. . . . nz]ñiçó .ñiñrçóñi . .é%. ñi .4% $iñiçóñrçó . . .ñr . .ñi éññiñe@r(t&háhp &hc%

.ñrñrçóñrñi . . .par(t&drhp &hc% .ñiñr {fñrñrñiçóñr . . .ñiñrñiçó."ñi .ñiñr

learn. we have to embrace that. whatever it takes, whatever it takes to make sure that a quality education is in the backyard of a student i'm going to do. what do we say for the kids that are failing today? it is because they are in failing schools. they are stuck. if the school in the neighborhood is not working, the least we can do is give more options to the parent. if we do that, i think we'll find ourselves with better statistics in employment. >> once again, i find no problem with giving more options to the parents whatsoever but we need to ensure that there is not a hole that allows those who cannot fit into those options that cost -- let me just put it

this way. i haven't been able to afford to go to new york and to this place and that place but i have been to charleston county school district. their boards consistently over the quality of education and the investment that they made in these same children that you are talking about in these so-called failing schools. i know for a fact that that investment that they have put into these schools is sub standard. they have not done their job like so many that we have heard and will continue to hear until we see people being treated in america the way that americans should be treated. they have not done their job to ensure that every child within charleston county school district receives a great education. they have not done it. as a matter of fact, the last term, they wound up losing $18 million of taxpayer money that should have gone into it. then, the cfo, the chief financial officers, walked away, no accountability whatsoever.

that money goes to help those schools. we know that money pumped into schools ensures that schools will be more successful. i'll let you talk. >> i don't dispute with you. i would just suggest that when you look at the apparatus of education as a nation, we spend 7$700 billion. we are 14th, 17th, and 26th in math, science and reading. our schools are failing the poorest kids. the poorest outcomes are where the poverty levels are the highest. we have to do better. >> we turn around and offer charters and we offer taxpayer incentives to help to subsidize those schools. that's money that could be poured back into the public school. we have to find a way to ensure we don't have our students

graduating or being released. i call it released from 8th grade with a 3rd grade reading level. that's ridiculous in america. the answer is not through segregation. that's what you are talking about when you are talking school of choice. you are talking segregation. >> unfortunately, our public schools, specially in our city are segregated. i would suggest on the funding mechanism. let's remember, that charter schools receive less than half of the money of a public school. the options are very clear. if you are in a failing public school, let's create more options in the public apparatus. i would even go further, as we have had to do in d.c. with the support of the city council and the mayor of d.c. you have to have charter schools and school of choice for kids to be able to succeed. in d.c., the average, because we are talking about america's education, not just south

carolina's education. an average student in d.c. is $22000 per pupil. they graduate 56% of the time. the school of choice, with a 93% satisfaction rate among african-american and hispanic parents, graduates 93% of the time. 91% of the time, those kids go on to a two or four-year education. in other words, it is 40% of the cost. for $10,000, you get a higher quality education than you do for $22000 and a 25,000 student waiting list for the charter schools. >> my last comment. very simple. washington, d.c., new york city, all of these things. why are we number 42 out of 50

states for education? >> i think that's a good question. part of the answer, by the way, is that in south carolina, 44 cents to 46 cents on the dollar goes to the classroom. the average nationwide is 65 cents out of the dollar. said differently, we could have another $1 billion in the classroom if south carolina changed its formula and the legislators and governor would have to have a robust conversation on how to get there. part of the reason we are so far behind, from my es estimation, we have $1 billion lost in administration and not getting to a child. >> we're going to shift gears a little bit. pastor dixon, one of the issues you said is important to you is gun violence. if you were a member of congress, what would you do about gun violence? >> the first thing i would do and the same thing i have been pushing for is that we actually

need to close the brady background check loopholes that allow guns to get into the hands of those who are not supposed to have guns, that shouldn't have guns. i want to make it perfectly clear right here, right off the bat, that i am not anti-second amendment. i am proconstitution when it comes to the right to bear arms, but we are americans and we are charged with the fact of keeping america safe by any means necessary. that should be our first and foremost consideration. right now, through the proliferation of guns that are flooding into the communities throughout america, guns that are getting into the community through the background check loopholes that allow online sales without any kind of identification of anything. i'll put it out here right now. i am an ex-felon.

i can buy a gun online. people like to talk about chicago and the gun violence going on. the guns in the community that are being used for gun violence in chicago, they are not made or sold in those communities. they are being brought in purchased from bad apple gun dealers. that 5% of the legal gun dealers who are responsible for 90% of the guns used in crimes. those loopholes need to be changed and they need to be changed immediately. it has been estimated. i can only speak on an estimate on this, because i am really unsure on this. since brady was enacted in 1994, there has been about 1 million guns kept out of the hand of those who should not have guns in their hands. it has been estimated by the statisticians that that translates into 2 million lives saved. those are estimates. what i say to that is if closing

the background check loopholes, if prosecuting, getting rid of the protection of lawful commerce and arms act that protects bad apple gun dealers, if we do those things and one life is saved, we have done what we are supposed to do. i have stood with those who have lost their loved ones to crime. i have stood with the families who have lost their families in mother emanuel. a legal loophole that dylann roof got his hands on that gun. a dealer gave him that gun because the background check wasn't over 72 hours. that's a problem with the background check system. common sense, why have that

option to sell to a person. we have nine people in a church dead because of the charleston loophole that now we know this shouldn't have happened. we still don't have it closed. i don't understand that. many people say, the gun rights people say, well, you know, nothing prevents a person from killing those who -- a person that shouldn't have a gun from killing people other than those who have guns. those are the preventative force. the reality is, when we look at dallas, you had armed law enforcement, armed to the tee. at the end of the day, one man with a military style assault weapon with a high capacity magazine, killed five and kept the entire department at bay. my whole thing is, when it comes to firearms, and i said it already, if we don't do everything we can in our means to stop the violence in order to

stop people from dying by the hands of those that shouldn't have their hands on guns anyway, we've let our american public down. that's unamerican. we're americans and we take care of our citizens. >> senator scott, your thoughts on gun violence. i was looking at my text from the pastor at emanuel and how happy he was when i was chosen for the senate and how he invited me down to his church to introduce me to his congregation, i remember sitting through those nine funerals and wakes. i remember coming up here and fly ng

flying in to see the school where jacob hall was shot. i remember coming in my superman t-shirt to his funeral. i remember being at walter scott's funeral. the truth on the charleston loophole, dylann roof was a prohibited person. it was already against the law for him to get a gun. he got one. there is no way to close the loophole in the charleston case that was already closed. it was illegal. he should not have had a gun. he should not have had a gun. i think about the issue of gun violence in this country, think about this. 30,000 people in this nation lose their lives because of a gun. 65% of those folks take their own lives.

65%. 20,000 people out of the 30,000 took their own lives. out of 35, according to philip cook, who is supposedly the researcher on gun violence and guns, 3%, that's the number of folks who legally buy a gun at a show, buy a gun anywhere, has been that person who use that is gun in a crime. the vast majority of folks steal their weapons to commit the violence. if you take the 30,000 number down to the 10,000, we've taken 20,000 out because of suicide. about 5,000 to 6,000 of those gun deaths are homicides.

four cities out of 35,000 cities in america represent 25% of those gun deaths. even in those cities, chicago, baltimore, detroit, d.c., those cities have the most restricted gun laws in the country. so when we have a conversation about how to make people safer with more gun laws, even chris murphy, friend of mine, democrat for connecticut, filibuster, when asked a question on, i a think it was, face the nation. certainly, it was fox news, one of the other shoes. it is running in my head. he said the laws he was pushing would not have saved the lives in the massacres in connecticut.

they broke 41 gun laws. >> so what do we do? >> the challenge is, congress, aren't law enforcement officers. nor are we the courts. our law enforcement officers arrest these folks, put them in jail. sometimes they get out. our law enforcement officers are doing their job. >> we are giving them enough resources to do the jobs and crack down on the people that get the guns illegally. >> a couple things. we have grants that help support officers, i have a legislation, safer officers, safer citizens. it would provide $100 million more to assist law enforcement officers. the research doesn't seem to be the answer to stop the crimes from happening. the answer is not within the realm of congress to stop it from happening. we have taken up last year and this year, we have all heard, no fly, no buy.

we put a lid on that but it failed because of due process. we can make progress if we get both sides to say yes to due process. that's the biggest dill lynnation in congress. >> both sides need to come together. as i listen to your conversation, i was there. i have been with judy scott an the scott family. i have been with the survivors and with tamika myers mother, whose daughter went out on her 19th birthday and didn't come back home. i have been with melody get it is mcfadden, whose niece went to myrtle beach and didn't come home because somebody shot open fire on them there. we can break down those numbers and everything and play the numbers game.

the thing is, unless we do everything within our power in order to stop tamika meyers from losing her daughter or melody from losing her niece or judy scott from losing her son, then we've let america down. you kind of sort of made light of it, it seems like to me. with all due respect to you, and i have the utmost respect for you. >> yes, sir. >> and i would love to work along with you somewhere in the future. >> happy to do that. >> when it comes to gun legislation, common sense gun legislation that's going to reduce the violence that we see in america, if we don't do everything we can within our power, then we are letting americans down. when will it touch you or when will it touch anyone in this

audience today? it is not bound by color, race, creed, gender orientation or anything. gun violence will invade anyone's life. the proliferation or the amount of guns that are in the community are because of the standard law enforcement answer. that's a lie out of the pits of hell. i come from a community. i come from the projects of chicago. i know how guns came in back then when it was better than it is now. it is still going on. i can look for that guy to pull up in his trunk and open it up. as an eight-year-old with $20, i could buy a gun. now, common sense gun legislation, we close the background check loopholes. we shut down bad apple gun dealers. we identify them and repeal protection of law for common arms act so they are not

protected anymore. we stop online gun sales. i'm not going to say when it comes to military assault type weapons. there does need to be more training involved and more licensing involved in this. i am not going to say licensing. any way it goes, though, we are charged with this. i am not yet into the senator's spot which i am going to objecting wa occupy. we are charged with the task of taking care of americans, because that he what we do. when we send our volunteers off to fight for their country, they make a pledge to die for this country. there is no reason why anybody on any day in america should not get up in a situation of safety in a country of safety where you don't have to worry about going to the movie. you don't have to worry about going to church, where you don't have to worry about going to school. you definitely don't have to

worry about a group of 6-year-olds. you don't have to wherry aboorr somebody coming up in the elementary school gunning them down. >> i am with you. i would suggest if you could take a look at the chicago statistics specifically about whether or not those guns were legally purchased, the stats are clear, in black and white, number one, and number two, i would suggest the reality of it is that in each case that you just mentioned, dozens, if not 40 laws broken in connecticut. each incident you have mentioned, at heleast a dozen ls were broken. if the laws we have on the books aren't working, what law do you suggest? i'll tell you, charleston, the charleston loophole was actually a law that said that he should

not have had the gun. so it was breaking that law. >> how about the law of love that says that i am my brother's keeper? how about that law. >> i am a big fan of first corinthians 13, the entire chapter, faith, hope, and love. >> i didn't overtalk you. let's show some love in here. >> i want to be on facts. we can't each have our own facts. >> i am not disputing your facts. what i'm saying is that, any time that we fail to do anything that we can in order to stop someone from dying,the way you broke it down, suicide, you got if down to this little number. i don't know what you are saying about chicago, the fact is, in chicago, these are not legal guns that are killing people. >> that's right. they are not legal guns.

>> i don't know the comments you were making. >> they are illegal guns. because of that, in chicago, where this massive amount of illegal guns are, those folks don't make no guns. there are no gun stores in their community. the guns are coming from somewhere. if they are coming from somewhere, they must be coming out of the back door of somebody's gun shop, online purchases, straw purchases. they are getting in there from somewhere. yes, it is a matter of enforcing laws. until we do that, we can not overlook anything that's going to make america safer for americans. >> nothing whatsoever. >> i actually agree with you, sir. >> good, we have agreement and we are going to go to another question. all right. one of the unique responsibilities of senators is to provide advice and consent on the president's nominees to the

courts. judge merit garland was nominated. he has not yet received a hearing or a vote. there are dozens of vacancies on the lower federal court. some of these nominees have been waiting for more than a year for senate action. i am not asking you what you would do about a specific nominee currently nominated. is that confusing enough? i want to know what you think the senate's responsibility is regarding nominations. should they be given a hearing and or a vote and what criteria would you use to determine whether you would confirm a president's nominees to the court? >> let's start with pastor dixon, unless you would rather i start with senator scott. i think i will defer to my senator. >> this is how conversations work. >> to my seated senator, yes.

>> a couple things. on the lower courts, bruce smith was just put on the bench within the last 24 months, mr. coggins from the up state. another we held a hearing on. in the last 100 years, the party that occupies the white house at the same time has a different party controlling the senate, the last 100 years, one time has there been a supreme court justice allowed in that last year. to use the words of vice-president biden, chuck schumer, and dick durbin, when asked if they would allow for president bush to have a nominee in his last year, the answer was no, we would not do so. >> to clarify, that question was asked in june of the presidential election year and it was a hypothetical question. there was no vacancy at the time. >> so, to continue my point here, because i think you helped

me build that point. >> i want to make sure we are all clear on that. >> which is a very important point. even the moderator, who is moderating this, has a strong opinion on where we should go much the reality of it is simply this. >> i didn't say they were right. i just said that was the timing of when they did it. i strongly disagree with what they did. >> you sure. go ahead. >> i know you are fired up. >> the reality of it is that both sides have consistently opposed a nominee in the last year. there is a reason why. as president obama said, elections have consequences. we are waiting until this election is over before there is an appointment. i'm sure there will be. the fact of the matter is that for us who believe a more conservative justice would be helpful, the president is not going to provide us with a

conservative nominee. so our advice and consent, we have advised him that we are not going to consent. if they would like to come back with a more conservative nominee, they would improve it. >> is that your criteria? >> i want the most conservative candidate i think i can get. >> pastor dixon? >> i think it is dangerous to set in stone our actions today based on how things went in the past. if just because things were done a particular way in the spast, e say, oh, it has been done that way, even though it is not law, that we have to continue doing things and we justify our behaviors based on the way

things were done. i think that's dangerous. we have every opportunity this year to confirm a supreme court justice that was not only extremely moderate in his opinions but someone that most those on the aisle seemed to gravitate to a bit. but, we have a republican controlled congress that basically says no, because president obama has nominated the supreme court justice, the same way they have done consistently for the last eight years. i don't want to make this about president obama. he is not running for this office. the reality is, congress is charged with the task of doing its job, not based on the way things have been but the way things are right now. so let's get the job done. that's the whole thing. >> and, the nominees, the

nominee was someone -- is someone that could be acceptable to both parties across the aisle if it was just simple thing of saying, let's get the job done, let's get it done. some good candidates, qualified candidates, a man whose morals are impeccable, who is acceptable for both sides of the aisle. the only reason i can see, this is only a personal opinion. >> yes, sir. >> it has to be with the same obstructionist view we have seen consistently over eight years, that says, anything this president puts out, we are going to say no and we are going to wait to get an advantage to get someone who leans more to the right than toward the left, when the people of america deserve somebody who understands both sides of the aisle and will vote in the best interests of

americans at-large. >> other than our approach from the left to the right, i actually agree with your overall d dispositions. i think many of us will look back at history and use those precedents, because we like t m them. we would advise and consent if we thought he was conservative enough. when replacing scalia, we want someone that starts with a constructive, positive equilibrium that would maintain the current balance of the courts. those of us on the right who have not been willing to hear the case of mr. garland, it is because we don't think he is conservative enough. i don't disagree with you. that's just where we are.

>> the american public, the same american public that elects congress, from my reading and from my limited knowledge and my scope, the american public want the congress to do their job right now. they didn't want you to wait or delay until after the election. the majority of the people that i have read on said, do the job now. let's get a confirmation now. as elected officials, as people who elected other people, by the people, and to work for the people, the people are the ones who call the shots when it comes time for our elected officials, not our party idea of what a person should look like, talk like, act like or even

represent. the people are the ones that have that say-so. when it comes to the issue of, say, i want to give a brief example. when it comes to the gun legislation situation, over 80% of americans want common sense gun legislation passed. over 80%. i am just going to say conservatively speaking, 80%. that leaves 20% that don't want common sense gun legislation passed. you and your republican congress consistently want to serve the 20%, instead of the 80%. that has got to stop in america. the people in america deserve to be represented completely. if the majority of americans speak in favor of a particular position, then our government officials and elected officials who were elected of the people, by the people and for the people, need to represent the

people, not the party. >> i'm going to give senator scott a chance to respond quickly. we will end this part of our segment and be talking more about that question of representation in the final p few minutes. >> i think that the people, particularly, if you flow out republican and democrat labels, and you look at what -- who president obama presented to the u.s. senate, it was someone who was consistent with his philosophical disposition. the majority of the country sent a check in the form of a majority in the senate being republicans. throw away the republican label now. the majority of us have a philosophical disposition that is more conservative than the president. therefore, the constitution

advices us to advise and consent. we are telling the president, we do not like the candidate you sent. he has not sent another one. if you look at that philosophical position of the president and the senate, we are locked. >> great explanation, great explanation. that's why we need to change. >> hold off on that until the next part. >> thank you, gentlemen. turn your microphones off. you can have a five-minute break, not more than five minutes. >> 15-minute break. >> five minutes or i will send search parties out for you. >> senator, don't get lost. >> all righty. great, thank you. after they debated, the candidates participated in a roundtable discussion. they discussed how they would each represent constituents in congress. this is just over 30 minutes.

>> they got the memo on civility. aren't you impressed. i want to report that thus far, mid-term grades are good. thank you all. >> is this the final exam? i gave them assigned reading and sent them federalist -- in this segment, this is the prerogative of the congressional scholar. this is what i have always wanted to have a conversation with candidates about, because it is not always apparent to me that once folks get to congress, they think about these as much. i am looking forward to the two of you there tell me if i am wrong. i want to shift gears and talk about how these candidates would do their job in congress. james madison talks about the importance of a representative democracy and the benefits it holds over a pure or direct democracy, a democracy where we would all just register our vote

for ourselves on every single issue that comes along. one of the things that madison says is a benefit of representative democracy is that our representatives can gather and deliberate in a way that we as a country cannot. in that deliberative process, they can refine and enlarge the public view. that's what i want to talk about a little bit tonight, how they view that role of representation. gentlemen, i am going to give each of you a chance to respond. i do not care what order you take it in. when you say you want to represent me and the people in this room in congress, what do you mean and how are you going to carry out that responsibility? what does it mean for you to represent me? how will you do that job? >> who wants it first. >> i'm happy to start. one of the things i think is important as an elected official is to recognize that you are a

public servant. when i was appointed to the senate, one of the first things i did was i went undercover as a senator. i put on some jeans, hat, disguised myself a touch and got on public buses and drove around so i could talk to everyday people, not take a poll, not hear from lobbyists. i wanted to hear from people. then, i worked odd jobs around the state. worked at the good will up here and talked to people so that i could understand what the passion in their heart really is, not what someone tells me that it is, what am i experiencing. i worked at a mo's burrito, which was interesting. they said, you can't sweep at all, young man. thanks for calling me young. i learned a lot. one of the most important things i thought i should do was get around this state as a public servant and understand their issues.

second thing i have done, every year, i go on a 46 county tour, of all 46 counties in south carolina. i sit down with republicans and democrats, libertarians and independents, old folks, young folks, folks that have severe disabilities, folks that are doing really well. i am not elected to rep cans. but south carolina yans and the country. we are doing that on the criminal justice issue and policing and community relations. we are on a listening tour. we have been in columbia, came up here to greenville last week and heading towards charleston so we can understand and appreciate what the issues, challenges and hopes are within the most fragile and difficult relations. my answer is simply to learn to listen so that you can serve

them well. >> we can just go around. well, dr. vincent, i appreciate you giving us that refresher. i got to get back in school mode a little bit. aside from his discussion of a direct democracy, the biggest ill james madison was trying to warn us about, was, as he said t public officials, putting the interest of their faction before those of the public good. his warning is very topical today. that's what so many americans have seen happen in their congress. they have seen hundreds of people supposedly elected to represent them put the interest of their faction, of their party, before the interest of the people. whether we are talking about six years of complete inaction or a failure in the senate to do their constitutional duty and at least have a hearing for someone, a justice that the president nominated.

we've seen an unprecedented level of inaction. when i was thinking about this, i thought, you know, you can't just put the blame on the factions, on the parties, right? these parties are made up of individuals. it takes individuals to exercise their courage and their prerogative as a leader, as an elected official, to sometimes say, no. i will vote to have a hearing for justice garland, even though my party doesn't want it or i'm okay with passing comprehensive immigration reform even if my party doesn't want it, because it is the right thing to do and in the interest of the people, of the public school. that's what we can change. we need new leaders to do it. >> i am going to come right back to you. let me get their response and come back to you. >> i was just intrigued. >> i told them to nod if they want to jump in. >> i'll be happy to jump in if you want me to. >> i'll come back to you. >> professor, one person's

faction is another person's majority. that's what i keep coming back to. you referred to factions n a couple weeks, there is going to be a vote. either you will win or i will win. it will be north of 50%. every vote you cast will disappoint half the people you purport to represent. when i hear the word faction, that is usually a phrase people use when they are in the minority, when they don't like what's going on. if you are the representative and you are consistently vote ng a way antithetical to what a majority of the people of your district want. you are not going to be a representative very long. you ask what does it mean to represent. voting is a very small percentage of what members of congress do. i get that it is what the media always judges us on. how many pieces of legislation have you passed. you must be historically ineffective, you haven't passed that many pieces of legislation.

we have a task force on overcriminalization. we are going back and finding law that is were passed in the past that should not have been passed. that is an ineffective barometer of success. my job is to listen to the people i work for, many of whom disagree with me, even in my own party, they disagree with me. most of what our staffs do and a lot of what we do has nothing to do with politics. if you are someone trying to interface with your government on social security or veterans administration or you have a passport issue, no one in my office will ever ask you what your political eye deation is. no one in my office or tim's office has anything to do with politics. they are there to represent the constituency, no matter what you are politics are. you better vote the way your district wants you to vote. if you firmly believe that your district may not have all the

information that they are entitled to, then your job as a representative is to come back and say, you may want to consider this. you may want to consider that. chris, i've got to tell you, my decision not to vote for comprehensive immigration reform was not a mistake. it wasn't a mistake. we'll find out in two weeks but i don't think it was a mistake to say that we need to go incrementally. we'll find out. that's the beauty of our republic. we have to face the voters every two years. if our positions are not consistent with theirs, they can send us off. >> pastor dixon? >> that's a whole lot, a whole lot. i found it really funny about who you worked for but you didn't allude to the fact that you work for the people. i found that a little disturbing. >> you must have misunderstood my answer. i said i did. >> that's not really how it came

out. that's neither here nor there. in traveling the state and interacting with people, if i pick and choose who i am interacting with, then i'm going to get the answer i'm looking for. if i exclude certain people from my polling, my personal conversations, then i'm only going to get the responses that i'm looking for and are going to feed into wherever i want to go to. we have a very, very vast array of ideas, thoughts, suggest suggestions, based on ethnicity, personal backgrounds, upbringing. if we don't bring all of those ideas into the storehouse, into our wheelhouse, we are really not going to come up with ideas and thoughts that are representative of the people. i think when we get into this party issue, i am not going to say it.

well, i guess i am. specially with the republican party. i am going to say it. >> as long as you do respect. >> i tried to step away from it. i had to come back to it with the way the partisan voting consistently has been there, consistently, when we look at things like planned parenthood, voting against the best interest of our women, when we look at -- yes, this is pastor dixon talking. looking at the fact that in 2016, $15 an hour is just barely enough for a person to live decently off of. voting against the best interest of our seniors and veterans, and all of the things that are going to make our nation better. i don't know who you are talking to. the people that i talk to, because i come from a social justice advocacy background. it only started since i came out of the prison system.

been there too. i understand what it takes in order to have comprehensive prison reforms, because i have been there. you want to know how to fix prisons. do it the same way when we do it when we go to the doctor. we need to ask those in the prison system how we fix prisons. all of these different things, these learned experiences, means having my boots on the ground, as they say, for years, coming up in the projects of chicago, interacting with those that are violent, actually, drug dealers, drug users. i've been shot at. i understand how close you can be to getting killed in the streets. when we sit as representative os have the people, we understand we represent all of the people. i admire you for work at mo's

but mo's ain't getting to know the people. it's kind of obvious when it comes to the voting records that getting to know the people is a bigger priority, as far as mo's or whatever. i understand you get to the schools too. that's well and good. let me put it like i put it out there in the streets many time. until you get to know ray-ray and pookie and them, you really don't know what's going on in the city. >> ray-ray is my cousin. so let me just say this. >> i know him. >> listen. i'm happy to have this conversation. the fact of the matter is, to assume myself or trey aren't talking to all the people, the politically correct word is hogwash. here is a fact. if you are looking for a classic

example of a criminal justice system heading in the right direction, stay home. look around south carolina. we have closed six prisons. we are supposed to have 30,000 folks incarcerated. we have 20,000 incarcerated. in 2010, legislation passed for criminal justice reform. according to our good friend, roland martin, on tv one, the states that are leading on criminal justice reform are southern republican states. >> i had to write down what you said, because you said a lot of things in there. >> being in touch with your constituents, one of the reasons why i have visited two state prisons and sat there and fed them so that i could understand and appreciate what people are going through right now. what are the needs right now? how do we deal with folks right now? one of the reasons why trey and myself are going around south carolina meeting in our current

demographic makeup of our police and community relations, i think it is three-quarters black, a quarter white, and probably and probably half the cops are black from around the state is because trey believes that the issues is diffusing the issue that's in the communities is so important. it's important in greenville and spart tanville but he believes that it's important enough to meet around the country and solve the issues. we don't just represent a certain party or race. we represent everybody. the reason why i sat down and made people safe aer and that the law enforcement officers god

bless their souls for their passion and the reason why we sat down for the naacp and because it's a right thing to do. if you're going to be a public servant, it's the right thing and the next generation of americans. [ applause ] [ applause ] >> very well said senator. that's why the naacp and gave you an overall voter. >> here is my point -- >> let me get back to what i have to say.

>> it's not that you have to vote my way, i don't mind folks that say you're dead wrong. i'm going to meet with you any way. that's the point to circuming to the factions and being interested and engaged with people that are not like you who are completely opposed to the position. you're sitting down and having the conversation when they give you an f or as the naacp referred to as before a dummy. i'm going to meet with them any way. i'm not interested in the naa contracticp but the people that they supposedly represent. >> i'm sorry and let me get back to where i started. i appreciate it. you visit the prisons, but while you were visiting the prisons,

did you figure out and initiate the legislation in the senate that's going to ban the box that is inhibiting felons from getting work. did you get anything that says over time here is how we're going to do the debt of being paid and people of 1965 still cannot get a job? did you learn while you were in there how nobody that goes to prison wants to come back. i was there for three years and never met anybody that wanted to go back. but because of the lack of opportunities when they get out as an ex felon are not there to support them in the stay out. and ultimately making the communities safe because we're not really rehabilitating them.

did you get that while you were there? did you talk to the young mother that might have been working to moes or mcdonald's or taco bell and working those jobs because it provides enough to put a roof over their head and some people like to point fingers when the mothers don't show up at the pta meetings when they're trying to provide $7.25 an hour. did you get that out of it and if you did, why have you not done the job? >> let me interrupt for just a minute. i'm going giver you a chance to respend and then i'm going to give you a final word because we're out of time. >> this is good. >> yeah it goes fast. >> we need to do this again. >> here are the facts that i discover in my business with the prison folks.

there are good people there that made a tragic mistake and we should never look down on people. the average person incarcerated today has three things in common. they're functionally illiterate and came from single households and looking for a way out. i sat down with amazing folks. kansas state prison has opened the door for a company to come in and start training these prisoners on how to be productive and have a profitable life when they leave. they have started hiring the people and now they have an example and 90 percent of those

are incarcerated. these programs allow these young men, mostly men to make at least minimum wage. sometimes more. not much. and when they leave prison they leave with as much as 10,000 and the best example is $40,000 in the savings account and they can pay restitution. they have been able to catch up on back child support and get employed. 14 percent of the folks are now employed. >> 14? >> yeah, it was only -- it started three years ago. they're not getting out as often as some would like. while i was at moes, absolutely. this is what we know about minimum wage and the conversation around it. when you go -- this is a good example of caring about the issue as the reverend dixon does

and raised by a single mother that works 16 hours a day. i did not just get this from pookie but the average person stuck at a minimum wage job about 17 to 21 percent of the folks will lose the jobs because today two trillion dollars of payroll can be automated. said differently when you raise the minimum wage artificially with no production and when you end up with olive gardens with an ipad and more subways with a touch screen, you eliminate the first wrong of the economic and what does that mean? it manifests that the average person that we're talking about has an unemployment rate of 15 percent. the guy or gal that finishes the education while they're in prison and gets back in the workforce, you find that person

making significantly more and the unemployment rate falls through the floor. consistent is the facts. so what have i done? i created the opportunity agenda. i work working on it for years. it focuses on the most important foundation that the federal government can help build because the two things and doing the haves and have notes and the ed educational and then we have the work skills in prison or not. then there's an innovation of investing an opportunities act and that tarts the community. we're working on o it and hopefully we can be more receptive in the culture and see some of this became to light.

>> briefly. we're out of time. i have great confidence here. >> while you were talking, but i have listened to him be called an uncle tom. i have listened to him having his blackness challenged because he happens to have a different political orthodox. not by you but by others. >> i was like where are you going. >> i started tonight by complimenting someone that would never vote for me and going to compliment aaron gray and someone that i not only respect and like.

he would not vote for me and i don't expect him. we do not agree on the issues. you can have civility and the way that you discuss things and look in the areas that you want to be united. i listened to y'all discuss education. i did not hear that much difference. you think that it's the closest thing to magic and the single best way to transform a life. i would just say this. when you were talking i thought to myself paul held the coat while they stoned stephen to death. mosis was guilty of manslaughter and david the conspiracy to commit murder. they all went on to do great things. people can change lives ch our god is a god of second changes. i will commit myself to spend more time of understanding the need of of those reintegrating in society. the only thing that i ask is that you spend the time of talking to crime victims that have had their looifls un

ravelled by some of the people that you referenced in prison. >> apparently the congressman does not know me. anybody in here that knows me knows that i have dedicated my life to what you're saying. i have not seen you in any of those circles yet. it's okay. i'm sorry but you misjudged me. >> i'm not judging you. that's my point. help me keep people from judging him too because he has a different political or tthodox. you should be the first one defending him when people call him names. >> how do you know that i don't? what proof -- let me just say this. i know that we're wrapping it up. if that's not judgemental for you to just say that you just told me what i tell people about senator scott. what you just told me is that --

>> i think one of the questions is that tim scott discovered he is black and where he is referring to that. >> let's be transparent. >> let me go back to that then. >> please do. i'm looking for it in this one. >> the statement was made in the aftermath of your three day speeches on the senate floor that basically tied you into the african american community in a way that you have never been tied in before. now, sarcastically speaking, i said yeah senator scott discovered he is black. i am glad that this filtered aback to you. i did not call you an uncle tom. >> i just discovered i was black. i have been black for a long

time. can you tell? >> it's quiet obvious that blackness is not just the clool of skin. >> in 1997 when i was stopped seven times and then held a meeting at the counsel 18 years ago and driving while black, that might have been an indication that i was concerned with the sissue. >> it's really un fortunate. >> i thought you were not going to interrupt me. >> i'm going interpret yto inte for a moment. >> i think that officers do the job. >> gentlemen your participation grades are going down. okay. >> i thought we were just getting started. >> i thought we had a couple of more hours. >> i hope this is not the last

conversation that everyone in here has. i have made a promise to get certain people out of her at an hour. >> i thought you said 11:00. >> i did not. >> sorry. sorry. >> i want to give mr. pedalie. you have to wrap this up. >> i would be happy too. there seems to be one point of agreement and that's the education is a platform to the opportunity in the country because education is at the top of my platform and something that i care so deeply about. i have been going around and meeting with school superintendents in the district. one moment really impacted me from the meetings. i was meeting with a superintendent and he told me, he said chris if you get elected

please promise me that you would not cut money for free reduced school lunches. 60 percent of my kids depend on those to survive. when they go home, they do not have anywhere to go. they do not have a ride go anywhere. they need to lunches to survive. if they're hungry, they're not learning. if they're not learning, they're not going to get ahead. they do not have the platform. if we do not work on the issues that have an impact in people's lives, we're going to continue to see the same results. don't be surprised that people in poorer areas are not as good if they're not eating. we need to get back to who we are as a country? are we the country that allows our children to live in a poverty that they can not use the time in school to learn? as long as we have congressman that vote to cut the money for pell grants and lunch money so

people cannot go to college, if we have congress that vote against the violent woman's aact a, then we have ourself a very broken some the representation. >> professor -- >> because he mentioned congressman, i'm going give you one last word and keep it quick. that's it. >> i invite you to the floor speech. i will never be lectured to you against the violence to woman. my chief of staff was the head of my violence against woman task force. i'm the first person in south carolina that started one. i will not -- i voted for both the house versions. because of the politics, the democrats had to put something in there that the republicans in the house could not take. if you want an indictment, it's on politics. do not question me to protecting

woman in this country. don't do it. >> at the end of the day actions speak louder than words. [ applause ] [ applause ] >> you can sit down. i'm not done. i want one last word with everyone. i hope that you recognize that we were actually able this evening to have a discussion. it's clear that they not all agree with each other on a lot of things. i think it was also clear that there are some areas of common ground that could be discussed. we don't do it if we don't have parties walling themselves off. i commend the candidates for showing up this evening and have a conversation with each other when parts were un comfortable for them. i thank you folks for your participation and keeping it civil.

i was curious if i was going to have to call anybody down. you laughed when appropriate, and i am happy o say that i have spend the entire evening and not had the glare at anyone. the participation grades are good. thank you all and thank the candidates again. >> thank you sam. i appreciate it. a debate from the first congressional district and then the open enrollment for the affordable care act. later live coverage on the challenges facing nato. now a debate featuring those running for the new york house in the first congressional district. they discuss no fly and no gun, health care act and the black lives matter movement. this is an hour and a half. hello and good evening. my name is karen miller and i am

coshare of the league of woman voters, and i am the moderator for the debate this evening. before we start, would you all start and join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america. to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you. >> okay. the league of woman voters welcomes you. it's a trusted nonpartisan political organization. we never endorse candidates or parties, but we're directly involved in many of the issues important to the community. we are preparing and disturb

yuting on the voting issues. i'm going to spend just a minute on voting issues i hope when you came in tonight you saw and picked up the educational material such as voters guide a proposition guide that's going to help you understand the proposition that's on the ballot in november. you have the turn it over to see the proposition. it's on the exchange and community development fund. that's very important. also for those that have not registered, you still can.

registration forms are on the back and applications for absentee ballots. the ballot process is a two part process and you have to send the application in by november 1st. you will get a ballot back in the mail, and you have to have that postmarked by november 7. there's no video taping of the debate. they will air it frequently and provide a disk to ltv in east hampt hampton, and we will make it vablg on total on our facebook page and website. also in a first for us and the election of the candidates, c-span has requested a copy of the tape to be broadcast on their many platforms, several stations, the internet radio.

please consul the c-span website for more information. it takes many hands to put this sort of debate together. we need to thank everybody that that's assisted. johnson in the back and social sto studies teacher and then from south hampton we have tracey, lisa and their students. we need to thank the could say to and security staff. lynch greated you as you entered. she and you de and the student

guests will be in the aisle to pick up the questions that you have for the candidates. raise your hand as the debate goes on so you can have a card and then fill it out and they will pick it up again to give it to our vet the panelists asking the questions are joe shaw and they publish the south hampton press, east hampton press and 27.com. and gloria burke. they're asking what is received from the league members, you the audience and the students. i remind you that we like the questions to be identified as having come from the audience and students when that's the case. students, please let us know

what issues are important to you and noting on the card that the question came from the student. we also have chair of the government committee of the league and then copresident judy that's going view the questions that you write on the index card. it's not to sensor any voice, this is done to identify the issues that are most important to the audience while avoiding duplication. it also insures that questions are issued base and suitable to be asked to both candidates. one of the most important people is barbara. she is showing the signs that's going to be telling you how much time you have left and when to

stop. most important is marshal and the candidates lee sell don and now to the debate format that was agreed to by the candidates prior to the acceptance of the invei invitati invitation. they will be asked a series of questions they will have up to three minutes to answer the questions. both candidates are asked the same question and they have three opportunities to rebutte any statement in the state of the debate. they do so by raising the red card. you can use that up to three times. when you use a red card, you can

rebutte. if time allows, each one has an opportunity to ask a question of the opponent and then the o opponent offer a response. you have two minutes for that o. you have two minutes for that also. finally each candidate will have an additional two minutes to make the closing statement and closing statements are in adverse order of opening statements. the rules for the audience are no taping as i said, and no interruptions or verbal reactions and hold your applause until the final remarks of the candidates. there are many reasons for this. it allows the audience the opportunity to hear the response, it avoids wasting time because if the audience is making noise, the candidates can't be talking. it limits the information

available to voters that are un decided between the candidates and the candidates came here tonight to talk to the voters. that's the dialogue that we want to have. given the expanded desimilar nation of the tape, it's important that we maintain a civil atmosphere please write the questions on a card. it's important to us at the league that the concerns of the audience be addressed by the candidates. we can not know what the concerns are unless we have the questions. we need to air the issues uniquely important to us as voters in the local congressional district. as such we will not discuss breaking national news. this means that we will not be discussing whether bob dylan should have received the prize for noble literature. >> exactly.

we all agree. >> please remember to shut off the cell phones. thank you. based on the coin toss mr. zeldin is going to go first. he will make the opening statement. do you want the o o go here or ? >> well, good evening everybody. carole had a chance to recognize a lot of people and not here's. thank you to carole for moderating and for hosting and for all of you to be out here tonight for tonight's debate. this is what the american political process is really all about. you taking the time to be here tonight and taking the time to ask us questions on the community and country. my name is lee zeldin and i was born here on the island. my wife and i are raising our two daughters. i spent four years in active

duty in the army. i spent the last nine in the army reserves and i serve with the rank of major. i served in the new york state senate and during that i led the fight to repeal the payroll tax for 80 percent of the employers and cosponsored the nations tax cap and reduced to the lowest level in 60 years and then the joseph program for were the veterans with the post traumatic stress disorder. i was elected to congress in 2014. i have been focused on my new year of american strength agenda to protect america's security abroad and at home and have a good private paying sector job and then the first responders and then improve the quality of education in the schools and repair the infrastructure and safe guard the environment. all of the issues are important to all of you. during my brief time 21 months in congress i have been able to

get three bills passed to help the veterans that i introduced the proposals of mine to stop the sale of the island and preserve and protect it. i got my bill passed and then the opt out was signed into lay and that's the safe bridges act to direct the funding for the sate and local bridges and created a new health care clinic for the veterans and i am looking for waloo looking forward to tonight's debate. thank you all for being here. [ applause ] [ applause ] >> let me remind the audience please hold the applause until the closing stantements. thank you. >> thank you. hi, and good evening everyone. it's great to be in westhampton. i want to thank the league of woman voters and everyone else that is here today for doing this. it's i think an election -- hopefully an election of the lifetime. i hope that we never go through

the drama that we're going through now. i want to thank the students that came out tonight. this is the generation that we're talking about and the future of the country and the many things that are at stake. many of you know me and i am anna throne-hoist. i ran for congress because this is the all aaccount the most disfunctional, in affective of politics congress in the history of congress. according to a very resent poll no more than 11 percent of americans feel that congress is getting the job done for them. i have devoted my work in this community and i have raised my four kids in this community and voted my work to aaddressing the lack of opportunity.

as many of you know i started the hay ground school and i started the school because i wanted to bring the community together along racial lines, religious lines, cultural lines and make sure that early childhood education was available to every child in the community regardless of what school district you were born in to. i went on to run the bridge hampton child care center. we did the same thing and had a head start program and had the opportunity to go to college. as the town supervisor, i lead the way on managing our budgets, cutting wasteful spending, cutting multimillion dollar deficits and getting the aaa rating and making sure that government's served you in the most efficient and cost aeffective way and saving dollars. we have so many issues to talk about and that are not happening in congress totd. fixing the aca, fixing immigration reform, college

affordabili affordability, protecting social security and medicare. so many issues i could go on and on, and i look forward to the questions and i look forward to an informative meeting. >> okay. the first question is addressed to mr. zeldin. >> this come from a league of voters who do you support for president and please explain why. >> i endorsed donald trump over hillary clinton. i have some serious issues with hillary clinton, her record. this is not just about e leklec a president but the future of the supreme court for the next 40. i care deeply about national security. i want the see the economy grow. i believe that we can do a better job negotiating the trade deals to help the american

worker and the american company. the american companies and economy as well. i have been a prevocal o o opponent of common core and going back to the new york senate and it's important to improve the quality of education and he is outspoken with that as well. neither of the candidates are perfect. both of the candidates have their flaws, but on balance between the two of them, i have quiet candidly hillary clinton has with the conflicts of the clinton foundation and she mishandled classified zmchgs had a server in the basement, these were crimes committed and un fortunately every single day we have people going to court for much less in fractions and yet hillary clinton is not being held accountable for the crime

through the judicial system and that's un fortunate. i don't think any it's coincidence that there was a meeting with former bill clinton just a few days before it was said not to pursue any charges against hillary clinton. on the department of justice building it says when it ends it begins. the fact that hillary clinton is not being held accountable, she is not qualified to be president of the united states, but should not get a job inside of the file room at the fbi. she is a nonstarter and i disagree with her strongly and the position on the issues. i don't want to see my country to be more like europe. i want to see us get stronger with regards to immigration, cracking down on the illegal immigration here in the united states and providing workers and more opportunity for people that are here illegally. there's a process and i have a

lot of compassion for the person that's not here yet in the united states of america because they went to the local conciliate and said how do i have the american dream because they're following the rules they're not here yet. hopefully on the substance and policy, we can focus on the issues on the remainder of the debate on policy and substance and the future of the country and not just four years and securing the country and taking care of the veterans, but also for the future of the supreme court for the next 40. that's why i support him over her. >> thank you. mr. throne-hoist. >> i don't see how anyone cans.. >> i don't see how anyone can support a sexual predator and

anyone that disparages a gold star family. an individual that makes fun of people with disables. i don't know how anyone checks the moral compass that's an elected office and what it takes to be an elected office and thinks that it's okay to support someone who is all of what i just said. on top of that and the debate "the aftermath" debate and that he is un qualified on every single one of the issues that face us in the united states of america today the contrast is hillary clinton. she made a mistake with the e-mail server. there's no question about that. she is taking responsibility on

that. i don't know if anyone you saw the editorial today in the star. my opponent has said thhillary clinton belongs in jail as has donald trump. the east hampton star put it well today. only someone that thinks that the law of the land is equivalent to a third world banana republic and does not understand the law, would make a statement like that. i will remind you that mr. zeldin is an attorney. a statement like that means that you have a very simple ignorance for the rule of the law in a country like ours, but you're also neglecting to understand that making inflammatory statements like that is un truthful and misleading. now, we have two candidates and one that is going to win the white house and one that's going to make the opponentment or several to the supreme court.

one of them hillary clinton will make sure that that one will get the dark money out of politics, coke brothers et cetera and my opponent is a happy recipient and that a woman's right to choose is protected and work to make sure that all of the things that matter to us when we're talking about the north carolin opportunity that takes the burden off of the middle class the way that the tax code is written today. and shift it on to the top of the centers and the earn ers in the country today. make sure that the corporate taxes are not lodged outside of the country. immigration reform, i can go on and on. i am supporting hillary clinton because she is the only one qualified to run for president among the two front runners. >> thank you.

the second question will go intentionally to mr. throne-hoist. >> this is from us at the press home court. news day recently completed a poll of first district voters. it was a small sampling but provided some interesting in sights to the district beyond the count rates. it found that won the path of citizenship for the illegal immigrants and think that climate change is a real and looming threat. at the same time most want obama care repealed. on guns, democrats are on and republicans want a lesser and dekrieb themselves as second amendment supporters. how can one candidate from either party truly represent such a divided district?

>> i think that it's important to understand that we are a country and that today is very divided, but when i got elected to the town board in south hampton, i got elected on a people not politics platform. i got elected on that i was going to be there to serve people, keep the politics out, find common sense and common ground solutions. i believe to every one of these issues, there's such a thing. we have to deal with the immigration issues today. we have somewhere between 11 and 15 million un documented workers in the country today. if we don't solve that and come up with a bipartisan solution to that, there was a gang plan that was a bipartisan solution that

was pass in the senate and did not make it to congress but it was a by partisan plan to solve all of these issues. background checks, closing the loopholes and that means that you can go on a computer today and arm yourself. want to make sure that guns are kept out of the hands of terrorists, criminal record, domestic abuse and et cetera. 80 to 90 percent of americas have answered a poll saying that they want to see that. there's a solution to that that protects the tannates of the second amendment all that i agree with. the affordable care act, there too if congress were not so admired the way that it was

today, it has common sense solution to that as awell. number of those have weighed in on that and talked about how do we do it. every one agrees that the preexisting conditions should no longer be a condition on why people buy and kick off the insurance plan. it's the agreement that kids should be able to stay on the plan until they're 26 years old. i believe if congress can afford a plan today to make sure that pharmaceuticals can be negotiated, that there would be a by partisan support for that. there's a great example of the kind of medications that are now fably kat fabricated outside of the country and the tax dollars from the sale of the medications are staying outside of the country and we through medicare and

medicaid and the veterans aaffairs, cannot negotiate the cost of this. we need to end the cadillac tax. i built my career on by partisan collusio solutions and i would do the same in congress. >> thank you. mr. zeldin? >> well, you asked for things in the polls and tackling national security and the iran nuclear deal and what to do about the ref jew gu refugee and how do we take care of the veterans and reform the tax codes so that people can fill it out on a form as simple as a postcard. there are a lot of issues that we can talk about. earlier i mentioned common core. taking care of our environment. the mayor former new york city mayor said if you agree with me nine times out of 12, vote for

me. if you agree nine out, see a psyc psychiatrist. if you see this, look at my last 21 months. people ask me and say lee, you have accomplished more in 21 months than the pred secessor d in 12 years. a bill to save plum island during the predecessors time is when we lost the mission and a law was written to move the -- to sell the island and move the mission to kansas and then my predecessor introduced a bill to stop the sale of plum island and could not get out of the committee. i got it out of the committee and got it passed in the house after working with both sides of the aisles. early on when i introduced the

veterans bills, they were passed with the support of republicans and democrats. my bill to prevent the faa from taking negative actions from the aircraft and the noise restrictions was done unanimously and you have very local issues as well. right now as we go through the point plan, we have local officials way in with specific asks and we're working with them and the army core at the table to make sure that we do have more sand and to work with the village of westhampton beach because 13 of 15 groins has part of the point plan and they want an adjustment made, and we're doing what we need to do get that done in the final product. we do have to tackle the immigration. what we can not do is because we

have had a republican president and democratic president and republican and democratic mix. every combination of that and they have not passed a one solution for all of the problems. i'm not here blaming the republicans or democrats. i'm saying that there's so much between the agreement that we should pass. why hold hostage what everyone agrees with in order to have a fight on what is controversial. if you look at the record for the last 21 months, it's filled with getting congress to work with local officials and people of washington on both sides of the aisle. >> thank you. the third question goes to mr. zeldin. >> this question comes from a student. what would you tell first time voters for the solution of the current state of politics? what can they expect from you? be specific. >> thank you. that's a great question. you're here. get involved. there are so many people that are eligible to vote and will not vote. be the way that's people that

have in their 40s and 60s who are not voting. what is sad is going door to door and it's like why are the houses not on my list and it's because they're not on the list. do not let anyone tell you that you're too o young to get involved. people say that you have to wait the turn and do your time. maybe one day you will have a chance to run for office. people say how did you start to run for congress when you were 27. i said go to fec.gov and download a form. you submit it and now you're a candidate for the united states congress. run for the local school board or town office or county or state. just get involved and participate in the process. you don't necessarily have to run. there are many ways to contribute. some decide that they want to join the military. others want to be firefighters or teachers or cops or you can start a nonprofit and help the

victims of domestic violence. there are many ways to leave the world better than you found it. the best way to set what you want as far as the future of the community and the country, you're doing it by being here tonight. it does not matter truly when you go to the voter booth and you're circling and way back when we used to pull a live er and now it's different and you circle the box for who you want. you circle that and you can tell people or not, but participant. if you're voting for me the election is november 8th. if you're voting for my opponent it's -- just kidding. november 8th is the election. make sure that you're getting all of your friends involved as well because they may be eligible to vote and thinking i don't want to participate. cannot wake up on november 9th and complaining of the results of the election if you did not vote. if you want to complain, you

have to participate. i think it's great when you go off to college and you get involved in the local races there and maybe you decide to take a class on the political science and then you major in it and then the foreign affairs ask whatever you do that you pursue, that's the interest and passion and just go after it 110 percent. >> thank you. >> my interest is that there are a lot of young people really paying attention. i'm worried on what they're seeing. think that is perhaps bringing some attention to this. my sense among the young people that are paying attention to this and seeing what is going on on the presidential level and

seeing how the discourse is evolved into a referendum really on whether we elect a sexual predator and we elect someone that choi chooses to make fun of of someone with a different religion or race. i think that young people are looking at that. i look at my four kids that are in the 20s, and they're out there talking to everyone about this. not because their mom is running for congress, they're used to that. they're used to me being in office, but they're seeing a generation that's their generation that's worried is college going to be afoshd for them? are they going to be ail to refinances the college loans? will their kids have access to early childhood education. can they get a place and stay here on long island.

is there going to be housing and jobs and a transportation system that works for us right here on long island and for this next generation? these are big issues at hand. this is also a generation that have seen their parents lose the jobs and their homes with the mortgage melt down that happened just in this last decade. they're seeing people losing their farms and not being able to afford the bills right here on long island. this is a generation that i am seeing that is very reeved up to speak, to vote, to be part of this. i think the whole bernie sanders movement showed that front and center. i see that among my own kids and see that among other kids that i talk to out there and

understanding what is at stake here too in terms of the su cream court and understanding that a woman's right to choose and the access to woman's health care is at stake. the environment is at stake. this is a generation that's learning in school and understanding what science has to say even though that my o opponent does not believe in the science behind climate what i think and that it is caused by human action, and that we have a moral responsibility and an economic responsibility to deal with it. >> thank you. >> kids are coming out, and they should come out. >> mr. throne-hoist, thank you. >> next student. let's stay with the student questions. how do you feel about the black lives movement matter?

>> you can call me anna. >> movements start for a reason and we have very rich and complicated history of movements in the country, but they start for a reason and they start because a group of people feel the need to express themselves and feel the need to organize themselv themselves. my foster child is part of the wpy 00 and that's black youth project 100. these are young activists and mostly african american and latino that concern themselves with the opportunities going in to their adulthood, and concern themselves with feeling safe, with feeling that they have

opportunity and when we see what's evolved to a divide between the understanding of what black lives matter is about, which is wanting to have a voice and wanting to come to a table and have a conversation about how do we all feel safe, and part of that is getting the guns out of the hands of people that should not have guns. 30,000 or more people die from the hands of gun in the united states of america today, and we do not have guns -- common sense gun safety laws. my opponent has voted 28 times on a procedure motion that would allow common sense gun safety taking guns out of the hands of people on the terrorists watch list from coming forward for a vote. he dancing around the subject, but that's in fact what he has

done. when we're talking about protecting the men and woman in blue, that's equally important. one of my biggest honors on my time on the town board buwas th i was the police commissioner. we went through some tough times. most of you remember that. we worked very closely together and we worked on community policing, we worked on sensitivity training, we worked on making sure that this was a police force that strived for diversity and strived for community policing and a partnership in community. that's a conversation that we need to have on a national level today, and we need to come together and that's not what is is happening in washington today, and that's what i would like to be a voice for and bringing everyone together for this very important national

conversation. >> thank you mr. thr o one-hoist. mr. zeldin, same question. >> when anybody is justly and violently targeted and innocent, that's an important cause for anyone to take and make sure that does not happen again i don't believe when it's resulting in innocent, couragious law enforcement and different parts of the country to be murdered. when there's someone that's un justly murdered and there should be accountability and someone should get into a lot of trouble if they broke the law. what is not the answers is when it crosses the line where you're

lewdi looting the local area that you love and targeting the local police officers. when you're taking a man or woman that's wearing blue and they leave their family to keep their, not just family safe but strangers as well, and the family never sees them again. what is poerimportant is for everyone to come together and understanding that violence is certainly not the answer to solve this in consideration of the fact that all lives in this country matter. now my opponent says that -- just claimed that i now voted 28 times against a bill from peter king to keep terrorists for purchasing firearms and that's interesting because i was in dc and a couple of days ago it was 27. in the tv adds it's 25 times.

now, you don't have to take my word for it. if you look at the tv add it lists 25 different bills. you can go in and type them for yourself like one example the comprehensive addiction and recovery act. the number one priority is the heroine and op abuse. they're working to get it down $8.3 million to help combat the abuse in this country. who would have thought that honestly there would be a tv ad that's aired against me and this and 24 other bills will be displayed and saying that i voted against the p kings bill to prevent terrorists. p king voted the same exact way that i did on all 25 bills. these 25 bills -- you can look it up yourself and they had nothing to do with guns.

nothing. they had no part of the process. not right now after the bill is passed or the beginning when it was in the jurisdiction or not the rules committee or the house floor or congress or back to th. it's i think important to you that as we sit here in front of you that we have the ability to say not just what polls will to win an election but we want to be honest with you and that is a flat out lie. >> excuse me. are you using a red card? >> can i do that? >> yes, you may, but you have to show me. >> sorry. red card. i'm sorry? can i use that for a second because i'd like to show something here. we have had several debates now and i think it's time that we separate some real fact from fiction. and the fact of the matter is that the way it works on the floor of the house of representatives when a bill is introduced by a member of

congress on anything the majority can either vote for or against it, but as part of that procedure a member of congress can say, i would like to bring on a motion because i believe there is something more pressing and i would like to bring forward a procedural vote to bring forward in this case peter king's no fly, no buy legislation. that has now happened 25 times before we cut my commercial, three times since, 28 times. i have the dates right here and circled. mr. zeldin has had the opportunity 28 times to vote to bring forward peter king's bill on whether to prevent terrorist watch list individuals from also buying guns. he voted no every single time.

this is fact. i have it right here and, yes, if you google those bills, those were different bills, but the motion was brought forward when they were voted down to preempt them by a vote on whether to bring forward mr. king's bill on no fly, no buy. the question is simple, if you had it before you today would you vote yes or no for it? do you support peter king's bill on no fly, no buy? >> mr. zeldin. >> okay. so there was one thing in there that was very honest, she says those were different bills. when you look at the tv ad it lists 25 bills and it's absolutely true that all 25 of those bills have absolutely nothing to do with guns. and i'm not holding up -- i could hold up a book. i'm telling you to go on the

internet, you can look at it yourself. you can look at the tv ad, it lists 25 different bills and you will see that those 25 bills have absolutely nothing at all to do with guns. that was the one little nugget of my opponent's answer that was absolutely accurate. and if it was pete king's bill, why was it that every single time pete king voted the same exact way that i did? why? because when you fight really hard against the heroin and opioid abuse epidemic that is right here in suffolk county it's the worst county in the entire state as far as being targeted with abuse and it's a personal issue. i have been to a lot of wakes myself where families are being torn apart because of it. so i took this cause up. i had multiple press conferences, i formed a coalition with republicans and democrats in the house and the

senate to figure out how to get this bill done. and just think that that bill number, because i voted for it, is now one of 25 bills that have absolutely nothing to do with guns and it's going to be used in an attack ad to try to get you to vote for my opponent. why? i will tell you why. because it polls really, really, really well. if you can convince voters that your opponent wants terrorists to be able to purchase firearms. well, i've been doing my part my entire life to make sure that there is no threat to american security here at home or abroad. i will continue to do my part but it is outrageous when i fight to make sure that there are no more wakes to visit, that that will be used in an attack ad against me. that is outrageous. >> and no applause, please. no applause, please. i would remind the candidates

that that question from a student asked for their opinion of black lives matter. both of you were discussing matters that are of interest and are important in this election, but we are asking our audience for what is important to them and what they want to hear. so i would ask you to try to stay within the parameters of the question. >> i'm going to defend myself, though. >> well, you have to use another red card. wasn't worth it. okay. >> how many red cards are we entitled to? >> you have a total of three. you have each used one. okay. the next question is to mr. zeldin. >> this is a question that comes from the league as well as from the audience. the people would like to know regarding obamacare, if you feel it needs some fixing, which i think a lot of people do, specifically what would you

change? if you want to get rid of it, what are you going to put in its place specifically? >> that's a great question and we need to do something with obamacare. i would not have voted for it if i was in congress when it came up for a vote, i certainly wouldn't vote for it now. back in january i voted for legislation to repeal and replace obamacare which the president vetoed. parts of obamacare, like covering people with preexisting conditions, allowing children to be able to stay on their parents' policy, those are two components, for example, that liberals and conservatives, republican and -- republicans and democrats all agree upon. so whether you want to keep obamacare as-is or you're someone who wants to repeal and replace it, those are two components that are in all of the different versions that we see. we need to have more choice. in new york state we had just one lone co-op, health republic of new york which went under, 200,000 new yorkers some in the

middle of cancer treatment were told in the middle of cancer treatment that they no longer are covered. now that you wouldn't be covered in the future, that you're not going to be covered now. there needs to be more options, there needs to be to be more plans. with he need to have the ability to purchase plans from outside of state, with he need more providers here locally willing to honor those plans from out of state. we need to create more pretax incentives for people. there exists right now as far as being able to have affordable child care, to be able to reimburse a lot of different expenses related to you, yourself, your spouse, your kids. we need to have more of a pretax benefit for people to be able to cover some of those expenses that unfortunately they don't have enough money to go get treated. as a result of them not having enough money to go get treated they may up with a more chronic, more expensive long-term element that would cost more. the policies that exist right now and the lack of competition

and lack of affordability -- by the way, one other thing that's important is we have small and medium sized businesses on long island, to give them more of an ability to work together to be able to get a more competitive plan for their employees. right now employers are telling their employees that they're getting less and have going to have to pay more. i hear about pry yer premiums, higher deductibles, canceled policies, longer wait times. it's not working. the math on its own obamacare collapses in 2017 so we have to get something done with obamacare. so whether you want to talk about fixing it, improving it, delaying it, repealing, replacing t the fact is in 2017 this has to get done. if nothing gets done it collapses on its own. i have favored the repeal and replacement plan which was vetoed by the president. i continue to favor that plan as well, but health republic of new york as the example and what happened with a business model

where you put the freelancers plan in charge of the policy. they marked down the policy and when it went to new york state to fix it new york state told them, no, they weren't allowed to do it. we have to get smarter in the way we deliver it as well. >> thank you. miss throne-holst. >> the intention with the affordable care act was two things, one was to make sure that all americans had access to affordable health coverage and quality healthcare, regardless of income, and to start to reduce what are the high costs of healthcare in the united states of america. we pay somewhere in the realm of 30% more for almost every medical procedure than you do elsewhere in the world today. and that's part of the reason this is not tenable. would i have written the bill differently? yes, i would have. i wouldn't have given away the store to the insurance companies the way it was written, which was a compromise.

but today we have, again, a congress that will not come together and work on this. there are so many bipartisan solutions to this that are mired in the partisan bickering that's going on and that's what's got to stop. and when you talk about replace and -- repeal and replace but you don't actually put forward a replacement plan, there has been no bill, no comprehensive plan, put forward under the repeal and replace. so it's a lot of talk right now. so why congress doesn't get together and solve this i think is a big problem. today 20 million more americans are insured than they were before the affordable care act. we are at an all time low in terms of people uninsured in the united states of america today, but -- and we are starting to see the cost of healthcare going down, but we still have some very big problems. the income bracket has to be

fixed in terms of where people qualify for tax credits and tax reductions in order to be able to afford their plans. we have to be able to negotiate pharmaceuticals. i touched on that a little bit, but i will give you a frightening example of that. there's a company called gilead science, it's an american company that is manufacturing pharmaceuticals in ireland in a tax haven. they have the hep c do you remember. it is something that affects veterans today more than any other population, they come back and they are infected by hepatitis c and many others. the cost of producing that drug is a dollar a pill. they charge $1,000 per pill. and we do not have the ability to negotiate that today. we've got to fix the doughnut hole, we've got to take -- get

rid of the cadillac tax and we have to make sure that the fraud and abuse that is in there, over $200 billion worth of unnecessary medical procedures are ordered today and they are not stopped. there is a bipartisan way to do this and we have got to do it. >> thank you. okay. the next question which is our sixth will go to miss throne-holst. >> i feel compelled to point out this was actually on my list when i sat down, it seems appropriate now. so there is a proposal to prevent people on the government's terrorist watch list from buying firearms. do you support or oppose this proposal and why? >> me first? >> i think you first, yeah. >> thank you. as you know i absolutely support it. i think it's imperative that we get guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, be they terrorists, be they

people with a criminal record, be they people with a mental health record, be they people with a domestic abuse record. it's time that you stop being snowed by what he's talking about. the fact of the matter is there is a procedure that happens on the floor of the house of representatives where when a bill is brought forward there is an opportunity to vote no on that and ask for a preemption for something that any members of congress think is more important. 28 times -- and i have them right here -- and, yes, if you google them or go on his website what you will find is a bill unrelated, but the fact of the matter is that 28 times as part of that procedure which is very commonly used on the floor

and mr. zeldin has to start telling the truth. >> mr. zeldin. >> yeah, so i wasn't actually suggesting that you visit my website, i was actually suggesting that you visit any website. any website at all. and, by the way, if -- if peter king -- if it was peter king's bill, why would he vote the same exact way that i did every single time? because we were voting whether or not to consider, for example, the comprehensive addiction and recovery act.

now, to the -- >> mr. zeldin -- >> excuse me. excuse me. quiet from the audience. >> to the question, which bill are you referring to? >> repeat the question, please. >> do you support a proposal. >> yes. >> which maybe you can explain. >> excuse me. let mr. zeldin speak. >> it's called the protect america act and it's legislation to prevent terrorists from being able to purchase firearms or explosives. it's legislation that i introduced, now, to get beyond the sound bites and actually talk details because if you notice that there hasn't been any details discussed yet, it is because there is a substantive debate if you are concerned about this issue and by the way i don't know a single member of congress in favor of terrorists being able to purchase firearms. i don't know one member of congress out of 535 who is in favor of terrorists being able to purchase firearms or explosives. here is the question and you can be on either side of it. i will tell you what my personal

opinion is. do you believe that the burden should be on the government to show that the purchaser is a terrorist or should the burden be on the purchaser to prove that they are not a terrorist? that's the main difference between the legislation that pete king introduced and the legislation i introduced. i believe that the burden should be on the government to show that the purchaser is a terrorist and the legislation that exists the burden is on the purchaser to go to court and prove that they are not a terrorist. you could be on either side of it. i'm telling you what my personal opinion s additionally 97% of the watch lists are foreigners. so we are talking about 3% that this debate applies to. and of that 3% i as a member of congress who has briefings on these topics with the director of the fbi, director of national intelligence, secretary of national security i cannot tell you how someone gets on and off the list and why. what i do know is that people have been added to the list because the feds want to speak to the former college roommate of the person they added to the

list. there have been toddlers added to the list, members of congress, u.s. service members, u.s. marshals. so part of the protect america act is to ensure that we are cleaning the list, removing the names of people who shouldn't have been on it in the first place. if you want to use the list for new purposes, if you want to say that someone can't purchase a firearm because they are on the list, you need to remove from the list anyone who shouldn't have been on there in the first place. by the way, of the 3% who aren't foreigners some of them for completely different reasons can't purchase. so i don't know of anyone who is in favor of terrorists being able to purchase firearms or explosives and, again, i'm not asking you to visit my website, i'm asking you to visit any website. >> thank you, mr. zeldin. the next question -- and just to let the question nurse know we are going to have two more questions and then a question for the candidates to ask each other. so two more questions and this is addressed to mr. zeldin

initially. >> excuse me. i would just like to comment that the question that mr. shaw just asked was also from the audience and was also on the league's list. so clearly it was an issue that everyone wanted an answer to. my next question is a combination, again, of audience and the league and it refers to climate change and i will just ask the question what measures would you propose which would balance the need for more efficient energy, environmental protection while preserving jobs in the fossil fuel industry. so that's sort of the combine of what i was hearing from the audience and what the league was asking. >> mr. zeldin. >> our climate is changing, we need to do more to be better

stewards of the air, our land, our water. i have supported many different pieces of legislation that helps protect the environment around us here on long island, the first congressional district is unique because we are almost completely surrounded by water. additionally i have helped get funding for stony brook university, other funding sources noered to pursue clean, green alternative energies, wind, solar, water. when i was in new york state legislator i supported funds to allow people to make their homes more energy efficient. we need to upgrade that the way that we are delivering power on long island, we have new plants which is more nick clee friendly but you have other plants that are not economic cloo he or environmentally friendly but they are held in operation primarily because the local area around the plant relies on the money to help pay their property taxes. we need to be smarter in the way

that we deliver power because we have plants that are outdated and are causing harm to the environment around us. i mentioned earlier my two pieces of legislation to help save plum island, i got $26.5 million secured for the national estuary program. the estuary goes deep into south hampton, it goes all the way to montauk highway and around montauk highway. we secured $26.5 million for that. as far as conservation goes, the end of last year the picaunic land trust they got an extension of conservation easements, this allows those in the agricultural place an easement on their property and allows the property to pass from one generation to the next. the epa is phasing out actually -- a getting rid of the eastern dump sites, those that are directly above our district,

but there is a debate going on as far as what to do with the western dump sites with connecticut's bridge waste, to improve water quality in the long island sound i introduced the long island sound restoration and stewardship act with steve israel and as far as long island sound goes, i believe that in instead of the current plan to phase out open water dumping in the western long island sound that we need to reduce that to no more than five or ten years. there are many different ways that we can be better stewards of our environment, taking care of the air, taking care of our land, taking care of our water. i tried to cover a lot of it in two minutes, but the key is to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels to become more environmentally friendly and pursue clean and green energy. there are opportunities with research done right here, good paying jobs, but also important research that we can lead the way for the entire country here on the east end of long island. >> thank you.

miss throne-holst. >> i think it's first of all important that we recognize that science is on our side in this and it's very important to work with science and the scientific community on this and the scientific community is unequivocal in that climate change is real. and it is one of the biggest threats to our generation, but certainly to the next generation and when we're talking about the threat we are not just talking about environment, we're talking about the cost and the economic impact of climate change. when we talk about the threat to us right here on long island but also seeing that there is a level of opportunity here, yes, we have to recognize that we are still far too dependent on fossil fuel burning plants, we are looking at sea level rise that is affecting the value of our properties and the threat to our properties and to our businesses. during my time as town supervisor i led the way on

putting together a program called soul rise south hampton, but it avails tax credits and the ability to tap into lower and lower cost solarizing infrastructure for your homes. we partnered with nyserta that allows you to tap into an audit of the energy efficiency of your house and access low cost loans where your monthly payment will be less than what the difference between your new and old utility costs are. we are so well poised right here on long island, we are surrounded by water, we have abundant wind and solar energy and we have the ability to get off of fog sill fuels right here and now. the other big threat to our environment here is the nitrogen loading in our surface and ground waters. we've talked about the idea of how do we sewer long island.

well, you can't sewer long island the way it needs in order to stop the -- and mitigate the problem around nitrogen loading. so i led the way on the founding of the clean water technology center at stony brook university, which is now a national hub, incubator, research and development site to bring forward new technology to retrofit each and every one of your cesspool and septic systems and start to treat nitrogen right on site. it stands to create hundreds of jobs and that is the kind of innovation that we need to support, programs that we need to roll out and we need the federal government to show leadership in that and that's not happening right now. and when we talk about cathnis. they want to build a $5 billion fossil fuel plant. i don't think it's okay to deregulate like my opponent did as a state senator.

the burning of fossil fuel and the impact that that has. i don't think it's okay to defund the epa. >> thank you, ms. throne-holst. >> okay. for a final question, ms. throne-holst will address it initially. >> this was a question that came from the audience and we also had it on our list. what is the single biggest way that you man to help veterans in your first or your next term in office? >> that's a very important question. and it's a very important question right here in suffolk county because we have the largest veteran population in new york state and we have the largest homeless veteran population in new york state and i don't think we do enough. during my time as town supervisor i worked with the county veterans administration to make sure that we had an officer from that administration at town hall on a weekly basis so that our east end veterans didn't have to travel all the

way out west to access those services. we also contracted with sus, services for the underserved, which is a wonderful organization that provides services to veterans and they are now operating out of our senior center in glanders. we need programs that ensures that every veteran that comes back has a job, has job training, has housing and has access to medical care and mental health care and we are not doing enough. we have seen reports repeatedly over the last several years how our va hospital in north poured is not able to provide the services. it's underserved. my opponent held a congressional hearing seven weeks out from this election, just a couple weeks ago, after having been in office for almost two years. he voted against the administration's proposed budget

that slashed the proposed funding by a billion dollars which reduced for about 70,000 veterans less costly healthcare. now, he denies that, but there is a record on all of this. and i will work tirelessly to make sure that the programs that need to be there are rolled out to, again, make sure that every veteran that comes back has a job and access to job training. there are not for profits that want to work with this with our educational system, with the companies on long island that want to hire veterans but need to make sure that they are trained for it. and roll out those programs that make sure that that happens. and protect medicare and social security because our veterans are as dependent on all of these programs. my opponent voted to create a

voucher program, medicare, and wants to tie social security to the stock market. well, for someone who has managed a municipal budget for eight years where our pension system in new york is tied to the stock market, i know firsthand how well that works. it doesn't work, and taxpayers end up paying the difference. and these are issues that, again, this dysfunctional congress is not coming together on and funding is being denied by the majority of this congress. >> thank you, ms. throne-holst. mr. zeldin. >> well, at risk of spending two minutes on a really important topic defending myself against a few different things unrelated that were untruthful i will focus on veterans but i might use this red card to give plyself some extra time. my biggest personal passion as it relates to our veterans is combatting our veterans

returning home to mental wounds of war and losing their lives. in suffolk county we have too many veterans that feel isolated an alone, they don't realize there are other veterans in their community going through what they are going through. there are strangers in the middle of the night who will drop everything and lend a helping hand. i created. the veteran support program. suffolk county was one of four counties in new york state, the program has worked exceptionally. the county, tom ronane, private groups, vsos have done an amazing job to get help to our veterans who need it most it's saving lives. when we lose one veteran due to suicide it is one too many and some of these veterans like joseph dwyer his last words were i don't want to die. it gets called suicide but he was huffing for temporary relief. a yer ago i introduced legislation to take the dwyer program which is now in over a dozen counties in new york state

and makemake it national. whether you live in suffolk county, new york, or anywhere else in this country our veterans need to know that also a helping hand, love and support and they should not give up. i've lost more friends due to suicide with ptsd than i have lost friends who have died overseas in combat. beyond that, there is -- the department of veterans affairs needs to do a much better job in the way it's operating its capital budget, the denver va hospital project alone is a billion dollars over budget, you have executives using the relocation incentive bonus program to get themselves set up with moves that they want and getting themselves paid $127,000, $227,000 and when the office of inspector general for v. a said that those cases need to be referred to the department of justice, the department of veterans affairs turned on their own inspector general. we have veterans who have -- they are -- they've died on

secret wait lists, we have in several states employees having inn stukted to falsify wait lists. we will have a new secretary of veterans' affairs in january and they have to improve the culture at the va and need to tackle these issues head on. some laws need to change. the house passed the va accountability act which is in the senate and they are looking to try to to get a final product to pass before the end of this year because like the albany stratton va hospital director the department of veterans affairs wanted to fire but the review board said you can't, the law is not going to allow you to fire this person who should have been replaced. improving the culture, changing some of the laws, changing money more efficiently are important. we can have a debate just on veterans because theres no end ever to ways we can serve those who have kept us safe. >> thank you, there zeldin. at this point if you would like

to, mr. zeldin, you have the opportunity to ask one question of your opponent, miss throne-holst you will have two minutes to respond to that question. as i said at the beginning we would really like it to be issue-based. thank you. >> completely issue-based. if just on a policy level which policy positions of hillary clinton do you disagree with? >> you've made a statement the other day that i supported her proposed increase in accepting refugees from syria over the proposed 10,000 limit right now. i don't know where you got that from because i have never made that statement. what i have said is that i do think that we need to do our absolute fair share on this issue. but until we make sure that we have an immigration and vetting

system that is absolutely airtight for this. right now it takes 18 to 24 months for a syrian refugee to even go through the consideration process. and if anyone is suspected of any kind of terrorist affinity or connection, they are denied. but when we are looking at people being slaughtered, which is what's going on in syria today -- thank you -- i think we have to take our fair share of responsibility here. not letting syrian refugees into this country is one of the biggest jihadist recruitment tools going on today. not being part of a comprehensive plan to bring stability is part of what's going on today in terms of jihadist recruitment. we have an absolute responsibility there.

and i do agree with her stance on the nuclear deal. every military expert who understands this -- and there are many both on the american side of this and the israel side of this agreed that we had an absolute responsibility to make sure that iran did not build a nuclear bomb, and we managed that. we stopped that. >> would you disagree with hillary clinton's position -- >> mr. zeldin, this is not -- >> i just -- the question -- i'm just trying to understand. >> excuse me. mr. zeldin, do you want to use a red card? >> sure. okay. but don't direct -- don't direct your comments to ms. throne-holst. direct them to the audience. those are your voters. >> okay. great. so i have two minutes? >> two minutes. great. okay. so first off i would encourage my opponent just to clarify that

she's saying that she doesn't -- the question was what policies do you not agree with and the only thing that was mentioned was disagreeing on refugees so i would just like clarification that my opponent is saying that she disagrees with hillary clinton's position on refugees and that would be the only -- i don't want to put words in her mouth i just want to know if that's what she's saying she disagrees with. with the available time that is left, yeah, we absolutely disagree on a few different things that were just mentioned. the iran nuclear deal gives up to $150 billion to the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. iran is pledging to wipe israel off the wipe, they chant death to america on their holidays, they have financed assad in syria, hezbollah, they have overthrown foreign governments, the houthis in yemen. we had to pay $1.7 billion to the iranians, money that we did not owe and we had to pay it at

the same exact time simultaneously in order to secure american hostages, that's called ran some. people want to call it something else that's fine. what's important to note since then we have been more american hostages that have been taken. we could call it an agreement. we didn't even ask for a signature on the agreement so secretary kerry in responding to me in a letter says it's an unsigned political commitment. the side deals which have not been put out between the iaea and iran but the ap has reported iran is responsible for collecting some of their own soil samples and inspecting some of their own nuclear sites. the leverage that brought the iranians to the table was the sanctions relief. if you want to deal with any of the other bad activities like right here, we are not allowed to talk about anything that is in the in us today but when you go home and read about what the iranians are doing right now because of what happened with the houthis in iran you will see their aggressive behavior

towards us and we don't have the leverage to bring them to the table. >> thank you, mr. zeldin. thank you. yes. >> all right. let's get some facts on the table here and separate fiction. since the iranian nuclear deal was implemented -- and i'm going to read you real facts here. okay? a score sheet on iran's compliance has been kept and agreed to by the international community and oversight agencies that are now there to oversee. they have, as required, removed and placed iaea, those are the international atomic energy agency monitors storage two-thirds of the 19,000 centrifuge it used for iranian enrichment. iran has ended up uranium enrichment, a process that can be used to create the nuclear

bomb. it has removed all nuclear material from its once secret facility in forda which was the one we wore creed about the most. it has reduced all of its stockpile of enriched urianium from 12,000 to to 300 kilograms and the core of a reactor has been filled in with concrete. in other words, they have been incapacitated from building a nuclear bomb. now, does iran need to be very carefully monitored on this? there is no question about it. and that was a part of the deal that i did not agree with. the oversight was not strong enough. but again, the international community, national security

experts, army experts, military experts, intelligence experts on both american, international and israeli soil believe that this was the only way to move forward to ensure that. >> thank you, ms. throne-holst. mr. zeldin, we're talking about the iranian agreement which is important, but that question was not asked. now, is your rebuttal, again, on the iranian -- >> that's not okay? >> well, you do have use of one more red card. go ahead. >> okay. so the iran nuclear agreement, when we had our ten navy sailors being embarrassed, photography, videography and generals are being given awards, the iranians, the russians, the north koreans, the chinese, we have enemies that are testing us right now and they are watching each other test us. they do not respect weakness,

this he only respect strength. america's foreign policy needs to strengthen by strengthening our relationships with our allies and treating our enemies as our enemies. going back to this what we call an agreement, iron nuclear agreement, sometimes the word deal is used, again, it is not even signed by the iranians. when you go out and want to buy a car and say i'm going to give you $10,000 and, no, you're going to give me $25,000, there's no agreement. there are material terms of this deal where both sides are disputing. for example, the americans said that we are going to be able to inspect their military sites. therefore, during and after the negotiations the iranians said you will never be able to inspect our nuclear sites. we said that sanctions relief was going to be phased in over time based off of compliance, the iranians said sanction relief will be immediate, no suspension. you could go down the list of material terms of the agreement where both sides do not agree and what was made worse was that

certain components that they could not agree upon by the end was put into these deals, the verification agreement between the iaea and iran, there were more than one of these verification agreements. the leverage that brings them to the table is the sanctions relief. we have negotiated away the sanctions relief that brought them to the table and are propping up the wrong regime. these are really bad people. 2009 after an undemocratic election millions of iranians took to the streets to protest an undemocratic election and we said it was none of our business. now we have these people who are there right now doing all these bad activities, chanting death to erk ma, pledging to wipe us off the map, and inter continental ballistic missiles, they are for us. all these other issues we need the leverage to bring them to the table. >> thank you. ms. throne-holst, would you like to take this opportunity to ask a question of mr. zeldin? mr. zeldin, two minutes to respond, please. >> do you believe in a woman's right to choose?

do you believe that roe v. wade should be upheld? do you believe that planned parenthood should be funded to provide -- >> i'm sorry. misthrone-holst, one question. >> okay. all kind of baked into one, but -- >> excuse me. >> okay. so i am pro life and my daughters were born 14 1/2 weeks early, they were less than a pound and a half when they were born and i am so blessed, my wife and i, that these girls were given that ability to be able to be born into this world. we have every amount of admiration and respect for the doctors through that process, the nurses through that process, the power of prayer, we accepted prayer in about 16 different religions, i hope that's okay, i'm jewish, that was one, there was probably about 15 others and our daughters are grown-up to be

strong, but, you know, i got a chance to see life at 25 weeks. it's precious. now, when i was up in albany all this debate about abortion, the debate actually taking place right now in state governments and the federal governments is whether or not we should be allowing partial birth late term abortion. i passionately disagree with allowing late term aspartial bih abortion. we need to encourage more adoptions in this country. we need to do whatever we can to provide the best amount of health for women, men, children with the entire planned parenthood debate that has taken place when the video -- videos were first released one thing that gets left out a lot of the video -- of the entire debate was that the legislation itself doesn't take money away and put it in the treasury, it directs money to women's health centers

which are included right here in suffolk county, there is owens women's healthcare center, there is the women's health center in south hampton, green port, that's where the money was going so it was going towards women's health. during this time where there was an investigation taking place into those videos. it is obviously a very passionate topic for everyone, but it's something that i'm unapologetically have many different positions that i believe in. i'm not going to change my answer from one audience to the next. >> thank you. okay. so please no applause. thank you. you will have your opportunity in just a couple minutes when they give their closing statements. ms. throne-holst, would you please give your closing statement. two minutes. >> sure. >> thank you. >> i'd be happy to. again, thank you everyone for coming out tonight and i'm glad that the interest in this election is as big as it is

because there is no question that both on the presidential level and right here on the congressional level you are looking at two candidates that are about as diametrically opposed as they could ever be. i will just talk about what i think is important right here in district 1 new york but also spills over to the national level and why i believe that you need someone in congress that has an absolute track record of reaching across the aisles, working in a bipartisan way to find common sense solutions. we need to resolve immigration reform in this country. we need to find a path to citizenship and the dream act. we need to shore up our borders and make sure that our immigration and visa system goes back to a functioning level where it used to be but no longer is. we need to make sure that long island is affordable. we need to revamp our tax code today that gives away the store

to the top percent of earners. while giving it away to big corporations and big oil. we need to get the money out of campaigns. we need to overturn citizens united, which is where all the dark money that is going into politics today is there. we need to get common sense gun safety laws in place and make sure that guns are out of the hands of terrorists and any criminals. we've talked about it. the bill that mr. zeldin is talking about is not supported by law enforcement including former new york city police commissioner bill bratton. and you can't on the one say that government should stay out but then on the other hand say that government should have the sole responsibility. it's one or the other. we've got to do what we did on a local level in south hampton and cut the wasteful spending that

goes on in government and make it more efficient and make affordable living right here on long island a reality. and college affordable for all of our kids. >> thank you, ms. throne-holst. [ applause ] >> mr. zeldin. >> well, i think it is important to be able to work across the aisle with people at different levels of government and just today we announced 22 endorse presidents that we received from east endo initials with legislation that i discussed here tonight, all these different bills were a product of republicans and democrats working together. my opponent tonight is talking about people not politics and bipartisan and working across

the aisles, that all sounds good but you wonder why no one political party or elected officials, no one that served with her on the town board supports her race for congress. that includes democrats who campaigned against her in the primary. now, during these -- during these debates we say there's a lot that you might get -- you might say when you're desperate for votes, you really, really, really want to win an election so you will say whatever it takes in order to get elected. well, what's most important is actually looking at over the course of 21 months my office we successfully resolved over 4,000 cases. i mentioned the legislation and creating the east end veterans healthcare clinic. the fimp project and making sure we have $1.16 billion coming to restore our coastline or getting a new zip code for glanders, north hampton and riverside. legislation that we now have in a must pass bill the postal

service reform act introduced by the chairman of the committee jason chaffetz. working with the south hampton town trustees when this he needed help contacting the new york state dec in order to get permitting done to open up the cut at mecox bay. i mentioned the national estuary program and getting the funding there or permanently saving the land and water conservation fund. when you actually look at my track hoard, the cove study in south hold which is now completing the public comment period to restore that coastline. these are all re important issues and ask you to look at my record and not my opponent's slant on it in order to win votes. i ask for your support on november 8th. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> thank the candidates. i thank the audience and, again,

if you haven't registered, get out there tomorrow and definitely get out there on november 8th and vote. thank you. [ applause ] next a news conference on the upcoming 2017 affordable care act open enrollment period. health and human services secretary sylvia burwell responded to reporters' questions about the enrollment rates and predicted and increase of people signing up for healthcare coverage. this is about 20 minutes. hello. 11 years ago this coming december i found fred living inside my head. fred is the name i gave to the brain tumor that was blocking the flow of ceral