Slotkin, Barrett spar in final debate on gay marriage, tax policy, 2020 election

Democratic U.S. Rep. Elissa Slotkin and Republican state Sen. Tom Barrett traded barbs on economic policy, the 2020 election, gay marriage and corporate taxes during a contentious televised debate Thursday night in the Lansing area.

The live exchange on WLNS-TV (Channel 6) was the second and final debate planned between the fierce rivals, who are facing off in the race for U.S. House in Michigan's new 7th District — considered one of the most competitive and expensive contests for Congress nationally this fall.

The 7th District covers the greater Lansing area, Livingston County and small parts of western Genesee and Oakland counties. Both parties view the competitive district as a must-win to clinch the House majority next term.

Moderator Tim Skubick started out by asking the candidates which of their opponent's advertisements they disliked most.

Barrett brought up a Slotkin ad that goes after his five votes against bills to create and fund a state incentive program aimed at attracting economic development projects to Michigan, including a General Motors Co. project promising to create 1,700 jobs at a $2.5 billion battery cell plant west of Lansing in Barrett's Senate district.

Barrett said the ad mischaracterized his position by suggesting he's against jobs in his district.

"What I voted against, and what I've stood steadfast in opposition to, is when we take taxpayer money out of the back pockets of working families in our communities and give that directly as cash subsidies to private global corporations," Barrett said. "The jobs in question under this proposal are going to cost Michigan taxpayers $166,000 for every job created, for jobs that will pay only $46,000 (a year) to the workforce."

Slotkin said she wouldn't apologize "at all" for the ad, saying it laid bare a significant difference between them.

"I'm a big believer that after COVID there are just certain things that should be made in America, that we can't just outsource everything to China — electric vehicle batteries so that we can build the next generation of cars," Slotkin said, also highlighting her support for a bill incentivizing the U.S. microchip industry.

"You want to make a Rubik's Cube in China? Go make it in China. But certain things that are fundamental to our economic security, yes, I will support them coming here because this is what we do. We're a manufacturing state."

Slotkin said the ad that most offended her was one in which Barrett "accused me of literally living with another man other than my husband," saying it was "deeply below the belt" and "desperate."

Slotkin was referring to an attack ad launched Wednesday by the GOP-aligned Congressional Leadership Fund that's critical of her leasing a Lansing condo from a campaign donor and director of government relations for a Michigan manufacturer, Niowave. As The Detroit News has reported, Slotkin's landlord is living in Connecticut (not at the condo), and she is paying fair market value for the rental, according to her lease.

Slotkin accused Barrett of having his allies post the congresswoman's address online and photos of her home taken from a private parking lot.

"You can imagine, as a sitting member of Congress, that hasn't made me feel more safe," Slotkin said. "It's just something I would personally never do to Tom. I would never do that to his family. I would never make them less safe, and I would never accuse him of sleeping with somebody else."

Slotkin said the situation reflected a "fundamental difference in character."

"I am not suggesting that you are living in the same residence together, but I am suggesting that your voting registration and his, as well as the registration for his LLC, are all co-mingled in that same residence," said Barrett, later adding he doesn't support publishing her address.

Slotkin said it was "patently false" for Barrett to claim that she did anything in Congress to benefit her landlord's company, noting the amount of federal grants that Niowave received had fallen since her 2018 election. Barrett noted that Niowave has been the only Michigan recipient of the grant program that she advocated for, though bipartisan members of Michigan's delegation have advocated for the same.

On gay marriage, Barrett said he's opposed. He said he voted for the 2004 ballot proposal to make it unconstitutional for Michigan to recognize or perform same-sex marriages or civil unions — a measure invalidated by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015.

"That's in our state constitution. That should have been respected, and if it wanted to be overturned, there could have been a proposal to do that. Obviously, the U.S. Supreme Court nullified that. That issue is, as I see it, settled now," Barrett said.

Slotkin, whose mom came out as gay in 1986, disagreed. She referenced a concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas to the June ruling that overturned the right to an abortion that suggested the high court should also reconsider precedent that established the right to same-sex marriage, among others.

"This is something that if the Republicans flip the House … there are people who are going to put up a ban on gay marriage," Slotkin said. "They're going to bring it to him whether he wants to vote on it or not. ... Will you vote on a federal ban against gay marriage?"

"I would not vote to ban gay marriage at the federal level," Barrett said. "I think that is an issue for the states to decide."

The candidates also debated the 2020 election, with Slotkin pressing Barrett about whether he would have voted to certify the results as she did in Congress after the Jan. 6 insurrection, and if believed that President Joe Biden legitimately won Michigan. Barrett said he would have voted to certify after the debate on the House floor on concerns about the election in disputed states like Pennsylvania and Arizona.

"I would have certified after the debate took place. I think the remedy for what transpired was in the courts, and the courts decided months afterward. Barring that decision, I think it was the obligation to certify," Barrett said.

"But I still have legitimate concerns about how that (election) took place. That's why I've been a leader on trying to make sure that that doesn't happen in the future," he added, noting his bill to require photo identification to vote.

Slotkin highlighted her support for the Inflation Reduction Act that passed over the summer, noting it caps the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors who have Medicare, allows the government to negotiateprices for some drugs under Medicare and caps beneficiaries’ out-of-pocket costs if they have the Medicare Part D benefit.

Barrett said he wouldn't have supported the bill because it wasn't just about Medicare prescription drugs and insulin. "It was 700 and some billion dollars, just short of a trillion dollars in new spending that is not going to reduce inflation," he said.

Slotkin countered that the bill would be paid for in part by the savings on Medicare negotiating drug prices, as well as by imposing a corporate minimum tax of 15% on corporations with profits of over $1 billion.

"Tom, you say you're the anti-corporate guy. You don't believe in corporate welfare. Do they have to pay their fair share?" Slotkin said of the most lucrative corporations.

Barrett didn't directly answer whether he'd support the 15% minimum tax for corporations. "What I am saying is every corporation should be treated fairly and equitably under the tax code," he said. "What's happened is we've just made the tax code so complex and so out of control, that all these gamesmanship things happen."

Both candidates said they support banning individual stock trading by members of Congress and neither supports changing the age for when people can start receiving Social Security retirement benefits. They differed on the death penalty, with Barrett opposed, and Slotkin saying she supports it in rare cases for repetitive, egregiously violent crime like serial killers.

"There have been a number of people who've been exonerated after they've been convicted of a very heinous crime, and you can't undo it once it's done," Barrett said. "And it's something that I think just the government should not be empowered to take someone's life."

On court reform, Slotkin said she's open to a proposals for term limits or expanding the court but is reticent to change tradition. Barrett said he opposes expanding or "packing" the Supreme Court but would be open to a conversation about term limiting justices.

mburke@detroitnews.com