The following is a New Hampshire election special presentation.

The New Hampshire candidate debates 2022 in collaboration with New Hampshire.

Public Radio, New Hampshire PBS and New Hampshire Bulletin.

Production support is provided by the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire.

Welcome to NHPR's U.S. Senate Debate.

I'm Josh Rogers, senior political reporter from NHPR, joined today by Amanda Gokee of New Hampshire Bulletin.

These debates are produced in collaboration with The Bulletin and New Hampshire.

PBS we're joined today by incumbent Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan and her challenger, Republican Don Bolduc.

Welcome to you both.

Great to be here.

Thank you.

As you can.

As you can, devine.

We do have a live audience here at NHPR a bit about our format.

Each candidate will have 60 seconds for an opening statement, will then move to questions.

Candidates will have a minute to respond.

Amanda and I may follow up or seek clarity.

Candidates will get 30 seconds on those.

And in the case of a direct attack, we'll be allowing candidates 30 seconds to respond.

We've relied on the public's feedback in selecting today's topics and thank everyone who supplied input.

We'll get started with opening statements.

We did have a coin flip.

General Bolduc, you're up first.

I'm a first, yes.

Okay.

Very good.

Thank you.

Well, thank you all for being here.

It's my honor to be here.

It's my honor to have the opportunity to represent Granite Staters in Washington, D.C., and that's what I'll do.

I'll represent you.

Been campaigning for two years now, and I have been to every town and city in the state.

And Granite Staters are hurting and making choices between heating and eating.

Retirees are going back to work.

Interest rates have doubled.

What does that mean?

It means that a $5,000 home two years ago the mortgage would be 1700.

Today, that mortgage is now 2700.

Everything has doubled.

Oil, gas, food, everything.

And it's her fault.

Her votes have driven this.

And that's the problem.

We have career politicians who focus on special interests in lobbyists and wealthy political elite.

That must change You need an outsider in Washington, D.C. And that is Don Bolick.

Thank you.

Thank you, General.

Senator.

Well, I want to thank you, Josh and Amanda, for moderating and to NHPR and PBS and New Hampshire.

Bulletin for sponsoring today to Don Bolduc for participating.

And for everybody who's here and tuning in.

Thanks for being part of this today.

Every day Granite Staters put aside their differences and work together to solve problems.

And that is the approach that I've worked to follow in the United States.

Senate.

I've worked across the aisle to expand high speed Internet to every community, to fix roads and bridges, to boost manufacturing, and to make sure that our veterans get the care and support that they have earned and deserve.

I've also stood up to Big Oil and Big Pharma to take the steps necessary to begin lowering costs.

I have a record of delivering for the people of New Hampshire, and I am proud to have been named the most bipartisan senator in the country.

There's more work to do to build an economy that works for everyone.

My focus will always be on listening to people in New Hampshire and delivering for the Granite State Thank you.

We're now going to turn to some economic issues.

Amanda has some questions, so we're going to start with you.

Senator Hassan, many economists say increased government spending, much of which is has been championed by Democrats, contributed to inflation over the past two years.

You've said the Biden administration was slow to respond.

And so why should voters trust Democrats including you, to address this in the coming year?

60 seconds.

So thanks for the question.

So taking a step back.

Inflation is a global phenomenon, and most experts say that the labor shortage and the supply chain disruptions that are driving it are caused primarily by the pandemic and the war.

So it's absolutely essential we do what we can right now to lower people's costs while also dealing with the long term drivers of inflation.

So that's why I passed a new law with other senators to allow Medicare to negotiate the cost of prescription drugs.

We are already seeing that law go into effect that helps people lower their costs right now when it comes to energy costs.

That's why I've pushed the Biden administration to release more home heating fuel right now from its reserves so that we can increase supply.

We also came together and I led a bipartisan push to increase home heating assistance because right now these immediate costs are really hurting people.

I also support suspending the gas tax.

Obviously, these are all things that Don Bolduc opposes.

There's more to talk about with the chips and science Act and the bipartisan infrastructure bill and how they'll help us lower costs, too.

So I want to talk, a significant amount of government money went through the Paycheck.

Protection Program.

But there was plenty of PPE fraud, with some estimates that as much as ten to 15% of the funds or $80 billion were stolen.

Is there a role for Congress to investigate this fraud?

30 seconds.

Yes, there is.

Now, I have talked with businesses all across New Hampshire who have told me that the PPP program was a lifeline for them.

Somebody, a small business owner this morning, just for example.

So it was really important to keep businesses open.

I also work to make sure that businesses got a tax credit for keeping their employees on board during that time.

But we also included in that law critical oversight mechanisms.

And we need to prosecute people who defrauded the government to the full extent of the law.

Energy prices are a major concern.

You support suspending the federal gas tax, but there's no guarantee that that would result in savings for people at the pump.

How would a gas tax holiday really help consumers?

Well, it would put more money in their pockets.

Look, Shell Oil announced today that they made $9.5 billion in profits, the second highest profits that they have ever had.

They are raking up profits along with other big oil companies, while also jacking prices up at the pump.

They are exploiting a war and a pandemic at the expense of Granite Staters.

And here's the thing.

My opponent stands right with big oil says he would have opposed the new law we pass it will lower energy costs and help us pivot to a clean energy economy.

So there's finally competition for big oil.

A law that would give people tax breaks for making energy efficient investments in their homes right now.

Don Bolduc opposes that, too.

He has been standing with big oil rather than demanding that they increase the capacity that they have right now, thousands of untapped but permitted wells.

And, you know, they could make they could help lower costs.

We'll let Gerneal.

Buldoc respond in a second but why haven't you been more successful?

I mean, you've been talking about this gas tax holiday for a long time.

It clearly hasn't picked up enough traction to become reality.

Why Mitch McConnell blocked it on the Senate floor.

We brought it to the Senate floor and Mitch McConnell blocked it at about the same time that Republicans in New Hampshire blocked the suspension of the state gas tax.

Okay, General, but I want to turn to you now.

You have been criticizing your opponent on the issue of inflation, but the U.S. is not the only country experiencing this inflation is up on every continent, double digits in many places.

So given this, how is it accurate to lay all of the blame on Democrats in Congress?

60 seconds.

I don't lay all the blame on Democrats.

I say this is a Republican and a Democrat problem, which my opponent refuses to recognize.

I'm going down there to represent Granite Staters who are hurting.

And they're hurting because both parties are extreme.

Both parties can't come together for the economy, out of control spending and the safety and security of this nation, and most importantly, the people here.

So, you know, let's be clear here.

Let's make sure my words are understood.

I mean, she just thrown out several accusations that are all lies, right?

I have never been a politician.

She's ineffective.

That's why we have these problems.

She has not done the right thing for spending 5.2 trillion more dollars from March to August.

This Medicaid thing, that Medicare thing, she talks about, that's great.

But it doesn't go into effect until 2026.

And it lowered prices for insulin, which was great.

But it took out Alzheimer's medication.

How is that helping our elderly?

It's not.

It's double talk by career politicians who follow special interest lobbyists and wealthy political elite.

And that's who they follow.

They don't work for Granite Staters.

They don't work for you.

Check your electric bill.

Let's talk a little bit about what you would do to address that issue on your website.

You say we must reverse the growth of federal spending, spending to reduce inflation since you can't claw back the money that's already out the door.

What future spending would you cut to address inflation?

30 seconds.

Well, the first thing I would have done is voted for the for the bill that was put on the Senate floor in August that she voted against.

And that was to stop any additional spending until we got inflation under control.

She voted no for that.

Okay.

She talks about all these things about Don Bolduc Well, Don Bolduc isn't in the Senate yet.

Don Bolduc will stop this spending.

And I will work on common sense measures that help Granite Staters pay the bills, drive down gas prices, down food prices.

She says she's been out talking to Granite Staters.

She hasn't been out talking to Granite Staters.

She's been hiding from Granite Staters.

How specifically would you drive down?

Would you drive down inflation?

How specific how specific?

I would change all the energy policies that she has agreed with with Biden, Xcel Pipeline, more drilling more permits, more leases.

This doesn't empower the petroleum industry.

It's dropped prices for you.

It makes life affordable for you.

She's got it all confused.

Her policies hurt people.

My policies will reverse all of this and allow that inflation to come down.

Where would you cut spending I mean, that's the other part of this that I mean.

Okay, how about $6 million going to New York to build golf courses?

How about $465,000 going to teach pigeons how to play slot machines?

How about $7 million going to California to build parks?

How about multimillions of dollars going to Tunisia and Pakistan to to study gender transition?

That's their issue.

That's not our issue.

That's not your issue.

How about how about looking at all this pork that she adds to bills in order to be able to to drive us into bankruptcy?

How about putting a limit on the Fed and printing money that we don't have?

Constantly putting us in more and more debt, $5.2 trillion.

You know what that did?

Bottom line, that took $2 trillion out of people's retirement savings.

2 trillion.

Think about that.

Think about where your retirement savings are right now.

The three of the 401 Ks are now 301Ks.

35% reduction in savings.

The military is now on 401 K retirement plans.

And I hope we can get into talking about veterans because she pats herself on the back and there's a lot to unravel there.

We're going to be talking about, a lot of things.

And right now, we're going to move to another question for you, General Bolduc regarding abortion.

You say you oppose a federal abortion ban at the federal level.

You said that consistently since the primary.

But in Portsmouth recently, you said, quote, These other things we've got to look into them.

You were fielding a question related to in vitro fertilization.

What other things were you referring to?

Well, I have no idea, because I don't have reference to that.

But bottom line is and ma'am, I wish you would please listen to me because I can read your mask.

I do not support.

I do not support a federal ban either for or against abortion at the federal level.

It is now a state issue which she does not understand.

I support New Hampshire's law.

I support Granite Staters.

She lies.

I've told her this personally in several venues and she continues to lie.

Her commercials are hurtful.

Her commercial about me wanting to murder mothers is disgraceful.

It's disgraceful.

And it brought my eight year old granddaughter to tears.

I have worked my entire life to protect men and women and children my entire life.

And I will never, ever put anyone's life in jeopardy.

These accusations are hurtful.

She talks about working with people.

She talks about wanting to get out there on the ground.

Well, I've been out there on the ground.

I know what these ads do.

I know what these lies do.

Lying about Social Security, about everything.

We're talking about abortion, right now.

We're going to move to Senator Hassan No ban.

Support the state law.

I will always do that.

So, no, no role for the federal government on any issue touching.

No, no, no, no.

And I've told Mitch McConnell and I've told Lindsey Graham.

Okay, Senator, you argue abortion should be a private decision between a woman and her doctor.

Do you see any role for the federal government to play in regulating abortion or should this be a state matter?

Let's just take a step back for a minute, because there's been a lot said over the last couple of minutes about a huge number of issues.

But let me talk about abortion, and then I hope to have the opportunity to talk about a couple of the other things that Don Bolduc is frankly misleading people about.

This is about a woman's fundamental freedom, her health and her safety.

And Don Bolduc has a very long record of extremism here.

He said on the campaign trail that he would never vote against anti-choice legislation in the United States Senate.

That means he is a yes vote for a nation national abortion ban, and people can go to Bolduc facts dot com and see the videos of Don Bolduc saying these things.

He said that we should rejoice.

When Dobbs overturned Roe v Wade.

The women of New Hampshire are not rejoicing.

And when we have pushed him on this first he told the women of New Hampshire to get over it.

Then he said, That gentleman in the state legislature should make these decisions for us.

The problem with politicians like Don Bolduc drawing arbitrary lines that I'm getting to your question in just a second, just arbitrary lines in terms of these decisions is that they can, in fact harm women and cost them their lives in some cases.

So do you believe, though, that the government should play any role in the regulation of abortion, period?

I believe that when the government tries to do that, it can cost women their lives, as we have seen in some states.

And I think it is very, very concerning that people don't trust women and their doctors to do to make these very complex and often tragic decisions together.

But, you know, you you are one of the sponsors of the Women's Health Protection Act, which leaves the door open for states to limit abortion after viability.

So you see that as something that states should be able to.

I, I am a sponsor of that law.

I support that law.

It would be my preference that neither legislators in the United States Senate nor in state legislatures substitute their judgment in complex difficult decisions for women and their doctors.

I also think it's really important that we allow doctors to do their jobs without fear of criminal prosecution.

All right.

We're going to move on.

Thanks, Josh.

Let's turn to climate, something we've heard from a lot of voters about.

Senator Hassan.

The Inflation Reduction Act was the federal government's biggest piece of climate legislation to date.

What do you believe needs to be done next to address climate change?

60 seconds.

Well, the new law that we passed will help in the short term lower home efficient home energy costs by giving people a tax cut for investing in home energy efficiency.

It also has a lot of provisions, as you know, to promote investment into a clean energy economy so we can finally see competition to big oil.

And we can pivot to a clean energy economy.

And since climate change is a huge issue, I hear about it from small businesses on the Seacoast, seeing increased sea level rise and facing flooding.

I see it and hear about it from the travel and tourism industry here in New Hampshire and from homeowners.

So it's really important that these measures are estimated to result in about a 40% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030.

There are also, by the way, are resources available to people right now to invest in weatherization in their home, to get assistance for weatherization in their homes as we're facing high heating costs, high energy costs, and trying to deal with climate change all at once.

There are a number of next steps, but I think the most important thing is we've taken this major step.

We're seeing investment already coming into the clean energy sector, and American innovation can all can now really be tapped to tackle this major problem.

So Democrats and Republicans don't typically see eye to eye on climate.

What does bipartisan climate policy look like and how would you personally go about bridging that gap?

Yeah, well, so I just talked about one of the bipartisan measures that made it into this new law It's something I worked on with Senator Collins in Maine.

It's the measure that I talked about that gives people a tax credit if they invest in home energy efficiency.

You know that Senator Shaheen and Senator Portman have long worked on bipartisan energy efficiency measures because we know the lack of energy efficiency in much of our built infrastructure is one of the major contributions to carbon emissions.

So that's another example of the kind of work we have been able to do across work, across the aisle and Senator Portman and Senator Sheheen were successful in including that that measure, too.

Now to you, General Bolduc.

Yes, ma'am.

You've said you're concerned about the environment and that American businesses should be held accountable for air and water pollution.

Do you believe the government should establish binding targets when it comes to reducing emissions?

I think the federal government involved in this business is a complete waste of money and a waste of time.

I think the federal I think the state government should do it.

I think our state legislatures and our governors will take care of our environment.

Really well.

And I think that the EPA at the federal level has established standards that that the state doesn't agree with.

For our water.

17, 70 parts per million versus 13 to 15 parts per million.

Right.

The federal when she talks about, you know, I support anything to help the environment, I think it's great.

I'm all over that.

But what they're not doing and everything that they are doing with the Green New Deal is hurting Granite Staters.

They're taking away fossil fuel, which they need in order to be able to make renewable energy.

They're costing you way more money.

This is the deal.

The deal is you pay for something.

They charge you for it.

There's no there's no goodness in that for you.

And how about China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, the biggest polluters in the world?

She's got nothing to say about that.

They're the biggest polluters in the world.

America does a great job and will continue to do a great job for our environment and our climate.

And I will be a champion for that.

But she doesn't hold any of the other countries that are polluting while while Russia is not held accountable.

She's holding American businesses accountable and running them out of business.

And how would you how would you hold Russia and other polluting countries accountable?

Well, I would I would demand the same kind of the same kind of international agreements that that that is that we have we are bound by.

I mean, come on, they dump plastic in all kinds of pollutants in our oceans every single day without any accountability from our U.S. Senate.

They don't hold anyone accountable.

They haven't they didn't hold them accountable for Afghanistan.

Look what's going on there.

Ukraine, look what's going on there.

You know, war is one of the biggest environmental polluters.

I know that.

I will work to keep us out of war.

China.

Look what they're doing in Asia.

They're polluting Asia all over the place, inside the South China Sea and everything.

We're not doing anything about that.

General, I wanted to ask.

That's the problem.

Bunch of political double talk up here to make you feel good.

But the bottom line is we're not holding the people accountable that we need to hold accountable.

And we're blaming ourselves and making you pay for it.

We're going to get more on things in a moment.

One more one more question to you, General from Amanda.

You call for energy independence.

So beyond drilling.

How would you accomplish that?

How would I accomplish energy independence?

Correct.

XL Pipeline, the expansion of.

But beyond drilling, what other or do you think that drilling is sufficient Well, I think exploration is sufficient.

I think that that the drilling, everything that they reversed that put us in this spot is what needs to be addressed because it has got us here and they reinforce failure every day.

I don't know how she can look Granite Staters in the eyes, knowing that they're making a choice between heating and eating.

I've been out there holding the hands of moms and dads and retirees who can't afford to live right now.

A family who was moved out of their home because they can't afford their home into a three room apartment with their three children.

This is disgraceful.

It's wrong.

It's her fault.

All right.

We're going to move on to foreign policy.

General, you've criticized U.S. foreign policy for being too reactive under Joe Biden.

What are some specific examples of what you think the country should be doing differently?

Well, first of all, we can't do anything when we're economically weak.

Listen, military strategy, policy national security is based off of strong diplomacy.

We are not respected in the world largely because of decisions made by the Biden administration.

With the withdrawal from Afghanistan and doing nothing and sitting back and watching Russia invade Ukraine and then do nothing in the times of lull to bring people to the diplomatic table.

Our politics is weak because our economy is weak because we have policies that weaken that.

And that's the Democrats fault.

That's her fault.

That's the administration's fault.

You can't have a strong military.

Our military is rated as weak now.

A downgrade from marginal our informational policy.

People don't trust us when we talk anymore because of what we did in Afghanistan.

They don't believe us.

Our values and principles have been undermined and they've been undermined by her and the Democratic Party.

And some Republicans and it's unfortunate and we need a change.

So, General, you mentioned Ukraine a moment ago.

And over the course of the course of recent months, you said a number of things regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

You voiced support for putting boots on the ground in the form of the CIA.

In April, you said President Zelensky needed material support.

You also said last month that funding should be cut because the U.S. has no mission there.

So which is it?

What should the U.S. do now?

Originally, we should have thrown every deterrent at them that we could have originally before months before but we didn't do it.

So then we needed to do that and then we were stuck.

So what are we going to do?

We're going to build up the resistance.

We did that.

And then before we even finish the first package of relief, she approved of the 40 billion.

I wouldn't have done that.

I would have required transparency to the American people.

On why we're going to add another $40 billion and then another $40 billion.

And instead of bringing Putin to the table when there was a lull in fighting, they just watched him do it.

And then he comes back and he comes back with missiles and, you know, killing women and children.

Their fault.

They did nothing because our diplomacy and our politics are weak, our military.

Well, what should we do now, though?

What should we do now?

What should we do now?

Well, it's simple, right?

We should be turning off Putin's ability to get any energy shutting that off.

That's his lifeline.

That's the center of gravity for him.

And if we cut that off, the Russian people in the Politburo will say enough is enough and we'll bring him to the table.

That's what we have to do.

Sending the 101st airborne division over there and putting him in Romania one step away from conventional boots on the ground when we have an administration that can't even do a withdrawal properly, we want them to get into a conventional war in Ukraine against Russia.

Is that what you want?

Because that's exactly what's going to happen under her.

What is she said about that?

Zip.

Nothing.

She's been absent.

You know, you want me to have all the solutions and I have solutions for military policy.

How are you?

She's there doing nothing.

We're going to get to her in a second.

But what would you do if if if Putin used a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine?

How should the U.S. respond in that circumstance?

If he uses a tactical nuclear weapon, then he has probably.

You know, first of all, he's going to threaten that It's on the table, right.

Mutually assured destruction on the table.

China is pulling the strings here.

And China wants to lead the world.

And they're getting they're well on their way to doing it because we've weakened ourselves so much economically, politically, diplomatically, militarily.

We've let them into every one of our institutions.

We're allowing them to buy farmland right up next to our strategic bases.

This is unbelievable.

Okay.

I wanted to talk to No, no, okay.

What's a what to do about a nuclear fuze?

So you got to put pressure on China because China is pulling the strings.

China does not want to inherit a post-nuclear world.

And so they will keep him in check.

But we have to do it, too, in sitting back saying, well, it's up to Putin.

That's their strategy.

That's what the democrats, well it's up to Putin.

And no, it's up to us to lead.

And we're not leading because we're weak.

Okay, Senator, what do you say to that critique?

Look, there are a lot of things that have been said over the last multiple minutes on a bunch of different issues.

Let me just start by saying that when Don Bolduc was talking about energy several minutes ago, he was apologizing yet again for Big Oil and singing their song.

Let me also just say that he has consistently stood with Big Oil and did not give you Amanda a straight answer, because, of course, Big Oil could be increasing their capacity and lowering prices at the pump right now.

And they are choosing not to.

And that's why I've called for an investigation to investigate their price gouging and manipulation.

Don Bolduc makes excuses for a lot of big corporate special interests.

Big Pharma being the other one.

I want to get to Ukraine.

I want I want to get to that, too.

But I also really do need to be able to have the opportunity to correct the record and let people understand how extreme and how aligned with big corporate interests.

My opponent is.

Now onto Ukraine.

Let me just ask you a question.

I mean, you've voted for billions of dollars in military aid.

You know, what do you make of U.S. strategy there?

Should there be a clear limit on this country's support in Ukraine?

So the Ukrainian people are giving their lives for what we have.

Democracy.

They are demonstrating at enormous personal risk and with enormous bravery and courage that democracies are worth fighting for.

Vladimir Putin is a war criminal.

He has to be held accountable.

There has been bipartisan support for making sure that we follow a strategy that does two things.

We make sure that Ukraine has the resources, both in terms of weapon expertize, training and finances to work to repel Vladimir Putin and stand up for their democracy.

We also have a strategy of imposing significant sanctions on Putin that have had serious effect and have crippled his ability to prosecute what is an unconscionable war.

At the end of the day, we have to be able to assess facts on the ground and make decisions about next steps accordingly with our allies.

One of the things that we have done successfully is build a strong alliance.

It is absolutely critical.

We have partners in the region so that we can let Vladimir, not only Putin but the other world autocrats China, Iran and North Korea, see that we will fight for democracy so that our democracies can survive.

Should the U.S. encourage Ukraine to give up territory to secure peace?

The Ukrainian people have a right to self-determination, and that is their decision.

To make.

We should do everything we can to foster diplomacy at the Ukrainian people's request is obviously important that we reach peace, that Ukraine reaches peace as soon as it can, because nobody likes war.

But we do also have to support a democracy that is struggling to repel a war criminal.

And I am proud of the fact that there has been bipartisan consensus in the Senate and in Congress to make sure that we are standing with people who are standing for freedom and repelling Putin before his aggression can move further.

Okay.

We're going to move on now.

We're going to talk a little bit now about immigration.

Senator Hassan, you've supported a Trump era policy called Title 42 that lets the federal government turn away asylum seekers at the border.

That public health measure is meant to stop the spread of infectious disease, but we're now at a different stage in the pandemic.

Is this still an appropriate way to address the issue?

Well, what I have said, because the first job of government is to keep its people safe, and that starts, among other things, with a safe, secure and orderly border so that we can also have a country that enforces the rule of law and lives up to our values, that the Biden administration should not prematurely lift.

Title 42.

There's consensus that when Title 42 is lifted, there will be a surge of migration.

We have to make sure that we can keep people from crossing the border illegally and that we can fight drug and human trafficking.

Right.

So knowing And there's really bipartisan consensus that when Title 42 is lifted, there will be a surge of migration.

We have to know that we have the security resources at the border to deal with that surge.

I have traveled multiple times to the border talking with frontline personnel, and they don't have the resources they need to have the kind of operational security that would be required.

So they need more personnel, they need more technology, and in some cases, they need more physical barriers.

And that's why I have pushed back hard against the administration's plan to lift this title 42 prematurely, because security has to be our priority.

So immigrant rights activists in New Hampshire say this policy is is racist.

Are they wrong?

We have to have a secure border so that we can run an asylum adjudication system that honors our values.

But the first job of government is to keep people safe.

And right now, we don't have enough customs, border patrol agents at the border.

I have voted to provide significantly more there.

We don't have enough technology not only to detect human smuggling, but also to detect drug smuggling.

Especially Fentanyl and the new synthetic opioids.

We have some new technology that does that, but not enough.

And in some cases, there are gaps in physical barriers that should be closed so that we can give our frontline personnel what they need.

Okay.

Thank you.

I want to turn to General Bolduc now.

You call for securing the borders and adding more border agents but employers around the country are struggling to fill vacancies, including industries that rely on migrant workers.

What changes in immigration policy would you support to address this problem?

Well, first of all, I would immediately want to enforce our legal immigration, right, which we're not doing right now, thanks to the Democratic Party and the policies of Joe Biden she just talked about Title 42.

Well, she just voted to lift it on the Senate floor, so she doesn't want to keep it in place.

She voted to lift it.

It's a matter of record on the Senate floor.

So what are we talking about there?

She voted against everything President Trump wanted to do to secure the border.

I want to hear about what you would do.

What I would do.

I'm telling you what I would do.

I would secure the border.

I would secure it.

87,000 IRS agents.

No way.

80 billion to fund that.

No way.

Needs to go to the Border Patrol.

She voted for 600 agents They're at 19,000.

They need 25,000.

They don't have the equipment they need.

They're trying to manage a border they're hurting the northern border and every other port of entry with their policies.

The weakening us all across this country.

5 million people have come to this country and they've come through unlawfully and they haven't been adjudicated right.

And they've been dumped on our communities, costing us billions of dollars.

Crime, opioid crisis, all these things.

You have to secure the border and you have to do it with a good, strong border patrol and you have to do it with good immigration law.

And the signal that's being sent is causing all kinds of people.

She said she cares about women and children.

Do you know the trek they have to take?

Murder, rape?

Do you know that is inhumane?

I know that I worked on borders.

I've seen it.

I've held babies.

I've held mothers.

I've held people that have been assaulted.

I have seen it personally.

I know what these policies have given us.

But do you think this isn't American values?

This is the exact opposite of American values.

And it needs to stop but.

Do you think sealing the border more effectively.

Visiting the border is a heck of a lot different than working on borders.

Do you think sealing the border more effectively will deter people from making that that frack you just described?

There's two messages here, and it's all informational.

We have illegal immigration system, not open immigration system.

And we have a border that will be sealed and you will remain in Mexico.

And that did work under the last administration because we got other countries involved.

Now it's willy nilly throw everybody at our southern border come in north from all kinds of countries never mind how many terrorists are here.

Look how she's empowered the cartel with opioids and human trafficking and weapons trafficking.

Look what's going up here?

Look what's going on here in this state.

200 percent increase in the opioid crisis.

We can revisit some of these issues.

We're going to take a break right now.

We'll stick around for NHPR's candidate debate.

We're going to take a short break.

We'll be right back.

Thank you.

The New Hampshire candidate debates 2022 in collaboration with New Hampshire Public Radio.

New Hampshire PBS and New Hampshire Bulletin production support is provided by the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire.

Support for closed captioning is made possible by Proulx oil and propane, a full service fuel company offering home heating oil and propane, as well as service and installation for home heating and cooling products.

Family owned and operated since 1944.

Information available at Proulx oil and propane dot com welcome back to NHPR's U.S. Senate debate in collaboration with the New Hampshire Bulletin and New Hampshire, PBS, we're talking with incumbent Democratic Senator Maggie House and Republican Don Bolduc I'm Josh Rogers.

NHPR senior political reporter with me is Amanda Gokee of New Hampshire Bulletin.

We'll continue now with the discussion on voting and elections.

General this week.

You know, earlier a couple of days ago, you said yesterday, I think you said you'd accept the results of next month's vote, you know, regardless of how it went for you, referring to last week, referring to the 2020 election, you said, quote, I still believe there were irregularities and fraud and I believe that can be proven even in this state.

You know, there is no evidence of widespread fraud in New Hampshire.

The governor and the secretary of state both say in.

New Hampshire, elections are secure and not compromised by fraud.

Do you believe they're wrong?

60 seconds.

Well, I believe Granite Staters.

Right.

And I'm the only one sitting here that's been every town and city in this state over two years.

And I believe Granite Staters, when they say they don't like the fact that college students that aren't residents here can vote.

They don't like the fact that they can't trust the mail in ballot system.

They don't like the fact that there was proven irregularities with voting machines that haven't been certified in 20 years.

They don't like the fact that same day voter registration causes fraud.

If Granite Staters don't like it, then we need to take a look at it.

But what she believes in is federalizing the process.

I don't believe in that at all.

More big government.

That's all she's been talking about.

Big government.

Not only does she believe in federalizing that, but she wants to take away our electoral college.

That would hurt new Hampshire.

She voted for that in SB one.

She can't hide from that.

That's her vote.

And that would also take first in the state primary away.

Something that brings about $4 billion every four years to the people of New Hampshire.

We're getting we're going to get some of that.

This is huge Okay.

We're going to get to some of that in a moment.

Huge so I listen to Granite Staters.

I don't want the federal government in your business.

All right.

We're going to get to that.

I'm doing a follow up, though.

You mentioned you want to eliminate Same-Day voter registration in New Hampshire.

No, I want the state to look at it.

Okay.

Well, this is what you said yesterday.

Okay.

I said I want the state to look at.

I want our state legislators and governors to look at it because the Heritage Foundation found that we ranked 21 21 in voter integrity.

Let me just get to the question here.

The question is that if you eliminate that, then New Hampshire would need to follow the so-called Motor Voter requirements federally, which would essentially have voters register at any time they got a driver's license.

Is that something that you favor?

You can balance that.

And again, the federal government needs to stay out of elections at the state level.

And these are all laws that have to be relooked.

That's what same day registration does for New Hampshire.

We're one of the small states.

Got to make sure that school busses loaded with people at the polls don't come in and vote.

And we need to make sure we need to make sure that the 10,000 people that show up on same day without an ID card actually come back and prove 10,000 people, less than 400 came back.

You can laugh about it, but people in New Hampshire aren't laughing about it.

This is a fundamental freedom that I was sent to other countries to make sure happened.

And you know what?

The Congress has rules when we help other countries, they have to have an ID.

They have to prove where they live inside that country.

They they can't do it same day.

This is all rules that we apply to other countries.

You can shake your heads all you want.

But the bottom line is.

But that's what it is.

But just to be clear, you're saying you're claiming that busses full of voters who are not permitted to vote here.

You're claiming that that happens in New Hampshire?

I am claiming that that is what Granite Staters telling me.

And I'm saying we need to respond to that.

They need to verify that information before.

I think we need to verify it.

That's what I just said.

Can you can you listen to me for a second?

I am saying that this is what Granite Staters are telling me and I think it's valid and I believe in it.

You think it's valid?

I think it's valid.

Senator, you praise the way in New Hampshire administers elections, but you also have supported you know, some of the things that the general invoked before the people act.

That is a sweeping federal law that would require early voting, expand voting by mail.

It would eliminate voter I.D.

requirements, among many other things.

But those provisions would override local election laws.

So if New Hampshire's elections are well run, in your estimation, why would the state be well-served by those changes?

Well, first of all, New Hampshire does have some of the best elections in the country.

And some of the provisions of that law make exceptions for small states like ours.

Happy to follow up with you.

But look, what you just heard from Don Bolduc is his continued attempt to stoke the big lie.

He has traveled around this state for over a year now, stoking the big lie that 2020 was stolen.

He has said he's been casting doubt on whether this election is something that he will accept by suggesting even last week that there would be big ballot dumps election night.

He has said that as a senator if the 2024 election doesn't go for his preferred candidate, he would work to overturn the election.

Here's the thing about election deniers, right?

He is working and has been working to conceal how extreme he is on everything from eliminating Social Security, enacting a nationwide abortion ban and being tested and being.

Stick to election laws right now.

Well, excuse me.

I've I've listened to him talk about a lot of different issues.

And here's the reason why having free and fair elections matters.

It is because it is the way people in New Hampshire hold us accountable.

Don Bolduc, can ignore where most Granite Staters are on those issues that I just talked about.

Right.

Because he thinks he doesn't need to accept election results.

It means he doesn't think he is accountable.

And he is promoting an agenda, Josh, that would raise people's costs.

We haven't even talked about his proposal to do a 23% sales tax on everything, including rent, rent and health care and eviscerate people's rights.

That's why this is a relevant that's why that's it.

But I mean, we can hear it here.

There is a big partisan gap that is obvious when it comes to election laws.

Republicans tend to focus on tightening laws in the name of guarding against fraud.

Democrats prioritize making it easier to vote.

What are specific ways you believe that there's common ground that could be reachable?

Well, I hope we can find common ground here.

It has been very hard to do.

Free and fair elections are the the hallmark and foundation of our democracy.

And when they are eroded because people think they can deny elections or when they can undermine elections with partisans overturning election results, which is one of the things that the Freedom to Vote Act tries to address, then our democracy erodes and it gets very hard to get it back.

So I have supported the Freedom to Vote Act that makes sure that we have, for instance, bipartisan, nonpartisan, sorry, commissions to do redistricting.

I think that's something most.

Yeah, I know.

So I. I would think that the Republican Party would join with us on wanting nonpartisan redistricting.

They have rejected that.

Okay.

We're going to move on.

And I just got a related topic of government.

Okay.

I want to move on to talk about potential structural reforms to how things work in Washington.

Let's start with the filibuster.

Senator Hassan, last year you backed ending the Senate filibuster to make it easier to pass a sweeping election overhaul bill that we've just been discussing.

Are there other circumstances when you you'd go around the filibuster and why not just get rid of it entirely?

Look, the filibuster rule, which I think most viewers and listeners know about, is a rule that is intended to incentivize senators to come together and find that common ground that I've talked about.

I'm proud of having been ranked the most bipartisan senator in the country, because I've really focused on how you find common ground on any number of wide range of issues.

Now, the problem with the filibuster as it is currently used is that it has gone from what we called the talking filibuster when a senator who wanted to block legislation from being voted on had to take the Senate floor and explain to the country why they were blocking this legislation is now gotten to a point where a senator with the push of an email button can just block legislation.

So you'd be in favor of returning to that.

I have been in favor of returning it to a talking filibuster.

Right.

I also think that there are some issues that are so fundamental to our democracy, like the right to vote or like a woman's right to make our own health care decisions.

That we shouldn't allow a minority of the Senate to block those rights.

Thank you.

Thank you.

General Bulldog, same question to you.

Do you see any circumstances in which you'd support doing away with the filibuster?

No, I do not.

Thank you, Senator Hassan let's move to the courts.

Do you think it's time to end lifetime appointments to federal courts?

I think, like many Granite Staters, I have been very concerned about the politicization of the United States.

Supreme Court, of justices who have been appointed, saying that they would respect precedent, for instance, in the area of reproductive freedom and then didn't And I think that concerns all Americans.

I have listened to a number of proposals.

And one of the proposals that I think might make sense is to put a limit on years of service on the Supreme Court to justices while they could still then serve and other federal on other federal benches so that we could have a predictable rotation of justices.

What about term limits for senators and members of Congress?

I think voters can decide whether we are term limited.

And I think it's really important for voters to have the choice to decide that they like what somebody has been doing and they want them to continue in service.

They can also obviously vote us out of office.

I mean, the general Bolduc already mentioned it but, Senator, but but you backed getting rid of the electoral college in the wake of the 2016 elections.

Do you think that's a good thing that serves a small state like New Hampshire?

First of all, it would require a constitutional amendment.

It's very unlikely to happen.

So what my concern is is an increasing kind of minority hold on popular elections.

But let's be really clear.

New Hampshire has two senators despite its size.

Right.

New Hampshire will continue always to have the first in the nation primary something will vigorous advocate for.

Now we have a law that says will go first, we'll go first and we make better candidates and better presidents.

And it's good for the country.

Let's just turn to the general on this.

I mean, where are you?

Where would you be on when getting rid of the Electoral College?

You think that a good thing for New Hampshire?

I would never support that.

General, I know you support term limits for members of Congress.

Do you think there should be term limits for federal judges also?

I do not support the term limits for the Supreme Court.

No, at this time I do not.

Do you think it's worth expanding the Supreme Court?

No, I do not.

All right.

We're going to move on.

You know, I want to turn to something that's been on display here today, but I want to turn to the kinds of campaigns you two have run in this race.

You know, Senator Hassan for much of the past several years, really, General Bolduc has been running a very public campaign, lots of open events, takes lots of questions from whoever shows up.

Your approach is relied on a more tightly controlled approach where events are often effectively private.

And I've heard you say many times that you believe we do democracy better in New Hampshire than anywhere else.

How does a candidate have a campaign that you've chosen to run reflect that?

I'm out and about talking to Granite Staters all the time.

I have lots of events at businesses where I sit down with employees.

I'll listen to their concerns.

I shop at Market Basket I go to Dunkin Donuts.

I hear a lot from Granite Staters, both positive and negative.

And look, I think the real issue here is what my record reflects in terms of addressing the issues that Granite Staters prioritize.

So it was Granite Staters who came to me and said they were paying hundreds and thousands of dollars in extra health care costs because of surprise medical billing.

I teamed up with a Republican.

We've now banned that nationwide saving people on their health care costs.

Granite Staters told me how much we need to fix our roads and bridges and to get high speed Internet to every community.

So I teamed up with Republicans and Democrats.

We negotiated the infrastructure law and we have delivered.

So you don't think people should view the, this is as a question of campaign style, though?

This is I mean, so you don't think that you don't think that this is a reflection of politics of our time, but it's not as sort of free and open and oh, we do it best in New Hampshire, and we were always going to be first.

And everyone.

I mean, it hasn't been that way.

Well, look, you are a political commentator.

I am not.

I run my campaign in a way that allows me to hear from Granite Staters and address their concerns in real time.

Both as a candidate and as a sitting United States senator.

Okay.

General, I want to turn to you.

You know, you obviously stress that you're a political outsider and you have today and all campaign long endeavored to deride Senator Hassan as a career politician.

But, you know, on plenty of issues from accepting the results of the 20, 20 election to abortion to how you see the future of entitlement programs, you know, your stances have been seemingly a little different depending on your audience, depending on who you're talking to.

You know how is that a departure from the kind of politics as usual.

You say voters are frustrated with and want to end.

Well, here's the deal.

I made it clear how I feel on abortion right.

Now I want to make it clear on how I feel on Social Security.

I never said ever did I say that I was going to terminate Social Security.

I will protect it and I will make sure that it endures and I will what.

I will make sure that it doesn't get stolen from like they have stolen from it.

And I will protect Medicare and I will make it easier and I will make it more affordable.

I will get rid of the donut hole, which you know what that is, right?

If you're in Medicare, you know what it is?

Because I hear from a lot of Granite Staters, the more care you need, the more expensive it gets.

But I mean, so this is the problem, right?

And so the more people that you talk to, the more experience you get and the more ideas that you get and the more views that you need to internalize.

So it's not changing for audience sake.

It's changing because that's what I'm supposed to be.

Accountable, responsible transparent, trustful.

Tell the truth.

Admit when I'm wrong.

And I've admitted that I got it wrong on the 2020 election.

She hasn't admitted that she was a 2016 election denier, but she was.

So this difference, fundamental difference is I account, right?

She does not.

I believe we have integrity issues in our in our elections.

She denies it and wants to federalize it and make it more problematic.

See, I am out there talking to people.

I am a Granite Stater.

I came from this state.

I was born and raised in this state.

I worked the ground in this state as a farmer as a police officer, served 33 and a half years for this country, lost 72 service members.

This is my.

This is my approach.

No, it's my approach.

As a general officer.

I've worked for people.

I did not make them work for me.

We're going to Senator Hassan to add to what you said.

I wish we had more time.

Look, people can watch videos for themselves at Boldoc Facts.com.

Which is her website.

Well, come on.

It has videos of General Bolduc talking.

That have been tampered with.

Please.

Oh, my goodness.

So let's just.

Let's.

I think what's happened here is that Don Bolduc, whose views are very extreme and very out of step with Granite Staters, has discovered that.

And so he works to conceal it from people, as he has throughout this debate today.

He has said that he wants to get rid of the Social Security program just a few weeks ago, saying on camera to a news reporter it's been around since 1935 it's time for a change.

He has said that privatizing Medicare and making at least a trillion of cuts to it is a priority of his.

That's on video too.

He has supported a 23% sales tax on rent health care everything else.

And he doesn't want people to know about it because he knows it's not something Granite Staters would support.

What do you mean by Granite Staters 20%.

I'd like to know too.

He supports something called the Fair Tax program and that is a 23% sales tax regardless of your income on everything you purchase including rental and health care.

He has supported that.

No I never said that and if I did you'd have it written down in your notes.

Well no he just supported it on Facebook Live this week with Adam Sexton.

Okay.

So let's just talk about what's really happening here.

Which is now, okay, we're going to bring our.

This is spinning out of control.

You know, I think we going to move to environmental regulation.

Yeah.

Thanks.

Josh, we're going to start with you.

General Bolduc, you've talked about your own exposure to chemicals and drinking nasty water during your time in the military.

What role should the government play in regulating pfas and other chemicals that can be harmful to human health?

Well, I think it's obvious, right?

They should they should make sure that corporations don't do it.

And I think our states should should be the ones in charge of that.

And I think they will do it very, very effectively.

And I think that at the federal level, we need to we need to give block grants to fire departments and others to buy new equipment so that they can be safe from their equipment that's made with pfas.

And they can be safe from all these chemicals.

That's what we should be doing.

We should be making sure at the federal level that they can do this and we let the states make sure that the water in the air and everything is clean.

Under her model, the federal government does it all.

And it's a wasteful model.

It cost us more money.

And the regulations are different.

It's more strict here.

It's less strict at the federal level.

But people but the companies will default to the federal level because they can.

And that's wrong.

And that's what we should do.

The environment is important to me.

Right.

And she's going to talk about the packed act.

Right.

And I think that's a great act.

But there's over 50,000 people waiting and it's not funded and the VA doesn't even know how they're going to implement it.

That's the problems we have when the federal government does things in a bureaucratic way and then pats themselves on the back for thinking they're solving a problem when they're creating more problems.

That's the problem.

Senator Hassan we want to give you a chance to respond to that.

Well, so, look, I hear about environmental concerns from Granite Staters all the time, especially when it comes to pfas contamination of our drinking water contamination.

We've seen obviously around the Pease Air Force Base and also over in Merrimack.

And we see it in other parts of the state as well.

It's why in the bipartisan infrastructure bill we allotted a specific amount of money nationally, $2 billion, I think it was it may have been more for decontamination of pfas sites.

And New Hampshire is seeing some of that money come to it right now.

Now, that's a bill that Don Bolduc says he would have voted against.

We know that the EPA has now defined pfas as a hazardous substance that will help us get more resources to that cleanup.

And yes, we do need to continue to work with fire departments and first responders to help them with new new equipment and ultimately get a new kind of firefighting foam that doesn't have pfas in it.

All right.

We're really running out of time here.

But quickly, 10 seconds each.

I know this is a tough one, but, you know, depending on who, regardless of who wins.

How would you how would you if you if if you get reelected, Senator, how would you work to reach out to people who didn't vote for you?

Obviously, there are great divides in this country.

I I always look forward to talking with Granite Staters and I will continue to travel around, do forums as I have been Chamber of Commerce, talking with people everywhere I go.

Okay.

What about you, General?

I've done 60 townhalls.

I invite everybody to those town halls and everybody comes.

Democrats, independents, libertarians, free staters, I welcome the challenge.

I welcome the questions.

You'll be treated with respect, and I will make sure that I listen and learn from you.

Okay.

Can you hear the music.

Well, that concludes our debate today.

I want to thank both of you, Senator Hassan and General Bolduc, for taking part.

Thank you to New Hampshire PBS.

Thank you for Amanda for being here to ask questions.

We're going to be debating tomorrow at noon for the candidates for the Second Congressional District.

For now, I'm Josh Rogers with Amanda Gokee.

Thank you very much for joining us today on NHPR.

Thank you.

Thank you.

This has been a.

New Hampshire elections special presentation.

The New Hampshire candidate debates 2022 in collaboration with New Hampshire.

Public Radio, New Hampshire PBS and New Hampshire Bulletin.

Production support is provided by the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire.