Decision ’92 : VOTING IN THE VALLEY / AN ELECTION GUIDE : ASSEMBLY / 42nd DISTRICT : Q and A

Questions were sent to candidates in September. Answers have been edited to fit the space.

State Spending

Q. What do you believe is the single most wasteful program in state government?

Davis: Since education is the largest part of the budget, it would seem to follow that it is the most wasteful. Since we have over $180,000 per classroom available, but in some cases they can’t get books, it would seem to be confirmed.

Margolin: The workers’ compensation system. California has the sixth highest workers’ compensation costs in the country, yet it ranks only 35th in benefits provided to injured workers. This inefficient and wasteful system costs California employers billions of dollars each year and needs to be overhauled immediately.

Rotter: The drug war exacerbates every problem it was intended to solve. By driving up drug prices, it has produced unprecedented levels of crime and violence. Our overextended police can no longer protect us, prisons are overcrowded, courts are overburdened.

Indispensable Program

Q. Are there any state programs you believe should never be cut? If so, what?

Davis: No. Isn’t this sort of a dumb question?

Margolin: Funding for kindergarten through 12th grade education. Moreover, the current level is woefully inadequate and should be increased.

Rotter: No.

Taxes on Wealthy

Q. Do you support a November ballot initiative that would raise taxes on wealthy individuals, corporations and banks while repealing 1991 sales tax hikes?

Davis: No.

Margolin: Yes.

Rotter: No.

Gay Rights

Q. Do you support legislation to ban job discrimination against homosexuals in California?

Davis: Yes.

Margolin: Yes.

Rotter: No.

Business Exodus

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?

Davis: Yes. Reformer workers’ compensation, reduce taxes and regulations, streamline regulations. Enact comprehensive legal reform--tort reform, etc.--and rein in local regulations by the use of state power.

Margolin: The business climate in California is deteriorating for a wide range of reasons, including the national recession and cutbacks in defense spending. On the issues over which state government has some control, such as reform of workers’ compensation, we need to take immediate and aggressive action.

Rotter: Yes. First, taxes must be cut across the board. We need to cut personal taxes that erode spendable income and, thus, make California less attractive to both businesses and workers. Second, California should adopt a school voucher plan giving parents a sum equivalent to that spent by public schools, which they could spend at a school of their choice. This will generate competition in education, which will force schools to meet the needs of parents and students. Better schools and a better-educated work force will help entice businesses to locate and expand in California.

Health 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?

Davis: No. Socialized medicine is a bad system.

Margolin: Yes. This approach makes sense, but only if it is absolutely tied to a major health-care cost containment package that gives employers guaranteed controls on their health spending.

Rotter: No. Mandatory employer-provided health insurance will consume a substantial portion of the money available for employee compensation and thus narrow the range of wage/benefits packages subject to negotiation between employers and employees or unions. One of two things will result--lower take-home pay or fewer jobs and higher unemployment.

School Vouchers

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

Davis: Yes.

Margolin: No.

Rotter: Yes.

College Tuition

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

Davis: Yes. I would favor a system such as I attended with state support, tuition being a strong part of the mix, and scholarships for the capable poor, and loans. We also need to regain control of the budget by requiring heavier workloads for professors and a freeze in salaries until an adjustment reflecting a fairer pay schedule is achieved.

Margolin: The recent 40% increase in CSU fees strengthens my belief that the pain of balancing the budget has fallen disproportionately on students.

Rotter: Yes. Especially in light of California’s fiscal crisis and the tremendous disparity between the actual cost of a college education and the fees charged at state institutions, students or their families should bear a greater portion of that cost.

School Bonds

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

Davis: No.

Margolin: Yes.

Rotter: No.

Death Penalty

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

Davis: Yes. Murder, attempted murder involving great brutality, possibly aggravated rape. In short, I would expand the death penalty.

Margolin: Yes. Premeditated murder motivated by profit, or political terrorism would be some examples.

Rotter: No.

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?

Davis: I believe it is wrong, a form of discrimination, in the first place. Employment and promotion should be done solely on the basis of merit and ability.

Margolin: In some areas it has not gone far enough and in others more work needs to be done. When affirmative action becomes a quota, I’m opposed to it. If it means that aggressive efforts at recruitment and training of women and minority candidates are being pursued in a field where those groups have been historically denied access, then I’m for it.

Rotter: The need for affirmative action varies from one region to another, from occupation to occupation, and from group to group. This is not, however, a problem that requires a uniform, government-mandated solution. Private-sector employers should be free to adopt whatever affirmative action plan they choose.

Abortion Rights

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

Davis: Yes.

Margolin: Yes.

Rotter: Yes.

Right-to-Die

Q. Do you support a November ballot initiative that would make it legal for doctors to “assist” terminally ill patients in dying, such as by giving them lethal injection?

Davis: Yes. To be done only on patient request, which is a higher standard than consent, or by a person given legal authority by the patient.

Margolin: No. I support the concept of allowing people to die with dignity, but having doctors change their professional roles to the point where they actively assist in suicide raises profound ethical questions which are not adequately addressed in the initiative.

Rotter: Yes. Since permitting doctors to assist someone who wishes to die violates no one’s rights, there is no reason to prohibit it.

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?

Davis: Yes. California encourages welfare dependency, which is the worst thing you can do for the poor.

Margolin: I support the part of Wilson’s proposal that limits welfare for new arrivals in the state. The reduction in grants from families already on welfare won’t solve the problem. Poor children will suffer.

Rotter: In general, I support efforts to reduce government spending across the board. However, I am disturbed by some of the social control aspects of Wilson’s plan. For example, I understand that it would treat a mother who has another baby while on welfare differently depending on whether or not she is married, and it would condition certain benefits to unmarried teen-age mothers on their continued school attendance.