Other
transcripts
Transcripts
November 23, 2004
Host:
Michael Grant
Topics:
· KAET-ASU Poll;
· Proposition 200;
· Arizona/Great Britain Economic Ties
In-Studio
Guests:
· David Gonzales, newly-appointed Director,
Department of Public Safety;
· Bruce Merrill, Director, KAET-ASU Poll;
· Tara Blanc, associate director, KAET-ASU poll;
· Kathy McKee, Chair, Protect Arizona Now;
· Gail Howard, Governor's Economic Advisor
>>> Michael Grant:
Tonight on "HORIZON", the latest KAET-ASU poll shows
Arizonans support a smoking ban and why Arizona voters cast their
ballots for Bush or Kerry.
>>> Michael Grant:
Governor Napolitano expected to sign proposition 200 into law
this week. It has been delayed. We'll hear from the woman who
helped put the initiative on the ballot about the delay and lawsuits
surrounding the proposition to target illegal immigrants. Plus
tourism. One of many topics Governor Napolitano and an Arizona
delegation discussed on a recent trip to Great Britain. We'll
hear from one of those who accompanied the Governor on the transatlantic
trip.
>> Michael Grant:
Good evening. Welcome to "HORIZON." I'm Michael Grant.
Governor Napolitano appointing a new director for public safety
announcing David Gonzales as the next DPS director. He was marshal
for Arizona for the past three years. He headed the criminal DPS
division and ran the division GITEM gang squad.
>> David Gonzales:
My wife said I came to DPS because I liked the smoky the bear
hat, which I do and I came to DPS and I don't regret it. I came
here because of the traditions and its people and its fine reputation,
and I come back for the same reasons.
>> Michael Grant:
Gonzales replaces Dennis Garret who will retire at the end of
December serving five years as DPS director for top priorities
for Gonzales getting patrol officers in rural and metro areas
and increasing officer pay.
>>> Michael Grant:
A registered Republican Gonzales must be confirmed by the state
senate.
>>> Michael Grant:
The latest KAET-ASU poll finding leadership and moral values helped
propel President Bush to victory in our state and the poll found
strong support for all-day kindergarten. KAET-ASU Walter Cronkite
school of journalism and mass communication ASU poll of 372 registered
voters conducted November 18 through the 21st and sampling error
plus or minus 5.1%. We'll take a look at the poll. But here is
a look at the results.
>>> Mike Sauceda:
The top reason voters gave forecasting a ballot for President
Bush were personal qualities, leadership, honesty and integrity,
35% cited those reasons and cited President Bush for moral values
and beliefs and some because of the war in Iraq and 11% against
Kerry and the rest in single digits. We asked voters who cast
their ballots for senator John Kerry why they did so and 25% did
not want George Bush as President and 23% against the war in Iraq,
and 14% cited personal characteristics, leadership, honor and
integrity and all others in the single digit range and methods
used to elect President and asked if they would like to get rid
of the electoral college. 48% said it's time to get rid of the
system, 32% said no and 20% had no opinion. Turning to statewide
views of issues. 49% surveyed support a constitutional ban on
gay marriage in Arizona, 43% do not support such a ban. Support
for all-day kindergarten strong, 70% support it and 22% do not.
Finally, asking voters if they support a statewide public ban
of smoking in bars, working places and restaurants, 62% said they
do and 35% said they do not.
>> Joining me is Bruce Merrill in the Walter Cronkite School
of journalism and Tara Blanc, associate director of the KAET-ASU
poll. Tara, congratulations on the promotion. Bruce has good judgment.
[ laughter ]
>> Michael Grant:
I don't know. Were you shocked by the reasons people either voted
for George Bush or John Kerry?
>> Bruce Merrill:
Not really, mike. It came out about what the polls were showing
before. I think what the poll makes very clear is that Bush was
smart in that he had a clear message and very focused on his message
which was leadership, moral values, commander-in-chief, I'm your
leader, you don't change in time of crisis and war. On the other
hand, Kerry just doesn't appear to have been the right candidate
for the Democrats at the right time. A liberal Democratic senator
was a good target for the Republicans. You know you are in trouble
in your campaign when the main reason people voted for you was
to vote against the other guy.
>> Michael Grant:
completely consistent with the poll we ran.
>> Bruce Merrill:
All summer long.
>> Michael Grant:
the other thing I found interesting and I'm not sure I believe
in exit polls anymore, but nationwide moral values listed as the
number one reason for the...
>> Bruce Merrill:
Absolutely. In all our polling, even issues we will look at later
tonight that will be on the ballot probably in a couple of years,
we are finding more and more that the polarization in the country
is based on values and not demographics. Not much difference between
young and old anymore college-educated and people with high school
or less. Basically, the differences tend to be on the basis of
values and that will only increase in the next several years.
>> Michael Grant:
The war in Iraq, how large a role did it end up playing?
>> Tara Blanc:
It played a larger role for those voting for Kerry than Bush.
It was about 23% of the people who voted for Kerry said it was
because they didn't like what George Bush was doing in Iraq. And
that was the second biggest reason why people voted for Kerry.
With Bush it was down on the list several places under leadership,
moral values and those kinds of things.
>> Michael Grant:
We are talking about we went on the air, does that result indicate
Howard Dean might have been a stronger candidate for the Democrats.
>> Tara Blanc:
I don't know.
>> Michael Grant:
What do you think, Bruce?
>> Bruce Merrill:
I really doubt it. He would have been, if he had run on a single
issue which was the war on Iraq, he might have done better. But
he still would have been paid, I think, by the Bush people as
a New England liberal, and again, what this election shows is
that the importance of style over substance, the main thing for
the people that elected the new President was the image and the
style not necessarily issues. So my doubt is that he would have
done much better.
>> Tara Blanc:
One of the things related to the war was a lot of people who voted
for Bush in the back of their mind didn't want to make a change
in the middle of the war. I think whether Howard Dean or John
Kerry, it would have been hard to get people to see there was
a need for a change.
>> Michael Grant:
Well, you know there are a couple in American politics and the
first is Americans vote their pocketbook and second they don't
want to change horses in the middle of the war.
>> Bruce Merrill:
Absolutely. I think that was a very, very big factor.
>> Michael Grant:
Yeah. What about issues like federal deficit? Stem cell research?
>> Bruce Merrill:
Well, they were more of an issue again for the Democrats. And,
in fact, one of the things we found which was very interesting
is only three or four reasons explain most of the reason why people
voted for George Bush. We had 12 or 15 reasons for Kerry. In other
words, there wasn't much focus on the Kerry side. There were people
who were concerned about the stem cell research, about abortion,
about social security, about minority relationships and there
were a lot of little pockets, but they were not bound into any
overall focus or strategy and I think it hurt him.
>> Michael Grant:
I found very surprising the result on would you support a constitutional
gay marriage ban.
>> Tara Blanc:
The fact that it was so evenly split when you take into account
sampling error, it is split down the middle in this state. Again,
it goes back to the fundamental difference in values. I suspect
that we talked a lot about the religious right and their impact
on voting, I think in this case people more moderate come into
play, plus you are talking about a constitutional ban which is
different than a piece of legislation, and I think people are
much more reluctant to make those kind of fundamental changes
to our constitution rather than passing another piece of legislation.
>> Michael Grant:
Bruce, it was on the ballot in 11 states. I will admit after election
night I did not track it closely, but my feel is, it wasn't close
in any state.
>> Bruce Merrill:
It lost in one. In 10 of the 11 it passed and it passed nicely.
Again, this is a focus now on an issue that was really made a
major issue in the Presidential campaign. So people have had a
chance to think about it, digest it a little bit. I think what
people don't understand about Arizona is the rapid growth in Arizona
and they have caused this electorate to be much more moderate
than a lot of people think. A lot of people think Arizona and
the state of Barry Goldwater and right-wingers. The migration
in the last 10 years operated to make Arizona a pretty moderate
state like somebody like Bill Clinton could win here just a few
years ago.
>> Michael Grant:
You know, it is interesting, though, Tara, because it is likely
it may be on the 2006 ballot here that will not be a Presidential
election year and your turnout will probably drop, given historic
turnout levels by at least 20, if not 25 points. I just wonder
if the people who are most likely to show up, though, might be
more favorably inclined to a constitutional ban than this poll
result indicates.
>> Tara Blanc:
Very likely when you consider it is an emotional issue and goes
back to core values and it will bring out the people who feel
the most strongly about it one way or the other. It will have
an effect on the gubernatorial election in 2006.
>> Michael Grant:
One of our results was that people... maybe we should justify
the Electoral College and volunteers had to explain precisely
what the Electoral College was.
>> Tara Blanc:
It was obvious with 20% who said they didn't know and didn't have
an opinion on it, people probably really haven't thought it through,
it is a knee-jerk reaction to I think what happened in 2,000 and
we were expecting it to happen in 2004. When the election was
over people quickly put it out of their minds and people haven't
really thought it through. We were talking about earlier; we really
want to give up some of the powers the states have.
>> Michael Grant:
right. One of the indicators there was Colorado turned down the
proportionate proposition and finally understood, hold it, I don't
know if it will increase our clout.
>> Bruce Merrill:
No. And keep in mind, the original intent of the Electoral College
was really to balance small states and the large states. And that's
still an important consideration.
>> Michael Grant:
We ask about all-day k, and it is strongly supported. I suspect
that issue will be front and center before the legislature comes
into session.
>> Bruce Merrill:
I think it is as usual. This did say funding for this proposal.
There was very, very strong support for it. I think that the legislature
will undoubtedly see the results.
>> Michael Grant:
And the smoking ban. I don't know if I am startled by that result.
What was that result again, about 62?
>> Bruce Merrill:
62%.
>> Tara Blanc:
They said they would support it. Only 3% undecided. People definitely
made up their mind on this one.
>> Bruce Merrill:
It was 2 to 1 in favor this time. I'm not really surprised at
that. This is very early and it depends on how much money and
what kind of spin and what kind of campaigns will run either for
it or against it. What these kind of... this information does,
Mike, it calls something permissive consensus. Which means it
at least shows there's a positive predisposition this early towards
things like funding kindergarten and having a ban on smoking in
public places.
>> Tara Blanc:
One of the things to consider on the smoking ban, too, they are
talking about a statewide ban as opposed to individual cities.
You get more support for a statewide ban because you won't see
effects locally like Tempe when they passed the smoking ban and
there was an economic effect. When it is a statewide ban you won't
see people shift from one city to another to go to some place
where they can smoke versus where they can't smoke.
>> Michael Grant:
We always want to recognize the volunteers and their help. You
know, a lot of poll results were borne out by the poll results.
>> Bruce Merrill:
I thought you would never say that. I was going to have to say
that. We did very well, our poll came out very well, and that's
because of the quality of the volunteers we have. If we didn't
have them, we couldn't do this poll. We are really grateful to
them.
>> Michael Grant:
And that and Tara's baseball bat.
>> Bruce Merrill:
That's right. [ laughter ]
>> Bruce Merrill:
she's on the program after all.
>> Michael Grant:
that's why she is assistant director.
>> Michael Grant:
Bruce Merrill and Tara Blanc, thank you.
>>> Michael Grant:
Governor Napolitano postponed signing proposition 200 into law.
It requires proof of citizenship when registering to vote and
applying for public benefits and makes it a crime if government
employees fail to report suspected undocumented immigrants to
immigration authorities. Governor's staff is in the process of
determining which programs are covered under the attorney general's
opinion issued a week and a half ago. The opinion said prop 200
applies only to certain welfare benefits. When the Governor signed
proposition 200 into law, the Mexican-American legal defense fund
said it would file an injunction to stop the implementation. Already
one group backing initiative filed suit with the definition of
public benefits should be expanded to benefits relating to employment,
government licenses and housing assistance. I talked to Kathy,
chair on protect Arizona now and the group that put the initiative
on the ballot and the Governor's postponement on prop 200 and
the lawsuits. Kathy, give me your reaction to the Governor delaying
the signing of the proclamation on proposition 200.
>> Kathy McKee:
We are very disappointed. I hope it is something justifiable and
we want to give everybody the benefit of the doubt. I have this
underlying nagging fear it is just giving opponents more time
to get their lawsuit ready.
>> Michael Grant:
I got the impression from a couple of comments that I heard from
the Governor last week that one of the reasons for the delay was
to try to sort out the remaining details on precisely what public
benefits means and what programs it applies to. You heard the
same thing?
>> Kathy McKee:
Well, yes, except the attorney general issued a very accurate
opinion and said a couple of things at his press conference we
didn't agree with and she did, also and looking at funding determining
the programs under title 46 were actually federal benefits instead
of state and local benefits and we vehemently disagree if they
are not federally mandated and under 46 they were covered by our
initiative and created by a state statute title 46 and administered
under other state statutes for enforcement. So we think it is
pretty clear-cut.
>> Michael Grant:
So if I understand correctly what they may be saying is even if
you have a state or locally created program but it has some level
of federal dollars funding it, that perhaps it loses its flavor
as a state and local public benefit, is that the essence of the
argument.
>> Kathy McKee:
It seems to be what Terry Goddard implied. I hope he is rethinking
that. I sent him a letter and I don't think it is true or right.
His opinion word for word is accurate and the legal opinion.
>> Michael Grant:
I think I know the answer to that and based on that last answer
can I safely assume you don't support Randy Pullen and the attorney
general's opinion?
>> Kathy McKee:
No. We are offended. We worked on this two and a half years and
have out of state interests coming in at the 11th hour telling
us what we meant and said. If we wanted to include federal benefits
we said have said as defined in USC.
>> Michael Grant:
I don't think I understand and I don't think a lot of people completely
understand, I will give you a chance to explain it, what is this
ongoing tension between your group and the national fair group?
What's at the root of that?
>> Kathy McKee:
They tried a hostile takeover of our group. They have taken $100
million out of our movement in the last 20 to 25 years and never
had a major success. What they have done, they have a pattern
of going into separate states and taking over successful state
organizations, kind of busting them up and fundraising and paying
their millions of dollars of expenses they have every year and
they leave. There's no victory because there's no group and money
left to fight the problem. We successfully fought the hostile
takeover attempt and this is the first time they have been stopped
and I guess they are bitter.
>> Michael Grant:
I guess I can understand the fundraising factor but you almost
portray it in such a way that fair doesn't want proposition 200-like
measures to pass. Am I overriding what you just said?
>> Kathy McKee:
There are a lot of people in movement that do say that and the
fact they filed this lawsuit and opened it up when the conventional
wisdom is when you win, you don't have a lawsuit, you are grateful
for your win and go on. I can never remember someone being on
the winning side in the initiative and I have worked on in several
states, where they sued. So I am very skeptical of the purpose
of this lawsuit and the outside interloping agenda that it's pushing.
>> Michael Grant:
Do you suspect it is an attempt to, in a backhanded way, torpedo
proposition 200?
>> Kathy McKee:
I don't know. It wouldn't surprise me. I don't want to say because
I don't know yet. We are actually working on for the litigation
stemming from the hostile takeover and activities and tactics
that were employed by this group and some of the people in this
state. So we feel very good we stayed on the high road and grassroots
organization never took a penny or made a penny and we have thousands
of supporters that stuck with us on the high road the whole time
and didn't get dollar signs in their eyes or anything else.
>> Michael Grant:
In fact, I will commend you for your consistency and your support.
In fact, attorney general Terry Goddard went out of his way to
commend you for your consistency. There's been a lot of inconsistency
on proposition 200, and I think you have been consistent. What
about the city of Phoenix. are they consistent when they say they
will indemnify employees?
>> Kathy McKee:
No. It is outrageous. It would be premature and second it is outrageous.
The citizens voted to be able to sue violating employees. So the
city says they are going to pay the legal defense, no, I don't
think Phil Gordon and the city council will legally pay the city
expenses. They will make the taxpayers pay the city expenses.
How smart is that we passed a law saying we can sue people who
violate the law and we have to pay for their defense. There wasn't
indemnification on prop 203.
>> Michael Grant:
Depending on the level of chaos and uncertainty in what's in this
bucket and not in this bucket it is not unusual for a government
to step forward and some say it is a very good idea to step forward
and say, listen, Mr. employee, or Ms. employee, if you follow
our policy and try to do so in good faith and get in trouble,
we will indemnify you. If you don't follow our policy and you
violate the law, we won't. What's wrong with that basic concept?
>> Kathy McKee:
Prop 203, some call it the bilingual ban, but it didn't ban bilingual
education, it had the same citizen standing at the end of it.
There was no indemnification when that passed. When ARS 140-section
c was passed 40 years ago making it a misdemeanor for welfare
workers not to file a written report on welfare fraud there was
no indication in 50 years, why wouldn't we think this is the first
indemnification and they are trying to side step what we intended
and I think they will call the national media and it is obvious
to us what they were doing.
>> Michael Grant:
Kathy McKee, thank you for joining us.
>> Kathy McKee:
Thank you.
>> Michael Grant:
International trade and tourism tops on the agenda of Governor
Napolitano and Arizona business leaders on a recent trip to great
Britain. Gail Howard the Governor's recent economic advisor accompanied
the Governor on the trip. Why go to Britain, Gail?
>> Gail Howard:
We went to Britain for a number of reasons. It is a great market
for Arizona, consistently one of our top four or five export markets
and in 2003 Arizona exported $750 million worth of goods to great
Britain and also our largest European source of tourists. In 2003
tourists from Great Britain spent about $40 million in Arizona.
So it is a great place for us for a business market and great
place for tourism market.
>> Michael Grant:
Now, the concept here to get people to fly into Phoenix to go
to the Grand Canyon instead of flying to Los Angeles to go to
the Grand Canyon?
>> Gail Howard:
Or into Las Vegas to go to the Grand Canyon. Yes. That is part
of the example, to get them to fly into Phoenix and to use that
as a base for the whole state including the Grand Canyon.
>> Michael Grant:
are we ever going to get over that problem?
>> Gail Howard:
It is difficult. The Las Vegas convention and visitors bureau
has a huge budget and it is physically close to the Grand Canyon
and use it as a way to get people to stay an extra day and gamble.
That's not our draw here in Arizona. They have to come here because
they love the natural beauty of our state and interested in seeing
things like that instead.
>> Michael Grant:
How do you think the pitch to British Airways to add another flight
each week was received?
>> Gail Howard:
It went extremely well. The Governor had the opportunity to meet
with the chairman of the board of British Airways and fly six
days a week from Phoenix to London Heathrow and adding another
$750 million into the Arizona economy. If we can add that 7th
day, the Wednesday flight, we can add that 7 day it will add another
$100 million into the economy and would be a consistent, send
a consistent message to business travelers and to tourists that
this is a very easy place to get to from the U.K.
>> Michael Grant:
It seems a little strange, three days a week and maybe not to
fly there every day but six out of seven days, Seems a little
strange, why not fly it once a day.
>> Gail Howard:
That's what we are hoping for. They have had a 17% growth in revenue
in the last year. As long as we can continue to have growth numbers
and forward bookings are strong, there's a chance to see the 7th
day by next summer.
>>> Michael Grant:
Genetics research was discussed. How does that figure?
>> Gail Howard:
Well, the research institute located in downtown Phoenix is an
independent, not for profit institute focusing on genetic-based
research and more specifically on taking the research into cures
and diagnostics. The U.K. is definitely the biotechnology center
of Europe. The U.K. government is putting a lot of money into
biotechnology research. They have a special interest in genetics
and it was natural to bring a researcher along on the trip and
have them also to use the Governor to open doors to make connections,
scientist to scientist and do research together and be much more
effect and I have attract some research funding collaboratively
that TGEN couldn't collect on their own.
>> Michael Grant:
Okay, to a more traditional industry-- a mining outfit for Superior
activity?
>> Gail Howard:
Yea, exactly. There's a company, Rio Tinto, it's the largest mining
conglomerate in the world that's the parent company of Resolution
Copper. Resolution Copper found an enormous ore stand up in Superior
near the site of an old mine. It is about 7,000 feet underground.
Some point in the past it would have been inaccessible. With today's
mining technology they are able to go that deep and they are in
the exploratory stage now adding possibly 150 construction jobs
and mining jobs in the little community of Superior in the next
several years. It is an exciting opportunity for investment with
them.
>> Michael Grant: Showing an interest?
>> Gail Howard:
They are extremely interested. As long as exploration pans out
the way indications are now, they will definitely go ahead with
the investment and that's another great example of tapping into
the global economy to be able to get investments here at home.
>> Michael Grant:
Okay. Gail, thank you for joining us.
>> Gail Howard:
Thank you.
>>> Merry Lucero:
Arizona is not seeing widespread flu activity but traveling for
the holidays could mean more potential exposure to the flu. Additional
flu vaccines are coming to Arizona, 220,000 doses and the shots
will go to private health care providers and county health departments.
More on that Wednesday at 7:00 on "Horizon."
>> Michael Grant:
"HORIZON" is off Thanksgiving evening but will return
with a special addition Friday. Each year "HORIZON"
brings you the ASU-Walter Cronkite awards luncheon and this year's
winner was long time CBS anchor Charles Osgood, always a good
speech. That's Friday on Horizon. Thank you for joining us this
Tuesday evening. I'm Michael Grant. Have a good one. Good night.
Back to the top
