2010 Vermont Candidate Debates: U.S. House; VPT Debate US House

Tonight the piccies 2010 candidate debates continue with the U.S. House debate. With all the candidates on the ballot invited to participate. Here's moderator Kristen Carlson. Good evening and thanks for joining us tonight on Vermont Public Television we are featuring the U.S. House debate tonight we have all the candidates on the ballot it's your chance to get to know where they stand on the issues. I'm Christine Carlson and I will be moderating this debate for Vermont Public Television. I'd like to introduce the candidates now. They are standing alphabetically. The first candidate we have is Paul Beaudry. He's the Republican in this contest. Gus geocaching he is the independent. Jay Newton is on the socialist ballot. And Peter Welch is the Democrat. I want to briefly go over the format so you know what we're entailed here for the next hour and a half. It's going to be I'll be asking all the questions each candidate will have one minute to respond. I will get to ask rebuttals at my own discretion I'm going to make sure that they answer the questions here this evening and then they'll be time for a one minute closing statements we drew by random

order and the candidates know that order and I'll let you know that coming up toward the end of this hour and a half long debate. One more important piece of information for you to know before we get into the debate is that we have our stopwatch our time keeper here is Laura waltz. She's going to help. Keep the candidates honest right Laura. And so she's going to be timing them out so that they stick to the Times allotted. We're going to start the first round of questioning now we're going to start with Paul Beaudry and we'll work our way across alphabetically my first question for the candidates is at what moment did you know that you wanted to go into politics. It was when I was doing a radio show and I realized that we had to have a change down in Washington. It was right around the end of a show I did it in the beginning of April of this year when I said I I've got to do something. And the timing was right at that time. Mr. GERACI I decided back in the 90s what I've really been feeling and by the way I don't recognize that name. I'm here is as a representative for the person who just called but

I'm Mr Jefferson from Virginia. Now of course it's been over 200 years since I was involved in politics but I think this man who gave me some notes I think he said that he started in 90 92 and 94 as a candidate for governor a serious candidate for governor. So I will give him credit for that. And you know why. Mr. GERACI decided to go into politics. Well Plato says politics is only for somebody who wants to protect himself from imminent death. But Aristotle said it's the highest art form that humanity has ever known and I happen to be an artist and hard so I chose Aristotle as my. Leader J knew and I can't really remember whether I decided to or not but I remember the first book I read that maybe want to really think harder was Howard Zinn's A People's History then I was saved and I began writing letters to the editor

and I think Peter Diamond stone of Liberty Union Party noticed that he was looking for a candidate and he persuaded me to be a candidate. And then I got up the nerve to do that and begin to realize that there was a need for other voices in a debate. And so and I think in general I really have the overriding were really the world which we may or may not even be leaving to our children. You know out well in the summer between my sophomore and junior year in college I went to Chicago and worked in a community organization that had as its focus trying to help African-American homebuyers who are getting totally ripped off in the purchase of homes to get justice. And in the course of that when I saw how there were laws that made it legal literally at that time to discriminate against them to deny them mortgages even if they had good credit to evict them after five or six years of payments even if

they only missed a single payment and they lose all their equity. I begin to see how the laws that were made made a huge difference. And that's when I decided I wanted to be active not so much run for office because I'm a firm believer that there's lots of ways for citizens to be politically active. But that was the time I think the turning point for me is that on Vermont Public Television we're featuring a debate for the U.S. House. We have all of the candidates on the ballot it's your chance to get to know the candidates a little bit better. But. Something else you can do tonight you can join the chat on line V P T Dot org. Seven days calling the shaitaan is moderating a debate online you can talk to him about this race for U.S. House. Do you have any questions about how the race has gone so far. Do you have any insights you want to share hop on line at V.P. dot org and you could have the conversation carry on there while you watch it. Also tonight on TV my next question I'm going to start with Peter Welch and the economy seems to be one of the top issues on voters minds this election. What role should the federal government have in

creating jobs. Well the federal government has to be a part a partner of the private sector job creation is done in the private sector. It's our small businesses our companies individuals who create jobs but they need the partnership of the federal government that has policies that encourage growth I'll give you an example in the couple of weeks ago just at the end of this session we are trying to crack down on China for manipulating their currency because that creates an immense competitive disadvantage for our manufacturers. We passed a small business loan bill that is going to provide affordable credit to our small businesses so they can have the tools they need to invest in their future and create jobs at home. So it has to be a partnership. Good policies that promote private enterprise and allow the private sector to create jobs. Guster Kassie your question in the end. Well as you recall I always thought and still do that the small farmer was the whole future and the whole purpose of our culture of the

American culture I've thought so 200 years ago I think so now. And I would say that the general impetus for all of creation of jobs comes from the soul of the individual person or family. So I have always felt that that the best thing we can do in education is to make every single young person an entrepreneur to some degree and watch for the signs of that soul and then get behind it and give it all the strength we can. I don't happen to think that the large corporations give much of a whit for that but the local farmers do. And here in Vermont we're very strong as I understand it as I say I haven't been here for a couple hundred years but I'm enjoying my visit this time. I don't care at mister about a tree. I believe the role of the federal government should be number one as little as possible. But there are some things in place primarily with the constitution and some other things that the federal government should more make sure that commerce throughout the different states actually is

regular. And I'll give you a good example this health care bill that just passed. They didn't want to allow people to purchase health insurance across state lines which is actually going to increase the cost to health insurance would be a lot less if you could purchase it across state lines. And Congress kind of botched that during this last health care bill. I also believe that the federal government should make sure that international nations that might have unfair practices against us could step in with different tariffs and other rules to make sure that we're on a level playing field in and centrally get out of the way and let the American entrepreneur Excel. Well in the face of so much unemployment I'm sort of bewildered about what can be done. But one of the things that to me is so obvious is that there's very little money to spend on anything that is going to benefit the human needs because most of our money probably

more than half of our federal budget is going to the Pentagon to the military. So essentially he's going to kill people. And on the other hand some 1 percent of the world's population has 90 percent of the wealth I think that's the figure all different but they're outrageous in the gap between rich and poor is so shameful and getting larger that without a proportional taxation and a decrease in our spending on the military there isn't going to be money to help make jobs. Most of our jobs have gone overseas. I think there should be a tax or something on anything comes back so the people can make a profit by going overseas. I thank you all for your answer to that question leading up to this very important debate we asked for your questions at Connect NVP dot org and a gal going to hear one of those questions one of the viewers wrote in. This is Neal Richardson from Randolph for Mont And here is Neil's question for the candidates. Neil writes in. The problem in Washington is that

people do not respect one another and can't seem to work together on tackling the important issues facing our state. Do you believe the rhetoric used in your campaign thus far is conducive to a spirit of bipartisanship in Washington. I'm going to start with. What's going on is there's a perception out there that there's a lot of rhetoric with the congressional race and both Congressman Welsh and myself from there to here to I don't want to forget them. We're all getting along with each other. Our big thing is we have different points of view and different ways to get there from here. Like a Vermonter would say personally a little disturbed with the nasty tone that I'm seeing with the governor's race. But with this congressional race we're actually not be need each other up. Like I said we might disagree on the issues. The rhetoric with this race I think is the way other races should be run. Nice and fair. Friendly debate the issues. But you don't need to rip each other apart you don't need to have

character assassination. Just go with the facts and the issues and let the people decide. You know well it's. Well I think Paul answered for me. I mean I agree with everything you just said. You know four years ago when I first ran for Congress and a very very tough race Martha Rainville is my opponent much like Paul she committed herself to a positive campaign and so did I. And that was the only congressional race contested in the entire country that year. They didn't go negative. And you know what. Both Martha and I as all of us here. Did that. We wanted to do it but we also knew that that's word from honors expected of us. And it really benefits us because as Paul was just saying it allows us to talk about the issues. There's real differences but it's up to Vermonters to decide who they want. It's their choice not ours. What do you think of the tone in the governor's race. Well it's negative. Now part of the reason is that there is so much outside money coming in that some of these negative advertisements are not being sponsored by the dooby

campaign or the Shumlin campaign but by outside groups that have their own agenda. And actually it points out to me one of the big problems with this Supreme Court decision in Citizens United which basically opens the floodgates of money to outside interests to come in and interfere with local elections both the tone and the content. One quick follow up so you think out absent that outside money the time the governor's race would have been respectful because I'm hearing from people who have heard ads that the candidates themselves are running that you know it's you know it's there's no question it's more negative. There's a lot of back and forth that seems to be diverted from the issues and that's on I think something that I've heard the complaints about that Paul mentioned. But there is no question whatsoever that the outside money I think is really an undertow here that's getting in the way saying you and I was in the with Martha and I think she really knew. Andrea thank you very different right now. I see the only solution to. The whole

problem is the public financing campaign finance reforms and taking the pallor and the money out of elections so that huge corporations which give their money to all the people who are candidates then end up by having more influence than we do in Washington and therefore even though they seem to argue with each other nothing really gets done because everybody is paralyzed by the system of big money and corporatism. And I don't know if I'm insuring the quest I think you did just one quick follow up for you. You've been running for U.S. House a few times now but you haven't won. Why do you keep running is it just to get the message out or what keeps you wanting to stay on the ballot. Well it sounds silly but I wouldn't know what to do if I were elected. And so I am here just because I think we need extra voices to talk about things that maybe don't get talked about and I should get a third party isn't that think you guys are catchy.

I don't know him but I'm willing to answer this question although he has sent me these notes as I as I have indicated now it is known to him and to me that if you make a graph of the civil behavior of the political process in Vermont and this axis is tolerance and this is civility that we are in Vermont here apparently the number one state year in and year out for civility and tolerance in public process. I happen to agree with what I've heard so far. As long as there's outside money that can make outside statements in excess. That's unfortunate but I think the real question you mean to be asking is Vermont a monetary culture or is it a community culture. That to me is much more important than just who gets what money and who gets angry about it. A quick follow up for you Mr. catchy. You are here dressed as Thomas Jefferson. What about Thomas Jefferson Do you think people can learn lessons from today in this

election. Well he was one of the most articulate and. Are wonderful people back then and now he is even more so. Showing up here he has more depth in talking to you today about the compassion and the spiritual nature of Vermont. He believes that Vermont is the state to reinvent the United States as does the man who's standing in for. So you know Massachusetts and Virginia were fundamental in the forming of this nation but right now in Vermont is the number one place in the nation where we get to reinvent what America means. That's why I came here to help this person call Mr. catchy because his name is. That's what we heard Thank you very much. And just a quick reminder you can go to View dot org and hop on and be part of a conversation that seven days columnist shaitaan is moderating and

taking part in. You can post comments about the debate. You can also talk about how you think this race for U.S. House has gone so far so good a V P T Dot org. And again shaitaan is there he is talking about the debate as we are displayed in the debate live tonight. Let's start our next round of questioning with Jay Newman. And if you are elected when it comes to voting on projects how will you define if something is so called pork or a worth while project we hear a lot of people who are concerned about the national deficit. I don't really like the word pork. It seems I don't know how you would get rid of it. I'm not and that's a hard question for me because I hadn't really thought about that and I probably won't be in the situation ever where I have to decide because pork could be pork to somebody important to somebody else depending on what state they come from and I don't know. Again maybe we have to get corporations out of the power of

corporations out of the debate so that people can vote more fairly or heap more compassionately I think that would be a good word. That's a catchy. Well since I'm standing in for that man I guess I'm going to have to learn to accept what you call that name. So I I won't resist although I'd prefer you said Mr. Jefferson as they do in Virginia now. I think it comes back to what I said a minute ago DO WE WANT to have a monetary culture or do we want to have a community culture. And by that I mean as long as we think all goodness and light comes from the budget in Washington D.C. that weakens us all the more. What we want here and in Vermont as we do in the rural areas in Virginia is we want self-sufficiency we want the people to know where their wood is where their food is where their neighbors are where their learning is where their animals are. So self-sufficiency to me

is the is the future of the wealth of the people. And it is not a monetary story. Well ask Mr. Jefferson a quick follow up then. In your day where people concerned about spending. Well of course the minute Washington started its dance we all were concerned and of course it's generally known that when Mr. Adams and I ran against each other it was probably the nastiest campaign in the history of American politics. And of course money was a good part of that. I always felt that having banks big national banks were more dangerous than a standing army in your own country. So again I'm trying to communicate tonight to Vermont which is such a blessed place and has such a potential and such a future that not money federal or any other source is what will make this state great. It is the power and the creativity of the people.

All right Peter routes. You know I heard a lot of frustration about earmarks the bridge to nowhere was the most compelling example that just made people furious so I became part of a Congress that was intent on reforming the process. Number one we cut the number of earmarks in half those are special appropriations. Number two and I think this is the most important. They're all transparent. So any requests that I make on behalf of Ma'at. REQUEST REQUEST appropriation. It's on my website. You get to see it you get to evaluate it. Next they can only be designated for not for profit companies not a for profit company. So what I've done is if you want to go to my website you'll see any request I've made. My standard of review is is it helpful to the community and does it create jobs in some of the appropriations for instance stormwater separation in Rutland their downtown and businesses have been almost wiped out and they have a civil war era sewer system and we are going to help them bring that to modern times. Thank you.

I'm going to have to echo the words of President Obama on this. If you put lipstick on a pig it's still a pig. You know I see pork from the federal government as excess money that could be used to reduce the federal budget deficit. I also see pork. Being used by Congress all the time for the specific reason of bringing money back to the state or a special interest group within your state so that you're going to acquire more votes and win the next election. We live in a time that we have to really pay attention to every penny that's in the budget. We are in debt. We are or we are in my opinion I believe on the verge of bankruptcy. We need to cut the pork and get back to sound fiscal policies. All right new round of questioning. 15:00 Vermont Guard soldiers are due home soon and some will suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Do you think there is

adequate funding to deal with this problem. If not what would you do to address it I'm going to start with three. I believe they put a lot of new funding and more programs in place since the wars started though. Our soldiers deserve everything that our federal government can possibly do to take care of them when they come back. As I've mentioned before I have a family member in the military. I have a brother who is not on this deployment but he's in the Guards and we need to make sure that when we as Americans send troops overseas for any war whatsoever that we're there for them when they come back. As far as the PTSD goes we need to make sure that they have the counseling available and that we can do everything possible so that they can get back on with their lives and live a good life back before they were deployed. So a quick follow up on that question. Just so I'm clear do you think the current level of funding is adequate to address this problem.

It probably is but I wouldn't be opposed to looking at it when you have a large load such as fifteen hundred troops coming in from Vermont we might need to bump it up a little bit here in the state of Vermont you know. The cost of the war must include must include the cost of caring for the warrior and our soldiers are in incredible challenging situations. The signature wounds of this war in Afghanistan as it was in Iraq is posttraumatic stress and TBI traumatic brain injury. Soldiers who are not even physically injured by shrapnel suffer significant concussions and those injuries emerge over time. We must have a V.A. health care system that meets their needs. And I was part of the Congress and I'm happy to say that on this issue there was strong bipartisan support that increased the V.A. budget the largest amount in the history of the V.A. and we have to review that every single year to make certain that the money that's required is the money that's there in order to implement what I believe folks on both sides of this question of the wisdom of the

war believe is to be true and that is the cost of the war must include our responsibility to care for the warrior. So again a quick follow up. You think the current funding is going to address this problem or going to again expect about 15:00 from our guard soldiers starting to come home around November December January you know with the increases I believe we do have sufficient funds now. But that's something that we have to review every single year. So if the demand increases and we need more money then we've got to find a way to provide funding so the soldiers who need the care get the care. Seeing you then. I think I but I'm not sure of my figures but I believe that the year the Pentagon's budget for one year has been a trillion dollars and that that is not enough to cover the V.A. the needs of the V.A. because it is so incredibly overwhelming. These soldiers that are coming back most of them have some her post-traumatic disorder simply because of the stop loss program they go back

over and over again and they're out. And post-traumatic disorder is really incurable I have a good friend who was in Vietnam and he'll never get better and so I don't think you know I just don't think we should be at war and living our letting our children get hurt like this but that they're coming back. And the intent there so many of them. The whole military has become demoralized. The suicide rate is incredibly high and it takes forever a year sometimes or more for people to get from back to this country and then into the administration because of all the. I'm into the V.A. because the administration difficulties so I understand you're you're what you're your solution to bench not get into the war but we're here. So how do you handle these fifteen hundred Guard soldiers will be returning home. I just hope that there will be enough money to take care of them but I think that some of these people will never be healed. That's what happened and why they're

just never healed and they're large they'll be those that are still vegetables and for the rest of their lives I have to live somewhere and I just don't think we should be at war. I don't think we should have our soldiers over there fighting for the big oil companies and what resources natural resources and pipelines and you know thinking they're doing something other than working for the banks and big money. That's catchy in my opinion you won't get a better answer from anyone then the three that you've already heard. It's about as circumspect and compassionate and realistic a view as any state could put forward and I'm proud of the three voices I've just heard however. Jane Newton has just as the ultimate question for Vermont. Do we want to be a war culture for generations out into the future. There has been no culture on the planet in the history of humanity that has been

as warrior like and war centric as the American culture so the question before Vermonters is do you want to be a war culture for generations into the future. And if the answer is No you have your town meeting probably is your strongest political action that you can do to put before the people the abolition of war it is totally obsolete and counterproductive and the towns of Vermont can take it into history. I must say with Mr. Schieffer this next question and we're going to stay on the war theme since it seems like it's something that a lot of you have interesting things to say about and my question my follow up here is in Afghanistan what direction do you think the country should take now. Which country Afghanistan or United States of America what direction should the US. Much of the foreign policy of the United States in regards to Afghanistan we've seen in Iraq a troop withdrawal. What approach do you think the U.S. should take with Afghanistan in

regard to the troops that are currently serving there. When I read the newspapers from all over the world both the Taliban and the United States have the same line and the line is we are seeking the hearts and minds of the people. So if you've got two enemies who are saying they're doing the same thing hearts and minds of the people the well-being of the natives how can they then be doing what they're doing. People don't seem to understand that war is not part of human nature. It is a social invention and a political strategy. And at some point it becomes obsolete like buggy whips. And so I wonder if it isn't that moment in the state of Vermont where we ask ourselves is war what we want to do and can we abolish it as we did with slavery and 1777. You were the first people on the planet to do that. Now it's time for Vermont to do the same. The institution of war. It is not part of human nature. It's an invention that is obsolete.

So do you think the military should pull out of Afghanistan. Absolutely we should have never gone and we should pull out. All right thank you Jane you and I love it. George Aiken long time ago I think during the Vietnam War said we should declare victory and get out. We did and that's what we need to do now because it's not a winnable war. And the first thing the one thing that people have to understand before we do this is why we are really there. We're not there to bring warm fuzzy living lives to these people over there with their two more or less profit from their resources and control the resources of the oil and natural gas in the Caspian Sea area and with pipelines going both directions one through Afghanistan because we're getting short on oil and there's other big countries coming to power so it's an imperial reason that we're there and it's unwinnable and I think you know Kurt Vonnegut said that. War is a

children's crusade and I believe him we send these little kids out to get killed and for what. For the banks around the United States had a right to go into Afghanistan. The Taliban had given aid and comfort and sanctuary to Osama bin Laden as he was planning to attack America 9/11. The president then George Bush diverted his attention to a war of choice in Iraq and when he finally came back to Afghanistan our policy had morphed into nation building. That's the wrong policy. We do face a terrorist threat but that threat is decentralized in dispersed. It doesn't center in any given nation and in fact the most recent attack on America was an American citizen going to Pakistan for training in bomb making returning to Times Square and attempting to detonate that bomb. So having 150000 troops 150000 contractors spending hundreds of billions of dollars taxpayers dollars with

the Afghan government that is a completely corrupt partner is not a winning and sustainable strategy so we should have a lighter military footprint and focus on intelligence in attacks on identified terrorists. Well you are a Democrat. Democrats control both the House and the Senate. There's a Democratic president. If that's how you feel why is it happened. I was one of 30 to a year ago who voted against Afghan funding. Because I disagreed with the nation building approach this year one hundred sixteen members of the House voted against that nation building approach including many Republicans. So I think that America is starting to take a look at the wisdom of a nation building strategy where you can get the ear of President Obama what do you think he's waiting for. Well I disagree with the president on this policy. All right thank you very much probably Bob Beaudry. I think that whenever the United States is in a situation where we have to go to war or defend ourselves the number one mission of that war should be

to win the war. You don't go into a war without the without believing you're going to actually win it. You have to win the war. Nobody gets into a war saying I want to lose. And I think what we ought to do is take a look at what the original mission was that we had when we went into Afghanistan. Afghanistan we could track that to Osama bin Laden and we can track it way to the 9/11 terrorist bombing. So they deserve to be punished. We went in there. We knocked out the Taliban government. We had another government elected that might not be what we'd like. But it's also not the United States. So we need to focus on winning the war. And then I believe we have already accomplished most of the missions give Afghanistan an ultimatum to take care of themselves bring our troops home and throw victory parade Foreman downtown. Any idea of a time line that you would use for getting the troops out of Afghanistan. I would be very reluctant as a retired Army person to come up with any timelines because timelines in a combat situation can change at a moment's

notice. I do think we ought to start withdrawing the troops and telling Afghanistan if anything they have a timeline to get their act together. But if we as Americans say we've got to be back on a certain date or on a certain timeline. If anything goes wrong with that it will be perceived internationally as America's weak and that we could have lost the war and I don't want to see that happen. I want to say welcome and to our viewers if you're just joining us tonight on Vermont Public Television we're hosting a debate between the candidates for U.S. House. We have all of the candidates on the ballot here this evening. This is your chance to hear directly from them about how they would address the big issues the country is facing and also the issues that are facing Vermont. We also encourage you to go to V.P. at t dot org. There you can join in a chat that's taking place with seven days columnists a TA and she is moderating a debate there and our conversation about the race for U.S. House this is your chance to get out some of the thoughts you have about this race have you made up your mind or are you still undecided. What do you make of the tone of this campaign all the

candidates here say it's much different than all the other races up and down the ballot. So we encourage you to go to V.P. t dot org. And I want to just do maybe a few quick questions that maybe get out your personality because you at home may be needing some of these candidates for the first time. I'm going to start with Peter Welch. What book is on your bedside table right now that you're reading in the woods. It's a mystery. All right tell us a little bit more about it. What drew you to that buck. A friend had read it. I can't say I knew much more about it there's that book and then the other one is the book War by Sebastian Younger. And it is there's a movie about it Restrepo but it was a reporter who followed some of our soldiers in Afghanistan in the Korean galley Valley for a year. It is just a very vivid first hand account of what our soldiers go through. So one is a fiction mystery kind of a way to fall asleep and the other is intensely interesting about a policy that all of us are talking about here tonight. Jane Newman.

I have to admit that I get so disturbed by what's going on and what I read about it and addicted to detective stories just as a way to get away from all the things that I worry about but the one author I've been reading lately is named John and he writes about England during the Second World War and it's historically accurate and very interesting. So I'm I'm working on that one. But I use him as an escape. MR. Yes well I've been reading books by Mr. catchy in fact and one of them is about me. It's letters that he and I wrote together is called America awake and it's some 30 plus letters about how distressed I am with the soul of America and how we have gone so far astray from the noble ideals that we began and what we might do to put ourselves back on the track another one of this mystery to catch these books is called ocracy in America which is

like democracy in America by de Tocqueville only this one has to do with the power of love. I'm ocracy being the power of love. And there are forty five letters from everybody from Albert Einstein Eleanor Roosevelt to George Washington and ending up with myself. There's a letter for me. So it may seem to you to be reading a book about me by some other author but that's what I'm doing. I guess you know how it ends. All right Paul Beaudry what's on your bedside table that you're reading. Well I'll be brutally honest with you at this time. I do not have a book on my bedside table. I have been very busy. And there's a lot of paperwork are in there. There are a couple books that I do look at quite regularly in the past six months I've been looking at the FCC regulation book to make sure I'm doing everything legal. And another book that I love to go to for guidance and inspiration I love to read the Old Testament stories of the Bible the old

stories in there with Israel. And I like to read about gold panning here in Vermont that some of the hobbies I do I used to do that in the past and and I do like to get into some other topics and things like that. If I could find a good book about The Beatles I'll read that too because it's my favorite group. One more quick sort of personality question before we dive into the serious issues that's facing our country but I'll start with Peter Welch on this one. You name one person who you count on for advice. Well my wife Margaret who's here with me and I should be right up next to me. She's pretty helpful. All right. Just for one. I've been coming up here with him and he's been helping me not you know overcome the fear of speaking in front of everybody but I guess Peter Diamond stone is the one that convinced me that this is worth doing even though it's difficult.

And so he's been a big help to his wife Doris also Esther catching is I'm not a Catholic but I do have a great love for St. Francis of Assisi and have visited him there and spoken with him. And I think his wisdom about the subject of love and the future of our well-being is absolutely unequalled in my opinion perhaps in my parting statement I'll give a quote from him but I would say Saint Francis of Assisi even though I'm not a Catholic. Paul Beaudry. Without a doubt it's my beautiful wife Joan. I trust her. She knows what's best for me. She's not afraid to tell me when she thinks I'm doing something wrong or she's not afraid to praise me if I'm doing something right. And I know she truly cares about me and she cares about our country and she has everybody's best interests at heart and I and I trust her unequivocally She's a wonderful lady and confidant. Well tonight on we were debating with the U.S. House candidates but what about you know a quick programming note that if you tune in next week same time same place you're going to get to hear from all of the

candidates in the U.S. Senate race that's going to be on BPT that debate is going to start at 7:30 p.m. It's going to go for an hour and a half it will be moderated by Stuart better so we encourage you to join in and listen to that debate with all of the candidates who are running for U.S. Senate. Back to the questions now we're going to start with Jane Newman for this one. Do you think the stimulus package has worked. If so or not please give examples and do you think there should be another round of stimulus money given out. I'm not sure if the stimulus packages have worked because I'm not really familiar with a lot of economic series. It seems that most of the money went to the banks and to big businesses and then the people rewarded themselves with these golden parachutes and went off in their 400 foot yacht which doesn't really make too much sense when some of that money I would believe should go. Why. Why is that happening over there and at the same time Congress is wondering wondering

whether to continue unemployment benefits for the poor. So it's to me it seems lopsided. And again I think if we cut back on our military spending and have a proportional kind of taxation there'd be plenty of money for everything for jobs for health care for schools fix everything up but as long as we're spending our money half of all of federal money on killing people it's almost silly to talk about jobs and things like that. You're bound you're the only person on the panel who had a vote in that stimulus. That's right and I voted for it. And the question about the stimulus in people's minds is very understandable. When America has unemployment in the range of 10 percent that's way too high so they ask the question if it worked why isn't unemployment lower. And it's a fair question but the context of this had the economy gone off the cliff two years ago. Bear Stearns went under Lehman Brothers went under. Folks there for a one case cut in half the savings for their kids to go to college vanishing. And the federal government had to take

action. In economist who advised John McCain as well as Barack Obama both recognize the absolute urgency of government taking some action to avert literally literally a depression. And the independent economists who have evaluated this say that absent the effort that we had that included tax cuts Incidentally we did lost eight million more jobs. We would have added three trillion dollars more to the deficit than we have now. So it had an impact. But we have a lot more to do. But the benefit of 20 20 hindsight is there any part of this stimulus that you look at and you say well if that was a bad decision. I do. I mean I was much more in favor of concentrating our spending on infrastructure like roads and bridges like sewer systems like retrofitting our schools and I thought that made much more sense than some of the tax cuts that were negotiated to get votes in the Republican Senate which never materialized. So I think we would have gotten more bang for our buck if we did this onetime spending on infrastructure

broadband deployment the railroads things that people I think really relate to and see is tangible and important state still in a recession thousands of people are unemployed. Do you think there should be another round of stimulus money I know budget writers are looking at the state budget there's one hundred twelve million dollar shortfall and they're worried there's not going to be that federal infusion of cash like in previous years the stimulus has become a political football and a bit of a dirty word. And I think much better is to focus on. Should we be spending money say on broadband deployment. Should the government play a role in that or should we spend money on high speed rail. And if you put it in very concrete terms so people can evaluate that as opposed to this abstract category then there are certain onetime spending proposals like infrastructure that I would support. Eric Guster catchy. Well again I think the Vermont question here is not the Washington question. In my opinion people are furious at what we did for the banks. And

so I think throwing good money after what I would call bad money is a dubious economic adventure. What I would suggest is that we do here in Vermont the switchover from big money to compassion creativity and community. At some point the American dollar is going to fall right off the table and be designated as the world reserve currency and we have no idea what that's going to do to our purchasing power. So I think it's only sensible that we create more powerful community and that we use community as our new economic engine. I don't throw good money after bad. Fair enough probably agree. Re Question Christian the question is Has the stimulus package worked and should we have another one I want to answer the second part of the question first. And that's a big fat NO. We should not have another stimulus period and then the first part is has the stimulus package worked well. When I'm only around Vermont and I talk to the Vermont citizens

out there they don't see it working for them. They're worried about paying their bills. They're worried about losing their job and I think it's worked great. If you're an international banker with the Federal Reserve or if you're a corporation that's donated money to Congress or your union that's donated money to different congresspeople. If you're corporations and unions and you make those contributions probably work pretty good for you. I don't see it working here in the state of Vermont at all and I don't think the stimulus package really ended up doing what it was intended to do. Remember unemployment went up with the stimulus not down. And they told us the other were your bosses want your quick response to that. So what Paul Beaudry any examples you can point to in Vermont where you think something worked well. Yeah I can. We're getting money for rail on the eastern side of the state. That's something that the state our governor and our legislature has been pushing for for years. We had over 50 million dollars to help us build that.

The state has had a bipartisan goal of broadband deployment. We can be a modern economy in Vermont without broadband in every corner of Vermont and we got over one hundred fifty million dollars to help us do that. These are things when I talk to Vermonters it makes sense to them. Now also Vermont has got a tax cut. A lot of people forget that. But in the stimulus a significant portion of it went to lowering taxes for everybody including businesses accelerated depreciation. So some of these are felt individually by small businesses town by town and it had an incremental impact benefiting them. Let's get to a viewer question now these are written and not connect at V.P. dot org and a quick reminder you can join in our chat that's going on right now at dot org seven days columnist shaitaan is here in the studio he is taking notes on this debate and he's also willing to chat on line about this debate have you made up your decision what are the big issues you think the candidates should be talking about. Go to V.P. t dot org and join

in a live chat that's going on right now. But now let's hear from one of the viewers who wrote in with this question this is Doug Richmond. He lives in Underhill Vermont. Mr. Richmond would like to hear from the U.S. House candidates. What do you think of our skyrocketing national debt and record setting government spending. What will happen if we return to 20 percent interest rates. We're going to start with Mr. catchy. Well as I've perhaps been trying to to make the case I believe that we are in a monetary and fiscal crisis and that we will not escape it. We can stave it off. Perhaps the stimulus did that for round one but if we cannot do it forever. Therefore the real question is have you got your wood in. Have you got your vegetables in the freezer. Are you ready for probably the hardest winter Vermont has ever faced. Because if you're not you're

trusting money and money is some kind of an addiction people. You can't eat it and you can't heat with it. So here in Vermont we better get on with another economy. And it has to do with relationships within the community and how much compassion and help we give to each other. Jane Newman the national debt Well once again I have to go back to the fact that I don't think we would have such a dead great national debt if we didn't spend most of our money on the military. And by the way I forgot to say that one of the things we have to do for get out of Afghanistan and Iraq is to pay huge amounts of reparations to them if we ever get enough money but we have to really think that that that. If we had a proportional system of taxation again on all incomes investments and everybody's all the corporations that are sneaking out of

paying their taxation their taxes now if everybody paid their taxes even the Social Security. Once you get over a couple of twenty two thousand dollars you know the 15 percent of your income doesn't go up at all. It just stops and people can go on and on and never pay into Social Security. That would all take care of Social Security would take care of all this so that I can't help but talk about what I call those elephants in the room. Let's talk a little bit more about that proposal. Well we need a graduated income tax on all incomes. Right now I think it's mostly paychecks that pay people working class and pay their paychecks in and the rich people get the more. The more ways they find to evade paying their taxes and big corporations the bigger they are the less they pay and that shouldn't be that way. And our whole social security system would be fine. It should

be anyway otherwise the government's been stealing from it but you know that in the trillion we pay a year to kill people. Makes no sense. And to price the poor people in this country above their human needs which as a socialist party that's what we believe is that human need should be publicly funded and it's you know we should think in terms of compassion not greed. Paul Beaudry Could you repeat the part of the sort of 20 percent sure I'll just repeat the question so we remember what Doug Richmond from Underhill Vermont wanted to hear directly from the candidates about his question was What do you think of our skyrocketing national debt and record setting government spending. Second part of the question what will happen if we return to 20 percent interest rates. OK good question Doug. That's one of the issues I've had I'm going to back up a little bit and say that part of the deficit has to do with the pork Elice or the stimulus bills they've been passing which is why I don't

want another one to be passed. I think that this debt if we keep going at the rate we're going. America could be reduced down to a third world status in nations like China will end up taking us over which we are already owed them a lot anyways. It is terrifying the implication that is going on. And Doug the 20 percent again and the 20 percent question was what will happen if we return to 20 percent interest rates. It would be just like when we had Jimmy Carter and they have what they called the misery index. It would be horrible. Right now we are essentially slaves to debt. And I think it would get even worse and we're going to take your houses your cars our roads our schools and another nation will end up owning the United States. I just want to tease out one minute here for rebuttal. You said that you're concerned that China could take over. Yes. Explain that. Well a lot of the money China has We're dependent upon China to

help us out with a lot of the debt. China right now is an emerging nation. Economically they're growing they're growing they're growing they are growing faster than we are. They have the ability to become the next superpower of the world in the United States could fall down and I don't want to see that happen I want to have a generation and be responsible for a generation is actually making it better for our children like all our other generations before us. And I just see that eroding away if we just keep spending and spending and spending and borrowing and borrowing and borrowing when you borrow and you have big debt you owe somebody. I'd rather them all of us than we owe them. So I get here well just thoughts on that. Do you think it's a real threat that China will take over and become a superpower. Well it's a real threat that we have 20 percent interest rates or the interest rates are going to go way up from where they are in that is connected to the first part of Mr. Richmond's question and that's the

deficit because his policy saying we're financing that by borrowing from China in a China decides to stop lending. We're going to have to raise interest rates in order to fund the deficit so the deficit is a threat. Both to our long term fiscal stability number one in future generations. Number two it can ultimately result in these high interest rates that will be crippling for the economy. Now it's important we get out of this and we should. I mean keep in mind President Clinton when he left we had the highest surplus in the history of the country. And then we went in in the short time of the Bush administration from a record surplus to a record deficit and a lot of that was because of policies that many people supported that are now having newfound conversion about deficit hawks. The Iraq war and the credit card the Afghanistan war on the credit card two point three trillion dollars and Bush tax cuts on the credit card the prescription drug plan on the credit card. So we have to take appropriate. Action to reverse that as President Clinton did.

So how do you propose that the country reverse this. Well there are some practical things that we can do. Number one we have to be comprehensive about it. The elements of the deficit and spending are one. The appropriations bill so every line item kick the tires save money where you can. But number two it's the tax bill. There are more tax code giveaways. Then there are spending in the appropriation bills. Does it make sense to be giving billions of dollars of tax cuts courtesy of the taxpayer you and me to oil companies when that's a mature and profitable industry. Third we have to have an entitlement reform commission that's been implemented. It gets political 11 of the Republican senators who were in favor of it voted against it when they had the chance to do it. And then. So those are those are three of the things that we can do right away to move us in the direction we need to be to restore balance. I'm sure when people hear 20 percent interest rates that's terrifying do you think that's a possibility. I don't think 20 percent is anything close to being realistic in the near term. But I do

think we're going to have higher interest rates is just a matter of when not whether these are historically low interest rates. Incidentally this is very tough on savers folks who are retirees saved carefully all of their lives. So in their retirement they'd be able to pay their bills. They're getting like zero percent or one tenth of one percent so it's very tough. But the low interest rates we have now that are good if you're borrowing money for a home or if you're a business and you can borrow money that's helpful to the economy but it's not sustainable and this debt will ultimately result in pressure to increase those interest rates and then expenses for businesses and home buyers. All right we're going to start the next round of questioning with Jane new and this question is for a man has lost 100 dairy farms just in the last three years. Do you support federal price supports or limiting production. I think that the small farmers must be subsidized or they will go right right out of business

because agribusiness has the price of milk has gone down because of the huge agribusinesses that have taken over and without federal subsidies of the farmers as what's happening all around is a small farmers or a local girl selling their cows and going out of business. So you would be. It sounds like your plan would be some kind of a subsidy and perhaps somehow take some of the pallor out of the the huge agri business and they are probably getting subsidized by the way and not the small farmers you could. You know we could change the money from going to these big agribusiness who make a ton of money hot hiring people if they don't have to pay anything you know that illegal immigrants say they hardly have to pay them at all where US and they get subsidized by the governments in the small businesses just go out the small farmers all go out of business and most of your

much arms half. All right let's hear from her. I like the question. I've been fortunate enough to have been invited to the Addison County Farm Bureau meeting and also the Orange County Farm Bureau meeting and I'll be the first to admit I'm not a farmer. I'm not a farmer although I'm very interested in the farming community because I believe that's part of the great heritage here in Vermont. It's also part of our working landscape here in the state of Vermont not being a farmer the best place to get that answer is from the farmers and that's who I have gone to. And overwhelmingly the farmers tell me they just want to be left alone and they want to be able to make a profit. They want to be able to raise the animals and the crops that they choose to raise. And they also are very smart people and they know that they have to adapt and change over time. We were a sheep state at one time now we're a dairy state. It could be that we're having something completely different. Or they might have to diversify but the farmers are the ones that we need to go to to

ask them what can the government do or not do to help them the most and they're leaning towards letting the farmers make the decisions and make their own shots. Let's go to be clear on your answer. Do you support federal price supports or limiting production. Not necessarily no. And I do not believe federal price supports would work I think that's going to interfere with the market. And as far as subsidies go I think that most farmers I've talked to would just assume see the subsidies go away. Then all the farmers will be on a level playing field. All right guys to catch up. Yes as you notice I'm no longer Mr. Jeffers I thought it was time to thank him for his participation tonight. And you can imagine being represented by such a person however on this particular question I'm glad to be back in the middle of it. The small farmer in Vermont the big farmer in Vermont needs absolutely everything we can do for him be it federal be it state be it County and be a community if I happen to vote for the last one the most in other words I think the villages have a

responsibility to their farmers to help them figure out not only their immediate finances but who's going to follow them in the next generation. And that to me is a local challenge that ought to be looked after by the people of the community. Now I think of Mr. Jefferson we're still here he would say that the small farm is the future of the nation he always thought so he thinks so now and so do I. And I think it's the archetype image of Vermont is the farm and the little church steeple. So we need to take care of them. Quick follow up what do you think the state loses Mr. catchy when there are just as I said a hundred fewer farms in the last three years. Well it loses its identity and loses its ability to feed itself. You know we're going to come to some times in the next few months when if you don't have a source of food or you and your neighbors have worked it out together it's going to be hard sledding for what you're going to eat. If the economy declines any farther the

18 wheelers will stop rolling to the supermarket and will have to feed each other. Are we ready this year. I'm not so sure but by next summer we certainly are going to have to one community at a time be able to feed each other totally. Maybe just one meal a day at the elementary school kitchen or something. But those days are coming and I think every Vermonter knows that food is the new economy not money. You know routes. Well the farmers in the firm communities are really the soul of a man and the qualities that they have self reluctant self-reliance ingenuity and hard work are ones that all of us I think want to aspire to. Also it's very important that Vermont have local agriculture it's important in America to have local agriculture so letting our farms go is giving up on ourselves. The farmers are the custodians of our environment and we've got to support them. Now what do we have to do. The milk price import system is broken in Vermont

farmers folks like Bill Raul have been taking leadership to have government be a partner with them. They are self-reliant. But we have to move towards a supply management or growth management system so the farmers don't suffer from these wild swings in price were for long periods of time. They're literally being paid less for their product than it cost to produce it's not sustainable. Also Senator Leahy is doing great work on trying to crack down on antitrust issues where farmers are not getting the fair price that they deserve. This is a problem that's been talked about ever since the dairy compact went away it seems like there's very limited options that the dairy compact would ever come back that seems like a very long shot at best. What do you think will happen moving forward because it seems like it's an intractable issue because it does seem to pit the Northeast against some of the needed western states. Well that's exactly right now that's why the work that Bill Russell and others are doing is so important. They believe you've got to move from the milk price aport system to a supply management type system.

And they've reached out to their fellow farmers in the Midwest and in California. And as a result of their leadership in the house I've introduced along with Congressman cost from California the big state small state Alliance Supply Management bill where the ideas are really generated by Vermont farmers. And in this last collapse in price whether you're a small farmer in Vermont big farmer in New Mexico or California you were losing milk or you were losing money on every single cow. So the farmers are appreciating that yes they're self-reliant but they've got to get together to be a voice. And then those of us in Congress can help them be successful that's the goal. Paul Beaudry Would you support a bill like that. I would be willing to look at it and look at the merits the pros and cons both ways. Like I said not being a farmer I would really be talking to the farmers and getting the guidance and advice from our local farmers first. That's a catch. I think what Peter what was just said by Paul is certainly true I mean you know the

farmers have to get together as Peter said the ability to integrate and collaborate is the nature of future it's it's it's what nature does to succeed is to collaborate so putting the conversations together with the farmers and they with each other and they with their communities is the first step and I think we can do a lot in town meeting to bring that about I don't mean that's sort of the March meeting I mean maybe three other meetings a year in which we talk about the philosophy and the compassion we need to take care of everybody especially the local farmers as they feed us. So yeah I think Peter's absolutely right we've got to get them together and let them define the future in conjunction with the people of the villages. Jane Newman would you support that bill. A little confused at what the bill was what I was thinking is that in the part of Vermont where I live around Londonderry there might be two

farms left and both of them. Own and run by people who have a little bit of money just anyway and so that when these farms because they're able to. But all the other small individual farmers have have sold their cows and gone and the whole of southern Vermont is now based on the ski industry and tourists in leaf peepers in various people will come around and maybe it's different in the northern part of the state there still may be some dairy farms up there I think there may be but very few I think it's almost too late to do anything about them. Tonight on Vermont Public Television will host a debate with the candidates for U.S. House. We also invite you to go to V.P. t dot org. There you'll find the shaitaan of seven days he is on line right now commenting commenting about this race you can join in the conversation. Are you hearing from the candidates what you hope they would be talking about have you made up your mind in this race Shaitaan who's here he is online you can join in a chat with him on V.P. t dot org Now prior to this debate. The PTA asked for

your questions what's a priority for you in this election. And let's hear now from another viewer who wrote in with a question for the candidates. We're going to hear now from George Richardson he lives in Charlotte Vermont. His question for the candidates for U.S. House why should the government feel they should share in my estate upon my death rather than my being able to leave my estate entirely to my children and grandchildren. Do you support the repeal of the death taxes. Let's start with you and I don't think we should have death tax makes sense in most of the people who leave money. So there's money to inherit. Have enough money to pay. Then that though the average small farmer doesn't have enough money to leave he may leave his land to his family but he doesn't have a lot of money and nothing gets taxed. So I don't think we should repeal least the estate tax at all. In fact maybe in some cases it should be increased. What about us. Well I supported continuing the estate tax and increasing the

exemption and that passed in the house. So there'd be a three million dollar individual exemption and six million dollars for a married couple and that would protect the vast majority 99 percent or even more of our businesses and certainly our firms. So you do want to have that in a generational opportunity husband and wife opportunity. But I actually do think that when folks like Warren Buffett say hey you know I shouldn't be passing this entire multibillion dollar estate onto an individual all of us have to work and earn and in and in and do our part. I agree with that so I was for increasing the estate tax exemption being considerate of small business needs and certainly are for our needs but not abolishing it altogether. Paul Beaudry. There's a saying that we've all heard here in Vermont the United States and there's two guarantees in life death and taxes. And I think this kind of sums it up. First of all I think we ought to repeal the death tax. Conservatives call it the death tax. Liberals call it the

Paris Hilton estate tax. The bottom line is you George you have worked all your life to accumulate whatever wealth you have and you've paid taxes to get where you are now. To me the way the government's doing it they want to tax you again so that you're not going to be able to leave it to your children so that you can have a better life for your children than what you've had now. In my opinion the estate tax is bad bad news and we've got to get rid of it. If you want to have a generation that's better for your children than what we live in now. Repeal the death tax. Quick follow up for you Mr. Beaudry then how would you make up the difference in the federal budget if you were to take that piece of the puzzle out of the equation very easily. Well you know if you look at the bills in Congress that there pass and they pass bills all the time with no regard to where the money is their only answer is hey look. Part of the money or let's raise taxes. Well how about if Congress and Washington did what you and I do as family

members. We're not family members but as a family what we do is we look at our budgets we see how much we can afford and we try our best not to spend more than we have coming in. They've got to stop spending like idiots down there they're just spending spending spending. If you keep doing that yourself you're going to be broke. So cut the spending back don't pass bills I don't care how good of a bill it is don't pass it unless it's already funded. All right I feel like we just need to get a quick response from the current Congressman Paul Baudry says quote Congress is spending like it. Well Mr. Beaudry has supported the war in Iraq that was put on the credit card. Medicare prescription Part D was put on the credit card. The Bush tax cuts two point three billion dollars on the credit card. The question facing Congress right now is do we extend those tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. That's for the top 2 percent income earners in the country. That would cost 700 billion dollars and go on the deficit. So it's these big decisions that cost our taxpayers

and future generations huge amounts of money. I've opposed all of those for fiscal responsibility reasons. And I would oppose a tax cut being extended the Bush tax cut for millionaires and billionaires not because folks haven't worked hard and they have earned that money. But you know what. It's not fair to stick the price tag of that 700 billion dollars on our kids and future generations. All right it's time for guys to catchy as response to Mr. Richardson's question about the death tax. As you can imagine that will be a little different. I made sure that this issue didn't happen to me although I don't have enough money to rub two nickels together but I gave all my property to my sons years ago. And I think Mr. Richardson is concerned that the passage of acquired wealth and property should be carefully thought about and done in advance and wait to after the fact so the government can any level can come in and mess with you in effect. What I really think Vermont should be asking yourself do we want an

income tax do we want the stew we want the Federal Reserve. Do we want the money structure that we now live under and seem to be enslaved by the answer I'd say is no why don't we consider either a flat tax or national sales tax let's get creative here in Vermont because the system is so full of discrepancies and inequalities that it really needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. A quick follow up on your idea of a flat tax. So how would that work. Because a lot of times I think sometimes Congress passes things so it's on your ability to pay so this would be a flat tax. Well. Let's suppose that there were a figure let's say 15 percent Paul is used a number of times when people when we've been asked before how much of my money can I keep. I've always said 100 percent let's go to sales tax. Paul it's often said 15 percent but let's suppose 15 percent then what James has been

saying is really important that everybody pays the 15 percent that you can't duck it. You can't get away the corporations can't skate. You know if it were equitable at Paul's suggested level of 15 percent I think we could do the job but I would prefer to see a national sales tax I think the IRS and that whole mechanism is falling apart faster than they can hold itself together. You know about is it time to rewrite the country's tax structure. Well I always favor simplification. But I also favor getting rid of loopholes in giveaways like for instance I mentioned earlier. We have a very profitable oil industry. They made 67 billion in profits last year. They paid thirty seven billion dollars in dividends and they bought 20 billion dollars in stock back. Yet they still receive from taxpayers billions and billions of dollars in tax breaks that cost us money. And should we be using the tax code

to provide subsidies to industries that are mature in part and profitable. So yes we've got to go through that tax code and it's a step that's absolutely essential if we're going to restore fiscal stability and balance in this country. That's got to be part of the solution. All right our next question is going to focus on health care a big issue facing the state and the country. And a quick reminder go to VPN dot org right now. You can catch up with seven days calling the shaitaan and he is talking about the debate that's going on right now he has a lot of political knowledge and insight He's covering all the races tonight we're focusing on the U.S. House race though and if you go to V.P. t dot org you can chat online with right now but let's talk about health care and we're going to begin our questioning with Jay knew and would you have voted for the health care bill. If not why and how would you address health care costs and Mr. Welch when it comes to the question's going to be why did you vote for the health care bill and how will people measure if it's working genuine.

I don't think I would have voted for it because I really believe we need socialized medicine. Maybe. Just call that single pair. And total care I mean everyone should. Everyone should have to have health care. And so there wasn't even a public option here for people. To avoid paying money to. And public health insurance companies and I really wonder why on earth our country is the only industrialized nation that people get their health care by paying huge amounts of money to big businesses big health care businesses that in the end give them almost no care there. If you're if you're sick they won't take care of you they don't even want to take care of sick children and that the money that people have to pay is too much they can't buy their medicine and so we really need to

have a single payer and universal healthcare. Just to catch up with what was just said. We spent a lot of time writing back and forth to these events together and I think Jay Newton is probably the why she's first of all a lifetime nurse as well as a grandmother and a mother. So when she starts talking about the care of people I'm listening. I would agree with her but Homer St. Francis with them was another coach of mine back when I ran for governor in 92. He had a brilliant idea he was a he was a medical corpsman and two different branches of the services idea was get a big house get three registered nurses put him in there on eight hour shifts and 90 percent of all the health in the town could be handled by those three nurses. And then if they needed extra surgery something there'd be a doctors assigned. That's a brilliant idea and in fact they've done now health co-ops and the new legislation allows that where people insure themselves the whole town does. And they save huge amounts of money can even buy.

Higher elementary school teachers from the left over money so cooperative community health to me is the future. You know while it's here the only person on the panel who is in a position to weigh in on that you did vote for it and why and how will people measure if it's working. Well two things First of all I am a supporter of single payer and I was a strong supporter of a public option we would have a better bill had either of those been the final product. But there's four things in that health care bill that made it worth doing because it is a solid step towards accepting the principle in this country that every citizen should be covered and every citizen should help pay one insurance reforms. Insurance companies been ripping us off. Under this bill your kids up to age 26 can stay on your policy. Insurance companies can't yank your coverage because you get sick. They can't deny a coverage because of a preexisting condition. They've got to spend 85 cents of your premium dollars paying for healthcare rather than fat CEO salaries. Second seniors they are going to get free preventive care. That's important. And they're going to get

help with prescription drugs. Third we're going to start moving towards accountable care organizations in the blueprint for health that were pioneered here in the state of Vermont to move away from Fall ume based reimbursement to performance based reimbursement. And then fourth. We're going to help our businesses with subsidies that are going to continue providing coverage for their workers. How will people measure if it's working because a lot of these provisions are sort of phased in over time. But you know it's going to be the real world experience. You know if when a parent is seeing their child graduate from high school or college in the really struggling with this question about health care for them and see that hey all we have to do is keep them on our policy that's going to be meaningful. When a senior finds out that they're actually getting help on the prescription drug coverage they fell into the donut hole and it makes their life easier. That's going to be meaningful to them. When a parent has a child born with a congenital condition and they are not denied coverage for that child they're going

to see the benefit of that. So I think it's going to be very real world experience that each of us has that we can compare what was before and what actually exists now. Just very quickly the Democrat running for Governor Peter Shumlin says he wants to pass single payer in our state he needs a federal waiver. Do you think that would be granted. I support a federal waiver I can't make a prediction as to whether it will or won't. But the reason I think there's some very compelling argument for it is that's about letting states experiment. So a lot of folks in Congress who may not agree with me and Peter Shumlin on single payer do agree that states should have the latitude to do what they think is best for them as long as what they do doesn't compromise the basic benefits that already are established in federal law. Paul Beaudry. I would not have voted for the unconstitutional health care bill that was passed down in Washington. I think it's going to bankrupt this country and I do think that one of the ways it will be measured is when we look at our senior citizens. Now I heard President Obama talking about this health care bill. Prior to it being passed and the question was asked something

to the effect of a senior needs an operation. And are they going to get the operation and he came right out and he said right on national TV. Well sometimes we might just have to give them a pill. Well I think what that's going to do is it's going to put a massive amount of more of the prescription drugs mainly the percocet and the morphine and all that on the market which we already have a problem with it here in this country and this state the health care bill in my opinion is a disaster waiting to happen and waiting to bankrupt America. And I think the quality of service is going to go down. Look at Canada they came here for to get our health care because the system they had up there where Americans going to go when we have the socialist system in place. The answer right now is here take a pill. All right we're getting close to the end I want to squeeze in one more question so I think we'll give you 30 seconds on this one we're going to start with Peter Welch. Do you support a guest worker visa program for migrant dairy workers many of whom are currently here illegally in Vermont.

Yes I do. Senator Leahy has sponsored legislation to allow our farmers to have access to labor that they need. It's impossible for them to run their farms without having access to that labor. I want to have a approach Senator Leahy's pioneered this. It's legal and it's fair aboveboard treats the workers right and make certain that the farmers are in compliance with the law so I do support genuine. I'm sorry I was thinking so hard I forgot where we were. We're talking. Do you support a guest worker visa program for migrant workers I do. And I also would like to say something about immigration in general because I I have a feeling this is hold today to vote illegal immigrants. Is utter hypocrisy. Because on the one hand we're trying to put up walls and keep them out and big business is sending in buses and bringing them out to work on their farms in there.

And their factories because they don't have to pay them and they still depend on them so there's just two things going on and it's very hypocritical and it's I think cruel. Yes I do and I want to say that I think we ought to we ought to have these four people all go to Washington as representatives. From the state of Vermont. One isn't enough. Peter's been doing a marvelous job but he needs the three of us in his office. And and I really think that that's the kind of immigration that the state of Vermont and hence the four of us go to Washington together. I do support a guest worker a visa program. I think we ought to make it easy for farmers and other employers that can legally bring these people to the country and work on our farms and work in other places. I also support getting rid of the illegal immigrants in this country. And I think if

these legal immigrants come in here with employer backing they could end up turning into good taxpaying productive citizens here in the United States. A quick follow up so you said get rid of illegal immigrants we know there are illegal workers on dairy farms so would you support the federal government coming in and doing raids as we've seen them do in the past. Yes I would. They're here illegally. They're a strain on our country. I think we need to have them come here legally. All right. Well believe it or not the hour and a half is flew by it's now time for closing statements. Each of the candidates will have one minute before they came they drew out of the hat I guess was a fish ball or a lawyer talking is a fish ball they get out of a fish ball. And so the order will start with Gus to catch it then only Peter Welch Jane Newton and Paul Beaudry missing because it was the start of something. Thank you very much for this opportunity tonight. The five ideas first for man is the state to reinvent the United States. It's our turn it isn't Virginia it isn't Massachusetts it's Vermont and we're able to do that how we're able to do it

in our town meetings we have the purest most powerful form of direct democracy in the world. Step aside can towns in Switzerland. Number three I think we really need to look hard and use our town meeting to abolish the institution of war. Number four I think we need to start in our towns what I call community verse cities that is the whole family of life in town learning together and lastly I think if we don't figure a way to get love involved in the political process both locally and federally were at a loss a terrible loss. So vote for the four of us and bring us to. WASHINGTON Thank you no doubts. Thank you very much. I come home every weekend from Washington and I listen to Vermonters. And what I'm hearing is that Vermonters are very worried about their jobs. They're worried about being able to send their kids to college and they're really worried about making ends meet. And if you choose to return me to Washington my top

three priorities will be to create good jobs to rebuild and strengthen our middle class and to get our fiscal house in order. But what I'm also hearing from Vermonters is that they're concerned about the way Washington works. In know that will only be successful if we do business there the way we do it in Vermont bipartisan focus on a practical approach. Listening to other people and having is the objective making progress. We need to bring that wire's that attitude to Washington and I believe I can do it. I will continue working on behalf of Vermonters every day they give me the opportunity to do so. And I'd request their support again. Your support again on November 2 the new and. OK when you read a letter that I wrote because it includes two very important things to me I said there are very many reasons why all nuclear reactors for my Yankee included must be shut down what is there a deadly connection with the military plutonium produced from nuclear waste is used to make nuclear bombs in some

10000 foreheads and tritium leaking in the old reactor is a separate is produced for the military because it boosts the yield of nuclear weapons and the so-called depleted uranium produced as a waster in the uranium enrichment process because with enough time it has the greatest capacity of all weapons to kill people is given to the military thousands of tons of this radioactive material with a half life of 4.5 billion has according to studies unleashed a global catastrophe. Thus in many ways our children face a radioactive future. Governments like our own will continue to protect the interests of two interwoven processes manufacture of nuclear power nuclear weapons. Someone said if we discovered how to make weapons out of sunbeams we would how all have solar power. Instead we have rightly or people have to cut you off there let it be said all the candidates follow DRI. I hope you get your vote on November 2nd. I'm a regular Vermonter. I'm a middle class

for minor. I live within my means. Unlike Washington I am refusing to take nor have requested corporate or union PAC money. That means you the Vermont citizen are my special interest group. I worry about the bills that come in. I worry about insurance I worry about my future. I worry about our children not having as good of a future as you and I have had. Well there is hope there is hope and we can have a Congress that spends responsibly follows the Constitution and there's a few other things such as becoming energy self-sufficient burning our own natural gas instead of Arab oil. We could reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by up to 80 percent and keep that money right here in the United States. Please vote for Paul Beaudry on November 2nd. Thank you. All right well thanks Violet for you to you for watching at home the U.S. House debate Don't forget to tune in same time same place next week for the U.S. Senate debate that I'm testing crossing. Have a great night and

vote November 2nd.