summer vacations washington state

- greeting and thank you for coming. i am jon bauer, i'm the opinionpage editor for the herald. and i will tell you off the start that i am a print journalist. and not used to being behind a lectern. but we will soldier on. just to go over a few ground rules, here. we will be taking a brief break at 8:10 to let that class depart when they need.

that would be a good time if in the middle of the forumyou think of a question that would be a good timeto get your questions in if you haven't submitted them before. each candidate will have aminute to respond to questions. and they will be warned withabout 15 seconds left to go that they have 15 seconds left to go. each candidate has beengiven a challenge card. if they feel they want to rebut

a point that their opponent has made they can hold that challenge card up. they will have 45 seconds to respond. their opponent will thenhave 45 seconds to respond. so i think with that i will go ahead and introduce our candidates starting with the 1st district. we have republican robert sutherland and democrat suzan delbene.

in the 2nd district wehave democrat rick larson and his opponent,republican marc hennemann. and in the 7th district we have democrat brady pinero walkinshaw and democrat pramila jayapal. there is no incumbent in that district with the retirement ofcongressmen jim mcdermott who has represented thedistrict since 1989. so i half expected himto show up out of habit

but i don't think he'swith us here tonight. we will go ahead with the first question. and i think for beginnerswe'll take it in reverse order. we'll start with the 7th district. and starting with brady and then pramila. first question. what's key to resolving the differences not just between parties,but within parties to pass legislation and end gridlock?

- well, thank you very muchfor coming out tonight. it's a pleasure to be here in edmonds and thanks to jean hernandezat the community college and everyone who helped inbringing this forum together. so it's a pleasure to be here. i'm a state representative. i served central seattle in thewashington state legislature and have for the last three years. and i'll tell you thefirst thing that i did

when i came into officewas that my spouse and i jumped into the front seat of our subaru drove across the cascadesto meet with colleges from across the aislein their home districts. in places like omackand the spokane valley walla walla, places verysimilar to the community that i grew up in in rural whatcom county. and i did that not because thoseare the values that i share but i did that because ibelieve that we need legislators

and i believe we need peoplein positions of leadership that have the courage andthe ability to work together. and that's how i wasinstrumental in passing landmark legislation in this state over the last several yearson mental health reform. criminal justice reformsthat have brought down licencing barriers forhundreds of thousands of people in washington state who haveconvictions in their past. and started the state's work on

opiate addiction and chemical dependency. - good evening everyone,my name is pramila jayapal. thank you so much for having us here it's a great honor and pleasure. my experience of coming to this country when i was 16 years old by myself my parents took all the money they had and it was about $5,000,and used it to send me here means that i have spent mylife working with people

no matter who they are, where they are. you kind of have to figure it out. and i think that has shown up in my career in so many different ways. on immigration reformi've been a champion. started the largest immigrantadvocacy organization. and worked across theaisle, across the mountains with the grower's league andwith the chamber of commerce and so many others, to puttogether a really strong

coalition for immigrationreform and ultimately wrote pieces of the bill that passedthe u.s. senate in 2013. also on minimum wage, was able to bring together a lot of people was right there at the committee that passed the minimum wage and on the police chiefsearch committee for seattle was able to bring people over. and i really think it's about finding that

one or two places where you agree. you don't have to agree on all 10 things but you can find one ortwo where you do agree. - thanks again for coming out tonight my name's rick larson and i ask for your vote in the election coming up. i think one key to passinglegislation in this environment is to find a good partner to work with. and i've worked with severalgood republican partners

to pass seven pieces of legislation in this session of congress alone including a bill that recognizes that as the faa hires new veteranswho might have a disability that those veterans now get automatically 104 hours of leave in their first year rather than having to work to earn it in case they need to taketime off in their new job because of their disability.

working with a republicanto make that happen. i worked with the bushadministration to pass the first piece of wildernesslegislation in 22 years. that was the wild sky wilderness bill and i led that effort in the house and senator murray ledthat effort in the senate. and finally, there's one structural thing that we can do to help getrid of the partisanship and that is pass a constitutionalamendment to get rid

of citizens united, which brings dark uncounted money intoour political process. - i'd like to thankyou all for inviting me and thank all of you forcoming out to listen. the key to ending gridlock is compromise. barry goldwater once said "politics and governingdemand compromise." ronald reagan said "if you get 75 or 80% of whatyou're asking for, take it.

and fight for the rest later." my opponent mentionedworking with republicans. and yet in the bills he'spresented in this congress he's only gotten 36% of themto have gop co-sponsors. he mentioned gettingrid of citizens united. and yet he has $550,000 in pac money. and i have yet to accept adime in pac money of my own. so if my opponent and hisparty would practice compromise what they claim to preach, we'd be fine.

- and thank you for having me here. for those that don't know who i am i am a veteran of theunited states airforce. and a scientist from gonzaga university. and in both of those fields there is no left or right, rich or poor. i was just an american serving whether in the military orwhether in the science field so i come at this at perhapsa little different of an angle

that i don't look at a bunch of different segmented pieces of population around. i've met thousands ofpeople on the campaign trail many thousands of people, andeven those we disagree with when we sit down and wetalk about some of the more important issuesof the deficit spending the unsecure boarders, things like that even though we disagree on certain things we can come together andfind common-sense solutions

to what i consider american problems not left of right problems. and so i'm hopeful that, ifelected and i go back to d.c. that i can find that same quality in the people that i'm working with. so that we can sit down andsolve the problems that our kids i'm old enough, i have four kids we're gonna pass of andwe're gonna hand to them and hopefully we can solve those problems

by working together. - good evening, i'm suzan delbene and i represent the 1stcongressional district. and the 1st district was setup to be a swing district to represent pretty muchevery point of view. and i think that listeningis one way that we help come up with solutionsthat work for everyone. and so going through mydistrict and listening to those different pointsof view means that i can

bring those back to washington d.c. and work with others tofind solutions to problems. i'm on the agriculture committee i've worked with the farmersin our region on a farm bill so that our products, that we produce fruits and vegetables, dairy were well-represented in the farm bill and came up with a bipartisanfarm bill that was one of the best farm bills thatwe've ever had for our region.

i'm working with republicans on legislation to protect privacy. in this congress we passed legislation to make sure we ended bulk collection and protected privacy for all americans. it's bringing that collaborative spirit working with folks focused on solutions and results, and not rhetoric which i have been doingsince i've been in congress

and i'll continue to do if i'm reelected. thank you. - thank you. next question. what's your assessment ofthe affordable care act also known as obamacare? should it be repealed, or reformed? what reforms are necessary? and we'll start with the 1st district.

susan? i think we have one important goal that we always have to strive to achieve which is making sure that every american has access to affordablequality healthcare. and in order to do thatwe need to continue to look at what's working,what's not working and make adjustments andreforms going forward. it is disappointing there continues

to be this dialogueabout repeal and replace instead of a dialogue about looking at what's working and what's not working and making responsible reforms. for example, i've introducedlegislation to help small businesses, so thatwe extend tax credits to small businesses soit's easier for them to provide health care to their employees. one important solution.

we need to continue tohave that conversation it should be a bipartisan conversation so again, we're continuing to move forward and make sure that we have a strong system so that everyone has access to affordable, quality healthcare. - [jon] thank you. robert? - yeah, i am completely againstthe affordable care act. there are good aspects in it

there's good aspects in almost anything but the bad aspects outweighthe good by far, in my opinion. never should our federalgovernment be dictating or mandating that we purchase aproduct in the marketplace. the do not have that authorityunder the u.s. constitution. if the government would getout of the free market system stop manipulating it, justlike we buy our auto insurance or our life insurance, our homeinsurance across state lines let the free market compete with itself

and the prices will comedown, the quality will go up. just like we have newcomputers every year, new tvs. the free market is efficient,and yet we've messed with that to where now we see the premiums going up the deductibles are skyrocketing it was supposed tosolve those that did not have healthcare insurance, 10-15,000 they're still uninsured, ithas not solved that problem. - thank you. we'll go to the 7th district.

pramila? - well, i serve on thehealthcare committee in the state senate and we have actually seen some of the effects, both good and some of the things we need to fix. the affordable care act, in my opinion was a great step forward. i really believe we should be moving towards a single-player healthcare system

because ultimately what is happening is the cost of co-pays and therising cost of pharmaceuticals and the fact thatinsurers are now actually dropping out of the insurance spaces partly because for insurance companies for-profit companies to make a profit they have to take on justthe healthiest people not necessarily the peoplethat have the most illness. and if you have a big enough pool and

you are actually able to provide for the government to provide that healthcare you are going to get better results. we have, through theaffordable care act, expanded particularly through medicaid expansion expanded so many peoples'ability to access healthcare. but we do have to take on this issue of copays and of thecost of pharmaceuticals both of which are very important.

and there are still thingswe can do within the system like the piece i passedaround expanding access for low-income women on medicaid to have access to contraceptives. - [jon] thank you. brady? - so a lot of great things came out of the affordable care act. and i've spent a lot of time in community health clinics in my district

and when you sit down with acommunity health clinic worker and you see the rates ofcoverage that have expanded through medicaid expansion,it's really striking. i mean, we have tens ofmillions of americans right now who have access to coveragewho never had it before. you have young people who areable to stay on their parents' plans for longer as theytransition into the workforce for a generation of youngpeople in this country that is actually facingincredible economic hardship.

and when i look forward and when i think about where we need to go i strongly support effortsaround single-payer healthcare. i support legislation that'ssitting in congress today that would establish a public option. we do have problems in the system today where you do have private providers who are pulling out becauseit's not penciling. but what i want to leave you with is

an issue i'm especially passionate about. and that's mental healthcare. we have 40 million americans today who struggle with mental illness. 17 million of those are adolescents. and secretary clinton has put forward a very strong plan onmental health coverage that i would be a partneron in working to pass. it's what i've done in olympia

it's what i would do in congress. - thank you. 2nd district. starting with rick. - so a couple reforms. one would be the public option. the other would be some changesto the reinsurance market. but i wanna make a commentabout the aca and that's to my friends in congress inthe republican party who have complained that the affordablecare act is not working.

here's what i wanna say to them. stop working very hard to besure that it doesn't work. rather, work with us whowanna make it work for people. and let's look at what that means. no longer is being a womana pre-existing condition in the united states of america. now young people havecoverage until the age of 26 providing them the freedomafter college to look for work without the specter ofno healthcare coverage.

we've prevented 565,000hospital readmissions in this country, savingabout $20 billion in costs. the growth of medicare spendinghas finally slowed down extending the life of themedicare trust fund, saving money all without resulting inloss of healthcare quality and washington state's uninsuredrate has been cut in half from about 14% to 7.3%, so to that i say thanks obama. (jon laughs)

- and marc. - obamacare should berepealed and replaced. in 2012 my opponent said onthe floor of the house that obamacare was "a welcome victoryfor middle class families" and that "we must make surethat middle class families have diverse options for high-quality,affordable healthcare." with the state exchanges collapsing with the big insurancecompanies withdrawing with deductibles doubling or more and with

premiums anticipated to followsuit in about three weeks obamacare has just aboutrun out of options. what we need to do instead is to keep some of the provisions of the law such as coverage forpreexisting conditions and allowing children to remain on their parents' plans untill they turn 26 while combining them with interstate sales oftailored healthcare plans

refundable tax credits for the poor health savings accounts,medical tort reform and medicare block grants to the states. this course will get rid ofthe worst abuses of obamacare while guaranteeing the availability of affordable healthcare for all americans. we'll start the next question with the 2nd district and marc. this is a related question,i want to know what you think

can be done to hold downthe cost of pharmaceuticals. and a great example ofthat would be the epipens. - okay, epipen had about 90% of the market at the end of 2015. that fact alone, seems to me would qualify the mylan company for regulation underfederal anti-trust law. that would be one wayto hold down the price keep it reasonable, and makesure everybody can afford it.

- okay. rick? - i've heard from quite a number of people about the price gouging taking place in the pharmaceutical marketplace and i think that what congress needs to do is finish the job that we started and that is give medicare the ability to negotiate drug pricesin the medicare program. much like we allow the va to negotiate

drug prices for our veterans. we didn't do that, there is a ban on that. the republican party pushed through a ban on allowing medicare tonegotiate better drug prices and we need to lift that ban. we also need competitionin the generic drug market. right now a manufactureof a brand-name drug has a head start inintroducing the generic version of that drug into themarket, over other companies.

we need to get rid of that head start for these brand-namemanufacturers and allow true competition in the generic market. and finally, the dojdid announce last week a $456 million settlement against mylan the maker of epipen, forprice gouging medicaid and for screwing the taxpayersof the united states. and i want a doj that does more of that. - moving to the 1st district and robert.

- the last thing we needis the government to come into the free market andstart dictating to companies what the price of their products will be. i was in the pharmaceutical industry. let me qualify that withwhat epipen, the cost of that that was ridiculous,and should not happen. and they should be punished. but when you have a pharmaceutical company that spends billionsof dollars over decades

trying to produce a drugand get it to market and they all fail, and theyfinally get one to market they need to recoup that lossfrom the past 10-15 years or they go out of business. so if the governmentcomes in and dictates the price of that product, thecompany will not survive. that's what happens whengovernment gets involved. having said that, when acompany is found to price-gouge there needs to be legislation that

will protect the consumeragainst that as well. so the 10 or 15 year windowwhere the company gets to sell their product thatthey finally got to market that safeguards thatcompany so that they can be free from competition for that time to recoup their lossesthat have had in the past. if companies could just come in and duplicate someone else's work no companies would be inresearch and development

and the system would collapse. - [jon] susan? - this is absolutely a critical problem facing folks throughout the country. and i've joined colleagues,i'm on the judiciary committee in congress to call fora hearing on drug pricing and i hope that ourchairman will hear that call and allow us to have that hearing. i also support allowing the

department of health adhuman services to negotiate medicare prescription drug prices. which would be very, very important when we have such a large group of people they could be negotiating for. we do need to bringgenerics to market faster and i have signed ontoa letter to make sure that we continue to ask for folks to push to make sure those areavailable more quickly.

and finally, if drug pricesare rising too quickly we've also asked for thereto be rebates if drug prices are rising quicker thanthe cost of inflation so that they are affordable to patients who desperately need that access. this is an important issue,we should be having hearings we should be having that conversation something i'll continue to push for on the judiciary committee andas a member of congress.

and to the 7th district and brady. so i agree with what's been said that we need to let medicarenegotiate drug prices we need more competition in generics. i was involved in supporting legislation in the state legislaturethat was introduced by a colleague of mine, eileen cody that would create that transparency in our prescription drugpricing that actually

from research anddevelopment through to market would create more transparency into where those costs actually are. and as congresswoman delbene shared that's now being calledfor at the federal level. i would support that there as well. but it's not just epipens. it actually extendsbeyond that and an area that i've been passionateabout that's really

impacted snohomish countyhas been the opiate crisis. we've also seen that skyrocketing price that you're seeing withepipens happen in naloxone which is a drug that actually reverses an opiate addiction whensomeone's been having it. and i started a lot of thestate's work in opiate addiction. and what we're seeing right now is that we're seeingrising rates of naloxone which is a life-savingdrug when it's in the hands

of the right person when someone'sexperiencing an overdose. and it's not getting topeople to save lives. so that's another exampleof where we've seen that rise in prices that we need to create transparency in r&d costs. - [jon] thank you. and pramila. - well, one of the things that happens when you run for office in a campaign is you wake up at 3:30 in the morning.

and the other day i watchedthe entire hearing in the house with the ceo of mylan andit was fascinating to see how that price has just beenraised over and over again. but it's not just mylan,it's been happening with a number of othercompanies and products as well. so i support much of what has been said. i think negotiating isobviously a key thing being able to negotiate the costs for medicare, for medicaid, for dshs

or the department ofhealth and human services. and also i think, makingsure that we are protecting the generic market, becausecongressman adam smith who represents the 9thdistrict, has endorsed me just introduced a billthat would do just this. it's called the eliminateprice increases act and it would just prohibit a company that holds the patent fora brand-name pharmaceutical from introducing the generic.

because then you controlboth sides of the market. and the whole point with the generic is to start to bring those prices down and create that kind of competition. so i would be very much insupport of that as well. i think we'll move to a reader question. er, an audience question. i did this last year. (audience and panel laughing)

and starting with the 1st district and we'll start with robert. where do you stand ona carbon tax, and why? and i'll add, if youwould feel comfortable giving us your position on initiative 732? - i do not like the idea of a carbon tax. whenever the governmentis taxing the people it needs to be something that's well thought-out and necessary.

the carbon tax i've got a minute to respond and it's hard to answer these questions in a minute - [jon] sure. is a ploy by some to tax american people using a scare tacticthat we're all gonna die if we don't tax the americanpeople for producing carbon. they're out measuring cowsnow, and what they produce.

so the science behindthat doesn't back it up. taxing people, driving theeconomy into the ground losing more jobs becauseof something like that i'm against, and seven, remind me... - [jon] oh, initiative 732, which would institute a carbon tax but would use that revenue to replacea portion of the sales tax. - yeah again, there's specialinterest groups that are out there trying to usethe environment and carbon

and things like that to goahead and tax americans. one thing our governmentis very, very good at is it red already? okay i'm out of time. (laughter) (candidates urging him to finish) - is finding a new way to tax citizens. - [rick] don't leave us hanging like that. - [jon] good. susan please?

- climate change is a serious issue that we absolutely must address now. and it's disappointing thatin congress we have not even been having conversationabout how we address climate and talk about how we move to clean renewable energy throughout our country. this is federal issue, it'san international issue. i applaud the work that happened in paris and the ongoing workinternationally that's going on

but this does need to be an issue that we look at at the federal level. we need to provide incentives to move to clean renewable energy and we are an incredibly innovative region and our region economicallycan be a leader in green, clean renewable energy and the innovation that goes into that. we are an innovative region and absolutely

it can be an economic driver for us if we make sure that we makethe correct investments. so this should be a priority,it absolutely i hope will be a priority and something i will continue to push for in the next congress. - 2nd district and rick. - i don't have a position on 732. i haven't really evaluated it so i'll beg off on that for now.

but i do support a carbontax, because it is the most efficient way to allocatethe cost of carbon pollution. and it is a important part ofthe debate on climate change. we know what science saysabout climate change. humans cause it, and we needto take action to stop it. and in order to do that weneed the correct incentives in our markets forrenewable energy investment. and here in the pacific northwest we are a center of excellencein renewable energy.

the largest solar panelmanufacturer in our state is in bellingham, washington, because of the good work of the state legislature and because of the federal taxcode helping them do that. the snohomish county pud is a leader in battery storage technology. we have wave energycompanies in this area. in this district, in fact. we are on the cusp of beingthe leader in the country

of any state when itcomes to renewable energy. and to do that we need to take action and take action now before it is too late. - [jon] and marc. - if you saw the film aninconvenience truth by al gore you saw one of thecharts in the film showed that our climate changed several times in the past couple thousand years. it got warmer and it got colder both.

while humans may be contributing to the current changes it's nowhere near sothat we are causing them. and we have to look and make sure that any remedy that we do,anything that we propose anything that we put into effect will not have unintendedconsequences and make things worse. what a carbon tax will do will be to raise prices on just about everything.

and we don't know if it will do what the proponents want it to do. we don't know that, we don't know what the unintended consequences might be. and we have to be very, very careful that we don't make things worse. 7th district and pramila? - climate change reallyis one of the top issues facing our country and our future

and i am very much infavor of a carbon tax. but i actually think wehave to not just tax carbon we actually have toeliminate carbon emissions. we have to keep fossil fuels in the ground and then we have to investin a renewable energy future. and as congressman larson said we are an incredible place to do that. the 7th district, the puget sound region we have so many resources,both in terms of

companies that are producingthese new technologies but also in terms of the types of renewable energy that we have access to. so i am a huge champion,and i think i'm really proud to have the endorsements ofsome amazing environmentalists both locally and nationally, people like bill mckibben and paulhawken and naomi klein. on 732, i have taken aposition against 732. and that is in line with

the state's majorenvironmental organizations the washington conservation voters as well as the democratic party as well as a number ofprogressive organizations. it's because it cuts a billion dollar hole in the state budget,and it simply does not allocate resources to themost affected communities that need the help the most. - and brady.

- absolutely. well this is a great question. i am really proud in this race to be the environmental candidate. i am proud to put climate front and center in this campaign and made it my top issue. i'm gonna tell you one thing just to show you my commitment to it. at our wedding lastsummer, my husband and i

instead of having flowerbouquets at our tables and my aunt and uncle live at edmonds they're in the audience,they were at our wedding we actually had salt water little aquaria at each table, and wehad sea grass in them so we could talk about about the seriousness of of ocean acidification my husband's a marine biologist at our wedding.

and i say that for two reasons. one is that we needleadership on climate change that's willing to act now,and this is a difference between my opponent and myself. i believe in a federal carbon tax but i also believe in and i support 732. it may not be perfect, butthe tipping point has come. and we need leadership that hasthe courage to actually act. so i believe we need to pushforward with the carbon tax.

and i also believe secondly,and i'll say two things on this one is that we need to do three things. we need to shift to a low carbon economy. the second is that we need to leave existing carbon in the ground. and the third i believe is that we need to really reduce theemissions that are coming from our forests and our farms. and this has been a big debate on 732.

and there are a lot of greatpeople on both sides of it. but i've come down on the side of deciding i will be supporting 732on the ballot this year. - thank you. next question. considering recent reports of hacking and attempts to hack state voting systems what remedies might congress propose to secure such systems and records? and we'll start with the7th district, and brady.

- oh, sorry, could yourepeat the question? - sure. the reports that state votingsystems have been hacked or there were attempts to hack them. - yeah. - do you have an ideas on how we might protect against that,prevent that, deal with that? - sure, so first of all,just broadly on voting. yesterday was the lastday to register to vote

so hopefully everyone registered to vote. and three things on voting integrity. yes it's important. yes we do need to have systems that protect the integrity of our votes. but i think moreover,and what's more important is we be expanding access to voting. and i'll say three things. one is, i've been an outspoken advocate

to support that voting rights be expanded to people who haveconvictions in their past. i believe felons should have aright to vote in our country. the second is, i believe we need to be supporting and passing legislation like the voting rightsact in washington state and supporting a federal government that's willing to takeaction on the inclusion of more people who arehaving access to vote.

and the third that i'llsay is that when we look at our country today,not enough people vote. and we need to be able to push so that more people come intoour democratic process because the more people have access to it the more likely it is that ourdemocratic process or voice reflects the voices of everyone. so i'll be a champion for expanding voting rights access in our country.

- [jon] pramila? - i'm so proud to have been a leader on voting rights in our state. i led the largest voter registration drive in the history of the state. we registered over23,000 new folks to vote. before i got into the state senate when i was at oneamerica we introduced the idea of washington voting rights act.

and in the state senatei was the lead negotiator on the washington voting rights act. we got very close to getting it done. and i introduced a bill aroundautomatic voter registration. so this is a top priority issue for me. and i will say that at the federal level president obama islooking at how do we make the voting system part ofour critical infrastructure so that the federal governmenthas much more authority

over implementation,resources, and making sure that we are really lookingat our voting systems and helping to upgrade them. but also i think the fact that we are now doing paperless votingmeans that we don't have any kind of a paper trail and that's about a fifth of all ofthe systems in the country. so we need to movetowards a system that we can track the paper trail and enforcement.

- and to the 1st district and robert. - the lady over here just mentioned that we do need a papertrail when we're voting. we've all seen on youtube and on the news those voting machines how you punch in a certain candidate andit changes the vote. or the receipt comesout and it's different than what you thought you voted for. quality control is essential.

what i heard over here wasthat the federal government needs to come in and take control of that. well no, that's not the best way to go. states have the responsibilityfor their citizens to vote within their states,we don't want to change that. that is constitutional. so what we need are goodquality control systems in place and a paper trail asa redundancy for that. and especially on closeelections where if you need

to do a physical hard count,then that's what you do. but again we've seen themanipulation of these machines and we have to make sure thatthe people that produce them and the quality controlsystems that are there are in place, and they areaccurate, and they work. that's what we need. - i agree that we need to make sure that every americanhas the access to vote. and we need to make sure thatthat access is protected.

updating the federal voting rights act will be an important part of that. on the technology side, we have technology it is infrastructure in many areas including in the government. but we have not gotten the best return on our investment in technologyon the government side. we haven't invested well. many times systems havenot been deployed well.

and a very, very important part of making sure we upgrade that technology that critical technologyinfrastructure in government is to make sure we bring in experts so they can help design those systems. the u.s. digital servicewas set up to help do that to bring people from theprivate sector with skills where they do a tour ofduty working in government to help upgrade those systems.

i want to make sure thatu.s. digital service continues after this administration and have introduced legislation to keep the u.s. digital servicegoing so that, again we make sure we have quality,up-to-date technology. - 2nd district, and marc. - you know, i was ateacher in florida in 2000. when the voting system there collapsed under the weight of anextraordinarily close election.

and america didn't know for 37 days who our next president would be. voting is one of the most cherished responsibilities we americans have. it is clearly the duty of the government to ensure the integrityof our voting systems particularly in the cyberage. what can the government do about it? they can provide expertiseand money to the states

to improve their electronicelection systems. last month, congressmanhank johnson of georgia proposed two bills, neither of which were cosponsored by my opponent,which would do just that. the election infrastructureand security promotion act would mandate that thedepartment of homeland security would classify voting systemsas critical infrastructure. the election integrity act would limit which voting machines states could buy

and also create a plan forhandling system failures. this would be a terrificexample of bipartisanship and if i'm a member of congress i would be glad to cosponsor both those bills. - [jon] and rick? - the most important action you can take to protect your vote, is to vote. please vote when theballots come out next week. but i've spoken recently to local auditors

about this issue, andthere are a couple things that we need to ensure happen. one is, to ensure thevote counting systems stay separate from theactual act of voting so that the process ofcounting can't be hacked. publicly test the vote countsystem before the election. and then finally, we need to prioritize the protection of theactual voter database. and that's where thedepartment of homeland security

can come in to help states and counties do just that, with tactical advice. and where the federal governmentcan come in with help. but believe me, there is federalrole in the voting system. there was a federalrole in the 50s and 60s to ensure people who were getting shut out of the voting process could vote. and there's a federal role now to ensure that these so-called voter-id laws

which are actually voter suppression laws get turned aside by our federalcourts so people continue to have the right to vote,and low hurdles to vote. i'm gonna combine one of minewith an audience question. and we'll start with the2nd district and rick. it's been a couple years now since the citizens' initiativeto expand background checks has been passed. yet we are still having

we still experienceddisturbing mass shootings up and down the i-5 corridor and seattle mokotio, marysville, and now burlington. what gun safety, gun controlmeasures would you support? or what other remedies would you suggest? and again, starting with rick. - well it's certainly tragic that the specter of gun violence has hit our own district in mokotio

and in burlington recently. and it's tragic that thespecter of gun violence continues throughout the entire country. not any one piece oflegislation that congress passes or the state passes is going to address all, or any one event. as tragic as they are. but taking no action is not an alternative here in the united states.

first off, we need to liftthe ban that prevents the cdc centers for disease control and prevention from even researching gunviolence as an epidemic. we need the data so wecan do a better job. we need to reinstate theban on assault weapons. when we had the ban on assaultweapons in this country gun violence againstpolice officers dropped. we need to pass a no-fly, no buy law. and i'll just say, ididn't think i'd ever be

in a protest with civilrights icon john lewis. but i was there, suzan was there on the floor of the houseof representatives in june side-by-side with johnlewis and many other members of congresssaying enough is enough. and we're not done fighting this fight. - [jon] marc? - back in june when congressman larson decided to treat thefloor of the u.s. house

as if it were a 1960s college dormitory i was at home mowing my grass while he was in the congresssitting on his behind. the right to own a weaponis a constitutional right guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. the supreme court has upheld that in the cases of d.c. vs hellerand mcdonald vs chicago. and yet, if you look atthose places that have the strictest gun controlin the united states

chicago. new york. los angeles. and new orleans. those four cities also have the most gun violence in the u.s. it is apparent that thosetype of laws do not work. - pramila, 7th? - i absolutely supportsensible gun reform measures

and i'm proud to have an a+ from the washington alliancefor gun responsibility. i recently held a "how tobring down gun violence" round table with a couple of the survivors from the jewish federationshooting some years ago. and we specifically talked about public health as animportant place to start because if you look atseat-belt cessation laws smoking cessation laws, they started with

doing the research, andonce you do the research you're able to actually figure out what are the right ways to move forward. but because the nra has successfully stopped congress from investing in public health research around gun violence we have not been able to do that. so we are left with a patchwork of laws that we try to propose,including things that i support

universal background checks,banning of assault rifles making sure that we are actually addressing the issue ofwho gets to have guns. if you've got severe mental illness how do you make sure that you don't have that situation where peoplehave guns in their hands and they can't act responsibly with them. - [jon] brady. - yeah, it's a really important question.

i actually grew up in rural whatcom county and i headed up to see my family a day after the burlington shooting and it was so eerie to goby the macy's parking lot and see people going back into the store after the incredibly tragic shooting. and i think you hear a lotof agreement here on this. and one thing i'll say is, wedo need to treat gun violence as a public healthepidemic in this country.

and when we do that, weneed to collect data on it so that we can move forward the same way we moved forward inteh 1960s on seat-belts when we had automobilemanufacturers opposing that kind of legislation. when we moved forwardwith consumer protections and public health basedon the data we were seeing about the health risk of nicotine. and those are the kindsof changes we need to make

in this country so that we can there's no reason that the united states should have levels ofgun violence that are 10 times as high as therest of the developed world. and those are the sorts of steps that i think are important for us to take. i was proud to standwith the attorney general to put forward the assault weapons ban when several of us stoodwith the attorney general

earlier this last month. and these are steps that i support and believe we need to take. 1st district, and robert. - i'm not sure if you've seen the videos on youtube, facebook, the ones that i have where the most recent one i saw was three armed thugs breaking down the door of a lady's house andbarging in, waking her up.

she came out from down the hallway with a pistol of herself and began defending herself and her property. and i didn't actuallycount the number of shots but there were severalshots that she fired in order to thwart that attack and save her life and her property and the thugs, the thieves if you will ended up running away.

one i think died outside the home there. and so a question i put on facebook to people who use emotion to legislate in other words "not one moredeath by gun" is what they do the sensible gun restrictionsthat they want to propose we've heard of seven rounds per magazine we've heard 10 rounds to limit it "what do you need 10 rounds for?" "what do you need 18 rounds for?"

she fired, i can guaranteeyou, a lot more than 10 rounds and she needed every oneof them to save her life. that's why we need it. - [jon] thank you. and susan. - we have experienced senselessgun violence in our region and we can and we must do more. and i did sit on the floor with congressman larson andcongressman john lewis because we were asking for a vote.

a vote on simple things. like allowing the centerfor disease control to do research into gun violence. simple research, so that we can understand the largest causes of gun violence and have data to work with that allows us to come up with responsible solutions. to make sure we could vote on preventing people on the no-fly list

from being able to purchase arms. when we talk about obstruction in congress it's because we aren'teven allowed a vote. put a bill on the floor ofthe house of representatives. if you don't like it, vote "no",but put yourself on record. allow us to vote, allow us tohave a conversation about this allow us to invest in basic research. that's what we're asking for. that's what the americanpeople are asking for.

and we absolutely should continue pushing so that we can make that happen. - next question. how do we keep the socialsecurity trust fund adequately funded to provide full benefits beyond the next 20 to 25 years? and we'll start with the1st district, and suzan. - well, social securityis something that people have been paying into,it's an earned benefit

and absolutely somethingthat should be available to people across our countrywho've paid into that benefit. seniors wanna to make sure we have a secure social security trust fund. i have sponsored legislationto make sure we scrap the cap so that people can continueto pay into social security. the cap right now hasn't been raised it hasn't kept up withthe cost of inflation. that would provide a lot moremoney into the trust fund

and keep it solvent for decades ahead. i also think we need to changethe index to a price index that is reflective of whatseniors' cost are, cpie. so that we are reflecting thereal costs that seniors have in terms of costs, forexample, of prescription drugs. that would make sure that our benefits are much more in line withwhat it costs to live today. that's a piece of legislation that i'm a cosponsor of in congress

and will continue to workhard to move that forward. - one of the biggest problems we see with washington d.c. andthe politicians there is that they have a spending problem. they can't not spend more money than they bring in every year. one of the things that they're doing is raiding that fund, leavingit continually broken. they have to pay out just year by year.

it's not allowing the fund to grow. so that has caused amajor problem within that. due to that and over the years,what we need to do now is those that are currently onit there should be no changes and those within say 10 years,there should be no changes. they've been paying infor years and years. but there comes a point wherecongress is going to have to make some hard decisionsor it's going to go broke. they either have to raisetaxes or cut benefits.

that's your only two options. and so, by pushing out thoseyounger people that haven't paid in as long, andinstead of 65 maybe 66, 67 by expanding the time that you can come in and start collecting on that that might be on possible solution. it's not good news. i didn't create the problem,i'm just addressing it. congress needs to keeptheir hands outta the pot.

- second district, and rick. - it will take hard decisions to ensure the long-term solvency of social security. no matter what decisions are made. and just because people maybewon't like the decisions that doesn't mean they aren'thard and difficult to make. social security represents aportion of retirement income for a lot of folks that irepresent, for a lot of folks that we all represent,or want to represent.

and for some of those folks,social security represents the only retirement income that they have. so it's absolutely important to ensure the long-term solvency of social security and we do that by scrapingthe cap, as suzan noted. you take off the cap that says if you make now $118,000 a year or more you don't pay any moreinto social security for every additional dollar that you make.

so really rich people don't actually contribute proportionallyinto social security like a person who makes $45,000. and the other thing weneed to do is ensure that the inflation rate attachedto social security benefits increases equal to the costof living of the elderly and that's why we need to pass this bill that replaces the cpi with the cpie. - you know, i am theonly candidate up here

who actually receives social security. i've been receiving it now for four years. so i know what it's like. none of the rest of the people up here do. i would agree that wecould eliminate the cap on how much income we canuse better social security. but there's other things we can do too. we can gradually increase the social security retirement age.

not for those who arealready on it, obviously. nor those perhaps within 10 years. but for those younger. we can means test social security. george soros doesn't need it. donald trump doesn't need it. bill or hillary clinton don't need it. and we could use what's call chained cpi rather than just cpie

which links all various things together. that's what i would do. and again, this would affectme directly, right now. - okay, replay. so, social security to me is one of the great systems of the united states. it says that if you workand you put in your money you're gonna be taken careof when you get older. and the beautiful thing about it is

it's one generation payingfor another generation and then paying for another generation. so i put my money in and it helps take care of you when you get older and you put your money in andit helps take care of him. it's the fundamental ideathat we are all better off when we are all betteroff, and so i am actually an indirect beneficiaryof social security because people don't always think about this

but it's not just when you retire. my husband's dad died when steve was six and he only went to college because of social security benefits. that is the only way thathe was able to survive and his mother was able to survive. so this is a very, very important system and i support scrapingthe cap, which by the way that phrase was originatedright here in the puget sound

by social security works coalition and i support reallylooking at cost of living which is what i hear all the time when i'm at senior centers is peoplejust really struggling with the increased costs andnot being able to keep up. - [jon] and brady. - yeah, this is one of the most important social programs that wehave in the united states. and for my mother, andher parents immigrated

to this country from cubawith very, very little and they retired on social security. and i watched how that was the sole source of their income as they aged. and it's essential for so much of our society in the united states. but the tragedy is, andthe concern is that for my generation, the mostasset-poor generation in u.s. history, if we don'ttake the kinds of steps

that congressman larsonhas shared, and others here of removing the cap on the payroll tax which is a very regressivetax, as was said you are not gonna provide that solvency for the future to allow for everyone to benefit from oursocial security system. so i'm strong advocatefor lifting that cap and i also believe in stepsthat have already been proposed in congress on possiblybringing down the retirement age

and looking at how we can usethe social security system which is so effective,in actually expanding the base of people for whom it supports. the next question is aboutthe trans-pacific partnership which is the 11 nation trade pact involving us and 10, i think 10 or 11 other pacific rim nations. it is opposed by both hillaryclinton and donald trump. and we have an audience question on this

and i wanna know whether you support tpp or not and what you would suggest we do to go forward? should we renegotiate tpp or should we just seek individualagreements with nations? and we will start with marc. - i strongly supportfree trade among nations. in the long run, free tradeis beneficial for both the

united states and the othernations with which we trade. washington state exports everything from aircraft and applesto wheat and wood. items from other states are also exported through washington state ports. international tradeagreements must be written so they are beneficialfor washington workers. what international tradeagreements must not do is export washington jobs.

foreign trade agreements thatsend washington jobs overseas are neither fair trade, nor free trade. we must never subsidize foreign jobs at the cost of washingtonstate unemployment. this proposed tpp is such a job killer. and i will not vote for it. i would instead supportbilateral trade agreements with our various trading partners. my opponent, by the way, hashad 11 months to study the

agreement, and still can'tdecide how he's gonna vote. - and rick. - i wanna start from abasic principal on trade for washington state, and trademeans jobs in our state. we can disagree or argue aboutindividual trade agreements but 40% of all jobs in ourstate depend upon trade. and 16 years ago, 33% of all jobs in our state depended on trade. so we're more dependent ontrade than we have been.

if congress doesn't pass tpp and just note that weare at a crossroads and we're gonna have tomeet at that crossroads so whether or not the clintonadministration renegotiates it it is secondary compared tocredibility that we'll lose in that region, as well asour efforts to regain it. i'd also note that notpassing it means that the actions of china becomethat much more important. china is seeking tonegotiate a similar type

of agreement with many of the same nations that are part of the tpp negotiations. so i just want to be sure that there's a broader debate than what is going on among people who haven'tread the agreement. a much broader debate. so i would support renegotiatingit if it comes to that but i can almost guaranteeyou that it will be to the detriment of u.s.workers and u.s. jobs

as 11 other countriesalso seek a better deal in a renegotiated agreement. so go into this with more openeye than we currently have. - thank you. 1st district and robert. - trade is critically importantto washington state and other states as well, butespecially us here in washington. we wanna do nothing thatis going to hinder that or keep our companiesfrom being able to trade successfully with other nations.

if you like nafta, the northamerican free trade agreement you're going to love tpp. we watched jobs being shippedout of our country to other countries and our manufacturingsector all but collapsing. they call them "fair trade agreements." let me give an example of fair. the treaty requires that food labels labels on products be removed. so if you go into a grocery store and you

see three packages of hamburger and if it said u.s.a. pakistan, or india they say that we wouldn't be fair. that we would buy the u.s.a. package. and to be fair, we haveto remove those labels. that's the kind of things thatare going on with the tpp. there's a lot others,i only have 60 seconds it's impossible to get intothe details of that agreement but i can just say this frommy heart, from what i've seen

it's bad on trade, and it's bad for jobs and it's bad for americans. - [jon] thank you. suzan? - we live in the mosttrade-dependent state in the country and in fact the threecongressional districts represented here are in the top 10 mosttrade-dependent districts in the country, so this is a very,very important issue for us. and as we've gone thoughthis process i have fought for strong and enforceablelabor, environmental

and human rights standards,which are critically important. and any agreement, tomeet a standard where i would support it, hasto support our workers and be strong for our economy. we are still waiting forpieces of legislation if we vote this year at allon implementing legislation so that's more informationthat will be important to see. but i wanna highlight,too, that as we look at making sure we protect jobs right here

we also have to look at tax policy. we talk a lot about trade,but tax policy is why we have corporate inversionsmoving headquarters overseas and tax policy is the reasonwe have money parked overseas. so when we wanna talk about making sure we have a strong economyright here at home we also have to look atthat, so that we make sure that folks invest righthere in the united states. - [jon] thank you.

7th district and brady. - yeah, thank you. as has been shared, andthis congressional district specifically may be themost trade-dependent congressional districtin the united states. and when we think about thetrans-pacific partnership i come at it from three angles. in its current form iwouldn't support the tpp because of three issues.

one is the lens i look at it through is environmental issues. the second is human rights. and the third is our workers. and i believe that withsome changes we can get to a point where i wouldbe supportive of a tpp. and i believe that weneed to see what will come before congress in the next and hopefully what ishillary administration

but in the beginning of thenext hillary administration to see what comes forward. i do have some specificconcerns, and as someone who is coming from representing avery trade-dependent state i've had a lot of backgroundin agriculture and food. that's actually been my background. i remember growing up workingin raspberry production. and the raspberry industryin whatcom county was deeply impacted by the tariffs thatwere set by chilean producers.

so we live in a community that's very impacted by trade policy,and it affects our jobs and i would fight for a tppthat reflects better labor human rights, and environmental standards. - [jon] and pramila. - as has been said, washingtonis incredibly trade dependent it is very importantto our state's economy and that is why i think we have the obligation to really get it right

and the opportunity to get it right. and i really believe that inany trade partnership agreement we have to have civil societyrepresented at the table representing workers andenvironmental protections and nancy pelosi saidit really when she said she would like the rules forglobalization to do as much for workers and the environmentas they do for investors. and i think that is where we are at. we need to look at a differentkind of a trade agreement

that actually ensures thatwe have in the process built into the process,accountability and transparency. that we have workers andenvironmental interests and groups at the table inhelping to negotiate those. and we need to make sure we are putting in specific provisions, forexample, around enforcement. this is very, very important. i think we need to make surethat we're not undermining the ability to get cheappharmaceuticals in other places

and protecting patents. there's a number ofthings that really need to be completely reformulated, and would if you had the right people at the table. so i am not supportive of the tpp. - alright, i think we'llgo ahead and resume. this is another audience question asking for your positionson immigration reform. and we will start with the1st district and robert.

- they say we are a nation ofimmigrants and that is true and without immigration wewould not survive as a society so it is vitally important that we have a good and well thought-outimmigration policy. our current birthrate is,i forget the exact number it's 1.2 children per coupleor something like that but it's not enough to sustain us so we absolutely need tohave an immigration policy. now having said that,we have to have a policy

that is such that actuallybenefits americans. and let me just give you an example. if we bring in, i think our current levels of immigration is 1.2 million per year which is up from 1/4 million, historically so it's drastically been increased which is driving down our wages filling up our classrooms,and things like that. so if we're going to havean immigration policy it has

to be well thought-out andbenefit the american worker. - [jon] suzan? - i strongly supportcomprehensive immigration reform. in fact, in last congress iwas one of the five members of congress who introduced apiece of legislation, h.r.15 which was a comprehensiveimmigration reform bill. and comprehensive isimportant because we need to address all issuesof immigration reform. and if you think of ourregion, we represent

all those pieces, fromagriculture and technology the business community,farmers, farm workers law enforcement, faith-basedcommunity, students and families, and we have a border. all of those issues are critically important for us to address. h.r.15 was a comprehensive bill. it was not a perfect bill,but it was a bipartisan bill and i think actually wouldhave passed that legislation

if we had just been allowed a vote. and again, we need to allow a vote have people take a position,because we have an opportunity to make huge difference inthe lives of many people throughout our country,keeping families together giving students opportunities,helping our economy if we pass comprehensiveimmigration reform. - thank you. going to the7th district and pramila. - well, this is the issue that

i've worked on for the last 15 years. after 9/11 i startedthe organization called hate free zone that became oneamerica. we took on the bushadministration and won. successfully sued thebush administration around illegal deportations andstopped thousands of people across our country from being deported. and then organized tensof thousands of people across our state and across the country

for comprehensive immigration reform. we desperately needcomprehensive immigration reform a path to citizenship for 11million undocumented immigrants legalization and a path to citizenship. we need to make sure thatfamilies can stay together. it shouldn't take 22years for a filipino mom to be able to get her adultchild into this country. we need to make surethat our workers are able to have rights on the joband that our businesses

are able to meet the needs of the economy. so we have a bill, it's not, as suzan said a perfect solution, but wedid pass the u.s. senate with 67 bipartisan votesand if it had been brought to the floor of the house,we know it would have passed. so we've got the answer,and it's time to enact just and humane comprehensiveimmigration reform. - [jon] thank you, and brady. - i also believe strongly in

comprehensive immigration reform. and on one side of myfamily, my family has been in the northwest for five,six generations, on the other my mother immigrated tothis country from cuba. and i think about immigration reform very strongly for three reasons. one is, we need to providethis path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumentedamericans in our country. the second is, we do need to provide for

an immigration system thatactually supports businesses and our economy to grow, andwe rely on that so deeply here in washington statein a variety of sectors. and the third piece i'll say is actually more about refugees. i believe that we need to betaking steps in this state at a time when you havea searing refugee crisis to be opening our doors and bringing more refugees into this country, not less.

i believe that we need leadership,and i spent a lot of time living and working in central america when you have unaccompaniedminors crossing our borders we need to be able to providethe policies that unite families when you have kidsseeking political asylum. and actually provide them representation in our immigration courts. so those are things i stronglybelieve in and you'll see a lot of shared valueshere on immigration reform.

2nd district and rick. - well i too supportcomprehensive immigration reform. i think we need a pathway to citizenship. we need to give anopportunity for folks who are in the united stateswho are undocumented to get in line to get a legal status so they can move towardsfull u.s. citizenship rights. we also need to put into lawdeferred action, or daca. this is the idea thatyoung people who came to

the united states with their parents when their parents cameillegally many years ago now only know the unitedstates as their country. and without daca, we would be deporting these folks back totheir country of origin but they wouldn't know anyone or anything. so we need to put thatinto law so that it becomes a permanent part of our law and that's not hanging over their heads sothey have the opportunity

to stay, to learn at our universities and community colleges,as well as to work. and finally, we alwaysthink of maybe one set of issues in immigrationreform, but let's not forget ukrainians fleeing religions persecution. let's not forget keepingfilipino families together. let's not forget korean andkorean americans trying to keep their families togetherhere in the united states. we need to think much broader sometimes

when it comes to immigrationthan sometimes we do. - [jon] thank you. and marc. - i am a child of immigrants and a grandchild of immigrants. my grandparents fled thewreck that was germany right after world war i. they brought my parentswith them as small children. so i am obviously not against immigration. what i am against is illegal immigration.

people here talked abouta path to citizenship. we have a path to citizenship. it's called come herelegally and become a citizen. as for reforming immigration laws yes by regression thosedo need to be reformed. absolutely. we should adopt a systemsimilar to australia and new zealand and canada and the u.k. in which we have a national census

to determine the skills we are short of and allow those peopleto come in as immigrants. that would make a lotmore legal immigration it would cut back on illegal immigration and would benefit our economy as well. next question is againan audience question. how are you going to addressthe ever-growing issue of our very congested freeways? and we will start with the7th district and pramila.

- so i know that in snohomishcounty this is a top issue and i think that there is somerelief coming if the budget gets passed in congress therewould be federal funding from the federal transit administration for 125 million for thelink light rail extension from northgate to lynnwood. there would be $43million in federal funding for the swift bus routes. so that's one piece, buti think the other piece is

we really need to investmore into our infrastructure. and i'm really excited thathillary clinton is talking about making sure that one of thefirst things she'd like to do would be to pass a biginfrastructure bill with the establishment of aninfrastructure development bank which would really allow usto get good jobs and make sure that we are actuallyputting in and replacing all the infrastructure, notonly our roads and bridges but investing in sound transit.

investing in our water systems. this is a great way foramerica to rise all together and to provide good, union-paying jobs in a lot of these industries. - [jon] thank you. brady. - so this is an area where they have a really long-term commitment from me. i would love to serveon this transportation infrastructure committee in congress.

when i look at thiscommunity that we live in and i believe so stronglythat we live in one of the most vibrant and economicallycompetitive and exciting parts of our country herein the central puget sound. and when we look at ourneeds, a lot of those needs are routed in the need for more transportation infrastructure investment. and an interesting metric, one that i would love to be trackedagainst in congress

is how long it takespeople to get to work. i believe that that's an issueof economic competitiveness. it's an issue of social justice,it's an issue of equity. and it's also a place where,for the last 10, 20, 30 years we haven't had enough federalpartnership here in the central puget sound ininvesting in our infrastructure. i had the chance to workvery closely in the finishing of the 520 bridge whichbenefited from $300 million in federal funding thatwas allocated in large part

thanks to senator pattymurray's leadership. and that's the kind of partnershipi believe we need in our own communities and that'swhat i will bring to you here. - thank you. going to the2nd district and rick. as the only member fromwashington state whose on the house transportationand infrastructure committee i'd welcome either viewas a partner on it. so i want to say that first off. but i think you need to lookno further than the major law

that congress passed latelast year and how we can help and assist snohomish countyto address congestion relief. so a couple things in that law one is it invests actualmoney, for the first time actual money in freight mobility,moving freight and goods which helps our economy more forward. it invests in the dollarsto separate road from rail. to deal with the congestionthat comes from trains going right through our communities.

we have the largest ferrysystem in the country and i authored the provision in the bill to increase funding for our ferry system. and i'm working withlocal transit agencies like community transit,to be sure that they have the investment necessary,like on bus rapid transit to move our local workforce to and from our major work centersin the pacific northwest. in the pacific northwest,transportation means jobs.

and that infrastructureinvestment in transportation means people not just going to work but actually going to work. - you know the average gas price today here in edmonds is $2.82 a gallon. my opponent wants toraise the federal gas tax 15 cents a gallon andhe supports a program put forth by president obama that would raise the price of gas another 25 cents.

that would bring it up to $3.22. there are other waysto find infrastructure. for example, on october5th, s&p global put forward a program requiringcompanies to commit a portion of any overseas profits they bring back for infrastructure improvements. the report suggests a zero taxrate on repatriate earnings in exchange for companiescommitting 15% of their return money to investments in, forexample, interest bearing

infrastructure bonds issued bystate and local governments. this is a one-timeeconomic growth catalyst which would raise $150 billionfor infrastructure projects if only half of the twotrillion in undistributed u.s. corporate earnings were repatriated. every dollar in infrastructure would add $1.30 to the economy. 150 billion in spendingwould create roughly 307 thousand infrastructurejobs and the investment

would eventually add 189and half billion to the gdp. - jon can i just...- sure. - use the 45 seconds. - ooh, this is exciting. - not really. (all laughing) it's not really all that exciting 'cause the idea that my opponent outlined is an idea that didn't takes&p global to come up with.

president obama came up with this idea that would allow repatriationof overseas dollars at a lower income tax rateand then capture some of that to put into infrastructureinvestment in this country. the problem in congressis that the republicans blocked that because theywanna save the potential of those dollars to cutthe corporate income tax down below somewhere to 22 to 21% instead of using those dollarsto invest in our country.

that's the problem withcongress right now. i would also note myopponent also suggested we cut the $500 million being used to provide services at planned parenthood for contraceptive servicesand other services there in order to fund transportation. i also think that's a bad idea. - good. and marc, you have 45 secondsto respond if you'd like.

- okay. right here you can see where s&p global obviously came up with the idea. i'll let my opponentread this if he wishes. and it seems to me to be a good idea. this way we don't haveto raise our gas prices by 40 cents a gallon, after we've finally just gotten them downto someplace reasonable. sort of reasonable.

i don't know how many of you want to see the return of $3.20 a gallon gasoline. i don't. as for planned parenthood,that was a suggestion. it was not necessarilysomething i advocate, or don't. we were asked for suggestions. that was one. - thank you. 1st district and susan. - well, our transportationinfrastructure is critical

to our economy, to movingof people and goods. and we saw how criticalthat infrastructure was when the skagit bridge wentdown up in skagit county. just a critical piece ofinfrastructure that divided a community and had a bigimpact on the economy there. so making sure that wemake strong investments in infrastructure gives us a great return. and we finally passed a fiveyear infrastructure package which was very, very important.

but we need to think long-term. these are investments that we make and if we make early we saveourselves a lot of money. if we fix the pothole today, we don't have to replace the whole roadbed tomorrow. so thinking through,making sure we have money available for thoseinvestments is critical. federal dollars complimentstate and local dollars. so making sure thestate government is also

providing those resources is critical. and i wanna say, i representa lot of rural areas. we need to make sure welook at transportation infrastructure on theeast side of our counties and east-west, becausewe have many, many people who need that service to getinto their jobs everyday. - it's almost humorous, it'ssad really, when we hear members of congress talkingabout shovel-ready jobs and investing in our infrastructureand things like that when

some of you younger oneshere may not remember it was only a few yearsago the stimulus package don't quote me on theexact number, $797 billion for shovel-read jobs, for bridges for roads, and things like that. and yet our bridges are still collapsing. the jobs weren't there, the money. i don't know where it went,to tell you the truth. but we have members of congress here

maybe you can ask them. so they always talk niceand positive when it's election time, that we justneed to invest in our roads and things like that,but it doesn't get done. the light rail, they'reproposing $54 billion that will be ready in like 20 years. and then it will only affect2% of the transportation. it will not solve one iotaof our traffic problems. in 20 years we're gonna have a lot

more than that 2% back on roads. we need to take that money andstart building better roads better freeways, and betterinfrastructure right here using a fraction of that 54 billion. and we would do a lot better in reducing congestion by doing it that way. - i wanna ask each of youwhat your priorities would be in the next session, andthe session after that. and we'll start with the1st district and robert.

- there are so manythings, so many problems that need to be addressed in congress. you hardly know where to start. let me just touch on a few. i have 60 seconds, again it'shard to get into any detail. one of our critical issues,i think, is that our federal government, ourcongress, spends too much money. it continually, year after year i think we're spendinghalf a trillion dollars

more than we bring in, year after year. our debt is currentlyat 20 trillion dollars. i see some young people out here. i don't know how that affects you. but when you go to work and you start earning a paycheck and you're thinking "why are they taking so much of my money?" it's to pay down not the debt,but the interest on the debt. they borrow the money from china

they give $300 millionof warplanes to pakistan and you guys have to payit back, with interest. so that's one of the critical areas. securing our borders so thatwe can let the good people in while keeping the bad ones out is another. helping our veterans. we ship 'em off, we send'em to war we expect 'em to defend us, they come backneeding our medical attention and yet they're dyingin long waiting lines.

let the benefits follow the veterans so that they can getthe care that they need. - susan? - we have incredibleopportunities when we realize the incredible innovationwe have in our region and we invest in a 21st century workforce. education, making sure that we have affordable college foreveryone in our country. i ran for congress because igrew up in a family where we

had many financial struggles,yet i was still able to get a great education because ofstudent loans and financial aid. we need to make sure that everyone has those same opportunities that i did. making sure stem education is available computer science education is available. today is ada lovelace dayand so making sure women have the opportunity in stem fieldsis critically important. a priority of mine.

comprehensive immigration reform. again, we need to pass that. it's overdue, has ahuge impact on families and people, but also on our economy. and making sure we support innovation. we talk about innovation,innovation in our rural economies where i have legislation calledthe timber innovation act working on cross-laminatedtimber, new opportunities there with wood that make a differencein our rural communities.

these are the things weneed to focus on so that we have economy that works foreveryone in our country. and we have opportunitiesfor everyone in our country. - thank you. 2nd district and marc. - first off i'd like to thank the league and all the sponsors for inviting us here. i thank all you good folks for listening to all of us all this time. my two main priorities areboth local and national.

one of them i just mentioned. next time you go and get gas in your cars think to yourselves, doyou really wanna spend in the low 2.80s to get gas or do you want to spend in the low 3.20s? the low 3.20s is what myopponent wants you to spend. my other priority is medicalcare for our veterans. my opponent in the lasttwo months has voted against funding for thedepartment of defense

and against a bill thatwould make it easier to remove people from thedepartment of veterans affairs who don't do their jobs,or do them incompetently. i will sponsor legislationthat would allow any veteran injured inthe service of the country either physically or mentally,or any retired veteran to go to any doctor, anyhospital, for any treatment anywhere, anytime, andsend uncle sam the bill. no more will our veterans,to whom we all owe so much

be literally dying toget care from the va. - thank you, and rick. - so again i wanna to thankeveryone for coming tonight and just to give you an ideaof what my plan is for the next two years as a member ofthe transportation committee and soon to be the subcommittee chair of the aviation subcommittee, willbe writing an aviation bill that will investinfrastructure in our airports around the country, helpingour economy move better

as well as creating construction jobs around our airports around the country. and i hope i can have yoursupport in doing that. we need to pass my billthat will better connect stem education in high schoolwith our community colleges and then expanding thatwith apprenticeships so that we have a better andmore well-trained workforce we have a good one now, we need a more well-trained workforceover time, to deal with

the complexities of ourglobal competitiveness. on veterans, we've served214 veterans out of my district office alone sincethe beginning of january, 2015. that's one every three and a half days. if you're a veteran in snohomish or you know one who needshelp, you can call my office i've got somebody specifically assigned to helping veterans in my district,and we're ready to help. and finally, in washington state we need

to continue to protect the environment. we've got a strong record on that. we've got some more to do in this state and i stand ready to do that. thanks again, and i lookforward to your vote. - [jon] and 7th district and brady. - thank you so much, ithas been great to be here and i've been really honored to have the chance to speak with you all.

so i'll say three things. one is, climate environment. i wanna leave you all withknowing that i will be a long-term champion forclimate in our environment in the northwest, andam a passionate believer in the opportunities that will come from our transition toa low carbon economy. the second is i'm thebridge builder in this race. i am the candidate who has been able

to bring people together and actually pass very significant legislationthrough divided government. and it's one reason why,and i tell this story of going across the cascadeswhen i first came into office. that's the ethos thati'll bring to congress. it's one of collaboration, it's one of bringing people together, andthat's why the vast majority actually, of people whoserve with both my opponent and myself in thewashington state legislature

have endorsed our campaign. and the third piece thati'll say is locally. i believe so strongly inthe home that we live in. and i'm so proud to havethe overwhelming support from so many of your snohomishcounty council members your mayors in mukilteo and edmonds. all your state legislatorsin the 21st district and cindy ryu and ruth kagi. and in fact i'm actuallythe only candidate

to live in the 7th congressionaldistrict in this race. so i would be so honored by your vote and your support in november. - [jon] thank you and finally pramila. i am really looking forwardto going to congress and continuing the work that i'vebeen doing on minimum wage. i was at the forefrontof the $15 minimum wage. i believe we can do that along with affordable child care andpaid safe and sick days.

i wanna continue the work istarted in the state senate. i introduced a bill forfree community college. i believe we should have debt-free college tuition-free college, in order for us to all invest in the next generation. i wanna make sure that we're expanding social security andmedicare, as we talked about. and i'm gonna make sure thati'm a climate justice champion. now one of the thingsthat's really important is

there's an immigrationbill that's ready to go and i can't wait to either workwith representative delbene whose on the judiciary committee,or get on that committee myself and make sure thatwe push that through. that is really important. and i'm so proud tohave almost every single major endorsement that'sbeen made in the race. the sole endorsement ofthe king county democrats. the sole endorsement of naral

planned parenthood, emily's list. the sole endorsement of 51labor unions that represent 70,000 workers in the 7thcongressional district and i would be so honored to have your support as well in november. thank you so much. let's give our candidatesa round of applause please. (audience applauds) and again i wanna thank our sponsors.

the edmonds communitycollege, sno-isle libraries snohomish county naacp,snohomish elections department the american associationof university women and the league of women voters. i wanna thank you, i wannathank our candidates. and i wanna encourage younot only to make sure you get your ballot marked and inthe mail or in a drop box but to encourage your friendsand neighbors to do the same. thank you, and happy election day.