Jim Cooper's Orange County; 39th & 40th Congressional District Races.

The. Welcome to election for a series of special election forms presented by Kaohsiung TV to introduce the candidates and the issues to the voters today we will be presenting candidates for the Thirty-Nine and the 40th congressional districts in Orange County the thirty ninth congressional district covers the north and south and north central parts of Orange County that borders on Los Angeles San Bernardino and Riverside counties and extends from Graha and La Habra on the north to orange in the south. It includes LA propria FULLERTON Yorba Linda Placentia Villa Park orange and the heavily populated unincorporated areas of the Santa Ana River Canyon and parts of Anaheim. The 14th congressional district covers the south central portions of Orange County stretching from the Pacific

Ocean to the Riverside County line on the east. It includes areas from Newport Beach eastward to include the Cleveland National Forest. It includes the coastal cities of Newport Beach Costa Mesa and Laguna Beach. Also included are Fountain Valley Irvine Laguna Hills Leisure World and parts of Huntington Beach Santana orange El Toro and many other unincorporated developed areas. Well both of these districts are predominantly Republican and voter registration both are held by GOP incumbents. The Thursday night congressional district has two hundred eighty four thousand voters of whom 188 thousand of Republicans are 54 percent. And a hundred and seven thousand Democrats or 37 percent of the total. There are 14000 more women than men registered to vote in this district. The 14th district is even more predominantly Republican. One of the heaviest GOP proportions of any district in the nation. There are three hundred twenty eight thousand voters of whom 180 4000 or 56 percent of Republicans are 106 thousand Democrats or 33 percent of the total

in this district. There are 20000 more women than men registered to vote. And now let's meet the candidates. William downa Meyer Republican has been the incumbent congressman since his first election in 1978 he previously served in the state assembly from 63 to 66. And again from 1977 to 1978 he serves on the House Energy and Commerce and post office and civil service committees. Robert Ward democratic practice law enforcement for 33 years he's in the state planning attorney. He served on the Fullerton City Council from 72 to 80 and as mayor in 75 and 76 he was a member of the North Orange County Community College Board of Trustees from 1969 to 1973. Robert Batum Republican had been the incumbent congressman from this district since 1976 he served previously as a member of the state assembly from 62 to 76. He's a member of the GOP National Congressional Committee and the state and county GOP Central Committee he serves on the House Armed Services committees and the administration committee Carol

Bradford Democrat is a business manager of an electronic technology company and a business woman for 17 years. She's a director of stand and STA NDU that is an Orange County Peace Forum and is a former Ford Foundation scholar. She's a member of the National Women's Political Caucus and is on the steering committee of the Orange County Alliance for survival. Maxine Belle Quirke peace and freedom candidates has been county chairperson of the Peace and Freedom Party for the past two years. She is also a state south state party chairperson. She's active in the Unitarian Church the Gray Panthers and the Peace and Justice Coalition for Central America and elected member of the U.S. Congress receives seventy two thousand six hundred dollars per year for the two year term in office. Each candidate will now make a one minute statement on his or her candidacy after which I'll ask questions on the issues and I'll start with Congressman William down on march. Thank you Jim for inviting the candidates here today for this discussion. I always look forward to it. The American people next month.

A classic choice between two conflicting philosophies of government on the one hand Mr. Mondale and his supporters want to raise taxes on the American citizens. We've calculated that his programs will cost each family in America an additional hundred and fifty seven dollars a month over what we're paying today. We Republicans on the other hand are dedicated to keeping the tax level where it is and finding ways where we can reduce spending so as to reduce the deficit. I'm pleased to be a part of this effort and I look forward to the discussion here today. Thank you very much Mr. Ward. Thank you Jim. The message of my campaign is very simple. We in the thirty ninth congressional district have their representative who as a radical right wing philosophy far out of the political mainstream he votes against most domestic programs that gives the military about anything that they want. Now I can present a positive

responsible alternative. Having been the mayor of Fullerton recognized in a national study as being a very fiscally conservative city and also one that is well balanced and has a good quality of life. What we need in our district is responsible representation fiscal conservatism without sacrificing moral responsibility. And I can provide that representation. Thank you. Thank you. Congressman Batum Thank you. Pleasure for me to be here on this by any occasion with you again. I would like to say that in my view the issues are clearly drawn in not only this campaign but every congressional campaign and the presidential campaign throughout our land. The question is the Mondale challenge is that he will raise taxes increase spending increase social programs and take trust away from the American people. I support the other side. I support our President Ronald Reagan and I'm willing and happy to run

with him on the basis that we want to tell the government to get out of the way of the American people. We want to tell America to move ahead. We will not have tax increases if you elect Republican congressmen Republican senators and the president of the United States. So I think the issues are clearly drawn. Trust the American people to build their own economy rather than not trust them and do it with more government spending. Thank you Carol and Bradford. Thank you Jim. The 40th district deserves better. They deserve better than a representative who is absent more than 96 percent of his colleagues. They deserve better than someone who gets around the world at taxpayers expense. They deserve someone better than someone who pays for his wife's dresses and luggage and wallpaper his home out of campaign funds in combat doesn't represent the 40th district. Well the National Council of senior citizens rate some as zero on seniors issues and the League of Conservation voters votes them

as they're out on environmental issues. He is anti education anti women's rights and he even voted against a bill that requiring a minimum of nutrition and baby formula. I believe the 40th district needs better representation. It needs Carolan Bradford. Thank you. Thank you. Maxine Belcourt territorial boundaries are obsolete and appropriate only to flat earth is military invasion of space. With the current budget of a billion dollars is already a fact. Until recently the emphasis was on non-weapon applications such as communications navigation and surveillance. On December 19th 1966 we agreed in the UN General Assembly not to place an orbit around the earth any nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction. We also agreed not to test or establish military bases undergoing

research on high energy lasers with orbiting the Earth particle beam microwaves and rocket powered kill vehicles all violate existing treaties. The outer space treaty does not explicitly ban these as they are not technically considered weapons. They could be directed at nuclear power plants chemical factories or dams. We need a comprehensive ban. I'd like to ask each of you to respond to this question because it's frequent in a forum like this. It is what the media thinks it's important to read. I'd like to have you state what you feel are the important issues with the most important issues in this race. Let's start with you again Mr Downer. I believe in the American people though that we are in experiencing a very valid effective economic recovery in the last 21 months. We've added some 6.2 million jobs to the work force in this country

unprecedented rise in unemployment rate is a little lower than it was when President Reagan took office. Inflation rate has been reduced down to a level of 4 percent from what it was when President Reagan took office over 13 the prime rate is down 21 to 12. Those economic factors tell the American people that things are going well. They believe in this president they believe in his programs that it is our hope that the people of this country will do the thing that needs doing the most and in America today and that is if the people want well Ronald Reagan in the White House for goodness sakes give him a house of representatives composed of Republican majority were by his programs can be adopted rather than frustrated at every single step of the way by that distinguished public servant tip O'Neill from Boston you want to respond to your own into a chart. You want to get it corrected. Being a right wing conservative. Well you know labels can be made. They're cheap. I think that I think my opponent is a fine man.

I would base people in office like myself on how they vote which is relevant. And I happen to have a sense here of the National Taxpayers Union which list all of you are once they can get it and they'll find that I'm one of those in the Congress is most concerned about the money we take out of taxpayers pockets insofar as the programs that I vote for and vote against. Look I'm not going to be here and explain why I'm voting against programs. I'm challenging those who are voting for these a responsible level of spending programs and asking them where do you get the moral authority to spend and consume and transfer this debt to our children and grandchildren. I don't think we have the right to do it. All right. That's the word. The question. The question is what do you see as the most important issue that from your perspective in that district race the most important issue as I see it John is the issue of war and peace because unless we can maintain maintain peace then all

other issues become unimportant in a nuclear age. It's a matter of survival so that the issue is as I see it are moving forward and doing something in the area of arms control and making a real effort to find ways and means of slowing down this arms race. Are you are you charging that your point has been less than sensitive on war and peace. Yes I have. Yes I wouldn't make that observation because my opponent has a philosophy of voting for every military program that comes along and he has published a news letter in which he has quoted some very misleading statistics saying that in effect you can't trust the Russians. We can't negotiate with them because you can't trust them. And yet he cites the distance statistics going back before 1959

to prove his point. Are they misleading because they were before 1915. Yes but they're also misleading because the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and many other very rapid reputable agencies had said that during the last 25 years the record of compliance has been good. And yet he would believe that he would have us believe that the record of compliance is bad. That is misleading just about him. We'll give you a chance for rebuttal on that a little bit later. Let's start with you. The most important issue is as you see them. I think the most important issues Jim are as I stated earlier the revolution that is going on economically in America whether or not the United States government is going to trust the American people and get out of the way of the American people so our economy can expand. I think registration figures in Orange County are indicative and I think registration figures in the whole United States are indicative young people 18 to 25 are an unprecedented numbers registering Republican because they have faith in the future. They are looking for opportunity. The issues therefore are in

this election simply will we continue to move ahead with a sound economy a secure defense a strong education system opportunity for all. Where will we go back to the programs with increased taxes increased inflation increased unemployment and more government control of our people. I think the issues are not only clear but I think they will be resolved resoundingly in favor of us who want to give the president of the United States Ronald Reagan a strong Republican majority in the Congress. Your opponent has criticized you for that your travels and questioned the use of your campaign money. You want to respond to that. Well Mrs. Bradford is not a contributor to my campaign. My campaign is fully reported my campaign is fully voluntary my expenditures by my committee from my campaign funds are reported 100 percent legal. And if she isn't a contributor she really doesn't have room very much to talk about that on the Travel Jim. I'm a delegate to the North Atlantic assembly which is the

Parliamentary Group which runs the North Atlantic Treaty Organization which is that organization which has kept peace in the western world ever since World War II. I am a member of the Armed Services Committee and we have troops throughout this world. We have installations throughout this world. We have negotiations throughout this world. It seems to me that as assigned as a delegate to the North Atlantic assembly by the speaker of the House of Representatives and the Republican leadership that a member of the Armed Services Committee if he's doing his job and paying attention to the alliances that have kept this world out of war particularly in western western Europe for the past 35 or so years that a person has some oversight responsibility Carolyn Bradford the question and I'll let you respond to that if you want to with a question that you see as the crucial issues in this in this election campaign. Well since you're letting me respond to that I'll say that I think the crucial issue in this district race is there is the representation in the race. Mr. Batum says

that he justifies this travel by the fact that he's on the Armed Services Committee. But the fact is that he travels more than twice and he went out with anyone else on that committee does. He's traveled more than the secretary of defense and not only that but one third of the country which he has traveled do not have a military in the United States military presence. I don't believe you can justify that. Do you want to say what you consider the crucial issue from your perspective. Yes I would like to hear that. I would like to go on and say that I believe that having a solid economy and well educated populace and a stable world community are the most important issue to me and what is the second one please. Well educated populace and a stable world community to have a stable economy a growing economy which we're in a recovery now we're not in a growth period we're still in a recovery. We must get down the deficit that we absolutely agree the way we would do it

would probably differ pretty drastically. But I think that the debt the huge deficits which the present administration has built up every single year for the last four years the administration has entered a budget with incredible deficit spending. The Congress has has actually cut things from it. So when the blame is placed on Congress I think it's a little bit misplaced. Where do you think it should be placed. I think the president has to and his campaigning that in 1980 he said he was going to balance the budget. And yet every single year his budget has had tremendous deficits. I will come back to that because I want to start with the line of questioning about the deficit. Let's hear from Maxine Belcourt. You've talked to many people on the Peace and Freedom Party and you must know that you're in a minority a big minority as far as registration goes but you can keep in there fighting. I'd like to ask you first why why do you keep up the fight.

Well I think people should have an alternative to the Democrats and Republicans. I wonder what do you see as the crucial issue from your perspective as someone said that one of the most important issues that you see in this race what would you say. Well besides the defense spending which of course is the most important thing that has already been covered the last three weeks I've been working on Proposition 41. That's a state ballot issue that's a state ballot but it affects everybody in the county. And also it is an opposition that has been brought up by Orange County assemblyman and Johnson. It also would affect our federal matching funds so I think that that gives you what you think is the federal tie in. Because if that were to pass it would reduce federal matching funds. We will lose a billion and a half in federal matching funds. All right. It is an extraordinarily complex business to try and explain with any simplicity to the people who are listening to this program what it's going to cost to run this country for a year and

after the performance of the 98 Congress of the last nine day stalemate that was described by Senator Pete Wilson today as shameful and disgusting the inability of the Congress to resolve its finances to operate the government of the United States. Let's take a look quickly to reduce this as simply as we can. As of today the information that we were able to obtain from the Congressional Budget Office that it's going to cost 930 billion dollars to run the United States of America for the year. That's coming up from October to October. The deficit if that 930 billion figure is accurate and they said it's an estimate. The deficit estimate is one hundred and eighty billion dollars. In other words of that 930 billion dollars that we do not have 180 billion dollars of it. How is this accomplished. Another action was taken today and I should tell our viewers that we're taping the show on October 12th and up to date and I'm speaking know shortly before noon today to raise the national debt ceiling. The old limit of the national debt was 1.5 7 3. Trillions of dollars and we

know that a trillion is one thousand billions of dollars. The new limit is 1.8 to 4 trillions of dollars or an increase of two hundred and fifty one billion dollars in the deadening capacity of this country as opposed to what it was yesterday. I would like to have first two members of Congress to comment on what Senator Pete Wilson called a disgusting performance of the 98 Congress in his inability to solve the business of the government in the time parameters that were given. Let's start with Mr. Denmark first of all do you do you have anything to say about his description. He's cute and I respect what he says and it is my said the duty to say that I concur. For instance two nights ago when we were doing our work we had up on the floor for consideration the continuing resolution which contained roughly four tenths of a trillion dollars of spending. The sum total of nine appropriation bills that we did not adopt individually so we had to do something before we quit.

And normally this system is built on accountability that is you know constituent can tell how all member votes. Well I was standing there along with one of my other colleagues Bill Frenzel so trying to get a roll call vote to do that you need 44 votes. We couldn't get 44 of our colleagues to stand and record a vote. So the measure passed by a voice vote. Now what that does. It hides accountability. Taxpayers voters can't figure out who voted how. But hey you know I've I've said this before and I'll say it again if you want the people of this country want to find out you know who is responsible for this horrendous runaway spending. One of the best sources is the National Taxpayers Union. If this organization is nonpartisan they prepare an analysis of every vote of every member of Congress. This one in my hand is for 1983 and it lists. They take every vote relating to spending for 1983 and they read us

all. And anybody below 20 is a big spender. And what do you know every member of every Democrat from California of the 45 28. California's a big spender. It's fair to ask you if you are distressed with a 200 guy with an estimated 180 billion dollar deficit under a Republican president who you have allowed as many. Sure. How does that happen. Let me say that you know presidents propose and Congress disposes. The level of spending of the United States government is not set by President. It's set by Congress. We in Congress by the Constitution have the responsibility in the house where I serve of originating on appropriation bills. That's where the buck stops. And Tip O'Neill and his liberal Democratic friends control that house as they have continuously for the past 30 years. And I'll tell you why we didn't get that roll call vote two nights ago. Tip O'Neill did not want it to take place even though in my view we had more than 44 standing because he

doesn't want to have his Democrat members go home to their home districts and explain to their constituents why they are voting for this horrendous spending program. But Mr. Bennett would you comment on that that the performance of the Congress that has been described by Pete Wilson Senator Pete Wilson that is shameful and disgusting. Bill and I work very closely with Senator Pete Wilson. Pete was correct when he described the operations of the Congress in the last couple of weeks as shameful and disgusting. We shouldn't have been there. Actually according to the Constitution in our rules the House of Representatives and the Senate should be out in June not in October after the fiscal year is over. It was shameful and disgusting because our system was not designed to work that way and it was petty partisan politics that drove it into that situation. It's the Congress that originates the revenue bills it's the Congress of the United States that is responsible for all spending bills. And the House of Representatives as Bill suggested has been in the hands of Tip O'Neill and the spending

Democrats for the past 25 years. I will tell you something that perhaps most Americans don't know and that is that in this past year in the budget categories of the 13 or so 15 appropriations bills every appropriations bill that came out of the House of Representatives was increased over the president's request it was increased over the budget committees number it was increased over the committees on the floor with the exception of one category the only category that went below the president's request and went below the budget figure created by the Budget Committee of the House of Representatives was the defense of our country. Shameful disgusting. You bet. Does it bother you a continuing resolution. Let me tell you that is because the Congress will not do its work in a timely fashion. We had one chairman of a committee all the chairman or Democrats of course led by Tip O'Neill when chairman of a committee get up on the floor the other night in the closing hours of a session and tell us that he had an absolutely essential bill

that had to be passed so foreign trade and commerce could keep going. It might be of interest to the listeners to know that I check the date of that bill and it came out of committee in October of 1983 and it was urgent to be passed before we went home. Let's hear from the Democrats now. You you heard the discussion that we're looking at a $180 billion deficit. They've just had to increase the national debt limit by 250 billions of dollars in order to meet the obligations to run the country. You have any comment on that. Yes I'd say the real problem that Congress is up against is the deficits. And I don't think that it does a lot of good to go around trying to assess blame as to you know who is causing these deaths. Certainly the president submits the budget and he has not submitted a balanced budget. Now with regard to the budget and what should be done about it I think that the responsibility rests both with the president and with the Congress. And I think they have defaulted on their responsibilities. The reason that I

think so is that it's obvious I think to almost everybody that the only way these deficits are going to be closed is by a judicious mixture of spending cuts and tax reform and yet Congress has not been willing to address those issues do you want to respond on this. Absolutely. I'd like to respond. Unusual as it might be to Mr. Danny Meyers comments about the National Taxpayers Union. I've looked into that and their rating system and I think it's genuinely flawed. You say they rate it on. The members who vote for an amendment to increase or decrease spending. And so the ones who decrease spending from a number of different issues perhaps education perhaps the issues that would impact women and on down the line. Giving each one a one rating and yet they don't look at all into the size of the spending that the people vote for.

And so it happens to be that a number of Republicans often or any congressperson who votes for these huge incredible defense budget items gets raided one thing and one mark for it might be billions as the same as you might get one mark for cutting some minor like as they've been cutting and it isn't really minor solar energy. Taxes. OK. So what happens is that the Republicans look as if they're not spending but in fact that is not so. And when Mr. Batum mentioned about the one item that the Congress cut out of the whole budget the defense of this country was 233 billion is what the president wanted something in the 313. That wasn't they settle for 291. Yes. What a night it is. That's quite a few billion dollars. And and that could be spent in other very productive ways that

actually would pay themselves back for instance if we spent a little money on education which we've been cutting. Training research building building the infrastructure. It actually would pay itself back and would be more economical for the country. Now if you just let me finish about the defense budget part of the administration's own congressional budget director David Stockman. And also just in today's paper was an article with yesterday's paper excuse me from Air Force people who said that the Pentagon is a swamp of waste throwing away nearly 30 billion dollars each year. And if we would stop throwing money at an organization that only 6 percent competitive bidding is in the military budget perhaps we would have enough to not have to cut from these other essential programs which would actually help build our economy make us better able to trade with other countries in an equal fashion and so on. And I think we come out of the recession faster and on a

stronger footing. I'm trying to come to a sharp edge between the difference of a curl and Bradford of Bob that I'm in this race. What would you say are the biggest sharpest issues that decide what you stand for as opposed to what the income I would say absolutely the priorities that we place on on where could you be more specific. I believe that a government should not be any larger than it needs to be. But I believe it must address the issues that no other individual can address. For instance cleaning up the environment like Bob Batum doesn't want to clean up the environment or I would say that's true from his voting record. Absolutely. And he is against funding for education. He a lot of education. Yes. Well he was ready to. I was ready to eliminate the Department of Education. I won't say he is against education but his commitment to education isn't very strong. He's not reason or right he's cut funding I have some figures here. He's cut back appropriations for educational programs and I have the bill numbers. He's opposed science and mathematics education improved improvement.

He's voted against job training. He's voted against allowing computer companies to deduct amounts given to computers they donate to school I'll come to you just a minute. Maxine please with that do you want to respond to that that you're soft on. Well it's really hard to respond to. You're confusing a tax that really comes from nowhere. To say that I am against education I think that people out there know better than that. I have been a supporter and a participant in private and public education in the state of California which is a state function and not a federal function. I don't think there's any question about that. I have introduced and carried environmental legislation in the state legislature and introduced environmental amendments into those in the Congress of the United States such as local toxic cleanups absolutely absolutely no clean. Certainly not true. Know there are many bills against which I vote. Obviously there are things in which the federal government in many cases does not

belong. There are areas that are loaded down by the Democrat Congress. The reason we couldn't get out of Washington over the past few days is because the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives hung everything but the Christmas tree on the continuing resolution that was just a stopgap spending bill. No I will take second place to nobody as far as fiscal sound management is concerned of defense in the other areas of our government. That's what I'm actually worked on I wouldn't want to neglect you. You've got the questionnaire get well of course the budget that would be helped considerably if we cut the defense spending in a good place to start would be to close down the military bases that we have and well over 100 nation the rest of the world is living in fear already that we're going to drop a bomb on them I think it's time we clean up our act. If we close that. Are you saying that we should abandon our our national defense and ask what would you what should we not abandon them and this country too. Are you only saying for

the ones that are overseas. I think that we should get out of other countries is to stop meddling in their fair share that I'd like to respond to that. I read with great interest what a background article the Los Angeles Times just a week or so ago said that Mrs. Quirke and Mrs. Bradford were arm in arm on their attitudes towards national defense and world involvement. And this is what was reported in The L.A. Times. She wasn't running against Mrs. Bradford at all. So they apparently share the United States of America the United States of America to give up its commitment to other free nations around the world because I think unspeakable and unheard of. Let me ask a question. All right. Quickly I just want to comment on this. You know this struggle that we go through in the house week in and week out on spending money for defense spending money for social programs. A good example is spending money on the Nicaraguan which And other than a. Let me finish my point about the rebels annually. The Office of Management

Budget puts out a pamphlet booklet listing expenditures for everything and they track spending. They divide federal spending into four categories defense social programs interest on the debt and all others. So you're able to compare spending on defense over two decades and the end the facts are that in the last 22 years defense spending has grown by 21 percent. And social spending has grown by three hundred and fifty percent. And the point is the reason we're in this fiscal mess is that we're not spending too much on defense we're spending too much on the social programs in order to honor the commitments of a bunch of politicians who have gone around this country has known that Mondale is promising everything to everybody without any concern about who's going to pay the bill. That's why we're in this fiscal mess. I have and I want to go into a flood but can you make it very short. Well I think that that's what my opponent has just said. He needs a response. It is very deceptive and misleading because

he made the same statement the other night and I looked up the facts and they're wrong. And just exactly what did he say that was wrong. Well what he said what was wrong was that the spending had gone up 21 social act gone up 350 right now. What he has done is next. Apples and oranges because two decades ago the trust funds and Social Security were not part of the budget. So that skews the whole thing. He's not comparing the same things. Now I looked at it that the budget without the trust fund just put the trust funds to one side and compare the spending. Now what has happened in the last 20 years is that social and economic spending has gone up 9 percent. And defense spending has gone up 62 percent. And those are figures that come from the League of Women Voters. And they are comparing apples with apples. Let me let me talk Arango from apples to floods here I'll do it differently. Just before you open the floodgates just may I say that since 1962 since we're playing

a numbers game and the ratings came in all of that since 1962 when social program expenditures in this country's budget were 24 percent and now they're over 50 percent with defense spending in the 1960s years was fifty more. More than 50 percent of our nation's budget. And now it's 27 or 28 percent. The trend has just absolutely reversed between social spending and defense spending with defense of our country coming in second. We're roughly in order to put it in perspective we have had the figures that we're talking about 291 but only five like the average defense like out of 930 billion total budget cuts roughly thirty three cakes that I would like to ask the question. All right Congressman. Go. And that is are the figures that you're supporting taking into account that two decades ago the trust funds were not included in the overall general budget. And after that there was a budgetary process change and now they are. And that makes the whole comparison meaningless. I want to ask you that

question. One of the responses that the figures the comparison that I just related are in 1972 constant dollars so that you can compare across two decades for the impact of inflation. And yes the figures that I have quoted do contain all federal spending in 1962 the base year I'm talking about including Social Security. So that you know I'm comparing apples to apples and I'll be happy to share that dinner with you and responded that really answers the same. All right. Let me move to floods because Orange County for anyone listening to this program we have many new people in Orange County who move into our county. Orange County is in a very very critical floodplain which has been described by the United States Army Corps of Engineers as the worst flood hazard that lies west of the Rocky Mountains there's been a program for a 1.3 billion dollar flood control plan that had it been put in by the Congress and had it been signed by the president would have gotten this county on its way to the Santa Ana River flood control plan. As we sit here at this broadcast that is not

being done and the information that was being given is it was not put in because of a presidential fear of a presidential veto. Let's talk about that 1.3 billion dollars and the flood control project desperately needed by Orange County. That is not going to be done at least as of this city. Is that it. I'm really glad we got into this issue because it really shows a little bit about how my opponent does not represent the district for as long as I can remember people in my district which are the majority of the people who will be impacted if we do have a major flood. I have been pushing for a flood control plane plan such has been around for over 10 years writing years. Right exactly. And that my opponent though he's been in Congress for eight years has dragged his feet for many years in and even addressing the issue and even proposing even far from proposing legislation. And finally this past spring and I was wondering whether it was because he's

getting a big challenge in his race this time he actually came forth with some partial 754 million I believe plan to partially help the problem. And I was very happy about that because at least it was a step in the right direction. Well now it seems this last time when it's come by come up in the house the vote was 336 to 64 for the plan that included the holy water and the water project that went out of the pot that was voted on. And back at the end of September that was the last time it's come back and again now. Each of the three representatives in Orange County including Mr. Dan Meyer and including Mr. Patterson Republicans and Democrats alike except for Mr. Batum voted for it. He voted against it. All right. But I do want to make a comment on this question Do you have anything to say about what controls are

telling us. We've had another attack here and I think it's only right for them to come. We'll come to you Mr. Ward again this is unfortunate that Mrs. Bradford doesn't understand the legislative process. Yes I voted against tacking on $18 billion worth of water projects onto a bill that was surely going to be vetoed by the president of the United States for the simple reason that $18 billion was an outlandish amount and it was put in a narrow partisan fashion by the Democrat leadership of the House of Representatives. You bet I voted against it. And what my opponent refers to as foot dragging is the point that the people upstream were not going to pay for the bill of 1.3 billion the people downstream were not going to pay it. There were flood control works up there that were absolutely unnecessary and overblown and I put together with the water resources people of the United States government a $716 billion package that was feasible and affordable. And we worked that out and we sent it down and it it was

agreeable to everybody and that's when the bill started moving. We included in that where the damage was really done in last year's floods and that's the drainage and flood control channels in Huntington Beach which with the first original upstream or 1.3 billion dollar plan would have not been touched would not have been touched by the flood control works that would have been upstream and the same kind of rain that we had last year would have flooded out Huntington Beach. So it's unfortunate that this got scuttled because of the 18 million dollar package of water that was or is that really not log rolling. Eighteen billion dollar thing which wouldn't have seen the light of day in either house and had it done that under last minute skullduggery it would have been vetoed by the president and we would still be back there. But all the spending Democrats could go home and tell their people that I did my best for that project and I heard it operate like where does that leave Orange County with its debt leaves. Orange County is like World War II had Orange County when they wouldn't bring the bill to the floor in the

first place and it's been there ready to go for almost a year because the Army Corps of Engineers is saying today that instead of being able to start 1987 this means now that the earliest we can hope to get started in 1989. That is an unfortunate turn if that is indeed unfortunate. I want to come to you also hear from Mr. dynamiter and then Mr. Ward do you having your say about this because your district is certainly impacted by this flood concern. I've been one of those in the House delegation from Orange County and San Bernardino Riverside that have supported this look into a project because in my view it presents a potential disaster to anybody who lives in Orange County. We don't know when the floods come with this story many as a million could be imperiled. We have this 100 year flood. I respect Bob's reasons that he is related as to why he voted against it. Quite frankly I held my nose and voted for that bill because unless Usman as a practical matter it is not probable that we're going to have one flood control project go through the house on its own or it has a tendency to be loaded up and

it's not a very pleasant prospect or process to watch. How do you get away from that from having this project get lost in this package of 18 billion that may or may not have merit Jim. How do you solve that. I believe the way we run it the way Congress works in this instance with flood control projects it is not probable in my judgment that we're going to have one flood control project go through the whole process if we're going to get it in Orange County kind of an omnibus then it's going to be an omnibus bill for all of us. That's why I held my nose vote for it even the US Army Corps of Engineers assessment is correct. This should be at the top of some kind of a priority list in the most perilous one and west of the Rockies. It certainly is. And I commend you for bringing it up today. Mr. Ward I have one comment and that is that one of the main issues in my campaign is the lack of representation that the people in our thirty ninth district are getting. And my information is that my opponent did not originally support this bill refused to sponsor the bill when it was first introduced in

1978. Only later came along. What we need is leadership on these questions. And of the Orange County delegation had been together and had all work in concert on this thing. We might have the bill by now. Carolyn BRADFORD You won't have anything more to say about the flood. We could certainly agree with that to affect the lives over a million people in Orange County whether we do address this problem or we keep on postponing it. I mean by we I mean the government you have anything further to add. Now just that when my opponent keeps saying that it's the Democrats again I repeat that the three Republican representatives in that district how their nose or whatever they had to do to get this protection for the people in the districts. MAXINE Well I think that money would have been better spent on the flood problem that we have which is really serious and stead of spending all the money on Star Wars instead of spending the money on the Star Wars the Star Wars program is not.

It's not going the IMX program has been postponed also. Are you concerned with that that the star worth isn't going to go there are two different programs. But I'm saying there are two things that the president had wanted that he's not getting now. Are you upset about that or are you glad that he's not getting it. Well I'm glad. Do you feel that we have any requirement at all to keep up our defense posture to preserve the national defense of this country. Isn't that a valid part of of any sovereign state. I think we're the biggest bully in the world. I'd like to change our image. Let me go to a hard question. Let's shift from it of an issue that affects us here because if you're sitting as a member of Congress you'd have to make a vote of whether this country should continue to help the Nicaraguan rebels or should it not help them anymore. And as you know now that the result of this Congress and the Congress is that there is a ban on any further assistance to the rebels to ban Bingol until February 28. How would you vote if you're a sitting member of Congress or if you would to go back to Congress help the Nicaraguan rebels or not help them.

I would have voted against helping the Nicaraguan rebels. And I have a number of reasons for that. But can you synthesize them very quickly for us. Yes. I feel that there is another process going on that we ought to be putting our primary emphasis on and that's the kind of door process. The nations closest to Central America Mexico Panama Venezuela and Colombia got to the point where there is a draft treaty that could solve all of these problems. Now my information is that as a result of what we have done in supporting the Contras has resulted in a vast military buildup in Nicaragua from about 12000 troops to 50000 troops something like that. And all we're doing is causing them to become more suspicious of us and to build up their military. Would it trouble you if Nicaragua were to become a communist state like Cuba. Well Nicaragua the present time does have a

Marxist government. I'm well aware of that. I mean a full fledged bastion of communism in Central America akin to Cuba. Would that trouble you. Yes it would trouble me greatly and I think it's a question of how you deal with it. And I don't think that you deal with it by by military means and by mining the harbors of Nicaragua and you know in an act which Barry Goldwater referred to as an act of war. I don't think that's the way that you do it. I think there are a lot of other nations involved and I think you do it collectively and you deal with it and through diplomatic and other channels and through at least ultimately the use of force. If if if that country turns aggressive but only then you want to come in at the same quick. Well to aid the Nicaraguan rebels. Yes I am against that covert actions in Nicaragua and also the Congress of the United States has voted against those actions. I mean I doubt that. Yes and I resent that the administration is getting around it and

finding them another way is I believe to the contract or a negotiated way is the best and and that we can see perhaps now beginning in El Salvador where President to stay has consented now and is willing to meet with the family and the FDR and perhaps they will be able to after many years of strife come to a negotiated settlement which will be good for all the peoples. And we can have countries down there that have a way of life that is not threatening to their people. And we can if not be friends we can coexist and and and have trade with them and they have a much less threatening. They ask the same question I asked Mr. what would it trouble you if the state of Nicaragua or the state of El Salvador for example were to become communist states. Cuba Nicaraguan government had came after their revolution. And I want to throw in here that America started with a revelation after their

revolution they came to the United States and they asked for our cooperation and assistance and so on and we turned them away. If we had done that now they're going to have that elections. And what they are having them sooner than the American people did after our revolution and and for that for 50 years previous to that under the samosa regime which we funded and supported heavily there never were any elections and we never even encouraged them to bother to try. And now this new government is trying to have elections and they sent a delegation to the United States to learn how to gently turn them away. You're suggesting that we are a more moderate regime. Exactly. For example Cuba. HK Yes exactly. Each country can have a system which is different and yet can co-exist and even cooperate with each other. You don't comment on that. Yes I think we should get out of all of Central America and give them an opportunity for all self-determination. All right. Very quickly to try to respond because of the comment about you know the revolution. One

of the premises of the position taken by our distinguished opponents here today is that well what's going on in Central America is a continuation of a revolutionary movement of which America was a part 200 years ago. But the defect in that assumption and that premise is is very powerful. The American Revolution which was fought 200 years ago was a political and economic revolution where people sought self-government in the process protected private property. The revolution going on in Central America today is a social revolution which has as its goal by force to take over government take over the property of all people and redistribute that property as those in power at the point of a Gun think is appropriate. All revolutions are not created equal. And to my colleagues I would like to ask them a question. At what point would you be willing to defend the borders of this country if you will defend it in Nicaragua or Salvador. Would you defend Chula

Vista would you defend Oceanside. How about Huntington Beach. I just give them a chance to answer that. I think that you'd have to have an answer to that. Let's start with Carol empresse saying that if we had treated the revelation differently we perhaps would have ever revolution similar to the United States. The people in these countries who have been oppressed in Nicaragua is a perfect example for 15 years with oppressive dictatorship and death squads and so on. These people want to have their children go to bed with a full stomach. They want to grow material. I mean food on their own land not Materi food. I'm sorry that it's going to get exploited. They want to have an education. They want to have health facilities. And under the Somoza regime for instance Holly I was Rathod we were fed millions of dollars in there and they never got rid of polio. And in one year they eliminated it totally.

I think that to answer this question What would you say that you would draw the line of defending. I would say not likely to get further and further away if we treated these countries in a different way. These people do not know the meaning the people who are rising up do not know the meaning of the word communism. They also don't know the meaning of the word democracy. They've never lived under either form of government. Yes some people come in and perhaps push them in ways but the people themselves. All they wanted to do was get out from oppression and not be killed by death squads and have their children. Are you saying you would if you would limit your defense would at our own borders not in that kind Times time now been saying if we traded other countries with human rights and with respect we wouldn't have to defend our our our borders. Right. Very quickly I want to get on to another area but about I am afraid that question is a specious question because it assumes that Nicaragua poses a great threat to the United States in its present form. My feeling is it does not because there is a process going on which I think will help solve the problem. And I'd like to ask one other question and that is the

largest country in the world. China is a communist country and we're friendly with China and we have relations with China. They are capable of doing a lot more harm to us. They have nuclear weapons and everything like that. So do we talk about going over there and taking over that country and overthrowing that regime. No. So I what I say is that we should work within the processes are going on now for a peaceful solution. And we only talk about drawing a line if there is a real threat. Very quickly do you have an opportunity to vote on Nicaraguan Akos I want to get on. Do you agree. I voted in favor of assisting those freedom fighters in Nicaragua who want to restore the revolution they thought they were starting for themselves in 1917. How did you vote. Did I ever get a chance to the because I want you on immigration here. We have the United States of America as was one of the first governments to recognize the Nicaraguan government Sandinista group. We have been sending aid to that country for a long time.

We have aided the Salvadorans in holding two not one but two sets of elections where the Nicaraguans have held none. Before we gave any aid to the Contras who were trying to win back their revolution in Nicaragua we clearly told the Nicaraguans if they would cease to become a sanctuary for Cuban Bulgarian and other East European and Soviet mercenaries that we would stop we would stop funding the Contras. But no they still remained to be a sanctuary for Bulgaria and Cuban Czechoslovakia Yugoslavia and instruments of war and weaponry. When they stop we'll stop. That's been very clear. How did you vote on the. I voted to continue the aid to the country. And we know that it's an order that was defeated and it is now banned until February 28. We have about two months left if you will help us out. That has to do with immigration that affects our area. We know that the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration bill has now been defeated for this time. It may or may not come up in the next session. Would you support bringing up a bill like Simpson-Mazzoli to deal with immigration in this country.

I would not support Simpson-Mazzoli in the form in which it was presented in Congress. I understand there were a lot of things that were done in the spring and summer but similar to what. No I would not because of the provisions that are in it that I think would lead to discrimination against brown people. All right. The question is is Simpson Simpson-Mazzoli or something like that if you were to go back to Congress were you surprised. I also was against the Simpson-Mazzoli bill as it stood. And I hate to sound like a broken record but I think if we did treat countries differently and say that they most of the immigrants besides the ones from Mexico or from El Salvador and Guatemala where we're supporting oppressive governments we would have fewer coming in. All right. Very quickly I'm very pleased that in passing for all my Hispanic friends something like something is only what you supported I voted against it. It can change the guest worker program that I think is an indispensable part of it that

comes out. I will vote against it. All right. But you will support you will support you say something like Simpson-Mazzoli I voted for it when it came up in the House earlier this year Jim. All right. I voted about it. There could be defects put in it that would cause me to oppose it. But the thing was originally before the House went to Walter Mondale said he didn't want it. I would support it because we need help with our borders and this would create disincentives to those who would come across illegally and create incentives for those people who are here and create a lawful climate wherein we could enjoy the fruits of the labor they could to for people to do so. All right thanks. On that note we're going to have to move along. Been a very good discussion a very fast hour. And of course the voters must make that final decision on November 6 times almost up. Please be with us next Friday night at 8:30 p.m. when we present candidates for the Forty-Second and the 43rd congressional district races. I'm Jim Cooper. Thanks for being with us. We.

The