And his proposed deportation of 11 million undocumented immigrants. We need to control our border just like people have to control who goes in and out of their house. But if people think that we are going to shift 11 Million People who are lawabiding, who are in this country and somehow pick them up at their house and ship them out to mexico, think about the families, think about the children. So you know what the answer really is . If theyve been law abiding, they pay a penalty, they get to stay, we protect the wall. Anybody else comes over, they go back. But for the 11 Million People, come on, folks. We all know you cant pick them up and ship them back across the border. Its a silly argument. It makes no sense. Youre lucky in ohio you struck oil. Thats one thing. Let me just tell you that dwight eisenhower, good president , great president , people liked him, i like ike, right . The expression, i like ike, moved 1. 5 million Illegal Immigrants out of this country, moved them just beyond the border. They came back. Moved them again beyond the border. They came back. Didnt like it. Moved them way south. They never came back. What happened youre not going to have my back. Im going to have my back. Just a couple of things here. First of all governor, you should let jeb speak. We have grown thank you, donald, for allowing me to speak at the debate. Thats really nice of you. Really appreciate that. What a generous man you are. 12 million Illegal Immigrants, to send them back, 500,000 a month, is just not possible, and its not embracing american values. And it would tear community as part. And it would send a signal that were not the kind of dcountry that i know america is. And even having this conversation sends a powerful signal theyre doing highfives in the Clinton Campaign right now when they hear this. Lets talk about that, shall we . I have president of republican super pac the congressional leader mike shields with us, also Cnn National Political Reporter Maeve Reston and john avalon. Welcome to all of you. Going through the debate, to me, that was really one of the strongest exchanges obviously onon immigration. I want to talk about the eisenhower talk. But first mike, this backandforth, to me really showkai d showcases this divide on, say, between trump and cruz and mainstream republican kacandid e candidates. Yeah. First of all, happy veterans day. I think the winner of the debate last night was the rnc and prince priebus. After the debate in colorado that everyone knew was poorly run by cnbc, they regathered themselves, put this debate on last night and what you just watched was a really, truly substantive debate among truly qualified candidates going back and forth on their immigration plans. You saw that over and over and over again. This is a bait i think all republicans who are looking at the president ial campaign is what theyve been looking for. They want substance and back and forth. The moderators dont have to get involved in sort of creating a fight or gotcha questions when the candidates are going to go back and forth. There are real differences in these candidates about how they would approach things. Shouldnt the mod yaitor have followed up with donald trump about deporting millions of people. The question is how. What does that look like . How do you pull that off . Where was that question . Yeah. Look, you can get even more deep into substance. Step one, lets have a substan stiff debate, yes, followon questions all the journalists that are covering the campaign really need to help dig deep into what these kand did thes stand for, what the policies will do, what the impact for the policies are, the American Action forum is a conservative c3 in washington, d. C. , a think tank. Theyre talking about a massive cost associated with trying to deport that many people. It would cost billions of dollars. Theres legitimate request questions to be asked but lets celebrate we had a good debate with qualified candidates answering questions about what their policy platforms are. John, to you, lets be real about what happened in the 1950s under president eisenhower and what donald trump is proposing. Can you please give everybody a history legislati History Lesson on what that effort was back then. Sure. And i think thats an important reality check. Look, i like ike. I think he was an underrated president. But this is not one of the high water marks for his president did i. It was known as excuse me for knowen it as Operation Wetback. Thats what it was known as. Calling for Operation Wetback ii, i dont think it will help the republicans connect with the hispanic community. The country was onetenth of the population that is the potential pool. And if you are a republican who claims to want limited government, you never seen big ghost trying to deport 11 million folks. Thats a reality. I think kasich and jeb bush were responsible trying to play it out beyond the bumper stickers. Its good to have a parallel but do your homework and look at the it was 150,000 people under fdr. Do that multiple and then ask yourself if youre a republican that says you believe in limited country if thats the president you want to see and support. Thank you. I just think we needed a little social studies 101. Maeve, i want to come to you, but let me dip into ben carson speaking here lynchburg, virginia, talking about last nights debate. Their facts on the table and then making a decision. See, the problem is we frequently make decisions based on one persons ideology or another persons ideology without actually recognizing that we live in a Pluralistic Society and we need to hear everybodys explanation of what needs to happen. You know, as ive looked at the data and ive talked to people, im still very open to having a discussion about it. But it is very clear that every time we raise the minimum wage we lose jobs. So the question then becomes, how many jobs are we willing to lose in order to increase a wage beyond the level where people will be working . And what is the rationale for that . And we ought to get that out there because a lot of times the people who are saying, lets increase the minimum wage, once they understand what the implications are say, you know what . Maybe we shouldnt be increasing the minimum wage. Just to be clear, are you saying youre still open to potentially supporting raising the federally mandated minimum wage . If somebody can come up with a good explanation of why that should be done, how it doesnt hurt the economy and increase uneconomy, i think its very reasonable to hear their argument. Could you explain your position on yes. Are you in favor of encourage ing to have a way to get citizenship, or are you in favor of deporting those who are here . Very easy question. Im in favor of enforcing the laws that have and in favor of securing our borders, all of our borders. And this is not a difficult thing to do, as was demonstrated in yuma county, arizona, where they spout 97 of illegal immigration simply by putting up a double fence with asphalt road in between so there was quick access, actually putting Border Guards on the border, which is a novel concept, and prosecuting firsttime offenders rather than the catch and release program that we now have. That stopped it. And thats without the addition of some of the unique surveillance equipment that we now have available to us. So i think you can get pretty close to 100 . Now, the other thing you have to do is you have to decrease the incentives for people to come here. You have to get rid of all of the things that they would be getting if they can get through the system. Therefore, they say, what is the point . Now, that gets rid of the influx, but it doesnt take care of the 11plus Million People who are still here. I propose that we give them a sixmonth period in which to register. If they dont register within that sixmonth period, theyre criminals and are treated as such. But if they register in that sixmonth period and they have a pristine record and they wish to be guest workers in this country, we would have to pay a back tax penalty and continue to pay taxes going forward. But they would no longer have to live in the shadows. Now, that does not give them the right to vote. It does not make them u. S. Citizens. If they want to become u. S. Citizens they have to go through the same thing anybody else who wants to do that has to go through, including leaving the country so that theyre legal and apply from the outside. Unless the American People indicate that they want a different course than that. Whats the economic harm of having these 11 Million People here now . Some people its a plus to the economy. It doesnt sound like you think it is. Well, when you look at the farming industry, ive talked to farmers who have multithousandacre farms, and they say that their business would collapse without these people completely. Ive talked to hotel owners, and they say that they would have a very difficult time without them. And thats why i say guest workers who are willing to work in industries where we need them. You know, thats a winwin situation. I think the other thing that we have to keep in mind, you know, were compassionate people. Like in cameroon right now, there are American Companies over there ive spoken to, some of them, who are helping to develop millions of acres, incredibly fertile land, growing record crops, getting big profits, which is great for them. I like business, you know. Thats you do what works for you. But at the same time theyre building the infrastructure of that nation, creating jobs there and teaching them the ag business so they carry on themselves and at the same time creating friends for the United States. Theres really no reason that we cant do the same kind of thing in other parts of the world, including central and south america, so that people wont feel a necessity to come here and thats a very good outreach and a positive effect for our businesses. And it doesnt require expenditure on behalf of our government. Last night during the discussion of dodd frank and the Financial Sector you said basically, i would have wouldnt allow then you also said you didnt want to tear banks down and reshuffle what we have now. [ inaudible question ] well, you know, its not the governments business to build things up by favoritism, and its not their job to tear things down. Its really their job to provide an atmosphere that allows earlyiearl entrepreneurial risk taking, innovation, capital investment, but not to facilitate those things for one group versus the other group. So i want to see a handsoff policy by the federal government. Let things rise and fall based on their merits without the government interfering. That includes subsidies also. Do you think further deregulation would well, you know, the amount of regulation has gone from just creeping into a full gallop now, enveloping virtually everything. You know, i talk to the deleterious effect of all those regulations on the poor and the middle class, but also in terms of stifling the powerful economic engine that we have. And that i believe is what we have to be looking at. You said last night [ inaudible question ] well, youre talking about isis and control of that. They only have 30,000 people. And theyre spread out not just there but in several other locations. So i dont think that they can defend that area particularly well, and the problem has not been so much that we cant effectively fight them. The problem has been that we have our hands tied. We have people micromanaging everything. If you gave our military a mission and didnt tie their hands and micromanage them, they would be much more capable than what weve seen. [ inaudible question ] i do. I do believe that. And the added advantage is, you know, weve been calling for a coalition because the fact of the matter is, you know, getting that area under control is much more beneficial to the countries of the Arabian Peninsula and throughout that region than it is anybody else. And many of them probably would get involved, but theyre not just going to form and do things by themselves. They need leadership. If we provide the leadership for them, that provides the night us. It will grow and be able to take care of itself. But thats the kind of Foreign Policy we have to have. We cant have a well sit in the back and manage everything kind of policy. That doesnt work. We can see that. [ inaudible question ] well, china has been trying to extend its influence not only throughout the middle east but throughout africa. And in several locations and their interest extends into that region as well. You know, i have to refer you to some other people todata, but t it to me. [ inaudible question ] whether its enough or not, my point is that, if we have operations going on over there, they need to be guided. And the special ops people are there to guide those operations rather than have them being done randomly or by people who really dont have a complete view of whats going on in the area. [ inaudible question ] my message is that, you know, there are few careers that are more rewardi ining than medicin. Even with all the regulations and sthauff that has made it a little bit miserable, because you get to intervene in the most important a person has, their life, and give them longevity and give them quality. You know, ive had the opportunity to do that hundreds and even thousands of times, and i wouldnt trade one of those lives for a billion dollars. Yes, in the back. [ inaudible question ] yeah. You know, the National Institute of health is a very important part of what we do as a nation, and when you look at the death rate and you look at the age of Life Expectancy at the last turn of the century, not this one recently but the one before that, versus now, you see weve gone from around 50 to around 80. Thats because of medical advances. Thats because of things that weve been able to learn and been able to apply in a rigorous and objective manner. And it says volumes about the benefit of rational thought processing, taking true evidence and using that to make decisions. That kind of thing needs to continue to be encouraged. Of course we have to look at the areas of the nih that are effective and the areas that perhaps are not as effective. We have to apply the same kind of standards as we would to any Government Agency or subagency in terms of cost to benefit ratio. But, in general, i would be very much in favor of maintaining and even increasing appropriations for that kind of wide ranging benefit to society. Two more questions, please. [ inaudible question ] any particular issue . Because in a general speech you generally dont have time to go through a whole lit aany of issues. Some people dont recognize that. If theres a specific issue [ inaudible question ] well, of course. But it wasnt an exhaustive discussion on the flat tax. You know, you have to talk about, what is the purpose of taxation . The purpose of taxation is to be able to have the funding thats necessary to run the government. That was the original purpose. Its morphed into controlling peoples behavior. That was not the original purpose, and thats not what i would want. Thats why the system that ive described does not include the things that control peoples behavior. It also, you know obviously we at any tididnt talk about t thats need to be made. The government is far too large. We have 4. 1 million federal employees. Thats ridiculous. We need to trim that down. I would do it very compassionately by attrition. Thousands of Government Employees retire each year. Dont replace them. You can shift people around from place to place, but dont replace them. You look at all of those agencies, 645 agencies and subagencies, 2 to 3 in each one across the board some people say, oh, you cant do that every penny is vitally important and the whole system will collapse. Thats a bunch of garbage. The fact of the matter is, there is fat in everything in the government and probably a lot more than 2 or 3 . Being very reasonable at that rate. Some people say, well, remember a couple of years ago with the sequester and how they tried to do just the small cuts and we had to close white house tours and Close National parks and all these kinds of benefits for veterans and stuff like that . Thats because they were intentionally trying to target the things that people would feel the most so they could make the silly argument that you cant cut anything. Thats a matter of putting the right people in government and have the right motives to really help it work efficiently and help it work for the American People and not people who have a political agenda. [ inaudible question ] [ inaudible question ] yes. I have looked at that and have concluded that the reason that we have 50 states is because they have some degree of autonomy. Federal government should not try to control them. And if they have onerownerous t policies, everybody should leave the state. Thank you. Retired neuropediatric surgeon ben carson answering questions from the press the day after the fourth president ial debate. Maeve reston is with me. Let me go to you. We heard him doubling down on some of the themes we heard last night, not only saying the minimum wage can stay, but he thinks its too high. He said thats attributing to the high unemployment among africanamericans which certainly made news on both sides of the equation today. But also as we were discussing, immigration. Obviously he sees it differently than lets say his other fellow frontrunner donald trump. How is he sounding today to you . Well, its so interesting. You know, there were a number of questions about dr. Carsons answers last night. For example, on how he would tackle isis as well as breaking up the big banks. There was a little bit of confusion about that. But i do think coming back to your original point, that this immigration debate is the most fascinating way to look at sort of the policy differences between all of these candidates. You heard there dr. Carson talking about the need for a guest worker program. Hes really placing emphasis on that, talked a lot about how hes talked to businesses about that, then you have donald trump whos much more saying, we need to deport all of these people. And then jeb bush coming in and saying, wait a minute, im the pragmati