Stephen and Bradley square off in spirited debate

Carroll County Republicans host debate between GOP congressional candidates

The setting for the Carroll County Republican Party's First District congressional debate Monday night was the former Carroll Count courthouse, and at times it seemed as though the two candidates were conducting a court case.Much of that can be attributed to candidate John Stephen of Manchester being a former prosecutor before he was New Hampshire's Health and Human Services commissioner. With the fiery zeal of an attorney zeroing in on his target, he went on the attack against former two-term First District U.S. Rep. Jeb Bradley of Wolfeboro, challenging the latter's conservative credentials and broad-brushing Bradley as a supporter of pork-barrel earmarks.It were as though Bradley were the defense attorney to Stephen's aggressive prosecutor, with Bradley defending his four years in Congress and his record of obtaining earmarks that benefited not only the U.S. troops fighting overseas, but also, on at least five occasions, he said, John Stephen's Department of Health and Human Services.Bradley touted his role as a small businessman as the owner of the hardware store that his family founded. He talked of his other businesses experience that he said sets him apart from Stephen and Carol Shea-Porter, the Democratic candidate, because he said he understands what it means to meet a payroll. He said that experience along with his years in the New Hampshire House served him well in preparing him to serve the First District during his four years in Congress.It was the eighth time that the two had squared off. The winner of the Republican primary Sept. 9 will face Shea-Porter, a first-term incumbent, in the general election Nov. 4.Scott Spradling, former WMUR political director, moderated the debate. Among those in attendance was former District 3 state Sen. Joe Kenney of Wakefield, now the presumed Republican nominee for governor.In a show of dramatics, Stephen during the hour-long debate repeatedly wanted Bradley to give a yes or no answer on whether he would take a pledge against pork-barrel earmark spending, as Stephen has. Bradley, in turn, repeatedly demanded that Stephen give a yes or no answer on whether Stephen would have voted for the defense budget.Stephen repeatedly pointed out that Bradley supported the defense budget, even though it did contain pork earmarks, Stephen said, for such items as $1 million for a spider study in Guam and $500,000 for a teapot museum.I make no bones about it [voting for the defense bill] I went to Washington to support our troops. I will always support our troops, said Bradley, charging that Stephen in 2006 wanted to cut veterans benefits. Yes or no commissioner: Would you vote for the defense bill?Stephen countered by asking all to go to his Web site to see his veterans' plan, and he said support for American troops is an American issue.I do not want to get into a debate about who is better for veterans. This is America and it's not a Democratic or Republican issue, said Stephen.Asked again whether he would vote for the defense bill, despite the questionable earmarks, Stephen answered, I am going to vote for change. All this pork doesnt help children or the elderly. How many times did you hear Jeb Bradley stand up and say this is wasteful. I have the whole list of earmarks that he voted for. If you want someone to shake up Washington, then vote for me. If you want to keep the status quo, vote for Jeb. If you want $1 million to go to Guam to study snakes, then dont vote for John Stephen, said Stephen to a round of applause from his supporters among the crowd of approximately 85 voters in the former courtroom, now home to the Ossipee Historical Society.Bradley said he agreed that Congress needed to be transparent, and said he had fought against pork but Stephen said that Bradley didn't show the backbone to say no during his tenure.Both support John McCain's energy plan, although Stephen charged that Bradley has only lately come to support drilling in ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.Bradley repeated what he has said throughout his campaign to win the Republican nomination and the seat he lost to Shea-Porter in the national Democratic tidal wave in the mid-term election of 2006: that different circumstances require different actions.He also reiterated a charge he has made of late saying that Stephen boosted property tax rates by shifting the state's nursing home costs onto them.Earlier in the day, Bradley at a campaign event in Concord was surrounded by approximately 40 state lawmakers and county officials as he challenged Stephen's claims to have reduced costs during his four years as commissioner of Health Human Services.As the Manchester Union Leader reported in its Aug. 12 edition, Bradley argued that although Stephen claimed to have found savings on the cost of Medicaid patients in nursing homes, he really moved costs onto the counties, which cover their costs through property taxes.Stephen aide Gregory Moore denied Bradley's assertions, and Stephen did so as well during the debate Monday night in Ossipee.Stephen said that reimbursements to county nursing homes went up by $15 million during his tenure, even though the number of people in nursing homes was falling. He repeated what he has said previously that his office had emphasized keeping the elderly in their homes through community care, a policy that he said kept costs from climbing faster.Stephen said he saved the state $143 million in areas such as Health and Human Services personnel costs, pharmacy benefits for Medicaid patients and consulting contracts. When have you heard of any state agency giving that kind of money back? said Stephen during Monday night's debate.In other issues, Stephen and Bradley both stated they were fundamentally opposed to governmental universal health care. Bradley said he supports allowing businesses to pool their insurance coverage and that individuals ought to be able to purchase insurance across state lines. Stephen said that, with his experience as former commissioner of the state Health and Human Services, he knows it would be inefficient for government to be in charge of universal health care.Both said that increased competition would allow for lower health care premiums, and Bradley also said that tort reform would keep keep lawyers out of the medical offices and operating rooms, thereby reducing health care costs by capping malpractice suit amounts.According to the latest Granite State Poll July 23, Shea-Porter is losing to Bradley, 46 percent to 40 percent. However, the same poll has Shea-Porter beating Stephen, 42 percent to 36 percent.Bradley enjoys a 48 percent favorable rating, while 62 percent of voters say they do not know enough about Stephen. Shea-Porter is viewed favorably by 35 percent of voters, and 32 percent view her has unfavorable.Bradley was interviewed Aug. 5 by The Conway Daily Sun's editorial board for a story that ran in the Aug. 9 edition. Stephen is scheduled to be interviewed by the Sun's editorial board Aug. 21.To learn more about the candidates, visit their respective Web sites Bradley at jebforcongress.com and Stephen at johnstephen.com.