Other transcripts

Transcripts

October 1, 2004

Host: Michael Grant
Topics:
· The Journalists Roundtable
In-Studio Guests:
· Chip Scutari, "The Arizona Republic;"
· Le Templar, "East Valley Tribune;"
· Howard Fischer, "Capitol Media Services

>> Michael Grant:
It's Friday, October 1st, 2004. In the headlines this week, President Bush, Senator John Kerry squaring off in the first debate Thursday night as preparations continue for the final debate later this week at Gammage Auditorium.

>> Michael Grant:
Some East Valley lawmakers finding themselves on the opposite side of the Mormon Church over the issue of light rail.

>>> Michael Grant:
And a report shows that the Motor Vehicle Division has problems with information systems that could lead to the release of sensitive personal information. That's next on "Horizon."

>> Michael Grant:
Good evening, I'm Michael Grant and this is the Journalists' Roundtable. Joining me to talk about these and other stories are Chip Scutari of "The Arizona Republic," Le Templar of the "East Valley Tribune," and Howard Fischer of "Capitol Media Services." All eyes, or at least fifty five million or so of them on Miami last night as President Bush and Senator Kerry met at the first of three presidential debates. Chip, you just replayed the discussion we've been having for the past half hour or so about the debate.

>> Chip Scutari:
Well, I think most people if you are a Republican or a Democrat -- Put it many boxing terms, like he trained for a 12 round fight and the fight was -- Senator John Kerry really picked up steam and the Bush campaign wanted the foreign policy to be the first debate because that's his area of expertise. His handling on the war on terror, and from most accounts, even some Republicans said Kerry handled himself well. He was concise. He didn't drone on. Bush stumbled. He had long pregnant pauses. If you are a Kerry supporter you have to be excited about a couple of things. He held his on on foreign policy and it built great anticipation for the second debate next Friday and if John Edwards, the Democratic vice presidential candidate can do well against vice president Cheney, there can be a big buildup to Friday and then the one in Tempe here on October 13th might decide a lot.

>> Howard Fischer:
You point out a very important point. John Kerry, I don't know if it's law training or too many years in the senate would have a tendency to go off with clauses and think about it, even as he was speaking. That little green, yellow and red light system sitting in front of him. Okay, you've got 30 seconds. He understood that and when you've got two minute answers his hand was training very well. He said, now, John, we know you think there are lofts things you want to explain, you can't do it. Keep it simple. As a result, in a lot of ways he gave his most coherent explanations of some of his otherwise conflicting votes before his other actions on Iraq.

>> Michael Grant:
Chip, going to your point about 45 minutes for a 90-minute debate, we were talking beforehand, I think maybe both candidates didn't expect to spend almost the entire debate on Iraq. They finally got to Korea and --

>> Chip Scutari:
At that points I'm saying that really favored Kerry because Bush's message was inconsistent going full steam ahead to Iraq, but treating north Korea differently. I think that's when Kerry started to pick up some points. If you are a Bush supporter, I know some of them telling primarily you that they are worried that he might have peaked too early in his presidential race. We're all political junk kings following the thing for two years, if you are Joe six pack, this presidential race just started last night. So Kerry has got to be encouraged by that fact.

>> Le Templar:
Another thing we talked about earlier, bush missed some openings that probably didn't help him. For example, Iraq versus Korea. Kerry kept hammering away on the weakness of the coalition for Iraq but criticized the coalition with Korea. And there is a mention of that problem from Bush.

>> Howard Fischer:
Kerry did a good job, I don't know whether it's his old debate club stuff of keeping bush a little off base. The nice thing was, the original agreement between the candidates was that there would be no cutaways. You wouldn't see the other candidate while the other one was speaking.

>> Michael Grant:
I guess fox ignored that.

>> Howard Fischer:
Yeah, it's hell no, we're covering it as a news event--

>> Howard Fischer:
Bush has this little nerve in the middle of his forehead, and when he gets peeved, you can see it. Kerry did a good job whereas Kerry understanding there would be cutaways, even when Bush was criticizing, he looked much more calm and collected than the president did.

>> Chip Scutari:
And everyone likes to think of these things as high-minded public policy debates, but we know what killed Gore is when he sighed 18 times. That night everyone thought he had won that debate, and when the tape was reviewed, and you hear him sigh, he looked really con descending. I was impressed by Kerry pep just shook his head. He was calm. He looked composed. That was a huge plus for Kerry.

>> Howard Fischer:
Matter of fact, Kerry had no place to go but up. The polls that channel 8 has done, you know, toss out everything else, the guy was in freefall. So at this point, even his own advisors said, you know, this is not a hail Mary, you know, just go short, punchy, hammer, hammer, hammer, bad policy, wrong policy, got to change without being inconsistent with what he said before.

>> Michael Grant:
I think, Lee, the jury may be out on obviously everyone is focused on the uncommitted and on the swing voter. But you've also goes a tremendous amount of the population that is as polarized as I have seen in maybe any presidential race. And those people, I don't know what percentage of the 50 or 55 million that I mentioned that constitutes, but those people are just simply watching to root for one side or the other.

>> Le Templar:
That's in general true. I think the one person who could have hurt himself more would have been Kerry with his base, but I think he struck the right balance between attacking the president on Iraq, on standing up for troops in Iraq, despite some questions that the president raised there and not saying something that could have driven some people away. Because there was some polls nationally that I had seen that part of what Kerry was flipping was some of his own base was saying they weren't comfortable with him and that I May not show up to vote.

>> Howard Fischer:
This is interesting. Coming back to the channel 8 poll. Bruce Merrill showed that among bush supporters, something like 93% said it doesn't matter what happens to the guy, I'm not moving. Kerry was something like 87%. So we're down to just the undecided. Lets come back to the poll here, among the likely voters, you had maybe 5% undecided, and 11 point margin. If these people truly are cemented, is there anything Kerry can do that will make a difference?

>> Chip Scutari:
But it'll be real interesting to see after the VP debate on Tuesday and the other presidential debate on Friday, if this pool of undecided voters goes. People may say maybe Kerry isn't too much of a Massachusetts liberal. It's interesting to see if that pool of undecided voters actually grows leading up to the final debate.

>> Michael Grant:
Did the people from Tempe pick up any tips for how to run the debate at Gammage better?

>> Chip Scutari:
No college campus event is exactly the same. They were hoping to go down there and mirror what they had at the University of Missouri, but every venue is going to be different. After going to this one and going to the one at St. Louis at the University of Washington down there, they'll see what changes they can make and how they can make it better so by October 13th when the presidential candidates come to Tempe, they should have everything worked out.

>> Chip Scutari:
Unfortunately, though, the Libertarians have brought suit against having the debate in Tempe. I don't think it's going to go.

>> Howard Fischer:
We're assuming, sitting here on the ASU campus that on October 13th, something will be happening here. The Libertarian party, the party nominee, who is on the ballot in most states, including Arizona, said we've got a problem here. He has no problem with the idea that the university will use its resources and maybe some cash and staff time to hold a nonpartisan debate. The problem is the commission on presidential debates says if you don't poll at least 15%, we're not going to include you in the debate, therefore, he can't get in. So now he's saying now this is a partisan debate between Democrats and Republicans, no Libertarians, and he says this violates the gift clause of the constitution because you are giving the state's resources, the state's time and energy to a partisan event. I have a feeling no judge who would like to be reelected in the upcoming retention is going to, two weeks out, say to ASU, yeah, I think you ought to move the debate somewhere else.

>> Michael Grant:
Howie, I would think any judge would look at that and say where have you been for a long time, because bringing that kind of suit this late would also be very disruptive of the process.

>> Le Templar:
There has never been a debate in Arizona before, so this would be tough under the state constitution. Bush only agreed to these debates like two or three weeks ago. Almost too late for them to pull them off. You know, I know it's really crunch timing and they may not get it done, but I don't think they are being totally unreasonable in filing a suit know than at some time earlier when there was technically no commitment to hold the debate here.

>> Michael Grant:
Ralph Nader hopes to win as a write-in candidate, evidently?

>> Le Templar:
That's the only option left to him after the state Democratic party went to court and forced him to withdraw his petitions to be qualified for the ballot. Then he turned around and sued in federal court trying to claim that the -- that his rights were violated as a candidate. That got tossed out. He filed the paperwork so he can run as a write-in. Nobody has challenged that so far. Write-ins pretty much don't have a chance, but what he has to do in order to maintain his effort and he needs to try to get on as many states as he can.

>> Chip Scutari:
Maybe they can have Nader debate the Libertarian outside while the other debate is going on.

>>> Michael Grant:
Several East Valley lawmakers find themselves at odds with the Mormon church over the issue of light rail. While the lawmakers oppose it, the church would like to see it expanded into downtown Mesa. Lee, why is the church supporting the trolly?

>> Le Templar:
A week ago Governor Napolitano went up to Salt Lake City to meet with church leadership. I went on that trip and attended all of the meetings except for the one she had with the spiritual leader, the prophet. And another one of the meetings with two of the three members of what's called the presiding bishoprick which are administrators of the church, they had an informal discussion about the need to revitalize downtown Mesa, which is where the Arizona Mormon temple is located. Part of that discussion, the church leaders said, they believe public transportation is a necessary component of revitalizing downtown Mesa. They know there is at least a plan in the works. It's not very far along, but it's a proposal to make that light rail, extend the existing line that's supposed to go from Phoenix through Tempe to the edge of Mesa, extend that downtown. They said if you are going to do that, please bring it to the temple, because we think that would be a good use for us. They are real happy with light rail in Salt Lake City where the headquarters is located.

>> Michael Grant:
The rift with lawmakers --

>> Le Templar:
Most East Valley lawmakers are Mormon has been opposing it. They are saying waste of taxpayer money. They are surprised that anybody in their church is discussing this possibility. The sense is the church said -- remember this was informal discussions. We weren't taking a stand on light rail, but they continue to say, if you build it, bring it by the temple.

>> Michael Grant:
Don't leave it at Dobson, take it all the way to what, at least -- a little further east from Country Club I guess?

>> Le Templar:
Right. Particularly what's troubling to -- the Mormon church made an effort to stay out of political issues unless it is issues relating to abortion, alcohol use or gambling, and everybody would agree that this is more of a traditional political issue that the church tries to stay out of when it comes to funding light rail.

>> Michael Grant:
The no on 400 forces coming out with some interesting campaign contribution figures.

>> Howard Fischer:
It's a no brainer, but they went and did what we can all do. State law requires if you contribute to an effort, get a public report on it. They went and pulled the yes on 400 campaign and found out that 80 plus percent of the money that has gone insofar has come from companies that will benefit if they build light rail.

>> Michael Grant:
Directly.

>> Howard Fischer:
Companies like Sundt the, the companies building the tracks, the companies building the garages, the companies doing the construction and the right of way. Again, this is never a surprise.

>> Michael Grant:
I was modestly surprised, I guess, by 82%, though. The concept certainly didn't catch me off guard.

>> Howard Fischer:
You're right. The percentage is high, but I think part of what happened is they provide the seed money. You are also going to find as we go on, companies even like Sundt, they do road construction. You know, Lord knows that we need more concrete and more asphalt. Of course its self interest. Is there a public policy issue? I don't know. On the other side, the big corporations that's emerged is Shamrock Dairies.

>> Michael Grant:
Buying a little radio time?

>> Howard Fischer:
That's interesting, because I haven't had a chance to talk to the shamrock folks, but I'm not sure whether it's a philosophical thing or they really want more money for freeways so their trucks can get to the supermarket faster?

>> Chip Scutari:
Would you say has the no on 400 campaign been more effective than supporters thought it would be?

>> Howard Fischer:
I think it's aggressive. One of the mailings had a picture of a cowboy with the caption of they used to call it highway robbery. They got some money. I mean, certainly, you know, Thompson who is funding this and along with shamrock has taken the time to say, okay, we're going to have to target it. Of course, the other fun part is, both the pro side and the anti-side, the idea let's protect the freeways. Now, of course, they want to do it in a different way.

>> Le Templar:
Key issue there is that as proponents look back at the Phoenix election when the people opposing light rail were very vocal, but they didn't have any money, they didn't have a real campaign to run. They relied on regular media to get their message out. They have been clearly cut off guard by funds that have been available to run a more effective anti-campaign at this time.

>> Michael Grant:
I also -- I think it's consistent, I think the no on 400 forces have been more effective in using free media. I think they've been picking their targets pretty well and generating free -- in addition to having --

>> Le Templar:
Well, I think -- because they can nail in on one issue, that's the light rail issue, and they can ignore everything else in the package, because all they have to do is convince people to vote no on it, where the other side has to convince people to vote yes, continue the tax and we have all of these wonderful benefits. So in order to sway people, they have to not only defeat the no on light rail argument, but explain all of these other things that you are going to get out of this.

>> Howard Fischer:
There is a couple of other things the no folks have working for them. When I was in PR, I did work on ballot measures. If you can confuse the issue, people will vote no. While the yes side saying there is no new tax, the yes side points out yes, if you vote no on this, you'll get back that half cent sales tax that you are paying on every item that you can. That's very important.

>> Michael Grant:
Let me get this straight. Senator John McCain has agreed to debate Stu Starky three times?

>> Chip Scutari:
I think Howie might have a higher name than Stu Starky. This is a great David versus Goliath statement. It's a wonderful contrast between Senator MCCain who stayed at Bush's Crawford ranch and is one of the most powerful political figures in the country versus this guy who doesn't have a chance. But he's going for if that there will be three debates, the first in Tucson October 15th on public television down in Tucson. It's a great -- it will be fun to cover.

>> Michael Grant:
Why did McCain agree to it? I'm happy that he did, but I don't --

>> Chip Scutari:
I think McCain has always said throughout his career, he's never turned down a challenge to debate. He will debate every one of his opponents. Ed Granger last time. He debated George Bush. The only thing is, I think it's good for state and he'll go around the state. He knows Stu Starky has a very low chance to win. This is the third thing. If McCain wants to run in 2008, he wants people to know hey, I'm still one of you, getting around the state, reintroducing himself around the state.

>> Howard Fischer:
I think to go along with one of your points, I think this is great sport. He has nothing to lose. I mean, Stu can pick up some points, but take a look at the numbers that come out constantly on McCain's positive. This isn't like Jon Kyl where people didn't know who he was or aren't sure what they think of the guy. Democrats love John McCain. Republicans love John McCain. Libertarians love John McCain. He's got nothing to lose. This could be great fun going around the state and doing it without having anything to lose. What a wonderful way to do this.

>> Le Templar:
Only consistent opposition to John McCain is the most conservative wing of the con sieve conservative party. They won't be voting for Stu Starky.

>> Michael Grant:
We haven't talked about corporate politics and money for three minutes. The Arizona Court of Appeals is saying no corporate money for the Democratic party?

>> Howard Fischer:
Well, law and the constitution has always been very clear. You cannot use corporate money or labor money to quote, unquote, influence an election. That's never been a question. The last 20-some years, however, the Democratic party is taking corporate money to use for things like rent at the party headquarters to, do some return postage things like get out the vote card. It came to a head in 1998 when somebody registered a complaint with the Attorney General's Office. Now, remember the attorney general at the time was Janet Napolitano who was in fact at the party official when this all started. So she farmed it out to a county attorney. He agreed there was something fishy and illegal. The party sued. What happened this week is the state Court of Appeals rejected the party's contention that there is an exception to this rule. The party argued, look, if you are getting to -- if you are giving to the party, you are not trying to influence elections. What Judge Daniel Brock has said, excuse me, what exactly is the purpose of the party. The purpose of the party is to, duh, elect Democrats. If you are giving money to the party for this, which might free up other money, you are in fact trying to influence election and therefore you can't do it.

>> Michael Grant:
Likely to go up to the Arizona Supreme Court?

>> Howard Fischer:
I think it will because it was a 2-1 decision and partly because this case, as I mentioned has been dragging on for six years. The Democrats have nothing to lose. The other issue is, of course, if this ruling stands, not only can't they take the money in the future, but they've got to refund $100,000 that they took in '98.

>> Michael Grant:
So a couple of coins associated with it.

>>> Michael Grant:
According to the Auditor General's office, Arizona's Motor Vehicle Division has problems when it comes to protecting the security of personal information. Well, it's got a lot of problems, Howie, but in this specific area, what problems have they encountered?

>> Howard Fischer:
I sense as somebody who has been at MVD recently, stood in line and got a bad picture.

>> Michael Grant:
It was an authentic driver's license.

>> Howard Fischer:
Well, for $600, I can get you one with a good picture. The MVD is going through a series of audits. They came out with two of them. The one you referred to deals with their information security. MVD obviously has everyone's driver's license numbers, your home address, you know, other personal information, your Social Security numbers. What the auditor found out is that there are thousands of people within MVD and outside contacts with access to this information. Okay, that's a problem in and of itself, maybe, particularly since they found some people who no longer working for state getting access or at least had sign-on. They also found that many of these people who were simply clerks had the authority under the various protocols to actually change data. Now they've got a real problem here, because it means any MVD employee with this additional authority can go ahead, delete files, change files, do anything they want. That, of course, that harkens --

>> Michael Grant:
One concern that comes to mind, identity theft and those kinds of issues, marketing?

>> Howard Fischer:
Well, certainly that becomes an issue. Certainly, the issue again, we have the indictments a week ago of selling fake driver's licenses as well. If you can reprogram the machine to do what you want it to do that makes that kind of fraud easier also.

>> Michael Grant:
And access to money issues also raised by the auditor general?

>> Howard Fischer:
Yes, the state gets in somewhere around the neighborhood of I think it's $15 million or something every day.

>> Michael Grant:
Could you sharpen that number?

>> Michael Grant:
15.7 million?

>> Howard Fischer:
I'm sorry, 15.7 a month. You've got these checks and money orders that come in. They always have had a backlog at MVD. These checks and money orders are just laying around, not only unendorsed which means somebody could take one of them and suddenly their name is MV David and all of a second they've got a check to MVD and they've redone it. But the fact that everyone has access, including the janitors. They said that's not a way to handle it, even if it's not hard cash, if you lose a money order, the state is out the money.

>> Michael Grant:
Homeland Security director Tom ridge in town this week talking about the military and the border.

>> Le Templar:
He stopped here in Phoenix for a couple of different events, and he was asked what are we going to do to secure the border, and his argument was that the Bush Administration has done a lot to improve security adding more than a thousand border patrol agents, investing in surveillance technology, and the number of apprehensions have risen, the second highest in the last fiscal year, he doesn't see a need in the long run to send the military which has been a very hot button issue when it comes to immigration policy. And so, apparently that's not a consideration and with so many troops out of the country anyway, it seems like it would be hard to really man that.

>> Michael Grant:
He has been here two or three times this year, hasn't he?

>> Le Templar:
It's funny. We're seeing a lot of cabinet secretaries roll through the state, even though they aren't on political ventures and there doesn't seem to be any election going on.

>> Howard Fischer:
We have the U.S. commerce secretary in town today. I called the press yesterday and said are they coming on a political visit no, why are they coming here? To explain the good things that the Bush Administration is coming to an economy.

>> Michael Grant:
I think we have to touch on that Maricopa County adult entertainment. We've only got about 30 seconds.

>> Howard Fischer:
Okay, very briefly, county passed a law dealing with what happens at these adult studios, dancing, et cetera. One of the provisions says you cannot engage in quote, unquote, simulated sexual activity. The Court of Appeals said, well, you didn't define it. Is that Elvis gyrating? One of the judges said this is a horrible situation. This is adult dancing. You are going to take the erotic out of erotic dances if you say you can't gyrate rate or do anything that's interpreted as simulated sexual activity.

>> Chip Scutari:
Did you do any research for the story?

>> Howard Fischer:
I want you to know we ran up the expense account at "Capitol Media Services."

>> Michael Grant:
All right, guys, thanks. We're out of time. If you would like to see a transcript of tonight's program, including those graphics on that last story, please visit our web site at www.kaet.asu.edu. When you get there, click on the word "Horizon." That's going to lead to transcripts, links and information on upcoming shows.

>> Reporter Larry Lemmons:
The race for Maricopa County Attorney is in full swing. The candidates will discuss the issues. A conversation with "Washington Post" columnist E.J. Deon about religion and the presidential election and a critique of the presidential debate. Monday night at 7:00 on "Horizon."

>> Michael Grant:
Incidentally, Tuesday, "Horizon" will take a break as Channel 8 brings you the vice-presidential debate. Thank you very much for joining us on this Friday evening. I hope you have an incredibly fine weekend. I'm Michael Grant. Good night.

Back to the top