KANU News Retention; Debate 96

dave haynes and welcome to debate ninety six another in a series of presentations about kansas public radio election project last fall the district congresswoman jan meyers amount she'd not be seeking his seventh term in office at a news conference in a hometown of overland park my is set that up to twelve years in washington it was simply time to move on to other things after a great deal of time i finally decided that i will not internment years their memberships or ten or twelve or fourteen years and then step aside and what someone else make a contribution we jam it is leaving the rough and tumble of washington politics the question now is who will fill his shoes in congress recently the

candidates competing for that job met at the johnson county community college in overland park for lincoln douglas style debate sponsored by the league of women voters and the kansas city star newspaper over the next hour you will have a chance to meet those candidates as they discuss the issues they all republican vince neil bonnett and a laser attorney was spent the last twelve years representing his city in the kansas legislature the democratic candidate is judy hancock an international trade attorney from prairie village hancock you may recall run for the seat two years ago she lost but not without taking more than forty percent of the vote away from congresswoman my as in the general election the libertarian candidate is charles clarke a former attorney who now owns and manages a computer store in manhattan manhattan isn't actually in the third district but the state's election polls don't prohibit that one statute says you only have to live in kansas to run for congress finally the reform candidate is write in the garden of an

accountant from desoto also teaches business at the university of missouri in kansas city gardener though did not attend this debate due to a scheduling conflict but relative that the candidates who are taking part it's time to join the studio audience at the johnson county community college auditorium and the debate's moderator michael mahoney we think it would be a great debate in every sense of the word which are going to say tonight is as close as we can come in modern times to the old style lincoln douglas debates heard a lot about them in this broadcast you're going to see what they're really like the candidates who are going to be here and i know the questions in advance they know the subject matters that are before the huge wallow i'm an optimistic that freeman a position statement on their own on their state of the respective issue and then here's the distinctive are the other candidates not reporters or anybody else the other candidates will then have three minutes to question the candidates in essence cross examination between the different candidates will be followed by that one of the rebels or appearance on the

positions the questions and rebels were selected in a draw just a few moments before this broadcast are the words of the story we'll be going first which is under our first question the american people are concerned about the prevalence of violent crime levels of congress play in controlling crime and what measures would you advocate for positions though thiel is quite as strong as ones concerned the ones on safely lower frequency and severity of crime before among the different than his third district will share a common concern for the sake of our families are friends and a course ourselves statistics show that out tennis maybe the victim of violent crime in our lifetimes most violent crimes of the jurisdiction of state and local governments i generally dealing with a criminal law at the state level as a member the kansas legislature for the last twelve years i served on the judiciary committee for ten years has happened or another for four years and in that time i've had the opportunity to work on a number of get tough on crime issues truth uncensored main specific sentences for

crimes their number by the criminal victim the victim's families for his rights legislation life imprisonment for those are persistent violent offenders the poet or the most egregious workers special federal registration and public transportation i work at innovation that as they are with their daughter's death and tried to pass legislation in the state legislature increased family traces of guns and crimes civil commitment for greater funding for the crime laboratories crime victim restitution guaranteeing victims' rights and taking juvenile crime seriously are trying in sentencing juveniles as a golfer committing violent crimes is your proposed centralized registration of our listeners know that all of the locations of those offenders we should do all we can to have the federal state and local authorities are working together to enforce laws and

i was rip support increase sentences for repeat offenders fortified prisoners currently our prisons our defenders almost one half of those serving time are sharing their force sends nineteen percent are sharing their seven cents for our crime does not serve her it is not solved by midnight basketball for interpretive dance i'm israeli by police were talking for an extended incarceration for repeat offenders it's a state law who initially that in the form of block grants without strings attached to accuse those organizations of those levels of government no better idea was the resources for their advantage finally drives must be treated as strictly pre order now we'll begin our question and answer period and again this was selected by brought the first question of the disorder and democrat jay hancock i share your concern in outrage over the prevalence of violent crime in

our society and i agree with much of what you said here tonight there is one subject however you did not really touch upon and that was the important subject of gun control gun control is not a panacea it's just one piece of crime prevention if you stay here tonight your position and your reason for it in respect to the repeal of the brady bill and the assault and and also you're reason for supporting legislation in the kansas legislature to permit the widespread carrying of concealed weapons by adel hanson's you know what i don't like about it brady bill is that it may not be as effective as it should be it's possible the concept of the list check which i do support the words instantly checking on background of those or subscribe via and yet the support that would make a state the assault weapons ban very quietly is

totally ineffective his legislation congress could not define what solomon was originally nineteen guns were on that list it's now down to two and very frankly it really doesn't have much effect on those weapons are used on anyone levels are by definition what writers not want waters and that provision to repeal to europe to have weapons ban only if that's what one says well it's not my concealed carry i've support concealed carry state kansas thirty one states already have concealed carry those august fifteenth a study was released by the university of chicago and jerry was ongoing in those states where concealed carry was allowed lerner was down eight point five percent weight was down seventy five percent an aggravated assault were down seven percent if you translate that out there potentially fifteen or fewer

murders forty one interview or rapes sixty thousand fewer bushels of the stage with an audience and superior and of the two and won one thousand licenses that were issued in those states there were only eighteen crimes involving firearms and i've presented longer sentences we did for nonviolent crimes crimes against the

senses center well thank you and good evening the amount of violent crime of child abuse and domestic violence in this country is outrageous what the most fundamental duties of government is to enforce the law and protect law abiding citizens i regularly ride on patrol police officers in the third district especially with their area and that experience teaches me that reminds the more police on the streets we must have a tougher sentences for violent criminals and we must have sentences that truly means what they say and are always served at the end of their term i'm just entitled to be hurting parole hearings and they should be entitled to be notified when perpetrators who committed crimes against them were released from custody and we do need a national registry of

sexual predators it we must impose much much tougher sentences on people who commit crimes with guns and gun control is not a panacea it's not to be an end all but it is one important piece of crime prevention i grew up around guns and i would never go to take away law abiding citizens' right to have a gun for hunting and sporting purposes and to defend themselves in their own home but under the constitution we as a society have the right to impose reasonable and limited restrictions on gun ownership this is an area where vincent i strongly disagree with this was to repeal the brady bill five day waiting period for background checks and as he said here tonight he wants to repeal the assault on bain that he actually wants to go further he wants to expand the availability of guns in our communities and just think about this the man sitting next to you and your child at a mcdonald's could be carrying a concealed weapon

it's simply beyond the dance how anyone could believe that by permitting the widespread carrying a concealed weapons in our society that we're going to make our communities safer it just doesn't make sense to me and frankly i don't think it's in keeping with the mainstream values of the people of the third district of kansas and i would urge you to reconsider your position on this issue that is so important to the safety of our children and all our citizens no question there are significant yet was a crime problems that we have to be aware that they can agree that elected officials allegedly a by example i know that within my own family that there is no drug use electronic been taught to understand that that's my expectation of them and that's a sudden expectation of you know the fact that when the

administration has eliminated mandatory drug testing the white house staff and especially a drug use policy that it and president when appointed attorney general that even legalization of drugs wind generated one administration has failed to lead by example for growth i believe that premieres in our society is simply unacceptable the level of a weather exists in public officials are wondering jesus and private citizens of our lives and homes and i am strongly opposed to any legislation to legalize drugs that were as was proposed here earlier but you know one of the areas we disagree on is egregious budget and his budget would have cut severely finding safe and drug free schools program and i just recently was at the wheel of the upper east our school and we would kansas and i was really impressed by the third fourth graders i met

there who are so attached to their police officer who comes in for the dare program once a week and counsels teaches them about the dangers of drug use and that program is one of those sports programs it's funded and the second rope free schools program and i think we should cut funding for that we have to balance the budget as you and i both agree that we have to do in a way thats in keeping with our fundamental value is that people are important priorities and i think drug free schools is one of the most important priorities our nation can handle it how do you think that the drone program is doing and give you say a drug free schools but in fact you could ask him in junior high school student where you could get drugs and going into himself taken directly to someone can hurt someone if not more than two people away from suppliers drugs are so i just don't think that workers

expect localities because their problem doesn't mean that we should try to make them more prevalent i really disagree with you i'm sorry on this point and i know in other forums we've had this discussion two but i just think we really need to crack down on drug use drug peddlers and we must do everything we can to have schools that are free of both guns and drugs and sold charlie hunter's point wages most respectfully disagree with you brazil long here without their divisions big question regarding crime and gun controls black was a member of the libertarian party candidate in this race these were criminals and we have a lot of police and we have a lot of prisons boyd we have a lot of prisons but we are reducing violent crime because the police were going after non violent criminals sixty percent were present berry's of occupied by drug users and that's not their

drug users to give up their presence but isn't let us use at work constructively and if we focus the efforts of the police and the president so that's the main focus is going after violent criminals and this character would go much nicer place to live first question that decline comes from all in similar questions of why curator state run away into the drug issue like a total broader perspective right if i can compare force the impact on federal crime policies in her home city of manhattan kansas those impacted on the furniture you know i dont know they're going to go to trial and there's your approach to this then he'd carry over not only the people who use drugs are people who traffic in them isn't part of the

problem that people are committing violent crimes in connection with drug dealers and drug trafficking and again i i just embattled by your approach to his instrument and the tragic causes roy to forty percent of the violent crime in this country but that's because it's illegal it's because someone with kurds cannot go to the police when it is wrong it is estimated that twenty percent or forty percent of the murders in this country is caused by the drug suppression is the drug laws like the violence it's not the drugs like the violence look at tobacco to make tobacco illegal think of the slaughter will happen and it'll make marijuana legal the slaughter would be critics no one would get rich it would legalize marijuana stores aren't you worried that this will lead to any more of our children becoming an iranian alliance right now these badges available now we're not suppress the drugs that it is there and in fact

under current laws is beneficial to use children as butchers because they could be locked up and we make it legal for adults and other financially in favor of using adults right now were pushed billions of dollars into the black market we're getting people millions and billions of dollars in order to make the drugs available you give people the kind of money they will find the users i think very much that concludes the first round question our first question of crime over the lead or second an article entitled wednesday july twenty first nineteen ninety six edition of the kansas city star compliant with this data allison tolman spending is brought under control we have no right in the years ahead to expect anything the chaos of the government and the economy the agreement and what would you do with two of the biggest entitlements medicare and social security by your order of the broad harper's democrats clearly we must balance the federal budget i am deeply committed to that and not only that we've got to start paying off the national debt as well by twenty years of

experience and business will teach me how important it is to balance the budget but we've got to do it in a smart fair sensible way and in keeping with our fundamental values and priorities as a people and with respect to medicare we actually have two distinct problems we have a short term insolvency problem and we have the long term problem posed by the impending retirement of the baby boomers people like benson charlie and me over the next fifteen to twenty years now i'm only democrats and republicans coming together in this era of bipartisanship can fall short term involving problems and ensure the fall in the next decade they've done that before democrats and republicans over the last thirty one years the program has been in trouble in various times and we solved that problem with respect to the baby boomers quite frankly very few people in public life even claimed to have a solution to that problem senator dole himself doesn't put on his last day in office and the senate he

proposed the establishment of an independent bipartisan commission literally study carefully this problem and come up with recommendations and i endorse senator cole's proposal now what we must not do in solving the medicare problem is we must not a job harvey majors such as those that were proposed by to enrich newt gingrich's medicare plan which has indicated are primary he would've voted for i'm fine with two for mr gingrich would have caught the medicare plan by two hundred and seventy billion dollars while simultaneously giving a two hundred and forty five billion dollar tax cut for the wealthiest americans i think those two numbers together and moreover the medicare trustees themselves then that that was three times as much as needed to be cut to ensure the solvency for another decade but it wasn't just the numbers that was the problem with that the average planet isn't the worst

there are a lot of other things wrong with it such as eliminating the federal guarantee of assistance that the elderly were the state nursing homes there were federal standards that were going to be abolished that protects seniors in nursing homes against abuse and neglect standards that were adopted in the reagan administration with bipartisan support and rich wanted to do away with federal enforcement of those standards they even wanted to go after the assets of surviving spouses what one spouse those interesting when the other space how they even went so far as to propose going after landing upon the assets of adult children whose parents were in nursing homes receiving medicaid that is simply too harsh during that period both of those programs represent intergenerational transfer that as

they're taking money from younger poorer people and delivering that money to people who are on average older and have more money than the people who are paying in and that the money goes and like a lot of money goes in to pay out immediately like in any game well charlie as as you may know only three percent of all medicare out ways all the money that we spend on medicare goes to beneficiaries who have incomes of over fifty thousand dollars and eighty three percent of all medicare money spent it goes to people who have incomes of less than twenty five thousand dollars so i don't think we're talking here in the broad brush about a lot of very wealthy seniors our country has a commitment that we've made to our parents and grandparents and i simply think we have to keep that commitment we have to apply and we have to be fiscally responsible anderson are goals that we've got a plan for the day when the baby

boomers retire believe that i knew that a fair way you know i think we need to take care of as a society we are judged in part by how we treat the most vulnerable in our society at the dawn of life at the twilight of life and i for one believe that with respect to our parents and grandparents who helped build this country we've got to preserve and protect medicare and again rich plan as much as they try to help that has been preserving protecting it wasn't there when i haven't by two hundred and seventy billion dollars a lot more simultaneously getting into a point by point our tax code on what you're doing that you think we can work in a bipartisan way to accomplish this a lot in here or any specifics and i think that one problem in discussions and debate they're saying maybe three alternatives to address problems that face and violence and you can either increase

benefits of the story was i proposed and raise taxes to continue funding faster than the rate of inflation as democrats have proposed barring postponed dealing with a problem or ignore altogether which i think i heard you say you propose which of those approaches you will if they were well we have a little disagreement on my approach hear what i mean i believe that with respect to the near term insolvency problem there are puzzle spending right now to congress by both democrats and republicans elements of those that can reduce costs could reduce out ways for the medicare program but when we got there when we get there and had shared sacrifice we must make sure that we're not cutting medicare to pay for a tax cut for the wealthiest americans as was proposed by mr gingrich and you were in a cave endorse his proposal and also we

must not for seniors to leave the choice of their own doctor as was proposed in the gingrich plan to get rich i also proposed now i'm going where doctors could charge patients more than would be re funded by medicare so a senior might find themselves hit with a big medical bill unexpectedly and finally i just i really find it hard to understand how anyone could say that they want to repeal the enforcement at the federal level of standards of care for seniors in nursing homes and levy upon the assets of the spouse who remains at home and they even proposed and this is what i find truly incredible to levy upon the assets of adult children of poverty stricken seniors who are in nursing homes now i say we can find ways to cut costs ways brought an abuse

certainly a good place to start in the medicare program is a senior in this room knows thank you very much money from and obviously we can read it over at her children the long term solution to suggest is that we study with them in the long term but the numbers are clear it cannot mutate genes right we want to build something that is not harsh we want to clear up the gentlest way out of our problems they give us a suggestion that we are increasingly deductibles which aren't hundred dollars on now medicare and with that would gently and slowly transfer of the land to a backup

harsh i'm not on social security and i don't think we've learned counsel a part of it but they would to question five will save a way that we can provide for laypeople welfare system that way about a third of it so that the next generation will have something to look forward to for their security and that for the time being at least we continue on a quest for a question and we didn't really get a social security and our discussion here and i gather that you are willing to look at preventing people younger people who are some years away from retirement to put a portion of what they're paying into social security now into their own private personally selected pension plan and i'm willing to look at that too i'm willing to look at a portion of what

people pay into social security letting him invested as they see fit i gather this question do you agree with that or do you have well actually the money we're going now to money and politics the peak and that was that they're listening to three alternative to addressing the problem child spending increasing benefits it's already

raising taxes to continue funding veterans inflation or postpone the un robert orr altogether which of those approaches the river if we ignore it would postpone or that we raise taxes we're going to have a larger catastrophe later therefore we have to increase the already wide candidates here with my terrier i jumped a rebuttal states the first question i will go back and make sure that we get the you know we get to that winning the rules of this style each of these candidates have a one minute window when they can respond anything they were during this question whether they were the wheat really are the first rebuttal on this question on talent goes to the senate democrats in their vans oh yeah he

can well in violent crime rates but an ivory an airport we've got a real problem for spending under control entitlement programs have to be reformed we ever hope to handle our fiscal problems and that may be the top of some but it's time that politicians face the reality that we cannot continue to ignore the problems rather after the question all gotten so scary devil we've got a very varied expectations from all sources first we have to guarantee the expectations of those currently the security and those who are reaching retirement age and the system that they have come to depend on is going to be there for them of benefits that federal wanted to be there but we also have to meet the expectations of the younger generation i've talked to a number of people of their different about whether or not they expect her to be around when they retire almost without exception those under the age of fourteen new system

will fail and not be there for it we've got to deal with that expectation and that reality we have provide choice to younger members of our workforce must allow them to decide when they're gonna retire how much they want to retire on and where to invest into those roles after all of them say indian state with the tax policy they have their money they should be alarmed those receiving benefits in those were near a major seeing benefits would continue on the current system on a sliding scale that younger you get more record payroll tax would be available to you for private investment to revive you are there be a prohibition on early withdrawal if you fail to choose a private investment then you continue on the current system the more you and that probably was renovated the entire system

later on it we were all going to face are in the system don't live for those who can't provide for themselves allison janney maybe maybe the current system that should not be tax cap on outside any country raise eliminate completely and we all be studying means testing talk about medicare i have to agree that there is a problem the current system that's been established by the medicare trustees themselves second you have to understand that the republicans are the ones proposed solutions democrats including ms hancock i have offered no solution this point i do support the republican medicare preservation act walker of general medical inflation is about three percent republican plan would allow one ever increasing medicare spending over seven point two percent that's more than inflation and angry population that this would increase from forty eight hundred dollars to seventy one hundred olive hoover said

a long term basis i think we need to look at the possibility of allowing medicare recipients enjoy the same benefits that lawyers are protesting now if we allow younger people to opt out of the plans are going to have private investment plan that will there be an incredible short fall of money is immediately incredible that for the general will be better to leave a third of their money is going into the government plan and leave a third of their planet money's going to pour into her private investment actually i don't know third and two thirds or would fall only be cured by actuaries history insurance in his study or retirement plans but was proposing is that we'd all be paying a certain amount of our payroll taxes so scary system to pay

for those who can't afford it to set aside money for those who can we are allowed and take part that tax a carbon tax that then that well as we have seen what the republican proposal mr gantry age was it was as i describe that plan to cut medicare by two hundred and seventy billion dollars and let's get to this subject of reducing the rate of growth in medicare actually what i am what a cat medicare by fourteen percent would it would've been fourteen percent less than expected rate of growth of inflation in medicare that means doesn't it bans that seniors on medicare would face higher premiums and reduced benefits isn't that really the thrust of the proposal that you know the war's know that

criticism the front of your criticism you're not going to believe in greece it's slowing the rate of increase anyone even show me how receiving forty eight hundred dollars now forty eight hundred hour presented now receiving seventy one hundred dollars is a cut must have some hand woman who have that i don't have one other question now deals with the problems in the budget can get to the question of political parties is that the significance of balancing the budget spending cuts mortgages support of thing about but when you're drawing here and what they don't thank you a serious spending cut will tend to have depressed economy and so when in

some pacs that can reinvigorate the economy we do one dollar of tax kept american dollar spending cuts or something in that vicinity we can reduce the deficit while we stimulate the economy but balancing the budget is not nearly enough not nearly enough to have a five trillion dollar debt we have to remain your shares of all forty thousand dollars or three that manager shares eighty thousand dollars and you don't want before the race a five trillion dollar that means that every time the rate of inflation goes up one percent we're going to an extra fifty billion dollars a year in interest fifty billion dollars a year old deficit right now so hundred and fifty billion dollars a year

that we need to do something to start paying that back down before the interest rate goes up one thing we do let's look at the army corporal there their seventy five billion dollars just generally a bad idea marcus and corrupt legislative process and he's wrong about one business and give it to a competitor so if weight and i want to say that every dollar for dollar corporate welfare is misspelled but i'm willing to give up the whole thing about the budget and that would take care of half of it because that seventy five billion dollars a year now if we were billion dollars a year twenty five million dollars and according to the cato institute we can't or right we will receive another two hundred

billion dollars a year in revenues from people who didn't go to prison very intimate republicans democrats and a libertarian and two minutes has turned a hundred and fifty billion dollars deficit and two hundred and twenty five billion dollar surplus and anyway even in education entirely agree with you now you can hear the previous forty

years under democrats which released a great cars right direction for years as they when i ask how much it fourteen percent on average today the question was how much of it how much is the most anybody ought to have to pay and three point five percent if you are willing to pay forty percent ourselves willing to see our worst enemies that twenty five percent that was the government spending thirty seven percent question i mean when you agree with the factual statement says we're having some tips you hear about actual statement would you agree with what the congressional budget office and a number of other economists state that if we were not paying the interest on the debt that was run up

between nineteen eighty and nineteen ninety two but the federal budget today we have a surprise as a factual statement by the congressional budget office and and i'm just wondering whether you agree with that or factual statement the accuracy of the last three years for partisan reasons you know i got eighty three years ago from the federal budget and the budget will bow the fact is we've reduce the budget deficit in the federal budget by sixty percent have we not in the last three years that when you agree that that's heading in the right direction we need to get to see relatively new orleans that's like saying if you turn right here and in the right direction even though the road in the back of the leg was not the right direction of your sentences well republican iris and present when the bear to reach agreement on one

issue related by total of three years and that was the budget needs to be balanced they couldn't agree on what about it they couldn't agree what about going to be a change and finally taken that reality that balance obviously those are not insignificant different a balanced budget for some concern is absolutely essential to the fiscal health of this nation to report re examination of all aspects of government and government and the role it plays in our society and become poor george we have to establish what they're only has space and families all live on the concept that you can spend more than contentment at him i'll be on the program look at those programs in the sense that after question for sure there may be involved in the program at all second question if government should be involved in government what

level government can't be involved every day hundreds of these the state local level don't have a vocal proponent of protest on monday four inches of cabinet level and they're in iraq education how involved some of the foreign media and other agencies song in the country standing but they go low wages in the bureaucracy and taylor's money needs to go back to state law grants to handle such as housing you know president clinton has made a very very courageous move their proposal why proposing to eliminate meaty taste report and the naval academy very far well i think we also need to be eliminating duplication in government there were twelve hundred independent commissions council words we have a hundred and sixty four federal job training programs a hundred and sixty four different program

we also look at the possible sale of assets we get twelve hundred non defense airplanes with helium reserves and there were other research as long we protect our ability to defend ourselves i think we need to look at possibly disposing of those assets the budget process of talk about budget amendment we need to rewrite the appropriations process where the committee is the only appropriate when evil and i want all your spending well you know what in fact low rates we are one one the bat have a balanced budget and frankly anyone you elect officers likely be a budget question is whether they'll cut the federal budget cut your record and

you have been here tonight have endorsed the appalachian of the department of education at the federal level and you've indicated their support which would cut education for college loan programs i'm curious do you support of taxpayer money to be used to fund private schools the so called schools vouchers approach do you support that the first job that i don't accept your definition that's so every time you mention that tonight what we are going to re definition that the increase in spending on those programs does the senate which your question i had the opportunities that at one point that what his lawyer to review doctors' one way doctors ought to be a state by state issue education on to be a station that's why we propose eliminating the part that at the federal level that money is wasted their recent that the states i'm not an octave on characters over against them i did not see the

ribbons victims at this point and as a result if the president but the goal was proposed about her it was those tax breaks i'll be happy to go about it would you be willing to do it called for the elimination of world no not not not all climate not all wear crosses or it every program of the government we need to take a look at the music that would cost benefit too would return shows there are some programs that have been winning corporate welfare very quietly allows to be overseas against companies that received the same kind of benefits where government i think we need to make sure that that we are not entering our building pee wee we now have these trade agreements that we have to live with that we be careful that we dont undercut the bill imposes a

certain visions did not going to be unfair i am absolutely committed to eliminating our federal budget deficit and not only that it's beginning to pay off for nashville that it's an absolute top priority for me as a member of congress should i be elected from this district now i had a sense very specific ideas about how we ought to reform the federal budget process for example i think we're going to hear a budget at the federal level so that in the austere members of congress can actually do what they're supposed to be doing now which is engaged in oversight judging the performance of the programs that we're finding in getting rid of those that are working or have outlived their usefulness i think we should break the federal budget in the capital and operating budget just as every company america's best and most state and local governments including kansas now once we reform the budget process we're going to get our priorities straight on the first

day ladies and gentlemen is i don't think that we should be getting the pentagon want money and they ask him or they say they need and that pakistan has been in the last two years and mr gingrich and his allies have voted for nine eighteen billion dollars war and military spending and the pentagon itself requested that just doesn't make sense to me and i think we do need to look at every program and in the discretionary budget at the federal level and i'm prepared to make cuts and specify ones tonight star wars program the space station and the commerce department which i have personal experience with they can tell you that there are a lot of programs it oughta be you cut or eliminated outright priorities straight and where i would differ with what mr raiche and his budget is that i wouldn't cut education and i wouldn't get environmental protection and i say that we as a society need to be investing in our youth i represent american

companies try to compete in the world i understand the competition that we face it's only then its therefore we have to invest in public education and response to your comment earlier the fact is that they were going to cut college loan programs and we can provide you with the facts on the number of students right here in the third district and across kansas who would have been severely impacted their ability to get an education college education because of the cut i repeat the cuts that were proposed by mr gingrich so i think we need to have a balanced approach we need to be fiscally responsible and as we cut we're gonna do it in a way that is there and sensible and in keeping with our priorities and our fundamental values as a people and their work balanced budget amendment as well a few votes

in the house one year and then they'll decide what one of the white house to support the balanced budget amendment tells the entire federal budget well i'm glad you asked me that question because of you an ad for a split in the paper that indicated that that you already knew the answer that question you said that i did not support a balanced budget amendment and this is the first time that you've asked me that and i am now pleased to tell you that this and that you were an easy way of it out loud generally i think the legislators your exercise titian and as you may know in a hundred fourth congress for twenty nine different balanced budget amendments have been proposed so to say with the balanced budget amendment is really nonsense but there is a balanced budget amendment that i could support it was entered this by congressman wise west

virginia which provides he provided firewood for breaking the federal budget in the capital budget and offering budget and he says that we should have a balanced operate the budget amendment to the constitution and i support that because i make sense you mentioned in the private sector vents we don't the private sector people will borrow money to build a factory or flight by plant and equipment that goal of capital investment they want the government to make that decision we're basically operating expenditures and i think it's completely irresponsible if i may say for legislators to talk in today's terms about balanced budget amendment when there's so many of them and we need to be very careful that we talk about that we know what we're talking about and also make sure that the country can provide for its military he liked a

good to do budgeting process saw how about putting military budget on even longer budgeting process that we just said and as a percentage of our revenues and say at next year's earlier after that military budget is presented this year revenues and that way the vote in the long term what they can expect and we'll have too much of our congressional term debating military budget every year we are we know it's going to come up well i think that that would not be pretty quickly and if i may say charlie because if anything the military budget is one where you need to be aware of what's going on the world and be able to react in the end a flexible adaptable way to new dangers in the world and so despite the military spending any given percentage the government's revenue i would be very worried about that we wouldn't have the capacity that we need in a crisis situation or responding to a new regional strategy in the world now the world in some ways it's more dangerous now than it was before the collapse of the soviet union

but i can't work on time here you knew that this was coming were the changes that we're down inside a climate of what i like to do is give you each sixty second this point to a quote we were all closing statements or whatever and on the stern long we were going to do is take the position from question number five and the first one that we want to watch it and you have sixty seconds i'm waiting for that i think congress because i believe the people of this district really want to say and the washington someone who was going to reject the extremes of both parties try to rise above as much as humanly possible kind of narrow partisanship and extreme etiologies from the left and the right that we see at work together work together to find commonsense solutions for common good i pledge to the people of this district that if you give me the privilege of serving you in washington i will be that kind of common

sense person who reflects the mainstream values independent thinking of the people of our district of kansas thank you very much the pope the news did not seem to respond to the attention of the blaze a reasonably moderate is a very lower now than it would be if we didn't have a war on drugs on a pension of the blaze but we don't get very much attention so what we need to do it in the war on drugs turn attention with a violent crimes and have a much safer societies remember every time you bought a marijuana smoker in prison you're putting a rapist on the street we need to and

if anyone can the party's in power and the republicans and the democrats like to blame the deficit on each other because of a his full well and to do that you know that they did it together the pain while positions that the gazans have a dual from the republicans raised and snowboard and a legislative last twelve years in the state of kansas of inventory request for a very very broad range of issues the same broad range of issues that will deal with at the federal level we joke that the only if you haven't dealt with or that we do with foreign policy and iraq we have to do it was written by the time they have a foreign policy experience as well there are a number of issues in this campaign i think the overriding issue but one that covers a mall is the role of federal government has chosen to play last few years they

haven't treated in a widening or businesses they have taken away our assets confiscated or property and put them to use is that they choose is time to restore the car back to states and have for the part that people and after going over there cringing listening to debate ninety six a special presentation of the kansas public radio election wanted for the last hour we've been hearing from the candidates vying to take over the job mei is third district seat in the us congress they were debating the issues at a recent forum held at the johnson county community college in overland park the candidates of been snowbound in a republican from only that we're currently serves as the kansas house majority leader democrats judy hancock and international trade attorney from prairie village and libertarian candidate shells clack the owner of a computer store in manhattan the reform candidate run the government did not attend the debate due to a

scheduling conflict kansas public radio would like to extend its thanks to the league of women voters and the kansas city star of this sponsorship of this forum we'd also like to thank the johnson county community college the technical assistance in this podcast i make haynes and from all of us here at kansas public radio thanks dave