Sen. Jonathan Paton is trying to bring a British practice known as “question time” to the Arizona Capitol to help break down the barrier between government leaders and the public and allow voters to have an inside look at what state politicians are doing.

The Tucson Republican has sponsored a measure that would require the governor to spend 30 to 60 minutes every two weeks under interrogation by the Legislature. Lawmakers would ask questions, the governor would respond, and the public would be able to watch it all go down.

“I think the public doesn’t get the chance to see their government in action enough,” said Paton, who is running for Congress. “I think this is our problem, not their problem. I think the system is sort of isolated from the way it should be.”

Question time is a revered tradition in the United Kingdom in which the prime minister goes before Parliament each week to answer members’ questions. It also might be catching on at the national level in the U.S. after President Obama participated in a question-and-answer session with congressional Republicans last month.

Some state lawmakers, however, said they were concerned that question time at the Arizona Capitol would devolve into a “blood sport” in which lawmakers would batter and abuse the governor. Others said there’s no reason to flush the governor into the open.

“I think it would be highly politically charged, and it has the potential to just degenerate into … it may just turn into partisan bludgeoning on a public stage every two weeks that’s now mandatory,” said Rep. Matt Heinz, a Democrat from Tucson. “And it could, I think, greatly distract and detract from the work of the executive, to be honest – and from the work of the Legislature.”

Rep. Phil Lopes, a Tucson Democrat, said the governor’s question time would be nothing more than a public spectacle.

“It’s got great entertainment value, but it doesn’t have any policy value I can see,” Lopes said.
Paton said governors in every state have a tendency to shield themselves from the public, and question time would make that harder.

He said he had former Gov. Janet Napolitano in mind when he wrote SCR1012.

Napolitano, a Democrat, often kept quiet about bills until they reached her desk, a practice that irritated Republican lawmakers who had spent months drumming up enough support to pass measures that were later vetoed.

Like the Napolitano administration, Gov. Jan Brewer’s spokesman, Paul Senseman, refused to say whether Brewer would support the measure. He cracked a joke instead, which seems to imply the governor dislikes the idea.

“Wouldn’t lawmakers be required to wear a powdered wig and buckles on their shoes?” he asked.
For much of Brewer’s first year in office, lawmakers said there were communication problems with the Ninth Floor. Lawmakers now say communication has improved after staff changes in the Governor’s Office.

Brewer’s communication with the public is a different story. When Brewer took office, she ended the weekly media briefings that were part of Napolitano’s routine. As a result, Brewer has a lower public profile than some of her predecessors.

In a September Cronkite/Eight poll, more than one in four of the people surveyed said they didn’t know enough about Brewer to have an opinion on her job performance, which pollsters said was unusually high for a governor who had been in office for eight months.

Sen. Russell Pearce, a Mesa Republican, said good communication is not something that should be passed into law or written into the state Constitution.

“I’m not sure what value it has,” Pearce said. “I think (meetings) have to be mutually agreed upon to be productive.”

Paton’s measure has some supporters. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Gray, a Republican from Mesa, said lawmakers should consider ways to increase public interaction in politics. But he said question time would have to be set up so that it doesn’t turn into a spectacle or merely a grandstanding opportunity.

“We’ll, I’m assuming, get some testimony as to whether or not it’s devolved into a spectacle in England, or if it’s kind of a blood sport, because I’ve seen some of those and they’re pretty animated,”
Gray said.

At least one former governor supports the idea. Fife Symington, who was governor from 1991 until 1997, said question time might generate more interest among voters in government and policy.

There would have to be safeguards, Symington said, to ensure that the sessions don’t get abusive.
“I like the idea very much,” he said. “I think it’s a very important aspect of governing that you answer to the people … and are able to articulate your positions clearly.”

Paton’s resolution, SCR1012, is scheduled to be heard in the Judiciary Committee on Feb. 22. The measure requires approval by the Legislature and voters because it would change the state Constitution.

While more government openness might seem like an easy pitch to the public, pollster Earl de Berge said voters might simply see question time as a chance for more partisan bickering.

“It certainly has inherent in it the opportunity to beat up on whoever’s governor all the time. I don’t know that Arizonans are particularly excited about that since it seems like it’s a catfight to begin with,” said de Berge, of the firm Behavior Research Center. “It feels good, but does it do any good?”