tv Today in Washington CSPAN October 5, 2010 6:00am-7:00am EDT
coverage of politics, public affairs, and books, all available on television, radio, if online, and on social media networking sites. and who the c-span video library. we have the digital bus, bringing resources to your community. the c-span networks. now available in 100 million homes, created by cable, provided as a public service. >> the first debate between connecticut u.s. senate candidates, democratic state attorney general richard blumenthal and republican linda mcmahon, former ceo of worldwide wrestling entertainment. it is rated as a tossup. this is in connecticut. the moderator is from the fox news channel.
>> live, from the bushnell center. >> good evening from the theater at the bushnell in hartford, conn. welcome to the connecticut senate debate between richard blumenthal and republican candidate to linda mcmahon. fox brings you this debate tonight which will cover of a wide range of topics from the economy to foreign policy. the candidates will have 30 seconds rebuttal.
the candidates will be signaled. the order has been determined by a coin toss. specific subjects and questions were chosen by fox connecticut and the harford current and have not been shared with or cleared by either campaign. the audience has promised to remain quiet. we will keep them to that. if no tears or clause or a purse of any kind. welcome to you both. if the first question to mr. blumenthal. we got questions from readers and viewers. this one comes from a viewer from ellington. how has your public elected office experience without any business experience preparing new to be a senator? >> thank you. i have stood up for the people of connecticut over 20 years fighting for them tenaciously.
fighting for their interests, putting them first. when i have a plan that contradicts what we have been sitting in washington, it is a plan based on my experience for reviving our economy and putting people back to work first. making sure that small businesses have loans and capital they need. tax deductions as well as payroll tax exemptions and a better trade policies. i will fight for them in washington, making use of my experience as a public official. second, more manufacturing, necessary. a policy that i will fight for in washington. using my experience as a public official, fighting for conn. third, ending the tax breaks for corporations that send jobs overseas. very important that someone with that experience stand up for
conn be there to change those trade policies to get the currency manipulations like china. my opponent would take us back to the policy that led us to these problems, including the bailout that she supported that i opposed. and a middle-income tax cut which i believe is necessary for economic revival, i would give people a middle income tax cut without the holding it hostage to a tax cut for the wealthiest 2% of the country. >> thank you. ms. mcmahon, you help to build a business with your husband and family and you went on to beat ceo of wwe. this person wants to know how has your business experience without elected office experience prepared to be a senator? >> thank you. thanks for the question. i would like to welcome our audience and the television
audience. thanks for joining us. this election is about clear choices and different philosophies. you have my opponent who's been in government all of his life and that is his position, he's about growing government. in about a growing the economy. i want our money to stay in the hands of our families and not washington. when he talks about a middle-class tax cuts, that's not true about me. i want us not to raise taxes on anyone. if we raise taxes on small businesses, we are going to print their growth and job creation and it will impact of the middle class. in a time of recession, raise taxes on anyone. we have to focus on making sure that small businesses that create 70% of the jobs in the country will have the ability to
grow and to create jobs. if we handcuffed them and continue to suppress our economy, we will not get the economy back on track. the government does not know how to create jobs. we have to let small businesses create jobs. that is what i will bring to washington is my business experience. >> if you have 30 seconds to respond? >> people create jobs, small businesses create jobs. 70% of new jobs are created by small business. my plan would help small businesses by giving the tax cuts to a small businesses, tax deductions, payroll taxes, startup cost to be deducted from a series of measures without holding hostage a middle-income tax cut to the wealthy 2%. i would vote immediately. i am the only candidate who would vote immediately for middle-class tax cuts.
>> we keep saying middle-class tax cuts, but i am saying that we should not raise taxes on anyone. what would happen under mr. blumenthal's plan is $4.5 billion would leave the state of connecticut to go to washington so they could spend it. i don't want descended on washington. let's hang onto our own money and keep it in the hands of businesses that do create jobs. we are in a recession. let's make sure that if small businesses have the opportunity to grow. and so they can create jobs. >> connecticut's voters in the last few weeks have seen you attack each other on the airwaves. many times. we want to ask questions related to those ads. lori has those questions. >> on friday the blumenthal campaign released its latest ad. >> linda mcmahon is everywhere, but will she be there for you?
>> she took $10 million from the state to create jobs but fired 10% of brokers ander business is under investigation for failing to pay social security, medicare, or unemployment. if she's talking about lowering the middlminimum wage. >> tell me what is wrong with that? >> let me say that is false and is incorrect. that i would consider reducing the minimum wage, that is a lie. that is wrong. mr. blumenthal and i share the same thought relative to raising the minimum wage. something we need to take a look bad. i never said that, but made it into his added quickly. -- ad quickly. wwe has tax incentives and i
encourage the states to continue to offer incentives to small business. my company grew 52 jobs and i am pleased. over the last 28 years wwe has grown by 20 jobs per year. we need more of that in washington. we need people that know how to create jobs. we also need people who have experienced when things are not so good. i have been bankrupt and come back from bankruptcy. i had an opportunity because of the american dream in this country to grow and to experience what a lot of folks in the state are experiencing. mr. blumenthal does not have that experience. he has been on the government payroll all his life. >> mr. blumenthal, today the mcmann team started running a new ad.
>> would you lie about serving in a war? >> since the days i served in vietnam. >> lying again and again. >> when we returned, we thought nothing of this gratitude. >> he covered one live with another. with another. >> why did you claim to be in vietnam? >> as i said before, there is nothing new in this ad and nothing new about her attack on need. she has spent millions on it. and everybody knows this because they have been seen in the mailboxes. as i said, i am proud of my military service. on a few occasions out of hundreds when i commented, i
described it inaccurately and i regret it. i take full responsibility for it. it was not intentional, but that is no excuse. i want to say i am sorry to our veterans and most especially to the veterans of vietnam. i will continue to fight for them and i have championed their cause over 20 years. the fact of the matter is i take accountability for my mistakes. my opponent has not done so. she took $10 million meant to create jobs and lay off 10% of rell work force and forcehome $46 million -- and took home $46 million. when she was asked by reporters about the minimum wage, as she said she would have to look added. i would never say such a thing. my answer would of been absolutely not, and he will not cut the minimum wage, people are struggling economically in our
state and in our nation. >> 30 seconds. >> mr. blumenthal knows that when i was talking about considering that, it was relative to an increase in the minimum wage and that is a mischaracterization. i will stanford is mischaracterization of that. if you understood how business works and tax incentives work in the state, tax incentives are not $10 million, they are tax incentives that once you have made the investment, you get credit for reducing your tax liability. if you knew anything about business, you would know that. >> i know more about business cmahon.cm having been working under the
law, i know that when you take tax credits and then cut the workforce if t10% and then take home millions, that is not right. connecticut needs someone who will keep their promises and put the people of profits. >> my next question is from chris. >> the biggest issue of the year is the struggling economy. mr. blumenthal, you have called for middle-class tax cuts, but the democratic leaders of the house and the senate in washington have decided to postpone any votes on tax cuts until after the elections. was that decision wrong? >> i believe that we should have voted and the congress rather should devoted right away before going home. i would have preferred if other members of our delegation -- and other members of our
delegation would of preferred to have the votes owner. people are struggling. not only do we need a middle income tax cuts now, with delta waiting for the wealthiest 2%, but programs that provide small businesses with capital they need to expand, we need better trade policies so they can export more from connecticut. my opponent has taken the position that those middle- income tax cuts should be held hostage. i believe that tax cuts should go to those small businesses because they need them. we should be supporting small businesses by targeting with the benefits they think they deserve so that they can create the jobs that we vitally need in our state and our country. we need to preserve the minimum wage. we also should make a promise on
this campaign trail to preserve social security and not impose any age eligibility raising and make sure we keep our promises to preserve medicare guaranteed benefits at their present level. my campaign opponents is it not appear before the campaign trail. >> with 10% unemployment in an ailing economy, more and more workers are being forced into minimum-wage jobs. you said a moment ago that you had been mischaracterized about the minimum wage and what you did not say. what exactly is your position on a minimum wage and what role does that play in getting the economy back on track? >> i would never advocate lowering the minimum wage. that is not what i said. i said we need to take a look at whether we need to increase the minimum wage. sphere congress looks at this all the time. i am not sure how long the
legislation wants the minimum wage to be increased. i think we need to always look at it and make sure it is in the right economic frame. i never said we should reduce it. i have to go back to something mr. blumenthal said. he keeps talking about the tax incentives would create jobs. 52 new jobs were created by my company in the digital media area. that is something i am proud of. it made the company's stronger. next year because of the restructuring that was done and a smart business that was done relative to wwe and let me just say layoffs are very difficult to do, to make those tough decisions in order for your company to move forward. as a result of that today wwe is at the same level as it was before the layoffs in 2009.
because of tax incentives, it's moving forward and the new initiative will add 100-140 employees next year. >> the record will show that when my opponent was asked woods she -- whether she would cut the minimum wage, says she would have to look at it. the record will show incontrovertibly that that is so. i would've said absolutely not. i am glad to see that the is doing well in tough times that she is left the company. but when the chips were down,% of oark force went without jobs and she continues to send jobs overseas by purchasing merchandise their. -- there. >> mr. blumenthal, you spoke about my taking money home.
i will not talk about the fact that your family owns the empire state building. [laughter] at wwe, we look in every instance to create jobs. i am proud of the digital media and the television network that will happen next year. that has been on the drawing board a couple of years. >> about the stimulus package, you spoke often about your opposition to the stimulus, $787 billion stimulus package, you said it was too expensive and special-interest-driven. if you said the stimulus is one of the reasons the country needs a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. if that were passed, it would require either a big spending cuts or massive tax increases, possibly both. can you name two specific programs that you would cut outside of attacking the waste and fraud and in the various
agencies. two agencies that you would get rid of and which taxes you would increase? >> i think the stimulus did not work, because the money never got into the hands of a private- sector. small businesses that could create jobs. government grew. garmin jobs grew. -- government jobs grew. i want to be clear that stimulus money does not work. what we really need to do is to take the balance and pay down our debts. we are spending a billion dollars a day to pay debt service on our debts. that's one area where we could really increase incentives, if we paid down our debt. i think the stimulus money also was going to create
infrastructure jobs. rs andpoken to may0 others in connecticut, and the red tape to get the money was unbelievable. let's take the money and pay down debt, reduce the debt and therefore we start chipping away at the deficit. i also think that we should roll back our non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels. we should capture government hiring and government wage increases. take the balance of stimulus and pay down our debt and we would be a long way to reducing the deficit. >> you were quoted as saying the stimulus was wrongly structured and "i would never have chosen the stimulus as it was." all but seven democratic house members. vice president joe biden called
it an absolute success and said the recovery act is working and supporting job-creation projects in every corner of the country. yet you would have voted against it. what doesn't vice-president understand? >> all due respect to the vice- president and the president, with a post of the alliance as well because it is too much for wall street, not enough for main street. my opponent supports bailout. in the same way that's the and failedas too big wit to provide direct money to road and bridge building and a school building and other infrastructure projects necessary to put money in people's pockets and creates to consumer demand and stimulate small business. inaccurate accountability, not enough restrictions on how the money was used and too big for those features.
i believe strongly that we need to cut spending. i think we need to rein in the national debt for our own sake and for our children. i would make specific cuts. i would put an end to the sweetheart deals, $200 billion of taxpayer money that goes to a drug companies because there is a bar on medicare drug coverage. i would end the tax breaks for corporations that send jobs overseas. they are reported for sending jobs overseas. more than $200 billion can be saved in that way. some agriculture businesses, i would put an end to the subsidies for them. some of them don't even grow crops. we must do it. >> i was asking for two specific programs that you would cut. i think you only mentioned one. which taxes would you increase, also? >> i want to address something
mr. blumenthal talk about relative to my. supporting the my at the time that congress voted for the bailout, i would have done it holding my nose. when the secretary of the treasury, to say we are on the verge of economic collapse, we ought to do something, that we clearly ought to do that. i would not have supported for the bailout to gm and the other car companies. i think mr. blumenthal is making a case of the fact that government cannot spend our money and the council it very well. >> stimulus not big enough or not fast enough? >> stimulus not fast enough, but most important not accountable enough. we need government to be accountable. as united states senator, i would fight for the people of connecticut, put them first. whatever the vice-president think about the program, the people of connecticut, first for
me, just like they have throughout my career. i have stood up to formidable foes, powerful special-interest, whether it is the utilities, pharmaceutical companies, health insurance companies, tobacco companies, i know how to fight for the people. >> this is an on-line question coming from south windsor. as king, "politics are becoming increasingly less civil with little regard will willingness to compromise. are you willing to work with the other party and can you give me an example of where you agree or see merit in the position of the other side and arlin to cross party lines to promote?" >> there is merit in the opposition of many republicans to the bailout. as it was designed, as it was too big, as it did too much for wall street and not enough for main street. i would a sided with
republicans and democrats. over 20 years, a lot of what i have done is to lead national coalitions, whether it is against a big tobacco or fighting for greater safety on the internet, republicans and democrats coming together. connecticut is a small state, but i fought by reaching out to republicans as well as democrats. that is the kind of leadership that i think we need in washington because there's too much acrimony based on partisanship, too much gridlock. washington is not listening. i believe i bring those qualities of leadership, which my opponent simply has never shown, because she has never had that experience. this historic challenge to fight for conn's people -- for the people of connecticut.
and to make sure we stand against special-interest. >> would they be the special- interest funding your campaign? i do believe we need to reach across party lines. we absolutely have to do that. i agree with mr. blumenthal that we are in gridlock and we must reach across party lines to get something done. however, i disagree with him. as the ceo of the company, you have to negotiate many deals. you have to know how to drive things when necessary and you have told the lines when necessary. the best deals i ever did as ceo is when both sides walk away from the table knowing that if they got some stuff they wanted but not everything they wanted. if the deal is too good for either side, you are going to wind up back at the negotiating table or you are going to be in court because you all to able to live up to the terms of the contract. i think what we've seen in
congress when we had bipartisan efforts on social security and medicare, those were bipartisan efforts, but you did not see bipartisan debates on health care. it was a bad process and we wound up with a bad product. i think that is evidence of what happens when there is not bipartisan debate and good ideas. there were good ideas on both sides of the aisle. let's bring them together and move the country forward and move the state's forward. >> your response? >> my opponent knows about washington because she hired lobbyists in washington and paid them $1 million to try to stop legislation that would impose penalties on companies that market sex and violence. i believe that she knows that i will stand strong against special interests, but she does not.
the people of connecticut do. no matter who says it, i will stand strong for the people of connecticut as i have 20 years. >> our government relations firm primarily was to build the smack down your voters program, a tribute to the troops program, and to talk to them about getting young people more involved in the voting program. wwe has utilized government relations companies in washington, yes. >> the next question is the candidates question in this section of the debate the candidates will ask each other a question and they will have time to respond and but. we begin with mr. blumenthal. >> fenty. thank you. federal tax dollars should have
to be used to buy american products. i believe manufacturing jobs should be in the u.s. why has your company bought products made abroad in china, pakistan, and other countries? >> ww, like many other companies has gotten products outside the united states because we do not have the kind of policies in place that are conducive to manufacturing. -- wwe. i agree that we can do better in our country by creating an environment to attract business. we can lower the corporate tax rate. it is the largest in the world at 35%. the average is 18%. 12.5% in ireland. let's make it conducive in america to make things in america so the prices will be down if, so we can't put people back to work. we have high labor costs, high
energy costs. all of these things contributed driving prices up in our country. i believe that we need to do a better job so that we can have more jobs in the united states. i believe we need to have markets where we can export our products because we are manufacturing here and exported from our country and that drives our economy and keep our prices down. i am for making products in america. wwe hasman products through our licensing company with mattel that they distribute all over the world -- wwe has products. we do pay taxes on all of the money that comes back to wvpt. none of it is kept offshore. -- we pay taxes on all the money that comes back to wwe. >> she's having the products
made overseas. as the ceo, linda mcmahon has to be held accountable for those choices that deprived american workers of the jobs that will lost overseas by making those products over there. we need to assess each of the candidates as to how they treat the voters of connecticut by how they made these decisions and we need to hold them accountable. >> 30 seconds. >> i am proud i created over 600 jobs in connecticut. over the past 28 years there were an average of 20 jobs a year created. we need more that in washington and in our state. i think it's a great record. how many jobs have you created? >> now the question for mr. blumenthal? >> you have talked about you
want to incentivize small businesses. how do you create a job? >> a job is created and it can be in a variety of ways. by a variety of people, but principally by people and businesses in response to demand for products and services and the main point about jobs in connecticut is we should create more of them by being creative spirit that's the kind of approach i want to bring to washington. i have stood up for jobs when they have been at stake. i have students for jobs when gm wanted to shut down that dealership. i stood up for jobs at pratt whitney when that company wanted to ship them overseas and other states. i stood up for jobs at another company when it was threatened by hostile takeover. i know about how government can
help preserve jobs. i want programs that provide more capital for small businesses, that have better tax policies to promote job creation, stronger intervention by government to make sure that we use the made in america policies and buy america policies to keep jobs here, rather than buying products manufactured overseas as wwe has done. >> government does not create jobs. job creation is simple. an entrepreneur takes. . he or she believes that he creates a good or service sold for more than it cost to make it. then he creates a job. >> mr. blumenthal? >> i don't differ. i am not going to be an entrepreneur as a senator. [laughter] [applause]
i will do my best to assist entrepreneurs in exactly the way i just described, which may not have been the answer my opponent wanted, but it is if the kind of answer government needs to provide in tough times when our economy is struggling. rather than talking about looking at cutting the minimum wage. >> now foreign-policy. >> mrs. mcmahon, fighting in afghanistan has gone on under republicans and democrats, how would you assess president obama's strategy and how is it working? >> don't insist one more time about the minimum wage, mr. blumenthal. that is a lie. you keep saying that, but you are wrong. in afghanistan?
>> regarding the minimum wage in afghanistan? >> i am sure it is very low. i am a mother and grandmother. before we send men and women into harm's way, have a clear goal and a clear strategy. defense strategiesferenc regarding afghanistan. i appreciate if president obama putting general petraeus in charge in afghanistan. he had great success in iraq. my fear is we have conflicting messages and conflicting strategies. we have a political strategy that says we are going to start withdrawing in july of 2011. we have a military strategy that says we are increasing our troops and that we have a surge, which is confusing to me and one of the first things i would like
as a senator is to have a detailed reasoning on exactly what the goals and strategies are in afghanistan. we need to make sure that our strategy is clear before we send our men and women in harm's way. when we bring them back, we have to take care of our veterans to make sure they have the benefits they deserve. >> what would you change about the president's strategy in afghanistan, if anything? >> i believe the president must adhere to the timetable we have set, despite some of the talk we have heard recently about varying on it. we should avoid an open-ended commitment in afghanistan. we must continue on war on terror. we need to take that war to wherever the terrorist make safe haven garrett whether it is pakistan or other countries. but we must begin with withdrawing combat troops in july of next year. i believe that the law war on terror requires inventive and
ingenious and aggressive means using cyber attacks and using special operations and using means that make us more nimble and more aggressive and more successful. but i believe the american people deserve that timetable least to begin withdrawing combat troops on that timetable. >> ms. mcmahon? i do agree that we need to fight terrorism and to identify where it is and to hopefully always fight it not on our shores but somewhere else when the need arises. we have to have a firm hand but a strong. policy to strong. >> mr. blumenthal? >> one area where we need to increase our capability is in some of the arms programs where committed has played a leading role. i would reinstitute the f-22 where connecticut hte
has played a leading role. it's right for our national security and our economy. >> let's talk about healthcare. ms. mcmahon, you said you would have voted against the health care bill of and you say it's a bad product and you want to repeal it and start over. which portions of the federal law would you have in place, still remaining? >> first, let me address that i do think it is a bad policy and therefore we have a bad product. we need bipartisan debate on something so simple as health care with over 70% of our country and i agree we need health care reform. what the bill does not do was to bring down the cost of health
care and to make sure there was broader coverage. what i am seeing is the opposite. premiums are going up and taxes on small businesses are going up. it would be a squeeze on families fear it is a squeeze on small businesses. also what is happening is in this bill we are cutting medicare by a half trillion dollars. mr. blumenthal indicated when the bill was first passed, he praised the bill and he thought it was a really good bill, now says it is a good first start. i don't think starting out with premiums increasing in double digits and cutting medicare payments to our seniors to the tune of a half trillion dollars is a good start. it is a bad bill. we need to repeal it and we need to start over again. because we want to be able to provide insurance to many. but i'm afraid with the reduced medicare payments, we will continue to see doctors leave
the profession or not take medicare patients. that is what is happening today. we really do need to look at that because we need to protect our seniors. >> you have said he supported the health care reform law, but it is a first step and a good beginning, but not the end. what do you see as the end? >> this bill recognizes some fundamental facts. no child in america should be denied health-care because of being sick. no worker should be dropped from health care insurance after they get sick. no american family should go bankrupt paying for health care. this bill is a good start because it eliminates some of the abuses that i have fought, pre-existing conditions, again and again. thousands of people coming to my office. i fight for them because the health insurance companies have denied coverage simply because they say they had a pre-existing condition.
or the doctor is out of network or the treatment is experimental. this bill puts an end to those abuses, but we need to do better in controlling costs. medical care costs are spiraling at five times the rate of inflation garrett i would put a provision in the bill supported republicans and democrats that prevents waste and fraud on medicare. we have combined with state and federal governments to pursue health-care fraud and waste and eliminate or recover millions of dollars for the state. we need stronger measures to rein in premiums. just recently i tried to fight a 20% premium increase. i have fought previous premium increases and i will do so again. were a couple of the
first things we could have done with the health care reform is looking at reform. -- tort reform. that would significantly. bring down significantly physicians spend so much effort and time making sure they're not going to get sued because they have not repeated a test or whatever. i think being able to buy insurance across state lines and allow small businesses to group together to buy insurance would bring the costs down. >> if you mentioned the insurance companies. had this had a detrimental effect on this date since so many insurance carriers are in this state? >> absolutely not. my opponent denied health care insurance to the wrestlers. her company is under investigation for improperly and illegally ms. classifying those
employees, denying guilt care insurance as well as dodging taxes for unemployment compensation, social security, and medicare. the bill, by the way cuts medicare special advantage, which in no way cuts guaranteed benefits to seniors. >> conn and the nation have been riveted by the facts of the cheshire, connecticut home invasion and the triple murder. the jury began deliberations in the stephen hayes case today. if convicted, he faces the death penalty. how do you feel about the death penalty? why or why not? >> i support the death penalty. there are crimes that are so heinous and tartabull that they merit it -- so heinous and horrible. i believe stephen hayes deserves
the death penalty. i support it because it is a deterrent to certain kinds of crimes. for example, crimes against law enforcement officers, if police or fire fighters or others risking their lives on our behalf, corrections officers. i believe that they strongly merit punishment in some cases such as this one, which are so horrific. >> in question to you. >> i do support the death penalty. i agree with mr. blumenthal in his assessment on that. i want to go back to something you read in your prior question. he spoke about government contractors, many of the contractors have full health coverage for any accident that they receive in the ring, fully
covered. let's make that clear. i find it a little unusual may be a coincidence, but in the 20 something years that wwe has been in connecticut, we have not been fined relative to contractors. only time it's been investigated is just after this campaign got going. i am not sure exactly why that might be. the only time univera stock to buy is when you came to visit me and we had a cup of tea. i would like to make sure, for those listening, the men and women of wwe who performed in that ring as independent contractors, their health and well-being is so important to ww. they get a full physical every year, cardio evaluation, concussion testing, and there's a drug policy in place to prevent illegal drug use and to
make sure that they are well- cared for. >> 30 seconds. >> thank-you. my jurisdiction, as you know, is exclusively civil. the allegations against wwe seem to be criminal in nature. it's no coincidence my investigation has not covered them. i have no investigation and never done an investigation, because allegations about independent contractors are investigated by the department of labour and the department of revenue services. i have no knowledge about that investigation being conducted by the state. >> go ahead, ms. mcmahon. >> i have no comment. [laughter] >> back to the panelists. chris. >> mr. blumenthal, meny or some
in your party have demonized the tea party, calling them a extremists and sometimes crazy. how would you describe the tea party? >> i welcome anyone wanting to be involved in the political process. i think we all benefit when people of whatever view commit their time and energy and passion to be involved. one of the great parts about this campaign has been that we have been listed the services of so many volunteers. we need those volunteers because i don't have anywhere near the $50 million that my opponent has committed to spend. she has already spent more than $25 million probably. i welcome the kind of energy that is brought to this process by volunteers of whatever views. i have said again and again that my campaign could be outspent,
but it will not be out-worked. the people of connecticut's want an election and not an auction. >> how do you describe the tea party? >> first of all, mr. blumenthal, i am funding my campaign with money i have earned. i have earned every nickel. if i choose to invest in the campaign because i firmly believe we need change, we need smaller government, we need to send not people who have been in government lifelong to washington, so i'm willing to spend my own money. i am not expecting a private interest because i want to have an independent voice when i go to washington. i said at the beginning that i would fund the campaign with my own money. i know the people of this state cannot be bought. i have been out of every single day since i announced my candidacy a year ago.
i have met and talked and listens to the people of connecticut and they have told me so much. they have given me so many ideas and shared with me how they want senator sure their ki continues to listen to them once they go to washington. i am pleased with the work i put into the campaign. >> your view on the tea party? >> i have also met with the tea party, two or three factions of the tea party. there commitment and their passion to reduce spending and reduce the deficit and make sure government grows. we are in lock step in this particular issue. i have enjoyed the meetings i have had with them. >> mr. blumenthal? >> listening is a very important part of this process. i have spent 20 years listening to the people of this state. if there's a joke about dick blumenthal that if there is a garage door opening, he will be
there. i have heard people are angry and upset and i think the tea party's views reflect that frustration. it's not just them, it's about washington not listening. i want to go to washington to make sure washington does better for the people of this state and listens to all people. >> ms. mcmahon? >> i have found in my meetings with the tea party to be informative and that they are very passionate and they do bring a good volunteer base and i welcome their support. we find common ground in areas like smaller government, reduced taxes, reducing the deficit. >> time for quick lightning round. this is one-word answers. before the closing statements. first, mr. blumenthal, one word to describe senator chris dodd?
>> not running. [laughter] >> same question for ms. mcmahon? >> retired. >> red sox or yankees? >> yankees.com. >> yankees. thin crust? >> thin. >> thin and crispy. >> the towbin cause was determined at the beginning, the order. ms. mcmahon will go first. >> again, thanks to all of you this evening and to the audience watching at home. i am running for the united states senate because our economy is in shambles. people are out of work. families are hurting. nest eggs have been devastated. there are not enough people in
washington who know how to create jobs. i want to make sure the american dream, which i have had the privilege to live, will continue to be there for my children and grandchildren and for generations to come. mr. blumenthal has spent a good amount of time tonight talking about fighting for the people of the state and making sure that we know that he's experienced in government and clearly he does, because he's a lifelong politician and he has spent his adult life on the government payroll. i am a mother, a grandmother, i am a wife and a businesswoman. a businesswoman who has created jobs and juggled a career and family and neither of those jobs is easy. i want to go to washington because i think we need more people in washington who understand the plight of those workers and who have created jobs. i've been in lean times and i've
known prosperity. i've come back from bankruptcy. it is important to the american dream that we focus on these particular issues. if this election you will have a clear choice. a choice between someone who's been a lifelong government person or someone who's been in the private sector creating jobs. someone wanting to grow government. i want to grow the economy. he wants to raise your taxes and send money to washington so they can spend it. i want to keep money in the hands of connecticut's families so they can spend it as they see fit. i want single moms who lost their jobs and looks at me and says don't forget about us, veterans fighting bureaucracy, teachers fighting to be innovators from i want them to know and that i will be their champion and that our seniors will be fully protected for their benefits. >> mr. blumenthal? >> thank you . thank you to fox and current and for all of you being here and listening to us tonight.
this election offers a very clear is darke choice. linda mcmahon says that she is different. she is different from me. i've spent my life and it's been my life's work trying to help people. i worked with kathy to save her car dealership when gm wanted to shut it down and put her people lot of work. billy clark is here tonight. thomas stood with him and hundreds of other workers saving their jobs when pratt wanted to end their contracts. and laura austin came to me when her insurance company would not cover baby formula essential to avert child's life. i am proud of my record in public service. i am proud that i have helped people build their futures. my opponent has built her
fortune. she has put pervis ahead of people. even now she refuses to recognize steroids can cause long-term health consequences. she is on the side of the bailout, all street giants. -- wall street giants. ward 8 should go to small businesses and not wall street. i oppose tax breaks that reward businesses for sending jobs overseas. she stands with corporations. i think more of those small businesses deserve a break. middle income families struggling to make ends meet need and deserve tax breaks right now. we should not wait, as my opponent would do, for the wealthiest 2% to receive their tax breaks. you can count on me to be on your side fighting in washington against those of interests, to cut spending when it's wasteful and always to put you first. >> thank you both very much.
that is the end of tonight's debate. we would like to buy the votes at the bushnell theater as well as fox, connecticut and the panelists in hartford. as a gubernatorial debate tomorrow night at the same time and same channel moderated by my fox news co-worker. we leave you with a few words of the hartford current. good night. >> thanks for watching tonight's debate for conn's u.s. senate seat. we believe in an open, accessible, and hon. democratic process. every citizen's right to know that a healthy and democracy requires an informed and gazed electorate. tomorrow evening we broadcast the gubernatorial debate from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. as they square off on the issues. last, we encourage you to get out and vote on november 2. from all of us at fox connecticut and the current, have a great evening. >> our political coverage
continues tonight. 8:00 eastern, illinois governor's debate. the incumbent faces the republican state senator bill o'grady. later, it forms for the new hampshire second congressional district. after that, connecticut governor's debate. the democrat running against tom -- , a republican. to go to c-span.org for more information. >> we will take your calls next on "washington journal." later today, a white house, on community colleges. the wife of vice president joe biden will moderate. live coverage at 12:15 p.m. eastern. coming up this hour, florida representative debbie wasserman schultz joins us to talk about schultz joins us to talk about the democrats'