>>> WELCOME TO THE IDAHO
DEBATES.

A LOOK AT THE CANDIDATES ON THE
2014 BALLOT.DAHO DEBATES IS A

COLLABORATIVE PROJECT OF THE
IDAHO PRESS CLUB, THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS OF IDAHO, AND IDAHO
PUBLIC TELEVISION.

THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE MADE
POSSIBLE BY BOISE STATE

UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC
SERVICE, DEVOTED TO BUILDING

FUTURE CIVIC AND COMMUNITY
LEADERS THROUGH

INTERDISCIPLINARY PROBLEM
SOLVING, REAL WORLD RESEARCH AND

POLICY STUDY, AND HANDS-ON
EXPERIENCE YOU CAN ONLY GET HERE

AT THE STATE CAPITOL.

THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE ALSO
BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR

CONTRIBUTION TO THE IDAHO PUBLIC
TELEVISION ENDOWMENT.

THANK YOU.

>>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO THE
IDAHO DEBATES AT THE IDAHO

PUBLIC TELEVISION STUDIOS.

THIS IS THE LAST OF SEVEN
DEBATES WE'RE HOSTING BEFORE THE

NOVEMBER 4th ELECTION.

TONIGHT THE TWO CANDIDATES FOR
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT TWO TAKE

THE STAGE TO ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.

IDAHO'S CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
TWO STRETCHES FROM EAST BOISE TO

THE WYOMING BOARDER AND
INCLUDES TWIN FALLS, IDAHO

FALLS, AND POICT.

I WANT TO WELCOME THE
CANDIDATES, MIKE SIMPSON AND

RICHARD STALLINGS.

CONGRESSMAN MIKE SIMPSON WAS
ELECTED IN 1998.

HE IS ON THE HOUSE
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE, THE

CHAIRMAN FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND WATER DEPARTMENTH

DEVELOPMENT.

HE SERVED AS SPEAKER OF THE
IDAHO HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AND PRACTICED DENTISTRY.

RICHARD STALLINGS SERVED IN
CONGRESS FOR EIGHT YEARS AND WAS

THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WASTE
NEGOTIATOR FROM 1993 TO 1995.

HE ALSO SERVED IN THE IDAHO
LEGISLATURE.

STALLINGS TAUGHT HISTORY IN
COLLEGE.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK OUR
REPORTERS WHO WILL ASK THE

CANDIDATES QUESTIONS.

I'M MELISSA DAVLIN, COHOST OF
IDAHO REPORTS HERE ON IDAHO

PUBLIC 2E8 VISION.

I'M MODERATING AND TO REMIND THE
CANDIDATES HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN

TALKING IS GAIL WILD VOLUNTEER
TIMEKEEPER FROM THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS.

EACH CANDIDATE WILL BE GIVEN ONE
MINUTE FOR OPENING COMMENTS AND

90 SECONDS FOR CLOSE.

WE FLIPPED A COIN TO SEE WHO
WOULD GO FIRST AND CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON YOU HAVE THE HONOR.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION
AND THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS

FOR HOSTING THIS DEBATE AND
THANK YOU ALSO FOR AGREEING TO

DELAYING IT FOR A WEEK FOR A
VARIETY OF REASONS SO I COULD BE

HERE.

I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH.

I'M RUNNING FOR REELECTION FOR
TWO REASONS.

ONE IS BECAUSE OF THE
ACCOMPLISHMENTS I'VE BEEN ABLE

TO ACHIEVE FOR IDAHO AND THE
THINGS WE'VE DONE.

AND I HOPE WE'LL GET INTO THOSE
ISSUES DURING THE DEBATE.

THE SYED REASON I'M RUNNING AND
THE MORE IMPORTANT REASON IS

THES BAWFTS CHALLENGES THAT LAY
AHEAD.

THIS COUNTRY FACES SOME VERY
DAUNTING CHALLENGES WHETHER IT'S

THE DEBT AND DECH IT IS, TRYING
TO FIX THE HEALTH CARE LAW,

WHETHER IT'S REFORMING THE TAX
CODE, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE

ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS ARE THERE
FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHOSE YOUNG

PEOPLE STARTING TO ENTER THE
WORK FORCE, SO WHEN THEY RETIRE

THOSE PROGRAMS EXIST.

THESE ARE TOUGH CHALLENGES AND
IT'S GOING TO TAKE PEOPLE

WILLING TO TAKE DIFFICULT VOTES
TO ADDRESS THESE CHALLENGES.

THAT'S WHY I'M RUNNING FOR
REELECTION.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH,
CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS, YOUR

OPENING REMARKS.

>> THANK YOU.

TO THE IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION,
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS, I'M

GRATEFUL FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.

FOR THE RECORD, DISCRIMINATED
NOT SERVE IN THE LEGISLATURE, I

HAVEN'T BEEN PAINTED, I'M STILL
PURE.

I DID SERVE ON POCATELLO CITY
COUNCIL WHICH WAS MUCH MORE

GRATIFYING THAN THE IDAHO
LEGISLATURE.

THIS IS BY FAR THE STRANGEST
CAMPAIGN I'VE EVER BEEN INVOLVED

N I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN A
NUMBER.

USUALLY THE CAMPAIGNS ARE WHICH
THE TWO CANDIDATES TALK ABOUT A

VISION FOR THE FUTURE.

THEY TALK ABOUT THEIR --
THE PROBLEMS OF THE NATION, BUT

THEY ALSO TALK ABOUT SOLUTIONS
TO THE PROBLEMS.

WE TALK ABOUT THE KIND OF THINGS
WE'D LIKE TO SEE IN THE FUTURE,

LIKE THE DIRECTION WE'D LIKE OUR
NATION TO GO.

THIS CAMPAIGN THAT HAS NOT BEEN
AT ALL PART OF IT.

I HAVE CAMPAIGNED CONSTANTLY ON
THE FACT THIS IS THE WORST

CONGRESS EVER, AND MR. SIMPSON
HASN'T SEEMED TO DISAGREE.

BY FAR THE WORST CONGRESS OUR
NATION HAS EVER EXPERIENCED.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THE FIRST QUESTION IS FOR
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

>> YOU'VE TBHEN D.C. FOR 16
YEARS I BELIEVE IT IS.

AND YOU'VE SEEN THE SYSTEM OF
GOVERNING GO FROM BEING ONE OF

WHERE THERE WAS SOME LEVEL OF
COMPROMISE TO INCREASING

GRIDLOCK ALL THE TIME.

WHY SHOULD --
WHY CAN'T PEOPLE IN CONGRESS

REACH AN AGREEMENT?

THEY'RE GROWN MEN AND WOMEN.

WHY CAN'T THEY REACH COMPROMISE
AND WHY SHOULD WE TRUST YOU TO

FIX THE PROBLEM?

>> WELL, THINGS I'VE BEEN
WORKING ON, AND I'VE WORKED IN A

BIPARTISAN MANNER, I CAN TELL
YOU THE LEGISLATION THAT I'VE

HAD BEFORE CONGRESS, THE ISSUES
I'M WORKING ON, WHETHER IT'S

FIXING THE DEBT AND DEFICIT, I'M
THE COCHAIR OF THE GO BIG

COALITION TO TRY TO ADDRESS
THAT.

I'M THE COCHAIR, THE COSPONSOR
OF THE WILDFIRE FIGHTING BILL

THAT HAS BOTH REPUBLICANS AND
DEMOCRATS WORKING TOGETHER TO

TRY TO SOLVE THAT.

THERE ARE THINGS WE'RE WORKING
ON, BUT WHEN RICHARD SAYS THIS

IS THE WORST CONGRESS EVER AND
THAT I HAVE NOT DISAGREED WITH

HIM, I STRONGLY DISAGREE WITH
HIM.

WE HAVEN'T HAD PEOPLE FIST
FIGHTING ON THE FLOOR, WE

HAVEN'T HAD ANYBODY THAT'S BEEN
CANED, WE HAVEN'T HAD HAD THE

SPEAKER RESIGN BECAUSE OF
ETHICAL VIOLATIONS, WE

ADOLESCENT A SCANDAL, A HOUSE
POST OFFICE SCANDAL OR ANY OF

THOSE THINGS.

SO ACTUALLY, THIS HAS BEEN A
CONGRESS THAT HAS TRIED TO GET

THINGS DONE BUT WE'RE DIVIDED.

THE REPUBLICANS CONTROL THE
HOUSE, THE DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE

SENATE.

THE HOUSES HAS PASSED 370 PIECES
OF LEGISLATION THAT ARE NOW

SITTING ON HARRY REID'S DESK IN
THE SENATE.

HE WILL NOT BRING UP FOR
CONSIDERATION.

BILLS THAT WOULD HELP OUR
ECONOMY, AND HELP GROW OUR

ECONOMY.

IF WE CAN'T GET THOSE --
THE SENATE'S TAKE OFF

LEGISLATION WE'VE PASSED, HOW
MANY SENATES BILLS HAVE THEY

PASSED THAT HAVE BEEN THROUGHOUT
HOUSE?

ONE, THE IMMIGRATION BILL.

THE SENATE HASN'T BEEN DOING
ANYTHING.

THE HOUSE HAS CONTINUED TO DO
OUR WORK AND AS SOON AS WE GO

BACK WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO OUR
WORK.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS?

>> THIS IS REALLY KIND OF A SAD
RESPONSE, BECAUSE THIS CONGRESS

HAS WORKED A TOTAL OF I BELIEVE
92 DAYS THIS YEAR.

FOLKS, THAT'S ONLY THREE MONTHS
FOR 174,000, YOU'VE GOT A

PART-TIME CONGRESS, 52 DAYS OF
THAT THEY SPENT REPEALING

OBAMACARE.

YOU HAVE TO ASK, HOW MANY TIMES
DOES ONE HAVE TO REPEAL

OBAMACARE BEFORE THEY GET
MESSAGE THEY DON'T LIKE THIS

PARTICULAR HEALTH CARE BILL?

LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THEY'RE NOT
DOING.

THEY'RE NOT DEALING WITH ISSUES
LIKE MINIMUM WAGE IN WHICH THEY

KEEP 176,000 PEOPLE IN IDAHO IN
IDAHO BELOW THE POVERTY LINE.

WHERE A SIMPLE UP OR DOWN VOTE
WOULD CHANGE THAT JUST ALMOST

INSTANTLY.

THEY HAVEN'T DEALT WITH
IMMIGRATION REFORM AS

MR. SIMPSON HAS ALLUDED TO.

THE SENATE PASSED A GOOD
BIPARTISAN VERSION.

I'M NOT TOTALLY THRILLED
WITNESS, BUT WE COULD DO BETTER.

I WOULD ACCEPT THAT.

THEY HAVE NOT DEALT WITH ISSUES
ABOUT WOMEN BEING PAID

CONSIDERABLY LESS THAN MEN AND
MOST OF ALL, I KNOW OF NO OTHER

CONGRESS THAT'S DONE SOMETHING
SO STUPID AS TO CLOSE DOWN THE

GOVERNMENT.

MR. SIMPSON HAS SAID HE DIDN'T
VOTE FOR THAT CLOSURE.

HOGWASH.

HE VOTED FOR IT JUST LIKE THE
REST OF THE REPUBLICANS DID.

AND AS A RESULT WE SPENT
$240 BILLION WITH 16 DAYS IN

WHICH GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN.

AND THE TRAGEDY OF IT IS, THE
TRAGEDY IS THAT WE HAD SOME

PEOPLE DIE, WHEY TWO WOMEN LOST
OUT IN THE DESERT BY THE CRATERS

OF THE MOON AND WHEN THEY CALLED
TO GET HELICOPTERS, THE

GOVERNMENT WAS SHUT DOWN SO THEY
COULDN'T DELIVER.

I DON'T KNOW IF THESE FOLKS EVER
CONSIDER THAT KIND OF LOGS OF

PEOPLE.

BUT TWO WOMEN DIED NEEDLESSLY.

BUT GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN, SO
THESE GUYS COULD SHOW THEIR MASH

0NESS AND MR. SIMPSON SAYS I
VOTED TO REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT.

I'LL TELL --
IF HE'D TOLD HIS FRIENDS NOT TO

SHUT IT DOWN IN THE FIRST PLACE.

>> WE HAVE A FOLLOW-UP.

>> DO I GET TO RESPOND TO THAT?

>> PLEASE DO, ACTUALLY.

THEN WE'LL GET TO THE FOLLOW-UP.

>> THAT'S A BUNCH OF NONSENSE.

IT DIDN'T COST $240 BILLION --
>> EXCUSE ME.

>> THE REALITY IS THE HOUSE
PASSED A BILL THAT FUNDED ALL OF

GOVERNMENT, ALL OF GOVERNMENT,
IT DID NOT FUND OBAMACARE

BECAUSE GUESS WHAT?

WE DON'T LIKE OBAMACARE AND WE
DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD FOR THE

COUNTRY.

WE TOOK AT THIS TIME OVER TO THE
SENATE, AND THE SENATE DECIDED

THEY WEREN'T GOING TO TAKE IT
UP.

I PRETTY MUCH KNEW THAT FROM THE
START AND WE TOLD THEM IT WAS

NOT A GOOD STRATEGY.

WE WEREN'T GOING TO ACCOMPLISH
THAT.

THEN WE SAID, OK, IF YOU WON'T
TAKE THAWP, HOW ABOUT JUST

REPEALING THE MEDICAL DEVICE TAX
AND WE WILL FUND ALL OF

GOVERNMENT?

HARRY REID WOULDN'T EVEN GO FOR
THAT.

REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ALIKE
AGREE THAT REPEALING THE MEDICAL

DEVICE TAX IS IMPORTANT AND
NEEDS TO GET DONE AND IT WILL

GET DONE.

SO WHO CLOSED THE GOVERNMENT
DOWN?

HUMAN PAPILLOMA VIRUS OR HARRY
REID AND THE SENATE?

>> YOUR FOLLOW-UP?

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS, WE'VE
HEARD YOU LOUD AND CLEAR ABOUT

YOUR CRITICISMS OF THE CONGRESS.

YOU'VE CONTINUED TO HAMMER AT
THAT POINT.

BUT WHAT CAN YOU REALLY --
REALISTICALLY DO IF WE --

IF IDAHOANS REMOVE CONGRESSMAN
SIMPSON FROM OFFICE, AND YOU'RE

PUT THERE IN HIS PLACE, WHAT CAN
ONE PERSON REALISTICALLY DO TO

SORT OF CHANGE IT ALL?

>> I FEEL VERY STRONGLY THAT I
HAVE THE ABILITY TO REACH ACROSS

THE AISLE.

WHEN I WAS IN THE CONGRESS FOR
THE EIGHT YEARS I PASSED A

NUMBER OF BIPARTISAN BILLS.

WHEN I PASSED THE BILL THAT
CREATED HYDROPROJECTS ON HENRY'S

FORT, IT --
[BLEEP] REACH ACROSS A DEMOCRAT

WITH REPUBLICAN OF MR. CHENEY'S
CALIBER, THAT SHOWS SOME REAL

EFFORT.

I THINK THERE ARE ENOUGH
LIKE-MINDED REPUBLICANS THAT

WOULD BE RESPONSIVE TO MY ISSUES
OF MINIMUM WAGE IMMIGRATION

REFORM, THAT I WOULD REACH
ACROSS TO THEM.

AND I THINK THE OTHER SIDE OF
THIS IS THESE GUYS DON'T GET

THEIR ACT TOGETHER, THEY'RE
GOING TO BE DELIVERED A

BLOODBATH LIKE NOTHING WE'VE
SEEN BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE FED UP

WITH THIS WHOLE SYSTEM
MR. SIMPSON IS TALKING ABOUT.

WHEN YOU HAVE ONLY 10% APPROVAL
RATING, WHEN 90% OF THE

POPULATION THINK THESE ARE A
BUNCH OF BUFFOONS THAT ARE NOT

DOING THEIR JOB, NOT DOING WHAT
THEY WERE ELECTED TO DO, YOU'VE

GOT PROBLEMS.

ANY ONE OF YOU FROM YOUR
NEWSPAPER, OR YOUR TELEVISION

SHOWS, IF YOU HAD ONLY 10%
RATINGS, THEY WOULD BE LOOKING

FOR NEW MANAGEMENT.

SO I THINK THERE IS A WAY TO
MAKE THINGS HAPPEN.

I HAVE DONE IT BEFORE, I HAVE A
GOOD TRACK RECORD.

I KNOW HIS PARTY IS SORELY
DIVIDED, IT'S NOT JUST DEMOCRATS

AND REPUBLICANS, IT'S
REPUBLICANS AND TEA PARTY

REPUBLICANS.

BUT THERE'S STILL A MAJORITY OF
REPUBLICANS THAT ARE

DISINTERESTED ENOUGH THAT WOULD
HELP US, BECAUSE I THINK --

WE CAN NOT LET PEOPLE CONTINUE
TO STAFER TO MINIMUM WAGE.

WE CAN'T LET WOMEN CONTINUE TO
TRY TO RAISE TWO KIDS ON $7.25

AN HOUR.

IT'S CRIMINAL FOR WHAT THESE
GUYS ARE DOING FOR THE PEOPLE

THEY WERE ELECTED TO SERVE.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON DID YOU
WANT TO RESPOND?

IT.

>> WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE
MR. STALLINGS GO BACK AND WORK

IN CONGRESS WITH THE REPUBLICANS
HE'S CALLING CRIMINALS AND

EVERYTHING ELSE.

THAT'S NOT HOW YOU REACH ACROSS
THE AISLE.

I'VE BEEN DOING THE HARD WORK OF
REACHING ACROSS THE AISLE, I WAS

ON A COMMITTEE THAT WORKS IN A
BIPARTISAN FASHION TO FORM THE

APPROPRIATION BILLS.

WE TRY TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS
OF DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.

IT'S THE MOST BIPARTISAN
COMMITTEE IN CONGRESS.

AND IT'S ALSO THE COMMITTEE
THAT'S ACTUALLY DOING THE WORK,

THE HARD WORK OF TRYING TO
ADDRESS THE DEBT AND DEFICIT IN

THIS COUNTRY.

WE'VE REDUCED SPENDING OVER THE
LAST FOUR YEARS WE'VE BEEN IN

THE MAJORITY.

SO I KNOW HOW TO WORK IN A
BIPARTISAN MANNER AND I HAVE

DONE THAT.

AND I KNOW HOW TO STAND UP FOR
THE PRINCIPLES THE PEOPLE OF

IDAHO ELECTED ME FOR.

>> WE HAVE A RELATED QUESTION.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS, YOU
SAID THE PRIMARY CAMPAIGN

BETWEEN CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON AND
BRIAN SMITH WAS THE NASTIEST

YOU'VE SEEN, BUT YOU'VE ALSO
SAID THINGS THAT PEOPLE COULD

TAKE AS NASTY.

LIKE SAYING REPUBLICANS ACTIVELY
WANT TO PUNISH POOR PEOPLE,

THINGS LIKE THAT.

WHY IT IS OK FOR TO YOU LOBBY
THOSE GRENADES AT CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON BUT NOT FOR HIM TO LOB
THEM AT BRIAN SMITH?

>> I HAVE NO MALICE TOWARDS
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

I JUST THINK HE NEEDS TO BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE.

I'VE HAD A COUPLE PEOPLE TEXT ME
AND SAY I WAS TOO MEAN TO HIM

LAST TIME.

I WANT IT CLEAR DISCRIMINATED
NOT PUT HIM IN THE HOSPITAL.

KIDNEY STONES DID THAT.

I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A --
>> OK, LET'S --

LET'S MOVE ON FROM THAT.

>> I BELIEVE MY COMMENTS HAVE
BEEN ABOUT THE PRODUCT, NOT

ABOUT INDIVIDUALS.

WHEN MR. SIMPSON REFERS TO BRIAN
CLARK AS A DEBT COLLECTOR OF

WIDOWS AND VETERANS, THAT WAS
NONSENSE.

NONSENSE.

IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

YET WHEN I SAY CONGRESS PUNISHES
POOR PEOPLE, I THINK YOU CAN

BUILD A TREMENDOUS CASE, WHY
ELSE WOULD YOU DENY 176,000

PEOPLE MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES?

WHY WOULD YOU KEEP THEM LIVING
IN THAT KIND OF SQUALOR HAVING

TO WORK TWO JOBS, HAVING TO
SPEND MOST OF THEIR LIFE GOING

TO AND FROM WORK AND PUTTING
THEIR KIDS IN DAY CARE?

WHEN A SIMPLE VOTE OF WHICH
THERE ARE THE VOTES TO DO,

MR. SIMPSON AND MR. BOEHNER
WON'T THREAT COME TO THE

FLOORMENT WE COULD RAISE THE
MINIMUM WAGE IN A MOMENT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO CALL
THEM OTHER THAN CRUEL AND

INFLICTING PAIN AND SUFFERING ON
THE PEOPLE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO

SERVE.

>> HE'S BEEN THE ONLY INDIVIDUAL
IN THIS CAMPAIGN, THREE TIMES BY

THREE PAPERS BEEN CRITICIZED FOR
USING LANGUAGE THAT WAS PROBABLY

INAPPROPRIATE.

WHEN YOU SAY THE REASON I
VOTED --

THAT I HAVEN'T VOTED TO INCREASE
THE MAJOR MY OPPOSITION TO IT IS

PROBABLY BECAUSE THE
PRESIDENT'S --

I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

THAT'S OUT OF BOUNDS.

HE SAID THINGS LIKE THAT
REPEATEDLY, THAT FRANKLY AREN'T

TRUE.

>> THE NEXT QUESTION IS FROM
BRIAN CLARK FOR CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON, YOU'RE
CLOSE WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL

LEADERSHIP, NOTABLY WITH JOHN
BOEHNER, THE HOUSE SPEAKER.

I IMAGINE IF WE CHECKED YOUR
PHONE YOU'D HAVE HIM ON SPEED

DIAL, HE WOULD PROBABLY BE UNDER
JOHN.

DESPITE IN THE MAJORITY OF
IDAHOANS DON'T TRUST CONGRESS OR

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THEY
DON'T BELIEVE YOU AND YOUR

FRIENDS CAN SOLVE THE BIGs
PROBLEMS FACING THIS COUNTRY.

HOW DO YOU AND SPEAKER BOEHNER
PLAN TO GET THE TRUST OF

IDAHOANS BACK?

>> THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE
MISTRUSTFUL OF CONGRESS AND THE

UNABILITY TO GET ANYTHING DONE.

FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, FOUR
YEARS IT'S BEEN VERY, VERY

DIFFICULT TO GET ANYTHING DONE
IN CONGRESS.

AS I SAID, WE'VE PASSED --
WE CONTINUE TO DO OUR WORK IN

THE HOUSE.

WE PASSED 370 BILLS ON THE
SENATOR'S DESK THAT THE SENATE

WON'T PICK UP.

WE'VE PASSED APPROPRIATION BILLS
THAT I SERVE ON, WE'VE PASSED

ALL OF THE APPROPRIATION BILLS
THROUGH THE FULL COMMITTEE, AND

SEVEN OF THEM ON THE FLOOR.

GUESS HOW MANY THE SENATE'S
DONE?

GUESS HOW MANY THE SENATE
APPROPRIATION BILLS HAVE PASS IN

THE LAST FOUR YEARS?

ZERO.

THEY'RE NOT WORKING.

IT IS HARD TO GET A PRODUCT OUT
AND TO DO OUR JOB WHEN THE

SENATE IS FRANKLY DYSFUNCTIONAL.

>> DID YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO
THAT?

>> I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT WE
HAVE A SENATE TO BLAME.

THE FACT THAT 52 OF THOSE BILLS
WE SENT TO THE SENATE ARE BILLS

TO REPEAL OBAMACARE.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A ROCKET
SCIENTIST TO REALIZE THAT'S NOT

GOING TO PASS THE SENATE, AND IF
IT DID, THE PRESIDENT WOULD VETO

IT.

HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU HAVE TO
REPEAL SOMETHING LIKE THAT?

I THINK THERE'S A NUMBER OF
BILLS TO ELIMINATE EPA, TO

CHANGE SOME OF THE REGULATORY
AGENCIES, SO THEY'RE KINDER TO

THEIR BUSINESS FRIENDS, TO DEAL
WITH THE TAX STRUCTURE SO YOU

GET MORE MONEY TO THE RICH.

AFL THOSE ARE ISSUES THEY
PASSED.

AND YET NONE OF THEM ARE GOING
TO PASS THE SENATE BECAUSE THAT

IS NOT WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
WANT.

AND THERE ARE SOME DYSFUNCTION
IN THE JALAL TALABANI BUT

NOTHING LIKE WHAT WE HAVE IN THE
HOUSE, WHEN YOU HAVE A MAJORITY

OF PEOPLE THAT WOULD SUPPORT
RAISING MINIMUM WAGE, THAT WOULD

SUPPORT IMMIGRATION REFORM, WHEN
YOU HAVE THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE

THAT WOULD VOTE TO GIVE WOMEN
EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK, AND

YET THEY WON'T DEAL WITH THOSE.

I WISH THAT THIS GROUP THANE
STEAD OF LOOKING AT THE SENATE

AS THEIR PROBLEM WOULD LOOK IN
HOUSE, BECAUSE AS LONG AS YOU

LET 40 TEA PARTY REPUBLICANS
FIGHT THE STUFFINGS OUT OF THESE

GUYS YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANY
KIND OF LEGISLATION BECAUSE EACH

ONE OF THEM, I CALLED A FRIEND
OF MINE THAT BOTH OF US KNOW, I

ASKED FOR HIS SUPPORT AND HE
SAID I CAN'T, SIMPSON IS TOO

GOOD FOR MY BUSINESS.

AND I SAID THIS IS THE WORST
CONGRESS EVER, AND HE SAID I

KNOW.

SIMPSON IS BETTER THAN HIS
RECORD REFLECTS, HE'S JUST

AFRAID.

I WOULD NEVER STAND STILL FOR
THAT KIND OF CALLING OF ME,

BECAUSE I'M NOT AFRAID, I'M NOT
INTIMIDATE AND I DON'T WORRY

ABOUT A PRIMARY ELECTION BECAUSE
I HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS

THAN TO WORRY ABOUT REELECTION.

>> THE NEXT QUESTION --
IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

WE HAVE TO --
IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS FOR
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON FROM MARCIA

FRANKLIN.

>> ASK ME THE SAME QUESTION, I
NEED TO RESPOND TO THAT.

>> YOU'LL HAVE TO COMPROMISE I
GUESS.

BOTH OF YOU TALK ELOQUENTLY, WAX
ELOQUENTLY ABOUT YOUR ABILITY TO

WORK IN A BIPARTISAN FASHION AND
TO COMPROMISE.

CAN YOU GIVE US A SPECIFIC
EXAMPLE WHERE THAT WAS REALLY

HARD FOR YOU, WHERE YOU REALLY
HAD TO YESES WEST NILE YOUR OWN

IDEALS IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT
COMPROMISE?

I'M THINKING OF THE REAL BIG
ISSUES HERE.

>> VOTING ON TARP.

THE REST OF THE DELEGATION VOTED
AGAINST TARP.

TWO OF THE DELEGATION VOTED
AGAINST BUT LARRY CRAIG AND I

VOTED FOR IT.

WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE ECONOMY
AT THE TIME AND WHAT ECONOMISTS

WERE TELLING US, THE ECONOMY WAS
GOING THROUGH THE FLOOR 23 WE

DIDN'T DO ANYTHING SOMETHING.

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN THE GREAT
DEPRESSION ONLY MANY TIMES WORSE

FROM WHAT EVERYBODY SAID.

IT WAS NOT A POPULAR VOTE.

I'VE BEEN WILLING TO TAKE VOTES
THAT I THINK ARE IN THE BEST

INTEREST OF THE STATE AND THE
COUNTRY AND HAD THE COURAGE,

CONTRARY TO WHAT MR. STALLINGS
SAID, TO TAKE SOME OF THOSE

TOUGH VOTES THAT SOMETIMES GO
CONTRARY TO MY PARTY.

BECAUSE I THOUGHT THEY WERE IN
THE BEST INTEREST OF THE STATE

AND THE COUNTRY.

I CAN --
THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF

THINGS I'M WORKING ON THAT
WILL --

THAT A LOT OF MEMBERS IN MY
PARTY DON'T AGREE WITH.

THERE ARE MEMBERS OF MY PARTY
THAT DON'T AGREE WITH ME BECAUSE

WE HAVE TO RAISE REVENUE THE WAY
YOU RAISE REVENUE IS BY LOWERING

TAX RATES AND EXPANDING THE
BASE.

THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT.

YOU CAN'T HAVE THE HIGHEST
CORPORATE TAX RATE IN THE WORLD

AND BE COMPETITIVE.

SO --
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE ON THE

OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE THAT
DON'T LIKE IT BECAUSE IT

INVOLVES ENTITLEMENT REFORM.

SO I'VE BEEN WORKING IN A
BIPARTISAN WAY AND ANYONE THAT

SAYS THAT RICHARD NEEDS TO CALL
HIS COLLEAGUES BACK IN

WASHINGTON.

>> FIRST OF ALL, I THINK I
CONGRATULATE HIM FOR THE TARP

VOTE.

WOULD I HAVE DON'T SAME THING.

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS, TARP WAS
REQUESTED BY MR. BUSH.

I WOULD BET $100 THAT IF OBAMA
HAD ASKED FOR TARP HE WOULD HAVE

BEEN FLIEG FLEEING FROM THAT
VOTE AND SAID ABSOLUTELY NOT.

REGARDLESS OF THE STATUS OF THE
ECONOMY.

BECAUSE THIS IS NOT ABOUT
PRINCIPLES, THIS IS ABOUT

PARTIES AND PARTISANSHIP.

AND IF OBAMA SUGGESTS IT'S
NIGHT, THEY'LL VOTE IT'S DAY.

>> WHEN HAVE YOU COMPROMISED?

>> I HAVE COMPROMISE ORDER
VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE LEGISLATION

I WORK ORDER WHEN I WAS IN
CONGRESS.

WHEN I DID THE --
I HAD TO WORK WITH THE STATES, I

THISH TO WORK WITH THE INTERIOR
COMMITTEE AND WE HAD TO

COMPROMISE.

JIM JONES, WHO HAS BEEN ATTORNEY
GENERAL SAID THESE ARE THE

THINGS WE NEED.

I DIDN'T LIKE THEM.

BUT SITTING DOWN WITH JIM
MCCLURE, WE IRONED THEM OUT AND

CAME OUT WITH AN AGREEMENT THAT
IS PRECEDENT.

IT BECOMES A WAY THAT MANY
STATES ARE LOOKING AT HOW TO

DEAL WITH WATER RIGHTS IN WHICH
YOU HAVE TRIBES, STATE, WATER

USERS, AND THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT INVOLVED.

YOU CAN MAKE COMPROMISES BECAUSE
YOU HAVE TO GO INTO THE SYSTEM

UNDERSTANDING YOU'RE NOT GOING
TO GET THE WHOLE PIE.

AND IF YOU GET JUST A PIECE OF
IT, THAT'S MOVING THE SYSTEM

FORWARD.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.

>> THERE WERE OTHER ISSUES LIKE
THAT, ON THE PAY RAISE BILL,

LIKE SOME OF THOSE THINGS.

BUT I VOTED FOR THEM BECAUSE I
THOUGHT IT WAS IN THE BEST

INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF
IDAHO.

>> FOR CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS O.

IMMIGRATION FROM MARCIA
FRANKLIN.

>> WELL, I'M PICKING UP ON THIS
THEME.

ASIDE FROM THE FACT BOTH OF YOU
AGREE SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE

DONE, LET'S STAY ON THE
COMPROMISE THEME HERE.

WHERE DO YOU BELIEVE THE TWO OF
YOU HAVE AGREEMENT ON

IMMIGRATION REFORM?

WHERE IS AN AREA YOU TWO CAN
COME TOGETHER AND COMPROMISE?

>> IF YOU CAN KEEP YOUR ANSWER
BRIEF.

>> I THINK WE DO AGREE WITH A
COUPLE OF EXCEPTIONS.

I THINK WE BOTH AGREE THAT WE
SHOULD NOT TRY TO DEPORT 12 OR

13 OR 14 MILLION UNDOCUMENTED
WORKERS.

THAT IS INSANE, IT WOULD DESTROY
A BIG PART OF IDAHO'S ECONOMY.

I THINK YOU WILL NOT GET ANY
RESISTANCE FROM HIM ON THAT.

I THINK WHERE WE DIFFER IS I
WANT TO PASS THE CITIZEN 14EU7.

HE SAYS HE WANTS TO KEEP THEM
HERE AND LET THEM CONTINUE TO

WORK AND STAND IN LINE FOR
ANOTHER 15 OR 20 OR 25 YEARS FOR

CITIZENSHIP.

WE DON'T HAVE TWO CLASSES OF
CITIZENS IN THIS COUNTRY.

WE DON'T HAVE THOSE WITH POWER
AND THOSE RESTRICTED AS WORKERS

ONLY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SAME QUESTION FOR YOU,
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

>> I SUSPECT WE AGREE ON BORDER
SECURITY BUT FIRST LET ME SAY

WHEN HE SAYS THAT I PROBABLY
WOULDN'T VOTE FOR TARP IF

PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT, I
VOTED TO OVERRIDE PRESIDENT

BUSH'S VETO OF S-CHIP.

SO I'VE WORKED IN A BIPARTISAN
WAY AND HIS STATEMENTS TO THE

CONTRARY ARE BULL.

BUT I THINK THE BORDER SECURITY
IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO DO FIRST

AND WE PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT.

BUT THE REALITY IS YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO DEPORT 14 MILLION

ILLEGAL ALIENS.

THAT'S THE REALITY.

WE WOULD BE DEVASTATED TO OUR
ECONOMY.

WHAT DO YOU DO IN THE MEANTIME?

I WOULD SAY YOU GIVE THEM GREEN
CARD STATUS SO THEY CAN STAY AND

WORK AND THEN YOU ALLOW THEM IF
THEY CHOOSE TO BECOME CITIZENS,

TO APPLY TO THE REGULAR PROCESS,
THEY DON'T HAVE TO LEAVE THE

COUNTRY TO APPLY, BUT THEY APPLY
THROUGHOUT REGULAR PROCESS.

YOU CANNOT GIVE SOMEONE AN
ADVANTAGE FOR COMING ILLEGALLY.

YOU CANNOT REWARD ILLEGAL
BEHAVIOR OR YOU WILL JUST

ENCOURAGE MORE ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR
JUST AS HAPPENED IN 1986 WHEN

MR. STALLINGS VOTED FOR SIMPSON
ME SOLELY THAT LEGALIZED ALL

THESE PEOPLE AND WE GOT MORE AND
MORE.

THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEM.

IT DIDN'T.

BECAUSE WE REWARDED ILLEGAL
IMMIGRATION.

>> WE HAVE A FOLLOW-UP ON THAT,
THE SAME QUESTION FOR BOTH OF

YOU.

START WITH CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

>> SO HOW DO YOU FASHION AN
IMMIGRATION POLICY THAT IS FAIR

BOTH TIME GRANTS WHO CAME HERE
LEGALLY BUT ENSURES A SUPPLY OF

WORKERS FOR AMERICAN BUSINESSES
WHILE AT THE SAME TIME STOPPING

THE ABUSE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
WHO LET'S FACE IT, SOMETIMES

THEY'RE UNDERPAID AND THEY HAVE
NO VOTING RIGHTS.

>> WELL, AS I SAID, I THINK YOU
NEED TO BRING THEM OUT OF THE

SHADOWS.

THEY HAVEN'T BE IN FEAR OF BEING
DEPORTED EVERY DAY, AND PEOPLE

CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM IF
THEY ARE UNDER THOSE SORTS OF

CIRCUMSTANCES.

SO I THINK THAT YOU GIVE THEM
GREEN CARD STATUS SO THEY CAN

STAY AND WORK, PAY TAXES, THEY
CAN DO ALL OF THAT KIND OF STUFF

AND THEN IF THEY WANT TO BECOME
CITIZENS THEY GO THROUGH THE

REGULAR PROCESS LIKE EVERYBODY
ELSE HAS TO DO.

BUT YOU DON'T REWARD ILLEGAL
IMMIGRATION.

I THINK YOU.

>>> REACH A COMPROMISE, AND I
THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL SEE

WHEN THE NEXT CONGRESS TAKES UP
IMMIGRATION REFORM, AND THE

HOUSE IS GOING TO TAKE IT UP.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS.

>> FIRST OF ALL, THERE IS NO
REGULAR WAY OF EMIGRATION --

OF IMMIGRATION TO GET
CITIZENSHIP.

IT REALLY DOESN'T EXIST THERE.

ARE DIFFERENT STEPS AND PHASES
BUT FOR THESE UNDOCUMENTED

FOLKS, IT CAN BE ANOTHER 20
YEARS.

IT'S JUST A HODGEPODGE OF
STUPIDITY.

MOST OF THE PEOPLE DON'T COME
ACROSS THE BORDER SO BORDER

SECURITY IS TALKING ABOUT REALLY
IS NOT A MAJOR ISSUE.

THE SENATE PUT TOGETHER ONE
THAT'S NOT BAD, MOST OF THE

UNDOCUMENTED COME HERE ON
STUDENT VISAS OR WORK VISA, AND

JUST DON'T GO HOME.

I THINK WE NEED A BETTER SYSTEM
FOR TRACKING.

I DON'T THINK PUTTING IN MORE
BORDER GUARDS IS GOING TO MAKE A

DIFFERENCE.

I THINK YOU NEED TO DO A BETTER
JOB OF TRACKING THEM.

BUT WE'VE NEVER DONE THAT, NOT
AS THOROUGHLY AS WE SHOULD.

THE IDEA WE LET THEM STAY AND
WORK IS A BOOM TO THE

AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY.

THEN THEY CAN WORK THEM TO DEATH
AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THEM

HAVING POLITICAL CLOUT.

HE'S RIGHT, THEY HAVE BROKEN THE
LAW, BUT THE LAW THEY BROKE WAS

A MISDEMEANOR AND THERE ARE NO
JAIL SENTENCES FOR MOST

MISDEMEANORS.

SO YOU HAVE A PENALTY, IT MIGHT
BE A FINE, IT MIGHT BE A TWO OR

THREE-YEAR WAITING PERIOD, A
YEAR OR TWO OF PUBLIC SERVICE.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT
BUT THE FIRST GROUP YOU HAVE TO

DEAL WITH ARE THE DREAMERS,
BECAUSE MR. SIMPSON WHO CLAIMS

TO BE IN SUPPORT OF THE
DREAMERS, THESE ARE THE FOLKS

WHO CAME OVER AS CHILDREN, HE
VOTED TO CUT THE FUNDING OF THE

AGENT STAY THAT HANDLES THEM AND
AT THE SAME TIME INCREASE

FUNDING FOR DEPORTATION.

SO I THINK WE'RE SEEING A LITTLE
BIT OF A SOFT SHOE IN WHICH HE

SAYS I'M FOR THIS, BUT I'M GOING
TO VOTE FOR SOMETHING ELSE.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON DID YOU
WANT TO RESPOND?

>> THE REALITY IS THE EXPANSION
OF THE DACA PROGRAM OBAMA

ADMINISTRATION DID, DID IT
WITHOUT CONSULTING CONGRESS,

JUST LIKE HE SAYS AFTER THIS
ELECTION.

WHY WOULDN'T HE DO IT BEFORE THE
ELECTION?

BECAUSE HE KNOWS PEOPLE WOULD
REJECT WHAT HE'S GOING TO DO BUT

LET'S GOING TO LEGALIZE A WHOLE
BUNCH OF PEOPLE AS SOON AS THIS

ELECTION --
USING HIS SKEETIVE POWER AND --

EXECUTIVE POWER AND CHALLENGE
CONGRESS TO TRY AND STOP HIM.

AND THAT'S GOING TO BE A FIGHT
AS SOON AS THE ELECTION IS OVER.

>> YOU HAD A FOLLOW-UP GHE.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON, I WANT
TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND YOU

CLEARLY, ARE YOU PROPOSING THEN
THAT FOR PEOPLE WHO ENTERED THE

COUNTRY ILLEGALLY WHRRKS THEY
HAVE A JOB HERE OR WHATEVER

THEY'RE DOING HERE, THERE WOULD
BE SOME SYSTEM FOR THEM TO GET A

GREEN CARD WITHOUT ACTUALLY
LEAVING THE COUNTRY AND THEN

REENTERING LEGALLY?

>> RIGHT.

>> OK.

ANY OTHER SPECIFICS YOU CAN TELL
ME ON AN IMMIGRATION POLICY THAT

WOULD ALLOW --
HOW WOULD THEY GET TO THE

CITIZENSHIP?

THAT'S A BIG STEP.

FROM GOING TO A 10-YEAR GREEN
CARD TO GOING TO CITIZENSHIP.

>> YOU WOULD ALLOW THEM TO APPLY
FOR CITIZENSHIP --

NOW F. THEY APPLY FOR
CITIZENSHIP TODAY THEY'VE GOT TO

LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

AND APPLY IN THE COUNTRY FROM
WHICH THEY CAME.

AND GET AT THE BACK OF THE LINE.

REMEMBER, WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE ACROSS THIS WORLD WANTING

TO BECOME AMERICANS AND THEY'RE
DOING IT THE LEGAL WAY.

THEY'RE APPLYING THROUGH THEIR
COUNTRY, AND SO FORTH.

SO WHY ARE WE GOING TO
DISADVANTAGE THEM BY GIVING AN

ADVANTAGE TO PEOPLE WHO CAME
ILLEGALLY?

THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.

YOU'RE REWARDING ILLEGAL
BEHAVIOR.

WHAT I WOULD DO IS SAY, OK, IF
YOU WANT TO BECOME A CITIZEN,

AND NOT ALL OF THESE PEOPLE WANT
TO BECOME CITIZENS, I'VE TALKED

TO A LOT OF THEM WHO SAY I JUST
WANT TO WORK, TO NOT FEAR BEING

DEPORTED.

BUT WHAT YOU WOULD DO IS SAY IF
YOU WANT TO APPLY FOR

CITIZENSHIP YOU DON'T HAVE TO
LEAVE, YOU CAN STAY HERE UNDER

YOUR GREEN CARD STATUS, BUT YOU
APPLY JUST AS IF YOU WERE IN

THAT EXPUN GOING TO COME THIS
THIS COUNTRY.

>> THE NEXT QUESTION IS FOR
CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS FROM

MARCIA FRANKLIN.

>> I'M --
THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN IS

SUPPOSEDLY OVER, THE WAR IN
IRAQ, NOW WE HAVE POTENTIAL

THREAT FROM THE SO-CALLED
ISLAMIC STATE RISING.

WE COULD BE ON THE PRECIPICE OF
YOU KNOW, ANOTHER WAR AT LEAST

MILITARY ACTION.

TAKE US THROUGHOUT STEPS THAT GO
THROUGH YOUR MIND IF YOU WERE

CALLED UPON TO MAKE A DECISION
ABOUT ENGAGE OUR TROOPS AGAIN.

>> I WOULD BE GRATEFUL IF
CONGRESS WOULD DEAL WITH THIS

ISSUE IN WHICH THEY HAVE FAILED.

THEY FLED WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA
SAID PLEASE DEBATE THE ISSUE AND

GIVE US SOME AUTHORITY.

THE PRESIDENT OFFERED TWO
POSSIBILITIES.

HE SAID FIRST OF ALL WE'D LIKE
TO SELECT THE GOOD SYRIANS AND

ARM THEM.

AND THEY DID DEAL WITH THAT.

I'D PROBABLY HAVE VOTED THE SAME
WAY.

THE SECOND ONE TO GIVE THE
PRESIDENT AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT

HE'S DOING IN SYRIA, WHEN THE
BRITISH DECIDED TO MAKE THAT

DECISION THEY CALLED PARLIAMENT
IN TO DEBATE IT AND THEY HAD A

POLICY.

OUR GUYS WENT HOME.

THEY DIDN'T STAY AROUND.

THEY'VE GIVEN THE PRESIDENT NO
AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT HE'S DOING.

HE'S OPERATING UNDER LAWS PASSED
IN 2001-2002 DEALING WITH IRAQ.

>> I'M CURIOUS, ASIDE FROM YOUR
CRITICISM OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED,

HOW WOULD YOU PERSONALLY MAKE
YOUR DECISION SHOULD YOU BE IN

THE SAME SITUATION?

>> WOULD I DEMAND A
CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT.

WOULD I DEMAND CONGRESS DO WHAT
IS CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED TO

DO.

THAT IS DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES.

CONGRESS AND THE CONSTITUTION
DEALS WITH WAR.

AND I WOULD HAVE JUST RAISE HELL
TO GET CONGRESS TO COME TOGETHER

AND DECIDE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO
DO ABOUT THIS.

MAYBE THE PRESIDENT IS RIGHT,
MAYBE HE'S WRONG, I DON'T KNOW.

UNLESS WE HAVE A FORMAL DEBATE
IN WHICH WE'D BRING IN THE

EXPERTS AND LISTEN TO THE BEST
MINDS IN THE COUNTRY, GIVE US

INSTRUCTIONS, I WOULD BE VERY
RELUCTANT TO ALLOW THE PRESIDENT

TO CONTINUE WITH THIS POLICY.

I THINK IT'S WRONG.

I THINK IT'S ILLEGAL AND I'M
CRITICAL OF THE CONGRESS OF

MR. BOEHNER AND MR. SIMPSON OF
BREAKING AND RUNNING RATHER THAN

DEALING WITH M THIS MASSIVE
ISSUE OF WAR AND PEACE.

MR. BOEHNER HAS SAID MAYBE WE
NEED BOOTS ON THE GROUND.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S
EXCITING.

I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SIMPSON
AGREE WAS, THAT BUT I WOULD

TOTALLY OPPOSE BOOTS ON THE
GROUND OF AMERICANS IN THAT

BATTLE, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT OUR
FIGHT AT THIS POINT.

>> LET'S FIND OUT WHAT
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON THINKS.

>> FIRST OF ALL, PRESIDENT OBAMA
NEVER ASKED US TO TAKE IT UP AND

GIVE HIM AUTHORITY.

EVERY PRESIDENT HAS BELIEVED
THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY UNDER

THE AUTHORIZATION TO USE
MILITARY FORCE.

UNDER THEIR POWERS AS THE
SUPREME COMMANDER TO ENGAGE IN

THESE THINGS.

CONGRESS HAS OFTEN TIMES PASTED
AUTHORIZATIONS FOR USE OF

MILITARY FORCE AND THE PRESIDENT
HAS SAID THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR

YOUR SUPPORT BUT I DON'T NEED
THIS, I CAN DO IT ON MY OWN.

I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION OF
DEBATE.

I THINK CONGRESS SHOULD HAVE
DEBATED IT AND CONGRESS SHOULD

DEBATE WHEN IT WE GET BACK AND
THE AUTHORIZATION TO HELP THE

FREE SYRIAN REBELS WHOEVER THE
HECK THAT IS, RUNS OUT ON

DECEMBER 11th.

SO THAT --
>> WHAT'S GOING THROUGH YOUR

HEAD RIGHT NOW --
>> WHAT WOULD I DO.

>> WHAT FACTORS ARE YOU
CONSIDERING?

>> FIRST YOU HAVE TO DECIDE
WHETHER ISIL IS A TRUE THREAT TO

THE UNITED STATES.

ARE THEY BAD?

THERE'S BAD PEOPLE ALL OVER THE
WORLD.

DO WE NEED TO GET RID OF THEM?

YEAH, WE DO.

YOU CAN'T HAVE PEOPLE BEHEADING
AMERICANS AND OTHER PEOPLE TODAY

THEY KILLED, I DON'T KNOW, 50
PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY WERE MORE

SUPPORTIVE OF THE UNITED STATES
AND STUFF.

WE NEED TO GET RID OF THEM.

HOW DO YOU AS A PRESIDENT GIVE A
SPEECH AND SAY THESE ARE BAD

PEOPLE, THESE ARE AN IMMEDIATE
THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES AND

WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUT ANY BOOTS
ON THE GROUND.

WE'LL BOMB THEM AND WE HOPE
SOMEBODY ELSE COMES IN WITH

BOOTS ON THE GROUND F THEY ARE
INDEED A THREAT TO THE UNITED

STATES, AND THE INTERESTS OF THE
UNITED STATES, THEN DO YOU

WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO GET RID
OF THEM.

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON, THE
NEXT QUESTION IS FROM BRIAN TO

CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON, YOU AND
OTHER CONGRESSIONAL REPUBLICANS

HAVE PUT A LOT OF FOCUS ON THE
DEBT AND DEFICIT IN RECENT

YEARS.

RUNAWAY SPENDING, THINGS LIKE
THIS THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET

OFFICE THIS YEAR PROJECTS THE
BUDGET DEFICIT WILL BE LESS THAN

3% OF GDP AND LESS OF A
PERCENTAGE THAN OVER THE AVERAGE

OF THE LAST 40 YEARS.

IT'S EXPECTED TO BE LOWER NEXT
YEAR.

WHY SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED ABOUT
THE DEAF IT?

>> BECAUSE AT $17.5 TRILLION, WE
SPEND $250 BILLION EVERY YEAR

JUST PAYING INTEREST ON THE
DEBT.

WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO
FIX THE ROADS AND BRIDGES IN

THIS COUNTRY, WE DON'T HAVE
ENOUGH MONEY TO DO OTHER THINGS

IN THIS COUNTRY, AND WE PAY
$250 BILLION IN INTEREST.

WHO'S GOING TO BE SADDLED WITH
THAT?

YOUNG PEOPLE.

WE CAN'T CONTINUE DOWN THIS ROAD
OF SPENDING MONEY WE DON'T HAVE

BORROWING IT FROM CHINA TO DO
OTHER THINGS.

IT IS AS COMMANDER HAYDEN SAID,
THE BIGGEST NATIONAL SECURITY

ISSUE THAT FACES US IS OUR DEBT
AND DEFICIT.

WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TODAY
IF A WORLD WAR II SORT OF

SCENARIO WERE TO BREAK OUT, WE
WERE ABLE TO MORE LIES THIS

COUNTRY AND USE THE RESOURCES
BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DEBT

AND DEFICIT WE HAD AT THAT TIME.

THAT WE HAVE AT THIS TIME BACK
THEN.

WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO
MOBILIZE THOSE FORCES AND THE

AMERICAN ECONOMY BECAUSE OF THE
DEBT AND DEFICIT.

IT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT FACE
24-G EXPUN OUR FUTURE.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS?

>> I'M SORT OF A JOHNNY COME
LATELY ANSWER THAT WE'VE HEARD.

BECAUSE WHEN BILL CLINTON LEFT
OFFICE, WE NOT ONLY HAD MOST OF

THE DEBT REDUCED BUT WE WERE
STARTING TO LIVE WITH SURPLUSES.

AND MR. BUSH AND MR. SIMPSON GOT
AHOLD OF THAT AND BLEW THAT

RIGHT OUT OF THE WATER.

SO WE TBRENT A SURPLUS TO MESSY
DEBTS IN THE FIRST AND SECOND

GEORGE BUSH TERMS.

THEY FIRST OF ALL PASSED TWO
MASSIVE TAX CUTS THAT DIDN'T

BENEFIT YOU AND I, BUT IT WAS
VERY BENEFICIAL TO THE RICH.

MR. SIMPSON DIDN'T FLINCH.

VOTED FOR THOSE.

THEN WE FOUGHT TWO WARS, DECIDED
WE DON'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THEM,

THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE BUDGET
RELATED SO YOU FIGHT TWO WARS IN

AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ, AND DON'T
COUNT THE COST OF THAT.

AND THEN YOU PASS UNDER BUSH'S
MISLEADING RHETORIC THAT THIS

THING IS NOT GOING TO COST AS
MUCH AND IN FACT THE REPUBLICANS

REFUSED TO EVEN DEBATE THE COST
OF THIS PLAN OR PART D OF

MEDICARE, THE DRUG CONNECTION TO
IT, AND SO NOW WE TURN A SURPLUS

BILL CLINTON LEFT TO A DEFICIT
NO.

KIT CRISP ABOUT HOW THIS IS
GOING TO HURT US, BECAUSE THEY

BLEW UP THE SURPLUS AND TURNED
THIS PATHWAY INTO PROSPERITY

THAT WE'RE ON, INTO THIS MASSIVE
DEFICIT.

WHEN BUSH LEFT OFFICE HE LEFT US
IN A MASSIVE 40E8 IN WHICH HE

SAID WAS SIMILAR TO THE GREAT
DEPRESSION, AND SO WE PASSED

TARP AND CONTINUED TO SPEND TO
GET OUT OF IT.

WE ARE TURNING IT AROUND AND IT
IS SERIOUS, BUT WHEN HE PONTIFF

INDICATES ABOUT HOW THE DEFICIT
IS KILLING US, HE JUST NEEDS

LOOK IN THE MIRROR BECAUSE HE IS
AS MUCH RESPONSIBLE AS THAT

DEFICIT AS ANY MODERN
POLITICIAN.

>> CONGRESSMAN DID YOU WANT TO
RESPOND?

>> OH, YEAH.

OH, YEAH.

THAT'S PART OF HISTORY, AND
IT'S --

FOR BEING A HISTORY TEACHER YOU
SURE FORGET ABOUT HISTORY.

WHEN CLINTON WAS STARTING TO
LEAVE OFFICE AT THE END OF HIS

TERM THE ECONOMY WAS GOING
THROUGH THE FLOOR AND THEN WE

HAD A LITTLE EVENT, WE HAD A
LITTLE EVENT, IT'S CALLED 9-11.

AND OUR ECONOMY WENT REALLY
THROUGH THE FLOOR.

AND WE --
AND CONSEQUENTLY WHEN THE

ECONOMY GOES THROUGH THE FLOOR
WE DON'T TAKE IN AS MUCH

REVENUE.

AND WE HAD PASSED TAX CUTS PRIOR
TO ALL OF THAT HAPPENING.

I ACTUALLY VOTED AGAINST THE
EXTENSION OF THE TAX CUTS AT ONE

TIME BECAUSE I DIDN'T THINK IT
WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO FOR

OUR ECONOMY, BUT HE HAS A
TENDENCY TO FORGET ALL THESE

THINGS.

I SAT ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
WHEN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND

HE'S RIGHT, NEVER PUT THE COST
OF THE WAR IN THEIR BUDGET WHEN

THEY CAME TO US.

GUESS WHO CRITICIZED HIM?

I DID.

AND EVENTUALLY THEY STARTED
PUTTING COSTS OF THE WAR IN

THEIR ANNUAL BUDGET.

BUT THEY ALWAYS SAID THAT WAS
SUPPLEMENTAL SPENDING THEY COULD

ASK FOR.

SO I'VE BEEN CONSISTENT ON IN,
AND IT HAS BEEN BOTH REPUBLICANS

AND DEMOCRATS THAT HAVE CREATED
THE SITUATION WE'RE IN, AND WE

NEED TO GET OUT OF A SITUATION
AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE TOUGH

VOTES.

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS FOR
CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON.

>> SHIFTING GEARS A LITTLE HERE,
WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW WITH

ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES IN
FACING IDAHO SPECIFICALLY,

WASHINGTON, DC WEIGHS IN ON
QUITE HEAVILY AND THAT'S THE

ISSUE OF WOLVES.

HOW MANY --
WHERE DO YOU THINK WE'RE AT WITH

THIS AND WITH THE WOLVES --
THE NUMBERS OF WOLVES WE HAVE

HERE AND SHOULD THE STATE BE
CONTINUED --

SHOULD THE STATE OF IDAHO BE
ALLOWED TO CONTINUE MANAGING

WOLVES AS A GAME SPEES ?IS HOW
MANY WOLVES SHOULD WE MANAGE DO,

WE HAVE TOO MANY OR NOT ENOUGH?

>> AS YOU KNOW, WHEN THE WOLF
REINTRODUCTION, AND THEY WERE

REINTRODUCED AS A
NONEXPERIMENTAL POPULATION, NOT

AN ENDANGERED SPECIES.

WHEN THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT WHEN
THEY GOT 30 BREEDING PAIR THE

STATES COULD TAKE OVER MT. .

WE HAD FAR MORE THAN 30 BREEDING
PAIR BUT A JUDGE IN MONTANA

SAID, WELL, IT'S GOT TO BE IN
IDAHO, WYOMING, AND MONTANA.

MONTANA AND IDAHO WERE DOING THE
RIGHT THING.

SO I ASKED ACTUALLY THROUGH
LEGISLATION PASSED A PROVISION

THAT RETURNED THE WOLVES TO THE
MANAGEMENT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

AS THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
HAD ORIGINALLY INTENDED.

IF THE NUMBER OF WOLVES FALL
BELOW A CERTAIN LEVEL, I'M NOT A

WOLF BIOLOGIST, I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THAT LEVEL OUGHT TO BE, BUT

IF IT FALLS BELOW A CERTAIN
LEVEL, THEN THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT WILL STEP BACK IN
UNDER THE ESPERANCA AND TAKE

CONTROL --
UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

AND TAKE THE MANAGEMENT OVER.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?

>> I DON'T DISAGREE, I THINK
HE'S ESSENTIALLY RIGHT, THE

STATE IS IN THE BEST POSITION TO
MANAGE THEM, HOWEVER I THINK

THERE'S GOING TO BE OVERSIGHT
BECAUSE OF THE NUMBERS GET TOO

LOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WILL
STEP IN.

BUT I BELIEVE THE STATE IS IN
THE BEST POSITION TO MANAGE IT.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

NEXT QUESTION FOR CONGRESSMAN
STALLINGS.

>> THERE'S BEEN A
WELL-DOCUMENTED RISE IN

INEQUALITY IN THE UNITED STATES
ESPECIALLY IN RECENT DECADES.

ACCORDING TO CENSUS DATA THE
INCOME AFTER FAMILY IN THE

MIDDLE HAS INCREASED BY LESS
THAN ONE-FIFTH IN THE LAST HALF

CENTURY.

BUT THE INCOME OF A FAMILY IN
THE 95th PERCENTILE THAT'S

RICHER THAN 95% OF OTHER
FAMILIES HAS GROWN BY TWO-THIRDS

IN THE SAME PERIOD.

IS GROWING INEQUALITY A PROBLEM?

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?

>> FIRST YOU NEED TO STOP THE
GROWTH.

THIS CONGRESS, WHICH I'VE
CONTINUED TO ARGUE IS THE WORST

EVER, HAS DONE NOTHING BUT --
THEY HAVE CONTINUED TO MAKE SURE

THE RICH GOT EVERYTHING THEY
WANTED, WE CONTINUE TO GIVE

SOCIALISM TO THE RICH BY
HANDOUTS TO BIG OIL LIKE EXXON,

WE DON'T FORCE G.E. TO PAY ANY
TAXES.

WE LET A NUMBER OF THESE BIG
COMPANIES GO OVERSEAS AND GIVE

THEM TAX BREAKS FOR MOVING JOBS
OVERSEAS.

IT'S BEEN A CONSTANT BARRAGE OF
BEATING ON THE MIDDLE AND LOWER

INCOME CLASSES FOR THE BENEFIT
OF THE VERY RICH.

YOUR NUMBERS ARE RIGHT.

THE RICH HAS DONE VERY WELL
UNDER THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

UNDER THIS CONGRESS.

AND I CAN SEE WHY THEY'VE
INVESTED SO MUCH IN THEIR

REELECTION BECAUSE THEY'RE ON A
GRAVY TRAIN.

BUT THEY ARE ELIMINATING THE
MIDDLE CLASS AND WHEN THAT

HAPPENS THIS ECONOMY WILL SURE ECONOMY WIL
L
SUFFER.

IT'S NOT THE RICH THAT CREATE
JOBS, IT'S THE CONSUMERS.

THE RICH BUY YACHTS AND EXPLEANS
TAKE LONG VACATIONS.

9 MIDDLE CLASS BUY CLOTHES, AND
FOOD, CONSUMER GOODS, AND THAT'S

WHERE THE JOB CREATION IS.

WHEN YOU CONTINUE TO ROB THESE
PEOPLE OF MONEY, TO ACTIVELY

INVOLVE THEMSELVES IN THIS
ECONOMY, THE ECONOMY IS HEADED

OVER A CLIFF AND I THINK UNTIL
MR. SIMPSON AND MR. BOEHNER GET

THE MESSAGE YOU'VE GOT TO QUIT
PANDERING TO THE VERY RICH AND

DEAL WITH THE PEOPLE WHO --
THEIR PROPOSALS HELP TWO OR

THREE REPUBLICANS IN IDAHO WHILE
176 --

AND PEOPLE CONTINUE TO LIVE IN
POVERTY.

>> CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON, WOULD
YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?

>> OH, YIERKS THAT'S JUST SILLY
WHAT HE SAYS.

I DON'T THINK HE MEANT YOU'VE
GOT TO STOP THIS GROWTH WHEN HE

SAID THAT.

THE REALITY IS GROWING THE
ECONOMY IS IMPORTANT.

AND WE'VE DONE THINGS TO TRY TO
HELP GROW THE ECONOMY THAT ARE

AS I SAID EARLIER, SITTING OVER
ON HARRY REID'S DESK.

WHEN HE SAID EARLIER THAT DURING
THE BUSH TAX CUTS ALL WE DID IS

GIVE TAX CUTS TO THE WEALTH REE,
DO YOU NOTE WEALTHIEST 10% OF

THE AMERICANS IN THIS COUNTRY
PAY THE HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF THE

TOTAL TAXES PAID THAN THE LOWER
20% AFTER THE BUSH TAX CUTS?

>> THE NEXT --
>> THEY PAID A HIGHER PERCENTAGE

OF THE TAXES.

>> I DO GET A SHOT?

>> YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS.

YOU DON'T MAKE THE WEALTH --
YOU DON'T MAKE THE POOR WEALTHY

BY TRYING TO RESTRICT THE GROWTH
OF WEALTHY PEOPLE.

AND DO I THINK WE NEED TO RORMT
TAX CODE?

YOU BET WE DO.

DO YOU KNOW WHY WE'VE --
WE GOT TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS

SITTING OVERSEAS BECAUSE WE'RE
THE ONLY COUNTRY THAT HAS A

REPATE RATION TAX.

THEY CAN'T BRING THAT REVENUE
BACK INTO THIS COUNTRY WITHOUT

BEING TAXED AGAIN ON IT.

THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN TAXED ON
THE COUNTRY IT'S IN.

WE NEED TO 58 LOU THEM TO BRING
THE MONEY BACK.

DO WE NEED TO DO OTHER THINGS?

I THINK THE TAX CODE IS FUFL
THINGS THAT OUGHT TO BE

REPEALED, THAT HAVE BEEN PUT
THERE OVER THE 200 YEARS, THE

HUNDRED YEARS WE'VE HAD A
FEDERAL INCOME TAX.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS?

>> DURING THE EISENHOWER
ADMINISTRATION, THE TAX ON THE

WEALTHY WAS 90%.

WE'VE CUT THAT DOWN TO
DRAMATICALLY.

TODAY MITT ROMNEY PAYS LESS
TAXES IN PERCENTAGE THAN HIS

SECRETARY DOES.

IF THAT'S FAIR, ANYONE IN THE
AUDIENCE THINKS THAT'S FAIR,

SUPPORT MR. SIMPSON.

I THINK IT'S OUTRAGEOUS THAT WE
PUT PEOPLE IN THE WORKING CLASS

THAT SPEND MOST OF THEIR TIME
TRYING TO KEEP AHEAD OF THE

BILLS AND THE SAME TIME TURN
AROUND AND GIVE THE RICH THESE

ONGOING BENEFITS THAT THEY DON'T
NEED, THEY ARE IRRESPONSIBLE AND

THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE MIDDLE
AND LOWER CLEAS, AND I THINK --

THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE SHOULD
STOP.

>> I HAVE TO --
THE ORIGINAL QUESTION IS THE

GROWING INCOME DISPARITY A
PROBLEM NEW BET.

IT'S HAPPENING UNDER THIS
ADMINISTRATION.

THIS ADMINISTRATION HA WAS GOING
TO CLOSE THAT, THAT WAS GOING

BRING US TOGETHER, THAT WE WERE
ALL GOING TO BE ONE, THE OCEAN

WAS STOP RISING, ETC.

IT'S BEEN THE MOST PARTISAN
ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY.

AND THIS INCOME GROWTH HAS GROWN
UNDER THEIR --

HIS ADMINISTRATION.

>> DID YOU WANT --
>> YES, I THINK ANY TIME YOU

GIVE THE TAX BREAKS TO THE RICH
DURING THE BENEFICIARY

ADMINISTRATION, NOT ONCE BUT
TWICE, YOU START THIS ON THE

DOWNWARD TRAJECTORY.

AND SOMEHOW HE BLAMES IT ON THIS
ADMINISTRATION.

THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN
STOPPED EVERY TURN BY THIS

PARTISAN NONSENSE.

THEY DIDN'T --
THEY DON'T WANT TO DO ANYTHING

THAT WILL DAMAGE, THAT WILL TAKE
REVENUE AWAY FROM THE VERY RICH,

BECAUSE SOMEHOW THAT IS THE
FIRST CONSTITUENCY.

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS FROM MARCIA
FRANKLIN.

>> FOR CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS,
I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW, HARKENING

BACK TO THE ISSUE THAT YOU
MENTIONED ABOUT CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON ABOUT HOW HOUSE HAS DONE
A LOT OF WORK BUT A LOT OF IT IS

SITTING WAITING FOR ACTION IN
THE SENATE SOR BEING STALLED IN

THE SENATE, YOU'VE GOT REVAMPED
PROPOSAL FOR THE BOULDER WHITE

CLOUDS, AND SOME PEOPLE EVEN ON
THE FURTHER LEFT THAN YOU HAVE

SAID DON'T DO IT, IT'S NOT GOING
TO GET THROUGH THE SENATE.

I'M CURIOUS FIRST FOR YOU SINCE
I'M TO ADDRESS YOU FIRST

CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS, WHAT DO
YOU THINK OF CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON'S LATEST ATTEMPT TO
DO --

MAKE A WILDERNESS DESIGNATION AS
OPPOSED TO A NATIONAL MONUMENT

FOR THE BOULDER WHITE CLOUDS?

>> I THINK --
IN THE BEGINNING IT WAS A GOOD

POSITION.

I DIDN'T DISAGREE.

I THOUGHT HE WAS TAKING IT IN
THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

UNFORTUNATELY WHEN HE TALKS
ABOUT BEING ABLE TO REACH ACROSS

THE AISLE, HE CAN'T REACH ACROSS
HIS OWN DELEGATION, BECAUSE HIS

OPPOSITION IS NOT COMING FROM
DEMOCRATS, IT'S COMING FROM HIS

OWN PARTY.

MR. IRISH SAID ON THE DEBATE
THAT HE HAD WITH NELS MITCHELL

BECAUSE SIMPSON HAD ALLOWED THIS
TO BE WATERED DOWN, HE COULD NO

LONGER SUPPORT IT.

MR. SIMPSON SAID THE OTHER DAY
THAT'S NOT TRUE, IT'S NEVER BEEN

WATERED DOWN.

ONE OF THESE TWO GUYS IS NOT
TELL US THE TRUTH.

>> WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE
PROPOSAL?

>> I THINK IT'S --
I THINK I WOULD HAVE DONE MORE

TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS IN
CUSTER COUNTY.

THEY'RE GOING TO GET THE
SHORTENED OF THE STICK.

>> DO YOU SUPPORT A WILDERNESS
DESIGNATION?

>> YES.

I DID WHEN I WAS THERE BEFORE
AND IN THE FUTURE.

>> IF PRESIDENT OBAMA DECIDED TO
MAKE IT A MONUMENT --

>> MR. SIMPSON'S REELECTED HE'S
GOING TO TRY AGAIN.

HE'S ASKED FOR ONE MORE TRY.

HE'S DONE IT FOR --
HOW MANY, 16 YEARS NOW?

HE'S TRADE IT AND FAILED EVERY
TIME.

HE'S GOING TO TRY ONE MORE TIME
AND IF HE'S SUCCESSFUL OBAMA

SATISFIED WE'LL GO --
WE HAVE A NATIONAL MONUMENT IF

MR. SIMPSON IS REELECTED.

>> HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET PAST
YOUR OWN PARTY ON THIS, YOU --

AS MENTIONED EVEN AT THE FRANK
CHURCH CONFERENCE YOU SAID IT'S

GOING TO BE TOUGH.

>> IT IS TOUGH.

IF IT WAS EASY RICHARD WOULD
HAVE DONE IT WHEN HE WAS IN

CONGRESS, BUT IT'S TOUGH WORK.

WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT FOR 12
YEARS.

AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON
IT, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO PUSH

FOR A WILDERNESS THE HIGHEST
DESIGNATION YOU CAN.

CAN I GET IT?

I THINK I CAN GET IT THROUGH THE
HOUSE NOW.

>> YOU'VE MENTIONED, THAT BUT
HOW DO YOU GET IT THROUGH THE

SENATE?

>> I GOT IT THROUGH THE HOUSE
WITH A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY.

AND ACTUALLY IT FELL APART IN
THAT LAST DEAL AT THE END OF A

SESSION AND ALL THAT KIND OF
STUFF.

THE DEMOCRATS TOOK CONTROL, AND
I COULDN'T GET THE DEMOCRATS TO

DO IT.

AND I COULD GO INTO WHY, BUT
THEN WE HAD A REPUBLICAN

CHAIRMAN OF THE RESOURCES
COMMITTEE WHO DOESN'T LIKE ANY

WELDNESS AND THEY HAVEN'T DONE
ANY WILDERNESS BILLS IN THE LAST

FOUR YEARS.

BUT WE WILL THIS YEAR GET IT
DOFNLT I'VE MADE IN ROADS WITH

THE COMMITTEE AND I THINK ONCE
IT GETS TO THE SENATE WILL THRB

A CHANCE, WILL IT BE A NATIONAL
MONUMENT OR WILDERNESS?

THAT'S THE REALITY.

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

>> EVERYBODY --
I DON'T THINK THE MONUMENT IS

THE WAY TO GO.

>> WILL YOU SUPPORT IT?

>> NO.

I DON'T THINK IT'S THE WAY TO
GO.

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT QUESTION.

IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.

CONGRESSMAN --
[TALKING AT ONCE]

>> IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO THE
NEXT QUESTION FOR CONGRESSMAN

SIMPSON.

>> CONGRESSMAN, YOU COSPONSORED
A BILL THAT WOULD RELAX EPA

STANDARDS FOR ARSENIC IN
DRINKING WATER IN SMALL TOWNS

THAT HAVE TROUBLE AFFORDING VERY
EXPENSIVE NEW WATER SYSTEM

INFRASTRUCTURE.

WHY NOT FIGHT FOR MORE FUNDING
INSTEAD FOR THOSE --

SOME OF THOSE TOWNS SO THEY CAN
AFFORD THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, AND

DON'T PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN SMALL
TOWNS DESERVE JUST AS GOOD A

WATER AS PEOPLE LIVING IN OTHER
BIG CITIES?

>> YOU BET THEY DO.

THE DIFFERENCE IS IN IDAHO AND A
LOT OF THE WEST WE HAVE

COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE NATURAL
OCCURRING ARSENIC IN THEIR LEVEL

AND THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
DECIDED THEY WERE GOING TO

REDUCE THE STANDARD OF 50 PARTS
PER BILLION THAT EXISTED FOR

CENTURIES --
EVER SINCE EPA DID IT, FROM 50

PARTS TO BILLION DOWN TO 10
PARTS PER BILLION.

I'VE FOUGHT FOR FUNDING FOR
THOSE COMMUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO

MEET THOSE STANDARDS, CASTLEFORD
WAS GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE THE

DECISION DO WE MAKE THE STANDARD
OR DO WE GET RID OF OUR ONE

POLICE OFFICER?

THAT'S THE DECISION YOU'RE
MAKING THESE SMALL COMMUNITIES

PAY.

AND THOSE ARE --
THEY HAD A TOUGH CHOICE.

I GOT FUNDING, SO THEY COULD
MEET THAT STANDARD BUT THERE'S

HUNDREDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY THAT
ARE ALSO HAVING VERY, VERY

DIFFICULT TIMES MEETING A VERY
AGGRESSIVE EPA.

>> YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN.

I THINK HE WAS WRONG, I THINK WE
SHOULD DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO

REDUCE ARSENIC.

I THINK IT'S HARMFUL TO
CHILDREN.

BUT I THINK THIS WHOLE IDEA THAT
SOMEHOW IT'S OK FOR KIDS IN THE

RURAL AREAS TO SUFFER WITH MORE
ARSENIC IN THE WATER, THERE ARE

OTHER WAYS.

IT'S NOT JUST THE CITY HAS TO DO
THAT.

IN POCATELLO WE HAD A NUMBER OF
ISSUES IN WHICH WE WERE ABLE THE

RESOLVE WITH FEDERAL GRANTS
THERE.

ARE FEDERAL GRANTS AVAILABLE AND
I ANY MR. SIMPSON WAS DOING HIS

JOB HE WOULD --
I THINK CHILDREN'S HEALTH IS

MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING
ELSE DO YOU IN A COMMUNITY F WE

KNOW ARSENIC IS DOING DAMAGE TO
THEM, WE DISCOVERING WE CAN.

AND IF SMALL TOWN CAN'T AFFORD
IT, YOU FIND ADDITIONAL

RESOURCES TO HELP THEM TOMORROW
ME THAT'S THE JOB OF THE

CONGRESSMAN.

NOT TO SAY, WE'LL JUST LET THESE
KIDS SUFFER BECAUSE THEY CAN'T

AFFORD IT.

WHY DO YOU WANT TO PUNISH PEOPLE
LIKE THAT IT?

SEEMS TO ME THE SOLUTION IS TO
FIND SOME RESOURCES SOME

ADDITIONAL RESOURCE,.

IF YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE FOLKS
PUTTING THAT IN THE WATER, THEN

HAVE THEM PAY.

IF IT'S NATURALLY OCCURRING,
FIND OTHER SOURCES FOR THE

MONEY.

THERE ARE SOLUTIONS.

THESE ARE NOT ROCKET SCIENCE,
THE MONEY NEED SECOND DEGREE NOT

HORRENDOUSLY SIGNIFICANT.

YOU CAN SOLVE IT.

IT'S VERY EASILY DONE.

>> -- NATURALLY OCCURRING
ARSENIC IN THE WEST.

DO YOU TO NEW DALE, IDAHO, THEY
KEPT TRACK OF THEIR ARSENIC

LEVELS, IT WAS EIGHT, NINE, 10
PARTS PER BILLION, SOMETIMES 12.

YOU COULDN'T BELIEVE THE
ADDITIONAL COST IT --

BECAUSE OCCASIONAMLY IT JUMPED
TO 12 BUT THEIR AVERAGE WAS LIKE

A 10.

THAT DIDN'T COUNT FOR THE EPA.

THEY HAD TO REDUCE IT SO IT WAS
BELOW 10 ALL OF THE TIME.

ASK THE PEOPLE OF NEW DALE IF
THEY THINK IT WAS WORTH IT.

ASK THE PEOPLE OF CASTLEFORD IF
THEY THINK IT WAS WORTH IT.

>> WE HAVE LESS THAN THREE
MINUTES LEFT.

ONE QUICK QUESTION FOR
CONGRESSMAN STALLING.

>> MANY OF THE JOBS IN THE
LABORATORY AND DESERT SITE ARE

LINKED TO THE CLEAN-UP OF
RADIOACTIVE WASTE THAT'S BEEN

LEFT THERE.

WHEN THAT TASK IS FINISHED THE
JOBS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT

CLEAN-COUP GO AWAY.

WHAT ARE SOME NEW VISIONS FOR
INL THAT YOU CAN SEE IN THE

FUTURE THAT COULD HELP STEM ANY
JOB LOSS ?ES.

>> LET ME FIRST POINT OUT IT WAS
MYSELF AND GOVERNOR ANDREWS WHO

PUT PRESSURE ON 2K-6789OE TO
CLEAN THAT FACILITY UP.

WHEN I WAS THRT BUDGET WAS OVER
A BILLION DOLLARS FOR INL.

WHEN I WAS THERE THEY HAD 13,000
EMPLOYEES OUT THERE.

UNDER MR. SIMILAR SEASON AND
MR. CRAPO'S STEWARDSHIP THOSE

NUMBERS DROPPED 6789 I THINK
THIS CLEAN-UP IS GOING TO GO ON

FOR ANOTHER YEARS AND I THINK
YOU'RE RIGHT, IT WILL BE AN

ISSUE.

THE OTHER POINT I FIND
FASCINATING IS THAT MR. SIMPSON

IS PROBLEM IT WILL ONLY MEMBER
OF THE DELEGATION FIGHTING FOR

THEM.

THE OTHER THREE, CRAPO IS HOT
AND COLD, THE OTHER TWO OPPOSE

IT.

I THINK THIS IS WHY.

I THINK IT'S BECAUSE THE OTHER
ROLE IS ALTERNATE ENERGY, AND

ALTERNATE ENERGY IN THE DOE'S
MIND IS TO DEAL WITH GLOBAL

WARMING.

THESE GUYS DON'T BELIEVE IN
GLOBAL WARMING.

IT DOESN'T EXIST.

MAYBE THEY'RE RIGHT NATASHA
WHEATLEY IN OPPOSING IT, BECAUSE

WHY SHOULD YOU SPEND MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS ON AN ISSUE THAT DOESN'T

EXIST?

THAT'S THEIR ARYAN NATIONS
GLIEWMENT WE'RE ALMOST --

>> I'VE NEVER DENIED GLOBAL
WARMING IS OCCURRING.

THE QUESTION IS WHAT CAN YOU DO
ABOUT IT.

THAT'S RIGHT, RICHARD IS RIGHT,
THERE WERE 13,000 EMPLOYEES OUT

THERE BUT THERE WERE HUNDREDS
AND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE THAT

WORKED FOR THE PONY EXPRESS WHEN
YOU WORKED IN CONGRESS BUT

THEY'RE NOT THERE ANYMORE.

>> I'M --
>> THAT'S A JOKE.

I'M TRYING TO BRING LEVITY.

THE REALITY IS, WHAT WE'VE DONE
IS FOCUS A MISSION FOR THE

LABORATORY PART.

WHEN THIS CLEAN-UP IS DONE,
THOSE EMPLOYEES GO AWAY BECAUSE

YOU'VE CLEANED IT UP.

THEY'RE WORKING THEMSELVES OUT
AFTER JOSH.

THEY KNOW THAT.

WE'VE CREATE ADMISSION FOR THE
SITE.

IT IS THE LEAD NUCLEAR LAB IN
THE COUNTRY.

AND IF YOU GO LOOK AT THE SITE
TODAY, AND THE LABORATORIES

THAT ARE OUT THERE, IF YOU'RE
GOING TO ATTRACT THE BEST

SCIENTISTS YOU GOT TO HAVE THE
RESEARCH FACILITIES OUT THERE.

WHEN RICHARD WAS IN CONGRESS
THEY WERE WORKING IN THE

STOREFRONT OF OLD ALBERTSONS
STORES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WE'VE ACTUALLY FOCUSED ON
REBUILDING THE LAB WITH A

MISSION.

THEY WERE TRYING TO ACTUALLY
BUILD --

>> ALL RIGHT I'M GOING TO HAVE
TO CUT YOU OFF, WE'RE OUT OF

TIME --
>> A WIND TUNNEL --

>> IT IS TIME FOR CLOSE REMARKS
AND CONGRESSMAN SIMPSON YOU ARE

FIRST.

>> THANK YOU.

AGAIN, THANKS ALL OF YOU FOR
BEING HERE, THANK THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS AND THE IDAHO
PUBLIC TELEVISION AND THE

CAPITOL CORRESPONDENTS FOR
HOSTING THIS DEBATE.

I THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT
DEBATE AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE

TO GO THROUGH THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN RICHARD AND I.

YOU'VE SEEN THOSE HERE TODAY.

I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR VOTE ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4th.

LET ME SAY IN CLOSING, RICHARD
AND I HAVE RUN AGAINST EACH

OTHER THIS, IS TWICE NOW, IN
1998, AND I THINK WE DEBATED

THREE OR FOUR TIMES, THREE TIMES
DURING THIS DEBATE.

IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, THIS WILL BE
THE LAST TIME RICHARD AND I EVER

DEBATE EACH OTHER REGARDLESS OF
HOW THIS ELECTION TURNS OUT.

AND NOBODY KNOWS HOW IT'S GOING
TO TURN OUT UNTIL THE VOTERS

HAVE SPOKEN.

I DO WANT TO TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO PERSONALLY THANK

RICHARD FOR HIS SERVICE FOR
EIGHT YEARS AS A UNITED STATES

CONGRESSMAN AND FOR HIS SERVICE
ON THE POCATELLO CITY COUNCIL.

I RESPECT ANYONE WHO IS WILLING
TO THROW THEIR HAT IN THE

AREBOUND WRAW AND SUFFER THE
SLINGS AND ARROWS OF SOMETIMES

OUTRAGEOUS FORTUNE.

YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO PLEASE
EVERYBODY.

BUT RICHARD KNOWS THAT, AND HE'S
BEEN THROUGH IT.

SO I RESPECT THAT AND I THANK
YOU FOR THAT, FOR THOSE --

THAT SERVICE YOU'VE GIVEN TO THE
STATE OF IDAHO, RICHARD.

AND YOU OUT THERE LISTENING,
MAKE SURE YOU GET OUT THERE AND

VOTE DAY AFTER TOMORROW.

THANK YOU.

>> CONGRESSMAN STALLINGS.

>> AGAIN, LIKE CONGRESSMAN
SIMPSON, I APPRECIATE THIS

OPPORTUNITY TOKES PRESS MYSELF
AND TO LAY OUT MY ISSUES.

I GAMBLED WHEN I GOT IN THIS
ELECTION THAT FOLKS THAT WERE

GETTING MINIMUM WAGE WOULD BE
RESPONSIVE TO MY PLEA TO RAISE

THAT MINIMUM WAGE.

I GAMBLED ON THE FACT THAT
HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF

LATINOS, HISPANICS ARE DENIED
CITIZENSHIP AND ARE KEPT UND IN

THE SHADOWS.

AND I THOUGHT MAYBE IF I MADE AN
APPEAL TO THEM WE COULD ATRIENG

GET SEVERAL THOUSAND MORE
REGISTERED AND VOTING.

I GAMBLED THAT WOMEN WHO ARE
MAKING LESS THAN MEN WOULD BE

RESPONSIVE TO MY --
AND I MAY LOSE THAT GAMBLE, I

DON'T KNOW.

I THINK WE MADE A GOOD CASE.

I THINK THE DESCHUTES ARE ON MY
SIDE.

I THINK PUBLIC OPINION IS ON MY
SIDE.

BY MORE THAN 70% IDAHOANS THINK
MINIMUM WAGE SHOULD BE RAISED.

BY MORE THAN 50% IDAHOANS
BELIEVE IMMIGRATION REFORM

SHOULD INCLUDE A PATHWAY TO
CITIZENSHIP.

I'M ON THE SIDE OF THOSE ISSUES.

I'M OPPOSED BY VERY FORMIDABLE
WELL FUNDED CONGRESSMAN SITTING

ON HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
DOLLARS, MOST OF IT CAME FROM

THE PACs, AND YET I HAVE BEEN
COMPETITIVE IN THIS RACE BECAUSE

MY ISSUES ARE HONEST AND
TRUTHFUL, MR. SIMPSON SAID THE

DIFFERENCE TO ME AND MR. SIMPSON
IS I'M HON OWES AND I TOOK THAT

AS A HIGH COMPLIMENT AND I
BELIEVE STRONGLY PEOPLE HAVE A

CHOICE THEY CAN CONTINUE THE
MISERY OF THE LAST TWO YEARS

WITH MR. SIMPSON, OR THEY CAN
HOLD OUT HOPE FOR THE FUTURE FOR

ME. PLEASE VOTE FOR ME, RICHARD
STALLINGS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH FOR
THE TIME TONIGHT.

THANKS TO THE REPORTERS FOR THE
GREAT QUESTION AND TO OUR

VIEWERS AT HOME FOR WATCHING.

YOU CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THESE
CANDIDATES ON OUR WEBSITE,

IDAHOPTV.ORG/ELECTION/2014.

AND WHILE YOU'RE THERE CHECK OUT
ANY OF THE DEBATES YOU MIGHT

HAVE MISSED.

ELECTION DAY IS TUESDAY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING
AND FOR A RECAP WATCH IDAHO

REPORTS 7:00 P.M. FRIDAY.

THANKS SO MUCH, GOOD NIGHT AND
WE'LL SEE YOU AT THE POLLS.

Captioning Performed By
LNS Captioning
www.LNScaptioning.com

>> THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE MADE
POSSIBLE BY BOY STATE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF PUBLIC SERVICE,
DEVOTED TO BUILDING COMMUNITY

LEADERS THROUGH
INTERDISCIPLINARY PROBLEM

SOLVING, REAL WORLD RESEARCH AND
POLICY STUDIES, AND HANDS-ON

EXPERIENCE YOU CAN ONLY GET HERE
AT THE STATE CAPITOL.

THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE ALSO
BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR

CONTRIBUTION TO THE IDAHO PUBLIC
TELEVISION DOCUMENT.

THANK YOU.