House Dist. 30 Debate Highlights Contrasts Among Candidates
Moderated by ABC 6 newsman Mark Curtis, the debate centered on solving the state’s economic woes.
Photos
The three candidates vying to be the next state representative for District 30 met in debate Wednesday night at the Varnum Armory, moderated by ABC 6 newsman (and East Greenwich resident) Mark Curtis.
Independent candidate Kevin McDonough emphasized his 30 years of business experience and his lack of party ties, while Republican Anthony Giarrusso spoke of the need for more jobs the state and few Democrats in the General Assembly, and Democrat Mark Schwager highlighted his years of town government experience and command of the issues.
While the debate, sponsored by the Republican and Democratic town committees and East Greenwich Patch, was a largely friendly affair, there were moments of stark contrast between candidates.
In one instance, both Schwager and McDonough said they would support legislation legalizing gay marriage if elected, while Giarrusso said he would not.
Giarrusso said marriage was a sacrament and allowing same sex couples to marry would degrade “traditional” marriage. He also said he thought it should not be left up to the General Assembly but should be put to the voters as a referendum.
McDonough challenged Giarrusso on that point, saying if we had put abolition of slavery to a vote, it would not have passed. He also said allowing same sex marriage “does nothing against my marriage.”
When asked how they were planning to vote on ballot questions 1 and 2 (allowing table games at Twin River and Newport Grand), again Giarrusso was the odd man out, arguing that casino gambling should be restricted to resort destinations like Las Vegas and the Bahamas so that those gambling are not “using their milk money.”
Schwager pointed out that since gambling is the state’s third largest source of revenue – $350 million, behind income tax and sales tax – competition from new casinos in Massachusetts could prompt a budget crisis.
He asked Giarrusso how he would make up for lost gambling revenues. Giarrusso said he would do it by increasing jobs in the state.
On the question of sponsoring legislation to merge the Fire District with the Town, the three candidates said they would sponsor the enabling legislation if that was the will of the voters.
All three candidates agreed legislative grants – whereby individual legislators are able to give away thousands of dollars to local nonprofit ventures – should be abolished, with Schwager saying such requests would then have to go through the regular budgeting process. [Ed. Note: This paragraph was edited at 10 a.m.]
Referring to the 38 Studios deal that may end up costing taxpayers more than $100 million – and noting that then-Rep. Bob Watson cast the lone “no” vote against the deal – Curtis asked if the candidates were capable of taking similarly uncompromising stands.
“I vote on principle,” said McDonough, pointing out that as an independent he would not be subject to party politics.
Giarrusso said he would never vote yes on something he didn’t think was right.
Alluding to his practice as a doctor, Schwager said he would serve his constituents like he treats his patients, noting that when treating patients he doesn’t answer to the American Medical Association.
Curtis used a combination of questions submitted in the days before the debate to East Greenwich Patch and his own questions. We will be posting video from the debate early next week.
Kevin McDonough
7:10 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
Because the issue of "gay marriage/same sex marriage" or as I refer to it, gender neutral marriage, is so emotional and personal, I wanted to reiterate the position I conveyed at the debate. Unlike my Republican opponent described government licensed marriage as a sacrament, in the realm of religion I too believe in the sacramental aspect of marriage but that is limited to religious rites and should not be confused with the government's involvement with marriage.
I believe the government should not be in the marriage licensing business at all. A better approach would be for the state to license civil unions without discrimination for all couples who desire to join legally and financially as one couple and leave the marriage ceremony to the private beliefs of the couple within the faith they choose or don't choose. Religions should be able to define marriage as their faith decides. Until such changes in the law regarding licensing are made I oppose any discrimination by the government and support the licensing of all couples requesting such license without regard to their gender.
Kevin McDonough
7:19 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
I was happy to hear our Republican Senator Dawson Hodgson in the earlier debate state the exact same position that I have on this topic. With our state in the fiscal crisis we are in, I have faith in the voters of East and West Greenwich to focus on the need to elect a prudent fiscal champion to the State House to represent the interests of hard working families. Born and raised in East Greenwich, having worked in the private sector for 30 years and being an advocate for protecting our natural environment by serving on the board of the Rhode Island Land Trust Council and the Rocky Point Foundation, I respectfully submit that I am the best choice to elect as your next State Representative in District 30.
Kevin McDonough
7:43 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
On the topic of Ballot Questions 1 & 2, my response was that unfortunately "the horse is out of the barn" on this subject, our state is already dependent on gambling revenue as the third largest source of income to our state. It is easy for my Republican opponent to simply say "I don't support it and we need to create more jobs" but simple answers will not deal with the realities of our complex fiscal crisis. Massachusetts is expanding casino gambling on our borders and until we have found the funding source to replace the income from Big River and Newport Grand, we need to remain competitive in this market.
East Greenwich GOP
8:12 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
When is an independent not an independent? When he was a registered Democrat for most of his voting history - and can't find any difference between himself and the Democrat in the race. If the debate revealed one thing, it was that Giarrusso told us where he stands, while the rest mostly obfuscated (Obfuscate: To be evasive, unclear, or confusing...)
EGkid
9:27 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
Thank you Anthony for being clear on where you stand on issues. I do believe that you will not compromise your values and vote on something you do not believe in. We need more like you running. I also believe that you will be successful in getting more jobs in the state if elected. You are not afraid to say what needs to be said to get the job done. Also, knowing what a family man you are, you know how important it is for all of us to keep our families together. We need jobs HERE to be able to do that. Families can't stay if they can't find work and/or can't afford to live here. We need NEW government because the current leaders haven't gotten the job done.
Kevin McDonough
11:35 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
There was a time not too long ago when "mixed marriages" were scandalous and by "mixed" people meant an Italian marrying a Swede or the Irish marrying the French. Thank goodness we live in better times. Thank goodness we have courageous Republicans like Dawson Hodgson, Democrats like Mark Schwager and Independents like myself and Independents who want to end bigotry on all levels.
Chuck Newton
11:44 am on Friday, October 26, 2012
Kevin, enough with the bigotry stuff. I happen to agree with Dawson's position on mixed marriage, but I also recognize that many - reasonable, intelligent people of good will - view marriage differently. Just because someone does not agree with you does not allow you to engage in pernicious labeling and name-calling.
All that being said, it is a good thing that for other candidates, this election is not hinging on same-sex marriage. It is a distraction against the tapestry of a crumbling Rhode Island.
Greenwp
12:56 am on Saturday, October 27, 2012
A prolonged debate on so called "important" issues like same-sex marriage does NOTHING to solve what R.I. really needs: A strong economy and Jobs, Jobs, Jobs. Mr. Giarrusso is right, let these questions be put to the voters and let the legislature work on fixing the economy #1.
Kevin McDonough
6:13 am on Saturday, October 27, 2012
As was said in the 1992 Presidential election and it holds true for this election, "it's the economy, stupid!" With Rhode Island ranked last for business climate, having the nation's second highest unemployment rate and the nation's 6th highest tax burden, the need for ABettterRhodeIsland is clear. I have offered specific approaches of what we need to accomplish to improve RI's economy: Reduce state spending by: 1. shrinking the budget of the Judiciary Branch which has grown 45% in ten years from a budget of $72 million in 2003 to over $105 million in 2013 budget. 2. Reign in the combined $577 million budgets of the quasi-governmental agencies. 3. Continue pension reform efforts migrating away from defined-benefit pension plans. In addition to cost reductions we need to implement tax reform to allow taxpayers to claim their property tax payments & sales tax on auto purchases on their state income taxes. These are just a few of the substantive ideas that I, Kevin McDonough, have offered to the dialog during this election campaign.
pam
12:03 pm on Saturday, October 27, 2012
I have found that the people who are first to point the finger at other's for bigotry are very often trying to mask their own bigotry.