================================================================== Published by INEWS. Freely distributable if unaltered and complete. See end of document for info on free E-mail trial of INEWS. INTERNATIONAL NEWS E-WIRE SERVICE All rights reserved. For information on receiving a free trial subscription to INEWS World News Daily via E-mail send E-mail to INEWS@AOL.COM ================================================================== '96 ELECTION SNAPSHOT VOL.1 #1 SUBSCRIPTION INFO/GENERAL INFO - INEWS@AOL.COM TO REACH EDITOR ---------------- INEWSEDIT@AOL.COM CONTENTS: PUBLIC OPINION POLL ON THE FIRST LADY CAMPAIGN '96: INDEPENDENTS CAMPAIGN '96: THE MEDIA CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT CALENDAR OF PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES THUMBNAIL INFORMATION ON EACH MAJOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RETIRING IN RECORD NUMBERS CAMPAIGN '96: CAUCUSES AND PRIMARIES CAMPAIGN '96: THE ISSUES POLL SHOWS FORBES GAINING ON DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLITICIANS DISCUSS '96 ELECTION REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: LAMAR ALEXANDER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PAT BUCHANAN REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DOLE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DORNAN REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: STEVE FORBES REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PHIL GRAMM REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: ALAN KEYES REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: RICHARD LUGAR REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: MORRY TAYLOR WORLD PRESS: 'U.S. ELECTION CAMPAIGN BEGINS FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER ========================== --------------- PUBLIC OPINION POLL ON THE FIRST LADY VICTOR BEATTIE WASHINGTON A new national poll finds that half the public does not believe first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton is telling the truth about her involvement in the Whitewater affair. However, as The first lady's standing in public opinion does not seem to be hurting her husband's re-election prospects. The "Newsweek" magazine poll finding is up sharply from a similar poll taken about Mrs. Clinton in April, 1994. The poll was released one day after Mrs. Clinton was subpoenaed to testify under oath Friday before a federal grand jury in Washington looking into the Clinton's past financial dealings. The independent Whitewater prosecutor wants to know how billing documents from Mrs. Clinton's former law firm, sought for two years, mysteriously appeared recently at the White House. Mrs Clinton is also part of a congressional probe into the firing of the staff of the White House travel office. The Clintons have steadfastly denied any wrongdoing in either case. Senior "Newsweek" editor David Alpern says despite the public's view of Mrs. Clinton, it apparently has not hurt Mr. Clinton's chances of re-election: "Sixty-six percent say they are not less likely to vote for (Mr.) Clinton because of Hillary, Whitewater, travelgate. And, more importantly, 77-percent of Democrats say they are not less likely to vote for Bill Clinton. And so, I guess, that explains why he continues to lead in the matchups against the Republicans." In the poll, Mr. Clinton still beats Republican presidential front-runner Senator Bob Dole by 52 to 49 percent and surprising runner-up Steve Forbes 49 to 42 percent. The Newsweek poll confirmed Mr. Dole has the most support among all challengers for the Republican party nomination. However, Mr. Alpern says Mr. Dole, at age 72, remains vulnerable: "Forty-one percent say he is too much of an insider. Almost as many, 37-percent, say he's too old to serve effectively as president. They're not majorities but it's a significant number and it's something (Mr.) Dole has to worry about." The poll finds Mr. Dole's support down from a November survey and Mr. Forbes, editor of the New York-based business-magazine that bears his name, has more than tripled his support in the last two months. --------------- --------------- CAMPAIGN '96: INDEPENDENTS JIM MALONE WASHINGTON Traditionally, U.S. presidential elections are a two-party affair, Republicans and Democrats. In U.S. politics, it seems, three is a crowd. In 1992 independent presidential candidate Ross Perot won 19-percent of the vote, the most by any independent candidate since the election of 1912. The growing voter disenchantment with the two established parties and the budding interest in alternative parties. Historically, the United States has been a two-party nation. Georgetown University professor of government Stephen Wayne says the two major parties have tended to attract a broad range of voters through the years, tempering demands for a major alternative political party: "They have been large, broad-based, inclusive parties. And they have reached out to accept as many voters of different views as they could get to vote for them. They were able to do it because the American party system is highly correlated or related to the federal character of the system. So that a Democratic Party in New Jersey is very different from a Democratic Party in Texas. They believe different things. The only thing they have in common is that they support Democratic candidates." But this may be changing. Public opinion polls in recent years suggest that more Americans are changing their voter registration from either Democrat or Republican to independent. Professor Wayne says independents continue to gain as more and more voters become disenchanted with political gridlock in Washington and blame the two established parties: "Today, if you ask the average American voter are you a Democrat or a Republican, approximately the same percentage will say that they are a Democrat a will say that they are a Republican. And that percentage tends to be a little less than the percentage of those who claim that they are independent. So the first thing that we can say is that there are many more people who identify themselves as independents today than in the past." Historically, third party presidential candidates have, on occasion, played a crucial role in presidential elections. In 1912, former President Theodore Roosevelt and his bull moose party helped to defeat Republican President William taft and elect Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Alabama Governor George Wallace won 46 electoral votes in 1968 and may have cost Democrat Hubert Humphrey some votes in the deep south. And in 1992, independent Ross Perot won no electoral votes but did capture 19-percent of the popular vote and probably hurt President Bush's re-election effort in a number of key states. This year, Ross Perot is trying to organize a formal third party challenge. His new reform party is struggling to get on the ballot in all 50 U.S. states. Mr. Perot says his party may choose a presidential candidate later this year, though he says for the moment he is not interested in running again. While opinion polls continue to show discontent with the two existing parties, Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne says it is still unclear if American voters will get a new choice of parties in 1996: "So here we have an opening for third parties but in a highly personalized system (of campaigning), no third party candidate. And we still have broad-based national parties that stand for many things. So I think there is a yearning (for a third party) but I am not sure there will be a movement this time around." Norman Ornstein watches the U.S. political scene as a resident scholar and expert at the American Enterprise Institute here in Washington. He says that a race between Democrat Bill Clinton and Republican Bob Dole could spawn a flock of independent challengers eager to meet the public's demand for more choices in the race for the White House: "But a populist ticket on the left. And depending on how the Republican campaign goes, I think it is not at all inconceivable to imagine some populist candidate emerging on the right either. So, (possibly) five candidates in that regard (could be running for president." In his book, the road to the White House 1996, professor Stephen Wayne argues that voter ties to both major political parties have weakened during the past 30 years. He says this has resulted in greater emphasis on the individual candidates rather than their party affiliation and has also placed more emphasis on issues rather than party loyalty. Several prominent moderates from both parties have been talking about fielding a candidate in 1996 who would appeal to voters in the political middle who feel left out in the election year struggles between Republicans and Democrats. This group of prominent moderates includes Democrats like former presidential candidate Paul Tsongas, retiring New Jersey senator bill Bradley and former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm as well as the former independent governor of Connecticut, Lowell Weicker. These moderates believe that their mix of conservative views on the economy and a more liberal outlook on social issues will appeal to the broad mass of moderate voters, voters who usually cast the decisive ballots in close presidential elections. Political success, however, requires a leader with enough name recognition and personal charisma to carry the message forward. And so far they have been unable to agree on a candidate. --------------- --------------- CAMPAIGN '96: THE MEDIA JIM MALONE WASHINGTON As the 1996 presidential campaign gets under way, more Americans will follow the election campaign from television broadcasts than from any other source. In 1992, more than two-thirds of American voters cited television as their primary source of news about the presidential election campaign. Only 20-percent cited newspapers. Television has the power to often set the campaign agenda, to frame the issues around which the campaign will revolve and to shape the public perception of the candidates who are seeking their party's nomination. In the 19th century, newspapers played a crucial role in presidential elections. But they were often dominated by the major political parties and partisanship within the press was an accepted hazard of political campaigns. Radio broadcasts began to play an important role in the mid-1920's and television came along in the early 1950's. Georgetown University professor of government Stephen Wayne has studied the impact of television on recent presidential elections: "It was not until the 1950's, however, that television was first used as a vehicle for reaching voters. And beginning in the 1950's, both major political parties began to run advertisements for their candidates in which their candidates appeared on television, much as you would advertise a soap or a deodorant or a cereal that would make you the biggest and strongest and smartest person in the whole world." Even as candidates began to use the medium of television to sell themselves to voters, they also found it a useful tool to respond to their opponents. The 1952 Republican nominee for vice-president, Senator Richard Nixon, went on national television to make an impassioned plea to voters to keep him on the ticket with presidential nominee Dwight Eisenhower. Mr. Nixon used the broadcast to detail his own meager finances and to deny allegations that he accepted improper campaign contributions. The speech was a hit with the public and Mr. Nixon stayed on the Republican ticket. Mr. Nixon seemed to turn the broadcast in his favor near the end when he said he was not going to return a puppy given to his daughters by a supporter from Texas. The girls named the puppy "Checkers," and the Checkers speech, as it later became known, is still considered a watershed event in the integration of politics and television. Mr. Nixon would make effective use of television as a campaign tool in winning the presidency in 1968. But television also played an enormous role in galvanizing public opinion and helping to force him from office because of the Watergate scandal in 1974. In addition to saturated news coverage of the presidential campaign and its use as a forum for candidate advertisements, television has also played a crucial role in bringing presidential debates to the American public. The first of these occurred in 1960 when a tanned, telegenic young senator from Massachusetts, John Kennedy, faced off against vice President Richard Nixon, who suffered from a painful knee injury and a bad make-up job. Opinion polls showed that most people who watched the first debate on television thought that Senator Kennedy had won. A majority of those who listened on radio, however, gave the edge to Mr. Nixon. Television debates have generally benefitted challengers rather than incumbents. This was true in the 1960 race involving Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Nixon as well as in Jimmy Carter's victory in 1976, Ronald Reagan's triumph in 1980 and Bill Clinton's win over George Bush in 1992. Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne believes that being an effective television communicator is now one of the chief pre-requisites of running for the White House: "I think we see that if you have a facility with television as Ronald Reagan did or a facility with radio, as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did, that gives you an advantage. It does not mean you are going to win. But it certainly gives you an advantage." The money candidates spend on television advertising now takes up the bulk of their campaign budgets. Each four-year election cycle brings new techniques to reach mass audiences. In 1992, for example, the Clinton campaign mailed 25,000 video tapes about the candidate to New Hampshire Democrats in advance of the primary. Many local television stations rely on satellite interviews with various candidates in their campaign coverage. And in 1996, the explosion of campaign information available on the Internet worldwide computer network promises opens up yet another frontier on the political information front. All this emphasis on television is a far cry from presidential campaigns of the past when political parties actually ran the campaigns, selected candidates at party conventions and waged a mass media effort through the use of buttons, billboards, banners and torchlight parades. Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne believes that some of America's most revered presidents would not far: too well in the television age: "Lincoln was a very bright man but his appearance was very angular and frequently he was melancholy (a bit depressed) and had headaches, and I am not sure that would have gone over very well on television. But it was fortunate for him (that he was not in a television age). As it was for Harry Truman in 1948, a person who talked like, in jabs (quick bursts) and would react quickly and not smoothly like Franklin Roosevelt. It was lucky for him that he was in a radio age and not a television age." Even as voters continue to rely on television for campaign coverage, many complain that the news media focuses too much on the contest or so-called horse race aspect of the presidential campaign, and not enough on issues and the character of the candidates. The candidates added a new weapon to their media arsenal in the 1992 campaign with frequent appearances on television talk and entertainment programs, capped by Bill Clinton's solo performance on the saxophone, complete with jazzy sunglasses, on the Arsenio Hall Show. It is likely that the line between politics and popular culture will continue to blur in 1996. --------------- --------------- CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT JIM MALONE WASHINGTON President Clinton's state of the union address and the Republican response from Senator Bob Dole highlighted this week's U.S. political news. President Bill Clinton seized the moment this week with his state of the union address. The president offered to work with Republicans to scale back the federal government but he also pledged to safeguard government programs which help the poor and the elderly. Public opinion polls indicate the vast majority of Americans approved of the Clinton speech and welcomed his conciliatory approach on working with the Republican-controlled Congress. The Republican response to the state of the union came from Senate majority leader Bob Dole. Senator Dole is also the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination and much of his speech was directed at conservative Republican voters in the early presidential contest states of Iowa and New Hampshire, saying: "President Clinton shares a view of America held by our country's elites. A nation of special interest groups, united only by a dependence on government, competing with each for handouts and held back by outdated values." Senator Dole's rivals for the Republican nomination said he looked old and tired during his speech. And several political analysts gave President Clinton the clear edge over Senator Dole in both style and substance. On the campaign trail, meanwhile, Steve Forbes continues to pound away at Senator Dole. A new Boston Globe newspaper poll this week showed Mr. Forbes only eight-points behind Senator Dole in New Hampshire. Mr. Forbes says he is gaining in the race because his call for a single tax rate for all Americans, known as the flat tax, is picking up support among voters: "So that is the key, how to get America moving again. The flat tax is simply the first, most essential, but the first step to get America moving." Political analyst Norman Ornstein is with the American enterprise institute here in Washington. He says Senator Dole remains the Republican frontrunner but that there are now increasing doubts among some Republicans as to whether he could beat president Clinton in November: "Now if you are betting, and if I were betting, I would still bet on Bob Dole. But there are two other things to watch. The first is that Bob Dole is an older man and that is a factor. One little stumble. If Dole, for example, has to take a day off campaigning because he is not feeling well, or has a few heart palpitations, things that could happen to anybody, it would underscore the age issue which makes a number of people nervous." Much of the early campaign activity continues to focus on the early contest states of Iowa and New Hampshire. The voters will finally begin having their say about the Republican presidential field when the primaries and caucuses begin next month. --------------- --------------- CALENDAR OF PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES REPUBLICAN CALENDAR The series of primaries and caucuses that will be held in all of the states between now and early June will have a two-fold purpose: a "beauty contest" that will advise the entire world of the popularity of individual presidential candidates plus, and even more importantly, the process for selecting delegates to the political parties' national nominating conventions. Rules among the states and the parties vary. The Democrats use a proportional system, and the percentage of delegates committed to a specific candidate is relative to his popular vote in each state. The Republicans use the winner-take-all system of committing all delegates from a state to the victor of that specific primary or caucus. In the past, the first caucus was held in Iowa, eight days before the first primary, in New Hampshire. This year, the schedule has been challenged by several other states which wish to be part of the early action, and the calendar still has not been finalized. Subject to change, following is the unofficial calendar for Republican events, during which 1,990 nominating convention delegates will be selected. Delegates also will be selected in American Samoa, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. A candidate needs 996 delegates to ensure the party's nomination. Date State Type Republican Delegates Jan 29 Alaska Caucus 19 Jan 31 Hawaii Caucus 14 Feb 6 Louisiana Caucus 30 Feb 12 Iowa Caucus 25 Feb 20 New Hampshire Primary 16 Feb 24 Delaware Primary 12 Feb 27 Arizona Primary 39 North Dakota Primary 18 South Dakota Primary 18 Mar 2 South Carolina Primary 37 Wyoming Caucus 20 Mar 3 Puerto Rico Primary 14 Mar 5 Colorado Primary 27 Connecticut Primary 27 Georgia Primary 42 Maine Primary 15 Maryland Primary 32 Massachusetts Primary 37 Minnesota Caucus 33 Rhode Island Primary 16 Vermont Primary 12 Mar 7 New York Primary 102 Mar 12 Florida Primary 98 Mississippi Primary 33 Oklahoma Primary 38 Oregon Primary 23 Tennessee Primary 37 Texas Primary 123 Mar 19 Illinois Primary 69 Michigan Primary 57 Ohio Primary 67 Wisconsin Primary 36 Mar 25 Utah Caucus 28 Mar 26 California Primary 165 Nevada Primary 14 Washington Primary 36 April 2 Kansas Primary 31 April 23 Pennsylvania Primary 73 May 7 District of Columbia Primary 14 Indiana Primary 52 North Carolina Primary 58 May 14 Nebraska Primary 24 West Virginia Primary 18 May 17 Missouri Caucus 36 May 21 Arkansas Primary 20 May 28 Idaho Primary 23 Kentucky Primary 26 June 4 Alabama Primary 40 Montana Primary 14 New Jersey Primary 48 New Mexico Primary 18 June 11 Virginia Primary 53 ---------------- ---------------- THUMBNAIL INFORMATION ON EACH MAJOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE Lamar Alexander -- The former governor of Tennessee considers himself an "outsider" candidate even though he has served as President Bush's secretary of education. Promoting a down-to-earth image, Alexander, 55, campaigns in casual clothing and speaks of the values he learned at home, in school and at church in his small home town. He says if elected he will move $200,000 million worth of federal programs out of Washington government and into the nation's communities. He also has served as president of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, as a U.S. Senate aide and as a worker in the Nixon White House. He is a graduate of Vanderbilt University and the New York University School of Law. He is married and has four children. Pat Buchanan -- The conservative television commentator and newspaper columnist is making his second attempt for the White House after his 1992 campaign helped weaken President Bush from the right. Buchanan, 57, is a one-time speech writer and aide to Presidents Nixon and Reagan. He represents the party's isolationist, protectionist, anti-immigrant wings, and is ardently anti-abortion and sympathetic to the agenda of Christian conservatives. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and has his masters degree from Columbia University. He is married. Robert Dole -- The Senate majority leader and current front-runner for the nomination is caught between the confrontational style that has marked his party and his own past history of negotiation and compromise in Congress. This is his third try for the nomination and his supporters feel it is now his "time" but he has not inspired many other Republicans. He has served in Congress since 1960, the past 10 years as party leader in the Senate. Previously he served in the state legislature in Kansas. In 1976, he was President Ford's vice presidential running mate in a losing campaign. Since his Senate seat is not up until 1998, he does not have to lose it in his presidential bid. At 72, Dole is the only candidate to have served in World War Two, in which he was wounded and decorated a hero. He is a graduate of Washburn University and is married and has an adult daughter from a previous marriage. Robert Dornan -- The California congressman and former broadcast journalist is a fiery, blunt-talking speaker who occasionally gets embroiled in controversy. With one break in service in the early 1980s, he has been in Congress since 1976, building a reputation as a staunch conservative and loyal supporter of Republican presidents. A former jet fighter pilot in the U.S. Air Force during the 1950s, Dornan has made defense issues one of his top priorities. His campaign slogan is "Faith, family and freedom," three principles that he believes Americans have begun to neglect. A native of New York, he is 62, married and has five children. Malcolm "Steve" Forbes, Jr. -- The heir to the Forbes magazine publishing empire is a political novice who is only beginning to have national recognition through extensive political advertising. He has written extensively about economics for the magazine. By far the richest candidate now running for the presidency, he is spending his own money on the campaign and is not subject to the limits set on candidates who use matching federal funds. He has served on the U.S. government's Board of International Broadcasting, overseeing the operations of the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. A graduate of Princeton University, Forbes, 48, is married and has five children. Phil Gramm -- The Texas senator and former economics professor says his steady sponsorship of tax cuts and spending reductions rather than his personality account for his appeal. As a Democratic congressman, he rankled party members with his support of President Reagan's tax and budget policies and then switched parties, successfully retaining his seat as a Republican. A native of Georgia, Gramm, 53, earned his undergraduate degree and doctorate from the University of Georgia. He is married and has two children. Alan Keyes -- The political commentator and former assistant secretary of state and ambassador to the United Nations is the first African American to seek the Republican presidential nomination. He is a fiery orator with strong conservative values. Twice he ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate seat in Maryland. Keyes, 45, earned his doctorate degree from Harvard University and has served as president of the activist group Citizens Against Government Waste. He is married and has three children. Richard Lugar -- The Indiana senator, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is the candidate who, in his campaign, talks the most about international relations. He is a former mayor of his home town of Indianapolis who has served in Congress since 1977. He is a graduate of Denison University and was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford. Lugar, 63, is married and has four children. Maurice "Morry" Taylor -- The president and chief executive officer of Titan Wheel International, Inc. -- a manufacturer of rims and wheels for farming and construction equipment -- is a political unknown who says his main concern is improving the U.S. economic base through balancing the federal budget and by creating jobs. A native of Detroit, he attended Michigan Tech and is a self-made multi-millionaire. Taylor, 51, is married and has three children. ------------- ------------- MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RETIRING IN RECORD NUMBERS A record number 13 senators and 37 members of the House of Representatives -- with a cumulative 814 years of experience in varying committee assignments -- have announced to date that they will not seek reelection in 1996, citing a variety of reasons for their decisions. Some said they no longer have the passion for the job and want to spend more time with their families; some have lost faith in party politics. Eleven of those in the House are stepping down to run for a Senate seat. In the Senate, where the record had been 12 retirees a century ago in 1896, the numbers include eight Democrats and five Republicans: -- Bill Bradley, New Jersey Democrat, 3 terms member, Finance Committee -- Hank Brown, Colorado Republican, 1 term member, Foreign Relations Committee -- William Cohen, Maine Republican, 3 terms member, Armed Services Committee -- James Exon, Nebraska Democrat, 3 terms member, Armed Services Committee -- Mark Hatfield, Oregon Republican, 5 terms chairman, Appropriations Committee -- Howell Heflin, Alabama Democrat, 3 terms member, Judiciary Committee -- Bennett Johnston, Louisiana Democrat, 4 terms ranking minority member, Energy and Natural Resources Committee -- Nancy Kassebaum, Kansas Republican, 3 terms chairman, Labor and Human Resources Committee; member, Foreign Relations -- Sam Nunn, Georgia Democrat, 4 terms ranking minority member, Armed Services Committee -- Claiborne Pell, Rhode Island Democrat, 6 terms ranking minority member, Foreign Relations Committee -- David Pryor, Arkansas Democrat, 3 terms member, Finance Committee -- Paul Simon, Illinois Democrat, 2 terms member, Budget Committee -- Alan Simpson, Wyoming Republican, 3 terms chairman, Veterans' Affairs Committee; member, Foreign Relations In the House of Representatives, the numbers include 25 Democrats and 12 Republicans: -- Wayne Allard, Colorado Republican, 3 terms (running for Senate) member, Budget Committee -- Anthony Beilenson, California Democrat, 10 terms member, Rules Committee -- Tom Bevill, Alabama Democrat, 15 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Bill Brewster, Oklahoma Democrat, 3 terms member, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee -- Glen Browder, Alabama Democrat, 4 terms (running for Senate) member, Budget Committee -- John Bryant, Texas Democrat, 7 terms (running for Senate) member, Judiciary Committee -- Jim Chapman, Texas Democrat, 6 terms (running for Senate) member, Appropriations Committee -- William Clinger, Pennsylvania Republican, 9 terms chairman, Government Reform and Oversight Committee -- Ronald Coleman, Texas Democrat, 7 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Cardiss Collins, Illinois Democrat, 12 terms ranking minority member, Government Reform and Oversight Committee -- E. "Kika" De La Garza, Texas Democrat, 16 terms ranking minority member, Agriculture Committee -- Richard Durbin, Illinois Democrat, 6 terms (running for Senate) member, Appropriations Committee -- Jack Fields, Texas Republican, 8 terms member, Commerce Committee -- Pete Geren, Texas Democrat, 4 terms member, National Security Committee -- Steven Gunderson, Wisconsin Republican, 8 terms member, Agriculture Committee -- Mel Hancock, Missouri Republican, 4 terms member, Ways and Means Committee -- Jimmy Hayes, Louisiana Republican, 5 terms (running for Senate) member, Science Committee -- Andrew Jacobs, Indiana Democrat, 15 terms member, Ways and Means Committee -- William Jefferson, Louisiana Democrat, 3 terms (running for Senate) member, National Security Committee -- Tim Johnson, South Dakota Democrat, 5 terms (running for Senate) member, Agriculture Committee -- Harry Johnston, Florida Democrat, 4 terms member, International Relations Committee -- Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas Democrat, 2 terms member, Commerce Committee -- Jan Meyers, Kansas Republican, 6 terms chairman, Small Business Committee; member, International Relations -- G.V. "Sonny" Montgomery, Mississippi Democrat, 15 terms ranking minority member, Veterans' Affairs Committee -- Carlos Moorhead, California Republican, 12 terms member, Judiciary Committee -- John Myers, Indiana Republican, 15 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Pete Peterson, Florida Democrat, 3 terms member, National Security Committee -- Jack Reed, Rhode Island Democrat, 3 terms (running for Senate) member, Judiciary Committee -- Patricia Schroeder, Colorado Democrat, 12 terms member, Judiciary Committee -- Gerry Studds, Massachusetts Democrat, 12 terms member, Commerce Committee -- Ray Thornton, Arkansas Democrat, 6 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Robert Torricelli, New Jersey Democrat, 7 terms (running for Senate) member, International Relations Committee -- Barbara Vucanovich, Nevada Republican, 7 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Robert Walker, Pennsylvania Republican, 10 terms chairman, Science Committee -- Pat Williams, Montana Democrat, 9 terms member, Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee -- Charles Wilson, Texas Democrat, 12 terms member, Appropriations Committee -- Dick Zimmer, New Jersey Republican, 3 terms (running for Senate) member, Ways and Means Committee --------------- --------------- CAMPAIGN '96: CAUCUSES AND PRIMARIES JIM MALONE WASHINGTON The 1996 U.S. presidential campaign begins for real with the Iowa party caucuses on February 12th and the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary election eight days later on February 20th. In the fourth part of his series on the U.S. election process. There was a time when candidates for president were chosen at the national party conventions. But beginning in the 1960's and 1970's the state primaries assumed the major role of deciding presidential nominees. Now the candidates are put through a rigorous schedule of state caucuses and primaries which begins in early February and lasts until June. In caucus states like Iowa, Republican voters gather in precinct meetings around the state and declare their preference for the Republican nominee. Delegates are awarded to the candidates later on a proportional basis. In some primary states like New Hampshire the voting is open to both Republicans and Democrats. Presidential candidates form their own slates of delegates before the primary and new hampshire's 16 delegates to the Republican convention are allocated to the candidates on a proportional basis reflecting the percentage of the popular vote each candidate won in the primary. New Hampshire's 16 delegates represent a small percentage of the 996 delegates necessary to clinch the Republican nomination (one-half of the one-thousand, 990 [1,990] delegates plus one). But New Hampshire is the most important primary because it is the first and because of the intense media scrutiny. The new hampshire primary has one other distinction, since 1952 every Republican who has become president has first won the new hampshire primary. Georgetown University government professor Stephen Wayne says the emphasis of personalities over the political parties and the influence of television in campaign coverage have boosted the importance of state primaries in the last 35 years: "John Kennedy tried to demonstrate in a presidential primary in 1960 that the American people were ready to elect a Roman Catholic as president. And Richard Nixon later used primaries to prove that even though he lost in 1960, he could still win in a subsequent election (1968)." Primaries and caucuses also serve an important role in helping voters get to know the candidates running for president. That is especially important in a year like this one when several Republican candidates are running who are not well-known nationally. Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne says all the candidates focus on making a breakthrough with the voters as early as possible in the primary process: "Since the candidates nominate themselves and run for office themselves and many of them are not that well known to the political party, it is very important that they achieve recognition early. And so they have tended to spend most of their money on the early contests to try to present themselves to the voters. This has given increased importance to the Iowa caucus which is traditionally the first caucus and the New Hampshire primary held on February 20th, is the first presidential primary." This year, several states have moved up the date of their primary in a bid to have more impact on the nominating process and to attract more candidates to campaign in their states. In fact three states, Louisiana, Alaska and Hawaii, are actually holding their caucuses before Iowa. This frontloading of the 1996 primaries means that the vast majority of the Republican delegates for the August convention in San Diego will be chosen by the beginning of April, far earlier than in previous years. Professor Stephen Wayne says the aim of every candidate is to develop momentum early in the primary season with a good showing in either Iowa or New Hampshire: "And states have found that the longer they wait the less interest there is in their primary and caucus because somebody has taken the lead and created a bandwagon and is mobilizing support and money tends to follow a winner. So the states have basically what we call frontloaded the process, they have moved up their primaries earlier and earlier. And today about 80-percent of the Republican delegates will be selected in a 44-day period from February 20, 1996 (New Hampshire) to March 26, 1996 (California)." The challenge is to keep the momentum going through the new England primaries on March 5th and the March 12th primaries featuring Florida, Texas and other southern states. That is known as super Tuesday because of the vast number of delegates selected. The campaign then moves into the Midwest primaries on March 19th and then to the California primary on March 26th. The primary season draws to a close with the Montana, New Jersey and New Mexico primaries on June 4th. The individual states determine the details of delegate selection but they also must conform to guidelines put forward by the two major political parties. Democrats have made a number of changes to their party rules for delegate selection in recent years in a bid to ensure more representation from women and minorities. Democrats also reserve about 20-percent of their delegate seats at the national convention for so-called superdelegates, including members of Congress, governors and high-ranking party officials. Republicans do not set aside seats for superdelegates. But they do differ from Democrats in that they allow some states to hold winner-take-all primaries where the top finisher gets all the delegates from that state. Democrats on the other hand require that delegates be divided proportionally for each state reflecting the candidates share of the primary or caucus vote. There have been suggestions to hold a national primary but Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne argues that that is unlikely as long as the early contest states like Iowa and new hampshire fight to maintain their first-in-the-nation status. --------------- --------------- CAMPAIGN '96: THE ISSUES JIM MALONE WASHINGTON Four years ago, voter anger over a weak U.S. economy helped to drive George Bush from the White House. But identifying the pivotal issues in the 1996 presidential race figures to be a bit more difficult. In 1992 Clinton campaign workers closely followed the advice of political guru (sage) James Carville who kept the Clinton campaign on track with his slogan, "it is the economy, stupid." But in 1996, things may not be so clear. Presidential elections tend to be a referendum on the record of the incumbent. President Clinton's record is decidedly mixed, but a downturn in the U.S. economy or mounting casualties among U.S. troops in Bosnia could seriously hurt his re-election chances. Elections can also turn on voter reactions to the results of the previous election. For example, some moderate voters disappointed in President Clinton's promise to govern as a new, more centrist Democrat supported Republican congressional candidates in 1994. That election produced the first Republican majorities in both houses of Congress in 40 years. In 1996, Democrats are counting on some of those same moderates to support the president in the face of what they see as an extremist conservative agenda put forward by the Republican-controlled congress. Historically, presidential elections have featured debates about the power and responsibilities of the federal government. Georgetown University government professor Stephen Wayne says the Democratic Party's traditional emphasis on the power of the federal government is sure to clash with Republican calls to return more power to the states and local communities: "Then, in 1992, President Clinton came in and he sought to maintain the government's large role. And there was a reaction to that in 1994 after the defeat of his health care program. And the Republicans now seek to devolve federal responsibility back on the states. So there is a pendulum that swings back and forth in the domestic area over what the federal government should be doing, how involved the federal government should be, how many regulations should emanate from the federal government." What decides who wins presidential elections? Many things, of course. There are the personalities of the candidates and their relative popularity. Domestic issues, especially the strength of the economy, are usually deciding factors. The relative weakness of the economy for incumbents Jimmy carter in 1980 and George bush in 1992 were crucial elements in their defeats. But foreign policy can play a big role as well as it did in the case of the Vietnam War in the 1968 campaign and Iran's seizure of American hostages which damaged President Carter's re-election hopes in 1980. By contrast, the easy victory over Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War did not help President Bush's re-election effort much in 1992. Political analysts are already consulting their crystal balls (they are looking ahead) for 1996 trying to determine which issues will be decisive. Analyst Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute here in Washington says the strong Republican tide which elected a Republican Congress in 1994 may not dominate the 1996 election cycle: "The final possibility to consider which may be the most likely is that we will have no large national tide here that would favor either party or would go dramatically against both parties. That voters are not terribly happy with what is going on but will pick and choose, will think carefully, or think, at least, about individual (election) contests." Differences between the president and Republicans over how to balance the federal budget will likely be a pivotal campaign issue in 1996. Republicans will argue that President Clinton is the last obstacle to a seven-year balanced budget plan and enactment of the legislative program they call a contract with America. Democrats will cite Republican demands for a large tax cut benefiting the wealthy and curbs on the growth of the Medicare health care program for elderly as fatal flaws in the Republican plan. They will also argue that losing control of the white house will remove the last check that Democrats have to prevent what they view as dangerous Republican proposals from becoming law. Republicans are expected to launch new attacks on President Clinton's character. They will also continue to raise questions about the Clinton's roles in the Whitewater affair involving the first family's financial ties to a failed Arkansas savings and loan association. But also look for heated debate on a host of other issues which usually come up in presidential elections years. Issues like welfare reform, abortion, affirmative action, education, health care, crime and the environment. --------------- --------------- POLL SHOWS FORBES GAINING ON DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE JIM MALONE WASHINGTON A new poll among voters in New Hampshire shows Republican presidential candidate Steve Forbes may be closing in on frontrunner Bob Dole. The poll comes less than one month before New Hampshire holds the first presidential primary February 20th. The poll of New Hampshire Republican voters was conducted by the Boston Globe newspaper. Frontrunner Bob Dole led the nine-man Republican field with 30-percent. Magazine publisher and political novice Steve Forbes came in second with 22-percent and appears to be closing the gap with Senator Dole. Commentator Pat Buchanan and Texas Senator Phil Gramm tied for third place with 10-percent each while former Tennessee governor Lamar Alexander trailed with five-percent. The rest of the candidates remain in single digits, but 19-percent of those surveyed said they were undecided about their presidential preference. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus four-percent. Steve Forbes has made a splash in the race by spending millions of dollars of his own money on television advertisements and making tax reform the centerpiece of his campaign. Mr. Forbes is proposing a so-called flat tax, changing the tax code to a single 17-percent tax rate for all taxpayers, a plan he believes would stimulate growth in the U.S. economy. But some political analysts are questioning just how strong a challenger Mr. Forbes is to Senator Dole. Norman Ornstein watches U.S. politics for the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. He says the Forbes phenomenon is partly driven by the news media's desire for a competitive race among the Republican contenders: "So that is why we are seeing this week cover stories in "Time" and "Newsweek" on Steve Forbes before he has really done much of anything, because they (reporters) want a contest. And if there is not a contest out there, they will find a contest. And so Bob Dole's ability to steamroll through to the nomination will be hurt in that way." Mr. Forbes and Senator Dole have been attacking each other with negative television advertising. The attacks are expected to increase in the weeks leading up to the New Hampshire primary February 20th. --------------- --------------- AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLITICIANS DISCUSS '96 ELECTION RODRICK MURRAY WASHINGTON 1996 is an election year in the United States, and African-American political organizations want the black community to have its say at the polls. The seventh National Policy Institute is holding a conference this month discuss issues facing black Americans. The National Policy Institute is a group of African-American elected officials. The group meets every four years, coinciding with an election year, to develop strategies for the future. Representatives from the public policy, civil rights, and religious fields will hold forums about issues such as education, welfare reform, poverty, job development, and voter registration. The sponsors say they want black Americans to be represented in the debate of issues that directly affect them. The police commissioner of Memphis, Tennessee, Shemp Wilburn, says creating jobs is essential for economic growth. But he says the black community can no longer rely on Washington for help: "Clearly we have got to be creative and innovative in coming up with ways to create jobs for ourselves. It is often said that the climate that we are in now is one where the African American community is being told that we must now pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. And so we have got to figure out how to create those jobs that will give our people an opportunity, that will give them a chance to take care of themselves and be prosperous, contributing citizens in this economy and this country." The president of the Washington-based Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Eddie Williams, highlighted some issues to be discussed during the conference: "One is the national leader's forum, bringing together representatives from these three cadres: Elected officials, religious leaders, and the civil rights community. Our goal in that discussion is to provide an opportunity for some significant discussion about strategies for 1996 and beyond. Then there are the subsidy panels, dealing with the economic issues, education issues, welfare, and poverty issues. There will be a concluding panel on civil society and that will deal with race relations and a number of other subjects." This month's conference will also include a success showcase to highlight some of the accomplishments that have already been made in the African-American community. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: LAMAR ALEXANDER DON HENRY WASHINGTON Former Tennessee governor and State University President Lamar Alexander remains a distinct dark horse as the Republican presidential nomination campaign nears the crucial primary voting phase (February-March). Mr. Alexander is hoping his self-styled image of Washington outsider and down-to-earth executive will catapult him to the top. Though he served as a U.S. Senate aide, worked in the Nixon White House and was education secretary in the Bush administration, Lamar Alexander calls himself a Washington outsider who will return power to American neighborhoods. He says his outsider status is a major reason why he ought to win the nomination against such Washington insiders as veteran senators Bob Dole and Phil Gramm. When Mr. Alexander declared for the presidency last year in his hometown of Maryville, Tennessee, he wore a plaid flannel shirt and talked fondly about his high school years and church upbringing as a boy: "My teachers at that high school taught me more than algebra and music. I learned the importance of the pledge of allegiance, of the greatness of this country and our civilization. Of the value of working and being on time, and of the difference between right and wrong. And across the street was the Presbyterian church; if the church doors were open, we were there." Son of a school teacher, Lamar Alexander was a popular student, a good pianist, a talented athlete. In 1966, he helped moderate conservative Howard baker become the first Republican from the state of Tennessee to win a U.S. Senate seat, and traveled along to Washington as a Senate aide. Mr. Alexander worked in the Nixon White House in the 1970's, and achieved political prominence in 1978 by winning the governorship of Tennessee after walking across the state in a homespun political campaign that stressed the virtues of a small town upbringing. He has continued to promote a populist image in presidential campaign appearances around the nation the past year: "Where I came from has almost everything to do with where I stand. Because I believe that parents and teachers in Maryville and Nashville and across this country know more about their children than anyone in Washington D.C. I would abolish the United States department of education and give you the responsibility for making the decisions for your children (cheers). We know what to do. I would not just fix welfare in Washington D.C. I would end it, and move the dollars back to you. We know what to do." Mr. Alexander ticks off a list of 200-billion dollars worth of federal job training, law enforcement, and other programs he would transfer from Washington to the states. He repeatedly calls the federal government the problem, saying state and local politicians and individual citizens know better how to handle their problems than anyone in Washington does. Once considered a moderate conservative, he has moved to the right the past few years and consistently speaks of lifting the yoke of government off the backs of farmers, teachers, business men and women: "We need a president who has the courage to say clearly and forcefully as long as anyone will listen, that we know what to do, and it is up to us to do it if we want to put our country back on the right track." But political observers question whether many people have been listening to Mr. Alexander. He was close behind Senator Gramm in the battle for second place in a 1995 test vote among Florida Republican activists, with Senator Dole well out in front. But on national polls, the former head of the University of Tennessee languishes below the 10-percent mark. Still, backers hope Lamar Alexander's populist appeal will attract voters who may be torn between senators Dole and Gramm, or others of the more outspoken primary contenders. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PAT BUCHANAN JANE BERGER WASHINGTON Conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan is mounting his second bid in four years for the Republican party's presidential nomination. Mr. Buchanan's controversial opinions on domestic and foreign policy matters have influenced debate among the candidates about the future direction of the Republican party. Pat Buchanan has always been a staunch conservative, but in recent years, he has moved even farther to the right. He no longer advocates free trade policies, and instead has embraced what he calls a policy of economic nationalism as one of his major campaign themes. Mr Buchanan supports cancellation of the North American free trade agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, along with a series of protectionist trade measures to prevent job losses to other countries. Mr. Buchanan says his policies will put America first, where it should be in the 21st century: "The battle for the future is not any longer between the United States and the Soviet Union, America and the evil empire, freedom and communism. I think the struggles that are taking place for the future in the 21st century is a battle over who will control markets, who will be the greatest manufacturing power on earth, therefore the greatest economic power, therefore the greatest political and military power." Mr. Buchanan also favors sharp curbs on immigration, and an end to American foreign assistance programs: "I think the Republican party should phase out foreign aid completely over the next three years. In so doing, they could save something like 60 billion dollars over a seven year period. That money could be used to virtually eliminate the corporate income tax on every small business in America." Patrick Buchanan was born and reared in Washington, DC, the son of an accountant, and he has always had a combative personality. He proudly recalls his fistfights and run-ins with the law as a rebellious teenager. And although he was suspended from college for one year, he graduated from Georgetown University and later attended Columbia University's graduate school of journalism. Mr. Buchanan began his political career as a speechwriter for President Richard Nixon. He later launched a national newspaper column, and in the mid-1980's returned to the White House as director of communications for President Ronald Reagan. Mr. Buchanan then became a regular conservative commentator on a series of television talk shows that focused on American politics. His television appearances served him well when he challenged incumbent President George Bush for the Republican party's presidential nomination in 1988. Mr. Buchanan claimed that President Bush was too moderate, and he shocked the country's political establishment when he came in a strong second to Mr. Bush in the first presidential primary contest. Many political commentators believe Mr. Buchanan's strong showing in the New Hampshire contest fatally weakened Mr. Bush in his campaign against Democrat Bill Clinton. On domestic issues, Mr. Buchanan is firmly anti-abortion, and he has campaigned against federally sponsored programs that guarantee blacks and other minorities opportunity for school admissions and government contracts. He sharply condemns homosexual rights, and says America's moral values have sharply declined. Mr. Buchanan now claims that the Republican party is in the firm control of conservative forces, and that there is no place in it for moderate Republicans: "If you take the Republican platforms of the last four Republican conventions, we are against affirmative action because that is government discrimination based on race. It is wrong. It is antithetical (contrary) to what we believe. We are pro-life. We are a pro-life party. I've worked my whole life to make this party a Conservative Party. It is. That's why we won America in 1994 and we are not moving back to a (moderate) Rockefeller Republicanism. That is going backwards. This country wants to go forward to conservative government at all levels, including Mr. Clinton's White House." At 57-years-old, Pat Buchanan this year is fighting to maintain a voice in the presidential campaign among a field of better-financed candidates. Nevertheless, his firm opinions have shifted the general political debate to the right, and as long as he stays in the race he will at least force the other Republican contenders to heed the conservative message. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DOLE JIM MALONE WASHINGTON The generally-acknowledged frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination is the majority leader of the United States Senate, Senator Bob Dole. He is making his third and probably last try for the White House, having failed in 1980 and again in 1988. In many ways Bob Dole is the quintessential American success story. Born in 1923 in the small Midwestern town of Russell, Kansas, Mr. Dole faced his greatest challenge early in life. As a 21-year old army lieutenant he led a group of American soldiers toward a heavily-defended German-held hill in Italy's Po Valley in April of 1945. As he climbed out of a foxhole after helping a wounded comrade, an exploding shell or bullet ripped into his body, shattering his shoulder, piercing his spine and leaving him temporarily paralyzed. Mr. Dole spent more than three-years in veterans hospitals recovering from his war wounds. Today he does not use his withered right arm and keeps a pen firmly clenched in his fingers to ward off those who want to shake his right hand. He was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1960, the same year John Kennedy was elected president. He won a Senate seat in 1968, became Senate majority leader for two years in 1984 and took over as majority leader again when Republicans won back control of the senate in 1994. This is his third run for president. He did poorly in 1980, but put up a spirited fight for the 1988 Republican nomination, losing to then-vice President George Bush. In announcing his third run for president last year, Senator Dole made it clear he will emphasize his long experience in congress and a record of getting things done in the presidential campaign: "My friends, I have the experience. I have been tested and tested and tested in many, many ways. I am not afraid to lead and I know the way." applause) His way is the conservative way, though more in the tradition of Richard Nixon than Ronald Reagan. Senator Dole wants to reduce the power of the federal government and transfer it to the states. But it was government medical care which helped him recover from his war wounds. Senator Dole believes the government does have a role in helping those who cannot help themselves, something which differentiates him from a younger brand of conservatives who look to Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich as their idols. His age could be a factor in the campaign. He is 72 and would be the oldest candidate ever elected to the presidency (at the age of 73) if he wins in November. But Senator Dole says his age could be an asset. He sees himself as one of the last politicians from the World War II generation, someone who has served his country well but who has one last call to duty to answer: "That maybe America needed someone from this generation, someone who sort of crossed all generations that are out there now. Somebody who understood hard times and good times and being tested and being on your back and being on your feet and facing whatever you might have to face in life, as all of you have faced, I think with a very positive attitude." Senator Dole first came to national attention in 1976 when President Gerald Ford chose him as his vice-presidential running mate. He quickly gained a reputation as a slashing campaigner which carried through to his 1988 race against George Bush. After a particularly bitter loss to Mr. Bush in the 1988 New Hampshire primary, Senator Dole lashed out at the vice-president, urging him to, in his words, stop lying about my record. Today, Senator Dole says he has mellowed and matured politically and he has learned some valuable lessons from past campaigns: "I said things I should not have said. I have never been more relaxed about what I am doing now. I mean, it seems to me that I am sort of at peace with myself. I know what I want to do. I am not going to be around criticizing anybody out there running on the Republican side. I have never personally attacked president Clinton or Mrs. Clinton. I gave that up. I had a round of that several years ago." He is well respected in the Senate, not only by fellow Republicans, but by Democrats as well who admire his character, his patriotism, and his biting sense of humor. Senator Dole places a premium on loyalty and keeping his word. Despite his bitter loss to Mr. Bush in 1988, Senator Dole fought hard for numerous Bush administration initiatives against a hostile Democratic Congress, right up until Mr. Bush's defeat in the 1992 election. On foreign policy, Senator Dole believes in a strong U.S. defense and in maintaining American leadership in international affairs. He was a strong supporter of the Persian Gulf war and memories of the Nazi march through Europe in the late 1930's spurred his call for a more aggressive policy to help Bosnian Muslims by lifting the international arms embargo. Senator Dole describes himself as a traditional conservative, but also as someone willing to compromise to get things done. His record indicates he prefers practicality over ideological purity. His willingness to compromise with Democrats gives him problems with some conservative Republicans, but his long record of service in congress and his impeccable political instincts and skills make him the clear favorite for the Republican presidential nomination. They would also make him a formidable opponent for president Clinton in November. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DORNAN JOHN PITMAN WASHINGTON Congressman Robert Dornan is running well behind his fellow Republicans in the race for their party's presidential nomination, but he continues to campaign. Robert Dornan's congressional career began as Democratic President Jimmy Carter's was ending. Mr. Dornan won his first congressional bid in 1976, representing a district in the western part of Los Angeles. During the next 12-years, he built a career and a reputation in the House of Representatives as a staunch conservative, and a loyal supporter of Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George bush. In the 1950's, Mr. Dornan flew jet fighters in the U.S. Air Force. In Congress, he has made defense issues one of his top priorities. He sits on the national security and intelligence committees, and has been a vocal supporter of the campaign to obtain information about American servicemen missing in Vietnam. During the 1980s, he supported controversial military projects like the strategic defense initiative, "star wars", and the B-1 bomber. He has also resisted efforts to integrate homosexuals into the military, and has vigorously opposed participation of U.S. soldiers in U.N. peacekeeping missions. But defense is not the only issue Robert Dornan is passionate about. Like other conservative politicians, he believes the United States has entered a period of social decline, and, as he hinted in a campaign speech, he blames the Democrats for causing, and perpetuating it: "I will tell you that if somebody is not publicly indignant about the bankruptcy policies of this, the richest country ever, destroying the American dream economically, and if somebody is not publicly indignant and saying, "stop this!" With our cultural meltdown and moral decline, then I will show you somebody who does not understand the facts. I will show you somebody who is a bystander." His campaign slogan is "Faith, Family and Freedom". Three principles he believes Americans have begun to neglect. Mr. Dornan is an unapologetic opponent abortion rights. He supports much of the welfare reform package included in the Republican party's "Contract with America". In fact, his campaign platform is similar to most of his Republican competitors. What sets him apart from other Republicans seeking the nomination is his commitment to campaign finance reform and term limits. But Congressman Dornan is not best known for his skills as a legislator. Rather, he has risen to national prominence by making scathing public attacks on other politicians. One of his favorite targets has been President Bill Clinton. From the floor of Congress and on the air, as a radio talk show host, Mr. Dornan has pursued the president on issues ranging from his participation in anti-war protests during the 1960's to adultery. According to Dornan: "He is a world class womanizer. He is a draft dodger. Character is the most important thing for the White House." For the most part, the White House and other critics have written Mr. Dornan off, as little more than an annoyance. On occasion, even his friends have urged him to tone down his rhetoric. But other observers say he would never have achieved a national following without his fiery speeches. Mr. Dornan has attracted a small segment of the middle class with his speeches about the loss of the American dream. It is impossible to count the exact number of supporters he has around the country. But a look at his fund-raising ability gives an idea of the measure of his popularity. Last year, he had one of the 10 largest campaign budgets in Congress, amassed almost entirely through small-scale personal donations. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: STEVE FORBES NICK SIMEONE WASHINGTON One of the candidates hoping to be elected president of the United States next November is a man whose family name is known around the world, but he is far from being a household name in the United States. He is Malcolm Forbes Junior, heir to the Forbes fortune and the man behind the empire that publishes the influential business magazine bearing his name. The name Forbes has long been synonymous with success in business. Steve Forbes, as he likes to be called, is now hoping success in politics will follow. The multi-millionaire candidate is hoping to tap into a sentiment among many voters who want a leader from outside the Washington establishment, someone who is more interested in getting things done than getting re-elected. Says Forbes: "Let us face it, the Washington political class has been an obstacle for the past 30 years. The American people know when the election is not there, these people are back to business as usual." The good news is Steve Forbes, unlike other candidates, can truly claim outsider status: The 48-year-old head of the Forbes publishing empire has never held elected office. The bad news is most Americans would probably have trouble identifying him among the field of Republican hopefuls and would likely have even more difficulty if they were asked to recite his ideas for governing. So, his chances of winning the Republican party's presidential nomination appear to be a longshot. Steve Forbes grew up among wealth and privilege, in a world where private jets are as common as private schools. He took over as head of the Forbes empire when his flamboyant father, Malcolm Forbes, Senior died in 1990. He now runs the Forbes publishing group along with his three younger brothers. The Forbes empire is estimated to be worth as much as one-billion dollars, making Steve Forbes by far the richest Republican running for president. That wealth is being used to keep his campaign apparatus well oiled. He has spent several-million dollars of his own money trying to get his name and ideas known to voters as he competes for attention in a crowded field of Republican candidates. Through the widely-read business magazine he publishes, Steve Forbes has been able to articulate his economic and political views. If elected, he says his goal would be creating more growth in the American economy. He is most outspoken on the need for what he says is a flat tax of 17-percent for all Americans earning more than 36,000 dollars a year. He attacks the current complex tax law, which he refers to as legalized cheating and a monstrous dead weight on the U.S. economy. He criticizes the Republican party's interest in a multi-billion dollar tax cut as falling short of what is needed to produce real economic growth: "The tax cut is inadequate. The growth rates that they assume are utterly inadequate to get America moving again. I think it may be a good start, but it is absolutely inadequate to get the future that we know we must have." He also backs term limits for elected politicians and has spoken out against President Clinton's decision to deploy troops to Bosnia-Herzegovina. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PHIL GRAMM JERRY MCKINNEY WASHINGTON Republican presidential hopeful Phil Gramm is working to convince his party he is the only true conservative who has a chance of beating Bill Clinton in November. Those who know Texas Senator Phil Gramm well say he has been preparing to run for president for most of his life. He was born in the southern U.S. state of Georgia but later moved to Texas. At the time the Democratic Party dominated Texas politics, so Mr. Gramm was a Democrat. He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1978 as a Democrat and won re-election twice as a member of that party. But in 1983 he was disciplined by fellow congressional Democrats for helping Republican President Ronald Reagan craft his economic package. Mr. Gramm then resigned from the Democratic Party and Congress. He went back to Texas where he was elected as a Republican to serve the same district. The next year he ran successfully for the U.S. Senate and in 1990 he was elected to a second term. He is seeking a third term this year at the same time he is seeking his party's presidential nomination. In the Senate, Mr. Gramm has built a record as a solid conservative on most issues. He has long sought to de-centralize government, balance the budget and reduce taxes. He was co-author of the Gramm-Rudman Act which was one of the first congressional efforts to reduce the budget deficit. When he announced his candidacy Mr. Gramm said he is seeking the presidency because he believes the nation needs a strong leader: "We need a leader that has the courage to tell our people the truth. We need a leader who has the vision to define solutions to our problems. Solutions that people can understand and can believe in. And we need a leader who is tough enough to get the job done." Mr. Gramm says he is the Republican party's best chance to beat the incumbent president. He says his record means voters would have a clear choice in a race between Phil Gramm and Bill Clinton. The 53-year-old Texas senator began the race as one of the best-ever financed presidential hopefuls. He raised more than four-million dollars at a fund-raising dinner the night before he formally announced his candidacy and funds have continued to come in since. But the money has done little to help Mr. Gramm mount a true challenge to front-runner Robert Dole, who also has had little trouble raising money. Mr. Gramm is working to convince Republicans it would be a mistake to nominate Mr. Dole: "Bob Dole can not beat Bill Clinton. Bob Dole can not tell our story in terms that working people can understand it. I can." Mr. Gramm continues to run second or third in most public opinion polls, despite efforts on his part to break out of the pack and move to the lead. Those close to his campaign say he hopes to score strong second-place finishes in the early contests in Iowa and new hampshire and then break into the lead when states in his native south and west choose. He also is hopeful Mr. Dole will make a major mistake and lose his lead, as he has done during past campaigns. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: ALAN KEYES MELISSA WINKLER WASHINGTON Alan Keyes is the first African American to seek the Republican nomination for the U.S. presidency. He is one of the least-known of the nine Republican contenders, and polls show him with no chance of winning. But he and his ardent conservative message are nonetheless capturing interest among Republican voters. Alan Keyes jumped into the Republican presidential race in March of 1995 and immediately grabbed attention with his conservative zeal. Virtually no one really believes the 44-year old political commentator has a chance of winning the nomination. But his campaign theme advocating family values has brought the party faithful to their feet at Republican gatherings across the country: "We should stop talking about voting for this winner and that winner and start talking about voting for what is good for the country. And I think right now we know that this country is beset by ills and we know in our hearts where those ills come from, they come from the breakdown of the social system, the breakdown of the family unit, the breakdown of the building block of this society and we had better put that at the top of our agenda. If you vote for somebody who puts it second third or last then this country will loose no matter who wins and I think its time we started to look at this election in those real terms. (Applause and cheers)." Mr. Keyes insists that America's budget problems are all linked to the country's moral crisis. The root of that crisis, he says, is abortion and he has made that issue the focus of his campaign: "We have defined freedom in a corrupt and licentious way that contradicts the heart of commitment and love and loyalty and obligation that is needed to sustain family life. Abortion is the issue that epitomizes that corrupt concept of freedom. We are destroying our families and destroying this nations moral and material fabric." Alan Keyes was brought up in a devout Roman Catholic family and, as a child of a military man, spent his youth on army bases. But his conservative political ideals developed while studying government at Cornell and Harvard universities. He went on to work for the Reagan administration, serving as ambassador to the U.N. economic and social council and as an assistant Secretary of State. He later ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate from (the state of) Maryland, losing to Democrats Paul Sarbanes in 1988 and Barbara Mikulski in 1992. In recent years he has worked as a radio-talk show host in Baltimore, and as a writer and commentator. Mr. Keyes faces many hurdles in his candidacy, starting with his relative political obscurity and lack of finances. He is also a black man in a political party whose 20th-century history has been mainly white. And he has alienated many potential black voters with his opposition to affirmative action and other social programs that often assist African Americans. He also angered blacks during the apartheid era with his opposition to economic sanctions against South Africa. Perhaps his biggest hurdle is that the other Republican candidates have already laid claim to most of the positions he holds dearest. Pat Buchanan, for example, is equally outspoken against abortion and homosexuality and Bob Dole has also stressed problems in the U.S. education and welfare systems. However, none of the other candidates appear to be able to match Alan Keyes' passionate political rhetoric. Despite trailing in the polls, Mr. Keyes has become one of the leading American voices of social conservatism. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: RICHARD LUGAR ERIN BRUMMETT WASHINGTON, D.C. Among the Republicans contesting the party's presidential nomination, Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar is considered a seasoned politician who is well-respected in Washington for his accomplishments in foreign policy. But the four-term moderate conservative is not as well-known outside the nation's capital and his lackluster style and foreign policy emphasis appear out of step in an era dominated by domestic politics. Mr. Lugar is campaigning on his long government service with expertise in foreign, military and agricultural policy. He asserts himself as a straight shooter and truth teller, tested at all levels for four decades. Mr. Lugar's first attempt at elective office was in the race for president of the student body at Denison University in Ohio. He tied with another student, Charlene Smeltzer, and they shared the office. Now they share the same home after 39 years of marriage. Mr. Lugar began his political career in 1964 on the Indianapolis school board. Three years later he was elected mayor. He even became known as President Richard Nixon's favorite city leader for supporting federal and state power-sharing policies. After eight years leading Indianapolis, Mr. Lugar ran for the U.S. senate and was defeated. In 1976 he succeeded in his senatorial bid and has been re-elected three times since. Mr. Lugar gained foreign policy recognition in rallying votes to override a presidential veto of sanctions on South Africa. He also persuaded President Reagan to stop supporting Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos and he won congressional endorsement of the Persian Gulf war. His long service on the senate foreign relations committee have made him among the most respected voices on foreign policy in congress. Mr. Lugar says the United States needs a president adept at foreign policy: "Something must happen for the president to command trust and confidence, that when the president speaks about moral issues in this country or about commitments necessary for American security and world peace abroad, he is respected." But Americans are preoccupied with domestic issues. So the Indiana senator decided to push for a tax overhaul plan. It abolishes personal and corporate income taxes and replaces them with a 17-percent national sales tax. Food, drugs, rent and other items are exempted. Mr. Lugar says this means bigger savings for Americans: "The scheme I am suggesting increases the investment pool from two-and-a-half-percent savings in our economy to seven (percent). That is a huge new pool for investment. That means new jobs, investment as Americans try to make money and keep the money they make." But some Republicans argue Mr. Lugar's tax plan and focus on foreign policy are not enough to set him apart from the other Republicans. And what some describe as a dull, stiff campaign style may also prevent Mr. Lugar from moving to the front of the Republican field. He also lacks the money and organization of his major rivals. Even so, he has advanced himself as the candidate of substance and straight talk over appearance and pandering. --------------- --------------- REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: MORRY TAYLOR IMANI CROSBY WASHINGTON Multi-millionaire and businessman Maurice, or Morry, Taylor is one of several Republican candidates for U.S. president. He is given almost no chance in the contest. At a debate before the (U.S.northern state of) New Hampshire's primary, Mr. Taylor said he is not at all concerned about his lack of political experience as he competes for the highest political office in America. He says he is also not concerned about what is described as his outspokenness on issues: Morry Taylor says his main concern is improving the U.S. economic base through balancing the federal budget and by creating jobs. He says America needs more high-wage jobs because it is hard to compete with a trading partner like China, where wages are much lower but the work force is much larger: "I'm the only candidate who has started from scratch and created thousands of good-paying jobs. I'm also the only candidate here who has worldwide trade (experience). It's time to get tough with America's trading partners, and, we've got to do that before we let all the jobs slip away." One way Mr. Taylor proposes to protect U.S. jobs is through what is considered protectionism, a step that could put the United States in violation of the recently signed world trade, or GATT, accord. He cites an example of a change he would make in international trade if elected president: "The first thing you have to do is become a fair trader, not a free trader. If you look at what's happened in our aerospace (industry), we've lost an awful lot of jobs. (For example), Boeing right now is laying-off. When you stop and look, did a new company in Europe take over? Yes, but it was backed by France, England, Germany and the Netherlands, (it was) called Airbus. It's wrong. We've got to start protecting our own job base because we are the market. If we don't protect the market, we're going to lose." As for social issues, Morry Taylor issues such as gun control and abortion rights should be enforced at a state, not federal, level. He says he would seek repeal the ban on assault weapons if he were president. Mr. Taylor says abortion is an issue for a woman, her doctor, and her religion. Although Mr. Taylor says states should have the power to legalize abortions for minors with parental consent, he says the federal government should not subsidize abortions under any circumstances. In international affairs, Mr. Taylor says U.S. troops should not be part of the NATO peacekeeping force in Bosnia-Herzegovina. He says Europe has enough countries to police what he calls a religious conflict: "We should not be over there. It's a war. It's actually a religious war, and, it's territorial. You've got everyone else over there. You've got Germany; you've got Italy next door; you've got France; you've got England, they're all big enough to get together and take care of it (Bosnia)." Mr. Taylor says the United States must stop being the police force for the world, and must scale back its participation in global affairs when there is no direct benefit for America engagement. Mr. Taylor sees his lack of political experience but wealth of business experience as an asset. He says its time to elect a president who knows how to manage, not just legislate, and he feels that president should be him, a Republican, not a Democrat nor an independent. --------------- --------------- WORLD PRESS: 'U.S. ELECTION CAMPAIGN BEGINS GAIL HAMER BURKE AND PAT MCARDLE WASHINGTON As the election campaign heats up in the U.S., foreign observers examined factors which they believe will have a significant impact on President Clinton's chances for re-election--mainly, the budget crisis, the controversies surrounding Whitewater and the White House travel office firings and Mrs. Clinton's ability to refute the allegations being made against her. BUDGET BATTLE--Writers bemoaned the long-term effects of the budget crisis: more political gridlock in Washington and increased voter frustration and ire. Commentators attributed Mr. Clinton's rise in the opinion polls to Americans' fears that the spending cuts proposed by the Republicans would result in an "enormous social upheaval" that would sharpen the divide between the haves and the have-nots, and create desperation among America's youth who are in search of jobs and a future. Many suggested that the president's stance--which had "helped solidify his image as a man of principle"--was an attempt to hold firm against an assault on 50 years of America's commitment to social programs. A Belgian writer suggested, however, that Mr. Clinton is less the "heir of Roosevelt's New Deal than the manager of a gradual liquidation of that heritage." The writer characterized the Republican Party as representing "the most ferocious aspect of the wealthy's selfishness." Some pundits turned their attention to Washington's political climate, with a few wondering whether the growing list of congressional members who have decided not to run again would turn into an "exodus." Centrist Stuttgarter Zeitung observed, "The hardliners on both sides are setting the tone, and it is difficult for voices of reason to be heard." WHITEWATER ET AL--Commentators suggested a Republican "offensive" behind the revival of the Whitewater and White House travel office cases, with many appearing sympathetic to Mrs. Clinton's predicament. Some suggested that the charges against the first lady persist not because of wrongdoing but because she is "too intelligent, too well educated, too much of a protagonist" and because she and the president have openly upset the traditional division of roles between men and women. Norway's independent Dagbladet quipped, "In the land of the Barbie doll, the working, educated and successful woman contradicts the religious right wing's agenda for debate in society." Analysts concluded, nevertheless, that Mrs. Clinton may have to appear before Congress to answer the charges leveled against her. Such an event, they predicted, might actually backfire against her critics. In the words of London's independent Financial Times, "Even Mr. Safire conceded that she could probably run rings round the senators." This survey is based on 26 reports from 17 countries, January 11-18. EUROPE BRITAIN: "Hillary Clinton Fights Onslaught" The independent Financial Times commented (1/16), "The first lady of the United States is Joan of Arc to her fans and Eleanor Roosevelt to her husband, President Bill Clinton, but she is Lady Macbeth to her critics and 'a congenital liar' to a New York Times columnist, who once wrote speeches for that paragon of truth, Richard Nixon. It now appears impossible for her to cross the road without controversy.... It is also impossible to know the truth of the allegations against her, other than to note, as President Bill Clinton did last week, that an allegation 'is not a fact.' But it is undeniable that, again, she has become an issue in a presidential election campaign that had appeared recently to be turning in her husband's favor.... "She is fighting back.... She has not ruled out appearing in person in front of the D'Amato committee, a prospect that has Washington salivating in expectation. Even Mr. Safire conceded that she could probably run rings round the senators and...Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah hoped over the weekend that such a confrontation would not take place. However, the onus is probably on Mrs. Clinton to lay out all she knows with the force of argument of which she is eminently capable. That will not stop the steady flow of denigration that appears her lot, but it could reduce it to a manageable drip." GERMANY: "Both Parties Are To Blame" Manfred Rowold said in an editorial in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (1/18), "This is not business as usual. This time not only figures are at issue but basic views on the role of the central government and the acceptable limits of the welfare state.... Both parties are to blame for the situation. The basic decision that resulted in the increase in costs were made when the Republicans Nixon and Reagan sat in the White House and the Democrats dominated Congress. Under Reagan, the annual budget deficit exploded from $70 billion to almost $280 billion, while it reached almost $340 billion under George Bush. But the $160 billion of last year were already a step back into the future." "Difficult For Voices Of Reason To Be Heard" Washington correspondent Juergen Koar filed for centrist Stuttgarter Zeitung (1/18) regarding the number of senators who do not want to run again, "Five Republicans and eight Democrats have thrown in the towel in frustration and are fleeing from the political climate in Washington.... An exodus of less dramatic proportions will take place in the House of Representatives. The hardliners on both sides are setting the tone, and it is difficult for voices of reason to be heard.... The U.S. governmental system requires the willingness to make compromises...and politicians who are able to build bridges are necessary to achieve a consensus. This may not be very likely in view of the current situation, but maybe it is also not desirable. However, this situation can be changed in November." "Whitewater Affair Is Grist For Republican Mill" Business Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf contended (1/17), "The Whitewater hearings...are creating mounting embarrassment for the White House. There is a reason as to why, under pressure, President Clinton is trying to distract attention from the affair by traveling to Bosnia and by focusing on the budget controversy with Congress. Right from the outset it has been President Clinton's battered credibility...that has been his biggest handicap. But now he is also being confronted with the marred image of his wife, whose reputation has been damaged because of her contradictory statements.... Little helpful in this politically explosive election year is the decision of the 8th Appelate Court which declined to grant the president immunity in the Paula Jones case. It goes without saying that the president will appeal this decision. But in connection with the never-ending series of scandals, this is a development which will result in a decline of his popularity ratings and will be grist for the mill of the Republicans who want to recapture the White House." RUSSIA: "Clinton More Stubborn Than Congress" According to a commentary in reformist, business-oriented Kommersant Daily (1/16), "Clinton has proved much more hard-headed than his Republican opponents in Congress.... "It may be that those calling the current conflict in Washington 'nonsense' are not all that far from the truth. Standing behind that 'nonsense' are quite real problems, but people prefer not to talk about them in public. One of those problems is the size of the federal government." ITALY: "Hillary's Intelligence Is Frightening" An analysis in the (1/13) issue of PDS (former Communist party) organ L'Unita' said, "Hillary is considered too active, too intelligent, too well educated, too much of a protagonist. In addition, she is testy.... What she is really accused of is not the legitimacy of her past tasks, but the aggressive way in which she has carried them out and the weight of her political and intellectual influence over President Clinton. The same accusation is being thrown at Clinton. Several people, and several authoritative journalists, believe the president is giving Americans a very bad example of what a good American husband should be.... He is accused of openly upsetting the traditional division of roles between men and women.... All these themes, in ordinary times, would be relegated to the margins of a normal electoral campaign. This time things will go differently, since the Republicans do not have many other cards to play.... Therefore, they have decided to attack the president on what they consider his weak point, i.e. his wife. Perhaps that won't be all negative. If Clinton manages to make it on these terms, and to impose Hillary's rights and intelligence over all the cliches and the small provincial jealousies, he will probably accomplish a revolution in the American public spirit even more important than any other social or political revolution he has in mind." "Hand Of Republicans Behind Accusations" Furio Colombo's analysis in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (1/11) said, "Concentrating all their resources on these kinds of alleged scandals should be considered humiliating by American journalists at a time when the United States is without a budget, American soldiers are in Bosnia against the will of the Congress, authoritative sources predict a new economic recession, and the number of the unemployed does not seem to be diminishing. Yet the press and television seem to enjoy the game. The unpleasant saga continues." "Everybody Against The 'First Liar'" Washington correspondent Ennio Caretto wrote (1/11) in centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera under the headline above: "The electoral campaign has de facto begun. Defeated in foreign policy (Clinton has obtained a green light for the deployment of U.S. troops in Bosnia) and in the dispute over the budget (Newt Gingrich pushed too hard, according to a majority of Americans), the Republicans are now playing the scandals card. And they seem to have a few aces up their sleeves. The White House saga, in fact, more and more resembles a comic-strip. But it may have serious political repercussions, so much so that Clinton has already scheduled a 'wide-ranging' press conference for tonight." CANADA: "Why No Budging On U.S. Budget?" Business columnist Peter Cook asked in the leading Toronto Globe and Mail (1/12), "Why no budging on the U.S. budget? The answer is political. It lies in the partial support that both sides muster on Capitol Hill, and the nature of that support. Mr. Clinton wants a deal.... He has already offended his party and cannot afford to alienate it.... On the other side, Mr. Gingrich has said that he will not do a deal unless 200 Republican members in the House support it. Mr. Dole cannot do a deal that his conservative rivals, such as Phil Gramm, will attack him for. Having left things to the 13th hour, a solution is as much entangled by election politics as by the ideological differences that divide Republicans and Democrats.... What, then, is the likely outcome? Either there will be a deal because financial markets are in revolt and the polls show it is needed, or there will be no deal this year. Politically, it is possible to get a budget through with the backing of Republicans and conservative Democrats. That may have Mr. Clinton's blessing or, if it does not, may force him to make more concessions. What is clear is that it is Mr. Clinton who stands to lose most and has least room to maneuver." "The Legal Problems Of Bill And Hillary" A commentary in French-language La Presse observed (1/16), "Whitewater...has something in common with Watergate.... Every time you think you know everything, a new revelation rekindles doubts.... "For Bill Clinton there is not even the possibility of challenging those who are attacking his presidency. Because this is a political campaign against him...(which) rests on presumption of guilt by association.... There is not much time left for the president to convince (American voters) that Whitewater and his at times tumultuous past in Arkansas have little importance for a president who has cut the deficit by half and who had a happy hand in defending American interests abroad.... Whitewater is not Watergate, but presidents have lost their race to the White House for much less." BELGIUM: "U.S.Election Campaign Has Virtually Begun" In socialist La Robert Falony wrote (1/16), "The U.S. election campaign has virtually begun. For Bill Clinton as for the Republicans...the problem is to position oneself vis-a-vis the middle class in view of the November election, either in the role of swashbuckler of the state deficit, or in the role of protector of the social security system. But there is an element of fiction in all this. Looking for compromises, President Clinton constantly yields ground and there will be further cuts in social benefits as well as in Medicare.... Clinton is less the heir of Roosevelt's New Deal than the manager of a gradual liquidation of that heritage. Of course, the Republican Party represents the most ferocious aspect of the wealthy's selfishness." "Like Joan Of Arc Facing Her Judges?" Columnist Franis Unwin wrote in conservative La Meuse/La Lanterne (1/13), "Everything is possible with Hillary Clinton, capable--like her husband--of endlessly reinventing herself. Before finally returning to her favorite reincarnation: Don Quixote, minus his naivete." NORWAY: "Hillary As Controversial As Eleanor Roosevelt" Independent Dagbladet opined (1/16), "Bill Clinton says Hillary is as controversial as Eleanor Roosevelt, and he says it as a compliment. The right wing, who dislikes the two first ladies equally, disagrees.... In the land of the Barbie doll, the working, educated, and successful woman contradicts the religious right wing's agenda for debate in society. Many women in America don't intend to be forced back into the kitchen, and will continue to defend the right to abortion and other gains women have made in the last 25 years." POLAND: "So Far Clinton Is At The Top" Military Polska Zbrojna ran this article (1/11) by Maximilian Berezowski, senior foreign correspondent: "Who is going to pay for all the disorganization and mess (of the paralysis of the federal government)? It seems that it should be paid for by both the Democratic president and the Republican majority in Congress. But that isn't so. So far, Clinton is winning.... He is winning mainly because of his veto of the drastic budget cuts for education and social welfare proposed by the Congress. By appealing to the American sense of justice, the president forced the Republican Party, so triumphant until now, into the defensive." SWITZERLAND: "The President's Advantage" Right-of-center Journal de Geneve observed (1/17), "The suspension of public services in November and December has, in effect, worked to the president's advantage. Clinton is now seen as the victim of arrogant Republican legislators who brought the administration to its knees.... (Congressman) Kasich recognized that the tug-of-war could last until the November elections. The two adversaries--practically neighbors in Washington--are miles apart on their projects to reduce the budget deficit to zero by 2002. The entire question revolves around the seven-year issue. Clinton's refusal to commit to this deadline--if it hurts America's most vulnerable--has helped solidify his image as a man of principle, undaunted by his adversaries. Such a boost is just what he needed during this electoral period." EAST ASIA AUSTRALIA: "Clinton's Hold On Presidency Begins To Firm" In an op-ed column in the national, conservative Australian, former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser commented (1/17), "Wherever there has been a major problem it is the United States alone that has ultimately made effective international action possible. I have sometimes been critical of U.S. actions, particularly in relation to trade. But in straight political matters that affect the future of the world, the United States is, and remains, the world's best hope for a sensible outcome.... Clinton has conducted an effective foreign policy with increasing maturity. The president seems also to have largely won the propaganda war in his battle with the Republican Congress.... If he wins the second term, which at this stage must be regarded as not only possible but probable, he will have earned it." "Clinton Leads But Scandals Loom" The regional West Australian (1/16) editorialized, "U.S. President Bill Clinton has started this election year on an unexpected wave of popular support resulting from his budget brawl with hard-line Republicans.... By re-asserting the role of the White House in the face of an all-out political assault, Mr. Clinton has preserved the constitutional balance between the President and Congress. In doing so, he showed the leadership qualities that American voters found attractive three years ago--but of which they have seen little evidence in the meantime.... The budget battle has exposed huge differences in policy and philosophy between the Democrats and Republicans. Electors will have a clear choice between parties that at times have seemed to be different in little more than names.... Mr. Clinton was politically deft in saying that the budget battle should be postponed and left to the people to resolve at the ballot box. But all his political style and acumen may not be enough for victory if continued scandals convince the American people that he is not fit to continue in office." CHINA: "When Will This Ever End?" Jin Canrong held in the official, Communist People's Daily (1/12), "This budget war actually started in early 1995. The test of will over whose budget cutting plan would prevail was a major political topic last year.... The 1996 election complicates matters. Both sides are using the budget conflict as a warm-up electoral contest. Neither side put a real solution on the table.... The two government shutdowns have caused major inconvenience to Americans and difficulties in the operation of the U.S. economy. The image of the United States overseas has also been damaged. This naturally aroused strong public dissatisfaction. At present, the public is criticizing the Republican party more than the president. In the long-term, however, this issue has illustrated a lack of political control that will not benefit the major political parties. A third party movement will undoubtedly profit from it. "Since the government has financing only through January 26th and the parties are still far apart on the concrete measures to reduce expenditures, one cannot discount the possibility of a third shutdown. Nevertheless, the leaders of the two parties are anxious to turn their attention to the election. Therefore the budget impasse may end in concessions." PHILIPPINES: "Bigger Issue Is Legacy Of Reagan Revolution" Adrian Cristobal commented (1/17) in the anti-Ramos administration Philippine Daily Inquirer on statistics cited by Secretary of Labor Reich during his January 3 news conference on the ill effects of the furloughs: "Although [Secretary Reich] noted an air of both optimism and cooperation affecting Congress and relationships between Congress and the Clinton administration, the quick conclusion is that the Republican Party leadership will hear it from the voters this year. However, the truth is that Clinton is not regarded as an effective leader himself. The bigger issue is the legacy of the Reagan revolution, which exalted the withdrawal of compassion from the poor as a moral value." MIDDLE EAST EGYPT: "Contract With America" Mohamed Safar Eid, pro-government Al Akhbar held (1/17) that for President Clinton "1995 was a year for foreign victories and domestic defeats. For the people it was a year of change, where Congress fell into the hands of the Republicans...and Internet fever became overwhelming.... The Republicans carried out a legislative coup that destroyed the achievements of 25 years.... Its real leaders...support the interests of billionaires.... The year ended with a clash on the budget that shut down the Federal government in a way that scared the Americans." SOUTH ASIA INDIA: "Conflict Of Ideas" An editorial in the independent Statesman (1/14) said, "A fundamental conflict of ideas is involved in the confrontation between President Bill Clinton and Republican leaders Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich over balancing the budget in seven years.... But frankly, President Clinton cannot really be blamed for rejecting the Republican demands as being too radical. A drastic cut in social security would normally result in an enormous social upheaval--of the kind witnessed in France, recently--that might push even more high school students into the back alleys looking for drugs and violence. According to the Republican plan, the complaint is that the spending cuts will affect the poor and tax cuts benefit the rich. Such a budget strategy can only lead to a sharpening of the divide between the haves and the have-nots especially if growth is not sufficient to push up income levels. No wonder a majority of Americans seem to prefer...Clinton's moderate stance to hardline Republican revolutionary fervor." PAKISTAN: "Developing Democracies Can Learn From U.S. Controversies" Karachi's independent, English-language Dawn (1/15) commented, "Blizzards of all kinds have been hitting the U.S. capital in the past couple of weeks.... The president will have to face sexual harassment charges.... The first lady has been accused of being a congenital liar.... A serving general criticizes the Clinton administration's strategy to check the flow of drugs from Latin America.... The Congress shows its muscle against the president and the budget for the financial year beginning October, 95, has not yet been passed in full. "But in the middle of all these major political developments there is no panic, no uncertainty of any kind and no doomsday prophet predicts the fall of the government or the collapse of the system. In fact, the responses that are emerging could serve as lessons in political tolerance for developing democracies around the world, especially the Third World. The lessons for emerging democracies are...not in taking refuge behind the excuse that democracy was new and had not yet taken roots." BANGLADESH: "Hillary A Liability" The independent Bangladesh Observer opined (1/16), "Hillary is a liability in the eyes of many. The problem is compounded by the fact that she is married to the president, which means she will be there. It is not a situation where a president can dump his vice president and go for a new running mate. That is where Clinton's feelings come in. And feelings must be respected." LATIN AMERICA PANAMA: "So Who's To Blame? The U.S. Public" Independent El Universal asked (1/16), "In the days leading up to the Congressional elections, voters backed the Republicans over the Democrats. Then the Republicans committed a fatal error: They tried to do what they promised.... So who is to blame for the lack of public maturity? The U.S. public is to blame, for wanting one thing and authorizing another." --------------- --------------- FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER "CLIP" NEWS SERVICE INEWS DAILY IS NOW AVAILABLE THROUGH E-MAIL FREE TRIAL LOW COST ROYALTY FREE REPRODUCTION RIGHTS AVAILABLE International News E-Wire Service (INEWS) is an English language daily, covering news of the world. INEWS provides up-to-date and accurate world news. It also includes many features and interviews covering such topics as current events, politics, economics, science, medicine, history, technology, agriculture, religion, and music. Low cost republication rights are available allowing articles to be used on BBSs, in newsletters, advertising, LANs, weeklies, community newspapers, school newspapers, brochures, media kits, presentations, church bulletins, and more. Every day, INEWS gathers reports filed by correspondents stationed at 26 news bureaus throughout the world. INEWS relates first-hand coverage of stories from news bureaus in Abidjan, Bangkok, Beijing, Berlin, Bonn, Cairo, Chicago, Geneva, Hong Kong, Islamabad, Jerusalem, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Miami, Moscow, Nairobi, New Delhi, New York, Paris, Prague, Rio de Janeiro, San Jose, Tokyo, Vienna, and Washington, D.C. Daily INEWS service is available for less than $4.00 a month. Delivered through E-mail in one of two versions, plain text or a DOS/VGA version. The DOS/VGA version is sent either through E-mail, encoded, or through file transfer on America Online, Compuserve, or Prodigy. A free two week trial can be received by sending E-mail containing E-mail address, name and address to: INTERNET: INEWS@AOL.COM AOL: INEWS COMPUSERVE: 76725,3622 -------------- ***END OF FILE***