|
2001 Virginia Gubernatorial Debate - Transcript
October 10, 2001, WDBJ7, Roanoke
Moderator: Larry Sabato
Candidates: Mark Warner (D); Mark Earley (R)
Voice Over: …From the studios of WDBJ7 in Roanoke, Virginia the Capital Correspondents Association and The University of Virginia Center for Governmental Studies present this 2001 Gubernatorial Debate between Republican Mark Earley and Democrat Mark Warner. The Center’s underwriting for this broadcast is provided by McGuireWoods Consulting.
Now here is tonight’s moderator, Center Director, Larry Sabato.
LS: Thank you and good evening. I am Larry Sabato, Director of the University of Virginia Center for Governmental Studies. Thank you for joining us for the final Virginia Gubernatorial Debate of 2001, cosponsored by the Center for Governmental Studies and the Virginia Capital Correspondence Association.
We are honored tonight to host the two major party candidates for governor of Virginia, Republican Mark Earley and Democrat Mark Warner. They are both fine men. And either would probably make a good governor. Having said that, our job at this debate is to be the public’s surrogate for the next hour. One of these two men will be spending over 90 billion dollars of your money over the next four years. And as a consequence, tough questions are in order.
I also want to mention there is a third candidate in the race for governor this year, Libertarian William Redpath. Mr. Redpath was not invited to participate in this debate because he is currently polling well below our established level of 15%.
Tonight’s debate is underwritten by McGuireWoods Consulting, a bipartisan, governmental affairs and public relations consulting firm with offices in Richmond, Washington, DC, and Northern Virginia. McGuireWoods is a subsidiary of McGuireWoods law firm. McGuireWoods has been home to Virginia governors of both parties. And in one interesting footnote to this years campaign, the chairman of both the Warner campaign and the Earley steering committee are part of the McGuireWoods team. And I hope that they are still talking to one another.
We also want to salute our host this evening, WDBJ7 Television in Roanoke. By producing this debate, WDBJ7 has shown a true commitment to public service. And thanks also to the many TV and radio stations across the Commonwealth for bringing this forum to the people of Virginia.
Now, Mr. Warner will deliver opening remarks first, as determined by a coin toss. Mr. Warner, you have one minute.
MW: Thank you Larry. I am delighted to be here tonight and I know I join with all Virginians in saying our prayers are with President Bush and our military as they defend our freedoms.
Now is not a time, though, for a return to politics as usual. Politics as usual created the budget mess this year in Richmond. Teachers got no raises. College construction was halted. Public safety was hurt. It was an embarrassment to Virginia.
The old style of politics of saying anything to get elected is not what we need. Instead, as a business man, I will clean up the budget mess in Richmond, restore accountability and no matter how many times my opponent may say otherwise tonight, I will not raise your taxes. Now more than ever, we need a leader with experience, experience in creating jobs and growing our economy. I will provide fresh ideas, a twenty-first century approach, a record of getting things done. That is the kind of leadership that will move Virginia forward.
LS: Thank you Mr. Warner. And now Mr. Earley your one-minute opening statement.
ME: Tonight is time for some straight talk about an issue that affects every Virginian. Who do you trust not to raise your taxes and who do you trust to protect your jobs? I put forward a sound plan to invest in transportation, education, safer communities, teachers and creating jobs all without raising taxes. As state senator and as attorney general, I have worked with George Allen and Jim Gilmore, and Senator John Warner to cut taxes. But my opponent has taken a different path.
When George Allen and Jim Gilmore ran for office, he called them radical and extremist. He opposed our plan to cut the car tax. When he ran against John Warner, he said John Warner was going to kick senior citizens out of their homes. And just last year, he worked to defeat President George Bush and opposed his plan to cut taxes.
Now, he has offered his own plan that requires a massive tax increase of 900 million dollars in troubling times. It is a big difference in this campaign. It is a job killer. And it puts your family’s financial security at risk. And I look forward to discussing it with you tonight.
Larry, thank you for hosting this.
LS: Thank you Mr. Earley. And now I am going to ask the candidates some questions from our Electronic Town Hall. Over the past few weeks, Virginians have submitted almost nine hundred email questions to the Center for Governmental Studies website, goodpolitics.org. And we selected some of the best for this evening’s debate.
The candidate to whom the question is directed will have one minute to respond and then there will be a thirty second rebuttal by his opponent except in special cases. And one of those special cases is coming up first.
Gentlemen, your latest television ads contain significant arguments about taxes and negative campaigning, issues about which we received several dozen questions from citizens. To provide some context, we are going to start out tonight by giving you both some free television advertising. Let’s watch two of your recent ads played together.
(television ads; Early, then Warner)
Well, you both look marvelous. But, people have asked us in email a very basic question: Who is telling the truth? And so, I am going to turn to each of you, give you one minute to respond to the following question from the people. Please critique your opponent’s ad and tell us why he is wrong and misrepresenting your positions. And the first minute goes to Mr. Warner.
MW: Thank you Larry. The whole issue of a referendum in northern Virginia comes from a failure of leadership of VDOT. Cost overruns running into hundreds of millions of dollars. The people of northern Virginia are fed up. It is gridlock, so they - the business leaders, the elected leaders - said, why don’t you give us a chance to help ourselves with a referendum.
My opponent has said that is a 900 million-tax increase. That is just not true. I said I would trust the voters of northern Virginia to vote on a referendum to decide whether they wanted to increase the sales tax a half a cent that could then be bonded to try to meet their transportation needs.
Now, don’t trust me. But, do listen to what other newspapers and other people have said. The Daily Press, the day after the last debate said Mr. Earley’s attacks and characterizations of the referendum were repeatedly not true. And then even further, trust the legislators - Republican legislators in northern Virginia, like Jack Rollison, who said clearly: Mark Warner’s position is not one to raise taxes, he just wants to give the people a chance to vote.
LS: Thank you Mr. Warner. Mr. Earley, one minute.
ME: The real question is who do you trust not to raise your taxes. One day after the stock market fell 600 points, my Democratic opponent released a written plan that was predicated upon a 900 million sales tax increase. He included the figures from the tax increase in his overall figures. He wants to raise taxes. Without that tax increase, his plan is 40% short because it makes up 40% of his plan.
And it is not just limited to northern Virginia. On page six, paragraph five; he talks about it only being conservatively 900 million dollars. And in paragraph three, says it could apply to other regions of the state. It is really not new. He supported Bill Clinton’s massive tax increase in ’93. He supported the national gas tax increase that didn’t even go to transportation.
He opposed us when we began to cut the car tax. So, it is consistent with his policy and philosophy and it is a disagreement we have.
LS: Thank you Mr. Earley. Now the next Electronic Town Hall question is for you Mr. Earley. And once again, I am going to give, in order to even out the times, each of you a minute to respond. Mr. Earley, many emailers said this year’s budget impasse between the Republican Governor and the Republican General Assembly was one of the most embarrassing and disruptive events in many years in this state. Many felt that you stood silently by Governor Gilmore. You’ve sighted your experience in high office as your main leadership qualification. But did you really show leadership during the budget dispute?
ME: Well, as you know Larry, for the last four years I have served as Attorney General, which is a tremendous privilege that this state gave me. I served for ten years in the senate. And during those years, we always produced a budget. I thought the failure of the Senate and House, last year, to reach a budget agreement was unacceptable. And I said so at the time. In fact, at the beginning of April when they came back into session, I released a press release calling upon my opponent Mark Warner to encourage his colleagues to agree to a budget agreement that would provide for salary increases for our teachers, deputy sheriffs and state employees - and I encouraged my colleagues in the Senate and House to do the same.
He was strangely silent and didn’t respond. So, I did speak out - I encouraged them. But, the fact of the matter is this: eighteen Democrats in the Senate did nothing to move forward and resolve this budget impasse. The Republicans were having a disagreement about how much to cut taxes and at least they were arguing about tax relief for hard working Virginians.
LS: Thank you Mr. Earley. Mr. Warner, one minute.
MW: If you want to know what old-style politics is, negative campaigning, you have just heard a minute full. That is not an accurate portrayal. Mark, you claim fourteen years of service and I respect that service. But, teachers in Virginia are no closer to getting their salaries raised to the national average. We have fifty thousand children who don’t have child health insurance who should have it. We have cost overruns at the Department of Transportation that run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. And then not having a budget this year hurt all Virginians. It was an embarrassment.
I’ll tell you this. When I am Governor, we will always have a budget. As a businessperson, I can’t imagine not having a budget. I would be out of business. But, that is the way things work in politics. We don’t need any more old style politics as usual. If you want a fresh approach, if you want someone who understands the challenges and opportunities of the twenty-first century, then my candidacy will bring all of Virginia forward.
LS: Thank you Mr. Warner. And now the next question in this Electronic Town Hall is for you. And it comes from a high school student by the name of Maegan Smith. Maegan is one of hundreds of thousands of students participating in the Center for Governmental Studies Youth Leadership Initiative, a program that provides free resources and activities for teachers and students to improve civic education. Many of these students are watching tonight. And they will participate in the nation’s largest online mock election later this month. Schools can still register to participate in this year’s mock election at youthleadership.net.
Now, let’s see the tape of Maegan’s question for Mr. Warner.
Tape: Good evening, my name is Maegan Smith and I am a sophomore in Ms. Redmond’s class at Atlee High School in Hanover County, Virginia. My question is directed toward Mr. Warner. Mr. Warner, how can you say that you support the public school system when your own children go to private schools? Many people are concerned with this inconsistency.
LS: One minute, Mr. Warner.
MW: Thank you Megan for asking that question. I am the proud product of public school. My folks went to public schools. My wife and I made the decision that we thought it was in the best interest of our children. I know that I am not embarrassed about that and I am not apologizing about that. But, I am strongly in support of public schools, public education in Virginia. I served with George Allen on the Communities and Schools Project to try to work on public schools that are in need. I co-chaired with the Math and Science Coalition, which tries to help improve math and science education in Virginia. And perhaps the best indication is the fact that public school teachers across Virginia have endorsed my campaign as the best candidate to make sure that public education in Virginia gets the resources and the attention it needs.
We are going to raise teachers’ salaries to the national average. We are going to have smaller classroom sizes. We are going to put much more focus on vocational and technical training. We need to make sure that every Virginia student has the skills to succeed. And we’re going to improve in order to improve on those SOL’s to make sure they are not just exams of rote memorization, but exams of real learning.
LS: Mr. Earley, thirty seconds.
ME: I am the only candidate in this race, Republican or Democrat, who went to the public schools of Virginia and whose children go to the public schools of Virginia. When George Allen ran for Governor, my democratic opponent said you shouldn’t vote for him because he was going to abolish public education. And when I began my campaign, he said I didn’t care about public education. It is a personal commitment for me. It is not just a public policy issue. We have a plan to reduce elementary school class sizes, recruit 21,000 new mentors to work with children, create educational scholarships for low-income children, to raise teacher’s salaries and to institute competency testing for new teachers.
LS: Thank you Mr. Earley. And the final question in this segment comes to you sir. It comes from a viewer who states, “This year, thanks to the budget deadlock, school teachers and almost all state employees received not a penny in raises. There have been promises of a caboose bill in January to provide immediately for a make-up salary increase. Will you and your democratic opponent - just yes or no - guarantee that you will support this bill and see that it passes?”
Mr. Earley, one minute.
ME: Yes. And it doesn’t take one minute to say that. In fact, we made a commitment, as I mentioned earlier, that we would not introduce the budget without raising teacher’s salaries. And then in fact, I was committed to raising teacher’s salaries to the national average over the next four years not only because we value what our teachers do, but because we want to retain our good teachers and attract teachers from all around the nation in the face of a national teaching shortage.
But I also believe in accountability. And I believe that it is important in Virginia that we institute competency testing for new teachers, a plan that my opponent disagrees with. I believe that we have great teachers in Virginia. It is why I send my children to the public schools, all six of them that are school age. And I can tell you, that the teachers that teach my children aren’t teaching by rote memorization. My children are getting a great education and we want to make it even better by increasing teacher’s salaries and by instituting competency testing for new teachers.
LS: Thank you. Mr. Warner, thirty seconds.
MW: The answer is yes, of course I will increase teacher’s salaries. But, this is again where the rhetoric doesn’t meet the reality. Mark, in 1993, you voted against the largest teacher salary increase in Virginia history. In 1995 you voted for a budget to cut education. And this year, you are part of the administration that without a budget didn’t have any salary increase for teachers. You can’t say one thing during the campaign and then do another thing when you have a chance to make a vote.
Public school educators all across Virginia are supporting Mark Warner for Governor because I’ll be the defender and supporter of public education in Virginia.
LS: Thank you Mr. Warner. And now I would like to introduce everyone at home and everyone in the studio to our outstanding press panel. First, Ellen Qualls of host station WDBJ7 who is the President of the Virginia Capital Correspondents Association and who has done a first rate job helping organize this debate. Thank you Ellen.
EQ: Thanks Larry.
LS: Pamela Stallsmith, political reporter from the Richmond Times Dispatch. Thank you Pam.
PS: Thank you Dr. Sabato.
LS: Jeff Kraus, State Capital Bureau Chief from WVIR Television in Charlottesville. Thanks very much Jeff.
JK: Thanks.
LS: And Matt Brock, Virginia reporter from News Channel 8 in Northern Virginia. Thanks Matt.
MB: Thank you Larry.
LS: The candidate to whom the question is posed will again have one minute to respond and then the opponent will have thirty seconds for rebuttal. The first question is for Mr. Warner, and comes from Ellen Qualls.
EQ: Mr. Warner, this debate was to have taken place on Sunday. On Saturday morning, your campaign staff said that on the advice of legal counsel, you would not be showing up if the Earley campaign did not sign a legal agreement promising not to use any of this debate in it’s advertising. We postponed the debate Sunday because America launched a military strike on Afghanistan. Within two hours of the war beginning, your campaign said that you would probably not be able to reschedule a statewide, televised debate. In both instances, what did you or your lawyers have to fear? And how should voters interpret those stances?
MW: I am here. We are having a debate. I think this debate is a good forum for us to exchange views and demonstrate the clear choices in contrast between our styles and our approaches. We have had this year four debates. That is what both campaigns negotiated. That is one more debate than we had four years ago in the gubernatorial campaign.
And perhaps more importantly it is four more debates than my opponent was willing to debate with his competitor in the Republican primary. My opponent refused to debate John Hager during the Republican nomination process. I think this is a good forum, this debate. So, I think we are going to continue to have opportunities to exchange views.
Over the next twenty-seven days, I am going to take my campaign to the people. And I have been very proud of the positive response we have gotten because we are running a different style campaign: a campaign that lays out a positive action plan for Virginia. It doesn’t resort to the old style negative campaign attacks that we hear in each of my opponent’s responses.
LS: Thank you Mr. Warner. Thirty seconds Mr. Earley.
ME: Well, I am simply glad that he is here. I think it is important for Virginians to have the opportunity to hear us discuss the issues. It is important for them to know the differences. It is important for Virginians to know that I have taken a pledge not to raise taxes, but my opponent refuses to take that pledge. It is important for Virginians to know that when we began to cut the car tax, my Democratic opponent opposed that plan. It is very important for them to know that despite what TV ads might say, that on the day after the stock market fell 600 points, he released a written plan that called for over 900 million dollars in tax increases in Virginia.
LS: Thank you Mr. Earley. Next question is for you from Pamela Stallsmith.
PS: Mr. Earley, you have accused your opponent of being untrustworthy and being a closet supporter of tax increases because of his backing of a referendum of a regional sales tax for transportation in northern Virginia. Yet, you yourself have been all over the place on the issue. In the spring you said that you would oppose it. Last month you said that you would be open to the idea. Last week you said you would “veto that bill in a heartbeat.” And then this morning, you were quoted in the Washington Times as saying that you would, “Certainly veto it in these economic times, but I can not see what the future is going to hold beyond now.” What does this say about your credibility on the issue? And what is your position?
ME: Well, I certainly never accused my opponent of being a closet supporter of tax increases. I think he has been very public on it. He opposed Governor Allen’s attempts to cut the business, the B-toll tax on gross business receipts. He opposed our efforts to cut the car tax when we began. And again, it is his plan in writing. It wasn’t a closet plan, a very public plan that called for over 900 million dollars in tax increases, and not just in northern Virginia.
And the point is that he supports that tax increase because he included that money in his plan. My position all along has been consistent. I oppose tax increases. I will have an open door to legislators. But, that does not necessarily mean I agree with them. And I wanted to make it clear that during these recessionary times, the worst thing that we could be doing was raising taxes by any means, which is why I would veto that legislation.
LS: Thirty seconds Mr. Warner.
MW: Mark, you have flip-flopped so many times on this issue, I hope you don’t throw your back out. The fact of the matter is, this is old style politics. He says one thing when he is in Northern Virginia, talking to business leaders. He says another thing on his TV ads. And then he says another thing when he is back up talking to the Washington Times.
I have said, trust the people. I have said, lets give them a vote. And this vote is only in regard to northern Virginia. It will affect no one else in the rest of the state. And Mark, if you’ve read my plan, you ought to read the first few pages of the plan where I clearly state that I will not raise taxes, and you saying otherwise isn’t going to change my position.
LS: Thank you sir. Let’s go now to Jeff Kraus for a question to Mr. Warner.
JK: Mr. Warner, my question has two parts. In 1998, Michelle Finn decided to remove life support from her husband who had been comatose for three and a half years. Other family members objected to that. And after exhausting their legal options, convinced Governor Jim Gilmore to intervene on their behalf. He did so and was met with both intense criticism and great praise. The first part: how do you assess Governor Gilmore’s actions? And the second part: considering that precedent, what is the appropriate role for the governor in an interfamily dispute over a relative in a vegetative state?
MW: I disagreed with the governor on intervening in the Michelle Finn case. My opponent intervened on behalf of the governor. I believed that those most personal of all choices should be made by family members and not by governors intervening. But, this is again a clear choice between the two candidates. I don’t believe in big government intervening in personal lives. That is why I trust the women of Virginia to make that most personal of all choices in terms of the right to have an abortion. My opponent does not.
I would not agree with what the governor has done in intervening in the Michelle Finn case. I believe those decisions should be left to family members and I trust the women of Virginia to make that most personal decision of all with their family and their God.
LS: Mr. Earley, thirty seconds.
ME: That case was a very difficult case, and very unusual. And it really points out the need for all families to make arrangements ahead of time for these kinds of contingencies. In this particular case, family members ended up suing each other in the Circuit Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia. And the parents of the young man who was comatose asked the governor to intervene and review the case, and ask the court to review it, which the governor did.
And you know, the Supreme Court said that the governor had every right to do that. And in that particular case, I think it was appropriate. But, it points out the need for families to make plans ahead of time so that those situations don’t arise and government does not have to be involved.
LS: Thank you so much Mr. Earley. And now we go to the final question in this segment for Mr. Earley, and it will be asked by Matt Brock.
MB: Mr. Earley, let’s face it, Mr. Warner’s campaign has criticized Governor Gilmore as much, if not more, than you. One of your ads has you and Governor Gilmore walking down the south lawn of the Capital, walking together. Which is he? Is he the political visionary or the political pariah?
ME: Well, I think Matt you know, it is important to note that my opponent, really for his political career, has chosen really the role of critic. When Governor Allen and Governor Gilmore ran for office, he called them radical and extreme. And you have to remember he also ran against John Warner five years ago and spent 10 million dollars of his own money savagely attacking John Warner. And indeed suggesting that John Warner was going to kick senior citizens out of their home. He worked to defeat President George Bush, and opposed his plan to cut taxes here in America that has helped all Virginians.
I think the issue in this campaign is not Governor Gilmore. The issue in this campaign is our positions and where we are going to take Virginia. I think the Governor has done an excellent job, particularly in the last few weeks in leading Virginia in difficult times after the terrorist attacks. And I am happy to see that my opponent’s attacks on the governor and others have been subdued.
But, what is important is for us to talk about where we stand. And it is most important for the voters to understand that I will not raise taxes and Mark Warner refuses to take a pledge to not raise taxes.
LS: The final question in…and I am terribly sorry. Mr. Warner, go right ahead. Thirty seconds. I beg your pardon sir.
MW: What we are seeing here again is old style politics. Attack, attack, attack, attack - instead of laying out any kind of positive vision. That is what we have done, lay out a positive vision. We have seen where slogans and sound bites and pledges and promises…what they lead to. They lead to budget impasses. They lead to Virginians having politics put in front of people.
Now, if you like politics as usual. If you like what has been coming out of Richmond the last 8 or 10 months, then I am not your candidate. But, if you want a candidate that understands the challenges and the opportunities of the 21st century, then I hope you will support me come November 6th.
LS: Thank you sir. The moderator gets two questions. One for each candidate. My question for Mr. Warner is now, for Mr. Earley later.
Mr. Warner, some observers say that you have undergone quite a conversion. When you ran for the US Senate in 1996, you ran as a more traditional, liberal, Democrat. Now you are running as a moderate conservative. In 1993, you were very critical of the abolition of parole. Now you say you are for it. In 1997, you were scathing about the car tax repeal. Now you say that you will implement it by the end of your term. Which is the real Mark Warner? With all respect.
MW: Larry, the real Mark Warner is the candidate who brings a wealth of experience to this job: a fiscal conservative, someone who understands that government has to live within it’s means, someone that will not raise your taxes, someone that is proud of his campaign…that I have reached out to all corners of Virginia in the most broad based appeal that Virginia politics has seen in the last 20 years. I am proud of the fact that nearly half our financial support has come from Republicans and Independents.
And my approach is about the 21st century. It is about restoring sound, conservative, fiscal management practices in Richmond. It is about growing the economy, particularly in these challenging times. To have a governor who has actually created jobs and met a budget.
Have I gotten more conservative, as I have grown older? Probably. Don’t we all? But, do I understand first and foremost that the old style, negative politics as usual…the approach we have seen from my opponent tonight, the one trick pony - use of taxes to try to scare voters is not going to work come November 6th.
LS: Thank you sir. Mr. Earley, thirty seconds, rebuttal.
ME: You know, I think in these times, particularly since September 11th, they have re-defined the priorities of this nation, and they have defined the priorities of the next governor. My immediate priority is going to be the safety and security of Virginia citizens and experience is important in that.
I just heard my opponent say he had experience. But, he has no experience in the arena of public safety. I have served for 10 years in the Senate of Virginia on the Courts of Justice Committee, four years as Attorney General, working with the Virginia National Guard, the state police, instituting a computer crime strike force. I want to bring that experience to work for the people of Virginia in these critical times.
LS: Thank you sir. Now, let’s move back into the Electronic Town Hall and hear more e-questions submitted by Virginians. And I want to once again thank our exclusive underwriters, McGuireWoods Consulting for their generous support.
The first question will go to each candidate. But, Mr. Earley responds first for a minute. Mr. Earley, the terrorist events of September 11th taught us all that the unthinkable can happen. God forbid that this scenario should ever take place. But, let’s suppose that terrorists successfully target the state capital buildings in Richmond. Assuming that you are safe, what are the first three or four official, not personal actions, official actions you would take in such an awful crisis.
ME: Larry, as governor, the first step I would take is declare a state of emergency in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Secondly I would activate the Emergency Operation Center of the Commonwealth of Virginia. I would activate the state police and deploy them to secure our infrastructure and to assist our local law enforcement officers. I would activate the Virginia National Guard to assist the state police and secure our citizens and secure our infrastructure. Finally, I would assemble the cabinet to make sure that across the board, in every discipline, we are doing what we need to do to respond, to provide assistance to our first responders at the local level - our firefighters, our emergency services personnel, our state troopers, our deputy sheriffs and our city police.
LS: Mr. Warner.
MW: I would declare a state of emergency. I would call up the National Guard. I would activate the counter-terrorism inter-agency strike force that I have called for creating. This strike force would include all first-responders and other important agencies like the Department of Health, because as we have seen just recently the next threat may come from bio-terrorism as well.
And I would make sure, have made sure already that our first responders, our firefighters, our police, our sheriffs, have the resources they need. That is why even though my opponent has served for fourteen years, firefighters have endorsed my campaign. Police organizations and the vast majority of sheriffs have said that I am the candidate for public safety.
LS: Mr. Warner, the next citizen question is for you. And I want to quote precisely from this question we received by email. “I recently read that there are tens of thousands of Virginians who were once convicted of a felony but who have long since completed their full sentences. And yet, they still cannot vote. Most of these people are African-American. Currently each governor restores the voting rights of only a few dozen people a year. But, the governor has the authority to quickly and dramatically restore the rights of thousands. Will you pledge that if elected, you will do justice by these people and give them their precious right to vote back?”
MW: The answer is yes; I will work to change the process for restoration of rights. There still needs to be a process, but we have one of the most onerous processes in the whole country. I believe that after a person has paid the appropriate debt to society, there should be a simpler process than we have right now.
The time it takes for a decision to be made is extraordinarily long. The paperwork is extraordinarily cumbersome. Some felons may not and should not have their rights restored. But, the process should be improved and I will work with members of the Legislative Black Caucus and other members to improve that process, as long, as well as expanding other opportunities - ending racial profiling, making sure that we expand economic opportunity for all Virginians. That approach of opening up Virginia for all of our diverse population: African American, Asian, Hispanic. Making sure that we reach out to the changing face of Virginia is critically important.
LS: Thank you. Mr. Earley, thirty second rebuttal.
ME: I do support the stream lining of our system here in Virginia with one exception; I do not think violent felons should have their right to vote restored. I think we have to draw a sharp demarcation about those who would create and commit violent crimes in Virginia. But, I do think others, after an appropriate time of serving their sentence and on probation have proved their good behavior should have those rights restored. But, it is important in Virginia that we fight violent crime. Over the last eight years, we have driven down violent crime significantly. And part of the reason was our abolition of parole, which my opponent opposed when we began.
LS: Thank you sir. Mr. Earley, your question comes from another Youth Leadership Initiative student, Amy Roy. Again schools across the country can register for this free program online at youthleadership.net. Let’s see the tape with Amy’s questions.
Tape: “Good evening, my name is Amy Roy and I am a senior in Ms. Marigold’s fifth period government class at Western Albemarle High School. We would like to thank all the candidates for taking the time to listen to our questions this evening. My question is for Mr. Earley. Mr. Earley, we know the people are discriminated against, killed and assaulted for their sexual orientation. And we have evidence in your literature that you are opposed to gay marriages. And my question is would you be opposed to or in favor of a hate crime law that includes gays and lesbians?”
ME: Thank you Amy for your question. You know, in Virginia we have a hate crime statute. But, I think it needs work and here is why. I think when you include certain groups and only give stiff penalties for ones that commit crimes against those groups, you leave an awful lot of groups out. I believe that the appropriate way to approach hate crimes and any violent crime is to give stiff, violent penalties against those who would commit crimes against anyone. Right now, the Virginia statute only calls for thirty days in jail for a simple assault. And it is limited to only three categories. I think we should abolish all of those categories and say if someone commits a violent assault against someone else for any reason that results in injury or even if it doesn’t, they should have a minimum of thirty days in jail. That protects all of our citizens and that is the important thing we need to do.
LS: Thirty seconds, Mr. Warner.
MW: Amy I would expand hate crimes to cover sexual orientation. We have seen incidents in hate crime right here in Roanoke with a beating and a horrible shooting a year ago. I would also expand hate crimes to cover persons with disabilities.
And my concern with my opponents approach in terms of that mailing that you held up - and let me set the record straight again - it was full of distortions and outright untruths. I do not support gay marriage. I oppose gay marriage. I support welfare reform. I support the abolition of parole. But, it is those negative attacks that voters will reject come November.
LS: Mr. Warner, the next citizen question is for you. Mr. Warner, why did you feel it was necessary to publicly state that your views differ from those of your ticket mates, Tim Kaine and Donald Mceachin on the issues of gun control and homosexual rights?
MW: I have already made my position clear on the case of gay marriages. I oppose them. In terms of gun control, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment Rights, individual Second Amendment Rights. I have reached out to hunters and gun owners all across Virginia…been criticized for it, but I believe that the NRA plays a responsible role in Virginia. It does a good job educating young people, particularly on gun safety.
And the fact that my campaign has been about reaching out, reaching out to nontraditional groups perhaps as someone who is running as a Democrat is the different kind of approach that I’ll bring and I am extraordinarily proud of the fact that I have sportsmen, gun owners all across Virginia who are supporting my campaign.
In terms of my opponent, and my running mate’s views, you ought to ask them to lay out their views specifically. I am proud of the approach, though, that we have taken in this campaign. The positive approach, as opposed to distortions and mailings…the mailing that was pointed out in the last debate that was so negative that Mark, your Mom thought it was over the top.
LS: Mr. Earley.
ME: Well, as I told you last week, my Mom may have not liked the mailing, but she likes your plan to raise taxes almost a billion dollars a lot less. And you have really significantly changed your position on the NRA and on Second Amendment Rights. In fact, in 1995, you gave a speech that said you were personally threatened by the views of the NRA and that you thought what it meant to be an American was threatened by the NRA.
Last week when you debated, you couldn’t say the NRA had a positive role and you consistently confuse the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms with the rights to hunt. It is critical that we protect the Second Amendment here in Virginia.
LS: Now, back to our press panel. And the first question comes for Mr. Earley from Ellen Qualls. Ellen.
EQ: Mr. Earley, on September 13th, Lynchburg Pastor Jerry Falwell said the ACLU has “got to take a lot of blame for the terrorist attacks.” 700 Club host, Pat Robertson agreed. Reverend Falwell went on to say, “I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Wave…all of them who have tried to secularize America…I point the finger in their face and say, you helped this happen.” Pat Robertson replied, “Well, I totally concur.” Mr. Earley, you have campaigned as Mr. Falwell’s guest, Pat Robertson is one of your biggest donors…having given you $70,000.00 since 1997.
It took you one week to respond to these comments, and then only through a spokesman who said that it was merely inappropriate. Is it more than inappropriate and should we judge you by the company that you keep?
ME: Well, I do think those remarks were inappropriate. I think any American knows that the attacks of September 11th were perpetrated by a few who were terrorists. They were not done by people within our country. They were done by those outside who attacked our people, attacked our values, and attacked our economy. And because they attacked our people, we are going to have as a first priority public safety. Because they attacked our values, we recognize that education is more important than ever before. And because they attacked our economy, we are going to have to stimulate this economy and make investments. And make sure we cut taxes.
I said at the time, when I was asked, that I thought those remarks were inappropriate. And they were certainly not the kind of remarks I would make nor that share my sentiments.
LS: Mr. Warner.
MW: Those remarks were inexcusable and it didn’t take me a week to denounce them. When our country was attacked on September 11th, it wasn’t just our people and buildings who were attacked, it was our institutions. I also have to say this…in the last month I have never been prouder to be an American. To see how our country has come together, fully united behind President Bush and our military. And my hope is that we’ll be able to keep that sense of unity, not only in Washington but we need it in Richmond as well. We can no longer have the kind of budget impasse and negative campaign, old style politics that we have seen so far.
LS: Thank you. Next question is for Mr. Warner, Pam Stallsmith.
PS: Mr. Warner, your campaign has actively sought and received the endorsement of many labor unions, including the Virginia chapters of the AFL-CIO and the United Mine Workers. Victory 2000, the coordinated campaign of the state Democratic Party has received well in excess of a half a million dollars from organized labor. You have said that you support Virginia’s right to work law, yet you have received backing from many unions. How do you reconcile these two seemingly different postures and what can labor expect from a Warner administration in return for it’s enormous support?
MW: Labor families, like all Virginia families are fed up with politics as usual. They are disappointed with the fact that we didn’t have a budget this year, that we haven’t made the investments in education and transportation. We have 50,000 children that don’t have child health insurance that are eligible. That we end up not having law enforcement getting the resources they need. Labor will have a seat at the table. Just as everyone will have a seat at the table in a Warner administration.
While I am proud of that support, I am also proud of the support that I received from the Washington Board of Trade, Virginia Realtors, and countless, countless business leaders. My campaign in broad based. My campaign reaches into every corner of the Commonwealth. As I mentioned earlier, literally half our funds have come from the Republicans and Independents. We even have a totally separate group called Virginian’s for Warner, made up of Republican leaders like former governor Holten, and former gubernatorial candidate Earl Williams, delegate Panny Rhodes, and more will be announced in the coming days. I am proud of this broad based appeal.
LS: Mr. Earley.
ME: I think the workingmen and women of Virginia care about their paychecks. You know, it would be nice if all of us could live without a financial care in the world, but we don’t. We live from week to week, on paychecks. We have mortgages, we have bills to pay. And I believe the thing that working families of Virginia care most about is making sure this economy moves forward, that their jobs are protected, and that taxes are not raised. If my opponent’s plan goes forward, if the money he has included in his budget of almost a billion dollar tax increase goes forward, it is going to hurt working families and senior citizens who are on fixed incomes.
LS: Next question, Jeff Kraus for Mr. Earley.
JK: Mr. Earley, in the wake of the terrorist strike on the Pentagon and the subsequent closure of Reagan National Airport, Governor Jim Gilmore swiftly enacted a number of economic relief measures for the out-of-workers of northern Virginia. Today, in Danville, the Goodyear Tire Company announced 275 layoffs. And in the past few years, thousands of workers have been laid off throughout southside Virginia. Governor Jim Gilmore vetoed a hard-fought relief package for them saying it wasn’t fair to help workers in one region and not another. If you are elected governor, what kind of assistance package can those laid off in the southside expect from you, if any?
ME: I think it is very important that we protect our jobs in the southside and in the southwest and all across Virginia. Southside and southwest has been hit particularly hard recently because of the declining textile industry, manufacturing industry and because of the all out assault by the Democrats in Washington over the last eight years on tobacco farmers and tobacco workers.
One of the things that we have proposed is a job creation tax moratorium such that if any company moves into southwest Virginia or southside Virginia or any distressed community, and creates fifty or more jobs, they will not pay any corporate income taxes for the next five years. Or if an existing business creates fifty new jobs, the same thing will be true.
I have also announced that we would create a workforce czar that will coordinate workforce-training programs for employers and employees of displaced workers and retraining. In fact, as Attorney General, we helped distribute funds to Project Hope in Danville. It helped to retrain female workers who had been displaced by layoffs. It is that kind of attention that I will bring to Virginia as governor.
LS: Mr. Warner.
MW: Another example where the rhetoric doesn’t meet the reality. When Martinsville and Henry County was hurting, Mark Earley stood by and did nothing. I supported that relief package. I knew when those workers were laid off they needed assistance. Matter of fact, when I visited with some of the firms with laid off workers at Lane Furniture recently, I was criticized by Mr. Earley’s campaign.
I have already put my money where my mouth is. I created regional venture capital funds to invest in early stage businesses in Southside and in southwest Virginia so that young kid in Martinsville doesn’t have to pick up and move away. We have got to grow the economy in every corner of Virginia and I will.
LS: Another question for you Mr. Warner from Matt Brock.
MB: Mr. Warner, some of your critics have stated that you went from a zero dollars to a personal fortune of over 200 million based on inside information provided by Maryland Democratic congressmen. This practice in the cellular phone industry has since been banned. How would you respond to those critics?
MW: Well, I say it is not true. I applied and my first business partner in the cellular phone industry was the Washington Post. I was a minority partner with the Washington Post. Are you saying that the Washington Post was somehow doing something untoward? The fact of the matter was, the Federal Communications Commission put out a request for cellular license applications. I joined with the Washington Post and other businesses in applying. I have been attacked for this. Attacked by the most personal, negative attack that I have seen in recent Virginia history - compared me to the mafia, John Dillinger, Al Capone. Mr. Earley placed it on his web site and only brought it down when you and other reporters called him on it. Negative old-style campaigning.
As a matter of fact, that attack was so outrageous that the two FCC chairman, Reagan appointees during that period that I was involved in the cellular process, both stood up and said, we don’t support Democrats, but what Mark Warner did was fair by the rules and he helped bring about the new wireless industry. I am proud of my business success.
LS: Mr. Earley.
ME: I certainly don’t begrudge anyone their business success. But, I think as you become successful, you have to remember working families and what they go through. It would be nice if all of us did not have a financial care in the world. But, that is not true in the real world. We live from paycheck to paycheck. We have a mortgage. We pay bills. We have to fill the car with gas. And the size of our tax bill matters. That is why my opponents proposal, one day after the stock market fell 600 points, to increase taxes by over 900 million dollars is wrong for the economy of Virginia and wrong for the hard working families of Virginia.
LS: Mr. Earley, I have got a question for you now to balance the earlier one I gave to Mr. Warner. Mr. Earley, the chairman of your own campaign, Lt. Governor John Hager, was recently quoted as saying after a previous debate, “How do you provide all of these new programs and then cut taxes, especially while our economy is sucking air?”
Mr. Hager said this not just about your Democratic opponent, but also about you as well. With the original revenue growth forecast for Virginia of 7%, now probably near 0%, how do you respond to Lt. Governor Hager’s question?
ME: Larry, I think now more than ever before it is important to move forward on our plan to cut taxes here in Virginia. When we began our plan to cut the car tax in 1997, my opponent opposed that plan. And reasonable people can disagree about whether citizens needed tax relief. But, I thought it was important. We are in the fourth year of that five-year phase out; we have one more year to go. In these stressful, financial times, when families are depending more than ever on promised tax cuts, I think we need to deliver.
How do we do that? It takes leadership. It takes setting priorities. The kinds of skills that I learned from ten years serving in the Senate and four years as Attorney General. We have our priorities set and they are to the public safety and security of Virginia citizens. The education of our children. And stimulating this economy by investing in transportation. And we do it with 1.8 billion dollars without raising taxes by prudently using the bonds that are available to us. We invest in higher education. And we make sure we cut taxes and not raise taxes.
LS: Mr. Warner.
MW: I will finish the repeal of the car tax. And Mark, I think I have counted, I think you have now said thirteen times that I am going to raise taxes. You have got that one trick pony. It is just not going to work.
The fact is that I will not raise taxes. My plan states it. I said it throughout this campaign. You can say it twenty more times, but the people will know the difference because newspapers across the state have said, my plan is simply offering the voters of northern Virginia a chance to vote in a referendum. A referendum that is thirteen months away. We’ll look at what the economy looks like at that point. Why don’t you trust the people? Do what the people in your own party… Vince Callahan, Jack Rollison… legislators in Northern Virginia say trust the people, Mark.
LS: All right, we are gradually running out of time. As much as I don’t want to, we have literally hundreds of questions left, but I doubt you will stay another six hours…let me give you both thirty seconds to answer this particular question because it applies equally and it is relatively bland compared to the others.
Over the past twenty-five years, Virginia has had three Republican governors and three Democratic governors. For each of you, which one Democrat and which one Republican governor did you most admire and why? And please only give us one in each category. Mr. Warner.
MW: I knew I was going to get one of those Larry Sabato questions at some point during this debate. On the Republican side, Lynwood Holden. He came in and worked with the democratic legislature. He actually wasn’t a career politician, like me. He had not been elected to prior office before he was elected governor. Also like George W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan, who weren’t career politicians before they were elected as well. They brought a different set of experiences to the table, business experience, real life experience.
On the Democratic side, I think I would probably have to say Doug Wilder, at least in terms of managing the budget. It is going to be a tough time to manage the budget without raising taxes, but I will do it.
LS: Mr. Earley.
ME: I think of the Democrats, I would say clearly Governor Wilder because in tough financial times he did not raise taxes. He did not put forward a plan that called for a 900 million dollar tax increase. And Mark, I may have mentioned it thirteen times, but it is a 900 million dollar tax increase. So, it may need to mentioned a few more times.
On the Republican side, I think it is George Allen. Because he came in at a time when Democrats had been in power for twelve years when there was a democratic legislature in the Senate and the House. And he worked, over your objection Mark, to pass some significant reforms such as parole abolition, and welfare reform.
LS: I have been told that because we have your closing statements, we have time for only one more question. And we always like to end these debates on an upbeat note. And so I hope that you will look at each other in turn as I call on you and take a few seconds, you probably won’t need very long, and tell each other what you most admire about the other candidate. Let’s start with Mr. Earley.
ME: Well, Mark I admire the fact you are persistent. You have wanted to seek public office for a long time. You initially wanted to run against Stan Parris. That didn’t work out. You ran against John Warner, that didn’t work out. Now you are running for Governor. And persistence pays off. But, we are hoping it is going to take at least four times, not three.
LS: Mr. Warner.
MW: I thought we were going to get through that without another negative attack. I respect Mark, your deep faith. I know how important it is to you. I know in many ways it brought you to politics in the first place. And I respect it, I may not agree with all of your positions. But, I respect your faith.
LS: Thank you both very much. And now let’s go to closing statements. And we can begin with Mr. Warner for one minute.
MW: Thank you Larry. This debate and this campaign have presented clear choices. My opponent was a part of the budget mess. His campaign, particularly on the issue of taxes knowingly distorts my record. And like many career politicians, he changes his views to suit whatever audience he talks to. I believe now more than ever we need a leader who can unite us. Now more than ever, we can’t afford the old style politics that created a budget mess in Richmond. Now more than ever we can’t end up with campaign, negative campaigns that divide us.
But, there is a better way. I am proud to live the American dream. I want to make that dream available to all Virginians. If you give me the honor of serving you as your next governor, I will always put Virginia first because Virginia did lead America in it’s first century. And we should aspire to nothing less than leading America in the 21st century as well.
These are challenging times. But challenging times also present great opportunities. And working together we will take advantage of those opportunities to build the future that Virginia deserves.
LS: Mr. Earley.
ME: Thank you all for tuning in this evening. I think it is obvious by now that my opponent and I differ strongly on how the state ought to respond during these tough economic times. He believes we should raise taxes. I agree with President Bush that we should be cutting taxes. And it is an important difference. It would be nice if all of us did not have to worry about finances, but in the real world we do. We have paychecks, mortgages, gas to put in the car, bills to pay. And the size of our tax bill matters. And it is just plain wrong to be suggesting a 900 million tax increase in these difficult times.
I put forward a plan to invest in transportation and education to help our teachers increase their salaries, to have safe communities and to create jobs all without raising taxes. And I believe that it is important to be forthright about that. When others point out my opponents plan to raise taxes, he simply calls it negative even though it is in writing. And he buys more TV ads to hide the fact he is going to raise taxes.
We have shown there is a better way and I want to put my experience as state senator and as Attorney General to work for you to do exactly that.
LS: Gentlemen, that is all the time we have tonight. And we salute both of you for terrific efforts tonight and great effort on the campaign trail. On behalf of the Virginia Capital Correspondents Association, on behalf of the University of Virginia Center for Governmental Studies, I want to thank our generous sponsor, McGuireWoods Consulting, as well as our home station WDBJ7 in Roanoke. And the 900 of you citizens who took the time to submit email questions to goodpolitics.org. Please remember that one of the most constructive responses to terrorism is to go out and support our democracy by casting your vote on November 6th. The candidates have worked hard for your vote. Please take the time. Good night and thank you very much for tuning in.
More Information on this Debate
_____________________________________________
Copyright © 2002 U.Va. Center for Politics. All rights reserved.
|
