The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour (PBS) - 1992-03-03 - 2 of 2

Channel: malgent

Transcript

Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)

[0:00] into effect elsewhere. You know, if you

[0:02] really look at the way this race was

[0:03] supposed to unfold from Clinton's point

[0:05] of view, had these charges never come up

[0:07] this Tuesday and next Tuesday were in

[0:09] fact supposed to lock it up for him. Uh

[0:11] but because of these charges, he's now

[0:13] faces a longer campaign. I still think

[0:15] he I think for some of the reasons that

[0:17] Mark cited, and that is that he is doing

[0:19] a better job and Paul Sonis right now at

[0:21] mobilizing the the fundamental

[0:23] Democratic base, I would have to say he

[0:25] has a slight edge going toward the

[0:26] nomination. All right, let's go to the

[0:28] Republican u uh results. Uh President

[0:31] Bush won on all three, projected to one

[0:33] big in Colorado, uh 70% plus in

[0:37] Maryland, uh 61% uh it looks like in uh

[0:42] in Georgia. What does that mean? Well,

[0:45] it means that that Georgia was the

[0:47] battleground. That's where the president

[0:48] spent the last weekend uh visiting

[0:51] churches and and and and making other

[0:53] appearances. Uh and Pat Buchanan looks

[0:56] like he comes out with two out of five

[0:58] votes. Uh it's it's not good news for

[1:00] the White House. I mean, it means that

[1:02] Pat Buchanan certainly uh has the

[1:04] license to hang around for a while. Uh

[1:07] he has not been repudiated and he can

[1:10] point to some real scalps on on his belt

[1:12] that George Bush has moved on, you name

[1:15] it, any conservative issue from the

[1:17] National Endowment for the Arts funding

[1:19] uh to cashier and the chairman there to

[1:21] school prayer uh to the tax issue. I

[1:24] mean Pat beginning to turn to the

[1:26] conservative heart and soul of the

[1:28] Republican party and say, "Look what

[1:29] I've made him do."

[1:30] >> And he is pushing the president to the

[1:31] right, is he not, David?

[1:33] >> Absolutely. Uh just in the last 24

[1:36] hours, the president, as we saw in the

[1:37] clips earlier this evening, uh has said

[1:39] he made a mistake on the on the when he

[1:41] signed on to the tax increase. Uh uh you

[1:44] know, something that he's been defending

[1:45] ever since he did it. And he's clearly

[1:47] was he was throwing a bone to the

[1:49] conservative saying, "Listen, I got your

[1:51] message. I made a mistake. I'm sorry.

[1:52] Let's move. I want to be be friends

[1:54] again. Uh I would think based on this

[1:57] now, Jim, because given the magnitude of

[1:58] the problem that that Buchanan is

[2:00] becoming that there's going to be more

[2:01] and more anger on the part of Bush

[2:04] partisans, I would imagine in the next

[2:06] few days we'll see a lot of pressure to

[2:08] get Pat Buchanan to withdraw from the

[2:10] race if he does not win a state on Super

[2:12] Tuesday. I would imagine they're going

[2:14] to start trying to raise the bar on him.

[2:15] In effect, I mean, you raised this

[2:17] question about where is the bar. I would

[2:18] think they're now going to try to raise

[2:19] it to a level where they don't think he

[2:21] can meet it and then say if you can't

[2:22] meet it, you ought to get out.

[2:24] >> Mark, the additional point the Democrats

[2:26] have made, Clinton made it again

[2:27] tonight. Uh Abe Rosenthal made it in a

[2:30] column in the Washington in the New York

[2:32] Times today. When is President Bush

[2:34] going to take on Pat Buchanan? Pat

[2:36] Buchanan, according to the critics of

[2:38] Buchanan has is vulnerable in areas of

[2:40] immigration and his attitude toward Jews

[2:42] and his his race things and all of that.

[2:44] Why doesn't President Bush take him on?

[2:46] Well, he's what he's done is used

[2:48] surrogates, both friendly press sources

[2:51] and and paid surrogates or at least

[2:54] deputized surrogates in his own campaign

[2:56] to do it. I mean, he has Bill Bennett uh

[2:59] former URSTW Republican National

[3:01] Chairman for about 12 microsconds. I

[3:03] think he took that job after his drugs

[3:05] are uh he he's gone after him. Uh PX

[3:09] Kelly, the former common of the Marine

[3:10] Corps, did it in the paid commercial. So

[3:13] I think they they they're going to

[3:14] resist as long as they can the president

[3:17] himself engaging Buchanan. Don't forget

[3:19] Jim, we're talking two weeks ago. Two

[3:21] weeks ago they didn't even mention Pat

[3:23] Buchanan's name in in New Hampshire. Now

[3:26] now we're talking about and he's and he

[3:27] won't debate him. So that be makes it

[3:29] even more complicated.

[3:30] >> What do you think, David? Do you think

[3:31] that President Bush and his folks are

[3:33] really going to come after ever going to

[3:35] come after Buchanan? Or are they so

[3:36] afraid of alienating the right? Uh they

[3:39] want to hold them together for November.

[3:41] They will tolerate it and keep trying to

[3:42] move that way rather than to fight it.

[3:45] >> Well, they're definitely afraid of

[3:46] alienating the right and that's clearly

[3:47] what they're trying to do by by by on

[3:49] these position changes on taxes. And

[3:51] he's been he's been moving over to

[3:53] evangelicals. you know, he changed

[3:54] churches this last Sunday to go from a

[3:56] mainstream church quote to to an

[3:58] evangelical church in Atlanta when he

[3:59] went to worship uh on Sunday. So, I I I

[4:03] think that they what they'll probably

[4:04] do, Jim, is find someone to go out and

[4:06] give a major speech trying to paint

[4:08] Buchanan out of the mainstream

[4:09] conservative movement that they'll try

[4:11] to say this is a man is a radical. He's

[4:13] flirting with, you know, racism and and

[4:16] anti-semitism and and he just cannot

[4:18] represent the Republican party any

[4:20] longer. And then I think they will join

[4:21] with that a challenge to Mr. Buchanan to

[4:23] say, "Look, if you can't win on Super

[4:25] Tuesday anywhere, you ought to get out

[4:26] of the race. This is unfair what you're

[4:28] doing to the party."

[4:28] >> But you believe it will still be done by

[4:30] surrogates. The president will not go

[4:32] after him personally.

[4:33] >> I I will be surprised. I think that they

[4:35] want to do everything short of that that

[4:36] they can, Jim. If they ultimately I

[4:39] would think the president might do that

[4:40] if they wanted to get him out. if if he

[4:42] continues on into the industrial states

[4:44] and vows to stay on into uh into

[4:47] California, maybe the president will go

[4:48] after, but I think they want to avoid it

[4:49] at all costs putting George Bush on his

[4:52] level. I think they see that as

[4:53] demeaning the president and losing some

[4:55] of the quote presidential a that goes

[4:57] with that office.

[4:58] >> We have to leave it there. I know you

[4:59] wanted to add something, Mark, but there

[5:01] will be other times, other places. Thank

[5:03] you both very much.

[5:14] Now, some politics as seen by voters in

[5:17] Hattisburg, Mississippi. It is the first

[5:19] of several reports using polling data

[5:22] from the Times Mirror Center for the

[5:24] People and the Press. In 1987, Times

[5:27] Mirror developed a voter classification

[5:29] system based on political and social

[5:32] values as well as party identification.

[5:35] when they did their latest national

[5:36] survey, Times Mirror did a special run

[5:39] for the NewsHour in Hattisburg. Then,

[5:41] Elizabeth Brackett went there to talk to

[5:43] some of the voices behind those numbers.

[5:52] Shrill train whistles still pierce the

[5:54] air in Hattisburg, Mississippi, much as

[5:57] they did in the late 1800s when

[5:59] Hattisburg rail yards and timber mills

[6:01] made it one of the biggest and most

[6:03] important cities in southern

[6:04] Mississippi.

[6:06] The big homes of the railroad and lumber

[6:08] baron still stand just around the corner

[6:11] from the homes of the workers drawn to

[6:13] the town by jobs in the two industries.

[6:16] Much of that industry is gone now.

[6:18] Today, the biggest employer in town is

[6:20] the University of Southern Mississippi.

[6:23] The military and hospitals provide most

[6:25] of the remaining jobs. The unemployment

[6:28] rate is about 6%. That's below the

[6:30] national average.

[6:32] Hattisburg sits in one of the most

[6:34] Republican areas of the state. Former

[6:37] President Reagan and President Bush both

[6:39] won by substantial margins in

[6:41] Hattisburg.

[6:42] The town is about 56% white, 40% black,

[6:46] with black voters still giving

[6:48] overwhelming support to Democratic

[6:50] candidates, but their turnout rates have

[6:52] been low. We came to Hattisburg to talk

[6:55] with these southern voters just as their

[6:57] region becomes crucial in the

[6:59] presidential primaries.

[7:01] In the latest Times Mirror poll, the

[7:03] South emerged as the strongest area for

[7:06] the president. But even here, for the

[7:08] first time, an unnamed Democrat

[7:10] virtually ties President Bush. This

[7:13] feeling was reflected in the Republican

[7:15] voters we spoke to in Hattisburg.

[7:19] >> How many of y'all got answers for

[7:21] everything?

[7:23] >> Steven Herring has been a substitute

[7:24] teacher in Hattisburg since he lost his

[7:27] full-time job in education two years

[7:28] ago. Times Mirror classified Herring as

[7:32] a disaffected voter. Disaffected voters

[7:35] are independent voters who lean toward

[7:37] Republicans. They are skeptical of big

[7:40] government and big business and are

[7:42] often having tough financial times

[7:44] themselves.

[7:45] They are also the group most likely to

[7:47] swing away from President Bush. Her

[7:50] supported Bush and Reagan before him,

[7:52] but he does not think Bush is as popular

[7:55] as he once was. I just get the

[7:57] impression from hearing people talk and

[7:59] all and uh seeing the opinion pose about

[8:02] the dissatisfaction with his job

[8:04] performance that uh uh you know he may

[8:07] not carry Mississippi in the future.

[8:09] >> And does that include you?

[8:13] >> At this point

[8:15] I I'm starting to kind of sway the other

[8:18] way so it could but uh it's still a long

[8:22] way till November too and a lot of

[8:23] things could change.

[8:25] >> Dr. William Yuri retired and moved into

[8:27] Hattisburg after 31 years as a general

[8:30] practitioner in a rural area. Times

[8:33] calls him an enterprise Republican.

[8:36] Enterprisers are affluent, educated, and

[8:38] pro business. They still make up an

[8:41] important part of the president's base,

[8:43] but the latest Times Mir poll shows his

[8:46] support slipping among those affluent

[8:48] voters.

[8:49] >> Dr. Yuri says he will support Pat

[8:51] Buchanan on Super Tuesday. I want to

[8:54] give a gentle protest to President

[8:59] uh to make him understand that we are

[9:02] not satisfied with his leadership

[9:03] domestically. And I I don't agree with

[9:05] all the things that Patrick Buchanan

[9:07] supports, but I'm going to vote for him

[9:09] because I do think that we've got to

[9:12] turn our attention to domestic policy

[9:14] and do some things very differently.

[9:18] Steve Thornton has had a very good year

[9:20] in his carpet cleaning business. Though

[9:23] he lacks a high school education, he

[9:25] made more money last year than ever

[9:27] before. Thornton is classified as an

[9:30] upbeat voter by Times Mirror. Upbeats

[9:33] are independents who often vote

[9:34] Republican. They are young, optimistic,

[9:38] and believe strongly in America. They

[9:41] are the group who remain most influenced

[9:42] by their president's conduct of the Gulf

[9:44] crisis. Thornton liked the way President

[9:47] Bush ran the war.

[9:49] >> I thought it was perfect. He couldn't

[9:51] did a better job. Um, just on that

[9:54] crisis alone, um, I I would vote for him

[9:57] again. Um, I kind of wish Dan Quail

[10:00] wasn't in there, but but given uh Dan

[10:04] Quell, if he

[10:07] serves another four years under Bush,

[10:09] you know, he could be a good candidate

[10:11] for presidency. While the Times Mirror

[10:13] poll showed the now famous unnamed

[10:15] Democrat beating George Bush, it also

[10:18] showed 66% of the voters think the

[10:20] president will win in the fall. That may

[10:23] relate to the voters's lack of

[10:24] enthusiasm for any of the current

[10:26] Democratic candidates. Just one in three

[10:29] rate the contenders as good or

[10:30] excellent. The vast majority rate them

[10:32] only fair or poor. The candidate with

[10:35] the clearest lead in the South is Bill

[10:37] Clinton. In the Times Mirror poll, he

[10:39] leads the other candidates by more than

[10:41] 2 to one. And we found strong support

[10:44] among Hattisburg Democrats for Clinton.

[10:47] That word is tyranny. Tyranny.

[10:50] >> Phyllis Graves and her husband Michael

[10:52] were born and raised in Hattisburg. He

[10:54] is a technician with Scott Paper Company

[10:56] and she does computer data entry for the

[10:58] city. Much of their free time is spent

[11:00] making sure their son Christopher gets

[11:02] his homework done.

[11:04] Her category is New Dealer Democrat.

[11:06] According to Times Mirror,

[11:08] >> they favor government spending on social

[11:10] programs and a strong national defense.

[11:13] >> Clinton has strong support among New

[11:15] Dealers and among blacks.

[11:17] >> I've been leaning toward Clinton. I

[11:19] think that because basically he's a

[11:22] Southerner.

[11:22] >> Why would it be important to you to have

[11:24] a presidential candidate from the South?

[11:26] >> To my recollection, we haven't had one

[11:29] from the South since Jimmy Carter. And I

[11:32] don't think Jimmy Carter did a bad job.

[11:35] Um, he understood the people. Uh, and I

[11:39] think Bill Clinton does too.

[11:42] >> Professor Neil McMillan has been

[11:44] associated with the University of

[11:45] Southern Mississippi almost from the

[11:47] time he arrived as a student from

[11:48] Michigan 35 years ago. He now teaches

[11:52] history and has published frequently in

[11:54] his field. Times Mir calls McMillan a

[11:57] secular independent voter. Most seculars

[12:00] lean toward the Democrats. They are well

[12:02] educated, vigorously support personal

[12:04] freedoms, and lack strong religious

[12:06] convictions.

[12:08] >> Paul Sonis receives his greatest support

[12:10] from the seculars. McMillan likes, but

[12:13] is now favoring Clinton. I

[12:15] >> I think that Bill Clinton might well be

[12:18] the best candidate if he's not already

[12:20] too badly damaged by what I think is the

[12:23] irresponsible allegations about his

[12:25] personal life and about his patriotism.

[12:28] How do you feel about those allegations?

[12:29] His personal life for instance.

[12:31] >> Well, I I'm not ready to say that uh

[12:34] one's uh personal life is is not

[12:37] relevant to one's leadership, but what I

[12:40] know about those allegations, they have

[12:41] no place in the public arena.

[12:44] The patriotism issue, the the uh war in

[12:46] Vietnam issue is even more vexing to me

[12:49] because it seems to me he took the stand

[12:51] that any principled and uh caring young

[12:55] man of conscience would have taken. And

[12:57] yet now it haunts him. Uh I'm afraid a

[13:00] whole generation of of people, people my

[13:02] age and somewhat younger are going to be

[13:04] plagued by that issue and until they've

[13:06] passed through our political system.

[13:08] >> On the questionnaire earlier, you

[13:10] preferred Sonis. Have you changed your

[13:12] mind that quickly?

[13:13] >> I still prefer Paul Sonis, but I don't

[13:15] think he's as electable.

[13:17] I think, you know, we care in this

[13:19] country about charisma, whatever that

[13:21] means. and uh his slight speech

[13:25] impediment I think may be a problem for

[13:27] him.

[13:30] >> 22-year-old Leslie Murell is one of

[13:32] eight children raised on a farm in

[13:34] northern Mississippi. She's a senior at

[13:36] USM with a major in banking and is now

[13:39] taking a semester off to earn money as a

[13:41] part-time bank teller to cover her

[13:43] expenses for her final year. 60s

[13:46] Democrat is the category given to her by

[13:48] Times Mirror. This group is strongly

[13:50] committed to issues of peace and social

[13:52] justice. Muriel has settled on Bill

[13:55] Clinton as her candidate.

[13:56] >> What do you like about Clinton? Why does

[13:58] he speak to you?

[14:00] >> I think he was given an unfair deal from

[14:02] the beginning because he has this

[14:04] scandal to come out all at once. I don't

[14:06] think he's had a chance to really prove

[14:08] himself. He's trying to dig himself out

[14:10] to try to get the public to look at him

[14:11] again because his his name has been

[14:13] scandal. And I think he might have

[14:15] something very good to say if you give

[14:17] him a chance. If Jesse Jackson does not

[14:19] endorse Bill Clinton, how much of a

[14:21] difference would that make to you?

[14:22] >> If he could give a very, very good

[14:24] reason as to why he's not endorsing by

[14:27] him being a very positive black image,

[14:29] yes, it can affect my opinion.

[14:32] >> Four of the six voters we talked to

[14:34] thought the economy was the most

[14:36] important issue the country faced. And

[14:38] none of them thought the president had

[14:40] done a very good job of handling the

[14:42] nation's economic woes. The thing I hear

[14:44] the most is people are unemployed. Uh

[14:49] people have used up their unemployment

[14:51] benefits. Uh and they have no income and

[14:54] they're standing in line to get jobs and

[14:56] they're not jobs there to get.

[14:58] >> How much can government influence the

[15:00] economy?

[15:01] >> I think government has to put money back

[15:03] into uh jobs. right now I think they're

[15:07] getting more than an adequate share of

[15:09] tax money uh which could be left in the

[15:13] economy to create more jobs. Uh and also

[15:17] I I mentioned this uh in the poll that

[15:21] uh there's a lot of waste in government

[15:24] spending. uh there's a lot of money

[15:27] being sent abroad uh to underdeveloped

[15:30] countries uh you know the Soviet Union

[15:34] uh and we have people starving in this

[15:37] country

[15:38] and I think we need to take care of our

[15:40] own people. I think it goes back to um

[15:44] the war in the Gulf. I I think um the

[15:48] president with all due credit did such a

[15:50] superb job of leading the free world in

[15:53] that terrible event. But I was really

[15:56] disappointed that as a parallel thing he

[16:00] didn't appoint a uh blue ribbon

[16:03] committee, a think tank to work on the

[16:05] domestic problems that the nation was

[16:07] developing. I think he had he missed a

[16:08] wonderful opportunity to present the

[16:11] nation and the congress with solutions

[16:13] to some of our economic woes while he

[16:15] was riding the crest of the popularity

[16:17] of uh solving that Gulf uh mess as well

[16:21] as he did. Um I think I think there has

[16:25] been such a morass of confusion uh the

[16:28] Congress uh the Democratic party makes

[16:30] utterances the Republican minority makes

[16:32] utterances the president's people that

[16:34] there seems to be no um leadership from

[16:37] anybody. It just seems to be on

[16:38] automatic pilot. Things are just

[16:40] floating and I think that people are

[16:41] really discouraged. I know people here

[16:44] are uh they just they feel like nobody's

[16:46] in control.

[16:48] >> How do you think President Bush has

[16:49] handled the economy? He didn't he ain't

[16:51] did a very good job on that just on the

[16:53] simple fact of a go for okay they um

[16:56] that took a lot of his time and uh you

[16:58] know and with uh Russia over there the

[17:01] crisis they've been going through and

[17:03] and uh you know it's you can only do so

[17:08] much.

[17:08] >> What do you think about President Bush's

[17:10] handling of the economy?

[17:13] Well, let me say the first four years I

[17:16] thought he had a grip on it, but then he

[17:20] kind of started losing it. And

[17:23] right now it's he's not doing a very

[17:26] good job right now. But I can't say that

[17:31] I'm not prospering that, you know, we're

[17:34] not doing well. Uh because we are. But

[17:37] as a whole, as I see the country, no,

[17:41] we're not. He He's not doing the job.

[17:43] No.

[17:44] >> For the first time, perhaps since 1946,

[17:47] can now focus our energies on domestic

[17:49] issues. President Bush has not uh

[17:52] address these issues. He has no domestic

[17:55] policy that I can understand. Paid no

[17:57] attention to domestic concerns until

[17:59] this race uh developed. And so to think

[18:02] that once elected he will turn to

[18:04] domestic issues is is extremely naive uh

[18:08] man simply does not have a social agenda

[18:10] or domestic agenda.

[18:12] >> I think the rising taxes is one of our

[18:14] more critical problems and the the

[18:17] problems faced with the middle class.

[18:18] The fact that they are suffering from

[18:20] the taxes that we currently go through.

[18:22] >> What do you see as the difference

[18:23] between the Democrats and the

[18:24] Republicans concerning the issue of

[18:26] taxes? I think that they all tried to

[18:28] avoid the questioning about taxes and

[18:31] the those who are afraid more or less of

[18:33] saying the wrong thing tend to say is

[18:35] they are going to lower taxes which I

[18:37] don't think will happen. The voices from

[18:39] Hattisburg reflect the discontent with

[18:42] the president that the Times mirror

[18:43] found in its poll. Both indicate that

[18:46] Super Tuesday and beyond could mean

[18:48] tough times for the Bush reelection

[18:50] campaign.

[19:01] First tonight is the end of the

[19:02] recession in sight. As we reported,

[19:05] there was some good economic news today.

[19:08] The index of leading economic indicators

[19:11] and new home sales posted significant

[19:13] gains. But that comes against a backdrop

[19:16] of bad news, including last Wednesday's

[19:18] report that consumer confidence hit a

[19:21] new 17-year low. Here to shed some light

[19:24] on all of this are Steven Roach, a

[19:26] senior economist at Morgan Stanley, a

[19:29] New York investment banking firm, and

[19:32] David Wrestler, chief economist at

[19:34] Numeurro Securities, an investment

[19:36] banking and securities firm and US

[19:38] subsidiary of a Japanese company. And

[19:42] starting with you, Mr. Roach, let's

[19:43] start with some basics. Briefly, what

[19:46] are the leading economic indicators?

[19:49] It's a gauge that the government has put

[19:51] together for a number of years that

[19:53] tries to be a forward-looking barometer

[19:55] of the ups and downs of the US economy.

[19:57] It has a variety of components. Right

[19:59] now, it has 11 key components. The

[20:01] government puts them together in a pot

[20:03] and comes out with a a magic answer

[20:05] every month that tells the future course

[20:08] as they expect it to occur in the US

[20:09] economy.

[20:10] >> What are those components? Oh, they

[20:12] include a variety of things like the

[20:13] stock market, the money supply, consumer

[20:15] confidence, the uh length of the work

[20:17] week in the factory sector, sensitive

[20:19] materials prices. You name it, they've

[20:21] got it. These are all uh ingredients of

[20:25] gauges that do tend to look into the

[20:27] future rather than behind us. And uh you

[20:29] know, hopefully they they do tell

[20:31] something about what lies ahead.

[20:32] >> All right. So, how significant then is a

[20:35] n% rise in those indicators?

[20:38] >> It's a big increase. If you look back

[20:40] over the last year and a half, uh we've

[20:43] had a couple of months when the increase

[20:44] was 1.2%. Those were the two largest

[20:46] gains we've seen, but a 0.9 is right

[20:49] behind that. We need more than 1.9 to

[20:52] say that we're out of the woods,

[20:53] however, on recession.

[20:54] >> Mr. Wrestler, how significant do you

[20:56] think that rise is?

[20:57] >> Well, unfortunately, the index doesn't

[20:59] tell us much that we don't already know.

[21:01] As Steve mentioned, most of those things

[21:03] have been reported already. This is an

[21:05] index for January, and we're now looking

[21:06] at February numbers. But uh one month of

[21:09] an increase doesn't tell us much. There

[21:11] used to be an old rule of thumb that you

[21:13] used to have to have three consecutive

[21:15] changes in direction to tell you where

[21:17] the economy is headed. Now last year we

[21:19] had six consecutive increases and we

[21:21] never came out of the recession or if we

[21:22] did we certainly aren't in a period of

[21:24] recovery yet.

[21:26] >> What do you think accounts for this rise

[21:29] and does that have any significance?

[21:32] Well, we had the biggest gainer was the

[21:34] stock market and this has been a you

[21:36] know pretty good uh run in the stock

[21:38] market but we you know we had a solid

[21:39] gain in um uh the

[21:43] I forget new orders for manufactured

[21:46] goods uh and we had broadly based gains

[21:48] in a number of other of our you know

[21:49] major indicators like sensitive

[21:51] materials prices uh and capital spending

[21:53] commitments and you know I think that's

[21:55] that's a sign that there is some life in

[21:57] the system.

[21:57] >> Why would there be a rise do you think

[22:00] in in the stock market? I mean

[22:02] particularly given that we have a report

[22:05] also that consumer confidence is way

[22:07] down

[22:08] >> or is there a relationship?

[22:09] >> Let's talk about consumer confidence in

[22:11] a second but I think you know the stock

[22:12] market is looking ahead to a an economic

[22:15] recovery that's driven by lower interest

[22:17] rates in an economy that's come through

[22:19] a a period of wrenching change and the

[22:20] stock market tends to look through uh

[22:23] any lingering downside that still may be

[22:25] out there for the US economy. Do you

[22:27] think it's because people think the

[22:28] economy is healthy that they're back

[22:30] into the stock market or is it because

[22:33] rates are cheaper?

[22:33] >> Well, I think there's something to

[22:35] realize about the stock market. We've

[22:36] had a 25% increase since the middle of

[22:38] 1989 when this the economy really

[22:41] started to slow down. So throughout the

[22:43] period of contraction or slowing of

[22:45] economic activity, stock prices were

[22:47] doing rather well and unfortunately I

[22:50] don't think they're as reliable an

[22:51] indicator of the future as they might

[22:52] have been in the past. Mhm. What about

[22:54] the report that home sales are up? I

[22:56] mean, that's a pretty good number, isn't

[22:58] it? Uh up almost 30% since last January.

[23:01] Since January.

[23:03] >> Uh the the home sales increase was

[23:05] rather impressive, but it's also

[23:07] important to bear in mind that we had

[23:08] the lowest interest rates in January

[23:10] since 1973

[23:12] uh for mortgage rates. And

[23:14] unfortunately, interest rates are up

[23:16] again about half a percentage point from

[23:18] where they were then. We're back to

[23:19] September and October levels in the

[23:21] interest rate markets. So, you're saying

[23:23] that might not sustain I mean the homes

[23:25] the high home. What do you how do you

[23:26] read that? I

[23:27] >> I like the tone of the housing market. I

[23:29] think we've had steady increases in uh

[23:31] single family residential construction

[23:33] activity now for some time. We're still

[23:35] at low levels, but we're off off of the

[23:37] rock bottom levels of the middle of

[23:40] 1990. I think this sector is going to

[23:42] continue to lead the economy out of

[23:43] recession.

[23:44] >> And that's the traditional role that

[23:46] that housing has played has

[23:48] >> if it does sustain. Housing is one of

[23:50] the leadersh coming out of a downturn.

[23:52] That's correct.

[23:53] >> All right. You said we would talk about

[23:54] this uh consumer confidence report in a

[23:57] minute. Let's let's assume we're at that

[23:59] minute now. What do how do you see I

[24:01] mean way down

[24:03] >> we have two measures of consumer

[24:04] confidence that come out came out last

[24:06] week. The conference board measure fell

[24:08] to a you put it 18-year low. The

[24:11] University of Michigan measure did not.

[24:13] Of the two measures the Michigan measure

[24:15] is far more reliable. It is included.

[24:18] It's far less volatile. The conference

[24:20] board measure always collapses at the

[24:22] very end of a recession. Uh in October

[24:25] of 1982, the conference board measure

[24:28] collapsed. People thought there was no

[24:29] end in sight to the recession. The truth

[24:31] is the recession was one month away from

[24:33] ending.

[24:34] >> How does that happen?

[24:35] >> The the it's a it's a statistical

[24:37] property of the way this measure is is

[24:39] constructed. The government for that

[24:40] reason alone tosses out the conference

[24:42] board measure includes the Michigan

[24:44] measure which actually rose last week in

[24:47] its index of leading economic

[24:48] indicators. It's a better gauge. Don't

[24:50] you know consumers are not thrilled

[24:52] right now but they're not nearly as

[24:53] depressed as a conference board measure

[24:55] would lead you to believe.

[24:56] >> Do you agree with that Mr. Russell?

[24:57] essentially yes he Steve's right that

[25:00] the uh index especially that which feeds

[25:02] into the February leading indicators the

[25:05] Michigan index uh was up last month but

[25:08] we're still uh tracking levels that are

[25:10] at the uh low point of this recession

[25:12] and we haven't really come off the

[25:14] bottom yet we're we're basically back to

[25:16] December November levels

[25:17] >> well when Aaron Greenspan testified

[25:19] today he warned about extraordinary

[25:21] forces that make the future uncertain

[25:24] doesn't that put a damper on some of

[25:27] this good news.

[25:28] >> Until people feel better, it's going to

[25:30] be tough to sustain meaningful gains in

[25:32] spending. I personally believe that the

[25:34] major impediment to an improvement

[25:36] consumer psychology is uh fears over job

[25:39] security, especially from white collar

[25:41] workers who have never before known the

[25:43] pain of economic distress and hardship.

[25:46] >> How do you see it?

[25:47] >> I I tend to agree. I think there's

[25:48] another element out there too that

[25:50] threatens the economy's recovery, and

[25:52] that is the backup in or rise in

[25:54] interest rates we've seen in the last

[25:55] month and a half. uh in my judgment it

[25:58] was that which derailed the recession or

[26:00] the recovery last year and it threatens

[26:02] to do so again this year.

[26:04] >> Do you see any um any turnaround in the

[26:07] long term? I mean like I think don't

[26:09] unemployment figures come out on Friday.

[26:12] I mean what what do you see happening

[26:14] any

[26:15] >> that's probably the single most

[26:16] important piece of economic information

[26:18] we get each month and most of us uh

[26:21] hazard guesses about what's going to

[26:23] happen. Our guess is that we didn't have

[26:25] much improvement in employment in the

[26:27] month of February and uh that's going to

[26:30] get reflected on Friday.

[26:31] >> Do you see any other weak spots uh that

[26:33] that Greenspan may have had in the back

[26:35] of his mind when he issued that little

[26:37] warning? I mean other little

[26:39] >> He's been cautious for a long time. He's

[26:41] worried right now about balance sheets

[26:42] both in the financial system and in the

[26:45] household sector of the economy. I have

[26:46] to say uh I think household balance

[26:48] sheets have improved significantly over

[26:50] the last several months. meaning

[26:52] household bal balance sheets meaning

[26:54] what

[26:54] >> uh debt ratios relative to income. If

[26:57] you look at installment credit that

[26:58] ratio relative to income is is down to

[27:01] its lowest level right now uh in about 6

[27:04] years. I think the banking system is

[27:06] more liquid today. Uh there there

[27:08] certainly has been a peaking out of

[27:10] non-performing loans. There's been an

[27:12] improvement of capital positions in the

[27:15] banking industry and the money supply

[27:16] growth is starting to pick up. So again,

[27:18] we're not out of the woods, but things

[27:20] are a lot better today than they were a

[27:21] year ago.

[27:22] >> You agree with that?

[27:23] >> I agree. Essentially, I do agree with

[27:24] that, but I still think we have a

[27:26] problem as long as interest rates remain

[27:28] stubbornly high. And in my judgment,

[27:30] that is the case, especially as it

[27:32] affects long-term interest rates.

[27:33] >> Any other weak spots?

[27:35] >> Well, I think there's a one of the

[27:37] uncertainties that perhaps Mr. Greenspan

[27:38] was alluding to is that we're going to

[27:40] be facing some rather significant

[27:41] defense cutbacks over the next several

[27:43] years uh as the US scales back its

[27:46] military commitments around the world.

[27:48] And I think that throws a lot of doubt

[27:49] on the economy's performance over the

[27:52] long haul.

[27:53] >> How confident do you feel sitting here?

[27:55] Uh, I don't want you to undercut your

[27:57] your your predictions and thing, but

[27:59] I've read so much today that says that

[28:01] there's just so much uncertainty out

[28:02] here that nobody can really be confident

[28:04] about whether we're coming out of the

[28:06] woods, when we're going to be out of the

[28:07] woods. How how confident do you feel?

[28:10] >> Well, if you've been doing this for as

[28:12] long as I have, you've had your

[28:13] confidence shaken many a time, and this

[28:15] is certainly a time when uh that has

[28:17] been the case. You just simply look at

[28:19] traditional relationships in the

[28:20] economy. As I see it, things seem to be

[28:23] falling into place in early 1992 that do

[28:27] lay out the possibility that we will

[28:29] build a sustainable recovery as the year

[28:31] progresses.

[28:32] >> About midyear, you would say

[28:34] >> uh mid year at the latest, possibly even

[28:35] sooner.

[28:36] >> Midyear, you think?

[28:37] >> I'd say mid year, assuming that we get a

[28:39] resumption of the decline in interest

[28:41] rates that we enjoyed last year. All

[28:43] right. Well, Mr. Wrestler and Mr. Roach,

[28:45] thank you both for being with us.

[28:47] >> Thank you. Thank you.

[28:56] Next tonight, the continuing showdown

[28:59] between Iraq and the United Nations on

[29:01] dismantling Iraq's weapons of mass

[29:03] destruction. Iraq agreed to get rid of

[29:06] its Scud missiles and other such weapons

[29:08] as a part of the Gulf War ceasefire

[29:10] agreement. But Iraq is now saying it

[29:13] will do so only if the UN starts

[29:15] relaxing economic sanctions imposed on

[29:18] the country.

[29:19] Threatening serious consequences, the UN

[29:21] Security Council extended its deadline

[29:24] until next week when an Iraq delegation

[29:27] headed by Deputy Prime Minister Tar Aziz

[29:29] comes to the United Nations for talks. A

[29:32] UN mission headed by Swedish diplomat

[29:34] Ralph Ekus has returned from Baghdad

[29:37] after trying to gain compliance with the

[29:39] Security Council resolutions. Judy

[29:41] Woodruff talked with Mr. Echus earlier

[29:44] today and asked him why it was hard for

[29:46] UN inspectors to get the information

[29:48] they need from the Iraqis.

[29:52] >> Well, it is a consistent uh refusive

[29:55] from Iraqi side. Well, the if if I may

[29:59] paraphrase what they are saying to us.

[30:02] They say we we give you what you uh uh

[30:05] what we what is necessary to know. uh I

[30:08] feel that the word necessary is their

[30:11] own interpretation.

[30:12] uh we don't feel that we get what is

[30:14] necessary and we have to follow up the

[30:18] um ceasefire resolution which and its uh

[30:22] uh followup resolutions which require

[30:26] that Iraq give full complete and final

[30:30] disclosure of all its programs and we

[30:33] indeed lack that type of information the

[30:36] full presentation of the comprehensive

[30:38] programs

[30:39] >> but you so you don't see any ambiguity

[30:41] in the language of the of the resolution

[30:43] itself. I mean there's no there's no

[30:46] room for say misinterpretation or a

[30:48] different interpretation on the part of

[30:50] the Iraqis.

[30:51] >> There is uh the language is very clear

[30:55] uh in the resolution. I don't see any

[30:58] possibility to misread that text.

[31:01] >> So of what they were required to do, how

[31:04] much have they done? Well, they are I

[31:07] think they have problems with missile

[31:10] related production capabilities.

[31:13] That means facilities and items which

[31:17] are necessary to modify or produce long

[31:21] range ballistic missile. Uh they have

[31:25] such equipment and material and the UN

[31:28] we require that these material should

[31:31] all of it should be destroyed.

[31:34] uh and the Iraqi side say well we could

[31:37] convert those items into for civilian

[31:40] purposes and and make those items useful

[31:42] in the civil industry.

[31:44] >> Well, what about that? I mean because

[31:45] the their uh what Minister of State for

[31:48] Foreign Affairs said in what a letter to

[31:50] the United Nations last week that in so

[31:52] many words he said it's not fair to

[31:53] destroy this equipment which could be

[31:55] converted. Is isn't that a legitimate

[31:57] argument that they're using?

[31:59] >> No, it's not at all. The uh the security

[32:02] council is has has made clear that

[32:06] missile related material including of

[32:08] course the missiles themselves and the

[32:10] launchers all of these things should all

[32:13] of these things should be destroyed.

[32:15] There is no alternative left for that.

[32:17] Uh what the uh what the Iraqi side is

[32:22] pointing to however is that in the field

[32:24] of chemical and biological weapons and

[32:26] also in the nuclear area there are

[32:29] certain provisions in the ceasefire

[32:31] resolution which makes it possible to uh

[32:36] so to say rendering harmless these

[32:39] materials. uh but that is not in

[32:42] relation to the to the uh to the missile

[32:45] missiles

[32:47] >> and and also uh it is even more

[32:50] difficult to understand the Iraqi side

[32:53] as the Iraqi authorities refuse to

[32:57] accept the plans provide prepared by the

[33:01] UN for

[33:04] monitoring and verification of Iraq's

[33:06] future capabilities which adds of course

[33:09] to the seriousness of the situation.

[33:12] >> Well, Mr. Ambassador, what do you think

[33:13] is going to happen? Uh the the Iraqi

[33:15] foreign minister, Mr. Aziz is coming to

[33:18] the United Nations what next week uh to

[33:21] talk with you and and others. Is that

[33:24] right?

[33:24] >> He is coming first of all to present his

[33:27] view the his government's view views on

[33:30] these issues to the security council and

[33:33] indeed also I will see him again. I was

[33:36] as you know in Baghdad only a week ago

[33:39] and uh

[33:40] >> do you see room for compromise here?

[33:43] >> No, I don't see any room for compromise

[33:47] because

[33:48] security council has taken its decision

[33:53] on the basis of a ceasefire resolution.

[33:56] That was this is a basis and one cannot

[33:59] suddenly start to change the ceasefire

[34:02] provisions. they are so to say cut in

[34:05] stone and they should be implemented.

[34:08] That is no doubt about it.

[34:09] >> Well, if that's the case, what's going

[34:11] to happen? The United Nations has said

[34:13] now that Iraq faces serious

[34:15] consequences. What does that mean

[34:16] exactly?

[34:19] >> Well, there are many aspects on this. Of

[34:22] course in in the in short term there are

[34:25] obvious things uh like the continued uh

[34:30] sanctions economic sanctions both with

[34:33] regard to uh possibility to deliver gods

[34:37] to Iraq and second of course to buy Iraq

[34:42] especially oil and make carry out

[34:45] financial transactions with with Iraq.

[34:48] That's the first thing. The second thing

[34:50] is more difficult maybe to define but it

[34:54] has to do with Iraq's political is

[34:57] isolation which is a consequence of its

[35:00] own refusal to fully comply with the

[35:04] resolutions. uh as you know security

[35:07] council all 15 members 15 to zero has uh

[35:11] all members have condemned Iraqi

[35:13] behavior and of course this political

[35:16] isolation is a matter which is severely

[35:20] hamper Iraqi capability

[35:22] >> but Mr. Ambassador Iraq has been uh uh

[35:25] isolated politically for more than a

[35:27] year since it uh invaded Kuwait. What

[35:31] makes you think that anything short of

[35:34] some sort of military action using

[35:36] military force is going to get what the

[35:38] United Nations says that it must have? I

[35:41] feel that these both economic and

[35:44] political components in this uh setup by

[35:48] the UN are are effective and that they

[35:51] are working in the long run. However,

[35:54] that doesn't mean that the council may

[35:57] contemplate or members of the council

[35:59] may contemplate other other actions. As

[36:02] as you rightly pointed out, the council

[36:06] has said that this can or will have will

[36:10] have definitely serious consequences.

[36:14] And that was the message we have brought

[36:17] home, I hope, very clearly to the

[36:19] Iraqis.

[36:19] >> Well, how quickly could something

[36:21] happen? What are we really what are we

[36:22] really talking about here?

[36:25] >> Well, I guess now that the council has

[36:27] decided in its Friday Friday agreement

[36:30] between all the 15 members to uh take up

[36:34] this matter very soon again and that is

[36:38] the second week of March the at the

[36:40] latest

[36:41] >> that's next week

[36:42] >> that is next week and I guess that

[36:44] council will consider the situation in

[36:46] the light on the what is presented by

[36:50] Iraq. We hope all that the Iraqi

[36:53] authorities and Iraq government now will

[36:55] come with a message clearly indicating

[36:59] that Iraq now unconditionally agrees

[37:02] with the resolutions.

[37:04] >> But you've been over there, Mr. You've

[37:06] been dealing with the Iraqi officials

[37:08] face to face. Do you think that they're

[37:10] about to change their position on this?

[37:14] >> I must say I have not I couldn't say I'm

[37:18] not totally hopeful. I I'm of course an

[37:21] optimist by nature. So maybe they will

[37:25] rethink the situation. they are in a

[37:27] very serious situation, the Iraqi side

[37:30] uh government and and authorities and I

[37:34] hope that they will understand that and

[37:37] uh I really really hope that because it

[37:40] will be a new situation uh if they do

[37:44] not now fully comply with what is

[37:47] requested namely unconditional agreement

[37:50] on the uh resolutions. Do you think they

[37:53] understand what this new situation is

[37:55] that they are facing serious

[37:56] consequences and possibly uh military

[37:59] force here?

[38:01] >> Well, if I can take the risk to

[38:02] speculate, I feel that components in the

[38:05] Iraqi leadership fully understands the

[38:10] seriousness of situation. However, there

[38:12] may be other and may be the leading

[38:15] component

[38:17] >> Saddam Hussein

[38:17] >> who does not does not understand what is

[38:21] at stake and there may be a new serious

[38:24] mistake.

[38:25] >> Are you referring to Saddam Hussein?

[38:28] Yes, I fear that it is on that level

[38:31] there where there is a misreading on

[38:32] situation and I hope now that after our

[38:36] mission I carried out last week and in

[38:39] the light of the discussion and debate

[38:41] preceding this uh visit by Iraq that

[38:45] this matter will be more sort of clear

[38:48] stand more clear in in the in front of

[38:50] the eyes of the uh the leadership. Yes.

[38:53] >> Well, Ambassador Ralph Aayas we thank

[38:55] you for being with us.

[38:56] >> Thank you.

[39:04] Again, the major story of this Tuesday

[39:06] was the ongoing 1992 race for president.

[39:10] Seven states held prim primaries or

[39:12] caucuses. President Bush won Georgia,

[39:15] Maryland, and Colorado over Pat

[39:17] Buchanan. Here are the latest votes in

[39:19] those states. First, in Georgia, the

[39:22] president got 62% to Buchanan's 38%.

[39:25] That's with 74% of the vote in. In

[39:29] Maryland, the Bush number was 70 to

[39:31] Buchanan's 30. That's with 37% of the

[39:34] vote counted. And in Colorado, with a

[39:36] lonely 11% counted, the president has

[39:39] 68% to Buchanan's 29%. The vote was

[39:43] split in the Democratic races. Bill

[39:45] Clinton won Georgia. Here is here are

[39:48] those results. His total was 61%.

[39:52] Kazongas is 20, Browns 8%, carries five,

[39:56] Harkkins two. That's with 77% of the

[39:58] vote in. In Maryland, Paul Sus finished

[40:01] on top. And here are those. He got 39%.

[40:05] Uh Bill Clinton did much better than

[40:06] expected at 35%.

[40:09] Brown nine, Carrie five, and as did

[40:11] Harkin. That's with 41% of the vote in.

[40:14] In Colorado, Zongas Clinton and Brown

[40:17] were running neck andneck in a race that

[40:19] was considered too close to call. These

[40:22] are the latest results there. Brown

[40:24] ahead 30%, Clinton with 28, Zongas 26,

[40:28] Carrie 11, Harkin 2% that's with 11% of

[40:32] the vote counted. And that is the

[40:34] NewsHour for tonight. We'll be back

[40:36] tomorrow night with full analysis of

[40:38] today's votes. I'm Jim Lara. Thank you

[40:40] and good night. Funding for the McNeel

[40:42] Aeron NewsHour has been provided by

[40:44] PepsiCo

[40:57] Mexico.

[41:00] Part of helping the world live and

[41:01] communicate better is keeping it well

[41:03] informed. That's why funding for the

[41:05] NewsHour is also provided by AT&T

[41:09] and by the Corporation for Public

[41:11] Broadcasting.

[41:14] This my personality, says the artist,

[41:17] barely hanging in.

[41:21] Here it comes again.

[41:24] There is pain in this exhibit. There is

[41:26] hope, say the sponsors. Medical

[41:28] treatment is available, but only half of

[41:30] those who need it seek it. Until they

[41:34] do, this is how they feel.

[41:39] Ray Summers at Large Hurts to watch.

[41:42] >> Oh, it does.

[41:43] >> That exhibit opens tomorrow and

[41:45] continues through March 22nd. The

[41:46] gallery is at 422 Northwest 8th Avenue.

[41:49] >> Thanks for joining us tonight. Hope

[41:50] you'll come back at 11:00

[41:52] >> and watch 48 hours tonight. See you

[41:54] later.