Jane Corwin and Kathy Hochul didn’t stray too far from their well-rehearsed sound bites in a 26th District congressional candidates’ debate Thursday, but the clash certainly underscored the differences between them.

The debate, organized by WGRZ-TV and the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, featured an empty chair symbolizing the place where candidate Jack Davis was supposed to sit, until he backed out of the event at the last minute Wednesday.

The special election to fill the U.S. House seat vacated by Chris Lee is May 24. Ahead of it, the campaigns are in overdrive, trying at least as hard to tell voters why they shouldn’t pick this or that person as why they should pick the Republican, the Democrat or the independent.

The animosity between competitors surfaced quickly in the debate, as Corwin, the Republican, used question-and-answer time to try painting Hochul, the Democrat, as a tax-and-spender with an “inconsistent” set of campaign promises.

Hochul returned the favor by suggesting repeatedly that Corwin would rather cut health care spending on senior citizens than give up tax breaks for “millionaires and billionaires.”



The Medicare problem

Federal officials say Medicare, the government program that pays the lion’s share of senior citizens’ health care costs, will go broke by 2029 unless it’s changed. The well-publicized “Ryan budget,” which included a proposal to privatize Medicare in 2022, by paying a portion of their health insurance premium rather than directly paying their medical bills, passed in the GOP-led House of Representatives on April 15.

A late April Siena poll of likely voters in the 26th suggested a slim majority, 59 percent, do not favor that proposal. Hochul has been hammering Corwin for saying she would have voted for the bill. Donald Trump, the TV personality and real estate mogul, opined Wednesday in the national press that Corwin’s campaign is struggling because of the Ryan Medicare issue.

Corwin did not back away from the Ryan bill in the debate.

“If we keep Medicare the same plan that it is now, we’re going to be out of money by 2029, which means nobody will receive benefits,” she said. “This (plan) does not eliminate Medicare, it protects Medicare” for future generations.

Not so, Hochul countered.

Corwin’s insolvency claim is “a scare tactic, to tell our seniors that there’ll be nothing for them in 2029; it’s not the truth,” she said.

The Ryan bill would take the country back to the early 1960s, before seniors had guaranteed health care coverage and many went without, she added.

“There’s a way to fix (Medicare). ... We have to continue what’s been a very successful program,” Hochul insisted.



Who should pay the piper?

Of the federal deficit, Corwin said she’s of a mind to put “everything” on the cutting block, including defense spending, in order to drive it down. The federal government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, she offered.

Hochul jumped on those words to point up another difference between herself and Corwin. To her, “everything on the table” includes entitlements, defense spending and revenue, she said. Unlike Corwin, she’s open to raising the income tax rate on earners of $500,000 or more.

“They can contribute more ... so it’s not on the backs of our seniors,” Hochul said. “I don’t think it’s fair to ask our seniors to get a voucher and be on their own with the insurance companies, to pay for something they’re entitled to that they paid into their entire lives, so we can continue tax breaks for the millionaires and billionaires.”

Corwin charged that for all of Hochul’s talk about understanding the needs of small businesses, including their need for tax relief, Hochul doesn’t understand that the end of the so-called Bush tax cuts for top earners would hurt many small businesses. That’s because the way tax law is structured, small companies and individuals often end up in the same tax bracket.

“A business making $500,000 to $1 million is not that big of a business. It’s still a small business,” Corwin said, adding corporate tax rates should be cut.

“Our large corporations are paying a higher tax rate than any other corporations in the world, so what’s happening is there’s incentive for these corporations to open up operations overseas ... and not hire here in the United States,” she said.

On so-called Obamacare, Corwin said she favors repeal of the health care reform act signed into law last year. It does nothing to bring down health care costs and stands as a small business/job killer, she insisted; business owners in the 26th District tell her if they’re forced to buy insurance for employees or pay a fine, they’ll avoid hiring or hire more temporary workers to dodge the mandate. The smarter moves are steps to drive down insurance and care costs, such as facilitating small business insurance pools and tort reform, she said.

Hochul said the health care law could stand some changes but she wouldn’t repeal it, because the benefits — including allowing young adults to stay on their parents’ insurance plans and mandating no discrimination against people with pre-existing medical conditions — are worth preserving. Speaking hypothetically of a 10-year-old girl with leukemia, she declared, “If you voted for the Ryan plan (which would repeal the health care reform act), you threw her under the bus.

“Let’s fix it but move on,” she said.



On the warfront

Of continued U.S. military engagement in Afghanistan, Hochul said she’d stick with the withdrawal timetable previously set by President Obama. She’d also demand an “evaluation” of the United States’ annual aid package to Pakistan, where U.S. troops recently tracked down and executed Osama bin Laden. It’s ridiculous to think the Pakistan government was not aware of bin Laden’s whereabouts, she said.

Corwin said she’d leave it up to military leaders to judge when the U.S. mission in Afghanistan is accomplished, then have the troops come home. Pakistan does face hard questions, she agreed, but said keeping a “relationship” with it is important to the United States’ anti-terrorism efforts.



Davis: Absent but not overlooked

Reporter Scott Brown asked both women to defend campaign ads containing “misleading” information about Davis, who dropped out of the debate Wednesday saying he was fed up with Hochul and Corwin lying about him.

In its most recent TV ad, the Hochul camp declared “both” of Hochul’s opponents would cut benefits for senior citizens.

Brown read aloud a section of Davis’ campaign website in which he wrote he does not favor cuts in either Social Security or Medicare. “I oppose privatizing Medicare and forcing seniors to buy insurance with vouchers. This would throw millions of senior citizens into poverty or worse, and it fails to lower health care costs,” the site says.

“I’m glad Jack had a last-minute conversion,” Hochul responded, defending her ad’s use of a comment Davis made to radio host Tom Bauerle in April 2006. “Why did he change his position?”

For Corwin, Brown held up a copy of Davis’ May 2010 voter registration form, on which he declared himself a Republican, and asked why she insists on calling him a Democrat.

“He actually ran three times as a Democrat for this seat,” Corwin said. “He ran on those principles for three elections, then switched principles.”

Oddly, Hochul and Corwin both ended up noting Davis’ absence from the debate not to needle him, but each other.

Hochul started it, saying she wished Davis had participated because “he brings a lot to the debate,” and on his behalf demanded Corwin state her view of the North American Free Trade Agreement and unfair trade. That’s been Davis’ signature issue in all four of his congressional campaigns.

Corwin’s answer: “Right back at’cha, Kathy. There are a lot of things that Jack could ask Kathy Hochul. I think we need to get clarification on her plan for Medicare. She talks about holding the line on taxes. How do you hold the line on taxes when you’re advocating ... to raise taxes?”