- We're here in collaboration with the American Association of University Women.

They'll be doing some timekeeping for us today as we come to you from the campus of Whitman College here in Walla Walla.

Now, tonight as we're counting down the weeks until this general election, we're gonna get a chance to hear from candidates in the 5th Congressional District, Michael Baumgartner and Carmela Conroy.

We'll introduce them in a moment.

But first, let's set the stage for what we're doing here tonight.

A major part of our mission here at NWPB is to provide a fair nonpartisan environment for candidates to speak on the issues and to inform the public about those whose votes they seek.

We cannot do this without our partners and our collaborators here.

And at this time, we'd like to invite Visiting Assistant Professor of Politics, Katie Heard, to make an opening statement here from Whitman College.

- Hello.

As Professor Loveless said, my name is Kathryn Heard and I'm a faculty member in the Politics Department here at Whitman College.

It's my honor and privilege today to welcome you to Cordiner Hall and to the Congressional District 5 Candidate Forum on behalf of President Bolton, as well as on behalf of our faculty, staff, and students.

It's also my honor and my privilege today to remind us as we gather here to deliberate over the values, ideals, and visions of governance that best represent our community, that we do so on the grounds that are the traditional Cayuse, Umatilla, and Walla Walla homelands.

As members of Whitman College, we pay our respect to the tribal elders, both past and present, and extend our respect to all Indigenous people today.

And we honor their stewardship of this land and commit to continuing that important work.

It is in this spirit of dignity, of inclusion, of good stewardship of our resources that I wish the candidates before us, waiting in the wings, and us as a community with diverse needs and diverse convictions, a productive conversation on the shape that our shared political future should take.

Thank you and welcome to Whitman College.

(audience applauding) - Thank you, Professor Heard.

And we do have some rules set up for tonight.

For fairness, this program has been carefully structured to allow candidates the exact time to answer questions.

The questions created and collected by the AAUW, some from the organization, other from citizens or constituent groups in the area.

We'll give them time for some opening statements here tonight.

After that, we'll get into the questions.

We have an even number of them.

Each candidate will go first.

Like we said, this is all about fairness.

There will be no rebuttals here tonight and no closing statements.

And I'll add, please no interruptions from the audience or by either candidates.

Those will not be tolerated for tonight.

All right, let's get to the candidates, the top two out of a primary that had a dozen on the ballot.

We will have on stage tonight the incumbent in the 5th District coming into this seat after six years as the Spokane County Treasurer, Mr.

Michael Baumgartner.

(audience applauding) In addition, we have an attorney, a graduate from the University of Washington School of Law, Spokane County Deputy Prosecutor who has also worked for the US Foreign Service, Carmela Conroy.

(audience applauding) Our crew, AAUW will set the timer at 90 seconds for opening statements.

Mr.

Baumgartner, the incumbent in this seat, sir, that time is yours.

- [Baumgartner] Is there a clock here?

- There is a timer down there.

Watch the traffic light.

- Got it.

Thank you.

Well, thank you to everybody in Walla Walla for hosting this important debate.

I can't think a better way to celebrate 250 years of our wonderful republic by getting together and talking out the ideas and celebrating this wonderful representative democracy that we have.

I was born up the road in Colton, Washington, a son of two educators.

My father was 40 years a Professor of Forestry at Washington State University.

Baumgartner literally means tree farmer in German, and I spent a couple summers in the Forest Service.

And my mother was the best kindergarten teacher in Colton and Pullman.

Very beloved there when I'm on the plus (indistinct).

I'm not Michael Baumgartner, I'm Mrs.

B's son.

I've been very fortunate to have a far-ranging career.

It's done lots of things, but I felt best when I've done things that feel bigger than myself.

In between WSU and Harvard, I spent a year with a group of Jesuit priests in Africa working with war refugees.

After Harvard, I thought I would go back to Africa, but then 9/11 happened and I got interested in going out to the Middle East.

I worked in both the public and private sector in the Middle East, but really enjoyed the time when I joined the State Department during the Iraq surge, very difficult time in 2007, 2008.

And then I met the love of my wife, love of my life, my wonderful wife Eleanor in Southern Afghanistan where we were together on a counter narcotics team.

And now we have five beautiful kids, a freshman, eighth grader, a seventh grader, a sixth grader, and a kindergartner, or a first year grader.

And it's for those kids that I do this job.

I want to leave them a thriving America, not a broken America.

And it's an honor every day to work for my kids, but your kids and grandkids as well.

- Ms.

Baumgartner, thank you very much.

Ms.

Conroy, your opening statement.

- Thank you.

Good evening, everybody.

It's nice to be back in Walla Walla and welcome to the listening and viewing audience at home as well.

My name's Carmela Conroy and I would like to be your next member of Congress representing Eastern Washington.

When my dad was a kid growing up in the late 1930s, early 1940s, he lived on my grandparents' ranch up in Chattaroy, north of Spokane.

And one winter money was tight and they could not afford a pair of new boots for my dad.

And that winter he went through a growth spurt and those two small boots crippled up his toes and his feet pained him for the rest of his life.

And at this time, my grandfather was working for the ground, my grandfather was working on the Grand Coulee Dam, an important piece of federal infrastructure that still provides us with electricity to this day.

My grandfather helped make that happen and he could not afford a new pair of boots for his boy.

And even when I was a kid, that made me mad because the people who employ laborers ought to pay them enough so that they can support their families and have a dignified living and buy a pair of boots for their kids when they need them.

That's why I'm running for Congress.

Things are going in the opposite direction.

And Mr.

Baumgartner's votes in support of the One Big Beautiful Bill are gonna make life harder for working people and we need to stop that.

And that's why I'm running for Congress and I look forward to this conversation and hope to earn your vote.

- Thank you both.

(audience applauding) So let's get into our questions, these gathered from AAUW, as we mentioned, thank you to those of you who participated.

I know people asked in the crowd, "Could we submit more questions?"

We apologize.

We just don't have room for that in this program, but we're gonna sort of take it from that, the first topic of affordability.

And just looking around Walla Walla today, unleaded gas, about 5.40 a gallon, diesel sitting at about 6.60, grocery prices are high, housing and healthcare have reached some unaffordable levels for many here in the 5th District.

What strategies do you support for making gas, food, housing, and healthcare more affordable, and wages more commensurate with the cost of living?

Mr.

Baumgartner, we'll start the line of questioning with you, sir.

- Well, thank you.

Certainly, a lot of folks are struggling right now.

In general, what we need to do is increase the supply of all the issues that you've mentioned.

I'm very proud that this year in Congress, we've done some very important things to make life more affordable on the tax side.

We eliminated taxes on tips to help service workers.

We eliminated taxes on overtime to help those in the trades.

We eliminated taxes on interest on American-made cars to make vehicles more affordable.

And probably one of the significance that we did is we made the tax credit permanent on the low-income housing tax credit, which will add about a million new units of housing.

So those are all things that will help.

I'm very proud that we've put more American energy on the market.

America is now the world's leading energy and gas producer and we've opened up more areas that helps both our economy and our national security.

Now, my opponent opposes those tax measures that we took.

And if she had had her way, Carmela Conroy would've seen the largest tax increase in American history.

So I do think there's a key difference between what we were able to accomplish and what would've happened had Carmela not lost the previous election.

- [Matt] Ms.

Conroy, same question to you.

- So I would like to refer everybody in the room, I don't have time to fact-check everything that's false that Mr.

Baumgartner says, and so, I'd like to refer you to a Substack titled, "Baumgartner's 51 False and Misleading Claims in the Debate" regarding a debate we had in Spokane that was published on September 15th, 2026.

And I can help you find that later if you need it.

What I would do to reduce the prices of gasoline, groceries, diesel, and you're lucky if it's below seven bucks a gallon.

It was 7.20 in Ritzville last time I was through Ritzville for diesel.

We can end the trade chaos.

And one of the reasons that we have a trade war going on, not only with our best neighbor in Canada, but with much of the world is because Mr.

Baumgartner has voted seven times to surrender Congress' power of the purse to the executive.

And that included being the deciding vote on one of those situations where the question was just whether to restore normal trade relations with Canada.

And a reporter with the "The Spokesman-Review" asked him why did he vote against that bipartisan bill to normalize trade relations with Canada and to return to the trade deal that the Trump administration had struck the first time around?

And he said, "I know tariffs hurt our farmers and our consumers, so I asked Mike Johnson what to do.

He asked me to vote against it, so I did."

Our congressman's job, our member of Congress' job is to look after our district.

In the vast array of the federal government, there's only one person whose primary job is to look after Eastern Washington, and that is our member of Congress, and that's what I will do if you vote for me.

- In the next question, many who submitted questions expressing concern over these tariffs as an issue.

There is a report in the hands of county commissioners where one wine exporter notes a 73% drop in exports that they blame on tariffs.

So the question is about how you would connect affordability and federal decision-making when it comes to those tariffs.

Do you believe or not believe that tariffs are ultimately something that is paid for by consumers of the country imposing the tariffs?

And could you explain why or why not, Ms.

Conroy?

- I'd be very happy to do that.

I had the honor of working for the State Department through six presidential administrations, and America's interest didn't really change that much just because the name on the White House mailbox changed.

And one of the important interests that the United States has is in securing its border, making sure that we can keep dangerous things and people out and that we can get good things and people in as swiftly and as efficiently as possible.

And during the George W. Bush administration, I worked on a number of trade agreements.

It is a fact that tariffs are a tax that is imposed on importers of the country imposing the tariffs and the loss of the wine sales, I've heard 40% of Eastern Washington wine sales were lost just when Canada closed its stores, Canadian provinces closed their doors to American wine and spirits in retaliation for some rude language about making Canada the 51st state of the United States.

So tariffs are in fact, tariffs imposed by the United States are paid by Americans when goods come into the United States.

And then countervailing duties are to, in effect, punish American exporters, but they lower the demand on the receiving people, the people who would like to buy American products if their country puts on a tariff in response to ours.

- [Matt] Mr.

Baumgartner, same question to you.

- Tariffs are taxes, this is why I oppose them.

I generally support lower taxes and it's no doubt that America does better when we have free and fair trade, but trade has to be fair to Americans as well.

And so, one of the aspects of tariffs as well too is that they're a tool of diplomacy.

Right now, if Carmela Conroy had not lost the last election and was in Congress, she would have folks like the Washington potato growers come to her and say, "Right now, British Columbia is not buying Washington potatoes."

Japan is using what's called a non-tariff barrier saying there's some microbe on the potatoes to not purchase them.

Now that's protectionist trade, but those folks would be arguing that we should be using our own tariffs to try to get free trade for them.

Another example would be, right now, our Walla Walla wines are taxed or tariffed at 55% when they're sold into Vietnam.

The European Union only tax or the Vietnamese only tax European Union wines at 5%.

So wine growers would be coming and saying, "Hey, we need to have fair trade when it goes into Vietnam."

And even just last week when I was back in DC, the Washington Trade Alliance, which represents the ports, came and asked to have a new fee put onto goods coming down from Canada because there's a fee for port maintenance on Washington ports that doesn't apply to Canadian ports, and so, they feel that more shipments are going out of Canada and that means less cargo containers to move things like Washington's fruit and apples.

So yes, tariffs should be low, but it should be free and fair for everybody and Washington and American companies need to be treated fairly as well.

- Mr.

Baumgartner, thank you very much.

We'll make sure the clock is set at two minutes for these next rounds of questions because we want to continue to talk about spending and certainly as consumers are making some budget decisions here in the 5th District, they're seeing how money is being spent over in Washington DC and many respondents pointing to White House renovations, a reflecting pool renovation, now a debate over the Kennedy Center that is happening right now.

And I know we can talk about which funds are paying for what.

So this is as much an optics question for you as it is a policy question.

What will you do to ensure that taxpayer dollars or any federal money are spent and prioritized on American people rather than in the context of how that money is being spent now?

Mr.

Baumgartner?

- Well, it's very, very important that federal dollars be spent responsibly, very important that state and local dollars be spent responsibly.

Right now, government at all levels is not doing right by future generations.

I mean, America now has $40 trillion in debt.

This year, the federal government will spend $7 trillion on the back of $5 trillion in revenue.

And about 90% of the meetings that you take as a member of Congress is people coming to you and asking for other people's money to be spent.

Now, a lot of that, of course, we support.

We had record funding for WSU, Washington University, they called it historic funding this year for the research department.

Certainly when we support irrigated lands or we raise the crop reserve prices for farmers, we're doing a support as well too, but we need to make sure that every dollar is spent responsibly because we're not running for, I'm not in this position to leave my kids a bankrupt country.

Now, we did some good things this year in terms of eliminating waste fraud and abuse in spending where we disincentivize states from putting illegal immigrants on healthcare to save money, and we put work requirements on food stamps and Medicaid, which also were something that the vast majority of the American people support.

So the American people are generous people, but they want their dollars spent responsibly and they certainly don't want to be bamboozled by con artists and scammers when it comes to public dollars.

- Ms.

Conroy, I'll turn that question to you and I'll restate it because as we worry about spending in the context of the spending that's happening on the White House and the reflecting pool and those types of things, it was a very important topic that our question askers gave us for this.

How do you reconcile that?

- I think it's really important, and this is because of my background as a prosecutor.

I think that the law ought to be followed and the people who most ought to be following the law are people in power, people in government.

And the Constitution says (audience applauding) that it is up to the House of Representatives to decide how to raise money, how to spend money, and then it's up to the executive branch to decide to figure out how to follow Congress' direction.

And I take issue with Mr.

Baumgartner talking about what I would've done had I been elected.

I certainly would not have voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill for which had Mr.

Baumgartner- (audience applauding) Had Mr.

Baumgartner crossed the aisle and voted with the Democrats and the seven Republicans who voted against it, we would not have put an additional $4 trillion on our children's and our grandchildren's credit cards just since that vote was taken.

In the Congressional Budget Office, which are nonpartisan experts on government money, they forecast that that was gonna happen by giving a pittance back temporarily to regular working people and giving massive tax breaks to corporations who ought to be paying their fair share.

(audience applauding) And so, with a little bit of time, if I could also share the moderator's press that we not applaud, I'd like to use my time to point out that what's going on to trash the John F. Kennedy Center or threaten to trash the John F. Kennedy Center with reconstruction at the White House that was not authorized by federal authorities that try to make sure that those public spaces stay beautiful for generations to come.

They do not belong to the current occupants of the White House.

And I would say I think that's all a distraction from the coverup of the Epstein conspiracy, and that has to stop too.

(audience applauding) - Thank you very much, Ms.

Conroy.

I'll reiterate that as well.

Applause and boos tend to take away time sometimes from the candidates you're cheering on, so please do your best to refrain from that.

We'll ask question number four here, however, Ms.

Conroy, you'll go first, two minutes for this one as well.

With healthcare costs being as high as they are, certainly people in rural communities here in Walla Walla County are concerned and everywhere in the 5th District.

What federal actions would you take to bring healthcare costs down and keep some rural healthcare facilities open and staffed?

- Yeah, thank you for that question.

We've got 11 rural critical access healthcare facilities district-wide, and I've spoken to executives and care providers and patients from many of those hospitals.

There was a standing room only 2.5-hour town hall in Ritzville when it looked like East Adams County Hospital might go under because of some malfeasance.

What the federal government can do and make sure that people have access to Medicaid.

Our rural hospitals rely on Medicaid payments for their patients more than urban hospitals do, but all of them rely on that to some extent, and they tell me that Medicaid payments are the most seamless payments they have, better than Medicare, better than private insurance, way better than Medicare Advantage programs.

And so, one of the things that I would like to do would be to expand access to Medicaid for children in the United States from birth to the 19th birthday.

And the reason I focus on that is because in 2022, the Department of Defense issued a report saying that more than 70% of America's youth between the ages of 17 and 25 are unfit for military service, either physically unfit or behavioral health or because of a criminal record.

That suggests to me that we as a society are failing our young, and for us to succeed as a nation, we have to give young people hope that there is a future and that those of us who've succeeded before them have a way to make that possible and not put things on their credit card and deny them the future, the bright future that we had when we were growing up, speaking for myself in the '60s and '70s.

- Mr.

Baumgartner, same question.

What federal actions would you take?

What federal actions perhaps are you taking to help rural healthcare in the area?

- Well, thank you.

Access to quality, affordable rural healthcare is so important to so many in Eastern Washington, including my parents.

I have two parents in their 80s.

All of us have family members that go through those stages of life where they need to get that healthcare.

And it's one of the reasons I'm so proud that this year we put a new $50 billion fund in specifically to help rural hospitals.

This year, the state of Washington will receive $177 million specifically for rural hospitals, and that will repeat itself for the next five years.

One of my favorite things we worked on when I was in the State Senate, probably my signature bill was to help create the WSU Medical School, working with Elson Floyd and working across the aisle with a number of good Democrats.

There was a silly 100-year-old law that only the University of Washington could teach doctors.

We broke that monopoly because we need the docs, and now the University of Washington also produces doctors in Spokane, so we have more doctors in Spokane being produced than we do in Seattle, and that's great for our community.

Again, as we strengthen healthcare in America, it is so important we root out waste, fraud, and abuse.

You only need to look at what's gone on with the scams in Minnesota or what's gone on even in this state where illegal immigrants have put on healthcare, increasing our healthcare costs, and there have been work requirements for programs like Medicaid and food stamps.

The American people are very generous, but we cannot afford to pay for a system that can be scammed and is corrupt.

So we need to continue to work on that waste, fraud, and abuse, and there's a whole lot of work to do there.

- Thank you, Mr.

Baumgartner.

Next question, and we've heard a couple of references in this debate already about the One Big Beautiful Bill, that's gonna face another milestone soon here on October 1st as Medicaid coverage for an estimated 11,000 Washington immigrants with legal status will be removed.

Now, according to the "Walla Walla Union-Bulletin" reporting recently, that'll have impacts for many here locally as well.

Mr.

Baumgartner, you first, do you support these cuts and what support, if any, would you advocate to people about to lose their Medicaid?

- Well, I certainly support that the federal government should not incentivize to put illegal immigrants onto healthcare spending.

And you look at what- - [Matt] This question was about legal immigrants.

Sorry, Mr.

Baumgartner.

- Well, there's no cuts to legal immigrants.

There's no cuts to legal immigrants.

So what I certainly support is, again, with the healthcare programs is cleaning up the waste, fraud, and abuse as we've done.

Again, the two big reforms that we made this year were to make sure that illegal immigrants were disincentivized from getting healthcare spending from states, and that there were work requirements put on programs like Medicaid and food stamps.

And those are two really, really important reforms as we seek to stretch these dollars further.

Now, if the state of Washington and the voters of the state of Washington want to make different decisions with your state tax dollars, well, that'll be up to those voters and your elected officials here.

But a federal government that is $40 trillion in debt and spending $7 trillion on the back of $5 trillion in revenue just can't afford that.

- [Matt] Mr.

Baumgartner, Ms.

Conroy, same question to you.

- Yeah, could I ask you to repeat the question so I'm not just reacting to him, please?

- Sure.

The One Big Beautiful Bill facing a milestone on October 1st going to remove Medicaid coverage for an estimated 11,000 Washington immigrants with legal status on October 1st, and also according to the "Union-Bulletin" here in Walla Walla, that will have impacts for many here locally.

So the question is, do you support the cuts and what additional support could you provide to people who fear losing their Medicaid?

- Yeah, I'm sorry to say that is new news to me.

I am deeply afraid for Medicaid.

And what's really aggravating about Mr.

Baumgartner continually saying that he found savings and eliminated waste, fraud, and abuse is that the $50 billion for rural hospitals is only for five years, and that's to replace a forecasted $1.1 trillion being cut out of Medicaid because the paperwork requirements, the red tape that Mr.

Baumgartner voted to impose on everybody who is disabled, or low income, or otherwise depends on Medicaid, including veterans who were previously exempt from work requirements.

All of those folks are now gonna have to file paperwork twice a year to document that they are still disabled.

That includes veterans who've become quadriplegics or are amputees because of war wounds.

Those people shouldn't have to prove to the US government over and over and over again for the rest of their lives that those limbs haven't grown back, for example, it's disgusting.

And it's the return of a nickel on every dollar that was taken away from the working people of this state and from the whole United States.

And people who are here legally, who've gone through the process that they need to to contribute to our economies as doctors, as farm workers, as educators, as students who are contributing to the knowledge of our own in-state student body, all those folks should have access to healthcare.

And those of us who've been privileged to live abroad, as Mr.

Baumgartner and I have, have had access to public healthcare systems in those countries.

And it is shameful that we would not offer the same to people that we welcomed and invited to live among us.

(audience applauding) - Ms.

Conroy, thank you very much.

Our next question, let's move on.

We'll talk about wildfires, and here in District 5, been a particular issue every summer.

I was in Spokane yesterday and saw some of the damage from the Spokane complex fire.

Here locally, the Lower Dry Creek Fire in July illustrated a deep need as farmers were using their own equipment and complained about a lack of coordination.

How would you ensure local fire districts, Ms.

Conroy, and emergency responders here have adequate federal support to fight these fires and have those resources before they begin?

- Oh, that's a big question, but part of what we have to do is make sure that the federal agencies that could help with that are fully funded to do that.

Mr.

Baumgartner voted twice to take hundreds of millions of dollars of emergency funds away from FEMA and deliver them to ICE instead so it could pay for for-profit detention facilities for immigrants here in the United States, some of them not properly documented, only a tiny percentage of them actually criminals.

So restoring funding to FEMA, restoring money to the US Forest Service so that federal firefighters are available.

I will say that news reports, we did suffer some pretty tragic home losses up in Spokane in August, all in a single day.

Fortunately, very little loss of life.

One person lost their life.

And the federal, state, local officials all credit each other for being willing to work together regardless of partisan affiliation.

And, unfortunately, or fortunately for this year, folks had had experience because of fires three years before and three years before that.

So that practice in earlier fires like Oregon Road, Gray fires meant that responders were able to function together better than they'd been able to in the past because they practiced.

And it's really important for communities to support firefighters and other emergency responders to drill and be prepared to save as many lives and have as little property loss as possible.

- Mr.

Baumgartner, same question to you.

How do you ensure they get that federal funding before disaster strikes rather than waiting until after?

- Well, thank you.

All of us in Eastern Washington have experienced wildfires, but what had happened this year is really cataclysmic and certainly hearts and prayers go out to everyone that's been impacted.

If you were to look in particular at the Spokane complex fires where this arsonist set a series of fires very close to a residential area, it's just heartbreaking.

And I know down here in Walla Walla where parts of Umatilla and your watershed have been on fire for a couple months now, it's extremely concerning, particularly if there's heavy rainfall in the following months that could impact your watershed.

So that's something that we're gonna be devoting a lot of resources to.

So we do need to have those federal programs in place, but we also need to return to science-based healthy forests.

We have far too heavy a fuel load in our forests right now because we haven't been following good science.

We've had nearly 100 years of severe fire suppression.

And frankly, after the spotted owl issues, didn't have enough logging going on in our forests.

So we're working on all those issues.

But I do want to say as well that I was really proud of both the Democrats and the Republican-elected officials in our state that came together to work on these fires.

When I was with Governor Ferguson and Senator Cantwell and Mayor Lisa Brown, we all have had our various political differences, but I really do think that everybody is stepping forward and working in a really good way.

And I know that that comes from the White House too on this issue.

Last year there were this terrible flooding on the west side of the state and there was some concern about the emergency declaration.

It's one of the things I talked to the White House about and it came through.

And in the past weeks, I've been regularly in contact with the White House Speaker Johnson, Vice President's Office, and other key players to make sure that Washington State's gonna get the support that it deserves in these fires.

I'm confident that'll happen as well too.

- Thank you very much, Mr.

Baumgartner.

All right, next up, we want to ask about, you mentioned ICE detentions, Ms.

Conroy, that is a question on this list in a recent report from "The Seattle Times" required a Freedom of Information Act to find previously unreported ICE detentions just here in Walla Walla County.

And as advocacy groups are hoping at the very least for a little bit more transparency in this, Mr.

Baumgartner, this question's for you first this time.

What specifically do you agree and disagree with when it comes to the administration's practices with ICE and how would you go about making changes that you disagree with?

- Yeah.

Well, I certainly was concerned, like a lot of Americans were concerned by the between 15 to 20 million folks that entered the country and kind of the open border policies of President Biden.

I think that was the determinant factor of why Republicans were put in charge was try to clean up the debacle down at the border because not only was it an ungoverned process of people coming in the country, but there was a lot of fentanyl, a lot of child trafficking going on with it.

And we've made a lot of progress there.

But at the same time, I certainly have some concerns with some of the ways some of the ICE operations have been carried out.

I think all of us were a little uncomfortable or more than uncomfortable with what happened in Minnesota and some of the theatrics that were going on by various aspects of the ICE detention.

So I thought it was great when senior leadership was replaced, when Bovino was out and Tom Homan was brought in.

Homan is somebody that is respected on both sides of the aisle, received President Obama's Highest Civilian Award for his work in immigration detention.

And so, that's things that we've advocated for behind the scenes is to say, "Hey, let's do this in a better way."

But you look at how much fentanyl deaths are down, they're down between 30-40%, murder's down, there's been zero getaways at the border for the last 16 months.

And one thing I was very uncomfortable with that my opponent said was she talked about ICE being beheaded.

And I think that's a really dangerous rhetoric in this time with all the things going on in the public space.

And she also called ICE detention facilities, concentration camps.

And that is really not appropriate.

Concentration camps killed six million Jews in ovens and we just have to be a lot more careful about the rhetoric that's used in public.

So I would urge some caution there as well.

- Ms.

Conroy, what do you agree with and disagree with when it comes to the current administration's approach?

- I think the administration's approach is brutal and inhumane, and if you take people who are in a specific category who've not been convicted of crimes and you concentrate them in a single place and deprive them of their liberty and access to healthcare, to food, to their families, to their jobs, to legal support, you are creating a concentration camp.

(audience applauding) - [Matt] All right, please hold the applause.

- With respect to the term beheaded, I'm gonna give Mr.

Baumgartner the benefit of the doubt and guess that he's been poorly advised by his staff.

I did not say anything about beheading, I did say that DHS needed to be dismembered, and post 9/11, there was this behemoth of a federal agency that was created in order to solve some of the intelligence problems that were perceived to have led to September 11th being carried out.

And I had friends at the time who were working for ICE who told me that they'd seen the structure of DHS, that it was going to have a thick, thick, thick layer of political appointees with zero experience in law enforcement, or justice, or law.

And she was very afraid that that political pressure was going to trickle down to the law enforcement and legal professionals underneath them.

And I think that 25 years later, we are seeing the effect of that politicized ICE.

And Tom Homan may have been good when he worked for the Obama administration.

I didn't realize he'd won a medal, but he's been bragging about terrorizing the nonpartisan public servants who are essential to the continuity of government from one administration to another, to providing the services at VA hospitals, at the Forest Service, at the Agricultural Service, and choosing to unilaterally break collective bargaining agreements for federal employees to terrorize people who make sure that all of us get the services that we pay for and we deserve is terrible.

- Ms.

Conroy, thank you very much.

All right, let's move on to question number eight of this program.

And as we talk about migrant farm work, there's been a measurable impact here locally.

In fact, Northwest Public Broadcasting has spoken with apple, pear, and cherry growers who say they're dealing with a lack of workers, in some case leaving a number of their crops entirely unpit.

We've spoken with leaders of organizations that handle H-2A labor contracts across the state who cite an uneasiness among people who are applying for these.

So what changes would you make to guest worker programs like H-2A, or would you advocate for any other changes to help local farmers?

Ms.

Conroy?

- Our agricultural workforce is really important and I don't have to tell people in Walla Walla that.

And what we need is a system that is efficient and that processes people's paperwork in good faith.

And we need immigration reform more broadly, which will help farmers as well as other businesses.

Eastern Washington University said that they had to raise in-state tuition for kids and families that grew up here because they no longer have as many foreign exchange students applying to enter Eastern Washington University because of the uncertainty and the fear that an enforcement-first immigration policy that has been underway for about two years now injects into the system.

There is a bait and switch aspect to failing to process for years and years the applications of people who've paid thousands of dollars to adjust their status, to have their paperwork match their lives here in the United States.

When I worked in New Zealand on immigration issues prior to a bipartisan agreement during the second Clinton administration, it cost a family of four who entered the United States on a business visa about 1,000 bucks when their lives changed to translate a business visa, a non-immigrant visa to an immigrant visa for that family of four.

After that immigration reform in about 1997, that same government function went to about $30,000.

So it went from something that a family, a moderate income family could put on a credit card and figure out how to pay off to having to put up front the price of a new entry-level Ford pickup truck.

And I don't know very many people that can afford to do that, just pull that out of their pocket and make it happen.

So we've got to get to a place where we recognize our nation was built on immigrants, on immigration, including my family, and we've got to have a fair and efficient system, both for the workers as well as for their would-be employers.

- And Mr.

Baumgartner, I'll restate the question.

What changes, if any, would you make to guest worker programs like H-2A?

If you wouldn't make any changes, what other relief could you say to farm workers here in the area?

- Well, it is definitely tough on farmers here in Washington State because a number of factors, including high wage and fuel prices caused by the Climate Commitment Act out of Olympia.

This is one of the toughest places in the country to be a farmer.

(attendees shouting) And... So, when it comes to immigration, we do need to have reliable workforce, but this thing's gonna come in stages.

And stage one is really to clean up the mess that was at the border of the 15 to 20 million folks that entered the country in the open border policy.

A lot of progress has been made there.

We've seen the fentanyl come down.

Other issues have come down.

And I think if anybody can have a Nixon goes to China moment on immigration policy, it may well be President Trump, who is someone that comes out of the hospitality industry and somebody that understands, and if you listen to his rhetoric, has spoken frequently about the need for various types of workers to meet the American workforce, but we do have to be a country of laws.

And then the third piece of this puzzle, fix the border, be a country of laws.

And then we have to look at welfare reform in this as well too, because at a time that welfare and education, at a time that America is $40 trillion in debt, spending 20% more than we can, why are we having to have so many folks on welfare and not generate the skilled labor force at all levels that we need to fill these jobs?

And that's why things like putting work requirements on food stamps and Medicaid is something that's a step in the right direction to get that labor force.

And then, finally, it is just so important that immigration laws be made by Congress.

Because it's complex and there's competing interests, anytime a president does something by decree, it takes a piece of the leverage out to get a comprehensive solution that can bring multiple parties together.

And so, it's extremely important that Congress does that with a willing president.

And I think that given the amount of progress we've made on fixing the border issues the last years, I think we're gonna be ready to do something like that.

- Thanks, Mr.

Baumgartner.

All right, question number nine about artificial intelligence, specifically data centers.

Hard to have a conversation about those, a nuanced one.

And around here, people tell us it's hard to have a conversation period about whether or not the area is going to build data centers, worded by some who submitted, "It feels like it's a done deal before the public gets to give their input."

So the question is, Mr.

Baumgartner, what solutions do you propose through legislation to help small communities ensure a democratic process and transparency at a local government level before committing to a data center project?

- Well, thank you.

No community should have a data center forced into it that the community doesn't want.

And also no data center should increase your water/electricity rates at the cost of subsidizing the company that's running the data center.

So I've sponsored legislation to that effect.

Just this last week we voted for legislation to that effect.

And I think it's appropriate that many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are saying, "Hey, let's take a pause on this and make sure that local communities support these and understand if these can be done in a way that people support" because that hasn't been there yet.

So that's something that needs to be worked on.

At the same time, there are a lot of benefits to supercomputing, whether it's conversing or watching entertainment or what it may bring in the medical field, things like early onset diagnosis of cancer and when data can be brought together to get healthcare solutions that we may not have realized before.

And so, that's something both have helped with costs and helped with live longer lives.

We also have to understand how dangerous it would be if China were to get a significant lead over us in the supercomputing race.

The Chinese Communist Party does not have the same value sets that we do in America.

And if they have ability to use supercomputing in ways at an advantage to ours, we all see how dangerous that is.

But it is appropriate right now that communities take a pause.

Industry and policy makers need to work together and make sure that people support them, how they're being done.

But if you don't want them, you don't get them.

They're not gonna increase your electricity rates and they're not gonna increase your water rates.

And that's kind of the framework that needs to be worked under.

- Ms.

Conroy, same question to you is citizens here are concerned with the lack of input they're able to provide on some of these data centers.

- Yeah, it's understandable that they're worried about it.

And I'm glad that Mr.

Baumgartner has changed his position on this because he put forward a bill that would have prevented local communities from making their own decisions about what conditions they would allow data centers and other large infrastructure to be built by private companies.

This is the second time that I've heard Mr.

Baumgartner raise China as a scare tactic.

And it sounds like the red scare that happened back in the 1970s when President Reagan was justifying a massive US military buildup based on what he claimed, maybe we knew, maybe we didn't know about Soviet capabilities.

And in fact, we had a much larger military than the Soviet Union did.

We did not have to outspend to outbuild them.

Here now with China, we have five times the data processing capacity, the supercomputers that China has.

We've already got so much more than they do, they're gonna be building for years to keep up with us.

And I do happen to agree that state-owned enterprises are a problem, that in order to have free trade, we need to make sure that we let the market do its business, but it can't be at the expense of local communities.

And this administration has been taking stakes, large stakes in private businesses.

And I think that's bad for those companies.

I think that's bad for the United States, that free enterprise ought to be free to operate without a chief executive deciding the winners and the losers.

And unfortunately, there's less difference now between the United States and China on that particular aspect than there used to be.

And I think that Congress should make sure that the executive branch stays out of the way of private enterprise except to create a level-playing field so that there is real competition and also allow communities the freedom to defend themselves from corporate overreach.

- Ms.

Conroy, thank you very much.

Our next question, we'll set the clock to 90 seconds for responses for this one for the sake of time.

And I want to ask about the SAVE Act.

Obviously, the well-publicized proposal, excuse me, to have people prove US citizenship in order to vote.

We're hearing from within that bill people among the millions of citizens who say those documents aren't readily available, married women who've changed their name to 2/3 of Washingtonians who don't have an enhanced ID.

How do you respond to concerns that this requirement poses unnecessary hurdles for voters in Washington, Ms.

Conroy?

- I'm very concerned about the requirement.

I'm concerned that Mr.

Baumgartner's posted to his Twitter account that he's proud to have voted for it because the SAVE Act is a violation of the US Constitution if it were to pass.

The Constitution says that it is up to the states to decide how to run federal elections.

And the way that the SAVE Act- (audience applauding) The way that the SAVE Act is written, it would in fact put an undue burden, really a sort of a poll tax on women who've changed their names or anybody who's changed their names because of marriage or some other reason, on registered tribal members who may only have a sovereign identity, a sovereign ID card as proof of their identity, but that's not proof of American citizenship, ironically.

And it would also put barriers between voters being able to vote by mail in the privacy of their own homes and instead require people who may suffer mobility issues or who've just got better things to do than to stand in line at a polling station to cast their vote.

And a series of mostly Republican secretaries of state in the state of Washington have carefully, over a couple of decades, made universal vote by mail, vote from home possible for us in Washington State.

We have one of the most secure and frictionless ways for American citizens to vote in the country.

I think a lot of people would like to follow our lead, but the SAVE Act, if it were to pass and stand up in court would make much of what we love illegal.

- [Matt] And Mr.

Baumgartner, same question, sir.

- Yeah.

There's, for a number of reasons, trust in our elections is eroding and it really endangers our republic.

If you go back to- (audience booing) If you go back- - [Matt] Please.

- If you go back, look, I know the crowd that we have here today, but just think about the good of the country.

What happened in the 2000 election between Bush and Gore?

What happened in 2004 with Dino Rossi and Gregoire?

What happened in 2016 when Democrats felt that Russia had tilted the playing field towards President Trump, or the terrible events of January 6th in 2020?

For all those reasons, we need to restore trust in elections.

And what the SAVE Act simply says is you have to prove that you're an American citizen to vote.

The same thing you have to do, prove your identity when you get on an airplane.

Right now in California, you can use a library card or a gym membership to vote.

In the state of Washington, a group of homeless people could register at a homeless shelter and someone, it's legal to collect ballots, you can ballot harvest in our state, could go down and collect their ballots.

All these things raise distrust in elections.

So we're simply trying to take what should be a bipartisan step back in the other direction and say, "Just prove that you're a citizen to vote.

Let's shore that thing up and then we'll go on to the next stage."

Again, this experiment of ours in representative democracy that we celebrated these 250 years, this thing is not set on autopilot.

It needs to be protected.

And if you don't have a foundation of trust in elections, no one's trying to keep women from voting.

No one's trying to keep anybody disowned from voting.

(audience booing) No one's trying to do that.

What is simply is a measure to say, "Prove that you're American citizen to vote.

Let's take that step towards restoring trust and then we can work on shoring up our democracy."

- Thank you very much.

Let's move on to question 11, 90 seconds for this one as well.

Got to talk about the ongoing conflicts overseas.

Nonpartisan policy organizations, the Brown University Cost of War Project estimates that ongoing military engagements have diverted hundreds of billions from domestic infrastructure, increased federal debt.

And a key point that was brought up by the person who asked this question, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution states, "Congress holds the exclusive power to formally declare war and fund military actions."

So as our submitter posed, Mr.

Baumgartner first, it seems like Congress has given up that role.

Do you agree or disagree with that sentiment?

Why or why not?

- Well, there's a lot in that question.

First thing I start with is the last time Congress declared war was I think against Romania at the end of World War II.

And so, many presidents, including President Obama, who launched attacks on Libya for more than seven months without the say so of Congress, have utilized their responsibility in the Constitution, which also says that they're supposed to be the Commander in Chief to protect our country.

So what's more important, I think, is the policy, and you talked about the cost of these conflicts.

And what I think we're doing a lot better now as America is learning the mistakes of Iran and Iraq, where we were spending over $10 billion a month in those conflicts, 4,500 Americans made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq, and about 2,500 in Afghanistan.

And instead, we're being smarter to make sure that we're not putting boots on the ground, but we're also doing something very, very important in Iran, which is to make sure that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon.

Iran having a nuclear weapon would be like Osama bin Laden or Hitler having a nuclear weapon.

It would potentially kill hundreds of millions of people in this country and would lead to nuclear proliferation all across the Middle East, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt.

And so, it's extremely dangerous, and I think that given that they've been chanting "Death to America" for nearly 47 years, killing scores of Americans, the strategy that we have now to not put boots on the ground, to put them in a vice economically, to make sure that they never acquire a nuclear weapon, I think is a step in the right direction.

So we have to learn from the mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan, because you're right, it was costing way too much.

- [Matt] Ms.

Conroy, same question.

- So Congress does have a role to play in whether or not the United States goes to war, and the executive does get 60 days to respond to an emergency and then give Congress a chance to either approve or, and Congress then has to approve or disapprove.

And Mr.

Baumgartner has voted five times to allow this administration to continue this billion dollar a day war.

So to say that there ought to be work requirements before somebody can get access to food, but the President can go ahead with a billion dollar a day war, that's just fine, is really quite a pivot to be making.

I would point out that Secretary of Defense Hegseth told us a year ago that he had destroyed all of Iran's nuclear weapons program.

And former DNI Nikki Haley said that Iran was years away from getting a nuclear weapons program, that there is no imminent threat when it comes to nukes.

I am concerned about Saudi Arabia or other countries being able to get access to nuclear weapons.

And so, I'm very concerned about the fact that the Trump administration seems to be willing to offer Saudi Arabia nuclear technology without putting a non-proliferation clause on that, which we've required of anybody else to whom we've offered energy support.

And the fact that the Saudis and the Pakistanis who are known proliferators have entered into a more robust defense treatment gives me great pause that they are working in fact on a Saudi nuclear weapons program.

- Well, for the sake of time, we have one more question.

I'll ask our timers to set the timer to one minute here.

And this one about divisive politics, a quick question, but more about philosophically how you would legislate.

Politicians go online to frame opposition in a way to purposely misrepresent the other side.

I think a lot of people can see through that kind of stuff.

And we often ask people how politicians reach across the aisle.

I'll be honest, the answer we get is generally a really easy piece of legislation that you were able to work across the aisle with.

So I'm gonna ask this a different way to close our program.

How will you commit to being a politician who refuses to play that game, refuses to engage in talking past each other in online spaces, and refuses to turn the job of a legislator into a performance for your party's ideology?

Ms.

Conroy.

- I stay offline as much as I possibly can and get my team to put stuff out there so that we can let folks know what we're doing to reach out and listen and get to know the people of this district.

But I enjoy the endorsements of a number of organizations by people who are, by nature and by nurture, have a deep love of this country and are nonpartisan.

And so, I've been honored to be endorsed by National Security Leaders for America, which is mostly led by retired admirals and generals, by The Steady State, which is mostly led by former intel, senior intel officials, and by Foreign Policy for America, which is mostly led by retired ambassadors.

That's over 1,500, between those three organizations, that's more than 1,500 former national security leaders whose organizations normally endorse the incumbent.

But if the incumbent is questioning the legitimacy of our election system and undermining the constitutional norms of states setting the rules for elections, when there is no actual evidence of widespread voter fraud, when an incumbent congressperson is surrendering powers granted in Article 1 of the Constitution in order to make sure that we can work together and so that Congress people have those discussions amongst themselves instead of handing power over to a powerful and unchecked executive, that's not doing the job.

We've got to get back to empowering Congress and keeping that power for our own district.

- [Matt] Ms.

Conroy, we have to go to Mr.

Baumgartner, that same question to you.

- Well, in my eight years in the state Senate, I was the majority.

So Republicans had control for six of those eight years, but we never had the House.

We never had the Governor's mansion.

So I have a long history of working across the aisle for the good of Eastern Washington, whether it was the WSU Medical School or other bills that we've passed, reducing college tuition, and we'll continue to do that in Congress as well too.

I'm very proud that I'm endorsed by people that know me the best.

America's most decorated diplomat is Ambassador Ryan Crocker.

He was my boss in Baghdad.

He supports my campaign, as do many other diplomats, but it really should be about diplomats overseas, about people here at home.

I'm very proud to be supported by the Farm Bureau, by agricultural leaders like Alex McGregor and Mark Schesler, by the Vaagen Bros.

up in Colville.

All the Northwest Indian tribes in this part of the state support me, the Colville, the Kalispel, Spokanes.

And even if they don't support me, and I know there's a lot of people here in this room that don't support me and that's okay, I represent you as well too.

So if I do have the privilege of getting to do this job for another two years, keep bringing your ideas, keep bringing your energy.

We're not always gonna disagree, but try to do it in a civil manner because the only thing that I worry about with America, I'm very optimistic about the future of America, but the only thing I am worried about is the divisiveness gets so bad that people just yell at each other instead of listening and talking to each other.

So try to keep that in mind, but thank you very much for coming out tonight and giving this opportunity to put our best foot forward and humbly ask for your vote.

- [Matt] Michael Baumgartner, Carmela Conroy, candidates for the 5th Congressional District.

Thank you very much.

(audience applauding)