LEONARDq & a;/1026/dt1st/mark2nd
32″
By HOWARD FINE
Staff Reporter
Assembly Republican Leader Bill Leonard might have had a very different career if not for term limits. The Inland Empire Republican served in the state Assembly from 1978 to 1988 before moving up to the state Senate. But then the term limits law passed, and Leonard was forced out in 1996. So he moved back to the Assembly, becoming the first legislator to swap seats. Leonard replaced Jim Brulte, who in turn was elected to Leonard’s Senate seat.
After then-Speaker Curt Pringle was unable to hold the Republican edge in the Assembly, the Republican caucus nominated Leonard to succeed him. As Assembly Republican leader, Leonard was one of the Big Five who negotiated the details of this year’s budget behind closed doors in Gov. Pete Wilson’s office. He is currently running for a second term in the Assembly.
Question: Do you see the Clinton scandal affecting state races?
Answer: There is a large number of people who want to see him impeached and there is a large number of people who support him and want the whole thing to go away. I don’t know where the middle is.
Right now, it’s too hard to predict whether turnout will be boosted or not by all this. If voters get angry with the President and want to send a message, they could vote Republican. But he could also get some sympathy, which would boost the Democratic turnout.
Q: You said this election is too unpredictable. Why?
A: Well, you’ve got the aforementioned Clinton issue. Also, there are few really hot issues on the ballot this year that will galvanize voters like, say propositions 187 and 209 did on previous ballots. And I don’t see the electorate getting too excited about the differences between (Gray) Davis and (Dan) Lungren. All this could mean a lower turnout than in 1994.
Q: Won’t that favor the Republicans?
A: Not if they, too, stay at home. We need to make sure our voters are energized.
Q: Nonetheless, there are a large number of hotly contested races, especially in the L.A. area. What is your strategy for securing a Republican majority in the state Assembly?
A: I’ve been watching 21 key races all year long. But we don’t have the money to pour into all of them. I still don’t know how many races I’ll be able to subsidize. Probably about a dozen. I do know we are fully funding for 41 Republican seats, which means we would be looking to take away four seats from the Democrats.
I’m very optimistic, especially if I can help these races. I do benefit from the election cycle: In off-presidential election years, Republican turnout tends to be higher proportionately. I also have a boost in that Dan Lungren and Matt Fong are not Bob Dole, who had no coattails in California in 1996.
Q: Having been part of the Big Five negotiating process, what was your take on the state budget and how it was put together?
A: It became a battle over the future of California. That was because we had a budget surplus, which fueled the debate over what to do with the extra money. Without the May revise of the budget, which showed a larger surplus than we had anticipated, the whole budget would have gotten done a lot faster.
As for the delay and lack of vision, the reason was simple. Republicans wanted lower taxes and to target money for education. Democrats wanted the same tax levels and more money going toward welfare programs. Given the divided government in Sacramento, the only thing possible was compromise. That’s why the document had no grand vision. It disappoints me, but it’s not surprising.
Q: What was the most significant accomplishment of the Republican caucus in the past legislative session?
A: Clearly the tax-cut package is the most significant accomplishment. Getting $3.6 billion in tax cuts on the books is a great victory. For businesses, it means more money available for investment, employment and improving products and services.
Individual families will get more discretionary income. It could be several hundred dollars per family in the coming year. That money can be put back into the economy or put it into savings. The important thing is that it’s up to the families themselves to decide what to do with that money.
Q: What is the Republican caucus planning to do in the way of business-oriented legislation in the next session?
A: First, we are looking for a fairer tax policy. The idea here is to figure out how to cut taxes to encourage business. There are two paths: cut rates of all taxes or target tax cuts at specific industries or types of companies.
Then there’s the quality of education. We need a labor force of the highest quality. That means more accountability for teachers, principals and school districts. Also, our colleges and universities spend $1 billion to teach high school-level courses. We need to make a high school diploma actually mean something: a certificate that says, “I know how to read, write and calculate.”
The third area is regulatory reform. We need to find ways to implement environmental laws in a way that helps business to comply with them. We’re not advocating changes in standards; rather, we are looking for changes in the way the standards are implemented.
Q: What about HMO reform, specifically, making HMOs liable for their treatment decisions and ensuring that those decisions can be reviewed by an independent third party?
A: Let me say first on HMO reform that the Democrats are catering to their trial lawyer friends and not the patients when it comes to HMO liability. Why go to court to resolve these disputes? That takes years. Which is why we support the independent review idea, giving the patients the right to appeal HMO decisions to a third party and get a quick response. The Democrats are focusing on the wrong end on this one.
As for HMO reform in general, we on the Republican side would rather see contracts between HMOs and patients, not between HMOs and employers. I’m talking about medical savings accounts, where I as an employee can go and bargain with the HMO or my doctor directly. Individuals seem to do a pretty good job at buying car insurance, home insurance, and other types of insurance, so why not health insurance?
