The three Rhode Island congressmen facing reelection this year met their opponents last week in a series of final debates held at Rhode Island College and sponsored by NBC-10.
The debate between Rep. David Cicilline '83, D-R.I., Republican candidate Brendan Doherty and Independent David Vogel - the state's most high-profile contest - aired Thursday night in the wake of an Oct. 30 WPRI poll that showed Doherty and Cicilline running neck-and-neck in the first district. In the race to represent Rhode Island's second congressional district, Rep. Jim Langevin, D-R.I., squared off against Republican challenger Michael Riley and Independent Abel Collins in a debate aired Friday. In the third debate, aired Saturday, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., faced Republican Barry Hinckley Jr.- the final broadcast Rhode Island debate of the 2012 election season.
Cicilline, Doherty and Vogel
Close poll numbers and the prospect of a Republican holding statewide office in Rhode Island - a historically liberal state that will almost certainly support President Obama over Republican candidate Mitt Romney in the presidential election - have drawn national attention to the race in the first congressional district. In addition to mentions in national media and investments made by the respective candidates' national parties, CSPAN aired Thursday's debate between Cicilline, Doherty and Vogel nationally.
The debate itself was notable not for its divisiveness, but rather for its relative congeniality and for its focus on economic issues - a significant departure from a campaign defined by its mud-slinging and vitriol.
The candidates spent most of the hour-long debate discussing economic issues, including the tax system, government regulation and energy policy. Cicilline touted the three-pronged economic agenda he has promoted throughout the race, which include calls for regulatory reform, increased access to capital for small business and the passage of his "Make it in America" block grants. The grants would end tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas, stop China from manipulating their currency and invest in infrastructure and job training, he said.
Doherty argued that as a member of the Republican Party, which is expected to maintain its majority in the House of Representatives, he would be more effective than Cicilline at bringing federal money to Rhode Island. He also reiterated his support for the proposed Infrastructure, Jobs and Energy Independence Act, which would bring jobs to America and reduce the country's reliance on foreign oil. Cicilline called the bill "a giveaway to big oil."
Vogel, who has only appeared in a couple of the first district debates, challenged other candidates on several of the basic assumptions underlying each of their campaigns. Despite both Cicilline's and Doherty's insistences that Congress needs to reduce the national debt and work towards a balanced budget, Vogel disagreed. "We don't have to work for a balanced budget," Vogel said. "We can work with a deficit. We had it during the '60s when economic growth was significant." Vogel expressed support for investments in green energy that would allow the United States to develop its economy while saving money.
Langevin, Riley and Collins
The race between Langevin, Riley and Collins has not generated the same attention as its first district counterpart, but Friday's debate was as upbeat and contentious as any nationally-relevant campaign.
Langevin and Riley traded shots over their respective abilities to promote growth in Rhode Island's economy. Langevin pointed to his work bringing two new Virginia class submarines to Rhode Island as the reason the state's Naval industry is "hiring hundreds of new workers."
The incumbent also highlighted his record of supporting job-training programs to reduce the state's "skills gap." Riley criticized Langevin for his commitment to these programs, noting that as a businessman, he has hired hundreds of people, but never anyone from a job-training program.
Riley focused his argument on his commitment to job growth in Rhode Island, emphasizing his own private business experience as proof that he knows more about growth than the incumbent. He said it is not surprising to see the state's low rankings in small business growth - the National Federation of Small Business gave Langevin a score of nine on a 100-point scale rating his support for small business in Congress.
Riley and Langevin had different ideas about how to reform the nation's tax code. Riley said he wants to bring the tax code from 77,000 pages to 100 and cut taxes across the board, while Langevin said he wants to give tax breaks to the middle class and eliminate tax incentives for businesses sending jobs overseas.
Collins, who made his first debate appearance Friday, provided a third voice distinct from the two party candidates.
"There are three men on this stage, but there are only two real choices," Collins said. "The failed policies of the two-party establishment - embodied here by my two millionaire opponents - and there's the independent voice, who will speak for Rhode Islanders and Rhode Islanders alone."
Whitehouse and Hinckley
The final debate between Whitehouse and Hinckley revolved around the central economic questions permeating this election cycle - taxes, health care and deficit reduction. Hinckley tore into Whitehouse for sponsoring "the Buffet Rule" tax increase for the country's wealthiest. Whitehouse defended his proposed measure on the grounds that it would increase revenues without raising taxes on the middle class.
Whitehouse, in turn, attacked Hinckley for signing lobbyist Grover Norquist's "No Tax" pledge. Hinckley conceded he was willing to reassess his commitment to the pledge.
Hinckley also tried to distance himself from the Republican presidential ticket, pledging support for the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan and eschewing the plan espoused by vice presidential ca
ndidate Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. Hinckley added that as a career businessman he is more capable of tackling issues like the deficit than Whitehouse, a career politician.
The candidates found a rare point of consensus, supporting National Flood insurance, which has garnered attention in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. The insurance program provides financial support to individuals in participating communities whose homes have been damaged by floods.
