Round 1: No agreement today in KY-3 debate

LOUISVILLE -- There was scarcely an issue upon which the candidates for the 3rd Congressional District agreed during a lunch-hour debate today in Louisville. The acrimonious history between U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Louisville) and former U.S. Anne Northup (R-Louisville): Politicker photoRep. Anne Northup (R-Louisville) was evident throughout the hour-long debate, as the candidates engaged in a highly critical back-and-forth on policy nuances and generalities alike right from the very start.

This year's contest between Northup and Yarmuth is a rematch of the contentious 2006 3rd District race, when Yarmuth upset and unseated the incumbent Northup  - a five-term House vet. At today's Louisville Forum debate - the first of four debates in the race - Yarmuth was quick to criticize Northup's time in office and she was willing to do the same.

From his opening statement, Yarmuth was on the attack. Discussing his decision to run in 2006, he said of the then-incumbent that "our representation was on the wrong side of the issues and not just on the wrong side of the majority of Louisville."

Northup, for her part, had a jab in her opening statement as well. She listed a litany of issues - from the financial bailout package to a proposed bridge in the east end of Louisville - and then swung away.

 "Closing our eyes and ignoring them, or making the problem worst is the worst thing we can do, and that's what we've had over the last two years," said Northup.

There was hardly a sentence uttered by the candidates that was not targeted by the opponents, who demonstrated a familiarity of each other that only past nemeses could.

Yarmuth, touting a series of awards he had won during his first term in Congress, claimed the "nation has taken notice" of his service.

"I have a garage full of awards," Northup retorted later, claiming one recognition cited by Yarmuth was given to 173 other members of Congress.

Christmas

Policy discussions drew the candidates deeper into their sparring match. When afforded the chance to question each other, Northup said there was one vote of Yarmuth's "I really didn't understand." She said Yarmuth had voted for resolutions honoring the Islamic holy month of Ramadan and a Hindu feast day, but questioned why the Democrat had chosen to vote "present" on a resolution to honor Christmas.

"Seriously, Anne...despite a period when we have a major financial crisis, we have men and women at risk overseas... and you're going to worry about a vote on Christmas," said Yarmuth.

"I thought it was irresponsible to treat Christmas the same way we treated Watermelon Month and National Marina Day," he continued, explaining his decision on the vote. "I decided to vote present as a way of protesting the fact that we were wasting the valuable time of our government on such an irrelevant proposition."

While the two evidently differed on that particular resolution, most other issues featured a wide divide between the candidates as well.

Questioned on whether she would still support the privatization of Social Security given economic turbulence, Northup defended her position and said the program was not secure as it stood.

"There is not one penny for it. At least in the stock market right now, you have 50 percent of your worth," she said.  "The government has gone and spent every single cent that you have put into Social Security."

She also asserted her earlier efforts to work towards creating social security investment funds included a "guarantee" that those who invested their funds would also have a minimum benefit matching what they would have otherwise received without investment.

Bailout differences

The two differed on the bailout package passed recently, as well, with Northup slamming Yarmuth's vote for the second incarnation of the bill.

"I think the $700 billion bailout is the biggest difference between John and me," Northup said.

She proposed an alternative solution whereby the assets of financial institutions targeted by the bailout would be "guaranteed" by the federal government rather than purchased.

Yarmuth, who voted against the first version of the bailout package before the House, said he changed his mind on the second bill after speaking with small business leaders who were "were desperately concerned about the massive loss of jobs in our community."

The policy differences between the two were clear on education policy, infrastructure, Iraq, health care, energy policy - everything.

One of the sharper contrasts showed during an extended discussion on Health care, during which Yarmuth claimed that working for "universal health care" would be a priority in his next term in office.

He said he supported a health care system that ensured no one "suffers financial ruin from illness or accident," covers "everybody," and is not "employer-based."

When questioned, Yarmuth said he did not support U.S. Sen. Barack Obama's (D-Ill) health care plan, as it retained an "employer-based" structure.

"I think ultimately we need to work away from that," he said of that structure.

Yarmuth endorsed Obama's presidential campaign in early February, prior to the state's May 20 primary. U.S. Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Louisville): Politicker photo

Northup said she supported the planks of her own party's presidential candidate, noting she favored the tax credit proposed by U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). She also launched a two-pronged assault on Yarmuth's position, arguing a health care bill he sponsored was the "most extreme" on the issue and criticized it as impacting a top Kentucky employer.

"John may be the first representative in the history of Congress that has proposed a bill that would put one of our signature industries out of business, and that's Humana [health insurance company]," said Northup.

Yarmuth said the legislation in question - specifically, H.R. 676 - was never going to pass and was intended only as a statement of his desire for universal health care. He also rejected Northup's claim about Humana.

"Right now, 70 percent of Humana's business is administering government paid plans," said Yarmuth. "So, basically, Humana is a subcontractor for the federal government. They will still have a role in whatever plan we have."

Northup pounced on Yarmuth's assertion that he had obtained $60 million for a Veteran's Administration Hospital in Louisville, arguing there was no appropriation specifically allocated for the project.

"The fact of the matter is there is no $60 million for the hospital. There is not one place in the bill where it says$ 60 million, nor does it say Louisville," claimed Northup, who said Yarmuth was "exaggerating" his accomplishments.

"I never ever would have claimed that in this community and then run it in my ads saying that I had gotten funding for this community," she added.

Yarmuth, who has touted the VA money on numerous occasions and  in television ads, said the VA committed to spending the funds in question in Louisville.  He also cited a fellow Kentuckian in Congress who he earlier thanked for working on the appropriation.

"You can also ask Mitch McConnell that," said Yarmuth of the four-term Republican incumbent. "This money is going to be spent in Louisville."

Three further public debates are scheduled between Northup and Yarmuth. With two already in the bag this year - including today's event and a closed Wednesday forum with employees of the Brown-Forman liquor distributorship - and attack ads running on both sides, the candidates seemed to have already easily switched back into the combative postures they developed in the 2006 race.

Yarmuth, however, joked that he hoped 2008 would be the last time they met at a debate.

"We love to have these spirited conversations - I hope we don't have them in two years," said Yarmuth.

In their closings, the two candidates presented their obvious and numerous policy differences as a contrast in philosophies about government.

"We can basically retrench. We can basically say ‘this country is as good as it's going to be and we can stop regulating, as we have been trying to do and try to let big corporations do everything they can to bail us out of this," said Yarmuth. "Or, we can go in a real new direction where we say as a government and a people ‘we are going to invest in our country, we are going to invest in our people, we are going to empower them.'"

Northup took the podium a final time, and said there was a "bright line difference" between she and Yarmuth over the role of government in society.

"The fact of the matter is that communities play a role, families play a role, we play a role, but in the end all government can do is provide people with a pathway that leads to a good job and that depends on the private sector," said Northup.

The two will next meet on Oct. 20 on statewide television for Kentucky Education Television's 3rd District Forum.