BOSTON – Gov. Maura Healey and Republican challenger Mike Minogue clashed over rising energy costs, abortion rights and accountability for misconduct in state government Thursday night, as the candidates met for their second and final gubernatorial debate before Election Day.
Among the sharpest exchanges came when Minogue pressed Healey over her administration’s handling of former aide LaMar Cook, who faces new federal fraud charges after being arrested on state cocaine trafficking allegations, and when the candidates debated a State Police barracks scandal involving the alleged rape of a woman by a civilian who had stayed there.
A portion of Healey’s response to the barracks incident — “Do things happen? Sometimes things happen,” she said — gave Minogue an opening to question her leadership and prompted a sustained back-and-forth over whether the governor had adequately addressed misconduct in her administration.
The candidates also offered competing explanations for Massachusetts’ high energy bills, with Minogue blaming Healey’s opposition to earlier natural gas pipeline proposals and Healey arguing that the state needs more energy from multiple sources. On abortion, Healey accused Minogue of opposing protections for women, while Minogue defended his commitment to following the law without directly answering whether he supported an effort to repeal expanded abortion protections.
The debate, hosted by WCVB-TV at its studio in Needham, repeatedly returned to the central question of the campaign: whether Healey’s record in office outweighs voters’ concerns about affordability, or whether Minogue’s promises to cut costs and change the state’s direction offer a more compelling alternative.
Both candidates have proposed suspending the state gas tax, but differ on the duration and approach. Asked what additional steps they would take to lower costs, Healey pointed to tax cuts enacted during her first year in office, along with investments in housing, health care and energy.
Minogue called for suspending the gas tax immediately, cutting a third of utility fees and allowing families to benefit from a federal scholarship tax credit — one of his main policy priorities, which he repeatedly returned to during the debate. He called on Healey to opt into the tax credit several times, which she has said she is still reviewing.
He also brought up a specific remark Healey made during their first debate last week several times: “Again, ‘Massachusetts is a great place, if you can afford it,’ is what she said. She knows people can’t afford it,” Minogue said. He returned to the line three times, using it to challenge the governor’s economic record.
Healey argued that the state remained an attractive place to live and work, citing economic growth, housing initiatives and job creation. She said governors should be “a cheerleader for our state” while acknowledging the challenges residents face.
The candidates’ housing debate highlighted a familiar disagreement over whether Healey’s administration has done enough to increase construction. Healey said she had cut permitting times from a year to 30 days, expanded opportunities for accessory dwelling units and offered tax credits to developers.
“I did something that has never been done before as governor,” Healey said of her housing plan. “Mike, you got an idea to cut permitting times. I already did that.”
Minogue countered that Massachusetts continued to lag other states in permitting and argued that restrictive building requirements and local bureaucracy were preventing more housing from being built. He said the administration was celebrating projects set in motion under former Gov. Charlie Baker.
Healey cited 100,000 homes that had been built, permitted or brought under development during her time in office and said she wanted to double that figure in a second term. She also pointed to companies expanding in Massachusetts and the creation of 15,000 jobs in the past year.
“Sure, people leave and come and go all the time,” Healey said. “But I’m telling you, we are seeing companies expand here.”
The candidates then turned to education and racial disparities in homeownership, with Healey touting a first-time homebuyer program offering $25,000 toward a purchase and her administration’s investments in public schools and career training.
Minogue repeatedly pressed Healey to opt into the federal scholarship tax credit, arguing that it would give families more educational choices and help address achievement gaps.
“The federal tax voucher thing is a tax policy. It is not an education policy,” Healey said.
Minogue rejected that distinction, arguing that additional school spending had not produced better outcomes and that families in struggling communities needed more options.
“You did put more money in, but the outcomes are worse. Sixty percent are not proficient in grammar school and high school at reading and writing. That’s down from where it was in 2019. So we’re doing something wrong,” Minogue said.
One of the debate’s most contentious stretches began with a question about misconduct at the Massachusetts State Police. Healey was asked about a reported rape involving a civilian who was allegedly invited by a trooper to stay overnight at a State Police barracks on Martha’s Vineyard.
Minogue said the governor needed to establish a culture of accountability and criticized what he described as leniency toward people accused of wrongdoing in her administration.
Healey defended her selection of Col. Geoffrey Noble, whom she hired from outside the agency, and said she supported law enforcement while expecting misconduct to be addressed.
“Colonel Noble has come in and, with his management team, done a wonderful job, in my view. Do things happen? Sometimes things happen, but I can tell you, he and I make sure that swift action is taken,” she said.
Minogue seized on the remark.
“I think the governor just said, ‘Sometimes things happen.’ That is unacceptable. A woman was raped. Sometimes things happen is not acceptable,” he said.
He argued that leaders should remove people who violate the public trust and accused Healey of making excuses for misconduct.
The dispute widened to include Cook, Healey’s former aide, who was arrested on cocaine trafficking allegations and later faced federal charges involving SNAP and wire fraud. Minogue said Cook had not been adequately held accountable and criticized the administration’s handling of the case, including the payment of $22,000 in unused vacation time.
Healey said she fired Cook the day he was arrested and worked with law enforcement to pursue the case.
“I did fire LaMar Cook before he was even arraigned,” Healey said. “I fired him before he was even arraigned.”
Minogue countered that Cook was arrested rather than fired and questioned whether the administration had adequately investigated how alleged drug trafficking could have occurred.
Healey rejected Minogue’s account of the case, saying he had made inaccurate claims, and emphasized her record as attorney general prosecuting fraud and abuse.
In a post-debate scrum with reporters, Healey said, “I wish I never hired LaMar Cook.”
Asked whether she had known when he was hired about a 2001 arrest involving a firearm, she did not directly answer the question, instead reiterating that Cook had violated the public trust and that she fired him after his 2025 arrest.
The candidates’ disagreement over immigration enforcement was less personal and mainly retraced lines they went over during their last debate.
Healey defended her administration’s efforts to limit cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, describing the agency as a public safety threat and citing families afraid to go to school, work or seek medical care.
Minogue said he opposed violent criminals and drug dealers but argued that state and local authorities should coordinate with federal officials to target them. He said he would meet with affected residents and work to lower tensions.
On energy, Minogue blamed Healey for high utility bills, arguing that her earlier opposition to natural gas pipeline proposals had constrained supply and increased costs. He called for more natural gas, nuclear power and innovation, and proposed eliminating utility charges he said were unrelated to household consumption.
Healey defended an “all of the above” approach that includes natural gas, wind, solar, hydroelectric power and geothermal energy. She said she was seeking federal approval to expand existing pipelines and argued that additional energy supplies were necessary to bring down prices.
She also called for an audit of utility companies to examine profits and rate increases.
WBUR’s Tiziana Dearing asked Healey whether Massachusetts should roll back its climate goals. Rather than immediately giving a yes-or-no answer, she said she was focused on bringing more energy online, including through natural gas, but the state “shouldn’t abandon” efforts to address climate change.
Pressed on giving a specific yes or no, Healey said, “We shouldn’t roll back climate goals, but goals are goals.” The state’s climate goals are legal mandates established through statute, and would need to be legally modified to weaken them.
Minogue criticized the response, arguing that the state’s energy strategy was too reliant on wind and solar power and that the administration had failed to prioritize reliable, affordable supplies.
The candidates also clashed over the productivity of the Legislature. Minogue gave lawmakers a “failing grade,” criticizing that they have not shown an interest in acting on a gas tax pause and calling for a legislative audit.
Healey gave the Legislature an “incomplete,” saying she wanted lawmakers to send her an energy cost-saving bill she originally filed. She said she had taken executive action where possible but could do only so much without legislative cooperation.
Later, when asked by reporters what she was doing to work with the Legislature to get that bill completed, she said, “I’ve continued to urge them.” Asked when her last face-to-face meeting with House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka was, Healey said, “about a week ago.”
On abortion, Minogue faced repeated questions about an advancing 2028 ballot effort to repeal the law Healey signed lifting restrictions on abortions after 24 weeks. He said he would uphold the law but declined to say directly whether he supported repeal. He accused Healey of “politicizing” a “very sensitive, very difficult decision.”
“I will obey the law. I will follow the law. I believe in the separation of church and state, and when I become governor, I will swear an oath to do that. Now, I am still allowed to have my own beliefs, but my own beliefs will not get in the way of me doing what I’m supposed to do in upholding the law,” Minogue said.
Healey accused him of failing to protect women’s access to care and defended her administration’s purchase of a stockpile of mifepristone, an abortion medication, as well as a state’s expanded shield law protecting patients and providers.
“It’s not politicizing something when one in three women in America live without access to needed abortion care,” Healey said. “I trust women. I trust women and their doctors. Mike Minogue doesn’t.”
Healey said Minogue would “get rid of that stockpile” of mifepristone that she acquired in 2024 when President Donald Trump suggested he was open to restricting access to the pill.
“That’s not true,” Minogue said. “Mifepristone is FDA-approved. You can buy it. It’s available. What you should be concerned about is buying a stockpile where the money is going to run out. You have to store drugs like that in air-conditioned or areas, they can expire. And the worst thing would happen is you buy a bunch of it, and it expires, and people get it, and it’s no longer valid.”
Healey replied: “Yeah, I know you’re a former biotech executive. I don’t need to be lectured about the storage of drugs.”
The stockpile cost $675,000 and was set to expire in September 2025, her spokesperson told the News Service in 2024 when the administration announced the rollout.
Minogue argued that the rhetoric had frightened residents unnecessarily.
“It’s legal. You can buy it. It was never going to be taken off the shelf,” he said.
Healey replied, “Well, it sure scared a lot of people.”
“You scared a lot of people,” Minogue retorted.
The governor said, “No, I protected people.”
The candidates closed with competing appeals on the state’s future. Minogue described the election as a “tipping point” and positioned himself as a political outsider who would focus on lowering energy costs, expanding manufacturing and improving public safety.
Healey defended her record on taxes, housing, education and transportation while acknowledging that affordability remained a challenge. She pledged to build more housing, expand primary care and mental health services, and protect workers as artificial intelligence reshapes the economy.
Both asked voters for their support, leaving affordability and the question of accountability at the center of their final televised argument before the election.