Candidates at town hall meetings, conferences and speeches. Monday morning at 10 00 eastern, live coverage from the province solvers convention. A republican and democratic president ial candidates talking on the issues of uniting the country, jobs creation, balancing the budget, and making America Energy secure. Tuesday afternoon at 12 30, we are alive with john kasich as he meetingn the town hall in new hampshire. Wednesday live at 7 00 p. M. Eastern, jeb bush will speak at a town hall meeting. Cspans campaign 2016 is taking you on the road to the white house on cspan, cspan radio, and cspan. Org. Public and president ial candidate marco rubio was in new york city. Proposals. Similar startups compete. Innovators, this is one hour. Good morning i am the founder. Welcome. For those of how have never been here before, civic hall is a Community Center and event space focused on civic innovation and a collaborative workspace for people who believe technology can make the world a better place. Its with great pleasure today that were able to host this event and so without further ado, i would like to present to you the junior senator from florida and president ial candidate 2016, senator marco rubio. [applause] mr. Rubio thank you, i appreciate that very much. I want to thank you all for participating in this a little loud. Is that better . So im here today not to just tell you my ideas, but to listen to yours. I think that the big part of what a campaign should be all about is the listening part. No one understands the needs of the ondemand economy as well as those of who you are building it. Coming into the discussion, heres something i can state to you with absolute confidence. If theres one thing that matters in the 21st century, its innovation. In order to be the leading economy on earth, america must be the most innovative economy on earth. Its that simple. Whenever we talk about innovation, what were talking about is problem solving. Were talking about finding ways to do things more efficiently, more affordably and more conveniently than ever before. I want to begin by telling you about a problem that i had earlier this year that american innovators, including many of you in this room, are attempting to solve. And then i want to tell you something you already know. Which is that the government is often getting in the way of solving it. So my problem was this. A few months ago my refrigerator at my home broke. It just stopped working. It died out. With four growing kids home for summer break in florida, you can imagine i was facing some pressure to get it fixed. So i googled Appliance Repair companies in miami and i made some calls. First of all, it was frustratingly difficult to get anyone to take me off hold or even to call me back. When i finally got in touch with a real person they said, no problem, we can have someone out to your house in three or four days to look at it. That just cant be how our economy works in the year 2015. Other things that took three days in the old economy now take three minutes or three seconds. What struck me in that moment was the following realization. Inevitably, somewhere not far away from me, there was someone who was capable of repairing appliances, someone who is just as eager to make extra money that day as i was eager to have a functional refrigerator. The only problem was this person and i had no way of finding each other or connecting. This is a problem that will not exist within a year or two. At least not if american innovators have their way. The reason is because of the ondemand economy. This is a revolution thats happening right before our isles. Also known as the sharing economy or the gig economy. The ondemand economy is allowing millions of professionals across multiple industries to connect directly with consumers. The most obvious examples, folks, are Companies Like uber and airbnb. Last week it was announced that amazon and google would be entering the ondemand market. Right behind these giants are thousands of small innovative startups and if you havent heard about them yet, just wait. The ondemand platform is one example of an important truth facing us in this election. Which is that the american economy, as the global one, is fundamentally being transformed. Uber didnt even exist when our current president was sworn into office. And today it is worth over 51 billion. And its not just the fact that the economy is changing. The fact is that the economy is changing faster than it has ever changed. For example, it took the telephone 75 years to reach 100 million users. It took candy crush one year to reach 100 million users. And yet while our economy is changing and changing fast, our government and its policies are not. Quite frankly, both parties are to blame. Never before, at least in my lifetime, has the political establishment in this country been more out of touch with the American People than it is today. The result is a worsening friction between our 20th century government and our rapidly changing 21st century economy. And nowhere is that friction more apparent than in the ondemand economy. Here you have Innovative Companies who are running up against an antiquated tax code, burdensome regulation and numerous, numerous outdated politicians. Thats not all. The companies are also victims of a coordinated attack from established businesses which influence the political process to pass new regulations that block competition. Weve seen this play out with Taxi Companies lobbying to stop uber and here in new york the government is spending millions to try and stop airbnb from threatening hotel chains. I want to give you another example today. I want to tell but a growing Company Based right here in new york that, like all businesses in the ondemand economy, is facing unnecessary challenges. As a result of the outdated government. Its a Company Called handy. And its c. E. O. Is here today. Handy is a Online Platform that allows consumers to connect directly with home cleaners, handymen, plumbers and other home service professionals. Its quickly growing, its now operating in 37 cities with over 11,000 professional as registered to use the platform. Handy is grown breaking for consumers for obvious reasons. It provides simple booking at the tap of a finger, a rating and review process that helps people find the best contractor for their needs, and an easy online Payment System that eliminates haggling over prices. But it isnt just great for consumers. One of the things i love most about the ondemand economy is the way it promotes upward mobility for the professionals who use it. Through handy, workers without the resources to start their own cleaning business, they can now have all the independence of selfemployment and the Customer Base of a large established business. Professionals who use handy can earn an average of 18 an hour, which is more than the typical worker in the field. Best of all, they set their own hours. Checking into the app whenever they have time to take on a job and signing out when they have other obligations. Many workers use this flexibility to pursue higher education, which is central to upward mobility in this new century. Others use it to spend more time with their children or work other jobs. Innovations like handy are part of the reason why im so optimistic, not only about saving the American Dream in this century, but actually about expanding it. To reach more people and change more lives than ever before. In the last century, my mother worked as a maid in hotels. She had no control over her schedule. No influence over how much she earned. And few opportunities to set herself apart. And yet she achieved the American Dream. Just think what she could have achieved cleaning homes through a company like handy. She would have had total control over her own financial life. The ondemand economy is a miracle that only American Free enterprise could produce. Thats why its so shameful shat that the biggest obstacles to the growth of this platform is our very own government. In fact, think about this. I met the c. E. O. Of an ondemand startup a few weeks ago and he asked me not to mention his Business Today out of fear, out of fear that he would attract attention from legislators, from lawyers and from competitors. What does this say . Do we want america to be a place where honest, innovative businesses have to hide their success . Of course we do not. We need to be the most business friendly economy on earth. But right now with the highest Corporate Tax rate in the developed world and a regulatory structure thats directly hostile to innovation, thats quite nearly impossible. Here are some of the obstacles that handy and Companies Like it face every day. First, an outdated tax code. Companies like handy have only two options for how to classify their professionals who utilize their services. They can either be classified as full w2 employees or they can be classified as 1099 independent contractors. But neither one of these makes perfect sense. Just last week, last friday actually, the chairwoman of the federal trade Commission Said that the ondemand economy would require, quote, targeted regulatory measures, unquote. We have to realize that all the best innovation in our economy is happening in the unregulated space. Yet washington has imposed 60,000 pages of new federal regulations just this year, costing our private economy almost over or almost 70 billion in total compliance costs. As president i will put an end to this. I will place a cap on the amount of regulations on the amount regulations can cost our economy each year. I will also require federal agencies to include an analysis of exactly how much proposed regulations would impact competition and ovation. I believe the more america regular late regulates, the more we create an opening for other countries to deregulate and draw jobs away from our shores. Other nations are already scrambling to cater to the ondemand economy. Germany, for example, has created a middle ground between full time employees and independent contractors. This classification is called independent contractors. It allows professionals to work for a sickle company, receive benefits and protections and yet retain control over their own work. Whether this model is the best option for america or not is something we should figure out. But heres what i know for sure. We have to change the way the political establishment in this country thinks about the new economy. Right now they recognize that the new economy doesnt fit our current tax code and our current way of doing things, so they ask themselves, how can we force the new economy to adopt to our pole, old policies rather than asking, how can we change our old policies to adapt to the new economy . This has always that has always been the american way. We are a unique nation in all the worlds history. A nation founded on the idea that government doesnt get to choose what our economy looks like. The American People and the private sector get to choose. And guess what . The American People have chosen. They have chosen a convenient, fast, techdriven economy, one with direct lane of access to the product and the services they want and need. The American People have chosen an economy in which the most valuable retailer in america, amazon, doesnt own a single store. They have chosen where the largest transportation company, uber, doesnt own a single vehicle. And where the largest accommodation provider, airbnb, does not own a single hotel. Free enterprise has brought us these developments and Free Enterprise will bring us even more developments in the years ahead. In fact, i believe Free Enterprise will work better in this century than it did in the last century. Because the new economy is all about innovation, creativity and productivity and we americans are the most innovative, creative and productive people on the earth. I believe the 21st century not only can be the american century, i believe it will be the american century. It will be as long as everyone in this room keeps doing what theyre doing and as long as we can get washington to stop doing what its doing and start looking for a better way. With that id like to hear your ideas and answer your questions. I thank you for the opportunity to talk about that today. Thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] were going to do a little bit of a question and answer session. Ill start. If you have a question youd like to ask, in about 15 minutes, there are two microphones in the aisles. Were going to do it based on alternating between, so ill give you a signal when were about to take questions. Senator, thank you very much for coming to civic hall and for talking about this issue. Theres been lots of cases where incumbent Market Forces who have political influence have reacted to the competition that the sharing Economy Companies are giving them. And a theyre using their political connections to try and stop these Innovative Companies. This is all eventually tied to money and politics. Its great, and i hear you when you say that government is targeting, but if you follow the money, it goes back to the incumbent market. How do you break that cycle . Mr. Rubio thats exactly right. I think part of it is to explain to people, were not experiencing an economic down turn. We are experiencing a mass of economic restructuring. Its like the Industrial Revolution happening every five years. So our policies need to reflect that. And in reflecting that, thats why its so important for us not to ascribe to the new economy attributes of the old economy. So thats why i believe a limited government is the best approach for the 21st century. The larger the government, the more powerful the government is, the more influence the government has over the economy, the more the people or the companies that can influence the government win at the expense of everybody else. So you have massive thats why, for example, regulatory budget is so important. The favorite way of established industries to block an innovative competitor is to create a regulatory impediment to that competitor, to enter the space. I always use this example, it may not be perfect, but imagine a blockbuster who, if youre looking around this room, some of you probably dont know what that is, a Blockbuster Video had convinced federal government to pass a regulation saying, in order to rent movies you must come into a physical store and show your i. D. Buzz we want to prevent underage kids from renting rated r movie, theyd still be in business and we wouldnt have downloading. Thats the mentality that exists in established industries. They find some sort of argument and they use it to create a road block that the innovator cant meet. The reason theyre able to do that and create that is because they have access and that access is tied to giving money to political candidates or officials. Mr. Rubio part of it is electing people who wont fall for that and understand that thats an impediment to economic growth. Thats why the regulatory budget is one of the proposal as i have. Yesterday a new report came out from the Freelancers Union that states that 54 million american, almost 1 3 of the work force, is doing freelance work. Its not just in urban areas, its in rural areas, throughout the country. 86 of the nations freelancers are likely to vote in 2016. 62 are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports freelancers interests. Some of these people are not necessarily working for handy or for uber or any of the sharing companies, theyre just working on their own but they care about things like retirement savings, health care, Legal Support for nonpayment because somebodys not paying them. And other issues unique to this group. Whatever a worker really wants is Flexible Work but also stable work. What would you do as president mr. Rubio you raise a couple of interesting points. Our 21st Century Health care is on the worker model. We work for somebody, those people offer you an insurance plan, thats how you get your health insurance. In the 2169 century, that cannot be the corner stone of our system. We have to have a portable system of health insurance, which is why i believe every american should be allowed to control their own pretax health care money, whether its an employer that gives it to you, whether its your own money or a tax a credit. We should open up pell grant and Student Financial aid to High School Students who dual enroll. I also think well have traditional fouryear education. But ive argued that students deserve to know how much theyre going to make when they graduate from that school with that degree before they borrow money to pay for it. So i have a bipartisan bill called right to know before you go with ron white of oregon that requires that before you take out a loan, you are told how much people make when they graduate from that school. Thats a better way to raise wages. Is to both create the policies that allow america to be the easiest and best place in the world to create better paying jobs and make it easier, faster and cheaper for people to acquire the skills they need for those better paying jobs. You mentioned that you want to limit regulation but in some cases these Innovative Companies have fantastic services but there are collateral effects. For example, airbnb, which many people love, both the users on both sides of the transaction love, but in some cases low income people are using airbnb to subsidize their incomes. Their landlords are finding out, theyre getting evicted. The landlord takes that apartment to market rent. Low Income Housing drops. Theres a collateral effect. You can probably follow a lot of these companies path and start seeing a wake of collateral effect which may not necessarily be so great, so if you have no regulation, how do you prevent collateral effects from coming back and biting us . Mr. Rubio i want the water we drink to not be poisoned. I fly on planes, im glad theyre regulated. Im arguing there comes a point when regulations go too far and they become an impediment to innovation. In the case of a private property owner, if im a private property owner, i own my own property, i can place restrictions on how tenants can use property. People do that all the time. Thats different from a government policy that places that restriction artificially, as opposed to a contractual restriction. Thats a situation youre facing. Structural change in the economy has always been disruptive. The Industrial Revolution was deeply disruptive. We had to work through issues of child labor and safety issues at factories that we never had before as a society. Were going to have disruptions we have to work through. That doesnt mean you walk away from this. This is the future. Were not going back to the 20th century. The only choice before us is do we embrace the future, harness its promise or allow it to leave us behind. Thats the only choice before us. This argument that were going to be able to go back to the good old days or the way things once were is not going to happen. If we do were going to be left behind by the fewer. Sharing economy has become a buzz term. But doesnt fully explain the changing nature of work in america. Companies like airbnb and lift and uber are examples, and even handy, are middlemen in effect between someone who is willing to provide a service and someone who is willing to pay for it. Wouldnt we be better off just building cooperatives where the people can find each other without having to pay a middleman to do the transaction . Because once you build that platform mr. Rubio whos going to build that platform . The government . Citizens could do it and a make it more open so the share hold, mr. Rubio i dont think youre going to get innovation that way. The way you come up with great ideas is someone says, i have a good idea and i think i can make money on, it im going to do it. Every major innovation in the world has been driven that way. Particularly when it comes to providing certains to individuals. You may believe in your idea, but the fact is that the reason why its created is because theres a profit motive. Somebody has made a decision, i think i can do this for a living and so they found these ideas. I think if youre counting on the collective to come up with it on its own, the not an effective way to move innovation. Free enterprise has proven that. The Great Company of the year 2025 doesnt exist yet. Someone is probably 14 years old playing mine craft right now and theyre going to figure out they shouldnt be playing right now. \[laughter] but theyre going to figure out how to put this thing together in eight or nine years. But theyre only going to do it because they think they can make money doing it. Theres nothing wrong with that. Theres nothing wrong with the profit motive involved in driving these. Some people argue there are new monopolies being created by new Tech Companies now that are will prevent innovation. Mr. Rubio you can very much be a creature of the new economy and once you are established decide youre an incumbent industry. Every established industry was once an innovator. Im not arguing that new economy creatures are going to not behave in the same fashion eventually. Thats why we have a system that doesnt allow that to happen. What we should have is a Free Enterprise system that says this no matter how great your idea, is you can be out of business in two years if someone comes up with a better service, a better idea and can deliver it at a better price. You mentioned we have a 20th century government but one of the challenges is that this technology continues to evolve and change and seems like some of the regulators are reacting as opposed to staying ahead. If youre president , what would you do to make sure that the government, where it does need to regulate, for example, airlines, making sure theyre safe, stays ahead of the technology . Planes right now, for example, arent connected 24 7, we still chase after black boxing when they crash. There is a role for government to stay ahead of technology. Besides just cutting the regulators budget and limiting the amount of regulation, how do we keep the government on a 21st century path. Mr. Rubio the government still has a vested interest in public safety. If youre an uber i keep going back to the same companies, i dont want to pick on anybody. But those usual cars are regulated. Before that car is on the road its been inspected, gone through the testing that the federal government requires for motor vehicles. It has regulations locally about how fast you can drive, what the safety features need to be, rules of the road, all those things are still in place. Were not saying uber drivers dont have to observe traffic signals. They still have to follow all of those rules. Thats not the issue. The issue is the industry in particular. Its a Business Model not being regulated. Heres the bottom line. There is no way that the federal government could ever keep up with innovation on a regulatory front. It cant move fast enough. Im a little concerned when you say that were going to limit the amount of regulation when volkswagen is able to play with their software and basically lie to the world about the efficiency of their cars. Somebody has to have the budget to be able to investigate to make sure they dont do that. If you cut regulation, it isnt just going allow for Innovative Companies, it may create damage to our economy. Mr. Rubio a regulatory budget is not just about cutting regulations. A regulatory budget is designed to force prioritization. Through a costbenefit analysis. All it says is that a cumulative impact of federal regulations cannot exceed a certain amount of money. These agencies must decide which regulations are worthy. If we only can have x number of regulations, which are the ones we really need and which are the ones that arent justified. Thats what its designed to do. On a costbenefit analysis, some people with a say get rid of gas emissions because its cheaper to make cars that dont save air pollution. A huge cost to the environment. Mr. Rubio then those people that make that decision will be accountable to their electorate. What we have now is a system where you can keep adding new regulations without removing existing ones. Its a system of perpetual regulatory growth. Without any costbenefit analysis. Many regulations are being put in place because of the theoretical value of the regulation or because someone hired the right person to influence the government to move in that direction. Well start taking some questions. I just have one more. The white house recently launched a program called the u. S. Digital service. Which is to bring the nations top engineers to work inside government, to fix problems. For example, like the v. A. Backlog. And save money. In fact, save hundreds of millions of dollars on old antiquated systems that the government currently spends. If youre president , would you continue that program and would you expand it . Mr. Rubio we want to see how it works first. Its been offered as a pilot initially. A very small amount. 0 million. But i think if it proves to be something thats effective, where we can attract some of the brightest minds in the country to dedicate themselves to Public Service for x number of years, to create solutions to how government provides services, thats something we should definitely be open to. I want to ask everybody to please have your questions remain on the topic of todays talk, if you could. Questioner thank you so much for being here today. I very much enjoy your discussion today. Especially you mentioned the American Dream. Im a daca recipient. Deferred action for childhood arrival. I have a question thats relevant to the topic. I am in the tech industry. Youve said our immigration system is broken because its based on whether you have a relative here rather than married. As president , what will you do to fix the lottery system to attract and keep the best and brightest talent in america, especially for tech . Mr. Rubio first of all, do i believe we need reforms to. That especially because some of it is being abused by existing companies and the other part of it is sometimes the visa, is within three days all the slots are gone. Countries like canada are deliberately targeting to steal away some of the best talent graduating from our universities by bragging that you can get the work force to live in canada but not in the u. S. I have a particular piece of legislation that expands the program but also creates rules and regulations so it cant be abused and used against the american worker. But the bigger issue is on the we admit a Million People a year to the United States permanently. My argument is, if youre in the best if youre one of the best people at what you do, i dont want you temporarily here, i want you here permanently. I want to you become an american. I want you to live in this country and become ingrained in our society and a culture. What ive argued is that the permanent Legal Immigration system needs to become more meritbased. We start admitting people to this nation permanently, primarily a on the basis what have they can contribute economically, not simply on whether or not you have a relative living here that serves as the magnet that brings you in. Thats why ive argued for a meritbased system. It reflects the 21st century much more accurately. Questioner hi, im danielle thompson. I have a question for you regarding open government. And government as platform. Open government believes that citizens should have access to all the data, laws and other information regarding government. And government as platform, an idea that believes government should make it easy for citizens to plug and play into their governments in order to govern themselves better. As president , how would you promote initiatives such as open government, which, coming from a conservative upbringing, who believes that people should govern themselves locally, how will you support initiatives of open government and government as platform . Mr. Rubio one of the platforms out there is about the online budgeting initiatives or other ideas to make more transparent the way government operates, particularly spending money. By providing that on an easy to use platform where the American People can access the mysterious federal government and understand where its spending money, how the moneys being spent, what the salaries of federal employees are, what the Spending Priorities are. So i would be open to leveraging technology to provide more transparency so that on an a ongoing basis individual americans would be able to have access to the way government operates and the way government spends money and the size of different programs, agencies, etc. I think technology has easy solutions for that if were willing to implement it. Questioner thanks for being here. Craig aaron from free press. Very interested, i appreciate you being in this dialogue, we talked a lot about companies, users and individuals. I think theres been this incredible upswing in internet activism in the last few years, uniting people across party lines, around issues of personal control. They dont want the government to be in charge of their online experience. But they dont want to handful of big corporations either. Im curious as president what you would do to protect privacy, peoples information and leave them in control of their own mr. Rubio thats important. Part of it is we have a system thats largely you have to opt out, for example, the way your information is used as opposed to the presumption being the other way. Theres this debate between the private sector which says, if we cant sell consumer information, then we cant offer all these services. The flip side of it is that Many American users, people even around the world are not aware that their information, unless they opt out, is being used and sold as a marketable good. That tension is very real. At the end of the day, if were forced to choose between both, id still err on the side of privacy rights of individual americans to opt in to the way their information is used. That meets enormous resistance, especially from banks, who find their Consumer Spending habits of their clients very valuable. But given a choice between these two, i think we always are on the side of individuals and the ability of individuals to have their private information protected, from being used in ways theyre not even aware of. On that topic in particular, i dont know if you knew this, but in bankruptcy the creditors have no obligation to maintain the terms of service that was originally signed even if people opted out when they signed on. Mr. Rubio meaning if you have a loan or bank account and you opted out of the information, once someone buying your debt, they dont have any yeah, any of these services. The companies collected all that data and if for some reason that company goes bankrupt, they have no obligation to that privacy. Mr. Rubio this is a 21st century issue that well have to confront. Questioner it seems like a lot of these regulatory battles that Companies Fight happen to be local in nature. Airbnb in San Francisco or uber in florida. How does the federal government get in there while preserving some of these local mr. Rubio it doesnt on the local issues. Youre right. A lot of these are being fought at multiple levels of government. Obviously theres nothing the federal government can do to tell a city, you have to allow uber to operate. Where we have a role is in the tax treatment and employment issues that i pointed out about how do you treat an independent contractor that doesnt mean theres a federal solution to all of this, but we have to ensure that our policies are conducive to innovation at the federal level. In addition to creating categories that allow us to account for the new employment, most american businesses, especially smaller ones, today you pay your tax rate on, that on your personal rate, not on the corporate rate, so thats where you find a large established industry might be paying very few taxes. Compared to a much smaller company. Ive argued that all a business income, no matter how youre structured, all business income should be taxed at one flat rate of 25 for everyone. That includes the money youre making in a subchapter s, your business income would only be taxed at 25 . Not at 39. 5 or 35 or whatever your personal rate might be. Thats a huge advantage for a smaller business. I would allow businesses to immediately expense anything they invest. Again, a large cooperation can afford to take that deduction on a scheduled depreciation. A Small Business that may not be around in four years they cant expense Capital Investments up front right away. These are examples of things we can do at the federal level to create a more even Playing Field for new operators and startups. Questioner greg waltman. I have a queen Energy AlternativeAnalytical Company do innovations in social media, professional sports as well. Mr. Rubio thats a pretty broad portfolio. Questioner going back to access. I was wondering, multibillion dollar wire fraud, there was a big loss in london. Lets stay on topic. Questioner journalists sit on the wire all day for a company like time warner inc. , contributing absolutely nothing to the economy and target people blocking sales and business im sorry. I would like to you respect if you dont mind. I would really like questioner [inaudible] wire fraud with no accountability. How do you plan to deal with fraud . The answer is you cant. You cheated on your wife in florida and im sorry. Im sorry. Questioner i think you should drop out of the race. Your polling numbers are too low to win. Youre not welcome here. I apologize. Mr. Rubio actually kind of weird anyway. [laughter] back to our regularly scheduled programming. Please. Questioner i was enjoying this until this last speaker. Im happy to be here and happy to listen to this discussion. Being one of the thousands of independent taxi owners in new york city, i do not have the means to have a research and Development Component to my business. But i am able to adapt. I am able to adapt. Should uber or any other company who has taxi technology, who hasnt bought taxi rights, be able to have those rights that i had to pay for without paying . Mr. Rubio i think theyre in a totally different Business Model. Their Business Model is not the same as a taxi cab. It connects the user on a different platform and a different way to the service that theyre trying to acquire. And thats just the result of an Economic Transformation. It happens, its unfortunate to some people, because it is disruptive. But every time weve had economic restructuring in this country, it has displaced some people. And our obligation is to ensure that the people that have been displaced can quickly access the benefits of the new economy or the new innovation. So, for example, the invention of the car was very disruptive to the horse drawn carriage industry, yet we had to figure a way to get those people online, either in a factory building cars or other industry that was created, that allowed them to once again restart their lives and get going and moving forward. But we cant stand in the way of these innovations. Theyre going to happen. Theyre going to happen in america or somewhere else in the world. Our job is to do the best we can to help people that are caught in that disruption, to either acquire new skills or add to their existing skills so they have access to the benefits of that new innovative economy. I think any effort to stand in the way of innovation, not only is fruitless, its counterproductive. Getting workers retrained brings up the question of education. And our Education System being built on the 20th century model rather than the 21st. There doesnt seem to be enough federal money for teacher training or mr. Rubio part of it is, if youre a nontraditional student, youre like this gentleman or somebody wholes has to work full time and raise a family, you cant drop everything and sit in a classroom for two years and be retrained in a gnaw profession or acquire a new skill. Competencybased learning would allow you to do a number of things. Number one, if you had an alternative accrediting model to the existing six big accreditors they would accredit innovative programs. If you have 20 years of Work Experience, thats worth something. That should be given College Equivalent Credit for. And then whatever youre missing you should be allowed to package from a variety of different sources. Whether its Community College course work, free online courses, paid online courses, additional Work Experience. So that people can package together the equivalent of a College Degree or the equivalent of a certificate award and use that. Thats at the high level. Mr. Rubio no, the entire economy. You can use that to retrain people to become paralegals or receptionists, to become a paralegal at a law office. You can create that as an opportunity to allow people to get credit for military service and other Work Experience to become a welder or someone that works in factory. What about our public schools, particularly in urban areas, where theyre underfunded and underresourced and there arent teachers to train science and math . Mr. Rubio the k12 educational system is a primary obligation of the local and state government. Where the federal government gets involved on occasion is helping key segments of our population through funding mechanisms, through the title 1 programs, through head start and so forth. My argument is not to cut those programs. My argument is that money should follow the child, not the child have to follow the money. I would allow people to use that money to access innovative programs. Thats one of the reasons i talked about opening up pell grant to dual enrollment. At the front end i believe that prek through 12 education should remain in the control of local jurisdictions. What could you do as president to ensure theres more funding for science and math . Mr. Rubio i believe that k12 education belongs at the state and local level. Both in its responsibility and its funding. Its never been a federal obligation. You dont want the federal government dictating the local communities. Because that money will always come with strings. And i want the youre not going to get educational innovation from the federal level. Youre only going to get the creation of new programs and approaches at the state and local level. Thats where k12edcation primarily belongs. Questioner can i respond . We want to get as many people as possible. Questioner we have a lot of people losing their jobs. Theres a limit to reeducating these people. Especially if theyre older. Using the do you think the government has the responsibility to care for these people and create a safety net . Mr. Rubio yes. I believe in a safety net. I dont think Free Enterprise works without a safety net. Free enterprise requires you to take a risk in many instances. If it fails, the consequences cant be that youre destitute. I dont think the safety net should be a life staple or way of life. I believe we should take our number two, i think our safety net is failing it. Doesnt cure poverty. The purpose of our Antipoverty Program should be to cure property, not to treat its symptoms. Thats what our safety net programs have become. A better approach is the one ive argued which is we should take our federal poverty money and allow them to be spent at the state and local level so they can design innovative programs that work in those communities that specifically target the causes or the leading causes of that poverty in that community. The only requirement that i would have, unless someone is permanently disabled and legitimately disabled, the only requirement i would have is that anyone who is receiving public assistance should be working or going to school and so any solution to poverty involves the following. It has to involve not just paying their bills in the short term, it also has to involve the acquisition of the skills you need to become employed and find a job that pays more. Ive also argued for a wage enhancement credit. Which would allow an individual that only makes 8 an hour to receive an extra 4 an hour because at least theyre working. Theyre not home unemployed. Now that becomes a stigma on your resume when you get hired years later. The longer youre unemployed the harder it is to get reemployed again. Weve offered a num number of Innovative Solutions to deal with. That the governments obligation ultimately is to create systems where individuals will fall on hard times, can get back up and try again. We dont want what cannot become is what it is now which is in some cases a lifestyle and in other cases a system that traps you. It makes you comfortable in your post but it does nothing to cure it. We need to cure poverty. Were not doing that right now. Questioner thank you for your emphasis on innovation. I am a Technology Education entrepreneur and i can tell you firsthand that sometimes startups have trouble finding the right talent to fill positions. Our local universities do a pretty decent job training a lot of foreignimportant students. Students. Borne some of whom are undocumented, like i have been since the first grade. So as president , what would you do to help foreignborn students and dreamers like me who want to stay in this country, who want to work in this country . Mr. Rubio i believe we need to pass immigration reform. I just dont believe we can do it in one massive piece of legislation. The reason why i know that is because i tried. We dont have the votes. We dont have the political support. Its actually gotten harder to do it that way. I think the only way forward is to say to the American People, we recognize that we have 11 million or 12 Million People here illegally, we have to stop the problem from continuing to grow from this point forward, this is not going to happen again. So step one has to be to prove that weve brought ilLegal Immigration moving forward under control. Step two is we have to modernize our Legal Immigration system so that its more meritbased and reflects 291st century. Reflects the 21st century. After weve done those two things, i believe the american ,eople would be very reasonable including the majority, would be reasonable how you deal with someone who is brought here as a , ifd, who is in a criminal they are criminal, they cannot stay, but they are not a criminal, what do you do with someone in that circumstance. And depending on your circumstances, you have to come forward and pass a background check and become proficient in english, start paying taxes and you get a work permit. A legal status that would allow them to be in this country for at least 10 years. After that period has expired im open to having people apply for a permanent residency. That would have majority support in this country but that is the biggest impediment. We have 12 million here, if we do it the wrong way, we will have another 12 million. Audience member yes. To bring back your refrigerator example, where do you stand on the right to repair . John deere prohibits only authorized dealers to repair things. Same thing for apple. You lose your warranty. Audience member there are restrictive terms of service, is it possible that you brought the wrong brand of refrigerator. Many independent contractors are building small repair businesses, but in terms of services and policies of the manufacturers dont allow third parties to repair. Senator rubio i havent thought about that in depth so i cant give you a great answer. I havent thought about it. As we move forward in this conversation about innovation and these sorts of services, these are the issues we will have to work through. Any Economic Transformation involves significant disruption, whether to the work force or issues like you have raised and well have to work through these. You cannot stand in the way of it and say he are going to try to go back to the way the things were. That is an Impossible Task and counterproductive one. Doesnt mean its going to be seamless. Im sure we can work through many of these, but we have no choice but to do so. This is the u. S. Economy and only going to change faster than ever and we need to adjust to it quickly