The only debate between the candidates running in New York’s U.S. Senate race was hosted by Spectrum News at the University at Albany Wednesday night. Incumbent Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand and Republican challenger Mike Sapraicone occasionally agreed during the testy debate.
Kirsten Gillibrand was appointed to her seat in 2009 and won six-year terms in 2012 and 2018. Sapraicone is a retired New York City Police detective who then created a security services company.
One of their most extended clashes occurred over abortion rights. The candidates were asked about New York’s Proposition 1, the Equal Rights Amendment, which would prohibit unequal treatment and protect reproductive healthcare autonomy. Gilllibrand said she plans to vote for it.
“I believe in equality. I believe women in this country deserve equal rights. We deserve bodily autonomy. We deserve the right to make decisions about when we’re having children and under what circumstances we’re having children,” asserts Gillibrand. “And an Equal Rights Amendment in New York will guarantee equality for everyone.”
Moderator Susan Arbetter turns to the Republican challenger: “Mr. Sapraicone?”
“I’ll vote no,” he states. “I mean what the Senator is saying we all should agree with but that’s not what this amendment is for, that’s not what this proposition is for. And what it’s about is you’re going to let an 8-year-old decide if they have the right to change what they are from male to female or female to male. They’re not going to include the parents. It doesn’t talk about abortion. We have the most expansive abortion law in the country for over 50 years. This proposition is not changing the way abortion is. It’s only taking the rights away from parents.”
Gillibrand: “You’re absolutely wrong.”
During a discussion on immigration reform the two candidates argued over a bipartisan border bill that lost House support. Gillibrand chastised former President Donald Trump for influencing the vote while Sapraicone, who has been endorsed by Trump, questioned why Democrats couldn’t manage to pass the measure.
“The bipartisan bill which should have been supported but President Trump derailed it for political purposes. He said don’t vote for this bill I want it to be a campaign issue,” Gillibrand says.
“The Democrats have the majority in the Senate. You’ve been a Senator for 15 years. Why were you not able to even get that bill on the floor of the Senate so it would’ve passed in the Senate and it would’ve went to the House,” questions Sapraicone. “How does that fail?”
“Because Donald Trump told the House of Representatives do not vote for this bill. If you vote for this bill it will harm my chances of winning the presidency and I’m more important than fixing New York’s problems,” Gillibrand contends. “So my question for you is how come the five new Republican House members did nothing as majority makers in the House to demand that Speaker Johnson put that bill on the floor? And when we did vote on it, Democrats voted for that common sense reform.”
“Not in the Senate, they didn’t Senator,” challenges Sapraicone.
“Yes we did,” asserts Gillibrand.
“You did not vote for it. It never came to the floor,” insists Sapraicone.
“We did vote for it. I’m Senator, you’re not,” retorts Gillibrand.
“Correct...” begins Sapraicone.
“I was there. We voted for it,” Gillibrand says.
“You’re a Senator and I’m not but that may change in two weeks,” argues Sapraicone.
“You’re wrong,” replies Gillibrand.
The Farm Bill, which includes provisions to fund farm and food nutrition programs, must be reauthorized. Sapraicone contends SNAP, or the food stamp program, should be reassessed leading to Gillibrand defending the current iteration of the program.
“I don’t think it’s the best program out there. I think we could reevaluate the program of SNAP and look at it in a different way,” considers Sapraicone. “But I certainly think a lot of things we do are wasteful and I think it needs to be reevaluated.”
“SNAP is not a wasteful program,” insists Gillibrand. “It is one of the most effective programs that exist to get rid of hunger insecurity. For every...”
“But I didn’t, excuse me, I didn’t say we should do away with it,” interrupts Sapraicone.
“I know but you said...” Gillibrand continues.
“What I said is we should reevaluate it and how we handle it,” defends Sapraicone.
“Yes but you said it’s misused and that’s again a false allegation,” Gillibrand maintains. “It’s not true. We need to expand SNAP benefits and make it more robust. Republicans want to cut SNAP funding.”
“No I don’t see the Republicans wanting to cut it,” Sapraicone says. “I think they may want to improve it or work on it a little bit better.”
“No they want to cut it,” mutters Gillibrand.
“And there’s always room in anything we do to improve,” Sapraicone avers.
While the two candidates argued on a number of issues, there were some topics they agreed on. As reports indicate Israel may retaliate against Iran, the duo expressed support for Israel.
“We should support Israel as best we can. They’re our closest ally in the MidEast and Israel is not just fighting a war for Israel, they’re fighting a war for us,” emphasizes Sapraicone. “Who’s going to be next in what’s going on with Iran. We need to stand tall with Israel. We need to support them in any way we can and we need to not micromanage them.”
“I do support Israel’s right to defend itself,” agrees Gillibrand. “Israel is a very small country in the middle of a very rough neighborhood. It is receiving missiles from Iran, from Lebanon and from Gaza. If Israel decides they need to target some part of Iran’s infrastructure for nuclear weapons, for missile production, some cyber response it’s absolutely in their right to do that because they’ve already been attacked. And we will support Israel in trying to defend itself.”
Early voting in New York state begins Saturday.
