State executive debates, 2014
From Ballotpedia - Reading time: 21 min
 |
November 4, 2014 |
Candidates for state executive elections in 2014 were debating the major issues facing voters from coast to coast prior to the November 4 general election. This page summarizes general election debates for state executive offices covered by Ballotpedia in 2014. The entries on this page were updated as new information became available.
Here is a breakdown of the general topics addressed by candidates during these debates, along with links to the appropriate debate summary:
| Debate Topics Index | |
|---|---|
| Topic | Debates |
| Abortion | WI Gov. |
| Death penalty | FL Gov. |
| Economic policy | IL Gov., KS Gov., ME Gov., MD Gov., MA Gov., MI Gov., NE Gov., NV Lt. Gov., RI Gov., WI Gov. |
| Education | HI Gov., MD Gov., MI Gov., NE Gov., NV Lt. Gov., PA Gov. |
| Energy | HI Gov., MD Gov., NE Gov. |
| Ethics | NV AG, NV Lt. Gov., SC Gov. |
| Healthcare | AZ Gov., RI Gov., WI Gov. |
| Heroin | DE AG |
| Immigration | AZ Gov., CO Gov., NV Lt. Gov. |
| Law enforcement | AZ AG, CO Gov., WI AG |
| Marijuana | CO Gov., FL AG, PA Gov., SC Gov. |
| Minimum wages | PA Gov., SC Gov., WI Gov. |
| Same-sex marriage | FL AG, MI Gov., NV Lt. Gov., UT AG |
| Voter ID | IA SoS, NV SoS, PA Gov., WI AG |
Arizona[edit]
Arizona Attorney General debate[edit]
- See also: Arizona Attorney General election, 2014
September 30[edit]
Mark Brnovich (R) and Felecia Rotellini (D) faced off over prosecuting experience and private persons during a debate hosted by public affairs program Arizona Horizon. Brnovich criticized Rotellini's lack of experience as prosecutor while highlighting his past work as a county prosecutor and assistant U.S. Attorney. Rotellini countered that Brnovich did not understand that the attorney general's office doesn't handle prosecutions, which are handled by county attorneys.[1]
Rotellini criticized Brnovich's efforts to bring ideology to the office as well as his support for private prisons. She also argued that his advocacy for pro-life positions was an unnecessary distraction for anyone aspiring to the office. Brnovich reacted by pointing out the lack of partisan divide over private prisons, citing the Obama administration's advocacy for these types of facilities. He also suggested that Rotellini's criticism was hypocritical because she accepted contributions from private-prison operators.[1]
Arizona gubernatorial debate[edit]
- See also: Arizona gubernatorial election, 2014
September 29[edit]
The Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission hosted a debate featuring Doug Ducey (R), Fred DuVal (D), Barry J. Hess (L) and Americans Elect candidate J.L. Mealer. The four candidates divided into separate camps over the state's expansion of a health-insurance program for low-income residents. Ducey opposed the expansion prior to implementation, but would allow continuation of the expansion over a three-year period where the federal government provides matching funds. Hess also expressed reservations about the program, arguing that he would cut the program because its success has led to excessive tax increases. DuVal and Mealer voiced support for the expansion, with DuVal noting that repeal would be burdensome not only to patients but the state economy.[2]
The debate also highlighted differences among the major party candidates over driver's licenses for young adults who came to the United States without proper documentation. Gov. Jan Brewer blocked issuance of licenses to this group and Ducey would continue the policy if elected. DuVal called the governor's actions "mean-spirited" and suggested that repealing the prohibition would be his first act as governor.[2]
Colorado[edit]
Colorado gubernatorial debate[edit]
October 6[edit]
A debate hosted by the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce evolved from an economics discussion into a clash over public safety issues between John Hickenlooper (D) and Bob Beauprez (R). Beauprez blamed Hickenlooper for lax oversight of state prisons, citing recent instances where inmates convicted of violent crimes were released without public notice. Hickenlooper noted that once a criminal has served a sentence, there is no legal rationale for keeping them incarcerated. He also argued that the state legislature failed to pass a new law in 2013 that would have created an intermediary step between prison and freedom for inmates with psychological issues or histories of violent behavior.[3]
Hickenlooper and Beauprez also shared their views on controversial topics including marijuana legalization and immigration policy during the debate. The incumbent pointed out that other states should take notice of the difficulties Colorado faces in the early days of marijuana legalization. Hickenlooper noted that Colorado residents who supported legalization were "reckless" and lacked the information to make an informed vote.[3]
Beauprez joined Hickenlooper in addressing a touchy political subject by bringing up his stance on immigration policy. The Republican candidate has previously argued that illegal immigrants should be sent back to their home countries before returning through official channels. Beauprez suggested during the debate that this process would not be necessary as part of immigration reform.[3]
Delaware[edit]
Delaware Attorney General debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
October 15 debate[edit]
Matthew Denn (D), Ted Kittila (R), Catherine Damavandi (G) and David Graham (I) discussed the state's heroin problem and their proposals for strengthening the office during a debate at Widener University Law School. Kittila and Damavandi agreed that the attorney general's office should target high-level dealers in the state to deal with the drug's growing use. Graham brought up a family member struggling with heroin addiction when bringing up the need for rehabilitation programs. Denn also argued on behalf of treatment programs that could stem the supply side of the problem.[4]
The candidates were asked to assign themes to their campaigns or potential administrations during the debate. Denn spoke about the need to improve the efficiency of the office while focusing on violent crimes. Kittila suggested that the office needed to reclaim its role atop the state's legal system. Damavandi stated that her administration would be focused on equal justice for every resident and Graham suggested that leadership and management would be necessary to continue the office's work.[4]
Florida[edit]
Florida Attorney General debate[edit]
- See also: Florida Attorney General election, 2014
Debate media[edit]
|
October 6 debate[edit]
Pam Bondi (R), George Sheldon (D) and Bill Wohlsifer (L) discussed their positions on medical marijuana and same-sex marriage and during a debate hosted by Tampa Bay News 9. A question about Amendment 2, a failed ballot measure that would have allowed medical marijuana in the state, divided the candidates into different camps. Bondi opposed Amendment 2 due to concerns about the legitimacy of medical marijuana prescriptions given efforts by the state against doctors providing unnecessary prescriptions through "pill mills." Sheldon criticized detractors like Bondi for drumming up hysterical criticisms of Amendment 2, while Wohlsifer argued that the measure should provide greater freedom for marijuana use.[5]
The debate brought up the United States Supreme Court decision to overturn the state's ban on same-sex marriage. Bondi did not provide a clear stance on same-sex marriage, stating that her office had only received the court decision hours before the debate. Sheldon argued that Bondi should not defend the state's ban, saying that the government should "get out of the business of telling people who they can love."[5]
Florida gubernatorial debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
|
October 21 debate[edit]
Rick Scott (R) and Charlie Crist (D) leveled sharp criticisms against each other during the race's final debate carried live on CNN. The race received significant attention for an earlier debate where Scott refused to join Crist on stage due to the Democratic candidate's use of a fan. Scott and Crist displayed their acrimonious relationship during the CNN debate by sparring over personal finances. Scott argued that Crist's privileged upbringing meant that he could not relate to low-income families. Crist countered that Scott was not qualified to make such a statement given his substantial wealth.[6]
The most interesting exchange of the night came after a question regarding the governor's role in signing execution orders. Crist accused Scott of delaying the execution of a death-row inmate this year to accommodate the fundraising schedule of Attorney General Pam Bondi (R). Scott responded that he did shift the date of the order because the proposed execution dates did not work for Bondi and stated that she apologized for the delay. He did not answer repeated questions about whether he knew the delay was due to a fundraising event.[7]
Hawaii[edit]
Hawaii gubernatorial debate[edit]
- See also: Hawaii gubernatorial election, 2014
October 15 debate[edit]
David Ige (D), Duke Aiona (R) and Mufi Hannemann (I) shared the stage during a debate sponsored by Hawaii News Now and the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Many of the questions offered by University of Hawaii students were left unanswered as the candidates focused on criticizing the records of their opponents. Hannemann criticized Ige and fellow legislators for rising electrical costs and public school woes. He argued that Hawaii voters needed to question whether Ige could lead the way after struggling to resolve these issues during 29 years in the legislature. Ige responded that legislators have to reach consensus on major issues and that he was "running for governor because I know I can't do it as a legislator...I have to be governor to make these things work."[8]
Ige trained his attack against Aiona, asking why the former lieutenant selected some policies from his tenure to support while claiming no influence over other issues. Aiona responded that the Democratic candidate should have asked former Gov. Linda Lingle that question. He also countered that voters could have asked a similar question of Ige because he ran with current Lt. Gov. Shan Tsutsui.[8]
Illinois[edit]
Illinois gubernatorial debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
October 9 debate[edit]
Bruce Rauner (R) and Pat Quinn (D) shared barbs over past executive experiences during a debate hosted by the League of Women Voters of Illinois and WTVP. Quinn criticized Rauner as a political novice who had not been effective at turning around businesses as an equity investor. He cited bankruptcy proceedings for a nursing home operator run by Rauner's firm that was sued for wrongful deaths as signs of "businesses that went wrong" under the Republican candidate's watch. Rauner responded by pointing to poor state management of a $54.5 million anti-violence grant under investigation by federal officials. The Republican candidate claimed that Quinn and state Democrats used the funds to shore up African American votes in the state, while Quinn argued that he eliminated the program when irregularities were brought to his attention.[9]
Quinn asserted that the state's economic fortunes improved in the past four years, with increases in jobs throughout the state and decreased unemployment. Rauner repeatedly used the term "failure" to describe Quinn's gubernatorial experience, claiming that "a small group of Chicago machine politicians" led the state down the wrong path.[9]
Iowa[edit]
Iowa Secretary of State debate[edit]
- See also: Iowa Secretary of State election, 2014
October 3 debate[edit]
Paul Pate (R) and Brad Anderson (D) discussed their views on voter ID and administration of absentee ballots during a debate for the public affairs program Iowa Press. Pate argued on behalf of a voter ID requirement, citing high bipartisan support in polls and the need to protect the integrity of elections. Anderson argued that a new voter ID law was unnecessary as state law already allows election inspectors to ask for identification if they suspect fraud.[10]
Pate and Anderson also revealed differences over the use of third-party groups to deliver absentee ballots to poll locations. This practice, used to increase voter turnout by both parties, was criticized by Pate because of the potential for ballot manipulation by political operatives. He also pointed to the ease of returning an absentee ballot by mail. Anderson countered that third-party groups ensure timely delivery of absentee ballots as elections near and protect the rights of voters with disabilities.[10]
Kansas[edit]
Kansas gubernatorial debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
September 19 debate[edit]
Sam Brownback (R), Paul Davis (D) and Keen A. Umbehr (L) shared the stage for a debate sponsored by the Johnson County Public Policy Council. All three candidates took turns explaining why their policies would help the state's largest county. Brownback argued that the controversial tax cuts he proposed have already helped the county increase business development. He also took a swipe at Davis for opposing a proposal to school districts in the county more authority over property tax rates. Davis countered that Brownback's tax policies have depleted funds for schools and roads in the county and the Republican proposal for greater tax authority included a provision taking job protections away from educators. Umbehr advocated for elimination of the income tax, favoring a sales tax that would keep more cash on hand for county residents. Brownback and Davis both opposed a tax on professional services in the county, though Brownback questioned the authenticity of the Democratic candidate's position.[11]
Maine[edit]
Maine gubernatorial debate[edit]
- See also: Maine gubernatorial election, 2014
October 8 debate[edit]
Paul LePage (R), Mike Michaud (D) and Eliot Cutler (I) discussed the state's economic health during a debate that seemed unlikely to happen only a month earlier. LePage, who was reluctant to debate his opponents throughout the general election, touted the state's healthy budget and repayments to state hospitals as examples of his first-term successes. He also noted that Michaud was symbolic of the state's Democratic legislators, who had not delivered on past promises.[12]
Michaud countered that he was the only candidate on stage who had worked with Democrats and Republicans during his time in the United States House of Representatives. He also highlighted LePage's argumentative reputation with state legislators as a reason to replace him in the governor's office. Cutler noted that voters had an opportunity to turn their backs on failed policies from Republican and Democratic governors by casting ballots for his independent candidacy.[12]
Maryland[edit]
Maryland gubernatorial debate[edit]
October 18 debate[edit]
Anthony Brown (D) and Larry Hogan (R) clashed over education, economic policy and fracking during a debate on Maryland Public Television. Brown advocated for expanding pre-K schooling as a solution to academic performance issues. Hogan countered that the key to Maryland's education future is the expansion of charter schools. Hogan, the owner of a real estate company, criticized Brown and current Gov. Martin O'Malley for "crushing small businesses" over the past eight years. Brown countered that he would work toward tax relief for small businesses if elected governor.[13]
The issue of fracking in western Maryland showed clear divisions between the two candidates. Hogan was enthusiastic in his support for natural gas extraction in the state, citing "an enormous gold mine" of energy resources that could boost the state's economic prospects. Brown touted the current administration's focus on gathering safety and environmental reports about fracking in the state to avoid long-term impacts on nearby communities.[13]
Massachusetts[edit]
Massachusetts gubernatorial debate[edit]
October 7 debate[edit]
All five candidates met for a debate prior to the general election, though sharp attacks between Martha Coakley (D) and Charlie Baker (R) were the headline event. The two candidates battled over reform of the state's child welfare system and Baker's tenure as chief executive for Harvard Pilgrim Health Care. A super PAC supporting Baker's campaign has claimed in ads that Coakley opposed reforms to the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families during her time as attorney general. Baker continued this attack by pointing out Coakley's defense of the state in 2010 from a lawsuit filed by a child welfare group concerned about the department's handling of foster care. Coakley responded that she was tasked with defending the state's interests as attorney general.[14]
Coakley attacked Baker for accepting a growing salary during his time at Harvard Pilgrim after he was brought in to improve the company's financial outlook. She argued that Baker's salary grew from $600,000 per year to $1.7 million per year while senior citizens were dropped from coverage. Baker countered that his salary was established by a board of directors and his work helped prevent Harvard Pilgrim from going under, which would have weakened health services in the state.[14]
Michigan[edit]
Michigan gubernatorial debate[edit]
October 13[edit]
Rick Snyder (R) and Mark Schauer (D) clashed over Detroit's bankruptcy proceedings, education spending and same-sex marriage during a debate at Wayne State University. Snyder argued on behalf of the state emergency manager's decision to take Detroit into bankruptcy, noting that the city was only months away from shedding $9 billion in debts. Schauer countered that pensioners in the city should not have been asked to cut their plans, citing legal and constitutional protections for public pension plans.[15]
Schauer criticized the governor's tax reform plan implemented in 2011, which he claimed cut $1 billion in education funds, raised taxes on the middle class by $1.4 billion and cut taxes for high-income earners by $1.8 billion. Snyder defended his tax plans by noting that education spending was up $1 billion during his term in office and tax reform brought fairer rates to small business owners.[15]
Snyder, who opposed same-sex marriage during his 2010 campaign, stated that he would abide by a federal appeals court ruling regarding Michigan's ban on the practice. Schauer criticized Snyder for evading a question about his stance on same-sex marriage and supporting a law that banned benefits for the partners of state employees.
Nebraska[edit]
Nebraska gubernatorial debates[edit]
October 2 debate[edit]
Chuck Hassebrook (D) and Pete Ricketts (R) shared barbs over past positions in a debate sponsored by Nebraska Educational Communications. Hassebrook accused Ricketts of supporting Gov. Dave Heineman's (R) tax proposal in 2013, which would have increased sales tax rates. The Platte Institute, a conservative think-tank created by Ricketts, supported the tax proposal, which ultimately failed to pass in the face of increasing public criticism. Hassebrook argued that Ricketts tried to hide his support for the measure when he decided to run for governor. Ricketts denied support for the bill, noting that he did not agree with every position taken by the institute.[16]
Ricketts countered by bringing up a report co-authored by Hassebrook in 1990 that called for a ban on exports of genetically modified crops. The issue of biotechnology in farming has grown in prominence due to the importance of Nebraska's agricultural sector. Hassebrook responded that he provided little assistance to the authors of the report, and was wrongly credited as a co-author. He also noted that he supported biotechnology research since the early 1990s, when he served on the University of Nebraska Board of Regents.[16]
Debate viewers also saw Hassebrook and Ricketts stake out distinct positions on immigration and the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would run through Nebraska. Hassebrook advocated for allowing driving licenses for children brought to the country illegally, while Ricketts opposed issuing licenses as a matter of protecting existing laws. Ricketts suggested that the XL Pipeline would bring jobs to the state and securely transport oil across the country, citing problems with rail transportation of oil. Hassebrook opposed the pipeline because he suggested the project would contribute to climate change.[16]
September 1 debate[edit]
Hassebrook and Ricketts sparred over education policy, economics and full-time residency in Lincoln at the Nebraska State Fair. Hassebrook opposed school vouchers for public school students, suggesting that tax dollars should be used to improve public schools. Ricketts countered that a gradual voucher policy would help students while keeping money in public schools. The duo showed stark differences in economic policy, with Hassebrook supporting a minimum wage increase and Ricketts opposing an increased wage. Moderator Mike'l Severe asked both candidates if they would reside in the governor's mansion full-time if elected. Ricketts, who has three children attending school in Omaha, said that he had not made a final decision on the question. Hassebrook stated that Nebraska needs a "full-time governor" and that he would live in Lincoln if elected because "40 hours a week is a vacation."[17]
Nevada[edit]
Nevada Attorney General debate[edit]
- See also: Nevada Attorney General election, 2014
October 10 debate[edit]
Ross Miller (D) and Adam Paul Laxalt (R) traded barbs during a debate recorded for Vegas PBS. Miller argued that his two terms as Nevada Secretary of State qualified him for the attorney general's office, given his experiences enforcing state election laws. He also jabbed at Laxalt for seeking the state's highest law enforcement position while lacking the legal experience to become a judge in Nevada. Laxalt cited his experience as a lawyer with the U.S. Navy Judge Advocate General's Corps and endorsements from county sheriffs in response to Miller.[18]
The debate featured a flurry of criticisms related to campaign finances and integrity between the two candidates. Laxalt claimed that Miller received $70,000 in gifts from special interests and asked what he gave them in return. Miller responded with veiled references to outside money spent on Laxalt's campaign and noted the transparency of his campaign's funding sources. The Center for Public Integrity reported in early October that Laxalt supporters had purchased $844,000 in campaign ad space while Miller's campaign purchased $690,000 of campaign ad space.[18]
Miller and Laxalt provided sharp retorts to campaign ad fodder from the early days of the general election. Miller stated that Laxalt's campaign was wrong to claim that Democratic operatives leaked a performance review from Laxalt's former employer indicating that he was a "train wreck." Laxalt used time during the debate to deny close connections with Cliven Bundy, a Nevada rancher whose supporters confronted federal officials in the spring over grazing rights.[18]
Nevada lieutenant gubernatorial debates[edit]
October 15 debate[edit]
Lucy Flores (D) and Mark Hutchison (R) traded criticisms about ethics, education reform and taxes during a debate hosted by Vegas PBS. Flores criticized Hutchison for failing to report a $15,000 trip to Israel sponsored by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee. This point was made in response to Hutchison's criticism of Flores for failing to report her use of campaign funds for personal expenses. Hutchison also noted that Flores participated in the Israel trip and he was not found guilty of breaking state campaign finance laws.[19]
Hutchison pointed to Flores's record on education in the Nevada State Legislature to indicate weakness on the issue. The Republican candidate indicated that Flores voted against reform proposals including flexibility for families to switch from public schools to charter schools and a $2 million proposal to hire Teach for America teachers for struggling schools. Flores dismissed the Republican-led reforms as insufficient to deal with the state's education issues and called for adequate public education funding.[19]
The debate also raised questions about the candidates' support for Question 3, a failed statewide ballot measure that would have added a 2 percent margin tax on businesses to benefit education. Both candidates expressed opposition to Question 3 due to the potential impacts on businesses. Flores suggested that Hutchison originally supported the measure in 2013, but switched his views on Question 3 to win statewide office. Hutchison countered that Flores and other state Democrats had not been effective on tax issues, arguing that economic growth is a better tool for government funding rather than higher taxes.[19]
September 3 debate[edit]
Lucy Flores (D) and Mark Hutchison (R) squared off over education funding, immigration and same-sex marriage during a debate hosted by Hispanics in Politics. Flores criticized Gov. Sandoval and state Republicans for failing to restore $1 billion in school funding cut during the recent recession. She also voiced opposition for school vouchers, arguing that expanded choice won't improve education outcomes. Hutchison countered that legislators increased education spending by $500 million in 2013, while noting that additional funds should be tied to reforms in teacher assessment. He also supported school vouchers and expanded choice to improve outcomes for low-income students.[20]
A discussion of immigration policy started with consensus over the need for comprehensive reform at the national level. Hutchison cited his work with Democrats in the state senate on driver's permits for immigrants and restrictions on notarios, or dishonest immigration brokers. He criticized President Barack Obama for using executive orders to halt deportations rather than pursuing congressional action. Hutchison's responses followed questions by Flores over the sincerity of his support for comprehensive reform.[20]
Flores expressed support for the legalization of same-sex marriage in Nevada, noting a potential windfall for state tourism. Hutchison referred to his Mormon beliefs in opposing the legalization of same-sex marriage. He added that while he cannot support marriage, he opposes social discrimination of same-sex couples.[20]
Nevada Secretary of State debate[edit]
- See also: Nevada Secretary of State election, 2014
October 3 debate[edit]
Barbara Cegavske (R) and Kate Marshall (D) differed over campaign finance laws, voter ID and same-day voter registration during a debate on Vegas PBS. Marshall criticized Cegavske for failing to spearhead campaign finance and ethics reform during her time in the Nevada State Senate. Cegavske argued that Democrats have held the Nevada State Legislature in recent sessions and failed to pursue campaign finance reforms. Marshall countered that Cegavske was the chair of the Senate Legislative Operations and Election Committee in 2005 and voted against a 2013 proposal for significant reform. Cegavske noted that her committee reviewed hundreds of proposals but committee members blocked most bills due to concerns for their respective parties.[21]
The debate highlighted stark differences between Cegavske and Marshall over voter ID and same-day voter registration. Cegavske supported voter ID during the debate while Marshall opposed an ID requirement due to the potential for disenfranchisement. Marshall argued on behalf of same-day registration at voting locations to increase turnout. Cegavske expressed concern that same-day registration might not be feasible as elections officials would need to verify citizenship and residency on short timetables.[21]
Pennsylvania[edit]
Pennsylvania gubernatorial debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
October 8 debate[edit]
Tom Corbett (R) and Tom Wolf (D) discussed myriad issues facing the state during a debate hosted by the League of Women Voters and WTAE-TV. Both candidates cemented firm divisions on questions regarding education funding, marijuana legalization, voter ID and the minimum wage rate during the debate. Wolf, the state Department of Revenue Secretary, criticized Corbett and Republican legislators for cutting $1 billion in education funding and 27,000 teaching jobs since 2011. Corbett countered that half of the job cuts were initiated by predecessor Ed Rendell and some funding was cut due to a decrease in federal funding. On the issue of marijuana regulation, Corbett opposed legalization of a "gateway drug" while Wolf advocated for legalized medical marijuana and partial decriminalization of recreational marijuana.[22]
The two candidates continued to clash as the debate moved toward questions about voter ID and minimum wages. Corbett supported voter ID requirements passed prior to the 2012 elections as necessary to curb voter fraud. Wolf accused state Republicans of trying to decrease Democratic turnout and suggested there was insufficient evidence of fraud. On the issue of minimum wage rates, Wolf promoted a $10.10 per hour rate for Pennsylvania and Corbett stated that the state rate should be tied to the federal rate.[22]
Rhode Island[edit]
Rhode Island gubernatorial debate[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
October 21 debate[edit]
Gina Raimondo (D), Allan Fung (R) and Robert Healey (M) sparred over job growth, healthcare and the state's loan to 38 Studios during a debate at the Providence Performing Arts Center. Raimondo argued on behalf of a proposed innovation institute that would leverage the state's relationships with industrial leaders and universities to generate new businesses. Fung countered that the state needed to cut taxes by $200 million and reduce barriers like the business corporation fee to spur job growth. Healey spoke generally about reducing regulations on businesses and cutting taxes, though neither Fung nor Healey indicated the source of proposed cuts.[23]
The candidates split into two camps when asked about the state's health exchange, HealthSource RI. Fung and Healey were optimistic that the exchange would work if control were given back to the federal government. Fung elaborated that the state needed to trim "bells and whistles" from the program to keep costs low. Raimondo suggested licensing the state's healthcare services to neighboring states in order to make the program self-sufficient as required by federal law.[23]
Fung and Healey also joined together to criticize the state's $75 million loan to video game company Studio 38, which entered bankruptcy in 2012. The company founded by ex-Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling received a loan from the state's Economic Development Corporation but did not repay the loan before shuttering its doors. Both candidates suggested that a broad investigation should be completed before the state repays bondholders who funded the loan. Raimondo stated that while she shared the frustrations of her opponents over the circumstances, the bonds need to be repaid to maintain the state's bond rating.[23][23]
South Carolina[edit]
South Carolina gubernatorial debate[edit]
October 14 debate[edit]
Charleston State University hosted a debate featuring all five candidates for governor, though Nikki Haley (R) and Vincent Sheheen (D) trained their attention against each other on the issue of ethics. Sheheen struck at Haley for past accusations of illegal lobbying during her time as a state legislator, arguing that the state would never be led in the right direction with Haley in office. Haley responded that she was cleared of charges twice by the state House in 2012 and Sheheen voted against a proposed ethics reform law twice over the past two years. Sheheen claimed that the Republican-supported reform would not go far enough to deal with lobbying concerns.[24]
The three third-party candidates on stage brought unique perspectives to the debate with their stances on marijuana legalization and job creation. Independent candidate Tom Ervin argued against legalization of marijuana, suggesting that medical evidence showed lowered intelligence from habitual use. United Citizens Party candidate Morgan Reeves countered Ervin's points by stating that marijuana first existed in the "imagination of God" and could produce tax revenue for the state. Libertarian Party candidate Steve French opposed increasing the state's minimum wage and compared jobs to sex by saying, "You shouldn't brag about it if you have to pay for it." On the issue of jobs, Haley pointed to a previous announcement that 57,000 jobs would be created throughout the state and Sheheen suggested that only half of those jobs were created in her first term.[24]
Utah[edit]
Utah Attorney General debate[edit]
October 1 debate[edit]
Sean Reyes (R) and Charles Stormont (D) discussed the office's recent past, same-sex marriage and polygamy during a debate in Provo. Reyes noted that when he was appointed to the attorney general's office, he "inherited an office racked with scandal and controversy." His solutions to these issues included improving salaries and requiring supervisors to participate in detailed evaluations to ensure integrity. Stormont countered that the office remained largely the same as when John Swallow held the office and promoted an ethics hotline that would allow citizens to blow the whistle on corrupt elected officials. Both candidates agreed on campaign finance limits and that they would not take campaign donations from sources that could create conflicts of interest.[25]
Reyes and Stormont heatedly discussed their stances on defending the state's anti-polygamy law and same-sex marriage ban. Reyes argued that the state needed to appeal a federal court's decision to strike down part of an anti-polygamy law, while Stormont called an appeal a waste of money over a law that is largely unenforced. Stormont also argued that the state should not waste time appealing higher court decisions on same-sex marriage as the U.S. Supreme Court will likely reject any appeal. Reyes stated that the attorney general has a duty to defend the state's laws in higher court.[25]
Wisconsin[edit]
Wisconsin Attorney General debate[edit]
October 12 debate[edit]
Brad Schimel (R) and Susan Happ (D) discussed how they would approach the duties of the attorney general's office during a debate sponsored by Marquette University. A flash point during the debate was the issue of whether the candidates would defend controversial laws like voter ID requirements and a same-sex marriage ban. Schimel argued that he would defend state law because the attorney general is not a" "super-legislator" who picks which laws to enforce based on personal politics. Happ responded by saying that the attorney general is not a "robot," and should not blindly follow state laws that are unconstitutional or run afoul of other principles.[26]
Schimel and Happ found consensus in their skepticism that larger penalties for first drunk-driving offenses would curb such offenses. The opponents also noted that the attorney general's office should be more proactive with treatment programs that could reduce the population of state prisons. Schimel did not have a definitive answer to whether he would defend a state law barring coordination between candidates and outside groups. This issue has emerged as prosecutors investigate whether Gov. Scott Walker's (R) campaign coordinated with conservative groups during an effort to recall him in 2012. Happ responded to accusations by Schimel supporters that she was lenient in a child-molestation case in 2012 because the accused purchased her house. The Democratic candidate noted that she recused herself from the case.[26]
Wisconsin gubernatorial debates[edit]
Debate media[edit]
|
|
October 17 debate[edit]
The second debate between Mary Burke (D) and Scott Walker (R) centered on the state economy as both candidates jousted for position as the best candidate for Wisconsin voters. Burke hammered away at the Republican governor for failing to create 250,000 jobs in his first term as he pledged during his 2010 campaign. She also blamed Walker and Republican legislators for a projected budget shortfall of $1.8 billion caused by poor financial management. Walker countered that his administration helped generate 100,000 new jobs and $2 billion in tax cuts since 2011. He also argued that Burke's economic plan used word-for-word passages from the plans of other Democratic candidates, an issue at the heart of recent pro-Walker TV ads.[27]
October 10 debate[edit]
Burke and Walker discussed the minimum wage, economic policy and abortion during a debate hosted by the Wisconsin Broadcasters Association. Gov. Walker initially evaded a question about raising the minimum wage from $7.25 per hour, though he eventually responded that state officials should push to create jobs that earn more than minimum wage. Burke countered that Walker's argument was unrealistic as "retail and home health" workers would not be able to shift easily to industrial jobs. Walker argued that Wisconsin families experienced an average tax reduction of $322 in 2014, while Burke suggested that Walker should not be elected again because the state has a projected budget shortfall.[28]
Gov. Walker did not respond directly to a question whether he opposed abortion in cases of rape, noting that the Supreme Court resolved the question in Roe v. Wade. Burke echoed an ad campaign by Planned Parenthood prior to the general election, arguing that the governor's position on abortion is "anything but reasonable."[28]
Recent news[edit]
This section links to a Google news search for the term "Governor + attorney + general + debates + 2014"
See also[edit]
- State executive official elections, 2014
- Gubernatorial elections, 2014
- Lieutenant gubernatorial elections, 2014
- Attorney General elections, 2014
Footnotes[edit]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Phoenix New Times, "Felecia Rotellini and Mark Brnovich Battle in Debate for Arizona Attorney General," October 1, 2014
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 12 News & The Arizona Republic, "Governor candidates debate Arizona highs, lows," September 30, 2014
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 The Denver Post, "Pot, immigration trip up governor, Senate candidates in Denver debates," October 6, 2014
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Newsworks/WHYY, "Delaware Attorney General candidates trade verbal jabs at Widener law debate [video," October 16, 2014]
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Tampa Bay Times, "Florida attorney general candidates spar in lone debate," October 6, 2014
- ↑ WFLA, "Final gubernatorial debate in Jacksonville is heated and personal," October 21, 2014
- ↑ Political Wire, "Scott Delayed Execution for Fundraiser," October 21, 2014
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 Hawaii News Now, "Final televised governor debate had winner and loser, analyst says," October 16, 2014
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Chicago Tribune, "Quinn, Rauner try to create fear about the other guy during debate," accessed October 15, 2014
- ↑ 10.0 10.1 The Des Moines Register, "Pate, Anderson differ on Voter ID in IPTV debate," October 3, 2014
- ↑ The Kansas City Star, " At debate, Kansas gubernatorial candidates focus on Johnson County," September 19, 2014
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 Reuters, "Maine governor, Democratic challenger face off amid tight race," October 8, 2014
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 The Washington Post, "Candidates’ frustrations on display in final Md. gubernatorial debate," October 18, 2014
- ↑ 14.0 14.1 WBUR, "Governor Candidates Joust In Boston Debate," October 8, 2014
- ↑ 15.0 15.1 The Monitor, "Michigan's only gubernatorial debate grows testy," October 13, 2014
- ↑ 16.0 16.1 16.2 Omaha.com, " In their last debate before election, Nebraska governor candidates try to build contrasts," October 2, 2014
- ↑ Omaha.com, "Hassebrook-Ricketts debate: Nebraska's governor candidates display stark choice voters will face," September 2, 2014
- ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 Las Vegas Sun, "Nevada AG candidates trade charges during debate," November 10, 2014
- ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Status quo isn't popular at lieutenant governor's debate," October 15, 2014
- ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Nevada lieutenant governor candidates clash in Vegas," September 3, 2014
- ↑ 21.0 21.1 Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Secretary of state candidates argue election reform, voter ID issues," October 3, 2014
- ↑ 22.0 22.1 PoliticsPA, "PA-Gov: The Third Gubernatorial Debate," October 8, 2014
- ↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 23.3 WPRI, "Fung, Raimondo go on the attack in first TV debate," October 21, 2014
- ↑ 24.0 24.1 The State, "2014 ELECTIONS: Gloves off for Haley, Sheheen in SC governor’s debate," October 14, 2014
- ↑ 25.0 25.1 Daily Journal, "Candidates for Utah attorney general debate ethics, defense of gay marriage ban," October 1, 2014
- ↑ 26.0 26.1 Green Bay Press-Gazette, "Attorney general debate shows differing philosophies," October 12, 2014
- ↑ Wisconsin State Journal, "Debate: Gov. Scott Walker, Mary Burke disagree on Wisconsin's economy," October 18, 2014 (dead link)
- ↑ 28.0 28.1 WKOW, "Walker, Burke spar in first gubernatorial debate," October 10, 2014
EncycloReader
is supported by the 
KSF