enough money so they can go get a job out-of-state. .here has been a big problem we all know friends and neighbors who are leaving in droves. what i should be focused on is making important changes to the tax codes, looking down the line, we have to make changes to our tax code to get it fair and flatter. we need to reduce the number of brackets available and reduce loopholes and something -- do something that is important to bring corporations back. other countries are bringing in companies to stimulate their economy. i don't understand why the united states is not an "tax haven." we have to make sure we do -- we we do what we have done with corporate taxation. part of the problem has been out of control spending. it is the same at the federal level. there was light they known it would do little to get people

back in this country. we need to reformat the corporate tax bill and lower the interest rate and lower the interest rate for corporations and get them back in the u.s. and get jobs to the folks a live here. number two is control our spending. part of the problem in connecticut has been the spending has been out of control, no question about it. it is the same at the federal level. when you have him a $600 billion in deficit every year at $20 trillion in debt, we are not spending wisely. that needs to be important and we need to support balanced budgets. >> you have two minutes to respond. mr. blumenthal: thanks for that important question. here is what i am doing to create jobs in connecticut. the federal government should do more to help. i have been leading the effort principally focusing on investment in national defense, bringing jobs.

investment in our roads, bridges, rails, and infrastructure through the transportation bill i helped to lead is bringing construction jobs to connecticut. people need the skills to fill the jobs that exist now. there are thousands of more jobs to be brought to the state by those investments. of course, lowering taxes, tax credits for investment in research, development, new capital, machinery, lowering the medical device tax, all of this is accomplished through my advocacy and i will fight for tax credits to bring jobs home

and stop the rewards and special rights for companies that bring jobs overseas. this is part of the "bring jobs home." rather than tax rates for oil companies, billionaires, lowering the cost in connecticut involves roads, investment in defense, and skills training to provide the workforce we need to bring more companies to connecticut. mr. carter: it strikes me that the answer to improving the economy is spending more. i'm not going to argue about the crumbling infrastructure. we need to work on this, federal and state, to make that happen.

i do not think the answer is to spend money on every different program. at the end of the day, we need to spend more wisely. with respect to the "bring jobs home" act, it does not team lies -- penalize companies. it is not a big change or benefit to anybody and it does not help us. we need structural change in the way that we do business in washington. it is open. -- it is broken, it is time to fix it and people have been there for 30 years are not the people who are supposed to fix it. >> the next question is about gun legislation.

there is now an effort to pass in congress. no-fly, no buy, do you support this? mr. booth all: i strongly support the law that would prohibit people who are too dangerous to board airplanes from buying a gun, along with other sensible gun measures and taking guns away from domestic abusers who are under a court order. i have been working on this issue and i was at the sandy hook firehouse and the church with families, holding hands and

working with loved ones of the victims. this is a public health emergency, a crisis or our country. these measures must be passed and congress must cease to be complicit with the gun lobby. we are breaking the grip of the gun lobby. my opponent and i have a disagreement. he voted against the ban on domestic abusers having guns and he received an honest grade from the nra. that could be the reason. i will continue to fight for these commonsense measures, including the ban on terrorists buying guns. people are dying as country, this -- in this country and we should deem this as a health

measure requiring immediate action. that is the way we need to regardregard our gun violence pm in this country. >> mr. carter, you have two minutes. we do have a gun problem in this country. we have people dying in our streets every day and it doesn't he to be solved. the question is how do you get there? first off, let me explain. we have to not be complacent. i addressed one of the most important challenges and how do we keep firearms out of the hands of something with an -- a mental illness. the only thing people need to do ban the gun that was used in that single shooting.

the bill i voted against would have done nothing to prevent sandy hook. i believe my legislation would. my opponent and folks like him do not get to corner the market on compassion. presenting new town. i understand how divided people are on this issue. i will tell you that people want to solve this and the way to do that is looking at illegal gun tracking in this country. and provide resources to keep those guns off the street. there are a lot of good democrats who voted against the bill and the recently did is they understand that the bill does nothing to actually protect lives. i say to you, my opponent, why is nothing getting done on this? they keep making the nra the bogeyman. we have a serious problem to go after and they are raising money off of it, exploiting it, and using it for their campaign coffers. it is important to not have

people who are labeled "a terrorist" being able to get a gun. i agree with all that. let's go after these criminals on the streets and address where guns are falling into the hands of the wrong people. mr. blumenthal: the reason why congress has been complicit in failed to act is simple, as the gun lobby and nra have congress in its grip. they give grades as they did to my opponent, honest grades or endorsements. we need to break that great and we can do it as is shown by connecticut where a strong, bipartisan majority voted to put -- in favor of commonsense proposals, putting connecticut at the forefront of this effort to stop gun violence. connecticut's law is only as protective as the weakest states law. guns travel across state borders, that is why we need a

national protective law. i know it will not be easy. i am going to work with that bipartisan the jordan -- majority just like we had in connecticut, involving a ban on illegal trafficking and straw purchases of gas and a mental health program and school safety. >> senator clinton's e-mail problem has been in the news and could be a problem, even if she is elected. should other public officials failed to do this in the future and if not, what should conga's do to prevent the same thing from happening and what should be the punishment for somebody who does this? carter: that is a big question in this campaign. i don't think every public official should worry of not whether they are on a private or public server. we have certain public officials who have access to classified information and that is the issue at hand with secretary clinton. i was in the air force and i had

classified information. i was trained and i understood it. the question is, should somebody with the access to that information be using a private server? probably not. the fact is, this has been controversial and it goes to a question of trust and honesty in washington and it is a thing we should be focusing on. we should have hearings on the supreme court because transparency is more important than ever and that is why i asked my opponent to have this opportunity to answer these questions. people do not trust the politicians in washington, because they go to washington and say one thing and do something else. it is a matter of trust with the american people.

as far as classification, if it less classified information goes, if it is ever proven that she had classified information, and handled it inappropriately she should suffer the same , punishment that any of the rest of us would. blumenthal: private servers should never be used for classified material. fact, we get classified briefings and we see classified material, but only in a special buildinghe capital that is designated for the viewing of that material and we are barred from taking electronic devices into that. news kinds of precautions are all the more important in light of the potential of cyber -- for hacking into our system

and several warfare and cyber attack are an increasing threat to our national security, and the united states should have before eluding stronger policies to deter those cyber attacks which are danger even to the classified systems that we have. the department affect -- defense is fending off attacks from russia and from china and from hackers around the world who seek access to those systems. the deterrence of those kinds of attacks has to be strengthened. we need a policy on cyber. -- what constitutes an attack on the u.s. when cyber is involved. we need to respond equivalently and kind and the terror and prevent those kinds of cyber attacks which -- because they are a threat to all of our servers. and including even our electoral system. i have advocated that our electoral system should be considered, along with utilities and our financial system.

and other kinds of critical infrastructure. >> mr. carter, one minute. mr. carter: thank you. i would say yes, we need to go after providing resources to combat cyber terrorism, cyber war, with respect to hillary clinton, it is important that we handle classified information -- and they should investigate and find out more information about the e-mails. if she was someone who did something wrong, we would challenge her on that. i don'tcaution to, think the electoral system is in jeopardy because of what is happening. we have a lot of venerable people and good people running these elections, doing these operations for the elections individually, not hooked into a big mainframe. i am not concerned about cyber warfare.

in those cases yet. we will pay attention to the news and see what happens next. >> many states require parental notification for girls to get an abortion. why shouldn't parents be told, if their child is getting an abortion? you have said you want abortion to be safe and rare. 12,000 abortions were performed in connecticut, an average of 31 a day. what are you doing to reduce that number or is that number ok with you? mr. blumenthal, abortion should be safe, rare, and legal. the law of the land is that these decisions are to be made by women individually, in consultation with their clergy, and their family, and others who

be involved, but it should their decision, not the government interfering. these health care choices are vital, as a matter of constitutional law and public -- but as a matter of public policy. i have been a staunch advocate of a woman's right to reproductive choice. since my days as a law clerk on the united states supreme court when i worked for harry blackmun who authored roe v wade before it was his law clerk. and as attorney general, i have helped to protect the clinics, helped to write a statute that embodies the standards of roe v wade. i think a woman who faces this decisionon making this on her own, deciding whether she wants to consult your parents doing so if she wishes to do so, but without the government telling her what to do.

women's rights are under siege in washington and i have led the -- there is a constant attack against them there and i have helped to lead the effort to the senate just as i did when i was attorney general. that they are under siege in state legislatures around the country which is why i wrote the women's health protection act. which would bar those kinds of measures that pretend to protect women's cliniccare by setting [indiscernible] and admitting privileges but present obstacles to her restitution all rights which why will -- which i will staunchly advocate and defend. mr. carter: i do recognize a woman's right to choose, it is guaranteed by our constitution under the 14th amendment and i do nothing we should be going after that, no question about it. but to your point about what she

read do or whether or not we should decrease abortions, i would say yes. obviously we want to make sure fewer people go through that. i think the way to do that is through education. we talk about the importance of a woman's right to choose and to talk to her family and clergy and people who are important to her. it is important that they have all the information available so we need to make sure as legislators and in state legislatures and the federal government as your senators that i am sure does making sure people have all the information available about adaptive services and all the options available and it is done on a equal playing field. my opponent is on the money when he says that he does not want things being treated as unequal. too often, that happens in washington. we need to make sure we are handling it is a very fair way and the government is not stepping in and telling people what to do. blumenthal: this issue goes

to the core of what i tried to do in washington, which is stand up for people when special interests try to get their way and women are entitled to make these choices on their own about contraception, having a child. every time planned parenthood is under threat, and it has been five or six times, i stand with planned parenthood. and advocated for them because planned parenthood provides education, contraceptive services, enabling women to avoid pregnancy, if that is their choice. in fact, only a tiny part of what planned parenthood does is abortion. a lot of it is education so in fact abortion will be safe,

legal, and rare. >> i think some are frustrated by gridlock in washington. those bills that are raised, many do get debated, many did not get voted on. what would you do if elected to be more productive and make congress more productive? mr. carter: everybody is frustrated with washington and 14 approval rating is 11% or percent and it is a huge issue. one of the problems is when we talk about these different bills, we just mentioned planned parenthood, that is a good example. recently, we spoke about in the news here a few months ago, we were having the zika virus crisis and we were talking about gridlock iname from congress. the way i looked at it, they were putting money out there for zika and the democrats took a hold of it as a group and they said, we are not giving money to

planned parenthood specifically because they do not accept medicaid funding in puerto rico. instead of finding a way to give us -- give money to health channels which is the way the bills were designed, they locked it and made it a planned parenthood issue. i support planned parenthood and the politicized it even more. it is that kind of politics that gets us in trouble. we will say we support something , my opponent talks about the equal pay for women and they have put the paycheck fairness act in front of congress since 1997. it was filled with poison pills for the other side that no one would ever pass, it was called a message bill, something people could run on when they come home. even right here in connecticut, we were able to do a bill like that and i crossed party lines because i am the third most independent there. i crossed party lines and i supported a bill that would

prohibit employers from talking aboutout wages and puts in the statute for women to sue if they think they have been infringed on. that is the kind of thinking i have, i am going to abandon the party politics whenever i can. i work with both sides and i think it is how we will get rid of gridlock in washington. >> senator blumenthal, you have two minutes. blumenthal: this job gives me the opportunity to fight for the people of connecticut in the face of gridlock and partisan paralysis. too often, the special interest and my job has always been to stand up to the special interests and fight for the people of connecticut, for consumers who are ripped off, for women who want equal pay, for equal work, and for our quality who deserve

health care. and for all the people in connecticut who simply want a fair shake. those special interest with campaign funds that now are ,ften anonymously donated corporations with virtually unlimited access to the political process, all too often are responsible for the gridlock that exists there. forll make no apologies opposing a bill that would have defined it planned parenthood as a price for meeting the zika crisis. wasact, the zika bill passed initially with a strong bipartisan majority and the united senate -- in the senate without those restrictive poison pills. we can reach across the aisle and do better. i have reached across the aisle on measures like the gain act which cuts the regulatory burdens for pharmaceutical drug

companies when they develop new -resistantantibiotic strains of viruses. that gain act which i did with senator corker, republican of tennessee, went through the senate and has already been used by a connecticut company to create drugs and new jobs. it is important that we talk about special interests. by the way, the bill they were talking about did not defund plan parenthood, that is not true. it did not give extra funding, they were funding through public health channels and planned parenthood did not qualify for medicaid. it did not defund planned parenthood. let's be truthful about that. we have been talking about special interests. let's talk about special interests. my opponent has a million and half from special groups in his campaign fund. does that affect every vote? maybe not. my opponent is the one who stood

in front of the ba accountable -- accountability act and single-handedly blocked a bill. baensibly because the employee unions did not want him to do it. to me, i am about putting veterans first and i am all about especially at a time when one out of three phone calls to the suicide hotline rolls over. how do you account for that, senator, when you block to that act and here our veterans are having the toughest time ever. lowenthal, term limits comes up. senator leahy has been in office for 41 years. there are members of the house that have been there for decades. do you support term limits? mr. blumenthal: we have term limits now, they are called elections. what i have found is that some of the best republican members in the house or the senate have served a long time, same is true of the democratic senators. the biggest area where we need

reform is campaign finance. the existence of the deluge of dark money where there's no accountability, reporting, anonymously donated through super pacs, not levelt the presidential but in the united states senate and congressional races, is the greatest threat we have to the and so,y of the system, i really have not supported term limits because i think the democratic process should work office peoplef who have exhausted the patience electorate and also who are failing to do their job as well as they should be and as as their opponents have. record oncorrect the something my opponent has just said. the marco rubio accountability bill because it

wouldconstitutional, never have passed muster and would have helped no one in accountability. an alternative called veterans first, a bipartisan bill which i crafted v.a.the chairman of the committee, senator johnny isaacson of georgia. i, as the ranking member, put together this bill on caregivers,ty, on on healthcare, an omnibus bill will eliminate bonuses for poor performers, remove wrongdoers and protect whistleblowers. it passed unanimously from the united states senate v.a. committee and i hope to see it become law. law.. carter, you have one mr. carter: speaking of term limits, i think we've gotten to a point where we've seen a race just like this when you have a powerful incumbent with a lot of funding, a lot of time behind him. difficult for people with good ideas to come up and challenge. this is the first opportunity i've had to have a debate and watch my opponent actually answer questions. my gosh, even trump gave three

debates. i'll tell you what, i'm ok with that. what i'm not ok with is the fact our democraticn process do term limits. if the united states congress senate want to get together and do a constitutional amendment to change term limits, be supportive of that. i think distrust about peopleton is clear, don't trust washington so i think it's important to consider term limits because maybe it's we don't have the same people going to washington year after year after year. this, if youay worked so hard to help the veterans and blocked the v.a. last year,ity act why do we have so many problems with our veterans. punchline that every politician wants to talk about helping veterans but nothing done. >> you have another minute so if you'd like to add a minute, please do. that's fine. i think i made my answer very clear. thet of times in legislature we talk about veterans all the time. all of us want to help veterans.

the way, i do not for a blumenthalk senator doesn't want to help veterans. i get that. but when we don't make it a priority and say we do, that's problem i have. senator, you made a career out of fighting for the little guy and it feels like you are fighting the little guy. none of these things ever get fixed after 30 years in service. i think it is time that you give somebody else a shot. susan: senator blumenthal, now you have a minute for rebuttal. sen. blumenthal: thank you susan. let me first of all thank my iponent for his service, as do every veteran. as a veteran, i respect that service. and i have worked in the senate and before i went to the senate so that this country could keep faith with its veterans. two of my sons have served and i and thes serving now other was in the marine corps in

safely.tan and is back and i have a special affinity for this problem. that is why, in the wake of this arizona debacle, i helped lead choice bill which created more choices for the v.a.to go outside health system. i wrote a measure with john mccain, veteran suicide prevention act because 20 veterans in this country still own lives every day. and i will continue to advocate and work for the veterans first better.make healthcare >> in five states, the choice to legalize marijuana will be on the ballot next month. including neighboring massachusetts, four states have legalized it but in the eyes of the federal government, it's illegal. do you think the federal government should legalize marijuana? use ofsupport the recreational marijuana? mr. carter: this is interesting. in the legislature, i have had this question posed to me a number of times. specific about medical marijuana.

that the line of i realize -- marijuana has shown promise for people. and it can help with the bill attending conditions -- with debilitating conditions. seizures and such. the use of recreational marijuana is a struggle. here's why. number one, i don't think we ite the ability to regulate in such a way that we make sure that we understand the ramifications on people machinery, who are police officers and how do we handle that to know to the degree they may be under the influence or not. that's a problem. welso understand that, if support recreational use, for anyone under 25 years old out there, using it regularly, it's proven to cause a problem in development. that is a real problem for a policymaker. i also understand the other side. there is a libertarian streak in me that says, why are we regulating a plant like this? why are we putting all the money

or puttinging -- people in jail for it? this is another issue we have to separately. from the federal government should lookwhat we at, how do we handle law enforcement activities with not letto marijuana but drug dealers off the hook. position yet to legalize it. i am open-minded to listening to hearings and i think this is something we have to face. we have real problems with marijuana. mr. blumenthal? sen. blumenthal: dennis, we are in the midst of the greatest opioid abuse and heroin epidemic this nation. and we need to act much more and robustly to save lives. i held round tables around state than 10 ofcut, more them. and they were heartbreaking and gut wrenching.

inries of young people recovery who started on opioids when they broke a bone or had wisdom teeth removed and were vicodined percocet or or oxycontin. i sued the maker of oxycontin when i was attorney general for inadequate labeling. prevailed in that lawsuit. as a result of those roundtables, i came up with a report with specific recommendations, including on opioid prescriptions, better training management to prescribers and caregivers. a crackdown, use of law enforcement to crack down on the drug trade. but law enforcement officials told me that we will not arrest our way out of this crisis. so we need more treatment and investment. investment in treatment facilities. what i also heard in those

that legalization of marijuana will in no way solve this crisis. it may only aggravate it. and that gives me pause. as much as i may support medicinal use of marijuana, i for now its legalization because i think this nation needs to do more than we've done already to save those lives. the comprehensive addiction and recovery act passed the united states congress by an overwhelming bipartisan majority. needs adequate funding. dennis: mr. carter, you have one minute. mr. carter: with respect to legalizing marijuana, it doesn't sound like we are far off. this. say with respect to opioid addiction issues and heroin, it is a plague in our state and in our country. that.w and it is important that we need to do more than strongly worded letters and roundtables. i've talked to people in our district about this. we need to make sure that we put

things in place that address this issue. in my years in the legislature, one of the things i have been behind all the way is how we manage our prescription drug monitoring program in the state to make sure we're going after people who are doctor shopping taking that medicine and selling it on the street. there are ways to do it and work with companies and the work.ment to make this i take objection to the fact talks aboutnent suing somebody. i believe that we need to work every stakeholder there is to come up with things to solve the problem working together and create adversarial relationships with business. unless they are truly a bad actor. dennis: our next question to senator blumenthal. has pulled out of obamacare citing the cost. some say it needs to be replaced and others say it needs to be repealed. if leak, what specific action should be taken regarding obama's signature

legislation? sen. blumenthal: a key question. you, dennis. i've advocated there be improvements in the affordable it bect but not that repealed. back to turn the clock a time when millions of people were denied coverage under their theyhcare policies because had supposed pre-existing were charged women more simply because they were ofen -- victims discrimination by those insurance companies. couldn't when children be on their policies. now they can be until they're 26 old. those reforms and others have enabled millions of people to gain effective coverage. i'm not going to throw those people out of health insurance. now, there needs to be improvements. the cost of medical care needs to be reduced and one of the are pharmaceutical drugs. that is why i have advocated

cost of the pharmaceutical drugs through medicare.n with right now, medicare is barred prices,otiating drug raising their costs. medicarecan negotiate, cannot. of profiteering we've seen recently in the state country,ticut and the the increase in the cost of 600%.s, astronomic price drive. i have asked for an investigation and the federal government is doing it criminal and civil. but in the meantime, i'm going to continue pressure on mylan to reduce the cost of epipens. there needs to be more competitors in the market and that has to be another improvement. but lowering costs for small businesses is a major goal. lowering the cost for small businesses, and providing support in greater subsidies so

people can afford it. dennis: thank you, mr. blumenthal. mr. carter? mr. carter: there is a lot of debate about obamacare being replaced, repealed, or what to do with it. the problem is we know it is and it doesn't work so let's move forward. we need to change it into something that works. we want to keep things that are important goals with respect to conditions. we understand that. we want to make sure that health care is affordable to everybody. we know that. let's make sure the system works. everybody gets in the fight, to repeal it. why not take some of the fixes that were proposed, that blumenthal voted against, which cost money to our hospitals. with respect to increasing funding available to community and thingscenters like that. we know how it has been for hospitals especially under our own governor, we know how difficult it is. we need to make sure this program works and create something that looks more like

fee-for-service, with decisions being made between a patient and a provider. isre that's where care rationed and where decisions are made and we get behind that decision and we make sure that exchange orre whatever we have in place is something that's available to affordable.d we have watched small businesses and families and deductibles go through the roof as well as their premiums and it doesn't have to be that way. now.ed to act i do not know why there is so much gridlock in washington. both sides say that we need to fix it and we have not. with respect to mylan. frominteresting to me that 2009 till now, that senator blumenthal supported obamacare cost of the the drug, with the epipen, mandated every school around the country, again, raising the price. all of a sudden where were you all the time while the up?e was going we should be working with them all along. to make sure they get generics sure theyket and make

have opportunities to lower the cost. we don't do this through something heavy-handed. "i'm going to sue you and crush your business" to make press. >> you have a minute to rebut. sen. blumenthal: i supported these improvements in the affordable care act from the time i came to congress. votes have been about repealing -- completely eliminating -- the affordable act. more than 60 times in the house time aftertatives, time in the senate, the votes repeal it because that's what the republican majority wanted over these last two years, not to help improve defects.x its this has to be the goal. i will continue to champion efforts to keep down the cost of pharmaceutical drugs. they need to be made available and that is why i was a leader

in providing them in our schools. are lifesaving. when a young child has an allergic reaction, they can lives and i will continue to advocate for them. question. carter, this has to do with jobs. there is a concern that many companies find it affordable to either relocate their headquarters or labor overseas cheaper.t is do you support punishing companies that do that? possible?t mr. carter: first part of the question is, yes, jobs are moving overseas and we have to find a way to keep them here. it is not entirely because of labor costs. we know if we kept the corporate tax within limits here or corporate taxes and got rid of loopholes to make it fair we had aountries and tax structure and regulatory environment that was predictable

and you could count on, a lot of companies would come here voluntarily. we would be our own tax haven. don't always have to use the heavyhanded approach and say we're going to punish. senator blumenthal talked about the "bring home jobs" bill. in that bill, it had a piece that would not allow people to advantage of a tax deduction for moving their company overseas. that's not the way it works for companies. they see a better tax rate. it's not like they pick up all stuff and take it. what they do is they build facilities and do construction. that's what we have to keep people from doing. tax rate belowe 15% and make it reasonable, that's going to help us. we talk a lot about corporate taxes but we have to understand that corporate taxes themselves in probably less than 10% of the entire federal revenue. why are we so focused on this, when it could be something that helps bring people back. that's how we get those jobs. to reduceve

regulation here at home. we need to remove barriers. until we find a way to do that which, by the way, even as a state legislator i've done that. we have tried for many years to get something where you can go to a restaurant and you can take home a 64-ounce jug of draft beer. otherwise, you couldn't get draft beer. like thatething removed from legislation where people could do it. and it added $2 million to the state in taxes and it allowed new revenue to the state. it also means people have a new product they couldn't get anywhere else. where we talk about removing legislation. blumenthal, you have two minutes. sen. blumenthal: addressing that question directly, susan, our tax code is riddled with loopholes, special breaks, giveaways to big corporations, special interests, and sweetheart deals. one of them concerns moving headquarters overseas to tax havens in the netherlands.

or ireland. mylan, the maker of epipens, ironically, was one of the that moved overseas in that way. thishey avoid taxes to country. moving jobs overseas is a loophole that of needs to be closed because companies can deduct the keep theird then profits overseas. i propose they bring them back a lower tax rate, but that they be required to invest in an infrastructure bank that a public-private partnership investing in our roads and bridges and rail. there are ways to close those loopholes and create jobs and drive our economy forward. those two loopholes are only a fraction of the ones that should be closed. the deductions for the big oil companies, the write-offs for

companies that give multi-million dollar bonuses to executives, the kinds of deprives that basically taxpayers of what we deserve and economic progress because a lot of corporations are paying much higher taxes. we should reward investment, broaden the tax incentives for investment in capital machinery such as i have advocated. we have those measures going forward, as well as in renewables such as wind and solar. it to fuelextend cells made in connecticut. >> you have a one minute rebuttal. mr. carter:i'm having a 2010 flash back. i still think the senator know how to create a job. ladies and gentlemen, there are a lot of complicated tax issues talk about but the bottom line is, it's all talk. what i see at a federal level is a lot of gridlock and a lot of

people talking about loopholes but who are not really acting on them because they're too busy doing other things. manytaken on my opponent times about the fact that he's always fighting for somebody, taking on an important issue, fins, saline solution, whatever the issue of the day may be but meanwhile we are jobs hemorrhaging from this state because of the fact that all these things we're talking about never get done in washington and i think the american people, that's part of the trust issue that we have in d.c. it is easy to stand here and talk about all the things he supported. throughnterested to go every one of them and see if they were in a bill that mattered. the "bring home jobs" act we talked about was a total farce. that's where we're talking about one of these major loopholes and look are many others to at. susan: that concludes some of questions. we wanted to end the debate with questions. senator blumenthal, who is the best u.s. senator in connecticut history? sen. blumenthal: the best u.s. senator in connecticut history?

think that probably abe ribakoff. follow up withto the rapid fire you avoided earlier in the broadcast. one, do you think the number of abortions in connecticut, 12,0 throne a day, is that considered rare? sen. blumenthal: you are asking me this question? dennis: yes. sen. blumenthal: i think that number of abortions isn't the measure of the effectiveness law.r constitutional it is the individual exercising the right of choice that is important. that constitutional right. i'm going to fight for that right. and by the way, i will fight to bring jobs home. that was a real act that real measures.

mr. carter: no, that is not rare. congressmanpport larson's plan to build a tunnel under the river linking hartford to east hartford? mr. carter: i would have to see all the details. it's a big deal. sen. blumenthal: it is infrastructure that should be seriously considered. it will create jobs and it will improve our transportation system. whether it is cost effective should be determined. senator blumenthal, role model. who do you look up to? sen. blumenthal: i look up to role models in this country and abroad. someone whom i greatly admire. mr. carter: james earl jones. all people. here's a guy who overcame a beor stuttering problem to one of the greatest voices we'll always remember. i look at someone like that with fortitude. dennis: mr. carter, several high schools in connecticut use indians or indian names as a mascot. do you think it's offensive and they change it?

mr. carter: it is not offensive. they should not change it. sen. blumenthal: they should change it. some people offends to have native american images identities as mascots. i advocate the redskins change their name, as well. susan: mr. carter, several buildings in connecticut are owners likeave calhoun college at yale. should that be renamed? mr. carter: we should not be renaming buildings based on our past. we should look forward and the important issues prevalent in our society with respect to race. renaming buildings is not going to accomplish that. susan: senator blumenthal? sen. blumenthal: the decisions have to be made by the individual institutions. i don't think a broad rule can everyone. to in certain instances like calhoun college i think they would be wise to rename it. dennis: hillary clinton said donald trump is a racist. is he? sen. blumenthal: he is many things that in my view disqualify him from the presidency.

he has mocked people with disabilities. indicated certainly his prejudice. he's a misogynist. demeand women and racism labelnly is a plausible to be attached to him. dennis: mr. carter? mr. carter: you know, i don't necessarily think somebody is a racist. i know it's about character. taken on my opponent with respect to his character and talking about vietnam service do not necessarily think that makes him a racist. >> what do you do in your free time? mr. carter: for me? susan: sure. mr. carter: obviously, i love kids whenime with my they're around. i have a great dog at home, rescue. i like to walk with her. i like to read. i would like to fly more but since i left the air force i haven't had the time or money. blumenthal?or sen. blumenthal: i love spending cynthia, whowife, is here today, as well as our

four children. they are the pride and joy of our lives. dennis: donald trump has called hillary clinton a liar. she, mr. carter? mr. carter: she is dishonest. dennis: mr. blumenthal? sen. blumenthal: no. she is not a liar. i think hillary clinton is going to be a president that stands up ordinary people. dennis: thank you. permit?o you have a gun mr. carter: i do. sen. blumenthal: no. dennis: how would you grade dan malloy's performance as governor? blampt i don't give grades to public officials. he is working hard and has a tough job. mr. carter: i think malloy has failed the state. dennis: do you want the governor a third term? sen. blumenthal: that's the governor's decision and the decision of the people of connecticut. i hope the people of connecticut will choose me for a second

term. mr. carter: i think you should run again because i think it will be a strong year for republicans because he is not done what's right by our state a unitedully there's states senator to watch that race. >> do you support early voting? sen. blumenthal: i do. mr. carter: i do. dennis: that is our time for this sunday morning. you both for being with us, our candidates, richard blumenthal and dan carter. >> a reminder that to election day is tuesday, november 8, just two weeks away from this tuesday and we want to know, who do you think won this debate? we'd like you to head to our to take part in our online poll. dennis: we welcome your comments. for joining us. have a great rest of the weekend. >> thank you for joining us. ♪

[captions performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> more debates from u.s. senate races. thursday, in new hampshire, term republican senator kelly ayotte and democratic governor maggie hassan in hampshire.w that's live at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. the cook political report lists toss-up. as a >> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. focusing one're presidential battleground states leading up to election day. morning, it'ssday florida. susan mcmannus, political thence professor at

university of south florida, talks about the latest state, ints in the the presidential race and key statewide races. florida's past presidential voting history and why political races are so competitive in this state. then, broward county democratic party chair joins us to discuss clinton campaign strategy in florida. the campaign's organization in the state, as well as advertising, voter enthusiasm, and other key statewide down-ballot races. chair on thecounty g.o.p. and trump campaign strategy, messaging in florida year's election differs from previous one. c-span's "washington journal" live at 7:30 eastern thursday morning. join the discussion. >> 2012 republican presidential candidate and former massachusetts governor mitt romney talked about the economy and his ideas to make the united states more attractive to

businesses yesterday at the u.s. commerce's annual legal reform summit. hour.s about a half ♪ >> good >> welcome to the chamber. my me start by adding congrats. the first of many to appreciate her appreciation -- express our appreciation. it is richly deserved, not just for what he has done for legal .eform his willingness after he gets through his first grumpy what you mean question to help people all around this building with key jobs do what they do, far

-- on what is his normal he has been a formidable force on almost every issue that the chamber fights for for legal thatm in all of the issues lisa mentioned. i would also like to thank lisa .nd her team the summit theme says it all, we're up against a litigation machine, an aggressive and innovative trial bar has helped create a legal environment that serves its own interests, not the interests of our system of justice or our people or our companies. we also have a system that is ripe -- rife with prosecutional abuse, over enforcement, over

criminalization of business and where did all of those finds go? we've seen proliferation of class-action lawsuits that have no merit, that allow unharmed individuals to join suit and that have given rise to serial plaintiffs, data privacy issues have become a bright new frontier, a new business in lawsuit abuse. and an entire industry has cropped up to go to court on financial litigation. as lisa highlighted in her remarks today, the litigation machine is an overdrive and it's harboring our economy, sucking the vitality out of american companies and undermining our companies and undermining our fragile economy and eroding due process rights for business. that's why legal reform is one

of the top priorities of this institution, the chamber of commerce of the united states. but today lisa asked me to talk briefly about another priority, that is the particularly timely one. we are less than two weeks from a major election, so i want to spend the rest of my time discussing not so much that election, but what is at stake for the business community. you know, every four years people say the same thing, this is one of the most consequential elections of our lifetime. you know, this time it may be true. the 2016 campaign has been unpredictable from its start, unprecedented and at times downright bizarre. i think many of us are ready for this ride to be over, but then we have to deal with the result. and november 8 will be a real reckoning time for the community, this community and

for the country. by the way, in the senate, we will be in december and january with some of the runoff in -- let's see, we'll be in georgia and i think we'll be in louisiana, so stay tuned, more an louisiana, so stay tuned, more to do. let's consider for a moment some of the things that could be on the line, depending on who is elected and who owns the senate. the supreme court hangs in the balance, more and more major policies impacting business are being decided at the highest court. by the way, we sort of like that, because we're very good at it. the next administration could transform a nine-seat court with as many as three or four new appointments. harry reid mentioned in the last day or so that he's getting ready to figure out how he could help get rid of the 60-vote rule, and this is one

that we'll have to live with, not just for four or eight years, but maybe for 25 years to come. the fate of our economy is at stake. the next president and the congress will inherit one of the slowest, weakest economic recoveries in our history. if history holds, we're headed into a recession, you know, you get them every seven or eight year, we're a little behind the curve. we can't afford another four years of same government-directed economic policies that have kept us limping along, half of 1 percent, 1 percent, 2 percent, at best. the chamber is urging our leaders to make growth the center of their agenda next year. we're talking to both parties, growth won't solve our problems, but we won't be able to solve any of them without it. the size and role of government