HECKEMEYER STRESSES REGIONAL ROOTS AND EXPERIENCE

Each of the three candidates for 8th District were asked the same set of questions. The candidates will appear in the order they were interviewed. John Hendricks' interview ran Tuesday. Jo Ann Emerson's interview was published Wednesdeay. Interviews were edited for length.

What is the most pressing problem facing the 8th District as a whole?

Tony Heckemeyer: As a whole, I would have to say probably poverty. The four poorest counties in the state of Missouri are here. Illegitimacy, illiteracy is higher here than anywhere in the state of Missouri. Our educational systems here are probably in more need than most. So if you isolate one issue, it would be poverty, I think. It's not so acute here in Cape Girardeau. In fact, Cape Girardeau is the Springfield of Southeast Missouri and will continue to be so. But as you leave Cape Girardeau, it becomes very, very apparent.

The key to attacking the problem in its root form is to increase your educational capabilities: vocational/technical education being the new element that has really come into being the last five or six years. When I was in the Legislature many years ago, I used to push hard for that field, but it just wasn't right. Now it's becoming so we're dealing with large populations that for all practical purposes don't have the tools in their hands or in their minds to actually sustain a family. And so you have a basic defect in the social structure, the inability to sustain a family from a financial standpoint.

Is the farm economy hurting in Southeast Missouri? If so, why? What should be done, if anything, to improve the agricultural economy?

Heckemeyer: The agricultural economy is in shambles. Back when the Freedom To Farm Act was passed, like a lot of things that Congress did, they were in a great hurry.

They had this dream that these markets would appear, but they were not there. Always in the past, the Democratic Party had a different philosophy about agriculture and I think it's a prevailing philosophy because Mrs. Emerson has assumed it, so it must be correct. She has done a beautiful job of becoming a Democrat for this race.

The Democrats always controlled the top of the market with production controls. There is no question that the United States farm policy over the last 50 years has produced the greatest abundance of food in the history of mankind at the cheapest price in the history of mankind. That's not a Republican program. That has been done under the farm programs and started after the Great Depression. FDR put them in place. Being a old conservative, there are many things about those programs that I don't like, but they work.

Republicans had this grand idea about taking off production controls and to turn the farmer loose to produce without limits. These people had no conception of it not working, so they did not prepare. They didn't fund their insurance programs adequately. They stripped off their loan programs. They opened their markets with NAFTA to cattle from Mexico and Canada and now, of course, we are bringing more cattle on the hoof into this country than we are exporting.

They promised an overhauled insurance program which would allow a farmer to insure his base commodity in amount and price. If you could do that, then you could hedge it on a market that's 10 months to 12 months away. Now, a farmer whose farming ice cream ground, who virtually never has a crop loss, has excellent ground to grade, it's going to make a crop. He can do that. The big guys can do that. The small man cannot do that. Not only that, economically, they've designed it to guarantee that he couldn't because the price of insurance is predicated on "can he make this crop?" Now the guy who needs insurance is the guy who has missed a crop 10 times out of 50 and he doesn't make 50 bushels. He has to pay an enormously higher price. That's the problem with dealing in Washington with people who don't understand agriculture.

And so now you have a failure in Asia, you have an enormous crop failure, which is relatively local here. There's no insurance. You're catastrophe insurance is supposed to get you back the seed cost, but it doesn't begin to do it. So, this program has left the farmer in a free market that doesn't exist with a bad crop, bad prices, because it's a bad farm program, bad policy made by people who do not understand agriculture.

Agriculture is a unique, fragile creature that is in an enormous flux at this time. I think it is imperative that this country, for the first time, sit down and discuss agriculture policies and what they want and what they expect agriculture to be and how they expect to produce its food and product. You're going to have to reinstate the loan program. You're going to have to devise a competent insurance program for farmers so they can begin to protect their own risks. And you're going to have to have some form of production control.

Should Congress take steps to preserve the financial viability of social Security and Medicare? If so, what steps should be taken to preserve those programs?

Heckemeyer: I have proposed a plan that will take an enormous step toward doing that and it is actually a trust fund. We use a unified budget at the present time. All the money from the government goes into one account. All the bills are paid out. Whatever is left in that account is declared surplus. This surplus they trumpet around does not exist. We are receiving money which is contractually bound, in my opinion, to future generations.

That money should be taken from the politician and set aside where the politician has no control of that money. It should be set up as a separate trust fund under an independent organization much like the Federal Reserve. Their job would be to invest that money, not in stocks, not in any high risk stuff, but in AAA bonds, government securities. And you could even give them the full faith and credit of the United States which would get them a higher interest rate.

In my opinion, they have really goofed Medicare up. It's probably in worse shape than Social Security, not probably, it certainly is. Again, you had an enormous philosophical change in the thrust of Medicare. They did make some changes in the program. They changed the program into more an HMO program than an old fee-for-service program. Now that did precipitate some savings, considerable savings.

The thing that does frighten me, one of the things that Washington has a propensity for doing, is transferring a program from what it is to another entity like the states. You hear,"~we'll send it back to the states." That's a cop out. If you design a program and you run it for 15-20 years and you make states participate in it and it doesn't work, why would you then send it to the states and cut the money back? There's a simple reason for that. You haven't got the political guts to correct the program.

What are your qualifications for office? What do you think sets you apart from your opponents?

Heckemeyer: Well, I'm the third generation of my people to farm the ground in Southeast Missouri. I graduated from our schools. Every child I have, graduated. My kids' kids will play here with you. I am indigenous to this place. I have a B.S. degree in agriculture. I have a Doctor of Jurisprudence in Law. When I returned home, I was elected to the Missouri General Assembly at age 25. I spent eight years of my life there. I was elected majority whip of the party. My name was on a lot of the agriculture laws.

Came home to Sikeston, practiced law eight years in this district. Was elected Man of the Year in Sikeston. I'm on the Hall of Fame in Sikeston High School. I've been an Eagle, an Elk, a Rotarian, I guess every social club. I was elected circuit judge at about age 41, which is relatively young as a circuit judge. Spent 17 years as a circuit judge. During that time, I was elected to preside as the president of the Missouri Trial Judges Association, which operates the judiciary below the Supreme Court in Missouri. Handled the highest case load in Missouri for a single judge. Served on the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. That's the oldest judicial organization in the United States and I chaired many committees for them. I think a total of four years, I was in charge of their nationwide training program. I'm not a hater of government. I believe the government can be a force for good and I'm a very conservative Jeffersonian. I believe absolutely in balanced budgets.

Do you favor or oppose gun control and why?

Heckemeyer: I was a gun dealer for 12 years in Sikeston. I operated the old Sportsman Gun Shop. I believe the Second Amendment guarantees the right to own firearms and I look with great fear on any encroachment of those rights by the federal government.

Should Congress change the tax code? Do you favor a flat tax or sales tax, or some other solution? Would you scrap the federal income tax?

Heckemeyer: Oh yes. I prefer a simple, graduated income tax. I believe it has proven to be a superior method in this country of taxing. I think it is far too complex. I prefer a simple, graduated income tax, perhaps three levels. I would eliminate a great number of the shelters that exist now, although I do accept the fact that a tax shelter can be used by government to modify and entice money into areas that are considered to be good areas for the population and the public. I would increase enormously the tax advantages to citizens to save their own money. I would change the death tax law by simply saying that death is no longer a taxable event. Then you can stop all of this posturing about death taxes. Just say, alright, if you're operating a business of any type or farm, death cannot be a taxable event if it continues in the same mode. Then you could stop all of this ridiculous, intricate dance of the special interests. Just say, well, when you die, if you're people are doing that, it's not a taxable event.

What is the single biggest problem facing small business today?

Heckemeyer: Probably in the Southeast Missouri area is the lack of a wage base. If you'll compare the differences in these small communities, when you go out in the very small communities, again, you've got to remember that 80-85 percent of the revenue in those communities is agriculturally generated or agriculturally related. So, you have a different problem there than you do other places. I think government interference in a businessman's operations is grossly, grossly overdone. I think that you need a higher wage base. South of here and out in the hills, we don't have a very big middle class. And let's face it, the middle class are the people that make the community. They make an adequate sum of money and they spend it. They generate your small businesses. They create commerce and enterprise. So I would seek to build a stronger middle class by education, by simplification and by hopefully raising that general income level in the 8th District.

What are your views on abortion?

Heckemeyer: I'm pro-life. I was raised Catholic. It is a moral thing and that's not in my political world.

Do you favor or oppose school vouchers and why?

Heckemeyer: I'm against vouchers because I think it will destroy the public school system and simultaneously destroy the private school system. The first commandment in the Constitution of the state of Missouri after the payment of your debts is you shall provide for the public education. The founders of this country understood that public education is absolutely mandatory in passing on a societal structure, improving the future and making a valuable citizen out of a little soul that God knows what he'd be.

Actually, we have a decent system. The cities have got real problems and those are mostly societal problems that have carried into our school systems. The federal government has had a great deal to do with that, in my opinion. The federal government allowed a change in the responsibility of schools about 20 years ago. One of the first lawsuits was in my court. They tried to kick out a really truant individual who was just a bad kid. He was making noise, he was going to beat the teachers up and the whole bit, and they did expel him. Mother and dad filed a lawsuit under the, I think it was, Title IX of the federal act, which in state courts we don't deal with that often. So, the lawyer, who was a very good defense lawyer, came in and said you can't do this. I said, why? They came up with, this child has behavioral disorders. It was one of the first times I had ever heard that term. I said, wait a minute, we all have behavioral disorders. I mean what is that. Well, it's a term that has no real definition, but it is a term recognized in law as being an infirmity of some type. If you have any infirmity of any type, then the government does not permit the schools to expel you. It didn't take long for every truant to become someone who is really a victim and really ill and all of a sudden schools could no longer get rid of a child that was not there for the purpose of learning.

Now, I don't think we should throw away those type of kids. I set up one of the first alternative schools in this part of the state in Sikeston, ran it for four years. It was after this case, and I went to the school systems and said I will take my juvenile department and my juvenile officers and we will hire teachers. If you have a kid you can't handle, you send him to us and we will try to get that kid back into your system. And we operated and handled hundreds of kids. In fact, we transported them from all over the district, brought some down from Cape. And we were very successful at it. Well, about three or four years later, the state actually passed laws which started the alternative school systems in the state of Missouri. And when they did, we got out because I'm a great believer that's not our primary function. So I don't think you can afford to throw away kids, but I don't think that you drag your school system down to the level of that kid because you do not have the tools to deal with that kid in a manner which brings about the results you need to bring about.

Do you favor criminalizing tobacco use?

Heckemeyer: No. That's ridiculous.

Should the federal government regulate the Internet?

Heckemeyer: I don't think they can. I think they've lost the ability to do that now. No, I don't think they have the capability to regulate the Internet. Not only that, I'm not sure that the Constitution, as it's presently constituted, would permit it in some areas. That question, again, is an exceedingly complex question. How would you regulate it? After all, you can access Ethiopia on the Internet and Africa. They're not bound by our laws and our rules and this thing is getting bigger every day. So, that's like saying are you going to regulate sunlight on the Earth? Well, that might be a wonderful thing to say, but getting it done is an entirely different matter.

Do we need campaign finance reform? If so, what changes are needed?

Heckemeyer: Oh, absolutely. I think even most of your politicians would agree, this system stinks. You buy these jobs. The incessant demand upon the politicians generate enormous sums of money, which can only be generated by tapping the special interests of this country who love it. They love it because it gives them, converts their money into power. The Constitution will not permit you to impede free speech. But you can control the amount of money a politician touches and handles. I think you could say, this figure would have to vary because districts vary, but let's say in this district, if you had a law which said you could only raise, as a candidate, $250,000, that would provide for your staffs, a little bit of advertising, your automobile expenses, would take care of the everyday operations of a campaign. But all of that money must be raised within your state and half of it or some percent, I don't want to set these percents, within your district so that there's some tie to your district as to how much you raise. Otherwise, you could have, right now, a multi-millionaire from New York come in here and spend about $10 million and probably choose our congressman. I mean, there's no doubt in my mind it can be done.

So I've said several time, I will vote for every bill that changes the system. There are certainly good ways to do it. But anything that pecks away at this system I will support because I really things it's costing the people far more than they know. I don't think that they have a clue what it costs them. Because this apparatus is designed to make itself look good and profitable because it's serving a great goal for the people who fund it. And they're good at it, damn good. So, yes, I would change it.

Do you think President Clinton should be impeached?

Heckemeyer: I've been a judge 17 years, a lawyer for nine years. Every citizen in this country right now, whether it be Republican or Democrat, is going to have to sit down and decide what are the standards we will use to do this. I think a citizen, anybody, the president, anybody has a right to know exactly what they're charged with and exactly what the standards are that they will be judged by. If you come into my court and you do not have filed against you what's called an information or an indictment, the prosecutor will be thrown out of court instantly, the Constitution requires it. This Congress probably, before it took the first step, should say, here is what we consider to be impeachable offenses. Now we have the law and we have a great amount of previous case law to do that. As a judge, I would have no compunction whatsoever voting to impeach if those standards are met, whatever they are.

MEET TONY HECKEMEYER

Party: Democrat

Hometown: Sikeston

Age: 59

Education: Graduated from the University of Missouri-Columbia with a bachelor of science degree in agriculture and a law degree.

Job History: Operates a farming business. He is a third-generation farmer and livestock producer. He is a veteran of the U.S. Army and the Missouri National Guard, was in a general law practice for nine years, and has owned and operated several wholesale and retail businesses in the 8th District.

Political Office: Elected to the Missouri General Assembly at age 25 and served eight years. He later was elected circuit judge, serving 17 years on the bench before resigning in February to run for Congress.

Family: He and his wife, Betty, have five children.