super Bowl: Beyond the End Zone

Nov. 20, 2007

Transcript:

>>Ted Simons:
Tonight on "Horizon," how do Maricopa County voters feel about Sheriff Joe Arpaio and country attorney Andrew Thomas? Find out as we release the results of the latest Cronkite-Eight poll. Also, we'll take a closer look at what the Super Bowl will mean to the state's economy. Those stories next on "Horizon."

>>Announcer:
"Horizon" is made possible by contributions from the friends of eight, members of your Arizona PBS station. Thank you.

>>>Ted Simons:
Hello, and welcome to "Horizon." I'm Ted Simons. A judge in St. George, Utah this afternoon sentenced FLDS leader Warren Jeffs to five years to life for his role in the arranged marriage of teenage cousins. The fundamentalist Mormon Church supports polygamy and arranged marriages. Jeffs was convicted of rape as an accomplice in 2001 for his part in the marriage of a 14-year-old girl to her 19-year-old cousin. Washington county prosecutors said Jeffs pressured Elissa wall into marriage and sex against her will. The Utah parole board will determine the length of Jeffs' sentence.

>>>Ted Simons:
Maricopa County voters like Sheriff Joe Arpaio and county attorney Andrew Thomas. They also think immigration is the county's top problem and that the solution to our transportation problem is more buses. Those are some of the results of the latest Cronkite-Eight poll taken exclusively among Maricopa voters. KAET eight TV and the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University conducted the poll November 15th through the 18th. 697 registered Maricopa County voters were surveyed and the poll has an overall margin of error of 3.7%.

>>Mike Sauceda:
The poll reveals that -- 34% have a generally positive view of him, 15% a somewhat negative view, 10% a very negative attitude toward the county attorney. 32% a positive opinion of Maricopa Sheriff Arpaio, 18% reported a somewhat negative opinion, and 17% had a very negative opinion of the sheriff. Involved in the arrest of Phoenix executive -- revealing secret subpoenas. 71 were aware of arrests. 6% had a very positive opinion of the new times, 11% had a somewhat negative view of it, while 6% had a negative opinion of the tabloid. A recall effort has been started against sheriff Arpaio and Thomas, 25% support the effort, 63% do not. We asked Maricopa County voters what was the top concern that needs to be addressed to improve the quality of live in the county, 10% cited better health care, 10% air quality, 9% cited traffic congestion and torn up roads, transportation, need for better and more mass transit a top issue. What is the single most important thing to help solve illegal immigration? 31% said stop illegal immigration at the border -- 14% would like a guest worker program, 9% employer sanctions. We asked people what needs to be done to solve the transportation problems in Maricopa County, 31% more and better mass transit, 19% extend the late rail system, 13% improved freeways. Republican voters how they felt about republican candidates running for president. 7% very excited, 27% excited, 47% not very excited -- not very excited at all. McCain by 32%, Rudy Giuliani next, Mitt Romney, 14%, Huckabee, Thompson and Paul. We asked Maricopa County democrats how they felt about presidential candidates, 25% very excited, 34% excited, 29% not very excited -- 21% Hillary Clinton -- finally, with the holidays coming up, we asked people about the Christmas shopping plans. 11% said they will spend more this year than last, 41% will spend less and then about the same as last year.

>>Ted Simons:
Here to discuss the Cronkite/eight poll is its director, Dr. Bruce Merrill, and associate director of the poll, Tara Blanc. Good to have you both here.

>>Tara Blanc:
Welcome.

>>Bill Simons:
Thank you very much. I appreciate that.

>>Bruce Merrill:
We have to do something about your ears and your hair though in order for you to, you know, really accept that challenge.

>>Ted Simons:
I'm sure something will be done. Thank you very much for that. Hey, immigration, obviously major concern, but bigger than the top two, next two issues combined.

>>Tara Blanc:
It was. Frankly it didn't come as a surprise considering everything in the media for the last several years about illegal immigration. People see it as a concern whether it is something that just because it is a reflection of what they hear in the media or something that they are concerned about it, it is the top -- we ask this question as an open-ended question, we were getting people's first reactions. I suspect that that might have a little something to do with it. It is the top issue for people of Maricopa County.

>>Ted Simons:
And it sounds like as far as to find a way to a solution to the border, border, border.

>>Yes. The two things were, essentially, stop people from coming across the border. The second thing was to enforce existing laws. Very few people said anything about making new laws or doing anything differently. Enforce what we have already on the books.

>>Ted Simons:
Illegal immigration has been an issue in Arizona for quite a while. Nothing like this. Where did this come from?

>>Bruce Merrill:
I think Proposition 200 really brought the issue to the forefront, and frankly I think the media then kind of really chose to make this an issue, and I think that's the biggest reason it is an issue today.

>>Ted Simons:
Do you sense that Maricopa County has maybe a different take on this than other parts of Arizona?

>>Bruce Merrill:
Not really. As Tara said, all of the polling we have done, it is consistently the major concern of people living in Arizona, and they're very frustrated in Arizona about it because they don't see the feds doing anything about it, and they think the federal government should have a responsibility but they don't see the state or anybody else doing anything about it and they want something done.

>>Ted Simons:
And Tara, is this the kind of issue that perpetuates itself? It is talked about, talked about, and the more it is talked about it is compounded.

>>Tara Blanc:
It seems to be because it touches so many bases. It is economic, value driven, the idea of being a citizen and a nationalistic sense, and so I think it does kind of build on itself and it could just continue to grow.

>>Ted Simons:
To you sense after the election cycle is over maybe this will calm down a little bit?

>>Tara Blanc:
I'm not sure. We have seen over and over again, we polled through the last general election, polled through back all of the way to the 2000 presidential election, when we started to ask about illegal immigration and it just has hung around, election after election, and it continues to be an issue.

>>Bruce Merrill:
Plus, I think it does have implications in the long run. I think we're finding in our polling that the Republican Party, for instance, is suffering a bit from the position that they've taken on this issue, particularly in the Hispanic community, and I think in the short term it could hurt the republicans.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about that in a general sense. In the numbers we just saw, it looks like republicans and democrats are on different planets as far as optimism and enthusiasm --

>>Bruce Merrill:
Well, they really are. I think the most surprising finding in the poll was that only about a third of the republicans are excited about their slate of candidates, twice as many democrats excited about theirs, and that has tremendous implications on getting money and going to the polls.

>>Ted Simons:
Is that a lame duck situation though? Do you see that as something that happens when you have a lame duck in the white house and people aren't generally as excited as they would ordinarily be?

>>Tara Blanc:
I'm not sure that that's true. The lack of a clear front runner for the Republican Party, and the republican party overall has taken a real beating over the past three years, and there are issues that they have taken a stance on that has made them unpopular. Registration trends in Arizona for example, more and more people registering as independents and more people registering as democrats, and the new registering for republicans is shrinking. You have a slate of candidates say they're not excited about, and if you have candidates you are not excited about, you will stay home. It is one of those things that tends to take on a life of its own. We will see similar results to the 2006 election when we put so many democrats into office.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about the numbers with Andrew Thomas and Joe Arpaio, what do they tell them? They don't look all that positive.

>>Bruce Merrill:
They are fairly positive for both Arpaio and Thomas. The big difference, everybody in Maricopa County knows about Joe. He is in the media all of the time. He has a two-to-one positive, 65% rated him favorable and 35% don't. Thomas a little difference in the sense that about a third of the people have never heard of Thomas, but among those who have heard about him, he gets a two to one positive rating, and that is pretty good in politics. We actually asked people specifically, would they support a recall? And there is very little support to recall either one of them, and I think that does not bode well for the people that are trying to recall them.

>>Ted Simons:
It is basically a familiarity factor there between the two of them.

>>Bruce Merrill:
Pretty much. They're both seen as conservative. I think one of the things that really helps them is that they're both seen as strong on enforcing immigration laws.

>>Ted Simons:
Back to immigration again. Real quickly, did the New Times thing, did that make a difference one way or the other that you could tell?

>>Tara Blanc:
We didn't get a sense that it really made a difference at all. Some people were surprised at the number of people that thought that the New Times executive should be arrested or should have been arrested and I suspect that is more of an artifact of this idea we stick to the law. We didn't get a sense that it had any impact on people's assessment or views of Thomas and Arpaio.

>>Ted Simons:
Alright. Very good. Thank you both for stopping by. Super bowls bring economic benefits to the cities and states that host them. As we continue our series "Super Bowl: Beyond the End Zone," we take a look at what super bowl XLII is expected to do for Arizona's economy. In a moment, we will hear from an ASU economics professor and the chairman of the Arizona Super Bowl host committee. But first, David Majure shows us how at least one local business expects to benefit.

>>David Majure:
The Super Bowl and events leading up to it mean different things to different people.

>>Heidi Vail:
The super bowl doesn't mean football to me, it means mouths to feed.

>>David Majure:
Heidi Vail owns Heidi's Events and Catering, a full service event catering business in Tempe.

>>Heidi Vail:
We're full service in the way that we have all our own rental equipment tents tables, chairs, china, linens, in-house floral, designers, a fabulous kitchen staff. You know that sort of thing.

>>David Majure:
Her staff will be plenty busy when super bowl XLII comes to Glendale February 3rd.

>>Heidi Vail:
The week of Super Bowl is a lot for me in terms of lunches and breakfast and corporate meetings. Super bowl Sunday is thousands of mouths to feed for me. We are involved in a couple of different venues that day.

>>David Majure:
It adds up to money for businesses, cities, and the state. How much depends on what you count and who you ask. After Tempe hosted Super Bowl 30, 89,000 out of town visitors contributed about $306 million to the state's economy. Expect the Glendale event to draw at least 125,000 visitors to Arizona, producing an economic impact of more than $400 million. How will all of this economic activity affect Arizona's budget shortfall that could approach $1 billion by kickoff? Staff did an analysis limited to direct taxable spending. Out-of-state -- 82,700 visitors determined that the state general fund would gain as much as $5.5 million in taxes, not enough to solve the budget crisis, but every little bit helps. Heidi says she expects to come out ahead even though business is usually pretty good the first part of the year.

>>Heidi Vail:
February is traditionally not a slow month for us, it is a good month. It is beautiful here in February. When you are talking about thousands of people to feed on one day that is a huge increase in revenue.

>>David Majure:
Some of that revenue probably would have existed anyway. Economists remind us when measuring the economic impact of a Super Bowl; take into account normal activity that may be displaced by spending that is related to the big event. In the long run, super bowl XLII is likely to help Heidi and the Arizona economy as a whole.

>>Heidi Vail:
Lots of potential for long after the super bowl is gone. I think it is going to bring a lot of corporate clients here that can't help but fall in love with our valley.

>>Ted Simons:
Joining me to talk about the economic impact of Super Bowl XLII is Mike Kennedy, chairman of the Arizona Super Bowl host committee, and Dennis Hoffman, a professor of economics at ASU and director of the university's seedman research institute. Thank you so much for joining us here on "Horizon." Dennis, let's start with you. A lot of numbers being thrown around, how do we know what kind of impact the super bowl is going to have?

>>Dennis Hoffman:
Well, Ted, it is a complex process in many ways. It depends upon the quality of the survey. It's all about the survey. It is all about determining where people who have come to observe the super bowl, where they have come from, what their expenditure patterns are, what they have been doing, activities they have enjoyed in the state of Arizona during their trip. You sample a large number of the attendees, it is not just the people who come to attend the game, it is this group of people who want to be near this experience, and the numbers of these folks exceed the number of people that attend the game. You have to survey all of them, as many as possible.

>>Ted Simons:
We hear 400 million, somewhere along these lines as far as economic impact, is this the kind of thing you can figure out in the short run, long term, how does that work to come up with a number like that?

>>Dennis Hoffman:
Well, you give reprehensive expenditure patterns from your sample of attendees, and you measure the number of people you have observed at the event, and you can do a fairly accurate job of measuring those direct expenditure patterns from that sample of people. It is all about the sample.

>>Ted Simons:
Mike, the sample here has to include super bowl, not BCS or Fiesta Bowl, because they're two different creatures, aren't they?

>>Mike Kennedy:
Totally different creatures, attendees, different profiles, demographics, spending habits. It is not one size fits all, you find a population of football fans and do a projection as Dennis explains.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's compare and contrast the Super Bowl from '96 and the one coming up now. What did we learn from the Super Bowl in Tempe that can be helpful in finding out the economic impact this time?

>>Mike Kennedy:
We start with a baseline of 12 years ago $360 million just applying a simple inflation number makes you comfortable with a $400 million number. You can also look to the experience of Miami, somewhere 460, $470 million. I think we can learn from that. We can also learn that this valley is significantly different today than it was 12 years ago in terms of the opportunities for spending, the different things for folks to do. We are really encouraging people to come for the game and stay for the week.

>>Ted Simons:
Dennis mentioned taking a sample of people who have gone to super bowls in the past. Who are you expecting? Are they people that come here for the game, come here for the experience, a little bit of both, nothing, what do we have here?

>>Mike Kennedy:
A little bit of everything is probably the right answer. There are some fairly well defined groups. There is the profile of the kind of NFL attendee, and those are sponsors and very high level sponsors of the NFL on TV and the media during the course of the year. Folks, large companies around the world that use this as an entertainment vehicle. So, those are fairly high rolling folks, and then on the other kind of definition of people is just the die hard NFL football team. Some of them are here because of the teams that are here, but many of them, as Dennis said, are here just to enjoy the Super Bowl experience. They don't have a ticket. They don't have any interest in going to the game. They just want to be part of the Super Bowl for a week.

>>Ted Simons:
Dennis, we talk about $306 million back in '96, upwards of $400 year. The numbers move and shake; pretty soon you're talking real money, as they say, how does that affect me or the small business owner in Queen Creek or the person who lives in North Scottsdale? How does the average Maricopa County resident benefit from the Super Bowl?

>>Dennis Hoffman:
Right. Great question, I think, Ted. The direct expenditures certainly fall on the hospitality industry, restaurant industry, people that cater to these visitors. The multiplier effect that extend to other businesses, generate incomes of people in the hospitality in the restaurant industry, people dealing with those visitors, but that generates income to those folks that is in turn spent in other ways throughout the valley. That's the multiplier effect that economists estimate due to events like this.

>>Ted Simons:
And you take into account the idea of security, of services, social services, these kinds of things.

>>Dennis Hoffman:
You can do all sorts of net effects. You can deal with counter-factuals, expenditures that would have taken place with or without the super bowl in terms of visitors that would have come here. Some people would argue that, look, the hotels are filled anyway. I would argue that people that are planning a trip to Arizona might, indeed, if they are not interested in football, might pick a different week, but they're still going to come to Arizona. You're still going to get that benefit from people planning trips to Arizona, and in addition during a super bowl year, you get the visitors that are coming exclusively for the Super Bowl.

>>Ted Simons:
Let's talk about some of these other aspects of what the super bowl does in terms of benefits. Obviously the idea if you are sitting in Ohio and it is snowing outside and you are watching desert scenes and sunsets, you are saying Phoenix may not be a bad place to visit. How much can a super bowl affect that mindset towards the industry in general?

>>Mike Kennedy:
Huge impact. There is no bigger center stage anywhere with any event. 232 countries, a billion viewers, the ten most watched TV programs of all time are all Super Bowls. I am not aware of a study or survey, but I don't think that it is just a coincidence that the successful Super Bowl in 1996 in Tempe came on the verge of a huge growth experience for the valley.

>>Ted Simons:
Talk about what happened in ‘96 and Tempe, are there tangible results, you look around the landscape and see things have changed.

>>Mike Kennedy:
You can look at what has changed and causes after you see the effect. In terms of exposure, I don't think there was anything in that period of time that had center stage and a more prominent role than the Super Bowl. Operationally there is not a lot to learn, we're going to a different site out in Glendale, but we did see huge effects and anecdotally, at least, businesses who claim that they were here and part of the experience in 1996, and that was part of the process that caused them to move here.

>>Dennis Hoffman:
Exactly the point I wanted to re-enforce. It is difficult to determine what makes a high-skilled worker relocate, what makes a business relocate. Certainly positive images that they have in their minds about regions, places to live, climates, the scenery around you when you go -- go to work each day. Those are all positive images that help tell the story. One of the strategic advantages as everybody knows for Arizona, our climate, life-style, making sure that that is seen by millions of people has an impact.

>>Ted Simons:
And the research on this, wildly divergent numbers in terms of not only expectations and what they saw afterwards. We are talking hundreds of millions of dollars of differences. Why the difference? What is going on here, a difference in methodology?

>>Dennis Hoffman:
I believe the methodology is sound and consistent. There are different sampling strategies, but there is different geographies, different geographies, some people are trying to measure impacts on a city. Some people trying to measure impacts on a county or state. Some of the studies that you have heard about with wildly different results are studies of different types of events. We as economists worry about counter-factuals, what would have taken place without this particular event here. A super bowl is really very unique. This is not going to an ordinary football game where the trade off is a few rounds of golf or something else that you could do in the local area. We worry about those counter-factuals, and we think is a sound analysis.

>>Ted Simons:
Gentlemen, thank you so much. Thanks for joining us on this Tuesday evening. I'm Ted Simons, have a great evening.