Other transcripts

Transcripts

October 8, 2004

Host: Michael Grant
Topics:
· The Journalist Roundtable
In-Studio Guests:
· Bart Graves, KFYI Radio;
· Paul Davenport, Associated Press;
· Phil Riske, Arizona Capitol Times

>> Michael Grant:
It's Friday, October 8, 2004. in the headlines this week, Arizona State University is preparing to host the final Presidential Debate next Wednesday at Gammage Auditorium. the issue of light rail continues to be a focal point as both sides battle over Proposition 400. And the U.S. Supreme Court announced it will not hear a case involving a Mesa firefighter over the issue of mandatory drug testing. that's next on "Horizon." good evening. I'm Michael Grant and this is the Journalists Roundtable. Joining me to talk about these and other stories are Bart Graves of KFYI Radio; Paul Davenport of the Associated Press; and Phil Riske of Arizona Capitol Times. Earlier tonight President Bush, Senator Kerry wrapping up their second debate in St. Louis. Now the focus, of course, turning to Arizona as Gammage auditorium prepares to host the final debate between the two next Wednesday. Bart, big doings. What is happening to get ready?

>> Bart Graves:
Well, this part of Tempe, we're sitting right now, is totally changing by the hour. Today they put up the fence. Security for this debate is going to be much like covering the Republican and democratic convention for those of us that went this summer. It's radically post 9/11 than it used to be. For instance, those of us local journalists will be invited to take a shuttle from Phoenix municipal stadium into Tempe the day of the debate because no one is allowed in or out unless they're VIPs or network brass.

>> Michael Grant:
When you use the term invited, is the equivalent of volunteer in the military?

>> Bart Graves:
Very much. Very much. We were given a tour of the -- the governor came down and toured the facility personally. There are four different platforms set up inside Grady Gammage for the networks. Both the cable networks and the regular networks. Then there's a 38,000 square foot Mead media tent slash spin alley where hundreds, I think over 500, probably 800, journalists from around the world, country, will be set up there, the radio stations, television, print, plus the campaigns with their various spin doctors, VIPs spin doctors, well-known or even local, that will meet with reporters following the debate to give their spin on things.

>> Michael Grant:
In fact, I understand that the governor said she designed spin alley and she specifically wanted it to be an alley?

>> Bart Graves:
Yeah, she wanted to have enough room for obviously -- thinking of the Kerry Edwards campaign of which she is an active part of, to have enough room for all the journalists and all the reporter and TV people are going to have access to whatever high campaign official be it James carville, Colonel Roe, whoever it is, to have enough as much info as they can about how their candidate did immediately on the air. It's very roomy. A huge refreshment area. It's a reporter's dream.

>> Michael Grant:
They have, Paul, a live broadcast of it scheduled for Wells Fargo arena, but we really haven't heard too much about how many people are expected to show up, sit down and watch the debate in Wells Fargo arena.

>> Paul Davenport:
That's mainly designed for the students. People who work and live on this campus are going to be inconvenienced an awful lot with the security arrangements and logistical traffic restrictions and things like that. This is something offered for them as part of the university community. I don't think a lot of folks off campus are going to go to the university to put up with that kind of traffic problem just to watch it in a big setting. They're more likely to stay at home or get together with friends.

>> Michael Grant:
The number I've heard is expected two to three,000 journalists?

>> Paul Davenport:
Yeah, but it would be even more if we had had the originally scheduled foreign topic, because then we would have more presence from the world press.

>> Michael Grant:
The --

>> Phil Riske:
The governor says this is great exposure for Arizona and it means millions of dollars, but, Bart, I'm wondering, besides the amount of liquor all these 800 to a thousand reporters are going to buy, what is the other economic and image benefit since the stations are not going to take us on a visual tour of the state?

>> Bart Graves:
I think the fact appear lot of them will be arriving on Saturday for this event, which is Wednesday, gives them almost a week to be here to check in the hotels and put more money in the coffers of Tempe, Scottsdale, Phoenix, wherever they're staying, and there's going to be so many of them that I think a lot of the cities are going to get equal share of the business. So that's a pretty good running start in terms of putting money in the economy. This particular debate will focus on economic issue, domestic issues, it will be the third and final. It is pivotal, what the governor is saying, it puts Arizona in the international spotlight, absolutely, puts must not knee our coffer, absolutely, but more importantly for those of us that really watch this, this is a very historic moment in time that Phoenix will be finally a part of, and that's kind of interesting.

>> Paul Davenport:
Bart, how much do you think they'll stick on domestic issues? That's what the assigned topic is. And on the economy per se? That's not assigned but it's domestic per se. Do you think they're going to lapse into some of the related -- domestic things, homeland security, that have the foreign intonations as well?

>> Bart Graves:
Well, go back to the governor, when she toured this, we specifically asked her what does John Kerry need to do to win this crucial third and final debate? She says, well, in a round about way, you're going to see a lot of issues discussed that are important to Arizona, I.E., border security, homeland security, without saying illegal immigration, prop 200, but all those kind of issues that Arizonans are worried about and the economy, gas prices, all that kind of stuff. I can't help but think that John Kerry is going to be loaded for bear by this governor and other Arizona advisors to bring up those issues and to hit George Bush with them.

>> Michael Grant:
Well, in fact, Phil, I mean, it's fairly easy to obviously get to almost any subject you want vis-a-vis the economy. For example, it has been suggested that either the president or John Kerry, if they wanted to, could point out the economic ramifications of 9/11 and then say, because of that, we need to pay more attention to the war in Iraq, or fill in this particular blank.

>> Phil Riske:
I think that if Kerry or the president were to try to keep the subject on domestic issues, they could bring up immigration, and who knows, with prompting, maybe they'll bring up prop 200. Which everybody says is a federal issue, but we've got it on our state ballot. So it's a state issue, it's a domestic issue. I think a couple of interesting things about it, the polls are showing it far ahead with the likely voters, and down in district 25, where senator ARSBERGER is running for reelection, knowing the public sentiment is for this proposition, and yet she is a Democrat, is against it, she has decided to take no official position in her campaign on that proposition, which I found interesting.

>> Michael Grant:
Does that play?

>> Phil Riske:
I don't know if it's playing or not. Her opponent, LES Thompson, on the other hand, circulated petitions, says it is very much an issue down there, and he expects it to pass, he expects it to be ruled unconstitutional, which I think most people agree they're going to line up at the courthouse to sue on this thing. But I guess the question is, with all the groups, associations that have come out against prop 200, just about everybody it seems like, why is it still supported so heavily among the registered voters? I don't know if it's just frustration and they're saying, government, whichever government, do something about this, or if they're -- you know, why the dichotomy there?

>> Michael Grant:
Well, Arizona republic comes out with some new poll numbers, indicates George Bush has a lead of about 10 points.

>> Bart Graves:
He had a much larger lead coming out of the Republican national convention with 16, so that's cut down a bit. And the Democrats are happy about that. Their spin on this is that the -- this shows there's kind of wavering support for the president. But more importantly it shows undecided voters, which we have long been led to believe is a small number is actually a larger number in Arizona than we think. Democrats have continued to say that Arizona is still a swing state. Republicans say, no, that ship sailed a long time ago. But if you look at this poll and some of the people they've interviewed and questions they asked, it shows people are still going back and forth on who they're going to finally vote for, and I've always thought that this election very much parallels the 1980 Reagan-Carter election where a lot of people, the polls went back and forth, it was very close and a lot of people made up their minds the final weekend before the election.

>> Michael Grant:
Obviously made them up in a tidal wave if I recall correctly.

>> Paul Davenport:
That's a testament to the importance of these debates in the closing months.

>> Michael Grant:
Yeah, I think these debates have taken on a level of importance that they normally do not occupy at this time of the year, and certainly the viewership numbers on the debates have indicated that.

>> Phil Riske:
The governor mentioned that in her press conference this week that because of the high viewership of the debates she predicted there would be a record turnout this year.

>> Michael Grant:
Voter registration numbers, voter registration deadline closed this week. What have we got?

>> Paul Davenport:
We don't have the latest figures. Those won't be known until next with week and there's apparently going to be a lot of new registrants to count up. Latest figures is the state has about 400,000 more registered voters than the last election. That's a significant bump. Everything you hear out there, as far as both parties, interest groups, they have been out registering people like crazy. I think we're going to see a much bigger turnout.

>> Michael Grant:
Certainly if it parallels -- if I recall correctly, there was a significant surge in July before the primary. So if it parallels that pattern from just a couple, three months ago that should be the case.

>> Paul Davenport:
It's interesting seeing all the volunteers of various groups come into this state from California and other places where they're not even thought of ever as a battleground, so they can get people to register to vote.

>> Phil Riske:
Do you think it's the presidential race more than anything that's spiking the registration?

>> Paul Davenport:
I think so. I don't think P.A.N. has caught public attention that much. I don't think it's motivated people to go beyond the presidential race.

>> Michael Grant:
My hunch is the Arpaio W. Steven Martin race, but it's just a hunch.

>> Bart Graves:
We all predicted that in the spring but it hasn't worked.

>> Michael Grant:
Proposition 400, interesting twist on the transportation thing this week. Dave Thompson says he's going to run ballot initiatives next year in Phoenix and Tempe trying to flip the first leg of this puppy.

>> Bart Graves:
A very successful businessman, formed this committee to oppose prop 400. He says he will launch -- as a matter of fact, I think he will launch the process now to start an initiative campaign in Phoenix, hopefully if they gather enough signatures on -- for his deal, to put that on the ballot in the spring to have Phoenix voters once again decide whether they really want to pay for this light rail. The boondoggle he says it's going to be and perhaps throw it out, take it off the plate. Then he believes Tempe voters were never really given a chance to decide the issue, so under their laws he he will try to get on it their ballot in the spring of 2005 to also take light rail off the table.

>> Michael Grant:
Some serious legal issues involved in that. I mean, obviously both cities have moved considerably down the road, buying equipment, planning to buy equipment, moving some utilities, construction, those kinds of things. So even if they were to succeed or maybe in an attempt to keep them off the ballot, obviously both of those cities are going to say, hey, this is too late.

>> Bart Graves:
That came up, and he was saying, when people actually see how much this is going to cost, how much disruption there is going to be in traffic for years to come, they'll be thrilled that we stopped it now. That's his response.

>> Phil Riske:
I think you'll remember back in January down at the legislature this whole light rail issue started back then, and it was the first major legislation that the legislature took up this year. It was very divisive and remains so today. It got so bad at one point where -- I mean, there were floor speeches on the Senate. Senator Jarrett said she had never seen anything so divisive and never seen so many threats thrown around at various senators from lobbyists. Senator Cheuvront got up at one time and pretty much threatened those that were against light rail pretty much saying, you can be replaced. At one time there was even a discussion that they were going to have skip Rimsza move into Dean Martin's district and try to knock him off if he didn't get the bill out of committee.

>> Michael Grant:
It has been a long and bitter battle. Obviously starting well before even January. Paul, what did the judge rule this week about mainstream Arizona and the matching issue that was before the Clean Elections Commission?

>> Paul Davenport:
Mainstream Arizona is a newly formed group that's this year trying to promote candidacies of moderate candidates, mostly Republicans but apparently they had in mind to back some Democrats as well. They suffered a major setback when the Clean Elections Commission decided that these mailings they were doing promoting candidates, these incumbents, without explicitly saying vote for them, would trigger matching funds for the opponents, and there is an outpouring of cash to the opponents, a lot of those promoted canned incumbents lost. They challenged the commission in court and lost. They haven't decided whether to appeal but that set them back and put on hold what could have been a major influence in this general election campaign. It doesn't look like we're going to see in that any timely fashion.

>> Michael Grant:
And Grant Woods --

>> Phil Riske:
Grant Woods with Jack Jewitt was one of the co-founders. He wasn't having a very good year. He remarked before this happened, before the Clean Elections Commission made its ruling, that they, because they lost so badly in the primary, they were going to be even more involved in the general, even supporting Democrat candidates as Paul said. The question now is, are they frozen out because of the ruling.

>> Paul Davenport:
It boiled down to legal issues, what can you say in support of a candidate without it having count against you as being and independent expenditure on behalf of the candidate an the judge said, hey, the timing, content, that decides it.

>> Phil Riske:
The whole 527 thing is just got to be resolved somehow.

>> Michael Grant:
Interestingly enough, some of the messages were fairly tepid and it really is interesting that it triggered money for the other side.

>> Paul Davenport:
The group said they had it thoroughly scrubbed by lawyers and went through it several times to take out things -- or -- even take out references that would be construed as vote for it. Just said support somebody.

>> Michael Grant:
The Brill owe pads were a little soft that time on that scrubbing. Arizona Supreme Court finally got around to articulating its reasons for why it kicked the -- I hesitate to say the repeal of clean elections but the clean elections issue off the ballot.

>> Paul Davenport:
They said it violated a constitutional provision that they are deciding at this point to call the separate amendment rule. They went out of their way to say it's a different constitutional provision that doesn't let you cram more than one constitutional amendment into an amendment. You have to have two or three, whatever the case may be. It's different from the constitutional provision that affects legislation like the clean elections law itself.

>> Michael Grant:
What were the two issues here? What was the court saying?

>> Paul Davenport:
The court was saying you have to look at different parts ant and effects. It would ban public funding of candidates, yet it would still have the commission -- the commission would do other duties. Voter education, regulate campaign finance and yet take away the funding for them and make them go to the legislature for dollars.

>> Michael Grant:
So what the Supreme Court is effectively saying because it had those two somewhat separate but interrelated subjects, you'd have to go two separate constitutional amendment?

>> Paul Davenport:
Yeah, I think they said there were three parts but maybe two would have worked.

>> Michael Grant:
Perhaps four, but you had to go with more than one, I guess. Attorney General's office -- this is kind of interesting story. A.G.'s office looking into the Steve he will man Maricopa County contributions on the Scottsdale Mayor race.

>> Bart Graves:
Every time I look at the paper there is some goofiness having to do with politics and the council and God knows what. Cow you could make a lot of money covering that full time. Basically this latest thing is this last mayoral election, which is nonpartisan, developer Steve Elman, who has been kind of in and out of love with the City of Scottsdale over the former Los Arcos development in terms of being the primary developer, he is being accused along with the Maricopa County Republican party and chairman Tom Liddy of funneling money, lots of money, 25 grand, that Elman wrote out a check for to try to defeat David or take nah his race against Mary manross.

>> Michael Grant:
Ortega seeming to be the biggest critic --

>> Bart Graves:
Of the big box project, exactly. Once again, this is a nonpartisan race. Or take saw a Democrat. Didn't matter. But it begs the question, parties should not be funneling money into defeating candidates and especially over some questionable practices of favoritism on the council.

>> Michael Grant:
Just bad form or is there actually a law violated with this?

>> Bart Graves:
I think it's bad form. I mean, if we go back to the Phoenix Gordon-Randy Pullen election, the Republican party was saying Randy Pullen was a good guy and he was making partisan attacks against Phil Gordon. But the party backed Pullen and they kept their distance and watched from the sideline. Here is an example where they got involved and I think the A.G. may not be real happy about that.

>> Paul Davenport:
The Elman camp story is we donated to the party. What they did with the money is our call. Don't look to us for how they spent it.

>> Michael Grant:
This week the United States Supreme Court said it wouldn't hear a Mesa case that involved mandatory drug testing for a firefighter. Paul, seems you were just on court beat this week.

>> Paul Davenport:
There was some significant action in some of the top courts around the state. And in the country.

>> Michael Grant:
What does the court's refusal mean for the City of Mesa if anything.

>> Paul Davenport:
It means it does not get to do the random drug testing it wanted to do of Mesa firefighters. A firefighter challenged that as soon as it was put on the books. So it never took effect. They lost -- the city lost the case at the state Supreme Court level. They said it was an intrusion into federal privacy rights. And the city appealed that to the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court said, no, we're not going to take it. Interestingly enough, City of Phoenix already has a program like this, but a key difference is that their department has a history of some drug use in firefighters. There was a scandal back in the early '80s but apparently there's been some cases since then. The Arizona ruling had said, if there's a reason to do it, you can do it. A history. But Mesa didn't have that kind of background.

>> Michael Grant:
And the City of Mesa, actually, when this policy was challenged, had never placed the policy into effect; they were awaiting the court outcome?

>> Paul Davenport:
That's right. That's right.

>> Michael Grant:
Bart, you know, if it's the fall, then we must have a flu vaccine problem, I guess.

>> Bart Graves:
Yes. Well this, year's problem is the fact that the British company that makes this vaccine was decertified by the British government, they pulled their license, essentially because the government believed there's problems with this vaccine. That means we're going another shortage situation. In this country. And in Maricopa County and in Arizona, the governor is concerned. She called a news conference and said that, first of all, she got our attention by saying she canceled the vaccination program for state workers. They're going to have to get to the back of line. She is encouraging those that are healthy to kind of put off their vaccination to allow those that are vulnerable that are not as healthy and children and especially at-risk kids from poor families to have -- step up to the front of the line.

>> Michael Grant:
It's good advice, if you're not -- if we have a shortage and you're not a member of the high-risk group, then don't take some vaccine that might otherwise be spent elsewhere, but obviously about all the governor can do on the issue is kind of use the bully pulpit and encourage people to do. You can't police it very much.

>> Phil Riske
: The only vaccine that the state actually purchases is for a program that -- to immunize high risk poor children, and anticipating -- the problems they had last year, they went ahead and purchased that vaccine ahead of time this year and have plenty of doses again to take of 139,000 high-risk poor children. So they will get the shots.

>> Michael Grant:
Speaking of medical gear, the Maricopa County taking up the abortion restriction for the new healthcare district, the Maricopa County Hospital healthcare district?

>> Bart Graves:
Voters agreed to create this district. They approved on it a ballot measure, and the district, the board members in that district will be elected November 2nd. So they've not taken office. So basically the Maricopa County medical center and all county health clinics are under this board's domain. County supervisor said, well, that's fine and good but we're still in charge. You guys haven't been elected here so we've had a long standing policy of not allowing abortions at all unless to save the mother so we're going to put that into the deed restriction as part of the restriction. You don't have any say. This is the way it's going to be. We're just going to continue that particular policy. The problem that was pointed out in this very long board of supervisors hearing this week was that AHCCCS, which will be a part of in this new program, this board will have supervisory power over, AHCCCS rules allow abortions in the case of rape and incest. Along with saving the life of the mother. Which the county wasn't too happy about. They saw that as broadening their policy and they voted 4 to 1 to keep it the way it is.

>> Michael Grant:
So they did not add -- or as otherwise required by law provision?

>> No.

>> Michael Grant:
At the end but want to touch on the drought task force. Finalized their recommendations?

>> Paul Davenport:
That's right. They finalized it this week, and it's going to the governor. She said she plans a major water policy speech on November 1st. This is the governor earlier this year who said Arizona needs to develop a culture of conservation. So it will be interesting to see if she even tightens that policy up. Those proposed policy changes up even more to emphasize conservation.

>> Michael Grant:
One of the aspects being if you lock in an emergency, then at least government agencies would have to restrict water usage?

>> Paul Davenport:
Yeah, it has an escalating level of conservation mandates for state agencies a well as an edict to local governments you have to do your own plans that.

>> Phil Riske:
Sidebar to that, representative O'Halloran is kind of house's water guy wants the Corporation Commission to get involved in drought management and said he will have a bill for that next year.

>> Michael Grant:
Panelists, out of time. Thank you very much. If you would like to see a transcript of tonight's program, please visit the website at www.azpbs.org. When you get there, click on the word "Horizon." That's going to lead you to transcripts, links and information on upcoming shows.

>> Announcers:
Preparations are ongoing as the day nears when attention will turn to Arizona State University for the third and final Presidential debate. Also this event will be the most recent of several meetings over the years between Presidential candidates. A look at the significance and impact of debates Monday night at 7:00 on Channel 8's "Horizon."

>> Michael Grant:
Tuesday on "Horizon," we'll talk with the moderator of the Tempe debate, CBS' Bob Scheiffer. Thanks very much for joining us on a Friday evening. Have a great one. Good night.

Back to the top