The Michigan U.S.

Senate Democratic primary is heating up, and one of the candidates, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, is here to talk about same.

Our lead story theyre triying to resolve the SNAP issue in Michigan.

The Senate and House disagree.

There's something new.

On the Craig Mauger, Emily Lawler, and Zoe Clark.

Sit in with us as we get the inside out.

Off the Record.

Production of Off the Record is made possible in par by Bellwether Public Relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwetherpr.com.

And now, this edition of Off the Record with Tim Skubick.

Thank you very much.

Welcome to studio C. An interesting week in our town.

They're trying to resolve the SNAP issue.

Lots of folks.

1.4 million could be losing benefits.

Here's what's going on.

We think .

Normally the federal SNAP program would pump some $3.9 billion each year into Michigan home where families do need the food.

But with the federal government still in shutdown mode and the benefits set to end on Saturday, the Michigan Senate, on a 27 to 4 vote, adopted an emergency state budget to put food in 13% of the Michigan homes, or about 1.4 million family members.

The chair of the Senate Budget Committee warns, however this fund is a stopgap measure, a lifeline for families facing uncertainty.

What we're doing today is not a permanent fix.

The benefits would go mostl to young children, older adults and the disabled.

50 million would go directly to families using their credit cards.

And while politicians in D.C.

are not making ideal decisions, we in this chamber, the leaders in the Senate are making sur that SNAP benefits are funded, that our food banks are funde to help support those efforts, and also making sur that families do not go without.

And another 20 million goes to restock the depleted food bank shelves across the state.

This Republican senator said he would vote yes, but he still wants a long term solution from the Democrats.

And he notes that this particular measure will not be in effect when th benefits run out November 1st.

This is all political theater.

The bill before us cannot be passed in time to help.

Here are the four Republicans who voted no, including Senator Joe Bellino from Monroe.

Oakland County Senator Jim Runestad, plus Senator and candidate for governo Eric Nesbitt from West Michigan.

None of them explained their no vote during floor debate.

At the same time, Governor Whitmer has found 4.5 million to send to food banks in all 83 counties, and she's calling on foundations to help out, too.

The measure now moves to the Michigan House floor for debate next week.

So that was a brillian piece of journalism, which was, you know, inoperative within the within a couple of hour because the Michigan House said not going to do it.

Would you make of this?

I mean, it's huge.

I mean, this is a huge story for two reasons.

One, it affects so many people in the state of Michigan.

More than a million people are about to lose food assistance that it that they depend on to feed their families.

And secondly, there's something going on in the legislature, and it's a little bit unclear between the Senate Democrats and the Democratic governor.

You had the Senate Democrats rolling out an aid package that the governor doesn't seem to be on board with, but hasn't said where she stands on.

And there's doesn't seem to be a lot of communication between the two sides.

We've seen this movie before, haven't we?

I mean, it doesn't appea like there's an actual workable plan among the legislature and the governor.

And to Craig's point.

I mean, and you noted in you setup piece, right, 1.4 million Michiganders, half a million of which are children, and they're just doesn't seem to be some workable everyone coming to the table and saying, here's what we want to do now.

You know, there was this $4 million, statement that came out, via email.

And the person, the leader whose name on it with the governor and with the budget director was Matt Hall.

And so I think it just had a lot of folks just sort of doing thi whiplash on Thursday of what are we actually trying to fix her and who's on board with the fix?

Yeah.

This is where the federal shutdown really starts to hit home here.

You know, there are obviously federal employees in Michigan who have been feeling this for a while, but the impact of this is 13% of Michigan's population.

It's up there.

So I think it's going to be pretty tangible starting November 1st.

But also, you know, this is the state trying to backfill and solv a fundamentally federal problem.

So even if they do pass some stopgap measure, I don't think there's anyone's under the illusion.

It's a permanent solution for the bulk.

And weight of th federal government in this area.

Well go ahead.

The other thing, too, you know, that I just I don't know if heartbreaking is the right word, but, you know, for for folks who don't necessarily, like follow this day by day, right?

I mean, earlier in the week, two House Democrats came out with their own plan, much larger right than the Senate Democrats.

And the thing that I think I just, kind of sick in my stomach is, is just reading a lot of, listener questions and comments and then just even online, folks just simply asking Will I have money on Saturday?

Right.

And s and so you're set up piece of, you know, this person is doing this and they're voting no, but they don't like it.

And again, you have more than a million Michigander who are just like okay, right.

Do I have money on Saturday to go buy groceries?

And and it's it's just it feels some of this is unnecessarily complicating just giving a michigander the answer to that question come Saturday.

Well, the answer to the question does come from Mr.

Hall, who basically said, I agree with the governor on starting out with this 5.4 million and well assess the situation week to week.

We've got a kitty of $30 million that we can revisit.

So they don't need the Senate.

That's not an answer, though, for people who are trying to figure out how they're going to eat next week is it?

$4 million is a drop in the bucket no matter what a press release says.

The food bank people said they could get through two weeks with that money.

But if this goes on a month, according to the state lawmakers, that's $250 million in food assistance.

That would have gone out.

Compare 4 million to 250 million.

And that's the governor's office is not providing a lot of answers.

They're saying here's the 4 million.

It's the communication breakdown that Zoe's talking about.

An example of this for your viewers.

The Senate Democrats, who passed $70 million in spending, told the reporters we don't know if the Department of Health and Human Services can put this on to people's EBT cards.

We don't know.

Less than an hour later, DHHS told our reporter, Melissa Nann Burke, oh, they can put it on EBT cards.

So, I mean, that is kind of the breakdown of what is going on here.

But what was Mr.

Hall's problem with the Senate plan?

What was wrong with it?

I mean, you're looking at significantly more money.

So I think that has to be a factor there.

Definitely.

The House Democrats is the biggest plan.

Senate Democrats is the second biggest plan.

Whitmer's is the smallest plan.

But also, you know, I think there's some validity to asking, we don't know how long this is going to go on.

How much money do we need?

That's the premise.

They think they can wait this thing out, that it's not going to be that long.

Yeah.

I mean, and also, I mean I think what Hall and you had, Senator Lindsey they're talking about, too, and this is also this, you know, sort of like inside Lansing having to understand how it works.

Is that the Senate passed a bill that has to wait five days in the House.

So no matter.

So that's where, you know, when they're saying it's disingenuous because instead you could have had a vehicle bill.

And this goes back to like who's actually sitting at the table saying, hey, if we want to actually fix this, right like let's have a conversation about how to actually fix thi instead of passing here and this and then press release here, and this 4.5 million bucket out of 30 million.

And again, it all just gets wrapped up.

And I think particularl heading into an election year, and we'll talk to the guest, the congresswoman who is here, it makes a lot of folks just continually feel like both parties aren't actually solution oriented and instead are just pointing fingers.

And that's I think, one of the reasons Hall is probably opposed to this.

It doesn't seem like the Senate Dems brought anyone into the fold.

Hey, you all want to join us on this?

It seems like they kind of just did this without talking to other people.

So that raises the question of how serious it is this time delay issue.

Hey, this bill has to sit in the house for five days.

That's already after people are going to start losing their assistance.

You know, that's another obstacle here.

But they're also funneling $70 million out there.

It's going to take multiple days for that to get wherever it's going to go.

Well, with that, money's not going anywhere, okay?

It's not going to go anywher now.

I mean, it doesn't appear.

It is DOA.

But do you think he changes his mind if this drags on two weeks?

Once Mr.

Hall makes a decision, he's pretty much locked in that we're going to.

We're going to monitor this thing.

There's a resolution that they sent to Congress to end the shutdown.

What impact will that have?

None.

Thank you, thank you.

All right.

Meanwhile, in all of this, also what you had on Thursday again, these sort of dual, you know, narratives was this other conversation which and stick with me here about why it matters is about earmarks and transparency.

Because Hall is is you know, still continues to to be very frustrated that the Senate has has changed the number of days that earmarks.

And we don't have to go into sort of all the machinations.

But h he passed a bill back basically, and then said at his press conference Thursday, like, I'm not actually sure that we're going to move any Senate bills until we figure this out.

It's incredibly wild.

I mean, they are talking about transparency, and they reach some budget deal that involves all these other things that they won't say what they are.

And I mean, just think about that.

It involves economic development.

We're not going to tell you what that is.

It involves, earmarks.

Maybe we agreed to something we don't know what we agreed to do.

I mean, it's just a wild situation.

Yes.

I was writing the story last night.

I was thinking to myself, they're complaining.

Well, we don't have enough money.

All they have to do is go to all the pork barrel spending, and they could find all the money they want.

If they all said, okay, I'm going to give up my local project to feed some people.

They have $2 billion in a rainy day fund, right now.

$2 billion.

Yeah.

Well, well.

And let me also just say to like and again, we'll talk to the congresswoman about this, but they're also, you know as states are scrambling.

Right.

So Michigan, one of many states we're trying to figure out how to backfill some of this.

to Craig's point, there's also a federal rainy day savings that that has been used in the past.

Going back to SNAP now to SNAP benefits.

Right.

so it doesn't have to be that the federal government has to be opene necessarily for these dollars.

So I do want to give, you know, the Michigan Legislature some credit, which is what they're trying to do, is figure out how to help fix the federal mess, which there actually is a solution to the federal mes as well, that no one wants to.

Well I mean, it's in the courts right now, and a judge will decide.

And by the time this airs, maybe they will.

Wouldn't it have been nic if somebody had called a meeting before this thing and brought all the partie in and said, what should we do?

Did that meeting happen?

Do we get that sense?

No, no.

And I it makes you wonde what the relationship is like, especially coming off a, you know, a hot mess of a budget to some extent.

Well, they took credit for getting the budget done.

Bring this group back together.

All right.

We got another assignment here, folks.

Let's sit in a room and work it out.

But the process behind the budget was not good.

And I think you're seeing a little bit of that reflected here as well.

there was a meeting of candidates for the Republican Party running for governor.

Mrs.. Mrs.

Clark doesn't like the word debate.

Okay.

I like the word debate theory, just not necessaril tied to what we saw on Tuesday.

Explain why.

Sure.

so basically what these are are put together by the Republican Party and they are forums, right, for really Republican voters to decide on a Republican candidate that they want to choose.

And and this happens all the time.

Like, let's be very clear, I have no trouble with that.

But this is also a fundraiser, right, for for the Republican Party.

And so I'm questioning and having some, you know, conversation in our own newsroom either about are these actual debates or forums.

And I would say that whether it was the Democratic Party or if Mike Duggan was having debates among independent candidates, right.

Like, are these actual debates as we know them, or are these really more moderated forum of candidates of the same party?

I think in order to have a debate, you have to have somebody asking questions.

It will do follow up questions, which peels back.

Everybody on that panel was for tax cuts.

Nobody asked them, well, how are you going to replace lost revenue?

Which is a critical question.

So by definition I don't think it was a debate.

And if it was it was small d. It's it I mean, you're making a great point.

We described it as a debate because you had candidates up on a stage having exchanges with each other.

That's something.

There are two more of these.

And that's the question that I have.

If you're the Michigan Republican Party, you can't just do what you did last week.

Again.

You got to.

Yes they can.

And they will.

If they did that, they're going to they're going to have a lot of bored viewers.

Do you think theyre going to change the format and turn this into.

I mean, I think they've got to ask these people questions to allow them to differentiate themselves.

And honestly, the accessibility is a problem too.

They had a prohibition on live streaming.

And the scope is just really really limited with the people you're going to reach and that kind of approach.

And, you know, frankly, you're going to need your own voters to engage if you want them to pick a candidate.

And the lead out of the lead, out of the gathering, I like that.

Actually, I like that word better.

For, I get it.

It's like, this is great.

Have the candidates out having conversations.

Let's just be careful about the language.

But the lead, I think, was that, it seems to be that the frontrunner, at least monetarily, was not there.

His name is?

John Jones.

Her name is Haley Stevens.

Let's call her in.

Mrs.

Stevens, welcome to Off the Record.

Thank you so much.

Nice to see you.

If you could wave a magic wand right now, what's the first thing you would do?

Well, I would work to lowe the cost of people's health care by reinstating the tax subsidies that we see evaporating.

And people are logging in for open enrollment, and it's 145% increases.

You got small business owners right now.

who are seeing themselves priced out of health care.

So we're in a crisis.

And, you know, I've been holding the line on behalf of the people of Michigan.

And of course, the president's nowhere to be found, and we're in a stalemate.

Emily.

So you've got something that nobody else in this primary has which is a congressional record, what 2 or 3 things are you out on the campaign trail making sure people know about your current work in Washington?

Well, look, I consider myself one of Michigan's biggest champions.

I tell the constituents of Michigan's 11th district that I am our bragger in chief and that is one of the reasons I'm running for United States Senate.

But more specifically, our state is one of jus a handful of states in the Union whose central economy is driven by the manufacturing sector.

And so this is why I played a lead role in, forming a Democratic manufacturing working group, passing the Chips and Science Act.

I was writing House leadership a letter a week.

It felt like the year before that happened but I was also holding a gavel on the science Space and Technology Committee, overseeing the science part of that bill, STEM education.

I'm an effective lawmaker.

And in fact, I was just recognized as the most effective Democratic lawmaker for Michigan.

So my sleeves are rolled up for our stat and for the people of the state.

The driver of our economy is also our workforce, which is incredibly talented, skilled.

We've got this rich concentration of engineering talent in the state of Michigan and that needs to be harnessed to continue to innovate and lead the future.

Representative, what do you say to people in the state of Michigan who might be appreciative of your wor to try to lower insurance costs, but are looking at the possibility that they will not get food assistance that they need?

Yeah.

Beginning this weekend.

It's look, it's astonishing.

And I'm hearing from people about this right and lef and have been for a long time.

And of course, to your previous conversation about how this state has found itsel in this position, unexpectedly.

We shouldn't be in this position.

We should be using the reserve dollars.

Now, like many things in this current environment, fate is hanging in the hands of a judge and how a judge is going to rule.

Didnt democrat also vote to reopen government?

Right now?

We have pain and suffering going on right now.

We are in a cost of living crisis.

Craig.

We've got $1.3 trillion of credit card debt in this country.

Michiganders are already puttin grocery bills on credit cards.

He asked you why didnt the Democrats just vote to open up the government?

Well, look, we we want to see the deal for Michigan.

That's where I am on this.

I'm I'm a House member.

And when you see people' health care coming under attack, when you don't have, compromise, which, look, the Republicans are in charg right now, the president hasn't been at the table just this morning.

There's a headline.

We're not going to have a meeting at the Oval Offic to to have a discussion on this.

So, no, the Republicans claim that they have a mandate.

They have every ability to reopen the government and come to the table.

And, look, we shouldn't be playin with people's food assistance.

You're going to see people robbing Peter to pay Paul.

They're going to make decisions about their rent, their mortgage, their transportation and those food costs.

And this is going to lead to further economic pain.

Congresswoman, back in March when there was an initial vote to continue to fund the government, there were a lot of Democrats that progressive Democrats were really frustrated with.

Chuck Schumer, for, you know having a majority of Democrats sort of say, okay, we're going to continue on, funding the government.

Gary Peters, who you would like to replace in the Senate was one of the senators to vote to, to continue the government, remaining open back in March.

Would you have voted to keep the government open in March?

I did vote as a House member, but.

But as a senator?

Yeah.

Well, look, I think this is keeping the finger on the pulse of Michiganders.

And certainly in that moment, I don't think we had the compromise.

I don't think we had, the, the set of policies down that warranted the vote.

You know Elissa Slotkin win a certain way and I can speak to about what my my vote was as a House member, and that would have been consistent.

I'm asking is because I'm trying to understand particularly the right now in the Democratic primary.

Right.

The kind of Democratic senator that you would be there's so many conversations right now, as you well know, in the Democratic Party about sort of the future.

Right.

And right now, of course you have the New York mayoral, candidate, Mamdani, who has just sort of gotten everybody online super geeked up.

And Democrats you've always sort of remained more of a establishment Democrat.

And there was a piece that came out this week that Democrats.

Well thats generous given that I had a six wa primary to flip my house in 20.

In 2018.

When you have a six way primary you win by a plurality, right?

So I guess I'm just curious about sort of the role that you see yourself in the Democratic Party right now when there's jus so many conversations about who the Democratic Party wants to be when it grows up.

Yeah.

Well, I, I consider myself meeting Michigan's moment.

And I will tell you, I was the first millennial that Michigan ever sent to Congress.

I was the first woman to ever hold my seat.

I hit the ground running.

I got my first bill signed into law within my first year in Congress.

And when Michigan is i moments of crisis, I stand up.

When Michigan is facing uncertainty, I stand up.

This is what led me to putting up my hand, in the Obama administration to serve as chief of staff on the auto rescue.

This is what led me to telling the Treasury operator, the white House operator, to wire the calls for Michiganders to me, and I stayed late returning those phone calls.

So I view thi as a public service moment here.

I am running against Mik Rogers, who's made it very clear that he wants to rubber stamp Donald Trump.

I want to rubber stamp with the people of Michigan need.

I'm effective.

I get things done, and I don't compromise at the expense of my values.

Will you stand up and say that the auto industry misplayed the EV issue?

They're looking pretty bad.

There were massive layoffs that they didn't judge this thing correctly.

Are you willing to give them low marks?

Well, look, I think the auto industry for many years in Michigan has made a series of plays that sometimes work out, and sometimes they don't see where there cheese is moving.

Market dynamics are market dynamics.

There job is to sell cars.

That's not my job.

What about negligent on judging the EV thing?

Well, look, they made some big pronouncements.

You know I certainly have some questions.

particularly for some of the big three, that, our had set goals for the 2030 that are clearly not achievable.

But I will say this, and I si on the China Select Committee, I'm looking at China competition each and every single day, the United States of America coming out of the great Recession, made investments in battery technology.

Those didn't those didn't take right away.

It went overseas.

We want to be competitive.

I have written an authorduced, I introduced the No Chinese Car Act.

Simply for this principl because Chinese subsidize EVs.

They're trying to circumvent trade, not our market.

And, you know, squash our auto industry.

So I when I was chief of staff, Tim, I didn't, on the auto rescue.

I learned this very early on.

We don't want to seek to control the day to day management of the companies.

I certainly have some questions.

I remember sitting down with them.

Thats not the story here, they did make mistakes, did they not?

Well, that's certainly up for analysts to to pursue.

I mean, these companies.

No no but I don't have an analysts in the chair.

I have you Do you think they made mistakes?

I certainly think that the auto industry, and our big three, you know, was looking at China competition.

They're looking at where the cheese is moving and they wanted to compete.

Jim Farley is waking up every day with that competition hanging on his shoulders.

You have China right now, as for the last 18 months, is the largest exporter of vehicles in the world.

So I want cars to continue to be made here in the United States of America and in Michigan with our best in class workforce.

And in term of how that gets done, you know, we need to set the right framework.

We need to certainly take our cues from, you know, private sector entities.

We know that, you know, on, a handful of matters, particularly with 5G.

You know, why is China eating our lunch on that?

You know who's responsible?

We got to meet.

We've got to meet the moment in terms of our innovation economy.

Representativ do you think large corporations have too much influence in politics right now?

I look, I think the voice of the people is very important and.

So is that a yes or no?

I look, I don't necessarily view it like that.

Why not?

I mean, this is a lot of energy on the Democratic side right now is on this.

Well what would be an example that Craig?

Well I was going to ask you that.

Yeah.

But you said, Well, here's the thing.

I field 50,000 phon calls a year from constituents.

I take my cues from people who are calling that office to get help.

I return millions of dollars to the pocketbooks of Michiganders.

That is who I serve.

I think some of your opponents and say an example is healt care costs are through the roof.

For average Michigan residents the health care industry gives buckets of money to the people who set the policies.

Why isn't anything being done here?

Well people don't want to see their their health care, prices, increase.

Look, I've worked very hard in the Congress to lowe the cost of prescription drugs.

I would say that we have got to protect access to affordable health care.

You know, every step of the way.

There's been a lot of debate about what this would look like, but we don't want to be in the business as Democrats of taking people's health care away.

This is what we see.

The Republican Party going down the line of over and over again.

When I was first elected to Congress, it was, preexisting condition that was a fear for for people.

And now we're seeing the same old playbook.

Well, we're not going to you know, we don't believe in the the the ACA exchange.

We don't believe in what was set up through Obamacare.

And now you've got almost 40,000 people in my congressional district that might be priced out of their health care.

So yet again, we've got t stand up and defend that.

Yes.

Should we have a holistic conversation on reworking?

Maybe we should.

But in the meantime, we're playing catch up.

Go ahead.

Very quickly.

There's there's so many things that have changed, dynamics in DC right no and norms that have been busted.

But one that has remained is, third rail is the so-called nuclear option in the Senate.

Right.

This idea of getting rid of the Senate filibuster, if you were to make it to Senate, is there, any issue that you would be willing to get rid of the filibuster over that you feel that passionately about?

Voting rights, women's health protection and, in fact, this is something I've campaigned on before.

You know, where we're at rubber meets the roa on a handful of these matters.

And I do think, people have been let down in the past with, sticking by old rules and not going, you know, as a Rep for Michigan, not going for what the majority of the people in this state want, and what the majority o the people in the country want.

If Mr.

Schumer and the Democrats take control of the Senate, would you vote for him for leader again?

And you got 10 seconds.

I'm going to make that decision when I get there.

That was a punt.

Why?

Look I'm focused on people in Michigan.

You're asking that question is a reporter.

People in Michigan are talking to me about their pocketbook.

You want you want to stay for an overtime?

Sure.

Why not?

Nothign better to do, right?

Go to wkar.org for more of our conversation with the congresswoman from Oakland County.

See you then.

Production of Off th Record is made possible in part by Bellwether Public Relations, a full servic strategic communications agency partnering with clients through public relations, digital marketing and issue advocacy.

Learn more at bellwetherpr.com.

For more off the record, visit wkar.org Michigan public television stations have contributed to the production costs of Off the Record.