CD-6 candidates debate economy, inflation

This debate is brought to you by Clean Elections, the state's nonpartisan voter education agency. My name is Danielle Lerner, and we are sharing this debate as part of an effort to support democracy in Arizona through a partnership with the Citizens Clean Elections Commission, the Arizona Media Association, and ReSTIR. It is a partnership designed to make these debates accessible to everyone in Arizona. So that means this debate and several more between now and November will air on a long list of local TV stations, radio stations, and digital platforms, including support from local newspapers. This is a shared effort between hundreds of local media brands across Arizona. Now the format of this debate may be familiar to you, and we have tried to keep the rules simple. Each candidate will have up to one minute to make an opening statement and the same for a closing statement. Candidates have drawn numbers to determine the order of each of those portions of this debate. Now throughout the debate, we will pose questions to each candidate, allow them to answer, and then make sure the other candidate has a chance to respond. Whenever a question is directed to a specific candidate, only that candidate's microphone will be open. At all other times, every microphone will be open. And thank you to voters across Arizona who have submitted questions for this debate. There were a lot of them, and we reviewed them all to make sure every voice is heard. However, no candidates have been given advanced access to any of these questions. Additionally, candidates for this race will take part in a speed round at the end of tonight's conversation. Those questions have been given to the candidates ahead of time, and they have just 15 seconds to answer each one. And so with that, let's introduce the candidates for this debate. Juan Siscamani, Joanna Mendoza. Mr. Siscamani, you have the first opening statement. You have one minute. Thank you, Danielle. I want to start off by remembering the victims of 9-11, 25 years ago, and also thank the first responders and the military personnel for your service and your sacrifice. Thank you. I'm Juan Siscamani. I'm a dad of six. I'm a youth football coach, and I'm a proud immigrant. Actually, this year marks my 20th anniversary as a United States citizen, as I get to represent my community with the United States Congress. So yeah, I'm a big believer in the American dream. That's why in Congress, as your congressman, I focused on results instead of rhetoric. And I've been ranked, independently, the most bipartisan member in Arizona every single year that I've been in office. Regardless of what you hear, that is my record, and that is what I've done. Now, my opponent has a different record. She's got a record, one of lobbying for dark money and special interests, one of wanting to raise her taxes, of course, while not paying and cheating on her own taxes, also a record of being endorsed by defund the police. That's a record that she's trying to run away from. But if you go to JoannaMendozaFacts.com, you're going to be able to see all the facts there. Gracias por su atención esta noche. Espero tener un buen debate. All right. Ms. Mendoza, you have one minute for your opening statement. Well, thank you. Good evening. Buenas noches. And thank you to Clean Elections and to everyone tuning in at home, including my son, Aiden. I love you, baby. I'm Joanna Mendoza. I am the proud daughter of farm workers. And I worked alongside my parents in the cotton fields every summer for as long as I could remember. At the age of 17, I joined the military to escape rural poverty, first in the Navy and then in the Marine Corps. I served for 20 years, including combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. And I had the immense honor of making the next generation of Marines as a Marine Corps drill instructor. Right now, our families are in trouble. They're struggling. And that's why I'm answering the call to serve again. I've taken an oath to protect this country and uphold the Constitution, and that oath does not expire. All right. Thank you, Ms. Mendoza. That was one minute. Let's kick things off here with one of, if not the biggest issue on so many folks' minds heading into the November midterms, and that would be the economy. You have issues like inflation, job security, cost of living, certainly being top priorities for voters all across the political spectrum. And so what is the single most important thing that Congress can do to make life more affordable for Arizonans in CD6, and what specific policy would you support to make that happen? Mr. Siskimani, we'll start with you. Well, thank you, Danielle. You're absolutely right that this is exactly what's on everybody's mind. And we can all feel it. Every family out there can feel this. When in my case, my wife and I are raising six kids, we feel what every family out there feels as well. Being a coach and being out in the community also helps me be in contact with just regular people, maybe not people that are highly involved politically, but people that are just living their lives and trying to make ends meet as well. The reality is that this has been going on for a while now. Of course, it started a few years ago under the highest inflation recorded here in recent history under the Biden administration, and it's carried on to where we are today. There's been up and down in prices, but definitely we're at a point right now where families are hurting, and as someone that feels it, we need to make sure that we take some action on this. What we cannot do is have more government, more taxes, more government involvement. That's why some of the legislation that we have passed deals with that, putting more money in people's pockets. Now, listen, we've been 18 months into this administration trying to get out of the Biden inflation that we had in the last four years before then, and it hasn't happened as fast as we all hoped it would have happened. Nevertheless, we are on that track. And when you let people keep their taxes on tips and on overtime and you extend the child tax credit and you give small businesses incentives to expand and invest in their businesses, all these things help. What we don't need is more government, more taxes, as my opponent continues to propose. That's not an area we want to go into because that only stifles the growth of the economy and it also hurts families in Arizona and across the country. So what we need to do in the Appropriations Committee that I'm in, we need to, of course, tighten up the spending, make sure that our debt decreases and we let people keep more of their hard-earned money. All right, Ms. Mendoza, I'll give you the full two minutes to respond to Mr. Siskimani and also talk about your priorities. Yes, thank you very much. You know, as I mentioned previously, I am from a farmworker family. And so as a kid, you know, farmwork doesn't pay a lot. And my parents worked really hard and we still found ourselves on government assistance programs like food stamps, like access. And I will tell you that without any of those, I wouldn't have been able to grow up healthy to serve my country for 20 years. And so for me, the cuts that my opponent voted for in H.R. 1 actually has increased costs for a lot of folks. And it also has made it very difficult for children across this district, I'd even say across the state, to get the nourishment that they need. And it's not just that. If we look at tariffs, my opponent voted nine times for tariffs, tariffs that are raising prices everywhere we go. I will tell you that I was down in a in a portion in a small little town in Pinal County and we went into the grocery store. And what I saw there in terms of prices for baby formula, for I mean, for, you know, not only baby formula, but for just everyday groceries, bread, ground beef. And the prices were through the roof. A can of baby formula cost anywhere between twenty one dollars and forty two dollars. And as a mom who could not nurse my son because he was colicky, that I can only imagine the desperation and hopelessness that that mom may feel. And that's because, unfortunately, my opponent voted for that bill that people are struggling every day. That was actually one of our most popular voter questions for this district was around the so-called big, beautiful bill. And its impact on Arizonans in the form of reduced SNAP benefits and access. And so, Mr. Siskimani, you know, you voted in favor of that bill. What would you like to say to Arizonans and CD6? Sure. Listen, to to start off with the economy part of it, which I just did in a second ago, I'll begin with the fact that we need to strengthen the safety net for so many families that need it. And that's absolutely been the priority of this bill and the legislation that we have passed. So when we talk about the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, let's let's digress here and see what's in that bill. This bill gets rid of taxes on overtime for people that want to work overtime that I have done that when I was in college, for example, to pay against me and be able to pay for that. It also gets rid of taxes for for tips, people that work on tips. It extends the child tax credit for families and makes it permanent as well. These are just three different provisions that that we are benefiting families with that. So when you say that you oppose this bill, that's exactly what you're opposing. It also tightens the requirements to make sure that SNAP benefits are delivered to the people that actually need it. We protect it for those families that need it. Single moms, people with disabilities, both on Medicaid and on SNAP. We want to make sure that we protect that safety net for the people that that was meant to do. There's there's a lot of fraud out there. And even Chris Mays, as the attorney general here in the state, has discovered millions of dollars in fraud. There's current investigations to try to pretend that that's not happening. It's ludicrous. So we have to make sure that we protect that at work requirements, do dual verification at least twice a year. These are all common sense things that people want. And also, while we don't tax people more now, my opponent just mentioned a slew of things that are more expensive at the grocery store. These are all things that she has supported raising taxes on that. That that is not the direction that we need to go. We need to lower the taxes and actually eliminate them in all these different areas so that people can be able to afford them as well. As we do other work, reducing government spending, but getting government out of the way is really the way to go about this and not tax people more, which, again, in her case, she wants to tax people more while she cheats on her taxes. It was reported by the Arizona Daily Star. That's exactly what happened. So it's pretty hypocritical here to be able to want to talk about taxes when she's cheating on hers. Ms. Mendoza, your response to that and also your specific plans that you would like to put into motion, should you be in the seat? Yeah, absolutely. Well, first and foremost, absolute lies. I mean, what my opponent isn't telling you is that they clipped the first part of that would said that no more tax cuts or tax breaks for billionaires, because that's what the entire statement actually was. So it's just very dishonest. It's very dishonest that you're saying that. And I think that we can start lowering costs by actually reversing all of the tax cuts to billionaires that my opponent voted for in H.R. one. We can also ensure that we end the tariffs because they're raising prices everywhere. We reinstate programs like SNAP for programs that I used as a young child growing up. In addition, in addition to ensuring that we are giving more tax cuts to our working families because they work so hard and still can't make ends meet. And that was a result of the vote that my opponent took for H.R. one. And just a quick follow up to that 30 seconds. How do you go about doing those things, given you would be working in the current administration in that landscape? How do you go about doing those things? That's a great question. I mean, look, I served including combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan and in the military. You don't ask people, are you a Republican? Are you a Democrat? No, you train together. You know what the mission is. You go out there, you have each other's backs and you accomplish the mission while taking care of people. And that's the kind of battle tested leadership that I'll bring to Congress. All right. Another voter question that we received regarding access, since this has already come up in the conversation tonight, asking about Medicare for all as a potential way to guarantee that constituents and that they have permanent financial stability for Arizona's rural hospitals in particular. So, Mr. Siskimani, I'll start with you when it comes to health care and ensuring it's accessible. What are your priorities for that? Well, one thing that I want to say first is that I do encourage the questions to continue to press my opponent on the specific plan because she still hasn't offered anything. I had to ask her twice and she still didn't come up with one single thing that she would specifically do to do this, like the bill that we passed. That is a specific action that we took. The other thing is that when you talk about billionaires and tax cuts for them, I don't know a lot of billionaires working off tips or working on overtime or worrying about their tax credit for their kids or worrying about their security check and not that being taxed. This is a bill for the working families in our district in America. And that's why that passed the way that it did. And that's why it's a law today. So having said that, when you talk about health care, I mean, we talked a little bit about Medicaid right now, and that is a big aspect of the state. We want to make sure that people that need this service, they have it. We need to expand and strengthen the safety net of our system so that it can take care of the people that are in the most need. We are a generous, benevolent country that want to take care and have that safety net for the people that need it the most. So when we look at that program, we need to protect that we need to protect the integrity of it. And we need to make sure that it's there available for the purpose that it was intended to do specifically for health care in rural areas. This is an area that I've been very involved in, although the majority of the population in our district is in my district is not in the rural areas. That is the largest landmass of the district. So these hospitals there are highly important because if one suffers any kind of reduction in funding or any of those levels, then obviously the whole area can can be impacted. So I've used my position in the Appropriations Committee to direct funding to these hospitals for emergency rooms, for for building renovations. That doesn't just stop in hospitals. It also goes for first responders, fire, police and so on. So this is what we've done. This bill that my opponent criticizes also brought in one hundred and sixty seven million dollars specifically for rural health care. So all these things that she opposes, she's she's being at least upfront about that and opposing all these tax cuts to let people keep more of their hard earned money. So very important in the rural health care piece as well. And that's the work that I've done. Miss Mendoza, you've said you want to expand health care. How do you do that? And what programs would you be willing to potentially cut in order to make that happen? Well, listen, I want to address something that my opponent has said concerning rural hospitals under H.R. one, the bill that he voted for and not just really for rural hospitals, but for access altogether. He stated that he knew how devastating it was going to be if those cuts happen to access. And he voted for the bill anyways. And I think that is something that honestly, as someone who served my country for 20 years, who grew up in a hardworking family and we were always taught servant leadership, you know, you take care of everybody else before you take care of yourself. I'd also like to talk about the rural hospitals right now. We have services that are on the verge of being cut maternal care for soon to be moms who are going to have to drive an hour and a half, two hours to get seen at the doctor. I mean, we're talking about putting people in dangerous situations that could eventually cost them their lives. And this is what my opponent voted for, even after he acknowledged that it would be devastating for folks in the district. Thirty seconds for you to respond to half truths, half lies. Right. I mean, that that's what you see. And leaning on the half lies on this one, I did oppose aspects of the bill. And that's why exactly the conversations I had with the White House and opposed the White House position on this when it came to F map changes. Had we done the F map changes that were proposed initially on this bill, then the entire expansion population of Medicaid would have been off the books. That would have been devastating for the state. Arizona expanded in a more aggressive way than any other state. And this would have just disproportionately impacted Arizona. I fought hard for that. And I held my vote until that was taken off the table. When that was taken off the table, I supported the bill because the majority of it was great for Arizona and great for America as well. Do I agree with everything on every on every bill? Of course, nobody does. But that was a big red line for me. I fought to keep it off off the table. I did that. And that's why that statement stands true. My opponent is nitpicking and cherry picking of things that that just makes sense to her rhetoric and not the truth. Ms. Mendoza, your response to that and also if there are specific policies or programs that you would support or champion to expand health care. Yeah, well, let's begin by saying that we need to revert the cuts that have been made to access and Medicaid. I mean, we're talking about, you know, the difference between life and death. We need to address the shortages of doctors and nurses by ensuring that there are programs, grants that our universities can actually sponsor to make sure that anyone who wants to go into these fields can do so. And I also like to talk a little bit more about the rural health fund that my opponent was talking about. And you know what? The cuts, the amount that he brought in, in what he just mentioned, did not even cover the cuts. Arizona received received the lowest amount in the country. It's like bringing a glass of water to a fire that you started. Mr. Siskimani to respond to that before we move on. Once again, no specifics on the plan. She's quick on criticizing things that apparently just no idea how how how it actually get out of any kind of problem that we're having here. She doesn't have the ability to work across the aisle. She's never shown that before. I have done that. I work with President Biden's administration. When he was in office now, President Trump's. That's why I've been ranked the most bipartisan member every year that I've been in office. This is an issue that shouldn't be by that should be bipartisan. It should not be partisan. So absolutely not. Arizona was not the lowest state on this. There was a specific formula that was used in every state fell into that. And Arizona was part of that mix. But it wasn't the lowest one. You can go into Joanna Mendoza facts dot com. Please go to that Web site and check out the facts on my opponent. OK, one issue that you both have listed as priorities are veterans and veterans issues. This district, of course, has nearly 80,000 veterans and their families there. And so I'm curious, Mr. Siscomani, we'll start with you as someone who has held this seat. What would you say is your biggest priority going forward when it comes to supporting veterans? You're absolutely right. So we have 80,000 veterans in our district. I'm the only member in Congress to serve both on the Appropriations Committee to impact the funding for our veterans and also on the Veterans Affairs Committee to impact the policy for our veterans. So every year that I've been in office, we have increased the funding for our VA and for our veteran affairs overall. That is something that we're very proud of. Only three areas in the entire appropriations process have had that position, Homeland Security, veterans and defense. So veterans continues to be my top priority. You can see that by the bills that we've passed and introduced and what we've been able to do here as well. Also, leaving the Sierra Vista Vet Center open as soon as I came into office, there was rumors that it was going to close the outstation there. We immediately got involved. We were able to advocate to leave that open again, working with whoever's in the White House. We've been able to bring both secretaries when President Biden was in the office and now when President Trump is in office into the VA here in southern Arizona, where it's been marked as one of the one of the examples nationwide of how VA's can and should work. We also do a lot of constituent services for our veterans. I'm proud to say that I have full time staff that takes care of this for our veterans returning now over eight million dollars in benefits to our veterans that were owed and they were having problems with the red tape and everything within the VA and everything that goes with just government bureaucracy. My office is focused on this and we've been able to help veterans also in terms of being able to keep accountability on these dollars. See, when people criticize what we've gone in there and look at the VA right when we came in, they were millions of dollars being given to bonuses of top executives in the VA. That's completely unacceptable. That money should be flowing to our veterans. So we immediately went into accountability on that and make sure that that money was going to our veterans specifically. Miss Mendoza, what would you do the same or what would you do differently when it comes to identifying veterans needs and working to meet them? Yeah, well, it's actually as someone who served this country for 20 years with several combat deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, you know, I get my care at the Tucson VA and I will tell you that it was just absolutely heartbreaking when my opponent was thrilled. He said he was thrilled to support the effort by Doge, who was led by Elon Musk, to basically cut staff from the VA. It increased wait times not only for our veterans in the district, but for me as a veteran who gets care at the Tucson VA. And so if we're going to ensure that the promise that has been made to our veterans, we need to ensure that that's not just after the fact that they've gotten out right now. My opponent completely supports the war in Iran where 18 service members have been killed. Parents don't want to see their kids come back and flag draped coffins. I don't. I've been deployed to the Middle East and I've lost friends. So I would say that, you know, talk is cheap and my opponent needs to put his money where his mouth is. Mr. Scamani, a veteran in our district, in my district, and that we can help is waiting. We've helped countless veterans with their wait times when they have specific cases that they reach out to us. We want to continue to help them do that. That's not right. And that shouldn't be happening. But I want to point out something again that I just said. And what my opponent has is a once a right, just throw more money at things without any accountability. When we talk about staff getting cut, no doctors were let go as she claims that they were. That was not the case. That did not happen. OK, that's a fact. Again, go to join them in those facts dot com. In fact, check my opponent and all her lies. What did happen is we did take away the funding for these bonuses of millions of dollars for top executives. If you have a problem with that, Joanna, then then then we've got bigger issues here. That should not ever happen. And that money should be going to veterans, not top executives. All right. Can I may I share 30 seconds to respond? Well, as someone who actually gets my care at the Tucson VA, I can tell you that doctors have been let go. My provider left, was gone, you know, fired from the VA and it increased wait times. I had to wait at least an additional month because of what my my opponent did, the vote that he were. Actually, it wasn't even it wasn't even a vote. He was thrilled to support Elon Musk and Doge. You know, 30 percent of our federal employees are veterans. They leave military service and then they want to continue service. And so they go from country to serving in government and serving the public. And my opponent is completely OK with ensuring that the promise that America has made to our veterans is not fulfilled. One thing you mentioned, Mr. Siskimani, was constituent services. That, of course, is a big part of this job. One voter question that we are actually a few voter questions that we received focused on your accessibility to the residents in your district, asking specifically if you will be holding town halls or how you'll ensure that you're hearing directly from your constituents. Mr. Siskimani, how have you been doing that and will you change anything going forward? I've been in the job for four years and I have my same cell phone number that I had when I was in college. Right. I went to Utterback Middle School, Rincon High School, Pima Community College, the University of Arizona, worked at the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the University of Arizona as well. Then Governor Ducey's office. I've been I've been accessible the entire time. People know how to get a hold of me. My kids go to three different schools. I have parent meetings there with them. We have town halls at different companies that are productive, that have conversations. We have teletown halls as well. We hold office hours all across the district, mobile office hours. We go to where our constituents are and everybody can get a hold of us. And you just have to look at the numbers and how much money we've been able to return to our constituents. Now, whether it's a passport they're having an issue with, for example, that they the whole family got approved and one is waiting. We have a direct line that we can help them with on that aspect. Now, that may seem small and trivial to some people, but for that family, that that is everything in that moment. We have, again, so many examples of veterans calling in because they have issues with a VA bureaucracy or disability claim wait times or things of that nature that we're working on improving. And we're able to help them out by making those those phone calls. So I'm highly accessible, not to mention the fact that I shop and go grocery shopping all across the district. I coach different football teams and black football teams there. I'm I'm just there on the field talking to parents all the time whenever we go out and eat. I mean, when you have six kids, you're in a birthday party every single weekend, possibly multiple ones on that weekend. So the accessibility for me has been I love being around my district. This is where I grew up and people know how to get a hold of me, not just my office, but me personally. All right, Miss Mendoza. Yeah, well, look, I mean, again, you know, as someone who served our country after service, I came back home to Arizona, put down roots where I grew up and my service continued. I worked on helping veterans and their families access the benefits that they have earned because our military families serve, too. And so when you have situations like we're currently seeing in Iran right now where you have the misclassification of injuries, when you're not reporting casualties, that impacts those benefits that our veterans and our families are entitled to. And, you know, my opponent, again, has not stood up for the men, the troops, the servicemen and women that are currently forward deployed right now and some of them who have lost their lives. And to that point, you had a spouse of an airman who was a casualty in Iran and couldn't get the survivor benefits because the war had not been the war. Powers resolution had not been voted on. And let's stick with that topic of Iran here since that just came up in your comments. What should be the limit of U.S. military involvement in the Middle East and what specific conditions do you believe justify putting American troops in harm's way? Miss Mendoza, we'll start with you. Yeah, well, again, look, I served my country for 20 years and I know what it means not only to serve and sacrifice, but to make the next generation of Marines as a drill instructor. And I will tell you is that when you're in a position of leadership, you put everyone else's needs before your own. And what we see happening right now with the situation in Iran is unnecessarily putting our our kids at risk. We have a president who does not have a plan for what's going to happen, no measure of success and what's going to happen in Iran. Service members are are are dying and they're not being reported properly. There's injuries happening. I mean, all of these things, when you're in a position of special trust and confidence like my opponent here, those are the things that he needs to be fighting for. And I will tell you that when I'm in Congress, I will do just that because I know what it means to serve. I know what it means to be forward deployed. You want to add you want to you want to talk about the additional concerns that we're having in Iran? Let's talk about the USS Abraham Lincoln. I am fully prepared to put together a congressional delegation to find out what the heck is happening on the USS Abraham Lincoln. My opponent has done none of that. And so, again, when you're in a position of leadership, it is your job to take care of the people whose lives you have in your hands. And again, my opponent supports the president has been endorsed by the president and he has not stood up once for servicemen and women. Mr. Siskimani, your response to that? Again, no specific plan is just staggering to me. So let's talk about the issue here. We have a situation where Iran cannot have nuclear weapons. We know that every president before this president has uttered those words and nobody had done anything about that, that that it was a need that everybody knew was coming. It was an eminent threat that kept increasing. Iran has been an enemy and the Ayatollah and the Iran regime has been an enemy of the United States for decades, from attacking our embassies, to attacking our men and women in uniform, to funding terrorism across the Middle East and across the world. The Houthis, Hezbollah, Hamas, all funded by these by this terrorist regime, also funding drones for Russia as they attack Ukraine. These are all things that they have done. They cried death to America in their open government sessions, yet no one had done anything about that. We cannot allow Iran to have nuclear weapons or the ballistic system that they have been developing. So that was what the action was about there. When we look at the human rights violations in Iran, women have no rights there. LGBT community has no rights in that community. They are not a good partner in any way, shape or form. And the world without the Ayatollah is a better world that we can live in, a safer world as well. So so when we look at this, this conflict, we have to look at the at the reason that we went there. And also, listen, everybody hoped and thought that this was going to be done a lot quicker. Now, we have to continue to make sure that the mission gets complete. The first part of it was completed, which was removing this regime and setting back the nuclear capabilities by decades. Now we have to make sure that the Strait of Hormuz is open and that we can continue to do some normalcy there. But as long as our regime stays in place, the world is not going to be safe. Daniel, for me, 30 seconds to respond. Well, look, I mean, I agree. Iran should not have access to nuclear weapons. And if that was the case and there was intelligence, then why not take it to the House Intelligence Committee so that we can have actually Congress pass the worst power resolution to make sure that our troops over in Iran are doing are successful in their mission? And unfortunately, my opponent has said absolutely nothing about that. And so I just wanted to take that quick moment to educate him on military operations. There has to be a mission. There has to be a strategy and a measure for success. And that's not happening right now. Let's bring it back here to Arizona, specifically when it comes to border security and immigration in this district. Mr. Siskimani, you've pointed out that crossings at the southern border have fallen dramatically. Which specific policies do you believe produced that decline? And what further actions would you advocate for going forward? Well, listen, when we talk about border security, we talk about immigration, we talk about border policy. This is very near and dear to my heart. I'm an immigrant. I went through the entire process becoming a U.S. citizen in 2006 and now 20 years later being able to serve in Congress. So I'm a product of the American dream. I want people to have a shot at that American dream. We also need to make sure that people respect the laws and we know who's coming into this country. For the for the four years before President Trump came into office, the border was wide open. My opponent, Joanna Mendoza, said nothing about that, never minded the fact that we had a wide open border with literal terrorists and the watch list and the terrorist watch list coming into this country and then being released. Crime being committed by people that were already criminals in their country coming into this country, committing crimes. That's not that's not good immigration reform. We have to make sure that we secure the border. We have to make sure that on the immigration system, we have a good process in which people can come here and work. People can come here and pursue a student visa, pursue a green card opportunity, like what my family did, and then citizenship later on, if that's what they would like to do. We need to be able to do both at the same time, not to mention the trade in the commerce that we'll talk about later. But right now, when we talk about immigration and border policy, we have to make sure that we have a secure border, secure nation so that we can also improve the immigration system and meet the demand in the in the demand that we have in this country for workforce, for example. So to answer your question specifically on the policy, honestly, much of it was allow Border Patrol to do their job and be able to secure the border under the Biden administration. Their hands were tight. They weren't able to enforce. You can talk to any Border Patrol agent out there and that's what they had. That's why I've been endorsed by the Border Patrol Council every single time. And every law enforcement agency that has endorsed in this race has endorsed me and endorsed against my opponent. Why? Because they trust me in that area. And having said that, there's more work to do. We need to codify a lot of this into law to to prevent another Joe Biden coming into office in the future or someone like my opponent being in a position of authority where they can reopen the border and then go back to to the place that we were in four years ago. Ms. Mendoza, I want to give you the full two minutes to respond to those comments and then to also share specific policies that you would work to change from the current administration. OK, well, first, I you know, I want to say that I support our Border Patrol. I support our police. I do not support defunding the police. And it's very dishonest that my opponent is saying that because that is not true. I said that back in 2020 specifically, it was captured on video. And I said that I do not support defunding the police. I don't support abolishing ICE. And look, I'm quite frank. Frankly, I'm a little I'm a little hurt that that that is the image that my opponent is trying to portray of me. I'm someone who actually served for 20 years, took an oath that was even payable with potentially my life. And for him to say that I don't care about border security or national security is it's just very dishonest when the truth is, is that I spent my life protecting this country, willing to die for our American values, for the Constitution, for who we are as Americans. And to say that I'm from open borders is not is not truthful. National security is always going to be a top priority. We need to make sure that we are working with one of our oldest allies, Mexico, which right now under this administration, with the support of my opponent, we don't have a great relationship with them. So tariffs the president has has increased tariffs in Mexico that are raising prices for us. I mean, in addition to that, you have law enforcement agencies across the border who are not able to share intelligence with Mexico to make sure that we're stopping cartels, that we're stopping the drug trafficking. And my opponent, quite frankly, has been there for two terms now. And I think everyone was expecting him to actually do something because both parties have failed in actually addressing border security. So 30 seconds to respond to the border is way more secure today than it was under the Biden administration. And the fact that my opponent can't accept the fact that the border looks a lot better today than it did under the Biden administration is staggering. And that tells you how much she's really willing to concede here and work across the aisle for this. The other thing I serve on intelligence committees that share this, I'm the vice chair of the Homeland Security Committee and the Appropriations Committee. There is more intelligence sharing with Mexican government today than there ever was before. And this could be collaborated by their own admission. That's what we've been able to secure the border on both sides. Mexico has militarized the border on their side, thanks to the pressure that our government has put on that, making that side of the border also secure. It's not just about making our side of the border secure. It's also good for our Mexican counterparts to have a safe border on their side. And it's not where it needs to be, but it is a much better position than where it was before. And the fact that she can accept that, that tells you a lot. Another few voter questions that we received related to this issue revolved around, you know, expanding guest worker programs or other options, particularly in this area where agriculture is really important. So my question is, how do you support or how do you balance rather stricter enforcement with potentially expanding some of these guest worker programs? Ms. Mendoza, we'll start with you. Yeah, well, look, I mean, my stepfather was an immigrant from Mexico who was naturalized under the Reagan administration. And so, you know, he quite frankly, we worked in the agriculture field. We worked in the you know, on the farms, on the cotton fields. And it's always been an issue that has been a pain point for a lot of farmers because the visa program is actually there's not enough incentives for employers and farmers to actually use. It's really expensive. And so if you have like a really small farm, it's going to be really hard to be able to comply with that. In addition to that, you know, it just needs a full revamping. You know, this is what I'm talking about with both parties across the aisle have kicked the can down the road. I mean, we should have had immigration reform a long time ago addressing worker visas. I mean, think of the Dairymen's Association. I mean, cows need to get milk three hundred and sixty five days a year, sometimes twice a day, and they don't have enough workers to fill those spots. And so that impacts our economy here in Arizona. So, again, you know, I'm fully prepared to work across the aisle on actually bringing some valid and implemental implementing solutions to address this issue that, you know what, Democrats and Republicans have both just kicked the can down the road. And who suffers for it? We do. We're the ones that suffer for it. Mr. Siskimani, your response to that and also your thoughts on this balance between an enforcement versus expanding some of these programs and options for folks. Yeah, that's a great question because they go hand in hand. You can't do one without the other. When you tighten the enforcement and you leave the bad people out and you can't you don't allow bad people to come into the country and you know who's coming in and you have control over that and you have the authority over that. And that allows you to focus on letting the good people and the people that want to come here and work, when they come here and study, when they come here and contribute, when they come here and maybe even assimilate and stay in this country for the long term. That that is what we need to do here. So when we look at, for example, the the the issue of the guest worker program, I've sponsored legislation and I've been on this that we can expand the permitting process for these for the permits of the work permits to last not just a year. Every time that people have to go back and forth, that's an expense on the business. That's that's also it gives no assurance to the migrant worker coming in and being able to know that they're going to come back. And if they have a new person every single year, the company here has to retrain, for example. So these are all things that that we can expand and do better on. The other mentioned the point that I'll mention here on this issue are our DACA students, our dreamers, that they need a shot at the American dream. We owe it to them for far too long. They came here at no fault of their own. And all this bickering back and forth and playing a political football by both sides have put them in a hard position that that they are not able to take full advantage of the American dream. Now, something that isn't necessarily in this district, but something that folks are watching is the construction of a border wall along the Tohono O'odham Nation, despite the tribe's objections. And so there were some voter questions as well about tribal sovereignty. And so my my questions for you is, are there circumstances where federal border security needs override tribal sovereignty? Mr. Siskimani, we'll start with you. Well, this this situation, this relationship with the tribes has been going on for a long time, not only in our southern border, but this also happens at our northern border. And specifically with the T.O. right right here in southern Arizona, that's something that Border Patrol has had a very good working relationship with and being able to honor their tribal land and also honor their sacred land as well and being able to help with the crossing of their sacred land back and forth on that. We want to make sure that we respect all that. And actually, I've been on the side of making sure that whatever fee is applied for tourism to go back and forth does not apply to members of the of the nation both here and and in Mexico as well. So having said that, it's important that both law enforcement agencies, our Border Patrol and also the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over these tribal lands are working together hand in hand. I think we can all agree that we want to secure a nation. They will be the first front line to be impacted by any kind of drug running, as we saw in the Biden administration. That's not what the nation wanted. I talked to many of their leaders and they were not happy with that. Ranchers in Cochise County certainly were not happy with that. And then farmers over in Yuma County were not happy with that. The open border policy that Joe Biden had for four years was not good for anyone, including our tribes. That's why it's so important to have that working relationship with them within our federal government and their sovereign nation. Ms. Mendoza, your thoughts on that? Yeah, well, look, I mean, there's places along the border where a wall actually does make sense. A physical barrier actually makes sense. But in addition to that, we need to be we we need to modernize our ports of entry. We need to have technology that will allow us to track cartels in technology that will allow us to determine whether or not someone is actually carrying fentanyl. And, you know, those are things that we can work towards. But there has to be a will. And again, both parties have kicked the can down the road. And, you know, unfortunately, my opponent is bringing up, you know, previous administration. This we're in a different administration now. And so the fact, again, kicking the can down the road, we cannot have that at all. We certainly are in a different administration. And I think everybody on the border knows that they can feel it. They feel safer. They feel we're in a better position. And we have definitely moved on from the last four years. It's important to note, though, because when you compare where we are today and where we were then, then the difference is a stark difference in the ports of entry. I worked leading the Arizona-Mexico Commission here for 80 years under Governor Ducey. And that was the sole focus, to be able to expand trade between Arizona and Mexico. Mexico is our number one trading partner, times four, over 20 billion dollars of two-way trade. We want to make sure we expand it. But also at the ports of entry, we need security. That's where the majority of the fentanyl crosses into this country, through this, through these ports, specifically at Nogales Port of Entry. So we need to make sure that we enhance security there and also enhance the port itself by expanding the lanes and the staffing as well. And Ms. Mendoza, 30 seconds, your thoughts on the border now versus how it was a couple of years ago? Well, you know, Danielle, I want to address tribal sovereignty. There should be no situation where the United States government is not respecting tribal government and should be consulting with the tribal government. And right now, you know, in terms of our border where, you know, I was down in Safford talking to the police chief down there. They have a 23 person police force, 23 strong. And what he shared with me was that when there are resources taken away from the border and especially most recently under this administration, that it makes it hard for them to keep the community safe and they can't expand it because they don't have the funding. So, again, we need to make sure that we're supporting our local law enforcement and no recognition of where we are today. See that? I mean, that she can't recognize that where we were then to where we are today. So I just point that out to the next big issue. I want to make sure we get this in. That's water, of course, a big issue statewide. Arizona's water supply, of course, one of the state's biggest long term challenges. If significant Colorado River cuts become unavoidable, should the federal government play a larger role in regulating how Arizona manages and allocates its water? Mr. Siskimani, listen, water is our most precious resource. No question about it. We have a long history in Arizona of managing water properly. One of the key aspects of that is to be able to work across the aisle and not make it a partisan issue. That's actually how you build the fifth largest city in the nation in Phoenix, in the middle of the desert. Why? Because of leaders before us like Mo Udall, like John Kyle, people from both sides of the aisle that got together and actually got things done. That is the water discussion that we need to have. No question. We have a drought. And because of that drought, everybody's going to need to take a certain amount of cuts. What we need to make sure is that we don't take a larger amount or the only amount of cuts as the current propositions had it. So when we saw the propositions, because the states couldn't figure it out between themselves, that got elevated to the Department of Interior, which we didn't want it to happen because we want to make sure to solve this state to state. However, our state leadership with both U.S. senators and the governor failed to do that. So it got kicked over to the Department of Interior. When that happened, they had different proposals. All of them had the lower basin states taking the majority of the cuts, with Arizona taking the majority of those cuts. That was unacceptable. So we leverage our relationship with the White House. We did our own proposal as a state, and that is a proposal that was accepted for the next two years. Now, that buys us time, but that's not the long term solution for this. We need to come up with a solution in these next two years where the cuts on water are equitable across the board and everybody does take their responsible cut due to the drought. But what cannot happen is that Arizona takes all the cuts on that or the lower basin states because that wouldn't be equitable or fair. And that's what we need to fight for. Ms. Mendoza, your plans when it comes to Arizona's water. Yeah, I mean, look, water's life. And we know that here very intimately in Arizona, if there's no water, then there's no economic development. There, you know, isn't building houses and really keeping kids where they grew up in those communities. I mean, look, you know, Penal County, I grew up in Penal County and Eloy, as you all know, and Penal County was one of the first counties to take a cut when we went into this drought situation and family farms there. I mean, they they couldn't they they couldn't stay functional. So a lot of that a lot of that land was fallowed, you know, family farms that were being sold. And that is just really egregious. I mean, agriculture is a huge part of Arizona's economy. And so for something like that to not be addressed, which means negotiating, talking, you know, I just with what we see in Congress right now, it's really hard to think that the federal government is going to solve this issue for Arizona. So we have to do it. One more issue I want to make sure we touch on before our time comes up here shortly, and that's regarding elections. The current administration is pushing for new restrictions when it comes to mail in voting, saying that tighter rules can make elections more secure. However, some critics warn about potentially disenfranchising voters. And so one minute each for this one, especially given the rural makeup of this particular district. Mr. Siskimani, how do you balance election security with ensuring that voters have access? Well, I support mail in voting, fully support mail in voting. We've done it better than any other state. We've done it longer than most states in the nation. So I trust our system. Is it perfect? No, we have to make improvements always. But I do support mail in voting and I've gone to bat for Arizona on that. I also support in-person voting. I don't support communities like, for example, in the city of Tucson, where mail in vote, where it's all mail in voting. So we need to make sure that all voting and encourage people to vote in the best way that works for them. And the way you add the security is by showing a picture ID that's not out of this world, by cleaning up the rolls and making sure that people that are no longer alive are no longer on the rolls. These are all common sense measures that we can continue to take measures that my opponent that my opponent opposes. Why? Because she doesn't want picture ID to be shown at the ballot. Why? I'm not sure why, but that will definitely increase the security in the election while allowing everyone that wants to vote to be able to vote in our rural areas as well. They highly prefer the mail in voting. Ms. Mendoza, your response to that? You have one minute. Yeah, well, look, I mean, you know, roughly about 80 percent of Arizonans vote by mail. They love it, including Republicans and Democrats. Right. I mean, it is something that has worked really well here in Arizona. Our elections are secure, they're safe. And, you know, in addition to that, like voter ID requirements, I support those. Why? Because it's the law already. So there's not anything that's new that's coming to the table. So I think when it comes to voting, we need to make sure that we're not disenfranchising folks who live in rural communities, who rely on vote by mail, our tribal communities, our our tribal members who, you know, rely on on vote by mail and any other demographics that this would really hurt. So, again, you know, voter ID, I support it. Sounds like an endorsement for the Save Act right there from Joanna Mendoza. Well, don't put words in my mouth, Congressman. Thank you. OK, one thing real quick before we move into the speed round. You both have mentioned bipartisanship and the importance of working across the aisle. And so 30 seconds real quick for each of you. Are there particular issues where you would be ready to vote against your party line? Ms. Mendoza, we'll start with you. Yeah, I mean, look, actually, there's two water because we need to protect our water here in Arizona. And the other one is border security, you know, and law enforcement. Mr. Siskimani. Yeah, I've done that. I've done that on the we had to override a presidential veto that that bill that the House passed on suspension in the House that authorized new water infrastructure in the western U.S. The president vetoed that bill and then they came back to the House for an override. I was part of a handful of Republicans that actually voted to override the president's veto. That takes some courage to be able to do that and send up to your party. So I don't have to talk about what I wish I could do or that I would do. I've done that. And I've stood up to the to my own party on different issues. I mentioned the mail-in voting, of course, and also water, which I would just give you an example. All right. Well, we are now going to shift into the speed round. And again, these candidates have been given these questions ahead of time. You have 15 seconds to answer each one. So the first question, what is the first word that you want voters to associate with your leadership? Ms. Mendoza, we'll start with you. Service. Results. All right. That was a lot quicker than 15 seconds. All right. The next question. What is the one thing that you wish Washington better understood about this district, Ms. Mendoza? That we can't keep going on like this with border security. I mean, again, you know, I talked extensively on how both parties have kicked the can down the road. And this is it. It's bad. It's it's time that we actually find solutions because we can't keep going on like this. Mr. Siskimani. What Washington doesn't understand about AZL 6, we could be here all day for that. We're going to need a full 10, 10 minutes for that. But I'll tell you this. We are a common sense district. We want solutions. We want bipartisanship, which is I've been ranked the most bipartisan member in Arizona every year that I've been in office. I've delivered that. This district wants common sense. Washington is not common sense. So that's the contrary right there. All right. What is one way that your ideology differs from the mainstream of your party, Ms. Mendoza? Yeah, well, look, I'm very pragmatic again. You know, I talked about in the Marine Corps, you don't ask people if they're Republican or Democrat. You say, are you trained in the mission? You train together, you go and you accomplish the mission and you take care of each other. And really, for me, it's about taking that kind of mindset to Congress to actually get things done. I have a very unique perspective, naturalized citizen, product of public schools, defender of public lands. I believe in the core of this district. One thing that I disagree on the ideology that we're seeing from both sides is the partisanship. Both sides seem to avoid working with each other right now. And that ideology does not fly well with me or this district. And that goes well into this final question, which is what is one issue that you are prepared to work across the aisle to address if you had to choose one? Water. Mr. Affordability for affordability for all our families that are hurting. All right. Well, thank you, candidates. It is now time for closing statements. Each of you has one minute and to keep us on time, we will politely cut you off if you start to run over. Miss Mendoza, you have the first closing statement. You have one minute. Yeah, well, thank you again to clean elections and to everyone tuning in at home. I'm running for Congress because I took an oath to protect this country and uphold the Constitution. And that oath does not expire. And we heard a lot tonight. But let me ask you this. Do you believe that Congress is making your life better? I don't. That's why I am running for Congress. You know, in the Marine Corps, we have a saying and that saying goes, lead, follow or get the heck out of the way. And, you know, my opponent, Siskemani, is a follower and we need a leader with a spine in the Marine Corps. We're trained to run towards the fight. And I will tell you that the only thing tougher than a Marine is a mom. And I am both. And I would be honored to have your vote. Mr. Siskemani, you have one minute for your closing statement. Well, thank you. I want to thank you for joining us tonight, everybody at home. Thank you for that. You saw today the differences, the stark differences between my opponent and myself. I think that was made clear today. As much as Joanna wants to run away from her record and extreme positions and rewrite her own history, the fact that she can't do that. So I encourage everybody again to go to JoannaMendozaFacts.com to get all the information on my opponent there. Look, I hear from people all the time and they're tired of politics. They don't believe anyone. And I get it. I don't blame you for that. We've had generations where both sides are fighting to seems like win elections instead of actually getting things done and getting results. It seems that politics has become a national sport with a never ending season. And at the end, everybody hates each other. But I'm fighting to change that. I am definitely fighting to change and I want to do that. That's why I've approached this job by putting labels aside and actually focusing on results. And we can see that I still believe in the American dream for my family, for your family, for all of our future as well. So I ask for your vote to continue fighting for that American dream for everyone. All right. Thank you both. This wraps this midterm election debate with the candidates for Congressional District 6. And just as a reminder, the Arizona midterm election is on November 3rd and early voting starts October 7th. The voter registration deadline is October 5th to register to vote. You can head to AZCleanElections.gov. You can also head to AZMedia.org to see a list of every local media partner, plus upcoming debates and where you can find them on TV, radio and digital platforms. You can also see the full debate schedule, submit questions and find voting information by heading to AZCleanElections.gov. On behalf of our partners at Clean Elections, the Arizona Media Association, Reister and Sneaky Big Studios, thanks for joining us.