Senate: 18th District : Questionnaires were distributed to candidates and returned this month. Answers longer than the space allotted were edited to fit the available space.

Family Sick Leave

Q. Gov. Deukmejian recently vetoed legislation that would have granted workers as much as four months of unpaid leave every two years to care for sick children, spouses and other family members without fear of losing their jobs. Do you favor this type of legislation?

Hart: Yes.

Rogers: No. Once again the Legislature is trying to force small businesses to bear the financial burden of family planning and personal family problems. Choosing to take time off to care for family members is the employee’s decision and responsibility.

Wood: No. Unfair to employees hired to fill the four-month gap and employer for losing training investment.

Teacher Salaries

Q. The Legislature approved a 4.7% cost-of-living raise for school employees, and Gov. Deukmejian reduced it to 3%, placing the difference in an account for special education programs. Should this money be used for salaries?

Hart: This is a decision for each local school board. Personally, I would like to see some of the money used to reduce class size, but that is a question for each district to decide.

Rogers: Yes. If the need in special education programs is for teachers’ salaries, it should be used for that purpose.

Wood: The money should be returned to the taxpayers--they are not receiving value for their funds.

Big Green

Q. Proposition 128, the so-called Big Green initiative on the November ballot, seeks 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. Do you support this initiative? Hart: I support Proposition 128 and believe that we can implement it effectively and economically.

Rogers: No. Proposition 128 gives too much power to one person and one agency. It could also destroy our agricultural industry. And if we eliminate all pesticides, are Californians willing to buy produce with worms and flies--or will they buy the perfect fruit from other states and countries with no restrictions on pesticides?

Wood: No. General rule: If you don’t understand the initiative, vote NO. Do not be influenced by emotional “stars” pleading one way or the other.

Tree-Cutting

Q. Proposition 130 on the November ballot would restrict clear-cutting of forests, allow the sale of $710 million in bonds to preserve ancient redwood forests and provide $32 million to retrain unemployed loggers. Do you support this initiative? Hart: I oppose Proposition 130.

Rogers: No. Proposition 130 takes the decision-making authority from forestry experts and gives it to another government bureaucracy of incompetents. Legislation to enable existing agencies to save redwood forests should come from the Legislature after being thoughtfully and carefully written and with minimum cost to the taxpayers.

Wood: No. Best possible way to save anything is to own it. Government ownership is subject to policy change. Sell the property.

Limited Terms

Q. Proposition 131 on the November ballot, authored by Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp and Common Cause, would limit most statewide elected officials to eight consecutive years in office, and senators and Assembly members to 12 years. Proposition 140, sponsored by Los Angeles County Supervisor Pete Schabarum, is more stringent, limiting lifetime service to eight years in the Senate and six in the Assembly. Do you support limiting the number of terms state legislators can serve? If yes, how long should the limits be? Hart: I don’t support term limits.

Rogers: Yes. I support Proposition 140 in its entirety--especially in limiting terms to eight years in the Senate and six in the Assembly--and limiting the legislative staff!

Wood: Yes. Two terms in each house max. Problem: The bureaucrats will run everything they now don’t control.

Sales Tax

Q. Proposition 133 on the November ballot would raise state sales and use taxes by 0.5% for four years to raise $7.5 billion for drug enforcement and treatment, anti-drug education, and prison and jail construction and operation. Do you support this initiative?

Hart: Yes.

Rogers: No. We don’t need any increases in sales and use taxes. When the Legislature stops wasting the taxes we’re already paying, we’ll have more than enough to win the war against drugs.

Wood: No. Raising taxes has never solved any problem! Read history and tell me if I’m wrong.

Liquor Tax

Q. Proposition 134 on the November ballot would substantially raise taxes on beer, wine and liquor, and dedicate the revenue from the tax hike to programs for the treatment of drug and alcohol abuse. Do you support this initiative? Hart: I support Proposition 134.

Rogers: No. It is too much of an increase in the taxes on wine. It would put many small wineries out of business. In addition, it spends more money than it raises, and these additional funds would come from our already overburdened general funds.

Wood: No. The administrative bureaucrats will get the largest share of the money.

Inmate Laborers

Q. Proposition 139 on the November ballot would allow private companies to hire state prison and county jail inmates as laborers. Do you support this initiative? Hart: Neutral. I support the idea of prisoners working to pay for the costs of their incarceration, but I am concerned about displacing law-abiding workers.

Rogers: Yes. We need job training for prison inmates so they can get jobs when they leave prison--and I think this initiative offers prisoners an excellent opportunity. It also allows them to earn money for their families and their future.

Wood: Yes! If a fair wage is paid and the victim of their crime is compensated.

Death Penalty

Q. Do you support capital punishment? If so, do you think it should be imposed on those convicted of importing or selling drugs? Hart: No.

Rogers: Yes. Especially for child abusers and murderers--and I would like to see it enforced! Yes. Selling drugs to minors and importing cocaine and heroin.

Wood: Yes, in cases involving the death of others. No--not the way to solve the drug problem. Take the profit out of drugs and the problem is reduced to a fad.

Handgun Controls

Q. Do you support additional limits on handgun purchase or possession in California? Hart: I support the current restrictions on handgun purchase.

Rogers: No. I believe the 15-day waiting period while checking the purchaser’s background is sufficient.

Wood: No. Read the Constitution of the United States. Read the words--not someone’s opinion of the words.

Abortion Rights

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

Rogers: Yes. No one has the right to interfere with a woman’s decision to have an abortion--or to become a mother.

Wood: Yes, as long as the state does not pay.

Abortion Funding

Q. Do you support government funding of abortions for women who cannot afford them? Hart: Yes.

Rogers: No. The right to have an abortion does not mean women have no responsibility for their actions. Providing free abortions is encouraging women to use them as a regular birth control method instead of taking precautions before having intercourse. I would support providing the abortions at minimum cost if there is provision for the woman to pay, either before or after the abortion.

Wood: No. No. No. Private charity will provide funds.

Day-Care Services

Q. Do you believe the state should require private employers to subsidize day-care services for employees who request them? Hart: No. I authored California’s child-care tax credit to provide incentives for employer-sponsored child care. I believe that incentives are a more appropriate and efficient method to increase the availability of child-care services.

Rogers: No. Employers are not responsible for their employees’ decisions to have children and they should not be forced by government to provide day care. I would support tax credits and incentives to employers to provide subsidized day care.

Wood: No. This amounts to a state-mandated pay raise to a select few.

War on Drugs

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? Hart: I am not confident that our present strategy will significantly reduce drug use. We certainly have to continue our law enforcement efforts, but the only way to really reduce drug use is through education, through treatment and public health programs, and by changing values to make drug use unacceptable.

Rogers: No. If we enforced our drug laws aggressively, instead of letting so many criminals plea bargain and buy their way out of jail, we could significantly reduce drug sales. And if we were educating everyone adequately about the dangers of drug abuse, plus providing children with an education that enabled them to lead productive, useful lives, we would reduce drug use.

Wood: No. Take the profit out of drugs!

Drug Decriminalization

Q. Would you consider supporting the decriminalization of drug use? Hart: No.

Rogers: Yes. If I could be convinced by the evidence that it would reduce drug use.

Wood: Yes.

Oil Exploration

Q. Do you think the present Mideast crisis justifies opening up additional parts of the California coastline to oil exploration? Hart: No. Conservation is a more efficient way to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. New drilling takes years to produce oil; conservation can save far more oil immediately.

Rogers: No. The current Mideast crisis has not yet actually produced oil shortages (in spite of the price-gouging that is going on)--and there is plenty of oil in reserves and in Texas and Alaska to keep our supplies stable until the crisis is resolved.

Wood: An excuse is not needed. Isn’t it amazing how politicians can turn any situation to an advantage?

Parkland Exchange

Q. Should the National Park Service exchange 50 acres in Cheeseboro Canyon in southeastern Ventura County for about 1,100 acres of the neighboring Jordan Ranch owned by entertainer Bob Hope, permitting park agencies to buy another 4,600 acres of Hope’s land in the Santa Monica and Santa Susana mountains for $10 million? Hart: Yes. On balance, I agree with the Sierra Club that this land exchange would provide a tremendous opportunity to acquire thousands of acres of valuable lands in the Santa Monica Mountains (in my district). However, even though Jordan Ranch is outside my Senate district, I am concerned about the impact of development in that area and believe that the land swap should not be conditioned on approval of development.

Rogers: No opinion. I am not informed enough about this exchange to answer.

Wood: I don’t know enough, but the deal seems good. Private ownership of land preserves more than government ownership.

Political Funding

Q. Do you support full or partial public funding of political campaigns? Hart: Yes. I believe that partial public funding of campaigns will reduce the influence of powerful special interests, increase political competition and give the public more control over politics.

Rogers: Absolutely not! I am opposed to any government funding of campaigns and feel we should lift all limits on funding by individuals. The result of all the so-called campaign reform in the past decade has been to make the PACs all-powerful and the incumbents literally unbeatable.

Wood: NO!!

Income Disclosure

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

Hart: No. California has one of the most extensive disclosure requirements on income and investments in the nation. They provide all the information required by the public. I am afraid that requiring legislative candidates to disclose their actual income, charitable contributions, etc., is an undue infringement on their privacy and will discourage capable people from running for office.

Rogers: No. I am not afraid to tell anyone what my income is--or was--or what deductions I take, or investments I have. But income tax returns are a private matter and should remain so.

Wood: No. Nobody’s business how much my income is, including the IRS!

Water Pipeline

Q. Do you support a new pipeline linking Ventura County to the state water system that brings water from Northern California? Hart: It is too early to decide this question. We don’t yet know the cost or implications of such a project. If this pipeline proves to be environmentally and economically sound and is approved by the voters, I will certainly work closely with local government officials to see that it is built.

Rogers: Yes. I think all of the central coast, including Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, should be linked into the state water system. We are in a water crisis now and our ground-water supplies are badly overdrafted. We need state water to bring the ground water back to a safe yield basis.

Wood: Yes, as long as the end user of the water pays for the pipeline.

Senate District 18 More registered Democrats than Republicans live in the district, which stretches along the coast from Guadalupe in Santa Barbara County to Malibu in Los Angeles County. It includes the inland communities of Ojai, Fillmore, Santa Paula, Moorpark and Woodland Hills.

CONTENDERS Gary Hart, 47, a Democrat from Santa Barbara, is chairman of the Senate Education Committee. He was first elected to the state Senate in 1982 after serving eight years in the Assembly. He was a teacher with the Santa Barbara schools before becoming a legislator.

Carey R. Rogers, 49, a Santa Barbara Republican, sells home and business security and fire alarm systems. She is a member of the Santa Barbara County Republican Central Committee and an officer of G.A.L.S., a Republican women’s club.

Jay C. Wood, 57, a Libertarian, is the owner of a small business that sells office machines. Wood, who recently moved to Fillmore from Port Hueneme, has been active in the Libertarian Party for 10 years. This is his second time running for the state Senate seat.