CALIFORNIA RECALL ELECTION / CBA RECALL DEBATE
FTG FOR COVERAGE OF THE RECALL ELECTION OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR GRAY DAVIS
CALIFORNIA BROADCASTERS ASSOCIATION'S PRESENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL RECALL CANDIDATES DEBATE
CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATES PARTICIPATE IN DEBATE HELD AT
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
24CA Debate
18:01:25 wide pull of panel
Stan Statham, Moderator
18:01:47 the deb you're going to see tonight is designed to see these candidates in verbal combat, create a debate on debates
18:02:16 if you tuned in to see scriped debates, you're seeing the wrong program
18:02:49 side angle of panel
18:03:12 we don't do debates for candidates, we do debates for you
18:03:31 what do you think of this recall?
AS
18:03:38 i think that is is a great idea, and i thank god every day for hiram johnson, create recall bec of special interests which is the case today, we are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore, it is terrific that the peoples' will is being acted out
TM
18:04:20 the recall is there so we can correct the state, more than half of the people are right ore than half of the time, it must be corrected we cannot afford to go down this road another three years...in the history of ca
PC
18:04:56 this recall exists because we have a crisis in ca, instead of a surplus, disastrous deficit, polls taken davis down to 22 percent, we do have a cr, this election is the worst election we've ever had and the best election we've ever had, worst runoff system
AH
18:05:44 i'm troubled by the fact that issa would pay 2 million, but nevertheless there's an unprecended opportunity to elect an indep, the two party system is damaged
CB
18:06:13 i think the recall is a terrible idea, bad for democracy, bad for our state, i think that's a bad way of doing politics, i agree with my colleagues that there's some good, but to do it in this way, even with johnson, in his address said is wasn't the panacea of government, we have to deal with the buget crisis but this could be bad for ca
Q1 (top priority for california?)
AS
18:07:21 i think our top priority shoudl be to t7urn the econ around, worst econ atmosphere and what we see is businesses, jobs leaving the state, highest workers' comp, energy, money management, credit rating, we have to stop and reverse that
AH
18:08:09 everhthing else you said si simply untrue, this state right now, you have gloom and doom, rep idea that if you do everything businesses want, ended up with enron, global crossig,i would really like you to tell people the truth
TM
18:08:58 the stats were'seeing directly contradict what you're saying, we've had the first net migration, when families looking for another place to raise their kids, look at our state and see the future out in the middle of AZ and NV deserts
18:09:51 why is anybody surprised we're leaving
PC
18:09:58 tax rates gone from 9.6 to 5.3, in fact ut, wy az, have higher taxes than ca, i want arnold and tom, people are not leaving ca they're pouring into ca, high unemployement, the corps are making more money but not the people, people are paying higher taxes, i want riches people to pay the same taxes you're paying
CB
18:11:05 during the dot com boom we were doing 7100 new startups in ca, today we're avg 7700, the workers are more productive than fl and tx combined.
18:11:28 we have a great econ, but we do have to fix worker's comp, there's no incentive for a good and bad workplace they get the same amount
TM
18:12:21 worker's comp, reduces direct state and local costs
18:12:31 there is not two parties
****18:12:36 ALL TALKING ON EACH OTHER, trying to put wool over the people's eyes
AH
18:12:58 these are the two parties that brought us the workers comp system, you voted for it, you can't just say we're doing something different, that has been the pattern, there has to be accountability cruz
CB
18:13:30 we tried to fix the wc issue they were clearly price gouging, drove the small guys down and rates started going up again, solid work safety su
AS
18:14:00 that was total pre election bogus and you know that, it was trickery, let me just tell you that the next year, the costs are going to go up, we are not competitive in wc, tremendous graud, i will creat real wc and cut the costs in half.
TM
18:15:16 we know people that are leaving ca
AS
18:15:30 IT'S ridic for cruz and ariann to say everything's fine, we just found out today tht th eoperating deficit 10 billion
18:15:54 remember one thinng in ca we have the three strike,it's that simple (applause)
QUESTION 2 (Balancing the state of ca)
TM
18:17:19 we're still taking more revenue than inflation and populations, but we/ve had a 38 percent increase in that time, w'ere paying through the nose,
PC
18:18:41 the wealthiest people pay 7.2 percent, if we had those people incomes rose, latinos fell, if we taxed at the same rate you pay we would, tome wants to cut, i want to put more money into education, how we can have a 19 billion surplus, develop affordable housing, all they want to do is cut, rip to the right and the others i don't know what they do, i want a five year audit 30 billsurplus into 38 billion
...i want to reverse that
AH
18:20:15 the first thing i would do is close corporate tax loopholes, we are losing about 2 billion in revenue, if we just change that that woud be 2 billion, offshore tax shelters would be a other 2 bill, reps do not believe applies to businesses, right now we have something like that in the leg, and it would pass,
AS
18:21:31 you have the biggest loophole, i could jump through it, i cannot believe you.
AH
18:21:48 we got advance notice that you were going to say that
CB
18:23:06 we spent more than was coming in, there's no rocket science to this, we spent more than we had, but what i decided to do was face this realistically, not tell half truths, we've done all the easy things and now it's time to do tough tings, "tough love ca", raise cig taxes, i do that but in return we close the gap, fully fund edu, put 23k comm college students, for all those vehicles under 20k, she called it raising revenues, we get something good for
18:24:17 AH gouth love for everybody but indian gaming tribes...big campaign contributors
TM
18:24:45 those taxes broke the back of , we had been collecting
CB
18:25:00 i really believe the future of ca is investing in education
AS
18:25:43 politicians make a mistake they keep spending and spending, then they go out and tax, what about cutting spending (bust breaks in) addiction problem, you cannot stop spending,
18:26:21 wide shot
AH
18:26:26 arnold's analysis feeds the bush administration, if you want to camp against bush go to nh, maybe a little bit more decaf
PC
18:26:50
you won't say that the wealtiest should pay, the rich should have to pay the same amount
AS
18:27:29 lets talk about california
TM
18:28:07 it is a tax on the necessity of life, does not go to roads, very first act i will take to sight exec order to rescind tripling of the tax
AH
18:29:06 let me tell you the facts, the repeal of the estate tax alone, there is a huge connection between budgetary problems, we need someone who will fight for properly funded mandates, completely hypocritical of arnold
**18:29:46 this is how you treat women
18:30:04 that was a direct and personal attack
18:30:12 i have a perfect part for you in terminator 4
QUESTION 3 (HEALTH CARE)
PC
18:31:07 all industrialized nations have universal health care, sb2 is a step in the right direction, we would save 7.3 billion in ca, 4 billion out of our budget, we've got to learn from canada, amaerica's not always right at all, that's what we advodcate that's why the whole world is watching
CB
18:31:56 we're in a budget sit that i don't believe we can get there at this time, sb 2 is the ost important piece that has not been signed by the governor, 1 million working people health care...in california
AH
18:32:28 that 's the problem with worker's comp, problem now, not implement another thing that does not include cost
18:33:19 tomorrow morning i'm introducing...in sac
AS
18:33:32 it is very important that we have as many companies, make it available, what cruz is suggesting to ahve the companies pay for it, they cannot do it right now bec they are overburdened as it is right now, high electricity costs, we cannot afford , you will have no jobs, no bus and no health care, protect jobs, you've never run a business, has paid for worker's comp, it's easy for you to sit there, sign the check from the back not form the front
CB
18:34:46 i uinderstand that, when you have mega corporations, wal mart, underpalying, give them official dox to apply for foot stamps.
TM
18:35:11 i think there's a much better way to do it, businesses pay for through the lower wages of the employees, avoid the threshhold that triggers, i believe we can do that in a much more rational way on simple tax credit on sliding scale, health plan of their own choosing...if your employer chose your egrocery store for you it'd be cheap for employer and inconvenient for you
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
CB
18:36:53 i think that the one thing you shouldn't do is take it out on the kids, it's not their fault that the parents are here, but the people who are here, people think their food comes from ralphs, it comes for 70 percent of peole who pick are our immigrants, they pay their taxes, stay out of trouble with the law, for them not to be able to have a dl or put their children through school. (applause)
PC
18:38:06 they are essential to our economy, we use this term inappropriate illegal, no one's going, there's here to stay, we have to end this apartheid system, i really object to this term illegal, they're here so give em a driver's license, give them rights, these are th echildren of the indigenous people of this country, lets' look at this as a human problem.
18:39:09 they're contributing to our tax base
AS
18:39:35 i think it is important taht we take care of our children, we have to make sure every child in ca is ensured, if we take care of our children, we have to take care of seniors, we have healthy family program, very good program, the only prob with the prog is that only 2/3 of eligible are not having the health care, the gov are not reaching out to help.
18:40:28 if i bec gov i would immediately go out and promote it, we must ensure our low income families and children
AH
18:40:46 i'm very glad arnold is in favor of children bec you did vote for 187, you came out against dl, i'm saddened you would come out against it, it's all very well to say you are for children, contradiction?
AS
***18:41:27 you are off, i am against the dl it iw without any background check, dangerous for security of ca, gov davis came out a year ago, now it's a great idea, it is wrong to do that, the gov is supposed to rep the people
TM
***18:42:16 we are taking about families in this country in violation of our immigration laws, undermines that process, ther are millions willing to abide by our immigration lawas, illegal imm is the process of cutting in line in front of them, costing this state 4 billioncollars in direct costs by , we have got to ensure our laws are enforced.
AH
18:43:15 the good news about TM is you know where he stands, with arnold it's all over the map, we are for taking care of kids but not driving them to school, that's the kind of pandering to the pete wilson team, they don't really
AS
18:43:48 the reality is identification, lets to it the right way, lets get them visas
QUESTION 4 (COLORBLIND SOCIETY)
AH
18:44:37 we will never know if we have acheived a colorblind soc if we pass prop 54
18:44:55 is racial discrimination without paper trail, make impossible for gov to collect date
18:45:14 we don't have a cb soc when dpoeple can get into yale with c avg just because daddy went there, like president there, we dont' when you have minorities, especially african americans, who have a much better chance of going to jail than college
AS
18:46:19 it is very important that we preachand practice tolerance, this is why im' involved in after shcool and inner city games, i feel very strongly that the children in inner cities get ,...same administration, same mold, we need to make sure our kids get great education..
18:47:08 the epopel have to have the same right for work, 6.6 percent unemployment, women, hispanic, af amer, wehre is the equality here, i will fight for it, the gov sets the tone for that
CB
18:47:40 i know that you prob don't know but i'm the author of the textbook bill, we got one billion dollars for texts in the school, everybody had theri great ideas, i went to sch and didn't see books,
AS
18:48:15 you guys cut out 122 million dollars ACLU is suing, no toilets flushing, paint , outrageous, you guys go into the class, do photo op, i am there all the time (crus: you want to talk)
AS
18:48:49 you said you are providing after schoo, prop 49 has not provided after school because there was no funding stream, it is really irresponsible for you to sit here and tell us you are ...AS 18:49:21 200k kids, prop 49 was the reponsible way of going after it, only when the state makes an addisional 1.5 billion, right now we have a financial crisis
CB
18:50:15 if you go to any sch in ca and ask them the name of the author, they'
18:50:26 i htinnk arianna is right we cannot get there if we're gonna pass prop 54, it is a bad proposal, ask all doctors and nurses
18:50:57 toldreance, it comes from acceptance, we don't attack, we accept people
TM
18:51:24 i don't think it's fiscally to spend money we don't have, disad chil come in all colors, it is there , it is not a question of race, i'm the only cand who supports prop 54, our gov't has got to stop classifying, the gov should treat everyone exactly the same, it's the disad itself we should be , this nation's best is when we are all race, an american race, and classifying that is abhorrent to the whole concept of one great american people
PC
18:52:33 this is a prop that promotes ignorance, we will not know, it isn't on race, if y0ou ask the latinos, they have less and they pay a higher tax rate than european americans, but prop 54 doesn't allow us to know that
18:53:13 i wlecome but if you're for equality to change this and prop 54 is a very dangerous bill, leads b, we still have enormous probs to solve
QUESTION 6 (BUSINESS CLIMATE)
CB
18:54:15 i think the very first thing we ought to do is invest in higher education, we have to be able to invest in our children
18:54:46 we can do this again but only if we invest and not allow 123k cc students left out
18:55:00 we need to fix worker's comp, find an incentive for good work places
AH
18:55:16 i agree about fixing worker's comp, but also when you talk about the fact of increasted tuition fees, but your party, gov davis supported it (then talk to him) it sould never have been on the table,
18:55:55 stop production of delano prison project
CB
18:56:12 you may not understand, (i have been writing about things) )argues back and forth)
18:56:55 the bigger issue is fully funding education
TM
18:57:21 there are basically four horsement wc, tax, litigation and regualation,
18:58:06 specifics of plan
PC
18:58:52 i think there is a myth here, the biggest prob we're facing is the crime wave, why is it that the managers are all stealing, get the rule of law established, owrkers own companies and don't even know it
18:59:48 what we should have done during energy crisis, fire all and bring people into run it
AS
19:00:11 we have the worst bus climate anywhere in th enation, the only way we can pay off our inherited debt is by bringing businesses back, bring jobs back, create more revenue then we can afford programs.
QUESTION 7 (LOCAL GOVERNMENTS)
AS
19:01:24 it's bery impor what we have good realtionship but now it doens't make sense, the loc govn, but it is wrong of the state to take half the property tax, they know best how to spend the money, each one has different needs
PC
19:02:17 it was pete wilson who took the money,
AS
19:02:25 on oct 8th it's tnot going to be wilson or bush it's going to be arnold
AH
19:02:38 let us pray it's not as, know now who you really are, you have been contradicting
19:03:15 if we want to know who we really are and expose all the inconsistencies
***19:03:26 gov schwarazenegger, i'm gonna
AH
19:03:40 i would approach it from the , prop 13 is responsible, local gov are left with so little money they have to go begging from the state, ammend prop 13, but when it comes to multimillionaires, why souldn't they pay their fair share, keep
19:04:50 accent
PC
19:05:21 this is a mystery in ca, our co gov are , most of the money the,
19:05:45 this is creating a crisis, counties start looking at their pension fund, we have to empower the local governments, as a supervisor
TM
19:06:41 when gov wilson rated prop tax, i tried to stop him, it seems to me that the biggest prob with local gov sac has not only raided their money but usurped their authority, use local revenues
CB
19:08:00 we agree on this issue, but i think it' smore than providing state mandates, there's no emphasis on building homes and communities
QUESTION 8 (PROP 53/3 PERCENT INFRASTRUCTURE)
TM
19:09:41 it seems to me that the importance of our infrastructure has been completely overlooked sonce 1974, we had the finest univ system in the country, one of the finest pub school systems,
19:10:25 prop 53 is an important start but we've got to go a lot farther
CB
19:10:56 let's not romanticize about the days of pat brown and ronald reagan, we've not built a campus in 35 years, but all that costs money tom, back then they raised taxes
AH
19:11:47 we need to improve our infrastrucure, but i want to be a gov to bring larger vision, renewable energy, creat hundreds of thousands of jobs
PC
19:12:19 i'm opposed to 53, it's micromanaging, it's really a capital expenditure, we are creating a disaster if we don;t straighten out and have a 20 year plan
AS
19:13:09 i am for 53, i think it's a good beginning, the fact is we need a lot of infrastructure, with rr, water suply, ports, model after texas, building 4k miles of transportation, they have already, export, now texas is first in export
CLOSING STATEMENTS
AS
19:15:59 a lot of friends of mine have asked me if i am crazy for running for gov, i have , they would rather tear me down
19:16:20 i wouldn't have all of those things if it wasn't for ca, now i wnt to give something back ,when i came here i had nothing but a big dream to come to the greatest state of the greatest countyr of the world,
TM
19:17:44 can be the historic turning point when ca turned back the taxes, restored our public works we have got to have gov that knows every inch of this gov, i am the only cand at this table who has signed a no tax pledge, who supports prop 54, only who supports the ca rep assemb ref to stop dl bill, only who's pro life, who supports the entire bill of rights, including 2nd ammendment, we
19:19:26 i will cut spending and balance the budget without a tax increase and that is a promise
PC
19:19:47 we have a fiscal crisis in ca and we're not going to solve it without a
AH
19:22:05 in this election we are seeing the rise of the machines, if you want this to continue don't vote for me, if you don't want bus as usual, vote for me, only atruly indep leader can cahnge our system
19:23:47 reverse shot
CB
19:23:51 i grew up in a big family in a small tonw
19:25:59 audience applause
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EVENTDATE: 09-24
CALIFORNIA GUBERNATORIAL CANDIDATES PARTICIPATE IN DEBATE
SPONSORED BY THE CALIFORNIA BROADCASTERS ASSOCIATION,
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 24, 2003
SPEAKERS: ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER (R)
LT. GOV. CRUZ BUSTAMANTE (D)
ARIANNA HUFFINGTON (IND.)
STATE SEN. TOM MCCLINTOCK (R)
PETER CAMEJO (GREEN)
STAN STATHAM, MODERATOR
(+)
STATHAM: Good evening, everyone. First of all, let me give some
very special thanks to California State University Sacramento for its
extraordinary effort in helping to bring you this debate. And special
thanks to its president, Dr. Alexander Gonzalez (ph).
The debate you're going to see tonight is designed so that you
can witness these candidates in verbal combat. One of our goals with
this very unusual debate format was to create a debate on debates, and
on that, we have been very successful.
Now, if you tuned in to watching your candidates hiding behind
podiums or giving timed responses or reading scripted notes, you're
watching the wrong program. You're going to be very disappointed.
A few weeks ago, actually a few days ago, I'm sorry, we gave to
the voters of California several questions. The reason we gave those
questions in advance to the voters of California so that they would
examine those questions very closely, so that their expectations to
the answers to those questions from these candidates would be, shall
we say, more severe and at a much higher level.
Well, for the next 90 minutes, candidates will answer questions
posed by real California voters. And I want to tell you and the
audience out there and here that each one of these candidates have
been advised that they should engage and challenge each of the other
candidates. And please, let us know at the California Broadcasters
Association what you think of this format and this program.
You know, we don't do debates for candidates. We do debates for
you.
Now, before we get to the first voter question, I thought of
something, and I would like each one of these candidates to do
hopefully a quick response to what I think is a really interesting
question. And the question is this: What do you think of this recall?
Mr. Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think that it is a great idea and I thank God
every day that we have Hiram Johnson, that's created this, you know,
more than 90 years ago. His intention was to create this recall,
because of special interests controlling politicians and this is
exactly what is the case today. And 1.6 million people have signed
the recall petition. They basically have said we're mad as hell and
we're not going to take it anymore. And the 60 percent of the people
have said in the polls that they want to have a recall. So it is
terrific. The people's will is being acted out.
STATHAM: Thank you. Let's take this question just down the
line, but from this point forward, jump in after the question is first
answered. Senator McClintock.
MCCLINTOCK: Well, the recall is there so that the people can
correct a mistake that was made at the ballot box. Our entire form of
government is based on the assumption that more than half the people
are right more than half the time. That doesn't mean that every now
and then they're not entitled to make a mistake. And the reelection
of Gray Davis and the course that he has taken this state down was a
mistake and it must be corrected. We cannot afford to go down this
road another three years that has led our state to the brink of
bankruptcy, and despite the highest percentage of personal income
being spent in the history of California, less to show than any
administration in the history of California.
STATHAM: Mr. Camejo.
CAMEJO: This recall exists because we have a crisis in
California. There's no question that in the last five years, we had
the highest income the state has ever had. And instead of ending up
with a surplus, we ended up with this disastrous deficit.
The polls have taken the governor, Governor Davis down to 22
percent. And that can't be done by the Republicans alone. They were
only 35 percent of the registered voters. So we do have a crisis
here. And this election is the worst election we've ever had and the
best election we've ever had. Why the best? Because the public has
really gotten a chance to hear and see more than two points of view,
to all of a sudden have two candidates here who are not Democrats or
Republicans, and it is the worst because we don't have a runoff
system. We have no way for the will of the electorate to be correctly
registered.
STATHAM: Thank you. If we can make this as quickly as possible.
Arianna Huffington, what do you think of the recall?
HUFFINGTON: I'm troubled by the fact that Darrell Issa could
spend close to $2 million to collect signatures, paid signature
gatherers. There are a lot of elements which are troubling. But
nevertheless, it is an unprecedented, historic opportunity here to
elect an independent, progressive governor on a simple plurality. And
the state desperately needs that, because the two-party political
system is broken and that opportunity will not come again in a hurry.
STATHAM: All right. The lieutenant governor, Cruz Bustamante.
BUSTAMANTE: I think the recall is a terrible idea. I think it's
bad for democracy. I think it's bad for our state. I know people
right now who are organizing to recall the next governor if it's a
Republican. I think that's a bad way of doing politics. I think it
is a perpetual type of politics. You know, I agree with my colleagues
that there's some good that could come from this as a result, but I
think that to do it in this way, even Hiram Johnson, as Arnold talked
about, in terms of him creating the recall process, even in his
inaugural address, he said that it wasn't the panacea. The recalls
are not the panacea for government. I really think that we have a
situation here that we have to deal with in terms of the budget
crisis. That's true. And we have to deal with that. But this recall
could end up being an era of perpetual politics I think could be bad
for California.
STATHAM: Thank you. Two citizen questions on videotape. The
first question is about a top priority for California.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My name is Dan Jett (ph). I live in Los
Angeles County. My question is, what should be California's top
priority right now?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: And the answer is coming from Arnold Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think that our top priority right now should
be to turn the economy around. We have the worst economic atmosphere,
the worst business atmosphere in California. And what we see is
because of the businesses are leaving the state and jobs are leaving
the state, and we're having the highest workers' compensation costs.
We have the highest energy costs here. We have the worst business
money management. We have the worst credit rating. We have all of
those things that drive businesses away. And we are overregulated,
overtaxed and overburdening our businesses. And so no matter where I
go in the state, it is the same thing, that workers' compensation is
killing businesses. And we have to stop and reverse that.
HUFFINGTON: Actually, you know, I agree with one thing you said,
that the workers comp system is broken, but everything else you said
is simply untrue. In the last year, there was an increase in business
in the state of 3.7 percent. This state right now is taxed that is
lower rate than when your chairman, the chairman of your election
committee, Pete Wilson, was governor. So, you know, this gloom and
doom statistics about businesses leaving are simply a perpetuation of
the Republican idea that if you simply do everything businesses want,
if you simply let them have all the loopholes they want, then all will
be well.
And we saw in the '90's that was not the case. We ended up with
Enron, Global Crossing and billions of dollars lost in shareholder
wealth and in pensions. And I would really like you to tell the
people the truth, because these illusions are simply hurting us.
MCCLINTOCK: Arianna, if I may, the statistics that we're seeing
are reported across California directly contradict what you've said.
We've had a net loss of nearly a third of a million job in the last
two and a half years.
HUFFINGTON: That's because of the economic policies of the Bush
administration.
MCCLINTOCK: We've had the first net-out migration of domestic
population in our state's history. And a lot of that is going to
Arizona and Nevada. Now, that's a pretty profound development in the
history of the state, when families looking for a better future, a
better place to raise their kids look at our beautiful state with all
of the blessings that God could bestow upon a land, and find a better
future out in the middle of a Nevada and Arizona deserts than they
found here in California.
When Fidelity National announced they were leaving for
Jacksonville, Florida, their CEO had taken 400 jobs with him. Their
CEO was quoted on local TV, he said, this wasn't a complicated
decision. In Florida, there is no income tax. The sales tax is 6
percent. It costs $40 to register your car. Why is anybody surprised
we're leaving?
STATHAM: Thank you. Which side are you taking, Mr. Camejo?
CAMEJO: Well, I think both Tom and Arnold are just factually
wrong here. First of all, corporations are now being charged the
lowest tax rate that they have been for decades and decades. They've
gone, their tax rate has gone in the last 16 years from 9.6 to 5.3
percent. In fact, Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona, three states where the
Republicans dominate, have higher taxes than California.
MORE
.ETX
EVENTDATE: 09-24
XXX taxes than California.
CAMEJO: So I want to ask Tom and Arnold to visit the states and
have a talk with them before they tell us to lower taxes when the
Republican party has higher taxes. People are not leaving California.
They're pouring into California. This is a place people want to come
to. We're right now hitting a record GDP but we have too much
unemployment, because we're having a jobless recovery.
That is, the corporations are making more money than ever before
but not the people. And we need to look at the fact that people
paying much higher taxes than the wealthiest people in our state or
what the corporations are paying. I won't to cut taxes on the
majority of the people, but I want the richest people that 1 percent
that have more income than 70 percent of the people to pay the same
taxes you're paying, the average person. So we can balance our budget
and start moving in the right direction.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you.
BUSTAMANTE: There are a couple of things. First, during the
dot-com boom, we were doing about 7,100 new business start-ups in
California. Today averaging 7,700 new business start-ups in
California. The work productivity of the workers of California are
more productive than Texas and Florida combined. There are problems,
however. We do have a great economy. We are a $1.5 trillion economy
but we have to fix the worker's comp issue. And what I would propose
is that we do it much like we do safe driver proposal. There is no
incentive for a good workplace and a bad workplace because they get
paid or get a premium that is exactly the same amount. So if we were
to provide a worker, a safe workplace discount and be able to have an
incentive for those people not doing a good job to do a better job, we
can lower premiums on those that are good work sites and increase the
premiums on those with bad work sites.
MCCLINTOCK: Cruz, let me do you one better. Let me do you one
better. Let just replace our workers compensation law with Arizona's.
BUSTAMANTE: Well, we could do that, Tom, but...
MCCLINTOCK: Arizona's cost one third of what ours does. Injured
workers are being fully compensated.
BUSTAMANTE: No, they're not. Not they are not, Tom.
MCCLINTOCK: And just replacing the system. That' a two thirds
reduction workers comp costs. Not only lift a burden from business.
But also...
BUSTAMANTE: But we have to agree to fix the workers comp.
(CROSSTALK)
MCCLINTOCK: But also reduces direct state and local costs by
$2.5 billion. That's all tough do.
SCHWARZENEGGER: But Cruz, you're painting a wrong picture.
(CROSSTALK)
HUFFINGTON: Your two parties. Your two parties that gave us...
STATHAM: Excuse me, Arianna. Can you go now and then we'll hear
from Arnold Schwarzenegger.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: Everything is not fine and dandy here in
California.
You know that....
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Excuse me, excuse me. Thank you. Lady. Gentlemen.
Lady. Gentlemen. You know, I am a traffic cop, but not a very good
one. So let me say this, because there's some keen information we
need. One, two, three -- Arianna.
HUFFINGTON: First of all, you know, this is the two parties that
brought us the broken working comp system. In 1993, you voted for the
deregulation of workers comp. And Pete Wilson was over there, your
chairman. So, you can't just suddenly say we did that and now we are
thinking something different. Because that really has been the
pattern. Workers comp deregulation, energy deregulation and all the
problems of this past are now coming to haunt us. And there has to be
some accountability -- Cruz.
BUSTAMANTE: I think you're right in the first situation. We
really did try -- you're absolutely right. What we tried to is that
we tried to fix the worker's comp issue by squeezing down on the
insurance companies. They were clearly price gouging, they were
clearly doing things that were effecting the premiums. And we tried
to squeeze down on that. Unfortunately, they went into some predatory
pricing. They drove the small guys out and then rates started going
back up again. Here we have an opportunity to change fundamentally
the system providing work safety. Places where they have good, solid
work safety places that will give them a lower...
STATHAM: All right Cruz, we have your point.
SCHWARZENEGGER: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) reform that you guys just did
was total preelection bogus, and you know that. Because this all
trickery just like the budget was, it was trickery. This is a trick
again before -- you wanted to put wool over the people eyes.
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Just a moment, please. Mr. Schwarzenegger has the
table. What would be the...
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: Let me just tell you, that the next year you say
this reform, but the worker's compensation costs are going to go up.
This is not what's going to help our businesses in California. Our
businesses are moving away because we're not competitive in worker's
compensation. There is tremendous fraud here and all those kind of
things. What we have to do is create -- when I go to office, I'll
create real worker's compensation. Cut the costs in half. That's
what we need to do. I visited companies here in California. I
visited the farmers and the small companies, big companies, vendors
and all this stuff. Every one is saying the same thing. That are
worker's compensation is way too high. We're paying three times the
amount of the national average.
And as Tom was saying, that are neighboring states are much more
competitive. And this is the problem we have and that what businesses
are moving out of the state.
STATHAM: Mr. Schwarzenegger, thank you very much. Pretty
convinced at this point we've done this subject.
(CROSSTALK)
MCCLINTOCK: Just another thing I'd like to point out. The
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) statistics, we have friends, family, neighbors who
are leaving California and finding a better place out in the Nevada
and Arizona desert. That what's happening in California.
BUSTAMANTE: Because housing is to high. Working people leaving
California.
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Excuse me, excuse me, excuse me. We're going to wrap
this subject up in one minute. Go ahead, Mr. Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think it's ridiculous for Cruz and Arianna to
say everything is fine and dandy. And everything is prefect.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: Let me tell you something. We have never seen a
situation like this. $38.2 billion budget deficit. We just found out
that the operating deficit, this is the operating deficit went up to
$10 billion. There's so much...
BUSTAMANTE: Well, I know you may not know this, Arnold, the
(UNINTELLIGIBLE) is no longer $38 billion.
STATHAM: One minute.
SCHWARZENEGGER: You have to be honest with the people. Remember
one thing, in California, we have a three strike system. You guys
pull the wool over the people's eyes, twice, the third time you are
out you are out. On October 7 you guys are out.
STATHAM: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen,
if you'll hold on the applause, we appreciate it. I believe the next
citizen question does relate to the topic we're actually talking about
now. And if it doesn't, I fear it is going to get in anyway. The
subject of the next question is balancing the state of California.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi. I'm Donna Fetchie Covia (ph). I live
in Felton. My question is, how would you propose enhancing revenue
and or what special cuts would you make to spending to achieve a
balanced budget?
STATHAM: Senator McClintock this question is yours.
MCCLINTOCK: A great question. I have to correct Arnold. It's
not the three strikes law, that's the lemon law when you have a car
that doesn't work, you get to take it back. That's a very, very
important question. First of all, bear this in mind...
BUSTAMANTE: Democratic proposal.
MCCLINTOCK: ... this state spending a larger portion of people's
earnings than at any time in its history. We are not suffering a
revenue problem. In the last four years of this administration, our
inflation and population combined grown 21 percent. Our revenues up
25 percent. That's after the dot-com collapse, after the car tax was
trimmed, after the state's revenues was plunged. We're still taking
in significantly more revenue than inflation and population. The
problem is we have a 38 percent increase in state spending in that
same period of time, and we have not gotten a 38 percent increase in
highway construction or school construction or anything. We're paying
through the nose for this government to provide. And not hard to find
waste in a system that produces as little as California and costs as
much. Let me just give you some examples. If we restored to
California government the same freedom that every family and business
has to shop around for the best service at the lowest price, there's
about $9 billion in savings across all departments from that one
reform alone. Streamlining...
STATHAM: Just a second. I am going let you continue. You have
got a minute and a half. We are try to get as many questions as
possible. Wrap it up if you could.
MCCLINTOCK: Let me cover another $8 billion of specific cuts and
then move on. $6 billion can be saved simply reorganizing the state's
bureaucracies. That means, abolishing agencies that duplicate local
or federal functions or that overlap each other's jurisdictions. As I
said worker's compensation reform, simply swapping our plan for
Arizona, that's about $2.5 billion of direct savings to local
governments and state government alone. There's about $18.5 billion
without even breaking a sweat.
Mr. Camejo.
CAMEJO: Look, we pay -- the average person in California is
paying about 9.2 percent of the income in taxes. The wealthiest 1
percent pay 7.2. If we just had the wealthiest 5 percent that receive
all of the advantages of the great rise in the economy over the last
10 years, their income rose 113 percent. Your income rose 8 percent.
Latinos actually declined 3 percent. If they were taxed at the same
rate that you pay, we would now have a surplus in the budget. We're
27th in education and we're number one in the nation in economy. And
Tom wants to cut, cut, cut. I want to put more money into education.
I want to fair tax on my Web site votecamejo.org we show how it can be
done. How we could have a $19 billion surplus. And that means to
start developing affordable housing. We can make California the
leader in renewable energy. These are the things California could be
doing.
But all they want to do is cut and cut and rip, rip over here to
my right. And the others I don't know what they do. They get the
money in the world and they spend it all. We don't know where it
went. I'm calling for a five-year audit. I want a five audit to find
out how we had a 30 billion surplus turn into a $38 billion deficit.
I think we don't know for sure. Some good things were done and let's
say. More money put in to give teachers a higher pay. Some steps
were made in taking care of our infrastructure. We don't want to go
back on that. But it was done irresponsibly. They didn't worry about
the income. They were cutting the taxes on the wealthiest people,
while they raised your taxes.
STATHAM: Thank you. We're going to have Arianna Huffington --
it's getting a little dizzy up here.
How are you going to balance the budget, Miss Huffington?
HUFFINGTON: Well, the first thing I will do is close corporate
tax loopholes, because right now, just in terms of how we're assessing
commercial properties, we are losing about $2 billion in revenue. And
if we just change that, if we just assess commercial properties
fairly, that would $2 billion. If we just close the loopholes when it
comes to tax shelters, both domestic and offshore tax shelters, that
would be another $2 billion.
And what I find amazing is that Republicans really do not believe
that morality applies to businesses. You know, morality for them is
just sexual morality. And I think it's time -- you know, I would
mention the three strikes and you're out law. I'd like a three
strikes and you're out when it comes to corporate felons. And right
now we have something like that in front of the legislature and it
should pass. Because it should be absolutely unacceptable that
companies defraud the California public and then the state continues
to do business with them. Is that the kind of business climate you'd
like to bring to the state, the same kind of business climate as
brought us Enron and Global Crossing and Adelphia and has cost
millions of jobs and we're still paying that price?
And one more thing, Arnold. You know, you talk about this...
SCHWARZENEGGER: Arnold?
HUFFINGTON: Yes. You talk...
STATHAM: Thirty seconds.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I like that. Arianna, let me say one thing.
You personally -- your personal income tax have the biggest loophole.
I can drive my Hummer through it, that's how big loophole is. Let me
tell you something, I don't know what you're talking about. I cannot
believe you.
HUFFINGTON: Yes. We got that but we got advanced notice in "The
New York Times" that you're going to say that. And you know that
perfectly well that I paid $150,000 in property taxes and payroll
taxes and you know what? I'm a writer. And this two years...
SCHWARZENEGGER: Yes, right.
HUFFINGTON: ...I was writing and researching a book and I wasn't
making $20 billion violent movies. I'm sorry.
STATHAM: We need to move. We need to move.
HUFFINGTON: Let me just finish, because he attacked me on
something very, very distorted.
STATHAM: Can you do in 30 seconds?
HUFFINGTON: Yes, I can do it in 15. Because the truth is that
small businesses sometimes make losses and sometimes make profits.
When my book, "Pigs at the Trough," was published in 2003 and became a
bestseller, that was a great year. I'm going to be paying a lot of
taxes. There was no loophole. And instead of focusing on the
distorted information, you should focus on the huge loopholes that the
Bush administration and other Republicans around the country have
allowed that have defraud us of billion of dollars in taxes.
STATHAM: Thank you. Before we go to lieutenant governor, I'd
like to admonish -- I'd like to admonish the candidates very politely,
because we're supposed to stay on topic. I don't know how Miss
Huffington got around to Republican sexual morality on balancing
budget, but she managed to do so.
SCHWARZENEGGER: That's Arianna.
STATHAM: There's the lieutenant governor. He's been in office
for sometime and he just came from speaker of the assembly speaker
before that. Mr. Bustamante, how are you going to balance the budget?
BUSTAMANTE: Well, clearly we spent too much.
STATHAM: Why did you?
BUSTAMANTE: We spent more -- as a government -- as a government
it, spent more than it was coming in. There's nothing -- it's no
rocket science to this. We clearly knew that there were certain
incomes that were coming in and we spent more than we had.
But what I've decided to do is I've decided to face this
realistically, to deal with it practically, to understand it and not
to have -- tell half truths about what we're likely be able to do.
We've done all the easy things and now it's time to do the tough
things. That's why I submitted a plan, a plan that I called "Tough
Love for California." In that plan, I raised tobacco taxes, I raise
alcohol taxes, I raise the upper income tax bract on the largest and
the highest 4 percent of all Californians.
I do that, but in return, we close the budget gap. We fully fund
education. We put 123,000 community college students back into our
colleges. And we relieve the car tax issue for all those vehicles
that are under $20,000. We do something in terms of raising taxes.
She called it raising revenues. We know what it really is.
STATHAM: Thank you.
BUSTAMANTE: But at the same time, we get something good for
California.
HUFFINGTON: Yes, there is tough love for everybody except for
Indian gaming tribes...
BUSTAMANTE: Well, that's not true....
HUFFINGTON: ...and for prison guard unions. And that's really
-- that's really the problem with our system. Tough love for
everybody except your big campaign contributors.
MCCLINTOCK: Yes, it's certainly tough on taxpayers. That's
true. And here's the question that I would pose. What makes you
think that your $8 billion of tax increases is going to do anything
differently than when Pete Wilson raised taxes $7 billion in 1991?
Those taxes broke the back of the economy. They turned a recession
into a near depression and we actually ended up collecting a billion
dollars less total revenue after those tax increases went into effect
than we had collecting before they had gone into effect.
BUSTAMANTE: Because I really believe, Tom, that the future of
California is really in investing in our education.
You know, we're closing down community colleges -- 123,000
students are not going to be going to community college this year.
Everything we have done in California has been based on research. You
know that.
MCCLINTOCK: That's because...
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: Unfortunately, those of us who have been working
diligently to try to make sure that we keep tuition low and allow
access to every single student, we know that our future really is --
it's not just a slogan. It's not just something to put on a campaign
brochure. It really is our future.
STATHAM: All right. You've all made your points on this except
for Mr. Schwarzenegger, needs another shot at this.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Yes. I don't understand the whole thing. So
what you're saying is that...
BUSTAMANTE: There's probably a lot of things.
SCHWARZENEGGER: The politicians -- the politicians make a
mistake. They keep spending and spending and spending.
BUSTAMANTE: That's right.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Then when they realize they made a mistake and
they spend the money they don't even have, then go out and go and tax,
tax, tax. That's the answer to the problem?
BUSTAMANTE: No, Arnold.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: What you have to do is you put the spending cap
on it.
BUSTAMANTE: We also provided tax cuts.
SCHWARZENEGGER: You guys have an addiction problem. You should
go to an addiction place because you cannot -- you cannot stop
spending. So what happens then is if you spend...
BUSTAMANTE: Well, that's what happens when you simplify things.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Then you have tax, tax, tax. I mean, all of a
sudden you say, Where are the jobs? Gone, gone, gone. That's the
problem that we're facing here.
STATHAM: All right. Thank you.
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Hang on. Right here. What do you got, Arianna?
Short.
HUFFINGTON: Because this -- Arnold's analysis fits perfectly the
Bush administration in Washington. They keep spending, spending,
spending.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: You keep talking about Bush. If you want to
campaign against Bush, go to New Hampshire.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: You're in the wrong state right now.
HUFFINGTON: You know what? Because otherwise, it's so
hypocritical for you to...
SCHWARZENEGGER: And maybe a little but more decaf.
HUFFINGTON: You know what?
CAMEJO: It is amazing that you will not say -- you will never
say that the wealthiest people should at least pay the same tax rate
as the average person. You will never say those words. And in fact,
you've been raising the taxes in California on the poorest people who
pay the highest tax rate and I'm the only candidate saying, "Cut
taxes!" -- on 60 percent of the people who are overpaying. I'm the
only one who says it. But I want the rich to pay their fair share.
And neither Tom or Arnold will say it.
All you got to say is, Yes, Peter, you're right. The rich should
have to pay the same amount -- the same amount as the average person.
STATHAM: All right.
CAMEJO: Go ahead and say it. It's just four words.
SCHWARZENEGGER: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) you talk about Bush and all
this stuff. Let's talk about California.
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: If I could have your attention? Candidates, if I could
have your attention. I think I actually have a budget related
question that might be on point and you could all get specific,
because somewhere in all of this, somebody mentioned a vehicle
licensing fee. So let's all jump in and see what you're going to do
to the vehicle licensing fees in California. What wants to go first?
CAMEJO: Better start with Tom because that's his ad.
MCCLINTOCK: Well, thank you
ARIANNA-ARNOLD EXCHANGE MISSING HERE
EVENTDATE: 09-24
XXX in "Terminator 4."
STATHAM: All right. I think at this point, I think at this
point -- this is not -- ladies and gentlemen, this is not Comedy
Central. I swear. At this point, we are going to change subjects.
We are going to change subjects. And we're going to have another real
question from a real voter that relates to health care. Let's hear
it.
QUESTION: Good evening. My name is Karen Vicary (ph) from
Sacramento. I'm with the Northeastern California Northern Nevada
Chapter of the Arthritis Foundation. My question tonight is, how are
you going to ensure that all Californians have adequate health care?
STATHAM: All right. Green Party candidate, Peter Camejo is
going to take this question.
CAMEJO: Well, all advanced industrial countries have established
universal health care. We're the only nation that hasn't. And we
really have to realize that having the insurance business running our
health care is not working. We have to turn to a single pair system.
I support Sheila Kuehl's proposals. I think SB-2 that John Burton has
raised is a step in the right direction but not the real answer.
Actually, if we did, a study done showing saving $7.3 billion in
California. About $4 billion actually out of the budget and we'd have
everybody covered. We have got to learn from Canada and from Europe.
There are things that other people can teach us. America is not
always right at all. And in fact, this is one of those issues where
we have to move towards universal health care for everybody, single
pair system. That's what we advocate and that's the whole world
watching. Why America doesn't come to its senses on this.
STATHAM: Go ahead, Mr. Bustamante.
BUSTAMANTE: Well, I absolutely agree with Peter about universal
HEMMER:. But we're in a budget situation that I don't believe we can
get there at this time. I believe do that also that SB-2 is probably
the most important piece of legislation that has not yet been signed
by the governor. I think it is a very important, because it will
provide 1 million working people health care in California. Probably
the most significant piece of legislation I believe that's going to
come out this year in California.
HUFFINGTON: Well, actually, SB-2, the John Burton bill, doesn't
include cost controls. And that's the problem with a lot half baked
measures out of the legislature. That is the problem with worker's
comp. The problem again now. I don't believe we should implement
another bill which does not include cost controls and which also
leaves over 3 million Californians uninsured.
BUSTAMANTE: That's true.
HUFFINGTON: Another half baked measure.
BUSTAMANTE: Well, not half-baked. It's a good step.
HUFFINGTON: But ultimately, we need universal health care. The
only reason we don't have it is because of the millions of dollars
being paid by insurance companies and the medical industry to
politicians and that's ultimately the only reason.
If that were not the case, we would have universal health care by
now. You know what the only state that has universal health care,
Maine. You know why? Because it has introduced a public financing of
campaign legislation and that's why it has made it and that's why
that's why tomorrow morning I'm introducing an initiative in
Sacramento for publicly funded campaigns. There's no other solution
if we are going to break the hold of special interests in Sacramento.
STATHAM: What's your solution to California's health care
problem, Mr. Schwarzenegger?
SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, first of all, it is very important to have
it available. That we have as many companies bidding so that the
prices coming down and make it available. What Cruz is suggesting,
that again, health care and have the companies pay for it, they cannot
do it right now. We have a really a crisis here with our companies
with our, you know, businesses because they're overburdened as it is
right now with worker's compensation and with Med-Cal and with all
those kinds of things -- high electricity costs. They are much, much
higher than anywhere in the nation.
They cannot afford it. What you will have then is, you will have
no jobs, no businesses, and no health care. What we have to do right
now is protect the businesses and protect the people so that they have
jobs. That's what we need to do.
BUSTAMANTE: I understand that, Arnold.
SCHWARZENEGGER: But let me just say something, Cruz. It doesn't
surprise me that it comes from you. You have never run a business.
I'm the only one here that run businesses. Developed businesses.
CAMEJO: Not true, Arnold, not true.
SCHWARZENEGGER: And met the payroll and has paid for worker's
compensation and has taken care of the health care for the employees
and stuff like that. You have never done that so it's easy for you to
sit there, because you're only used to signing the check on the back.
But not the front. You have never signed a check on the front. So,
this is what you have to do. Realize that.
BUSTAMANTE: I understand. I would just a real brief response.
You know, when you have megacorporations, the biggest in the history
of the world, like Wal-mart, who are underpaying the people and then
as a result give them official documents to go and apply for food
stamps and for public health care. That's a burden that taxpayers
can't afford any longer, either.
STATHAM: Senator Tom McClintock on this one?
MCCLINTOCK: I think there's a much better way to do it and it's
not SB-2 which requires businesses to provide health care plans for
their employees. The businesses own, the business control and paid
for through the lower wages of the employees. The very first impact
of that bill, Cruz, is an awful lot of people thrown out of work as
businesses pair back their payrolls to avoid the threshold that
triggers that obligation.
I do believe that we ought to have a society where everyone has
access to health care. Unfortunately, I believe we can do that in a
much more rational way through a simple tax credit on a sliding income
scale that will bring within the reach of every California family, a
health plan of their own choosing and selection that they will
control.
They don't have to worry about losing a job or staying in a dead
end job because they have to keep their health care. If you're
employer chose the grocery store for you, I guarantee you two things.
It's going to be cheap for the employer and it's going to be very
inconvenient for you.
And health plans are no different. We've got to bring within the
reach of families, again, control over their own health plans. When I
proposed that, as an alternative to the Healthy Families Plans, a
legislative analyst office reviewed it and said that we could provide
much, much broader coverage at much lower than the bureaucratized
system that was ultimately adopted.
STATHAM: Thanks, senator. Now, I thought of something to make
this a whole lot more controversial in the area of health care. So,
why don't each one tell us how much money you think the state of
California should spend on health care for the kids of illegal
immigrants. Who wants to go?
BUSTAMANTE: I'll go.
STATHAM: Go ahead Mr. Bustamante.
BUSTAMANTE: I'll be more than happy to deal with that particular
issue because I think that, you know, the one thing you shouldn't,
Stan just sort of in life is take it out on the kids. You know? I
mean, it's not their fault their parents are here. Put it to the side
for a minute.
The people who are here, you know, I know that sometimes people
think that their food comes from, you know, Safeway or Ralph's or but
it really doesn't. It comes from 70 percent of the people that pick
our fruit and our food and put it on the table are these immigrants.
They're also the same people who work hard every single day. They pay
their taxes. They stay out of trouble with the law. 30 percent of
the construction, 40 percent of the hotels.
All these folks here, working, they're taking care of the
families, paying taxes. You know, for them not to have a driver's
license or to be able to put their kids into school I think is just
wrong.
CAMEJO: May I jump in here?
STATHAM: I don't appreciate the demonstration but it's heart
felt. Peter Camejo?
CAMEJO: Well, I just want to say that the people we're talking
about are the lowest paid workers in California who work the hardest.
Who pay taxes and receive almost no benefits. They're essential to
our economy. We loosely use this word, I think totally inappropriate,
illegal. No one's going to arrest them. If somebody is illegal, you
arrest them. But no one is going to arrest them because they're
essential for California and everybody knows they're to stay. They're
part of our family. We have to end this apartheid system we have
towards them. They're part of our community essential to our economy.
I really object to this term illegal.
In the first debate, I referred to who came over here totally
illegally and it was European-Americans who came over here. And you
know, they're here so give them a driver's license, give them a right,
I'm not going to object to that.
But these are the children of the indigenous people of this
continent. Let's Understand that if your economic situation was the
same as there, you'd do exactly the same thing. People are moving
through borders to try to feed their families. Let's look at this as
a human problem we face. Not a thing of criminality. These are part
of our family. We need to help them and work with them and give them
medical insurance and the costs that it will come about, they are
paying for it because right now they're contributing to our tax base.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you. And I know -- ladies and
gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, this is a political debate and I have
good news for you. If you would like to demonstrate $20 and a
California highway patrol license fee and they'll give you a location
outside the capital building and you can enjoy yourself. Try to
restrain your applause, please. I know that Arnold Schwarzenegger has
a strong opinion on this issue. So, what is it?
SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, first of all, I think it's important that
we take care of our children. We have to make sure that every child
in California is insured. That is the most important thing. I'm very
passionate about children's issues. I think that we have to take care
of our children and our seniors. That is very important. Because
they cannot fend for themselves.
The children, we have a Healthy Family Program here in
California. It's a very, very good program. It's supposed to insure
people to get health care, for children and also for their parents if
they're low-income people.
XXX low-income people.
SCHWARZENEGGER: The only problem with the program right now is
only two-thirds of the people that are eligible are not having that
health care. And because the government has not done a good job of
reaching out and finding the people and letting them know to sign up
and to find easy ways for them to sign up. Two-thirds of the people
that are eligible do not have the health care. And so that is really
terrible.
If I become governor here, I will immediately go out there and
promote that. Promote it, and market it and (UNINTELLIGIBLE) get it
out there, so everyone knows about it and everyone signs up, because
we must insure our families, the low-income families, especially the
children.
Well, on that, we do agree.
STATHAM: Arianna, go ahead.
HUFFINGTON: I'm very glad that Arnold is in favor of providing
health care for the children of illegal immigrants. That's really
good news, because, after all, you did vote for 187. And also, I am
really glad that you say that, because you have also come out against
licenses for undocumented immigrants. So there is a bit of a
contradiction here. In fact, I was really saddened that you as an
immigrant would come out against giving that basic right to immigrants
here who are trying to drive to go to work, to take their kids to
school.
You know, it's all very well to say you're for children, you want
them to be insured, but if their parents cannot legally drive them to
work, you know, whether they're insured and they're safe, isn't that a
bit of a contradiction?
SCHWARZENEGGER: Arianna, again, as usual, you are off here.
We're talking about health care, and you're talking about driver's
licenses.
HUFFINGTON: But they are connected. You know, they are
connected, because parents drive their children.
SCHWARZENEGGER: But let me answer this. Let me answer that
quickly. Let me just say, I am against the driver's license because
it is without any background check and without any fingerprints or
anything. Therefore, it is dangerous for the security of California.
Governor Davis came out a year ago and has made it clear and has said,
you know, we cannot do that because it is endangering us, it is a
security problem. Now, because of this election coming up on October
7, now all of a sudden it is a great idea, let's get some more votes.
That is the idea of those things. It is wrong to do that. You know
that we have a security problem because of that.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: The governor is supposed to represent the people
of California, not special interests. That is the problem here.
MCCLINTOCK: I think you're all losing sight of a very important
fact, and that is we're talking about families that are in this
country in violation of our nation's immigration laws. Now, this
nation has the most generous immigration policies of any nation in the
world.
STATHAM: One minute.
MCCLINTOCK: Illegal immigration undermines that process of legal
immigration that's the strength of our nation. There are millions of
people who are willing to abide by our immigration laws to come to
this nation, become Americans and see their children grow up and
prosper as Americans. Illegal immigration is the process of cutting
in line in front of them. And I don't believe that we should be
rewarding such behavior.
Illegal immigration is costing this state $4 billion in direct
costs out of our state treasury by the most conservative estimates
available.
STATHAM: Thirty seconds.
MCCLINTOCK: We have got to assure that our immigration laws are
enforced. I led the opposition to the measure on giving driver's
licenses to illegal immigrants, because it undermines the enforcement
of our immigration laws.
STATHAM: All right, do you want a quick 15-second close on this,
Arianna?
HUFFINGTON: Yes, absolutely. Because you know what, at least
the good news about Tom McClintock is you know where he stands.
There's no fudging. And that's what I like about you.
With Arnold, you know, it's all over the map. You know, we are
for taking care of kids but not for driving them safely to school or
to the emergency room or wherever the health care is to be provided.
And ultimately, that's the kind of pandering to the Pete Wilson team
that you are surrounding yourself with, because ultimately they are
not going to change. You know, they don't really fundamentally care
for those immigrants in this country.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Arianna, there is no identification, there is no
background check. It is dangerous for our security here.
HUFFINGTON: It is offensive. It is offensive for you to imply
that...
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Two points. We have those two points.
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... but let's do it the right way. Let's get
them visas. Let's get them temporary working permits.
HUFFINGTON: It is really offensive to think that they are
terrorists just because they are here as illegal immigrations.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Let's get them permanent working permits.
Let's...
(CROSSTALK)
STATHAM: Ladies and gentlemen, this is not productive. We have
the points that you've made. We're going to move to another question
from a California voter and a different subject. And this question
has to do about a colorblind society. Let's hear it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My name is Shelly Bradford Bell (ph) from
San Francisco. And my question is, everyone talks about wanting a
colorblind society, but what does that actually mean to you? In other
words, how do we know when we have succeeded?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: And the question goes to businesswoman commentator
Arianna Huffington.
HUFFINGTON: First of all, we will never know if we have achieved
a colorblind society if we pass Proposition 54, because it would make
it impossible to collect the kind of data we need to know whether
we're making progress.
STATHAM: Will you please explain what 54 is?
HUFFINGTON: Oh, yes.
STATHAM: Thank you.
HUFFINGTON: Prop 54 is basically racial discrimination without
leaving a paper trail. And it would make it impossible -- I will be
more explicit. It will make it impossible for government institutions
to collect the kind of data that we need to establish where we are.
But also, let me just say how we are going to know when we have a
colorblind society. We don't have a colorblind society while people
can get into Yale with a C average just because their daddy went
there, like our president did. We don't have a colorblind society
when you have minorities, especially African-Americans in this state,
who have a much bigger chance of getting into jail than getting into
college. We don't have a colorblind society when there is one-third
more uninsured Latinos than whites. We don't have a colorblind
society when minorities are much more likely to be in these factional
(ph) schools, with teachers who lack certification and with no
textbooks.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you. For clarification on 54, and
she did a rather good version of what 54 is, Prop 54 does prohibit the
state of California from collecting most race-related data. End of
quote.
HUFFINGTON: Isn't that what I said?
STATHAM: Let's go to Arnold Schwarzenegger -- am I debating?
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think.
STATHAM: Can we hear from Arnold Schwarzenegger on this? Let's
get in on this one, gang.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think it is very important that we preach and
we practice tolerance, equality for everyone. It starts with
education. This is why I got involved with after-school programs in
the inner cities. I started the inner city games after-school
programs that are now nationwide and we are reaching out to 200,000
children.
Because I feel very strongly that the kids in the inner cities
get disadvantaged with education, especially just recently when our
governor and Cruz Bustamante has cut $120 million in textbooks which
is supposed to be for those inner city schools, which is unfair.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: It is the same administration. It is the same
mold. I mean, don't tell me otherwise here.
Let me just tell you, we need to make sure that our kids get
great education, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) education everywhere, and this is
what I'm fighting for. It is the same thing on the job market. We
have to have -- the people have to have the same right for work and
the same kind of opportunities. Right now, for instance, we have a
6.6 percent unemployment rate here in California, and we have an
increase in unemployment amongst women, 25 percent, amongst Hispanics,
20 percent, and amongst African-Americans, 45 percent. Where is the
equality here? We need to fight for equality. I will fight for that.
When I am governor, I will fight for that. And I think the governor
sets the tone on that. We need equality in this thing.
STATHAM: Thank you, Mr. Schwarzenegger. I know that Cruz
Bustamante wants a piece of this. Go ahead.
BUSTAMANTE: Arnold, I know that you probably don't know, but I'm
the author of the textbook bill. I've been, during the entire time
that I was in the legislature, I fought for textbooks for schools. In
the last year I was in the legislature, we've got $1 billion for
textbooks in the schools, because everybody, everybody had their great
ideas about reforming schools. And I went to schools, and I didn't
see textbooks. And so my great reform was to try to make sure that
every kid in California had updated textbooks. I know you wouldn't
probably know that.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, just so you know, just so you know...
BUSTAMANTE: I know you probably wouldn't know that, but
that's...
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... you guys cut out $122 million
(UNINTELLIGIBLE).
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: I didn't interrupt you.
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... no toilets there that are flushing...
BUSTAMANTE: I didn't interrupt you, Arnold.
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... the paint is peeling off. If you call this
equality in education, I think it's outrageous. You know what you
guys do, you politicians...
BUSTAMANTE: Yes, Arnold, go ahead, go ahead.
SCHWARZENEGGER: You go into the classroom, you do the photo op,
you do the photo op, and then you leave and then we never see you
again.
BUSTAMANTE: Right. You're the one to talk about photo ops,
Arnold.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I am there all the time, because I am providing
the after school programs, Cruz, and you know that.
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: OK. If you want to talk over me, that's one thing.
HUFFINGTON: One second, because you said you are providing after
school care. You know, your crowning achievement, the passage of Prop
49, has not provided after school care for a single child in the state
of California, because there was no funding stream. It was nothing
but a photo opportunity initiative. It was nothing but a springboard
for your run for governor. And it is really irresponsible for you to
stand or sit here and tell us that you are providing after school
care. Isn't it true that not a single child has gotten after school
care because of Prop 49?
SCHWARZENEGGER: First of all, our after school programs...
HUFFINGTON: Yes or no?
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... like I told you already...
HUFFINGTON: Yes or no?
SCHWARZENEGGER: ... are providing after school programs for
200,000 kids. Proposition 49 was the responsible way of going about
it to get after school programs. Because what the initiative says is,
there's a trigger mechanism, only when the state makes an additional
$1.5 billion in revenue, then the program can get funded. Right now
we have a financial crisis, that's why it's not getting funded. If
the Cruz Bustamante-Davis administration would have done that since
the year 2000, with all of the programs, we wouldn't have a budget
deficit right now.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHWARZENEGGER: Because I don't want to use money from other
program. Thank you.
STATHAM: Thank you, Mr. Schwarzenegger. We have gotten off
point, and I would like Cruz Bustamante to finish his comments on this
issue of color blindness.
XXX of color blindness.
BUSTAMANTE: Thank you.
Just to complete the thought, however, in the call that Arnold
had presented. If you go to any school in California, and you ask
them the name of the author of the textbook bill, they will tell you,
Arnold. All you have to do is ask.
But in terms equality -- the issue of the issue of equality, I
think, Arianna, in this particular case, is absolutely right. We
cannot get there if we're going to pass Proposition 54. It's bad. It
is a bad proposal. In fact, we believe it will jeopardize the health
care. And all you have to do is ask all the doctors and all the
nurses, ask any health organization in the state. They are opposed to
Proposition 54. I hope people make sure they do not vote for
Proposition 54.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I totally agree with you, Cruz.
BUSTAMANTE: And the last thing is that equal opportunity doesn't
come from tolerance. I'm going to tolerate somebody? No, it comes
from acceptance.
STATHAM: All right. We need..
BUSTAMANTE: And we need to make sure that everybody is accepted
and that we embrace our diversity. We don't attack immigrants. We
don't attack Native Americans. We don't attack people. What we do is
that we accept people and try to have everybody have an equal
opportunity.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you, Cruz. We need two more comments
on this issue and those comments will come from Senator McClintock and
then Mr. Camejo. Senator?
MCCLINTOCK: Well, thank you. With respect to Prop 49, I don't
think it's fiscally responsible to obligate to spend money when we
don't have it.
But getting to the main point -- and this is something I think
everyone has lost sight of. Disadvantaged children come in all
colors. It is their condition of disadvantage that we seek to
compensate. It is not a question of race. Proposition 54 -- I
believe I'm the only candidate on this platform who supports
Proposition 54 -- simply says that our government has got to stop
classifying us by race. It doesn't matter what race you are. The
government should treat everyone exactly the same.
And again, when you talk about disadvantage, it's the
disadvantage itself that we should be correcting and compensating. I
think that this nation's best is when we are all one race, an American
race. And this business of government classifying us according to
different ethnic groups, different racial categories, that is
abhorrent to the whole concept of one great American people.
STATHAM: Mr. Camejo, go ahead.
CAMEJO: Well, you know, the issue here is this is a proposition
that promotes ignorance. It says we will not know.
Look, if you made a poll right now and asked people what your
income level is between right and left handed, we all know it would be
about the same. Or education level. But it isn't on race. If you
ask the Latinos, do they have the same education? They have less.
They have less income. And they pay a higher tax rate. Do you know
that? Latinos in California pay a higher tax rate than the European
Americans.
But Prop 54 doesn't allow us to know that. We're not allowed to
ask the question. So how can we correct problems that exist in our
society, which are complex. And I welcome what Tom says and Arnold
says that they are for equality. But if you're for equality you have
to be willing to have the information so we can take the necessary
action to change this.
And Prop 54 is a very dangerous bill because what it does is
leads the people to begin to think that these problems are behind us.
They're far from behind us. We still have enormous problems to solve
in our society.
STATHAM: All right. We're going to move on to another citizen
question. This question has to do with our business climate in
California. Let's hear the question.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, my name is Mike Moody (ph). I'm a small
business owner in Sacramento. And my question is, Business leaders in
the community are convinced that we are losing jobs and unable to
bring new business to the state. If you agree, what are two things
that you would change to make this a more business-friendly state.
And if you disagree, what are the misconceptions that you would like
to correct? Thanks.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: Candidates, if you would be so kind to keep your
answers short on this, because we rather hit this subject earlier in
this one-hour debate, so far in this 90-minute program.
This question does go to the lieutenant governor first, Cruz
Bustamante.
BUSTAMANTE: Absolutely. I think the very first thing that we
need to do is continue to invest in higher education. It is
essential. If we're going to stay on the cutting edge of a global
economy, we have to be able to invest in our children. We must have
access of every qualified student to our universities and our
colleges. The kind of creativity and the talent that comes from those
universities is what created our boom in our economy.
In fact, the boom in California's economy led the way for the
nation's boom in their economy. We can do this again, but only if we
invest in our higher education system, and not allow 123,000 community
college students to be left out of the system this year.
The second thing is we need to absolutely fix this worker's comp
issue. There's absolutely no doubt about it. I've already talked
about how we need to find an incentive for good workplaces and have a
disincentive for bad ones. I think that that's how we should go with
worker's comp fixes.
STATHAM: Next.
HUFFINGTON: Absolutely. I agree about fixing the worker's comp
system and going beyond the bill that already passed the legislature
which was insufficient.
But also, you know, Cruz, when you talk about the fact that we
have increased tuition fees and the fact that there are many college
kids...
BUSTAMANTE: Opposed them.
HUFFINGTON: ... who can't go to college...
BUSTAMANTE: I opposed them.
HUFFINGTON: I know you opposed them.
BUSTAMANTE: I opposed them all.
HUFFINGTON: But your party...
BUSTAMANTE: My party....
HUFFINGTON: Governor Davis, you know, supported them. And the
bottom line is...
BUSTAMANTE: Well talk to -- then talk to him.
HUFFINGTON: Yes. I will.
But the bottom line is that it should never have been on the
table.
BUSTAMANTE: I agree.
HUFFINGTON: The bottom line is that this is a great
demonstration of how broken the system is. And I have a very specific
proposal.
BUSTAMANTE: On that we would agree.
HUFFINGTON: But I would like you to join me with (ph).
For example (ph), would you stop or help me stop the construction
of the Delano II Prison (ph) project? That is $600 million -- $600
million -- would completely make it possible for us to roll back all
the tuition fee hikes and have $150 million to spend. So would you be
in favor of that?
BUSTAMANTE: Let me tell you, Arianna, you may not understand how
the process works...
HUFFINGTON: Oh, please, you keep saying that....
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: But just let me say this so that you can understand
it for the final time.
HUFFINGTON: You know what? I have been writing about these
things. You can go to votearianna.com and see a complete proposal.
(CROSSTALK)
HUFFINGTON: Before you say anything you're going to say....
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: There are specific bonds that are left for specific
construction projects. If that facility was not built, the taxpayers
of the state of California would not save one dime.
The bigger issue -- and I agree with you -- the bigger issue is
fully funding education. I absolutely agree with that. And my "Tough
Love" plan, in fact, does do that. It provides a full funding for
Prop 98 and all of our schools, and it closes that hole...
STATHAM: We're off topic. We're off topic. You said schools.
We're off subject. The subject at hand was a two-part question. Do
you think California has a bad business climate, and if you do what
are you going to do about it, Senator McClintock?
MCCLINTOCK: Well, of course it does and we've talked about that
already. There are basically four horsemen of this recession --
workers compensation, taxation, litigation and regulation, and all
four of those have got to be addressed fundamentally.
We've talked about worker's compensation. We sit right next door
to Arizona. The worker's comp costs are one-third of what they are
there. Let's just swap the systems.
Taxation -- we've got to lower the overall rate of taxation as we
saw from the story of Fidelity National leaving California, taking 400
jobs with them. You start that with the abolition of the car tax.
The -- in terms of regulation, that's why I've introduced a
Bureaucracy Reduction and Closure Commission, so that we can begin
weeding out these duplicative bureaucracies that -- and provide that
businesses don't have to needlessly respond to multiple agencies every
time they want to do something.
STATHAM: Thank you.
MCCLINTOCK: And if I could just say -- and litigation, we have
got to overhaul the tort reform system in this -- or, the tort system
in this state, one of the major initiatives that I will be introducing
will be a general measure to restore our civil courts to the simple
process of compensating victims of torts and move all of the punitive
damages into the criminal courts where they belong, or at least apply
a criminal justice standard order to them, as well as the English...
STATHAM: Thank you, Senator. We have two more opinions on this
question. Peter Camejo from the Green Party.
CAMEJO: Well, First of all, Mike, I want to thank you for the
question, but tell you that I think there is a myth here.
The biggest problem we're facing in regards to corporation is the
outbreak of a crime wave. You have the Enrons and WorldComs. And why
is it that the managers are all stealing all over the country? In
fact, there was a study done for two years -- and this was a ways
back, but it was very interesting. It showed that of the largest 538
corporations, in two years 67 percent of them violated the law.
There's no other neighborhood with that type of criminal record.
So the corporations -- what we need to do is get the rule of law
established. We have companies with felony convictions every single
year. Nobody goes to jail. Part of the problem is that the owners of
these corporations, the largest ones, are the pension funds. And
working people actually own these companies and don't even know it.
What we need to do is democratize, change our 1937 act, democratize
our pension funds so they can exercise control.
You know what we should have done during the energy crisis with
these corporations? Voted out all their boards and put law abiding
citizens in there and stop them in our tracks. That's...
STATHAM: Thank you. Nobody....
CAMEJO: That's what the answer to this problem is. They're
welcome. Business is welcome in California and has been super
welcome. Their taxes are as low as they can possibly go.
STATHAM: We're going to end this particular subject with an
answer from Arnold Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think that I agree with Tom that we have the
worst business climate right now anywhere in the nation.
XXX in the nation.
SCHWARZENEGGER: And I think that this is what drives businesses
and jobs out of the state and I think we have to reverse that.
Because the only way that we can pay off our inherited debt, which
experts are now saying is between $12 billion and $20 billion, and
deal with the current operating deficit is by bringing businesses back
because if we bring businesses back, then we bring jobs back. When we
bring jobs back and the economy is booming, then we create more
revenue and then we can afford some of the programs and pay off the
debt, which is very important, because we're not going to get any more
credit now the way things are going right now.
STATHAM: As you know, ladies and gentlemen, these people are
running for the governor for the state of California. Which also has
a lot to do with local governments. So our next question has to do
with state money for local government.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, I'm Helen Thompson and my question is
this, what services will your administration expect local governments
to provide and what source of stable funding will you give them to do
it?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: All right. You're still on deck for this one, Arnold
Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think it's very important that we have a good
relationship between the local and the state government. Right now,
it doesn't really make much sense. I think that, first of all, that
the local government should continue with the services they're
providing right now, but it is wrong for the states to go there and
take half of the property tax away and then to have the cities and the
local government go up and lobby in Sacramento continuously to get the
money back.
I think that they know best how to spend the money. The local
people down at the ground know which programs they need, how to
improve education. Each one of the communities have different needs.
I think they should continue with the services. If it's job training
or if it is drug rehabilitation programs or the services that provide
with police and fire department, all of those kinds of things. But
they should have their own way of funding those programs.
CAMEJO: But, Arnold, it was Pete Wilson, your campaign director,
who took the money from the counties.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Let me make one thing clear, Peter. On October
8, it's not going to be Governor Wilson or Governor Bush or any of
those kinds of things. It's going to be Governor Arnold okay? So
let's make that clear. Thank you.
CAMEJO: Can I jump in here?
HUFFINGTON: Let us just pray it's not, because the last thing
the state needs is Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. In fact, it's very
important that the people of California know who you really are,
because, you know, you've been saying so many things and then
contradicting them a few weeks later. First of all, the day you
decided to run, you told us you're not going to take any special
interest money...
STATHAM: We're talking about local government, I believe.
Excuse me, I believe you're off subject. We're talking about local
government.
SCHWARZENEGGER: When you were waiting an hour and a half to do a
photo op with me, was that the day?
HUFFINGTON: You're asking us -- no, no, it was actually the day
you were on the "Jay Leno Show." But it's very important if we want
to know who we are and if the public is to find our out who we truly
are to actually expose the inconsistencies.
STATHAM: Let's fine out who you are -- Governor Schwarzenegger
-- pardon me. I'm getting mixed up here. I'm going to have to lower
my meds.
HUFFINGTON: Stan, what are you drinking? See, what I...
STATHAM: Governor Huffington would do what for local government?
HUFFINGTON: What I would do is I would actually approach it from
the most fundamental problem we're having, which is the fact that Prop
13 is responsible for the fact that local governments are left at the
moment with so little money that, as Arnold said, they have to go
begging to the state government to get their money back.
And what we need to do, as I said is to mend Prop 13, not end it
but mend it. And that means protect its original intent, which is
protect middle class homeowners, protect people on fixed income and
seniors. But when it comes to multi-millionaires living in multi-
million dollar homes, why shouldn't she pay their fair share?
Even Warren Buffett, that Arnold Schwarzenegger brought to
California, said that and then Arnold told him he should do 500 sit-
ups. I say keep talking Warren and I'm going to make you a big Greek
fat dinner.
The bottom line is that unless we fix Prop 13...
BUSTAMANTE: Arianna.
HUFFINGTON: we are not going to be able to handle -- hold on a
second. You're getting in a really bad habit but I'm not easily
intimidated. I'm going to finish and then you're going to speak and
we can see who speaks louder in a foreign accent right?
SCHWARZENEGGER: You can increase all you want but you will be
having empty buildings out there. There will be no companies left.
They will be moving to the next state. So, you will have nothing.
You will not have accomplished the goals.
STATHAM: I appreciate it. I'm so grateful -- I am so grateful
that these candidates had the courage to engage one another. But we
have irreconcilable differences here, so we're going to go to the
Green Party candidates.
CAMEJO: Yes, I'm trying to be respectful to everybody here. I
want to thank Helen for her question because this is a mystery in
California. There is a problem here that most people are not aware
of. Our county governments are starved for money right now. Most of
the money they received is already allocated. The county supervisors
have almost no power at all. The fact is about half of their
discretionary money was taken away and then when we had surpluses in
the budget of the state, instead of giving it back to the counties,
they refused to.
This is creating a crisis and I'll tell you where it starts
hurting. Counties start looking at their pension fund as a big pile of
money that maybe they can somehow lower -- solve their budget problems
by not making the payments that they should be making.
So what we need to do is give that money back. We have to
empower the local governments. We have to give them more freedom. We
have to look at these issues more carefully. And I think as a
supervisor, Helen is raising the stress that she's feeling and that
all supervisors are feeling for lack of funding to be able to carry
out the important tasks they do, including preventive medical, the
healthcare, the issues of -- that if we cut those, we'll end up paying
more because that simply becomes a problem in the emergency room.
STATHAM: Thank you, Peter. We've already gone an enjoyable hour
and five minutes and we want to move as rapidly as possible so we'll
go to Senator McClintock.
MCCLINTOCK: Senator Wilson raided the local property tax funds,
I was one of the very few members of the state legislature who stood
up and tried to stop him. This is a cause near and dear to my heart.
It seems to me that the biggest problem that we've had with local
government is this blurring of revenues and authority.
Sacramento has not only raided their money. It's also usurped
their authority. We have got to restore the distinction between local
government -- the state worked a lot better when local governments
could use local revenues and apply those for local purposes. They've
got to have a dedicated stream of revenues restored to them, and then
they've got to have the full authority restored to them to use those
revenues as they best see fit.
Mandated state costs on local governments have got to stop. If
the state government wants to mandate programs for local governments,
the state government can bloody well pay for them. That is one of the
most important governmental reforms that we have got to embark upon,
because right now, we end up with the state budget being a political
grab bag literally robbing Piedmont to pay Pasadena.
STATHAM: All right. Time -- time constrictions. Give us one
more comment from the lieutenant governor for about a minute and a
half.
BUSTAMANTE: Actually, we agree on this particular issue. But I
think it's more than just not providing state mandates without
funding. I think you're right about that. But we should create
better partnerships. For example, right now there is an over
dependence by local governments on sales taxes. And as a result,
there is no emphasis on building homes in our communities.
They're building strip malls and auto malls. But they're not
building homes. If we would be able to swap out some of the sales tax
with some of the property taxes that we have as a state, there would
be more of an emphasis by local governments on building the kinds of
homes in the communities that we want. We all know that we have a
tremendous amount of need out there in the communities. We have
500,000 homes that we need to build in California. That's why homes
are so high in terms of their price.
STATHAM: 30 seconds, please, 30 seconds.
BUSTAMANTE: Creating that special relationship to fix problems
between the state and the county I think, is the best way to go.
STATHAM: Our next question involves another ballot issue that
you must vote upon. And so let's listen to the question about Prop
53.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My name is Sonya from Anaheim Hills,
California. Under governors Pat Brown and Ronald Reagan, California
spent up to 20 percent of its general fund on infrastructure such as
roads, bridges, colleges, hospitals and water systems. Now we spend
closer to 1 percent. Proposition 53 on the ballot raises that figure
to 3 percent. What are your positions on Prop 53 and what will you do
to invest more in California's aging infrastructure?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: And the first answer comes from gubernatorial candidate
Senator Tom McClintock.
MCCLINTOCK: Well, the -- it seems to me that the importance of
our infrastructure has been completely overlooked since 1974. If you
go back to the last year of the Pat Brown administration, a period
when we were building highways faster than Detroit was building cars.
We were bringing down the state water project to provide for that
generation's water needs. We had the finest university system in the
country. We were providing a free university education to every
Californian who wanted one. We had one of the finest public school
systems in the country.
MORE
XXX in the country.
MCCLINTOCK: Our hydroelectric dams were producing power ...
STATHAM: Senator, can I interrupt? I'm not going to stop you,
but may I interrupt? We have slightly less than three minutes to wrap
this entire subject up, so please.
MCCLINTOCK: Well, Proposition 53 is a very important start, but
we have got to go a lot further. My vision involves a new era of
highway construction, dedicating our highway taxes once again for our
highways, water construction, electrical plants, hydroelectric dams
that were being produced during the Pat Brown administration are
producing electricity to half a cent a kilowatt hour. That's $30 a
year for an average family. We've got to restore that dedication to
our public works.
STATHAM: Thank you. We need 45-second answers on this question.
The lieutenant governor.
BUSTAMANTE: Let's not romanticize about those days of Pat Brown
and even Ronald Reagan. I mean, that cost money. We haven't built a
new university in California in 35 years. That's not keeping up with
growth in terms of our higher education. We're not keeping pace with
our transportation, we're not keeping pace with so many other things
that we need in California. But all that costs money, Tom. And back
then, let's not romanticize it, because back then they raised taxes to
get those things. They knew that they had to make an investment in
our future. The Californians of yesteryear...
(CROSSTALK)
BUSTAMANTE: I didn't interrupt you.
MCCLINTOCK: ... inflation adjusted dollars.
BUSTAMANTE: OK. Well, we agree that we need to build more
infrastructure. At least we agree with that, but we need to also make
sure that we build it and we don't it in a way that says we're going
to think about something else.
STATHAM: Arianna, on Prop 53.
HUFFINGTON: I oppose Prop 53, because unless there is a
dedicated funding stream, that money will have to be taken from
somewhere. And it will be taken out of schools, or health care
provision. We can't afford to do that. Absolutely, we need to
improve our infrastructure, but I want to be the kind of governor who
would also bring a larger vision to this issue. It's not enough to
just talk about fixing what we have. We need to look at the fact that
if we actually become the leader in renewable energy and we become the
leader in having high speed ray and we are looking ahead at the
future, then we'll be able to create hundreds of thousands of jobs and
be able to fix our infrastructure.
STATHAM: Excellent! Green Party candidate Peter Camejo.
CAMEJO: I'm opposed to Prop 53. It's micromanaging. We do have
a crisis of infrastructure, it's super important, but the way you
finance infrastructure is very different from the year-to-year budget.
It's really a capital expenditure, and it should be able to self-
finance. But we are creating a disaster in the future for the next
generation if we don't start straightening out and have a 20-year
plan. I really think one of the things we're doing wrong in
California is we're not getting together and coming out with a long-
term plan of how to keep our infrastructure and make it possible for
our economy, and we need to have funding that's not connected directly
with the budget, but have like when you build a bridge, you pay a fee
to go across the bridge. That's what pays for it, and you borrow
money to build the bridge. So we can build the infrastructure even
without hurting our budget.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you. The final 45-second comment on
this will be made by Arnold Schwarzenegger, please.
SCHWARZENEGGER: I am for Proposition 53. I think it's a good
beginning. But the fact of the matter is that we need a lot of
infrastructure here in California. Infrastructure with the highways
and with the transportation, the railroads, infrastructure with our
water supply, infrastructure with our ports. We need that. We should
model ourselves after Texas. In Texas, they've committed $140 billion
for infrastructure. They are going to start now with building 4,000
miles of transportation, railway, freeways, highways and all those
kinds of things.
They have already taken the position we were first in export, now
it's Texas is first in export, because they are really aggressive, it
seems. That's what California ought to do.
STATHAM: Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, you've just heard
five excellent candidates for governor directly address voters'
questions from citizens of California and directly confront one
another. We have a special announcement that you need to watch if
you're interested in this election. Then we will be back for a final
two-minute closing statement from each of these gubernatorial
candidates. But now we want to introduce to you the secretary of
state, the honorable Kevin Shelley.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN SHELLEY, CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE: The October 7
special election is an extraordinary moment in our state's history.
That's why we all need to go to extraordinary lengths to make sure as
many people as possible participate. It's important to educate
yourself about the election and the issues at stake. Tonight's forum
is an important opportunity to study candidates and the issues that
are important to California.
Also, review your state voter information guide. The guide
explains the recall question, lists the replacement candidates and
their positions, describes the two propositions on the ballot, 53 and
54. Registered voters can also vote by mail. Absentee ballot
applications are on your sample ballot. Or you can apply in writing
to your county elections officials. The absentee ballot application
deadline is September 30.
The sample ballot will help you find your candidate. Bring it
with you on election day to the polls. In some counties, you may be
able to vote early at special locations. Call your local registrar of
voters or county election officials to find out how. Look on the back
of the sample ballot to find out where to go to vote. It may be
different than the last time. The county may use punch cards, touch
screens or optical scan voting systems. Reviewing your sample ballot
and knowing the voting systems used in your county will speed things
along on election day.
Go to go myvotecounts.org to find out more about your county's
voting system, how to volunteer as a poll worker, and to answer any
other questions you might have about voting and the issues on the
ballot. California special election is October 7. Make your vote
count.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STATHAM: And now the timing on our 90-minute debate has gone
from important to absolutely critical. And our first closing
statement will come from Arnold Schwarzenegger.
SCHWARZENEGGER: Thank you very much.
A lot of friends of mine have asked me if I'm crazy to run for
governor. They said to me that I have the best life in the world,
that I have a great career ahead of me. I have a lot of money, a
wonderful family, and I know that when I get into politics, they will
try to tear me down.
But my answer to them is very simple. I wouldn't have all of
those things if it wouldn't be for California. California has given
me endless opportunities to create this great career, the money, the
wonderful family, and the businesses that I have.
Now I want to give something back.
When I came over here to California, I had absolutely nothing. I
had just one thing, which was a dream. A big dream. To come to the
greatest state of the greatest country in the world, to the Golden
State, to California.
But now our politicians have let us down. Our budget is in a
crisis. And we have to do something about it. The politicians are
now punishing the people for the mistakes that they have made in
Sacramento. They are asking to increase the taxes. They are driving
businesses out of the state and jobs out of the state.
We have to change that. We need new leadership. This is what
this is all about. And I want to go to Sacramento and I want to work
for you, because I am not beholden to anyone. I don't owe anyone
anything.
I set always big goals for myself. And most of them are
accomplished, but this one is a little bit bigger than I am. And
that's why I need your help. I need a lot of help. I want you to
vote for me on October 7. I know that together, we can do a lot of
great things. Thank you very much.
STATHAM: Thank you, Mr. Schwarzenegger. And now your two-minute
closing statement, Senator McClintock.
MCCLINTOCK: Thank you, Stan.
The election in 13 days can be the historic turning point when
California rolled back the taxes and the regulations that are choking
our economy, when we reigned in our out-of-control bureaucracies, when
we restore our crumbling public works.
To do so, we have got to have a governor that knows every inch of
this government and is able to confront and challenge and defeat the
spending lobby that now controls it.
I am the only candidate at this table who has signed a no-tax
pledge. I am the only candidate at this table who supports
Proposition 54, to stop the government from racially classifying every
one of us. I am the only candidate at this table that supports the
California Republican Assembly's referendum to stop the bill that
gives driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. I am the only
candidate at this table who is pro-life. I am the only candidate who
supports the entire Bill of Rights, including our Second Amendment.
And I am the only candidate who for 20 years in the public arena has
proposed and fought for precisely those fiscal reforms that are
desperately needed to straighten out this state's finances.
Now, we over the years have always been disappointed by
politicians who make a promise and then don't carry through on it.
We've seen a lot of campaign promises made and broken just in the span
of this very brief campaign.
There's one thing that everyone, friend and foe alike agrees
about Tom McClintock. And that is, that when I make a promise, I keep
it. I steer a straight course, and I stay that course no matter what
the pressure.
And here is my commitment to the people of California. I will
cut spending and balance this budget without a tax increase, and that
is a promise. You can help, and I would sure appreciate your help,
and make a difference at helptom.com. Thank you.
STATHAM: Thank you, senator. We are precisely on time. A two-
minute closing statement from Green Party candidate Peter Camejo.
CAMEJO: We have a fiscal crisis in California. And we're not
going to solve it unless we establish a fair tax system.
The wealthiest 1 percent pay a 30 percent lower tax rate than the
average person is paying. And they talk about not raising taxes, but
they have already raised it on you. But they're not -- the wealthy
people are not paying their fair tax, nor the corporations.
EVENTDATE: 09-24
XXX nor the corporations.
CAMEJO: And we're not going to solve the crisis of education or
other crises unless we establish a fair tax.
The amazing thing is that we would have a fairly substantial
surplus and we could actually attack these issues. Now, is there
waste in our budget? Of course there is. And we should try to find
it and stop it and curtail it. That I agree with some of the comments
Tom has made. But we are 27th in education. I want to improve that.
I want to start affordable housing programs. I want to make renewable
energy. I want to make California the leader in renewable energy.
We also have to raise our minimum wage. I want a living wage.
Do you know that our minimum wage is 24 percent lower today when
adjusted for inflation than it was in 1968 and our economy has
improved so much.
We need universal health care. One of the problems that's deeply
bothering me and we need a governor that will speak out on this is the
issue of civil liberties and our people in California. I'm very
concerned about what is happening internationally, because California
is a key to this world. We're the fifth largest economy and we must
speak out.
Here we were for ten years supporting Saddam Hussein and arming
him and now we're illegally occupying that country and destroying the
federal budget. No, we need someone who will speak out in sport of
the Kyoto Agreement and the U.N., charter and the rule of law in the
world -- and the world port (ph).
What I want to do is fight for the change of our electoral system
so that you don't just hear two people in the debates. And it's sad
to say that in the next two debates they're trying to exclude me. The
League of Women Voters now doesn't want the person heard from the
Green person heard anymore whose calling for a fair tax. If you
believe in Democracy and sustainable economics and if you believe in
peace and free elections, vote Green, vote Camejo governor. Thank
you.
STATHAM: Thank you Mr. Camejo. Our next closing statement comes
from Arianna Huffington.
HUFFINGTON: In this election, we're seeing the rise of the fund-
raising machines. We have Arnold Schwarzenegger raising over $8
million from big business and we have Cruz Bustamante raising almost
$4 million from the Indian gaming tribes. If you want this to
continue, please do not vote for me. Vote for either Cruz or Arnold.
If you want to end business as usual, if you want a truly
independent leader in Sacramento then vote for me. And go to
votearianna.com and get involved, because we have 13 days left. And
only a truly independent leader can change our broken system.
Does anyone here believe that the reason we have 2 million
children in substandard schools, 4 million people below the poverty
line and 6 million people without health insurance is because we don't
have enough money? Of course not. It's because we have the wrong
leaders driven by the wrong values and the wrong priorities in
Sacramento.
And this priority are set by big contributors who are treating
Sacramento like an ATM machine. They put in their contribution, and
they pull out one favor after another. And I'm the only one who can
change this because I'm not beholden to anyone, because I have the
most individual, small contributors of any other campaign. And
because I'm running a truly grassroots campaign.
So I want to bring to Sacramento the priorities of a mother, a
good school, health care, a clean and safe world to live in. And I
want to bring passion and commitment back to Sacramento so that we no
longer continue to ignore the pain in our communities. So vote for
me. And together we can make history on October 7.
STATHAM: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Camejo (sic). Lieutenant
Governor Cruz Bustamante, a closing statement.
BUSTAMANTE: I grew up in a very big family in a very small town
in the central valley of California. We picked, packed and shipped
just about everything there was in the valley to pick. I remember
growing up with six kids in the family, growing up in government
housing. And my dad was able to create a barber shop and be able to
take care of his family. But he also had to have three jobs during
school clothes time. We learned the value of hard work. And this
recall is a serious business.
And I believe that the voters believe it's a very serious thing.
Regardless of what other people say on national TV shows. I think
it's so serious that they're going to analyze everything we've got to
say. They're not going to give anybody a pass. You're going to be
looking at us and trying to figure out what our ideas are, complete
ideas, how to really fix things in California.
Well, I'm running in order to be able to maintain the kinds of
values that's always going to think about those families who are
struggling and trying to make sure that every time you sign a bill,
every time you veto a bill, it's going to be about making sure that
those values for those working families are being covered.
We have to make sure that we also defend the woman's right to
choose. Make sure that our environment doesn't fall into some abyss.
We need to make sure that we protect the working families and make
sure that everyone has equal opportunity in this state.
That's the kind of California that our parents gave us and that's
the kind of California that our children deserve. I'd appreciate your
consideration when you vote for governor.
STATHAM: Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know if you really
realize the kind of courage it takes for these individuals even in a
compressed 60-day recall election, what they have to do and how they
have to change their lives and place themselves before you and, of
course, before millions tonight and go through this interchange. They
are five fine human beings here. Will you please give them a great
round of applause?