Assembly: 36th District

Questionnaires were distributed to candidates in March. Answers have been edited to fit the available space. Democrat Arnie Rodio and Libertarian Ronald Tisbert are unopposed in the primary. Eight Republicans are vying for the GOP nomination in the June 2 primary. Keith Davis, a retired Los Angeles County probation officer, did not respond to The Times’ questionnaire. Answers of the other seven candidates appear below.

Business Environment

Q. Do you believe businesses are leaving California due to a hostile business environment? If yes, how would you make California more attractive to business?

Boese: Yes. Remove unreasonable regulation from business operations, completely overhaul workers’ compensation program, reduce state taxes on business income and overhaul state liability laws thereby lowering liability insurance costs.

Braly: Yes. I would reform workers’ compensation to put an end to fraud and spiraling employer costs. In addition, I would restore the balance to government regulations by eliminating such anti-business measures as SB 128, which increased paperwork costs to small business without any corresponding benefit. This would be coupled with a reduction in taxes. I would also work toward quality education in the public schools.

Drew: Yes. Take the “stress benefits” out of workers’ compensation. Establish small business incubators. Tax credits for new businesses.

Irmer: Yes. Through tax incentives and a targeted capital gains cut. Using the money for retraining workers and creating jobs, not administrative service. The added value tax needs to be reworked. Property tax cuts for a period of time.

Knight: Yes. Tax breaks for numbers of new jobs, workers’ compensation reform, compromise with environmental regulations.

McElroy: Yes. We can encourage business and job development by reforming workers’ compensation laws, reducing sales tax, eliminating and reducing unnecessary and burdensome state regulation and reforming California’s tort laws. We can encourage economic growth with enterprise and foreign trade zones and with private/public work force programs.

Tulley: Yes. California has many torts that are a cause for businesses leaving and not coming to the state.

Government Contracts

Q. Do you think state government contracts should be awarded on a “Buy American” basis, with winning bidders being those who promise to use specific percentages of American workers to produce goods and services?

Boese: No. American business and workers are the best in the world. Removing government regulations, not adding them, will keep Americans competitive and save tax dollars.

Braly: Yes. As long as we are being kept out of foreign markets we should give preference to American firms. At the same time, we should demand the same high-quality from our American firms that is associated with foreign firms.

Drew: No. Taxpayers should get the best deal.

Irmer: Yes. I am for America first and foreigners next. Cheap is not necessarily better; it only puts money in corporate executives’ pockets, not the workers’. Also, I am against aerospace industry selling to overseas.

Knight: Yes, but on a strictly competitive basis.

McElroy: Yes. And I’d like to take the idea one step further. I believe it is time to think about what’s best for California, including buying and contracting with companies that are headquartered in the state.

Tulley: Yes. State contracts are using taxpayers’ money that should be returned to the system via local state employees. This encourages research and development for businesses within the state.

Employee Insurance

Q. Do you support requiring California businesses to provide health insurance to employees or contribute to a fund to provide health care for the uninsured?

Boese: No. Further regulations and costs will only force more businesses out of the state. We should get rid of the causes of high health care--liability, fraud and lack of responsibility for cost containment.

Braly: No. The recession has taken a toll on California businesses and jobs. I support the use of tax incentives to encourage businesses to provide health-care insurance instead of mandating they do so.

Drew: No. This is a personal responsibility.

Irmer: Yes.

Knight: No.

McElroy: No. I have yet to see a government-run program that is cost-efficient. I favor development of a public-private joint plan with an emphasis on a major medical plan that would lower costs to private business, large and small.

Tulley: No. We need a health-care program, but it should not be borne by businesses.

Health Care

Q. Do you support state Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi’s proposed $34-billion plan, financed by a state payroll tax, for health care for California workers, people with pre-existing medical conditions and the unemployed?

Boese: No. Bureaucracy hasn’t done anything right yet; we must not let them have our health care. Instead, we should promote business and jobs so that workers can afford their own health care.

Braly: No. I do not believe that a “state insurance bureaucracy” funded by another payroll tax is the way to provide access to health care to all Californians. Government will probably make the problem worse, not better. I support tax incentives to encourage businesses to provide health-care coverage to their employees.

Drew: No.

Irmer: No. Not until I research the proposal.

Knight: No. The California business community--and all the jobs it represents--is on the brink of collapse because of the burdensome taxes, workers’ compensation costs and unbearable regulation. If we value holding our weakened economic climate together, the burden of $34 billion for universal health care insurance is ill advised.

McElroy: No. I am not familiar enough with the plan and the long-term costs to comment.

Tulley: No. This is a workers’ tax and workers should not be burdened by another tax.

National Health System

Q. Do you support a national health-care system in which the federal government would establish fees, pay all the bills and collect taxes to cover the cost?

Boese: No. Socialized medicine hasn’t worked anywhere else, not in Sweden, not in the United Kingdom, not in Canada. Let’s not embrace what the rest of the world is rejecting.

Braly: No. National health care is not the answer. Everywhere socialized medicine has been implemented, health care is more scarce than under a private, fee-for-service system.

Drew: No.

Irmer: Uncommitted because of cost layout. Get rid of perks and outrageous salaries of executives and chairmen of the board.

Knight: No. Government cannot be all things to all people. Health care programs must be reformed to reduce costs of doctors having to take extra precautions to satisfy malpractice suits.

McElroy: No. I would favor a private-public partnership.

Tulley: Yes. But with very stringent limitations.

Air Quality

Q. Should state and federal air quality rules be eased to reduce the financial burdens on California industry?

Boese: Yes.

Braly: No, but all regulations should be reviewed and all that are ineffective should be eliminated.

Drew: No.

Irmer: Yes.

Knight: Yes.

McElroy: Yes, to a reasonable degree.

Tulley: Yes.

Oil Exploration

Q. Barring a national emergency, would you ever support opening up more of the California coastline to oil exploration? If so, under what circumstances?

Boese: Yes. Oil development would promote jobs, add to tax revenues and our self-sufficiency for energy. I would support this as long as the oil companies agreed to pay cleanup costs of any spills.

Braly: Yes. I support offshore oil drilling where there are significant reserves and sufficient environmental protection.

Drew: No.

Irmer: Never.

Knight: No.

McElroy: No. We must continue to develop alternate energy sources and reduce our dependency on oil.

Tulley: Yes, as long as there are stringent safeguards against massive oil leaks.

Education Support

Q. Do you support giving state money to parents to allow them to enroll their children in schools of their choice, public or private?

Boese: Yes.

Braly: Yes, but only within the public school system. Private schools should be free from government restrictions and retain their autonomy. I am afraid that once public funds find their way into private schools, government mandates and restrictions will soon follow.

Drew: No.

Irmer: Yes.

Knight: No position yet. While I support much more choice for parents, the measure has not yet qualified for the November ballot and there has been little legislative debate. I am studying the initiative language to get facts about the impact and benefits.

McElroy: No. I support continued expansion of choice within the public schools system.

Tulley: Yes. I do support a voucher system so the taxpayer may receive money or credit for enrollment in private schools.

College Tuition

Q. Should tuition at state universities and colleges be increased to help offset state budget deficits?

Boese: No. Higher education is the basis for continued economic development of the state. Reduce the administrative costs rather than increase the tuition.

Braly: No. The universities should cut nonessential educational programs and ensure that students have the adequate number of courses offered. After all budget cuts have been made, small reasonable increases could be considered.

Drew: No. We need to defend the principle of equal opportunity.

Irmer: No.

Knight: Yes, to defray costs of university system.

McElroy: No. We must not discourage our young people from pursuing a college education.

Tulley: No. Tuitions are high enough at present.

L. A. School District

Q. Do you support the breakup of the Los Angeles Unified School District into smaller districts?

Boese: Yes. Although not a state question, I would personally support any measure that would give control of education to parents on a more local level.

Braly: Yes. The Los Angeles Unified School District is too large to allow parents an active and meaningful role in establishing education policies and programs that affect their children.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes, but only if it could be done without school boards, superintendents of school districts, administrators etc. Cost factor outweighs doing it.

Knight: No. The district bureaucracy is overpaid and too large in ratio of non-teachers to teachers. Overhead must be reduced in favor of devoting more resources to the classroom.

McElroy: Yes. The Los Angeles Unified School District is too large to operate effectively and efficiently. It could be better managed if it were divided into smaller units.

Tulley: No. It would make intra-district communication and cooperation more difficult.

School Bonds

Q. Do you support reducing the votes needed to pass a school construction bond issue from two-thirds to a simple majority?

Boese: No. Any measure that would involve such a commitment requires the solid support of the community, not just a bare majority.

Braly: No, because even though I strongly support state bonds for schools we need to be sure that Proposition 13 is not circumvented.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: No.

Knight: No. The two-thirds requirement was passed by voters as a prudent requirement to prevent runaway government spending. The requirement also assures that the community supports the need for the proposed construction.

McElroy: Yes. We must not continue to fund school construction from state bond issues. Local communities should decide which facilities are needed in their area and should not be hindered from getting them by unreasonable requirements.

Tulley: Yes. A majority rule by the people is always a good rule to follow.

Death Penalty

Q. Do you support capital punishment for any crimes? If so, which ones?

Boese: Yes. Premeditated murder and for murder during commission of a felony.

Braly: Yes. I support the existing laws plus capital punishment for repeated drug kingpins.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes. Gang-related murders, that is until we can educate young people that gangs are wrong, like drugs, AIDs and sex. Then repeal it.

Knight: Yes. Murder, multiple rapes.

McElroy: Yes. First-degree murder.

Tulley: Yes. First-degree murder, killing of any police officer or public official, killing during a crime such as robbery or rape, any death caused from terrorist acts.

Gun Control

Q. Do you support any form of limit on the sales of guns to individuals?

Boese: Yes. I would not support gun sales to convicted felons.

Braly: Yes. I do not support the sale of guns to persons convicted of serious crimes. However, I do believe that law-abiding citizens do and should have a right to firearms.

Drew: No. Common sense precautions make sense, but we should make gun owners feel like they’re the enemy.

Irmer: Yes. Current laws are enough.

Knight: Yes. Waiting period and background check.

McElroy: Yes. There should be no sale of guns to convicted felons, minors and the criminally insane. I would support a ban of sales on assault weapons to the general public and a waiting period for handguns.

Tulley: Yes. To mentally impaired persons, minors, felons.

Police Intervention

Q. Do you support making it a crime for a police officer to fail to intervene if he or she witnesses a fellow officer using excessive force against someone?

Boese: No. Hindsight is always 20/20. Excessive interference of officers doing their duty will reduce excessive force only because officers will be afraid to do their job--reduce crime!

Braly: No, except in cases of proven negligence. Police officers put their lives on the line every day in the fight against crime and we should not tie their hands further. However, we must continue the procedures requiring police officers to report misconduct.

Drew: No. Officers are generally responsible; no reason to do this, despite the Rodney King incident.

Irmer: Yes. Use your head, officer. Look how much Los Angeles city and county are paying in civil suits.

Knight: No. This should be an internal police responsibility.

McElroy: Yes. A sworn officer of the law has the responsibility to carry out his or her duty in protecting citizens no matter who is involved in committing the offense--fellow officers included.

Tulley: Yes. However, it must be another on-duty police officer and not one off-duty who may be passing by.

Campaign Funding

Q. Should political campaigns be taxpayer-funded to reduce the importance of special-interest money?

Boese: We need less government involvement and more taxpayer involvement to lessen special interest influence. We cannot rely on government to do what is our own responsibility as citizens.

Braly: No.

Drew: No. This would just help incumbents, since incumbents will write and control the implementation of the legislation.

Irmer: Yes. Or all contributions should go into a bank account to be divided up. I have a little over $1,000 and am almost out of money, but can’t get my ideas across.

Knight: No.

McElroy: No, but I would limit the amount of contributions and the amount that a candidate can spend on state elections.

Tulley: No. But limits on funds to be used for specific races I believe would help.

Affirmative Action

Q. In general, do you think affirmative action in employment of women and members of minority groups has not gone far enough, or has gone too far, or is about right?

Boese: A policy that accepts and promotes discrimination is unacceptable. Rather than binding us together as Americans, affirmative action splits us apart, sowing distrust and resentment, not equality.

Braly: I support current laws enforced by the Fair Housing and Employment Commission to protect against discrimination in employment and housing. I would not support hiring quotas.

Drew: I oppose quota systems. People should be hired by merit, not to right previous wrongs.

Irmer: Does not work. Companies put up literature required by law. Get rid of it and use money to train welfare mothers how to work and get jobs.

Knight: Uncertain. We have seen great progress in bringing women and minorities to a fairer, more representative position in the mainstream work force.

McElroy: I support the present affirmative action program and believe it is working about right to accomplish its aims.

Tulley: It is fair now. I see it with employment at where I work. It was fair to me and I have seen the system be fair to minorities.

Abortion Rights

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

Boese: No.

Braly: Yes.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes and no. If elected, and this came to a vote by the people, whatever way they decided, I would support, no matter what my beliefs are.

Knight: Yes.

McElroy: I am personally opposed to abortion when it is not medically indicated, except in limited circumstances, such as rape or incest. However, I do not believe that our government should interfere with a woman’s voluntary decision to avail herself of an abortion. This is an extremely personal and private decision that must be left to the woman, with the possible guidance of family, physicians, clergy and counselors. I would not support any legislation that would eliminate or unreasonably restrict a woman’s choice to obtain an abortion.

Tulley: Yes.

Abortion Funding

Q. Do you support state funding of abortions for women who cannot afford them?

Boese: No.

Braly: Yes.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: No.

Knight: No.

McElroy: No.

Tulley: Yes.

Terminal Illness

Q. Do you support the so-called “right-to-die” initiative on the November ballot that would allow doctors to end the lives of people who are terminally ill in a “painless, humane and dignified” manner?

Boese: No. Doctors should not play God.

Braly: No. However, I do not know enough about the initiative and its contents to formulate an informed opinion.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes.

Knight: No. Government has no place in such a personal and moral decision, which must remain an individual responsibility. There are too many variables and too much is at stake to make life or death decisions by government regulation.

McElroy: I have not reviewed the initiative.

Tulley: No. Because of the possibility of misuse.

Child Care

Q. Should businesses be required to subsidize child care for employees?

Boese: No.

Braly: No.

Drew: No.

Irmer: I don’t know if a mom and pop store with five employees can afford it versus Rockwell International (my company), which can build a gym. I would like to see something to help commuting parents and other families.

Knight: No.

McElroy: No. I believe creative and forward-thinking businesses are seeing the benefits of providing child-care programs at the workplace.

Tulley: No. If this is allowed, you may find employers hiring only single people.

Welfare Benefits

Q. Do you support Gov. Pete Wilson’s proposal to reduce welfare benefits for a family of three by 10% immediately, to $597 a month, and by another 15% for families with able-bodied adults who were not working?

Boese: Yes. We cannot continue to be a magnet for welfare recipients. This proposal will encourage people to get off welfare, promoting business, and training will give them the opportunity for jobs.

Braly: Yes. We cannot allow automatic cost-of-living increases to put California’s budget on auto-pilot. In addition, welfare benefits in California are among the highest in the nation, and accordingly our welfare population is disproportionately larger as well. Hard-working taxpayers cannot afford to be so much more generous than the rest of the country.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes. I also support a proposal requiring those same people to go to work while children are in school or going to school and learning a trade. Earnings should not be subtracted from gross take-home pay, but from net take-home pay.

Knight: Yes. California needs to reduce welfare benefits to reduce incentives to stay on welfare. We must also remove the incentives that attract welfare recipients to California by setting new arrival grants at the same level as the state from which they have migrated.

McElroy: Yes. I support the proposal with enthusiasm, believing that the costs and consequences of our current welfare system have been prime factors in the state’s loss of economic strength.

Tulley: Yes. I believe if they are able-bodied and can work, they should be required to do some work for the community.

Proposition 13

Q. Do you support any change in the laws enacted by voters in 1978 as Proposition 13?

Boese: No.

Braly: No.

Drew: No.

Irmer: Possibly. As I understand it, money that used to go directly to the schools is now diverted through Sacramento. This might have been a mistake. If not, no.

Knight: No.

McElroy: Yes. I do not believe the public is being served with the present requirements for public school construction bonds. I would support lowering of the two-thirds requirement to a simple majority for local school bond issues.

Tulley: No.

B-2 Bomber

Q. President Bush has urged that production of the B-2 bomber--which is assembled at a Palmdale plant--be cut from 75 to 25. Do you support this reduction?

Boese: No. The B-2 is a critical weapon system. Its value compared to the cost was adequately demonstrated during the Gulf War.

Braly: No. Our job base in the Antelope Valley has been decreased drastically already. We need jobs that this contract would bring. There have been many cuts in the defense budget already and the last year has shown that the world situation can change dramatically in a short period of time. We need a strong arsenal to be prepared for any situation and that arsenal is being built in the Antelope Valley.

Drew: Yes. Bush knows what he is doing. I’d like to help these workers find new jobs and new uses for their skills. In general, defense cutbacks will improve our economy.

Irmer: No. The B-2 has problems. The line should be slowed now that we have some peace and the problems worked out.

Knight: No. The development costs have been spent. Fifteen planes are not sufficient to provide strategic support. The cost of the B-2 is now only production costs.

McElroy: A considerable investment has been made in developing the B-2 that would not be returned if the contract were cut short at 25. California’s aerospace industry, jobs and national defense interests are at stake and must be considered in making any such decision.

Tulley: Yes. That aircraft is way too expensive.

Thomas or Hill?

Q. Who do you think more likely told the truth, Anita Hill or Clarence Thomas?

Boese: I don’t know. I refused to watch the circus put on by Congress.

Braly: After days of testimony, both were convincing. I have no basis from which to judge one’s truthfulness over another, and at this point, I’m not sure it really matters.

Drew: Anita Hill.

Irmer: Anita Hill. And how come there were no women on the panel? Do they think only men can seat a justice and decide sexual questions?

Knight: I’m at a loss to see how the media sensationalized incident--and my opinion about who told the truth--has any bearing on a state legislative race.

McElroy: I have no basis on which to make that assessment.

Tulley: I believe both told the truth from what they recalled from an incident that occurred 10 years ago.

Personal Scrutiny

Q. Would you be comfortable opening your life history to the kind of scrutiny now regularly given to presidential candidates?

Boese: Yes. I have nothing to hide.

Braly: Yes. I have always been a law-abiding, responsible member of our community. I’m proud of my record in public service and private enterprise.

Drew: Yes.

Irmer: Yes.

Knight: Yes. Nothing to hide.

McElroy: No. I can’t imagine anyone being “comfortable” with that kind of scrutiny. However, I accept that it may be necessary to the process.

Tulley: Yes. A person’s past is important. When I vote I like to know the person’s honesty and integrity. A person’s past is a document for the future.

California Life

Q. What single change would most improve life in Southern California?

Boese: Eliminate the intrusion and interference of the state government into private enterprise. This would stop businesses from leaving and bring jobs, opportunity and prosperity back to our state.

Braly: Less business regulation in the form of lower taxes, workers’ compensation reform and fewer regulations.

Drew: Slow growth. Too much residential construction has harmed roads, schools and other government services. Rapid growth had led to increased gang activity.

Irmer: Give the teachers and students uncrowded classrooms and programs needed for our children to improve their lives.

Knight: Improved business climate, state support of business--all to provide jobs that are necessary for people’s well-being.

McElroy: The single most important change we could make would be to develop the best education in the nation. I am firmly convinced that improvement in this area can lead to quality improvements across the board.

Tulley: More jobs, more business.

Public Figure

Q. What public figure do you most admire?

Boese: Living--Ronald Reagan, a man not afraid to stand up to the socialist influence. Deceased--George Washington, a man not afraid to stand up for what he thought was right.

Braly: Former President Teddy Roosevelt.

Drew: President Bush.

Irmer: JFK. Abe Lincoln. James Baker. Colin Powell.

Knight: Barry Goldwater.

McElroy: The Rev. Billy Graham.

Tulley: Jean Fitzpatrick.

Literary Influence

Q. What, if any, book have you recently read that influenced your view of public policy?

Boese: I haven’t had enough time for books as I once had. See what has been going on in the papers and in magazines has been the major influence.

Braly: “Churchill” by Martin Gilbert.

Drew: “Losing Ground” by Charles Murray.

Irmer: Newspapers, magazines, television, radio and people, California law books.

Knight: Not answered.

McElroy: “Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector” by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler.

Tulley: “1787--The Day-to-Day Story of the Constitutional Convention.”

Freedom of Speech

Q. What, if any, restrictions do you believe should be placed on freedom on speech?

Boese: The only restrictions that should be placed would be in the case of safeguarding the national security.

Braly: I am disturbed that some people use “freedom of speech” to destroy our American flag. That is wrong and their actions should not be protected by our constitutional right to freedom of speech.

Drew: None, except for public safety.

Irmer: None. Leave the Constitution, the most important document, alone.

Knight: Difficult to make a blanket statement. But certainly people and organizations proposing illegal activities should be restricted.

McElroy: I would place no further restrictions on freedom of speech than presently exist in our laws and Constitution.

Tulley: None.

Assembly District 36

Overview: The newly drawn district was pieced together from several other districts through reapportionment. The district, which stretches from the Antelope Valley into the Santa Clarita Valley, has attracted 10 candidates, eight of them Republicans. There is no incumbent.

Where: The district includes Acton, Agua Dulce, Canyon Country, Lancaster, Leona Valley, Littlerock, Llano, Palmdale, Pearblossom, Quartz Hill, Santa Clarita and Saugus in the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys. To find out if you live in the district, call the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder’s office at (213) 721-1100.

Demographics Anglo: 75% Latino: 16% Black: 5% Asian: 4%

Party Registration Demo: 34% GOP: 55% Others: 11%

Candidates: Democrat: Arnie Rodio, Lancaster city councilman Libertarian: Ronald Tisbert, small businessman

Republican Kurt C. Boese, senior procurement representative Hunt Braly, state senator’s staff director Keith Davis, retired probation officer John Drew, college professor Richard Irmer, aerospace worker William J. (Pete) Knight, mayor / aerospace businessman Forrest L. McElroy, superintendent of schools Sandra F. Tulley, commercial airline mechanic

CONTENDERS

Kurt C. Boese, 35, of Canyon Country, is a senior procurement representative for Hughes Aircraft Co. This is his first try for political office.

Hunt Braly, 36, of Santa Clarita, is district chief of staff for state Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia.) He ran unsuccessfully for a state Assembly seat two years ago.

John C. Drew, 35, Newhall, is a political science instructor at College of the Canyons. This is the first time he has sought public office in California.

Richard William Irmer, 45, of Lancaster, is an aircraft mechanic for an aerospace firm. This is his first try for state office. He once ran for City Council in Sonora, Calif., his former home.

William J. (Pete) Knight, 62, of Palmdale, served as mayor of Palmdale for two terms. He chose not to seek reelection to his seat on the City Council on the April ballot.

Forrest L. McElroy, 56, of Palmdale, is superintendent of the Palmdale Elementary School District. A 30-year educator, McElroy is seeking public office for the first time and says he is a moderate Republican.

Sandra F. Tulley, 44, of Lancaster, is an aircraft mechanic for United Airlines and a reserve deputy sheriff for Los Angeles County. She is a board member of the Antelope Acres Town Council.