‘We are not there to pander to illegal aliens; we’re not here to pander to a radical, leftist agenda. That is the job of our governor.’ — Sen. Jack Harper

In a debate that prompted a Clean Elections memo about audience control, Sen. Jack Harper, R-4 and his Democrat opponent traded partisan barbs Sept. 19 that brought jeers and applause from a divided crowd.
Trying several times to speak over loud laughing and hoots from detractors, Mr. Harper first tried to turn the tables on Democrats, whose mantra against the GOP this year has been that it’s a party of corruption.
“Corruption is not common in our party,” said Mr. Harper, and a section of the audience laughed heartily. “The Democrats, on the other hand, are unapologetic and are running for re-election — the same ones that were involved in corruption.”
His opponent, Dr. Ed Gogek, a psychiatrist, countered with a charge that Republicans are controlling the Legislature under a narrowly conservative ideology.
“My opponent caters to the extreme right wing,” Mr. Gogek said. “The biggest issue is the incumbent himself. He is not able to get his legislation passed,” adding that Senate Republicans have “made fun” of the Mr. Harper, who often is outspoken in his caucus and on the Senate floor.
Mr. Harper next attacked Governor Napolitano and what he called her “illegal alien friends.”
“Every problem we have in this state can be attributed to Janet Napolitano,” he said. Audience members booed as Mr. Harper tried to continue. “Under her watch . . .under her watch, this state has risen to number one in crime in America.” Others cheered that statement.
“If Janet Napolitano’s illegal alien friends were not here, we would do very well on per capita spending,” he said. “We are not there to pander to illegal aliens; we’re not here to pander to a radical, leftist agenda. That is the job of our governor…”
Mr. Gogek said you could put all the “radical socialists in Arizona in a broom closet.”
Mr. Gogek, whose medical specialty is treatment of addictions, said that while illegal immigration must be dealt with, drug addiction, especially to methamphetamines, is the source of 40 percent of crimes in Arizona. He noted that Mr. Harper voted against a bill to more severely restrict the purchase of pseudoephedrine used to manufacture crystal meth.
The Democrat called for mandatory treatment of drug addicts who commit crimes.
Mr. Gogek said Republicans are responsible for Arizona being ranked 49th in the country for quality education, “terrible traffic problems,” and they refused to sanction employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. He also said the state budget was balanced through Ms. Napolitano’s efforts.
“Maybe the Republicans need a straight jacket to restrain themselves because the Democrats know how to balance the budget,” Mr. Gogek said.
In a closing statement, Mr. Harper, who is seeking his third Senate term, said Republicans have undergone a metamorphosis.
“The Arizona legislators in the Arizona Legislature have remade themselves,” he said. “We are looking out for the middle-class families.”
Mr. Gogek countered that Mr. Harper, who is a full-time legislator, wants to see his salary raised to $36,000 from $24,000, but is against raising the minimum wage. He provided a bit of humor in describing his qualifications as a Senate candidate
“I spend my time with meth addicts and junkies, people who will call you every name in the book to get what they want, which I figure is pretty good preparation for running for office,” he said.
The debate’s moderator was Jim Fausel, whose non-partisan company is called the Conference Connection. The day after the debate, Michael Becker, voter education manager with Citizens Clean Elections Commission, released a memo to debate sponsors about maintaining audience decorum for general election debates.
“Please remind all of your moderators to control the crowd to the best of their ability,” he said. “Do not allow the audience to overshadow the candidates. Remind everyone to be respectful before the debate.
“If the audience continues to be disruptive I would ask that you stop the debate and ask for their cooperation. If people continue to disrupt the debate, you may ask them to leave the event.”