 |
||||
4211 Trindle Road, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania 17011 (717) 761-0702 Fax (717) 761-4315 Media CenterWest Shore Chamber of Commerce Hosts 88th District State House Candidate Debate
An audience of more than 250 people came to hear the one Democrat and seven Republicans field questions posed by moderator RJ Harris at the West Shore Chamber of Commerce’s 88th State House Seat Debate on April 7, held at Mechanicsburg Middle School.
The questions were supplied by the Chamber’s Legislative Committee. All of the candidates were prepared and provided thoughtful answers. All candidates also promised to uphold the legacy provided by retiring Representative Jerry Nailor. Nailor, who sat quietly in the back of the auditorium with his wife, received three enthusiastic rounds of applause during the debate.
The following is a condensed overview of the questions asked and individual answers given, in order of speaking. The West Shore Chamber of Commerce does not endorse any one candidate.
Candidates: Jeffrey Banzhoff (R) Bill Cornell (R) Sheryl Delozier (R) Lowell Gates (R) Mike Hancock (R) Ian Hayes (R) Matt Seagrist (R) Margaret Stuski (D)
Q1. What is your position on the current legislation to expand health care to those not covered in Pennsylvania?
Seagrist – Commended legislature for passing Chip and Bush for his extension of SChip. Believes in market based solutions.
Stuski – Supports expansion of Chip and PACE, and small business incentives for health coverage.
Banzhoff – Would like to see expansion of SChip, a sliding scale for Health Saving Accounts, and tort reform limiting lawsuits against doctors.
Cornell – Believes Pennsylvanian’s should not be forced to pay for universal health insurance and does not believe in the government providing health insurance. Favors PACE and Chip.
Delozier – Supports Chip. Does not believe in government providing health insurance, nor in small businesses being forced to pay. Does not want to see another new program.
Gates – Opposed to universal health care. Supports tort reform and does not want small businesses to be forced to pay for health care for all.
Hancock – Opposed to universal health care. Supports tort reform and expanded Chip and PACE programs.
Hayes – Stated there is “no silver bullet” which will take care of everything. Opposed to universal health insurance.
Q2. What is your opinion on unfunded mandates; i.e. the education department adding mandatory classes to the curriculum and the EPA/DEP mandate to clean up the Chesapeake Bay?
Banzhoff – Stated “unfunded mandates do not work.”
Cornell – Declared it was a “shameful way of running government”.
Delozier – “Unfunded mandates frustrate taxpayers.” Before passing legislation, the government needs to ask “who is going to pay for this?”
Gates – Stated “unfunded mandates are a cowardly way of doing business”. Added, we should look to the farmers for part of the Chesapeake Bay funding.
Hancock – Believes unfunded mandates burden all of us and that adding mandatory classes to the curriculum puts a burden on our education system.
Hayes - Does not support HB 2146, amending the Public School Code providing for courses of study in high schools.
Seagrist - Believes mandates are an abuse of power and wants to know where the Chesapeake Bay mandate came from in the first place.
Stuski – Noted mandates have to be stopped. Opposes HB 2146 and suggests finding funding for the Chesapeake Bay cleanup may be a bond issue.
Q3. Is the legislature too large and should there be term limits? Will you be a full-time legislator?
Gates – Stated he does not believe the legislature is too large, does believe in term limits, and would serve full time when the legislature is in session.
Hancock – Believes the legislature is too large, and supports term limits.
Hayes – Believes the legislature is too big, opposes term limits, and will be a full time legislator.
Seagrist – Stated that the state government is not only too big, “it is broken”. Would set term limits for committee chairs.
Stuski – Believes the legislature is too big but would address costs and hone expenditures before she would call for a constitutional convention to limit the size. Does believe in some sort of term limits, and would serve full-time.
Banzhoff – Supports term limits and has already closed his business in preparation for campaigning and serving.
Cornell – Opposes term limits and said, “We already have term limits. They’re called elections”. Addressing the size of the legislature, he said it was not size that counts, but perks and bonuses. He would serve full-time.
Delozier – Does not believe the legislature is too big, but does believe the cost of state government is too much. She would be a full-time legislator.
Q4. What is your position on proposed “Right to Work” legislation and forced unionism?
Delozier – Supports “Right to Work” legislation and the right to join, or not join, a union.
Gates – Opposes forced unionism and believes unions have outlived their usefulness. Supports “Right to Work”.
Hancock – Opposes forced unionism.
Hayes – Stated he is 100% against forced unionism.
Seagrist – Opposes forced unionism and supports “Right to Work”.
Stuski – Took the opposing view and stated she believes unions may still be necessary, and is thoughtful about “Right to Work”.
Banzhoff – Opposes forced unionism.
Cornell – Opposes forced unionism and is favor of “Right to Work” in a “careful way”.
Q5. Is it time for a constitutional convention?
Stuski – Believes a convention would be a good way for people to begin a dialogue about government. Pointed out that a constitutional convention opens the door to many issues being brought up and would like a limitation of questions to the voters.
Banzhoff – Supports a sliding scale for property tax.
Cornell – Also stated a convention would not just be for just one issue. Delozier - Agreed with Cornell and said to “be careful opening that door. What is it that the constituency wants?”
Gates – Opposes a carte blanche convention. “What we need”, he said, “is to follow the constitution.”
Hancock – Supports a constitutional convention because he believes we need change in state government.
Hayes – Wants to see change from within the government and believes we are not yet at a point where we need a constitutional convention.
Seagrist – Would support a “narrowly defined” constitutional convention.
Q6. How would you propose to fund the transportation shortfalls in Pennsylvania?
Hayes – Believes the Governor is not making transportation an important budget issue.
Seagrist – Believes transportation is the most important issue to be addressed.
Stuski – Supports the Pennsylvania Chamber’s positions (www.pachamber.org) and advocates car pools and mass transit.
Banzhoff – Suggested the State reallocate wasted funds (on such things as soccer stadiums) and apply them to transportation.
Cornell – Declared that Philadelphia and Pittsburgh have to stop taking central Pennsylvania’s money.
Delozier - Believes that the government should put the money where it was initially intended, dedicated funding.
Gates – Stated he does not trust Rendell. “Pennsylvania does not have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem.”
Hancock – Believes all the money goes to Philadelphia and said, “Let Philadelphia subsidize itself.”
Q7. What is your position on the need for additional tort reform in Pennsylvania?
Cornell – Would like to see tort reform in the medical field.
Delozier – Stated people need to take some personal responsibility and be less sue happy.
Gates – Stated the legal system is broken and supports eliminating joint and several liability. Also believes the loser should be accountable for paying the legal fees, and supports medical liability. Hancock – Would cap economic damages and believes the current legal atmosphere is a burden on the healthcare system.
Hayes – Said tort reform is long overdue and pointed out the legislature did pass some tort reform already and the Governor vetoed it.
Seagrist – Stated this is an extremely important issue. Supports tort reform, especially concerning malpractice suits. Advocates caps.
Stuski - Believes medical malpractice needs to be reformed. Supports caps and the need to move lawsuits along more speedily.
Banzhoff – Believes it is our right to sue. Supports caps on punitive damages and actual damage entitlement.
|
||||
|
||||