Bernie Sanders in 2019 Town Hall

On Abortion: Totally absurd for U.S. to limit birth control abroad

SANDERS: The answer is yes. And the answer has everything to do with the fact that women in the United States of America have a right to control their own bodies and make reproductive decisions. And the Mexico City agreement, which denies American aid to those organizations around the world that are--that allow women to have abortions or even get involved in birth control to me is totally absurd. So I think, especially in poor countries around the world where women do not necessarily want to have large numbers of babies, and where they can have the opportunity through birth control to control the number of kids they have, it's something I very, very strongly support.

On Environment: Deal with existing nuclear waste before creating any more

SANDERS: We got a heck of a lot of nuclear waste, which is going to stay around for many thousands of years. We don't know how to get rid of it right now. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me to add more dangerous waste when we don't know how to get rid of what we have right now. Number two, it costs a lot more to build a new nuclear power plant today than it does to go to solar or to go to wind. So I think that it is safer and more cost effective to move to sustainable energies like wind, solar, and geothermal, and not nuclear.

Q: Can you go carbon neutral without nuclear in the short term?

SANDERS: I think you can. And I think the scientists tell us, in fact, that we can. And I think if you talk to the people in Japan in terms of what happened at Fukushima, talk to the people in Russia what happened in Chernobyl, they may not feel so comfortable with nuclear power.

On Environment: Reform FEMA to stop rebuilding in same place after storms

SANDERS: Yes.

Q: How would you implement those changes?

SANDERS: We have the absurd situation where FEMA will only pay to repair a facility or a piece of infrastructure where it was before it was destroyed. That's pretty stupid. I mean, if it was destroyed once and you rebuild it, it's destroyed twice, it doesn't make a lot of sense to put it there again. So the answer is, absolutely.

Q: So would people in coastal communities, have a house right on the beach, would they have to move?

SANDERS: Well, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to rebuild that house so that it is knocked down again in the next storm. You do your best through carrots and sticks at the federal level. But if people want to rebuild in an area which will be devastated by the next storm, they're certainly not going to get any federal assistance from my administration to do that.

On Government Reform: We need major filibuster reform, but don't abolish it

SANDERS: I have not.

Q: What will you do if bad actors like Senator Mitch McConnell use the filibuster to block climate legislation?

SANDERS: I haven't wavered. What I believe is the Senate should not be the House and we shouldn't simply have a majority body. But what I have said repeatedly is we need major filibuster reform. And second of all, just as Bush got through major tax breaks for the rich through the Budget Reconciliation Act, we can do that, as well. So if your question is, "are we going to need 60 votes to save the planet?", the answer is, no, we will not. There are ways to get that through the Budget Reconciliation Act, which will require 51 votes, and that's the method we will use.

On Health Care: We lose 30,000 people a year due to not going to the doctor

SANDERS: Keep going. You're doing great!

Q: What is the priority on climate change compared to all these others, if you have to choose?

SANDERS: Well, I have the radical idea that a sane Congress can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. And, you know, there are so many crises that are out there today. I worry very much that we lose 30,000 people a year because they don't have the money to go to a doctor when they should and that 87 million people are uninsured or underinsured. And I will implement as president a Medicare-for-all single-payer program. So to my mind, it's not prioritizing this over that. It is finally having a government which represents working families and the middle class rather than wealthy campaign contributors. And when you do that, then things fall in place.

On Homeland Security: Cut military spending to pay for fixing climate change

SANDERS: We have a moral responsibility to act boldly, and to do that, yes, it is going to be expensive. This is how we get the money.

1. Insanely, right now we are giving the fossil fuel industry approximately $400 billion every single year in subsidies and tax breaks. Obviously, we end that.
2. We believe that the federal government is the best way to move aggressively to produce sustainable energy, like wind and solar. We will expand public power concepts like the TVA.
3. We are not going to have to spend money on the military defending oil interests around the world. We can cut military spending there, as well.
4. Our program will create up to 20 million good- paying jobs over the period of the 15 years. And when we do that, you're going to have a lot of taxpayers out there who will be paying more in taxes