PBS NewsHour - 1996-02-13
Channel: malgent
Transcript
Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)
[0:06] Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the
[0:08] NewsHour tonight, the Iowa caucus
[0:10] results. Margaret Warner talks to Pat
[0:12] Buchanan, Mark Shields, and Paul Gigot,
[0:15] plus David Yepsen of the Des Moines
[0:16] Register do some analyzing. A new way to
[0:19] settle disputes on the range. Elizabeth
[0:22] Farnsworth reports. The globalization of
[0:24] the economy. David Gergen engages New
[0:27] York Times columnist Tom Friedman. And
[0:30] something new about a very old map.
[0:32] Charlayne Hunter-Gault debriefs a man
[0:34] from the Smithsonian. And all follows
[0:36] our summary of the news this Tuesday.
[0:38] >> Major funding for the NewsHour with Jim
[0:40] Lehrer has been provided by the Archer
[0:42] Daniels Midland Company, ADM,
[0:45] supermarket to the world.
[0:48] And by New York Life.
[0:50] Yet another example of New York Life's
[0:53] wise investment philosophy.
[0:57] And by the Corporation for Public
[0:59] Broadcasting, and by the annual
[1:01] financial support from viewers like you.
[1:05] >> The race for the Republican presidential
[1:06] nomination moved from Iowa to New
[1:09] Hampshire today. Last night in the Iowa
[1:11] caucuses, Senator Bob Dole came in first
[1:14] with 26% of the vote. Pat Buchanan was
[1:17] second with 23%. Lamar Alexander was
[1:20] third, Steve Forbes fourth, Senator Phil
[1:22] Gramm fifth. Gramm cut short his New
[1:25] Hampshire trip this afternoon and flew
[1:26] back to Washington. His campaign manager
[1:29] said Gramm would make an announcement
[1:31] tomorrow. Earlier today, Pat Buchanan
[1:33] talked with Margaret Warner.
[1:36] >> I'm in this campaign because I have
[1:37] ideas, convictions, and beliefs. We
[1:40] don't have consultants, focus groups,
[1:41] pollsters. No one tells me what to say.
[1:44] I am firmly pro-life. I always have
[1:46] been. My supporters in United We Stand,
[1:48] they say, "Pat, why don't you not talk
[1:49] about that so often?" My right-to-life
[1:52] folks say, "Pat,
[1:54] I don't think you're right on trade."
[1:56] And I tell them, "Look, this is what I
[1:57] believe, and these are the issues that
[2:00] I've decided upon, and you agree with me
[2:01] on so much. Even if you disagree with me
[2:03] there, come on. This This campaign's
[2:06] wide open."
[2:07] >> President Clinton had no opposition in
[2:09] the Democratic caucuses last night.
[2:11] We'll have the rest of Margaret Warner's
[2:12] interview with Pat Buchanan, plus
[2:14] analysis of the Republican results,
[2:16] right after this news summary. In
[2:19] Washington today, President Clinton
[2:20] signed an executive order on hiring
[2:22] illegal workers. Federal contractors who
[2:25] do so would be barred from additional
[2:27] federal contracts for 1 year. There are
[2:30] already criminal penalties for those who
[2:32] hire illegal workers. White House
[2:34] spokesman Mike McCurry explained the new
[2:36] ones.
[2:37] >> The executive order he signed today
[2:38] relates to federal contracts that go
[2:40] typically to companies that are involved
[2:42] most often in in the in the construction
[2:44] business, but there are other federal
[2:46] contractors that would apply. It's not
[2:48] designed to apply to individuals, and
[2:50] it's not designed to put a burden on
[2:52] private sector employers, either.
[2:54] Um the They simply have to do is to
[2:56] verify that they have employed who
[2:58] employed people that they
[3:00] know to be legally employable, legally
[3:03] authorized to work.
[3:04] >> The order prohibits employers from using
[3:07] these sanctions as a way to discriminate
[3:09] on the basis of ethnic origin.
[3:11] On Bosnia today, Secretary of Defense
[3:13] Perry hailed the extradition of two Serb
[3:16] officers to the UN War Crimes Tribunal
[3:19] in The Hague. Perry told reporters at
[3:21] the Pentagon the peace mission in Bosnia
[3:23] was back on track. He said NATO
[3:25] peacekeeping troops will be given more
[3:27] information to help them recognize
[3:29] suspected war criminals. He spoke at a
[3:31] photo opportunity with a Croatian
[3:33] defense minister.
[3:35] >> NATO does have instructions that if they
[3:39] come across
[3:41] any indicted war criminals,
[3:43] they are to detain them and turn them
[3:44] over to the international tribunal
[3:47] tribunal.
[3:50] This
[3:51] function can be greatly facilitated
[3:54] by getting better information
[3:57] to the NATO forces
[3:59] on the identities pictures
[4:02] of these indicted war criminals.
[4:04] And we're in the process of doing that
[4:06] right now.
[4:08] >> In Bosnia in protest of yesterday's
[4:10] extraditions, Bosnian Serb authorities
[4:12] said they would not attend arms control
[4:14] talks in Vienna later this week.
[4:17] In Israel, the government has closed off
[4:19] access to and from the West Bank and
[4:22] Gaza. A spokesman said it was done
[4:24] because of warnings about possible
[4:26] suicide bomb attacks. Palestinians
[4:28] protested the action. It will keep tens
[4:31] of thousands of them from going to work
[4:33] in Israel. In Norway today, Israeli,
[4:36] Jordanian, and Palestinian negotiators
[4:38] initialed an agreement on sharing Middle
[4:41] East water resources. It must now be
[4:43] approved by their governments.
[4:45] Character actor Martin Balsam died today
[4:48] in Rome where he was vacationing. The
[4:51] cause of death is not yet known. Balsam
[4:53] won an won an Oscar for his supporting
[4:55] role in the 1965 movie A Thousand
[4:58] Clowns. He also played supporting parts
[5:00] in such films as On the Waterfront, 12
[5:03] Angry Men, and Psycho. He was 76 years
[5:06] old. And that's it for the news summary
[5:08] tonight. Now it's on to the Iowa story.
[5:11] Something new on the range.
[5:13] A Gergen dialogue. And a new discovery
[5:16] about an old map.
[5:28] To the Iowa results and impacts are
[5:31] where we go first tonight. Our coverage
[5:33] begins with a report and an interview by
[5:35] Margaret Warner.
[5:37] >> Thank you, Iowa. On to New Hampshire.
[5:41] Let the future begin.
[5:43] >> The results from the Iowa caucuses were
[5:45] barely in when the Republican candidates
[5:48] took off for New Hampshire. The first to
[5:50] greet New Hampshire voters this morning
[5:52] was the third-place finisher in Iowa,
[5:54] former Tennessee Governor Lamar
[5:56] Alexander. He held an early morning
[5:58] meeting with high school students in
[5:59] Manchester, then worked the breakfast
[6:01] crowd at a nearby diner.
[6:03] >> Narrowed it down between you and Bob
[6:05] Dole. Why should I vote for you?
[6:07] >> Well, there's nothing wrong with Bob
[6:08] Dole to start with. He's a terrific
[6:10] person. I've got a lot of respect for
[6:12] him.
[6:12] But, here's what I think. We need new
[6:15] leadership. I mean, Bob Dole's a
[6:16] legislative engineer.
[6:18] He's very good in the legislature.
[6:20] That's where he belongs. We've got to
[6:22] pick somebody who can stand up there
[6:23] with Clinton.
[6:26] >> The first event of the day for Iowa
[6:28] winner Bob Dole was a late morning
[6:31] speech to the New Hampshire legislature
[6:33] in Concord, where the Senate majority
[6:35] leader tried to cement his claim to the
[6:37] state's Republican establishment.
[6:40] >> I have long been a fan of the great New
[6:42] England poet Robert Frost,
[6:44] but I found an area where
[6:46] we have a very slight disagreement.
[6:49] You see, Mr. Frost once wrote that New
[6:51] Hampshire and Vermont were the two best
[6:53] states in the union.
[6:55] I hope you would forgive me this morning
[6:56] if I said that New Hampshire and Iowa
[6:59] were the two best states in the union.
[7:02] But, I want you to know, as you already
[7:03] know,
[7:05] that the eyes of the nation are trained
[7:07] here,
[7:08] waiting for your judgment
[7:10] a week from today.
[7:12] Your judgment on who should lead
[7:14] America.
[7:15] >> Dole understands how critical the New
[7:17] Hampshire primary is. No Republican in
[7:20] recent history has won his party's
[7:22] presidential nomination without winning
[7:24] here first. But, New Hampshire voters
[7:27] have a history of anointing someone
[7:29] other than the Iowa winner.
[7:33] Texas Senator Phil Gramm finished fifth
[7:35] in Iowa. That, coupled with a loss last
[7:38] week in Louisiana, was grim news. Gramm
[7:41] made just one stop in New Hampshire
[7:43] today then canceled the rest of his
[7:45] events to return to Washington to
[7:47] rethink his campaign.
[7:48] >> When you run fifth in Iowa, an important
[7:52] state, you would have to be brain dead
[7:55] not to take a look at where you are and
[7:57] what you're doing.
[7:58] And I think that one of the things that
[8:00] we're going to try to do
[8:02] this afternoon
[8:04] and tonight is to take a look at where
[8:06] we are
[8:07] to try try to take a look at what our
[8:09] strategy is.
[8:10] >> He's been called a champion of economic
[8:13] growth and a visionary. He is Steve
[8:15] Forbes.
[8:16] >> The only sign in New Hampshire today of
[8:18] publisher Steve Forbes was his
[8:20] multi-million dollar advertising blitz.
[8:23] Forbes canceled his only scheduled
[8:25] appearance in the state. Aides said the
[8:27] candidate and his campaign needed to
[8:30] take a day to regroup after his distant
[8:32] fourth-place showing in Iowa. The last
[8:35] to appear publicly was an exhausted but
[8:37] a buoyant Pat Buchanan who took a strong
[8:40] second place last night.
[8:42] >> People want to be a part of this cause,
[8:44] they believe in it, they do wonder
[8:46] whether we can win, but more and more
[8:48] are coming to believe that Pat Buchanan
[8:50] can be the next president of the United
[8:52] States, and I'm coming to believe that.
[8:54] >> A sign of what that Iowa showing may
[8:56] mean,
[8:57] his press conference in Manchester today
[8:59] drew more reporters than candidate
[9:01] Buchanan has seen so far in this
[9:03] campaign.
[9:05] Now we speak with the man who surprised
[9:07] the pundits in Iowa, Pat Buchanan.
[9:09] Welcome Mr. Buchanan.
[9:10] >> All right.
[9:11] >> How do you explain your strong showing
[9:12] last night?
[9:13] >> I think our message is resonating across
[9:15] this country. We have a new conservatism
[9:18] of the heart that speaks out not only
[9:19] for the innocent unborn,
[9:21] but speaks out for working Americans
[9:23] whose jobs have been shipped overseas,
[9:25] and it speaks for the American middle
[9:26] class and their concerns about economic
[9:28] insecurity and economic stress. And
[9:31] we're the only candidate that's
[9:32] addressing that issues of jobs and
[9:34] economic insecurity.
[9:36] And I think that was it and we had a
[9:37] wonderful organization, and we got
[9:39] devoted followers and supporters who
[9:41] work harder than anybody else, even
[9:42] though we don't have as much money as
[9:43] anybody else.
[9:44] >> You made your living as a television
[9:45] commentator handicapping politicians and
[9:48] politics. Give me your quick assessment
[9:50] of the top other top four finishers in
[9:52] Iowa. How they did as well or as poorly
[9:54] as they did, and what it says about the
[9:55] prospects.
[9:57] >> All right. Uh Senator Dole only got 26%
[10:00] of the vote in the state where he is
[10:01] really a favorite son. 75% voted against
[10:04] him. I think that means Republican Party
[10:06] wants someone other than Bob Dole, even
[10:08] though they respect him, admire him, and
[10:10] like him.
[10:11] I think the Dole candidacy for
[10:13] Republicans is like an arranged
[10:14] marriage.
[10:15] They really would prefer not to do it.
[10:17] They may have to.
[10:19] Uh Steve Forbes, I think uh really
[10:22] crippled his campaign with the extent
[10:25] and the remorselessness of his attack
[10:26] ads on everybody in the race. Uh they
[10:28] were on every other minute, it seemed.
[10:31] Originally, he came in as an outsider
[10:33] with three good issues, which happened
[10:34] to have been my issues.
[10:36] And he sort of seized them and said, "I
[10:37] stand for these." And they were very
[10:39] popular. But when he turned the
[10:40] remorseless attack ads all the way up to
[10:42] the last day, I think he hurt himself.
[10:45] And a lot of his votes, I think, went to
[10:46] Lamar Alexander. Lamar is a good friend
[10:48] of mine. He's a class act.
[10:50] He runs a class campaign. Uh I think
[10:52] Lamar did well because a lot of the
[10:55] Forbes people went to him.
[10:57] But I think this.
[10:59] Lamar's problem is that there is no
[11:00] agenda.
[11:02] Uh there's no cutting edge there.
[11:04] Uh
[11:05] there is a there is Lamar, who's a nice
[11:07] moderate man and a good friend of mine.
[11:08] I used to serve with him in Richard
[11:09] Nixon's White House in our youth, long,
[11:12] long ago.
[11:13] Phil Gramm is suffering from the fact
[11:15] that he and I were competing
[11:17] for the title of Mr. Conservative in the
[11:19] politics of 1996.
[11:21] And I defeated him in the first major
[11:23] battle in Alaska, and he came in fifth.
[11:25] And then we went down to his state,
[11:28] which is virtually home state Louisiana
[11:30] in his backyard.
[11:31] And we worked it, and worked it, and
[11:33] worked it and to the life of me I don't
[11:35] understand why he didn't go down there
[11:36] and we defeated him.
[11:38] Uh and I think that hurt his campaign.
[11:40] So what happened was the conservatives
[11:41] in Iowa said
[11:43] "Well, there's only one conservative now
[11:44] who can win." And so we came into Iowa
[11:46] with momentum. At the same time people
[11:48] were being disgusted by these attack ads
[11:50] everyone was doing. We ran positive ads
[11:53] and the conservatives started moving
[11:54] toward Pat Buchanan.
[11:55] >> All right, let me let me ask about your
[11:57] >> Bob Dole's problem in New Hampshire.
[11:59] >> Let me ask ask you about the two legs of
[12:01] your conservative message. The first
[12:02] being the social or cultural
[12:03] conservative message.
[12:05] There are a lot of voters who are turned
[12:08] off by that message.
[12:09] >> Right.
[12:10] >> As much as you have fervent support, you
[12:11] also are a polarizing figure. If you
[12:14] really want to win the nomination, how
[12:16] can you
[12:17] can you deal with that? How are you
[12:19] going to deal with the polarizing nature
[12:21] of
[12:21] >> we were outspent by Mr. Dole maybe eight
[12:23] to one in Iowa
[12:25] and Mr. Forbes 13 to one at one
[12:27] television station we saw.
[12:29] I'm in this campaign because I have
[12:31] ideas, convictions, and beliefs. We
[12:33] don't have consultants, focus groups,
[12:35] pollsters. No one tells me what to say.
[12:37] I am firmly pro-life. I always have
[12:39] been. My supporters in United We Stand,
[12:41] they say, "Pat, why don't you not talk
[12:43] about that so often?"
[12:44] My right to life folks, they say, "Pat,
[12:47] I don't think you're right on trade."
[12:49] And I tell them, "Look, this is what I
[12:50] believe and these are the issues that
[12:53] I've decided upon and you agree with me
[12:54] on so much. Even if you disagree with me
[12:57] there, come on. This This campaign's
[12:59] wide open. You're welcome. I know you
[13:01] disagree with me, but that's where I
[13:02] stand and I'm going to be faithful to
[13:04] all of my constituencies. You know, it's
[13:06] something I learned from a president you
[13:08] covered and I worked for and that's
[13:09] Ronald Reagan. Say what you mean and
[13:11] mean what you say and and follow through
[13:14] and and do it with a smile.
[13:16] >> But can you do that particularly on
[13:19] these social or conservative issues and
[13:21] win actually a majority of your party?
[13:23] And if you look here in New Hampshire, a
[13:25] majority of even Republicans say they
[13:27] are pro-choice
[13:28] >> Margaret, Margaret, we are a pro-life
[13:30] party.
[13:31] We elected 40 new pro-life congressmen
[13:33] in 1994.
[13:35] Ronald Reagan wrote the pro-life
[13:36] platform
[13:38] plank in the Republican platform. He did
[13:39] fairly well twice. George Bush ran a
[13:42] pro-life candidate in 1988. I believe
[13:45] that not only is pro-life
[13:47] the right position to take because it's
[13:49] right, I think it's politically right.
[13:51] And I think these Republicans who say,
[13:53] "Well, looks like the polls are moving.
[13:55] Let me start moving over there." I think
[13:57] as they move over they cut their own
[13:58] throats because people know they really
[14:00] are just
[14:01] they're just creatures of polls and
[14:03] creatures of trends and people are tired
[14:05] of them.
[14:05] >> You have a very firm anti-free trade
[14:09] message. You're talking about abolishing
[14:11] or getting out of GATT and NAFTA. Do you
[14:13] think that's a selling message again to
[14:16] a majority of the
[14:17] >> I think that's a
[14:18] That is that is really a a distortion of
[14:20] a message. I'm in favor of the the free
[14:22] trade agreement with Canada. I would be
[14:24] in favor of free trade with Europeans
[14:26] and I said Australia. Even with Japan if
[14:28] they were free traders. People who play
[14:30] hardball with us, you play hardball with
[14:31] them. Here's what we need, Margaret. We
[14:33] need a free trade zone, if you will,
[14:35] among nations that have comparable wage
[14:37] levels and comparable regulations. But
[14:40] if you take a try to make a free trade
[14:42] agreement with Mexico
[14:43] your factories will go down there and
[14:45] get labor which they can buy at 10%, no
[14:47] environmental rules, and none of these
[14:49] other rules, and all your factories and
[14:50] good paying jobs will go down there. It
[14:52] is simple common sense. It is happening.
[14:55] We've now got a $1.7 trillion total
[14:58] merchandise trade deficit in the last 15
[15:01] years.
[15:02] My friends in Washington have got to
[15:03] wake up and smell the coffee. There are
[15:05] more Americans now working in government
[15:07] than in manufacturing. And we wanted
[15:09] America, I want America to be the
[15:11] greatest industrial and manufacturing
[15:13] nation on Earth with the highest
[15:15] standard of living for our workers, and
[15:17] I want to make America the enterprise
[15:18] zone of the Western industrial world. It
[15:20] is Reaganism plus the founding fathers
[15:23] equals Buchanan.
[15:25] >> You just had a press conference that I
[15:26] just attended and what you said that you
[15:28] thought your party had become too arid.
[15:31] Arid is one of the adjectives you used.
[15:33] What did you mean by that?
[15:34] >> Well, I mean well, look, uh this was I
[15:36] thought we had a great victory in '94
[15:38] and we have there's there's got to be
[15:40] some romance and poetry in politics and
[15:42] you got to concern yourself with with
[15:44] leading people, but in the last several
[15:46] months all we hear about is, you know,
[15:49] um balance in the budget in 7 years with
[15:51] OMB or or what's that other group up
[15:53] there? Numbers. CBO numbers.
[15:56] And we mean that's really something to
[15:58] march up the hill for, isn't it? I mean,
[16:00] look, Ronald Reagan made ours party of
[16:02] the city on a hill. Ronald Reagan had
[16:05] gave brought romance to politics. What
[16:07] Jack Kennedy did for the Democrats,
[16:08] Ronald Reagan did for the conservative
[16:10] movement and people expect their leaders
[16:12] to really to lead and to show where
[16:14] we're going and to describe it to them.
[16:17] Instead, we got I mean, a lot of our
[16:18] guys are behaving, you know, like
[16:20] they're accountants working on an audit,
[16:22] you know, of some company I'm not
[16:24] interested in. And they got to get out
[16:25] and they got to address the people and
[16:27] they got to communicate with them in
[16:28] words people understand.
[16:30] >> Okay, let me go back to the electability
[16:31] issue one more time. A senior Dole
[16:33] person in his state said to me last
[16:35] night, "This is just what we want. It's
[16:37] a two-man race and our opponent in this
[16:39] two-man race, Pat Buchanan, is a guy
[16:42] with a built-in ceiling."
[16:43] >> Mhm. That's what Phil Gramm said in
[16:45] Louisiana.
[16:46] That's what they all said in Alaska.
[16:49] Listen,
[16:50] in the state of New Hampshire and in
[16:52] this race,
[16:54] I believe that not only can we win this
[16:56] nomination, but Bob Dole would have far,
[16:59] far more difficulty beating Bill Clinton
[17:00] than I would. I'll tell you why. Two
[17:02] reasons.
[17:03] One, I can communicate and I can debate
[17:04] with Bill Clinton head-to-head, no
[17:06] problem. I think Bob will have a problem
[17:09] on that. Secondly, Bob cannot bring home
[17:11] the Perot voters. This is the missing
[17:14] element. They They driven off from
[17:16] 18-1989 to 1993. 19 main Americans.
[17:20] Where do they stand? They oppose NAFTA,
[17:22] they oppose GATT, they oppose the
[17:24] Mexican bailout, they want campaign
[17:26] finance reform. Bob Dole is the
[17:28] antithesis of campaign finance reform.
[17:31] He was for NAFTA, GATT, and he was for
[17:34] he was for the Mexican bailout.
[17:35] >> They're also pro-choice.
[17:36] >> Many of them are pro-choice, but if you
[17:38] were at that Dallas convention,
[17:40] they know I'm pro-life.
[17:42] I mean, they lifted the roof off there a
[17:43] couple of feet.
[17:44] >> One final thing about the week ahead.
[17:46] You benefited in good part, it seems to
[17:48] me,
[17:49] in previous weeks because you were not a
[17:52] target of the negative advertising by
[17:54] Steve Forbes. He did go after Alexander,
[17:56] Gramm, and Dole.
[17:58] Do you expect that special status to
[18:00] continue, or do you think he's going to
[18:01] start attacking you?
[18:02] >> I think it'd be a mistake. I mean, he
[18:03] might start attacking me, but it'd be a
[18:04] mistake. My vote is rock solid, and if
[18:07] he hammers me,
[18:08] they're not going to leave me and go to
[18:09] him.
[18:11] Uh because Steve Forbes is a social
[18:12] liberal. They're not going over there.
[18:14] And so, I think that would be a mistake.
[18:16] And also, I think it'd be a mistake from
[18:17] a second standpoint. Steve Forbes better
[18:19] stop attacking people,
[18:21] or he's going to get less than 10%. I
[18:23] mean, people are a little bit tired of
[18:25] someone, uh you know, excuse me, that is
[18:27] I described it, a little rich kid
[18:28] throwing rocks at every car that comes
[18:30] down the street.
[18:31] And and I think he hurt himself. And he
[18:33] had a good message, and I don't know why
[18:35] he did it. I know Steve Forbes, he's a
[18:36] much nicer guy than the campaign he ran
[18:38] in Iowa.
[18:39] >> Well, thanks very much.
[18:40] >> Thank you.
[18:42] >> Now, how the various Iowa outcomes
[18:44] appeared to our regular analysts,
[18:46] Shields and Gigot, syndicated columnist
[18:48] Mark Shields, Wall Street Journal
[18:49] columnist Paul Gigot, joined tonight by
[18:52] Dave Yepsen, political reporter for the
[18:54] Des Moines Register.
[18:55] Gentlemen, let's start at the bottom,
[18:57] cuz that's where the news is of the day,
[18:59] and work back up. And that's Phil Gramm.
[19:02] The That's the latest development. He's
[19:04] going to make an announcement tomorrow.
[19:05] Mark,
[19:06] is it over for him?
[19:07] >> Yes.
[19:09] >> Dave Yepsen, why couldn't he make it in
[19:11] Iowa?
[19:12] >> Uh Phil Gramm had the props knocked out
[19:14] from underneath him here. Steve Forbes
[19:15] took the economic conservatives away
[19:17] from him and Pat Buchanan's victory in
[19:19] Louisiana took the social conservatives
[19:21] away from him and there was no legs left
[19:23] on his stool.
[19:25] >> Paul Begala, what would you add to that?
[19:28] >> I think that David summed it up quite
[19:31] well. He never found a way to talk about
[19:33] the values agenda that is so important
[19:35] to Iowa voters
[19:38] in a way that made them believe that he
[19:40] really believed. Deep in his heart, I
[19:42] think Phil Gramm is an economist, he's a
[19:44] libertarian economist and that's the way
[19:46] it came across to these voters.
[19:48] >> Mark, the fourth place
[19:50] finisher was Steve Forbes. We just heard
[19:52] what Pat Buchanan said about him and his
[19:55] attack ads. What do you think he did
[19:56] wrong if anything in Iowa?
[19:58] >> Uh, a couple of things, Jim. First of
[20:00] all, he stayed negative too long. Uh, in
[20:02] a in a multi-candidate race
[20:04] it you cannot go negative and expect to
[20:06] be the beneficiary. In a two-way race,
[20:08] if you're running against Brown against
[20:10] Jones and Brown's beaten Jones' brains
[20:12] in, voters only have an option if
[20:14] they're going to vote against Jones to
[20:15] vote for Brown. Voters had another
[20:17] options than to vote as he attacked
[20:19] everybody in sight and they could go
[20:21] elsewhere. They did, they went to Lamar
[20:23] Alexander, they went to Bob Dole, they
[20:24] went to Pat Buchanan, but they didn't go
[20:26] to to Steve Forbes. I I don't think he
[20:29] gave them a reason to vote for him in
[20:30] the last week and I think the other
[20:31] thing is that at some point the lack of
[20:34] restraint in that campaign on spending
[20:37] became a political liability. If he'd
[20:38] spent 20 or 25% more than everybody else
[20:41] in the race, Jim, it wouldn't have been
[20:42] as much of a problem. He spent $4
[20:44] million on television. He spent more on
[20:46] television seven times as much as
[20:48] Buchanan had spent in the whole
[20:49] campaign.
[20:50] >> Yeah.
[20:51] Paul, what's your reading on Forbes in
[20:53] Iowa?
[20:53] >> I think the the the negative advertising
[20:56] gave everybody including his opponents
[20:58] and the media chance to change the
[21:00] subject from his message, which was as
[21:01] Pat Buchanan said, a good message, to
[21:03] the to the ads. I I think that getting
[21:05] into a fight in Iowa with the Christian
[21:08] Coalition is little like running for
[21:11] mayor of Nashville and running against
[21:12] country music. I mean, you are just not
[21:15] going to win here with that and that was
[21:16] a and the social conservatives also
[21:18] moved against him. He was doing well
[21:19] with him for a while.
[21:20] >> Yeah. Dave Yepsen I heard on television
[21:23] last night various people various Iowa
[21:25] pundits saying, "Well, this is terrific
[21:27] that Forbes did so poorly. It proves
[21:29] that Iowans can't be bought." Is that an
[21:31] oversimplification of what happened?
[21:33] >> Well, I I think it's a little bit true,
[21:35] but I think it's also true that Steve
[21:37] Forbes went negative when he should have
[21:38] stayed positive. If you look at Steve
[21:40] Forbes' tracking numbers in the polls,
[21:42] when he started in this race, it was the
[21:44] a positive advertising message that he
[21:47] had about the flat tax and he really
[21:49] took off in the polls. And then when he
[21:50] went negative, he started flattening
[21:53] out.
[21:54] You know, if you swing a ball bat at
[21:55] other people, sometimes things
[21:57] splatter on you. And so, I think he was
[22:00] one of the big uh
[22:02] helpers of Pat Buchanan in this in this
[22:04] state because he knocked down Bob Dole
[22:07] and he knocked down Lamar Alexander. Pat
[22:10] Buchanan has to thank Steve Forbes for a
[22:12] lot today.
[22:12] >> Yeah, Mark, Lamar Alexander apparently
[22:15] has a lot to thank Steve Forbes for,
[22:17] too. How's that Is that What's the
[22:18] What's your explanation for for
[22:20] Alexander's good strong third place
[22:23] showing?
[22:23] >> It's a good third. He's claimed a good
[22:26] third. I mean
[22:27] >> It sounds weird, doesn't it? I don't
[22:29] know the words are hard to
[22:30] >> Most guys get 18% Jim and they go into
[22:32] hiding. And only in Iowa do they stand
[22:34] up in front of their friends and family
[22:35] and say, "Boy, oh boy, did we want
[22:37] them."
[22:38] >> Uh but uh no, he had 12% in
[22:41] David's paper's poll in December. He
[22:43] ended up with 18% as opposed to Buchanan
[22:46] went from 7 to 25.
[22:48] Uh but he he's the remainder man of this
[22:50] campaign. I mean, his basic message is
[22:52] he's Dole-lite. I'm I'm not as hard to
[22:54] swallow as Bob Dole. I'm certainly not
[22:56] as old.
[22:58] I'm not as
[23:00] threatening as Pat Buchanan. I have my
[23:02] campaign's not as mean as the Steve
[23:03] Forbes. Uh Uh and and that's that's sort
[23:06] of the message. Now, Lamar Alexander,
[23:08] just like Pat Buchanan and Margaret's
[23:10] interview, will be scrutinized this next
[23:12] week more so than he has been before. I
[23:14] mean, his basic message has been I'm a
[23:15] president for the 21st century, whatever
[23:17] that means.
[23:18] >> Yeah. Paul, what's your reading on
[23:19] Alexander?
[23:20] >> Well, he he he is the none of the above
[23:22] candidate. Uh
[23:23] and he's the best at props. I mean, I've
[23:25] never seen anybody any politician use
[23:26] props so skillfully. You know, he has
[23:28] those ABC blocks Alexander beats
[23:30] Clinton. Then he had those mud boots,
[23:32] which uh he used to as a prop to
[23:34] describe uh his candidates and his
[23:36] strategy, which worked enough to keep
[23:37] him fighting another day or another
[23:39] week, was to run right up the
[23:41] demilitarized zone between Dole and uh
[23:43] and Forbes. And it succeeded. Uh he's
[23:45] got a tougher job in New Hampshire,
[23:47] though, because
[23:48] it's an economic uh uh minded electorate
[23:51] up there. And he's going to have a hard
[23:53] time beating Pat Buchanan uh to move
[23:55] into second uh or to beat Bob Dole to
[23:57] move into second to to uh to stay in
[23:59] this race.
[24:00] >> Dave, Buchanan, how did uh what what's
[24:03] your explanation for why he did as well
[24:05] as he did? 23% to 26% for Bob Dole.
[24:08] >> Well, he got the social a lot of the
[24:10] social conservatives. But I think one of
[24:11] the stories that uh that Pat Buchanan
[24:14] really highlighted in this campaign is
[24:16] the economic disaffection
[24:18] um that Americans feel. Many people feel
[24:20] left behind. I mean, the the the Dow is
[24:22] going through 5,600, and there are a lot
[24:24] of people are saying, "Yeah, I can't
[24:25] make ends meet." And you go to a
[24:26] Buchanan event, and yeah, there were
[24:29] pro-lifers there. But the the the thing
[24:31] that really added the juice to a
[24:32] Buchanan event uh were the were the
[24:34] blue-collar workers who showed up. And
[24:36] there were times you could sit there,
[24:37] and you could close your eyes, and you
[24:38] would think, "My god, I'm sitting at a
[24:39] Jesse Jackson event." Uh and Pat
[24:41] Buchanan has tapped into something here
[24:43] that I think will is is an issue that uh
[24:45] politicians in both parties are going to
[24:47] have to address, including President
[24:49] Clinton. He can't sit there on the State
[24:50] of the Union and tell us how great the
[24:52] economy's doing and expect that to
[24:53] resig- res- resonate with a whole lot of
[24:55] American workers today.
[24:57] >> Now, Mark, you've said that before, that
[24:58] you think that's at the heart of
[25:00] Buchanan's message, correct?
[25:01] >> I I really do and I I think David's put
[25:03] his finger on it with with the Jesse
[25:04] Jackson parallel, Jim. He's a hot
[25:06] candidate. You saw it. He's a guy he has
[25:09] a coherent, consistent message.
[25:11] Uh he doesn't go through focus groups.
[25:12] He knows what he believes, which is an
[25:14] enormous advantage. But he's speaking to
[25:16] and for a constituency that the party,
[25:18] each party covets in November. In the In
[25:21] this case, evangelical Protestants,
[25:23] religiously active people. Uh in In
[25:26] Jackson's case, was African-Americans.
[25:27] But the party really doesn't want to get
[25:29] spend a lot of quality time with between
[25:31] now and November. Uh and and and they
[25:33] they they covet they they don't want
[25:35] their candidacy. They didn't want
[25:36] Jackson. But what's fascinating to me is
[25:38] he's putting together a coalition or he
[25:41] he did in Iowa. He began to. He carried
[25:43] He beat Bob Dole by better than two to
[25:45] one in Dubuque County, which is a
[25:46] Catholic county. In Carroll County,
[25:48] another Catholic county on the other end
[25:49] of the state, he he he beat Dole by
[25:52] better than two to one. And he's putting
[25:54] together a possibly putting together a
[25:55] coalition of conservative Northern
[25:57] Catholics and Southern Evangelical
[25:59] Protestants. Two groups that have been
[26:00] at each other's throat culturally
[26:02] throughout our history, but that FDR
[26:04] forged into a a Democratic coalition. Uh
[26:06] just as Jesse Jackson tried to put
[26:08] together
[26:09] uh blacks and and white working class
[26:11] people. I- If he does that, if he pulls
[26:13] that off, it's formidable.
[26:15] >> Yeah, Paul, how do you read that and
[26:17] also put it in the context of Bob Dole?
[26:19] What did Bob Dole win yesterday?
[26:21] >> Well, first on Buchanan, I think that uh
[26:24] I agree with Mark's analogy on Jesse
[26:25] Jackson, but disagree a little bit on
[26:27] the analysis. I think he is the he is
[26:29] the only Republican other than Steve
[26:31] Forbes who has an explanation
[26:33] and a prescription, a remedy for the
[26:35] economic distress that's going on out
[26:37] there.
[26:38] Uh the problem with his prescription,
[26:40] and this is where I think the Jesse
[26:42] Jackson analogy is right, is it divides
[26:44] the Republican party. He may be able to
[26:47] draw in some of those Perot voters, but
[26:48] the problem is it's going to push some
[26:50] of those business interests and as well
[26:53] as a lot of economic conservatives
[26:55] away from the Republican Party. So, he's
[26:57] got a very difficult job, I think, to be
[26:59] able to win the nomination.
[27:01] Bob Dole, the story was all you had to
[27:03] do was go to his rallies. Uh I mean,
[27:06] they they they weren't really rallies.
[27:07] It looked like everybody there was under
[27:08] orders.
[27:09] Uh there was no enthusiasm at all. One
[27:11] of the rallies I went to in Waterloo,
[27:13] they had import people from Wisconsin
[27:15] to have any kind of enthusiasm. Uh
[27:17] there's almost a sense of resignation
[27:19] that he's a safe choice, but there's a
[27:21] real doubt out here, and I think this
[27:23] this vote showed it, about whether or
[27:25] not Bob Dole can go toe-to-toe and beat
[27:27] Bill Clinton.
[27:29] >> Dave Yepsen, what's your reading on what
[27:30] Bob Dole won last night?
[27:32] >> He didn't win anything last night. In
[27:33] fact,
[27:34] >> Not anything? Come on, he came
[27:35] >> No, I No, I He got a wake-up call.
[27:37] >> Okay.
[27:38] >> Uh he he got you know, you get 25% of
[27:40] vote of the vote in a state where he uh
[27:42] where he got 37% in 1988. He got fewer
[27:45] votes this time.
[27:47] This state is not typical of the country
[27:49] as a whole, but these 100,000 activists
[27:51] who who showed up last night are fairly
[27:54] typical of Republican activists
[27:55] everywhere. And I think it ought to be a
[27:57] real wake-up call to Senator Dole's
[27:59] campaign and to Senator Dole uh that he
[28:01] that 3/4 of these people wanted somebody
[28:03] else to be their nominee. Uh and I think
[28:05] that I think one of the problems he's
[28:07] got is a message. Uh what's he for? He
[28:09] kind of wanders around on the stump, and
[28:12] and you know, he he needs to to get rid
[28:13] of that 10th Amendment card that he
[28:15] carries around with him, and just write
[28:16] 10 things on a piece of paper that he
[28:18] wants to do, and get up and talk to
[28:19] people about it. I mean, there there's
[28:21] got to be some energy in that campaign
[28:23] because Paul's right. You go to his
[28:24] events, and they're just flat.
[28:27] >> Mark, your reading of uh Dole right now.
[28:29] >> Well, I mean, Bob Dole uh did finish
[28:31] first. I mean, that and finishing first
[28:33] still does matter for something, but uh
[28:35] I I would say instead of 10 things, uh
[28:37] three things. The three things that a
[28:38] Dole presidency means. I think he has to
[28:40] ask people for vote for their vote. This
[28:42] is something that uh that doesn't come
[28:44] easily to Bob Dole or people of his
[28:46] generation, his background,
[28:48] uh to to be self-promoting, but I think
[28:50] he has to do that to bring some energy
[28:52] and some intensity and some passion to
[28:54] campaign. Jim, what what what's
[28:55] fascinating about this race to me is
[28:57] every Republican hates Washington. Some
[29:00] Republicans hate Hollywood. Pat Buchanan
[29:03] is the only one that also hates Wall
[29:05] Street, okay? And American people don't
[29:07] like all three.
[29:09] >> Yeah.
[29:09] >> Uh and I think that's what the key is to
[29:11] me coming out of Iowa.
[29:12] >> Finally, uh David Yepsen uh from the
[29:14] inside looking out, in other words, from
[29:16] inside Iowa looking out, does it does it
[29:18] make sense to you that so few so few
[29:20] people, your 100,000 activists in Iowa
[29:22] who went to these caucuses last night,
[29:24] are making such a huge difference in
[29:26] who's going to be the next president of
[29:27] the United States?
[29:28] >> Well, that's always a criticism that's
[29:30] made of the Iowa process. And the
[29:31] problem is the country can't come to an
[29:33] agreement on an alternative, and so Iowa
[29:35] and New Hampshire continue to be first.
[29:37] They continue to have a disproportionate
[29:38] impact on the process. It may not be
[29:40] right, but that's the way the that's the
[29:42] rules of the game.
[29:43] >> And the rules of this game is that we're
[29:44] over for tonight, and we'll talk about
[29:46] it again later. Thank you all three very
[29:48] much.
[29:49] >> Thank you.
[29:57] >> Still to come on the NewsHour tonight,
[29:59] another way to solve range wars, a
[30:01] Gergon dialogue, and an old map story.
[30:04] The range war story is about a place on
[30:06] the Arizona-New Mexico border where some
[30:09] traditional opponents have declared a
[30:11] truce. Elizabeth Farnsworth reports.
[30:16] >> In much of the West, this threesome
[30:18] would be about as unlikely as Sitting
[30:20] Bull and General Custer riding together
[30:22] 120 years ago.
[30:27] The riders are a third-generation
[30:29] Arizona rancher and mountain lion
[30:31] hunter,
[30:32] a US Forest Service official, and a
[30:34] botanist from the Nature Conservancy,
[30:37] the powerful environmental organization.
[30:39] They've joined forces in southern New
[30:41] Mexico and Arizona in something called
[30:43] the Malpai Borderlands Group. It stands
[30:46] in stark contrast to what's happening
[30:48] elsewhere in the West.
[30:50] >> RANCHERS REFORM NOW. RANCHERS REFORM
[30:53] NOW.
[30:54] >> This scene is more typical, a protest in
[30:57] Bozeman, Montana by environmentalists
[30:59] out to limit cattle grazing on public
[31:01] lands. The charge? That overgrazing
[31:04] causes erosion and other damage,
[31:06] especially in riverbeds and other
[31:08] vulnerable places.
[31:12] And in this confrontation in Nevada, an
[31:14] angry rancher aimed a bulldozer at an
[31:17] armed US Forest Service agent in a
[31:19] dispute over a road on public lands.
[31:22] No one was hurt, but the incident, which
[31:24] was taped on home video, served notice
[31:27] that disagreements between ranchers and
[31:29] government agents can turn violent.
[31:35] In a million-acre triangle of mountain
[31:37] and high desert straddling the
[31:39] Arizona-New Mexico border, the Malpai
[31:41] Borderlands Group is taking a different
[31:44] course.
[31:44] >> We're just uh
[31:47] really excited about
[31:49] uh how how well we've come. I mean,
[31:51] we're working with the Forest Service
[31:52] and the BLM and the state land
[31:54] departments and the
[31:55] and the game and fish departments of
[31:58] both New Mexico and Arizona.
[32:00] >> The spirit of what's going on here is
[32:01] that um
[32:02] they're trying to get together and
[32:03] recognize that they share common
[32:05] problems in trying to improve the
[32:06] condition of the land.
[32:08] And by working together
[32:09] chances that we can actually make some
[32:11] progress towards solving some of the our
[32:12] mutual problems rather than blaming each
[32:14] other for those problems.
[32:17] >> It all began when the Nature Conservancy
[32:19] bought the 320,000 acre Gray Ranch in
[32:22] southern New Mexico to preserve it from
[32:24] development and then sold it to a
[32:27] foundation set up by a local rancher who
[32:29] promised to preserve and improve the
[32:31] land in cooperation with the
[32:33] Conservancy.
[32:35] That relationship widened to include
[32:37] about 15 local ranchers and two
[32:39] government agents.
[32:41] They hope to preserve and improve 1
[32:43] million acres here.
[32:45] Their first goal was to bring back
[32:47] natural wildfires.
[32:51] Until federal agencies had started
[32:53] suppressing wildfires, they kept woody
[32:55] shrubs down and grasslands healthy.
[32:58] The Malpai Borderlands Group forged an
[33:00] agreement with the agencies to let some
[33:02] fires burn.
[33:04] >> They'll have to stop wherever it got it.
[33:06] >> Malpai executive director Bill McDonald
[33:09] let a fire burn on his land. And in late
[33:11] August, when he walked the area with
[33:13] other Malpai members, they found the
[33:15] fire had been partially successful in
[33:18] clearing the woody shrubs, which made
[33:20] room for grasses to grow.
[33:23] Endangered species are another key
[33:26] problem for the Malpai group.
[33:28] >> The ranchers
[33:30] historically speaking
[33:32] is scared to death to have a dangerous
[33:34] species
[33:36] found on his place. And because they
[33:38] think, well, then then they're going to
[33:40] make you quit grazing. Well, what we're
[33:41] trying to
[33:42] prove is that if there's an endangered
[33:44] species there and it's it is existing at
[33:47] the present time
[33:49] with grazing, that there's no reason why
[33:51] it shouldn't be continued to
[33:53] to be to be that way.
[33:55] >> The endangered Chiricahua leopard frog
[33:57] was found on Malpai rancher Matt
[33:59] McGlothlin's property.
[34:01] Because of a drought, he's been hauling
[34:03] 1,000 gallons of water a week since
[34:06] early 1994
[34:07] to keep the rare amphibians alive.
[34:10] >> Uh the Malpai Group
[34:12] has been helping me some on the
[34:15] on the expense. Uh they've donated some
[34:18] money.
[34:19] And they've offered to uh assist on some
[34:22] equipment if I need equipment.
[34:25] And Fish and Wildlife has helped some on
[34:28] on the project, too.
[34:31] >> The The Group's most controversial
[34:33] program is called the grass bank.
[34:36] It allows a rancher whose pastures are
[34:38] in trouble to graze cattle on
[34:39] neighboring lands.
[34:41] >> Uh without
[34:43] participating
[34:45] in the grass bank, I would frankly been
[34:47] out of business here. I
[34:49] I withstood droughts before for the lack
[34:53] of rain for 1 year,
[34:55] but three sustained years in a row
[34:58] really put a tough situation on
[35:01] the land here, the cattle, and the whole
[35:03] situation.
[35:06] >> As part of the grass bank program, Billy
[35:09] Darnell was able to move his hungry
[35:11] cattle to pastures on the neighboring
[35:13] Gray Ranch.
[35:14] The Malpai Group paid the Gray Ranch for
[35:16] the service, and in return, Darnell
[35:19] signed an agreement prohibiting the
[35:21] subdivision of his own ranch in
[35:23] perpetuity.
[35:25] Subdivisions are replacing ranches all
[35:28] over Arizona, and one of the key goals
[35:30] of the Malpai members is keeping their
[35:33] ranches relatively untouched and intact.
[35:36] >> This is the Nature Conservancy's version
[35:39] of what ought to happen in the world.
[35:40] This is not the version of the
[35:42] community. This isn't something that
[35:43] they thought of.
[35:44] >> The Malpai Group's programs are drawing
[35:46] heavy fire from some ranchers in the
[35:49] area who are convinced the Nature
[35:51] Conservancy, in league with the federal
[35:53] government, is out to control the whole
[35:56] million-acre borderlands area.
[35:58] >> We're talking about tying up certain
[36:01] options into perpetuity, and everybody's
[36:04] ears ought to go forward when that
[36:06] happens.
[36:07] >> They are selling or trading,
[36:12] and these are Al's words, a renewable
[36:15] crop, which is grass,
[36:18] for a non-renewable crop, which are the
[36:20] property rights.
[36:22] >> This is something that came from the
[36:23] outside, and it's still being run by
[36:25] people from the outside.
[36:26] >> The reason that we've have outsiders
[36:28] helping us and that we feel that we need
[36:31] them is because those are the people
[36:32] that have been determining what's
[36:34] happening to us.
[36:35] We can't
[36:36] any longer sit at here in the middle of
[36:38] nowhere minding our own business
[36:41] and not be affected because the
[36:44] government and the environmental people
[36:46] that are way away from us that don't
[36:49] understand us
[36:50] are the ones that are making policy for
[36:52] us whether we like it or not.
[36:54] >> The Malpai board and advisors meeting at
[36:57] the Glens Ranch address some of the
[36:59] critics concerns.
[37:01] >> You know, this whole thing was not
[37:03] a grand scheme.
[37:04] Uh
[37:05] I had never intended to have the Nature
[37:07] Conservancy involved in any
[37:09] significant way. It it takes a lot to
[37:13] affect a change and uh
[37:15] the Nature Conservancy is a in a is
[37:17] extremely uh influential powerful
[37:19] organization.
[37:21] And um if uh you know, it works uh then
[37:26] they can be very helpful to us.
[37:28] >> And John, why do you want to do it? I
[37:29] mean a lot of
[37:30] conservationists, a lot of groups would
[37:32] just not want to do this because it they
[37:34] would feel that they are somehow
[37:35] compromised.
[37:36] >> Yeah, the mission of the Nature
[37:37] Conservancy is to protect the uh
[37:40] uh native plants and animals and the
[37:42] habitats that support them and
[37:44] increasingly we realize that a uh a a
[37:48] preserve with a fence around it doesn't
[37:50] do the job that that really where we um
[37:53] uh need to go is to support and be part
[37:57] of healthy rural economies as well as
[38:00] straight biological systems.
[38:03] >> In those areas where a group like ours
[38:04] does not emerge or some middle ground is
[38:06] not emerge, um
[38:08] there's going to be a tremendous loss.
[38:10] Uh there's going to be a loss for those
[38:12] people who are fighting about it right
[38:14] now
[38:14] and it's going to come uh when one side
[38:18] uh
[38:18] uh the the landowner's side finally
[38:21] caves in and says, "Okay, we're off.
[38:23] Uh now I'm going to turn around and I'm
[38:25] going to sell this thing uh for the
[38:26] highest dollar I can get out of it. And
[38:28] you're never going to see it the way it
[38:30] was again.
[38:31] And that'll be a sad day for everybody.
[38:37] >> The Malpai members aren't alone in
[38:39] forging alliances with former enemies to
[38:42] save the ranching way of life.
[38:44] This is a gathering 100 miles away in
[38:46] Dos Cabezas of a group called Common
[38:48] Ground, which has chapters in several
[38:51] western states.
[38:52] Common Ground has also brought together
[38:54] environmentalists and ranchers to
[38:56] experiment with new range management
[38:58] techniques.
[39:00] >> Oh, you are pretty.
[39:02] You are pretty.
[39:04] >> But even with these efforts, most
[39:06] ranchers in Arizona, including Peggy
[39:08] Monzingo and her son Ed Allen, remain
[39:11] outside the new organizations and are
[39:13] skeptical about cooperating with
[39:15] environmentalists or government agents.
[39:17] Also, the Monzingos worry that the new
[39:20] ideas for protecting the range will be
[39:22] too expensive to implement.
[39:24] Still, the Malpai Group and Common
[39:26] Ground give Peggy Monzingo some
[39:29] confidence that ranchers will not always
[39:31] be seen as environmental villains.
[39:34] >> And hopefully, we're getting a foot in
[39:37] the door with these wonderful groups
[39:38] that are using imaginative, very
[39:40] expensive, but still workable
[39:42] uh methods of working with the agencies
[39:44] and with the environmentalists.
[39:48] >> And so, for some ranchers at least,
[39:51] there is some hope on the range and a
[39:53] temporary peace in the new war for the
[39:56] West.
[40:06] >> Now, a Gergen dialogue. David Gergen,
[40:08] editor-at-large of US News and World
[40:10] Report, engages New York Times columnist
[40:13] Tom Friedman. He talked to him last week
[40:15] about a piece he wrote about an economic
[40:17] conference both had attended in Davos,
[40:20] Switzerland.
[40:21] >> Thomas, been 13 months now since you
[40:23] became the Foreign Affairs columnist for
[40:25] the New York Times. And during that time
[40:27] you've traveled all over the world. I
[40:29] think you may have traveled more than
[40:30] the Secretary of State.
[40:31] Uh but coming back from Davos,
[40:33] Switzerland at a forum we both attended,
[40:35] the World Economic Forum, you wrote a
[40:36] column in the New York Times which
[40:38] seemed to crystallize a lot of your
[40:39] thinking over the last year.
[40:41] >> What I've really seen this year, uh
[40:43] David, as I travel all around is free
[40:45] markets and free market principles
[40:47] spreading all over the world and markets
[40:49] being integrated more and more. And as
[40:51] that's happening, it's putting a lot of
[40:53] pressure on every country in the world
[40:55] to compete to attract capital. Under
[40:57] that pressure, there are winners and
[40:59] losers. There are people who have the
[41:00] knowledge, skills in order to tap into
[41:03] that market, and there are people who
[41:04] don't, who are left behind. And really
[41:06] what I found is that some of the most
[41:08] interesting conflicts in the world today
[41:10] are between winners and losers within
[41:12] countries. Whether it's the communists
[41:14] against the Yeltsin forces or the
[41:17] energy forces in Russia, the unions
[41:19] against owners in France,
[41:22] uh or the Buchananites
[41:24] against others in this country. And it's
[41:26] really those conflicts between winners
[41:28] and losers in societies and how they are
[41:32] resolved that I think is going to
[41:33] increasingly shape international
[41:35] affairs.
[41:36] >> Right. So, you think that increasingly
[41:38] also
[41:39] foreign policies of various countries
[41:40] are going to be shaped by the end their
[41:42] internal conflicts.
[41:43] >> Oh, absolutely. You look at Russia
[41:45] today. I mean, the outcome of this fight
[41:47] really over the next presidency in
[41:49] Russia, whether it's won by the
[41:50] communists
[41:52] or the Yeltsin forces, is going to very
[41:54] much influence Russian foreign policy.
[41:56] >> Right. Right. And in addition to the
[41:58] Buchanan campaign, if it continues to
[42:00] have any influence upon the Republican
[42:01] Party, that will clearly have an
[42:02] influence upon our our economic trade
[42:04] policy.
[42:05] >> Absolutely. I think when people talk
[42:06] about America going isolationist,
[42:09] it's not happening in a vacuum. Who is
[42:11] an internationalist and who is an
[42:12] isolationist today is a lot dependent on
[42:15] whether you can tap into and are
[42:17] benefiting from this process of
[42:18] globalization, markets, and integration,
[42:21] or you're not.
[42:21] >> Right. And it's what you're seeing then
[42:23] is is a backlash against globalization.
[42:25] >> Absolutely. What I what struck me about
[42:27] Davos, of course, was that Davos is a
[42:29] convention of capitalists. It is the It
[42:31] is the place where people who get
[42:32] together to celebrate the process of
[42:34] global markets and global integration.
[42:36] And who is the star at Davos this year?
[42:38] Who of all people but Gennady Zyuganov,
[42:41] the head of the Russian Communist Party.
[42:43] >> Right.
[42:43] >> Uh and and that told me that and he was
[42:45] there representing the backlash
[42:47] avowedly. And there were a lot of
[42:50] businessmen interested in talking to him
[42:52] because I think they intuitively
[42:54] understood that this is a way about
[42:56] that.
[42:56] >> Right. What also struck me about Davos
[42:58] in that same regard in in in the losers
[43:00] here are people who have jobs with their
[43:02] low-paying jobs, whereas in Europe, the
[43:04] losers are increasingly people who have,
[43:07] you know, can't get jobs because the the
[43:09] cost of creating a job there is so high.
[43:12] They haven't reformed their social
[43:13] safety net.
[43:13] >> Absolutely. You know, in Germany had a
[43:15] 150,000 people unemployed in the 1960s.
[43:18] Today, it's got over 3 million people
[43:21] unemployed. And uh the the Europeans
[43:24] really have not begun to go down that
[43:26] road yet. I sort of see the world like
[43:27] this that, you know, Russia is what
[43:29] happens in a country where you have a
[43:31] social safety net, a whole system to
[43:32] protect people, and you take it away.
[43:34] And the instability they've got. France
[43:36] today, the fight between the unions and
[43:38] the government. What happens when you
[43:39] have a very elaborate social safety net,
[43:42] but you don't reform it to make it
[43:44] sustainable. Africa, where I just was 2
[43:46] weeks ago, in its worst forms, is what
[43:48] happens when you have no safe safety net
[43:50] at all, and everyone is really left to
[43:52] the tender mercies of the global
[43:54] marketplace.
[43:55] >> But the Europeans,
[43:57] uh you know, in the chemical industry
[43:58] today in Germany, for example, uh
[44:01] it now costs our corporation some $43 an
[44:03] hour per employee. That's about twice
[44:06] what it is in the United States. and the
[44:08] result is they're having to lay off a
[44:09] lot of people. You can't compete in this
[44:11] process of globalization with $43 an
[44:13] hour payments. Absolutely. See, every
[44:15] country's really in the same boat. Now,
[44:17] what is the role of governments
[44:18] increasingly? Everyone's motto is come
[44:20] hither. It's to attract global global
[44:22] capital and investment to their country
[44:24] because they don't have it indigenously
[44:26] to produce those jobs. Yeah, that was
[44:28] another important insight that you had
[44:29] in your column about. The fact that it's
[44:31] not just corporations that are
[44:32] downsizing. Because of the globalization
[44:34] process, governments feel it's important
[44:36] to downsize so that even as workers are
[44:38] getting hit by the corporations having
[44:40] to lay off a lot of people, the safety
[44:42] net that was there is also being
[44:43] withdrawn or being threatened because
[44:45] governments are downsizing. That That's
[44:46] what's scary. That as as businesses
[44:49] streamline and downsize, and as
[44:51] governments do it, the left behinds are
[44:54] left in free fall. And that's I think
[44:56] the danger that we have to think about
[44:57] in this country, and others do that when
[44:59] you talk about taking away Medicare,
[45:01] Medicaid, Social Security. Yes, it has
[45:03] to be reformed, to be sure, and made
[45:05] long-term and sustainable, but let's not
[45:08] take away these social safety nets
[45:09] precisely when our society is going
[45:11] through this cleavage and pressure.
[45:13] Well, what have you seen in your travels
[45:15] around the world
[45:17] that suggested to you that there are
[45:19] solutions
[45:20] out there that that one could embrace?
[45:22] Well, you know, everyone is really
[45:23] grappling for it the right combination.
[45:25] I mean, the good news is I think people
[45:27] are now really thinking about what is
[45:28] the formula to deal with this. The bad
[45:30] news is nobody's quite got it yet, but
[45:32] it's going to be some combination of
[45:34] worker training, uh
[45:36] uh environmental um protection,
[45:39] uh population control, and uh
[45:42] sustainable social safety nets. But one
[45:44] thing we know for sure is that
[45:46] globalization, free trade, is not
[45:48] necessarily a win-win proposition.
[45:50] >> Right.
[45:51] >> And I think that's uh the beginning of
[45:53] wisdom. And we got to start looking, if
[45:55] you care about this process, and if you
[45:57] believe it is inevitable, as I do, that
[45:59] we got to look how to I think cushion it
[46:01] a little more.
[46:02] >> Do you see any country that's out in
[46:04] front and dealing with these issues? Do
[46:06] you see Have you Have you visited a
[46:07] country where you think it's been that's
[46:08] been most successful?
[46:09] >> Well, the the best example is Japan.
[46:11] Look, you go into a department store in
[46:13] in downtown Tokyo today and 14 women bow
[46:15] to you. And you say, "What is this?" You
[46:17] know what I mean? And then you stay out
[46:18] at the karaoke bar till 2:00 in the
[46:20] morning, walk back to your hotel, and
[46:21] there isn't crime, you can eat off the
[46:23] streets, and then you understand what's
[46:25] going on. That Japan has made a choice,
[46:27] and that's full employment. That they
[46:29] want to employ those 14 women to greet
[46:31] you at the department store in order
[46:33] It's a social choice in order to
[46:35] maintain social stability and cohesion.
[46:37] You can only do that in Japan, though,
[46:38] where the system was basically rigged
[46:40] >> Mhm.
[46:41] >> um to keep foreign competition out. So,
[46:43] but that is one answer.
[46:45] >> Yeah, but it but it's also an answer
[46:46] that can't they can't sustain.
[46:47] >> sustain. They're under pressure
[46:49] >> Uh
[46:49] >> And some ways, it's interesting because
[46:51] I found that just as we in America are
[46:53] fascinated by what happens in in
[46:54] California, because we think it's going
[46:56] to happen around the rest of the country
[46:57] over the next three or four years, that
[46:59] many uh Europeans and Asians look to
[47:01] America
[47:03] for what's happening What happens here
[47:04] first often happens there later.
[47:06] >> Right.
[47:06] >> And so, they would they have the same
[47:07] fascination with America we have with
[47:08] California.
[47:09] >> They are But we're all in the same game.
[47:11] See, we've gone from a world, David, of
[47:12] superpowers to a world increasingly
[47:14] dominated by supermarkets. And everyone
[47:17] really is under the pressure of those
[47:19] supermarkets. It's the Tokyo bond
[47:21] market, the Shanghai bond market, the
[47:23] Wall Street bond market, the Frankfurt
[47:24] bond market. In the old days of the
[47:26] superpower conflict, you know, a country
[47:28] could play off the Soviet Union and the
[47:29] United States. Now, you really have to
[47:32] try to play off the markets, but you
[47:33] can't do that cuz they play you off.
[47:35] >> So, you have to be You You have two
[47:36] superpowers, I think you say these days.
[47:38] >> That's right. There are two superpowers
[47:39] in the world today, in my opinion.
[47:40] There's the United States and there's
[47:41] Moody's bond rating service. The United
[47:43] States can destroy you by dropping
[47:45] bombs, and Moody's can destroy you by
[47:47] downgrading your bonds. And believe me,
[47:49] it's not clear sometimes who's more
[47:51] powerful.
[47:51] >> Okay. Thank you very much for joining
[47:53] us.
[47:53] >> Pleasure.
[48:03] >> Finally tonight, a map mystery. Charlene
[48:06] Hunter-Gault has that story.
[48:08] >> It's called the Vinland Map, and it's
[48:11] also been called the most exciting
[48:13] cartographic discovery of the century,
[48:15] but it's also been called a fake. And
[48:18] that has led to 30 years of toing and
[48:20] froing in high academic circles,
[48:22] including Yale University, which first
[48:25] published the map in 1965.
[48:27] Today, Yale weighed in once again,
[48:30] declaring the disputed map, valued at
[48:33] $24 million,
[48:34] genuine after all. For more on the
[48:37] modern-day mystery of the thing
[48:39] medieval, we turn to Dr. Wilcomb
[48:41] Washburn, director of American Studies
[48:43] at the Smithsonian Institution in
[48:46] Washington. And Dr. Washburn, thank you
[48:47] for joining us. What exactly is the
[48:50] Vinland Map and its significance?
[48:53] >> Well, it's the earliest representation
[48:54] of the Western Hemisphere on the map, 50
[48:56] years before Columbus. Now, does that
[48:58] mean that it took the map to prove that
[49:01] the Norse came here that early?
[49:04] Uh no, it doesn't, because most scholars
[49:06] accept the saga or chronicle evidence
[49:09] from the Icelandic sagas,
[49:11] uh which describe various Norse uh
[49:13] ventures into the
[49:14] um area west of Greenland. Uh and also
[49:18] there's archaeological evidence which
[49:20] emerged, particularly in the 1960s. And
[49:22] so all those things uh demonstrate that
[49:24] the Norse did come about a 1,000 AD. But
[49:28] the importance is that it's a graphic
[49:30] representation. It's a picture. And uh
[49:32] you you in television, of course, know
[49:34] the power of a picture. And the fact
[49:36] that it is a picture, it is a drawing,
[49:38] it is a
[49:39] graphic cartographic representation of
[49:41] the New World, that has caused it to be
[49:43] a tremendously uh powerful in its impact
[49:47] on the American imagination.
[49:48] >> Well, we have a we have a representation
[49:51] of the map. Tell us uh if we can get it
[49:54] up here what we are seeing.
[49:56] >> Well, we're seeing basically a world map
[49:58] from the mid-15th century, about 1440.
[50:02] Um at that time, the assumption was that
[50:04] there was a single Eurasian landmass
[50:07] with a a surrounding ocean sea. But, in
[50:10] the green area on the left in the ocean
[50:13] sea to the west of Europe is a peculiar
[50:17] island which is called on the map
[50:19] Vinland.
[50:20] We're now focusing in on it. It's west
[50:22] of Greenland and west of Iceland and
[50:25] west of the European peninsula. At the
[50:27] other end of the map, you have various
[50:28] islands that represent the end of the
[50:31] world from the other direction. And um
[50:34] this was a map, if it is authentic, and
[50:37] you
[50:38] >> We'll get to that in a minute.
[50:39] >> out that there is a question about it.
[50:40] >> Yeah.
[50:41] >> That represented um
[50:43] if it was if it was made during the
[50:46] 1440s and perhaps in the council a
[50:49] church council that occurred in in um in
[50:52] Switzerland.
[50:54] It perhaps represented the extent of
[50:55] Christendom because the
[50:58] document with which it was
[50:59] uh bound was called the Tartar Relation
[51:02] and related to the Mongols or Tartars um
[51:06] who dominated the uh end of the world at
[51:08] the other end uh of the Eurasian
[51:11] landmass. But, um there also was a
[51:14] for instance, a bishop of Gardar in
[51:16] Greenland, and we have
[51:18] from the saga evidence knowledge that he
[51:21] even took a trip to Vinland. And indeed,
[51:23] you could even say that uh
[51:25] the first uh
[51:27] the mother of the first child of
[51:29] European origin born in the New World
[51:31] actually went back to Iceland and then
[51:33] eventually went to Rome. We know there
[51:34] was a connection, in other words, from
[51:36] the saga evidence.
[51:38] >> And and this this map um
[51:40] it establishes that uh if it is
[51:43] authentic, that who who were the people
[51:45] who were supposed to have come here, the
[51:47] Leif Erikson
[51:47] >> Well, these were were Norsemen, yes.
[51:49] Generally, the people from Scandinavia.
[51:52] Leif Erikson and Bjarni. In fact,
[51:55] there's an inscription next to that
[51:56] island that you you highlighted that
[51:59] tells about Leif and Bjarni in company
[52:02] discovering this particular island.
[52:04] >> All right. Now, tell me when and how the
[52:06] controversy over this began because
[52:08] first it was authenticated
[52:10] >> Yes, exactly. Well, well, most maps
[52:12] early maps have a very
[52:15] odd and uncertain provenance, as they
[52:17] call it. Origin. And it came out of
[52:19] Spain and went through a series of
[52:20] dealers and eventually ended up in
[52:23] Switzerland and was bought by a dealer
[52:25] from New Haven,
[52:27] Lawrence Witten, for $350
[52:30] $3,500.
[52:32] And was eventually um
[52:34] sold um
[52:36] to Yale University. And a donor provided
[52:39] the money to buy it, the million
[52:40] dollars. It's now valued at $24 million,
[52:43] as you pointed out.
[52:44] >> Later to be to be Paul Mellon, right?
[52:46] >> Yes, exactly. And um
[52:48] so that it it
[52:49] it had an uncertain background, but most
[52:52] maps most early documents have an
[52:54] uncertain background.
[52:55] >> And there were scholars who vindicated
[52:56] it at the time authenticated it at the
[52:58] time.
[52:58] >> Well, yes.
[53:00] Several scholars from the British Museum
[53:01] and several scholars from Yale
[53:02] University um
[53:04] uh
[53:05] analyzed the map and published the first
[53:07] edition of the book that came out in a
[53:10] second edition today
[53:12] in 1965.
[53:13] >> But then it was declared a fake right
[53:15] after
[53:16] >> declared a fake, but there were some
[53:17] people who were critical of it,
[53:19] including members of the Yale faculty in
[53:20] the history department who were not
[53:22] really aware that this was going on. And
[53:24] I organized a Vinland Map conference at
[53:27] the Smithsonian in 1966.
[53:29] And the the map was debated for a long
[53:32] time.
[53:33] And nobody could shake anyone else, you
[53:35] know, on on the evidence on cartography
[53:38] or paleography, that's early writing,
[53:39] and so on. So, they said, "Let's get a
[53:41] technical study of this. Let's get a
[53:43] technical study of the inks." And it was
[53:45] at that point that they um
[53:47] uh provided the map to Walter McCrone
[53:50] Associates in Chicago, uh who analyzed
[53:52] the ink and
[53:54] and concluded that it contained a 20th
[53:57] century substance, and therefore it was
[53:59] probably a forgery. And Yale tended to
[54:01] accept that at that time.
[54:02] >> And now just recently, how how come
[54:04] they've changed their minds?
[54:06] >> the shoe was on the other foot. And over
[54:07] the years, people were very skeptical of
[54:09] this analysis by McCrone Associates. And
[54:12] the University of California, Davis, at
[54:14] their laboratory, particularly under
[54:15] Thomas Cahill, analyzed not only the
[54:18] map, but hundreds of other medieval
[54:20] documents. As a matter of fact, McCrone
[54:22] had not analyzed medieval documents
[54:24] before.
[54:25] >> And now they're saying that the ink is
[54:27] >> And now they're saying that this
[54:28] particular substance, uh which is based
[54:30] on titanium, it's a commercial product,
[54:33] anatase, it derives in a precipitated
[54:35] form from titanium, um could have
[54:38] occurred in nature. Could have occurred.
[54:40] In fact, it does occur in most of the
[54:42] other medieval maps.
[54:43] >> In the mid- All right, so does this
[54:44] >> And documents.
[54:45] >> So, does this put the controversy to
[54:46] rest?
[54:47] >> It doesn't Nothing puts the controversy
[54:49] to rest. Uh it's still going on. At the
[54:52] second Vinland Map Conference, which
[54:53] occurred in New Haven on Saturday,
[54:56] Walter McCrone came, and others came,
[54:58] and asserted that it was still a
[55:00] forgery.
[55:00] >> All right. Well, Doctor, thank you for
[55:02] joining us.
[55:11] >> Again, the major stories of this
[55:12] Tuesday, the Republican nomination race
[55:14] moved on to New Hampshire. Senator
[55:16] Majority Leader Dole won the the Iowa
[55:18] Republican caucuses last night. Senator
[55:21] Phil Gramm finished fifth and was
[55:22] reassessing his race. And in Washington,
[55:25] President Clinton signed an executive
[55:27] order penalizing federal contractors who
[55:29] hire illegal workers. We'll see you
[55:31] tomorrow night. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank
[55:33] you, and good night.
[55:38] >> Major funding for the NewsHour with Jim
[55:40] Lehrer has been provided by the Archer
[55:41] Daniels Midland Company, ADM,
[55:44] supermarket to the world.
[55:47] And by New York Life.
[55:50] Yet another example of New York Life's
[55:52] wise investment philosophy.
[55:56] And by the Corporation for Public
[55:58] Broadcasting, and by the annual
[56:00] financial support from viewers like you.
[56:07] >> On tomorrow's morning edition, love
[56:09] expressed in words and music. Musicians
[56:12] tell us their favorite love songs. Join
[56:14] us between 3:00 and 9:00 a.m. on OPB
[56:16] Radio.
[56:22] >> Video cassettes of the NewsHour with Jim
[56:24] Lehrer are available from PBS Video.
[56:27] Call 1-800-328-PBS-1.
[56:35] This is PBS.
[56:46] >> Funding for local broadcast of the
[56:48] NewsHour with Jim Lehrer has been
[56:49] provided by a grant from ODS Health
[56:51] Plans, the group medical plans that meet
[56:53] the needs of Oregonians by providing a
[56:55] broad range of medical and dental
[56:57] coverage and responsive service. And by
[56:59] the Oregon Trawl Commission,
[57:01] family-owned businesses catching your
[57:02] seafood for you, supporting research and
[57:05] management of a public resource.
[57:21] >> You think it's man that rules the world?
[57:24] Think again.
[57:26] Insects dominate nearly every bit of the
[57:28] planet, surviving where nothing else
[57:31] can.
[57:32] We can live with them. We can destroy
[57:35] them.
[57:36] But it's never a fair fight because we
[57:38] know who always have the power.
[57:41] On the next Alien Empire.
[57:44] You're surrounded.
[57:47] >> On OPB tonight at 8.