ALWAYS HOPE FOR A BETTER FUTURE!
Follow the News with an open mind.
Never stop asking to find out the truth!
Criticisms / Disagreements lead to a better future.
Participation of all is the key.
This page is also a way to improve your English.
Be critical of the current president
The Tuesday before Election Day was not a day for presidential politics, at least not for Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey.
Hours after Superstorm Sandy savagely hit his state, the man who gave
the keynote address at the Republican National Convention that
nominated Mitt Romney appeared on morning television shows praising
President Obama.
Christie, in his Aug. 28 convention speech, declared it time to end Obama's "absentee leadership in the Oval Office and send real leaders to the White House."
Two months later, none of that rhetoric was on display.
"He
has been very attentive and anything that I've asked for he's gotten to
me, so I thank the president publicly," Christie told Fox and Friends. "He has done, as far as I'm concerned, a great job for New Jersey."
On Wednesday, Obama and Christie will tour damage in the Garden State. When asked by Fox and Friends if he expected Romney to visit, Christie said:
"I
have no idea nor am I the least bit concerned or interested. I've got a
job here to do in New Jersey that's much bigger than presidential
politics, and I could care less about any of that stuff. ... If you
think right now I give a damn about presidential politics then you don't
know me."
On CBS's This Morning, Christie
called the federal government's cooperation with his state "excellent,"
adding that he "can't thank the president enough" for his handling of
the storm. The New York Times'Michael D. Shear wrote:
"But
some Republicans have already begun grumbling about Mr. Christie's
over-the-top praise of the president at such a crucial time in the
election. One Republican in Washington said Mr. Christie could have
simply expressed appreciation for what any president would have done.
Another Republican strategist observed that Mr. Christie's kind words
for the president were delivered with the kind of gusto that he often
uses to criticize Mr. Obama."
On Tuesday afternoon, Obama praised Christie, New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (a Republican, an
independent and a Democrat, for what it's worth) while speaking at a Red
Cross center in Washington, D.C.
"I want to praise them
for the extraordinary work that they have done," Obama said. "The
preparation shows. Were it not for the outstanding work that they and
their teams have already done and will continue to do in the affected
regions, we could have seen more deaths and more property damage. So,
they have done extraordinary work."
The president also
described the coordination efforts between federal, state and local
officials as "outstanding," saying he's given "no red tape" instructions
to federal agencies.
THE PRESIDENT: First of all, I want to thank Gail and Charlie who
are on the scene doing work every time we have a disaster here in the
United States of America. But obviously, the Red Cross is doing
outstanding work internationally, so we want to thank them for their
outstanding work.
A few things that I want to emphasize to the public at the top. This
storm is not yet over. We’ve gotten briefings from the National
Hurricane Center. It is still moving north. There are still
communities that could be affected. And so I want to emphasize there
are still risks of flooding, there are still risks of down power lines,
risks of high winds. And so it is very important for the public to
continue to monitor the situation in your local community, listen to
your state and local officials, follow instructions. The more you
follow instructions, the easier it is for our first responders to make
sure that they are dealing with true emergency situations. So the
better prepared individual families are for the situation, the easier it
is going to be for us to deal with it.
Next, obviously, I want to talk about the extraordinary hardship that
we’ve seen over the last 48 hours. Our thoughts and prayers go out to
all the families who have lost loved ones. Unfortunately, there have
been fatalities as a consequence of Hurricane Sandy, and it’s not clear
that we’ve counted up all the fatalities at this point. And obviously,
this is something that is heartbreaking for the entire nation. And we
certainly feel profoundly for all the families whose lives have been
upended and are going to be going through some very tough times over the
next several days and perhaps several weeks and months.
The most important message I have for them is that America is with
you. We are standing behind you, and we are going to do everything we
can to help you get back on your feet.
Earlier today I had a conversation with the governors and many of the
mayors in the affected areas, including Governor Christie, Governor
Cuomo, and Mayor Bloomberg. I want to praise them for the extraordinary
work that they have done. Sadly, we are getting more experience with
these kinds of big impact storms along the East Coast, and the
preparation shows. Were it not for the outstanding work that they and
their teams have already done and will continue to do in the affected
regions, we could have seen more deaths and more property damage. So
they have done extraordinary work working around the clock. The
coordination between the state, local, and federal governments has been
outstanding.
Obviously, we’re now moving into the recovery phase in a lot of the
most severely affected areas. New Jersey, New York in particular have
been pounded by this storm. Connecticut has taken a big hit. Because
of some of the work that had been done ahead of time, we’ve been able to
get over a thousand FEMA officials in place, pre-positioned. We’ve
been able to get supplies, food, medicine, water, emergency generators
to ensure that hospitals and law enforcement offices are able to stay up
and running as they are out there responding.
We are going to continue to push as hard as we can to make sure that
power is up throughout the region. And obviously, this is mostly a
local responsibility, and the private utilities are going to have to
lean forward, but we are doing everything we can to provide them
additional resources so that we can expedite getting power up and
running in many of these communities.
There are places like Newark, New Jersey, for example, where you’ve
got 80, 90 percent of the people without power. We can't have a
situation where that lasts for days on end. And so my instructions to
the federal agency has been, do not figure out why we can't do
something; I want you to figure out how we do something. I want you to
cut through red tape. I want you to cut through bureaucracy. There’s
no excuse for inaction at this point. I want every agency to lean
forward and to make sure that we are getting the resources where they
need -- where they're needed as quickly as possible.
So I want to repeat -- my message to the federal government: No
bureaucracy, no red tape. Get resources where they're needed as fast as
possible, as hard as possible, and for the duration, because the
recovery process obviously in a place like New Jersey is going to take a
significant amount of time. The recovery process in a lower Manhattan
is going to take a lot of time.
And part of what we’re trying to do here is also to see where are
some resources that can be brought to bear that maybe traditionally are
not used in these kind of disaster situations. For example, there may
be military assets that allow us to help move equipment to ensure that
pumping and getting the flooding out of New York subway systems can
proceed more quickly. There may be resources that we can bring to bear
to help some of the private utilities get their personnel and their
equipment in place more swiftly so that we can get power up and running
as soon as possible.
So my message to the governors and the mayors and, through them, to
the communities that have been hit so hard is that we are going to do
everything we can to get resources to you and make sure that any unmet
need that is identified, we are responding to it as quickly as
possible. And I told the mayors and the governors if they're getting no
for an answer somewhere in the federal government, they can call me
personally at the White House.
Now, obviously, the state, local, federal response is important, but
what we do as a community, what we do as neighbors and as fellow
citizens is equally important. So a couple of things that I want the
public to know they can do.
First of all, because our local law enforcement, our first responders
are being swamped, to the extent that everybody can be out there
looking out for their neighbors, especially older folks, I think that's
really important. If you’ve got a neighbor nearby, you’re not sure how
they're handling a power outage, flooding, et cetera, go over, visit
them, knock on their door, make sure that they're doing okay. That can
make a big difference. The public can be the eyes and ears in terms of
identifying unmet needs.
Second thing, the reason we’re here is because the Red Cross knows
what it’s doing when it comes to emergency response. And so for people
all across the country who have not been affected, now is the time to
show the kind of generosity that makes America the greatest nation on
Earth. And a good place to express that generosity is by contributing
to the Red Cross.
Obviously, you can go on their website. The Red Cross knows what
they're doing. They're in close contact with federal, state, and local
officials. They will make sure that we get the resources to those
families as swiftly as possible. And again, I want to thank everybody
here who is doing such a great job when it comes to the disaster
response.
The final message I’d just say is during the darkness of the storm, I
think we also saw what’s brightest in America. I think all of us
obviously have been shocked by the force of Mother Nature as we watch it
on television. At the same time, we’ve also seen nurses at NYU
Hospital carrying fragile newborns to safety. We’ve seen incredibly
brave firefighters in Queens, waist-deep in water, battling infernos and
rescuing people in boats.
One of my favorite stories is down in North Carolina, the Coast Guard
going out to save a sinking ship. They sent a rescue swimmer out, and
the rescue swimmer said, “Hi, I’m Dan. I understand you guys need a
ride.” That kind of spirit of resilience and strength, but most
importantly looking out for one another, that's why we always bounce
back from these kinds of disasters.
This is a tough time for a lot of people -- millions of folks all
across the Eastern Seaboard. But America is tougher, and we’re tougher
because we pull together. We leave nobody behind. We make sure that we
respond as a nation and remind ourselves that whenever an American is
in need, all of us stand together to make sure that we’re providing the
help that's necessary.
So I just want to thank the incredible response that we’ve already
seen, but I do want to remind people this is going to take some time.
It is not going to be easy for a lot of these communities to recovery
swiftly, and so it’s going to be important that we sustain that spirit
of resilience, that we continue to be good neighbors for the duration
until everybody is back on their feet.
Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you, Red Cross. (Applause.)
On Monday, Mother Jones' DC bureau chief David Corn revealed
a new Romney tape, in which Mitt says Obama regards businesspeople as
"a necessary evil," and Ann Romney implies Obama isn't a "grown
up." Corn joins MSNBC's PoliticsNation host Al Sharpton, and Maria Teresa Kumar, executive director of Voto Latino, to discuss the latest malarky.
Visit NBCNews.com
David Corn is Mother Jones' Washington bureau chief. For more of his stories, click here. He's also on Twitter.
Let me finish tonight with what Susan Eisenhower just asked: Do you—does anyone?—have a grip on who Mitt Romney is?
Really?
Is he the moderate, pro-choice candidate for governor of Massachusetts, the guy who gave us the model for Obamacare?
Or is he the right-wing guy who hangs with the hawks, talks cozily of
war, signs on with Grover Norquist, joins with the religious right?
Is he Dr. Jekyll? Or Mr. Hyde?
Or is he both?Or neither?
Jack Kennedy once said he felt sorry for his rival Richard Nixon
because he “doesn’t know who he is and at each stop has to decide which
Nixon he is at the moment.”
Want to hear a worse case?
Do you really think that this guy who will service the right-wing so
sweetly will suddenly have the force of will to betray it? Have you seen
a single case when Romney’s broken free from the mob that’s brought him
this far? A single “Sister Soulja” moment when he’s said to the Trumps,
the Sununus, the “birthers” and Norquists and Neo-Cons, “No, this time
you ask too much.”
No. All the evidence is that Romney will remain Romney—pliable,
bendable, usable to the same crowd that took Dubya, used him, and dumped
him in history’s hamper.
As the East Coast prepares for Hurricane Sandy only eight days before
Election Day, voters might be wondering how a President Romney would
manage a similar situation.
Romney and Paul Ryan have cancelled their
campaign events scheduled for Monday night and Tuesday “out of
sensitivity for the millions of Americans in the path of Hurricane
Sandy,” But at a Republican primary debate last June, he seemed to
propose shutting down FEMA, the federal disaster management agency
that’s spearheading the government’s response to the storm.
During the CNN primary debate, Romney was asked about the role of the federal government. He answered:
As the East Coast prepares for Hurricane Sandy only eight days before Election Day, voters might be wondering how a President Romney would manage a similar situation. Romney and Paul Ryan have cancelled their campaign events scheduled for Monday night and Tuesday “out of sensitivity for the millions of Americans in the path of Hurricane Sandy,” But at a Republican primary debate last June, he seemed to propose shutting down FEMA, the federal disaster management agency that’s spearheading the government’s response to the storm.
During the CNN primary debate, Romney was asked about the role of the federal government. He answered:
“Every time you have on occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further, and send it back to the private sector that’s even better. Instead of thinking in the federal budget what we should cut, we should ask ourselves the opposite question. What should we keep? We should take all of what we’re doing at the federal level, and say what are the things we’re doing that we don’t have to do, and those things we gotta stop doing.”
Moderator John King followed up, asking what Romney would do about disaster relief specifically, and the candidate responded that,
“We cannot afford to do those things without jeopardizing the future for our kids. It is simply immoral,
in my view, for us to continue to rack up larger and larger debts and
pass them on to our kids, knowing full well that we’ll all be dead and
gone before it’s paid off. It makes no sense at all.”
Gov. Romney believes that states should be in charge of emergency
management in responding to storms and other natural disasters in their
jurisdictions. As the first responders, states are in the best position
to aid affected individuals and communities, and to direct resources and
assistance to where they are needed most. This includes help from the
federal government and FEMA.
But there’s also the issue of how a Romney budget would treat FEMA, especially given the looming sequester. MSNBC policy analyst Ezra Klein points out that
if the sequester were to take effect, FEMA would “lose about $878
million, largely from programs that provide direct relief to disaster
victims. And even if Congress averts the sequester cuts, it has already
put hard new limits on disaster relief into effect, thanks to the
debt-ceiling deal.”
President Obama has pledged that the sequester won’t happen.
The US presidential elections in November 2012 are expected to become the most expensive in history. One estimate by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) goes as high as $11bn.
The vast majority of this political money has come from a handful of
super-rich supporters of the Republican Party dwarfing the attempts by
citizens, associations or labor unions to do the same.
Many on the right claim deregulating campaign financing as a victory for
free speech whilst most on the left fear the changes are corrupting
democracy.
Controversial campaign funding rule changes brought in
after a Supreme Court ruling in 2010 have opened the floodgates to
billionaire donors with the potential to buy influence all the way to
the White House.
The Citizens United ruling means that anyone can
support a candidate with unlimited funding through the use of groups
known as Super PACs (Political Action Committees) and some donors can
keep their identity and the source of their money secret through similar
organisations which have earned them the nickname 'Dark Money' groups.
The
new system is rarely challenged in the mainstream media. Broadcasters
benefit from all the spending on political advertising and news
journalists use the adverts as a big source for their election stories.
But more fundamentally, in a free market society where the richest 400
people have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans, Empire
asks if money transforms or distorts the whole political process. What
happens on the morning after when the lobbyists catch up with the
politicians to push their interests? And who is challenging this system
when the media benefits from all the spending on political advertising?
Joining
us as interviewees: Senator Richard Lugar, the long-serving and
outgoing Republican Indiana senator; and James Bopp Jr, the lawyer whose
work has been immensely successful in deregulating campaign finance and
who was instrumental in winning the landmark Citizens United case.
And
we debate the larger issues of money and power in American politics
with our guests: Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington; Steven Hoersting, the
co-founder of the Center for Competitive Politics, an attorney who is
regarded as an architect of the Super PAC system; Clyde Wilcox, a
professor of government at Georgetown University and the author of more
than 30 books, including Interest Groups in American Campaigns: The New Face of Electioneering; and Larry Beinhart, a novelist and author of the critically acclaimed novel American Hero, which was adapted into the film Wag the Dog.
In an essay selected for the Readings section of our October issue, Victoria Bassetti writes about the lack of constitutional protection for voting—an
important issue right now, as some states have passed
voter-identification laws that civil-rights groups believe could
discourage millions of people from voting in the upcoming general
election. Since 2003, Republican lawmakers in Indiana, Pennsylvania,
Georgia, and a handful of other states have passed laws that require
voters to present photo identification at polling stations to cast a
ballot, with the stated aim of preventing voter-impersonation fraud, and
the actual aim of placing obstacles to voting in front of poor people
and minorities, who happen to traditionally support Democrats.
Even without such efforts, turnout will be abysmally low, as it
always is. Presidential-election voting peaked in the twentieth century
in 1960, when nearly two-thirds of eligible voters came out to the
polls, and reached its nadir in 1996, when just over half did. The most
recent two presidential elections were better, with each turning out
over 60 percent, but the most recent midterm elections managed only 40.
Given that it has become a struggle to get half of Americans to the
polls, it’s quite incredible that anyone would do anything to discourage
voting.
This has become a particular problem for Democrats, who, if they were
wise, would be targeting nonvoters with more than just get-out-the-vote
drives. In August, a USA Today/Suffolk University poll showed that
unregistered voters, if they had to choose, would pick Obama over Romney
at a rate of nearly two to one, while registered voters who said they
weren’t sure if they would cast a ballot also heavily favored Obama. The
pool of 90 to 95 million nonvoters represent a significant missed
opportunity for Democrats, one they might someday capitalize on by
pushing to aggressively reform voting laws around the country, a
strategic goal that happens to coincide with increased participation in
the democratic process. Allowing same-day registration and a variety of
acceptable identifications at the voting booths helped Minnesota achieve
the highest turnout of any state in the 2008 presidential election, at
77 percent, while Democrats in California have passed laws that allow
for online registration in the upcoming election, resulting in promising
early numbers. But to really push people to the polls would require
much more.
The most obvious and effective reform would be a compulsory voting
system. While such a move would invoke the rage of tea partiers and
those who see compulsory anything as inimical to the American notion of
freedom, the concept isn’t foreign to U.S. politics. In the seventeenth
century, several American colonies required eligible voters to
participate in elections. (In Virginia, the fine for not voting was at
one point two hundred pounds of tobacco, while Georgia wrote into its
first constitution a fine of five pounds for anyone who absented himself
from an election without valid reason.) More recently, many delegates
to Massachusetts 1917 constitutional convention supported amending the
state’s constitution to permit compulsory voting. Turnout had been
backsliding in the United States from its highest historic participation
rates in the late nineteenth century, and was heading for its all-time
low in the 1920 presidential elections. One of the Massachusetts
delegates argued that “when these men find it obligatory on them to go
and vote they are going to give this question thought, and they will
study it over, and they will talk it over in the market-places and in
the grocery stores and with the folks at home, and the result is they
get more light and are better able to vote.” Another complained that 28
percent of registered voters had not voted in state elections that year,
and that primaries regularly drew less than one-quarter of
voters—turnouts that would be nothing short of miraculous today. The
trends were troubling enough for drafters of the constitution to add the
amendment permitting the government to require voting, though no law
has yet been passed to test it.
Other countries have shown that mandatory voting works. In 1924,
Australia legislated a mandatory-voting system after its turnout dipped
below 60 percent in its most recent federal elections. Its next ones, in
1925, saw the participation rate rise to 91 percent; and it has never
dipped below that figure since. Opinion polls consistently show that the
majority of Australians support obligatory voting. Similar systems in
Italy and Belgium, which has had a compulsory vote since the nineteenth
century, regularly produce turnouts of over 90 percent. Notably, the few
who do refuse to vote in these countries face relatively mild
punishments. Nonvoting Australians are fined up to about $50. Nonvoting
Italians can encounter a few extra bureaucratic hurdles when trying to
register for state services.
It would be in the Democrats’ interest to push in that direction—and
at relatively low cost, as reform would first have to happen slowly on a
state level, where, if other systems are any example, the success and
popularity of compulsory voting would serve as a model that could spread
through the country. The biggest challenges would most likely be legal
ones—because, as Bassetti points out, the lack of a federal
constitutional right to vote makes standards flexible and essentially
subject to the whims of state courts.
Of course, Democrats legislating voters to the polls strictly for
their benefit would be no less cynical than Republican
voter-registration efforts, nor earlier efforts to remove property
requirements, for example, to ensure that more white men could vote,
thus preserving slavery. But a compulsory vote would represent the
expansion of electoral engagement; the Democrats would potentially reap
political gain while advocating for a just and proven form of democratic
process. That they aren’t taking the initiative is their own loss.
One of the more controversial aspects of the 2012 election campaign has been a series of new laws that make it harder for some people to vote.
In the past two years, more than a dozen states across the US have passed laws that could restrict voting. Democrats have accused Republicans of trying to block legitimate voters from casting ballots. But Republicans claim that they are trying to stop fraud.
President Barak Obama had been consistent and done his best
to safe the economy with so many lives throughout the United States on the line.
Mitt Romney on the other has been claiming that President Barak
Obama has not kept his promise.
Well, President
Barak Obama made this promises when no one knew what would happen in 2008. Nobody
expected the economy fall off the cliff due to the failure of oversight during
the George W. Bush Presidency.
However, Mitt Romney has not only broken promises but flat
out lied to the people.
The latest lie was the claimed that the car company Jeep would
move to China and when Jeep was asked by journalists, Jeep declared this a
big lie.
Mitt Romney has said he will be the President of all
Americans but behind closed doors he states that he doesn’t care about 47% of
Americans who get any kind of Government assistants.
Mitt Romney claims he could get the government working again
like he had in his state of Massachusetts. In Massachusetts he didn’t have a
choice because he was governing with a democratic controlled congress. He just
went along to pave the past to become President in 2012.
I think once Mitt Romney is elected he will become another
George W. Bush and do whatever the Republican Party wants him to do. Remember George W. Bush was portrait as a centrist
Republican and turned out to be one of the most conservative and war-hungry President.
So watch out what you wish for, you may get it but not in the way you think or
had promised.
Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
The White House
October 27, 2012
Hi, everybody. It’s now been four years since a crisis that began on
Wall Street spread to Main Street, hammering middle-class families and
ultimately costing our economy 9 million jobs.
Since then, we’ve fought our way back. Our businesses have added
more than 5 million new jobs. The unemployment rate has fallen to the
lowest level since I took office. Home values are rising again. And
our assembly lines are humming once more.
And to make sure America never goes through a crisis like that again,
we passed tough new Wall Street reform to end taxpayer-funded bailouts
for good.
Wall Street reform also created the first-ever independent consumer watchdog, whose sole job is to look out for you.
That means making sure you’ve got all the information you need to
make important financial decisions like buying a home or paying for
college. And it means going after anyone who tries to take advantage of
you, or rip you off.
Starting this month, that includes the folks who come up with your credit score.
If you haven’t checked out your credit score recently, you should.
It can have a major impact on your life. It can determine whether or
not you qualify for a loan or what kind of interest you have to pay. It
can even affect your chances at renting an apartment or getting a job.
But here’s the thing: the companies that put your credit score
together can make mistakes. They may think you had a loan or a credit
card that was never yours. They may think you were late making payments
when you were on time. And when they mess up, you’re the one who
suffers.
Until this week, if you had a complaint, you took it to the company.
Sometimes they listened. Sometimes they didn’t. But that was pretty
much it. They were your only real hope.
Not anymore. If you have a complaint about your credit score that
hasn’t been properly addressed, you can go to
consumerfinance.gov/complaint and let the consumer watchdog know.
Not only will they bring your complaint directly to the company in
question, they’ll give you a tracking number, so you can check back and
see exactly what’s being done on your behalf.
And fixing your credit score isn’t the only thing they can help with.
If you’re opening a bank account, trying to get a student loan, or
applying for a credit card and something doesn’t seem right, you can let
them know and they’ll check it out.
If you’re looking to buy a home, and you want to know if you’re
getting a fair deal on your mortgage, you can give them a call and
they’ll get you an answer.
Their only mission is to fight for you. And when needed, they’ll take action.
For example, alongside other regulators, they recently ordered three
big credit card companies to return more than $400 million to folks who
were deceived or misled into buying things they didn’t want or didn’t
understand.
That’s what Wall Street reform is all about – looking out for working
families and making sure that everyone is playing by the same rules.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t been enough to stop Republicans in
Congress from fighting these reforms. Backed by an army of financial
industry lobbyists, they’ve been waging an all-out battle to delay,
defund and dismantle these new rules.
I refuse to let that happen.
I believe that the free market is one of the greatest forces for
progress in human history, and that the true engine of job creation in
this country is the private sector, not the government.
But I also believe that the free market has never been about taking
whatever you want, however you can get it. Alongside our innovative
spirit, America only prospers when we meet certain obligations to one
another, and when we all play by the same set of rules.
We’ve come too far – and sacrificed too much – to go back to an era
of top-down, on-your-own economics. And as long as I’m President, we’re
going to keep moving this country forward so that everyone – whether
you start a business or punch a clock – can have confidence that if you
work hard, you can get ahead.
Thanks and have a great weekend.
So what would Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan do for the poor and the working class if they were elected? Let's recap:
They would allow the payroll tax holiday to expire. This would
immediately raise taxes on everyone, and would hit the working poor
especially hard.
They would repeal Obamacare, which would immediately kick about
17 million low-income earners and their family members off of Medicaid.
In addition, they want to block grant Medicaid and cap its
growth. In some states, this wouldn't have a big immediate impact. In
other states, conservative governors and legislatures would use their
newfound authority to limit enrollments and cut benefits substantially.
Over time, all states would have to cut enrollments dramatically, probably by another 15-20 million within a decade.
If they pursue the cuts outlined in Paul Ryan's budget plan,
they would cut funding for SNAP (food stamps) by more than $100 billion
over the next decade. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
estimates that this would reduce enrollment in the program by at least 8 million people.
They would cut funding for Planned Parenthood and other
reproductive health organizations. This would especially hurt poor
women, since they don't have the resources to pay for services at
full-cost clinics.
This is a short post. Sometimes it's better to lay out the facts
simply and starkly, because Romney's priorities really are pretty stark:
He wants to cut taxes on the rich and cut spending on the poor. That's
Romney's real poverty plan.
Transcript:
Obama: There's just no quit in America, and you're seeing that right now. Over 5 million new jobs, exports up 41%, home values rising, our auto industry back and our heroes are coming home. We're not there yet, but we've made real progress. And the last thing we should do is turn back now. Here's my plan for the next four years: making education and training a national priority; building on our manufacturing boom; boosting American-made energy; reducing the deficits responsibly by cutting where we can, and asking the wealthy to pay a little more. And ending the war in Afghanistan, so we can do some nation-building here at home. That's the right path. So read my plan, compare it to Governor Romney's and decide which is better for you. It's an honor to be your president, and I'm asking for your vote. So together we can keep moving America forward
Reported by the Guardian News
The Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said on
Thursday that he had gained voters as a result of his claim that
pregnancies from rape are "something that God intended to happen".
The GOP candidate from Indiana was criticised by Republicans
and Democrats after he made the comments during a debate on Tuesday.
Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, has become embroiled
in the row after refusing to withdraw his support for Mourdock. President Obama said Mourdock's remarks were "demeaning to women".
But
Mourdock said on Thursday that his popularity had been unaffected by
the fallout. Asked about voters who might not vote for him because of
the remarks, Mourdock said: "I haven't heard of those voters," the Indianapolis Star reported.
When
Mourdock was given an example of one voter who had, in fact, stopped
supporting him, he said: "I assured all women that the issue of rape is a
serious issue. It is not one that my God condones. If anyone thinks
that I would condone that, that's a ludicrous point of view."
Asked if his campaign had gained votes after the abortion comment, the Star said Mourdock replied: "I know we did."
Mourdock's
assertion may come as surprise within his own party. The Senate
candidate was the subject of headlines for the second day in a row on
Thursday, with criticism coming from prominent Republicans as well as
the president.
Haley Barbour, the Republican former governor of Mississippi, told CBS's This Morning that Mourdock's remarks were "kinda crazy" and said he did not support Mourdock's statements on rape.
"I
don't agree with what he said. I thought that what he said was kinda
crazy," Barbour said. The former governor tried to play down the impact
on the presidential race, saying that outside Mourdock's state people
are "not talking about what someone who's secretary of state in Indiana
said".
Even if Mourdock's comments – the latest in a series of
missteps by Republicans over issues of rape and abortion – do not
adversely affect his campaign, his notoriety could have an impact on
Romney's popularity among women, which polls show has improved over the
last month.
The latest AP/GfK poll found that Romney has eroded
Obama's substantial lead among women – an issue which has been seen as
key to deciding the election. The poll showed Romney dead even with
Obama on 47%, having been 16 points behind the president with women
voters just a month before.
The poll was largely conducted before
Mourdock made his remarks, however, and Romney's reluctance to withdraw
support from the Indianan is unlikely to be popular. In a debate on
Tuesday, Mourdock said he was opposed to abortion even when a woman had
been raped, saying "even when life begins in that horrible situation of
rape, that it is something that God intended to happen".
In a press conference on Wednesday, Mourdock said he stood by his comments, apologising only for people misinterpreting them.
Obama
sought to draw attention to the comments on Wednesday, saying the
statement was "demeaning to women". Asked about Mourdock's comment on
The Tonight Show, Obama told host Jay Leno: "Rape is rape. It is a
crime."
The president continued the theme on Thursday, telling a
crowd of supporters in Florida: "I don't think politicians in
Washington, most of whom are male, should be making healthcare decisions
for women."
Romney refused to answer questions from reporters
about Mourdock on Thursday, the Associated Press reported. His campaign
spokeswoman, Andrea Saul, said that Romney "disagrees with Richard
Mourdock, and Mr Mourdock's comments do not reflect Governor Romney's
views". However, she added: "We disagree on the policy regarding
exceptions for rape and incest but still support him."
There was
some good news for Mourdock, however, as John McCain, who beat Romney to
the Republican nomination for president in 2008, said he still
supported Mourdock. McCain had appeared to waver when interviewed by
CNN's Anderson Cooper on Wednesday. Asked if he still supported
Mourdock, McCain said "it depends on what he does".
"If he
apologises, says he misspoke and he was wrong, and he asks the people to
forgive him then obviously I'd be the first [to forgive Mourdock]," he
said.
On Thursday a spokesman for McCain issued a statement saying
the 2008 presidential candidate hoped Mourdock would be elected to the
Senate.
"Senator McCain was traveling yesterday in Florida and did
not have an opportunity to see Mr Mourdock's full press conference
before he taped his CNN interview," the statement said. "Senator McCain
is glad that Mr Mourdock apologised to the people of Indiana and
clarified his previous statement."
Mourdock has also been backed
by the national Republican senatorial committee, although the New
Hampshire senator Kelly Ayotte dropped plans to campaign with Mourdock, a
spokesman saying she disagreed with his comments.
Mourdock is not
the first Republican to find himself in hot water over beliefs related
to abortion. In August, Todd Akin, a Republican Senate nominee from
Missouri, said that pregnancy as a result of "legitimate rape" is rare
as "the female body has ways to try and shut that whole thing down".
Just
last week, Republican congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois told reporters
"you can't find one instance" where it had been necessary to perform an
abortion due to the risk to the mother's life, due to medical advances.
Medical experts note that there are some cases where the only option in
the case of complications sustained during pregnancy is to abort the
foetus.
Transcript:
Standing up, so you mean something big is about to happen. it's a very close race. it's a very very close race. one of the consequences is that it is entirely possible that at the end of all this the president of the united states is going to be john boehner. I'm not kidding.
Here's how this works. the process by which that could happen is not that hard to understand and it really could feasibly happen.
This is the battle ground map. the yellow states. the states that are red or blue is it seems clear that the states are going to vote. Let's assume there are not going to be any big surprises there in the non- battle ground states. that brings us to just the battlegrounds. those are the states in yellow.
So in this scenario, before we get to the battleground states, President Obama, just from adding up the blue states, has 237 electoral votes. That's even before we get to the battleground states in yellow. you need 270 to win.
So president Obama picks up Ohio, all important Ohio. Let's say he also wins new Hampshire, and let's say he wins the great state of Wisconsin.
But let's say mitt Romney wins all of the other battleground state on the map. this is not that hard to image. Romney would win Florida and north Carolina and Virginia and Colorado and Nevada and what I like to think of as the Iowa part of Ohio.
So if that happens on election day, look at what the electoral count is. that is a tie. 269 to 269. Neither of them is president in this circumstance. So how in this circumstance do we do side who wins the presidency?
Jonathan Carl from ABC News spun this out in print and we've been look looking at it ever since. It is not an accident what would happen in the case of a 269 to 269 electoral college tie. This is not something we would have to make it up on the spot. The founders talked about what would be the right thing to do in a circumstances like this. And it turns out what they thought was a very strange thing. so according to the 12th amendment, it's the house of representatives who gets to choose who is the president.
But, they do not vote on who's going to be president the way they normally vote on things in the house. In that circumstance, when they're making that specific decision, each state just gets one vote per state. So no matter how many members of congress there are from each state, no matter how big the state's population, each state gets an equal vote.
So in this scenario that get us to an electoral tie between Mitt Romney and President Obama, Mitt Romney wins more states. he wins 29 states to Obama's 21 states. Which means that if the house of representatives voted, Mitt Romney would be elected by the house of representatives. Nobody can instruct the state congressional delegations exactly how to cast their ballots, they get to decide on their own.
You would think they would vote the way their state voted and work it out in their own mini democracies or something. But if they did that the way their states voted, this is who we would end up with.
What if we ended up instead 25 states picking president Romney and 25 states picking President Obama. There is no tie breaker in that case. you know who becomes president in that circumstances? Not Mitt Romney, not President Obama, but this guy, speaker of the house John Boehner. That's who becomes president in the event of a 25/25 tie.
The more likely outcome in our electoral tie that got us here, is that there will be no tie in the house. Mitt Romney will be elected president in the house, but then what happens to the vice presidential tie?
If there's an electoral tie it goes to the house of represents we get president Romney and vice president Paul Ryan not automatically. This is the amazing part and it's on purpose. It didn't come up by accident.
The vice presidency would be decided in the senate after the presidency was decided in the house of representatives. So it's kind of nuts but look it how it works out. In the senate they would vote for a vice president in a straightforward way. One senate, one vote. We would be talking about the senate we would have after the election.
If it's a republican majority in the senate, presumably that republican majority would pick Paul Ryan.
If there is a democratic majority, that senate would presumably pick Joe Biden, right?
If the senate is tied at 50/50, in that case the sitting vice president would break the vote. So then we would have a process dictated by the constitution of the United States.
President Mitt Romney and vice president Joe Biden. Together. At once. That is a totally feasible prospect as an outcome for this election.
>>> before you get our vote, you're going to have to answer some questions. questions like --
>> when is the election? how soon do we have to decide?
>> what are the names of the two people running? and be specific.
>> who is the president right now? is he or she running? because if so, experience is maybe something we should consider.
>> i have been told that when "snl" lampoons you, you've finally made it or maybe that's what helps me sleep at night. the other possibility is that you are simply so ripe for mockery, your mere existence is so absurd that "snl" cannot ignore you any longer. undecided voters i'm talking to you. take a look good, hard look in the mirror because this is your wake-up call. officially out of excuses. the debates are wrapped up and with two weeks left, it's time to make up your minds. we got to know these guys pretty well. i mean, i know the candidates better than i know my own neighbors. but that's because i hate them. if you still don't know who president obama is, look around you. some will say he's like jesus, he is everywhere and in everything. he's in your higher milk prices an out of work cousin, in your second mortgage and your uncle who keeps telling you to buy gold and he's on "the view" everything morning. as for mitt romney, he's also been pretty easy to find from california to new hampshire, you can find him at any one of his 400 homes. you can find him at fox news 17 times a day. you can often find him on both sides of an issue, and sometimes you'll find he's the only candidate to show up at a debate. and so i don't buy this undecided nonsense. in 2011 a study found most women believed 180 seconds was long enough to decide whether a potential suitor was mr. right or mr. wrong. men make snap decisions all the time like when they decide to buy a mustang at 55.
>> yep.
>> or grow to mustache. colin powell made a study of good decision making insisting you should need to less than 40% of available information to make a tough decision and no more than 70%. someone should have told that to haml hamlet. i'm calling your bluff undecideds, you, the most contemptible voting group out there. you're either procrastinating, lazy, or lying, so pick a side and make up your minds and consider this your written invitation to the election. oka
USA-Today 1:55AM EDT October 23. 2012 - During
the third and final presidential debate Monday night, President Obama
and Mitt Romney disputed an array of statements on foreign policy. Here
are a few worth a deeper look:
Defense spending Claim:
Obama said Romney wants to add $2 trillion in spending the military
hasn't asked for and that defense spending has increased every year he
has been president.
The facts: Obama's claim about Romney's increase is accurate; his statement that budgets have increased is not.
Romney
calls for spending a minimum of 4% of the nation's gross domestic
product on defense. Over 10 years, that would amount to about $2
trillion more for the Pentagon than Obama has budgeted over the same
period.
The 2013 Pentagon base budget — excluding costs for the
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — as proposed by Obama declines by $5
billion compared with 2012, according to the Pentagon's comptroller.
Claim: Obama said that Romney said he would provide heavy arms to Syrian rebels.
The facts:
Romney did say he would provide heavy weaponry to rebels in Syria. In
an Oct. 8 speech in Lexington, Va., Romney said he "will work with our
partners to identify and organize those members of the opposition who
share our values and ensure they obtain the arms they need to defeat
(President Bashar) Assad's tanks, helicopters and fighter jets."
The 'apology tour' Claim: Romney said Obama went on "an apology tour of going to various nations in the Middle East and criticizing America."
The facts:
The use of the term "apology tour" to describe Obama's April 2009
foreign visits appears to have started with Fox News host Sean Hannity.
In
his book, Romney cited a number of speeches in which he said Obama
apologized: "The United States certainly shares blame" for the global
banking meltdown, Obama told the French. The George W. Bush
administration had "lowered our standing in the world," he told the
English. And to the Turkish parliament, he said: "The United States is
still working through some of our own darker periods in our history,"
which included slavery, segregation and treatment of American Indians.
Even
so, none of his foreign speeches included what many people would
consider an essential element of an apology: the words "we're sorry."
That's why Obama is correct that professional fact-checkers have rated
the statement as untrue.
Mali Claim: Romney, citing a litany of Middle East hotspots, said northern Mali "has been taken over by al-Qaeda-type individuals."
The facts:
Mali, an African nation of 14 million people in the western Sahara
desert, has been embroiled in conflict this year as insurgent groups
have fought for independence. The Economic Community of West African
States has identified at least three of the groups as having links with
al-Qaeda. Intelligence officials say the groups may also have
connections to insurgent groups in Algeria and Libya.
The Obama
administration's response has been low-key, but on Monday, a French
defense official told the Associated Press that it was discussing drone
strikes with the United States. German Chancellor Angela Merkel also
sounded the alarm Monday, telling a German military conference near
Berlin that "Free democratic states cannot accept international
terrorism gaining a safe refuge in the north of the country."
Libya Claim: Obama said Romney suggested that getting rid of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya was "mission creep."
The facts:
"What we are watching in real time is another example of mission creep
and mission muddle," Romney wrote in the National Review on April 21, in
the midst of the Libya operation. In that piece, Romney said he
supported the "specific, limited mission" of a no-fly zone to protect
Libyan civilians from the Gadhafi regime, but he said Obama owed
Americans a better explanation of why he had changed his position to
call for the Libyan dictator's ouster.
After Gadhafi was killed by rebel forces, Romney said, "The world is a better place with Gadhafi gone."
Iraq Claim: Obama said Romney wanted to leave troops in Iraq after Dec. 31, 2011, a claim Romney denied.
The facts:
When the U.S. government was trying to secure a status of forces
agreement last year with the Iraqi government that would have allowed
some U.S. troops to remain in the country, Romney said more U.S. troops
should remain than Obama was proposing.
Romney repeated that sentiment in a video leaked to Mother Jones from a May fundraiser. Romney said: "This president's failure to put in
place a status of forces agreement allowing ten to 20,000 troops to
stay in Iraq: unthinkable." But there is no record that Romney made the
claim as recently as "a few weeks ago."
Global Influence Claim: Romney said nowhere in the world is the United States' role greater than it was four years ago.
The facts:
Global attitudes about the United States have declined slightly over
the past four years, according to the Pew Research Center. In 2008, 84%
to 14% positive-negative view of the United States and 14% unfavorable.
In 2012, that favorability figure had fallen to 80%-14%.
Veterans Claim: Obama said the unemployment rate for veterans is below the national jobless rate.
The facts:
The unemployment rate for veterans in September was 6.7%, just above
the three-year low of 6.6% reached the previous month, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Department of Veterans Affairs.
That's below the 7.8% national jobless rate. However, unemployment for
veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan era was 9.7% last month.
Iran Claim: Obama said Romney now favors bilateral talks with Iran, a reversal of his previous stance.
The facts: The Associated Press reported that Romney refused to answer when asked Sunday whether he supported one-on-one talks.
Russia Claim: Obama said Romney has called Russia the largest geopolitical threat to the United States.
The facts:
It is true that Romney said in a March 26 interview with CNN that
Russia "is without question our No. 1 geopolitical foe." He added: "They
fight for every cause for the world's worse actors. The idea that he
(Obama) has more flexibility in mind for Russia is very, very troubling
indeed." In a subsequent interview, Romney sought to clarify his
remarks, saying, "That doesn't make them an enemy. It doesn't make them a
combatant. They don't represent the No. 1 national security threat."
Class size Claim: Obama said Romney said that reduced class sizes at schools did not make a difference.
The facts:
During a May visit to a Philadelphia charter school, Romney discussed
his approach to education when he was governor of Massachusetts. He said
people told him that smaller class sizes were needed, and Romney said
he analyzed every school district and their students' performance.
"I
said let's compare the average classroom size from each school district
with the performance of our students, because we test our kids, and
we'll see if there's a relationship. And there was not."
He later
cited a study by a consulting firm that studied classroom size around
the world and came to a similar conclusion. "So it's not the classroom
size that's driving the success of those school systems."
Oil imports Claim: Obama said the United States has cut its oil imports to the lowest levels in 20 years.
The facts:
That's close. The Department of Energy said this year that U.S.
dependence on imported oil fell to 45% last year, the first time it
dropped below 50% since 1997. The White House, citing DOE figures, says
on its website that net imports — that's imports minus exports — as a
share of total consumption fell to 45% last year and that was the lowest
level in 16 years. Meanwhile, U.S. oil production has risen sharply.
September's domestic production was the highest of any September since
1998, the American Petroleum Institute reported last week. Overall,
petroleum imports fell to 10.5 million barrels a day in September, down
602,000 barrels a day from a year earlier.
Cooperation with Israel Claim: Obama said, "We have created the strongest military and intelligence cooperation between our two countries in history."
The facts:
By its nature, intelligence cooperation is difficult to verify. But
military cooperation is a bit more visible. On Sunday, the United States
and Israel launched a joint training operation called "Austere
Challenge 12." Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Andrew Shapiro called
the exercise the "largest and most significant joint exercise in the
allies' history."
Nevertheless, the event also happens at a low
point in the political relationship between Obama and Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Obama declined to meet with Netanyahu last
month when Israeli leader visited the U.S. And asked by Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes whether he felt pressure on Iran from Israel, Obama said he would "block out any noise" from the Israelis.
Middle East peace talks Claim:
Romney said the United States has not exerted leadership in the Middle
East and said Israel and the Palestinians haven't met in two years
The facts:
The last direct talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders happened
in September 2010 — and then quickly broke down when the Israeli
moratorium on settlements in the West Bank expired.
Obama himself
has admitted that peace in the Middle East has eluded him, as it has
every president since Jimmy Carter. "I have not been able to move the
peace process forward in the Middle East the way I wanted. It's
something we focused on very early. But the truth of the matter is that
the parties, they've got to want it as well," he told Washington, D.C.,
television station WJLA in July.
Romney is more pessimistic. In a
secretly taped fundraiser more famous for his "47%" remark, he said:
"The pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish," that "it's
going to remain an unsolved problem" and that a permanent agreement is
"just wishful thinking." He also angered many Palestinians in July when
he said at a Jerusalem fundraiser that cultural differences accounted
for the stark disparities in wealth between Israel and Palestine.
Romney
has softened that stance more recently. In a foreign policy speech in
Virginia this month, Romney said he would "will recommit America to the
goal of a democratic, prosperous Palestinian state living side by side
in peace and security with the Jewish state of Israel." By that score,
Romney's Palestinian policy is the same as Obama's. They both espouse a
"two-state" solution that first became U.S. policy under President
George W. Bush.
Carter, with a delegation of elder statesmen
visiting Israel Monday, said prospects of a lasting Israeli-Palestinian
accord are "vanishing."
U.S.- Israel Relations Claim: Romney said Obama was trying to create "daylight" between the United States and Israel.
The facts: The reported "daylight" policy first surfaced in a Washington Post
story recounting a 2009 meeting Obama had with Jewish leaders, in which
one leader told Obama, "If you want Israel to take risks, then its
leaders must know that the United States is right next to them."
Obama
disagreed, saying, "Look at the past eight years. … During those eight
years, there was no space between us and Israel, and what did we get
from that? When there is no daylight, Israel just sits on the sidelines,
and that erodes our credibility with the Arab states."
By that,
the president seemed to be saying that the United States can be more
effective acting as an honest broker between the Israelis and the
Palestinians.
The White House hasn't disputed the Washington Post account,
but press secretary Jay Carney has made it clear that the policy, if
there is one, does not extend to Iran. "There is no daylight between the
United States and Israel when it comes to the absolute need to prevent
Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," Carney said.
China Claim:
Obama said his administration has brought more trade cases against
China in four years than the Bush administration did in eight years.
The facts:
The Obama administration has brought eight trade cases against China
with the World Trade Organization, according to PolitiFact.com and the
Alliance for American Manufacturing. Bush filed seven cases over two
terms. However, China joined the WTO in 2001, after President George W.
Bush took office, and member countries effectively gave China a grace
period. The United States was the first nation to file a trade case
against China in 2004. Thus, Obama could take advantage of some of the
groundwork laid by Bush's administration.
Exports to China Claim: Obama said U.S. exports to China have doubled since the start of the Obama administration.
The facts:
The United States has more than doubled its exports to China during
Obama's presidency, but that has coincided with rising imports from
China as well. When Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, the United
States exported $4.2 billion worth of goods to China. By August 2012,
that had risen to $8.6 billion, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Imports from China over that time period have risen from $24.7 billion
to $37.3 billion. So the American trade balance with China has gone from
$20.6 billion in favor of China in January 2009 to $28.7 billion in
August 2012.
Education Claim: Romney and his running mate, Paul Ryan, want to cut the education budget, according to Obama.
The facts:
Though Ryan's budget has called for $5.3 trillion cuts in federal
spending over the next decade, he has not singled out education programs
for reduction or elimination, according to Politifact. An analysis by
the National Education Association determined that the large cuts
proposed by Ryan, and generally embraced by Romney, could cut 2 million
spots in the Head Start early childhood education program.
Romney
insists that he is not going to cut education programs. "I'm not going
to cut education funding. I don't have any plan to cut education funding
and grants that go to people going to college. I'm planning on
continuing to grow, so I'm not planning on making changes there," Romney
said in his Oct. 3 debate with Obama.
Defense budget Claim: Romney said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta called Pentagon budget cuts totaling $1 trillion over 10 years devastating.
The facts:
Panetta and the Joint Chiefs of Staff have agreed to $487 billion in
budget cuts. However, about $500 billion in additional cuts to defense
spending will automatically begin in January — a process termed
"sequestration" — if Congress and Obama do not reach a comprehensive
deal to reduce deficits. Panetta was referring to those $500 billion in
cuts as devastating. Moreover, Romney's running mate, Ryan, chairman of
the House Budget Committee, voted for that Budget Control Act that
included the automatic cuts.
Over
the three debates Mitt Romney has become softer on his issues, even at
times sounding like a pastor rather than a presidential candidate,
trying to please the voters. Moreover, he has changed his positions but
claimed that he never did. President
Obama on the other hand has become stronger and has consistently
pointed out his successes as well as given us a plan for the future. What
I missed in these debates was a response by President Obama to the Mitt
Romney claim that the current administration hasn't improved the
economy. Well, where did we start and where are we now? I don't think Mitt Romney is a sorcerer either who magically could have gotten us out of this economic crises any faster!
Hi, everybody. In recent weeks, you might have noticed something. Or maybe even heard the sound of it if you live close enough.
New homes are going up. In fact, construction workers are
breaking ground on new homes in America at the fastest pace in more than
four years.
At the same time, more homes are being sold. Home values
are back on the rise. And foreclosure filings are at their lowest point
in the five years since the housing bubble burst and left millions of
responsible families holding the bag.
Now, we’re not where we need to be yet. Too many homes are
still underwater. Too many families are still having a hard time making
the mortgage on their piece of the American Dream.
But one of the heaviest drags on our recovery is getting
lighter. Now we have to build on the progress we’ve made, and keep
moving forward.
I never believed that the best way to deal with the
housing market was to just sit back, do nothing, and simply wait for
things to hit bottom. That would have been a disaster for all the
responsible families who – through no fault of their own – were
struggling to make ends meet.
Instead, I’ve made helping those homeowners a priority.
Since I took office, my Administration has taken action to help millions of families stay in their homes.
We teamed up with attorneys general in almost every state
to investigate and crack down on the practices that caused this mess.
And in the end, we secured a $25 billion settlement from the biggest
banks – one of the biggest settlements in history – and used it to
provide relief to families all across America.
We’ve taken action to help responsible homeowners
refinance their mortgages. As a result, just this year hundreds of
thousands of Americans who were stuck in high-interest loans have been
able to take advantage of historically low rates and are saving
thousands of dollars every year.
And now I want every homeowner in America to have that
chance. I just wish it didn’t require an act of Congress. But it does.
So, back in February, I sent Congress a plan to give every responsible
homeowner the chance to save about $3,000 a year on their mortgage by
refinancing at historically low rates. That’s the equivalent of a $3,000
tax cut.
It’s a plan that we know will work. It has the support of
independent, nonpartisan economists and leaders across the housing
industry. It’s a no-brainer that should have passed easily.
But Republicans in Congress banded together and kept this plan from even coming to a vote.
They banded together and prevented millions of Americans –
including many of you listening today – from saving $3,000 a year.
That’s money that could have gone back into the value of your home, or
your kid’s college savings account. That’s money that could have gone
into your local businesses, so they could hire and create more jobs in
your town.
But Republicans in Congress still won’t let that happen.
And that’s only held back the economy, when we should be doing
everything we can to accelerate our economic engine.
Let’s be honest – Republicans in Congress won’t act on
this plan before the election. But maybe they’ll come to their senses
afterward if you give them a push. So contact your Representative,
especially if this plan will help you or someone you know. Tell him or
her that American homeowners have waited long enough. Tell them that
it’s time for Congress to stop standing in the way of our recovery and
to start standing up for you. Thanks and have a great weekend.
I am a male and I am concerned about Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan’s positions on contraception. Are we going back to the 1950s where birth control was still outlawed?
Well, the Republican Party seems to think we should go back to the good old times. They seem the admire Saudi Arabia where women have no rights and where men are the only rulers. Watch out what you are wishing for, you may get it but in a way you never thought that it could happen in this free country called the United States of America.
And then there is women healthcare. Don't let politicians tell you how to take care of your health or your body!
THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Every day, all across the world,
American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the
interests and values of our nation. Often, they are away from their
families. Sometimes, they brave great danger.
Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an
attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our
Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean
Smith. We are still notifying the families of the others who were
killed. And today, the American people stand united in holding the
families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.
The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and
shocking attack. We're working with the government of Libya to secure
our diplomats. I've also directed my administration to increase our
security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we
will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who
attacked our people.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects
all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs
of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of
senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to
unequivocally reject these brutal acts.
Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack
will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya. Libyan
security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside
Americans. Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they
carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically
learned that he had died.
It's especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it
is a city that he helped to save. At the height of the Libyan
revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi. With
characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with
Libyan revolutionaries, and helped them as they planned to build a new
Libya. When the Qaddafi regime came to an end, Chris was there to serve
as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support
this young democracy, and I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied
deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there. He was a
role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who
aspire to walk in his footsteps.
Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is still
striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. Today, the loss of
these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on. I
have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they
did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who love them back
home.
Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we
marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the
families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who
made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed
grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you
and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last
night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.
As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only
sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to
stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our
country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service
of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.
No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation,
alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand
for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of
the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to
see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake,
justice will be done.
But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark
contrast to those of their attackers. These four Americans stood up for
freedom and human dignity. They should give every American great pride
in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents
to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with
dignity.
We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and
let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better
world for all of our children.
Thank you. May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America.
END
CANDY CROWLEY, MODERATOR: Good evening from Hofstra University in
Hempstead, New York. I’m Candy Crowley from CNN’s “State of the Union.”
We are here for the second presidential debate, a town hall, sponsored
by the Commission on Presidential Debates.
CROWLEY: The Gallup organization chose 82 uncommitted voters from the
New York area. Their questions will drive the night. My goal is to give
the conversation direction and to ensure questions get answered.
The questions are known to me and my team only. Neither the
commission, nor the candidates have seen them. I hope to get to as many
questions as possible.
CROWLEY: And because I am the optimistic sort, I’m sure the
candidates will oblige by keeping their answers concise and on point.
Each candidate has as much as two minutes to respond to a common
question, and there will be a two-minute follow-up. The audience here in
the hall has agreed to be polite and attentive — no cheering or booing
or outbursts of any sort.
We will set aside that agreement just this once to welcome President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney.
(APPLAUSE)
Gentlemen, thank you both for joining us here tonight. We have a lot
of folks who’ve been waiting all day to talk to you, so I want to get
right to it.
Governor Romney, as you know, you won the coin toss, so the first
question will go to you. And I want to turn to a first-time voter,
Jeremy Epstein, who has a question for you.
QUESTION: Mr. President, Governor Romney, as a 20-year-old college
student, all I hear from professors, neighbors and others is that when I
graduate, I will have little chance to get employment. What can you say
to reassure me, but more importantly my parents, that I will be able to
sufficiently support myself after I graduate?
ROMNEY: Thank you, Jeremy. I appreciate your — your question, and
thank you for being here this evening and to all of those from Nassau
County that have come, thank you for your time. Thank you to Hofstra
University and to Candy Crowley for organizing and leading this — this
event.
Thank you, Mr. President, also for being part of this — this debate.
Your question — your question is one that’s being asked by college
kids all over this country. I was in Pennsylvania with someone who had
just graduated — this was in Philadelphia — and she said, “I’ve got my
degree. I can’t find a job. I’ve got three part- time jobs. They’re just
barely enough to pay for my food and pay for an apartment. I can’t
begin to pay back my student loans.”
So what we have to do is two things. We have to make sure that we make it easier for kids to afford college.
ROMNEY: And also make sure that when they get out of college, there’s
a job. When I was governor of Massachusetts, to get a high school
degree, you had to pass an exam. If you graduated in the top quarter of
your airlines, we gave you a John and Abigail Adams scholarship, four
years tuition free in the college of your choice in Massachusetts, it’s a
public institution.
I want to make sure we keep our Pell grant program growing. We’re
also going to have our loan program, so that people are able to afford
school. But the key thing is to make sure you can get a job when you get
out of school. And what’s happened over the last four years has been
very, very hard for America’s young people. I want you to be able to get
a job.
I know what it takes to get this economy going. With half of college
kids graduating this year without a college — excuse me, without a job.
And without a college level job, that’s just unacceptable.
And likewise you’ve got more and more debt on your back. So more debt
and less jobs. I’m going to change that. I know what it takes to create
good jobs again. I know what it takes to make sure that you have the
kind of opportunity you deserve. And kids across this country are going
to recognize, we’re bringing back an economy.
It’s not going to be like the last four years. The middle-class has
been crushed over the last four years, and jobs have been too scarce. I
know what it takes to bring them back, and I’m going to do that, and
make sure that when you graduate — when do you graduate?
QUESTION: 2014.
ROMNEY: 2014. When you come out in 2014, I presume I’m going to be
president. I’m going to make sure you get a job. Thanks Jeremy. Yeah,
you bet.
CROWLEY: Mr. President?
OBAMA: Jeremy, first of all, your future is bright. And the fact that
you’re making an investment in higher education is critical. Not just
to you, but to the entire nation. Now, the most important thing we can
do is to make sure that we are creating jobs in this country. But not
just jobs, good paying jobs. Ones that can support a family.
OBAMA: And what I want to do, is build on the five million jobs that
we’ve created over the last 30 months in the private sector alone. And
there are a bunch of things we can do to make sure your future is
bright.
Number one, I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again.
Now when Governor Romney said we should let Detroit go bankrupt. I said
we’re going to bet on American workers and the American auto industry
and it’s come surging back.
I want to do that in industries, not just in Detroit, but all across
the country and that means we change our tax code so we’re giving
incentives to companies that are investing here in the United States and
creating jobs here.
It also means we’re helping them and small businesses to export all around the world to new markets.
Number two, we’ve got to make sure that we have the best education
system in the world. And the fact that you’re going to college is great,
but I want everybody to get a great education and we’ve worked hard to
make sure that student loans are available for folks like you, but I
also want to make sure that community colleges are offering slots for
workers to get retrained for the jobs that are out there right now and
the jobs of the future.
Number three, we’ve got to control our own energy. Now, not only oil
and natural gas, which we’ve been investing in; but also, we’ve got to
make sure we’re building the energy source of the future, not just
thinking about next year, but ten years from now, 20 years from now.
That’s why we’ve invested in solar and wind and biofuels, energy
efficient cars.
We’ve got to reduce our deficit, but we’ve got to do it in a balanced
way. Asking the wealthy to pay a little bit more along with cuts so
that we can invest in education like yours.
And let’s take the money that we’ve been spending on war over the
last decade to rebuild America, roads, bridges schools. We do those
things, not only is your future going to be bright but America’s future
is going to bright as well.
CROWLEY: Let me ask you for more immediate answer and begin with Mr.
Romney just quickly what — what can you do? We’re looking at a situation
where 40 percent of the unemployed have been unemployed have been
unemployed for six months or more. They don’t have the two years that
Jeremy has.
What about those long term unemployed who need a job right now?
ROMNEY: Well what you’re seeing in this country is 23 million people
struggling to find a job. And a lot of them, as you say, Candy, have
been out of work for a long, long, long time. The president’s policies
have been exercised over the last four years and they haven’t put
Americans back to work.
We have fewer people working today than we had when the president
took office. If the — the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent when he took
office, it’s 7.8 percent now. But if you calculated that unemployment
rate, taking back the people who dropped out of the workforce, it would
be 10.7 percent.
We have not made the progress we need to make to put people back to
work. That’s why I put out a five-point plan that gets America 12
million new jobs in four years and rising take-home pay. It’s going to
help Jeremy get a job when he comes out of school. It’s going to help
people across the country that are unemployed right now.
And one thing that the president said, which I want to make sure that
we understand, he said that I said we should take Detroit bankrupt. And
that’s right. My plan was to have the company go through bankruptcy
like 7-Eleven did and Macy’s and Condell (ph) Airlines and come out
stronger.
And I know he keeps saying, you want to take Detroit bankrupt. Well,
the president took Detroit bankrupt. You took General Motors bankrupt.
You took Chrysler bankrupt. So when you say that I wanted to take the
auto industry bankrupt, you actually did.
And I think it’s important to know that that was a process that was
necessary to get those companies back on their feet, so they could start
hiring more people. That was precisely what I recommended and
ultimately what happened.
CROWLEY: Let me give the president a chance.
Go ahead.
OBAMA: Candy, what Governor Romney said just isn’t true. He
wanted to take them into bankruptcy without providing them any way to
stay open. And we would have lost a million jobs. And that — don’t take
my word for it, take the executives at GM and Chrysler, some of whom are
Republicans, may even support Governor Romney. But they’ll tell you his
prescription wasn’t going to work.
And Governor Romney’s says he’s got a five-point plan? Governor
Romney doesn’t have a five-point plan. He has a one-point plan. And that
plan is to make sure that folks at the top play by a different set of
rules. That’s been his philosophy in the private sector, that’s been his
philosophy as governor, that’s been his philosophy as a presidential
candidate.
You can make a lot of money and pay lower tax rates than somebody who
makes a lot less. You can ship jobs overseas and get tax breaks for it.
You can invest in a company, bankrupt it, lay off the workers, strip
away their pensions, and you still make money.
That’s exactly the philosophy that we’ve seen in place for the last decade. That’s what’s been squeezing middle class families.
And we have fought back for four years to get out of that mess. The
last thing we need to do is to go back to the very same policies that
got us there.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, the next question is going to be for you here.
And, Mr. Romney — Governor Romney — there’ll be plenty of chances here to go on, but I want to…
ROMNEY: That — that Detroit — that Detroit answer…
CROWLEY: We have all these folks.
ROMNEY: … that Detroit answer…
CROWLEY: I will let you absolutely…
ROMNEY: … and the rest of the answer, way off the mark.
CROWLEY: OK. Will — will — you certainly will have lots of time here coming up.
Because I want to move you on to something that’s sort of connected
to cars here, and — and go over. And we want to get a question from
Phillip Tricolla.
QUESTION: Your energy secretary, Steven Chu, has now been on record
three times stating it’s not policy of his department to help lower gas
prices. Do you agree with Secretary Chu that this is not the job of the
Energy Department?
OBAMA: The most important thing we can do is to make sure we control
our own energy. So here’s what I’ve done since I’ve been president. We
have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years.
Natural gas production is the highest it’s been in decades. We have
seen increases in coal production and coal employment. But what I’ve
also said is we can’t just produce traditional source of energy. We’ve
also got to look to the future. That’s why we doubled fuel efficiency
standards on cars. That means that in the middle of the next decade, any
car you buy, you’re going to end up going twice as far on a gallon of
gas. That’s why we doubled clean — clean energy production like wind and
solar and biofuels.
And all these things have contributed to us lowering our oil imports
to the lowest levels in 16 years. Now, I want to build on that. And that
means, yes, we still continue to open up new areas for drilling. We
continue to make it a priority for us to go after natural gas. We’ve got
potentially 600,000 jobs and 100 years worth of energy right beneath
our feet with natural gas.
And we can do it in an environmentally sound way. But we’ve also got
to continue to figure out how we have efficiency energy, because
ultimately that’s how we’re going to reduce demand and that’s what’s
going to keep gas prices lower.
Now, Governor Romney will say he’s got an all-of-the-above plan, but
basically his plan is to let the oil companies write the energy
policies. So he’s got the oil and gas part, but he doesn’t have the
clean energy part. And if we are only thinking about tomorrow or the
next day and not thinking about 10 years from now, we’re not going to
control our own economic future. Because China, Germany, they’re making
these investments. And I’m not going to cede those jobs of the future to
those countries. I expect those new energy sources to be built right
here in the United States.
That’s going to help Jeremy get a job. It’s also going to make sure that you’re not paying as much for gas.
CROWLEY: Governor, on the subject of gas prices?
ROMNEY: Well, let’s look at the president’s policies, all right, as
opposed to the rhetoric, because we’ve had four years of policies being
played out. And the president’s right in terms of the additional oil
production, but none of it came on federal land. As a matter of fact,
oil production is down 14 percent this year on federal land, and gas
production was down 9 percent. Why? Because the president cut in half
the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands, and in
federal waters.
So where’d the increase come from? Well a lot of it came from the
Bakken Range in North Dakota. What was his participation there? The
administration brought a criminal action against the people drilling up
there for oil, this massive new resource we have. And what was the cost?
20 or 25 birds were killed and brought out a migratory bird act to go
after them on a criminal basis.
Look, I want to make sure we use our oil, our coal, our gas, our
nuclear, our renewables. I believe very much in our renewable
capabilities; ethanol, wind, solar will be an important part of our
energy mix.
But what we don’t need is to have the president keeping us from
taking advantage of oil, coal and gas. This has not been Mr. Oil, or Mr.
Gas, or Mr. Coal. Talk to the people that are working in those
industries. I was in coal country. People grabbed my arms and said,
“Please save my job.” The head of the EPA said, “You can’t build a coal
plant. You’ll virtually — it’s virtually impossible given our
regulations.” When the president ran for office, he said if you build a
coal plant, you can go ahead, but you’ll go bankrupt. That’s not the
right course for America.
Let’s take advantage of the energy resources we have, as well as the
energy sources for the future. And if we do that, if we do what I’m
planning on doing, which is getting us energy independent, North America
energy independence within eight years, you’re going to see
manufacturing jobs come back. Because our energy is low cost, that are
already beginning to come back because of our abundant energy. I’ll get
America and North America energy independent. I’ll do it by more
drilling, more permits and licenses.
We’re going to bring that pipeline in from Canada. How in the world the president said no to that pipeline? I will never know.
This is about bringing good jobs back for the middle class of
America, and that’s what I’m going to do.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me
just see if I can move you to the gist of this question, which is, are
we looking at the new normal? I can tell you that tomorrow morning, a
lot of people in Hempstead will wake up and fill up and they will find
that the price of gas is over $4 a gallon.
Is it within the purview of the government to bring those prices down, or are we looking at the new normal?
OBAMA: Candy, there’s no doubt that world demand’s gone up, but our
production is going up, and we’re using oil more efficiently. And very
little of what Governor Romney just said is true. We’ve opened up public
lands. We’re actually drilling more on public lands than in the
previous administration and my — the previous president was an oil man.
And natural gas isn’t just appearing magically. We’re encouraging it and working with the industry.
And when I hear Governor Romney say he’s a big coal guy, I mean, keep
in mind, when — Governor, when you were governor of Massachusetts, you
stood in front of a coal plant and pointed at it and said, “This plant
kills,” and took great pride in shutting it down. And now suddenly
you’re a big champion of coal.
So what I’ve tried to do is be consistent. With respect to something
like coal, we made the largest investment in clean coal technology, to
make sure that even as we’re producing more coal, we’re producing it
cleaner and smarter. Same thing with oil, same thing with natural gas.
And the proof is our oil imports are down to the lowest levels in 20
years. Oil production is up, natural gas production is up, and, most
importantly, we’re also starting to build cars that are more efficient.
And that’s creating jobs. That means those cars can be exported,
‘cause that’s the demand around the world, and it also means that it’ll
save money in your pocketbook.
OBAMA: That’s the strategy you need, an all-of-the-above strategy, and that’s what we’re going to do in the next four years.
ROMNEY: But that’s not what you’ve done in the last four years.
That’s the problem. In the last four years, you cut permits and licenses
on federal land and federal waters in half.
OBAMA: Not true, Governor Romney.
ROMNEY: So how much did you cut (inaudible)?
OBAMA: Not true.
ROMNEY: How much did you cut them by, then?
OBAMA: Governor, we have actually produced more oil –
ROMNEY: No, no. How much did you cut licenses and permits on federal land and federal waters?
OBAMA: Governor Romney, here’s what we did. There were a whole bunch of oil companies.
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: No, no, I had a question and the question was how much did you cut them by?
OBAMA: You want me to answer a question –
ROMNEY: How much did you cut them by?
OBAMA: I’m happy to answer the question.
ROMNEY: All right. And it is –
OBAMA: Here’s what happened. You had a whole bunch of oil companies
who had leases on public lands that they weren’t using. So what we said
was you can’t just sit on this for 10, 20, 30 years, decide when you
want to drill, when you want to produce, when it’s most profitable for
you. These are public lands. So if you want to drill on public lands,
you use it or you lose it.
ROMNEY: OK, (inaudible) –
OBAMA: And so what we did was take away those leases. And we are now resetting them so that we can actually make a profit.
ROMNEY: And production on private — on government land –
OBAMA: Production is up.
ROMNEY: — is down.
OBAMA: No, it isn’t.
ROMNEY: Production on government land of oil is down 14 percent.
OBAMA: Governor –
ROMNEY: And production on gas –
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: It’s just not true
.
ROMNEY: It’s absolutely true. Look, there’s no question but the
people recognize that we have not produced more (inaudible) on federal
lands and in federal waters. And coal, coal production is not up; coal
jobs are not up.
I was just at a coal facility, where some 1,200 people lost their
jobs. The right course for America is to have a true all-of-the-above
policy. I don’t think anyone really believes that you’re a person who’s
going to be pushing for oil and gas and coal. You’ll get your chance in a
moment. I’m still speaking.
OBAMA: Well –
ROMNEY: And the answer is I don’t believe people think that’s the case –
OBAMA: — (inaudible).
ROMNEY: That wasn’t the question.
OBAMA: OK.
ROMNEY: That was a statement. I don’t think the American people
believe that. I will fight for oil, coal and natural gas. And the proof,
the proof of whether a strategy is working or not is what the price is
that you’re paying at the pump. If you’re paying less than you paid a
year or two ago, why, then, the strategy is working. But you’re paying
more. When the president took office, the price of gasoline here in
Nassau County was about $1.86 a gallon. Now, it’s $4.00 a gallon. The
price of electricity is up.
If the president’s energy policies are working, you’re going to see
the cost of energy come down. I will fight to create more energy in this
country, to get America energy secure. And part of that is bringing in a
pipeline of oil from Canada, taking advantage of the oil and coal we
have here, drilling offshore in Alaska, drilling offshore in Virginia
where the people want it. Those things will get us the energy we need.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, could you address, because we did finally get
to gas prices here, could you address what the governor said, which is
if your energy policy was working, the price of gasoline would not be $4
a gallon here. Is that true?
OBAMA: Well, think about what the governor — think about what the
governor just said. He said when I took office, the price of gasoline
was $1.80, $1.86. Why is that? Because the economy was on the verge of
collapse, because we were about to go through the worst recession since
the Great Depression, as a consequence of some of the same policies that
Governor Romney’s now promoting.
So, it’s conceivable that Governor Romney could bring down gas prices
because with his policies, we might be back in that same mess.
What I want to do is to create an economy that is strong, and at the
same time produce energy. And with respect to this pipeline that
Governor Romney keeps on talking about, we’ve — we’ve built enough
pipeline to wrap around the entire earth once.
So, I’m all for pipelines. I’m all for oil production. What I’m not
for is us ignoring the other half of the equation. So, for example, on
wind energy, when Governor Romney says “these are imaginary jobs.” When
you’ve got thousands of people right now in Iowa, right now in Colorado,
who are working, creating wind power with good-paying manufacturing
jobs, and the Republican senator in that — in Iowa is all for it,
providing tax breaks (ph) to help this work and Governor Romney says I’m
opposed. I’d get rid of it.
That’s not an energy strategy for the future. And we need to win that
future. And I intend to win it as President of the United States.
CROWLEY: I got to — I got to move you on –
ROMNEY: He gets the first –
CROWLEY: — and the next question –
ROMNEY: He actually got –
CROWLEY: — for you –
ROMNEY: He actually got the first question. So I get the last question — last answer –
CROWLEY: (Inaudible) in the follow up, it doesn’t quite work like
that. But I’m going to give you a chance here. I promise you, I’m going
to.
And the next question is for you. So if you want to, you know, continue on — but I don’t want to leave all –
ROMNEY: Candy, Candy –
CROWLEY: — sitting here –
ROMNEY: Candy, I don’t have a policy of stopping wind jobs in Iowa and that — they’re not phantom jobs. They’re real jobs.
CROWLEY: OK.
ROMNEY: I appreciate wind jobs in Iowa and across our country. I
appreciate the jobs in coal and oil and gas. I’m going to make sure –
CROWLEY: OK.
ROMNEY: — we’re taking advantage of our energy resources. We’ll bring
back manufacturing to America. We’re going to get through a very
aggressive energy policy, 31/2 million more jobs in this country. It’s
critical to our future.
OBAMA: Candy, it’s not going to –
CROWLEY: We’re going to move you along –
OBAMA: Used to being interrupted.
CROWLEY: We’re going to move you both along to taxes over here and all these folks that have been waiting.
Governor, this question is for you. It comes from Mary Follano — Follano, sorry.
ROMNEY: Hi, Mary.
QUESTION: Governor Romney, you have stated that if you’re elected
president, you would plan to reduce the tax rates for all the tax
brackets and that you would work with the Congress to eliminate some
deductions in order to make up for the loss in revenue.
Concerning the — these various deductions, the mortgage deductions,
the charitable deductions, the child tax credit and also the — oh,
what’s that other credit? I forgot.
OBAMA: You’re doing great.
QUESTION: Oh, I remember.
The education credits, which are important to me, because I have
children in college. What would be your position on those things, which
are important to the middle class?
ROMNEY: Thank you very much. And let me tell you, you’re absolutely
right about part of that, which is I want to bring the rates down, I
want to simplify the tax code, and I want to get middle- income
taxpayers to have lower taxes.
And the reason I want middle-income taxpayers to have lower taxes is
because middle-income taxpayers have been buried over the past four
years. You’ve seen, as middle-income people in this country, incomes go
down $4,300 a family, even as gasoline prices have gone up $2,000.
Health insurance premiums, up $2,500. Food prices up. Utility prices up.
The middle-income families in America have been crushed over the last
four years. So I want to get some relief to middle-income families.
That’s part — that’s part one.
Now, how about deductions? ‘Cause I’m going to bring rates down
across the board for everybody, but I’m going to limit deductions and
exemptions and credits, particularly for people at the high end, because
I am not going to have people at the high end pay less than they’re
paying now.
The top 5 percent of taxpayers will continue to pay 60 percent of the income tax the nation collects. So that’ll stay the same.
Middle-income people are going to get a tax break.
And so, in terms of bringing down deductions, one way of doing that
would be say everybody gets — I’ll pick a number — $25,000 of deductions
and credits, and you can decide which ones to use. Your home mortgage
interest deduction, charity, child tax credit, and so forth, you can use
those as part of filling that bucket, if you will, of deductions.
But your rate comes down and the burden also comes down on you for
one more reason, and that is every middle-income taxpayer no longer will
pay any tax on interest, dividends or capital gains. No tax on your
savings. That makes life a lot easier.
If you’re getting interest from a bank, if you’re getting a statement
from a mutual fund or any other kind of investment you have, you don’t
have to worry about filing taxes on that, because there’ll be no taxes
for anybody making $200,000.00 per year and less, on your interest,
dividends and capital gains. Why am I lowering taxes on the
middle-class? Because under the last four years, they’ve been buried.
And I want to help people in the middle-class.
And I will not — I will not under any circumstances, reduce the share
that’s being paid by the highest income taxpayers. And I will not,
under any circumstances increase taxes on the middle-class. The
president’s spending, the president’s borrowing will cost this nation to
have to raise taxes on the American people. Not just at the high end. A
recent study has shown the people in the middle-class will see
$4,000.00 per year in higher taxes as a result of the spending and
borrowing of this administration.
I will not let that happen. I want to get us on track to a balanced
budget, and I’m going to reduce the tax burden on middle income
families. And what’s that going to do? It’s going to help those
families, and it’s going to create incentives to start growing jobs
again in this country.
CROWLEY: Thanks, Governor.
OBAMA: My philosophy on taxes has been simple. And that is, I want to
give middle-class families and folks who are striving to get into the
middle-class some relief. Because they have been hit hard over the last
decade. Over the last 15, over the last 20 years.
So four years ago I stood on a stage just like this one. Actually it
was a town hall, and I said I would cut taxes for middle- class
families, and that’s what I’ve done, by $3,600.00. I said I would cut
taxes for small businesses, who are the drivers and engines of growth.
And we’ve cut them 18 times. And I want to continue those tax cuts for
middle-class families, and for small business.
But what I’ve also said is, if we’re serious about reducing the
deficit, if this is genuinely a moral obligation to the next generation,
then in addition to some tough spending cuts, we’ve also got to make
sure that the wealthy do a little bit more.
So what I’ve said is, your first $250,000.00 worth of income, no
change. And that means 98 percent of American families, 97 percent of
small businesses, they will not see a tax increase. I’m ready to sign
that bill right now. The only reason it’s not happening is because
Governor Romney’s allies in Congress have held the 98 percent hostage
because they want tax breaks for the top 2 percent.
But what I’ve also says is for above $250,000, we can go back to the
tax rates we had when Bill Clinton was president. We created 23 million
new jobs. That’s part of what took us from deficits to surplus. It will
be good for our economy and it will be good for job creation.
Now, Governor Romney has a different philosophy. He was on 60 Minutes
just two weeks ago and he was asked: Is it fair for somebody like you,
making $20 million a year, to pay a lower tax rate than a nurse or a bus
driver, somebody making $50,000 year? And he said, “Yes, I think that’s
fair.” Not only that, he said, “I think that’s what grows the economy.”
Well, I fundamentally disagree with that. I think what grows the
economy is when you get that tax credit that we put in place for your
kids going to college. I think that grows the economy. I think what
grows the economy is when we make sure small businesses are getting a
tax credit for hiring veterans who fought for our country. That grows
our economy.
So we just have a different theory. And when Governor Romney stands
here, after a year of campaigning, when during a Republican primary he
stood on stage and said “I’m going to give tax cuts” — he didn’t say tax
rate cuts, he said “tax cuts to everybody,” including the top 1
percent, you should believe him because that’s been his history.
And that’s exactly the kind of top-down economics that is not going
to work if we want a strong middle class and an economy that’s striving
for everybody.
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, I’m sure you’ve got a reply there.
(LAUGHTER) ROMNEY: You’re absolutely right.
You heard what I said about my tax plan. The top 5 percent will
continue to pay 60 percent, as they do today. I’m not looking to cut
taxes for wealthy people. I am looking to cut taxes for middle-income
people.
And why do I want to bring rates down, and at the same time lower
exemptions and deductions, particularly for people at the high end?
Because if you bring rates down, it makes it easier for small business
to keep more of their capital and hire people.
And for me, this is about jobs. I want to get America’s economy going
again. Fifty-four percent of America’s workers work in businesses that
are taxed as individuals. So when you bring those rates down, those
small businesses are able to keep more money and hire more people.
For me, I look at what’s happened in the last four years and say this
has been a disappointment. We can do better than this. We don’t have to
settle for, how many months, 43 months with unemployment above 8
percent, 23 million Americans struggling to find a good job right now.
There are 3.5 million more women living in poverty today than when the president took office.
We don’t have to live like this. We can get this economy going again.
My five-point plan does it. Energy independence for North America in
five years. Opening up more trade, particularly in Latin America.
Cracking down on China when they cheat. Getting us to a balanced budget.
Fixing our training programs for our workers. And finally, championing
small business.
I want to make small businesses grow and thrive. I know how to make
that happen. I spent my life in the private sector. I know why jobs come
and why they go. And they’re going now because of the policies of this
administration.
CROWLEY: Governor, let me ask the president something about what you just said.
The governor says that he is not going to allow the top 5 percent,
believe is what he said, to have a tax cut, that it will all even out,
that what he wants to do is give that tax cut to the middle class.
Settled?
OBAMA: No, it’s not settled.
Look, the cost of lowering rates for everybody across the board, 20
percent. Along with what he also wants to do in terms of eliminating the
estate tax, along what he wants to do in terms of corporates, changes
in the tax code, it costs about $5 trillion.
Governor Romney then also wants to spend $2 trillion on additional
military programs even though the military’s not asking for them. That’s
$7 trillion.
He also wants to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. That’s another trillion dollars — that’s $8 trillion.
Now, what he says is he’s going to make sure that this doesn’t add to the deficit and he’s going to cut middle-class taxes.
But when he’s asked, how are you going to do it, which deductions, which loopholes are you going to close? He can’t tell you.
The — the fact that he only has to pay 14 percent on his taxes when a
lot of you are paying much higher. He’s already taken that off the
board, capital gains are going to continue to be at a low rate so we —
we’re not going to get money that way.
We haven’t heard from the governor any specifics beyond Big Bird and
eliminating funding for Planned Parenthood in terms of how he pays for
that.
Now, Governor Romney was a very successful investor. If somebody came
to you, Governor, with a plan that said, here, I want to spend $7 or $8
trillion, and then we’re going to pay for it, but we can’t tell you
until maybe after the election how we’re going to do it, you wouldn’t
take such a sketchy deal and neither should you, the American people,
because the math doesn’t add up.
And — and what’s at stake here is one of two things, either Candy —
this blows up the deficit because keep in mind, this is just to pay for
the additional spending that he’s talking about, $7 trillion – $8
trillion before we even get to the deficit we already have. Or,
alternatively, it’s got to be paid for, not only by closing deductions
for wealthy individuals, that — that will pay for about 4 percent
reduction in tax rates.
You’re going to be paying for it. You’re going to lose some
deductions, and you can’t buy the sales pitch. Nobody who’s looked at it
that’s serious, actually believes it adds up.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me get — let me get the governor in on this. And Governor, let’s — before we get into a…
ROMNEY: I — I…
CROWLEY: …vast array of who says — what study says what, if it
shouldn’t add up. If somehow when you get in there, there isn’t enough
tax revenue coming in. If somehow the numbers don’t add up, would you be
willing to look again at a 20 percent…
ROMNEY: Well of course they add up. I — I was — I was someone who ran
businesses for 25 years, and balanced the budget. I ran the Olympics
and balanced the budget. I ran the — the state of Massachusetts as a
governor, to the extent any governor does, and balanced the budget all
four years. When we’re talking about math that doesn’t add up, how about
$4 trillion of deficits over the last four years, $5 trillion? That’s
math that doesn’t add up. We have — we have a president talking about
someone’s plan in a way that’s completely foreign to what my real plan
is.
ROMNEY: And then we have his own record, which is we have four
consecutive years where he said when he was running for office, he would
cut the deficit in half. Instead he’s doubled it. We’ve gone from $10
trillion of national debt, to $16 trillion of national debt. If the
president were reelected, we’d go to almost $20 trillion of national
debt. This puts us on a road to Greece. I know what it takes to balance
budgets. I’ve done it my entire life. So for instance when he says,
“Yours is a $5 trillion cut.” Well, no it’s not. Because I’m offsetting
some of the reductions with holding down some of the deductions.
And…
CROWLEY: Governor, I’ve gotta — gotta — actually, I need to have you both (inaudible).
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: I understand the stakes here. I understand both of you. But I — I will get run out of town if I don’t…
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: And I just described — I just described to you, Mr. President
— I just described to you precisely how I’d do it which is with a
single number that people can put — and they can put they’re — they’re
deductions and credits…
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Mr. President, we’re keeping track, I promise you. And Mr. President, the next question is for you, so stay standing.
OBAMA: Great. Looking forward to it.
And it’s Katherine Fenton, who has a question for you.
QUESTION: In what new ways to you intend to rectify the inequalities
in the workplace, specifically regarding females making only 72 percent
of what their male counterparts earn?
OBAMA: Well, Katherine, that’s a great question. And, you know, I was
raised by a single mom who had to put herself through school while
looking after two kids. And she worked hard every day and made a lot of
sacrifices to make sure we got everything we needed. My grandmother, she
started off as a secretary in a bank. She never got a college
education, even though she was smart as a whip. And she worked her way
up to become a vice president of a local bank, but she hit the glass
ceiling. She trained people who would end up becoming her bosses during
the course of her career.
She didn’t complain. That’s not what you did in that generation. And
this is one of the reasons why one of the first — the first bill I
signed was something called the Lily Ledbetter bill. And it’s named
after this amazing woman who had been doing the same job as a man for
years, found out that she was getting paid less, and the Supreme Court
said that she couldn’t bring suit because she should have found about it
earlier, whereas she had no way of finding out about it. So we fixed
that. And that’s an example of the kind of advocacy that we need,
because women are increasingly the breadwinners in the family. This is
not just a women’s issue, this is a family issue, this is a middle-class
issue, and that’s why we’ve got to fight for it.
It also means that we’ve got to make sure that young people like
yourself are able to afford a college education. Earlier, Governor
Romney talked about he wants to make Pell Grants and other education
accessible for young people.
Well, the truth of the matter is, is that that’s exactly what we’ve
done. We’ve expanded Pell Grants for millions of people, including
millions of young women, all across the country.
We did it by taking $60 billion that was going to banks and lenders
as middlemen for the student loan program, and we said, let’s just cut
out the middleman. Let’s give the money directly to students.
And as a consequence, we’ve seen millions of young people be able to
afford college, and that’s going to make sure that young women are going
to be able to compete in that marketplace.
But we’ve got to enforce the laws, which is what we are doing, and
we’ve also got to make sure that in every walk of life we do not
tolerate discrimination.
That’s been one of the hallmarks of my administration. I’m going to continue to push on this issue for the next four years.
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, pay equity for women?
ROMNEY: Thank you. And important topic, and one which I learned a
great deal about, particularly as I was serving as governor of my state,
because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet and all the
applicants seemed to be men.
And I — and I went to my staff, and I said, “How come all the people
for these jobs are — are all men.” They said, “Well, these are the
people that have the qualifications.” And I said, “Well, gosh, can’t we —
can’t we find some — some women that are also qualified?”
ROMNEY: And — and so we — we took a concerted effort to go out and
find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members
of our cabinet.
I went to a number of women’s groups and said, “Can you help us find folks,” and they brought us whole binders full of women.
I was proud of the fact that after I staffed my Cabinet and my senior
staff, that the University of New York in Albany did a survey of all 50
states, and concluded that mine had more women in senior leadership
positions than any other state in America.
Now one of the reasons I was able to get so many good women to be
part of that team was because of our recruiting effort. But number two,
because I recognized that if you’re going to have women in the workforce
that sometimes you need to be more flexible. My chief of staff, for
instance, had two kids that were still in school.
She said, I can’t be here until 7 or 8 o’clock at night. I need to be
able to get home at 5 o’clock so I can be there for making dinner for
my kids and being with them when they get home from school. So we said
fine. Let’s have a flexible schedule so you can have hours that work for
you.
We’re going to have to have employers in the new economy, in the
economy I’m going to bring to play, that are going to be so anxious to
get good workers they’re going to be anxious to hire women. In the — in
the last women have lost 580,000 jobs. That’s the net of what’s happened
in the last four years. We’re still down 580,000 jobs. I mentioned 31/2
million women, more now in poverty than four years ago.
What we can do to help young women and women of all ages is to have a
strong economy, so strong that employers that are looking to find good
employees and bringing them into their workforce and adapting to a
flexible work schedule that gives women opportunities that they would
otherwise not be able to afford.
This is what I have done. It’s what I look forward to doing and I
know what it takes to make an economy work, and I know what a working
economy looks like. And an economy with 7.8 percent unemployment is not a
real strong economy. An economy that has 23 million people looking for
work is not a strong economy.
An economy with 50 percent of kids graduating from college that can’t
finds a job, or a college level job, that’s not what we have to have.
CROWLEY: Governor?
ROMNEY: I’m going to help women in America get good work by getting a stronger economy and by supporting women in the workforce.
CROWLEY: Mr. President why don’t you get in on this quickly, please?
OBAMA: Katherine, I just want to point out that when Governor
Romney’s campaign was asked about the Lilly Ledbetter bill, whether he
supported it? He said, “I’ll get back to you.” And that’s not the kind
of advocacy that women need in any economy. Now, there are some other
issues that have a bearing on how women succeed in the workplace. For
example, their healthcare. You know a major difference in this campaign
is that Governor Romney feels comfortable having politicians in
Washington decide the health care choices that women are making.
I think that’s a mistake. In my health care bill, I said insurance
companies need to provide contraceptive coverage to everybody who is
insured. Because this is not just a — a health issue, it’s an economic
issue for women. It makes a difference. This is money out of that
family’s pocket. Governor Romney not only opposed it, he suggested that
in fact employers should be able to make the decision as to whether or
not a woman gets contraception through her insurance coverage.
That’s not the kind of advocacy that women need. When Governor Romney
says that we should eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, there are
millions of women all across the country, who rely on Planned
Parenthood for, not just contraceptive care, they rely on it for
mammograms, for cervical cancer screenings. That’s a pocketbook issue
for women and families all across the country. And it makes a difference
in terms of how well and effectively women are able to work. When we
talk about child care, and the credits that we’re providing. That makes a
difference in whether they can go out there and — and earn a living for
their family.
These are not just women’s issues. These are family issues. These are economic issues.
And one of the things that makes us grow as an economy is when
everybody participates and women are getting the same fair deal as men
are.
CROWLEY: Mr. President…
OBAMA: And I’ve got two daughters and I want to make sure that they
have the same opportunities that anybody’s sons have. That’s part of
what I’m fighting for as president of the United States.
CROWLEY: I want to move us along here to Susan Katz, who has a question.
And, Governor, it’s for you.
QUESTION: Governor Romney, I am an
undecided voter, because I’m disappointed with the lack of progress I’ve
seen in the last four years. However, I do attribute much of America’s
economic and international problems to the failings and missteps of the
Bush administration.
Since both you and President Bush are Republicans, I fear a return to
the policies of those years should you win this election. What is the
biggest difference between you and George W. Bush, and how do you
differentiate yourself from George W. Bush?
ROMNEY: Thank you. And I appreciate that question.
I just want to make sure that, I think I was supposed to get that
last answer, but I want to point out that that I don’t believe…
OBAMA: I don’t think so, Candy.
ROMNEY: … I don’t believe…
OBAMA: I want to make sure our timekeepers are working here.
ROMNEY: The time — the time…
CROWLEY: OK. The timekeepers are all working. And let me tell you
that the last part, it’s for the two of you to talk to one another, and
it isn’t quite as (inaudible) you think.
But go ahead and use this two minutes any way you’d like to, the question is on the floor.
ROMNEY: I’d just note that I don’t believe that bureaucrats in
Washington should tell someone whether they can use contraceptives or
not. And I don’t believe employers should tell someone whether they
could have contraceptive care of not. Every woman in America should have
access to contraceptives. And — and the — and the president’s statement
of my policy is completely and totally wrong.
OBAMA: Governor…
ROMNEY: Let me come back and — and answer your question.
President Bush and I are — are different people and these are
different times and that’s why my five point plan is so different than
what he would have done.
I mean for instance, we can now, by virtue of new technology actually
get all the energy we need in North America without having to go to the
— the Arabs or the Venezuelans or anyone else. That wasn’t true in his
time, that’s why my policy starts with a very robust policy to get all
that energy in North America — become energy secure.
Number two, trade — I’ll crack down on China, President Bush didn’t.
I’m also going to dramatically expand trade in Latin America. It’s been
growing about 12 percent per year over a long period of time. I want to
add more free trade agreements so we’ll have more trade.
Number three, I’m going to get us to a balanced budget. President
Bush didn’t. President Obama was right, he said that that was outrageous
to have deficits as high as half a trillion dollars under the Bush
years. He was right, but then he put in place deficits twice that size
for every one of his four years. And his forecast for the next four
years is more deficits, almost that large. So that’s the next area I’m
different than President Bush.
And then let’s take the last one, championing small business. Our
party has been focused too long. I came through small business. I
understand how hard it is to start a small business. That’s why
everything I’ll do is designed to help small businesses grow and add
jobs. I want to keep their taxes down on small business. I want
regulators to see their job as encouraging small enterprise, not
crushing it.
And the thing I find the most troubling about Obama Care, well it’s a
long list, but one of the things I find most troubling is that when you
go out and talk to small businesses and ask them what they think about
it, they tell you it keeps them from hiring more people.
My priority is jobs. I know how to make that happen. And President
Bush has a very different path for a very different time. My path is
designed in getting small businesses to grow and hire people.
CROWLEY: Thanks, Governor.
Mr. President?
OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think it’s important to tell you that we
did come in during some tough times. We were losing 800,000 jobs a
month when I started. But we had been digging our way out of policies
that were misplaced and focused on the top doing very well and middle
class folks not doing well.
Now, we’ve seen 30 consecutive — 31 consecutive months of job growth;
5.2 million new jobs created. And the plans that I talked about will
create even more. But when Governor Romney says that he has a very
different economic plan, the centerpiece of his economic plan are tax
cuts. That’s what took us from surplus to deficit. When he talks about
getting tough on China, keep in mind that Governor Romney invested in
companies that were pioneers of outsourcing to China, and is currently
investing in countries — in companies that are building surveillance
equipment for China to spy on its own folks.
That’s — Governor, you’re the last person who’s going to get tough on
China. And what we’ve done when it comes to trade is not only sign
three trade deals to open up new markets, but we’ve also set up a task
force for trade that goes after anybody who is taking advantage of
American workers or businesses and not creating a level playing field.
We’ve brought twice as many cases against unfair trading practices than
the previous administration and we’ve won every single one that’s been
decided.
When I said that we had to make sure that China was not flooding our
domestic market with cheap tires, Governor Romney said I was being
protectionist; that it wouldn’t be helpful to American workers. Well, in
fact we saved 1,000 jobs. And that’s the kind of tough trade actions
that are required.
But the last point I want to make is this. You know, there are some
things where Governor Romney is different from George Bush. George Bush
didn’t propose turning Medicare into a voucher. George Bush embraced
comprehensive immigration reform. He didn’t call for self-deportation.
George Bush never suggested that we eliminate funding for Planned
Parenthood, so there are differences between Governor Romney and George
Bush, but they’re not on economic policy. In some ways, he’s gone to a
more extreme place when it comes to social policy. And I think that’s a
mistake. That’s not how we’re going to move our economy forward.
CROWLEY: I want to move you both along to the next question, because
it’s in the same wheelhouse, so you will be able to respond. But the
president does get this question. I want to call on Michael Jones.
QUESTION: Mr. President, I voted for you in 2008. What have you done
or accomplished to earn my vote in 2012? I’m not that optimistic as I
was in 2012. Most things I need for everyday living are very expensive.
OBAMA: Well, we’ve gone through a tough four years. There’s no doubt
about it. But four years ago, I told the American people and I told you I
would cut taxes for middle class families. And I did. I told you I’d
cut taxes for small businesses, and I have.
I said that I’d end the war in Iraq, and I did. I said we’d refocus
attention on those who actually attacked us on 9/11, and we have gone
after Al Qaeda’s leadership like never before and Osama bin Laden is
dead.
OBAMA: I said that we would put in place health care reform to make
sure that insurance companies can’t jerk you around and if you don’t
have health insurance, that you’d have a chance to get affordable
insurance, and I have.
I committed that I would rein in the excesses of Wall Street, and we
passed the toughest Wall Street reforms since the 1930s. We’ve created
five million jobs, and gone from 800 jobs a month being lost, and we are
making progress. We saved an auto industry that was on the brink of
collapse.
Now, does that mean you’re not struggling? Absolutely not. A lot of
us are. And that’s why the plan that I’ve put forward for manufacturing
and education, and reducing our deficit in a sensible way, using the
savings from ending wars, to rebuild America and putting people back to
work. Making sure that we are controlling our own energy, but not only
the energy of today, but also the energy of the future. All of those
things will make a difference, so the point is the commitments I’ve
made, I’ve kept.
And those that I haven’t been able to keep, it’s not for lack of
trying and we’re going to get it done in a second term. But, you should
pay attention to this campaign, because Governor Romney has made some
commitments as well. And I suspect he’ll keep those too. You know when
members of the Republican Congress say, “We’re going to sign a no tax
pledge, so that we don’t ask a dime for millionaires and billionaires to
reduce our deficit so we can still invest in education, and helping
kids go to college. He said, “Me too.”
When they said, “We’re going to cut Planned Parenthood funding.” He
said, “Me too.” When he said, “We’re going to repeal Obamacare. First
thing I’m going to do,” despite the fact that it’s the same health care
plan that he passed in Massachusetts and is working well. He said, “Me
too.” That is not the kind of leadership that you need, but you should
expect that those are promises he’s going to keep.
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me let…
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: …the choice in this election is going to be whose promises are
going to be more likely to help you in your life? Make sure your kids
can go to college. Make sure that you are getting a good paying job,
making sure that Medicare and Social Security…
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Mr. President. Thank you.
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: …will be there for you.
CROWLEY: Thank you. Governor?
ROMNEY: I think you know better. I think you know that these last
four years haven’t been so good as the president just described and that
you don’t feel like your confident that the next four years are going
to be much better either.
I can tell you that if you were to elect President Obama, you know
what you’re going to get. You’re going to get a repeat of the last four
years. We just can’t afford four more years like the last four years.
He said that by now we’d have unemployment at 5.4 percent. The
difference between where it is and 5.4 percent is 9 million Americans
without work.
I wasn’t the one that said 5.4 percent. This was the president’s plan. Didn’t get there.
He said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform Medicare
and Social Security, because he pointed out they’re on the road to
bankruptcy. He would reform them. He’d get that done. He hasn’t even
made a proposal on either one.
He said in his first year he’d put out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges. Didn’t even file it.
This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he’d do.
He said that he’d cut in half the deficit. He hasn’t done that either.
In fact, he doubled it. He said that by now middle-income families would
have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2,500 a year.
It’s gone up by $2,500 a year. And if Obamacare is passed, or
implemented — it’s already been passed — if it’s implemented fully,
it’ll be another $2,500 on top.
ROMNEY: The middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a
president who has not understood what it takes to get the economy
working again. He keeps saying, “Look, I’ve created 5 million jobs.”
That’s after losing 5 million jobs. The entire record is such that the
unemployment has not been reduced in this country. The unemployment, the
number of people who are still looking for work, is still 23 million
Americans.
There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in poverty.
How about food stamps? When he took office, 32 million people were on
food stamps. Today, 47 million people are on food stamps. How about the
growth of the economy? It’s growing more slowly this year than last
year, and more slowly last year than the year before.
The president wants to do well. I understand. But the policies he’s
put in place from Obamacare to Dodd-Frank to his tax policies to his
regulatory policies, these policies combined have not let this economy
take off and grow like it could have.
You might say, “Well, you got an example of one that worked better?”
Yeah, in the Reagan recession where unemployment hit 10.8 percent,
between that period — the end of that recession and the equivalent of
time to today, Ronald Reagan’s recovery created twice as many jobs as
this president’s recovery. Five million jobs doesn’t even keep up with
our population growth. And the only reason the unemployment rate seems a
little lower today is because of all the people that have dropped out
of the workforce.
The president has tried, but his policies haven’t worked. He’s great
as a — as a — as a speaker and describing his plans and his vision.
That’s wonderful, except we have a record to look at. And that record
shows he just hasn’t been able to cut the deficit, to put in place
reforms for Medicare and Social Security to preserve them, to get us the
rising incomes we need. Median income is down $4,300 a family and 23
million Americans out of work. That’s what this election is about. It’s
about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and
prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they
deserve.
CROWLEY: Governor, I want to move you along. Don’t — don’t go away,
and we’ll have plenty of time to respond. We are quite aware of the
clock for both of you. But I want to bring in a different subject here.
Mr. President, I’ll be right back with you.
Lorraine Osorio has a question for you about a topic we have not…
OBAMA: This is for Governor Romney?
CROWLEY: It’s for Governor Romney, and we’ll be right with you, Mr. President. Thanks.
ROMNEY: Is it Loraina?
QUESTION: Lorraine.
ROMNEY: Lorraine?
QUESTION: Yes, Lorraine.
ROMNEY: Lorraine.
QUESTION: How you doing?
ROMNEY: Good, thanks.
QUESTION: Mr. Romney, what do you plan on doing with immigrants
without their green cards that are currently living here as productive
members of society?
ROMNEY: Thank you. Lorraine? Did I get that right? Good. Thank you
for your question. And let me step back and tell you what I would like
to do with our immigration policy broadly and include an answer to your
question.
But first of all, this is a nation of immigrants. We welcome people
coming to this country as immigrants. My dad was born in Mexico of
American parents; Ann’s dad was born in Wales and is a first-generation
American. We welcome legal immigrants into this country.
I want our legal system to work better. I want it to be streamlined. I
want it to be clearer. I don’t think you have to — shouldn’t have to
hire a lawyer to figure out how to get into this country legally. I also
think that we should give visas to people — green cards, rather, to
people who graduate with skills that we need. People around the world
with accredited degrees in science and math get a green card stapled to
their diploma, come to the U.S. of A. We should make sure our legal
system works.
Number two, we’re going to have to stop illegal immigration. There
are 4 million people who are waiting in line to get here legally. Those
who’ve come here illegally take their place. So I will not grant amnesty
to those who have come here illegally.
What I will do is I’ll put in place an employment verification system
and make sure that employers that hire people who have come here
illegally are sanctioned for doing so. I won’t put in place magnets for
people coming here illegally. So for instance, I would not give driver’s
licenses to those that have come here illegally as the president would.
The kids of those that came here illegally, those kids, I think,
should have a pathway to become a permanent resident of the United
States and military service, for instance, is one way they would have
that kind of pathway to become a permanent resident.
ROMNEY: Now when the president ran for office, he said that he’d put
in place, in his first year, a piece of legislation — he’d file a bill
in his first year that would reform our — our immigration system,
protect legal immigration, stop illegal immigration. He didn’t do it.
He had a Democrat House, a Democrat Senate, super majority in both
Houses. Why did he fail to even promote legislation that would have
provided an answer for those that want to come legally and for those
that are here illegally today? What’s a question I think the — the
president will have a chance to answer right now.
OBAMA: Good, I look forward to it.
Was — Lorranna — Lorraine — we are a nation of immigrants. I mean
we’re just a few miles away from Ellis Island. We all understand what
this country has become because talent from all around the world wants
to come here. People are willing to take risks. People who want to build
on their dreams and make sure their kids have an even bigger dreams
than they have.
But we’re also a nation of laws. So what I’ve said is we need to fix a
broken immigration system and I’ve done everything that I can on my own
and sought cooperation from Congress to make sure that we fix the
system.
The first thing we did was to streamline the legal immigration
system, to reduce the backlog, make it easier, simpler and cheaper for
people who are waiting in line, obeying the law to make sure that they
can come here and contribute to our country and that’s good for our
economic growth.
They’ll start new businesses. They’ll make things happen to create jobs here in the United States.
Number two, we do have to deal with our border so we put more border
patrol on the — any time in history and the flow of undocumented works
across the border is actually lower than it’s been in 40 years.
What I’ve also said is if we’re going to go after folks who are here
illegally, we should do it smartly and go after folks who are criminals,
gang bangers, people who are hurting the community, not after students,
not after folks who are here just because they’re trying to figure out
how to feed their families. And that’s what we’ve done. And what I’ve
also said is for young people who come here, brought here often times by
their parents. Had gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag.
Think of this as their country. Understand themselves as Americans in
every way except having papers. And we should make sure that we give
them a pathway to citizenship.
And that’s what I’ve done administratively. Now, Governor Romney just
said, you know he wants to help those young people too, but during the
Republican primary, he said, “I will veto the DREAM Act”, that would
allow these young people to have access.” His main strategy during the
Republican primary was to say, “We’re going to encourage
self-deportation.” Making life so miserable on folks that they’ll leave.
He called the Arizona law a model for the nation. Part of the Arizona
law said that law enforcement officers could stop folks because they
suspected maybe they looked like they might be undocumented workers and
check their papers.
You know what? If my daughter or yours looks to somebody like they’re
not a citizen, I don’t want — I don’t want to empower somebody like
that. So, we can fix this system in a comprehensive way. And when
Governor Romney says, the challenge is, “Well Obama didn’t try.” That’s
not true. I have sat down with Democrats and Republicans at the
beginning of my term. And I said, let’s fix this system. Including
Senators previously who had supported it on the Republican side. But
it’s very hard for Republican’s in Congress to support comprehensive
immigration reform, if their standard bearer has said that, this is not
something I’m interested in supporting.
CROWLEY: Let me get the governor in here, Mr. President. Let’s speak to, if you could…
ROMNEY: Yes.
CROWLEY: …the idea of self-deportation?
ROMNEY: No, let — let — let me go back and speak to the points that the president made and — and — and let’s get them correct.
I did not say that the Arizona law was a model for the nation in that
aspect. I said that the E-Verify portion of the Arizona law, which is —
which is the portion of the law which says that employers could be able
to determine whether someone is here illegally or not illegally, that
that was a model for the nation. That’s number one.
Number two, I asked the president a question I think Hispanics and
immigrants all over the nation have asked. He was asked this on
Univision the other day. Why, when you said you’d filed legislation in
your first year didn’t you do it? And he didn’t answer. He — he doesn’t
answer that question. He said the standard bearer wasn’t for it.
I’m glad you thought I was a standard bearer four years ago, but I wasn’t.
Four years ago you said in your first year you would file legislation.
In his first year, I was just getting — licking my wounds from having
been beaten by John McCain, all right. I was not the standard bearer.
My — my view is that this president should have honored his promise to do as he said.
Now, let me mention one other thing, and that is self-deportation
says let people make their own choice. What I was saying is, we’re not
going to round up 12 million people, undocumented illegals, and take
them out of the nation. Instead let people make their own choice. And if
they — if they find that — that they can’t get the benefits here that
they want and they can’t — and they can’t find the job they want, then
they’ll make a decision to go a place where — where they have better
opportunities.
But I’m not in favor of rounding up people and — and — and taking
them out of this country. I am in favor, as the president has said, and I
agree with him, which is that if people have committed crimes we got to
get them out of this country.
ROMNEY: Let me mention something else the president said. It was a
moment ago and I didn’t get a chance to, when he was describing Chinese
investments and so forth.
OBAMA: Candy?
Hold on a second. The…
ROMNEY: Mr. President, I’m still speaking.
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: Mr. President, let me finish.
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: I’ve gotta continue.
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, you can make it short. See all these
people? They’ve been waiting for you. (inaudible) make it short
(inaudible).
ROMNEY: Just going to make a point. Any investments I have over the
last eight years have been managed by a blind trust. And I understand
they do include investments outside the United States, including in — in
Chinese companies.
Mr. President, have you looked at your pension? Have you looked at your pension?
OBAMA: I’ve got to say…
ROMNEY: Mr. President, have you looked at your pension?
OBAMA: You know, I — I don’t look at my pension. It’s not as big as yours so it doesn’t take as long.
ROMNEY: Well, let me give you some advice.
OBAMA: I don’t check it that often.
ROMNEY: Let me give you some advice. Look at your pension. You also
have investments in Chinese companies. You also have investments outside
the United States. You also have investments through a Cayman’s trust.
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: We’re way off topic here, Governor Romney.
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: I thought we were talking about immigration.
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: I do want to make sure that…
CROWLEY: If I could have you sit down, Governor Romney. Thank you.
OBAMA: I do want to make sure that — I do want to make sure that we
just understand something. Governor Romney says he wasn’t referring to
Arizona as a model for the nation. His top adviser on immigration is the
guy who designed the Arizona law, the entirety of it; not E-Verify, the
whole thing. That’s his policy. And it’s a bad policy. And it won’t
help us grow.
Look, when we think about immigration, we have to understand there
are folks all around the world who still see America as the land of
promise. And they provide us energy and they provide us innovation and
they start companies like Intel and Google. And we want to encourage
that.
Now, we’ve got to make sure that we do it in a smart way and a
comprehensive way, and we make the legal system better. But when we make
this into a divisive political issue, and when we don’t have bipartisan
support — I can deliver, Governor, a whole bunch of Democrats to get
comprehensive immigration reform done, and we can’t…
ROMNEY: I’ll get it done. I’ll get it done. First year…
OBAMA: … we can’t — we have not seen Republicans serious about this issue at all. And it’s time for them to get serious on it.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me move you on here please. Mr. President, (inaudible).
OBAMA: This used to be a bipartisan issue.
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Don’t go away, though — right. Don’t go away because I — I
want you to talk to Kerry Ladka who wants to switch the topic for us.
OBAMA: OK.
Hi, Kerry.
QUESTION: Good evening, Mr. President.
OBAMA: I’m sorry. What’s your name?
QUESTION: It’s Kerry, Kerry Ladka.
OBAMA: Great to see you.
QUESTION: This question actually comes from a brain trust of my friends at Global Telecom Supply (ph) in Minneola yesterday.
OBAMA: Ah.
QUESTION: We were sitting around, talking about Libya, and we were
reading and became aware of reports that the State Department refused
extra security for our embassy in Benghazi, Libya, prior to the attacks
that killed four Americans.
Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?
OBAMA: Well, let me first of all talk about our diplomats, because
they serve all around the world and do an incredible job in a very
dangerous situation. And these aren’t just representatives of the United
States, they are my representatives. I send them there, oftentimes into
harm’s way. I know these folks and I know their families. So nobody is
more concerned about their safety and security than I am.
So as soon as we found out that the Benghazi consulate was being
overrun, I was on the phone with my national security team and I gave
them three instructions.
Number one, beef up our security and procedures, not just in Libya, but at every embassy and consulate in the region.
Number two, investigate exactly what happened, regardless of where
the facts lead us, to make sure folks are held accountable and it
doesn’t happen again.
And number three, we are going to find out who did this and we’re
going to hunt them down, because one of the things that I’ve said
throughout my presidency is when folks mess with Americans, we go after
them.
OBAMA: Now Governor Romney had a very different response. While we
were still dealing with our diplomats being threatened, Governor Romney
put out a press release, trying to make political points, and that’s not
how a commander in chief operates. You don’t turn national security
into a political issue. Certainly not right when it’s happening. And
people — not everybody agrees with some of the decisions I’ve made. But
when it comes to our national security, I mean what I say. I said I’d
end the war in Libya — in — in Iraq, and I did.
I said that we’d go after al-Qaeda and bin Laden, we have. I said
we’d transition out of Afghanistan, and start making sure that Afghans
are responsible for their own security, that’s what I’m doing. And when
it comes to this issue, when I say that we are going to find out exactly
what happened, everybody will be held accountable. And I am ultimately
responsible for what’s taking place there because these are my folks,
and I’m the one who has to greet those coffins when they come home. You
know that I mean what I say.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, I’m going to move us along. Governor?
ROMNEY: Thank you Kerry for your question, it’s an important one. And
— and I — I think the president just said correctly that the buck does
stop at his desk and — and he takes responsibility for — for that — for
the failure in providing those security resources, and — and those
terrible things may well happen from time to time. I — I’m — I feel very
deeply sympathetic for the families of those who lost loved ones. And
today there’s a memorial service for one of those that was lost in this
tragedy. We — we think of their families and care for them deeply. There
were other issues associated with this — with this tragedy. There were
many days that passed before we knew whether this was a spontaneous
demonstration, or actually whether it was a terrorist attack.
ROMNEY: And there was no demonstration involved. It was a terrorist
attack and it took a long time for that to be told to the American
people. Whether there was some misleading, or instead whether we just
didn’t know what happened, you have to ask yourself why didn’t we know
five days later when the ambassador to the United Nations went on TV to
say that this was a demonstration. How could we have not known?
But I find more troubling than this, that on — on the day following
the assassination of the United States ambassador, the first time that’s
happened since 1979, when — when we have four Americans killed there,
when apparently we didn’t know what happened, that the president, the
day after that happened, flies to Las Vegas for a political fund-raiser,
then the next day to Colorado for another event, other political event.
I think these — these actions taken by a president and a leader have
symbolic significance and perhaps even material significance in that
you’d hope that during that time we could call in the people who were
actually eyewitnesses. We’ve read their accounts now about what
happened. It was very clear this was not a demonstration. This was an
attack by terrorists.
And this calls into question the president’s whole policy in the
Middle East. Look what’s happening in Syria, in Egypt, now in Libya.
Consider the distance between ourselves and — and Israel, the president
said that — that he was going to put daylight between us and Israel.
We have Iran four years closer to a nuclear bomb. Syria — Syria’s not
just a tragedy of 30,000 civilians being killed by a military, but also
a strategic — strategically significant player for America.
The president’s policies throughout the Middle East began with an
apology tour and — and — and pursue a strategy of leading from behind,
and this strategy is unraveling before our very eyes.
CROWLEY: Because we’re — we’re closing in, I want to still get a lot
of people in. I want to ask you something, Mr. President, and then have
the governor just quickly.
Your secretary of state, as I’m sure you know, has said that she
takes full responsibility for the attack on the diplomatic mission in
Benghazi. Does the buck stop with your secretary of state as far as what
went on here?
OBAMA: Secretary Clinton has done an extraordinary job. But she works
for me. I’m the president and I’m always responsible, and that’s why
nobody’s more interested in finding out exactly what happened than I do.
The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I
told the American people in the world that we are going to find out
exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said
that we’re going to hunt down those who committed this crime.
And then a few days later, I was there greeting the caskets coming into Andrews Air Force Base and grieving with the families.
And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of
State, our U.N. Ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or
mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. That’s
not what we do. That’s not what I do as president, that’s not what I do
as Commander in Chief.
CROWLEY: Governor, if you want to…
ROMNEY: Yes, I — I…
CROWLEY: … quickly to this please.
ROMNEY: I — I think interesting the president just said something
which — which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose
Garden and said that this was an act of terror.
OBAMA: That’s what I said.
ROMNEY: You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror.
It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying?
OBAMA: Please proceed governor.
ROMNEY: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it
took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an
act of terror.
OBAMA: Get the transcript.
CROWLEY: It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. So let me — let me call it an act of terror…
OBAMA: Can you say that a little louder, Candy?
CROWLEY: He — he did call it an act of terror. It did as well take —
it did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea there being a
riot out there about this tape to come out. You are correct about that.
ROMNEY: This — the administration — the administration indicated this was a reaction to a video and was a spontaneous reaction.
CROWLEY: It did.
ROMNEY: It took them a long time to say this was a terrorist act by a
terrorist group. And to suggest — am I incorrect in that regard, on
Sunday, the — your secretary –
OBAMA: Candy?
ROMNEY: Excuse me. The ambassador of the United Nations went on the Sunday television shows and spoke about how –
OBAMA: Candy, I’m –
ROMNEY: — this was a spontaneous –
CROWLEY: Mr. President, let me –
OBAMA: I’m happy to have a longer conversation –
CROWLEY: I know you –
OBAMA: — about foreign policy.
CROWLEY: Absolutely. But I want to — I want to move you on and also –
OBAMA: OK. I’m happy to do that, too.
CROWLEY: — the transcripts and –
OBAMA: I just want to make sure that –
CROWLEY: — figure out what we –
OBAMA: — all of these wonderful folks are going to have a chance to get some of their questions answered.
CROWLEY: Because what I — what I want to do, Mr. President, stand
there a second, because I want to introduce you to Nina Gonzalez, who
brought up a question that we hear a lot, both over the Internet and
from this crowd.
QUESTION: President Obama, during the Democratic National Convention
in 2008, you stated you wanted to keep AK-47s out of the hands of
criminals. What has your administration done or planned to do to limit
the availability of assault weapons?
OBAMA: We’re a nation that believes in the Second Amendment, and I
believe in the Second Amendment. We’ve got a long tradition of hunting
and sportsmen and people who want to make sure they can protect
themselves.
But there have been too many instances during the course of my
presidency, where I’ve had to comfort families who have lost somebody.
Most recently out in Aurora. You know, just a couple of weeks ago,
actually, probably about a month, I saw a mother, who I had met at the
bedside of her son, who had been shot in that theater.
And her son had been shot through the head. And we spent some time,
and we said a prayer and, remarkably, about two months later, this young
man and his mom showed up, and he looked unbelievable, good as new.
But there were a lot of families who didn’t have that good fortune and whose sons or daughters or husbands didn’t survive.
So my belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we’ve already
got, make sure that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of criminals,
those who are mentally ill. We’ve done a much better job in terms of
background checks, but we’ve got more to do when it comes to
enforcement.
But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for
soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. And so what I’m
trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the
violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault
weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other
sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago,
there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re
using cheap hand guns.
And so what can we do to intervene, to make sure that young people
have opportunity; that our schools are working; that if there’s violence
on the streets, that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we
can catch it before it gets out of control.
And so what I want is a — is a comprehensive strategy. Part of it is
seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing
numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. But part of
it is also going deeper and seeing if we can get into these communities
and making sure we catch violent impulses before they occur.
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, the question is about assault weapons, AK-47s.
ROMNEY: Yeah, I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on — on
guns and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal. We, of course,
don’t want to have automatic weapons, and that’s already illegal in
this country to have automatic weapons. What I believe is we have to do,
as the president mentioned towards the end of his remarks there, which
is to make enormous efforts to enforce the gun laws that we have, and to
change the culture of violence that we have.
And you ask how — how are we going to do that? And there are a number
of things. He mentioned good schools. I totally agree. We were able to
drive our schools to be number one in the nation in my state. And I
believe if we do a better job in education, we’ll — we’ll give people
the — the hope and opportunity they deserve and perhaps less violence
from that. But let me mention another thing. And that is parents. We
need moms and dads, helping to raise kids. Wherever possible the — the
benefit of having two parents in the home, and that’s not always
possible. A lot of great single moms, single dads. But gosh to tell our
kids that before they have babies, they ought to think about getting
married to someone, that’s a great idea.
Because if there’s a two parent family, the prospect of living in
poverty goes down dramatically. The opportunities that the child will —
will be able to achieve increase dramatically. So we can make changes in
the way our culture works to help bring people away from violence and
give them opportunity, and bring them in the American system. The — the
greatest failure we’ve had with regards to — to gun violence in some
respects is what — what is known as Fast and Furious. Which was a
program under this administration, and how it worked exactly I think we
don’t know precisely, where thousands of automatic, and AK-47 type
weapons were — were given to people that ultimately gave them to — to
drug lords.
They used those weapons against — against their own citizens and
killed Americans with them. And this was a — this was a program of the
government. For what purpose it was put in place, I can’t imagine. But
it’s one of the great tragedies related to violence in our society which
has occurred during this administration. Which I think the American
people would like to understand fully, it’s been investigated to a
degree, but — but the administration has carried out executive privilege
to prevent all of the information from coming out.
I’d like to understand who it was that did this, what the idea was
behind it, why it led to the violence, thousands of guns going to
Mexican drug lords.
OBAMA: Candy?
CROWLEY: Governor, Governor, if I could, the question was about these
assault weapons that once were once banned and are no longer banned.
I know that you signed an assault weapons ban when you were in
Massachusetts, obviously, with this question, you no longer do support
that. Why is that, given the kind of violence that we see sometimes with
these mass killings? Why is it that you have changed your mind?
ROMNEY: Well, Candy, actually, in my state, the pro-gun folks and the
anti-gun folks came together and put together a piece of legislation.
And it’s referred to as an assault weapon ban, but it had, at the
signing of the bill, both the pro-gun and the anti-gun people came
together, because it provided opportunities for both that both wanted.
There were hunting opportunities, for instance, that haven’t
previously been available and so forth, so it was a mutually agreed-
upon piece of legislation. That’s what we need more of, Candy. What we
have right now in Washington is a place that’s gridlocked.
CROWLEY: So I could — if you could get people to agree to it, you would be for it?
ROMNEY: We have –
OBAMA: Candy?
ROMNEY: — we haven’t had the leadership in Washington to work on a
bipartisan basis. I was able to do that in my state and bring these two
together.
CROWLEY: Quickly, Mr. President.
OBAMA: The — first of all, I think Governor Romney was for an assault
weapons ban before he was against it. And he said that the reason he
changed his mind was, in part, because he was seeking the endorsement of
the National Rifle Association. So that’s on the record.
But I think that one area we agree on is the important of parents and
the importance of schools, because I do believe that if our young
people have opportunity, then they are less likely to engage in these
kinds of violent acts. We’re not going to eliminate everybody who is
mentally disturbed and we have got to make sure they don’t get weapons.
(AUDIO GAP)
OBAMA: because I do believe that if our young people have
opportunity, then they’re less likely to engage in these kind of violent
acts.
We’re not going to eliminate everybody who is mentally disturbed, and
we’ve got to make sure they don’t get weapons. But we can make a
difference in terms ensuring that every young person in America,
regardless of where they come from, what they look like, have a chance
to succeed.
And, Candy, we haven’t had a chance to talk about education much, but
I think it is very important to understand that the reforms we’ve put
in place, working with 46 governors around the country, are seeing
schools that are some of the ones that are the toughest for kids
starting to succeed. We’re starting to see gains in math and science.
When it comes to community colleges, we are setting up programs,
including with Nassau Community College, to retrain workers, including
young people who may have dropped out of school but now are getting
another chance, training them for the jobs that exist right now.
And in fact, employers are looking for skilled workers. And so we’re
matching them up. Giving them access to higher education. As I said, we
have made sure that millions of young people are able to get an
education that they weren’t able to get before.
Now…
CROWLEY: Mr. President, I have to — I have to move you along here. You said you wanted to…
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: We need to do it here.
OBAMA: But — but it’ll — it’ll — it’ll be…
(CROSSTALK)
OBAMA: … just one second.
CROWLEY: One…
OBAMA: Because — because this is important. This is part of the choice in this election.
When Governor Romney was asked whether teachers, hiring more teachers
was important to growing our economy, Governor Romney said that doesn’t
grow our economy.
When — when he was asked would class size…
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: The question, Mr. President, was guns here, so I need to move us along.
OBAMA: I understand.
CROWLEY: You know, the question was guns. So let me — let me bring in another…
OBAMA: But this will make a difference in terms of whether or not we can move this economy forward for these young people…
CROWLEY: I understand.
OBAMA: … and reduce our violence.
CROWLEY: OK. Thank you so much.
I want to ask Carol Goldberg to stand up, because she gets to a
question that both these men have been passionate about. It’s for
Governor Romney.
QUESTION: The outsourcing of American jobs overseas has taken a toll
on our economy. What plans do you have to put back and keep jobs here in
the United States?
ROMNEY: Boy, great question and important question, because you’re
absolutely right. The place where we’ve seen manufacturing go has been
China. China is now the largest manufacturer in the world. It used to be
the United States of America. A lot of good people have lost jobs. A
half a million manufacturing jobs have been lost in the last four years.
That’s total over the last four years.
One of the reasons for that is that people think it’s more attractive
in some cases to go offshore than to stay here. We have made it less
attractive for enterprises to stay here than to go offshore from time to
time. What I will do as president is make sure it’s more attractive to
come to America again.
This is the way we’re going to create jobs in this country. It’s not
by trickle-down government, saying we’re going to take more money from
people and hire more government workers, raise more taxes, put in place
more regulations. Trickle-down government has never worked here, has
never worked anywhere.
I want to make America the most attractive place in the world for
entrepreneurs, for small business, for big business, to invest and grow
in America.
Now, we’re going to have to make sure that as we trade with other
nations that they play by the rules. And China hasn’t. One of the
reasons — or one of the ways they don’t play by the rules is
artificially holding down the value of their currency. Because if they
put their currency down low, that means their prices on their goods are
low. And that makes them advantageous in the marketplace.
We lose sales. And manufacturers here in the U.S. making the same
products can’t compete. China has been a currency manipulator for years
and years and years. And the president has a regular opportunity to
label them as a currency manipulator, but refuses to do so.
On day one, I will label China a currency manipulator, which will
allow me as president to be able to put in place, if necessary, tariffs
where I believe that they are taking unfair advantage of our
manufacturers.
So we’re going to make sure that people we trade with around the
world play by the rules. But let me — let me not just stop there. Don’t
forget, what’s key to bringing back jobs here is not just finding
someone else to punish, and I’m going to be strict with people who we
trade with to make sure they — they follow the law and play by the
rules, but it’s also to make America the most attractive place in the
world for businesses of all kinds.
That’s why I want to down the tax rates on small employers, big
employers, so they want to be here. Canada’s tax rate on companies is
now 15 percent. Ours is 35 percent. So if you’re starting a business,
where would you rather start it? We have to be competitive if we’re
going to create more jobs here.
Regulations have quadrupled. The rate of regulations quadrupled under
this president. I talk to small businesses across the country. They
say, “We feel like we’re under attack from our own government.” I want
to make sure that regulators see their job as encouraging small
business, not crushing it. And there’s no question but that Obamacare
has been an extraordinary deterrent to enterprises of all kinds hiring
people.
My priority is making sure that we get more people hired. If we have
more people hired, if we get back manufacturing jobs, if we get back all
kinds of jobs into this country, then you’re going to see rising
incomes again. The reason incomes are down is because unemployment is so
high. I know what it takes to get this to happen, and my plan will do
that, and one part of it is to make sure that we keep China playing by
the rules.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, two minutes here, because we are then going to go to our last question.
OBAMA: OK. We need to create jobs here. And both Governor Romney and I
agree actually that we should lower our corporate tax rate. It’s too
high. But there’s a difference in terms of how we would do it. I want to
close loopholes that allow companies to deduct expenses when they move
to China; that allow them to profit offshore and not have to get taxed,
so they have tax advantages offshore.
All those changes in our tax code would make a difference.
Now, Governor Romney actually wants to expand those tax breaks. One
of his big ideas when it comes to corporate tax reform would be to say,
if you invest overseas, you make profits overseas, you don’t have to pay
U.S. taxes.
But, of course, if you’re a small business or a mom-and-pop business
or a big business starting up here, you’ve got to pay even the reduced
rate that Governor Romney’s talking about.
And it’s estimated that that will create 800,000 new jobs. The problem is they’ll be in china. Or India. Or Germany.
That’s not the way we’re going to create jobs here. The way we’re
going to create jobs here is not just to change our tax code, but also
to double our exports. And we are on pace to double our exports, one of
the commitments I made when I was president. That’s creating tens of
thousands of jobs all across the country. That’s why we’ve kept on
pushing trade deals, but trade deals that make sure that American
workers and American businesses are getting a good deal.
Now, Governor Romney talked about China, as I already indicated. In
the private sector, Governor Romney’s company invested in what were
called pioneers of outsourcing. That’s not my phrase. That’s what
reporters called it.
And as far as currency manipulation, the currency has actually gone
up 11 percent since I’ve been president because we have pushed them
hard. And we’ve put unprecedented trade pressure on China. That’s why
exports have significantly increased under my presidency. That’s going
to help to create jobs here.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, we have a really short time for a quick discussion here.
iPad, the Macs, the iPhones, they are all manufactured in China. One
of the major reasons is labor is so much cheaper here. How do you
convince a great American company to bring that manufacturing back here?
ROMNEY: The answer is very straightforward. We can compete with
anyone in the world as long as the playing field is level. China’s been
cheating over the years. One by holding down the value of their
currency. Number two, by stealing our intellectual property; our
designs, our patents, our technology. There’s even an Apple store in
China that’s a counterfeit Apple store, selling counterfeit goods. They
hack into our computers. We will have to have people play on a fair
basis, that’s number one.
Number two, we have to make America the most attractive place for
entrepreneurs, for people who want to expand their business. That’s what
brings jobs in. The president’s characterization of my tax plan…
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: …is completely…is completely…
(CROSSTALK)
ROMNEY: …is completely false. Let me tell you…
CROWLEY: Let me to go the president here because we really are
running out of time. And the question is can we ever get — we can’t get
wages like that. It can’t be sustained.
OBAMA: Candy, there are some jobs that are not going to come back.
Because they are low wage, low skill jobs. I want high wage, high skill
jobs. That’s why we have to emphasize manufacturing. That’s why we have
to invest in advanced manufacturing. That’s why we’ve got to make sure
that we’ve got the best science and research in the world. And when we
talk about deficits, if we’re adding to our deficit for tax cuts for
folks who don’t need them, and we’re cutting investments in research and
science that will create the next Apple, create the next new innovation
that will sell products around the world, we will lose that race.
If we’re not training engineers to make sure that they are equipped
here in this country. Then companies won’t come here. Those investments
are what’s going to help to make sure that we continue to lead this
world economy, not just next year, but 10 years from now, 50 years from
now, 100 years from now.
CROWLEY: Thanks Mr. President.
(CROSSTALK)
CROWLEY: Governor Romney?
ROMNEY: Government does not create jobs. Government does not create jobs.
CROWLEY: Governor Romney, I want to introduce you to Barry Green, because he’s going to have the last question to you first?
ROMNEY: Barry? Where is Barry?
QUESTION: Hi, Governor. I think this is a tough question. To each of
you. What do you believe is the biggest misperception that the American
people have about you as a man and a candidate? Using specific examples,
can you take this opportunity to debunk that misperception and set us
straight?
ROMNEY: Thank you, and that’s an opportunity for me, and I appreciate it.
In the nature of a campaign, it seems that some campaigns are focused
on attacking a person rather than prescribing their own future and the
things they’d like to do. In the course of that, I think the president’s
campaign has tried to characterize me as — as someone who’s very
different than who I am.
I care about 100 percent of the American people. I want 100 percent
of the American people to have a bright and prosperous future. I care
about our kids. I understand what it takes to make a bright and
prosperous future for America again. I spent my life in the private
sector, not in government. I’m a guy who wants to help with the
experience I have, the American people.
My — my passion probably flows from the fact that I believe in God.
And I believe we’re all children of the same God. I believe we have a
responsibility to care for one another. I — I served as a missionary for
my church. I served as a pastor in my congregation for about 10 years.
I’ve sat across the table from people who were out of work and worked
with them to try and find new work or to help them through tough times.
I went to the Olympics when they were in trouble to try and get them
on track. And as governor of my state, I was able to get 100 percent of
my people insured, all my kids, about 98 percent of the adults. I was
able also to get our schools ranked number one in the nation, so 100
percent of our kids would have a bright opportunity for a future.
ROMNEY: I understand that I can get this country on track again. We
don’t have to settle for what we’re going through. We don’t have to
settle for gasoline at four bucks. We don’t have to settle for
unemployment at a chronically high level. We don’t have to settle for 47
million people on food stamps. We don’t have to settle for 50 percent
of kids coming out of college not able to get work. We don’t have to
settle for 23 million people struggling to find a good job.
If I become president, I’ll get America working again. I will get us
on track to a balanced budget. The president hasn’t. I will. I’ll make
sure we can reform Medicare and Social Security to preserve them for
coming — coming generations. The president said he would. He didn’t.
CROWLEY: Governor…
ROMNEY: I’ll get our incomes up. And by the way, I’ve done these things. I served as governor and showed I could get them done.
CROWLEY: Mr. President, last two minutes belong to you.
OBAMA: Barry, I think a lot of this campaign, maybe over the last
four years, has been devoted to this nation that I think government
creates jobs, that that somehow is the answer.
That’s not what I believe. I believe that the free enterprise system
is the greatest engine of prosperity the world’s ever known.
I believe in self-reliance and individual initiative and risk takers
being rewarded. But I also believe that everybody should have a fair
shot and everybody should do their fair share and everybody should play
by the same rules, because that’s how our economy’s grown. That’s how we
built the world’s greatest middle class.
And — and that is part of what’s at stake in this election. There’s a
fundamentally different vision about how we move our country forward.
I believe Governor Romney is a good man. Loves his family, cares
about his faith. But I also believe that when he said behind closed
doors that 47 percent of the country considered themselves victims who
refuse personal responsibility, think about who he was talking about.
Folks on Social Security who’ve worked all their lives. Veterans
who’ve sacrificed for this country. Students who are out there trying to
hopefully advance their own dreams, but also this country’s dreams.
Soldiers who are overseas fighting for us right now. People who are
working hard every day, paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don’t make
enough income.
And I want to fight for them. That’s what I’ve been doing for the
last four years. Because if they succeed, I believe the country
succeeds.
When my grandfather fought in World War II and he came back and he
got a G.I. Bill and that allowed him to go to college, that wasn’t a
handout. That was something that advanced the entire country. And I want
to make sure that the next generation has those same opportunities.
That’s why I’m asking for your vote and that’s why I’m asking for
another four years.
CROWLEY: President Obama, Governor Romney, thank you for being here tonight.
On that note we have come to an end of this town hall debate. Our
thanks to the participants for their time and to the people of Hofstra
University for their hospitality.
The next and final debate takes place Monday night at Lynn (ph)
University in Boca Raton, Florida. Don’t forget to watch. Election Day
is three weeks from today. Don’t forget to vote.
