.jpg)
Sharp differences were on display in the only debate between U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber (R) and his DFL challenger - Jen Schultz.
A 40-minute debate aired by Duluth television station WDIO included terse exchanges on both foreign and domestic policy, the actions of the Biden Administration, and Stauber’s record in Congress.
Schultz said she was running “because you deserve a better representative” and charged Stauber has failed to accomplish much in Washington.
“He has done almost nothing in Congress in six years,” said Schultz.
At one point, Stauber told Schultz “you have no idea what you’re talking about” during an exchange about Mideast policy, and he repeatedly took aim at Democrats for stances related to mining, energy and foreign policy.
“Go back to four years ago under Trump and we had peace, peace through strength,” said Stauber. “Biden and Harris are getting run over by tyrants across the world and it’s costing us all.”
The candidates, who are squaring off in a rematch of a 2022 contest won decisively by Stauber, traded views on issues ranging from the economy, housing, gun rights and mining.
Stauber often painted Democrats, both in Congress as well as the Biden Administration, as roadblocks to measures that would improve the financial fortunes of those in the spacious Eighth Congressional District, which extends from northeastern Minnesota to the edge of the Twin Cities.
“It’s not right that folks in the Northland have to pay 30-to-40 percent more on their heating bills,” said Stauber. “That has to do with policy.”
Stauber said that federal mandates hinder new home construction and accused the Biden Administration of anti-energy, anti-mining and anti-forest harvesting policies.
“We know we can do better,” said Stauber. “What this administration has done has been devastating.”
Stauber pointed to the Inflation Reduction Act and said “all the leading economists said it would lead to inflation. Kamala Harris was the deciding vote. It’s unacceptable that the average family is paying $11,400 more per year under the Biden-Harris Administration than under the Trump Administration.”
Schultz responded several times that Stauber has been in office for three terms and has been unable to take action to curb costs and improve the economy.
The former Duluth legislator said “people are struggling with the high costs of housing and child care and health care,” and called for the government to do more to “make sure we have more competition.”
She also chided Stauber for voting against a measure “that would have helped,” control price gouging in the gas and oil industries.
“Everywhere I went (across the district) I handed out my business card and I wanted to listen to concerns,” said Schultz. “Housing is a big concern. The biggest solution is to increase supply of all types of housing and we have to make sure we have sound monetary policy to lower interest rates and make mortgages more affordable again.”
Mining was another point of contention, with Stauber reiterating his support for both taconite and proposed copper-nickel mining in the region and accusing Democrats of standing in the way.
“There’s not a week that goes by that Democrats don’t want to stop hard rock mining which means shutting down the Iron Range,” said Stauber. “We have to have the political will to expand iron ore mining, and to mine the critical minerals in the Duluth Complex, the biggest untapped copper nickel find in the world. Biden and Harris shut it down. I can tell you there’s only one presidential candidate that will open up mines on the Iron Range and that’s Donald Trump.”
Schultz called herself a mining supporter and noted support from some steelworker labor groups.
“We need to move mining forward and that’s responsible mining,” said Schultz.
She added Stauber “is not moving anything forward” and that “we need a leader who brings everyone to the table. People have concerns. How are we going to make investments and to do it reasonably without polluting the water.”
Both candidates said they supported the Second Amendment, with Schultz saying she “grew up with a rifle in an unlocked gun cabinet” in her home.
“(But) gun violence does need to be addressed,” said Schultz. “Especially when I visited high schools in our district. They have grown up with active shooter drills. We should make it safe for young people to go to school and not be afraid of being killed with an assault rifle.”
Schultz touted her support for background checks and “Red Flag” laws, while Stauber responded and pointed to his 23 years of experience as a police officer, which included two attempts on his life.
“I was the victim of two violent gun crimes,” said Stauber.
The incumbent blamed a justice system too lax on crime.
“We need to look at prosecutions,” said Stauber. “There were times we would arrest violent criminals and before I was done with my shift those criminals were out (of jail). We need prosecution for violent crimes.”
The two candidates differed on foreign policy, with Schultz critical of Stauber for policy related to Ukraine.
“(Stauber) voted against funding (to Ukraine) - he’s giving Putin the keys,” said Schultz. “Putin is not our ally and we need to do whatever we can for our national security interest to protect a sovereign democracy that was invaded.”
Stauber said “Putin is a tyrant. He’s a dictator and Ukraine must win.”
But Stauber was also critical of the present administration and said that Biden and Harris have “appeased” dictators.
Both candidates said they’d vote to certify the results of the presidential election with Schultz charging “I am not an election denier like my opponent.”
“I certified the 2020 election,” said Stauber. “We need to bring down the rhetoric.”
Stauber added “there’s not a better place to raise a flag, son our daughter than right here in the United States of America. Politics should not divide our families and communities. It has and it’s unfortunate.”
Schultz closed by saying “I want to move our district forward and turn the page,” contending that Stauber’s communications are “filled with anger, blame and complaining.”
