SPRINGFIELD — Missouri gubernatorial candidates offered contrasting views on state funding and ballot initiatives in a debate Friday hosted by the Missouri Press Association.
Republican Mike Kehoe, Democrat Crystal Quade, Libertarian Bill Slantz and Green Party candidate Paul Lehmann all were given an opportunity to clarify their stances on key issues including abortion, taxes, funding and ballot measures.
“Welcome to my legislative district,” Quade said regarding the debate’s location at the Fox Theatre here.
Abortion
The debate began with questions on ballot measures — the first being Amendment 3, which would reinstate abortion rights in the state.
Kehoe emphasized his personal experiences throughout the debate, beginning his discussion of Amendment 3 and abortion by noting his status as a parent and new grandparent. Kehoe has been consistently opposed to abortion except for instances of rape and incest.
Kehoe argued that the amendment goes too far because of its broad language and said he would do all he can to see that Amendment 3 is defeated. Kehoe said that he would support pregnancy resource centers and adoption if elected.
Quade took on abortion issues in her opening statement, affirming her stance that Missouri’s current ban on abortion is the most extreme of any in the country.
“There are women all across the state of Missouri right now bleeding out on their own bathroom floors because our doctors can’t do their jobs,” Quade said.
When discussing her support for Amendment 3, Quade highlighted the 380,000 signatures gathered in the petitioning process.
During questioning, Slantz said he was personally opposed to abortion, but made clear that he believes the government should stay out of decisions regarding abortion. He also noted that he believes no government money should go to abortion providers. He did not say whether he would support Amendment 3.
Lehmann strongly endorsed the measure, echoing other candidates’ stance that the government has no place in making decisions surrounding abortion.
Infrastructure, school and law enforcement
Quade emphasized the importance of funding infrastructure including law enforcement, school and roads.
“We deserve better than what we’ve been getting,” Quade said. “Missouri ranks last in public education funding. We have crumbling roads and bridges. Police shortages all across the state, and the state of Missouri can’t even pay its child care bills on time.”
Quade also emphasized a lack of health care in rural areas, pointing to the closing of 18 hospitals since 2014 across the state, according to the Missouri Hospital Association.
Kehoe and Quade did find some common ground, with both candidates seeing a need to provide support and resources for police.
Quade found multiple opportunities to express support for law enforcement, pointing to police shortages throughout the state and especially in St. Louis. She emphasized a need to fully fund police departments around the state. During questions regarding school safety and firearm regulation, Quade pointed to a need for more regulation of firearms, which she claimed would help police better do their jobs.
Both Kehoe and Slantz acknowledged the importance of tackling the issue of gun violence but neither supported limiting Second Amendment rights. Kehoe pointed to his background growing up in inner city St. Louis, claiming that those who would use guns harmfully do not purchase them at stores. He favored additional support for police and mental health resources.
Budget and taxes
Each candidate had differing stances on the issue of taxes.
For Kehoe, the phasing out of income tax over time is key to making Missouri a more attractive state for businesses. While Kehoe would like to see the income tax reach zero, he said that achieving this goal must be done responsibly to ensure funding for essential services and education.
“I believe that Missourians can spend their money way better than any elected official could ever spend it,” Kehoe said. “Missourians understand what to do once they have more money in their pocket.”
Slantz favored a more direct approach: “First, end personal property tax. Also, let’s end the state income tax in Missouri, you can cut the 50% of the budget if you stop taxpayer funded education.”
Slantz also said he would like to end statewide public education, leaving education in the hands of local communities. He argued that the primary taxes should be a gas tax to maintain roads and sales tax to fund the rest of the budget.
Quade and Lehmann both emphasized the importance of those with more wealth paying more in taxes.
“If you make $8,500 a year, you’re paying the exact same tax rate as a millionaire,” Quade said.
Quade said she would be interested in getting rid of things like the food tax and feminine hygiene product tax.
Minimum wage
Kehoe said that as a business owner of over 35 years he could not support the measure to raise the minimum wage. Kehoe said he believes that an increase in minimum wage would actually hurt those it is aimed at helping, claiming that consumers can expect to see increased prices on basic goods. He claimed that if the amendment were to pass young people would be denied entry level jobs.
Slantz showed the strongest opposition to the measure, denying a need for a minimum wage altogether.
“There should be no minimum wage in the state of Missouri,” Slantz said. “Entry level jobs are not meant to be supporting a life or a family.”
Quade backs the measure and pushed back on claims that minimum wage jobs should not support a family or are meant only for young people.
“The reality is we have so many parents and so many people who are working minimum-wage jobs, multiple minimum-wage jobs, to get by because they can’t actually find good quality, high-paying jobs in the state of Missouri,” Quade said.
Lehmann also supported the amendment, pointing out a Green Party goal for the state to achieve a $20 minimum wage. Lehmann added that he hopes the measure can be used “as a platform for doing even more to support the poor in our economy.”
Sports gambling
Lehmann was the only candidate fully opposed to an amendment legalizing sports gambling while the other candidates showed varying levels of support. Lehmann, who holds a master of divinity degree, claimed that gambling was a sin.
“When I grew up, it was a common knowledge that betting of any kind, or gambling of any kind, was a sin,” Lehmann said.
The amendment has gained support because tax revenue from betting would be appropriated for education funding.
Lehmann also opposes the amendment on the grounds that the funding generated by taxes on betting would not actually increase education funding as the legislature would simply budget less general fund money for education to offset the increase from the gambling proceeds.
“We know what the legislature will do, they’ll say, ‘Oh, we’ve got all this money, so we don’t need to budget any,’” Lehmann said.
