campaign or candidate that you like in any given year. this would wash out the lobbyist cash briey a factor of 8-1, it would make it so that i m a candidate and you like me and i get 10,000 americans to like me in a congressional race, that s $1 million. then when the fossil fuel company says i ve got a check for $50,000, you can say i don t need your $50,000 check. that s how we take the government back from fossil fuel companies and get our government working for us again. i want to stay on this subject. we have a question from dick barrett from white plains, new york, with the appliance for climate education, spoken on climate change and is among 21 youth activists between the ages of 10 and 21 who are suing the government for its contribution to climate change in the case of julianna versus the united states. [ applause ] hi. thank you for taking my question. do you agree that the president of the united states has the constitutional obligation to end federal government support
have the incentive to do it. so our system is set up that we have a tax on every citizen in america, every business in america to pay for damages from the fossil fuel company. until we really put a price on these damages or reflect their view costs, we won t take the actions that are actually better for everybody as a whole. because we don t see that they re better, and we just see that these small incremental costs in, say, gasoline prices at the pump. a depressing assessment, from professor of climate changes, thanks for being here and sharing your insights. coming up, international mystery, a veteran international journalist walked into the saudi consult lat in turkey and never
what is that and how do i know who paid to influence my vote? so what that is is one of the front groups that was filled with money from charles and david coke who run and own the second largest private company in america. it s a fossil fuel company for the most part but came out swinging for obamacare and help to fund the tea party unrest during that period. jane, my beef is not so much with the fact they gave money, i think they ve got a right to be political players and that s fine. it s the lack of transparency and so if i m a member of the house or the senate and i, to get back to my original point in coming to this segment and i have to compete in this environment, then i m not spending time in washington. i m not relocating my family and putting the kids in the school and having a cocktail with a colleague. i got to get the hell out of there and go raise money because i ve got to be able o defend
to run the country s foreign policy. has he thought about america s role in the world? has he thought about grand strategy? what does he think about what china is doing in the south china sea, the iran nuclear deal? would he cooperate with putin in syria? there are a lot of hard questions to ask of him. the russia ties are obviously an issue. so is his history as a fossil fuel executive. oil and gas, the biggest fossil fuel company in the world, a very successful one. democrats are questioning him on that almost more than russia. exxon endorsed the carbon tax for about a decade. in a certain way it s kind of truth in advertising. what they say is carbon is already taxed, but the tax is collected through regulation. so wouldn t it be better to have a more rational system instead of having a different price for carbon. good luck with that. of course it s a political problem because you re asking congress to give up power and
345,000-plus for his campaigns. and the scott pruitt in oak receives more than $318,000 since 2002. and his reelect in 2013 was chaired by chaired by basically a fossil fuel company. let s move on to rick perry, a member of the board of directors, received $6 million from the ceo. so obviously, this is a cause for concern. look, there has never been a greater threat to the air we breathe or the water we drink. the cabinet that trump is amassing and remember, this is a man who ran on a populist general at that, has brought in people who have spent their entire careers, putting polluter profits first and people last. but what about those on the other side who say, wait a minute, drilling equals jobs. the more we drill in the united states, the more jobs there will be. how do you respond to that? well, look. i think the jobs argument is