U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, D-4th District, squared off against two of his opponents — Republican Michael Goldstein and Independent Benjamin Wesley — on issues ranging from abortion, immigration, the conflict in the Middle East and the top of the presidential ticket at a Tuesday night debate one week from the election.
Himes, who has represented the southwestern part of the state since 2009, focused much of his attacks on Donald Trump’s past administration and current candidacy and his Republican challenger’s support for the former president. Goldstein similarly challenged Himes by connecting him to the policies of the Biden-Harris administration as Vice President Kamala Harris seeks the presidency.
Wesley, the Independent Party candidate who is a manufacturing engineer, served as a foil to Himes and Goldstein on the U.S. response to Israel’s war in Gaza in the year since Hamas’ attack. Wesley said he hoped to use his candidacy to push for diplomacy over war and challenge the congressman in particular over weapons shipments to Israel. He argued that taxpayer dollars should be redirected to domestic needs.
The debate was hosted by CT Examiner and moderated by editor Gregory Stroud at Stamford’s Ferguson Memorial Library. It was the first and only 4th Congressional District debate just days from the Nov. 5 election, when every member of Connecticut’s House delegation will be up for reelection.
Some of the biggest clashes of the night were over the personalities at the top of the ticket, their agendas and their rhetoric on the campaign trail.
In his opener, Himes ticked through a quick list of recent legislation he supported, including Democrats’ wide-ranging Inflation Reduction Act, which included climate investments as well as some health policies such as capping the cost of insulin for seniors at $35 a month. He said those policies were “without exception made and opposed at every step by MAGA extremists.”
But he quickly pivoted to try and draw a contrast between the presidential candidates, arguing that it is a choice between “progress and democracy and decency or not.” Himes pointed to Goldstein’s attendance at Trump’s Madison Square Garden weekend rally that caught backlash over incendiary and racist insults. On Instagram, Goldstein posted a video of him waiting in a long line outside of the New York City venue.
“As we speak, Donald Trump is sowing doubt about the election so that he can attack it just like last time, and as one of the last members out of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, I don’t want to go there again,” said Himes, who was in the inside the House chamber when rioters breached the building.
It won’t surprise you that today Donald Trump called [the rally] a love fest,” he continued. “It might surprise that with a week left until the election, Dr. Goldstein waited in line for hours to get into that rally.”
Goldstein did not mention Trump or his attendance at the rally over the weekend during his opening statement or in subsequent questions. The Republican nominee took aim at Himes as a “career politician” and rubber stamp for the Biden-Harris agenda, including his vote for the Inflation Reduction Act and an increase in the deficit.
Goldstein, who previously ran for Congress in the 4th District, raised concerns about energy prices, a rise in anti-Semitism, border security and health care costs “where corporate profits take precedent over patient care.”
“Why is a 74-year-old person running for Congress, and I’ve had full career in medicine and I don’t need a job,” Goldstein said. “And the answer is, I’m horrified by the direction of our country, in contrast to the way Mr. Himes thinks things are going.”
There were a few areas of consensus during the hour-long debate. The three of them generally agreed on expanding the use of nuclear power when asked about how Congress will ensure clean and affordable energy for Connecticut residents. And they all expressed a desire for a federal response to the state’s current housing crisis and lack of supply that includes affordable options.
But they drew larger distinctions on immigration, foreign policy and tax reform.
On how they would respond in Congress to some of the Trump-era tax cuts starting to expire in 2025, Goldstein sounded supportive of extending the expiring provisions.
“In my opinion, keeping taxes low is a way to stimulating the economy,” Goldstein said. “So to me, keeping more money in people’s pockets is a very good idea.”
Himes pushed back on the 2017 tax bill for increasing the federal deficit and giving a large portion of tax breaks to wealthy Americans.
“I actually agree with the point of view of President Biden, which is that we will allow the tax cuts on the very wealthiest Americans to expire,” Himes said. “I represent a lot of them, and I know that they would accept this to pay their share.”
Wesley said the tax policy question was not in his area of expertise and used his two minutes to ask Himes about why he will not support an arms embargo to Israel.
On immigration, Goldstein and Wesley found more common ground on the issue. Goldstein called it a “free for all” at the southern border. Wesley said it “took me a while to come around to that” on the issue and expressed concerns about the benefits going toward migrants in some cities being prioritized over older Americans.
Himes said he criticized the Biden administration at times over this issue and wants more border patrol and judges for adjudicating asylum cases. He pointed to his support for the bipartisan border bill brokered in part by U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.
When asked about the role Congress could play on abortion, both Himes and Wesley said they would support legislation to codify the protections that were once covered under Roe v. Wade into federal law. Connecticut law protects the right to an abortion up until fetal viability or if the health of the mother is at risk.
Himes and Goldstein disagreed on whether access to abortion is a fundamental right. Goldstein, who is a physician, said it is up to each state to decide and that voters should be able to vote on the issue in a referendum. “The decision has been made in Connecticut,” he said.
Some of the most contentious exchanges of the night were over the Israel-Gaza war. Wesley used much of his speaking time at the debate to challenge his opponents on the issue, but the moderator also asked all three of them about addressing the conflict.
Wesley called for an arms embargo of U.S. weapons to Israel and an immediate ceasefire. He also pointed to the high death toll of 40,000 Palestinians over the past year, suggesting that it is likely a “gross undercount.”
“My opponents on the Democratic and Republican side will say the only way to solve the wars in Gaza and Lebanon or the Russian-Ukraine conflict or the tensions in China and Taiwan is to shovel more of your hard-earned tax dollars and more weaponry into the fight,” Wesley said.
“I disagree,” he added. “It’s my intention to bring saner ideas to the discussion, ideas like American tax dollars should be prioritized for our own needs at home and diplomacy abroad instead of for foreign wars.”
Himes and Goldstein were largely in agreement on this issue. They both said they support Israel’s right to defend itself after the deadly attack on Oct. 7, 2023. And in response to an earlier retort from Wesley, Himes said, “we’re not cutting Israel off.”
“Israel has a right to defend itself also from Hezbollah, Houthis and Iran,” Himes said. “It’s also true how Israel defends itself is very, very important.”
Goldstein, who said he is the son-in-law of Holocaust survivors, said he agreed with Himes’ assessment surrounding Hamas and the attack on Israel.
“It happened once. It’s never going to happen again, so good luck with putting my people at risk of being exterminated,” Goldstein said.
In his rebuttal, Wesley said his criticism is not geared toward Jewish people but of the Israeli government.
While Wesley once again advocated for diplomacy abroad, Goldstein and Himes used their closing statements to argue that democracy is at risk but for vastly different reasons.
“Are we going to follow the Harris-Himes role of transitioning our country from a constitutional republic … to a socialist economy with greater government, regulations, higher taxes?” Goldstein said. “Our democracy is at risk”
Himes painted a very different picture about the threats to democracy in this election.
“Our Constitution and our democracy matter,” Himes said. “And they are at risk by this abnegation and disdain for the truth and the disdain for our democratic constitution that is so shown by Donald Trump and Michael Goldstein.”
The Connecticut Mirror/Connecticut Public Radio federal policy reporter position is made possible, in part, by funding from the Robert and Margaret Patricelli Family Foundation.
This story was originally published in the Connecticut Mirror Oct. 29, 2024.
