ELECTIONS CONGRESS : A Guide to Issues in District 26 Race

Overview

Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City) is strongly favored to retain his seat in the 26th Congressional District, where he has served for eight years as a very high-profile liberal politician and a partner of Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Los Angeles) in the powerful Berman-Waxman political organization. Running against Berman in the Democratic primary is Scott Gaulke, a follower of Lyndon LaRouche. Two conservatives, Roy Dahlson and Gary Forsch, are competing for votes in the Republican primary.

Contenders

Rep. Howard L. Berman, 49, serves on the House Judiciary, Foreign Affairs and Budget committees. Berman was born and raised in Los Angeles, and received his bachelor of arts and law degrees from UCLA. A lawyer, he served in the Assembly from 1973 to 1982, when he ran for Congress after losing a bid to become Assembly speaker. Berman has stressed issues such as immigration reform, trade policy, foreign aid, human rights, arms control and anti-terrorism. He and his wife, Janis, have two daughters, Brinley, 17, and Lindsey, 11.

Scott Gaulke, 33, a Studio City property manager, was raised in Wisconsin and attended Milwaukee Area Technical College, majoring in architecture and mechanical engineering. He ran for the Assembly seat held by Burt Margolin (D-Los Angeles) in 1984 and managed the 1988 congressional campaign of Don Marquis when he ran against Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton). He has been an associate of Lyndon LaRouche for 11 years. He is single.

Roy Dahlson, 59, of Van Nuys owns a wholesale flower business and a flower farm in San Diego County. He has lived in the San Fernando Valley for most of his life. He has been endorsed by California Young Republicans and Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich. Dahlson and his wife, Gerrie, have raised nine children, all of whom work in the family flower business.

Gary E. Forsch, 39, of Sun Valley is manager of a retail hardware store. Forsch’s family has lived in the Sun Valley area for more than 60 years. He attended UCLA, where he majored in chemistry. Forsch has directed several conservative political action committees and has been endorsed by the California Republican Assembly. He and his wife, Phylis, an administrative assistant, have one son, Michael, 10.

Libertarian Bernard Zimring is unopposed in his primary. His name will appear on the general election ballot in November.

Questionnaire

Questionnaires were distributed to candidates in contested primary races and were returned this month. Answers have been edited to fit the available space.

Q. Do you believe that there will be a “peace dividend” as a result of reduced tension with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact nations?

If yes, would you generally be most inclined to use the dividend to: a) spend more on domestic needs, b) reduce the deficit, c) cut taxes?

Berman (D): Yes. Domestic needs and reduce deficit.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): Yes. Reduce the deficit.

Forsch (R): Yes. Reduce the deficit.

Q. Do you believe our present system of criminal prosecution, interdiction of supplies and imprisonment of dealers and users will ever significantly reduce the level of drug use in the United States?

If no, what should be done?

Berman (D): No. We need a substantial increase in drug treatment programs and drug education, and a more pervasive presence of police foot patrols and citizen involvement.

Gaulke (D): Yes.

Dahlson (R): Yes; however, greater emphasis must be created in discouraging use and purchase of drugs.

Forsch (R): No. The criminal prosecution aspect of our anti-drug efforts is not effective because dealers are not given sentences that deter them. Border needs to be more effectively patrolled to prevent smuggling.

Q. Would you consider the possibility of decriminalizing drugs?

Berman (D): No. I’d consider almost anything, but I’m not persuaded that this is a sensible approach.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No.

Forsch (R): No. Why add to the poison already on the streets?

Q. Under the Gramm-Rudman law, the federal government is supposed to cut the budget deficit to zero by 1993. Is that a realistic goal?

Briefly explain your answer.

Berman (D): No. The important goal is to continue to reduce the deficit. The massive tax increases that would be needed to comply with the Gramm-Rudman 1993 requirement could trigger a very serious recession.

Gaulke (D): No. The nation is in an economic depression. Gramm-Rudman is not going to solve that, and cutting the budget to the bone will only make things worse. We need to return to American System economics, and fast. We need aid from the Asians and Europeans, and the Paris-Berlin-Vienna triangle of industrial production.

Dahlson (R): No because our Congress is controlled by legislators who belong to the “Big Spenders” club.

Forsch (R): No. It is unrealistic because the liberal majority in Congress will not cut wasteful spending and balance the budget.

Q. Rising property values in the Santa Monica Mountains have made it more difficult for state and federal parks agencies to buy land for public use. Land prices have escalated in part because local officials have allowed developers to build more houses than provided for under zoning laws. To keep property prices more affordable to parks agencies, should governments in Los Angeles and Ventura counties refuse such so-called “upzoning”?

Berman (D): Yes. Continued haphazard development in the Santa Monica Mountains could lose us essential open space resources forever.

Gaulke (D): No. The over-inflated real estate balloon is going to pop sooner or later. Governments in L. A. and Ventura should organize to get out of the depression we are in and worry about such secondary concerns when they have done so.

Dahlson (R): Yes and no. Each case has to be weighed in light of the facts; location and other variables are pertinent.

Forsch (R): People need a place to live. People come first.

Q. Do you support President Bush’s call for a capital gains tax cut to stimulate economic growth?

Berman (D): No.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): We need to give more incentives to business to create jobs. High taxes create unemployment.

Q. Do you support capital punishment?

Berman (D): No.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): Yes.

Q. Do you support a woman’s unrestricted right to an abortion within the first three months of pregnancy?

Berman (D): Yes.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No. That’s my personal viewpoint, but I would abide by the will of the people and by current law.

Forsch (R): I support the human right to life.

Q. Do you support President Bush’s policy of seeking to maintain good relations with China’s current regime despite its violent suppression of the pro-democracy movement last year?

If no, what specific measures should the United States take against China?

Berman (D): No. No munitions list or militarily useful items should be exported to the PRC. If most-favored nation status extended, should be of limited duration and withdrawn absent amnesty to political prisoners, loosening of emigration and an agreement with China to lessen its support of the Khmer Rouge.

Gaulke (D): No. Economic embargo, discounting humanitarian aid. Diplomatic isolation, in concert with our allies. Aid to pro-democracy forces inside China.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): We must have equal policies against repressive regimes. We must have the same policy toward Soviet Russia that we have for China. Economic embargoes and no high-level summit talks until the repression ends.

Q. Do you support removing China’s most-favored nation trading status because of the regime’s repressive policies?

Berman (D): Yes.

Gaulke (D): Yes.

Dahlson (R): No.

Forsch (R): No.

Q. Do you support Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole’s proposal to shift foreign aid from traditional allies, including Israel, to newly emergent democracies in Eastern Europe and drug-fighting nations in Latin America?

Berman (D): No. We can and should aid emerging democracies without undermining our traditional allies like Israel.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): No.

Q. Do you favor opening up additional parts of the California coastline to oil exploration under any circumstances other than a national emergency?

Berman (D): No.

Gaulke (D): Yes.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): I would support it if the local people, the folks who live in the area, agree.

Q. Congress has passed legislation that would expand tax credits for low-income parents with children in day care and create school-based day-care programs for “latchkey” children of middle-income families. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation, which will cost $27 billion, unless its cost is dramatically reduced. Do you support the President?

If no, briefly explain your answer.

Berman (D): No. Current severe shortage in child-care facilities and services is a problem that threatens the quality of life for the children of countless working families. Child-care bill passed by Congress addresses this crisis in a comprehensive way. What the President wants would not.

Gaulke (D): No. Refer to explanation for question about Gramm-Rudman law.

Dahlson (R): Yes.

Forsch (R): Yes. I support the right of women to stay home and take care of their children. This bill restricts that right.

Q. Would you support a national gasoline tax increase if the proceeds were dedicated to improving transportation?

Berman (D): Only if combined with elimination of the “bubble” that benefits the richest taxpayers at the expense of the middle class.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No. This would hurt those who can least afford it.

Forsch (R): Why can’t we properly spend the gas tax revenue that we have now? We are not under-taxed; we are incompetently governed.

Q. Would you support a national gasoline tax increase to reduce the deficit?

Berman (D): See previous answer.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No. For the same reason. We must learn to spend less.

Forsch (R): No. So long as Congress spends more than they take in, increased taxes are useless.

Q. Do you support limiting the amount of money a candidate for national office can spend on the campaign?

Berman (D): We must be very careful not to impose limits that are so low that challengers can never defeat incumbents. I’d prefer mandating free or low-cost TV advertising, televised campaign forums and a limited low-cost mail allowance.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No.

Forsch (R): I refuse to support limitations on freedom of speech.

Q. Would you support at least a partial taxpayer-financed campaign funding as part of a reform package that limited spending?

Berman (D): Yes.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No. Under no condition.

Forsch (R): No. Why force people to support through their tax dollars people they oppose?

Q. Do you support limiting the number of terms that U.S. senators and representatives can serve?

If yes, what should the limit be?

Berman (D): No.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): Yes and no. If a fair and impartial reapportionment plan were instituted, there would be no need to limit terms.

Forsch (R): No. The voters can limit terms of elected officials by voting them out.

Q. Do you favor more control over the availability of handguns to the general public?

If yes, what specific controls?

Berman (D): Yes. A waiting period, safety instructions and licensing to keep handguns out of the hands of criminals.

Gaulke (D): No.

Dahlson (R): No.

Forsch (R): No. Since law enforcement has been unable to control the availability of firearms to criminals, the public must be able to defend themselves.

Q. Do you support the current program to build a “Star Wars” anti-missile system?

If yes, do you think the program is adequately funded?

Berman (D): No. Program is rife with questions regarding technical feasibility, survivability and cost-effectiveness.

Gaulke (D): Yes. Program must be funded at several hundred billion dollars. We need a crash SDI program modeled on the Manhattan Project. The spin-offs to the civilian economy more than pay for the investment.

Dahlson (R): Yes. It’s not adequately funded. Big spenders in Congress are not concerned over research in the area of national defense.

Forsch (R): Yes. Unsure if it’s adequately funded.