KEN: GOOD EVENING, I'M KEN VERDOIA. WELCOME TO THE STUDIOS OF KUED FOR ANOTHER IN OUR SERIES OF VOTE UTAH PRE-PRIMARY DEBATES. TONIGHT WE TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES SEEKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT THEIR PARTY IN THE RACE FOR THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. SQUARING OFF IN THE JUNE 22ND PRIMARY ELECTION AND IN TONIGHT'S DEBATE ARE THE FOUR-TERM INCUMBENT IN OFFICE, CONGRESSMAN CHRIS CANNON. HIS CHALLENGER IS A UTAH BUSINESSMAN AND FORMER MEMBER OF THE UTAH HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MATT THROCKMORTON. PRIOR TO AIR TIME A COIN TOSS DETERMINED THE FIRST OPENING STATEMENT OF TWO MINUTES WOULD GO TO MATT THROCKMORTON. MR. THROCKMORTON?

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS, AS WELL AS THOSE WATCHES AT HOME. THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STATE OF UTAH AND FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. WE'RE INVOLVED IN A CAMPAIGN TO DECIDE WHO WILL BE THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE STATE OF UTAH. AND OF COURSE THAT BOILS DOWN TO A VOTING RECORD, HOW WE'RE GOING TO REPRESENT THE STATE OF UTAH. BUT WE'RE ALSO HAVING A DISCUSSION AS TO, WHAT IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY? WE'RE DEFINING THE REPUBLICAN PARTY WITH THE VALUES AND PRINCIPLES THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEND BACK TO WASHINGTON. AND AS I'VE GOTTEN INTO THIS ELECTION I'VE HAD A NUMBER OF CONCERNS AS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN, AS A HUSBAND AND FATHER, THERE ARE MANY ISSUES THAT CONCERN ME. ISSUES OF IMMIGRATION, WHICH I KNOW WE WILL TALK ABOUT, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, NATIONAL DEBT, MANY IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TO ADDRESS, AND ISSUES THAT ARE NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. ISSUES THAT WE HAVE TO GET A HOLD OF NOW, AND IF WE DON'T TAKE CARE OF NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE FACED WITH THESE FOR QUITE A LONG TIME. A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON MYSELF: BORN AND RAISED HERE IN UTAH, I LIVE DOWN IN SPRINGVILLE, UTAH. MARRIED HAVE, ONE- - ONE WIFE, OF COURSE. ONE DAUGHTER. AND AS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN, I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO LIVE IN AN ECONOMY THAT HAS ITS UPS AND DOWNS, TO HAVE TO MAKE PAYROLL, TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH A MORTGAGE, AND QUITE HONESTLY, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NATIONAL DEBTS THAT ARE OUT OF CONTROL AND IMPACTING JOBS, WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH JOB INSECURITY, WHEN WE HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE ISSUES, THAT IT'S DIFFICULT FOR INDIVIDUALS TO HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE. EDUCATION IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE AS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CONTROL OF EDUCATION, THE INPUT THAT A PARENT WILL HAVE ON EDUCATION. THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT ISSUES AND WE'LL GET INTO THOSE. AND ONE THING THAT YOU'LL FIND IS WHEN I RUN OUT OF THINGS TO SAY I'LL STOP TALKING. AND WITH THAT, WE'LL CONTINUE.

KEN: THANK YOU. AND NOW A TWO-MINUTE OPENING STATEMENT FROM REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS CANNON. REPRESENTATIVE?

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU, KEN, FOR HOSTING THIS TONIGHT. THIS IS ONE OF THE FUN DEBATES, I ENJOY DOING IT. THIS IS A GREAT TIME IN AMERICA. YOU KNOW, AMERICA HAS REALLY BECOME SORT OF THE CITY ON THE HILL THAT REAGAN TALKED ABOUT, BUT FAR MORE SO THAN I THINK EVEN HE HAD CONSIDERED. WE'RE SPENDING MORE MONEY ON OUR MILITARY THAN EVERY OTHER COUNTRY COMBINED ON THE WHOLE EARTH. OTHER COUNTRIES HAVE TO BUY BOOTS AND PANTS, LIKE WE DO, BUT WE ALSO BUY SOFTWARE THAT CONTROLS THE ACTIVITIES OF PEOPLE, AND SMART BOMBS THAT DESTROY ONLY OUR ENEMIES AND LEAVE THE HOUSES NEXT DOOR SAFE. SO WE'VE BECOME A MIGHTY NATION. WE'RE ALSO A GREAT NATION IN THE SENSE THAT WE'RE DOING MUCH, THE MAJORITY OF THE TECHNOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE WORLD. THE WYFI IS AN AMERICAN IDEA. 85 PERCENT OF DRUGS THAT ARE REFERENCE, THAT IS THE IMPORTANT DRUGS, WERE DONE IN UTAH, NOT UTAH BUT IN THE UNITED STATES. WE'RE PRODUCING THE GREAT DRUGS, THE MEDICAL BREAKTHROUGHS THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE WORLD. AND I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT TIME TO HAVE THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON, D.C., TAKING US IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. AMONG OTHER THINGS HERE IN UTAH, WE HAVE PARTICULAR PROBLEMS THAT WE CAN ONLY SOLVE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. IN EDUCATION, FOR INSTANCE, WE HAVE THE LOWEST PER STUDENT PAYMENT IN THE COUNTRY, AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE THE LARGEST NUMBER OF STUDENTS PER CAPITA HERE. AND THE ONLY WAY WE'RE REALLY GOING TO DEAL WITH THAT IS BY GETTING MORE MONEY OUT OF OUR SCHOOL TRUST LANDS, AND THAT MEANS CONSOLIDATING THOSE TRUST LANDS. AND THAT'S A PROCESS THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR A GREAT DEAL OF TIME, AND I THINK THAT'LL BE HELPFUL. WE ALSO HAVE OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPORTANT, ISSUES LIKE WHERE TELECOMMUNICATIONS IS GOING TO GO. YOU REALIZE THAT IF WE HAD VOIP, VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL, FOR OUR TELECOMMUNICATIONS, THAT OUR BILLS, OUR TELEPHONE BILLS WOULD DROP LIKE TWO THIRDS IN MOST CASES, AND THE REST OF THE WORLD COULD GET TELECOMMUNICATIONS AT VIRTUALLY NO COST. SO THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE WORLD TO DO MUCH BETTER BECAUSE OF WHAT WE DO IS GREAT. SO I WANT TO GO BACK TO WASHINGTON, D.C. AND CONTINUE TO WORK ON THESE ISSUES, AND MAKE AMERICA A BETTER PLACE AND MAKE UTAH A BETTER, HAPPIER PLACE FOR US TO LIVE. THANK YOU.

KEN: WELL THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN, FOR THOSE OPENING STATEMENTS. I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT OUR QUESTIONS TONIGHT WILL BE COMING FROM A STUDIO AUDIENCE, MANY OF WHOM RESIDE IN THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, AND THEY REPRESENT A BROAD RANGE OF ISSUES THEY WISH THE CANDIDATES TO ADDRESS TONIGHT. EACH CANDIDATE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND, AND THERE WILL BE REBUTTAL TIME. BUT AT THE OUTSET WE DO NOTE THAT THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT PRIMARY HAS BEEN SHAPED, AND SOME WOULD SAY SCORCHED, BY AN ISSUE THAT HAS COMMANDED EVEN NATIONAL ATTENTION. THE ISSUE IS ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION INTO THE UNITED STATES. CHARACTERIZATIONS, REFUTATIONS OF CHARACTERIZATIONS, ALLEGATIONS OF OUTSIDE INFLUENCE, BACK AND FORTH, HE SAID-THEY SAID-WHO SAID. GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO START THIS EXCHANGE WITH BOTH OF YOU HAVING A TWO-MINUTE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE THIS AUDIENCE AND THE PEOPLE AT HOME A STRAIGHT, SQUARE RESPONSE ON WHERE YOU STAND ON THIS SUBJECT OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. AND, OF COURSE, THERE WILL BE REBUTTAL TIME AFFORDED. REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, TAKE THE FIRST TWO-MINUTE OPPORTUNITY.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. THIS IS, AS YOU POINTED OUT, AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. WE HAVE MAYBE 12 MILLION PEOPLE, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 8 AND 12 MILLION, AND PROBABLY 12 MILLION, TOWARD 12 MILLION WHO ARE HERE WITHOUT US KNOWING WHO THEY ARE. THAT INCLUDES A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING TO SOCIETY, WORKING HARD, AND BEING PART OF WHAT WE BELIEVE IN AS THE AMERICAN DREAM. BUT THAT ALSO INCLUDES AN INCREDIBLE, VERY HIGH DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE CRIMINALS. AND THEY'RE HERE AS CRIMINALS BECAUSE IT'S EASY FOR THEM TO HIDE IN THE SHADOWS OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HIDING FROM THE LAW BECAUSE, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE NOT BREAKING THE LAW GENERALLY--THEY HAVE COME HERE ILLEGALLY, THAT'S BREAKING THE LAW, THEY GENERALLY SPEAKING BUY FORGED DOCUMENTS, A DRIVERS LICENSE AND A SOCIAL SECURITY CARD, SO THEY'VE BROKEN THE LAW AGAIN. AND THEY'RE IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY'RE CONCERNED, AND THEREFORE THEY TEND TO HIDE, AND IT'S EASY FOR CRIMINALS, AND EVEN TERRORISTS, TO HIDE AMONG US. WE HAVE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. THAT'S THE REAL KEY THING. IT SEEMS TO ME THERE'S REALLY ONLY ONE SIGNIFICANT QUESTION, AND THEN A FOLLOWUP QUESTION. THE QUESTION IS, DO WE KICK ALL THESE PEOPLE OUT? AND THE FOLLOWUP QUESTION IS, IF SO, FOR HOW LONG? BECAUSE THE CURRENT LAW REQUIRES A 10-YEAR PERIOD BEFORE SOMEONE WHO'S OVERSTAYED THEIR VISA BY 90 DAYS CAN COME BACK. AND SO DO WE KICK THEM OUT FOR TEN YEARS? AND IF SO WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE ECONOMY? AND, YOU NOW, IF YOU DON'T MIND, KEN, WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS DEFER TO MY OPPONENT, BECAUSE HE SAID THAT I SUPPORT AMNESTY, WHICH I DON'T, BUT THAT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT AMNESTY MEANS. BUT I THINK WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HEAR FROM HIM WHAT THE ANSWER TO THOSE TWO QUESTIONS ARE. FIRST OF ALL, SHOULD WE KICK ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE ILLEGALLY OUT? AND SECONDLY, FOR HOW LONG? TEN YEARS, OR SOME LESSER TIME?

KEN: I WILL, AND SINCE WE'RE GOING DOWN AN UNUSUAL PATH RIGHT NOW, I WILL ACCEPT THE PREMISE OF THAT QUESTION. MR. THROCKMORTON, PLEASE TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTION, BUT THEN BEGIN YOUR TWO MINUTES OF SPEAKING TO THIS ISSUE AS YOU PERCEIVE IT, AS WELL.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. FIRST OF ALL, AS FAR AS KICKING PEOPLE OUT, THAT'S JUST BAD POLICY. AND THE PROBLEM THAT YOU'VE STRUGGLED WITH, CHRIS, IS YOU'VE FAILED TO RECOGNIZE HUMAN NATURE. WHAT WE NEED TO HAVE IS A SYSTEM THAT CREATES INCENTIVES. AND WHAT I'VE DONE CONSISTENTLY IS COMPARED IMMIGRATION REFORM TO WELFARE REFORM PRE-1994. YOU GO BACK TO PRE-1994, AND WE HAD A SYSTEM IN WHICH THE INCENTIVES WERE SIMPLY WRONG. OF COURSE WE DESIRE TO HELP PEOPLE. HOW ARE WE GOING TO HELP THEM? WELL, WE HAD INCENTIVES THAT IF YOU DID NOTHING YOU WERE ELIGIBLE FOR FOOD STAMPS, FOR WELFARE, YOU WERE ELIGIBLE FOR ALL THE BENEFITS. IF YOU DID ANYTHING YOU LOST THOSE. AND WHEN REPUBLICANS TOOK OVER IN 1994, WHAT THEY UNDERSTOOD IS THAT THOSE INCENTIVES HAD TO BE CHANGED. AND IN CHANGING THOSE THEY PUT IT THAT IF YOU DID NOTHING, THAT'S WHERE YOU LOST THE ELIGIBILITY. IF YOU DID ANYTHING, THAT'S WHERE YOU RECEIVED THE ASSISTANCE. AND IT'S WORKED SO WELL THAT THE DEMOCRATS. SO AS FAR AS REMOVING INDIVIDUALS, WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS CREATE A SYSTEM WHERE THE INCENTIVES ARE TO COME HERE LEGALLY FIRST. THE PROBLEM WITH YOUR BILL, AND WE CAN CALL IT AMNESTY OR WE COULD CALL IT A FOOTBALL, WHATEVER WE'D LIKE TO CALL IT. I BELIEVE THE TERM THAT'S GENERALLY THROWN ABOUT IN WASHINGTON IS A MORE RAPID PROCESS OF EARNED LEGALIZATION. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAVE TO REQUIRE INDIVIDUALS TO APPLY FOR THIS VISA FROM THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN. EVERY SINGLE YEAR ABOUT HALF A MILLION INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE HERE IN THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY WILL GO HOME OF THEIR OWN ACCORD. WE NEED TO SECURE THE BORDERS, WE NEED TO WORK WITH THE SYSTEM, WE NEED TO CREATE A VISA THAT'S GOING TO WORK WITH THEM, AND MOST OF ALL WE CANNOT PUT INTO PLACE AN AMNESTY SYSTEM THAT IS GOING TO ENCOURAGE THEM. IN FACT, IT DEMANDS, YOUR BILL, YOUR ADD JOB BILL REQUIRES THEM TO COME INTO THIS COUNTRY FOR 100 DAYS AND, OF COURSE, WORK ILLEGALLY. AND THEN THEY CAN APPLY FOR IT. THERE ARE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS, AND SO LONG AS WE HEAD THAT DIRECTION WE WILL NEVER GET A HOLD OF THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION PROBLEM.

KEN: THAT TAKES US TO TIME FOR YOU, AND REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.

MR. CANNON: WELL, THANK YOU. IN THE FIRST PLACE, THE BILL, YOU'VE MISCHARACTERIZED IT, YOU HAVE TO READ IT BECAUSE IT'S ACTUALLY DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT. IT TAKES PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN HERE ILLEGALLY FROM SOME TIME SINCE. THEY HAVE TO HAVE BEEN HERE FOR THREE YEARS PRIOR TO LAST AUGUST. AND SO THERE'S NO INCENTIVE FOR NEW PEOPLE TO COME UNDER THAT BILL. IT DOES CHANGE THE H-2-A PROGRAM, WHICH ALLOWS PEOPLE TO COME HERE AND WORK ON FARMS, AND ALLOWS, IT REMOVES ALL THE BUREAUCRACY SO A PERSON CAN COME FROM MEXICO ON RELATIVELY SHORT NOTICE, THE GUY WHO HAS CROPS IN THE FIELDS AND HE NEEDS SOMEONE TO HARVEST THOSE CROPS CAN ACTUALLY GET HERE IN A TIMELY FASHION, WHICH THUS FAR HAS BEEN IMPOSSIBLE AND HAS THUS BEEN A BIG INDUCEMENT TO GROWERS TO BRING PEOPLE HERE WHO THEY MAY SUSPECT ARE ILLEGAL. BUT IN THE CASE OF WELFARE REFORM, THAT WAS, THE INCENTIVES THERE WERE STATE INCENTIVES, WE TOOK THE STATE INCENTIVES AND CHANGED THOSE. THEY WERE NOT THE INCENTIVES THAT WERE- - THE STATES THEN WENT AHEAD AND MADE THE CHANGES IN THE PROGRAMS THAT DID DRAMATICALLY REDUCE WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH, FOR GETTING PEOPLE INTO WELFARE. BUT YOU STILL HAVEN'T SAID, YOU SAID, I TAKE IT, THAT YOU WOULD NOT KICK THEM OUT, BUT YOU ALSO SAID THEY NEED TO GO HOME TO GET THEIR VISA. AND THAT'S WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

KEN: GO AHEAD.

MR. THROCKMORTON: VERY CLEARLY, WE HAVE TO ENFORCE OUR LAWS. IF WE DON'T TAKE OUR LAWS SERIOUSLY, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE OUR LAWS SERIOUSLY. WE HAVE TO REVAMP THE VISA. ABOUT HALF A MILLION INDIVIDUALS WILL GO HOME OF THEIR OWN ACCORD, WE HAVE TO SECURE OUR BORDER. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN. BUT PART OF THE ENFORCEMENT, IF INDIVIDUALS SEE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO HOME TO MEXICO, OR WHEREVER IT MAY BE, HAVE A SIMPLIFIED VISA WHERE THEY CAN BE BACK HERE IN A FEW MONTHS LEGALLY AND THEY REFUSE TO TAKE IT THEN THEY HAVE TO BE DEPORTED. IF THEY ARE NOT DEPORTED, THEN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IS INDIVIDUALS SAYING, "WELL, THEY'VE REVAMPED EVERYTHING BUT THERE'S NO REASON TO APPLY FOR IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENFORCED," THEN WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING THAT WASHINGTON AND MOST POLITICIANS NEVER DO, AND THAT IS EXERCISE PATIENCE. THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM THAT'S GOING TO BE SOLVED WITH AN AMNESTY. IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO TAKE MANY YEARS. IT'S GOING TO TAKE PATIENCE, IT'S GOING TO TAKE FIVE TO SEVEN TO EIGHT YEARS. AND AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW- - WELL, WE CAN GET INTO THE WELFARE REFORM ISSUE. CHRIS, THE INCENTIVES IN THE SYSTEM RIGHT NOW ARE CLEARLY TO COME HERE ILLEGALLY FIRST AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT. AND YOUR BILL, YOUR ADD JOBS BILL, AS YOU STATED, DOES IN FACT REQUIRE THEM. IF THEY COME HERE ON A STUDENT VISA THEY'RE NOT SUDDENLY ELIGIBLE FOR IT. THEY HAVE TO COME HERE ILLEGALLY, AND THAT'S THE QUALIFICATION.

KEN: WE'RE GOING TO LAST RE-AROUND ON THIS, I'M GOING TO GIVE EACH GENTLEMAN ONE MORE MINUTE, BUT I WANT YOU TO ANSWER THIS DIRECT QUESTION. THE ESTIMATES RANGE FROM 8 MILLION TO 12 MILLION PEOPLE LIVING IN THIS COUNTRY WITHOUT DOCUMENTATION. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THEM? GENTLEMEN, ONE MINUTE EACH. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY HERE? MR. CANNON.

MR. CANNON: LET ME SUGGEST THAT MY OPPONENT OUGHT TO READ MY BILL. ACTUALLY IT'S A LONG BILL, MAYBE HE COULD READ A SUMMARY OF IT, BECAUSE IT DOESN'T DO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. MY BILL ALLOWS A PROCESS WHEREBY FARMERS CAN GET WORKERS TO COME. WE RENEW, OR REDO THE H-2-A PROCESS. THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WORKING HERE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS TO IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, AND WE GET TO FIND OUT WHETHER, WE GET THEIR FINGERPRINTS SO WE CAN TELL IF THEY'VE COMMITTED CRIMES. BECAUSE YOU NOW HAVE A DATABASE OF EVERY FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL CRIME THAT'S BEEN COMMITTED, AND IF WE HAVE A PERSON WHO'S COMMITTED CRIMES, HE'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO COME FORWARD, FRANKLY, AND IDENTIFY HIMSELF. HOPEFULLY HE'LL LEAVE AND GO HOME BEFORE WE CATCH HIM. IN ADDITION, HE HAS TO NOT HAVE THE KINDS OF DISEASES THAT ARE PROHIBITED UNDER THE LAW, AND HE HAS TO SHOW THAT HE'S CONTRIBUTED. NOW, UNLIKE 1986, WHICH WAS AN AMNESTY, WHERE WE LET PEOPLE STAY, WE DIDN'T HAVE THE DATABASE CAPABILITY TO IDENTIFY PEOPLE WHO HAD ACTUALLY CONTRIBUTED TO SOCIETY. BUT WE NOW HAVE THE SOCIAL SECURITY DATABASE, AND PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN HERE HAVE BEEN USING FALSE CARDS, AND THEY CAN SAY, "BUT I HAVE BEEN PAYING MY SOCIAL SECURITY." SO WE CAN IDENTIFY THE GOOD FOLKS AND KEEP THEM HERE, AND KEEP OUR SOCIETY WORKING, AND ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO ARE NOT HERE AND CONTRIBUTING TO LEAVE.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOUR ONE MINUTE, AGAIN, SPEAKING TO THAT ISSUE. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY IN THIS COUNTRY?

MR. THROCKMORTON: AS FAR AS IDENTIFYING- - FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A MISCHARACTERIZATION OF YOUR OWN BILL, CHRIS. IT ALLOWED A WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY TO 2005, BUT IT ALSO, YOU'VE PRESENTED THIS BILL FOR OVER A YEAR AS SOMETHING DEALING WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS ALREADY HERE. SO TO SAY THAT IT'S DESIGNED TO BRING THEM HERE FIRST LEGALLY, THAT'S NOT HOW YOU'VE CHARACTERIZED THIS FOR THE LAST YEAR. AS FAR AS THE IDENTIFICATION, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO HANDLE, BUT WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES, "HOW ARE WE GOING TO BEST AND MOST EFFECTIVELY HANDLE THIS? WHEN WE DO A BACKGROUND CHECK- - NOW, IF ANY OF YOUR LISTENERS,OR VIEWERS, IF THEY WERE TO GO OUT AND PURCHASE A WEAPON, WITHIN 15 MINUTES WITH OUR DATABASE SYSTEM HERE IN AMERICA, YOU CAN HAVE A COMPLETE BACKGROUND OF VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING THEY'VE EVER DONE, TO INCLUDE SPEEDING TICKETS. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE CURSORY BACKGROUND CHECK THAT CHRIS IS REFERRING TO, WE'RE GOING TO GET THAT BASIC INFORMATION. BUT UNFORTUNATELY THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE NOT BEEN IN THIS COUNTRY. WE DO NOT HAVE A DEPTH OF KNOWLEDGE OF THEM. THERE'S A CASE OF WHERE A--LONG STORY SHORT--BUT AN INS WORKER WAS CALLED IN BY A LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT RIGHT HERE IN UTAH, HE HAD PASSED ALL OF HIS BACKGROUND CHECKS, HAD A VALID UTAH DRIVERS LICENSE, HE WAS WANTED ON A DOUBLE HOMICIDE WARRANT DOWN IN TEXAS. THESE BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE NOT GOING TO WORK AS PRESCRIBED.

KEN: WELL, HOPEFULLY THAT EXTENDED TIME WAS DESIGNED TO CLARIFY, AND I DON'T THINK WE ACTUALLY GOT TO A MEETING OF THE MINDS, SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT ISSUE, AND YOUR QUESTION.

>> I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHERE YOU STAND ON NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, SPECIFICALLY TO THE ADDITIONAL TIME IT TAKES A TEACHER TO ADMINISTER THE TESTS IN THIS PROGRAM.

KEN: AND MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU HAVE THE FIRST 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, WHEN NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND WAS BEING DRAFTED I WAS CHAIRING A COMMITTEE UP AT THE STATE LEGISLATURE, AND OUR WHOLE PURPOSE OF THAT COMMITTEE, IT WAS THE ENHANCEMENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION TASK FORCE, WAS TO SIMPLIFY EDUCATION AND RESTORE CONTROL OF EDUCATION ULTIMATELY TO THE TEACHER IN THE CLASS ROOM. AND AS WE'RE HEADING THIS DIRECTION, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND IS BEING CREATED, IT'S ESEA, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN AROUND SINCE THE 60'S, WHERE THEY PUT IN ALL THESE NEW MANDATES, ALL THESE TESTING REQUIREMENTS, TEACHER QUALIFICATION, I'M IMMEDIATELY ALARMED WITH IT, AND I SPENT THE LAST TWO YEARS RAISING A WARNING ABOUT THIS BILL. MY ABSOLUTE COMMITMENT IS TO REPEAL NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND. IT'S VERY WELL INTENTIONED, IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. AS FAR AS THE TESTING TIME, SOMETHING VERY CONCERNED WITH, THE LAST BILL THAT I RAN AS A STATE LEGISLATOR WAS HOUSE BILL 6005, WHICH REPEALED ABOUT A THIRD OF THE TESTING REQUIREMENTS OF U-PASS, AND HOPEFULLY A LOT OF THE VIEWERS UNDERSTAND U-PASS. WE COULD HAVE DONE A LOT MORE, IN MY OPINION, AS CHAIR OF THE ENHANCEMENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION TASK FORCE, IS WE SHOULD HAVE DONE A LOT MORE, BUT THERE WAS A PROBLEM. WE COULDN'T REPEAL MORE OF THOSE TESTS IN ORDER, AS A DIRECTOR IN JORDAN SCHOOL DISTRICT SAID, "YOU CAN'T GET A PIG FAT BY STANDING HIM ON THE SCALE." YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THEM IN THE CLASS ROOM, LEARNING. AND WHEN WE SPEND SO MUCH TIME TESTING, THAT'S GOING TO DETRACT FROM IT. I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO OF GOTTEN RIDDEN MORE OF THOSE TESTS, BUT ENTER NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, WITH NO CONSIDERATION FOR WHAT UTAH WOULD LIKE TO DO, WITH HOW WE HANDLE OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM. WE NOW HAVE A ONE SIZE FITS ALL. WE HEAR ABOUT ALL THE FLEXIBILITY, WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT. WE ALSO NEED TO TALK ABOUT THE UNFUNDED MANDATE. IT WILL COST THE STATE OF UTAH HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR, MONEY WE DON'T HAVE. IF WE DID HAVE IT THAT'S NOT HOW I'D WANT TO SPEND IT.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, YOUR 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU, KEN. THERE'S NO QUESTION BUT WHAT TEACHERS IN UTAH ARE IN PAIN. DO WE HAVE ANY TEACHERS HERE? WE UNFORTUNATELY- - IT'S INTERESTING. I SPENT SOME TIME TODAY WITH A TEACHER, JUST TODAY, WHO WANTED--FROM TINTIC SCHOOL DISTRICT--WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, AND TALKED ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND IN HIS SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE STATE DECIDED NOT TO TAKE THAT MONEY. AND THAT WOULD MEAN TWO TEACHERS WHO WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO TEACH IN TINTIC. AND IT'S VERY CLEAR FROM HIS POINT OF VIEW, AND FROM THE POINTS OF VIEW OF DOZENS OF SCHOOL TEACHERS THAT I'VE TALKED TO, THAT NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND, THE WAY IT WAS IMPLEMENTED, CREATED SOME PAIN FOR TEACHERS IN UTAH, AND, FRANKLY, TEACHERS AROUND THE COUNTRY. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION BUT THAT TEACHERS ARE ENERGIZED EVERYWHERE BECAUSE OF THE DIFFICULTY THIS CREATED. NOW, FUNDAMENTALLY THE BILL, I THINK, INCORPORATES GOOD REPUBLICAN PRINCIPLES, BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF IT IS THAT IT GOES THROUGH A DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, AND I THINK THEY DID A FAIRLY GOOD JOB. THEN IT HAD TO BE IMPLEMENTED HERE AT THE STATE LEVEL. NOW, WE HAVE A NEW SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS IN UTAH, PATTY HARRINGTON, AND WHEN SHE TOOK OFFICE SHE SAID THAT HER GOAL WAS TO WORK WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION TO CHANGE THE WAY NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND WAS IMPLEMENTED IN UTAH TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS HERE IN UTAH. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH PATTY FOR A YEAR, I AGREE WITH PATTY. WE NEED TO DO THINGS IN UTAH TO MAKE IT WORK RIGHT, AND THE FEDS KEEP SAYING THERE'S PLENTY OF LATITUDE, SO WE'RE GOING TO BE THE HAMMER ON THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO WHAT PATTY HARRINGTON, THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION WANTS TO DO, TO MAKE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND WORK HERE IN UTAH. NOW THE REAL PROBLEM, OF COURSE, IS HAVING A DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, WHICH HAS NEVER MADE SENSE, AND MOST TEACHERS AGREE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TODAY.

KEN: AND YOU BOTH WERE IN KIND OF MID-SENTENCE WHEN YOUR TIME AN ELAPSED SO I'M GOING TO EXTEND BY 30 SECONDS, YOU CAN CALL IT REBUTTAL OR YOU CAN CALL IT EXTENSION, BUT MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU HAVE THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND DOES NOT WORK. IT'S A WELL-INTENTIONED BILL, IT DOES NOT WORK. HERE'S THE ULTIMATE IRONY. UTAH'S TEACHER OF THE YEAR FOR LANGUAGE ARTS IS UP IN BOX ELDER COUNTY, I BELIEVE, FAILS NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND. WE CAN SEND THIS TEACHER TO WASHINGTON, D.C. AND SAY, "YOU ARE THE BEST UTAH HAS TO OFFER BUT YOU FAIL NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND." IT DOES NOT WORK. AND THE NOTION THAT SOMEHOW WE'RE JUST GOING TO TWEAK IT AND MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER, THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. AND OF COURSE CHRIS CANNON SUPPORTED THAT BILL PASSIONATELY, AND HE'S PLEDGED TO CONTINUE SUPPORTING IT. I WILL VOTE TO REPEAL IT, AND BLOC GRANT THAT MONEY BACK TO THE STATE.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE?

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, I DON'T DO VERY MANY THINGS PASSIONATELY. I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT IT'LL IT DO TO THE WORLD. BUT WITH NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND I WORKED INTENTLY ON THAT ISSUE, AND I WORKED WITH THE ADMINISTRATION BEFORE IT PASSED, AND WE WORKED ON, NOT ON THE COMMITTEE, BUT WE WORKED WITH IT TO GET IT GOING, AND WE WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THEREAFTER. WE HAVE A SYSTEM THAT'S BEEN HERE SINCE THE 60'S. TO THINK THAT THAT SYSTEM IS SOMEHOW GOING TO DISAPPEAR BECAUSE SOMEBODY RIDES ON A WHITE HORSE INTO WASHINGTON, D.C. TO CHALLENGE IT IS WRONG. WE NEED TO WORK WITH THIS SYSTEM AND CHANGE IT OVER TIME AND MAKE IT WORK FOR UTAH'S TEACHERS.

KEN: AND OUR NEXT QUESTION, THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY GO TO REPRESENTATIVE CANNON FOR RESPONSE.

>> LAST YEAR THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS VOTED TO PROVIDE $25 MILLION FOR TEST READINESS ACTIVITIES AT THE NEVADA TEST SITE. FUNDING WAS ALSO PROVIDED FOR RESEARCH INTO NEW GENERATION OF FIRST STRIKE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. THIS YEAR CONGRESS IS POISED TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL $36.6 MILLION FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS RESEARCH. IN LIGHT OF THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT EACH OF YOUR POSITIONS ARE IN REGARDS TO THE RESUMPTION OF NUCLEAR TESTING, AND WHAT WILL YOU DO TO PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ALL UTAH CITIZENS SHOULD NUCLEAR TESTING RESUME?

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON?

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. THIS REALLY IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, AND IT'S IMPORTANT IN PART BECAUSE WE HAVE A HUGE ARSENAL OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS TODAY THAT ARE AGING. THEY'RE DETERIORATING, AND WE NEED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO TEST SO WE KNOW HOW THOSE NUCLEAR WEAPONS WILL PERFORM IN THE FUTURE. HOPEFULLY WE CAN REDUCE THOSE OVER TIME, AND WEAN THE WHOLE WORLD FROM NUCLEAR TERROR. BUT IN THE MEANTIME I THINK WE NEED TO BE TESTING THOSE THINGS, AND I AM UNWILLING TO TIE THE HANDS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND KEEP HIM FROM TESTING NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THE FUTURE, I THINK THAT'S JUST SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO. NOW, WE HAVE A SYSTEM, WE'RE IMPROVING IT ALL THE TIME SO THAT HEALTH AND SAFETY CONCERNS ARE MORE DEALT WITH. MY FIRST JOB AS A LAWYER WAS TO WORK WITH STEWART UDALL IN THE LAWSUITS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BY PEOPLE WHO DIED FROM CANCER. AND SINCE THAT TIME MY FATHER DIED FROM CANCER THAT WAS RELATED TO ALL THE TIMES HE WENT OUT AS A PATRIOTIC UTAHN TO WATCH THE TESTS GO OFF IN UTAH. AND I'LL JUST TELL THAT WE SHOULDN'T TRUST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FARTHER THAN WE CAN THROW THEM, AND THAT'S NOT VERY FAR, INDIVIDUALLY, OR EVEN AS A CONGRESS. WE NEED TO OVERSEE THOSE PEOPLE. THERE'S ONLY ONE MAN OF CONSCIENCE IN THAT WHOLE GROUP THAT DEALT WITH NUCLEAR TESTING, AND THAT WAS EDWARD TELLER. THE REST OF THEM WERE JUST, COULD HAVE SAVED GREAT PAIN AND SUFFERING ON THE PARTS OF MANY PEOPLE HERE IN UTAH AND OTHER PLACES WHERE WE HAD DOWNWINDERS, BUT DIDN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF THE SECRECY THEY WANTED. WE NEED TO PUNCTURE THAT SECRECY, WE NEED TO FORCE THE GOVERNMENT TO DO THINGS APPROPRIATELY, WE NEED TO FORCE THEM TO DO IT TRANSPARENTLY, BUT WE NEED TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE TESTING. FOR OUR OWN SAFETY, THE SAFETY OF OUR ARSENAL, AND ALSO FOR THE PROTECTION OF AMERICA AND OUR WAY OF LIFE.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOUR 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW THE IDEA, BASICALLY THE PREMISE THAT CHRIS PUTS FORWARD I AGREE WITH, WE DO HAVE AN AGING ARSENAL, WE DO HAVE TO ENSURE THAT THAT IS OPERABLE. BUT LET ME EXPAND THE ISSUE JUST A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT THE ONE SIMPLE ISSUE. SOMETHING THAT GOES HAND IN HAND WITH THAT IS MINI-NUKES, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THEY WANT TO DEVELOP, MINIATURE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. THEY HAVE A VERY SMALL YIELD, THEY'RE DESIGNED FOR VERY SURGICAL APPLICATION, AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I STRONGLY OPPOSE. YOU KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO WARFARE, AND THIS MAY BE A VERY CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENT, BUT AS CHRIS SAID, THERE'S A MORAL ISSUE TO THIS. AND IF THERE IS ANY POTENTIAL OF REMOVING THAT MORAL ISSUE FROM IT, IT BECOMES A DANGER. YOU KNOW, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THROUGH TOMAHAWK TECHNOLOGY AND LASER-GUIDED WEAPONS, WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROSECUTE WARS WITH INCREDIBLE PRECISION. AND WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS WE HAVE BECOME A LITTLE MORE WILLING TO USE THEM. AND BEFORE I WOULD CONDEMN ANY ACTION WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. BUT THE CONCEPT OF HAVING A MINI-NUKE, WHERE IN OUR MIND, WE CAN HIT THIS SMALL LITTLE TARGET WITH A NUCLEAR WEAPON AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT ANY POTENTIAL FALLOUT BECOMES AN ISSUE THAT I'M VERY CONCERNED WITH. WE CANNOT REMOVE THAT MORAL ISSUE FROM THIS DISCUSSION. WE HAVE A NUCLEAR DETERRENT, WHICH IS BASED PRIMARILY UPON DETERRENTS OF THE SOVIET UNION AND GROWING CHINA. IT'S NOT A DETERRENT FOR NORTH KOREA, IT'S NOT A DETERRENT FOR IRAN. THOSE COUNTRIES NEED TO BE HANDLED A DIFFERENT WAY. HOPEFULLY OVER TIME WE CAN HAVE A BETTER RELATIONSHIP IN WHICH THAT NUCLEAR DETERRENT CAN BE PULLED BACK. UNTIL THEN I DO SUPPORT TESTING, BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT MINI-NUKES.

KEN: IT'S INTERESTING, TWO NIGHTS AGO IN THIS STUDIO WE PRETAPED A DEBATE BETWEEN THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR. THAT WILL AIR ON MONDAY EVENING ON KUED. BOTH CANDIDATES, JON HUNTSMAN JUNIOR AND NOLAN KARRAS, IN FACT ONE OF THE USED THE WORD "RESIST WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY BODY" THE RESUMPTION OF TESTING IN NEVADA, AND BOTH OF THEM PLEDGED TO TURN TO THE UTAH CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION FOR JOIN WITH THEM IN PROTECTING THE WELL-BEING OF THE PEOPLE OF UTAH. SOMETIMES THERE ARE LINKAGES IN THESE DEBATES, AND SO I ASK YOU IN YOUR
30-SECOND EXTENSION, WHEN THAT REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR, SHOULD THEY BE ELECTED, COMES TO YOU AND SAYS, "PLEASE, REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, PLEASE, REPRESENTATIVE THROCKMORTON, PROTECT THE PEOPLE OF UTAH," HOW ARE YOU GOING TO RESPOND TO THEIR CONCERN?

MR. CANNON: WELL, WE'LL LOOK AT IT AT THE TIME AND PLACE, BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T DONE TESTING FOR SOME TIME. BUT IN PART THIS HAS BEEN AROUSED BECAUSE, BY RUMORS THAT WE WERE GOING TO DO BUNKER BUSTER TESTING NEAR KANAB, UTAH. THAT IS NOT THE CASE, THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WATCH AND SEE WHAT IT IS. AND THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OVERSIGHT OF ANYTHING THE PRESIDENT DOES TO ORDER TESTING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS. AND SO CAN I ASSURE YOU WE WILL BE ENGAGED IN THE SAFETY ASPECT OF IT, AND THE TRANSPARENCY OF IT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NO HEALTH PROBLEM FOR UTAH.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOUR 30 SECONDS. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT FUTURE GOVERNOR?

MR. THROCKMORTON: YOU WORK WITH THEM. YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IS MAINTAINING THE VALIDITY OF THESE WEAPONS, AND THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS THAT GO INTO THIS. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS CONSIDER THE OPINION HERE IN UTAH, WE NEED TO CONSIDER THE INPUT OF THE GOVERNOR, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER NATIONAL SECURITY. AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY IN WASHINGTON IS ALSO TO DEAL WITH NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE IMPLICATIONS THERE. IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT WAY OF TESTING, IF THERE'S A DIFFERENT WAY OF VERIFYING THAT THOSE NUCLEAR WEAPONS ARE STILL VALID, THEN WE CAN GO THAT ROUTE, AND I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT IT. UNTIL THAT IS BROUGHT FORTH WE DO HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT, WE HAVE TO WORK WITH THE GOVERNOR AS WELL.

KEN: A BRIEF PAUSE TO RECOGNIZE THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT MAKE UP ONE OF THE MOST UNIQUE VOTER INFORMATION PROJECTS IN THE NATION, AND ARE PART OF THIS DEBATE. VOTE UTAH BRINGS TOGETHER SEVEN PUBLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS WITH DIFFERENT TALENTS AND ABILITIES, BUT ONE SHARED PURPOSE, AND THAT'S TO PROVIDE UTAH'S VOTING PUBLIC WITH A RANGE OF RESOURCES TO BE INFORMED AND INVOLVED WHEN IT COMES TO MAKING ELECTION YEAR DECISIONS. ONE OF OUR SHARED UNDERTAKINGS IS THE VOTE UTAH WEB SITE, WHERE YOU'LL FIND BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE CANDIDATES, THE ISSUES, EVEN TOOLS FOR SCHOOL TEACHERS INTERESTED IN BRINGING THE POLITICAL PROCESS TO CLASS ROOMS. ON LINE, ANY TIME, AT WWW.VOTEUTAH.ORG. LET'S GO BACK TO OUR STUDIO AUDIENCE. WE HAVE A QUESTION, AND WE ARE GOING TO SHIFT GEARS SOMEWHAT.

>> WHAT WILL YOU DO TO ENSURE THAT EVERY AMERICAN HAS ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE?

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU HAVE THE FIRST 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, IT'S AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ISSUE, AND AS I'M OUT GOING DOOR TO DOOR, MEETING ESPECIALLY WITH YOUNG PARENTS AND OLDER INDIVIDUALS AS THEY GET ON TO MEDICAID AND MEDICARE, THERE'S A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. AND THERE'S NO EASY ANSWER. IF THERE WERE AN EASY ANSWER WE WOULD HAVE IMPLEMENTED THAT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS A GREAT REDUCTION IN THE REGULATION OF THE HEALTH CARE ENVIRONMENT. PERFECT EXAMPLE OF ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS THAT WHEN WE PASSED SOME MANDATES IN HEALTH CARE, WHAT WE FIND WITH THE MANDATE IN HEALTH CARE, IT'S DESIGNED TO HELP A SMALL GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS, BUT WE SPREAD THAT ACROSS THE ENTIRE POPULATION. AND EVERY TIME WE DO THAT WE FIND THERE ARE AN AWFUL LOT OF PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD THAT ADDITIONAL COST. AND SO IF WE CAN DEREGULATE, IF WE CAN PULL THAT BACK, IF WE COULD ALLOW YOUNG PARENTS, YOUNG FAMILIES ACCESS TO A HEALTH CARE THAT HAD CATASTROPHIC EMERGENCY ROOM AND SOME PRIMARY HEALTH CARE WITHOUT ALL THE ADDITIONAL, AND ALLOW THEM TO TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN THERE. THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE CAN DO. TORT REFORM IS ALSO EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. TORT REFORM IN THE SENSE OF THE COST OF PROVIDING HEALTH CARE, THE COSTS OF THE DOCTORS. YOU KNOW, WE FIND DOCTORS, JUST OUT OF CONCERNS OF POTENTIAL LAWSUITS, WILL ORDER A LOT MORE TESTS THAT THEY DON'T ACTUALLY NEED, BUT NOT TO DEAL WITH THE PATIENT, BUT TO DEAL WITH POTENTIAL LITIGATION. AND SO TO FIND A BETTER BALANCE OF HANDLING THAT LITIGATION, WE CAN'T RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE COURTS, BUT FINDING SOME REFORMS THERE. SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT I WOULD BE VERY AGGRESSIVE IN. BUT MOSTLY WE'VE GOT TO ROLL BACK THE MANDATES. UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE COVERAGE, WHILE IT'S APPEALING, IT HAS THE CONCEPT OF IT'S GOING TO HELP EVERYBODY. COUNTRIES THAT HAVE IT GENERALLY DO NOT HAVE A GOOD HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, YOUR 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. THIS WEEKEND IN NEWSWEEK MAGAZINE THERE'S AN ARTICLE BY A GUY WHO WAS IN FRANCE WHEN HIS WIFE SUFFERED A DEBILITATING STROKE, AND A COMPARISON BETWEEN FRANCE AND AMERICA. FRANCE HAS A SOCIALIZED SYSTEM WHICH IS FAIRLY EFFICIENT. IT HAS ITS PROBLEMS. BUT IN AMERICA, HE CAME BACK AND POINTED OUT THAT 30 CENTS OUT OF EVERY DOLLAR SPENT ON HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA GOES TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS, PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU HAVE LARGE HEALTH CARE PLANS THAT DECIDE WHAT YOUR TREATMENT SHOULD BE. AND IN THE END WHAT I DON'T WANT IS AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE WHERE SOMEBODY ELSE DECIDES, MAKES DECISIONS FOR YOU. BUT THEN HE GOES ON TO TALK ABOUT THE INCREDIBLE COST TO HIM OF SORTING THROUGH THE ERRORS IN THE BILLS, BECAUSE THE WAY THE SYSTEM WORKS. IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN YOU HAVE A ONE-PAYER SYSTEM, LIKE WE DO WITH INSURANCE THESE DAYS, THERE ARE TERRIFIC INCENTIVES TO MAKE MISTAKES THAT FAVOR THE HEALTH CARE PROVIDER. AND SO WE NEED TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT MAKE A CHANGE. ACTUALLY WE'VE DONE THE THING WHICH I THINK IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FOR A CHANGE, AND IF YOU ALL HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT YET YOU SHOULD BE LOOKING AT HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS, WHICH WE'VE PASSED AND WHICH ARE NOW IN PLACE, AND WHICH WILL SHIFT THE NATURE OF HOW WE DO HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA AWAY FROM A PAYOR WHO HAS DIFFERENT INCENTIVES TOWARDS YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR AND YOUR INTEREST IN BEING WELL, AND YOUR INTEREST IN PRESERVING YOUR OWN INSURANCE, YOUR OWN MONEY, YOUR OWN SAVINGS ACCOUNT, SO THAT YOU LIVE WELL, YOU LIVE WEALTHY, AND YOUR CHILDREN INHERIT WHAT YOU LEAVE THEM. AND WE'VE DONE THAT WITH HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I WENT TO CONGRESS FOR, AND I'M VERY PROUD OF. YOU SHOULD ALL, AND ALL OF OUR LISTENERS, SHOULD TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE.

KEN: NOT EVERY ISSUE NECESSARILY PRODUCES CONTENTION. IS THERE A NEED FOR REBUTTAL ON THE ISSUE OF HEALTH CARE?

MR. THROCKMORTON: CHRIS AND I BASICALLY DEGREE.

KEN: OKAY, THEN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS GO BACK TO OUR AUDIENCE AND TALK UPON ANOTHER PRECIOUS RESOURCE. THIS ONE NATURAL, THIS ONE WATER.

>> WATER, YES, CHANGING THE SUBJECT. GOOSEBERRY NARROWS WATER PROJECT IS THE SUBJECT OF INTENSE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS AND IRRIGATORS IN SANPETE COUNTY. DO YOU SUPPORT CONTINUED U.S. GOVERNMENT FUNDING OF THIS PROJECT, OR INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVES?

KEN: AND REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, FIRST OPPORTUNITY.

MR. CANNON: THAT'S A GREAT LITTLE PROJECT THAT WAS PROMISED TO THE PEOPLE OF SANPETE COUNTY, ALMOST 100 YEARS AGO, AND CARBON COUNTY'S BEEN TAKING THAT WATER EVER SINCE. AND I THINK OUR GREAT PIONEER ANCESTORS ACTUALLY CUT A TUNNEL THAT WAS PARTIALLY USED FOR THAT, AND WE GOT SOME WATER OUT OF ONE DRAINAGE INTO ANOTHER DRAINAGE. AND SANPETE COUNTY FOLKS WANT THAT WATER TERRIFICALLY. THERE ARE SOME REALLY BIG HURDLES FOR THEM DOING THAT. ONE OF THOSE HURDLES IS THE WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ANALYSIS THAT'S GOING ON THERE RIGHT NOW, AND ANOTHER HURDLE IS GETTING THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TO ACTUALLY FUND THE PROCESS OF DOING THAT. WE THINK, THAT IS I THINK, AND THOSE THAT WORK IN MY OFFICE WITH ME, THINK THAT
THE PROMISE OUGHT TO BE HONORED IF IT CAN IN A WAY THAT'S REASONABLE AND THOUGHTFUL. AND SO WE'RE WORKING WITH B.O.R. AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND SEE WHAT CAN BE DONE. AND THAT WILL RESOLVE ITSELF OVER THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO, AND IT WILL EITHER BE A PROMISE THAT'S NOT KEPT, OR A PROMISE THAT'S KEPT IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOUR OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. GOOSEBERRY NARROWS, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. THERE ARE A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT WATER PROJECTS. THERE'S WATER THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE GOING DOWN TO NOT ONLY SANPETE COUNTY, BUT DOWN TO JUAB COUNTY, MILLARD COUNTY. UTAH COUNTY HAS SOME WATER ISSUES. ALL OF THESE HAVE A VERY COMMON DENOMINATOR, WHICH IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. IN MANY OF THESE CASES WE HAVE LOCAL INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN PAYING PROPERTY TAXES FOR DECADES TO HAVE THESE WATER PROJECTS CONTINUE. NOW, WHETHER ONE LIKES THE WATER PROJECT OR NOT, WHETHER ONE THINKS IT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED OR NOT, THE SIMPLE FACT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS MADE A COMMITMENT. SO EITHER THEY KEEP THAT COMMITMENT OR THEY NEED TO REIMBURSE THE TAX MONEY. IF YOU CAN'T KEEP THE PROMISE AS WELL. BUT MUCH OF THIS, IN MY OPINION, WITH SOME REAL AGGRESSIVE REPRESENTATION CAN BE RESOLVED. WE CAN GET THAT WATER DEVELOPED. I THINK BACK TO HIGHWAY 6, AS A STATE LEGISLATOR I WAS VERY INVOLVED IN HIGHWAY 6. THE EIGHT YEARS PRIOR TO ME GETTING IN OFFICE, HIGHWAY 6 OF COURSE WAS ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS STRETCHES OF ROAD IN UTAH. $18 MILLION WAS SPENT ON THAT AFTER VERY AGGRESSIVE REPRESENTATION OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS OVER $120 MILLION WAS INVESTED INTO HIGHWAY 6. A LOT MORE TO DO, BUT THAT'S AN AWFUL LOT OF GOOD FOR THAT. THAT KIND OF REPRESENTATION IS GOING TO GET US A LONG WAY BACK IN WASHINGTON WITH THESE WATER PROJECTS. AND YOU KNOW, THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE, EDUCATION ISSUES, THOSE WILL BE ISSUES THAT I'LL BE VERY INVOLVED IN. SOME OF THESE WATER ISSUES WILL BE THE ISSUES THAT, FROM DAY ONE, I WILL BECOME VERY ACTIVE IN GETTING SOME RESULTS.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL.

MR. CANNON: JUST VERY QUICKLY. I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN VERY AGGRESSIVE ON THESE ISSUES, AND OBVIOUSLY MATT WENT BEYOND THE QUESTION TO TALK ABOUT SEVERAL OTHER ISSUES, MOST OF WHICH ARE NOW VERY CLOSE TO BEING RESOLVED. WE HAVE DECISION DOCUMENTS OUT THERE READY TO BE DONE, AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WORKING. I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE WESTERN CAUCUS, WHICH IS THE REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THAT REPRESENT PUBLIC LANDS DISTRICTS IN THE WESTERN UNITED STATES AND PARTS OF THE EAST. AND WE'VE BROUGHT A GREAT DEAL OF FORCE TO BEAR ON THESE ISSUES. THEY'VE BEEN RESOLVED, HOPEFULLY WE CAN MOVE BEYOND THEM BY THE NEXT CONGRESSIONAL, BY THE NEXT CONGRESS.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME AS WELL.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANKS. YOU KNOW, IN A HISTORY OF, A 200-YEAR HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY, OF COURSE WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF THINGS CHANGE, A LOT OF RESOLUTION AND SUCH. THIS HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY SLOW. A LOT OF THESE ISSUES HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED. I THINK OF THE WATER DOWN IN JUAB COUNTY THAT'S BEEN PROMISED, THEY PAID FOR IT FOR 70 YEARS, AND ESSENTIALLY RIGHT NOW THEY ARE RECEIVING NOTHING. AND THE LONG HAUL, I'VE SPOKEN TO SOME OF THEIR EXPERTS DOWN THERE, THEY SEE NO RELIEF FROM THIS. SO WE DO NEED A DIFFERENT TACK ON THIS.

KEN: WELL, IF WE'VE STRUGGLED OVER THE ISSUE OF WATER, IMAGINE WHAT WE'VE DONE OVER THE SUBJECT OF TAXES. WHICH IS OUR NEXT QUESTION. AND MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU'LL HAVE THE FIRST 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

>> WHAT SPECIFIC LEGISLATION WILL YOU SPONSOR TO REDUCE FEDERAL TAXES? AND PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR STAND ON THE FLAT AND THE NATIONAL SALES TAX.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON FIRST.

MR. THROCKMORTON: FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO DO IS GO TO A NATIONAL SALES TAX. FOR THE STATE OF UTAH, CONSIDERING MANY FACTORS, THAT, OF COURSE, WOULD BE THE VERY BEST. IF WE HAD A FLAT TAX THAT WOULD BE TREMENDOUS, IT WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM WHAT WE HAVE NOW. WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH A FLAT TAX, WHAT YOU'RE DEALING WITH IS DEFINING, "WHAT IS INCOME?" AND IT GREATLY SIMPLIFIES THAT DISCUSSION, BUT IMMEDIATELY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WELL SHOULD WE HAVE A MORTGAGE WRITE-OFF? SHOULD WE HAVE HEALTH CARE WRITE-OFF? YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, BUT IT IS FAR IMPROVED OVER WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. AND AS AN EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, IT'S EASY TO TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS. AS A STATE LEGISLATOR I SPONSORED A RESOLUTION SEVERAL YEARS AGO THAT CALLED FOR THE REPEAL OF THE 16TH AMENDMENT AND REPLACE WITH EITHER A FLAT TAX OR A NATIONAL SALES TAX. NOW, REALLY UNFORTUNATE, I HAD NO GRAND IDEA THAT BY PASSING A RESOLUTION HERE IN THE STATE OF UTAH WE WERE GOING TO GET THAT CHANGED. BUT THE HOPE WAS TO BEGIN THE DISCUSSION AGAIN. YOU KNOW, WHEN STEVE FORBES RAN FOR PRESIDENT BACK IN THE 90'S, THE BIG ISSUE WAS FLAT TAX. EVERYBODY TALKED ABOUT IT. WHAT WAS REALLY UNFORTUNATE IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, AS SOON AS STEVE FORBES FELL OUT OF THE RACE, THEY SAID, "WELL, YOUR FLAT TAX GOES WITH YOU." AND THAT KIND OF A SERIOUS REFORM HAS NOT REALLY HAD A GREAT DEAL OF DISCUSSION SINCE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE REINTRODUCED INTO THE POLITICAL DIALOGUE. AND IN GOING WITH A SIGNIFICANT SHIFT IN HOW WE DO TAXES, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN EASY THING. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE, "WELL, LET'S FILE THE BILL TODAY AND THREE MONTHS DOWN THE ROAD WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT." WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND MANY YEARS WITH THIS, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A VERY GOOD PROCESS. STEVE FORBES HAD US ON THE WAY. UNFORTUNATELY WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GET BACK TO WHERE THAT WAS, A GOOD NATIONAL DIALOGUE ON IT, AND EXPECT SOME GOOD RESULTS. I'VE DEMONSTRATED CLEARLY I'M WILLING TO GET INTO THAT. TALK'S CHEAP, I'VE DONE IT.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU, KEN. I ACTUALLY WORKED VERY HARD ON REDUCING OUR TAXES, AND WE'VE ACTUALLY REDUCED TAXES. IT'S BEEN WONDERFUL FOR THE ECONOMY, AND NOW WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THE DEATH TAX IS DEAD. I WANT TO GO BACK TO CONGRESS SO WE CAN MAKE THESE TAXES WE'VE DONE PERMANENT. AND I THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN. NOW, THAT'S CONSTRAINED GOVERNMENT CASH, AND HAS LEFT US WITH A DEFICIT. AND SO THE REAL ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS, WHAT DO YOU DO WITH GOVERNMENT SPENDING? WHAT DO YOU DO WITH SPENDING? BUT THE PROBLEM HERE IS NOT HOW MUCH WE TAX, IT'S WHAT WE SPEND IT ON. UNFORTUNATELY, OF COURSE, THE MORE WE TAX THE MORE WE SPEND. IT'S ALSO UNFORTUNATE THAT THE LESS WE TAKE IN, SOMETIMES WE DON'T DO LESS SPENDING. AND SO WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT SPENDING. AND REPRESENTATIVE TODD TIAHRT OF KANSAS HAS COME UP WITH A GREAT IDEA. YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSING COMMISSION. HE'S COME UP WITH THE IDEA OF A PROGRAM CUTTING COMMISSION THAT WOULD DO THE SAME THING. CONGRESS WOULD ESTABLISH THE COMMISSION AND AGREE BY RULE, AMEND THE RULES SO THAT WHEN THAT COMMISSION CAME BACK WITH A PROPOSAL TO CUT PROGRAMS, IT WAS A YES-OR-NO VOTE. THAT'S WORKED REMARKABLY WELL AT BASE CLOSINGS, EVEN PAINFULLY WELL. PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA THAT LOST HUGE AMOUNTS OF JOBS AT A BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSING PROCESS VOTED FOR IT. IF YOU DO A THOUGHTFUL SERIES OF COMMISSIONS ON PROGRAMS TO CLOSE, I THINK YOU'LL SEE THE PEOPLE BEGIN TO SAY, "WHY DO WE NEED THIS FEDERAL PROGRAM?" WHY DO WE NEED A FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION? THAT'S SOMETHING WE OUGHT TO HAVE. AND AS YOU REDUCE THE PROGRAMS, THEN YOU REDUCE THE COST OF GOVERNMENT, AND YOU GET TO A POINT WHERE A NATIONAL SALES TAX MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO FORCE PEOPLE INTO A BLACK MARKET, IT'S GOING TO LET THEM BUY SOMETHING AT A NOMINAL INCREASE OF COST, AND SPREAD THE COST OF TAXATION OVER THE BROADEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE, WHICH IS THE BEST KIND OF TAX.

KEN: NEED FOR REBUTTAL?

MR. THROCKMORTON: YEAH, I'D LIKE TO JUMP IN THERE. YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, WE TALK ABOUT CUTTING SPENDING, AND HERE'S A BIG PROBLEM. ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO THERE WAS A BILL BEFORE CONGRESS THAT INCREASED OUR NATIONAL DEBT, DEBT ALLOWANCE, BY ALMOST A TRILLION DOLLARS. AND OF COURSE CHRIS VOTED TO INCREASE THAT DEBT. AND IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTROL SPENDING THAT'S NOT HOW WE GO ABOUT CONTROLLING SPENDING. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT TAX CUTS, I HAVE A 100 PERCENT LIFETIME RATING WITH THE UTAH TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION. WE NEED TO HAVE BALANCED BUDGETS. WE NEED TO HAVE BALANCED BUDGETS. FIFTY STATES IN THE UNION HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT. WASHINGTON NEEDS TO HAVE IT AS WELL. TAX POLICY IS A WHOLE POLICY.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON?

MR. CANNON: YOU'RE NOT SAYING YOU WOULD VOTE AGAINST THE RAISING THE DEBT CEILING, ARE YOU?

MR. THROCKMORTON: OH, ABSOLUTELY.

MR. CANNON: LET ME JUST SAY THAT THIS IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT MORE SPENDING WITH THE DEBT CEILING, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MANAGING OUR FINANCES, WHICH GOES ALL THE WAY BACK TO ALEXANDER HAMILTON AND THE DEBATE OVER OUR WAR BONDS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROPER LEGAL AUTHORITY, GOVERNMENT SHUTS DOWN. NOW, THAT'S NOT THE KIND OF GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN THAT THE PEOPLE UNDER NEWT GINGRICH WANTED TO SEE IN 1996. THIS IS THE KIND OF SHUTDOWN THAT HAPPENS BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE LAW THAT MAKES SENSE. SO I VOTE AGAINST SPENDING, BUT I WILL VOTE TO DO A LEGAL PROCESS WITH OUR GOVERNMENT FINANCING.

KEN: I KNOW YOU WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND ON THIS, BUT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A WALK AROUND HERE TO THE FRONT ROW OF THE AUDIENCE. WHY DON'T YOU STEP UP WITH ME? THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF OUR DEBATES IN THIS PRE-PRIMARY SEASON YOU'VE SEEN A LOT OF VERY BRIGHT YOUNG FACES WEARING "VOTE PROJECT 1824" SHIRTS. IN THE GENERAL ELECTION VOTE PROJECT 1824 WILL BE JOINING WITH THE VOTE UTAH PROJECT. AND WHAT IT REPRESENTS IS A UTAH-BASED INITIATIVE TO GET YOUNG VOTERS CONNECTED, INFORMED, AND TO THE POLLS TO BE PART OF THE POLITICAL PROCESS WITH A RENEWED SENSE OF ENERGY. WHERE DO YOU GO TO SCHOOL? DO YOU GO TO SCHOOL?

>> WELL, I JUST GRADUATED.

KEN: YOU GRADUATED FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH.

>> YEAH.

KEN: OKAY, WELL THE CRUEL WORLD AWAITS YOU. AND WE WILL BEGIN THAT, TO SHOW JUST HOW CRUEL IT CAN BE, BY GIVING YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THE NEXT QUESTION, WHICH REPRESENTATIVE CANNON WILL RESPOND TO FIRST.

>> OKAY. IN 2005 KEY PROVISIONS OF THE USA PATRIOT ACT ARE SET TO EXPIRE. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THE EXTENSION OF THIS ACT AND THE EFFECT ON AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES?

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU, THAT IS A VERY THOUGHTFUL QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN GETTING PEOPLE ACTIVE AND OUT TO VOTE, ESPECIALLY IN THAT AGE GROUP, WHICH IS NOT VOTING ENOUGH, AND WE WANT TO SEE PEOPLE GET INVOLVED. AND YOU KNOW, ALL THESE QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT YOUR FUTURE. I HOPE TO BE A GOOD GUARDIAN OF IT, BUT I'M SORT OF BEYOND YOUR AGE. AND I WANT TO BE ABLE TO LOOK BACK AND SEE THIS HANDED OVER TO A RISING GENERATION THAT DOES THINGS RIGHT. THESE PATRIOT ACTS HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES THAT WE'VE DEALT WITH FOR A LONG TIME. AND IT'S CONTROVERSIAL BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE, EVEN VERY CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE, WHO ARE DEMANDING TO BE PROTECTED. DEMANDING IT. IN FACT, THERE WAS A TALK SHOW HOST HERE IN UTAH THAT ACTUALLY LOST HIS TEMPER AND WAS SCREAMING AT ME BECAUSE WE HADN'T FINISHED OUR WORK IN THE HOUSE. I SAID, "WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?" HE SAID, "YOU HAVEN'T AUTHORIZED THE FEDERALIZATION OF THE WORKERS IN AIRPORTS." WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS APPROPRIATE, BUT HE THOUGHT IT WAS, AND I THOUGHT HE WOULD HAVE TAKEN A DIFFERENT APPROACH BECAUSE HE'S A VERY CONSERVATIVE GUY. THE FACT IS, WE DID THAT, WE DID IT IN A THOUGHTFUL AND APPROPRIATE MANNER, AND WE'LL DO THE SAME THING WITH THE PATRIOT ACT. AND THE U.S. PATRIOT ACT, THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT. THE FIRST IS THAT WE'VE GIVEN AUTHORITY TO TAP A PERSON INSTEAD OF A WIRED PHONE. SO A PERSON CAN USE A PHONE FOR A FEW MINUTES, THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW AND USE THE NEXT PHONE, AND WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY, IF PROPERLY DONE WITH A JUDGE'S WRIT TO LISTEN IN ON THE NEXT PHONE CONVERSATION, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE BASED UPON THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT LAW ENFORCEMENT IS DOING. THE SECOND THING WE DID THAT IS SIGNIFICANT IS THAT WE GAVE AUTHORITY TO LOOK AT PARTS OF THE HEADER ON AN E-MAIL. NOW, THOSE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT PRIMARILY WILL HAVE TO BE RENEWED HERE NEXT YEAR, AND WE WILL LOOK AT THOSE VERY CAREFULLY IN CONGRESS.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOUR 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. THE ISSUE OF THOSE PARTS THAT HAVE TO BE SUNSETTED, LET ME SAY VERY CLEARLY THERE ARE FAR MORE WISER, OR FAR WISER CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS THAT WILL TELL YOU THERE ARE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS WITH THOSE SUNSET PROVISIONS, AND THEY DEAL WITH WIRE TAPS, THEY DEAL WITH E-MAILS AND SUCH. THAT'S NOT MY CONCERN. THEY CAN DEAL WITH WHATEVER THEY WANT. THE CONCERN IS HOW THEY DEAL WITH THEM. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A FOURTH AMENDMENT THAT REQUIRES A WARRANT BEFORE YOU'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SEARCH AND SEIZE. AND THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A TRADITION. IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO REMOVE SOMETHING FROM SOMEBODY OR ARREST THEM, YOU GO BEFORE A JUDGE, A JUDGE SIGNS A WARRANT, AND YOU'RE OFF. WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN MANY REGARDS IS THEY HAVE CHANGED THE PROCESS OF DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN GAIN THAT INFORMATION. SO THE WARRANT THEY NOW, IT'S NOW A BIT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, AND THERE'S AGAIN A GREAT DESIRE TO DO THAT. I HAVE A BIG CONCERN WITH THAT. YOU KNOW, HERE IN THE STATE OF UTAH WE HAD AN AGENCY OF GOVERNMENT THAT WENT TO THAT VERY PROCESS, WHERE THEY COULD MAKE SOME VERY CRITICAL DECISIONS WITH ONLY ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, AND IT CAUSED FITS. MY ABSOLUTE COMMITMENT IS THAT WE NEED TO DO THIS RIGHT. IF THEY NEED TO FOLLOW THE INDIVIDUAL, THAT'S FINE. GET A JUDGE. IF THEY NEED TO READ E-MAILS, THAT'S FINE. GET A JUDGE. THOSE PROVISIONS THAT NEED TO BE SUNSETTED FOR THOSE CIVIL LIBERTY, OR THOSE BILL OF RIGHT CONCERNS, I WILL SUPPORT SUNSETTING THEM. IDEALLY WE CAN AMEND THEM. IDEALLY WE CAN PUT SOME PROVISIONS IN THERE THAT HAS THE NECESSARY PROTECTIONS. WITHOUT THAT, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD SUNSET THEM AND START THE DISCUSSION ON THAT AREA OVER. WE HAVE ONE CHANCE TO REALLY DO THIS RIGHT, AND EXPEDIENCY OVER A 200-YEAR HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY, EXPEDIENCY SHOULD NOT OVERRIDE THAT. WE HAVE A SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT TO MAINTAIN.

KEN: REBUTTAL TIME?

MR. CANNON: THIS GIVES COMFORT TO AMERICANS, WE HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE JUDGES REVIEW THESE WRITS. ONE OF THE MORE CONTROVERSIAL AREAS IS IN THE WRITS WHERE WE HAVE WHAT'S BEEN CALLED A SNEAK AND PEEK. THAT IS YOU'VE DONE A SEARCH BUT YOU DON'T TELL THE PERSON THAT YOU SEARCHED THAT YOU SEARCHED THEM. AND WHAT WE RESOLVED THE PROBLEM. THIS HAS BEEN DONE FOR 40 YEARS IN AMERICA, BUT THE DIFFERENT CIRCUITS IN THE COUNTRY HAD DIFFERENT DECISIONS. WE'VE RESOLVED THAT IN THE PATRIOT ACT, WITH SOME CLARITY AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK BACK AT THAT AND SEE HOW IT WORKS. BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING WRITS TO DO WIRE TAPS OR OTHER THINGS WITHOUT A JUDGE TODAY. THAT'S CURRENTLY THE LAW.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, AFTER THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING, WHICH I THINK WE ALL AGREE WAS ABSOLUTELY TRAGIC, WHAT HAPPENED IS THEY DID A TERROR BILL. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY DID IS THEY ALLOWED INDIVIDUALS, THE F.B.I. TO GAIN A WEAR TAP WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO A JUDGE. THEY GO THROUGH AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING. IT COULD BE APPEALED TO A JUDGE, AND THAT'S A CONCERN. WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT FIRST YEAR, WELL, THE YEARS PRIOR AN AVERAGE OF 1,000 TO 1,500 WIRE TAPS WOULD BE GRANTED A YEAR. WITHIN THREE YEARS THEY WERE CLOSE TO 100,000 WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PROCESS. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT PROTECTION IN OUR LAW, AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PROCESS IS NOT IT.

KEN: BACK TO OUR STUDIO AUDIENCE, ANOTHER HOT BUTTON ISSUE. REPRESENTATIVE, OR EXCUSE ME, FORMER UTAH HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, REPRESENTATIVE THROCKMORTON WILL RESPOND FIRST.

>> WHERE DO YOU STAND IN THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO CARRY CONCEALED WEAPONS INTO CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS?

MR. THROCKMORTON: I VERY STRONGLY SUPPORT IT. NOW, THE ISSUE OF CHURCH AND SCHOOLS IS AN ISSUE, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HALF-FULL HALF-EMPTY. A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO REALLY CONCENTRATE ON THE CHURCH AND THE SCHOOL ASPECT. I'M GOING TO CONCENTRATE ON THE FACT THAT WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE A DEGREE OF TRAINING, THEY'VE GONE THROUGH A COMPLETE BACKGROUND CHECK, F.B.I. BACKGROUND CHECK, AND HERE IN THE STATE OF UTAH I KNOW IT'S KIND OF A SASQUATCH THEORY OF POLITICS, WE ALWAYS TALK ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO'S COMMITTED A FELONY WITH A CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT. EVERYBODY'S HEARD ABOUT IT BUT NOBODY'S REALLY QUITE SEEN IT YET. YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT VERY LAW-ABIDING INDIVIDUALS. INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY HAVE A PROBLEM. AND THAT BEING THE CASE, I JUST DON'T SEE A COMPELLING REASON TO RESTRICT THEM THERE. NOW, THERE IS AN ASPECT OF IT, OF COURSE, WE SHOULDN'T GET CONFUSED. CHURCHES RIGHT NOW HAVE THE ABILITY THAT IF THEY WANTED TO THEY CAN TELL YOU YOU CAN'T COME IN. YOU KNOW, THAT IS THEIR RIGHT. WHAT IS BEING ASKED WITH THIS DISCUSSION IS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A CARTE BLANCHE THAT THEY CANNOT COME IN BY STATE LAW. CHURCHES HAVE ALWAYS MAINTAINED THAT RIGHT. WHEN IT COMES TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS OR SCHOOLS, OF COURSE, WE HAVE A BIT OF A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION THERE. CURRENTLY, TECHNICALLY, IF YOU GET WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF A SCHOOL WITH A FIREARM IT'S A FELONY OFFENSE. OBVIOUSLY IF YOU LIVE ACROSS THE STREET, YOU KNOW, IT'S A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION. AND SO BASED UPON THAT WE'VE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM, I DON'T SEE THAT WE'RE EVER GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM, AND I JUST DON'T SEE THAT THAT'S THE ROUTE WE NEED TO GO INTO. I THINK IT'S MORE JUST POLITICS.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN A VERY INTERESTING DEBATE IN AMERICA, AND IT'S TRANSFORMED ITSELF REALLY DRAMATICALLY OVER THE LAST SIX OR EIGHT OR TEN YEARS. WE'VE HAD THE STUDIES DONE IN THE ORIGINAL BOOK "MORE GUNS LESS CRIME," AND I THINK THAT EVERYBODY WHO'S LOOKED AT THAT NOW, I MEAN THERE'S SOME PEOPLE NOT HAPPY WITH IT WHO WOULD LIKE TO CONTROL GUNS, BUT IT'S PRETTY CLEAR, THE EVIDENCE IS REMARKABLY CLEAR, AND BEING AUGMENTED DAILY, IT APPEARS, THAT PEOPLE CARRYING GUNS RESULT IN LESS CRIME EVERYWHERE, WHERE PEOPLE INCREASE THEIR CARRYING OF GUNS. SO PERSONALLY, I BELIEVE THE CONSTITUTION CREATES A CONTEXT FOR A PERSONAL RIGHT TO CARRY A GUN. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE NOT AFFECTED BY STATE OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD EXPAND THAT. NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE OUGHT TO DO IS HAVE TRAINING FOR PEOPLE. THAT'S WHERE I THINK THE NEXT DEBATE GOES, IS, WELL, WHEN CAN SOMEONE CARRY, FOR INSTANCE, A FIREARM ACROSS STATE LINES? WE HAD THIS DEBATE IN THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE JUST LAST WEEK. AND THERE'S AN ATTEMPT TO GIVE RETIRED AND ACTIVE POLICE OFFICERS THE RIGHT TO CARRY A GUN WHEREVER THEY GO IN THE COUNTRY. OF COURSE THAT PRE-EMPTS STATE LAW, AND THAT'S A PRETTY INTENSE DEBATE IN CONGRESS. THE DEBATE IS GOING TO CONTINUE, I THINK THE DEBATE IS VERY, VERY GOOD, I THINK IT'S GOING TO LEAD US TO MORE UNDERSTANDING ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD GOVERN OURSELVES AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROTECT OUR OWN SELVES AND OUR FAMILIES AND OUR INTERESTS AND OUR SOCIETAL INTERESTS IN BEING SAFE FROM CRIME MUCH BETTER.

KEN: NOT READING SUBSTANTIAL DISAGREEMENT ON THIS ISSUE BETWEEN YOU, GENTLEMEN, LET'S SHIFT GEARS THEN, GO BACK TO THE AREA OF HEALTH CARE, THIS TIME WITH A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TWIST. YOUR QUESTION, PLEASE.

>> PEOPLE ARE BECOMING MORE AND MORE FRUSTRATED WITH THE LIMITED MENTAL HEALTH COVERAGE ON THEIR INSURANCE PLANS. ARE YOU SUPPORTIVE OF REPUBLICAN PETE DOMENICI'S MENTAL HEALTH INSURANCE PARITY BILL?

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON, YOUR OPPORTUNITY.

MR. CANNON: YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM WITH HEALTH CARE TODAY THAT IS WE HAVE LOTS AND LOTS OF FEDERAL MANDATES, AND THE ARGUMENT HERE ON PARITY FOR MENTAL HEALTH IS THAT IF YOU BRING IT UNDER THE INSURANCE, THE GUISE OF INSURANCE, THEN THE COST WILL GO DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL HAVE ACCESS, AND YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PREVENT COSTS IN THE FUTURE WITH MENTAL HEALTH CARE. AND FRANKLY, I FIND THAT A VERY COMPELLING ARGUMENT. THE PROBLEM IS I JUST DON'T THINK IT OUGHT TO BE DONE THROUGH A FEDERAL MANDATE. BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET A FEDERAL MANDATE THEN EVERYTHING BECOMES RIGID, AND THE MARKET FAILS TO OPERATE. AND SO I MIGHT- - WHEN I WENT TO CONGRESS, WHAT MY PRINCIPLE IDEA ON HEALTH CARE WAS TO DO HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS. WE'VE GOT THOSE IN PLACE. NOW, I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT THE MARKET IS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THIS PROBLEM, AND YOU'RE GOING TO FIND HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS WHERE PEOPLE ARE SAYING, "I WANT TO BE WELL." AND AS PART OF THAT PROCESS OF BEING WELL AND SAVING MONEY FOR THEMSELVES AND MONEY FOR THE SYSTEM, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY, "MY WIFE, OR MY SON, OR MY DAUGHTER, OR I HAVE A HEALTH CARE MENTAL PROBLEM. AND IF I DON'T DEAL WITH THAT MENTAL PROBLEM OTHER THINGS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN THAT ARE BAD. AND SO YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT PEOPLE WILL LOOK FOR POLICIES THAT HAVE CATASTROPHIC ISSUES, BUT WHERE PEOPLE DEAL WITH THOSE MENTAL PROBLEMS IN A WAY THAT OPTIMIZES THE RESOURCES OF THE SYSTEM AND GIVES THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHOOSE OVER A SYSTEM WHERE WE DON'T FOCUS ON THAT QUITE AS MUCH AS WE MIGHT. THANK YOU.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE. AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS. THIS HAS BEEN A NATIONAL DISCUSSION AS WELL AS A STATE DISCUSSION FOR YEARS. AND WHAT YOU END UP WITH, AS I ALLUDED TO EARLIER, WITH MANDATES, IS YOU HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL, A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY OUR CURRENT SYSTEM, AND SO THE IDEA IS WITH THIS MANDATE IT'S GOING TO SPREAD THE COSTS OVER. AND WHAT WE FOUND, HERE IN THE STATE OF UTAH WE DID A MEMORIAL HEALTH PARITY BILL, AND VERY CLEARLY I VOTED AGAINST THAT. AND IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE. I HAVE A SISTER WHO'S HAD, HER OLDEST SON HAS HAD SOME EXTREMELY DIFFICULT PROBLEMS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS. IT'S TOUGH. THERE'S NO EASY ANSWER. BUT I KNOW JUST IN GENERAL, REVIEWING THE SYSTEM, WHEN WE PASSED THE MENTAL HEALTH PARITY HERE IN THE STATE OF UTAH, OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS WE SAW MANY THOUSANDS OF INDIVIDUALS THAT ENDED UP IN THE UNINSURED ROLLS. WE SAW THAT THERE ARE MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD TO REDUCE THEIR COVERAGE. IT'S THE CLASSIC ARGUMENT, YOU SPREAD THE COST AMONGST EVERYBODY, BUT THERE ARE MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO CANNOT AFFORD IT. WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO FIND IS IF THERE ARE WAYS THAT WE COULD, DIFFERENT WAYS OF HANDLING THE CATASTROPHIC HEALTH CARE ISSUE. AND YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THE STATE FACILITIES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED. IT'S A TOUGH ISSUE, BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH PARITY.

KEN: LET'S GO BACK. I DON'T, AGAIN, I THINK YOU BOTH MADE VERY CLEAR STATEMENTS. WE HAVE A NEW ISSUE THAT HAS NOT BEEN PRESENTED IN ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS DEBATES, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A GOOD ONE. REPRESENTATIVE, MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU'LL BE SPEAKING FIRST.

>> OKAY. THE FOUNDING FATHERS WARNED US OF ENTERING INTO TREATIES WITH FOREIGN NATIONS AND GIVING UP OUR NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. I WONDER, DO YOU SEE THE FTAA, THE NEW PUSH THEY'RE WORKING ON NOW, AS A WAY THAT'S GOING TO TEAR DOWN OUR BORDERS FURTHER, OR WOULD YOU SUPPORT THAT?

KEN: FTAA, JUST FOR MY BENEFIT, NOT FOR THEIRS, BECAUSE I'M SURE THEY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE. BUT WHAT IS THE FTAA?

>> THE FREE TRADE OF THE AMERICAN ALLIANCE, IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN EXPANSION OF NAFTA.

KEN: MR. THROCKMORTON, YOU HAVE THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY.

MR. THROCKMORTON: FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE TWO ISSUES I HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. THE FIRST ONE IS THE BORDER ISSUE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IMMIGRATION. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IMMIGRATION AND THE AMNESTY AND THE WHOLE IDEA ESSENTIALLY, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME HERE SO LONG AS YOU HAVE A JOB OFFER, VERY, VERY LIBERAL POLICIES, YOU KNOW, WE GET INTO ALL KINDS OF SCARY POLITICS. BUT WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IS THE ULTIMATE IDEALS OF FREE TRADE, A FREE EXCHANGE LABOR, OF PRODUCTION, OF ALL THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS. LABOR, OF COURSE, BEING WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE. I DO NOT SUPPORT OPEN BORDERS. AND OF COURSE, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FREE EXCHANGE OF LABOR, THAT'S WHERE THE DISCUSSION LENDS TO. AND OF COURSE EVERY ECONOMIST OUT THERE, CERTAINLY THOSE WHO FOLLOW INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMICS, WILL TELL YOU THAT VERY THING. AS FAR AS THE CONCERNS OVER SOVEREIGNTY, YOU KNOW, ECONOMICS AS A TOOL OF FOREIGN POLICY CANNOT BE
OVERSTATED. WHEN WE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ANOTHER COUNTRY, WE CAN TALK TO THEM, WE CAN DO INDIRECT NEGOTIATIONS, TALK TO A NATION WE HAVE MUTUAL RESPECTED NATION. WE CAN GO THOSE DIFFERENT ROUTES. WE CAN PUT THE NAVY OFF OF THEIR COAST. BUT AT SOME POINT WE ALWAYS BEGIN THE ECONOMIC DISCUSSION, THE ABILITY TO SAY, "WELL, IF YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO PUSH THAT THEN WE'RE GOING TO LIMIT TRADE, OR MAYBE STOP OIL," OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. AND OF COURSE THE ULTIMATE, IF NONE OF THAT WORKS, IS WE USE THE MILITARY. AND WHEN WE GO TO THOSE TYPES OF ARRANGEMENTS, I'VE READ A GREAT DEAL OF THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION, AND GAT, AND OF COURSE THE FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS PIGGY-BACKS ON THAT, VERY LIMITED IN THE ABILITY OF A NATION TO MAKE ITS OWN DECISIONS WHEN IT COMES TO ITS OWN NATIONAL SECURITY. SO ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE TYPES OF DECISIONS IN OUR BEST INTERESTS, I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT.

KEN: REPRESENTATIVE CANNON.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU. YOU KNOW, THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE REALLY VERY, VERY WISE. AND THEY SET UP THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE SENATE WITH BALANCING POWERS. THE SENATE WAS ORIGINALLY ELECTED BY THE STATE LEGISLATURES, AND WAS THEREFORE RESPONSIBLE TO THE STATES, AND, IN FACT, THEY'RE THE GROUP THAT RATIFIES TREATIES. AND THAT BEING, THE OTHER 50 STATES, THE 50 UNITED STATES MEANS WE HAVE 50 SOVEREIGN POWERS, AND THAT WE EXPECTED SENATORS FROM EACH OF THOSE STATES TO ACT, WHEN THEY DEALT WITH TREATIES- - A
TREATY MEANS YOU SUBORDINATE AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY TO SOME AGREEMENT. AND SO EXPECTED THOSE SENATORS TO HAVE AS THEIR PRIMARY GOAL THE PROTECTION OF AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY. NOW, YOU, I THINK THE 17TH AMENDMENT, WHERE WE GOT DIRECT ELECTION OF SENATORS HAS SORT OF MITIGATED THE INTENSITY OF THEIR FEELINGS ABOUT PROTECTING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATES. BUT THE FREE TRADE OF THE AMERICAS IS A TREATY THAT THE PRESIDENT WILL NEGOTIATE, THE SENATE WILL RATIFY, IF THEY DO--THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY IS NEGOTIATING RIGHT NOW--AND THE HOUSE WILL VOTE ON ISSUES THAT RELATE TO IMPLEMENTING LAW. AND I AM CLEARLY FOR EXPANDING FREE TRADE. I'M ALSO CLEARLY FOR PROTECTING AMERICA'S INTERESTS, AND AMERICA'S SOVEREIGNTY, AND NOT GIVING UP SOVEREIGNTY IN WAYS THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE. NOW, THERE ARE ISSUES BEING DISCUSSED IN THE FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS, DISCUSSIONS THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT AND WATCH CAREFULLY AND SEE HOW THEY COME OUT, AND WE HOPE THE SENATE WILL DO ITS APPROPRIATE ROLE IN CURTAILING ANY KIND OF IMPROPER FORFEITING OF AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY.

KEN: WE HAVE COME TO THE POINT IN THE PROGRAM WHERE WE MUST TURN OUR ATTENTIONS NOW TO CLOSING STATEMENTS. AND JUST AS A MATTER OF TIMING, WE WILL EXTEND A ONE MINUTE AND 30-SECOND OPPORTUNITY FOR A CLOSING STATEMENT TO EACH ONE OF OUR CANDIDATES, AND THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT 90-SECOND STATEMENT GOES TO MAT THROCKMORTON.

MR. THROCKMORTON: THANK YOU. THIS HAS BEEN GREAT. I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU HERE IN THE AUDIENCE, AS WELL AS THE VIEWERS AT HOME CAN REALLY UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CANDIDATES, HERE. VERY CLEAR DIFFERENCE. WHEN IT COMES TO IMMIGRATION, I SUPPORT LEGAL IMMIGRATION PASSIONATELY. THE PROBLEM WITH AMNESTY, I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE LONG-TERM PROBLEMS. AND WE'VE TALKED ABOUT A GREAT DEAL OF IMMIGRATION, BUT I'LL TELL YOU PERSONALLY, THE MOST PASSIONATE ISSUE FOR ME IS NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND. WHEN WE TURN OVER CONTROL OF EDUCATION TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, INCREASINGLY SO, YEAR AFTER YEAR, WE ARE LOSING CONTROL OF OUR CLASS ROOMS. WE ARE LOSING CONTROL OF THE ABILITY FOR A PARENT TO GO INTO A CLASS ROOM, WORK WITH A TEACHER, COME UP WITH A DECISION THAT WORKS FOR THAT CHILD. YOU KNOW, WHEN WASHINGTON PASSED NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND TWO YEARS AGO THEY WERE VERY HAPPY WITH THEMSELVES. NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND DEALS WITH TESTING AND IT DEALS WITH TEACHER QUALIFICATION. BUT WHAT THEY BEGIN TO TALK ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO HAVE NATIONAL STANDARDS FOR CURRICULUM, FOR TEXT BOOKS, FOR TEACHING METHODS. EVERY CRITICAL DECISION THAT COULD BE MADE IN EDUCATION WILL BE MADE BY STANDARDS IN WASHINGTON. IT IS THE WRONG DIRECTION. NATIONAL DEBT ISSUES, WE UNDERSTAND NATIONAL DEBT. WE HAVE DEBT THAT WE PERSONALLY, THAT WE CANNOT TAKE CARE OF. WE CAN'T ALL GO OUT AND BUY A $100,000 SPORTS CAR. WE HAVE TO LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS. AND RIGHT NOW OUR DEBT ISSUE IS EXCESSIVE. WE NEED TO CONTROL SPENDING WITHOUT A DOUBT. THERE ARE MANY ISSUES THAT ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO UTAH, AND THE REASON THAT I'M RUNNING IS, AS A STATE LEGISLATOR I'VE SEEN THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND I'VE SEEN THAT WE NEED REPRESENTATION THAT CAN AGGRESSIVELY REPRESENT THE BEST INTERESTS OF THIS STATE. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOUR SUPPORT ON TUESDAY AT THE PRIMARIES. THANK YOU.

KEN: AND NOW OUR FINAL 90-SECOND OPPORTUNITY, REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS CANNON.

MR. CANNON: THANK YOU, KEN. I WANT TO THANK THE AUDIENCE FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT. THIS ACTUALLY HAS BEEN A GREAT DEBATE, BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN SOME VERY CLEAR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN US. I THINK YOU'LL FIND, AS WE LOOK AT THE DEBATE ON IMMIGRATION, THAT THERE ARE REALLY NOT MANY CHOICES, AND THAT THE QUESTION GOES TO MANY, MANY DETAILS, BUT NOT TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE GOING TO DO THE PROCESS IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. DESPITE APPARENT DIFFERENCES, I DON'T BELIEVE IN AMNESTY, AND WE'RE GOING TO GET THE RIGHT THING DONE ON IMMIGRATION. ON THE OTHER HAND, I'M GOING TO VOTE, AND WILL CONSISTENTLY VOTE FOR REAL AND REASONABLE DEBT LIMITATION AND HANDLING IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS AMERICA TO OPERATE, AND SO THE FOREIGN POWERS AND AMERICANS WHO INVEST IN GOVERNMENT BONDS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH CLARITY AND REASON. BUT THE REALLY COOL THING ABOUT WHERE WE ARE IN THIS ELECTION IS WHERE WE GO FROM HERE. AND HOPEFULLY SOME OF YOUR 18 TO 24 YEAR OLD GROUP WILL GET OUT AND REALIZE THAT WE ARE MAKING DECISIONS IN WASHINGTON TODAY THAT ARE REALLY, REALLY IMPORTANT. AND THEY'RE GOING TO RESULT IN A DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT FUTURE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. WHETHER OR NOT WE CONSOLIDATE OUR SCHOOL TRUST LANDS WILL MAKE BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS' WORTH OF DIFFERENCE TO OUR SCHOOL KIDS IN UTAH. WHETHER OR NOT WE DO VOIP OVER THE INTERNET WITHOUT REGULATION, WITHOUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GETTING ITS CLAWS INTO THAT ISSUE, IS GOING TO MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE AS TO HOW YOU GUYS PAY YOUR TELEPHONE BILLS IN THE FUTURE, AND ALSO HOW PEOPLE IN HAITI PAY THEIR TELEPHONE BILLS, AND IN BANGLADESH AND OTHER PARTS OF THE WORDS WORLD. WHAT WE DO TODAY IS GOING TO AFFECT HOW PEOPLE IN GUATEMALA SELL THEIR GOODS, ON THE INTERNET OR INDIA, OR ANY OTHER PART OF THE WORLD. THIS IS A WONDERFUL TIME TO LIVE. I WANT TO GO BACK TO WASHINGTON, D.C. AND CONTINUE TO DO THE THINGS THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT WILL MAKE AMERICA AND THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE.

KEN: THIS RACE WILL BE DECIDED ON JUNE 22ND, IN THE PRIMARY ELECTION IN UTAH. GOOD LUCK IN THAT VOTING PROCESS. I'M KEN VERDOIA, IN SALT LAKE CITY, GOOD NIGHT.