>> THE FOLLOWING PROGRAM IS PART OF OUR WISCONSIN VOTE 2012 ELECTION >> COVERAGE.

>> LIVE FROM THE UW MARATHON COUNTY CENTER FOR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT THEATER, IT'S >> THE WISCONSIN 2012 DEBATE, THE U.S. SENATE DEBATE. >> IT'S A PACKED HOUSE. 350 AUDIENCE MEMBERS JOIN BROADCAST AND ONLINE VIEWERS >> FROM ALL OVER THE COUNTRY FOR OUR ONE-HOUR WISCONSIN U.S. SENATE DEBATE. >> I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG, FROM WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION. >> AND I'M CHARLES BENSON, OF TODAY'S TMJ4. LET'S WELCOME THE U.S. SENATE >> CANDIDATES, REPUBLICAN TOMMY THOMPSON AND DEMOCRAT TAMMY BALDWIN. >> [APPLAUSE] >> >> >> >> >> OUR FORMAT TONIGHT MIXES THE TRADITIONAL CANDIDATE Q&A WITH UNMODERATED INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES. SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE NEXT HOUR, THE CANDIDATES WILL TALK WITH EACH OTHER ON ISSUES. THESE WILL BE STRETCHES OF ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATIONS. CHARLES AND I WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN THOSE EXCHANGES IN ANY WAY.

>> INSTEAD, IT'S A CHANCE FOR THEM TO CHALLENGE THEIR OPPONENT FOR MORE >> DETAILS ON THEIR POSITION, AND HAVE A HEALTHY EXCHANGE OF IDEAS. >> >> >> >> AT >> ENDED UP LOSING THEIR JOBS FOR OUTSOURCING, AND OTHER SITUATIONS, SO I >> THINK JOBS IS THE BIGGEST KEY RIGHT NOW FOR WISCONSIN, FOR SURE. >> I'M WORRIED ABOUT ONCE I GRADUATE, AM I GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIND A >> CAREER. IF NOT, WOULD I HAVE TO RELOCATE SOMEWHERE ELSE? >> IT'S MY AGE THAT IS PULLING ME DOWN, YOU KNOW? IT'S MY AGE. SO, NOBOD Y >> TOLD ME THAT. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> AND SO WITH THAT BACKDROP, WE ASK OUR FIRST QUESTION. ECONOMICS, 101 IS ALL ABOUT SUPPLY AND DEMAND. IF IT'S DEMAND THAT PROMOTES BUSINESS EXPANSION AND HIRING, WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO AN INCREASED DEMAND FOR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES AND TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY? THIS QUESTION GOES FIRST TO YOU, GOVERNOR THOMPSON. YOU HAVE 90 SECONDS. FIRST OFF, THANKS VERY MUCH FOR HAVING US HERE TONIGHT, AND THANK THE AUDIENCE FOR COMING. AND THOSE THAT ARE OUT THERE WATCHING, THANK YOU. WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR, I WAS FACED WITH A SIMILAR SITUATION. I WORKED WITH THE DEMOCRATS TO CUT TAXES 91 TIMES. WE CREATED A STATE THAT WAS VERY OPEN FOR BUSINESS. WE WERE ABLE TO CREATE 742,000 JOBS. UNEMPLOYMENT WAS DOWN TO 2%. WORKING TOGETHER, WE WERE ABLE TO ESTABLISH A STATE THAT WAS ON FIRE. WITH REGARDS TO ECONOMIC GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, JOB CREATION, UNEMPLOYMENT DOWN BELOW 2%, ANYONE WHO WANTED A JOB COULD HAVE ONE. THAT'S MY RECORD. I'M A REFORMER. MY OPPONENT ON THE OTHER SIDE-- WE'RE IN THE HEART OF PAPER COUNTRY. THERE WAS A RULE THAT WAS PUT IN BY A.P.A., THE MACT RULE. IT'S GOING TO COST THE PAPER COMPANY ABOUT 7500 JOBS, SOME OF THOSE JOBS HERE IN WAUSAU. MY OPPONENT, SHE VOTED WITH THE EPA. SHE VOTED WITH EPA, AND THOSE YOU CAN JOIN IN THE CONVERSATION TONIGHT DURING THE DEBATE BY GOING TO WISCONSINVOTE.ORG, JSONLINE.COM OR TODAYSTMJ4.COM FOR A LIVE WEB CHAT. AND SO, WE BEGIN. OUR FIRST TOPIC, JOBS AND THE ECONOMY, A SUBJECT THAT WAS HIGH ON THE LIST OF VOTER'S CONCERNS AS WE TRAVELED THE STATE. >> JOBS. JOBS IS NUMBER ONE. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE, MYSELF INCLUDED, TH

>> >> >> >> >> >>

JOBS COULD BE LOST NEXT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE EPA RULES REGULATIONS. THE PAPER INDUSTRY IS VERY CRUCIAL TO THIS AREA, THE STATE OF WISCONSIN, AND I WANT TO TELL THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE, JUST LIKE I'VE ALWAYS FOUGHT FOR WISCONSIN, CREATING JOBS AND OPPORTUNITY, I WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO. I WILL NOT GIVE EPA THE OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE DOWN PAPER COMPANIES IN WISCONSIN, LIKE MY OPPONENT DOES.

>> CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN, YOUR TURN. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I APPRECIATE AND ALSO WANT TO THANK YOU FOR SPONSORING THIS DEBATE, AND THE LIVE AUDIENCE, AS WELL AS THE TELEVISION AUDIENCE FOR PARTICIPATING. YOU ASKED ABOUT DEMAND AND THE IMPACT ON JOBS. RIGHT NOW, AND THE MIDDLE CLASS IN THIS STATE IS STRUGGLING. THE CENSUS BUREAU FIGURES SAY THAT MEDIAN INCOME IN OUR STATE HAS GONE DOWN 14.5% OVER THE LAST DECADE. WE'RE NOT TALKING JUST ABOUT THIS RECENT RECESSION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DECADE. AND I THINK WE NEED A PLAN MOVING FORWARD FOR JOBS, FOR DEFICIT REDUCTION, FOR TAXES, ET CETERA, THAT KEEPS THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE STRENGTH AND THE GROWTH OF THE MIDDLE CLASS AT HEART. WHEN PEOPLE HAVE EXTRA MONEY IN THEIR POCKETS, THEY'RE GOING TO SPEND IT IN SMALL BUSINESSES ACROSS THIS STATE. SO GROWTH IS ONE OF THE KEY-- HAVING PEOPLE WITH DISCRETIONARY INCOME IS KEY WITH GROWTH. I AGREE WE'RE IN THE HEART OF THE PAPER PRODUCING REGION OF WISCONSIN, AND THAT'S WHY I INTRODUCED A BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT GOT WRAPPED INTO A LARGER BILL, SIGNED INTO LAW BY OUR PRESIDENT THAT LEVELS THE PLAYING FIELD AND STOPPED CHINA'S CHEATING. THAT'S THE REAL THREAT TO OUR PAPER INDUSTRY. BUT ON THE MACT ISSUE, SENATOR KOHL AND I MET WITH A.P.A. SECRETARY LISA JACKSON AND URGED FOR MORE TIME. I HEAR A LOT FROM MY OPPONENT ABOUT HIS TIME IN THE '80s AND '90s IN THE GOVERNOR'S MANSION, BUT THE TRUTH IS, FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS, HE'S BEEN A PARTNER AT ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL LOBBYIST FIRMS IN WASHINGTON, FIGHTING FOR THE VERY POWERFUL INTERESTS. I THINK WE CAN CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION IN OUR NEXT SEGMENT, BECAUSE AS WE SAID AT THE START, DURING PARTS OF THIS DEBATE, THE CANDIDATES ARE ON THEIR OWN, PRESSING EACH OTHER ON THESE ISSUES. MEANWHILE, CHARLES AND I, AGAIN, STEP OUT OF THE WAY.

>> WE'RE GOING TO SIT ON OUR HANDS AND BITE OUR LIPS. THE IDEA IS TO GET THE >> CANDIDATES TO PROVIDE MORE DETAIL, BE MORE SPECIFIC, MORE INTERACTIVE THAN >> THE STRAIGHT-UP MINUTE AND A HALF RESPONSE THAT WE MIGHT NORMALLY HEAR. >> THESE UNMODERATED SEGMENTS RUN ABOUT SIX MINUTES, WE WANTED TO REMIND YOU, >> THE AUDIENCE, OF THAT. WE'RE NOT KIDDING, CHARLES AND I ARE NOT INVOLVED. >> SO WE TURN THEM LOOSE NOW ON THIS QUESTION OF HOW TO GROW THE ECONOMY, AND >> WITH IT, JOBS. THERE'S NO DIRECTION ON WHO SPEAKS FIRST OR LAST. WE WON'T >> RUN ANY INTERFERENCE. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> LET ME JUMP RIGHT IN. WISCONSIN IS A STATE THAT MAKES THINGS, SHIPS, PAPER, TOOLS, ENGINES. AND MANUFACTURING HAS TAKEN A HIT IN RECENT YEARS. IT'S WHY I CHAMPION BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION THAT I REFERRED TO EARLIER, SIGNED INTO LAW, TO LEVEL THE PLAYING FIELD, TO CRACK DOWN ON CHINA'S CHEATING, WHERE THEY SUBSIDIZE THE PAPER INDUSTRY THERE TO THE TUNES OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. BUT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. WE'VE SEEN TOO MANY OF OUR JOBS OUTSOURCED, AND WE HAVE TO GET RID OF THE PERVERSE INCENTIVES IN OUR TAX CODE THAT LEADS FOLKS TO BRING JOBS OVERSEAS. AND MY OPPONENT NOT ONLY REFUSES TO REPEAL THOSE, BUT HAS A HUGE ADDITION TO THAT IN HIS PROPOSAL THAT I'VE HEARD HIM TALKING ABOUT THROUGHOUT THIS CAMPAIGN. AND LASTLY, WE IN MANUFACTURING, NEED TO PROMOTE BUY AMERICA POLICIES. WHEN WE'RE SECURING OUR HOMELAND DEFENSE, WHEN WE'RE SECURING OUR DEFENSE, WE OUGHT TO BE USING U.S. TAX DOLLARS FOR U.S. JOBS, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN PUSHING,

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

BUT WE CERTAINLY HAVE MORE TO DO. THAT'S JUST THE MANUFACTURING ECONOMY. WE ALSO NEED TO PROTECT THE VERY INVESTMENTS THAT WE NEED TO GROW. THAT'S EDUCATION, INNOVATION. THAT'S INFRASTRUCTURE. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE PAUL RYAN PLAN THAT TOMMY THOMPSON HAS CAMPAIGNED ON THROUGHOUT THIS CAMPAIGN IS ONE THAT WOULD GIVE ENORMOUS TAX BREAKS TO THE VERY WEALTHY, PAY FOR IT BY INCREASING MIDDLE CLASS TAXES, AND CUT THE VERY INVESTMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN ORDER TO GROW OUR ECONOMY. INVESTMENTS LIKE EDUCATION, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND RESEARCH AND INNOVATION. WELL, THANK YOU. I CUT TAXES 91 TIMES WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR. SHE'S VOTED FOR 155 TAX INCREASES. I'VE CUT REGULATIONS. SHE WENT TO BAT FOR EPA, AND AGAINST THE PAPER INDUSTRY. THE PAPER INDUSTRY IS GOING TO LOSE 7500 JOBS, BECAUSE MY OPPONENT DIDN'T HAVE THE COURAGE TO STAND UP AGAINST EPA. I CAN ASSURE YOU, THAT WON'T HAPPEN. NUMBER 3, WE HAVE A CHANCE TO BUILD A PIPELINE DOWN FROM ALBERTA, CANADA. 20,000 JOBS COULD BE CREATED. THE PIPELINE FROM BROWNSVILLE, SEVERAL COMPANIES FROM WAUSAU, FROM WAUKESHA, TO CREATE JOBS. MY OPPONENT? SHE'S AGAINST THE PIPELINE. I DON'T KNOW WHY. 20,000 JOBS, POSSIBLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF JOBS. WE CAN DRILL OIL AND BRING IT DOWN AND BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT. MY OPPONENT IS OPPOSED TO THAT. MY OPPONENT IS ON THE EXTREME SIDE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. SHE TALKS ABOUT ONE BIPARTISAN BILL. WHEN THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, SHE'S VOTING 98% OF THE TIME WITH HER POLITICAL PARTY. SHE DOESN'T CHERRY-PICK. THIS IS THE ONLY EXAMPLE. AND THAT WAS A REPUBLICAN BILL. SHE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING FOR 14 YEARS. HER 14 YEARS IN CONGRESS HAS BEEN ABOUT PASSING THREE BILLS. ONE BILL, CHANGING THE POST OFFICE IN MADISON'S NAME TO BOB LAFOLLETTE. THAT'S NICE, BUT IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T CREATE ANY JOBS. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS--

>> I'D LIKE TO->> I'M A REFORMER AND I'VE CUT TAXES. SHE RAISES TAXES. I CUT REGULATION. SHE >> INCREASES REGULATIONS. I CREATE JOBS. SHE DRIVES JOBS OUT OF THE STATE. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I WANT TO REFLECT ONCE AGAIN THAT TOMMY THOMPSON TALKS A LOT ABOUT HIS TIME IN THE 1980s AND 1990s WHEN HE WAS GOVERNOR OF THIS STATE. BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT FOR THE LAST SEVEN YEARS, HE'S BEEN A PARTNER AT A POWERHOUSE LOBBYING FIRM IN WASHINGTON, D.C., REPRESENTING INTERESTS THAT HAVE TRIED TO WRITE THEIR OWN RULES. AND I KNOW WE'LL BE TALKING SHORTLY ABOUT ISSUES LIKE THE DEFICIT AND TAXES, WHERE THIS COMES INTO PLAY, BUT OUTSOURCING IS ONE OF THE KEY CONCERNS IN GROWING JOBS IN OUR ECONOMY. AND HIS FIRM HAS REPRESENTED COMPANIES FROM CHINA, AS WELL AS OUTSOURCING. AND HE REFUSES TO BEAR DOWN ON THE VERY PERVERSE TAX INCENTIVES THAT LEAD, INCENTIVIZE PEOPLE TO BRING JOBS OVERSEAS. I WANT TO ONCE AGAIN PRESS DOWN ON THIS. HE SAID A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE SIMPLY UNTRUE. WITH REGARD TO THE EPA AND THE REGULATION THAT HE KEEPS REFERRING TO, SENATOR KOHL AND I CONDUCTED A MEETING WITH THE ADMINISTRATOR OF EPA ON BEHALF OF OUR PAPER INDUSTRY, JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO, BECAUSE THIS RULE WAS BEING ANNOUNCED, AND WE WERE CONCERNED IT WASN'T GOING TO BE FAIR TO WISCONSIN PAPER MANUFACTURERS AND WE ARE PRESSING FOR CHANGES, JUST SO THAT WE CAN PROTECT OUR AIR AND OUR WATER, WHICH PAPERWORKERS, BY THE WAY, CHERISH AS MUCH AS YOU AND I DO, AS WELL AS KEEPING-YOU CAN TALK ALL NIGHT, AND YOU CAN TALK ON TRUTHS, BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, THE RESOLUTION WAS IN FRONT OF CONGRESS. IT WAS IN CONGRESS TO POSTPONE EPA, TO KEEP THE JOBS IN WISCONSIN. YOU VOTED AGAINST IT. SURE, YOU TALK ABOUT TAXES. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER, I WAS IN WISCONSIN CREATING JOBS WITH LHI AND AGA. I WAS INDIVIDUALLY HELPING TO CREATE JOBS.

>> WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON. IT WORKED PRETTY WELL, SO WE APPRECIATE >> THAT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE NOW TO ANOTHER ISSUE THAT SEPARATES VOTERS AND

>> CANDIDATES ALIKE. AS WE TRAVELED THE STATE TALKING TO PEOPLE, WE DISCOVERED >> THAT THE FUTURE OF HEALTHCARE AND MEDICARE WAS AT THE FOREFRONT OF THEIR >> MINDS. >> HEALTHCARE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR ME. I WORK IN HEALTHCARE. I >> TRULY BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE REGARDLESS OF >> INCOME. >> HEALTHCARE SEEMS TO MATTER TO US THE MOST. MY HUSBAND AND MYSELF, BECAUSE >> HE HAS HEALTH PROBLEMS. >> I SEE AND HEAR OF SO MANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE FALLEN THROUGH THE CRACKS, >> ESPECIALLY THE ELDERLY, WHO CAN'T AFFORD THEIR MEDICINE. >> MEDICARE AND MEDICAID BOTH NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN A BIG WAY. WE'VE GOT A >> HUGE BABY BOOM COMING, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ENORMOUS HEALTHCARE COSTS. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> SO THIS QUESTION IS ACTUALLY SPECIFIC TO EACH CANDIDATE. WE'VE HEARD THE CAMPAIGN COMMERCIALS THAT HAVE FEATURED BOTH OF YOU MAKING STATEMENTS ABOUT HEALTHCARE. GOVERNOR THOMPSON, YOU'RE QUOTED AS SAYING, "WHO BETTER THAN ME TO COME UP WITH PROGRAMS TO DO AWAY WITH MEDICAID AND MEDICARE." AND CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN, YOU'VE BEEN QUOTED AS SAYING, "I WAS ACTUALLY FOR A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF MEDICINE." BUT FIRST TO YOU, CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT? WELL, I HAVE THROUGHOUT MY TIME IN PUBLIC SERVICE, RECEIVED MORE LETTERS ON THE ISSUE OF HEALTHCARE THAN ANY OTHER, FROM PEOPLE WHO WERE BATTLING INSURANCE COMPANY ABUSES, BEING CUT OFF AFTER ONE CHEMOTHERAPY TREATMENT, PUTTING THE SECOND ON A CREDIT CARD, THE THIRD ON A HOME EQUITY LOAN, AND MANY GOING BANKRUPT. I HEARD FROM PARENTS UNABLE TO GET CHILDREN WITH PREEXISTING HEALTH CONDITIONS ANY COVERAGE AT ALL. AND THESE ABUSE AND PRACTICES NEED TO BE REINED IN, AND FRANKLY, THEY WERE, WITH THE AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT, TO A GREAT EXTENT. SO SPECIFICALLY, THERE IS A ROLE FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. I FIND YOUR CLIP THAT YOU SHOWED BEFORE ASKING THE QUESTION, TALKED ABOUT BOTH HEALTHCARE IN GENERAL AND MEDICARE SPECIFICALLY. MEDICARE IS A PROGRAM RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT. I WAS RAISED BY MY GRANDPARENTS. I GOT TO SEE AT A VERY EARLY AGE THE DIFFERENCE THAT MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT PARTICULARLY MEDICARE, MADE IN OUR FAMILY'S ECONOMIC SECURITY. IT IS ONE THAT I THINK-- IT'S A PROGRAM THAT I THINK ISN'T JUST A PROGRAM, BUT IT'S A PROMISE. AND ONE THAT I VOW TO KEEP. WE NEED TO STRENGTHEN AND EXTEND THE SOLVENCY OF MEDICARE, NOT VOUCHERIZE IT OR DO AWAY WITH IT, AT TOMMY THOMPSON SAID HIMSELF.

>> GOVERNOR THOMPSON, LET ME GO TO YOU. WHAT DID YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAID, "WHO >> BETTER TO DO AWAY WITH MEDICAID AND MEDICARE?" >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WHAT I MEANT, CHARLES, WAS VERY SIMPLE. I WAS ABLE TO REFORM WELFARE, BECAME A MODEL FOR THE COUNTRY. MY OPPONENT VOTED AGAINST IT. WHO BETTER THAN SOMEBODY LIKE ME TO BE ABLE TO PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND IMPROVE MEDICARE? MY OPPONENT HAS BEEN IN CONGRESS FOR 14 YEARS. HAS NOT LIFTED A FINGER, PUT IN A PROPOSAL TO SAVE MEDICARE. MEDICARE IS GOING BROKE BY THE YEAR 2024. BANKRUPT. I WANT TO SAVE IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SENIORS IN AMERICA AND WISCONSIN, ESPECIALLY, ARE PROTECTED, ABLE TO HAVE MEDICARE, AND I ALSO WANT YOUNG PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MEDICARE WHEN THEY REACH 65. IF YOU DO NOTHING, IT GOES BANKRUPT IN THE YEAR 2024. THAT'S THE ANSWER MY OPPONENT HAS. I WANT TO BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A SYSTEM THAT PROTECTS MEDICARE FOR ALL SENIORS, AND ALL THOSE OVER THE AGE OF 50 IN 2020 ARE GOING TO HAVE THE CURRENT MEDICARE. BUT THOSE 50 AND UNDER IN THE YEAR 2020 ARE GOING TO HAVE A CHOICE, NOT A VOUCHER. THAT WAS YESTERDAY'S NEWS WITH SOMEBODY ELSE, NOT ME. MY PROGRAM WOULD ALLOW YOU TO HAVE AN

>> OPPORTUNITY TO CHOOSE MEDICARE IF YOU WANT TO, OR THE FEDERAL EMPLOYEE >> HEALTH BENEFIT PROGRAM, THE SAME INSURANCE THAT THE CONGRESSWOMAN AND >> SENATORS AND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS. >> AGAIN, WE GET TO GO INTO A SIX-MINUTE UNMODERATED IN OUR NEXT SEGMENT. AND >> AGAIN, WE WILL NOT BE TAKING PART IN THIS AT ALL. >> SINCE SHE STARTED LAST TIME AND TOOK FOUR-FIFTHS OF THE TIME, I THINK I >> WILL ANSWER, OKAY? >> GO AHEAD. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> SHE TALKS ABOUT A NATIONAL HEALTHCARE. SHE EXPECTS YOU, AND AMERICA, TO ALLOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DIRECT YOUR HOSPITAL, YOUR DOCTOR, YOUR PHARMACY. SHE DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT OBAMACARE WENT FAR ENOUGH. SHE SAID IT MANY TIMES. SHE WANTS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TO RUN YOUR HEALTHCARE PROGRAM. NOW, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN AMERICA WOULD LIKE TO SEE US THE TAKE THE SAME KIND OF PROGRAM THAT CANADA HAS AND RUN WITH THAT. I'M OPPOSED TO THAT, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS. AND I KNOW THAT DOESN'T BOTHER HER, BECAUSE WHILE SHE'S BEEN IN CONGRESS, THE DEBT HAS GROWN FROM $6 TRILLION TO $16 TRILLION. I BELIEVE SINCERELY, LADIES AND GENTLEMAN, IN A MARKET-BASED HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, WHERE YOU, THE INDIVIDUAL, HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PICK YOUR DOCTOR, YOUR HOSPITAL, TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT IN YOUR HEALTH INSURANCE, TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT OUT FOR A BID, AND ALLOW INSURANCE COMPANIES TO BID ON IT, TO BE ABLE TO PUT INDIVIDUALS IN A POSITION THAT THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. 93% OF THE COST OF HEALTHCARE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS TO HELP YOU GET WELL AFTER YOU'RE SICK. ONLY 7% IS USED TO KEEP YOU WELL IN THE FIRST PLACE. THAT IS A MISTAKE. LET'S CHANGE IT AND KEEP PEOPLE HEALTHIER. WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR, I STARTED BADGER CARE, THE BEST HEALTHCARE PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY, TO THIS DAY. I ALSO STARTED SENIOR CARE, WHICH IS ALSO THE BEST ELDERLY PROGRAM FOR SENIORS IN AMERICA. DEMOCRATS SUPPORTED ME. MY OPPONENT WAS OPPOSED TO IT.

>> THAT'S NOT TRUE. AND I THINK IT'S ABOUT TIME FOR ME TO JUMP IN ON THIS. >> FIRST OF ALL, GOVERNOR MCCALLUM STARTED SENIOR CARE, A BILL SPONSORED BY >> JUDY ROBSON. >> NO, I DID. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DEBATE ABOUT. I THINK WE START WITH THE RECORD ON MEDICARE. WHEN TOMMY THOMPSON LEFT WISCONSIN IN 2001 TO JOIN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, HE RAN MEDICARE. YOU COULD SAY HE RAN IT INTO THE GROUND. WHEN HE CAME THE ADMINISTRATION, MEDICARE WAS APPROACHING BANKRUPTCY IN THE YEAR 2029. WHEN HE LEFT, IT WAS 2020. NINE YEARS CLOSER TO BANKRUPTCY. THAT'S THE TOMMY THOMPSON RECORD AS SECRETARY UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH. WELL, LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. I BELIEVE STRONGLY THAT SENIORS NEED ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS. PART OF THE AFFORDABILITY IS MAKING SURE THAT MEDICARE CAN SOMEDAY NEGOTIATE WITH THOSE DRUG COMPANIES FOR BETTER PRICES. THE V.A. DOES, AND THEY GET DISCOUNTS OF 40% TO 60% OVER WHAT OUR SENIORS DO, AND THEY SHOULD FOR OUR VETERANS. WE SHOULD BE DOING THAT FOR OUR SENIORS. UNDER TOMMY'S WATCH, IT WAS MADE ILLEGAL FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, FOR MEDICARE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DRUG COMPANIES FOR LOWER PRICES FOR OUR SENIORS. THE BILL WASN'T PAID FOR. IF YOU LOOK FROM TODAY, TEN YEARS FORWARD, IT'S GOING TO ADD NEARLY A TRILLION DOLLARS TO OUR NATIONAL DEBT. I BELIEVE YOU PAY FOR THINGS. I SUPPORT THE POLICY OF HAVING SENIORS HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE DRUGS, BUT YOU'VE GOT TO PAY FOR IT. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE IN THE MESS WE'RE IN. ON THE LARGER ISSUES OF HEALTHCARE, I SUPPORTED THE HEALTHCARE ACT.

>> YOU KNOW SOMETHING, YOU CAN KEEP TALKING, BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, >> WHY DON'T YOU TELL THE TRUTH? >> I AM TELLING THE TRUTH. >> >> >> >> >> TO TELL THE TRUTH IS, IS THAT MEDICARE, UNDER PART D, WHICH YOU VOTED AGAINST, 90% OF THE SENIORS SUPPORT. AND YOU ALSO HAVE TO REALIZE THE BILL YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WAS INTRODUCED BY BILL CLINTON. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, HE'S A DEMOCRAT. THEN IT WAS PUT IN BY TOM DASCHLE. I REMEMBER HE WAS A DEMOCRAT. THEN MR. GEBHART, WHO WAS ALSO A DEMOCRAT, PUT IT IN.

>> TOMMY THOMPSON->> YOU'VE HAD YOUR TIME. AND ONLY THEN, IT WAS PASSED IN PART D ON A >> BIPARTISAN BASIS. I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. I'M NOT IN THE CONGRESS. YOU >> ARE. AND YOU VOTED AGAINST PART D. >> YOU WERE THE MASTERMIND OF MEDICARE PART D, BUT YOU HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH >> IT? >> IF YOU GO TO THE DRUGSTORE AND BUY YOUR DRUGS, REMEMBER, IT WAS TOMMY >> THOMPSON THAT PASSED PART D TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT, AND THEN REMEMBER, IT >> WAS TAMMY BALDWIN WHO VOTED AGAINST IT. >> >> >> >> WELL, AGAIN, THE SALIENT POINTS HERE, DURING HIS FOUR-YEAR TENURE AS SECRETARY UNDER BUSH, MEDICARE MOVED NINE YEARS CLOSER TO BANKRUPTCY. THE MEDICARE PART D PROGRAM IS AN IMPORTANT PROGRAM, BUT IT WASN'T PAID FOR, AND IT COSTS US BETWEEN $700 AND $800 BILLION, EVERY TEN YEARS.

>> YOU STOLE $716 BILLION TO FUND OBAMACARE. >> THE IDEA, WELL, A.A.R.P. HAS SAID THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE. WE DID NOT CHANGE >> ONE GUARANTEED BENEFIT IN MEDICARE. IN FACT, WE STRENGTHENED IT. >> YOU STOLE $716 BILLION OUT OF MEDICARE. >> FROM OVERPAYMENTS TO PROVIDERS THAT WERE UNWARRANTED. A.A.R.P. SAYS YOUR >> ALLEGATION IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE. >> YOU STOLE $716 BILLION FROM MEDICARE. YOU TOOK IT OUT OF THAT AND USED IT >> FOR OBAMACARE. >> BELIEVE THE A.A.R.P. >> THEY TOOK IT FOR OBAMACARE. WHO OUT HERE WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE MONEY TAKEN >> OUT OF MEDICARE TO FUND OBAMACARE? I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY WHO DOES. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WELL LET ME JUMP IN HERE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 30 SECONDS FOR A FOLLOW UP AND RESPONSE. I'M GOING TO START WITH CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN. YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS SWEETHEART DEAL WITH MEDICARE PART D, BUT UNDER THE AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT, THERE WAS TALK AMONG THE DEMOCRATS, LET'S GET RID OF THIS, WE DON'T LIKE IT. YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE TO SAY, ALL RIGHT, LET'S GET RID OF IT. WHY DIDN'T THAT HAPPEN? WELL, I REGRET THAT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. I AM ON LEGISLATION AND HAVE INTRODUCED LEGISLATION TO GET RID OF THAT SWEETHEART DEAL. I ACTUALLY STARTED WORKING ON THIS ISSUE WHEN I FIRST CAME TO CONGRESS, EVEN BEFORE THERE WAS A MEDICARE PART D, I JOINED IN LEGISLATION TO ALLOW MEDICARE TO BARGAIN WITH THE DRUG COMPANIES. THIS IS SOMETHING I WON'T RELENT ON. I

>> THINK ON THE AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT, WE MOVE FORWARD, WE MAKE IT WORK >> FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, AND WE FIX WHAT'S BROKEN. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS >> THAT'S BROKEN THAT I PLEDGED TO FIX. >> AND GOVERNOR THOMPSON, LET ME FOLLOW UP WITH YOU, THEN. YOU CALLED YOURSELF >> THE ARCHITECT OF MEDICARE PART D. WHY DIDN'T YOU PUSH FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO >> NEGOTIATE WITH DRUG COMPANIES? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> BECAUSE IT WAS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY. WE PUT IN THE PROPOSAL WITHOUT THAT IN THERE. AND THEN ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS IN A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, SENATOR BAKUS, WHO'S A DEMOCRAT, AND BILL THOMAS, WHO'S A REPUBLICAN, PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN. IT WAS FIRST INTRODUCED BY THE DEMOCRATS IN THE 1999 CONGRESSIONAL SESSION. THEY PASSED IT. I DON'T VOTE IN CONGRESS, AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW. I'M A SECRETARY. I ADMINISTER THE PROGRAMS THAT CONGRESS PASSES. I DON'T VOTE ON IT, I DON'T WRITE IT, AND I DON'T INTRODUCE IT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ALONG, THANK YOU. BEFORE WE RETURN TO MORE Q&A, I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT YOU CAN JOIN IN AN ONLINE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE DEBATE BY GOING TO WISCONSINVOTE.ORG, JSONLINE.COM, OR TODAYSTMJ4.COM. NOW ANOTHER QUESTION ROUND FOR THE CANDIDATES. THIS TIME, ON THE ISSUE OF TAXES AND SPENDING. THE NATIONAL DEBATE HAS BROUGHT THE MIDDLE CLASS FRONT AND CENTER. EACH OF YOU TAKES A POSITION ON HOW TO TAX INDIVIDUALS AND HOW TO TREAT CORPORATE TAX AND ITS LOOPHOLES. SO THE QUESTION IS, HOW SPECIFICALLY DOES YOUR PLATFORM PROTECT THE MIDDLE CLASS. WE GO FIRST TO GOVERNOR THOMPSON. WELL, FIRST OFF, I CUT TAXES 91 TIMES. MY OPPONENT VOTE FOR 155 TAX INCREASES. DURING THE DISCUSSION ON AFFORDABLE CARE, THERE ARE 21 TAXES INCREASES IN THE AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT. MOST OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE GOING TO HIT THE MIDDLE CLASS. THERE WAS A PROPOSAL IN THERE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET TAXED ON YOUR HEALTHCARE INSURANCE PROPOSAL, AND 87% OF RESPONSIBILITY, OR $47 BILLION, IS GOING TO REST STRICTLY ON THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE LOWER INCOME CLASS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT. MY OPPONENT VOTED FOR EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE 21 TAXES, TAXING THE MIDDLE CLASS OF AMERICA. TAKE A LOOK AT MY SCHEDULE. WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR, I CUT INCOME TAXES THREE TIMES. I CUT PROPERTY TAXES BY OVER $1 BILLION, NOT ONCE, BUT TWICE. AND YOU KNOW, MY OPPONENT WAS IN THE ASSEMBLY AT THAT TIME. MOST OF THE DEMOCRATS VOTED WITH ME. CONGRESSMAN BALDWIN VOTED AGAINST IT. PROPERTY TAXES ARE A HUGE TAX ON THE MIDDLE CLASS. SHE VOTED AGAINST IT. EVERY CHANCE THAT MY OPPONENT GETS TO VOTE FOR A TAX INCREASE, SHE WILL VOTE FOR IT. 155 TAX INCREASES, 21 IN THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, THE OBAMACARE, MOST OF THOSE IMPACT ADVERSELY ON THE MIDDLE CLASS.

>> CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ON THE ISSUE OF TAXES, THERE IS PROBABLY NO STRONGER CONTRAST BETWEEN MYSELF AND MY OPPONENT. I INTRODUCED THE BUFFET RULE TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT PEOPLE MAKING OVER A MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR WERE TOO OFTEN PAYING AT LOWER TAX RATES, LIKE OUR NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT ON THE REPUBLICAN TICKET, ROMNEY, WHO'S PAYING 13.9%, PAYING AT A LOWER RATE THAN HARD WORKING MIDDLE CLASS WISCONSIN FAMILIES, LIKE NURSES AND CONSTRUCTION WORKERS. TOMMY THOMPSON HAS EMBRACED AND CAMPAIGNED FOR MANY MONTHS ON THE RYAN PLAN, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE TAX POLICY CENTER, INCREASES THE TAX CUTS FOR OUR VERY WEALTHIEST BY $265,000 ON AVERAGE FOR MILLIONAIRES LIKE HIMSELF. NOW, TO MIDDLE CLASS TAXES. VERY RECENTLY--

>> THAT'S A FALSEHOOD. >> THIS IS NOT THE EXCHANGE TIME YET. VERY RECENTLY, I SUPPORTED AND CONTINUE >> TO SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD MIDDLE CLASS AND SMALL BUSINESS TAX CUTS. THE

>> >> >> >> >>

VERY PROGRAM I JUST TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT MY OPPONENT SUPPORTS, THE RYAN PLAN, RAISES TAXES ACCORDING TO THE ECONOMIC COMMITTEE BY ROUGHLY $1300. AND LASTLY, I TALKED ALREADY ABOUT THE PERVERSE INCENTIVES IN OUR TAX CODE THAT PROMPTS COMPANIES TO BRING JOBS OVERSEAS. I WANT TO BRING THOSE TO AN END. MY OPPONENT WANTS TO DOUBLE DOWN.

>> WE NOW MOVE INTO THE SIX MINUTE UNMODERATED SEGMENT. I KNOW YOU WANT TO >> KEEP TALKING. >> BUT FEEL FREE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY WRONG. I'VE GOT A TAX BILL THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN PAUL RYAN. YOU KEEP PUTTING ME IN WITH PAUL RYAN. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, MY BILL DOESN'T REDUCE THE TAXES ON THE WEALTHY AT ALL. MY BILL ALLOWS FOR INDIVIDUALS TO MAKE A CHOICE, WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT A FLAT TAX. IF YOU WANT A FLAT TAX, YOU GO DOWN AND SIT DOWN WITH WHAT YOUR GROSS INCOME IS, AND YOU CAN DO IT AT HALFTIME BETWEEN THE GREEN BAY PACKERS AND THE CHICAGO BEARS, PUT IN THE PERCENTAGE. YOU CAN'T SKIM THE SYSTEM OR SCAM THE SYSTEM, BUT YOU CAN DO IT AND STILL HAVE ENOUGH TIME LEFT OVER TO GO GET A GLASS OF BEER OUT OF THE REFRIGERATOR. OR, IF YOU WANT TO DO ALL THE DEDUCTIONS, FINE. YOU CAN HAVE IT. YOU CAN HAVE A CHOICE. NO CHANGES WHATSOEVER. YOU MAKE THE DETERMINATION AS TO WHICH TAX YOU WANT TO GO. SHE KEEPS THROWING OUT THAT I'M FOR THE MILLIONAIRES. I HAVE NO IDEA WHATSOEVER. SHE KEEPS MAKING THIS UP. LET ME BE VERY SPECIFIC. AT THE REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION YOU SAID, "I AM GOING TO BE THE 51ST SENATOR TO PASS THE RYAN BUDGET." DAYS AFTER YOUR PRIMARY, YOU RAN ON AD ON THE RADIO, SAYING, "I WILL BE THE 51ST SENATE VOTE TO PASS THE RYAN VOTE." YOU CAN'T AT THIS LATE DATE SAY, I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RYAN BUDGET THAT GIVES TAX BREAKS TO MILLIONAIRES LIKE YOURSELF, AN AVERAGE OF $265,000, AND TO PAY FOR IT, RAISES MIDDLE CLASS TAXES. THIS IS A JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE AND THE TAX POLICY CENTER. LET'S MOVE ON FROM THAT-NO, LET'S NOT. YOU TAKE UP THE TIME. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, I'VE HAD MY TAX PLAN UP ON MY WEB PAGE SINCE I STARTED. IT WAS NOT THE RYAN PLAN. IT'S THE TOMMY THOMPSON PLAN. TAKE A LOOK AT IT. YOU MIGHT EVEN LIKE IT. OH, NO, YOU WOULDN'T, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T RAISE TAXES. YOU ONLY WANT TO RAISE TAXES. 155 TAX INCREASES. I LOWER TAXES. I DON'T RAISE THEM. IN REGARDS TO THIS BUFFET RULE, I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW, IF THE BUFFET RULE-THE ONLY THING SHE'S EVER PUT IN IS THE BUFFET RULE. THE BUFFET RULE WOULD RAISE ENOUGH MONEY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TO RUN THE GOVERNMENT FOR 11 HOURS. IT WOULD COST 750,000 JOBS. SO, I WOULD SAY THAT'S A PRETTY EXPENSIVE TAX. LOSE 750,000 JOBS AND RUN THE GOVERNMENT FOR 11 HOURS. THE ISSUE IS THE FAIRNESS IN THE TAX CODE. THAT'S WHY I INTRODUCED THE BUFFET RULE. IT IS WRONG THAT PEOPLE WHO MAKE OVER $1 MILLION A YEAR SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY AT LEAST AT THE SAME TAX RATE AS THE HARD-WORKING, MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES. THE CORPORATE TAX SIDE IS ALSO IN DISARRAY. I'D EVEN SAY IT'S RIGGED. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A COUPLE OF PROBLEMS AT PLAY HERE. ONE IS THAT TOO MANY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, AND MY OPPONENT IS INCLUDED IN THIS, HAVE TAKEN A PLEDGE TO A WASHINGTON, D.C., LOBBYIST, GROVER NORQUIST, WHEREBY THEY'VE SWORN THAT THEY WILL NOT EVER ASK THOSE WITH THE MOST PRIVILEGE TO DO MORE, TO DO THEIR FAIR SHARE.

>> THAT'S JUST PLAIN A FALSEHOOD. >> YOU SIGNED THE GROVER NORQUIST PLEDGE. >> THAT'S A FALSEHOOD. YOU SIGNED THE PROGRESSIVE TAX BILL. HERE'S SOMEBODY

>> >> >> >> >>

THAT TEAMED UP WITH THE MOST LIBERAL, FAR-REACHING, FAR OUT TAXING PEOPLE IN CONGRESS. SHE'S THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF IT. SHE INTRODUCED THE BUDGET, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT WOULD INCREASE TAXES BY $3.9 TRILLION. THE TAX SYSTEM WE HAVE RIGHT NOW BRINGS IN $2.3 TRILLION. SHE WANTS TO RAISE THAT TO $3.9 TRILLION.

>> WHICH IS LESS THAN THE RYAN BUDGET, IF I'M CORRECT. >> >> >> >> >> >> PRESIDENT OBAMA SAYS, THAT'S CRAZY. THAT'S GOING TO RAISE TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS. NANCY PELOSI HAS TO TELL ME TO TALK TO MY OPPONENT, BECAUSE SHE'S SO EXTREME, SHE SAID, WE CAN'T DO THAT. THEY WON'T EVEN TAKE IT UP. I'M TELLING YOU, MY OPPONENT CAN ONLY SEE ONE THING, RAISE TAXES, INCREASE SPENDING. THAT'S BEEN HER MANTRA EVER SINCE SHE'S BEEN IN THE LEGISLATURE, EVER SINCE SHE'S BEEN IN CONGRESS.

>> SO, A COUPLE OF THINGS. FIRST OF ALL, I DO BELIEVE, GIVEN THE CHALLENGES >> FACING OUR NATION, THAT FOR EVERYONE TO HAVE A SHARE SHOT, EVERYONE DOES >> HAVE TO DO THEIR FAIR SHARE->> DO YOU AGREE THAT $3.9 TRILLION INCREASE IN TAXES IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD >> HAVE? >> THE ROMNEY PLAN IS $5 TRILLION. >> OVER TEN YEARS. >> CORRECT. >> $3.9 TRILLION IS ONE YEAR. >> NO, IT WASN'T. >> YES, IT WAS. >> THAT'S RIDICULOUS. >> NO, IT WASN'T. YOU WANTED $3.9 MILLION. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> IN ANY EVENT, LET'S MOVE ON. WHY IS THE SYSTEM RIGGED? WE READ STORIES ALL THE TIME OF THE FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES, SOME OF THE MOST PROFITABLE COMPANIES OF OUR TIME PAYED ZERO, OR NEXT TO ZERO IN TAXES. WHY IS IT RIGGED? BECAUSE THE POWERFUL, THE WEALTHY, HAVE A LEGION OF LOBBYISTS OUT THERE PUTTING IN SPECIAL LOOPHOLES, SPECIAL TAX BREAKS. WE ALL KNOW OUR TAX CODE IS LOADED WITH THEM. YOU CAN ALWAYS TALK, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GET-- I'D LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, YOU'VE BEEN IN CONGRESS 14 YEARS. YOU'VE DONE NOTHING. YOU HAVEN'T PUT ANYTHING IN TO CLOSE ONE LOOPHOLE. ALL YOU DO NOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE RUNNING FOR THE SENATE--

>> I'VE WORKED TO EXPAND THE CHILD TAX CREDIT AND OTHER->> >> >> >> >> ALL THESE CORPORATION TAXES YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU'VE NEVER PUT IN ANY LEGISLATION WHATSOEVER, CONGRESSWOMAN. YOU JUST HAVEN'T. YOU WANT TO COME OUT HERE AND SAY, SOMEHOW, CORPORATIONS ARE BAD, THEREFORE WE'VE GOT TO CLOSE LOOPHOLES. I WASN'T IN CONGRESS. YOU ARE. I WAS BACK IN WISCONSIN CREATING JOBS. SOMETHING YOU PROBABLY DON'T UNDERSTAND.

>> WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE GETTING COMFORTABLE WITH THE UNMODERATED AREA, >> SO WE APPRECIATE THAT. BUT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO TALK ON THE TOPIC OF

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

FOREIGN POLICY. WE'D LIKE EACH CANDIDATE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. IF IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT IRAN HAS NUCLEAR AVAILABILITY, UNDER WHICH CIRCUMSTANCES, IF ANY, WOULD YOU SUPPORT PUTTING U.S. SOLDIERS ON THE GROUND IN IRAN? THIS QUESTION FIRST GOES TO CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN. THANK YOU. THE AMBITIONS OF IRAN TO GAIN THE CAPACITY TO BUILD A NUCLEAR WEAPON IS AN ENORMOUS THREAT TO OUR WORLD, TO OUR COUNTRY, TO THE REGION, AND CERTAINLY TO OUR ALLY, ISRAEL. IN FACT, TO THEM, IT'S AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT. AND THIS IS A THREAT THAT I TAKE ENORMOUSLY SERIOUSLY, AND WE CANNOT LET IRAN BE CAPABLE OF MAKING A NUCLEAR WEAPON. AND IT'S WHY I BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT, ALL OPTIONS ON THE TABLE APPROACH, IS THE RIGHT APPROACH. WE'VE LOOKED AT IT CAREFULLY OVER THE YEARS, AS CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED. AND DEALT COOPERATIVELY, AND IN HIGH COLLABORATION, WITH SENIOR ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE AND MILITARY OFFICIALS AND U.S. INTELLIGENCE AND MILITARY OFFICIALS, AND I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW, WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, THAT THE CRIPPLING SANCTIONS THAT I SUPPORTED ARE BEGINNING TO DO THEIR JOB. BUT WE CANNOT LET IRAN BECOME CAPABLE OF MANUFACTURING A NUCLEAR WEAPON. SO I ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT ISRAEL'S RIGHT TO DEFEND ITSELF, AND WE LEAVE THE MILITARY OPTION ON THE TABLE, BUT YOU NEVER GO INTO A WAR WITHOUT HAVING AN EXIT STRATEGY AND A PLAN FOR VICTORY.

>> GOVERNOR THOMPSON, 90 SECONDS. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WE'RE IN A VERY UNSAFE WORLD TODAY, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. IRAN IS RUN BY AYATOLLAH, AND A PRIME MINISTER BY THE NAME OF AHMADINEJAD, WHO HAS SOME REAL MENTAL PROBLEMS, AS FAR AS I CAN SEE. HE DOES NOT BELIEVE THE HOLOCAUST EXISTED OR EVER HAPPENED. HE BELIEVES THAT HE CAN WIPE OUT THE COUNTRY OF ISRAEL. HE BELIEVES IF HE GETS A NUCLEAR BOMB HE CAN CLOSE THE STRAITS OF HORMUZ. CLOSING THE STRAITS OF HORMUZ WOULD CLOSE DOWN ALL OIL PRODUCTION COMING INTO THE WORLD. WE WOULD HAVE AN ECONOMIC DISASTER. I BELIEVE WITHOUT A DOUBT THAT MORE SEVERE SANCTIONS WE CAN HAVE, THE BETTER OFF WE ARE. MY OPPONENT VOTED AGAINST SANCTIONS IN 2001, 2006, 2009, 2010, AND RECEIVED $60,000 FROM AN ORGANIZATION THAT SUPPORTS IRAN. I CAN NOT BELIEVE ANYBODY WOULD TAKE MONEY FROM AN ORGANIZATION THAT SUPPORTS THAT MAD MAN IN IRAN AND TAKES $60,000 FOR HER CAMPAIGN. THAT'S WHY SHE WAS AGAINST THE SANCTIONS. BECAUSE SHE'S RUNNING FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE NOW, SHE BELIEVES THAT SHE WOULD NOW HAVE TO VOTE FOR SANCTIONS, WHICH SHE DID FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS YEAR. I THINK IT'S BECAUSE SHE GOT A BELIEF THAT SHE'S RUNNING FOR THE SENATE, SHE'D BETTER DO THAT. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE WE CAN NEVER ALLOW IRAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TO HAVE A NUCLEAR BOMB.

>> IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE READY TO JUMP IN ON THIS. >> I SURE AM. >> GO FOR IT. >> >> >> >> FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE VOTED FOR SANCTIONS STARTING WHEN I FIRST CAME TO THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS, IN IRAN, AND YOU HAVE YOUR FACTS WRONG. BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ALL OF THEM WRONG, BECAUSE I DID INDEED, ON TWO OCCASIONS, I BELIEVE--

>> FOUR OCCASIONS. >> >> >> >> >> >> I THINK YOU'RE INCORRECT-- I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A PROSPECT IN IRAN FOR REGIME CHANGE FROM WITHIN. MANY OF YOU LOOK AT THE REGION CAREFULLY SAW THAT THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTORS WHO TOOK TO THE STREETS AND STOOD UP TO AHMADINEJAD AND KHOMEINI, AND I FELT IT VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE SEND A MESSAGE TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT WE WANTED THEM TO SUCCEED IN A REGIME CHANGE FROM WITHIN, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

STAKES AS HIGH AS SENDING WISCONSIN YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN INTO HARM'S WAY, I WOULD SURE RATHER SEE THAT REGIME CHANGE HAPPEN FROM WITHIN. BUT AS YOU KNOW, YOU'VE PROBABLY READ THE SAME HISTORIES THAT I HAVE, THEY WERE BRUTALLY BEATEN BACK BY THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT. I THINK WE MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REGIME CHANGE THERE, SO WE HAD TO GO BACK TO THE TACTIC OF CRIPPLING SANCTIONS, CRIPPLING SANCTIONS. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. BUT I WANT TO ADD ONE THING, BECAUSE I WAS SO DISTURBED AFTER HAVING HEARD SOME OF YOUR RHETORIC AROUND MY POSITION ON IRAN, TO HAVE READ A REPORT JUST HOURS BEFORE TAKING THIS STAGE THAT YOU HAVE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN INVESTMENTS IN COMPANIES THAT DO BUSINESS WITH IRAN, INCLUDING A COMPANY THAT TEAMS UP WITH IRAN DOING URANIUM MINING IN AFRICA. I FIND THAT SHOCKING. AND IF YOU WANT TO BE TOUGH ON IRAN, WE HAVE TO ISOLATE IRAN. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT COMPANIES DON'T DO BUSINESS, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE ISOLATED IN THE WORLD STAGE, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE WAYS THAT WE ARE GOING TO BE SUCCESSFUL, I STILL HOPE, WITHOUT WAR, BUT WITH TOUGH SANCTIONS. IRAN IS BUILDING A NUCLEAR CAPABILITY, 175 FEET IN THE GROUND. THEY WOULD NOT BE BUILDING A PEACEFUL NUCLEAR ENERGY PLANT 175 FEET IN THE GROUND. IT'S ONLY A MATTER OF TIME, THEY GET A NUCLEAR BOMB. WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY CAN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, TO STOP IRAN. MY OPPONENT, FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES, SHE MENTIONED THE FACT OF THE UNREST. WELL, IT COULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF SHE DID SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNREST WHEN THE PEOPLE WERE CRYING OUT FOR HELP FROM AMERICA. SHE DID NOTHING. BUT SHE DID SEND A LETTER TO THE PALESTINIANS WHEN ISRAELI PUT UP A BLOCKADE, SUPPORTING THE PALESTINIANS AGAINST THE ISRAELIS. SHE ALSO RECEIVED THE $60,000 IN CAMPAIGN FUNDS. $60,000, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FOR A CAMPAIGN FROM A COMPANY THAT BELIEVES AND SUPPORTS NO SANCTIONS IN IRAN. I HEARD ABOUT THIS STOCK.

>> WHO ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU CAN'T TAKE $60,000->> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WAIT A MINUTE, LET ME FINISH. LET ME FINISH. YOU HAD TWO MINUTES. IF YOU WANT TO INTERRUPT ME, JOE BIDEN, JUST GIVE ME A CHANCE. THE OTHER THING IS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IS THAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT STOCK. I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, THE FACT THAT MY STOCKBROKER HAD PURCHASED TWO SHARES-- TWO COMPANY STOCKS. I SOLD IT. I SOLD IT TODAY. I DO NOT-- I FOUND OUT TODAY, AND I SOLD IT TODAY. I DO NOT TOLERATE. I DO NOT AGREE WITH ANYBODY DOING BUSINESS WITH IRAN. NONE WHATSOEVER. AND I THINK YOU SHOULD TURN BACK YOUR $60,000 THAT YOU GOT FROM THAT COMPANY THAT SUPPORTS NO SANCTIONS FOR IRAN. FIRST OF ALL, COMPANIES CANNOT GIVE CAMPAIGN DONATIONS, AND I HAVE NEVER TAKEN A CAMPAIGN DONATION FROM A CORPORATION OR A COMPANY. YOU KNOW, IT'S INDIVIDUALS. MAYBE THERE'S A SUPER PAC OUT THERE THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT'S SUPPORTING YOU, OR WHATEVER. BUT TO SAY THERE'S A COMPANY, YOU KNOW YOU'VE ALREADY MISSPOKEN. ALSO, YOU KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS TO KNOW THAT PEOPLE OR COMPANIES CANNOT GIVE IN THAT SORT OF QUANTITY OF MONEY. SO WHATEVER YOU'RE SAYING, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT IT'S RIDICULOUS. BUT BACK TO THE ISSUE AT HAND.

>> ARE YOU SAYING YOU DIDN'T RECEIVE ANY MONEY FROM THE COUNCIL FOR A LIVING >> EARTH? >> COUNCIL FOR A LIVING EARTH? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH A COUNCIL FOR A LIVING >> EARTH. >> THEY'VE BEEN SUPPORTING YOU FOR TEN YEARS. >> I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THEM.

>> IT WAS ON THE FRONT PAGE OF "THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL" THIS MORNING. >> I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT, >> I GUESS YOU'LL HAVE TO. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> BUT I'VE NEVER HEARD OF THE COUNCIL FOR A LIVING EARTH. BUT BACK TO THE SECURITY QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEFORE US. THE PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION, WHICH SHOULD BE A GUIDING DOCUMENT FOR ALL OF US, TALKS ABOUT PROVIDING FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE AND THE GENERAL WELFARE. THERE IS NO RESPONSIBILITY THAT I TAKE MORE SERIOUSLY THAN TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO KEEP AMERICA SAFE. WHEN I SAW, YOU KNOW, YOUR-- YOUR SHOOT FROM THE HIP, THINK LATER APPROACH, AND NOT LEARNING FROM THE MISTAKES THAT WERE MADE IN THE PAST, IT TROUBLES ME. WE LEAVE THAT THERE, BUT I DID WANT TO ASK A FOLLOW-UP ON A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TOPIC, BUT RELATED TO FOREIGN POLICY. I'LL GO FIRST TO YOU, GOVERNOR THOMPSON, WITH THIS. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA HAS BEEN RECENTLY DESCRIBED AS THE ONLY NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER WITH A KILL LIST. WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON UNMANNED DRONES AND TARGETED KILLING? WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON UNMANNED DRONES AND THE TARGETED KILLING OF TERRORISTS? I THINK UNMANNED DRONES ARE SOMETHING THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL SO WE DO NOT KILL INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, BUT DRONES ARE ABLE TO BE UTILIZED TO TAKE OUT MANY INDIVIDUALS FROM TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS. THEY HAVE BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN AND IN LIBYA. BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, WE'VE GOT TO HAVE ALL OF OUR ASSETS AVAILABLE. THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE TERRORISTS--

>> 30 SECONDS. >> CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN, WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE UNMANNED DRONES AND >> TARGETED KILLING? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> FIRST ON THE TECHNOLOGY, UNMANNED DRONES ARE A HUGE AND IMPORTANT ADVANCEMENT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU COMPARE TO ALL THE INVESTMENT IN COLD WAR TECHNOLOGY, THIS IS IMPORTANT. THEY'RE USED FOR SURVEILLANCE. THEY'RE USED FOR INTELLIGENCE GATHERING, AND AS YOU NOTE, THEY'RE ALSO USED FOR STRIKES. I THINK WITH THE NEW TECHNOLOGY, WE HAVE TO REVIEW THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT. WE HAVEN'T YET WITH THIS NEW TECHNOLOGY. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR OBLIGING ME THAT FOLLOW-UP. SO FAR, WE HAVE WORKED THROUGH JOBS, HEALTHCARE, MIDDLE EAST POLICY. IF THERE IS TO BE ANY REAL MOVEMENT IN CONGRESS IN THESE AREAS, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME FORM OF BIPARTISANSHIP IN CONGRESS, SOMETHING THAT, ACCORDING TO MANY VOTERS AROUND THE STATE, IS A TALL ORDER.

>> PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUES, REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, CONSERVATIVES, >> LIBERALS, NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND STOP FIGHTING. >> I DON'T FEEL THAT EITHER PARTY HAS BEEN PRODUCTIVE IN RECENT YEARS. I WOULD >> LIKE TO SEE WHOEVER IS ELECTED MAKE SOME EFFORT TO IMPROVE RELATIONS >> BETWEEN THE MEMBERS OF THE TWO PARTIES. >> THEY NEED TO FIND SOME COMPROMISE. IT'S TIME WE FIND SOME COMPROMISE. >> YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANYTHING DONE IF WE KEEP FIGHTING. >> SO WITH THAT, WE WONDER FROM EACH CANDIDATE THIS. CAN YOU NAME AND DESCRIBE >> ONE POLICY POSITION ON THE PART OF YOUR CHALLENGER THAT YOU WOULD SUPPORT? >> AND WE GO FIRST TO YOU, GOVERNOR THOMPSON, BUT WE JUST HAVE ONE MINUTE.

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

PRETTY HARD, BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT ANYTHING THAT WE COULD DO ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, TO BE ABLE TO IMPROVE AND CUT BACK ON SPENDING. IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO HOLD DOWN ON SPENDING, WE HAVE TO DO IT. WE HAVE TO LEARN TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS. WE'VE LEARNED THAT IN WISCONSIN. I DID IT AS GOVERNOR. AND IF THERE'S SOME WAY THAT CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN COULD SHOW ME A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD SAVE MONEY AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, I WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY ENTHUSIASTICALLY SUPPORT HER. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY YET, BUT I HOPE SOMEDAY I WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

>> CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WELL, LET ME START BY SAYING THERE ARE MANY THINGS UPON WHICH TOMMY THOMPSON AND I AGREE, AND WE'VE ACTUALLY, IT MAY BE A SURPRISE TO THOSE IN THE ROOM WHO HAVE HEARD A HEATED DEBATE, WE'VE WORK CLOSELY OVER MY YEARS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE, AND WHEN HE WAS SECRETARY. WITH REGARD TO THIS CAMPAIGN, I BELIEVE HE SUPPORTS THE DREAM ACT. I DO TOO. I BELIEVE I HEARD HIM AT THE LAST DEBATE SAY THAT HE BELIEVES WE SHOULD BRING OUR TROOPS BACK FROM AFGHANISTAN AS QUICKLY AND SAFELY AS POSSIBLE. IF THAT'S WHAT I HEARD, I'M IN STRENUOUS AGREEMENT WITH HIM ON THAT. TALKED ABOUT SENIOR CARE VERY BRIEFLY EARLIER. I'M A HUGE PROPONENT OF SENIOR CARE AND HAVE FOUGHT BOTH WHEN HE WAS BUSH'S HEALTH SECRETARY AND AFTER HE LEFT TO MAKE SURE THAT WISCONSIN WOULD BE ABLE TO KEEP THE WAIVER THAT THEY NEED IN ORDER TO KEEP THAT OPERATING. WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER ON ANY NUMBER OF THINGS, AND THAT'S WHY I WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL AS A UNITED STATES SENATOR, BECAUSE I CAN SEE THE COMMON GROUND, AND I ALWAYS HAVE REACHED OUT FOR IT. ALL RIGHT, APPRECIATE THAT. WE HAVE ANOTHER UNMODERATED PART, BUT WE DO WANT TO ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION HERE. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO THE TOPIC OF EDUCATION. IT'S OFTEN REPORTED THAT THE U.S. IS FALLING BEHIND THE WORLD COMPETITIVELY WHEN IT COMES TO MATH AND SCIENCE COMPETENCY, EVEN IN THE MIDST OF TALKING ABOUT CUTTING BUDGETS AND ELIMINATING PROGRAMS, WHAT IS THE BEST PRESCRIPTION FOR MAKING U.S. STUDENTS MATH AND SCIENCE LITERATE? WE'LL BEGIN WITH CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN. I LOVE THIS QUESTION. I HAD A DOUBLE MAJOR IN MATHEMATICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE. AND I USED TO SAY THAT, OR HAVE SOMEONE SAY THAT ABOUT ME, AND THERE WOULD BE AN AUDIBLE GASP IN THE ROOM. BUT I BELIEVE VERY STRONGLY THAT THE KEY TO ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THIS COUNTRY, AS I SAID EARLIER, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT JOBS, OUR INVESTMENTS IN EDUCATION, AND INNOVATION AND RESEARCH. WE MAKE THINGS IN THIS STATE. WE HAVE SEEN THAT DECLINE. BUT WE NEED TO START DOING IT AGAIN, AND THAT MEANS WE NEED ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS AND OTHER INNOVATORS, AND ENTREPRENEURS. I AGREE WITH THE PRESIDENT THAT WE NEED TO MAKE A HUGE EMPHASIS ON GETTING 100,000 NEW STEM TEACHERS ACROSS AMERICAN SCHOOLS. CHARLES, EDUCATION IS REALLY BASIC. WE HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY CAN TO IMPROVE THE EDUCATION QUALITY, THE GRADUATES, COLLEGE GRADUATES, AND VOCATIONAL TRAINING IN AMERICA. WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR, I WAS ABLE TO PICK UP TWO-THIRDS OF THE COST OF EDUCATION, THE BIGGEST INCREASE EVER, SO THAT LOCAL PROPERTY TAXPAYERS COULD HAVE A BREAK AND WE COULD PUT MORE MONEY INTO SCHOOLS. I INCREASED THE MONEY FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN. I SET UP VOCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT GOING TO THE UNIVERSITY, FOR SKILLS TRAINING, SO INDIVIDUALS COULD BECOME A WELDER, A PLUMBER, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, BECAUSE THAT IS THE JOBS OUT THERE THAT ARE GOING, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE INDIVIDUALS SKILLED TO DO IT. MATH AND SCIENCE IS ABSOLUTELY IMPORTANT, AND WE HAVE TO PUT THE DOLLARS, WE HAVE TO ENCOURAGE INDIVIDUALS TO GO INTO THOSE PROGRAMS, BECAUSE THAT IS OUR FUTURE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AND THAT'S IS WHAT I'M ABSOLUTELY DEDICATED TO DO. PELL GRANTS IS ONE WAY WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT.

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

CONGRATULATIONS TO BOTH OF YOU, YOU'VE GOTTEN THROUGH ALL THE TOUGH QUESTIONS. IT'S TIME NOW FOR THE CLOSING STATEMENTS. WE FLIPPED A COIN TO DETERMINE THE ORDER OF CLOSING STATEMENTS, AND CONGRESSWOMAN BALDWIN WON THE TOSS AND CHOSE TO GO LAST. GOVERNOR THOMPSON, YOU WILL GET TWO MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR CLOSING STATEMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, FREDERICA AND CHARLES. THANK YOU TO THE AUDIENCE. IT'S BEEN A SPIRITED DEBATE. BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, OUR COUNTRY HAS SOME SERIOUS PROBLEMS. WE'RE $16 TRILLION IN DEBT, AND $10 TRILLION OF THAT IS WHILE MY OPPONENT HAS BEEN IN CONGRESS. WE ARE OVER THE GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT, WHICH MEANS THAT WE'RE PLACED IN A CATEGORY WITH OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE SPAIN, LIKE GREECE. I WANT TO CHANGE THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. I'M RUNNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BECAUSE I HAVE THREE GREAT CHILDREN AND EIGHT GRANDCHILDREN. I'M RUNNING BECAUSE OF THEM, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, YOUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN. WE'VE ALWAYS PROMISED CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN IN AMERICA THAT THEY ARE GOING TO INHERIT A COUNTRY THAT'S STRONGER, FREER, FAIRER AND SAFER. I CAN NO LONGER SAY THAT. A BABY BORN RIGHT NOW TODAY IS $51,000 IN DEBT, FOR THE DEBT THAT WAS ACCUMULATED IN THE LAST TEN YEARS. IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, DEBT HAS GONE UP BY $5.5 TRILLION. THE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS HAVE NOT EVEN PASSED A BUDGET IN 3-1/2 YEARS. THAT'S MALFEASANCE OF OFFICE. THE SPENDING GOES UP, THE TAXES GO UP, AND OUR COUNTRY IS FACING A FISCAL CLIFF. AND IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE HEADED FOR A FISCAL ABYSS. WHO IS THE BEST PERSON TO DO IT? SOMEBODY THAT'S CUT TAXES 91 TIMES, OR SOMEBODY THAT'S RAISED TAXES 155 TIMES? SOMEBODY THAT HAS BALANCED A BUDGET 14 YEARS IN A ROW WITH DEMOCRATS ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, OR SOMEBODY THAT HASN'T PASSED ANY BUDGET IN 3-1/2 YEARS? I'M LOOKING OUT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FOR THE FUTURE OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY. WE'RE AMERICANS. WE CAN CHANGE THIS. WE CAN BALANCE THE BUDGET, BRING THOSE JOBS BACK SO 23 MILLION AMERICANS ARE ABLE TO HAVE A JOB, JUST LIKE THEY DID WHEN I WAS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF WISCONSIN. THANK YOU. I WANT TO START BY THANKING YOU, TOMMY, FOR JOINING ME ON THIS STAGE, AND ALSO, TO OUR HOSTS AND MODERATORS, WISCONSIN PUBLIC TELEVISION, THE LIVE AUDIENCE AND THOSE WATCHING ON TELEVISION. IT'S BEEN AN ENORMOUS PRIVILEGE TO BE ENGAGED IN THIS U.S. SENATE CAMPAIGN. AS I'VE TRAVELED THE STATE, I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN. PEOPLE OPEN UP ABOUT THEIR STRUGGLES. THEY'RE WORKING HARD, PLAYING BY THE RULES, TRYING TO GET AHEAD, BUT TOO MANY OF THEM ARE JUST GETTING BY. AND I'VE LISTENED TO THEIR FRUSTRATIONS, WITH THE DISCONNECT THAT THEY SEE BETWEEN THE DEBATES THAT ARE GOING ON IN WASHINGTON, D.C., PARTICULARLY, AND THE TEA PARTYCONTROLLED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THOSE DEBATES AND THEIR LIVES. WHAT THEY WANT IS SOMEBODY WHO IS GOING TO GO TO THE U.S. SENATE AND FIGHT FOR THEM, NOT FOR WALL STREET AND THE BIG BANKS, NOT FOR THE BIG HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES. NOT FOR THE BIG DRUG COMPANIES. NOT FOR THE TEA PARTY. SOMEONE WHO WILL GO AND FIGHT FOR THEM. AND THAT'S WHAT I'VE ALWAYS DONE AND PLEDGE TO DO AS YOUR U.S. SENATOR. THERE'S A CLEAR CONTRAST IN THIS RACE. TOMMY LIKES TO TALK A LOT ABOUT WHAT HE DID AS GOVERNOR IN THE 1980s AND 1990s, BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT HE HAS SPENT HIS LAST SEVEN YEARS AS A PARTNER AS A BIG, POWERFUL, WASHINGTON LOBBYING FIRM THAT LOBBIES ON BEHALF OF THOSE VERY SAME SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT I'VE SPENT MY CAREER STANDING UP AGAINST. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES ON TAXES, ON HOW WE WOULD TAX THE DEFICIT, ON HOW WE WOULD GROW THE ECONOMY. AND IT ALL GETS DOWN TO, WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON? THE PEOPLE OR THE POWERFUL? I ASK YOU FOR YOUR VOTE ON NOVEMBER 6, AND ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS ELECTION.

>> AND WE THANK YOU, BOTH CANDIDATES, VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US. AND THAT IS >> OUR DEBATE. GOOD NIGHT. [APPLAUSE]

CAPTIONS PRODUCED BY RIVERSIDE CAPTIONING COMPANY www.closed-captioning.com