basically cable news handed over their airwaves the donald trump and then begrudgingly added bernie sanders and hillary, so they gave him a free ride for a long time and maybe were not as aggressive in hoping to feed to the fire during the primaries and debates as they should have. in the last month or so it is dike watching a badly referee basketball game where we see makeup calls and particularly print -- i am not a donald trump defending at all, but going after donald trump in ways i think violate every candidate ethics for news reporting and i completely agree with that. >> just look at the additives in the news stories in "the new york times was quote or "the washington post." one today talked about donald trump "lurching."

that is a verb, they use additives and verbs in a very -- gloria: i think we all need time to get through this election and then take a look back, which i think would be very useful. the one thing i will say about donald trump which i think is a lesson to a lot of people running for office, which is if you make yourself available to the press, the press will interview you and i recall during the primaries with jeb bush -- win jeb bush talked to us frequently, the answer is "no " because he was behaving like the front runners who did not have to speak to the media. the thing that donald trump did would served to his advantage and this is not to say the press did not do things that were wrong, but he put himself in -- out there and talk to people. but now, donald trump has not had a press conference since i july and there was a

guy who would talk to the press anytime all the time. things shift and now hillary clinton is talking to the press more. >> i would respectfully disagree. i think you could have been every other candidate in fusions -- andum kenesaw and many of them would not have gotten coverage. i think this was about ratings and allowing him to do phone in. you could not phone in these shows before. >> we did not allow him to phone in. gloria: then hillary clinton started to phone in. charlie: they were allowing her because they were allowing him. isid: if hillary clinton elected what role will bill clinton have? >> the first gentleman. >> probably not up front, but he

.ill be an emissary she talked about wanting him to be an emissary to blue-collar america and actually he would be very effective. >> east wing or west wing office? chris: probably both. >> i would say if elected president, hillary clinton should try to get him a job as a lecturer on a cruise ship that had no telecommunication whatsoever. [laughter] david: if donald trump is elected president -- do you think you will be disappointed by the quality of camp david, air force one, and the white house? do you think he will be ok, up to his standards? if hillary clinton is elected who do you think will be chief of staff? .> it will not be sheryl mills i would think a lot of the

people who you normally thought of are so tainted by the emails and all of that that i do not names-- i mean, you hear and we are all speculating, you hear names like ron mclean, -- gloria: tom phil sack. sack.m vilc david: who would be chief of staff for donald trump? >> donald trump. [laughter] david: ok, and what time on election night do you think we can go to sleep? >> it depends. if florida goes for clinton, it is early -- over early. if it doesn't and you start to begin ohio going for donald trump and florida going for trump, it could be a longer evening. gloria: i do not know about you, we are on the air until 3:00 a.m. >> i think we will know by

midnight. >> we knew about obama at 9:00 p.m. gloria: the senate could be a very interesting story. state, buts a late if democrats are at four going with nevada still at -- five with nevada still out. david: any november surprises? anything that can happen between now and election day that could change the election? >> are you kidding asking this question? david: do you expect the fbi director to come up with a more definitive answer? chris: my gut says no. gloria: i do not know, they are reviewing email. they must have a program to allow them to see whether there are duplicate emails. i think maybe and maybe it is not on that front. this campaign has been a surprise a minute, how many days do we have left?

6 days, anything. >> you are the only lawyer up here. hear any goodto news for clinton out of the fbi this week? it seems to me there is a greater downside risk than upside risk because if they find classified stuff in there we would probably hear it sooner and if they have not found it yet some of they are probably still looking, maybe. whoever is elected, do you think they can effectively govern given this campaign and the division with congress? do you think it will be difficult to get anything done? there could not have been a more contested election than 2000 with george w. bush literally being decided by the supreme court and coming down to 500 votes in florida, yet i know the reaction afterwards was if you win, you govern like you

have a mandate whether you do or not and he actually had a very successful first year. hillary clinton should pray for a republican senate because it would help her constrained her own instincts. even more for that it would be -- for elizabeth warren, sanders, she would say i have to deal. notd: which individual running for president the think enhanced his or her potential the most in the last year? gloria: elizabeth warren certainly did with the progressives on the democratic party. she became a star on the campaign trail for democrats aside from bernie -- points come i think if elected hillary clinton will have as many problems on her left does on her right. i would say that two things that make me less pessimistic would be, number one i think it is

always better to have a president who will meet with members of congress and pick up the phone and talk to them without having his arm broken and secondly, i think the schumer-mcconnell relationship will be a functional one. those are two things that might make things -- david: who is the biggest flop in this campaign versus their -- in terms of their reputation going so low? is there anyone you really think came out a loser? >> i think the people who waffled on donald trump will eventually pay a price. one of the ted cruz's sentences in the cycle, where you were on this one will matter, people will remember. have another presidential campaign, will you still cover a campaign or years from now? chris: god willing. >> i think i have to.

i hope there is not a second one. chris: do you know who my father was? i will be here another 20 years. [laughter] [applause] all.: i want to thank you chris: very nice. gloria: thank you. david: little tokens of our appreciation. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

announcer: c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by amerco's cable companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. an update on our road to the white house coverage. president obama and singer james taylor campaigning for hillary clinton this afternoon at the university of north carolina chapel hill.

live coverage now expected at 3:15 eastern. the day inp spending florida. a rally this afternoon will cover in orlando, live at 4:00 p.m. eastern. day, november 8, the nation decides our next president and which party controls the house and senate. with c-span for coverage of the presidential race, including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump, and surrogates. follow key house and senate races with coverage of their senate debates and speeches. c-span where history unfolds daily. a look at the race from rollcall even with trump, he tweets is a reach for minnesota democrats. they are talking about the third congressional district in minnesota. in the, a debate district with incumbent erik paulsen and democratic state senator teri.

they talked about tax policy, the affordable care act, donald trump, and national security. hosted by eyewitness news. >> minnesota's third congressional district covers the metro. you'll find districts like lymington, and maple grove. a variety of industry -- of places call this home. republican erik paulsen was first elected in 2000 eight after serving as house majority leader in a state legislator. this year, he is facing a democratic challenger who served a decade in minnesota senate. have representative erik paulsen and state kerry bonne off here from the third district. this you for coming in for debate. we will have more of a conversation here. thank you both for coming in. let's start with your opening statement.

>> thank you. i think it is more important than ever before that we elect courageous leaders who bring people together on both sides of the aisle together to tackle our real and tough challenges. in the minnesota senate, i earned a reputation for doing that. as a pro-business democrat come i worked with the minnesota chamber to create the pipeline project. that program was about getting rid of student debt and addressing the skills gap. it connected students with employers, on-the-job training and paid wages while they are getting their degree. it is that kind of bold leadership that i would bring with me to congress where it is sorely lacking. congressman, you have been there for eight years and i think you have enabled part of the gridlock and obstructionist congress. i also believe you have voted to

often on the wrong side of history with the extreme parts of your right-wing party. i believe i have values to represent the district. i was proud to be endorsed by publishers, the group that has all the local community newspapers. what a second man doors me is that i represented in my candidacy real hope and change. leaderbeen a courageous in the business world and the minnesota senate and i would be that in washington. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for hosting the debate here it i'm running for congress once again. this is a time when minnesota expects elected leaders to work across the aisle, transcend by part -- transcend partisan politics but i will continue to do that whether it is repealing the medical tests, focus on

keeping high-paying jobs right here in the state, high-paying jobs that are so critical in all of minnesota. i work on that with the senator and it took five years to get that across the finish line and spend that tax. it can sometimes take a while. it sometimes there may be an issue that moves quicker. a vape -- sex trafficking, a very bipartisan issue. it is literally saving lives. i recently passed in missing children's bill that will help us find missing children and help put sex offenders become -- behind bars. time with partisan gridlock and politics and i want to continue to be a part of the solution to move the ball forward. it is why i am endorsed by business organizations such as twin west chamber, for instance. i will continue to work along that mold. i'm one of 34 members this year

to have a bill signed in law from either party by the president. that is what minnesotans expect here that type of leadership in our will continue to do that if i am elected next week. >> thank you both. let's get to the economy. is home toistrict mixed industries. technology startups as well. makeneeds to be done to sure the third district specifically continues to create jobs and continues to be economically viable? doubt our economy should be performing better than it is now. it is the worst economic recovery in the history of the country. we have recommended -- record numbers of people who put -- who would prefer to work full-time. we have one third of folks aged 18 to 31 living at home with parents. that is the biggest percentage in 40 years and it is first time in history during the economic

recovery where we have had median incomes fall. we need tax reform to help international corporations with more competitiveness and bring jobs back home, keep their headquarters here, keep innovation here. we it means we need small businesses and main street companies and that means lowering their business tax rate. the fourth tier .ncome tax a different view on fiscal or pocketbook issues. tax reform is needed if we will help create jobs here in the county. >> thank you. there is nothing more important when i look at what the job of being a congresswoman would be than making sure we have a .trong economy percent, that is not the whole story but there are those who have timed out who after the

recession never got bacon -- never got back into the job force. we can to do all ensure a strong economy. the most important thing we can do looking long-term is focus on the next generation. that is why i should my work with regard to the pipeline project. small business is the engine of the economy. that is what i focused on. i was the chief officer of the angel investment startup, the tax credit, and also, the r&d investment credit. they invest online so startups have more access to capital. i believe we need to do significant tax reform and we are blessed to have fortune 500 companies in our midst and we need to reform our tax code so

they can repatriate their money. i do have to address the, about my fourth tier. the only tax i have voted for with income tax was 2009. the budget andce it never happened. thatovernor -- fourth tier voted against that. votes i haveher taken, i have been endorsed in i got the small business award each of my last elections including the past summer. i do not believe the answer is to increase the tax burden. they actually said that in the endorsement. congressman endorsed -- mischaracterized my record in that i have a record of restraint. clear, you voted for a

billion dollar increase that would target small businesses at affordwhere they cannot more. each in every one of the organizations you mentioned have now endorsed my candidacy because they understand the difference. i will continue to work across the aisle on bipartisan issues. state sen. bonoff: you purposely distorted my record and bought a domain name called "taxing terri," which seems uncharacteristic of a congressman but kind of takes a page out of the playbook of donald trump, where you call people names. what i would say is i want everyone to know i did not vote or the recent tax increase. that when we were faced with a difficult choice -- how will we close the budget gap, and we have a constitutional obligation to balance the budget, we had a choice. borrow from schools or raise taxes? we ended up borrowing from schools. i did not vote to raise taxes. and i issued a bill or worked on a bill to exempt small

businesses from that fourth year rate. i think it is a burden on small businesses. i think we have to take the burden away from small businesses. leah: let's talk about the medical device tax. congressman paulson, i know you have in supportive of suspending the medical device tax. but senator bonoff, what do you think about the future of that? state sen. bonoff: i support a permanent repeal. it is very important to our communities that that happens. i appreciate it. congressman paulsen's leadership on that. but the bigger question is what is the future of the affordable and how will we pay for it? so i welcome getting into that discussion.

leah: and what about you, representative? would you support a full repeal of the tax? rep. paulsen: absolutely. it took five years to get across the finish line. the only reason we were able to get across the finish line is because of the bipartisan work and leadership i was able to do in the house. the entire minnesota delegation was on board. because this was such a bad policy, hurting patients and jobs in minnesota, we ended up with veto-proof margin, despite the president's objections, to get this across the finish line. now, we are seeing money back and research and development, it will help our patients and jobs.

leah: let's dig into this more. we have seen the cost of health insurance going up some 6% or 7%. the governor says affordable care act is not affordable anymore. representative paulsen, you voted to repeal the aca. what is the solution then? getting rid of the whole thing, making changes? rep. paulsen: we will have to start over. number one, you have a system now that has no competition. some states offer only one

provider or carrier. so of course they will have skyrocketing insurance states. you may have some counties in minnesota not even able to offer insurance, which would be a disaster. this is a real crisis issue. you have to have insurance companies able to buy and sell across state lines, you need health insurance to be portable, so you take it with you. you do not have to rely on your employer, you should be able to take it with you like a backpack in life and take it with you throughout your life. and more chronic care management is the direction to go. terri voted for bringing obamacare to minnesota. it is a disaster. it is hurting minnesota families. i have never voted for obama care. we need to move forward. leah: explain where you stand.

state sen. bonoff: erik has run tv commercials that said i voted for obama care. that is kind of silly, because obamacare was done in congress. i am not in congress. so i did not vote for obama care. so when the federal government mandated the states have the change and democrats had the reformed part, i voted no. the reason i did that is because i have a great relationship with the company's in my district, the health industry companies. they showed me concerns about that. so i used the strength of a no vote to actually shape it. and it did get better. not all the way, for sure, but this increase in premiums, who i hold accountable is congress. the reason i do is because, erik, you voted over 60 times to repeal the affordable care act. you had eight years to reform that. it is fine now that you are feeling the pressure of what is happening. in this race. to say all the things you would do. what 60 times to repeal, when you could have offered significant reforms to this thing. it is good to repeal the medical device tax. but where were you on telling the federal government they should negotiate drug prices, on making sure that republicans and democrats came together and made real reforms? it reminds me of when the federal government says everybody deserves a high quality, equal education, and we all agree with that, and the fed says they will pay for that then do not follow through. your lack of accountability with actually reforming this has put the burden back on the states.

so now the states should have a special session and should live down premiums and do whatever it is to take the hurt away from families. but we should hold congress leaders accountable for the mess we find ourselves in. rep. paulsen: just to be clear, when the affordable care act was put into place, you had the president who wanted to do it all his way. he did not want bipartisanship. nancy pelosi said that you had to pass the bill to find out what was in it. i can tell you stories of cancer patients who had relinquished their network of doctors. it is a tragic situation. at the same time, you voted on a party vote to give mnsure here. now we have people losing their doctors. we need to fix that and move in

a different direction. state sen. bonoff: you start off by saying what president obama said when it was passed. that was eight years ago. i know leaders in the u.s. senate said that the most important thing they could do for the next four years is make sure barack obama did not have a second term. really, that is an abdication of duty. what should be the most important thing now and always is everything we can do to put the american people first. it is not ok to say, eight years later, that now you would take all of these actions to reform it. because people are hurting. i needed you to solve this problem. for example, small businesses, if we could give them pretax dollars, so they do not have to administer it, then you could send healthy people to the exchanges. that would help expand the pool, bring the cost down. and, like you are saying, that would allow portability. if you could drive people into the individual market, now you have competition and folks who want to be in that market. there are solutions. if i am in congress, i promise i

will work with whoever is there, republicans or democrats, just like i have done in the senate, and i will do it to make real change. leah: let's talk about who may be in washington, d.c. according to our kstp poll, voters in the district favor hillary clinton at 40%. 16% are going for a third-party candidate or are undecided. senator bonoff, you and other organizations have been running as talking about how representative paulsen has been supporting donald trump. you have gone on to say you are no longer endorsing donald trump, representative. is that fair to continue to say that he is supporting trump when he has said he is not? state sen. bonoff: i have no control over what outside groups do. for example, i changed an ad to say "supported," because he has disavowed him. donald trump's candidacy poses a real threat to our country. the way he has campaigned has reminded me of very dark times in our world history.

when dictators have come to the forefront. they would not have been able to do that if people had stood up and said "this is unacceptable." so i, partly, got into the race to tell the public that, that donald trump poses a danger and threat to america. because my opponent would not do that. that aside, i believe your votes reflect, in some ways, where donald trump stands. for example, you are not pro-choice, which is a personal choice, but you are a leader in wanting to defund planned parenthood. i saw a letter sent to president obama that you are one of the signers, calling roe v. wade a tragedy. and our district rejected the gay marriage ban. and i came back as a co-author

on their freedom to marry bill. that you got an award to put that ban into the constitution. i know of donald trump's stance with the nra. you have an a minus rating and voted 26 times to not even bring up gun violence prevention issues. and have done nothing on climate change. it is not about donald trump, it is about you are on the wrong side of history on too many votes and vote with the right wing of your party. rep. paulsen: just to be clear, i never endorsed donald trump. i was hoping to hopefully vote for the nominee and said he would have to earn my vote when he became the nominee. i endorsed marco rubio.

i am the only one who has not endorsed either candidate running. we have 2 deeply flawed candidates running. unfortunately. a lot of the issues that terri brought up -- folks know i focus on issues where we have bipartisan support, where there is consensus. she wants to talk about divisive issues -- i think people are tired of single issue politics. i will continue to have my track record and focus on coming together. leah: do you want to publicly support a candidate? rep. paulsen: i supported marco rubio and will likely write him in. i will say that terri had the opportunity to say that we do not want those ads and refused to do that. we have the ability to keep negative campaign money out of minnesota, but here it is, unfortunately. state sen. bonoff: what he is talking about is he offered me a pledge keep everyone outside. i said let's do that and let's then, given you have already raised several million dollars and i just got into the race, have you give back all of your special interest pac money, and i was happy to take that pledge

because you had something like 60% of your donations were from special interest pacs. you had a head start, but it would have been level. i want to go back to what he said about divisive wedge issues. we had a sandy hook shooting, where 20 children lost their lives. it is not a divisive wedge. we have not addressed gun violence prevention, when we have tragedy after tragedy. this is not about a divisive wedge issue. this is about putting the people first and making common sense gun violence prevention laws. and, in regards to women's choice, when you have a republican party platform that says they want to roll back roe v. wade, that is not divisive, it is demeaning to women. i look at everything i do through the lens of is it good for kids, is it good for our state and nation, and will it bring stronger jobs and strengthen our economy.

talking about overturning roe v. wade is not something the next generation of women have much interest in. that is not a divisive issue, it is being a responsible leader. and with regard to your vote for rubio, we have a law that says, unless someone has requested to be a write in candidate, it is not counted. so as a leader, we have choices. what is right, what is wrong. in this particular case, there are just two choices. you talk to any young person, they will say hillary clinton or donald trump. if you want to throw your vote away, i do not call that courageous leadership. rep. paulsen: you talk to any person, you will say they are

not happy with either candidate. and you never throw your vote away. and there is no bigger interest then nancy pelosi's special interest pack. they have run ads that have proven to have a d or d minus rating. state sen. bonoff: your ad against me right away said i was taxing -- but i want to go back. he took a sentence i said in a debate, and that was the theme of your commercial. it was "when the bridge collapsed." obviously one of the greatest tragedies our state has had. i was a leader to bring people together to invest in transportation. and the deputy commissioner, who lives in prairie, has endorsed my candidacy because of the leadership role i played when that bridge collapsed. that is what i was talking about, when you put it out of context in your ad. even the television stations said that you distorted my message.

and you did not vote for the transportation bill when the bridge collapsed. that points to you being on the wrong side of history in regards to your vote. we away to the people of our state to invest in infrastructure. rep. paulsen: i agree, and i did not vote for that gas tax increase or the sales tax increase or income tax increase you did. but i voted for a five-year federal transportation bill now in place. for the first time in a decade, we have a long-term highway bill. there are four more years to go. it is fully funded. the whole delegation was on board and supported it. leah: let's talk more about transportation. what is your big priority for a long-term transportation bill?

state sen. bonoff: there is nothing changing faster than our transportation system and infrastructure needs. because it is a game changer. you have 3m's, working on signs that talk to our cars. have this movement on driverless cars. we need to modernize our infrastructure. one to make sure it is safe. we certainly owe that to the next generation. we also have to take into account changing technology and make sure that we are doing all we can to keep up in this exciting time. i think cars are going to be more efficient. the gas tax will be outdated quickly. we have to be creative, we have to be innovative, and we have to listen to the experts. but i will not abdicate my responsibility. and the last thing on transportation is i know young people, the millennials -- i kids, 2 in d.c., one in l.a. they want comprehensive transit. that is why i supported the

light rail. our country needs to modernize our approach to transportation. leah: we only have a few minutes left. can we move on to another topic? rep. paulsen: real quick, transportation infrastructure is critical to our economy and a critical for our jobs and for moving people. we had the highway 610 opening, very bipartisan. but where we should go is looking at using energy royalties. there is not a lot of support about increasing the gas tax. we should look at energy royalties and put that number into infrastructure and transportation. that is the long-term plan i would like to see happen. tim walz and i have talked about that. state sen. bonoff: energy royalties is if you drill for oil on federal land or for natural gas, then the royalties that go to the fed would support transportation. that is not a very reliable, sustainable plan. rep. paulsen: it is reliable in the largest investment in the country in transportation. leah: we have three minutes

left. we have to touch on national security. we had an isis-inspired attack in the mall in st. cloud, minnesota. minnesotans are even traveling to join isis. so let's focus on this. what needs to be done on the federal level to stop attacks here at home in minnesota and abroad as well? state sen. bonoff: the radicalization and endoctrination of terror, particularly for young people, is a grave danger. they are getting that on the internet, through social media. we have to do all we can to root out terror everywhere it is. we talk about it at home, but you also have to address it in syria, we had the greatest threat of isis.

we are now arming the rebels in syria, doing everything we can to root out isis. there has been some progress in mosul. we had a partner with allies around the globe so we use our intelligence capabilities to find out where the terror cells are. then, we use that information to make sure that we are addressing that in our communities. and really, one of the great problems is that, many times, those allies around the world are not sure they trust us. for example, there are muslim majority countries like qatar and indonesia. so it is not helpful when you have what donald trump is saying about letting muslims into our country. we had to be careful to keep the doors of communication open so we can partner with allies and make sure we root out the threat of terror everywhere. rep. paulsen: we have no greater duty than to protect the homeland and our citizens. that is key. we have had more incidents here domestically with terrorism.

it is appropriate we review and make sure our vetting process is appropriate for refugees, no matter where they are coming from. we have to understand islamist fundamentalism for what it is, call it what it is. we have identified situations where folks have been sentenced but then travel back to somalia. we have lacked leadership at the top. we need to get your take and nos are going to continue to be real. and we have lacked leadership at the top. we'd to understand that the threat is real. we did nothe things talk about was climate change. i wanted to let the voters know because i haven't said anything about that. i believe it is urgent and very real and i would take action on itt and i'm proud to have endorsed by the league of conservation voters and the sierra club. >> clean energy and new development of cleaner energy is absolutely the direction to go

as we look for nuclear, biofuel, wind and solar. >> thank you both for joining us. we hope to see you back for eyewitness news at 10:00 tonight. >> house speaker paul ryan is in minnesota third congressional district today campaigning for the republican incumbent. reports that democrats have succeeded in using donald trump to expand possible democratic wins, however, able conducted in mid-october shows the incumbent in the lead with likely voters. week,n the road this president obama stumping for hillary clinton. he will be joined by james taylor at the university of north carolina chapel hill. afternoon at this three: 15 eastern. donald trump is holding a campaign rally in orlando florida. we will that beginning at 4:00 eastern.

election day, november 8, the nation decides our next president and which party controls the house and senate. stay with c-span for coverage of the presidential race, including campaign software hillary clinton, donald trump him and their surrogates. races to house and senate . c-span, where history unfolds daily. >> as the nation elect a new president on tuesday, will america have its first sincen-born first lady louisa adams or will we have a first gentleman? learn about presidential spouses from "c-span: first lady's." it looks at the impact of every first lady in american history. it is a companion to c-span cause well-regarded biography series and features interviews

with the leading first lady historians. each chapter offers brief biographies of 45 presidential spouses and archival photos from their lives. "first lady's" published by public affairs is available at your favorite bookseller and as an e-book. >> u.s. house candidate for new york's 19th district met in woodstock, new york, for a debate hosted by time warner cable news. they discussed national security, trade him tax policy, water quality and abortion rights. this is about one hour. >> hello and welcome to our time warner news and cable debate. we are coming to you live from the woodstock playhouse.

congressman chris gibson has represented this district since 2011. however, he is not seeking reelection this year. running to replace him are john zephyr teachout, law school professor at democrat. interestingly enough, both of previouslydates have run for governor. >> here are the rules the candidates have agreed to. each gets one minute for an opening statement and one minute for a closing. we'll ask questions on a range of topics. answers are limited to one minute followed by a 45 second rebuttal. through, the candidates will ask one another a question and at the end, we have everyone's favorite lightning round. answers will be limited to one word or yes or no.

>> the order was determined by chance. the first goes to miss teachout. >> thanks, liz, thanks, john, most important way, everybody watching the debate tonight. i love this country and i am running for congress because i'm worried about it. i'm an economic patriot and i believe we should be focused on bringing jobs home, supporting local farming, and making things in america again. i'm running because we have to protect our water from the big polluters. a deeper issue happening in our countries. we have a crisis of democracy. everywhere i go, people ask how can we get congress to work again for the people, not big

were great and's, not clinical parties. i have worked with you on the fracking fight, taking on corruption in albany, i've always been an independent writer and i've promise you if i am honored to have your vote, i will be an independent voice in congress because i cannot be bought. you to my opponent and the audience here in the woodstock playhouse, which is a great, great venue. i am running for congress because our country is in crisis. we face an economic crisis threatening our future. our children and grandchildren will be saddled with an enormous amount of debt. we would be the first generation to leave our children and grandchildren with a country worse off than the one we founded. but we have it within our capacity to fix it. i've laid out a program of tax reforms to get our small business economy moving again.

we face a crisis of national security and we have to make sure america is strong and our defenses are second to none and that we have the best intelligence and the o-matic capacities in the world. it is a privilege and honor to run for this office and i will my effort measure of to the people of the united states of america. moderator: a current events question goes to miss teachout. as we speak, peshmerga fighters and u.s. airstrikes and u.s. of portraits are conducting a major offensive against islamic state, also known as isil. is this the right time to launch the offensive or is -- was the u.s. to slow to remove islamic state? ms. teachout: i think we are facing three major national security threats in the global environment. one of the biggest one is isis. should be our

focus in terms of involvement abroad. that should be our focus in syria and it should be our focus in iraq. supportive of the president's actions in those areas and i think moving forward, it's incredibly important we keep that focus, a tough it focused approach. i, unlike my opponent, was opposed to the intervention in iraq and i was also opposed to the intervention in libya, so i will disagree with members of my party whenever i think they are making a wrong decision. but the key is instead of making interventions which lead to instability, which forces us into difficult situations like the one we are in now, we have to use our judgment in terms of where we intervene in the first place. moderator: there have been some developments about having turkish forces move into the region. should the u.s. welcome turkish

forces as part of their involvement? i think alliances are incredibly important. i would approach this question talking to military leaders about their own judgment about what is happening on the ground. i respect the people on the ground and believe there's a lot more wisdom there. -- moderator: >> the fact of the matter is the coordinated attack being made now is being well planned and executed. to be ansis is going evolving threat and they have done this in other areas. they attacked kirk cook just the other day. but the overriding issue is the iran nuclear deal, which i think has made us met -- has made us less secure and opened the door

to nuclear proliferation. it is highly likely that if iran gets a nuclear weapon, so will saudi arabia which will destabilize the region in the future. troops arethese considered to be advisory troops. should the u.s. commit ground troops to this area in order to root out isis? rely uponwe should the local nations who have the first line of defense. but we don't have 500 troops. we have between 6000 and 8000 special forces and other assistance in that region. it is vitally important the american people understand our role in that region is ongoing. while it doesn't get a lot of attention, we aid with help and instruction and support for the iraqis and kurds in order for them to combat isis successfully in that region. we move on to another

topic which is getting a lot of attention during this campaign season. it is trade. we have heard a lot about the transpacific partnership in particular and there are on both sides of the aisle opponents, just like the fact that the obama administration is championing this as it moves out the door. and ifo you stand on tpp you are elected to congress, regardless of who is in the white house, would you vote in favor of getting fast-track negotiation power to the president? mr. faso: those are two different issues, as you have correctly put in your question. i am not in favor of tpp because i think the obama administration has mishandled the critical details. congressman gibson, who is supportive of my candidacy as his successor, i think it is plain that leaders in both sides of congress have said tpp is not

going to get voted on and is unlikely to be adopted in the lame-duck session. but i think it is important we recognize trade is vitally important. we are 5% of the world population and 95% of the customers with outside the united states. it is vitally important that we understand there are 600,000 plus jobs in new york state alone that depend on u.s.-canada trade, so we have to be concerned when we hear voices say let's throw out all these trade agreements. think fast-track authority is critical for any president and we have seen presidents in both parties over 30 years utilize fast-track authority because you cannot negotiate with 15 different countries at once knowing they can go back to their national legislature and amend the agreement. so the congress gets an up or down vote under fast-track. moderator: you would feel

comfortable giving donald trump fast-track authority? mr. faso: these are all hypotheticals. i think president of both parties for 35 years have had the fast-track authority. that is the only way we can conduct trade negotiations in a reasonable way. i think there will be more bilateral trade agreements between the u.s. and other countries individually. with the brexit and england leaving the eu, it could be that you see many more agreement done separately rather than these global type arrangements being facilitated. this is an area where we bring real differences to bear and trade is something i feel passionately about. lastwas talking about the 35 years. we have lost so many manufacturing facilities. 50,000we have lost manufacturing facilities in this country.

depending on the estimates, it's 5 million jobs or more. luckily, little manufacturing is coming back to the united states, but i'm running for congress to bring jobs home. we can make things here again and fast-track enables these deals with offshore jobs. i am not only deeply opposed to the transpacific partnership, but we have to renegotiate the trade relationships that have led to off shoring jobs to china and elsewhere. when i am in congress, i will be a strong voice for made in america and bringing jobs home. if hillary clinton is in the white house, you would not give her fast-track authority to negotiate trade deals? i would not give president clinton or any other president fast-track authority. the vast majority of these deals have not helped american workers. athink it's time for 21st-century real trade policy that focuses on our workers.

in a societye where one in five people are either making were growing something and that requires tradeg back at all those deals. fast-track overturned a fundamental constitutional ideal and that gives way too much power to the executive branch. i think ms. teachout fails to understand the lessons of history. great recession that turned into the great depression , we erected trade barriers. it is vitally important with all those customers around the world that our custom -- our companies have the ability to export. she put all the problem on trade when every expert left and right has said we lost many manufacturing jobs due to productivity and automation. so yes, we need to fight to reform our tax code so that we bring the opportunity to bring those jobs back.

i have specific ideas and suggestions about doing that. anybodyhout: i think traveling through our committees can see the devastation of the loss of manufacturing jobs. there are political elites that believe the trade deals at last 30 years have helped americans. some of them are big donors to my opponent. there is a guy named paul singer who gave $500,000 to my opponent's super pac. are not feeling the pain of what is happening in our communities and i believe in american workers and i believe american workers can compete if they are allowed to compete fairly. moderator: this next question gets to that. moderator: the financial services industry was while -- was widely blamed for the economic collapse, but this industry is essential for generating needed tax revenue in new york. should wall street be further

regulated and if so, how would you go about it in congress? ms. teachout: after the financial crash of 2008, i found it an all volunteer grassroots group dedicated to taking on the big banks. the big banks have way too much a lyrical power and they are running the table in washington. when we want as citizens to say they are too fragile, they brought down our economy and we are subsidizing them so heavily with the bailout, you could see campaigngiven so many contributions and gotten so involved in lobbying in washington that their power was drowning out the voices of small businesses. there is a whole series of things we should do. thet, we have to recognize watchdog group that came out of the laws after the financial responsible for

catching wells fargo in the massive fraud and it is really important that we allow for those watchdog groups. i tend to favor structural reforms and supporting more community banks. moderator: do you think dodd frank went far enough? ms. teachout: yes. they had the consumer financial protection bureau, which is responsible for uncovering this massive fraud, otherwise wells fargo would have gotten away with more. there are some problems with. frank and areas where it went too far and areas where it did not go far enough. when i talk to community bankers and you could see this in 2009, 30 bankers were not getting a voice and big banks were happy to have regulations pushed down on community banks that drown them out and made it hard for them to compete. i listen to this imagined series of explanations and it's like they are playing

monopoly looking at the bankers on the monopoly board. the fact is the consumer finance protection board did not uncover wells fargo. that was uncovered by the los angeles city attorney. how she rewrites history is beyond me. the fact is the consumer finance protection board established under dodd frank two weeks ago, it was declared unconstitutional. underdog meant there was an unaccountable philosophy. left elites the want. that is perfectly acceptable to my opponent but it doesn't work and that is why we had the financial crisis, not because we had not enough regulation. we had bad regulation and oversight. moderator: are there any regulations that could be put in

place? wall street is strictly regulated and should be more closely regulated. she said let's put a $10 million stock transfer tax -- that ain't every teacher with a pension, every state and local worker, every worker with an ira is going to get a tax every time there's a transaction that goes forth. this is lunacy. it makes no sense whatsoever and what is killing the local lending is excessive regulation from dodd frank. this had nothing to do with the mortgage meltdown. ms. teachout: a few things -- it's a matter of public record, the role in the wells fargo crisis and you are welcome to look that up. there are two broad approaches you can take toward what is happening in the banking industry. i tend to favor the approach,

the teddy roosevelt approach of trust busting. what we see happening is banks not doing the job of banks but becoming political actors where they are involved in policy, trying to shape policy in just doing boring old banking. i tend to favor a rules approach as opposed to a regulation approach that focuses on making sure the big banks don't get so powerful in the first place. both of you know there has been a lot of finger-pointing during the campaign. you did say when you were running for governor that you would support rolling back the property tax cap and there's a theory behind that. two -- you have accused your opponent of mischaracterizing your position. propertye the highest tax burden in the nation. you prefer doing so through

methods like the circuit breaker. your positionify on this issue and where is the money going to come from for investment in things like education? thanks so much for the question. if you have been turning on your tv, you have seen some attacks that are simply not true. we have to lower property taxes. they are the highest in the country and they are causing real pain. families are paying 10% of their inome, in some cases 20% property taxes. it is a heavy burden on people who have had land and their families for generations. it is a real problem. i have a video online that you are welcome to watch talking about the property tax burden and ways to approach it. my issue is that it doesn't go far enough in relieving the burden and takes away control.

i'm a big supporter of local control and trusting local communities instead of albany politicians telling communities what to do. to the second part of your question, you see property taxes go up when my opponent was in albany. they went up 43%. the core reason they went up is because the state started getting tax breaks to downstate big companies and the wealthiest new yorkers. the effect was there was last -- there was less revenue in the state pushed unfunded mandates on local communities. i know you do believe in investing additional amount in the education system. ms. teachout: the money comes from a more fair tax system in new york state. basically the 1% and big corporations, mostly in new york city are the ones doing away with it. the times union had a great story just a couple of weeks ago

about where our tax revenue has vanished. from the biggest companies in new york city. moderator: ms. teachout: higher personal income tax? ms. teachout:i'm focused on the big corporations. moderator: early on in your campaign, right after you announced, you put forward a cost ofreduce the local medicaid, which is an unfunded mandate. are forced tos pick up that cost. that would relieve a burden local governments are generating a lot for an taxes but it is not a federal issue. is aaso: it actually federal issue because federal law permits the state to impose the burden partially on the localities. i researched this and we are one of the only states in the country that does this.

we can fix nelson rockefeller's 50-year-old mistake. that by amending federal law and i propose just that. you would be one member of a whole host of a conference. how would you convince those folks to do that? it would be fairly unpopular. if you look at all the burden of medicaid, $9 billion is spent, $7.5 billion is spent by new york state. when people say their property taxes are so much higher here in new york state, that's one of the reasons. but my opponents approach is wrongheaded. she doesn't know what she's talking about when it comes to property taxes. maybe that's because she just moved into the district and has never paid property taxes.

the bottom line is the circuit says she supported does not hold the line on local spending and the localities, the town or village or school district can override the tax cap. so that local control is maintained. burdenor: it is a high as far as their ability to override the cap. she want not only does to raise the property tax by limiting the cap, she wants new energy taxes on heating oil, propane, diesel and electricity. moderator: going hand in hand of having the state pick up the entire cost of medicaid, would you advocate for reduced services? new york's medicaid has been called the cadillac of medicaid. has to reformyork it but only when a are fully responsible will they do it. was inachout says when i

new york, property taxes went up. when i was in albany, the sun rose in the east and sets in the west every day. there is a lot that has been raised and i want to address a few different things. aally, i do not support national energy tax or carbon tax as john has said. also, i agree with him on medicaid. we actually have a real problem and people have been talking about this for decades. john, i feel very strongly about protecting medicaid, protecting medicare and expanding medicare to include dental care, which is something i care passionately about, and protecting social security. i hope we get to that because there's a real difference between us on social security. moderator: do you want to respond to the payment of

property taxes? my husband and i pay property taxes. we live in dutchess county. moderator: the water contamination issue has been the subject of several public forms and hearings, including lengthy discussions about federal agencies discovering the problems and how they responded. for residents, one of the biggest questions remains what happens next and what resources will be available if they develop problems related to the contamination? what steps need to be taken to make sure residents have access to needed information, blood testing and other forms of stateance? mr. faso: the possible response was pathetic and epa shares some burden here. i do think the companies

involved should be first and foremost responsible for cleaning up, for providing clean water to the resident and making sure their health is monitored. the costs that might be related not only to the cleanup of their water, but to make sure there are health is taken care of. that is google. many, manythis state instances of pollution taking place and we need to make sure the state and federal revolving loan fund which is there to fix they have it fully funded and fully activated. governor cuomo tried to grab onto the revolving loan fund which is revolving money.

fortunately, the epa prevented him from doing so. moderator: do you think residents who live in these communities should be allowed to sue these companies? absolutely, and i think many of them already are. you have not if been paying attention to what is happening in st. petersburg, please do. i spent a lot of time talking to members of the community and just a few weeks ago, mothers from flint michigan came to meet mothers to talk about how we may be poisoned in different ways but we are still dealing with poison from big companies and government responses. one of the most painful stories i heard was a young mother who said i just gave birth and i thought the best and healthiest my son healthy was to breast-feed him and it turns out for over a year, i've been

poisoning him because of the water i myself have been thinking. we need to make sure that companies a, that there is medical monitoring, and i would call for hearings with subpoena power to figure out what happened and make sure there is full accountability going forward. sitting inso you are congress and a constituent comes to you and needs more information about contamination. how would you work with that constituent to make sure this is resolved? it depends on what the particular question is. we need to know what the company's new, when they knew it, let the agency's new, when the epa knew it, what the state government knew, when it knew it and why it did not respond faster because this is not the last time. you might be asking about medical concern and making sure there's full access to doctors because the families in st.

petersburg will be affected for a long time. even when that spotlight is gone, we have a responsibility to take care of the people in those communities. i largely agree on this topic. i would point out on the topic we raised earlier, she specifically said she wants a national energy tax. oil. a tax on home heating we are just going into the heating season. out how to figured tax would yet but i would not put it past her. you should have an opportunity to respond. ms. teachout: the other thing i want to say about water quality as we should have -- we have very different stance on water quality. i was proud to stand against fracking in new york state. my opponent is pro-fracking.

when he was in the assembly, he wrote letters to the epa saying ge should not have to pay the full cost of cleaning up the hudson river. this was after he had taken campaign cash from ge. i have to remind folks to please withhold your response until the end of the debate. this is a perfect example of how she plays fast and loose with the facts and the truth. plan theythe initial wanted to do in the late 90's ,or dredging the hudson river mainly because they had an unsafe approach which would have pcbs migrating downriver. everyone of those communities was opposed to it. subsequently was adopted, i supported in the dredging was done and completed

in 15. if the evidence shows the fish are not sufficiently reduced in their levels, i would support additional dredging. -- she rewrites history. she just moved here from rockland. falsemes up with a narrative and false narratives should not allowed to go unanswered. moderator: we're going to move on to water quality. os is an issue in new bern. before the health risks were discovered, congress passed an update to the top -- toxic substance control act to give epa more power. equipmentremoving showing the chemical is considered a risk before testing it.

-- [crosstalk] it does not require manufacturers to improve a product is safe before it goes to market. do you think the government is taking the right approach toward regular eating chemicals? be --achout: it needs to toward regulating chemicals. ms. teachout: it needs to be much more aggressive. we are jumping behind as there is new evidence. i favor the precautionary principle. instead of having the one at a time approach which allows us to say this looks a lot like another chemical that has caused harm, i think we will see this pop up a lot. to be ant's going ongoing issue. one is making sure we empower you going forward. and the other is to make sure

people who have been affected get the help they need. eparator: given the way the handled the situation, you feel confident empowering the epa further is a good idea? ms. teachout: i feel confident that when i'm in congress, i will be an independent writer and call in any agency not doing its job to task. any political leader not doing its job to task. separate from constituent services, separate room working on the legislation is being a vigilant watchdog. i agree that needs to be better congressional oversight in albany. the state legislature needs to have better oversight on the actions of agencies. that's one of the reasons i was concerned about the consumer protection agency whose authority was deemed

unconstitutional because of the way it was immune from congressional oversight. renewalc substances done this past year was done in an instant where congress worked on a bipartisan basis. you have different from -- you have people from different points of view. as someone running for chris ibsen's seat, i would be better suited to work in that because i have worked across party lines to get things done. as it stands, you are satisfied with the reg year -- with the rigor of that act? mr. faso: it depends on how well the agency administers it and how well the congress provides oversight. it was the update of a 40-year-old act and i think my opponent and i would agree, there were chemical substances that were never evaluated and where wee is a process

can get many more chemical substances evaluated to learn their potential carcinogenic effect on human health. moderator: we have reached about the halfway point on this debate. the candidates will now ask questions of each other. ms. teachout: you have said you support donald trump because of the role he would play in selecting supreme court justices. you have also said you think roe versus wade is a black mark on our country. agree with donald trump that the next supreme court justices should rollback roe versus wade. mr. faso: there are many things i don't agree with donald trump on and many things i don't agree with hillary clinton on. i think roe v wade is the law of the land. if i ammething that,

honored to be elected, i'm sworn to uphold the law of the land and i'm satisfied with the current status of the law. i do not support things like public taxpayer funding of whereon but by and large the law is is where the law is going to stay. you asked a question that we were going to be getting too. do you believe the state, if it did take it back to the states as donald trump has said he hopes the supreme court would do if you made it to the white acte, that the state should to change the current abortion laws in any way? mr. faso: i think that is one hypothetical wrapped up in another. settled law is satisfactory. i do not support taxpayer funding of abortion. i think we have a clear difference on that, but i do not foresee any change in new york state. or would: you would not vote to codify the hyde amendment? mr. faso: i support the hyde

amendment. first, happy birthday. i understand it is your birthday. [applause] you will find that they come every year. has many statect historic sites and beautiful this doesn't great parks and historic sites. lights -- federal sites, what is your favorite historic site in the 19th district? by far, myt: favorite is the dover stone church. it was a favorite during the great depression and afterwards, it was a place where many people got married in the 19 century and if you haven't been, you should go. it is heaven. it.faso: i will try

i am looking for heaven. schools have faced challenges from the obama administration whether transgendered students should be allowed to use the bathroom that meets their gender identity. is this a federal overreach or is it a protection of transgendered students? mr. faso: we should be respectful of transgendered students and their situation. this is a matter best handled at the local level and i think the problem with the federal action is that it was based on a lack of statutory authority to act in this area and they did it through a letter guidance. it's now subject to litigation and the prospect of that litigation being successful is fairly strong. there's not a proper statutory basis for it, but we should be respectful and

careful how we deal with situations like this. they are going through a difficult time emotionally and otherwise. i think it is finally important that we treat everyone with respect and dignity. moderator: governor cuomo about a year ago put the gender expression act into regulation. should there have been some sort of legal challenge? it's much more broad in terms of housing, but should there be a legal challenge? mr. faso: i have not read his executive order. i did vote for the sexual orientation bill, i was one of the first republicans to do that. we have to be careful in terms of when executives assert their authority beyond , one of thety things i feel deeply about as we

have to uphold the constitution and one of the things that has not happened nationally is for , wheres to exert itself the president may overstep his or her boundary. ms. teachout: this is a broad area in terms of an aggressive potentially overreaching executives where john and i may agree. i feel like it is incredibly aportant for congress to play watchdog role. i'm a supporter of lgbt right and always have been and i think this is a matter of basic human dignity and respect. children are going through a tough time in schools, but we have to work with school districts themselves to make it work. there is an area of real difference between john and i. when john was running for governor in 2006, he was asked if he would veto a marriage equality bill that came to his

desk. he said he would the tow it. instead of imposing his own anti-equality these, i deeply disagree. i want to clarify your opinion. do you believe the federal government should require school districts to allow transgendered students to use the bathroom they are most comfortable using? ms. teachout: i think it is incredibly important we respect the rights of children in the classrooms. i think the way we do it matters. we should focus with the school district on the best possible way to do that. i think the attack that she's made on my position in 2006, my position in 2006 was i favored civil unions and that's it is edition i think many people, barack obama,

hillary clinton and most political leaders did not favor marriage equality, but we have marriage equality now. it's the law of new york state and the law of the united states and if i'm honored with election to congress, i'm sworn to uphold the law of the country and i am fully supportive of doing so. regarding executive up,reach which nick brought there have been legal challenges. didcurrent congress challenges presidents use of power. did you support that? mr. faso: absolutely. democracy is messy. it is not something that we have a magic wand or snap of the fingers. the founders created the system we have intentionally.

they came from a parliamentary system where a majority in parliament could work its will and do anything it wanted. checks andystem of balances, coequal branches, making it difficult to pass things in the united states and that is the system we have. i think it's a very important system and i feel strongly about that checkswe have and balance in our system and in the case of obamacare, where he has been challenged and in the case of the immigration executive order, the president himself has said 22 times before that that he did not have the authority to do it and then he did it. moderator: leaving aside whether you agreed with the specific instances, do you support the idea of legal challenges when an executive overreach is? ms. teachout: we have such a much bigger problem with congress right now.

congress isn't working. it is not functioning at a basic level. it is not actually solving problems. when you look under the hood, the root reason congress is not working is because of the role of money in politics and the role of super pac's. moderator: you do or do not support legal action? ms. teachout: it is going to depend on the particular issue. moderator: we were talking earlier about water quality and the hudson came out -- came up in terms of dredging. i would like to talk about the coast guard proposal to build anchorage points along the hudson river. a democrat is working on legislation that would severely limit options for these locations and take all 10 sites off the table. is there any way for these to be parked along the river and if not, should they be allowed at all?

ms. teachout: the correct number of barges in the hudson zero. i've been very clear about that. i've talked to community members throughout the region. big news, tomorrow, we will be announcing that congressman ichi will be endorsing my campaign. i am thrilled about that and following congressman hinge ethos legacy, we have to protect the hudson and our water for its own sake and our economy. to people about the problem with the proposed barges, there are so many different problems, but it is the wrong direction to be going. the great strides we have made in terms of tourism, in terms of exciting new technology companies, that all depends on protecting the hudson instead of putting barges in. the coast guard really is not

up up to do a full health and economic assessment. it's the agency without the right tools to be evaluating the legitimacy of this. when i am in congress, one of the things i want to focus on -- agencies that are not equipped to do a full environmental health and property value view, there something else happening here. someator: i need verification. you are suggesting all the current barge traffic on the river -- ms. teachout: i'm talking about the proposed -- we clarified glad that because all of our heating oil coming gasoline and diesel comes up the river on barges. -- thisthe coast guard is an obama administration proposal.

the coast guard is part of the department of homeland security and the proposal as it currently stands is not something i could support. moderator: could you support any modification? i would like to see the justification. if they say they need and anchorage for emergency situations where there is a temporary need because of whether or some traffic backup in the port of albany, then i think that's the kind of discussion we should have because everyone wants to make sure that this traffic on the river, not just the barges that may be new, but what about the barges taking our heating oil? and diesel shee wants to tax as well. what about those barges? we want to make sure the safety in the river to make sure our queries are protected and commerce is done in a safe and efficient manner.

moderator: we are coming down close to the wire, if you would like to rebut here. one of the big differences between john and me is i will always tell you where i stand. i will tell you where i stand on the barges and john has a history as a career politician answersyist and his reflect that. it's sort of a non-answer. i think people want to know exactly where you stand on these issues. cheapso: it's just one shot after another. ms. teachout was a lobbyist and outof -- they have an ad and pull a snip out of a comment of a radio show and that's dishonest. you should own up to it. she is running a dishonest campaign, they attacked my 97%.dance record which is i missed 100 votes and i'm getting attacked by her and her

allies. it is outrageous. if you can't trust her to tell you to truth about little things, how can you trust her to tell the truth -- moderator: we have two more topics. everything i have said is a matter of public record. you can look it up. you can look up his history as a lobbyist for pipeline companies and payday lenders. the one other factual correction i want to make is i do not support a carbon tax or energy tax. district in this relies on driving to get to work and we simply cannot afford to put a on people at the gas pump. moderator: i want to move to a different topic. addiction to opioids and heroin has devastated sun communities. what methods would you seek to combat drug addiction? education, treatment,

and enforcement. we really need to focus on education because many people are not aware that 75% of the people have migrated from prescription opioid painkillers and the cdc and medical community have finally awakened, too late, unfortunately. we need better insurance coverage because you do not detox from heroin on 30 days. you also need enforcement to go after the traffickers. the bottom line is this is an issue that affects our society, everyone regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, their sexual orientation. it is something that is devastating our communities. there are more people who died in 24 teen from heroin overdoses and prescription opioid overdoses and died from automobile accidents in the united states. moderator: should there be more access to narcan?

does revive them amid an overdose. , sixaso: my wife and i months ago, my wife is a school nurse and we attended a training session in woodstock and the must have been 200 people there. do to informan people and get them to understand how people move from prescription drug abuse is vitally important. ms. teachout: this is a daily, ongoing, devastating tragedy and i have spent a lot of time working and talking to former addicts working on building theory support to get out of addiction. there is a great group called friends of recovery.

there is also leadership taking place and right here in chatham, they have said addiction is a health problem, not a crime. if you come to us, you -- we will try to help. we need access to beds and our police department and first responders are on the front line . i'm proud to have the support of the kingston firefighters. moderator: we are going to try to squeeze one more of these in here. presidentialame a contender, bernie sanders introduced a bill for spending $1 trillion over five years to rebuild america' going infrastructure. but it turns out that doesn't

even begin to touch the need according to the american society of engineers. at $3.6 trillion. we all agree this is a massive problem, but how to pay for it? do we borrow our way out or tax our way out? what is your solution? ms. teachout: we need infrastructure and i'm a big border of an infrastructure bank puzzle. we need to -- infrastructure -- infrastructure bank proposal. that investment in infrastructure is good for everybody and it's also good for jobs, which is so sorely needed. everywhere i go in this district, there's a need for good jobs. here is what is happening in our society right now. there are a handful of big companies that have hired lobbyists to go to washington and become legal tax cheats. they are avoiding taxes by getting loopholes put into laws. do you know how much ge paid in

federal income tax in 2011 after making $14 billion in profits? zero. they paid zero. that doesn't make any sense. there is enough wealth in our society, but the big companies are hiring lots usher hiring lobbyists and getting away with not hang their fair share. close the you would corporate loopholes and use the money to pay for infrastructure? ms. teachout: absolutely. there's billions of dollars getting taken out of the federal government from huge tax loopholes. mr. faso: we do need tax reform and one of the things i have we could fix the corporate tax system. u.s. companies that do business abroad can keep their profits abroad because if they brought them home, they would be double taxed. they pay them once where they earn them abroad and this is a primary where we have to fix and

it would encourage investment in jobs and the economy here in the united states. the second thing we have to do is eliminate disincentives for exporters who have to pay a value added tax. imported goods have value added theadded to them, so subsidy for imports as opposed to exports. we should have 100% expensing for small businesses when they invest in new plants and machinery. and will inject capital jobs and help small business sector in particular. you support any borrowing for infrastructure projects mr. faso:? mr. faso:we are already borrowing. we have $20 trillion of debt and this is why we have to grow the economy. not by this grapes of wrath view of the world, but we have to do it from the standpoint of how do you let businesses invest and create jobs? tax reform, getting rid of

loopholes, getting rid of things like ethanol subsidies, getting rid of crazy anomalies in attacks systems. when ronald reagan and bill the lawdid tax reform, was 20,000 pages. we havehout: right now, a crisis in terms of infrastructure and in terms of corruption. and they are deeply connected. i have been outspoken as an opponent of subsidies going to big businesses, subsidies that of our general funds to people who can afford lobbyists. if you talk to mom and pop and they cannot afford a lobbyists. i talked to a former that set her dairy farm had to go out of business in the real root issue is the big guys are getting subsidized and they have to compete on an unfair playing

field. to move on tohave a lightning round. these are yes or no answers or one word answers. to trump is not committing accepting the results of the presidential election. are you feeling confident in the integrity mr. faso: of the election process? mr. faso:mr. faso: yes. ms. teachout: yes. moderator: should at&t and time warner be allowed to merge? ms. teachout: absolutely not. mr. faso: moderator: we have gain or no gain, just to be clear. >> this should go to mr. faso. ould ride sharing like uber be legal in upstate new york? ms. teachout: it depends on the rules. >> would you run for governor again? ms. teachout: i am not planning on it. mr. faso: no! >> so unfortunately we are out of time, mr. faso, the close to

you goes first. mr. faso: well, thank you to time warner and to my opponent and the audience and the woodstock playhouse. very simply i'm running for congress and i ask for your trust on november 8 to change the direction of our country. we need reform in our tax code. we need to make sure our national security is protected and i want to lay out for people where i come from and how i look at issues. what motivates me is the defense of the constitution, a defense of limited government. a defense of the rule of law, a defense of free enterprise as the embodiment of what creates the most wealth and opportunity for the mass of our citizens and lifts up american families. i also support equal opportunity and i support personal responsibility. so when citizens want to ask -- how will i be guided? i will be guided by those principles. i'm honored to have chris gibson's strong support in the seat and i would be honor to have your support as your next member of congress on november

8. >> mr. faso, thank you. ms. teachout. ms. teachout: thank you, nick, liz, john and everybody for watching. this is a real -- a really critical election and there are real differences between myself and john. some of which we talked about not. not all of which we did. the core difference is i am an independent fighter. i never responded to political party heads or to big corporations. my opponent is really the ultimate insider. he was assemblyman and then a lobbyist. even a couple years ago said he couldn't really see there was corruption in albany. what i see is that people throughout our district are angry because they don't have a voice. and i promise i will be that independent voice only responding to people in this district, only raising up people's voices. i believe in protecting social security. my opponent believes we should privatize it. ban.ieve in the fracking

my opponent thinks we should do more fracking. there are deep differences but the biggest difference is i will be independent. >> thank you, ms. teachout. thank you, mr. faso. we are very close for time. nick, i want to thank you for being with me, for you watching at home. for you at the woodstock place house. i want to remind everyone please do vote on november 8. it is very important. be well. ood night. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> and we take you live to the university of north carolina at chapel hill. on stage is singer-songwriter james taylor. ahead of president obama campaigning for hillary clinton. >> ♪ with brotherhood from sea to shining sea

♪om sea to shining sea cheers and applause] [audience yelling "obama"]

cheers and applause] >> we didn't plan it that way

with james taylor finishing up a couple of songs here at the university of north carolina. he spent all of his childhood in north carolina. he's here ahead of president obama who's campaigning for hillary clinton. the president should be out shortly. six days until election day and in north carolina in particular polls there showing mr. trump, donald trump leading in north carolina. we get an update of what's happening in the state while we wait for president obama. joining us on the phone from charlotte is a reporter for the charlotte observer. thanks very much for being with us. guest: thanks for being with you. thank you. host: why has north carolina turned to a battleground state? guest: part has been demographic changes. you have people moving down to

the northeast and many millennials moving to charlotte and raleigh and the triangle. the politics have become more moderate, i guess. you know, you still have an urban-rural divide with a lot of the old jesse crass, people who used to vote for jesse helms, used to be democrats are now republicans and a lot of them in rural areas and then the urban areas are pretty blue just like across the country. host: with the president making two visits to the state this week, donald trump back in north carolina on thursday, what is their message and who are they appealing to? guest: well, i think trump is appealing to the people that he has appealed to at most of his rallies. in fact, he's having a rally in rural -- a rural area near charlotte that is in the same arena where he's already had one rally this year so he's going back to his strong hold with the rural north carolina and, again, it's the jessecrats

turned republicans who are the base of his support. and president obama is going to chapel hill, which is in the heart of the trin -- triangle, which is cleage town. a lot of young people there, a lot of young voters. he's also going to fayetteville and charlotte. fayetteville also has some college presence. of course, military presence and a large african-american presence in charlotte. we don't know what the venues are yet but, you know, this is a big urban area with a lot he carried by 100,000 votes four years ago. host: based on early voting, what indication do you have on overall turnout in north carolina? guest: well, turnout is high. there's about two million people who've already voted. the people that look at this stuff expected there to be about 60% of the voters of the overall voters voting early, either by absentee ballot or in-person early voting. and so what the patterns are showing so far is that democrats are a little under

their 2012 performance and a republicans are a little bit over their 2012 performance. and independents, unaffiliated voters are up like a third from what they were in 2012. so i don't think anybody's quite sure what that means. host: jim morrill, based on the information we have been following, the general sentiment seems to be that north carolina is a state that hillary clinton would very much like to win. for donald trump it's a must-win state. do you agree with that? guest: you know, that's been the conventional wisdom. i mean, if clinton wins it, it's really a flip of 30 electoral votes, right? 15 that she would have gotten and 15 that he wouldn't have gotten which could be significant. although lately you're hearing -- that he has other paths to victory. and maybe it's not as important. but we like to think it is. you know, he's certainly been here a lot. both candidates and their

vice-presidential nominees have been all over north carolina. so it's really a busy year for all of us. host: and north carolina voters making a lot of choices not only for president but you have a hotly contested governor's race and a designate race that's become far more competitive. guest: oh, definitely. nobody expected the senate race to be that competitive at the beginning because democrats -- a couple democrats who are more prominent turned down the race. deborah ross, who was kind of a little known legislator from raleigh, became the nominee. she's run a strong race, and it's pretty competitive. a lot of polls show it within the margin of error. we had a poll last week that came out showed her within two points of richard burr, senator burr, the republican. and then we have a very competitive gubernatorial race. of the e us the sense

demographics of north carolina? what will you be looking for trends on the presidential level and these closely watched statewide races? guest: well, i think i will be looking at turnout figures in the urban areas in wake and mecklandburg county, raleigh as well as charlotte and winston-salem and greensboro. and also the rural area which is trump country. i think those are the areas and the suburbs too. the suburbs are tending to be more blue than they normally are, that would be a bad sign for trump. we heard a lot about suburban women. so suburbs would be an area to watch too. host: we will look for your reporting online at charlotteobserver.com and jim morrill who is a reporter for "the charlotte observer," thank you very much for being with us. guest: oh, my pleasure. thank you, steve. >> and back live to the university of north carolina-chapel hill. president obama is due here

shortly. he is campaigning this week for hillary clinton with six days left until election day. the president here in cham hill today. tomorrow in florida. he'll have appearances in jacksonville and miami. back to north carolina on friday with rallies in fayetteville. and also in charlotte. donald trump, meanwhile, spending the day today in florida, and we'll have a rally this afternoon coming up at 4:00 eastern in orlando. live here on c-span.

♪

>> students and others gathered at the university of north carolina-chapel hill to hear president obama out campaigning this week for hillary clinton. some six days before election day. and since last friday's

announcement by james comey of the f.b.i. about more investigations -- emails being investigated related to the clinton -- hillary clinton email server, several new polls are out. a couple out today and according to cnn polls, hillary clinton appears to be leading in pennsylvania and florida. those polls showing a tight lead by four points in ennsylvania, two points in florida. emerson college, meanwhile, finds donald trump holding substantial leads in georgia and missouri. in arizona, mr. trump now needs hillary clinton by four points. all of these polls florida. emerson done after last friday's announcement and the new polls coming out here in north carolina. their polling show hillary clinton up by three points, 47-44. in florida hillary clinton up 46-45. in ohio, hillary clinton 46 and donald trump 44. and pennsylvania, 48 for hillary clinton. 43 for donald trump.

those are rinet polls, again, just coming out today. we'll have live coverage of the president here on c-span once he starts speaking. in the meantime, a look back at voting questions to the year 2000 in the election between george w. bush and vice president al gore from today's "washington journal." host: history and public affairs professor and author of the fierce urgency of now. professor, thanks for joining us this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: professor, during this campaign, the donald trump campaign, at some point had raised the specter of what happened with the election of 2000 between george w. bush and al gore. could you paint the picture of not only what's been said about it in context of this campaign but if there's merit to those

comparisons? guest: i think they're very different. in 2000 it was a very close election between al gore and george w. bush, and there was a dispute about the count in florida, looking in particular ballots in certain counties. and what we saw after the election was a process where there were recounts, overcontested votes that ultimately ending in a supreme court decision which stopped the recounts. that's very different than what we're hearing today. today, we've heard from donald trump, meaning in the last month, about the idea of a rigged election where it's not about contested ballots after the election in certain areas. rather, it's about the entire political system. it's about the entire media being stacked against one candidate over the other. combined with allegations of voter fraud, without any evidence that that's happened. there are two very different

kinds of issues. i would say that there was some feeling after bush v. gore, which was the supreme court case that ended the recount, that the supreme court had acted improperly and stopped the process too early. but i think they're different. host: and so as far as this election, more about the people involved than the actual voting process? guest: exactly. although then it was about, how do you count the votes in terms of the voting process? there were ballots where you couldn't see exactly who someone voted for or there were claims the voter was confused with how the balance oat is constructed. today there is one aspect of the voting process that's emerged. donald trump has argued that there will be a lot of voting fraud in this election which is the kind of argument we've heard from many conservatives for over a decade now. and that's why we have new

voter i.d. laws put into place in many states where there will be fraud. people will try to vote who say they are someone they're not. they'll claim the identity of dead people, and this is something he's warned about and he's even called on his supporters to go and monitor on election day to make sure that no such fraud takes place. host: back in 2000 we heard about the infamous hanging chads and i think that's what you're referring to. now we have more than a paper ballot system in play today. guest: right. so the 2000 election exposed some of the inadequacies in some way how we conduct our voting. it was very archaic. it's still run by local governments. what we saw in some places it was sloppyly done. the butterfly ballot dispute in 2000 really focused on some democratic counties in florida