tv Capital News Today CSPAN October 26, 2010 11:00pm-2:00am EDT
we're looking at 10% unemployment, give or take i the way. should congress consider another bill to jump-start the economy or should we be putting in tax incentives into help small businesses grow and what should that be specifically? we recently passed a small business legislation. this is a small landing bill going to our community banks that we know and trust. we are trying to get this bill. the house and through the senate for months and months -- get this bill through the house and through the senate for months and months. two brave republican senators came forward and voted for that legislation. that will help throughout our
region. i voted for 16 tax cut for tax small businesses. republicans voted with us for one. it is helping to create jobs. we want to find the tax cut for our small businesses to continue to create jobs. my opponent says he is against stimulus. as a member of the authority of the chairman of the redevelopment authority, he has asked for stimulus money for butler county. is one thing to say you are against it. it is another thing to put out your hand and asked for it. we have to find ways forward. we need tax incentives weather for a green energy or a job is. i have legislation that will give tax breaks for those who want to develop wind turbines. it is very important to our
economy and energy needs. those are the sensible tax credits that will be there till 2020. those are the smart incentives i would like to see happen. >> i find it interesting that somebody who voted for a $1 trillion stimulus that puts a heavy burden on corporations would find that that somehow was an incentive. where of looking at reform bill that is 5000 page -- we are looking at reform bill that is 5000 pages. there is not taken the world right now in this country that feels confident that they can lend money to any small business because of of the regulations they do not know are there yet. the reels arrules are not there.
we stay here are the rules. you look at that piece. you tell me that we are somehow helping small businesses. how can we spur the economy? by lowering corporate tax rates and making it easier for people and small business to invest in jobs and training and the tools said they need to. these are the things that make people in best. the biggest problem for anybody in small business is the unknowing. they are afraid to get in the game. they do not know what the next thing is. we are so overregulated. the taxes are so high. we cannot move. we are bound by air cell. these of the people that create the jobs. -- by ourselves. these are the people that create jobs. they will take more of your tax adopt. that is the way it has always
worked. >> i just want to make sure you clear. you are talking about taxes. if we had the same type of package before, would you or would you not vote for a stimulus package as previously passed? >> i've that you are talking about further beyond. >> both actually. >> i would vote for the bill that already passed. that bill i believe kept this from going into a depression. did it do everything? no. it created $8 million. -- to reinvested in the future. we reinvested in clean energy technology. we reinvested in broadband. in pennsylvania, where the largest recipient of broadband in the state. if you are a business and to have dial-up and you are trying
to compete, it is impossible to do that. we reinvested in infrastructure. this is a game changer. we invested in high-speed rail. it is spurring growth in a private job creation area. >> out of like to respond. i would like to respond. hearing this right, it is one of the things you do not have a time to look at you still voted for. you voted for an over a billion dollars in stimulus funds. if we did not do it right thing, and upon it was like to go above 8%. we've been hovering around 10%. the president said the biggest problem was that he thought
there were shovel ready projects. they do not know where they are. this is a person that we have to do this. this idea a half to take its vantage of a crisis, if this is in the whole theme of the administration. this is dangerous. this is the result of believing in your party instead of the people. they are overregulated. we are saying it works? that does not work. that is a disaster. >> i will read by the candidates that we have not to direct questions or comments directly to each other. -- would like to remind the candidates that we do not want to direct questions or comments directly to each other. there are recent projections that suggest our national debt is approaching $14 trillion. recent media reports suggest
candidates across the country and in both parties have been very vague about what they would do about the deficit. let's break that down and for specifics. according to the cbo, making bush year tax cut permanent would add an additional $4 trillion to the national debt over 10-years. extending those tax cuts just for the middle class would add an additional $3 trillion to the national debt. your web site suggest, mr. kelly, that if elected he will fight government waste and pork barrel spending. even the most optimistic projections of pork barrel spending is that combine a would total less than one-half of 1%. could you please tell us what specific savings you have?
where would you find drastic cut? >> i will address it very specifically. the specificity is in the process. when governor charlie crist the got elected, he said the same thing. as a business person, you have to look at fremont and what you do. you have to look at the things that worked -- you have to look very closely what you do. you have to look at things that have worked and what that have not worked. i would tear it apart. i would want to look at everything we are spending money on. does it work? is it something we can improve on? absolutely. there is that to be cut. -- steps to be cut. people take this attitude that you cannot expect the government to work the way a business does. i look at it the other way. you could never expect a
business to look at the way government does. when we talk about all these savings, the costs are on the backs of the taxpayers. the government act like we are taking money from them. the truth is, if they are taking money from every single penny that goes into government coffers comes off the backs of -- the truth is, if they are taking money from every single taxpayer. the money that goes into government coffers comes off the backs of taxpayers. is a performing the way it is supposed to? is this another government program that has an endless license? the specificity is getting people that are responsible and understand what it means to make payment out of your own pocket and not the taxpayers. you would look at it as a sacred duty.
>> to be fair, your web site devotes a bid to the deficit. you mentioned your office was able to get $90,000 back. you mentioned that it was a drop in the bucket. we are talking about trillions of dollars. could you provide some specifics on where you think we might find savings? >> i certainly will. my opponent and not answer the question. let me tell you what i would do. [applause] >> both candidates have agreed to the rules of the debate among have a plus.t . >> what i would do is not extend tax cuts to the millionaires and billionaires. that'll cost is $700 billion
over the next 10 years. we cannot afford it. what i will do what the economy westill struggling as recover it is to extend the tax cuts to the middle class people who need to have a tax break at this particular time. what i have done it is a number of things. we reinstated statutory and pa y-go. last august when there is a need to keep teachers on th in the school, i set out not vote for this unless it was paid for. we pay for it by closing tax loopholes that allow our jobs to go overseas. every republican voted against it. i am on a balanced budget amendment. we have to balance our amendmenbut it. i've balanced the budget at home all the time.
if i ever run my business by the government, it would have been out of business. i understand that. a balanced budget is necessary. we have got to look at how we can cut programs in the long term. we need a commission to look at the programs that are wasteful. one specific thing i would do -- if you watch c-span and there is someone out there speaking and no one else in the house, that costs us $22,000 an hour. you do not see of the security that is out there prepared to do thousand dollars an hour every night times four. -- out there. that is $22,000 an hour every night times 4. >> i like to speak about international relations. u.s. and china are heading toward a currency war. we had the u.s. dollar being not
as valued as the chinese dollar. it is hurting our industry. it has been a thorn in our side for about 10 years. we are looking at the possibility of trade tensions against china to help the playing field. if it does come to a trade war, what specifically would you support we go after? >> i have already voted for a bill that will go after china for the currency manipulation. this is something we have been talking about for years and years. today they were saying that going after china would actually create half a million jobs in this country. there are some people that think we should be happy about this. -- this, because we can go out and buy cheaper products. those cheap products means
american jobs have been lost. we need to go after china. they have been teaching for a long time. i have been a vocal supporter of looking at that manipulation. we both did that out of the house last of timber. we need -- we voted that out of the house last september. we need to get it out. we've had three hearings in front of the trade commission. i have testified at two of them. we have won all three cases. the last administration would not take on china. these are products being brought illegally. we will not go after china. we cannot let them trample on our businesses and workers. we have gone after china. we will continue to go after them again and again and again. they unfairly dumped products into our country.
we need to go after china when they tried to corner the market. let me tell you something about legislation that is mine. we passed through the house in september regarding rare earth minerals. china controls 97% of the world supply of a rare earth minerals. our country controls 0%. their use in all the energy projects -- they are used in all the energy products and security products and hybrid batteries. we have got to go after china for these unfair trade practices. >> i have no problem with fair trade as long as it is -- fear -- i have no problem with free trade as long as it is fair. we do not play by the rules in china. we force ourselves to go by the rules of the force china not to go by the rules. i understand it is a global
economy. i am concerned with shareholders. why do they go overseas? we over regulate and overtax them. we make a possible for some companies to stay in the country prepared them a one to blame the chinese for our taxation. -- in the country. then we want to blame the chinese for our taxation. to not make it too hard to compete. it all comes down to that. the rest of the world has been waiting for america to take a stand with china. when china was part of the wto, we did not enforce the rules. now that they are in the 20, everyone wants to make sure they followed the rules. we've always welcomes competition. what i do talent is the
government that over regulate and over taxes -- challenge is the government that over regulates and overtaxes. we need to see what is going on in the world. the why want to protect american jobs? absolutely. we have to do them with the rules that make sense and enforce them. >> i will look at domestic politics for a minute. we will talk of the health care reform. -- about health care reform. you want to repeal it. would you replace it with anything? >> first of all, how can anybody boat for a health care package that penalizes our seniors? neo-natals.s our am
we do not increase affordability. who do we penalize the most? the seniors, the people who have lived with in the roles, who have paid their dues and taxes. who do we put that burden on? it is a 500 million dutch predict by founder billion dollar cut in medicaid -- it is billion cut in medicaid. i would never vote for a bill that penalized the unborn. we can talk about executive orders. it is the worth the paper is written on. the first thing obama did was resend bush's executive order about mexico city funding. i will not have been more proud of her. she was in a position -- they needed her more than she needed
them. if we were really concerned about protecting the unborn, put the language into law. that is all that it would have taken. you could have done that. i would have been so proud of you. your district would have been so proud. the party ask too much. instead of taking the side of the people, you went the way of your party. that is inexcusable. we are supposed to be representatives. i do not think we have represented ithe best interests of our people. >> i think is morally reprehensible that my opponent would accuse me of not being pro-life. i've been pro-life of my life. ito's wife at the age 21 when i was pregnant and unmarried -- i chose pro-life at the age of 21 when i was pregnant and unmarried. i'm the best friend they have.
this was the best legislation ever passed by congress. pennsylvania, new mexico had to change their language. the worm farm to not take out any possibility of abortion -- they were warned not to take out any possibility of abortion funding. i'm nature. i was the one fighting the night before we voted -- i made sure. i was the one fighting the night before we vote. my opponent was repealed health care was to take away healthcare from a young child that might have autism. he wants to take away healthcare from a senior. he was to increase prescription drug costs. he wants to take away tax credit for small business.
this is why we passed health care. it is a basic need. at some point, everyone is going to need to access healthcare. working men and women across this country are working hard every day to not have the access to health care that i do. i am sure that my opponent says. it is the right thing to do. it is the moral thing to do. i did with a certainty that there will be no abortion period, o uout of that bill except in the case of rape. >> i like to move on a little bit to some other foreign policy issues. we have troops in afghanistan and iraq. we also have the world on edge.
there have been reports bailey, attacks in india. if the u.s. was attacked and we know who did it, we have the evidence, would you be willing to send troops into the country it is hard -- that is harboring the group that harmed the u.s.? >> if our country or any american base is attacked, and the country from which the country a tactic known listed by and allow the attack to happen, every option to be on the table. we should never go into war without looking at every option in front of us. we should always look at every single option diplomatically prior to going to war with any
country. certainly, if a country stands terrorists attackattac americans, i think war is certainly one of the options that we should seriously think about. >> the question is under attack? >> yes. such as an embassy attack in a third country and the country does a bit to do it and the government stands by and does -- and a bit to doing it in the government stand by and does admits to doing it and the government stands by and does nothing. >> i would support it if he made that decision.
>> we are going to move into some of the audience questions. the first steps upon by a number of participants. it has to do with the electoral process. it is very close to a question that i've pulled together. there has been a trend in recent years that scholars and commentators are beginning to fall outside money. it is being spent by those that are not located in the community. that has pulled together it this information and does ranked our district 16th in the nation.
-- and has ranked our district 16th in the nation. you have been the benefactor of most of that money. they estimate through the court order that it has predicted a the third quarter that it has been 1 million -- the estimates through the third quarter it has been $1 million. do you think this outside money is appropriate? would you support legislation to disclose the sources of this information? >> i think it is a good question. i do not think you go far enough. you just said what money is raised. if the go back to the prior, the congresswoman started off with $1.3 million. i started off a 75,000. i raise more in the third quarter. this is for all of us to follow. >> i'm not asking about your own fund-raising.
i am talking about the groups that are spending money on your behalf. >> i understood that. if you are going to say about to who took the money, there are ballots we have to follow. i have no problem with making sure whoever has money that they declare it. i do not think that is a problem. >> i am not sure. she voted against the bill that would require disclosure. i am wondering if you could explain that and talk about the outside money and the disclosure issues. >> i think we have all seen the amount of money that has come into this district. i think everyone in this room has about had enough about all the commercials. most of them are targeted against me.
it is not our local chamber. it takes money in from beyond our borders. i have been supporting my opponent. they are going after china. i voted against it when it came in front of the house. it actually had exemptions for certain groups. i thought if we are going to pass legislation which i thought is crucial, if we have elections that are not bought, i think everyone to have to be disclosed. no one should receive an exemption. that is why i voted against it. i fell strongly that everyone to be disclosing the i feel strongly that everyone should be disclosing who their donors -- i feel strongly that everyone
should be disclosing who their donors are. he thought the citizens united ruling was just fine and that we did not need the disclosure. or we were together last week, he said he cannot give you an answer on whether that was good or not. he also says he is not read the health care bill. if you are going to go to congress, but to understand the issue and the bills. you have to make decisions. it has been out there for a long time. you better know about these very important issues. >> it has been brought to us this audience, this question.
how are we going to be able to go after china won the zero of them so much money? they have a lot of our debt -- when we showed them so much money? they have a lot of our debt in their hands. >> we certainly have to go after this. i have a plan that we are working on to attack that. we have to have a balanced budget. we have a sunset commission that will determine which programs are not working. we have to look at our entire budget including the department of defense. we have to continue to hold china and accountable for the roles that they agreed dumb. that is why we need to take them in front of the international trade commission. that is why we need to go after
them, for manipulating their currency that allows them to into our country. this is a pretty important subjects. these rare earths control 97% of the world's supply. japan does not have any natural supplies on their rock. an these are very important products. china controls 97% of it. we have our own supply here.
we have not mind since 2002, because china subsidizes that industry. irene is a sympathy beckon to that of industry to get it back up and going -- might industry put sympathy -- my group put sympathy back on that industry to get it up and going. >> thank you for repeating the question. i got lost in the answer. first of all, we do not have to worry about china and the debt that we owed china. china buys debt from the united states because it is a great investment for china. the rules are the rules. we have allowed china to back door a lot of things because we have not had the stomach to go
ahead and stand up and say stop. you cannot do it. when we talk about all of those things -- really, i thought that was a closing statement. when we talk about a balanced budget, this year, the revenue, $2.10 trillion, which is what we will taken as a government, the spends $3.50 trillion. i do not need a laptop for this. a $1.40 trillion deficit, if you put your hand up and say, i think that will work. i can do that in my business -- we have put ourselves in a bad situation by people who go to congress and make a decision among things they do not understand and vote on a $1 trillion bailout. the third district is in the northwest corner of pennsylvania.
anything dealing with natural resources to not appear. how can we interpret that? >> we have technology out there that is cutting edge. protecting our environment is our first responsibility. we do have the technology out there. we have ways of doing almost everything that we're doing right now, whether it is mining coal or drilling for gas. i think it can make a lot of sense.
pennsylvania. we are so based on fossil fuels here. it would have been a very heavy economic burden on our industry. i have voted for so many wonderful pieces of legislation that will help move things along with cleaner environment for all of us. my opponent did not answer the question as to why he does not address this issue at all. he talks very little about these issues. i do truly wonder how much he really cares about this. i voted for the greatest increase in funding for the great lakes, to make sure the great lakes are protected. i have voted for protecting land throughout this country. i voted for a bill that reinvest in green energy technology. i know a lot about earth conservation company. their project is just around the corner here.
with the wreck center and the training center coming together on their campus to put in a new energy, cleaner lng-burning -- cleaner energy-burning heating unit. it is great because they were able to get many from the american recovery and reinvestment act. without that money, they would not have the money to save this community. that is what we did with the recovery and reinvestment act. . >> one thing we would like to ask you about is bipartisanship. it is a matter who wins this
election between the two of you. one of you will go to congress, maybe in the minority or maybe in the majority. what do you think about the possibility of bipartisanship going forward? would you be willing to work across the aisle with the opposite party? >> i have tried and have worked with the opposite party many times. i was surprised at how much both sides of the i'll try to tear you apart. we have great orientations for a couple of days and then they separate, republicans over here and democrats over there. it is the party leadership that continues to try to pull of support i go every morning to a bipartisan prayer breakfast.
it allows me to get to know members of congress in a very different way. when you going to a committee to work with them, you actually see the many different light. we need to have more things like that outside of the house floor. in my committee, we work very well together. i am on the science and technology committee. every bill that we have brought out of that committee has passed in a bipartisan nature. i mentioned a rare earth bill. i'm very proud. we passed that out of committee and bipartisan. it was passed 395 to 98. i will continue to find ways. do we have common ground? of course we do. i am a moderate. i was voted the eighth most moderate member of congress. i work with those moderates all the republican side.
there has been the constant call from republican leadership to keep their members in line, in tow, and not allow them room on any single piece of legislation that was on the agenda of anyone who might possibly have a v behind their name. >> that is interesting that you would be the eighth most moderate. you voted 94% of the time with your own party. the biggest piece of legislature ever passed, the most intrusive bill we have ever had, there was not one republican sign-on to it. when we talk about bipartisanship, it you do not invite them to the table, if you do not invite them to the debate, then how was that bipartisan? when you look at that voting record, it is not true what you say. you may have grown up in northwest pennsylvania, but you sure vote like you were from san
francisco. these are the kinds of things that make people wonder at the end of the day, if we're talking about bipartisanship, will we really be bipartisan? will we only be bipartisan while we're here? [booing] [applause] if we vote on the bills the do not mean as much, why did not -- you said that washington is broke. it may be so. i think the government is just fine. i think the people that we have elected and sent there to represent us have done a worse job. if you're watching bipartisanship, then invite the other party to the table. do not exclude them and then make and the demons when things do not work out.
>> if you were elected to work on democrats on legislation, is there anywhere that you would break ranks with the party? >> i cannot be that person now. i do not know. i'm not there yet. would there be issues? i would sure hope that there would be issues. but i would really hope that we would be built to have the debate over it an extra get invited to the table. what i see going on right now is the summit calls up because their houses on fire and two different fire departments show up and the debate over who has the right to put it out. in the meantime, the house burns down. we have seen a time after time on both sides of the aisle. i will never vote for legislation that for the people that they were voted to represent. i will be going to represent them and their best interests
and the best interest of this country, not my party. >> can i respond to that? >> republicans were invited to the table when we passed health care. in fact, there are 200 pieces of legislation that were republican ideas. we invited republicans to everything we have done and we invited a lot of people to be part of this. but will we do not appreciate is my opponent calling me a liar and that i am not telling the truth because i am telling the truth. [applause] we are about at the end of our time. we have 10 more minutes. we're doing a good job. thus continue 1. >> i have broken with my party on a number of things. first of all, i am pro-life. the majority of the members of my party are pro-choice. i am pro-gun. the majority of the members of my party are not.
i have broken with them on many different pieces of legislation and will continue to do that because i have two things that i love to. first of all, i look at my conscience. when i go to sleep a night, i want to be good with my god and with myself. third, what the big things for the people of the third district and the 60,000 people that i represent? >> ok, and john, from erie, rights there are a number people in the region were poor. what would you do in congress that would help the working poor this community? i believe it is mr. kelly first. >> i think it is me. >> the working poor in this region. >> when you talk about working poor, we're talking much of again and the economy. as the economy improves, so would the wages. what could government do?
the best answer is that the least the government is the best government. if we could get to a point where we are able to actually grow our businesses without being over-regulated or over-taxed, then we can go into training. in my business, every month, we reinvest in our people. we add on and we buy stuff that we have to buy to make it better. i would think that the same their attendance would be used in government, too. -- the same very tenanttenets would be used in government, too. it is unbelievable to me that come in the united states of america, there 15 million people that wake up every morning and have no place to go to work. and all we have talked about all the time is taxing, taxing, taxing and spending, spending, spending. we have not addressed the very problems that keeping those businesses from growing. it is the government that has
its foot on their threat. many people to go there who have a strong stomach and a strong backbone to do the things that need to be done. i will tell you right now, the hundred-pound gorilla -- the 800-pound gorilla in the room is spending. your party, the economy, we have to take a step back and do things that make sense, common sense, the same that you do in your home is coming your schools, in your churches. it is so basic. we have just gone away from it. we have allowed these other things to cloud our minds. >> one thing i would not do is extend the tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires in this country. that will not help the working poor. but we need to do is give them a tax break. we need to make sure that they have education, good education. it should not matter where you live or what your income level is, in terms of what kind of
education you get. this education needs to begin with our preschoolers, our youngest children. this -- they're beginning to realize how important it is that our youngest students are prepared for kindergarten. they will be much better student and all the way through to graduation. obviously, we need to reinvest in high-speed rail. >> if i am hearing this ride, the stimulus bill had to be rushed through. again, is probably one of those things. you voted for over $8 billion in stimulus. unemployment was going to go to
-- we have been hovering around 10%. the president said that the biggest flaw was that there were not enough schauble-ready projects. -- enough shovel-ready. you have to take a ride -- did did you have to take advantage of a crisis to -- this idea that you have to take advantage of a crisis to get things done. the stimulus is so overregulated. that did not work. it should never have happened. >> i will remind the candidates to address their comments directly to each other. as you know, this is very
informative. recent media reports across the country, in both parties, they have been very vague about what they would do about the debt. according to the cbo -- making bush tax cuts -- a government that is so overregulated, so over-taxed, and we just want to eliminate the tax loopholes, why do you think these businesses are leaving this country. they are being penalized for staying here.
we have to level the playing field. i am not saying anything about who we should tax and who should not tax. if i can pick your guess somebody else, we talk about only raising taxes on the wealthiest 2%. that makes it pretty good. but who determines who the wealthiest car? they are small businessmen. these are not the wealthiest out there. they are the job-treaters. creators. believe me, there's on a day that goes by that a company does not see me and says that we need funding. we need help. [unintelligible]
the answer is truly right there. it is not hard to see. we all know where it comes from and we know where we need to go. especially those times when you are standing on the edge of the abyss and there's nobody there to help you. but god. that is who i am. that is too high have always been. the reason i am running is because i could not said at a thanksgiving table or christmas table and look at my kids or my grandchildren and say, i knew it was bad and that it would not work, but i did not love you enough to provide for you. >> my life has always been guided by my strong faith. my faith in god. i have always been a person for whom family comes first. something that is difficult to hold on to. but it is my family that helps me everyday and it has continued to move forward for this country because they have the support of
the service that i have given over the last two years. i continue to be a person who is filled with compassion for all. for our seniors. i will not use scare tactics and untruths to scare our seniors. i care too much for them. my mom and dad died from cancer this year. my in-laws are still here. i would not vote for a piece of legislation that would hurt those people who i love so dearly. i would never vote on a piece of legislation that would hurt my children or my friends or neighbors or my constituents that this district. i was a scout once and they said, leave the place better than you found it. that is what i have always tried to do, whether it is my church, my children's school, my committee, or the third district of pennsylvania. >> we will move on to closing.
>> by calling toss, she will give us to her final words first. >> two years ago, we were losing 750,000 jobs a month. two years ago, we lost two 0.8 million jobs in 2008 we saw $17 trillion in savings, your retirement savings. we have seen 14 straight months of improvement in manufacturing numbers. we have seen 863,000 jobs created in the private sector this year alone. we are on track to create more jobs than were created in the
eight years of the last administration. if my opponent sounds like a career politician, it is because he is. he says he is against bailout, but he took a cash-for-concur money. he sold nearly $3 million worth of cars and pocketed the profits from that. when he sat on the butler city kelso, he raised taxes. he says he is against the stimulus, but he has asked for stimulus dollars for color. he says he is against outsourcing, but he will not sign on against a loophole that will send your jobs abroad. he says he will vote on the legislation that will extend the tax cuts for the millionaires and billionaires of this country. let me tell you. i'm tax cuts for the middle class. i'm for tax cuts for small business. i am for making it in america again and going after in a country that uses unfair trade
practices to go after our jobs. i'm here to protect seniors, social security, veterans, and the press -- and the promises we have made. and i want to continue to take this country down the right path for children and our grandchildren and continue to grow this district as a place where they can have the american dream. i ask for your vote in november. [applause]
as of the same claims she made two years ago. my question is where was that strong of mr. gearan told us, as mother and grandmother, that she was worried about the growing deficits and has transferred the step onto her children? you were worried as a candidate. you should be sick to your stomach as a legislator. you have from the disaffect -- the deficit to the point that it will break this country. i will never apologize for being a successful businessman, the same as your husband. that is how i feed my family. i do it every day of the week. [applause] and the same talking points you're hearing tonight in allegheny are being voiced by a democrat because it cannot talk about their record. that demonized their opponent. >> please. [booing]
>> where are we going? if you're really happy in the next two months and you can see this great success that the white house report has put up there, that is fine. deficits have grown off the charts and taxes have gone higher. a feature for your children that will not be there. it will not be the same, america -- it will not be the same america that we have. it will be totally different. who do you want representing you? what does one vote mean one vote for a congressman would have kept them in session and they would have had to vote on a budget.
live from the francis marion university campus, the south carolina gubernatorial debate. >> tonight, politics is the subject as we put the two major party candidates for governor of south carolina to the test. good evening to you, thank you for joining us. for our viewers watching locally, and across the nation on c-span and online, we welcome you to the campus. a capacity audience of more than 400 people are here tonight, this is the third in our series of voice of the vote
debate sponsored by francis marion and coastal community. first the republican nominee, state representative nikki haley from lexington. and democratic nominee, state senator vincent sheheen from camden. also a panel of esteemed journalists will help question the candidates tonight. for more than two decades he served as chairman of the state house press corps, and has been named best state house press reporters in the country. our third panelist is rusty ray, he's with news 13rk he's
been a member of the news team since 2002. he anchors wbtw's morning newscast and our "positively carolina" report. we welcome him as well. tonight's debate is five rounds, the first three are questions from our panel, for rounds four and five i'll submit questions from the audience. in rounds two and three, student ruptives will ask a question. the candidate whose turn it is to answer will have one minute, 45 seconds to answer, the other candidate gets one minute for rebuttal. robert had the first question for ms. haley. >> south carolina is facing a $1 billion budget shortfall next year as you know.
education and health care combined account for about 75% of the budget. what specifically would you do to cut $1 billion out of the budget, especially considering that a big part of the health care budget is medicaid, which by federal law the state cannot cut? >> there's a great opportunity in that we have a billion-dollar deficit and we have to see that when businesses go through the hardest times they make the best decisions. we need to start at zero, say what do we have to have and work our way up. wheny talk about health care we have to understand that in our health care services agencies, we have twice as many secretaries as nurses. streamlining to what we have to have. when it comes to education, we need to acknowledge that we're too top heavy, we have too many administrators, not enough dollars going to the students and teachers in the classroom. the key way to do that is go to every single agency, tell them we have to do certain reports by the end of the year and make
sure we get it done. we have to say, what do we have to have? government was intended to secure the rights of the people, not intended to be all things to all people. we're one of the only states in the country not privatizing school bus systems. we'll find things the government doesn't need to pay for and create opportunity for the private sector to do it better and we'll have a stronger government because of it. >> mr. shemheen, 45 seconds. >> we account have multiple accounting departments in state agencies or multiple human resources departments. it's going to have to be folded and streamlined into the executive branch. this is a great opportunity to shift the way we think about budget as well. with eff to recree at a programmatic budget. i've pushed for a programmatic budget for the last fur years, this is the year to do it.
the legislature and agencies to give criteria to measure the successes and jut put of any program. if an agency can't give us an objective criteria, we can't have the program. we have limited dollars, we have to be smart. >> jackie, your next question is for mr. sheheen. >> u.s. transportation secretary lahood pointed to south carolina's infrastructure bank as a mold for a national infrastructure bank and i understand that will be pitched in washington. will you support a national infrastructure bank and make sure our constituent is among the first it funds? >> i will and i do. i want to say thank you, francis marion, thunge coastal for he'sing us in this debate. i want to thank all of you for being here and participating, i want to thank my wife amy who has been with me for the last year and a half and the last 15
years of our marriage. i'm excited about the opportunity for the federal infrastructure bank modeled on south carolina's. secretary lahood also said they needed a governor who would support i-73. i support i-73. i have supported it for the last four years. i have supported resolutions about i-73 to get the support we need in the legislature. we have to have a governor who will convene other governors in this country who will have an input into i-73. i will do that. we have to have a governor who will support the creation of a national infrastructure bank. otherwise, i-73 won't be able to be funded. this is a distinct difference between my opponent and myself. i will do what it takes to have i-73. that may mean tolling i-73, it may mean public-private partnership but we have to explore these opportunities to make i-73 a reality. the next secretary of transportation when i appoint him or her will be on the same
page as i am. and will support i-73. the amount of job creation projected to come from successful i-73 projects is staggering. thousands and thousands and thousands of jobs. when i had the opportunity to vote to support i-73, i have. my opponent voted against the resolution, i think this year, the support of i-73 and would have allowed for public-private partnership and tolling of i-73 if needed. >> ms. haley? >> i have been a supporter of i-73 and will continue to be. infrastructure is at the heart of economic development. when companies come to south carolina they look for three things. they look for a skilled work force and infrastructure which is roads, dueling-rail competitive airfare. what i didn't support this year
is the tolling of i-73. we are not going to tax people for this road. if we're beginning to do it, we'll do it right. my opponent is right we differ on this. he would support a national infrastructure bank like he supported national obama care. that's not what we need. that's going in blindly without knowing what's in the bill. i will go tour our federal delegation, we have to have i-73. it doesn't matter to me how they do it but we'll get it done. as governor, my main concern is to make sure i bring economic development to south carolina. >> i want to clear one thing up, the representative of myrtle beach said that you supported tollway. now you're saying you're against it. >> i have never supporting tolling. that's why i voted against that bill. i do not support tolling. >> i would like to know how the state is going to provide funding for i-73 if we're not going to increase the gas tax, which i don't think you believe should happen and not support tolling. the state is going to have to provide funds to it. >> senator, i don't believe in
taxes whike you do. i believe we go through the federal delegation and make sure -- this is not a small project. >> you want to use federal money? >> this is not about $100 million, which we have for i-73. i-73 is going to take $2.75 million. s we have to decide we have to have it but we're not going to be part of a huge national bill just like we're part of the national health care mandate because all we see is that taxes everybody for everything. we have to be smart about this. i'll work directly with the delegation. we have not going to doran dom taxes, we are going to do this right. that takes care of the citizens of this state and makes sure we get i-73 and i talked with senator graham and this. we are going to continue to move forward and i-73 will be a reality in south carolina. >> she she knows full well i don't support mandates in health care.
she throws it in because she likes to distract people from what we're talking about. you condition just say we're going to get it done. mark sanford is saying we're going to get it done for eight years and i haven't seen i-73 move far down the road. here's some specifics. we ought to have a federal infrastructure bank. number two, we know the state will have to match that. i can tell you what should be on the table. tolling of i-73 has to be on the table. one won't do it without the other. we're either going to be honest in this debate and talk about ways we honestly can move south carolina forward or we'll pretend like we pretended for the last eight years that things will just happen. and you know what, ladies and gentlemen, things don't just happen. >> we do need to be honest. i think you need to be honest that it was the sun news that said you spord obama care. i think you need to stand up to that. i think we are being honest when we sea i'm not mark sanford. i know you want me to be but
i'm not. we have to be realistic. i support i-73 and will make sure we get it. >> rusty ray to representative haley. >> representative, some lawmakers in columbia advocate a stronger immigration law in south carolina like that passed in arizona. do you support scrutiny of suspects by law enforcement who may believe someone is here illegally. do you think there needs to be a different standard than an officer's judgment. >> everyone has -- compared the immigration law to yeads. if i get the immigration arizona law i will sign it. arizona did what they had to because the frovet failed to act. we have a south carolina immigration reform bill. it's not as strong as the arizona law. i will tell you the problem with the south carolina bill is it doesn't allow us to actually go and take illegal aliens, we are only allowed to call homeland security whereas arizona allows homeland security to take illegals.
it also says any illegals caught carrying weapons, carrying drugs or committing a terrorist act would be considered a felony. south carolina doesn't do that and arizona does. i will also tell you, when illegal immigration, senator sheheen did not fund it. instead he chose to support the stimulus package while i chose to support funding prosecution for illegal immigration. we have to get serious about illegal immigration. we have gangs and drug cartels going straight from mexico to atlanta and coming through south carolina as they get to charlotte. i'm not going to wait for us to become victims of the process. we're going to be very strong on that. while we are a country of immigrants, we are a country of laws. when you give up being a country of law, you give up everything the couldn't run was founded on. >> senator sheheen? >> i represent the immigration bill. represent haley said that two years ago we passed one of the
strongest immigration bills in the country. this legislature passed an amazing immigration reform bill. i voted for it. the focus is cracking down on employers who employee illegal immigrant. if we enacted yeast' bill, it would weaken arizona's -- south carolina's immigration bill, i won't support that. if there are measures that will toughen our bill, i will support it. i do believe that law enforcement should be able to call in the federal sthorts if they have reason to suspect that somebody is here illegally. but we're not going to weaken south carolina's bill just so for governor of the united states. we need to worry about south carolina and i'm running for the governor of south carolina because i care about south carolina. and we did put funding in to support the immigration bill. in fact, they're doing it today. >> arizona's bill is much tougher and the difference that makes it tougher is it allows our law enforcement to arrest then and there the bill that
south carolina has requires them to go through training which cost expenses we don't have. two years ago we did have the strongest bill in the state but right now arizona is the strongest and i think we need to support it. >> this is a voter question from jeff gardner, jeff asks, this will go to senator sheheen, what will you do about the current job market, especial lit in the pee dee region of the state -- that's the northeast part of the state. >> i represent one of the counties in the pee dee, and used to represent marlboro. i know the pee dee has been ignored by this admgs. my commitment to the pee dee is the same commitment i make to the rest of south carolina, you'll have a governor who will travel this nation, travel this world to cre re-crute jobs and strbak into our state. it's not good enough to sit back and think things will
happen. that's what's happened for the last eight years. i will push job into the pee dee just like i'll push jobs throughout the rest of the state. i want to rebuild the partnership between the commerce department and local development officers. i've spent the last year visiting entrepreneurs and small businesses throughout this state to learn about what they need to be successful. i want to be that governor who again believes it's the governor's top priority to recruit business and industry into south carolina. code. we have a very convoluted tax code that places an increasing burden on small businesses and property taxes. i voted against an act passed a new years ago which put a tremendous burden of property tax on small business throughout south carolina, including the pee dee. i want the pee dee to be part of our economic development plan because counties like marion, counties like dillon cannot sur private with 18% or 19% unemployment. i'm committed to this area just
like i am to the rest of the state. >> ms. haley? >> we do have 11% unemployment but while we have 11% unemployment, we have 54,000 open jobs that our south carolina businesses need to fill and they're beginning out of state and out of country to get it. that's a south carolina problem. we have to understand when we bing in job we need to bring in good quality jobs. the way to do that, have a tax structure to allow them to make profits and cash flow. when you give businesses cash flow, the first thing they do is hire people. we need to make sure we're we take care of small businesses. i will tell you the bill that senator sheheen is referring to gave a 60% tax reduction. i voted for that tax relief he voted against it and that's unfortunate. what i'll tell you is the way support them is through workers' comp reform. that's what they need. it's through tort reform, you cap mononed call damages and
give small businesses cash flow and bottom line. >> our next question goes to senator sheheen. >> i'd like to talk more about the looming state budget crisis. if it's not possible to cut $1 billion from the state budget without limiting state agencies or things like schools, law enforcement and health care, that includes raising taxes. are you willing to raise taxes or is in tax increase off the table? >> i don't believe we can afford to raise taxes on people in south carolina. my opponent talked about raising the food tax. that's exactly the wrong approach to have. she'll deny it now but she said it back in august pretty clearly. we can't afford to raise taxes on working south carolinians because people are suffering right now. it is important that we are real about the budget situation. it is critical. there will be cuts this year. there were cut this is past year. we have to prioritize. my priorities are the job creating agencies like commerce, public education,
will still see difficult times ahead. i support an increase in the cigarette tax last year and now my opponent is running a tv commercial accusing me of raising taxes on families. if raising the cigarette tax is raising the tax on families we have got a big problem in south carolina. but that's how she's run this campaign. i'm not afraid to do what's right, i'm not afraid to do what's right regardless of consequence. it was right to raise the lowest in the nation cigarette tax to help stem teenage smoking to help make sure we had the dollars necessary to function as a state government to make sure that people who were criminals didn't keep coming into south carolina, buying cigarettes and smuggling them out on the black market. but i don't think we can afford to raise taxes on south carolinians in general this year. ic it would be a big mistake and i won't support it. >> what we need to do is understand if we reform medicaid, every state averages 10% abuse in the system. we need to tackle that.
we've got to look at education and understand it's all about dollars going to the teachers, students, technology in the classroom. there's a lot of overhead waste. we're spending $11,000 a year to eath child in this state. 85 school -- it's going through 85 school districts before it gets to a child in the classroom. we have to streamline what we're doing and how we're doing it. in terms of the grocery stacks, i troted -- voted for the elimination of grocery tax, my opponent voted for it. i wasn't just talking about raising taxes on cigarettes, he'll -- ehe voted to raise taxes on a lot of things. i will make sure when we come out of this. >> sometimes you tell the character of a person by the little things they say. one of the weirdest things about this campaign is representative haley insists on saying things that aren't
threw. employees in the department of education. she can't say 1,000, there's 883 and about-of them are bus mechanics. it's important that we talk the truth when we're having these debates otherwise we're never going to move this state forward in any kind of rational way. we've got to be honest about this debate. >> thrrn 1,179 employees in the department of education, yes, many of them are school bus mechanics, which is why i think we need to privatize the school bus system. >> i asked the department of education how many employees there were because it gets old hearing people say things that aren't true. this is what, as of september 1, o2010, they had 883 employees. that's the truth. >> i looked at the budget. the budget is for 1,179. that's what we're paying for. >> uhdowns -- you understand they're authorized to have 1,179 but don't because they had to cut back on the number of people there. >> whether it's 1,000 or 883, it's too many. >> you tell me which ones --
you know, my platform is to push the dollar into the classroom. i want you to talk specifics and tell me which positions we need to let go. i can't tell whether or not we should unless you tell me what they do. >> i want to privatize school buses. >> we'll still pay for them. >> 16 to 17-year-old school buses, we could have three to four-year-old school buses. yone privatize the school bus system, they hire the people and we don't have to have the maintenance people or maintain the school buses so it's more effective you don't believe in more dollars going to the classroom, in the budget this past year you voted against moving the percentage from 65% going to the classroom as opposed to 55% now you voted against 65% of the dollars. >> i munsing is that 70% of the dollars go to the classroom but you don't -- >> the amendment you voted >> you want the teachers to cook and teachers to -- >> you didn't answer the
question senator. >> next question. jackie, representative haley. >> as long as we're talking about schools, representative haley, in the past you've proposed doing away with college and university boards, eliminating college campuses and ending university-tied economic development. how, specifically is that going to preserve existing jobs and create new ones? >> i've had the opportunity to talk to a lot of presidents and school boards around the state. just say if we got this issue of funding, how do we fix it? the way i think we need to do is acknowledge, where is the problem coming from and where do we go with the solution? we fund colleges based on football tickets and lobbyists in the state house. that's not the way to fund education. when we fund a school, send them the money, don't tell them how to spend it. francis marion is not like
clemson. at the end of the year, go to measurables. what's the dollars in the classroom, in-state versus out of state. what did you co-for economic development? at that time, take those measurables to the legislature and say that's how you fund a college. those colleges that did great, brag about them and give them more money. those that didn't, just got challenged and incentivized to do better. it's better for the taxpayer, puts more control in the hands of the college and allows students and families to feel better about the situation. >> i think the question was, do you support abolishing the boards of trustees, it would be nice to hear representative haley's answer. i think we need a board on higher education but i don't think we need to abolish boards of trustees. i think there's arn pont -- important role for boards of trustees to play. we have invested in education and the result is a doubling and tripling of tuition.
the next governor has to make a commitment that over the long-term, when the budget recovers we will commit a higher percentage of the state fwouget higher education to stabilize tuition and make sure our students our children, our young people, our young adults have the best opportunities to succeed and to grow this economy. in the meantime, the colleges an universities are going to have to tighten their belts. we can't have tuition going up and up. >> next question, rusty ray to senator sheheen. >> you support the new insurance program by the president's health care reform including the part that requires states to pay an extra $20 million. how would you propose that the state pay for this extra millions of dollars of coverage? >> i don't support unfunded mandates on state government. i don't support mandates on individuals. i don't support any increased burden placed on small businesses. if there are increased burdens on state government, then the federal government ought to pay
for it or it ought not be in place. i will advocate sthrongly. there is a difference between myself and my opponent. i believe it's important that young children who are born with pre-existing conditions are covered by health insurance. i think that's a good thing. i think that's a good thing. i'll tell you a quick story. i have a nephew named david, his mother, my sister margaret, is here today. he was born with a heart margaret and her husband were lucky enough to have an insurance policy that allows pre-existing conditions. there are thousands of kids out there who aren't. and i believe in my christian faith that what we do to the least of these we do for him. i couldn't look margaret in the face, couldn't look my family in the face, couldn't go to church on sunday morning if i didn't support provisions that allow children with pre-existing conditions to be covered under insurance or provisions that say to a woman who has breast cancer that her costs are very high that she's going to be kicked off her
insurance policy. to representative haley, this is a political game and political football. there are things i done like an i have said that several times. as governor, i'll stand up against it. covering pre-existing conditions for children born with heart defects like little david, or there are good things like women with breast cancer who won't get kicked off their policy we ought to try to make those things work. >> ms. hay leah? >> you can't split the cow. the people didn't have the opportunity to say, we like this part of the health care mandate, but not this one. it is coming down. it's going to cost the people of south carolina $1 billion. anyone who doesn't participate, it will cost you $700 or 2.5% of your income, whichever is greater. i not only will fight this health care mandate, i'll get a coalition of governors that say we do not support this. instead, let us incentivize our small businesses to prvide health care. let us reform medicaid.
and what we need from the federal government is to allow insurance companies across state lines so we can get affordable, efficient health care. obama care is not something you can support. you can't say you like parts of it and not other parts. we're stuck with the whole cow. >> to have a governor with the intelligence and to the say when things are good and when things are bad, i'm willing to stand up against mandates and i will. >> our next question comes from the student president here here, she's from columbia. your representative -- question is for representative hey lee. >> first and foremost on behalf of the student body, i thank you both for being here it's an honor and privilege to have you here. as a young south carolinian pursuing a college education, i
have a part time job and when i graduate i will have student loans to repay. i understand how important a bachelor's degree is to my future and i'm dedicated to my education. what i'd like to know is what specifically, two or three things, you plan to do that will benefit young south carolinians like myself? >> first of all, thank you for we are very proud of you and what you are accomplishing. the first thing we have to do is, we've got to understand we have a lot of graduates not finding jobs. that's why it's so important we cre re-crute good companies to this state. we don't need a boeing every 20 years, we need them more often. skid the executives a few weeks ago, how many of your contracts that you have are going to south carolina businesss? they said 91%. that's our small businesses getting 91% of those contracts. that's jobs for you. that's things i know we can take care of. my goal is to make sure we are a business friendly climate.
we have a good tax structure. we have worker's comp reform and tort reform. i'll make sure we get the companies we need to to match you up. the sec thing, make sure -- the second thing, make sure we have good work force center for you. my goal is to keep you in south carolina. >> thank you, and thank you for your question. first of, -- first off, i'll tell you, please stay in southbound. we lose too many of our young people. we are losing too many of our young professionals to north carolina, georgia and tennessee. right now, we've been the butt for late night television jokes for years. i'll change that as governor. i'm committed to creating a division of entrepreneurship and small business within the department of commerce with the existing states we have.
other state have done this, it can reach out and help young people starting businesses, can help link you into financing opportunities, can be there to help you navigate the difficult bureaucracies of state and federal governments. i want to offer an opportunity to young entrepreneurs in south carolina because they are the future of this state. thank you. stay here. >> robert has the next question for representative hey lee. >> you mentioned boeing. the incentives the state gave boeing will bring thousands of jobs. you've been critical of the incentives. where do you stand on incentives, and if you're against those, what would you do? >> it's a -- i'm not against them, but you have to do a cost-benefit analysis. the reason boeing was great, not only are they here for the long-term, they are going to expand, we are talking with them about expanding. 91% of their contracts go to
south carolina businesses. that's something that needs to be negotiate theend front end. we need to make sure it's our small businesses benefiting from the corporations. we need to make sure we are bringing in good quality corporations that will stay here. we have to keep relations with them not just bringing them here but staying here and link them with technical colleges to get the work force they need. we don't want to bring in company it's a take away south carolina businesses. we've seen retail outlets come in. i will always support things that help our south carolina small businesses. >> i will aggressively use incentives to recruit business into south carolina. i want to make sure those incentives have bang for their buck and you measure that with jobs. we've been allowing other states to out-recruit south carolina. we used to be the model for recruitment in the southeast and now we're the best thing other states have going for
them. i'm going to change that. i was there to vote for the boeing incentive package because i thought it was the most important economic development vote we had. i was there, representative haley did not show up to vote that day. it will help all over the state, including the pee bee who will be out there as a top and other parts of the state. economic developer and i'm excited to be a governor recruiter for south carolina. >> next question is from jackie to senator sheheen. >> there have been calls for attorneys who serve in the state legislature, like msves lfuse from votes that have have direct impact on their paycheck. how can you reassure citizens that your actions as governor won't have a conflict of interest. >> once i'm governor, i won't be practicing law. right now, we have a part-time legislature, where we have our own occupations. i practice law, representative
hey lee is an accountant and worked for a government hospital in lexington county. there are times when there were issues that relate to the law -- well, every law we pass relates to the law. i recuse myself when i'm supposed to. i recused myself on voting for workman's compensation commissioners. it's important we have a citizen legislature and it's important to have a part-time legislateture. nikki has accused me of suing the state oftentimes but those cases she refers to are cases where my law firm was defending the state. i think i've been proud that members of my law firm have defended the state. i believe two of those clines are here, i didn't know them beforehand when their case was going on. these people, their land was taken by the government. they didn't hire me but they hired a member of my firm to defend them. they worked their whole life, their whole life to build a small business. and my understanding is that they hired my law firm and my law firm defended them when the
government came to take their land and made sure they got fair compensation that a jury decided. i'm proud of that. i'm not going to apologize for that. my -- i'd rather be a successful lawyer and have a successful lawyer as my next governor than an accountant who didn't pay her taxes. >> ms. haley. >> he's successful, all right. in the first two years of being in the senate he became the fifth highest paid attorney in workers comp cases. not only does he vote on the budget to give workers comp, not only does he work on subcommittees behind the scenes and then recuse himself in front he goes and asks for the jobs from the state, he works on the workers comp commission and that's whee the reason he sue ours taxpayers and represents our taxpayers at the same time. he's a very successful trial lawyer, he's made a lot of
money doing that. i will tell you what i do think needs to happen is lawyer legislatures should not be allowed to sit on committees with workers comp commissions. we need to have more business people than lawyers, we need to make sure we -- they don't have both their hands in both their pockets. he has made thousands of dollars being a lawyer. >> ms. haley, before she was elected to the legislature, didn't have a job. she got to work in her own county for a government hospital. she then got work as a consulting contract who has contracts with the government. it gets old hearing her preach to me when i've followed the law, recused myself voting on commissioners, where she had jobs when she was asked in the debate if she reported the question and misled them. you cannot work that way
anymore. >> senator, you have spent 80% of your advertising dollars attacking me and every director of the department of records, every ethics commissioner said i did nothing wrong. i did have a great job working for my family's business which they have had for 37 years. they are the heart of america, the reason i am running for governor. i dd work for a hospital as executive assistant director, i worked on their books, changed the way they did their bookkeeping. i never once was involved -- involved in state contracts at all. i think that once again i would ask you to stay on the issues. i think you have had a great time targeting me but all you've done is misinform the public and there's something very wrong with that. for someone that cares a lot about trust -- >> let's go through what you have -- i think it's important we do that. i think it's important we do that. >> let's go to the next question, we're going to run out of time. rusty ray, to representative
haley. >> representative, year after year, south carolina ranked near the top for the you were in of women killed by men in domestic violence situations. can you say which steps you would take, that you could take, as governor, to help reduce this number of these crimes? >> that's something very sad, it's not something we want to be involved in. i can tell you the attorney general has done a masterful job at trying to bring attention to this. we have to continue to have crnters to help these women get out of this situation. i have talked many times about bringing faith-based organizations together to take care of so many things in south carolina that need help, whether it's the poverty areas, after-school programs or tutoring, it's also going to help women in bad situations. we've got to give them the strength to know they're in a support group. domestic violence is something we need to take very seriously. we need to understand that as long as we have women out there suffering or men out there suffering, we cannot stop until
we make sure they have the support they need to get them out of their situation. strength and law enforcement can take the acts they need to to the and give the stiffest and harshest penalties to those people. >> i prosecuted cases against spousal batterers. i understand it first hahn. we need to continue to have stiff stiff penalties on domestic vibles and we need to break that single. -- cycle. it's a real cycle. that requires domestic violence counseling for batterers, and jail snrns repeat offenders. it includes jail sentences for violent offenders. we have to include for the low level offenses some inclusion is -- of education is critical. >> our next question comes from taylor eubanks, the student body president of coastal
university. he's a political science major. your question is for senator sheheen. >> i'd like to thank the candidates for being here. as a representative of coastal carolina university, i'm concerned with the future of higher education in this state. as governor, what are your plans to address the issues that revolve around colleges and universities in this state? >> thank you for your question. i thank you very much for being here today and i hope that you will remain in south carolina as well upon graduation. i have some specific elements i think would be followed in future. number one, over the next four years as our budget increases, as we see revenue growth, we have to commit a higher percentage of that to higher education. it is critical. over 10 years, we have seen that support steadily decline. also i think we need a more coherence system of higher education. it makes no sense to me that classes taken at one public college can't be transfered to another public college.
many can, but some can't. we need to streamline that. we need to empower a higher education commission that has the ability to do long 46 range planning, to put into place plans along with the colleges and university that will move us forward in a coherent, strategic manner instead of each college and university going its own way. i think we've seen excellent leadership from the president here and the president at coastal and president of major institutions around the state. i think we have to have leadership from the governor's office to tie it all together and work with the commission on higher education to move this state forward. thanks again for being here and again, stay in south carolina. thank you. >> ms. haley. >> the biggest thing we can do for colleges and universities in this state is deregulate them. not have columbia tell them how to spend their money. make sure they can do whatever they want to do to make it strong as we're going to have a business plan for higher ed. at the state level, each college and university has to have a business plan. that's why the pleasurables are so important.
giving them the money and then asking in-state and out of state students and what they those measurables will give stability. they know if they hit those achievements, they get more money. if they don't, they'll be punished and incentivized. the focus on higher ed will come from the -- when the trust of the tax payer is back in their hands. when they can show where the money is going, there will be trust again. >> robert kendall has the next question for senator sheheen. >> south carolina has a lot of problems from poverty to unemployment, high crime, what do you think is the biggest single problem facing our state and what would you do about it? >> i think the biggest single problem is the unemployment rate in south carolina. we historically had a fairly low unemployment rate. for about 25 years we were at
our below the national average with a slight aberration in that time. over the last seven years, we have seen an incredible spike in the unemployment. let me tell you why it's the most important issue. we won't have the funds to fund public education. we won't have the funds to do the necessary core functions of state government. and we will have people successful in their private -- we won't have people successful in their private lives unless we have jobs. my commitment is that the next governor, me, will spend his time recruiting jobs and industry into south carolina. when i look at all the many problems we have, and we have many, we have poverty higher than the national average, we have tuition costs for higher education that is higher than the southeastern arch, the highest in the southeast. we have many issues relating to crime. we many issues in south carolina. there's one thing i've learned over the last year and a half as i've traveled from the low country to the upstate, the one thing i've learned is that people in this state still believe we can do it.
if we believe we condition do it, and we have a leader with the vision who can bring us together we can do it. i'm going to be that type of governor. we can do it again, ladies and gentlemen. we can do it again. >> robert, i talked to a company and they said that they interviewed 100 people and of the 100 people they interviewed, half of them could not read or write properly. of the half left, half of them failed drug tests. we have a cultural problem in south carolina that we have to acknowledge. the way we will do that is, we're always going to work on economic development bringing jobs, but we've got to work on what are the cultural issues we have in the state and that's why you will see me bring in a huge faith-based coalition. we will have a statewide community plan on how we'll go into these poverty stricken areas and we'll go in there and do tutoring programs, preschool programs, mentoring programs and job shadowing programs. this is about making sure people see something they don't see right now. this is when someone is
unemployed and going for a hard time, after the community ready to help them. when a child is there and they see something that's not successful, with eff a mentor to show them what they can be. it will be through the faith-based organization we will do that to tack they will cultural problems we have in the state. >> jackie, next question to representative haley. >> yes. the state ethics commission said you didn't have to disclose $42,500 contract you got for consulting work and you didn't at first. how do you reconcile this with calling for legislators. >> i noticed there are a -- there were a lot of voice votes. then i realized there was a lot of wasteful spending and legislators weren't putting their names on their votes. the same thing happened with income disclosures. every year i sat down with an
ethics attorney, which of this do i need to disclose. i always disclosed what was appropriate. but when i saw how much every ledge slayor -- legislator had to do that, i saw it was not right. i said they should have to disclose, not the dollar amount but at least the sources of income. one, legislators would know whether to recuse themselves from votes they shouldn't be taken and two, south carolina policy would move in a way to help the people and businesses of this state. i will tell you while i went ahead and disclosed income i didn't have to disclose, senator sheheen has yet to disclose his clients. he said he doesn't have to do to do that but in congress every lawyer discloses their clients. it's a good way of seeing exactly what those resources are. so what you saw me do was, i saw wrong and made it right, very much like i saw voice votes were causing a problem in the state and i pushed and now
we have recorded votes on the record. >> mr. sheheen. >> most troubling is that ms. haley was asked, have you disclosed all your income? i heard you might have done some work for wilbur smith. he she -- she said, i disclosed it all. she looked in the camera and said that. it wasn't true. five days later,en the day of the election, she release shed herbed money from wilbur smith. i released 10 years of my tax returns. representative ailey has not given a copy to anybody. she let the media come in and look at them and take notes. i cannot disclose all the clients niff south carolina because i i'd get disbarred. representative hay lye knows that as well. what is public record is any dollars that she talked about tonight, that in any way involve state government, i think it's important we do what we say. >> thank you, mr. sheheen.
rusty, next question to senator sheheen. >> we're going to talk about crime one more time. each year statistics show florence and sumter have some of the highsest per capita violent crime rates in the nation. what could you do as governor to help fight crime in smaller cities and communities in south carolina and perhaps raise community awareness about prevention of those crimes? >> i was a prosecutor in one of those small cities, in camden, south carolina, and i can tell you, we have to beef up the police force. right now, we are operating our highway patrol on numbers that were there a decade ago. we have a difficult budget crunch but we have to commit to at least maintaining law enforcement this year and growing the number of officers in the long-term. we need to look at other alternative sentencing programs for nonviolent offenders. it costs you and i and the taxpayers of south carolina an incredible amount of money to
lock up to a nonviolent offenders. i want to make sure if we have someone who is addicted to drugs and hasn't committed any violent offenses we have alternatives that can help them beat their problems, punish them and save the taxpayers dollars. venal christmases have to be put away. and the sentences should be tough. we need more law enforcement out there. i've worked closely with law enforcement and will continue to do so. >> ms. haley? >> i always said government was intended to secure the rights and freedoms of the people. we need to give our sheriffs and law enforcement everything they need. that is a priority in south carolina that is a part of the budget we can't cut. we shouldn't cut. we shouldn't see it drop. we've got to strengthen it and give them what they need. this is about safety, about them being able to do their job and being able to strengthen them. i will maintain a strong relationship with our sheriff's department. strong relationship with our
law enforcement team and fire departments and all those to make sure the safety is in place and that's one thing we never compromise on. >> time for the final voice of the voter question, kevin benton asks, with republicans letting the economy slide down in the ditch and democrats driving it further down, why should we trust either of them? both make promises, neither have deliver. representative haley what do you say to voters like kevin who lost faith in the government? >> i think kevin is right, both parties have let them down. i think the republicans made mistakes and the democrats made mistakes. through that the burst of the tea party came. the tea parties aren't a party at all. they're republicans, democrats an independents who said they have had enough. i think that's an amazing thing. what i love to see is that as we go across the state, as you look across the country, i have never seen people more spirited about their government and elected officials so scared. it's a beautiful thing. it needs to stay that way. that is the way we make sure
it's accountable to the people. that's what my movement has been about. making sure elected officials are accountable to the people they serve. making sure government knows the value of the dollar. making sure jobs and the economy come first. i think it's something we owe to kevin and the people of the state and country andic it's why we're seeing the excitement and spirit come alive from the people as they find the power of the voice. >> mr. sheheen, why do you think people have lost faith in government? >> i agree with what kvetch said. i don't want anybody to vote for me because i'm a democrat, and i don't want anybody to vote for ms. haley because she's a republican. at the end of the day, we have to vote for people because they are good leaders. why are we disillusioned in south carolina? we had a treasurer that went to jail for drug dealing, an agricultural secretary who went to jail for bribery. who wouldn't be disillusioned,
who wouldn't be disappointed? i grew up in a small community, i've traveled around south carolina over the last year and these people who have been running south carolina are not the people i know in south carolina. i will be a leader we can trust in this state again. i am tired of being the butt of late night television jokes. i know you are too. south carolina deserves so much better than we have had from our leadership over these last few years. my goal is to restore integrity and trust in the leaders of south carolina and kevin hit the nail on the head. i'm pretty sure we had one minute to answer that question? >> one minute and 30 seconds. >> i didn't interrupt you, i'd appreciate you not interrupting me. >> time for the closing statement. we start with representative haley. >> first of all, i want to thank you for having me here today. it is hard to believe it's been
18 months and it's hard to believe we're down to a week. but there's a real decision to be made. you know, as we came through the primary, i went across the state and said, if you think government should be dollar, if you think elected officials need to remember who it is they work for and if you think jobs and the economy should come first, join our movement. i always said if you join our movement, don't ever make it about a person, don't make it about an election. make it about what we're going to do in january. you have a clear choice coming up in january. this is about what our state and country is going to do going forward. this is about saying no to obama care, more to -- no to mandatory health care we can't sustain and saying yes to a governor that will fight every step of the way to the supreme court. this is about saying no to stimulus packages and bailouts we don't need and a governor who says yes to the fact that we will bring fiscal displain back to the state house and make sure we never take federal taxes that raise the debt. this is about saying no to
lawyer-legislators what sue businesses for a living and yes to an accountant and business person who understands the struggles every business goes through every single day and will work hard to strengthen their bottom line. this is about saying no to the status quo and saying yes to real people who know what it's like to have -- to say that the people deserve to have the pow over their voice again. this is an exciting time in our state and country. we are going through tough times. but i will make sure we have a 10-year business plan. we will look and see what south carolina wants to be when it grows up. we will have a state that's proud. my goal is that everybody look back at south carolina and say that's how you do it. please join our movement and i ask for your vote today. >> snoort sheheen, you have two minutes. >> it's been an honor to be with you, upping their -- i thank you for hosting this debate and i thank the voters of south carolina for listening. i ask for your support and vote
next tuesday. i'm not looking for a movement. i'm finally looking for a governor. we need one again in south carolina. i want to be that governor for you, a governor that you can trust. this is about having government that we can trust again. i've been honest with the state be as your governor. we're at a crossroads and the question is, will we can't to do what we've done for the last eight year the eight years of mark sanford and nikki haley? we done need a governor who doesn't pay her taxes on time. we don't need a governor who will say something that's completely not true. we need a governor who will -- who will once again make us proud. it's written in the book of proverbs that without a vision, the people perish. i believe that's what's happened in south carolina and my vision is of a governor who once again will travel this nation to recruit jobs and industry into south carolina. it is of a governor who is
proud to be a public school graduate who wants to make sure we focus on the classroom and make sure our teachers are paid at least as good as surrounding states and we have discipline in our classrooms an smaller class sizes. we have to take basic steps to get government working again. we have to make sure we consolidate state agencies because we can't afford the government south carolina had four years ago. at the end of the day, four years from now, you will look at me and i will make you proud. i will always tell you the truth. thank you, good night, and god bless you all. [applause] >> a quick question for each of you. do you like each other? >> yes. >> i used to. [applause]
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> it has been a contentious race, certainly, but we only have one more week to go. senator vince event sheheen from camden, representative nikki haley, thank you for being with us. we also thank the students from francis marion university and coastal carolina university, we thank our viewers and readers an subscribers for submitting questions for tonight's debate. we also want to give a big round of applause to dr. fred carter here at francis marion, he has done a terrific job. [applause] let's not leave out the president of coastal airline
university, dr. david divicenza. both universities and both university presidents have been instrumental in putting on this series of debates in the primary and during the general election. finally to our viewers we say this. you've heard from the candidates, heard a lot from the gubernatorial candidates, now it's time to have your voice heard. exercise your right and vote in next tuesday's election. for francis marion university in florence, south carolina, have a great night and please vote on tuesday. [applause] >> just one week remains until the 2010 elections.
the indiana debate commission hosted this debate. >> the final of three indiana debates. >> welcome to the performing arts center. welcome to the indiana debate commission's third of three debates for the u.s. senate. i am your moderator. this is the indiana debate. voters will ask the questions and indiana's hoosiers will watch on tv, listen on ready -- radio, and tune in on the web as they listen to the candidates and get ready to cast their ballots one week from tomorrow. c-span will be rebroadcast in
this debate tomorrow night at 8:00 eastern time. the candidates drew lots for their lectern position. immediately next to me is republican dan coats, in the middle is a democrat brad ellsworth, and a libertarian candidate. they have agreed to the rules for tonight's debate. the candidates will have one minute and 30 seconds to answer most of the questions. in announced that one answer will have to vary to accommodate a general final question. as moderator, in cut off a candidate who exceeds the time limit. and they call for additional time to fully answer a question. the questions come from hoosier voters. the candidates know that they can use only small nuts and no
-- a small notes and and no props. prior to the broadcast, the audience was apprised of the house rules. the candidates have 30 seconds to introduce themselves and that starts with mr. cuts. . >> is an honor to be here this evening and have the opportunity to debate and discuss the issues important for the future of america and our state of indiana. i passionately believe that the leadership of our country and the president obama, nancy pelosi, supported by my opponent are leading american in the wrong direction. i will fight to get america back to work, hoosiers back to work, back on the right economic track. change can only come if we make a change. you have to pick a different direction. >> now mr. ellsworth.
>> it is great to be back in not scammony. it has been and -- knox county. i hear, and things. we need to get america back to work. work for us. keep honest. do not fall prey to a special interest. that is what i intend to do when you elect me senator. >> miss sink-burris. >> i want to thank you for watching these three debates. it has been a real pleasure. it highlights why i am libertarian rather than republican democrat. i want to stop the tennis match in washington. every campaign season we have candidates promising to end the partisan bickering, but it never stops. if a libertarian is elected to the senate, i'll not belong to
big business interest or the white house but to you, the american people. >> now we will ask the question of our candidates. >> with the passage of health- care reform, insurance premiums are expected to rise by 8.8% in 2011. what exactly would you do is a member of the u.s. senate to help hoosiers cope with the rising cost of health care? >> mr. coates. >> i would vote to repeal this massive 2000-page bureaucratic overtake of medicine by our government at a cost about one trillion dollars. there issues that need to be dealt with and we can do that with less than two dozen pages. we could do that without
breaking the bank and without putting government between the patient and his doctor or her doctor. this tax care bill was not supported by hoosiers or the american people. they do not want a one size fits all health care. held savings accounts, serving 50,000 low-income hoosiers. it significantly reduces costs. this takes that away from our state. there are a number of provisions that will add so much bureaucracy. companies are still trying to figure out how best to deal with it. mcdonald's has come full with the plan, a number of aerospace companies and others. they now have to discard those plans because it will not fit under this massive bill in washington.
we need to do sensible cost saving things with health care. but this bill was opposed by a large majority of hoosiers. i think we ought to start over. to get let's move on to brad ellsworth. >> when the health-care debate started, i have hundreds if not thousands of individuals on the phone and in person about health care. when i ran for congress four years ago, i talked to doctors and nurses and hospitals say you have to pass health care in this country. i am glad that we took it on. hear some of the things it is going to do. no one can turn people down for pre-existing conditions. closing the doughnut hole -- seniors came man and said clothes that hole. the whole idea behind this was to bring down the cost of health
care in this country. the bill was paid for. we had to find different ways to pay for that. the congressional budget office estimates it will actually reduce the cost of health care by $1 trillion. i am proud that this bill was taken on. it is not perfect. but to repeal the bill would not make sense at this particular time. we get to it or delete from it. it would not make sense to repeal it and start over. >> miss sink-burris. >> it is a real concern for everyone in indiana and the country. the main problem that we have with held car -- health care is how expensive it is. it is risen much higher and faster than inflation. this health care bill does nothing to address the costs. it is not one to save anyone any money. it is going to mean more money out of your pocket and out of
your employer's pocket, and it will mean that employers cannot absolutely offer health care insurance to their employees. i know someone in indianapolis wanting to expand his pizza franchises, and he would be playing employees more in health. then he would be paying them in salary. a business cannot do that and survive. ways been talking for about making health care less expensive. let the free market operate and control costs that way. we have not had a free market in health care in a long time. many of the issue -- many in new in this ruse -- one surgery is not covered by insurance.
and how the quality of that operation has gone up. >> sorry to cut you off. our next question there is to research singer richie is theresa singer. she has an education question. >> the notes child left behind policy has forced educational institutions to take costly measures to meet the needs of the first to the populations. however, in doing so, a vast majority of the student body has been pushed through the education system with very weak reading comprehension and less than adequate writing skills. with the cuts in education been proposed, how would schools meet the needs of their diverse population such as special education and english as a
second language, as well as the general population that is lagging behind the rest of the world in fundamental knowledge and skills? >> mr. ellsworth takes the first shot at the question. >> our daughter is the third year educators here in indiana. we've seen the struggles of teachers in this country and the education systems. no child left behind is a great concept and phrase. but you have to fully fund it and allow it to happen. we should leave no doubt the hon. we cannot have teachers working miracles. doing one test on one particular day and learned this way, some are visual, and sunday their hands on stuff.
you have to empower teachers to teach in different ways. i'm talking teachers across our great district. they bring the students and with special needs and they are taking the toss -- test. we have to look it different ways that kids learn. charter schools, we have to fully fund our education system and not punish our teachers. >> rebecca sink-burris. >> i am a former teacher and i have been in the public system and the private school area. as a libertarian, we envision an educational system that leaves no child behind. it allows every child to have a quality education that they deserve. you do not get that from an education monopoly.
that monopoly is more concerned with employee in adults than it is with teaching children. the federal program, no child left behind, is one of many failed federal programs. education belongs at the local level, not the federal level. not a single program the federal government ever put into place has improved our education, and is used dollars from taxpayers. the solution to this is adding more choice to education and empowering parents so that they can choose where to send their children to school, whether that is private or public. the funds should follow the child. by bringing in competition, you're going to get innovation like you have never seen before. you were going to get a variety of type educational settings and more availability of specialized
teaching. this might meet a child better than the one size fits all that is happening right now. i encourage you to take a look at libertarian ideas. >> let's move on to dan coats now. >> this should not be a decision made in washington, d.c. the department of education spends an extraordinary amount of money. as ms. sink-burris said, the one-size-fits-all does not apply. what is right for new york or los angeles or miami or chicago is not necessarily right in evansville or indianapolis. that is why at the state and local level, that is where the change needs to be made. more money into washington does not improve education.
charter schools, alternative schools, i think that is good for the public system. it's good for our economic system to have competition. parents are frustrated that the state-run public school system depends upon federal guidelines and their children and not getting the education that they need. some predict for some, it is the only way to get out. but it has failed them. we need choices, we need to get parents more involved, and the last thing we need is more money into washington with more programs out of the department of education. >> our next questioner is from the area here. >> i like to know where you stand on amnesty for illegal immigrants. >> rebecca sink-burris.
>> when a libertarian looks at a problem, we try to work out what we have done. if we find that we have done things that contributed to the problem, we want to remove those things first before adding another layer to answer the problem. but we have done in immigration has been to close the door to illegal immigration for both high skilled and low-skilled workers. we have made it so that people have been forced to practice -- -- forced to cross that border illegally. what we really need to do to solve the undocumented worker crisis is to open the door to legal immigration. make it orderly said that we know who is coming into our country. work visas, temporary, and those who come in here illegally need to register. i don't think i would give those
people citizenship because they did come here illegally. but a lot of them have been 5-10 years and have been contributing to our society. i do not think that they should be deported. they need to be in part of that tax system. i talk about their tax at the last debate. it spreads the tax over everyone, legal, illegal, underground economy, no matter what you pay it is a fairtax. >> i do not support amnesty. i do not think we have secured the border like the government promised. the government did not live up to its responsibility. and the welfare system, the education system, and others have been overwhelmed. if that were happening in indiana, we too would want to take action when the federal government did not.
in arizona, you are right, we have not done what needs to be done to get it done. their laws are more than reasonable. my mother came here when the ship pulled into ellis island. her father had come to years earlier. she said that we are americans now. i do not want to hear another word of swedish. you're going to learn english and you can live the american dream. that is illegal immigration. illegal under -- illegal immigration undermines that. >> this is something that the federal car man should have done a long time ago. if they had better laws on the books, we would not be in this
situation. we did not secure the border. the desert creates its own fenced sometimes. we think of this is a national security problem. we have to let employers know that if they hire people illegally, we're going to punish them also. that is extremely important, holding them some -- responsible. mr. coase just said that he was against amnesty and yet he voted to give amnesty when he was in congress before. it was part of a bigger bill but one of his republican colleagues in the congress filed an amendment to take the amnesty portion out, and he voted against that. again, he voted for amnesty and when he had the chance to take that amendment out, he voted against that too.
>> the next is an accountant. she could not make it here so i will ask the question. recently released data suggest on capping social security earnings would solve the funding problem. do you support the wealthy continuing to pay social security tax of of the $106,000 cut off. >> social security needs to be saved from itself. the system is paying out more money than is coming in. there needs to be an adjustment to the long-term structural way that social security is set up. i think we can do that by increasing the age of retirement gradually, maybe 67.5 in a couple of months. the important thing is not to turn this into a political got
cha, have a discussion on a bipartisan basis to address this particular problem. one provision is on the benefits that go to the wealthy, if warren buffett does not want to pay social security, i think we should honor that. there should be an area where people can adjust to that and perhaps have an opportunity, given their income situation, where they do not have to take social security. but the real problem is for the people on the system. we have to address that. when i ran for congress, there was a vote -- there was an amnesty portion, but that was 26 years ago. i have had 12 or 15 votes that oppose that now.
>> but you did take the vote -- when the amendment was there to take amnesty out, you voted against that. going back to his thing, we need to put america back to work. create an atmosphere that creates jobs and our country. i am opposed to raising the age. that might be fine for someone who is keyboarding or pushing a pan, not someone on the end of a jackhammer. mr. coase has endorsed a plan to privatize social security. i am totally against that. at the last debate, he said we need to work together in a bipartisan manner. but this would stop that. that is not what the people of indiana won.
we should work together to work on this in a bipartisan manner for all of these problems facing our country. that is what we should do. now's the time to raise taxes. >> ms. sink-burris. >> it is important to save social security which needs changing. it is insolvent. we should not hurt those who are already depended on social security and those who are near retirement age. unfortunately, according to the supreme court, you may have paid money into social security your whole life. that does not mean that you have a right to that money coming back to you. the government can change what he gives out to you at any time. i would like a more secure system for our elders and for those working now and who expect to retire in the future.
one plan i like is using your payroll taxes that you pay and your employer pays to have that going into an account that the worker would fund, so that you could not -- they could not take it away from you on a whim. the other half coming the other 6.2% would continue to pay benefits for current retirees and disabilities, etc. the social security administration has says it has plans to keep the system solvent in the long run. they would not raise taxes or raise the age of benefits. >> our next questioner is an analyst. >> the u.s. worker cannot compete with cheap labor.
how you plan to curtail freetail fta, which such as naphth continued to take jobs out of this country to places like mexico? >> probably the number-one issue in campaign is putting in keeping america back to work. it is clearly the atmosphere that allows for private at best -- private jobs in this country. we need to create things and make things and a country that sells things. that includes trade agreements. nafta, 50,000 jobs in our loans are directly related to this. multiplied that across the country. you want to repatriate ties jobs, but when dan coats ship
jobs overseas, he was a lobbyist for that company. we had -- that creates another dip -- another government program. they are eligible for the employee assistance program. >> almost every time that government make something, you can bet the result is going to be opposite of the name. a free-trade agreement ends up being a trade for favored company's agreement. if we had true free trade, the world bank has figured that each person -- each citizen in this country would benefit by almost $8,000. from lower prices on items. to make jobs in this country, we need to change the tax system.
i mention the fairtax earlier. if you have not looked at the fairtax, look at our website their tax -- fairtax.org. when companies overseas are asked if united states changes that system, what they would do, they said that they would really cade and start building facilities here in this country. -- it would relocate and start building facilities here in this country. we need to get back to work by changing the way we tax and the complicated system that we have now. we have to stop the spending right now. and we have to lower our taxes on business. we're the second highest on business taxes in the world. that sends labor and capital away from this country. we need to lower that down to 15% to be competitive with the world market.
american workers can be competitive. >> the worst thing that this country can do would be to enter into a trade war. that happened after the great depression. our economy was flat for over a decade. we ought to open trade barriers. we have urged the democratic congress to move forward on opening trade. one in five hoosier jobs are due to exports. if we throw up trade barriers, that will not happen. it is so important to employment in this part of the state. to adopt a policy where we on not allowing businesses to compete worldwide in a global
system, because our taxes are so high, because regulation is so high, because of health-care mandates on businesses, miss sink-burris is again correct. we need to get money to repatriate money back here and get them on an even playing field with our competitors worldwide. even amnesty on taxes would bring companies back here and invested here with new jobs and new equipment and new hires. >> a software consultant near columbus, they do so much for making the trip down today. >> well experienced professional engineers and technicians and other professionals along with
recent graduates remain jobless, companies continue to import professionals for overseas under the visa program to fill technical positions, knowing that there are available qualified candidates here. the you think that this is a problem or is it an expected component of free trade? what policies would you support regarding this issue? >> miss sink-burris, you go first this time. >> by bringing jobs back to this country, we will produce more jobs within this country. we will have a boost for occupation in skills and every level. for every h1b visa that comes here and fills a job, that company could add five more jobs
to support that position. but we really need in this country are more jobs. that is why i'm so enthusiastic about their tax. every indication is that we would build our economy, almost doubled in the first 15 years of a fairtax, and that is a lot of jobs. we would be bonding more immigrants to come to this country. worker compensation will go up by 40% in the first 10 years. that is the kind of growth and prosperity that libertarians want for america. and it can happen. we just have to get behind it. >> mr. coates. >> how are we going to get americans back to work? we cannot do it by passing trillion dollar programs out of washington, stimulus programs that did not stimulate. the only thing it stimulated was
more debt and more government workers. the only entity in united's. >> at this is that is adding people. that tells us a lot. -- the only entity in the united states that is adding jobs. that tells us a lot. i talk to people all over the state, and they are saying, i do not know what is coming down next. we've got to get our economy moving again. that will put americans back to work. we can talk about small statistics, but how do we get this country back on track? the policies of this administration have not solve the problem. that is simply not the answer. my opponent has supported those policies 90% of the time. that is not the right direction.
we simply need to change direction. >> i think as that to staying in the same place. we need to reinvest and give our kids energized about the maps and sciences in this country. we've got a lot of talent and brainpower. we just have to bring the jobs. in other countries -- one person said that she had a good job, and it is unpatriotic and we are shipping jobs overseas. i am for it taking our products overseas and finding new customers. companies take advantages of a loss to ship our jobs overseas and that is plain wrong. one woman made an investment in some and advanced manufacturing equipment. she told me she had at -- she
cut me out a piece of aluminum and she -- i keep it on my desk. it's an investment in our kids. american workers working here on american soil, that is the answer. >> a quick word about our questioners. he cancelled travel plans after his question was selected to be here tonight. our next questioner is a student at the university of indianapolis. he watched the first debate. he is a political science major. i don't think he gets extra credit for being here tonight. >> elected to the senate, what measure would you propose to control the growing cost of college education to keep students from graduating with a lifetime of debt? >> we have programs in place
that provide loans for students and programs for students. -- pell grants for students. i think that we have to recognize as we look to develop the work force for the future, we have to make sure that our institutions adapt to the changes that take place in our economy, that we have the kind of variety of options available. some people -- many people want to get a quarter-year education , and others want a community college education. others might want to go into a vocation. those options and those varieties need to be available to us. and i go back to the facts if we try to solve all these problems out of washington, and this administration has spent $3
trillion of the last 20 months, and predicted another $3 trillion -- it's almost incomprehensible. it will affect our military the spending for education, and a whole number of areas. we cannot keep looking to washington to solve all our problems. i think our states have taken their interesting steps to develop educational alternatives in training at low cost for students without having to live on campus. >> i would end of moderators' privilege here. i would ask a question of mine. senator evan bayh opted not for re-election cites the climate in washington and the frustration created by all the gridlock and infighting. how would you propose to overcome this obstacle and accomplish our stated goal for indiana?
i will start with you, miss sink-burris. >> as a libertarian, i have the freedom to work with anyone i want to in the u.s. senate and the government. there'll be times when i would combine my views with those of the democrats. other times more closely aligned with the republicans. that way i can bring people together to solve some of our problems. one planned cuts military spending without hurting our troops. there are some other plans out there and different ways to include the issues that we've got. they had been worked on by a group of people, not all from one side. that's the kind of thing i would combine my efforts with.
i would have the freedom to do so. i would not being beholden to special interests. i am not beholden to pay them back with special favors and helping them with everything. that is me the freedom to represent the american people and help turn our country to the limited government tradition of our founding fathers. >> when i decided to run in this race, i fully expected that i would be competing with senator bayh. a well funded candidate, someone will none. -- well none. he supported a bomb was agenda 70% of the time. i was concerned that that was
not the duration indiana wanted to go. i was surprised when he announced his retirement and i am running against a different candidate. he has voted for the obama agenda of 90% of the time. but there's a very clear choice for people i want to go and a completely different direction. let me just say that as a conservative, someone who is putting our children and grandchildren in great jeopardy for the future, totally on the wrong track. i would welcome democrats that would admit that the last two years have been a disaster. if they want to work together and try to stop the spending and this big government, social
welfare state, we would welcome bipartisanship on that basis. >> you as the most important question in this debate. when someone called the dispatch center, and he did not as if someone was a democrat republican, and i made that same pledge. that is why you did not say me saying these republicans are these democrats. i don't think anyone has a corner on the market of good ideas. you don't hear me making speeches about how bad the republicans are. when i got the congress, i joined a caucus with 25 republicans and democrats. there is not a member of the senate that i will not work with on the republican side to try to move the agenda forward. regarding that 90% vote, anyone
who tracks are votes know that this is the same old tired political thing. i could come back and say, mr. cuts, you voted with nancy pelosi 60% of the time. 54%. that should never happen. the record shows that. we have to get away from saying that these are all bad and these are all good. >> i did i get the other two candidates to answer your question. >> elected to the senate, what measures would you propose to absorber the absorbent costs -- the eight sorbent cost of college education. >> i would love to see it brought in. mr. coats and i presume this. not everyone is going to go to
harvard or yale. itve got technical schools, got middle-of-the-road schools. we've got master's programs. driving down the cost, what is the way that we can use the best use of dollars to bring down the cost for you? having jobs on the other end is the best way. when you come out with some debt, it is going to be a job that you can repay debt. you can reduce the interest rates on pell grants and putting more money in there. more money would be available for you to come back and reduce the interest rates. these are private institutions that have to pay payroll and keep the lights on. but we do not want to saddle you with that. >> now your opportunity. >> many view in this opera
critique audience will remember -- many of you in this audience will remember that it used to take a kid working to a summer at a construction job to pay for an entire year of education. that is not possible anymore. partly because of government involvement. you were sent us student loan program and the prices of college went up and up because colleges did not have to compete on a price level anymore. they knew that a student could get a loan. programs were put in with the best of intentions, but there were unforeseen consequences. this happens to be one of them. our dollar is not worth what it used to be because our government has inflated the money supply. in the 1970's, when we went completely off the gold
standard, the worth of our dollar has continually dropped. it takes more dollars to pay for your college education. getting those things back in that ourhat there i -- dollar is worth something, so that students can afford a college education without going into a lifetime of debt. the important thing is to get the jobs going so that when people get out of college, they can become productive members of our society. >> our next question is from evansville. >> indiana has been number one in the entire country in preventable child abuse deaths. since federal tax dollars are used by the child welfare agency for the prevention of abuses, why doesn't the federal government clothes are in the an
agency -- hold the agency accountable? would you call for congressional hearings for indiana as well as child welfaretes' agency? >> the first answer is mr. brad ellsworth. >> i look back at my career protecting people no matter what the crime was or whether was against children. we prosecute them fully when that occurs. it is horrible when someone hurts a child. i'm very proud of my record of going after the bad guys seeking successful prosecutions of those. certainly, as in any federal program, of oversight, if we're sending federal taxpayer dollars into the program, it should have federal oversight. when it is not being in ministered, you approve that or you pull the program.
>> rebecca sink-burris. >> protecting those who cannot protect themselves is certainly within the purview of government. it is one of the duties of government. for us to be failing at that as we have in indiana is just not acceptable to many of us. part of the problem is we have allowed the government to go way beyond its core duties. that means it is not able to focus on those core duties and take of those in the way that it should. there's so many things that governments are involved and that should really be in the private sector or in civil society, that these dined -- that these kinds of things have happened. the federal program, of course there should be oversight. what i would prefer is that the
federal dollars come to the state of indiana in block grants so that the stated in the and i can decide how to use those monies -- so that the state of indiana to decide how they use those monies. it should be up to us to hold our state and local governments accountable to doing their core functions of protecting those, with the youngest or the very oldest, from abuses. i am not satisfied with the job the government has done in this. i demand better. >> when i served in the congress, i was the chairman of the committee with the problems that you name and others that came before us very frequently. one thing we learned is that congress is very good it passing programs, but not good at following up.
there were 336 programs at the time directed toward children, including abusive situations. we looked into those. which ones that did not work and why. we found out that there was tremendous overlap, one hand did not know what the other hand was doing, and there are a lot more than that now. the idea -- then we started looking at alternatives. what were the alternatives to help support in deal with problems? turn to our local communities, but also of the community and save haven institutions outside the government. i worked with big brothers big sisters, worked with an institution in indianapolis that reaches out for instance -- whether it is churches or
synagogues, community groups, volunteers, we need to get involved and get engaged with this. government cannot afford to do everything. and what the government pays for, often does not work. >> i'm going ask a question on the energy. how can you help indiana become energy independent? you have 45 seconds. >> energy like any other good or service is best provided by the free market. you get innovation, you get variety, you get a sensibility with a free-market. you do not get a program controlled by the government. i would encourage the coal industry to operate in a responsible manner, and make sure that we're not hurting our
environment. indiana as special conditions because of delay about land. we often have ozone problems in indianapolis. because of that, we have to be especially concerned with coal- burning plants. >> dan coats for 45 seconds. >> indiana relies primarily on calls for energy production. our rates are among the lowest in the country. it is a benefit to consumers. it is a benefit to our producers. the alcoa aluminum plant can effectively complete worldwide. it produces low cost energy to produce aluminum. that is true for our steel mills
and everyone in the manufacturing world. i am for using this resource. it helps make is more energy independent. >> i apologize. brad ellsworth. >> colas important to the state of indiana, no question about it. .e're 95% coal i can tell you one thing. i am a coal supporter. i voted against cap and trade. dan went to lobby for cap and trade legislation in washington. there was a billionaire they wanted to make money at of cap and trade and mr. coates lobbied for him. >> is it appropriate to ask for
personal charge like that that is not true? >> we're coming down to the end. can it did seem to be more loyal to their party. if elected, are you going to be more loyal to your party or to the people who put you in office? be honest. remember, we are watching. [laughter] so we go first to demand cuts. and you may answer however you like. but bear in mind, there is a better question on the table. >> if i'm elected to serve the people of indiana, i have one client -- the people of indiana. i know exactly what they won in washington. they want to cut spending. they do not want big government. they do not want to continue massive programs that put the future of our country into jeopardy. under represent those views. my position for lobbying have
been totally miss characterized by my opponent. our regret that. if you go to washington saying you're a conservative and you vote for $1 to find -- $1 trillion program, and you run our country deeper into debt, if you bail out the big banks, if you do not have anything else to come home and talk about except going after your opponent. this country has faced difficult decisions before. we have faced crises from the beginning of the time of our country. history -- americans have faced wars, bad economies, depressions, and each time the spirit of the american people has risen and addressed those successfully. we have a challenge in front of us today. we can succeed but we have to change direction to do it. i am confident the american people will come out and vote on
next tuesday. i would be glad to have your vote because i will fight for change. >> ellsworth. >> i think that answer did a couple of times. i do not -- that voted against my party on several issues. cap and trade, abortion is used, stem cell research, and i was one of the most independent voters on the democratic side of the house. it is all on the record. people foralking to -- mr. coates came back and talk to people for nine months. i never left indiana. mr. coats moved to virginia and bought a second home. he said he hoped to move down here. if you do not tell the good people of indiana, you can shake
your head all along. >> we had an aging parent. >> i will work with anybody to move the american agenda for. >> rebecca sink-burris. >> you elect a libertarian to the u.s. senate, the swing vote will not belong to large corporate interests or the white house, it will belong to you, the hoosiers and the american people. i know this is more difficult for the democrats of the republicans. but i have left that two-party system for reason. i will not give up principle for party. i will not badger an opponent because he comes from some other place.
i would rather wake up in the morning knowing that i have not wasted my vote on the lesser of two evils. as a libertarian, i can be an independent voice in the congress. i have not taken money from pac's, from big business and unions, from a trial lawyer associations. i am a free agent and i can represent you and the constitution. there is a mood in america to both the bums out. but we do not have new faces up here. we have old voices. it is time for change. i humbly ask for your vote on november 2. if you like to know more about my views, my website is selectrebecca.com. >> i think you for watching the u.s. senate debate sponsored by
the indiana debate commission. we also want to think our candidates, the staff, and our partners in media. and our hosts, vincennes university. also a special thanks to the voters who went of and beyond -- who went above and beyond. election day is tuesday, november 2nd. for more reformation, log on to the indian and debate commission's website. once again, thank you and good night. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] ♪
♪ >> the second personal panel for t.a.r.p. is preparing a report for release tomorrow. you can watch live coverage beginning at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. >> one of the great features of the c-span video library is the ability to clip and share programs with your friends. during the campaign season, that includes more than 100 debates
we have erred on c-span. watch a tutorial on how to clip and share on our website. clip and share with the c-span video library. >> c-span is local content vehicles are traveling the country, visiting congressional districts for a look at the most closely contested house races in this year's midterm elections. >> the issues that are important to me, i had a close family member loses business after being in business for six years. >> pontiac went down. we have nothing. >> i am concerned about employment, definitely. >> the auto industry has