Texas Primaries '86 GOP Governor Debate

codes, text and TV technological participants. Texas Preferries 86 is being broadcast 86 is being broadcast live to all Texas Public Television Stations from the studios of KERA TV Dallas Fort Worth Denton. The moderator is Bob Ray Sanders. Good evening and welcome to the second and final televised debate between the Republican candidates for Governor of Texas. Seeking the GOP's nomination or Dallas Businessman Bill Climates, who became the state's first Republican governor in more than 100 years when he was elected to office in 1978. In 1982, he lost his bid for re-election to then Attorney General Mark White. Climates, now 69 years old, is a founder of a multinational drilling company and served

as Deputy Defense Secretary for four years under President Nixon and Ford. Former Congressman and State Senator Kent Hans served four years in Austin and six years in Congress. In 1981, Hans co-authored the bill that included President Reagan's tax program. The 43-year-old Lubbock Attorney switched from the Democratic to the Republican Party in 1985 after losing a Democratic primary race for the U.S. Senate. U.S. Congressman Tom Leffler of Hunt Texas is the third ranking Republican in the House. The 39-year-old rancher and attorney is serving his fourth term and sits on the powerful House appropriations and budget committees. Before his election to Congress, Leffler served as Chief Legislative Council to the U.S. Senator John Tower and later as Special Assistant for Legislative Affairs to President Gerald Ford. We'll begin with brief opening statements from each of the candidates. Time limits for statements have been set and will be strictly enforced. The order of speaking was determined by a coin toss. Mr. Clements, you now have one and a half minutes to have your opening statement.

Thank you. Good evening. We in Texas are in an economic crisis. Petroleum, agriculture, financial institutions, real estate, high tech and compounded with the problem of population growth going from $16 million to $22 million in the year 2000. This governor's race is the most important in my judgment since World War II. Our business climate, our family traditions, our very quality of life are all at stake in this election, and we must choose wisely. I started as was stated in the All Fields at 17, I'm a drilling contractor on a worldwide basis. I have been blessed many, many times, and I feel a deep obligation to this great state of ours. Our problems in Texas do have solutions. We're in tough times, and we must live within our means and cut the cloth to fit the pattern. All the polls show that I have an 18% lead over Mark White.

And yet I can say to you that we are not going to have an easy election. It's going to take the best efforts of everyone concerned. We're going to have to work together if we're going to choose the right path and do these things that we need to do to solve the problems that we in Texas have. Thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be with you tonight. All right, thank you, Senator Mr. Hance, your opening statement. Thank you. Today we face new challenges in Texas. We do have an economic crisis, something like we have not faced in a long time. We have to have new approaches. We have to have new ways to come up with solving these problems. I was the first candidate that announced with an announced plan for economic diversification. I came up with an economic development plan that includes establishing offices for the economic development office and other parts of the world to promote Texas products and seek out venture capital to create jobs here in Texas. Also in my plan, we plan to have a Texas day in the northeast and the Midwest so we can sell Texas.

You know, we have been very lazy in Texas because energy has been good to us and we have not had an administration that's been aggressive in selling Texas in economic development. I think that's very important that we be aggressive in bringing new businesses to the state of Texas and pointing out to them that we don't have an income tax. We're not going to under my governorship. Third thing that I would do is to set aside the corporate franchise tax during the first three years of the company would move here to bring jobs to Texas and then the other thing is to have some type of tort reform change so that we can get these insurance liability rates down. I faced economic crisis before as a leader in 1981 and that was when I carried President Reagan's tax cut. We cut your taxes 25 percent across the board and it saved you a bunch of money. In fact, I tell people if they want to, they can send in the difference in what was saved to the Ken Hance campaign committee. Thank you. It's a little bit of your opening statement please. Thank you Bob Ray and good evening. There's no question that our state is facing some really tough challenges.

Challenges in the oil fields, challenges on farms and ranch, challenges in the job markets. But none of us would have ever suspected that today the rate of unemployment in Texas is higher than the nationwide rate and beyond that let's look at crime. We saw last year a 12 percent increase approximately in the rate of crime in our state and you know you can put that right on the back of Mark White because he's been giving the early release of criminals by the thousands from our penitentiaries. You know what Texas needs is a strong and decisive leader. During the next 15 days you will be making one of the most critical decisions for this race and that is who is the best candidate who can defeat Mark White. Let's look at the facts for just a moment. Bill Clements lost when he was governor of Texas and lost big against Mark White. Kent Hans lost when he ran as a Democrat in the primary two years ago. The questions that we need to ask is can Bill Clements come back and win as a challenger or can Kent Hans win when he's been a Democrat who's been defeated?

I believe I bring to you the ability to win. It's not just because I've never lost an election but it's because I can bring you the leadership, the type of stout direction that number one will create new jobs in Texas. Number two will protect and expand businesses in Texas. I'll be stout on crime and also I'll bring you the very best public education system that the state has ever known. Thank you, sir. We're ready now to begin our questions from our reporters. Our panel of reporters. They are Rosalind Salise, the reporter for KERATV's news edition, Glenn Smith, Austin Bureau Chief for the Houston Post and Carol Neelan, Austin Bureau Chief for WFAATV. Through the ground rules, the candidates may not interrupt or ask direct questions of the others. They are permitted to use prepared notes and support materials but not to use props or visual aids. Each panelist will in turn ask a candidate a direct questions. Rebuttles from opponents and answers to follow-up questions will be one minute and late in length.

And we begin with Mr. Lisa's question for Governor Clements. Thank you, Bob. Right. Mr. Clements, in a statewide poll conducted two years ago for an anti-crime organization associated Texans against crime, 78 percent of those polls said they would favor a tax hike specifically for building more prisons if that's what it would take to keep criminals off the streets. Now why would you rule out any tax increases if that would help solve the problem of the early release of prisoners, which is a practice that you deplore? Well, first of all, I think that everyone needs to understand that our Texas tax revenues are in fact up 38 percent in the three years since I left office. In the last five months or the first five months of this fiscal year, starting September 1 through January 31 in Mr. Bullock's most recent fiscal notes, our tax revenues are up in that five months period, 12.4 percent. So we have all time historic highs as far as our Texas tax revenues are concerned.

The issue here is not do we need more tax revenues if the question is on the spending side. What we need to do is scrub the budget and allocate those funds for the prisons that are necessary to build more prisons. When I was governor, we had the largest building program in Texas history in our prison system, $203 million, almost a quarter of a billion dollars during my term. We built 3,200 beds at one time in capacities as far as prisons are concerned. So during my administration, we had more construction and spent more money than any other governor in Texas history. Mr. Hans, rebuttal. 1977, 1978, I served in the state senate. We were passing all those law and order bills to lock more people up and thank goodness they were passed. We did start locking more people up. Bill won, that was involved in government at that time, believed that we weren't going

to have to build more prisons. We were. I think one of the problems is that Bill Clemens did veto prison bill in 1981 and in talking about spending, I think that if you look at spending, Bill, the spending in your last biennium was 9 billion more than briskos last biennium. It was an increase of 56 percent. So there was a substantial increase in spending during that time. Okay, Mr. Laplett, your rebuttal. I pray I think that first of all what we need to do is think in terms of our prison systems and what we really need to do is state government. That's one of the primary responsibilities of state government and that is to have the necessary prison facilities to keep the criminals behind bars until their senate has been served. I have a proposal which would move forward the construction of our prison facilities and keep those criminals off the street instead of doing what Mark White is doing. And furthermore, my proposal is one that calls for the necessary money is not to come from state revenue increases but rather to take the money that we have from the offshore

oil and gas settlement in Washington, which is some $421 million and use that to provide the $150 to $175 million that's necessary to build those facilities and keep those criminals behind those bars. Okay. What do you have a follow-up question? Yes. You mentioned in your opening statement that you thought we needed to bring down the liability insurance rates. Who do you feel is responsible for those rates and how would you exactly bring them down? Well, I think that there is no one certain entity that you can blame. The first thing that I would do is put a cap on a pain in suffering. I put a limit on what could be recovered under a pain in suffering. Also, I would allow the winning party to recover damages and as far as attorneys' fees and all their cost. The reason for that is to discourage people from just filing frivolous lawsuit. In other words, they would have to stop and think before they filed a lawsuit because they lost, they would be out of the cost to the other side.

Another thing that I would do is to put a four-year statute of limitations on products liability cases. This is something I supported in the State Senate. Back in 1977, the State Senator Grant Jones had a bill to do just that. Also I think that we have to look at the way insurance companies handle their reserves. I don't think that anything should be off limits. And I think that the governor, to be successful in getting these rates down and be far out of the public and the consumer as well, has to be kind of an umpire with all the groups that will be involved. Okay. You're a bottle, Mr. Leppard. Well, Glenn, I agree with Kent. What we need to do is have a governor who will lead, and in this instance we need to have the address of those premium rates that have blown the roof off the house. How do we do it? Well, we look at placing a ceiling again on the amount to be collected for pain and suffering. We look at doing away with frivolous lawsuits. We look to check in the fee of the exorbitant rewards to the attorneys. And we also deal with Texas laws that deal with joint and severable liability.

I also believe that it's high time for the governor of Texas to call a special session. And in that special session, it would be number one to take care of this problem with the premiums going through the sky. And number two, to look at our fiscal problems, and also to get about the bill, the position of building those necessary prison facilities, which are long overdue, and that he didn't do anything about last year when he could have. Mr. Clemmonshire, are you a bottle, please? Our tort revision and reform is absolutely necessary under the present business climate in Texas. As a business person coming out of the business community, I know of specific cases where professional people, as well as small business people, have closed their doors and gone out of business and retired or started something else because they cannot get covered right now on their liability insurance. This governor needs to call a special session of the legislature. I've said this repeatedly, I've held press conferences to bring it about, and we need

to have a governor who will call that special session, scrub the budget, live within our means, include tort reform, and also allocate the funds for this prison that is getting ready to be built under a provision that is not constitutional. Now, if our governor would evidence the kind of leadership that he really should have in his office, he'd call that special session. All of you all statements would indicate that you tend to believe the insurance company's statements that the huge damage of awards have driven down their profits. Do you believe that? I mean, is there possible an insurance company need to double, triple, and quadruple its premiums just to break even? I think one of the things that has to be looked at, and I mentioned in my statement, Glenn, is that I think you have to look at how they're handling the reserves and their investments. The consumers shouldn't necessarily have to pick up the cost if they've been making bad investments.

I think that you have to look at everything, and I imagine we all three would agree on the fact that we're not going to say we'll just look at one area and not look at the entire area. Mr. Lepp, your rebuttal? Glenn, I can't say it is right, you've got to look at the entire arena. There's no question about it, but the area that we can make something happen, and is the area that we have just described. I'd like to say something else about Kent's opening statement. He indicated that he was far corporate franchise tax relief for businesses coming into Texas. Well, I'm not, because I believe that's unfair for those businesses in Texas that have been working hard, and why should we give a break to someone new and make someone else who's been here and working hard for a long time, pay a price? And there's something else that Kent said during that opening remark that I believe is, it needs to be addressed, and that is, he talks about Arthur in the President's Tax Reduction Bill, while I introduced him to Barbara Conable. And on top of that, one of the most important things that we had in there was 25% reduction in individual income tax rates.

He voted against giving the third year 10% reduction. I think the record ought to be mighty clear on that. Okay, Mr. Clements, a rebuttal? Now, the issue here has to do with a combination, as has already been touched upon by my two other candidates, on the basis that the insurance commission, the business community, as the payers of the premiums, and the legislatures should all work together to bring about torque reform. I think there's enough fault here to go around for everybody concerned. It isn't just the courts and the system of these extremely unreasonable settlements. It's also the insurance companies within their own structures. And I've talked to the insurance commission chairman about this, Mr. Olson. He is undergoing an audit right now to determine some of these things. We have a committee within the legislature that's now studying it. President Reagan is putting forward a reform bill in the Congress on this issue.

So this is a very, very front burner type of priority issue, and it must be addressed and addressed reasonably soon. The governor needs to call a special session. Thank you, Dennis. Ms. Neelan, your request for Mr. Leffler. Thank you, Mr. Leffler. You have said that you're not sure that the 22-to-1 student-to-teacher ratio is necessary in the elementary grades. Yet all the information that was presented to the legislature and to the select committee on public education was that teacher attention to students in those grades is critical. Do you really think that it's reasonable to expect a teacher to handle more than 22 students in an elementary class where the basics of reading and writing and math are just beginning? Well, Carol, I really believe in the concept. I would like to see us be able to achieve it. But like you, I also understand the real world here in Texas, and that is that we have some tough physical times right now, and by the fact that House Bill 72 mandates the 22 per person or per teacher classroom means that we've got some tougher times now trying

to address those needs, and I know that there are some exceptions already being granted by a TEA to certain school districts. I believe it is a good goal, and it's something that if we had the day that the revenues were no problems, I would support it. We would even be greater if we could have fewer in a classroom, quite frankly. But in a realistic sense, today is a day that we cannot say absolutely and unequivocally, there have got to be 22 and only 22. Hopefully someday we can have a fewer group of children under those teachers because then they could do an even better job of giving that personal attention, which is so important. All right, Mr. Clements. Well, it's interesting, Carol, that you would ask this question because I call together a conference of senior educators that are right at the top of the educational systems in our public school system to discuss this very issue. And their statement is that when you have 28 and above, you're in trouble. Between 18 and 28 is a reasonable number, and from 18 to 11, there's no change.

And you've got to get to 11 and below before there is a marked difference in the educational quality of that size classroom. So when you start talking about getting to 11, at the point then that you really improve the quality on a significant basis, you're talking about a tremendously expensive program. So I think this is one of the things that the legislature is going to have to look at and take a real hard look at, based on statistical information by the most professional educators in the country. It's a pertinent issue. No question about it. Mr. Hansler, a bottle. I want to make sure I specifically answer your question. You had to do with the 22 to 1 ratio. That's now being implemented in kindergarten, 1st and 2nd grade. It's phased to go into the 3rd and 4th grade. The critical years are really the kindergarten, 1st and 2nd grade that you have that size classroom. I think that what most superintendents believe right now is that in the 3rd and 4th grade, that if they could have a maximum of 24 with an average of 22, it would give them a little

leeway money wise so they could continue on those first 3 years to have 22 to a class. And I would certainly be supportive of leaving it 22 and K through 2, but 3 and 4, allowing them to go up to 24. Once you get bound beyond 24, really the teacher becomes a babysitter. And I've been involved in this issue for some time, and I can certainly understand why we need to try to keep it at 22 or lower. All right. Yes, Mr. Luffler, since you say that the cost is one of the things that concerns you about it, there have been a number of polls done that show that along with prisons, education is another area that people in Texas don't want to cut back on, or in fact are willing to pay extra taxes to get better education. Why not raise taxes for this kind of a purpose? Well, first of all, we are just seeing more than half a billion dollars being raised right

now by the local school districts to address this particular mandate from House Bill 72. I'm like any Texan. I'm a father of three young children, a nine-year-old, a five-year-old, a three-year-old. I want them to have the very best public education system. I think House Bill 72 was the beginning of that process, but I don't believe it's the best. I think we can do a lot more. We can restore discipline in the classroom. We can reduce the paperwork burden on our teachers. We can, in fact, give them a good appraisal system for the teachers where they will have input for the appraisal process where they've been shut out by Mark White, and then a career later if that's important. But I will also say that the TKAT test that they took didn't give them one bit of ability to teach better, and it didn't give us anything as taxpayers who spent some $7 million. Let's have them have an appraisal system, an evaluation system, based upon something they have input, and then we'll know what kind of teachers they are, and they will have a feeling being good about themselves inside to do a better job to teach the most important aspect we have, and that's our children.

Mr. Clemmons, you're a rebuttal. Well, I think it needs to be emphasized that we in Texas today spend $52 cents out of every tax dollar on education. And under the circumstances, there is a limit within the framework of our overall budget for all Texans that maybe don't have children in school as to how those tax dollars are allocated and how they're spent, because they're all sorts of services that the state is responsible for. It's not just the prisons, and it's not just education. It's also mental health and mental retardation or highway system, and so forth. I don't think there's any question that the people of Texas today are satisfied and happy and pleased to spend the $52 cents out of every tax dollar on education. But I think what we need to do is take a hard look at education dollars and how we're spending those dollars and get a better product. Mr. Hans, you're a rebuttal.

Well, I would just tell you, I'm not for raising taxes, and I think that we have to look at the budget and set priorities and determine what we can afford. The building presence, I think there will be sufficient funds available, especially if we work the prisoners. The way to do that is to have the prisoners' workers, the construction workers. That way you keep them busy, you also give them some job training, and you save the taxpayers a lot of money. Mr. Least, you have a question from Mr. Hans on the second round. Mr. Hans, you just said we have to set priorities, but in these debates, we're not hearing specifics. We've heard about the easy things to cut. We've heard about your plans to make plans when the session opens in January. But how are you going to make the hard cuts? Where are the hard cuts going to come? I think a lot of that will depend on what the price of oil is in January. I've said all along on budget cuts, first thing I would do is make substantial cuts in the governor's office. It's a little difficult for a governor to have standing with an agency to ask them to make cuts after he spent $3 million on a new jet for the governor's office.

After making cuts in the governor's office, I would then ask all the agencies to less their programs on a priority basis. Then I would go through and threaten to use the line item veto to veto the lowest priority programs that I believe to be of low priority. And then if that were not enough, then I would use across the board cuts. There are a few exceptions that you might have to grant TDC because of the overcrowding of the presence and stop the early release. But I think that's an overall game plan that we can work with at this point in time. I've not seen any of the candidates and I don't think that you will see any of the candidates outline specific cuts until we know exactly what the revenues are going to be come January. Mr. Laffler, your rebel. First of all, I'm the only candidate in this race who has a proven record on spending restraint without turning to tax increases. I've been doing it in my capacity in leadership in Washington on the Appropriation and Budget

Committee. And this is the kind of thing that we need to bring home to Texas now, someone who can look in a fair and responsible manner and make the necessary decisions where people don't panic but work together to now begin to live within our means in Austin, Texas. I believe that the first thing that needs to be done is as soon as I'm elected, before I'm sworn in, have a Grace Commission group similar to what we had in Washington, DC. That Grace Commission group is a bunch of people from the private sector looking internally into the executive branch of government, looking for those ways to get effective cuts, good efficiency. I believe that we ought to have, in the area of energy conservation, a plan that has just been released where we can save $100 million in our state offices today. That should have been done years ago. I believe as well that the governor does need to set the example and not be the exception to the rule. Thank you, sir. Mr. Plymouth, you're a bottle. Well, Mr. Love Laffer has apparently got a poor memory because I've never voted for a tax increase in my life.

I've never had an opportunity to vote for a tax increase in my life. The only office I've ever had has been governor and you don't get a chance to vote on tax increases. And as a matter of fact, as governor, I brought about a special session in which I nominated and opened up the issue to reduce taxes by $1 billion in taxes by abolishing the state property tax. So that's an absolute misstatement by Mr. Laffer and I resent that. I don't like that. Now, so far as how you scrub a budget, you set your priorities. We're going to have to increase the prison system. No question about that. MHMR is going to have to go up. And so is the Department of Public Safety. Our crime rates up. In addition to that, I've already said 52 cents goes to the education. So that leaves about 200 other state agencies and departments and commissions that are eligible then for scrubbing. And we can look at those and set priorities within them and have operational audits. I didn't see the light.

That's OK. Although, but I would think the voters deserve a little more specific information. And at this point, I would think in the campaign, you've already considered what areas or certain areas where you can make cuts, a grace commission aside and without attacking the governor's office, the governor's use of his jet, certainly you must have something more specific. Well, you know, we can go through and name specific programs. Small ones from a good neighbor commission that we could trim back some money there and try to get the private sector involved. The physical fitness commission could certainly be abolished. State federal office in Washington could have its budget cut by half or two thirds. Those are small ones that are easy to look at. I think the big ones that where you get the real money you can't tell until we know what the price of all is going to be. And I really just, you're not going to find a candidate that's going to go out there and make statements this early or I would hope the three of us wouldn't make statements

this early before we knew what the price of all was going to be. And that's to make statements before we know what revenues are going to be available would not be very wise. I don't know. Maybe Mr. Lepler is one of those candidates who will make statements. I look at some other programs that can't have, as mentioned, and for me that jet was made in my congressional district in San Angelo, Texas, that jet won't be part of state aircraft fleet. I can assure you of that. I would like to respond to a statement that Bill made about, he's never had a chance to vote for tax increase and Bill, I understand that, you're right. But you also haven't had a chance to vote for spending restraint either. And I know that while you were governor of Texas, you basically had a 33% increase in spending as far as the appropriations bills were concerned while you were governor. I think that is a fact. And I think it's something that we ought to air in this debate. I do too.

I think that's an excellent subject for us to talk about in the debate. And as a matter of fact, while our spending went up, I also left a billion dollar surplus in the state treasury. So I lived within our means. I increased the programs that I thought were proper programs. But every one of those programs and all that increased revenue was from revenues and not increased taxes, no increased taxes of any kind. I have never voted and I've never approved for any increased tax. And I have said with no equivocation that during my administration, if the people of Texas see fit to elect me, there will be no new taxes and there will be no increased taxes during my administration. Our revenues are up 38% in the three years since I left office and we have ample revenues. What we need to do is cut the spending side. And I know how to do that. Okay, Mr. Smith, your question for Mr. Leppler. To stay with this interesting subject of the budget, Mr. Leppler, you and your opponents have criticized the 1984 tax hike throughout the campaign.

If elected, would you roll any of it back? Well, I think first of all, what we see now is a situation in Texas where revenues are failing substantially as a result of the all-engas problems. The deep plunge in the price of all has changed the economic conditions of our state drastically. And I will also say that there are major programs at state level that need to be implemented. They need to be implemented efficiently. But that's the role in the responsibility of state government to include our highways and to include our public education system. But I will tell you what I would have done if I had been governor and what we've just seen Mark White finally understand is I would have practiced fiscal austerity or let's get to spending first before we turn to any consideration of a tax increase. Mark White said when he ran against Bill in 1982, and I was working hard for Bill then, that he'd never give us an income tax. What he did, the largest one in the history of our state. From my own perspective, the governor of Texas needs to look at the spending side, spending

restraint. I have a proven record there. And furthermore, there's one thing that you can count on from Tom Leppler. And that is, as long as I'm governor of Texas, there will never be a state income tax period. Mr. Clements, your rebuttal, please. Well, you know, the first thing that I think we have to think about is the past record. And during my administration, as four years as governor, we had operational audits within those departments. We knew what we could spend and what the priorities were, and we allocated those funds accordingly, and we still ended up with a billion dollar surplus. So I don't think that we need to go too far back to compare my record to Mr. White's in that regard. Now what he did, he misrepresented what happened in House Bill 72 and the resulting tax increase. And he misrepresented it by saying, first of all, that all those monies would be spent for education in highways. And that's an absolute falsehood.

About $700 million of those funds went to the general revenue. So the issue here is not whether the tax revenues were needed or not, but whether or not he was credible in what he said. Integrity is the issue. All right. Follow-up question. I'm sorry, Mr. Hans. Don't forget me. I wouldn't dare. I think the first thing that I would have done in 1984 is to open up the session for some cuts in some of the spending that had already been appropriated. There were two representatives, Wollens from Dallas and Pennington from the Houston area, Democrat and Republican, that had outlined along with several other representatives, about $700 million in spending cuts that they felt like could be cut out of the budget, and that money could have been spent to improve education. And that's the way I think he should have handled it. As far as reducing those taxes, the revenues available, if the price of all during my administration goes up $20 barrel like it did during years, Bill, I guarantee you, I'm going to have big tax cuts, big surpluses, and there won't be any vacant buildings in Houston or Dallas

and everybody will be happy. But we have to look and see what's going to happen in January. All right. Thank you, Senator. I apologize for the oversight. Now it's your turn for a follow-up. Well, if I understood all of y'all correctly then, whether it was through great foresight or whatever, you don't like the tax increase, but you agree now that it was necessary and you couldn't roll it back. So how can you criticize Governor White for signing it in the first place? Man, you misinterpreted what I said when I tell you. I do criticize him. I want a governor now who's going to lead taxes and should have been leading taxes for the last three years. And letting first Texans know what we really spend our money for, we have to do that. We've never really had to go through the learning process as Texans that, you know, our school system is really financed to a great extent by state money. Our highways are to a great extent financed by state money. Our prisons are funded by state money. We just kind of know those things and we assume them. We don't know where the money comes from. What I'm saying is we need a governor of Texas who's going to lead, who will educate the public.

We're of what we're spending our money for, then develop a consensus. We now have a $36 to $37 billion revenue base and I believe that is sufficient to meet the needs of what government is all about in Texas. Mr. Clements? Follow up. Well, I've already said our revenues in the first five months this fiscal year from September through January 31, according to Mr. Bullock's latest fiscal note, those revenues are up 12.4. It's not really an issue of do we have the revenues and can we afford this or can we afford that? The issue here has to do with credibility and integrity. You know, this governor that we have, Mr. White, promised that there would be no tax increases during his administration and he put on us $4.6 billion in taxes. So the issue here is not in the real world of rolling back those taxes that the legislature has put into effect. The real issue here is governor, White's credibility and integrity. That's the issue.

Mr. Ant. I would like to get a cross section of school administrators together and to see what programs that we can live with and what programs that are expensive and that are not cost effective and that might be one way to cut some of our spending. And if we cut enough through that and the price of all goes up, well then I would certainly roll back those taxes. I would start by rolling back some of the fees. I think the fees have been a tremendous increase. Now, Mark White, what happened to him, really? In 1984, you know, he's saying that he's not going to erase taxes in 1982 and then he comes back and spends everything they can get their hand on in 1984. They did not plan for a rainy day. There was no foresight whatsoever in looking down the road to what has happened. As Phil Graham says, the greatest comparison is that Ken Hance passed the largest tax cut in the history of the country and Mark White passed the largest tax increase in the history of the state. Ms. Neelan, your question for Mr. Clements? Mr. Clements, it's been very frustrating to those of us who have been covering you this

time to try to get some specifics out of you on the budget cuts that we've been talking about so much here. You have ruled out prisons, mental health, mental retardation and Department of Public Safety. In fact, they may even need more money. We've told us at times, one time, you told us that Santa Claus would come at Christmas and tell us what the budget cuts were. Well, Christmas is after the November election. I would like to know right now, specifically, some budget cuts you would make. Well, Carol, I can tell you right now that as an example, the governor's office budget and it's a significant budget. It's up 40 percent since I left office three years ago and that's just not acceptable. There is no reason whatsoever why this governor's office budget should be up 40 percent. And this is indicative of every agency right down through the state government. They're all up a large significant percent. As an example, the PUC, I can tell you again, specifically.

He promised that he would lower everyone's utility bill. Well, the real world and the fact of the matter is that everyone's utility bill on an average per year is up 102 dollars. Now the PUC has not done its job, yet its budget is up 50 percent. So you know, the utility bills are up. They're not down as Mark White promised. And yet the utility commission's budget is up 50 percent. Additionally, I can't... I... Oh, excuse me. I'm sorry. I don't see the light. I'm looking at Carol. I don't see the light. I'm sorry about that. Mr. Hanson, rebuttal. It doesn't see the light on our answers either in that we have not been specific. You're right. And I've always tried to be straight-forward with you and what my answer was that you can't tell until you get close to January what the price is all is going to be. Just like on presence, we do have to build some new presence. You know, whatever it takes to build some presence, I'm going to do.

Because I'm against the early release. That's a reason our crime rates are going up. If it includes saying that there will be an extra fee on some of the fines that people pay to help finance the prison, then that, I guess, would be called a user fee to try to make sure those that are breaking the law help build more prisons. That's just one example. The other thing I'd say is, of course, the last resort I would make across the board cuts. Mr. Leppler, your rebuttal, please. To go through a process, maybe from a different perspective, I mentioned having a commission, gentlemen, to the Grace Commission, which will come from the outside and look into government on the inside and give us a very thorough and in-depth review to reprioritize what we really want and to do it in the most efficient and effective manner possible. Now, also, I believe that the governor of Texas should reach out to the state agency heads and say, you are the career, professional, and government, we need your help. Show us where we can save or what we need to do in addition, but where we can do away with other programs.

And to give you just a specific, and I've mentioned it before, it's a small amount, but you can find things like this where, rather than having every two months inspectors from government and inspect our inspectors stations, our gasoline stations, where we get our stickers, do it twice a year, that'll save $2 million. But what you have to do, and I've been going through the process on the Appropriations Committee and the Budget Committee, is listen to people, reach out for them, let them give you your input, but listen with an eye and a very careful eye toward restraining spending increases, which is what we have to do. Time, sir. Kelly, you'll follow. Yes, just a quick one. Some of the largest areas of spending, beyond the agencies you've talked about, and excluding the governor's office and the PUC, which are relatively small spenders compared to other agencies, are welfare, health, nursing home inspections, highways, would you cut in those areas? There are. The ones that I have said that we should raise increase, and then I've said we should probably leave education as an allocation of 52 cents out of every tax dollar, leave

it alone. But that still leaves 200 plus agencies and departments and commissions in our state government that lend themselves to a budget audits and the budget scrubbing. Now there are any question that the monies are there. I've gone through the numbers and what we're really talking about is cutting those 200 plus that are left about 17 percent. And within those 200 agencies, we have to get a total of a 17 percent cut to equal about 1.5 billion dollars. And that's where we are right now in the budget. We are in a shortfall of about 1.5 billion, and we can get it out of those 200 agencies. All right. Mr. Hans. I looked at the number of agencies that Mr. Clemens would put off limits. And then we checked with the comptroller's office. And the remaining programs of all the other agencies would have to be cut by 32 percent. So that means we'd have to eliminate one third of the courts in the state.

And with the crime problem that we have, I wouldn't do that. And frankly, I do not think that bill would. But I think it's unrealistic to think that you can eliminate 32 percent in every other program that is available. All right. Mr. Leppler. You mentioned sort of the compassionate programs in your question follow up to bill. And I believe there is a responsibility for the state as well as other governments and individuals and churches and charities to deal with the compassionate needs of people. You have to prioritize how much you can do and what you can do. And in the area of health, MHMR needs to be accelerated and you've heard me say that before. We need to do something there that hadn't been done. That is to have a governor who will take advantage of a situation and bring a solution rather than waiting till the late date when the courts force them to. That's what's happening now. Also I believe that we're going to have to review very quickly next year as we enter the session, the Engine Healthcare Program. I think part of that program that dealt with prenatal and postnatal care was essential and well thought out.

I think other parts were not. And it has the tremendous ability of just quite frankly, going again the roof off the house as far as spending is concerned. What do we need? How can we afford it? We've got to blend that rather than just coming up with a quick fix at a short moment. Okay. Thank you. Gentlemen, this last round will be one minute response times each and we'll begin with Mr. Lisa's question for Mr. Leppler. Mr. Leppler, it's been unproductive to work with Mexico to curb the illegal immigration situation in the state. What are the alternatives, alternatives that would protect the rights of Hispanics in Texas? Well, first of all, when you deal with the illegal alien problem, let's look at it from one perspective. And that is, there will never be a legislative solution out of Washington to resolve what is essentially an economic problem in Mexico. Now I'm opposed to Simpson-Mazoltan. I'll vote against it when it comes up on the floor of the House if it does this year. But let's look at it from our own perspective as Texans. We need a governor who'll take the bull by the horns and try to come up with a solution

to a very complex issue. That solution in my judgment is reaching across the river to deal with the governors from those states and the other side of the river from Texas to work with governors from New Mexico, Arizona, and California to try to find a solution. But I believe the real answer lies in providing economic abilities in Mexico and that means in my judgment for businesses in Texas and throughout the country to be able to invest in that country without the fear of losing their investment. From the standpoint of the Hispanic Americans, I believe that what we need to do is look at each other as Texans. We really care about each other and provide the opportunities in the way for all of us. Thanks a lot. Mr. Clements, are you a bottle police? Well, I think the issue of the illegal alien is one of the most important long-term issues that we have in Texas. Right today, we have somewhere around three to three and a half, four million illegal aliens in Texas. I'm opposed, unalterably, to the Simpson Bell, as it's now constituted in primarily because of its amnesty provisions.

Under the Simpson Bell, right today, we would have an influx because of the provisions of amnesty in that bill of approximately legitimizing about one million illegal aliens that are in Texas today. And under the family provision of that bill, you have a multiplying factor of three and a half to four to one. So we would have, here in Texas, about four to five million new citizens that are not under any consideration today. I'm absolutely opposed to the bill. And what we really need is a discipline built into the system on both sides of the river where we have complete cooperation and coordination between Mexico and the United States. And until we have that, we will never succeed. Thank you, sir. Mr. Hansard, bottle. I've probably been the most outspokesman, a person on illegal immigration and helped kill the amnesty bill last year. I'm surprised that Bill Clemmence is happy that he's now on my side in July 24th, 1981, Fort Worth Start Telegram.

He came out for amnesty. Also in the August 13th of the Houston Chronicle, Bill Clemmence came out for amnesty and he said at that time that the amnesty plan for illegal aliens already here was too harsh. He wanted to grant more amnesty. This is an issue that's critical to this country and I cannot think of an issue that's more important to this nation than making sure that we do not grant amnesty to illegal aliens and we have to regain control of our borders. I'd like to see the federal law change so that local law enforcement officers can arrest someone for being an illegal alien. I'll be out front. I'll draw the line and I'll protect our borders. Okay. We have time for one more question. How many of you will not be raising articles from the Start Telegram or other morning news? Mr. Smith, your question for Mr. Clemmence? Mr. Clemmence, you mentioned earlier tonight that during your administration there was a $200 million building program at the TDC. Revelations that were made, some at the end of your administration, some afterwards showed us that a lot of that money was misspent.

There was a lot of mismanagement. There were overpayments to architects. There was employee theft of that money. Do you accept any of the responsibility for the confusion of the TDC, particularly the building program during 1978 to 1982? Well, I have to admit that it was an unsatisfactory situation without any question whatsoever. You will recall that I changed drastically the membership on the prison board and put new people in there and had audits within the prison department and put the administration of TDC under severe criticism. There's no question about that and it was a current topic of conversation at that time. So we did the best we could under the circumstances, I think, and we made great progress. We did have a $223 million building program. We did build the $3,200 badge. We did put 4,500 people into tents in order to avoid early releases.

And I also want to say that we had a terrible time with Judge Justice down in the federal courts. But one of the most important things is we did not have an attorney general. Okay, Mr. Hans, sure about it. I think the problem has been over the last eight years that no one's had either the courage or taken the time to stand up to Judge William Wayne Justice, the very liberal federal judge from Tyler, and appeal his decisions. The first thing I want to do as governor is go back and look at all the agreements been signed up to this point in time and file for rehearing on some of those matters. The state of Texas cannot afford everything that Judge Justice thinks that we can afford. You know, this is a very critical issue because what has happened with all the problems we have and with overcrowding, with the lack of vision to building any presence, we've been put into a position where they've got the early release program. We have to build on to the presence, but we also have to stand up for our own standards

and not let Judge Justice cram those down in throat. All right, Mr. Lepler. I think when you look in terms again about what a governor ought to do, as I indicated earlier about mental health, mental retardation, we're sitting, we wait, the governor doesn't move from a leadership capacity, and then all of a sudden the courts get into our business. And the same thing basically happened over at the prison system. What I want over there is to get about the business of building those presence, and I would disagree with Kent about using prisoners to build and construct the new facilities. They're inexperienced workers and they're going to make expensive mistakes. I think what we need to do is get the bids, get the most efficient and effective bed, and get about building so we keep those criminals off the street. All right, thank you, candidates, panelists. It's time now for closing statements. Again, the order of speaking was determined by a coin toss, I'm going to give you two and a half minutes each rather than the two. You were promised, Mr. Clements, we'll begin with you. You're very generous.

Thank you, sir. I want to repeat that I believe that this is the most important gubernatorial election since World War II. We have some very, very important issues to face. I am optimistic about Texas. I believe in Texas, it's been awfully good to me. I've been blessed in many, many ways here in Texas, but we need to preserve that in Texas which we all hold so dear. We need to be sure that our business and climate is favorable to business and brings about formation of capital and gives the kind of entrepreneurial spirit to our people that allows our people to go into small business and have hopes of success where they can reach their ambitions and their aspirations. You know, we in Texas have a very special place. And if we don't choose wisely in this election, we will go down the wrong fork in the road. And we will be in the position of other large states across the country that have traveled that wrong road.

We'll have higher and higher taxes, more and more taxes, and bigger and bigger budgets. And what we need to do is to face up to our problems, seek the kind of solutions that will maintain the family traditions and will give us the public schools and will give us the public services that we need, but we will live within our means. I do not believe that we need it in new taxes. I don't think that new taxes are necessary. Our revenue basis ample. What we need is the kind of leadership, the kind of management, the kind of experiences that I can bring to that office. I want to stand on my record. My record is governor is a good record. We reduce taxes, we left a billion dollars surplus, we reduce the bureaucracy, and we had an efficient cost-effective government that met the needs of the people of Texas. And I'm proud of that record. With your confidence and with your help, we can win this election. It won't be easy, believe me, because the importance of this election is well, well-known to the democratic side of the issues.

And they will be working hard, and they will turn out their vote. And what we need to do is to have the kind of grassroots feeling about preserving in Texas what we hold so dear, and that we consider so valuable and maintain their traditions that we're so proud of. And with your help, we will accomplish that. Thank you, and good evening. Mr. Hans, to Bill and Tom, and they are two worthy opponents, and we may disagree from time to time, but I have the utmost respect for them and have enjoyed this campaign. As governor of Texas, I will be the number one spokesman and the number one salesman for the state of Texas. We have to have new ideas. We have to have new approaches to solve the economic crisis that we're in. We have to recruit businesses to move to Texas. We have to broaden the base of the economy in this state. And part of that will be providing for quality education. You know, quality education comes from setting the highest standards for the students and for the teachers, and helping them to achieve those high standards.

It certainly doesn't come from verbally beating up on the students and the teachers for lack of leadership and lack of foresight. Another issue that I want to touch on briefly is the prison system. I can assure you that the prison system is in shambles. That's the reason we're having the early release program, as the prison system is in shambles. We've had no leadership in the prison system over the last eight years. It's been easy to push that item off to the side. As your governor, I will work and if it takes going to Huntsville twice a week and finding a director that will get in charge of the prison system and that will control things and run it like a prison and not like an army, then that's what I'll do. I will run the thing like a prison. This is something that has to be looked at closely because early release is what is causing us all the problems. That's what's made the crime rate go so high. And I'll get tough on crime, but part of that getting tough on crime is doing something about the prison system.

The issue of illegal aliens was brought up. I think that's the number one issue that we're going to be facing over the next two decades. We're seeing over a million people in this state and those are the low estimates that are illegal aliens. I feel sorry for Mexico and I feel compassion for them, but we can't take everyone from the third world countries and take them into the state of Texas without causing severe consequences on our structure system, on our schools. We just can't do it. We have to draw the line somewhere and I'll draw the line at the border and I'll be an out front spokesman to change some things and to stop the flood of illegal aliens that we have at this time. In this primary, I hope that you will vote and support for us and work for us. Workwide is not going to be easy to beat. He's a tough candidate, but I can carry rural areas and I can carry the cities. And we need a candidate that can do just that. So if your priority is beating Mark White, then I'm your candidate.

Thank you, sir. And I would say special thanks. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Mr. leftler. I'd almost give you my time. They won't let me. One. But to the panel and to KERA Television, to Bob Rae and to Bill and to Kent. Thanks for tonight and thanks for allowing us to be able to share our views and our visions for Texas. This primary has been a great experience for me, but we've put our records on the table and we've given our visions for the future. And now we're getting down to the final stretch. You can almost see that final wire out there ahead of us now. And there's no question that the next governor of Texas is going to have his work cut out fine. What we're going to do is to work hard because the next governor of Texas is going to have to make a big difference. I believe that I can give the kind of leadership to make that difference. And as I reflect upon the programs that I have proposed over the last months of campaigning throughout Texas, I'd like to talk about them in brief very quickly.

I have a comprehensive economic plan. It is one that calls for a special office on enterprise and trade that will consolidate all the efforts in Texas to really promote Texas, promote us economically across the board, beginning with protecting and expanding our businesses that we have, bringing in new industry for our state, finding new markets for our products, be they domestically or international markets, and also competing with other states to bring jobs into Texas and not let them flow out and finally to provide for diversification of our economy. That is critical for the future. I think in terms of what Texas is about and Texas needs to have a governor who has doggone tough on crime, I am sick and tired of seeing criminals have more rights than the innocent victims and the law abiding citizens and our law enforcement officers. We've got to get about the business of building those necessary prison facilities to keep those criminals behind bars until their sentence is served and also today we need to have a governor who is going to act because we have something that is approaching our state

and it can be very dangerous and very bad and that is the high increase in the inflow of illicit drugs. We need to stop it and stop it now. I care about my children and I want them to have the very best education system in the state. Even the best in the nation and I will do everything to achieve it and I will continue to reach out with the educators, the parents and concerned citizens to provide that and then finally I want to be your next governor. I ask for your vote tonight as I conclude as I have traveled throughout the state there have been some Texans who say Texas will never be Texas again, they are wrong. Texas will always be Texas and with your help we will make it even better. Well thank you, that concludes this last televised debate, I want to make a special consideration to thank you Mr. Clemens, Mr. Hans and Mr. Leffler, my colleagues in the media who joined us here tonight, it has been one of those kinds of things I would also like to take this

time to tell all of those people out there on your behalf to indeed vote on May 3rd. We can say which candidate but we hope we will help them make that choice. That is it, our thanks to all of you and thanks to our public television stations for carrying this broadcast. Good night.