Kentucky.

Tonight I'm Laura Rogers.

Thank you for joining us for the first time in more than 20 years, Kentucky's sixth district congressional seat is open, meaning the incumbent isn't seeking reelection.

Four candidates are vying to replace Republican AndyBarr, who is running for U.S.

Senate.

Two candidates met our criteria to appear on tonight's program.

Republican Ralph invitation.

Democrat Zach Dembo accepted.

He is a U.S.

Navy veteran and a former federal prosecutor.

The sixth district includes much of Central Kentucky.

It covers all or part of 16 counties from Mercer and Garrard County through Nicholas and Fleming County, as well as Fayette, Scott and Madison counties.

As always, we would love to hear from you.

You can send your questions and comments through X at Pub Affairs KET.

Send an email to KY tonight at KET dot ORG or use the web form at ket.org/ky.

Tonight.

You can also call us at one 800 4947605.

Mr.

Dimbo, we welcome you this evening.

>> Thank you for havingme.

It's an honor to be here.

>> Well, you're very welcome.

You have never held an elected position.

Why do you think voters in Kentucky's sixth congressional District should send you to Washington?

>> Well, Laura, all over the district, what I keep hearing is that folks are fed upwith politics as usual.

They're fed up with both parties.

They're fed up of the corruption coming out of D.C.

and they want to change.

My whole career has been Nonpartizan public service, whether it was serving on active dutyin the Navy, being an eighth grade English teacher or being a here in Lexington.

What I'm hearing is folks want a new face and a new approach.

That's what we represent.

That's what our campaign represents.

And that's what I want to doin Congress is really take on this corruption that's driving up costs on all Central Kentucky homes and needs to be fought by a former corruption prosecutor.

>> When you say corruption, can you give an a specific example of what you plan to do to root it out?

>> Sure.

Right now, in 2026, it is still legal for members of Congress to trade individual stocks based on information that you and I don't have.

I don'tsee how you can see that as anything but corruption.

Similarly, members of Congress are allowed to be lobbyists only a year after they leave.

This is why I've come outin favor of a lifetime ban lobbying and a ban on stock trading for members of Congress.

I will sell any individual stocks I own if I'm lucky enough to be a member of Congress.

But we need to make sure all members of Congress from both parties are banned from trading stocks.

>> Do you think you could get bipartisan support for something like that?

>> I do, because all I'm hearing from everyone is constituents are not feeling well served by It would be anenormously popular decision, and I think if folks are smart and they're truly listening to their constituents, doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican, you should be in favor of this.

I do wonder my opponent does have up to $900,000 in stocks.

I hope he would make the same commitment if he's elected, but I'm sure there areother Republicans who would be willing to make that commitment and work with Democrats to get it done.

>> Well, I would venture to guess something else that you're hearing from voters on the campaign trail would be about the rising cost of living and affordability.

If elected, what could you realistically do as a member of Congress to bring down the cost of essentials likegas and groceries?

>> I do hear about that all the time.

That is one of the biggest issues that central Kentuckians are facing.

Everything the good thing is we can fix that just by Congress doing its dang job right.

These tariffs that are taxes being passed on to all ofus, adding $1,000 to every Central Kentucky household.

Congress has control over that in the Constitution.

The only reason these tariffs have been allowed to be in placeis because Congresshas been too scaredand too spineless to stand up to Similarly, the war in Iran is driving up gas and diesel costs all over Central Kentucky.

It's crushing everyday Kentuckians, especially our farming community.

The Congress has the power to intervene in this war on Iran.

And again, we've seen that there are two spineless and playing politics with it.

Rather thanfighting for us.

Finally, a lot of people are worried about the cost of health care.

This is a district that relies heavily on Medicaid.

Ourrural hospitals rely heavily on Medicaid.

Congress needs to stop these disastrous cuts from coming into effect in 2027.

All of it boils down to people not acting like career politicians andinstead acting in the bestinterests of their constituents.

>> You appeared here on KET during the primary, and you were the only Democratic candidate at the desk that did not support Medicare for all.

And because if we switched now, Robert F Kennedy Jr would be in charge.

You didn't feel comfortablewith that.

However, he will not always be the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

So should Medicare for all.

Should that be the ultimate goal?

And if so, how do we get there?

>> Look, the health caresystem is not working for folks.

I hear that across the district.

Too many people are sick because they're poor or poor because they're sick.

It's got to be changed.We need a major overhaul now.

We've tried for Medicare for all in the past, in a time where we had a Democratic House, a Democratic Senate and a Democratic White House, and one concern I hear, especially from members of unions, are that they like their negotiated health care plans, thatthey fought hard to earn.

And come in and kick people off health care plans, they like, that's going to leave them in a worse situation thanbefore.

But I do think as part of this overhaul, a public option has got to be a starting point.

There has to be an ability for people toget cheaper, affordable health care.

And a way, by the way, to intervene against greedy pharmaceutical companies and some of these other gouging patients instead of providing quality care.

>> So what steps do youthink the federal governmentshould take to reduce the cost of health care?

>> Well, first and foremost, we have to reduce these terrible Medicaid cuts.

I mean, it's already too expensive for folks in Central, Kentucky to be able to afford health care.

And for this one big, beautiful bill to come 200,000 Kentuckians off their health care to possibly risk closing six rural hospitals right here in the district is a huge step in the wrong direction.

We have to reverse that.

We also need to make sure that these subsidies under the Affordable Care Act that were in place for years, that people were planning on and were allowedto expire again because Congress job.

We need to bring those subsidies back.

But then writ large, we need people who are there to represent the working folks of Central, Kentucky, and not the pharmaceuticals and not big business.

And the problem is with the role of corporate money in our politics andsome of the corruption you and I have been talking about.

We're not seeing that out of Congress right now.

>> We do have a pretty staggering federal deficit.

So how for those subsidies and other measures that you wantto take to reduce thecost of health care?

>> Look, everything in government is a matter of policy choices right now.

We have a Congress that's allowing a war that's cost $43 billion to continue on into effect without any check.

It's clear we have the money to do these things.I mean, imagine all the amazing things we could do with 43 billion instead of a war that's never been sold to the American people and is failing in all of its strategic objectives.

There are ways that we can fix the tax code to make sure that folks on Wall Street making hundreds of millions are paying the same tax rate as small businesses on Main Street.

There are things we can do.

And so I reject the idea that it's an either or.

I think we start to shrink the deficit and debt while ensuring we're taking on things thatreally matter to our constituents.

>> And you have been vocal about being in opposition to the war with Iran.

President Donald Trump has said that Iran was close to developing nuclear weapons.

Do you support the idea that Iran shouldnot have nuclear capabilities?

>> Of course, Iran should never be allowed to weapons, and I'm firmly in favor of ensuring Iran is treated as the enemy of America, that it is.

The problem is the way we're going about it is accomplishingnone of the strategic objectives that we'd want to see, and that I'dwant to see.

As a veteran, you know, the president has laid out a series of goals, none of which we've met.

We do not have a denuclearized Iran.

have a regime that is less extreme.

If anything, it's more extreme.

And in the meantime, there seems to beno exit strategy and no end in sight.

While all of us suffer at the gas pump, while we have American service members dying, including two Kentuckians, and unfortunately, Congress is just allowing this out of control war to continue on.

You know, when the president ran, he promised an foreign wars.

And I didn't agreewith some of the things thepresident said.

That's one thing I agreed with him on.

And he's betrayed folks who trusted him when he made that promise.

>> Doyou support continued military aid to Israel?

>> So I think that this government, the Netanyahu government, has made some really terrible, inhumane decisions in how it's handled the situation in Gaza.

I do not support almost anything that the Netanyahu government has done.

However, I will always support Israel's right to exist.

And so my concern is, just as I, as an American, don't want to be blamed for some of the terrible decisions of this administration.

Idon't think the Israeli people deserve blame for this government that hopefully will no longer be in pretty soon whenthey have elections over in Israel.

I want to make sure that American values are going to be understood and reflected in any decision we make.

I don't think what the Netanyahu government hasbeen doing is consistent with American valuesat all.

I wouldnot support it.

But if there's a new regime that comes in and a better government, I think we need to keep inmind that we treat Israel like any other ally.

And if they're doing things that are in accordance with American interests, we support them.

If they do things that them, we don't.

>> Let's move to artificial intelligence.

You have said you'dlike to see aggressive legislation that regulates AI.

What should that legislation look like?

And are you concerned that putting up too many guardrails could slow innovation and allow countries like China to dominate the AI race?

>> What we've heard about AI in the last few weeks has been terrifying.

We about AI doing things that the AI companies themselves didn't know, that these AI bots were doing.

It shows that we need aggressive legislation from this Congress.

And whatdoes this Congress do?

Instead of putting that legislation in to help us, it goes home early and takes a vacation.

Just another example of the do nothingness of this Congress.

I think the point you bring up choice between innovation in China and this.

We are actively helping China to develop better AI capabilities because we don't have proper restraints on chips that are are sent there.

So whatwe need to dois make sure we're not sending China the tools it needs to continue to advance in AI, while at the same timeputting up much needed guardrails that even members of the AI corporate community have been need and we should have done this yesterday, but it's got to be right at the top of our priorities.

If we get into Congress, because I am scared about what AI is going to do if we don't have Congress coming in to stand up forregular workingfolks.

>> And of course, when you talk about AI, that comes along with the data center discussion.

And we see the controversy in the people are very concerned about the thought of data centers coming into their communities.

However we necessary infrastructure.

So where do you stand on the placement and construction of these data centers?

>> You're absolutely right.

People are scared.

People are scared because they're seeing these big corporations coming in and forcing data centers where the communities don't want them.

And so I've said publicly, it's on my website as well, that Congress needs to make sure that allowed to occur and that it takes into account input.

And there's transparency.

We've seen successes in this district.

Woodford County enacted enacted the first data center ban.

That was what theydetermined was appropriatefor their citizens.

Lexington has extended a local moratorium.

Congress needs to make sure we are supporting those decisions.

But no matter what, if a community have a data center, Congress needs to make sure that it's protecting clean air, clean water, and that no individual person payingfor utilities experiences, any increase in cost that needs to be borne entirely by the AI data center.

But generally speaking, Congress needs to doa much better job interms of protecting these communities who feel that their agency is being taken away by all over the world who are making billions that they can't stand up to.

>> There is criticism of a recent campaign ad that seeks to tie your opponent to former Governor Matt Bevin, Senate President Robert Stivers.

Among those critics, he says only Matt Bevin is responsible for the sins of Matt Bevin, and any attempt to blame someone else is simply gutter politics.

He calls your quote, false and misleading.

Your response to that?

>> Well, there's only one person who signed up to be Matt Evans running mate in 2019, having seen Bevin's legacy of attacking teachers, attacking seniors.

And that was Ralph Alvarado whenhe got in the race, my opponent said he, shared Matt Bevin's vision after the pardons that this ad covers, where Matt Bevin pardoned child rapist and later it was found hewas getting donations from the family members of some of these folks.

My opponent did not say one word publicly against it, and as a matter of fact, it was later reportedin 2022 that Matt Bevin was still confiding in my opponent when he was considering yet another run at governor.

He is tied to Matt Bevin because he chose to sign on with biggestrace he's ever run, and he's never changed his tune until it became politically expedient here, which is the sort ofcareer politician move that folks in Central Kentucky arefed up with.

>> The Kentucky FraternalOrder of Policehas endorsed your opponent, former Kentucky state trooper, who was indicted for excessive force, among other charges, has alleged that as a federal says you didn'tlisten to his side of the story.

He was later acquitted.

Doyou consider yourself an ally tolaw enforcement?

>> I'm the onlyveteran in this race.

I am the only prosecutor in this race.

I'm the only person who's put dangerous criminals behind bars in this race.

And I was onlyable to do that because as a prosecutor, I was supported by amazing law enforcement cases I got were investigated by police, deputy sheriffs, and then ultimately my federal partners at the FBI, DEA and other agencies.

And so I will always be pro-law enforcement, no matter what anyone else says.

And my record shows that.

>> We want to take aviewer question now.

And this is going back to health care.

Martin from Lexington asks with the Medicare fund facing a shortfall in 2032 or 2033, what paths do you think we should take to address Medicare?

>> It's a great question.

And look, we have a real problem wherein both parties are spending without any account for the debt and deficit, we're seeing problems with Medicare.

There's also worries about Social Security.

Both of those are absolutely vital promises that have been made to our seniors.

And we can't consider it an option for them not to be servingour seniors.

So one thing that I proposed, in addition tomaybe not spending 43 billion on an endless foreign war, would be closing the carried interest tax loophole, which is something that allows rich hedge fund managers on Wall Street to get away with payingless taxes.

There are all sorts of ways in which our tax structure currently benefits the ultra wealthy and big corporations.

That's a policy choice that we can change to make sure we're prioritizing Medicare and Social Security, because that's what weneed to be doing.

These folkspaid in, and they deserve to get what they paid in for.

>> Would you like to see higher taxes on the ultra rich?

>> Absolutely.

>> I want to ask you about let's see a few things here.I want to go back to the law enforcement question, because we were is a narrative across the country that Democrats are soft on crime.

Do you agree or disagree?

And do you think the party's policies and leadership are effective at strengthening public safety?

>> Look, I have never run for office before.

I am not a pundit or a career politician.

I can't tell you what other national Democrats are like.

I'll tell you this Democrat is the only candidate who has worked sideby side with law enforcement, who is unabashedly pro-public safety and has put dangerous criminals behind bars.

I don't know about what the rest of thenational Democratsare doing.

I'll tell you, I'm not happy with either party right now.

I'm certainly not happy with the mess we have in the white House.

And this do nothingCongress.

There are lots of things that the National Democrats have done that but right now I'm just focusing on these 16 counties where I was lucky enough to call home.

>> Flock cameras havealso come under scrutiny across the country, and that includes here in the Commonwealth and several local police agencies.

Do support flock cameras.

They say that they area powerful crime solving tool.

Conversely, though, we have seen somecases of abuse and maybe even mistaken identity in some situations.

So do you the use of flock cameras, and are you concerned about the U.S.

becoming a surveillance state?

>> Look, there have been some really well documented abuses of flock cameras thatare very concerning.We need to make sure, if any law enforcement agency is asking for flock cameras, that there is control over their ability to use them properly, that any abuses are regulated and addressed appropriately, and have appropriate data security for them.

I understand why folks would be scared about it.

It makes sense, and there is a concern about it being a surveillance state.If these aren't being properly controlled.

Andso I'm glad to see that, for example, in Lexington, they're doing a review of flock camera policies.

I think that's appropriate.

Every locality needs to be doing that because you don't want togive that much power to any there's accountability.

>> We'll move to immigration now.

An ad paid for by a PAC that islinked to President Donald Trump claims that you support, quote, full amnesty for illegal immigrants, giving them welfare, health care, and more.

Your own website says that you support a path to citizenship.

Should someone who has illegally entered the country have access to U.S.

taxpayer funded programs?

>> No, they should not.

And those ads are complete lies.

They desperate because they're up against a prosecutor who's actually prosecuted folks who are here illegally and committed dangerous crimes.

And that was absolutely theright thing to do.

And I'm the only person in the race who can say that.

However, I think we can all acknowledge this immigration system is broken.

We have not seen Congress take it on in a big way long.

And for folks who aren't here committing dangerous crimes, who have been here for 20 or 30 years, I was just talking to some members of the farming community who were talking about whatimportant work these folks are doing for our farming community, construction industry, service industry.

When folks are here for 20 or 30 years doing the right thing, we owe it to these industries, to them, and to ourselves.

As a nation of immigrants to create a system through which they can have legal pathway to citizenship.

>> Another question from a viewer.

Now this is from Chris and Lexington.

What would you do to reduce oil prices if we abruptly end the war in Iran and Iran continues to attack oil tankers on the Strait of Hormuz?

>> Well, one thing we need to be thinking aboutis making sure we are sources of oil.

We've been doing a goodjob with domestic production, but we've seen other partners that wecould work with.

For example, I know Canada has a good amount of oil production.

Unfortunately, we're engaged in a senseless trade war with them and a situation where we are treating our allies as enemies and our enemies as allies.

I'll tell youwhat I wouldn't do would paying the Putin regime for their oil and enriching a rogue nation instead of taking on the real problem, which,as you rightly point out,is the Strait of Hormuz and making sure thatwe get it reopened.

>> We'll take another viewer question here.

And this is from Versailles, since Mr.

Alvarado seems to be shiftingtowards being more independent and wants to bring the cost of health care down and lower costs in positions closer to your views.

Can you explain what differencesyou and Mr.

Alvarado have in policies and goals from the federal government?

>> Mr.

Alvarado is clearly not going to be independent.

We know that because the only advertising he used in the primary was how many times he backed the president.

Since then, we've seen the speaker of theHouse, Mike Johnson, flown in his campaign.

We've seen Jim Jordan flown in to prop up his campaign.

We've seen a lot of DC insiders being sent here.

They wouldn't come here ifthey didn't know he'd be a rubber stamp for everything.

This failed majority has wanted and done, which has beennothing other than giving up their power based on political cowardice.

That's the major difference.

If folks with the status quo, that is exactly what my opponent represents.

If they want change, if they want a new face, if they want someone who doesn't owe either party anything and is ready to take on the corruption head on, that's what this campaign represents.

And that's the choicethese voters face in November.

>> Also, a national party politics.

If Democrats do win the House majority in midterms, Republicans say that your party will seek to impeach the president and members of his cabinet.

If you're elected and you join that majority, would you support those actions of pursuing impeachment?

>> My priority is fighting for working folks in Central Kentucky.

Idon't see how impeaching the president a third time is going to put another dollar in the pocket of theworking moms that I'm talking talking to.

That's what I'm laser focused on, and that's what we have to do.

If we get a change in the in theHouse of Representatives, we have to be fighting for working people.

That's all I care about.

>> And this race is projected to be a tight race.

And you do have a lot of diversity in your district because you have urban areas like Lexington, Richmond, Georgetown.

You areas, of course.

How are you seeking.

This seems to have been an issue forthe Democratic Party in Kentuckyto bridge that divide between rural and urban.

We've seen some erosion of support in rural areas.

What are you doing to appeal to those voters?

>> Well, well, I agree, national Democrats have done a terrible job in terms of reaching out to rural voters.

Kentucky Democrats, Ithink, have done a good job.

And we see that in Governor Andy Beshear, who carried this district by 20 points in his reelection.

Look, all of these folks want the same things for their families.

They want to be able to afford every day cost of living issues.

They want to be able to have a safe community.

They want to have a good job and affordable health care doesn't matter if you live in Lexington, Flemingsburg, Richmond.

Anyof the above.

And so I think by meeting with and listeningto them and being sure to show up, I was proud to not only be in the Roots and Heritage Parade in downtown Lexington, but the Flemingsburg tractor Parade.

Justlast week, showing up is what matters and being sure theyknow that I'm in it forthem.

I'm in it as public, as a public servant, not as a career politician, and not as someonewho wants to be a rubber stamp for any party.

>> I mentioned at the beginning that this is your first foray into you thought it would be.

>> In some ways, no, actually it has not been what I thought it would beat all.

I have been amazed at how positive folks are in Central Kentucky, and I should have known better.

But when you look at the news media, when you look at social media, you'd believe thatwe're all hopelessly divided.

When I was out in Powell County in a parade, I made sure to shake the hand wearing a Maga hat I saw, and we did not have a single negative interaction.

>> What was their response?

>> They were polite, courteous.

I don't know if they'll vote for me or not, but that doesn't matter.

I wanted to look them in the hand, look them in the eye and shake their hand.

And I think that resonated.

We are much less dividedthan everyone would think, and it's really given me a lot of hope.

That's the vision that I'm working towards forCentral Kentucky to bring folks we care so much more than just party.

We don't view this as a sports game where your team is up or the other team is down.

We just want better, and that's what I'm trying to fight for.

>> Have you had concernsfrom voters that they do?

They maybe they are a more conservative or moderate voter.

And they do identify the Democratic Party with more progressive policies.

>> I've not about that because I don't come outand talk about being a Democrat as being the most important thing about me, just as most of the people I'm talking to.

The party is not the most important thing.

It's about your values, your background, your faith.

For me, it's public service.

As a veteran and a federal prosecutor that resonates with everyone, and it's led to some amazing conversations and some amazing support across the spectrum.

>> Well, here this evening.

We appreciate your time so much and our candidate conversations continue next Monday right here on Kentucky tonight.

And you'll find in-depth coverage of Kentucky's 2026 general election weeknights on Kentucky Edition.

[MUSIC] Good night.