♪ ♪ GOOD EVENING EVERYONE.

I'M CATHERINE SHEN, EDUCATION REPORTER AT CONNECTICUT PUBLIC.

WELCOME TO TONIGHT'S SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT DEBATE LIVE FROM THE FINE ARTS INSTRUCTIONAL CENTER CONCERT HALL ON THE CAMPUS OF EASTERN CONNECTICUT STATE UNIVERSITY.

TONIGHT'S DEBATE IS A COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CONNECTICUT AND CONNECTICUT PUBLIC.

BEFORE I INTRODUCE THE CANDIDATES, LET ME FIRST GO OVER THE CUMULATIVE TIME FORMAT.

THE FORMAT IS DESIGNED TO ALLOW THE CANDIDATES TIME TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES.

THE ONLY RULE IS THAT THE TOTAL TIME USED BY EACH CANDIDATE BY THE CONCLUSION OF THE CANDIDATE MUST BE APPROXIMATELY THE SAME.

THE CANDIDATES WILL NOT BE RESTRICTED TO ONE OR TWO MINUTE RESPONSES.

INSTEAD, THEY MAY SPEND AS LITTLE OR AS MUCH TIME AS THEY FEEL IS APPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS EACH ISSUE.

OUR GOAL IS TO ENCOURAGE DEBATE.

THE CANDIDATES WILL TAKE TURNS BEING THE FIRST TO RESPOND TO A QUESTION.

FOLLOWING THE QUESTION PERIOD, EACH CANDIDATE WILL MAKE A TWO-MINUTE CLOSING STATEMENT.

MEMBERS OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ARE SERVING AS TIMERS FOR THE DEBATES AND WILL KEEP US INFORMED OF THE TIME EXPENDED.

IF A SERIESOUS IMBALANCE IS USED, I WILL CALL IT TO THEIR ATTENTION.

APPLAUSE IS PERMITTED AT THE START AND AT THE END OF TONIGHT'S PROGRAM.

NOW WITHOUT FURTHER ADO, LET'S WELCOME TO THE STATE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE JOE COURTNEY... [ APPLAUSE ] AND REPUBLICAN NOMINEE MIKE FRANCE.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR JOINING US TONIGHT AND THE FIRST QUESTION WAS CHOSEN BY A COIN FLIP BEFORE THE PROGRAM STARTED AND GOES TO Mr. COURTNEY.

WHAT ACTIONS TO DO YOU PROPOSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKE FOR INCREASING HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR THE AVERAGE CITIZEN?

>> FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU TO CPTV AND EASTERN FOR HOSTING THIS EVENING AND YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION OF HEALTHCARE COSTS HAS BEEN A PERSISTENT ISSUE FROM THE FIRST DAY THAT I TOOK OFFICE.

I THINK LAST AUGUST, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VOTED FOR AN HISTORIC PIECE OF LEGISLATION, TALKING ABOUT THE PRESCRIPTION DRUGS BILL THAT WILL FINALLY BE USED TO USE THE GOVERNMENT'S LEVERAGE OF NEGOTIATIONS TO BRING DOWN THE COST OF MEDICATIONS.

IT WILL SAVE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY BECAUSE WE ARE OVERPAYING IN TERMS OF PRESCRIPTION DRUGS AND IT WILL ALSO SAVE PATIENTS.

NEXT YEAR, THE COST OF INSULIN FOR MEDICARE WILL BE CAPPED AT $35 A MONTH.

THAT'S ABOUT A THIRD OF WHAT A DIABETIC PAYS TODAY WHO IS ON MEDICARE.

AND THEN OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING AN OVERALL CAP OF OUT OF POCKET COSTS, $2,000 IN TOTAL BY 2025.

FOR PATIENTS WHO HAVE MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS, THIS CHANGE IS LIFE CHANGING BECAUSE THE COST OF INFUSIONS WHICH MEDICARE PAYS THE CO-PAYMENTS AND DEDUCTIBLES FOR M.S.

PATIENTS CAN RUN THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS MUCH DOLLARS PER INFUSION TO.

ME THAT IS ABEXAMPLE OF REALLY SMART POLICY IN TERMS OF TRYING TO CONTROL HEALTHCARE COSTS.

IF YOU LOOK AT INSURANCE PREMIUMS IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT APPROVED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, IN FACT IT WAS PRESCRIPTION DRUGS COST THAT WAS THE BIGGEST COST DRIVER THAT RAISED PREMIUMS FOR NEXT YEAR.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT MEDICARE BILL EXTENDED TO WORKING AGE FAMILIES BY AGAIN PROVIDING THAT THE NEGOTIATED SAVINGS FOR PRESCRIPTION DRUGS WILL BE APPLIED TO EMPLOYER-BASED HEALTH PLANS.

THAT WAS IN THE BILL WHEN IT WAS IN THE HOUSE.

UNFORTUNATELY, IT WAS STRIPPED IN THE SENATE.

IT DID NOT RETAIN THE 60 VOTE MARGIN TO INVOKE CHLOE CHLOE BUT THE IDEA AND THE ISSUE IS FAR FROM GONE BUT AS WE SEE THE NEW PRESCRIPTION DRUG BILL IMPLEMENTED AND THE BENEFITS IT HAS FOR PEOPLE 65 AND OLDER, I THINK FRANKLY THE POLITICAL ARGUMENT TO EXTEND IT TO LARGER GROUPS OF THE POPULATION WILL BECOME MORE POWERFUL AND WE WILL DEAL WITH, AGAIN, A MAJOR COMPONENT OF WHAT HEALTHCARE LOOKS LIKE TODAY.

>> ARE IN FRANCE.

>> THANK YOU, AND ALSO THANK YOU TO CPTV AND LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS FOR SPONSORING THIS DEBATE.

I THINK THE CHALLENGE THAT WE SEE IS IN HEALTHCARE, THE MORE THAT GOVERNMENT HAS GOTTEN INVOLVED IN HEALTHCARE, THE MORE EXPENSIVE IT HAS BECOME.

WE CERTAINLY CAN CONTROL PROGRAMS LIKE MEDICAID AND MEDICARE BECAUSE THEY'RE GOVERNMENT SPONSORED PROGRAMS, BUT THOSE THAT ARE NOT, THOSE PROGRAMS BEAR THE COST OF THAT I THINK THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING DRUGS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BEING ABLE TO NEGOTIATE PRICES FOR THE BENEFICIARIES IS POSITIVE.

THE CHALLENGE IS THOSE THAT ARE% NOT ON A GOVERNMENT INSURANCE PROGRAM DO NOT DERIVE THAT BENEFIT.

THE MORE THAT WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE A FREE MARKET SOLUTION TO THIS AND THE BETTER THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PATIENT CAN NEGOTIATE DIRECTLY WITH THEIR DOCTOR FOR THEIR CARE, THE BETTER THE OPPORTUNITY ARE.

THE CHALLENGE IS WHEN GOVERNMENT HAS GOTTEN INVOLVED, THEY'VE INCREASED THE REGULATION AND OVERSIGHT ON THE INDIVIDUAL DOCTORS AND WE HAVE SEEN A DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF INDEPENDENT CARE DOCTORS PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES IN COMMUNITIES AND THEY'VE MOVED TO LARGE GROUPS OR THEY HAVE MOVED TO THE HOSPITALS.

THAT IS A CHALLENGE FOR THE INDIVIDUAL SEEKING CARE THAT IS NOW IN A HOSPITAL SYSTEM OPPOSED TO BEING ABLE TO GO SEE THE COMMUNITY DOCTORS.

THE CHALLENGE THAT I THINK WE NEED TO SEE IS TALKING TO THE DOCTORS THAT ARE PROVIDING THE CARE AND FINDING OUT FROM THEM WHAT ARE THE IMPEDIMENTS TO PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES DIRECTLY TO THE PATIENT.

LISTEN TO WHAT THE CHANGES HAVE BEEN AND THEN ENACT IN LAW TO THE PATIENTS AS THEY SEE IN THE DOCTOR'S OFFICES THAT WILL IMPROVE THE CARE FOR PATIENTS BOTH OF YOU MENTIONED MEDICARE AND ON A RELATED QUESTION, WE'LL START WITH Mr. FRANCE THIS TIME, DO YOU SUPPORT LOWERING THE AGE FOR MEDICARE?

WHY OR WHY NOT?

>> I THINK THE CHALLENGE FOR LOWERING THE AGE OF MEDICARE IS EXPANDING THE BASE OF PEOPLE ON IT.

THE MODEL IS BASED ON A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PEOPLE AGE 65.

IF YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ELIGIBLE, YOU HAVE TO INCREASE THE RATE OR EXPAND THE OPPORTUNITY, IF YOU WILL.

THE CURRENT MODEL IS A PORPTION WHERE YOU PAY INTO THE SYSTEM THROUGH YOUR WORKING LIFE AND THEN YOU EARN THE BENEFIT AT 65.

IF WE LOWER IT TO 55 OR 50 OR WE EXPAND IT TO EVERYBODY THE MODEL WILL NOT WORK BECAUSE THE COSTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY HAS LOOKED AT WHAT THAT COST WOULD BE ABOUT THE I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CHALLENGE WOULD BE HOW DO YOU PAY FOR IT AS YOU EXPAND THAT.

I THINK THE BETTER CHOICE IS TO LOOK AT THE FREE MARKET SOLUTION OF INDIVIDUALS BEING ABLE TO SEEK MEDICAL CARE DIRECTLY WITH THEIR DOCTORS OPPOSED TO THROUGH A GOVERNMENT MANDATED ONE SIZE ALL FITS SOLUTION.

>> I ENTHUSIASTICALLY SUPPORT LOWERING THE AGE TO 55.

IN FACT I CO-SPONSORED LEGISLATION ORIGINAL CO-SPONSOR LEGISLATION TO DO PRECISELY THAT.

AND AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE THE LAW BASICALLY WOULD SET UP A SYSTEM WHERE IT WOULD BE VOLUNTARY, IT WOULD BE OPTIONAL.

PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE MANDATED TO TAKE MEDICARE AT AGE 55 TO AWJ 65.

BUT YOU WOULD HAVE, AGAIN, THE BENEFIT OF A LOWER PREMIUM COST WHICH HAS BEEN STUDIED AND ANALYZED IS THAT FOR PEOPLE IN THAT'S EABLG RATING WHERE RATING IS HIGHER THAN YOUNGER PEOPLE, HAVING A MEDICARE OPTION TO BUY INTO WOULD RESULT IN SAVINGS.

AGAIN, IT WOULD NOT BE PAID FOR EXACTLY LIKE MEDICARE.

PEOPLE WOULD GET IT THROUGH THEIR EMPLOYER OR THEIR OWN TAX DEDUCTIBLE PREMIUM PAYMENTS IF YOU QUALIFY FOR THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, THE TAX SUBSIDIES THAT YOU PRESENTLY RECEIVE TO BUY HEALTH INSURANCE ON THE EXCHANGE COULD BE APPLIED TO A MEDICARE PLAN.

AGAIN, WE HAVE RUN THE NUMBERS AND THIS ACTUALLY IS A VERY WORKABLE SOLUTION.

IT WOULD INTRODUCE INTO THE POOL OF MEDICARE PATIENTS A HEALTHIER POPULATION WHICH MEANS THERE WOULD BE LESS UTILIZATION THAN PEOPLE WHO ARE OLDER.

SO ACTUALLY, IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE FISCAL SOLVENCY OF THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

IT WOULD BE VOLUNTEER.

NO ONE IS GOING TO FORCE ANYONE% OR MANDATE ANYONE TO TAKE IT.

IF THEY HAVE A HEALTH PLAN WHERE THEY WORK OR WHATEVER ARRANGEMENT THEY PREFER, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE FORCED TO DO IT BUT THAT OPTION SHOULD BE THERE.

THE NEXT QUESTION COMES FROM THE PUBLIC.

WE'LL START WITH Mr. COURTNEY THIS TIME.

WHAT DO YOU VIEW AS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ROLE IN HELPING REDUCE THE COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION?

>> SO YOU KNOW, AGAIN GREAT TO BE HERE AT EASTERN KENTUCKY STATE UNIVERSITY, WHICH IS AGAIN ONE OF THE REALLY OUTSTANDING INSTITUTIONS THAT HAS A RELATIVELY AFFORDABLE TUITION AND AGAIN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PART OF THAT.

AGAIN FEDERAL PROGRAMS GOING BACK TO 1960S AND 70s, STAFFORD STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM, PELL PROGRAMS PROVIDE SEBILITY FOR STUDENTS WHO ATTEND THIS UNIVERSITY.

THE ISSUE OF STUDENT LOAN DEBT WHICH STILL HOVERS OVER THE WHOLE ECONOMY, IT WAS 1.7 TRILLION BEFORE THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE ORDER, WHICH, DEPENDING ON WHICH ANALYSIS YOU USE, BROUGHT IT DOWN TO ABOUT 1 MNT 3 OR 1.4 TRILLION SO IT'S STILL A HUGE OVERHANG THAT REALLY HINDERS PEOPLE IN A LOT OF WAYS IN TERMS OF LIFE DECISIONS AND THEY CAN FIND THEMSELVES TRAPPED WITH LOANS FOR ALMOST THEIR WHOLE LIVES THAT ARE THERE.

AGAIN, THE PRESIDENT'S MEASURE AGAIN, WHICH IS CUT OFF AT A CERTAIN STATE IN DETERMINES OF LOANS THAT WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR DISCHARGE, IN MY OPINION, CLEARLY LEFT A LOT OF MEAT ON THE BONE IN TERMS OF OR DEALING WITH HIGHER EDUCATION AFFORDABILITY.

I AM SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD GET OUT OF THE BUSINESS OF CHARGING INTEREST ON STAFFORD STUDENT LOANS.

THESE LOANS ORIGINATE AT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

SO ANY INTEREST IS COLLECTED IS A WINDFALL FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

THAT WAS NOT THE INTENT OF STAFFORD WHEN IT WAS CREATED.

AND BASICALLY TAKING INTEREST OUT OF THE EQUATION, YOU WOULD STILL BE RESPONSIBLE TO PAY BACK THE PRINCIPAL OF THE LOAN, IS SOMETHING THAT OTHER COUNTRIES IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD HAVE STRUCTURED THEIR STUDENT LOAN PROGRAMS.

THE OTHER THING THAT WE NEED TO DO THOUGH FRANKLY IS TO GO UPSTREAM AND LOOK AT REALLY THE QUALITY OF INS INSTITUTIONS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE PROVIDING DEGREES THAT PROVIDE PEOPLE WITH GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT.

THAT WAS ACTUALLY STARTED UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WHEN ARNIE DUNCAN WAS SECRETARY OF EDUCATION A FEW YEARS BACK AND IT GOT COMPLETELY UNDERMINED BY, YOU KNOW, INTEREST PRESSURE.

BUT THE FACT IS THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY INSTITUTIONS THAT I THINK REALLY SADDLE PEOPLE WITH HIGH LEVELS OF DEBT PARTICULARLY IN THE FOR PROFIT COMMUNITY THAT WE SHOULD NOT BE USING PUBLIC DOLLARS TO REALLY PUT PEOPLE ON A PATHWAY THAT IS HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GOING TO SUCCEED IN LIFE.

SO AGAIN, IT'S MY POSITION IS TWO FOLD.

RESTRUCTURE THE WAY LOANS ARE WRIT TONE GET RID OF INTEREST AND NUMBER 2, WE SHOULD BE TIGHTENING UP IN TERMS OF WHAT INSTITUTIONS CAN ACTUALLY UTILIZE THESE PROGRAMS.

>> Mr. FRANCE.

>> THE FIRST THING WE LOOK AT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION, THE MORE FEDERAL MONEY THAT COMES INTO THE PROGRAM, THE HIGHER THE COST HAS BEEN.

WHEN I WENT TO COLLEGE IN THE 80s, THE MAXIMUM STUDENT LOAN WAS $10,000, NOW IT'S $37,000 AND OVER THAT TIME THE COST OF EDUCATION HAS GONE UP.

YOU HAVE HAD ACCESS TO GREATER LOAN MONEY ALONG THE WAY SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AS THE ENTERING ARGUMENT, YOU ALSO LOOK AT THE CHALLENGE OF WHETHER YOU GO TO COLLEGE OR NOT IS A FINANCIAL DECISION WHICH IS NOT REALLY WHAT THE INTENT WAS WHEN YOU GO BACK ANOTHER GENERATION, COLLEGE EDUCATION WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REASONABLE AND VERY AFFORDABLE FOR MOST WE ALSO NEED TO LOOK AT HOW DO YOUNG ADULTS MAKE THE DECISION WHETHER TO GO TO COLLEGE, NOT WHAT TO STUDY.

THAT STARTS IN HIGH SCHOOL AND YOU NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THE CHILD GOING THROUGH THE EDUCATION MODEL.

I THINK THAT RESIDES WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WHERE THEY INCENTIVIZE GUIDANCE COUNSELORS.

BUT WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH IT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE STUDENT LOAN ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TODAY, IT IS SUBSTANTIAL BUT THE CHALLENGE IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MODEL, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT DON'T GRADUATE FROM COLLEGE AND DON'T EARN THEIR DEGREE YET THEY INCUR THE DEBT.

I THINK THAT GOES BACK TO HELPING CHILDREN WHEN THEY GRADUATE FROM COLLEGE, YOUNG ADULTS TO MAKE THE DECISION ON GOING TO COLLEGE RIGHT AWAY WHEN I WENT TO COLLEGE, I WASN'T MATURE ENOUGH AND I WENT INTO THE NAVY AND THEN EARNED A SCHOLARSHIP.

THE CHALLENGE WE FACE WHEN WE LOOK AT HIGHER EDUCATION IS HOW DO WE ENSURE THE SUCCESS OF THE STUDENT AS THEY ENTER AND THE SUCCESS IS MEASURED BY THEIR GRADUATION.

WE LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF GRADUATES AT THE 6 TO 7 YEAR POINT BEYOND HIGH SCHOOL AND YOU ARE ONLY LOOKING AT JUST OVER 50%.

THAT'S NOT A GOOD MODEL AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS THOSE THAT DON'T EARN A DEGREE STILL HAVE THE DEBT, BUT NOW THEY'RE HIRING ABILITY IS STILL BASED ON THEIR HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION AND IT'S VERY CHALLENGING FOR THEM TO DISCHARGE THAT DEBT.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT.

>> I THINK IT'S REALLY HARD TO TALK ABOUT EDUCATION NOW WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT STUDENT DEBT WHICH YOU BOTH MENTIONED SO THE NEXT QUESTION WHICH WELL ON' START WITH Mr. FRANCE IS WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND ALLEVIATING STUDENT DEBT?

>> FRANKLY I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A ROLE.

WHEN YOU TAKE OUT DEBT OF ANY KIND, IT'S AN INVESTMENT.

WHETHER YOU PURCHASE A HOUSE, YOU PURCHASE A CAR OR YOU GO INTO EDUCATION AND YOU USE DEBT TO INCUR OR GO TO COLLEGE.

YOU ARE INVESTING IN YOURSELF.

THAT INVESTMENT NEEDS TO BE RETURNED AND YOU HAVE TO PAY ON THAT INVESTMENT.

THAT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENT DECISION FOR YOUNG ADULTS GRADUATING FROM HIGH SCHOOL.

DO I TAKE ON THE DEBT OR DO I SAVE MONEY OR DO I GO TO A COMMUNITY COLLEGE FIRST VERSUS A FOUR-YEAR UNIVERSITY.

THOSE ARE ALL DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN HELP THEM TO MAKE THEIR WAY THROUGH.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SUBSTANTIAL DEBT THAT WE HAVE, THE CHALLENGE THAT PEOPLE HAVE, THEY EARN DEGREES THAT MAYBE THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO FIND A JOB IN THAT DEGREE AND THEREFORE THEY'RE CHALLENGED WITH PAYING BACK THE LOAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS LOOKED AT REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF PAYMENT OBLIGATED AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE YOU GO, BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO LOOK AT IT'S AN INVESTMENT IN THE INDIVIDUAL NO DIFFERENT FROM ANY OTHER INVESTMENT.

THE INVESTMENT HAS TO BE PAID BACK.

WHEN WE LOOK AT INTEREST RATES, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL LOANS STARTING IN THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, THEY'VE EVOLVED FROM GUARANTEED STUDENT LOANS WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GUARANTEED A PORTION OF THE LOAN TO DIRECT FEDERAL LOANS IF WE LOOK AT THE LAST THREE YEARS OF DEFERRED PAYMENTS, THERE IS NO WAY THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE THAT IF IT HAD STILL BEEN UNDER THE MODEL OF A GUARANTEED STUDENT LOAN.

THERE ARE CHALLENGES WITH HAVING THE GOVERNMENT BE THE SOURCE OF LOANS AND NOT BEING THE FREE MARKET WITH A GUARANTEED PROCESS SO THAT THE RISK OF EFFECTIVELY A SIGNATURE LOAN ON THE STUDENT GOING THROUGH COLLEGE IS NOT SOLELY BORN BY THE BANKS.

>> MORE COURTNEY.

ONE THING I WOULD AGREE WITH MIKE IS THAT WHEN YOUNG PEOPLE ARE MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER TO ENTER HIGHER EDUCATION AT ANY DIFFERENT SORT OF PLATFORM, THAT IS A LIFE DECISION NOW WHICH CAN REALLY HAVE PROFOUND IMPACTS FOR DECADES TO COME AND I DO THINK THAT THOSE DECISIONS NEED A LOT MORE FOCUS AND SUPPORT FOR STUDENTS TO REALLY FULLY UNDERSTAND THE CHOICES THAT THEY'RE MAKING.

I ACTUALLY THINK THE HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELORS ARE SOME OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN OUR SOCIETY RIGHT NOW IN TERMS OF REALLY MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE DON'T MAKE BAD CHOICES THAT CAN SOMETIMES SADDLE THEM WITH A LIFETIME OF ALBATROSS OF DEBT.

SINCE I HAVE BEEN ON THE EDUCATION AND LABOR COMMITTEE DURING MY TIME IN CONGRESS, ONE MEASURE THAT IS A GOOD PROGRAM IS THE PUBLIC SERVICE LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM WHICH WAS ENACTED IN 2007, SIGNED INTO LAW BY PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH.

IT WAS A BIPARTISAN BILL.

THE INTENT OF THAT WAS TO BASICALLY SAY THAT PEOPLE WHO GRADUATE FROM HIGHER EDUCATION HAVE STUDENT LOAN DEBT GO INTO TEACHING NURSING, MILITARY SERVICE, YOU KNOW, ALL DIFFERENT FORMS OF PUBLIC SERVICE, NON-PROFIT INSTITUTIONS THAT AFTER 10 YEARS OF STAYING CURRENT, WITH THEIR DEBT, CAN APPLY FOR DISCHARGE.

AGAIN, THIS WAS A PINE MEASURE WHEN IT WAS ENACTED.

UNDER BETSY DeVOS, THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION DID EVERYTHING THEY COULD TO HINDER THE EXECUTION OF THE FIRST COHORT OF STUDENTS WHICH COMMENCED IN 2017, 10 YEARS AFTER THE LAW WAS PASSED THERE WERE LAWSUITS GALORE, DISCHARGING LESS THAN 1% OF ELIGIBLE APPLICATIONS ONE THING I THINK SECRETARY CARDONA HAS DONE VERY WELL HAS BEEN TO RESET THE PROGRAM AND ESTABLISH A WAVER FOR PEOPLE WHO, AGAIN HAVE DONE THEIR 10 YEARS OF PUBLIC SERVICE BUT REALLY GOT STUCK IN THIS BOTTLE NECK AT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

THERE IS A WAVER PROGRAM ARE I THINK FOR PEOPLE LISTENING EXPIRES FOR OCTOBER 31 FOR PEOPLE TO GET THE BENEFIT OF THAT RESET AND I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO INVESTIGATE IT.

IT'S A VERY EASY TOOL FOR THEM TO GET ASSISTANCE AND HELP.

I TALKED ABOUT HOW INTEREST WHICH I THINK IS REALLY THE CANCER FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH STUDENT LOAN DEBT IS SOMETHING THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD GET OUT OF THAT BUSINESS THE NEXT QUESTION WE'LL START WITH Mr. COURTNEY.

WHAT ACTIONS DO YOU PROPOSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKE TO ADDRESS INFLATION?

>> SO YOU KNOW, THE COST OF LIVING IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT WE GET LOTS OF CALLS INTO OUR OFFICE AND DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO PEOPLE.

AGAIN I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEASURE WHICH THE PRESIDENT JUST SIGNED INTO LAW, I TALKED ABOUT THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG BILL WHICH IS GOING TO REDUCE COSTS FOR PEOPLE ON MEDICARE P WITH REALLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST ITEMS THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR; NAMELY PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

THAT CERTAINLY IS GOING TO BE A GREAT ASSISTANCE.

A COUPLE DAYS AGO THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SERVICES ANNOUNCED NEXT YEAR'S PREMIUM FOR MEDICARE PART B WHICH IS THE PREMIUM DEDUCTED FROM PEOPLE'S SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK IS ACTUALLY GOING DOWN IN 2023.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN 11 YEARS THE PREMIUM HAS GONE DOWN.

MY OFFICE HAS BEEN PUSHING THE SECRETARY TO RECOGNIZE THAT THEY OVERCHARGED LAST YEAR AND TO HIS CREDIT, THEY ADJUSTED THE PREMIUM.

WHEN SOCIAL SECURITY'S COA COMES OUT, THE PROJECTION IS 8% COMPANY LA FOR COLA, THERE IS GOING TO BE RELIEF FOR PEOPLE IN THE FIXED INCOME OLDER AGE GROUP IN TERMS OF HIGHER SOCIAL SECURITY PAYMENT, SMALLER PREMIUM AND HELP WITH PRESCRIPTION DRUGS.

BUT THERE IS OBVIOUSLY A MUCH BROADER POPULATION THAT IS STRUGGLING HARD.

THE BILL THE PRESIDENT SIGNED IN TERMS OF ENERGY PRODUCTION DOESN'T GET TALKED ABOUT A LOT, BUT IT MANDATES THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO OPEN UP MORE LEASES IN THE GULF OF MEXICO AND ALASKA FOR OIL AND GAS DRILLING BECAUSE WE NEED TO INCREASE SUPPLY.

IT CERTAINLY IS AT BEST OR AT WORST A TRANSITION SORT OF FUEL AND THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THERE IS HARDSHIP OUT THERE IN TERMS OF OIL AND GAS PRICES EVEN THOUGH THERE HAS BEEN SOME MODERATION RECENTLY.

I'M NOT UNDER ANY ILLUSION THAT THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED.

AND AGAIN MAKING AFFORDABLE OPTIONS FOR PEOPLE TO RETRO FIT THEIR HOUSES WITH HEAT PUMPS TO GET DECOUPLED FROM FOSSIL FUELS, SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL, WHICH AGAIN THERE IS VERY GENEROUS TAX CREDITS THAT I THINK WILL HELP PEOPLE BE ABLE TO RETRO FIT THEIR HOMES TO LOWER ENERGY PRICES.

>> USUALLY INFLATION IS DRIVEN BY TWO THINGS: FIRST IS THE INFUSION OF TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF MONEY INTO THE ECONOMY WITH NO ECONOMIC BASIS FOR IT.

THE SECOND IS THE COST OF DIESEL FUEL BASED ON THE CURRENT POLICIES OF THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.

OVER 80% OF THE GOODS THAT ARE DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THIS COUNTRY EITHER COME BY TRACTOR-TRAILER OR BY RAIL: THEY USE DIESEL SO WHEN YOU DOUBLE THE COST OF DIESEL FUEL, YOU DOUBLE THE COST TO TRANSPORT THE MATERIAL ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND DELIVER IT TO THE PEOPLE.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, THOSE ARE THE POLICIES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION THAT TOOK INFLATION RATE THAT WAS BELOW 2% AND TAKEN UP OVER 8% IN UNDER TWO YEARS AND WHEN YOU STUMLY LOOK AT THE NUMBER-- ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE NUMBER, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CHANGED HOW THEY CALCULATED INFLATION A NUMBER OF DECADES AGO TO REMOVE FOOD AND ENERGY COSTS.

WHEN YOU COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES, WE ARE FAR WORSE THAN THE 70s IN A NUMBERS PERSPECTIVE.

THAT'S SOMETHING THE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND EVERY DAY WHEN THEY'RE FILLING UP THEIR CARS AND WHEN THEY GO TO THE GROCERY STORE TO BUY FOOD.

THAT'S THE REALITY THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON AND UNFORTUNATELY MY OPPONENT HAS NOT SAID MUCH ABOUT THIS, THE POLICIES OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION THAT HAVE LED TO SHUTING DOWN THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE THAT WOULD HAVE BROUGHT OIL FROM CANADA TO BE REFINED IN THE U.S. AND WHEN WHEN WE WERE ENERGY INDEPENDENT AND NOW WE ARE NOT, WE ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO INTERNATIONAL INCIDENTS AND THE ISSUE OF WHETHER WE CAN GET OIL HERE AND THE COST OF THAT.

I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO BE SELF SUFFICIENT IN SO THAT WE AREN'T SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE INTERNATIONAL ACTIONS.

THOSE ARE THE FIRST, THE THINGS THAT ARE DRIVING IT.

THE KEY IS TO GET BACK TOWARD ENERGY INDEPENDENCE TO OPEN UP THE DRILLING ON FEDERAL LAND AND I'M GLAD TO HEAR CONGRESSMAN COURTNEY IS TALKING TO THAT.

THE CHALLENGE IS WE CREATED THIS PROBLEM BY THE POLICIES AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT WE ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT OPENING THAT BACK UP AGAIN WHEN THE PRESIDENT STOPPED IT TO ALMOST TWO YEARS AGO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT ARE TRULY DRIVING THE PEOPLE TO REALLY BE MAKING HARD CHOICES ABOUT HOW THEY LIVE THEIR LIVES.

RECENTLY NOW HERE IN NEW ENGLAND, WE ARE ISSUING THE CONTRACTS FOR HEATING OIL.

UNDERSTAND YOU ARE SEEING PEOPLE PAYING TWO AND THREE TIMES AS MUCH AS THEY PAID LAST YEAR BECAUSE IT'S A DIRECT REFLECTION ON THE COST OF DIESEL WHEN YOU LOOK AT HEATING HOYLE.

THOSE ARE VERY REAL COSTS THAT COULD BE TWO TO $3,000 A YEAR MORE FOR EVERY FAMILY.

THAT IS A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE THAT THEY'RE NOT PREPARED FOR AND THAT'S CAUSED BY THE POLICIES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION.

>> Mr. COURTNEY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO A CHANCE TO RESPOND.

>> BRIEFLY.

OIL IS A COMMODITY WHOSE PRICE IS SET ON AN INTERNATIONAL MARKET.

THE U.S. IS NOW, TODAY THE NUMBER WITHIN PRODUCER OF OIL AND GAS IN THE WORLD.

THAT'S A FACT.

AND THE KEYSTONE PIPELINE WAS A PIPELINE.

IT DID NOT PRODUCE OIL.

IT WAS NOT A DRILL RIG.

AND OIL FROM CANADA IS FLOWING NICE LID INTO THE U.S. TODAY.

THE OIL COMPANIES AND OIL DRILLERS IN CANADA FOUND ALTERNATIVE MEANS TO TRANSMIT CANADIAN OIL INTO THE U.S.

BUT WHEN I SAY INTO THE U.S., IT'S REALLY INTO THE INTERNATIONAL GLOBAL MARKET BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE PRICE IS SET EVERY SINGLE DAY.

THERE IS NO QUESTION THERE IS INTERNATIONAL FACTORS THAT IS DRIVING UP THE PRICE ALL ACROSS THE WORLD FOR OIL AND GAS.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE ARE HELPLESS AND WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

AS I SAID,THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT INCLUDED PROVISION FOR MORE DRILLING AND ACTUALLY ALSO MORE TAX CREDITS TO PROMOTE NUCLEAR POWER, WHICH AGAIN, I SUPPORT.

I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER WAY OF HAVING SORT OF POWER GENERATED BY WITHIN OUR OWN BORDERS THAT CAN AGAIN TAKE US AWAY FROM FOSSIL FUELS.

AS I SAID, THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WE ARE VERY MINDFUL OF.

THE PACKAGE THAT WE VOTED ON LAST WEEK IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE INCREASED THE HOME HEATING OIL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BY A BILLION DOLLARS.

IT WILL PROBABLY NEED MORE AND WE CAN DO ANOTHER SUPPLEMENTAL AS WE HAVE DONE IN PAST YEARS BASED ON WEATHER AND PRICE.

OUR OFFICE IS VERY FOCUSED IN TERMS OF GETTING HELP TO PEOPLE WHO ARE STRUGGLING WITH THESE ISSUES AND AS I SAID, WE HAVE THE GOOD NEWS IS PARTICULARLY FOR SOCIAL SECURITY WHICH COVERS WELL OVER 150,000 CONSTITUENTS IN A TOTAL DISTRICT OF 700,000, THEY'RE GOING TO GET SOME RELIEF STARTING IN JANUARY WITH AN INCREASED COLA, LOWER PREMIUM AND PRESCRIPTION DRUG COSTS PRUX REDUCTIONS.

>> COST IS DEFINITELY ON PEOPLE'S MINDS SO THE NEXT QUESTION FROM THE PUBLIC IS WHAT ARE YOUR PROPOSALS TO LOWER ENERGY COSTS?

AND WE'LL START THIS ONE WITH Mr. FRANCE.

>> THE KEY TO REDUCING ENERGY COSTS IS TO, AT A FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL, NOT HAVE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL SOLUTION.

WE HAVE SEEN A MOVE TOWARDS SOLAR AND WIND AS THE ONLY SOLUTION TO PROVIDING POWER AND PROVIDING ENERGY.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A MORE ROBUST, WHILE WE ARE NOT PREPARED TO HAVE THAT AS OUR ONLY SOURCE, I THINK WE HAVE SEEN A MOVE AND I'M THANKFUL FOR IT THAT THE E.U.

ANNOUNCED WITHIN LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS THAT BOTH BOTH NATURAL GAS AND NUCLEAR ARE SOURCES OF GREEN ENERGY DECADES OF SAYING THEY WERE NOT.

THAT'S AN OPENING WHERE WE CAN NOW HAVE A DIVERSIFIED SOURCE OF FUEL AND BE PRODUCING ENERGY.

I THINK THAT WILL HELP REDUCE THE COST THE CHALLENGE WITH NEURAL POWER IS THAT WE HAVE THEBY BYPRODUCT OF THAT, THE NUCLEAR WASTE WE NEED TO DEAL WITH THAT AND THAT'S SOMETHING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS FAILED AT FOR DECADES AND LEFT THE MATERIAL ON SITE.

HAVING SAID ALL OF THAT, I THINK THAT WE WOULD BE-- THE MORE DIVERSIFIED WE CAN MAKE THE ELECTRICAL GENERATION FIELD, THE BETTER IT IS FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY AND I THINK THAT LOOKING AT SOLUTIONS BESIDE SOLELY SOLAR AND WIND AND LOOKING AT HOW WE CAN ENSURE THAT THE DISCHARGE FROM THE PLANTS USING NATURAL GAS AS AN EXAMPLE IS CLEAN, USING TECHNOLOGY, I THINK THAT IS A BETTER SOLUTION THAN USING A CHEAP SOURCE OF ENERGY.

WHEN YOU GET TO SOLAR AND WIND, AND THAT OF COURSE IS A MORE EXPENSIVE WAY.

THE ONLY WAY THAT WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT IS BY USING TAX DOLLARS TO SUBSIDIZE THAT INDUSTRY.

THAT IS NOT A ROBUST WAY AND LONG STANDING WAS I TO HAVE A SUSTAINABLE ENERGY SOURCE.

I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE A BROADER DISCUSSION ON THIS.

I THINK THAT HAVING MULTIPLE SOURCES OF FUEL TO PROVIDE ELECTRICITY AND ENERGY COSTS WILL HELP KEEP THE COSTS DOWN.

WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW AND FOR SEVERAL DECADES IS ONE SIZE MANDATED TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT WE ONLY GO TO 100% RENEWABLE AND THE ONLY RENEWABLE IS SOLAR AND WIND.

THAT'S NOT THE POLICY THAT WILL WORK.

IT IS NOT THE POLICY THAT WILL KEEP THE COST OF ENERGY DOWN.

I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT A MORE BROADER APPROACH TO THAT SOLUTION.

>> SO LET ME JUST TAX SUBSIDIES HAVE BEEN THE PERFLUORO'S MILK OF THE OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY IN THIS COUNTRY GOING BACK ON TO THE END OF WORLD WAR II.

THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO SPECIAL PLACE FOR OIL AND GAS OR FOSSIL FUELS OR COAL IN TERMS OF NOT HAVING THE BENEFITS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT, THE OIL DEPLETION ALLOWANCE, THE LIST GOES ON AND ON AND ON.

THE FACT IS THAT WHAT I SEE OUT THERE RIGHT NOW BETWEEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL WHICH AGAIN INCLUDING PROVISION TO EXTEND THE SERVICE LIFE OF NUCLEAR REACTORS ACTIVE INCLUDING ONE IN WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT, IS AN EXAMPLE WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS STEPPING UP TO TRY AND CREATE OTHER OPTIONS OF CLEAN ENERGY.

40% OF THE ELECTRICITY IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT COMES FROM DOMINION AND I THINK THAT IT'S AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT TO A CARBON FREE ENERGY FUTURE AND SOMETHING THAT I BROUGHT THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY, TO THE DISTRICT A FEW MONTHS AGO AND SHE WENT DOWN AND MET WITH THE FOLKS THAT DO GREAT WORK DOWN AT DOMINION AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE NUCLEAR WASTE ISSUE BECAUSE THERE IS AN INITIATIVE TO CREATE AN INTERIM STORAGE PLAN, AGAIN THEY DID A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AROUND THE COUNTRY, THEY GOT 200 RESPONSES OF COMMUNITIES THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN AN INTERIM STORAGE SITE AND THEY ARE NOW ROLLING OUT THE PHASE TWO OF THAT WHOLE PROCESS THAT'S THERE.

THE OTHER THING THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL DID, WHEN IS SO CRITICAL, IT IS PUTTING IN MONEY EVEN WITH EXISTING POWER SOURCES AND POWER USES, I THINK AS WE MOVE INTO A DECARBONIZED FUTURE WHERE ELECTRIC POWER FOR VEHICLES, HOMES, WHOLE VARIETY OF OTHER ACTIVITIES IS GOING TO PUT MORE DEMANDS ON THE GRID.

AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL SMARTLY INVESTS BIG MONEY IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A GRID FOR FUTURE TO DEAL WITH THE DECARBONIZED ECONOMY.

WE JUST PASSED THE MEASURE THAT IN TERMS OF CLIMATE CHANGE, WAS VERY BROUGHT IN TERMS OF IT'S NOT JUST SOLAR AND WIND.

YOU KNOW, THERE IS GEOTHERMAL, ALL KINDS OF RESEARCH BEING DONE ON OTHER TECHNOLOGIES TO GENERATE POWER AND ONE OF THE BIGGEST AGAIN, RETRO FIT AND PROVIDE MORE CONSERVATION FOR HOMES IN THE NORTHEAST WHERE WE HAVE THE OLDEST HOUSING STOCK AND SOME OF THE OLDEST BUILDING STOCK.

THAT'S A HUGE WAY, WITHOUT PRODUCING A SINGLE WATT OF ENERGY TO REDUCE DEPENDENCE AND LOWER COST FOR ALL AMERICANS SO.

>> SO THE NEXT QUESTION WE WILL START WITH Mr. COURTNEY.

YOU MENTIONED ELECTRI VEHICLES.

THE PUBLIC IS INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHAT ACTIONS DO YOU SUPPORT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TAKE ON IMPROVING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND MAKING THE TRANSITION TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES ONE BILL THAT RECENTLY PASSED WITH DECENT BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN THE SENATE BECAME PARTISAN IN THE HOUSE WAS THE CHIPS AND SCIENCE ACT WHICH IS AGAIN, MEASURE THAT IS SO CRITICAL.

A LOT OF THE TECHNOLOGIES LIKE SEMICONDUCTORS AND CHIPS INVENTED IN THE U.S. ARE PRODUCED OVERSEAS AND WHAT COVID TAUGHT US IS HOW BRITTLE THE SUPPLY CHAIN IS FOR THOSE COMPONENTS.

TALK TO ANY CAR DEALER AND THEY WILL TELL YOU ABOUT THE FACT THAT THEY COULD NOT GET PRODUCT BECAUSE THERE WAS A SHORTAGE OF CHIPS.

WHAT THE CHIPS AND SCIENCE ACT DID WAS IT PROVIDED INCENTIVES TO INSOURCE THE PRODUCTION OF THESE REALLY CRITICAL ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS TO A MODERN ECONOMY AND AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE, AGAIN, BETWEEN THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL AND THE CHIPS ACT WE ARE REALLY GOING IN A SMARTER DIRECTION, LEARNING THE HARD LESSONS OF COVID ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A STRONG NATIONALLY CONTROLLED SUPPLY CHAIN AND IN TERMS OF MASS TRANSIT, AGAIN, THE BILL THAT WE JUST PASSED ACTUALLY HAS INCENTIVES FOR ELECTRIFYING LARGE VEHICLES INCLUDING BUSES, SCHOOL BUSES, YOU KNOW, POSTAL TRUCKS, ALL OF THESE VEHICLES WHICH DON'T HAVE NECESSARILY A WIDE LONG RADIUS OF TRAVEL ON ANY GIVEN DAY.

THEY'RE PERFECTLY SITUATED FOR E.V.

POWER, YOU KNOW, SORT OF MODELS THAT EXIST RIGHT NOW AND THERE IS A COMPANY UP IN INFIELD CONNECTICUT, CONTROL MODULE, I WAS UP THERE THE OTHER DAY, THEY'RE MAKING SOME OF THE TECHNOLOGY FOR THE CHARGING STATION.

THE PHONE IS RINGING OFF THE HOOK AND IT'S A COMPANY THAT OUT OF 30% JUST THIS YEAR, IN TERMS OF THE PRODUCT THEY'RE SELLING, AND AS THIS NEW LAW CAN YOU BEINGS IN, I MEAN THE SKY IS THE LIMIT AND PLACES LIKE CONNECTICUT WILL BENEFIT.

>> I WANT TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT TO REMIND YOU THAT Mr. COURTNEY HAS A LITTLE MORE TIME SO FEEL FREE TO USE MORE TIME IN THE QUESTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

SO GO FOR IT.

>> THANK YOU, SO THE FIRST ON PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND THE INVESTMENT IN THAT, THE CHALLENGE THAT YOU FACE WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THAT IS DO YOU HAVE THE DEMAND TO MAKE USE OF THAT AND MAKE IT AN EFFICIENT USE OF IT.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT AN URBAN SETTING OF NEW YORK CITY AS AN EXAMPLE, YOU HAVE A LARGE POPULATION, AND YOU HAVE A HIGH TRANSIT.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PLACES IN CONNECTICUT, WHICH ARE LESS POPULOUS, AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MORE THAN JUST THE CONVENIENCE FOR TRAVEL TO THE CITY OF NEW YORK AND YOU WANT TO MAKE IT A COMMUTING, LIKE WE HAVE IN OUR CITIES, THE CHALLENGE IS, DO YOU HAVE THE CRITICAL MASS OF PEOPLE TO MAKE IT EFFICIENT.

AND SO THAT'S THE FIRST CHALLENGE WITH THAT.

AND THE OTHER PART ABOUT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IS JUST HUMAN NATURE.

I LEARNED THIS AS I LOOK IN CALIFORNIA, LATE 60s, 1968, MAYOR BRADLEY WAS RUNNING FOR HIS FIRST TERM AND AND AT THAT TIME THERE WAS A PLAN TO ESSENTIALLY COVER THE ENTIRE GREATER L.A. BASIN FROM THE HILLS OF PASADENA TO ORANGE COUNTY TO CONNECT EVERYTHING AND HE RAN ON A PLATFORM OF I WON'T MAKE YOU GET OUT OF YOUR CAR AND IF WE LOOK BACK AT 1968 IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WITH THE BEACH BOYS AND TRAVEL THE BEACH AND MUSCLE CARS, THAT PLAYED WELL WITH THE PEOPLE AND THEY KILLED THAT PLAN.

20 YEARS LATER HE IS RUNNING FOR REELECTION AND TRAFFIC HAS GOTTEN TERRIBLE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.

AND HE IS RUNNING ON A PLATFORM OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.

THE COST OBVIOUSLY HAS GONE WAY UP FROM THE MERE COST OF $4 BILLION.

THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE 10 MILES A TRACK AND I THINK THE CHALLENGES YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CRITICAL MASS OF NOT ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAVE AN INTEREST BUT ALSO A DEMAND SO IN THE CASE OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE REASON THAT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION WORK IS YOU HAD A TRAFFIC ISSUE THAT WAS SUBSTANTIAL.

LITERALLY STOP AND GO ALONG THE MAJOR HIGHWAYS.

THAT IS WHY FRANKLY IN OUR REGION, METRO NORTH IS SO SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE THAT TRAFFIC INTO NEW YORK CITY MAKES IT SUCCESSFUL.

WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND THE ENTIRE GREEN ENERGY, I SPENT THE LAST HALF OF MY CAREER IN THE NAVY AS AN ACQUISITION PROFESSIONAL AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE LEARNED ABOUT IS LIFE CYCLE COSTING AND THAT IS NOT JUST THE PRODUCT IN ITS USE BUT THE PRODUCT WHAT DOES IT 25IC TO BUILD THAT PRODUCT AND THEN AT THE END, WHAT THE COST OF DISPOSAL AND THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS ON BOTH THE FRONT END AND THE BACK END OF THAT THAT I THINK NEED TO BE ADDRESSED AND THEY'RE NOT ADDRESSED CURRENTLY WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE RARE EARTH METALS THAT HAVE TO BE HARVESTED OUT OF THE GROUND IS DAMAGING THE ENVIRONMENT THERE.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BACK END, THE BATTERIES IN OUR VEHICLES, SOLAR PANELS AND WIND MILL BLADES ARE NOT RECYCLABLE AND BEING BURIED IN OUR GROUND.

WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST WHERE WE HAVE HAD ENVIRONMENTAL DANGERS AND AS AN ENGINEER, WE LOOK AT THOSE PROBLEMS AHEAD OF FINDING A SOLUTION.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO GO BACK TO AND START FIGURING OUT, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WHEN YOUR END OF LIFE.

YOU HAVE AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE THAT HAS A NUMBER OF BATTERIES AND WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT THE USE OF THAT VEHICLE, SO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, BUSES AND OTHER THINGS, IT TAKES A LOCK TIME TO CHARGE THAT BATTERY.

SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT DO WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT?

AND YOU START LOOKING AT THOSE ISSUES AND THERE IS A DRAMATIC GAP BETWEEN THE DESIRE TO HAVE ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND THE ABILITY TO SUPPORT THEM, BOATS BY CAPACITY ON THE GRID AS WELL AS THE SPEED WITH WHICH YOU CAN FULFILL AND RECHARGE THOSE BATTERIES TO BE ABLE TO USE THEM.

AND THOSE ARE PROBLEMS THAT WE NEED TO RESOLVE BEFORE WE MOVE TOO MUCH FURTHER DOWN THIS PATH.

OTHERWISE YOU ARE GOING TO END UP WITH LIKE WE HAD HERE IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT, WE HAD RECENT BUS FIRE BECAUSE OF THE BATTERY BLEW UP AND WE TACK TOOK THE BUSES OFF THE ROAD THAT WERE ELECTRIC.

THOSE ARE VERY REAL HAZARDS.

WHEN I WAS IN THE NAVY, I WAS A DAMAGE CONTROL ASSISTANT RESPONSIBLE FOR FIREFIGHTING.

ELECTRIC FIRES TAKE A U NIKE WAY TO PUT THEM OUT.

THOSE ARE SOME THINGS WE NEED TO LOOK AT, THOSE CONSEQUENCES AND HAVE A PLAN FOR THOSE SHOULD THEY HAPPEN BECAUSE ONCE A BATTERY LIGHTS OFF AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEM IS ON FIRE, IT IS VERY CHALLENGING TO PUT OUT AND VERY DANGEROUS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE.

>> SWITCHING GEARS TO THE NEXT QUESTION AND WE'LL START WITH Mr. FRANCE, WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ON THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY AS IT RELATES TO REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, CONTRACEPTION AND GAY MARK MARRIAGE?

>> >> I THINK EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO THEIR PRIVACY.

WE HAVE SEEN THE LAWS CHANGED.

WE HAVE PRIVATE PERSONAL INFORMATION.

I THINK THAT WE THEY'D TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE FEEL SECURE IN THAT.

THE CHALLENGE THAT WE FACE IN THAT IS WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE RECENT DOBBS DECISION AND WE SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THAT, I HAVE LOOKED AT THAT AND RELATED IT TO PRIVACY IS NOT THE CONCERN THAT GETS RAISED BY MOST PEOPLE THAT I TALK TO.

WHEN YOU TALK TO AND I HAVE LISTENED TO PRO-CHOICE INDIVIDUALS ACROSS THE DISTRICT, IN THIS ISSUE RELATED TO REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, YOU HAVE A CHALLENGE WHERE MOST UNIVERSALLY PRO-CHOICE INDIVIDUALS DO NOT SUPPORT LATE TERM ABORTION.

AND THEY'RE ACCEPTING NUMBER UNIVERSALLY OF REASONABLE LUMENTS ON THAT.

-- LIMITS ON THAT SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AND I LOOK AT MY OWN-- I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE A STATES ISSUE.

I DON'T BELIEVE THIS IS A FEDERAL ISSUE AT ALL.

AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUPREME COURT IN 1973 MADE A DIFFERENT DECISION.

THEY MADE IT A FEDERAL ISSUE AND CURRENTLY WITH THE DOBBS DECISION, IT STILL CONTINUES TO BE BUT THAT'S NOT THE ROLE OF THE COURTS.

THEY SHOULD NOT BE MAKING LAW.

THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THAT SO THE LEGISLATURE AND THE CONGRESS SHOULD BE TAKING THIS UP.

THE COURTS HAVE RULED THAT THE MISSISSIPPI LAW IN DOBBS 15 WEEKS IS A REASONABLE LIMIT.

AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING SHOULD BE DEBATED WHAT THE REASONABLE LIMIT IS.

I DO NOT SUPPORT A BAN ON ABORTION UNLIKE MY OPPONENT WHO HAS ISSUED MANY EMAILS OUT CLAIMING THAT I SUPPORT A BAN ON ABORTION.

THE QUESTIONNAIRE THAT I SUBMITTED TO A PROLIFE GROUP CLEARLY STATES THAT I DO NOT SUPPORT COMPLETE BAN ON ABORTION.

CLEARLY THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER AND THE CASE OF RAPE AND INCEST ARE INCIDENTS WHERE IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE.

BUT WHEN YOU TALK TO PEOPLE THEY DON'T BELIEVE DAY OF BIRTH ABORTION WHICH MY OPPONENT RECENTLY VOTED FOR IS APPROPRIATE AND I THINK THERE SHOULD BE LIMITS THAT ARE REASONABLE THAT MOST PEOPLE SUPPORT AND THAT ONCE THE CHILD IS VIABLE, THAT IS A TIME WHEN WE SHOULD NOT BE LOOKING TO TERMINATE THE PREG PREGNANCY AND LOOKING AT OTHER A LITTLER TO SUPPORT THE MOM AS THEY'RE OR DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES.

>> IN THE WAKE OF THE DOBBS DECISION, I HEAR FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT THEY'RE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY BECAUSE IF YOU READ THE DECISION WHAT JUSTICE ALITO BASICALLY SAID IS THAT ROE V. WADE WAS BUILT ON AN OPINION WHERE THERE WAS NO-- WHERE THERE WAS NO ENUMERATED RIGHT IN THE CONSTITUTION FOR ABORTION.

THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS THAT ALL RIGHT TO PRIVACY CASES BEFORE AND AFTER ROE INVOLVED NON-ENUMERATED RIGHTS WHETHER IT WAS THE RIGHT TO TRAVEL, WHETHER IT WAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE CONTRACEPTIVES, THE RIGHT TO MARRY THE PERSON YOU LOVE AND THESE WERE ALL SORT OF CRAFTED AROUND, AGAIN, A JUDICIAL PRECEDENT IN TERMS OF FINDING A RIGHT TO PRIVACY WITHIN THE OVERALL STRUCTURE OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS, PARTICULARLY THE 14th AMENDMENT SO WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT THE DOBBS DECISION DID, IT UNDERMINED NOT JUST THE RIGHT TO HAVE AN ABORTION OR REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE BUT IT FRANKLY RAISED A SERIOUS QUESTION ABOUT ALL THESE OTHER PRIVACY CASES THAT FLOATED AND CLARENCE THOMAS MADE IT PRETTY CLEAR HE IS SOMEBODY WHO IS OF A MIND TO GO REVISIT A LOT OF THOSE DECISIONS WITH THE SAME LOGIC OF THE DOBBS DECISION.

WHEN I WAS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE IN 1990, WE PASSED A BIPARTISAN BILL THAT CODIFIED ROE V. WADE AND I SAY BIPARTISAN BECAUSE IT PASSED IN THE HOUSE 136-12 AND 31-3.

AND AGAIN, IT JUST CODIFIED ROE WHICH BUILT THE WHOLE PREMISE OF HOW MEDICAL DECISIONS ARE MADE AROUND THE DETERMINATION OF VIABILITY.

AND THAT THE-- HIVE HEALTH OF THE MOTHER AFTER THE PERIOD OF VIABILITY WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY IN THE HANDS OF THE DOCTOR AND THE PATIENT.

THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, AFTER DOBBS, WAS HANDED DOWN, DESCRIBED IT AS AN EGREGIOUS INTRUSION BY THE GOVERNMENT INTO THE MEDICAL EXAMINATION ROOM AND HAS PUT PATIENTS HEALTH AT RISK.

I AGREE WITH THEM.

I DON'T AGREE WITH JUSTICE ALITO.

AND THE BEST WAY TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM WOULD BE TO PASS THE WOMEN'S HEALTH PROTECTION ACT THAT WE VOTED ON IN THE HOUSE AND PASS AND WAS UNFORTUNATELY BLOCKED IN THE SENATE BECAUSE NOT ENOUGH VOTES FOR CLOTURE.

MIKE, WHEN YOU WERE ON CHANNEL 3 WITH ERIC PARKER, HE ASKED IF YOU WOULD VOTE FOR THE 15 WEEK LINDSEY GRAHAM MISSISSIPPI LAW AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS AND THE ANSWER HE GAVE WAS YES.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS YOU MAY WANT IT TO GO BACK TO THE STATES BUT THAT WASN'T THE QUESTION YOU WERE ASKED.

YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT A FEDERAL LAW.

IT WOULD TOTALLY CAPSIZE THE CONNECTICUT STATUTE WHICH I JUST DESCRIBED AND VOTED FOR.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE OR THIS DISTRICT WANT, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE REAL SOLUTION IS TO RESTORE ROE.

LOOK WHAT HAPPENED IN KANSAS IN TERMS OF JUSTED KANSAS.

WHERE THEY CAME OUT IN RECORD NUMBERS TO REASSERT THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WANT THEIR PRIVACY IN TERMS OF HOW THEIR MEDICAL DECISIONS ARE MADE BETWEEN THEM AND THEIR DOCTOR WE SHOULD LISTEN TO THE A.M.A., THE AMERICAN NURSES ASSOCIATION, ALL OF THESE GROUPS HAVE UNITED AROUND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE GOT TO AS A LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, ADDRESS THIS ISSUE BY PASSING THE LAW THAT REALLY IS ALMOST VERBATIM THE SAME AS THE CONNECTICUT STATUTE THAT IS STILL ON THE BOOKS TODAY AND IS A GOOD LAW FOR NOW.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT?

>> I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT MY OPPONENT BRINGS UP THE STATUTE IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT PASSED IN 1990 BECAUSE IT DOES HAVE THE TERM VIABILITY.

GENERALLY ACCEPTED THAT VIABILITY IS APPROXIMATELY 20 WEEKS OF GESTATION.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT AND YOU LOOK AT THE LAW THAT WAS PASSED AND THE PROVISIONS IN THE WOMEN'S HEALTH PROTECTION ACT, IT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS ABORTION ALL THE WAY UP TO BIRTH.

SOME AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER THING IT WOULD DO, IT WOULD NULLIFY STATE LAWS ACROSS THE COUNTRY ON THINGS LIKE PARENTAL NOTIFICATION OR PARENTAL CONSENT THAT OTHER STATES HAVE DONE.

IN FACT IT WOULD NULL VY OUR OWN STATE LAW BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT JUST HAVE VIABILITY BUT ALLOW BY FEDERAL FIAT, ABORTION UP TO BIRTH.

YOU ARE TALKING THIRD TRIMESTER AND EVERY PRO-CHOICE PERSON I HAVE TALKED TO UNIVERSAL DOES NOT SUPPORT THAT.

THIS IS FRANKLY THE CHALLENGE AND THE DANGER THAT WE FACE AS FREE CITIZENS IN HAVING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DICTATE TO ALL 50 STATES.

I WOULD PREFER NOT TO BE A FEDERAL ISSUE.

I HAVE BEEN CLEESH ON THAT FROM THE BEGINNING.

FEDERALISM WORKS.

WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVES AND ALMOST 50 YEARS AGO THE SUPREME COURT MADE A DIFFERENT DECISION AND IT IS A FEDERAL ISSUE AND THE PEOPLE'S ELECT THE REPRESENTATIVES IN% CONGRESS TO HAVE A DEBATE AND DECIDE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE.

>> NEXT QUESTION FROM THE PUBLIC.

WE'LL OWE START WITH Mr. COURTNEY THIS TIME WHAT IS I DON'T ARE POSITION ON IMMIGRATION REFORM AND ADDRESSING THE RECENT SURGE OF ASYLUM SEEKERS?

>> SO AGAIN, IN THIS DISTRICT, IMMIGRATION IS DEFINITELY A CLOSELY WATCHED ISSUE AND WE HAVE A LOT OF CASE WORK THAT MY GREAT STAFF DOWN IN NORWICH IS INVOLVED WITH IN TERMS OF FAMILY REUNIFICATION DEALING WITH DIFFERENT VISA PROGRAMS AND DIFFERENT EMPLOYER GROUPS.

WHAT I WOULD JUST SAY IS YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IN COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM.

THAT'S BEEN TRIED A NUMBER OF TIMES THIS CONGRESS, WE ACTUALLY TRIED TO BE A LITTLE MORE FOCUSED, A DIFFERENT STRATEGY THAT MIGHT GET SOMETHING MOVING AND WE PASSED THE FARM WORKER MODERNIZATION ACT IN THE HOUSE WITH THE BIPARTISAN MAJORITY THAT WOULD LOWER THE COST FOR H2A VISAS FOR FARMERS WHO DESPERATELY NEED MORE WORKFORCE.

IN TERMS OF MILKING THE COWS, PICKING THE CROPS, YOU NAME IT.

UNFORTUNATELY, AGAIN, THE REPUBLICAN BLOCKADE IN THE SENATE, YOU KNOW, EVEN BLOCKED CONSIDERATION OF A BILL THAT WAS PROBABLY ENDORSED BY 3 OR 400 AG GROUPS AROUND THE COUNTRY AND WHEN WHEN YOU GO OUT AN TALK TO FARMERS WHICH I DO A LOT NCHTS YOU WILL HEAR WORKFORCE IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONCERNS THEY HAVE IN TERMS OF TRYING TO, AGAIN, MAKE THEIR FARMS SUCCEED.

IN TERMS OF THE UPTICK IN YOU KNOW, ENCOUNTERS HAPPENING AT THE BORDER AND ASIGH LEM APPLICATIONS, WE TRACK THIS AND FOLLOW THIS AND GET LOTS OF CALLS IN OUR OFFICE AND ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE WHO ASK THESE QUESTIONS.

RIGHT NOW IT IS VENEZUELAN REFUGEE FLOCKING IN THE BIGGEST NUMBERS.

THEY'RE FLEEING A LEFT WING DICTATORSHIP WHICH, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD GET MORE SYMPATHY IN TERMS OF FOLKS ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE BUT NONETHELESS, THAT'S THE BIGGEST GROUP THAT'S COMING AT THE BORDER THERE, WHEN THEY CLAIM ASYLUM, I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE SOME OF THE NEWS OUTLETS ACT LIKE IT'S AN AUTOMATIC OLLY OLLY IN FREE.

YOU AUTOMATICALLY BECOME LEGAL IN THE U.S.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE RATE OF ASYLUM APPLICATIONS THAT ARE ACTUALLY GRANTED DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OVER FOUR YEARS, IT WAS ABOUT 20%.

80% WERE REJECTED AND THE PEOPLE WERE BASICALLY SENT AWAY PRESIDENT BIDEN'S FIRST YEAR, THE SUCCESS RATE WAS 16%.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE VOLUME THAT YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR QUESTION HAS CREATED A BACKLOG THAT REALLY HAS GOT TO BE ADDRESSED.

THE ADMINISTRATION DID I THINK MAKE A GOOD DECISION IN TERMS OF HAVING IMMIGRATION OFFICERS ADJUDICATE CASES TO EXPAND AND ACCELERATE THE NUMBER OF CASES AND THAT PROGRAM SEEMS TO BE SHOWING GOOD RESULTS RIGHT NOW I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD FOCUS ON IN TERMS OF EXPANDING THE CAPACITY OF THE ASYLUM APPLICATIONS WHICH THE U.S. IS OBLIGATED ABOUT I TREATY, INTERNATIONAL TREATY TO ADHERE TO AND WE SHOULD HAVE A RATIONAL SYSTEM THAT DEALS WITH THE OVER ARCHING QUESTION OF REALLY TRYING TO COME UP WITH SYSTEMS WHERE CRITICAL PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AND THE ECONOMY CAN GET INDIVIDUALS TO COME IN AND HELP OUR COUNTRY GROW JUST LIKE IT ALWAYS HAS FROM OUR EARLIEST DAYS.

I'M IRISH.

MY FAYE ALMOST CAME OVER HERE DURING THE POTATO FAMINE.

WE ALL HAVE THESE STORIES.

BUT IT'S BEEN A SUCCESS STORY AT THE END OF THE DAY FOR OUR COUNTRY.

>> AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO AREA AND FOR A PERIOD LIVED ONE TOWN AWAY, SAN ISIDRO AND COULD SEE THE WALL AND THE HILL WHERE I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS ISSUE WHAT WE SEE IS A CHANGE IN POLICY I SHOULD SAY IN ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING LAW.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS CHOOSING NO THE TO ENFORCE THE LAWS AS THEY'RE ON THE BOOKS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT ASYLUM, YOU HAVE THE PEOPLE COMING HERE AND THEY'RE TRAINED, THEY'RE TAUGHT, IF YOU SAY THE WORD ASYLUM, YOU WILL BE LET-- THERE IS NO PROVISION TO DETAIN THEM AND THEY'RE RELEASED WITH A PROMISE TO APPEAR.

THE PROBLEM IS THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM FAIL TO APPEAR.

AND WHILE IT MAY BE THAT 16 OR 20% OF THE PEOPLE ARE FOUND TO BE QUALIFIED, THE OTHERS ARE NOT.

IF THEY DON'T SHOW UP, WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHERE THEY ARE IN THE COUNTRY.

IT'S NOT JUST AN ISSUE AS SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID OF JUST THE FOUR BORDER STATES.

THESE PEOPLE ARE BEING TRANSPORT ADD ROUND THE COUNTRY AND THEY'RE LANDING IN PLACES EVEN IN MY OWN TOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, A BUS FULL OF PEOPLE COMING FROM THE BORDER ENDED UP IN THE CENTER OF MY TOWN.

AND SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT THE PEOPLE-- AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING IN BECAUSE BORDER PATROL ESTIMATES THERE ARE THREE TIMES THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THEY INTERACT WITH AND INSTEAD OF THE BORDER PATROL MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR BORDER, THEY'RE NOW ACTUALLY BEING CUSTODIALS OF THE INDIVIDUALS COMING ACROSS THE BORDER.

AS FAR AS ASYLUM, AN INDIVIDUAL SEEKING ASYLUM FROM TRAGIC THING IN THEIR COUNTRY DOESN'T GET TO WANDER THE WORLD AND FIGURE OUT WHERE THEY WANT TO LAND.

ONCE THEY'VE LEFT THAT COUNTRY, THEY'RE NO LONGER IN DANGER SO TO HAVE THE POLICY OF THE LAST ADMINISTRATION WHERE WE ADJUDICATED THE ASYLUM CLAIMS WHILE THE REMAIN IN MEXICO PLAN, THAT ATHEN ALLOWED US TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WERE TRULY SEEKING ASYLUM OR NOT AND THAT IS, I THINK, THE CHALLENGE THAT WE FACE IS WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS IN OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE, AS I SAID, THEY DON'T SHOW UP WHEN THEY HAVE A PROMISE TO APPEAR.

WE NEED TO LOOK BACK AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT OUR BORDERS AND ENSURE THAT WE HAVE A CONTROL MECHANISM.

HIVE AND WE GO BACK IN TIME.

HE BROUGHT UP THE IRISH IMMIGRANTS.

I HAVE IRISH BACKGROUND AS WELL.

THE MAJOR IMMIGRATION IN WHEN IMMIGRATION WAS STOPPED, WE HAD EFFECTIVELY A WALL.

THE WALLING WAS THE OCEAN AND THEY CAME IN PRINCIPALLY THROUGH CASTLE GARDENS AND ELLIS ISLAND.

WE NO LONGER HAVE THAT BASED ON THE ABILITY TO TRANSPORT THE AIR TRAFFIC OR EVEN COMING ACROSS THE BORDER SO WE SEE PEOPLE FLYING INTO MEXICO FROM AROUND THE WORLD OVER 150 COUNTRIES ALMOST 200 RECOGNIZED HAVE COME INTO THIS COUNTRY.

THAT IS EFFECTIVELY AN OPEN BORDER AND THEY'RE USING THE ASYLUM PROCESS AS THEIR MECHANISM TO GET INSIDE THIS COUNTRY AND THAT IS NOT WHAT SIGH LUM IS MEANT TO BE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE 16 OR 20% AND COUNT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T SHOW BACK UP AGAIN, SUBSTANTIAL ISSUE OF PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE HERE OR WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND THEY'RE A POTENTIAL RISK TO THE POPULATION THAT IS HERE.

>> CAN I QUICKLY, THE QUESTION OF ATTENDANCE, BECAUSE WE GET ASKED THIS QUESTION A LOT, WE GET LOTS OF CALLS INTO THE OFFICE AND WE HAVE CHASED THAT DOWN IN TERMS OF THE PROFESSIONAL STAFF IN WASHINGTON TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE ATTENDANCE RATE.

THE LAST FIGURES WE GOT IS ROUGHLY ABOUT 90% SHOW UP FOR THEIR HEARINGS.

AND AS I SAID, REJECTION RATE IS MUCH HIGHER THAN I THINK IS OUT THERE IN A LOT OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA AND LASTEDLY I WOULD JUST SAY HAVING VISITED THE BORDER A NUMBER OF TIMES, WALLS ARE VERY APPROPRIATE IN CERTAIN PARTS OF THE BORDER IN ARIZONA, IT HAS A DIVIDED CITY.

HALF IS IN MEXICO AND HALF IN THE U.S. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A WALL.

IT'S A VERY DENSELY POPULATED MUNICIPALITY AND THEY DO A GREAT JOB DOWN THERE.

I HAVE A NEPHEW WHO WORKS FOR THE BORDER PATROL IN ARIZONA AND NOBODY IS SAYING THAT WE HAVE ABANDONED WALLS WHERE APPROPRIATE WHERE THERE IS A POPULATION DENSITY AND THE LAST BUDGET WE PASSED WE GAVE ICE AND BORDER PATROL MORE FUNDS AND MORE TECHNOLOGY SO THIS THE THEY CAN MONITOR MORE REMOTE AREAS WHERE THE COST OF A WALL REALLY JUST VERSUS THE COST OF TECHNOLOGY, DRONES, ET CETERA THAT CAN TRACK THE BORDER IS A MUCH MORE EFFICIENT AND INTELLIGENT WAY TO PROTECT THE BORDER MOVING TO THE NEXT QUESTION FROM THE PUBLIC.

Mr. FRANCE.

THE PUBLIC WANTS TO KNOW WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE TOP NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES FACING THE U.S. AND THE TOP ACTIONS THAT THE U.S. SHOULD BE TAKING?

>> >> I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT NATIONAL SECURITY AND YOU LOOK AT THE ISSUES AROUND THE WORLD, I THINK THAT THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS FRANKLY THE TRIANGULATION BETWEEN CHINA, RUSSIA AND IRAN.

AND THAT TRIANGULATION, AS WE LEFT AFGHANISTAN MADE THE RETREAT THERE AND ABANDONED THAT STRATEGIC LOCATION, MADE THAT PROBLEM WORSE AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE CAPABILITY, FRANKLY, WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR OWN INTERESTS HERE IN EASTERN CONNECTICUT AND THE SUBMARINE INDUSTRY, IT'S INTERESTING THAT THE N.D.A.A.

OF 2007 STATED WE SHOULD HAVE 48 SUBMARINES TO MEET THE NEEDS.

THAT'S THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT WAS CATEGORIZED IN THE N.D.A.A.

AND THE CHALLENGE IS WE HAVE NOT MET THAT NEED.

AND I THIS I WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE, AT THAT TIME, IT WAS BETWEEN 2020 AND 2032, THAT WE WOULD BE BELOW THAT AND NOW IT'S PROJECTED ACCORDING TO A RECENT OP-ED IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, OUT FOR THE NEXT TWO DECADES.

WE LOOK AT THAT, IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAVE THE TWO SUBMARINES PER YEAR, HERE BEING CONSTRUCTED BUT THE REALITY IS TO MEET THE NEED AND WE ARE LOOKING AT THE RISE OF THE MILITARY IN CHINA, AND DURING MY OPPONENT'S TERM, WE HAVE SEEN THE NAVY IN CHINA SURPASS US.

THEY MAY AND SOME CLAIM MAY NOT HAVE THE CAPABILITIES BUT SHEER NUMBERS WILL OUTDO US AND WE DON'T HAVE THE DETERRENT FORCE OF THE SUBMARINES TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO LOOK AT.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT OTHER DECISIONS MADE OVER THE LAST 16 YEARS, YOU SEE A PROCESS OF AND EXAMPLES A POLICEMAN FOR A BATTLE IN A MISSION THAT DIDN'T EXIST ANYMORE BUT WE BUILT I ANYWAY AND IT WAS NOT BUILT WELL AND WE ARE DECOMMISSIONING THEM EARLY IN THE CYCLE SO IT WAS A WASTE OF MONEY FOR THAT SERVICE.

WE ALSO SAW DECISIONS TO COMBINE THE CAPACITY OF A CRUISER AND DESTROYER INTO ONE PLATFORM.

THEY'RE TWO VERY DIFFERENT MISSIONS AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DECISIONS MADE IN THE NEW HULL DESIGN THAT HAS COST A LOT OF MONEY.

WE LOOK AT THE CAPACITY AND WE GO BACK TO DO OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND THE SEQUESTRATION.

WE LOOK AT NATIONAL SECURITY TODAY AS IMPACTED BY THE FACT THAT WE CUT THE DUFFS BUDGET IN REAL DOLLARS THAT HAD A DRAMATIC IMPACT ON MATERIAL AND PERSON WILL READINESS.

AS WE LOOK AT NATIONAL SECURITY FROM THE MILITARY STANDPOINT, WE DO NOT HAVE THE FORCE TODAY THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO COMBAT THAT AND WE SEE A RISE BOTH IN AS WE SEE RUSSIA AND UKRAINE, YOU SEE CHINA MAKING NOISE ABOUT GOING TO TAIWAN, WE NEED A STRENGTH OF A MILITARY, AS PRESIDENT REAGAN SAID, PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE DIPLOMACY WORK, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DETER ACTION, YOU MUST HAVE A CREDIBLE FORCE THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO USE IF REQUIRED.

IF YOU DON'T HAVE A CREDIBLE FORCE OR YOU DON'T HAVE LEADERSHIP THAT GIVES AN EDUCATION THAT YOU ARE WILLING-L FAIL AND WE HAVE SEEN THE RESULTS OF THAT WITH PUTIN INVADING UKRAINE AS AN EXAMPLE.

>> Mr. COURTNEY.

>> SO THE INVASION IN FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR OBVIOUSLY WAS AN EVENT WHICH I THINK HAS REALLY DRIVEN HOME THE POINT AND I AGREE SOME IN SOME AREAS WITH WHAT MIKE SAID BUT CLEARLY WE ARE LIVING IN A WORLD WHERE INTERNATIONAL NORMS, RULE OF LAW IS VERY MUCH UNDER THREAT AND INVASION OF A SOUTHERN COUNTRY DEMOCRACY BY PUTIN, I THINK IS PROBABLY THE MOST SHOCKING CASE THAT IS NOW SOMETHING THAT WE ARE ADDRESSING AND AGAIN I VOTED LAST WEEK WITH THE MAJORITY TO SUPPLEMENT THE MEDICAL-- THE MILITARY EQUIPMENT FOR U DRAIN, WHICH, AGAIN, IS SHOWING INCREDIBLY IMPRESSIVE RESULTS.

IN THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION, CHINA'S POSTURE, WHICH AGAIN, HAS BEEN VIOLATING INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW IN TERMS OF MARITIME BEHAVIOR, WHICH THE U.N. LAW OF THE SEA TREATY CHASTISED THEM FOR, IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK YOU KNOW, ALONG WITH TAIWAN, REALLY SHOWING THAT THAT IS A PART OF THE WORLD THAT AGAIN INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW IS UNDER THREAT.

THERE ARE TWO WAYS TO ADDRESS IT.

NUMBER 1 IS ABOUT I STRENGTHENING THE NAVY AND AS CHAIRMAN OF THE SEA POWER SUBCOMMITTEE, WE PLUSSED UP AGAIN THIS YEAR THE SIZE OF THE NAVY'S SHIP BUILDING BUDGET.

WE DID IT EVERY YEAR UNDER TRUMP IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW, DOING THAT ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS.

BLOCKED CUTS TO THE SUBMARINE FLEET THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA TRIED IN 2013 REVERSED HIS BUDGET WHICH ONLY WANTED ONE SUBMARINE INSTEAD OF KEEPING THE TWO PER YEAR CADENCE.

TRUMP DID THE SAME THING IN 2020 WORKING ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, WE REVERSED THAT CUT AND KEPT THE TWO PER YEAR CADENCE.

THE ATTACK SUBMARINE FLEET IS OVER 50 SUBS TODAY AND THEY'RE DOING SERVICE LIFE EXTENSIONS INTO SOME OF THE OLDER LOS ANGELES CLASS WHICH IS GOING TO KEEP THAT LEVEL.

AGAIN I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT BIGGER.

THE SHIP BUILDING PLANS CALL FOR A 66 ATTACK SUB FLEET FLEET AND LASTLY ONE THING, IFER WITH GOING TO ADDRESS THESE, WOE HAVE TO WORK WITH OUR ALLIES AND ONE OF THE MOST I AM IMPRESSIVE EXAMPLES IN THE LAST YEAR WAS THE NEW TREATY SECURITY AGREEMENT WITH AWE TRAILIA.

THE CENTER PIECE OF WHICH IS SUBMARINE CONSTRUCTION.

I CO-CHAIR THE FRIENDS OF AUSTRALIA CAUCUS AND THE WORKING GROUP WHICH IS A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF MEMBERS IMPLEMENTING WHAT I THINK IS ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT WAYS TO STRENGTHEN DETERRENCE FOR SOME OF THE REALLY MALIGNED BEHAVIOR WE ARE SEEING IN THE WORLD TODAY.

>> WE ARE HITTING OUR LAST QUESTION.

IT COULD BE A LIGHTNING ROUND AND WE ARE GOING TO START WITH Mr. COURTNEY.

WHAT ACTIONS DO YOU THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD TAKE IN PLANNING FOR AND MITIGATING THE IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE?

>> WELL, AGAIN DECARBONIZING THE WAY OF LIFE THAT WE HAVE IS SOMETHING LONG EVERY OVER DUE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN OVER NIGHT.

I THINK WE JUST PASSED A REALLY GOOD BALANCED PACKAGE THAT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF MOVING US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION >> THE THINK THE CHALLENGE IS A BROADER SOLUTION.

WE HAVE BEEN DOWN THIS PATH FOR SEVERAL DECADES THAT THE ONLY SOLUTION IS AS I SAID EARLIER SOLAR AND WIND.

THERE ARE OTHER SOLUTIONS.

NUCLEAR S ONE OF THEM BUT I THINK WE NEED TO, BECAUSE WE HAVE EMPHASIZED SOLAR AND WIND EXCLUSIVELY, I THINK THAT THE ENGINEERING FIELD, THE TECHNICAL SIDE OF THINGS IS NOT LOOKED AT HOW DO WE CONTINUE USING FOSSIL FUELS BUT NOT HAVE THE DISCHARGE.

WE SAW THE CATALYTIC CONVERTERS WERE CREATED AND PUT ON CARS THAT HELPED.

IF WE LOOK AT THOSE KINDS OF TECHNOLOGIES THERE MAY BE A SOLUTION THERE BUT THE PROBLEM WE HAVE IS THE MANDATES FROM GOVERNMENT THAT HAVE CHOSEN THE SOLUTION.

YOU DON'T CHOOSE A SOLUTION BEFORE YOU IDENTIFY THE PROBLEM AND FIGURE OUT WHAT IS BEST WAY TO GET THERE AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE HAD.

WE HAVE HAD GOVERNMENT MANDATES TOP DOWN DICTATES THAT HAVE BEEN DRIVEN BY HOW WE HAVE INVESTED SO WE SEE FEDERAL DOLLARS ONLY GOING INTO THOSE THINGS WHILE GEOTHERMALS AND OTHER SOURCES OF NON-CARBON PRODUCING ENERGY.

THE CHALLENGE IS THAT WE ARE STILL A LONG WAY AWAY FROM GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE THAT IS GOING TO BE A SOLE SOURCE.

WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT CLIMATE CHANGE AND LOOK AT THE ISSUES THERE WE NEED TO BE A BROADER PERSPECTIVE AND OPEN UP THE APERTURE TO ADDITIONAL SOLUTIONS BESIDE THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN DICTATED BY THE GOVERNMENT AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL AND THAT'S WHAT I THIS I WE NEED TO DO AND USING THE EXPERTISE OF PEOPLE, CATALYTIC CONVERTERS DIDN'T EXIST.

SOMEBODY CAME UP WITH IT AND CAME UP WITH A GREAT IDEA BUT BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS MANDATED THIS IS THE SOLUTION, THE INVESTMENT AND RESEARCH THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY PAID FOR BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ISN'T GOING TO THESE OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT MA I PROVIDE A BETTER OR INDICATER SOLUTION.

WE NEED TO OPEN THE APERTURE AND LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS AND THAT WAY WE CAN FIND A BETTER SOLUTION FOR THE FUTURE WITHY HAVE NOW CONCLUDED THE DEBATE PORTION OF THE PROGRAM AND WE WILL HAVE BOTH CANDIDATES MAKE THEIR CLOSING STATEMENTS AND THE FIRST ONE IS Mr. COURTNEY.

HAVE YOU TWO MINUTES.

>> GREAT.

THANK YOU FOR HOSTING WHAT I THINK WAS A VERY GOOD EXCHANGE THIS EVENING.

WOULD I LIKE TO ADDRESS ONE QUICK POINT WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT MASS TRANSIT.

YOU KNOW, THERE WAS MY OPPONENT TALKED ABOUT LOU CRITICAL MASS IS NECESSARY TO MAKE IT WORK.

I WOULD JUST SAY AS WE SIT HERE IN WYNDHAM COUNTY, THERE IS A NEED FOR MASS TRANSIT EVEN THOUGH IT'S SPARSELY POPULATED BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR WHOM OWNING A CAR OR PAYING FOR A CAR'S OPERATION IS OUT OF REACH.

THE GOOD NEWS IS WE HAVE SEEN SOME GOOD MASS TRANSIT START UP IN THIS SORT OF 395 CORRIDOR SERVING TOWNS LIKE PLAIN FIELD AND THOMPSON AND I'M SOMEBODY WHO BELIEVES THAT RURAL MASS TRANSIT IS CRITICALLY, SHOULD BE REALLY GIVEN LOTS MORE HELP AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL DID SO.

YOU KNOW, WOULD I JUST SAY MY There's some people who for every day it's how many tweets have I gotten?

Likes and shares on how much soc I got and how many cable shows to sort of be and how outrageous I can be to that some of those people that's a good day.

They don't really work in terms of trying to, you know, b consensus around issues that are going to solve real problems in And in my time in the state legislat a Connecticut magazine poll was held and I wa most admired by Republicans and most conscie I've carried that same attributes, I think, The Lugar Institute, which ranks bipartis has given me the highest rating of the Connecticut delegation, The committee, the Vanderbilt University Effec Index, has put me in the top 10% They did.

That's what I'm focused on as a of Congress, because, frankly, that's what these people that I have the privilege to represent And I'm asking them for two more years get results that make a differen Mr. France, you have 2 minutes.

Thank you.

I think there's been a good cont the debate here on the issues that are that are of con I've spent my life in service, first in uniform, enli and joining a submarine service, volunteeri earning an ROTC scholarship, serving as a junior officer on and then finishing the last half of my career as an enginee back with the submarine communit doing overhaul, repair and new And over that time, I have learn And the principal thing that I learned is about l And that is, I think as I look a run if I thought that the distri by the current member of Congress, I w But I don't I don't think there's the leaders We see it in this term, this cur term, where we see inflation, t the distress that people are feeling with pu And so those are the things that I think that were taking a And as we look at what are the solutions, I think lead And I agree that bipartisanship and what I've learned in servin is, frankly, how government is s to work, where the people can c redress with their elected offic and expect an answer right in f And I've observed as I've gone t Hartford and it's further out, across the district, the disconnect betwee the district and the people that I think the key is building thos and I've done it at the local l I built relationships as the ran of the committees that I serve and that that is what is produced good l I agree that that's what had happened, but that is not w You know, we look at voting reco We look at my opponent being a p He is perfectly aligned with Nancy Pelosi and that is not se and that is not what we think of as a leadership and representin And that is, I think, why we see the problems that pe with here today in this district Once again, service is my hallma That's what I've done my whole l And I think that the people of Eastern Conn a leader who is going to represe available to them and be respon and serve them and not serve the Just want to take a moment to th for spending time with us durin Thank you very much and thank yo Connecticut Public.

And the League of Women Voters of Connecticut' Don't change the channel just ye Connecticut politics Frankie Gra is standing by with their post- Our next debate will take place October 11th, between the candi House of Representatives first Congressi Ray Hardman will be your host live from Manchester Commu If you have a question you like ask the candidates, head to CTP I'm Catherine Shen.

Have a great INCLUDING BROCK LIN AND, I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION.

I WANT TO ASK YOU HOW DO YOU THINK THE ISSUES THAT CAME UP LIKE ABORTION, INFLATION, WHERE THE TWO CANDIDATES SEEM TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO JAB ONE ANOTHER.

, HOW DO YOU THINK THAT EXPWROA COURTNEY, A CANDIDATE YOU SUPPORT DID THERE?

>> I THINK JOE DID WHAT HE NEEDED TO DO TONIGHT.

HE SHOWED HIS WORK ETHIC AND THAT HE JUMPS THAT TO POLICY OF STUFF AND HAD ACTIONABLE SOLUTIONS GOING FORWARD.

HE DIDN'T JUST TALK ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHY.

HE TALKED ABOUT WHAT HE LAS DONE IN MULTIPLE ADMINISTRATIONS SOME DEMOCRATIC, SOME REPUBLICAN AND WHAT HE WANTS TO DO GOING FORWARD.

DETAILS MATTER AND I THINK HE LAID THEM OUT TONIGHT.

>> HE SAID HE WAS ENTHUSIASTIC AND THIS IS MY LAST QUESTION.

HE SAID HE IS ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT MEDICARE.

HE IS ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT DROPPING THE COST OF HEALTHARE.

DO YOU THINK THAT DAME ACROSS?

>> HE ACKNOWLEDGED THERE IS A LOT OF WORK THAT NEED TO BE DONE, UNPRECEDENTED TIMES IN BOTH FOREIGN AFFAIR AND THE ECONOMY IN THE UNITED STATES AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED OVER THE LAST COME TO OF YEARS AND AGAIN ACTIONABLE STEPS AND WHAT HE WILL BRING IS WHAT WE HEARD TONIGHT.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DEMOCRATIC STATE REPRESENTATIVE IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.

TAKE CARE.

AND JOINING ME NOW, IRENE HAYNES HEY, JUST REALLY QUICKLY I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT PERFORMANCE.

AND WHEN I'M ASKING ABOUT PERFORMANCE, I WANT TO UNDERSTAND IF MIKE FRANCE A CANDIDATE YOU SUPPORT HAD, I WANT TO SAY CREDIBILITY ON THE TOPICS OF INFLATION AND REALLY WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, I WANT TO SEE IF HE HAD CRIBILITY THERE AND IF IT INSPIRES YOU TO THINK THAT HE CAN DO SOMETHING YOU DARE ABOUT VERY MUCH WHICH IS IMPROVING PROSPECTS FOR WORKERS IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MIKE BRINGS TO THE TABLE IS HE REALLY HAS A GREAT DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUES WITH HIS WORK HE HAS DONE IN THE HOUSE AND THE LOCAL WORK HE HAS DONE.

HE UNDERSTANDS WHAT WE NEED IN THE WAY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND BEING AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN IN THE NAVY, HE UNDERSTANDS THE PEOPLE OF THIS DISTRICT AND WHAT THEY NEED AND SO I THINK HE DEFINITELY HAS A BREADTH OF KNOWLEDGE WE COULD USE AND HE WANTS TO COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS AND HE WANTS THE SOLUTIONS BRO THE FORTH BEFORE WE START THROWING FEDERAL DOLLARS AT IT WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT.

>> WHEN CANNING ABOUT CREDIBILITY AND PERFORMANCE DO DO YOU THINK HE INSPIRED VOTERS IN THE LAST MONTH BEFORE THE ELECTION?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

AS A NAVY VETERAN, 20 YEARS IN THE NAVY, THREE DEPLOYMENTS, HAS WORKED ON THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE HERE IN HARTFORD HE KNOWS WHERE THE MONEY IS.

HE HAS WALKED THE WALK, TALKED THE TALK.

HE IS THE GUY.

>> THANK YOU FOR JOINING CONNECTICUT PUBLIC ON THE CAMPUS OF CONNECTICUT EASTERN UNIVERSITY.

WE INTERVIEWED SOME REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE CANDIDATES BUT THIS IS BY NO MEANS OVER.

THIS IS A POST DEBATE ANALYSIS FROM CONDONE PUBLIC.

I'M NOT GOING TO BE ALONE HERE.

I'M GOING TO BE JOINED BY MARK, THE CAPITOL BUREAU CHIEF FOR THE CONNECTICUT MIRROR AND OUR JOINT FEDERAL POLICY REPORTER FOR THE CONNECTICUT MIRROR AND CONNECTICUT PUBLIC IS LISA.

JOINING US AS WELL.

GUYS, I GOT TO TELL YOU, IT HAS BEEN 20 YEARS SIPS A REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE HAS UNSEATED A DEMOCRATIC INCUMBENT IN THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT.

IT HAPPENED IN THIS DISTRICT.

IT WAS SAM GADDENSON-- ROB SIMMONS EXCUSE ME, 20 YEARS AGO.

MARK, I'LL START WITH YOU FIRST.

I GOT TO WONDER, ARE YOU SEEING IN THIS RACE THAT SAME OPPORTUNITY-FOR-THIS CANDIDATE WHO IS THE CHALLENGER MIKE FRANCE?

>> THE DIFFICULTY FOR REPUBLICANS IN THIS DISTRICT IS THAT NOBODY HAS BROKE N 40% AGAINST JOE COURTNEY SINCE HE WON BY FEWER THAN 100 VOTES IN 2006 WHICH FOREVER EARNED HIM THE NICKNAME OF LANDSLIDE JOE.

BUT THE REASONS REPUBLICANS TEND TO FOLK NEWS THIS PART OF THE STATE IS BECAUSE IN OTHER RACES, MID TERM ELECTIONS, NAMELY GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS, IN 2018, THE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE FOR GOVERNOR BOB STEFANOWSKI CARRIED THE 2nd DISTRICT.

THIS IS WHY AND THE SAME IS TRUE FOR THE 5th DISTRICT IN THE WEST PART OF THE STATE SO THAT'S WHY YOU ALWAYS SEE REPUBLICANS FOCUS ON CAN WE MAKE INROADS IN THE SECOND AND THE FIFTH WNG OF THE OTHER CHALLENGES IS THAT REPRESENTATIVE COURTNEY HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE WINNING IN 2006.

HE HAS NOT, QUITE FEIGNINGLY BEEN SERIOUSLY TESTED.

MIKE FRANCE PROBABLY IS THE MORE THE MOST CREDIBLE OF CHALLENGES HE HAS HAD.

BUT COURTNEY IS KNOWN FOR YOU KNOW, KIND OF A MILD PERSONALITY OF A FOCUS ON CONSTITUENT SERVICES AND OBVIOUSLY GREAT ATTENTION PAID TO THE SUBMARINE BUILDING INDUSTRY, WHICH IS CRUCIAL IN THIS PART OF CONNECTICUT.

>> I HAVE TO ASK YOU, LISA ARE YOU SEEING OR HEARING, IT IS GREAT THAT WE HAVE AN E.C.

REPORTER WITH US, ARE YOU SEEING INROADS MADE BY MIKE FRANCE'S CAMPAIGN OR IF NOT SPECIFIC TO THAT, IN OTHER DISTRICTS?

>> NATIONAL REPUBLICANS DEFINITELY SEE THE 5th AND 2nd AS THEIR BEST OPTIONS FOR FLIPPING A SEAT AND AS MARK ALLUDED TO, MID TERM YEARS ARE ESPECIALLY TYPICALLY HISTORICALLY GOD FOR THE PARTY OUT OF POWER BUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 5th AND 2nd IS THAT NATIONAL REPUBLICANS ARE SPENDING IN THE 5th WHICH WE ARE NOT SEEING IN THE 2nd RIGHT NOW AND IF THEY START TO SPEND THERE, IT WOULD BE AN INDICATION OF MOMENTUM MOVING TOWARDS REPUBLICANS.% >> A CASH IN HAND BEEN.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME ISSUES AND IT SEEMED LIKE INFLATION WAS A HUGE ISSUE EARLIER ON WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT INFLATION, I TALKED ABOUT IT WITH IRENE HAYNES.

WE'RE SEEING THAT PASSION AND ENTHUSIASM RELATED TO MEDICARE COSTS AND HEALTHCARE COSTS OVERALL WHEN JOE COURTNEY IS SPEAKING AND THEN IN INFLATION WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DIESEL FUEL COSTS AND POTENTIALLY GETTING THOSE LOWERED, DIVERSIFICATION OF ENERGY WHEN WE ARE TALKING WITH MIKE FRANCE.

WHAT WAS A MENTAL WRABL MOMENT FOR EACH OF YOU WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INFLATION?

I'LL START-- >> THE THING THAT JOE COURTNEY HAS IN HIS CORNER IS THAT DEMOCRATS JUST PASSED THE INFLATION REDUCTION ACT AND SO IT'S VERY-- IT'S NOT TYPICAL FOR, YOU KNOW, A PARTY IN AN ELECTION YEAR TO BE ABLE TO PASS SOMETHING SO JOE COURTNEY IS ABLE TO POINT TO THIS BILL AND SAY THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO LOWER PRESCRIPTION DRUGS COSTS BUT THE FLIP SIDE FOR REPUBLICANS IS THAT THEY'RE USING THE SAME BILL AS A WEDGE ISSUE SAYING THAT SPENDING PLLS, TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, ADDS TO INFLATION AND THEN ALSO POINTS TO THE HIGH COST OF FUEL AND SO THEY'RE BOTH USING THAT IN THEIR RESPECTIVE WAYS.

WE ARE SEEING THAT ENTHUSIASM AND HEARING A LOT OF THINGS, WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT DIESEL FUEL AND THIS HAS BEEN A BIG TOUCH POINT BECAUSE IT'S EASY FOR ANY CANDIDATE TO KIND OF RELATE MAYBE TO THE DIESEL FUEL DRIVER, THE DEES YOU WILL TRUCK DRIVER AND SAY COSTS ARE GOING UP BUT CAN YOU PLAIM THAT ON ONE PA ITER?

IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN DO IS BLAME THE LOCAL ECONOMY?

ON DIESEL FUEL PRICES AND THOSE RISING?

>> AND WE HAVE CERTAINLY SEEN THAT IN THE RACE FOR GOVERNOR, AN EFFORT TO BLAME GOVERNOR LAMONT BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, THAT INFLATION HAS BEEN A WORLDWIDE PHENOMENA.

AS CONGRESSMAN COURTNEY POINTED OUT, THE UNITED STATES IS A NET EXPORTER OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS.

THERE ARE ANOMALIES IN THE SYSTEM OF DISTRIBUTION, WHICH IS WHY SOME OF OUR OIL GOES OVERSEAS AND WE IMPORT OTHER OIL BECAUSE OF WHERE IT CAN GET TO REFINERIES AND WHEN AND THE TWO CANDIDATES I THINK HAD A FAIRLY HIGH MINDED DISCUSSION OF WHAT DRIVES THE ECONOMY.

THERE WERE REALLY FEW SHARP EDGES THERE.

MIKE FRANCE CERTAINLY TOOK-- HE SHOWED HE AGREES WITH THE BASIC REPULICAN LINE THAT THE MASSIVE AID WE HAVE SEEN DURING COVID WAS INFLATIONARY.

AND, BUT HE REALLY, HE REALLY TOOK A SOFT APPROACH TO THAT.

WE DID NOT ANY OF THE GENTLEMEN INVOKE BIDEN AND TRUMP AS CUDGELS AGAINST EACH OTHER.

>> THAT'S A BIG KEY.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PERFORMANCE, RIGHT?

THE THREE OF US ARE SITTING BACK THERE AND WE ARE ENJOYING OURSELVES TRYING TO SEE WHERE THESE CANDIDATES ARE GOING TO SHINE AND YOU ARE RIGHT, THEY DIDN'T TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO JAB EACH OTHER.

I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT CREDIBILITY EACH CANDIDATE HAD BUT I'LL JUMP AHEAD AND SEEING FACEBOOK POSTS, IT SEEMED LIKE THE TONE COMING IN, AT LEAST ON THE SIDE OF MIKE FRANCE MIGHT HAVE BEEN A LITTLE MORE AGGRESSIVE IN TALKING ABOUT UKRAINE AND AFGHANISTAN AND COMPARING JOE COURTNEY TO BEING THEIR FAVORITE CANDIDATE THERE WAS NAT KIND OF A JOKE ON FACEBOOK BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SAW THAT TONIGHT MAKE A LITTLE MUTED.

>> .

DIDN'T HEAR ANY OF THAT WHATSOEVER.

IT WAS A VERY RESPECTFUL DEBATE THAT DID GO DEEP INTO DETAIL.

I THINK BOTH CANDIDATES CERTAINLY SHOWED A COMMAND OF THE ISSUES.

IF VOTERS WERE LOOKING FOR SHARP DIFFERENCES, THE LIST WAS FAIRLY SHORT.

THEY DISAGREE ON MEDICARE EXPANSION, THEY DISAGREE ON ABORTION AND THEY DISAGREE ON THE FORGIVENESS OF STUDENT LOANS BUT TO YOUR POINT ABOUT PERFORMANCE, PEOPLE LOOK AT THESE THINGS FOR A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE IS JUST THE IMPRESSION.

HOW DO THESE GUYS COME ACROSS?

BUT LET'S BE HONEST, THE AUDIENCE FOR CONGRESSIONAL DEBATES TEND NOT TO BE HUGE, PARTICULARLY IN A YEAR IN WHICH THERE IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY BEING SPENT IN THIS DISTRICT TO WHIP UP INTEREST AND GIVE A SENSE THAT THIS IS IN PLAY.

SO, YOU KNOW, DEBATES GENERALLY DON'T MOVE THE NEEDLE, I DON'T THINK WE HEARD OR SAW ANYTHING TONIGHT THAT FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGES THE 2nd CONGRESSIONAL RACE.

>> MARK TACTFULLY USED THE WORD DETAIL.

THAT'S HOW I CAUGHT IT.

DID THE CANDIDATES MAYBE GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS TONIGHT OR AT LEAST INTO THE DETAILS?

>> DEFINITELY A LITTLE WONKY AS SOMEONE COMING FROM WASHINGTON SO YEAH, THEY REALLY DELVED INTO THE ISSUES.

YOU DIDN'T EXACTLY AS MARK WAS SAYING, YOU DIDN'T HEAR THEM TALK ABOUT TRUMP OR BIDEN.

MIKE FRANCE AT THE END GOT A LITTLE PELOSI JAB CONNECTING JOE COURTNEY WITH THE HOUSE SPEAKER A LOT OF NATIONAL REPUBLICANS DO BUT WE DIDN'T HEAR THAT.

THERE WASN'T A LOT OF CONTENTIOUS MOMENTS AND EVEN WHEN THEY DAYS AGREED, IT WAS A PRETTY CIVIL DEBATE.

>> AND JUST REALLY QUICKLY, I KNOW WHAT A COLA IS BECAUSE I HAVE A PAYCHECK.

MANY FOLKS MAY NOT NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IS A JAB FROM ME TO JOE COURTNEY.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT A COLA IS?

>> BUT PEOPLE WATCHING THIS MIGHT NOT BE IN THE WEEDS ON THE PUBLIC SERVICE LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM THAT JOE COURTNEY IS VERY BIG ON OR SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF BUT IT WAS VERY ISSUE HEAVY.

>> WE HAVE A FEW MINUTES LEFT SO I JUST WANT TO REALLY GET INTO THE LAST TOPIC TO BUTTON UP THIS DEBATE BLOARGS.

THAT SEEMED TO BE WHERE WE GOT THE MOST ENERGY OUT OF ANY CANDIDATE OR THE MOST RANCOR IN THIS DEBATE, SO LET ME NOT GET TOO FAR INTO THAT.

YOUR IMPRESSIONS.

>> I THINK THE BIGGEST THING WAS THAT MIKE FRANCE BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT JOE COURTNEY SAID HE SUPPORTED LINDY GRAHAM, THE SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA'S NATIONAL ABORTION BAN AT 15 WEEKS AND MIKE FRANCE SAID HE DIDN'T SUPPORT A NATIONAL ABORTION BAN EVEN THOUGH THAT WAS IN AN INTERVIEW SO I THINK HE IS TRYING TO CIEN OF TOW THE LINE LOIK A LOT OF OTHER REPUBLICANS ARE.

HE WANTS IT TO BE A STATES RIGHTS ISSUE AND NOT A FEDERAL ISSUE AND THAT'S WHAT WE HEAR FROM A LOT OF REPUBLICANS.

JOE COURTNEY CHALLENGING HIM ON THAT A BIT BUT MIKE FRANCE TRYING TO STAY MORE TOWARDS THE CENTER ON THE ISSUE.

THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A PRETTY CONTENTIOUS ONE.

>> VERY CONTENTIOUS.

MARK, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE GROUND FLOOR QUICKLY EXPLANATION ON WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING WITH PARENTAL NOTIFICATION.

IT HAS BEEN HIGHLY POLITICIZED ON BOTH SIDES.

>> IT'S AN EASY TALKING POINT FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE PRO-CHOICE AND YET MAKE A GESTURE TO THE PROLIFE SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION IN CONNECTICUT AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE GUBERNATORIAL RACE.

CONNECTICUT, YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS GOING TO AREY MAIN A STATE ISSUE, CONNECTICUT HAS A COUNSELING LAW WHICH ENCOURAGES MINORS GETTING ABORTIONS TO CONSULT WITH FAMILIES AND PREFERABLY A PARENT.

PARENTAL CONSENT IS-- PARENTAL NOTIFICATION EQUATES TO PARENTAL CONCEPT BECAUSE ONCE THE CHILD CONSULTS WITH THE PARENT, IT DOES BECOME THE PARENT'S DECISION IN MOST CASES AND NOT NOT EVERY FAMILY IS SET UP TO ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD ON ALL MATTERS.

>> WE ONLY HAVE ABOUT 30 SECONDS EACH FOR THE NEXT ONE.

THIS IS GOING TO BE THE LAST TOPIC I TALK ABOUT TONIGHT A COUPLE BIG BREAKING NEWS ITEMS HAPPENING TODAY.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT POLITICO HAS RAID RATED THE 5L1 TH DISTRIC RACE.

THEY RATED THAT NOW A TOSS-UP AND LEORA LEVY AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WILL HAVE SOME KIND OF SPONSORSHIP VENTURE AT MARA LAGO WHICH HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS.

SO I'LL START WITH YOU WHAT ARE THE YOUR IMPRESSIONS.

>> AS SOMEBODY WHO HAS COVERED HER AFTER HER BIG TRUMP ENDORSEMENT AND WON THE PRIMARY UNEXPECTEDLY, SHE HAD STARTED TO DOWNPLAY HER CONNECTION TO HIM SO IT IS NOT SURPRISING SHE IS DOING A FUNDRAISER GIVEN SHE HAS A BIG DISPARITY WITH MONEY AND THE 5th DISTRICT RACE, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ONE IN THE STATE, AND SO THERE IS JUST TONS OF OUTSIDE MONEY REGARDING THE STATUS IN THE 5th DISTRICT, COULD I GIVE A DAMN WHAT AN OUTSIDE PUNDIT SAYS.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS IT'S A COMPETITIVE RACE.

WE ALL KNOW IT'S COMPETITIVE RACE.

WHETHER YOU CALL IT A LIKELY DEMOCRATIC OR YOU CALL IT A TOSS-UP, IT'S A COMPETITIVE RACE GETTING A LOT OF OUTSIDE MONEY COMING IN.

REGARDING ALLURA LEVY, SHE HAS NO CHOICE.

SHE CANNOT TURN DOWN ANY INVITATIONS FOR FUNDRAISERS AT THIS POINT.

SHE HAS NOT BEEN ON THE AIR WITH CAMPAIGN ADS SINCE THE NIGHT SHE WON THE PRIMARY ON AUGUST 9.

SHE EFFECTIVELY, HER CAMPAIGN IS BROKE.

SO I DON'T THINK THERE WAS MUCH OF A STRUGGLE IN DECIDING WHETHER SHE WOULD ACCEPT THE HOSPITALITY OF DONALD TRUMP.

AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT SHE IS A SUPPORTER OF TRUMP AND TRUMP PLAYED A HUGE ROLE IN HER WINNING AN UPSET VICTORY IN THE THREE WAY REPUBLICAN PRIMARY FOR U.S. SENATE IN CONNECTICUT.

>> WHAT A DEBATE WE HAD HERE TONIGHT.

THANK YOU TO CATHERINE SHEN FOR DOING A GREAT JOB MODERATING AND THE CANDIDATES, AND IT DOESN'T STOP HERE.

YOU HEARD US TALK ABOUT THE 5th DISTRICT AND THE U.S.

SENATOR RACE.

WE PLAN TO HAVE DEBATES ON THOSE AND YOU CAN JOIN US NEXT TUESDAY NIGHT AT 8 CLOCK FOR MANCHESTER AS WE HAVE THE U.S. 1 RACE BETWEEN Dr. LARRY LASER AND THE INCUMBENT JOHN LARSON AND THEN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT NEXT THURSDAY, WE ARE GOING TO BE IN THE 4th DISTRICT, WE ARE GOING TO BE IN NOR WALK IN A RACE BETWEEN JAMIE STEVENSON AND THE INCUMBENT JIM HIEMS.

WHAT A GREAT NIGHT WE HAVE.

THANKS TO CATHERINE SHEN AND OF COURSE MY COLLEAGUES HERE GOOD NIGHT AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR WATCHING.