Major funding for Election 2020 for Arkansas PBS debates is provided by Civic Arkansas, a Winthrop Rockefeller Institute program.

Additional funding provided by the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce from the campus of the University of Central Arkansas and the studios of Arkansas.

PBS It's election 2020 for Arkansas.

PBS Debates in 54321.

And hello, everyone, and welcome once again to debate week here on Arkansas PBS.

At this hour, the candidates for Congress in Arkansas second District, they are in alphabetical order.

French Hill, the Republican Party nominee and the incumbent, and Marcus Jones, the Democratic candidate, questioning the nominees at this hour.

Hunter Field of Arkansas business.

Katrin Associates of K.R.

Kay News and independent journalist Steve Bronner.

Each nominee will have one minute to respond to questions and the rules.

The candidates will have 30 seconds for rebuttal if they choose.

And at the conclusion of questioning, each candidate will have one minute for a closing statement.

Now, the order of candidate appearances was determined prior to the debate with a toss of a coin that was observed by the candidates or their representative.

And with that little piece of housekeeping, we'll begin.

Our first question tonight comes from Hunter Field, and it goes first to Mr. Hill.

Thanks, both of you for being here.

This is a good thing.

In Arkansas, the health care sector is struggling, particularly in rural areas, rural hospitals, rural providers.

What do you attribute this to and what do you think the fix is?

Well, thanks for the question.

First, let me thank Steve you.

Arkansas, PBS and our panel for inviting us today to participate in this debate and to respond to your questions.

As you say, Hunter, it's a good thing.

Well, I think first you've got a lack of of competition nationally in health care.

And so health care is consolidating.

You're seeing hospitals merge, you're seeing insurance companies merge.

And so there's a lack of competition.

Secondly, you've got huge costs associated with health care that I think are driven up primarily because the federal government is so deeply involved in it.

And therefore health inflation is one of our most rapid forms of inflation, inflation over the last few years.

Those things have made it harder with shrinking populations to keep some of our hospitals open.

So I think those are some of the root causes.

I think our counties are fighting back by having county property taxes that support local hospitals.

That's a good thing.

I think that the federal health system has been somewhat supportive in repayment, but there are some deficiencies.

I got to call time.

Congressman, I'm sorry.

Okay.

Yeah.

Mr. Jones.

One minute.

I want to thank you for the question and thanks to PBS for doing this.

Thanks, Congressman Hill.

I think this is a great opportunity for us to talk about contrast and and your question.

You know, one of the things that's great about running for Congress is that you get to talk to people all over the second District, and I get to talk to hospital administrators and I get to talk to doctors in those rural areas.

And what they tell me is, you know, they've got concerns about how they're reimbursed in Medicaid.

And I will say this, You know, when I am elected to Congress, one of the first things I'll do is sign on as a co-sponsor to the Save Rural Hospital Act.

That will increase the repayment that they receive.

And what they also tell me oftentimes is that were it not for Medicare, Medicaid, which in our state has had so many people kicked off of it and the assurances of the Affordable Care Act, they would have to cut services, they would have to reduce those services.

And that affects quality of life for our folks, especially in rural areas.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Hill, you have 30 seconds.

Yeah, I think those are those are good points.

But I think that the key issue I would say is we have community health centers that are out there that are federally supported.

They're doing well with 173 of those for primary care.

And that we need to continue to work to support rural hospitals that support community health centers across the state.

I support our our rural hospitals.

I support PBM reform, which I think is another thing that would benefit both the rural pharmacies and our rural delivery of health care.

Back to Mr. Jones, sir.

Thank you.

Yeah, absolutely.

The the rural hospitals.

But, you know, I grew up in Jonesboro and growing up there, you always knew somebody was really sick when they either had to come down to Little Rock or they had to go to Memphis.

But we have expanded health care in the state, but we can't sustain it where we're at right now.

You know, when we talk about access to health care, we have to work.

Just as Congressman Hill said, from a federal level.

We've got to work that because we have far too many health care deserts and far too many maternal care deserts.

We have got to address this, and we can do that from the federal level with the act I talked about.

Got to call it business off as our next question goes.

First to Mr. Jones.

Well, gentlemen, thank you both for being here today.

Reproductive rights are another major concern for voters this election with many Americans worried about future changes.

If you were asked to vote on a nationwide abortion ban, how would you vote and why?

I would not vote for a nationwide abortion ban.

I will tell you this A strong nation, a strong nation protects women's rights.

It does not invade their exam room.

And right now, my 19 year old daughter has less rights in this state than her grandmother had 50 years ago.

We have no exceptions in our state currently for rape, for incest, for fatal fetal anomalies.

We have no exceptions for health care of the mother.

That is simply cruel.

You know, Congressman Hill has said before that he supports those exceptions and he has done nothing to support women.

Done nothing.

How powerful would it have been for a Republican congressman from a Southern state to have identified those basic reproductive rights and entered that as a bill?

Instead, we've had lip service.

When I am in Congress, I will support women's right.

Mr. Hill.

One minute.

Well, first, the Supreme Court has acted, and this is simply turned back to the states.

This issue of abortion, it's simply said that there's not a fundamental constitutional right to abortion.

And so that's going back to the states.

My opponent's right when he says that I've always supported long before I was in Congress and since I've been in Congress.

Exceptions.

Rape, Incest.

Life of the mother.

That's always been my position.

I would never vote for a nationwide ban for abortion.

I don't know that there's any support on either side of the aisle in significant ways for that proposal.

My daughter is an OB-GYN.

She's a graduate of Uams.

She's an outstanding young female doctor.

And we want our women to have rights.

We want our women to have health care rights and access to care.

And that's why community health centers provide extraordinarily capable women's health care in 173 locations across our 75 counties.

And we need to continue to work on maternal health care.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Jones, back to you.

30 seconds.

So it isn't just maternal health care, it's women's health care.

And, you know, I always say this.

I'm happy to run on my opponent's record.

It is great that he has given lip service to the fact that he he views these exceptions as important.

He has never acted once to protect Arkansas women's rights.

And on top of that, he has voted against the Contraception Act that would have allowed Arkansas women access to contraception.

So it's no surprise he has not delivered for Arkansas women in this regard either.

Mr. Hill, another 30 seconds.

Well, I'm not in the state legislature, so I'm not voting on that rule here.

What I'm saying is I'm supportive of women's rights as it relates to their health care.

I support exceptions to abortion laws at the state level.

I always have since before I was in Congress.

And I think that's the important issue there.

I also voted against Democratic efforts to allow late term abortion on a national basis to authorize that, like Virginia, New York, where a baby can not have rest as dissertation if they're born in a botched abortion.

I think that's cruel and unusual and mean.

And our next question comes from Mr. Bronner, and it goes first to Mr. Hill.

Congressman, the federal budget deficit was about $2 trillion this past fiscal year.

Many provisions of the tax cuts and Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025.

Should those provisions be extended or which one of those should be extended?

And what, if any, spending should be cut?

Well, Steve, thankfully, every time we're together, we talk about the budget deficit.

And I appreciate you being a voice and Arkansas journal journalism making the budget deficit important.

You know, the federal spending has really taken a turn for the worse since the pandemic.

That's why I opposed all the extra spending of the Biden-Harris administration, because we couldn't afford it.

It wasn't well focused.

It wouldn't benefit Arkansas directly, a fault last year to get a debt ceiling limit.

And we cut spending by $1,000,000,000,000 over ten years.

And we reform policies and regulations that I think will spur economic growth on the expiration of the tax cuts next year.

We've got to make sure we have bipartisan and agreement on what will preserve growth.

So if we want to raise any of those tax rates or remove some of the credits, we need to do that, in my judgment, on about on a bipartisan basis, because the next president, Harris or Trump, will inherit this sustained $2 trillion deficit, which I've fought against since I've been in Congress.

And these expiring tax cuts.

And it's going to be a very important fiscal session next Congress.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Jones.

One minute.

So, Steve, thank you.

Thanks for that question.

You know, the $2 trillion that get added to the deficit are absolutely something we must look at.

But we also need to look at the previous trillions of dollars that were added to that deficit coming out of a Trump administration that added $4 trillion bills that Congressman Hill supported that add those $4 trillion.

And when you talk about the the tax cuts, corporations and the wealthiest amongst us who who received more than 80% of those tax cuts, that takes $1.38 trillion out of tax revenue coming into our into our system.

So if we're going to look at tax cuts, we need to focus those on the working class, focus that on the middle class.

Instead of giving a buy and a tax cut to corporations that are already seeing record profits.

Back to the congressman, 30 seconds, sir.

Well, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 benefited all families.

Families in Arkansas went from about seven out of ten.

That could take the standard deduction to nine out of ten.

In the standard deduction, everybody got a rate cut.

People got outstanding jobs.

Job growth was high.

Real wages rose.

Unemployment was at record lows.

So they worked very effectively.

It was not a tossed out to the rich.

It's about economic growth.

And I think that's important to consider.

And to Colonel Jones for 30 seconds.

Thank you.

This is really where we differ.

You know, it's not a toss out to the rich.

I find that to be almost laughable.

More than 80% of those tax cuts went to the went to corporations and went to the wealthiest 1%.

I'm in favor of just as the vice president, Harris has indicated, retaining those tax cuts for those that make less than $400,000.

But those corporations and the wealthiest amongst us should not be the beneficiary when they are the primary beneficiary of.

Of our goods and services.

And our next question comes from Hunter Field, and it goes first to Mr. Jones.

What a great weekend it was for the Razorbacks.

But we're in a weird time in college athletics that's been turned on its head.

There's been a complete paradigm shift with name, image and likeness.

There's been a lot of legislation introduced in Congress.

None has gotten a ton of traction.

Do you feel like Neil should be addressed at the federal level?

So I think that the.

That that answer.

Well, first off, thanks, Hunter.

But I think that the NCAA is handling that presently.

I don't see that as a requirement to be introduced in Congress.

I see that as something that the NCAA is able to address, is able to govern and is able to manage as they go forward.

You know, I am in favor, finally, for a lot of student athletes who have not been able to earn on their name.

While the schools did earn.

I'm in favor of them being able to have nil access in nil contracts.

But I don't see that as something that Congress needs to step in on.

Mr. Hill, one another.

Well, the NCAA coaches all have come to Capitol Hill and asked for this legislation, so they are lobbying for it mightily because they want to have a some sort of a common framework that could be put in place by the by legislation so that small schools and large schools all have a common set of rules around name, image and likeness.

It's not something I've worked on.

It's not something I'm very familiar with.

But I know that coaches have spent the better part of a year working on it.

And what I think is we need fairness here.

We need our college athletes to be able to get an education, to be able to use their skills on the field or on the court for success.

And if they're outstanding, let them earn some long term financing of college.

Let them have some annuity aspect of it in terms of some earnings.

But not just have that cash.

Secondly, those companies that are putting up the money for a name, image and likeness, where's the fairness there?

So if we're going to have like a pro sports aspect at college, we need to be fair on both sides, both to the contributors of the funding and to the college athletes.

Colonel Jones, 30 seconds yet I understand that the coaches are lobbying for that.

Coaches who have long, a very long time had access to their own something similar.

The name, image, likeness.

But, you know, and I agree with Congressman Hill, you know, we need to allow those student athletes the opportunity to, if they have the talent and the market bears.

For them to earn on their name.

Mr. Hill, 30 seconds.

I don't think I don't have much to add on that subject, but I'll go back to the spending question for a minute.

The spending coming out of the Trump administration, where the deficit increase was predominantly due to the incredible response by Congress to try to fight COVID 19.

We tried to call as much of that $5 trillion back as we could at the end of 2020, and it was the Joe Biden and Kamala Harris administration that spent another $6 trillion on top of that.

That's put us in this deep unsustainable hole and finance business off as our next question.

And it goes first to Mr. Hill.

Well, you both have very different backgrounds and experiences from no previous experience in elected office to nearly ten years of it.

My question is, why are you running in this election and why do you feel your background lends itself more to representing Arkansans?

Well, thanks for the question.

You know, I love public service.

I grew up in a family that valued public service and really encouraged supporting people to step away from their home and hearth and go serve, whether it's on a city council or school district or run for Congress.

And it's been a real privilege to represent the people here and in central Arkansas.

I'm a local leader with a local focus.

I was a chamber chairman.

I was the Rotary president.

I started a community bank here that I ran for 15 years.

I was in banking before that at a locally publicly traded business.

And so what I've seen is helping businesses with access to capital, doing economic development.

That's what I've prided myself in, is working with county judges.

Our legislature on economic development priorities, conservation priorities, helping our parks expand, working with the governor on that.

And a real love of mine has been workforce development with our HBCU's historically black colleges and universities and also supporting our vets every single day of the time I have in service.

Colonel Jones, one minute.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jason.

You know, the safety of Americans and our interest.

That has been my entire focus since I was 17 years old.

And, you know, some of the highest ranking leaders in our country and around the world have trusted me.

They've trusted me to plan and lead and manage secret and top secret efforts across this globe.

And I've done it in Iraq.

I've done it in South Korea.

I did it as part of Naito, and I've done it on the southern border.

And I have never shirked that responsibility.

And, you know, I have managed multimillion dollar projects that engaged thousands upon thousands of people, employed thousands upon thousands of people.

And I'm doing this to you know, I was very fortunate that my last assignment on active duty brought me back to Arkansas.

And I am I am here.

I'm excited to bring that service in.

Service of the people of Arkansas and give them leadership that they haven't had in Congress for the last decade.

Mr. Hill, 30 seconds.

Well, I'm proud of my record as a local leader with a local focus on helping the Port of Little Rock expand, building the long awaited Mayflower overpass over 40 for safety for our students there.

But I'm also a national leader with a national focus.

I serve on the House Intelligence Committee.

I serve on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

I've been deeply involved in international economic policy, national security policy for the decade I've been in Congress.

And I think that work shows because I was entrusted with with the highest national security work pushing back against Russia and China as a member of the Intelligence Committee and Mr. Jones.

So I appreciate you know, again, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about this.

One of the things that that compelled me to do this is when I returned to Arkansas after having served all over the world, I did not see opportunity being delivered.

I you know, we have one of the highest food insecurity rates, the highest food insecurity rate.

We have the highest maternal mortality rate.

We have, you know, the the least access to health care in our rural areas.

And and I saw this as an opportunity to deliver to regular Arkansans.

Thank you, sir.

Steve Bronner has our next question goes first to Colonel Jones.

Colonel, recent bipartisan legislation to address immigration reform failed to pass through Congress.

What should be done to make the border more secure and what should be done about the millions of people who are here now?

So, Steve, thanks.

You know, Congressman Hill, I will say this, Congressman Hill, as time and time again said that he has gone down to the border and I've I've seen the different nine different trips.

I've seen his cargo pants in his hiking boots in the pictures.

I lived south of the Rio Grande in Texas.

I don't need to take a trip down there to understand this.

We have two problems on the border.

We have a national security crisis and we have a humanitarian crisis.

And with the opportunity that legislation you talked about presented itself back in March to allow us to have immigration reform for the first time in three decades.

Congressman Hill worked to table it and then went on every cable show to try and get Secretary Mayorkas impeached, which turned out to be a waste of time and a waste of effort.

I am ready when I get to Congress to address this.

I'm ready to get that bipartisan bill passed so that we can truly have immigration reform for the first time in three decades.

And to Congressman Hill now.

One minute, sir.

Thank you.

Well, on the question about the specific bill that originated in the Senate, it didn't have support in the House from a lot of people because it was setting an arbitrary number of 5000 illegal border crossings a day across the border as suddenly that was an on off switch to close the border.

And that's not how presidents have operated on the border since we've done border enforcement since the 1920s and certainly since the 1980s.

So I didn't think that was the right mix.

Instead, I supported H.R.

two, which reformed our immigration system, reformed the asylum system, reformed the parole system that the Biden-Harris administration has been using to let these millions of people in the country.

And I think H.R.

two was a much better, more comprehensive approach.

I've voted in several Congresses for comprehensive immigration reform and border security reform before the Trump administration, during the Trump administration and during the Biden administration.

And I'll continue to make this a priority from my due diligence and work on the border.

Colonel Jones, 30 seconds.

So that border bill would have put 1500 more Customs Enforcement agents on the border.

It would have added 100 fentanyl detection machines.

These are these are issues that would have been tangible changes, tangible improvements that we could have right now.

H.R.

two focused on building the wall.

That is an unrealistic goal.

And we've already talked about deficit spending and what that would mean.

And likewise, H.R.

two addressed no opportunity for our seasonal worker visas for seasonal folks that are so important to the economy here in Arkansas.

Congressman, 30 seconds.

Well, it did do more than just focus on the wall.

It had significant asylum reform.

70% of the people who surge against our border, particularly over the four years of the Biden administration, are people attempting to seek asylum in this country.

They know under the Biden administration they'll be paroled into the country or allowed into the country waiting for a court date, even though none of them will be able to qualify for citizenship.

And so it closed that loophole on asylum, which was one of the most important issues.

I do support seasonal work and I support full comprehensive immigration reform.

And that's something that, as I say, we continue to need to have done with bipartisan support.

Mr. Field has our next question.

Who goes first to the Congress?

Both presidential candidates have indicated a friendliness towards tariffs, particularly on Chinese imports.

Tariffs hit Arkansas farmers hard generally.

What does a healthy tariff landscape look like in the US and how do you see the sea changes to the tariff landscape that you'd like to see?

Well, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris kept in place all of President Trump's tariffs that he'd used, particularly, as you noted, on China.

They've added some.

I'm not a big fan of tariffs on an ongoing basis.

I spoke out against the across the board steel and aluminum tariffs when those were imposed during the first year of the Trump administration, because I think they raised prices.

I think they dislocated opportunities for small businesses here in our country.

I haven't seen significant employment in the steel and aluminum industry across the country since they were imposed.

And I've seen costs go up and supply chains be stressed.

To me, the most important thing to use is a tariff.

And I saw this in the Reagan and the Bush administration.

Bush 41 administration is as a stick to bring people to the negotiating table.

And I think threatening tariff and non-tariff barriers of countries like China, particularly that are predatory and mercantilist in their trade policy can bring them to the negotiating table.

And I think that should continue.

Colonel Jones, one minute.

I thank you.

You know, I don't support you know, I don't support wholesale tariffs, blanket tariffs.

And they are you know, there is I had a conversation with a small business owner in in Faulkner County not long ago, and he and his family own a fabrication company, metal fabrication.

And he talked to me about the impact of those steel and aluminum tariffs on his business and what it meant to them, how they struggled to get past that.

And now we're talking about, you know, former President Trump has discussed a potential 200% increase in John Deere parts.

Just imagine the impact that is going to have for farmers here in central Arkansas.

So so I don't see tariffs.

I think any conversation we have regarding tariffs need to start with how they are going to affect the bottom line for manufacturing in the United States, how they're going to affect the bottom line for for small businesses and how we look at essentially what is a sales tax passed on to the consumer.

We need to look at those things before we start to discuss tariffs.

Back to Mr. Hill.

Thank.

Well, I think I've made my views clear on tariffs.

I think this issue of how to bring China to the negotiating table and determine what the right step is, is going to be a big challenge for the next president.

For example, China to work around those tariffs now is using third party movement of their foreign direct investment to try to export to the US by moving manufacturing and foreign direct investment into Mexico, Canada, Vietnam, where they can try to dodge those tariffs.

I think that's where we have to be very alert as we go into the next year.

Back to Mr. Jones, 30 seconds.

Yeah.

So the use of tariffs again as a means to to force, particularly China as an example to the negotiating table.

I absolutely agree with that.

My concern more is that this is going to be something tantamount to a sales tax, is going to be passed on to the consumer.

And that is my greatest concern, especially at a time where we talk about increased costs for working Arkansas families.

We're going to see that passed on to them as they saw as the nice question that goes first to Mr. Jones.

Well, just over a month ago, America saw its most recent school shooting at a high school in Georgia.

What followed were weeks of false threats and concerns over school safety, including here in Arkansas.

What do you feel needs to be done in order to better protect students?

And do you see any sort of gun reform as part of that solution?

Thank you.

I do see gun reform as part of that solution.

Look, I am a gun owner.

I have been since Christmas when I was five years old.

And I'm a believer in the Second Amendment.

And I will also say this.

When I was a battalion commander.

Soldiers under my command fired more than 5 million small arms rounds, and they did that without a safety and a gun related safety incident.

And I received an all army two years in a row, all Army safety board.

So I understand this problem.

And we have got to look at common sense solutions for this issue.

It does not violate any one Second Amendment to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

It does not violate anyone's Second Amendment to close any loopholes on on ghost guns that may move to criminals through our society.

It does not violate any one second Amendment to look at safe and secure storage options.

We have got to look at those issues.

We have got to do that for the safety of our communities, for the safety of our schools.

And to the congressman for one minute.

Thank you, Steve.

It's very important that we talk when we talk about the gun issue.

We need to talk about what the real mission is, which is public safety.

In the case of the school challenges that you mentioned, school safety.

And I have voted for background check improvements where we've increased the penalties for any federal or state criminal reporting agency that doesn't report that information to next to the National Background Check Center.

I think that was an important commonsense reform and that's been signed into law.

I've also supported grant programs to stop violence in schools and support schools.

I've supported mental health money for schools to support access to behavioral health and I also support the work that former Governor Asa Hutchinson did with Dr. Cheryl May, both in 2018 and 2022.

That created a whole strategy for how to build safe, safer schools and safer school environments here in our state.

And I certainly hope and pray that the legislature and Governor Sanders take up those recommendations and implement them.

Carl Jones, 30 seconds.

So in 2018, The New York Times identified Congressman Hill as the number one recipient of the benefits of the gun lobby in Congress.

That means he has received more benefit than any other member to that date in Congress.

Congressman Hill will not ever vote for the common sense gun reforms I talked about.

He will not represent Arkansas families in that way.

He has already sold that vote calling time, sir.

And over to Mr. Hill, 30 seconds.

Well, I have voted for common sense gun reforms and advocated for that and more importantly, I've supported federal funding to our schools and our school districts to support safer public safety for our kids.

As a father of two, and they were in high school when I started my run for Congress.

No one wants to get a call from their school about any kind of an effort that involves shooting death or mayhem.

And that's why I think behavioral health, mental health resources in the schools are so critical, and I'll continue to support those efforts.

Mr. BRAWNER has the next question, and it goes first to the congressman.

Congressman.

Hurricane Helene has become one of the deadliest natural disasters in recent memory, and another hurricane is on its way.

How much do you think manmade climate change might be contributing to these disasters?

What do you think about the federal government's response?

And what should the United States be doing looking to the future?

We're looking to the future about response both for disaster response and also climate change mitigation.

Yeah, well, I think, first of all, a climate change mitigation needs to start in the local areas, whether you're talking about the drier west in the hills above Los Angeles or the coastal areas, we've had counties and states do bad decision, make bad decisions on zoning, allowing great density out on our barrier islands, which I think have created the risk of life, limb loss, property loss driven up flood losses.

I also support a complete reform of the flood insurance program, which was last reform back in 2012.

I think we need to combine those reforms with more resilience grants and auditing that we learned after Katrina and Ivan how bad that was and how the federal response on resilience was insufficient.

So we have more that we have to do there.

And Colonel.

One madam.

Yeah.

So I would say, first off, you know, I agree with the scientists and we do have a problem with climate change and it is in many cases caused by our activities.

So the first thing we've got to do is look at how we interact, how we use our energy to lower that that impact on our environment.

I don't think that the answer is to tell people not to move to places.

I think the answer is address it at the source, and that is our impact on the environment.

That's the first thing.

And there is legislation in place to begin to reduce that carbon footprint, to reduce our impact.

You know, we see you know, we see now changes in weather patterns that affect us here in Arkansas as well.

As far as the disaster response, you know, I've worked with FEMA.

I went through with working with the defense, coordinating officer here in the state to understand those problems.

And what we've got to do is push those resources as much as we can to the local level, to the incident commander, be that a county commissioner, county judge, county sheriff at the point of crisis.

30 seconds for Mr. Hill.

Well, first, on the energy point, we've got to be realistic about the energy transition.

It's not going to happen overnight.

It's not going to happen in the next five years or ten years.

It's a multi-decade transition because we have to have battery storage for renewables and we don't have that.

That technology still needs to advance the real secret.

To move baseload power to cleaner or less carbon dependent is first to go to natural gas away from coal and then go to nuclear.

And so I fully support nuclear energy.

Clean nuclear energy is the way to have the baseload power we need.

But in a carbon free manner.

30 seconds for Mr. Jones.

Yeah.

So I do agree that it will be a transition over time for us to change our dependance on energy.

Fortunately, industry is moving faster than government in that regard.

Again, one of the things that's great about run for Congress is you get to talk to all kinds of people.

And as we have coal power plants coming offline in the next 12 to 15 years, we have already got Arkansas utilities that are looking for those other renewable options.

You know, I spoke with a CEO of a of a of a utility last week to talk to me about how 25% of their load is coming from solar.

It's those kind of steps.

We got a call from Sir and Steve brought our as our next question, I believe or no, I feel I'm sorry.

Today is one year since the Hamas led attack on Israel that's led to the escalating conflict where it is today.

What should the US role be in that conflict going forward and what broader steps can we take to ensure more stability in the Middle East long term?

I know you're addressing that to Oh, I'm sorry.

The question goes to Mr. Jones.

Thank you.

You know, so I spent two and a half years in the Middle East.

And so understanding this issue, understand that challenge is is something I am very familiar with.

And my opinion on this remains unchanged from the beginning of this campaign.

You know, Israel is our ally.

It is our responsibility to live up to our allies.

And it is our responsibility when they are in this existential fight to support them.

We can do that in lots of ways, that the defensive capability we have provided them has to date has been significant.

We can do it through intelligence sharing.

We can do it through cooperative partnership.

We can do it through training, all of those things.

I'm very familiar with those those issues having worked in that part of the world.

One of the other things we have got to do as part of the International community is ensure that the humanitarian assistance gets to those in in Gaza that need it.

Now that this is expanded to Lebanon and Hezbollah, where I may wind up covering this in my rebuttal, but we're facing a greater threat now from Iran in their proxies, got into Syria, the time being.

Mr. Hill, One minute.

Well, thanks for the question, Hunter.

Look, the origins of this or Iran and the coddling by the Obama and then the Biden-Harris administration to Iran, freeing them from sanctions, freeing them to sell oil on the open market where they now sell 80% of their production to China.

They take that money, they fund the Houthis in Yemen, which have attacked Saudi Arabia, attacked Israel, Hezbollah in Lebanon, in Syria.

They back the Assad regime, which is attacking.

And of course, a year ago today, the horrific 911 for Israel.

On October 7th when Hamas came across the border.

So at the root, it's building the coalition to push back against Iran and their financing.

Of course, we have to back Israel, our ally.

We need to do that in every way, shape and form.

I was proud to be at Al Saleem Airbase in Kuwait, seeing our airmen from the 19th Air wing here, a little like Air Force Base delivering the aid to Gaza that was parachuted in to help those poor citizens due to Hamas's brutality.

Got to go to Mr. Jones now.

30 seconds, Colonel.

Thank you.

So I have fought Iran's proxies.

I fought Iran's proxies in Iraq, tried to kill me, and they did kill people in my unit.

I am painfully familiar with this issue.

The challenge we have right now was the short sighted decision that the Trump administration had when they pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal.

It gives us neither carrot nor stick, gives us no ability to negotiate.

We're totally on our back foot and we have no relationship.

We have got to repair those relations gaps and we have got to engage in order to have stability.

And ultimately, we've got to move this to Israel's two state solution.

30 seconds now for the congressman.

Well, first, the lead opponent of Mr. Obama's nuclear deal was Eliot Engel, Democrat chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee.

In the House, he built a bipartisan coalition in the House and Senate to take votes to oppose the structure of Barack Obama's nuclear deal.

Why was it a bad deal?

It didn't end a nuclear weapon in Iran, and it didn't make any constraints on the Revolutionary Guards exporting of terror or their ballistic missiles.

And that's why it was a bad deal.

And it was it was good that it was terminated.

And before we go to the next question, we want to let you know that the candidates will have the opportunity to participate in a press conference immediately following the debate.

You at home can scan the QR code, which is on your screen right now with your mobile device and be able to watch.

So you may want to get your mobile phones ready and you'll that QR code, by the way, periodically through the balance of our debate business off as the last question that goes first to the congressman.

Well, of course, this year is also a presidential election.

If a president is elected from the opposing party, how would you work to promote bipartisanship and prevent a stagnant Congress?

Great question.

Thank you for that.

I've now had the honor, as I say, to represent my hometown of Little Rock and the surrounding area and the district for the better part of nine and a half years.

And I've worked under three presidents President Obama, President Trump, and President Biden.

And in every instance, I've got that capability of leading on finding bipartisan solutions.

And I've worked with the White House in all three administrations as well.

In the Biden administration, I've led the negotiations to create the repo act, which freezes Russian assets and converts Russian assets for the benefit of Ukraine.

I worked with the White House on my Iranian Leaders Act, which creates a website that tells everybody in the world in Farsi and Urdu and Arabic and English and French what how much money the Iranian leaders have stolen from the Iranian people.

So both in national security and domestic policy, I've worked with three administrations I've served under and I'll continue to that because I've got that reputation in Congress, a can do guy who will work across both sides of the aisle.

Colonel Jones, one minute.

So one of the things that I have learned in this campaign, you know, we have had the opportunity to actually stand on on 14,536 doorsteps in central Arkansas.

And what I hear from those people, what my campaign hears from those people, is they want us to move from them, from the extremes back to the middle.

And I'm committed to do that.

I will tell you that, you know, I have learned that there is so much more that unites us than divides us.

If we will just talk to each other about it.

And I carry that into Congress and into those bipartisan efforts.

You know, we we need to move past the extremism on both sides.

We need to move past that and to meet together for common solutions.

But I am committed to being a solution oriented congressman solutions for central Arkansas.

And that's where we've got to move.

And that's, you know, every vote I cast is going to be based on the values of those Arkansans that I've spoken with and for their interests.

32nd, 30 seconds for Mr. Hill.

Well, for a decade with Alma Adams, Democrat of North Carolina, I've worked to benefit historically black colleges and universities, getting them ready for a workforce, improving their campuses, improving their leadership with Haley Stevens, Democrat of Michigan.

She and I have led the fight in Congress to help the families who have a family member wrongfully that pertained abroad by state or a non-state actor.

With Bill Foster and Jim Himes of Illinois and Connecticut, we've led on creating financial services legislation together across the aisle to benefit American families and American business.

Another 30 seconds for Mr. Jones.

Yeah, Thank you.

You know, so I say I grew up I grew up in the Army since I was 17 years old.

And it is the most talented and diverse workforce in the history of our world.

It's drawn from every background, every political background as well.

And So I am very accustomed to getting answers to problems, to delivering in a bipartisan, multicultural, multi-ethnic way.

Congress is no.

It's about people.

It's about connecting to people.

And it's about finding solutions for for people.

And when I say people, I mean central Arkansans solutions that benefit them.

Steve Bronner, other with the next question now goes first to Mr. Jones.

Colonel, what kind of support should the United States give Ukraine?

How long should it continue and should it encourage Vladimir Putin and Vladimir's Linskey to negotiate?

A Thank you.

So I spent three years in Naito and part of the mobilization efforts that are being done right now, part of those plans, part of the contingency plans.

I worked those efforts.

I was there from 2017 to 2020.

So I'm very familiar with this part of the world.

And what I will tell you is it is absolutely in our interest to continue to support Ukraine.

And I'll give you several reasons.

The first of those is that, you know, the NATO alliance and that transatlantic alliance is the strongest alliance this ever existed in the history of our world.

And on top of that, European and American trade represents $1 trillion foreign investment in the United States.

20% of that comes from Europe.

So we cannot allow that to be disrupted by Vladimir Putin.

That's the first part of it.

The second part is that our our assistance to Ukraine in standing up against and I'm going to run out of time again.

Yes, sir.

Fred, you have.

We'll come back to Josh Hill one minute.

Well, I do support US engagement with our European allies to draw the line in Ukraine.

I think it was, again, a failing of the Obama and modestly, the Biden-Harris administration that triggered Putin's engagement there.

First of all, want to thank the colonel for his steadfast service in the Army and his service in South Korea and in NATO's.

It was to be commended.

But we have not to let Putin win is a goal of the United States.

It's an American interest on that for the economic reasons and trade reasons that he noted.

But also in the defense of Europe.

What's been a problem for me is that Joe Biden has slow walked munitions and equipment, slow walk sanctions, and has only worked on consensus in Europe.

We need strong American leadership, and I think we would have had a different position than we find ourselves in right now if we'd had that under President Biden at the very beginning.

Back to the colonel now for $0.30.

Thank you.

And I will be very quick, I promise.

You know, I am an absolute again, I'm a believer in support of this that we have to stand by, but stand by Ukraine.

This is an existential threat for them.

The other thing I would say, it's not an Obama and it's not a Biden issue.

There was no attack under a Trump administration because there didn't need to be one.

From Vladimir Putin's point of view.

And then finally, you know, when we talk about the munitions that have been given of the $175 billion, 70 billion of that has come back to the United States, 13 of those weapons systems are created here in Arkansas.

Got to go to Mr. Hill.

30 seconds, sir.

Well, I do think it's important that we send the message that Putin can't win in Ukraine.

I think it's going to be a big challenge for the next president to achieve that.

I think the outcome there sends a signal in East Asia to the XI government in Beijing, both those governments in Beijing and in Moscow all saw failure when they saw the failed pull out of the U.S. forces from Afghanistan under Joe Biden's failed exit.

It's one thing to leave.

It's another thing to leave in an effective way and not leave equipment and people behind.

And he did that.

And I think that sent the wrong message on our field as the question for Mr. Hill.

Our best actuarial estimates indicate we have about ten more years until the Social Security trust funds reserves are depleted.

What that essentially means is the Social Security Administration will no longer be able to pay out 100% of each person's benefit.

Is this a problem for the next Congress?

And how should it be addressed?

It's a it's an important question, and it allows us to use moral good behavior from our predecessors.

Tip O'Neill, Democrat, Massachusetts Speaker of the House.

In 1983, Ronald Reagan, Republican President United States, had Alan Greenspan form a commission to figure out how to put Social Security back in the early eighties, in a time of high inflation and extending workforce ages on a sound footing.

And they did it.

And they had a bipartisan solution with an up or down vote in Congress that involved both decisions that individuals had to make about their own retirement, whether they put it off and get a higher payment.

It was determined how the tax the Social Security tax, what we call the fake attacks, was charged and levied.

And it gave us this 50 years that you're now referencing of a strong Social Security system.

So I'm supportive of that kind of approach on a bipartisan basis with a new president in the White House that will make it a priority.

And I hope either Harris or Trump would make such a plan a priority.

Colonel Jones, One minute.

So I'll say this I appreciate the history lesson, but I would support the increase in the FAC attacks from 168 that that is paid for those that make up to $400,000.

I know that's a can be an unpopular thing, but it has 134 co-sponsors right now and it would allow Social Security to be funded from 2025 to 2034 and expand Medicaid, Medicare as well.

So I would I would support that legislation.

It is there right now ready to be voted on and move forward to ensure that our seniors who have paid into Social Security are going to have that support in their retirement.

But my mom is on Social Security, and I understand the importance.

I understand the pinch and I understand the fear we have.

But if Congressman Hill's had a decade and his best answer is always cut it.

That's unacceptable for those here in our state.

Congressman, 30 seconds.

Well, I've never proposed to cut it, so that's a sarcastic answer with no basis in fact.

I've just called on a bipartisan solution.

If your idea is such a good one, why didn't Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden propose it when they controlled the House and the presidency and had 60 votes available to them in the Senate for their other bipartisan solutions?

I think the way you solve something as complex as Social Security is to absolutely have a bipartisan consensus like Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan put together in the early eighties.

That's the only way you're going to get it done and get it done successfully.

Back to Mr. Jones, 30 seconds.

Yeah, What I just talked about.

It affects less than 2% of Arkansans.

Less than 2% of Arkansans are affected by that.

And when you when you talk about the second District 170,000 Arkansans in the second District rely on Social Security.

So so we've got to look at their interests.

That is the that's the first part I care about is the interests of voters and the citizens here in the state.

Our next question, Mr. Staff, goes first to Mr. Jones.

In recent years, party members or rather party leaders, have seemed to hold more sway over party members.

Will you promise here today to hold the needs and wishes of Arkansans over the needs and wishes of any one political figure?

I absolutely do.

I will tell you that I am I am running for this to represent central Arkansas.

You know, this is this is my home.

This is where I'm from.

This is where my values lie.

And the benefit that we have is that, you know, the very first thing in every every vote that I take is how will this affect Arkansas?

You know, recently you know, unfortunately, former Senator David Pryor passed.

And one of the things that always struck me about Senator Pryor is that he had a little plaque on his desk and that little plaque usually faced him.

But in some pictures, you'll see it face out so people could catch it.

And what it says was Arkansas comes first.

And I am committed and I'm making that commitment right now that any vote that I cast will always have that litmus test.

How does this affect Central Arkansas?

How does it affect our state in this district?

Congressman, one matter I think I've demonstrated that over the last decade, serving in Congress from this district and working under three different presidents and three different presidential sets of an agenda and working to try to find, as I say, bipartisan solutions to a lot of tough topics.

A name two earlier.

One was supporting comprehensive immigration reform and border security at the same time.

That's not a popular policy position for some.

But to have economic growth and more jobs and more opportunity and more sustainment of the Social Security system.

America needs a robust legal immigration system that takes care of seasonal worker needs, that fills our gaps in medical and technology and computer science that we need.

That's an example of certainly, I think, a good working example of where if somebody is not going along with, quote, somebody's view of what the party norm is.

Answer Mr. Jones, 30 seconds.

Yeah, And again, my my entire focus in this campaign, my entire focus in Congress is going to be representing the second District.

You know, immigration reform is a great example.

You know, we did that and we need that to benefit our district here.

You know, we need to talk to we need to talk to chambers of commerce.

We need to talk to industry.

We need to talk to communities to understand how we can have comprehensive immigration reform.

And we need to get those here into our system working, paying taxes and on the track to citizenship.

After call time there.

Mr. Hill, back to you for 30 seconds.

Well, just I've dedicated myself to the views of Arkansans, and I subscribe to that.

I've said I'm a local leader with a local focus, and that's true.

But I also think that we're elected to use our judgment.

That was something that Edmund Burke told his fellow Englishmen.

It was a point that Jack Kennedy made in profiles of courage, that we're there to use our best judgment.

So we take into account how do we benefit Arkansas, but how do we benefit the general welfare of the whole nation for domestic tranquility, which we were urged to support in the preamble of the Constitution?

So I work hard at doing both.

And our time for question and answer has it has expired.

Time now for closing statements.

Again, they were determined prior to the broadcast by the toss of a coin.

Colonel Jones, you have one minute.

Thank you very much.

So first, again, I would like to thank PBS for this opportunity.

I'd like to thank Congressman Hill for the chance to talk.

And we could talk about contrast.

And what you saw today is a contrast in some cases of values.

Contrast in in the ideas that I look to represent central Arkansans.

I am a believer that we can build our economy, but we have got to build it from the middle out and the middle up, not from the top down.

40 years of economists have told us that doesn't work.

And we've got to move forward with what we can do here.

I have spent my entire adult life successfully leading large organizations and looking out for Arkansans and Americans and delivering solutions in the most complex circumstances.

And I am asking for your vote so that I can do that for you in the United States Congress.

Thank you.

Thank you, Congressman.

Well, it's been a privilege for me to represent my hometown of Little Rock and the surrounding area in Congress.

You know, I love my education at Forest Park School and Henderson Junior High and my beloved rockets at Little Rock Catholic High.

They gave me the grounding through scouting and through my work in high school and my early jobs to love this nation and love my hometown.

My work on the Children's Hospital Board for 15 years, my work in and get our kids regrowing gave me a love for kids and to make sure they've got the right environment.

And it really frustrated me that so many families have been hurt by fentanyl and death.

I've seen my kids go to funerals.

I never went to a funeral when I was their age.

So it's that passion that I want to continue the work with a dedication for home, but an interest in national security and keeping Americans safe with a closed border with leadership in the world.

And I ask you humbly for your vote to let me keep doing the work that I have interest in your home and your family.

Congressman, we thank you.

And Mr.

Colonel Jones, we thank you as well.

You can watch this and all Arkansas PBS debates on demand at the Arkansas PBS YouTube channel on the PBS video app and on our website.

Again, the candidates have been invited to participate in individual press conferences immediately following the broadcast.

So you can continue watching our live stream at my r PBS dot org slash elections or by scanning the QR code on your screen right now to again to view those press conferences.

Again, we thank our candidates for participating and our panelists also for their questions.

And of course, we thank you for watching.

As a reminder, Election Day, Tuesday, November the fifth, make your voice heard.

Thanks again.

Major funding for Election 2020 for Arkansas PBS debates is provided by Civic Arkansas, a Winthrop Rockefeller Institute program.

Additional funding provided by the Arkansas State Chamber of Commerce.