>> Braude: TONIGHT, A SPECIAL "GREATER BOSTON," OUR SERIES OF THE ONLY TELEVISED PRIMARY DEBATES IN MASSACHUSETTS CONTINUES.

NEXT UP: THE RACE FOR STATE AUDITOR.

ALSO KNOWN AS THE "CHIEF ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICER," THE AUDITOR ANALYZES AND INVESTIGATES HOW STATE AGENCIES OPERATE AND SPEND TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING WHAT WE COLLECTIVELY.

PAY FOR.

I'M JOINED BY THE TWO DEMOCRATS VYING FOR THE JOB, AHEAD OF PRIMARY ELECTION DAY ON SEPTEMBER 6th: DIANA DIZOGLIO, STATE SENATOR SINCE 2019, FROM METHUEN, WHO SERVED AS A STATE REP FOR SIX YEARS PRIOR.

AND CHRIS DEMPSEY, WHO SERVED AS AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER GOVERNOR DEVAL PATRICK, LED THE 2015 "NO BOSTON OLYMPICS" CAMPAIGN, AND MOST RECENTLY RAN THE NONPROFIT TRANSPORTATION FOR MASSACHUSETTS.

AS ALWAYS, THE RULES?

THERE ARE NONE.

BUT TIME IS SHORT, SO BREVITY IS APPRECIATED-- ACTUALLY, REQUIRED.

THEY SHOULD FEEL FREE TO TALK TO EACH OTHER, JUST NOT OVER EACH OTHER.

WE'VE GOT A LOT TO COVER, SO LET'S JUMP RIGHT IN.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

IN SEPTEMBER, THE AUDITOR WILL CERTIFY HOW MUCH REVENUE THE STATE HAS TAKEN IN, AND IF IT EXCEEDS THAT REVENUE, THE SO-CALLED TAX CAP FROM 1986, HOW MUCH IT RETURNED.

STARTING WITH YOU, THAT'S A STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITY.

THE AUDITOR ALSO HAS A BULLY PULPIT.

LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT FOR A SECOND.

IF THERE IS AN EXCESS OF $2 OR $3 BILLION, AS IS SUGGESTED, SHOULD THAT BE RETURNED TO THE TAXPAYER PURSUANT TO THE LAW OR SHOULD THE LAW BE CHANGED IN SOME.

>> YOU WANT SOMEONE WITH FINANCE EXPERIENCE AND NOT A POLITICIAN.

I THINK THE AUDITOR NEEDS TO DO THAT CALCULATION.

IT'S FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO DECIDE WHERE THAT MONEY SHOULD GO.

IF I WERE IN THE LEGISLATURE AND I'M NOT, AND NOT RUNNING FOR LEGISLATURE, I WOULD SAY THE MONEY SHOULD BE RETURNED TO THE TAXPAYERS.

AT THIS POINT, THE LEGISLATURE LOST ITS OPPORTUNITY, AND THAT'S ON THE LEGISLATURE FOR NOT FIXING THAT.

THE AUDITOR ISSUES THIS REPORT EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

THERE IS NOTHING UNIQUE, OTHER THAN THE REVENUES ARE COMING IN HIGHER.

>> Jim: SHOULD THEY HAVE FIXED IT, TO USE YOUR WORDS.

>> YES.

>> Jim: HOW SO?

>> THERE WAS AN ECONOMIC BILL THAT I THOUGHT WAS A GOOD START.

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN GADE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE FORWARD AND THAT GOT STALLED BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T CATCH IT IN TIME.

>> Jim: LET'S SAY IT'S 3 BILLION AS MOST SUGGEST, SHOULD IT BE RETURNED AS THE LAW REQUIRES?

>> YES, AND WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT, JIM, IS WHAT I WILL DO IN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THIS NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.

I RELEASED MY PLAN, HAVING STAYED UP ALL NIGHT, TO DISCUSS THESE ISSUES.

THE LEGISLATURE NEVER SHOULD HAVE WAITED UNTIL LAST MINUTE TO TAKE UP THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL IN THE FIRST PLACE.

HOWEVER, THEY WERE SURPRISED WITH THIS INFORMATION AND THIS INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN SOMETHING THAT WE IN THE LEGISLATURE HAD.

THE AUDITOR HAS A ROLE TO PLAY THAT IS LARGELY A CONFIRMATORY ROLE WHERE SHE CONFIRMS WHAT THE COMMISSIONER OF D.O.R.

SAYS REGARDING THE REVENUES THAT ARE COMING IN.

THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE REPORTS QUARTERLY, GIVING THOSE REPORTS TO THE COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE, WHERE THE AUDITOR HAS A SEAT ON THE ADVISORY BOARD FOR.

THAT COMPTROLLER'S OFFICE MEETS FOUR TIMES A YEAR.

IF THE AUDITOR WAS PUSHING FOR-- WHICH I PLAN TO DO-- FOR THESE REVENUE REPORTS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THOSE QUARTERLY MEETINGS THIS MIGHT NOT HAVE CAUGHT US BY SURPRISE.

AS YOUR NEXT STATE AUDITOR I'LL MAKE SURE I'M PUSHING FOR THESE DAB DISCUSSED AT THE QUARTERLY MILLIONS.

>> Jim: DO YOU SUPPORT THE FAIR SHARE AMENDMENT, THE MILLIONAIRE TAX ON THE BALLOT?

>> YES, I HAVE FOR YEARS.

>> Jim: THAT WOULD TAX THE WEALTHY AT A HIGHER RATE.

THIS WOULD RETURN MONEY, THE TAX CAP, AT A HIGHER RATE TO THE WEALTHY.

WHY AREN'T YOU SAYING, JUST LIKE YOU SUPPORT THE FAIR SHARE AMENDMENT, "I SUPPORT RETURNING THE MONEY TO THE TAXPAYER, BUT THE LAW SHOULD BE AMENDED SO IT'S RETURNED MORE EQUITABLY."

I DON'T GET IT.

THEY'RE TWO IN-CONFLICT CONCEPTS.

>> WE NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION IN THE LEGISLATURE ABOUT ACTUALLY AMENDING THE LAW.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

I THINK RIGHT NOW TAXPAYERS ARE IN NEED OF RELIEF AT A TIME WHEN WE HAVE INFLATION, AT A TIME WHEN WE HAVE GAS PRICES OUT OF CONTROL.

AND, YES, I DO SUPPORT FAIR SHARE TAX AMENDMENT.

MY OPPONENT HAS BEEN PUSH FOR A 25 CENT GAS TAX INCREASE ON WORKING FAMILIES IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS THOSE FROM LOWER INCOME.

>> Jim: I WANT TO BE CLEAR, IF THAT'S FAIR-- IF I MAY, SENATOR-- WOULD YOU SUPPORT AMENDING THE TAX CAP LAW SO THE $3 BILLION-- I'M JUST PICKING THAT FIGURE-- IS RETURNED MORE EQUITABLY, YES OR NO?

>> I WOULD SUPPORT GIVING THE MONEY BACK TO THE TAXPAYER.

>> Jim: IN A MORE EQUITABLE FASHION?

>> IN A MORE EQUITABLE FASHION FOR SURE-- >> >> Jim: SO AMEND THE LAW.

AMEND THE LAW?

>> I WOULD BE OPEN TO IT.

>> Jim: WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO IT?

>> I THINK WE JUST HEARD SENATOR TAKE THREE DIFFERENT POSITIONS ON ONE ISSUE.

SHE'S SAYING WHEN I'M AUDITOR I WILL BE SURE TO CATCH THIS.

SHE'S IN THE LEGISLATURE.

SHE'S IN THE LEGISLATURE'S JOB TO CATCH IT.

THEY DIDN'T CATCH IT AND NOW WE'RE IN THE SITUATION TO RETURN THE FUNDS AND NOT HAVE A BETTER ECONOMIC BILL THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PASSED.

>> Jim: YOU DO SUPPORT A 25 CENT INCREASE IN THE GAS TAX?

>> MY ROLE AS TRANSPORTATION FOR MASSACHUSETTS, IS NOT TO SAY WHAT THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD DO, BUT CALL OUT THE NEED AND RESOURCES WE NEED TO FIX TRANSPORTATION.

THAT'S EXACTLY THE JOB OF THE AUDITOR.

IT'S NOT TO SET POLICY.

IT'S TO BE CLEAR WITH THE FACTS AND THE DATA ABOUT WHAT OUR COMMONWEALTH NEEDS.

>> Jim: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT IS A BULLY PULPIT, AND A LOT OF THINGS I HAVE HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT ARE THINGS YOU DON'T HAVE THE STATUTORY POWER TO DO.

SHE SAID SHE WOULD AMEND THE TAX CAP.

>> I SAID THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL WOULD BE A BETTER WAY-- >> Jim: YOU WOULD AMEND THE TAX CAP AS IT CURRENTLY IS?

>> IF I HAD BEEN IN THE LEGISLATURE, WHICH I WAS NOT, I WOULD HAVE CAUGHT IT IN TIME.

>> Jim: LET'S TALK-- >> IF MY OPPONENT WAS IN THE SLAWRKT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR A 25-CENT GAS TAX INCREASE ON WORKING FAMILIES RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT TO ME IS UNACCEPTABLE.

>> Jim: I THINK THE ONE THING-- ONE OF A NUMBER OF THINGS I HOPE YOU BOTH AGREE UPON IS ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY IS CENTRAL TO THE MISSION.

I'M SURE YOU SAW A "GLOBE" EDITORIAL THAT TOOK YOU TO TAX ABOUT QUESTIONNAIRES FROM ADVOCACY GROUPS THAT BASICALLY SAID NOT ONLY SHOULD THE QUESTIONS BE DISCLOSED, BUT THE CANDIDATES' ANSWERS OTHERWISE YOU ARE, "MAKING PROMISES IN SECRET."

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A REPRODUCTIVE QUESTIONNAIRE, WHICH THE ORGANIZATION SAID COULD ENDANGER LIVES, WHICH HE HAS NOT POSTED.

HE POSTED ALL THE OTHERS.

YOU STICIALG LEAST TWO HOURS AGO WHEN WE CHECKED, HAVE MOTT POSTED THE MASSACHUSETTS TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION QUESTIONNAIRE, NOR THE AFSCME QUESTIONNAIRE, EVEN THOUGH YOUR CAMPAIGN SAID YOU WOULD.

>> WE HAVE BEEN POSTING THEM.

I KNOW THOSE ARE UP RIGHT NOW IF I'M CORRECT.

IF THEY'RE NOT, THEY SHOULD BE POSTED YESTERDAY.

WE TALKED TO THE M.L.B.

YESTERDAY AND THEY WERE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE US PERMISSION TO POST THEIR QUESTIONNAIRE.

WE HAVE BEEN MAKING OUR WAY THROUGH THESE ORGANIZATIONS RESPECTING THEIR PROCESS.

>> Jim: WHAT IF THEY SAID NO, YOUR CAMPAIGN SAID SEVERAL DAYS AGO.

>> NOBODY SAID NO.

>> Jim: WHAT IF THEY DID.

>> THEN WE WOULD HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION.

I'M NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT SHOULD HAVE, WOULD HAVE, COULD HAVE.

MY OPPONENT PREEMPTIVELY AND RECKLESSLY RELEASED AN EMAIL AND PRESS RELEASE THAT STATED HE HAD ALREADY POSTED ALL QUESTIONNAIRES TO HIS WEB SITE.

DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT, CHRIS, POST REPRODUCTIVE EQUITY NOW'S QUESTIONNAIRE TO YOUR WEB SITE?

>> Jim: HOW ABOUT THAT.

>> THE ANSWER IS VERY CLEAR, WE DID NOT.

>> THEN YOU LIED ABOUT POSTING ALL QUESTIONNAIRES IN A PRESS RELEASE, CALLING ON BOTH OF YOUR OPPONENTS TO BE TRANSPARENT AND HONEST.

>> WE DIDN'T DO THAT, JIM.

WE PUT OUT A PRESS RELEASE THAT SAID WE WILL BE POSTING THEM ALL.

>> PAST TENSE.

IT WAS PAST TENSE.

>> Jim: LET LET HIM FINISH.

>> THE MINUTE WE PUT THAT OUT WE SAID REPRODUCTIVITY EQUITY NOW QUESTIONNAIRE WOULD BE OUT SOON.

WE HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THEM FOR WEEKS.

THEY HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT THE INFORMATION BEING RELEASED AND THE THE QUESTIONS-- NOT THE ANSWERS -- AND WE WANT TO RESPECT THAT AT A TIME WHEN REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ARE UNDER ATTACK AT THE SUPREME COURT.

WE WANT TO BE EXTREMELY THOUGHTFUL.

EVERY OTHER QUESTIONNAIRE GOES UP ON OUR WEB SITE.

>> Jim: THE SENATORS LED THE CHARGE FOR NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS TO BE BANNED ON BEACON HILL, NOT SUCCESSFULLY, BUT THEY BAR VICTIMS FROM SPEAK OUT ABOUT SETTLEMENTS.

YOU, ON THE OTHER HAND, ACCORDING TO SENATOR DIZOGLIO, VOTED NOT TO BAN, AGAINST BANNING SUCH AGREEMENTS IN THE BROOKLINE TOWN MEETING.

ONE, IS THAT TRUE?

AND TWO, WHY?

>> JIM, NOBODY SHOULD EXPERIENCE HARASSMENT OR RETALIATION IN THE WORKPLACE.

IT'S COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE.

ON THIS ISSUE, I STAND BY MY VOTE, AND I STAND WITH EXPERTS IN THE FIELD.

YOU'VE HAD ON THIS SHOW A WOMAN NAMED ELLEN ZUCKER.

SHE IS WORLD RENOWN FORWARD HER DEFENSE OF OF VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT IN THE WORKPLACE.

AND SHE SAID AS RECENTLY AS THIS FRIDAY IN THE "BOSTON BAR JOURNAL" SHE DISAGREES WITH DIANA DIZOGLIO'S STANCE.

SAYING THE SENATOR'S ABSOLUTIST APPROACH ON THE ISSUE IS NOT ONE THAT BEST PROTECTS VICTIMS.

I STAND WITH VICTIMS AND VICTIMS' ADVOCATES ON THIS ISSUE.

>> Jim: AND AGAINST THE BAN.

>> I BELIEVE THAT VICTIMS ARE BEST SERVED-- I AGREE WITH ELLEN ZUCKER-- THAT VICTIMS VICTIMS VICTIMS ARE BEST SERVEDSERVED WHEN THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO A NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT FOR BOTH PARTIES.

>> Jim: WHAT ABOUT IT?

>> I WAS WRITING THE OP-ED PIECE IN CONTRADICTION TO THAT AND I WAS PROUD TO DO SO.

WHAT MY OPPONENT VOTE FORWARD WAS NOT, NOT GIVE VICTIMS AN OPTION, FORCE NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS PAID FOR WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS ON VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION, AND ABUSE IN THE TOWFN BROOKLINE AND WAS ONE OF ONLY 66 PEOPLE IN THE TOWN TO VOTE FOR IT.

THANKFULLY, REST OF THE TOWN MEETING MEMBERS VOTED AGAINST MY OPPONENT'S DECISION.

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, WE KNOW WE HAVE SEEN MANY ALLEGED CIRCUMSTANCES OF IN THE TOWN OF BROOKLINE, UNFORTUNATELY.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD USE TAXES TO COVER UP ABUSE, HARASSMENT, OF ANY KIND.

FOR AN AUDITOR CANDIDATE TO SAY THEY DON'T SUPPORT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUPPORT THE USE OF TAX DOLLARS TO SILENCE VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION, AND PROTECT POWERFUL PERPETRATORS AND POWERFUL POLITICIANS IS UNACCEPTABLE.

>> THE SENATOR HAS HER FACTS WRONG ON THIS.

THERE WAS A SETTLEMENT ON THE CASE THAT WAS THE MOST HIGH-PROFILE.

I THINK YOU ALSO COVERED THIS ON YOUR SHOW, A FIREFIGHTER DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.

I VOTED TO PROVIDE THAT FIREFIGHTER A SETTLEMENT.

AND I VOTE FORWARD NO NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT AS PART OF THAT SETTLEMENT.

SHE HAS HER FACTS WRONG AND IS COMPLIETLY MISSTATING-- >> 2020 VOTES-- >> WHEN SHE SAYS I SOMEHOW FORCED VICTIMS BUT I'M ON THE RECORD AS HAVING VOTED FOR A SETTLEMENT WITHOUT AN N.D.A.

SHE HAS HER FACTS WRONG AND TRYING TO MAKE THIS AN ISSUE THAT IS NOT ISSUE OF AN ISSUE.

I STAND WITH VICTIMS AND ADVOCATES FOR VICTIMS ON THIS ISSUE.

>> Jim: VERY BRIEFLY.

>> MY OPPONENT IS ON THE RECORD.

WE HAVE THE RECORD, AND WE ARE HAPPY TO GIVE IT TO ANY REPORTERS OR ANYONE SEEKING IT TO SUPPORT THE USE OF TAX-FUNDED N.D.A., FORCING, GIVING THE VICTIM NO OPTION, FORCING NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS ON VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT, DISCRIMINATION, AND ABUSE.

>> Jim: WE HAVE TO USE MOVE AHEAD.

SHIRLEY DEYOUNG WROTE EVERY DAY IS A TRANSIT CRISIS.

>> I'M THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN THE RACE COMMITTED TO CONDUCTING A FULL SAFETY AUDIT OF THE "T," THE CAR MEN'S UNION, THE INSPECTORS, THE MACHINISTS, ALL THE UNION WORKERS WHO HAVE STOOD BY MY CALL FOR A SAFETY AUDIT OF THE M.B.T.A.

WE HAVE TRAINS CATCHING ON FIRE.

WE HAVE LINES BEING SHUT DOWN MIEP OPPONENT, FOR AS MUCH AS HE LOVES TO TALK ABOUT BEING ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION, WAS PART OF THE FAILED CULTURE OF TRANSPORTATION THAT LED TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW.

I DON'T THINK ANYONE AT HOME CAN DISAGREE THAT OUR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM HAS NEVER PROPERLY SERVED THE PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS.

WE NEED A SAFETY AUDIT.

WE NEED IT NOW, AND I'M THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN THIS RACE TO-- >> Jim: SPEAK TO BOTH ISSUES, THE AUDIT AND THE ISSUE OF THE FAILED CULTURE.

>> JIM, THANS ISSUE PERSON TO ME.

I TOOK THE M.B.T.A.

WHEN I KISS MY WIFE GOOD-BYE SHE GETS ON THE GREEN LINE.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE TAKEN THE "T" AND QUESTIONED MY SAFETY WHILE RIDING A VEHICLE AND THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE.

WE'RE PUTTING OUT A FOUR-POINT PLAN AVAILABLE TO YOUR VIEWERS RIGHT NOW AS A SNEAK PEEK AND WE'LL BE LAUNCHING IT TOMORROW AT NUBBIAN SQUARE STATION.

WE'LL BE HAPPY TO GET INTO THE DETAILS.

WE ARE GOING TO DO A DAY-ONE ODDIST OF THE M.B.T.A., WE'RE ALSO GOING TO PUT IN A BUDGET REQUEST FOR $2 MILLION SO WE CAN STAFF UP AN OFFICE OF M.B.T.A.

ACCOUNTABILITY WITHIN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE SO WE HAVE THE SPECIALIZED STAFF AND RESOURCES TO ACTUALLY HOSPITAL M.B.T.A.

TO GET BETTER.

ON THE QUESTION OF CULTURE AT THE M.B.T.A., I'M PROWFTD WORK I HAVE DONE TO MAKE THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BETTER.

I LED TO ALL THE CELL PHONE APPLICATIONS THAT TELL YOU IN REAL TIME WHEN YOUR BUS OR TRAIN WILL COME.

I USED ONE OF THOSE TODAY.

WE MADE THE M.B.T.A., THE VERSUS FIRST TRANSIT AGENCY ON THE ENTIRE EAST COAST TO MAKE THOSE APPS AVAILABLE TO RIDERS.

I HAVE MADE THE "T" WORK BETTER.

>> Jim: AT OUR DIDN'T OTHER DAY, YOU OTHER THAN BOTH ASKED IF YOU SUPPORTED GOVERNOR BAKER'S DECISION OF THE MASS SHUTDOWNS.

YOU SAID NO.

MAYOR WU SAID SHE SUPPORTS IT.

SO BOTH GOVERNOR BAKER AND MAYOR WU ARE WRONG WITH THE STRATEGY?

>> I AGREE WITH THE STRATEGY IN THE CONCEPT.

THE IDEA OF GETTING FIVE YEARS' WORTH OF WORK IS ATTRACTIVE.

I DON'T HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE BAKER ADMINISTRATION TO EXECUTE.

>> I DON'T HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THE BAKER ADMINISTRATION TO DO IT, EITHER.

LIKE I SAID, THINGS HAVE GOTTEN TO THIS POINT AFTER YEARS OF NOT BEING HANDLED PREVIOUSLY FROM PRIOR ADMINISTRATIONS AS WELL, WHILE MY OPPONENT WAS ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION AND DID NOT DEAL WITH THESE SAFETY ISSUES BACK THEN.

WE ARE NOW LIVING WHAT WE'RE LIVING BECAUSE THINGS WEREN'T HANDLED BACK THEN AND NEED TO BE HANDLED NOW.

I HAVE CONTINUED TO CALL ON MY OPPONENT TO AGREE TO DO A SAFETY ODD EXIT HE HAS STILL NOT AGREED TO DO IT.

>> WE NEED MORE THAN PRESS RELEASES TO FIX THIS ISSUE.

THAT'S WHAT THE SENATOR IS OFFERING, A PRESS RELEASE.

I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO GO TO MY WEB SITE AND READ OUR FOUR-POINT IN-DEPTH PLAN WHICH WILL TALK ABOUT HOW THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE CAN HELP, BE A PART FIXING THE M.B.T.A.

>> Jim: I WOULD ASSUME EVERY SINGLE PERSON WATCHING IS AWARE OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE STUDY ABOUT THE WEALTH GAP IN THIS COMMUNITY.

$250,000 FOR A WHITE FAMILY, $8 FOR A BLACK FAMILY.

$3500 PUERTO RICAN FAMILY, ZERO FOR A DOMINICAN FAMILY.

WHAT CAN THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE DO REDUCE THAT DISPARITY.

>> IT'S COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE THAT'S THE STATUS QUO IN OUR SOCIETY.

I THINK A CENTRAL ROLE IS LOOK AT CONTRACTING AND HOW WE ARE INVESTING OUR DOLLARS.

THE VERSUS FIRST PLAN WE PUT OUT ON THIS CAMPAIGN WAS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE $5.3 BILLION IN FEDERAL STIMULUS DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND THE NEXT THREE TO FOUR YEARS.

WE'RE ADOPTING MANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF WHAT'S CALLED THE RACIAL EQUITY SCORE KARKD DEVELOPED BY N.A.A.C.P., THE MASS PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION OTHER ANDS SO WE HAVE EQUITY METRICS TO DETERMINE HOW THOSE DOLLARS ARE BEING SPENT AND IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY MAKING OUR COMMUNITIES MORE FAIR, MORE QITDABLE, AND ADDRESSING THAT WEALTH GAP.

>> I WOULD IMPLEMENT MY SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY AUDIT PLAN AS SOMEONE WHO WAS BORN TO A 17-YEAR-OLD SINGLE MOM AND GREW UP IN LAWRENCE.

YOU MENTIONED DOMINICAN FAMILIES.

MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS ARE DOMINICAN.

I LEARNED HOW TO SPEAK SPANISH SO I COULD BETTER WORK ALONESIDE MY NEIGHBORS AND THE PEOPLE I GREW UP WITH IN OUR COMMUNITIES WHO WANT NOTHING MORE THAN TO HAVE A VOICE IN WHAT IS HAPPENING IN STATE GOVERNMENT AND BE HEARD.

AS PART OF MY SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY AUDIT I HAVE A PLAN TO HELP DIVERSIFY OUR STATE CONTRACTING AND PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES.

GBH HAS DONE GREAT REPORTING.

ONLY 0.05% OF CONTRACTS GO OUT TO MINORITY BUSINESSES.

WE CAN DO BETTER.

AND WE SEEK TO LOOK AT THESE CONTRACTS AND FIND A WAY FOR THE SYSTEM TO WORK MORE EQUITABLY IN MASSACHUSETTS, REGARDLESS OF OUR FAMILY BACKGROUND OR BANK BALANCE OR SWRIB CODE.

>> Jim: THE AUDITOR, SUZANNE BUMP, DID AN AUDIT ABOUT WORKERS IN PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS AND AS I'M SURE YOU BOTH KNOW, 60% OF THEM HAD NO WOMEN, A QUARTER OF THEM HAD NO PEOPLE OF COLOR.

THEY'VE ALSO DONE THE REPORTING ON THE CONTRACTS THEMSELVES AND HOW FEW GO TO MINORITY-OWNED FIRMS.

WHAT ELSE SHOULD THE AUDITOR BE DOING ON THAT MINORITY CONTRACTING FRONT WHEN THE NUMBERS SO PITIFUL QUICKLY?

>> THIS IS THE FIRST THREE POINTS OF MY SOCIAL JUSTICE EQUITY AUDIT PLAN.

I WOULD LIKE TO DO A DEEP DIVE INTO DIFFERENT STATE AGENCIES TO SEE IF THEY ARE COMPLYING WITH ANY SORT OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION MODEL, SUCH AS MASSPORT, WHICH HAS A 25-POINT DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION MOD TOLL TRY TO MAKE SURE WE ARE ACTUALLY MEETING OUR D.E.I.

GOAL.

THE CITY OF BOSTON HAS ALSO DONE A LOT OF WORK ON THIS FRONT, BUT NOT ALL STATE AGENCIES ARE ACTUALLY DOING THIS.

I WOULD USE THE TAXPAYER PROTECTION ACT TO GO INTO THESE R.F.P.

PROCESSES, THESE PROCUREMENT PROCESSES AND ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE CONTRACTS THEMSELVES AND WHAT THE PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.

THAT IS MEANT TO SAVE TAXPAYER DOLLARS, BUT IT CAN ALSO BE USED TO INCREASE EQUITY ACROSS THE BOARD TO MAKE SURE WORKING FAMILIES ARE GETTING ACCESS TO THESE IMPORTANT CONTRACTS.

>> Jim: HOW ABOUT YOU?

>> I'M GLATD SENATOR MENTIONED THE MASSPORT MODEL.

THE PERSON WHO CREATED THAT MOD CELL SUPPORTING MY CAMPAIGN.

I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING THE SENATOR TALK IN MORE IN-DEPTH HOW THE MODEL WORKS.

I'M NOT SURE THE SENATOR COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDS HOW IT WORKS.

>> Jim: THAT'S A TIE ON THAT FRONT.

( LAUGHTER ).

>> IF I MIGHT JUST SAY, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, CHRIS, THE COMMENT ABOUT UNDERSTANDING AS THE SENATE CHAIR OF THE SMALL-BUSINESS COMMITTEE, I WORKED DIRECTLY WITH THE BLACK ECONOMIC COUNCIL OF MASSACHUSETTS ON PROVISIONS TO INCREASE ACCOUNTABILITY AROUND OUR STATE'S SUPPLIER DIVERSITY OFFICE AND ACTUALLY, MY OFFICE PLAYED AN INSTRUMENTAL ROLE IN MAKING SURE THAT THE SUPPLIER DIVERSITY OFFICE IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE REGARDING THIS ADMINISTRATION'S MANDATE TO DIVERSIFY EQUITY IN STATE CONTRACT.

>> Jim: I HAVE TO HOLD YOU THERE.

>> I UNDERSTAND VERY WELL.

THOUGH, I AM USED TO MEN LIKE MY OPPONENT UP ON BEACON HILL TRYING TO DISCREDIT THE WORK OF WOMEN.

>> Jim: YOU HAVE 15 SECONDS.

>> I FIND THAT UNFORTUNATE.

>> I DIDN'T HEAR AN EXPLANATION OF HOW THE MASS MODEL WORKS AND I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON THAT.

>> Jim: WHAT'S THE FIRST AUDIT AND WHY, SENATOR.

YOU HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME BECAUSE OF ME SO WE'LL TRY TO BEND IT BACK NADIRECTION.

GO AHEAD.

>> WE CAN DO MANY THINGS TO START.

WHAT I WANT TO DO FIRST IS HAVE THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE AUDITORS TAKE A LOOK AT THE OFFICE AND DO AN AUDIT OF THE OFFICE SO THAT WHEN I COME INTO THE OFFICE I'M ABLE TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE CHALLENGES IN THE OFFICE THAT NEED TO BE FIXED.

AND I WOULD DO AN AUDIT ON THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE.

THEN GET TO WORK IMPLEMENTING MY SOCIAL JUSTICE EQUITY PLAN SHOWN MY WEB SITE THAT SEEKS TO ADDRESS EQUITY IN THINGS LIKE HOUSING, MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES, ADDICTION SERVICES, PAY EQUITY-- >> Jim: YOU BELIEVE YOU CAN AUDIT THE LEGISLATURE.

YOUR TWO PREDECESSORS, IF YOU'RE ELECTED, DON'T AGREE WITH YOU.

WHY DO YOU THINK YOU HAVE THE POWER TO AUDIT THE LEGISLATURE?

>> IT WAS DONE BACK IN 1922, AND IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE.

IT'S BEEN DONE SUBSEQUENTLY AFTER THAT GLUM SUZANNE BUMP AND JOE DeNUCCI DON'T AGREE WITH YOU.

>> I'M VERY PROUD TO HAVE AUDITOR BUMP'S SUPPORT IN THIS RACE.

SHE'S THE FIRST WOMAN TO EVER HOLD THE OFFICE.

SHE'S THE PERSON WHO KNOWS THE OFFICE BEST AND SHE IS STRONGLY ON MY SIDE ALONG WITH 24 WOMEN IN THE LEGISLATURES, INCLUDING MANY OF THE SENATE COLLEAGUES AND THE SENATE PRESIDENT ANNOUNCED HER SUPPORT FOR ME TODAY.

PEOPLE LIKE THAT HAVE WORKED WITH BOTH PEOPLE IN THIS RACE.

THEY SAT DOWN AND THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND ARE SQUARELY ON MY SIDE.

I DON'T SEE AUTHORITY FOR THE AUDITOR TO AUDIT THE LEGISLATURE.

CERTAINLY I'M GOING TO USE THE OFFICE FOR ITS FULL POTENTIAL IF THAT IS SOMETHING A GENERAL COUNSEL THEY HIRE SAYS IS A POSSIBILITY, ABSOLUTELY, WE DOLL IT.

>> Jim: WHAT'S YOUR FIRST AUDIT AND WHY?

SORT OF WHAT'S THE THINKING BEHIND THE AUDITING THAT YOU'D DO?

>> JIRNLG WE HAVEN'T TALKED TODAY ABOUT MY PLAN TO DO CARCON ACCOUNTING, TO MAKE THE OFFICE A NATIONAL LEADER ON CLIMATE BY HOLDING AGENCIES ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS THAT REQUIRE THEM TO REDUCE EMISSIONS.

AND CREATE AN OFFICE ON ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, SO PEOPLE ON THE FRONT LINES OF THE CRIME SUMMIT CLIEMENT CRISIS HAVE A SEAT AT THE TABLE ON BEACON HILL.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEIR VOICES ARE HEARD.

WE'RE GOING TO TACKLE TOUGH ISSUES LIKE REFORM OF THE SYSTEM STATE POLICE.

I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR TROOPERS ON THE FRONT LINE BUT WE NEED OVERSIGHT AND REFORM OF THAT AGENCY.

>> OF COURSE MY OPPONENT HAS THE SUPPORT OF FOLKS LIKE THE SENATE PRESIDENT AND THE INCUMBENT AUDITOR THAT I HAVE TAKEN TO TASK ON WHY THINGS LIKE AUDITING THE ABUSE OF TAXPAYER-FUNDED N.D.A.s HAVE NOT BEEN ANALYZED AS I'VE BEEN ASKING.

OF COURSE HE HAS THE SUPPORT.

>> Jim: THE SENATE PASSED YOUR N.D.A.

>> THE SENATE DID.

STATE AUDITOR HAS NOT ODD TED THIS, AS I HAVE REQUESTED IN RECENT YEARS.

OF COURSE MY OPPONENT HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE LEGISLATIVE ESTABLISHMENT, BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN CALLING TO AUDIT.

>> Jim: I HAVE TO BRING BALANCE BACK TO THE TIME.

QUICK RESPONSE.

>> YOU KNOW I HAVE TAKEN ON THE ESTABLISHMENTALS THE COFOUNDER OF "NO BOSTON OLYMPICS."

YOU FOLLOWED THAT AND I THINK YOU WERE SKEPTICAL OF MY CHANCES EARLY ON.

>> Jim: I WAS.

>> WE GOT ORGANIZED AND HAVE THE FACTS AND THE DATA.

THE TAKEAWAY FROM NO, WHEN YOU PUT GOOD DATA AND INFORMATION IN FRONT OF THE PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS, WE MAKE SMART DECISION.

THAT'S THE JOB OF THE STATE AUDITOR.

>> Jim: WAIT, I ONLY HAVE A COUPLE THINGS LEFT AND I HAVE VERY LITTLE TIME.

TOM WOLAC IN GREAT REPORTING IN THE "GLOBE," KEPT REMINDING US WHERE THE JUDICIARY, SLAWRKT AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH BELIEVE THEY'RE EXEMPT FROM OPEN MEETING LAWS.

AND IF IT IS, IT IS A-- IS IT A FULL ZURIN TO THINK THE LEGISLATURE WOULD EVER CHANGE THAT?

OR DO YOU THINK YOU COULD HELP LEAD SUCH A CHARGE?

>> I THINK IT'S WORTH A SHOT, ABSOLUTELY.

AND THERE'S A REAL CONTRAST IN THIS RACE.

MY OPPONENT, ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT MAKING THE LEGISLATURE SUBJECT TO THE PUBLIC RECORD LAW.

SHE HAS NEVER FILED LEGISLATION pIN 10 YEARS OF WORKING IN WORKING IN THE LEGISLATURE TO DO, THAT AND THE BILL FILED BY SENATOR JAMIE ELDDRIJ, THE SENATOR DIDN'T COSPONSOR THAT BILL.

SENATOR ELBRIDGE HAS ENFORCED ME IN THIS RACE.

>> Jim: IS THAT TRUE?

>> I HAVE ABSOLUTELY SUPPORTED PUBLIC RECORDS CHANGES.

I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT FOR YEARS.

>> Jim: DID YOU SPONSOR THAT BILL?

>> NO, I DIDN'T COSPONSOR A BILL.

SENATOR ELDRIDGE DID NOT CALL ME AND ASK ME TO COSPONSOR THE BILL.

I FILED MY OWN LEGISLATION OF 21 AMENDMENTS TO OUR SENATE RULES PACKAGE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO READ BILLS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THEM, THAT WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE MINUTE TO READ A BILL, JIM.

THAT'S ALL I'VE BEEN ASKED IN THE PAST.

I'VE BEEN DENIED THAT OPPORTUNITY.

THE SENATE PRESIDENT, THAT MY OPPONENT IS ENDORSED BY, SHOT DOWN MY BILL TO HAVE AT LEAST AN HOUR TO READ A BILL BEFORE WE VOTE FOR THEM.

I HAVE BEEN TAKING MY LEADERSHIP TO TASK FOR GOING ON 10 YEARS NOW, 10 YEARS.

AND I AM THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN THIS RACE THAT HAS CALLED FOR A FULL LEGISLATIVE AUDIT.

WOULD YOU ENDORSE ME, JIM, FIST CALLING FOR AN AUDIT OF YOU?

PROBABLY NOT.

SO I AM TAKING ON THE ESTABLISHMENT THAT MY OPPONENT IS SUPPORTED AND ENRSED BY-- >> Jim: I'M THINKING, BY THE WAY.

>> MY OPPONENT IS THE ESTABLISHMENT PICK.

IF YOU WANT THE STATUS QUO, VOTE FOR MY OPPONENT.

IF YOU WANT BOLD AND MEANINGFUL CHANGE, I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.

>> Jim: ONE QUESTION ABOUT BOLD AND MEANINGFUL CHANGE THE LEGISLATURE IS OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRATIC AND WILL BE IN THE FALL.

IF POLLS ARE TO BE BELIEVED, WE WILL HAVE A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR.

WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT VIRTUALLY COMPLETELY CONTROLLED BY DEMOCRATS.

WHY WOULD IT NOT BE BETTER TO HAVE A REPUBLICAN AS AUDITOR OF THE OPPOSING PARTY AS SOMEONE WHO OVERSEES THE SPENDING OF THAT TOTALLY DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR-- GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE IN MASSACHUSETTS, SENATOR?

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE HAVE SOMEBODY THAT CAN STAND UP AND SPEAK TRUTH TO BOTH PARTIES.

WHEN I WAS SEXUALLY HARASSED AS A LEGISLATIVE AIDE, I DECIDED NOT TO LET THEM GET RID OF ME OR SILENCE ME WITH A NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT.

I DECIDED INSTEAD TO COME BACK, RUN FOR STATE REP, AND BECAME THE YOUNGEST WOMAN SERVING IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AT THAT TIME.

I WENT TOE TO TOW WITH DILEO TO SILENCE VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT.

MY OPPONENT SUPPORTS WILL THE TAXPAYER-FUNDED N.D.A.s, AND I HAVE GONE TOE TO TOE WITH GOVERNMENT BAKE OR THIS.

IT IS IMPORTANT FOR SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO BE INDEPENDENT AND STAND UP AND SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER.

>> Jim: WHY NOT A REPUBLICAN?

>> I THINK INDEPENDENCE IS IMPORTANT IN THIS ROLE.

I TAKE ON LEADERS, AND BEING OUTSPENT 1,500 TO ONE.

I HAVE WON BY WINNING THE "NO BOSTON OLYMPICS" DEBATE.

I THINK IT'S ALSO VERY IMPORTANT HERE WHILE THIS ROLE IS NOT PARTISAN THAT WE HAVE SOMEONE RUNNING FOR THIS OFFICE WHO SHARES OUR VALUES.

AND THE SENATOR FURC LOOK AT HER VOTING RECORD, HAS ONE OF THE MOST CONSERVATIVE VOTING RECORDS IN THE ENTIRE STATE LEGISLATURE.

SHE HAS VOTEED IN THE PAST AGAINST TRANSGENDER RIGHTS, AGAINST GUN CONTROL, AGAINST POLICE REFORM.

>> EXCUSE ME.

>> TIME AFTER TIME-- >> Jim: LET HIM FINISH.

>> HER VALUES HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE A SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT.

AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS WANT IN THIS ELECTION.

>> Jim: WE HAVE 15 SECONDS.

>> MY OPPONENT IS ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT.

I HAVE A STRONG RECORD NOT ONLY ON TRANSGENDER RIGHTS.

I HAVE THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE TWO FIRST ELECTED TRANSGENDER WOMEN IN THE COMMONWEALTH BECAUSE OF TAKING THAT HISTORIC VOTE TO SUPPORT TRANSGENDER RIGHTS, COUNCILOR HOLE RYAN AND JACKIE RYAN WHO STRONGLY SUPPORT ME BECAUSE I HAVE A STRONG AND PROVEN TAX RECORD.

>> Jim: WE HAVE TO GO.

>> OKAY, SO GREAT TO BE HERE.

>> THANKS A LOT, JIM.

>> Jim: GOOD LUCK TO YOU BOTH.

THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT, BUT COME BACK TOMORROW FOR A SPECIAL DEBATE-SERIES "EXTRA" HERE IN "GREATER BOSTON," WITH A LOOK AT THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR.

WHILE CHRIS DOUGHTY HAS AGREED TO JOIN US FOR A DEBATE, HIS OPPONENT, GEOFF DIEHL, HAS NOT.

SO IN LIEU OF A TRUE FACE-OFF, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK BACK AT BOTH THEIR PAST APPEARANCES ON THIS SHOW AND ADAM REILLY WILL JOIN ME TO TAKE STOCK OF THE MAJOR UPDATES AND CHANGES, IF ANY, IN POLICY AND PUBLIC PRONOUNCEMENTS SINCE.

THEN, WEDNESDAY, WE'LL WRAP UP OUR 2022 PRIMARY DEBATES WITH THE CANDIDATES FOR SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH: SEVEN-TERM INCUMBENT BILL GALVIN AND PRESIDENT OF THE BOSTON N.A.A.C.P., TANISHA SULLIVAN.

pTHAT'S WEDNESDAY AT 7:00 HERE ON GBH2, OR SEE IT FIRST ON THE GBH NEWS YOUTUBE PAGE AT 6:30.

THE "BOSTON GLOBE," WCVB, AND WBUR ARE ALSO CONTINUING THEIR SERIES OF PRIMARY RADIO DEBATES THIS WEEK, AS WELL.

I'D URGE YOU TO FOLLOW THEM.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

SEE YOU TOMORROW.

Captioned by Media Access Group at WGBH access.wgbh.org