Davis, Lungren Take Gloves Off in 2nd Debate

FRESNO —  Gubernatorial candidates Gray Davis and Dan Lungren resumed their summer sparring Tuesday night with a temper-flaring, finger-pointing debate that featured their harshest exchanges ever on the touchy issues of abortion and the death penalty.

The 55-minute session in the speech arts theater at Fresno State University broke little new substantive ground. But stylistically, the debate showed a more free-wheeling, aggressive side to both candidates, particularly Atty. Gen. Lungren, who displayed occasional flashes of anger as he repeatedly tried to quiet Lt. Gov. Davis.

Hurling charges of deception and distortion, Republican Lungren and Democrat Davis each sought to persuade listeners in the audience and the television viewers throughout the state that his opponent was trying to portray himself as something he was not.

Lungren accused Davis of casting “fig leaf” votes in favor of the death penalty to bolster his credentials as a centrist Democrat. “You can talk,” Lungren said at one point, “but the question is will you perform.”

For his part, Davis charged that Lungren was “out of step and out of sync and determined to take our state backward.”

Aside from tossing out personal attacks, the candidates used the session, the first ever held in the heart of the agricultural Central Valley, to vie for the title of most farm-friendly. Both repeatedly extolled the importance of the region and its leading industry, pledging to pay more attention as governor to a part of the state that has long felt neglected in favor of California’s richer, more populous urban areas.

Politically, the region could prove to be a decisive battleground in the race for governor because it is rich with independent-minded voters coveted by both sides.

The session, hosted by Fresno State, was the second debate between Davis and Lungren since they won their respective party nominations in June. It was a far more raucous debate than their first meeting. Three more face-to-face confrontations are planned between Labor Day and the Nov. 3 election; the next one is Sept. 23 in Sacramento.

From his rat-a-tat opening statement on, Davis turned in a far more aggressive performance than he did 2 1/2 weeks ago, when he appeared diffident and occasionally defensive at the first debate in San Diego.

“I am pro-choice, he is not,” Davis said. “Who can [Californians] trust to make sure that there’s no additional offshore oil drilling? I will support a ban. He will not. Who can they trust to make sure that the ban on assault weapons is enforced. I will enforce it. He will not.”

Like a TV show in summer reruns, Tuesday’s matchup included a reprise of scenes from the candidates’ first debate, covering familiar ground on issues such as education, the pair’s respective accomplishments and, most notably, abortion and the death penalty.

As promised, Davis responded to an attack that left him flat-footed at the first debate. At that time, Lungren questioned Davis’ assertion that he has “always” favored capital punishment, citing a pair of procedural votes Davis cast against the death penalty more than a decade ago while in the Assembly.

Nonplused, Davis promised a response in Fresno, which he delivered Tuesday night in what were virtually his first remarks of the night. He accused Lungren of purposely distorting his record by seizing on the obscure votes to misrepresent it. “Trust starts with truth,” Davis said. “You owe the citizens of this state an apology.”

Lungren reprised his assertion that he was a doer, not a talker. For all Davis’ statements of support for capital punishment, Lungren said as the state’s chief law officer, “I defend the death penalty. You fooled around with the death penalty. You made fun of the death penalty.”

Davis retorted: “The bottom line is you’re for the death penalty and I’m for the death penalty and you have tried to deceive people . . . into letting them think I’m someplace where I’m not.”

The candidates also clashed briefly over education, with Lungren restating his support for vouchers, which would give parents the ability to use tax dollars to send their children to private schools.

But Davis replied: “I am fundamentally against vouchers because I would never abandon public education. Vouchers are an easy answer to a tough question.”

The two also differed somewhat on sex education, with Lungren calling for a greater emphasis on abstinence as a part of the curriculum.

But probably the most heated exchange involved the candidates’ differences over abortion. Just as they had in the first debate, the two men had a chance to directly question one another, producing rare moments of spontaneity and genuine displays of emotion.

More accusatory than inquisitory, Davis asked Lungren to square his statement that he considers abortion permissible in instances of rape or incest with his record in Congress opposing such exceptions. “You don’t trust women to control their own bodies,” Davis charged.

Lungren replied that he believes “every abortion is a tragedy” and hoped to move public sentiment in that direction. At the same time, he insisted, his congressional votes against rape and incest exceptions were forced by procedural rules that prohibited amendments and required a straight up or down vote.

Besides, he added, “I voted with Al Gore 13 out of 13 times” and current Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) 19 out of 23 times on abortion legislation when all three served together in the House of Representatives. “Have you ever asked them the question?” Lungren demanded.

Playing to local sentiments, the candidates also sought to demonstrate their empathy by repeatedly pledging their support for development of a University of California campus in Merced and finding a way to end decades of debate by securing a safe and reliable supply of water. However, they offered few specifics on the sensitive matter.

Lungren, playing to perhaps the biggest local bugaboo, pledged a land-use policy that would stem the paving over of the valley’s threatened farmland. “I don’t want to see the Los Angelization of the Central Valley,” he said.

On perhaps the most topical matter of the day, the two candidates disagreed at separate post-debate news conferences on the character of President Clinton and the seriousness of his confession involving the Monica S. Lewinsky matter.

Asked by reporters about the president’s mea culpa Monday night, Lungren replied, “Maybe the higher up you get in the chain the less responsible you are,” implying that Clinton was wrong to suggest that the matter was strictly a private subject.

While serving in Congress, Lungren said, he twice voted to “censure colleagues for inappropriate sexual conduct with young people.”

Davis, who campaigned last week alongside Clinton, said he stood by the president and would “be pleased to have him come out any time he wants.”

“I accept his apology and I think most Americans think it’s time to move on,” Davis told reporters. Asked whether he trusts the president, the Democrat replied, “I trust the president to do a good job for California.”

Profiles of Gray Davis and Dan Lungren, their positions on key issues and other reports on the governor’s race are on The Times’ Web site. Go to: https://www.latimes.com/elect98

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

FACING OFF

In the second of five scheduled debates, this one in Fresno, gubernatorial candidates Dan Lungren and Gray Davis discussed education reform, the Central Valley’s future and the death penalty, among other issues. Some highlights:

ON EDUCATION REFORM

Dan Lungren: I do support fundamental change in the entire educational system. My support for vouchers is only one part of that. I have stood for curriculum reform, for statewide standards that are strongly maintained by virtue of testing, and testing results that are allowed to be used to make judgements as to the results of not only a student, not only a teacher, not only a class, but also a principal in a school district.

Gray Davis: I view a failing school like a natural disaster that requires immediate and urgent action and I will reconstitute the school board, I’ll ask the local mayor or the local board of supervisors if they want to be on the board, I’ll look at local state colleges like Fresno state or local UC campuses or local community colleges to see if they want to be a part of helping bring up the quality and skills of individual education.

****

ON THE CENTRAL VALLEY

Dan Lungren: “I don’t want to see the Los Angelization of the Central Valley, a ribbon of concrete from the ocean to the mountains, from Bakersfield to Sacramento.”

Gray Davis: “There is a perception in the valley that they are shortchanged. Under a Gray Davis administration, the valley would be treated as a full partner on all decisions, whether it’s education, the environment, land use, the economy.”

****

ON THE DEATH PENALTY

Dan Lungren: I’ve spent a good portion of my life on the death penalty. I’ve argued a case in the United States Supreme Court on the death penalty. I brought the death penalty to the House of Representatives for the first time. I defend the death penalty. You fooled around with the death penalty. You made fun of the death penalty. You played games with the death penalty.

Gray Davis: The point is . . . I voted for a capital punishment bill that added special circumstances for the killing of any peace officer. The bottom line is you’re for the death penalty and I’m for the death penalty and you have tried to deceive people on procedural votes into letting them think I’m someplace where I’m not. And I think we ought to get on with other issues.

****

CLOSING STATEMENTS

Dan Lungren: If you believe as I do that values count, that being a person of your word counts, that actions count, not just words, then I hope you’ll join in my crusade to bring a better future to the state of California. We can do this together.

Gray Davis: Your positions are radical. They make even Newt Gingrich look moderate . . . I think it’s pretty clear that your philosophy is to lead us backwards. But the people of this state want someone to take us forward.