tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN October 13, 2016 12:00am-2:01am EDT
put these right-wing social ahead of thees best interest of our citizens. that is where he and i differ. chuck todd: we're going to take a quick break here for a public service announcement. when we come back, we will have questions on policing democrat on justice ♪ >> so many call north carolina home. 300 miles ofoy pristine beaches and some of the countries most beautiful old growth hardwood forests as an mountain tops, from the coast to the mountains and everywhere in between, broadcasters and north carolina are prior to provide free over the air programming that educate, in forms, and entertains.
the north carolina association of broadcasters leads in the nation on educating the public and businesses about the use and values of broadcasting. through the nose carolina association of special through the north carolina association -- through the north carolina association of broadcasters, they are prior to make tonight debate possible. and we are back here live with the two candidates for north carolina. governor patrick worry and attorney general roy cooper. earlier this month, you were quoted saying the state crime providing service. should voters be concerned about your management skills because we have got these wait times? this is an issue about leadership, finding a
problem, excepting responsibility for that problem and solving it. we had years of shoddy investigation. i ordered the independent investigation and made sure that we got rid of that backlog and works to major all of our scientists were certified in the lab. it is providing good service across our state. when you are talking about crime mccrory was mayor of charlotte when they had a crime lab, and they destroyed , manyds of dna rape kits of them in open cases, and governor mccrory did not fix the problem. mayor's left the
office, it was still happening. i am sure we are going to hear him blame it on summary else like he usually does. chuck todd: mr. mccrory, 60 seconds. roy cooper: patrick mccrory: the reason charlotte had its own crime lab is because attorney general cooper could not do their job. not only did charlotte have to have its own crime, fayetteville is going to build its own crime lab. greensboro is going to have its own crime lab. wise r dale county thinking of getting a crime lab? are dale county thinking of getting a crime lab ? they are tired of waiting for you. how are you going to handle all of state government? it has been a disaster. he talked to sheriff's, one of the reasons they say you do not have a backlog is that you contracted it out. now the contractors have backlog. if you talk to any lawyer who has gotten his grip in the dwi, no problem.
it will take a half a year or a year to get the blood tests back. they love the crime lab just as it is. chuck todd: 30 seconds. roy cooper: another distortion. the charlotte crime lab was started in 1969, so governor mccrory is trying to blame somebody else. crime labs are critical. we with the north carolina state crime lab, we have put thousands of rapists and murderers in jail. they have also helped clear innocent people across north carolina. they are working hard with law enforcement every single day, and it is critical that we continue to fund them, because more and more evidence continues to come in. chuck todd: 30 seconds. gov. pat mccrory: i agree it is critical that we continue funding, and as governor, i have
asked for more funding. i have not gotten one e-mail from him requesting help from the crime lab. of course he has only sent 14 e-mails in his 16 years as attorney general. if you really wanted to improve the crime lab, you would talk to the governor and send e-mails to the legislative leaders. you have not done that. there are no e-mails saying we have got a problem, help us fix it together. roy cooper: may i respond? chuck todd: ok. i will give you 30, and give him 30 again. gov. pat mccrory: -- roy cooper: we met with governor mccrory's budget director and budget team every single time before the legislature. governor mccrory has all of a sudden become interested in the crime lab issue during these last few months. it is critical that there be resources for the state crime lab to make sure those crimes are solved. and governor mccrory has not been doing his job in providing those resources. chuck todd: final 30. gov. pat mccrory: actually, i'm the governor who got the resources for the development of western lab, because the western part of north carolina has been suffering because of the lack of productivity from your crime lab, which you have been responsible for. by the way before that, you were
, responsible for the sbi. the head of his sbi was a political appointee, basically a political hack that he hired. when i took over the sbi, i put people who had actual experience in law enforcement, not making it a political organization. chuck todd: i'm going to stay on the issue of criminal justice reform. mr. mccrory, you signed a law saying police are not required to release footage of body cameras or other technology unless there is a court order. the law would have barred charlotte police from releasing video of keith lamont scott's death as they ended up doing before the law took effect. governor, don't we need more transparency for the police? gov. pat mccrory: we have several things we need to balance, took. -- chuck. first of all, we need to balance the public interest, but we also need to balance the constitutional rights of those being investigated. i know cnbc and cnn and fox would love to show the video right away, it helps ratings,
but the fact of the matter is we , have got a criminal investigation going on right now. both the da, the sbi, and the charlotte police department have to go through an investigation. and let me correct you in your question. it does not deny the release of it, it allows a third party to make that decision. frankly, politicians should not be making that decision, whether it be a mayor, a governor, or a da. it should be an impartial judge who determines where the constitutional rights of those being investigated that are being seen in the video, versus the right of the public to know. that is exactly what this new law does. i think it is a perfect law. we are going to see some possible gaps, but it is a vast improvement. we had no rules before, and i am pleased it got bipartisan support. more democrats voted for it than anything -- chuck todd: thank you. mr. cooper. roy cooper: i am grateful to the men and women of law enforcement who served honorably and risk their lives every day to keep us safe.
i'm also mindful that there are so many committees out there who feel targeted and they yearn to be heard, and they yearn for respect. what we need is a governor who is going to work to make sure we have that mutual respect. part of mutual respect is transparency. we need to make sure that the community trusts what law enforcement is doing. that is why i said there were significant problems with this law, because i believe that the records in these videotapes should be open. clearly, there are some times when it should be kept confidential, but the presumption should be that it is public, because the more transparency you have, the more mutual respect you are going to develop. chuck todd: 30 seconds. gov. pat mccrory: this is typical roy cooper. after the law is passed, he expresses concern, the way after
the shooting, he then expresses concern. in front of it and interview, he -- in front of an interview, he says he was in favor of it, trying to get the endorsement of the federation of police. by the way, i got that endorsement, and i'm very proud to have that and the endorsement of five other major police organizations in north carolina, because i care for the victims and i also care about the person being investigated. it needs to be taken out of politics. chuck todd: thank you, mr. mccrory. mr. cooper, 30 seconds. roy cooper: i have strong approval from law enforcement across north carolina. again, governor mccrory's story is not true. what we have to do is to make sure we earn this mutual respect. law enforcement needs training, law enforcement needs support and resources. law enforcement needs to look like the communities that they protect and serve. and as governor, i'm going to be a strong law enforcement governor, but we also need to make sure our communities are
respected and that they work with law enforcement, with community policing, and other ways to make sure our communities are safer. chuck todd: thank you, mr. cooper. all of these will be 30 seconds for both of you. mr. cooper, i am going to start with you. in the first presidential debate, hillary clinton said, "i think implicit bias is a problem for everyone, including police." do you agree? roy cooper: i think police definitely need more training. i think all of us have biases that sometimes conflict with our jobs. we need training, we need to make sure that law enforcement has the resources it needs. and we also need to emphasize community policing. i think when law enforcement officers work with communities, get to know communities, i think you have safer law enforcement , and better law enforcement all the way around. chuck todd: do you accept the idea there is implicit bias? gov. pat mccrory: i think there is bias in all of us. it is not necessarily racial, it
might be bias of how we dress, how we look, the environment we might be in. those are tools for police officers to determine what action to take. what we have to do i agree with , the attorney general, we need more training for police officers, there is never enough training. as mayor of charlotte for 14 years, i helped institute community policing. community policing is vital, our police officers should get out of their cars, become problem solvers. i'm a firm believer in that. chuck todd: let me go, final 30 seconds. gov. pat mccrory: but to attack police officers the way ms. clinton did and our president has done in his first year in office was totally inappropriate. chuck todd: let me ask you both the same question. what does the term "black lives matter" mean to you? i will start with you, mr. cooper. 30 seconds. roy cooper: i think it is a statement that is true. i think what we need to do is to make sure we continue this
effort to understand that many communities of color feel targeted. they feel discriminated against. and what they want to be is heard, and what they want to be is respected. so i think there are many in law enforcement who would absolutely agree that this is something we have to do. gov. pat mccrory: i personally was an admirer of martin luther king, who believed we should be judged by the content of our character, and i think all lives should matter. it is the heart inside that matters, and we should value every single human life, but we do have to recognize the anger that communities have within how they interact with law enforcement, but at the same time, we have got to recognize the pressure of our police officers, who every day leave their family's home not knowing if they will come back. the officers who were most recently involved in shootings, they had no idea that was going to happen to them and their lives were also changed.
chuck todd: let me move here. there is obviously a lot of national politics impacting the state as well. mr. mccrory, you released a statement condemning donald trump's comments about women in the "access hollywood" video from 2005. many of your fellow republican governors went further and withdrew their support completely from the republican nominee. why didn't you? gov. pat mccrory: let me first say firstly when my parents , moved to jamestown, north carolina, my first day in class, i did not say "yes ma'am" to the teacher, and they washed my mouth out with soap. for something so minor but so important, showing respect to our teachers. sometimes, when i see the presidential candidate mr. trump, he needs to have his mouth washed out with soap, and so does ms. clinton, because the teachers said do not tell a lie, and she lies an awful lot, about the e-mails, about
benghazi, about other factors. maybe she needs to look at a bar of soap next time she does not tell the truth. we have got some character issues among the candidates, but i'm voting for the candidate that best represents my viewpoints now even though i disagree with his character traits, on issues like immigration, obamacare is a total disaster, something that the attorney general continues to praise is obamacare. it is a disaster if you are a middle class individual. chuck todd: thank you. mr. cooper. roy cooper: it is hard to believe that governor mccrory continues to support a presidential candidate who condones sexual assault, who has admitted that he has done that, who has continued to demean women. governor mccrory, this is the first time i have heard you even speak up at all about donald trump. you have gone to his rallies, made jokes about house bill 2 on stage, you -- when a gold star family was demeaned by donald trump, you did not say anything.
when women were demeaned, you did not say anything. governor mccrory and donald trump are a lot alike. they both have trouble with the facts, and they both engage in divisive rhetoric. it is not good for our state, not good for our country. chuck todd: 30 seconds. gov. pat mccrory: i don't know where that divisive rhetoric comes from. sadly we have to make some , difficult decisions. you obviously, back when you were in your first year as attorney general and state senator, you had to make some difficult decisions and vote for bill clinton. i'm sure you were uneasy about many of the things bill clinton did but you had to make a choice , and balance those character traits. i have to do the same thing, and it is a sad commentary that we both had to make those decisions. chuck todd: 30 seconds, mr. cooper. roy cooper: listen, donald trump is bad for our country, and governor mccrory continues to go across the state and attend his rallies and continues to support him. i think that is wrong.
i would call on him today to withdraw his support from donald trump, considering this type of language that is so demeaning to women and actually says that he has committed crimes. governor mccrory still supports him. it is wrong. chuck todd: a quick 30 second follow-up, mr. cooper. gov. pat mccrory: -- roy cooper: i think she is much more trustworthy than donald trump. i think that the secretary will help keep our country more safe and more secure, and she certainly is not going to be a dangerous president like donald trump, who governor mccrory supports. chuck todd: 30 seconds on this. on donald trump. is he a role model for kids? gov. pat mccrory: not his vulgar outbursts. i do not like the personal attacks. i hate it. chuck todd: does any part of him make him a role model?
gov. pat mccrory: i think what makes him a moral model is where you stand strong on certain issues that need to be said, especially from outside washington d c. the syrian refugee situation is a disaster. i have personally talked to one of the top leaders of the fbi, and they kind of laughed when they said they are checking the backgrounds of the syrian refugees. no, they aren't. there is no embassy to check. there is no qualification. when hillary clinton says they are doing a vetting process, the syrian refugees coming to our state, fbi is not even being told where they are -- chuck todd: thank you, mr. mccrory. i'm going to move to health care. mr. cooper, as you know, former president bill clinton recently referred to the affordable care act, or obamacare, as the craziest thing in the world. one of the reasons he was pointing out is the issue with the exchanges. here in north carolina, there is only one major insurer. is obamacare broken? roy cooper: the reason there is only one insurer on the exchange
is because governor mccrory and the legislative leadership have faulted having a state exchange where more people can get health insurance. they have also withdrawn money that could help educate people and could help encourage more insurance companies to become competitive. the worst thing that governor mccrory and legislative leadership has done, they have refused to accept the billions of dollars -- billions with a "b" -- that we have already paid to washington that could come back to north carolina and expand medicaid to hundreds of thousands of north carolinians. here we are again, governor mccrory putting social issues ahead of the best interest of our state. governor chris christie, governor john kasich in ohio, even governor mike pence, they all saw that expansion of medicaid in their state, even though they disagreed with the policy, helped to create tens of thousands of good paying health
jobs, helped private insurers, and governor mccrory continues to say no. chuck todd: thank you, mr. cooper. mr. mccrory. gov. pat mccrory: the blame game is coming. i have never been blamed for obamacare, this is a first. i had nothing to do with the legislation. i did try to get you to fight the legislation representing the state of north carolina, and you as attorney general refused to fight obamacare because you thought it would be fantastic for the united states of america. it has been a total failure. if you talk to any middle-class business person right now if you , talk to any family right now -- you have had a nice set up with health insurance through the state of north carolina for 26 years. your own state plan is free. you talk to someone with obamacare -- my gosh, it will cost you $20,000 to $30,000 a year. you have gotten too used to the government health insurance that you are now guaranteed until you are 65. if you feel so good about obamacare, get on it and get off the state plan we have right now.
chuck todd: 30 seconds, mr. cooper. roy cooper: it is incredible to me that with this policy already set at the federal level, that the governor cannot accept the billions in tax money we have already paid -- this is our tax money -- that could come back to north carolina and insure hundreds of thousands of people and take pressure off the small businesses, take pressure off private employers who see a benefit. the other states who have done this have seen a benefit in their insurance premiums, but governor mccrory has got to put the ideology, continue to talk about it -- gov. pat mccrory: it's ok to admit it's a failure. that is ok. by the way, i do agree in some aspect that in medicaid, we are expanding medicaid services to alzheimer's patients, those people who cannot help themselves. i want to emphasize helping those who can't help themselves.
i personally met with president obama in the white house in the oval office and encouraged him to work with us to allow us to have a north carolina plan, not a washington, d.c. plan. which you want. i'm extremely sad right now that blue cross and blue shield is the only -- chuck todd: your time is up. i will give you 30. roy cooper: we can make a north carolina plan. we can expand medicaid in a north carolina way. that opportunity is there, and for him to talk about, saying that you are not giving health insurance to people who need it, this is the perfect opportunity, with tax money that we have already paid. he continues to say no because of ideological reasons. gov. pat mccrory: you are not going to get on obamacare, you are going to keep your government plan you have enjoyed for 26 years in the state of north carolina. chuck todd: answer the medicaid question, why won't you extend it? gov. pat mccrory: we don't know what the cost would be to 10% of the taxpayers of north carolina. i think it is irresponsible to enter into something not knowing
the cost. right now, "wall street journal" articles are showing all states that he mentioned, the costs are much greater than ever anticipated. i had to inherit a $525 million missed forecast on medicaid spending from the perdue administration, and we had to fix that. chuck todd: i want to get one more topic in here before i , think we got an idea where you stand on expanding medicaid. i want to go to voter id. if you can keep your answers quick. mr. mccrory, a federal court in august 2013 said the voter id law targeted "african-americans with almost surgical precision." it has been thrown out. do you regret signing the bill? gov. pat mccrory: absolutely not. in fact one thing i would like , to compliment the attorney general on is one thing he did years ago regarding sudafed. we were having a terrible we , both agree on the issue of drug addiction. he passed a law requiring id when you get sudafed. if id is good enough for
sudafed, i think it is good enough for the people of north carolina to vote. because anyone who thinks, with tens of millions of dollars on the ground, if you do not think there is a potential for voter fraud, you are digging your head in the sand. as you know in the history of , the united states, in chicago, west virginia, texas, voter fraud occurs, and we need to do everything we can to make sure it does not happen. if you do not look for it you , are not going to find it. chuck todd: 60 seconds and this is it, so go ahead. roy cooper: the governor knows that this legislation was much broader than a voter id law. although this was the strictest in the country. it had to do with early voting, the ease of registration. when the three-judge panel in the fourth circuit said this law intentionally discriminates against minorities and students, it was time to stop, but governor mccrory continues to
use taxpayer money to pay for attorneys to continue to appeal this. of course, he lost. it is shameful for the governor to keep pushing this legislation. it is wrong for our state. chuck todd: excuse me. you are both going to get more time here in a minute for your own closing statements. that concludes all of my questions. i would have more come i promise you, if they gave us more time to do it. you both get 90 seconds for your closing statement. mr. cooper, by virtue of a coin toss, you will be first. roy cooper: thank you, chuck. thank you to the broadcasters. thank you, governor mccrory, for joining me. thank you to my wife and family who are here today and to all of you watching the debate at home. let's all remember to keep working to help the flood victims. even though we disagree on a lot of things, we agree we have got to pull together to help them. some of them are in nash county where i grew up, and i have
always been proud to call north carolina home, and i still am. but over the last two years, some things have changed that we have heard about during this debate. for decades, you could travel across this country and tell people you are from north carolina, and the questions would be about our great universities, technology, mountains, or our beaches. now the question is, what in the world is going on in north carolina? we can fix that. but the first thing we got to do is recognize the problems that we face. we have to make education a priority. 41st in the nation is not good enough. we need to get to at least the national average. and we need good jobs, governor. a governor who will work to bring better paying jobs to our state instead of driving them away with discriminatory laws like house bill 2. and we need a governor who is going to work to restore north carolina's great reputation, and i plan to do that. thank you so much. god bless you.
gov. pat mccrory: i concur that our prayers are with everyone tonight. i'm going right back to the emergency operations center to work with mike and our other team members, and our prayers are with people tonight, especially in kinston and rocky mount and greenville, up and down the tar river. this is going to be a tough next 72 hours. i would like to thank roy cooper for running for governor. it takes courage for the family to do this. i know with my family and my wife, it is an extremely hard thing to do. only a politician like roy cooper, however, would consider record job increases, record tax increases, record job creation and record teacher pay raises as a failure. this is leadership like we have never seen in three and a half years. it is leadership that we need to continue in north carolina. we cannot go back to the leadership of easley and purdue and cooper. let us continue this great progress forward because we do live in the best state in united
states of america. chuck todd: i thank you both for a very civil debate, by the way. it was wonderful. it is now up to the voters, and it is up to you. so don't forget to vote. this public service program was brought to you by the north carolina association of broadcasters educational foundation. i thank them for the privilege of moderating. i'm chuck todd from nbc news. thank you for watching. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪
>> watch c-span's live coverage of the third debate between hillary clinton and donald trump on wednesday, october 19. our live debate preview from the university of nevada, las vegas starts -- at 9:00inute debate is p.m. eastern. stay with us following the debate for viewer reaction including your cause, suite, and facebook postings. tweets, and facebook postings. download it from the app store or google play. now, republican senator mike lee in a debate with democratic challenger misty snow. this is courtesy of the utah debate commission.
from the campus of brigham young university, the utah debate commission welcomes you to the utah senate candidates debate. [applause] >> good evening. i am pleased to have been invited to moderate this debate. we are life in the studios on the campus of brigham young university for a debate between candidates for the united states senate. tonight, we'll here from the incumbent, republican mike lee, and from his democratic challenger, misty snow. we begin with each candidate making a 92nd opening statement. prior to the start of the debate, it was determined misty snow would speak first.
ms. snow: thank you very much. i would like to thank the utah commission for hosting the debate and for all of you watching this evening. my name is misty snow. i was born in the state of utah and lived my entire life in the state of utah. i have a deep connection to the state and its people and an appreciation for the history and culture of this state. i am 31 years old. will be theted, i first millennial in the u.s. senate, making the invoice for best making me a voice -- voice.me a i understand what average people all across the nation are going through on a day-to-day basis. many people throughout the country feel like congress is out of touch and no longer represents them. i believe if we want a government that truly represents working-class people, we need to elect more working-class people to government. as your senator, i will fight to
ensure that our workers have a living wage, that our children have clean air to breathe and clean water to drink, and i want to ensure our mothers have paid maternity leave, and our women are paid equally, i want to fight to get money out of politics. i am not a career politician. i am not a washington insider. i have never been to washington. i am someone who will be a new voice in congress, a voice that is needed, a voice that is currently underrepresented. a voice that will truly represent working-class people in this country. moderator: thank you. sen. lee:. thank thei want to debate commission for putting this together. it is good to be back. when iran for the senate for the first time in 2010 i promised to be a different kind of senator. i made two promises. first, i promised that i would fight every day to protect and
defend the constitution of the united states. against an increasingly dysfunctional status quo in washington. toond, i promised not only oppose bad ideas, but also to , bettergood ideas ideas. i have kept these promises. over the last six years, i have fought every single day against washington's dysfunctional status quo in all three branches of government. over the years, i have helped to ban earmarks, overturn president obama's unconstitutional recess appointments, and to end once and for all, washington's warrantless surveillance against u.s. citizens. i have also worked with democrats and republicans, liberals and conservatives to agenda, anew reform agenda with big ideas to help working-class families, big ideas including creating new
jobs, growing wages, and expanding opportunity for all americans, especially those families and communities that washington's status quo has left behind. thanks to all of you for tuning in. i look forward to our discussion tonight. moderator: thank you, senator lee. we have developed a format that allows each candidate 90 seconds to respond to each question. i will begin with this question, .ubmitted by haley winterton he goes to misty snow, first. the least involved group and politics is college aged students. the most important issue to them is being able to afford their education. what will you do to make college more affordable? someone: obviously, as who is a millennial, this is an issue i care a lot about because it has a big effect on my generation.
many people in my generation go to college, they find that college is almost unaffordable. a lot of people have been skipping going to college because they determined the costs are not worth it. they know that if they go to college, they might get their degrees, but they will leave with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. i find that unacceptable. to mcauliffe affordable. we need to make it accessible. our nation benefits from a more educated populace. what i think we should do is try to make the student loans, give them a lower interest rate. wife the federal government currently trying to make money off the backs of our students? we are charging 6% interest on areent loans, and we getting banks loans for near zero interest rates. why can't we give our students the same deal? we have a lot of grants in stop available for students who want to go to college. it might cost the government $62 billion a year, but another
report shows we could actually make state university tuition and for a cost of 75 billion dollars a year, a difference of $12 billion. i think that would be a better plan that would make college more affordable and accessible to people who are, who want to be able to choose their careers that they want instead of being forced into one. moderator: senator lee, your response. sen. lee: ms. snow and i agree in many respects. i agree for example that we are better off as a country when we have well-educated citizens, but we end up with a bigger and better tax base. everyone prospers when they have access to an affordable high-quality education. i completely agree. the federal government should not be in the business of making money off of -- my belief the federal government business of in the common during the student on industry in the first place. we created a dynamic that has resulted in twitching height.
-- tuition hikes. they collectively restrict entry into this industry. when you restrict entry and subsidize people getting access to the services offered in the industry, you hike prices. we need to increase competition in this field, a field where competition is badly lacking. that is why i have introduced the higher education reform opportunity act. it has as its purpose creating more competition in higher education, allowing the state to a credit on their own so that education or professional certification apprenticeship or rent or otherwise can also participate. one thing we know about increasing competition, two things always happen. prices tend to go down and quality tends to go up. that is what my bill would do. moderator: a follow-up question.
you agree on much of this but the follow-up is, in light of what senator lee just said, how do you view for-profit education, which has experienced some controversy with some of them having to be closed. what would you do about the for-profit sector of higher education, ms. snow? ms. snow: obviously the for-profit colleges, they are less affordable because they are trying to make a profit and i think we need, when we are talking activation, -- accre dation, we do not want them being considered equal to brigham young university. we want to have standards and i think it is important that the people who are going to college that education is worth the money they are paying. fact that some for-profit schools are bad does not mean they are all bad. nonprofits.
there are a whole lot of nonpublic schools that are good does not mean they are all good. each going to be evaluated on the basis of its results. that is as true in higher education as it is anywhere else. we need to encourage competition and that will help bring quality up and tuition down. moderator: the next question , a student aty brigham young university. andy. >> i would like to know what specific actions and legislation theou would take to address issue of climate change if you are elected to office? moderator: senator lee first. sen. lee: a big debate in our society about climate change. there can be no dispute that the climate is changing. climate change. it is what they do. they always have and they always will. some of the greatest debates ,round whether and in what way to what extent, human beings are responsible for the change in climate. even more critically, what if,
anything, we can do to change that. what i struggle with the most with this question is that every proposal i have heard of that would try to put the government in the middle of this and have the government thinks it would do little or nothing that should fix it would do little or nothing to affect climate change but threatened to devastate the economy. as president obama himself admitted a few years ago, if we a. cap -- if we adopt the cap and trade, it would cause energy prices necessarily to skyrocket. that is a backdoor invisible tax increase on the poor, the most regressive type of expense hike you can imagine. affectsproportionately poor and middle-class americans who would be stuck paying higher prices on everything they buy and would also pay for it with of womend wages, and and unemployment. the best way we can get to a cleaner environment, where we have greater efficiency is through innovation.
innovation is most likely to happen when we allow our free market economy to prosper. people will build a better power plant, if we have a free market economy in place. ms. snow: thank you very much for the question. the issue of climate change is a very important ones. despite what senator lee said, climate change is real, but even if you do not believe climate change is real, in the state of utah, we have a problem with air quality. polling shows that no state is more this satisfied with its air quality than utah, and a lot of the solution to prevent climate change are a lot of the same solutions that are needed to reduce air pollution. what i would like to propose is that our country starts making investments into clean air and energy, such as solar, wind, and greener transportation structures. the cost of not doing this is a negative impact on the health of our citizens, especially our elderly, children, pregnant mothers, and their economic cost
to those health problems. health care costs that they would otherwise spend elsewhere. the cost of not doing something is too high. i do not think it would cost too much to start making these investments. in the state of utah, we actually raised the price of gasoline by about five cents per gallon in the state of utah. most people in the audience probably did not know that until i mentioned it. it was well absorbed by the economy and most people do not notice it. we could do something like that nationwide, maybe a small tax, five cents per gallon, and that money could be used to make advancements in solar, wind, greener transportation if a infrastructure. the cost on not doing it is too high on our health and future. moderator: i will invite a rebuttal. i would like to focus it a little bit. the question is what is the role of government in legislation or
regulation? to each of you, what is the role of government in fostering innovation, which you mentioned, senator lee. are there specific role for government that you think ought to be -- sen. lee: there is a role to play. limitsent needs to set for emissions. in the case of utah, one of the things we struggle with is ozone. one of the problems that we have is that we have got these one-size-fits-all rules that of theo broad swaths country when we have unique geography that might make our si. they want to address those geographic unique aspects of our state. moderator: ms. snow. obviously, the federal government can play a very constructive role. we can start making investments into solar, into wind.
when you are talking about economics, talking about jobs, there are a lot of jobs to be created in these industries. solar energy is one of the fastest growing industries in this country. the government is trying to create investments in these industries will create new jobs and that will help spur economic growth. moderator: next question, a student. [indiscernible] areongress and the nation hostile towards each other. americans have become less and less confident in congress' ability to make laws due to widespread gridlock in both houses. will you compromise with opposition to pass bills? ms. snow: i think there are a lot of issues that resonate with the majority of people. there have been a number of laws that have passed with bipartisan support. i do not think because there is uncertain issues that you cannot find agreement on, there are issues were you can find agreement on. there is a lot of critical issues that i think are very
, such as the need for paid maternity leave is a popular issue. the united states of america is just one of two countries in the entire world along with papua new guinea that is confirmed to not offer its mother's maternity leave. 86% of people in the country support guaranteed paid maternity leave for mothers including 73% of republicans. it is a popular issue precisely because everybody has a mother, everybody knows someone who has given birth. i think we can finally ensure that our mothers in this country have access to paid maternity leave like every other country. it really just takes some people in congress to actually draft legislation to advocate for it and i think we could probably pass a bill like that with bipartisan agreement because it is an issue that resonates with a lot of people, especially coming from a state like utah which has the nation's highest birthrate. -- on a number of other issues, 90% of the senate
was an agreement on some bills. issues, i think there is a lot of agreement to be found. moderator: senator lee. sen. lee: there are, as ms. snow correctly notes, a lot of areas in which the parties are deadlocked. a are just irreconcilably in conflict. they are doing this not to be obstinate, but because the people they represent have different opinions, and people across this country have somewhat different vision. ms. snow was correct in pointing out there are a lot of other areas were that is not the case and this is one of my favorite parts about being a senator. we can find bipartisan agreement. it is one of the reasons why a few years ago, i was troubled by the fact that the federal government through the nsa was collecting data on your phone calls, everyone's phone calls, the phone calls of every single american. they knew who you call, who called you, how long he spoke. he kept it in that database for
years at a time. i started looking for allies. pat leahy is a liberal democrat rom vermont and i am very rarely described that way. he put together a bipartisan solution to this call beat usa freedom act. initially, the members of my party, the republican party, were very reluctant to go along with this. the democrats were overwhelmingly supported. eventually, we got it passed with almost all of the democrats and a must-have of the republican supporting it. president obama signed into law. question. next you are largely in agreement and i think i heard you both say you would be willing to compromise with someone from the other party so there is no reason to prolong this. some republican leaders have advocated a total shutdown of islamic operation or shutting down immigration from dangerous areas.
what are your views on this policy? moderator: this one goes to senator lee first. sen. lee: as a religious minority myself, a descendent of people who were ordered it terminated by the governor of , isouri on october 27, 1838 am against any sort of religious test. we should shun any kind of approach that says that if you belong to religion at or believe you lose access to this or that. i think we have got to push back against that anytime it happens. i also think that anytime we are talking about who we are going to allow into this country, whether it is for humanitarian reasons, economic reasons, work-related reasons, we have to be careful that we know who it is we are letting in, have a good idea of whether or not they have the potential to be good u.s. citizens, fit in well here, to abide by our values, to respect their fellow americans. and so, i think every time we
take someone in, particularly when taking refugees from a war-torn country like syria, we have got to make sure that we have procedures in place to make sure we know who we are taking in. this is especially difficult with syria because in the case of syria, they have no established reliable record keeping system, and to the extent that they had one before the current civil war, it has been badly damaged and we akened. we have to take a next her cautious effort to make sure we have something to back that up so we know who is coming in. ms. snow: i kind of agree with much of what mike lee said about religion. i do not think we should be favoring immigrants were refugees of one religion over another. it is antithetical to the values of our nation. in the first amendment, is as we shall not favor one religion , or thether cour
establishment of one religion over the other. that requiresing a lot of compassion. people are coming from syria or iraq or anywhere else, they are trying to escape a bad situation, trying to escape a cases,verty, and many certain death, from a lot of the war that is happening there, a lot of the different forces from isis and other groups not affiliated with them that are warring with each other and a lot of innocent people caught in the middle of that. i think, as a nation, we should show these people compassion. i think it is ok to accept refugees from syria and elsewhere. the united states of america does have one of the most ofingent vetting processes any nation in the world when it comes to taking refugees into our nation and their religion should not matter. our constitution protects the religion -- and to thell faiths
great diversity of our nation and it is what makes our nation what it is. moderator: you largely agree with each other in terms of the principal, but there may be some disagreement on the vetting process. are you confident the vetting process works in cases other than syria? and secondarily, would you support donald trump's position of an across-the-board prohibition for muslims? senator lee. sen. lee: second part of the question, no, heck no, absolutely not, never. [laughter] sen. lee: i cannot ever support that. the other part of your question assumes -- moderator: other than syria. sen. lee: generally speaking, we do a decent job in vetting people who come here as refugees. syria is a notable inception. isknow that isis manipulating refugee programs in western countries to carry out terrorist activity and we cannot let that happen. moderator: ms. snow, the
question about vetting, but also where you with an with mr. trump. ms. snow: donald trump is very wrong on the issue it. religious tests are antithetical to our values. syria is problematic, but the betting process -- the vetting process is very stringent. services tosecurity catch them. i have a lot of confidence on my government in this issue because it has proven to be very effective and we have had few problems with refugees coming into this nation from syria or elsewhere. moderator: thank you for your answers. >> most americans are concerned about gun violence in their communities. with the ever-increasing rash of mass shootings, many polls indicate a majority of americans favor tighter gun control laws. without denying second amendment rights, for sportsmen and individuals seeking
self-defense, and in the spirit of bipartisan compromise, what can be done in congress to address this problem? ms. snow: obviously, this is a huge issue. we have seen several mass shootings over the last year including one of the worst in our nations history in orlando back in june, so i think what we need to do, when we talk about polling, a poll from august in the state of utah for public policy polling shows that 81% of utah wants universal background checks on all gun purchases. to see people on the terrorist watchlist banned from purchases. because they are popular, i think we could get bipartisan support on that. there might be some issues with how the terrorist watch list is structured, but i think it does give us a good idea what the public wants on how to move forward on this issue. i think we can find a way to balance legitimate safety needs of our citizens without
violating the constitutional right to read on the flipside, why we are allowing people on the terrorist watchlist you buy it, we are banning people who use marijuana from being able to buy firearms. of ank it is a bit inconsistency in that we are banning people who use cannabis in accordance with their state law, but we are ok with allowing people on terrorist watchlist to buy firearms. seen a lot of leadership from mike lee on this issue. i would like to see him support marijuana and the rights of legal cannabis users to own firearms. sen. lee: i agree we should not let terrorists get guns. i agree with should not let convicted felons have access to guns. i recognize the fact that polling data often results in numbers like those that you have cited. we do have to remember that what
we vote on in congress are not polling questions. they are legislation. we have to read the actual bill. about three years ago, there was a big push for gun-control measure authored by a couple of my colleagues. people in the media and people around town in washington were predicting that this would pass overwhelmingly and be signed into law by the president and nothing would change it. , if noty, you have many most members of the united states senate signing onto this legislation before it had even been written, true story. this happens sometimes. i remember the friday when the legislation was finally released. it had 50 or 60 cosponsors already but no one had read it as it had not -- it did not yet exist. i like to read bills before i vote on them. what a discovered is that this bill would do little or nothing at all to stop violent crime. but what it would do was
dramatically restrict those who were already law-abiding citizens. so every time i review gun-control legislation, i review it was an eye toward respecting the second amendment and the rights of the law-abiding and comparing that to what it would do if anything to protect americans from violent crime. moderator: a quick follow-up for each of you on this. senator lee, this snow mentioned something about cannabis, which is legal in some places but waited to stop them from getting firearms. ms. snow, a question on assault weapons and other kinds of weapons you think may worthy of some prohibitions, if any. sen. lee: you're are asking about the legalization of marijuana? moderator: as it is linked to the ability to acquire firearms. sen. lee: this brings a very interesting topics. if we were starting as a matter of first principles, i think it would make the most sense to allow states the option of deciding what medical treatments are appropriate and legal is in
that state rather than having that decision made by government bureaucrats in washington. that is not the system of laws we have currently in place. we have a nationwide federal criminal ban on a number of things including marijuana. and so, there is a debate on this that warrants further study , but as a matter of respect the polls, i think states ought to have the right to decide what treatment can benefit people in that state so people do not have to wait for years at a time pending fda approval. ms. snow: i actually do not have any issues necessarily with assault rifles. maybe we should work with universal background checks maybe on restricting certain violent people from being able to buy firearms first and zero that adding certain types of firearms. i am a interested in taking people's guns away. that is why i care so much about ending the federal prohibition of marijuana is i think it has created this issue where most states already have cannabis
legal for medicinal purposes including in the state of utah where we have cannabis legal for the treatment of epilepsy. i find it problematic that a lot of people using marijuana in accordance with their state laws are running into issues where they can no longer own firearms. moderator: we got two questions for the time of one. we now near the midpoint of our time tonight. i welcome you want to get to this debate between misty snow and mike lee, candidate for the united states senate. you are joining us live on the campus of brigham young university. this debate and others, held in 2014 and 2016 are the result of a group of citizens and media outlets joining together to broadcast statewide a series of exchanges between candidates for statewide and federal office. questions for this debate were submitted in advance at the utah debate commission website. utah debate commission.org. the aim is to better inform you, the voter, about the candidates. now, back to the questions. the next question goes to tim
anderson. this goes to senator lee first. >> what are the proper balance between religious liberties and the rights liberties and the rights of lesbian gay, bisexual, transgender citizens? are we near the balance now, and if not, what would you advocate? mr. lee: thank you very much for your question. this is an important issue. it is important to understand there are two different types of discrimination we see in our society. one type of discrimination, private, is when two individuals interact. another type, public, is when government itself discriminates against its own disfavored citizens based on some characteristic disfavored by those in power. both are forms of discrimination and can be deadly and ugly, but between the two, public discrimination is perhaps the most dangerous, for the simple reason that when government is disfavoring people based on their characteristics that people don't like, people don't
have any choice. they can't not interact their government. there is a disparity in their power and ability to resist, because government, particularly the federal government, operates with overpowering force. it's what governments do. it's why they exist. that's why we got to be very careful whenever government starts to discriminate on the basis of a disfavored religious belief. i am convinced that lgbt writes and religious liberties can thrive in the same environment. the government needs to take a position of nondiscrimination. it is not going to discriminate on the basis of religious beliefs, and it will treat all citizens, regardless of race or sexual orientation, with dignity.
moderator: ms. snow. ms. snow: absolutely i do believe all people deserve equal protection under the law, and that extends to lgbt people. the balance of religious rights and rights of minorities is that people have the right to believe in whatever religion they want to believe and whatever god or gods they want, they believe they have the right to worship how they want, and it is a terrorist value of our nation. at the same time, you cannot -- it is a great value of our nation. at the same time, you cannot use those rights to oppress others. just as you cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater, you cannot use your religion as an excuse to discriminate. the supreme court has world that -- ruled that business cannot this from a against a -- cannot discriminate against a couple based on their religion, and they should not able to discriminate against a same-sex couple for the same reason. i think it is possible to balance all rights of people. i don't think it is a problem to say if you need a business, you need to treat all customers equally, you should not favor some customers over another, you should not be able to serve only
christians, white people, or straight cis people. i think most people agree with that. you need to show equal treatment and compassion to all people. as a senator, i will absolutely support equal rights for lgbt people, without exception. moderator: what either of you like time for a rebuttal? mr. lee: i would like to respond. i have introduced a bill called the first amendment defense act, the purpose of which is to prohibit the federal government or any of its agencies or departments from discriminating against any religious institution or individual.
based on a religious belief about marriage. regardless of what your beliefs about marriage are, or regardless of what your neighbor might believe about marriage. neither you nor your neighbor should ever be discriminated against a government based on that belief. ms. snow: the problem with that is it pretty much legalizes discrimination in the name of religion. let's say you have a hospital owned by the catholic church. it would be wrong for the hospital to be able to discriminate against somebody who needs life-saving medical care just because they are lgbt. there have been issues where, back in the year 2000, there was a man who was transgender and had ovarian cancer. he was denied access to 13 different hospitals on the basis that he was trans, and he denied from his condition because he was not able to get medical care by private hospitals. mr. lee: i would like to respond to that if i could. moderator: a 10 second response. mr. lee: sure. if you take a look at the first
amendment defense act, it does not cover what you described. what we are talking about is protecting religious individuals and institutions like byu so their tax exempt status cannot be denied, so no other adverse actions can be taken based on religious beliefs. moderator: 10 seconds as well. ms. snow: i would encourage religious institutions to treat all students equally, regardless of whether or not they are lgbt. i think that is the loving, humane, compassionate and to do. moderator: let's go to the next question -- [applause] moderator: i invite you to hold your applause, please. >> we often loom on the precipice of government shutdowns because we cannot pass a budget. senator lee, you shut down the government in 2013. under what circumstances would you support shutting down the
government if reelected, and the snow, -- and ms. snow, under what circumstances would you shut it down? ms. snow: i don't think they should shut it down. congress has a job to pass a budget. the government shutdown of 2013i think was a shameful part on our nation's history, and it was really about whether or not we should give health care to our citizens. and likely -- mike lee and other republicans did not offer an alternative to the affordable care act. the supreme court later world that the affordable care act is constitutional. the federal government is the largest employer in the state of utah, employing about 35,000 people. during the shutdown, those people were out of work. they did not know when their
next paycheck would be. and a lot of people were struggling because they were not sure if they would see a paycheck anytime soon. and furthermore, it did not just hurt the public employees. utah has multiple national monuments, millions of acres of public land that brings a lot of tourism to the state. a lot of communities depend on the national park. places like cedar city depend on tourism. tourism is the life of those cities. during the government shutdown, people were not coming to their hotels, their restaurants, or buying stuff from the good shots. -- from the gift shops. i would do everything i can to keep government working for the people, as i was sent there to do. moderator: senator donnelly. -- senator lee. mr. lee: shutting down the government is bad. let me tell you what happened in 2013. we learned that president obama
had rewritten four keeper visions of obamacare, without any authority under the constitution. he said it was necessary, because obamacare was not ready to be implemented as written. based on that explanation, i and other members of the house said if it is not ready to be implemented, let's not find its implementation. it was set to kick in fully on january 1, 20 14. what we proposed is not fund it, because president obama said it was not ready. by the way, we now know what he meant. we know that people have seen premium increases, year after year. just recently, one of utah's health insurers announced another increase, this one a 40% premium increase that will hit ratepayers next year. what we suggested is that we have at least two bank votes to fund the government. that's one of the biggest problems with washington. they push it all on one bill, one day, with just a few hours to go.
i said let's have at least two bank votes. let's have one vote on whether to fund obamacare. what's happened other on funding for everything else in the government. -- let's have another on funding for everything else in the government. president obama said no. if you don't fund obamacare, i won't let you find anything. president obama shut down the government. you have been told otherwise by the media, but they are wrong. moderator: a response? ms. snow: i think the senate should have done more to prevent that. i don't think it is all obama's fault. the senate does create bills. they do put a lot of provisions in a single bill. that shutting down the government was such an extreme response. we are talking about the affordable care act. the affordable care act has been very good at reducing the number of people who are uninsured, has very good consumer protection
that allow people to have health insurance that were being denied because of pre-existing conditions. obviously we need to do more to make sure that everybody has access to health care, but it is a complex top like. -- complex topic. moderator: a rebuttal, senator lee? mr. lee: it is a huge problem in washington, a little like something you might experience if you are in an outlying area. only one grocery store for miles around. your spouse calls saying to bring home bread, milk, and eggs. you get to the counter and the cashier says, i'm sorry, i can't sell you those items unless you also buy a bucket of nails and a book about cowboy poetry, and a very manilow album. you say, i don't even like barry manilow, they say too bad. this is how washington has been funding itself. this is wrong and it has to stop. moderator: the next question i
will post for both senator lee and ms. snow, some senators have held open the possibility of moving on a vote to confirm merrick garland for the united states supreme court before the new president is sworn in. republican leader mitch mcconnell says the newly elected president should name that. -- may not justice. if elected, would you vote to confirm merrick garland to the supreme court, why or why not, and who would you include on your shortlist list for supreme court justices, and why? senator lee first. mr. lee: those who are wanting justice garland confirmed are often saying that the senate needs to do its job and act. the senate does act every time there is a senate confirmation. the senate acts sometimes by holding votes and voting the person up, confirming the person. the senate can also vote someone
down. the said it also acts and speaks when he chooses not to hold hearings, because that is the same result as voting the person down. this is the senate's prerogative, and it is taken seriously because the senate is a political body, and it is put into the appointment process for a reason. it is a reason that has become increasingly important, because the supreme court of the united states has started involving itself in the process of deciding all kinds of issues that are hotly debated matters of public policy. it has decided issues ranging from the sanctity of unborn human life to the definition of marriage and everything else in between. with that politicization of the supreme court of the united states, it should not be surprising that the united states senate has chosen to exercise its power and to allow the next president of the united states to fulfill the vacancy left by antonin scalia a. ms. snow: many utahns would feel that mike lee is not doing his
job. a poll shows that 65% of utahns want to merrick garland to have a hearing. mike lee can ask him questions, and if he is not satisfied, he can go 10 down -- he can vote in down. that is how the process is supposed to work, and it is shameful that every day our nation is setting a new record for the longest vacancy on the supreme court. as a u.s. senator, i would be willing to give merrick garland a hearing, or whoever else the sitting president nominates. i would give him a fair hearing and vote him up or down based on the merits. i think that is what the senate is supposed to do. i think that is what the majority of citizens across the nation want, including a majority of utahns. it is also a situation where vacancies on the court prevent it from working effectively. since scalia's death, we have had a number of 4-4 decisions. the court has always decided important issues facing the nation.
you can go back to the 19th century, even early parts of the 20th century. they have always ruled on the constitutionality of laws. i think that is their purpose, and i think the senate needs to work to confirm that nominee to fill the vacancy as soon as possible. moderator: rebuttal with a quick follow-up up -- how long would you allow such a period to go without a hearing or vote if the senate is not acting, and under what circumstances would you supporting nominee from an opposing party that you disagreed with? would you still bring it to a vote? mr. lee: the question of deciding to bring it up for a
vote is the question of the majority leader. that is up to mitch mcconnell or chuck schumer, not me. i want to be very clear with judge garland -- it is an open secret, a well-known fact that if judge garland were confirmed, judge garland would predictably, reliably vote with the bloc of justices that include brier, kagan, ginsburg, and so the mayor. -- sotamayor. ms. snow: i disagree that judge garland would be as liberal as mike lee says. when he was approved to lower court, he had spoken very highly by senator orrin hatch because he is a fairly moderate justice, probably the most conservative justice that a democratic president has nominated in recent years. what would get me to supporting nominee of an uprising party really just depends -- an opposing party really depends on how to answer the question. the most important issue would
be a justice willing to overturn citizens united. in the past, we have had justices confirmed with bipartisan support, and i believe justice scalia was confirmed unanimously. it is possible to have bipartisan appointments. moderator: let's go to the next question. >> if brought to a vote, would you support the transpacific partnership, which aims to strengthen ties between partnering nations in the pacific rim by slashing tariffs and fostering trade? why or why not? ms. snow: no, i am actually against the transpacific partnership. there are a lot of problematic provisions in that -- it feels like there are a number of provisions that gives too much power to corporations that would actually undermine the sovereignty of our own government.
also, i find it problematic that many of the provisions were drafted largely in secret, without congressional approval or oversight until very recently. many of our members in the house of representatives and senators had no idea what was in the bill. i find that very problematic. if our congress is supposed to do the vote on such bills, i think it is important that they know what is in it. there needs to be transparency. instead of having a trade bill written by congress, it seems to have been written by private corporations. when we are looking at trade deals overall, i find some of our past trade deals, while they might have increased trade, i think they have actually hurt american workers and workers abroad. there are no labor protections or environmental protections. there is no wage standard in
those laws. it has four star workers to compete with brutalized child labor in the third world and sweatshop jobs in filthy conditions, and that has led to a number of corporations closing up shop here and moving abroad, where labor is cheaper. we need to have fared trade deals and not only free-trade deals. moderator: senator lee. mr. lee: the transpacific partnership is an international trade agreement. i am supportive of free trade. free trade is good for consumers because it gives consumers access to more affordable products. it is good for manufacturers who transact internationally, because it gives them access to the markets. when revealing this or any other trade agreement, i have that is my central inquiry -- what will
this do to promote free trade? will it do more to promote free trade been restricted? and is there anything it would do to oppose it? with the transpacific partnership in particular, it requires a lot of study, because it is more than 5000 pages long. i agree with ms. snow that there has been a problem with transparency in this document. a few months ago, it was tight yet public. i had to go into an underground bunker in order to review it. i cannot take any parts of it outside of the capital. it was not subject to public disclosure. it is now out. i am reviewing it, but it is over 5000 pages long.
if it does promote free trade, and if it does not diminish american national sovereignty by subjecting u.s. law to an international tribunal, i can support it, but my decision is not made yet. moderator: thank you both. you have been very good at staying on time. he will go to our last question, and it will be a 45 second answer. >> what would be the most important message about our country that you as a united states senator would share with a utah fifth rater or high school student studying american history? moderator: this one goes to ms. snow first. ms. snow: i would say become involved in current events, pay attention to what is happening in your country, and as you get older, pay attention to the political process. there is a problem currently with my generation, millennials. we are the largest voting bloc, but we are not actually exercising our power accordingly. i think it is important that they become active citizens and vote, and be involved politically. that is a message i would like our young people to have. i want them to be engaged and pay attention to how government works. moderator: senator lee. mr. lee: the most important message i would have been focus on is the u.s. constitution. this document, written by wise men, raised up by the almighty god for that very purpose, has fostered the greatest civilization the world has ever
known. it has done this by limiting government power. not just because we want small government or weak government, it's because we want strong citizens. the constitution is often misunderstood and too seldom read anymore. it is not taught as much as it should be. it limits power in two ways, by keeping power close to the people and making sure power is exercised only by elected representatives. if we read the constitution and understand it as a people, we will be better off as a result. moderator: we are approaching the conclusion of this hour. we have time for each candidate to present a one minute closing statement. before the debate, it was determined that senator lee would speak first. mr. lee: thank you very much. and i want to thank the big commission and byu -- the utah that they commission and byu for hosting, and i want to thank miss know for being here. this is a great discussion. today, six of the wealthiest counties in the united states
are in the washington, d.c. area. this is an area that manufacturers basically nothing. it is not a technological innovation hub, and it is not the home of any fast collection of national resources. the wealth is there only because the power is there, concentrated in the hands of washington elites, elected officials, and government bureaucrats. i am asking for your vote tonight for the very same reason i ask your vote -- asked for your vote in 2010, to allow me to serve the people of utah by working to dismantle the concentration of power in washington, d.c., and to restore the separation of powers put in place by the u.s. constitution. i am running to put our back desperate power back where it -- to put power back where it belongs, in your neighborhoods, families, and communities. i am running so i can return power back to you. thank you very much. moderator: ms. snow.
these issues. they were not brought up in the debate, but i find these actions to be problematic and i think we want somebody who is better for our women and children. you have more power. you have a power to elect a working class person that will represent working-class people in the u.s. senate, and i would encourage you to exercise that power. thank you very much. moderator: my thanks to mike lee and missy snow. -- misty snow. thank you to those who asked questions. also, thanks to the faculty and students of brigham young university for hosting this on their campus. the utah that they commission reminds you that the next debate will be at 6:00 p.m. on monday, october 17 reliever state university. that debate will feature candidates for utah's first congressional district. if you would like to attend that debate, or the final debate in this series featuring the third congressional district candidates on october 19, or would you -- or if you have a
question you would like to have submitted for consideration, lee's visit utahtodaycommission.org. there you will also find a video archive that will contain this and all of this season's debates. we invite you to exercise your right to vote on or before november 8 for the candidates of your choice. in provo, i'm david magleby, wishing you a good evening, and inviting the live audience to express appreciation to the candidates. [applause] [captions copyright national
cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: c-span. betweenday, the debate its patrick and the democrat. and the richard heard debate for the senate. the senate debate between ron
measure up to his expectations. forinds the right person the right job and he puts them thehe position, giving you tremendous amount of responsibility. >> he is a mentor to so many and it does not necessarily get out there as much as it should. >> donald
trump tweeted this. he said it is nice that i can fight for america the way i want to. >> i have never been so ashamed. >>
>> everything is broken about it. >> it has not been finished at all. on three. >> washington journal is live every day. managing, the deputy standard, the weekly covering the rift between trump and republican leaders. she will talk about women's attitudes towards trump and we will discuss the rock the vote efforts to reach millennial voters and getting them to polls on election day. discusser will challenges with the consumer
>> this is an up north live special presentation, brought to you by abc 29. welcome to the first congressional district debate from the campus of northwestern michigan college. now here is your moderator, mark hyman. >> good evening, and welcome to the only televised debate of michigan first congressional district race between jack bergman and the general, united states marine corps retired, lon johnson, democratic nominee for the u.s. congress. the candidates have agreed to how they will be addressed this evening. the order in which the candidates are seated and the order in which they deliver their opening remarks and closing statements but decided earlier this evening by the campaigns flipping a coin. asking questions are my colleagues, bankers of seven and for use -- the anchors of 7 and 4 news. each candidate has 60 seconds to respond to a question. they each have eight 32nd rebuttals -- eight 30 second rebuttals. however, a rebuttal must be used prior to the closing statements. as a moderator, i reserve the right to ask a question if it is needed to clarify things. we would like the audience -- we have an audience with supporters of both candidates and some undecided voters. i am asking the audience to
refrain from reaction during the debate. however, there are two exceptions. one at the conclusion of the debate, and right now when we welcome the candidates. [applause] moderator: gentlemen, good luck. let's get started. by the flip of a coin, the 60 second organization will start with mr. johnson. mr. johnson: working hard, playing by the rules, never giving up. those are the lessons in values i learned in my family of five generations through northern michigan history. i was one of the first in my family to graduate from college. in 2005, i went to iraq a civilian. came home in 2006, married my wife, and worked to endorse -- worked to grow manufacturing companies. we need to protect what you worked a lifetime to earn, your social security v.a. benefits. and second, we need to create a future where our families can stay and succeed. we are losing too many of our kids and grandkids. to do that, we need to invest in and protect our greatest assets,
our people, our land, and our great lakes, and i look forward to having that debate tonight. thank you. mr. bergman: good evening, i'm jack bergman. the world for our grandkids now is different from the one left by our grandparents, who persevered through world war i, but great depression, and world war ii.
we need to make sure that the freedoms and opportunities for future generations are equal to or better than what we received from our parents and grandparents. we all need to step up to make the tough decisions for the future generations. my mother used to say when you sense a problem, look in the mirror. i looked in the mirror, and i am ready to go to washington and help solve some problems. i hope that other politicians look in american and move forward -- look in the mirror and move forward. through experience of the business and military, i have experience and i am accountable. military service taught us it is service before self. i have lived a life of service and sacrifice just like all our veterans. in the marine corps, we are taught to fight for the marine on our left and the marine on our right, because then we all fight together. we must keep our country safe and secure.
we must provide an environment where the -- moderator: your time has expired. mr. bergman: thank you very much. moderator: first question of the evening. >> both candidates have claimed strong candidates -- strong ties to michigan's first congressional district. questions have been raised by each campaign to the other. how do you respond to that accusations? mr. johnson: i moved here in 2006. there were two men significant periods where i moved away, one to be with my wife and her job opportunities, and once when i was chairman of the democratic party. i would respond by saying it is not about where jack or i lived in the past, it is about where our children and grandchildren live, and how to create a better place to stay in northern michigan. >> migrant parents immigrated to the upper peninsula in the 1880's. my dad was born there.
in the mid-1920's, he could not find work. i was born and raised in a small town in minnesota, where he met my mom. in the 1980's, i made a decision to come to my ancestral home, found property, bought it, designed and built the house, and became a voting member and part-time resident because i was deployed in the military for the next 14 years. anybody who claims that someone in the military is not a citizen i think really needs to rethink how we qualify as far as residency. we serve all over the world at the call of the united states government, and we need to make sure that we understand the difference between living somewhere and serving somewhere. that is the key difference between someone who is a
general, someone who is in operative. thank you. moderator: next question. >> michigan roads are some of the worst in the nation. every road commission must make decisions on what does and does not get funded. what should be done on the federal level to address michigan's rambling infrastructure? general bergman: the federal level by and large has overstepped its bounds for so many years, whether it is federal regulation, underperformance. the area under the federal government does not understand the difference between roads in chicken and roads and assisted the. -- roads in michigan and roads in mississippi. don't take tax dollars. turn them back around and send them to michigan. -- i'm not saying to take federal tax dollars and send them to michigan, but the role
of the federal government needs to be reduced. regulations are masquerading as laws, and we don't need that. that's what bureaucracies do. as an outsider, i am going there to make sure the federal government decreases its role in those types of situations. moderator: mr. johnson? mr. johnson: ask somebody who drives north between atomic and sheboygan, i do respect the role the department of transportation plays in bringing dollars to north michigan. as a member of congress, i will do that. we had that for 18 years in congress. it's precisely the kind of member of congress i would be. moderator: for the next question, we start with mr. johnson. >> tell us how you would create jobs in both urban and rural areas of our communities. gen. bergman: we need to -- mr. johnson: we need to invest in ourselves. often times, you hear about us sending tax dollars to wall street.
last time i checked, wall street is doing just fine. we need to bring mobile cell service to every community. we need to expand passenger rail service. and we need to think 5, 10, and 15 years ahead to make sure that our children are getting the education and funding that they need, and their local schools and colleges. moderator: general bergman, same question. gen. bergman: most of the first district is not urban or even suburban. it is rural. the bottom line, when you have 24,000 square miles, 32 counties, 700-8000 people, you have challenges when you are that spread out.
we in michigan are blessed with resources. we need to create an environment where we responsibly conserve and utilize our resources so that we bring jobs and create an environment where a young 18-year-old with a good high school education and maybe a couple years of tech school can stay here, or they can leave for a while, go to the military, see what life is about. the when they come back, they know why they are coming back. we have an opportunity to use what god gave us to create the environment we want. moderator: mr. johnson, a rebuttal? mr. johnson: yes. in northern michigan, we have always led the world. he led the world in to trade in the 1700s. we lead the world in lumber. we helped build the american west. we did that because our forefathers looked at what we
have. we have great land, the great lakes, smart people, and they invested in those assets, and that's kind of member of congress i would be. gen. bergman: may i rebut that? moderator: yes. gen. bergman: what you mentioned was low hanging fruit. why it was not done, i have no idea. but it will be done during my time, because not only was it an economic -- an issue of economic security, but also of national security. not only do you rebuild the locks, you expand the locks to be ready to take the large freighters. moderator: for the next question, we will start with general bergman. >> one of the biggest challenges for local employers is keeping young talent.
many young people tend to leave the area of school and never return. what should be done to change this? gen. bergman: in the words of a native of newberry who left for 20 years, came back and was a successful business owner, he said, i don't think we need to create an environment where everybody stays. we need to create an environment where everybody can come back to. some people at 18 will stay. jobs, a place to raise a family. but for most folks at the age of 18, they need to see more of the world, so i would suggest we build the future of the first congressional district so that people, when they go away, those who choose to, can't wait to come back here, raise their families, and retire. that's more long-term thinking in the growth of young men and women who are citizens, great citizens of our country. we owe them that to show them how good we have it. moderator: mr. johnson? mr. johnson: we need to address housing. when you are paying more than 50% of your income towards housing, that is a problem. it is not only a problem for the individual, but towards our economic growth. you see for sale signs throughout northern michigan, but it is tough to afford the housing. we also need to address our transportation system.
people are having a live further away from our employment and having to pay more for gas. it is a problem for them to get to work and spend three dollars a gallon for gas. we have to address working from home. we need to bring high-speed internet and mobile cell phone service everywhere. we are moving toward an economy where people can live and work wherever they choose, but in deed of many communities, we have very little access to high-speed internet. >> in recent years, michigan has made deep spending cuts in order to balance the budget. what action should be taken in washington to balance the budget? mr. johnson: there are a number of things. we have a $19.5 trillion debt. if we don't get our hands around that, it will involve us.
number two, we need to do pay-as-you-go. if you introduce something to the budget, we need to take something off. next, the tax code. it is rate for the wealthy and well-connected. and third, i believe we need to stop giving tax break to corporations shipping jobs overseas. moderator: general, same question? gen. bergman: the spending in washington is so upside down that we would not know a budget if we saw it, in some cases. we need a balanced budget amendment. we need to hold congress accountable to say, if you have a balanced budget amendment, give us a balanced budget. congress has to the rest of government accountable to ensure the balanced budget occurs. we need to make sure that when
you start this process, you send a signal. we have to cut the bureaucracies in washington, d.c. that are spending money that do not add value to our country. if we don't do that, we are going to be fiscally insolvent sooner than we would like to be. congress has to stand up to ensure that the bureaucracies who are responsible do what they need to do with less money and less intrusion into our lives. moderator: mr. johnson, your rebuttal? mr. johnson: i would add that the first thing we do is stop taking. jack bergman has also talked about privatizing social security. if we were to privatize, we would at anywhere from $1 trillion to $2 trillion to our federal deficit. moderator: a rebuttal? gen. bergman: just a minute.
we've got a nice example of how political operatives spin, twist, turn your words or part of your citizens -- sentences to deceive the voters. the reality is, by 2032, social security will be broken. 300 used to pay in for one. now we are down to three to one. what do we have to do? we have to reformat so our grandchildren have something to spend. the seniors, your benefits will stay exactly -- moderator: your time has expired. >> some are calling to scale back the air service that subsidizes commercial air service to rural areas that might not otherwise have commercial flights. this is a two-part question. should the service maintain its level of federal funding, and secondly, when cutting funds for the air service arm northern michigan -- would cutting funds for the air service harm northern michigan? gen. bergman: the program needs to be looked at, because we have airports in the first district, some benefit, some suffer. when i get to washington, d.c., we are going to look into that,
because right now there is a balance between which airports we support, which we don't, but the key is to bring tourists and businesses into our airports, so that is what they come here to do, business and tour. we have work to do on that one. i would work with -- mr. johnson: i would work with the department of transportation to bring back every nickel we can get. these are extremely important not only for their travel, for their family and so forth, but also we are becoming a more connected world. people are having the ability to work from home, and they do from time to time have to travel. we need to make sure that we bring back the transportation dollars that can keep our airports open and running. moderator: kristen, you will start with mr. johnson. >> do you support resending nafta regulations that may be harmful to the domestic auto industry? mr. johnson: free trade is important for our country.
however, we are not getting fair trade. with this ttp trade agreement coming down the height, it was negotiated in secret and is not addressed some of the policies that shipped our jobs overseas, especially currency manipulation. i would be for reopening nafta and opposing tbp in its current form. i believe these are shifting our jobs overseas, and we have to do everything to keep our jobs here. we have 40,000 jobs, 25,000 in the manufacturing sector and 20,000 in the agricultural sector that are reliant on fair trade, and that is not what we are getting out of washington. gen. bergman: i believe resending may be one word, but if you look at regulations in general, we need to put some sense on most of these so we can revisit them when the time is appropriate. if we put something into law, policy, or program, if you don't have a sunset on it but people assume it is there forever. that is one of the major things wrong with our government, the federal government, and the bureaucracy. i think as president reagan said, the closest name to eternal life is a government
program. we need to start putting sunset on some of those pieces of legislation and regulation. moderator: mark, your question to the general? you have a rebuttal? mr. johnson: this is an area where we disagree. my opponent has indicated that he supports tpp. in fact, he said there are some jobs that should be done overseas. i don't agree with that. i think we should be opposing the trade agreement, and that is a major area of difference between jack and i. gen. bergman: may irobot that? moderator: please. gen. bergman: this is example
number two of political operatives twisting my words so that you don't understand what it is that i said. i don't support tpp, fair and simple. it was done in the middle of the night. it needs to be redone whenever it comes up. moderator: mark? >> enbridge 5.5 is a divisive topic. supporters say it defies -- devides our economy, opponents say it is unnecessary. gen. bergman: i think you will hear straight talk between a marine corps general and a political operative. our environment is number one. it is critical. we are not going to do anything to harm our environment. we need safe water, clean water. we need jobs for tourism. we need to maximize god's national beauty. we need to make sure that pipeline number five, if it is safe, it is safe.
if it is not safe, no problem, shut it down. but we also need to understand that propane heat most of our houses. three years ago, when propane went to five dollars a gallon, some people cannot afford it, and cannot even get it because of the fact that it was not available. we need to ensure that we are smart and take care of our citizens. mr. johnson: once again, this is a major area where jack and i disagree. he has shed -- he has said that shutting down line five is a business decision. protecting the great lakes is not a business decision. when it comes to line five, we have a pipeline in the strait of mackinac that has not been inspected. we need to do three things. one, shut it down.
mackinac that has not been inspected. we need to do three things. one, shut it down. two, have an independent inspection. three, we need to work with the government's task force to make sure that it is safe, so we can discover ways to move this oil through another pipeline if we can. i am not opposed to oil, i am not opposed to pipelines. pipelines are the safest way to move oil. however, a 63 euro -- 63-year-old type line in the strait of mackinac is not a good idea. this is the same type of attitude that got us into the flood disaster. -- flint disaster area of [applause] -- flint disaster. [applause] gen. bergman: lon and i agree on the fact that government is not a business. the bottom-line is, because it is not a business, we can see what the results of it are in the last eight years when you don't understand balance of power. in washington dc, we need to have some level of business mentality and acumen that allows
us as a country to make the tough decisions we need going forward. logicians don't have that background -- politicians don't have that background. mr. johnson: jack was in michigan last year, he would note that the flint water was caused by a is this decision over the rights of people -- by a business decision being made over the lives of people. we are being told it is safe by the same people who told us the flint water was safe. when it comes to our freshwater, i will be vigilant, and i do not trust the businesses for the protection of our freshwater. moderator: i would like to ask the audience to refrain from clapping or other noise so we don't take time away from our candidates. nick? >> in june, the city of waukesha
was granted permission to draw water from lake michigan, yet the city lies outside of lake michigan's watershed. do you agree with this decision? mr. johnson: no, i don't. this decision moves our great lakes water outside of the great lakes water basin. i believe it sets a dangerous legal precedent. we have to protect water. that means we have to protect it against the gators, against water fraction -- and it -- against endangered species, against fracking. we need to show the world how to use fresh water. if we do that, we can create a better economy and protect our freshwater. gen. bergman: the great lakes contract was created 10 years or so ago, and it was the issue of what we do with the water of the great lakes -- where does it go,
or does it stay? the fact of the matter is, 8% of that water is in lake superior, and lake superior is a border state between canada and the united states. we have to be wise about how we maintain our water in the great lakes, and the reality is that is, if you will, and across the aisle, bipartisan, multi-country decision that has to ensure that our great lakes remain under our control. but we have to negotiate. moderator: a rebuttal? mr. johnson: jack, i don't know if you are aware, but he is a member of the great lake compact, and i believe we set a dangerous precedent by allowing our water to move outside the contract.
in 20 to 30 years time, when california and nevada come looking for our water, they will have more members of congress and great lakes members of congress, and we have to start setting the legal change in place to protect our freshwater. moderator: rebuttal? gen. bergman: i did not realize i said canada was outside it. moderator: before we moved to the next question, both candidates -- kristen, please direct it to general bergman. >> michigan is a state rich in natural resources. what role does the federal government had in protecting our natural resources, keeping in mind any positive impact on businesses and people? gen. bergman: we know in the state of michigan how to live our lives, how to use our natural resources, how to keep it in such a way where we provide jobs. we conserve our natural resources.
the federal government's role should be minimalist so that we in the first district and state of michigan work together to make sure that we do the best job of controlling our resources. moderator: mr. johnson? mr. johnson: climate change is real. we have an obligation to protect on climate. our best assets are our people, our land, and our great lakes. we have an obligation to protect our great lakes and land. that means we need to continue sustainable logging practices, but we must keep an eye on our fresh water. we have the most fresh water in any district in america, which creates an obligation for the next member of congress to show the world how to use and protect freshwater. we can strike that balance. we have always struck a balance in northern michigan. moderator: mark, please start
with mr. johnson. >> where do you stand on the protection of the wolf, which is arguably eliminating much of the deer population in the northwest peninsula and impacting the economy? mr. johnson: i think we should allow science to dictate our wildlife policies. not politics, not emotion. science. moderator: general? gen. bergman: any wildlife population needs to be managed. our deer population is way down. we walk in the woods with kids and dogs and everything else. nature does what nature does, and we need to make sure that the state manages our populations that need to be managed.