ELECTIONS : Rivals in 36th District Race Address Issues : Overview

Following are answers to questions posed by The Times to the candidates in the June 5 Republican primary in the 36th Assembly District.

Contenders

Assemblyman Tom McClintock, 33, (R-Thousand Oaks) was first elected in 1982 at age 26. He is the lead Republican on the Judiciary Committee. He has been a newspaper columnist and administrative assistant to state Sen. Ed Davis (R-Santa Clarita). An outspoken conservative, he criticizes his own party leaders for not pushing alternatives to Democratic proposals in Sacramento. Earlier this year, he was stripped of his position as Republican whip after he failed in a bid to oust Republican leader Ross Johnson of La Habra.

Kevin Staker, 35, of Camarillo is the first Republican since 1982 to challenge McClintock in the heavily Republican district. A political newcomer, Staker is a tax lawyer who manages a small law firm in Camarillo. He was chairman of a defunct Camarillo citizens group that investigated the $26-million financial loss of the city government. He is a bishop in the Mormon Church. Staker says McClintock’s “negative” political style has alienated officials in Ventura County and state leaders in Sacramento and made him less effective. McClintock denies it and says his record shows many accomplishments.

Questionnaire

Questionnaires were distributed to candidates earlier this month. Answers have been edited for length.

Question: Do you support the California State University system’s locating a Ventura County campus on the Taylor Ranch? Briefly, why?

McClintock: Yes. After five years and a half-million dollars evaluating 27 sites, Taylor Ranch is our last opportunity for a university for Ventura County.

Staker: No. Taylor Ranch is on the far edge of the county, inconvenient for students of the county and too close to UC Santa Barbara. It would increase traffic congestion in Ventura and air pollution in the county in general. Trustees selected Taylor Ranch for its ocean view. The campus should be more near the population center of the county, near Oxnard or Camarillo, just off the Ventura Freeway.

Q: Under recently introduced legislation, state sales taxes would be raised 0.25% for 10 years to help finance school construction. Do you favor an increase in sales taxes to underwrite new school construction?

McClintock: No. Local bond measures should finance school construction where needed.

Staker: No. As a tax lawyer, I do not see that we need any more sales taxes unless it is to make up for abolishing the state income tax for all but the most wealthy. The state has plenty of revenue. It simply needs to make education a higher priority.

Q : An initiative measure on the June ballot would raise taxes on gasoline sales by 9 cents a gallon to finance highway building projects. Do you support the concept of higher gas taxes to underwrite road construction?

McClintock: No. Proposition 111 will cost the average family of four $9,160 over 10 years--with only $1,450 going for roads.

Staker: Absolutely yes. It is simply an increase in a user fee to try to keep up with inflation. Construction costs have increased 326% since the current tax was fixed; this increase is only 100% over a number of years.

Q : A ballot initiative now in circulation would prohibit the spraying of pesticides on private property without the written consent of the owner. Do you support this measure?

McClintock: No. The Medfly turned Hawaii from a net agricultural exporter into an importer. We can’t let this happen to California.

Staker: No. Aerial spraying of pesticides to fight the Medfly is for our own good. I am concerned about the rights of property owners but do not believe in creating a right to sue every time a small amount of pesticide blows onto the property of a disgruntled person.

Q : Under current law, the Legislature is responsible for redrawing state legislative and congressional district boundaries. Do you believe this system should be changed?

McClintock: Yes. State-of-the-art gerrymanders by politicians rob the people of their votes.

Staker: Yes. Our present system thwarts the will of the people. It particularly favors incumbents of both parties. I support the idea of a nonpartisan commission to redraw the boundaries to make districts that really do belong together.

Q : Earlier this year, Assemblyman McClintock tried unsuccessfully to oust Assembly leader Ross Johnson from his leadership post. Do you support keeping Ross Johnson as Republican leader?

McClintock: No. Ross Johnson was a character witness for convicted Sen. Joseph Montoya and has led Assembly Republicans to support the two biggest tax increases in California history. Our party needs new leadership.

Staker: Yes. I see no need to rock the boat over who is the leader. All that Assemblyman McClintock’s attempt to unseat Ross Johnson has done is to get himself fired as minority whip, an important position, and to be literally relegated to a back seat in the Assembly. McClintock is now politically dead and has no prospect of getting anything done for the district.

Q: Do you support putting limits on the number of terms state legislators can serve? If yes, how long should they be?

McClintock: Yes. I support the proposed 12-year limit.

Staker: Surprisingly, no. The voters have the good judgment to know when to throw out a worthless politician.

Q: Do you support a woman’s right to unrestricted abortions within the first three months of pregnancy?

McClintock: No. I am opposed to government’s financing and promotion of the practice and insist on parental consent for minors.

Staker: No. I firmly oppose almost all legalized abortions; the exceptions are when pregnancy has resulted from incest or rape, the life or health of the mother is in jeopardy in the opinion of competent medical authority or the fetus is determined, by competent medical authority, to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. It is reprehensible for government to make anyone opposed to abortion pay, through our tax dollars, for something we believe to be so wrong.

Q: Do you support the death penalty for any crimes? If so, which ones?

McClintock: Yes, for first-degree murder and treason. I am carrying legislation this year to impose the death penalty for the murder of a child.

Staker: Yes. I support the current death penalty statute. I would add killing a police officer as a special circumstance that justifies the death penalty.

Q: Do you support the state ban on semiautomatic assault rifles?

McClintock: No. This measure enacts an infinitely expanding list of firearms and severely threatens the right of the decent population to defend itself from criminals.

Staker: Yes. I believe strongly in the right to bear arms and that government should interfere as little as possible in people’s affairs. However, I see the ban as simply drawing the line in relation to machine guns. These weapons can be fairly easily converted into automatic weapons. Our law enforcement officials have asked for this ban, and I support them.

Q: Do you support the so-called “Big Green” ballot initiative, which would seek to eliminate ozone-depleting chemicals by the year 2000, phase out pesticides known to cause cancer and require that trees be planted in all new developments?

McClintock: No. This proposal would be an economic catastrophe for the people of California.

Staker: No. I believe that our present governmental environmental regulations, if properly enforced, are adequate to do the job.

Q: Do you think the state should require private employers to subsidize day-care services for employees who request them?

McClintock: No. Employment benefits should be freely negotiated between the parties involved.

Staker: No. Government overregulates business already. In addition, I have really not heard a hue and cry for such a requirement. By and large, people are making their own arrangements for day care quite well.

Q: Proposition 112 on the June ballot would ban speaking fees and limit gifts to state legislators while creating a commission that could pave the way for higher legislative salaries. Do you support it?

McClintock: No. I am disgusted with the Legislature’s response to recent scandals, which says, “Double our salaries, and we’ll try to behave ourselves.”

Staker: No. Although I would ban speaking fees and limit gifts to legislators, assemblymen are paid enough already. The framers of the state Constitution intended that the assemblymen be part-time citizen legislators, not full-time politicians who have no idea of what it is like to hold an honest job.

Q: Do you support Gov. George Deukmejian’s proposed constitutional changes that would require state prison inmates to work in privately sponsored industries to pay for their incarceration?

McClintock: Yes. I carried a portion of the proposal last year, and carried the original legislation in 1985, long before the governor proposed it.

Staker: Yes. They should earn their own keep, and this is a great way to do it.

Q: Do you believe our present strategy of criminal prosecution, interdiction of supplies and imprisonment of users and dealers will ever significantly reduce the level of drug use in the United States? If no, what should be done?

McClintock: No. It doesn’t do any good to arrest a drug dealer if he’s back out on the streets before the officer’s paper work is finished. We need Proposition 115. (Prop. 115 is an anti-crime initiative on the June ballot that would toughen penalties for murder and torture and speed up criminal trial procedures.)

Staker: No. The only way to really make a dent in the drug problem is to educate the public, especially the children, about the evils of drugs, and then, if that fails, to impose heavy prison sentences for drug use. If demand stops, so will the crimes of the suppliers.

Q: Would you consider the possibility of decriminalizing the use of drugs?

McClintock: No. It has been tried in other countries with disastrous results.

Staker: Absolutely not. The opposite should be done: Severely punish drug users.

Q: Do you support raising sales or other taxes to finance anti-drug law enforcement efforts and/or anti-drug education programs? If yes, by how much?

McClintock: No. Californians already bear among the heaviest tax burdens in the country. We need to change our current spending priorities.

Staker: No. Our taxes are already high enough. We simply need to get our spending priorities straight.

Q: Do you support full or partial public funding of political campaigns?

McClintock: No. Thomas Jefferson said it best, “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors in sinful and tyrannical.”

Staker: No. Our new campaign finance laws, with their spending limits, should do the job. However, they should be combined with a ban on speaking fees.

Q: A ballot initiative now in circulation would prohibit foreign individuals and corporations from owning land in California. Do you support this?

McClintock: No. Our foreign trade problems have nothing to do with foreign land investment.

Staker: No. America stands as a beacon of freedom to the world. We should not discriminate against an individual simply because he or she comes from abroad.

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”?

McClintock: No. Local land use decisions should stay with local elected officials, who are accountable to the voters for their actions.

Staker: Yes. We have plenty of developable land away from the Santa Monica Mountains. The control of growth in our area is very important, especially in wilderness areas.

Q: Are you willing to publicly release your tax returns and those of your spouse prior to the election?

McClintock: No.

Staker: Yes, if McClintock will do the same. However, all our return shows is our income from my legal practice and the usual sort of deductions. It shows no speaking fees, as I assume Assemblyman McClintock’s should show.