tv New York 11th Congressional District GOP Primary Debate CSPAN June 15, 2018 8:01pm-9:02pm EDT
donovan features dan and michael grimm, the previous help the seat before resigning and serving time in prison for federal tax evasion. this debate is courtesy of new york one news. we bring it to you as your primary source for campaign 2018. good evening and welcome to staten island where we are holding a republican primary debate for the 11th congressional district. i will be joined in the questioning by two of my , andagues, courtney gross anthony pascale. the 11th congressional district encompasses all of staten island and parts of southern brooklyn. it is currently the only congressional district to be represented by republican. let's introduce the candidates. we have the incumbent dan
donovan. challengers is his michael grimm. the are the rules of debate, which have been shared with by both campaigns. they will have a maximum of 90 seconds to respond to individual questions it will be given the opportunity to respond if directly addressed by the other candidate. will have a cross-examination round during which each candidate will be asked to ask his opponent a question. will be a lightning round it was the answers must be yes, no, or a short response. please follow along tonight on social media. we begin now with short opening statements. the order was drawn randomly. selected first so he will begin with the first opening statement. dan: good evening. i think the audience and the people at home where watching tonight.
i have serve this community for over 20 years with honesty and integrity. i was the deputy president of staten island during one of the most vital times of our city's history, after the september 11 tragedy. i was chief of staff when we closed the garbage dump. i was the da of staten island when we helped make staten island the safest community and big city and american. i read for congress at a vital time. ,y opponent like for community asked us to book for him, and then used our vote to cut a deal with the justice department to get a sweeter deal. we didn't have a voice in washington for over five months drink -- during barack obama's last term in office. i have a campaign that you are watching and witnessing that has been filled with lies and dispositions. the president of the united states had to set the record straight. he told the people of our community that he wants me to be
the candidate. to help him make america's first agenda succeed. he also told us that he didn't want us to vote for my opponent and laid out the reasons. through all oft the lies and distortion, if you want to help make america great again, please vote for me. [applause] michael: i big thank you to everyone sitting on the panel tonight. to serve. the honor many of you know i served in the united states marine corps in combat. i served with the fbi undercover. those were trying times. doubt, the proudest moment was serving all of you is your congressman. it was very difficult because we were coming off of one of the worst economies we had.
we had democratic senate, and supers got ravaged by sandy. we can together as a family and we led and we got things done. i running again because over the last three years my opponent has not been sleeping in his office, he has been sleeping on the job. that is why i'm asking for your vote. thank you. [applause] host: thank you very much. i'm going start -- to start tonight's question. andrning is about choices there are some scenarios in which the representative of the 11th district will have to choose between supporting president trump's national goals and pursuing local priorities. on any given day, you can advocate to build the wall on the border or seal offer the east shore. assure voters that
they could come first if the choice emerges between what the president wants and what the district needs? dan: it is easy for me. i'm glad that you brought up the seawall. that was fully funded by the bill that i helped write. it was over $60 billion. it included the funding for the seawall. it included the moneys of the state would need to pay their portion. almost all of the money is federally funded because of the sandy bill that i helped write. more to the point, when my own party said, we are not doing flood insurance reform, i was told it would in my political career. they told me it would end my political career if i pushed it. of chairman of the party, the committee that had jurisdiction said it was dead or -- dead on arrival. i went against almost everyone on the republican side. we got that buildup.
not only passed the house. i was working with the senate while we were negotiating the house version. the senate passed it in record time. i have always put the people first. i support the president's national goals, i think everything he ran on made a lot of sense, that is why he will have my support. the district will always come first in my proof of that was the perfect example, was that the when i risked my political career to get the flood insurance reform bill passed. a lot of people in our district would have been out of their homes because they would have never been able to afford those exaggerated premiums. host: thank you. paired up with maxine waters, the most liberal democrat in the house, was on the floor of the house screaming for the impeachment of president trump. it had increases in flood insurance premiums for the people i represent. that seawallure
gets built. i got the metoo agree that once it is halfway built, many of those families will see a reduction in their fema flood insurance premiums. many won't be in the floods of it all. flood zone at all. i voted against the tax bill because it was harmful for the people i represent. i want my people do have the same tax cuts as the rest of america. i don't want it on the back of my people. that is why i had to vote no. we lost the most important deduction to my community that has been used since 1913, the state and local tax deduction. we negotiated. it was eliminated totally. we got a $10,000 cap put in the bill but it was not enough. i have shown that. i spoke to the president about it and told him why i had to. he understands.
people, i spoke with the president 90% of the time. i vote with the people i represent 100% of the time. the seawall is not on time, it has artie been delayed. that is first and foremost. i will work with any member of congress as long as it is going to get the ball across the line for mike and rituals. my opponent says he will vote against the tax bill. he voted against banning sanctuary cities. the idea that he voted with president trump 90% of the time, he voted with the republican party 90% of the time. my opponent has voted against -- i would have voted for it. when you analyzed the bill, 94%
of average families here in the district will still get a tax break. something is better than nothing. you cannot forget about all of the small businesses. down, every third store is out of business. the tax bill is excellent for small businesses, it brings a lot of relief. our local economy is still lagging behind the overall national economy. that tax bill is part of it. don't forget the ancillary benefits. 401(k)s and peoples have bonuses for people. wages have increased. the economy is growing. all of those things are benefits we cannot forget about. andpponent wrote an op-ed gave an example of a family making somewhere around $90,000 a year. they lost money on the first version of the bill. the bill that actually passed,
they saved money on this new tax plan. that is not true. a police officer and a nurse, schoolteacher, they're going to see a tax increase next year. california is going to pay the tax benefits for the rest of the nation. the president called the replacement plan by the republicans from the house mean. i voted against it. both the president and i thought this was a terrible replacement plan. we wouldn't have needed a replacement plan. my opponent voted for obamacare seven times when you was in the was in theern he house. it would increase in premiums for seniors and it was going to cost $100 million from the hospitals that i represent. one told me they would have to close if that tax bill was passed. that is why i voted no and the president understands it. host: thank you.
next question. >> we are going to the topic of immigration. i want to start with mr. donovan. you voted against stripping several fundings from sanctuary cities last year. earlier this year, you introduce new legislation that would do just that. strip funding away from sanctuary cities. nypd,d of targeting the this bill targeted the department of correction. salaries.o to some had to explain this change in position? are you favoring nypd officers over correction officers, both of these officers keep new yorkers say. dan: i honor both of their services. i voted against the first bill because the penalty was wrong. i have been opposed to sanctuary cities. i was a law-enforcement officer. we have to enforce the laws. you can't choose which ones.
sanctuary cities choose which laws to enforce. billenalty in the original was going to take hundreds of millions of dollars away from police officer. new york city is the number one terrorist apartment in the world -- target in the world. my bill has the correct one. two courts have struck down that bill, the penalty does not have the correct nexis. i bill doesn't take money away from correction officers. it takes away money for lack of enforcing immigration law. if you're not going to enforce the law, we're not going to give you federal fund to do it. i'm trying to get that into the immigration bill now. we'll be voting next week. i think it is the right penalty that penalizes sanctuary cities but does not put our safety and jeopardy. >> how would you have voted on
the original bill? michael: i would have supported the bill. you are seeing now is a lot of excuses why my opponent has not voted for the three things are president lobbied congress four. to get those exact votes, go back in time a little bit. my opponent doesn't say he cosponsored to amnesty bills. two bills that had no language for border security. when he was interviewed in october after the president became the nominee, the new york observer, he said he disagreed his the president on immigration policies, that he didn't believe in supporting people. in that he wouldn't build a wall. those were his words. it is a flip-flop on doubles every issue. what has changed? i got in the race and now my opponent has to go to the right advertisement he didn't support
amnesty and that we has reversed his positions. it is visible technicality. i don't support amnesty or sanctuary cities, so i'm going to change this mechanism. the only thing that has changed is that i entered the race. dan: 20 years i have enforce laws. was asked about deportation, i said we are not going to depart 25,000 people. we're going to do for people who are convicted of crimes. michael: my opponent has been unelected bureaucrat. he was behind a desk. i have been on the street. i know my dangerous it is. sanctuary cities make it dangerous for our police officers. indoors with the new york city police department. i have served in harms way for 20 years. light, the penalty was banning sanctuary cities is just one example. i don't remember my opponent using the bully pulpit of the
congressional office to push back on a progressive mayor whose policies are destroying the quality of life all across this district. that is the bigger issue. my opponent would've left it up to bill de blasio. can you imagine that? i couldn't allow that to happen. >> what you mean -- michael: it would've been up to bill de blasio to put that money back in. i didn't trust him to do it. immigration, aut bill will be on the floor of the house next week. in your careers, i am going to start with mr. grimm. you have supported a pathway to citizenship. you have both told us on the record multiple times. you talked about a solution for the dreamers. what is your position now?
if you go by the rhetoric on the campaign trail, you would think that neither of you would support any type of pathway to citizenship. michael: i'll list.doc or was the leverage. when we were negotiating in congress, the dreamers was the leverage to get all the things we need done. time, on your show, i was saying, build the fence. that was before president trump was even running for office. now it would be, build the wall. order security was always the top priority. combined with fencing and all of the things that go with it from technology. more importantly, it was going to a system that works for the united states. migration, ending the visa lottery plan, those are two big components. , ife were three main things
we could get that, we would give a pathway to citizenship for daca. i still think that is the way to go. bill thea companion tom cotton's act, that is a village with support. my position has been consistent on that and i still supported. >> how about you? dan: the four pillars he just mentioned, one thing he mentioned that was ironic is it verify. if we had it when he owned his restaurant, he would have been quartered a lot earlier. it requires people to check the verification the status of anybody that they hire. it is one of the pillars of immigration reform that president trump is enforcing right now. he is going after employers who hire illegal aliens. is a system to prevent that. i find it ironic that my
opponent, who hired illegal aliens, is now a fan. >> you want to respond? michael: everyone knows about the delivery boy, i'm not going to perpetuate that. , wepeople sitting back home have heard about this for years. what do they care about? a congressman who is going to work as hard as them. only one person standing up. actually passing substantive bills into law. my opponent has passed them out of the house. not one bill from dan donovan has been signed into law. the record is clear on that. it is a government website that proves it. >> you want to respond? quickly, in this school, there are veteran students who now have a better housing allowance, better than it was, for going to school here and living here. it was in the ncaa bill. it was my amendment and
signature. and you can go out there and ask any of the students were veterans how much more money they're getting because of my bill. [applause] >> we have to move on. michael: that was an amendment to someone else's bill. you always talk about how you stand up for veterans. since the end of 2015, the veterans administration hospital in brooklyn has been closing services at reasonable year and it is getting ready to close completely if we don't stop it. that has all happened on your watch. services donald trump is supporting me because of how good i am at supporting our veterans and military. michael: the clinic is now gone. dan: it is not gone. >> muska go to a different topic. host: we are going to move on. issue's talk about an that a every single person who is watching tonight. that is health care. you voted against the bill that
would've completely repealed the affordable care act. saying, it would not provide the relief needed for local families. it would end up costing seniors more. , you voted for a complete obamacare repeal. you still took advantage of the government health care offered to members of congress. why should members of congress benefit from government health care but the rest of the country can't have that option? michael: i think everyone should. my understanding, members of congress have the exact same health care that everyone else does. we go through the exchange and had to pick a plan like everyone else. that was my understanding. i remember looking for a plan. you mentioned something. i voted to repeal obamacare. every time it was an up-and-down vote, i voted repeal. out,ponent keeps drilling
the funding bills. when you have a democrat senate,t and democratic it puts things in there that you either hold your nose and vote for it percent on the government. although it was funding for obamacare and planned parenthood, there's no way around it other than shutting down the government. i believe the last funding bill that my opponent but it have funding for obamacare and play. . there is a difference between voting for a funding bill and voting up-and-down on whether you would kill it or not. >> are there any aspects of obamacare you like? michael: are there certain aspects, yes. i think we should completely repeal it and start from scratch. it is allowing children to stay on longer, those that have pre-existing conditions. happenedm line is what
here, all we did was increase medicaid and make everyone else a four. that hurt our seniors. many doctors stopped taking seniors altogether. there were less doctors out there. the exchanges, there were not enough providers actually provide the services. you were not able to keep your doctor. when you look at government intervention into our health-care care system, it was the worst thing we can do. the private sector does things more effectively and we can keep the government out of our health care. [applause] said they were opened of certain aspect of obamacare, you said there are good parts of it. what are those good parts? are you concerned that they may no longer be available? dan: allowing children to stay on their parents help insurance until they are 26 years old. covering people with pre-existing conditions. the solution here is that we have to break it apart.
let's pass the things that everybody agrees on. allowing insurance companies to sell insurance across state lines or lower the premiums for people working for health care. let's try that and see it work. let's go this step-by-step and appeal it. you repeal the whole package, i voted no and president trump said it was a mean replacement plan. i voted seven times repeal obamacare. when the replacement plan came up for a vote, were too many things. onhave to hospital systems staten island. anyone who goes when emergency the weight that they have and how many people are in there and tell long it takes them, some people walk out. can you imagine what it would be like if we only had one hospital? i have learned a lot of things in this job, one is to listen to people in the field. when i asked the hospital administrators about the replacement plan, both toby was going to be devastating, that convinced me. >> what about the people who
cannot afford assurance -- insurance? dan: we allow small businesses to pull together, somebody who has four employees, a cost them a fortune to buy a health insurance for them. that employee can pull with other employees, you have 5000 people, you can get a cheaper rate and never -- better coverage. to say that you agree here? you are here for a piecemeal approach to dismantling obamacare -- michael: i think we should outright repeal it. my opponent is saying it is because the hospital said it would be devastating. , the reason it is devastating to the hospitals is because of the massive cut in medicaid. all of these hospitals receive much more money in the expansion of medicaid.
it is not because of the replacement or anything else. it is a massive cuts in medicaid. he said before that many times to repeal obamacare. the only thing that changed, they were still going to receive those cuts under those other appeals. only thing that changes that he now had a president that would sign it into law. the second thing is, my opponent doesn't tell you that right now add some running all over fox from a pro-obamacare special-interest group in washington. endorsede was recently , the number one issue was keeping obamacare. all of these pro-obamacare groups are supporting my opponent. drill down on why the hospital didn't want to draw repeal it was because of the medicaid funding that it came with. other times he voted would have taken that away also. >> mr. donovan, you have a quick
response. does he want to tell the people who depend on the hospital system every day for their health care, those doctors, those nurses, if he wants to tell them that he would have voted to shut them down, let him explain that to them. [applause] leastl: those people, at they know me and my face. irene and sandy, i was there at 2:00 in the morning in the rain, taking sure that they had a backup generator. they know me well. host: thank you candidates. we are to have a short lightning round. this is based on what you know. you,no, i will start with mr. granted it should russia be allowed to rejoin the g7? michael: no. dan: no. host: have you ever voted for
democrat? dan: yes. michael: yes. host: should victims of domestic abuse be granted at the border? michael: i don't know. that is a case-by-case basis. host: should the yankees have agreed to change their name to the pizza rest? dan: hell no. michael: i agree. should pharmaceutical companies be held criminally liable for the opioid crisis? michael: yes. dan: those who were deceptive. host: there is a controversy over whether or not the bridge has been misspelled because the original family spelled it with two these. shouldn't actra -- shouldn't you be added? dan: no. it is like getting a stamp where the plane is upside down. let's keep it. michael: i wouldn't change it. host: should members of congress
be allowed to sleep in their offices? michael: no. dan: yes. host: your favorite restaurant in the district? michael: tony's brick oven. dan: that is a really tough one. i eat out a lot. i don't want to upset anyone. newof my favorites is the ones, the corner house. they can candidates. it is time for our cross-examination round. each candidate gets to question his opponent. we are to start with michael grimm. michael: there has been enough name-calling, i think that the people want to your about what is going on in the district. we haven't heard an update in a long time. i think this is a great opportunity. with is a park contamination. we haven't heard anything.
what exactly is the source of the contamination? is there a timeline? when can we use the park, and will this affect anything else in the district? dan: it is a good question. remediation and was finally settled, it will be the city's responsibility. the city dumped the substances there. they found the hotspots and realized where they were and it was caused on the city. there are negotiations between the federal internet and the city. it was the city that will clean it up. it will be part of the seawall as we are setting the seawall from underneath the verizon a bridge and going along the east coast. it ends at the oak meant treatment center plans. that is why we started the project that way to give the city time to remediate and rid the park of contamination. it will help the seawall. michael: is the city actually doing the work? my understanding is the city has
to pay for it. dan: the feds had to ok it was done not really. errol: your turn to ask a question, mr. donovan. dan: in the spring of 2012, you retained a patent for an investigation into your campaign finances, which ended up resulting in your girlfriend going to federal prison, and unwed mother going to prison. since that time they have forgiven nearly $500,000 of debt you owe them for the criminal representation. did you do anything with such a generous gift by you or did they lobby you for them to forgive $500,000? michael: let me correct the record. you are talking about my old campaign entity, michael grimm for congress which is a separate legal entity. i don't get the opportunity. i don't have the opportunity to make deals on that account.
that has a treasurer. the treasurer cannot make that deal, neither can patton boggs. the federal action commission, the government that regulates those campaigns and those type of accounts, has to approve it. right now it is pending for approval with the fac. so there is no deal because they have to approve it. if they do, obviously it is within the wall. if they do not, it stays on the books. dan: did you do anything for such a generous offer to get $500,000 removed? michael: it was closer to $400,000 and they had repaid $600,000. i thought they would have to reduce. i don't make that decision and i did not receive any benefit because that campaign account is its own entity. [speaking simultaneously] michael: i am not done speaking.
i don't know that money at all. the campaign does. if a business goes out, goes under, you only get what is left. they don't have a choice. this is up to the federal election commission. i don't make that decision. dan: they lobby you at all? >> we can control the question, we cannot control the answer. i think he has answered. dan: i asked did he lobby, was he lobbied like patton boggs? did you do anything? michael: absolutely not. i did not do anything and did not receive. dan: did they lobby you? michael: i know are you are going. a vacuouslant and attack. let me tell you why. [applause] oneael: i said on new york that to the best of my recollection i was never lobbied by patton boggs. that was 100% true because i do not recollect. in 2011, patton boggs had one meeting with a staffer of mine.
i had nothing. i looked it up after the attack. they were lobbying for azerbaijan, which i am on the opposite side of their issue and have never changed my position. i have recognized the genocide of the armenian people which is what they wanted me to stop doing. they may have been tempted to lobby. in 2011, over seven years ago, i spoke to one staffer. i am on the opposite side and have never changed. [speaking simultaneously] dan: did they send you emails about you lobbying on their behalf? [applause] dan: that the client owed -- [speaking simultaneously] errol: we are going to leave that for the reporters and fact checkers. the next question we are going to ask you to answer first. we are in hurricane season, and indeed the national flood insurance program you both
referenced before is going to expire at the end of july. there are homeowners complaining about annual double percentage increases. the home itself is underwater, $400 billion in the red after a failed. do you support the program and what should be changed? michael: we have to reform the program. we have priced people out of their homes, but the seawall will help staten island. it is being built to withstand a 300 year storm. when is 50% complete, the people who are protected by it either will no longer be in the flood zone or premiums will be reduced. we are working with the city of new york to fight the fema on the present flood maps. we don't think the flood maps are accurate. premiums are based on inaccurate flood maps, then people are paying for insurance they don't have to do. we have to redo the maps.
we have to complete the seawall and people in staten island will be better. [applause] errol: mr. grimm. michael: we got that seawall thanks to a build i was -- a bill i was able to write in the aftermath of sandy. [applause] says themy opponent flood insurance reform bill i worked on with maxine waters and others did not do a good enough job, but he has not put in his own bill to make it better. i am not saying it was perfect. we had opposition. we had to take on the majority leader and the chairman in charge. we could only get through what we were able to get through. in the last three years that should have been amended or redone. i don't disagree. note had a congressman sleeping in an office, maybe we would have gotten it done. errol: under the white house proposed budget, fema would be allowed to discontinue coverage
or competitive loss properties, buildings that have flooded more than once. the plan, this is the trump administration's budget, coverage for commercial properties, bar coverage for sloan -- flood prone medians. how would you handle that? one of the ways you mitigate your premiums is to elevate your home. so if you elevate your home your flood insurance premiums go down. so many people i represent cannot elevate. they live in a test housing. fema is coming up at my request to list people that live in a test housing, whether housing or duplexes, what they can do to lower flood insurance premiums because they cannot elevate. elevation is the only solution. but one of the things i had to didthe very first thing i when i went to congress, the first bill i propose was to stop the fraud after sandy when
engineering reports were altered by insurance companies that are claiming that damage was pre-existing to people. under the new laws, you as a homeowner will get the original engineering report, so if it is altered or modified, you will know it. [applause] michael: one of the issues is there are certain areas people should not live in. elevation is one option but there is also other options which we used in staten island after sandy. one of them is a buyout. we can buy these people out at market rate. there are two things you can do. you can give back to nature and allow it to be part of the natural drainage which is very important. we forget mother nature is in charge, not us. we build in areas where mother nature tells us not to, and we should not be. the second thing we can also do is buy people out, then offer
that land and bid it out for developers to come in and rebuild properly with proper elevations and all the things that go along with that, breakaway walls, parking underneath and if you get a first round a refusal for the homeowners to buy back in. it should be part of a plan should have done after sandy. rebuild all of those areas, make them beautiful waterfront property which is something we don't do. dan: this week at my request they removed the sandy money from the package that we retained the sandy money that able desperately need, on my request. [applause] errol: thank you. courtney: we will move to a crisis that is ravaging this district, the opioid crisis. in 2016, 116 people died on staten island because of drug overdose. last year it was 99.
on the campaign trail both of you have talked about treatment options. we need more. orn you talk to providers on within the district, they say there is a shortage. i want to start with mr. grimm and ask, what have you done specifically to make sure there are enough treatment options, rehab within the district to address this growing need? michael: i have not been in office, but one of the first things i did was educate myself. i joined the congressional caucus for prescription drug abuse and opioid abuse. we joined that so i can go around the country and get information from the stakeholders that do this every day, not just people in rehab but people from around the country and big pharma, all the people involved. what we have to do besides increasing access, it is not enough because that is such a complex issue is we have to have
a public-private partnership. on the private side we should model it at demand. companies like google and facebook that have a ton of money should be doing a huge advertising campaign like mothers against drunk driving to bring awareness to the issue at all levels whether you are in school or a grandmother. on the government side increasing access is one aspect. what do you do when you come out every have? nowhere to go. we have to get rid of the stigma involved with being an addict. you have to deal with big pharma so they stop making drugs that are so addictive. we have to deal with the fda so they stop allowing drugs to hit the market. you have to deal with doctors because they are overprescribing . this is a difficult and complex issue, you cannot look at increasing access to rehabilitation but look at the whole picture. i would work with the hhs secretary and make a pilot program with the full weight of
the ministries in conjunction with the city and state here in staten island. courtney: when you said the fda, would you ban some type of opioid? michael: what we need to do is -- congress has to give through its oversight function has to give fda more guidelines and maybe through legislation, not allowing certain things to come to market that are so addictive. oxycontin or something like that. originally they say it is for cancer patients terminal. that is fine, but then all of a sudden you find out 18-year-olds can have a tooth pulled and are vicodin orribed percocet. we have to have stricter rules so these addictive drugs are used only for terminal patients and so on. courtney: mr. donovan. dan: i am the product of alcoholic father. my father found the rooms of aa
when i was eight years old. i you didn't find those rooms would not be here today, so i understand recovery. when i was the district attorney we had one of the most successful drug treatment court in all of new york state. us -- i started pilot program that trained and equipped every police officer with naloxone, saved alice lives. no every department is using that. i had the highest conviction rate. this is opioid week in congress. we are passing bills, had 35 of them. one of those required nih to research and develop a nonaddictive, nonnarcotic pain relief. that is one of the things we can do, treat the people who are being addicted. education, educating people. just because it is an mom's cabinet doesn't mean it is safe. on the treatment site, the local
doing it washington 100%. we are supplying them with resources, for more beds, counselingthen services or camelot, do what they do best and train people with an addiction. federal government is to support supply and get out of the way. [applause] those 35 bills, did you sponsor or right anyone? dan: they cannot of a different committee. the reality is -- michael: we didn't even have the problem yet. the problem was just starting. that problem came a crisis and an epidemic all during his watch. one of the reasons why -- the conviction rate was very high. a lot of those drug dealers were bargained down. dan: now my opponent has a 10
point plan to fight opioids. he was in congress during that time and did nothing. i went down to washington, went on to washington and said, i have three crossings to new jersey. i need you to get new york in the federal network to stop people circumventing the system and going over to new jersey to get prescriptions written or filled. for years he did not get it done. i was there four months, one letter to governor cuomo, it was done. [applause] [speaking simultaneously] michael: i have to say something. anyone knowing this -- here is the reality. -- governor cuomo did it. on the day he was doing the ceremonial signing, this man sent the letter to urge him to do it. he found out after the fact the governor was going to sign that agreement with the other states and sent the letter just so he could take credit for it.
that is a fact. if you look at press releases by governor cuomo, he doesn't mention his name. if you look at our state senator the other, the local guys who had something to do with it, they thanked each other and the governor. he never had anything to do with it. like you have been doing your whole career. [applause] [speaking simultaneously] michael: the day the governor signed it. is that not ridiculous? the governor didn't know he was signing it? the day he was signing and he sends a letter, and anyone to take credit for it there that is shameful. [applause] courtney: sticking on the same topic, having shorter answers potentially, i will go back to obamacare. both of you say you want to repeal all of obamacare. all -- obamacare increased the amount of medicaid funding for certain states, allowing people who needed treatment to seek it.
they say it exponentially increased the amount of people who could go and get into rehab. it called substance abuse and essential health benefit. how do you square that? we start with mr. donovan. dan: this week we gave the local people, the locals but kamala and ymca counseling services more resources of the care for people. courtney: is rehab and essential health benefit? dan: absolutely. they cannot function without sobriety. my father was an alcoholic. courtney: mr. grimm. michael: it is about empowering -- health care complex. i don't believe the federal government does many things well. the military is one of the exceptions, but when it comes down to health care and issues, they are localized. states need flexibility to service their constituents the way they see fit. the federal government, the best thing we can do is give grants
and give money to the local areas and support camelot and others that can give them the care. you are heading on a bigger issue. will the insurance companies cover it? that is a state issue and new york should make it mandatory that drug treatment is in fact covered under your care, but not for the short amount of time it is covered now. the reality with opioids is it takes much longer to recover. if you send someone for a few weeks most likely they will relapse even harder. that is why the death rate goes up because they think they have recovered, then they end up using more when they come back from a rehab not complete. courtney: thank you. >> next question. >> you both voiced support for trump's executive order temporarily blocking people from seven countries from entering the u.s. on visas. that included iraq, iran, somalia, sudan, and yemen.
critics argued not one suspect of any major u.s. terror attack came from any of those nations. the largest number of terrorists have come from the u.s. why is it fair to signal out -- single out those muslim countries when blocking them would not have prevented any major prior attack? dan: that list was created by barack obama. there is about 45 other predominantly muslim countries in the world. when people call them the travel pause, because the president was only asking for 90 days, we were not banning muslims. we were banning travel from these seven countries that we did not have a proper vetting aocess to ensure that when person comes with a passport that it has actually him. at the time there was 200,000 syrian passports missing. we didn't know if they syrian coming from syria was that person or a terrorist.
our enemy told us they were going to infiltrate and compromise the refugee program in syria. it was a dangerous situation. while this was going on in ports , the secretary of homeland security and the state department came up with a proper vetting process for one of the countries, so one is eliminated. there was a travel pause. it was not a ban, and the number one priority and number one responsibility is to protect people. he was asking for a short time to determine that people coming into our country were not going to be harmful to us. i supported it. [applause] michael: i want to point out when interviewed by the observer, my opponent did not support the travel ban, but putting that aside i agree with what he said. looking at yemen, you are looking at areas where they are failed states. people need to understand that.
it has nothing to do with religion. you are talking about areas that are failed states. my opponent did point out there were thousands upon thousands of passports that were stolen, but the real question is how? if it is a failed state, do you do any vetting? there is no way to get a check and answer back. at the end of the day the number one job of the government is to keep us safe. that is their number one job. the president is trying to do that. he is trying to keep us safe. one of the biggest issues he has is we have become so politically correct that it stifles ability to do common sense things. it is common sense. whether it is a catholic country, christian, it is irrelevant. if it is failed on poses a threat, the president must -- has a duty to keep us safe and do proper vetting. that is -- i agree. >> how do you square that with those who are muslim?
we have a large muslim population in part of brooklyn. how do you square that with people whose relatives cannot come over? michael: it is an inconvenience that will reject our nation. mosque a letter to every when this was put in place explaining to what this was. it was not anti-muslim attack. it was not anti-muslim policy. it was a production for the united states until such time we can get the proper vetting process in place. during the time it was in battle in court in one of those countries came off. anthony: mr. grimm. michael: it is important to remember that coming into the united states is a privilege, not a right. it is unfortunate and maybe a family member cannot come, but if you go back decades ago whether it is my great great grandparents or whatever, it took them years. they had to fill out paperwork
and one person was able to come sometimes, maybe they brought a child or two, then they wait for the husband or wife to come later. many inconveniences because the privilege and honor of being here and becoming a citizen is supposed to be valuable. we don't give that away. it is not a right. anthony: thank you. >> time for another short lightning round. should president trump fire robert mueller? michael: yes. dan: i think it is over. we should end it. errol: fire? dan: fire him. it is over. errol: will the staten island we'll ever be built? michael: i hope so. dan: i doubt it. errol: should nypd officer daniel be returned to full duty? michael: yes. dan: absolutely. errol: should members of congress have term limits? michael: no. dan: yes. errol: should public money be used to remove wild turkeys? michael: yes.
dan: we have got to do something. errol: should new york city ban plastic bags? dan: no. michael: no. errol: when was the last time you took mass transit? michael: seven months ago. dan: i might have been on that bus. errol: should new york state legalize marijuana? dan: no. michael: no. [applause] errol: how are we? we will go for a final round of questions. let's start with anthony. this question is for the audience because there was a lot of traffic tonight on the staten island expressway and the case is often. there are numerous studies that show president of the south shore have one of the longest commutes in the country. if elected, which transportation project would you make a priority to help the commuters? michael: there is two i think are important. one i pulled for when i was in
theress, a light rail over bridge would be helpful. i think we need to be pushing for fast ferries. we have a highway we are not using. if you look around the country, every major city is using fast ferries. i would like to see a fast very around the princess bay area. there is that park and ride, outerbridge park and ride, bus depot. you could park there and have a shuttle to the ferry, but it should go from -- that would be the south shore and east shore of staten island and stop somewhere on holocaust. uff.n houghlin h anthony: there was a very not many people wrote. michael: it was in a place not many people could use. the unique things that were wrong. it was not planned out. if you put it in print this day and have that park and ride and a shuttle, that would help and go to the other side of west shore.
the city of new york. only two boroughs, manhattan and staten island, profitable for the city of new york. so the money they get from the bridge they should be paying for this. we are the only ones that don't have a free bridge. that is the other reason they should pay. it should stop not only downtown but the very should stop midtown because that is the reason why we have one of the longest commutes in the country. dan: it is multifaceted. so many things we need. i asked the mta to study tolls. people believe that might relieve traffic. it may end up being a revenue boost for the mta. i am asking if they find it will relieve traffic and increase their revenue, i want them to spend that increase revenue on staten island and south brooklyn. the other thing i have done is my appropriation request, the committee this year has two bills and it. one is for $1 billion for light rail, one $300 million for rapid
transit. we cannot dedicate those funding sources directly to staten island, so i curtailed the requirement of digital for that. you have to have a dense population of over 200,000 people. we have 500,000. anthony: where would it go? dan: the west shore expressway and the bay of bridge. you have to have a dense area, public transportation commute of over 35 minutes. our average is 43. staten island is one of the few in the country that would qualify. anthony: thank you. [applause] errol: coming down the home stretch. we will keep this quick. courtney: very short answers. the new york city housing authority on monday, the city and housing and urban development talked about creating $1 billion to the public housing authority for much-needed repairs. over the past 10 years or so, budget has been slashed by
hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government. underneath circumstances, whoever is going back to washington, if you go back, would you advocate for more admiral funding for the housing authority -- federal funding for the housing authority, and should be spent? dan: the best thing to happen was the federal monitor. new york city is a landlady -- landlord. lord -- we reported on new york 1 of the peeling paint and lead exposure to young children. given the city of new york more money is not the solution. making sure they spend it correctly and holding them accountable is. the decision to have a federal monitor oversee the housing authority and make sure they are spending tax dollars hourly, that was the right answer. courtney: more federal money. [applause] agree.: i
the problem with new york city is they expect the federal government to throw money at a problem and that makes it a bigger problem. they have failed for decades to take care of the people that, by the way, they have hoped for. if you look around the country, all the housing parties and other states, they are all controlled by local and state democrats. i don't understand why. is federal government forcing to hold them accountable. if we spent the money wisely, people would live in a much better environment and they would not need more money. courtney: ok. errol: thank you both candidates. we will say good night. that is all the time we have. go us on -- go visit us on twitter and facebook. you can find us on ny1.com. i would like to thank both candidates and everyone at the college of staten island. remember to vote on june 26.
thank you for watching and have a great evening. [applause] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] theunday on thread day discussion of the documentary "hit and stay." the actions of the catholic activists who protested the vietnam war. >> as we understand it the
vietnam war movement was thought about as scruffy haired protesters. here were middle-aged clergy. think, ife public they are against this war, i should reconsider it myself. that was a turning point for the antiwar movement. >> their action did not end the vietnam war, but i don't see how you could argue that it didn't help and the draft. the head of selective service said publicly that they felt they were under attack. clearly you can draw a line from what they did to the draft ending in 73. >> sunday at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span skua day. >> on friday, former trump campaign chair paul manafort was jailed after being accused by rescuers for trying to influence in the testimony
investigation being led by robert mueller. mr. manafort had been under house arrest while awaiting trial for charges ranging from money laundering to conspiracy against the u.s.. before it was announced that mr. manafort would be going to jail, president trump spoke to reporters outside the white house about the mueller investigation and the fbi's handling of the melt probe. also askednt was about north korea and the u.s. immigration policy of separating children at the border. reporter: mr. president. reporter: mr. president.