Transcripts For CSPAN2 Key Capitol Hill Hearings 20141031

Moderator mr. Sub i will have plenty of time to talk about it that we need to move the discussion on. Another big race has been self dakotas views of the eb5 Investor Program. We will get to that coming up next. Moderator welcome back to our senate debate. South dakota voters have heard a lot about the state administration of the eb5 immigrant Investor Program during this campaign. Moderator Chuck Grassley has been working to root out corruption sewer question to the candidates is will you work with grassley to improve the program or should the program be eliminated . Lets start with you mr. Howie. Howie they somewhat we have seen in south dakota im hardpressed to say i would support the program. We have seen all of the things that folks are really wary of everything from missing millions to fbi investigations and we dont know yet if governor rounds is a partner of those investigations. Certainly it seems like the 1. 6 million that his company took from the eb5 committee would be worth looking at. I believe it transcends honesty and integrity. The eb5 program itself picks winners and losers and in south dakota south dakota taxpayers were the losers in the winter seems to be friends and cronies of former governor rounds. I think its time that we do Something Different in washington d. C. And thats Something Different is not spend more of the same career politicians that send someone who has got the record of standing up to powerbrokers and even parks officials when they are wrong and frequently they are. Moderator lets go to mr. Pressler in question. Pressler i would favor new immigration bill and i would vote to repeal it. The issue is corruption at the state level and that is why we havent it hasnt been examined and looked at. Based on my experience and ones first year in United States senate if there is a problem governor rounds and the people of south dakota might find themselves of find themselves with a weakened senator for five or six years. That is why its important we shouldve had an should still have a complete statement of fact from governor rounds on this matter. Theres a great deal of corruption in this program. I recently brought the head of the fbi the leading corruption founder in the United States agent goode to south dakota who endorsed me and he said we need to elect honest people with honest reputations to the United States senate. He felt so strongly about the issues in the south Dakota Senate race that he came out here as a volunteer and endorsed me based on the issue of honesty and he said in this race we have to be very careful because there are so many unanswered questions. I would point out that governor rounds of his first in the senate will be and it could be harmful to the people of south dakota. Moderator governor rounds lets go to you. Would you repeal this program or improve this program . Rounds i appreciate senator grassley support. Senator grassley is a friend of mine in his campaign for me. He has been very gracious with his time and ive appreciated that. Ive met with him several times. Senator grassley will look at all federal programs. This is one in which he has been around since 1990. Every federal program out there should be reviewed. Theres nothing different between this one and the rest. Make sure thats something we have i done in south dakota. In south dakota we have taken the facts and on the bus to review them. This one can be reviewed as well and i would support that. In fact as a shared with other people there lots of federal programs out there that need to be reviewed. Take a look at the failed federal policies that are there now. Take a look at obamacare. That has got to be repealed and replaced. Take a look at the failure to allow us to build pipelines including the keystone xl. Look at whats going on right now in western south dakota and eastern south dakota because of a federal program to build the pipeline. If we could go we would have farmers and ranchers who do get there bring to market. Thats an economic boon to south dakota thats not going to happen. Record crowds in south dakota we cant get it to market. We can get paid because of the federal program that they are not taking care of. This president shouldve had that policy overturned a long time ago and it wont happen when harry reid is in charge of United States senate. This president s policies are on the agenda. They are on the ballot in a vote for anyone up here is a vote for the continuation of president obamas failed policy in south dakota. Moderator we will give mr. Weiland a chance in a shaking his head. Weiland i have said from the getgo that this is a bad program for the country and its turned out to be a bad program for south dakota. I would vote to repeal it. One of the first things i would do. This is big money on steroids. This is selling a path to citizenship for half a Million Dollars to wealthy Foreign Investors and anytime you have an intersection of big money and politics that breeds corruption. We have seen a lot of that here in south dakota. There are more questions about eb5 than there are answers and i guess im disturbed about both about mike rounds. He has not been willing to stand up and take any responsibility. He has not been willing to go under oath and answer the questions. He has not been willing to basically tell the truth. When i hear him talking about the jobs that eb5 five created twitches five created which is 30 been debunked by the south dakota press corps like the jobs he talked about the keystone will create. This is nothing more than halftruths trying to convince people to vote for someone that i believe gordon howie is hard to trust. Ive heard him talking about medicare and how its going to be rocked by obamacare which has been debunked by the National Press. I have heard him talk about wanting to close down bosworth air force base because i got support from some progressive group. Ive heard him talk about how he didnt know that there was a deal in southfield going on between mr. Boland and a private group that he set up. Its time for some truth and honesty and ive been talking to people and if thats what they want for their next senator then i think mike needs to come clean tonight. Moderator a quick rebuttal on this issue mr. Howie. What you have to say dead to this discussion . Howie i believe we have seen an exercise in professional d. C. In this whole race and frankly im not going to vote for rick weiland. I dont think thats a surprise to anybody that it aggravates me and most south dakotans when we hear one of the candidates Say Something that he knows is just not true. Governor rounds you know that rick weiland is not going to close Ellsworth Ellsworth air force base. Why do you just tell the truth and while youre at it when you give back over the 1. 5 million at you and your company took from folks of south dakota. Are you ready to do that tonight . Lets come clean and restore some trust in your candidacy. Moderator mr. Pressler what would you improve about the program . Governor rounds would use date tonight why the autopsy is than suppress . The people of the state wants out. We have been talking in circles but lets get to the heart of the matter. He was her secretary of commerce in your Office Every Day for eight years. We have not heard a statement for me as to why you think he committed suicide or was murdered or whatever happened to them. This will be dug up by the press if you were in the senate. He should tell us tonight. You have not been taking responsibility on this issue. Have you been taking responsibility and what do you have to add . Rounds this is the kind of trash talking has been going on for over a year and a half. Its been any window and misinformation and mr. Hou whiskey is a flatout lynn. This is not the way we should handle this in the first place but this is what we had with regard to this particular program. This is trash talking. These folks dont want to talk about the real issues that are important to south dakota such as the failed obama policies. They dont want to talk about it because they dont want to talk about the issues surrounding the keystone xl pipeline and issues surrounding their support for obamacare. What they want to do is take as much time away from the real debate issues here so they dont have to defend the failed policies of barack obama which has the president himself has said are on the ballot this november. A vote for any one of the individuals besides myself is a vote for the failed policies of president barack obama. Moderator quickly on the p5 and we will move quickly on to the other issues. Howie south dakota wants a leader someone whos willing to take credit for the good things that happen on their watch watch but not willing to take responsibility when things go bad. We havent seen that from mike rounds. He is willing to throw everybody under the bus instead of being willing to stand up and say i have made some mistakes and im sorry but lets move on. He talks about the issues. We have several debates and forums with gordon how he and senator pressler that he chose not to show up to. We were talking about the issues of me sitting at home complaining in his paid Television Ad funded by big money. All we want to do is trash talk and talk about eb5. I hope the people of south dakota are listening tonight because you have seen the real mike rounds. He doesnt speak truth to power. Moderator thank you mr. Weiland. According to our legislative poll 60 of south dakota and support building the keystone xl pipeline and 30 are posted. Moderator or question for you is do you think the keystone xl pipeline will benefit south dakota do you support the project . This question goes first to mr. Pressler. Pressler i feel strongly that the Keystone Pipeline should be altered in montana and north dakota and midwestern refineries. To hault oil all the way down to louisiana coast to coast and then ship it back to south dakota in the midwest costs 1 dollar a gallon in terms of your fuel costs. I believe strongly that we need to american pipelines and they should be made into an american pipeline. President obama can alter it or demand it be altered. To go to nd eastward to the refineries in chicago minnesota and wisconsin keeps the oil in the midwest. If we haul it to louisianas governor rounds suggests and all the way back by train and truck it will be about 1 dollar a gallon more on your fuel bill when you are filling up your car. At the threepoint pipeline plan and i resent governor rounds saying that we have not discussed that. We have had all these debates where i presented my plan and he has not attended. We do need to buy plants and north dakota. Its better environmentally to move oil by pipeline than by train or truck that well have to haul it back to louisiana by train and truck under governor rounds plan. I would go to see president obama and say please demand that the xl pipeline be altered so it doesnt go across our precious water supply. We have very little potable Drinking Water and south dakota and i want to protect the obama water reservoir. It would stay in the region and your gas bill will be 1 dollar less in diesel fuel 1. 50 less. Moderator mr. Rounds you obviously support the pipeline. Go ahead. Rounds i do support the Keystone Pipeline and i support it for a couple of reasons. Number one its a shovelready. Private industry knew then that we were going to have literally 1 Million Barrels a day coming out of north dakota. This president has failed to respond to that and even though his own state department has said there will be 42,000 jobs created directly and indirectly and south dakota 3000 jobs. Over 20 million in tax revenue coming in and this is the company that wants to come into our counties and schools and south dakota in western south dakota. This is good for south dakota and also good for america because it allows us to continue creating an Energy Independent country. Keystone xl pipeline brings not just canadian oil down but also 100,000 barrels of north dakota crude. Thats trained we wont have to be taking oil out of north dakota and that makes it available for bringing grain out of south dakota. Some people would say thats just a drop in the bucket but right now we have more and more oil developed and north dakota. During the same time these farmers and ranchers along the rail lines in south dakota are getting less on a per bushel basis than they would otherwise. Heres whats happening. Ill be interchange is a severe filled with trains going to north dakota that are blocking the way so our trains cant get to where they normally go to drop off corn. We have corn sitting on the ground in me sitting on the ground and soybeans sitting on the ground. It will take two weeks to get our grain from south dakota to where they would drop it now takes three weeks which means that producers have to rent those rail cars or an extra week and that extra cost comes directly out of their paycheck. This is an economic catastrophe waiting to happen and we are seeing it happen because this president failed economic policies in this misunderstanding about how to get the oil to market safely is hurting us directly. This is wrong. Moderator we need to move on. Mr. Weiland can respond. Do you support the keystone xl pipeline and do you think he will benefit south dakota . Weiland i dont and it wont. Very easy. Just do your homework. Mike is getting his information from big oil. He has everything to gain we have everything to lose. This is not a we are talking 3500 permanent jobs in 1800 temporary jobs. Thats like macys hiring holiday workers for two weeks. This is not Energy Security for south dakota or the country. This is energy thats being pumped to pipeline down to port arthur texas and is going overseas to be used over there there. It has nothing to do with Energy Security. This really is the new argument coming from big oil because it has nothing to do with freeing up the rail lines. Thats another big oil argument that they are trying to make. They have lost the ones on jobs and Energy Security. They want that to go to the east coast not to port arthur texas. Theyre not interested in putting in the pipeline but big oil is so desperate and have people like mike rounds in their hip pocket unfortunately that they are willing to say anything they can to convince the American People and go been south dakotans the biz and now they are 60 out there that think its a good deal but you have been hearing the propaganda from mike rounds in the Oil Companies for far too long. It would have been easy to rick weiland to rollover latino its at the heart of this . We are talking about a pipeline that if kids build, it could basically wipe out the aquifer. We have a lot of farm families and ranchers who are out of business. They have been on the land for five generations. Is it really worth it for no jobs and no energy and the whole grain thing that mike is making a . Is it worth it to run a pipeline through this country . I dont think so. Moderator we will give mr. Howie a chance to weigh in on this. Howie thank you. I agree with most south dakota set this pipeline is a net gain for south dakota and frankly for america but the larger question is are we going to have the United States senate that will Work Together and develop a comprehensive Energy Program . We have seen that seau by the kind of leadership that demonstrated with Mitch Mcconnell and harry reid. They have both failed us miserably. So yes i think there is a net positive but i just cant stop my time without challenging the governor. He sat here and said it was a flat out lie that his company took 1. 6 million from izzy p5 committee for his company. Im just asking you, do you categorically deny the press reports . Moderator we are talking about the keystone xl pipeline. Anymore and the keystone xl . Howie im waiting for response from the governor. Moderator mr. Pressler lets move on to you for a bottle on the keystone xl pipeline. Rounds you cannot carry north dakota crude in the same pipeline as a persons oil and thats a lie told to us by the Oil Companies. The original keystone plan was to move canadian tar sand oil to louisiana. Now that they are under fire they say we will put north dakota crude in there. You cant. I looked at an engineering report today. That would be impossible to do so our shippers should not be told that we need to american pie lines to run in north dakota, two american pipelines taking up two midwestern refineries and bring it to south dakota. This is absolutely absurd. Moderator mr. Browns a quick rebuttal. Rounds with all due respect to senator pressler ive talked to the individuals building the keystone xl pipeline and they have made it clear that they have reserved 10 of the allowable space on the pipeline to bring north dakota crude which is a light and sweet crude. Its different from the tar sands coming out of canada. Its not intermix. Set up in separate segments to run through the pipeline. One of the things the opponents to the keystone say is they will contribute to global warming. It will reduce the cost to the American Consumer by 6 cents a gallon. I dont think farmers and ranchers will burn more diesel. The other part is this. Those same Petroleum Refineries are actually right now this is a replacement for venezuelan crude. We have become more Energy Independent. We are actually moderator mr. Weiland we will give you a chance to talk. Weiland the 10 demand talking to folks exploring and pulling out the bakken sweet crude . No. Big oil is a conspiracy going on between keystone and mike rounds wanting to build this pipeline. The folks out there want to send it to the east coast. They dont want to senator pipeline to texas and over to china. Its not about jobs. Its not about Energy Security. Certainly not about bringing up grain cars to move our corn and what its about frankly and at the end of the day do you know what this is about . Its about greed. Its about greed and making millions and millions of dolla dollars. Moderator thank you mr. Weiland and we need to give mr. Howie a chance. Howie you have heard that 60 of south dakotans approved of the pipeline and what tells that is 40 dont. I believe both moderator 30 . Howie the undecided business has a lot to do with the leadership we have seen in america and frankly in south dakota of late. I believe if we are going to be productive and effective we need to have leaders that we can believe instead of the old argument about information and misinformation. Would it be refreshing if we had a leader we can trust . Moderator from pipelines to job control. Our discussion but the candidate wraps up. Welcome back to her u. S. Senate debate. Congress rejected a proposal for highcapacity magazines last year. Our question for the candidates to support this type of gun control . Mr. Rounds you get the first response. Rounds i and the endorsed candidate of the National Rifle association. I believe in protecting our Second Amendment rights. I think the new attacks are going way too far and i will not support those. The idea behind the Second Amendment was to make sure Constitutional Rights to bear and carry arms but to take bits and pieces out. The whole final response is that you cannot allow the federal government to make after into our 2nd amendment rights. The only people that will not have guns are those that are lawabiding. The criminals will still have theirs. To me this is a very simple issue. 2nd amendment rights should be defended in south dakota. Its not just about the defense but the quality of life we get. I got it because i wanted to pass down the heritage to the next generation. If this continues the way it is we may not have that right again so some of us have to stand up and say we understand that a gun is a tool and it should be respected. We have to train young people to do that correctly. We should not be making all of these crazy new ideas and saying some person suggesting that an Assault Rifle is one thing and you cant have that in rifle without summary shells. Moderator we will give mr. Weiland a chance. Do you support putting restrictions on highcapacity magazines . Weiland i think sometimes democrats get pigeonholed into being against guns and the Second Amendment. I believe in the Second Amendment. Are people push back sometimes and i disagree with mike here. We saw another School Shooting last week. We need some kind of legislature process that would allow us to do universal background checks and try the best we can with our technology to ensure mentally ill people and criminals dont have readily access to firearms. I dont think thats radical and frankly as i have traveled around south dakota by a vast people that have shown up at my town Hall Meetings what they think and that seems to be pretty common sense. Mike wants to talk about common sense and the values in south dakota. I think a majority of south dakotans are with me on that. The nra is not not your grandfathers nra or your dads nra. They have a calm a very narrow focused group that frankly i think is being driven somewhat by bigmoney special interest in the arms manufacturers that dont want any kind of commonsense legislation. I just think thats unfortunate. We can do better by her kids, by her students, by her teachers and administrators. Moderator mr. Weiland thank you. Mr. Howie do you howie the gun owners of america issued their scorecard and rated me the highest of any candidate running for federal office in south dakota. I dont have the celebrity politician endorsing me. Frankly i dont know but i want them but what i found interesting is that those celebrities come to south dakota and perpetuates this deception that says some mouth governor rounds is the only progun candidate in this race the only prolife candidate. My record of support for conservative traditional values is clear. Its Crystal Clear in the recent bad misdirection and misinformation is perpetuated is an attempt to keep my record in the backroom and cover frankly for a record on those two issues that the governors we come. Moderator thank you mr. Howie and mr. Pressler your feelings on putting restrictions on assault style rifles and pressler i support the bob dole plan which requires some background background checks if you buy an assault weapon. That does not mean you were strict gun control. Im a hunter but we need to do something about the killings in our high schools in our schools. That is the present law. I cant see why governor rounds and the nra is against it. I think its very appropriate that before one buys an Assault Rifle there should be some background checks are we not selling them to people who have severe mental problems or her record. Almost every case where there has been a problem it is than where someone has been able to buy a gun who should not have been able to. That is a lemon to say that im for gun control. You are getting those mailings and tv ads that dont believe it. I have 140,000 in my campaign fund. A lot of them are in this area. I am for the bob dole gun plan which is a republican plan incidentally which calls for some background checks on assault weapons. Moderator we will skip the rebuttals and go to another topic the Affordable Care act being implemented currently. Is it realistic to repeal and replace the law and we will go to you mr. Weiland. Weiland i came out very early and said you know what we can didnt make us better for everybody is give them an option to buy into medicare. Medicare serves south dakotans well. 140,000 south dakotans rely on it. I have been attacked by mike brown. He represents the Insurance Industry and i understand their concerns. To be forced to have to compete with medicare id be a little bit problematic. They may have to cut the salaries theyre ceos are making. Medicare works. 97 cents of every dollar goes to pay for health care. 3 goes to pay for salaries. Thats not the same when it comes to big insurance. I think giving people a choice between big insurance which will bring down the cost of health care for everyone. Even on mikes web site it talks about we need Affordable Health care insurance. Join me and lets i have asked them to come out on the road in debate that with me but he has refused to do that. They didnt want medicare. They have the political contributions and the lobbyists and they killed it when it was being decided in washington. Moderator we need to be quick on time. Mr. Howie. Howie it does not come as a surprise to anyone in south dakota. I do like governor rounds suggestion that we should repeal and replace. We should repeal the entire law and frankly governor that includes you. I think its time that we put government in its proper role. Moderator mr. Pressler on Affordable Care act. Pressler the Affordable Care act illustrates why im running as an independent. The absurdity of in this country. This plan was started by governor romney who i supported and gave money to and he is a friend of mine. It was then carried out by president obama. Romney had run the election it would be called, it would be called and all the republicans would support it but because of called obamacare all the democrats supported. Its about the same thing. We do need some form of the Affordable Care act in south dakota. Ive talked to county commissioners. They say that they need Something Like that so they can push back. Moderator we have to move on to mike rounds and you have 30 seconds. Rounds we have to repeal and replace obamacare section by section. Its over 2. 4 trillion no plan to pay for it. It will increase the federal debt like you cant believe. It will take away choice for positions and takes away choices for individual patients. Medicare subsidized by private Insurance Industries picking up the difference between the cost for what medicare paid. If you do what you will see medicare go away as it exists today. If you dont want medicare to exist then follow what rick is suggesting because it will cease to exist as we know it today. Moderator thank you mr. Rounds. We will be right back. Welcome back to our new special report for a time for closing statements. Mr. Rounds you can go first. Rounds tonight you have heard my vision for america. I want to bring common sense to washington d. C. We have to repeal and replace obamacare. We have to pass the raines act. We have to get the pipeline in the ground. We have to protect our Constitutional Rights. This is critical for south dakotans but tonight also we have to take that south dakota, and sent to keep send it to washington so well you have her divisions. You have heard my vision tonight that you have also heard from my opponents. You havent heard of vision from them. What you have heard some trashing me. Thats because they dont have a vision. What they will do with pass a failed approach to policies by president barack obama. A vote for any one of my competitors is a vote for this president s policies. South dakota deserves better. The stakes are too high. Im asking for your vote and your support. Thank you. Moderator now to you mr. Weiland. Weiland this election is about a fight for the middle class. I also think this election is about the trust and leadership and ive been spending a lot of time talking to people of south dakota and i know what theyre looking for. They are looking for honesty. Theyre looking for someone who show up and fight for them every day in the senate. Someone who is going to show up and fight and be on their side. This election is about getting money out of our politics and our government and out of the pockets of people who boast about raising 9 million boast about spending all their time outside south dakota doing it. There couldnt be a starker difference between mike rounds and i when it comes to this election and our hopes for this country. I believe in the promise of america. I really do and i believe in equal opportunity for everyone. Mike rounds supports the paul ryan budget which squashes equal opportunity because it goes after programs and invest the middle class. I believe in the power to vote. As for your vote next tuesday. Moderator mr. Howie. Howie thanks for the opportunity. This is a sacred trust and i believe this election is very much about who can we trust. Can we trust career politicians . If we look back at in history we see George Washington who was the example for politics in this nation. Actually only served eight years. He wasnt looking for a career advancement. He was looking for an american advancement. [inaudible] politics should never be a career. It should be a calling, call to service to god and country. Im asking for your support for conservative traditional values and i will guarantee if you look at my record you will see i will be a strong supporter of the values that south dakota holds dear those conservative traditional values. Moderator thank you mr. Howie and mr. Pressler you get the final word. Pressler there will probably be for independents in the senate. I was endorsed by angus king of main who is a fiscal conservative who very much wants me to join msn and pennon. It appears that there will be in attendance senator selected from kansas. Those for independents will challenge the senate rules and get things moving again. The personality we talk about may be gone or change that we must change the rules of the senate so he put on things that we get things done. I can take my seniority back to the senate to fight for south dakota. South dakota is 20 years of seniority invested in me and i came out of semiretirement as a professor to run on idealism but for one term i have only served six years because income senators have to spend 52 or time raising money. I can work 100 my time for the people of south dakota. They want to go back to the senate take my experience in my seniority fight for the state of south dakota as far as Real Services concerned are Senior Citizens and by the way i am for Social Security. Dont believe the ads. Moderator we would like to thank her candidates for competing in her u. S. Senate debate and thank you to the viewers. Watch for details coming up on the news at 10. Moderator thank you very much. Up next on cspan2 political posters talk about next weeks Midterm Elections. Then in New Hampshire governors debate between incumbent Maggie Hassan and walt havent signed. Now a discussion about Midterm Elections. Democratic and republican pollsters discuss some of the key issues and races. This 90 minute event was hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center. Good morning everybody. Im a senior fellow at the Bipartisan Policy Center. I like to recognize any of my former colleagues. I see the honorable jim jones former ambassador of mexico and distinguished american pr bomb martin frost distinguished american from the state of texas. Martin gave me this book called the partisan divide that he and congressman tom davis wrote that is going to be published fairly soon. Im giving him a little plot there. And the other former members of the house or senate here in the room . Thank you. I want to thank everybody for coming this morning to talk about something which is on a lot of peoples minds in washington and i can think of no better beginning than the beginning of the new congress to discuss reasonable ways that our government can work better. The politics is interesting in the campaigns are interesting but the whole purpose of all of this is to elect a government that is supposed to do right for the people. I think as we look at the issues today we ought to consider how this is going to impact governing america over the next couple of years. And understanding the cause of the partisan divide has been a big issue at the Bipartisan Policy Center for the past two years. With johns leadership we have had something called the commission on political reform chaired by former senator Daschle Lott Snowe governor kempthorne and myself and we have a lot of recommendations on how to get the country back on track and those are available on line. We can get you hard copies if anyone here needs and here needs and could we have three excellent panelists are today better on tv frequently with mark mehlman and amy walter walter. If the decade of experience analyzing elections and politics in washington. They are here to talk about what they think is going to happen next week and how they think the results will shape the next two years of governing in this country. Before handing off the microphone to john i cant resist weighing in on the candidates races that are near and dear to my heart. Sometimes we in kansas get paranoid even though we are a wonderful state and everything is beautiful but often we are known for that deepest hand dug well in america and the largest ball of twine. But we also have perhaps the most interesting political environment in the country right now with respect to not only are governors race in our senators rice and secretary of states secretary of states racing events on the congressional races out here. When thomas frank asks whats the matter with kansas i see nothing is the matter with kansas. In fact we have genuine debate taking over and a revival of policies bear and other places in the country as well. Whatever the reasons its clear that over the past decade or two the most conservative candidates have had a successful couple of decades in kansas. Notwithstanding kansas natural republican leading his kansas voters are playing close attention in examining the race for governor or senator in secretary of state and even the congressional races based on the results of thing, and tenure its impact on jobs Public Services Global Economy and society as a whole. Kansas voting patterns historically trend republican. In truth and they dueling republican and i would say i was a victim of that myself in the 1990s. Kansans are not wedded irrevocably to one party and people forget the 1978 democratic speaker of the house incumbent republican governor in kansas. In 1990 the state treasury beat a republican governor in kansas and i will talk in a bit about the bob dole race in 1994 because their democratic congressman almost beat an incumbent republican senator but no matter what happens in november whichever party wins these races im hopeful that this can be positive not only for kansas but other places as well. Senator dole who is one of the founders of the bipartisan top center here in the legend of american politics once told me that elections are therapeutic. I believe he was referring to is specifically a closely run race in 1974 against former u. S. Representative bill roy. Roy gave him a tough race. Senator dole won by about 1 . It was the closest political race in the country postwatergate. Each dole and roy spent roughly about 1 million in total in that senate race. Today i dont know of 1 million would have bought them three days of advertising. In my view such a close call against senator dole the incentive to pursue more pragmatic approaches to politics and to do the job with greater stability. Senator dole never gave up on his conservative values but he did embody a more inclusive approach to the kansas electorate. He was a senator for every kansan and not just republican kansans. I think that race is also a lesson for both people on both sides of the isle democrats and republicans. The politics can be a way to try to bring people together rather than divide people. No matter how the elections turn out next week lets hope that all the winners not only in kansas but all over the country can follow senator doles bipartisan lead. With that i turn to john 48 red river democracy project to introduce our great panelists. Thank you all very much. [applause] thank you dan. I was wondering if you are going to go with the metaphors that we are falling into a hole or getting bundled up in twine. Thank you for that great introduction. We have a great panel today to talk about the Midterm Elections which are upon us but also to think a little bit about the polarization in our electorate or Congress Going forward. Each of us are going to speak for 10 minutes or so and have a discussion and open it up to your questions. Each of us will address the current races but also the longerterm trends and polarization. A series of polls that we did on political reforms some of them directly addressing polarization and some of the policy changes so we will hear more from them on that. See you on our website where he pulled a number of candidates and parties and groups and its a great panel and i will say a few words and i will go right down the line as well. Where are we going in this election and there is a republican direction to this election and i think its something of the republican election and three big macro factors in elections at the midterms to go against the president s party. They almost always lose. Two Midterm Elections are a little bit more republican in terms of their composition and i think that people can overstate how different they are. Certainly bringing a mix of voters that are more favorable to the Republican Party. And third, the president s Approval Rating, which does affect these elections and the president himself has said that he is on the ballot and republicans are trying to sustain that. It does affect these elections and the president s Approval Ratings have been very consistently throughout the year and finally in the senate where most people are noted, republicans obviously have a lot more seats and focusing your attention with what they are competing on an very republican places and i will come back to that. Because there arent so many seats like this in the senate and house today. Were republican residents when bylaw, these are those which republicans are quite likely to win and if they win there is a body of others that they will have to win a few seats. So they began with a strong base by having likely winds. Aside from that, there are only six other races we would watch. And that is where republicans are leading in the polls, iowa, colorado. Two states where we have republican leaning states that are going against the polls that are very close and that is in kansas were dan mentioned and also in georgia. And certainly these are leaning a little bit democratic and they are swing states within the margin. And so quickly without saying much in detail, the house, again, the direction and number of Seats Available is not so great. The number of those out there is small and the gains of the modest amount are likely. And so its hard to say how its going to go. We have a good republican trend, but many have close races, some against trends and some were republicans my win in a Democratic State where democrats could win in other states as well. Close the states. And i think everyone will take this on in a different way. One way of looking at congress and what has happened is to think about how members of congress do this against their party. And these are very common. In 1992 there were many seats that were held by democrats were republican president s would win overwhelmingly by our town and we had a measure where there were over 90 seats that democrats could say, that number was a large number. And a substantial number in democratic places and today we think about others on the democratic side, some of who are retiring like that on the democratic side. So i think that we will see some of the trends continuing and that is my point in the senate. If those seats that we are talking about in montana and alaska and West Virginia, is a term republican we will be left with a few seats left better like that. Joe manchin is still in West Virginia and you have a camp in north dakota. And a few republicans. That is a state that is democratic, shes a republican. And that is just a tiny fraction of the senate and those members of the senate where the most moderate. If you think about a member from a swing district, they are not necessarily much different than their average member of congress. But this is where you find a democrat representing and a republican representing. So we have some sort of trend at least in the senate that we have been seeing over the last 30 years, less party voting represented. So with that, im going to turn to our guest. When you think about the races and some of the work as well. Thank you to the Bipartisan Policy Center for putting this on and for inviting us. We have really enjoyed working together. Some of the worker we have done is very interesting stuff and i encourage you to go on the website and take a look at that. And its also important to share this. These two are truly voices of reason and the very best in their fields. And its a privilege to be on the podium with both of you. John has done a good job of sketching this environment and those of us who in the polling business has seen this coming for a long time and we are constantly on the lookout for a way and we knew that thunderstorms could develop even if they are not on the radar at the moment. So we are constantly scanning the radar. But within last week to 10 days we have started to pick up the thunderstorms developing. And there were was only four Percentage Points up a week before the election, the tuesday before the election that we were pulling through the weekend. And so on thursday he was up by seven and saturday he was up by nine and the following tuesday he beat an incumbent democratic senator by 14 Percentage Points. He gained 10 points in the last week. But unless youre pulling through the weekend you would miss it. So we are starting to see this now, as we sit here the thursday before the election of a building of a republican wire. But in the Washington Post just came out with this, 66 to 64. Cbs news came out with one where we have generic preference for republicans at a point. And this includes 57 to 39. The generic preference for republicans in 2010 was about four. Just to put that in context. Theres a real sense where you are starting to see republicans favored now a lot of the bigger issues they had it been a few weeks ago on the economy. And in states where republicans have done well or even better, and we are starting to see an expansion of the republican leads. We are a week away from the election, but its fair to say that we are starting out to see the evidence of this wave and if you follow the polling through the weekend, you will be able to get a sense of just how big that wave is likely to be. And i agree with john, i think the republicans are likely to pick up the three in West Virginia, south dakota and montana and i think that republicans are likely to do very well in louisiana, although itll probably be a runoff in louisiana and we may not know until december. But if Mary Landrieu and cassidy are in a runoff, the object overwhelmingly favoring chastity in that race. Iowa and colorado are two of the swing states where wave comes in and its going to be enough to do this. And so we get a commendation of the Larger Forces and the broader environment and you have the makings of a significant way. And that is something this year that is kansas. If you wouldve told me that a incumbent republican governor and senator will both be in tough races for reelection in kansas, and here we are and theres a lot that we all have to learn. In the house i think the best bet right now is probably upper singledigit gains for republicans and if this wave comes and ended substantial as it is at the moment it could sweep republicans together and so assuming that we are right or republicans take control of the Senate Although that may be december 6 with a louisiana runoff or maybe even january 6, assuming that they control the house and senate, what does this mean . Well, to a certain extent i think that the outlook depends on the press. Bill clinton in 1994 lost control of congress and said that i need to recalibrate here and he figured out how to work with some of the republicans and welfare reform being one of them. And he had less ability to work with his own party in order to get something done in congress and i will just issue one morning when it comes to polarization. This is one question from the survey that mark and i did in february 2013 and i have to give credit where credit is due. This is a stroke of genius that came up with this idea and we asked about education policy and a split sample. And we have reduced class sizes in our schools and now the republicans have proposed is making sure that they teach the basics. Democrats have proposed increasing teacher pay while licking making it easier and so republicans love the republican plan. Seventy to 10. And this was the republican plan and the democratic plan and everybody goes to their corners and said lets support our plan. This guy knows his audience, i will tell you that. Thank you for my invitation. Im happy to be here today. And i dont disagree with anything that has been done and i am much more interested in what happens after the election and what is happening on election night, even though it is christmas to me. I have been staring at these boxes with a big bow on them for weeks and i have been shaking the iowa senate one. And that is something that we need to look at, does this look at a 1995 way that both sides recognize that we cant get this done without the other one and move forward. The idea of the longago times. So for those of us who live especially in dc, we will appreciate this and in the dc area. We have a county Board Election in arlington and this is the county board and we want them to worry about the roads and they gave me the positions on obamacare and gay marriage and theyre giving you their positions everywhere else. And i just want to make sure that those streets are paved and the schools are funded and it has to be that. You cant possibly vote for this especially in arlington where it is a democratic county. Just to let you know that i didnt vote for ken and i love gay marriage. So even if those are not issues that you shouldnt be should be concerned about, people are still voting based on that sort of mentality. You cant possibly be good as an independent because we cant trust on those other issues. So i think that we are kind of trapped in that cycle. The other thing is watching politics since 1994, the batters about the elections is when we talk about what clinton was able to do in 1995 and he was able to do it because there were moderates in the house. In the house and in the senate. There were peoples that were republicans in new england and democrats in the south and they all wanted to Work Together because they knew it was in her best political interest and there are zero republicans in new england in the house. John boehner is the last man standing in the south in georgia is a white southern democrat. And so i say this to both sides that democrats won in 2006 by turning every republican, including the moderate middle republican into a caricature of george bush and all the badness of frustration including moderate democrats in every republican turned to this character of obama. So theres not much to work with. And typically but the Republican Party in the selection, yes, we have to talk about this next legislative session. And about who they want to be and who their agenda is going to be. They have been very successful in this 2010 election about making the case against barack obama and how terrible he is and how terrible his policies are. Theres never been a positive case made for the Republican Party. It doesnt work with Midterm Elections or when youre trying to be elected as. And it is clear that the leadership wants to get something done. Kevin mccarthy talking about how theres going to be cooperation and Mitch Mcconnell talking about the regular rules and regular order. This is going to be a collaborative process. The crappy thing that were going to to work with both come in a house in the senate, were going to get together and focus on an agenda. And some say that sounds fantastic. So its kiloliters back and look at who the people are in congress would have to agree for this from their leaders. And so when you look at how there are three charts that i put together but i think highlight just how difficult this is going to be for republicans to bring the party together, the first is the Brookings Institute which has done a great job looking at primaries this year and if you go back to 2004 primaries are getting more competitive which is not surprising and they are getting less competitive at the general election level in more competitive at the competitive level. As the margins have narrowed with his and her challenger, he saw where we heard from the Mainstream Media that the tea party was dead and that all those incumbents survived. We want more cooperation cooperation, we dont want pitchforks or torchs to take the place down u. S. Republicans specifically do want to see cooperation . The question how they ask it in the Washington Post poll is working in a bipartisan manner verses sticking to your position 50 said stick to the position. Begat teapartier only 30 one compromise. Sova identified teapartier voters that does not say i want to see Republican Leadership to go out to work with the president and i think that is somewhat problematic. Hoodies think has a vision for the country . The republicans nor the president who has a vision to move forward . 40 percent of republicans think that republicans have a vision for the country so it is a report a problematic place to be right now. I would argue the best news is that they dont have a very good night because what every party does is they take it as a mandate that everything they have done is right and Everything Else is wrong with donated compromise we picked up 12 seats in the house doing everything right. And that will lot be governed with a much bigger challenge for the Republican Party right now we think it is time to how mr. To compromise with the white house. Everything has been said that not everyone has said it. That with this gentleman everybody on the panel individually i am not a southern gentleman. [laughter] let everyone is wonderful and i am delighted to be here. [laughter] but to talk about the election item think it is all over. I am still fighting so i will talk about the election for a couple of minutes then talk about the future implications there are three of four factors that are largely central but are underlined the first is a mid term that is the most single fact about the election they are not kind to the power party in the white house only three times since 1862 has not lost in the house and those are extraordinary times in 2002 the country was still in the grips of 9 11 1998 the republicans bill clinton and in 1934 the country was coming at a real depression so these are unique circumstances. Well have anything that significant going on by any stretch of the imagination besides ebola so this is a mid term and the party in power loses seats on average 30 seats in the house. In terms of democratic lawsuits in the senate it is not nothing so the fact to read some of that commentary that thinks that it did not have a history that democrats will lose some seats but it is just history and president ial approval is important it may be the better they do the less well they do the president obama is currently 42 plus or minus putting them above george bushs standing in 2006 and slightly above Ronald Reagan in 1982 and far below where clinton was with 65 percent and bush as 68 . Dramatically different but the reality is this president s Approval Rating is not so hot. Why . The economy is recovering people notice Consumer Confidence in the most recent reports that a seven year high but the reality is there not in sync with the a economy and then with all the Foreign Policy chaos with those economic improvements. Read the wrong fair or not people believe the president should control as well as war in other countries but right or wrong they will the president responsible. And that affects as well but with a growing correlation with Us Congressional Senate and at the gubernatorial level is very hard for a democrat for red state or republican to win the blue state there is a much tighter coordination but that made many of the seats that we are defending our incumbents in those red states but those that are in danger are the democrats because of this increasing in changing correlation. But the reality is the math is the greatest enemy this year because of 2016 we have blue state republicans who are up for reelection. But i have to say clearly but if republican end up winning but if they did is that a wave than the democrats lose the average number . I am not sure. Then i think we can agree but it is not that important but not necessarily lot of cheerful thought. But the reality is the correlation with the denny for democrats this year but it does change in 2016 but we are defending a lot more seats than republicans and that matters a lot. There is one wild card that is part of the images and people dont Like Congress or democrats the truth is the Republican Party images at a low point historically. And no major party has ever been as unpopular as today how will that affect the election it will with the benefactors but we dont know exactly how. But that it helps us at some level. And with the 47 seats that they have to win to keep control of the senates but if they win and there is said good chance. But georgia and alaska i was colorado louisiana kentucky only three of those need to go to the democrats in order to keep control every one of these democrats as a path to victory and it is very narrow and the likelihood that all of those democrats will potentially navigate the path to the and it to be achieved that is at least for the moment still being a little uncertain yet what will happen exactly but the reasons underlying with the discussion of the future and the role the polarization but the reality is once upon a time politics was local but today it is all partisan. That is a fundamental fact of life and the question that makes it very clear the policy is less important to him the label. There is greater people talking about partisanship today in the past only one recent survey settled in a percent only 9 was the culmination democrat and republican. Can you imagine . What about the other categories . [laughter] race, sex, gender, only 9 . So the reality is with the tremendous social distance that they though consistently in the same way moreover that theyre no permanent friends then could enemies with shifting coalitions that is not true anymore by now would get every single issue in the same people lining up again. Then you go deeper and deeper and deeper that is the political reality just to say people are voting democrats or republicans and that is creating a partisan divide that is real and substantial and encourages and engenders the antipathy that makes it very difficult to cooperate in any meaningful way. We have time to talk among ourselves but you are a proponent but give us an example of a race that you are watching that fifth babydoll the kids in play but it would be indicative of the republican direction but then take on a mes point that maybe republicans would be better off with a small victory . May be a larger one than we expect . What would we see from the atmosphere out of that . One state to keep an eye on is to hampshire with the general assumption is that gene will coast into reelection but the numbers are getting closer and closer if scott brown wins it is a pretty good indication of the wave. Ill take up the challenge. Thinking 1984 house the feels close but they all fall the same direction and if we have that situation next tuesday with a lot of senate seats by one and zero or two points that all the same direction that is a pretty good definition of a wave. I happen to think the more republicans in the senate and the house of better. I can tell you there is enormous frustration for the lack of debates and the inability there is a pentup demand on our side for the senate to function as a deliberative body as it is supposed to. In the Republican Caucus there will be enormous pressure to be bored to lucrative than it has been but i am hopeful more than 51 seats to what it never ends up being that it will the the the Republican Caucus to adjust the way the senate has been run to be the body is supposed to be. I have two points. Looking to history but the closest races as a tossup going into the election this has happened to the point the average 80 to go one way or the other not 50 50. 460 on one side. And in one case it was 70 it would not be this way and then that went that way colorado this way but a really gives the good sense it is true they can stay close to the end but the other point is a good one that how the senate is run. Coming out yesterday or the other day with a charge i am on one side or the other voting with every Single Campaign and had with 96 percent with the president and the irony of that when democrats put themselves in that position by saying we will not vote on everything unless we have consent among democrats so lets not embarrass the white house to protect my vulnerable democratic incumbents but in doing so amended they could show distance from the white house to vote on pieces of legislation to offer amendments. To have a 100 percent voting record to but they keep trying to say that but have no ability to show that. If i was a republican in control knowing i have pennsylvania and New Hampshire and ohio i would try to find is many opportunities to give them a chance. It may not be popular there but it would be at home. And lets be honest that some points in the past it is all about the partisanship to have message amendment though its to improve legislation designed to put them in got seat that is a republican majority to say i will not force them to vote on the democrats to force us on the record. That is what unfolds. It is about partisan competition republicans understand 2016 will be a better year but they are looking to control the process than the reality is that will move on whoever is a majority to greater levels of control and less freewheeling debate that happens with no permanent friends or permanent enemies. That makes it very difficult to run the institution on a. First of all, i will give you a chance. But to make the point about the primary challenges the common story is there not a lot of knocking off those incumbents but significant challenges are pretty close you want to elaborate on the future . But this is where pat roberts is a great example to win the battle that i have to win a primary and to do that i need to move to the right with the clever with the white house then twos said up perfectly very far right controlling the Republican Party feeling very frustrated with that weighing of the party is not so much to elect a democrat or republican but what kind of republican do want to reelect . By moving so far over to the right he set up a great argument to say he is not who you think he is. It anyways to take chances off the table it would be better to have a candidate. And pat toomey although he is leader of that teapartier challenger that it would be a tough race even New Hampshire for portman and in the president ial turnout that is something to watch for. But i do think in some point with that moment where we have hit rock bottom and we have to let themselves keep dropping to be a National Party and democrats had that moment we will define and we will continue to hold congress as a good Regional Party late think that is where republicans find themselves now that is enough for control of congress but if you win 270 electoral votes you have to win North Carolina and virginia and florida and ohio right now we dont see the brand getting any better in the day after the election to say all i am sorry we are wrong. [laughter] they have to figure that out. But there are two kinds of people there want to know who will win or lose then people like me better commentating to write a column the next day i wanted it to be over. Net is not like extra innings. [laughter] no, no, no. To be up all night to be awake and a life. [laughter] this would not be great if North Carolina and New Hampshire rather polls closed early if either goes republican and i to be pretty confident to start my column as republicans go to the majority in the senate blah, blah, blah. If marks scenario was corrected there is not know ways building and they break the way they sit is as light at a disadvantage to the democrats that i have twos stay up all night. Alaska does not even close until 1 00 in the morning our time. [laughter] then the territory to bring the balanced down we will never know. [laughter] with that dilemma facing the republicans 2016 i dont underestimate the challenge that amy lays out at all pliable enough and a number of us can remember the republican from the Electoral College when we would talk about the 1980s when it would just be impossible for the democrats to put together an Electoral College majority because the republicans had such a lock. Along, as bill clinton i afford Death Penalty and end welfare redefines the party then all of a sudden they moved into the white house eight years no party has a firm lot on anything. That is a lesson that history teaches because eventually the losing party get sick of losing. And they make the changes necessary to become more competitive. I am convinced the Republican Party is one good president ial nominee and one president ial election away from resurrection it just has to be the right nominee and the right message. Look at how quickly the democrats turn this around you have to assume that no party has a lock on the white house over a long period of time. And to take this on before i get to that talk about the republican primaries but not so much theyre not so many democratic primaries but few were bred state democrats why dont we see that . Water your thoughts on that . With democrats in the white house you all there the blue jerseys but then when we lose everything he does makes me crazy. That is just like life in general. It is easier to be frustrated it is one piece of it that this is much more homogenous whether focused on the democratic side is not that there are not big gaps like a marriage or abortion or contraception you pretty much had unity even on the economic message with the blue dogs on trade and those issues but for the most part with a cohesive agenda. Since world war ii there is only been one time when a president ial party seeking a thirdparty term has one and that was george bush after two terms of Ronald Reagan and he certainly couldnt get that fourth party. Theres a Natural Inclination towards change in the country so two terms of democrats like we had makes it a realistic possibility for republican is to win the presidency and nothing is going to happen. Thanks to the strength of our candidate. Its not crazy and its a possibility. In terms of governing, if democrats keep control is not going to look much different than if republicans take control in the sense that not much is going to get down because there will be enough republican shirley to brock blocked the senate from doing anything in there would be a president who would stop republicans if they succeeded in doing something that he is doing and there will only be modest areas of agreement. In those areas where agreement can be found we may have progress. I want to make one final point on this and it goes back to the education question that we had talked about. Part of what it is tells us as we are highly partisan and people are normatively sensitive to queues. If the republicans just as president obama stood up and said im for samesex marriage in the Africanamerican Community and moved overwhelmingly within days toward supporting samesex marriage. If a republican stands up and says im going to make changes in our Party Platform the Republican Base will follow and so its a very important measure. Somebody has the courage to take those on the republican side and move the party. If they do they have a real chance of being more competitive. I think its going to be harder for them. We are going to turn it over. A mic is going around the rim and what i would like to do is wait for for the m and odata for yourself and keep it a question. Are the mics and the . I will identify martin frost. Via the 64,000dollar question for witt and this goes to the possibility of bipartisan agreement. Is the Republican Party capable of getting Immigration Reform because in order to have a real shot at the presidency they probably have got to have they have got to do somewhat better among hispanics than i have done previously. Whenever anyone on the republican side suggests that they might consider Immigration Reform their rightwing base cls amnesty and everybody disappears so can the Republican Party operated under bipartisan basis on this issue . The short answer is yes. Its going to take real leadership but we so real leadership in the four senators to join the gang of eight in the senate and produced a bill that got 68 votes. I think in the house you are unlikely to get a comprehensive bill but its just as good if you get a series of individual bills that gets you to the same direction. Theres an overwhelming consensus among republicans, not just entire voters but among republicans in the country that the immigration system is broken that it is a drag on our economy, that it is not serving the interests of anyone very well. So you have an obvious problem that is linked to the number one issue which is the sluggish growth of the economy and you have hopefully enough people who are willing to put together a set of proposals that will help to make the system better. I think thats entirely possible. Its going to take some real leadership to do that. Its going to take what mark suggested i think at the president ial level somebody willing to take on that issue and articulate the case for it. But i will tell you within the Republican Party among Republican Voters there is a strong agreement that we have got broke in system and we can make it better. So im hopeful that will lead to a concrete result in the next congress. Okay we are going to get the microphone and we have a question right here. My name is tom hill and ive worked for the National Conservation association. I have a question. You all have agreed that one reason for the difficulty in bipartisanship work in the congress is the extreme partisanship that exists across the nation and im just curious why you think that has occurred. What were the underlying reasons for that . You didnt mention the reasons and im just wondering if you have some thoughts. I have my own thoughts that i can tell you later. Up i could just add to that question which any of you can take this but in your polling you did with us one of the questions please sought to get after it is it washington are the people . Maybe you want to highlight some of those things. I will just do it while hes looking and i will give you what i think is one culprit. There are multiple at one of the nationalization of the news i think is one piece of the reason we are having a nationalization of politics. This idea that all politics is local, you have got your news locally and then also watching what is happening nationally. Now if you look at where people are getting their news sources is much more nationalized that it is localized. Part of that is the focus of newspapers on the bigger quote unquote stories which do the big stories coming out of new york or d. C. We dont have the boots on the ground to be able to go and spend a whole lot of time especially here in california and get digging in and doing those deep dives. We are going to get everything from where all the action is happening cheaper and thats where people are taking their cues from. As i said we are voting on a county level position where the issues are marriage and obamacare. Thats a tough challenge. Our survey addressed precisely that question or at least the americans perception of whites become more partisan. Theres overwhelming agreement that we have become more partisan in recent years. We asked whether its because republicans have become more conservative Court Democrats have become more liberal or both had changed about the same. About one third of republicans think its because democrats have become more liberal and one third of democrats think its because republicans have become more conservative but the overwhelming answer is both parties have changed. Most people think thats bad. Is it a good thing because it gives voters a real choice or isnt a bad thing because division makes it harder to get things done . Threequarters of each party thought it was a bad thing. There is one interesting twist. We blame everything on washington. Other deep divisions because the Political Parties in washington, but they are not deep divisions among everyday americans. The American People have more common than the government makes it appear or are there divisions between the Political Parties because they are divisions among everyday americans, divisions between doing democrats and republicans reflect the deep divides between American People majorities of independent republicans and democrats thought they were deeper divisions among the Political Parties than they were among the American People. The American People are wrong about this in the sense that they are much more divided than they think they are. They like to blame washington blame the parties but its reflected in where people live increasingly, neighborhoods or counties oneparty counties are increasingly oneparty counties. People are less likely to live with people people from either party but if he asked what the source of this is i think the source of it is, there are a lot of sources. Another part is the basic sorting we have gone there in the country that is leased to have liberal republicans and conservative democrats. We dont have that anymore. We have relatively homogeneous and it goes back to what i was talking about before but its also true in the public at large. People are much more conducive in terms of their beliefs and their partnership and that creates a much bigger divide between people and among people that existed before. That continual tension makes it less likely you will marry someone of the other party makes it less likely you will live with someone of the other party and that makes it less likely you will work with them as well. Those of us with advanced degrees in political silence science and that includes a number of us that there will remembered old Political Science article called towards a more responsible twoparty system that was primarily driven by the desire to have democrats be liberal and republicans be conservative and responsible twoparty system would be better for the country. Well folks this is what we have got. We are voting like we are in a parliamentary system but yet we have a twoparty system. It would almost be better if we said lets just have 15 parties so that you can have the lamel Democratic Party and the liberal moderate tea party in the tea party in the Establishment Republicans in and the green party here. Thats a way to make it more effective. One point i wanted to echo especially with amy and mark were saying we have certainly a nationalization of our parties and its hard to say if someone can call themselves an Alabama Democrat or massachusetts republicans republican and distinguish themselves from the National Party. Its a little more possible in the governors race. If you look at some of the governors races you might see a bit of that also it has also moved in that direction but you may see some surprises where republicans are moving into a very democratic place and the democrats and in the other direction more than the other races. Usually at the state level. Just one comment on amys point i remember the Study Commission in the United States said look what we really have to be more like the british system. Thats the way to change American Government at the same time there was a commission in britain that said we have to be like like the israeli system where you have a commission in israel that says we have to be more like the american system. So you know we can make all these changes but it does not work out that way. We have more questions. I will try to hit all parts of the room. Whit witt talked about americans feelings that washington is more divided than american having served as a Committee Counsel for 14 years in washington i think that might be true and i wonder what people on the panel would say about the idea that Real Solutions to problems that are now basically impossible to reach in washington because washington is deadlocked might be achieved in the same way that states originally forced congress to propose the bill of rights. Using the article v powers that they have and the threat of that article v power thereve republicans and democrats in state legislatures might actually decide to Work Together as politicians in washington dont often seem to be able to do to force reforms on congress that cant happen here. Its a good idea. I have no idea how to answer the question. The states tend to work better than congress in part because states are far more homogeneous in their political outlook and in their value structure. And so there is less of the divide like mark is talking about in massachusetts or in an alabama than there is when you throw them all together. There is at least a greater possibility for cooperation and states working together but count me skeptical. Actually the problem we are seeing out the state level is that what we have always thought about washington and its dysfunction and partisanship is showing itself in the state. There are fewer and fewer states where you have a divided one Party Controlling the legislature in one Party Controlling the governorship and you have the senate and a d governor. You have oneparty control in more states than certainly in recent history. I dont know how far back we would have to go. What we have seen and i think part of this is making these competitive governors races and in the case of North Carolina leading into the senate race is that those oneparty legislature governorships are creating a more polarized partisan climate and pushing more ideological agendas and it has hurt somebody like governor hickenlooper in colorado especially on issues like guns and a way thats not always appreciated across the state and in North Carolina where tom tell us the republican speaker of the house is struggling, because they are republicarepublicancontrolledln governor pushing an ideological agenda. That is out of step with a purple state. So i think that is the one fear at least that im saying about the states. They used to be these places that were laboratory side ideas and we could get bipartisanship working and had tours and fixers and now the states are becoming as polarized as ever. You cant have a more ideological agenda and the states can look a mob more Like Washington then increasingly they are. The red states on the republican side are getting redder. Their portion of the republican control of the state legislatures in the Southern States has been growing over the last dozen years to the point where they are virtually uncompetitive. Question . Okay. I would like to ask about leadership versus the actual senators and a republican congress. My experience in covering it though is the Senior Citizens senators are very frustrated that nothing is getting done but not just the Senior Citizens, the junior senators are frustrated too. I remember at a hearing where a bill to reform fannie mae and freddie mac had have a hugely difficult issue had actually passed but it wasnt going to be brought up on the floor. Heidi heitkamp was just beside herself with frustration as a democrat and bob corker from tennessee a republican was equally frustrated. So one has a sense of the senators dont want to go out there to do nothing so why is it your sense that this will last for a week and then it will be all over and it will get back to normal when my sense is many senators on both sides really want to get something done . I think thats absolutely true. Its true with every senator. I dont think theres anybody from the top leadership to the most senior members who dont want to get a lot done. This is a case where what starts to happen his politics gets in the way so when you say we will have a Fannie Freddie reform bill and i dont know the details of that for the context but when someone says okay we want to have an amendment and put the democrats for obama camp is and it has difficulty in deciding whether to support this or not, that is what leads people to say leadership to say we are not really going to do this. If we are going to take staff and stop giving health care to our staff like most employers do in the country we are not going to do that. Its irresponsible to do it like they want us to do. Democrats much more responsible for sure but we will do political things to mackinac republicans will say wait a minute we dont have to vote on these things. That ends up shutting down the process. The only way you can get around it is when people say you know what, its more important to get to the business of the country done that it is to score political points and we are willing to sit back and not score political points. When you have the current minority leader saying in the context of the last election the single most important objective of republicans was to prevent obama from being reelected is pretty clear what the number one objective is. Keeping obama from being reelected. If he was speaking honestly he would say his number one priority to become the majority leader which is a big if, i would tell you he wont say publicly that if he was on a lie detector he would say my number one priority is to keep the republicans in control in the next congress. What you just articulated was exactly what i hear from our senate, just exactly. And at some point you have got to say i didnt come up here just to perpetuate myself here and get absolutely nothing done. We elected you to take a few risks and indeed take a few Political Risk to get something good done for the country. At some point i hope somebody will be persuasive enough in the senate so that they will be willing to take at least a few Political Risks and do something little like pass the budget for the federal government. We have a little bit more time. Maybe i can go all the way to the back there. Thank you. I may have missed this but i havent heard any of you talk about the populist sentiment in the country the frustration with wall street, the corporate influence in our politics, the decline of the middle class. How is that affecting the election now and how will it affect the election in 2016 . I think it will be a central theme in 2016. If you look at republicans like marco rubio and mike lee this whole idea of increasing upward mobility of regenerating hope in the middle class and dealing with the lack of opportunity for middleclass families is going to be central to a lot of what they talk about. And indeed that is central to why so many people think the country is going in the wrong direction right now. The sense of frustration with the economy and the lack of upward mobility, difficulty in getting the kinds of opportunities that historically we have come to expect. So i think precisely those issues will be right at the heart of much of the president ial debate probably in both parties. I think voters have been asking for an answer to that issue since 2006. They havent gotten an answer that they particularly like on those issues and they feel like they have been saying to washington we need you to figure out how to fix this economy especially for those of us who feel trapped that we are the middle class and we are and have not seen any of rise in income in 15 years being able to send your kid to college or have retirement now seems like they are pipe dreams and washington has come back to perceive some politically motivated agenda. I completely agree this is what 2016 is going to be. That is a challenge for both parties which is how do you go into this next election with an agenda that looks like its addressing those concerns and theres an actual policy proposal on the table rather than just saying if you do the things that republicans want we are all going to be eating dogwood out of cans and grandmas never going to get her Social Security and if you do things the way democrats want we are going to be you know socialist country where we are going to look like canada with her health care plan. So we have got to get away from that. I think theres a reason why we have in this election the fact that we are not talking about this issue and we are going to see a dropoff even in a Midterm Election of voters even below where we see it normally in the Midterm Elections. We are seeing now a National Viewer people interested in the election and fewer people voting than we have seen in 2006 or 2010 and i think thats exactly because those issues arent being talked about. I think that has been the theme of every major democratic campaign. Its being drowned out by the other side focused on obama which is all the other side is really talking about. That is just sort of a fact of life presumably in 2015 the obama keyes will fade a little bit and both sides will debate the issue. There is one other problem and the problem is people are increasingly confident that theres anything the government can do really to solve not only that problem but many others if not most of the problems as well. The level of confidence in our institutions is continuing to reach new lows. Peoples believe that government can address those economic problems is really in tatters and that makes it extremely difficult for anybody to advance those plans successfully because people just dont buy it. Thats just a fundamental problem. Just as election campaigns have a finality where the last vote is cast on election day so does panels we are at the end of our time but please join me in thanking this fantastic panel. [applause] [inaudible conversations] bing a couple of live and study about. First discussion of the Midterm Elections and the latino vote. We will hear from the present of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus institute and the director of Hispanic Media for the Republican National committee. Watch live coverage from the National Press Club Tomorrow at 10 00 eastern here on cspan2. And on cspan a conversation on Oil Prices Energy analysts and economists will look at the political and economic effect that Lower Energy Prices might have been one it could mean for russia, iran and venezuela. Live coverage from the Wilson Center starts at 10 00 a. M. Eastern. The Midterm Elections are less than a week away and cspan has more debate coverage tonight. Up next to New Hampshire governors debate between incumbent maggie hasan and while havenstein. New hampshire incumbent governor Maggie Hassan is running against governor bob havenstein. Mr. Havenstein is a former ceo of an aerospace company. This debate was held in concorde and is courtesy of an h. One and wpi and tv. Moderator tonight the showdown for governor New Hampshire the incumbent democrat Maggie Hassan running for a second term in congress and republican challenger first time politician while the havenstein kisses her reckless spending. She says hes nothing but a failed ceo. The debate starts right now. Moderator good evening. Im political director paul site has her. Welcome to the crucial debate in the gubernatorial and congressional election. Tonight the race for governor. Lets introduce her candidates democratic candidate Maggie Hassan was away in private practice before being elected to the state senate in 2004. She served three terms in the state senate. She was elected governor in 2012. Shes the second woman following gene gene to be elect