our live coverage begins at 4 p.m. eastern. then at 7:30, president trump speaks at a rally in houston to support texas senator ted cruz in his reelection bid. live coverage of both rallies on c-span, your primary source for campaign 2018. now republican congressman leonard lance debates tom malinowski in the senate house race. the cook political report lists this race as a tossup. this is just over an hour. >> good evening, and welcome to the njtv news 7th congressional debate. welcome to our candidates. thank you both for being here. we've got a lot to cover. let's get right into it. this first question is for both of you, mr. malinowski, you're first. in light of the me too movement during the confirmation

hearings during justice brett kavanaugh and at the state level due to governor murphy's administration. what can be done at the federal level improving reporting and handling cases of sexual assault? >> thank you for that question and thank you for moderating the debate today. i very much look forward to a wide ranging discussion. when i worked for human rights watch, a wonderful organization dedicated to promoting civil rights and human rights in the united states and around the world, one of the causes that we took up was the cause of victims and survivors of sexual violence in the united states. there was a terrible problem at that time that rape kits were being basically discarded by police departments all around the country, rather than actually tested and used in those terrible situations and we led a campaign to try to fix that problem. that was several years ago and we still have a long, long way

to go. if i'm elected to congress i think one of the most important things we can do at the congressional level is to set a good example. the procedures in the united states congress for reporting and acting on accusations of sexual assault and sexual harassment are way behind where they need to be and the congress has not taken the steps it needs to fix them. >> thank you mr. malinowski. now to you, the same 60 seconds. >> thank you for moderating this debate and my thanks to njtv. . house of representatives has taken action moving forward no public funding regarding sexual abuse charges rendered against a member of congress. that legislation has passed the house of representatives and it's now in the senate of the united states and i hope the senate of the united states will take it up in an expeditious manner. also, strongly favor measures against human trafficking and

the lead on this issue is our colleague from new jersey, congressman chris smith. this is an important area and congressman smith has devoted his life to this and, of course, we have to lead by example and i have always led by example in this area and i'm-- i have proudly hired and promoted women on my staff, both on my political staff and in the staff of public policy and we have to speak out whenever there is a sexual assault making sure that it never occurs. >> thank you. did you want 30 seconds, mr. malinowski? >> yes, and i think following, also, what the congressman said. we do have to speak out. we have to be very clear when serious allegations are made. we have to hear out and respect the survivors and there is a difference here between us related to what happened in the judge kavanaugh case when dr. blasey ford came forward, congressman lance said that, well, he was dismissing--

dismissed her allegations before she could be heard before the house of representatives. i think that's precisely the source that makes it hard for victims of sexual-- >> that's time. >> i'll give you 30 seconds, mr. lance to respond. >> i believe in due process of law and when dr. ford's attorney said she might not testify, i did not think that was appropriate. i stated throughout the matter that dr. ford should be given the opportunity to testify and she should be treated with dignity and respect and indeed, that is what happened. i think we can make sure that that is true, also recognizing due process of law. >> let's move on to health care. our senior correspondent brenda flannigan put together an explainer piece for us on this issue. (siren sounding) >> land in a new jersey hospital without insurance and it will cost you more than $2500 a day on average. no wonder the biggest concern

for swing voters here is a stable, affordable health care market, according to the monmouth university poll. >> i ended up buying the cheapest insurance i could get for an emergency and that insurance is almost $800 a month, which is just ridiculous. >> on jersey's individual market, three insurers offer coverage under aca and the good news average rates will actually decrease by 9.3% next year because new jersey acted to keep the individual mandate. meanwhile, the trump administration seeking to abolish coverage for pre-existing conditions. new jersey, however, prohibits so-called junk plans to strip coverage for pre-existing conditions and reimburses insurance companies for catastrophic medical bills and it's 17th in health care according to u.s. news world and report. >> mr. lance, first question is for you. you ultimately voted against the g.o.p. repeal and replacement of the affordable

care act, but you had voted in favor of repeal in the past. you say you remain committed to repeal and replacement. what would need to be in a health care bill for you to vote on it and is it possible to lower health care costs if there's no individual mandate? >> yes, of course it's possible to lower health care costs and that's why i was a sponsor of the moderate republican bill in 2009, in 2010 that never saw the light of day because nancy pelosi would not put it on the floor of the house. if it had been placed on the floor of the house, i think it it would have passed. what it did making sure there was no denial of coverage based upon a preexisting condition. and policies across state lines. pooling together of like-minded interests, health savings accounts. mr. malinowski opposes health savings accounts and i think they're an important component and medical malpractice insurance reform. i do not want to go to a single

payer system as is true in europe and canada. i favor the system on which we built american health care and that's largely through employment and i think we should make sure moving forward that we go in that direction and i am confident the new congress can work on this issue. >> i'll give you 30 seconds, mr. malinowski. >> congressman lance voted more than 60 times to repeal or gut the affordable care act. he touts this bill in 2009 he claims with a moderate alternative and would protect preexisting conditions. that's categorically not true. yes, it would have said you can't be denied coverage if you once have cancer, but you could be denied coverage if the cancer reoccurred. insurance companies could charge you much more if you had a preexisting condition. to say that that protects preexisting conditions is not levelling with the voters of the 7th district. we need to be honest about this. >> 30 seconds to respond, mr. lance? >> in the partial bill that came out of the energy and

commerce committee, there was protection of preexisting conditions that was in the underlying statute and in no way did we change that. it was changed in the rules committee later. that was one of the principal reasons i did not vote for the bill on the floor. of course, i favor protecting people with preexisting conditions and that's the law in new jersey for 25 years. >> mr. malinowski, 30 seconds? >> you voted against it more than 60 times, congressman. in 2009 the bill you just boasted you supported would have denied people coverage for the preexisting conditions that they had. and i can't get around that record. in fact, you used to proudly run on that record, when you were not afraid of losing reelection to a democrat. and now you're running away from it, but what we face is a congress where the republican majority has promised that the first thing they will do, if they win the midterm elections is once again try to repeal-- >> and got to stop there. mr. lance, i'll give you 30

seconds. >> the new congress will be controlled narrowly by either the republicans or democrats and i think the most important force in the new congress will be those of us who are in the sensible center. those of us who are problems of the problem solvers caucus. there are only two new jerseyans who are in that, and i as a conservative. and i think we will pro veil on those and many other issues and don't favor mr. malinowski moving to a european style health care system. >> mr. malinowski, this is for you, you said you've quote every american no matter their age should have the freedom to buy into a medicare plan. the estimated cost for bernie sanders's medicare plan is trillions. >> that's completely different. medicare for all is an idea we should scrap the current system. abolish the current health care

and push everybody into a health care system and i've never been for that, and the ads you see suggest that every democrat is for it. that's politics. what i'm for is keeping our present system and giving everybody a freedom to choose a public option on top of the private options they currently have. medicare could be one of them and when this was first proposed in 2009, the congressional budget office, nonpartisan congressional budget office said that it would save taxpayers money because it would provide a less expensive competitive option on the marketplace which would tend to reduce rates overall for everybody. it's about freedom of choice. additional choice. competition. these are american values that we ought to embrace as we reform our health care system. >> mr. lance, i'll give you 30 seconds to reply. >> i'm opposed to that. i think it would destroy medicare for senior citizens. inevitably employers would leave private health care coverage and force their

employees to go into medicare. it would cost $32 trillion and i think that that is the wrong way to proceed. under obamacare, 700 billion dollars was taken out of medicare and that was one of the principal reasons i voted against obamacare i do not favor that. i favor preserving medicare as we know it. >> mr. malinowski, 30 seconds? >> sure. obamacare did nothing to take away benefits from seniors under medicare. what is threatening medicare today is continued efforts by the republican leadership and the house to turn it into a voucher program. paul ryan was in the district raising money for you, sir, today and you voted for his proposal to do that several years ago and mitch mcconnell today, the republican leader in the senate, very candidly said that because of the deficit that he helped create through the tax bill last year, the only way to pay for that now is to rob the money from medicare. that's the threat to medicare. that is the threat that we need

to stop in these midterm elections. >> thank you, mr. lance, i'll give you 30 seconds. >> yes, nancy pelosi would not put up the bill i favored. mr. malinowski supports nancy pelosi in the five contested races in new jersey this year, all of the other democrats have said they would not support nancy pelosi for speaker. mr. malinowski refused to do that and i certainly think moving forward we should protect medicare and not rob it of $700 billion as was done under obamacare. >> i'll let you get your thoughts on nancy pelosi and then we'll move on. 30 seconds. >> you know, it sometimes feels there's a republican campaign school that teaches candidates that the answer to every question should be noun, verb, nancy pelosi and i think it's one reason people are sick of politics in this country of the the vote for speaker is important, i'm not for or against anybody. i've said i will only vote for a speaker who will help me deliver for new jersey, put a bill on the floor of the house to restore our property tax

deductions, who will help us fund the gateway tunnel. i can deliver a speaker like that, congressman lance cannot make the same promise. there's not a single republican candidate for speaker who will help us with those issues. >> would you like to reply? go ahead, 30 seconds. >> that's not accurate, i said i would only vote for a speaker on gridlock, and gateway tunnel and dtsdz let me repeat. might be cheryl, andy kim, josh welly and jeff van drew said they would not vote for nancy pelosi for speaker and that's not true ever mr. malinowski. >> we'll get to that later, and the gateway transportation. for now let's go over to john mooney founding member of nnj spotlight. the first question from the social media posts. >> hi, how are you? these debates are getting a lot of attention on-line and behind me in the news room, monitoring

is lot of it. in addition, nj spotlight and news reached out to readers and viewers and getting ideas on the platforms, get some suggestions for questions. a big topic at that came up was the financial squeeze of living in new jersey and one question reflective of that came from roger johnson, an undecided voter in district 7. retired teacher. he's worried about his own children who can't aspire to own a house anymore. with housing costs so high, house ownership is beyond the reach of many citizens. what are your plans to make home ownership more affordable. >> thank you, john. mr. lance, we'll go to you first, 60 seconds. we have to do a better job in new jersey on the cost of government in this state. we have far too many jurisdictions, both municipal jurisdiction and school boards. there should be greater consolidation and that's one of

the principal reasons our property taxes are so high. also in new jersey, i believe that we have to do a better job regarding bringing federal aid back to this state and that's why we have to, would in a bipartisan capacity to do that, it seems to me that bipartisanship will be the way forward in this area. in regard to senior citizens we have to preserve medicare so they can continue to live in new jersey and of course we cannot take $700 billion out of medicare based on obamacare. i am the author of the amendment that prohibits the state barring voter approval and that is expenditures on the state level which in in return look at the cost of living in new jersey. >> mr. malinowski, 60 seconds to you, how would you make home

ownership more affordable? >> it's a crisis in the state of new jersey. it's home ownership, it's the cost of college education, cost of transportation, it's the cost of living across the board and the federal government is not helping us. we're getting back 74 cents from every dollar that we send to washington. and the loss of deductions ma i cans it much worse. the critical step we have to take next year is to make sure that congress restores those deductions. now, the republican leadership and the house of representatives, kevin mccarthy, the likely next speaker who congressman lance does support has made it clear under no circumstances will the house do that under republican leadership. this is absolutely the critical issue facing us in new jersey today. and the only way that bipartisan legislation to address the needs of our state can come forward in the future

congress is if we elect a democratic majority. >> follow-up for both of you, but mr. lance, the house did recently vote to make that permanent, the $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions. and monmouth university poll found your district nearly half of the residents expect their tax bills to increase. so how will you work to restore the deduction. >> i would continue to work on that and the new congress in my judgment in the house will pass that because of the problem solvers and to break the gridlock. i will not vote for any speaker who would not bring to the floor co-sponsored by a majority of democrats and republicans. number two, the bill in the house passing, it has no chance in the senate. >>le number three what we need most of all is an advocate in

the senate in the united states on the republican side and why i support bob hugen. and in the tri state, new york, connecticut and new jersey there's no senator in the public of the united states and we advocate this for the house of representatives, we need a republican in the senate to help with republicans from across the country in the senate for our point of view regarding thought. >> mr. malinowski, same question to you. you've said you'll work to restore the deduction how? >> well, we need to do is to elect a majority in the house of representatives that degrees with us, that the salt reduction should be restored. this is not very complicated. politics in the house of representatives is a team sport. the speaker, the chairs of the various committees. the leadership controls the agenda and the next speaker of the house of representatives, as i mentioned, if the republicans maintain their majority, will be a guy named kevin mccarthy who believes that paul ryan was too

conciliatory with democrats who has stated repeatedly he does not believe that the salt deduction should be restored. we could take a circuitous route as congressman lance suggests and create new rules that enable fewer republicans to rebel against their leadership and be done or elect a majority that agrees with us. that's the simpler and more available approach. that's what we can achieve in the 7th congressional district because we're one of the swing districts that will determine who controls the house. >> mr. lance, i'll give you 30 seconds to respond. >> yes, yes, i'm sorry that mr. malinowski dismisses the work of the problem solver caucus and breaking the gridlock and urge all constituents to examine that. that's why i'm supported by no labels in this campaign. the preeminent bipartisan group in washington. let me repeat, the real issue

is to get it through the senate of the united states and to do that we need a strong republican foist for huge and that we have. >> mr. malinowski, would you like to reply? >> maybe you should run for senate, congressman, you keep talking about that race. this is a choice between congressman lance and myself what kind of house of representatives we are going to have and what leadership this district is sending to the house of representatives. and whether we can ensure that that body sends to the senate and sends ultimately to the president a bill that gets this done for the state of new jersey. congressman lance has failed to stop the passage of the tax bill last year. he failed to stop the passage of the bill to make it permanent. in fact, he helped his leadership out by voting for a rule that prevented his own amendments. that's time. >> to restore the-- >> mr. lance, 30 seconds. we have a bicamerral

legislature, that's why we need bob hugen in the senate of the united states. simply put to have legislation pass the house is not good enough. it has to pass the senate as well. >> let's move on from there. let's talk about, mr. lance, you brought up earlier some government programs. this is for both of you. social security, medicare and medicaid are based on a compact with the government. does the government have a responsibility to honor that deal at any costs? >> the government absolutely has a responsibility to honor the deal it made with seniors in the country. these are not entitlement programs, these are not social programs, social security and medicare in particular, these are programs we paid into and there was a promise made to us that we would get the benefits we earned. now, we have to make sure that these programs are viable going forward into the future. medicare, another 10 or 12

years, we could hit a crisis point. one of the things that i would like to do if i'm elected, that would help medicare, is to give it the opportunity. give it the legal right to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for the price of prescription drugs. the price of prescription drugs is going through the roof. this is the cost of another living crisis that we would face. it would also save medicare money in the long-term to make that reform that president trump would promise he would pursue in the campaign in 2016, and it would extend the viability of that all important promise to our seniors. >> mr. lance, same question to you, i'd like your thoughts on mr. malinowski's proposal about negotiating those costs. >> absolutely social security and medicare are programs because the american people have paid into those programs and we have to protect them. and of course, under obamacare, medicare was robbed of 700 billion dollars and that's no way to protect medicare. regarding medicaid, and you did

mention medicaid as well. i favored the expansion of medicaid, that has been helpful in new jersey under obamacare, every state was supposed to expand medicaid, but the supreme court of the united states ruled that as unconstitutional. new jersey was one of 31 states to expand medicaid, done by a republican governor chris christie and democratically controlled legislature. and certainly i have fought in washington for funding for that medicaid expansion. regarding the cost of drugs, i think a principal culprit is pbm's and we have to reform pbm's and i also think we have to get much tougher with other nations that in effect do not contribute for the cost of research and development and the american people are in effect paying for research and development in the pharmaceutical industry and that's not fair fot -- to the american people. got to stop you there. >> a follow-up. mr. malinowski you talked about

keeping this solvent. would you support raising the retirement age to do so? >> no, and this is the difference between us, congressman lance proposed raising it further. it's being raised right now based on an agreement that was made years ago. he supports raising it even further. and i think that's a really bad deal for the american people, particularly folks who are working in jobs that require heavy physical labor. tell it to a steel worker, the way we are going to save this system, which politicians have mismanaged in washington is that they have to work two, three or four years longer in the future. and again, this is coming from the same people who are telling us that somehow, this deficit has been created, somehow we are looking a trillion dollar deficit as far as the eye can see. well, we know why, it's because of the tax bill that they passed and their solution to that is to cut social security and medicare and medicaid.

how do we know that? they honestly say that, mitch mcconnell told us that this week. that's the threat to social security and medicare today that i am determined not to allow to happen. >> mr. lance, same question to you. >> mr. malinowski is not running against mitch mcconnell, he's running against me and i favor preserving social security and medicare. in 1985, i believe, president reagan, a strong republican and tip o'neill, a strong democrat speaker of the house, passed a bill that raised the retirement bill gradually for people my age and mr. malinowski's age not anybody close to retirement. gradually from 65 in four month increments to 67. 65 and 4 months, 65 and 8 months, 66. and depending on your cohort, you can retire with full benefits at 65, 66 or the top age of 67.

i would raise that for teenagers and people in their young 20's perhaps a year or two and the reason i say that, when social security was enacted in 1935, the age expectancy in this country was 61. the age expectancy now in this country is roughly 80. >> got to stop you there. candidate to candidate questions you each prepared. we did a coin toss earlier to determine who would go first. mr. lance, you will ask your question first. >> thank you very much. mr. malinowski, you and i have a fundamental disagreement on the iranian nuclear agreement and i recognize that this is based upon our views of policy, and i think the people of this congressional district and the people of new jersey have a right to recognize that i was a strong opponent of the iranian nuclear agreement and you were a strong proponent of it. i do not think it was in the national security interest of the united states, i do not think it was in the national

security interest of our closest allies. billions and billions of dollars were given to the iranian government, unfrozen, and at least 1.7 billion dollars was given. palates of cash in the dead of night. can you guarantee, mr. malinowski, that none of that funding went for terrorism against the united states or against our closest allies? >> well, thank you for the question. i've spent much of my career, as you know, congressman lance, working to protect the national interest and the national security of this country. no one takes these issues more seriously than i do. for years, under both republican and democratic administration, it was our highest objective with respect to iran to end that country's nuclear program. over the years both the bush and obama administrations mobilized sanctions, mobilized the international community and we reached an agreement that the head of the israeli defense

forces said set back iran's nuclear program by over ten years. and it was not a perfect deal. there were flaws in the deal. it did not do enough to counter iran's support for terrorism. it did not do enough to counter iran's other maligned activities in the region. here is what happened in the last year. ... you've no plan to resolve that problem. >> your question to mr. lance. >> congressman, you speak a lot about your partisanship. you tout your membership and the problem solvers caucus pick it

many times to and you've argued that in the future congress which will more democrats come something you seem to favor, thank you, that caucus will more influence over policy. here's what puzzles me about that. your party right now has a 23 seat majority in the house of representatives. the problem solvers caucus has 24 republican members. you have the power right now as a caucus to control the agenda of the house of representatives. you could pass that break the gridlock rule right now. you could write not use that 244 votes in the problem solvers caucus to pass moderate responsible health-care legislation, universal background checks for gun purchases come something on assault desert you. arrange about marsupials that a been languishing. why don't you use that influence now? if he can't use it now why do you think you'll be able to use any future? >> first of all you didn't

answer my question, and certainly a good deal of money that we gave to the iranians was used for terrorism against the united states and i think you should admit that. the problem solvers caucus will be more effective in the neutral because where the controls congress it will be by a narrower margin. most important of all in the problem solvers caucus is the break the gridlock proposal which would mean bipartisan legislation will be able to come to the floor of congress get out of not vote for a speaker does not agree to break the gridlock. i urge you to examine that and hope you might be able to endorse that. >> you have more time if you'd like to finish. >> my record of bipartisanship is well known. i have been ranked the 13th most, most bipartisan member of the house of representatives, 13 out of 435 and the top 3%. josh gottheimer, my colleague from bergen county has been ranked eighth. i think it's no accident he and

i are the only members of new jersey delegation in the problem solvers caucus. >> let's talk about trade. mr. malinowski, , the deal to replace nafta called usmca now, has been agreed upon by the u.s., mexico and canada but still requires approval from congress. supporters tout domestic job growth. opponents say who don't be too higher cost for consumers and said majorie leader mitch mcconnell indicated a boat will not take place until next year. if elected what you deal? >> i think this is been a really interesting and disturbing episode. president trump railed against the north american free trade agreement. effectively declared war on one of our closest allies and partners in the world, canada, even as he cozied up to kim jong-un and other dictators around the world calling this the worst radio ever negotiated. and then they negotiated a deal is basically 99% the same as

nafta. this is theater. i think americans have enough of this theater, enough of this drama. in the meantime diseases, consumers are living in a state of anxiety about the future of the economy and what does trade war that the president keeps starting and stopping and starting and stopping is going to mean. and to all of this time the united states congress has been absolutely nothing. there are indeed moderate republican members who felt congress should gain the right to approve the steel tariffs and other terrorist before they would be imposed and hurt american consumers but everything by person, nothing happens. >> mr. lance come same question to you. would you support the new deal, the usmca as it is called the? >> yes. i'm likely to support it. i would of course want to read it in its entirety. i am by nature and by political philosophy a free trader and i'm pleased an agreement has been reached. let me say, however, think with

the much tougher on china and i've observed this in washington and i think the chinese got away with action that is completely inappropriate not only regarding the dumping of steel and other matters but also in intellectual property rights. i hope as we move forward with free trade and new jersey is a a free trade state and i am an eisenhower republican who believe in free trade but we have to be much tougher with china and i think this administration is attempting that. i hope it is successful. ultimately the end goal however to be free trade. >> let's move onto foreign policy. senior correspondent david crews put together a background explain a piece on the issue. >> the president as ratchet up the trade war with china announcing tariffs on $200 billion with a chinese the chinese products. china responded with $60 billion in tariffs on u.s. products.

monitor policy still the bone of contention, these economic powers seem headed for lingering economic cold war. with the randy administration has got the obama era nuclear deal and is hoping your sanctions or force tehran back to the bargaining table. north korea securing a denuclearization deal and unifying the peninsula will take more than just love from the leaders of these two long-term adversaries. u.s. sanctions against russia starting to hurt the economy and severe measures are expected next month. for the complicated relationship that is already under scrutiny by the special counsel. saudi arabia to elicit international flashpoint as of the kingdom or the u.s. this week not to impose sanctions over the disappearance of the saudi journalist. turkey says was murdered by saudi agents. >> given all of that, mr. malinowski which u.s. foreign relationship requires the most

immediate attention? >> well, i think as of today we are all focused on this very dysfunctional relationship with that was saudi arabia. for many years which was brought into stark relief by the apparent brutal murder of an american resident, a journalist jamal khashoggi who was lowered into the embassy, the saudi embassy in turkey. when i was in the state department helped convince president obama to suspend arms sales to saudi arabia that were being used in the brutal war in yemen am one of the first decisions, one of the worst decisions this administration may what came into office was to restore those arms sales. now it seems the president is going to give credence to the ridiculous denials that are coming from the saudi government. it's extremely important that we set a very tough precedent that you cannot do this hereto cannot

reach out to the sort of another country we have a lot of people living in new jersey and in the united states who are critics of governments around the world and we cannot allow them to be killed. >> same question to you. which u.s. one relationship is the most immediate attention? >> the most dangerous place on earth i believe is north korea. and when the obama administration left office there had been no progress in that area at all and i believe president obama said to present electron that would be the most serious area. do i think we will be successful in north korea? i don't know. i'm glad we are engaged there, but i'm very cautious. i believe in the flossie ronald reagan trust but verify and so i do not hope, i do not know whether it will work. i hope it will work but i'm under no illusion that that is a sure thing. regarding saudi arabia we should not continue with the agreement and this is appalling and

congress is outraged by this and there have been statements by quite a few people including lindsey graham, for example, of south carolina. finally, let me say regarding russia, i believe deeply in the russian sanctions. we passed that. the president signed into law, perhaps reluctantly but certainly that is a difficult as well. >> if i can you correctly, north korea would be where your most immediate attention spitted most immediate but, of course, saudi arabia is a terrible situation as up-to-date. >> we have another social media question so lets let's it backr to the newsroom where john mooney is standing by with that for us. >> another topic that's coming up a lot in the paste the discussion doing right now and as climate change and the urgency of the crisis and what's going to happen to address it. a recent international report that talked about dire

consequences as soon as the next decade or two. this this is a concern of one or readers, theodore chase, a former or retired biochemistry professor from rutgers and he worries that his children, grandchildren and the earth will inhabit. his question is quick and to the point. what's the first thing congress should do about global warming? >> would like quick and to the point. mr. malinowski, let's go to you first, 62nd. >> climate change is a threat to the planet. our failure to confront it is also missing a tremendous economic opportunity. i want the united states to lead the world to a clean energy future, not china. there are two different ways to approach is. one way is the regulation, compelling energy emitting companies to lower their inhibitions and understand that most of the private sector does like that. the alternative is to use market incentives, a cap-and-trade

plan, a carbon seat that would place a market price on carbon that would eventually return to the american taxpayers in the form of a rebate. president obama proposed first one and then the other. congressman lance said no to both. he will say he's for solar energy and for wind and all these things. so am i, so you come so is everybody but what are we doing about it in the congress if we are rejecting every alternative that has been presented that my quick? >> mr. lance? >> i am a member of the climate change caucused in the house of representatives. i believe in climate change. i believe in science at a think this is a serious issue. i favor a strategy of all of the above, wind, solar, nuclear. half of the power in the state comes from nuclear. regarding the atlantic coast, this is an ideal area for wind farms off our coast.

however, mr. malinowski and i do disagree, i do not favor a carbon tax. i think the people of the united states are taxed far too much. i believe that is not in the best interest of the american taxpayer. i think we can get to where we need to be by these alternative sources of energy, recognizing they are important in the tax could make as we move forward with wind, solar and let me repeat regarding nuclear energy we integers up a lot too much a greater extent than other state states. >> mr. malinowski our give you 30 seconds to respond to the carbon tax. >> he said exactly what i predicted he would say. he said he favors nuclear and wind and solar, you are a member of congress get what he doing to favor those things? >> tax credit. >> tax credits are not going to get us to the point of speedy i don't favor a carbon tax. >> you don't seem to favor anything that sears economists have told us might meet the

targets we need to avert the catastrophe that is looming. it's quite pathetic frankly. >> mr. lance? >> we are overtaxed and the scotch and i do not favor a carbon tax. i do think being the best interest of the united states and i hardly consider it that. >> let's move onto the top of this been a big issue across the country but also for your district. mr. lance, in 2012 he voted to allow licensed gun carriers from other states to bring firearms into new jersey but you recently voted against the concealed carry reciprocity act. how do you explain the change? >> that was based upon the fact that after hurricane sandy a person came into new jersey, a good samaritan, to help us and had a weapon that was legally purchased another state and i thought it was unfair that person should be arrested. i do favor gun control and that's what i had been endorsed by gabby giffords because when

my proudest endorsements, gabby giffords and her husband and their organization. possible to have gun safety laws and at the same time strongly support the second amendment. i do not believe they are mutually inconsistent. for example, i do not favor concealed carry voter recently that way. this is well beyond the sandy era. i favor background checks anything that's the most important piece of legislation we can past. it's not as the thompson-king bill. i am a republican sponge of the bill. congressman thompson is a democrat from california, congressman king of republican from a pilot and i'm confident we can move forward with that. i also believe in repealing the dickey amendment speedy that's tom, thank you. >> -- which should examine -- >> mr. malinowski, 30-second straight black. >> as we are speaking you tonight that our children telling their parents across this district about the life

shooter drills girls they encor today. it started with the sandy hook massacre in connecticut when those children were killed in their elementary school. when that happened those parents pleaded with you, congressman, cleaved with congress to do something in 2012. you oppose universal background background checks picu post a ban on assault rifles. you opposed every single sensible measure. what exchange? you are afraid of losing an election. >> time but it do have a follow-up if you say you were in favor of the strong gun-control reforms. what one piece of legislation would you prioritize? >> there are a number things we have to do. universal background checks is one of them. returning to the ban on military style assault rifles that with saving lives in america in the 1990s and then in an age of purchase for weapons. limiting the amount of ammunition people could buy. i shall not be able to go to a gun show and bought enough ammo to equip an army company. these are sensible steps that

the vast majority of american support. even that universal background check that congressman lance now in this effort to survive this race is saying that he supports, has absolutely no chance of passage if the republicans retain the majority. if you think the problem solvers caucus could do it, congressman, you could do it right now. you have 24 members who could force a vote on that bill right now that they are not with you, you cannot do this. i can't. >> 30-second. >> this congress has passed gun-control legislation that the democratic control caucus did not pass. fix nics. when barack obama was first president of the democrat controlled the house overwhelmingly in the senate by 60 votes, the obama administration did not bring forward the assault weapons ban because it would not have passed the senate. and so i think we should work in areas where we can be effective

and i believe the next most effective step is the background check, eliminating the gun show loophole and i'm committed to doing that. mike is a based upon my views, not based upon political consideration. >> mr. malinowski, one more rebuttal, 32nd. >> you were not for any of those things until you got afraid of losing reelection to contact in your past campaigns you proudly campaigned on your opposition to universal background checks into everything that you now say you are for, the dickey amendment languish in energy and commerce committee which you sit on comforters. >> that's now law. >> it's the lot after the parkland massacre. why did you act on it after the massacres that took place -- >> i am so proud of us apart by gabby giffords and i think she is the person who is the important person in this area. >> i was endorsed by the brady campaign to end gun violence and have the support of moms demand action, all of the gun activist interdistrict who are canvassing for me and demonstrate outside

your office every single wednesday because congressman, they know your record. >> my record i'm proud of and i'm so proud the gabby giffords who's the leader in the nation on this issue has endorsed mr. chee recognizes we need bipartisan cooperation on this issue. >> thank you both. let's move on to transportation. mr. lance, first question to you. it's unclear if federal funding will be granted to continue the gateway tunnel. since congress has been unable to shore up the financial commitment, where would you look to find at the money? >> first of all i am one of those responsible for $500 million in the appropriations bill for the gateway tunnel. i get an enormous amount of credit to my colleague congressman, the chairman of the appropriations committee. i personally defended that portion of the appropriations bill in the house of representatives went a colleague from north carolina wanted to strip it out of the bill and i'm proud of that fact.

gateway fund has to come from several sources. it has to come from the federal government and when i was in the white house i've been in the white house precisely twice in the trump presidency, once fighting for gateway funding another time in opposition to health care bill. it has to come from the federal government, from the state of new jersey, trenton, the state of new york, albany, the port of new jersey and york and i think that will occur and it will occur because i think these forces should come together. no one source will be responsible but it is the source on the various entities i have described. >> mr. malinowski, it's a $30 billion project project, the town itself cost $13 billion. would you favor a public-private partnership to get the funding it though and exchange the repayment we need to come in the form of tolls and fees on commuters? >> i favor the deal that was reached under which the federal government is supposed to provide 50% of the funding.

we do not give up on that in new jersey just because we have a president who wants to break the deal. we elect a a congress that is going to fight for it. we did get a little bit of money in the budget last year to start the process of paying for this time and congressman lance is correct that we got it primarily because congressman feeling house and is now the chairman of the appropriations committee which writes that budget. he is retiring, getting up into the republicans retain the majority, and next chair of that all-important committee that will decide this question will be some either from texas, oklahoma, or alabama. those are the candidates. we are not going to get federal funding for the gateway tunnel if we reelect the leadership that congressman lance supports in the united states congress. >> mr. lance, 30-second. >> yes. i am hopeful that the new chairman of the appropriations committee might be caucus the goal of oklahoma and is a perfectly reasonable man.

he's been in my own residence in new jersey and i think you'd be favorably disposed to helping us. i do not discover against members of congress based upon the geographic location. i i am a proud believer in bipartisan cooperation and in treating each member of congress as an individual regardless of where he or she may come from. i believe congressman company would listen to our point of view. >> we need to move on from there. let's talk about politics here mr. malinowski, how would a democratic congress function differently to accomplish national goals than the current republican congress with a republican also in the white house? >> first of all we would repeal what is known as the has to rule which is one of the recent for the gridlock that has taken place in the house of representatives -- pastored. rule republican majority has embraced this has you cannot even get a vote on the bill

unless a majority of the republican caucus for. that gives the tea party republicans effectively veto power over everything. we will not govern in that way because it is in our interest as democrats to move bipartisan legislation forward. i'll tell you why. because the big threat to our country now and, frankly, a big threat to the democratic party is the cynicism that is so pervasive in our country about the ability of congress and the government to get things done. it will be in our interest to pass bills which this congress has been unable to do apart from the tax bill that couched new jersey. >> mr. mr. lance comes to you, e says he's only way to maintain a check on executive ajman the opposing party in the majority in congress. >> no, of course not. each of us is a member of congress should be a check and where i disagreed with the president i did get to pick if

nancy pelosi, she's among the most partisan person in washington. proof of this is when nancy pelosi was speaker of the house, republican bill said that come to the floor, for example, the healthcare bill that i favor. regarding bipartisanship i've always tried to be bipartisanship, the 13th most bipartisan member of congress and in a debate, mr. malinowski accused the republican party in washington, d.c. i'm debating whether or not it is a white nationalist party. one of the most appalling statements i've heard in public life if that is no way forward and bipartisanship or i would never accuse the democratic party of any such action related in any way. we should treat each other in congress as we should treat each other as americans, civilly and respectfully, that of course is what i always conducted myself. >> mr. malinowski, 30 seconds. mr. lance was referring to a

form at the gateway regional chamber of commerce that happened in clark, 30 seconds. >> of course. and i was very clear in that, that would never attribute those kinds of sentiments to you, congressman lance, or to the vast majority republicans i meet in the district. i can endorse recently by several elected republican officials in the district. by to say there's no debate went after all the president is republican and he is praised white nationalist in charlottesville and complained about white genocide going on around the world, and said that people were against confederate moderates, confederate monuments are threatening the culture of our country come to say there's no debate come to die is an issue is -- to deny -- is to not be in a position to anything about. >> thirty seconds and we need to move on. >> mr. malinowski did not make it all clear at the gateway chamber of commerce debate whether or not he was referring to me.

he may have clarified later but there's not as much of the gateway chamber of congress. let me say it's no way forward regarding bipartisanship i tried it treat all cards in washington with respect they deserve as i try to treat all residents in this congressional district with the respect they deserve. that is why felt 47 town hall meetings, more than any other member of caucus in new jersey, was at all members of congress taken together. >> that's time. thank you. 30 seconds, mr. malinowski. >> i did make that clear. because not talked about the new jersey republican party and i think we can it be in a state of denial about the sources that incivility in our country today. the president of the united states is a role model. children hear what he says, and honestly, congressman come when it comes to checks and balances, it's not enough if you're a member of congress to say you disapprove. that's not a check. that's not a balance.

congress has constitutional responsibility to act and it is not doing so. >> thank you. mr. lance, what letter grade would you give president trump and why? >> i would give him a b. i believe that he is doing a better job fighting isis. i favor moving our embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. i'm much more strongly pro-israel than mr. malinowski. but i've been critical of the president in several areas, and regarding that can washington i have been critical of the president tweeted inappropriate i was critical charlottesville. i'm also critical of the written statements of hillary clinton and of eric holder. that is no way forward. i do believe firmly that we should always be civil and respectful of each other. hillary clinton said civility after this election and i thought it was an appalling statement. the president is the leader of

the country and he certainly should be more civil, so should democratic leaders as the. >> thirty seconds, mr. malinowski. >> to suggest there's an equivalent is again an example of congressman lance state of denial. there are not democratic leaders are calling women horse face. there are not democratic leaders who failed to distinguish between white supremacist and the patriotic americans republicans and democrats who demonstrate against him. we have a problem and we are not going to address that problem by simply occasionally disapproving and sang all, i wish he wouldn't tweets much. this is a much deeper problem that requires leadership in the house of representatives and in congress. >> we will move on to immigration. mr. malinowski, this question is for you. would you support funding for it while on the southern border in exchange for that the citizenship for daca recipient? >> no, don't believe we should hold these children hostage to

build a wall that we don't need. have you ever heard of a 30-foot ladder? it's preposterous. so president trump can keep it campaign promise he made that we forced the german people who have given everything to this country, some of whom have served in the military, that we should hold their fate hostage to that. i think it's terribly wrong. we would not have this problem if the united states congress so for years ago had not failed to pass the dream act and congressman lance, you were one of the republicans in a partyline vote who voted against the greenback. you helped create this problem that we are now trying to dig our way out of with these ridiculous negotiations over a wall. past a a clean bill to protect these kids and then we should have bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, but set aside the daca kids, please. >> the trump administration did recently capped the permitted number of new refugees entering

the u.s. to 30,000. is that an appropriate number? >> i think the number should be higher than that, and let me say regarding the issue of immigration, i am a sponsor of a clean dream act but i do not think that were passed in the senate of the united states. the bill i think is most likely to pass is a compromise bill that leads to greater for security, not the building of the wall but greater border security. a republican from texas and a a democrat from california, and cosponsor of that bill. i favor a path to citizenship for dreamers to give a greater border security, not a wall. and regarding the parents of gamers who came here illegally, i favor the path to legalization but not to citizenship. as someone who is in washington who understands the dynamics of

both the house and the senate, as i hope i do, the way forward is a compromise bill, greater border security, not a wall, and a path to citizenship for the dreamers. >> mr. malinowski, i will go too far response. >> we hear this defeatist attitude from congressman lance a lot. we shouldn't try to do something in the house unless it passes, less we know passed the senate. he has, in fact, been rated the 13th 13th most bipartisan member of congress but it's also true he's been rated the fifth least effective member of congress and i think exactly why. >> mr. lance? >> that's an appalling statement. that was my left wing blogger that is going out of business. it's really not any best interest of public policy make such a statement. i was rated the 13th most bipartisan member of congress by the lugar center at georgetown. that's quite different from a left-wing blogger who no longer

exists. >> mr. malinowski? >> i can't think of a single piece of legislation you've gotten through the congress to i can think of a single thing that us that is change in the united states of america or for the people of our district on healthcare, on gun violence, on immigration, uninvited, the gateway tunnel because of something you did, congressman. you have renamed a post-office. that was one bill you past your this is a serious question. we are electing somebody needs to fight for us and i don't see a lot of fight in you in the united states congressman pearce we need to change that if we want to get results. >> quickly, 30-second. >> regarding the rename the post office, i have passed and the to help out. i passed the breast cancer cancr education act. i passed the anti-scamming act. i have passed a billion dollars for chip for children puerto rico after the horrible hurricane there. i have passed major pieces of

legislation, and the opioid package that is passed and also reached the president desk. i was responsible for the bill fighting opiates as relates to infectious disease. >> mr. lance, this question to you about women's health that you propose splitting plan. into two organizations have one edges with women's health services and another to perform abortion services. do you still stand by that proposal? >> i would hope that would be the case but it probably will not but i think that would end the controversy. let me say that i support funding for women's health services. i would prefer that it be through qualified health centers but when the bill came back to us in the house from the senate i voted for that. there were a bunch of republicans who did not but i'm one of those republicans who voted for that funding. i would hope moving forward that we can continue with these essential programs and that is how i have voted for planned parenthood but but i would have

preferred that funding go to qualified health care centers. there are four more qualified health care centers in this congressional district and across the nation and our planned parenthood facilities. >> thirty-second. >> that's not not to the plan. so the only organization that provides vital services, cancer screenings, contraceptive care to women in many parts of our congressional district. you say you know the district like the back of your hand. you should know that. you did vote again and again and again to deny funding to planned parenthood. this preposterous idea that they should split into two organizations to give yourself an easier time politically to vote on this issue, it certainly is that on arrival with what we need to do is to support reproductive health care. >> it's time now for your closing statements. the order was determined earlier and mr. malinowski you local first. >> thank you so very much for

this pacitti debate that we've had. there is a lot of noise out there as it is in every election. election. the a ridiculous negative ads that are being funded by super p pacs of people just are opportunities rather than watch. this is an important election and every election is about choice. we've seen in the last few days the republican leadership in the congress has been very honest, and to give them credit, about what a vote for them would mean. number one, they will try to review before it will correct again. at this time john mccain is not there to cast the dividing and tax -- deciding about 50 want to make the tax will permit and make a whole in the national budget they could buy rating salsa good medicare. there will be no checks and balances. congressman lance and do nothing about any of those things that we can do something in the southern congressional district. we can elect the congressman who has a record of effectively fight in the united states

congress and a congress that will agree with new jersey on the major issues of the day. >> thank you. >> mr. lance. >> thank you. i run for reelection based upon the record of service over the last ten years. i've run for reelection based upon my nose of the district. mr. malinowski parachuted into this district a year ago to run for congress, , never having lid in the district before. he's a complete and total carpetbagger. his views are far to the left of the majority of the residents of this congressional district. the majority of the congressional district who believe in centrism, best government is from the center out. that is what i'm so proud of my responsibilities and the problem solvers caucus come out of my responsible for moving forward with a new speaker on break the gridlock, making sure we work together in a bipartisan capacity that will require continued civility as i've always conducted myself and certainly i believe that my

views are the views of the majority of the residents of this congressional district. ask for continued support and i'm confident and optimistic about the future of this country. we can and will work together to create a better america. >> thank you leonard lance, tom malinowski. that concludes our seventh congressional district debate.

>> now a debate in the race in pennsylvania's newly redrawn u.s. 17 house district between democratic representative conor lamb and republican congressman keith rothfus. this is one hour. they note. >> congressional map changed but the