Skip to main content

tv   2016 Debate for U.S. Senate  CBS  October 17, 2016 7:00pm-8:01pm EDT

7:00 pm
7:01 pm
7:02 pm
7:03 pm
7:04 pm
7:05 pm
7:06 pm
7:07 pm
7:08 pm
7:09 pm
7:10 pm
7:11 pm
allegany county. (so let's look at my records with respect to judges. back in 2010ly was candidate for the united states senate, i wrote why i would have supported judge society so meyer, to be a supreme court justice. i knew i wouldn't agree with her on many things. but, i thought her record as a judge was solid. she had demonstrated admirable restraints in terms of
7:12 pm
limiting limit the role after j and i would have supported her. i worked with bob kacie, and senator casey and i have had 16 federal judges recruited, betted confirmed to the federal bench because we worked closely together, and most of those are democratic judges because that's the nature of the arrangement we have with the democrat in the white house. >> prior to passing, we had supreme court that was roughly bald. sometimes it made decisions that conservatives liked, like the heller decision on the second amendment. other times, decisions liberals like like upholding obama care. with the passing of justice scalae a, the question a rises in this election year, will we have a balance, and which way will it turn? of the constitution very clear, the power to seat adjust tis is a shared power. president and the senate, and in my view,
7:13 pm
>> put candidate forwards, and the senator has acted in a totally partisan way, and frustrating, what the constitution directs the senator to do, and that is to ensure that there are fair and thorough hearings of nominees. i thought it was interesting, to hear that senator say that when he was running for office last time, he wrote that had bipartisan flavor, that's the first and last we've seen of bipartisanship from this senator when it comes to judges. >> well, obviously, that's completely untrue, because i work with senator casey, to get more federal judges confirmed, 16 judges, in my six year, most of them democrats, and that's more than any other state in the union other than california and new york which are much
7:14 pm
larger states. the fact of the hyper partisan person that i'm concerned about how she was behaving in the senate is katie mcginty, when she was the chief of staff for governor tom wolf. the budget negotiations were so acromonious, so unreasonable, so inflexible, that republican negotiated insisted they couldn't proceed if she was in the room. and they had to conduct negotiations directly with governor wolf, or other staff members. that's the kind of atmosphere that we can't afford to have in washington. >> thank you, senator. moving on, senator toomey, is donald trump correct when he blames dumb trade deals for reaking havoc in our economy? and he says steel jobs can be returned to this region, and it that manufacturing can make towns like ambridge thrive again. or as trump as credits allege peddling false hope? >> you know, i've visited the assembly line at the
7:15 pm
locomotive plant in erie. i've been to meet with some employees of westinghouse. i've met with the folks who work making medical devices in southeastern and southwestern pennsylvania. everyone every those areas depends on the ability to sell our products overseas. 96% of the worlds' population lives somewhere else. and i supported agreements when they've been backed by the pennsylvania man awe fact too ers association, pennsylvania farm bureau, when they open up foreign market for our goods, i supported them. because that helps sustain good high paying jobs. when there have been cheating has happened, as has happened in princeton steel, the u.s. steel workers, and the uss steel, u.s. steel itself brought this to my attention, i went to bat for them to insist on tougher enforcement. so, that's been my approach, support, trade agreement, that expands opportunities, and open up market for our workers, stands up when it is unfair, with respect to tpp, this is an agreement that's flawed. i've been clear about that.
7:16 pm
>> hold on, let me direct you back to the question. and i'm going to follow up quickly on that. do you agree, do you agree with donald trump that towns like ambridge, towns up and down the valley, have been desomated by the loss of manufacturing jobs, donald trump and new policies can bring those towns back? >> well, i think those towns can come back. and the right policies can bring them back. i'll give you one example. we have a tremendous advantage over the entire rest of the worlds with our energy. we have natural gas that's cheap nerve pennsylvania than almost anywhere in the world. there are a lot of heavy manufacturing industries very end err gentlemen -- energy intense i have, need a loft gas, need a lot of coal. so the point is if we take advantage of the opportunities we have, we can -- it will be different jobs, it will be different firms. and it will be across the manufacturing spectrum. but we can absolutely have a strong recovery. now, katie mcginty policies will be stifling those energy sources that are so vital to
7:17 pm
recovering this manufacturing. >> hold on. you will get to come back to this. ms. mcginty, what's your opinion of donald trump suggesting that there is hope for steel, steel industry, to be reborn, in western pennsylvania? >> thanks, but first dow want to address that the senator just said, i was proud as secretary of environ meant al protection to bring not a couple, but to lead the charge to bring 3,000 new jobs in the energy sector to pennsylvania, specifically manufacturing, renewable energy equipment. the send for's well familiar with those jobs, because while i am for the full spectrum of our energy resources, he had an issue with the fact that this is renewable energy, instead of just conventional energy. and actually led the charge to take away the tax incentive that help to make those jobs here and grow in our own state. you know, i guess he also has been rewards dollars well for taking those renewable energy jobs away, because the senator happens to be one of the single largest recipients of
7:18 pm
big oil contributions in the united states senate. look, i think we have every opportunity to compete and win in manufacturing, and here's why. the days of manufacturing just being about cheap labor really are gone. it is about skilled labor, plus technology, plus speed to market. and that's a recipe for our sweet spot where we can compete and win. >> let me justice still this for you. yes or no. can better trade deals bring back the steel industry in win person pen? >> we need fair trade deals. i have opposed consistently opposed the tpp unlike the senator who led the charge to try to push it through the united states senate in fast tracking it. the reason i oppose it is because even the proponents say it was to would cost us 50,000 good manufacturing jobs a year. so we can't afford that. senators flip flopped on that recently. but i think really it is just
7:19 pm
like with donald trump. the senator doesn't want to be straight about this. can my view is the rules matter. we need a level, fair playing field, and when the playing field is fair, nobody can out compete the american worker. >> time's up. go ahead, senator. >> first of all the person who flipped flip flopped on trade agreement was katie mcginty, all for nasa when they clinton said you could be for that is a when it is not good to be with nasa any more, she did 180 reversal. what i supported was the procedure that would allow a president to bring any trade agreement to congress for an up or down vote. let's go back to katie mcginty claim she created 3,000 jobs. this is the problem with this extreme, extreme version of how she approaches economics. it takes massive subsidies to create any of these jobs. taxpayers have to subs dies in this case spanish company to come in here and it still didn't work. the business still failed. we are forced to pay higher
7:20 pm
electric rates because katie mcginty supports the policy that forces electric companies to buy inch effective electricity. the only person who wins in this multi-millionaire named katie mcginty who got awarded on the board of the money she kicks the money to. >> i do want to follow up on the subject of energy. and, specifically, fossil fuel, if i may, because we know that many, many folks in western pennsylvania are employed in possible fuel industries. and, fossil fuels used to heat and power our homes and factories. so, ms. mcginty, are you engaged in a war on coal, believing as many environmentalists do that we need to reduce reliance on fossil fuel like coal? and if so, what do you say to employees in this region and throughout the state, in the fossil fuel industry, who might think that their jobs are at steak, if you get elected senator? >> well, i appreciate the question, john. and let me just say, as hats off to two of my six brother,
7:21 pm
who have made their living as coalminers. actually started my career as a chemist, working with arco chemical company inventing coal dust suppressants. look, i am all about the full use of our energy resources, we have to tackle climate change. but here's how i go about doing that. in a pro jobs agenda, and in terms every our coal fired pour plant, some of those are 30, 35% efficient. i put people to work, improving the efficiency of those plants, through combined heat and power, for example. we can own that technology. we can manufacture that technology. and we can put our people to work. i showed this when i was secretary of environmental protection where i was taking on this toughest environmental problems including climate change. but growing jobs, as the solution, you know, we look at the clean water problems, in flint michigan, right here in pennsylvania. that's an opportunity to put people to work, ripping out
7:22 pm
old pipes. we can't be a climate deny err like the senator is. we have to be honest about real problems, challenges. but, let's create jobs in tackling them. >> senator i will give awe chance to respond directly to ms. mcginty in just a second, let me ask you, as you know, there are many super packs that are supporting fossil fuels who have engaged in lots of campaign ads, against your opponent in this race. do you reject the science behind global warming? and if re-elected, will you oppose efforts to reduce the dependents on fossil fuel? >> so john, i'm on record on this, been very clear, any honest objective look at the record shows that the surface temperature of the planet has risen over the last hundred years. and common sense is suggesting that human activity has contributed to that. but it is a fact that we don't know exactly how much human activity has contributed to it, and the cost that katie mcginty and others advocate foreign considering is
7:23 pm
unbelievable in the trillions of dollars while china and india will do nothing about it, and the benefits, if there are any, are completely negligible. now, the fact is the president of the united states, barack obama, admits that there is a war on coal. katie mcginty won't admit it but she supports all of the policies that have put our coal workers out of work. i have met with these guys. i have seen them. i have looked into their eyes when they said why is my own government destroying my job, my career, my lively hood. it is not right. because coal is a low cost reliable domestic source of energy. and i'm afraid natural gas is next on their list. katie wants the epa to come in and have a regulatory power over an industry that is adequately regulated by the dep. >> miss mcginty? >> well, i think this is the olds saw that we've heard for decades. that if your pro environment, you're anti-jobs. and time and time and time again i've had the opportunity to work to prove that not to be true. i think it is an excuse for the senator who is well rewarded by big oil for his
7:24 pm
opposition to putting people to work. diversifying our energy resources. that's what we should do. and, listen, as it relates to our natural gas assets, i've been a person who says, look, let's regulate it, let's zone it, and by the way exxon mobile should pay their fair share of taxes here too. senator wants to impact the corporations. >> so nobody's been better rewarded for green energy programs than katie mcginty getting rewarded by the companies to which she funnels pennsylvania tax dollars. this is what's wrong with this kind of corporate crony capitalism where politicians think they ought to allocate resources. they ought to pick winners and losers. it is bad for the economy. it is counter productive for economic growth. it drives up our energy bills. we all pay higher electric rates than we otherwise would because of katie's middle class tax increase in the form of more expensive energy. this isn't the way we should
7:25 pm
go. >> i want to switch gears now and take a look at community police relationships. in many cities the the relationship between police and communities are strained at best. hillary clinton says part of the problem is implicit bias, developing an attitude or steriotype that can affect under standing actions or decisions in a unconscious manner. senator too toomey too many, do you believe implicit bias is real and that it is at the root of police community relationships? >> well, let me just say, you know, i've seen as we've all seen some very disturbing videos, young african-american men being shot, under circumstances that it certainly looks like something was wrong. and i have said any time, anybody does something wrong, whether it is the police or from any other profession, there needs to be an investigation, and someone has to be held accountable. what i object to is this completely dishonest notion that the police are somehow a
7:26 pm
bunch of road racist causing our -- causing violence, in fact, they protect us from that violence. and the vast majority of them are good and honest, decent, hard-working men and women, who protect us every day. i've stood up against this false narrative that's maligned the police. katie mcginty has property gated that narrative. i'm going to continue to stand up for the people who protect us. and maybe that's why i have been endorsed by every police organization that makes endorsements in pennsylvania, including the philadelphia police on which force katie mcginty's father served. >> ms. mcginty, i'll gave you a chance to respond, but senator toomey, am i saying you don't believe this implicit bias is real? >> i'm sure implicit bias occurs, i'm sure that occurs, but i don't think it is fair to characterize police generally as racist. because i know too many police to believe that. >> ms. mcginty, just this past week, national association of police chiefs held a conference.
7:27 pm
they were introduced to a new method of training its design to de escalate and take a tactical pause before responding. yet there has been a lot of resistance from the f.o.p. to this concept. do you believe that retraining is a proper way to address this issue of bias? >> well, thanks, lynn. and i do want to start my response, if i consideration on a personal note. the senator has run on a campaign not only of his untrue ads, but ads i find deeply offensive, and my nine brothers and sisters would, as well. it is only one every us on this stage who kissed her dad good-bye in the morning, not knowing after he walked his beat for 35 years, 25 as a philadelphia police officer, whether dad was coming home for dinner. and he has suggested that i or any of my family would do anything other than re veer our law enforcement officers.
7:28 pm
it is really unacceptable. but let me get to the substance. here's what we need to do. we need resources in our community. we need to make sure that we have cops on the beat. my dad literally walked the beat. that's why i have proposed double the cops program. that's community policing, where the police and the neighbors build bonds of trust and relationships. and yes, de escalation techniques are an important part of that. senator toomey has pushed legislation aptly called punishment police, where he has tried to ends or severely de fund the cops program and has pushed voted to end the program that gives law enforcement critical equipment. that's wrong. that endangers our safety. and it endangers good public servants like my dad, god rest his soul. >> well, it sounds like more of how katie was the first in her family to go to college. the fact of the matter is the
7:29 pm
police across pennsylvania pay very careful attention to the records of the man versus the united states senate and house. they have looked at my records. they've met with me. and every single police organization that makes an endorsement, the philadelphia police, the pittsburgh police, the state-wide fom, the state troopers, even the corrections officers union, they've all endorsed me in this race. none of them have endorsed katie mcginty. >> that's not true. i have been end doser dollars by law enforcement organizations as well. >> what police force? what police f.o.p.? >> i've been end doser dollars, as well, and i think it would be well, senator, for to you support our police officers by making sure that they've got the resources, not to be un safer on our streets. >> and i have supported the grants programs to unable them to by pro tuck tiff equipment. i have introduced the legislation to forbid the president from denying them the surplus military equipment, and everyone every them has endorsed me. and you haven't been able to name anyone that has endorsed
tv-commercial
7:30 pm
you. >> senator, you -- >> final word on this please? >> only introduce that when you were running for re-election. your record, as a member of our united states congress, was to eliminate the program. >> you know better than -- >> and i will say that the senator also knows as well, crony capitalism, as he has referred to, until recently, the senator sitting on the senate banking committee, 80,000 of his own constituent were ripped off by wells fargo, that the senator comes -- >> getting a little bit off topic. you can -- >> if you want to talk about that later fee friel. but little off topic. we need to pause now for a quick break. we will do that now, continue with more the u.s. senate debate with pat toomey
tv-commercial
7:31 pm
but pat toomey actually owned a bank. most people owe the bank. and when he went to washington, he voted to change the laws... to benefit wall street and banks like his. voting to gut consumer protections that crack down... on predatory lending and fraud.
tv-commercial
7:32 pm
to take money from you and... line the pockets of wall street millionaires like... himself. pat toomey: out for himself, all in for wall street. dscc is responsible for the content of this advertising. i survived breast cancer. if the doctors hadn't caught it early i might not be sitting here. so i'm outraged that pat toomey voted to defund planned parenthood... which thousands of pennsylvania women depend on for cancer screenings. pat toomey was even willing to shut down the federal government to eliminate funding for planned parenthood. shut down the government over planned parenthood? i think we ought to shut down pat toomey. senate majority pac is responsible for the content of this advertising. >> welcome back to our debate. uncumbent rear push can senator pat toomey and democratic challenger katie mcginty. moving on, candidates, the
7:33 pm
next question, i have, is for ms. mcginty first. both of you have supported at one time or another new gun laws. so, what in your opinion is the most effective way to protect americans from mass shootings and other gun violence without infringing on the rights guaranteed by the seconds amendment, and something with a real legitimate chance of passing and being enacted. >> ken, look, i think we have the chance to achieve bipartisan concensus around some common sense measures that some 90% of pennsylvanians, including gun owners support. common sense like close those backgrounds checks loopholes, common sense like do not allow terrorists to buy the weapons of war in our country. you know, i come from a family where my brothers were hunters. we had guns, and hunting guns in the house. i don't think this is an easy thing at all.
7:34 pm
unfortunately, senator toomey did a photo op about one piece of legislation. but when it came to the closing the loopholes that allows terrorists to buy guns in our country, he voted no, not once, but twice. what i would do, ken, is bring people to the table. and stay at the table. respectfully of different point of view. and i think we can achieve concensus around those kind of common ground common sense measures. >> one initiative you believe has realistic chance. you know the history of gun legislation after sandy hook, after orlando, it has gone no where. give me one realistic. >> really two, closing the background check loopholes for criminals and the mentally infirmed. you know, it only lost by some five votes. and yet, senator toomey says the senate has spoken, let's move on. i stick with that just like as an urgent priority, i most certainly would work to close that loophole again that
7:35 pm
allows terrorist toss buy guns. >> okay. thank you. senator toomey? >> i think the most painful meeting that i ever had, probably in my life, certainly in my six years in the senate, was with the parent of the victims of the sandy hook massacre, parent who the six year old children were mode down. it was excrutiating. one of the things i respect and learned so much about those parents who they came to meet with me, they weren't asking to have guns confiscated from law abiding citizens. they weren't asking to ban whole categories of popular and commonly owned firearms, as katie mcginty has advocated. they said can't we work on improving our backgrounds checks? i knew that was going to go over like a led balloon >> he and i introduced the legislation came closer than anything else come in the senate. >> i'm big believe err in the second amendment. i think personal individual right, an important one at
7:36 pm
that, i don't think there is a conflict between the second amendment and three minute backgrounds check. >> we had threw times, when we had debate this somber keeping terrorists from buying fewer arms, i supported three different versions that far to try to find common grounds including working with susan collins. so here is the thing. >> gabby give orders, she's endorsed me in this campaign. >> the fact that it has to be bipartisan. >> time is up. >> katie's record of being hyper partison won't get us to the common grounds. >> miss mcginty? >> well, it was the right thing to do, for joe mansion to lead the charge and the senator to lends his name to that legislation, that closed backgrounds check loopholes. that's why it was such a shame. that will when it only failed by a couple of votes, the senator said the senate has spoken, let's move on. and even after grissly horrible tragedies in san bernardino, orlando, the senator refused to
7:37 pm
re-introduce his bill saying infamously let democrats lead, you know, there is one of those things where we have to respect the second amendment. we have to respect grieving parents, including those of the pennsylvania 18 year old young lady, who was mode down in orlando. we can act on this. >> and i will. >> i mean, as i said, katie takes an extreme partisan view on this just like the reason she was excluded from budget negotiations in harrisburg. she's not going to be able to reach a come on, you know, place where there is common grounds on this. >> bring as many people together as we could, we introduce the legislation repeatedly, we had three votes on it, and when i saw an opportunity to have a backgrounds check on people on the no fly list, i crafted the legislation to do that, when the democrats refuse to help, i worked with susan collins to get that done. i'm going to continue to defends the second amendment rights of law abiding
7:38 pm
citizens, and i'm also going to continue to try to get guns out of the hands of violent criminals, dangerously mentally ill people, and people who are on a no fly list. >> thank you, senator. >> candidate, obama care means different things to different people. it has delivered health insurance, to over 15 million, uninsured too private insurance plans and expanded medicaid. it is also raised costs. it has ended gender discrimination, outlawed exclusions for pre-existing conditions like cancer, and it has kept young people on their parents' insurance until age 26. if you repeal obama care, you will repeal everything. the good and the bad. so, senator toomey, get very specific. what do you like, what do you not like, and what would you change in obama care if-ee elected to another term? >> so, let's remember all of the false promises made about obama care. remember? we were told if you like your insurance, you could keep your insurance, we were told that while they were systematically
7:39 pm
disqualifying whole categories of insurance plans, we were told if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. we were told that when they new that the replacement insurance plans would exclude all kind of doctors. and, now, oh, and we were told that we would save $2,500 per family on average. all completely untrue. costs have gone through the roof. options have chanced. deductibles have gone up. this has been the disaster that i was afraid it would be. and the reason is because we pride to centralize control of 1/7 of our economy in the hands of washington bureaucrats. healthcare is too personal. individuals, men and women, sitting around the kitchen table, should be making decisions about their families healthcare, not bureaucrats in washington. and all the tax increases embedded in it, the medical device tax, tax on insurance plans, another whole wrath of middle class tax increases that katie mcginty supports, and this is not the right direction. we need to go in the direction, and i would have a transition for people who are currently in obama care, transition to a really competitive, multi insurance marketplace, across state
7:40 pm
lines, we need to encourage things like portable, and renewable of insurance plans, so people don't get caught with pre-existing conditions. and we ned to ring out some of the excess costs, like the excessive litigation. >> senator; there any part of obama care that you like? >> yes, there are some features that are encouraging for one, some encouragement we move healthcare in a direction, generally speaking, where care is treated come re hence live and not individual treatments for services. but that's a very, very small part of obama care. generally speaking, it is a disaster, tan can't be fixed because it is flawed at it core. >> miss mcginty, same question, what do you like, not like, how would you charge? >> i would be hard charging to do something that the senator won't do. and that is take on the prescription drug companies, the cost of prescription drugs has gone through the roof. but under the law, we're not allowed to negotiate that cost
7:41 pm
down. no country does. that will we need transparency, the cost, consumers know before they have a procedure what it is going to cost. you know you would almost think that the senator was only planning to go to washington. he's been in washington for 18 years with republican majority. and he's got nothing done on this critical issue. and i do disagree. i don't think we should put the insurance companies back in charge. so that why, they can charge women more than men? why? they can kick you off your insurance if you have got a pre-existing condition? or if your child, god forbid, has a very serious illness and hits a life-long cap in terms of coverage? that's wrong. i would work to get the cost down in a common sense way. that's the agenda to make sure we have affordable -- >> so ms. mcginty, you like everything about obama care. >> i do not like the fact we are precluded from negotiating
7:42 pm
the cost and the price of prescription drugs. that is absolutely wrong. and i think we need to make sure that there is affordable and choice in healthcare. but what i know for sure is that the senator, again, has been there for 18 years, and have we seen him take on the insurance companies? no. have we seen him take on the prescription drug companies? no. i will. >> senator toomey? >> well, what you just heard is katie mcginty advocate that we have even more government control, and it is the government that messed us up. remember these are the people who couldn't roll out a website. they couldn't. it was a disaster. and everything about this has been pretty much a disaster. 40% of all pennsylvanians have grand total of one choice in the individual exchange market. what kind of choice is that? what kind of competition is that? this is a failure. it has been an unbelievable failure. we need to go in complete at this different direction. what katie mcginty wants to do sex panned government control.
7:43 pm
have single pair system. have the government dictate prices. then we're going have even worse healthcare. >> ms. mcginty, you get the last word on this one. >> i was proud to help expand medicaid in pennsylvania. we now have 625,000 people covered. and it was a great deal for our taxpayers. saving $500 million a year. here's what would be a disaster. let's just take one piece of what we're talking about here. you know, i come from a family where we've seen, we know, what the heart break of addiction looks like. you know, under this law that senator toomey would repeal, we finally had parody. if you have a mental behavioral health problem, that that would be covered. in pennsylvania alone, just that medicaid expansion that the senator would take away, 66,000 pennsylvanians with mental behavioral health challenges now have healthcare. i think that's the right thing to do. we don't just take it away. but, yes, i will stands up to
7:44 pm
the companies to take down the cost. >> miss mcginty, thank you. lynn? >> i want to continue our conversation about costs, but i want to look at the cost of this campaign. this senate race is the most expensive race in the country. last week the amount already spent exceeded $06 million. by political "action cam" pain, soup ever parks, non-profits. senator toomey has already said he does not believe in spending limits. so ms. mcginty, i would like to ask you, what do you propose is the best way to take money out of politics? >> i appreciate the question, lynn, and i think it is absolutely urgent. i am proud to be endorsed in this race by an organization called and citizens united. that's an organization that's a hundred% dedicated to getting that money out of politics overturning citizens united that has led this flood of dark secret money into our politics. in a democracy there is no room for secret checks and
7:45 pm
secret money. i would help lead the charge to over turn citizens united and i would also go further. i think it is time for us to make it easier for people to be engage in the their political system and to vote with early voting or same day voting and registration, restoring the voting rights act, for example. now, senator toomey had a chance, but he voted against overturning citizens united. has voted for allowing all of this dark money, like the coke brothers money, and talk about partisan, senator has 100% voting record with the un accountable coke brothers. that's not democracy in action. that's crony capitalism. >> senator toomey? >> there has been an unbelievable ever recall amount of campaigning, no question about it, i'm staggered by the amount of money that's been spent in this race already. we all know it is not over yet. again, hard to watch it. >> v. this is part of the reason why i suggested that katie mcginty and i have five debates.
7:46 pm
five debates across pennsylvania, so we would have a chance to go a little deeper into the issues than these 30 second sound bites. katie refused. she insist that we have no more than two. wouldn't dot other three debates across the state that i wanted to do. look, i've always preferred more transparency in the system, and the simple way to do this is have all of this money go to candidate, let the candidates be responsible and accountable for it, and require disclosure. that's what i think would be a much better approach. but the people like katie mcginty who want to over turn citizens united, let's be clear about what this case is about. citizens united was a not for profit corporation that wanted to allow people to buy a document ooh individually about hillary clinton during the last campaign. and the government's position which katie holds is that the government should be able to band that. forbid it. dis allow it. in fact, the government's argument was that they should even be able to ban books if they're about politics or politicians. and the democratic senators that katie agrees with, they
7:47 pm
had a vote on the senate floor to amend the first amendment, to rewrite the first amendment like it hasn't served us adequately for 240 years to give the politicians the power to control political speech. that's a bad idea. >> we'll give miss guinta chance to respond. >> thank you. the senator had an opportunity to vote in favor of getting the dark un accountable secret money out of our politics. and he voted no. i not only will vote yes, but i will help lead this effort, so that we generally bring people's voices back to the center of our politics, and our democracy. >> thank you. >> do we not -- i think we have final rebuttal. >> we do. >> well, again, this comes down to whether or not you think politicians should be able to control political speech. that's what the senate democrats voted for. that's what katie mcginty supports. and i think that's outrageous. if the first amendment is for anything, it is to give people the freedom to criticize their politicians. the elected officials, that
tv-commercial
7:48 pm
represent them. that's what the first amendment is about. it is about personal freedom, the freedom to express your opinion. whether you like them or not. the idea that we would give congress the power to control political speech is a terrible idea. and i'm not tore it. >> all right, another quick break now. more of this kate k a/k/a vo: donald trump and pat toomey anhave plenty in common --. they're both putting pennsylvania women at risk. even after trump bragged about sexually assaulting women,
tv-commercial
7:49 pm
toomey stood by him. on women's health - both trump and toomey would defund planned parenthood. on abortion: trump: "there has to be some form of punishment" toomey: "i would suggest that we have penalties for doctors who perform them." pat toomey and donald trump: too dangerous for pennsylvania women. i survived breast cancer. if the doctors hadn't caught it early i might not be sitting here. so i'm outraged that pat toomey voted to defund planned parenthood... which thousands of pennsylvania women depend on for cancer screenings.
7:50 pm
pat toomey was even willing to shut down the federal government to eliminate funding for planned parenthood. shut down the government over planned parenthood? i think we ought to shut down pat toomey. senate majority pac is responsible for the content of this advertising. >> welcome back to u.s. senate debate. right back to the question. candidates, as you know, donald trump has expressed concerns that this election in pennsylvania is going to be rigged. he has said, quote, we'll watch pennsylvania, go down to certain areas, watch and study and make sure other people don't come in and vote five times. do you share this concern and if so based on what evidence? senator toomey? >> let me be very, very clear about this. this is really important question. maybe one of the most important questions of the evening, in my opinion. we have for 240 years, we've had the most successful, most
7:51 pm
vibrant, republican in the history of the worlds, it depends to a very large degree on the american people having confidence in the outcome of our elections. our elections may not always be completely perfect, but they are legitimate. they have integrity. and everyone needs to respect the outcome. i don't know how this race, my race, the president's race or any other race is going to turn out. but we all need to respect the outcome because that's going to be necessary to pull us altogether on november the ninth, the day after the election. >> miss mcginty? >> thanks, ken. i think it is a very dangerous and wreckless allegation, and suggestion, that donald trump has been making. you know, we've seen this movie before here in pennsylvania. not long ago, we saw republican leadership in harrisburg push a voter id law. spent millions of our dollars, spent efforts to intimidate voters, and here's what we found then. court proceedings, following that legislation, after
7:52 pm
millions spent and the court asking show us one example, one example, of voter fraud. and not a single example was identified. not one. look, the good people of pennsylvania take their democracy, take their commonwealth, and their country very, very seriously. and i know in this election season and others people want their voices heard. they will show up respectfully of the process. but i do think that is another one of those reasons why it is important for senator toomey to say donald trump is unfit to be president of the united state. >> senator, quit rebuttal please? >> well, i mean, i think i covered the point. the fact is our elections are a fundamental aspect of our democratic process. one of the most important defining features. and they work. they have worked for a very long time. and we all need to respect the outcome. >> and just according to the rules here, ms. mcginty, you have another 20 seconds if you
7:53 pm
want it. >> well, i think it is vital that we respect the institutions of our democracy. it is one of the reasons why i am happy to say i don't support donald trump to be president of the united states, and i vine the senator can considering sharing his views with his constituents, but also the reason why i will be avoids to get the money out of politics, to vote, to make sure that dark secret money get out of politics, that the senator voted against, and keeping that money in our determine okras. >> i thank you it, cents time now for the candidates to make their closing statements. the orders was determined earlier by coin togs. miss mcginty, go first, you have two minutes. >> thank you. and thanks to all of you for tuning in. i am katie mcginty. running for united states senate. and i ask for the honor of your consideration and your vote. i come from a hard-working family. where i tell you my mom and my dad both working every day, told all ten of us kids that we could chase and realize our
7:54 pm
dreams, that if you're willing to work hard, this is the place where it is about your perseverance, your grit, not about your pet agree, not about your zip code. it is about an american dream that says put in your 40 hours, and you will be able to provide for yourself and your kids. if i have the honor of serving as your united states senator, i'm going to go to bat for hard-working families. hard-working families who have gotten the shortened of the stick, frankly, by our own senator, who started his career on wall street and in many ways never left. still goes to bat for those banks. i'm going to go to bat for you. because i know when we give the good people of this commonwealth and this country a fair, honest shot, nobody in the world can compete with us, and our best and our greatest days are ahead. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator toomey
7:55 pm
you have two minutes. >> thank you, ken, and thanks for tuning in tonight. i appreciate this. you know it has been an extraordinary honor to serve as your senator for those last six years. i've really focused on three things. i'm a fiscal conservative. so i've been fighting washington's wasteful spending, i've always been working to lower middle class tax burdens. second big thing that i've work on is making sure i'm looking after pennsylvania. so whether that's saving the oil refinery jobs in suburban philadelphia, or fighting this crazy washington war on energy jobs in western pennsylvania, or the opioid crisis, all across our state, these things have kept me very busy. i've also been an independent voice, willing to work across the aisle with chuck schumer on a job bill that help encourage more job creation, and joe mansion on backgrounds checks. katie mcginty not going to be that kind of person with any independence. she was hand picked by the washington power brokers to be a rubber stamp for hillary
7:56 pm
clinton. she enriched herself when she was running the dep with monday that i originated with taxpayer dollars, supported all kind of middle class tax increases, regulations that are holding back our economy, and dangerous security issues like her support for sanctuary cities. look, it has been eight really tough years for working class families. like the one that i grew up in. and i meet with these families all the time. and i know they just want a chance to be able to see a brighter future for themselves and for their families. we can have that future. but we won't get it if we double down on all of the failed policies that have given thus really weak economy. if i have the honor of serving one term in the senate i will be working as hard as i can to create environ. that will encourages, job creation, job growth, higher wages, and the better standard of living that we've all been waiting for. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator, on behalf of everyone here, thanks to the candidates for u.s. senate, thank you for watching this debate. remember, election day is november 8th.
7:57 pm
i'm ken rice, see you on the news. good night.
tv-commercial tv-commercial
7:58 pm
pat toomey and donald trump: they're just wrong for the women of pennsylvania. "new fallout for donald trump." "should a woman be punshied for having an abortion?" "there has to be some form of punishment."
7:59 pm
"for the woman?" "yeah, there has to be some form." "i would support legislation in pennsylvania that would ban abortion and i would suggest that we have penalties for doctors who perform them." pat toomey and donald trump: they're not for you. senate majority pac is responsible for the content of this advertising. on the big bang theory... cohabitation with my girlfriend?
8:00 pm
that's a great deal to process. hmm? it's only for five weeks. let me appeal to the scientist in you. given the five-week end date, isn't it the perfect opportunity to consider this an experiment and collect data on our compatibility? don't try luring me in with sexy talk. leonard: okay. star trek: the original series. the enterprise was on a five-year mission to explore new worlds. think of this as your personal five-week mission to do the same. oh, you want to lure me in with sexy talk, that's how you do it. okay, why don't you guys stay across the hall and we will live here? (exhales) very well. i'm on board. seriously? yes. i accept this five-week mission to share a living space with my girlfriend. oh. this is so exciting. well, now, don't be surprised if, like star trek, it's canceled in three. (dramatic music playing) okay, i'm confused.

232 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on