RINDGE — Katrina Swett and Ann Kuster, Democratic candidates for Congressional District 2, pulled no punches at the Monadnock Debates on Tuesday, where they fought to prove their dedication to the middle class and criticized one another’s past decisions.

This week’s debate was the second of a three-part series of House and Senate candidate debates co-sponsored by Franklin Pierce University’s Fitzwater Center and the Monadnock Ledger-Transcript.

Swett currently teaches American foreign policy at Tufts University, serves on the board of New England College in Henniker, and runs the N.H.-based Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice. She began her involvement in politics by campaigning for Joe Biden in 1988. Her husband, Dick Swett, held the Second District Congressional seat from 1991 to 1995.

Kuster describes herself as a community activist, attorney, public policy advocate and author. She co-authored a book about the burden of aging and Alzheimer’s disease, “The Last Dance: Facing Alzheimer’s with Love and Laughter.” She has served on a number of nonprofit boards across New Hampshire. Her mother, Susan McLane, served as a N.H. state representative and senator from 1969 to 1994.

Lobbying

Both candidates denied working as lobbyists in Washington, but that did not stop them from accusing each other of lobbying throughout the debate.

Swett went on the offensive first, accusing Kuster of opposing a mid-1990s bill to force drug manufacturers to provide the same discounts to all purchasers because she was employed by the national pharmaceutical lobby.

“Katrina, with all respect for you, let’s get real. You were a lobbyist, too,” said Kuster. “The records are clear, you were a regular lobbyist for Wall Street in Congress.”

Swett later fired back on Kuster’s accusation.

“I just want to clarify, I have never been paid to lobby for anyone ever,” said Swett. “She [Kuster] has been a lobbyist for 20 years, and a highly paid one.”

“The final word we will give to Google,” said Kuster. “Just go to ‘Katrina Swett lobbyist.’”

According to published reports, Swett’s name is listed on a lobbying registration form from the 1990s that refers to her as the vice president of her husband’s lobbying firm, although she says it was a formality and she never personally lobbied. Also, for 20 years Kuster has been a lobbyist for educational and health care companies, but on the state level.

Campaign financing

Swett spoke in favor of a reform on campaign financing that she said will “break the connection between politics and money.”

She also supports federal support for campaigns and free air and television time for candidates who “meet a certain threshold of legitimacy.”

Swett said she sees corruption in the political process and her own campaign will fight against it.

“I am also proud to be the only Democrat in this race that has not accepted any corporate PAC money,” she said.

According to Kuster, Swett received most of her contributions from donors outside of New Hampshire, even receiving $250,000 from Wall Street sources.

Kuster described her campaign as being a true grassroots effort.

“I am very proud to be running a people powered campaign,” said Kuster. “We have created our own campaign finance reform within our own campaign.”

She said she has received thousands of contributions under $20 over the Internet. She said those contributions came from “New Hampshire people stepping up.”

Economy

Kuster and Swett both said they would fight for the prosperity of the New Hampshire people, particularly the middle-class.

“I am running to fight for the middle class, the lifeblood of our economy,” said Swett, who wants to extend tax cuts to middle-class Americans.

“Any bill that comes before me has to pass a litmus test: Does it support the middle class?” said Swett. “I will not support any legislation that will increase living costs on any middle class families at this time.”

Swett said that Congress gets a pay raise even when the members don’t do their jobs. She said she would not take that raise and wants to reduce the pay of the rest of Congress.

“It would save 17 million dollars toward reducing the federal deficit,” said Swett. “It is one cut every single American would support.

Kuster focused on job creation for the people of New Hampshire by creating tax incentives for companies that will create new jobs.

“Instead of bailing out Wall Street banks, we should be pushing them to make loans to New Hampshire businesses that want to grow and expand,” said Kuster.

She said her focus is to get the country out of the recession, which she said is hurting New Hampshire families.

“New Hampshire has lost a higher percentage of jobs to China in the last decade than any other state in the country, especially in the high tech industry,” said Kuster.

Foreign policy

Kuster called for an end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, wanting to focus instead on keeping Americans safe at home.

“This mission is not keeping us safer,” she said. “We need to disrupt Al-Qaeda wherever we can find them, but we need to keep America safe. The truth of the matter is that Al-Qaeda has moved.”

She also wants to increase sanctions on Iran, which she describes as a “powder keg.”

Kuster accused Swett of supporting former President Bush’s rush to a war in Iraq.

Swett replied that, like many Democrats, she “believed what turned out to be faulty intelligence, mainly Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.”

“I think it is a bit of a distortion to describe my record the way you have,” said Swett.

Swett said the Kuster opposes President Obama’s pledge on pulling out of Afghanistan.

“I intend to hold his feet to the fire on that pledge,” said Swett, who also wants to make sure that Pakistani weapons don’t fall into the hands of extremists.

She also expressed the need to protect the women in Afghanistan from “brutal and vicious forces.”

“We cannot abandon the women of Afghanistan to be dragged back to the 20th century against their will,” said Swett.

Kuster said that trillions of dollars have been spent on the war, “savings we could have on the deficit and savings we could have on American lives.”

Healthcare

Both candidates were in agreement that the healthcare reform law was the right step, but said it needed a public insurance option.

“It was far from a perfect proposal and I think it needs a lot of additional work,” said Swett. She said that the pharmaceutical lobby prevented Medicare from negotiating to create lower prices, which “will cost 200 billion dollars over the next decade.”

The bill “didn’t go far enough because a handful of Democrats stood in the way of the public insurance option,” said Kuster, citing Senator Joe Lieberman as the leader of these Democrats. She wants to address the cost issue and make the details of the bill less complex, she said.

Environment

The candidates were in agreement on the dangers of climate change and the need for alternative energy sources.

“It is one of the critical issues facing our country,” said Swett. “Because it is a slow moving crisis, it has been hard to arouse the general public to make changes.”

She wants to encourage Americans to be powered by clean, renewable energy like deep thermal, wind, and hydro.

“I believe we absolutely need to address climate change,” said Kuster. “This is very, very real and right here right now in our lives.”

She is in support of nuclear energy and wants to have it on the “menu of options” for alternative energy.

“We should not be re-licensing decrepit old nuclear power plants that have lived out their useful life and instead support state-of-the-art, new plants like the ones in Europe,” said Kuster.

Audience reaction

Some members of the audience said they did not feel the candidates addressed the issues, especially when it came to the question of lobbying.

“My question is: What’s the truth about the lobbyists?” asked Kathy Weibel. “I don’t think either one of them answered the questions that were asked them, and I find that frustrating as well.”

“The thing I was disappointed in was Kuster didn’t answer the questions,” said Rob Pearlman of Sanbornton. “I thought it was a debate for Swett and a speech for Kuster.”

“I thought Ann came off as more level-headed and on the level, more real,” said Bill Thomas of Rindge.

The panelists at this week’s debate were Monadnock Ledger-Transcript Publisher Heather McKernan and FPU professor Heather Tullio.

“I think Katrina Swett was very positive,” said Tullio, citing Swett’s focus on working together and not getting discouraged. “I thought that Kuster was very effective with saying ‘I’m going to fight for jobs and the middle class and the environment and the green jobs.’”

Tullio was looking to get some straight answers on the lobbyist question, but was also unsure of the candidate’s answers. “I am still kind of confused about who was a lobbyist and who wasn’t,” said Tullio. “It is a little bit frustrating, because it becomes a little bit ‘She said, she said.’”