Other transcripts

Transcripts

October 22, 2002

Host: Michael Grant
Topics:
Candidates's Forum: Governor
In-Studio Guests:
Barry Hess, Libertarian;
Richard Mahoney, Independent;
Janet Napolitano, Democrat;
Matt Salmon, Republican

>> MICHAEL: OUR NEXT GOVERNOR DOESN'T HAVE AN EASY TASK AHEAD. OUR ECONOMY IS SUFFERING, RESULTING IN CONTINUED BUDGET SHORTFALLS. THE STATE'S DROPOUT RATE CONTINUES TO RESIDE IN THE CELLAR. WE MAY FACE A DECISION ON THE DEATH PENALTY. AND HEALTH ISSUES WILL CONTINUE AT THE FOREFRONT.

>> ANNOUNCER: TONIGHT FROM THE CHANNEL 8 STUDIOS ON THE CAMPUS OF ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY. ELECTION 2002 SPECIAL, A FORUM WITH THE CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR.

>> MICHAEL: GOOD EVENING. I'M MICHAEL GRANT OF CHANNEL 8'S "HORIZON" PROGRAM. THIS IS THE OFFICIAL CLEAN ELECTIONS FORUM FOR CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR. EACH CANDIDATE WILL HAVE UP TO 90 SECONDS FOR AN OPENING STATEMENT. THEY WILL ALSO HAVE UP TO 60 SECONDS FOR A CLOSING STATEMENT. IN BETWEEN, WE WILL ASK OUR CANDIDATES QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE MAJOR ISSUES FACING THE NEXT GOVERNOR AND SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS WILL COME FROM "HORIZON" VIEWERS. FIRST, LET'S FIND OUT MORE ABOUT EACH CANDIDATE.

>>> BARRY HESS IS THE LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR. HE IS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND WAS A PRESIDENTIAL DELEGATE FOR THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY. HESS HAS LIVED IN THE STATE 22 YEARS, MARRIED AND HAS ONE CHILD. HE IS A NON-PARTICIPATING CANDIDATE UNDER THE CLEAN ELECTIONS ACT. RICHARD MAHONEY IS AN EXECUTIVE EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR, WHO FORMERLY TAUGHT AT THE THUNDERBIRD SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT. HE SERVED AS SECRETARY OF STATE, FROM 1991 TO 1995. HE ALSO SERVED ON THE BOARD OF THE CENTRAL ARIZONA WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT. HE IS A FOURTH GENERATION ARIZONAN. HE IS DIVORCED, WITH ONE CHILD. HE IS A PARTICIPATING CANDIDATE. JANET NAPOLITANO IS THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE AND ARIZONA'S ATTORNEY GENERAL. SHE SERVED AS U.S. ATTORNEY FOR ARIZONA. SHE MOVED TO OUR STATE IN 1983. SHE IS SINGLE. SHE IS A PARTICIPATING CLEAN ELECTIONS CANDIDATE. MATT SALMON IS THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE. HE IS A BUSINESS CONSULTANT AND FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN, SERVING FROM 1995 TO 2001. SALMON HAS LIVED IN ARIZONA 32 YEARS. HE IS MARRIED AND HAS FOUR CHILDREN. HE IS A NON-PARTICIPATING CANDIDATE. BEFORE THE PROGRAM BEGAN, WE DREW LOTS TO DETERMINE THE ORDER OF OPENING STATEMENTS. WE BEGIN WITH MATT SALMON.

>> Matt Salmon: I HOPE THAT'S PRELUDE FOR THINGS TO COME. I DID A LITTLE GUT CHECK OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS THINKING ABOUT THIS RACE, THINKING ABOUT WHAT FIRST GOT ME INTO POLITICS. I RAN 12 YEARS AGO FOR THE STATE SENATE BECAUSE I BELIEVED THAT WE COULD DO BETTER. IN FACT, DURING THE LATE 80S, OUR STATE LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR SIGNED TWO OF THE LARGEST TAX INCREASES IN ARIZONA'S HISTORY. I THOUGHT ABOUT HOW THAT IMPACTED SMALL BUSINESS. AS A BUSINESSMAN, I WANTED TO GO IN AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE. I'M PROUD SERVING FOUR YEARS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE I WAS PART OF THE TEAM THAT DELIVERED A BALANCED BUDGET. WE HAD A BUDGET DEFICIT. ABOUT 250 MILLION, I RECALL. WE WENT IN AND WE PUT SOME COMMON IDEAS, COMMON SENSE IDEAS INTO PRACTICE. WE NOT ONLY BALANCED THE BUDGET, WE CUT TAXES AND CREATED A RAINY DAY FUND AND A SURPLUS. I LEFT FOR CONGRESS BECAUSE I WANTED TO DO SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR OUR COUNTRY. I WANTED TO BALANCE THE FEDERAL BUDGET FOR THE FIRST TIME IN A GENERATION AND I'M PROUD TO HAVE BEEN PART OF THAT TEAM. IT TOOK A LOT OF HARD WORK AND TOUGH DECISIONS. BUT I'M PROUD THAT THE CITIZENS AGAINST GOVERNMENT WASTE RANK ME IN THE VERY, VERY TOP OF THE CONGRESS AND THE NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION FOR MAKING SURE WE LIVED WITHIN OUR MEANS. I'M RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR BECAUSE I BELIEVE WE NEED SOME HONEST CHANGE. I'LL WORK MY HEART OUT FOR A BETTER ARIZONA. OUR FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT AND SO DO YOU. I HOPE YOU'LL VOTE FOR ME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MICHAEL: THANK YOU. MR. HESS, YOUR OPENING STATEMENT.

>> Barry Hess: YES. MY NAME IS BARRY HESS, I'M A LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR. AND THAT PUTS ME IN A SPECIAL POSITION BECAUSE WE ARE THE PARTY OF PRINCIPLE. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT LIBERTARIANS ARE ALL ABOUT. I GUESS I COULD SAY WE ARE THE ONE PARTY THAT WILL GIVE YOU YOUR MONEY BACK, GUARANTEED. THAT'S WHAT IT'S ABOUT. I THINK THAT ARIZONA NEEDS TO LOOK SERIOUSLY AT THE FUTURE. WE HAVE GOTTEN INTO A MESS IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT AREAS AND I THINK IT'S TIME THAT WE HAD A CITIZEN, ONE OF THE OF, BY AND FOR CITIZENS TO RECTIFY THE CIRCUMSTANCE. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE TALKED ABOUT WASTED VOTES AND I WOULD ASSURE YOU THERE ARE ONLY TWO WASTED VOTES. ONE IS THE VOTE NOT CAST AND THE OTHER IS THE VOTE NOT CAST IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, BUT RATHER ON SPECULATION OF A WINNER. WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU DRAW THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM AWAY FROM WHERE YOU KNOW IT SHOULD BE AND IF YOUR TACTIC SHOULD FAIL YOU, THEN YOU TRULY HAVE WASTED YOUR VOTE. I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE VOTE COME NOVEMBER 5TH TO SEE WHAT ARIZONA IS MADE OF. IT'S TIME FOR SERIOUS AND DRASTIC CHANGES IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS, IN THE TAX STRUCTURE AND IN OUR BELIEFS ABOUT WHAT FREEDOM IS ALL ABOUT. WE ARE THE VOICE OF FREEDOM, WE WILL NOT BE SILENT AND WE WILL NOT GO AWAY. WE'RE THE PARTY OF PRINCIPLES. IT'S PRINCIPLES AND ETHICS, NOT PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST. LET'S LET ARIZONA WIN THIS NEXT ELECTION. PLEASE VOTE BARRY HESS, LIBERTARIAN FOR GOVERNOR.

>> MICHAEL: THANK YOU, MR. HESS. MS. NAPOLITANO.

>> Janet Napolitano: HI. I'M JANET NAPOLITANO AND I, TOO, AM RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL I HAVE WORKED VERY HARD FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS FOR SENIORS, FOR CONSUMERS, FOR CHILDREN. I HAVE TAKEN ON THE BIG BOYS. I'VE TAKEN ON THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY ON THE DESIGN OF THE CROWN VICTORIA POLICE CAR, ANDERSEN ACCOUNTING COMPANY ON BEHALF OF THE INVESTIGATORS, AND THE BAPTIST FOUNDATION RECOVERING $217 MILLION. QWEST PHONE COMPANY TO PROTECT THE PRIVACY OF YOUR PERSONAL PHONE INFORMATION, AND I'VE TAKEN ON AN INHERITED BACKLOG OF 6,000 CHILD ABUSE CASES, CHILD DEPENDENCY CASES AND REDUCED IT TO 700 TODAY. WE NEED A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE AND WE ALSO SOMEONE WHO CAN PRODUCE RESULTS. I WILL FIGHT TO BRING BACK FISCAL SANITY TO OUR BUDGET IN A BALANCED WAY WITH CUTS AND REVENUE BONDING AND OTHER TECHNIQUES DESIGNED TO GET US TO A PLATFORM THAT IS FAIR FOR ALL CONCERNED. I WILL INVEST IN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR CITIZENS, QUALITY JOBS, THE KIND OF HIGH WAGE JOBS THAT WILL KEEP OUR CHILDREN IN OUR STATE. BUT THE TOP PRIORITY WILL BE PUBLIC EDUCATION, BECAUSE WITHOUT INVESTING IN THE HUMAN CAPITAL, WE WILL NOT GET OUT OF THE HOLE WE HAVE DUG INTO. EDUCATION IS OUR FUTURE, IT WILL BE MY NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. RICHARD MAHONEY.

>> Richard Mahoney: MICHAEL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU SHOULD CONSIDER VOTING FOR ME AS GOVERNOR BECAUSE I HAVE EXPERIENCE IN RUNNING STATE GOVERNMENT. AS SECRETARY OF STATE, I RETURNED 28% OF MY BUDGET TO THE STATE IN THE FORM OF A CHECK. THAT'S SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE WE NEED TO CUT $500 MILLION OUT OF THE STATE BUDGET, AND I HAVE THE PLAN TO DO THAT. I'M A TEACHER AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT EXCELLENCE MEANS IN TERMS OF THE CONNECTION BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A CHILD. THAT'S WHERE WE SHOULD INVEST AND WHERE WE NEED TO DEDUCT IS IN ADMINISTRATION. I'M A WATER EXPERT. AND I THINK IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE FACE THE WATER EMERGENCY THAT'S ON US, PARTICULARLY IN NORTHERN ARIZONA. (SPEAKING IN SPANISH.) I'M AN INDEPENDENT. I COME TO YOU WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED. I DON'T HAVE A PARTY BEHIND ME AND THERE IS NO SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY. THAT IS A CRITICAL THING IN RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY AND NEW IDEAS IN GOVERNMENT. SO PLEASE CONSIDER VOTING FOR RICHARD MAHONEY ON NOVEMBER 5.

>> MICHAEL: THANK YOU. LET ME STICK WITH YOU, MR. MAHONEY. IN LAST NIGHT'S LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS DEBATE, THE SUBJECT IN PART WAS LOOSENING OF ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS IN RELATION TO MILITARY TRAINING EXERCISES. LET ME STICK UP IN NORTHERN ARIZONA AND GO TO A RELATED SUBJECT. HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT LOOSENING ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AS THE ADMINISTRATION SUGGESTED AND TOM DASCHLE HAS SUPPORTED FOR TREE THINNING OPERATIONS IN THE NATIONAL FOREST?

>> Richard Mahoney: I THINK THAT'S LEGITIMATE. ANYTHING IN A TIME OF DROUGHT THAT PROTECTS US AGAINST WHAT WE HAD THIS PAST SUMMER IS IMPORTANT. TREE THINNING, CREATING CLEAR-CUT BARRIERS AROUND RESIDENTIAL AREAS. LAST NIGHT, I MUST SAY, I DIDN'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE ISSUE, MATT AND JANET KIND OF GOT INTO IT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT MILITARY BASES OBSERVE POLLUTION LIMITATIONS. I HAVE A LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF IT, BUT TO THE EXTENT I UNDERSTAND IT I DO AGREE WITH JANET.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO, WHAT ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO LOOSEN ENVIRONMENTAL RESTRICTIONS ON TREE THINNING OPERATIONS IN NATIONAL FORESTS, SUPPORT OR OPPOSE?

>> Janey Napolitano: IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER IT'S AN OVERALL PLAN FOR THE FOREST AND IS PART OF THE EXCHANGE HOW WE'RE GOING TO MANAGE. MY FOREST PLAN CALLS FOR THINNING SMALL DIAMETER TREES, PARTICULARLY IN THE FOREST INTERFACE WITH CITIES, AREAS AROUND SHOW LOW, AREAS AROUND PRESCOTT, FLAGSTAFF, AND SO FORTH. LOOSENING THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS SHOULD ONLY BE DONE AS PART OF A CONSOLIDATED PROGRAM INVOLVING THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WHILE ON THE SUBJECT OF THE MILITARY INSTALLATIONS, YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THE MILITARY INSTALLATIONS ARE THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE OF POLLUTION IN NORTHERN ARIZONA AND CAMP NAVAJO IS THE NUMBER ONE EXAMPLE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT UNEXPLODED MUNITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN LEFT ON THE LAND, TO THE EXTENT THEY WARN HUNTERS NOT TO HUNT, TO WATCH OUT FOR ARMS AND TO THE EXTENT THE NATIONAL GUARD HAS TO BE CAREFUL WHEN THERE. I WAS JOINED BY MORE THAN 30 ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACROSS THE COUNTRY, REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT, ALL OF WHOM AGREED WE COULD NOT AFFORD TO HAVE OUR MILITARY INSTALLATIONS EXEMPT FROM ALL ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS.

>> Michael: MR. SALMON.

>> Matt Salmon: LET ME TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE YOU BROUGHT UP. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT AND THAT IS STILL IN THE LEGISLATION AND MOST OF THE ATTORNEYS GENERAL IN THE COUNTRY AGREED WITH MY POSITION AND THE POSITION OF SECRETARY RUMSFELD AND THE PRESIDENT. IN FACT, YOUR FORMER BOSS, BILL CLINTON, THROUGH EXECUTIVE ORDER ALSO ENACTED THE SAME RULES. TO GIVE SOME MODEST WAIVERS, FROM THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT, ESPECIALLY OUR TRAINING BASES SO THEY COULD CONDUCT THE MISSION OF PROTECTING OUR COUNTRY. JANET, WE DISAGREE. THE FACT IS, THE SIERRA CLUB WHO HAS ENDORSED YOU, THEY ENDORSED PROPOSITION 202, WHICH YOU NEVER TOOK A POSITION ON IT, I CAME OUT AGAINST IT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE CRIPPLED OUR ECONOMY. THANK HEAVEN, THE VOTERS ON A TWO TO ONE BASIS AGREED WITH MY POSITION THAT WAS HARMFUL.

>> Michael: THE OLD 202?

>> Matt Salmon: THE OLD 202. GROWING SMARTER WAS 101, BUT IT WAS AN EXTREME GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. I CAME OUT STRONGLY AGAINST IT. JANET TOOK NO POSITION. THE FACT IS, WE NEED SOME COMMON SENSE, NEED TO PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO TAKING CARE OF OUR FOREST, LET'S LET THE SCIENTISTS DECIDE. I'VE MET WITH WALLY COVINGTON, WHO IS A NAU ONE OF THE PREEMINENT SCIENTISTS ON FOREST IN THE NATION, AND JANET, HE AGREES WITH PRESIDENT BUSHES PLAN, AND SO DO I. WE SHOULDN'T LET THE ENVIRONMENTALIST EXTREMIST GROUPS LIKE THE ONES THAT SUPPORT YOU DECIDE WHAT THE POLICY SHOULD BE FOR HAVING A HEALTHY FOREST.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS. YOUR POSITION ON TREE THINNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS.

>> Barry Hess: IS THAT WHERE THIS STARTED?

>> MICHAEL: IT IS.

>> Barry Hess: COMMON SENSE IS COMMON SENSE. WE HAVE TO THIN OUT THE FORESTS TO STOP THEM FOR FUTURE BURNS, ALONG WITH FIRE BREAKS. WHERE I COME FROM IN THE NORTHEAST, PEOPLE OWN THEIR OWN PROPERTY AND HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN IT. I THINK THAT'S REALLY CRITICAL BECAUSE THEY TAKE CARE OF IT. THEY PUT IN THE PROPER FIRE BREAKS. YOU NEVER HEAR ABOUT A FOREST FIRE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. I THINK THE ULTIMATE ANSWER IS TO MOVE AS MUCH OF THAT LAND AS WE POSSIBLY CAN INTO PRIVATE HANDS BECAUSE THERE IS THAT FUTURE VESTED INTEREST IN THE FINANCIAL VALUE OF THAT PROPERTY. BALANCED AGAINST THINGS LIKE THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT, IT'S GONE TOO FAR WHEN WE TAKE ANIMALS LIKE THE SPOTTED OWL AND PRESERVE ENTIRE AREAS DESTROYING ECONOMIES. THAT'S REALLY GOVERNMENT GONE WILD. IT SHOULD BE ONE OF THOSE VIDEOS THEY PUT ON T.V. I THINK REALLY A COMMON SENSE APPROACH TOWARD PRESERVING AS MUCH AS WE CAN OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND ANIMAL LIFE IS A REASONABLE AND PRUDENT THING TO DO.

>> MICHAEL: ALL RIGHT. LET ME STICK WITH SOME POLICY AND SOCIAL ISSUES. MS. NAPOLITANO, THIS MONTH AS YOU KNOW, ARIZONA COURTS RULED ARIZONA'S PARENTAL CONSENT LAW CONSTITUTIONAL. DO YOU SUPPORT THAT CONCEPT AND DO YOU ALSO SUPPORT A 24 HOUR MANDATORY WAITING PERIOD FOR ABORTION?

>> Janet Napolitano: I THINK IT WAS THE 9TH CIRCUIT THAT UPHELD THE PARENTAL CONSENT LAW.

>> MICHAEL: TRUE.

>> Janet Napolitano: THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT TODAY, BY THE WAY, HELD AHCCCS, WHICH IS OUR STATE MEDICAID PROVIDER, COULD NOT DENY THE RIGHT OF ABORTION TO A WOMAN IF HER HEALTH WAS AT RISK, WHICH WAS A RULE THEY HAD ADOPTED, THAT WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. SO WE'VE GOT A LOT OF LAW COMING DOWN. AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, I DEFENDED THE CONSENT LAWS, I'VE DEFENDED THE LAWS GOVERNING ABORTION CLINICS. I BELIEVE THAT THOSE LAWS ARE THERE AND WILL PROBABLY REMAIN FOR AWHILE BECAUSE THE SUPREME COURT HAS SPOKEN ON THOSE TOPICS, BUT I'M SKEPTICAL OF NEW LAWS IN THIS AREA BECAUSE I THINK THEY CREATE FALSE CHOICES AND I THINK THEY ARE PRIMARILY, MANY TIMES DESIGNED TO UNDERCUT THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO MAKE HER OWN HEALTH CARE DECISIONS. WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT A 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD, IT SOUNDS VERY SIMPLE AND EASY. YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT A YOUNG GIRL IN A RURAL PART OF THE STATE WHO HAS TO TRAVEL TO TUCSON OR TO PHOENIX TO GET ACCESS TO A CLINIC ON HER OWN NICKEL AND THEN TO WAIT AN EXTRA DAY WHEN WE DON'T REQUIRE THAT FOR OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURES.

>> MICHAEL: DOES IT HELP THAT THAT CONSULTATION CAN BE BY TELEPHONE, BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE HAS ALLOWED THAT TO OCCUR, SO THE PERSON WOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE THE TRIP?

>> Janet Napolitano: THAT MITIGATES IT SOMEWHAT. BUT YOU HAVE TO SAY WHAT IS THE PURPOSE BEING SERVED HERE AND WHY IS THAT REQUIREMENT BEING IMPOSED ON THIS PROCEDURE AND NOT ON OTHER MEDICAL PROCEDURES? THESE ARE ALL THINGS DONE TO UNDERCUT THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO MAKE HEALTH CARE DECISIONS WITH HER PHYSICIAN, WITH HER HUSBAND, WITH HER SPIRITUAL COUNSELOR, WHOMEVER ELSE SHE WISHES TO CONSULT, ON THE MOST INTIMATE PERSONAL DECISIONS YOU CAN MAKE. I DON'T BELIEVE AND AM VERY SKEPTICAL OF LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS TO INTERFERE WITH THAT.

>> MICHAEL: MR. SALMON. PARENTAL CONSENT OR A 24-HOUR WAITING PERIOD?

>> Matt Salmon: I WON'T GIVE YOU A LAWYER ANSWER, I'M GOING TO TALK FROM THE HEART AS A FATHER WITH TWO CHILDREN, AS I TALKED TO OTHER PEOPLE AND THOUGHT ABOUT THIS ALOT. THERE ISN'T A HECK OF A LOT THAT A GOVERNOR CAN DO. ROE VERSUS WADE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND. THERE ARE VERY FEW THINGS WE CAN DO WITHIN OUR STATE. ONE IS TO BAN PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, WHICH IS AN ABORTION IN THE VERY LATEST TRIMESTER. I SUPPORT A BAN ON PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTIONS. MY OPPONENT JANET DOES NOT. LAST NIGHT IN THE DEBATE SHE SAID SHE SUPPORTS NO EXCEPTIONS, ABORTION ON DEMAND ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM. THE FACT IS, SHE HAS ALSO SAID BEFORE SHE IS AGAINST PARENTAL NOTIFICATION. I'M GLAD TO HEAR SHE CHANGED HER HEART TONIGHT -- AT LEAST IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE. THE FACT IS, ONE LAST ISSUE IS DEALING WITH WHETHER OR NOT WE PAY FOR THOSE ABORTIONS. I KNOW PEOPLE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENCES OF OPINION. THERE ARE FOLKS OUT THERE THAT CAN HAVE ABORTIONS FOR GENDER SELECTION. JANET APPARENTLY SUPPORTS THAT TOO, WITH NO EXEMPTIONS. I BELIEVE WE NEED SOME MODEST IMPOSITION ON SURGICAL PROCEDURE SUCH AS THIS.

>> MICHAEL: MR. MAHONEY.

>> Richard Mahoney: I'M PRO CHOICE, BUT I THINK AS A PARENT WITH A 14-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTER WHO WOULD REQUIRE FOR ANY MEDICAL PROCEDURE AS A MINOR MY CONSENT THAT WE SHOULD HAVE PARENTAL CONSENT. THIS IS NOT UNDERMINING THE LAW, THIS IS GOOD COMMON SENSE FROM FAMILY MEMBERS, FROM FATHERS AND MOTHERS. PARENTAL CONSENT MAKES GOOD SENSE.

>> MICHAEL: WHAT ABOUT 24 HOUR WAITING PERIOD?

>> Richard Mahoney: I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, AS WELL. THIS HAS BEEN SO POLARIZED. THE DEMOCRATS HAVE A STRICT POSITION, WHERE THIS IS AN EXCEPTIONAL MEDICAL PROCEDURE. THE REPUBLICANS HAVE A TERRIBLE STRUGGLE OF BEING PRO LIFE, ANTI-CHOICE. LET'S USE COMMON SENSE HERE. I THINK CHOICE IS GOOD AND PARENTAL CONSENT IS RIGHT.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS. MR. MAHONEY JUST GESTURED TO YOU FOR SOME COMMENTS. WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> Barry Hess: WELL, OF COURSE HE WOULD. I LOOK AT IT IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS AND LOOK AT THE AFTERMATH AS WELL. TALKING WITH THE YOUNG WOMEN WHO HAVE HAD ABORTIONS, IT DOESN'T JUST DESTROY A LIFE, IT DESTROYS A PIECE OF THEM, TOO. IT HARDENS THEIR HEART. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'VE GOT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. OF COURSE I WOULD BE FOR THE 24 HOUR WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL CONSENT BECAUSE IT GIVES THE FAMILY INPUT. I THINK THAT'S VERY NECESSARY. WE HAVE TRIED TO DESTROY OUR FAMILY IN A SOCIALISTIC FASHION AND WE'VE GOT TO PUT IT BACK TOGETHER AGAIN. THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT CROSSES JUST HEALTH CARE NEEDS, IT REALLY DEALS WITH LIFE. AND WHEREAS I FIRMLY BELIEVE GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO SAY AND NO MONETARY STAKE IN PROVIDING ABORTIONS AT ALL, I WOULD HAVE TO SAY PROTECT FROM CONCEPTION, BECAUSE I HAVE ENOUGH TO ANSWER TO SAINT PETER, I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE THE BLOOD OF THE INNOCENT ON MY HANDS, AS WELL.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, LET ME STICK WITH YOU. SOME SAY IT'S TIME FOR A STATEWIDE SMOKING BAN IN BARS, RESTAURANTS, OTHER PUBLIC PLACES. IT'S BEEN MENTIONED IT MIGHT BE ON THE BALLOT IN 2004. WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> Barry Hess: I THOUGHT THERE WAS. ISN'T 203 TO RECTIFY THAT? ACTUALLY, I THINK BANNING SMOKING IN ANY SPECIFIC AREAS WHEN YOU SEE WHAT IT'S DONE IN MESA, 20% LOSS IN REVENUES ON THE CONSERVATIVE SIDE. IT HAS HAD DEVASTATING ECONOMIC EFFECT WITHOUT BENEFIT. PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CHOOSE IF THEY WANT TO GO TO A SMOKING RESTAURANT TO GO TO THAT SMOKING RESTAURANT. IF THEY DON'T LIKE IT, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO PLOP THEIR REAR-END DOWN IN THAT SPECIFIC CHAIR AND THEN DEMAND THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGE AROUND THEM. THAT IS THE STUPIDEST THING I'VE EVER SEEN, IS THE SMOKING LAWS.

>> MICHAEL: WHAT ABOUT THE ALLEGED THREAT TO WORKERS SAFETY OF SMOKING?

>> Barry Hess: THE ALLEGED THREAT TO WORKERS ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF GOING TO FIND ANOTHER JOB OR INVENTING ONE.

>> Michael: MR. MAHONEY, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT A STATEWIDE BAN ON SMOKING?

>> Richard Mahoney: I'M OPPOSED TO THAT, MICHAEL. I SAW A BUMPER STICKER THAT SAID, TO RESOLVE ALL THESE INITIATIVES, IT SAID YES ON NO. BUT I THINK IT GOES TOO FAR. I THINK CHOICE IN THIS REGARD IS RIGHT. IF YOU GO TO A PLACE THAT, IN WHICH THERE'S SMOKING, THAT'S A CHOICE YOU MAKE. ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY. I WOULDN'T VOTE FOR THAT.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO, WHAT ABOUT A STATEWIDE SMOKING BAN?

>> Janet Napolitano: I'M A NO VOTE. I THINK THESE MATTERS SHOULD BE LEFT TO LOCALITIES TO VOTE ON AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND I WOULD OPPOSE A STATEWIDE BAN.

>> MICHAEL: WHAT ABOUT TEMPE'S POSITION THAT, HOLD IT, UNLESS WE ALL OPERATE BY THE SAME RULES WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HEMORRHAGE SALES TAX REVENUE? AREN'T PERSUADED BY THAT?

>> Janet Napolitano: NOT PERSUADED.

>> MICHAEL: MR. SALMON, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> Matt Salmon: MICHAEL, I SPONSORED ONE OF THE VERY FIRST LEGISLATIVE MEASURES WHEN I WAS IN THE STATE SENATE TO BAN SMOKING IN ALL STATE FACILITIES, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS REASONABLE, BECAUSE SECOND-HAND SMOKE KILLS PEOPLE. BUT TO FORCE THAT ON TO THE PRIVATE SECTOR ALL ACROSS THE STATE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. I BELIEVE IN LOCAL CONTROL AND I THINK EACH JURISDICTION SHOULD BE ABLE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES.

>> MICHAEL: LET ME STICK WITH YOU, MR. SALMON. SHOULD ARIZONANS CANCEL THE SPONSOR OF THIS DEBATE, THE CITIZENS CLEAN ELECTION COMMISSION, AS CONGRESSMAN FLAKE SUGGESTED?

>> Matt Salmon: AS I SAID, THE DEVIL IS ALWAYS IN THE DETAIL. THE 10 YEARS THAT I SERVED IN PUBLIC OFFICE, YOU HAVE THESE GREAT SOUNDING BILLS WITH A GREAT NAME ON THEM AND THE BILL DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE NAME OF THE LAW. I THINK CLEAN ELECTIONS REALLY FALLS WITHIN THAT CATEGORY. IT WAS BILLED TO HELP BRING CLEAN ELECTIONS. THE NEW YORK TIMES WROTE A STORY SAYING THIS IS ONE OF THE DIRTIEST GOVERNOR ELECTIONS IN THE WHOLE COUNTRY. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS NOW TAXPAYERS ARE FUNDING THESE ATTACK ADS ON T.V. I THINK WE HAVE A LOT BETTER THINGS TO DO WITH OUR FUNDING. I'M GOING TO TALK TO CONGRESSMAN FLAKE IN THE REPEAL TO TAKE THE $16 MILLION IN CLEAN ELECTIONS AND PUT IT IN THE CREATION OF A RISK POOL FOR THE UNINSURED SO WE CAN REALLY DO SOMETHING GOOD WITH THAT MONEY. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE POTENTIAL OF A BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT NEXT YEAR. I THINK WE HAVE A LOT BETTER THINGS TO DO WITH OUR MONEY RATHER THAN FUND ATTACK ADS.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO, WE'VE GOT BETTER THINGS TO DO WITH OUR MONEY THAN CLEAN ELECTIONS OR NOT?

>> Janet Napolitano: THERE'S A SAYING, THOSE WHO FORGET HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT. WE FORGET WHAT IT WAS LIKE BEFORE CLEAN ELECTIONS. WHEN EVERYBODY RUNNING FOR OFFICE, HAD TO DO FUNDRAISER AFTER FUNDRAISER, HAD TO GO TO THE LOBBYISTS, SAY WOULD YOU PLEASE HELP ME PUT ON A DINNER, WOULD YOU PLEASE RAISE ME A THOUSAND DOLLARS OR $2,000. THE CLEAN ELECTIONS SYSTEM TAKES THAT OUT OF THE PROCESS. IT ALLOWS SOMEONE LIKE ME TO TALK TO VOTERS AND NOT WORRY ABOUT MY NEXT $250 A PLATE FUNDRAISER. AFTER THIS ELECTION THE DUST SETTLES WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO DO AN EVALUATION, MAYBE DO SOME TWEAKING. BUT I'LL TELL YOU, I THINK THE VALUE IN GETTING THE SPECIAL INTEREST OUT OF THESE RACES SO THEY NO LONGER DOMINATE THE CAPITAL THE WAY THEY HAVE THE LAST 12 YEARS AND PUT US IN THE HOLE IS A HUGE VALUE.

>> MICHAEL: CAN'T YOU BE JUST AS BEHOLDING TO A GROUP THAT COLLECTS 1,000 $5 CONTRIBUTIONS IN YOUR BEHALF?

>> Janet Napilitano: NOT IN THE SAME WAY. ANYBODY CAN PUT IN $5.

>> Richard Mahoney: HOW ABOUT 3 OR $4 MILLION FACTORED IN BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY? THE CLEAN ELECTIONS CANDIDATE GETS THE PUBLIC FUNDING BUT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DOES THE HIT WORK. THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS THE SAME. THEY ARE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS, THEY GET THE SPECIAL INTEREST MONEY AND FACTOR IT OUT. IN THE PARTICULAR CASE OF THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, IT'S A STEP FURTHER. WHEN HE HITS JANET THROUGH HIS PARTY, SHE GETS FUNDED. AND I THINK THAT -- I WOULDN'T SAY TWEAKING, I WOULD SAY A FUNDAMENTAL REFORM. I'M A CLEAN ELECTIONS CANDIDATE AND I HAVE WORKED FOR IT, AS I KNOW YOU DID.

>> MICHAEL: SO DON'T REPEAL IT, BUT FUNDAMENTALLY REFORM IT ON SOME OF THE POINTS YOU HAVE COVERED?

>> Richard Mahoney: YES.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT CLEAN ELECTIONS?

>> Barry Hess: I THINK CLEAN ELECTIONS HAVE TO BE A COMPLETE DO-OVER. THIS IS OBNOXIOUS IN THAT CLEAN ELECTIONS IS ANYTHING BUT. THE REALITY IS THERE WERE SOME GOOD INTENTIONS. WE'VE GOT TO GET SPECIAL INTEREST OUT. THAT IS A MAJOR PROBLEMS. BUT BY THE SAME TOKEN, THE PROBLEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST CREATED BY EVEN THE CLEAN ELECTIONS COMMISSION ITSELF HAS BY EXCLUDING NON-CLEAN FROM CERTAIN EVENTS DISWEIGHTS THE FIELD. IT GIVES A LEG UP TO PEOPLE WHO WILL SUBMIT AND WHO WILL COMPLY WITH THIS STUFF. WHAT SCARES ME IS SO MANY OF THE CLEAN ELECTIONS CANDIDATES ARE BEING FINED AND INVESTIGATED, LIKE UP TO 15 CANDIDATES. IT'S GONE WILD. THAT ROAD TO SOMEPLACE IS PAVED WITH SOME GOOD INTENTIONS. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING, BUT THE CLEAN ELECTIONS AS IT'S SET UP WAS I THINK DOOMED FROM THE OUTSET BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU NEVER, EVER GIVE A POLITICIAN MONEY.

>> MICHAEL: IS YOUR CATCH PHRASE, VARIOUS ENTITIES GONE WILD?

>> Barry Hess: THAT WOULD BE IT.

>> MICHAEL: LET ME SHIFT TO BUDGET. MS. NAPOLITANO, AFTER THE DEBATE LAST MONTH YOU SAID EVERYTHING, REVENUE WAS ON THE TABLE.

>> Janet Napolitano: I SAID EVERYTHING IN THE BUDGET IS ON THE TABLE.

>> MICHAEL: SPECIFICALLY, WOULD YOU SUPPORT AND INCREASE IN THE INCOME TAX RATE, INCREASE IN THE SALES TAX RATE AND FOR REINSTATEMENT OF THE STATE PROPERTY TAX RATE TO SOLVE THE BUDGET CRISIS?

>> Janet Napolitano: NO. I PUT TOGETHER A BUDGET PLAN FOR 2003, WHICH HAS A 400 OR 500 MILLION DEFICIT. IT DOES NOT CALL FOR RAISING ANY OF THOSE TAX RATES. I WOULD NOT SUPPORT DOING THAT. WHAT I HAVE RECOMMENDED AND SUGGESTED THAT, I WILL TELL YOU THE BUSINESS PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING AND THE ECONOMISTS UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING, IS THAT WE CLOSE SOME OF THE SPECIAL INTEREST TAX LOOPHOLES SO WE CAN HAVE A TAX SYSTEM THAT IS LOW, FAIR AND EQUITABLE AND A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR EVERYBODY SO THAT SOME ARE NOT PAYING TOO MUCH AND SOME PEOPLE ARE PAYING TOO LITTLE TAX. IN CLOSING THOSE LOOPHOLES, YES, WE MAY GET AND WE SHOULD GET EXTRA REVENUE AND THAT WILL GO INTO THE PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM, OUR INVESTMENT IN OUR HUMAN CAPITAL FOR OUR FUTURE.

>> MICHAEL: I WANT TO GET TO LOOPHOLES IN A MINUTE, BUT LET ME STICK WITH RAISING EITHER INCOME OR SALES OR REINSTATING THE STATE PROPERTY TAX.

>> Matt Salmon: MICHAEL, THANK YOU. UNLIKE MY OPPONENT ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE, I SIGNED A PLEDGE NOT TO RAISE TAXES. 98% OF THE JOBS IN OUR STATE ARE SMALL BUSINESS PEOPLE. JANET, I THINK WE OWE THE VOTERS OF THE STATE SOME INTEGRITY HERE. YOU SAID AFTER THE FIRST DEBATE WHEN YOU CRITICIZED MY VOTING FOR TAX CUTS IN THE EARLY '90'S, YOU SAID WE'RE GOING LOOK AT EVERYTHING AS FAR AS RAISING TAXES. YES, YOU DID. AND THEN WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LOOPHOLES YOU USE THE EXTREME EXAMPLES OF CLOSING THE LOOPHOLES, WHICH IS GOING TO RAISE PEANUTS AND YOU KNOW IT. THE FACT IS, THE REAL MONEY IS, LOOPHOLES SHE TALKS ABOUT A TAX EXEMPTION ARE TAXES ON FOOD, TAXES ON SERVICE, REALTORS, ACCOUNTANTS AND WHO BEARS THE COST? IT'S SMALL BUSINESS. YOU NEED TO BE STRAIGHT WITH PEOPLE AND TELL THEM WHERE YOU STAND AND WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT $200 MILLION IN NEW TAX INCREASES IN YOUR BUDGET PLAN. I VOWED NOT TO RAISE TAXES, YOU SAID YOU WILL.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, WHAT'S YOUR POSITION ON TAX INCREASES, SALES INCOME OR PROPERTY?

>> Barry Hess: ALL OF THEM SHOULD BE ELIMINATED WOULD BE THE ANSWER. ACTUALLY, I WAS READING THIS REPORT FROM CAROL SPRINGER. AND NOBODY IN THE STATE KNOWS THE NUMBERS BETTER THAN CAROL SPRINGER. IT'S INTERESTING, HER PROPOSAL ALSO INCLUDED THE ELIMINATION OF THE INCOME TAX. THE SIMPLE FACT IS WE NEED TRANSACTIONS AND CONFIDENCE IN GOVERNMENT IF WE'RE GOING TO FIX OUR ECONOMY. WHAT BETTER WAY THAN LETTING PEOPLE KEEP WHAT THEY EARN. BUT THE GOOD THING IS, BY PUTTING THE MONEY BACK IN THE HANDS OF THE PERSON WHO EARNED IT, YOU ARE NOT TAKING FOOD OFF THEIR TABLE ANY LONGER TO PAY FOR A SPECIAL VOTE FROM ANOTHER GROUP. YOU ARE STIMULATING THE ECONOMY IN AREAS THE GOVERNMENT COULDN'T HOPE TO REACH SO THE ENTIRE ECONOMY GROWS AND THE REVENUES PROJECTED WILL MORE THAN COVER ACTUALLY WHAT WE HAVE TO MEET WITH IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS EVEN BY CAROL'S FAR LESS RADICAL PROPOSALS THAN MINE. IT'S GOING TO TAKE MAIN LINE ECONOMICS TO DO IT AND WE ASKING THE THIEVES IN THE LEGISLATURE WHO ARE DROWNING LET GO OF THE BAG OF GOLD.

>> MICHAEL: MR. MAHONEY, I WON'T ASK YOU MARK FLATTEN'S WERE YOU WRONG THEN OR ARE YOU WRONG NOW?

>> Richard Mahoney: YOU'RE VERY KIND. I'M TOTALLY OPPOSED TO TAX INCREASES. WE'RE IN A TIME OF RECESSION, THERE'S A LOT OF STRESS. HERE'S THE TRUTH: UNLESS WE CUT DEEPLY INTO STATE GOVERNMENT, I PROPOSE $495 MILLION OF ELIMINATION OF AGENCIES LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND ON AND ON, THESE ARE DIFFICULT CUTS. I LOOKED AT JANET'S PLAN, AND I SAW A $1.5 MILLION ERADICATION OF THE OFFICE OF EXCELLENCE IN GOVERNMENT. THAT'S 1.5 MILLION OUT OF $1.4 BILLION. ONE-TENTH OF ONE PERCENT. YOU HAVE TO TELL US, YOU ARE THE FRONT-RUNNER, YOU HAVE TO TELL US HOW MUCH YOU ARE GOING TO RAISE OUR INCOME TAXES BECAUSE YOU CANNOT COME UP WITH REAL NUMBERS IN TERMS OF REAL CUTS. I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU IN THE TIME LEFT TO COME UP WITH REAL NUMBERS. AND NOT THESE SORT OF I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND CREATE A COMMISSION ABOUT THAT. WE NEED DEEP CUTS, ELIMINATION OF AGENCIES. I HAVE CALLED FOR THOSE.

>> MICHAEL: HERE IS THE PROBLEM. LET ME PREFACE WITH THIS, GOVERNOR SAID YOU COULD CUT EVERY NON-ESSENTIAL AGENCY IN THIS STATE AND YOU'RE STILL NOT GOING TO MAKE A BILLION DOLLARS. LET ME SUGGEST THAT EVERYONE AT THE TABLE IS NOT APPROACHING THE ISSUE VERY CANDIDLY WHEN THEY TRY TO AVOID REVENUE INCREASES. TAX INCREASES.

>> Janet Napolitano: I THINK -- AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE VIEWERS TO GO TO MY WEBSITE, GOJANET.ORG, AND PULL UP MY BUDGET ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN. YES, I HAVEN'T IDENTIFIED EVERY ONE.

>> Richard Mahoney: YOU CERTAINLY HAVE NOT.

>> Janet Napilitano: LET ME FINISH MY ANSWER. I WANT TO DO WHAT THE STATE OF TEXAS DID, THEY APPOINTED A PANEL OF PRIVATE CITIZENS IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR TO GO IN AND GO THROUGH EVERY LINE OF THE BUDGET. THIS IS LIKE TAKING OVER A BIG CORPORATION AS CEO. WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THE BOOKS. THAT'S WHY I SAY LOOK AT EVERYTHING. WE WILL DO THAT BETWEEN NOVEMBER AND JANUARY. WE WILL LOOK AT REVENUE BONDING FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION SO WE CAN SPREAD OUT THOSE COSTS OUT OVER TIME, JUST AS YOU WOULD SPREAD OUT A HOME MORTGAGE. AND WE WILL LOOK AT TAX LOOPHOLES, WE WILL DO THIS IN CONSULTATION WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE LEGISLATURE AND IF THE LEGISLATURE WON'T ACT WE WILL GO BACK TO THE BALLOT AND GO BACK TO THE PEOPLE IN TWO YEARS.

>> MICHAEL: MR. MAHONEY, I APPRECIATE YOU HAVE OFFERED A VARIETY OF CUTS. LET ME GO BACK TO THE POINT GOVERNOR HULL MADE. IT'S NOT MINE, IT'S GOVERNOR HULL'S. YOU CUT ALL OF THE NON-ESSENTIAL AGENCIES. YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED CONSOLIDATION ON SEVERAL AGENCIES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DEPARTMENT OF TOURISM. BUT ELIMINATE THEM ALL AND YOU STILL CAN'T HANDLE THE BUDGET SHORTFALL. HOW DO YOU GET THERE, THEN, WITHOUT SOME SUBSTANTIAL TAX INCREASES? ONE OF THE ONES YOU MENTIONED IS A TAX ON NATURAL GAS TO POWER PLANTS. SOME OF THAT POWER IS GOING TO GO TO ARIZONA. IN FACT ONE OF THE NEW POWER PLANTS COMPLETELY DEVOTED TO SRP. ISN'T THAT A BACK DOOR TAX INCREASE FOR ARIZONA RESIDENTS?

>> Richard Mahoney: THE MAJORITY WOULD BE TAXED AND THE POWER HAS TO BE EXPORTED. IF THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA HAVE TO PAY THAT BILL, THAT'S OKAY WITH ME.

>> MICHAEL: SOME WILL BE HERE.

>> Richard Mahoney: BUT MOST WILL BE UNDER THE REGULATED REGIMEN. WE NEED THE MONEY. THERE'S BEEN AN ARGUMENT ABOUT HOW MUCH, WE BELIEVE IT'S 400 MILLION. BUT LET ME JUST MENTION THAT I PASSED AN INITIATIVE THAT CHANGED THE CONSTITUTION THAT FORBIDS THE LEGISLATURE AND GOVERNOR FROM CHANGING ANY VOTER APPROVED INITIATIVE. THAT HAS LOCKED IN $2.7 BILLION OF REVENUE IN HEALTH CARE AND IN EDUCATION. I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT, I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD DECISION. BACK TO YOUR QUESTION. YOU'VE GOT TO CUT AND ELIMINATE, THERE ARE NO SACRED COWS. THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, THAT IS A SOVIET-STYLE AGENCY. THE REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT IS RUN LIKE A THIRD WORLD POST OFFICE. JUST GO READ THE AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT. WE HAVE IDENTIFIED $624 MILLION, CLOSING 46 SALES TAX LOOPHOLES.

>> MICHAEL: ARE YOU SUGGESTING A CUT IN THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS? A RECENT REPORT INDICATED IT WAS SERIOUSLY UNDERSTAFFED.

>> Richard Mahoney: WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE PROCUREMENT, SOME OF THE BIDDING PROCESS, IT IS NOT COMPETITIVE. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS LOOK AT THE AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT. FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE THIS HAS TO BE ADDRESSED. PUT THAT ON THE TABLE, TOO.

>> MICHAEL: MR. SALMON, YOU HAVE A $6 BILLION BUDGET. YOU HAVE ABOUT 3 BILLION OF YOUR BUDGET PROTECTED BY THE VOTER PROTECTION ACT. YOU'VE GOT TO CUT A BILLION. THAT'S A THIRD OF STATE GOVERNMENT. HOW CAN YOU DO THAT WITHOUT TAX INCREASES?

>> Matt Salmon: MICHAEL, THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME THAT WE'VE BEEN FACED WITH THESE KINDS OF PROBLEMS. WHEN I FIRST WENT INTO THE STATE LEGISLATURE, WE HAD A HUGE DEFICIT. WE WERE ABLE TO BALANCE THE BUDGET AND CUT TAXES AT THE TIME. I'M NOT PROPOSING THAT NEXT YEAR WE MAKE A TAX CUT. OVER THE COURSE OF MY ADMINISTRATION WE WILL MAKE TAX CUTS TO STRENGTHEN BUSINESS IN OUR STATE. I HAVE GIVEN MY WORD, I HAVE PLEDGED TO NOT RAISE TAXES. WHEN YOU HAVE TAXES, SMALL BUSINESSES -- THAT'S THE BACKBONE OF ARIZONA -- ARE THE FIRST ONES HURT. I HAVE A DEAR FRIEND WHO HAS A SMALL BUSINESS. IF WE RAISE TAXES, AS MY OPPONENT IS PROPOSING, HE HAS TO CUT INTO HIS PROFIT MARGIN OR HE HAS TO LAY PEOPLE OFF AND PEOPLE LOSE JOBS. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE LONG TERM. LOW TAXES GROW JOBS.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, LET ME SUGGEST, THOUGH, THAT WE HAVE A VERY IMMEDIATE BUDGET PROBLEM AND LONG TERM TAX STRATEGY AND PHILOSOPHY IS GREAT BUT YOU MAY HAVE A PROBLEM IF YOU'RE ELECTED GOVERNOR IN JANUARY. SO HOW CAN WE GET THAT TAX PHILOSOPHY TO KICK IN QUICK ENOUGH TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM?

>> Barry Hess: I HAVE THE QUICKEST RECOVERY METHOD FOR GETTING REVENUE INTO THE STATE, BY QUICKLY PUTTING IT INTO THE ECONOMY WHERE IT CAN BE TURNED INTO TRANSACTIONS THAT ARE TAXABLE. THE LOOPHOLE NONSENSE, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S AN HONEST TAX THAT'S IMPOSED THAT CAN HAVE ANY EXEMPTIONS. AND YES, THAT INCLUDES FOOD. SOUNDS CRUEL, ALL THAT GOOD STUFF. THAT'S WHY MADISON WAS SO BRIGHT IN THE FEDERALIST PAPERS IN SAYING THE POOR ARE THE ONES WHO ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THE TAX STAYS DOWN. GOVERNMENT HAS TO FIT INSIDE THE BUDGET AND ONLY A LIBERTARIAN IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO TAKE THE HATCHET TO IT AND NECESSARILY DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE, INCLUDING THINGS LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THAT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING. WE HAVE TO FUND THE SCHOOLS, MINIMALLY, OF COURSE, TO MAKE SURE THE JOB GETS DONE. BUT I'M NOT INTERESTED IN PRESERVING THE PROCESS OF ADMINISTRATIVE EDUCATION, I'M INTERESTED IN THE PROGRESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL STUDENT.

>> Matt Salmon: IF WE RAISE TAXES NEXT YEAR, IT MAY OR MAY NOT SOLVE THE BUDGET DEFICIT FOR NEXT YEAR, BUT THE NEXT YEAR IT WILL PLUNGE US INTO DEEPER ECONOMIC CRISIS, MORE AND MORE BUSINESS WILL BE LEAVING ARIZONA, MORE AND MORE SMALL BUSINESS WILL BE HURT. WE HAVE TO TAKE A LONG TERM VIEW. ANY TIME YOU HEAR THE RHETORIC ABOUT CLOSING LOOPHOLES, GETTING RID OF EXEMPTIONS OR JANET'S IDEA EVERY FIVE YEARS EVERY TAX EXEMPTION, INCLUDING DOCTORS, LAWYERS, ACCOUNTANTS, YOU NAME IT, COME BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE AND BEG AS TO WHY THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE A NEW TAX IMPOSED ON THEM WOULD BE FISCAL INSANITY.

>> Janet Napolitano: I WISH, MATT, I WISH WHEN YOU WERE IN THE LEGISLATURE YOU HAD HAD THAT KIND OF LONG TERM VISION BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK AT YOUR VOTING RECORD, THE DECISIONS YOU MADE IN THE EARLY '90'S WE'RE PAYING FOR NOW. YOU VOTED AGAINST FUNDS FOR EDUCATION, YOU VOTED AGAINST FUNDS TO REDUCE CLASS SIZE, YOU VOTED AGAINST FUNDS TO REDUCE DROPOUT. VOTE AFTER VOTE AFTER VOTE. YOU BALANCED THE BUDGET, BUT HOW DID YOU DO IT? YOU SUCKED $500 MILLION OUT OF THE PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM BY NOT PAYING FOR INFLATION BETWEEN 1992 AND 1995. WE ARE PAYING FOR THAT NOW. YES, WE HAVE TO HAVE A LONG TERM VISION, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU, BUT THE LONG TERM VISION MEANS GETTING THE STATE BACK TO FISCAL SANITY, PUTTING THE REVENUE STREAM ON AN EVEN BASIS AND INVESTING IN PUBLIC EDUCATION.

>> Matt Salmon: I'VE GOT TO RESPOND BECAUSE IT'S NOT ACCURATE. WHEN I WAS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE, WE INCREASED EDUCATION FUNDING, WITH DEMOCRAT HELP BY THE WAY. THE LAST BUDGET PASSED IN THE STATE SENATE 27-2, THERE WERE A LOT OF DEMOCRATS THAT VOTED WITH US. WE INCREASED EDUCATION FUNDING BY HALF A BILLION DOLLARS AND PER PUPIL SPENDING WENT UP WHILE I WAS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

>> MICHAEL: ONE LAST STATEMENT AND THEN I WANT TO ASK A VIEWER QUESTION.

>> Richard Mahoney: OUTSIDE THE REALM OF BICKERING ABOUT RECORDS, THIS ISN'T A MATTER OF VISION. IF YOU WERE THE GOVERNOR, YOU'VE GOT TO CUT, SO THAT HAS TO BE DONE. I'LL CREDIT MATT SALMON WITH HIS SOMEWHAT MORE, THERE'S ABOUT 200 MILLION OR THEREABOUTS INCLUDING THE SALE OF STATE LAND AND RENEGOTIATING LEASES IS GOOD. THIS HAS TO BE CUT AND CUT DEEPLY. THE FACT THAT CERTAIN THINGS HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED IS RIDICULOUS. THE ONLY THINGS THAT SHOULD BE EXCLUDED IN MY VIEW ARE HEALTH CARE AND EDUCATION.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, A VIEWER WANTED ME TO ASK ALL OF YOU WHAT YOUR POSITION IS ON THE TWO-THIRDS MAJORITY VOTE REQUIRED IN THE LEGISLATURE IN ORDER TO INCREASE TAXES.

>> Barry Hess: I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO SAY OVERCOME MY VETOES.

>> MICHAEL: THAT'S NOT UP FOR A VOTE.

>> Barry Hess: THE TWO-THIRDS TO INCREASE THE TAXES? I THINK THAT'S MORE THAN REASONABLE. IF ANYTHING, IT SHOULD BE INCREASED TO THE 7/8THS SUPER MAJORITY. TAXES ARE SERIOUS. THEY DRAIN PEOPLE OF FUNDS THAT THEY HAVE EARNED. WHAT WE DO BY INCREASING TAXES IS END UP PUTTING MORE PEOPLE ON THE POOR, RECEIVING END. YOU END UP DEPRESSING THE ECONOMY. THAT'S BACKWARD THINKING.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO, WHAT ABOUT THE SUPER MAJORITY REQUIREMENT IN THE LEGISLATURE?

>> Janet Napolitano: IT'S PASSED BY VOTERS AND I WON'T SEEK A REPEAL, BUT I THINK IN GENERAL SUPER MAJORITY REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT A GOOD PUBLIC POLICY. THEY PUT ALL THE POWER IN THE HANDS OF A MINORITY. WE'RE A GOVERNMENT OF MAJORITY RULES. I WILL NOT SEEK A REPEAL OF THAT ONE.

>> Richard Moahoney: I TOTALLY SUPPORTED THAT INITIATIVE FOR A SUPER MAJORITY. WE DO NOT NEED TAX INCREASES AND IN 2004 WE OUGHT TO CUT THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATE AND GET RID OF THE BUSINESS PROPERTY TAX.

>> MICHAEL: MR. SALMON, WHAT ABOUT THE TWO-THIRDS ON RAISING TAXES?

>> Matt Salmon: I CONTINUE TO SUPPORT IT. I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE DIFFICULT TO RAISE TAXES. THE FIRST INCLINATION OUGHT TO ALWAYS BE HOW CAN WE MAKE GOVERNMENT LEANER, MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE COMPASSIONATE. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SPENDING BECAUSE DURING THE TIME I WAS IN THE LEGISLATURE, WE HAD A SURPLUS OF MONEY. WE CREATED A RAINY DAY FUND, A SURPLUS IN GOVERNMENT, THE ECONOMY WAS HUMMING ALONG. IN FACT, THE DOWNTURN AND PROBLEM BECAME WITH EXCESSIVE SPENDING ABOUT '98, JANET ABOUT THE SAME TIME YOU WERE ELECTED TO BE A LEADER IN OUR STATE. OUR CURRENT LEADERSHIP HAS LET US DOWN. WE DESERVE BETTER AND WE NEED TO MOVE IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO COMPLETELY REDEFINE OUR GOVERNMENT, TO MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY, TO MAKE IT RESPOND TO THE PEOPLE, TO HELP PEOPLE AND NOT JUST CONTROL PEOPLE.

>> MICHAEL: MR. MAHONEY, OUR WEEKEND POLL RESULTS INDICATE THAT THE MAJORITY OF ARIZONANS THINK YOU HAVE RUN A VERY NEGATIVE CAMPAIGN. DID YOU CROSS THE LINE WHEN YOU STATED THAT MR. SALMON, BECAUSE HE IS A MORMON, COULD NOT ENFORCE THE LAW IN COLORADO CITY?

>> Richard Mahoney: THERE WAS A COLUMN ON THAT AND IT SAID A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MAD AT RICHARD MAHONEY. BUT NOBODY SAID HE WAS WRONG. HE IS RIGHT. WE HAVE A VERY BAD SITUATION UP THERE, RAPE, STATUTORY RAPE, WELFARE FRAUD AND THE STATE GOVERNMENT HASN'T DONE ANYTHING ABOUT IT. 25 TO 30 WOMEN HAVE APPROACHED THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THROUGH LEGAL AND PHYSICAL MEANS WITHOUT ANY RESULTS. I'LL GIVE MATT SALMON SOME CREDIT, HE HAS BEEN IN TOUCH WITH SOME OF THESE WOMEN AND PLEDGED HIS SUPPORT AND INTERVENTION ONCE THIS CRAZY CAMPAIGN COMES TO A HALT. I THINK IT'S A REAL ISSUE, IT'S AN OLD ISSUE. MY GRANDFATHER WHEN HE WAS SHERIFF OF MOHAVE COUNTY, THREW THESE PEOPLE OUT. THIS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED WITH A GRAND JURY.

>> MICHAEL: GIVEN THAT REACTION BY MR. SALMON, DID YOU ERR WHEN YOU STATED HE COULDN'T ENFORCE THE LAW UP THERE?

>> Richard Mahoney: I DIDN'T STATE THAT AT ALL. I RAISED THE QUESTION, HE HAS ANSWERED IT. THE ANSWER IS HE WILL. WHEN SOMEBODY ASKED ME, YOU'RE A CATHOLIC, COULD YOU DISCIPLINE IF YOU HAD THE POWER, THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? THAT'S A LEGITIMATE QUESTION. I THINK I COULD.

>> MICHAEL: YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION?

>> Matt Salmon: DID I ANSWER HIS QUESTION? THE FACT IS, I HAVE A STRONG TRACK RECORD OF GOING AFTER THOSE THAT WOULD ABUSE CHILDREN. THERE ARE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN LEVELED ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON THERE, DICK. FRANKLY, I WON'T TOLERATE ANY ABUSE OF CHILDREN. I WOULD NEVER DO THAT. I DO BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN IN OUR STATE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR LAWS ARE ENFORCED AND TO MAKE SURE THIS STATE IS A SAFE HAVEN FOR CHILDREN. THAT'S WHY I INTRODUCED THE NOTION OF AMY'S LAW. I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME TYPES OF CRIMES THAT ARE SO HEINOUS, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE A CHANCE. I WON'T TOLERATE A FATHER THAT ABUSES A FATHER OR A COUSIN THAT ABUSES A COUSIN. I BELIEVE WE OUGHT TO HAVE ACROSS THE BOARD, NO TOLERANCE OF THOSE ACTIVITIES IN OUR STATE.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO THE ALLEGATION IS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN SOFT ON PROSECUTING THESE KINDS OF CRIMES, BIGAMY AND OTHER CRIMES IN COLORADO CITY.

>> Janet Napolitano: I'LL RESPOND WITH THE FACTS. MORE THAN 18 MONTHS AGO, I MET WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UTAH. COLORADO CITY EXISTS ON THE BORDER. YOU HAVE TO DO IT IN A TWO STATE WAY. WE HAVE USED EVERY LAW ENFORCEMENT TOOL AT OUR DISPOSAL IN THESE VERY DIFFICULT CASES IN A VERY ISOLATED AREA. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, TO BRING A CRIMINAL CASE YOU MUST HAVE EVIDENCE, MUST BE ABLE TO PROVE THE CASE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT AS I HAVE DONE LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF TIMES INVOLVING INTERNET STALKING, CHILD MOLESTATION. IT DOESN'T TAKE MUCH TO SAY I'M AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, WE ARE ALL AGAINST CHILD ABUSE. I THINK CHILD ABUSE IS ONE OF THE HALLMARKS OF MY ADMINISTRATION AS ATTORNEY GENERAL. THE QUESTION IS, AND DICK AS A FORMER LAWYER SHOULD KNOW THIS, AT WHAT POINT DO YOU HAVE THE EVIDENCE YOU NEED? WE HAVE CASES PENDING AND WE HAVE INDICTED SOME CASES.

>> Richard Mahoney: YOU NEED A STATE GRAND JURY, THAT'S THE WAY TO BREAK THE CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

>> Janet Napolitano: AS YOU KNOW, I CANNOT COMMENT ON WHAT THE STATE GRAND JURY DOES. YOU DON'T KNOW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> MICHAEL: MR. HESS, I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO ASK YOU ON THIS SUBJECT. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO COLORADO CITY?

>> Barry Hess: I HAVE NOT, BUT I HAVE TALKED TO -- I THOUGHT YOU WERE THE ONE LOBBYING FOR MORE. THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE ADS STRUCK ME AS A TOTAL EMBARRASSMENT. THIS IS SERIOUS. THE NAME CALLING WAS SOMETHING I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE ANY HAND IN. NOT TO MENTION I DON'T HAVE A MILLION DOLLARS IN MY ACCOUNT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON, COLORADO CITY IS KNOWN AS A POLITICAL HOT POTATO IN THIS STATE, I THINK IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. IT IS BEING AVOIDED RIGHT NOW BY THE PEOPLE CHARGED WITH THE DUTY TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS OF ARIZONA. THERE IS MOLESTATION, PEOPLE ARE GETTING HURT. WE CAN'T TURN A BLIND EYE AND SAY WE HAVE TO GATHER MORE EVIDENCE.

>> MICHAEL: ANOTHER THING WAS THE GAMING PROPOSITIONS. LET ME ASK YOU TO ASSUME THAT NONE OF THE GAMING PROPOSITIONS PASSED AND BARRY HESS IS GOVERNOR. WHAT IF ANY KIND OF COMPACT WOULD YOU NEGOTIATE WITH THE TRIBE? AND SPECIFICALLY, GIVE ME WHAT YOU THINK AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SHARED REVENUE IS AND IF THERE SHOULD BE ANY EXPANSION OF GAMING TYPE TO TABLES, FOR EXAMPLE.

>> Barry Hess: I THINK GAMING IS PRETTY MUCH WHERE IT SHOULD BE. I'M NOT REALLY FOR THE EXPANSION BUT I HAVE TO REALIZE THIS IS A SOVEREIGN NATION. I WOULD NOT NEGOTIATE. I SEE NO REASON, YOU ARE COMPELLED TO BUT IT WOULD BE SO NOMINAL IT WOULD BE A BLANK SHEET OF PAPER AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. I DO APPRECIATE THE WORD SOVEREIGNTY. I DO THINK THEY ALL SHOULD GO DOWN.

>> MICHAEL: HERE IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW. IF YOU REFUSE TO NEGOTIATE AS GOVERNOR, THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT MOVES IN AND JAMS A COMPACT DOWN YOUR THROAT THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT LIKE. IS THAT GOOD POLICY?

>> Barry Hess: YOU HAVE TO WALK THOSE LINES. I THINK IT WOULD IMPRESS UPON PEOPLE THAT WE WOULD HONOR OUR TREATIES AND RECOGNITION OF TRUE SOVEREIGNTY.

>> Janet Napolitano: I WOULD MEET WITH THE TRIBAL LEADERS. WE WOULD USE THE COMPACTS THAT ARE EMBODIED IN 202 NEGOTIATED OVER THE PAST 18 MONTHS AS BASE.

>> MICHAEL: IS 18% ENOUGH REVENUE SHARING WITH THE STATE?

>> Janet Napolitano: I BELIEVE IT IS.

>> MICHAEL: MR. MAHONEY WHAT KIND OF COMPACTS IF THE THREE GAMING PROPOSITIONS GO DOWN?

>> Richard Mahoney: IN MICHIGAN IT'S 12%, AS GOVERNOR I WOULD NEGOTIATE EXCLUSIVITY AND TAKE AN IDEA OF MATT SALMON, TO ENCOURAGE GREATER SHARING BECAUSE THERE ARE DESPERATELY POOR TRIBES THAT HAVE NOT BENEFITED, I WOULD WANT A 10 PERCENT SLICE OFF THE TOP.

>> MICHAEL: ANY EXPANSION OF GAMING TYPE? TABLES, BLACKJACK?

>> Richard Mahoney: THAT'S FINE. THE IDEA IS THE STATE GETS MORE, WELL REGULATED, CLEAN AND GREATER DEGREE OF SHARING AMONG THE TRIBES.

>> MICHAEL: MATT SALMON, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT GAMING COMPACTS IF ALL THREE PROPOSITIONS GO DOWN?

>> Matt Salmon: I HOPE THEY DO. I WOULD LIKE TO NEGOTIATE COMPACTS THAT DON'T EXPAND IT BEYOND WHAT IT IS CURRENTLY. YOU RAISED A VALID POINT. I WAS PART OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE WHEN WE WERE FORCED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO NEGOTIATE THE COMPACTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. I WOULD RATHER SEE US CONTAIN IT TO WHERE IT'S AT RIGHT NOW, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE ANYTHING FROM WHAT THEY HAVE RIGHT NOW. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE REVENUE SHARING SO NATIONS LIKE THE NAVAJO NATION WHICH GET NO BENEFIT AND HOPI AND OTHER TRIBES THAT ARE HAVING THE PROBLEMS. SINCE I DON'T WANT TO EXPAND IT, I DON'T WANT THE REVENUES. WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT, THOUGH, IS I'VE BEEN TO THE NAVAJO NATION. THEY HAVE A 60 PERCENT UNEMPLOYMENT. IT'S TIME FOR US TO HELP THEM FOCUS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BRINGING MANUFACTURING JOBS TO THE TRIBAL LAND. WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO IT WITH MEXICO, WHY CAN'T WE BRING THAT SAME CONCEPT TO THE TRIBAL LAND? BECAUSE ONE OF THE PROBLEMS IS THAT BUSINESSES DON'T KNOW WHAT LAW THEY WOULD BE SUBJECT TO, TRIBAL LAW, U.S. LAW, ARIZONA LAW. I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN WORK OUT AN AGREEMENT, A TREATY, IF YOU WILL, BETWEEN US AND THE TRIBAL LANDS TO BRING SOME GOOD JOBS AND HELP THEM OUT OF THEIR ECONOMIC PROBLEMS.

>> MICHAEL: VERY QUICKLY, THERE'S -- IT HAS TO BE VERY QUICKLY. CITIES AND TOWNS SHARED REVENUES, VIEWER QUESTION, WILL YOU CUT THEM?

>> Matt Salmon: I'VE VOWED THERE ARE TWO AREAS THAT I HAVE TAKEN OFF THE BUDGET. NO TAX INCREASES, NO SHARED REVENUES, NO CLASSROOM FUNDING.

>> Janet Napolitano: MY BUDGET PROTECTS IT.

>> Barry Hess: RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE SO DEPENDENT ON IT, THE SMALLER TOWNS I HAVE TO PROTECT BUT I LOOK TO GET RID OF THEM.

>> Richard Mahoney: LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS GOOD GOVERNMENT, IT DOES WORK.

>> MICHAEL: BEFORE THE SHOW STARTED WE DREW LOTS TO DETERMINE THE ORDER OF CLOSING STATEMENTS. MATT SALMON.

>> Matt Salmon: THERE'S A CLEAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES TONIGHT. YOU'VE HEARD THEM. I BELIEVE IN MORE LIMITED GOVERNMENT. THIS IS A CHANCE FOR US TO REDEFINE OUR STATE GOVERNMENT TO MAKE IT MORE COMPASSIONATE, MORE EFFICIENT, TO REALLY MAKE SOME POSITIVE CHANGES IN OUR STATE, MAKE OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM PERFORM. I WILL NOT RAISE YOUR TAXES. MY OPPONENT HAS SAID SHE WILL. THERE'S A CLEAR DIFFERENCE. I BELIEVE IN LESS GOVERNMENT. LAST NIGHT I HEARD MY OPPONENT CALL HERSELF A CONSERVATIVE. SOMEBODY PROPOSING THIS KIND OF MASSIVE TAX INCREASE AND DOESN'T BELIEVE IN REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS, ON ABORTION, ADVOCATES ON GAY MARRIAGE, WE DO HAVE SOME KEY DIFFERENCES AND I HOPE THE VOTERS WILL REALIZE THAT AND VOTE FOR ME.

>> Barry Hess: I THINK MATT IS RIGHT WE HAVE WIDE DIVERSITY. WHAT IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN, WE'RE GOING TO ELECT A GOVERNOR, THE SOCIALIST STATE OF ARIZONA OR FREE REPUBLIC OF ARIZONA. I UNDERSTAND GOVERNMENT, TO PROTECT THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS AND PROPERTY OF THE INDIVIDUAL. WE HAVE GONE SO FAR AWRY, EVEN IN OUR EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM WHERE WE ARE CONSTRAINED BY CONSTITUTION TO PROVIDE PUBLIC EDUCATION, PEOPLE HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE OBJECTIVE OF EDUCATION IS, TO GRADUATE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN, TO MAKE THEIR OWN WAY WITHOUT BURDENING ANYONE ELSE. INSTEAD WE HAVE THIS IDEA GOING THAT YOU GET OUT AND YOU BECOME DEPENDENT. I THINK WE'VE GOT TO GET AWAY FROM THE POLITICAL TIMIDITY.

>> MICHAEL: MR. RICHARD MAHONEY.

>> Richard Mahoney: THANK YOU. THE ADVANTAGE OF RUNNING AS AN INDEPENDENT IS YOU CAN BE BLUNT. YOU CAN BE BLUNT ABOUT IMMIGRATION, ABOUT THE DRUG WAR, ABOUT THE NEED TO INVEST IN TEACHER'S SALARIES, ABOUT THE WATER EMERGENCY PARTICULARLY IN NORTHERN ARIZONA THAT WE FACE. THE DISADVANTAGE IS YOU DON'T HAVE THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES HAVE TO SLAM EACH OTHER AND REMIND THE ELECTORS THAT IT'S THE EVIL OF TWO. YOU CAN TURN MY DISADVANTAGE INTO AN ADVANTAGE IF YOU SAY TO THE PARTIES, THE PARTY IS OVER. YOU TRASHED THE PLACE. WE'RE GOING TO TRY SOMEBODY NEW, SOMEBODY WHO IS MORE ACCOUNTABLE. YOU CAN MAKE HISTORY AND CHANGE HISTORY. THAT'S WHY I'M RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR. PLEASE VOTE OR CONSIDER VOTING FOR RICHARD MAHONEY FOR GOVERNOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MICHAEL: MS. NAPOLITANO.

>> Janet Napolitano: THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT CHANGE. ARIZONA IS AT A CROSSROADS. WE HAVE HAD 10 YEARS OF FAILED LEADERSHIP, 10 YEARS OF MAKING SHORT-SIGHTED DECISIONS THAT SHORTCHANGED THE CHILDREN IN TERMS OF EDUCATION, ECONOMIC OF QUALITY JOBS. IT MAY NOT HAPPEN IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS BUT MY ADMINISTRATION WILL TALK STRAIGHT WITH YOU, PUT FORTH THE CHANGES THAT WE NEED TO MAKE AS A STATE. WE ARE ALL IN THIS STATE TOGETHER AND WE OWE IT TO OUR CHILDREN TO GIVE THEM A BETTER STATE THAN THE ONE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. THAT WILL BE MY GOAL AS THE NEXT GOVERNOR.

>> MICHAEL: JANET NAPOLITANO, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. BARRY HESS, RICHARD MAHONEY, MATT SALMON. TWO WEEKS LEFT TO GO, BEST OF LUCK ON THE REMAINDER OF THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL. THANKS TO YOU FOR JOINING US THIS EVENING. I'M MICHAEL GRANT. HAVE A PLEASANT ONE. GOOD NIGHT.