Not just a criminal record, but an arrest record. It is easy to find just looking at the internet. One of the ways that congress is focusing, state lawmakers are focusing on having opportunities for people making mistakes is this ban the box campaign, where employers are not allowed to initially ask you about your arrest. If you committed a crime that is relevant to your work obviously if you have committed a Violent Crime or sex crime, we do not want you working around children if you have not been successfully rehabilitated, so there are common sense campaigns, but the idea is to give folks that have made mistakes a Second Chance. Host park storm tweets in the percentage of blacks is way out of proportion with the total percentage of blacks in the u. S. Population. Jim says i am not buying that white folks buying dope get a pass but black folks selling dope get life in prison. Larry is calling in from indiana. Mary, go ahead. Caller mr. Butler, lets start for a beginning. Suckers work for a levy. In the u. S. Justice system, i worked in illinois and i retired from a u. S. Penitentiary in 2003. They are not inmates. They call themselves convicts. You insult them when you call them an inmate. They want to be called convicts. They start at an early age whether it is dope were any other crime. The arrest record starts when they are 12 years old. By the time they get to the criminal Justice System they have a rap sheet of nine or 10 arrests before they get sent to the penitentiary. It is not the firsttime dope dealer that gets sent to the penitentiary. You are misleading the public when you say that on the program. They already have a cumulative arrest record before the judge comes down with a gavel and sends them to a penitentiary. Host larry, do you think the drug laws should be used back a little bit eased back a little bit . Caller eased back it depends. They do not send people that have been arrested for the first time to a u. S. Penitentiary. Someone is misleading the public. Host thank you. We got your point. Paul butler . Guest i do not think i said or anybody said that if you get a first possession offense you go to a federal prison, but it sounds like larry retired before we experienced in the 1980s and the 1990s this massive increase in the prison population, again based on these laws that went into effect in the early19 90s. Maybe he is not up to date with who actually is incarcerated now. Again, the reason why people like the Koch Brothers are on board with having to reduce our prison population is because the folks that are serving time now, again, some of them, about half are there for Violent Crimes in federal prison, and there is not a lot of debate about whether they should be there. That is an area that we need to investigate, but with nonviolent drug offenders, about 50 of folks in the federal system, i think, again, no one wants to coddle criminals. Everyone is in favor of public safety, but it turns out that too much incarceration is what we call criminal genic, which means when you reach this Tipping Point where to many people are locked up, that makes crime go up, not down. Again, the reason why 32 states have reduced their prison population at the same time that they have reduced their crime rates is not because they want to coddle criminals. It is because they understand that reducing incarceration is a way of being smart on crime. It is a way of making the streets safer for everybody. Host International Rates of incarceration imprisonment rate you can see the u. S. Leads with 716 followed by rwanda russia, and on down with some other countries including china at 121. Ted in flushing, new york. Independent line. Caller yes, good morning. I am really surprised that we are leading rwanda and other countries. Lets be honest with this the guy before it was saying that a 12yearold boy will be jailed and then jailed again. I am really shocked how come we allow a 12yearold kid to be locked up . I do not understand that. Now i see hope. The hope is there is bipartisan support. The educational the Justice System has to be reformed. It should be an educational system, where young people have a chance to be in a society. The United States is setting a bad example for the world. Were talking about Human Rights Violations in china, and china says you are the worst offenders, putting disproportionately black people in jail. Host thank you, sir. Paul butler . Guest i totally agree with the callers comments about the juvenile Justice System. That is an area we have to turn our attention to. We have people who are children that are treated like adults. We know, just in based on what we know about just based on what we know about psychology, science, brain development, that these are children that need rehabilitation, that need the kind of Mental Health services that they do not get in prison, but oftentimes now, again, children get locked up in some jurisdictions because we have been so punitive. We really do have to be especially concerned about how we treat children because that says something about where we are as a civilized society. Peter, i appreciate that you are putting up these charts with how the prison population has been going up and up and up, but it is important for folks to know that if you put up a chart about the crime rate, the crime rate has actually been going down and down. The rate of Violent Crime especially has dramatically increased since the 1970s, and that is good news for everybody. The fact that Violent Crime is going down all over the country number one suggest that Police Strategy might have something to do with it, but there are so many Different Police strategies in the 50 states that it is hard to say that things like stop and frisk, zerotolerance policies are responsible. Worldwide, interestingly enough, crime has been going down, not just in the states, but all over the world. Host this tweet can you guessed address the high crime rate in chicago . Guest yeah. I know that is a special concern for president obama because he spent a lot of time in chicago and he calls that home now. Me, too. Chicago is my home. When i look at what is going on there and the rates of Violent Crime first of all, we should say there is some lightly encouraging news. Violent crime in chicago has not increased at the same rate it has increased in most of the other parts of the country, but Violent Crime is going down there. The police are being smarter about the kinds of tactics that they use. I think they are still using stop and frisk, for example, way too much. In new york we hav that that does not really help communities feel invested in the Justice System. The way we catch the bad guys like murderous murderers and rapists, is not the way you see on tv, chasing them, but the way police solve serious homicides and rates is by talking to people rapes is by talking to people, getting them to tell them what happened, and the only way people are willing to talk to cops is if they feel the system is legitimate, that they are there to serve and protect them. One of the things Police Officers in chicago are doing is becoming more invested in their immunity. A lot of those issues are structural. I grew up in 6 community. I a lot of those issues are structural. I grew up in chicago. My mother sent me to Saint Ignatius prep. If i had gone to the Public School in the neighborhood that i grew up in in the south side of chicago, i do not know if i would be here talking to you today, peter, as a law professor. A lot of those folks who have the bad outcomes including some of those people who are committing Violent Crimes in chicago, they did not have the opportunities that i had and that president obama had. Again, when we think about things like getting young women and men to graduate from high school when we think about having them learn trades you do not have to be a lawyer. I have a lot more time in d. C. Finding a good electrician or a good plumber than i do a lawyer. If some of these folks who feel that they do not want to go to college if they could just learn a trade, if they have that opportunity, that is a way to invest in communities to reduce the kinds of violence weve seen in certain areas. Host paul butler is also the author of lets get free a hiphop history of justice. Donna, what is your experience . Caller i work in north carolina. I was one of the first women to work in an allmale institution set up initially as a research institution. Hey professor from northwest a professor from Northwestern University set this program appeared the inmates were up by there by choice. They had 30 days to stay with the program. They were required to go to school, take a job. They worked, had family day twice a year. The idea was they would have to keep their relationship. They wore their personal clothing, they had to watch wash their own. My spans is they lived up my experience is they lived up to what i expected of them, and they called me mama wagner, to give you an idea of my investigation to give you an idea. Most of them figured out they can wear their personal clothing, it was the best they were going to have it and they did very well. Our recidivism most of them came back only because they were drug addicts and alcoholics. Most of the inmates were there for gross stupidity. Very few were psychopaths or other things. Most of them just did not seem to think through what they were doing and i would suggest a Career Change because i was time them what to do and it fitted not like that they could think about more positive things. I think i should be reinstated, and administrated institution and there should be one in every region and every inmate should come through there for five years in order to prepare to return home. They have associate degrees in optics there. Shaw University Offers a degree in business there. Everything is there. They are not doing it now. They have ruined it, but they can reinstated. People like jesse helms and Rush Limbaugh did a lot of damage by trying to tell the bureau how to run institutions. It does not even have a gym in it. That is unacceptable. I had 365 days to dream up something to do and only had 40 hours a week to get it undone. I loved working for the bureau. It was a wonderful institution. We trained three regional directors, to directors of the bureau of prison. Call kathy hawk. Mike started off as an officer and retired as a warden. I think it is a fantastic opportunity for people to work with the bureau. I am very proud. Host that is donna in woodlief north carolina. Professor bollard. Guest donna, first of all congratulations on breaking the gas Glass Ceiling and im an advocate for having more women in Law Enforcement. When you look at the problems we see now in places like ferguson and staten island, women are more less likely to shoot and arman unarmed person than male tops. Sometimes i feel if we had a lot more women Law Enforcement officers we would not see the level of problems that we see now. Your story about giving these people who are locked up opportunities to, rather than sit around all day and watch tv, opportunities to get a ged get an associates degree, learn a trade, not just a story evidencebased. We know that works. You are absolutely right that a lot of the rhetoric that we hear from people from like Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives, that is not evidencebased. A lot of the get tough put them under the jail that does not work. That does not make communities safer because once again, these folks come home. 95 i keep saying that because it is so important to realize. All of these, 2. 5 Million People that are locked up now, more than 2 million one day will be back with us on the streets, in our neighborhood, and we want them to have the opportunity when they are incarcerated to learn, just like donna said, to learn a new trade. Host in 1985, 6 . 7 billion worth spent on corrections. 2013 26. 5. Caller this is not what i talked about but since you brought up i will address it quickly it is not necessarily that we need more women, because the kind of woman that would shoot unnecessarily is the same kind of man, it is not gender, it is a mental tap. It is not that we need more women, but more certain types of people. What i called about is the bulk of the problem is the sixmonth to threeyear sentences people are getting and that is primarily because of the flexibility fake hero judges and prosecutors are being given that they should not have are two examples i would like you to address. I do not believe it is rational anyone should be locked up for any on of time if they were not paying money to a court for supposedly the wellbeing of a child i have a false promise of Child Support. It will not give productive value to that childs life for that person to be sitting in a lockup. Some people are victim of paternity fraud. Victims of paternity fraud. Separate from that, i think legislators should be setting up a system so that if someone is locked up for something they should not be locked up for the police have no evidence, and the judges were consciously complacent, the system should be set up where they should have to go to jail and go to jeff for a certain amount of time where they are in correctional programs and not just sitting there in the joint doing time. I want you to address the first thing i brought up that you should not be sending people to jail for long periods of time because it is not want to pay money to a court, but they were paying for the wellbeing of their child. Host todd. Paul butler . Guest i am with you, todd. I think a lot of misdemeanors should probably not be dealt with through the criminal Justice System. There was a frightening article in the New York Times this week about public urination, and it turns out thousands of people in new york city get arrested for peeing in the street, if you excuse the expression, and that is a problem. A lot of folks agreed it is a public nuisance, people should not do that, and there needs to be some disincentive, but the problem is one folks get arrested for that, they, a lot of times, spent time in a holding cell and they have an arrest record, and people plead guilty because they get caught redhanded, and and up with his criminal record. When we think about the collateral consequences that come from having a criminal record, and especially having a conviction, are those equivalent to the problem of public urination . So, again, being creative about ways to deal with social problems other than by locking people up, and the example that you used about if a man is not making his Child Support payments, that is a problem. Again, we need people, obviously, to be responsible parents, but it does seem kind of counterproductive to put them in a ce for all cell for a period of time because obviously than they are not going to be a responsible parent the same way they would be if they were on the street, and clearly they are not going to make Child Support payments if they are locked up. Again, a great example of something that everyone would agree is a problem. Again, folks need to take care of their kids, but is locking them up the best way of addressing that problem . A lot of the criminal justice policies, i think a lot of your callers are keying in on. A lot of the policies are not evidencebased, factbased. A lot of the policy is driven by emotion. When i think about some of these deadbeat dads it makes me kind of mad, too. I know some children whose fathers need to be more involved in their lives financially, so i get the emotion, but again, when i think about how to fix the problem, i wanted to be evidencebased, i wanted to focus on something that works, and for lots of these misdemeanors, there are better ways of addressing the problems than locking folks up or even giving them criminal records. Host Edward Perkins tweets in not just about the disproportionate number of arrests, drugs to be legalized and regulate. Jamie in maryland. Caller hello, i want to address a couple of points and i will move through them quickly. First, hats off to the president , especially when it comes to compassion. To speak on subjects that, you know, to be so passionate about things that are not necessarily an issue of yours, i think that takes great strength. I like what he said when he said what he said about redemption. I think that was a key point. I wanted to also say that a lot of folks that find themselves in prison, when you look at the man, you have to understand the story to understand him. A lot of these folks are the kids of addicts and that kind of thing. If you are the child of an addict, you are exposed to things everybody else is not. Sometimes you found ways to take care of yourself because maybe that person, that parent was not there, and that kind of thing. So, you have a whole different expands altogether that other folks do not understand. Another thing i wanted to say host jamie, before you do, can you share your experience with the criminal Justice System . Caller yeah. I am 36 years old now, but when i was about 19 or 20 years old myself and another german got into an argument gentleman got into an argument. The argument escalated and we both acted in a way we should not have. Host what does that mean . What does that mean . Caller well, it came to a violent situation. Host guns fists . Caller we are talking guns. Host was somebody killed . Caller no, nobody was killed. Caller i was hit, but it was the fault of my own. Host how has that affected you . Did you end up going to prison or jail for a while . Caller i was one in a million that caught a fair break and the reason i say that is because what i did deserved punishment and it just so happened that i had a very good family and i was also in a decent position myself to hire a good lawyer. That lawyer cost me 20,000. I am 20 years old and i had to come up with 20,000 for a lawyer and i was able to make that happen, but a lot of people cannot do that. If i had a public defender or Something Like that, i would still be in jail right now. That was 15 years ago. The end result was the judge he was not really his reputation was not one of a lenient one. So i was definitely scared, but that judge gave me a huge break and the only reason he did was he saw i had no previous arrest record, had never been locked up for anything. He said i will take this as you made a mistake, but if you ever come in front of me again, i promise you i will make you pay for it. Host how has that arrest affected your life in your professional career . Caller i will get to it. When i was in high school i was able to obtain my cdo license. I was a truck driver. I really had a good job before that arrest happened. So, it has affected me because it has been difficult for me i wanted to be a pilot and because of the arrest record, even if i went to school to be a pilot, there would be nobody i would be able to fly four. Host are you driving a truck today, jamie . Jamie got cut off. Im sorry about that. Paul butler, and response to what jamie had to say . Guest yeah, so, it sounds like he got a Second Chance and he really benefited from that Second Chance and it is important to know that it sounds like he is a very responsible contributing member of society and he was implicated in a crime of violence. I understand why now there is a lot of focus on nonviolent offenders, because that is, kind of, lowhanging fruit in the sense that it is very obvious period that locking up those people for long locking up those people for periods of time. It is important to think about people that have been locked up for round offenses, ways to help them get Second Chances and become responsible, returning citizens. In a i want to give a shout out to my public defenders. They have some of the most difficult jobs in our society. So many of them are just the hardest working and must responsible citizens, lawyers good human beings that you could meet. I get calls sometimes from people whose kid might be have a case standing. They say, is there anyway you can find someone to help me represent them because now its just a public defender . Lots of times, the public defender is the best person to represent you because they have so much experience representing people with crimes like the ca ller was accused of. The problem is not public defenders. Its that we do not send enough money in defense in our system. I know a lot of times you talk about Unfunded Mandates on states are required to do something, but they are not given the resources to do that. Defense of poor people is a classic example remember that story case of gideon versus wainwright . In the United States of america, if you are being prosecuted by the awesome power of the government, then you need somebody on your side. The bill of rights requires that you have a lawyer to represent you. If you are poor, then the government has to provide that lawyer. Sweeping grant announcement from the Supreme Court about the bill of rights and its relationship to an accused person. But who pays for that lawyer . States do. States have not been very forthcoming with the money that they have been allocating to that very pressing need. A lot of times when people are represented by appointed attorneys, those attorneys have way too many cases to focus on anyone in a way that does anything to do with justice. It depends on the jurisdiction. If you are in a place like the District Of Columbia youre lucky to be represented by the public defender. In the bronx, new york neighborhood defenders San Francisco has a great defender, you really have to think about where you are. Public defense lawyers, people who are Public Interest lawyers who represent an accused person, those are some of my heroes. Host paul butler we appreciate you coming on and talking about this issue. If congress brings it up next week, the washington journal a look at it again. An hour. Mr. Cook our guest today is former pennsylvania senator and current president ial candidate Rick Santorum. His last visit with us was in july of 2005. We are glad to have him back. He was born in virginia but moved to pennsylvania when he was 7. Hes a graduate of penn state. Earned a m. B. A. At the university of pittsburgh, and has a law degree from dickenson law school. In 1990 at the age 32, our guest ran for the u. S. House, defeat an incumbent who outspent him almost 3is. In 1994 at age 36, he beat another incumbent for u. S. Senate seat and won a second term before being defeated in 2006. Hes currently making his second run for the white house having been the last conservative challenger standing against mitt romney in 2012. The senator and his wife are the parents of seven children. Thus ends the biographical portion of the program. Now on to the ever so compelling recitation of ground rules. As always we are on the record here. Pleas no live blogging or tweeting. In short no filing of any kind while the breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what our guest says. There is no embargo when the session ends. To help you curve that selfie urge, well email several pictures of the session to all reporters here as soon as the breakfast ends. And as regular attendees know, if you like to ask a question, please do the traditional thing and send me a subtle nonthreatening signal and ill call on as many reporters we can in the time we have with the senator this morning. Well start off by offering our guest the opportunity to make some opening comments and then questions around the table. With that thanks again for doing this, sir. Appreciate it. Senator santorum thank youall for coming this morning. Appreciate it. Look forward to your questions actually not. Ill do my best. I would just say that i think this is as someone who ran four years ago, this is a very different election. For me one thats a much more satisfying election as a candidate because this is an election, at least from my perspective, the republican primary, four years ago the election was about who was the conservative alternative to mitt romney. The entire justification as a candidate was establishing yourself as a foil for what seemed to be the establishment pick for the nomination. This is a race thats obviously a wide open race. Its a real opportunity to go out and talk about the important things that confront this country, important issues that confront this country and why what your vision is and why you believe youre the best person to be able to tackle the problems that americas facing right now. So, in that respect its a more interesting race for me as a candidate because its a race about issues, its a race not about who your opponent is. I think if you look at most of my comments, its certainly in the last few months, i dont talk about my other folks in the race. To me its not relevant. There are so many faces out there that paying any attention to any one is isnt necessarily important from the standpoint of the success. I dont think its relevant. What the voters are trying to figure out right now is who is on my list. I dont think they are looking for any help from the candidates in trying to take people off their list. I think they are looking to see what candidates are potential viable president ial candidates Going Forward. I look at that as a real opportunity to make the case as to why we are we are the candidate that is has the right solutions for the country right now and has the best possibility of success in the general leaks. Thats really the focal point of our campaign so far and will continue to be. Thats exciting for me because its about how we can help the country, what we can do to make things better for to the people who are struggling in this country, and why winning is not as important as winning something thats worth winning. Its not just about winning the election. Its actually winning for this country in a way that we havent seen, in my opinion, in several elections. Im excited about the message we are delivering. Thats why i announced from a factory floor in western pennsylvania. I believe that message. Looking at the people in America Today who are not succeeding. Looking at the middle of this country that needs to be filled with policies and values that are going to make america a much more top to bottom successful country Going Forward. I think we have some very unique ideas in that regard that separate us from the pack. Thats when i travel around the country we do a lot of manufacturing events. Well be in identify way probably 19 out of the next 33 days well be in iowa. Well be doing a manufacturing event almost every single day we are there because that to me is one of the real big keys of help making america stronger from top to bottom. Making things and creating the jobs and opportunities that are available to people who are not succeeding through a resurgence in that sector of the economy. On the other side, we have the National Security which has become really important issue in this election which was not at all important four years ago. Again we believe that our message is different. We have experience that nobody else in the field has. An a track record that certainly distinguishes ourself from Hillary Clinton, but the experience to go up against a Hillary Clinton. Thats an important part of this race is how what are you going to do for america . But also how you juxtapose that with the likely democratic nominee. I think a lot of fronts we match up very well because we have matched up well in the past. I think im the only person in the field that has any real experience having gone toe to toe with the clinton machine and Hillary Clinton specifically when i was in the United States senate. I think that if experience matters, i think theres a lot of folks who believe now experience is more important than it once thought it was, that recommends me to the electorate as time goes on. Ill be happy to stop there. Mr. Cook one or two and move around the table. Let me ask you about fundraising. As you know jeb bush has raised an enormous amount of money, 114 million. And the estimates are that cruz raised and allies raised 51 and rubio 45 million. Cruzs folks say that you dont need to be the most well funded but that you need to have the money to go up against jeb bush. Conservative does not need to raise the most amount of money to go up against jeb bush. Conservative does not need to raise the most amount of money to beat an establishment candidate. We are a raw funded conservative candidate and the only one. Can you give us an update on what you have raised and your folks have raised and what your response is to the argument from folks like cruzs staff that you need to be the best funded conservative to really have a place at the table . Senator santorum look at it this year. Four years ago, four years ago we raised less than 2 million. And we started raising money april 1 of 2011. We raised less than 2 million heading into iowa. And we won the Iowa Caucuses. After that point we raised about 20 million. I think if you go back and look at how campaign itself, how fundraising was going, we were at times outraising romney. It was towards the end of the Campaign Romney was laying off staff because they were not in some respects keeping up with us with the fundraising pace we had. I would make the argument that money is important, but whats money for . Money is to get you votes. So the most important thing is how effective are you in getting votes that you need to be able to win the election . And clearly four years ago we ran a race with being outspent four and five to one and still were able primarily four and five to one because of the super p. A. C. Situation. I dont think this time around youre going to see that same type of dynamic. Four years ago we had an establishment candidate that everyone backed and including the vast majority of super p. A. C. Donors. I just dont think that there is that candidate this time. I understand that jeb bush has raised a lot of money, but theres a lot of other money out there on the sidelines that i think is willing and able and will support a conservative candidate as that conservative candidate emerges in february and march of next year. I think the question is, how much money do you need to win iowa and be competitive after that . And my opinion, its not new the money being talked about. Mr. Cook you didnt give us a number. Do you want to give us a number . Senator santorum well report the number at the appropriate time. Mr. Cook trying. Let me ask you one other, fox news has said to be on stage at their debate in cleveland you have to place in the top 10, as you know. The average five most recent National Polls as conducted by major nationally recognized organizations, an analysis by the cnn polling director recently released has you 11th. How damaging is that to your bid to overtake the other conservatives in the field who are likely to be there . Ben carson, mike huckabee, ted cruz. Whats the strategy to get you on the stage . Senator santorum i dont pay a whole lot of attention to things that go on this far ahead of a an actual vote. Go back four years ago and we finished fourth in the iowa straw poll. Most people would have thought that was not a particularly good thing to happen. It turned out not to be particularly relevant at all. So a lot of things have happened six, seven months before an election sound big at the time but in the interim dont turn out to be very consequential. I think there are pluses and minuses of the way that the fox has set up their debate and cnn has set up their debate. Well participate in whatever their black box black box way of determining what polls at what point in time. I think i have been very, very vocal about this. I think staff and National Media plays such a an Important Role early in and who is not its undermining the advantage, if i was an r. N. C. Chairman, its undermining the process that was established by the r. N. C. To let the states and voters make that call as opposed to the National Media. Particularly using a yardstick that historically has had no relationship to who the actual winner of any of these primaries are going to be which is months before the election, 1 or 2 National Polls two weeks before the Iowa Caucuses, i was at 4 . I won the Iowa Caucuses. So given that benchmark, i wouldnt have been included in they were going to eliminate 2 3 of the people in the debate prior to the Iowa Caucuses, i wouldnt have been included. Yet i was on the way to winning the caucuses. To me its a miscarriage of by r. N. C. To agree to Something Like that. Having said that, well play by the rules. I dont think our game plan hasnt changed much. We are probably going to do a little bit more Television Radio this month than we otherwise would have, but i think i just told you, ill going to spend 20 of the next 19 of the next 33 days in iowa. My game plan hasnt changed much. We are going to continue to work and make sure we win the Iowa Caucuses. One of the things do i know from four years ago, the people in iowa dont Pay Attention what guess on here in washington, d. C. , they decide for themselves who they pick as president. Mr. Cook way in the back from cbs. First question. [inaudible] senator santorum hes the Democratic Party. Hes the base. Hes the heart left. Hillary clinton is moving to the hard left thats who the Democratic Party has become and their activists and downers. They are the party of the left. Its not a far cry to say the party to the left would be very welcoming of someone who is a selfidentified socialist. Mr. Cook next to the washington post. National Security which is an area you have economic inequality. Youre still talking about issues like abortion. Do you worry about alienating new people that you might need in the general election . Senator santorum im a conservative across the board who speaks on all the issues National Security to economic to moral and cultural issues. I dont see them as indistinguishable. They fall together. If you dont have a Strong Family structure in america, i have said this many times, as the American Family breaks down, the ability for limited government becomes less and best possible. When the government has to fill in for the problems that come with the breakdown of the family and in those communities, then the ideal of the of economic conservatives in the Republican Party that want to talk about these or even members of the public, why do i need to focus on, if you look at every study thats been done by the left and right, i always talk on the campaign trail, i talk about the two books on the campaign trail, coming apart. and one called our kids read both our books. The principle problem, and every study done on income economy the principle reason income equality is as intractable problem as it is today is first and foremost the breakdown of the Nuclear Family. So you can say, well, you still talk about those things. I talk about those things because they are relevant to the debate on how we get our vibrant middle of america, and how we create better opportunities for children to be successful. So i think it is important to understand that none of these things are sort of issues unto themselves but they interrelate. National security, if we dont have a vibrant middle of america, the desire of america to engage in the world is you saw the story in the recession you saw republicans pulling back saying we dont we cant afford to do this anymore. We have to cut the military. That became a very even within the Republican Party. Why . Because people were really hurting. When people are hurting at home, the last thing they want to do we need to be going off and doing these things arne the world. All of these things interrelate. To me the foundational element is make sure we have Strong Families. We have Strong Families that are together and raising children. I think it was said its more important for parents to read to their children the first four years of life than to pay for four years of college. I dont think that message is out there. That the message from either party about how important these this Public Policy issue is of reknitting the American Family. Mr. Cook nicole from roll call. [inaudible] senator santorum obviously i talk about the importance of targeting voters who have been left behind by this economy in the last 10 years. So i announced that on the factory floor. You look wages have been stagnant. You look at medium income has declined in the last seven years. Party that have is the recession but it hasnt recovered. And you see this stagnation that has really made this a much more important issue that i think republicans are have been and continue, many not all, many continue to ignore at our peril. So i think this idea of laying out a vision for how progrowth economics can translate into improved Job Opportunities for the 74 of americans age 25 to 65 who dont have a College Degree and we are going to provide a pathway for a more stable optimistic future for them, thats a that is a an issue that was not as clearly as important 10 years ago as it is today. And Going Forward. The prospects dont look a whole lot brighter. So i think the focus on that for me is nothing new. If you look at my track record when i was in the senate, we were very always interested in these issues, but it now becomes more front and center. Obviously the cultural issues i talked about, big changes in the culture in the last 10 years but to me its just a continuation of what we have seen for the past 30 years. We have seen a continual break down of the understanding of marriage and family, and it didnt start with the current marriage debate. It started a long time ago. It started 40, 50 years ago. We have seen the impact of that with ever increasing outofwedlock birth rates. Ever increasing absentee fathers. Ever increasing levels of poverty. As you read the book, its pretty jarring when you read that book is to see that the changes in communities and opportunities are available for young people growing up in broken families and poor communities. There just isnt the network of support there. So all of those things are big cultural shifts that require the Republican Party to begin to address them. I think we are stuck. I think the Republican Party is stuck. I wrote this book many of you know last year called blue collar conservative. one of the chapters in the book is a chapter saying a rising tide lifts all boats. Unless your boat has a hole in it. I think republicans still use the rising tide lifts all boats, which is a john f. Kennedy line, nevertheless we use that line all the time and we dont recognize there are a lot of people say, the tide has risen. Im in deeper water and ill bailing faster, and i feel like im sinking as the tide is going up. We have to have specific policies oriented toward how we are going to help those who are sinking. And we dont. We talk we still talk in macroeconomic terms. We still are unwilling to carve out Public Policy that addresses particular microeconomic categories or people. Because thats thats tinkering with the its not purist. I would just make the argument that thats a losing strategy on economics. And there are from my perspective, if we are going to win this election and if we are going to create a win for the American Public who are hurting, we have to have a different message than what we have been saying for the past 20 years. Mr. Cook we are going next to john of the b. B. C. And herb jackson, jonathan easily, todd dana, and miles. [inaudible] senator santorum i welcome the spotlight. The manner which hes done it is donald trump, not Rick Santorum. There will be a differentiation between the way we talk about this issue and the substance of what we talk about, because i saw donald over the weekend talking about how he wants more and easier legal immigration. He wants more people coming in and make it easier for people to come in. I have been very different approach to that. While i think its important hes focused the issue of immigration which i do believe is important. Particularly for the workers i have been talking about. I said in my announcement, we have seen 35 Million People come to this country in the last 20 years. Thats over 10 of the population of this country have come to this country combined legal and illegal to live here. We have more People Living in this country who werent born here than any time in the history of our country. We are approaching the highest percentage of folks not born in this Country Living here. That can all be good. Thats not necessarily its not necessarily bad, let me put it that way. But we have to analyze what the impact is on the very people i was talking about. Whats the impact on those struggling the most in america . And to do that is not xenophobic, its simply a rational policy discussion we should be able to have in this country without being called various names that are not particularly appetizing in the public. I always refer back to the last Immigration Commission that was constituted under president clinton run by barbara jordan. She said immigration policy is first and foremost in the national interest. We need to have a discussion of whats in the national interest. I think certainly a part of that is how American Workers are doing under this system. I make the argument when you look at flatline wages now for those 74 of American Workers who dont have a College Degree, you look at what their wages have been, look at their incomes over the last 20 years during this period of record, record immigration, not even close to any 20year period, that includes the great wave. So i think its rational and responsible for Public Policy discussion as to what the impact is on the people who are most affected. And i would make the argument that the people most affected are those workers that i talked about and they are not doing well under this. We have an obligation to take a step back and say what is the in the best interest of the American Workers, by the way both native born and those who came to this country legally over the last 20 years and before that, and see what we policy Going Forward will address those issues. Thats why ive suggested not just what most republicans talk about, which is Border Security and tracking our visa overstays and talking about everify and the importance of using everify and find folks who are here illegally, but what we are going to do about legal immigration, particularly the large amount of unskilled labor that we are bringing into this country legally to compete. I use this number, again, age 25 to 65, you look at since 2000 there have been about 6 1 2 what percentage of those net new jobs are held by people who are in this country who were not born in this country . The answer is all of them. There are fewer native born americans working today than there was in the year 2000. And theres 17 million more native americans in the work force. And so you can make the argument that, immigration is a good thing for america, but if you look at stagnant wages, if you look at the fact that immigrants primarily are taking all the net new jobs and what the impact is on those wages and benefits, i think its pretty clear whats happening. So to suggest as i have that we have to make some changes to that, i think its simply a topic that needs to be front and center and talked about, and i think most americans would like to have this conversation without being made to feel by many that theyre somehow antiimmigrants. I dont think youre antiimmigrant if you, as i have suggested, still are after the proposal that i have laid out there, and i did a couple months ago, called for a 25 reduction in legal immigrants in this country, wed still be at the highest level we have been at prior to this 20year period. Mr. Cook herb jackson at the end. Senator, i have a transportation question. The tunnel amtrak uses under the hudson river is more than 100 years old. Juan 20 years its going to fail they say because of damage from hurricane sandy. The existing car tunnels and bridges are at capacity. Thats going to have a major impact in the northeast. Congress so far not addressed. If you were president would you support building a new tunnel . Senator santorum i have taken the approach on transportation that the federal government should do less not more on transportation. In fact im supported i supported proposal that would dramatically reduce the gas tax and put the federal Government Back in the position of simply doing what we should be doing, which is dealing with interstate commerce and movement of, which of course includes movement of people, from an interstate capacity. Doesnt necessarily mean just interstates class definition, it could be u. S. Highways and other major interstate movers of goods and people. And that we reduce the gas tax to the level that can maintain and in fact improve that system. And then cap the tax at that amount and send the rest back to basically cut it and let the states deal with all these other issues that are more local in nature. We have not traditionally, obviously, with passenger trains, we have supported amtrak very generously over the years. As you know the federal government has traditionally not gotten involved with Rail Construction. Certainly freight Rail Construction we have stayed away from. We have done some passenger Rail Construction. So i guess my gut reaction would be thats not that getting involved with a project like that would be one of those gray areas that i would look at because it is interstate movement, but it would have a high bar in order to cross to do that kind of project. Mr. Cook jonathan from the hill. senator, you said at the outset this has been in some ways a more satisfying campaign for you. Is it also frustrating you at all . It doesnt appear a lot of the base you had in 2012 has transferred over in support in 2016. Is it frustrating to be in some ways starting from scratch . Senator santorum i remind everybody that prior to the Iowa Caucuses we were at 2 or 4 . A lot of support we got came late. And it was after looking at all the candidates they made the decision. Thats one of the things i certainly know about iowans as we call around and we are talking to our supporters. We are getting a fair number of them to say, yeah. They are still with us. Which is pretty encouraging. But a lot of them are saying you know what, we really like you, but, as i have said theres a lot of new models on the show room. We are taking a look at everybody. Im not surprised at all. There are a lot of new models. There are a lot, as i said public, a loft good people out there that people are going to take a look at. I have always felt confident that four years ago i felt this way when i was starting from scratch. I feel very much the same way this time in spite of all the new models. I think this model is a good reliable model that people will come back to and say you know what, all that glitters is not gold. And im using the example of donald trump. Trumps the best guy on immigration. Then you read, he may be tough on the border, but on a lot of other immigration issues hes not very good not considered a conservative on those things. That just takes time and my one of my concerns and i explained about this at the time, didnt complain commented, the lack of debates means that really most americans have most primary voters have no idea where most candidates stand on the issues. They dont. Its all just i always wish these National Surveys would start without saying who youre going to vote for and list the candidates, who are you going to vote for . And just can you name all the candidates running for president . I guarantee you that most people couldnt name more than two or three candidates. And so its just all these questions are not relevant. Because it is so early and people arent paying that much attention clearly in iowa, what i do know, they make their decision the last month or so. Not to say they wont be for someone today, but as i find out just because they are for someone today doesnt mean theyll vote for someone later on. Id rather not be their favorite now. I would rather be their favorite when it matters. Mr. Cook bloomberg. Twopart question. Going back to september of 2005 when you were in the senate, knowing everything you know, would you still confirm john roberts . And secondly, where are you on the constitutional amendment following the decision on samesex marriage . Should it define marriage as a man and woman on a federal level or let the states do it . Senator santorum knowing what i know now would i confirm john roberts . Look, i confirmed john roberts because he was he had a good strong track record of someone who paid attention to what the constitution said and followed it. Everyones entitled to a mistake every now and then and hes made one mistake twice. And thats disappointing, but hes also written a lot of really good and strong opinions. I wish i could say that every everybody i ever voted for on anything not just judges but for elections didnt disappoint me at some point in time, but thats just not the world. By and large hes been a solid Supreme Court justice. Looking at the best Case Scenario of his opinions, the opinion was one that was deferential to the congress which even though im running for president , i like president s and courts that defer to congress because thats the body that our constitution wanted to rest most of the power in washington, d. C. On. Im not happy with the decision. Looking at it sort of the other way, i can get myself to not be as upset about it as i might be. As far as a constitutional amendment, i coauthored and pushed for the vote on that amendment way back in 2004. I believe we need a National Standard for marriage. I dont think you can have a standard one state to another what marriage is. So i would continue to support an effort to redefine define marriage the way it was defined for 4,000 years of human history. That sets you apart from governor cruz and Governor Walker . Senator santorum i think thats a mistake. I argued that 10 years ago when others wanted to do that 10 years ago. You cant have a hodgepodge of marriage. The reason one of the reasons the court decided the way decided because they recognize you cant have different marriage laws in different states. Just creates tomb too much confusion out there for on a variety of different levels. Mr. Cook todd gilman from dallas morning news. there are those on the other side of the cusp. Do you see any evidence of anything if [inaudible] senator santorum im going to do media appearances. I dont spend money this far out in the campaign. Do you see evidence that anyone in the field is gaming the system to try to get into the top 10 . Is there any way to juice your numbers . Senator santorum the people who set the game up have the biggest influence on who gets in because its going to who they put on the network and give air time. They control in some respects the ability to put their thumb on the scale to give someone not that were doing it. I am certainly not a media dont watch a lot of television. I have no idea who what they are doing. But they certainly have the ability to do that but if they decided, for example, they wanted Rick Santorum to be in the debates, it would be helpful to them for some reason to have they could say we are going to put santorum on every single day and have our anchors talk about this guy, stories. The point is they can. Im not saying they are or will. But they certainly can have an impact because whats driving National Numbers is . Its news coverage. Thats what drives National Numbers. If you folks had written as many stories about jeb bush as you did lindsey graham, i guess jeb bushs numbers wouldnt be where they are today. Is it a death spiral. If you dont make the debate, you or anybody else, youre probably not going to make the next debate or next one after that . Senator santorum heres what i found. Go back and look at look at every election cycle. People go up, people go down. That debate to be a very interesting time. And could prove to be a wonderful opportunity for some and as we saw in the past it could be a disaster for others. It could shoot their campaign right between the eyes. And so you just the idea that being in the debate or not there were debates i wasnt in last time. And it had it had absolutely no impact on the campaign. I think something this early on with all the things that are going to happen between now and caucus day i just dont think its going to be that important. Mr. Cook dana milbank from the post. the trump effect. You got this widely fragmented field and it appears in order to break out you got to Say Something outrageous. And youre here very nicely talking about Robert Putnam which is terrific. But its not outrageous. Do you think you can do basically what you did last time, sort of plodding along . Are the rules going to be fundamentally different this time and its going to be all about money and all about being provocative to get the Media Attention . Can you be plotting and get to the finish line . Senator santorum i hope so. Thats we havent really changed how who i am as candidate and what i believe in. And i dont think iowa has changed. I know everybody likes to look at all the things going on in the National Media. But in the end, iowas going to cut this field down dramatically much more than whether you attend the debate or not. If you can go there and connect as we did in the past, and be successful, we are going to be one of a handful of guys or gals i should say who are going to be the nominee of the Republican Party. I would say im the tortoise and the hare. Slow and steady wins the race. We are not going to i dont see any real opportunities for us over the next six months to break out. I didnt see it six years ago we were going to break out. What i believe in is that when people get down to the Serious Business of judging who they want to be their president , not who they are enjoying for the moment, not who gets them excited and gets them to cheer for something that they feel frustrated that no ones speaking for them, but in the end who they want to sit beyond the resolute desk, i think its a different calculation. We went through 20 debates, 18 debates, you think of a memorable line that Rick Santorum said . No. Thats not i give good solid answers that are knowledgeable that show a clear vision for what i want to accomplish. And whats best for this country. And on a variety of different topics and eventually people came around and said i think that guy can be president. And it coalesced. We had a lot of really wonderful people you may say there are just better fecks out there. They are stronger. That may be the case. But one of the things i learned is you dont know that this far out. What i do know is that we passed that test before and i think we can pass that test again. Mr. Cook miles. You began this session talking about income inequality and your belief that what you read about it being primarily caused by a break down in the family. Senator santorum i said thats what the studies have shown the principal reason. There are others. Education, problems with education. Mentioned the Manufacturing Sector of the economy has been dramatically reduced in this country and therefore opportunities for a lot of noncollege educated people to get goodpaying jobs and rise has been compromised. Theres a lot of factors. That is certainly one of them. Is a conservative view of limited government, can government do anything about reestablishing the American Family . And income equality . Or are those things not the business of the government . Senator santorum i would say the answer is yes and no. When i say yes and no, there are things that the political system and Public Policy can do to effect the family. On a policy side, i use the example of when i was campaigning in wisconsin four years ago now congressman grossman shared with me a study when he was state senator showed that if you are a single mother with two kids, and youre making 15,000 a year in the state of wisconsin, you are eligible for 38,500 in welfare medicines. If you got married you would lose those benefits. And so what the government had done all with the intent of trying to help people, was create a barrier for marriage among lower income single moms. 0and thats why you see for the first time in the history of our country a majority of kids will be raised at homes without a father in the home at some point in time. Number two, majority of kids born in america out of wedlock are born with fathers living in the home but not married. There are several reasons for that. One the marriage debate i would make the argument has now separated the idea of children for marriage. Marriage is no longer about children. I think thats part of it. Part of it is because of Government Programs that particularly for low income individuals. Government programs make it economically not viable to get married because you have to be making 50,000 to 60,000 a year which is above Median Income in america, that person youre going to marry, to net 38,000 in basically taxfree benefits. The government has done things all with the intent i dont describe ill intent. With the intent of trying to help. What they have done is create a barrier to marriage in america among lower income individuals. Thats number one. We have to look at Public Policy changes to stop that disincentive. Its damaging for mothers and children in particular. Thats one idea of Public Policy. Shift over to what is another important area which is the power of the government to the bully pulpit. Using the power of the presidency or the government to convenient convene a discussion and movement to try to do something in america about this problem. The president uses his bully pulpit power for many things but no more than climate change. Hes constantly out there we passed a bill on climate change. No. But if things happen in this country over the last six years on climate change. Yes. Why . Because the president has been out there talking to the Business Community and the churches and our schools and all of these institutions out there that have a huge impact on what goes on in america. The president has driven this issue so they have taken up this cause. And implemented and done things to promote this idea. Imagine a president who said the most important issue right now is restoring the Nuclear Family in america. Is what can we do in your business to help . I was at a business in tennessee, the reason i mention that is in my book 10 years called it takes a family i wrote about chattanooga and a program there called first things first. Its the first time a community at large came together because they had very high rates of divorce, outofwedlock birth, single motherhood, etc. , so they decided as a community to do something about it. Government didnt pass the law. But the churches and schools and businesses and the civic and Community Organizations came together in this group called first things first, and implemented a variety of Different Things to try to get the community to bring families together. I was at a business there a couple months ago and i just said, just curious, because. Do you guys do anything for your families . And, i did not even have to explain. Everybody we have in our company, we give them a free dave ramsey course so they can we give one of our benefits is marriage counseling. So they went through all these things they do to support the Nuclear Family in chattanooga. Why . Because they made a conscious effort that the schools now talk about marriage and the importance of marriage and what marriage is and why its important to be married, to have children. I would suspect most schools in america dont do that, right . They talk about the importance of fathers. They talk about, in fact condoms but they dont talk about what its about to be a responsible father and a responsible family. All those things can be done without any Government Programs because if we identify and, you know, danas talking about the putnam book. I dont know how many read the putnam book. When you read that book you cant walk away and say, we can continue this in america. You cant. Theres no effort on the part of the federal government. Nothing by this president. Nothing. He has poverty summit. When you talk about using the power of the presidency to try to change and start a debate in this country of what we can do so the situations that are occurring every single day in america because children are abandoned by a system that is not focused on kids, i think we can make some real changes. Weve got about 10 minutes left. Well try to get in three more questions. Paul. Paul senator, four years senator santorum what if i filibuster . Paul senator, four years ago your family played a big role in your campaign. Youre a dad of seven. How have things changed in four years . Is it easier, harder . How do you how do you stay dad . Senator santorum its hard. Seven kids, going through those teenage years and everything its theres challenges out there. Ill be honest with you. I feel first, the biggest issue, if you recall four years ago, was our daughter bella and the Health Problems that she had. Im just were just real excited shes doing better she has ever done and has been for about three years. After the campaign, we you know, we realized we had to look at some things because she was just getting there was a pattern of her getting sick, very seriously sick. And she had that pattern but it was getting worse. So anyway, we dug into some things and we actually found a therapy thats in our book. She takes something to boost her immune system and its just changed her life. Shes doing great. And so i if she was in the same position as she was four years ago, i wouldnt be sitting here. But she is doing great. And so we feel very, very comfortable on that front. We have six other kids. As i said, theyre going through their teenage and college years. I dont need to say any more than that. But its a last time around, it was a family enterprise. And in spite of the travel and other things, it actually in many respects brought the family even closer together. And everybody is excited about it. You know, our kids are its just fighting them off as to who goes to what trip because everybody wants to go and be out on the trail and do things. Its sort of like the Family Business in some respects. You want to go to the store and participate, but its so i feel very good. Our family is well prepared to do it. Not to say we dont have our issues like every other family but if we didnt then you should be worried about it. Paul you would be taking a pay cut if you win, right . Senator santorum yeah. Its pretty good job. Mr. Rappaport from the New York Times. Talk about taking on the clinton machine. Is it more or let formidable candidate than president obama . Senator santorum yeah, we took on a machine in 1994 when i ran against harris and we were you believe against carville and begala and bill and hillary came to pennsylvania with great frequency to campaign against us. You know, pennsylvanias not the reddest of states. We felt we went up against their best and brightest. Health care was the big issue back in 1994. The guy i was running against was the senate sponsor. In fact, you go back and look at your political reason, kids in 1991 really ushered bill clinton into the 1992 campaign because cargo and carville made health care the issue of the 1991 special election and went down to little rock, basically took their experiences in pennsylvania in 1991 and applied it to the race in 1992 and the rest is history. They had a lot riding on pennsylvania in 1994. Let me assure you, they threw the kitchen sink at us and we were able to survive. I remind people in 2000, we won by five points in 2000 in the state that bush lost by four. We were the only conservative to win in a state that bush lost. I think we have a good track record of being able to overcome big election odds. I beat two incumbents. I represented a 60 democratic seat and a 70 democratic seat in my first few terms in the congress. I think we have a pretty good track record. When we get to a general election we can be pretty effective. I feel like Hillary Clinton is in some respects tougher than barack obama. In some ways. In some ways easier. I think hillarys going to have a harder time galvanizing her base. I think she probably has a little bit more of an opportunity to appeal outside of her base. The president last time obviously lost independents and moderates, and that would have been an opportunity for me, at least i believe, we could have done better there. I think shell shell have pluses and minuses, but, again we have a track record. Not just gone up against the Political Team but also went up against her in the United States senate on more than one occasion and i think we did pretty well when we did that. So if youre looking at debate performances and how well you can stack up and be effective, i think we have some pretty good evidence that well do very well. Phil, last question. Senator santorum i kept trying to finish up. Phil are we going to see mrs. Santorum this time . Last time she had a pretty tough go at it. What is her role in the santorum 2. 0 is going to be . Senator santorum the least disruptive model possible. Particularly with our daughter whos doing well but she is still 24 7 care. If care is not there, then we got to hire someone to be there. That becomes economically challenging, lets just put it that way. So ill be honest with you. A big part of it is just family economics for us to have nursing care when karens not home 24 hours a day gets expensive and its not covered by insurance or anything like that. So part of it is driven by just the family realities of having a disabled child that requires 24 7 care and the other reality is we have six other kids. Theyre going through teenage years and sort of good to have a parent around. Thats happening. We had some experiences about that in the last year or so. And so karen and i is a division of labor, if you will. While i think karen does an amazing job on the campaign trail, is a huge asset, the most important asset that we have is our family. And while she maybe a great asset on the campaign, she is the indispensible asset at home and thats the way well view all sorts of opportunities on the campaign. Thanks for doing this. Senator santorum you bet it. Appreciate it. Senator santorum appreciate it. What painless. Somewhat. Im glad. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] \[captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org]