oldDebate.txt

 Well, first of all, it's great to be here in New York, and I am delighted to have this chance to discuss the issues that are important to our future.
 I was so honored to serve as a senator from New York for eight yearsand to work to provide opportunity for all of our citizens to make it possible that we could knock down the barriers that stand in the way of people getting ahead and staying ahead.
And during those eight years, we faced some difficult challenges together.
 We faced 9/11.
 We worked hard to rebuild New York.
 I was particularly concerned about our first responders and others who'd been affected in their health by what they had experienced.
 We worked hard to bring jobs from Buffalo to Albany and all parts of New York to give more hard-working people a chance to really make the most out of their own talents.
And we worked hard to really keep New York values at the center of who we are and what we do together.
  And that is — that is exactly what I want to do as your president.
 We will celebrate our diversity.
 We will work together, bringing us back to being united, setting some big, bold, progressive goals for America.
 That's what I'm offering in this campaign, to build on the work, to build on the value that we share here in New York, to take those to Washington, and to knock down those barriers that in any way hold back not only individual Americans, bur our country from reaching our full potential.
 That is what my campaign is about.
  
 Well, first of all, it's great to be here in New York, and I am delighted to have this chance to discuss the issues that are important to our future.
 I was so honored to serve as a senator from New York for eight yearsand to work to provide opportunity for all of our citizens to make it possible that we could knock down the barriers that stand in the way of people getting ahead and staying ahead.
And during those eight years, we faced some difficult challenges together.
 We faced 9/11.
 We worked hard to rebuild New York.
 I was particularly concerned about our first responders and others who'd been affected in their health by what they had experienced.
 We worked hard to bring jobs from Buffalo to Albany and all parts of New York to give more hard-working people a chance to really make the most out of their own talents.
And we worked hard to really keep New York values at the center of who we are and what we do together.
  And that is — that is exactly what I want to do as your president.
 We will celebrate our diversity.
 We will work together, bringing us back to being united, setting some big, bold, progressive goals for America.
 That's what I'm offering in this campaign, to build on the work, to build on the value that we share here in New York, to take those to Washington, and to knock down those barriers that in any way hold back not only individual Americans, bur our country from reaching our full potential.
 That is what my campaign is about.
  
 Well, it is true that now that the spotlight is pretty bright here in New York, some things have been said and Senator Sanders did call me unqualified.
 I've been called a lot of things in my life.
 That was a first.
 And then he did say that he had to question my judgment.
 Well, the people of New York voted for me twice to be their senator from New York andandand President Obama trusted my judgment enough to ask me to be secretary of State for the United States.
  So, look, we have disagreements on policy.
 There's no doubt about it.
 But if you go and read, which I hope all of you will before Tuesday, Senator Sanders' long interview with the "New York Daily News," talk about judgment and talk about the kinds of problems he had answering questions about even his core issue, breaking up the banks.
When asked, he could not explain howthat would be done andwhen askedwhen asked about a number of foreign policy issues, he could not answer about Afghanistan, about Israel, about counterterrorism, except to say if he'd had some paper in front of him, maybe he could.
I think you need to have the judgment on day one to be both president and commander-in-chief.

 Well, it is true that now that the spotlight is pretty bright here in New York, some things have been said and Senator Sanders did call me unqualified.
 I've been called a lot of things in my life.
 That was a first.
 And then he did say that he had to question my judgment.
 Well, the people of New York voted for me twice to be their senator from New York andandand President Obama trusted my judgment enough to ask me to be secretary of State for the United States.
  So, look, we have disagreements on policy.
 There's no doubt about it.
 But if you go and read, which I hope all of you will before Tuesday, Senator Sanders' long interview with the "New York Daily News," talk about judgment and talk about the kinds of problems he had answering questions about even his core issue, breaking up the banks.
When asked, he could not explain howthat would be done andwhen askedwhen asked about a number of foreign policy issues, he could not answer about Afghanistan, about Israel, about counterterrorism, except to say if he'd had some paper in front of him, maybe he could.
I think you need to have the judgment on day one to be both president and commander-in-chief.

 Well, let me
 Well, let me
 let me just say
 let me just say
 let melet me say
 let melet me say
 OK.

 OK.

 Well, make — make no mistake about it, this is not just an attack on me, it's an attack on President Obama.
 President ObamaYou know, let me tell you why.
 You may not like the answer, but I'll tell you why.
 President Obama had a super PAC when he ran.
 President Obama took tens of millions of dollars from contributors.
 And President Obama was not at all influenced when he made the decision to pass and sign Dodd-Frank, the toughest regulationson Wall Street in many a year.
So this is — this is a phony — this is a phony attack that is designed to raise questions when there is no evidence or support, to undergird the continuation that he is putting forward in these attacks.

 Well, make — make no mistake about it, this is not just an attack on me, it's an attack on President Obama.
 President ObamaYou know, let me tell you why.
 You may not like the answer, but I'll tell you why.
 President Obama had a super PAC when he ran.
 President Obama took tens of millions of dollars from contributors.
 And President Obama was not at all influenced when he made the decision to pass and sign Dodd-Frank, the toughest regulationson Wall Street in many a year.
So this is — this is a phony — this is a phony attack that is designed to raise questions when there is no evidence or support, to undergird the continuation that he is putting forward in these attacks.

 Absolutely.
 You know, this is what I've saying for the past year.
 No bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail.
I have been talking about what we should be doing under Dodd-Frank.
 I'm glad that Senator Sanders is now joining in talking about Dodd-Frank, because Dodd-Frank sets forth the approach that needs to be taken.
 I believe, and I will appoint regulators who are tough enough and ready enough to break up any bank that fails the test under Dodd-Frank.
There are two sections there.
 If they fail either one, that they're a systemic risk, a grave risk to our economy, or if they fail the other, that their living wills, which is what you're referring to, is inadequate.
Let's look at what is at stake here.
 We can never let Wall Street wreck Main street again.
 I spoke out against Wall Street when I was a Senator from New York.
 I have been standing up and saying continuously we have the law.
 We've got to execute under it.
 So, you're right.
 I will move immediately to break up any financial institution, but I go further because I want the law to extend to those that are part of the shadow banking industry.
 The big insurance companies, the hedge funds, something that I have been arguing for now a long time
 Absolutely.
 You know, this is what I've saying for the past year.
 No bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail.
I have been talking about what we should be doing under Dodd-Frank.
 I'm glad that Senator Sanders is now joining in talking about Dodd-Frank, because Dodd-Frank sets forth the approach that needs to be taken.
 I believe, and I will appoint regulators who are tough enough and ready enough to break up any bank that fails the test under Dodd-Frank.
There are two sections there.
 If they fail either one, that they're a systemic risk, a grave risk to our economy, or if they fail the other, that their living wills, which is what you're referring to, is inadequate.
Let's look at what is at stake here.
 We can never let Wall Street wreck Main street again.
 I spoke out against Wall Street when I was a Senator from New York.
 I have been standing up and saying continuously we have the law.
 We've got to execute under it.
 So, you're right.
 I will move immediately to break up any financial institution, but I go further because I want the law to extend to those that are part of the shadow banking industry.
 The big insurance companies, the hedge funds, something that I have been arguing for now a long time
 Dana, you know — I love being in Brooklyn.
 Dana, let me add here that there are two ways to at this under Dodd-Frank, which is after all the law we passed under President Obama, and I'm proud that Barney Frank, one of the authors, has endorsed me because what I have said continuously is, yes, sometimes the government may have to order certain actions.
 Sometime the government can permit the institution themselves to take those actions.
 That has to be the judgement of the regulators.
But, there's another element to this.
 I believe strongly that executives of any of these organizations should be financially penalized if there is a settlement.
  They should have to pay up through compensation or bonuses because we have to go after not just the big giant institution, we have got to go after the people who are making the decisions in the institutions.

 Dana, you know — I love being in Brooklyn.
 Dana, let me add here that there are two ways to at this under Dodd-Frank, which is after all the law we passed under President Obama, and I'm proud that Barney Frank, one of the authors, has endorsed me because what I have said continuously is, yes, sometimes the government may have to order certain actions.
 Sometime the government can permit the institution themselves to take those actions.
 That has to be the judgement of the regulators.
But, there's another element to this.
 I believe strongly that executives of any of these organizations should be financially penalized if there is a settlement.
  They should have to pay up through compensation or bonuses because we have to go after not just the big giant institution, we have got to go after the people who are making the decisions in the institutions.

 And hold them accountable as well.
  
 And hold them accountable as well.
  
 Well, you can tell, Dana, he cannot come up with any example, because there is no example.
  It is important — it's always important.
 It may be inconvenient, but it's always important to get the facts straight.
 I stood up against the behaviors of the banks when I was a senator.
I called them out on their mortgage behavior.
 I also was very willing to speak out against some of the special privileges they had under the tax code.
 When I went to the secretary of state office, the president — President Obama led the effort to pass the Dodd-Frank bill.
That is the law.
 Now, this is our ninth debate.
 In the prior eight debates, I have said, we have a law.
 You don't just say, we're upset about this.
 I'm upset about it.
 You don't just say, go break them up.
 You have a law, because we are a nation of laws.

 Well, you can tell, Dana, he cannot come up with any example, because there is no example.
  It is important — it's always important.
 It may be inconvenient, but it's always important to get the facts straight.
 I stood up against the behaviors of the banks when I was a senator.
I called them out on their mortgage behavior.
 I also was very willing to speak out against some of the special privileges they had under the tax code.
 When I went to the secretary of state office, the president — President Obama led the effort to pass the Dodd-Frank bill.
That is the law.
 Now, this is our ninth debate.
 In the prior eight debates, I have said, we have a law.
 You don't just say, we're upset about this.
 I'm upset about it.
 You don't just say, go break them up.
 You have a law, because we are a nation of laws.

 So I support Dodd-Frank, but I have consistently said that's not enough.
 We've got to include the shadow banking sector.

 So I support Dodd-Frank, but I have consistently said that's not enough.
 We've got to include the shadow banking sector.

 You know, first of all — first of all, there isn't an issue.
 When I was in public service serving as the senator from New York, I did stand up to the banks.
 I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused.
I'm the only one on this stage who did not vote to deregulate swaps and derivatives, as Senator Sanders did, which led to a lot of the problems that we had with Lehman Brothers.
Now, if you're going to look at the problems that actually caused the Great Recession, you've got to look at the whole picture.
 It was a giant insurance company, AIG.
 It was an investment bank, Lehman Brothers.
 It was mortgage companies like Countrywide.
I'm not saying that Senator Sanders did something untoward when he voted to deregulate swaps and derivatives
 You know, first of all — first of all, there isn't an issue.
 When I was in public service serving as the senator from New York, I did stand up to the banks.
 I did make it clear that their behavior would not be excused.
I'm the only one on this stage who did not vote to deregulate swaps and derivatives, as Senator Sanders did, which led to a lot of the problems that we had with Lehman Brothers.
Now, if you're going to look at the problems that actually caused the Great Recession, you've got to look at the whole picture.
 It was a giant insurance company, AIG.
 It was an investment bank, Lehman Brothers.
 It was mortgage companies like Countrywide.
I'm not saying that Senator Sanders did something untoward when he voted to deregulate swaps and derivatives
  but the fact is he did.
And that contributed to the collapse of Lehman Brothers and started the cascade  
  but the fact is he did.
And that contributed to the collapse of Lehman Brothers and started the cascade  
 I have said, look, there are certain — there are certain expectations when you run for president.
 This is a new one.
 And I've said, if everybody agrees to do it — because there are speeches for money on the other side.
 I know that.
But I will tell you this, there is — there is a long-standing expectation that everybody running release their tax returns, and you can go — you can go to my website and see eight years of tax returns.
 And I've released 30 years of tax returns.
 And I think every candidate, including Senator Sanders and Donald Trump, should do the same.
  
 I have said, look, there are certain — there are certain expectations when you run for president.
 This is a new one.
 And I've said, if everybody agrees to do it — because there are speeches for money on the other side.
 I know that.
But I will tell you this, there is — there is a long-standing expectation that everybody running release their tax returns, and you can go — you can go to my website and see eight years of tax returns.
 And I've released 30 years of tax returns.
 And I think every candidate, including Senator Sanders and Donald Trump, should do the same.
  
 Right.

 Right.

 You know, let's set the same standard for everybody.
 When everybody does it, OK, I will do it, but let's set and expect the same standard on tax returns.
 Everybody does it, and then we move forward.

 You know, let's set the same standard for everybody.
 When everybody does it, OK, I will do it, but let's set and expect the same standard on tax returns.
 Everybody does it, and then we move forward.

 Well, you know, there are a lot of copy machines around.

 Well, you know, there are a lot of copy machines around.

 Well, first of all, I do have a very comprehensive plan to create more jobs and I think that has to be at the center of our economic approach.
 And so I think it is important that we do more on manufacturing.
 I went to Syracuse and laid out a $10 billion plan that would, I believe, really jump-start advanced manufacturing.
I have seen the results of what can happen when we have the government cooperating with business.
 And that's exactly what I will do.
When I was secretary of State, I helped to lead the way to increased exports of American good around the world, which supports tens of thousands of jobs.
So I think you've got to go at this with a sense of how to accomplish the goal we are setting — more good jobs with rising incomes for people everywhere from inner cities to rural areas to every distressed community in America.
 And that's exactly what my plan would bring about.
I think we have a pretty good record if we look at what happened
 Well, first of all, I do have a very comprehensive plan to create more jobs and I think that has to be at the center of our economic approach.
 And so I think it is important that we do more on manufacturing.
 I went to Syracuse and laid out a $10 billion plan that would, I believe, really jump-start advanced manufacturing.
I have seen the results of what can happen when we have the government cooperating with business.
 And that's exactly what I will do.
When I was secretary of State, I helped to lead the way to increased exports of American good around the world, which supports tens of thousands of jobs.
So I think you've got to go at this with a sense of how to accomplish the goal we are setting — more good jobs with rising incomes for people everywhere from inner cities to rural areas to every distressed community in America.
 And that's exactly what my plan would bring about.
I think we have a pretty good record if we look at what happened
 in the 1990s, we got 23 million new jobs and incomes went up for everybody.

 in the 1990s, we got 23 million new jobs and incomes went up for everybody.

 Let's do that again in America.

 Let's do that again in America.

 Well, of course I would.
 And I have supportedI have supported the fight for 15.
 I am proud to have the endorsement of most of the unions that have led the fight for 15.
 I was proud to stand on the stage with Governor Cuomo, with SEIU and others who have been leading this battle and I will work as hard as I can to raise the minimum wage.
 I always have.
 I supported that when I was in the Senate.

 Well, of course I would.
 And I have supportedI have supported the fight for 15.
 I am proud to have the endorsement of most of the unions that have led the fight for 15.
 I was proud to stand on the stage with Governor Cuomo, with SEIU and others who have been leading this battle and I will work as hard as I can to raise the minimum wage.
 I always have.
 I supported that when I was in the Senate.

 But what I have also said is that we've got to be smart about it, just the way Governor Cuomo was here in New York.
 If you look at it, we moved more quickly to $15 in New York City, more deliberately toward $12, $12.
50 upstate then to $15.
 That is exactly my position.
 It's a model for the nation and that's what I will do as president.

 But what I have also said is that we've got to be smart about it, just the way Governor Cuomo was here in New York.
 If you look at it, we moved more quickly to $15 in New York City, more deliberately toward $12, $12.
50 upstate then to $15.
 That is exactly my position.
 It's a model for the nation and that's what I will do as president.

 Go as quickly asto get to $15.
  
 Go as quickly asto get to $15.
  
 You know, wait a minute
 You know, wait a minute
 wait a minute.
 
 wait a minute.
 
 wait, wait
 wait, wait
 Come on, I have stood on the debate stage
 Come on, I have stood on the debate stage
 with Senator Sanders eighttimes.

 with Senator Sanders eighttimes.

 I have said the
 I have said the
 Exact same thing.

 Exact same thing.

 If we canraise it to $15 in New Yorkor Los Angeles or Seattle
 If we canraise it to $15 in New Yorkor Los Angeles or Seattle
 let's do it.

 let's do it.

 OK.
  
 OK.
  
 Thank you.
 Thank you very much.

 Thank you.
 Thank you very much.

 All right.
 I have said from the very beginning that I supported the fight for $15.
 I supported those on the front lines of the fight for — it happens to be true.
 I also — I supported the $15 effort in L.
A.
 I supported in Seattle.
 I supported it for the fast food workers in New York.
The minimum wage at the national level right now is $7.
25, right? We want to raise it higher than it ever has been, but we also have to recognize some states and some cities will go higher, and I support that.
 I have taken my cue from the Democrats in the Senate, led by Senator Patty Murray and others, like my good friend Kirsten Gillibrand, who has said we will set a national level of $12 and then urge any place that can go above it to go above it.
Going from $7.
25 to $12 is a huge difference.
 Thirty-five million people will get a raise.
 One in four working mothers will get a raise.
 I want to get something done.
 And I think setting the goal to get to $12 is the way to go, encouraging others to get to $15.
 But, of course, if we have a Democratic Congress, we will go to $15.
  
 All right.
 I have said from the very beginning that I supported the fight for $15.
 I supported those on the front lines of the fight for — it happens to be true.
 I also — I supported the $15 effort in L.
A.
 I supported in Seattle.
 I supported it for the fast food workers in New York.
The minimum wage at the national level right now is $7.
25, right? We want to raise it higher than it ever has been, but we also have to recognize some states and some cities will go higher, and I support that.
 I have taken my cue from the Democrats in the Senate, led by Senator Patty Murray and others, like my good friend Kirsten Gillibrand, who has said we will set a national level of $12 and then urge any place that can go above it to go above it.
Going from $7.
25 to $12 is a huge difference.
 Thirty-five million people will get a raise.
 One in four working mothers will get a raise.
 I want to get something done.
 And I think setting the goal to get to $12 is the way to go, encouraging others to get to $15.
 But, of course, if we have a Democratic Congress, we will go to $15.
  
 No, of course not.
 Of course not.
 This is — this is a serious difference between us.
 And what I want to start by saying — it's not a laughing matter — 90 people on average a day are killed or commit suicide or die in accidents from guns, 33,000 people a year.
 I take it really seriously, because I have spent more time than I care to remember being with people who have lost their loved ones.
So, yes, we have a problem in America.
 We need a president who will stand up against the gun lobby.
 We need a president who will fight for commonsense gun safety reforms.
  And what we have here is a big difference.
 Senator Sanders voted against the Brady Bill five times.
 He voted for the most important NRA priority, namely giving immunity from liability to gun-makers and dealers, something that is at the root of a lot of the problems that we are facing.
Then he doubled down on that in the New York Daily News interview, when asked whether he would support the Sandy Hook parents suing to try to do something to rein in the advertising of the AR-15, which is advertised to young people as being a combat weapon, killing on the battlefield.
 He said they didn't deserve their day in court.
I could not disagree more.
And, finally, this is the only industry in America, the only one.
  That has this kind of special protection.
 We hear a lot from Senator Sanders about the greed and recklessness of Wall Street, and I agree.
 We've got to hold Wall Street accountable
 No, of course not.
 Of course not.
 This is — this is a serious difference between us.
 And what I want to start by saying — it's not a laughing matter — 90 people on average a day are killed or commit suicide or die in accidents from guns, 33,000 people a year.
 I take it really seriously, because I have spent more time than I care to remember being with people who have lost their loved ones.
So, yes, we have a problem in America.
 We need a president who will stand up against the gun lobby.
 We need a president who will fight for commonsense gun safety reforms.
  And what we have here is a big difference.
 Senator Sanders voted against the Brady Bill five times.
 He voted for the most important NRA priority, namely giving immunity from liability to gun-makers and dealers, something that is at the root of a lot of the problems that we are facing.
Then he doubled down on that in the New York Daily News interview, when asked whether he would support the Sandy Hook parents suing to try to do something to rein in the advertising of the AR-15, which is advertised to young people as being a combat weapon, killing on the battlefield.
 He said they didn't deserve their day in court.
I could not disagree more.
And, finally, this is the only industry in America, the only one.
  That has this kind of special protection.
 We hear a lot from Senator Sanders about the greed and recklessness of Wall Street, and I agree.
 We've got to hold Wall Street accountable
 Well, what about the greed and recklessness of gun manufacturers and dealers in America? 
 Well, what about the greed and recklessness of gun manufacturers and dealers in America? 
 I put it out
 I put it out
 Well, the facts are that most of the guns that end up committing crimes in New York come from out of state.
 They come from the states that don't have kind of serious efforts to control guns that we do in New York.
But let me say this — in 1988, as we've heard on every debate occasion, Senator Sanders did run for the Congress and he lost.
 He came back in 1990 and he won, and during that campaign he made a commitment to the NRA that he would be against waiting periods.
And, in fact, in his own book, he talks about his 1990 campaign, and here's what he said.
 He clearly was helped by the NRA, because they ran ads against his opponent.
 So, then he went to the Congress, where he has been a largely very reliable supporter of the NRA.
 Voting — he kept his word to the NRA, he voted against the Brady Bill five times because it had waiting periods in it.
Thankfully, enough people finally voted for it to keep guns out of the hands of who should not have them.
  
 Well, the facts are that most of the guns that end up committing crimes in New York come from out of state.
 They come from the states that don't have kind of serious efforts to control guns that we do in New York.
But let me say this — in 1988, as we've heard on every debate occasion, Senator Sanders did run for the Congress and he lost.
 He came back in 1990 and he won, and during that campaign he made a commitment to the NRA that he would be against waiting periods.
And, in fact, in his own book, he talks about his 1990 campaign, and here's what he said.
 He clearly was helped by the NRA, because they ran ads against his opponent.
 So, then he went to the Congress, where he has been a largely very reliable supporter of the NRA.
 Voting — he kept his word to the NRA, he voted against the Brady Bill five times because it had waiting periods in it.
Thankfully, enough people finally voted for it to keep guns out of the hands of who should not have them.
  
 Well, I believe that the law that Senator Sanders voted for that I voted against, giving this special protection to gun manufacturers and to dealers, is an absolute abdication of responsibility on the part of those who voted for it.
This is a — this is a unique gift given to only one industry in the world by the United States Congress, as Senator Murphy from Connecticut said, we have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns.
And the point that Senator Sanders keeps making about how he wouldn't want a mom and pop store — that was not the point of this.
 And if he can point to any, any incident where that happened, I would love to hear about it.
What was really going on, I'll tell you, because it has a lot to do with New York City.
 New York City was on the brink of being able to hold manufacturers and dealers accountable through a very carefully crafted legal strategy.

 Well, I believe that the law that Senator Sanders voted for that I voted against, giving this special protection to gun manufacturers and to dealers, is an absolute abdication of responsibility on the part of those who voted for it.
This is a — this is a unique gift given to only one industry in the world by the United States Congress, as Senator Murphy from Connecticut said, we have tougher standards holding toy gun manufacturers and sellers to account than we do for real guns.
And the point that Senator Sanders keeps making about how he wouldn't want a mom and pop store — that was not the point of this.
 And if he can point to any, any incident where that happened, I would love to hear about it.
What was really going on, I'll tell you, because it has a lot to do with New York City.
 New York City was on the brink of being able to hold manufacturers and dealers accountable through a very carefully crafted legal strategy.

 The NRA came to their supporters in the Congress and said, stop it, stop it now, and Senator Sanders joined those who did.

 The NRA came to their supporters in the Congress and said, stop it, stop it now, and Senator Sanders joined those who did.

 Well, I think that it had some positive aspects to it.
 And you mentioned some of them.
 The Violence Against Women Act, which has been a very important piece of legislation, in my opinion.
  And it also did some things which were to provide more opportunities for young people.
 So if we were to have the balance sheet on one side, there are some positive actions and changes.
On the other side, there were decisions that were made that now we must revisit and we have to correct.
 I think that sentences got much too long.
 The original idea was not that we would increase sentences for non-violent low-level offenders, but once the federal government did what it did, states piled on.
So we have a problem.
 And the very first speech I gave in this campaign was about what I will do to reform the criminal justice system and end the over-mass incarceration.
So I think that if all of us go and look back at where we were, Senator Sanders voted for the crime bill, and he says the same thing, there were some good things, and things that we have to change and learn from.
So that's how I see it.
 And I think we ought to be putting our attention on forging a consensus to make the changes that will divert more people from the criminal justice system to start.

 Well, I think that it had some positive aspects to it.
 And you mentioned some of them.
 The Violence Against Women Act, which has been a very important piece of legislation, in my opinion.
  And it also did some things which were to provide more opportunities for young people.
 So if we were to have the balance sheet on one side, there are some positive actions and changes.
On the other side, there were decisions that were made that now we must revisit and we have to correct.
 I think that sentences got much too long.
 The original idea was not that we would increase sentences for non-violent low-level offenders, but once the federal government did what it did, states piled on.
So we have a problem.
 And the very first speech I gave in this campaign was about what I will do to reform the criminal justice system and end the over-mass incarceration.
So I think that if all of us go and look back at where we were, Senator Sanders voted for the crime bill, and he says the same thing, there were some good things, and things that we have to change and learn from.
So that's how I see it.
 And I think we ought to be putting our attention on forging a consensus to make the changes that will divert more people from the criminal justice system to start.

 To tackle systemic racism and divert people in the beginning.

 To tackle systemic racism and divert people in the beginning.

 Well, look, I supported the crime bill.
 My husband has apologized.
 He was the president who actually signed it, Senator Sanders
 Well, look, I supported the crime bill.
 My husband has apologized.
 He was the president who actually signed it, Senator Sanders
  voted for it.
 I'm sorry for the consequences that were unintended and that have had a very unfortunate impact on people's lives.
I've seen the results of what has happened in families and in communities.
That's why I chose to make my very first speech a year ago on this issue, Errol, because I want to focus the attention of our country and to make the changes we need to make.
 And I also want peopleespecially I want — I want white people — I want white people to recognize that there is systemic racism.
 It's also in employment, it's in housing, but it is in the criminal justice system, as well.
  
  voted for it.
 I'm sorry for the consequences that were unintended and that have had a very unfortunate impact on people's lives.
I've seen the results of what has happened in families and in communities.
That's why I chose to make my very first speech a year ago on this issue, Errol, because I want to focus the attention of our country and to make the changes we need to make.
 And I also want peopleespecially I want — I want white people — I want white people to recognize that there is systemic racism.
 It's also in employment, it's in housing, but it is in the criminal justice system, as well.
  
 Well, look, I think that, as Senator Sanders said about what I said, I will say about what he said.
 I think that we recognize that we have a set of problems that we cannot ignore and we must address.
 And that is why I have been promoting for my entire adult life, I think, the idea of investing early in kids, early childhood education, universal pre-K, like what Mayor de Blasio brought to New York.
 We have got to help more kids get off to a good start.
 That's why I want a good teacher in a good school for every child, regardless of the ZIP Code that child lives in
 Well, look, I think that, as Senator Sanders said about what I said, I will say about what he said.
 I think that we recognize that we have a set of problems that we cannot ignore and we must address.
 And that is why I have been promoting for my entire adult life, I think, the idea of investing early in kids, early childhood education, universal pre-K, like what Mayor de Blasio brought to New York.
 We have got to help more kids get off to a good start.
 That's why I want a good teacher in a good school for every child, regardless of the ZIP Code that child lives in
  and to be really focused on how we build ladders of opportunity and tear down these barriers that stand in the way of people getting ahead.

  and to be really focused on how we build ladders of opportunity and tear down these barriers that stand in the way of people getting ahead.

 Well, let me start by saying we need to talk about this issue and we should talk about it in terms of the extraordinary threats that climate change pose to our country and our world.
 And that's why for the last many years, both in the Senate and as secretary of State, it's been a big part of my commitment to see what could be done.
But there has never been any doubt that when I was a senator, I tried — I joined with others to try to get rid of the subsidies for big oil.
 And I have proposed that again, because that's what I think needs to be done as we transition from fossil fuels to clean energy.
And everyone who's looked at this independently, "The Washington Post" and others, who give us both hard times when called for on facts, have said that this is absolutely an incorrect false charge.
So, we both have relatively small amounts of contributions from people who work for fossil fuel companies.
 Best we can tell from the reports that are done.
But, that is not being supported by big oil, and I think it's important to distinguish that.
 And, let's talk about what each of us has proposed to try to combat greenhouse gas emissions and put us on the fastest track possible to clean energy.

 Well, let me start by saying we need to talk about this issue and we should talk about it in terms of the extraordinary threats that climate change pose to our country and our world.
 And that's why for the last many years, both in the Senate and as secretary of State, it's been a big part of my commitment to see what could be done.
But there has never been any doubt that when I was a senator, I tried — I joined with others to try to get rid of the subsidies for big oil.
 And I have proposed that again, because that's what I think needs to be done as we transition from fossil fuels to clean energy.
And everyone who's looked at this independently, "The Washington Post" and others, who give us both hard times when called for on facts, have said that this is absolutely an incorrect false charge.
So, we both have relatively small amounts of contributions from people who work for fossil fuel companies.
 Best we can tell from the reports that are done.
But, that is not being supported by big oil, and I think it's important to distinguish that.
 And, let's talk about what each of us has proposed to try to combat greenhouse gas emissions and put us on the fastest track possible to clean energy.

 Well, let's talk about the global environmental crisis.
 Starting in 2009 as your Secretary of State, I worked with President Obama to bring China and India to the table for the very first time, to get a commitment out of them that they would begin to address their own greenhouse gas emissions.
  I continued to work on that throughout the four years as Secretary of State, and I was very proud that President Obama and America led the way to the agreement that was finally reached in Paris with 195 nations committing to take steps to actually make a difference in climate change.
  And, I was surprised and disappointed when Senator Sanders attacked the agreement, said it was not enough, it didn't go far enough.
 You know, at some point putting together 195 countries, I know a little bit about that, was a major accomplishment
 Well, let's talk about the global environmental crisis.
 Starting in 2009 as your Secretary of State, I worked with President Obama to bring China and India to the table for the very first time, to get a commitment out of them that they would begin to address their own greenhouse gas emissions.
  I continued to work on that throughout the four years as Secretary of State, and I was very proud that President Obama and America led the way to the agreement that was finally reached in Paris with 195 nations committing to take steps to actually make a difference in climate change.
  And, I was surprised and disappointed when Senator Sanders attacked the agreement, said it was not enough, it didn't go far enough.
 You know, at some point putting together 195 countries, I know a little bit about that, was a major accomplishment
  And, our President led the effort to protect our world and he deserve our appreciation, not our criticism
  And, our President led the effort to protect our world and he deserve our appreciation, not our criticism
 Well, I'm a little bewildered about how to respond when you have an agreement which gives you the framework to actually take the action that would have only come about because under the Obama administration in the face of implacable hostility from the Republicans in Congress, President Obama moved forward on gas mileage, he moved forward on the clean power plant.
 He has moved forward on so many of the fronts that he could given the executive actions that he was able to take.
  And, you know, I am getting a little bit — I'm getting a little bit concerned here because, you know, I really believe that the President has done an incredible job against great odds and deserves to be supported.
 Now, it's easy — it's easy to diagnose the problem.
 It's harder to do something about the problem.
 And  
 Well, I'm a little bewildered about how to respond when you have an agreement which gives you the framework to actually take the action that would have only come about because under the Obama administration in the face of implacable hostility from the Republicans in Congress, President Obama moved forward on gas mileage, he moved forward on the clean power plant.
 He has moved forward on so many of the fronts that he could given the executive actions that he was able to take.
  And, you know, I am getting a little bit — I'm getting a little bit concerned here because, you know, I really believe that the President has done an incredible job against great odds and deserves to be supported.
 Now, it's easy — it's easy to diagnose the problem.
 It's harder to do something about the problem.
 And  
 No, well, I don't think I've changed my view on what we need to do to go from where we are, where the world is heavily dependent on coal and oil, but principally coal, to where we need to be, which is clean renewable energy, and one of the bridge fuels is natural gas.
And so for both economic and environmental and strategic reasons, it was American policy to try to help countries get out from under the constant use of coal, building coal plants all the time, also to get out from under, especially if they were in Europe, the pressure from Russia, which has been incredibly intense.
 So we did say natural gas is a bridge.
 We want to cross that bridge as quickly as possible, because in order to deal with climate change, we have got to move as rapidly as we can.
That's why I've set big goals.
 I want to see us deploy a half a billion more solar panels by the end of my first term and enough clean energy to provide electricity to every home in America within 10 years.
  So I have big, bold goals, but I know in order to get from where we are, where the world is still burning way too much coal, where the world is still too intimidated by countries and providers like Russia, we have got to make a very firm but decisive move in the direction of clean energy.

 No, well, I don't think I've changed my view on what we need to do to go from where we are, where the world is heavily dependent on coal and oil, but principally coal, to where we need to be, which is clean renewable energy, and one of the bridge fuels is natural gas.
And so for both economic and environmental and strategic reasons, it was American policy to try to help countries get out from under the constant use of coal, building coal plants all the time, also to get out from under, especially if they were in Europe, the pressure from Russia, which has been incredibly intense.
 So we did say natural gas is a bridge.
 We want to cross that bridge as quickly as possible, because in order to deal with climate change, we have got to move as rapidly as we can.
That's why I've set big goals.
 I want to see us deploy a half a billion more solar panels by the end of my first term and enough clean energy to provide electricity to every home in America within 10 years.
  So I have big, bold goals, but I know in order to get from where we are, where the world is still burning way too much coal, where the world is still too intimidated by countries and providers like Russia, we have got to make a very firm but decisive move in the direction of clean energy.

 You know, I have laid out a set of actions that build on what President Obama was able to accomplish, building on the clean power plan, which is currently under attack by fossil fuels and the right in the Supreme Court, which is one of the reasons why we need to get the Supreme Court justice that President Obama has nominated to be confirmed so that we can actually continue to make progress.
I don't take a back seat to your legislation that you've introduced that you haven't been able to get passed.
 I want to do what we can do to actually make progress in dealing with the crisis.
 That's exactly what I have proposed.

 You know, I have laid out a set of actions that build on what President Obama was able to accomplish, building on the clean power plan, which is currently under attack by fossil fuels and the right in the Supreme Court, which is one of the reasons why we need to get the Supreme Court justice that President Obama has nominated to be confirmed so that we can actually continue to make progress.
I don't take a back seat to your legislation that you've introduced that you haven't been able to get passed.
 I want to do what we can do to actually make progress in dealing with the crisis.
 That's exactly what I have proposed.

 And my approach I think is going to get us there faster without tying us up into political knots with a Congress that still would not support what you are proposing.

 And my approach I think is going to get us there faster without tying us up into political knots with a Congress that still would not support what you are proposing.

 Well, let me say I think we did a great deal to help the Libyan people after Qadafi's demise.
 And here's what we did.
We helped them hold two successful elections, something that is not easy, which they did very well because they had a pent up desire to try to chart their own future after 42 years of dictatorship.
I was very proud of that.
We got rid of the chemical weapons stockpile that Qadafi had, getting it out of Libya, getting it away from militias or terrorist groups.
We also worked to help them set up their government.
 We sent a lot of American experts there.
 We offered to help them secure their borders, to train a new military.
They, at the end, when it came to security issues, Wolf, did not want troops from any other country, not just us, European or other countries, in Libya.
And so we were caught in a very difficult position.
 They could not provide security on their own, which we could see and we told them that, but they didn't want to have others helping to provide that security.
And the result has been a clash between different parts of the country, terrorists taking up some locations in the country.
And we can't walk away from that.
 We need to be working with European and Arab partners
 Well, let me say I think we did a great deal to help the Libyan people after Qadafi's demise.
 And here's what we did.
We helped them hold two successful elections, something that is not easy, which they did very well because they had a pent up desire to try to chart their own future after 42 years of dictatorship.
I was very proud of that.
We got rid of the chemical weapons stockpile that Qadafi had, getting it out of Libya, getting it away from militias or terrorist groups.
We also worked to help them set up their government.
 We sent a lot of American experts there.
 We offered to help them secure their borders, to train a new military.
They, at the end, when it came to security issues, Wolf, did not want troops from any other country, not just us, European or other countries, in Libya.
And so we were caught in a very difficult position.
 They could not provide security on their own, which we could see and we told them that, but they didn't want to have others helping to provide that security.
And the result has been a clash between different parts of the country, terrorists taking up some locations in the country.
And we can't walk away from that.
 We need to be working with European and Arab partners
 with the United Nations in order to continue to try to support them.
The Libyan people deserve a chance at democracy and self- government.
 And I, as president, will keep trying to give that to them
 with the United Nations in order to continue to try to support them.
The Libyan people deserve a chance at democracy and self- government.
 And I, as president, will keep trying to give that to them
 Yes, well, III — I would just point out that there was a vote in the Senate as to whether or not the United States should support the efforts by the Libyan people to protect themselves against the threats, the genocidal threats coming from Gadhafi, and whether we should go to the United Nations to seek Security Council support.
Senator sanders voted for that, and that's exactly what we did.

 Yes, well, III — I would just point out that there was a vote in the Senate as to whether or not the United States should support the efforts by the Libyan people to protect themselves against the threats, the genocidal threats coming from Gadhafi, and whether we should go to the United Nations to seek Security Council support.
Senator sanders voted for that, and that's exactly what we did.

 We went to the United Nations — yes, he did.
 We went to the United Nations Security Council.
 We got support from the Security Council.
 And we then supported the efforts of our European and Arab allies and partners.
This was a request made to our government by the Europeans and by the Arabs because of their great fear of what chaos in Syria would do to them.
 And if you want to know what chaos does, not just to the people inside but the people on the borders, look at Syria.
Nobody stood up to Assad and removed him, and we have had a far greater disaster in Syria than we are currently dealing with right now in Libya.
  
 We went to the United Nations — yes, he did.
 We went to the United Nations Security Council.
 We got support from the Security Council.
 And we then supported the efforts of our European and Arab allies and partners.
This was a request made to our government by the Europeans and by the Arabs because of their great fear of what chaos in Syria would do to them.
 And if you want to know what chaos does, not just to the people inside but the people on the borders, look at Syria.
Nobody stood up to Assad and removed him, and we have had a far greater disaster in Syria than we are currently dealing with right now in Libya.
  
 Well, that isn't
 Well, that isn't
 There was also in that a reference to the Security Council, and I know you're not shy when you oppose something, Senator.
 So, yes, it was unanimous.
 That's exactly right, including you.
And what we did was to try to provide support for our European and Arab allies and partners.
 The decision was the president's.
 Did I do the due diligence? Did I talk to everybody I could talk to? Did I visit every capital and then report back to the president? Yes, I did.
 That's what a secretary of state does.
But at the end of the day, those are the decisions that are made by the president to in any way use American military power.
 And the president made that decision.
 And, yes, we did try without success because of the Libyans' obstruction to our efforts, but we did try and we will continue to try to help the Libyan people.

 There was also in that a reference to the Security Council, and I know you're not shy when you oppose something, Senator.
 So, yes, it was unanimous.
 That's exactly right, including you.
And what we did was to try to provide support for our European and Arab allies and partners.
 The decision was the president's.
 Did I do the due diligence? Did I talk to everybody I could talk to? Did I visit every capital and then report back to the president? Yes, I did.
 That's what a secretary of state does.
But at the end of the day, those are the decisions that are made by the president to in any way use American military power.
 And the president made that decision.
 And, yes, we did try without success because of the Libyans' obstruction to our efforts, but we did try and we will continue to try to help the Libyan people.

 Well, I think Senator Sanders has just reinforced my point.
 Yes, when I was secretary of state I did urge, along with the Department of Defense and the CIA that we seek out, vet, and train, and arm Syrian opposition figures so that they could defend themselves against Assad.
The president said no.
 Now, that's how it works.
 People who work for the president make recommendations and then the president makes the decision.
 So I think it's only fair to look at where we are in Syria today.
And, yes, I do still support a no-fly zone because I think we need to put in safe havens for those poor Syrians who are fleeing both Assad and ISIS and have some place that they can be safe.

 Well, I think Senator Sanders has just reinforced my point.
 Yes, when I was secretary of state I did urge, along with the Department of Defense and the CIA that we seek out, vet, and train, and arm Syrian opposition figures so that they could defend themselves against Assad.
The president said no.
 Now, that's how it works.
 People who work for the president make recommendations and then the president makes the decision.
 So I think it's only fair to look at where we are in Syria today.
And, yes, I do still support a no-fly zone because I think we need to put in safe havens for those poor Syrians who are fleeing both Assad and ISIS and have some place that they can be safe.

 I support our continuing involvement in NATO.
 And it is important to ask for our NATO allies to pay more of the cost.
 There is a requirement that they should be doing so, and I believe that needs to be enforced.
But there's a larger question here.
 NATO has been the most successful military alliance in probably human history.
 It has bound together across the Atlantic countries that are democracies, that have many of the same values and interests, and now we need to modernize it and move it into the 21st century to serve as that head of our defense operations in Europe when it comes to terrorism and other threats that we face.
 So
 I support our continuing involvement in NATO.
 And it is important to ask for our NATO allies to pay more of the cost.
 There is a requirement that they should be doing so, and I believe that needs to be enforced.
But there's a larger question here.
 NATO has been the most successful military alliance in probably human history.
 It has bound together across the Atlantic countries that are democracies, that have many of the same values and interests, and now we need to modernize it and move it into the 21st century to serve as that head of our defense operations in Europe when it comes to terrorism and other threats that we face.
 So
  yes, of course they should be paying more, but that doesn't mean if they don't we leave, because I don't think that's in America's interests.

  yes, of course they should be paying more, but that doesn't mean if they don't we leave, because I don't think that's in America's interests.

 I will stay in NATO.
 I will stay in NATO, and we will continue to look for missions and other kinds of programs that they will support.
 Remember, NATO was with us in Afghanistan.
 Most of the member countries also lost soldiers and civilians in Afghanistan.
 They came to our rallying defense after 9/11.
 That meant a lot.
And, yes, we have to work out the financial aspects of it, but let's not forget what's really happening.
 With Russia being more aggressive, making all kinds of intimidating moves toward the Baltic countries, we've seen what they've done in Eastern Ukraine, we know how they want to rewrite the map of Europe, it is not in our interests.
 Think of how much it would cost if Russia's aggression were not deterred because NATO was there on the front lines making it clear they could not move forward.
  
 I will stay in NATO.
 I will stay in NATO, and we will continue to look for missions and other kinds of programs that they will support.
 Remember, NATO was with us in Afghanistan.
 Most of the member countries also lost soldiers and civilians in Afghanistan.
 They came to our rallying defense after 9/11.
 That meant a lot.
And, yes, we have to work out the financial aspects of it, but let's not forget what's really happening.
 With Russia being more aggressive, making all kinds of intimidating moves toward the Baltic countries, we've seen what they've done in Eastern Ukraine, we know how they want to rewrite the map of Europe, it is not in our interests.
 Think of how much it would cost if Russia's aggression were not deterred because NATO was there on the front lines making it clear they could not move forward.
  
 I negotiated the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas in November of 2012.
 I did it in concert with  President Abbas of the Palestinian authority based in Ramallah, I did it with the then Muslim Brotherhood President, Morsi, based in Cairo, working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli cabinet.
 I can tell you right now I have been there with Israeli officials going back more than 25 years that they do not seek this kind of attacks.
 They do not invite the rockets raining down on their towns and villages.
  They do not believe that there should be a constant incitement by Hamas aided and abetted by Iran against Israel.
 And, so when it came time after they had taken the incoming rockets, taken the assaults and ambushes on their soldiers and they called and told me, I was in Cambodia, that they were getting ready to have to invade Gaza again because they couldn't find anybody to talk to tell them to stop it, I flew all night, I got there, I negotiated that.
So, I don't know how you run a country when you are under constant threat, terrorist tact, rockets coming at you.
 You have a right to defend yourself.
  That does not mean — that does not mean that you don't take appropriate precautions.
 And, I understand that there's always second guessing anytime there is a war.
 It also does not mean that we should not continue to do everything we can to try to reach a two-state solution, which would give the Palestinians the rights and
 I negotiated the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas in November of 2012.
 I did it in concert with  President Abbas of the Palestinian authority based in Ramallah, I did it with the then Muslim Brotherhood President, Morsi, based in Cairo, working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli cabinet.
 I can tell you right now I have been there with Israeli officials going back more than 25 years that they do not seek this kind of attacks.
 They do not invite the rockets raining down on their towns and villages.
  They do not believe that there should be a constant incitement by Hamas aided and abetted by Iran against Israel.
 And, so when it came time after they had taken the incoming rockets, taken the assaults and ambushes on their soldiers and they called and told me, I was in Cambodia, that they were getting ready to have to invade Gaza again because they couldn't find anybody to talk to tell them to stop it, I flew all night, I got there, I negotiated that.
So, I don't know how you run a country when you are under constant threat, terrorist tact, rockets coming at you.
 You have a right to defend yourself.
  That does not mean — that does not mean that you don't take appropriate precautions.
 And, I understand that there's always second guessing anytime there is a war.
 It also does not mean that we should not continue to do everything we can to try to reach a two-state solution, which would give the Palestinians the rights and
  just let me finish.
 The rights and the autonomy that they deserve.
 And, let me say this, if Yasser Arafat had agreed with my husband at Camp David in the Late 1990s to the offer then Prime Minister Barat put on the table, we would have had a Palestinian state for 15 years.
 
  just let me finish.
 The rights and the autonomy that they deserve.
 And, let me say this, if Yasser Arafat had agreed with my husband at Camp David in the Late 1990s to the offer then Prime Minister Barat put on the table, we would have had a Palestinian state for 15 years.
 
 I will certainly be willing to answer it.
 I think I did answer it by saying that of course there have to be precautions taken but even the most independent analyst will say the way that Hamas places its weapons, the way that it often has its fighters in civilian garb, it is terrible.
I'm not saying it's anything other than terrible.
 It would be great — remember, Israel left Gaza.
 They took out all the Israelis.
 They turned the keys over to the Palestinian people.
And what happened? Hamas took over Gaza.
So instead of having a thriving economy with the kind of opportunities that the children of the Palestinians deserve, we have a terrorist haven that is getting more and more rockets shipped in from Iran and elsewhere.

 I will certainly be willing to answer it.
 I think I did answer it by saying that of course there have to be precautions taken but even the most independent analyst will say the way that Hamas places its weapons, the way that it often has its fighters in civilian garb, it is terrible.
I'm not saying it's anything other than terrible.
 It would be great — remember, Israel left Gaza.
 They took out all the Israelis.
 They turned the keys over to the Palestinian people.
And what happened? Hamas took over Gaza.
So instead of having a thriving economy with the kind of opportunities that the children of the Palestinians deserve, we have a terrorist haven that is getting more and more rockets shipped in from Iran and elsewhere.

 Well, if I — I want to add, you know, again describing the problem is a lot easier than trying to solve it.
 And I have been involved, both as first lady with my husband's efforts, as a senator supporting the efforts that even the Bush administration was undertaking, and as secretary of state for President Obama, I'm the person who held the last three meetings between the president of the Palestinian Authority and the prime minister of Israel.
There were only four of us in the room, Netanyahu, Abbas, George Mitchell, and me.
 Three long meetings.
 And I was absolutely focused on what was fair and right for the Palestinians.
I was absolutely focused on what we needed to do to make sure that the Palestinian people had the right to self-government.
 And I believe that as president I will be able to continue to make progress and get an agreement that will be fair both to the Israelis and the Palestinians without ever, ever undermining Israel's security.
  
 Well, if I — I want to add, you know, again describing the problem is a lot easier than trying to solve it.
 And I have been involved, both as first lady with my husband's efforts, as a senator supporting the efforts that even the Bush administration was undertaking, and as secretary of state for President Obama, I'm the person who held the last three meetings between the president of the Palestinian Authority and the prime minister of Israel.
There were only four of us in the room, Netanyahu, Abbas, George Mitchell, and me.
 Three long meetings.
 And I was absolutely focused on what was fair and right for the Palestinians.
I was absolutely focused on what we needed to do to make sure that the Palestinian people had the right to self-government.
 And I believe that as president I will be able to continue to make progress and get an agreement that will be fair both to the Israelis and the Palestinians without ever, ever undermining Israel's security.
  
 Well
 Well
  you know, I have spoken about and written at some length the very candid conversations I've had with him and other Israeli leaders.
 Nobody is saying that any individual leader is always right, but it is a difficult position.
If you are from whatever perspective trying to seek peace, trying to create the conditions for peace when there is a terrorist group embedded in Gaza that does not want to see you exist, that is a very difficult challenge.

  you know, I have spoken about and written at some length the very candid conversations I've had with him and other Israeli leaders.
 Nobody is saying that any individual leader is always right, but it is a difficult position.
If you are from whatever perspective trying to seek peace, trying to create the conditions for peace when there is a terrorist group embedded in Gaza that does not want to see you exist, that is a very difficult challenge.

 Well, again — again, I absolutely agree with the diagnosis, the diagnosis that we've got to do much more to finish the work of getting universal health care coverage, something that I've worked on for 25 years.
 Before there was something called Obamacare, there was something called Hillarycare.
 And we're now at 90 percent of coverage; I'm going to get us to 100 percent.
And with respect to college, I think we have to make college affordable.
 We are pricing out middle-class, working, and poor families.
 There's no doubt about that.
But I do think when you make proposals and you're running for president, you should be held accountable for whether or not the numbers add up and whether or not the plansare actually going to work.
 And just very briefly, on health care, most of the people who have analyzed what Senator Sanders put out — remember, he had a plan for about, I don't know, 18, 20 years.
 He changed in the middle of this campaign.
 He put out another plan.
 People have been analyzing the new plan.
 And there is no doubt by those who have analyzed it, progressive economists, health economists, and the like, that it would pose an incredible burden, not just on the budget, but on individuals.
 In fact, the Washington Post called it a train-wreck for the poor.
 A working woman on Medicaid who already has health insurance would be expected to pay about $2,300.
The same for free college.
 The free college offer — you know, my late father said, if somebody promises you something for free, read the fine print.
 You read the fine print, and here's what it says.

 Well, again — again, I absolutely agree with the diagnosis, the diagnosis that we've got to do much more to finish the work of getting universal health care coverage, something that I've worked on for 25 years.
 Before there was something called Obamacare, there was something called Hillarycare.
 And we're now at 90 percent of coverage; I'm going to get us to 100 percent.
And with respect to college, I think we have to make college affordable.
 We are pricing out middle-class, working, and poor families.
 There's no doubt about that.
But I do think when you make proposals and you're running for president, you should be held accountable for whether or not the numbers add up and whether or not the plansare actually going to work.
 And just very briefly, on health care, most of the people who have analyzed what Senator Sanders put out — remember, he had a plan for about, I don't know, 18, 20 years.
 He changed in the middle of this campaign.
 He put out another plan.
 People have been analyzing the new plan.
 And there is no doubt by those who have analyzed it, progressive economists, health economists, and the like, that it would pose an incredible burden, not just on the budget, but on individuals.
 In fact, the Washington Post called it a train-wreck for the poor.
 A working woman on Medicaid who already has health insurance would be expected to pay about $2,300.
The same for free college.
 The free college offer — you know, my late father said, if somebody promises you something for free, read the fine print.
 You read the fine print, and here's what it says.

 The fine print says this, that it will — the federal government will cover two-thirds of the cost and require the states, even those led by Republican governors
 The fine print says this, that it will — the federal government will cover two-thirds of the cost and require the states, even those led by Republican governors
  to carry out what the remaining one-third of the cost.

  to carry out what the remaining one-third of the cost.

 Well
 Well
 We have — we have a difference of opinion.
 We both want to get to universal health care coverage.
 I did stand up to the special interests and the powerful forces, the health insurance companies and the drug companies.
  And perhaps that's why I am so much in favor of supporting President Obama's signature accomplishment with the Affordable Care Act, because I know how hard it was to get that passed, even with a Democratic Congress.
 So rather than letting the Republicans repeal it or rather starting all over again, trying to throw the country into another really contentious debate, let's make the Affordable Care Act work for everybody
 We have — we have a difference of opinion.
 We both want to get to universal health care coverage.
 I did stand up to the special interests and the powerful forces, the health insurance companies and the drug companies.
  And perhaps that's why I am so much in favor of supporting President Obama's signature accomplishment with the Affordable Care Act, because I know how hard it was to get that passed, even with a Democratic Congress.
 So rather than letting the Republicans repeal it or rather starting all over again, trying to throw the country into another really contentious debate, let's make the Affordable Care Act work for everybody
  let's get to 100 percent coverage, let's get the cost down, and let's guarantee health care.

  let's get to 100 percent coverage, let's get the cost down, and let's guarantee health care.

 I have said repeatedly, Wolf, I am going to make the wealthy pay into Social Security to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 That is one way.
 If that is the way that we pursue, I will follow that.
But there are other ways.
 We should be looking at taxing passive income by wealthy people.
 We should be looking at taxing all of their investment.
But here's the real issue, because I — I've heard this, I've seen the reports of it.
 I have said from the very beginning, we are going to protect Social Security.
 I was one of the leaders in the fight against Bush when he was trying to privatize Social Security.
But we also, in addition to extending the Trust Fund, which I am absolutely determined to do, we've got to help people who are not being taken care of now.
 And because Social Security started in the 1930s, a lot of women have been left out and left behind.
And it's time that we provide more benefits for widows, divorcees, for caregivers, for women who deserve more from the Social Security
 I have said repeatedly, Wolf, I am going to make the wealthy pay into Social Security to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 That is one way.
 If that is the way that we pursue, I will follow that.
But there are other ways.
 We should be looking at taxing passive income by wealthy people.
 We should be looking at taxing all of their investment.
But here's the real issue, because I — I've heard this, I've seen the reports of it.
 I have said from the very beginning, we are going to protect Social Security.
 I was one of the leaders in the fight against Bush when he was trying to privatize Social Security.
But we also, in addition to extending the Trust Fund, which I am absolutely determined to do, we've got to help people who are not being taken care of now.
 And because Social Security started in the 1930s, a lot of women have been left out and left behind.
And it's time that we provide more benefits for widows, divorcees, for caregivers, for women who deserve more from the Social Security
 system and that will be my highest priority.

 system and that will be my highest priority.

 I did.
 If that's the way we're
 I did.
 If that's the way we're
 yes, I did.

 yes, I did.

 I did answer the
 I did answer the
 Well, don't — don't put words
 Well, don't — don't put words
 into my mouth and say something
 into my mouth and say something
 that's not accurate.

 that's not accurate.

 I have supported it.
 You know, we are in vigorous agreement here, Senator.

 I have supported it.
 You know, we are in vigorous agreement here, Senator.

 I think it's importantto point out thatyou know, we're — we're having a discussion about the best way to raise money from wealthy people to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 Think about what the other side wants to do.
 They're calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme.
 They still want to privatize it.
In fact, their whole idea is to turn over the Social Security Trust Fund to Wall Street, something you and I would never let happen.

 I think it's importantto point out thatyou know, we're — we're having a discussion about the best way to raise money from wealthy people to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 Think about what the other side wants to do.
 They're calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme.
 They still want to privatize it.
In fact, their whole idea is to turn over the Social Security Trust Fund to Wall Street, something you and I would never let happen.

 So, yes, we both want to make sure  
 So, yes, we both want to make sure  
 Social Security 
 Social Security 
 and well-funded
 and well-funded
 No.

 No.

 We are goingwe are we are going
 We are goingwe are we are going
 I — as he said, I've said the same thing for years.
 I didn't say anything different tonight.
 We are going to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 There is still something called Congress.
 Now, I happen to support Democrats and I want to get Democrats to take back the majority in the United States Senate
 I — as he said, I've said the same thing for years.
 I didn't say anything different tonight.
 We are going to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 There is still something called Congress.
 Now, I happen to support Democrats and I want to get Democrats to take back the majority in the United States Senate
 so a lot of — a lot of what we're talking about can actually be implemented
 so a lot of — a lot of what we're talking about can actually be implemented
 when I am president.

 when I am president.

 I am
 I am
 I have said yes, we are going to pick the best way or combination
 I have said yes, we are going to pick the best way or combination
 or combination of waysyou knowit — it's all — it's always a little bit, uh, challenging because, you know, if Senator Sanders doesn't agree with how you are approaching something, then you are a member of the establishment.
Well, let me say then
 or combination of waysyou knowit — it's all — it's always a little bit, uh, challenging because, you know, if Senator Sanders doesn't agree with how you are approaching something, then you are a member of the establishment.
Well, let me say then
 let me say this we are going to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 We've got some good ideas to do it.
 Let's get a Congress elected
 let me say this we are going to extend the Social Security Trust Fund.
 We've got some good ideas to do it.
 Let's get a Congress elected
 that will actually agree
 that will actually agree
 with us in doing it.

 with us in doing it.

 I am not going to contradict the president's strategy on this.
 And I'm not going to engage in hypotheticals.
 I fully support the president.
  And I believe that the president — the president is on the right side of both the Constitution and history.
 And the Senate needs to immediately begin to respond.
 So I'm going to support the president.
 When I am president, I will take stock of where we are and move from there.

 I am not going to contradict the president's strategy on this.
 And I'm not going to engage in hypotheticals.
 I fully support the president.
  And I believe that the president — the president is on the right side of both the Constitution and history.
 And the Senate needs to immediately begin to respond.
 So I'm going to support the president.
 When I am president, I will take stock of where we are and move from there.

 You know, there is no doubt that the only people that I would ever appoint to the Supreme Court are people who believe that Roe V.
 Wade is settled law and Citizens United needs to be overturned.
And I want to say something about this since we're talking about the Supreme Court and what's at stake.
 We've had eight debates before, this is our ninth.
 We've not had one question about a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive health care, not one question.
  And in the meantime we have states, governors doing everything they can to restrict women's rights.
 We have a presidential candidate by the name of Donald Trump saying that women should be punished.
 And we are never asked about this.
And to be complete in my concern, Senator Sanders says with respect to Trump it was a distraction.
 I don't think it's a distraction.
 It goes to the heart of who we are as women, our rights, our autonomy, our ability to make our own decisions, and we need to be talking about that and defending Planned Parenthood from these outrageous attacks.

 You know, there is no doubt that the only people that I would ever appoint to the Supreme Court are people who believe that Roe V.
 Wade is settled law and Citizens United needs to be overturned.
And I want to say something about this since we're talking about the Supreme Court and what's at stake.
 We've had eight debates before, this is our ninth.
 We've not had one question about a woman's right to make her own decisions about reproductive health care, not one question.
  And in the meantime we have states, governors doing everything they can to restrict women's rights.
 We have a presidential candidate by the name of Donald Trump saying that women should be punished.
 And we are never asked about this.
And to be complete in my concern, Senator Sanders says with respect to Trump it was a distraction.
 I don't think it's a distraction.
 It goes to the heart of who we are as women, our rights, our autonomy, our ability to make our own decisions, and we need to be talking about that and defending Planned Parenthood from these outrageous attacks.

 Let us talk about where we are in this race.
 I've gotten more votes than anybody running.
 9.
6 million at the last count.
 That is 2.
3 million more than Senator Sanders.
  And it is 1.
4 million more than Donald Trump.
 I think you have to look at the facts.
 And, the facts are that I'm putting together a very broad-based, inclusive coalition from the South to the North, from the East to the West, with African-American, Latinos, women, union households, working people and I am very proud of the campaign we are running.
 It is a campaign that will not only capture the Democratic nomination, but a campaign that will defeat whoever the Republican end up nominating.
 
 Let us talk about where we are in this race.
 I've gotten more votes than anybody running.
 9.
6 million at the last count.
 That is 2.
3 million more than Senator Sanders.
  And it is 1.
4 million more than Donald Trump.
 I think you have to look at the facts.
 And, the facts are that I'm putting together a very broad-based, inclusive coalition from the South to the North, from the East to the West, with African-American, Latinos, women, union households, working people and I am very proud of the campaign we are running.
 It is a campaign that will not only capture the Democratic nomination, but a campaign that will defeat whoever the Republican end up nominating.
 
 And, I want to say — I also want to say that I do — I do think it is absolutely critical and incredible that we have so many young people involved in the political process.
 I applaud all of those who are applauding you, Senator Sanders.
 We're happy that they are supporting you, that they are passionately committed to you and to the issues.
But, let me also say it's going to be important that we unify the Democratic party when the nomination process has been completed
 And, I want to say — I also want to say that I do — I do think it is absolutely critical and incredible that we have so many young people involved in the political process.
 I applaud all of those who are applauding you, Senator Sanders.
 We're happy that they are supporting you, that they are passionately committed to you and to the issues.
But, let me also say it's going to be important that we unify the Democratic party when the nomination process has been completed
 And, I know something about that
 And, I know something about that
 Thank you so much.
 Because, when I went to the very end of the 2008 campaign with then Senator Obama
 Thank you so much.
 Because, when I went to the very end of the 2008 campaign with then Senator Obama
  We did unify the party, and we did elect a Democratic president
  We did unify the party, and we did elect a Democratic president
 Now, let me say this
 Now, let me say this
 I think it's — I think it's important for people out there watching this tonight to know that I also have a considerable lead in pledged delegates.
 And my lead in pledged delegates is actually wider than Barack Obama's lead was over me.
And in addition to winning states in the Deep South, we won Florida, Texas, Arizona, Massachusetts, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Missouri.
  And so I think where we stand today is that we are in this campaign very confident and optimistic, but it all comes down to reaching every single voter.
 I'm not taking anything for granted or any voter or any place.
So I'm going to work my heart out here in New York until the polls close on Tuesday.
 I'm going to work in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and Maryland, all the way through California.
 And when we end up with the number of delegates we need, we will unite the party and have a unified convention
 I think it's — I think it's important for people out there watching this tonight to know that I also have a considerable lead in pledged delegates.
 And my lead in pledged delegates is actually wider than Barack Obama's lead was over me.
And in addition to winning states in the Deep South, we won Florida, Texas, Arizona, Massachusetts, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, Missouri.
  And so I think where we stand today is that we are in this campaign very confident and optimistic, but it all comes down to reaching every single voter.
 I'm not taking anything for granted or any voter or any place.
So I'm going to work my heart out here in New York until the polls close on Tuesday.
 I'm going to work in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and Maryland, all the way through California.
 And when we end up with the number of delegates we need, we will unite the party and have a unified convention
  that we'll go onto the general election with.

  that we'll go onto the general election with.

 Thank you.
 I am very grateful for the fact that the people of New York gave me the great honor of serving as your senator.
 You took a chance on me in 2000, and then you re-elected me with one of the biggest margins we've had in our state in 2006.
 During those years, we worked closely together.
 I tried to have your back, and time and time again, you had mine.
We took on the challenges of 9/11 together.
 We got the money to rebuild New York.
 We came to the aid of our brave first responders, construction workers, and others who endangered their own health by helping to save lives and search for survivors.
  We worked to create jobs — despite the disastrous policies of George W.
 Bush — across New York.
 And we stood up time and time again against all kinds of vested powerful interests.
I'm asking for your support again in the primary on Tuesday to continue that work together, to take what we did in New York and to take those New York values to the White House, and put them to work on behalf of all of our people, to knock down the barriers that stand in the way.
You know, of course we have economic barriers.
 I've been fighting against those trying to even the odds most of my adult life.
 But we also have racial barriers, gender barriers, homophobic barriers, disability barriers.
  We have a lot of barriers that stand in the way of people being treated as they should and having the chance to live up to their own God-given potential.
So I am humbly asking for your support on Tuesday.
 I'll work my heart out for you again.
 And together, we won't just make promises we can't keep.
 We'll deliver results that will improve the lives of the people in New York and in America.
  That's what we'll do together.
 Thank you, New York.
  
 Thank you.
 I am very grateful for the fact that the people of New York gave me the great honor of serving as your senator.
 You took a chance on me in 2000, and then you re-elected me with one of the biggest margins we've had in our state in 2006.
 During those years, we worked closely together.
 I tried to have your back, and time and time again, you had mine.
We took on the challenges of 9/11 together.
 We got the money to rebuild New York.
 We came to the aid of our brave first responders, construction workers, and others who endangered their own health by helping to save lives and search for survivors.
  We worked to create jobs — despite the disastrous policies of George W.
 Bush — across New York.
 And we stood up time and time again against all kinds of vested powerful interests.
I'm asking for your support again in the primary on Tuesday to continue that work together, to take what we did in New York and to take those New York values to the White House, and put them to work on behalf of all of our people, to knock down the barriers that stand in the way.
You know, of course we have economic barriers.
 I've been fighting against those trying to even the odds most of my adult life.
 But we also have racial barriers, gender barriers, homophobic barriers, disability barriers.
  We have a lot of barriers that stand in the way of people being treated as they should and having the chance to live up to their own God-given potential.
So I am humbly asking for your support on Tuesday.
 I'll work my heart out for you again.
 And together, we won't just make promises we can't keep.
 We'll deliver results that will improve the lives of the people in New York and in America.
  That's what we'll do together.
 Thank you, New York.
   Well Nikki, it's a very fair question.
Your government at all levels have let you and your children and the people of Flint down.
 So I think that there are there several things.
 All the repair work that is being done — and Mayor Weaver program that we support to begin to help train people in Flint to be able to do this work to distribute the water.
 Everything that is done has to be triple checked to regain your trust and to hold those who are responsible for fixing the pipes and delivering the clean water which has you said, you bathe in it and drink it and wash food in it.
 You do everything with it.
Every one of us should have to run through in our minds how we use water every single day to understand the pressures and the real pain that families are going through.
 So I will make sure as President that I double and triple check.
 I will work with elected officials who I trust like your mayor and like your senators and member of Congress so that we can assure you that when it's fixed, you can trust it.
 You deserve nothing less.

 Well Nikki, it's a very fair question.
Your government at all levels have let you and your children and the people of Flint down.
 So I think that there are there several things.
 All the repair work that is being done — and Mayor Weaver program that we support to begin to help train people in Flint to be able to do this work to distribute the water.
 Everything that is done has to be triple checked to regain your trust and to hold those who are responsible for fixing the pipes and delivering the clean water which has you said, you bathe in it and drink it and wash food in it.
 You do everything with it.
Every one of us should have to run through in our minds how we use water every single day to understand the pressures and the real pain that families are going through.
 So I will make sure as President that I double and triple check.
 I will work with elected officials who I trust like your mayor and like your senators and member of Congress so that we can assure you that when it's fixed, you can trust it.
 You deserve nothing less.

 Well, I support what President Obama is doing.
 He called for and got accountability from the officials at the EPA to make sure the state is doing its job.
 He expanded Medicaid for helping kids particularly to get the health care they need.
 He is also ordered that there be a Head Start program.
 I support that.
When it comes to the water itself, we are supporting a program that Mayor Waver announced through Flint Waterworks to pay people in Flint, not outsiders, but people here to deliver the water while we are fixing the pipes.
 I would do even more of that.
 As president, what we were able to put together was a beginning.
 As president, I would concentrate resources on the city for economic development for more jobs as we fix the water and provide the health and education, interventions that children need.
 
 Well, I support what President Obama is doing.
 He called for and got accountability from the officials at the EPA to make sure the state is doing its job.
 He expanded Medicaid for helping kids particularly to get the health care they need.
 He is also ordered that there be a Head Start program.
 I support that.
When it comes to the water itself, we are supporting a program that Mayor Waver announced through Flint Waterworks to pay people in Flint, not outsiders, but people here to deliver the water while we are fixing the pipes.
 I would do even more of that.
 As president, what we were able to put together was a beginning.
 As president, I would concentrate resources on the city for economic development for more jobs as we fix the water and provide the health and education, interventions that children need.
 
 Well, I think that the people here in the region, who knew about this and failed to follow what you just said, rightly, the law required, have been eliminated from the EPA.

 Well, I think that the people here in the region, who knew about this and failed to follow what you just said, rightly, the law required, have been eliminated from the EPA.

 I don't — well, I don't know how high it goes.
 I would certainly be launching an investigation.
 I think there is one.
 I was told that — you know, some of the higher-ups were pushing to get changes that were not happening.
So I would have a full investigation, determine who knew what, when.
 And yes, people should be fired.
 How far up it went, I don't know.
 But as far as it goes, they should be relieved, because they failed this city.
But let me just add this, Anderson.
 This is not the only place where this kind of action is needed.
 We have a lot of communities right now in our country where the level of toxins in the water, including lead, are way above what anybody should tolerate.
 We have a higher rate of tested lead in people in Cleveland than in Flint.
 So I'm not satisfied with just doing everything we must do for Flint.
 I want to tackle this problem across the board.
 And if people know about it and they're not acting, and they're in the government at any level, they should be forced to resign.

 I don't — well, I don't know how high it goes.
 I would certainly be launching an investigation.
 I think there is one.
 I was told that — you know, some of the higher-ups were pushing to get changes that were not happening.
So I would have a full investigation, determine who knew what, when.
 And yes, people should be fired.
 How far up it went, I don't know.
 But as far as it goes, they should be relieved, because they failed this city.
But let me just add this, Anderson.
 This is not the only place where this kind of action is needed.
 We have a lot of communities right now in our country where the level of toxins in the water, including lead, are way above what anybody should tolerate.
 We have a higher rate of tested lead in people in Cleveland than in Flint.
 So I'm not satisfied with just doing everything we must do for Flint.
 I want to tackle this problem across the board.
 And if people know about it and they're not acting, and they're in the government at any level, they should be forced to resign.

 Well, I agree completely.
 I want to go further though.
 I want us to have an absolute commitment to getting rid of lead wherever it is because it's not only in water systems, it's also in soil, and it's in lead paint that is found mostly in older homes.
 That's why 500,000 children today have lead — lead in their bodies.
So, I want to do exactly what you said.
 We will commit to a priority to change the water systems, and we will commit within five years to remove lead from everywhere.
We were making progress on this in the 1990's.
 I worked with then Senator Obama to get more money, more support to do more to remove lead.

 Well, I agree completely.
 I want to go further though.
 I want us to have an absolute commitment to getting rid of lead wherever it is because it's not only in water systems, it's also in soil, and it's in lead paint that is found mostly in older homes.
 That's why 500,000 children today have lead — lead in their bodies.
So, I want to do exactly what you said.
 We will commit to a priority to change the water systems, and we will commit within five years to remove lead from everywhere.
We were making progress on this in the 1990's.
 I worked with then Senator Obama to get more money, more support to do more to remove lead.

 That has, unfortunately, been in many ways, moved to a lower priority.
 I will elevate it, and I will do everything I can.
 Water, soil, and paint.
.
.

 That has, unfortunately, been in many ways, moved to a lower priority.
 I will elevate it, and I will do everything I can.
 Water, soil, and paint.
.
.

 .
.
.
 We're going to get rid of it.
 
 .
.
.
 We're going to get rid of it.
 
 Well, that's going to be up to the legal system, Don.
 I mean, I can't standing here — I don't have all the facts, but people should be held accountable wherever that leads.
 If it leads to resignation, or recall if you're in political office.
If it leads to civil penalties, if it leads to criminal responsibility.
 There has to be an absolute accountability, and I will support whatever the outcome of those investigations are.

 Well, that's going to be up to the legal system, Don.
 I mean, I can't standing here — I don't have all the facts, but people should be held accountable wherever that leads.
 If it leads to resignation, or recall if you're in political office.
If it leads to civil penalties, if it leads to criminal responsibility.
 There has to be an absolute accountability, and I will support whatever the outcome of those investigations are.

 Well, I think because throughout my public career I have been evening the odds for people in every way that I could.
 I started out with the Children's Defense Fund, I worked throughout my time as a young lawyer as a person, an activist.
 Certainly, in Arkansas, then in the White House, to try to fix problems wherever I saw them.
And, this problem is one that is particularly outrageous and painful at the same time.
So, when I heard about it I immediately sent people here to find out what was going on.
 It was almost unbelievable.
 We have this problem in other places, but we don't say that it was actually caused by decisions made by public officials in positions of authority, as this one was.
Then, when I talked to the mayor I basically said, "What can I do to help?"Then, when I came here, and I met with some of the mothers, and met their children, and heard their stories — I'm just determined to do whatever I can.
 So, I have put together resources from the private and philanthropic communities to help provide a bridge because you've got to get the federal money, you've got to get the state money, but I'm going to do everything I can.
 And, I will be with Flint all the way through this crisis in whatever capacity I am.
And, if I'm president, it will always be a priority for action from me.
 
 Well, I think because throughout my public career I have been evening the odds for people in every way that I could.
 I started out with the Children's Defense Fund, I worked throughout my time as a young lawyer as a person, an activist.
 Certainly, in Arkansas, then in the White House, to try to fix problems wherever I saw them.
And, this problem is one that is particularly outrageous and painful at the same time.
So, when I heard about it I immediately sent people here to find out what was going on.
 It was almost unbelievable.
 We have this problem in other places, but we don't say that it was actually caused by decisions made by public officials in positions of authority, as this one was.
Then, when I talked to the mayor I basically said, "What can I do to help?"Then, when I came here, and I met with some of the mothers, and met their children, and heard their stories — I'm just determined to do whatever I can.
 So, I have put together resources from the private and philanthropic communities to help provide a bridge because you've got to get the federal money, you've got to get the state money, but I'm going to do everything I can.
 And, I will be with Flint all the way through this crisis in whatever capacity I am.
And, if I'm president, it will always be a priority for action from me.
 
 I'm going to do what I think will work which is both carrots and sticks.
 Let me talk about the carrots.
 We're going to have a very clear set of proposals and incentives for manufacturing so that we change the way that companies think about making investments again in America.
 I have a comprehensive manufacturing plan that I will be implementing.
We're also going to invest more on infrastructure as we both have said, "it's woefully under resourced.
" That will put a lot of people to work.
 I want to do more to help small businesses, they are the source of two thirds of our jobs and we have to help them start and grow, particularly minority and women-owned small businesses.
We need to do more to help create clean energy as a source of good jobs but I am also going to go after companies.
 You know, when a company decides to leave like Nabisco is leaving and they have gotten tax benefits from Chicago and Illinois to stay there, I will claw back the benefits.
 They will have to pay them back if they are leaving a place that actually invested in them.
I am also going to go after companies like Johnson Controls in Wisconsin.
 They came and got part of the bailout because they were an auto parts supplier and now they want to move headquarters to Europe.
 They are going to have to pay an exit fee.
 We are going to stop this kind of job exporting and we are going to start importing and growing jobs again in our country.

 I'm going to do what I think will work which is both carrots and sticks.
 Let me talk about the carrots.
 We're going to have a very clear set of proposals and incentives for manufacturing so that we change the way that companies think about making investments again in America.
 I have a comprehensive manufacturing plan that I will be implementing.
We're also going to invest more on infrastructure as we both have said, "it's woefully under resourced.
" That will put a lot of people to work.
 I want to do more to help small businesses, they are the source of two thirds of our jobs and we have to help them start and grow, particularly minority and women-owned small businesses.
We need to do more to help create clean energy as a source of good jobs but I am also going to go after companies.
 You know, when a company decides to leave like Nabisco is leaving and they have gotten tax benefits from Chicago and Illinois to stay there, I will claw back the benefits.
 They will have to pay them back if they are leaving a place that actually invested in them.
I am also going to go after companies like Johnson Controls in Wisconsin.
 They came and got part of the bailout because they were an auto parts supplier and now they want to move headquarters to Europe.
 They are going to have to pay an exit fee.
 We are going to stop this kind of job exporting and we are going to start importing and growing jobs again in our country.

 Well — well, I'll tell you something else that Senator Sanders was against.
 He was against the auto bailout.
 In January of 2009, President-Elect Obama asked everybody in the Congress to vote for the bailout.
The money was there, and had to be released in order to save the American auto industry and four million jobs, and to begin the restructuring.
 We had the best year that the auto industry has had in a long time.
 I voted to save the auto industry.
 He voted against the money that ended up saving the auto industry.
 I think that is a pretty big difference.

 Well — well, I'll tell you something else that Senator Sanders was against.
 He was against the auto bailout.
 In January of 2009, President-Elect Obama asked everybody in the Congress to vote for the bailout.
The money was there, and had to be released in order to save the American auto industry and four million jobs, and to begin the restructuring.
 We had the best year that the auto industry has had in a long time.
 I voted to save the auto industry.
 He voted against the money that ended up saving the auto industry.
 I think that is a pretty big difference.

 You know.
.
.

 You know.
.
.

 If you're gonna talk, tell the whole story, Senator Sanders.

 If you're gonna talk, tell the whole story, Senator Sanders.

 I will.

 I will.

 OK, so.
.
.

 OK, so.
.
.

 Well, if I — if I could.
.
.
.
.
.
to set the record straight, I voted against the only multinational trade agreement that came before me when I was in the Senate.
 It was called CAFTA.
 I came out against the TPP after it was finished.
 I thought it was reasonable to actually know what was in it before I opposed it.
 I oppose it.
 Now let me get back to what happened in January of 2009.
 The Bush administration negotiated the deal.
 Were there things in it that I didn't like? Would I have done it differently? Absolutely.
But was the auto bailout money in it — the $350 billion that was needed to begin the restructuring of the auto industry? Yes, it was.
 So when I talk about Senator Sanders being a one-issue candidate, I mean very clearly — you have to make hard choices when you're in positions of responsibility.
 The two senators from Michigan stood on the floor and said, "we have to get this money released.
" I went with them, and I went with Barack Obama.
 You did not.
 If everybody had voted the way he did, I believe the auto industry would have collapsed, taking four million jobs with it.
 
 Well, if I — if I could.
.
.
.
.
.
to set the record straight, I voted against the only multinational trade agreement that came before me when I was in the Senate.
 It was called CAFTA.
 I came out against the TPP after it was finished.
 I thought it was reasonable to actually know what was in it before I opposed it.
 I oppose it.
 Now let me get back to what happened in January of 2009.
 The Bush administration negotiated the deal.
 Were there things in it that I didn't like? Would I have done it differently? Absolutely.
But was the auto bailout money in it — the $350 billion that was needed to begin the restructuring of the auto industry? Yes, it was.
 So when I talk about Senator Sanders being a one-issue candidate, I mean very clearly — you have to make hard choices when you're in positions of responsibility.
 The two senators from Michigan stood on the floor and said, "we have to get this money released.
" I went with them, and I went with Barack Obama.
 You did not.
 If everybody had voted the way he did, I believe the auto industry would have collapsed, taking four million jobs with it.
 
 Well, all I can say is that given the terrible pressures that the auto industry was under and that the middle class of this state and Ohio and Indiana and Illinois and Wisconsin and Missouri and other places in the Midwest were facing, I think it was the right decision to heed what President-elect Obama asked us to do.
He sent a letter, an authorized letter, asking us to support that to save the auto industry.
 Yes, were there things in it that you and I would not have necessarily wanted? That's true.
 But when it came down to it, you were either for saving the auto industry or you were against it.
 I voted to save the auto industry.
 And I am very glad that I did.
 
 Well, all I can say is that given the terrible pressures that the auto industry was under and that the middle class of this state and Ohio and Indiana and Illinois and Wisconsin and Missouri and other places in the Midwest were facing, I think it was the right decision to heed what President-elect Obama asked us to do.
He sent a letter, an authorized letter, asking us to support that to save the auto industry.
 Yes, were there things in it that you and I would not have necessarily wanted? That's true.
 But when it came down to it, you were either for saving the auto industry or you were against it.
 I voted to save the auto industry.
 And I am very glad that I did.
 
 And I have said and I will say again, I will be happy to release anything I have as long as everybody else does too, because what really is behind that question, Republicans and Democrats, is where I can stand up to Wall Street.
Well, let's have some facts instead of some rhetoric for a change.
 I went to Wall Street when I was a United States senator.
 I told them they were wrecking the economy.
 I asked for a moratorium on foreclosures.
 I asked that we do more to try to prevent what I worried was going to happen.
 I also called for closing loopholes including the carried interest loophole.
 I also called for changes in CEO pay.
 I have a record.
 And you know what, if you were going to be in some way distrusted or dismissed about whether you can take on Wall Street if you ever took money, President Obama took more money from Wall Street in the 2008 campaign than anybody ever had.
And when it came time to stand up to Wall Street, he passed and signed the toughest regulation since the Great Depression with the Dodd-Frank regulations.

 And I have said and I will say again, I will be happy to release anything I have as long as everybody else does too, because what really is behind that question, Republicans and Democrats, is where I can stand up to Wall Street.
Well, let's have some facts instead of some rhetoric for a change.
 I went to Wall Street when I was a United States senator.
 I told them they were wrecking the economy.
 I asked for a moratorium on foreclosures.
 I asked that we do more to try to prevent what I worried was going to happen.
 I also called for closing loopholes including the carried interest loophole.
 I also called for changes in CEO pay.
 I have a record.
 And you know what, if you were going to be in some way distrusted or dismissed about whether you can take on Wall Street if you ever took money, President Obama took more money from Wall Street in the 2008 campaign than anybody ever had.
And when it came time to stand up to Wall Street, he passed and signed the toughest regulation since the Great Depression with the Dodd-Frank regulations.

 Well, I think we are in vigorous agreement on this.
 I have said repeatedly no bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail.
 And I have said that I would use the tools in the Dodd-Frank regulations, that if any bank posed a systemic risk to the economy, they would be broken up.
Because we now have tools, laws that we didn't have before.
 And I am very happy we did.
 Because there does need to be accountability, including criminal accountability if it is called for.
 
 Well, I think we are in vigorous agreement on this.
 I have said repeatedly no bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail.
 And I have said that I would use the tools in the Dodd-Frank regulations, that if any bank posed a systemic risk to the economy, they would be broken up.
Because we now have tools, laws that we didn't have before.
 And I am very happy we did.
 Because there does need to be accountability, including criminal accountability if it is called for.
 
 You know, if we're going to argue about the 1990's instead of talking about the future, which I'd much prefer because I think every election is about the future, and you all deserve to know what we will do to help you have a brighter future — but, if we are going to talk about the 1990's I think it's only fair to say that at the end of the 1990's, after two terms of my husband's presidency, the unemployment rate in Michigan was 4.
4 percent.
There had been a net increase of 54,000 manufacturing jobs.
 There had been a net increase of 653,000 jobs overall.
And, one of the ways jobs were brought to, and grown here in Michigan was through something called the Export-Import Bank which helped a lot of businesses, particularly small businesses, be able to export around the world.
Senator Sanders opposes that.
 I think we're in a race for exports.
 I think China, Germany, everybody else supports their businesses.
 Here in Michigan there's been $11 billion dollars in recent years used to support exports, primarily from small businesses.
I favor that, he's opposed it.
 I want to do everything I can for us to compete and win in the global economy.
.
.

 You know, if we're going to argue about the 1990's instead of talking about the future, which I'd much prefer because I think every election is about the future, and you all deserve to know what we will do to help you have a brighter future — but, if we are going to talk about the 1990's I think it's only fair to say that at the end of the 1990's, after two terms of my husband's presidency, the unemployment rate in Michigan was 4.
4 percent.
There had been a net increase of 54,000 manufacturing jobs.
 There had been a net increase of 653,000 jobs overall.
And, one of the ways jobs were brought to, and grown here in Michigan was through something called the Export-Import Bank which helped a lot of businesses, particularly small businesses, be able to export around the world.
Senator Sanders opposes that.
 I think we're in a race for exports.
 I think China, Germany, everybody else supports their businesses.
 Here in Michigan there's been $11 billion dollars in recent years used to support exports, primarily from small businesses.
I favor that, he's opposed it.
 I want to do everything I can for us to compete and win in the global economy.
.
.

 .
.
.
 and that's what I will do as president.
.
.

 .
.
.
 and that's what I will do as president.
.
.

 When I traveled around the world on you behalf as Secretary of State and went to 112 countries, one thing I saw everywhere was how European and Asian countries were supporting their companies back in their countries, to be able to make sales and contracts in a lot of the rest of the world.
 In fact, without the export-import bank, supporting businesses of all sizes — I believe more jobs would be lost here at home and more jobs literally would be exported.
 Instead of exporting products, we would be exporting jobs.
I just believe that Senator Sanders took that lonely position because most of us who saw the results — I saw it as a senator from New York.
 Your Senators saw it here in Michigan.
 They can give you the names of 240 companies in Michigan that have been helped.
There is a company in Levonia being helped, there are companies all over this state.
 I know, if we are going to compete and win in the global economy, we can't let every other country support their companies and we take a hands off approach.
 I will not agree with that.

 When I traveled around the world on you behalf as Secretary of State and went to 112 countries, one thing I saw everywhere was how European and Asian countries were supporting their companies back in their countries, to be able to make sales and contracts in a lot of the rest of the world.
 In fact, without the export-import bank, supporting businesses of all sizes — I believe more jobs would be lost here at home and more jobs literally would be exported.
 Instead of exporting products, we would be exporting jobs.
I just believe that Senator Sanders took that lonely position because most of us who saw the results — I saw it as a senator from New York.
 Your Senators saw it here in Michigan.
 They can give you the names of 240 companies in Michigan that have been helped.
There is a company in Levonia being helped, there are companies all over this state.
 I know, if we are going to compete and win in the global economy, we can't let every other country support their companies and we take a hands off approach.
 I will not agree with that.

 I will tell you what, Anderson, after I investigated it, I concluded they did and here's why.
 There two big plane manufacturers in the world, there's Airbus and Boeing.
 Airbus does everything it can to get contracts to sell planes everywhere in the world.
 We don't have as quite an aggressive outreach from our government.
I did go in many places around the world to sell American products because the alternatives were usually European, Asian, primarily Chinese products.
 That to me was an unacceptable concession.
 So yes, Boeing and other big companies get support just like their competitors do from the companies that they are from in the countries that provide the support.

 I will tell you what, Anderson, after I investigated it, I concluded they did and here's why.
 There two big plane manufacturers in the world, there's Airbus and Boeing.
 Airbus does everything it can to get contracts to sell planes everywhere in the world.
 We don't have as quite an aggressive outreach from our government.
I did go in many places around the world to sell American products because the alternatives were usually European, Asian, primarily Chinese products.
 That to me was an unacceptable concession.
 So yes, Boeing and other big companies get support just like their competitors do from the companies that they are from in the countries that provide the support.

 We are on the path to doing that thanks to President Obama and the Affordable Care Act, we have 90 percent coverage.
 We are lacking 10 percent.
 We are going to stay on that and get to 100 percent universal coverage.

 We are on the path to doing that thanks to President Obama and the Affordable Care Act, we have 90 percent coverage.
 We are lacking 10 percent.
 We are going to stay on that and get to 100 percent universal coverage.

 Well, first of all I am looking at your daughter and I'm very grateful that she is laughing and she is on a road to recovery.
 But it never should have happened.
 You know, on average, 90 people a day are killed by gun violence in our country.
I think we have to try everything that works to try to limit the numbers of people and the kinds of people who are given access to firearms.
 The Brady Bill, which has been in effect now for about 23 years, has kept more than two million purchases from going forward.
 So we do have to continue to try to work on that because not every killer will have the same profile.
But the comprehensive background checks, closing the gun show loophole, closing the online loophole, closing what's called the Charleston loophole, where you get a gun at the end of three days, even if the background check is not completed which is what the killer in Charleston did.
 And then they found out later, he shouldn't have gotten the gun when he killed nine people at Mother Emmanuel Church.
I also believe, so strongly Gene, that giving immunity to gunmakers and sellers was a terrible mistake.
 Because it removed any accountability from the makers and the sellers.
 And it also disrupted what was a very promising legal theory, to try to get makers to do more to make guns safer for example.
 To try to give sellers more accountability for selling guns when they shouldn't have.
 So that is an issue that Senator Sanders and I differ on, I voted against giving them immunity, but I think we should very seriously move to repeal that and go back to making sure gun makers and sellers are like any other business.
 They can be held accountable.
And then I do think we have got to have a public.
.
.

 Well, first of all I am looking at your daughter and I'm very grateful that she is laughing and she is on a road to recovery.
 But it never should have happened.
 You know, on average, 90 people a day are killed by gun violence in our country.
I think we have to try everything that works to try to limit the numbers of people and the kinds of people who are given access to firearms.
 The Brady Bill, which has been in effect now for about 23 years, has kept more than two million purchases from going forward.
 So we do have to continue to try to work on that because not every killer will have the same profile.
But the comprehensive background checks, closing the gun show loophole, closing the online loophole, closing what's called the Charleston loophole, where you get a gun at the end of three days, even if the background check is not completed which is what the killer in Charleston did.
 And then they found out later, he shouldn't have gotten the gun when he killed nine people at Mother Emmanuel Church.
I also believe, so strongly Gene, that giving immunity to gunmakers and sellers was a terrible mistake.
 Because it removed any accountability from the makers and the sellers.
 And it also disrupted what was a very promising legal theory, to try to get makers to do more to make guns safer for example.
 To try to give sellers more accountability for selling guns when they shouldn't have.
 So that is an issue that Senator Sanders and I differ on, I voted against giving them immunity, but I think we should very seriously move to repeal that and go back to making sure gun makers and sellers are like any other business.
 They can be held accountable.
And then I do think we have got to have a public.
.
.

 Well, we've got to have a public discussion, because we have created a culture in which people grab for guns all the time.

 Well, we've got to have a public discussion, because we have created a culture in which people grab for guns all the time.

 And there has got to be a way to have more warning signals and more efforts to try to stop that from happening like with the man who shot your daughter.

 And there has got to be a way to have more warning signals and more efforts to try to stop that from happening like with the man who shot your daughter.

 Well, that — that is not — that is not what happened, and I think it's important for people to understand.
Because of the proliferation of guns, because of the epidemic of gun violence in our country, there were a group of cities, states, and other concerned people who, in the late 90s and in the early 2000s, were working on legal theories that they thought would force gun makers to do more to make guns safer and force sellers to be much more responsible.
The NRA saw this happening, and they said, "we've got to stop it.
 Last thing in the world we want is to have guns that you can only shoot with your fingerprint, or to have guns with such strong safety locks on them that they may not be sellable.
"So the NRA went to the Congress, and the head of the NRA has said this was the most important NRA legislation in more than 20 years.
.
.

 Well, that — that is not — that is not what happened, and I think it's important for people to understand.
Because of the proliferation of guns, because of the epidemic of gun violence in our country, there were a group of cities, states, and other concerned people who, in the late 90s and in the early 2000s, were working on legal theories that they thought would force gun makers to do more to make guns safer and force sellers to be much more responsible.
The NRA saw this happening, and they said, "we've got to stop it.
 Last thing in the world we want is to have guns that you can only shoot with your fingerprint, or to have guns with such strong safety locks on them that they may not be sellable.
"So the NRA went to the Congress, and the head of the NRA has said this was the most important NRA legislation in more than 20 years.
.
.

 .
.
.
 and they basically went to the Congress — I was there.

 .
.
.
 and they basically went to the Congress — I was there.

 I was in the Senate.
 And they said, "give us absolute immunity.
" No other industry in America has absolute immunity.
.
.

 I was in the Senate.
 And they said, "give us absolute immunity.
" No other industry in America has absolute immunity.
.
.

 .
.
.
 and they're held responsible.

 .
.
.
 and they're held responsible.

 That is like the NRA position.
 No.

 That is like the NRA position.
 No.

 Anderson, I just want to finish, because this — I know some of the parents from Sandy Hook.
 I want people in this audience to think about what it must feel like to send off your first grader, little backpack, maybe, on his or her back, and then the next thing you hear is that somebody has come to that school using an automatic weapon, an AR-15, and murdered those children.
Now, they are trying to prevent that from happening to any other family.

 Anderson, I just want to finish, because this — I know some of the parents from Sandy Hook.
 I want people in this audience to think about what it must feel like to send off your first grader, little backpack, maybe, on his or her back, and then the next thing you hear is that somebody has come to that school using an automatic weapon, an AR-15, and murdered those children.
Now, they are trying to prevent that from happening to any other family.

 And the best way to do that is to go right at the people.
.
.

 And the best way to do that is to go right at the people.
.
.

 .
.
.
 you talk about corporate greed?
 .
.
.
 you talk about corporate greed?
 The gun manufacturers sell guns to make as much money as they can make.
 
 The gun manufacturers sell guns to make as much money as they can make.
 
 Well, Don't, let me say this, Senator Sanders voted for that bill, we both supported it.
 And, I think it's fair to say we did because back then there was an outcry over the rising crime rate, and people from all communities were asking that action be taken.
Now, my husband said at the NAACP last summer that it solved some problems, but it created other problems, and I agree.
 And, one of those problems was, unfortunately, a move to expand the reasons why people would be incarcerated, not just at the federal level which is what this bill about, but in states and localities as well.
 And, that's why the very first speech that I gave in this campaign was about criminal justice reform, and ending the era of mass incarceration because I believe absolutely that too many families were broken up, too many communities were adversely affected.
 So, we've got to do a bunch of things.
On the criminal justice side, look, we've got to have better policing.
 That means body cameras, that means ending profiling, that means doing everything we can to make sure there's respect between the community and the police.
And, when it comes to incarceration.
.
.

 Well, Don't, let me say this, Senator Sanders voted for that bill, we both supported it.
 And, I think it's fair to say we did because back then there was an outcry over the rising crime rate, and people from all communities were asking that action be taken.
Now, my husband said at the NAACP last summer that it solved some problems, but it created other problems, and I agree.
 And, one of those problems was, unfortunately, a move to expand the reasons why people would be incarcerated, not just at the federal level which is what this bill about, but in states and localities as well.
 And, that's why the very first speech that I gave in this campaign was about criminal justice reform, and ending the era of mass incarceration because I believe absolutely that too many families were broken up, too many communities were adversely affected.
 So, we've got to do a bunch of things.
On the criminal justice side, look, we've got to have better policing.
 That means body cameras, that means ending profiling, that means doing everything we can to make sure there's respect between the community and the police.
And, when it comes to incarceration.
.
.

 .
.
.
 That means we have to limit mandatory minimums, we have to end disparities and treatment at last through incarceration.
.
.

 .
.
.
 That means we have to limit mandatory minimums, we have to end disparities and treatment at last through incarceration.
.
.

 Well, Senator Sanders voted for it as well.
 Are you going to ask him the same question?
 Well, Senator Sanders voted for it as well.
 Are you going to ask him the same question?
 I just said that.
 He said at the NAACP that there were some aspects that worked well.
 The violence against women provisions have worked well, for example.
 But, other aspects of it were a mistake and I agree.
 That's why I'm focused, and have a very comprehensive approach toward fixing the criminal justice system, going after systemic racism that stalks the criminal justice system, ending private prisons, ending the incarceration of low-level offenders, and I am committed to doing that.
 
 I just said that.
 He said at the NAACP that there were some aspects that worked well.
 The violence against women provisions have worked well, for example.
 But, other aspects of it were a mistake and I agree.
 That's why I'm focused, and have a very comprehensive approach toward fixing the criminal justice system, going after systemic racism that stalks the criminal justice system, ending private prisons, ending the incarceration of low-level offenders, and I am committed to doing that.
 
 Let me go answer Mr.
 Mcghee's question because I think it's a profound one.
I think the most important that happened to me was a combination of my church and youth minister when I was a teenager, insisting that we go in to inner-city Chicago because I lived in a suburb and have exchanges with kids in black and hispanic churches.
 It was also important for me to be a baby-sitter for the children of migrant workers and to learn more about their lives, and to hear Dr.
 King speak in Chicago when I was about 14 years old.
 That got me thinking about what I needed to do to try to fulfill my faith.
When I was in law school, I had the opportunity to mead a visionary woman, named Mary Right Adelman, who worked with Dr.
 King who was the first African-American woman who passed the Mississippi bar.
 I asked her for a job and she said she didn't have any money.
 I was working my way through law school and she said if I could get a job and get myself paid, she would give me a job.
 So I got law students a Civil Rights Research Council Grant.
The first thing she did was send me to look at South Carolina, to investigate juveniles being sent to adult jails.
 The second thing she did was to send me to Alabama to investigate segregated academies.
 So from that moment until today, I am so grateful for my experiences as a very young woman driven by my church and my experiences working for the Children's Defense Fund which have given me some insight and have lit a fire inside me to do everything I can to address systemic racism.

 Let me go answer Mr.
 Mcghee's question because I think it's a profound one.
I think the most important that happened to me was a combination of my church and youth minister when I was a teenager, insisting that we go in to inner-city Chicago because I lived in a suburb and have exchanges with kids in black and hispanic churches.
 It was also important for me to be a baby-sitter for the children of migrant workers and to learn more about their lives, and to hear Dr.
 King speak in Chicago when I was about 14 years old.
 That got me thinking about what I needed to do to try to fulfill my faith.
When I was in law school, I had the opportunity to mead a visionary woman, named Mary Right Adelman, who worked with Dr.
 King who was the first African-American woman who passed the Mississippi bar.
 I asked her for a job and she said she didn't have any money.
 I was working my way through law school and she said if I could get a job and get myself paid, she would give me a job.
 So I got law students a Civil Rights Research Council Grant.
The first thing she did was send me to look at South Carolina, to investigate juveniles being sent to adult jails.
 The second thing she did was to send me to Alabama to investigate segregated academies.
 So from that moment until today, I am so grateful for my experiences as a very young woman driven by my church and my experiences working for the Children's Defense Fund which have given me some insight and have lit a fire inside me to do everything I can to address systemic racism.

 Well, Don, if I could, I think being a white person in the United States of America, I know that I have never had the experience that so many people, the people in this audience have had.
 And I think it's incumbent upon me and what I have been trying to talk about during this campaign is to urge white people to think about what it is like to have "the talk" with your kids, scared that your sons or daughters, even, could get in trouble for no good reason whatsoever like Sandra Bland and end up dead in a jail in Texas.
 And I have spent a lot of time with the mothers of African-American children who have lost them, Trayvon Martin's mother.
 And I've gotten to know them.
 I've listened to them.
 And it has been incredibly humbling because I can't pretend to have the experience that you have had and others have had.
 But I will do everything that I possibly can to not only do the best to understand and to empathize, but to tear down the barriers of systemic racism that are in the criminal justice system, in the employment system, in the education and health care system.
That is what I will try to do to deal with what I know is the racism that still stalks our country.
 
 Well, Don, if I could, I think being a white person in the United States of America, I know that I have never had the experience that so many people, the people in this audience have had.
 And I think it's incumbent upon me and what I have been trying to talk about during this campaign is to urge white people to think about what it is like to have "the talk" with your kids, scared that your sons or daughters, even, could get in trouble for no good reason whatsoever like Sandra Bland and end up dead in a jail in Texas.
 And I have spent a lot of time with the mothers of African-American children who have lost them, Trayvon Martin's mother.
 And I've gotten to know them.
 I've listened to them.
 And it has been incredibly humbling because I can't pretend to have the experience that you have had and others have had.
 But I will do everything that I possibly can to not only do the best to understand and to empathize, but to tear down the barriers of systemic racism that are in the criminal justice system, in the employment system, in the education and health care system.
That is what I will try to do to deal with what I know is the racism that still stalks our country.
 
 Well, I was speaking about drug cartels and criminal activity that was very concerning to folks across the country.
 I think it was a poor choice of words, I never used it before, I haven't used it since, I would not use it again.
Because my whole life, to go back to what I was saying to Mr.
 Mcgee, is, you know, really, ever since I went to work for the Children's Defense Fund, is to try to figure out ways to even the odds for people that are left out and left behind.
And I know very well that we have too many kids in our country right now who are living in poverty, who are going to schools like the ones in Detroit that have mold and rodents in them.
 I saw that in South Carolina.
 It's unfortunately across America.
 So what we have got to do is provide more opportunities earlier in the lives of every child.
That's why I believe in supporting families, early childhood education, universal pre-kindergarten, help kids be successful.
 And here is Flint, we've got to do more to mitigate against the effects of lead, because too many kids are having the experiences I've been told about, where they're falling back in school, where they are having headaches because of the lead exposure.

 Well, I was speaking about drug cartels and criminal activity that was very concerning to folks across the country.
 I think it was a poor choice of words, I never used it before, I haven't used it since, I would not use it again.
Because my whole life, to go back to what I was saying to Mr.
 Mcgee, is, you know, really, ever since I went to work for the Children's Defense Fund, is to try to figure out ways to even the odds for people that are left out and left behind.
And I know very well that we have too many kids in our country right now who are living in poverty, who are going to schools like the ones in Detroit that have mold and rodents in them.
 I saw that in South Carolina.
 It's unfortunately across America.
 So what we have got to do is provide more opportunities earlier in the lives of every child.
That's why I believe in supporting families, early childhood education, universal pre-kindergarten, help kids be successful.
 And here is Flint, we've got to do more to mitigate against the effects of lead, because too many kids are having the experiences I've been told about, where they're falling back in school, where they are having headaches because of the lead exposure.

 So we're going to have to do even more here than we would do in most other counties.

 So we're going to have to do even more here than we would do in most other counties.

 No, it was the crime bill.

 No, it was the crime bill.

 Crime bill.

 Crime bill.

 Well, once again, if we're going to argue about the '90s, let's try to get the facts straight.
 That bill had a lot of provisions that unfortunately were stripped out by George W.
 Bush, by Republican governors.
 And I disagreed with the way it was applied.
 And I have a very clear set of ideas about what should be done to try to provide more support, including trying to cut poverty in half in the next years.
But if we are going to talk about the '90s, let's talk about 23 million new jobs, incomes went up for everybody.
 The median African- American income went up 33 percent at the end of the '90s and we lifted more people out of poverty than at any other time in recent history.
So we were on the right path.
 More jobs, rising incomes.

 Well, once again, if we're going to argue about the '90s, let's try to get the facts straight.
 That bill had a lot of provisions that unfortunately were stripped out by George W.
 Bush, by Republican governors.
 And I disagreed with the way it was applied.
 And I have a very clear set of ideas about what should be done to try to provide more support, including trying to cut poverty in half in the next years.
But if we are going to talk about the '90s, let's talk about 23 million new jobs, incomes went up for everybody.
 The median African- American income went up 33 percent at the end of the '90s and we lifted more people out of poverty than at any other time in recent history.
So we were on the right path.
 More jobs, rising incomes.

 Along came George W.
 Bush and trickle down economics and brought us the Great Recession, which thank goodness President Obama has been digging us out of ever since.

 Along came George W.
 Bush and trickle down economics and brought us the Great Recession, which thank goodness President Obama has been digging us out of ever since.

 Mrs.
 Kim, here is what I would do as president.
 Number one, I would reinstate a program we did have during the 1990's where the federal government provided funding to repair and modernize public schools because a lot of communities can't afford to do that on their own.
 Secondly, I would use every legal means at my disposal to try to force the Governor and the state to return the schools to the people of Detroit — to end the emergency management.
.
.
.
.
.
which, I believe, if you look at the data, the situation has only gotten worse with these emergency managers that have put the system further in debt.
 Number three, I want to set-up inside the Department of Education, for want of a better term, kind of an education SWAT team, if you will.
 Where we've got qualified people, teachers, principals, maybe folks who are retired, maybe folks who are active, but all of whom are willing to come and help.
 When Detroit gets back their schools, they should have all the help they can get to be able to get teachers in the classroom, to be able to find spaces while schools are being repaired.
 And, I also would look at how we could through the federal government support more teachers because we're going to have a teacher shortage in some of the hardest to teach districts.
.
.
 
 Mrs.
 Kim, here is what I would do as president.
 Number one, I would reinstate a program we did have during the 1990's where the federal government provided funding to repair and modernize public schools because a lot of communities can't afford to do that on their own.
 Secondly, I would use every legal means at my disposal to try to force the Governor and the state to return the schools to the people of Detroit — to end the emergency management.
.
.
.
.
.
which, I believe, if you look at the data, the situation has only gotten worse with these emergency managers that have put the system further in debt.
 Number three, I want to set-up inside the Department of Education, for want of a better term, kind of an education SWAT team, if you will.
 Where we've got qualified people, teachers, principals, maybe folks who are retired, maybe folks who are active, but all of whom are willing to come and help.
 When Detroit gets back their schools, they should have all the help they can get to be able to get teachers in the classroom, to be able to find spaces while schools are being repaired.
 And, I also would look at how we could through the federal government support more teachers because we're going to have a teacher shortage in some of the hardest to teach districts.
.
.
 
 .
.
.
 including Detroit.

 .
.
.
 including Detroit.

 You know, I am proud to have been endorsed by the AFT and the NEA, and I've had very good relationship with both unions, with their leadership.
 And we've really candid conversations because we are going to have to take a look at — what do we need in the 21st century to really involve families, to help kids who have more problems than just academic problems?A lot of what has happened and honestly it really pains me, a lot of people have blaming and scape-goating teachers because they don't want to put the money into the schools system that deserve the support that comes from the government doing it's job.

 You know, I am proud to have been endorsed by the AFT and the NEA, and I've had very good relationship with both unions, with their leadership.
 And we've really candid conversations because we are going to have to take a look at — what do we need in the 21st century to really involve families, to help kids who have more problems than just academic problems?A lot of what has happened and honestly it really pains me, a lot of people have blaming and scape-goating teachers because they don't want to put the money into the schools system that deserve the support that comes from the government doing it's job.

 You know what - I have told my friends at the top of both unions, we've got take a look at this because it is one of the most common criticisms.
 We need to eliminate the criticism.
You know, teachers do so much good, they are often working under most difficult circumstances.
 So anything that could be changed, I want them to look at it.
 I will be a good partner to make sure that whatever I can do as president, I will do to support the teachers of our country.

 You know what - I have told my friends at the top of both unions, we've got take a look at this because it is one of the most common criticisms.
 We need to eliminate the criticism.
You know, teachers do so much good, they are often working under most difficult circumstances.
 So anything that could be changed, I want them to look at it.
 I will be a good partner to make sure that whatever I can do as president, I will do to support the teachers of our country.

 Well, there's no doubt, we have an enormous backlog of infrastructure repairs.
 Here's what I'd do - the congress finally got around to pass the Highway Transportation Bill, which should never have been partisan - it turned into be one partisan argument.
 I want to go further.
I want to put 250 billion dollars additional, on top of what Congress has done.
 That gets us to a half a billion.
 I want to start a National Infrastructure Bank.
 I want to capitalize it with 25 billion that I believe will leverage 10 times that, that's another 250 billion.
So I'm trying to do this in a way that will gain support and be affordable but there's no doubt, we have to do more on our roads, our bridges, our tunnels, our ports, our airports.
 And as we've talked in the beginning here, under our ground, our water systems, our sewer systems.
 We have pipelines that are leaking and that are dangerous.
 We have so much work to be done and if we can put millions of peoples to work, I think my plan is a very good way to begin doing that work and get people out there doing it.

 Well, there's no doubt, we have an enormous backlog of infrastructure repairs.
 Here's what I'd do - the congress finally got around to pass the Highway Transportation Bill, which should never have been partisan - it turned into be one partisan argument.
 I want to go further.
I want to put 250 billion dollars additional, on top of what Congress has done.
 That gets us to a half a billion.
 I want to start a National Infrastructure Bank.
 I want to capitalize it with 25 billion that I believe will leverage 10 times that, that's another 250 billion.
So I'm trying to do this in a way that will gain support and be affordable but there's no doubt, we have to do more on our roads, our bridges, our tunnels, our ports, our airports.
 And as we've talked in the beginning here, under our ground, our water systems, our sewer systems.
 We have pipelines that are leaking and that are dangerous.
 We have so much work to be done and if we can put millions of peoples to work, I think my plan is a very good way to begin doing that work and get people out there doing it.

 You know, I don't support it when any locality or any state is against it, number one.
 I don't support it when the release of methane or contamination of water is present.
 I don't support it — number three — unless we can require that anybody who fracks has to tell us exactly what chemicals they are using.
So by the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place.
 And I think that's the best approach, because right now, there places where fracking is going on that are not sufficiently regulated.
So first, we've got to regulate everything that is currently underway, and we have to have a system in place that prevents further fracking unless conditions like the ones that I just mentioned are met.

 You know, I don't support it when any locality or any state is against it, number one.
 I don't support it when the release of methane or contamination of water is present.
 I don't support it — number three — unless we can require that anybody who fracks has to tell us exactly what chemicals they are using.
So by the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place.
 And I think that's the best approach, because right now, there places where fracking is going on that are not sufficiently regulated.
So first, we've got to regulate everything that is currently underway, and we have to have a system in place that prevents further fracking unless conditions like the ones that I just mentioned are met.

 Yeah.
 Yeah.
 
 Yeah.
 Yeah.
 
 Well, first, let me say I think I have the most comprehensive plan to combat climate change.
 It sets some very big goals, a half billion more solar panels deployed by the end of my first term, if I'm so fortunate to be president.
 And enough clean energy to power every home by the end of my second term.
What I am looking at is how we make the transition from where we are today to where are today to where we must be.
 I worked with President Obama during the four years I was secretary of state to begin to put pressure on China and India and other countries to join with us to have a global agreement which we finally got in Paris.
So I am committed to and focused on how we make that transition.
 I've already said we are taking away the subsidies for oil and gas, but it is important that people understand that a president can't go ordering folks around.
 Our system doesn't permit that.
 I am going to set the goals.
 I will push everybody as hard as I can to achieve those goals.
 We will make progress on clean renewable energy and create millions of jobs through that.
  
 Well, first, let me say I think I have the most comprehensive plan to combat climate change.
 It sets some very big goals, a half billion more solar panels deployed by the end of my first term, if I'm so fortunate to be president.
 And enough clean energy to power every home by the end of my second term.
What I am looking at is how we make the transition from where we are today to where are today to where we must be.
 I worked with President Obama during the four years I was secretary of state to begin to put pressure on China and India and other countries to join with us to have a global agreement which we finally got in Paris.
So I am committed to and focused on how we make that transition.
 I've already said we are taking away the subsidies for oil and gas, but it is important that people understand that a president can't go ordering folks around.
 Our system doesn't permit that.
 I am going to set the goals.
 I will push everybody as hard as I can to achieve those goals.
 We will make progress on clean renewable energy and create millions of jobs through that.
  
 I don't have any comment.
 I don't know that.
 I don't believe that there is any reason to be concerned about it.
 I admire what Senator Sanders has accomplished in his campaign.
 I have more than 850,000 donors, most of them give less than $100.
 I am very proud of that.
And I just want to make one point.
 You know, we have our differences.
 And we get into vigorous debate about issues, but compare the substance of this debate with what you saw on the Republican stage last week.
 
 I don't have any comment.
 I don't know that.
 I don't believe that there is any reason to be concerned about it.
 I admire what Senator Sanders has accomplished in his campaign.
 I have more than 850,000 donors, most of them give less than $100.
 I am very proud of that.
And I just want to make one point.
 You know, we have our differences.
 And we get into vigorous debate about issues, but compare the substance of this debate with what you saw on the Republican stage last week.
 
 And.
.
.

 And.
.
.

 And that is one of the many reasons we must all support President Obama's right to nominate a successor to Justice Scalia and demand that the Senate hold hearings and a vote on that successor because there are so many issues at stake.
 On the first day of my campaign, I said, we are going to reverse Citizens United.
 And if we can't get it done through the court, I will lead a constitutional amendment effort to reverse it that way.
 
 And that is one of the many reasons we must all support President Obama's right to nominate a successor to Justice Scalia and demand that the Senate hold hearings and a vote on that successor because there are so many issues at stake.
 On the first day of my campaign, I said, we are going to reverse Citizens United.
 And if we can't get it done through the court, I will lead a constitutional amendment effort to reverse it that way.
 
 Well, let me start by saying that the last time I checked as of last night, Donald Trump had received 3.
6 million votes, which is a good number.
 And there is only one candidate in either party who has more votes than him and that's me.
 And, I am building a broad, diverse coalition across our country.
 I'm very excited by the support we're receiving.
 I have said, and I'll repeat here, I think that Donald Trump's bigotry, his bullying, his bluster, are not going to wear well on the American people.
 So, I will look forward to engaging him because, you know, I don't think we need to make America great again.
 America didn't stop being great, we have to make it whole again.
 We have to knock down the barriers, we have to end the divisiveness, we have to unify the country.
And, if I'm fortunate enough to be the nominee that's exactly what I will do.

 Well, let me start by saying that the last time I checked as of last night, Donald Trump had received 3.
6 million votes, which is a good number.
 And there is only one candidate in either party who has more votes than him and that's me.
 And, I am building a broad, diverse coalition across our country.
 I'm very excited by the support we're receiving.
 I have said, and I'll repeat here, I think that Donald Trump's bigotry, his bullying, his bluster, are not going to wear well on the American people.
 So, I will look forward to engaging him because, you know, I don't think we need to make America great again.
 America didn't stop being great, we have to make it whole again.
 We have to knock down the barriers, we have to end the divisiveness, we have to unify the country.
And, if I'm fortunate enough to be the nominee that's exactly what I will do.

 Well, I have been several times in your services and have joined in those prayers and have also been privileged to lead them in some settings.
 I pray very specifically for people whom I know by name.
 People who either have gone through or are experiencing difficult times, illness, divorce, death, disappointment, all of the life experiences that confront most of us.
I pray for the will of God to be known that we can know it and to the best of our limited ability, try to follow it and fulfill it.
 I have said many times that, you know, I am a praying person, and if I haven't been during the time I was in the White House, I would have become one.
 Because it's very hard to imagine living under that kind of pressure without being able to fall back on prayer and on my faith.
So I do pray for people in authority.
 I try to think about what they are going through, even when I disagree with them.
 Trying to find some common ground, some common understanding that perhaps can make me more empathetic.
 I don't always succeed.
 I will tell you that.
So I pray on a pretty regular basis during the day, because I need that strength and I need that support.
 And especially when you are in the position that I'm in and that Senator Sanders is in, where you are asking people to vote for you, to give you the most important job, not only in our country, but I would argue in the world.
I think humility is one of the most important attributes that you bring to both that seeking and then if you're fortunate enough, to that holding of office and that's what I will try to do.
 
 Well, I have been several times in your services and have joined in those prayers and have also been privileged to lead them in some settings.
 I pray very specifically for people whom I know by name.
 People who either have gone through or are experiencing difficult times, illness, divorce, death, disappointment, all of the life experiences that confront most of us.
I pray for the will of God to be known that we can know it and to the best of our limited ability, try to follow it and fulfill it.
 I have said many times that, you know, I am a praying person, and if I haven't been during the time I was in the White House, I would have become one.
 Because it's very hard to imagine living under that kind of pressure without being able to fall back on prayer and on my faith.
So I do pray for people in authority.
 I try to think about what they are going through, even when I disagree with them.
 Trying to find some common ground, some common understanding that perhaps can make me more empathetic.
 I don't always succeed.
 I will tell you that.
So I pray on a pretty regular basis during the day, because I need that strength and I need that support.
 And especially when you are in the position that I'm in and that Senator Sanders is in, where you are asking people to vote for you, to give you the most important job, not only in our country, but I would argue in the world.
I think humility is one of the most important attributes that you bring to both that seeking and then if you're fortunate enough, to that holding of office and that's what I will try to do.
 
 Well, I'm running for president to do my very best to knock down every barrier that stands in the way of America realizing its potential and every American having a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.
 We have a lot of work to do.
 We have economic barriers.
 That's why I've laid out plans for more good jobs with rising incomes.
 We have barriers that stand in the way of quality health care.
 That's why I will build on the Affordable Care Act.
We have barriers to education.
 That's why I want to start early and provide debt-free tuition, and deal with student debt so it is no longer the burden that weighs down so many young Americans.
 And I do want to take on the barriers of systemic racism.
 I may not have experienced them, but I see the results every single day.
So I'm asking for your support in the primary here in Michigan on Tuesday.
 I'm asking for it, and I will do whatever I can as the Democratic nominee to run a campaign you'll be proud of.
I don't intend to get into the gutter with whoever they nominate, but instead to lift our sights, to set big goals, to make it clear that America's best days can be and are ahead of us.
 
 Well, I'm running for president to do my very best to knock down every barrier that stands in the way of America realizing its potential and every American having a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.
 We have a lot of work to do.
 We have economic barriers.
 That's why I've laid out plans for more good jobs with rising incomes.
 We have barriers that stand in the way of quality health care.
 That's why I will build on the Affordable Care Act.
We have barriers to education.
 That's why I want to start early and provide debt-free tuition, and deal with student debt so it is no longer the burden that weighs down so many young Americans.
 And I do want to take on the barriers of systemic racism.
 I may not have experienced them, but I see the results every single day.
So I'm asking for your support in the primary here in Michigan on Tuesday.
 I'm asking for it, and I will do whatever I can as the Democratic nominee to run a campaign you'll be proud of.
I don't intend to get into the gutter with whoever they nominate, but instead to lift our sights, to set big goals, to make it clear that America's best days can be and are ahead of us.
  Thank you.

 Thank you.

 I'm running for president to knock down all the barriers that are holding Americans back, and to rebuild the ladders of opportunity that will give every American a chance to advance, especially those who have been left out and left behind.
 I know a lot of Americans are angry about the economy.
 And for good cause.
 Americans haven't had a raise in 15 years.
 There aren't enough good-paying jobs, especially for young people.
 And yes, the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top.
 We both agree that we have to get unaccountable money out of our political system and that we have to do much more to ensure that Wall Street never wrecks main street again.
 But I want to go further.
 I want to tackle those barriers that stand in the way of too many Americans right now.
 African-Americans who face discrimination in the job market, education, housing, and the criminal justice system.
 Hardworking immigrant families living in fear, who should be brought out of the shadows so they and their children can have a better future.
 Guaranteeing that women's work finally gets the pay, the equal pay that we deserve.
 I think America can only live up to its potential when we make sure that every American has a chance to live up to his or her potential.
 That will be my mission as president.
 And I think together we will make progress.

 I'm running for president to knock down all the barriers that are holding Americans back, and to rebuild the ladders of opportunity that will give every American a chance to advance, especially those who have been left out and left behind.
 I know a lot of Americans are angry about the economy.
 And for good cause.
 Americans haven't had a raise in 15 years.
 There aren't enough good-paying jobs, especially for young people.
 And yes, the economy is rigged in favor of those at the top.
 We both agree that we have to get unaccountable money out of our political system and that we have to do much more to ensure that Wall Street never wrecks main street again.
 But I want to go further.
 I want to tackle those barriers that stand in the way of too many Americans right now.
 African-Americans who face discrimination in the job market, education, housing, and the criminal justice system.
 Hardworking immigrant families living in fear, who should be brought out of the shadows so they and their children can have a better future.
 Guaranteeing that women's work finally gets the pay, the equal pay that we deserve.
 I think America can only live up to its potential when we make sure that every American has a chance to live up to his or her potential.
 That will be my mission as president.
 And I think together we will make progress.

 Judy, I think that the best analysis that I've seen based on Senator Sanders plans is that it would probably increase the size of the federal government by about 40%, but what is most concerning to me is that in looking at the plans — let's take healthcare for example.
 Last week in a CNN town hall, the Senator told a questioner that the questioner would spend about $500 dollars in taxes to get about $5,000 dollars in healthcare.
 Every progressive economist who has analyzed that says that the numbers don't add up, and that's a promise that cannot be kept, and it's really important now that we are getting into the rest of the country that both of us are held to account for explaining what we are proposing because, especially with healthcare, this is not about math.
 This is about people's lives, and we should level with the American people about what we can do to make sure they get quality affordable healthcare.

 Judy, I think that the best analysis that I've seen based on Senator Sanders plans is that it would probably increase the size of the federal government by about 40%, but what is most concerning to me is that in looking at the plans — let's take healthcare for example.
 Last week in a CNN town hall, the Senator told a questioner that the questioner would spend about $500 dollars in taxes to get about $5,000 dollars in healthcare.
 Every progressive economist who has analyzed that says that the numbers don't add up, and that's a promise that cannot be kept, and it's really important now that we are getting into the rest of the country that both of us are held to account for explaining what we are proposing because, especially with healthcare, this is not about math.
 This is about people's lives, and we should level with the American people about what we can do to make sure they get quality affordable healthcare.

 I can only say that we both share the goal of universal health care coverage.
 You know, before it was called Obamacare, it was called Hillarycare.
 And I took on the drug companies and I took on the insurance companies to try to get us universal health care coverage.
  And why I am a staunch supporter of President Obama's principal accomplishment — namely the Affordable Care Act — is because I know how hard it was to get that done.
 We are at 90 percent coverage.
 We have to get the remaining 10.
 I've set forth very specific plans about how to get costs down, especially prescription drug costs.
 And it is difficult to in any way argue with the goal that we both share.
 But I think the American people deserve to know specifically how this would work.
 If it's Medicare for all, then you no longer have the Affordable Care Act, because the Affordable Care Act, as you know very well, is based on the insurance system, based on exchanges, based on a subsidy system.
 The Children's Health Insurance Program, which I helped to create, which covers 8 million kids, is also a different kind of program.
 So if you're having Medicare for all, single-payer, you need to level with people about what they will have at the end of the process you are proposing.
 And based on every analysis that I can find by people who are sympathetic to the goal, the numbers don't add up, and many people will actually be worse off than they are right now.

 I can only say that we both share the goal of universal health care coverage.
 You know, before it was called Obamacare, it was called Hillarycare.
 And I took on the drug companies and I took on the insurance companies to try to get us universal health care coverage.
  And why I am a staunch supporter of President Obama's principal accomplishment — namely the Affordable Care Act — is because I know how hard it was to get that done.
 We are at 90 percent coverage.
 We have to get the remaining 10.
 I've set forth very specific plans about how to get costs down, especially prescription drug costs.
 And it is difficult to in any way argue with the goal that we both share.
 But I think the American people deserve to know specifically how this would work.
 If it's Medicare for all, then you no longer have the Affordable Care Act, because the Affordable Care Act, as you know very well, is based on the insurance system, based on exchanges, based on a subsidy system.
 The Children's Health Insurance Program, which I helped to create, which covers 8 million kids, is also a different kind of program.
 So if you're having Medicare for all, single-payer, you need to level with people about what they will have at the end of the process you are proposing.
 And based on every analysis that I can find by people who are sympathetic to the goal, the numbers don't add up, and many people will actually be worse off than they are right now.

 Well, let me just — let me just say, once again.
.
.
.
.
.
that, having been in the trenches fighting for this, I believe strongly we have to guarantee health care.
 I believe we are on the path to doing that.
 The last thing we need is to throw our country into a contentious debate about health care again.
 And we are not England.
 We are not France.
 We inherited a system that was set up during World War II; 170 million Americans get health insurance right now through their employers.
 So what we have tried to do and what President Obama succeeded in doing was to build on the health care system we have, get us to 90 percent coverage.
 We have to get the other 10 percent of the way to 100.
 I far prefer that and the chances we have to be successful there than trying to start all over again, gridlocking our system, and trying to get from zero to 100 percent.
 
 Well, let me just — let me just say, once again.
.
.
.
.
.
that, having been in the trenches fighting for this, I believe strongly we have to guarantee health care.
 I believe we are on the path to doing that.
 The last thing we need is to throw our country into a contentious debate about health care again.
 And we are not England.
 We are not France.
 We inherited a system that was set up during World War II; 170 million Americans get health insurance right now through their employers.
 So what we have tried to do and what President Obama succeeded in doing was to build on the health care system we have, get us to 90 percent coverage.
 We have to get the other 10 percent of the way to 100.
 I far prefer that and the chances we have to be successful there than trying to start all over again, gridlocking our system, and trying to get from zero to 100 percent.
 
 No.
 But it is absolutely fair and necessary for Americans to vet both of our proposals, to ask the really hard questions about, what is it we think we can accomplish, why do we believe that, and what would be the results for the average American family? In my case, whether it's health care, or getting us to debt-free tuition, or moving us toward paid family leave, I have been very specific about where I would raise the money, how much it would cost, and how I would move this agenda forward.
 I've tried to be as specific to answer questions so that my proposals can be vetted, because I feel like we have to level with people for the very reason, Gwen, that you are mentioning.
 There is a great deal of skepticism about the federal government.
 I'm aware of that.
 It comes from the right, from the left, from people on all sides of the political spectrum.
So we have a special obligation to make clear what we stand for, which is why I think we should not make promises we can't keep, because that will further, I think, alienate Americans from understanding and believing we can together make some real changes in people's lives.

 No.
 But it is absolutely fair and necessary for Americans to vet both of our proposals, to ask the really hard questions about, what is it we think we can accomplish, why do we believe that, and what would be the results for the average American family? In my case, whether it's health care, or getting us to debt-free tuition, or moving us toward paid family leave, I have been very specific about where I would raise the money, how much it would cost, and how I would move this agenda forward.
 I've tried to be as specific to answer questions so that my proposals can be vetted, because I feel like we have to level with people for the very reason, Gwen, that you are mentioning.
 There is a great deal of skepticism about the federal government.
 I'm aware of that.
 It comes from the right, from the left, from people on all sides of the political spectrum.
So we have a special obligation to make clear what we stand for, which is why I think we should not make promises we can't keep, because that will further, I think, alienate Americans from understanding and believing we can together make some real changes in people's lives.

 I will put a price tag.
 My price tag is about $100 billion a year.
 And again, paid for.
 And what I have said is I will not throw us further into debt.
 I believe I can get the money that I need by taxing the wealthy, by closing loopholes, the things that we are way overdue for doing.
 And I think once I'm in the White House we will have enough political capital to be able to do that.
 But I am conscious of the fact that we have to also be very clear, especially with young people, about what kind of government is going to do what for them and what it will cost.

 I will put a price tag.
 My price tag is about $100 billion a year.
 And again, paid for.
 And what I have said is I will not throw us further into debt.
 I believe I can get the money that I need by taxing the wealthy, by closing loopholes, the things that we are way overdue for doing.
 And I think once I'm in the White House we will have enough political capital to be able to do that.
 But I am conscious of the fact that we have to also be very clear, especially with young people, about what kind of government is going to do what for them and what it will cost.

 You know, I think, again, both of us share the goal of trying to make college affordable for all young Americans.
 And I have set forth a compact that would do just that for debt-free tuition.
 We differ, however, on a couple of key points.
 One of them being that if you don't have some agreement within the system from states and from families and from students, it's hard to get to where we need to go.
 And Senator Sanders's plan really rests on making sure that governors like Scott Walker contribute $23 billion on the first day to make college free.
 I am a little skeptical about your governor actually caring enough about higher education to make any kind of commitment like that.
 
 You know, I think, again, both of us share the goal of trying to make college affordable for all young Americans.
 And I have set forth a compact that would do just that for debt-free tuition.
 We differ, however, on a couple of key points.
 One of them being that if you don't have some agreement within the system from states and from families and from students, it's hard to get to where we need to go.
 And Senator Sanders's plan really rests on making sure that governors like Scott Walker contribute $23 billion on the first day to make college free.
 I am a little skeptical about your governor actually caring enough about higher education to make any kind of commitment like that.
 
 Well, first, Judy, I have spent my entire adult life working toward making sure that women are empowered to make their own choices, even if that choice is not to vote for me.
 I believe that it's most important that we unleash the full potential of women and girls in our society.
 And I feel very strongly that I have an agenda, I have a record that really does respond to a lot of the specific needs that the women in our country face.
 So I'm going to keep making that case.
 I'm going to keep making sure that everything I've done, everything that I stand for is going to be well known.
 But I have no argument with anyone making up her mind about who to support.
 I just hope that by the end of this campaign there will be a lot more supporting me.
 That's what I'm working towards.
 
 Well, first, Judy, I have spent my entire adult life working toward making sure that women are empowered to make their own choices, even if that choice is not to vote for me.
 I believe that it's most important that we unleash the full potential of women and girls in our society.
 And I feel very strongly that I have an agenda, I have a record that really does respond to a lot of the specific needs that the women in our country face.
 So I'm going to keep making that case.
 I'm going to keep making sure that everything I've done, everything that I stand for is going to be well known.
 But I have no argument with anyone making up her mind about who to support.
 I just hope that by the end of this campaign there will be a lot more supporting me.
 That's what I'm working towards.
 
 Well, look, I think that she's been saying that for as long as I've known her, which is about 25 years.
 But it doesn't change my view that we need to empower everyone, women and men, to make the best decisions in their minds that they can make.
 That's what I've always stood for.
 And when it comes to the issues that are really on the front lines as to whether we're going to have equal pay, paid family leave, some opportunity for, you know, women to go as far as their hard work and talent take them, I think that we still have some barriers to knock down, which is why that's at the core of my campaign.
 I would note, just for a historic aside, somebody told me earlier today we've had like 200 presidential primary debates, and this is the first time there have been a majority of women on the stage.
 So, you know, we'll take our progress wherever we can find it.
 
 Well, look, I think that she's been saying that for as long as I've known her, which is about 25 years.
 But it doesn't change my view that we need to empower everyone, women and men, to make the best decisions in their minds that they can make.
 That's what I've always stood for.
 And when it comes to the issues that are really on the front lines as to whether we're going to have equal pay, paid family leave, some opportunity for, you know, women to go as far as their hard work and talent take them, I think that we still have some barriers to knock down, which is why that's at the core of my campaign.
 I would note, just for a historic aside, somebody told me earlier today we've had like 200 presidential primary debates, and this is the first time there have been a majority of women on the stage.
 So, you know, we'll take our progress wherever we can find it.
 
 You know, I have said — I have said many times, you know, I'm not asking people to support me because I'm a woman.
 I'm asking people to support me because I think I'm the most qualified, experienced, and ready person to be the president and the commander-in-chief.
  And I appreciate greatly Senator Sanders' voting record.
 And I was very proud to get the endorsement of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, because I've been a leader on these issues.
 I have gone time and time again to take on the vested interests who would keep women's health care decisions the province of the government instead of women ourselves.
I'm very proud that NARAL endorsed me because when it comes to it we need a leader on women's issues.
 Somebody who, yes, votes right, but much more than that, leads the efforts to protect the hard-fought gains that women have made, that, make no mistake about it, are under tremendous attack, not just by the Republican presidential candidates but by a whole national effort to try to set back women's rights.
 So I'm asking women, I'm asking men, to support me because I'm ready to go into the White House on January 20th, 2017 and get to work on both domestic and foreign policy challenges.
 
 You know, I have said — I have said many times, you know, I'm not asking people to support me because I'm a woman.
 I'm asking people to support me because I think I'm the most qualified, experienced, and ready person to be the president and the commander-in-chief.
  And I appreciate greatly Senator Sanders' voting record.
 And I was very proud to get the endorsement of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, because I've been a leader on these issues.
 I have gone time and time again to take on the vested interests who would keep women's health care decisions the province of the government instead of women ourselves.
I'm very proud that NARAL endorsed me because when it comes to it we need a leader on women's issues.
 Somebody who, yes, votes right, but much more than that, leads the efforts to protect the hard-fought gains that women have made, that, make no mistake about it, are under tremendous attack, not just by the Republican presidential candidates but by a whole national effort to try to set back women's rights.
 So I'm asking women, I'm asking men, to support me because I'm ready to go into the White House on January 20th, 2017 and get to work on both domestic and foreign policy challenges.
 
 You know, I completely agree with Senator Sanders.
 The first speech I gave in this campaign back in April was about criminal justice reform and ending the era of mass incarceration.
 The statistics from Wisconsin are particularly troubling, because it is the highest rate of incarceration for African-Americans in our nation, twice the national average.
 And we know of the tragic, terrible event that lead to the death of Dontre Hamilton right here in Milwaukee, a young man unarmed, who should still be with us.
 His family certainly believes that.
 And so do I.
 So we have work to do.
 There have been some good recommendations about what needs to happen.
 President Obama's policing commission came out with some.
 I have fully endorsed those.
But we have to restore policing that will actually protect the communities that police officers are sworn to protect.
 And, then we have to go after sentencing, and that's one of the problems here in Wisconsin because so much of what happened in the criminal justice system doesn't happen at the federal level, it happens at the state and local level.
 But, I would also add this.
 There are other racial discrepancies.
 Really systemic racism in this state, as in others, education, in employment, in the kinds of factors that too often lead from a position where young people, particularly young men, are pushed out of school early, are denied employment opportunities.
 So, when we talk about criminal justice reform, and ending the era of mass incarceration, we also have to talk about jobs, education, housing, and other ways of helping communities.
 
 You know, I completely agree with Senator Sanders.
 The first speech I gave in this campaign back in April was about criminal justice reform and ending the era of mass incarceration.
 The statistics from Wisconsin are particularly troubling, because it is the highest rate of incarceration for African-Americans in our nation, twice the national average.
 And we know of the tragic, terrible event that lead to the death of Dontre Hamilton right here in Milwaukee, a young man unarmed, who should still be with us.
 His family certainly believes that.
 And so do I.
 So we have work to do.
 There have been some good recommendations about what needs to happen.
 President Obama's policing commission came out with some.
 I have fully endorsed those.
But we have to restore policing that will actually protect the communities that police officers are sworn to protect.
 And, then we have to go after sentencing, and that's one of the problems here in Wisconsin because so much of what happened in the criminal justice system doesn't happen at the federal level, it happens at the state and local level.
 But, I would also add this.
 There are other racial discrepancies.
 Really systemic racism in this state, as in others, education, in employment, in the kinds of factors that too often lead from a position where young people, particularly young men, are pushed out of school early, are denied employment opportunities.
 So, when we talk about criminal justice reform, and ending the era of mass incarceration, we also have to talk about jobs, education, housing, and other ways of helping communities.
 
 Well, I'm just not sure I agree completely with that assessment.
 I think under President Obama we have seen a lot of advances, the Affordable Care Act has helped more African Americans than any other group to get insurance, to be taken care of, but we also know a lot more than we did.
 We have a lot more social media, we have everybody with a cellphone.
 So, we are seeing the dark side of the remaining systemic racism that we have to root out in our society.
 I think President Obama has set a great example.
 I think he has addressed a lot of these issues that have been quite difficult, but he has gone forward.
 Now, what we have to do is to build on an honest conversation about where we go next.
 We now have much more information about what must be done to fix our criminal justice system.
 We now have some good models about how better to provide employment, housing and education.
 I think what President Obama did was to exemplify the importance of this issue as our first African American president, and to address it both from the President's office, and through his advocacy, such as working with young men, and Mrs.
 Obama's work with young women.
 But, we can't rest.
 We have work to do, and we now know a lot more than we ever did before.
 So, it's going to be my responsibility to make sure we move forward to solve these problems that are now out in the open.
 Nobody can deny them.
 To use the Justice Department, as we just saw, they have said they are going to sue Ferguson, that entered into a consent agreement, and then tried to back out.
 So, we're going to enforce the law, we're going to change policing practices, we're going to change incarceration practices, but we're also going to emphasize education, jobs, and housing.

 Well, I'm just not sure I agree completely with that assessment.
 I think under President Obama we have seen a lot of advances, the Affordable Care Act has helped more African Americans than any other group to get insurance, to be taken care of, but we also know a lot more than we did.
 We have a lot more social media, we have everybody with a cellphone.
 So, we are seeing the dark side of the remaining systemic racism that we have to root out in our society.
 I think President Obama has set a great example.
 I think he has addressed a lot of these issues that have been quite difficult, but he has gone forward.
 Now, what we have to do is to build on an honest conversation about where we go next.
 We now have much more information about what must be done to fix our criminal justice system.
 We now have some good models about how better to provide employment, housing and education.
 I think what President Obama did was to exemplify the importance of this issue as our first African American president, and to address it both from the President's office, and through his advocacy, such as working with young men, and Mrs.
 Obama's work with young women.
 But, we can't rest.
 We have work to do, and we now know a lot more than we ever did before.
 So, it's going to be my responsibility to make sure we move forward to solve these problems that are now out in the open.
 Nobody can deny them.
 To use the Justice Department, as we just saw, they have said they are going to sue Ferguson, that entered into a consent agreement, and then tried to back out.
 So, we're going to enforce the law, we're going to change policing practices, we're going to change incarceration practices, but we're also going to emphasize education, jobs, and housing.

 Look, I am deeply concerned about what's happening in every community in America, and that includes white communities, where we are seeing an increase in alcoholism, addiction, earlier deaths.
 People with a high school education or less are not even living as long as their parents lived.
 This is a remarkable and horrifying fact.
 And that's why I've come forward with, for example, a plan to revitalize coal country, the coalfield communities that have been so hard hit by the changing economy, by the reduction in the use of coal.
 You know, coal miners and their families who helped turn on the lights and power our factories for generations are now wondering, has our country forgotten us? Do people not care about all of our sacrifice? And I'm going to do everything I can to address distressed communities, whether they are communities of color, whether they are white communities, whether they are in any part of our country.
 I particularly appreciate the proposal that Congressman Jim Clyburn has — the 10-20-30 proposal — to try to spend more federal dollars in communities with persistent generational poverty.
 And you know what? If you look at the numbers, there are actually as many, if not more white communities that are truly being left behind and left out.
 So, yes, I do think it would be a terrible oversight not to try to address the very real problems that white Americans — particularly those without a lot of education whose jobs have — you know, no longer provided them or even no longer present in their communities, because we have to focus where the real hurt is.
 And that's why, as president, I will look at communities that need special help and try to deliver that.
 
 Look, I am deeply concerned about what's happening in every community in America, and that includes white communities, where we are seeing an increase in alcoholism, addiction, earlier deaths.
 People with a high school education or less are not even living as long as their parents lived.
 This is a remarkable and horrifying fact.
 And that's why I've come forward with, for example, a plan to revitalize coal country, the coalfield communities that have been so hard hit by the changing economy, by the reduction in the use of coal.
 You know, coal miners and their families who helped turn on the lights and power our factories for generations are now wondering, has our country forgotten us? Do people not care about all of our sacrifice? And I'm going to do everything I can to address distressed communities, whether they are communities of color, whether they are white communities, whether they are in any part of our country.
 I particularly appreciate the proposal that Congressman Jim Clyburn has — the 10-20-30 proposal — to try to spend more federal dollars in communities with persistent generational poverty.
 And you know what? If you look at the numbers, there are actually as many, if not more white communities that are truly being left behind and left out.
 So, yes, I do think it would be a terrible oversight not to try to address the very real problems that white Americans — particularly those without a lot of education whose jobs have — you know, no longer provided them or even no longer present in their communities, because we have to focus where the real hurt is.
 And that's why, as president, I will look at communities that need special help and try to deliver that.
 
 I strongly support the president's executive actions.
 I hope the Supreme Court upholds them.
 I think there is constitutional and legal authority for the president to have done what he did.
 I am against the raids.
 I'm against the kind of inhumane treatment that is now being visited upon families, waking them up in the middle of the night, rounding them up.
 We should be deporting criminals, not hardworking immigrant families who do the very best they can and often are keeping economies going in many places in our country.
 I'm a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform.
 Have been ever since I was in the Senate.
 I was one of the original sponsors of the DREAM Act.
 I voted for comprehensive immigration reform in 2007.
 Senator Sanders voted against it at that time.
 Because I think we have to get to comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship.
 And as president I would expand enormous energy, literally call every member of Congress that I thought I could persuade.
 Hopefully after the 2016 election, some of the Republicans will come to their senses and realize we are not going to deport 11 or 12 million people in this country.
 And they will work with me to get comprehensive immigration reform.

 I strongly support the president's executive actions.
 I hope the Supreme Court upholds them.
 I think there is constitutional and legal authority for the president to have done what he did.
 I am against the raids.
 I'm against the kind of inhumane treatment that is now being visited upon families, waking them up in the middle of the night, rounding them up.
 We should be deporting criminals, not hardworking immigrant families who do the very best they can and often are keeping economies going in many places in our country.
 I'm a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform.
 Have been ever since I was in the Senate.
 I was one of the original sponsors of the DREAM Act.
 I voted for comprehensive immigration reform in 2007.
 Senator Sanders voted against it at that time.
 Because I think we have to get to comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship.
 And as president I would expand enormous energy, literally call every member of Congress that I thought I could persuade.
 Hopefully after the 2016 election, some of the Republicans will come to their senses and realize we are not going to deport 11 or 12 million people in this country.
 And they will work with me to get comprehensive immigration reform.

 Two quick responses.
 One, with respect to the Central American children, I made it very clear that those children needed to be processed appropriately, but we also had to send a message to families and communities in Central America not to send their children on this dangerous journey in the hands of smugglers.
 I've also called for the end of family detention, for the end of privately-run detention centers, along with private prisons, which I think are really against the common good and the rule of law.
 And with respect to the 2007 bill, this was Ted Kennedy's bill.
 And I think Ted Kennedy had a very clear idea about what needed to be done.
 And I was proud to stand with him and support it.
 
 Two quick responses.
 One, with respect to the Central American children, I made it very clear that those children needed to be processed appropriately, but we also had to send a message to families and communities in Central America not to send their children on this dangerous journey in the hands of smugglers.
 I've also called for the end of family detention, for the end of privately-run detention centers, along with private prisons, which I think are really against the common good and the rule of law.
 And with respect to the 2007 bill, this was Ted Kennedy's bill.
 And I think Ted Kennedy had a very clear idea about what needed to be done.
 And I was proud to stand with him and support it.
 
 Well, that just wasn't — that just wasn't the fact, Senator.
 The fact is that there was a great effort made by the Obama administration and others to really send a clear message, because we knew that so many of these children were being abused, being treated terribly while they tried to get to our border.
 So we have a disagreement on this.
 I think now what I've called for is counsel for every child so that no child has to face any kind of process without someone who speaks and advocates for that child so that the right decision hopefully can be made.
 
 Well, that just wasn't — that just wasn't the fact, Senator.
 The fact is that there was a great effort made by the Obama administration and others to really send a clear message, because we knew that so many of these children were being abused, being treated terribly while they tried to get to our border.
 So we have a disagreement on this.
 I think now what I've called for is counsel for every child so that no child has to face any kind of process without someone who speaks and advocates for that child so that the right decision hopefully can be made.
 
 I think — I think it's fair to say we don't have a disagreement.
 We both believe there has to be more money going into the Social Security system.
 I've said I'm looking at a couple of different ways, one which you mentioned, Senator, but also trying to expand the existing tax to passive income that wealthy people have so that we do get more revenue into the Social Security Trust Fund.
 I have a slightly different approach, though, about what we should do with that initially.
 First, rather than expand benefits for everyone, I do want to take care of low-income seniors who worked at low-wage jobs.
 I want to take care of women.
 When the Social Security program was started in the 1930s, not very many women worked.
 And women have been disadvantaged ever since.
 They do not get any credit for their care-taking responsibilities.
 And the people who are often the most hard-hit are widows, because when their spouse dies, they can lose up to one-half of their Social Security monthly payment.
 So we have no disagreement about the need to buttress Social Security, get more revenue into the program.
 But I want to start by helping those people who are most at risk, the ones who, yes, are cutting their pills in half, who don't believe they can make the rent, who are worried about what comes next for them.

 I think — I think it's fair to say we don't have a disagreement.
 We both believe there has to be more money going into the Social Security system.
 I've said I'm looking at a couple of different ways, one which you mentioned, Senator, but also trying to expand the existing tax to passive income that wealthy people have so that we do get more revenue into the Social Security Trust Fund.
 I have a slightly different approach, though, about what we should do with that initially.
 First, rather than expand benefits for everyone, I do want to take care of low-income seniors who worked at low-wage jobs.
 I want to take care of women.
 When the Social Security program was started in the 1930s, not very many women worked.
 And women have been disadvantaged ever since.
 They do not get any credit for their care-taking responsibilities.
 And the people who are often the most hard-hit are widows, because when their spouse dies, they can lose up to one-half of their Social Security monthly payment.
 So we have no disagreement about the need to buttress Social Security, get more revenue into the program.
 But I want to start by helping those people who are most at risk, the ones who, yes, are cutting their pills in half, who don't believe they can make the rent, who are worried about what comes next for them.

 Well, Senator, look, I think we're in vigorous agreement here.
 We both want to get more revenue in.
 I have yet to see a proposal that you're describing that the — raising the cap would apply to passive income.
 That has not been.
.
.

 Well, Senator, look, I think we're in vigorous agreement here.
 We both want to get more revenue in.
 I have yet to see a proposal that you're describing that the — raising the cap would apply to passive income.
 That has not been.
.
.

 Well, that has not been a part of most of the proposals that I've seen.
 I'm interested in making sure we get the maximum amount of revenue from those who can well afford to provide it.
 So I'm going to come up with the best way forward.
 We're going to end up in the same place.
 We're going to get more revenue.
 I'm going to prioritize those recipients who need the most help first.
 
 Well, that has not been a part of most of the proposals that I've seen.
 I'm interested in making sure we get the maximum amount of revenue from those who can well afford to provide it.
 So I'm going to come up with the best way forward.
 We're going to end up in the same place.
 We're going to get more revenue.
 I'm going to prioritize those recipients who need the most help first.
 
 I can't speak for the Koch Brothers, you're referring to a Super PAC that we don't coordinate with, that was set up to support President Obama, that has now decided that they want to support me.
 They are the ones who should respond to any questions.
 Let's talk about our campaigns.
 I'm very proud of the fact that we have more than 750 thousand donors, and the vast majority of them are giving small contributions.
 So, I'm proud of Senator Sanders, and his supporters.
 I think it's great that Senator Sanders, President Obama and I have more donors than any three people who have every run, certainly on the Democratic side.
 That's the way it should be, and I'm going to continue to reach out to thank all my online contributors for everything they are doing for me, to encourage them and help me do more just as Senator Sanders is.
 I think that is the real key here.
 We both have a lot of small donors.
 I think that sets us apart from a lot of what's happening right now on the Republican side.
 The Koch Brothers have a very clear political agenda.
 It is an agenda, in my view, that would do great harm to our country.
 We're going to fight it as hard as we can, and we're going to fight whoever the Republicans nominate who will depend on the Koch Brothers, and others.
 
 I can't speak for the Koch Brothers, you're referring to a Super PAC that we don't coordinate with, that was set up to support President Obama, that has now decided that they want to support me.
 They are the ones who should respond to any questions.
 Let's talk about our campaigns.
 I'm very proud of the fact that we have more than 750 thousand donors, and the vast majority of them are giving small contributions.
 So, I'm proud of Senator Sanders, and his supporters.
 I think it's great that Senator Sanders, President Obama and I have more donors than any three people who have every run, certainly on the Democratic side.
 That's the way it should be, and I'm going to continue to reach out to thank all my online contributors for everything they are doing for me, to encourage them and help me do more just as Senator Sanders is.
 I think that is the real key here.
 We both have a lot of small donors.
 I think that sets us apart from a lot of what's happening right now on the Republican side.
 The Koch Brothers have a very clear political agenda.
 It is an agenda, in my view, that would do great harm to our country.
 We're going to fight it as hard as we can, and we're going to fight whoever the Republicans nominate who will depend on the Koch Brothers, and others.
 
 We are mixing apples and oranges.
 My 750,000 donors have contributed more than a million and a half donations.
 I'm very proud.
 That, I think, between the two of us demonstrates the strength of the support we have among people who want to see change in our country.
 But, the real issue, I think, that the Senator is injecting into this is that if you had a Super PAC, like President Obama has, which now says it wants to support me.
 It's not my PAC.
 If you take donations from Wall Street, you can't be independent.
 I would just say, I debated then Senator Obama numerous times on stages like this, and he was the recipient of the largest number of Wall Street donations of anybody running on the Democratic side ever.
 Now, when it mattered, he stood up and took on Wall Street.
 He pushed through, and he passed the Dodd-Frank regulation, the toughest regulations since the 1930's.
 So, let's not in anyway imply here that either President Obama or myself, would in anyway not take on any vested interested, whether it's Wall Street, or drug companies, or insurance companies, or frankly, the gun lobby to stand up to do what's best for the American people.

 We are mixing apples and oranges.
 My 750,000 donors have contributed more than a million and a half donations.
 I'm very proud.
 That, I think, between the two of us demonstrates the strength of the support we have among people who want to see change in our country.
 But, the real issue, I think, that the Senator is injecting into this is that if you had a Super PAC, like President Obama has, which now says it wants to support me.
 It's not my PAC.
 If you take donations from Wall Street, you can't be independent.
 I would just say, I debated then Senator Obama numerous times on stages like this, and he was the recipient of the largest number of Wall Street donations of anybody running on the Democratic side ever.
 Now, when it mattered, he stood up and took on Wall Street.
 He pushed through, and he passed the Dodd-Frank regulation, the toughest regulations since the 1930's.
 So, let's not in anyway imply here that either President Obama or myself, would in anyway not take on any vested interested, whether it's Wall Street, or drug companies, or insurance companies, or frankly, the gun lobby to stand up to do what's best for the American people.

 Well, let's just — let's just follow up on this, because, you know, I've made it very clear that no bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail, and because of Dodd-Frank, we now have in law a process that the president, the Federal Reserve, and others can use if any bank poses a systemic risk.
 I think that's a major accomplishment.
 I agree, however, it doesn't go far enough, because what it focuses on are the big banks, which Senator Sanders has talked about a lot, for good reason.
 I go further in the plan that I've proposed, which has been called the toughest, most effective, comprehensive plan for reining in the other risks that the financial system could face.
 It was an investment bank, Lehman Brothers, that contributed to our collapse.
 It was a big insurance company, AIG.
 It was Countrywide Mortgage.
 My plan would sweep all of them into a regulatory framework so we can try to get ahead of what the next problems might be.
 And I believe that not only Barney Frank, Paul Krugman, and others, have said that what I have proposed is the most effective.
 It goes in the right direction.
 We have Dodd-Frank.
 We can use it to break up the banks, if that's appropriate.
 But let's not kid ourselves.
 As we speak, there are new problems on the horizon.
 I want to get ahead of those, and that's why I've proposed a much more comprehensive approach to deal with all of these.
.
.

 Well, let's just — let's just follow up on this, because, you know, I've made it very clear that no bank is too big to fail, no executive too powerful to jail, and because of Dodd-Frank, we now have in law a process that the president, the Federal Reserve, and others can use if any bank poses a systemic risk.
 I think that's a major accomplishment.
 I agree, however, it doesn't go far enough, because what it focuses on are the big banks, which Senator Sanders has talked about a lot, for good reason.
 I go further in the plan that I've proposed, which has been called the toughest, most effective, comprehensive plan for reining in the other risks that the financial system could face.
 It was an investment bank, Lehman Brothers, that contributed to our collapse.
 It was a big insurance company, AIG.
 It was Countrywide Mortgage.
 My plan would sweep all of them into a regulatory framework so we can try to get ahead of what the next problems might be.
 And I believe that not only Barney Frank, Paul Krugman, and others, have said that what I have proposed is the most effective.
 It goes in the right direction.
 We have Dodd-Frank.
 We can use it to break up the banks, if that's appropriate.
 But let's not kid ourselves.
 As we speak, there are new problems on the horizon.
 I want to get ahead of those, and that's why I've proposed a much more comprehensive approach to deal with all of these.
.
.

 Absolutely.
 And, you know, there are a number of programs that I think are duplicative and redundant and not producing the results that people deserve.
 There are a lot of training programs and education programs that I think can be streamlined and put into a much better format so that if we do continue them they can be more useful, in public schools, community colleges, and colleges and universities.
 I would like to take a hard look at every part of the federal government and really do the kind of analysis that would rebuild some confidence in people that we're taking a hard look about what we have, you know, and what we don't need anymore.
 And that's what I intend to do.

 Absolutely.
 And, you know, there are a number of programs that I think are duplicative and redundant and not producing the results that people deserve.
 There are a lot of training programs and education programs that I think can be streamlined and put into a much better format so that if we do continue them they can be more useful, in public schools, community colleges, and colleges and universities.
 I would like to take a hard look at every part of the federal government and really do the kind of analysis that would rebuild some confidence in people that we're taking a hard look about what we have, you know, and what we don't need anymore.
 And that's what I intend to do.

 Look, I think we are readier than we used to be, but it's a constant effort that has to be undertaken to make sure we are as ready as we need to be.
 We have made a lot of improvements in our domestic security since 9/11, and we have been able to foil and prevent attacks, yet we see the terrible attack in San Bernardino and know that we haven't done enough.
 So we have to go after this both abroad and at home.
 We have to go after terrorist networks, predominantly ISIS — that's not the only one, but let's focus on that for a minute.
 We have to lead a coalition that will take back territory from ISIS.
 That is principally an American-led air campaign that we are now engaged in.
 We have to support the fighters on the ground, principally the Arabs and the Kurds who are willing to stand up and take territory back from Raqqa to Ramadi.
 We have to continue to work with the Iraqi army so that they are better prepared to advance on some of the other strongholds inside Iraq, like Mosul, when they are able to do so.
 And we have to cut off the flow of foreign funding and foreign fighters.
 And we have to take on ISIS online.
 They are a sophisticated purveyor of propaganda, a celebrator of violence, an instigator of attacks using their online presence.
 Here at home, we've got to do a better job coordinating between federal, state, and local law enforcement.
 We need the best possible intelligence not only from our own sources, but from sources overseas, that can be a real-time fusion effort to get information where it's needed.
 But the final thing I want to say about this is the following.
 You know, after 9/11, one of the efforts that we did in New York was if you see something or hear something suspicious, report it.
 And we need to do that throughout the country.
 But we need to understand that American Muslims are on the front line of our defense.
 They are more likely to know what's happening in their families and their communities, and they need to feel not just invited, but welcomed within the American society.
 So when somebody like Donald Trump and others.
.
.
.
.
.
stirs up the demagoguery against American Muslims, that hurts us at home.
 It's not only offensive; it's dangerous.
 And the same goes for overseas, where we have to put together a coalition of Muslim nations.
 I know how to do that.
 I put together the coalition that imposed the sanctions on Iran that got us to the negotiating table to put a lid on their nuclear weapons program.
  And you don't go tell Muslim nations you want them to be part of a coalition when you have a leading candidate for president of the United States who insults their religion.
 So this has to be looked at overall, and we have to go at it from every possible angle.

 Look, I think we are readier than we used to be, but it's a constant effort that has to be undertaken to make sure we are as ready as we need to be.
 We have made a lot of improvements in our domestic security since 9/11, and we have been able to foil and prevent attacks, yet we see the terrible attack in San Bernardino and know that we haven't done enough.
 So we have to go after this both abroad and at home.
 We have to go after terrorist networks, predominantly ISIS — that's not the only one, but let's focus on that for a minute.
 We have to lead a coalition that will take back territory from ISIS.
 That is principally an American-led air campaign that we are now engaged in.
 We have to support the fighters on the ground, principally the Arabs and the Kurds who are willing to stand up and take territory back from Raqqa to Ramadi.
 We have to continue to work with the Iraqi army so that they are better prepared to advance on some of the other strongholds inside Iraq, like Mosul, when they are able to do so.
 And we have to cut off the flow of foreign funding and foreign fighters.
 And we have to take on ISIS online.
 They are a sophisticated purveyor of propaganda, a celebrator of violence, an instigator of attacks using their online presence.
 Here at home, we've got to do a better job coordinating between federal, state, and local law enforcement.
 We need the best possible intelligence not only from our own sources, but from sources overseas, that can be a real-time fusion effort to get information where it's needed.
 But the final thing I want to say about this is the following.
 You know, after 9/11, one of the efforts that we did in New York was if you see something or hear something suspicious, report it.
 And we need to do that throughout the country.
 But we need to understand that American Muslims are on the front line of our defense.
 They are more likely to know what's happening in their families and their communities, and they need to feel not just invited, but welcomed within the American society.
 So when somebody like Donald Trump and others.
.
.
.
.
.
stirs up the demagoguery against American Muslims, that hurts us at home.
 It's not only offensive; it's dangerous.
 And the same goes for overseas, where we have to put together a coalition of Muslim nations.
 I know how to do that.
 I put together the coalition that imposed the sanctions on Iran that got us to the negotiating table to put a lid on their nuclear weapons program.
  And you don't go tell Muslim nations you want them to be part of a coalition when you have a leading candidate for president of the United States who insults their religion.
 So this has to be looked at overall, and we have to go at it from every possible angle.

 If I could just respond.
 Two points.
 One, Senator Sanders voted in 1998 on what I think is fair to call a regime change resolution with respect to Iraq, calling for the end of Saddam Hussein's regime.
 He voted in favor of regime change with Libya, voted in favor of the Security Council being an active participate in setting the parameters for what we would do, which of course we followed through on.
 I do not believe a vote in 2002 is a plan to defeat ISIS in 2016.
 It's very important we focus on the threats we face today, and that we understand the complicated and dangerous world we are in.
 When people go to vote in primaries or caucuses, they are voting not only for the president, they are voting for the commander-in-chief.
 And it's important that people really look hard at what the threats and dangers we face are, and who is best prepared for dealing with them.
 As we all remember, Senator Obama, when he ran against me, was against the war in Iraq.
 And yet when he won, he turned to me, trusting my judgment, my experience, to become secretary of state.
 I was very honored to be asked to do that and very honored to serve with him those first four years.
 
 If I could just respond.
 Two points.
 One, Senator Sanders voted in 1998 on what I think is fair to call a regime change resolution with respect to Iraq, calling for the end of Saddam Hussein's regime.
 He voted in favor of regime change with Libya, voted in favor of the Security Council being an active participate in setting the parameters for what we would do, which of course we followed through on.
 I do not believe a vote in 2002 is a plan to defeat ISIS in 2016.
 It's very important we focus on the threats we face today, and that we understand the complicated and dangerous world we are in.
 When people go to vote in primaries or caucuses, they are voting not only for the president, they are voting for the commander-in-chief.
 And it's important that people really look hard at what the threats and dangers we face are, and who is best prepared for dealing with them.
 As we all remember, Senator Obama, when he ran against me, was against the war in Iraq.
 And yet when he won, he turned to me, trusting my judgment, my experience, to become secretary of state.
 I was very honored to be asked to do that and very honored to serve with him those first four years.
 
 You did support a U.
N.
 Security Council approach, which we did follow up on.
 And, look, I think it's important to look at what the most important counterterrorism judgment of the first four years of the Obama administration was, and that was the very difficult decision as to whether or not to advise the president to go after bin Laden.
 I looked at the evidence.
 I looked at the intelligence.
 I got the briefings.
 I recommended that the president go forward.
 It was a hard choice.
 Not all of his top national security advisors agreed with that.
 And at the end of the day, it was the president's decision.
 So he had to leave the Situation Room after hearing from the small group advising him and he had to make that decision.
 I'm proud that I gave him that advice.
 And I'm very grateful to the brave Navy SEALs who carried out that mission.
 
 You did support a U.
N.
 Security Council approach, which we did follow up on.
 And, look, I think it's important to look at what the most important counterterrorism judgment of the first four years of the Obama administration was, and that was the very difficult decision as to whether or not to advise the president to go after bin Laden.
 I looked at the evidence.
 I looked at the intelligence.
 I got the briefings.
 I recommended that the president go forward.
 It was a hard choice.
 Not all of his top national security advisors agreed with that.
 And at the end of the day, it was the president's decision.
 So he had to leave the Situation Room after hearing from the small group advising him and he had to make that decision.
 I'm proud that I gave him that advice.
 And I'm very grateful to the brave Navy SEALs who carried out that mission.
 
 Well, I know journalists have asked who you do listen to on foreign policy, and we have yet to know who that is.

 Well, I know journalists have asked who you do listen to on foreign policy, and we have yet to know who that is.

 That's fine.
 That's fine.
  You know, I listen to a wide variety of voices that have expertise in various areas.
 I think it is fair to say, whatever the complaints that you want to make about him are, that with respect to China, one of the most challenging relationships we have, his opening up China and his ongoing relationships with the leaders of China is an incredibly useful relationship for the United States of America.
  So if we want to pick and choose — and I certainly do — people I listen to, people I don't listen to, people I listen to for certain areas, then I think we have to be fair and look at the entire world, because it's a big, complicated world out there.

 That's fine.
 That's fine.
  You know, I listen to a wide variety of voices that have expertise in various areas.
 I think it is fair to say, whatever the complaints that you want to make about him are, that with respect to China, one of the most challenging relationships we have, his opening up China and his ongoing relationships with the leaders of China is an incredibly useful relationship for the United States of America.
  So if we want to pick and choose — and I certainly do — people I listen to, people I don't listen to, people I listen to for certain areas, then I think we have to be fair and look at the entire world, because it's a big, complicated world out there.

 And, yes, people we may disagree with on a number of things may have some insight, may have some relationships that are important for the president to understand in order to best protect the United States.
 
 And, yes, people we may disagree with on a number of things may have some insight, may have some relationships that are important for the president to understand in order to best protect the United States.
 
 Well, with respect to Syria, I really do appreciate the efforts that Secretary Kerry has made.
 The agreement on humanitarian relief now needs to be implemented, because there are enclaves that are literally filled with starving people throughout Syria.
 The agreement on a cease-fire, though, is something that has to be implemented more quickly than the schedule that the Russians agreed to.
 You know, the Russians wanted to buy time.
 Are they buying time to continue their bombardment on behalf of the Assad regime to further decimate what's left of the opposition, which would be a grave disservice to any kind of eventual cease-fire? So I know Secretary Kerry is working extremely hard to try to move that cease-fire up as quickly as possible.
 But I would add this.
 You know, the Security Council finally got around to adopting a resolution.
 At the core of that resolution is an agreement I negotiated in June of 2012 in Geneva, which set forth a cease-fire and moving toward a political resolution, trying to bring the parties at stake in Syria together.
 This is incredibly complicated, because we've got Iran as a big player, in addition to Russia.
 We have Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and others who have very important interests in their view.
 This is one of the areas I've disagreed with Senator Sanders on, who has called for Iranian troops trying to end civil war in Syria, which I think would be a grave mistake.
 Putting Iranian troops right on the border of the Golan right next to Israel would be a nonstarter for me.
 Trying to get Iran and Saudi Arabia to work together, as he has suggested in the past, is equally a nonstarter.
 So let's support what Secretary Kerry and the president are doing, but let's hope that we can accelerate the cease-fire, because I fear that the Russians will continue their bombing, try to do everything they can to destroy what's left of the opposition.
 And remember, the Russians have not gone after ISIS or any of the other terrorist groups.
 So as we get a cease-fire and maybe some humanitarian corridors, that still leaves the terrorist groups on the doorstep of others in Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and the like.
 So we've got some real work to do, and let's try to make sure we actually implement what has been agreed to with the Russians.
 
 Well, with respect to Syria, I really do appreciate the efforts that Secretary Kerry has made.
 The agreement on humanitarian relief now needs to be implemented, because there are enclaves that are literally filled with starving people throughout Syria.
 The agreement on a cease-fire, though, is something that has to be implemented more quickly than the schedule that the Russians agreed to.
 You know, the Russians wanted to buy time.
 Are they buying time to continue their bombardment on behalf of the Assad regime to further decimate what's left of the opposition, which would be a grave disservice to any kind of eventual cease-fire? So I know Secretary Kerry is working extremely hard to try to move that cease-fire up as quickly as possible.
 But I would add this.
 You know, the Security Council finally got around to adopting a resolution.
 At the core of that resolution is an agreement I negotiated in June of 2012 in Geneva, which set forth a cease-fire and moving toward a political resolution, trying to bring the parties at stake in Syria together.
 This is incredibly complicated, because we've got Iran as a big player, in addition to Russia.
 We have Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and others who have very important interests in their view.
 This is one of the areas I've disagreed with Senator Sanders on, who has called for Iranian troops trying to end civil war in Syria, which I think would be a grave mistake.
 Putting Iranian troops right on the border of the Golan right next to Israel would be a nonstarter for me.
 Trying to get Iran and Saudi Arabia to work together, as he has suggested in the past, is equally a nonstarter.
 So let's support what Secretary Kerry and the president are doing, but let's hope that we can accelerate the cease-fire, because I fear that the Russians will continue their bombing, try to do everything they can to destroy what's left of the opposition.
 And remember, the Russians have not gone after ISIS or any of the other terrorist groups.
 So as we get a cease-fire and maybe some humanitarian corridors, that still leaves the terrorist groups on the doorstep of others in Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and the like.
 So we've got some real work to do, and let's try to make sure we actually implement what has been agreed to with the Russians.
 
 Well, I respectfully disagree.
 I think we have achieved a great deal with the Iranian nuclear agreement to put a lid on the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
 That has to be enforced absolutely with consequences for Iran at the slightest deviation from their requirements under the agreement.
 I do not think we should promise or even look toward normalizing relations because we have a lot of other business to get done with Iran.
 Yes, they have to stop being the main state sponsor of terrorism.
 Yes, they have to stop trying to destabilize the Middle East, causing even more chaos.
 Yes, they've got to get out of Syria.
 They've got to quit sponsoring Hezbollah and Hamas.
 They have got to quit trying to ship rockets into Gaza that can be used against Israel.
 We have a lot of work to do with Iran before we ever say that they could move toward normalized relations with us.
 
 Well, I respectfully disagree.
 I think we have achieved a great deal with the Iranian nuclear agreement to put a lid on the Iranian nuclear weapons program.
 That has to be enforced absolutely with consequences for Iran at the slightest deviation from their requirements under the agreement.
 I do not think we should promise or even look toward normalizing relations because we have a lot of other business to get done with Iran.
 Yes, they have to stop being the main state sponsor of terrorism.
 Yes, they have to stop trying to destabilize the Middle East, causing even more chaos.
 Yes, they've got to get out of Syria.
 They've got to quit sponsoring Hezbollah and Hamas.
 They have got to quit trying to ship rockets into Gaza that can be used against Israel.
 We have a lot of work to do with Iran before we ever say that they could move toward normalized relations with us.
 
 .
.
.
 Senator Sanders, from a debate in 2008, quote what I said.
 The question was, would you meet with an adversary without conditions? I said no.
 And in fact, in Obama administration, we did not meet with anybody without conditions.
 That is the appropriate approach in order to get the results that you are seeking.
 
 .
.
.
 Senator Sanders, from a debate in 2008, quote what I said.
 The question was, would you meet with an adversary without conditions? I said no.
 And in fact, in Obama administration, we did not meet with anybody without conditions.
 That is the appropriate approach in order to get the results that you are seeking.
 
 Well, I was pleased that NATO announced just this week that they're going to start doing patrols in the Mediterranean, in the Aegean, to try to interdict the smugglers, to try to prevent the kind of tragedies that we have seen all too often, also to try to prevent more refugees from coming to the European Union.
 And it's especially significant that they are working with both Turkey and Greece in order to do this.
 With respect to the United States, I think our role in NATO, our support for the E.
U.
, as well as our willingness to take refugees so long as they are thoroughly vetted and that we have confidence from intelligence and other sources that they can come to our country, we should be doing our part.
 And we should back up the recent donors conference to make sure we have made our contribution to try to deal with the enormous cost that these refugees are posing to Turkey and to members of the E.
U.
 in particular.
This is a humanitarian catastrophe.
 There is no other description of it.
 So we do as the United States have to support our friends, our allies in Europe.
 We have to stand with them.
 We have to provide financial support to them.
 We have to provide the NATO support to back up the mission that is going on.
 And we have to take properly vetted refugees ourselves.

 Well, I was pleased that NATO announced just this week that they're going to start doing patrols in the Mediterranean, in the Aegean, to try to interdict the smugglers, to try to prevent the kind of tragedies that we have seen all too often, also to try to prevent more refugees from coming to the European Union.
 And it's especially significant that they are working with both Turkey and Greece in order to do this.
 With respect to the United States, I think our role in NATO, our support for the E.
U.
, as well as our willingness to take refugees so long as they are thoroughly vetted and that we have confidence from intelligence and other sources that they can come to our country, we should be doing our part.
 And we should back up the recent donors conference to make sure we have made our contribution to try to deal with the enormous cost that these refugees are posing to Turkey and to members of the E.
U.
 in particular.
This is a humanitarian catastrophe.
 There is no other description of it.
 So we do as the United States have to support our friends, our allies in Europe.
 We have to stand with them.
 We have to provide financial support to them.
 We have to provide the NATO support to back up the mission that is going on.
 And we have to take properly vetted refugees ourselves.

 I certainly agree with FDR for all the reasons Senator Sanders said.
 And I agree about the role that he played both in war and in peace on the economy and defeating fascism around the world.
 I would choose Nelson Mandela for his generosity of heart, his understanding of the need for reconciliation.
But I want to — I want to follow up on something having to do with leadership, because, you know, today Senator Sanders said that President Obama failed the presidential leadership test.
 And this is not the first time that he has criticized President Obama.
 In the past he has called him weak.
 He has called him a disappointment.
 He wrote a forward for a book that basically argued voters should have buyers' remorse when it comes to President Obama's leadership and legacy.
 And I just couldn't agree — disagree more with those kinds of comments.
 You know, from my perspective, maybe because I understand what President Obama inherited, not only the worst financial crisis but the antipathy of the Republicans in Congress, I don't think he gets the credit he deserves for being a president.
.
.
.
.
.
who got us out of that.
.
.
.
.
.
put us on firm ground, and has sent us into the future.
 And it is a — the kind of criticism that we've heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans.
 I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama.

 I certainly agree with FDR for all the reasons Senator Sanders said.
 And I agree about the role that he played both in war and in peace on the economy and defeating fascism around the world.
 I would choose Nelson Mandela for his generosity of heart, his understanding of the need for reconciliation.
But I want to — I want to follow up on something having to do with leadership, because, you know, today Senator Sanders said that President Obama failed the presidential leadership test.
 And this is not the first time that he has criticized President Obama.
 In the past he has called him weak.
 He has called him a disappointment.
 He wrote a forward for a book that basically argued voters should have buyers' remorse when it comes to President Obama's leadership and legacy.
 And I just couldn't agree — disagree more with those kinds of comments.
 You know, from my perspective, maybe because I understand what President Obama inherited, not only the worst financial crisis but the antipathy of the Republicans in Congress, I don't think he gets the credit he deserves for being a president.
.
.
.
.
.
who got us out of that.
.
.
.
.
.
put us on firm ground, and has sent us into the future.
 And it is a — the kind of criticism that we've heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans.
 I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama.

 You know, Senator, what I am concerned about, is not disagreement on issues, saying that this is what I would rather do, I don't agree with the president on that, calling the president weak, calling him a disappointment, calling several times that he should have a primary opponent when he ran for re-election in 2012, you know, I think that goes further than saying we have our disagreements.
 As a senator, yes, I was a senator.
 I understand we can disagree on the path forward.
 But those kinds of personal assessments and charges are ones that I find particularly troubling.

 You know, Senator, what I am concerned about, is not disagreement on issues, saying that this is what I would rather do, I don't agree with the president on that, calling the president weak, calling him a disappointment, calling several times that he should have a primary opponent when he ran for re-election in 2012, you know, I think that goes further than saying we have our disagreements.
 As a senator, yes, I was a senator.
 I understand we can disagree on the path forward.
 But those kinds of personal assessments and charges are ones that I find particularly troubling.

 You know, we — we agree that we've got to get unaccountable money out of politics.
 We agree that Wall Street should never be allowed to wreck Main Street again.
 But here's the point I want to make tonight.
 I am not a single-issue candidate, and I do not believe we live in a single-issue country.
 I think that a lot of what we have to overcome to break down the barriers that are holding people back, whether it's poison in the water of the children of Flint, or whether it's the poor miners who are being left out and left behind in coal country, or whether it is any other American today who feels somehow put down and oppressed by racism, by sexism, by discrimination against the LGBT community, against the kind of efforts that need to be made to root out all of these barriers, that's what I want to take on.
 And here in Wisconsin, I want to reiterate: We've got to stand up for unions and working people who have done it before.
.
.
.
.
.
the American middle class, and who are being attacked by ideologues, by demagogues.
 Yes, does Wall Street and big financial interests, along with drug companies, insurance companies, big oil, all of it, have too much influence? You're right.
 But if we were to stop that tomorrow, we would still have the indifference, the negligence that we saw in Flint.
 We would still have racism holding people back.
 We would still have sexism preventing women from getting equal pay.
 We would still have LGBT people who get married on Saturday and get fired on Monday.
 And we would still have governors like Scott Walker and others trying to rip out the heart of the middle class by making it impossible to organize and stand up for better wages and working conditions.
 So I'm going to keep talking about tearing down all the barriers that stand in the way of Americans fulfilling their potential, because I don't think our country can live up to its potential unless we give a chance to every single American to live up to theirs.
 
 You know, we — we agree that we've got to get unaccountable money out of politics.
 We agree that Wall Street should never be allowed to wreck Main Street again.
 But here's the point I want to make tonight.
 I am not a single-issue candidate, and I do not believe we live in a single-issue country.
 I think that a lot of what we have to overcome to break down the barriers that are holding people back, whether it's poison in the water of the children of Flint, or whether it's the poor miners who are being left out and left behind in coal country, or whether it is any other American today who feels somehow put down and oppressed by racism, by sexism, by discrimination against the LGBT community, against the kind of efforts that need to be made to root out all of these barriers, that's what I want to take on.
 And here in Wisconsin, I want to reiterate: We've got to stand up for unions and working people who have done it before.
.
.
.
.
.
the American middle class, and who are being attacked by ideologues, by demagogues.
 Yes, does Wall Street and big financial interests, along with drug companies, insurance companies, big oil, all of it, have too much influence? You're right.
 But if we were to stop that tomorrow, we would still have the indifference, the negligence that we saw in Flint.
 We would still have racism holding people back.
 We would still have sexism preventing women from getting equal pay.
 We would still have LGBT people who get married on Saturday and get fired on Monday.
 And we would still have governors like Scott Walker and others trying to rip out the heart of the middle class by making it impossible to organize and stand up for better wages and working conditions.
 So I'm going to keep talking about tearing down all the barriers that stand in the way of Americans fulfilling their potential, because I don't think our country can live up to its potential unless we give a chance to every single American to live up to theirs.