Horizon, Host: Ted Simons

September 26, 2006


Host: Michael Grant

Cronkite-Eight Poll


  • Who will Arizonans vote for this coming election for U.S. Senate, Governor, Secretary of State and other top state races? And what do they think about some of the propositions on the ballot? Those are some of the questions from the latest Cronkite-Eight Poll. Poll Director Bruce Merrill and Assistant Poll Director Tara Blanc will analyze the results.
Guests:
  • Dr. Bruce Merrill - Director, Cronkite-Eight Poll
  • Tara Blanc - Assistant Director, Cronkite-Eight Poll
Category: Cronkite-Eight Poll

View Transcript
Michael Grant:
Tonight on Horizon, our latest Cronkite-Eight Poll looks at the race for senate between Jon Kyl and Jim Pederson and the top statewide races. We reveal the results tonight in our latest Cronkite-Eight Poll. Plus, two competing anti-smoking measures could set the ballot on fire. A debate on props 201 and 206 coming up on Horizon

Announcer:
Horizon is made possible by contributions from the friends of 8, members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.

Michael Grant:
Good evening, I'm Michael Grant. Welcome to Horizon. First up, in the news the University of Phoenix Stadium will be the official new name for the home of the Arizona Cardinals. The naming-rights deal came today for the new football stadium in Glendale. It is part of a major branding and marketing campaign for the University of Phoenix. The deal has the U of Phoenix giving the cards nearly $155-million over 20 years.

Michael Grant:
Senator Jon Kyl's lead over Jim Pederson remains steady. Governor Janet Napolitano has a huge lead over Len Munsil. Those are a couple of the results of the latest Cronkite-Eight Poll, conducted by KAET-Eight TV and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University September 21st through the 24th. 882 Arizona registered voters most likely to vote were surveyed and the poll has a margin of error of 3.3 percent. Here are the results.

Mike Sauceda:
The Cronkite-Eight Poll found that 49\% of those likely to vote were planning to vote for Republican Senator Jon Kyl. 38\% for Democrat Jim Pederson and 2\% said they would vote for Libertarian Richard Mack. In race for governor, 64\% plan to vote for Governor Janet Napolitano and 28\% plan to vote for Republican Len Munsil. While 2\% plan to vote for Libertarian Barry Hess. Republican Incumbent Jan Brewer is in the lead at 46\% of secretary of state and 22\% for Israel Torres and 4\% plan to vote for Libertarian Ernie Hancock. Democrat Incumbent Terry Goddard received 58\% of the race of state attorney general. 29\% plan to vote for Bill Montgomery. Republican Incumbent Tom Horn holds a 42 to 34\% lead over in race of superintendent of public instruction over Jason Williams. Dean Martin has 40 to 26\% edge over Democrat Singh. Slight error margin of 3\%.

Michael Grant:
Here to discuss the Cronkite-Eight poll is its director, Dr. Bruce Merrill and his assistant, Tara Blanc. Some interesting results. Tara, I 880 interviews which is a margin of error slightly of 3\%. What was the procedure to figure out most likely to vote? How did you go about that?

Tara Blanc:
We drew a random sample from the list of names from the secretary of state people who are registered to vote. What happens we drew was a random sample of people who voted in the three out of the last three general elections and new registrants.

Michael Grant:
The presumption on new registrants being?

Tara Blanc:
They just registered and would be eager to vote in the general election.

Michael Grant:
Do we follow--obviously that is good method obviously to look at what your actual voting pattern has been. Do we follow it in the survey in itself that are you interested in politics?

Tara Blanc:
We did create an index. Several questions depending on the person's answer would indicate whether they were more or less likely to vote. Including things whether they decided on a candidate, how strong they felt about a candidate, how strong they feel about party affiliation and several other things we know from past experience tend to indicate people are more likely to vote and add it up and highest scoring people are those we consider most likely to vote.

Michael Grant:
Bruce, this 11 point spread Kyl up on Pederson is becoming boring. Haven't we gotten that two or three times?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Three times in the row now. The difference is between 9 and 11 percentage points from the thing is that interesting now we're down to the point very undecided vote and there's 11\% difference and these people are most likely to vote. Voting starts in two weeks. The early voting campaign starts in two weeks. If Pederson is making inroads he has to do it in the next couple of weeks.

Michael Grant:
Three factors we identified for the point spread. Walk through those.

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Basically what's happening right now and why Pederson has not been able to close on the senator is Kyl has a two to one advantage in what we call party crossover. In other words 20\% of the democrats are crossing over and supporting Kyl only 9\% of the republicans are crossing over and supporting Pederson. When you are in a state with 158,000 republicans you can't afford to have a negative crossover factor. The other two factors quickly are one Pederson is not doing as well in Pima County as most democrats do. Kyl is carrying Maricopa County by 15 percentage points and the vote is evenly divided in the heavily democrat Pima County. Quickly the third factor there is a gender gap in this particular election in favor of males. What happens is when we pull out females, they are splitting their vote evenly between the two candidates. When you pull out the men and look how they are going to vote, by the 20\% advantage they are voting for Kyl. So Pederson is really any one of those three could cost him the election. He has a lot of work to do.

Michael Grant:
Incidentally, Tara, is there a gender gap on a voter efficacy?

Tara Blanc:
I believe men are considered slightly more likely.

Michael Grant:
Slightly more likely to vote?

Tara Blanc:
Yes.

Michael Grant:
Any indication how the Hispanic vote breaks down?

Tara Blanc:
We did not run that, did we?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
We don't have big enough ends to have a good margin of error. Of all three polls we have done 40\% of the Hispanics tend to be voting for Kyl. You have a fairly conservative Hispanics who tend to vote for republican candidates.

Michael Grant:
Interestingly enough, Bruce, I want to say three weeks ago Jim Pederson went, here I'll use the term aggressive, different people will characterize it differently. He obviously went to a much more aggressive set of campaign ads. So far it seems to indicate it's not making any progress.

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Well, what we know is attack ads more aggressive ads, negative advertising gets people's attention. Once you get their attention, you have to have the right message. I don't think it's unfair when you look at what's happened now for three months in a row that there's been no change in how well Pederson is doing in this race to say that the money he spent on political advertising probably 8 to $10 million really doesn't seem to be very effective in terms of convincing people to support Pederson.

Michael Grant:
Turning to the governor's results. The governor absolutely crushing Munsil at 64 to 28\%. One thing that struck me about that, though, we had done hypothetical questions on the four republican candidates again here and the results were actually in that range as I recall.

Tara Blanc:
They were I think the highest when we asked about the different candidates of 27\% and we find 28\% for Munsil in this poll. It's consistent with what we found when we asked about the four primary candidates against the governor. She's incredibly popular.

Michael Grant:
Three primary factors going on there? What were some of the keys there?

Tara Blanc:
It's pretty much the same thing happening with Kyl only on the democratic side for Governor Janet Napolitano. She is doing well in Pima County and leading in Maricopa County crossover for republicans for her is 37 to 38\%. She's picking up a lot of republican support and evenly split between men and women and she's carrying all of the counties regardless of whether they are republican or democrat.

Michael Grant:
Some of those republicans will come home, will they not?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Absolutely, what happens is the election approaches particularly with republicans is party identification will begin to exert itself particularly as Munsil gets better known out there, republicans know who he is. He will have a socially conservative agenda. If that happens, many of those republicans will come back to the Republican Party. In fact if the governor ends up with a 56, 57\% victory on Election Day, it really would almost be a landslide in a heavily republican state like Arizona.

Tara Blanc:
Particularly considering what the turnout might be. The lower turnout, the more it will favor Munsil. When we looked at the sample most likely to vote of the most likely to vote, the percentage for Munsil rose slightly because those people tend to be republicans. That would tend to favor him, whether it would be enough to make a dent is the question.

Michael Grant:
I found somewhat surprising that Tom Horn - Jason Williams result 42\%, 34\%. Is this strong endorsement of the NBA or what?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
It is interesting in the state-wide races this is the one that gets the most votes for the democrats. You would hate to think they are voting for an NBA basketball player. Certainly a name can be a tremendous asset to a political candidate.

Michael Grant:
In fact witness, Dean Martin doing very well in the state treasure's race. Mike Sauceda our executive producer suggested maybe the democrats should have filled in Frank Sinatra--

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
That would have been a wonderful contest.

Michael Grant: --
to run against him. Obviously the undecideds grew in all of these further down the ballot races. Again up at the top of the keys, most of the people have their minds made up.

Tara Blanc:
The undecided margin is very small. Because we are talking to people most likely to vote. These people who made up their minds in the high profile key races. Most know who they will vote for at this point. If they haven't decided at this point, chances are they may not vote at all.

Michael Grant:
They may not vote at all. Tara Blanc thanks for joining us. Bruce Merrill, interesting results. And thanks to the volunteers.

Michael Grant:
Tonight we continue our in-depth coverage of Arizona's ballot props with a look at competing anti-smoking measures. Although voters have passed several previous local measures, efforts to ban smoking in public places have a history of controversy in our state. There are two rival propositions on the ballot in November that have varying degrees of a statewide smoking ban. If both pass, the one with the most votes wins. In a moment, we'll hear support and opposition of the measures. First Merry Lucero has a comparison of propositions 201 and 206.

Merry Lucero:
Smoking is currently prohibited in Arizona in certain areas and most state buildings. Several cities and towns have their own restrictions in smoking public places. Nearly a third of the states nationally have statewide smoking bans and Arizona could be next. Prop 201 smoke free Arizona is backed by coalition of health corporations including the American Cancer Society and American Heart Association.

Michelle Pabis:
It prohibits smoking in all enclosed places and work places. That means your offices, healthcare facilities, restaurant, bars, bowling alleys indoor work places.

Merry Lucero:
The Department of Health Services would enforce 201. Prop 206 from the Arizona non-smoker Protection Committee is backed by the licensed beverage association, tobacco company RJ Reynolds and bar owners. It's similar to 201 --banning smoking in enclosed places and places of employment with the exception of bars.

Mark Anthony Desimone:
If an establishment has a bar area and if the primary purpose of which is for the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and they would like to make that an area where they would allow smoking, what they need to do is completely seal it off floor to ceiling, separately ventilate it, preclude minors from entering and they could have smoking in that area.

Merry Lucero:
There is not a designated enforcement agency for prop 206. Both election camps urge a yes vote on theirs and no vote on the other.

Mark Anthony Desimone:
Prop 206 is a reasonable and fair solution. It protects smokers, non-smokers, minors and small businesses. 201 would be very, very detrimental to my industry and my business which feeds my family.

Michelle Pabis:
It's really an effort to have a loophole-riddled proposition out there. What theirs would do is allow smoking in over 3,000 restaurants and bars in Arizona and continue allowing smoking in free standing bars.

Merry Lucero:
It would not prohibit retail tobacco shops, patio smoking areas and hotel rooms designated and private clubs physically separated, independently ventilated and not opened to the public.

Michael Grant:
Here now to talk about the anti-smoking measures proposition 206 Camilla Strongin a supporter, opposing proposition 201 and partner with the Symington Group; and Bill Pfeifer, proposition 201 supporter opposing proposition 206. Bill is president and CEO of the American Lung Association of the Southwest. You know you need the program for all the props this time. What do we have on the ballot? 19 or so? Camilla, tell me why people should vote yes on proposition 206?

Camilla Strongin:
Prop 206 is a statewide smoking ban that protects non-smokers, children and it also protects small business owners because we certainly know that small business owners are the life blood of our economy. This is a uniform statewide smoking ban that makes a level playing field for businesses, protects those who do not want to be around second-hand smoke and makes it limited to exemptions like bars and certain hotel rooms would be exempted.

Michael Grant:
Tobacco shops.

Camilla Strongin:
Tobacco shops.

Michael Grant:
Makes sense.

Camilla Strongin:
Yes.

Michael Grant:
Bill, why is prop 201 better?

Bill Pfeifer:
First and foremost prop 201 is brought to by the organizations, by those who look after your health. The American Lung Association, the American Heart Association and as opposed to the opposition proposition 206 is funded by the tobacco industry. It's comprehensive and prohibits smoking in all enclosed workplaces throughout the state. It won't differentiate between big businesses or small businesses, restaurants or bars, everything. If it's a workplace or public place it prohibits smoking in those places except of course outside patios. What makes it different is proposition 201 clearly details and defines the issue of enforcement. As we were writing the initiative that's what came out as reviewing legislation in 14 states is the issue of enforcement and making sure you detail who is responsible and how will it play out.

Michael Grant:
Bill, let me focus on what I think are a couple of key differences. Certainly one key difference is whether or not you can smoke in a bar if the bar owner wants to allow that, the bar owner can still say no. Why isn't that appropriately left to the bar owner and for that matter the people that either want to walk in there or not walk in there?

Bill Pfeifer:
Well, I think the simple answer is it's a public health issue. We've got to remember second-hand smoke causes death and disease in normal, healthy individuals. It causes those death and disease whether it's a restaurant or bar. Second-hand smoke doesn't know this is a bar as opposed to restaurant or workplace or public place. The issue is about public health. From our position is this is a public health matter and needs to apply to all work places, all public places.

Michael Grant:
Camilla, why draw the line around the bar? Why not, for example, draw it more broadly and leave say a smoking area in a restaurant? I mean why are we putting a circle around the bar?

Camilla Strongin:
We clearly feel that a bar is a logical choice. That's an adult environment. Prop 206 limits access by minors into a smoking bar for example and prohibits them from entering it and has certain sanctions. We think this is a reasonable choice. We have smokers in our society. We need to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke. Certainly I think it's an appropriate location for smokers to gather. You certainly will know if it's a smoking environment, that's your choice as an adult to enter that environment.

Michael Grant:
Let me give you an opportunity to respond to those points that he made on opening about there why should you trust RJ Reynolds and what they are saying about a smoking proposition?

Camilla Strongin:
If you look at our initiative, it's very clear. It's a comprehensive smoking ban. We're proud to have the support of RJ Reynolds as well as hundreds and hundreds of small business owners throughout Arizona who feel strongly about protecting property rights and allow business owners to continue to make the decisions about how their bars and work and who they cater to. They don't want to be in an environment that allows smoking and keeps small businesses up and running in Arizona and that's vital to our economy.

Michael Grant:
Bill, let me go to second major distinction between the two. Proposition 206 would be statewide and say to the localities what was policy we have got we want this to be statewide and uniform. Yours obviously doesn't do that. It would allow flexibility not at the local level. If Tempe wanted to do something more severe, why is that a good idea?

Bill Pfeifer:
Let me have you look at it in a different perspective. Is what we do in our initiative is respect local control. We respect the city of Tempe or some other city or city council made a decision on their smoking initiative years ago and what proposition 206 is going to do is say the tobacco industry believes they know better and they need to preempt the local city from doing more and rollback what has been done in the city of Tempe or Sedona or Flagstaff. We have a decision here. As voters do we trust the tobacco industry to make that choice for our good public health or choose associations like lung association?

Michael Grant:
Is that local control or chaos? If you're driving along a Superstition Freeway you are probably violating an ordinance with every town you pass through or sometimes you're not.

Bill Pfeifer:
Michael, what we believe as we wrote our initiative it is truly a comprehensive law. What is going to happen most will see what that law is all about? They will say, hey, it's covered all inside places, all work places, public places and healthcare facilities and covers the gamut. It's a comprehensive law that covers everything. However it allows still for the local control.

Michael Grant:
Camilla, why and localities be--you have a different feeling about this statewide. Why shouldn't they have the freedom--okay? We'll go with yours as a base, some people in a well-ventilated bar they don't want to allow it why shouldn't they take that state?

Camilla Strongin:
I think what they are promoting is a checkerboard process. A bar owner in Tempe doesn't play by the same rules as somebody in flagstaff if they own two different bars. Ours is a uniform statewide smoking ban. It makes it very clear. It's definable and while we know that no smoking ban in Arizona has failed, this creates a level playing field for small business owners to make a decision about how they operate--excuse me--and conduct their business.

Michael Grant:
Obviously the small business owners though, could move. In fact I think there's examples of where that has happened.

Camilla Strongin:
Well, I think certainly, you know, that creates another hardship on small business owners creating a very intensive environment and having government intervention dictates how they are going to operate their businesses. We certainly if a Tempe bar owner is comfortable with not allowing smoking in his bar, he doesn't need to change a thing after prop 206 passes.

Michael Grant:
Bill, we are almost out of time. Where does private property rights fit in this if at all?

Bill Pfeifer:
First of all we don't believe prop 201 infringes on personal or property rights no more than current regulations we have in business. We go in a restaurant; we expect that restaurant to have a clean kitchen and to have certain standards that we just expect them to meet. It's about public health. Secondhand smoke, it's a public health issue and we should expect no different when we go through public places and work places throughout the state.

Michael Grant:
We are almost out of time.

Camilla Strongin:
We see it as a choice issue. It clearly comes down to a reasonable lot that accommodates non-smokers and smokers alike and protects children and keeps them out of the environment that has secondhand smoke. I think it's clearly a reasonable choice for Arizona voters.

Michael Grant:
Camilla Strongin, thank you for being here. Bill Pfeifer, good seeing you again. Best luck at the polls.

Bill Pfeifer:
Thank you very much.

Larry Lemmons:
Proposition 204 mandates that pigs are treated humanely before being slaughtered. The man who brought down the Nixon administration is now a critic of the Bush administration. A conversation with John Dean, Wednesday night at 7 on Horizon.

Michael Grant:
For more information about what's coming up on Horizon, transcripts and to contact us please visit our web site at azpbs.org.

Michael Grant:
Thank you very much for joining us this Tuesday evening on Horizon. I'm Michael Grant. Have a great one. Good night.

Propositions 201 and 206


  • Two competing anti-smoking measures will be on the November ballot and both say they work in the interest of helping to protect people from secondhand smoke. Prop 201, Smoke Free Arizona, is backed by a coalition of health organizations and would ban smoking in most public spaces and workplaces, including restaurants, bars, arenas, offices, bowling alleys and nursing homes. Prop 206 from the Arizona Non-Smoker Protection Committee would ban smoking in most enclosed public places and places of employment but allow smoking in freestanding bars, and bar areas that are closed off and separately ventilated from adjacent non-smoking areas.
Guests:
  • Dr. Bruce Merrill - Director, Cronkite-Eight Poll
  • Tara Blanc - Assistant Director, Cronkite-Eight Poll
Category: Elections

View Transcript
Michael Grant:
Tonight on Horizon, our latest Cronkite-Eight Poll looks at the race for senate between Jon Kyl and Jim Pederson and the top statewide races. We reveal the results tonight in our latest Cronkite-Eight Poll. Plus, two competing anti-smoking measures could set the ballot on fire. A debate on props 201 and 206 coming up on Horizon

Announcer:
Horizon is made possible by contributions from the friends of 8, members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.

Michael Grant:
Good evening, I'm Michael Grant. Welcome to Horizon. First up, in the news the University of Phoenix Stadium will be the official new name for the home of the Arizona Cardinals. The naming-rights deal came today for the new football stadium in Glendale. It is part of a major branding and marketing campaign for the University of Phoenix. The deal has the U of Phoenix giving the cards nearly $155-million over 20 years.

Michael Grant:
Senator Jon Kyl's lead over Jim Pederson remains steady. Governor Janet Napolitano has a huge lead over Len Munsil. Those are a couple of the results of the latest Cronkite-Eight Poll, conducted by KAET-Eight TV and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University September 21st through the 24th. 882 Arizona registered voters most likely to vote were surveyed and the poll has a margin of error of 3.3 percent. Here are the results.

Mike Sauceda:
The Cronkite-Eight Poll found that 49\% of those likely to vote were planning to vote for Republican Senator Jon Kyl. 38\% for Democrat Jim Pederson and 2\% said they would vote for Libertarian Richard Mack. In race for governor, 64\% plan to vote for Governor Janet Napolitano and 28\% plan to vote for Republican Len Munsil. While 2\% plan to vote for Libertarian Barry Hess. Republican Incumbent Jan Brewer is in the lead at 46\% of secretary of state and 22\% for Israel Torres and 4\% plan to vote for Libertarian Ernie Hancock. Democrat Incumbent Terry Goddard received 58\% of the race of state attorney general. 29\% plan to vote for Bill Montgomery. Republican Incumbent Tom Horn holds a 42 to 34\% lead over in race of superintendent of public instruction over Jason Williams. Dean Martin has 40 to 26\% edge over Democrat Singh. Slight error margin of 3\%.

Michael Grant:
Here to discuss the Cronkite-Eight poll is its director, Dr. Bruce Merrill and his assistant, Tara Blanc. Some interesting results. Tara, I 880 interviews which is a margin of error slightly of 3\%. What was the procedure to figure out most likely to vote? How did you go about that?

Tara Blanc:
We drew a random sample from the list of names from the secretary of state people who are registered to vote. What happens we drew was a random sample of people who voted in the three out of the last three general elections and new registrants.

Michael Grant:
The presumption on new registrants being?

Tara Blanc:
They just registered and would be eager to vote in the general election.

Michael Grant:
Do we follow--obviously that is good method obviously to look at what your actual voting pattern has been. Do we follow it in the survey in itself that are you interested in politics?

Tara Blanc:
We did create an index. Several questions depending on the person's answer would indicate whether they were more or less likely to vote. Including things whether they decided on a candidate, how strong they felt about a candidate, how strong they feel about party affiliation and several other things we know from past experience tend to indicate people are more likely to vote and add it up and highest scoring people are those we consider most likely to vote.

Michael Grant:
Bruce, this 11 point spread Kyl up on Pederson is becoming boring. Haven't we gotten that two or three times?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Three times in the row now. The difference is between 9 and 11 percentage points from the thing is that interesting now we're down to the point very undecided vote and there's 11\% difference and these people are most likely to vote. Voting starts in two weeks. The early voting campaign starts in two weeks. If Pederson is making inroads he has to do it in the next couple of weeks.

Michael Grant:
Three factors we identified for the point spread. Walk through those.

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Basically what's happening right now and why Pederson has not been able to close on the senator is Kyl has a two to one advantage in what we call party crossover. In other words 20\% of the democrats are crossing over and supporting Kyl only 9\% of the republicans are crossing over and supporting Pederson. When you are in a state with 158,000 republicans you can't afford to have a negative crossover factor. The other two factors quickly are one Pederson is not doing as well in Pima County as most democrats do. Kyl is carrying Maricopa County by 15 percentage points and the vote is evenly divided in the heavily democrat Pima County. Quickly the third factor there is a gender gap in this particular election in favor of males. What happens is when we pull out females, they are splitting their vote evenly between the two candidates. When you pull out the men and look how they are going to vote, by the 20\% advantage they are voting for Kyl. So Pederson is really any one of those three could cost him the election. He has a lot of work to do.

Michael Grant:
Incidentally, Tara, is there a gender gap on a voter efficacy?

Tara Blanc:
I believe men are considered slightly more likely.

Michael Grant:
Slightly more likely to vote?

Tara Blanc:
Yes.

Michael Grant:
Any indication how the Hispanic vote breaks down?

Tara Blanc:
We did not run that, did we?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
We don't have big enough ends to have a good margin of error. Of all three polls we have done 40\% of the Hispanics tend to be voting for Kyl. You have a fairly conservative Hispanics who tend to vote for republican candidates.

Michael Grant:
Interestingly enough, Bruce, I want to say three weeks ago Jim Pederson went, here I'll use the term aggressive, different people will characterize it differently. He obviously went to a much more aggressive set of campaign ads. So far it seems to indicate it's not making any progress.

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Well, what we know is attack ads more aggressive ads, negative advertising gets people's attention. Once you get their attention, you have to have the right message. I don't think it's unfair when you look at what's happened now for three months in a row that there's been no change in how well Pederson is doing in this race to say that the money he spent on political advertising probably 8 to $10 million really doesn't seem to be very effective in terms of convincing people to support Pederson.

Michael Grant:
Turning to the governor's results. The governor absolutely crushing Munsil at 64 to 28\%. One thing that struck me about that, though, we had done hypothetical questions on the four republican candidates again here and the results were actually in that range as I recall.

Tara Blanc:
They were I think the highest when we asked about the different candidates of 27\% and we find 28\% for Munsil in this poll. It's consistent with what we found when we asked about the four primary candidates against the governor. She's incredibly popular.

Michael Grant:
Three primary factors going on there? What were some of the keys there?

Tara Blanc:
It's pretty much the same thing happening with Kyl only on the democratic side for Governor Janet Napolitano. She is doing well in Pima County and leading in Maricopa County crossover for republicans for her is 37 to 38\%. She's picking up a lot of republican support and evenly split between men and women and she's carrying all of the counties regardless of whether they are republican or democrat.

Michael Grant:
Some of those republicans will come home, will they not?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
Absolutely, what happens is the election approaches particularly with republicans is party identification will begin to exert itself particularly as Munsil gets better known out there, republicans know who he is. He will have a socially conservative agenda. If that happens, many of those republicans will come back to the Republican Party. In fact if the governor ends up with a 56, 57\% victory on Election Day, it really would almost be a landslide in a heavily republican state like Arizona.

Tara Blanc:
Particularly considering what the turnout might be. The lower turnout, the more it will favor Munsil. When we looked at the sample most likely to vote of the most likely to vote, the percentage for Munsil rose slightly because those people tend to be republicans. That would tend to favor him, whether it would be enough to make a dent is the question.

Michael Grant:
I found somewhat surprising that Tom Horn - Jason Williams result 42\%, 34\%. Is this strong endorsement of the NBA or what?

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
It is interesting in the state-wide races this is the one that gets the most votes for the democrats. You would hate to think they are voting for an NBA basketball player. Certainly a name can be a tremendous asset to a political candidate.

Michael Grant:
In fact witness, Dean Martin doing very well in the state treasure's race. Mike Sauceda our executive producer suggested maybe the democrats should have filled in Frank Sinatra--

Dr. Bruce Merrill:
That would have been a wonderful contest.

Michael Grant: --
to run against him. Obviously the undecideds grew in all of these further down the ballot races. Again up at the top of the keys, most of the people have their minds made up.

Tara Blanc:
The undecided margin is very small. Because we are talking to people most likely to vote. These people who made up their minds in the high profile key races. Most know who they will vote for at this point. If they haven't decided at this point, chances are they may not vote at all.

Michael Grant:
They may not vote at all. Tara Blanc thanks for joining us. Bruce Merrill, interesting results. And thanks to the volunteers.

Michael Grant:
Tonight we continue our in-depth coverage of Arizona's ballot props with a look at competing anti-smoking measures. Although voters have passed several previous local measures, efforts to ban smoking in public places have a history of controversy in our state. There are two rival propositions on the ballot in November that have varying degrees of a statewide smoking ban. If both pass, the one with the most votes wins. In a moment, we'll hear support and opposition of the measures. First Merry Lucero has a comparison of propositions 201 and 206.

Merry Lucero:
Smoking is currently prohibited in Arizona in certain areas and most state buildings. Several cities and towns have their own restrictions in smoking public places. Nearly a third of the states nationally have statewide smoking bans and Arizona could be next. Prop 201 smoke free Arizona is backed by coalition of health corporations including the American Cancer Society and American Heart Association.

Michelle Pabis:
It prohibits smoking in all enclosed places and work places. That means your offices, healthcare facilities, restaurant, bars, bowling alleys indoor work places.

Merry Lucero:
The Department of Health Services would enforce 201. Prop 206 from the Arizona non-smoker Protection Committee is backed by the licensed beverage association, tobacco company RJ Reynolds and bar owners. It's similar to 201 --banning smoking in enclosed places and places of employment with the exception of bars.

Mark Anthony Desimone:
If an establishment has a bar area and if the primary purpose of which is for the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and they would like to make that an area where they would allow smoking, what they need to do is completely seal it off floor to ceiling, separately ventilate it, preclude minors from entering and they could have smoking in that area.

Merry Lucero:
There is not a designated enforcement agency for prop 206. Both election camps urge a yes vote on theirs and no vote on the other.

Mark Anthony Desimone:
Prop 206 is a reasonable and fair solution. It protects smokers, non-smokers, minors and small businesses. 201 would be very, very detrimental to my industry and my business which feeds my family.

Michelle Pabis:
It's really an effort to have a loophole-riddled proposition out there. What theirs would do is allow smoking in over 3,000 restaurants and bars in Arizona and continue allowing smoking in free standing bars.

Merry Lucero:
It would not prohibit retail tobacco shops, patio smoking areas and hotel rooms designated and private clubs physically separated, independently ventilated and not opened to the public.

Michael Grant:
Here now to talk about the anti-smoking measures proposition 206 Camilla Strongin a supporter, opposing proposition 201 and partner with the Symington Group; and Bill Pfeifer, proposition 201 supporter opposing proposition 206. Bill is president and CEO of the American Lung Association of the Southwest. You know you need the program for all the props this time. What do we have on the ballot? 19 or so? Camilla, tell me why people should vote yes on proposition 206?

Camilla Strongin:
Prop 206 is a statewide smoking ban that protects non-smokers, children and it also protects small business owners because we certainly know that small business owners are the life blood of our economy. This is a uniform statewide smoking ban that makes a level playing field for businesses, protects those who do not want to be around second-hand smoke and makes it limited to exemptions like bars and certain hotel rooms would be exempted.

Michael Grant:
Tobacco shops.

Camilla Strongin:
Tobacco shops.

Michael Grant:
Makes sense.

Camilla Strongin:
Yes.

Michael Grant:
Bill, why is prop 201 better?

Bill Pfeifer:
First and foremost prop 201 is brought to by the organizations, by those who look after your health. The American Lung Association, the American Heart Association and as opposed to the opposition proposition 206 is funded by the tobacco industry. It's comprehensive and prohibits smoking in all enclosed workplaces throughout the state. It won't differentiate between big businesses or small businesses, restaurants or bars, everything. If it's a workplace or public place it prohibits smoking in those places except of course outside patios. What makes it different is proposition 201 clearly details and defines the issue of enforcement. As we were writing the initiative that's what came out as reviewing legislation in 14 states is the issue of enforcement and making sure you detail who is responsible and how will it play out.

Michael Grant:
Bill, let me focus on what I think are a couple of key differences. Certainly one key difference is whether or not you can smoke in a bar if the bar owner wants to allow that, the bar owner can still say no. Why isn't that appropriately left to the bar owner and for that matter the people that either want to walk in there or not walk in there?

Bill Pfeifer:
Well, I think the simple answer is it's a public health issue. We've got to remember second-hand smoke causes death and disease in normal, healthy individuals. It causes those death and disease whether it's a restaurant or bar. Second-hand smoke doesn't know this is a bar as opposed to restaurant or workplace or public place. The issue is about public health. From our position is this is a public health matter and needs to apply to all work places, all public places.

Michael Grant:
Camilla, why draw the line around the bar? Why not, for example, draw it more broadly and leave say a smoking area in a restaurant? I mean why are we putting a circle around the bar?

Camilla Strongin:
We clearly feel that a bar is a logical choice. That's an adult environment. Prop 206 limits access by minors into a smoking bar for example and prohibits them from entering it and has certain sanctions. We think this is a reasonable choice. We have smokers in our society. We need to protect non-smokers from second-hand smoke. Certainly I think it's an appropriate location for smokers to gather. You certainly will know if it's a smoking environment, that's your choice as an adult to enter that environment.

Michael Grant:
Let me give you an opportunity to respond to those points that he made on opening about there why should you trust RJ Reynolds and what they are saying about a smoking proposition?

Camilla Strongin:
If you look at our initiative, it's very clear. It's a comprehensive smoking ban. We're proud to have the support of RJ Reynolds as well as hundreds and hundreds of small business owners throughout Arizona who feel strongly about protecting property rights and allow business owners to continue to make the decisions about how their bars and work and who they cater to. They don't want to be in an environment that allows smoking and keeps small businesses up and running in Arizona and that's vital to our economy.

Michael Grant:
Bill, let me go to second major distinction between the two. Proposition 206 would be statewide and say to the localities what was policy we have got we want this to be statewide and uniform. Yours obviously doesn't do that. It would allow flexibility not at the local level. If Tempe wanted to do something more severe, why is that a good idea?

Bill Pfeifer:
Let me have you look at it in a different perspective. Is what we do in our initiative is respect local control. We respect the city of Tempe or some other city or city council made a decision on their smoking initiative years ago and what proposition 206 is going to do is say the tobacco industry believes they know better and they need to preempt the local city from doing more and rollback what has been done in the city of Tempe or Sedona or Flagstaff. We have a decision here. As voters do we trust the tobacco industry to make that choice for our good public health or choose associations like lung association?

Michael Grant:
Is that local control or chaos? If you're driving along a Superstition Freeway you are probably violating an ordinance with every town you pass through or sometimes you're not.

Bill Pfeifer:
Michael, what we believe as we wrote our initiative it is truly a comprehensive law. What is going to happen most will see what that law is all about? They will say, hey, it's covered all inside places, all work places, public places and healthcare facilities and covers the gamut. It's a comprehensive law that covers everything. However it allows still for the local control.

Michael Grant:
Camilla, why and localities be--you have a different feeling about this statewide. Why shouldn't they have the freedom--okay? We'll go with yours as a base, some people in a well-ventilated bar they don't want to allow it why shouldn't they take that state?

Camilla Strongin:
I think what they are promoting is a checkerboard process. A bar owner in Tempe doesn't play by the same rules as somebody in flagstaff if they own two different bars. Ours is a uniform statewide smoking ban. It makes it very clear. It's definable and while we know that no smoking ban in Arizona has failed, this creates a level playing field for small business owners to make a decision about how they operate--excuse me--and conduct their business.

Michael Grant:
Obviously the small business owners though, could move. In fact I think there's examples of where that has happened.

Camilla Strongin:
Well, I think certainly, you know, that creates another hardship on small business owners creating a very intensive environment and having government intervention dictates how they are going to operate their businesses. We certainly if a Tempe bar owner is comfortable with not allowing smoking in his bar, he doesn't need to change a thing after prop 206 passes.

Michael Grant:
Bill, we are almost out of time. Where does private property rights fit in this if at all?

Bill Pfeifer:
First of all we don't believe prop 201 infringes on personal or property rights no more than current regulations we have in business. We go in a restaurant; we expect that restaurant to have a clean kitchen and to have certain standards that we just expect them to meet. It's about public health. Secondhand smoke, it's a public health issue and we should expect no different when we go through public places and work places throughout the state.

Michael Grant:
We are almost out of time.

Camilla Strongin:
We see it as a choice issue. It clearly comes down to a reasonable lot that accommodates non-smokers and smokers alike and protects children and keeps them out of the environment that has secondhand smoke. I think it's clearly a reasonable choice for Arizona voters.

Michael Grant:
Camilla Strongin, thank you for being here. Bill Pfeifer, good seeing you again. Best luck at the polls.

Bill Pfeifer:
Thank you very much.

Larry Lemmons:
Proposition 204 mandates that pigs are treated humanely before being slaughtered. The man who brought down the Nixon administration is now a critic of the Bush administration. A conversation with John Dean, Wednesday night at 7 on Horizon.

Michael Grant:
For more information about what's coming up on Horizon, transcripts and to contact us please visit our web site at azpbs.org.

Michael Grant:
Thank you very much for joining us this Tuesday evening on Horizon. I'm Michael Grant. Have a great one. Good night.

Content Partner: