To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Pennsylvania's 24th congressional district

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pennsylvania's 24th congressional district was one of Pennsylvania's districts of the United States House of Representatives.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    581
    4 910
    18 684
  • PBS39 15th Congressional Debate
  • Washington, D.C. Aerial Tour "Heart of the Nation" circa 1930 Central Film Company
  • Daniel Sickles: The Colorful and Controversial Commander of Gettysburg - Ranger Matt Atkinson

Transcription

GOOD EVENING. WELCOME TO WHAT PROMISED TO BE A SPIRITED CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE. WE PARTNERED WITH PBS39WLVT AND THE GREATER LEHIGH VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOR THIS SPECIAL EVENT. UNDERSTANDABLY MOST OF THIS YEAR'S ATTENTION IS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE. BUT THE PEOPLE TRUMP OR CLINTON WILL BE WORKING WITH ON CAPITOL HILL PLAY A VERY IMPORTANT ROLE IN GUIDING OUR NATION OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. WITH THE MORNING CALL AND THEMORNINGCALL.COM, WE BELIEVE IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP LEHIGH VALLEY VOTERS UP TO DATE. REMEMBER TO VOTE ON NOVEMBER 8 AND ENJOY THE DEBATE. >>> (MUSIC) WELCOME, EVERYONE, TO THE PUBLIC MEDIA CENTER AT PBS39 IN SOUTH BETHLEHEM AND OUR 15TH DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE. IT'S A LIVELY DISCUSSION ON ISSUES VITAL TO OUR COMMUNITY. WE ARE JOINED IN THE STUDIO BY CANDIDATES RICK DAUGHERTY, CHARLIE DENT, AND PAUL RIZZO. LATER THE CANDIDATES WILL GET A CHANCE TO QUESTION EACH OTHER AND WE INVITE OUR VIEWERS AT HOME AND IN OUR LIVE STUDIO AUDIENCE TO JOIN THE CONVERSATION ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER AND AT PBS39 CHANNEL USING THE HASHTAG ELECTION LV. LET'S LEARN ABOUT EACH CANDIDATE. >>> RICK DAUGHERTY IS 55 YEARS OLD. HE IS SINGLE AND HAS THREE CHILDREN. BORN IN ALLANTOWN HE CURRENTLY LIVED IN ROWHILL TOWNSHIP. RICK GRADUATED IN 1982 WITH A BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE. HE WORKED FOR FORMER CONGRESSMAN PAUL MCHALE AND WAS A FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE LEHIGH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. HE SERVES AS THE DIRECTOR OF A LOCAL SENIOR CENTER. >>> REPUBLICAN INCUMBENT CHARLIE DENT IS 56 YEARS OLD. HE IS MARRIED TO HIS WIFE PAMELA. THEY HAVE THREE CHILDREN AND CURRENTLY RESIDE IN HIS HOMETOWN OF ALLANTOWN. HE GRADUATED FROM PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY WITH A BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS IN 1982. HE EARNED HIS MASTERS IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION FROM LEHIGH UNIVERSITY IN 1993. DENT SERVED EIGHT YEARS IN THE PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SIX YEARS IN THE STATE SENATE BEFORE WINNING ELECTION TO THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN 2004. HE SERVED ON THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPIATION AND SUBCOMMITTEES ON MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS AND CHAIRMAN ON THE HOUSE COMMITTEE OF ETHICS. >>> PAUL RIZZO IS 42 YEARS OLD AND MARRIED TO HIS WIFE DORIS. THEY HAVE TWO CHILDREN. HE IS IN HANOVER TOWNSHIP. HE ATTENDED A TECHNICAL INSTITUTE AND WORKED IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS FOR 20 YEARS. HE JOINED THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY IN 2012. HE SERVED AS CHAIRMAN OF THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY IN 2014 AND 2015. PAUL RIZZO IS CURRENTLY A CENTRAL TECHNICIAN AT IRONTOWN COMPANY. >>> I'LL BEGIN THE QUESTION AND ANSWER PORTION WITH ONE QUESTION FOR ALL THREE CANDIDATES. EACH HAS ONE MINUTE TO RESPOND. SO WHO ARE YOU SUPPORTING IN THE RACE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? WHY AND WHY NOT? AND I'D LIKE TO SEE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN. >>> I'LL GO. I'M SUPPORTING GARY JOHNSON. I BELIEVE THEY ARE THE BEST CHOICE FOR AMERICA RIGHT NOW. THEY SEEM TO REPRESENT THE VALUES I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN GOVERNMENT. >> REPORTER: CONGRESSMAN DENT? >>> UNLIKE MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHO ARE VERY DISSATISFIED, A NATION OF MORE THAN 300 MILLION PEOPLE, WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS. WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT I INTEND TO GO TO CONGRESS AND DO THE CHECK AND BALANCE AGAINST WHOEVER THE NEXT PRESIDENT IS. I WILL WORK WITH THE NEXT PRESIDENT REGARDLESS OF PARTY AND I'LL WORK IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER. IF THEY'RE ON THE WRONG TRACK I'LL STAND UP AND OPPOSE THEM AS WELL. REGARDLESS OF THE PARTY. THAT'S WHERE I STAND. >> REPORTER: WILL YOU SHARE WHO YOU PLAN TO SUPPORT? >> I MIGHT WRITE SOMEONE IN. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHO THAT MIGHT BE. I'VE THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT IT AND BOB GATES, CONDOLEEZZA RICE, JOHN KASICH WHO I SUPPORTED IN THE PRIMARY. PRESIDENT OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY. AND FORMER GOVERNOR OF INDIANA ALL IMPECCABLE INDIVIDUALS AND ALL WORTHY OF SUPPORT. >>> MR. RICK DAUGHERTY? >> I'M VOTING FOR CLINTON AND I WILL BE AN INDEPENDENT VOICE IN WASHINGTON. THE REASON I'M RUNNING FOR CONGRESS IS BECAUSE I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT OUR TRADE POLICIES. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH CLINTON TO REVERSE THE TRADE POLICIES WE HAVE IN PLACE NOW TO RENEGOTIATE NAFTA AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE A NATIONAL POLICY THAT BENEFITS US AND BENEFITS OUR WORKERS FIRST. >> REPORTER: THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESPONSES. >>> LET'S BEGIN THE TRADITIONAL SEGMENT OF THE DEBATE. OUR PANELISTS ARE LAURA OLSON AND CHRISTOPHER BORICK, A PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE. LAURA AND CHRIS WILL START A QUESTION. START WITH A QUESTION FOR ONE CANDIDATE BUT ALLOW TIME FOR THE OTHERS TO ANSWER AS WELL. A CONVERSATION IS ENCOURAGED AND WILL ROTATE. EACH CANDIDATE WILL HAVE ONE MINUTE TO RESPOND. LAURA, LET'S START WITH THE QUESTION FOR MR. DENT. >>> THIS IS FOREIGN PAUL ISSY. HOW WOULD YOU -- POLICY. HOW WOULD YOU EVALUATE HAS THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PERFORMED IN COMBATTING ISIS AND WHAT ROLE SHOULD CONGRESS PLAY IN THE ONGOING FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM? >> FOREIGN POLICY IS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD. I BELIEVE MANY OF OUR FRIENDS AND ALLIES BELIEVE AMERICA RETRENCHED WHETHER IT'S IN EUROPE OR MIDDLE EAST OR PACIFIC. VACUU VACUUMS ARE CREATED AND FILLED BY ACTORS WHO DON'T SHARE OUR INTEREST OR VALUES. IT'S FILLED WITH COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA AND IRAN AND WE SEE WHAT THAT HAS LED TO IN SYRIA. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS DEAD. FOREIGN POLICY THAT I THINK WE NEED TO -- NEED IS ONE WHERE AMERICA EMBRACES ITS ALLIES. MAKE SURE THE ALLIES UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE AND KNOW WE HAVE THEIR INTERESTS AND THEY HAVE OURS AND OUR ENEMIES AND ADVER SARIES -- ADVER SARIES UNDERSTAND THAT AMERICAN IS STILL CREDIBLE. WE SEE AN AGGRESSIVE CHINA, ISIS. I WOULD SAY WE HAVE TO CREATE SAFE ZONES. WE HAVE TO CREATE SAFE ZONES TO MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE OF SYRIA HAVE A SPACE TO LIVE IN SAFETY WHICH THEY DON'T NOW. >>> WE NEED TO WRAP UP AND GO TO MR. RICK DAUGHERTY NOW. >> ISIS IS IN THE MIDDLE OF TURMOIL AND I COMMEND THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION FOR DELIVERING $3.8 BILLION TO ISRAEL. THEY'RE OUR STRONGEST ALLY IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND HAS TO REMAIN STRONG. CHINA IS A GROWING THREAT AND EVEN MORE SERIOUS THAN ISIS. THE REASON CHINA IS AS STRONG AS IT IS BECAUSE OF OUR DISASTER TRADE POLICY. EVERY TIME YOU PICK UP SOMETHING MADE IN CHINA, PART OF THAT IS GOING TO CHINA'S MILITARY. I THINK TO BE A LEADER AND TO LOOK TO THE FUTURE AND TO IDENTIFY SERIOUS THREATS THAT ARE COMING AROUND THE CORNER IS WHERE CONGRESS NEEDS TO DO BETTER AND IN MY VIEW THE THREAT COMING FROM CHINA IS THE MOST SERIOUS THREAT NOW AND IN THE NEAR FUTURE. >>> MR. PAUL RIZZO? >> I BELIEVE OUR FOREIGN POLICY IS A DISASTER. WE'RE ARMING PEOPLE WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO THEY ARE. THE MIDDLE EAST IS MIRED IN TURMOIL AND WE HAVE A REFUGEE CRISIS ON OUR HANDS. WE NEED TO BASICALLY CREATE SAFE ZONES AND PUT PRESSURE ON MIDDLE EAST COUNTRIES TO TAKE IN THE REFUGEES AND ACTUALLY END THE WARS THAT ARE GOING ON OVER THERE. I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR DISENGAGEMENT FROM THE MIDDLE AGE. I THINK WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED TOO LONG WITH TOO MANY WARS AND I THINK IT NEEDS TO END. >>> CHRIS, YOUR QUESTION IS FOR MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> GOOD EVENING. OF ALL INSTITUTIONS OF GOVERNMENT, THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS HIT THE LOWEST PUBLIC APPROVAL RATINGS. WHAT IF ANYTHING CAN YOU DO TO IMPROVE THE PUBLIC STANDING OF CONGRESS IF ELECTED TO OFFICE ON NOVEMBER 8? >> I THINK THE GENERAL PUBLIC IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT THEY SEE SOLUTIONS ARE SOMETIMES FAIRLY SIMPLE AND YET CONGRESS SEEMS TO STUMBLE OVER ITS OWN FEET. THERE WAS A REPORT IN AUGUST THAT SAID TO HOLD FEDERAL SPENDING AT 2% INCREASES EACH YEAR WHICH IS WHERE INFLATION IS AT THIS POINT, THOUGH IT'S AN INCREASE WITHOUT ANY ADDITIONAL TAX INCREASES WOULD ELIMINATE THE DEFICIT IN EIGHT YEARS. SOCIAL SECURITY IF IF THE WAGE TAX WAS ELIMINATED SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE FOR MEDICARE, SOCIAL SECURITY IS SOLVENT FOR ANOTHER 30 YEARS. TRADE POLICY AGAIN IS ANOTHER TOPIC I'LL COME BACK TO. THEN NAFTA IS AROUND FOR 20 YEARS AND SOMEBODY IN MOKES CO -- MEXICO IS MAKING $8 IN WAGES, IT DOESN'T HELP US OR THE MEXICANS. THEY'RE MYSTIFIED WHY CONGRESS CANNOT TACKLE SOME OF THESE SOLUTIONS THAT WOULD HAVE MAJOR POSITIVE IMPLICATIONS FOR US. >>> MR. PAUL RIZZO? >> I BELIEVE CONGRESS'S APPROVAL RATING IS WARRANTED. 15%. I'M A REFLECTION OF THIS BECAUSE I'M RUNNING BECAUSE I'M UPSET WITH THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING IN GOVERNMENT. I THINK THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE NOT REPRESENTED WELL. AND I THINK WE NEED TO GET BACK TO THE BASICS. WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE COUNTRY IS LAW MAKERS ARE PASSING BILLS THAT DON'T NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND I'D LIKE TO PUT AN END TO THAT. I THINK THAT THERE'S TOO MUCH CORRUPTION IN WASHINGTON AND WE NEED TO GET BACK TO BASICS. TWO-PARTY SYSTEM LET US DOWN. >>> CONGRESSMAN DENT? >> I THINK WE NEED PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON WHO HAVE THE CAPACITY TO FIND SOLUTIONS AND A LOT OF PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON ARE VERY GOOD AT TELLING YOU WHAT THEY WILL NEVER DO. WE NEED PEOPLE WITH THE CAPACITY TO GET THE YES. MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION. I'M OFTEN -- MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES WILL SAY THERE ARE THREE TYPES OF PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON. REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, AND APPROPERATORS. BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY COMMITTEE THAT HAS TO PUT TOGETHER A PRODUCT EVERY YEAR AND PASS IT INTO LAW. AND JUST TWO WEEKS AGO MY LEGISLATION ON MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND THE VA APPROPRIATIONS BILL WAS ENACTED INTO LAW. THE FIRST TIME AN APPROPIATION BILL IS PASSED INTO LAW SINCE 2009. I'D LIKE TO BECOME PART OF THE SOLUTION. THAT SAME WEEK I HAD LEGISLATION THAT PASSED THE HOUSE WITH SYNTHETIC DRUGS AND POISONING SO MANY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. I'VE BEEN WORKING TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION AND NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM. >>> LAURA, YOUR SECOND QUESTION STARTS WITH MR. PAUL RIZZO. >>> CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE WAYS THAT YOU WOULD EVALUATE INTERNATIONAL TRADE DEALS AND WITH THE PACIFIC TRADE DEAL STILL PENDING, WHAT SPECIFIC WAYS DO YOU THINK IT WOULD HELP OR HURT THE 15TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT? >> I THINK IT WOULD HURT. I THINK A LOT OF THE TRADE DEALS WE ENTERED INTO HAVE NOT SERVED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WELL. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE TPP ACTUALLY DOES IS GIVE CORPORATIONS THE RIGHT TO SUE SOVEREIGN NATIONS AND THAT INFRINGES ON THE AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY. I'M AGAINST IT. SOME OF THE OTHER REASONS ARE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT IS IN THE BILL. IT'S BEEN FAST TRACKED. NEGOTIATING IT IN SECRET AND WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S GOING TO BE NECESSARILY GOOD FOR US. WE CAN LOOK TO SOME OF THE OTHER TRADE DEALS THAT PASSED IN THE -- BEFORE LIKE NAFTA AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN GOOD FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. WE LOST OVER 50,000 MANUFACTURING COMPANIES WITH NAFTA. THEY SAY WE GAIN JOBS BUT THE JOBS WE GAINED WERE PROBABLY NOT THE QUALITY JOBS THAT WE LOST. SO THAT'S MY POSITION ON THAT. >>> MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> ACCORDING TO THE TRADE COMMISSION, THAT'S US, ALL FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS WE HAVE CURRENTLY ARE RUNNING $180 BILLION TRADE DEFICIT. TWO YEARS INTO THAT OUR TRADE DEFICIT WITH SOUTH CAROLINA WENT UP 50%. -- SOUTH KOREA WENT UP 50%. WE GOT TOGETHER WITH OTHER NATIONS POST WORLD WAR II AND SET UP TRADE POLICIES WORKING WELL. WHEN NAFTA CAME, WE HOOKED IN A FREE TRADE AGREEMENT WITH MEXICO. MEXICO IS IN CHAOS. DRUGS ARE COMING INTO MEXICO BECAUSE OF NAFTA. MUCH MORE FREELY THAN THEY WERE. 27 YEARS INTO THAT AGREEMENT, MEXICAN WORKERS ARE STILL PAID ABYSMAL WAGES. CHINA IS THE BIGGEST DISASTER AND WE ALLOWED THEM TO GET MOST FAVORITE NATION STATUS TRADE ORGANIZATION. OUR TRADE DEFICITS IN 1994 WERE 100 BILLION. WENT UP TO 800 BILLION. NOW THEY ARE 500 BILLION. IT'S A DISASTER. >>> MR. DENT. >> TRADE MUST BE (INAUDIBLE) SPACED. RULES MUST BE ENFORCED. I SUPPORT FAIR TRADE. UNLIKE RICK, I HAVE A REAL DISAGREEMENT WITH HIM. HE BELIEVES AMERICA SHOULD RETREAT FROM THE STAGE AND WITHDRAW. CHINA WILL FILL THAT VOID. IF THE UNITED STATES IS NOT AT THE TABLE WRITING THE RULES AND SETTING THE STANDARDS, THE CHINESE WILL. THAT WILL BE THE WORST THING IN THE WORLD TO THE AMERICAN WORKER AND AMERICAN INDUSTRY. THIS NATION HAT 14 TRADE AGREEMENTS WITH 20 NATIONS. WE RUN A NET MANUFACTURING TRADE SURPLUS WITH THOSE NATIONS. LET'S BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT. AND RICK LIKES TO SAY THE TRADE AGREEMENTS WERE ALL BAD. BUT WE NEED OPEN MARKETS FOR AMERICAN PRODUCERS. FARMERS, SERVICE PROVIDERS. WE TEND TO DO WELL BECAUSE WE KNOCK DOWN BARRIERS FOR AMERICAN PRODUCERS. THAT'S WHY I'M BEING SUPPORTED BY MANY OF THE FARM COMMUNITIES. IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE OPEN MARKETS AND NOT RETREAT FROM THE WORLD AND LET THE CHINESE SET THE RULES AND STANDARDS TO DESIMATE AMERICAN WORKERS AND INDUSTRY. >>> CONGRESSMAN DENT, CLIMATE SCIENTISTS SAYS POLICY IF ANY WOULD YOU SUPPORT TO REDUCE GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. >> SURE. FIRST, IF THIRST THING WE CAN -- FIRST THING WE CAN DO ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS INVEST IN BASIC RESEARCH IN THE ENERGY SECTOR. NOT TRY TO COMMERCIALIZE SARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES BUT -- VARIOUS TECHNOLOGIES BUT BASIC RESEARCH. I HAVE STRONG FAITH IN MARKET PLACE THAT WE'LL SEE ALTERNATIVE AND NOBLE SOURCES DEVELOPED AT A REASONABLE COST. BUT IN THE MEANTIME WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ACCEPT THE REALITY THAT WE HAVE TO DRILL FOR GAS IN THIS COUNTRY WHICH HAS A LOWER CARBON FOOTPRINT WITH COAL AND OIL. MY OPPONENT OPPOSES HYDRAULICS. EVEN GOVERNORS -- WILL SUPPORT IT. WE ALSO NEED TO DO CROSS BENEFIT ANALYSES IN TERMS OF CLIMATE CHANGE. WHAT WILL BE THE DOMESTIC COST IN TERMS OF LOST JOBS, LOST INDUSTRY, AND WHATEVER CO2 MITIGATIONS BENEFIT THAT WILL BE REALIZED. THAT'S WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN IN THE DISCUSSIONS. BASIC RESEARCH, AND I SUPPORT ALL THESE ALTERNATIVES AND HYDRO. ALL GOOD. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SURVIVE ON THOSE ALONE. >>> MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> I BELIEVE WE SHOULD TAKE A SECOND LOOK AT NUCLEAR ENERGY AND WE HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND THAT WHENEVER WE CLOSE A FACTORY HERE WHETHER IT'S A STEEL PLANT OR ANY TYPE OF MANUFACTURING PLANT AND IT ENDS UP IN CHINA, THE LEVEL OF POLLUTION THERE IS 10 TIMES WORSE. EVEN WITH FWLOEBL WARMING BRINGING MANUFACTURING JOBS HERE WHERE THEY WOULD BE UNDER OUR ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS WOULD HAVE A HUGE BENEFIT. SO THAT WILL BE PROBABLY THE FIRST THING I WOULD LOOK TO DO. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE IF WE ALLOW CHINA TO CONTINUE TO POLLUTE AS MUCH AS IT DOES. VERY SIMPLY, CHINA CAME OUT SAYING THAT IN 10 YEARS THEY'RE GOING TO BEGIN TO SLOW DOWN HOW MUCH THEY'RE POLLUTING. AT THAT POINT THEY'LL START TO THINK ABOUT IT. SOMEHOW THAT WAS A MAJOR ACCORD AND I THINK IT WAS NOTHING AT AL ALL. >> WOW WOULD SUPPORT THE PARA-SUPPORT? >> THE PART THAT INCLUDES CHINA IS WORTHLESS. THAT'S MY POINT, CHRIS. THAT AS THE NUMBER ONE POLLUTEER IN THE WORLD AT THIS POINT, CHINA IS SAYING IN 10 YEARS IT WILL CONSIDER TRYING TO CUT BACK REALLY DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING. MY DISAPPOINTMENT IS HOW THAT SEEMS TO BE PUT FORTH AS A GREAT BREAK THROUGH AND I DON'T THINK IT WAS REALLY ANYTHING AT ALL. >>> MR. PAUL RIZZO? >> BEING A GOOD STEWARD OF THE ENVIRONMENT IS VERY IMPORTANT. I BELIEVE IN IT. I TRY TO LIVE THAT WAY MYSELF. BUT WHEN WE -- THESE GUYS ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW IT EFFECTS THE ECONOMY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT HISTORICALLY HAPPENED. I THINK IT WAS IN THE 1990S WE HAD THE PROTOCOL THAT WE NEVER SIGNED BUT ALL THE WESTERN POWERS SIGNED ON FOR ALL THE WESTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. THE ASIAN COUNTRIES LIKE CHINA AND SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTRIES DID NOT SIGN ON TO THESE BINDING TARGETS AND THAT GAVE THEM AN UNFAIR TRADE ADVANTAGE. SO WE NEED TO BE GOOD STEWARDS AND TAKE CARE OF THE ENVIRONMENT BUT IT HAS TO BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD. SO. >>> LAURA, YOUR NEXT QUESTION WILL BE OUR LAST QUESTION FOR THIS SEG MENT. >>> THE OBAMACARE HEALTH CARE LAW HIT SOME SNAGS. WHAT CHANGES TO THAT LAW IF ANY WOULD YOU SUPPORT IF ELECTED? MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IS THE PUBLIC UTILITY MODEL FOR HEALTH CARE. GOVERNMENT CREATES THE BOX. THEN THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS WHAT DELIVERS THE SERVICE. THE DIFFERENCE OBVIOUSLY IS MOST OF US OR ALL OF US REALIZE WE NEED ELECTRICITY BUT -- THAT'S WHAT MAKES THE SYSTEM WORK. NOT ALL OF US REALIZE WE NEED HEALTH CARE AND ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO ARE THE HEALTHIEST AMONG US PROBABLY DON'T THINK WE DO. PART OF WHAT I'M LOOKING AT AS THIS LAW EVOLVES IS AS THERE IS GREATER PARTICIPATION FROM MORE PEOPLE, HEALTHIER PEOPLE, YOUNGER PEOPLE, I BELIEVE THAT IT BILL BEGIN TO WORK ITSELF OUT. THERE ARE BUGS IN THE SYSTEM. I SUPPORT EXTENDING THE BAN ON THE MEDICAL DEVICE TAX. I ALSO SUPPORT RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS BEING ABLE TO NOT BE FORCED TO COVER THINGS THEY OBJECT TO. BUT THE LAW ITSELF I THINK IS A MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. >>> MR. PAUL RIZZO. >> AS FAR AS THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT I THINK THAT IT'S BEEN A FAILURE. AND I CAN SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE. I ACTUALLY HAD TO JOIN IT FOR A FEW MONTHS WHEN I WAS LAID OFF A FEW YEARS BACK AND I DIDN'T THINK THAT THE DEDUCTIBLES OR THE COVERAGE WAS THAT GOOD MYSELF. $1200 A MONTH RATE FOR MY FAMILY. THAT BEING SAID, I THINK THE GOVERNMENT HAS A LOT OF WELL INTENTIONED PROGRAMS THAT ULTIMATELY FAIL US. SO MY VIEW IS I THINK THAT WE SHOULD ACTUALLY GO BACK TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR. IF WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE STUFF THAT HAPPENS AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, LIKE LASIK EYE SURGERY, THE MARKET COMPETES AND IT MAKES THE PRICES LOWER. I'M ALL FOR PRIVATE SECTOR ENHEALTH CARE. >> GET RID OF THE OBAMACARE LAW ENTIRELY? >> YES. I WOULD BE AN ADVOCATE FOR THAT. >>> MR. DENT? >> WOW. WHAT TO SAY HERE. ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT THE LAW INCREASED COSTS, RAISED TAXES, STIFLED INNOVATION, BEYOND THAT IT'S WORKING JUST FINE. IN FACT THE ACTUARIES ARE TELLING US THIS LAW IS TWO YEARS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE IN TERMS OF COLLAPSING. ONE THIRD OF THE COUNTRIES IN THIS COUNTRY HAVE ONLY ONE INSURANCE PROVIDER ON THE EXCHANGE. SO WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO TO FIX THIS? WE'LL HAVE TO REPLACE THIS LAW. OBVIOUSLY I SUPPORT HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABLE AND WANT YOUNG PEOPLE TO STAY ON THEIR PARENT'S COVERAGES AND WOULD CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE SURE NO ONE WITH A PREEXISTING CONDITION WOULD BE EXCLUDED. MAKE SURE THEY CAN GET INSURANCE AND WE NEED MEDICAL RELIABILITY REFORM. PRIEVEIUMS ARE PRE -- PREMIUMS ARE SKY ROCKETING FOR PEOPLE. THIS LAW IS FAILING. IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE TWO YEARS AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. >>> NOW WE TURN TO OUR AUDIENCE FOR QUESTIONS. WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CAMPUS HERE ON REPUBLICANS AND FROM THE YOUNG DEMOCRATS. EACH WILL ASK ONE QUESTION OF THE CANDIDATES. KATE RAIL WILL GO FIRST FROM THE REPUBLICANS. EACH CANDIDATE HAS 45 SECONDS TO RESPOND. MR. RICK DAUGHERTY GETS THE FIRST QUESTION. >>> GOOD EVENING. AS A COLLEGE STUDENT WHO WILL GRADUATE IN MAY, INCREASING COLLEGE DEBT IS AN ISSUE REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME AND MY PEERS. AS GREAT AS FREE COLLEGE SOUNDS I WAS WONDERING WHAT COLLEGE COULD ACTUALLY DO TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE BURDEN ON RECENT GRADUATES FROM COLLEGE. >>> FIRST OF ALL I THINK COLLEGE SHOULD BE ABLE TO RENEGOTIATE THEIR DEBT. I THINK THE PERCENTAGE WHICH IS 6% AT THIS TIME IS TOO HIGH. I BELIEVE THAT IN TERMS OF FREE COLLEGE EDUCATION IT SHOULD BEGIN WITH COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND FOR MOST OF THE FOUR YEAR INSTITUTIONS IN LEHIGH VALLEY, THE CREDITS CAN BE TRANSFERRED 100% TO THE 4-YEAR SCHOOL. IT'S A GREAT WAY TO TEST THE WATERS TO SEWHAT YOUR INTEREST -- SEE WHAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN AND FIND A CAREER PATH. BUT I AGREE WITH YOU. THERE HAS TO BE BETTER OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS TO GET AN EDUCATION AT A LOWER PRICE. ON THE OTHER END OF IT, YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO FIND A JOB IN YOUR FIELD THAT PAYS WELL. WHEN WE WERE IN SCHOOL WE GOT DEBT. BUT THEN WE FOUND EMPLOYMENT. I FOUND EMPLOYMENT THREE WEEKS AFTER I GRADUATED. I WAS ABLE TO PAY THAT OFF RATHER QUICKLY. THAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF IT. WHEN MANUFACTURING JOBS ARE SENT OVER SEAS IT NOT ONLY EFFECTS WORKERS BUT EVERYBODY. THEIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS JUST BUILT A PLANT IN CHINA. AND SO THEY NO LONGER NEED SUPERVISORS HERE. THEY NEED SUPERVISORS IN CHINA. WE NEED TO BRING ALL THE JOBS BACK SO EVERYBODY, HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE GRADUATES GET A JOB. >>> MR. DENT. >> HIGHER EDUCATION COSTS OBVIOUSLY IS A BIG ISSUE FOR EVERYBODY. STUDENTS AND FAMILIES ALIKE. I'M ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND LABOR HEALTH AND JUST ENACTING THE LAW LAST YEAR. INCREASE IN THE TELEGRANTS TO $5900. THAT HELPS BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION. IT'S EXPLODING. MANY SAY PEL GRANTS WILL FUEL HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. RICK SAID FREE COMMUNITY COLLEGE. I DISAGREE. SURE. THERE IS NOTHING FREE. BUT THE POINT IS ON FREE COMMUNITY COLLEGE WHY SHOULD MY CHILDREN GET FREE COMMUNITY COLLEGE. THEY DON'T NEED IT. IT SHOULD BE NEED BASED. STUDENTS WITH NEEDS SHOULD BE GIVEN THE PRIORITY. MR. RIZZO WENT TO TECHNICAL SCHOOL. WE HAVE TO FOCUS RESOURCES TOO AND TRY TO DIRECT PEOPLE INTO THOSE KINDS OF CAREERS. NOT IN THE POST -- WE HAVE A LOT OF EXCELLENT PROGRAMS. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH VETERANS AND OTHER GROUPS TO FIND FUNDING FOR MANY TECHNICAL TRAINING PROGRAMS SO IF PEOPLE DO GO INTO THAT WORK, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT. I FEEL VERY GOOD ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE DONE ON OUR COMMITTEE AND VETERANS SIDE OF THE HOUSE AS WELL. BOTTOM LINE IS WE WANT PEOPLE EDUCATED TO FIND JOBS AND MAKE IT OUT. TOO MANY ARE NOT FINDING SUSTAINABLE WORK. >>> MR. RIZZO. >> OKAY. AS FAR AS STUDENT DEBT, JUST THE NUMBERS ON IT IS WE HAVE $1.4 TRILLION OF STUDENT DEBT IN THIS COUNTR COUNTRY. 40 MILLION AMERICANS THAT ACTUALLY OWE STUDENT LOANS. I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BUBBLE WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW. HOW DO WE ADDRESS IT? SOME OF THE ISSUES -- SOME OF THE SOLUTIONS WE COULD DO IS HELP WITH GETTING JOBS FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE -- HAVE GRADUATED. BUT THE UNDERLYING ISSUE IS PRETTY MUCH THAT GOVERNMENT GOT INVOLVED. HELPED BUILD THE STUDENT BUBBLE. NOW WE HAVE A HUMONGOUS PROBLEM ON OUR HANDS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE AREN'T TAKINGABOUT -- TALKING ABOUT IS STUDENTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DEFAULT ON THEIR DEBT. THIS IS A PROBLEM ALSO. THEY'RE LADEN WITH THIS DEBT FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE. THERE NEEDS TO BE REFORM TO DEFAULT OR HAVE SOME SORT OF NEGOTIATION TO LOWER THE DEBT. >>> NOW SENIOR JAKE SALARIO THE YOUNG DEMOCRATS GO. EACH CANDIDATE HAS 45 SECONDS TO RESPOND. MR. DENT WILL RECEIVE THE FIRST QUESTION. >>> THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. UNITED STATES HAS THE HIGHEST CORPORATE TAX RATE AT 35%. BUZZ OF OUR HIGHERERACY -- BECAUSE OF OUR HIGHER RATES, AVOID THE DOMESTIC TAX BURDEN IS COMMON AMONG CORPORATIONS. WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO RAISE TAX REVENUE AND WHY? LOWER THE CORPORATE TAX RATE OR MAINTAIN LOW RATE AND IMPLEMENT HARSHER PENALTIES FROM MOVEMENT ABROAD. >>> GREAT QUESTION. ONE WE HAVE TO LOWER THE CORPORATE RATE AT 35%. IT'S NOT COMPETITIVE. THAT'S WHAT IS DRIVING SOME OF THESE INVERSIONS. I WOULD ALSO TELL YOU TOO THAT UNITED STATES NEEDS TO TAX AMERICAN HEAD KWRTER COMPANIES THE WAY OUR COMPETITORS DO. IF AN AMERICAN COMPANY EARNS A PROFIT IN IRELAND OR ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, WE HAVE TO PAY THE LOCAL TAX IN IRELAND. 12 AND A HALF PERCENT. IF THE MONEY IS RETURNED TO THE UNITED STATES, IT'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 12% AND 35%. GERMAN COMPANIES TAKE THEIR PROFIT HOME. WE SHOULD LOWER THE RATE AND MOVE TO A TERRITORIAL SYSTEM ON TAXATION TO BE LIKE THE REST OF THE WORLD AND A LOT OF THE INVERSIONS WILL STOP. A LOT OF AMERICAN COMPANIES FIND IT EASIER TO INVEST IN AMERICA AS A FOREIGN HEAD KWRTER COMPANY HAN -- HEAD QUARTER COMPANY THAN AMERICAN HEAD QUARTER COMPANY. >>> THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE NOTED 20% PAID ZERO IN TAXES. AND THE CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE NOTED THE AVERAGE TAX RATES THAT OUR COMPANIES PAY IS 27.1%. OTHER NATIONS PAY 27%. SO THE STATISTIC IS THERE BUT WE HAVE SO MANY LOOP HOLES IN OUR TAX SYSTEM AND MANY PEOPLE, SOME RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, DON'T PAY ANYTHING. SO BEFORE WE DO ANYTHING WITH THE INVERSION AND GIVING CORPORATIONS ANOTHER BREAK, WE NEED TO CUT OUT THE LOOP HOLES AND MAKE SURE CORPORATIONS ARE PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. IN 1952, CORPORATIONS PAID 37% OF THE REVENUE. NOW IT'S ONLY 10%. SO THE STATISTIC IS ONE THING BUT THE REALITY IS SOMETHING ELSE. >>> I THINK THE WAY TO GROW THE ECONOMY AND ACTUALLY CREATE JOBS IS TO GET RID OF THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX. TO BE HONEST I KNOW THAT WHAT RICK IS SAYING AS FAR AS BIG COMPANIES ARE BASICALLY USING LOOPHOLES TO NOT PAY CORPORATE INCOME TAX. THAT'S PROBABLY TRUE. MOST JOBS COME FROM SMALL BUSINESSES SO IF WE HAVE SMALL MANUFACTURING THAT DIDN'T PAY ANY CORPORATE INCOME TAX OR A GREATER DEGREE LESS, THAT WOULD STIMULATE THE JOB GROWTH AND GET SOME PEOPLE THAT GRADUATED SCHOOLS BACK INTO THE WORK FORCE AND PAYING DOWN SOME OF THE STUDENT DEBT. WE NEED TO STIMULATE JOBS HERE. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I REALLY BELIEVE TO DO IT. >>> WE STAY WITH OUR AUDIENCE FOR ONE QUESTION FROM GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATOR AT THE GREATER LEHIGH VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE COMMERCE. >>> GOOD EVENING. A NEW U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR FEDERAL MANDATE WILL CHANGE OVERTIME REGULATIONS THAT WILL NEGATIVELY EFFECT OUR MEMBERS. OUR SMALL BUSINESSES, INSTITUTES OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND NONPROFITS. AS OF DECEMBER 1, THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT WILL DOUBLE THE MINIMUM SALARY THRESHOLD FOR OVERTIME FROM 24,000 TO ALMOST 48,000. COMPLYING WITH THIS NEW MANDATE IS NOT AN OPTION TO MANY MEMBERS. IT WILL RESULT IN LESS PAID HOURS AND JOB LOSS. I ASK THAT YOU PLEASE SHARE WITH THE VIEWERS YOUR STANCE ON THIS NEW MANDATE AND IF YOU WOULD DO ANYTHING TO DELAY OR CHANGE THE THRESHOLD AMOUNT. >>> MR. RIZZO? >> I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE QUESTION BUT YOU'RE SAYING THE GOVERNMENT IS MANDATING YOU NEED TO PAY MORE OVERTIME TO PEOPLE FOR WORKING MORE HOURS? OR? >> NO. THEY'RE INCREASING THE THRESHOLD FROM 24,000 TO 48,000. THE MINIMUM. >> OKAY. SO YOU WOULD MAKE OVER THAT FOR THE MINIMUM. I DON'T UNDERSTAND. >> YOU'RE SALARIED OVER THAT. >> NO. I THINK THAT'S WRONG. BECAUSE IF YOUR SALARY, YOU KNOW, I WAS A SALARY EMPLOYEE FOR A UNG LATIME. -- A LONG TIME. I ENDED UP WORKING A LOT OF HOURS AND DIDN'T GET PAID FOR IT. SO I WOULD BE PROBABLY AGAINST THAT THEN. >>> NEXT WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. DENT. >> I VOTE TO DELAY THIS VERY BURDENSOME MANDATE. I ASKED POINT BLANK, I KNOW YOU DON'T CARE HOW THIS WILL EFFECT SMALL BUSINESSES BUT MAYBE YOU WILL CARE HOW THIS EFFECTS LOCAL NON-PROFITS. LIKE THE ALLANTOWN YMCA TOLD ME IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE THIS TYPE OF A MANDATE. IT'S GOING TO DISRUPT HOW THEY HAVE TO OPERATE. PEOPLE WILL LOSE HOURS. PEOPLE POTENTIALLY LOSE JOBS. THE LGBT CENTER IN ALLANTOWN SAID TO ME, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HIRE A DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BECAUSE OF THIS MANDATE. I CAN GO ON AND ON. ALLAN JENNINGS TOLD ME THIS -- THIS -- IN THE PAPERS SAID THIS IS GOING TO COST HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO HIS ORGANIZATION THAT IS DEDICATED TO ALLEVIATING POVERTY. SO THIS VERY -- THIS PROPOSAL IS COMPLETELY DETACHED FROM REALITY. SIMPLY DELAY IT OR -- >> TIME IS UP. SORRY. THANK YOU. >> I'D SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL 100%. I WORK AT NON-PROFIT. WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS SOMEBODY MAKING $24,000 A YEAR COULD BE ASKED TO WORK 80 HOURS A WEEK AND THEY'RE STUCK. FOR SOMEBODY TO HAVE THAT AMOUNT OF PRESSURE PUT ON THEM AND THAT AMOUNT OF WORK LOAD AND SAY THEY'RE EVEN ONLY GETTING $48,000 I THINK IS COMPLETELY FAIR FOR THE WORKER AND IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE CHANGE AND I SUPPORT IT. >>> NOW IT'S TIME FOR OUR CANDIDATES TO QUESTION EACH OTHER. WE'D LIKE QUESTIONS HERE, NOT SPEECHES. ANSWERS MAY BE UP TO 45 SECONDS. WE'LL BEGIN WITH MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. YOU WILL ASK DENT AND THEN RIZZO. LET'S BEGIN WITH MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >>> CHARLIE, I WAS SURPRISED AT OUR DEBATE LAST WEEK WHEN YOU MENTIONED YOU SUPPORT TERM LIMITS. 12 YEARS FOR A U.S. SENATOR AND SIX YEARS FOR A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE. YOU'VE BEEN IN PUBLIC OFFICE FOR 25 YEARS. WHEN WOULD A TERM LIMIT KICK IN FOR YOU? >> I WOULD SUPPORT A TERM LIMIT. I THINK IT WOULD DO A REASON OF POLICY AND SUPPORT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL. >>> MR. RIZZO? >> I ABSOLUTELY 100% SUPPORT TERM LIMITS. I THINK THERE IS TOO MANY PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN IN POLITICS TOO LONG AND KOENT REPRESENT US PROPERLY. -- DON'T REPRESENT US PROPERLY. I WOULD PROBABLY BE IN OFFICE FOR ONE TERM. >>> OUR NEXT QUESTION IS FROM MR. DENT. >>> RICK, LAST TIME WE DEBATED HERE IN 2012 WE TALKED ABOUT THE HEALTH CARE LAW AND HOW IT WOULD REDUCE PREMIUMS AND CONTROL THE SPIRALING COST OF CARE. GIVEN FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON SAYS THIS IS THE CRAZIEST THING IN THE WORLD -- HIS WORDS NOT MINE AND SAID IT'S RAISING PREMIUMS. GIVEN THIS, YOU CONTINUE TO STAND BY THE HEALTH CARE LAW AND WHAT YOU CALL THE PUBLIC UTILITY MODEL DESPITE ITS ADMITTED FAILURES. >> SO PART OF WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT INITIALLY THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WITH SERIOUS ILLNESS THAT HAD NOT HAD HEALTH CARE COVERAGE BEFORE THAT GOT INVOLVED IN THE SYSTEM. AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT HAD A PROVISION TO BE ABLE TO PAY INSURANCE COMPANIES WHO ARE LOSING MONEY MORE THAN WHAT THEY TOOK IN PREMIUMS LOOKING AT -- THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. AND THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE WHICH YOU HAVE THE STRINGS TO BE ABLE TO DO COVERED THAT FUNDING AND -- >> (TALKING OVER EACH OTHER) COMPANY. >> DURING THE TRANSITION PERIOD? OH, YEAH. FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD. BECAUSE IT WAS VERY CLEAR THERE WAS A LOT OF VERY SICK PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T GET COVERAGE COMING IN. WE WERE GOING TO HELP THE INSURANCE COMPANIES GET THROUGH THIS TIME AND THEN BE ON THEIR OWN. THAT'S WHY -- >> (INTERRUPTING). >> DOES HE HAVE SIX QUESTIONS OR ONE? CAN I ANSWER? SO THE REPUBLICANS PULLED THE FUNDING. THAT'S WHY A LOT OF INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE PULLING OUT OF THE SYSTEM. >>> MR. RIZZO, YOUR RESPONSE. >> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE -- THE -- HEALTH CARE ACT WAS EVER BASED ON FUNDING. I THOUGHT IT WAS SOLD ON THE BASIS IT WOULD SUPPORT ITSELF. SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE I AGREE WITH CHARLIE FOR NOT FUNDING IT. IT HAS NOT BEEN GOOD FOR US. MORE INSURERS ARE PULLING OUT THAN GOING INTO IT. THEY'RE LOSING MONEY AND THERE IS A REASON BECAUSE THE BILL WAS FLAWED. SO WE NEED TO ACTUALLY REEVALUATE AND GIVE THIS BACK TO THE PRIVATE MARKET PLACE. >>> MR. RIZZO, YOUR QUESTION TO MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> CONGRESS HAS NEVER PASSED A BALANCED BUDGET ON EVEN CASH BASIS SINCE 2001. AND HAS NEVER TAKEN ANY ACTION -- OR SORRY. HAS -- UNDER CHARLIE'S WATCH, THE NATIONAL DEBT HAS SKY ROCKETED FROM 7.5 TRILLION TO NEARLY $20 TRILLION. WOULD EITHER OF YOU SUPPORT AS I DO A PLEDGE NEVER TO VOTE FOR AN UNBALANCED BUDGET ON A CASH BASIS OR GENERALLY EXCEPTED PRINCIPLE? >> I WOULDN'T SUPPORT THAT ESPECIALLY IN TIMES OF NATIONAL AMERICANS. YOU NEED TO -- EMERGENCY. YOU NEED TO GO IN DEBT TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER THE SITUATION MIGHT BE. THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE HAS IN PLACE THAT IF FEDERAL SPENDING IS LIMITED TO AN INCREASE AT 2% OVER THE NEXT 8 TO 10 YEARS, WITH NO INCREASE IN TAXES, THAT WE WILL GET RID OF THE DEFICIT AND THAT WOULD BE THE PATH I WOULD SUPPORT. >>> MR. DENT? >> FIRST LET ME SAY I BELIEVE WE SHOULD MOVE TOWARD A BALANCED BUDGET. I THINK A 10-YEAR WINDOW IS REALISTIC. WE'RE ACTUALLY -- I OVERSEE THAT ONE THIRD OF FEDERAL SPENDING. WE ARE SPENDING LESS TODAY THAN 2010 THROUGH 2012. THE TWO THIRDS OF SPENDING THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE APPROPIATIONS PROCESS ARE THE SO-CALLED ENTITLEMENTS OR MANDATORY SPENDING. THAT'S WHAT MEST BE DEALT WITH. THAT HAS TO BE IN A BIPARTISAN MANNER. I SPOKE SUPPORTEDLY OF THE PROPOSAL THAT WOULD ACTUALLY ESTABLISH A DEBT COMMISSION THAT WOULD ACTUALLY TAKE POSITIVE STEPS TO TRY TO REIGN IN SOME OF THE ENTITLEMENTS AND DEAL WITH REVENUE. THAT'S WHERE THE GROWTH IS. IT'S APPROPRIATE TO CUT SPENDING. IT'S NOT EASY. IT'S PAINFUL. BUT I CAN'T BALANCE THE BUDGET ON THAT ONE THIRD. WE HAVE TO GO ON THE OTHER TWO THIRDS. >>> MOVING ON TO NEXT QUESTION. MR. RICK DAUGHERTY, YOUR QUESTION. >>> FOR PAUL OR CHARLIE? >> WE'LL BEGIN WITH -- MR. DENT. >>> OKAY. CHARLIE, IN 2014 YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPONENT. YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPONENT IN THE PRIMARY OR GENERAL ELECTION. ONLY YOUR NAME WAS IN THE BALLOT. YOU SPENT A MILLION DOLLARS TO GET REELECTED. WHAT DID YOU SPEND THE MONEY ON AND WHY? >> FIRST I KNOW RICK THAT YOU'RE VERY UPSET YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO GET SUPPORT FOR YOUR CAMPAIGN FINANCIALLY. >> I HAVE PLENTY OF SUPPORT. MORE THAN I NEED. >> IT'S PROBABLY A RESULT THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING A LOT OF SUPPORT BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T BELIEVE IN YOUR CANDIDACY. >> THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. A MILLION DOLLARS WITHOUT AN OPPONEN OPPONENT. >> WE ACTUALLY SENT OUT MAIL AND HAD TO DEAL WITH A LOT OF THE MOTIONS AND SUPPORT OTHER CANDIDATES AND DO ALL KINDS OF WORK TO SUPPORT THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE CAMPAIGNS AND OTHER FOLKS. >>> MR. RIZZO? >> I'M RUNNING MY CAMPAIGN ON A SHOE STRING BUDGET. I'M PROUD OF THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. MONEY IS THE CORRUPTER OF POLITICIANS. SO -- [LAUGHS] WHAT RICK IS SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, SPENDING MONEY WISELY IS SMART. SPENT A MILLION DOLLARS, THAT'S QUITE IMPRESSIVE IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE SOMEBODY RUNNING AGAINST. I -- [LAUGHS] BUT -- YEAH. SO. THAT'S MY OPINION. >>> MR. DENT, YOU'LL HAVE THE NEXT QUESTION. >>> RICK, YOU DESCRIBED THE JOB OF CONGRESSMAN AS FOOLISH. YOU CALLED IT A FOOLISH JOB. I DON'T CONSIDER MYSELF TO BE AN IMPORTANT PERSON BUT I STRONGLY BELIEVE THE WORK IN CONGRESS IS IMPORTANT. AND INCREDIBLE HONOR AND RESPONSIBILITY AND WORK IMPACTS PEOPLE'S LIVES POSITIVELY AND NEGATIVELY. WHY DID YOU CALL THE JOB OF A CONGRESSMAN FOOLISH? >> I THINK WHAT'S FOOLISH ABOUT WHAT CONGRESSMAN DO IS SPEND OVER HALF THEIR TIME WHEN THEY GET INTO CONGRESS ON THE PHONE, BEGGING FOR CASH. >> I DON'T. >> BEGGING FOR CASH. BEGGING FOR CASH. YOU SPENT A MILLION DOLLARS WITH NO OPPONENT. SO -- TO ME -- >> WHY IS IT FOOLISH? >> YOU'RE FOCUSING ON JUST GETTING REELECTED. OVER 90% GET REELECTED. WHEN THEY STOP, IT'S AFTER THEY GET THE PENSION AFTER 10 YEARS AND CASH OUT. THERE ARE SUCH SIMPLE SOLUTIONS TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF THIS NATION AND BRING US BACK TO PROSPERITY AND YOU GUYS FUMBLE THE BALL -- THIS IS -- >> (TALKING OVER EACH OTHER). >>> LET'S MOVE ON HERE. >> [LAUGHS] I DON'T BELIEVE THE JOB OF THE CONGRESSMAN IS FOOLISH. I'M ACTUALLY TAKING IT VERY SERIOUSLY AND DOING THE BEST I CAN. I WANT TO REPRESENT THE -- THE VOTERS OF THE 15TH DISTRICT AND I THINK THAT I CAN BRING, YOU KNOW, THE REGULAR GUY PERSPECTIVE TO WHAT GOES ON. I'M THE GUY THAT HAS TO WORRY ABOUT PUTTING BREAD ON THE TABLE AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME. >>> MR. RIZZO, YOUR NEXT QUESTION. >>> SINCE THE CREATION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE IN 1913, THE FED DESTROYED BY INFLATION AND MONEY PRINTING OVER 98% OF THE VALUE OF THE DOLLAR. THE FED IS A QUASI PRIVATE BANKING CARTELL RUN BY BIG BANKS WHERE THEY CREATE NEW MONEY AND GET TO USE IT FIRST. EVERY YEAR THE PURCHASING POWER DECREASES AND HITS RETIREES THE HARDEST. WHETHER IN THE HOUSING SECTOR IN 2008 OR THE CURRENT AUTOLOAN AND STUDENT LOANS TODAY. WOULD YOU SUPPORT ABOLISHING THE FED AND COINING MONEY BACK TO CONGRESS? >> I HAVE SUPPORTED -- VOTED TO (INAUDIBLE) THE FED AND ALSO TELL YOU I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT MONETARY POLICY TOO. I BELIEVE THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS TRYING TO TAKE ON TOO MUCH. I THOUGHT THEY HANDLED THE FINANCIAL CRISIS QUITE WELL. BUT I THOUGHT THEY HAVE GONE INTO -- BRING A LOT OF MONEY. THEY HAVE GONE ON TOO LONG AND NOW TRIED TO ROLL THAT BACK. BUT THE FED HAS TWO OWLS IN ITS QUIVER. WE'RE VERY LIQUID RIGHT NOW AND HAVE VERY LOW INTEREST RATES. SO ANOTHER FINANCIAL CRISIS OR COLLAPSE, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE FED CAN DO BEYOND WHAT THEY'RE DOING NOW. I THINK WE NEED TO MOVE TO A MORE NORMAL POLICY. WE CAN'T KEEP INTEREST RATES HERE. THERE HAS TO BE REAL MOVEMENT HERE. >>> MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> I SUPPORT AN AUDIT OF THE FED. AND I DO SUPPORT HAVING THE FEDERAL RESERVE IN PLACE. I THINK THERE IS AN IMPORTANT ROLE. MY MAIN CONCERN WITH CURRENCY IS THE CURRENCY MANIPULATION THAT OTHER NATIONS DO TO US. TAIWAN, JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA, GERMANY, AND CHINA HAS MAJOR CURRENCY MANIPULATORS. AND MAKES THEIR PRODUCTS CHEAPER THAT HAS US LOSE OUR JOBS. THAT WOULD BE MY FOCUS. >> TO CORRECT THAT FIRST. I THINK THE FED IS -- MANIPULATING THE CURRENCY NOW NOW. >>> MR. RICK DAUGHERTY, YOUR NEXT QUESTION. >>> 2015 REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE U.S. CHINA ECONOMIC AND SECURITY REVIEW COMMISSION, THIS IS THE PUBLIC REPORT. THERE IS ALSO A SECURE CLASSIFIED REPORT THAT CHARLIE WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO. IT NOTED THAT WE CANNOT DEFEND AGAINST CYBERATTACKS FROM CHINA. CHINA NOW BELIEVES IT CAN WITHSTAND A NUCLEAR STRIKE AND RETALIATE. CHINA SOON WILL BE ABLE TO KNOCK OUT EVERY SATELLITE AND EVERY ORBIT. DID YOU READ THE REPORT AND HOW ARE YOU PROTECTING THE NATION? >> LET'S BEGIN WITH MR. RIZZO. >> WELL -- WHAT WE CAN DO AS FAR AS CHINA IS -- ATTACKING US? >> BECAUSE OF MY TRADE IN MY VIEW IS TO THE POINT WHERE THEY'RE NOW THREATENING US. THAT'S THE EXAMPLES THAT ARE VERY SERIOUS. >> THEY HOLD SO MANY OF OUR -- SO MUCH OF OUR DEBT. THEY CAN ACTUALLY -- THEY DON'T HAVE TO PULL THE TRIGGER ON ANYTHING EXCEPT OUR MONETARY POLICY AND THAT WOULD DO US IN EVEN QUICKER THAN A NUCLEAR STRIKE. THEY HAVE 8% OF OUR PHONE DEBT. THAT'S -- FOREIGN DEBT. THAT'S ENOUGH TO DO DAMAGE. >>> I HAVE NOT SEEN A REPORT YET THAT SAID ANY NATION COULD WITHSTAND A MAJOR NUCLEAR ASSAULT. THERE ARE NO WINNERS INCLUDING THE CHINESE. THAT'S HOW WE WANT TO REVERT. >> IT'S ONLINE. ANYBODY CAN READ IT. >> I GUARANTEE YOU THAT -- OUR NUCLEAR ARSENAL WOULD DO DAMAGE ANYWHERE. IF IT WERE HEAVEN FORBID EVER RELEASED. I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WOULD BE KILLED. THAT SAID, CYBER-SECURITY IS A VERY REAL ISSUE. IN FACT IT'S BEEN BROUGHT OUT BECAUSE ONE OF OUR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IS VERY LAX IN TERMS OF HER OWN E-MAIL SECURITY. OBVIOUSLY. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO MOVE GOVERNMENT WIDE AND MAKE SURE THE PRIVATE SECTOR FEELS COMFORTABLE SHARING INFORMATION WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND SHARE THREAT INFORMATION WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR. MOST OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS OWNED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR. NOT BY THE GOVERNMENT. TELECOMMUNICATIONS, ENERGY. >> TIME IS UP. >> THAT WAS QUICK. >>> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT QUESTION FROM MR. DENT. >> RICK, LAST WEEK'S DEBATE YOU SAID DIRECTING RESOURCES TO OUR COMMUNITY WOULD BE ONE OF YOUR LOWEST PRIORITIES. THE APPROPIATIONS LAW THAT RECENTLY BECAME LAW INCLUDED SECURITY PERIMETER FENCE AROUND THE GAP AND CENTER IN THE CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. MANY BASES ARE TARGETS FOR ATTACK. ALSO HELPED SECURITY FUNDING FOR 12 WHICH IS RIGHT OUTSIDE THIS (INAUDIBLE). ALSO IMPROVEMENTS AND MANY FOR THE BRIDGE OF AMERICA PARKWAY IN ALLANTOWN. WHY IS IT NOT YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY? WHY WOULD YOU THINK IT'S NOT IMPORTANT FOR A CONGRESSMAN TO ADVOCATE FOR HIS DISTRICT? >> IT'S A LOWER PRIORITY. MY REASON FOR GOING TO CONGRESS IS TO TRADE POLICY. FAST TRACK LEGISLATION PASSED BY ONE VOTE. CONGRESS IS EVENLY DIVIDED ON TRADE. BOTH PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES, DISASTROUS TRADE POLICIES. THE QUESTION WOULD -- >> THE QUESTION WAS -- >> WHAT I'M SAYING IS -- THE QUESTION IS ABOUT PRIORITIES. SO I WOULD LIKE TO -- >> (TALKING OVER EACH OTHER). >> I'M TRYING TO GIVE AN ANSWER. CAN I GIVE AN ANSWER? HE ASKED ABOUT 50 QUESTIONS. MY ANSWER IS -- I'M GOING TO LOOK TO BRING PROJECTS BACK BUT I'M NOT LOOKING TO MAKE THIS A CAREER OR HAVE RIBBON CUTTINGS AND GET MY NAME IN THE PAPERS FOR 12 YEARS. >> THAT'S ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO (INAUDIBLE). >> IT'S A LOWER PRIORITY. THAT'S MY POINT. >>> MR. RIZZO? >> IT'S AN INTERESTING ONE. I THINK ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS IS THE MONEY WE SENT TO WASHINGTON AND NEVER SEEM TO GET BACK AS MUCH AS WE SEND TO WASHINGTON. AS FAR AS WITH THE ROADS, CHARLIE JUST BROUGHT UP, THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND. 25% ALLOCATED TO OTHER PROJECTS WITH NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ROAD -- THE -- SO. I WOULD SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE OBVIOUSLY WANT TO FUND THAT STUFF THROUGH THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT. ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, LIKE THAT. WE NEED TO BE GOOD STEWARDS WITH THE MONEY AND MAKE SURE IT'S SPENT APPROPRIATELY. >>> THAT WAS THE LAST QUESTION. WE ARE OUT OF TIME FOR THAT SEGMENT. OUR LAST PIECE OF BUSINESS IS A 45-SECOND CLOSING STATEMENT FROM EACH CANDIDATE. WE'LL GIVE THE CHALLENGERS THE LAST WORD AND START WITH MR. DENT. >>> MICHAEL GRESHAM WROTE AN EXCELLENT CONTEMPT FOR POLITICS YOU OFTEN GET POLITICS WORTHY OF CONTEMPT. I'M SO CONCERNED ABOUT OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM. THE DEMAGOGUERY THAT GOES ON. WHAT I CONCLUDED IS THAT WE NEED PEOPLE IN THE U.S. CAPITAL WHO KNOW HOW TO FIND SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS. THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE WHO SIMPLY CAN'T GET THE YES. THEY TELL ME WHAT THEY CAN NEVER DO. I PLEDGE TO GO DOWN THERE AND FIND THE SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS AND WORK IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY AND THIS COUNTRY. I THANK YOU AND ASK FOR YOUR VOTE IN NOVEMBER. >>> NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM MR. RICK DAUGHERTY. >> I WANT TO BRING OUR JOBS BACK. THAT'S THE SOLUTION TO MOST OF OUR PROBLEMS FOR WORKING FAMILIES AND THE MIDDLE CLASS. CONGRESS IS THE ONE THAT PASSED LEGISLATION BEGINNING WITH NAFTA AND ALLOWING THE WTO THAT MADE IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FOR AMERICANS TO BE ABLE TO MANUFACTURE THINGS HERE LIKE WE USED TO. CONGRESS IS EVENLY DIVIDED. ELECT ME AND A FEW OTHERS LIKE ME AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO REVERSE TRADE POLICY AND BRING JOBS BACK AND PROVIDE PROSPERITY FOR MORE AMERICANS. HOME OWNERSHIP IS AT THE LOWEST RATE IN DECADES. VOTER PARTICIPATION IS DOWN. IT'S ALL BECAUSE OF OUR JOBS GOING OVERSEAS. IT CAN CHANGE. I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU. >>> MR. RIZZO. >> I'D LIKE TO THANK CHANNEL 39 FOR HOSTING THE DEBATE. I'LL LEAVE YOU WITH THIS. I THINK WE CAN LOOK AT RICK AND CHARLIE AND SAY WE'VE SEEN THE SHOW BEFORE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE GOVERNMENT SPENDING, MORE BAD TRADE DEALS, AND MORE LEGISLATION THAT CONDISTRICTS BUSINESS. IN THIS YEAR'S ELECTION WHEN YOU GO TO THE BALLOT BOX, YOU CAN VOTE FOR THE ILLUSION OF A CHOICE OR REAL CHANGE. I'M PAUL RIZZO AND I ASK FOR YOUR VOTE THIS NOVEMBER. >>> THAT CONCLUDES OUR 15TH DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE DEBATE. PBS39 THANKS THE CANDIDATES FOR PARTICIPATING AND LAURA OLSON AND CHRISTOPHER BORICK AND OUR PARTNERS, THE MORNING CALL AND THE GREATER LEHIGH VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. ELECTION DAY IS NOVEMBER 8. THANK YOU.

History

This district was created in 1833. The district was eliminated in 1983.

List of representatives

Representative Party Years District home Note
District created in 1833
No image.svg
John Banks
Anti-Masonic March 4, 1833 – April 2, 1836 Redistricted from the 18th district, resigned to become the judge of the Berks judicial district
vacant April 2, 1836 – December 5, 1836
No image.svg
John James Pearson
Anti-Jacksonian December 5, 1836 – March 3, 1837 Mercer Not a candidate for renomination in 1836
No image.svg
Thomas Henry
Anti-Masonic March 4, 1837 – March 3, 1841 Beaver
Whig March 4, 1841 – March 3, 1843
No image.svg
Joseph Buffington
Whig March 4, 1843 – March 3, 1847 Kittanning Not a candidate for renomination in 1846
No image.svg
Alexander Irvin
Whig March 4, 1847 – March 3, 1849 Clearfield Not a candidate for renomination in 1848
No image.svg
Alfred Gilmore
Democratic March 4, 1849 – March 3, 1853 Butler Not a candidate for reelection in 1852
Carlton Brandaga Curtis - Brady-Handy.jpg
Carlton B. Curtis
Democratic March 4, 1853 – March 3, 1855 Redistricted from the 23rd district
No image.svg
David Barclay
Democratic March 4, 1855 – March 3, 1857 Brookville
No image.svg
James L. Gillis
Democratic March 4, 1857 – March 3, 1859 Ridgway Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1858
No image.svg
Chapin Hall
Republican March 4, 1859 – March 3, 1861 Warren Not a candidate for renomination in 1860
No image.svg
John Patton
Republican March 4, 1861 – March 3, 1863 Curwensville Not a candidate for renomination in 1862
JesseLazear.jpg
Jesse Lazear
Democratic March 4, 1863 – March 3, 1865 Waynesburg Redistricted from the 20th district

Not a candidate for renomination in 1864

George V. Lawrence (Pennsylvania Congressman).jpg
George V. E. Lawrence
Republican March 4, 1865 – March 3, 1869 Monongahela Not a candidate for renomination in 1868
No image.svg
Joseph B. Donley
Republican March 4, 1869 – March 3, 1871 Waynesburg Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1870
No image.svg
William McClelland
Democratic March 4, 1871 – March 3, 1873 Mount Jackson Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1872
No image.svg
William S. Moore
Republican March 4, 1873 – March 3, 1875 Washington
John Winfield Wallace - Brady-Handy.jpg
John W. Wallace
Republican March 4, 1875 – March 3, 1877 New Castle Not a candidate for renomination in 1876
WS Shallenberger 1901.jpg
William S. Shallenberger
Republican March 4, 1877 – March 3, 1883 Rochester
George V. Lawrence (Pennsylvania Congressman).jpg
George V. E. Lawrence
Republican March 4, 1883 – March 3, 1885 Monongahela Not a candidate for renomination in 1884
No image.svg
Oscar L. Jackson
Republican March 4, 1885 – March 3, 1889 New Castle Unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1888
No image.svg
Joseph W. Ray
Republican March 4, 1889 – March 3, 1891 Waynesburg Unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1890
No image.svg
Andrew Stewart
Republican March 4, 1891 – February 26, 1892 Election successfully contested by Alexander Craig
No image.svg
Alexander K. Craig
Democratic February 26, 1892 – July 29, 1892 Waynesburg Died
vacant July 29, 1892 – December 5, 1892
No image.svg
William A. Sipe
Democratic December 5, 1892 – March 3, 1895 Pittsburgh Unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1894
Ernest F Acheson.jpg
Ernest F. Acheson
Republican March 4, 1895 – March 3, 1909 Washington Unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1908
JohnKTener.jpg
John K. Tener
Republican March 4, 1909 – January 16, 1911 Pittsburgh Resigned to become Governor of Pennsylvania
vacant January 16, 1911 – March 3, 1911
CharlesMatthews1.jpg
Charles Matthews
Republican March 4, 1911 – March 3, 1913 New Castle Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1912
H.W. Temple-RPTS Class of 1887.png
Henry W. Temple
Progressive March 4, 1913 – March 3, 1915 Washington Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1914
vacant March 4, 1915 – November 2, 1915
H.W. Temple-RPTS Class of 1887.png
Henry W. Temple
Republican November 2, 1915 – March 3, 1923 Washington Installed after being elected to replace Rep-elect William M. Brown who died before taking office, Redistricted to the 25th district
No image.svg
Samuel A. Kendall
Republican March 4, 1923 – January 8, 1933 Greenville Township Redistricted from the 23rd district, unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1932, Died
vacant January 8, 1933 – March 4, 1933
J. Buell Snyder.jpeg
J. Buell Snyder
Democratic March 4, 1933 – January 3, 1945 Redistricted to the 23rd district
ThomasEMorgan.jpg
Thomas E. Morgan
Democratic January 3, 1945 – January 3, 1953 Fredericktown Redistricted to the 26th district
No image.svg
Carroll D. Kearns
Republican January 3, 1953 – January 3, 1963 Redistricted from the 28th district

Unsuccessful candidate for renomination in 1962

James D. Weaver.jpg
James D. Weaver
Republican January 3, 1963 – January 3, 1965 Erie Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1964
Joseph Vigorito.png
Joseph P. Vigorito
Democratic January 3, 1965 – January 3, 1977 Erie Unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1976
Marc L. Marks.jpg
Marc L. Marks
Republican January 3, 1977 – January 3, 1983 Erie Not a candidate for renomination in 1982
District eliminated in 1983

References

  • Martis, Kenneth C. (1989). The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
  • Martis, Kenneth C. (1982). The Historical Atlas of United States Congressional Districts. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
  • Congressional Biographical Directory of the United States 1774–present

This page was last edited on 2 September 2018, at 02:54
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.