tv New York Congressional 19th District Debate CSPAN October 26, 2016 12:33am-1:36am EDT
course of the week where senior figures from around the world will begin moving us away from the range of negotiation and into the discussion of implementation. it is a big shift. this will be face to, the anthem -- phase two, the implementation. will this be inscribed in gaveled through and we will take away and have a concrete tickling -- take away? i don't know yet, it remains to be seen. i think some of the pieces will come out in a standard form. you have to have a decision with a timetable, you have to have a decision with a form of work, with the conclusions that will reach the agreement. decision that
comes out of morocco the a political statement? i think it will be. how much will be in it? i think that will be a function of these discussions. how do you recognize the progress we have made but do not rest on your laurels? the lima agreement, accords, each one of these has their own kind of structure that i think the moroccans would want something that they could say, we do these things and we can look back at pride -- look back with pride. much, we areyou so out of time. a great discussion. [applause] >> i want to thank jonathan in coral for this great discussion. rate moderation and discussion and questions from the audience.
we look forward to you all coming to our next program. once again, let's give a round of applause. [applause] >> with the supreme court back in session, we have a special webpage to help you follow the court. go to c-span.org, select supreme court. you will see the calendar for this term, a list of all current justices, and with supreme court video on demand, watch arguments we have aired in recent c-span appearances by supreme court justices. at c-span.org. tonight, a debate for new york's 19th congressional district between the democrat and republican. hillary clinton and donald trump both campaigned in florida today, we will have their remarks later. c-span's "washington
journal," live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. this week we are focusing on presidential battleground states leading up to election day. coming up wednesday morning, it is pennsylvania. we will talk about voters, recent polls and political races in the state. include terry madonna , is to for nicholas -- christopher nicholas. be sure to watch us live at 7:00 eastern. the new york 19th district is being held by someone he was not running for reelection. time warner cable news host of this debate in woodstock, new york.
>> hello and welcome to our debate. >> running to replace the congressman. interestingly enough, both of these candidates have previously run for governor. >> here on the rules they have agreed to before the debate. it gets one minute for an opening statement and one minute for a close. in between we will be asking questions on a range of topics. answers are limited to one minute followed by a 45 second second rebuttal
is allowed at moderator discretion. we will also have a lightning round. >> the order of the opening statements was determined earlier this evening by chance. teachout.ms. sorry. >> thank you. here, the most important everybody watching the debate. i love this country and i. am running for congress because i'm worried about it. patriot and iic believe we should be focused on bringing jobs home, supporting local farming and making things in america.
i'm also running because we have got to protect our water from the big polluters, but there is a deeper issue happening in our country right now. we have a crisis of democracy. everywhere i go, people ask me how can we get congress to work again so the people, not be corporation, not political parties? with many of you on the fracking fight, on common honored tof i am have your vote, i will be an independent voice in congress because i cannot be bought. >> thank you very much. fasso. >> thank you. i am running for congress because our country is in crisis. we face an economic crisis that -- affecting the future.
we would be the first generation to leave our children and grandchildren with a country worse off than the one we found. we have an inner capacity to fix this. taxve laid out a program of reforms and regulatory relief to get our economy moving again. we also have a crisis of national security and we have to make sure that america is strong, that their defenses are second to none, and that we have the best intelligence and diplomatic capacities in the world. it is a privilege and honor to run for this office and if i am honored to serve, i will give every measure my devotion to the people of this district and the united states of america. >> now the first question. fighters along with u.s. airstrikes and support troops are conducting a major offensive against isis in mosul.
is this the right time to have the offensive? we are facing three major national security threats in the global environment. one of the biggest ones is isis. this should be policies in terms of abroad. e of theeen supportiv president's actions in that area. i think it is important we keep a tough but strong focused approach. i unlike my opponent was opposed to the intervention in iraq. i was opposed to the intervention in libya. so you know i will disagree with members of my party when i think they're making the wrong decision. they key is instead of making
interventions that in a ,ong-term lead to instability we have to be more using our judgment in terms of where we intervene in the first place. >> there been some developments in the past stay in terms of having turkish forces move into the region, there been tensions. should the u.s. welcome the tanker's -- turkish forces? >> i think alliances are important and i would approach talk toaying military legals -- leaders. i think there is a lot more wisdom from the people on the ground than from a distance. isagree that combating isis incredibly important to the security of the region and our country in the free world. the fact of the matter is that the coordinated attack that is being made now has been well
planned and executed and we know that isis is going to be and if often threat. -- an evolving threat. i think the overriding issue in the region is the iran nuclear deal which i think has made us next -- less secure. gets highly likely if iran a weapon, so will saudi arabia and others in the region which will destabilize the region. >> these troops have been considered to be advisory groups. should the u.s. commit ground troops to this area if that is necessary? >> we should rely upon the local nations who have the first line of defense. we don't have 500 troops there, forces 6000-8000 special and others in that region. it is important that the american people understand that
our role in the region is ongoing and while it doesn't get a lot of publicity, it is vitally important that we aid and help the instruction and kurort for the iraqis and combat isisan successfully. >> we move onto another equally important topic. trade. we have heard a lot about the transpacific partnership in particular. there are now on both sides of the aisle, opponents, despite the fact that the obama administration is champion on the -- championing it. where you stand on the tpp? vote in terms of giving fast-track negotiation power to the president? differentre two
issues as you correctly put in your question. i am not in favor of tpp because i think the obama administration has mishandled the critical details. i think it is plain that the leaders on both sides of congress of said that tpp is not going to get voted on and is unlikely to be adopted and in the lame-duck session. but i think it is important to recognize that trade is vitally important. we are 5% of the worlds population and 95% of the customers without of the united states. it is important that we understand that there are 6000 plus jobs in new york alone that depend on u.s.-canada trade. when we hear voices talking about throwing out trade agreements, there are a lot of people here who depend upon it. i think the fast-track authority
is critical for any president, and we have seen presidents from both parties utilize it over the years, because you cannot negotiate with 15 different countries at once knowing that they can go back to the national legislature and amend the agreement. congress gets an up or down vote on fast track. toyou would feel comfortable give donald trump fast-track authority? >> these are all hypothetical. i think the fact is that president of both parties for over 35 years. i think it is the only way we can conduct trade negotiations in a reasonable way. i think they will be more bilateral trade agreements between the u.s. and other countries individually. with brexit and england leaving the eu, and it could be that you see many more agreements that are done separately rather than these global type arrangements. >> this is an area where i think
we have real differences. trade is something i feel passionate about. john was talking about the last 35 years. we have lost so many manufacturing facilities. since nafta, we have lost 50,000 minutes efrin facilities in this country. beginning on the estimates, it is 5 million jobs are more. luckily, a little manufacturing is coming back to the united states, but i am running to congress to bring jobs home. dealsrack enables these with offshore jobs. i'm not only deeply opposed to the tpp, but i think we need to regulate these agreements. when i am in congress, i will be a strong voice for made in america. >> i put the same question to
you -- if hillary clinton is in the white house, would you not vote to give her fast-track authority? >> i would not give president clinton or any other resident fast-track authority. the last 35 years of trading deals have not helped american workers. i think it is time for 21st century trade policy that focuses on our workers. this requires looking back at all of the trade deals. fast-track overturns a fundamental constitutional premise and gives way too much power to the executive branch. that she fails to understand the lessons of history. thehe great recession in 30's -- 1930's, it was because we erected traded various -- trade barriers.
she puts all of the problem on trade when the fact is that every expert left and right has said that we have lost many manufacturing jobs due to productivity and automation. so yes we need to fight to make sure we reformed our tax code so that we ring the opportunity to bring those jobs back. i have specific ideas to do that. >> i just want to say that i think that anybody who is traveling through a community can see the devastation of the loss of manufacturing jobs. there are political elites who believe that the trade deals of the last 30 years have helped americans. some of those political elites are big donors to my opponent. there is a guy who gave $500,000 to my opponent through a super pac. they are not feeling the pain of what is happening in our community. believe in american workers and believe american workers can compete if they are allowed to compete fairly. >> the tax question gets to
that, it will. >> we will stick with the economy. the financial services industry was widely blamed for the economic collapse. however, this industry is also essential for generating needed tax revenue in new york. should wall street be further regulated, and if so, how would you go about that? after the financial crash, i cofounded a group that was all volunteer, grassroots, dedicated to taking on the big banks. the big banks have way too much political power. they are running the table in washington. when we went as citizens and tried to say that they brought down our economy and our subsidizing them so heavily with the bailout, what you can see is that the hit given so many campaign contributions and gotten so involved in lobbying
that their power was drowning out the voices of small businesses. there is a whole series of things we should do. that we have to recognize the watchdog group that came out of the loss after the financial press, is responsible for catching wells fargo in massive fraud. it is important that we allow for those groups. i believe in structural reform, breaking up the banks. >> do you think. frank went far enough? frank went far enough? >> yes. the bureau that uncovered this massive fraud. there have been problems within dodd frank. when i talked to community bankers, and you can even see this in 2009, 2010 in
washington, the community bankers were not getting a voice , and the big banks were happy to have regulations pushed down on the community banks that really drop them out. -- ground them out. i listen to the series of exploration -- explanations and it is like fair play monopoly. the board did not uncover wells fargo, it was uncovered by the los angeles city attorney. the fact is that the consumer wasnce protection board declared unconstitutional. anmeant that there was unaccountable bureaucracy subject to no power of congress, subject to no oversight. this is what the left elites want.
super bureaucracies to control every aspect of the economy and that is perfectly acceptable for her but it does not work. that is why we had a financial crisis, because we had bad regulation and oversight. >> do you think there are any regulations that you put in place for wall street? >> wall street is strictly regulated and it should be even more closely regulated, but i would not want to do what ms. teachout did when she put a stock transfer tax on stocks. every teacher with the pension, every state and local worker, every worker with an ira is going to get taxed every time there is a transaction that goes forth. this is lunacy. killing thet is local lending with small business is excessive regulation from dodd frank.
this had nothing to do with the mortgage meltdown. >> a few things. it is a matter of public record -- of the discovery of wells fargo. you can look up. i favor the teddy roosevelt approach. what we really see happening is banks not doing the job of banks but becoming political actors, where they are really involved in policy and in trying to buy and shape policy instead of just .oing making -- banking i favor a rules approaches that of regulation approach that focuses on managing, making sure the big banks don't get so powerful in the first place. >> this question is for ms. teachout. there has been a lot of finger-pointing during the campaign regarding property
taxes. i know you said when you are running for governor you would support rolling back the property tax cap. you have accused your opponent of mischaracterizing your position and you said that you understand the importance of reducing high property taxes. you prefer doing so through other methods. please could you clarify your position, but also, where is the money going to come from for investment and things like education? >> thank you so much for the question. on yourave been turning tv,. you've probably seen some attacks that since the are not true. we have got to lower property taxes,. they are the highest in the country and are calling -- causing real pain. overfamilies are paying 10% or 20% of their income and property taxes. it is a heavy burden on people
who have had land in their families for generations. it is a real problem. i have a long video online what you're welcome to watch. and talks about the property tax burden and how to approach it. i am a big supporter of local control and testing local communities instead of politicians telling local communities what to do. 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 wind up is because the state started giving mostly downstate the companies and to the wealthiest new yorkers. there was less revenue for the state and the state then pushed all of these unfunded mandates onto the local communities. >> just to be clear, i know you
investing an additional amount into the education system, for example, the money comes from? >> a more fair tax system in new york state. right now, the 1% and the big corporations are the ones getting away with it. "times-union" had a great story about where our tax revenue has vanished. a lot of it is from the biggest companies in new york city. >> a higher personal income tax? >> no, i am focused on the corporations. , before you respond, earlier in your campaign, you put the plan to reduce the local cost of medicaid, and unfunded , and that would
certainly relief a burden that local governments aren't getting a lot of revenue for, but is not really federal issue. federaltually is a issue because federal law permits a state to impose the burden partially on the localities. i researched this and i realize that we are one of the only state in the country to does this. we can fix nelson rockefeller's 50-year-old mistake. we can fix it by amending federal law and i've proposed is that. -- i propose just that. >> you would be just one member of a whole host of a conference. how would you convince folks to do that? >> if you look at the local burden on medicaid in the whole country, $9 billion is spent by local government in the whole country. $7.5 billion is spent by local governments in new york state.
when people say that there taxes are higher here, that is one of the reasons. ms. teachout's approach is wrongheaded. she doesn't know what she is talking about when it comes to property taxes, maybe because she just moved into the district and has not paid property taxes. thebottom line is that circuit breaker that she has supported this not hold the line on local spending. the localities, the town or village, a school district can override the tax cap. if they want. >> it is a high burden in terms of their ability to override that cap. >>
ms. benjamin: it is a halliburton, you would agree, in terms of their ability to override? ms. teachout: because property taxes are too high. not only does she want to raise the property taxes, she wants entergy texas on heating oil, propane, diesel, electricity. ms. benjamin: before ms. teachout response, i want to ask, going hand-in-hand with medicaid, would you advocate reduced services to medicaid? because new york has been called the cadillac of medicaid. ms. teachout: new york needs to reform it is only when they are responsible in albany will they do it. ms. teachout reports that thing that when i was in albany, property taxes went up 43%. when i was in albany, the sun rose and used them suddenly west and i was no more responsible for that the property tax. ms. teachout: i want to address
a few different things. first of all, briefly, i do not support an energy tax or carbon tax as john has said. i agree with him on medicaid, we have a problem in new york, people have been talking about this for decades. picking on the reimbursement issue. unlike john, i feel strongly about expanding medicare to include for instance dental care, something i care passionately about, and protecting social security. i hope that we get to that later because there is a real difference on social security. ms. benjamin: we're going to try. do you want to respond to the property tax issue? that mr. faso brought up? ms. teachout: oh, my husband and i have paid property taxes. we live in dutchess county. mr. reisman: question for mr. faso, petersburg has been the form of hearings including lengthy discussions about when the state and federal agencies discovered the problem and when they responded. the big question remains, what happens next and what resources will be available if they develop health problems related to contamination.
even assuming the companies cover the cost of care, what steps need to be taken to be sure that residents have access to information, blood testing, and other forms of assistance? mr. faso: the state response is pathetic and epa shares some burden here. i do think the companies involved should be responsible for making sure health is monitored. we need to look at making sure that we have a fund to cover costs that might be related to not only the cleanup of the water but to make sure that health is taken care of. that is critical. i think it is a larger issue. in this state, we have many, many instances of pollution taking place. we need to make sure that the
state and revolving loan fund to fix the water and sewer issues that communities have is fully funded and fully activated. governor cuomo tried to grab onto the state water revolving loan fund which is federal money. he tried to take $500 million to pay for the bridge. that was a terrible decision and approach to take. fortunately the eva prevented him from doing so. mr. reisman: do you think residents that live in the communities with health effects should be allowed to sue these companies? there was a bill in the legislature. mr. faso: absolutely, and i think many of them are. ms. teachout: if you have not been paying attention to what is happening, please do. i have spent a lot of time talking to members of the community, and just a couple weeks ago, mothers from flint, michigan came to meet mothers and hoosick falls to talk about, we may be poisoned in different ways that we are dealing with
poison from big companies and government which has not been responsive. one of the most painful stories that i heard were young mothers who said, i just gave birth of a thought the healthiest way to take care of my son was to breast-feed him and it turns out that i was poisoning him because of the water that i was drinking. we need to make sure that companies pay and there is medical monitoring and in congress i would call for hearings with subpoena power to make sure there is full accountability. mr. reisman: ms. teachout, you are serving in congress and a constituent asks for more information. what would you seek and how would you work with the constituent make sure the issue was resolved? ms. teachout: that depends on what the particular question is.
we need to know what the company knew, what the agencies knew, including the epa, when the epa knew it. what the state government knew and when it knew it and why the faster. was not making sure there is full access to medical doctors who can monitor and answer ongoing medical questions. the families will be affected for a long time. even when this spotlight is gone, we have a responsibility to take care of the people in those communities. mr. faso: i would point out that on the topic we raised earlier, she wants a dividend. she has an figured i had to tax wood yet, but i wouldn't put it past her.
getting a okay, we're little far afield. ms. teachout: the other thing i want to say about water quality is that we have a very different history on water quality. i was proud to stand and fight against fracking in new york state, one of the greatest environment though victories in recent decades. my opponent john is pro-fracking. when he was in the assembly, he wrote letters to the epa saying that ge should not have to pay the full cost of cleaning up the hudson river. this is after he had taken campaign cash from ge. ms. benjamin: before i allow you, i just have to remind folks in the audience, please withhold a response until the end. mr. faso: this is a perfect example of how ms. teachout plays fast and was with the facts as well as the truth. i opposed the initial plan that epa and dac wanted to do in the late 1990's for dredging the
hudson river of pcb's mainly because they had an unsafe approach which would have had pcb's moving down river. was subsequently adopted, i was for it. the dredging was completed in 2015. she rewrites history. she just moved here from brooklyn and settled here. she doesn't even know what happened. ms. benjamin: we have to move on. ms. teachout: because of water quality. mr. faso: it should not be allowed to go unanswered. ms. benjamin: we will move on to water quality. if we could just stick to the topic.
pslf is an issue important in newburgh. --removing the equipment that the agency show the chemical is considered a risk before testing it. it does not require [indiscernible] i know, forgive me. [laughter] it does not require manufacturers prove that a product is safe before goes to market. do you think the government is taking the right approach towards regularly chemicals at this point? mr. faso: it needs to be a lot more aggressive. -- ms. teachout: it needs to be a lot more aggressive. right now, we're jumping behind. i favor the precautionary principle. instead of having one at a time approach, a broader approach, which allows us to say, wait a second, this looks a lot like another chemical that has caused harm.
i think we will see this pop up a lot. we are already seeing the beginning of it. it will be an ongoing issue. there are two separate issues. one to make sure that we empower the epa to be aggressive going forward. the second is making sure that the people already affected get the help that they need. ms. benjamin: if i may, quickly, given the way the epa and the cuomo administration handled the situation, you feel confident that empowering the epa further is a good idea? mr. faso: i feel confident that when i am in congress, i will be an independent fighter as i've always been in calling any agency that is not doing its job to task him any political leader that is not doing his job to task. separate from constituent service, separate from working on the legislation, it's being a vigilant watchdog on the agencies that are important to our region.
mr. faso: i agree that there needs to be better oversight, congressional oversight on the actions of agencies. that is one of the reasons why i was very concerned about consumer finance protection agency, whose authority was deemed unconstitutional because of the way it was in use from congressional oversight. so the toxic substances renewal was actually done this year. there was an instance when the congress worked on a bipartisan basis. it took them a long time, but they finally got it done. that's one of the reasons why, as someone running at chris gibson street, i would be -- be qualified to work as i have done in the past. that act was a good accomplishment.
now it's a matter of how well the agency administers it and how well the congress provides oversight to it. yes, it was update of a 40-year-old act. there were many substances, chemical substances, orphans substances, if you will, that were never evaluated. now there is a process that we can get many more chemical substances evaluated, to learn their potential carcinogenic effect on human health. ms. benjamin: we've reached about the halfway point of the debate. it is time for the candidates to ask a question of one another. ms. teachout: john, you said that you support donald trump because of the role he would play in selecting supreme court justices. you have also said that you think roe versus wade is a black mark on our country.
do you agree that the supreme court should roll back these decisions? mr. faso: i think roe v wade is the law of the land. it is something that, if i'm honored to be elected, i'm sworn to uphold the law of the land. so i'm satisfied with the current status of the law. i don't support things like public taxpayer funding of abortion. but i think, by and large, where the law is is where the law is meant to stay. ms. benjamin: i have a follow up on that, because you asked a
question we were going to be getting to. do you believe the state is in fact, if the supreme court would throw back to the states, that it would change the current laws on abortion in any way? mr. faso: that is one hypothetical wrapped up in another. my view is on the topic is that it is settled law. i don't support taxpayer funding of abortion. i think we have a difference of opinion on that. but i do not foresee any change in new york state. mr. faso: happy birthday. it's your birthday today. ms. teachout: thank you. [applause] mr. faso: you will find they come every year. the 19th district has many state historic sites and many vistas and great parks, like mena wants park.e
what is your favorite historic site or park here in the 19th district? ms. teachout: by far my favorite is a place i go very often, the dover stone church. it is a favorite during the great depression. it is a place where many people got married in the 19th century. if you haven't been, you should go. mr. faso: i'll try it. i'm looking for heaven. mr. reisman: i believe this goes to mr. faso. this question is on whether students should be a lot to go to the bathroom that confirms their gender identity. was this overreach? or is this a protection of transgender students? mr. faso: i think this is a matter which is best handled at the local level. i think the problem with the federal action was that it was based upon a lack of statutory authority to act in this area and they did it through a letter guidance to school district
around the country. it is now subject to litigation. the prospect of that litigation being successful is fairly strong, because there is not a proper statutory basis for it. but i do think we should be exceedingly respectful and careful about how we deal with situations like this because, especially students in school. they are going through a very difficult time emotionally and otherwise. it's vitally important that we treat everyone with respect and dignity. mr. reisman: governor cuomo about a year ago put broadly the gender of nondescript nation act into regulation. it is not a law, obviously. so there have been some sort of legal challenge to that? that is much more brought in terms of housing and the workplace. should there be a legal
challenge to those rights? mr. faso: i haven't read his executive order. i did back in the 1990's when i was in the legislature vote for the nondiscrimination bill. i think we have to be careful in terms of when executives assert their authority beyond their capacity. one of the things i feel really deeply about it -- we have to uphold the constitution. i think one of the things that has not happened enough nationally is for the congress to assert itself these of he the the president and executive orders where the president may overstep his or her boundary. ms. teachout: actually, this is over a broad area in terms of an aggressive congress and potentially overreaching executive where john and i may agree. it is incredibly important for congress to play a watchdog role.
i am supportive of lgbt writes and i have always been. we need to make sure that we work with school districts themselves to make it work. there isn't a real difference between myself and john on this in our own history's. when john was -- our own histories. when john was running in 2006, he was asked if he would veto a marriage equality bill that was brought to his desk. he said that he would oppose it. anti-marriagewn views. i deeply disagree. mr. reisman: i want to clarify your opinion on this. do you believe that the federal government should require school districts to allow transgender students to use the bathroom that they believe they are most comfortable using? ms. teachout: i think it is incredibly important that we respect the rights of children in the classroom. the way we go about it really matters.
i would work with an approach that focus on engaging school district in the best possible way to do that. mr. faso: i think that the attack that ms. teachout just made on my position in 2006, in 2006, i favored civil unions and that was a position that several people -- barack obama and hillary clinton and most political leaders at that point did not favor marriage equality. but we have marriage equality now. it is the law of new york state. and it is the law of the united states. again, if i am honored with election to the congress, i am sworn to uphold the law of the country. so i am fully supportive of doing so and i think it is important that we all recognize that. ms. benjamin: regarding the issue of executive overreach, legal challenges, which nick brought up, there have been legal challenges. the gop conference did challenge the president's executive order
on immigration. mr. faso: it is not something that we have a magic wand or a snap of the fingers. we have a system of checks and balances, making it difficult to pass things in the united states. that is the system we have and i think it is a very important system that we uphold it. i feel strongly making sure that we keep the checks and balances in the system. in the case of obamacare, where he has been challenged and also the case of the immigration executive order, the president himself said 22 some odd times
before that that he did not have the authority to do and then he did it. ms. benjamin: leaving aside whether you agree in those specific instances, do you support the idea of legal challenges by congress when an executive overreaches? ms. teachout: we've got such a much bigger problem with our congress are now. congress is it working. it really isn't working. it's not functioning on a basic level. when you look under the hood, is because of the money of super pac's. ms. benjamin: so to clarify, you do or you don't believe in litigation for executive overreach? ms. teachout: it depends on the issue. ms. benjamin: the coast guard proposal to build these anchors along the river, folks are very upset about it.
is there any way for these to be put safely along the river? if not, should they be allowed at all? ms. teachout: i have been very clear on that. i have talked to leaders and community members. tomorrow, we will be announcing that congressman hinchy will be endorsing my campaign. i am thrilled about that. and following in that legacy, we have to protect the hudson and our water for its own sake and also for our economy. when i talk to people about the problem with the proposed barges, there are so many different problems with it.
but it's the wrong direction to be going for our economy. the great strides we've made in terms of tourism, in terms of exciting new tech companies, all that depends on protecting the hudson and set up a barges in. the coast guard really isn't set up to do a full health and economic assessment. it is the agency without the right tools to be actually evaluating the legitimacy of this. when i am in congress, one of the things i want to focus on is the coast guard -- and agencies that are not equipped to do for environmental health and property review. there is something deeper happening here. ms. benjamin: before we move on, i need some clarification. you are suggesting that all the current barge traffic should be -- ms. teachout: no. i'm talking about the proposed. ms. benjamin: because the barges
are integral to the current economic -- ms. teachout: right. mr. faso: all of our decent diesel comes up the river in barges. clearly the coast guard, which this obama administration proposal, the coast guard is part of the homeland security. i do think that the proposal, as currently stands, is something that i can support. ms. benjamin: can you support any modifications to the proposal? mr. faso: what i would like to see from the coast guard and from the industry, i would like to see the justification. if they say they need an anchorage for emergency situations, where there is a temporary need because of the weather or because of some traffic backup in the port of albany, then i think that is the kind of discussion we should have.
i think everybody wants to make sure that this traffic on the river, not just the barges that may be new because of the crew going down the river, but what about the barges that are taking our heating oil and -- which ms. teachout wants to tax? what about those barges? so we need to examine safety in the river to make sure our communities are protected and that commerce is done in a safe and efficient manner. ms. benjamin: we are close to the wire here. ms. teachout: what i would say is, you know, one of the big differences between john and me as i will always so you where i stand. i will tell you what i vote for, where i stand on the barges, and john has a history as a career politician and a lobbyist. his answers reflect that. it is a nonanswer on the barges. people deserve to know precisely where you stand on these core
issues. mr. faso: it's just one cheap shot after another. ms. teachout was a lobbyist. her allies have an ad out crucify me. they pull a snip out of it, from a radio show. that is really dishonest. you should own up to it. they attacked my attendance record, which was 97%. my wife was in the hospital. i have a two and seven-year-old at home. and i'm being attacked by her and her allies. it is really kind of outrageous. if you can't -- you can't trust zephyr teachout to tell you the truth? ms. teachout: everything i've said is a matter public record. you can look it up. you can look up john faso's history as a lobbyist for pipeline companies and payday lenders. the one other factual correction i would like is i do not support a carbon tax or an energy tax. everybody in this district relies on driving to get to work. and we simply cannot afford to put a tax on people at the pump.
mr. reisman: i want to shift to a different topic. addiction to opioids and heroin has devastated some rural communities. what measures would you seek in congress to address heroin and drug addiction? mr. faso: education, treatment and enforcement. we need to really focus on education. many people are sadly not aware that 75% of the people that go to heroin have migrated from opioid pank k -- painkillers. we need better insurance coverage. you don't detox from heroin on 30 days. and we need enforcement to really go after the traffickers. but the bottom line is this is an issue that is affecting all our society. it affects everyone, regardless of their race, their gender,
their ethnicity, their sexual orientation. rich, poor, it is something that is devastating our communities. there were more people who died in 2014 from heroin overdoses and prescription opioid overdoses than died in automobile accidents in the united states. mr. reisman: should we have more access to narcan? it furthers addiction for some people because it revives them from an overdose. mr. faso: my wife and i, six months ago -- my wife is a nurse at a local high school. we attended a narcan training session. there must have been 200 people there. this is really important. anything we can do to inform people, get people to understand how people move to prescription -- from prescription drug abuse to heroin is vitally important. candidly, this is an area where we can all work together. ms. teachout: this is a daily,
ongoing, devastating tragedy. i spend a lot of time working and talking to ex-addicts working on building community support. there is a great group in sullivan county called friends of recovery. there is also really, really important leadership taking place -- actually, throughout our police departments right here in woodstock police department, in chatham, the police chief has said, look, diction is a health problem, not a crime -- addiction is a health problem, not a crime. but we need beds. the first responders are on the front line of this. they will tell you they need to make sure that there is a place that people who want to seek treatment can go. ms. benjamin: bernie sanders did introduce a bill for a spending $1 trillion over five years to rebuild america's crumbling infrastructure. as it turns out, that does not begin to meet the need. it is pegged at $3.6 trillion by 2020. so we agreed it is a massive problem.
do we borrow our way out? do we tax our way out? what do you propose? ms. teachout: we need to be building our roads, do more with our bridges and investing in our wastewater treatment and water infrastructure. that is good for everybody. it is good for jobs. we haven't talked about it a lot in this debate. everywhere i go in this district, there is a need for good jobs. here is what is happening in her society right now. there is a handful of big companies that have hired lobbyists to go to washington and basically become legal tax cheats. they are avoiding taxes by
getting loopholes put into laws. do you know how much it 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 that the big companies are hiring lobbyists and getting away without paying their fair share of taxes. ms. benjamin: to be clear, you would close the loophole and use the money to pay for
infrastructure? ms. teachout: absolutely. there is money being taken out of the federal government through tax loopholes. mr. faso: we do need tax reform. one of the things i have said is fix the corporate taxes some. right now, it allows you as companies who do business abroad keep their profits abroad because f they brought it home, they would be double taxed. this is something we have to fix. the second thing is eliminate the disincentives for our exporters who have do pay a value-added tax on the go across the border. imported goods have value-added tax refunded to them before they come in. subsidysence it is a exports.ts compared to we should have 100% expensing for small businesses when they invest in new plant equipment and machinery. that will help the small business sector in particular.
ms. benjamin: would you support any borrowing forever structure projects? mr. faso: we are already borrowing. ms. benjamin: additional borrowing. mr. faso: we have $20 trillion of debt. this is why we have to grow the economy. not by this kind of "grapes of wrath" view of the world that ms. teachout has. how do you let businesses investing create jobs so tax reform civil vacation, getting rid of loopholes, ethanol subsidies, crazy anomalies -- when ronald reagan and bill bradley did tax reform in 1986, the tax regulations were 26,000 pages. they are now 77,000 pages. ms. teachout: right now, we have a crisis in terms of our infrastructure and in terms of corruption. as i said before, they are deeply connected. i have been outspoken as an opponent of subsidies going to the big businesses, subsidies
that are flowing out of our general fund to people who can afford a lobbyist. you talk to a mom-and-pop, they can't afford a lobbyist. they don't have a voice. i was talking to a farmer who said her dairy farm had to go out of business. she said the real root issue here is that the big guys are getting subsidized and they are having to compete on an unfair playing field. mr. reisman: we will have to move on to the lightning round. these are yesterday we answered or one word answers. mr. faso first. donald trump is still not gommitting to acceptin the results of the presidential election. are you feeling confident in the integrity of the election? mr. faso: yes. ms. teachout: yes. ms. benjamin: should at&t and time warner be allowed to merge? ms. teachout:ms. teachout: absolutely not. mr. faso: probably not.
ms. benjamin: just to be clear, time warner, time warner cable are separate companies. just to be clear. mr. reisman: should ride sharing apps like uber and lyft be legal in upstate new york? mr. faso: yes. ms. teachout: depends on the rules. ms. benjamin: are you planning to run for governor? ms. teachout: i'm not planning on it. mr. faso: no. [laughter] ms. benjamin: we have run out of time could mr. faso, the close goes to you first. mr. faso: very simply, i am 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 a people where i come from and where i look at issues. what motivates me is the defense of the constitution, a defense of limited government, a defense of rule of law, a defensive 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 supported goal opportunity and i support personal responsibility. -- 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 am honored to have chris gibson's strong support in this he and i would be on her have your support as your next member of congress on november 8. ms. teachout: thank you nick and liz and john and everybody for watching. this is a really critical election and there are real differences between myself and john, some of which we talked about tonight, not all of which we did. i am an independent fighter. i never responded to political party heads or to big corporations. my opponent is really