BY HOWARD WILKINSON
The Cincinnati Enquirer
The two candidates in Ohio's 1st District congressional race shot polite but pointed arrows across the wide philosophical gap that separates them in a broadcast debate Thursday night.
Before an audience of about 50 at the studios of WVXU-FM (91.7), Republican incumbent Steve Chabot and Democratic challenger Roxanne Qualls hit each other on a wide range of subjects, from taxes to the environment to the definition of pork.
By the time it was over, no one who tuned into the live radio broadcast could doubt that 1st District voters have a clear choice to make 11 days from now.
Mr. Chabot, the 45-year-old Westwood Republican seeking his third term in Congress, used much of his opening statement to defend some of his recent House votes, including his vote Tuesday against a $520 billion federal budget agreement. It's a vote the Qualls campaign already has hit on with TV ads, saying Mr. Chabot was "shortsighted" and against the interests of the district.
"That was a spending bill that looted another $20 billion from the budget surplus," said Mr. Chabot, who bucked his party's leadership in opposing a budget bill GOP leaders had worked out with the Clinton administration.
Ms. Qualls, saying she respected Mr. Chabot's dedication to public service, declared the vote was a mistake because there was much in it -- particularly in education -- that would benefit Cincinnati.
"That was a time to make a commitment to our community, to say yes to the hiring of 100,000 new teachers, yes to environmental protection to clean our air and water," said Ms. Qualls, the three-term mayor of Cincinnati. "This week, Mr. Chabot engaged in the politics of "no.' "
Mr. Chabot said that while he supports the education aspects of the bill, he opposed it because it used $20 billion of the projected federal budget surplus and "gave nothing back to the taxpayers in terms of tax cuts."
He said he also objected to spending on "wasteful pork," including billions in military spending that would go into the Georgia district of House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
"There were things in this bill that made no sense whatsoever -- money for grasshopper research in Alaska, peanut research in Georgia," Mr. Chabot said.
Mr. Chabot defended his earlier vote for a House GOP plan that would have used about $80 billion of the projected federal budget surplus over the next five years for a series of tax cuts, while setting aside $1.4 trillion for Social Security.
Ms. Qualls has said the entire surplus should be used for Social Security and said the tax cut proposals, which apparently will die in the Senate, amount to "new spending."
"I don't see how you can say that is new spending," Mr. Chabot said. "What I am saying is that families should be able to keep more of what they earn, and that is not a new expense. It's their money to begin with, not Washington's."
Thursday's debate was the second in a race in which millions of dollars will be spent by the two sides, and one that has attracted national and even international attention. The 1st District, which includes most of Cincinnati and many of its western and northern suburbs, is considered almost evenly divided between Republican and Democratic voters.
The candidates have been waging a TV air war of attacks, and Thursday night's debate echoed many of the same themes that have been raised in the TV campaign and in their first debate last month in Cheviot. The two clashed again over whether federal money should be used for a study of a light-rail system for Cincinnati. It was money that was included in the federal budget. Ms. Qualls lobbied for it; Mr. Chabot opposed it.
Ms. Qualls said she thinks light rail should be "part of an overall transportation system for the region that depends primarily on buses."
Mr. Chabot said "the ultimate cost of it is going to be enormous, at least $1.25 billion. And only 10 percent of the money will come from the fare box. What we are looking at is a huge local tax increase."
In response to a question from the audience, both said they deplored the recent killing of a gay University of Wyoming student. Ms. Qualls urged passage of a federal hate-crimes law, while Mr. Chabot said he does not think it's necessary "because we already have laws on the books to punish people who commit murder."
Another audience member asked whether they support the death penalty.
Ms. Qualls said she supports it "in very specific circumstances, such as where there is a death in the commitment of another felony."
Mr. Chabot said he is a death penalty supporter and wants to see the appeals process in death penalty cases expedited, so "justice is not just delayed and delayed."
There was also a question about the impeachment inquiry of President Clinton.
Mr. Chabot, a member of the House Judiciary Committee that will take up the impeachment investigation, said he "will not rush to judgment; no one should. But neither should we let these serious matters be swept under the rug."
Ms. Qualls said the inquiry "must be objective and impartial."
