Horizon, Host: Ted Simons

July 20, 2006


Host: Michael Grant

Republican Gubernatorial Debate


  • Join HORIZON for the official Clean Elections Commission primary debate between Republican candidates for governor Don Goldwater, Mike Harris, Len Munsil and Gary Tupper.
Guests:
  • Don Goldwater - Gubernatorial candidate


View Transcript
Michael Grant:
Tonight on "Horizon," the next Governor of Arizona will have some biggest issues to deal with like illegal immigration. On top of that, there are potential ballot initiatives that might be passed by voters. Like a same-sex marriage ban. We'll talk about those issues and many others in this "Horizon" special; a debate between the four men running for the Republican nomination for Governor. That's next on "Horizon."

Michael Grant:
Good evening.
I'm Michael Grant. Welcome to "Horizon." Tonight you will get to meet the four men running for the Republican nomination for Governor of our state. For many voters, these men have been a mystery. But you'll get to learn more about each and their positions on big issues facing our state in this special one-hour debate. It is sponsored by Arizona's Citizens Clean Elections Commission. And Arizona State University. Before we talk to the candidates, here is a brief biography of each.

Announcer:
Don Goldwater is a 50-year-old resident of Levine. He is a real estate investor, developer, married and has two children. He is attempting to qualify for clean elections funding. Mike Harris is 51 and lives in phoenix. His occupation is investment banker. He is divorced and has a son. Harris is not running as a clean elections candidate. Len Munsil lives in Scottsdale and is 42. He is an attorney. He is married and has eight children. Munsil is running with clean elections funding. Gary Tupper is a 47-year-old resident of Gilbert. He works as a contractor and is single with four children. One of whom is deceased. He is not running as a clean elections candidate.

Michael Grant:
It's time for one minute opening statements from each candidate. The order of presentation was chosen by random selection before the program. And, Don Goldwater, you were the lucky guy. You get to go first.

Don Goldwater:
Thank you, Michael. Good afternoon or good evening as the case may be on the time slot. My name is Don Goldwater. I am a gubernatorial candidate on the Republican ticket. I am running because the state's headed in the wrong direction. We have a Governor that believes no illegal aliens should be left behind. Who believes that throwing more money at the education system is the best answer instead of finding out where the money goes to. Believes we should pay more in taxes. These are some of the issues that we'll be discussing tonight and that I will work hard to reduce taxes, fix the education system. I am the only candidate who is backed by all the major people behind securing our border. Including the minutemen, Americans for a secure defense. I am also the leading candidate in the Republican Party. I've been leading on all the polls, some as high as 4-1 for decided voters. And all the way down to about 2-3 in one.

Michael Grant:
Len Munsil, you're next.

Len Munsil:
Michael, it's good to see you again. I am the third generation Arizonan. Native of the state. Have been here my whole life. And I have a track record of 20 years experience as a national conservative leader. I'm running for Governor because Janet Napolitano has failed our state in significant ways. She's failed to secure our borders. She's failed to deal with Arizona's number one crime rate in the nation. She has failed to fix CPS or to improve our educational system despite making the hallmarks of her campaign for office. I have a track record, Michael, of 20 years of experience. That's why I have the support of four U.S. congressmen, more than 30 state legislators who have seen me in the arena fighting on behalf of conservative public policy. With respect to my friend Don Goldwater, I am not a conservative leader in name only. I am in reality. I've been in the arena and that's why I have the support I have now at the grassroots level and endorsements.

Michael Grant:
Thank you, Len. Gary Tupper you are up.

Gary Tupper:
I am Gary Tupper I was born and raised in Spokane, wawrt. Graduated with degrees in psychology and biology. I moved to southern California. I was a financial planner for 14 years. I found my home in Arizona about twelve years ago. In my mid-30's I realized what I really wanted to be when I grew up was a carpenter. So I jumped out into this heat and started my own little company. Decided to run for Governor two years ago because I saw first-hand how poorly the government was being run. I knew what I wanted to do. I wanted to be a Governor, not a politician, but a working Governor. And from that point forward I started learning the job. Now, I am a carpenter, contractor, businessman, financial planner, and author. I'm working on my master's in marriage, family and child counseling to educate myself as to what people in government do. Talking to CPS workers, law enforcement officers, teachers, I've completed reports on health care, child abuse, poverty, diversion programs for prostitution, education, terrorism. I'm working on the right to be the Governor.

Michael Grant:
All right. And finally, last but not least, Mike Harris.

Mike Harris:
Thanks for having me. I'm Mike Harris. I moved to Arizona in 1973 to attend the University of Arizona at Tucson. I fell in love with the state. Only left for a brief time to get an MBA at Pepperdine University. I've been a business leader for the past 25 years. I incorporated my first company in Arizona in 1983. Went on to become a pretty much dedicated sub-contractor for companies like Motorola and Intel. I have demonstratable results in business skills. Negotiation, planning, implementation. Of course, management. And that's some of the strengths I bring to this race. I am the guy that people go to get things done. So the reason I decided to run... Decidedly the state is moving in the wrong direction under this Governor. She has been an obstructionist. I got tired of yelling at the TV and I wanted to get up and make a difference and do something. That's why I'm running.

Michael Grant:
We'll give you a chance to yell at the camera tonight

Mike Harris:
Don't need that tonight.

Michael Grant:
Let's continue on the qualifications. Don, the normal path to Governor involves usually, I'll admit not always, but some elected service maybe at the city level, perhaps the county level, possibly the state level. That's the usual routine. None of you have that. Why should voters all of a sudden elevate Don Goldwater to Governor when he sort of bypassed that governmental training?

Don Goldwater:
Well, number one I think I have the message that people want to hear out there on securing the borders out there. I am the only candidate talking about putting the National Guard down at full capacity like we have in Iraq, building a wall across the border, putting high-tech nolg on that border so we can see people coming across and meet them coming back into the cities and towns. Phoenix, for example, the sanctuary city. Who does not follow immigration law and explaining to them if they do not wish to uphold the letter of the law we'll withhold tax dollars from their budget until they comply to. Go after businesses who violate the law and prosecute them to the fullest extent. As I said in the past I want to take a page out of Sheriff Arpaio's books. Work with them on the border to get funds to build a tent city and use the convicted nonviolent illegal aliens to help build the wall, clean up the desert and fix the ranches they're tearing up.

Michael Grant:
No value whatever in your opinion to having served in elected office, understanding how government operates? It's a different kind of world.

Don Goldwater:
I worked behind the scenes in government. I worked back in Washington, D.C. as a staffer under Senator Packwood working with the tell communications act in 1984. I helped kill bills in Washington, D.C. the daytimer's bill back there. I worked behind the scenes on the political fronts here for not only Governors but congressmen and city council people.

Michael Grant:
Government's a lot different than business. Why should voters put someone in who is a political neophyte?

Mike Harris:
Well I've been the victim of government for a long time. I have to pay taxes. It's one of the things that we do. I've watched our state deteriorate in the business climate here. Currently the state pays the third highest rate of business property taxes in the country. One of my goals is to create a business fertile environment. In 1999, Motorola was the largest employer in the state paying an average salary of $60,000 per year. Today the largest employer is Wal-Mart and they pay less than $18,000. I think that we're due for massive reform. I think not being a politician, being a businessman, bringing an objective and pragmatic view to the problems facing the state is a benefit, not a detriment. I think people have had enough of politicians. I think it's time to get some fresh blood in the game.

Michael Grant:
Len, obviously one of the advantages of having served in elected office is you get familiar with the ropes, you understand the processes, a variety of things. You have been around the process, but you have never been in the process.

Len Munsil:
I've not been in elective office, that's true. I notice with Don and Mike they spent a lot more time talking about what their issues were than about their qualifications. I think that is the key distinction in this-- distinction in this Republican primary. I have not only been around the process, I've been instrumental in affecting conservative change at the state of Arizona and at the national level. I have a similar background to Janet Napolitano. She clerked on the ninth court of appeals I clerked for a Reagan judge after law school. I've been on a conservative since I was on campus as editor of the newspaper in 1984 defending president Reagan. I've been in the arena, debating the ideas, advancing them for two decades. The organization I founded, the center for Arizona policy, became the largest of its kind in the United States with a staff of 18 by the time I left at the end of last year. It doesn't happen by accident that you have four U.S. congressmen who don't agree with each other on issues, 30 plus state legislators rallying around one candidate. It's because they've seen me operate effectively in the public policy arena to communicate the ideals we believe in as Republicans. And that's why they're behind me.

Michael Grant:
Gary, you ripped off a lot of jobs. In fact that sounded fun. But none of those is elected official. Don't you think it's strange to drop somebody in the top spot in the state right off the bat?

Gary Tupper:
No I think this is a perfect time. We've got all our signatures talking to people on the street. That was something that came up. Are you a politician? This is a perfect time for this. People feel a sense of inefficiency in government, a sense of corruption. I think they want a new government. And what you have when you have people who are in politics, they basically wind up starting to take sides. They start to develop ideology. It makes a very interesting when you start to negotiate within politics. We've been talking a lot of legislators over the number of years. You gotta start bringing people back together. There's not as much negotiation. I think I can bring that really to this group that we have here down at the capitol.

Michael Grant:
Part of this process is Republican voters go to the primary polls to try to, theoretically, come up with someone who can knock off a Democrat called Janet Napolitano. Now I am not-- I think going to breaking news here to say three of the candidates here at the table don't have a lot of bucks. In fact, you were asking for change out of couches I think.

Mike Harris:
That was a humorous thing that I tossed out there.

Michael Grant:
But more seriously, I mean can you be viable without any dollars?

Mike Harris:
It's incumbent upon me to raise those dollars. We have put the pedal to the metal and our fundraising is in full swing. The numbers you have are reflective as of May 31. There's been substantial movement since that time which I am not going to disclose. One other thing I want to remind you of. It's not just Republicans who can vote in this primary. Independents can vote. I would urge the independents to vote and participate and help select the best Governor for who the Governor is going be for the Republican side.

Michael Grant:
Len, you are the only guy that's got any bucks. Does that make you the most viable?

Len Munsil:
I think its demonstration of viability. Clean elections was set up so if you just gave anybody half a million dollars to run for Governor, everybody would run. Hawf to demonstrate some level of grass root support we set a record with how fast we qualified for clean election funding. We did it faster than Janet Napolitano did four years ago. We got all of our five dollar donations and signatures in record time. We have maxed out. We have the maximum amount of money you can have under clean elections. And with the other candidates, that has not happened. Mike got into the race promising to raise $6 million. He has had donations of $8,000 from people outside of himself. Don's got the most famous last name in Arizona political history and yet is struggling after a year in the race. We did it in two-and-a-half months. It thinks that shows viability.

Michael Grant:
Don, obviously you do have a famous last name. But you need money to communicate your message.

Don Goldwater:
We're just wrapping up the five dollar clean election contributions as we speak right now.

Michael Grant:
You are going to get them?

Don Goldwater:
Oh yeah. It's not a question of if we're going to get them its question of when we're going to turn them in. I did not have center for Arizona policy helping me out. I did not have right to life sending out letters and helping me out. I did not have four congressional congressmen sending out letters to help me out. Ours has been strictly a grassroots event. If you look back historically on these things as to when people turn in their five dollar forms it's always been in July. I have to commend people that can get the support of special interest groups to bring the money in faster. I have to commend people that want to work traditionally and things of that nature. But we're right where we're supposed to be.

Michael Grant:
You will file those next week?

Don Goldwater:
Probably next week, yes.

Michael Grant:
Gary Tupper?

Michael Grant:
You got any money?

Gary Tupper:
Not that I am gonna tell you about.

Gary Tupper:
We had a problem earlier in the campaign back in October when we started running. We were collecting money and we got repeatedly snubbed by the Arizona republic. They would run articles and my name would be missing. So we were out raising money. We'd say we're raising money for the gubernatorial campaign and the people would say you're not running. I would say I am. The paper says you're not. It doesn't say I'm not running it just doesn't say I am running. So it became difficult after we ran into that a number of times that we felt we better go for the ballot and just drop off on fundraising.

Michael Grant:
I understand that. But I mean I realize it's difficult. I don't minimize that. But can you be an effective candidate without dollars?

Gary Tupper:
I think there's a lot of swing in this election. Anything could happen. So I think there's some possibilities. Stay tune. But I think we need to go back to clean elections. How clean are clean elections when you do have, like Don said, special interests can raise their money, but then you have Don struggling and what three people couldn't make it. We looked at it in October and said this is just not possible. So how clean are clean elections?

Mike Harris:
May I inject something.

Michael Grant:
Real quick.

Mike Harris:
Both the candidates Janet Napolitano and Len Munsil who have qualified as clean have both had clean election complaints filed against them. After watching the David Burrell Smith incident last year where they were removing him from office, it's not worth --

Michael Grant:
You don't want to touch it.

Mike Harris:
I don't want to touch it.

Len Munsil:
Janet Napolitano got a lot of complaints against him and he was running outside the system.

Mike Harris:
Nothing that would remove him from office as Smith was. I thought that was such a hazard that we didn't want to risk that.

Michael Grant:
But we digress. Len, let's shift to some initiatives. I want to get feedback from each of you on at least a few. Obviously, center for Arizona policy, your former group, driving force behind Protect Marriage Arizona. Why in your opinion is that needed?

Len Munsil:
I want to respond to something Don said first. All he said is that I've got a lot of support out there and that's why I got my fives. That's correct. These are not special interest groups. The center for Arizona policy could not help me with the five dollar donations. I am well-known in the community for the work I've done over the last twenty years and that's why the support came from the congressmen and others. With respect to Protect Marriage Arizona. It's foundational to our society that marriage is the union of a man and woman. I am one of the architects of that amendment as you know because I've been on the program to talk about it before. I wrote Arizona's law that defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. This is an important principal. We have a threat from activist judges wanting to redefine one of the foundational institutions of our society. It's not against anyone; it's in favor of preserving marriage as the union of a man and woman. And it should pass.

Michael Grant:
Gary, Protect Marriage Arizona, do we need it or not?

Gary Tupper:
Well I've been on the record and I'll continue stating the same thing. My official position on gay marriage is it's really not important to me and I really could care less. I don't know why that is a more important issue than education, health care, child protection, taxes. Why is this in the forefront when real issues like immigration are just basically sitting on the table not being dealt with.

Michael Grant:
So it's bad idea, good idea? Or are you just wholly indifferent?

Gary Tupper:
I won't vote for it. I don't see any point to it.

Michael Grant:
Don, what's your position on Protect Marriage Arizona.

Don Goldwater:
While he was out writing the bill I was out collecting signatures for protect Arizona marriage amendment. I agree with it.

Mike Harris:
My personal view is that marriage is between a man and a woman. Period. The fact that we have to have an amendment that dictates this is really a symptom as to how out of control judicial activism has become. That's something that the Governor can affect by appointing conservative, constitutionally based judges. That's something I support. These judicial activist judges are inventing rights that never existed before. I think that that's not right. We have a constitution, we have a system of laws, let's follow it.

Michael Grant:
Gary, there are a couple of smoking initiatives on the ballot. Sort of the primary difference between the two is one that will allow smoking in bars and would also preempt local governments from being more restrictive.

Gary Tupper:
Right.

Michael Grant:
Which one, if either, do you favor?

Gary Tupper:
I am gonna impose both of them. I'm gonna tell you why. Because as we travel around the state, what you find out from people who don't live in Maricopa County is in a certain way they have resentment towards Maricopa County dictating policy. In really both of these amendments though one is certainly better than the other. They are more amicable in the county. When you go to Cochise County or Graham County. This is a Maricopa County bill. This is not something that would go statewide. So we shouldn't be enforcing statewide laws for something that we should be dealing with in local jurisdictions. Whether it's city or a county.

Michael Grant:
Don, which, if either, perhaps neither, do you support?

Don Goldwater:
I gotta tell you in all honesty I'm an ex-smoker. I did used to smoke. I don't like to be around smoke. I think it's very, very dangerous issue. I worked with my kids to make sure they never ever carry on that bad disease. But we have a problem with some of these issues on the smoking issues that we have a business problem in there. That people should have the right within their separate businesses if they want to carry on a legal activity. The answer to the smoking ban in the state of Arizona is purely to outlaw tobacco. If you are gonna continue to do smoking bans, let's go after the source. Let's not go after the laws and people's rights and restrictions and things like that. If smoking is really as bad as it is, and I believe it is, then let's go ahead and ban smoking completely, outlaw tobacco, then education can figure out where they're gonna get their funds from the taxes from the smoking taxes.

Michael Grant:
Let me clarify you would vote no on both of them?

Don Goldwater:
No I would end up voting for the ban on them. I am just saying I don't like it. I don't like the issue because you are talking about private property issue within the bars. If a bar wants to sit down and say nobody but smokers are allowed in this bar, regardless of how stupid that be, they should have the right to do that as long as it's not affecting the health of the employees and everything else.

Michael Grant:
I got you. Mike, what about your position? And there is the additional issue of one would preempt localities from doing anything different. Is that a good idea to remove that level of local alcohol?

Mike Harris:
What I am seeing here is this on-going trend of government interfering in people's right to live their own lives by their own choices. I don't condone smoking. I don't smoke. I've never smoked. I don't advocate smoking. But if people wish to go smoke, they should have the freedom do-- freedom to do so as long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's health, right or comfort to be in a place. I don't think that --

Michael Grant:
Opponents say it does. They say it interferes with other people and employee's rights.

Mike Harris:
If that's the case it shouldn't be allowed in that situation. But if there's bars and restaurants that want to offer smoking sections exclusive to smoking, as long as they have proper equipment, the technology exists, the smoke eater things to take the smoke out of the room, I have no problem with that. I just watch government intruding into people's lives more and more. And that's a trends that I fight. I want to see people be able to have-- if they wish to ruin their health by smoking, they should be free to do so.

Michael Grant:
So you are against both?

Mike Harris:
I am against both.

Michael Grant:
Len, what's your position?

Len Munsil:
I don't smoke. I prefer restaurants where there's not smoke available. But this is a limited government conservative this brings up another competing principal and that is private property rights. If someone has a business, their ability to choose what they want to do that is legal. As a conservative I don't believe it's the role of government to step in and interfere with that legal activity.

Michael Grant:
All right. Um, let me go to another tobacco related measure, Don, but this time I want to focus on its purpose. And that's the early childhood development initiative. It wants to put a tax of 80-cents a pack on cigarettes and then flow those funds to various community councils where it would be directed to a potpourri of early childhood development programs running I suppose from nutrition through head start, those kinds of things. What's your position on that idea?

Don Goldwater:
I haven't studied that particular proposition much, so I can't give you a solid issue. But it goes back to what we were talking about. We keep wanting to tax cigarettes to help out in the health community and education and stuff like that on one hand. Then on the other hand government wants to restrict the rights for people to buy the product where the taxes are generated to go back and fund these health issues or education issues. I mean does this sound a little strange? On one hand you want to take care of the health of the child but on the other hand you want to kill the tax or kill the product where you get the revenue to do that.

Michael Grant:
Placing the revenue stream to one side, is the concept of doing something like focusing on early childhood department using some source of public funding a good idea or a bad idea?

Don Goldwater:
I think there's a good idea in there. I'd rather see it brought up through the private sector. I think government does have a role to play in helping to reinforce children's health. But, again, I'm more of a private enterprise person. I'd rather sit down and work with a revenue stream that goes through private industry to do the exact same thing.

Michael Grant:
Mike, early childhood development initiative.

Mike Harris:
I think it's another play to expand government programs. They have to fund it somehow, let's go after smokers. Let's make them pay to expand our programs. If we're going to implement an additional cigarette tax, I would prefer to see it applied to the statewide health care cost. AHCCCS currently has 1.2 million people on the program. If they're gonna raise cigarette taxes 80-cents, smokers have a higher incident of health problems later in life, let's put the money where-- let's make the smokers pay for their own health care cost by taxing the cigarettes that will cause their problems in the future.

Michael Grant:
Proponents of the early childhood develop development initiative say that dollars spent at that stage can save you a ton later on. What's your position?

Len Munsil:
I've got a few children. Early childhood development is very important and something we need to look at. As you know, I've spent the last twenty years working to protect the innocence of children, to strengthen marriage and family. A lot of problems we're depleting with in our society is because the traditional family has been under attack and there's been a breakdown in many ways. Contributing to the effort, and again it seems like the solution that people want to come up with all the time is a government solution. I'm not sure that's the best approach. I do favor the involvement of faith based organizations and community groups. We need to teach people how to parent. We need to work to create better circumstances for kids at early childhood development to make sure they don't miss those significant years.

Michael Grant:
Gary, what's your vote on early childhood and the 80-cents a pack tax?

Gary Tupper:
I agree with Mike on behalf of-- if you say you are against early childhood development by voting against this that would be the implication. But I do agree with Mike on the position that they're basically targeting someone. I don't think that's the solution. I also-- although Len and I disagree quite a lot on many things I do agree with him on this point as we do need to look at faith based and social based services. And really the key is education. Getting these kids through these stages. And it's number of different stages where kids need certain things at certain stages. The only way to really provide that is to educate parents.

Michael Grant:
Okay. Mike, I want to move to some immigration related issues. But let me stick with the initiatives and use that as a transition. As you know there's a proposition that probably-- well it undoubtedly will be on the ballot because it's referred by the legislature, that would expand the scope of proposition 200 which voters passed four years ago, I believe. And it would fence off some additional benefits from illegal immigrants. Is that a good idea?

Mike Harris:
Absolutely support it. 100 percent. That's just the tip of the iceberg. We all know what's been going on at the border and we need to secure that border and secure it now. There are a number of issues we can do to help. First thing we should do is put sufficient manpower down there. Right now we have a crisis on the border. It's really a crisis. I would put the National Guard down there to contain that crisis. Once it's contained, we can go back to more traditional policing methods. But I want to prevent the illegal from entering in the first place. Number two, we're being taken advantage of. We're being taken for the biggest ride of our lives with these illegal immigrants coming in here. The statistics of L.A. County are that ten million people live there, a third of them are there illegally and 40 percent pay no taxes whatsoever and work for cash. We pick up their health care. We pick up their education for the children. We pick up the law enforcement costs. They're a net detriment to our society, not a positive.

Michael Grant:
Would it be your position that to the extent allowed by law, because some things are fenced off, that you would expand policy to say if you are illegally here, you are entitled to the benefits of no state programs whatsoever?

Mike Harris:
Yes I would.

Michael Grant:
All right. Len, what about your position?

Len Munsil:
Well I agree obviously that illegal immigration has become a huge problem. And it has been you know the fundamental role of government toss protect the lives and property of its citizens. This is an issue that our Governor has ignored for four years as five million illegal crossings have occurred on her watch. My approach to immigration emphasizes the priority of border security. I really don't think a lot of the other issues are going to be easy to resolve until we have a secure knowledge that our border is secure. I would sign the bill that the legislature passed that provided $20 million for radar technology so that we can see every illegal crossing before it occurs. Then it's simply a matter of having the manpower in place to deploy them to the border and prevent illegal crossings before they happen.

Michael Grant:
Was the wind taken out of the sails of that one? Because the feds have indicated they're gonna finance it so why should I --

Len Munsil:
We don't have any agreement. That's been Janet Napolitano's strategy for four years to sit back and do nothing and say it's the federal government's responsibility. But the people of the state are dealing with the consequences of 5,000 plus people a day coming across the border. There's still no agreement as to where we're headed in congress. And for that reason I think the people of Arizona have waited long enough.

Michael Grant:
Let me get, Gary, back to proposition 200 expansion. Should illegal people who are illegally here be denied state benefits?

Gary Tupper:
I think what we need to do and address that has not come to this table really in our debates is the benefit of undocumented workers. I think we have to figure out who is contributing and who isn't contributing. Until we can establish that through some form of registration program I believe we have to enforce 200, but I believe that if there are people contributing and earning services should be-- or should be available for services and they should receive those services. I think that's only fair. As far as immigration and this enforcement at the border. The question I look at is how much is this gonna cost and is it worth taxpayer money? As far as enforcement goes, the federal government is working on that. And I don't see any reason to spend our state tax dollars on that. I feel that we need to register everybody who is here and find out what they're doing. Are they working? Are they contributing? Then control the population that way.

Michael Grant:
Don, what's your position on expanding the state benefits that are fenced off from illegal immigrants?

Don Goldwater:
I am 100 percent behind it. Right now we're talking about $2.4 billion annually to educate, medicate and incarcerate illegal aliens. That works out to 700-$1,400 a legal household that we're paying in taxes to take care of this. Proposition 200 was passed in its full phase by the citizens of the state of Arizona over 62\% voted for it. And the Governor and the attorney general set about trying to challenge this proposition 200 in court. They challenged it three times. They lost three times. The last lost being in the ninth circuit court of appeals or the ninth circuit court of appeals as I call it. Then the Governor went to the attorney general and said I want you to narrow the focus. I want you to write opinions to narrow the focus. We can expand proposition 200 very, very quickly when I become Governor by having the agency heads write the attorney general's office asking them to revisit that law and to expand it. If for some unforeseen chance that it's Terry Goddard in there as AG, if he does not wish to do that we'll go to outside counsel. We talk about the benefits of these, quote, illegal aliens are bringing into the state. They're not bringing in any benefits to the state. They're costing the state billions of dollars. Hb2577 which Len talked about would provide $100 million to build a fence, $250 million to pay for the National Guard down there, $52 million for first year to pay local law enforcement, and $60 million minimum there after. I think these are good bills. I think it's something we have to do now.

Michael Grant:
Len, as you know there's been a big controversy about whether or not the presence of an illegal alien in our state should be criminal trespass. Put to one side whether or not you want to go high misdemeanor, low felony, and high felony. Should the legislature, and would you sign as Governor, a bill making it a crime to be here as an illegal alien?

Len Munsil:
You know, that was part of the package of the bill that the Governor vetoed to make it a misdemeanor. I would have signed that bill. But my priority, again, has to begin with border security. The simple reason is you can begin arresting people who are here illegally. You can spend them back across the border. If they're able to walk back the next day you have accomplished nothing from a policy standpoint. You have to begin with what the priority is. The priority is to secure the border. The federal government is not moving rapidly enough to make that happen. And the state of Arizona can come in and supplement it and get that done. But we have a Governor who believes it's impossible. She said two weeks ago she does not believe we can secure the border.

Michael Grant:
1200 National Guard troops down there.

Len Munsil:
A few hundred national guardsmen unarmed at desks are not gonna get the job done.

Michael Grant:
All right. Gary, what about the concept of criminal trespass for illegal aliens? Here's one of the problems. A lot of local law enforcement have weighed in and said that's not a good idea. We got enough to do; we don't need to be footing around with that.

Gary Tupper:
Are you reading my notes here? Law enforcement, absolutely.

Michael Grant:
Terrible handwriting.

Gary Tupper:
Thank you. Law enforcement really it's not realistic. This is not a realistic law. The first thing I consider is taxes. Is this a benefit and is it worth the taxpayer money? We can't arrest everybody. It's not practical. So why have a law that's not practical. Two, law enforcement. It creates an unnecessary burden on law enforcement that I oppose. But everything that's being addressed even some of the things coming out of Dison-- especially the things coming out of Don aren't solutions to the problem. People can rant and rave about illegal immigration.

Michael Grant:
What's the solution?

Gary Tupper:
Well we have to register everybody who is here and work on that registration process. Whether it's a worker program or whether it's just driver license and state I.D. so we can identify people who are here and find out what they're doing here and control that population through attrition.

Michael Grant:
What about criminal trespass for illegal aliens. One thing it does do, let me now flip to the other side. One thing it does do is give local law enforcement an option in the so-called catch and release phenomena. Where you catch people and call for the border patrol, they never show up and you can't hold them.

Don Goldwater:
Number one, it already is against the law. Under 8usc1344, a federal law. When somebody comes into the country illegal the first time, it is a $250 fine and six months in jail. After that, it bumps up to, I believe it's $1,000 fine and minimum of a year in jail. And it continues to go there. The reason we need a state law on top of that is because some people feel state law enforcement cannot enforce federal law. They forget to go back to 8usc1644 which states specifically no local ordinance or local law shall inhibit local law enforcement from enforcing the immigration laws. We have the laws on the books. If we need to pass state laws to enforce that law, we need to do that immediately.

Michael Grant:
Should local law enforcement be instructed to enforce those laws? Because a lot of them say we don't want to enforce those laws we have better things to do.

Don Goldwater:
Local law enforcement should be instructed to enforce those laws. But it cannot be an unfunded mandate. That's why hb2577 was so important. Because the first year it gave a minimum of $52,000,000 to local law enforcement to beef up their staff to handle the support to get peas people incarcerated. $60 million the next year. These are funds that we talk about to take care of the local sheriff on the community and the police here in the states of-- or cities of Phoenix and Mesa.

Michael Grant:
Mike, should the status of being an illegal alien in this state be a criminal trespass?

Mike Harris:
Yes, sir, it should. Here is why. The illegal immigrants coming in now have changed in character. I've got this from highly placed individuals within federal agencies that right now the government of Mexico is emptying out their prisons and dumping their prisoners at our border and instructing them to head north. This is real. This is happening. I've got it on reliable sources. We're being inundated with not just good hard working people looking for a better life. Don't buy that line. Because by crossing they become criminals. Real criminals are being sent to the United States today, right now. That's not acceptable. We need to have the tools to be able to catch these people and make sure they're repatriated to their own country and not left in ours to continue this crime spree going on in this state. This state is the number one crime environment in the entire U.S. and it's because of our proximity to the border and the easy access of Mexican criminals up here illegally doing to our society. This cannot be tolerated.

Michael Grant:
All right. Gary, let me shift to another subject.

Gary Tupper:
Please.

Michael Grant:
Taxes. There's always a large debate. I am not gonna ask this crowd if you are in favor of tax cuts. There's always a big debate though if you are inclined to cut taxes on how to do it. Do you cut income taxes? Do you cut property taxes? Certainly more popular idea these days in some quarters is what you want to do is take the same kiddy of money and target it at specific industries that maybe you want to encourage through tax credits, whatever. What's Gary Tupper's approach to tax cutting?

Gary Tupper:
Government reform. I think we need to go through every job, every agency, eliminate as much waste as possible, try to create as much efficiency in the system, and then find out what our net expense is. And at that point start looking at tax cuts rather than just cutting them across the board.

Michael Grant:
Which ones? Across the board income? Property tax?

Gary Tupper:
I think it's very clear to most of us we need to freeze property taxes one way or another. That needs to be addressed. Some people have mentioned that for the elderly. But then you have to look at people who just bought their first home and basically being taxed out of their property as well. I think that's the first thing that needs to be addressed. Then also reducing the income tax. But we have to do this one step at a time which is what is our burden, how can we increase efficiency and then start looking at the taxes we cut.

Michael Grant:
Don, what about you? Let's assume that you are gonna cut taxes. You are gonna do income taxes, property taxes, more targeted taxes? Resist the tendency to say all of the above at this point. I mean what do you think is most effective?

Don Goldwater:
Let's look at the problem that we have right now. When I started campaigning last August we had a $750 million projected budget surplus. Today we have over $2 billion budget surplus. And the Governor has seen fit to give us $500 million back over the next two years. Which I think is a joke.

Michael Grant:
The Republican legislature was a little complicit in that.

Don Goldwater:
I agree. You know you are absolutely right on that. They should have dug deeper and cut harder. We need to freeze the assess value of property taxes for as long as you own your home. It makes no sense when you own a home for $300,000 and a couple years down the road it's appraised at $600,000 and you are getting tax odd that 600,000 dollars. You didn't get to pay with $300,000 to your property value went on up. We're taxing the elderly, people on fixed income and first-time buyers and people with special financial considerations, we're taxing them out of their house and home.

Michael Grant:
You would focus on property taxes.

Don Goldwater:
I would focus on property tax cut. I would eliminate the business taxes and start cutting the income taxes immediately.

Michael Grant:
Mike, you lean more towards income taxes or not.

Mike Harris:
That's not the right question. My approach is I wish to create a business fertile environment in the state of Arizona. We lost Motorola who was our largest employer here. They're gone. We're not attracting new capital intensive businesses here. Last year august 27 Samsung was considering putting a $3.5 billion memory chip fab in Arizona. We lost it. They passed on us. They went to Austin, Texas.

Michael Grant:
Why?

Mike Harris:
Taxes. The tax rates. We're the third most hostile environment to business capital investment in the country.

Michael Grant:
So business property taxes.

Mike Harris:
But taxes in general. We're-- we have a $2 billion dollars surplus according to Don. I thought it was $1.2 billion. But there's never been a better time to restructure our tax code to make it both citizen friendly and business fertile. I was the first one to espouse a property tax moratorium rolling back to the 2005 levels. Government's role is to protect our people. We have old people living in Sun City on fixed income taxes, disabled. They need to be protected. They're being taxed on unrealized gain. They haven't realized the gain yet. We need to reform this. We can turn the state's economy. Right now with the real estate market cooling-- we've had two primary drivers to our economy. Tourism, construction and real estate. Real estate's cooling we have nothing else in the pipeline. We need to move forward.

Michael Grant:
Len Munsil what's your tax cutting strategy? Give me your primary focus.

Len Munsil:
I've been very vocal about this. This is a classic example of the difference between a Reagan conservative and our current Governor. She views the budget surplus as more money for her to spend. She sent an email to that affect. I view a budget surplus as we overpaid our taxes for the level of government that we were provided. And I came out early for both income tax and property tax cuts. I do think it's significant when we have the valuation increases that we've had in property taxes over the last few years to protect people so they don't get thrown out of their homes they may have lived in 30 or 40 years if they're on a fixed income. But at the same time the most effective way to create an environment that's friendly for business is to have low income tax rates. And that's been documented to be the most effective way to create an environment friendly to business, friendly to small business, and individuals, and I would support income tax cuts as well.

Michael Grant:
Mike, I think we've got time for one more round of questions. There's a ton of things I could go to. But let me go to English language learning. It's up in front of the ninth circuit court of appeals. The legislature passed something, the Governor vetoed it a couple times; finally let it go to law. The legislature has the right solution on English language learning or not?

Mike Harris:
I don't like the Governor's solution for sure. I don't think the legislature quite has the right solution. Right now we're spending more money per student to educate students who don't speak English than we are to our own native born. I think our own children should be given the opportunity to learn foreign languages as well. I've traveled the world extensively. I've made 96 trips to Asia and 26 to Europe and the former Soviet Union. We're the only country that teaches one language.

Michael Grant:
If you have English challenged students, are they appropriately being taught Spanish under the legislative plan or not?

Mike Harris:
I don't think so. I think they should be taught English. English is the primary language. We need to make it the official language of the state and country. And they can adapt.

Michael Grant:
I gotta move along. Len, English-language learning? Do we have the right solution in the legislature approach or not.

Len Munsil:
I thought the legislative approach was sensible and provided resources. It required accountability in terms of the amount of money that was actually needed to teach kids English. As opposed to the Governor's approach, like many issues, is to throw money at a problem with no accountability. That's not the right thing. I wanted to mention this is an example of the judicial activism that I've been fighting. When you have one federal judge overturning the efforts of the state legislature and you have the Governor and the attorney general actively working with that federal judge to circumvent the will of the people on how to address this problem, that's not a good thing. So I have been the leading proponent in our state of judicial reform.

Michael Grant:
The judge was highly critical of the legislative plan. Said it was wholly inadequate funding. Based upon some studies the legislature had commissioned. What's your position on that?

Gary Tupper:
I don't think a judge should be telling the legislature and the Governor how to spend state money. I don't think that's really appropriate.

Michael Grant:
Even if federal law requires it?

Gary Tupper:
I think if there's a judgment the state has to pay that money. But I don't think a judge should be telling the state how to spend that money. Regarding the ELL problem, we have to address the problem that we have. We can't ignore it and hope that everybody's gonna learn English by just English only education we did a very extensive report on that and found out that English-only education for none English speaking student is failing. We need to get back to letting the districts determine, listening to teachers how best to teach these kids. That's what's gonna be the solution. Going back to teachers.

Michael Grant:
Don, English-language learning, what do you think the legislature landed on the right solution or not?

Don Goldwater:
I think they landed on the right solution. I think as has been mentioned before you have a judge that is acting in an unconstitutional matter. Only the legislature can appropriate sums of money and here we have a judge trying to go out of their jurisdiction and appropriate money. They do not have the authority to do that. Also when you take a look at the ELL program there's other things you need to look at. Under the ELL program we're trying to increase the reading capabilities of young Hispanic children that are out there. It's what it's geared towards. But if you look at the groups failing in reading at the fourth grade level, you look at the Caucasian is 30 percent of Caucasian children failing in reading. 46 percent of Hispanic children are failing in reading. And the African American are the biggest group out there at 47 percent of their children are failing at to read at the fourth grade level. And here we are spending, trying to spend a ton of money to take on one specific group when we should be taking that money to be helping all the children in the state of Arizona not just one select group.

Michael Grant:
We got time for one fast round. Len, college tuition has been going up considerably. The constitution says it should be as nearly free as practicable. Something along those lines. Do we need to stop the large increases in university tuition?

Len Munsil:
Yes. I believe that it should be as-- I mean I am a constitutionalist. That's what it says in the constitution. We seem to have adopted another vision for our universities in recent days. And we are piling it on in terms of the students. It seems like the lower priority to make sure that our undergraduate students in Arizona are taken care of well and given an opportunity with good professors at a good price to have a college education.

Michael Grant:
Gary, we need to slow down the increase in university tuition or not?

Gary Tupper:
Absolutely. I think we need to go back to government reform. Where is this money going? Going back to where we were 20 years ago and how is that money spent pro proportionately to administration as opposed to the classrooms with the professors and students. Getting back to the basics. Putting the dollars at that student level.

Michael Grant:
Don, and would you support general fund tax increases to do it, to slow down the rate of college tuition increase?

Don Goldwater:
I think if we're gonna have our universities doing what they're doing we need accountability to find out where the money is going before we start talking about rate increasing. I think we also need to sit down and take a look at the tax breaks and, excuse me, the tuition breaks we're giving to foreign students and illegal aliens allowing them to come in for free or paying the same tuition that in-state students pay. I would like to take a serious look at the constitutional regulations, the laws on the books with the constitution and take a look at what the universities want to do. If they want to go to a private situation, that's a whole different matter.

Michael Grant:
Mike, give me about 30 seconds on this.

Mike Harris:
Okay I think the whole university system's ready for reform. I think the tenure system is outdated. I think we need to be the best practices in our university system. We need to reform this thing and make it in a business sense. The universities in this state, and many other places, don't compliment tenured professors. Let's get after it.

Michael Grant:
Should we stop very large increases?

Mike Harris:
We should. And where we can do that we can bring economies scales and efficiencies into the university system if we bring the best practices into the system.

Michael Grant:
Okay. We are now out of time for the debate portion between the candidates running for Republican nomination for Governor. Each candidate will be given a minute for a closing statement. Order of closing statement once again chosen by random selection. And, Don, you get to go first again.

Don Goldwater:
Well. Thank you very much. I'd like to thank the viewers for taking the time to watch this program. I am, like I said before, I am the only candidate that's endorsed by the leader of the immigration plan, proposition 200. I am a former charter board school president. I know the education system. I know we need accountability in education. I know we need vouchers in the education system. Taxes, we need to reform our tax structure. Reduce taxes that we're charging against our citizens. Do away with business personal property tax; lower the business property tax so we can get businesses to come in to the state. I am currently finishing up on my five dollar contributions so your viewers tonight I appreciate it if you go to my website at www.goldwaterforgovernor.org and download a five dollar form and send me in five dollars so we can get this thing underway and get it done. Thank you very much and good night.

Michael Grant:
Search the couch for change if necessary.

Don Goldwater:
That's his line.

Michael Grant:
I just stole that. Gary Tupper, your closing statement?

Gary Tupper:
One of the biggest factors is the polarization of our society on many issues such as immigration. There's one side gravitated to one extreme and the other that's gravitated to the other extreme. Instead of getting together and working the problems out the divisions grow stronger. The powers that control politics are dividing us. We need to bring politics back to the center for the future of our country. And end the politics of extremes. When we develop policy we look at all sides of the equation not just the Republican side but the Democrat side and libertarian side and the side that the independents are starting to take. Because when you become Governor of Arizona you can't be the Governor of this side or that side you've gotta be the Governor of all the people. You gotta try to take every effort to get every belief and voice into every decision. I'm Gary Tupper working to earn your right to be Governor. I ask that you vote for me on September 12. Thank you.

Michael Grant:
Len Munsil your closing statement.

Len Munsil:
Since Don got a plug in for his website I am blogging. I don't need any money but I'm blogging daily at lenmunsil.com. And would love for people to go there and learn about me and my background and the experience that I bring. Elections are about persuasion. They're about making the case for why the ideas that we believe in are better than the ideas of our opponents. I believe that the Reagan conservative principals that I support, securing the border, less government, economic freedom, lower taxes, educational choice and opportunity for all, I am the only candidate endorsed by Arizona right to life. Strengthening marriage and family. Those principals represent the mainstream of the state of Arizona. I have the policy experience. I have the grassroots support. I have the endorsements. I have the funding. But I have the support of the people that have been in the arena watching public policy take place and recognize me as an effective conservative leader in the state of Arizona. Thank you.

Michael Grant:
All right. Who do we have left?

Mike Harris:
Me.

Michael Grant:
Yeah it's mike. I lost track. Sorry about that.

Mike Harris:
I need your support. I'm running for Governor. I bring business skills that the other candidates lack. I have the proven leadership ability. I have the proven management ability. I can run the state effectively. I can run the state efficiency. My goal is to make Arizona reach its full potential economically, socially and culturally. I want this place to be a better place than I found it. I want to leave it to be the best possible it is for our kids and our grandchildren. Arizona has a huge potential. And I want to see it realized. And the decision we make right now will affect the next 20-25 years. I want to encourage the independents out there who are sitting on the fence looking, vote in the Republican primary. Help us decide who is gonna be the candidate to face off against Janet Napolitano. You have a voice, use it. Independents, vote. Yes I will take your five dollars, your $50, your $500 and even the change you find between the cushion of the sofa. My name is Mike Harris. I'm running for Governor. My website is www.MikeHarrisforGovernor.com. Thank you very much. I need your support.

Michael Grant:
You know I apologize for that. We should have prepared lower screen font with all of your websites. Mike Harris, thank you very much for joining us. Don Goldwater thanks to you. Len Munsil, to you as well. And, Gary Tupper, we appreciate your participation. Gentlemen, best of luck on the remainder of the campaign trail and thanks for joining us. Our thanks to you for joining us as well. I'm Michael Grant. Have a great one! Good night.

What's on?

Content Partner:

  About KAET Contact Support Legal Follow Us  
  About Eight
Mission/Impact
History
Site Map
Pressroom
Contact Us
Sign up for e-news
Pledge to Eight
Donate Monthly
Volunteer
Other ways to support
FCC Public Files
Privacy Policy
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Google+
Pinterest
 

Need help accessing? Contact disabilityaccess@asu.edu

Eight is a member-supported service of Arizona State University    Copyright Arizona Board of Regents