should we relegate the authority to use a significant amount of power and a disastrous situation. where human beings may not be able to respond quickly enough, effective enough or intelligently enough in order to process the doctor whatever. these are great questions because they raise the question of what are we developing ai for? it started off, if we forget the first few years with a scientific experiment and again it's a those be something which makes our life better and easy. that's the entire idea about the subculture. for example, if they can make a good decision quicker than a human being and save a life, most people would say that's a good thing, and as racing technology develop, i personally being a technological name and working on this issue can tell you that i see numerous examples where computers are much better than human beings at making decisions which i want them to make because human beings are scared, tired, don't have all the information. human beings sometimes tonight on the legal instinct that turns out to be a different process which sometimes is the good and sometimes really, really bad. it may not only be a good thing to delegate authority to a machine, and i think the decision we need to make is where we agree the machine comes to help us. your scenario which is extreme i would rather not pushing make that decision personally. i can definitely identify parts of life were i want machines to help me out, what i really like the fact that i'd don't need to trust all human beings with everything. but i do not want them to replace is in the things which i care about. this is the type which i think we should have. before we let technological companies and market pressures push us in a direction where not necessarily willing to go. >> if no one else -- go ahead. >> just to say, we hear quite a bit from the artificial intelligence community, the guys out in silicon valley about how ai can be beneficial, big catchphrase. they are investing money into trying to determine which was a can be beneficial to humanity but delegating the story commissions on battlefield without meaningful human control the line of which many of them draw, we haven't talked about policing, we haven't talked about out of control. we are just talking about armed conflict of the moment but this is not just in a row of armed conflict. it's much broader than that i guess the point at which the campaign, the stop collar campaign robot, and much broader, bigger debate and we don't have all the answers. >> i want to thank obviously the panelists all of you for at least here, begin a process of this debate and helping us really i think you know what some of the key questions and issues are. so thank you all again and thank dan and general panwar. [applause] >> thank you all for coming for this first part. we hope to see many of you on december 2 in pittsburgh or you can join us by police to go push about cyber deterrence will be one of the panels we will be looking at on december 2. in the meantime i encourage you to download the carnegie app with content of our latest analysis and would like to last but not least as you'll to join in thanking the team that is help with his event, particularly lauren and rachel to help with the organization. so thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> hillary clinton is camping in ohio holding a rally in cincinnati at 6:15 p.m. eastern. a state with the race is tight with a donald trump holding a slight lead. we will take it to the clinton rally live over on c-span. >> this week on "the communicators" a discussion about the proposed merger between at&t and time warner. here to discuss it are two men who cover and watch telecommunications policy here in washington, harold feld is senior vice president of public knowledge, and scott wallsten is president of the technology policy institute. let's begin with you. what would this merger mean to at&t? what would happen? >> guest: at&t has wanted to buy lots of content. apparently to seize this is the future of the industry following the comcast-nbc merger. at&t is hoping to vertically integrate with time warner. >> host: use a vertical. what does that mean? >> guest: rather than in horizontal merger to companies who compete directly with each other working. so the attempted at&t, t-mobile merger would event in horizontal merger and was blocked because of concerns related to that. a vertical mergers we have upstream and downstream company combining. they are in separate markets, so you're not changing the concentration, the industry concentration in either one by putting those together to the justice department tends to look at those differently. generally speaking, vertical mergers are easier to get through than horizontal mergers where you have to show that they will be improved efficiencies from the merger and show that will not be anticompetitive effects but it's typically anticompetitive effects are typically less likely in a vertical mergers than horizont horizontal. >> host: harold feld, what would this mean at this early stage to the consumer of at&t or time warner? >> guest: i do think there is a lot of reason to be very skeptical about this merger. particularly based on what we've seen and have industries evolve and increasing concentration within the industry, and the wedding of all of the particularly the marquee programming. not just whatever little clips got to watch on youtube but the big name programming like hbo and big name movies coming out of these studios that are critical for the success of online streaming services. that big concern here i think of the thing that consumers are to be most concerned about is at&t is a national wireless carrier. they're also in a lot of other lines of business but they recognize that the shift in watching video is moving from the big screen on the wall to being in handheld devices as well. for at&t a lot of that money comes from data overages, limiting on your data cap. there's also a lot of money in advertising that they are increasingly becoming involved in with the, in fact which is proceeding about this at the ftc that the fcc vote on and one of the things the fcc found and look at broadband privacy was that was like at&t have a tremendous window into your lives because as your every device becomes connected to the internet, as you carry a cell phone that's connected to the internet with you everywhere, at&t is your provider can see what you get for breakfast out after smart refrigerator, what, you know, when you go to work in the morning, when you're walking by a mcdonald's on the way to work, and can combine that with its content that it would get from this to essentially dissect every element of your life as a consumer, and market it back to you with these advertisements. so that's one very important concern for consumers is you really want at&t following you around figuring out how to best sell you stuff. some people may like that but a lot of people have concerns about that. the other is just the pricing and the locket on the information. at&t will have incentives to push people towards its content and away from the content of others. we have some rules about that right now with what's called net neutrality, so they can't directly interfere with my going to a rival in his company. but what they can say is if you want to watch cnn, that won't count against your data cap. but if you want to watch msnbc or bloomberg or fox news on your mobile handset, it will. so they will have this capacity to push people in a particular direction and particularly what comes to things like news, which is all part of this, that's very troubling for democracy. >> host: let's get lydia beyoud of bloomberg been involved. she's a senior tech and telecom reporter. >> jamaican with a vertical integration is usually less antitrust concern but i'm curious if both of you can speak to what precise legal and regulatory issues might be raised by opponents to oppose this deal triggered i probably should let herald talk about the legal issues because as an economist i know no laws. but i think -- >> and i don't know economics. >> together we know nothing. specifically fell on issues that will be important to one of the things herald mentioned is that time warner will treat content is content, how at&t will treat time warner content relevant to other content. he's right. that is the potentially this kind of vertical merger could be anticompetitive. if they treat their own content heavily from others. of course, that's going to be probably the biggest issue that the justice department will want to look at and want to impose the conditions to try to make that not so simple for them. and so that i think will be the biggest one. herald is bringing in the privacy issue and i'm not quite sure that fits into the merger itself. it seems like kind of a different issue. but i think it's going to be this question of whether at&t has both the incentive and ability to foreclose on rivals are raised rifles costs. in trying to think that through, they are going to look at the instance of different size. on the one hand, you could imagine at&t would profit by raising rivals costly keeping time warner content from others and so when. on the other hand, at&t on to the distaste us about, at&t and directv combined have about 25% of the subscribers. and also now matured of internet subscribers to if you try to withhold content then they lose licensing fees and advertising and although this associate with that and other marketing opportunities. it's not at all couldn't even have the incentive to do that. with that being said i'm sure that's what the doj will primarily focus on. >> the are a couple things from a legal perspective. one is that there is a big question whether the federal communications commission, the fcc, which one would think would be absolutely in the thick of something like this, whether it's even with one of our largest imitation providers, our largest news entertainment producers, but because of the way the law works its not clear what role the fcc will have. there is a lot of speculation that because at&t, which is the company that is regular by the fcc, is the one buying time warner, that the deal can be structured in a way that completely avoids fcc review. and scott is right that traditionally but not always but traditionally certainly a lot of the concerns that i've been talking about, the concerns to democracy and news production, the concerns about privacy are more the subject of fcc public interest review than the department of justice. so but i do want to emphasize that we are actually at an important shifting point in antitrust, in antitrust law and antitrust review. these are revolution changes. they don't take place overnight. but we have certainly seen within the last decade, first a change in the literature around the trust. scott has exactly described what traditional antitrust review has been for the last 40 or so years. and if you go to an antitrust lawyer, that's exactly what they will tell you the department of justice has tradition look at. at the same time it's important to recognize we have been seeing a gradual evolution, particularly around these kinds of vertical mergers and particularly in these very large, complicated markets. the comcast-nbc merger and what happened after that is something that people point to. so on the one and certainly you look at that and say that department of justice refuted and the putting conditions the ultimate uprooted. but on the other with six years of administering those conditions. and as we found out in the comcast-time warner cable merger offer, which was again, that was horizontal but a lot of the concern about they came from expanding that vertical integration power with the enhanced reach that they would have after the acquisition. so i think that, in fact, there is a lot more scope and a lot more challenges for at&t with regard to some of these vertical issues than we have previously seen. >> i agree tha there are going e poor challenges for them because of the political environment and so on, and because even if they were able to get rid of, make sure no license is changed hand, there is no way the fcc is going to stay out of it. i think the comcast-nbc merger is a good precedent. you say what happened since then, but there hasn't been, what bad things have happened that are related to the merger itself, from comcast and nbc? both companies are doing pretty well. nbc was a terrible network at the time of the merger. most of the critiques i've seen are things that don't have to do with the merger itself. give some examples. >> the one that, what has really come up and came up in the discussion of the comcast-time warner cable was the building of the department of justice to actually enforce and monitor the behavioral conditions. so the biggest most marquee example was when disney and news corp. are looking at spinning off hulu and what potential to become a big competitor in streaming. and allocation was that despite a merger condition that said comcast would not try to get it there without, there was evidence that brian roberts had gone to the heads of news corp. and disney for making these decisions and setting unit, navy you guys got to consider, comcast might want to invest more in you if you don't do this deal. so a potential new competitor was squashed. this was precisely the danger the department of justice was concerned about. that's the source of what imposed the condition. and they did know about and to after the fact and into investigating another merger. the department of justice apparently felt strongly enough about it because we never went, because the width attribute we never had a complaint. we never knew for certain but i could point to that. i can point to the effort by, does a startup called concord, which tried to gain access to video programming under the video access condition that wasn't there that would stimulate over the topic that didn't work out very well. >> that's a tough one because these are all of negotiations. sometimes the cable companies pay and broadcaster or content creator, this debate is being. somebody doesn't get on, is it because of what the reasons are talking of which is because it was a negotiation that didn't work? we will never be able to separate that out. >> i agreed but that's part of the reason why there's such caution. that the old attitude i would say was because we don't know, we should let the merger go through. i think there is an emerging sensibilities of we have a lot of concentration in the market already. we are seeing a lot of difficulty in competitors emerging when we can't prove that it's safe, we should be more skeptical rather than let it go through and hope that we have a condition to stop it. >> i have a question for you both. this merger announcement comes at a pivotal point for our nation, and that, of course, is the presidential election. hillary clinton has taken, she's not really taken a position. she said folks should look into it. but she's not opine. donald trump has said he would disapprove if he becomes president. what do you think the potential outcome of the election might play, not just on this merger and the federal regulators that may be in charge of it, it also on a deceptively mergers depending on who wins the white house? >> first of all i think the time is really interesting. because when donald trump said he would approve merger them ever pointed out th that presidt doesn't have a say on this. but on the other hand, at this point in time the president actually could have a say in it because the president has to appoint who's going to be the head of the next antitrust division and will be the next year of the sec. potentially they could make this a litmus test of what they want, the outcome they would like to see. so in this case you could see the president having a big effect the least be up on the process be the direction. of course, what donald trump thinks debate might be something different tomorrow. who knows what he thinks? >> i do think what's very interesting and important is your right, clinton did the the presidential thing and say well, you know, if i were president i would make sure we studied it very carefully, which is the thing you're supposed to say. this is, though a time when the democratic party generally generallycomment serving the progressive wing of the democratic party, but even the more centrist wing of the democratic party has made it clear that they think that antitrust needs to be revived, strengthen. what i like to call the new new antitrust. the old antitrust, the old teddy felt passionate roosevelt trust, too much power, contador 217 fans. the new antitrust which we've had since the 1960s and 70s that have now become the sort standard antitrust is the economic efficiencies versus the potential for harm, and very sort of technocratic. the new, new antitrust, though it's a step further and says well, we need to be concerned about both. we need to recognize the limits of our economic analysis that a lot of times we are just guessing, because of the potential dangers of concentration, when we are unsure we should be skeptical rather than let it go through. so i think that, particularly if the democrats are elected we are very likely to see, even if it doesn't impact of this merger specifically, and attorney general and folks at department of justice and other agencies who are much more interested in these new theories of antitrust. >> host: scott wallsten come on its surface doesn't make economic sense? >> guest: i think, the economic suggesting that it's hard to see the arms in it. they are in completely separate markets. both industries are evolving, and where they will end up, nobody really knows right now. they are all trying different things. it could turn out to be a double-edged for both of those companies. we have seen that before. it might turn out to be a great idea. it's partly for that reason that if there aren't, if you can show that there aren't unnecessary harms and that conditions that protect against those arms, that you allow them to experiment. because if it's a merger that doesn't work out, that's their problem, right? as long as there are not harms associated with it. >> randy stephenson has pointed to the data that they could potentially leverage from this combination as to reduce the cost of the content through advertisement. now, you mentioned the evolution of antitrust laws and also market economics. how might they dated that he combined at&t and time warner be able to mine and combined multiple platforms playpen, not just in the economics of the merger also in the antitrust review of it? >> one thing that i still don't understand is a guy that the new privacy rules that the fcc passed will interact with this. we don't have a text of the draft of the order yet. but in principal at&t will be operating under one set of privacy rules, and the contents i will be operating under another set. i don't know how those two things will fit together the sending side what you think of those privacy rules and whether at&t should be under different rules than the content side, i don't know how one puts those two together when you're operating under separate regimes. i also don't know how to answer that question. >> i think from the economic perspectives there's a number of things to look after one is we have seen movement in the european union did you information harvested and collected -- to view -- and antitrust review. that there's a recognition that this has value, there is a recognition that it can be combined with other information in the market in ways that can have anticompetitive effects. also it can be used to impact consumer behavior. if i know how to make it harder for you to switch, i can reduce the ability of people to compete with you. and similarly, i can, likewise, use this some would say the tv stuff that's good for you, that's the positive benefit, but also to know when competitors are trying to offer you competing services and do my best to interfere with that. there's always a concern about this that goes back to when we broke up the at&t monopoly. and we said okay, we really have to segment these businesses because we can't have the people who know all of the call information also be the ones doing the long distance and being able to have those pieces interact. we did it with the cable act of 1992 where we actually did a lot to try to break up content and the cable industry. i think when it comes to privacy and seeing this now, this raises a very serious concern. it is a concern that is again kind of not in the traditional antitrust step, but it's one that as digital information has become more informed and its impact on competition has become more important, we are seeing starting to come in as part of an antitrust. >> a couple of things. one on the eu point. here is absolutely right. and eve just went to look at coast of data as potentially anticompetitive. that's still, they're still arguing about that. it's not clear or is not the case of having data creates an anticompetitive barrier to entry. and also just having data isn't valid and its of the gift of the processing power and the know-how to handle it. that's an actively debated question. the second point about the historical looking back and seeing how you separate content, how did come back together and so on. that goes back to the point the boundaries of firms are not fixed. sometimes firm firms do things e house, out of house. as time changes they will spin things often bring things in. and it will depend on what they choose to do in second what they choose to do outside will depend in part on the transactions cost involved, and what is the right candidate will be the wrong after tomorrow. and vice versa. it's a fluid thing. >> congress has already scheduled one hearing on this merger for early december 7 in the senate judiciary committee. what role do you expect or would you anticipate congress playing in looking at this merger? >> congress we have a large merger like this usually plays a combination of bully pulpit and public temperature. what you look at his, if people getting a lot of phone calls about this, i hate this, don't let this happen to you will see members of congress ask much more aggressive questions. he was even skepticism about the deal. those of signals that are often picked up by the agencies who, after all, are accountable to congress to get their budgets from congress. and even though the doj and the antitrust division have very professional staff into the best to try to insulate themselves from these concerns, they are human beings like anyone else. the other thing though it's part of our broader popular oversight and debate about this, where when you have these kind of public hearings, they are important to advance in the public the nature of the arguments for and against. and i think they put a very valuable role, not necessarily in the decisions by the staff but a sort of the broader sense in the country of whether we need to do something like re-examine our basic ideas about antitrust, or whether we're happy with the way things are going. >> also is another issue with congress. it's not just the hearings. we know that certain senators will be very opposed to it. we know that elizabeth warren and al franken will not like this. they will have hearings and send it is with speeches but they also want to go through, they will see the confirmation process. that's what mentioned earlier. this is going to come up during the confirmation process as well. and so congress will have an impact on the merger intensive. also just to emphasize what herald said. that staff at doj and fcc, it is amazing how much they work tuesday and slid from politics and just do the analysis but it's pretty impressive. >> host: scott wallsten to you mentioned almost offhandedly that the fcc will find a way to get its hand into this. how can that happen? >> guest: that's a good question to i'm sure there are ways -- >> maybe i should take that one. every attorney at the sec this plan for every document to make sure that they can get folks into the it's hard to imagine how an agency at such an important, such an important part of the process of at&t and some of time warner would manage to stay out. >> i would say first of all, if you are tom wheeler you really happy that this is happening now rather than when you're likely to have to stick around to do with it, as i've taken to saying, i'm sure chairman wheeler is saying -- i don't have to figure this out. but there are a number of ways in which the fcc could be brought into this. the first is by the department of justice. the department of justice is free to consult a sister agency. there's a good working relationship between the static it's also little-known fact that the fcc has concurrent antitrust jurisdiction with the department of justice over common carriers, telecommunications providers like at&t. so even though they're not part of the merger review process, it is certainly appropriate to bring them in as just part of the antitrust review. that would be one way. there are also certain licenses that time warner has picked some of them are the one tv station that they've got. that easy to get rid of. in terms of the deal structure that are a lot of other licenses. as i like to remind people, every one of the little tour buggies they've got at the time warner studios has a little fcc licensed to use their two-way radios. and all of those are transferred as part of this deal. now come usually -- [talking over each other] >> over 50 settle it stays under and base stations. >> many, many licenses. normally in a deal that doesn't involve the fcc, these are what are called pro forma. the sec just a many to record where licenses go because we need to know to make sure we have interface but that's not our business. go to the case are bound to this actually in the '90s with -- when exxon was merging with mobile. and that would've, but also produced the largest transfer of fcc licenses and fcc issued a statement saying we don't review oil. but in this case we will give you like the fcc ought to be involved, but they are not involved because it's at&t buying time warner. this might be a case where norman we don't get into with thesthis kind of license transf, but this time we got into it. >> it will make a big difference. for the justice department, the justice but has to challenge the merger. if they believe it will hold up incorporate the fcc is to approve the merger. that conditions they ask for our very different. >> so if this merger is approved what do you think the impact will be on the market, on consumers? >> i don't think it would be much impact on consumers, lease in the short or medium term. i think it depends on how they try to use time warner's content. presuming they believe it will be valid but that allow them to introduce new services your we will have to see. i think we will have to see how all of these business models play out, but it will not, it's hard to see how it will be bad for business. >> first of all when of the of these sorts of things, you will then have another one of these arms races where everybody starts to try to grab for a partner. it's not just what this particular merger will do. it's been th verizon may want to buy cbs because they wanted more content to their getting into content to aol and some of these other things. or you might have chartered time warner cable try to make a go of it in terms of buying more content. the argument will always be you let that guy do it, now i need to bulk up. there's a longer-term issue of fewer choices, more concentration of media power. i do think though that for consumers the biggest problem here is likely to be with content and data overages, where the most short-term effect is going to be right not at&t is already planning to release their directv video where they won't zero rate that and not charged it. so the effect is to make it more expensive to watch netflix on your handheld that it is to watch at&t's competing video product. i think for consumers that leads to greater expense and less choice. >> supposedly, so far netflix is not opposed to this merger, however. >> host: we will have to leave it there. thank you very much. scott wallsten, harold feld and lydia beyoud. >> on election day november 8 to the nation decides our next president in which party controls the house and senate to stay with c-span for coverage of the presidential race including campaign stops with hillary clinton, donald trump and their surrogates. anthology house and senate races with her coverage of their candidate debates and speeches. c-span, where history unfolds daily. >> into new hampshire senate race in template kelly ayotte and democratic governor maggie hassan debate health insurance, prescription drug costs, the presidential candidates, heroin and opium abuse, national security, gun control, pay equity and climate change. governor hassan leads the race in most polls. >> tonight the is the senate general election debate in new hampshire. in our studio, republican incumbents senator kelly ayotte the democratic challenger, maggie hassan. it's sure a showdown. from domestic issues -- >> my opponent has supported efforts. should stood right with corporate special interests to undermine social security and about the budget on the backs of our seniors spin this unfortunately been a very negative campaign from governor hassan and her allies and rendering all kinds of false negative attacks against me. >> to national security. >> the policies she's been supporting under this administration continues to support like -- has made us less safe speed she has put her party before country. that's a distinction i will continue to draw. >> these two candidates do not see eye to eye. the debate begins right now. ♪ ♪ >> good evening. it is debate night image that we want to welcome the candidates and thank them for coming to her students that they depart in this important discussion of issues that matter most to you. the voters. also want to welcome our viewers watching on tv individuals around the country to begin on c-span. >> before we start, the ground was what is becoming a question and to have one minute to respond. at the end of that minute the candidates and judy's with an audio cue. at the discretion of myself or paul, 30-second rebuttals will be allowed at the end of the debate the candidates will be given one minute closing statement. governor hassan mogul first followed by senator a guy. we are partnering with the open debate coalition, a group dedicated to making debates better represent the people. and historic first times that will feature the top questions posed and rated by more than 120,000 voters in new hampshire and around the nation. >> we have a lot of crucial issues want to tackle today so let's get to it. let's start with health care. in the news this week for those receiving their insurance coverage through the exchange is set up by obamacare their premiums will rise sharply. we should note in new hampshire will be a very modest 2% rise. a new tv commercial on the air this week by senator ayotte campaign says maggie hassan can't stand up to her party. she supports the broken health care law that even bill clinton called the craziest thing in the world. governor hassan, would like to give you a chance to respond. >> first of all thank you for moderating in the nh1-tv, things are hosting. to senator ayotte, thank you for participating tonight and for everybody who's watching tonight. thank you for tuning in and engaging in this debate. my husband and i two terrific kids. our oldest happens every severe physical disabilities, and at race time he has had as many as nine doctors and over a dozen prescriptions. so we certainly know the strength and plots over health care system. but what's really important is that we need to improve the affordable care act to be sure that we shouldn't go back to a time when people who with preexisting conditions cannot buy insurance. we have our medicaid expansion, our bipartisan expansion program in new hampshire. offers coverage over 50,000 hard workers because of the affordable care act there are improvements that debate but i will fight any attempt to vote to take away medicaid expansion from 50,000 hard-working granite status, something my opponent has voted to do. >> thank you. i want to thank you all so paul for having us tonight. and all of your viewers, governor hassan, it's good to be with you. this issue is one we do have agreement on two things. first of all i think we need to address pre-existing conditions that also those who are receiving coverage now. we do want to pull the rug from the. that's why i actually voted to extend medicaid expansion for two years so that we can work on a new hampshire centric solution to give more ability of states to craft their own solutions but make the mistake, i mean for people in new hampshire, high deductibles, co-pays, premiums. they were told they could keep your plan if you like it. they have been able to do. costs have gone up and so we need more competition, more choice, more transparency. i supported expanding flexible spending accounts, health savings account, more competition and transparency. this is a big difference between governor hassan and i because she is going to be following hillary clinton's lead others who wants to expand the affordable care act winter some issues that need addressed. >> government? >> first of all people should be clear that might opponent has voted repeatedly to repeal medicaid expansion. just recently she now is using washington speak to tell you because you going to give you one we are on medicaid expansion and dental the bug out, that some of that's a good thing. we came together in new hampshire in a bipartisan group of us build and medicaid expansion program that actually has added competition on our exchange. and yes, there is more to do to fix the issues and problems and lower costs for the affordable care act but we shouldn't do by taking away health care for people. >> we will stick with health care and you can respond to that. >> our next question tonight, name three things you can propose in the senate to do with the price of health care premiums. senator ayotte, we will start with you. >> first of all of the bennett some of the mandates that come from washington. the one size fits all. you have to give people the ability of flexibility of different plans. they should've been able to keep the plant if they like it which did not been able to do. we should expand health savings accounts. toshiba transparency of pricing. and he should be able to purchase insurance across state lines and more competition. there is so much more we need to do but i know one size fits all for washington is not going to solve as for the people i've met in new hampshire who have high deductibles, higher co-pays and higher premiums. this is a real issue for families who are struggling out there. let me just go back to something that governor hassan said with regard to medicaid expansion to other to extend it for to you because i want new hampshire-based solutions and more to build a new hampshire to craft ways to better serve people who need our help. not just washington to lex had to do this. >> we, of course, did put together a new hampshire-based bipartisan solution medicaid expansion which despite her protests here, senator ayotte has voted to repeal five times with no extensions. look, there are a number things we need to do to lower health care costs, among them reward quality over quantity. among them get generic drugs to market more quickly, something that senator ayotte has not been willing to do. we could also allow the importation of drugs from canada, something senator ayotte has voted against. that's really reflective of her path in washington and standing with corporate special interest like big pharma who are major donors to her campaign. >> senator? >> first of all i support allowing generic drugs to get to market sooner. we have to address problems with the fda that allowed to happen often. governor hassan's favorite talking point is that somehow i'm supporting special interest at the irony is that she's actually raising money from lobbyists from big pharma ashes criticizing me. >> governor? >> if i could, first of all, senator ayotte has failed to stand up to big pharma over and over again. and i will continue to talk in this campaign about the people, the things people in new hampshire talk to me that. there for so frosty with washington that is broken because people like my put stand with the party and special interest instead of the people and small businesses of new hampshire. >> talk about standing with the party. i mean, think about this. if you're wondering who's going to make changes to the affordable care act that more transparency choice, governor hassan stand with hillary clinton on this. this system needs to be change. she stands with her on the flawed iran agreement that's dangerous for the country. tax increase is something that hasn't spent a lot of time supposing tax increases. >> another question about health care. john wood like to know what will you do about the skyrocketing price of prescription drugs. governor hassan we will start with you. >> first of all john, thank you for the question. as you know, my family and i deal with insurance companies, change in which prescription my second down because, prescription drug prices skyrocketed among the things you could do is allow medicare to negotiate for prescription drug prices. their love of purchasing would add competition and bring the price down. this is something that h again senator ayotte has failed to stand up for. she has stood with big pharma repeatedly, and this is one of the major things we could do to lower the cost of prescription drugs, along with allowing them to be imported from canada which she is again voted against doing. at the end of the day this is an election or whether you are going to a senator who stand up to the people in small business of new hampshire as i have as governor. we've been working together to make progress in our state. we have 2.9% on point rate. cnbc is listed us as the most business friendly state in the country. more people working to the indexer than anytime in our state district that's the work we did it ever reach across party lines and make progress rather than stand with special interest. >> senator? >> senator? >> first of all i would support medicare stability negotiate but that's not enough. even going to canada solves this problem, it does not. not. we need is love do. that's what i said i support that their drug price act and i will support getting more competition, more generics to market. governor hassan talks about special interest. it's her favorite talking point. just look at the television did you see the special interest but she was recruited by the power brokers in washington, harry reid and chuck schumer who want control. control. that's why you see them spending $50 million from harry reid supertight. the former mayor of the city standing on her path. gingers come hillary clinton. so i'm standing up for you at that's what i am always going to do because i think about the people in new hampshire who are struggling, and that's the work that we need to do. i have one of the most bipartisan records in the senate and to work to find common ground to deliver results for our state. >> first of all, senator ayotte stood with the koch brothers voting with the nearly 90% of the time in the first four years in office. sliding within with big oil to protect their tax breaks. she's voted against cutting a tax break for companies that outsource their jobs to overseas to places like china. she has been with wall street which by the way has given $2.5 million to her campaign in protecting taxpayers for ceos. i will continue to talk about the things the people of you have to talk to me about. we should be building a future that helps are working families expand opportunity, not standing up for special interest student let's move forward. >> i would like to respond to that if i could. this is again a favorite talking point, that is something not too. there are no ads on the air from the koch brothers because they been quite critical of me because i stood up to protect new hampshire's if i but from climate change. and you want to talk special into. governor hassan in a time as governor, the largest state contract in state history $1.6 billion from whatever largest contributors which it took almost a quarter million dollars to her campaign and to the democratic of the association. this is the kind condit people worry about and we've seen from her as well. >> we want to move on but very quick response. >> senator ayotte knows what she just said is just blatant political attack. let's be clear, the contract was entered into by the state before i even became governor. and she knows that. let's also be clear, the koch brothers gave, the coke them has given personally to her even after she did the kind of things to begin chance the strong arm of the record. thank you. >> thank you both. a lot of voters this week got something in the mailbox. it was a man from a state republican party into said quote donald trump needs senators like kelly ayotte. the governor hassan campaign responding, kelly ayotte is backtracked on her support for the republican nominee yet in secret mailing basis and by her campaign. she brags a future president trump nature in the senate. senator, two questions. first of all did your campaign have any hands in that mailer? also you said you wouldn't go for donald trump after those audio recordings that we all know about. instead usage right in and of his running mate mike pinsker isn't that in a way still supporting the trump ticket? >> first of all, there's lots of mayors to open up your mailbox. i do know what that one comes from the it doesn't come from my camping but i will tell you this. i stood up to my party, unlike governor hassan commented going to put the priorities of new hampshire first. i did that before donald trump was a candidate, or the issues like the government shut down. i did different when i was attorney general. that's the big difference industries between governor hassan and that because she is not stood up to her nominee. if you think about it, she would do the talking points about where she disagrees with president obama but she's not stood up to hillary clinton anything of consequence whether it's the iran deal, the health care law, the ease of the need to be addressed with our cost, or whether it is the trillion dollar tax increase that hillary clinton wants. and governor hassan again has history of proposing tax increases. >> first of all senator ayotte on 35 to vacations over the last year or so stood with the donald trump even as he insulted women, even as he made fun of people with disabilities, a tactic goldstar family and then finally when it became politically inconvenient after the tapes were released, she finally said she wasn't going to vote for him, as if she was surprised by those tapes, reflected we've come to know as donald trump. and now having tried to walk back, her campaign approved of that mailer that went out in situ wanted to work with them in the united states center. she wants to great gridlock and i'm happy to talk about how i will stand up to my party as i have and i will at any time. >> senator, final word. >> you want to talk gridlock. it's becoming a budget like governor hassan did that was bipartisan because they wanted to decrease taxes on businesses. she vetoed it and then now you hear me see the ad taking credit for it. i will be a person who makes sure our small businesses have lower taxes, unlike governor hassan. we getting the stand up for your party, governor hassan has not stood up to hillary clinton on anything of consequence. i've already done that. i stood up to donald trump or i will stand a. i stood up on the government shut down. i will stand up to democrats of the don't think they're doing the right thing for new hampshire but i also happen to one of the most bipartisan records in the senate focus on getting things done for the people of this state. >> governor, very quickly. >> i dispute your characterization. it's not a bipartisan record at all. but let's be clear. senator ayotte scituate willing to vote to put donald trump in the situation with access to nuclear codes. i have stood up to hillary clinton. i don't support the president's proposal to close guantánamo bay. i will continue to fight for the people of new hampshire as i have. let's also be very clear. i have stood up to veto a budget that can -- i will always stand for fiscal responsibility bill in washington, d.c. you hear debate about who should take credit for something. there was plenty of credit to go around. >> thank you very much. >> governor hassan, lately we've been getting a daily download from wikileaks. a documentary build some disturbing information about the clinton foundation and hillary clinton's time as secretary of state. has it made you rethink your position of supporting our? >> first of all i think as senator rudy has indicated it is really a mistake to give credence to this wikileaks string. he supporting the very people who hacked into these records it when you do that. i think it's realistic to do that. look, i will never fail to stand up to secretary clinton or my party. i have criticized her for her handling of her e-mails. that was a mistake. she has apologized for that. but what's really at issue in this campaign and what this campaign is going to be about is whether we're going to come together as americans and build a future that includes everyone. a place for hard-working families who work hard to get ahead and stay ahead. were a middle-classes growing and thriving and where parents are competent once again the kids love a better future. that's the vision i've been working on with minutes of both parties in new hampshire. that's the vision hillary clinton shares which is why i supported. i do differ on of the things which i think about. >> centra care, a 30-second response. response. >> the mistake is when you say two plus two equals five, and that's what governor hassan has said about what hillary clinton did by establishing a private server and then lying about the situation in your in your. some of which were classified that jeopardize national security. see, this is the difference between she and i. i will stand up to my own party into the other side. i have one of the most bipartisan records because i've been focusing getting things done by passing legislation to address our heroin epidemic, making sure it's easier for our small businesses on health care, taxes and regulations. and again governor hassan vetoed a budget that, in fact, they provide reductions for our small businesses. she wants to take credit for that but it's been described as partisan and way she handled -- >> let's be really clear about senator ayotte's record in washington to she voted with ted cruz five times to shut down the government. government. them and when she was the third new hampshire issues getting political heat, then she decided to pretend to be hard for the solution. she voted to defund land parroted six times. she's been standing right with mitch mcconnell on the supreme court blockade. there's nothing bipartisan. shiastan with the party and she's made the mistake of supporting the donald trump even when members of her own party, national security expert said he close -- he proposed a grand present danger. >> let's move on. sexual misconduct scandal is want to confront and center in this campaign. a new ad out this week by an outside group that is supporting senator ayotte says the governor husband was president of the time at the academy covered up this candidate the ad includes -- speaking to myself and other reporters explain why she accepted a campaign contribution in her first run for governor from the academy instructor involved in the scandal. governor, your campaign is pushback out against this commercial saying it is basically out of bounds but i'd like to directly from you on this issue. >> this is a false and personal attacks against my family. the facts you are that this school and my husband went right to the police as soon as they receive allegations of misconduct. and my campaign donated to charity the golden small dollar contribution from the offender. once really concerning here is how much senator ayotte's allies want to be elected that they would stoop to this to politicize this kind of tragedy at a school, that they would stoop to politicize other things as well as they have, for instance, around the air within opera crisis, running ads about that. something we're all working together hit on new hampshire to combat. senator ayotte's allies want her back in washington because they know she will vote with them. they know she will vote with big pharma to protect high prescription drug prices for the profits. they know she will vote with big oil against our environment. they know that she will vote to protect deduction for outsources so they get a tax break when they move jobs overseas. that's why they're supporting her and that's what they are running this kind of despicable political act. >> what's most disturbing is that we could've kept all of his outside and outside of this race. i offered governor hassan a people's pledge. it was a pledge to keep his outside money out there that actually elizabeth warren, one of her supporters, put in place in the senate race and senator shaheen offered in a race and we could've kept all this money out. i think we know why she didn't want it out because you see $15 million from harry reid who recruited her in this race. the power brokers in washington supporting or. mike bloomberg, former mayor of new your city to over $7 million federal unions, you've got hillary clinton super tax supporting her because she knows that, in fact, governor hassan will be a rubberstamp for her instead of someone who will stand up like me no matter what. >> back to campaign finance spending a little greater in the debate, but quickly. i know the ad was not from your campaign. do you think it was appropriate? >> i've been attacked on my character. i've been attacked with misleading ads about my record. and governor hassan has not said anything about it. we could've kept this money out. .. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> moderator: you are watching the u.s. senate debate. >> moderator: and we continue with a topic that has been front and center here in new hampshire, and that is the drug crisis. governor hasan, outside republican groups have made it a point to slam your record on the heroin problem, and as we know, more people this year are expected to die this upcoming -- or this year i should say than last. how do you respond to these attacks on how you handled the drug crisis? >> hassan: the sister of a colleague of mine who is in recovery but trying to regain the trust of her children, a classmate of my son ben's who died from an overdose. we see the impact of this all across our state. and since my first days in office, i've been working to address p sustaining drug task force money as the government cut it back, pushing hard to get medicaid expansion passed which we did because it covers substance abuse and behavioral health treatment, making far can available for first responders and working to get emergency funding passed so that we can get dollars out the door as we have been to places like friendship house in bethlehem or harbor homes in nashua. we have to continue to roll up our sleeves each and every day to combat this, but it's also one of the reasons it's so important that we keep moving forward and make sure to protect medicaid expansion. >> governor, just to follow up on that, how much responsibility do you personally take for the fact that more people are going to die this year than last year though? hassan: well, we all want to save every life we possibly can, so we've been working hard, everything from medicaid expansion to expanding our drug courts and investing in operation granted hammer to combat the supply of what is a new and more deadly form of opioids, fentanyl. we need emergency federal funding from the federal government, something all governors in the country have called on, and we'll continue working every day. every life lost is a tragedy, and we have to continue to work together to combat this epidemic. >> moderator: senator ayotte, how would you handle this crisis differently? ayotte: first of all, this is such an important issue. i think about my friends, the griffins, who lost their beautiful daughter courtney, so many families who have lost someone they love in this state. so at the national level, i worked on a bipartisan basis to help pass the comprehensive addiction and recovery act to help state and local efforts in prevention, treatment and recovery. i've been fighting for more funding, working with senator shaheen to support emergency funding as well and also looking at the southern border where you see it coming over. it's coming from these mexican drug cartels, so in the armed services committee, getting more resources at the boarder for interdiction to help our police and first responders. it's really important at the state level the money that's coming down, i know that there's millions that have, a couple million dollars that have not gone out the door, and we need to make sure that those resources flow to help those in or community. >> moderator: senator ayotte, is the money getting to the front lines of this crisis? ayotte: unfortunately, i think there's been some concerns about not fast enough. two of the $3 million most recent aloe candidated has got gone out the door. i'm going to continue to work together. we have to turn this around for our families and continue to sport our first responders who are on the front lines of this. hassan: you know, senator ayotte just said some things she knows are not true are. first of all, we've gotten out the door about $25 million in contracts for treatment, prevention, treatment and recovery. we also have almost all of the money that was allocated is already encumberedded, which means there are plans to spend it over the course of the year which is how you handle contracts. this is an incredibly misleading attack by senator ayotte and by her republican allies here in the state. it's very unfortunate. and, frankly, if some of those republican allies were so concerned about the speed of dollars getting out the door, they could have taken a lot less than the seven months they took to authorize the money. >> moderator: thank you, both. ayotte: let me just say first of all who she's talking about are the legislature that allocated the money and what was most recently aloe candidated just base on a recent report, two-thirds of it has not gone out. but also when she vetoed the budget, she delayed getting funding out the door about three months. so this is one we do need to work together. i've been working my hardest to work with senator shaheen to make sure we do all we think to get the help to the state and we focus on prevention, treatment and recovery to save lives. >> moderator: quickly, governor, did that veto delay the funding? hassan: we kept government running after i stood up for fiscal responsibility. the numbers in the budget didn't add up, and the timing and lack of safeguards for the tax cuts would have made it very difficult to continue our prevention, treatment and recovery funding. so we came together, something that i wish washington would do more of, and we actually put together a compromise with safeguards so that we could have the tax cuts, which i support and i'm glad we were able to accomplish, but also protect these investments in critical priorities that businesses and families around new hampshire need. >> moderator: senator, final word, and then i want to move on. ayotte: she vetoed the budget that had had reductions for small businesses here in new hampshire and called the budget dishonest and then actually delayed not only funding that was going to help to enhance addressing the heroin epidemic, but also to help those struggling with mental illness. and then, basically, the thing that's bipartisan about the budget is that republicans and democrats came together to override her veto. and now she says that she was for this all along. i mean, that's the kind of double speak that we don't need. we need to be working together. hassan: i want to be clear that senator ayotte has voted to repeal medicaid expansion five times, for her to be concerned about funding behavioral health and substance abuse treatment when she is willing to take away that treatment for 50,000 hard working granite staters, medical care and that treatment, is concerning. >> moderator: candidates, we could litigate this all night long, but i do want to move on to the broken v.a. system. this has been a big topic here in new hampshire and across the country, and veterans are committing suicide at a rate of 22 per day. here many new hampshire, of course, we do not have a full-time hospital for our veterans. paul d. from here in the granite state, he wants to know what will you do to end veteran suicide pandemic. senator ayotte. ayotte: yes. this is so devastating. my husband's a combat veteran, and this, you know, he served in the iraq war, so we have to do all we can to help our veterans. in the senate i've supported the clay hunt bill to help address serving veterans better with their mental health needs. but at the state level, we need to be insuring -- this is something senator shaheen and i have worked very much together on -- is making sure we've not only fought for a full-service hospital, but allowing our veterans to get local care easily in their communities so that there's more treatment capacity. we need to continue to have accountability at the v.a., so unfortunately we hear of misconduct at the v.a. that does not go answeredded, and i've introduced a bill to address that, to make sure that people are held accountable and also to support the people who are doing a good job at the v.a. there's so much more we need to do for our veterans, and this is one that of all the things we need to be doing, those who have defended this nation, they deserve the very best. >> moderator: governor. hassan: well, i'm the daughter of a world war ii veteran, so i have a particular personal interest in making sure that our veterans have access to excellent health care, including behavioral health care. we have much more to do to end the terrible scandals around wait times in the v.a. we know we have to do more to allow whistleblowers to bring forward issues at the v.a. here in new hampshire we should have a full-service v.a. hospital, and i support the effort, although we definitely are to improve things. i'm proud of the work we have done in new hampshire of making permanent our ptsd and traumatic brain injury commission and our ask the question campaign, which is really helping providers and community members learn more about who has served in their communities to make sure they're getting the help they need. and then we have to make sure that we are protecting our veterans from shady, for-profit companies like bridge point education who would prey on them. >> moderator: senator, i'll give you a very quick response, and then i'll move on since bridge point did come up. ayotte: for me, i'm the wife of a combat veteran, i have fought so hard for our veterans. in fact, i introduced legislation to be able to claw back bonuses from people who committed misconduct at the v.a., passed through the v.a. committee, also to hold people accountable that weren't serving our veterans, and guess what? blocked by federal employees' unions. and be guess what? they're putting millions of dollars into governor hassan into supporting her campaign. the status quo is not acceptable. we have to address this for our veterans, and this issue with bridge point, i returned this money. so, you know, governor hassan has not returned money when it's come to all of the millions of dollars that are supporting her campaign, including people who want to keep the status quo. >> moderator: governor, 15 seconds, and then we need to move to another issue. hassan: i've been fighting for the people and small businesses of new hampshire, i'm very proud to stand up for working men and women and their right, for instance, to organize. and at the end of the day, senator ayotte accepted money from bridge point university which preyed on veterans, actually even presiding on the senate floor as the discussion of their potentially illegal and certainly unethical and immoral behavior was discussed. >> moderator: governor? hassan: said she didn't know anything about it, which was concerning. >> moderator: candidates, thank you. >> moderator: a question tonight about equal pay. a new report from the world economic forum says at the current pace, pay equity for women globally is 170 years away. in a list of 144 countries, the u.s. came in at number 45. what would you do to help close that gap? governor hassan? hassan: one of the things i have been pleased to do was sign a bipart season bill -- bipartisan bill. look, we should have an inclusive economy that works for everyone. that's who we are as americans. that's how we build a growing and thriving middle class. and i will always stand up for equal pay for equal work. i'm stand up for a woman's right to make her own health care decisions and to have family planning access, for instance, something that senator ayotte has voted against. and i'll make sure that we stand up for working families in supporting the expansion of pell grants. senator ayotte voted to make $90 billion of cuts to pell grants, allowing students to refinance their student loans and working as i have in new hampshire to hold down the cost of higher education. we froze in-state tuition at our university system for the first time in 25 years. we're lowering our community colleges. this is a choice in this election about whether we're going to continue that kind of progress at the federal level or stick with the special interests who have been supporting senator ayotte, and she's been supporting them. >> moderator: senator. ayotte: first of all, as the mother of a daughter, equal pay for equal work is so important to me. in fact, i liked what happened in new hampshire, and i thought it was a very good solution. i introduced a bill in washington, because there's been so much gridlock on this issue that i actually thought this bill, solution in new hampshire was very good. i call it the gap act. i introduced it, and i actually made it stronger than what was passed in state because there are penalties in it that give it even more teeth in new hampshire. that's me looking at new hampshire solutions and bringing them to the nation's capitol instead of gridlock. and in a situation, you know, governor hassan attacks me, i've been fighting so hard. federal bureaucrats are are trying to cut access to women's mammograms, and i worked on a bipartisan basis to make sure that they would be preserved. and unfortunately, there are so many moves to actually cut access to women's health care on mammograms, and i was glad to fight that. when it comes to pell grants, you know, her favorite talking point, go read senate con current resolution 1 is. i have not voted to cut pell grants in any wisconsin. in fact, i have voted, in fact, expanding pell grants, working on bipartisan -- >> moderator: thank you. thank you. senator, thank you. ayotte: accessible and lower interest rates -- >> moderator: senator, we're past the minute. thank you very much. governor, would you like to respond? hassan: on march 27, 2015, senator ayotte voted for a budget that included $90 billion of cuts to pell grants. those cuts would have made college more expensive for thousands of students around new hampshire. the day before, on march 26, 2015, there was an amendment offered that would have allowed her to restore, vote to restore the $90 billion of cuts in that budget. she voted against e -- restoring it. that's her record. and just like she's trying to run away from donald trump sometimes, it seems like this campaign is running away from real records. ayotte: go read are senate concurrent resolution 11 that governor hassan is citing, because i voted to make sure no cuts to pell grants, but that we actually look across the board on federal spending. this is, again, a false attack from governor hassan, but i want the viewers to be able to go read that bill, because i have, i voted on it, and i'm making sure that pell grants remain strong. and i have fought also to make sure that perkins grants would not be eliminated when people in washington wanted to do that. 5,000 new hampshire students impacted by that. >> moderator: candidate, the time is flying, we're going to take a short break. when we come back, national security. stay with us. ♪ ♪ huck huck marc. >> moderator: with 12 days to go until the election, the u.s. senate race is so crucial. >> moderator: and we continue with a question about national security. senator ayotte, you've recently applauded efforts by companies like google and facebook for removing the islamic state's presence, and you even said the companies could be more aggressive on this. but where's the line between our first amendment right to express ourselves and national security? ayotte. i strongly support the first amendment, but when you're supporting terrorism or you are asking people to commit terrorist attacks which many of the sites are being used to do that are being taken down by these social media sites, that's a line that cannot be crossed. so isis, other radical islamist groups, these businesses do need to take down those sites, because we know that they're encouraging violence in our own country and with our allies, and this is a very serious issue. and the line, i think, is clear. when you're encouraging terrorism and you're a terrorist group, that is a position, obviously, where it goes well beyond free speech. >> moderator: governor hassan. hassan: in the united states senate i'll always put the security of our country first. here at home i've put more troopers on the road, i've worked to enhance school safety plans in the face of homeland security threats. we've extended active shooter training more our law enforcement. we've developed new standards for cybersecurity in the state and trained our state employees on cybersecurity and gotten rid of the kind of outdated hardware and software that makes us more vulnerable. and be i'm very proud to have stood up for the new hampshire national guard, men and women who are deployed right now in harm's way. i certainly support the first amendment. but when terrorists are using our social media and our systems to promote terrorism and to create and develop real threats to our country, we have to take a stand and make sure that we are working with those high-tech companies to get the terrorists off social media and keep our country safe. >> moderator: thank you both. paul? >> moderator: let's shift gears and talk about college affordability. unfortunately, this state has one of the highest levels of student debt in the country, it's $36,000 per student, that's up 8% over the year before. now, the democratic presidential nominee, hillary clinton, was just in the state about a month ago at unh calling for debt-free college more students at public institutions, and i'm wondering -- i want to get the answer from both of you but, governor, if you're in the senate next year, is that a plan you're going to sign up for? hassan: one of the things i hear from both families and businesses is how important affordable higher education is. so as governor, one of the first things i did was work in a bipartisan way in our budget to freeze in-state tuition at our public university system for the first time in 25 years, and we actually lowered it at community colleges. and then we put together some creative options for public university and system students to lower the cost of higher education. that's something i want to continue to work on in the united states senate. it is one of the major points of difference between senator ayotte and myself. as you've heard us discuss tonight, she has voted to make deep cuts to pell grants and against allowing students to refinance their student loans while i've been working to make sure that we lower the cost of higher education, and i will continue to do that in the united states senate. i think secretary clinton's plan to have debt-free college at public universities is a very good goal to be working towards, and i think we all have to come together and get to this issue, because it's really important not just for our families, but for our businesses who need a 21st century work force. >> moderator: senator, you're back there in january and a clinton white house does introduce this legislation, is there a different way you would want to go? ayotte: well, first of all, as someone who had student loans, put herself through law school and then transferred those payments to childcare once i paid them back, i understand this is a big issue for new hampshire students. and governor hassan can keep claiming i cut pell grants, but i did not. i'm actually working to expand them. with tim kaine, the vice presidential nominee for hillary clinton, for career technical education. i also was part of a bipartisan group to make sure interest rates would not double for students, saving millions of dollars. when they were trying to eliminate the perkins grant, i fought that and made sure that didn't happen to impact 5,000 students in new hampshire. this is a very important issue that we need to work on together. but we also need to understand how would we pay for this, you know, making sure that we're in a position that we provide affordable education -- we need colleges to have more skin in this game to make sure that they're actually working with us instead of increasing prices in a way that makes it unaffordable for all families. i will make this a priority, i know how important it is to new hampshire families having experienced it myself. >> moderator: candidates, thank you, we have a lot more to get through. >> moderator: this question comes from a person in exeter, what type of gun control measures do you support to protect the prick from mass shootings -- the public from mass shootings in their communities and schools? senator ayotte? ayotte: having been attorney general of our state, this has been a priority to keep new hampshire safe for me and also serving on the armed services committee from both, obviously, criminals and terrorists. so it's very important that criminals and terrorists cannot have access to firearms, but it's equally important that we protect people's law-abiding rights under the second amendment to the constitution. i'm very proud to have the endorsement of the new hampshire troopers and the manchester patrolmen's association having worked directly with law enforcement on keeping our state safe. so i would want to make sure that we fix the system right now in terms of our background check system. i support background checks. i want to get the mental health records that have not been put in that are supposed to be there by law. new hampshire's finally doing that but has been late to do that. in addition to that, if you're too dangerous to get on a commercial flight, to not be able to immediately purchase a a firearm. but also if you think you're wrongfully on that list, i've supported a bipartisan effort to be able to get off the list. we have to focus on making sure that people are safe, but we also have to protect people's constitutional rights. >> moderator: thank you, senator. governor. hassan: well, i fully support the second amendment. responsible gun owners have a right to own guns for self-defense, for recreation, for hunting. but i also believe that we can take steps to bolster our national security by expanding background checks. and this is a major difference between senator ayotte and myself. she talked a moment ago about the no-fly/no-buy bill. the very least the united states congress should have done is make sure that terrorists on the no-fly list can't buy, but they could still circumvent the background check system under her bill by buying guns online and at gun shows. and you know what? isis knows it. they've been advertising about it, telling people in the united states who they're trying to recruit that they can just go buy guns online and at gun shows. senator ayotte had a chance to vote to expand background checks in 2013 after san key hook, she didn't. -- sandy hook. she didn't. this is a national security issue, and it is a very concerning record or that she has of standing with the gun lobby, again, instead of the public safety for the people of new hampshire and our country. >> moderator: senator ayotte, quick response, then we need to move on, please. ayotte: first of all, gun control is not going to stop isis, unfortunately. but i have worked, i led a bipartisan effort of bringing people together to address if you're too dangerous to get on a commercial flight, not being able to purchase a firearm. i bring people together around these problems and also making sure we protect the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, something that i will do and governor hassan will not. this is a very, very important issue, and i have the endorsement of law enforcement agencies in the state like the troopers' association, because they know i'm going to work to keep new hampshire safe. >> moderator: candidates, we have about 90 seconds left before close, so i'm going to do a lightning round. yes or no. climate change, do you believe it is manmade? governor. >> hassan: yes, i do. i have been fighting climate change and working to improve our environment. senator ayotte, when she first ran for the united states senate, doubted whether climate change was real -- .. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., october 31, 2016. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable steve daines, a senator from the state of montana, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: orrin g. hatch, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on thursday, november 3, 2016.

Related Keywords

Mexico , United States , Sandy Hook , Wisconsin , Canada , Montana , Iraq , New Hampshire , Iran , Washington , China , Jamaica , Bethlehem , West Bank General , West Bank , Ohio , Cincinnati , Americans , Jamaican , Mexican , Chuck Schumer , Ayotte Scituate , Maggie Hassan , Tim Kaine , Elizabeth Warren , Harold Feld , Huck Marc , Steve Daines , Randy Stephenson , Harry Reid , John Wood , Tom Wheeler , Al Franken , Brian Roberts , Mitch Mcconnell , Mike Bloomberg , Hillary Clinton , Ted Cruz , Kelly Ayotte ,