WELCOME TO THE IDAHO DEBATES
A LOOK AT THE CANDIDATES ON THE

REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION
BALLOT FOR CONGRESSIONAL

DISTRICT 1.

THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE A
COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AMONG THE

IDAHO PRESS CLUB, BOISE STATE
UNIVERSITY'S SCHOOL OF PUBLIC

SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO'S
MCCLURE CENTER, IDAHO STATE

UNIVERSITY'S DEPARTMENT OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE, THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS' VOTER EDUCATION
FUND, AND IDAHO PUBLIC

TELEVISION.

FUNDING FOR THE IDAHO DEBATES IS
PROVIDED BY THE FRIENDS OF IDAHO

PUBLIC TELEVISION AND THE IDAHO
PUBLIC TELEVISION ENDOWMENT...

>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO THE
IDAHO DEBATES ON IDAHO PUBLIC

TELEVISION.

TONIGHT THE REPUBLICAN
CANDIDATES VYING TO REPRESENT

CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 1 TAKE
THE STAGE TO ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.

THE WINNER OF THE REPUBLICAN
PRIMARY WILL FACE THE DEMOCRATIC

NOMINEE FOR CD1 IN THE NOVEMBER
GENERAL ELECTION.

CANDIDATES: ALEX GALLEGOS,
CHRISTY PERRY, MICHAEL SNYDER,

DAVID LEROY, AND RUSS FULCHER.

ASKING THEM QUESTIONS TONIGHT
WILL BE REPORTERS SELECTED BY

THE IDAHO PRESS CLUB: BETSY
RUSSELL OF THE SPOKESMAN-REVIEW,

CAMERON RASMUSSON OF THE
SANDPOINT READER, AND BILL

SPENCE OF THE LEWISTON TRIBUNE.

I'M MELISSA DAVLIN, HOST OF
"IDAHO REPORTS" ON IDAHO PUBLIC

TELEVISION.

I'M MODERATING TONIGHT'S DEBATE
AND WILL DO MY BEST TO MAKE SURE

ALL THE CANDIDATES GET EQUAL
TIME AND STAY ON POINT.

TO HELP ME AND TO REMIND THE
CANDIDATES HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN

TALKING IS A VOLUNTEER
TIMEKEEPER FROM THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS, BARB WOOD.

WE'VE ASKED THE CANDIDATES TO
ENGAGE EACH OTHER ON THE ISSUES.

IN OTHER WORDS, LESS EMPHASIS ON
A RIGID FORMAT AND MORE FOCUS ON

INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION THAT
HELPS YOU THE VOTER CAST A MORE

INFORMED BALLOT.

EACH CANDIDATE WILL BE GIVEN 90
SECONDS FOR OPENING COMMENTS AND

90 SECONDS FOR CLOSING.

WE DREW NAMES A FEW MINUTES AGO
AND COLONEL GALLEGOS WILL BEGIN

WITH HIS OPENING REMARKS.

>> THANKS.

I'M LIEUTENANT COLONEL RETIRED
ALEX GALLEGOS, NATIVE OF CANYON

COUNTY.

I ENLISTED IN THE UNITED STATES
ARMY STRAIGHT OUT OF HIGH

SCHOOL.

DURING MY CAREER, I DEPLOYED SIX
TIMES, I EARNED THREE DEGREES,

AND I SERVED AT EVERY LEVEL OF
THE ARMY, INCLUDING TWICE AT THE

PENTAGON.

MY WIFE IS A COLONEL ON ACTIVE
DUTY.

TOGETHER, WE HAVE NEARLY HALF A
CENTURY OF ACTIVE SERVICE.

I'M RUNNING FOR CONGRESS BECAUSE
I DEEPLY CARE ABOUT OUR NATION.

I KNOW THAT CONGRESS HAS FAILED
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND IS

HURTING IDAHOANS.

THE LACK OF DISCIPLINE IN
CONGRESS IS PLACING IN JEOPARDY

OUR QUALITY OF LIFE, OUR
CHILDREN'S FUTURE, AND/ OUR

AMERICAN VALUES.

WE HAVE TO CHANGE WHO WE ELECT.

WE NEED TO ELECT LEADERS WHO
HAVE DISCIPLINE, COURAGE, AND

HAVE COMMON SENSE.

IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL
SECURITY, WE NEED LEADERS WITH

REAL-WORLD EXPERIENCE.

OUR FAMILY UNDERSTANDS
SACRIFICE.

OUR CHILDREN'S FATHER, A REAL
AMERICAN HERO, CAPTAIN DAN

AGERS, PAID THE ULTIMATE
SACRIFICE.

WITH YOUR CONFIDENCE, I PROMISE
TO DEFEND AND PROTECT OUR

FREEDOM AND HONOR THE SACRIFICES
OF OUR FALLEN BY RESTORING

DISCIPLINE IN CONGRESS.

THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

REPRESENTATIVE PERRY.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU TO IDAHO PUBLIC
TELEVISION AND FOR EVERYONE WHO

PARTICIPATED IN MAKING THESE
DEBATES POSSIBLE TONIGHT.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK MY
HUSBAND AND MY FAMILY FOR

JOINING US IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY
AS WELL.

FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE NEVER
MET ME, MY NAME IS CHRISTY

PERRY, AND I'M A STRONG
CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN

CHRISTIAN WOMAN FROM CANYON
COUNTY WHO, ALONG WITH MY

HUSBAND, OWN AND OPERATE A GUN
SHOP HERE IN IDAHO.

I'M THE GIRL WITH ALL THE GUNS.

I COME FROM HARD-WORKING
CHRISTIAN PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER

BEEN HANDED A THING.

I'M THE FIRST PERSON IN MY
FAMILY TO GRADUATE FROM COLLEGE.

I HAVE A BACHELOR'S DEGREE, A
MASTER'S DEGREE.

I HAVE SERVED AS A REPUBLICAN
PRECINCT COMMITTEEMAN, AND I'M A

FOUR-TERM REPUBLICAN LEGISLATOR
FROM THE AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT

OF CANYON COUNTY.

I'M HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE I WANT
TO BE YOUR NEXT CONGRESSIONAL

REPRESENTATIVE FROM DISTRICT 1.

MY ONE QUESTION FOR YOU TONIGHT
IS, WHAT HAVE THESE GOOD OLE

BOYS DONE FOR YOU LATELY?

I'LL TELL YOU.

THEY'VE GIVEN US A $21 TRILLION
DEFICIT.

THEY HAVE BANKRUPTED THE SOCIAL
SECURITY TRUST FUND.

THEY HAVE NO SOLUTION FOR OUR
HEALTH CARE CRISIS OR

IMMIGRATION CRISIS.

RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE WORKING ON
RULES TO INFRINGE ON YOUR SECOND

AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

WE NEED SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

WE NEED A STRONG CONSERVATIVE
REPUBLICAN CHRISTIAN WOMAN IN

CONGRESS, AND I'M ASKING YOU TO
SEND ME, CHRISTY PERRY, THE GIRL

WITH ALL THE GUNS TO FIGHT FOR
YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

SENATOR FULCHER.

>> HI.

I'M RUSS FULCHER.

I'M A HUSBAND, A FATHER, AN
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESSMAN, A

REAL ESTATE BROKER, AND A FORMER
STATE SENATOR.

I'M DOING THIS BECAUSE I KNOW
THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS

FORGOTTEN THAT THEY ARE HERE TO
SERVE THE PEOPLE, NOT THE OTHER

WAY AROUND.

AND I WANT TO PLAY A PART IN
SHIFTING SOME OF THAT CONTROL

FROM THE GOVERNMENT BACK TO THE
PEOPLE.

I'VE BEEN VERY BLESSED TO HAVE
DEEP ROOTS IN THIS STATE.

THE FIRST 20 YEARS OF MY LIFE
WAS SPENT ON A DAIRY FARM IN

MERIDIAN.

THE NEXT 20-PLUS YEARS WAS SPENT
TRAVELING ALL OVER THE WORLD.

WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU GET JUST A
LITTLE BIT OF AN APPRECIATION

FOR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT MAKE
GOVERNMENT WORK AND SOME OF THE

THINGS THAT JUST DON'T.

FROM THERE, I WAS BLESSED AGAIN
TO BE IN THE IDAHO STATE SENATE

FOR TEN YEARS WHILE RUNNING A
REAL ESTATE BUSINESS.

I WANT TO TAKE THAT EXPERIENCE,
BUT I WANT TO USE IT ON YOUR

BEHALF.

I WANT TO HELP PUT A PLAN IN
PLACE TO SECURE OUR BORDER.

I WANT TO HELP PUT A PLAN IN
PLACE TO ENABLE THE FREE MARKET

SYSTEM AND OUR HEALTH CARE
SYSTEM SO THAT WE CAN HAVE LOWER

COSTS AND BETTER CARE.

AND I WANT TO HELP PUT A PLAN IN
PLACE TO EMPOWER WISE MANAGEMENT

OF OUR LANDS, PROTECT THE
ENVIRONMENT AND OUR ACCESS.

MY FRIENDS, EXPERIENCE REALLY
DOES MATTER.

A POSITIVE MESSAGE REALLY DOES
MATTER.

I WILL BE YOUR CHAMPION IN
CONGRESS, AND I HAVE THE RECORD

TO PROVE IT.

THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT.

MR. SNYDER, YOUR REMARKS,
PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU.

MY NAME IS MICHAEL SNYDER.

I'M ONE OF THE MOST POPULAR
CONSERVATIVE AUTHORS IN THE

ENTIRE COUNTRY.

I'VE TOUCHED MORE PEOPLE FOR
CONSERVATIVE CAUSES THAN

EVERYBODY ELSE ON THIS STAGE
COMBINED, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO

CONGRATULATE ALL OF MY FELLOW
CANDIDATES HERE TONIGHT FOR

ADOPTING PRO-TRUMP MESSAGING FOR
THEIR CAMPAIGN AND FOLLOWING MY

LEAD IN DOING SO, BUT SHOULD WE
TRUST THE LATE BANDWAGON

JUMPERS?

WE KNOW ORIGINALLY ALL THE OTHER
LEADING CONTENDERS IN THIS RACE

TRIED TO KEEP DONALD TRUMP OUT
OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

THEY DID NOT WANT DONALD TRUMP
WHILE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING I

WAS A TRUMP SUPPORTER EVEN
BEFORE DONALD TRUMP GOT IN THE

RACE.

I RESONATED WITH HIS MESSAGE.

I WAS TALKING ABOUT A WALL.

I WAS TALKED ABOUT OUR
IMBALANCED TRADE WITH CHINA.

WHEN HE CAME ALONG, ME AND MY
WIFE JUMPED ON BOARD RIGHT AWAY.

THESE GUYS, THEY'RE LATE TO THE
GAME.

THEY SAY TRUST US.

LET ME GIVE YOU ONE CLUE.

IF SOMEONE SURROUNDED THEMSELVES
WITH PEOPLE WHO HATE DONALD

TRUMP, PROBABLY NOT A PRO-TRUMP
CANDIDATE, SO WE DON'T LIKE FAKE

TANS.

WE DON'T LIKE FAKE NEWS, AND WE
CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO SEND A

FAKE PRO-TRUMP KRCANDIDATE TO
WASHINGTON.

LISTEN TO US.

EVALUATE US.

COMPARE.

IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH ME,
COMPARE WHAT WE BELIEVE TO THE

OTHER GUYS.

WHEN YOU DO, I THINK YOU'LL VOTE
FOR THE PRO-TRUMP CANDIDATE, THE

MOST CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE IN
THIS CASE, AND THE PERSON THAT'S

MOST OUT FRONT ABOUT TAKING
CHRISTIAN VALUES BACK TO

WASHINGTON, D.C.

>> LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY.

>> GOOD EVENING, IDAHO.

I'M DAVID LEROY.

117 YEARS AGO MY AN SCESTORS CAME
TO IDAHO TO FARM.

I SPENT A NUMBER OF GLORIOUS
SUMMERS ON THE LAKE.

I'M A TWO-TERM COUNTY
PROSECUTOR, WAS FORMERLY THE

YOUNGEST ATTORNEY GENERAL IN THE
COUNTRY, APPEARING THREE TIMES

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME
COURT.

FOR FOUR YEARS, I WAS LIEUTENANT
GOVERNOR OF IDAHO PRESIDING OVER

THE SENATE.

WHEN THE GOVERNOR WAS OUT OF
STATE FOR 254 DAYS, I WAS ACTING

GOVERNOR OF IDAHO.

IN THE FORMER ADMINISTRATION, I
SERVE ED AS A PRESIDENTIAL

APPOINTEE, BUT NOW I'M CITIZEN
DAVE.

BEEN OUT OF POLITICS FOR 20
YEARS.

WHY WOULD I COME BACK?

BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP IS A CHANGE
AGENT.

IF WE PUT CONSERVATIVE
LEGISLATION IN FRONT OF HIM,

HE'LL PASS IT.

HE'LL SIGN IT.

AND HE'LL ENACT IT INTO LAW.

YOU SEE, WITH MY CONSIDERABLE
BACKGROUND, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE

A CONTRIBUTION IN CONGRESS FROM
DAY ONE.

AS SOMEONE WHO HAS RUN A FEDERAL
AGENCY, I HAVE GOOD IDEAS ABOUT

THE BUDGET PROCESS AND HOW TO
IMPROVE IT.

AS SOMEONE WHO HAS TESTIFIED
FREQUENTLY BEFORE CONGRESS, I

WILL LEARN HOW TO ASK QUESTIONS,
LISTEN TO THE ANSWERS, AND MAKE

PUBLIC POLICY.

IF YOU'LL SEND MY WIFE NANCY,
LEROY, AND I TOGETHER AS A TEAM

TO CONGRESS, WE'LL REPRESENT YOU
HONORAB

HONORABLY, ETHICALLY,
AGGRESSIVELY, EFFECTIVELY.

IT'S OUR TURN AND OUR TIME TO
PRESERVE THE REPUBLIC.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

REPRESENT MALEK.

>> THANK YOU, MELISSA.

MY NAME IS LUKE MALEK, AND I'M
RUNNING FOR CONGRESS.

I'M RUNNING FOR CONGRESS TO
FIGHT FOR OUR SECOND AMENDMENT

RIGHTS, TO FIGHT TO PROTECT THE
LIFE OF THE UNBORN, TO FIGHT TO

PRESERVE OUR INDEPENDENT WAY OF
LIFE IN THE STATE OF IDAHO, AND

TO DEFEND AGAINST THE HEAVY HAND
OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

I FIGHT BECAUSE, LIKE YOU, I
FIGHT FOR WHAT I LOVE, AND I

LOVE OUR COUNTRY.

I LOVE THE STATE OF IDAHO.

I LOVE MY FAMILY, AND I LOVE OUR
CONSERVATIVE VALUES.

HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT I'LL FIGHT?

BECAUSE ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER
THAN WORDS.

I'VE FOUGHT AND I HAVE WON.

WHEN OBAMA WAS SPYING ON US
USING OUR CELL PHONES, I SUED

HIM TO DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS.

WHEN OBAMACARE THREATENED TO
BANKRUPT IDAHOANS, I FOUGHT TO

MAKE SURE OUR HEALTH CARE
DECISIONS REMAINED IN OUR HANDS.

I FIGHT FOR IDAHOANS, WHICH IS
WHY I HAVE BEEN ENDORSED BY OUR

FIREFIGHTERS, BY OUR POLICE
OFFICERS, BY MANY NMAYORS, BY

MANY PROSECUTORS, BY MEMBERS OF
THE AGRICULTURE INDUSTRY, THE

TIMBER INDUSTRY, THE MINING
INDUSTRY, AND MANY MORE.

AND I AM AUTHENTIC TRUE
CONSERVATIVE, AND I FIGHT FOR

WHAT I LOVE.

AND I CAN'T BE BOUGHT, WHICH IS
WHY I AM RUNNING FOR CONGRESS TO

MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AUTHENTIC
LEADERSHIP IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

WE HAVE 90 MINUTES OF DEBATE
AHEAD OF US.

THE FIRST QUESTION IS FROM
CAMERON TO COLONEL GALLEGOS.

>> COLONEL GALLEGOS, GIVEN THE
DISTINCT ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL

DYNAMICS THROUGHOUT YOUR CONTROL
pFOR REPRESENTING THE COMMUNITY?

>> THANK YOU FIRST OF ALL FOR
THE QUESTION.

WE HAVE TO LISTEN.

AS LEADERS, WE HAVE TO LISTEN
AND OBSERVE WHAT'S GOING ON IN

THE COMMUNITIES.

IDAHO IS HURTING RIGHT NOW.

IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE'S A SKILLS
GAP IN JOBS.

IT'S CLEAR THAT EDUCATION IS
ATTRIBUTED TO THAT AS WELL.

WE HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMUNITIES
AND FIND OUT WHAT WORKS FOR

THEM.

OUR AG INDUSTRY IS VERY
IMPORTANT IN IDAHO.

WE HAVE TO, AS A REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE UNITED STATES, MAKE SURE

THAT WE ARE REPRESENTING OUR
RANCHERS AND FARMERS.

IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM,
AND TO SUSTAIN THE INCOME THEY

NEED, THAT'S IMPORTANT.

I WILL TELL YOU MY FAMILY FARMS
IN WISCONSIN, AND I KNOW HOW

DIFFICULT THE CHALLENGES WE FACE
ARE.

I WILL TELL YOU THERE WILL BE NO
ONE BETTER THAN ME TO REPRESENT

YOU IN CONGRESS BECAUSE I KNOW
WHAT THE CHALLENGES ARE THAT WE

FACE.

>> VERY GOOD.

AND GIVEN THAT IDAHO IS JUST TWO
REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS AND

SOMETIMES THE INTEREST BETWEEN
THE DISTRICTS CONFLICT WITH EACH

OTHER, WHAT IS YOUR DUTY TO
REPRESENT ALL OF IDAHO -- THAT

IS TO SAY, IS IT YOUR DUTY TO
REPRESENT ALL OF IDAHO AND NOT

JUST CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 1?

>> AS A SERVICE MEMBER, WHAT WE
LEARN IS TEAMWORK IS PARAMOUNT.

YOU HAVE TO OPERATE AS A TEAM TO
ACHIEVE ANY OBJECTIVE.

THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS
SPLITTING IDAHO IN HALF AND

CREATING TWO SEPARATE IDAHOS.

WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER IN BOTH
DISTRICTS TO REACH COMMON

OBJECTIVES.

THAT'S IMPORTANT.

FARMERS AND RANCHERS ON ONE SIDE
OF THE STATE AREN'T ANY

DIFFERENT THAN FARMERS AND
RANCHERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF

THE STATE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, SAME
QUESTION.

>> IN THAT REGARD, I THINK
WHAT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT BOTH

FOR ALL PARTS OF IDAHO ARE THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE GOT TO PUT

SOME INVESTMENT INTO OUR
S.T.E.M. EDUCATION ACROSS THE

STATE AND EDUCATION AND
TECHNOLOGY ACROSS THE STATE.

AS I'VE TRAVELED UP AND DOWN THE
DISTRICT, THERE'S SOME CONCERNS

THAT CONSISTENTLY COME UP.

ONE OF THEM IS THIS QUESTION OF
THIS URBAN/RURAL DIVIDE.

RURAL IDAHO TRULY FEELS LEFT OUT
OF THE EQUATION.

THAT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE, SO WE
HAVE GOT TO PUT SOME TIME INTO

FIGURING OUT HOW DO WE ENSURE
THAT RURAL IDAHO AND THEIR

CHILDREN HAVE THE SAME ECONOMIC
VIABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY AND

OPPORTUNITIES AS URBAN IDAHO
DOES.

THOSE ARE THINGS AT THE IDAHO
LEGISLATURE WE HAVE CERTAINLY

ALREADY BEEN WORKING ON.

UNLIKE MR. GALLEGOS HERE, WE'VE
WORKED ON THOSE.

WE KNOW FIRSTHAND WHAT THESE
ISSUES ARE.

WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THOSE
KINDS OF THINGS, SO IT IS

EDUCATION AND IT IS THE
INVESTMENT IN S.T.E.M.

AND IT IS ALSO INVESTMENT IN
TRANSPORTATION BECAUSE IN ORDER

FOR BUSINESSES ALL ACROSS IDAHO
TO BE SUCCESSFUL WE HAVE GOT TO

HAVE A VIABLE TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM.

NORTHERN IDAHO CAN'T BE TAKING A
HELICOPTER AND HAULING THE TREES

OUT OF THERE.

WE'VE GOT TO BUILD SOME
INFRASTRUCTURE SO THEY CAN

SUCCEED.

TO RESPOND TO THAT BRIEFLY.NTED
>> I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE

WOULD CONTEST THAT.

PEOPLE ON THIS PANEL HAVE SERVED
THE STATE OF IDAHO.

I WOULD JUST ASK YOURSELF --
IT'S INTERESTING THAT WE TALK

ABOUT S.T.E.M. EDUCATION, BUT
IDAHO HAS A HORRIBLE RECORD OF

EDUCATION.

IT'S GOOD TO HEAR THESE THINGS.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT OF
HIYPERBOLE TONIGHT.

I HOPE WE HEAR HUMILITY AND
AUTHENTICITY AS WELL.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, WHAT
COMMITTEES WOULD YOU LIKE TO

SERVE ON AND HOW WOULD THEY
IMPROVE THE COMMITTEE?

>> THE COMMITTEE IS OBVIOUSLY
NATURAL RESOURCES.

THAT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TO
IDAHO.

AGRICULTURE IS ALSO INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT.

THE ENERGY AND COMMERCE
COMMITTEE, WHICH REALLY ALTHOUGH

THE NAME SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING
ELSE, IT REALLY DEALS WITH

HEALTH CARE.

ID
IDAHO O

IDAHOANS ARE STRUGGLING WITH THE
HEALTH CRISIS.

THEY'RE STRUGGLING TO EVEN MAKE
THE PREMIUMS.

IF THEY CAN'T, THEY'RE BEING
PRICED OUT OF THE MARKET, SO

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO
BE DEALT WITH ON A NATIONAL

LEVEL.

I'VE WORKED AN AWFUL LOT IN THAT
ARENA, AND I WOULD LIKE TO

CONTINUE TO DO THAT TO HELP THE
CITIZENS OF IDAHO.

>> SENATOR FULCHER, YOU'RE USED
TO WORKING IN A DEEP RED STATE,

BUT WHEN YOU GET TO CONGRESS,
IT'S GOING TO BE A MUCH MORE

EVEN DIVIDE.

HOW DO YOU PLAN TO WORK WITH THE
OTHER SIDE IF YOU ARE ELECTED?

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WAS
ABLE TO DO DURING MY SERVICE IN

THE IDAHO STATE SENATE WAS GAIN
THE CONFIDENCE OF MY COLLEAGUES

ACROSS THE STATE.

SO MUCH SO THAT THEY ELECTED ME
AS ONE OF THEIR LEADERS FOR SIX

OF THE TEN YEARS THAT I SERVED.

YOU DON'T DO THAT WITHOUT BEING
ABLE TO WORK ACROSS A BROAD

SCALE.

MANY OF THE BILLS I SPONSORED OR
DEALT WITH, THERE WAS CO-SPONSOR

CO-SPONSORS FROM THE MINORITY
PARTY.

I THINK THAT WILL SERVE ME WELL
IN A PLACE LIKE WASHINGTON, D.C.

THE OTHER THING THAT I'M A
LITTLE BIT EXCITED ABOUT, TO BE

HONEST, IS I THINK I MIGHT KNOW
JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HOW THIS

PRESIDENT THINKS.

THE REASON OF THAT IS IN MY
EARLY DAYS AT MICRON TECHNOLOGY

I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT
WOULD INTERACT WITH A LOT OF

HIGH-PROFILE PEOPLE.

NOT AT THE TIME, BUT LATER.

THE STEVE JOBS OF THE WORLD AND
THAT MIND-SET AND HAVE SOME

COMMON THOUGHT PROCESSES.

IMAGE THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT
OF COMMONALITY THERE.

>> MR. SNYDER, LET'S GO WITH THE
SAME QUESTION.

>> SURE, BUT I HAVE A DIFFERENT
APPROACH THAN THESE GUYS.

GOING TO CONGRESS, I'LL WORK
WITH ANYBODY THAT WORKS WITH ME

ON ANY ISSUE.

SYSTEM UPSIDE DOWN.TURN THE -
LET ME EXPLAIN.

WE JUST GOT DONE WITH A TWO-WEEK
TOUR ALL AROUND THE DISTRICT.

WE'RE DOING TWO OR THREE OF
THOSE A DAY.

I WOULD ASK THE AUDIENCE A VERY
SIMPLE QUESTION.

I SAID, IF YOU APPROVE OF THE
JOB CONGRESS IS DOING, GO AHEAD

AND RAISE A HAND.

IN ALL THOSE MEETINGS, NOT A
SINGLE PERSON RAISED A HAND,

WHICH IS A BIG PROBLEM BECAUSE I
WAS TALKING TO REPUBLICAN

AUDIENCES.

I WAS TALKING TO CONSERVATIVE
AUDIENCES, BUT REPUBLICANS ARE

ALREADY IN CONTROL IN
WASHINGTON, D.C., BUT EVERYBODY

HATES CONGRESS.

CONGRESS HAS A 15% APPROVAL
RATING TODAY.

IN THIS ELECTION, WE HAVE A VERY
CLEAR CHOICE.

WE CAN CHOOSE A CONVENTIONAL
CAREER POLITICIAN WHO IS NOT

GOING TO MAKE ANY WAVES IN
WASHINGTON.

IF WE ELECT ONE OF THESE GUYS,
NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE.

IN TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WE'LL
COME BACK AND EVERYBODY WILL

TALK ABOUT HOW THEY HATE
CONGRESS, BUT I'M GOING THERE IN

THE LAST DEBATE.

WE NEED TO SEND A FIREBALL TO
WASHINGTON LIKE DONALD TRUMP.

I AM THAT FIREBALL.

I'M GOING THERE TO EXPOSE THE
CORRUPTION AND TAKE ON THE

LEADERSHIP OF BOTH PARTIES AND
SAY, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO

IT THIS WAY ANY LONGER.

>> JUST TO FOLLOW UP HERE, YOU
KNOW, HOW WOULD YOU WORK WITH A

POTENTIAL DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN
CONGRESS?

>> ON CERTAIN ISSUES, THERE'S
COMMON GROUNDS, BUT ON CERTAIN

ISSUES THERE'LL NEVER BE COMMON
GROUND.

FOR EXAMPLE, FUNDING PLANNED
PARENTHOOD.

I HAVE MADE A PLEDGE THAT I WILL
NEVER, EVER VOTE FOR ANY BILL

THAT HAS FUNDING FOR PLANNED
PARENTHOOD EVEN IF IT IS $1.

IT'S AN AUTOMATIC NO VOTE FOR
ME.

THERE'S SOME THINGS YOU CAN
COMPROMISE ON.

FOR EXAMPLE, HOW MUCH MONEY ARE
WE GOING TO SPEND ON REPAIRING

ROADS THIS YEAR, BUT THERE ARE
OTHER THINGS WHERE WE MUST STAND

ON PRINCIPLE.

UNLIKE THE OTHER CANDIDATES IN
THIS RACE, I HAVE A BACKBONE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY, I
KNOW THAT YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS

ABOUT COMMITTEES YOU'D LIKE TO
SERVE ON.

CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
THAT?

>> I DO.

THE COMMITTEES I WOULD LIKE TO
SERVE ON RELATES BACK TO YOUR

QUESTIONS, ONE, TWO, AND THREE,
HOW DO YOU BRIDGE TOGETHER THE

NORTH AND THE SOUTH, THE RURAL
AND URBAN, THE FIRST AND SECOND

DISTRICT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SERVE ON THE JEW
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND THE

HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE OF
GOVERNMENT AND REFORM.

THEY HAVE THEIR TENTACLES
WRAPPED AROUND ALL THE LAWS OF

THE UNITED STATES AND
REGULATIONS OF THE UNITED

STATES.

MANY OF THE THINGS THAT IMPACT
US IN A PUBLIC LAND STATE WITH

62% OR 63% PUBLIC FEDERAL LAND
AND TIMBER INDUSTRIES WITH

ACCESS TO RECREATION,
BACKCOUNTRY AIRPORTS INCLUDED,

ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE WRAPPED
UP IN REGULATIONS AND LAWS.

THOSE TWO COMMITTEES CAN BE
INSTANTLY AVAILABLE TO HELP ALL

OF IDAHO, ALL OF THE INDUSTRIES,
ALL OUR CITIZENS.

IT IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT, IN
MY OPINION, IN THIS TRUMP

ADMINISTRATION WHERE ON FIRST
YEAR'S PERFORMANCE THE TRUMP

ADMINISTRATION CUT 22
REGULATIONS FOR EVERY 1.

UNLESS WE CHANGE THE STATUTES,
WHICH DATE BACK TO THE 70s AND

80s, EVEN THE 60s UNDER WHICH
THESE REGULATIONS WERE INITIALLY

ADOPTED, THEY'LL BLOOM AGAIN
UNLESS WE NARROW THE DEFINITIONS

AND NARROW THE AUTHORITIES.

>> ALL RIGHT.

AND JUST TO CONTINUE WITH THAT,
HOW WOULD THAT AFFECT ALL

IDAHOANS?

CAN YOU REFERENCE THAT A LITTLE
BIT?

COULD YOU KIND OF CONTINUE WITH
THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

FOR INSTANCE, UNLESS WE HAVE A
CHANGE IN EPA REGULATIONS OR A

WAIVER FROM EPA REGULATIONS,
EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN OF NAPA,

IDAHO, MEN, WOMEN, AND CHILDREN,
WILL BE PAYING $111 PER MONTH

MORE FOR SEWER ACCESS AND SEWER
FEES BECAUSE OF AFFLUENT

REGULATIONS DUMPING OUT OF THEIR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, SO

WE NEED TO, IN THE CASE OF NAPA,
GET AN IMMEDIATE ACTION ON THAT.

IF NOT IN THIS CONGRESS, THEN
CERTAINLY EARLY IN THE 116th

CONGRESS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

REPRESENTATIVE MALEK, LET'S GO
BACK TO THE QUESTION ABOUT THE

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE NORTH AND
THE SOUTHWEST AND HOW YOU WOULD

REPRESENT BOTH OF THOSE
DIFFERING REGIONS.

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION,
CAMERON.

IF I AM ELECTED IN CONGRESS,
WHEN I'M ELECTED TO CONGRESS,

I'LL BE THE FIRST CONGRESSMAN
FROM KUTNEY COUNTY SINCE THE

1950s.

THE NORTH HAS BEEN IGNORED, BUT
I CAN TELL YOU I HAVE BUILT

RELATIONSHIPS FROM THE CANADIAN
BORDER DOWN TO THE NEVADA

BORDER.

THIS DISTRICT IS 600 MILES LONG
AND TAKES ABOUT TEN HOURS TO

DRIVE FROM ONE END TO THE OTHER,
AND I DO ON A REGULAR BASIS.

IT'S A BEAUTIFUL STATE, AND I
KNOW PEOPLE WITHOUT.

THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN BONNERS FERRY AND

ORIANA.

THE ISSUES ARE DIFFERENT.

THE LANDSCAPE IS DIFFERENT.

WHAT RUNS THROUGH THIS DISTRICT
IS AN INTENSE DEDICATION, FIERCE

 

FIERCELY INDEPENDENT PEOPLE WHO
DON'T WANT THE GOVERNMENT IN

THEIR LIVES AND WANT SOMEONE WHO
UNDERSTANDS THAT INDEPENDENCE,

WHO IS ACCESSIBLE TO THEM, WHO
WILL FIGHT FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE

IN.

I BELIEVE THAT I WILL BE
UNIQUELY SUITED AND REPRESENT

THE ENTIRE DISTRICT VERY WELL.

>> ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE GOING TO STAY WITH
REPRESENTATIVE MALEK.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS --
>> CAN I ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE

QUESTION REAL QUICK BECAUSE THEY
ALL GOT TO?

>> WE CAN GET TO THAT IN JUST A
SECOND.

WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON.

>> THAT'S A DISTINCTION THAT WE
HAVE.

>> BRIEFLY, REAL QUICK.

>> SURE.

I'LL START WITH A BECAUSE I'M
ALEX.

AGRICULTURE AND RESOURCES ARE
IMPORTANT TO IDAHO.

THEN WE CAN START WITH
APPROPRIATIONS.

APPROPRIATIONS IS ARGUABLY THE
MOST IMPORTANT COMMITTEE IN THE

GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THEY GIVE
MONEY.

WHY WOULDN'T WE WANT TO DO THAT?

AS A SERVICE MEMBER, THE ARMED
FORCES AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

COMMITTEE IS SO IMPORTANT.

THERE'S NO ONE MORE QUALIFIED ON
THAT PANEL TO REPRESENT VETERANS

IN IDAHO THAN I AM.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MALEK, OVER
THE LAST 40 YEARS, CONGRESS HAS

TRIED MULTIPLE TIMES TO TIE ITS
OWN HANDS AND FORCE SOME LEVEL

OF FISCAL DISCIPLINE UPON
ITSELF.

NONE OF THOSE MECHANISMS HAVE
WORKED.

THEY CONTINUE TO DEFICIT SPEND.

WOULD YOU SUPPORT A
CONSTITUTIONAL BALANCED BUDGET

AMENDMENT TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE
AND IF SO, WHAT KIND OF

EXCEPTIONS WOULD YOU INCLUDE IN
THAT?

>> THANK YOU, BILL.

I WOULD NOT BE ACTIVELY LOOKING
FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

I BELIEVE CONGRESS NEEDS TO DO
ITS JOB.

ONE OF THE ONLY JOBS OF
CONGRESS, WHO IS ELECTED BY THE

PEOPLE, IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
PASS A BUDGET ON A REGULAR

BASIS.

I CAN TELL YOU AS A MEMBER OF
THE BUDGET COMMITTEE I

UNDERSTAND THE TOUGH DECISIONS
THAT HAVE TO BE MADE IN ORDER TO

MAKE SURE THAT A BUDGET IS
BALANCED.

IN IDAHO, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT
THINGS AND SAY, YEAH, THAT WOULD

BE REALLY NICE FOR THE STATE OF
IDAHO, BUT OUR REALITY MEANS WE

HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHAT IS
NECESSARY.

WE NEED THAT SORT OF PRAGMATISM
IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

>> REPRESENTATIVE, YOU AND I
HAVE TALKED BEFORE ABOUT THIS,

THAT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, THEY
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROBLEMS

ARE.

THEY KNOW SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS.

THE ISSUE IS THEY DON'T TRUST
THEMSELVES TO HAVE THE

DISCIPLINE TO ACTUALLY ABIDE BY
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY.

IT'S TOO HARD.

HOW DO YOU OVERCOME THAT?

>> WELL, I THINK TOO HARD IS AN
EXCUSE.

MAYBE I'M NAIVE TO THINK I CAN
GO BACK THERE AND BE DIFFERENT,

BUT I CAN TELL YOU I'M NOT GOING
BACK THERE TO BE PART OF THE

SYSTEM.

I LOVE THE STATE OF IDAHO.

I LOVE WHERE I LIVE.

MY WIFE AND I OWN A BUSINESS
HERE.

WE HAVE NO DESIRE TO LIVE IN
WASHINGTON, D.C.

I'M GOING BACK THERE TO DO WHAT
IS RIGHT, AND THE RIGHT THING TO

DO IS TO MAKE SURE CONGRESS DOES
ITS JOB.

I'M GOING BACK THERE TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE PASS A BUDGET, AND

THAT WE DO THE OTHER JOBS THAT
CONGRESS NEEDS TO BE DOING.

I DON'T THINK THAT MY POLITICAL
CAREER IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN

THE VERY, VERY PERTINENT ISSUES
THAT ARE FACING THIS COUNTRY.

I'M NOT GOING TO PRETEND LIKE
I'M TOO IMPORTANT TO BE INVOLVED

IN THE IMMIGRATION DEBATE OR TOO
IMPORTANT TO BE INVOLVED IN

SOLVING OUR SOCIAL SECURITY
CRISIS.

I'M GOING BACK THERE TO FIX
THESE PROBLEMS.

>> YOU TALK ABOUT CONGRESS NEEDS
TO GET A HANDLE ON IT WITHOUT A

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

LAST DECEMBER, THEY APPROVED THE
TAX REFORM PACKAGE BY SOME

ESTIMATES THAT ADDS $1.5
TRILLION TO THE NATIONAL DEBT.

THAT'S ON TOP OF ANOTHER 10
TRILLION THAT'S ALREADY GOING TO

HAPPEN UNDER THE STATUS QUO.

WOULD YOU HAVE SUPPORTED THAT
PLAN?

>> I ABSOLUTELY WOULD HAVE
SUPPORTED THE TAX BILL THAT WAS

PASSED IN DECEMBER.

OUR TAXES ARE UNIVERSALLY
RECOGNIZED AS BEING TOO

COMPLICATED.

THEY'RE UNIVERSALLY RECOGNIZED
AS BEING TOO ONEROUS IN A GLOBAL

ECONOMY.

WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO COMPETE IN
A GLOBAL ECONOMY.

I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED THAT
BILL.

IF EVERYTHING STAYS THE SAME,
THIS IS GOING TO REDUCE REVENUE,

BUT WE HAVE ALLOWED EMPLOYERS,
JOB CREATORS, TO CREATE MORE

pEMPLOYEES, SO I BELIEVE THE LONG
RUN WILL SHOW THIS TAX REFORM

HAS CREATED A MORE HEALTHY
UNITED STATES.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, YOU
WANTED TO RESPOND TO THAT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I WANTED TO RESPOND TO MR.

SPENCE'S DISCUSSION AND QUESTION
REGARDING THE BALANCED BUDGET

AMENDMENT BECAUSE I HAVE
ACTUALLY WORKED ON THAT FOR A

NUMBER OF YEARS ACTUALLY IN THE
IDAHO LEGISLATURE.

I'M ONE OF A FEW LEGISLATORS WHO
WENT DOWN TO ARIZONA WHEN THEY

ACTUALLY DID A CALL TO DO A
CONVENTION OF STATES TO DISCUSS

THAT VERY ISSUE.

THAT WAS IN ITSELF HISTORIC
BECAUSE YOU HAVE STATES NOW

RECOGNIZING THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IS INEPT AT BEING

ABLE TO CONTROL ITS SPENDING.

THEY ARE ADDICTED TO IT.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT CONGRESS NOT
BEING ABLE TO TRUST THEMSELVES,

I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S NOT THAT
THEY TRUST THEMSELVES.

I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE PUTTING
THEMSELVES AHEAD OF THE PEOPLE

THAT THEY SERVE, AND THE DEBT IS
ABSOLUTELY DESTROYING AMERICA

FROM THE INSIDE OUT, SO I JUST
KIND OF WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

IT IS ON RECORD THAT I HAVE
WORKED WITH THAT FOR A NUMBER OF

YEARS IN THE IDAHO LEGISLATURE.

THE HOUSE HAS ALREADY USUALLY
BEEN POISED TO PASS A HOUSE

BUDGET AMENDMENT.

IF WE DO AN AMENDMENT, THAT'S
THE PEOPLE SPEAKING.

THAT'S THE PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO
ENGAGE INTO THIS PROCESS, AND

THEY CAN START TAKING IT OVER
AND START TELLING CONGRESS WHAT

THEY WANT TO SEE DONE.

I AM MORE THAN HAPPY TO WORK
WITH THE PUBLIC TO HELP GET THAT

DONE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

DID YOU HAVE A FOLLOW-UP FOR
REPRESENTATIVE PERRY?

>> REPRESENTATIVE -- SO, THAT'S
A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT, BUT

THAT'S STILL GOING TO TAKE TIME,
EVEN IF CONGRESS WERE TO APPROVE

IT.

IN THE INTERIM, AS
REPRESENTATIVE MALEK WAS SAYING,

CONGRESS NEEDS TO DEAL WITH IT
ITSELF.

THE HOUSE IS ALREADY TALKING
ABOUT ADDITIONAL TAX CUTS ON TOP

OF WHAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR.

WOULD YOU SUPPORT TAX CUTS THAT
EXPAND THE SIZE OF THE DEFICIT?

>> AND KEEP YOUR ANSWER BRIEF,
PLEASE.

>> I WOULD.

I WOULD SUPPORT THE TAX CUTS,
BUT I WOULD DEMAND CUTS IN

PROGRAMS TO HELP OFFSET THAT AND
THEN LET THE ECONOMY GROW BY

HAVING THE EXTRA MONEY IN THE
PUBLIC'S HANDS AND POCKETBOOKS.

>> LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, LET'S GO
BACK TO THE --

>> I WANT TO VOLUNTEER ON YOUR
LAST ONE.

AFTER AN HOUR AND 20 IN YOUR
BASEMENT LAST WEEK, I NEVER

THOUGHT I WOULD VOLUNTEER ON
ANOTHER ONE.

HOWEVER, I DO SUPPORT A BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT.

I WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE TAX
CUT BILL SIMPLY BECAUSE THE

DEFICIT THERE -- YOU SAID 1.5
TRILLION.

OTHERS SAY 1.3 TRILLION.

IT'S BASED ON STATIC
COMPETITIONS, NOT DYNAMIC

COMPETITIONS.

BUT THE REAL KEY TO YOUR
QUESTION HERE IS WHAT DOES

CONGRESS DO IN THE MEANTIME.

FOR THE LAST YEAR, I'VE BEEN
ADVOCATING THAT WE ADOPT

SOMETHING CALLED THE PENNY PLAN.

IF WE WILL SIMPLY TRIM ONE PENNY
OUT OF EVERY DOLLAR, 1% OUT OF

EVERY BUDGET ACROSS THE BOARD,
WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS,

WE CAN ACHIEVE A BALANCED
BUDGET.

NOT REDUCING THE TOTAL DEBT, BUT
A BALANCED BUDGET NOT

ACCUMULATING ANY MORE DEBT.

INTERESTINGLY, SENATOR RAND PAUL
JUST TEN DAYS AGO INTRODUCED A

BRAND-NEW 2018 PENNY PLAN.

I HAVE HIGH ASPIRATIONS FOR
THAT.

>> OKAY.

MR. SNYDER, I WANT TO GET YOUR
VIEWS ON THE BALANCED BUDGET

AMENDMENT.

>> YEAH.

VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF A BALANCED
BUDGET AMENDMENT.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE $1.3
TRILLION OMNIBUS BILL THAT WENT

THROUGH CONGRESS.

MOST REPUBLICANS VOTED IN FAVOR
OF IT, AND IT EXPLODED SPENDING

LEVELS, WHICH WE CAN'T DO.

WE JUST DID TAX CUTS, WHICH IS
GOOD, BUT WE CAN'T EXPLODE THE

SIZE OF GOVERNMENT AT THE SAME
TIME.

THAT'S INSANITY.

I IMMEDIATELY CAME OUT AND SAID
I WOULD HAVE BEEN A RESOUNDING

NO VOTE TO THAT BILL.

AND I REPEATED MY PLEDGE THAT I
WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR PAUL RYAN

FOR SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE BECAUSE
HE WAS THE AUTHOR AT THE TIP OF

THE SPEAR ON THAT BILL.

I CAME OUT WITH THAT PLEDGE.

I URGED AT LEAST ONE OTHER
MEMBER OF THE PEOPLE RUNNING

AGAINST ME TO JOIN THAT PLEDGE.

I WISH ONE OF THEM WOULD HAVE AT
THAT TIME.

WE FOUND OUT LATER PAUL RYAN WAS
STEPPING AWAY.

I WAS VERY, VERY HAPPY ABOUT
THAT, BUT WE CAN'T KEEP DOING

WHAT WE'RE DOING IN WASHINGTON.

FOR EXAMPLE, SINCE BARACK OBAMA
ENTERED THE WHITE HOUSE, WE'VE

BEEN STEALING MORE THAN $100
MILLION EVERY SINGLE HOUR OF

EVERY SINGLE DAY FROM OUR
CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS BEYOND
CRIMINAL.

IT'S A RECIPE FOR NATIONAL
SUICIDE, AND WE MUST STOP --

THAT'S WHY WE'VE TO SEND
SOMEBODY WITH A BACKBONE TO

WASHINGTON.

>> I WANT TO GET YOUR VIEWS ON
THE BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT.

>> YES, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

I WOULD ENCOURAGE ONE THAT IS
PAIRED WITH IT, AND THAT HAS TO

DO WITH TERM LIMITS.

SOME OF THE ISSUES WE'RE
STRUGGLING WITH IS DO THE

PERPETUAL SITUATION WHERE WE'VE
GOT THE SAME PEOPLE YEAR AFTER

YEAR, DECADE AFTER DECADE.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD
PAIRING IN ORDER TO HELP TRY TO

PUT SOME OF THAT SYSTEM IN
CHECK.

I WOULD ALSO ADD ON THE TAX CUT
I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED THE TAX

CUT THAT WENT THROUGH.

IN FACT, I THINK IT SHOULD HAVE
GONE FURTHER BECAUSE ONCE

THAT -- ONCE THE PEOPLE OUR
BUSINESSES AND OUR INDIVIDUALS

AND FAMILIES HAVE THE ABILITY TO
HANG ON TO MORE OF THEIR MONEY,

THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING
WITH IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO INVEST IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO SPEND IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO CIRCULATE THAT
THROUGH THE ECONOMY, SO I

BELIEVE THAT'S A TRIGGER FOR AN
ECONOMIC ENGINE THAT WILL HELP

WITH THIS WHOLE DEBT SITUATION.

>> TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT IN A
LITTLE MORE DETAIL.

YOU TALK ABOUT CUTTING TAXES,
CUTTING SPENDING, BUT YOU ALSO

TALK ABOUT FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITY.

THIS YEAR, THE FEDERAL DEFICIT
IS GOING TO BE SOMEWHERE IN THE

NEIGHBORHOOD OF $450 BILLION.

THAT'S ROUGHLY HALF OF ALL
NONDEFENSE DISCRETIONARY

SPENDING.

HOW DO YOU BRING THAT BACK INTO
BALANCE?

>> I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

THERE HAS TO BE AN ATTACK ON
BOTH SIDES OF THE EQUATION.

THERE NEEDS TO BE AN AGGRESSIVE
STANCE ON THE REDUCTION IN

SPENDING.

THERE'S A REAL GOOD PLACE TO
START, AND THAT'S THE FEDERAL

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,
POTENTIALLY THE ELIMINATION OR

REDUCTION OF THE EPA, AND A LOT
OF THE FOREIGN AID THAT DOES NOT

HAVE TO DO WITH HOMELAND
SECURITY FOR AMERICA OR MILITARY

SUPPORT FOR AMERICA.

ON THE SPENDING SIDE, THERE'S A
GOOD PLACE TO START.

WHAT I JUST LISTED OFF, THERE'S
A BIG, BIG NUMBER.

ON THE ECONOMIC ENGINE START,
BILL, WE'VE GOT TREMENDOUS

POTENTIAL.

WE'VE GOT A TURBO CHARGED V-8 IN
THIS POTENTIAL ECONOMY, AND

WE'RE RUNNING ON THREE
CYLINDERS.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHY
THAT'S THE CASE.

BUT AMONG THEM IS JUST SO MANY
REGULATIONS AND SO MUCH

BUREAUCRACY THAT IT IS HAMPERING
OUR BUSINESSES AND OUR FAMILIES.

JUST WITH THE TAX REFORM THAT
WAS RECENTLY PLANNED, THAT HAS

INFUSED A CONFIDENCE WITHIN MUCH
OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY TO

REINVEST IN AMERICA, REINVEST IN
JOBS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT
CONTINUE AND EXPAND.

>> OKAY.

REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, AGAIN,
THAT $450 BILLION DEFICIT, WHAT

DO YOU CUT TO GET BACK INTO
BALANCE?

>> YOU NEED TO GO BACK, JUST
LIKE WE DO HERE IN IDAHO -- WE

HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT DO WE WANT
VERSUS WHAT DO WE TRULY NEED.

THOSE ARE THOSE TOUGH DECISIONS
THAT HAVE TO BE MADE.

WE KNOW THERE ARE PROGRAMS THAT
DO NOT WORK, BUT ONCE THEY WERE

PUT IN PLACE, THEY CONTINUE TO
BE FUNDED.

WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK THROUGH
EVERY AGENCY.

WE NEED TO START PAIRING DOWN
THOSE AGENCIES, AND WE NEED TO

START TRANSFERRING THE DUTIES OF
AN AGENCY MORE TO THE STATE AND

STOP MAKING THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT BE THE LARGEST

EMPLOYER IN THE NATION.

WE CANNOT RELY ON THE
GOVERNMENT.

JOBS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CREATED
BY THE SMALL BUSINESSES AND THE

BUSINESSES OF THIS NATION, AND
WE'VE GOT TO START CUTTING THOSE

REGULATIONS AND ALLOWING THAT
GROWTH AND SOME BREATHING ROOM

SO THAT THEY CAN.

THAT'S WHERE I WOULD BEGIN ON
THAT.

AGAIN, WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE
THAT BOTH SIDES ARE EQUAL.

I'M ALWAYS FOR THE TAX CUTS.

I THINK THAT PUMPING MONEY BACK
INTO THE ECONOMY IS IMPORTANT.

AS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, MY
HUSBAND AND I CERTAINLY SEE THAT

WHEN PEOPLE RECEIVE A BONUS,
WHEN PEOPLE HAVE A LITTLE EXTRA

MONEY IN THEIR PAYCHECK.

THEY'RE COMING IN TO SPEND IT.

THAT MONEY GOES THEN TO THE
PEOPLE WE EMPLOY.

THIS IS REALLY HOW IT IS
SUPPOSED TO WORK.

THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO SEE.

>> COLONEL, SIMILAR QUESTION FOR
YOU.

IF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY WERE
EASY, CONGRESS PROBABLY WOULD

HAVE DONE IT BY NOW.

THE REASON IT'S HARD IS BECAUSE
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY INCURS

PAIN.

IN YOUR VIEW, WHO BEARS THE
BURDEN OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT
QUESTION.

I THINK THIS IS THE MOST
IMPORTANT QUESTION IN PROBABLY

THIS ELECTION.

I THINK THE DEFICIT OR THE DEBT
IS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO OUR

NATIONAL SECURITY FOR A LOT OF
REASONS BECAUSE MONEY TRANSCENDS

EVERY ASPECT OF OUR GOVERNMENT.

WE HAVE $19 TRILLION -- GDP IS
ABOUT $19 TRILLION.

YET WE SPEND $21 TRILLION.

WE'RE $21 TRILLION IN DEBT.

THIS IS A PROBLEM.

WE HAVE TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT.

BY FAR, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE
AGENCIES.

I WOULD CALL FOR AN AUDIT OF THE
AGENCIES IMMEDIATELY AND THEN

CUT OFF ALL THE --
OVERSTRENGTHEN THOSE AGENCIES,

BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT RESTORING --
MY CAMPAIGN IS ABOUT DISCIPLINE.

DO YOU KNOW CONGRESS HASN'T
PASSED A BUDGET ON TIME IN THE

FISCAL YEAR IN 20 YEARS?

YOU NEED TO SEND A
REPRESENTATIVE TO CONGRESS

THAT'S GOING TO HOLD OTHER
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RESPONSIBLE.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO.

BETSY RUSSELL TO LIEUTENANT -
GOVERNOR LEROY.

>> LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY, IT
IS COMMON FOR MEMBERS OF

CONGRESS TO BE HIGHLY CRITICAL
OF A PRESIDENT AND THAT

PRESIDENT'S ADMINISTRATION WHEN
THAT PRESIDENT IS OF A DIFFERENT

PARTY THAN THE MEMBER OF
CONGRESS.

WHEN THE PRESIDENT IS OF THE
SAME PARTY, SOMETIMES THE

SILENCE IS DEAFENING.

ARE YOU WILLING TO HOLD THIS
PRESIDENT, SHOULD YOU BE ELECTED

TO CONGRESS, AND HIS CABINET TO
THE SAME STANDARDS YOU WOULD

HAVE FOR A DEMOCRATIC
ADMINISTRATION AND BE VOCAL IN

YOUR CRITCRITICISM?

>> I DON'T THINK I WOULD HAVE
ANY PROBLEM BEING

STRAIGHTFORWARD WITH ANY
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

WERE I TO SWEAR TO UPHOLD THE
SAME CONSTITUTION THAT HE DOES

OR SHE DOES.

I BELIEVE THAT APPROACHING THAT
IN AN OBJECTVE AND IMPARTIAL A

WAY IS VERY USEFUL.

ON THE OTHER HAND, OF COURSE,
PARTISANSHIP IS PART AND PARCEL

TO WASHINGTON, D.C.

DONALD TRUMP HAS BEEN AN
UNCONVENTIONAL PRESIDENT IN

SEVERAL REGARDS, AND THAT
UNCONVENTIONALITY IS PAYING

SIGNIFICANT DIVIDENDS FROM TIME
TO TIME, SUCH AS IN NORTH AND

SOUTH KOREA TODAY.

I THINK APPROACHING THE PEOPLE'S
BUSINESS FROM THE PEOPLE'S BEST

INTEREST AND BEING CANDID ABOUT
IS IT VERY USEFUL.

I DO DETEST THE AMOUNT OF
PARTISANSHIP THAT'S RANK IN

BETWEEN THE CANDIDACIES, IN
BETWEEN THE POLITICS, BETWEEN

THE PARTIES IN THE CONGRESS AND
IN THE SENATE.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WE WOULD
BETTER BE SERVED BY HAVING A

JOINT PRESS CONFERENCE EVERY
WEEK WITH THE MINORITY LEADER

AND THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE
STANDING AT THE SAME PODIUM THAN

HAVING THESE VERY DIVERSE, VERY
CAUSTIC HEARINGS AND PRESS

CONFERENCES THAT WE HAVE NOW,
BUT I'M WILLING TO COMMIT TO BE

PARTIAL WITH A POLITICAL
OVERLAY.

>> HAVE YOU SEEN ANY COMMENTS OR
BEHAVIOR FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP

THAT RAISED ETHICAL CONCERNS FOR
YOU?

>> THE ETHICAL CONCERNS THAT ARE
ALLEGED AGAINST THIS PRESIDENT

HAVE ALL FAIRLY WELL SHOWN NOT
TO BE EXISTENT IN A YEAR OR

MORE'S WORTH OF INVESTIGATION.

FOR EXAMPLE, RUSSIAN COLLUSION.

THAT HAS JUST COLLAPSED IN THE
HOUSE OF INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE

REPORT THAT FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF
COLLUSION.

I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ETHICAL.

I DON'T APPROVE OF NAME CALLING.

I DON'T ALWAYS AGREE WITH EVERY
ACTION OF THE PRESIDENT, BUT I

DO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT HE
IS BOLD, THAT HE'S TAKING THE

INITIATIVE, THAT HE'S THE KIND
OF LEADER THAT AMERICA SEEMS TO

APPRECIATE AND HAS CERTAINLY
ELECTED AND RESPONDED TO

SUBSEQUENTLY.

I THOUGHT IT WAS OUTSTANDING
LAST NIGHT WHEN NANCY AND I WERE

WATCHING TELEVISION TO SEE THE
PRESIDENT ON ONE HAND IN

MICHIGAN SPEAKING TO 30,000
PEOPLE AND EXPLAINING WHERE HE

WAS AND EXPLAINING HOW HE'D BEEN
DISADVANTAGED BY, WITH ALL DUE

RESPECT, THE MEDIA AND
CONTRASTING THAT TO THE WHITE

HOUSE'S BLACK TIE DINNER.

THIS PRESIDENT DOES HAVE TOUCH
WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

HE DOES HAVE A CORE OF GOOD
SOLID ETHICS.

THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM HAVE
REMAINED UNPROVEN.

>> MR. SNYDER, THE SAME
QUESTION.

WOULD YOU HOLD THIS
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE IN

THE SAME WAY YOU WOULD OF AN
ADMINISTRATION IN ANOTHER PARTY?

>> IN TERMS OF DONALD TRUMP,
EVERYONE WANTS TO CRITICIZE HIM.

WHY DON'T WE TALK ABOUT ALL THE
GREAT THINGS THAT HE'S DOING?

LOOK ON THE KOREAN PENINSULA.

WE HAVE PEACE FOR THE FIRST TIME
IN DECADES.

WE'VE GOTTEN THOUSANDS OF PAGES
OF REGULATIONS THAT ARE BEING

ELIMINATED.

WE'VE GOT AN ECONOMY THAT'S
GROWING AGAIN, BUT PRESIDENT

TRUMP HAS DONE AN AMAZING JOB.

HIS APPROVAL RATINGS ARE RISING.

THAT'S WHY I'M VERY, VERY PROUD
TO STAND WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP.

YOU'LL SEE RIGHT AT THE TOP OF
MY SIGNS, "VOTE PRO-TRUMP."

ON OUR CAMPAIGN BROCHURES AND
WEBSITE, EVERYTHING SAYS

PRO-TRUMP BECAUSE THE WAY THIS
PRESIDENCY HAS STARTED IS THE

GREATEST START WE'VE SEEN TO A
PRESIDENT IN THE POST-WORLD WAR

II ERA.

WE SHOULD BE APPLAUDING HIM.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THE
INVESTIGATION, THE MUELLER

INVESTIGATION.

I'M ON RECORD AS SAYING ROBERT
MUELLER SHOULD BE FIRED

IMMEDIATELY.

I WOULD LIKE ONE OF THE OTHER
GENTLEMAN UP HERE TO JOIN WITH

ME IN THAT PLEDGE, IF THEY'RE
WILLING TO, BUT LET ME GO ON

RECORD AGAIN.

ROBERT MUELLER SHOULD BE FIRED.

THE INVESTIGATION INTO THIS
RUSSIAN COLLUSION THING, TOTAL

WHI
WITCH HUNT.

IT NEEDS TO END.

HILLARY CLINTON NEEDS TO BE HELD
ACCOUNTABLE.

MOST CONSERVATIVES HERE IN THE
DISTRICT WOULD VERY MUCH AGREE

WITH ME ON THAT.

>> WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WOULD
CAUSE YOU TO WITHDRAW YOUR

SUPPORT FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP?

IS THERE ANYTHING HE WOULD DO?

>> AS LONG AS DONALD TRUMP
STICKS TO THE MAKE AMERICA GREAT

AGAIN AGENDA AND DOES WHAT HE
SAYS HE'S GOING TO DO, THERE'S

NO REASON TO WITHDRAW SUPPORT.

I'M NOT GOING TO WITHDRAW MY
SUPPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT

BECAUSE I TRUST HIM.

HE'S A MAN OF HIS WORD.

HE'S FOLLOWING HIS AGENDA.

NO.

WHY SHOULD ANY OF US BE THINKING
ABOUT WITHDRAWING SUPPORT?

WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT HOW
CAN WE GET MORE ON THE BANDWAGON

AND GET MORE BEHIND TRUMP?

THAT'S WHY SOMEONE FROM TRUMP'S
NATIONAL CAMPAIGN TEAM CAME AND

JOINED MY CAMPAIGN, IS HELPING
RUN MY CAMPAIGN, BECAUSE THEY

KNOW WE'RE WITH TRUMP.

TRUMP SUPPORTERS IN THE DISTRICT
AND IN THE STUDIO TODAY WHO

JOINED MY CAMPAIGN BECAUSE I'M
THE TRUMP CANDIDATE, SO NO.

I'M NOT GOING TO CRITICIZE THE
PRESIDENT.

I'M GOING TO APPLAUD HIM FOR THE
START OF A TREMENDOUS

PRESIDENCY.

>> YOU HAVE PORTRAYED YOURSELF
AS THE MOST PRO-TRUMP CANDIDATE,

THE ONE THAT WAS WITH TRUMP FROM
THE BEGINNING, BUT YOU DIDN'T

CAST A VOTE IN IDAHO'S
PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE PRIMARY

WHEN DONALD TRUMP WAS RUNNING
FOR PRESIDENCY.

WHY NOT?

>> I DID A LOT OF TRAVELING FOR
TELEVISION AT THE TIME.

I WAS CALLED AWAY UNEXPECTEDLY.

I WAS TRAVELING A LOT DURING
THAT TIME, BUT CERTAINLY YOU CAN

GO BACK AND LOOK AT MY WRITING.

ALL THROUGHOUT 2016, YOU'LL SEE
I PROMOTED DONALD TRUMP

EXTREMELY STRONG.

THAT SAME TIME FRAME ALL THE
OTHER LEADING CONTENDERS UP HERE

WANTED TO KEEP DONALD TRUMP OUT
OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

THEY WERE BACKING OTHER PEOPLE.

THE RECORD SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.

I WORKED EXTREMELY HARD ALL
THROUGHOUT 2016 TO PROMOTE

DONALD TRUMP, AND I'M VERY PROUD
TO HAVE DONE SO.

>> SENATOR FULCHER, THE SAME
QUESTION.

WOULD YOU HOLD PRESIDENT TRUMP
AND HIS ADMINISTRATION AS

ACCOUNTABLE AS YOU WOULD A
DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION?

>> YES, AND I'VE GOT A HISTORY
OF DOING EXACTLY THAT.

WHEN I WAS SERVING AS A SENATE
LEADER, THERE WAS A COUPLE OF

DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATIONS THAT I
WAS HAVING TO DEAL WITH SOME OF

THAT FALLOUT.

ONE OF THEM WAS THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION WITH A HORRENDOUS

FEDERAL MANDATE ON HEALTH CARE.

THAT WAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON US
AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT WE

HAVEN'T RECOVERED FROM STILL.

WHEN GEORGE H.W. BUSH WAS IN
PLACE, HE HAD A PROFICIENCY FOR

SPENDING, SPENDING TOO MUCH.

THAT HAD AN IMPACT ON US AS WELL
HERE IN IDAHO BECAUSE MORE

THAN 1/3 OF THE BUDGET THAT
COMES TO THE STATE OF IDAHO IS

FROM SOME FEDERAL KIND OF A
SUBSIDY.

YES, I WOULD, AND YES, I HAVE.

I WOULD BACK THAT UP IN THIS
CASE BY SAYING, HOWEVER, THAT

THIS PRESIDENT HAS INFUSED SOME
CONFIDENCE IN THE ECONOMY

BECAUSE HE'S TAKEN A VERY UNCON
UNCONVENTIONAL APPROACH.

HE DOESN'T LOOK AT THE WORLD THE
SAME AS YOU AND I DO.

HE SEES EVERYTHING AS A COST
CENTER AND PROFIT CENTER.

THAT'S JUST HOW HE FUNCTIONS.

IF YOU KNOW THAT AND YOU KNOW
HOW TO COMMUNICATE ON THOSE

TERMS, THEN I THINK THAT THERE'S
SOME EXCITING THINGS YOU CAN DO

WITH THIS PARTICULAR TIME FRAME.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, BETSY, JUST
TO -- THERE'S ANOTHER EXCITING

COMPONENT.

THAT IS WE'RE ABOUT TO HAVE THE
LARGEST TURNOVER IN THE UNITED

STATES CONGRESS IN PROBABLY
ABOUT 50 YEARS.

IF YOU INFUSE ALL THOSE NEW
MINDS AND A PRESIDENT THAT'S

WILLING TO DO SOMETHING
DIFFERENT, THERE'S SOME EXCITING

THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN.

>> THE SENATE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE RECENTLY VOTED TO

PROTECT JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER,

WHO YOUR OPPONENT MR. SNYDER
WANTS TO FIRE, FROM BEING FIRED

BY PRESIDENT TRUMP.

HOW WOULD YOU HAVE VOTED?

>> TO ME, THOSE ARE
DISTRACTIONS.

THEY'RE DISTRACTIONS FROM
GOVERNING.

THEY'RE DISTRACTIONS AS TRYING
TO TAKE AWAY FROM THE POSITIVE

THINGS THAT CONGRESS IS TRYING
TO DO, TRYING TO TAKE AWAY FROM

THE POSITIVE THINGS THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO DO.

TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, I
HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN FOLLOWING IT

THAT CLOSELY.

THE ATTENTION NEEDS TO BE ON THE
THINGS THAT ARE REALLY IMPORTANT

TO IDAHO.

IF YOU GO TOP TO BOTTOM, IT'S
REALLY CLEAR.

IT'S IMMIGRATION.

IT'S HEALTH CARE.

IT IS THINGS TO DO WITH OUR
RESOURCE BASE AND REGULATIONS.

THAT'S WHERE MY ATTENTION IS
GOING.

I'M NOT FOLLOWING A LOT OF THIS
PROPAGANDA.

>> YOU THINK THE SENATE
JUDICIARY'S VOTE TO PROTECT

MUELLER WAS PROPAGANDA?

>> NOT PROPAGANDA.

A DISTRACTION.

THIS WHOLE THING IS A
DISTRACTION.

OUR FOCUS NEEDS TO BE ON THE
THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO

IDAHO AND TO AMERICA.

THAT'S MY POSITION ON IT.

I HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN FOLLOWING IT
THAT CLOSELY.

>> YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT
CONGRESS SHOULD TAKE ANY ROLE IN

THAT MATTER?

>> IN WHAT MATTER?

>> IN WHETHER OR NOT THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL SHOULD BE FIRED BY THE

PRESIDENT?

>> I THINK CONGRESS SHOULD BE
WORRIED ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS

THAT MR. SPENCE BROUGHT UP, AND
THAT IS THE FISCAL HEALTH OF

THIS NATION AND GO ABOUT THE
PROCESS OF GOVERNING.

THAT'S WHERE CONGRESS SHOULD BE
FOCUSING ITS EFFORTS.

>> OKAY.

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY WANTED
TO RESPOND.

KEEP IT BRIEF, PLEASE.

>> YES.

FRANKLY, BETSY, I THINK YOU'VE
GOT RUSS ON A KEY ISSUE.

THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION ON THE
POSITION OF SENATE COUNSEL AND

SPECIAL COUNSEL IS A VERY
IMPORTANT ONE AND POTENTIALLY A

CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS FOR THIS
NATION.

THAT INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO BE
WRAPPED UP VERY SWIFTLY.

IT NEEDS TO COME TO A SPECIFIC
AND FULLY DETAILED CONCLUSORY

REPORT.

AND WHEN IT DOES AND AS I EXPECT
IT TO DO, IT CLEARS THE

PRESIDENT OF ANY FINDINGS OF
CRIMINALITY IN THE

ADMINISTRATION.

THEN WE HAVE DONE OURSELVES A
SOUTHBOU

SERVICE, AND WE CAN GET BACK TO
THE BUSINESS OF IDAHO AND

EVERYTHING ELSE.

THAT'S NOT JUST A DISTRACTION.

THAT'S A POTENTIAL
CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.

THE BILL BEFORE THE SENATE IS
UNNECESSARY.

THE DYNAMICS OF THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, THE PRESIDENT, AND

AN OCCASIONAL SPECIAL COUNSEL
WORKING OR COOPERATING WITH THE

CONGRESS OF THE THE UNITED
STATES, THE SENATE AND THE

HOUSE, IS AN IMPORTANT FEATURE
OF GOVERNMENT.

IT'S NOT JUST A DISTRACTION.

>> SINCE I WAS MENTIONED --
>> PLEASE BRIEFLY.

>> I WILL BE BRIEF.

I'M NOT PUCKERED OVER THAT.

I'M SIMPLY MAKING THE POINT IF
THE ATTENTION OF CONGRESS AND

THE ATTENTION OF THE EXECUTIVE,
LEGISLATIVE, AND JUDICIAL BRANCH

WAS WHERE IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE,
WE WOULDN'T BE DEALING WITH THIS

KIND OF THING.

WE WOULD BE ABOUT THE BUSINESS
OF THE HEALTH OF THIS NATION.

THAT'S WHERE OUR FOCUS HAS GOD
TO BE.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MALEK, YOU HAD
SOMETHING TO SAY.

>> THANK YOU, MELISSA.

I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT SHOCKED
THAT SENATOR FULCHER IS NOT

PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN CONGRESS WITH THIS.

I DIDN'T HEAR AN ANSWER TO
BETSY'S QUESTION ON THAT.

I APPRECIATE WHAT LIEUTENANT
GOVERNOR LEROY SAID HERE BECAUSE

WE ABSOLUTELY NEED TO MAKE SURE
THAT THERE'S A SEPARATION OF

POWERS.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE
MAINTAINING CONSTITUTIONAL

INTEGRITY ON THESE ISSUES.

I CAN'T SECOND GUESS WHERE THE
SENATOR IS AT ON THIS, BUT WE

NEED TO MAKE SURE THERE'S
INTEGRITY IN THE PROCESS SO WE

HAVE FULL FAITH IN THE PRESIDENT
AND THE PROCESS.

I'M JUST A LITTLE BIT SHOCKED
THAT THE SENATOR WAS NOT PAYING

ATTENTION TO THAT ISSUE.

>> SINCE I WAS MENTIONED AGAIN,
I DON'T WANT TO SHOCK

REPRESENTATIVE MALEK TOO MUCH.

I DON'T THINK WHAT I'M TRYING TO
COMMUNICATE IS THAT DIFFICULT TO

UNDERSTAND.

MY POINT ONCE AGAIN IS THAT IF
THE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT WERE

FOCUSED ON WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED
TO BE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE,

WE WOULDN'T BE RUNNING DOWN
THESE RABBIT TRAILS NOW.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND?

>> ENSURING WE'RE DEFENDING THE
CONSTITUTION IS AN ABSOLUTELY

FUNDAMENTAL ROLE OF THE
GOVERNMENT.

>> THE NEXT QUESTION IS FROM
BETSY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MALEK, THE
SAME QUESTION THAT I'VE OPPOSED

TO YOUR OPPONENTS HERE.

WOULD YOU HOLD THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE IN

THE SAME WAY THAT YOU WOULD AN
ADMINISTRATION OF THE OTHER

PARTY?

>> THANKS, BETSY.

NO ONE IS ABOVE REPROACH,
INCLUDING MYSELF.

I'VE BEEN QUITE VOCAL ABOUT SOME
OF THE THINGS THAT I DON'T AGREE

WITH THE PRESIDENT ON, AND I'VE
BEEN CRITICIZED FOR BEING TOO

CRITICAL OF THE PRESIDENT.

BUT ODDLY ENOUGH WHEN IT COMES
TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ISSUES

THAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING TO
MAKE SURE THIS COUNTRY IS MOVING

FORWARD, I AGREE WITH HIM MORE
THAN ANYBODY ELSE ON THIS STAGE.

I HAVE BEEN CRITICIZED FOR THE
THINGS THAT I HAVE AGREED WITH

THE PRESIDENT ON.

WHEN IT CAME TO MAKING SURE THAT
WE DON'T HAVE A LOOPHOLE IN OUR

LAWS WITH GUN STOCKS, I STAND
WITH THE PRESIDENT.

WHEN IT CAME TO MAKING SURE WE
KEPT THE GOVERNMENT MOVING

FORWARD WITH AN OMNIBUS BILL
WHICH I WILL ADMIT IS A COMPLETE

ATROCITY, I'M THE ONLY ONE ON
THE STAGE WHO STOOD WITH THE

PRESIDENT ON THIS ISSUE, SAYING
WE NEED TO FIX OUR FISCAL AND

CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS IN THIS
COUNTRY, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE

SURE WE'RE MOVING THE BUSINESS
FORWARD.

pFIX ONE PROBLEM.E BUSINESS TO
YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO WALK AND

CHEW GUM AT THE SAME TIME.

THOSE THE THINGS I'VE BEEN
CRITICIZED FROM MY OPPONENTS

HERE.

I STAND WITH THE PRESIDENT ON
MORE ISSUES THAN I DON'T AND

MORE THAN ANYBODY ELSE ON THIS
STAGE.

>> HAVE YOU SEEN ANY COMMENTS OR
BEHAVIOR FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP

THAT FOR YOU RAISES ETHICAL
ISSUES?

>> WELL, THERE'S ACCUSATIONS
THAT GO WITH EVERY

ADMINISTRATION.

THE ETHICAL ISSUES THAT BEEN
RAISED -- I BELIEVE IN THE RULE

OF LAW.

I BELIEVE IN DUE PROCESS.

I'M NOT ABOUT TO JUMP ON ANY
BANDWAGON CONDEMNING THE

PRESIDENT OF SOMETHING OF THAT
THERE'S NO PROOF.

THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE
PRESIDENT HAS SAID IN THE PAST

THAT HAS GOTTEN UNDER MY SKIN.

I WAS RAISED IN A HOUSEHOLD
WHERE YOU RESPECT WOMEN.

SOME OF THE THINGS THE PRESIDENT
HAS SAID IN THE PAST ABOUT WOMEN

HAS REALLY GOTTEN UNDER MY SKIN,
BUT I AGREE WITH HIM WHERE HE'S

TAKING THE COUNTRY.

THE FACT THAT HE'S BEEN ABLE TO
DO WHAT HE'S DONE ON THE KOREAN

PENINSULA -- I'M NOT ABOVE
HOLDING ANYBODY ACCOUNTABLE, BUT

I'M ALSO VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE
GOOD THINGS THE PRESIDENT IS

DOING FOR OUR COUNTRY.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, THE
SAME QUESTION.

HOW WOULD YOU HOLD THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE AND

WOULD YOU DO IT IN THE SAME WAY
THAT YOU WOULD HOLD A DEMOCRATIC

ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE?

>> I THINK THAT'S ONLY FAIR THAT
YOU HAVE TO HOLD THE

PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION
ACCOUNTABLE, BUT PART OF THE

CONVERSATION IS IF CONGRESS IS
WILLING TO POINT FINGERS

SOMEWHERE ELSE, THEY ALSO HAVE
TO POINT FINGERS AT THEMSELVES

AND THEY NEED TO HOLD THEMSELVES
ACCOUNTABLE.

THEY NEED TO STOP ARGUING OVER
THINGS LIKE YOU HAVE SEEN HERE

ALREADY AND START DEALING WITH
THOSE THINGS THAT REALLY MATTER.

IN REGARDS TO TRUMP AND SOME OF
THESE ACCUSATINS THAT ARE

AGAINST HIM AND WHETHER THE
SENATE IS DOING THEIR THING WITH

ROBERT MUELLER CORRECTLY, I
THINK THAT TRUMP IS FULLY IN

CHARGE OF HIS EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

IF HE WANTED TO GET RID OF HIM,
HE WOULD HAVE ALREADY, BUT I

BELIEVE HE ALLOWS THESE THINGS
TO GO THROUGH, AS HE SHOULD,

BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN THE END
HE'S GOING TO BE VINDICATED.

I THINK A LOT OF WHAT IS GOING
ON UP THERE RIGHT NOW IS REALLY

SMOKE AND MIRRORS.

WE'RE DISTRACTING EVERYBODY
ELSE, AND WE'RE NOT PAYING

ATTENTION TO THE THINGS THAT
REALLY MATTER.

CONGRESS HAS BROUGHT IN MARK
ZUCKERBERG BASICALLY TO EDUCATE

THEM ON HOW THE INTERNET WORKS
WHEN THEY REALLY OUGHT TO BE

HOLDING HEARINGS ON HOW TO
BALANCE THIS BUDGET AND

REINSTATING A BUDGET PROCESS SO
WE'RE NOT BEING FACED WITH

OMNIBUS BILLS LESS THAN 24 HOURS
WHEN YOU'RE EXPECTED TO VOTE.

YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HOLD
YOURSELF ACCOUNTABLE.

I WANT TO SAY ONE THING
CERTAINLY ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP.

YES, HE IS UNCONVENTIONAL, BUT I
HAVE TO SAY HOW EXCITING IT WAS

TO WATCH WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE
KOREAN PENINSULA.

FOR ALL OUR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED
SERVICES WHO SERVED IN THE

KOREAN CONFLICT, I WANT TO SAY
THANK YOU.

I HOPE THEY FEEL VINDICATED AND
FEEL THAT THEIR SERVICE WAS WELL

DONE BECAUSE IT WAS.

>> COLONEL GALLEGOS, THE SAME
QUESTION.

HOW WOULD YOU HOLD THIS
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE IN

THE SAME WAY THAT YOU WOULD HOLD
ACCOUNTABLE AN ADMINISTRATION

FROM THE OTHER PARTY?

>> I THINK IT'S A GREAT
QUESTION, AND I AGREE WITH MY

PEERS.

NO ONE IS BEYOND REPROACH WHEN
IT COMES TO INTEGRITY AND

CHARACTER.

I THINK WE HAVE TO HOLD THE
ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE, ANY

ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THAT MATTER.

I WOULD TELL YOU I KEEP GETTING
THROWN IN A GROUP OF FOLKS

HERE -- BUT I WOULD HAVE
SUPPORTED THE OMNIBUS BILL AS

WELL EVEN THOUGH I HATE THE
SPENDING IT HAD.

ARE WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD
HOLD IN HIGH ESTEEM.

IF THEY DON'T DO THAT, WE HAVE A
PROBLEM IN GOVERNMENT.

IT IS A CONSTITUTION ISSUE.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, I LOOK AT
THINGS FROM A DIFFERENT LENS.

IT IS ALSO A MATTER OF NATIONAL
SECURITY.

WHEN WE HAVE OTHER GOVERNMENTS
AND OTHER COUNTRIES INTERFERING

WITH OUR ELECTIONS, WE HAVE TO
HAVE DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE

THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

CYBER WARFARE IS REAL.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOUT A LOT OF
THINGS.

MOSTLY IMPORTANT IS JUST HOLDING
EVERYONE ACCOUNTABLE AND

STOPPING THE PARTISAN POLITICS
BECAUSE ACCOUNTABILITY AND

DISCIPLINE ARE PARAMOUNT.

>> HAVE YOU SEEN ANY COMMENTS OR
BEHAVIOR FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP

THAT RAISES ETHICAL QUESTIONS
FOR YOU?

>> I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE
ALLEGATIONS OF ANYONE.

I WILL TELL YOU I LIKE WHAT MR.

SNYDER SAID.

I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD COALESCE
AROUND THE PRESIDENT OF THE

UNITED STATES AND THE COMMANDER
AND CHIEF.

HE HAS AN IMPORTANT JOB, AND
HE'S REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE OF

AMERICA.

AMERICANS DECIDED THAT THEY
WANTED TO ELECT A COMMANDER AND

CHIEF AND A CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER WITH A DIFFERENT SET OF

TALENT SKILLS AND ABILITIES.

THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE.

I WOULD BE THE FIRST TO SUPPORT
THE PRESIDENT.

AS COMMANDER AND CHIEF, I'M USED
TO DOING THAT.

>> THE NEXT QUESTION IS FROM
BILL SPENCE FOR REPRESENTATIVE

PERRY.

WE ARE GETTING ALREADY SHORT ON
TIME.

IF YOU KEEP YOUR ANSWERS BRIEF,TOPICS.

>> ON THIS ISSUE, I DO WANT TO
TALK TO THE COLONEL FIRST ON IT

BECAUSE IF I'M CORRECT, IT IS
EITHER YOUR PARENTS OR

GRANDPARENTS WHO EMIGRATED TO
THIS COUNTRY.

TALK TO ME ON YOUR VIEWS ON WHAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE WITH OUR

IMMIGRATION SYSTEM.

>> MY GRANDMOTHER CAME HERE IN A
LEGAL WAY.

SHE IS THE EPITOME OF THE
AMERICAN DREAM.

I'M A SECOND-GENERATION
AMERICAN.

SHE WORKED HARD.

SHE RETIRED FROM A CAREER.

SHE WAS ABLE TO BUILD A
FOUNDATION FOR OUR FAMILY, WHICH

WE BUILT UPON OURSELVES.

THE FIRST THING IS ABOUT THE
RULE OF LAW.

THERE'S NO ONE ABOVE THE RULE OF
LAW.

I THINK IMMIGRATION IS A MATTER
OF NATIONAL SECURITY.

MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT WE ARE
A SOVEREIGN NATION.

WE HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO
PROTECT AND SECURE OUR FREEDOM

AND THE SAFETY OF AMERICANS.

I SEE IMMIGRATION A LITTLE BIT
DIFFERENTLY AGAIN BECAUSE I KNOW

THAT THERE ARE THREATS.

THERE'S THREATS FROM CRIMINALS,
CARTELS, DRUG TRAFFICKERS, HUMAN

TRAFFICKERS.

IT IS ABOUT SEAPORTS AND
AIRPORTS AS WELL.

WE CAN TALK ABOUT IMMIGRATION.

I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO
JUMP IN ON THIS CONVERSATION,

BUT I WOULD TELL YOU NO ONE IS
ABOVE THE LAW.

WE HAVE TO ADHERE TO THE LAW.

THAT'S WHAT OUR NATION WAS
FOUNDED UPON.

>> COLONEL, I'M NOT SURE WHAT
IMMIGRATION POLICIES BEFORE IN

PLACE WHEN YOUR GRANDPARENTS
EMIGRATED.

THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT
HAVE TALKED ABOUT, LOOK, WE NEED

TO FOCUS ON THE BEST AND THE
BRIGHTEST AND NOT JUST THE

RIFFRAFF.

IS THAT AN APPROACH THAT YOU
WOULD SUPPORT?

>> FOR SURE.

FIRST OF ALL, WE CAN'T ALLOW
AMNES

AMNESTY.

WE HAVE DONE THAT.

THE REAL PROBLEM THAT CONGRESS
HAS TO ADDRESS IN THE 116th

CONGRESS IS THE 11 MILLION
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS THAT WE HAVE.

SAY NOTHING ABOUT THE DACA
APPLICANTS.

WE HAVE TO HAVE A PROGRAM.

WE HAVE TO GET RID OF CHAIN
MIGRATION.

I BELIEVE THAT AS WELL.

THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT.

THOSE ARE TOUGH POLICY ISSUE
THAT THE NEXT CONGRESS HAS TO

DEAL WITH.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, THE
CONCEPT OF A BORDER WALL WITH

MEXICO WAS A BIG ISSUE DURING
THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN.

DO YOU SUPPORT THAT CONCEPT?

>> I DO.

I DO SUPPORT BEING ABLE TO
PROTECT OUR BORDERS IN THE WAY

THAT WE FIND NECESSARY.

I ALSO KNOW THAT IT IS NOT JUST
BUILDING A WALL UP ON TOP.

WE KNOW THAT THE TUNNEL SYSTEMS
EXIST.

ISRAEL HAS CERTAINLY BEEN A
COUNTRY THAT HAS BEEN SUBJECTED

TO THAT, AND THEY HAVE BEEN
DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY IN ORDER

TO FIND THOSE TUNNELS.

I BELIEVE THAT TECHNOLOGY THAT
WE SHOULD BE SHARING THAT

INFORMATION WITH ISRAEL AND
BEING ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT

OURSELVES.

I THINK IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE
DO THAT.

I THINK THAT VETTING IMMIGRANTS
IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT PART OF OUR

IMMIGRATION SYSTEM IN MAKING
SURE THAT WE ARE DOCUMENTING

THEIR PAST HISTORY AND WHO
THEY'RE RELATED TO AND WHO THEY

ARE NOT AND WHO THEY ARE
COOPERATING WITH AND WHO THEY'RE

NOT.

IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT.

I KNOW IN THIS DISTRICT, IN THE
FIRST CD, THAT'S BEEN AN

INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT TOPIC TO
THEM.

PEOPLE WANT TO FEEL SAFE, BUT
THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT

PEOPLE ARE HERE BECAUSE THEY
WANT TO BE HERE.

THEY WANT TO BE PART OF AMERICA.

THEY WANT TO COME AND JOIN, AND
THEY WANT TO WORK FOR THE

AMERICAN DREAM.

THEY'RE ALSO VERY SUPPORTIVE OF
THAT.

>> OKAY.

SENATOR FULCHER, SIMILAR
QUESTION.

YOUR VIEWS ON THE WALL, BUT I
ALSO WANT TO FOCUS YOU ON THE

COST.

WHEN THIS IDEA WAS ORIGINALLY
PRESENTED, IT WAS MEXICO IS

GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

THAT HASN'T MATERIALIZED.

HOW MUCH ARE YOU WILLING TO PAY
FOR THAT CONCEPT?

>> SURE.

FIRST OF ALL, BILL, WITH THE
WHOLE IMMIGRATION ISSUE, THE

BORDER SECURITY IS FUNDAMENTAL.

THAT'S THE BUILDING BLOCK THAT
YOU REALLY HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE.

I'VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF
TRAVELING A LOT AROUND THE

WORLD.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT THE REST OF
THE WORLD PUTS A HIGH PRIORITY

ON THEIR BORDER SECURITY FOR A
GOOD REASON.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT
HASN'T BEEN AS MUCH OF A

PRIORITY HERE AS IT SHOULD HAVE
BEEN.

THE BORDER SECURITY IS
ABSOLUTELY PARAMOUNT.

I DO SUPPORT THAT, AND THEN
THERE'S SOME OTHER PROGRESS THAT

APPEARS TO BE COMING ALONG THAT
HAS TO GO WITH THAT IN JUST THE

CHANGE IN THE IMMIGRATION
SITUATION, THE ELIMINATION OF

CHAIN MIGRATION.

BY FAR THE MOST DIFFICULT IS
DEALING WITH THE DACA SITUATION.

THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME
PROGRESS ON THAT.

NOBODY WANTS TO SEE FAMILIES
SPLIT UP, BUT ON THE OTHER HAND

YOU HAVE TO RESPECT THE CITIZENS
HERE AND THEIR PROFICIENCY TO

HAVE TO PAY AND JUST SECURITY
CONCERNS.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE COST, I
THINK THAT WAS THE SECOND PART

OF YOUR QUESTION, THAT'S
SOMETHING WHERE I THINK THE

PRESIDENT'S FIRST COMMENTS ABOUT
THAT AND HAVING MEXICO PAY FOR

THAT WITH THE TRADE IMBALANCE, I
THINK THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT HE

NEEDS TO GO REVISIT AGAIN.

>> OKAY.

MR. SNYDER, KIND OF A RELATED
QUESTION.

IF YOU GO BACK A GENERATION,
FRANKLY, ONE OF THE GREAT

MOMENTS OF FOREIGN POLICY WAS
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN SAYING

MR. GORBACHEV, TEAR DOWN THIS
WALL.

WHY ISN'T THAT APPROACH AND THAT
PHILOSOPHY APPLY TO US AS WELL

AS TO RUSSIA?

>> IN TERMS OF THE BERLIN WALL,
THE COLD WAR WAS ENDING.

IT WAS NO LONGER NEEDED.

WE SENSED SEEING GERMANY
REUNIFIED, BUT NOBODY SUGGESTS

THAT THE UNITED STATES AND
MEXICO ARE GOING TO UNIFY.

ON OUR SOUTHERN BORDER, WE HAVE
SEEN MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS UPON

MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ILLEGALLY
CROSS THAT BORDER FOR DECADES,

WHETHER IT HAS BEEN THE
DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION OR THE

REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION.

THEY HAVE NOT SECURED OUR
BORDER.

COME ON IN, DRUG DEALERS, GANG
MEMBERS, PEOPLE WHO WANT TO

ABUSE THE SYSTEM, EVEN ISLAMIC
TERRORISTS.

WE NEED TO BRING AN END TO
SANCTUARY CITIES.

WE NEED TO HOLD PUBLIC OFFICIALS
THAT HAVE SET UP SANCTUARY AREAS

ACCOUNTABLE, AND WE NEED TO
BUILD THE WALL.

I'VE BEEN WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP
ON THIS SINCE DAY ONE, UNLIKE

THE OTHERS UP HERE, BECAUSE WE
HAVE AN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM THAT

IS TOTALLY BACKWARDS.

WE'RE ALWAYS GOING TO NEED SOME
IMMIGRATION TO THIS COUNTRY, BUT

OUR SYSTEM OF LEGAL IMMIGRATION
IS TOTALLY MIESSED UP.

IT IS INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED AND
EXPENSIVE.

MEANWHILE, WE HAVE LEFT THE BACK
DOOR WIDE OPEN FOR ILLEGAL

IMMIGRATION.

WE NEED TO SLAM THE BACK DOOR
SHUT WITH A WALL, MAKE SURE

EVERYONE COMES IN THE RIGHT WAY.

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S WIFE IS A
LEGAL IMMIGRANT.

WE'RE NOT AGAINST IMMIGRANTS.

WE JUST WANT EVERYONE TO FOLLOW
THE LAW.

>> LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY,
YOUR THOUGHTS ON RONALD REAGAN.

>> WELL, YOU ASKED MICHAEL TO GO
BACK A GENERATION.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK A QUESTION.

NOBODY ANSWERED SPECIFICALLY
YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WALL

AND THE COST.

LET ME START THERE.

DECEMBER 29th, I WANTED TO KNOW
THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION, SO

I SPENT A DAY, SIX HOURS IN
FACT, DRIVING AND WALKING ALONG

THE MEXICO BORDER WITH THE
I ASKED HIM HOW MUCH MORE .

PHYSICAL STRUCTURE DO YOU WANT,
EXPECTING HIM TO SAY 10 MILES,

20 MILES.

HE SAID ANOTHER MILE WOULD DO.

A HALF A MILE ON EITHER SIDE OF
PORT OF ENTRY.

THE RIO GRANDE THERE IS ABOUT
100 METERS WIDE, 90 FEET DEEP.

HE ALSO HAS A ROAD SYSTEM ALONG
THAT BORDER WITH CHECKPOINTS

EVERY 30 MILES.

IN A BEND TO THE RIO GRANDE, A
CH

CAMERA LOOKING ONE MILE EACH WAY
AND A MILE THE OTHER WAY COULD

SUFFICE.

HE HAS A 60 TO 90-MILE
IMPASSABLE DESERT BEHIND THE

TOWN.

AT THE JUNCTION WITH THE PECOS
RIVER, THERE'S A NATURAL WALL, A

SHEER CLIFF, ALONG THE RIVER.

WHAT THE SHERIFF TOLD ME WAS IF
WE WOULD ASK OUR LOCAL SHERIFFS

AND POLICE CHIEFS WHAT WOULD
BEST SERVE, WE COULD HAVE AN

EFFECTIVE BORDER SECURITY SYSTEM
WITHOUT THINK KIND OF MEGA

TRILLION DOLLAR COST, MEGA
BILLION DOLLAR COST.

IT COULD BE ACHIEVED.

>> YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE WALL AND
THE COST OF IT, SENATOR MALEK?

>> WE HAVE AN IMMIGRATION CRISIS
IN THE COUNTRY.

IT IS AN CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY OF
CONGRESS THAT THEY HAVE

ABDICATED.

THEY HAVE NOT DONE THEIR JOB ON
MAKING SURE WE HAVE SUFFICIENT

IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THIS
COUNTRY, AND THAT IS

COMPREHENSIVE.

THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO ABSOLUTELY
MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SECURE AS

A COUNTRY.

IF WE HAVE A OPEN BORDER, WE
HAVE NO WAY OF KEEPING OUT

CRIMINALS OR KEEPING OUT THREATS
TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.

WE HAVE PEOPLE OVERSEAS FIGHTING
FOR OUR COUNTRY, AND WE HAVE TO

MAINTAIN OUR SAFETY HERE AT HOME
AS WELL.

WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE GOOD LAWS
FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO COME TO

THIS COUNTRY.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY
PERSONAL TO ME.

MY WIFE AND HER FAMILY EMIGRATED
TO THIS COUNTRY, AND THEY DID IT

LEGALLY, WHICH MEANT THEY SPENT
THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF

DOLLARS AND YEARS TRYING TO DO
IT THE RIGHT WAY.

AND IT'S A COMPLICATED SYSTEM.

WE NEED A WAY FOR PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE

DIVERSE FABRIC OF OUR NATION AND
BE AMERICANS TO BE AMERICANS.

RIGHT NOW, OUR LAWS -- MANY
PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA

WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO BE
ENFORCED ON ONE DAY OR NOT ON

THE NEXT, WHICH MEANS WE ARE
COMPLETELY UNDERMINING THE RULE

OF LAW.

CONGRESS NEEDS TO DO ITS JOB AND
FIX THE IMMIGRATION CRISIS IN

THIS COUNTRY.

AND IS IT GOING TO COST MONEY TO
DO THAT?

ABSOLUTELY, JUST LIKE IT COSTS
MONEY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE

SUPPORTING OUR TROOPS OVERSEAS.

THIS IS GETTING VERY PERSONAL TO
ME BECAUSE I HAVE A BROTHER

THAT'S CURRENTLY FLYING
HELICOPTERS IN AFGHANISTAN FOR

THE AIR FORCE OVERSEAS.

I GET TOUCHY ON THIS ISSUE
BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE

THAT WE'RE DEFENDING OUR NATION.

>> ALL RIGHT.

THE NEXT QUESTION IS FROM
CAMERON FOR COLONEL GALLEGOS.

>> COLONEL GALLEGOS, YOU'VE
PROBABLY HEARD OF SENATOR JIM

RICH'S PROPOSAL TO DECLARE
SCOTCHMAN PEAKS AS DESIGNATED

WILDERNESS.

CAN YOU SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON
THAT PROPOSAL AND PERHAPS YOU

CAN ALSO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON
PUBLIC LANDS IN A GENERAL SENSE?

>> FOR SURE.

YOU KNOW, I READ ALL THE ARTICLE
ABOUT THE ISSUE WITH THE OMNIBUS

BILL AND OUR REPRESENTATIVES
GETTING INVOLVED IN THAT.

THIS IS PETTY TO ME.

I THINK WE HAVE BIG PROBLEMS IN
CONGRESS, AND WE HAVE TO REQUIRE

CONGRESS TO HAVE DISCIPLINE.

PUBLIC LANDS ARE IMPORTANT.

WE NEED TO TAKE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT OUT OF OUR MANAGEMENT

OF FEDERAL LANDS.

THEY OWN TOO MUCH OF IT.

IF WE WANT OUR FARMERS AND
RANCHERS TO GRAZE AND HAVE WATER

RIGHTS, WE WANT THEM TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE ABUNDANCE OF

RESOURCES WE HAVE IN IDAHO, THEN
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS TO

COME OUT OF THAT.

NAMING PUBLIC LANDS AND
HISTORICAL MONUMENTS, THOSE ARE

IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR SURE, BUT
WE NEED TO LOOK AT ARTICLE 1

SECTION 8 OF THE CONSTITUTION
ELIMINATING THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT'S OVERREACH INTO
STATE POLICIES AND LAWS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

REPRESENTATIVE PERRY, SAME
QUESTION.

>> I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO
THOSE TYPES OF THINGS WHAT I

WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS MORE OF A
COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AND

CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING WITH THE
VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS ACROSS THE

STATE BEFORE WE GO AHEAD AND
MOVE FORWARD.

LAND USE IN IDAHO IS TREMENDOUS.

IT'S OF GREAT IMPORTANCE.

THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT UP
AND DOWN THIS DISTRICT AS I HAVE

TRAVELED UP AND DOWN THERE, AND
THEY WANT TO BE SURE THAT THE

LANDS HERE IN IDAHO ARE MULTIPLE
USE.

THEY WANT TO BE SURE THAT THE
STATE OF IDAHO HAS THE

OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY MANAGE
THOSE LANDS AND NOT HAVE THE

FEDERAL OVERREACH AND TELL US
HOW TO DO THAT.

THEY WANT TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE
RESOURCES.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO HARVEST
THE TIMBER, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE

FOREST FIRES HAVE DEVASTATED THE
FOREST.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO THE
MINING.

THEY WANT TO HAVE ACCESS TO
RECREATION ACTIVITIES AS WELL,

AND SO ANY CONVERSATIONS,
ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO OUR

FORESTS AND OUR FOREST USE, MUST
BE COLLABORATIVE IN NATURE AND

ABSOLUTELY MUST INCLUDE MULTIPLE
USE ON ANY OF THE LANDS.

>> ALL RIGHT.

SENATOR FULCHER, I GUESS
FOLLOWING UP ON THAT, PERHAPS

YOU CAN SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON
LAND MANAGEMENT, PARTICULARLY

FOREST MANAGEMENT GIVEN THE
WILDFIRES AND OTHER ISSUES THAT

WE'VE SEEN THERE.

>> CAMERON, RIGHT NOW, WE KIND
OF ARE OPERATING UNDER A

LOSE-LOSE SCENARIO.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR 2/3 OF THE LAND

WITHIN OUR BORDERS.

THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO
MANAGE IT, SO THEY DON'T.

AS A RESULT OF THAT, THE FUEL
LOAD IN OUR FORESTS GETS BUILT

UP.

IT GETS DISEASED, AND OUR
PRIVATE INDUSTRY IS KEPT FROM

CLEANING THAT UP AND REMOVING
THE FUEL LOAD.

A LIGHTNING STRIKE HITS, AND THE
NEXT THING YOU KNOW WE'RE GOING

TO BURN A HALF MILLION ACRES A
YEAR OR MORE AND IN THE MEANTIME

KICK A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF
CARBON UP INTO THE ATMOSPHERE

AND DECIMATE WILDLIFE.

RIGHT NOW, WE'RE OPERATING IN A
LOSE-LOSE SCENARIO, BUT THERE'S

HOPE ON THE HORIZON.

BECAUSE I THINK THE STATES THAT
ARE SUBSIDIZING US, WHICH IS

GENERALLY THE EAST, I THINK
THEY'RE STARTING TO FIGURE THAT

OUT.

THERE'S MORE AND MORE PRESSURE
TO ALLOW FOR THE WEST TO BE MORE

ACTIVE IN MANAGING THE RESOURCE
BASE THAT IS UNDER OUR FEET.

WHOEVER CONTROLS THE LAND,
WHOEVER CONTROLS THE RESOURCES,

CONTROLS THE ECONOMIC DESTINY.

THAT WOULD BE A REAL BIG ISSUE
FOR ME.

I WANT TO GET OUR STAKEHOLDERS
INVOLVED AND PUT SOME WISDOM IN

HOW THAT'S DONE AND MAKE SURE
THAT ACCESS IS KEPT OPEN AND THE

ENVIRONMENT IS CLEAN.

>> VERY GOOD.

MR. SNYDER, WATERWAY ISSUES ARE
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT IN NORTH

IDAHO, AND THESE ARE AFFECTED BY
INTERSTATE ISSUES.

WE HAVE A PROPOSED SMELTER IN
EASTERN WASHINGTON.

WE HAVE PROPOSED MINES IN
WESTERN MONTANA.

CAN YOU SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON
HOW YOU WOULD TACKLE THOSE

INTERSTATE ISSUES IF YOU'RE
ELECTED?

>> YEAH, THE SMELTER IN
WASHINGTON STATE IS VERY CLOSE

TO OUR BORDER, SO IT IS GOING TO
AFFECT NORTH IDAHO VERY DEEPLY.

I'M FROM NORTH IDAHO SO I'VE
TALKED WITH PEOPLE EXTENSIVELY

ABOUT THIS.

I DID A FULL INTERVIEW WELL OVER
AN HOUR WHERE WE TALKED ABOUT

ISSUES WITH THE SMELTER.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT PEOPLE THINK
ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN SO

QUIET ABOUT IT, BUT I'M 100%
AGAINST THAT SMELTER.

I'LL DO WHATEVER I CAN TO SHUT
THAT SMELTER DOWN BECAUSE IT IS

GOING TO AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT
IN NORTH IDAHO, AFFECTING OUR

WAY OF LIFE.

IN TERMS OF GETTING BACK TO
FEDERAL LANDS, YOU HAVE TO GO

BACK TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

NOWHERE IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION
DOES IT AUTHORIZE THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL ANY OF OUR
LAND.

CONSTITUTION
CONSTITUTIONALLY, WE HAVE A

PROBLEM.

I KNOW DAVE LEROY DISAGREES WITH
ME ON THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE

ANYONE TO SHOW ME ANYWHERE IN
THE CONSTITUTION WHERE IT

AUTHORIZES THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL OUR LAND.

WE'VE GOT OIL AND NATURAL GAS
AND PRECIOUS METALS.

WE HAVE RARE EARTH ELEMENTS.

WE SHOULD BE A GLOBAL CENTER FOR
THE RARE EARTH INDUSTRY.

RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE TO RELY ON
CHINA.

THEY HAVE US OVER A BARREL
BECAUSE WE IMPORT RARE EARTHS

FROM CHINA.

>> WE HAVE TO MOVE ON, I THINK.

YOU DID MENTION LIEUTENANT
GOVERNOR LEROY THERE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND TO
THAT?

>> MICHAEL REFERRED TO THE FACT
THAT DURING THE TIME I WAS

ATTORNEY GENERAL ON IDAHO I
SERVED ON THE STATE LAND BOARD

KEEPING OUR TIMBER MILLS
FLOWING, OUR SMALL TOWNS AND OUR

MINERS HEALTHY, HAPPY, AND WELL
ADJUSTED.

AS A PART OF THAT, I ALSO WAS
LOOKING AT THE SAGE BRUSH REBEL

REBELLI
REBELLION, THE ISSUE OF FEDERAL

AND LAND STATE TITLE MANAGEMENT.

WHAT I DIDN'T HEAR ANY OF MY
COLLEAGUES MENTION WAS THE FACT

THAT WE ALREADY HAVE A VERY
SIGNIFICANT JOINT MANAGEMENT

AUTHORITY CALLED THE GOOD
NEIGHBOR AUTHORITY BY WHICH

STATE GOVERNMENTS ARE NOW
MANAGING THE RESOURCES ON

FEDERAL LAND AND PROPOSING CUTS
IN COLLABORATIVE WITH PRIVATE

INDUSTRY.

OF THE 12 MILLION ACRES
AVAILABLE FOR THAT KIND OF LAND

MANAGEMENT IN IDAHO, 4 MILLION
ARE BEING MANAGED BY THE STATE

OF IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF LANDS.

ON THE WATERWAYS ISSUE, THEY'RE
CRITICAL TO NORTH IDAHO.

I WANT PORT OF LEWISTON TO BE OF
USE TO WHEAT FARMERS AND THE

PEOPLE AT THE MILL.

IN ADDITION, LIKE MICHAEL, I AM
VERY SUSPICIOUS OF ANY STATE

THAT PROPOSES TO LOCATE A
NOXIOUS FACILITY ON THE VERY

DOWN WIND BORDER OF THAT STATE.

SQ
>> WE ARE RUNNING SHORT ON TIME.

REPRESENTATIVE MALEK, LET'S STAY
ON LAND USE.

>> I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR
ON THE RECORD.

I'M SUPPORTIVE OF SENATOR RICH
AND THE WORK HE'S DONE.

WHEN I WAS A KID WORKING ON HIS
STAFF, WE WERE DOING THE PUBLIC

HEARINGS AROUND THAT.

IT FITS SO WELL INTO A MATRIX OF
LAND MANAGEMENT IN IDAHO THAT IS

THE ENVY OF THE ENTIRE NATION
BECAUSE OF GOOD PROJECTS LIKE

THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AUTHORITY.

MANY PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF HAVE HAD
SOME OF THE MOST FORMATIVE

EXPERIENCES OF MY LIFE ON THE
LANDS OF IDAHO.

I'LL NEVER FORGET THE FIRST TIME
I KILLED AN ELK HERE IN THE

STATE OF IDAHO.

I LOOK BACK AT THAT MOMENT AND I
THINK THAT WAS THE MOMENT THAT

MADE ME A MAN, SO WE NEED TO
PRESERVE THAT FOR FUTURE

GENERATIONS, BUT THAT DOESN'T
MEAN THAT WE DO ANYTHING THAT

HARMS OUR TIMBER INDUSTRY.

IN FACT, I WAS JUST UP IN
OROFINO ON FRIDAY MORNING

TALKING TO THE ASSOCIATED
LOGGING CONTRACTORS ABOUT THESE

ISSUES.

THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A
BROAD WAY OF MANAGING LAND FROM

WILDERNESS AREAS LIKE THE
SCOTTSMAN PEAK TO MANAGING

FEDERAL LANDS WITH THE STATE OF
IDAHO AND THE STATE OF IDAHO TO

MAKE SURE WE'RE MANAGING
DISEASE, MAKING SURE WE'RE

MANAGING THE BUGS THAT ARE
INFESTING OUR FOREST.

THIS IS A COOPERATIVE EFFORT.

THE TIMBER INDUSTRY IS
SUPPORTING WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH

THE WILDERNESS UP THERE.

LIKEWISE, THE ADVOCATES OF
WILDERNESS ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE

TIMBER INDUSTRY BECAUSE OF THE
CONTRIBUTIONS THEY'RE MAKING TO

LAND MANAGEMENT.

>> WE HAVE ABOUT THREE MINUTES
UNTIL CLOSING COMMENTS, SO

YOU'RE GOING TO GET BONUS POINTS
FOR KEEPING IT BRIEF.

DON'T MAKE ME CUT YOU OFF.

>> VERY, VERY BRIEFLY.

EACH OF YOU SAID OBAMACARE WAS A
BAD IDEA AND SHOULD BE REPLACED

WITH SOMETHING BETTER.

VERY BRIEFLY TELL US.

DESCRIBE WHAT IS THAT SOMETHING
BETTER.

REPRESENTATIVE MALEK?

>> WE NEED MORE LOCAL AND STATE
CONTROL.

THE MORE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WE
PUT INTO HEALTH CARE, THE LESS

SUCCESSFUL WE'LL BE.

>> FREE MARKET HEALTH CARE WITH
HIGH RISK POOLS AT THE STATE

LEVEL.

>> MR. SNYDER?

>> WE BELIEVE IN DIRECT PRIMARY
CARE.

WE BELIEVE IN ASSOCIATION BIND
GROUPS.

WE BELIEVE FREE MARKETS WORK.

IF WE GO BACK TO A FREE MARKET
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, IT WILL

WORK.

>> I WISH I WAS FIRST ON THAT.

IT'S THE FREE MARKET ANSWER.

IT'S PUTTING THOSE DOLLARS BACK
IN THE POCKETS OF THE INDIVIDUAL

AND TRANSPARENCY SO YOU CAN SHOP
WISELY AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE

GOING TO PAY BEFORE YOU HAVE TO
GO THROUGH A PROCEDURE.

THE FREE MARKET ANSWER.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY?

>> FROM THE AVERAGE PUBLIC
PERSPECTIVE, IT IS FREE MARKET

AND BEING ABLE TO HAVE YOUR
CHOICE OF HEALTH CARE.

HOWEVER, WE CAN'T IGNORE THE
FACT THAT WE DO HAVE A MEDICAID

SYSTEM TO HELP THOSE WHO ARE
DISABLED AND WHO NEED FULL-TIME

AROUND THE CLOCK CARE.

IN THAT REGARD, WE HAVE TO
REFORM OUR MEDICAID PROGRAM SO

THAT IT IS NO LONGER OPERATING
UNDER A FEE-FOR-SERVICE MODEL,

THAT IT IS ACTUALLY PAYING FOR
THE OUTCOMES.

WE NEED TO STOP PAYING ATTENTION
TO OUTPUTS AND PUT OUR EMPHASIS

ON OUTCOMES.

>> I AGREE FREE MARKET SYSTEM
OBVIOUSLY, BUT THERE'S A BIGGER

PROBLEM THAT CONGRESS HAS TO
DEAL WITH AND THAT'S SPECIAL

INTERESTS.

A LOT OF FOLKS WILL ACCEPT
SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE INSURANCE
AGENCIES AND PHARMACEUTICALS.

AS A VETERAN, I HAVE TO PAY FOR
MY MEDICATION.

IT IS VERY EXPENSIVE.

SO FAR SENIORS OUT THERE, I
WOULD TAKE ON THE PHARMACEUTICAL

COMPANIES.

YOU CAN BET FOR THAT.

>> I FULLY EXPECTED ALL OF YOU
TO TALK A LOT LONGER THAN THAT,

SO I HAVE ONE MORE YES OR NO
QUESTION.

WOULD YOU VOTE FOR AN AFFORDABLE
CARE ACT REPEAL WITHOUT A SOLID

REPLACEMENT?

>> FIRST OF ALL, IT'S SHAMEFUL
THAT THE CONGRESS HASN'T PASSED

OR REPEALED THE AFFORDABLE CARE
ACT.

WE HAVE TO DO THAT.

IT'S OBVIOUS.

WOULD I SUPPORT ONE WITHOUT --
WE HAVE TO HAVE A REPLACEMENT.

WE CAN'T ALLOW CONGRESS NOT TO
HAVE A REPLACEMENT.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY?

>> I WOULD NOT SUPPORT REPEALING
IT WITHOUT HAVING A REPLACEMENT.

I WOULD PUT IN THE FACT THAT THE
DUAL WAIVER BILL THAT I BROUGHT

TO THE FLOOR TWICE DURING THE
IDAHO LEGISLATURE WOULD BE A

GREAT REPLACEMENT IDEA TO WORK
FROM.

>> I WOULD SUPPORT IT BECAUSE IT
WOULD FORCE THE CONTROL WHERE IT

BELONGS, MORE LOCAL.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> YES, AN IMMEDIATE REPEAL OF
OBAMACARE I WOULD VOTE FOR.

OF COURSE, WE HAVE MUCH MORE
WORK TO DO AFTER THAT.

YES, I WOULD VOTE FOR IT.

>> YES, I WOULD AS WELL.

I HAVE BEEN ENSURED BY INSURANCE
COMPANIES AND INSURERS AND

MEDICAL PROVIDERS AND OUR OWN
DEPARTMENT THEY COULD BE UP AND

RUNNING WITHIN TWO MONTHS ON
THEIR OWN REPLACEMENT.

>> I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED THE
REPEAL BILL THAT THE FREEDOM

CAUCUS TANKED, THE FREEDOM
CAUCUS THAT HAS ENDORSED SENATOR

FULCHER.

I WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED THAT BILL
THAT THEY TANKED.

>> THAT WAS QUITE AN END
STATEMENT.

IT IS TIME FOR CLOSING REMARKS.

WE'RE GOING TO START WITH
COLONEL GALLEGOS.

>> THANK YOU, MELISSA AND AGAIN
IDAHO PUBLIC TELEVISION.

THE NUMBER ONE THING I HAVE
HEARD THROUGHOUT THIS CAMPAIGN

IS THAT I FACE AN IMPOSSIBLE
CHALLENGE.

THE PEOPLE THAT TOLD ME THAT
MUST NOT BE FROM IDAHO BECAUSE

IDAHOANS THRIVE ON CHALLENGES,
AND WE APPRECIATE HARD WORK.

I BELIEVE THE MOST IMPORTANT
ATTRIBUTE OF ANY LEADER IS

AUTHENTICITY.

I'M NOT A LAWYER OR A
BUSINESSMAN, BUT I'VE SPENT MY

LIFE DEPLOYING AND PROSECUTING
OUR NATION'S GLOBAL WAR ON

TERROR.

I'M NOT A SMALL BUSINESSER O EE EE EER --
SMALL BUSINESS OWNER, BUT I'VE

FACED GUNS TOWARDS THE ENEMY.

IN 2016, AMERICANS MADE A
CHOICE.

THEY DECIDED TO GO A DIFFERENT
WAY.

IDAHOANS HAVE A SIMILAR
OPPORTUNITY.

AS YOU CONSIDER THE DIRECTION OF
OUR GOVERNMENT, I ASK YOU TO ASK

YOURSELF ONE QUESTION.

ARE WE BETTER TODAY THAN WE WERE
YESTERDAY?

IS OUR EDUCATION BETTER?

IS HEALTH CARE BETTER?

DO WE HAVE HIGH-PAYING JOBS THAT
IS COMMISERATE WITH THE INFLUX

OF PEOPLE?

MANY OF THESE CABINETS HAVE HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE OUR

LIVES.

NOW THEY WANT TO REPRESENT YOU
IN WASHINGTON.

I'M NOT A SEASONED POLITICIAN,
WHICH IS CLEAR.

MY PASSION TO SERVE STEMS FROM
TWO THINGS -- LOVE OF GOD AND

COUNTRY.

AS A CAREER CIVIL SERVANT, I'VE
PREPARED MYSELF FOR THIS MOMENT.

IT WOULD BE AN HONOR TO
REPRESENT EVERYONE AND THE

PEOPLE OF IDAHO.

>> REPRESENTATIVE PERRY.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I WANT TO THANK IDAHO PUBLIC
TELEVISION AND ALL THOSE WHO

PARTICIPATED AND WATCHING THE
DEBATES TONIGHT.

IT'S BEEN A LONG TOUGH CAMPAIGN.

IT'S A BIG DISTRICT.

I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW TOUGH
IT'S BEEN FOR RUSS HERE BECAUSE

HE DIDN'T EVEN WANT TO RUN FOR
THIS SEAT.

HE WAS RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR.

HE RAN FOR GOVERNOR LAST TIME.

HE RAN FOR GOVERNOR THIS TIME.

AND HE HAD ALL HIS SIGNS MADE
OUT FOR GOVERNOR.

THEN LABRADOR AND SOME SPECIAL
INTEREST GROUPS CAME IN AND

WOULDN'T ALLOW HIM TO DO THAT,
SO HE FOLDED.

BUT THE PROBLEM IS HIS SIGN
STILL SAID FOR GOVERNOR.

AS WE WENT AROUND THE DISTRICT,
HE PUT TAPE OVER THEM AND SAID

CONGRESS.

AS THE TAPE PEELED BACK, IT SAID
GOV GRIS.

THAT'S THE REAL JOKE.

IF HE DIDN'T HAVE THE GUTS TO
STAND UP AND STAY IN THE RACE HE

WANTED TO, HOW IS HE GOING TO
HAVE TO THE GUTS TO STAND UP FOR

YOU?

WHAT HE DIDN'T TELL YOU WAS THAT
THE VOTERS REJECTED HIM BACK IN

'86 WHEN HE LOST TO A DEMOCRAT
AND AGAIN IN '94 WHEN HE LOST TO

A STRONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN
WOMAN FROM THIS DISTRICT.

HE'S KIND OF 0 FOR 2 AND THIS IS
HIS LAST BREATH.

THAT'S NOT REALLY FAIR TO US.

WE KNOW THAT THE AVERAGE
CONGRESSMAN IS A 58-YEAR-OLD

WHITE MALE, RIGHT?

WHAT HAVE THEY GIVEN US?

$21 TRILLION IN DEBT, A BANKRUPT
SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM.

WE HAVE NO SOLUTIONS FOR A
HEALTH CARE CRISIS.

WE NEED TO SEND A STRONG
REPUBLICAN OF CONSERVATIVE AND

CHRISTIAN WOMAN TO CONGRESS.

I'M ASKING YOU TO SEND THE GIRL
WITH ALL THE GUNS, CHRISTY PERRY

PERRY.

THANK YOU.

>> SENATOR FULCHER.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, REPRESENTATIVE PERRY
FOR THE INACCURATE HISTORY

LESSON.

THE SHORT LESSON IS IT IS CALLED
SERVANT LEADERSHIP.

I'LL CLOSE WITH THIS.

FOLKS, ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN
WORDS.

THERE IS A REASON THAT I'VE BEEN
ENDORSED BY CONGRESSMAN LABRADOR

AND THE LIKES OF SENATOR TED
CRUZ AND SECOND AMENDMENT

CHAMPION DICK HELLER AND CLUB
FOR GROWTH.

IT'S BECAUSE WITH YOUR HELP I'VE
ACTUALLY BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH

SOMETHING.

WITH ME, YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT
YOU'RE GOING TO GET.

SOMEONE WITH DEEP ROOTS IN IDAHO
WHO KNOWS THIS STATE.

SOMEONE WITH GLOBAL EXPERIENCE
IN BUSINESS AND ALSO IN THE

LEGISLATURE.

AND AN OPTIMIST, QUITE FRANKLY,
THAT'S EXCITED ABOUT MOVING

FORWARD WITH THIS.

I WANT TO POINT OUT SPECIFICALLY
ALL OF OUR ADVERTISEMENTS HAVE

BEEN POSITIVE, AND THAT'S ON
PURPOSE.

FRIENDS, THIS IS AN EXCITING
TIME.

WE'RE IN A NEW ERA OF HISTORY.

CONGRESS IS ABOUT TO HAVE THE
LARGEST TURNOVER IT'S HAD IN 50

YEARS.

WE'VE GOT A PRESIDENT WHO IS
WILLING TO LOOK AT THINGS IN A

DIFFERENT WAY.

RIGHT NOW, I'M ON A JOB
INTERVIEW.

WE CAN MAKE THINGS BETTER.

I BELIEVE IT.

IF YOU HIRE ME, I WILL NOT LET
YOU DOWN.

I'M RUSS FULCHER.

THANK YOU.

AND GOD BLESS.

>> MR. SNYDER.

>> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE
OTHER CANDIDATES, PEOPLE ALL

OVER SOCIAL MEDIA DURING THIS
PROGRAM AND THROUGHOUT THE WEEKS

HAVE BEEN DEBATING ONE THING.

RUSS FULCHER VERSUS MICHAEL
SNYDER.

MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT
IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN TO IN

THIS CAMPAIGN.

NUMBER ONE, I WAS THE ORIGINAL
PRO-TRUMP CANDIDATE.

RUSS FULCHER, EVEN THOUGH WE
KNEW HE WAS AGAINST TRUMP AND

NOW HE IS FOR TRUMP, BUT IF YOU
GO TO HIS WEBSITE, HIS CAMPAIGN

TEAM IS FULL OF NEVER TRUMPERS.

NUMBER TWO, BOTH OF US ARE
CONSIDERED TO BE CONSERVATIVE,

BUT THE PRESS SAYS THAT I'M THE
MOST CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE IN

THIS RACE, BUT DON'T TAKE THEIR
WORD FOR IT.

COMPARE WHAT I BELIEVE ON MY
WEBSITE AND THEN GO TO RUSS'

WEBSITE AND TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT
HE BELIEVES.

YOU'LL COME TO THE SAME
pI HAVEN'T HAD ONE VOTER EVER

COME BACK TO ME SINCE I'VE BEEN
RUNNING JULY 4th AND SAY, RI

ACTUALLY THINK RUSSELL IS A LOT
MORE CONSERVATIVE.

I WANT TO TAKE CHRISTIAN VALUES
BACK TO WASHINGTON, D.C.

FOR DECADES, WE'VE BEEN MARCHING
DOWN THE ROAD TO SOCIALISM AND

A
ATHEI

ATHEISM.

WE NEED TO SEND A FIREBALL.

WE NEED TO SEND A FIGHTER.

I'M ASKING FOR YOUR VOTE ON MAY
15th.

GO TO MICHAELSNYDER
MICHAELSNYDERFORCONGRESS.COM.

WE ARE GOING TO WIN THIS THING
ON MAY 15th.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR VOTE.

>> LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR LEROY.

>> WITH MY LAST BREATH --
[ LAUGHTER ]

>> -- LET ME THANK YOU FOR
WATCHING TONIGHT.

MY HERO ABRAHAM LINCOLN SAID
AMERICA IS THE LAST BEST HOPE OF

EARTH.

HIS HERO, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN,
SAID THAT WE HAVE A REPUBLIC, IF

WE CAN KEEP IT.

I THINK WE SHOULD NOT ONLY KEEP
IT, BUT WE SHOULD ENHANCE IT AND

PRESERVE IT BY RETURNING TO THE
PRINCIPLES OF FAMILY, FREEDOM,

LIBERTY AND GOVERNMENT, AND
PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

THE TRUMP PRESIDENCIES OFFERS US
A UNIQUE POSSIBILITY OF DOING

EXACTLY THAT.

I HAVE THOROUGHLY ENJOYED THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MEET THESE

COLLEAGUES AND EXCHANGE STORIES
AND PRINCIPLES BACK AND FORTH.

WE ALL TALK ABOUT EXPERIENCE.

BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE
EXPERIENCE THAT WASHINGTON NEEDS

RIGHT NOW IS NOT ANOTHER
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESSMAN OR

EVEN A GIRL WITH A GUN.

THE EXPERIENCE WASHINGTON NEEDS
RIGHT NOW IS A LITTLE GRAY HAIR,

A LOT OF GOOD JUDGMENT, AND
PERHAPS A TOUCH OF

STATESMANSHIP.

I OFFER THAT.

DONALD TRUMP HAD A HECK OF A
WEEK.

305 TREASURY REGULATIONS WERE
CANCELLED.

THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT
APPLICATION LEVEL IN 48 YEARS.

IN KOREA, DENUMENT.

IF YOU SEND NANCY TO WASHINGTON,
I'LL GO WITH HER.

>> REPRESENTATIVE MALEK?

>> DAVID, I DON'T THINK
WASHINGTON NEEDS MORE HAIR.

[ LAUGHTER ]
>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M

LIKE YOU.

I FIGHT FOR WHAT I LOVE, AND I
LOVE OUR COUNTRY.

I LOVE OUR WAY OF LIFE, AND I
LOVE OUR CONSERVATIVE VALUES.

IF YOU'RE LIKE ME, YOU'RE
OFFENDED THAT D.C. SPECIAL

INTERESTS ARE SENDING NEARLY $1
MILLION INTO THIS STATE TO BUY

THIS RACE.

A GROUP CALLED THAT MIKE
HUCKABEE CALLS THE CLUB FOR

AGREED HAS DECIDED THAT RUSS
FULCHER, THE GUY WHO GAVE A LONG

RAMBLING ANSWER ON IMMIGRATION
AND DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING

ON IN THE SENATE, BUT CAN TALK
ABOUT EXPERIENCES AND

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CAN'T NAME A
SINGLE ONE, THEY HAVE DECIDED HE

SHOULD BE THE NEXT CONGRESSMAN
FOR IDAHO.

MY NAME IS LUKE MALEK, AND I'M
RUNNING FOR CONGRESS TO FIGHT

FOR OUR CONSERVATIVE VALUES.

I AM THE CANDIDATE WHO HAS A
PROVEN EFFECTIVE HISTORY.

I CANNOT BE BOUGHT.

I'M RUNNING TO PROTECT THE
SECOND AMENDMENT TO FIGHT FOR

THE LIVES THAT ARE UNBORN, TO
FIGHT FOR OUR INDEPENDENT

SPIRIT, AND TO FIGHT BACK
AGAINST THE HEAVY HAND OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

YOU CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT ME AT
LUKEMAL

LUKEMALEK.COM.

YOU CAN LEARN ABOUT MY HISTORY
AS A PROSECUTOR.

I WOULD LOVE FOR YOUR VOTE ON
MAY 15th.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH TO THE
CANDIDATES AND REPORTERS.

THNK YOU FOR WATCHING.

ELECTION DAY IS MAY 15th.

WE'LL SEE YOU AT THE POLLS.

THE IDAHO DEBATES ARE A
COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AMONG THE

IDAHO PRESS CLUB, BOISE STATE
UNIVERSITY'S SCHOOL OF PUBLIC

SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO'S
MCCLURE CENTER, IDAHO STATE

UNIVERSITY'S DEPARTMENT OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE, THE LEAGUE OF

WOMEN VOTERS' VOTER EDUCATION
FUND, AND IDAHO PUBLIC

TELEVISION.

FUNDING FOR THE IDAHO DEBATES IS
PUBLIC TELEVISION AND THE IDAHO

PUBLIC TELEVISION ENDOWMENT...