Voter's Pipeline; 42nd Congressional Race

Welcome to election 82 one of the series of special election programs on channel 50. Why did I didn't I know when we present candidates an issue to the voters. Today's program features candidates in the new forty second congressional district. Some tough choices face the U.S. Congress. According to the U.S. Department of Labor the nation actually experienced deflation in the month of March the first decline in consumer prices since 1953. And yet the nation's unemployment rate reached 9.4 percent in May its highest level since 1941. The battle over the federal budget continues to be the most urgent domestic issue. The White House and the GOP have not yet been able to reach a compromise with the Democrats over enormous deficits projected to top 100 billion dollars this year. And a hundred and thirty billion dollars next year in the budget proposed by the president. Following California's new reapportionment Plan Orange County will now include all or part of five congressional districts each representative receives a base salary of sixty thousand six hundred sixty two dollars a year and serves a two year term. Today we'll consider the race

in the forty second district. The new 40 second congressional district created through reapportionment includes sections of North West Orange County and runs a snakelike course along the coast into Los Angeles County. As far as the Palace Verdes Peninsula. In Orange County the district includes the cities of Huntington Beach Seal Beach and parts of Los Alamitos and Westminster. It also includes Seal Beach Leisure World. In Los Angeles County the district includes the cities of Torrance rolling hills rolling hills estates San Pedro and parts of Long Beach. The forty second district has two hundred ninety nine thousand registered voters including those in both orange and Los Angeles counties. Of those voters 46 percent are Republican and 43 percent are Democrat. Where the 11 percent of the other parties and unaffiliated category. And now let's meet the candidates. Republican Tom Hines Shimer is rolling hills as a senior staff scientist with the nonprofit research corporation. He sits on the Rolling Hills City Council and is chairman of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. He's been

on the Rolling Hills City Council since 1972 serving three times as its mare. Republican Congressman Dan Lungren of Long Beach is completing his second term as a representative of the existing thirty fourth congressional district. He served on the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Committee on Aging. Mr. Lungren an attorney is also chairman of the Republican task force on crime. Democrat Jim Spellman of Long Beach is an attorney with the Orange County Public Defender's Office. He's a member of the Democratic Central Committee at both the state and local levels and is on the party's state finance committee. Richard Spellman is also a past president of the Long Beach Democratic Club. Democrat Martha Zinah of rolling hills Estates is the controller of a Los Angeles based service business. She spent 15 years as an accountant and was the first woman manager of the finance department in a major airline company. MS It was on as a member of the palace a very democratic club and has worked as an advisor in the Junior Achievement Program. John Donoghue of the Peace and Freedom Party lives in Long Beach and works in a cleaning and repair business. He

describes himself as a socialist and peace activist and worked with many political groups such as Alliance for survival and the Seal Beach nuclear action club. Mr. Donahue is also a member of the state and county central committee of the Peace and Freedom Party. Well now we're going to ask each of the candidates to make a one minute statement after which we'll be asking them some questions and we ask that all of you candidates cooperate by making a reply as quickly to that one minute requirement as possible. Let's start with you Mr. Chairman. I'm Tom hindsight. I'm a Republican running in a Republican district. Whoever wins the Republican primary in the forty second congressional district will be your congressman for many years to come. I'm a small businessman who knows how difficult it is to keep a business running in today's economic environment. I'm the chairman of the Air Quality Management District and I've practiced what I like to call Republican environmentalism for many years reducing air pollution by a

million pounds per day with no loss of jobs and without decimating industry. I'm a city councilman and I understand what makes local and regional government tick. I worked in the aerospace industry and I know the high technology aerospace contracts and projects which are the heart of our national defense and our local economy. Thank you. Thank you Jim. My name is Dan Lungren on the congressman in the thirty fourth congressional district which comprises much of the new forty second district. When I ran in 1978 and was successful and then ran again in 1980 for reelection I promised that I would try and change the representation that the people of my district had been receiving from the previous incumbent. I think I've done that. I went to Washington to try and see what I could do about limiting the size of government trying to cut taxes trying to bring some regulatory relief to individuals and businesses particularly small business. I worked hard at

doing that. I think I've been somewhat successful at it. I've been named twice the taxpayer's best friend by the National Taxpayers Union the guardian of small business by the National Federation of Independent Businesses and watchdog of the Treasury by the National associated businessmen. I think that a person running for reelection ought to be judged upon their record. I made a record I'm proud of and I would like to bring it forward to the people of this district and ask them to vote based on that record. Thank you Mr. Spelman. My name is Jim Spellman and I'm seeking a Democratic nomination in this newly created congressional district because I believe that the voters are fed up with the Reagan administration's policies that are causing the high interest rates the soaring high and on a soaring unemployment rate extremely high rate of business failures and the ever deepening deficits we have before us today an opportunity to apply common sense economic policies which we as Democrats believe must replace the Republican Party's ideologically oriented

trickle down economic and social policies. I think that we deserve effective representation in the Congress. I hope to be the candidate that brings you that effective representation. Thank you. Thank you Mark it was on. Hi I'm Martha Donna and should that lead me to enter this race for representative in Congress is my belief that the federal income taxes should be simplified. I believe that people should be taxed on their gross income and the tax rate should be the same for everyone. Everyone should pay taxes and that should relieve the burden on the W2 wage earner who is carrying the majority of the personal income taxes today. Money and energy that is now spent to avoid taxes can be channeled into more productive pursuits. Also lower tax rates should reduce the amount of tax evasion or seeing today which is at epidemic proportions. Taxes should be the government's source of revenues. Too many programs through tax deductions and tax credits. Are not subject to the annual budget

scrutiny. And we need to remove the incentives to borrow the income interest expense deduction from the taxes. All right thank you very much Mr. Donahue. John Donoghue and I believe that our fundamental problem lies in our inability to face the fact that our political economic system is a failure. Every day we see headlines that jump out at us that proves the contradictions that are occurring. Ten million unemployed and the subsequent rise in the rate of crime cuts in housing education and school lunch programs and other vital interests there are we have. Business fair use home foreclosures environmental disasters. Thirty million people live below the poverty level in this country. All of this

in the richest most powerful country in the world. We feel that this must change vitally if we are to survive. All right thank you we'll give you all of you have a chance to expand a bit on that I'd like to start with the first question. Not what I think are the important issues but I'd like to have what I feel to be is your responsibility as a candidate to define the issues yourself. So I'm going to ask you to go around and very briefly tell me what you have crystallized at the top one or two issues in this whole election. Let's start with you Mr. Hines what I think very obviously that the top issue that's occupying everyone's attention right now is the economy that we've got to do something that appears to be fair and equitable and reasonable so that we can get the budget deficit down as rapidly as possible that's something the president wants to do. It's something that we all have to do together fair and equitable and reasonable are for sort of general words you have the specific program yes I think what you have to do in order to be fair and equitable do something that cuts across everywhere.

First of all I would. Seriously push for a freeze in all the entitlement programs at the present fiscal year's level. That's a very tough step but you can't take the entitlement programs one of the time you have to go across the board in order to make that appear fair. I would do two other things at the same time. First in the defense area I would restructure the defense area to concentrate on the high technology areas where you get a lot of as they say in the business bang for your buck. You can spend less money on defense and get a better defense budget by doing that. And obviously those are the kinds of things that I've been working on from the side of things that are being done here in Southern California. When Ronald Reagan campaigned to be president the campaign one of his important tenets was to work toward a balanced budget and yet we have a very critical budget problem the deficit problem. Do you think Ronald Reagan is wrong to have to still after all use the programs that have so much deficits in him. Well you know what you quarrel with the president.

I think that what he is trying to do is get the budget balanced. And if you did the two things that I mentioned plus the third thing which is to review the ability of corporations to buy and sell tax credits I think that has to be rethought. If you do those three things then you are cutting across the board. Practically everybody I guess can get that through. I mean specifically if you were a congressman sitting in Congress right now would you go with him for the president's program or would you be critical of it and try to get more deficits cut back but I want to use the deficit I think he is trying very hard to get the deficits cut back that's the essence of the program and what he's trying to do is get a congressional compromise through which will allow that to happen. What I would suggest is that those three elements were really able to chart deficits even more than he has. They would cut the deficit very considerably but you're not going to what would you say are the two let's say the two top issues in the race. Well there's no doubt the number one issue across the country in this district is the economy the state of the economy. I don't for a minute suggest that the state of the economy in terms

of unemployment and in terms of the difficulty we have in getting the private sector moving is the fault of this president. Quite the contrary. If we had passed the program that the president had suggested which I campaigned on and I fought for and worked for in the Congress you would not have the depth or the length of this recession. The tax cuts that the president suggested I supported wholeheartedly he wanted to go into effect immediately that is as of January 1 last year. We put that off cut it in half to October 1st of this past year. The second element of it doesn't go into effect till July 1 of this year we wanted that to go into effect a full 10 percent cut in January 1 of this year. Why are those things important. Because virtually any economists you can find will say that the worst thing you can do is increase taxes in the midst of a recession. Tax cuts no matter whether you're Keynesian economist or a supply sider a monetarist or whatever you will agree tax cuts help you out of a recession. So I think if we did the president's programs in effect we would have had a far shorter recession. I have supported efforts to try and accelerate the

tax cut to bring it back to April 1 or January 1 of this year which I think would have an immediate impact one of the problems we have right now is the business community not just the business committee but the average person consumer or producer whatever who is the potential investor is afraid of making some commitments now because of all the talk in Washington of us getting rid of the tax cuts that affect the little guy. The third year the tax cut. Are you dismayed that the president ran on the campaign of balancing the budget and yet we're facing some of the biggest budget done not this country's ever saw not dismayed at all what I am feeling I do here again is he happy about off the deficit. You know what it shows is that the most fiscally responsible president we've had in office in 20 years cannot by himself balance the budget and I think it's an eloquent testimony to the fact that we should have an outside discipline on the Congress which would be a constitutional amendment to balance the budget present don't you bend one dollar he doesn't raise $1 in tax revenues. The Congress does and that's where the problem you're if you're in favor of a balanced budget amendment.

Absolutely I'm fighting for it. That's if the Democrats can't to have something to say about it what are the top issues. I joined with the Republican candidates in. Joining the main problem facing our society today as economical. And I think it's important to note that. Dan Lundgren has voted for a piece of legislation which Time magazine in its April 26 issue called the want to call the bill as one of the sloppiest pieces of legislation ever approved by Congress it was a shambles of bits and pieces containing unnumbered pages handwritten notes. It insulted the legislative process. We talk about fiscally responsible activities and the Republican Congress did not share in that fiscally responsible attitude when they enacted the Economic Recovery Act of 1990. We had promises from David Stockman in congressional testimony later belied through the Atlantic Monthly article as to voodoo economics which is not a

Democratic term which is of course. Vice President Bush's term and he used that and defining what supply side or trickle down economics was. Let's face it trickle down economics supply side economics doesn't work. Wall Street didn't buy it. Main Street doesn't buy it today. Wall Street was ahead of Main Street and that's what we had today. We had a deepening deficit soaring unemployment because of poor fiscal planning on the executive level. So you say you'd done that the New Year to all voters will decide this race on the number one economic. That is the principal one just under Goutman. Are you saying disenchantment definitely. You cannot make recovery definitely not only that I'd like to also yes for two there's the environmental issues James won in creating offshore oil drilling off the Pacific coastline here not just recd is also called the coastline district. Wherever we go we have environmental concerns that concern does not seem to be shared by the Department of Interior and the present Republican administration.

Martha I also think that that may have to do with the economy and I guess the one thing that everybody does agree on is that the economy is weak. I think there seems to be a great difference of opinion on how we got here or how we're going to get out of this. What are you ever going to do and what you do as a congressman from the forty second district OK. Well I think that first of all. What we had in the 1981 tax law changes aggravated an already bad situation because what happened isn't it. Number of additional tax loopholes were put into the tax laws and the revenue loss from this was not properly provided for nor was the increase in expenditures for higher interest rates and unemployment anticipated. Therefore the one thing that has to be done is bring down the federal deficit so that the interest rates can start to fall and business can start to get moving again. The interest rates from the huge government borrowing is strangling business.

Now you heard Mr Hines timer say at the end of the opening comments that whoever wins the Republican primary is going to be automatically heir go will become your your next Congressman. Do you feel that you feel Democrats are just a voice in the wilderness or do you think you have a viable chance. I'm talking about Democrats in general and it's look I feel that we have a viable answer. Well I do know that I am coming in with an issue that will reach across party lines. People are concerned about the fairness of the tax laws. Even the people at the higher end say to me I use the tax shelters because it would be silly not to. But it isn't fair and everybody starting to recognize we need something to get the country moving. Would it be fair to call you a one issue candidate then because you keep on coming back to the income tax if you know the president is very pervasive I think it underlies everything I'm not a one issue candidate. Let me go to let's hear from Mr. Donahue for we have to give him is say oh yeah thank you. I'm glad I'm here because I disagree that economics is the major issue.

What is it I don't know where I've been out on the streets talking to people in front of supermarkets getting signatures for the nuclear freeze initiative. And I feel that the major issue in this and in all of the campaigns throughout the country is nuclear disarmament and general this. I don't think they'll be any balancing of any budget while we have the president proposing trillions of dollars for military budget for every billion dollars that's spent on the military we lose 33000 jobs I don't want more bang for my buck I want more jobs and I want most vital programs for my buck. Let me ask you a question of the others. Now that we're on that the nuclear freeze a unilateral nuclear freeze that has been proposed in the country. Let's let the voters know how you feel about that. What how would you feel about a nuclear freeze right now unilateral nuclear freeze. I think that it would have to come whether you're liberal alright. MR.

Oh I certainly support the bilateral nuclear freeze as obviously not a unilateral freeze no swearing in not your unilateral nuclear freeze. I think we have to have a bilateral nuclear freeze I think it makes more sense to approach it in those terms. You understand that that puts you on the upper side of the fence from the secretary of defense of the United States does it. OK Richard. As are you going to clear unilateral nuclear freeze. What is your position as regards nuclear weapons obviously you don't want a unilateral free is what you want is to support the U presidential initiatives we heard the president very eloquently yesterday talk about his intention to really achieve a one third reduction. If we could all support that if we could understand it and listen to it and get behind that kind of a program if we had a one third reduction bilateral one third reduction we'd have a much safer world. Congressman LaHood. Well Jim if the real goal is to try and reduce nuclear weapons in the world what we ought to do is go back and see what's worked in the past. And I'd suggest we go back and look what happened with the ABM Treaty the Soviets were not

interested in being engaged in any serious negotiations with any ballistic missiles until the United States Senate in the early 1970s by one vote margin authorized an ABM system for the United States. Shortly after that. The Soviets said they would come to the table. We went to the table and we got a binding treaty limiting both sides to a single system. That's what works you have to show the Soviets that you have the will to match them in terms not dollar for dollar or tank for tank but at least power for power. And once they see you'll do that then it is in their interest to come to the table and it is in their interest to try and reduce the overwhelming number of nuclear weapons we have on both sides it cannot be unilateral unilateral disarmament is folly it is never worked it certainly hasn't worked with the Soviet Union Soviet Union didn't influence Poland because Poland was strong and they didn't march into Afghanistan because they perceived strength on the part of the Afghan rebels.

A question to you on another subject housing is certainly one of the urgent issues of the whole area. On Wednesday the House of Representatives of the United States had a vote to vote with three hundred forty three to sixty seven carried to have a 1 billion dollars in immediate mortgage subsidies I'm for sure you're familiar with the bill another Democratic congressman from Orange County Congressman Patterson and others are on the other side of this. You said this sentiment this bending disease we've had and this is the center of this Benghazi that we've had in Congress for too long. You are one of the few I say few of us are in the minority that voted against that bill and yet it seems that many people would think that would be a bill that would stimulate housing. So can you explain your vote. Well I don't believe in corporate welfare any more than I believe in abuses of welfare by individuals. This was a specific program in which we said we were going to create 1 billion dollars. There was as I pointed out in the debate on the floor no companion bill for a tax of a billion dollars. So you assume this is going to add to the deficit. Everyone agrees that there is a relationship between the size of the deficit the amount of money we have to go out and borrow

and interest rates because we crowd out everybody else. So what we're going to do we were going to put another program that costs a billion dollars and we were going to therefore add to the deficit which would have an impact on the interest rates supposedly to support a program that was going to help us subsidize interest rates. I don't think that makes much sense. You're trying to hammer. We've heard a lot of rhetoric about the economy and about being fiscal conservative. Yes down along and calls himself a friend of the tax fair and the watchdog of the Treasury. I think people have to be judged by what they do rather than by what they say. Personally I think we all know that Congressman Lungren voted himself a nearly nine hundred thousand dollar tax break in the last congressional period. I think that's unconscionable that cost 10 million dollars per year which the congressman put into their pockets and of course took out of the pockets of the taxpayers. He was kinds of things should not be tolerated. You say 10 million that is roughly 10 at least $20000 per Congressman I mean there are

400 some odd about that you want to start to tell what that had to do with the question you asked on housing but you're all talk about that it is not worth nineteen thousand dollars for a congressman and I challenge anybody to prove that it is it is an adjustment for the first time in 29 years in terms of how members of Congress will be treated with respect to their business expenses. And after 29 years I thought it was appropriate for us to change it. I voted for it I acknowledge that I voted for it even though it was part of another bill. I have bills in that I have supported since I've been there to require every single vote on anything that affects our pay and that it should not affect us until after the next election so that people have a chance to vote. But I'm tired of members of Congress coming up to me on the floor and saying I'm going to vote no on this and hope it passes. I've been very forthright and said that's how I voted. The real cost in Congress is not doesn't have anything to do with members salaries it has to do with staff and committee staffs have exploded I've been one of the leaders on the floor of the house for the last four years in cutting down on the size of Staffs. And I've turned over $250000 back to the federal treasury in moneys

not spent for salary and expenses on my own staff so I would be happy to talk to the. I was going to save them. I think a fair question to you is it is time with 10 million three hundred thousand people out of work in the USA was it appropriate act for the Congress to give itself this financial break. Well what the Congress had done two weeks before was to take out the one that they had given in 1952 in anticipation of a new one I would have preferred it be done at another time but I wasn't privy to when it was brought up when it was brought up I voted as it was presented. But you did vote in favor of this. I did vote in favor of it. We got a couple of minutes left I'd like to have all of you I'm going start with Mr. Donahue because you've been concerned with the environment the other day. I said the other day this week James Watt secretary of the interior who's been pushing for offshore oil leasing as a way to beef up the nation's energy. On Friday last Friday announced the sale next month of eight hundred fifty six thousand acres of off the southern California coast for oil and gas leases. Very quickly. What do you think about that action.

Terribly disgusted with it naturally. I'm very concerned about the environment and I think it's part of our problem is that as I said this is for profit. They don't care what they do. They'll destroy the earth they'll build bombs by the way I don't think the question was answered about the nuclear freeze because it is a bilateral nuclear freeze it's not unilateral and some people did not answer that question some people of that for unilateral freezes although I'm for what I was specifically talking to you asked the one that's on the. Going to be on the ballot in November here how those people feel about I think every person likely now. We're still on this one but I how many want to know how many are in favor of a bilateral freeze very quickly and to that question. Verified verifiable verifiable bilateral verifiable that's not a that's what's not for novels. You're not good. I mean we've got that I strait gate very quickly it comes back we only have a little time left off your leases with what writer was he wrong.

Very quickly very quickly. The secretary of the Interior has usually spoken on the part of the environment not against it. And he seems to be working against the environment. Very nice day on my opening remarks. But let me also point out as I always thought it time very quickly are you in favor of the offshore oil leases or not. I'm against it. OK. I'm sorry we are almost out of time gentlemen very quickly we're almost out of time in favor of offshore leases but I would have to see specifically which ones that he has approved. OK. With very careful environmental safeguards it's possible to do it. I'm sorry we're out of time right now of this have been an interesting discussion. Thanks for being with us and of course the final decision will be made when you go to the polls on June 8th in this important congressional district. Join us next week at this same time when we beat Orange County's candidates for the 30 second state senatorial district. I'm Jim Cooper. Thanks for being with us.