went outside the wire, they didn't care if i was going home to a boyfriend or a girlfriend, they didn't care what country my dad immigrated from and whether he was documented or not. we just learned to trust each other. in fact, the fact that i want every american to have that experience without having to go to war to get there is one of the reasons why i believe national service is so important. i guess i'll follow in the pattern tonight and point out you can go to peteforamerica.com and read all about it. it's also about building a sense of belonging in this country, because i think that's what friendship and that's what service can create. and i think we have a crisis of belonging in this country that is helping to explain so many of our problems, from our politics being what it is to the fact that people are self-medicating and we're seeing a rise in the deaths from despair. i believe only the president can build a sense of belonging and purpose for the entire country. the purpose of the presidency is
not the glorification of the president. it is the unification of the american people. and i'm asking for your vote to be that president, when the dust clears over the rubble of our norms and institutions at the end of the trump presidency, pick up the pieces and guide us toward a better future. [applause] anderson: mr. mayor, thank you. senator sanders? sen. sanders: when i was chairman of the senate committee on veterans affairs, i tried to get through the most comprehensive piece of veterans legislation in modern american history. and i failed. i only had two republicans to vote with me in the senate. so we had to go back to the drawing board. and i worked with john mccain. i certainly did not get in that legislation working with mccain all that i wanted. but it turned out that we were able to pass a very, very significant piece of legislation, including $5 billion more for the veterans administration. more recently, i worked with a very conservative republican from utah, mike lee.
and mike understood, although he and i disagree on everything, that the u.s. involvement in the saudi-led war in yemen was a catastrophic disaster for the people of yemen. and for the first time in 45 years, we were able to get the war powers act utilized and get u.s. -- get the votes to get the u.s. troops out of that area. but i think, at the end of day, what i appreciate is that we have got to end the hatred that trump is fostering on our people, the divisiveness, trying to divide us up by the color of our skin or where we were born or our sexual orientation or our religion. and there is no job that i would undertake with more passion than bringing our people together around an agenda that works for every man, woman, and child in
this country rather than the corporate elite and the 1%. a progressive agenda that stands for all is the way that we transform this country. [applause] anderson: senator sanders, thank you. senator warren? sen. warren: you asked about a surprising friend. for me, it would be charles fried. 27 years ago, when i was under consideration for a job, he was someone who had been george bush, the first, solicitor general, a deeply principled republican. and we didn't agree on much. i was far more liberal than he was. but he also was willing to listen to my work about what's happening to america's middle class. and charles engaged with it over and over and ultimately is the person who made sure i got the job. you know, i grew up out in oklahoma.
i have three older brothers. they all served in the military. two of the three are still republicans. i love all three of my brothers. and there are a lot of things that we're divided on, but there are core things that we believe in together. we want to see all of our children get a good start in life. we don't want to see any of our friends or neighbors not get covered by health care. we're willing to get out there for the things we believe in. look, people across this country, whether they're democrats, independents, or republicans, they know what's broken. they know that we have an america that's working better and better and better for a thinner and thinner and thinner slice at the top and leaving everyone else behind. people across this country, regardless of party, are ready to say no more, we want an america that works for everyone.
2020 is our moment in history. it is a deep honor to be here, to be in this fight. i know what's broken. i know how to fix it. and we are building a grassroots movement to get it done that includes everyone. [applause] anderson: thank you, senator warren. vice president biden? vice pres. biden: this is reassuring in the fact that we're all acknowledging that we have to reach across the aisle, get things done. no other way to get anything done in this country. the two people that maybe would surprise you the most were -- he's been mentioned twice, but john mccain. john mccain worked for me when he worked in the navy, and he was assigned to me to travel around the world. we became close friends. he became very close friends with my wife, jill. visited our home. he was there with his children. and on his death bed, he asked me to do his eulogy. john, i would say to john, "john, you didn't see a war you never wanted to fight." and he'd say, "you didn't see a problem you never wanted to
solve." but he was a great man of principle. he was honorable. he was honorable. and one of the things -- that's the reason why i'm running. we have to restore the soul of this country. that's why i'm doing this. in fact, this president has ripped the soul out of this country, divided us in ways that are absolutely outrageous. a liar, he cheats, he does not do anything to promote people generally. secondly, we have to rebuild the middle class. the only way we're going to do that is to be able to reach across the aisle. my dad used to say a job is about a lot more than a paycheck, joey. it's about your dignity. we have to restore people's dignity. and lastly, we have to unite the country, because, folks, it's time we stopped walking around with our heads down. we are better positioned than any country in the world to own the 21st century. so for god's sake, get up. get up and remember this is the united states of america. there's nothing, nothing we're unable to do when we decide we're going to do it. nothing at all. period. [applause] anderson: candidates, thank you. that concludes the fourth democratic presidential debate. we want to thank otterbein
university for hosting us. now please stay tuned to cnn for special coverage of tonight's debate with jake tapper and chris cuomo. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: the commission on presidential debates has announced the dates and locations for all three 2020 presidential debates. the first is scheduled for tuesday, september 29, at the university of notre dame in indiana. the other debates will take place thursday, october 15, at the university of michigan, and, exactly one week later on october 22 at belmont university in nashville. the vice presidential candidates will meet for their first and only debate on wednesday, october 7, at the university of
utah in salt lake city. each debate is expected to start at 9:00 p.m. eastern and run 90 minutes without interruption. additional details about the format and moderators will come from the commission at a later time. campaign 2020. watch our live coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail and make up your mind. c-span's campaign 2020. your unfiltered view of politics. campaign: our c-span 2020 bus team is traveling across the country, visiting key battleground states in the 2020 presidential race, asking voters what issues they want presidential candidates to address during the campaign. by farssue to me that is the most paramount in the 2020 election is the climate crisis. i am electing to call at the climate crisis or the climate
emergencies so as to express the urgency of the matter. according to that famous report, we have only 11 years, until 2030, to deal with this issue, and we need to understand that 11 years is not a ton of time in historical or political context. so this is absolutely an emergency. we have to be dealing with this today. >> the main thing we want presidential candidates to talk about is the second amendment. i agree with the whole gun control thing, but if it is stuff being bought on the black market, then why do they want to take our guns away? why do they want to take away these -- the civilians of this country, and why don't they want to disarm us? >> i would like the candidates to address international solidarity. and the trade union movement
across borders. , where they stand on the former president of brazil. >> education. our kids are being left behind. in education, the government tells you you have to do this or that, but the funding is variable, and then the taxpayers have to come up with it. announcer: voices from the campaign trail, part of c-span's battleground states tour. --ouncer: c-span and if so's ipsos have released a new survey on voting and elections. the polls show just a third of americans believe voter fraud is a problem, and just as many disagree. republicans, at 44%, are more likely to believe it is an issue than democrats or independents, but it does not reach a majority among any of those groups.
almost half of americans believe voter discrimination is still a problem in the united states, while a quarter disagree. 50-point gaply a between republicans and democrats on that question. 24% of republicans and 72% of democrats believe voter discrimination is still an issue. you can read the full results of the poll at c-span.org. the british house of commons held a special saturday session, its first in more than 35 years, to debate and vote on the latest brexit agreement. the u.k. is scheduled to leave the eu on october 31. the house voted to delay consideration of the prime minister's plan. here is some of the debate, starting with prime minister johnson and labor leader jeremy corbyn. statement. the prime >> mr. speaker, i want to begin by