The Arsenal Files 6/The Arsenal Files 6 (Arsenal Computer).ISO/epub/96snap04.zip/96SNAP04.TXT

Text File | 1996-02-19 | 155KB | 2,975 lines

==================================================================
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 [e-mail]
==================================================================

DISTRIBUTE FREELY

                        '96 ELECTION SNAPSHOT
                               VOL.1 #4


SUBSCRIPTION INFO/GENERAL INFO - [e-mail]
TO REACH EDITOR ---------------- [e-mail]


CONTENTS:
   BUCHANAN TAKES TO NATIONAL T.V. TO DEFEND AGAINST RACISM CHARGES
   LIBERALS AND THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
   GRAMM ENDORSES DOLE
   CLINTON NEW HAMPSHIRE CAMPAIGNING
   CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS AND THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
   CAMPAIGN '96: REPUBLICAN LEADER HUGH GREGG AND THE N.H. PRIMARY
   CAMPAIGN '96: EXPERTS ON NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
   CAMPAIGN '96: STEPHEN HESS ON THE PRESIDENCY
   THE POLITICS OF TRADE
   REPUBLICAN NEW HAMPSHIRE DEBATE
   CAMPAIGN '96: FROM IOWA TO NEW HAMPSHIRE
   CLINTON: STRESSING INCUMBENCY
   THE ROLE OF THE U.S. MEDIA IN ELECTIONS
   THE IOWA CAUCUS -- A LOOK BACK FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL
   CAUCUS EXIT POLLING
   THE MESSAGE AND THE MEDIA STRATEGY IN IOWA
   ON IOWA CAUCUS NIGHT
   CLINTON AND THE IOWA CAUCUS
   FROM THE MOUTHS OF CHILDREN
   EDITORIAL COMMENTS
   ALEXANDER RECEIVES BENNETT ENDORSEMENT
   NEW GEORGIA CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAP
   GRAMM DROPS OUT
   ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CAMPAIGN '96
   NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY HAS LONG BEEN KEY TEST FOR CANDIDATES
   DOLE WINS IOWA
   IOWA CAUCUS IMPACT
   IOWA CAUCUS REACTIONS
   IOWA CAUCUS: RADIO INTERVIEWS
   OREGON MAIL-IN VOTE: WAVE OF THE FUTURE?
   "ONE MAN; ONE VOTE" 1964
   TELEVISION TOUR OF THE WHITE HOUSE 1962
   LINCOLN BORN 1809
   WORLD PRESS: U.S. POLITICS:  FOLLOWING THE GOP HORSERACE
   FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER
   =========================
   ---------------
   BUCHANAN TAKES TO NATIONAL T.V. TO DEFEND AGAINST RACISM CHARGES

   JERRY MCKINNEY
   MANCHESTER, NH

   Conservative newspaper and television commentator Pat Buchanan
went on nationwide television Sunday to defend his presidential
campaign against charges some of its officials are racist. The
broadcast ("This Week With David Brinkley" on ABC) broke no new
ground, but may have a large impact on the Buchanan campaign.
   Pat Buchanan is one of three candidates for the Republican
presidential nomination who seem possible winners in Tuesday's
New Hampshire primary election. Most public opinion polls show
him bunched at the top along with Senate majority-leader Bob Dole
and former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander.
   But the Buchanan campaign has been hit with a series of
incidents suggesting it is supported by racists. There was a
campaign flyer in Louisiana pointing out the wife of former
candidate Phil Gramm is of Korean descent, a campaign worker in
Florida was also part of an organization supporting racist ideas,
and high-level campaign aide Larry Pratt was forced to take a
leave of absence after it was revealed he has appeared with white
supremacist groups on several occasions.
   Mr. Buchanan calls all these things side issues being
emphasized by his opponents because they do not believe they can
defeat him otherwise. Despite numerous suggestions Mr. Buchanan
dismiss Mr. Pratt the candidate says he will stand by him:
   "The man's reputation is on the line. His career is on the
line. His life is on the line. He has told me the things about
him are a lie. He has asked me for a chance to defend himself."
   Mr. Buchanan said he does not want to follow the example of
1House speaker Newt Gingrich who, he said, dismissed an aide
without first checking whether charges against her were true. Mr.
Buchanan said the aide was later cleared but could not regain her
reputation. He characterized Mr. Gingrich's actions as
contemptible.
   Mr. Buchanan was also questioned closely about statements he
has made about possibly giving nuclear arms to South Korea,
Taiwan, and Japan. He said he would not transfer nuclear arms to
any nation under any circumstances. But he added the United
States must recognize other nations could develop such weapons on
their own.
   He also said the United States must make it perfectly clear to
China any attack on Taiwan would not be tolerated.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   LIBERALS AND THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY

   NEAL LAVON
   MANCHESTER, N.H.

   Most of the attention in Tuesday's New Hampshire primary has
been focused on the race in the Republican Party and its
candidates' efforts to win the votes of conservatives. But as
there are other types of voters in New Hampshire.
   Most of the rhetoric in the New Hampshire primary has been
conservative. But not all New Hampshire voters and political
activists are conservative.
   Liberals and progressives in the northeastern U.S. state are
also listening to the candidates and making some political
judgments of their own.
   A group called "Expose The Right", a project of the
Washington-based liberal organization, "People for the American
Way", is arguing the candidates in the New Hampshire primary are
pandering to religious political extremists. For six-weeks the
group has been tracking the candidates and attempting to insert a
liberal point of view into an election dominated by
conservatives.
   Tom Andrews is the group's leader in New Hampshire and
explains how liberals are preparing to fight back:
   "People are ready to make phone calls, distribute literature,
stuff envelopes, knock on doors, and carry the word to people in
this state and across the country that the extreme right-wing
agenda promoted by religious political extremists are not in the
interests of our children, of our families, of anyone here, and
we are going to fight them."
   Mr. Andrews says even some of the state's conservative
Republicans are uneasy with the rhetoric coming out of the new
hampshire primary concerning social issues. He says Republicans
who support his effort feel adrift in their own party:
   "There are many conservative Republicans who believe in
freedom, for example, here in New Hampshire. And when it comes to
a question such as the very difficult issue of abortion and
choice, they believe that that decision should be the woman's
decision, based upon her conscience and her judgment. It should
not be a decision dictated by government. If that is how people
feel, there is no one to vote for in this Republican field. And
so when I ask some of the Republican supporters of this campaign
why they are doing this, they say we are here to fight for our
party and get the Republican Party back from these extremists."
   One female New Hampshire voter, Gail Page of Concord, says she
has not liked what she has heard coming from the Republican
candidates in New Hampshire:
   "It is sickening and frightening and I would like to see an
alternative viewpoint put forth. Oh, I have not questioned that
the Republicans are not going to come up with anything I would
vote for (laughter)."
   President Clinton won this state in 1992 by a slim margin over
President Bush and independent candidate Ross Perot. To do so
again, he will be counting on the support of the liberal and
progressive activists like the ones gathered at this rally on the
weekend before the New Hampshire primary.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   GRAMM ENDORSES DOLE

   JIM MALONE
   MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

   Senator Bob Dole received a boost for his presidential
campaign Sunday when Texas Senator Phil Gramm announced that he
is endorsing Senator Dole's bid for the White House. Senator Dole
is locked in a tight race in Tuesday's New Hampshire primary with
commentator Pat Buchanan and former Tennessee Governor Lamar
Alexander.
   Senator Gramm withdrew from the presidential race after
disappointing showings in Louisiana and Iowa. Now, the Dole
campaign hopes that the Gramm endorsement may win over just
enough conservative voters to push Senator Dole into first place
in Tuesday's primary.
   At a news conference in Manchester, Senator Gramm told
reporters that Senator Dole is the best candidate to bring the
Republican party together:
   "If we are just the party of economic conservatives or if we
are just the party of social conservatives, we are not going to
beat Bill Clinton. We are not going to change America. And we are
going to miss a historic moment where we can bring back the
American dream, where we can share it with people who missed it
the first time around. There is only one candidate in this race
that can do that job and his name is Bob Dole."
   Senators Gramm and Dole are longtime political rivals. For
much of last year, Dole campaign officials believed that Senator
Gramm was their main competition in the race for the Republican
nomination. That was before the emergence of Pat Buchanan as the
leading conservative in the race.
   An obviously grateful Senator Dole is now hoping that the
Gramm endorsement pays some immediate political dividends as time
runs down before Tuesday's primary:
   "I have talked to Phil (gramm) on the phone a couple of times
and he said one thing that struck me, he said, 'you know, I have
lost the election but I still love my country. And I (Phil
Gramm,) am going to support the best possible candidate who can
beat Bill Clinton.'"
   Meanwhile, Pat Buchanan was defending his campaign over
allegations that some of his campaign workers have ties to racist
extremist groups. Mr. Buchanan blames rivals and the news media
for trying to distract him from his America first message which
he believes will carry him to victory on Tuesday.
   And former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander is lashing out
again at Senator Dole for negative campaign advertisements which
Mr. Alexander says indicates that the Dole campaign is running
scared:
   "All he can do is negative ads against me which I am not doing
against him. I am talking about the future. And I believe new
ideas, fresh ideas are going to beat a negative Dole campaign any
day."
   The latest New Hampshire polls show a close three-way race
between candidates Dole, Buchanan and Alexander with Steve Forbes
lagging behind in fourth place. All four major candidates are
holding last-minute get out the vote rallies both Sunday and
Monday in a final attempt to persuade undecided voters.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CLINTON NEW HAMPSHIRE CAMPAIGNING

   DAVID BORGIDA
   MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

   President Clinton campaigned across the northeastern state of
New Hampshire Saturday just before that state's primary election
Tuesday. He is not opposed in the race by any Democrat. But he
told voters he still has tough opponents anyway.
   Usually in February, it is harsh winter weather in new
hampshire that keeps visitors away. But in the president's case
Saturday, it was ice and snow in Washington that delayed his
visit.
   He made all his scheduled appearances anyway, despite the
delay.
   With the bitter Republican primary contest here serving as a
dramatic backdrop, the president continued what he did last week
just before the Iowa political caucuses, offering an upbeat,
optimistic message. Telling voters America is moving in the right
direction, he highlighted what he sees as his key
accomplishments, a stronger economy, a more compassionate society
and a safer world. He said voters should not expect miracles but
more progress.
   He remained above the political fray, taking advantage of the
benefits of incumbency, never once mentioning all the Republicans
gathered here this weekend. But in a speech in Keene, in the
southwestern part of the state, he told voters he does face
opponents, just different ones:
   "Our opponent is cynicism. It is negativism. It is apathy. It
is division. It is short-term gain instead of the long-term
interest of the country. Those are our opponents. Remember, when
we're united we never lose; when we're divided, we defeat
ourselves. Cynicism is a cheap cover and a poor excuse for
inaction by the American citizens. Don't tell me your vote
doesn't make a difference, it does. It does!"
   He offered the same message in Manchester later. His campaign
pitch was briefly interrupted by a few demonstrators challenging
the president's commitment to helping those with AIDS. The
demonstrators have been active here at other campaign events
sponsored by Republicans.
   Still, it was a mostly successful campaign visit designed to
maximize media attention to the president throughout the state.
It ended with a fundraising dinner with Democrats, where he
thanked the party faithful for their support.
   New Hampshire has been good to Bill Clinton. He was a
relatively unknown governor from the southern state of Arkansas
in 1992. But he came in second here in the 1992 primary and then
carried the state in the general election.
   His re-election campaign insists he has been good to new
hampshire too, citing a declining state unemployment rate and
increased federal funds for law enforcement that provided for
hiring more than 100 new police officers in the state.
   But Bill Clinton's most critical political challenge lies
ahead, not in states like New Hampshire but in larger states with
more electoral votes. Next week, he visits California, with 54
electoral votes, and then he goes back there again in a few more
weeks.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANS AND THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY

   NEAL LAVON
   MANCHESTER

   One of the most critical voting blocs in Tuesday's New
Hampshire primary will be religious conservatives. These voters,
many of whom have organized themselves in a group called the
Christian Coalition, are expected to turn out in force Tuesday
and most likely will back former television commentator and
speechwriter Patrick Buchanan.
   New Hampshire's religious conservatives gathered in manchester
on Friday to hear from several of the candidates seeking the
support of their organization. While religious conservatives were
very important to the outcome of the votes in the recent Iowa
caucuses, political analysts are not sure of their influence here
in New Hampshire.
   The New Hampshire right to life committee, which opposes
abortion, is said to have more than 30,000 members. Many of them
are supporting Pat Buchanan, a candidate who is emerging as the
main rival to front-runner Senator Robert Dole, and a politician
who is not afraid of supporting the agenda of the religious
conservatives.
   Barbara Copeland, a voter from Bowe, New Hampshire, says she
thinks social issues will be critical to the 1996 presidential
election:
   "I think we're going to have a very big say, I think we're
going to surprise people, absolutely. There are a lot of
Christians out there. They have firm beliefs and they want a
change in this country."
   George Fellendorf is chairman of the New Hampshire Christian
Coalition and agrees that social issues will be paramount in the
1996 presidential election:
   "I think that in New Hampshire, you're going to see a very,
very strong evidence, as we did see in Iowa, of the importance of
social issues as compared to fiscal issues."
   Mr. Fellendorf concedes that the Christian Coalition may not
be as strong in New Hampshire as it was in Iowa, but he believes
that many voters who are not members of the Christian Coalition,
support the goals of the coalition and will vote accordingly on
Tuesday:
   "I don't think that the Christian Coalition membership as such
is as strong as it was in Iowa. But I think you have to realize
that there are a lot of people that are not associated with the
Christian Coalition that feel the same we do about many of the
issues."
   The Christian Coalition is distributing some 22 million voter
guides across New Hampshire in their bid to influence the outcome
of the New Hampshire primary this Tuesday.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN 96: REPUBLICAN LEADER HUGH GREGG AND THE N.H. PRIMARY

   NEAL LAVON
   NASHUA, N.H.

   When the New Hampshire primary became the political
institution it did in 1952, the governor of the state worked
ceaselessly to make it a reality.
   Today, that governor is still actively involved in maintaining
the status of the New Hampshire primary as the first in the
nation.
   He also is a key player in Republican Party politics in the
state and nation and offers perspective and insight into this
American tradition.
   Hugh Gregg was elected governor of New Hampshire in 1952, the
year of the first New Hampshire primary. The name "Gregg" is
synonymous with Republican Party politics in this state. One of
Hugh's two sons, Judd Alan Gregg, is also a former governor of
New Hampshire and is currently a United States senator.
   Governor Gregg remembers the first Republican primary when
then-General Dwight D. Eisenhower defeated Senator Robert taft,
and went on to capture his party's presidential nomination and
the White House.
   While the technology of the campaign is certainly different
from the technology used in 1952, Governor Gregg says, that's
about the only thing that has changed about the New Hampshire
primary:
   "Well, it hasn't changed as much as many people think. Back in
1952, when we had the first race up here, with General Eisenhower
on the ticket, we didn't have television, we used typewriters and
carbon paper, we had no fax machines, no computers and that
technology, of course, changed dramatically. But the basic part
of what makes New Hampshire unique is the one-on-one and get out
on the street and meet the people. That hasn't changed very
much."
   Except for 1992, when Governor Bill Clinton lost to former
Massachusetts Senator Paul Tsongas, the New Hampshire primary has
an uncanny record of picking the candidates who go on to capture
the Oval Office.
   Governor Gregg points out that the primary serves not just the
voters in New Hampshire, but the voters across the nation as
well. And other states, which are trying to usurp New Hampshire's
role, can not duplicate the interest and sophistication of the
voters in this snowy, northeastern enclave:
   "It was great for the state. It was great for our economy, it
was great for the people of our state. But more importantly, it
was great for the nation. As you probably know, New Hampshire has
never missed, we've always picked the president. We had a little
aberration last time and that's explainable. The neighbor's boy
from Massachusetts ran against a foreigner and that can happen.
But we dismissed that one. With that kind of a reputation, people
began to wonder, how do they do that up in New Hampshire?' Maybe
we should get a piece of the action when they saw the press and
the media coming up here. So this year, many people have been
trying to encroach upon us, but that's been good for us."
   So what's New Hampshire's secret? How can a state with less
than half of one percent of the nation's population and a state
that reflects so little of the America's diversity, manage to be
so right so much of the time?
   Hugh Gregg says it's because New Hampshire's people are
interested in political candidates as people and are more
concerned with character than ideology. And that, he adds, is the
biggest asset that New Hampshire voters possess:
   "One interesting thing about the New Hampshire people is that
they are not interested in issues. Well I mean everyone is
interested in issues but the point is, that we don't look so much
to that as we do to the individual. Because we have a chance to
talk to people personally, we look at the person with the idea,
would he be a good friend? Would he be a good leader? Is he
honest? Does he have decency? Is he somebody I would like to have
in my home? Is he in good health that can carry on the tremendous
responsibilities of the presidency. They are more interested in
the individual that they are voting for than the issues for which
he stands. And I think that's what's important. And that's killed
a lot of people (ended their candidacies) because they didn't
measure up on those qualifications, even though they may have
been saying the right things as a person, as a man, as a woman.
They just didn't measure up to somebody that we felt was
experienced enough and qualified enough to lead this nation."
   While other states tried to steal New Hampshire's thunder by
trying to put their primary first, the American political
establishment rallied around the granite state's traditional
status and maintained the present political structure.
   But even the attempts by states like Arizona and Delaware,
Governor Gregg points out, have only aided New Hampshire in
keeping its spot at the front of the political line:
   "All its done is emphasize the importance, and the necessity
and the good of the nation New Hampshire serves by having the
early primary. And the best part of it is, is that all your major
candidates in both parties, President Clinton being one of them,
have said, we have to preserve the New Hampshire primary for the
good of the nation'. And before, people may have felt that way
but they never said it. Now they're on the record as having said
it. And I don't think there's any question that in the future,
they're going to do everything they can to preserve the new
hampshire primary."
   Former governor of New Hampshire Hugh Gregg, speaking on the
New Hampshire primary which takes place Tuesday across the state.
For the record, he's picking Senator Bob Dole to win.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: EXPERTS ON NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY

   NEAL LAVON
   HANOVER, NEW HAMPSHIRE

   Two long-time observers of the New Hampshire primary agree
that Senator Bob Dole is likely to win when Republicans cast
their ballots in Tuesday's election. They also agree that the New
Hampshire primary will survive as the first presidential primary
in the nation. But they disagree as to what Tuesday's result may
mean for Republican hopes against President Clinton in the fall.
   Jeffrey Hart is a veteran conservative writer and editor who
analyzes American politics from Dartmouth College in hanover, New
Hampshire, where he is a professor of English.
   Professor Hart thinks Senator Bob Dole will win Tuesday's New
Hampshire primary. But the Republican electoral coalition
engineered by former president Ronald Reagan so successfully in
the 1980s, he says, is in danger of unravelling as the major
candidates in the race attack each other more than President
Clinton and the Democrats:
   "I see a close win for Bob Dole. The interesting thing about
these candidates is how each of them seems to reflect one part of
the coalition that Reagan put together. Forbes, the optimism; Pat
Buchanan, the cultural conservatism; Bob Dole, of course,
reflects the experience of being in Washington for a long time,
Republicanism. The one thing of Reagan's that they don't inherit
was the eleventh commandment, do not speak ill of another
Republican'. They certainly have let that go by the board. But
the Reagan mixture seems to have fragmented among these various
people."
   Laurence I. Radway, professor emeritus of government at
Dartmouth College, has hands-on experience in new hampshire
politics, serving as a Democratic Party leader in the state's
legislature and managing several Democratic presidential primary
campaigns here in the 1980s.
   He says the support and political organization of new
hampshire's popular Republican Governor Stephen Merrill will help
Senator Dole win the primary. But the other candidates, he adds,
have some assets of their own:
   "Nobody's going to have a commanding victory here. It's going
to be close. Several of these people have major assets here. The
governor of the state is quite popular and a Dole supporter. A
good deal of the Republican establishment leans toward him. Pat
Buchanan, on the other hand, has the support of the most
important newspaper in the state and he'll do very well with
working-class Democrats. And Alexander is, I would say, the third
person who is going to do well. He gained much ground out there
in Iowa and has a very able young manager in the state, a former
student of mine. And I think Forbes will find New Hampshire
slightly more favorable to him than in Iowa. So, it's going to be
pretty close."
   Recent tracking polls show a very tight race developing
between Senator Dole and Pat Buchanan, while Steve Forbes and
Lamar Alexander are deadlocked further back for third place. A
significant bloc of the electorate still remains undecided.
   Professor Radway believes that no matter who comes out on top
this Tuesday, the Victor in New Hampshire's Republican primary
will be President Clinton:
   "But I may say, I think so far, the real winner in the primary
contest has been President Clinton. Because the Republicans have
slashed each other to bits. There's a very important story in The
New York Times... The issue of the deficit has faded out. People
are not talking about that as much as they did before."
   Throughout much of last year and the first weeks of this year,
other states like Arizona and Delaware tried to usurp new
hampshire's position as first in the nation primary. Both parties
and candidates eventually acted to protect New Hampshire's status
but political observers think New Hampshire's role may be in
danger. Professor Hart believes the New Hampshire primary
deserves to survive and plays an important role in American
politics:
   "1my only reservation about it is that America is a big
country and therefore, a prolonged journey among the various
states by the candidate makes a certain sense which it might not
in England where the party leader emerges as the nominee having
been examined by the party in parliament and so on. But here, you
don't know these people until you see a great deal of them, I
think."
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: STEPHEN HESS ON THE PRESIDENCY

   TED LANDPHAIR
   WASHINGTON

   As the presidential campaign begins to stir, the American
people are paying close attention to the man who currently has
the job, and to those who would like to have it. Through
presidencies as far back as the Eisenhower administration 40
years ago, Stephen Hess has served on White House staffs or
written about the nation's highest office. Now he has published a
book on the presidency.
   Stephen Hess has been a White House staff member and
speechwriter, a syndicated columnist, and is now a presidential
scholar at the Brookings Institution think tank [research
organization] in Washington. Over the years he has written a
number of essays, some of which have been collected in a new book
called presidents and the presidency. Today, a president is
regularly investigated by the press and hammered by the party out
of power. And even those of the same political party who aspire
to the job routinely demean each other in speeches and debates.
So Stephen Hess, why would anyone in an unforgiving age of attack
ads and prying media even want to be president?:
   "I guess it's a very exciting thought to know that
schoolchildren and others a hundred years from now will be
reading about your achievements and probably your failures in the
year 1996."
   Stephen Hess says he grew up in a time of an idealized
presidency, even when the incumbent was not especially well
liked. The job was lionized in textbooks, and the White House
press corps conveniently overlooked a president's character
flaws. But Mr. Hess says later generations formed less charitable
impressions of the presidency during turbulent times, such as the
ferment over the unpopular war in Vietnam:
   "Or there were long gas lines because of our problems with
Iran in 1977. Or Watergate even more so, a president who was
forced out of office in a tremendous constitutional crisis. So I
think we have to be lucky for awhile and have some fine
presidents doing some fine things before another generation is
going to come along and have that sort of respect that we had."
   Presidents once ventured out of the White House, alone, for a
stroll on Washington streets. They chatted with strangers in
hotel lobbies, and routinely took breaks from office to visit
with pals back home. Some of those pals became informal White
House advisers called a "kitchen cabinet" who helped a president
stay in touch with the mood of the country. But Stephen Hess says
that is less so today:
   "Instead of a president's relying on an elite, a group of wise
men, maybe by today they'd be wise women, but in the old days
they were wise women, now a president relies on the morning
headline or the evening network television show, increasingly by
polling. So it's become more and more a presidency in which you
wet your finger and you hold it up, and you see which way the
wind is blowing. And the forces that produce the wind
increasingly are the media."
   Presidents make mistakes, of course, says Stephen Hess,
sometimes out of exuberance at the chance to act on the many
ideas they have tossed out during a campaign. President Clinton's
first significant act, for instance, was a controversial push to
allow homosexuals to serve in the U.S. military, though the issue
had even been peripheral in the gay community. Then he drew more
fire by appointing his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to lead
efforts to reform the nation's health care system. And Mr.
Clinton raised eyebrows when he invited to the White House
various friends from Little Rock [Arkansas] and Hollywood for a
chat:
   "He was just so delighted at being president that he took the
option to be able to have anyone in that he wanted. Who would you
really want to have dinner with? We'd all ask that. It could be a
party game. 'Well, I think I'd like to have dinner with Barbara
Streisand.' well, pick up the phone and call her. 'I'd like to
have dinner with Frank Sinatra.' pick up the phone and call him.
Anybody could come. But I think he quickly learned that you don't
get your information about what makes America tick from Barbara
Streisand or Frank Sinatra. That was an error of a young
presidency."
   Stephen Hess says President Clinton, if he is re-elected, or a
Republican president, will have only about a year to take
advantage of the mandate from voters. There is a midterm
congressional election in the second year, in which a president's
record usually comes under close scrutiny. The third year is
spent recovering from that battering. And in the fourth year, the
president has either become what's called a "lame duck",
preparing for retirement, or is busy posturing for his bid for
re-election.
   Business executives Steve Forbes and Ross Perot, and
journalist Pat Buchanan have made serious runs for the presidency
in this decade. But except for an army general, Dwight Eisenhower
in 1952 and 1956, and one businessman, Wendell Willkie in 1940,
all the democratic and Republican finalists for the job of
president in this century have been professional politicians.
Stephen Hess says that's what the American people seem to prefer,
since they are mostly apolitical [a-political]. They would rather
talk about family, religion, their jobs, or even sports before
politicians' favorite issues like taxes and trade:
   "So what they do is pick somebody to do all this political
stuff for them, and they want to feel very comfortable with that
person. And it's very unlikely that a corporate executive has
that kind of aura."
   Yet a president needs management skills, says Mr. Hess. He
points out that the federal government's executive branch, of
which Bill Clinton is in charge, has one-million more people than
did the entire state of Arkansas, where Mr. Clinton was governor.
Americans like their presidents to be bright, says Stephen Hess,
but not overly cerebral. Intellectuals, he says, are always
pondering various options rather than decisively acting.
   For the remainder of this campaign year, he says, Bill Clinton
can expect rough treatment from Republicans for the hints of
scandal that have touched him and his administration:
   "Politicians, like nature, abhor a vacuum. So if the world is
at peace, and if the country is economically strong, the
opposition party will spend more of its time working on what it
calls 'the character issue.' I don't think a character issue
alone can bring down a president. But it certainly would suggest,
perhaps, the nature of the campaign next fall."
   If Senator Bob Dole or an even more conservative Republican
wins the White House, don't expect as many new directions and
radical new programs as his campaign speeches might suggest.
Change, Stephen Hess says, comes slowly in Washington.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   THE POLITICS OF TRADE

   DAVID SWAN
   SENATE

   This year's American presidential campaign has focused heavily
on economic issues so far, especially taxes and the effort to
balance the nation's budget. But with conservative commentator
Pat Buchanan rising high in the Republican field, foreign trade
and protectionism have suddenly become key topics.
   His opponents call him an extremist who will never be
nominated by the party or elected by the voters. Mr. Buchanan
describes himself as a "new conservative," committed to restoring
traditional values and protecting American jobs:
   "I do believe the working people of this country see in Pat
Buchanan a friend who is concerned about their loss of jobs and
their lower standard of living, and they see in Washington
politicians who really don't seem to care and who are committed
to these trade deals that look good on paper but are devastating
in impact."
   Mr. Buchanan spends much of his time condemning trade deals,
mainly the worldwide GATT accords and the North American free
trade agreement, or NAFTA, between the United States, Mexico and
Canada:
   "Sure, NAFTA was really a wonderful deal for America. Two
years after we negotiated it and signed it our trade surplus is
gone, we got a 15-billion dollar trade deficit with Mexico."
   Mr. Buchanan's protectionist views are not new. He said much
the same thing when he ran against George Bush four years ago.
But that was a largely symbolic campaign against a sitting
president. Now, the Republican race is wide open, and according
to public opinion polls, Pat Buchanan could win the pivotal New
Hampshire primary election next week. In a debate in New
Hampshire Thursday, he used the trade issue to attack his chief
rival, Senate majority leader Bob Dole:
   "Three-hundred thousand jobs have gone south, the Florida
winter tomato industry is on its back, illegal immigration is
soaring into this country, Mexico is the prime source of
narcotics and drugs, and my good friend Senator Dole negotiated a
50-billion dollar bailout with Bill Clinton for the regime that
brought this all about."
   Mr. Buchanan may be finding a receptive audience because many
big companies slashed payrolls in recent years, even when the
U.S. economy was not in recession. This left hundreds of
thousands of people jobless and made many others worry about
their futures.
   Ironically, Mr. Buchanan's views on NAFTA are close to those
of some liberal Democrats in Congress. Last year, they introduced
a bill that would pull the United States out of the pact unless
Mexico changes what they call unfair policies. Meanwhile, most of
the Republican presidential pack is still supporting free trade.
Former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander tells voters the system
worked for his state:
   "I became governor of one of the poorest states. We had to get
our family incomes up. The way we did it was to join the world.
We recruited international investment and we got busy selling our
soybeans and our cotton and our corn and our Jack Daniels
(whiskey) and our country music. And now we're ready to sell our
Saturn cars around the world."
   For Senator Dole, who was long considered the Republican
frontrunner, the trade controversy comes at a difficult time. It
has put him on the defensive as he fights to stay atop the
Republican field.
   However, the senator shows no sign of backing away from the
party's traditional free-trade stance and is trying to turn the
issue against President Clinton instead:
   "We've got to trade. We've got to go out there and find
opportunities. Now maybe we can be more aggressive with NAFTA and
GATT and things of that kind. Maybe the administration hasn't
done what they should, using some of the tools they have. But you
know, we can't build a wall around America."
   The administration says NAFTA is already working, creating and
not destroying jobs for Americans. But with so many people so
worried about job security, the issue seems unlikely to
disappear, even if Pat Buchanan eventually quits the race.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN NEW HAMPSHIRE DEBATE

   JIM MALONE
   MANCHESTER

   Disagreements over international trade agreements and
accusations of negative campaign tactics took center stage at
Thursday night's Republican presidential debate in manchester,
New Hampshire. The debate revealed a deep divide within the
Republican party over the benefits of free trade agreements.
   Commentator Pat Buchanan, hoping to ride a wave of momentum
from his strong second place finish in Iowa to victory in New
Hampshire, once again went on the attack against the NAFTA and
GATT trade agreements.
   Mr. Buchanan says the trade pacts sold out American jobs and
he went after (criticized) Senator Bob Dole for supporting both
trade agreements as well as the Clinton Administration's
financial bailout of Mexico:
   "I plead guilty Bob to wanting to protect American workers
making ten bucks (dollars) an hour in South Carolina textile
mills from having to compete with Mexicans making a buck an hour.
That is just not fair. That is unamerican."
   Mr. Buchanan and Senator Dole are running neck and neck in
some of the most recent New Hampshire polls and long term
concerns over the economy and jobs may become a pivotal issue in
this primary battle. Senator Dole ridiculed Mr. Buchanan's call
for a fence along the U.S. border with Mexico to keep out illegal
aliens and says he is committed to making sure the free trade
agreements work for the benefit of American workers:
   "But Pat is off on this isolationist kick. Build a fence
around America. Now let us face it, the thing we ought to do in
Mexico is to get this NAFTA thing (working), get a good strong
president who will use the weapons that the Congress gave him and
improve the economy of Mexico. (Then) those people will stay
home."
   The two men also jousted over negative campaign advertising on
television, with Mr. Buchanan criticizing Senator Dole for a new
ad which portrays the conservative commentator as too extreme to
occupy the White House. Senator Dole also went after magazine
publisher Steve Forbes for his earlier negative TV ads and
accused him of trying to buy the presidential election.
   Former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander said he is best
equipped to lead the country into the next century as a
Washington outsider, while the other four contenders focused on
restoring moral values and making the United States more
competitive economically with other nations.
   There were no knockout punches thrown Thursday but Mr.
Buchanan did appear the most self-assured of the group and at one
point boasted that his campaign is now on fire and that he is on
his way to the Republican presidential nomination.
   Senator Dole touted his long experience in the congress as his
main qualification and said Republicans were only one election
away from gaining control of both the White House and congress
for the first time since the 1950's.
   New Hampshire voters will have their say on the candidates in
next Tuesday's primary.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: FROM IOWA TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

   TOM MAHONEY
   WASHINGTON

   Senator Phil Gramm, after a disappointing fifth-place finish
in the Iowa caucuses [feb. 12], has abandoned his bid to win the
Republican presidential nomination.
   At a Washington news conference [2-14], Texas senator Phil
Gramm told reporters it wouldn't be fair for him to stay in the
race when it became clear he could not win his party's
presidential nomination. In a Capitol Hill hearing room filled
with enthusiastic supporters, he accepted full responsibility for
failing to convince voters he was the best candidate.
   The fifth-place finish in Iowa sealed his fate. Veteran
political analyst Fred Barnes of the weekly standard had this
reaction to the collapse of Senator Gramm's candidacy:
   "We'd seen in the few weeks before, after he lost the
Louisiana caucuses and generally failed to stir conservatives or
others in the party, he was going to be one of history's great
presidential campaign failures.
   "I would have thought that his conservatism would have been
more appealing to what is basically the core of the Republican
party. Turned out he was too humorless, too narrow, too
unappealing to social conservatives, and got nowhere."
   In a morning-after assessment of caucus results, about the
time Senator Gramm was cutting short a campaign trip to New
Hampshire, the chairman of Iowa's Republican Party said he
thought it was now a three-man race. Brian Kennedy says Iowans
did their usually effective job of narrowing the large field of
contenders before the New Hampshire primary, February 20th:
   "Senator Dole has the experience and leadership and those are
his strengths. Pat Buchanan, the commentator, is an idealogue.
He's very passionate in communicating about issues. Lamar
Alexander is a more pragmatic figure, a governor from outside
Washington. So these are three distinct choices that are offered
to voters in the rest of the country."
   So what about Iowa's top three finishers? Fred Barnes says he
was among a number of people surprised by Senator Dole's thin
margin of victory over Pat Buchanan. Fellow analyst Stuart
Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the Rothenberg Political
Report, says Bob Dole's problem is he really doesn't have a
compelling message:
   "Bob dole's message is, it's his turn. He's the oldest white
guy in the Republican party and so it's his turn to be the
nominee. That's not a terrific emotional message for anybody. And
this is a campaign with a candidate who I think has some stature,
who obviously has chits [favors to be paid back] within the
party, many IOU's among political leaders, but he's not exciting
people."
   According to Stuart Rothenberg, Patrick Buchanan is the
candidate who's exciting people with his message. Ronald Walters,
professor of political science at Howard University, agrees. He
thinks the conservative commentator is the man to watch in New
Hampshire , more so than former Tennessee Governor Lamar
Alexander:
   "I think he seems to have hit a vein out there of people who
are feeling, I think, some economic insecurity. He wants to speak
to that. Never mind whether or not his ideas right now are
correct. He comes off as a populist, he calls himself an economic
conservative, and whether or not he's got the program, he got the
attention of the people out there who feel insecure about their
jobs. So I think his is the message.
   "Alexander, i'm not persuaded that he has a compelling
message. Right now, his message is that, 'I'm the alternative to
dole'. And the two of them, of course, are splitting the moderate
vote."
   Fred Barnes says don't rule out wealthy publisher Steve Forbes
because of his poor showing in Iowa. He points out that New
Hampshire is political turf where the Forbes message will be well
received by a candidate with plenty of money to spend on campaign
ads. But Fred Barnes believes the Forbes campaign made a major
mistake by spending so much time and money in Iowa:
   "It's a state where religious conservatives are very strong
and they're particularly concerned about the abortion issue. From
their standpoint, he (Steve Forbes) was on the other side of
that. He's pro-choice on abortion, essentially. And, secondly,
it's a state that doesn't have the tax cut fever that you find in
other states like New Hampshire.
   "And this was his essential message, 'I'm gonna cut your taxes
by installing a flat tax". So he spent all this money and wound
up generating only 10-percent of the vote, but also stirring some
real anger among Iowans because he helped steer the campaign in a
very negative direction."
   Tm: According to published reports, Steve Forbes is changing
the tone of his campaign. He plans to accentuate the positive and
tell voters in New Hampshire where he stands on the issues.
Meanwhile, Bob Dole is taking aim at a different target this
time. The hard-charging Pat Buchanan has replaced Steve Forbes as
the subject of Bob Dole's newest campaign ads.
   It remains to be seen whether two, three or even a cluster of
four candidates will emerge from new hampshire's presidential
primary on February 20th and head on to a series of primaries in
southern and western states.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CLINTON: STRESSING INCUMBENCY

   DAVE BORGIDA
   WHITE HOUSE

   While Republicans seeking their party's presidential
nomination battle for a political edge in a primary in New
Hampshire Tuesday, President Clinton is busy being president. He
is visiting areas hard-hit by recent flooding in addition to the
caucus and primary states. His strategy is no secret. The
president is taking advantage of the powers of incumbency.
   Iowa, Last week. The Cedar Rapids, Iowa, airport, was the
scene of this study in contrasts, and a reminder of the power of
the presidency.
   The presidential aircraft, Air Force One, is one of the
world's most sensational planes. Sparkling clean, it was parked
on the tarmac of the airport, surrounded by security officials.
Outside the airport perimeter, mothers and fathers had parked
their cars off the road so their children could perhaps for the
only time in their lives see the plane the president flies on.
   Not too far away, tucked behind a nondescript hangar, sat a
small white plane with very small red letters scrawled on the
side. The one word was "Lamar." It was Republican candidate Lamar
Alexander's plane. And no one appeared to be going out of their
way to see it.
   As other politicians and presidents have done long before him,
President Clinton is taking advantage of being an incumbent
president, and not just by showing up at airports around the
country.
   He brings something with him.
   In Iowa last weekend, it was signed legislation making it
easier for farmers and ranchers to get credit.
   In Washington state this week, it was federal aid.
   The president toured recent flood damage and then made this
announcement:
   "Today we can announce that we will be able to provide over 26
million dollars to the communities to help rebuild the community
facilities, 10 million dollars in emergency relief funds for
federal highway damage, and two million dollars to meet other
emergency needs."
   As presidential expert Stephen Hess says, it's just the
beginning of the distribution of what he calls federal "goodies."
It's a word parents sometimes use when they are giving children
candy or sweets:
   "Whatever goodies are left to give out, presidents give out,
particularly if it happens to be an even-numbered year when
Americans hold elections and particularly, of course, if a
president is running for re-election. So we can see that this is
just the first of a president feeling the nation's pain, whenever
there is a disaster, a flood, a hurricane, a tornado or anything
else."
   This shrewd use of the incumbency occurs on all levels of
American government, from the federal to the state to the local
level.
   For a politician, there is nothing quite as effective as
helping a voter in their time of need.
   President Clinton is applying this venerable political
strategy. In fact, he is delaying any official declaration of his
candidacy. His spokesman Mike McCurry jokes that might not happen
until the party nominating conventions this summer.
   He knows that by holding off as long as possible, his boss
will be viewed by voters as "President Clinton," doing the
nation's business, not as "candidate" Clinton, exchanging nasty
charges with Republicans.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   THE ROLE OF THE U.S. MEDIA IN ELECTIONS

   MARILYN SILVEY
   WASHINGTON

   The media have long played a very important role in American
elections. Flocks of reporters follow each candidate, and
newspapers and radio and television stations give extensive time
to campaign reporting. The goal is to give as much information as
possible about all the candidates in any given race, so that
voters can make decisions. But is there a negative side to so
much media exposure? Following the Iowa caucus, a panel of three
Washington, DC, media experts debated that question. They agreed
that the role of the U.S. media in elections is not always
positive.
   In the current campaign to choose the Republican Party's
presidential nominee for the November elections, there's been
criticism that too many of the candidates' advertisements are
negative, that is, instead of positively telling about a
candidate's own accomplishments, they criticize other candidates.
Newsweek magazine reporter Eleanor Clift said the media may also
be contributing to the public's feeling that all the candidates
have too many negative qualities:
   "It just seems to me that the media, in its effort to reveal
the inner workings of campaigns, that we sometimes fall down on
presenting what is good about candidates. We end up in an
election commonly hearing people say that they have to choose
between the lesser of two evils. I think the media generally does
a good job, but we could do a better job of putting the flaws of
these candidates into perspective."
   Ms. Clift added that that's one of the overall problems of the
U.S. media: Too much emphasis on negative news.
   The role that television plays in elections is often debated.
Panel member James Inocenzi, whose consulting firm advises
candidates, says that the media, as well as the candidates' own
television advertisements, are often not in tune (accord) with
voters' thinking. Mr. Inocenzi is especially critical of the ads
of candidate Lamar Alexander, which try to get voters to focus on
who has the best chance to beat President Clinton. Mr. Inocenzi
believes the average voter is asking quite a different question:
   "The question is, who is better for my future, who's going to
lead the country, rather than who beats Clinton.' that's more of
what the reporters and the press will say in terms of the
'horserace' here in this country, but in terms of the average
voter, I don't think there's concern about who beats Clinton.
It's who's going to really deliver for me as the president of the
United States, and those are more important issues."
   The media panel members agreed that the current presidential
campaign is proving that television advertising does not
necessarily play a very large role in influencing voters. They
noted that millionaire candidate Steve Forbes spent far more on
television advertising than did some of the other candidates, but
still did very poorly in Iowa. James Inocenzi analyzes why:
   "Forbes really was nothing more than a creation of his
television commercials, and when people started to poke, they
found some holes, and some soft spots. And I think that's going
to continue, and hopefully that will continue all the way through
to the election this year."
   Mr. Inocenzi says viewers expect political commercials to be
true:
   "You have to be sure that what you're putting on the
commercial is pretty factual. Yes, there's going to be a slant
one way or the other, whether it's liberal or conservative, but I
think the ads for the most part are going to be factual. The ones
that aren't are picked apart very quickly."
   The third member of the panel, professor Lewis Wolfson of
American University, a former political reporter, says the media
made the caucuses in Iowa seem more important than they really
are, because Iowa is one of the earliest states in the
months-long process of selecting a Republican presidential
candidate:
   "Because we send all these reporters out there, it magnifies
the importance of these early primaries especially in these
states, and it's not representative of what people in the country
necessarily feel."
   The panel agreed that it is difficult to refer to "the media,"
because there is such a wide range of differences in the U.S.
press and broadcast outlets. There are literally thousands of
newspapers, magazines and radio and television stations that, as
Eleanor Clift put it, "range from the ultra-responsible, to the
semi-responsible, to the irresponsible." But Ms. Clift says there
is too much tendency for all journalists to stick together, in a
pack, and report the same things:
   "When you have a campaign that is unfolding quickly, you have
a great deal of what is called 'pack journalism.' it's when the
pack goes here, then the pack goes there, and most reporters
don't want to be outside of the pack, because then they're going
to get a call from their editors saying, 'gee, everybody else is
saying this, why are you saying this?'"
   But for all the faults of the American media, the panel
members agreed that the vast majority of political reporting is
balanced, responsible and fair, and greatly helps to educate
voters. It helps considerably, the panel added, that the press in
the United States is privately owned, not owned by the
government.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   THE IOWA CAUCUS -- A LOOK BACK FROM THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL
   BY STUART GORIN

   Des Moines, Iowa -- Only in America can someone end a race in
second or third place and still be called "the winner."
   That's the scenario adversely affecting the true first place
finisher in the Iowa Republican Caucus -- presidential contender
Bob Dole. He "only" had 26 percent of the vote in the crowded
nine-man race. As the Des Moines Register newspaper pointed out,
that means nearly three-quarters of the caucus attendees want
someone besides the Senate majority leader to be the party's
nominee.
   Political observers point to conservative commentator Pat
Buchanan, in second place with 23 percent, and former Tennessee
Governor Lamar Alexander, third with 18 percent, as the true
victors because the indications prior to the February 12 caucus
were that they wouldn't do as well.
   Buchanan successfully galvanized the religious conservatives.
If he had also obtained the seven percent of the vote that went
to Alan Keyes, he could have surpassed Dole.
   But while noting that Buchanan's performance was "undeniably
impressive," the New York Times said "unless he can broaden his
appeal to include mainstream Republicans, he will go the way of
(Pat) Robertson" (the evangelist who was the surprise runner-up
in Iowa in 1988, but who soon faded).
   Alexander's third-place surge, which the Chicago Tribune
called "perhaps the most electric result," means he now will try
to make the case that he is the principal alternative to Dole.
   Political scientist Steffen Schmidt said "The big winner in
Iowa was Alexander because the expectations for him were so low.
The quasi-loser was Bob Dole, because he did not meet
expectations." Alexander now has the bounce needed to attract
more money to the campaign and get on the nationally televised
talk shows, Schmidt noted, but added that even with the momentum
going into the New Hampshire primary, there is still no guarantee
it would be enough to get him the nomination.
   Alexander is "civil and has run a positive campaign," said Des
Moines Register political editor Dave Yepsen. "His lack of
passion disturbs some but reassures those who don't want some
hothead in the White House. He's not conservative enough for
others, but his friends say that's fine because someone on the
extremes of things won't be elected to the presidency because
American elections are won in the center."
   Calling it "certainly a great showing for us," Alexander's
campaign manager Dan Pero said "We were counting on a lot of
undecideds breaking our way. It looks like they did."
   But what caught Republican officials off-guard in Iowa was an
unexpectedly low turnout. Many had predicted record numbers above
130,000, however less than 97,000 caucus-goers cast ballots state
wide.
   Senator Charles Grassley, a Dole supporter, was one of many
observers who attributed the low turnout to people being turned
off by negative advertising campaigns, a move which hurt
fourth-place finisher Steve Forbes the most. Acknowledging that
Buchanan did well in Iowa, Grassley said that if he wants to move
his campaign ahead, however, he will have to modify his
protectionist views. Grassley also said that Alexander ran a
credible campaign but he doesn't have the "certainty for the
process" that Dole can deliver.
   Dole has been faulted by some for being a deal-maker, but the
Des Moines Register pointed out, "that is actually one of his
strengths. Pragmatic deal-making is how democracy works, and few
know how to make it work better than Dole."
   The Register's Yepsen said of Dole: "Those who are looking to
put a grown-up in charge have a candidate. But there's an
uncertainty and a lack of enthusiasm about him this time, a
feeling perhaps he's too old, or too unfocused to be the nominee.
A lot of people wish he'd throw away that copy of the 10th
Amendment (concerning states' powers) he carries in favor of a
list of 10 things he'd do as president."
   There were many factors playing a part in businessman Forbes'
dismal showing -- he had little organization in the state and he
relied almost entirely on his television commercials, most of
which were negative, and some Iowans resented his heavy spending.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAUCUS EXIT POLLING

   Voter News Service, a cooperative media effort, interviewed
more than 2,000 caucus attendees at 70 different precincts. Its
poll determined that 23 percent didn't decide on a candidate
until the final three days, and the major recipient of those
votes was Alexander. Another finding was that Alexander won
support from 46 percent of those caucus-goers who said their
determining factor was which Republican candidate could beat
President Clinton in the November general election. And the poll
showed that Dole was the candidate of choice among older voters,
Buchanan among those who feel opposition to abortion is a major
consideration of party policy, and Forbes among those who cited
tax policy as their top concern.
   --------------

   --------------
   THE MESSAGE AND THE MEDIA STRATEGY IN IOWA

   Here are the media strategies and messages that the candidates
used in Iowa:
   -- Lamar Alexander: touted himself as a political world
outsider despite having a proven record as governor of Tennessee;
painted optimistic visions of the future.
   -- Pat Buchanan: said he would be the most pro-life president
in history; called for trade policies that opponents argued were
isolationist.
   -- Bob Dole: used slogans such as "trusted and tested" to
emphasize his long tenure in Washington; called Forbes' ideas
"untested and risky."
   -- Bob Dornan: had little money, no television ads and no
evident campaign structure.
   -- Steve Forbes: bought a multi million-dollar media blitz
that promoted himself and his flat tax proposal, while
disparaging other candidates.
   -- Phil Gramm: said he was the only real conservative who can
win; emphasized his opposition to abortion.
   -- Alan Keyes: used a conservative, pro-family message that
focused on a "values" theme; had no television ads.
   -- Richard Lugar: avoided personal attacks and major issues,
preferring to focus on such topics as foreign policy.
   -- Morry Taylor: used his own fortune to stress that he is a
businessman, not a lawyer or a politician.
   --------------

   --------------
   ON IOWACAUCUS NIGHT

   Caucus -- a Native American term that means a gathering of
             tribal leaders.

   The weather cooperated with Iowans who attended the 2,142
individual precinct caucuses held throughout the state. It was a
cold but clear and dry night. All of the events began at the same
time, and they took place in schools, churches, fire stations,
public buildings and private homes.
   At a typical Republican caucus outside of Des Moines -- if any
diverse gathering of individuals can be called "typical" --
several hundred neighbors crowded into the high school cafeteria,
competing for space with dozens of journalists on hand with their
video and audio equipment. Many of the attendees, ranging from
the young to the old, said it was their first caucus.
   Local political leaders called the caucus to order and allowed
several citizens to have one minute of time to speak on behalf of
a presidential candidate. Slips of paper were passed out and the
attendees were asked to write down the name of the candidate of
their choice. These unofficial ballots -- or straw votes -- were
then collected and counted, with the results being forwarded to
the party headquarters.
   Caucus-goers interested in becoming delegates to the party's
upcoming county convention, or in helping to select delegates,
then were asked to form separate groups in the room, associated
with the individual presidential candidates. The number of
convention delegates selected in each group was proportional to
the percentage of votes each candidate received. The county
convention delegates are not required to support the presidential
candidates preferred in the caucus but usually feel an obligation
to do so. The county convention delegates then elect delegates to
the state convention which in turn elects them to the national
nominating event in August.
   But back to the precinct caucus: its final order of business
was a public discussion of issues under consideration as part of
the Republican Party's platform which will be developed for the
national convention. These included foreign policy, trade,
agriculture, taxes and social themes.
   --------------

   --------------
   CLINTON AND THE IOWA CAUCUS

   On the Democratic side, President Clinton had no real
opposition. Still, the party faithful turned up -- about
50,000-strong statewide -- to affirm their support for the
president and to select delegates to their own conventions.
   And the president came to Iowa on the final weekend for
rallies and to take some of the media attention away from the
Republicans. He said he wanted the people "to feel like their
grass roots political approach still counts in national
politics."
   Addressing large crowds in several Iowa cities, Clinton
reiterated the agenda for America that he proposed in his State
of the Union address last month, covering such topics as
education, economic security for families, the environment,
crime, the federal budget and a comprehensive nuclear test ban
treaty.
   Said Des Moines Mayor Archie Davis, "Clinton has captured the
center of American politics. The Republicans gave it to him by
moving to the right."
   --------------

   --------------
   FROM THE MOUTHS OF CHILDREN

   Four days before the Iowa caucus, a non-partisan voter education
organization conducted a mock election among school children
throughout the state in all grades from kindergarten through high
school. They were given preference ballots that listed all nine
Republicans plus President Clinton on the same sheet, and there
were more than 41,000 responses.
   By several thousand votes, Alexander came in first, and he
used that publicity to stress in his subsequent campaign events
that the children of Iowa "are the smartest," and their parents
can learn from them.
   Dole came in second in the children's vote, and Clinton was
third.
   --------------

   --------------
   EDITORIAL COMMENTS

   Des Moines Register: "Democracy cannot work without people who
are willing to put their egos on the line and suffer possible
rejection, even humiliation. Their presence provides a choice,
and it forces the favorites to extend themselves. Having a large
field of candidates at the beginning of the race is a wholesome
thing, and the Iowa caucuses make it possible."
   Washington Post: "It took only one round of the Republican
contest to pump up new speculation and longing within the party
for another set of candidates. Iowa left the party divided on its
familiar fault lines, its future course unsure."
   Washington Times: "Iowa seems this year to have performed a
perfectly ordinary and typical function: separating an upper tier
of candidates from a lower tier."
   New York Times: "Every election has its story. Iowa's is that
Pat Buchanan now owns the social conservative wing of the
Republican Party, while the moderates are casting about
desperately, flinging their allegiance from one Dole substitute
to another."
   New York Times analyst R.W. Apple: "For all the commotion that
now surrounds the caucuses -- the millions of dollars and
thousands of hours expended by the candidates, the blizzard of
television commercials, the invasion of this civilized and
amiable state by enough journalists to cover a fair-sized war --
they remain a preliminary. They are Act I, Scene I, of the year
long drama of electing a president, not its climax."
   Wall Street Journal: "In one sense, the Iowa results were
impressive. To wit, the split between social and economic
conservatives actually appeared....Indeed, the lesson of Iowa is
that if Republicans hope to beat Bill Clinton this year, the two
groups of conservatives need to find a common language so they
can understand each other and work together."
   Baltimore Sun: "As for President Clinton, he rubbed it in by
appearing at wildly enthusiastic Democratic rallies on the eve of
the Iowa caucus voting. With opinion polls showing him ahead of
every Republican candidate now in the field, he is clearly the
man to beat."
   --------------

   --------------
   ALEXANDER RECEIVES BENNETT ENDORSEMENT

   From one former education secretary to another: endorsement.
Former secretary Bill Bennett, who now heads the Empower America
organization, said Lamar Alexander has the right combination of
being a "good man" and having a winning set of ideas to defeat
President Clinton.
   The Los Angeles Times reported that Alexander aides "hope for
a significant boost" from the endorsement, "particularly with
cultural conservatives who have been skeptical about Alexander's
positions."
   --------------

   --------------
   NEW GEORGIA CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAP
   BY DAVID PITTS

   The U.S. Supreme Court has cleared the way for a new Georgia
congressional district map -- featuring just one majority-black
congressional district.
   The court did this by leaving intact a plan created by a
three-judge federal panel that featured the one majority-black
congressional district rather than the three majority-black
congressional district plan that many black voters and civil
rights activists had supported.
   There could be a further appeal to the Supreme Court. But
Georgia Attorney General Mike Bowers said "this is probably, as a
practical matter, the end of the debate on the subject, although
there is still a possibility the Supreme Court can take the
case."
   Laughlin McDonald, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties
Union, who filed an appeal on behalf of black and white voters to
retain more than one majority-black congressional district, said
he would press ahead with another appeal. But he also said that
even if the court agrees to hear it, it would not likely be
resolved in time to change the map for this year's elections.
   The Supreme Court struck down the majority-black 11th district
in Georgia last summer in a landmark ruling that said race cannot
be the predominant factor in the drawing of election district
lines. The three-majority black congressional district map had
been drawn up by the Georgia legislature under pressure from the
U.S. Justice Department.
   Critics of the court ruling say it could eventually reduce the
number of blacks elected to public office nationwide as
challenges to other black-majority districts elsewhere in the
nation are mounted.
   In Georgia, Representatives Sanford Bishop and Cynthia
McKinney, both African American Democrats, "are expected to have
spirited contests" for re-election, both in the primary and
general elections, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
the state's leading newspaper.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   GRAMM DROPS OUT

   DAVID SWAN
   SENATE

   Texas Senator Phil Gramm, who was once thought to be a strong
presidential contender, has given up his bid for the nomination
to run against President Clinton. This narrows the Republican
field just before a crucial primary election in the northeastern
state of New Hampshire.
   The senator called off his plans for New Hampshire after a
disastrous fifth-place finish in Monday's Iowa party caucuses.
Wednesday, he became the third Republican to quit the
presidential race:
   "I am today (Wednesday) ending my campaign for president of
the United States. When the voter speaks, I listen, especially
when the voter is saying someone else's name."
   Mr. Gramm portrayed himself as the true conservative voice of
the party. He moved to the right of his chief rival, Senate
majority leader Bob Dole, by opposing the use of American troops
in Bosnia and rejecting compromise in the drive for a balanced
(federal) budget.
   But Mr. Gramm never picked up much of a following, though he
had a strong political organization and at least 20-million
dollars in campaign money. He suffered an embarrassing loss to
commentator Pat Buchanan in the Louisiana party caucuses, then
stumbled again in Iowa. For now, Mr. Gramm says he will not
endorse any other candidate, though he did attack Mr. Buchanan
for what he calls his protectionist views on trade:
   "Our party can never follow the path of protectionism. It is a
dagger aimed at the heart of everything we stand for in the world
and I have fought it in the campaign, I intend to fight it in the
Senate and I intend to speak out against it."
   Mr. Gramm's departure leaves eight men in the race, though
only four are considered serious contenders. Besides Senator Dole
and Mr. Buchanan, the group includes millionaire publisher Steve
Forbes and former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander. All are
fighting for votes in New Hampshire, where the year's first
primary election takes place Tuesday.
   New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith, a Gramm supporter, says the
outcome is still in doubt:
   "I think frankly its between Buchanan and Dole at this point
but I think Lamar (Alexander) will finish very strong."
   Analysts say Mr. Gramm's absence should not have much impact
in New Hampshire. But it could be a factor next month when the
primary season moves to the southern states, especially Texas.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AND CAMPAIGN '96

   DEBORAH BLOCK
   WASHINGTON

   In the 1970's and early 80's, there was much concern in the
United States about the deterioration of the environment. In
1971, the first annual "Earth Day" was observed to bring
attention to environmental problems around the world, but
especially those in the United States. During the last decade,
however, environmental issues have received less attention, at
least in the American political arena. But the issue appears to
be re-emerging in this year's political campaign.
   In his recent state of the union address, President Clinton
spoke at length about environmental issues. He was applauded by
some members of Congress, mostly Democrats, when he denounced
Republican opponents who think the government has gone too far in
trying to address environmental concerns. The president called on
congress to re-examine U.S. policies and reverse those that do
not protect the environment.
   Democratic Congressman Louis stokes is a strong supporter of
federal environmental programs. He thinks the stance that
candidates take regarding the environment could determine whether
or not they get elected in November. He pointed especially to
Republicans who try to delay or block appropriation bills that
would fund environmental protection programs:
   "I think that the Republicans have really misjudged the
American people with this assault that they have waged against
the environment. It should be basic, I would think, to realize
that it is a mistake to let lobbyists for the large polluters in
this country to have the audacity to come on Capital Hill, and
not only persuade these Republican congressmen to make this
assault on the environmental laws affecting our water and air and
food, but to actually let them write riders which they then take
and attach to appropriation bills."
   But Republican Congressman Richard Pombo sees the issue
another way. He says the problem is that a number of federal
environmental regulations have gone too far:
   "The Clean Water Act or Endangered Species Act, laws that
started out with very broad support, nearly unanimous support,
when they originally passed. But unfortunately, what begins to
happen, is you pass a law that protects water from being
polluted, or species from becoming extinct, and as those laws
become implemented out in the real world, you have a bureaucracy
that tends to feed upon itself and grows, and begins to regulate
things that people never imagined would ever be regulated when
the law originally went through."
   During the past year, some Congressional Republicans have
introduced legislation that would ease controls imposed on
businesses to help reduce water and air pollution. Some
Republicans have also called for a sharp reduction in the budget
for the U.S. environmental protection agency, which oversees
implementation of environmental programs.
   Recently, however, a group of Republican moderates in Congress
complained to House speaker Newt Gingrich that the party was
taking a political beating on environmental policy. Mr. Gingrich
apparently does not disagree, and is expected to appoint a house
task force on the environment, to be headed by congressman
Sherwood Boehlert (bo-lert), the Republican party's leading
environmentalist. He opposes any effort to roll back
environmental laws, and says more Republican lawmakers are
showing they want to deal with environmental issues in a
responsible manner:
   "The reason there's been a come-back is because most people
felt Washington had its act together and was dealing responsibly
with environmental legislation. But then, in early 1995, when it
appeared there was an all-out assault on environmental
legislation, the environmental organizations got concerned, and
they began to energize grass roots America, and members of
congress began to hear from their constituents."
   Polls show that most Americans overwhelmingly support
government efforts to promote a clean environment and the
protection of natural resources. But are they willing to pay the
large costs of implementing such programs?
   Betsy Loyless, political director for the League of
Conservation Voters, a private environmental group, says
Americans are recognizing the pay-off:
   "We have polling data that indicates the American public
understands that paying for public health protection saves and
prevents future problems, both for their children and in general.
There is a majority of the public that is willing to do this but
they want it to go for clean-up."
   Paul Bogart, national campaign director for the environmental
group, Greenpeace, thinks most Americans do not want to pay more
money to support environmental programs:
   "I don't think Americans are willing to pay for more
environmental protection in the sense of, would they want
increased taxes. But I don't think that's the trade-off we're
looking for. We realize that these huge corporations, not only
are they getting substantial tax benefits, but they're also
polluting our lives and ruining our children's lives at our
expense. They should be paying the cost. "
   While there is growing attention to environmental concerns in
the United States, will the issue be a notable part of the this
year's election campaign? Karlyn Bowman of the private research
group, the American Enterprise Institute, says 'no':
   "I think it will probably, in the final analysis, in the
national campaign, influence a very small number of voters.
Public thinking on the environment has evolved very significantly
in the last 25 years. The issue appears to be less urgent for
many Americans than it was in the past.
   Greenpeace official Paul Bogart says, in the end, the
Americans who are most concerned about the environment will
scrutinize the candidates views on the issue:
   "I think what is most important, and will be most important as
people go to the polls, is that they look at the actual record
(of the candidates). And I think for Democrats to feel a general
public feeling that Democrats are sensitive toward environmental
protection is going to carry them through an election year that
promises to be very contentious, I think is a false assumption."
   Even though some politicians are putting emphasis on
environmental concerns in this election year, polls show the
issue ranks well below the priorities of most Americans, such as
the economy, jobs and education.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY HAS LONG BEEN KEY TEST FOR CANDIDATES

   DAVID PITTS
   WASHINGTON

   There is one reason why all the candidates for the Republican
nomination for president have been investing a disproportionate
amount of their money and time in New Hampshire, a relatively
small state that provides few convention delegates. It hosts the
first primary election in the nation.
   Consequently, the media attention is fierce leading up to the
date of the primary -- February 20. Veteran reporters know that
if a candidate does not do well in New Hampshire it could be the
end of his campaign, even if he is popular in much larger states,
such as New York and California.
   Foreign observers are often perplexed about the New Hampshire
primary's weight in U.S. political party nomination races since
the state, located in the upper northeast, is relatively small
and untypical of the country at large. New Hampshire provides
only 16 delegates to the Republican party convention this year
compared to 163 delegates provided by California, for example.
But New Hampshire is the first primary, and thus the first
electoral test of voter preferences in the presidential
nomination races.
   Every U.S. president elected from 1952 to 1988 won the New
Hampshire primary. This record has given the state's presidential
primary unique importance in modern American electoral politics,
experts say.
   The streak of wins was broken, however, in the 1992 New
Hampshire presidential primary. Former Senator Paul Tsongas, a
Democrat from Massachusetts, beat Democratic Governor Bill
Clinton in the Democratic primary by nine percentage points. But
Clinton went on to win the Democratic nomination and was elected
president. Clinton faces no major challengers for the nomination
this year. In the 1992 Republican primary, President George Bush
handily defeated his Republican opponents for the nomination, but
lost to Clinton in the general election.
   According to Sandy Maisal, an expert on the New Hampshire
primary, the state "was largely ignored by candidates running for
president during the first half of this century." Even though New
Hampshire has held the first presidential primary ever since
1920, until the 1952 election only delegates to the party
conventions were selected.
   In 1949, however, the state changed the law to allow voters to
select a preference for a presidential candidate. From that point
on, the New Hampshire primary results were big news, Maisal adds.
   In the 1952 New Hampshire Republican primary, Dwight
Eisenhower scored an upset victory over Robert Taft, the favorite
of the establishment party pros and considered the likely
nominee. Eisenhower won 50 percent of the vote compared to Taft's
39 percent. After the victory, the Eisenhower bandwagon took off.
He won the Republican nomination, and later captured the
presidency in the general election.
   On the same day, Tennessee Senator Estes Kefauver defeated
President Harry Truman in the New Hampshire Democratic primary.
Although political historians say that Truman could have likely
reversed the impact of the New Hampshire result and gone on to
win the nomination, he said he would not seek re-election, which
many commentators then attributed to his loss in New Hampshire.
"These two results formed the basis for the reputation of the New
Hampshire primary," Maisal notes.
   Neal Pierce, the author of a number of books on primary
elections, agrees with this view. After the 1952 New Hampshire
primary results, this presidential primary "grew in importance,"
he says. Since that year, Pierce adds, U.S. presidential politics
has never been the same and the New Hampshire primary has played
a key role in all successive nomination races.
   A primary election is a unique American institution that
allows voters, rather than party activists and officials, to
choose the candidate who will represent a political party in a
general election -- either local, state, or federal. A primary
may be either open -- allowing any registered voter in a state to
vote -- or closed, allowing only registered voters who belong to
a particular political party to vote.
   Critics complain the New Hampshire primary gives conservative
candidates an edge since voters there, particularly in the
Republican primary, are predominantly conservative.
   But New Hampshire is one of 26 states that holds an open
primary. This means that Democrats and Independents in New
Hampshire can vote in the Republican primary, if they wish, a
fact that could affect the chances of particular candidates. This
year, for example, Steve Forbes' strong showing in the polls in
New Hampshire is due, in no small part, to his strong support
among independent voters.
   Although there has been an enormous increase in the number of
states holding primary elections in recent years, they are by no
means universal. In some states, candidates are selected at
caucuses and conventions. Turnout is generally much lower at
these gatherings than in primary elections because people must
invest a number of hours of their time to participate.
   New Hampshire holds the first presidential primary in the
nation, but it is not the first state to publicly select
delegates to the party conventions. Since 1972, Iowa, a small
midwestern state, has held caucuses before the New Hampshire
primary -- this year on February 12. Senator Bob Dole was the
winner with 26 percent of the vote. Louisiana also held caucuses
on February 6. Former Nixon speechwriter Patrick Buchanan was the
winner there, but only he and Texas Senator Phil Gramm actively
campaigned.
   But the New Hampshire primary is still the first electoral
barometer of voters' opinions and experts here say, so long as it
remains so, the state will continue to be a popular destination
for both candidates and reporters during the presidential
nomination season.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   DOLE WINS IOWA

   PAUL FRANCUCH
   DES MOINES

   Kansas Senator Bob Dole has won the Republican presidential
caucus in (the Midwest state of) Iowa. But the final tally also
produced strong showings by conservative news commentator Patrick
Buchanan and former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander.
   Senator Dole's vote was less than his campaign had hoped for
and only a few percentage points more than second-place finisher
Patrick Buchanan. But, in addressing supporters Monday night in
the Iowa capital, Des Moines, mr. Dole pledged to continue his
quest for the White House in a campaign based on conservative
values:
   "I know your dreams for your children and I'll be guided every
day by your hopes for the future. And that's what this is all
about, leaving America a better place than we found it; making
America freer and stronger and a better place to live for our
children and our grandchildren."
   An analysis shows most conservative voters gave their support
to columnist Patrick Buchanan, who gained momentum in recent days
in a state he says hardly knew him a year ago. Buchanan said:
   "You know, we were strangers here, political strangers in this
land and you took us in. And, now you are sending us out with the
support of tens of thousands of Iowans, hard on the heels of Bob
Dole in the state he called his own. The victory is tremendous,
friends. And we are going to win this Republican nomination."
   Although Mr. Buchanan is expected to play well among
conservative voters in next week's Republican primary election in
(the northeast state of) New Hampshire, political analysts are
watching closely to see if former Tennessee Governor Lamar
Alexander, who finished a strong third in Iowa, cuts into Senator
Dole's support among Republican moderates.
   Mr. Alexander attributes his strong showing in Iowa to his
issue-oriented campaign and the absence of negative, if not
nasty, commercial radio and TV ads which characterized the
campaigns of some of the other candidates in Iowa:
   "Iowa has said "yes" to a grassroots campaign about the future
of America and "no" to negative mud-slinging."
   Magazine publisher Steve Forbes, who financed his
media-oriented campaign in Iowa largely with his own money,
finished fourth in the Iowa caucus, slightly ahead of Texas
Senator Phil Gramm, who had hoped to finish second or third.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   IOWA CAUCUS IMPACT

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   Senator Bob Dole won an important victory in the Iowa
Republican caucuses Monday. Senator Dole is now setting his
sights on next Tuesday's first-in-the-nation presidential primary
in New Hampshire, a state which has dashed his presidential hopes
in the past.
   Bob Dole knows New Hampshire well. In 1980, he finished well
back of the pack behind Ronald Reagan. In 1988, he experienced a
political nightmare in New Hampshire. After trouncing George Bush
in Iowa, he was overtaken in the final days before the New
Hampshire primary by a negative television advertising blitz
launched by the Bush campaign.
   So here we are in 1996. Bob Dole has again won the Iowa
caucuses. Now it is on to New Hampshire for next Tuesday's
primary where he will face a tough fight. Recent public-opinion
polls have shown magazine publisher Steve Forbes is running with
or even ahead of Senator Dole in New Hampshire. One question
coming out of Iowa is whether Mr. Forbes' poor finish will do
damage to his standing in New Hampshire and whether he will
continue to drop in the polls.
   The other big story out of the Iowa vote is the surprising
strength of conservative Pat Buchanan, who took second place. Mr.
Buchanan will use the momentum from his good showing in Iowa and
his earlier win in Louisiana to energize an already-potent
campaign organization in New Hampshire. In 1992, Mr. Buchanan
took 37 percent of the vote in his New Hampshire primary match-up
against President Bush and New Hampshire voters know him well.
   Former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander also is a winner, of
sorts, coming out of Iowa and heading toward New Hampshire. He is
trying to position himself as the only Republican candidate who
can defeat President Clinton in November. His third-place Iowa
finish should give him a boost as he heads for new Hampshire.
   Two candidates who had disappointing showings in Iowa were
magazine publisher Steve Forbes and Texas Senator Phil Gramm. Mr.
Forbes can continue to spend his considerable personal fortune,
which could keep him in the race for some time. That is probably
not the case for Senator Gramm. His poor showing in Iowa comes on
the heels of a surprising loss to Pat Buchanan in Louisiana, last
week. New Hampshire could be the Gramm campaign's last hurrah.
   The remaining four candidates, Senator Dick Lugar, commentator
Alan Keyes, Congressman Bob Dornan and businessman Morrie Taylor,
all finished well back of the leaders and their campaigns may be
about to end, even as the 1996 presidential election process is
just beginning.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   IOWA CAUCUS REACTIONS

   DAVID SWAN
   SENATE

   U.S. Senate Republican leader Bob Dole has won a narrow
victory in the Iowa party caucuses, the first important step in
this year's long election campaign. The voting has changed and
perhaps narrowed the field of candidates fighting for the right
to run against president Clinton.
   After leading the field for months in opinion polls, Mr. Dole
can now claim a real victory in Iowa. He vows to win again in
next week's New Hampshire primary election, and in the end, to
return what he calls conservative common sense to the White
House:
   "But you stood with me and we will stand together for America,
and when it is over Bill Clinton will be out of work and I will
be in the White House."
   But the senator's triumph appears less than overwhelming.
Though he comes from a nearby state and is well known in Iowa, he
took only 26-percent of the vote, just three points ahead of
conservative commentator Pat Buchanan.
   Mr. Buchanan, who had already won the Louisiana caucuses, ran
a strong second in Iowa on a platform of social conservatism and
trade protectionism:
   "But I also represent the working folks of this country who
are losing their jobs because of things like NAFTA and gatt, and
trade deals that sell out their interests to a bunch of guys on
Wall Street who are working on paper, shutting down factories
here, and sending them to Singapore, Taiwan or Mexico or China."
   Mr. Buchanan concedes some Republicans consider him a fringe
candidate, who can not win the nomination or the general election
in November.
   Former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander came from behind to
finish third in the caucuses, by telling voters he is the only
Republican who can take back the White House:
   "After New Hampshire what I hope we have is a race between Bob
Dole and me to see who can be the first president of the next
century who can beat Bill Clinton. And that is not a bad choice
for our party."
   Wealthy publisher Steve Forbes finished behind Mr. Alexander.
Mr. Forbes has attracted a flurry of national attention with his
plan to overhaul the federal tax code. But despite spending
millions of his own dollars on Iowa, Mr. Forbes lost much of his
early support and placed fourth. Still, he claims to be satisfied
with the result:
   "I think what it all demonstrated was even though we did not
have the organization in this state that others had, we had a
wonderful core of supporters and we are going to build on that
core going into the New Hampshire primary."
   Opinion polls show Mr. Forbes enjoys stronger support in New
Hampshire. Meanwhile, Texas Senator Phil Gramm came in fifth in
Iowa, in what could be a fatal blow to his conservative campaign.
   The other Republicans, talk show host Alan Keyes, Senator
Richard Lugar, Congressman Bob Dornan and businessman Morry
Taylor, picked up less support. President Clinton was unopposed
in the Democratic caucuses.
   The campaign now shifts to New Hampshire, where the nation's
first primary election is just a week away, and all the signs
point to another close race.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   IOWA CAUCUS: RADIO INTERVIEWS

   JOHN PITMAN
   WASHINGTON

   Republican candidates have taken to the airwaves for one last
broadcast push before Monday's Iowa caucus. The discussions on
WHO radio in Des Moines Iowa focused on two main issues: Trade
and taxes.
   Senate majority leader Bob Dole says thE song, "You'll Never
Walk Alone" from the musical "Carousel," has been one of his
favorites since the 1940s. And he hopes the song's sentiment will
convince Iowa voters to join him on a stroll to the Republican
nomination.
   The latest polls suggest Senator Dole has begun to walk away
from his rivals and will likely win the Iowa caucus, but not by
much. Two major newspaper polls show him leading with just under
30 percent of the vote.
   In his radio appearance, Senator Dole repeated many of his
campaign positions, from returning decision making power to the
states to protecting American farmers.
   He tried not to mention any of his rivals by name. But when
asked about Steve Forbes' flat tax proposal, Mr. Dole said he did
not endorse it, and made this indirect jab at Mr. Forbes:
   "Just to come out with some edict, 'this is going to be the
tax plan', is an indication that somebody doesn't know much about
how it works. I mean, you've got to go through the Congress, you
can't be a dictator if you're president of the United States and
say, 'this is it, this is my tax plan.'"
   As for his own tax reform plan, Mr. Dole said only that he
supports maintaining tax deductions for mortgages and charitable
donations. The rest, he said, would have to be decided by the
Congress.
   Mr. Forbes' was introduced to the strains of his unofficial
campaign song, Aretha Franklin's "Respect", and that's what he
came looking for. For his part, Mr. Forbes defended his flat tax
proposal. He also played up his status as a Washington outsider,
saying the flat tax would not only help the middle class, but
would also change the way congress does business:
   "There are now registered in Washington 12-thousand-606
special interest lobbyists and most of them are there to
manipulate the tax code. So, we remove the tax code, make it
simple, put these lawyers and lobbyists out of business and then
we can make other reforms to remove sources of power in
Washington."
   In the latest polls, Mr. Forbes is running a close second with
conservative political commentator Patrick Buchanan. Both men
hold about 15 percent of the vote.
   Mr. Buchanan has made foreign trade a keystone of his
campaign. Accompanied by his unofficial campaign anthem, the
Patsy Kline song, "I Fall To Pieces", the conservative politician
tried to keep his candidacy in one piece by pounding on his
rivals as politicians who support policies like NAFTA that he
claims send American jobs overseas:
   "Look what's happened as a consequence of NAFTA. Our trade
surplus is now a 15 billion dollar trade deficit with Mexico,
300,000 lost American jobs last year. NAFTA has been a disaster.
I mean if that has not been a failure, I would like to know what
a failure is."
   Texas Senator Phil Gramm and the former governor of Tennessee,
Lamar Alexander, also made appearances on the radio program, as
did Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, local industrialist Morry
Taylor and, talk-show host Alan Keyes.
   Among these candidates, the polls show only Mr. Alexander
pulling down more than 10 percent support. But, even these
candidates can take hope in this little morsel of history, since
1972, no Republican who has won in Iowa has gone on to win the
presidency.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   OREGON MAIL-IN VOTE: WAVE OF THE FUTURE?

   GREG FLAKUS
   LOS ANGELES

   The election last month in Oregon to fill the U.S. Senate seat
vacated by Robert Packwood attracted nationwide interest partly
because it was conducted by mail. Some see postal balloting as
the wave of the future.
   The recent election that brought Democrat Ron Wyden to the
U.S. Senate represented the first time that a federal office had
been filled through a process that was conducted entirely by
mail. Mail voting has been used in numerous other elections for
local offices and for special referendums, but the Oregon vote to
fill a U.S. Senate seat could signal the beginning of a
nationwide trend towards using this more convenient ballot method
for major elections.
   Some political observers have expressed concern over a
possible increase in vote fraud if mail-in balloting catches on,
but political science Professor Priscilla Southwell at the
University of Oregon says her state's system is quite secure:
   "When you vote, you have to sign the outside of the envelope.
This is not the privacy envelope; that is inside. You have to
sign it and every single signature is verified and compared to
the signature on record when that person who the ballot was sent
to registered however many years ago. This is a very streamlined,
efficient procedure. So, somebody doing that, obviously, has to
know the signature on record or it is not going to get through
the courthouse."
   Ms Southwell notes that in addition to the safeguards to
protect mail-in ballots, there is an Oregon law that makes
tampering with a ballot or forging a signature on a ballot a
felony punishable by a long prison term. Ms Southwell says her
investigations have also shown that privacy is not a major
problem for people who fill out their ballots at home, as opposed
to a polling booth. She says people either choose to tell others
how they voted or they keep it to themselves, just as they would
if they had voted at a public polling place.
   Most people in Oregon seem unconcerned about such dangers and
find the mail vote an attractive idea. A survey Ms Southwell
conducted indicated 77 percent of the people in Oregon favor
voting by mail. Still, some observers question whether democracy
is not weakened by procedures that make it too easy for people to
vote. Some critics of the mail vote argue that citizens should
have to go through some minimal inconvenience to take part in the
electoral process. Ms Southwell, however, sees good reasons for
making the process as easy as possible for the voters:
   "People are always lamenting the loss of the polling place and
everything. This is something they feel every good citizen should
do by showing up in a place. Most of the evidence I have seen
even in preliminary results from my survey show that those types
of people who have not voted in the past are often not voting for
quite legitimate reasons. In other words, it was snowing that
day, they had a sick child at home, they had some kind of
handicap or illness that prevented them from getting to the polls
on time."
   Even though she is a political scientist with an intense
interest in the political process, Ms Southwell says even she was
once prevented from voting by circumstances beyond her control:
   "I have voted in every election that I have been eligible to
except for one and that was in 1982 and I was in the hospital
when my son was born. There was no physical way that I could get
to the polls. So, that is my view. Of course, it is a very
anecdotal story and probably not that frequent, but still, this
is a system that disenfranchised a political scientist, so
obviously I do not see it as desirable."
   Ms Southwell says voting by mail is a way of ensuring that
everyone has the opportunity to participate in the process. Of
course, most states allow for absentee balloting, which is
generally done by mail, but this is an option sometimes available
only to people who will be out of town on election day.
   The other reason Ms Southwell believes voting by mail will
soon become the preferred method throughout the United States is
that it saves money:
   "Vote-by-mail elections cost one-third to one-half the cost of
conducting a polling election. Those are pretty strong compelling
arguments. As we speak, there are state legislators considering
it. There are lots of people looking at Oregon and have tried it
to a limited extent themselves and are now considering expanding
this. I think it is a very rational, logical way to proceed
here."
   Now that Oregon has successfully conducted the first mail vote
for a federal office, there could be a number of other such
elections in other states in the years to come. And one day,
perhaps, even the presidential election may be conducted by mail.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   "ONE MAN; ONE VOTE" 1964

   On February 17, 1964, the United States Supreme Court issued a
decision that profoundly changed the makeup of the U.S. House of
Representatives. In its decision in the case of Westberry versus
Sanders, the nation's highest court ruled that congressional
districts within a state must be substantially equal in
population. The decision provided the legal basis for ending the
over-representation of rural voters in the House of
Representatives at the expense of citizens who lived in urban and
suburban areas. Following the decision, urban areas elected more
representatives to the House. Professor A.E. Dick Howard of the
University of Virginia law school says the Westberry decision
ruled unconstitutional, the system that allowed one citizen's
vote to be proportionally greater than that of another:
   "The typical system in many American states, at the time of
'Westberry,' was one in which rural districts were
over-represented and urban districts were under-represented. In
other words, the scale was tilted in favor of the less-populous
areas against the centers of population."
   The Supreme Court said that while mathematical precision is
impossible, the constitution requires each person's vote in a
congressional election be worth as much as any other person's.
Thus congressional districts must be substantially equal in
population.
   --------------

   --------------
   TELEVISION TOUR OF THE WHITE HOUSE 1962

   On February 14, 1962, Jacqueline Kennedy made White House
history when she conducted the first live television tour of the
executive mansion in Washington, D.C. The first lady had made the
restoration of the White House to its original look her personal
project. She sought out the correct colors of paints, wall paper,
original furniture and styles of carpets that had been purchased
for the White House during its 160 years of occupancy.
Accompanied by a camera crew, she strolled through the house
commenting on the history of each room and its furnishings.
   Jacqueline Kennedy, who had assumed celebrity status herself,
enhanced her popularity with the American people with her shy
honesty and obvious commitment to the task of restoration.
   --------------

   --------------
   LINCOLN BORN 1809

   Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth president of the United States,
who preserved the nation in the American Civil War, was born in a
dirt floor log cabin on February 12, 1809. He grew up on frontier
farms as his parents emigrated westward seeking a way out of
their poverty. Abraham Lincoln's mother Nancy taught him to read,
but she died when he was nine years old. When his father
remarried his step-mother insisted he attend school whenever
possible. She also instilled in him a keen desire to learn. The
rest of Abraham Lincoln's education came at night when he read by
candle light. The appetite for reading continued with the bible
and classic books that included American history, philosophy and
George Washington's biography. Lincoln grew into a tall,
remarkably strong and even-tempered teenager. He did menial jobs
to earn money for his family. His willingness to work hard and
his honesty became legendary and he was often called, "Honest
Abe." Before he was assassinated in April, 1865, President
Lincoln had led the U.S. to victory in the American civil war and
had freed black slaves in America. Is said that more has been
written about Abraham Lincoln than any other president of the
United States. The nation observes his birthday, and the birthday
of George Washington, with a holiday on February 19.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   WORLD PRESS: U.S. POLITICS:  FOLLOWING THE GOP HORSERACE

   ROSE SUE BERSTEIN
   WASHINGTON

   Foreign journalists covering the U.S. political scene focused
intently on the Republican primary race, though widespread
commentary on last night's Iowa caucuses has not yet been
received. Observers who did weigh in on the Iowa results, along
with those commenting on last week's race in Louisiana, were
quick to conclude that arch-conservative TV journalist Pat
Buchanan's strong showing had: placed him in the lead for the
conservative wing's votes; dealt a "mortal blow" to Sen. Phil
Gramm's campaign and left Sen. Dole in a more "vulnerable"
position to battle with newcomer Steve Forbes for the centrist
Republican voters. In Paris, financial La Tribune argued that
Iowa had a "sifting" effect on the campaign: "The Iowa caucuses
generally eliminate the weakest candidates and therefore give
prominence to those who have the greatest chances of winning the
party's nomination."
   Many analysts expected, as well, that the infighting among
Republicans would make President Clinton's re-election easier.
Some pundits also saw the victory of Democratic senatorial
candidate Wyden in Oregon--a state considered liberal but which
had not sent a Democrat to the Senate in 34 years--as a good omen
for the Democrats. From nearly every region, commentators seemed
surprised by the "rise" of Steve Forbes. Writers in Chile, India,
Egypt and Sweden wondered whether Forbes' family media fortune
could "buy" him the Republican nomination. However, at least one
pundit argued that the millions Forbes was spending would end up
helping only Mr. Clinton. Milan's financial Il Sole-24 Ore,
looking back to the president's State of the Union address as his
campaign "kick-off," argued that "Dole's adversary, Bill Clinton,
has stolen the centrist chair from him and has placed himself in
the key political position to obtain the vote of the big center."
The paper suggested that Mr. Dole needed to resort to ideology,
but predicted that would be difficult for such a pragmatist. Many
commentators continued to note the contrast between the "appeal
and confidence" of Mr. Clinton and the "unconvincing" Senate
majority leader.
   Several observers--from Brussels to Buenos Aires and
Cairo--noted that candidates have "exceptionally little to say
about what is happening or going to happen outside their
borders." Madrid's conservative ABC complained that the U.S.
seeks a "united and powerful Europe. But it should be neither too
united nor too powerful." Several pundits dwelt on economic,
financial and trade themes, as well. German dailies wondered why
the American public was so enchanted with the concept of a
balanced budget. They, along with others elsewhere, stressed that
the public tends to blame the Republican-led Congress for the
budget impasse and the partial government shutdowns.
   The news that the president would be asked to submit testimony
to the Whitewater investigation also attracted significant media
attention. Some writers chided Mrs. Clinton, not for any specific
wrongdoing, but for not explaining herself clearly. The
conservative Philippine Star called it "painful" to see Mrs.
Clinton get "pilloried once again," and suggested the Republican
campaign against her "may just backfire--in the same way that
their...budget campaign...has boomeranged" on them.

   This report is based on 117 commentaries from 30 countries,
   Jan. 31-Feb. 13.

   EUROPE

   GERMANY:  "Boring"

   Manfred Rowold observed in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin
(2/12), "So far America is not excited about the election
campaign. One reason is the lack of a Democratic challenger to
President Clinton. Another is the lack of charisma among the nine
Republican candidates."

   "The Magic Of A Balanced Budget"

   Peter de Thier wrote in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of
Munich (2/7), "So far, nobody has explained why the elimination
of the budget deficit is necessary and reasonable for the
national economy. But in the political discussion the magic term
'balanced budget' has developed its own life, and during the
election campaign, it will undoubtedly increase its
significance."

   "At An Abyss?"

   Washington correspondent Dietrich Zwaetz wrote in Handelsblatt
of Duesseldorf (1/31), "The Republicans who initiated the budget
controversy will be faced with the consequences for a long
time.... Since November, the U.S. government has been paralyzed
several times, but it was not Bill Clinton who was pilloried but
the Republicans.... The opposition will not make the life of the
government easy, but regarding the debt question the bipartisan
coalition is growing. The Republicans have seven more weeks to
save the state from falling into the abyss of insolvency."

   BRITAIN:  "Religious Right Gives Buchanan Surprise Win"

   The liberal Guardian (2/8) said Pat Buchanan "stunned the
Republican Party establishment by a surprise victory in the
Louisiana caucus, establishing himself as the champion of the
right wing and bringing ideology and religion to the forefront of
the Republican nomination race.... Mr. Buchanan's new credibility
will give him the funds to start challenging Mr. Dole and Mr.
Forbes on television in the next battlegrounds of Iowa and New
Hampshire."

   "Voters Stop Flirting With Fiery Right"

   The centrist Independent (2/8) commented, "Obscured by the
dust of the electoral contest, a deeper truth lies hidden. The
Republican revolution, in full flood a year ago, has ebbed. The
radical zeal that swept Newt Gingrich and his cohorts to power in
the November 1994 congressional elections is waning. No longer is
the fuel that drives the party engine provided by the firebrand
faithful of the Christian Coalition, whose message to
congressional Republicans was 'if you back us on abortion and
family values, we'll bring our crusading zeal to bear on your
efforts to slash the budget.' The message from Iowa...is that
America, having flirted with fire, has shifted its affections
back to the center.... Mr. Dole suffers from the comparison with
Mr. Forbes on account of his age, his reputation as a Washington
insider and because he has been unable to shake off the image of
a man who has no clear policies, who will tailor his message to
fit the opinion poll fashions. Yet that alone marks him out as a
wet (a moderate). Compromise was a word unknown to the House
members who set the Republican tone in 1995. But Mr. Dole...is a
man whose middle name is compromise. He is a man who makes deals.
No one knows for sure how hot his passion is for balancing the
budget, for combating abortion, for reducing sex on television,
for stopping Mexicans wading over the Rio Grande. And no one
knows whether he will modify tomorrow the position he claims
today.
   "Which means he occupies the mushy center--which is why it is
he and Mr. Forbes, and not Mr. Gramm and Mr. Buchanan or the
fading Mr. Gingrich, who are battling today for the soul of the
Republican party."

   "How Much Support Will Buchanan Pull Away From Dole?"

   Pat Buchanan's unexpected win in Louisiana prompted this by
Washington correspondent Bridget Kendall on BBC Radio (2/7): "The
question now is how far Pat Buchanan can go in this presidential
race, if he is the preferred candidate of conservative
Republicans. The unexpectedly dramatic result of this first
caucus of the season isn't just a possibly mortal blow for
Senator Gramm.... The question now is how much support he will
pull away from Senator Bob Dole, the already beleaguered front
runner."

   "The Forbes Bonanza"

   The liberal Guardian (2/5) opined, "Steve Forbes's millions
will certainly not be used to make a direct contribution to the
Democratic Party's campaign funds. But Mr. Forbes is doing even
better by Bill Clinton. The personal fortune that he is
spending...has created mayhem in the party and is provoking
recriminations among the other Republicans in search of the White
House.... Barring unexpected developments in Whitewatergate, this
year's presidential campaign seems increasingly set to turn into
a virtual one-horse race.... In the deadlock...over the federal
budget, Mr. Clinton has consistently scored by using his veto to
defend at least part of the federal welfare structure budget.
   "Mr. Dole's lackluster performance in reply to the president's
combative State of the Union address brought him under fire from
the Republican Party's barons. Add the Forbes persona and wealth
to this brew of discontent, and it reveals a rudderless
Republican Party. Under the circumstances, it is hardly
surprising that America's allies are already speculating who will
be Secretary of State under President Clinton's second term."

   "Want A 17% Tax Rate?"

   The Independent's Rupert Cornwell commented (2/5), "No one
likes taxes but Americans hate them and, not surprisingly, they
are listening to Mr. Forbes' siren call. He has pushed tax reform
to the top of the national agenda.... Amid the smoke and the
thunder, only one prediction can safely be made: the flat tax
will not be enacted in anything like the mooted form.... Forbes'
lasting contribution might be to hasten a simplification of the
tax code. That, and possibly throwing open the Republican race to
fight Bill Clinton."

   FRANCE:  "Tough Campaign For Republicans"

   "Nothing decisive," concluded Europe One Radio (2/13).
Jean-Bernard Cadier added, "The battle promises to be tough on
the Republican side. Dole has won...but with less than 30 percent
of the vote.... This augurs a tough campaign among the
Republicans, and an easy one for Clinton, at least at the
beginning."

   "Survival Of The Fittest?"

   Jean-Marie Macabrey wrote from Washington for financial La
Tribune (2/13), "The Iowa caucuses generally eliminate the
weakest candidates and therefore give prominence to those who
have the most chances of winning the party's nomination."

   ITALY:  "TV's Power, Dole's Vulnerability"

   New York correspondent Arturo Zampaglione observed in
left-leaning, influential La Repubblica (2/13), "The Iowa
Republican caucuses have underscored five aspects of the '96
presidential elections: First, the excessive power of TV. Second,
the relative vulnerability of Bob Dole.... Third, the
aggressiveness and the unity of the Christian right.... Fourth,
the strengthening of the Democratic White House as a result of
internal divisions among the Republicans. Fifth, the
deterioration of the political fight with the massive use of
'negative advertising,' aimed at bringing discredit upon
adversaries."

   "Forbes, Dollars In The Mix"

   Financial Il Sole-24 Ore (2/9), continued its "Toward The
Nominations" series with this by Marco Valsania: "The skeptical
say that, if worse comes to worse, he (Forbes) will have at least
gotten free publicity for his magazine."

   "Uphill Race For Dole"

   New York correspondent Mario Platero commented in Il Sole-24
Ore (2/8), "Dole's adversary, Bill Clinton, has stolen the
centrist chair from him and has placed himself in the key
political position to obtain the vote of the big center. At this
point, in order to prevail, Dole should resort to ideology, a
very difficult task for a pragmatist like him. So much so that,
at the first important appointment--his reply to Clinton's State
of the Union Address--he failed and gave an impression of scarce
lucidity and little self-confidence."

   "Greenspan's Message"

   Centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera said regarding
the lowering of interest rates (2/1), "The message...by Alan
Greenspan is clear: The American economic picture is good, yet
the slowdown in expansion over the last few months requires a
lessening of the monetary squeeze."

   "Pendulum Of U.S. Politics Favors Democrats Again"

   New York correspondent Arturo Zampaglione wrote in La
Repubblica (2/1), "According to rumors circulating in
Washington...Greenspan...decided to lower interest rates in order
to please the White House and eliminate all obstacles to his
renomination (to the Fed.)... (Wyden's victory in Oregon is)
confirmation that the pendulum of American politics, after so
many humiliations and fears, is again oscillating toward the
Clintonians."

   AUSTRIA:  "Republicans Need A Strong Candidate To Beat
              Clinton"

   Eric Frey remarked in independent Der Standard (2/7),
"Whitewater remains a burden and casts an unfavorable light on
Clinton's character. But it was the same during the last election
campaign with the affairs around Gennifer Flowers and his
conscientious objection in Vietnam. The talented election
campaigner was hardly affected. The voters were a little
suspicious, but they still prefered him to the incumbent,
President George Bush. The Republicans would need a strong
candidate to beat Clinton this time. But they seem to gamble this
chance away in the current primaries." BELGIUM:  "90 Seconds For
Foreign Policy"
   New York correspondent Tom Ronse filed for independent De
Morgen (2/13), "In recent years, the Republicans have attacked
Clinton time and again in the field of foreign policy...but they
did not formulate a reasonable alternative themselves. Only by
omitting to do that were they able to conceal their
disagreements.... Most of them have exceptionally little to say
about what is happening or going to happen outside their borders.
The only one to attempt to debate international problems is
Lugar. But his campaign does not seem to have taken root.
Recently, candidates participated in a TV debate in Iowa. It
lasted one and a half hours--of which exactly 90 seconds were
devoted to foreign policy."

   IRELAND:  "Flagging Campaign"

   The highly-respected, intellectual Irish Times (1/30) opined,
"Mr. Dole has had a difficult opening week in his campaign.
Following an unconvincing speech in response to Mr. Clinton's
State of the Union messsage, he has failed to attract popular
enthusiasm on the campaign trail in New Hampshire. On the
contrary, Republican activists are much more enthused by the
hare-brained flat-tax proposal put forward by the
multimillionaire businessman, Mr. Steve Forbes. If Mr. Dole fails
the test of the forthcoming primaries and caucuses it will be a
dramatic setback for his party.... It is his misfortune that so
far Mr. Clinton's energy, articulateness and politcal opportunism
have trumped him in successive encounters and must clearly be
expected to continue to do so as the campaign proceeds. It is not
hard to understand why in these circumstances the Republicans
should concentrate so much on prolonging the Whitewater affair in
the hope that it will hobble Mr. Clinton's appeal and
confidence....
   "Although Mr. Gingrich's radicals have inevitably had to
compromise on their program, most of it has survived; this would
have led one to expect that they would have a more sustainable
candidate than Mr. Dole appears to be to offer as an alternative
to Mr. Clinton."

   NORWAY:  "Iowa's Major Role"

   Business and finance Dagens Naeringsliv commented (2/12), "The
competition between clumsy Steve Forbes and grumpy old Bob Dole
gets most of the attention.... A U.S. candidate often reaches a
crossroads with one sentence. The other day Forbes was accused of
certain 'inclinations' because a work of the notorious homosexual
erotic photographer Robert Mapplethorpe hangs on Forbes' yacht.
Iowa was thus reminded that Forbes is the candidate with a 150
foot yacht equipped with a private helicopter on the quarter
deck, docked in the un-American city of New York and decorated by
the despicable Mapplethorpe. 'It is only a marine painting,'
Steve Forbes said. Which made Bob Dole so pleased he almost
smiled."

   SPAIN:  "An Open Race"

   Conservative ABC (2/8) opined, "The winner of this caucus
(Louisiana) is a candidate that does not have, in principle, any
chance of reaching the final stages of the Republican primary
elections. But that voters in Louisiana chose the most
conservative and unlikely prototype of a 'professional
politician' is an indication of the problems which Bob Dole might
have to face in view of the clear upsurge of an 'outsider' like
Steve Forbes. If only the polls are minimally proved true, Dole
will be disqualified. If he (Dole) is unable to obtain a clear
victory, he will show the same weakness as George Bush's in New
Hampshire.... Following this pattern, it will be difficult for
Republicans to take the White House away from Bill Clinton
despite the weak points in the mandate of the Democratic
president and that the Whitewater scandal is mounting."

   "Two Economic Giants"

   Political analyst Dario Valcarcel held in ABC (2/5), "The
United States wants to support the construction of a united and
powerful Europe. But it should be neither too united nor too
powerful.... A truly united Europe will give security and wealth
to the United States, but it will limit its leadership.... The
most influential people who design American foreign policy think
that it is necessary to promote the idea of a united,
independent, strong Europe in the certainty that this is
best...for America. However, there is another school of thought
that defends a wealthy, disunited and weak Europe easily
dominated by the United States. The presidential elections, where
Clinton has a lead, will answer this."

   SWEDEN:  "The Forbes Phenomenon"

   Social-democratic Aftonbladet (2/7) opined, "The Forbes
phenomenon discredits the U.S. election process. A stupid idea
(that every American should only pay a 'flat tax' of 17%
regardless of income), and $125 million of his own money can make
the magazine magnate the Republican party's candidate for
President. This ought to be impossible. Can money and a general
weariness of politicians make Steve Forbes a winner? Let us hope
that he is just a short-lived phenomenon. But he is nevertheless
a typical example of the political decline characteristic of U.S.
politics."

   SWITZERLAND:  "Who Will It Be?"

   Pierre Ruetschi, Washington correspondent for centrist Tribune
de Geneve (2/6), judged, "The forecast? Nobody wants to hazard a
guess. Steve Forbes looks like a shooting star. A recent poll
puts Dole back in the lead, while Gramm insists he'll be the
winner. And what if they're all wrong? Americans are stuck for a
choice because none of the candidates is a real inspiration. They
loved General Powell, but he's not in the running. More than
ever, the door is open for an independent surprise candidate."

   EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

   JAPAN:  "Clinton's Budget:  Too 'Rosy' A Forecast?"

   An editorial in liberal Asahi said (2/7), "In his budget
message to Congress, President Clinton unveiled an ambitious
seven-year spending plan calling for a cutback of $600 billion in
seven years from fiscal 1996 and a budget surplus in 2002. The
U.S. fiscal deficit, which stood at $290 billion in 1992, has
dropped to the $150 billion-level in 1996. If this trend
continues, it would appear possible to attain a 'zero deficit.'
   "However, we cannot help but agree with the opposition
Republican Party that Clinton will not be able to perform such a
fiscal feat. The budget message says the administration will cut
down on spending on health care programs, but no concrete
measures are mentioned. We wonder if the Clinton administration
had to draw a 'rosy,' 'get to balance' budget blueprint in order
to turn the tide for Mr. Clinton's re-election bid in the fall."
   "U.S. Casualties In Balkans And Clinton's Re-Election"
   Washington correspondent Kashiyama wrote for conservative
Sankei Shimbun (2/5) about "the first U.S. fatality among U.S.
troops deployed in the former Yugoslavia.... The U.S. Congress is
still strongly opposed to the dispatch of U.S. troops to
Bosnia-Herzegovina and a future increase in American fatalities
or casualties may deal a deadly blow to President Clinton's bid
for re-election this fall."

   "Key Interest Rate Cut Welcomed"

   Sankei (2/2) held, "Although the latest rate cut is
politically-motivated by the presidential election set for this
fall, the trend of the U.S. economy is always important to world
economic growth. As a member of the Group of Seven Industrialized
Countries, Japan should welcome the U.S. rate cut."

   AUSTRALIA:  "Trade To The Forefront"

   An op-ed article by the Washington correspondent of the
national, conservative Australian (2/13) said, "A surprisingly
strong campaign by conservative commentator Pat Buchanan has
brought trade issues to the surface. He is the only serious
presidential candidate in either party who is ardently proposing
the sort of aggressive protectionism which would spell bad news
for trading partners such as Australia.
   "Buchanan will not be the next president of the United States,
but the resonance of his trade message is being carefully watched
by the White House...Senator Bob Dole, and the significant
minority of members of Congress who oppose free trade. The power
of populist protectionism during an election year has already
led...Clinton and Dole to subtly tone down their support for free
trade during the past two months."

   "Fates Of Clinton's Re-Election, Bosnia Inseparable"

   The regional West Australian's Washington correspondent wrote
(2/5), "With almost eerie symbolism, the first death of an
American soldier in Bosnia came as...Clinton was campaigning in
New Hampshire.... The fates of both missions are inseparable....
The president and his advisers know that a military debacle in
Bosnia would dash all his dreams of winning a second term."

   "Clinton's Hidden Weapon:  Angry White Women"

   The national, conservative Weekend Australian (2/3) ran this
from its Washington correspondent: "The 'angry white males' who
are spoiling to kick President Clinton's butt in November may be
out-muscled by a new and more potent political force--millions of
'angry white females.' They outnumber men. They don't like the
Republican House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, or his cuts to
government services. And they do like Mr. Clinton and his wife,
Hillary.... The best Democratic result in three years (the Oregon
Senate by-election)...was built on an amazingly strong voting gap
between the sexes.... The real force mobilizing Oregon's women
appears to have been the widely different policies offered by the
candidates, a split which goes to the heart of the broader
political battle between Mr. Clinton and the Republican
Congress."
   "Desperate Dole Loses Shine As Clinton's Star Shoots Higher"
   The Australian's Washington correspondent (1/30) claimed, "The
power of Senator Dole's political machine and the lack of any
outstanding rivals means he is still likely to survive the
Republican nomination race. But on the strength of his
performances at a series of campaign stops around New Hampshire
and on the latest opinion polls here and elsewhere, he will then
have an extremely tough time going on to beat President Clinton
in November."

   CHINA:  "Summons Served On White House And Video Goes To
            Court"

   Washington Correspondent Li Zhengxin wrote in official
Communist Youth League China Youth Daily (2/8), "The summoning of
President Clinton before a federal court will turn the Whitewater
affair into a greater focus of media attention just when the
presidential campaign is getting underway.
   "According to the political rules of U.S. campaigns, as
campaigning grows fiercer, the temperature will rise
correspondingly in the Whitewater investigation. This trend is
unfavorable to Clinton's reelection bid. Nevertheless, American
voters are increasingly disgusted with their political leaders
making an issue of such events. Voters want the candidates to
concentrate on the issues and show some concern for ordinary
people's lives. Therefore, if the Republican party makes too much
of Whitewater, their efforts (to harm Clinton) may backfire."

   HONG KONG:  "Two Camps Face Varied Election Situations"

   Leading pro-PRC Ta Kung Pao (2/6) ran this commentary: "Forbes
has come out suddenly. Other Republican participants are focusing
on attacking him. In the other camp, it looks like the only
Democratic participant, Clinton, is at leisure.... Clinton has
not announced that he is running for re-election yet. This is one
of his strategies, i.e., to take action early but not to waste
money and manpower. Once he announces (his candidacy) and sets up
election campaign headquarters, it will be like starting a
machine that won t stop. He wants to start the machine at the
most important moment in order to achieve the greatest interests.
In one camp, the competition is very fierce, while the other camp
is storing up energy to get ready for the encounter. The key act
will come soon."

   INDONESIA:  "Whitewater Reflects U.S. Political Trends"

   Leading independent Kompas (2/8) observed, "For Clinton,
testifying by videotape is politically advantageous as it would
reduce press coverage and public attention. It would help to
minimize damage to his image in an election year. He can also
avoid scorn by political opponents, particularly Republicans
campaigning for the November election.... The Whitewater case
Clinton faces is not as heavy a scandal as Watergate or
Iran-Contra.... It is too early to predict the winner of the
November presidential elections. However, Whitewater and the
presidential election process is useful food for thought to
observe U.S. political trends."

   "Bill Clinton"

   Independent Surya of Surabaya (2/8) opined, "With Clinton's
many rights and prerogatives, it would not be difficult for him
to refuse the subpoena. But neither he, his wife, nor his child
would choose that path. They are aware that they are under the
power of the constitution and the law.... Certainly this is
noble.... Justice is the soul and the objective of that country's
ideal of fairness and prosperity.... Bill Clinton's case...would
not occur here, as we are not the United States.... We adhere to
the values of Pancasila (Indonesia's political philosophy)... At
the same time, we acknowledge that many values of Pancasila
should be carried out purely and consistently rather than as mere
slogans."

   PHILIPPINES: "Will The 'Get Hillary' Campaign Succeed Or
                 Backfire?"

   Economist and former economic planning secretary Solita Monsod
wrote from Washington in the conservative Philippine Star (2/1),
"It has been painful to watch Hillary Rodham Clinton get
pilloried once again. Particularly because I admire her as a
woman, lawyer, wife, mother, advocate, speaker. She's got
world-class brains.... Will the 'get Hillary' campaign succeed?
The Republicans obviously hope so, and hope that...Clinton's
re-election chances will be damaged beyond repair. On the other
hand, their campaign may just backfire--in the same way that
their...budget campaign...has boomeranged on them. I'm betting on
Hillary."

   "Dole's Trickle Down Lead"

   Washington-based correspondent P. Europa commented in
pro-business Malaya (2/1), "The GOP contest for the 1996
presidential nomination is now between...Dole and Forbes...while
Buchanan is not very far behind in the role of spoiler."

   SINGAPORE:  "U.S. Heading For Isolation?"

   According to the pro-government Business Times (2/9), "It was
not so long ago that international issues used to play a central
role in U.S. presidential campaigns. American voters were aware
that by electing a president, they were also picking the man who
would have control over their country's nuclear arsenal and could
decide the fate of the world.
   "Now that the Cold War is over and Americans are beginning to
withdraw into isolation, slogans like 'it's the economy, stupid!'
and the character of the Clintons seem to be the focus of
interest for most American voters.
   "It is natural that with the end of the superpower rivalry and
the breathtaking impact of globalization and technological
changes on the U.S. economy, Americans would be asking their
leaders to guide them into the promised land of economic
restructuring. And as the United States is confronting the
consequences of a decaying welfare state, American voters have
the right to ask their next president to present ideas for a
social renaissance of the nation.
   "But one sign of leadership is the ability of any politician
to transcend the currents of public opinion. It must be hoped
that notwithstanding the 'come home America' nature of the
campaign, the Republican presidential candidates and Mr. Clinton
will begin articulating a sense of the way they would want to see
the only remaining superpower manage its foreign policy for the
rest of this century. Without such a clear message, the citizens
of the global village are bound to conclude that America is on
the way to withdrawing into itself."

   SOUTH KOREA:  "Dole, The Candidate"

   Conservative Segye Ilbo (2/13) commented, "In terms of
trustworthiness, Bob Dole is clearly ahead of President Clinton,
but it's also very true that Dole does not quite come across as
'the candidate' when a final decision has to be made."

   "Personal Attacks to Get Heated"

   Moderate Hankook Ilbo (2/4) commented, "The Republican attack
on President Clinton is more or less targeted on Hillary Clinton
for now. This focus is expected to continue or even intensify for
a while. "As for the president himself, the woman
issue--including the lawsuit filed by Paula Jones--will remain a
major headache throughout the re-election campaign. Otherwise, in
such areas as foreign policy and the economy, his leadership has
been demonstrated."

   "The Forbes Storm"

   Conservative Chosun Ilbo (1/31) noted that "the simplicity of
[Forbes's] central theme, the flat-rate income tax plan,
continues to gain support among Americans to whom current tax
codes are very hard to comprehend. Forbes's greatest asset is his
wealth, which enables him to save energy and time otherwise spent
on collecting campaign money. Bob Dole's disappointing
performance in responding to the Clinton State of the Union
speech has also turned voters to Forbes."

   THAILAND: "Republicans Switch Tactics In U.S. Budget
              Tug-of-War"

   The independent English-language Nation (2/4) held,
"Republican leaders...faced by the growing public backlash
against the gridlock in Washington, agreed to fund the U.S.
government until March 15....
   "Clinton's genius is that after fighting a losing battle
against the charms of a balanced budget, he has managed to turn
the issue around completely. After reluctantly agreeing to come
up with his own seven-year balanced budget, Clinton has produced
one that wipes out the red ink, but with much less pain than the
Republican plan.... Clinton is a new convert to balancing the
U.S. budget, and now he should have little trouble convincing
voters that the Republicans are playing partisan politics in a
bid to stall the government. Certainly the November campaign is
already looking a lot less daunting for him."

   MIDDLE EAST

   EGYPT:  "Foreign Policy Returns To Elections"

   Washington correspondent Atef El Ghamry wrote in
pro-government Al-Ahram (2/13), "Foreign policy for the Americans
sometimes seemed to be an unwanted visitor.... (But) the
viewpoint concerning foreign policy changed and so foreign policy
returned to the 1996 elections.... The collapse of the USSR
brought with it new and different enemies--drugs, international
organized crime, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and the
fact that U.S. prosperity is affected by what happens outside
U.S. borders. The change occurred when President Clinton made the
decision to send U.S. troops to Bosnia and thus made foreign
policy a partner in the 1996 elections."

   "Forbes Doesn"t Fit The Mold"

   Columnist Mohamed Abdellah wrote in pro-government Al Ahram
(2/8), "It is said that the American electorate wants a president
who can talk to them about his life of struggle. Forbes has no
such story.... He is not like Clinton, who was raised in a poor,
broken family in Arkansas.... He is not like Bob Dole, who was
also raised in a poor family from Kansas.... If Forbes, with his
unconventional way, wins the elections, he will be the most
important story in American politics in a long time."

   SOUTH ASIA

   INDIA:  "Forbes:  Rerun Of Perotmania Of 1992"

   According to the independent Indian Express (2/6), "(The)
American presidency is the best thing money can buy, and...Steve
Forbes is the highest bidder in the fray.... "The Forbes wave,
generated by the media as well as the millionaire's chutzpah, is
to a great extent the rerun of the Perotmania of 1992.... Forbes
is creating a minor tempest because he epitomizes the lure of the
unknown.... The media may soon become less indulgent and start
probing his private life, and, at the end of it all, there may
not be a Candidate Forbes at all. But he has made the point: As
the GOP elephant and the Democratic donkey make the predictable
noises, Americans long for more biodiversity in politics."

   "Stakes In Bosnia Are High For Clinton"

   An analysis in the independent Hindu by Washington
correspondent Sridhar Krishnaswami concluded (2/5), "Foreign
policy is not the main focus of this November election but the
stakes in Bosnia are very high for...Clinton.... It is not as if
the Clinton administration underestimated the dangers of Bosnia
to Congress, but a fundamental and persistent question (is
whether) the United States should be there to begin with....
   "The initial response to the death of the soldier in the mine
incident has not been much from among the Republicans.... But
hardliners in the Republican Party have taken the stance all
along that Bosnia was not worth the life of even a single
American soldier; and that the United States had no national
interests in putting troops in Bosnia."

   "Hillary To Testify Before Jury Today"

   Washington correspondent Seema Sirohi wrote in the independent
Telegraph (1/26), "Pure and dirty politics cried the Democrats. A
public interest investigation, insist the pious Republicans. Will
the Whitewater scandal turn into a Watergate for the Clintons?...
President Bill Clinton survived 'Nannygate,' the Waco debacle,
allegations of sexual misconduct from nubile young women and even
a $200 haircut aboard the presidential plane. But by targeting
the First Lady his opponents seem to have found a scandal that
will survive until the elections.... It was not the kind of
television coverage the Clintons were hoping for in an election
year but they are boxed in.... The grand jury appearance could be
the first step towards a formal indictment.... The whole thing is
political and (shows) that the Republicans are desperately
looking for ways to continue the investigation which has not
produced anything of substance in nearly four years."

   BANGLADESH:  "For Any Nation To Work"

   The government-run Bangladesh Times (1/29) opined, "The
Americans have again demonstrated that they possess the essential
intensity of purpose to enable their superpower country to
function smoothly and retain its superiority in the global arena.
Amid a deepening crisis...President Bill Clinton, who belongs to
the Democratic Party, made an emphatic plea to the Congress to
resolve the crisis keeping the U.S. national interest uppermost
in their minds. 'We shall work together as one nation for America
to work,' he said. The Congress responded positively quite
quickly and within less than four days, resolved the crisis by
paving the way for America to continue to work without a fund
scarcity impeding its progress. But the Republican-led Congress
(could have) totally incapacitated the Clinton administration.
But they haven't done it. The obvious consideration was that the
American national interest must precede any personal or party
interest. That's why the United States is still the mightiest
superpower, both militarily and economically; isn't there a
lesson for us in it? Can't we all unite and work together as one
nation for Bangladesh to work, being mindful of the needs and
aspirations of our people?"

   LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN

   MEXICO:  "Cynicism In Washington"

   An editorial in border city Tijuana's El Mexicano (2/9)
opined, "The pre-election environment in the United States has
brought about uncertainty and political cynicism to the point
that public officials break agreements they had previously
supported. The politicians' positions are so grotesque that their
principles and ethics have been exchanged for popularity and
votes. President Clinton has now stated that his administration
stopped the NAFTA to guarantee that Mexico comply with high labor
and environmental standards.
   "This is the first time that the White House occupant has
admitted that his country is acting unilaterally and that he has
changed his mind regarding Mexico. Doesn't President Clinton
remember that he was the one who demanded the inclusion of labor
and environmental side agreements in the NAFTA?... Every single
day, the U.S. electoral dispute is more contaminated by political
cynicism."

   ARGENTINA:  "Why Latin America Should Pay Attention"

   Oscar Raul Cardoso, international affairs analyst for leading
Clarin, opined (2/10), "The present U.S. electoral campaign is
yet, in its early stages, a distant spectacle to Latin
America.... If the electoral fight continues, finally, in the
expected direction, Latin America may have reasons to regret not
having paid attention to it. A true possibility...is that the
South may be demonized in U.S. political speech--not only from a
faction or sector--but in the heart of its public agenda....
   "Latin America may lack--at first sight--a great deal of
importance as the ghost of U.S. security, in terms of the
people's everyday concern, not as an abstract idea. But one only
needs to take a look at the Colombian political dilemma, or
listen to recent bypartisan threats--by both Senators Alphonse
D'Amato and Diane Feinstein--to call off Mexico's financial
rescue, and the strong protectionist and isolationist
declarations in the incipient electoral campaign, to think that
Latin America has not heard the best, or the worst, yet."

   "The Buchanan Style"

   Walter Goobar commented in left-of-center Pagina 12 (2/8),
"Those who know Buchanan personally confirm that the strange
mixture of Catholic fundamentalism with an aggressive and
gangster-like mentality of a suburban fascist, which constitute
his ideology, are thanks to his father, an Irish immigrant....
Buchanan's instinct to exploit local prejudice is infallible.
Since 1992, when he tried to contest the candidacy with George
Bush, Buchanan knew that Louisiana and Mississippi offered ideal
conditions to win.... In the track of Buchanan's campaign one can
see a new kind of U.S. fascism emerging. Though it may be too
sectorial to win an election, it is surely powerful enough to
turn the Republican primaries into a three-men race: Dole, Forbes
and Buchanan."

   "Ultra-Rightist Buchanan Wins Louisiana Caucus"

   New York-based correspondent Marina Aizen wrote in Clarin
(2/8), "The ultra-right wing made its debut on Tuesday with a
victory in Louisiana's caucus by...Pat Buchanan.... Nevertheless,
this victory is not enough to determine Buchanan's strength in
the rest of the primaries.... Buchanan is an enraged nationalist
militant who sees enemies everywhere: the United Nations, Wall
Street, free trade. His favorite idea is his fight against
abortion, which he preaches from church pulpits, as if they were
political committees. In Louisiana, Buchanan hit Phil Gramm below
the waist.... But only 30,000 out of 500,000 registered
Republicans voted in Louisiana. Many people did not even know
that primaries were starting there."

   "The Million-Dollar Candidacy"

   Oscar Raul Cardoso wrote in Clarin (2/3), "Ross Perot may
claim the dubious privilege of having initiated, with his
presidential candidacy...the assault of business on the power
citadel of politicians in the United States.... That stage has
another occupant now: publisher Steve Forbes.... His candidacy is
a powerful leap to the top from the base itself.... Forbes is
triggering one of the most troubling questions of the age: Is it
possible, in direct and blunt language, to buy democratic
legitimacy? The publicity of this apprentice wizard penetrates
every nook and cranny. His ads are in the papers, on radios, and
certainly on TV and internet.... The effects are immediate.
Starting from nothing politically, he stands today in second
place among the Republican candidates and has, for New Hampshire,
11 percent of the votes. Even if Forbes's campaign is a fiasco
and his flat tax does not prevail, this time, perhaps, the man's
popularity and his idea say a lot about a society economist
Lester Thurow referred to as 'apparently shifting toward a
19th-century capitalism' which will be...painful for those on
whom it will experiment and very risky for those interested in
social stability."

   "Powerful Woman, Loved And Hated"

   Ruben Guillemi commented in Clarin (1/27), "In her three years
in the White House she had the ability to divide the waters
clearly between those who love her and those who detest her (with
this group growing steadily).... The number of her critics has
grown dangerously these past days. Surveys confirm now that 52
percent of Americans believe that Hillary lies about the
Whitewater case.... Hillary dreamed about a place in history
similar to Eleanor Roosevelt's...in terms of her participation in
political life. The succession of errors...or lies have placed
her, actually, facing a grand jury, another place no other first
lady occupied in history."

   BRAZIL:  "Politics As Theater"

   Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo (1/27) commented, "Maybe in
the United States, more than in any other country in the world,
politics is theater.... President Clinton used all the resources
available to make his speech a remarkable show to launch his
re-election candidacy. If he maintains the rhythm, the world will
be able to watch the rebirth of a candidacy, which was believed
to be dead, a victim of the president's former backwardness in
the face of international events, and continuous mistakes in
(U.S.) domestic policies....
   "Clinton modified the course and style of (his)
government...acted with energy and determination in the former
Yugoslavia, intervened in the peace process of North
Ireland...and faced the challenge of the Republican Congress in
such a way that public opinion does not consider him responsible
for the failure to produce a budget that required the closure of
the government twice.
   "In his speech Clinton challenged the Congress, reprehending
the Republicans gently but firmly for the budget impasse and at
the same time offering his hand to resolve differences. Clinton's
strategy is to show that in what the Republicans are asking and
what he does, there is no substantial difference, just a matter
of style.
   "Bill Clinton is back in the presidential running. He is
leading, assuming positions before exclusively those of the
Republicans, and scoring before public opinion when he called
upon the Congress to talk, with sober polish."

   CHILE:  "Electoral Expenses In The United States"

   Financial El Diario (2/9) opined, "In the land of the free
market, the United States, representatives are asking to put a
limit on campaign expenses to prevent millionaires from
overwhelming their opponents with advertising. The event which
triggered the nervousness among both the Democrats and
Republicans was the candidacy of (publisher) and multimillionaire
Steve Forbes.
   "Senator Specter said that Forbes, a political newcomer, has
been able to challenge Republican leader Bob Dole because he has
spent $15 million of his own money on political advertising in
Iowa, New Hampshire and other states.... As a result of this
concern, Specter and (Sen.) Hollings have proposed a
constitutional amendment that would permit the Congress and the
states to limit campaign expenses.... In any event, the reactive
American voters have other things to consider--more than whether
the size of a candidate's bank account is a defect. Besides,
Specter's proposal would not be in effect for next November's
elections."

   EL SALVADOR:  "Forbes Stirs Up U.S. With Tax Reform Proposal"

   Leading, very conservative El Diario De Hoy (1/31) opined,
"Forbes...has stirred up the U.S. primaries...with an audacious
if not original campaign proposal to substitute for the complex
and arcane income tax tables a single and universal tax rate of
17 percent.... The evidence is that Forbes has struck a very
sensitive chord in the heart of the populace, such that he has
succeeded in only a few weeks in moving himself into second place
among the aspirants of the Republican Party. And in the time
remaining before the party's convention this fall, he could
outdistance the rest.
   "The Forbes phenomenon comes on the heels of the voter turmoil
which allowed the Republican Party to take control of the U.S.
Congress under the leadership of Newt Gingrich, who himself
arrived promoting deep fiscal reforms and the adoption of a
zero-deficit policy."

   PANAMA:  "A Strong Leader"

   Independent La Estrella de Panama (2/4) opined, "President
Clinton's State of the Union address...was sincere and
optimistic.... President Clinton's address was that of a ruler
who knows what he is doing, what should be done, and is confident
of his party nomination, and of winning the next elections."

   PARAGUAY:  "The End Of Big Government"

   An opinion column in leading ABC Color (2/8) pointed out,
"Today, what the United States wants is to reduce (government)
and eliminate the dizzying deficit of billions of dollars, caused
especially by Social Security, which if maintained at its current
level will bring the country to bankruptcy. In his State of the
Union speech a while ago, Clinton could not avoid a promise of
fiscal responsibility. The statement by the 'liberal' Clinton was
an admission...of the urgency of reform. He announced nothing
less than 'the end of big government' by a balanced federal
budget. Seeing is believing."
   ---------------








   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: [e-mail]
   AOL: INEWS
   COMPUSERVE: 76725,3622
   --------------
   ***END OF FILE***