Other transcripts

Transcripts

August 23, 2004

Host: Michael Grant
Topics:
· District 20 Candidate Forum;
· Corporate Commissioner
In-Studio Guests:
· State Senator Slade Mead, Phoenix;
· State Representative John Huppenthal, Chandler;
· Howard Fischer, chief correspondent and chief financial officer, Captiol Media Services

>> Michael Grant:
Tonight on "Horizon," the Republican primary for the District 20 Senate seat, one of the state's hottest races, the candidates will debate the issues. And we'll take a look at the race for Corporation Commissioner.

Good evening, I'm Michael Grant. The District 20 State Senate Republican primary has been described as a race that could determine if conservatives or moderate Republicans control the state legislature. District 20 includes Ahwatukee, South Tempe, parts of Chandler. Voters go to the polls, of course, for the primary on September 7th. Joining me to talk about their positions on the issues is the incumbent State Senator Slade Mead of Phoenix and the challenger State Representative John Huppenthal of Chandler. Gentlemen, good to see both of you. Senator Mead, why should you be re-elected?

>> Slade Mead:
Well, first of all, thank you for having the two of us here. I appreciate the schedule change for curriculum night for my daughter's school. She appreciates that. Why should I be re-elected? I feel very strongly that what I've done in the Senate for the last two years is worked for the people of District 20. All the people of District 20. And, Michael, what happened two years ago with the state budget is a classic example of where leadership in my opinion was passing a state budget that would've been detrimental to our schools and to our district, and primarily $80 million in cuts to K-12 and 20 million to colleges and universities. Now, the simple thing and easy thing would've been to go along with leadership but instead I said no and I took the political brunt of it, which was threatened to be thrown off my committees and that I would have a challenge in the primary. The first part didn't come true because the other moderate Republicans rallied around me but the second part has come true. So, no good deed goes unpunished. I now have a primary but I feel I've done a good job for the folks in district 20 and I look at each issue for its merits as opposed to its partnership and I would like to be returned by the voters of district 20.

>> Michael Grant:
Why should you be elected?

>> John Huppenthal:
When I came to the legislature in 1993, the state's per capita income was falling relative to the rest of the nation. We were in the top 10 of the nation in taxation, and we had a financial mess on our hands. I was a part of a discipline team that brought our taxation from the top 10 in the nation down below 25th at the state level and we got the state moving again. We were -- we have been in the top 10 in job creation every single year since the second year I have been in the legislature. So we've had enormous prosperity that I think was a part of the discipline we brought to the process. Now, that's all fallen away, fallen apart. My opponent Slade Mead drove the budget to a billion dollars in the hole this year, and he says it was all about education, but actually he was a proponent of spending at every single area. We didn't see any single area in which he wasn't a proponent of pushing spending higher. He was spending education's money everywhere. There never were the votes to cut the education spending he claims to be a hero in having stopped however we need an enormous amount of discipline because we are a billion in the hole and that puts us as a tremendous disadvantage moving forward.

>> Michael Grant:
The counter-argument to this is that the state fell on tough times but they are temporary tough times, it's eventually a vibrant economy, you don't want to gut essential services, you don't want to gut, well, particularly the state's education system, borrow some money here, borrow some money there, keep it on a relatively even keel, the economy will catch back up and you'll be in fine shape. What's wrong that with that analysis?

>> John Huppenthal:
The problem is this, there's not the evidence the tide will lift us out. We have never been in the hole to the extent of the deficit we had this year, a billion dollars. We are a minimum $300 million going forward. That's excluding one-time elements. There are always new one-time elements. We are at least 500 million in the hole. That's an enormous hole that's a tremendous risk to our basic services like education. We have to be incredibly disciplined moving forward to make sure we stretch every dollar. My opponent has been a spendthrift in every single area. There is no area where he won't say I'll spend your 10 and raise you 10.

>> Michael Grant:
Senator, I think your counter-argument is that government doesn't have a lot of things that discipline it and a economic downturn is one of the things that frequently that will, and if you go on spending, like a drunken sailor, which may be a slander to sailors everywhere, you --

>>Slade Mead:
Of all navies.

>> Michael Grant:
You don't have a chance to trim back government in these natural economic cycles.

>> Slade Mead:
Let me try putting this in perspective. In 2003 we were looking at being the only state in the country without head start because that was being pulled out of the budget. This is a budget; by the way, John voted for and called it unmerciful that's what the paper quoted him saying. I wasn't going to let it happen. We were going to cut back on career ladders, cut back on the dual enrollment programs with the community colleges. We were going to cut back on teacher experience index. We were cutting back to the point, Michael, where you're going into the bone now. I serve on the Kyrene school board so I see the effects of what they do at the state down on the school district level. It's tight ship, and to turn around from the state perspective and say, just cut, cut, cut, cut and then expect to keep the schools in a healthy position makes no sense.

>> Michael Grant:
Is this a battle for the heart and soul of the Republican party? You see it that way?

>>Slade Mead:
I think it's a battle for the heart and soul of district 20. Independents can vote in this primary as well. I understand that the dynamics is such that the far right side of the Republican Party is going to support my opponent. That's fine. What I'm asking is the mainstream Republicans and the independents who have low efficacy and we were joking about that word a minute ago, they have to get out and vote. If they don't vote, I lose. If they vote, I win. It's that simple.

>> Michael Grant:
Do you see it that way? Is it a battle for the heart and soul of the GOP?

>> John Huppenthal:
I think it's a battle to protect and preserve our basic services at the state level. My opponent's actions don't match his words. He joined with the Democrats to turn control of the process over to the Democrats. He drove the budget to a billion dollars. That still wasn't big enough hole for him. He was running hostile amendments to that budget, none of his hostile amendments dealt with education. He was trying to drive the deficit higher. On top of that he was running other bills, some of which would have cost $100 million a year, to drive the deficit higher yet.

>> Michael Grant:
In some fairness to the senator, though, this year a lot of your colleagues staged a result -- a revolt in the house caucus and drove the budget the same way.

>> John Huppenthal:
Well, there are some things that I can change and I can change the Senate seat. There are some things that are going to be up to other legislative races for them to resolve. My opponent's actions were to drive the budget -- the budget deficit to an all-time high in areas completely outside education, put education funding at an ongoing risk, a billion dollar deficit moving forward poses a tremendous risk to education. He was spending education's money everywhere, and in trying to trying to drive the deficit higher. We need to be very disciplined so we can continue to stretch every dollar so we can continue to support and improve education.

>> Michael Grant:
Let me see if I can focus this a little bit. All day K, I think you are a strong supporter of all day K. Why?

>> Slade Mead:
It makes good sense for our kids and the argument it costs too much, I think, is a complete cop-out to our future generation of leaders and citizens. Full-day kindergarten is good. There are studies now, I understand this, Representative Huppenthal parades out a study that says it's terrible, in fact he referred to kindergarten as dangerous. I'm not quite sure I've heard that before but it's an interesting word to use for kindergarten. A preponderance of the evidence suggests that full-day kindergarten is good. You want children to learn. K-3 is a vital time for children. And now we're one of 47 states that offer full-day K. I'm just amazed we're having the debate over full-day K. I'm sorry.

>> Michael Grant:
Certainly no argument about the value of early childhood education but I think some people say, hold it, at age 4 or 5 are they ready for all-day K?

>> Slade Mead:
That's a parental choice. If they don't want to put that child into full-day K, that's why it's voluntary. If they want to home school that child, that fine. They have that option. But now they don't have the option for the full-day K. That's what we're giving to the citizens of Arizona to give to their children.

>> Michael Grant:
Representative Huppenthal you think it isn't effective, right?

>> John Huppenthal:
Well, my position on all-day K let's sit down and negotiate something out. You're talking about $200 million a year and if we're a billion in the hole we need a safety valve in case the state budget is imploding. If you get on that mandatory auto-pilot, you have put a tremendous risk to all our other education services. So we needed some kind of safety in there if we simply didn't have the cash. The other thing we needed was some kind of comprehensive study to resolve the issues. There is serious doubt about whether we're getting the maximum bang for the dollar out of our kindergarten the way it's currently structured. I felt those issues needed to be addressed. My opponent said let's put $200 million into the system, no associated reform and the coalition that was moving all day kindergarten force said no negotiations to include reforms. So I was willing to negotiate. The proponents of all-day K they said we want the money.

>> Michael Grant:
Let me shift to another budget subject. You voted against a higher pay increase for DPS officers. Why?

>> John Huppenthal:
Well, the pay increase was included in the budget, so anybody who voted against the budget voted against the pay increase for DPS.

>> Michael Grant:
There was a differential, though, debate on how big the increase should be. Let's put it in that context. Should they have gotten a larger increase?

>> John Huppenthal:
These were the issues. I sat down and we negotiated with DPS. First thing I did was say, what are the benefits for the families of fallen officers. I wanted to make sure they were the best in the country. We have the best benefits. I did a review of benefits for catastrophically injured officers. We when we got to the pay increase, we looked at turnover data, we looked at their ability to fill vacancies and when I got done with that analysis my feeling was that we should do -- with a $300 million a year deficit to a billion depending on how you do the math, if 5% was the proper number, that's 5 1/2 times the average state employee, that's 150% of the average taxpayer increase. My opponent been for went for a 17% pay increase and all the data he has talked about that are associated with that are false data. The turnover at DPS is very low, incredibly low, it's around 4%. They have no trouble filling their vacancies.

>> Michael Grant:
What do you say?

>>Slade Mead:
I don't know where John gets his numbers, quite frankly. DPS is imploding. This is a crisis. Right now they're losing two officers a weeks. And they can't compete against the city and towns that are paying more, especially in the urban areas. Now, what I did during the budget process this year is I offered an amendment that would have been a huge increase, it was a $7,500 pay increase but what happened after the appropriations, after it passed through the appropriations by my fellow senators, they approved my amendment. It went to the floor, we were able to negotiate it up to 3500, and we've helped stop -- stem this hemorrhaging of officers. But there is turnover there, John, and to say it's low turnover, you're not recognizing the fact that they are having problems filling vacancies and right now I believe they have 76 vacancies and, Michael, out of that they just put out an RFP and they received four applicants who met the minimum standards. If you don't pay people they won't go to work for you.

>> Michael Grant:
Can't you make the turnover argument for almost every agency of the State of Arizona?

>>Slade Mead:
You can but I think public safety should be one of our public priorities. When you dial 911 you want to make sure somebody is picking up the phone and can respond to that. DPS is one agency where I feel we can't compromise. We've got to keep DPS strong.

>> John Huppenthal:
You know, the 7% was an increase that I could support. You know, the question is, you have somebody who is going for 17% when we have a $300 million a year deficit. Somebody else who is negotiating tough. What my opponent did was really irresponsible. He created a situation where you have a group of employees that got a 7% pay increase and are incredibly dissatisfied. He dangled out that huge pay increase, saying look at me, I'm the hero for you, and he did this with every single constituency group that we were dealing with in the legislature--

>>Slade Mead:
John, I voted for that budget, which you didn't.

>> Michael Grant:
Shouldn't public safety be a priority, if you have to pick a place to dangle?

>> John Huppenthal:
Absolutely. The question is, to me the 7% said, this is a priority, you know, you're talking a huge margin above the 2%, and also you have a problem, too, our correctional officers are critically important officer, too. They're part of public safety. Turnover rate there is much higher. And so I think there's a fairness issue. You have to be ready to come up with the cash to treat them in a similar manner.

>>Slade Mead:
Can I point one thing out, John, you did vote against the budget. You're saying you supported the 7% increase but you voted no on it. I voted yes on that budget. You're recorded as a no. So now to say you supported a 7 that was increase which you voted no on, either that's disingenuous or you don't know how you're voting.

>> John Huppenthal:
Well, let's talk about the budget. The budget jammed through hundreds of millions of dollars in increased welfare spending. That's the basis upon which I voted no on the budget. You're part of jamming through all that increased welfare spending. That increased welfare spending puts education funding at risk.

>>Slade Mead:
Now, I would argue the education at risk -- there was one billion fairness to John, he says I support every education bill, no, I fought your $50 million subsidy or voucher program with the corporation. There was a bill throughout to give a corporation income tax voucher to private schools. I voted no on that one, John, because I don't think the general fund is ready for a $50 million hit for a corporate give back so they can give it to private schools. That's going to bat for private schools, John.

>> John Huppenthal:
We're at the core of disagreement between my opponent and myself. I believe in vibrant competition in public education. I believe a child can get a public education in any number of places. The corporate tax credit with the initial proposal was $50 million; we were willing to negotiate down to a sliver to get the process of reform started. I support corporate tuition tax credits, more competition negligent indication, I support charter schools, I support the existing tuition tax credit. My opponent recently expressed hostility to competition in education. If we had been able to negotiate a compromise, I would not be running.

>> Michael Grant:
Are you an enemy of school choice?

>Slade Mead:
No, I'm not an enemy of school choice. What I did do and I think it was a prudent move, I put the pressure on the state charter board to adapt rules. They've been working for nine years without any set of rules. So before we sunset and rolled them over for another term, I held up their rollover until they adopted rules. Now under Kurt Davis up at NAU -- the fellow from Flagstaff, they've got rules finally. It's to see.

>> Michael Grant:
Up or down, though? If charter schools were to come back up for a vote, how would you vote?

>> Slade Mead:
When you say come up for a voter, in what manner -- absolutely, we can have charters but you have to have charters accountable. This year, for instance, there were 426 charters, I believe, in Arizona. 399 did not have to do the grading that all the public schools do of excelling, hyper-forming, the four -- 399 get off the hook being alternatives schools or too small. Well, now we're not on an equal playing field. So I do have some problems when you let charters just go without any oversight and you have a charter board that has no rules. Well, the charter board now has rules and I'm very happy that they do and I also think we need to start looking at those charter schools that are not meeting the needs of our kids. Because you don't want to take two or three years saying, it's the market, we'll see if it's a good school or not, because those are kids in the meantime who aren't getting educated.

>> Michael Grant:
Charter schools run amok?

>> John Huppenthal:
This shows my opponent's lack of any kind of understanding of statistics, ability to analyze. We have two of the best studies on charter schools, came out of Arizona, Dave Garcia and Lou Solomon did a matched pair study where they took matched pairs of students and calculated academic gain. It's the only study recognized on a national basis. Charter public school students had greater academic gain than district school students. We also have a huge study by the behavioral research institute where they surveyed 8,000 parents and had them rate the quality of their child's school. Nationwide, 26% of the parents rated an A school. In Arizona district schools we were at 32%. Charter schools were at 38. So the data is clear that charter schools are thriving and doing well and are highly accountable in Arizona.

>> Michael Grant:
We're almost out of time but I want to get one to one last subject, protect Arizona now, a good idea or a bad idea?

>> John Huppenthal:
You know Protect Arizona now is a great idea. We need something to stop the onslaught that we are facing on services, welfare service -- we need to take care of Arizona citizens first and I think that it's just prudent to say, no, you're not a citizen of the United States, you're not going to get access, you're got not going to get welfare been pits through our hospitals. That's what protect Arizona now does.

>>Michael Grant:
Position on protect Arizona?

>>Slade Mead:
It's my understanding that in that bill, or in that referendum, if a government employee fails to report someone, that they can face criminal charges.

>> Michael Grant:
That's true.

>>Slade Mead:
That is not good. That is wrong, wrong, wrong. We have enough pressure our state employees that I don't want to start seeing people being prosecuted for either misdiagnosing a situation -- I think it's very poorly written, quite frankly. I'm disappointed to see we're going that route, plus I feel the immigration issue is much more of a federal issue an a state issue.

>> Michael Grant:
Senator Slade Mead, we are out of time. Best of luck in the campaign. Representative John who Huppenthal, thanks to you as well.

>> Michael Grant:
Arizona voters will have the opportunity to vote for four of five members of the Arizona Corporation Commission. The commission is the state regulatory authority that decides quality of service, utility rates and future investments by public utilities. They also have the responsibility to oversee corporations. Arizona constitution grants the commission executive, legislative and judicial power.

>>Larry Lemmons:
There are three seats of the commission up for grabs for the term expiring January 5, 2009. The three Republican incumbents, Mike Gleason, Jeff Hatch-Miller and Bill Mundell will be running against Democratic challengers Scott Clark, Mark Manoil and Nina Trasoff. That race will be determined in the November 2nd general election. For the Corporation Commission term expiring January 1st 2007, also to be determined in the general election, there are two Libertarian write-in candidates, Rick Fowlkes and Zelig Hess. However a significant race will be determined in the Republican primary September 7th, incumbent Kris Mayes was appointed by Governor Janet Napolitano to fill the remainder of Jim Irvin's term who resigned from the commission in September 2003. Mayes is the governor's former press secretary. Her opponent Carl Seel has worked in marketing in Arizona.

>> Michael Grant:
Joining me to talk about the significance of this race is the chief correspondent and chief financial officer of Capitol Media Services, Howie Fischer. I haven't done in that a long time. Remember when that I used to run through different titles?

>> Howard Fischer:
It's sort of like the daily show when you're the chief Iraqi correspondent. I'll work for that, too.

>> Michael Grant:
Actually this race started out as a three-way race. Jog our memory?

>> Howard Fischer:
Yes, the -- there was actually one person in the race who apparently didn't quite get the number of signatures he needed and Carl Seel and went ahead and challenged, not necessarily on the number of signatures but he didn't list which commission office he was going for. As the package pointed out you have three seats for a new four year term and this new seat for the last two year's of Jim Irvin's term 37 because of the fact he didn't tell voters which seat he was running for, all the names were thrown out.

>> Michael Grant:
Corporation Commission is a very powerful agency and in many respects probably plays the largest role in the day to day lives of Arizona in terms of their utility rates and their water quality and those kind of things. Yet it always remains a pretty low radar kind of race.

>> Howard Fischer:
Well, part of it is that until a rate hike comes up, ALA the Arizona Public Service announcement that we got this week, you don't have anyone really looking at it. I mean, first of all, in terms of water, most people get their water from municipal water companies. They are not regulated by the commission. That's off the radar. That leaves you pretty much with natural gas, if you've got natural gas, which a lot of Arizonans don't, and it leaves you with the power. If you're an SRP customer, again, not affected by the commission except for certain financing and transmission line matters. That leaves you pretty much with the situation that you only care when your phone rates are up and for APS and Tucson electric customers when your power is up. That's when it becomes high profile. I mean, 20 years ago, you and I have both been around a long time when the commission was looking at double digit rate increases, everyone paid attention. Now we've actually had a few years of rate declines, and nobody's paying much attention to it.

>> Michael Grant:
In fact there was a massive voter revolt about 20 years ago or so. Let's don't go that far back. Let's return to the present day. Interestingly enough, let's focus on the Mayes-Seel race because that's the primary. The real issue be being played in that race is Kris Mayes a true Republican?

>> Howard Fischer:
That's what's real interesting about this. I suppose on some level anyone running for the commission, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, vegetarian says, I will protect consumers better. It's the only way you're going to get elected. The one candidate who didn't understand that a view years ago was Roberta Voss, we don't need much regulation and you see what happened to her candidacy. So we are left with thing on the margin. One of the differences between them is should utilities be forced to buy energy from alternative sources, solar, geothermal, wind. So at least Carl Seel who is who as the challenger must get publicity with the question of going to Republican voters and saying who is a true Republican and the hot issue is abortion. Kris Mayes is a member of the wish list which is women in the Senate and house. One of their main positions is preserving the original "Roe vs. Wade" decision which made abortion legal. He said, I am anti-abortion. My question to him is, so exactly when did the commission get authority?

>> Michael Grant:
Is article 15 of the --

>> Howard Fischer:
His answer is if you are going to elect a Republican, you ought to elect somebody who is a true Republican. The other thing, of course, is that Mayes helped elect Janet Napolitano. She was the governor's press secretary before the governor was the governor. Now, the problem for Carl in all this is one of the people supporting Kris Mayes is Matt Salmon, the Republican whom Napolitano defeated, and Salmon said the fact is that Kris Mayes did a good job for her client. He believes that Mayes is a good Republican. And believes that she has done a good job. That kindive 81 cuts a lot of what Carl has to say.

>> Michael Grant:
You touched on this, but is the only related issue, the Corporation Commission, sit the environmental resources issue?

>> Howard Fischer:
I sat through a debate, I have talked to both of them. I mean, there are some things on the margin as to who is -- would be better off in terms of natural gas pipelines but it really comes down to Mayes wants to have a mandate for solar portfolio. Seel says, utilities should be encouraged to but you shouldn't force them to buy more expensive energy.

>> Michael Grant:
Howie Fischer, thanks for the update.

>>Paul Atkinson:
The latest KAET/ASU poll asks voters about President Bush's performance and if they'll vote for the Republican incumbent or democratic nominee senator John Kerry. Also should Maricopa County spray pesticide to quill west Nile virus carrying mosquitoes? Complete poll results Tuesday at 7:00 on "Horizon".

>> Michael Grant:
We will hear from Dan Saban who is running against Sheriff Joe Arpaio Friday, the Journalists Roundtable. Thank you very much for joining us this evening. I'm Michael Grant. Have a great one. Good night.

Back to the top