==================================================================
Published by INEWS. Freely distributable if unaltered and complete. 
See end of document for info on free E-mail trial of INEWS.
INTERNATIONAL NEWS E-WIRE SERVICE All rights reserved. For 
information on receiving a free trial subscription to INEWS 
World News Daily via E-mail send E-mail to INEWS@AOL.COM
WORLD WIDE WEB: http://members.aol.com/inewscirc/inews.html
==================================================================

DISTRIBUTE FREELY

                        '96 ELECTION SNAPSHOT
                               VOL.1 #11


SUBSCRIPTION INFO/GENERAL INFO - INEWS@AOL.COM
TO REACH EDITOR ---------------- INEWSEDIT@AOL.COM


CONTENTS:
   CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT
   U.S. OPINION ROUNDUP: THE BOSNIAN ARMS EMBARGO'S IRANIAN CONNECTION
   CLINTON TO APPEAR IN TELEVISION MOVIE
   CLINTON RETIREMENT POLITICS
   "FIRST FAMILIES" EXHIBIT
   PRESIDENT VETOES LATE-TERM ABORTION BAN
   EXPERTS ANALYZE ROLE OF RON BROWN IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
   ROSTENKOWSKI VOWS TO MAKE A COMEBACK
   WHITEWATER TRIAL UPDATE
   CLINTON MAKES FULL USE OF STATUS AS UNDECLARED CANDIDATE
   POTENTIAL VICE PRESIDENTIAL RUNNING MATES DISCUSSED
   POLL SHOWS CLINTON MAINTAINING COMFORTABLE LEAD OVER DOLE
   AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION GIVES DOLE AN 87 PERCENT RANKING
   SENATOR BRADLEY PRESSING FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
   FREE TELEVISION TIME PROPOSED FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
   FIRST MEMBER OF CONGRESS OUSTED IN TEXAS PRIMARY RUNOFF
   JOURNALISTIC JUXTAPOSITIONS
   PUNDIT PEARLS
   CAMPAIGN '96: ISSUES
   THE DRUG WAR AS POLITICAL ISSUE
   NEW HEAD OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD ON UPCOMING ELECTIONS
   MINIMUM WAGE DEBATE
   WORLD PRESS: U.S. ELECTION:  VOTERS' 'FEARS' WILL DOMINATE CAMPAIGN
   FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER
   =========================
   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   It was another slow week on the U.S. presidential campaign
front but there were a few political surprises in congressional
races in Texas.
   Senator Bob Dole, the presumed Republican nominee for
president, is back on the campaign trail after vacationing in
Florida. Senator Dole was quick to condemn President Clinton's
veto of a bill which would have outlawed a rare procedure used to
abort late-stage pregnancies. The debate over the so-called
partial-birth abortion bill would appear to ensure abortion will
yet again be an issue in the 1996 battle for the White House.
   But the highlight of this week's political news was the
surprising victory of political newcomer Victor Morales in Texas.
He defeated veteran Democratic Congressman John Bryant in a
run-off election to win the democratic nomination for the U.S.
senate. He will face veteran Republican Senator Phil Gramm in
November.
   Until recently Mr. Morales was an unknown 46-year old high
school teacher from a Dallas suburb.
   He has spent virtually no money on his Senate campaign and
travelled around the state in his pickup truck, meeting voters
and happily presenting himself as a political novice eager to
meet what he believes is the public's demand for a new face in
Washington:
   "But then, for the people that I have been talking to, they
just want somebody honest, they want somebody intelligent,
somebody hardworking, someone they can believe in. In fact, I
have had people specifically tell me, well, I do not even care
about your issues. I mean, of course they do inside, but they
just want someone to believe in."
   The man Mr. Morales defeated, Democratic Congressman John
Bryant, had the strong support of the Democratic political
establishment in Texas, including the popular former governor,
Ann Richards.
   Mr. Morales drew strong support from Hispanic voters in Texas,
but he also appears to have done well among those who want to
change the political status quo in Washington. Washington-based
political analyst Stuart Rothenberg keeps a close watch on
congressional races around the country. He says the Morales
victory shows voter disenchantment with politics as usual remains
a potent force in the 1996 campaign year:
   "Well, it suggests one thing to me. That is that voters are
still going to look at untraditional candidates, political
outsiders, people who can take on the political establishment,
talk about change. I think there is some concern among
Republicans that we have a wild card (unpredictable) Democrat in
the race here, that this guy is really an unknown political
figure, and that for him to win suggests that he was able to tap
a lot of anti-Washington, anti-government sentiment out there."
   Texas voters also had some bad news for party-switching
congressman Greg Laughlin. Mr. Laughlin used to be a Democrat,
but was one of five U.S. House members who switched to the
Republican Party last year. This week he failed in his bid for
re-election. He lost in a run-off election to fellow Republican
Ron Paul, despite the efforts of former President George Bush and
House speaker Newt Gingrich who campaigned on his behalf.
   Political analyst Stuart Rothenberg says the laughlin defeat
demonstrates the difficulties that some party-switching
candidates face in convincing voters their new party loyalty is
genuine:
   "Now, the political leaders, the Republican establishment were
all embracing (congressman) Greg Laughlin, the Democrat turned
Republican. But this is a guy who ran (in previous elections) as
a democrat. Republican voters remember that and they were slow to
warm to him (support him). That is a problem that all party
switchers face."
   Stuart Rothenberg says the Laughlin defeat might put a damper
on any more party switchers in the near future. But he says most
of those Democrats who were thinking about switching their
affiliation to the Republican Party have already done so anyway.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   U.S. OPINION ROUNDUP: THE BOSNIAN ARMS EMBARGO'S IRANIAN CONNECTION

   ANDREW N. GUTHRIE
   WASHINGTON

   Last week "The Los Angeles Times" reported that President
Clinton, during the heart of the Balkan civil war, chose to
ignore Bosnia's acquiring arms from Iran, in defiance of the U.N.
arms embargo. Critics say the United States, in effect, approved
of the arms purchases. The story has generated substantial
controversy in Washington and in the editorial pages of the
nation's newspapers. Republicans, who at the time chafed under
the U.N. mandated arms embargo against the combatants, are now
demanding a congressional investigation of the U.S. policy.
   "The Times" reported that President Clinton had told Croatian
President Tudjman the U.S. had "no position" on the question of
Iranian arms shipments crossing Croatia for the beleaguered
Bosnian-government army. This was at a time when the
Muslim-controlled forces of Bosnia-Herzegovina were losing ground
to a well-equipped Bosnian Serb militia, apparently getting
weapons through the blockade from Serbia.
   The revelation that the United States did not object to the
Iranian arms sales is being criticized on at least two fronts.
One, is that it violated official U.S. policy and was, therefore,
hypocritical at the least, and secondly, that it gave the Islamic
regime in Iran a "foothold" [or connection] in Europe. However,
some papers see as hypocritical Republican calls for a
congressional investigation of the president for doing what many
of them were aggressively calling for, that is, to ignore or find
holes in the embargo policy to help the Bosnian government get
arms to defend itself. We begin our sampling in New England,
where "The Hartford Courant" says, in part:
   "...The United States is a member of the United Nations, which
had imposed the arms embargo on Bosnia. The U.S. government
officially went along with the prohibition... Branding Iran's
government an exporter of terrorism and looking the other way
when Tehran exports arms and fighters to Bosnia is improper. Or
does Mr. Clinton consider hypocrisy to be acceptable government
practice?"
   Elsewhere in New England, "The Boston Globe" is also highly
critical of the U.S. position:
   "President Clinton exhibited bad judgment in 1994 when he
approved secret shipments of arms from Iran to the Muslims of
Bosnia. In retrospect, it might be argued that [Mr.] Clinton's
complicity in violating the U.N. arms embargo on the former
Yugoslavia was justifiable as the lesser of two evils...
Nevertheless, [President] Clinton was ignoring sound principles
and making bad policy when he instructed U.S. diplomats to tell
Croatian strongman Franjo Tudjman...that Washington would not
object to the activation of an Iranian arms pipeline to the
Bosnians. the passive permission of Iranian arms transfers should
not be confounded with Ronald Reagan's active delivery of U.S.
missiles to Ayatollah Khomeini's military. But the folly of
conducting a secret policy that contradicts official policy is
the same in both cases."
   In California, the paper that reported the story, "The Los
Angeles Times", harks back to an earlier scandal involving arms
and Iran that clouded the presidency of Mr. Clinton's
predecessor:
   "Yes, the White House decision helped level the field in the
Bosnian war, but surely the administration should have been more
sensitive to the Iranian factor. Iran-Contra is not even in the
history books yet. The Clinton Administration, like its
predecessors, has pursued a policy of containing Iranian
influence beyond the Persian Gulf. Why then did the
administration choose to tacitly endorse Iran's shipment of arms?
Weren't there some other options at that time, including putting
the question of the U.N. arms embargo back on the table? Fallout
[consequences] from the disclosures has begun and President
Clinton is feeling the pressure in an election year. Senate
majority leader Bob Dole... Called the details 'disturbing news'
and asked pertinent Senate committees to investigate... The White
House says it was observing the letter of the U.N. embargo, but
the guns were going into Bosnia, with U.S. knowledge. And each
shipment built Iranian influence there."
   "Hold on just a minute", says "The Christian Science Monitor",
with regard to the cries of outrage from Republicans, including
Senate majority leader and presidential candidate Bob Dole.
Finding some way around the arms blockade to help the Bosnian
government, the paper reminds readers, was exactly the policy the
Republicans espoused at the time:
   "...It's ironic to hear Senator Dole and others now calling
for an investigation of reports that the administration knew of
the Iranian shipments... The people [Congressional Republicans]
who demanded the U.S. violate international law by lifting the
arms embargo are now condemning the president for, in effect,
doing what they wanted done?"
   And lastly, "The Washington Times" makes clear it does not
agree with "The Monitor" at all:
   "The Iranian mullahs must be rubbing their hands in glee.
Through the delivery of much needed arms to the Bosnian Muslims
since 1994, it has established a bridgehead in Europe. All the
president has to say, faced as he is with several congressional
probes of U.S. acquiescence in the Iranian involvement is, 'there
was absolutely nothing improper done.' that depends on how you
define improper, but certainly this policy was duplicitous and
foolish in the extreme. And it is not as though there were no
alternatives, either."
   "The Washington Times" goes on to suggest that either Turkey
or Saudi Arabia "would have been infinitely preferable to the
Ayatollahs of teheran" to supply arms to the Bosnian military.
And on that critical note, we conclude this brief sampling of
U.S. editorial comment on the news that Washington did not
interfere with Iranian arms shipments to Bosnia-Herzegovina at
the height of the U.N. embargo against all sides in the Balkan
conflict.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CLINTON TO APPEAR IN TELEVISION MOVIE

   DAVID BORGIDA
   WHITE HOUSE

   The Clinton White House confirms reports president Clinton
will make his acting debut in a television movie to be broadcast
after the November presidential election.
   Former President Ronald Reagan was a professional actor before
he became president. Now President Clinton can at least claim
some real professional experience as a thespian.
   He will play himself in a television movie called "A Child's
Wish" about a young cancer victim who desperately wants to meet
the president. Her father loses his job because he spends too
much time with her.
   Clinton spokesman Mike McCurry says the president liked the
idea because it highlights one of his favorite legislative
accomplishments, the 1993 family medical leave act, which allows
workers up to 12 weeks unpaid leave to attend to urgent family
business.
   A film crew will come to the White House Oval Office in May to
shoot the scene with the president.
   President Clinton will donate the five hundred dollars he
earns to the "Make A Wish Foundation", which grants wishes to
seriously-ill children.
   No word yet on whether the president, who is known for veering
off course in speeches, will stick to his script.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CLINTON RETIREMENT POLITICS

   DAVID BORGIDA
   WHITE HOUSE

   President Clinton continues to press his election-year
domestic agenda, offering middle-class voters a new proposal to
ease their worries about the future.
   He has not yet formally declared his candidacy but it is no
secret President Clinton is seeking re-election.
   Thursday he tried to assure middle-class American voters he
cares about their future, proposing at a rose garden ceremony
legislation he believes will open pension plans for more
Americans and impose stiffer safeguards to protect their savings:
   "With the retirement savings and security act, we can help to
make retirement something Americans can look forward to, not
dread. Where their hard-working retirement earnings are
concerned, we can give Americans peace of mind."
   According to the Clinton White House, 51 million Americans are
not covered by an employer pension plan and millions do not have
a savings plan. Seventy-five per cent of those who work for small
businesses do not have any retirement plan.
   Labor Secretary Robert Reich briefed reporters on the proposal
and he says as he travels around the country, he hears a common
complaint:
   "I talk to them about their problems, and issues and dreams
and what's on their minds, and so often they say to me
'retirement, pensions, saving, I'm not sure I'm going to be able
to do it. I'm worried about not having it there for my wife, for
my husband, for me, for my children.'"
   With the election campaign against the presumptive Republican
presidential nominee Senate majority leader Bob Dole heating up,
the future of this legislation is unclear.
   Secretary Reich denies it was introduced for political
purposes only, and he says it has bipartisan support. But
introduction of the legislation follows administration steps with
considerable voter appeal. In recent weeks, President Clinton has
pressed for approval of an increase in the minimum wage for
unskilled workers. He has called for speedier federal approval of
cancer-fighting drugs, and Friday he highlights his
accomplishments on the trade front.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   "FIRST FAMILIES" EXHIBIT

   PENELOPE SOUQUET
   NEW YORK

   Family letters are rarely intended for public display,
especially when they are written by American presidents. But
those are just what are now on exhibit in New York, personal
letters of American presidents that shed new light on these
public figures.
   The exhibit at the Forbes Magazine Gallery provides the public
with a glimpse into the family lives of American leaders. Robert
Forbes, vice-president of the Forbes company, thinks it is a new
and interesting way to look at the role of the president:
   "We thought this would be a fun way to look at the presidency.
The idea of first families. Who are these people who become
president? It's the idea that presidents are people too. They
have families and all the problems and passions inherent there.
They've got nephews importuning (asking) them for jobs, they've
got kids who need a letter from dad saying why they're not going
to be at school that day, they have financial problems, they're
sending along gifts, they're looking for a pension after their
husbands died. Who are these people? So that's the genesis of the
show itself and that's why we have some of the pieces here that
we do."
   Robert Forbes' late father, the publisher Malcolm Forbes,
started collecting presidential letters and memorabilia when he
was a student at Princeton University, approximately 50 years
ago. Robyn Tromeur (tro-mer'), assistant curator for the "First
Families" display, says it was relatively easy to obtain such
documents at the time:
   "People were not interested in American history. There were
not presidential libraries like there are now like the Reagan
Library, the JFK Library, etc. So these things were up for grabs
and Malcolm actually purchased many of these pieces for a
bargain. People didn't care and it's only recently that they do."
   The first letter Malcolm Forbes acquired was written in 1865
by the 16th American president Abraham Lincoln to the secretary
of war, asking him to find flags for his son tad. Malcolm Forbes'
sons Steve and Robert Forbes continued acquiring autographs,
letters and pictures, and they now own about four thousand
pieces.
   The current exhibit only displays those letters which are
centered around the presidents' family lives. One of the more
popular letters is a top secret memo written by President John F.
Kennedy on which his daughter caroline doodled. Another is 33rd
President Harry Truman's letter to a Washington Post music critic
who severely criticized the president's daughter's singing
ability. Mr. Truman threatens the critic: "Someday I hope to meet
you. When that happens you'll need a new nose, a lot of beef
steak for black eyes and perhaps a supporter below!"
   Letters like these, says Robert Forbes, show that presidents
are "real" people:
   "When you take the time to read some of the letters, it shows
that there is a lot more to these people than just these icons we
put on dollar bills, have framed elsewhere and put on Mount
Rushmore. They're real people. This is aimed to show that they
are."
   The letters, all originals, are sometimes difficult to read
because of illegible handwriting and because of fading ink.
   Robert Forbes says since this is an election year in the
United States, the public seems to be more interested in
"presidential things" such as these letters.
   The exhibit also includes a section of letters written by
first ladies. Ms. Tromeur describes as "pitiful" a letter written
by Mary Todd Lincoln, wife of President Lincoln:
   "This is after the assassination of Lincoln, and she is
basically pleading for help. She is claiming that she is
destitute. And she cannot believe the country has turned their
back on her. She has not or will not receive a pension as first
lady. That was not instituted yet and it was really because of
Mary Todd Lincoln that they started to think, well maybe we
should take care of the first ladies after the presidents are
deceased. But it's just a pitiful letter where she is literally
begging for some money. But in reality, Congress didn't know what
to make of these letters because Mary was known to take jaunts to
Europe where she would stay on and off, she went on wild spending
sprees, so they didn't really know what the truth was. But
nonetheless, five years after Lincoln's death she actually did
receive a pension of three thousand dollars a year."
   Robert Forbes says that sharing these letters "is the most
fun" for the organizers of the exhibit, adding that otherwise it
would be useless to own them.
   The Forbes Magazine Gallery was opened 10 years ago. Its other
displays include toy boats and toy soldiers, old monopoly board
games, American historical papers, and art objects by the Russian
jeweler Faberge (fah-bare-zhay). All of the collections are owned
by the Forbes family.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   PRESIDENT VETOES LATE-TERM ABORTION BAN

   ANDREW J. BAROCH
   WASHINGTON

   U.S. President Bill Clinton has vetoed congressional
legislation that would have banned a rare but gruesome method of
abortion.
   Abortion providers performing a "D-and-X" procedure extract
the fetus from the womb feet-first. When only the head remains
inside, its brain is suctioned out. The suctioning allows the
head to then pass through the birth canal.
   But it also conceals a "cruel and barbaric procedure", says
Douglas Johnson, the legislative director for the National Right
to Life Committee in Washington, DC:
   "It involves the abortion doctor grabbing the legs o: the baby
and literally pulling the baby's body out feet first into the
birth canal and leaving only the head just within the womb,
because, you see, if the head emerged, then it would be a live
birth. That baby would be protected by the constitution and the
homicide laws in every state. So [Florida Republican] congressman
Charles Canady, who has sponsored this bill, put it very well, I
think, when he said 'the difference between a partial-birth
abortion and homicide is about three inches.'"
   An estimated 500 D-and-X abortions are performed each year,
according to the Alan Guttmacher (goot-mahker) Institute, a
research group sympathetic with abortion rights advocates.
   Cory Richards, the institute's vice president for public
policy, says that the small figure roughly translates to
five-one-hundredths of one percent of the one-and-a half-million
abortions performed each year in the United States.
   Mr. Richards says that while the procedure is rare, in his
view, it is still necessary:
   "Obviously, women under certain circumstances in the middle
stages of pregnancy, sometimes require abortion procedures. They
require them either because their own lives are gravely at risk,
or because they are carrying fetuses that are very severely
deformed and, in most instances, won't live past birth in any
case."
   In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court declared that a woman has a
constitutional right to an abortion. It lifted restrictions on
early-term procedures, that is, up to three months, but gave the
states authority to put limits on later abortions. While 41
states now restrict later procedures, most state laws grant
exemptions for health-related reasons.
   Abortion opponents say those reasons are now loosely
interpreted to include depression and other emotional and
psychological problems, which are frivolous reasons, in the
opinion of Douglas Johnson of the right to life committee. He
says that very few Americans apparently know that these late-term
procedures take place and that about 500 are D-and-X abortions:
   "The Gallup poll, and other polls, have shown that most
Americans believe, quite wrongly, that abortion is legal only in
the first three months of pregnancy, and yet even the Alan
Guttmacher Institute [a research group, which is sympathetic to
abortion rights groups] has reported there are over 160,000
abortions a year that are done in the fourth month or later."
   Mr. Johnson says the legislation was, in his words, partly an
"educational exercise." As he puts it, "we want people to be
aware that abortions are being performed on unborn human beings,
20 weeks and beyond, when they look like babies and have a
capacity to feel pain."
   But the goal of those backing the legislation was actually far
more ambitious, according to Cory Richards of the Guttmacher
Institute:
   "They may choose at this moment to say, 'an abortion at 23
weeks is worthy of being banned.' But the fact of the matter is,
if you ask them, 'well, would you prefer abortion procedures that
take place at 12 weeks or at eight weeks, when most abortion
procedures do take place?', they say, 'those abortions are
equally immoral.' So I think it's disingenuous to be
concentrating on this particular type of procedure, as though
this is really what they're out to stop."
   Under the legislation passed by Congress, and vetoed by
President Clinton, an abortion provider performing a D-and-X
procedure would have been charged with a felony, and faced up to
two years in prison.
   Vicki Saporta (suh-port-uh), the executive director of the
National Abortion Federation, which represents some
three-thousand abortion providers, says that if Mr. Clinton
hadn't vetoed the measure, as she sees it, Congress would have
"criminalized doctors for performing surgery":
   "Any surgical technique could be made to appear frightening or
made so that it's misrepresented or inflammatory. I think what it
boils down to is that congress does not belong in the business of
banning medical techniques. Doctors should be allowed to perform
surgery based on their medical knowledge, experience, expertise.
And women want doctors to be performing surgery based on those
factors, not on the right wing's political agenda in this
country."
   The conservative Republican Party, which gained control of
Congress last year for the first time in 40 years, is heavily
influenced by anti-abortion, and other religious, conservative,
organizations. But its influence is stronger in the House of
Representatives, where the bill was overwhelmingly approved. In
the U.S. senate, it passed by four votes. A wider margin would be
needed to override the president's veto.
   At a White House ceremony earlier this week, Mr. Clinton
indicated that he had some reservations about his decision. And
he repeated them in a letter to cardinal Joseph Bernardin
(burr-nar-deen) of Chicago. Mr. Clinton stated that he does not
"support the use of this procedure on an elective basis where it
is not necessary to save the life of the woman or prevent serious
risks to her health." Most public opinion surveys show that while
a majority of Americans believe a woman has the right to an
abortion, a large percentage believes the procedures should be
subject to stricter limits.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   EXPERTS ANALYZE ROLE OF RON BROWN IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

   JIM FISHER-THOMPSON
   WASHINGTON

   Former Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was not only a superb
salesman for American business overseas but also a political
healer whose abilities helped make it possible for a unified
Democratic Party to help sweep Bill Clinton to victory in the
presidential election of 1992, two political analysts have said.
   Ron Walters, chairman of Howard University's Department of
Political Science, recently discussed the role of Ron Brown in
presidential elections with Bonnie Erbe, journalist and host of
the Public Broadcasting Service's (PBS's) show "To the Contrary,"
American television's first all-female news analysis program.
   Speaking just the day after the tragic plane crash in Croatia
that took the life of Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and 34 others
who were on a trade mission to the Balkans, Walters praised Brown
as an expert political operative as well as a superb trade
advocate.
   Noting that he and Brown, who was the senior African-American
official in the U.S. government, had worked together on
Democratic Party presidential campaigns in the 1980s, Walters
said, "Ron had confronted racism all his life, but he always had
the feeling that he could overcome it, and that is one of the
reasons he was so valuable in Jesse Jackson's presidential
campaign of 1988."
   He was a "political go-between" or liaison, Walters said,
"between the establishment Democratic Party and those of us in
the Jackson campaign who considered ourselves political
progressives."
   In this role, Walters said, Brown was the person who kept the
disparate elements of the Democratic Party together and unified
behind a candidate whom whites as well as minorities could agree
to work for. Brown was later rewarded for his political savvy by
being made chairman of the National Democratic Party, a role he
used to help propel Bill Clinton into the White House.
   As the first African-American named to head the Democratic
Party, Bonnie Erbe noted, Brown was instrumental in positioning
the party back to the center of the political spectrum, where
Americans feel the most comfortable.
   During the few years prior to 1992, when the Democrats had not
won a presidential election for 12 years, Erbe said, Brown "was
able to pull the party back together, heal divisions, and make
Democrats, who were very downtrodden at the time, feel proud
again."
   Brown, she explained, was a very "credible liaison" to what
most political analysts identify as a "core" group of supporters
in the Democratic Party -- African-Americans.
   Erbe said she thought Brown's real, "lasting legacy was that
he was one of only a handful of Americans, white or black, who in
the last 30 years has been able to cross the color line and
operate effectively in both communities."
   So "he will be sorely missed," she emphasized, "because he had
credibility among whites and blacks, was able to speak in both
communities, and could bring them together."
   Interestingly, said Erbe, "I don't know how much our African
audience knows about the distinction between our two major
parties, the Democrats and Republicans, but the Republican Party
has always been seen as the party of big business and Ron Brown,
more than anybody, was working to change that."
   Brown was fairly successful in ending that stereotype, she
said, and "this most recent trip where he died was one
indication, because he had a number of big business leaders with
him."
   Actually, said Erbe, "Brown was doing this constantly --
taking business executives on trade missions abroad -- making
them realize the Democratic administration cared about them and
creating all kinds of overseas investments by U.S. corporations.
There is really nobody who can step in and do that immediately."
   In addition, said Walters, in the area of campaign financing,
which is always of importance to presidential campaigns, Brown
set a new trend as a Democratic Party activist. "As chairman of
the party he raised more money than any previous chairman.
Therefore, when Bill Clinton got ready to run, he found a
well-funded apparatus in place that was very helpful to him."
   One of Brown's innovations in campaign financing, Walters
explained, was the system of "coordinated campaigns," where, he
explained, "the party, at the local and national level, puts in
certain amounts of money and does a certain amount of
campaigning" to support local candidates for office as well as
the presidential nominee.
   Asked how Brown's death might affect President Clinton's
campaign for the November 1996 election, Erbe said, "One of the
things that is very important for President Clinton's victory is
solidifying the vote of the African-American community, and Ron
Brown was key to that."
   Although it seems Clinton has already captured that support,
Erbe cautioned that "we are still over eight months away from the
election and anything can happen."
   Problems could arise for the Democrats in keeping that vote
locked up, she added, if the Republican presidential candidate
Senator Bob Dole is successful in convincing retired General
Colin Powell to be his vice presidential running mate.
   U.S. Army General Powell, who is the retired African-American
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is the architect of the
U.S.-led coalition that triumphed in the 1991 war against Iraq
and is immensely popular, among both whites and blacks, as a
presidential contender.
   Even though Powell, a declared Republican, announced that he
would not seek political office this year, Erbe said, "Senator
Dole is reportedly still wooing him and we won't know about that
until the Republican Party's national convention this summer."
   The fund-raising aspect for the Democratic Party is critical,
said Walters, because President Clinton "is going to need over
$100 million to be competitive in this presidential season."
   He added that, "of course, the Democratic Party has become
pretty good at raising money -- $20 million so far -- but there
is a lot more that has to come in and Ron Brown, knowing half the
corporate leaders in America on a first-name basis, would have
been able to raise a lot of that money, so his is going to be a
major, major loss."
   Again on the organizational and liaison level, Walters said
Brown will be missed because "here was someone who knew the
Democratic Party's setup intimately" and how it works to get
candidates elected.
   The scholar concluded that "in the mesh between the
president's political strategists and campaign people and the
party," Brown was an important "fixer." So, "just in terms of his
personal advice to the president, he will be a definite loss."
   ---------------

   ---------------
   ROSTENKOWSKI VOWS TO MAKE A COMEBACK

   PAUL FRANCUCH
   CHICAGO

   One of the most powerful members of the United States Congress
in recent decades is going to prison after pleading guilty to
charges of official corruption in office. Former Democratic
Congressman Dan Rostenkowski of Chicago made the plea in a
federal court in Washington DC Tuesday. However, the former
congressman vows to make a political return when his sentence is
over.
   A five-year-long investigation which began at a low level in
the U.S. Congress eventually spread to the office of Congressman
Rostenkowski, the long-time chairman of the powerful tax-writing
Ways and Means Committee, and a man whose power and influence was
seen in the many public projects around Chicago paid through
federal dollars wangled by the influence of the long-time
Democratic Congressman.
   Dan Rostenkowski was a man who presidents turned to in hopes
of winning his influence in shepherding important legislation.
Even with the possibility of a federal indictment looming ahead
in 1994, President Clinton came to Chicago to campaign on behalf
of Dan Rostenkowski.
   But President Clinton's support was not enough to stop the
Justice Department from handing down a 17-count criminal
corruption indictment against Rostenkowski. That forced him to
give up his chair of the Ways and Means Committee. But it did not
stop him from running later in the year for a 19th term in
Congress. Unfortunately for Rostenkowski, the allegations of
wrongdoing were too much to persuade his normally loyal
constituents in the safe Democratic district of Chicago to
re-elect him.
   The investigation continued. Rostenkowski maintained his
innocence. Shortly after the indictments were handed down, the
federal government's attorney heading up the investigation, Eric
Holder, struck an agreement with Rostenkowski's attorney for a
plea bargain which would trade a six-month jail term and a 38,000
dollar fine for admitting to just one count in the indictment.
Rostenkowski turned it down. Attorney holder at the time said the
alternative was a trial with the promise of a lengthy prison term
upon conviction:
   "If the congressman were convicted of all the offenses that he
stands charged with, he would spend several years in jail. But I
have not added up all the possibilities."
   Following his defeat, Rostenkowski left Washington and
returned to Chicago where he resumed his residence in his modest
home in the city. But the corruption probe continued and
associates accused of being on the congressman's payroll yet
doing little or no work were being prosecuted and convicted. Dan
Rostenkowski's legal bills were reportedly running into the
millions of dollars. Federal prosecutors promised a thorough
trial where many of the former congressmen's friends and
relatives would be subpoenaed to testify. The combination of the
costs and the anguish reportedly forced Rostenkowski to plead
guilty to a lesser charge, two federal counts on mail fraud.
   But emerging from federal court in Washington late Tuesday,
Dan Rostenkowski sounded more like a man who did nothing many
other members of Congress did, or who had any feelings of guilt:
   "Having pled guilty, I do not believe that I am any different
than the vast majority of the members of Congress and their
staffs who have experienced enormous difficulty in determining
whether particular services by congressional employees should be
classified as congressional, political or personal."
   Dan Rostenkowski must report within the next month to what is
likely to be a minimum security federal prison near Chicago. He
is to serve a 17-month sentence, which could be reduced. While in
prison, the ex-congressman will continue to draw nearly 100,000
dollars a year from his retirement pension. And Dan Rostenkowski
says when his prison term is over, he plans to return to public
life.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   WHITEWATER TRIAL UPDATE

   JANE BERGER
   WASHINGTON

   A federal corruption trial involving close associates of
President Clinton is now in its second month in (the southern
state of) Arkansas.
   Arkansas Governor Jim Guy Tucker and two former business
associates of President Clinton, Jim and Susan McDougal, are
standing trial in federal court on charges of financial fraud.
The three have been accused of conspiracy to illegally obtain
over three million dollars from two loan institutions backed by
federal funds. Both institutions eventually went bankrupt, and
their failure cost taxpayers an estimated 70 million dollars.
   The charges stem from a wide-ranging investigation by an
independent counsel appointed to look into into President
Clinton's involvement in the failed Whitewater land development
deal in Arkansas when he served as that state's governor. The
president and his wife, Hillary, have not been accused of any
wrongdoing, but many questions remain unanswered about their role
in the Whitewater project.
   One of the president's partners in the failed Whitewater deal,
Jim McDougal, owned the Madison savings and loan bank. That bank
is one of two institutions at the heart of the special counsel's
investigation. The other is a private loan company owned by
former Arkansas municipal judge David Hale, who was once a friend
of President Clinton's, but is now his political enemy.
   Mr. Hale is the chief prosecution witness, and his testimony
is considered the crucial element in the trial. Mr. Hale has
already pleaded guilty to loan fraud charges in a plea bargain
agreement with federal prosecutors. He agreed to testify against
governor tucker and the McDougals in exchange for a grant of
immunity from further prosecution and a 28-month prison sentence,
much shorter than the term he could have received.
   Mr. Hale has said he took part in illegal loan deals with Mr.
Tucker and the McDougals. He has also said that President
Clinton, while governor, urged him to complete illegal loan
transactions to benefit Mr. McDougal. President Clinton has
repeatedly denied Mr. Hale's allegations and says he took no part
in conversations about the illegal loans.
   Defense attorneys for governor tucker and the McDougals say
Mr. Hale lied about the loan transactions to protect himself from
charges of further wrongdoing and to receive a more lenient jail
term.
   Late this month, President Clinton is expected to give
videotaped testimony at the Arkansas trial. His statements are
expected to be a crucial factor in the jury's decision to acquit
or convict the state's Democratic Governor and Mr. Clinton's two
former business partners.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CLINTON MAKES FULL USE OF STATUS AS UNDECLARED CANDIDATE
   By Alexander M. Sullivan

   The only undeclared presidential candidate is making full use
of his status.
   He, of course, is Bill Clinton, the incumbent, the presumptive
nominee of the Democratic Party once he announces his candidacy
and a politician free to shun publicly any political motivation.
   White House Press Secretary Mike McCurry continues to insist
that the president will make his plans known at the "appropriate
time," presumably before the Democratic nominating convention
convenes in Chicago in August.
   Meanwhile, Clinton makes no secret of the fact that he enjoys
the air up there, far above the partisan fray. "I think we should
put off politics for a little longer," he says with a straight
face.
   Clinton has suggested a temporary truce, postponing partisan
debate on the issues until some unspecified time later in the
year. Clinton backs up that invitation by noting that he and his
opponent are both public servants collecting salaries paid for by
the taxes of Democrats, Republicans and independents.
   Congress is in its Easter recess and the Republican
nominee-in-waiting, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, has been
resting up from a grueling primary schedule and the ardors of
late-session legislating. Whether enjoying the Florida sunshine
or down-home visits with his wife's relatives in North Carolina,
Dole has been relatively quiet, so Clinton has had the
no-politics stage to himself. This too, of course, shall pass.
   Given the fact that Americans continually tell public opinion
pollsters of their minimal regard for politicians of any stripe,
it's apparently a great electoral advantage to adopt a
non-partisan stance and hold it for as long as possible.
   Clinton is not the first president who has found it useful to
shun political warfare while manning the partisan battlements;
nor is he the first to complain that political campaigns go on
forever, a proposition with which most Americans would agree. As
Clinton noted recently, the 1996 election campaign started "the
second I took my hand off the Bible" after taking the oath of
office in 1993.
   "I think I should do my job and Senator Dole should do his,"
Clinton asserts, "and we should not have a work stoppage (because
of political considerations) between now and November just
because we've got an election."
   Such a posture by an incumbent has always been one of the more
fascinating aspects of the American electoral process. Almost by
definition, the man who wins the White House is the pre-eminent
politician of his time, having survived the long trek of party
caucuses, state nominating (primary) elections, the national
nominating convention, and the general election, to take up
residence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
   Once he demonstrates his pre-eminence as a politician, a
president frequently finds it to his benefit to proclaim that
he's the leader of all the people, and not a politician carrying
the standard of his political party.
   That's a posture that allows a president to insist his motives
for any action are as pure as the driven snow and motivated by no
consideration other than the national interest. It also allows
him, more in sorrow than anger, to disparage his opponents as
short-sighted politicians intent on thwarting his own idealistic
initiatives or in furthering their own selfish interests.
   President Clinton shows how it's done. Once he had delivered
his most recent invitation to non-partisanship, the president had
no trouble in shifting political gears, in the same news
conference, to nitty-gritty vituperation.
   Taking note that some Republicans criticized his selections
for the federal bench, the president explained at length the
excellence of his choices and the accolades most had received
from the American Bar Association. As for why Republicans would
criticize, the president asserted, "The people on the other side
are sort of embarrassed about their ... record" on crime
legislation. "Now they think they can sort of get well by making
some outrageous claims about the judges I have appointed."
   Sooner or later, partisanship will inevitably take center
stage, the stump speech Clinton has been practicing will be
delivered with full-fledged partisan feeling, and Dole will
unlimber his noted mordant wit. Until then, America's political
junkies must pursue an unaccustomed virtue -- patience.
   ---------------
   
   ----------------
   POTENTIAL VICE PRESIDENTIAL RUNNING MATES DISCUSSED

   Continuing its series on potential vice presidential running
mates for expected Republican presidential nominee Bob Dole, the
American Political Network's Hotline reported on these interviews
with political observers:
   -- Weekly Standard publisher/editor Bill Kristol said even
though Colin Powell has publicly declared he is not interested in
public office, the retired Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman is "a
very popular and well-respected American" who would "change the
ticket more than anyone else." He said it would be "the strongest
ticket in terms of stature and character than one can imagine."
But, Kristol added, if Powell wouldn't be a good candidate
"unless he really wants to," and if he won't run, Dole can find
other ways to use him, such as announcing Powell would be a key
member of his national security team.
   -- Former Republican National Committee co-chair Neanie Austin
said Florida Senator Connie Mack "has the strong ability to unify
different factions. He's been the peacemaker in some major
squabbles that we've had intra-party." Mack has been "a good
supportive party person in helping us with fund-raising around
the country," Austin said. She said she has not discussed with
Mack whether he even wants the job but "in politics we all have
egos or we wouldn't be in this. You have to be flattered to be
mentioned."
   -- Dole campaign political adviser Jay Smith, supporting the
potential candidacy of Arizona Senator John McCain, said McCain
"has emerged as one of the most respected voices in either party
on foreign policy" and is "a strong conservative Republican with
compassion for people and people issues." Smith said that McCain,
who was a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam, "would serve to reinforce
Bob Dole's special status as an American war hero" during World
War Two. Smith added that if Ross Perot were to enter the
presidential race, Arizona could not be regarded "as a sure thing
for Republicans" and having someone on the ticket from the West
"would be helpful."
   -- Dole campaign political adviser Don Devine, discussing
California Attorney General Dan Lungren, said he would target "an
important geographical location" -- California -- and "a critical
constituency" -- the Catholic vote. What putting Lungren on the
ticket would do, Devine said, "is guarantee that Bill Clinton has
to spend $15 million or maybe even $20 million in California
because he just can't take the chance that somebody on the ticket
from California isn't going to take it." And he said the
Catholics have not had somebody on the Republican ticket before,
except in 1964, when nobody even knew the candidate was a
Catholic.
   ---------------
   
   ----------------
   POLL SHOWS CLINTON MAINTAINING COMFORTABLE LEAD OVER DOLE

   The latest public opinion poll taken by the New York Times/CBS
News shows President Clinton maintaining a comfortable lead over
presumed Republican presidential nominee Bob Dole (49 percent to
39 percent) even though the Senate majority leader showed
considerable strength against the president on such traits as
leadership, personal values and a vision for the country.
   Analysts said many voters indicated they want the president
re-elected if for no other reason than as a check on the
Republican Congress. The analysts also said the public's
favorable image of the Republican Party has sunk to a low of 41
percent, in part because the party is blamed for several
government shut-downs during the winter, and in part because of
an impatience with House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
   According to the poll, which was based on randomly selected
telephone interviews with 1,257 adults throughout the United
States, if Ross Perot entered the race again as a third party
candidate, he would take votes evenly from Clinton and Dole and
would draw 18 percent of the vote, almost matching his 1992
totals of 19 percent.
   But as evidence that a Clinton-Dole match up might become
competitive, the poll found similar job ratings and personal
favorability ratings for the two men.
   ---------------
   
   ----------------
   AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION GIVES DOLE AN 87 PERCENT RANKING

   According to the American Conservative Union (ACU), which
studies the voting patterns of members of Congress and rates them
on a conservative-to-liberal scale, Senate Majority Leader Bob
Dole ranks 87 percent as a conservative but that is solidly in
the middle of his Republican colleagues.
   Seven Republican senators registered scores of 100, denoting
perfect agreement with the ACU legislative agenda. The lowest
rating for a Republican senator was 23. Dole's 87 was higher than
25 Republicans and lower than 28 others, recognizing him as a
"moderate conservative."
   On the House side, the ACU gave perfect 100 scores to 31
legislators, including House Speaker Newt Gingrich.
    ---------------
    
    ----------------
   SENATOR BRADLEY PRESSING FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
   By Judy Aita

   Senator Bill Bradley piqued the interest of American voters
and political analysts early in the presidential process with
provocative statements suggesting that anybody within the
Democratic Party could step up and challenge President Clinton in
1996.
   However, Bradley -- a former professional athlete, scholar and
Democrat who represents New Jersey -- decided that he would not
be the one to challenge the president. But Bradley has embarked
on a unique campaign of his own that will keep him in public
life.
   Since announcing that he also would not seek a third term in
the Senate, Bradley has been traveling to promote his new memoir
"Time Present, Time Past." But the book tour provides
opportunities to bring the conversation around to the new role he
intends to play in American politics -- engineering fundamental
political reform in the United States primarily through radical
campaign finance overhaul.
   "I'm in this for the long haul to try to figure out a way to
do politics in a new way, to get beyond the politics of sound
bites, attack ads, focus group praises, and massive amounts of
special interest money," the senator said at a recent press
conference in New York.
   Bradley said that as he traveled around the country in the
last several months he found that "the public yearning for a
system where money plays less of a role and distorts democracy
less is palpable."
   The senator predicts that the changes are going to take place
"in the states, not in Washington," but says that the "first
thing needed is a constitutional amendment."
   Citing the fact that Ross Perot spent about $63 million of his
own money on his run for the presidency in 1992, and Steve Forbes
about $30 million in 1996, Bradley said that "the Supreme Court
decision that says that in free speech terms a rich man's wallet
is the equivalent of a poor man's soap box is ludicrous....The
point is that it's a vast imbalance in the political process."
   Bradley's other changes include limiting the amount of money
that can be spent in a state primary to what can be raised within
that state and to contributions of no more than $200 or $300;
financing the general election through a "Senate elections fund"
that is divided equally between Democrats, Republicans and
qualified independents in early September; and asking local radio
and television stations to make time available to each Senate
candidate to make his or her case.
   Bradley readily admits that when he mentions his proposals in
Washington people roll their eyes in disbelief. "It may never
happen; (the system) may be too entrenched; money may be too
powerful. But I believe there is building pressure out there and
it should be the focus for organizing for the long term," he
said.
   Bradley also discussed how difficult it is for independent or
third party candidates to get a foothold, let alone succeed, in
presidential campaigns.
   "If you're a Democrat you have to decide: do you challenge the
president in the primary? I decided no. If you're an independent
you have to decide how do you do that and you suddenly face all
these obstacles," Bradley said.
   "Let us not assume because somebody is immediately a third
party candidate, has $63 million he can dump on the election
process, that that means that person is a remotely possible
winner," the senator pointed out. "It's very difficult for a
third party to emerge in America in any significant sense to
challenge the Electoral College."
   In 1992, Perot "got 19 percent of the popular vote, but the
popular vote is not where the presidential elections are won.
Presidential elections are won in the Electoral College --
essentially 50 winner-take-all elections," he said. "So in 1992
Ross Perot got fewer electoral votes -- zero -- than Strom
Thurmond got in 1948 when he ran as a 'Dixiecrat' and won four
states in the South."
   The current U.S. system perpetuates a "two-party monopoly"
through money and ballot access, he said.
   "As soon as you get your party's nomination, you get $72
million -- Republican and Democrat. An independent gets zero and
you have to raise (funds) in $1,000 contributions," Bradley
pointed out.
   "The most money raised in $1,000 contributions was by George
Bush. In 1992 as the sitting president, he raised about $20
million. So if you're an independent you have to raise four times
the most money that has ever been raised by anybody in American
politics in order to get on an equal playing field," Bradley
said.
   To get on the ballot in many states "you need more signatures
than somebody who's a Republican or Democrat," the senator said.
"The rules of the game ... are enforced by the Federal Elections
Commission, which is (made up of) seven Republicans and seven
Democrats."
   But Bradley said that "it doesn't have to be that way in the
future. There is a wave building that will create unpredictable
flows .... There is a substantive opening for a third way in
America today that is rooted in the economic insecurity that
million of Americans feel in the midst of this economic
transformation."
    ---------------
    
    ----------------
    FREE TELEVISION TIME PROPOSED FOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
    By Charles Salter

   A group of high-level Americans in the fields of politics and
television have proposed a plan for television networks to
provide presidential candidates with two to five minutes of free
air time each evening during the final month of the election
campaign.
   The plan would have the networks broadcast the messages
simultaneously, providing airwaves "saturation" in an environment
that the creators hope will bring back many Americans who have
lost interest in the political debate. With this uninterrupted
time, candidates could focus on issues rather than on the kind of
negative character attacks that have plagued recent campaigns.
And they would be able to address the public without interference
from their rivals, the media or a moderator.
   This plan also would allow candidates whose funds are limited
by election laws to compete equally with those who fund their own
campaigns and are not so restricted.
   Voters would win with this plan, said USA Today.
"Broadcasters, who hold temporary permits to use the publicly
owned airwaves, have long acknowledged a responsibility to let
presidents speak directly to the people in prime time on
important occasions," the newspaper noted. "What could be more
important than the choice to be made November 5?"
   But according to David Bartlett, president of the Radio and TV
News Directions Association, it is a bad idea because "the last
people who should be allowed unfettered access to the airwaves or
the cable waves without journalistic scrutiny are politicians."
   Also, the owners of the major television networks are not
enthusiastic about the plan and argue that they would lose
millions of dollars in advertising revenue. Depending on the
program, air time can cost as much as $1 million every thirty
seconds.
   The originators of the plan argue that the free air time idea
can only be successful if all the networks participate.
Otherwise, they say, viewers may simply change to a network that
is not broadcasting a candidate's message.
   ---------------
      
   ----------------
   FIRST MEMBER OF CONGRESS OUSTED IN TEXAS PRIMARY RUNOFF

   Greg Laughlin of Texas, a Democrat-turned-Republican, has
become the first member of Congress to be ousted this year,
losing a primary runoff election April 9 to Ron Paul, a former
presidential candidate who ran on the Libertarian Party ticket in
1988 and then returned to the Republican Party. Laughlin, a
four-term congressman, was one of five Democrats who switched
parties after the 1994 Republican landslide. In November, Paul
will face Democrat Charles Morris, an attorney.
   In another upset in Texas, political unknown Victor Morales, a
high school teacher, won the Democratic Senate runoff over
seven-term Congressman John Bryant, who had given up his House
seat for the chance to challenge Republican Senator Phil Gramm in
November.
   ---------------
   
   ---------------
  JOURNALISTIC JUXTAPOSITIONS

   -- Syndicated columnist Joseph Sobran: "The political
establishment, including the courtier press, approves of the
Clinton-Dole match up, and will try hard to persuade the voters
that it's futile (or dangerous) to go outside the two-party
system. But Ross Perot has already proved that a large part of
the electorate won't buy that line anymore. The Forbes and
Buchanan campaigns revealed the level of discontent even within
the Republican Party; it surely exists among Democrats too. This
year the voters are the great unknown quantity. Alternative
parties can give them a chance to say how they really feel about
the kind of system that offers them a choice between political
Siamese twins like Bill Clinton and Bob Dole."
   -- Syndicated columnist Donald Lambro: "Lost in all the media
hype about the likelihood of Ross Perot mounting another quixotic
presidential campaign is the looming reality that he has lost
much of his grass-roots support. Republican Party officials,
activists and some state polls find there is not the same
emotional enthusiasm this year for the eccentric knight errant of
the Perotistas that there was in 1992....While he hopes to get on
the ballot in all 50 states by November, he is on the ballot in
only seven so far. Despite the belief this is a party driven by
democratic, grass-roots, reformist impulses, it is in fact being
promoted by paid professional workers employed by Ross Perot.
Meantime, whatever Mr. Perot decides to do when his party holds
its convention in Dallas on Labor Day, this is a candidacy that
is growing weaker each month."
   -- Roll Call executive editor Morton Kondracke: "There aren't
vast differences between Clinton and Dole on foreign policy. Both
are internationalists at a time when isolationism is gaining
ground. Both are free traders. Both respect the need to pursue
hard-headed U.S. national interests while still expressing
idealistic American values. Neither has invented a new U.S. grand
strategy for the post-Cold War era or even a regional 'doctrine.'
Both are inclined to grapple with issues on a case-by-case basis.
Still, a presidential campaign is under way and the two
candidates need to fight."
   -- New York Times correspondent Richard Berke: "As Clinton and
Dole try to drive the campaign dialogue, they will most likely
present themselves as unusually apolitical. Sensing that people
want performance, not more politics, both are already trying to
dress their ambition for the White House in policy trappings. It
could be that, in pursuing their own best interests, Clinton and
Dole might even cooperate occasionally....What now looks like the
longest general election campaign ever could turn out to be the
shortest, with Clinton sticking to a Rose Garden strategy (in the
White House) and Dole to a Rotunda strategy (on Capitol Hill)."
   -- USA Today columnist Walter Shapiro: "So many men and women
whom Clinton liked and trusted in the days before he became
president have vanished or been exiled from the inner
circle....Even if they have trained themselves to call him 'Mr.
President,' old friends cannot help thinking of him as 'Bill.'
Not so with new recruits. That is partly why (Commerce Secretary
Ron) Brown's death leaves such a void. Brown demonstrated his
loyalty as party chairman by rallying Democrats around the
nominee in those difficult days in the spring of 1992 when
Clinton was running a weak third in the polls behind George Bush
and Ross Perot. Debts like that cannot be forgotten. Nor can they
now, sadly enough, ever be fully repaid."
      ---------------
      
      ---------------
      PUNDIT PEARLS

   -- Georgetown University political scientist Stephen Wayne:
"Clinton is going to stress that he is a moderate, centrist
president, who is willing to compromise but wants to change
policy in a slow, careful, incremental way. The subtle contrast
here will be to the more extreme Republican positions, which are
at least extreme as he will describe them. On the other side, the
majority leader, Senator Dole, will try to focus not so much on
the Clinton administration as on President Clinton, as on Bill
Clinton. He will attempt to contrast his character as a war hero,
a person who was near death from injuries suffered in the second
world war. He will try to contrast that to Clinton, who did not
serve in the military and over whom allegations still hang with
respect to his dealings when he was governor of Arkansas."
   -- Former secretary of state and Republican presidential
campaign chairman James Baker: "In the end, the vote for
president is usually a referendum on the incumbent and the job he
is doing. Do you like the incumbent enough to renew his lease? Or
can we do better? Mr. Dole is action; Mr. Clinton is words. Mr.
Dole is solid, conservative and committed to reducing spending,
lowering taxes and reforming welfare. Mr. Clinton is forever
changing his positions, is liberal and has vetoed bills to reduce
spending, lower taxes and reform welfare. Mr. Dole is meat and
potatoes; Mr. Clinton is designer cuisine. Contrary to
conventional wisdom, my bet is that after four years, the voters
will have a bit of an upset stomach and will order some good,
solid home cooking."
   -- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace political
analyst Adonis Hoffman: "With a caustic and sagacious opponent
like Senator Dole, who has spoken on every foreign policy issue
since 1960 when he was first elected to the House, Clinton must
pay careful attention to the handling of foreign affairs. Current
indicators suggest that Clinton has reached a plateau in foreign
policy where, for the time being at least, he is beyond reproach.
Early in his administration, however, no one would have predicted
that Clinton would survive a series of policy debacles that
threatened to render him a one-term president....This evolution
from visionless foreign policy idealist to astute
internationalist has as much to do with personal maturation as it
does with political circumstance. Among America's allies and
adversaries Clinton's new-found status as a world leader is not
only recognized, but very much appreciated."
   -- Elections public relations consultant Mark Rhoads: "In many
states, if your own party's primary does not provide an
interesting enough contest, you can vote in the competing party's
primary to help nominate the weakest candidate for the fall or
choose one who represents your philosophy but not the one of most
legitimate advocates of that party. Great, say the open primary
reformers, that's the way it should be. My answer is that the
practice is fundamentally flawed and intellectually
dishonest....A party should not be allowed to exclude someone on
the basis of race, color, creed or national origin. But it should
have every right to ask a minimum pledge of support from those
who claim the right to shape its policy and choose its nominees."
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: ISSUES

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   Although it is still seven months until the presidential
election in November, the players in this year's election
campaign appear to be pretty well established. President Clinton
will seek a second term and the presumed Republican nominee,
Senator Bob Dole, will be his main competition. Independent Ross
Perot looks like he may make another bid for the White House as
well. But the big question is what issues will dominate the 1996
presidential campaign.
   The slogan at Clinton headquarters in 1992 was, "it is the
economy, stupid." But this year's campaign is looking a little
tougher to predict in terms of the issues which will dominate the
political debate.
   A number of economic indicators show the U.S. economy is
healthier than it was four years ago. But stagnant wages and job
cuts by large corporations are fueling uncertainty and insecurity
about economic prospects in the longterm.
   Senator Dole and the Republicans are expected to cast
President Clinton as the last obstacle to enactment of their
contract with America legislative program. Their focus will be on
issues like welfare reform, tax cuts and a balanced budget,
issues where they have sharp differences with the president.
   Mr. Clinton, on the other hand, will be playing a bit of a
defensive game, eager to portray the Republicans as legislative
extremists who pose a threat to popular government programs like
the Medicare health care program for the elderly and
environmental protection.
   Stephen Wayne is a professor of government at Georgetown
University here in Washington. He predicts Bill Clinton will
revert to a campaign mode which has been successful in the past,
casting himself as a moderate Democrat eager to appeal to
independent swing voters in the election:
   "He is going to stress that he is a moderate, centrist
president, who is willing to compromise but wants to change
policy in slow, careful, incremental way. And the subtle contrast
here will be to the more extreme Republican positions, which are
at least extreme as he will describe them."
   As for Senator Dole, Professor Wayne says he will be eager to
wage a presidential campaign based on character, focusing more on
how Americans feel about Mr. Clinton on a personal level rather
than the policies of the Clinton Administration:
   "On the other side, the majority leader (Senator Dole) will
try to focus not so much on the Clinton Administration as on
President Clinton, as on Bill Clinton. And he will attempt to
contrast his character as a war hero, a person who was near death
from injuries suffered in the second world war, he will try to
contrast that to Clinton who did not serve (in the military
during Vietnam) and over whom allegations still hang with respect
to his dealings when he was governor of Arkansas."
   Most analysts believe another slashing, personal campaign is
all but inevitable. Norman Ornstein is a senior policy analyst at
the American Enterprise Institute here in Washington. He predicts
the campaign will get nasty but he says both major party
candidates will use others to deliver the heavy political hits on
their behalf:
   "And some of the sharp attacks that will emerge will be over
character, over age, over vision. And some of them will be over
specific issues, welfare reform pushed by the Republicans, they
are for it and the president, they will argue, is against it.
Cutting Medicare, where Democrats will argue that Republicans are
for it and they are against it. But my guess is that a lot of
those attacks are going to come not directly from the candidates
themselves, which will make things very uncomfortable if they try
to work together, but from their surrogates (political allies who
will carry out the verbal attacks on their behalf)."
   For the moment, most political experts believe the campaign
will revolve around domestic issues. Foreign policy will only
become an issue if American peacekeepers take heavy casualties in
Bosnia or if North Korea or China, for example, emerge as
national security threats.
   Failed Republican candidate Pat Buchanan made foreign trade
deals a target in his campaign. But experts like Mr. Ornstein and
professor Wayne believe trade will not be an issue in the fall
campaign because both the president and Senator Dole are strong
supporters of the NAFTA and GATT trade deals.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   THE DRUG WAR AS POLITICAL ISSUE

   DON HENRY
   WASHINGTON

   Experts on crime, politics and public opinion essentially
agreed at a forum in Washington Tuesday that crackdowns on
illicit drugs must be accompanied by expanded treatment and
preventive education programs. But they also predicted the drug
war will not be a major election campaign issue this year,
because major candidates hold similar views about it.
   Top Republican and Democratic election campaign consultants
said at the drug policy forum that candidates base their election
strategy on issues over which they differ sharply from their
opponent.
   And even though some candidates use more rhetoric than others
on how to deal with drug abusers and traffickers, the consultants
said the counter narcotics distinctions are not broad enough to
give voters much choice this year.
   They said President Clinton defused the drug war as an issue
by naming a top general to preside over a vastly enlarged drug
policy office this year.
   However, the forum, sponsored by several public policy
foundations, came up with new data and new arguments about the
drug war, especially on dividing resources between supply
interdiction and demand reduction.
   For example, pollster Peter Hart surveyed police chiefs around
the nation a few weeks ago, and said the drug war might not be on
the political campaign landscape but it is the leading public
safety concern among police:
   "When they have to compare all of those other things that we
see on the news and we hear about, such as domestic violence,
property crime and violent crime, what they tell us the number
one serious problem for them is drug abuse."
   He said 60 per cent of police chiefs believe law enforcement
efforts, including seizing drug shipments and jailing
traffickers, are not successful in reducing the drug problem.
   By two to one the chiefs also believe putting drug users in
supervised treatment programs would be more effective than
incarceration.
   Peter Hart said one answer stood out clearly when he gave the
police leaders a number of choices for the most effective means
of reducing crime in the community:
   "The single largest answer is drug education in the schools,
recognition from the police chiefs that if you're going to deal
with this, in the end you're going to have to deal with kids in
the schools."
   Drug education got about twice as much support as such other
choices as large-scale counter narcotic street raids, undercover
operations and special drug interdiction units.
   The tilt toward demand reduction in the survey of police
chiefs reinforced the view of best-selling author Michael
Crichton. In remarks to the forum, he said the concentration in
drug war budgets on interdicting the supply has been a failure:
   "For more than 20 years this was the bipartisan policy in this
nation. We had a self-styled war on drugs policy of interdiction,
keep drugs from crossing the border. Interdiction has been a
bust. The fact that it still has some die-hard advocates only, to
my mind, demonstrates the old adage that the human being is the
only animal that if it tries something and fails will try it
again. Even a pigeon pecking a key would have given up after 20
years."
   Mr. Crichton, board member of a nonprofit drug war
organization, told the forum moving the war inside America's
borders by expanding imprisonment also is proving fruitless:
   "The new simple solution is to incarcerate. This policy isn't
working either. It's disturbing to hear that the state of
California spends more on corrections than it does on higher
education. To hear that is really to think that something's wrong
and we ought to be doing something else."
   The something else, in his view, is a sustained and widespread
effort to intensify social disapproval so that taking drugs will
not be an acceptable behavior. While the next generations are
being told '"no" by parents, community leaders and others,
especially including the entertainment industry, Mr. Crichton
says those who abuse must be treated and preventive education
reinforced until ultimately illicit drug use will be a rare
occurrence.
   At the end of the discussion most of the experts agreed the
public will not support greater demand reduction funding if it
means less interdiction and law enforcement. They said the policy
should be punishment plus prevention, a slogan they agreed most
politicians would readily adopt.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   NEW HEAD OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD ON UPCOMING ELECTIONS

   BARBARA SCHOETZAU
   NEW YORK

   The new head of the planned parenthood federation of America,
Gloria Feldt (felt), said Tuesday the nationwide organization
must encourage voting by Americans favoring abortion rights.
   Ms. Feldt says a big part of her new job will be informing
Americans about what she considers the gravity of the situation
in the current Congress where many members want to eliminate
abortion rights and dismantle a federal family planning program.
   Last year, the privately operated Planned Parenthood
organization received 41 million dollars from the government
program for services other than abortions. But anti-abortion
forces in and out of Congress say any money given to Planned
Parenthood indirectly subsidizes the group's abortion clinics.
According to Feldt:
   "The mission of planned parenthood is simple but profound: We
believe women and men should decide for themselves whether and
when they will have children, not Congress, not state
legislators. We believe that children should be wanted and loved.
We believe that the moral choices of women should be respected."
   Planned parenthood offers many health care services including
birth control counseling. Some three point three million
Americans use the organization's services each year in one
thousand branches throughout the United States. But over the last
decade controversy has focused on the organization's abortion
clinics.
   Ms. Felt, who is now 54, had three children by the time she
was 20. She said she had experienced the life religious political
extremists want to impose on all Americans. Ms. Feldt told
reporters the agenda of the religious right seeks to eliminate
not only abortion rights but also family planning and sex
education programs:
   "I know from my own life how important it is that we not only
save America's family planning program, but protect real family
values, the values of childbearing based on love and planning,
not on ignorance and lack of health care and choices."
   Until being named national president of the Planned Parenthood
Federation of America, Ms. Feldt headed the organization's branch
in Phoenix, Arizona, where she was involved in a joint program
with Mexico. She said she hopes to strengthen the organization's
international links during her tenure.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   MINIMUM WAGE DEBATE

   LINDA CASHDAN
   WASHINGTON

   President Clinton wants to raise the minimum wage, the
government standard that sets a floor on hourly salaries in the
United States, but Republicans insist that doing so would make
small businesses less competitive and result in job losses. Such
debates over raising the minimum wage have occurred regularly for
almost 60 years.
   The U.S. minimum wage was established by the 1938 fair Labor
Standards Act. That law has often been called the nation's
"industrial Bill of Rights," because it also mandated extra
overtime pay for employees working more than 40 hours a week, and
outlawed exploitative child labor.
   The original minimum wage was 25 cents an hour, so low, even
back in 1938, that its passage raised the pay of only 300,000 of
the 11 million workers then in the U.S. labor force. The minimum
wage has been raised 15 times since 1938 to keep up with
inflation, most recently in 1991, when it went up to four dollars
25 cents an hour.
   President Clinton says the present minimum wage has decreased
in real terms so much that the earnings of someone working full
time at the minimum wage are below the U.S. poverty line. He
wants to raise the wage to five dollars 15 cents an hour:
   "The minimum wage has stayed unchanged while the cost of
living goes up. This year if Congress does not raise the minimum
wage, it will drop in value to a 40-year low. These are among our
hardest working people. Six out of 10 of them (earning minimum
wage) are working women, many trying to raise children and hold
their families together. Others are just getting started in the
work force trying to get a rung up the ladder, all of them trying
to do the right thing, to work. Raising the minimum wage would
honor both work and family. We should not leave behind anyone who
is willing to work hard as our country moves forward."
   Those who oppose the president's proposed raise, like
Republican Senator Don Nichols of Oklahoma, argue that higher
labor costs reduce over-all employment. Thus, Mr. Nichols says,
raising the minimum wage will mean that many low wage earners,
instead of getting a raise, stand a good chance of losing their
jobs:
   "I very much want people on the low end of the scale to climb
the economic ladder, but what we do by increasing the minimum
wage is we say: 'if for some reason you can't make five dollars
and fifteen cents, you can't have a job,' and I think that's
grossly unfair. Seventy-seven percent of the economists say if
you have an increase in the minimum wage of 20 percent or more,
you're going to lose jobs, hundreds of thousands of jobs."
   The issue is further clouded by the fact that economists
disagree on this issue. To bolster their opposition, Republicans
point to an economic study that demonstrates the last minimum
wage increase led to reduced employment of low wage workers.
   To bolster their position, Democrats, like Massachusetts
Senator Edward Kennedy, point to a different economic analysis,
the "Kruger Study", whose statistics reveal just the opposite:
   "In New Jersey, the Kruger study showed that actually it
(raising the minimum wage) increased employment, and you want to
know why? Because people that were outside the job market saw
that they could finally get a livable wage and went back in (to
the job market) and it meant expanding opportunities."
   The minimum wage issue has always pitted Republicans,
traditionally the party of business, against Democrats,
traditionally the party of the working man. However, this is a
presidential election year, one in which the president, a
Democrat, is running against the Senate majority leader, a
Republican.
   As a result, party lines are tighter than usual, and the
arguments surrounding the issue tend to be more political than
economic, as this exhortation from President Clinton illustrates:
   "Over the past five years, while the minimum wage has been
stuck at four dollars and 25 cents an hour, a senator's salary
has gone up by a third. I challenge the Republican leadership to
stop blocking a vote and let the majority rule. Pass an increase
in the minimum wage. Congress should vow that the next time they
want to raise their own pay, they'll raise the minimum wage too."
   Analysts believe the U.S. minimum wage may have a greater
chance of passing after the 1996 presidential election is over.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   WORLD PRESS: U.S. ELECTION:  VOTERS' 'FEARS' WILL DOMINATE CAMPAIGN

   DIANA MCCAFFREY
   WASHINGTON

   With Senator Bob Dole's primary wins in California and other
Western states on March 26, editors around the globe hunkered
down to examine what they thought would be the major campaign
issues and/or problems facing the two leading Democratic and
Republican presidential candidates, and what political strategy
the Clinton and Dole camps would pursue in order to win in
November.  Turin's centrist La Stampa reflected the prevailing
sentiment among commentators:  "In November, American voters will
have to make a crucial choice for the future of political parties
and the state....  In an apparently serene moment--the economy is
hanging on, foreign policy is getting along---the American
superpower is questioning many of its values.  So far, fear has
dominated the U.S. electoral campaign, projecting a negative
picture of the country.  Fear of losing one's job and seeing the
standard of life decline....  Fear of immigrants, of the failure
of the welfare state, of crime."  Pointing to such worrisome
episodes as the standoff involving the Freemen in Jordan,
Montana, and the bombing in Oklahoma City, many analysts also
focused on an increasing and persistent anti-government sentiment
in the U.S.  "Distrust of the very business of politics and
governance remains at an all-time high," London's liberal
Guardian remarked.
   Recent news items on the videotaped incident involving the
arrest of Mexican nationals in California, the 17-day strike of
auto workers, in Dayton, Ohio, as well as Pat Buchanan's
so-called "isolationism tenet" were the major topics in editorial
comment. Regarding the Mexican nationals, journalists criticized
what they saw as growing U.S. intolerance of immigrants--both
legal and illegal.  "What has become of the U.S. tradition of
hospitality, the land of immigration?" asked one Belgian writer. 
Iranian and Ecuadoran media voices joined with a Mexican daily in
assailing the U.S. for abuse of the nationals' human rights. 
Opinionmakers argued that the U.S. has no claim to moral
leadership, and contended that candidates Bill Clinton and Robert
Dole will bend with perceived public opinion and take a hard line
on immigration.  The "bitter strike in Dayton," asserted a
Singaporean paper, reflects the growing gap between business and
labor, between the shareholders on Wall "Street and stakeholders
on Main Street.  That is becoming the top issue dominating the
political agenda this year."  Bogota's second-leading Liberal
Party-oriented El Espectador stressed that the average American
is not pleased that the U.S. captains of industry want to "to
produce in other countries with their designs and their
technology.  Blaming the immigrants is just a distraction."
Meanwhile, pundits in Latvia, Poland and Indonesia expressed
concern that isolationist tendencies--championed by Pat
Buchanan--would cause the U.S. to renege on its international
responsibilities and also reduce the superpower's economic
competitiveness.
   A majority of commentators continued to hedge their bets on
who would win the presidential contest in November.  Most were
given to describing the campaign strategy challenges for both
sides: President Clinton--to avoid personal scandal and appear
"trustworthy" and presidential; and Senator Dole--to unite the
Republican Party, deal with the issues Pat Buchanan and Ross
Perot symbolize, and appear vigorous.

   This survey is based on 31 reports from 18 countries, March
   26-April 9.

   EUROPE

   BRITAIN:  "Standoff In Montana:  Atheistic Washington Replaces
              Godless Soviets"

   The liberal Guardian commented (4/2), "The United States seems
fated now to confront awkward questions about the ultra-right at
increasingly frequent intervals....  The ultra-right phenomenon
is often explained, even explained away, as the historical price
to be paid for the creation of the United States with its very
specific individualistic values.  But no taxation without
representation never meant just no taxation.  And the
Constitution has been systematically misquoted to justify the
carrying of personal arms.  Ultra-rightism should not be glossed
as the right of self-determination and opposition to 'big
government' carried to excess.  It is and always has been a
pathological expression of extreme views which are too often
tolerated in the mainstream.  Public figures should be more
willing to speak out--as President Kennedy did against the John
Birchites with their terrorist Minutemen fringe--against those
who evade their social responsibility by finding 'a simple
solution, an appealing slogan or a convenient scapegoat'.  Of the
familiar trio of anti-black, anti-communist and anti-Jewish
ideology, only the last still survives.  No wonder that members
of the Michigan militia use pictures of Bill and Hillary Clinton
for target practice and that atheistic Washington has replaced
the godless Soviets in their sights.  With the mainstream
Republican movement captured by the simple slogans of Newt
Gingrich, it is not surprising that the spectrum has shifted
unhappily further to the right."

   "Anti-Government Feeling In U.S. Refuses To Go Away"

   The Guardian (4/2) also ran this piece by Jonathan Freedland,
"There is much at stake.  Besides the lives of the Freemen and
their families inside Justus township--and of the agents watching
them--there is also the bedrock principle of the rule of law.  If
these people evade justice by threatening violence, runs the
argument, then American society itself is not safe.  And, just
like Oklahoma, the siege of Jordan, Montana, is forcing Americans
to face an ugly, stubborn fact about themselves:  distrust of the
country's leaders is not confined to a few crazies in a faraway
ranch--it is becoming a national disease....
   "The simple truth is that anti-government feeling in the
United States, while rarely expressed in the extremist argot of
the Freemen, refuses to go away.  Rightwing firebreather Pat
Buchanan ran an insurgent presidential campaign against the
'politicians.' Texan billionaire Ross Perot and consumer advocate
Ralph Nader are poised to do the same, both running as
independent 'outsiders'.  There was a pause after Oklahoma, but
it didn't take long for Republicans once again to start railing
against 'government bureaucrats.'  Distrust of the very business
of politics and governance remains at an all-time high.  Just
days after the Oklahoma bombing, a staggering 45 per cent of
Americans told pollsters they considered the federal government
posed a threat to their constitutional rights.  One in two.
   "The battle of Jordan will end eventually--in flames, in
surrender, in mass suicide, no one knows.  But the grievance of
the Freemen will not disappear so quickly: the $300m already
spent on securing federal buildings in time for April 19 could
prove to be money will spent."


   "Clinton:  Looking For Campaign 'Magic' A Second Time"

   On the BBC Radio's Today program, Washington correspondent
Gavin Esler looked at President Clinton's re-election chances
(4/1), "President Clinton's 1992 theme tune urged Americans never
to stop thinking about tomorrow, and he won the election as a new
Democrat--more conservative, more in tune with the values of
ordinary people than the traditional tax-and-spend liberal
democrats.  Four years on, as President Clinton tries to work
that campaign magic a second time, many people, especially from
the president's home region, the South, are unconvinced....
   "President Clinton promised to focus like a laser beam on the
economy....   But the Clinton presidency is defined by its
failures, not just successes:  a bumbling managerial style for
the first 18 months; failure to produce welfare reform; and the
crushing failure to live up to what Bill Clinton promised in 91,
in 92 and yet again in his first state of the union address in
93...(healthcare reform)....  The healthcare fiasco helped
provide Bob Dole with his biggest stick to beat President
Clinton:  The president is a talker while Dole is a doer; and on
issues such as homosexuality in the military, he looks out of
touch with those who elected him....
   "But in fighting over the budget to help the poorest
Americans, battling the gun lobby over gun control, many
Americans seem to admire the way Mr Clinton brushes off his
failures and marches on....  It is true that no American
president this century has ever had a better second term than his
first, which those who view Mr. Clinton's achievements as thin
may find rather scary. But it is also true that the American
people have a very forgiving attitude to those who fall down
while doing difficult tasks, and will help them up again--if they
believe they fall down while facing in the right direction."

   ITALY:  "Big Fears Will Characterize The Vote"

   Ennio Caretto observed in centrist La Stampa (3/28), "Where is
America going, that America whose leadership the world, including
Europe, does not seem to be able to renounce?  Only two months
ago, the U.S. elections seemed to be limited to a
referendum--pro-Clinton or anti-Clinton....  But the primaries
have upset all forecasts and have brought up again all of
America's devils, which are common for the most part to all
developed nations:  In November, American voters will have to
make a crucial choice for the future of political parties and the
state.  In an apparently serene moment--the economy is hanging
on, foreign policy is getting along---the American superpower is
questioning many of its values.  So far, fear has dominated the
U.S. electoral campaign, projecting a negative picture of the
country.  Fear of losing one's job and seeing the standard of
life decline....  Fear of immigrants, of the failure of the
welfare state, of crime....  There are indications that the
primaries' poisons are already prompting political parties to
examine their consciences....
   "The first to change direction was Bill Clinton, one of the
most able 'campaigners.'  He proposed educational reform
yesterday, and he will propose pension reform.  Dole will echo
him with a program for a 'common American house,' based on
economic expansion and the defense of the family as an
institution.  As men and candidates, Clinton and Dole are poles
apart.  But both have understood that America risks losing the
moral leadership without which it could no longer exert
leadership, neither military nor political."

   "Dole Will Conduct Campaign From Senate Podium"

   New York correspondent Mario Platero wrote in leading
financial Il Sole-24 Ore (3/28), "Bill Clinton begins the
presidential campaign with the advantage of an economy in
excellent shape and, most of all, with a presidential image as an
outsider, something which Americans like.  That is why his most
loyal advisors have suggested to Bob Dole that he switch as soon
as possible from a 'local' campaign to a 'national' campaign,
even to resign as Senate Majority Leader, to leave Washington, in
sum to renege his past and become what he is not.  It is
difficult to imagine that Bob Dole will follow that advice.  It
is difficult to build a new image in only a few months and be
credible.  That's why the Republican candidate will conduct his
campaign from the Senate podium."

   BELGIUM:  "United States, Land Of Immigration?"

   Luc Ruidant asked (4/9) in socialist La Wallonie, "What has
become of the U.S. tradition of hospitality, the land of
immigration?   Of course, Dole, carefully avoiding any electoral
upstaging 'contents himself' with advocating a 'modest and
temporary' reduction of the number of legal immigrants, whereas
Clinton does not even want to hear about it.  Nevertheless, both
of them, under the pressure of a large majority of U.S. public
opinion convinced that immigrants represent a 'burden' for the
country, want to reinforce the battle against illegal
immigration."

   "Battle From White House, Senate Podiums"

   Washington correspondent Yve Laudy observed in conservative
Catholic La Libre Belgique said (4/2), "While campaigning partly
from the White House--where he can be 'presidential' and grant
favors--is proving to be a good strategy for Bill Clinton, his
adversary Bob Dole, the Senate Majority Leader can also
demonstrate his efficiency in Congress.
   "Both will say that they wish compromises, but Dole can
support popular bills and secure the adoption of others which
emphasize ideological differences or prove to some lobbies that
he is their ally.  And if Clinton opposes them, Dole will say
that 'old veto Bill' represents an obstacle to change....  The
Republicans sometimes....play with fire.  They are still unable
to find an agreement on the budget for the current fiscal year
and, knowing that the public approved Clinton's vetoes when they
sought to reduce credits for the environment and education, the
Democrats are trying to make them yield.  Since the public was
angry against them when the administration closed its doors, the
Republicans had to finance the government temporarily without
condition because, otherwise, they would have been confronted
with a new presidential veto.

   "The struggle will continue until the elections, often to the
    benefit of the people.  Then...."

   "Dole And Minimum Wage"

   New York correspondent Tom Ronse wrote in independent De
Morgen (4/1), "With the Republican nomination in his pocket, Bob
Dole is in Washington again.  He is hoping to prove that, in
contrast to 'Veto Bill,' he is a politician who can get things
done.  But he immediately blocked a very popular proposal:  the
increase of the minimum wage.
   "It was not the first time that Dole used a Congressional
procedure to avoid a vote on the increase of the minimum
wage--and it will not be the last either.  The Democrats have
plans to seize every opportunity to table the proposal again....
Nobody denies that the minimum wage is too low to live on.  'But
if you increase it, many young people--black teenagers, in
particular--will lose their jobs,' Dole argued this week in the
Senate.  However, several studies are contradicting him....  The
U.S. industrial world fears that an increase in the minimum wage
may spark the increase of other wages.  This might cause the
danger of inflation increasing.  'Nonsense,' says (Los Angeles
Occidental College Professor) Dreier who underscores that
inflation has been minimal for years.  'A higher minimum wage
will help the economy because it will give more purchasing power
to consumers.'"

   CANADA:  "Clinton Not Trusted"

   Graham Fraser wrote in French-language Le Devoir (4/2), "In 24
years...American politics have changed...by (maybe) shedding a
tear, Muskie had shown a sign of weakness....  By crying (maybe)
in Russell, Kansas, Dole showed he was a sensitive man....
Journalists are accomplices....   Many factors explain this
visceral instinctive reaction....  Washington reporters respect
the legislative work of the senator.  They admire his courage and
the daily contribution of a man who is from a generation borne
out of the Second World War.  On the other hand, they are tired
of hearing Clinton's nice speeches....  They do not trust him and
believe that he is willing to say anything to please his
audience....  For a president who wishes to be liked by
everybody, being despised by journalists is a considerable
handicap."

   LATVIA:  "What Does Dole's Doctrine Promise?"

   Voldemars Hermanis wrote in centrist Neatkariga Rita Avize
(4/3), "The main strategic issue is America's capability and
willingness to undertake longterm commitments abroad....  It
remains to be seen whether or not Dole, once in the White House,
will neglect to pay the bill to the United Nations in an effort
to save money....  It is already obvious that the Republicans
give in much less than the Democrats to the so-called post-Cold
War harmony....  Of course, Dole still has to win the elections
over President Clinton as well as a possible independent
candidate. Signs indicate that that could be Texan millionaire
Ross Perot....  It is not out of the question that in that case
Perot could tackle Dole and all his 16 years of dreaming of the
president's chair."

   POLAND:  "Candidate Debate On U.S. Military Strategy And
             Security?"

   Maximilian Berezowski wrote in military Polska Zbrojna (4/2),
"Will there be a debate between Bill Clinton and Bob Dole on
military strategy and security?...  So far both parties are
charging one another with isolationism in foreign policy....
Clinton charges the Republicans with...cutting funds for foreign
aid, the Republicans charge him with cutting the military budget
and having an incoherent strategy, which may weaken...the
credibility of the United States as a superpower....  Before the
debate on strategy and security reaches the highest level, it
begins in the Pentagon and other interested places.  Pentagon
experts are of the opinion that informatics technology will give
America the superiority in conventional methods of war.  Some
people believe, however, that the technological superiority
doesn't lessen the need for a firm political stand....  Time is
more than money."

   EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC

   AUSTRALIA:  "Dole, Not A California Kind Of Guy"

   The national, business-oriented Australian Financial Review's
Washington correspondent filed (3/28), "Senator Bob Dole's
crushing win in yesterday's Republican presidential primary in
California was overshadowed by nagging doubts that he will even
try to wrest America's biggest state from President Clinton in
November....  However Senator Dole's brief primary campaign in
media-saturated California failed to muster much excitement and
was capped ominously by a record low turnout by Republican
primary voters....  Prominent California Republicans fear that
Senator Dole will not seriously contest America's 'Golden State'
between now and November, effectively conceding it to President
Clinton....  California Republicans still resent President Bush
ignoring California in 1992....  They fear a repeat by the
Kansas-reared Senator Dole, who, compared to the state's favored
political sons such as Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, is not a
California kind of guy."

   INDONESIA:  "Pat Buchanan's Isolationism Not An Option For
                U.S."

   Leading independent Kompas opined (4/3), "A tenet of
Buchanan's campaign was isolationism.  He was also accused of
wanting increased economic protection....  Regardless of
Buchanan, the issue of U.S. isolationism continues to command
attention.... Ambassador Albright has stated that the current
U.S. trend toward isolationism is stronger than it has been in 70
years, but added that...most Americans realize it is not an
option....  The central role of the United States in the UN
demonstrates that the United States has never applied
isolationist ideas....  We see that in terms of international
security, whether in Bosnia, the Gulf, or the Taiwan Strait, the
United States has never shown decreased commitment to the
international arena.  Thus, despite financial cutbacks, the U.S.
image as world policeman remains strong....  The idea of
isolationism and economic protection is strange amidst an
increasingly interdependent world.  It is possible that the
United States could isolate itself, but such a policy would only
reduce its competitiveness....  Despite inherent shortcomings,
Buchanan's ideas on isolationism and economic protection are
interesting to ponder."

   "A Desire To Witness Populist And Egalitarian Presidential
    Elections"

   Leading independent Kompas commented (3/29), "We cannot expect
Clinton and Dole to replay the eras of Reagan and Kennedy, two
presidents who had the courage to effect revolutionary change and
restore the country's international image.  Given the perceived
mediocrity of the two candidates, analysts expect negative
campaigning.  Dole, who has spent approximately $1 million on
negative campaigning, has attacked the weaknesses of his
Republican rivals.  Clinton, troubled by the Whitewater scandal
and past affairs, will become the target of Dole's negative
campaigns.  Former President Bush launched negative ads against
Clinton in 1992, which ultimately were disregarded by the voters.
There is no sense in Dole repeating Bush's experience, as it
could backfire.  We wish to see presidential elections which
demonstrate American populism and egalitarianism rather than a
circus."

   PHILIPPINES:  "President Dole?  Not By A Long Shot"

   Ricardo Malay wrote in the independent Manila Chronicle (4/1),
"President Robert Dole?  No by a long shot.  Even allowing for
the volatility of America voters, it's a sure bet that Clinton
will whip the senator....  It's not that the prez...is a
hot-button candidate who stokes admiration and respect; it's just
that the 72-year-old challenger fails to evoke enthusiasm and
excitement with his dour and tepid approach to issues.  Virtually
all opinionmakers and editorial cartoonists have panned Dole for
making this contest a non-starter.  Americans, however, aren't
dying to see the reelectionist president in the White House."

   SINGAPORE:  "Labor Pains, Who Gains?"

   The pro-government Business Times' Washington correspondent,
Leon Hadar, held (4/4), "As officials of the United Automobile
Workers and General Motors executives were meeting in Dayton,
Ohio last week to finalize an accord that ended a 17-day strike,
President Clinton was travelling around the Midwestern state,
proposing his own version of a stakeholder society, in which
business and labor cooperate to expand the economic pie of the
entire community.
   "The bitter strike in Dayton reflected, in many ways, the
growing gap between business and labor, between the shareholders
in Wall Street and stakeholders in Main Street.  That is becoming
the top issue dominating the political agenda this year.
   "Republican Pat Buchanan has been exploiting the nasty mood in
Main Street, using the platform of his presidential campaign to
blame Washington and Wall Street for the sense of economic
dislocation that many Americans are feeling, and drawing support
from factory workers, a traditional constituency of the
Democratic Party.  At the same time, Mr. Clinton's Labor
Secretary Robert Reich has launched his own assault on Wall
Street, calling for a new 'social contract' between labor and
business, and proposing that Washington reward companies that
treat their employees well with new tax breaks....
   "Mr. Clinton's support for international free trade agreements
and a multibillion dollar bailout plan for the Mexican economy
helped create the impression that big business, not the little
worker, has a friend in the White House....
   "But [Treasury Secretary Robert] Rubin has been warning Mr.
Clinton that his populist messages are seen in Wall Street as
part of a 'corporate bashing' campaign.  A recent poll among
major CEOs indicated that most of them are planning to vote for
Bob Dole in November."

   THAILAND:  "The Third Choice"

   The mass-circulation Daily News' Trairat Soontornprapat said
(4/4), "Like George Bush, Bob Dole could suffer an election loss
at the hands of Ross Perot and his Reform Party....  Dole's
problem now is how to change Perot's mind and persuade him to
withdraw from the race.  The Democrats, though, definitely want
the opposite."

   "Dole Still Unable To Outshine Clinton"

   Elite Matichon's Boonkerd Sutaweesup discussed Robert Dole's
political career, including his previous failed election bids and
current election possibilities, concluding (3/29), "As things
stand now, even with his (party's) nomination sealed, Dole's
image and popularity are still unable to outshine those of
Clinton."

   "In U.S., Money Alone Does Not Guarantee Victory In
    Presidential Bid"

   Soontorn Tasai's commentary in largest-circulation Thai Rath
said (3/29), "It is an undisputed fact that in the politics of a
capitalist society, money talks loudest....  In Thailand, a
country where the god of money is so revered, money obtained
through whatever means can guarantee a person even the top
executive position....  In the capitalist...United States,
however, despite the fact that a political leader must himself
have or be supported with a huge sum of money from his
party...money alone cannot guarantee the success of a
presidential bid.  Ross Perot, for example, is not only a
billionaire but also a man with vision, but lost to Clinton in
the last presidential election....  This time, Steve Forbes
campaigned on the theme, 'money talks'...and ended up withdrawing
from the race."

   SOUTH ASIA

   INDIA:  "Stage Set For Start Of Campaigning"

   The indpendent Hindu ran this by Washington correspondent
Sridhar Krishnaswami (3/28), "It was quite obvious from the very
beginning that the importance of California was not in March but
in November.  Dole, while claiming the party nomination, has also
to go home with the clear message that he has a long way to go to
beat...Clinton in this state.  The more sobering message
to...Dole in California is that 51 percent of the Republicans
voting for him (say) that they were not happy with the choice
offered....
   "The primaries in the West Coast, the state of California in
particular, hold out several pointers to the election showdown in
November....  Dole's win in California and elsewhere raises the
important question of the kind of fall campaigning he is going to
do in this state.  Going by the composition of the electoral
college and in the ideological geographic map carved out by the
two main contenders, the view has been that...Dole does not need
California as badly as...Clinton does....
   "The problem for...Clinton in California is not...Dole, Ross
Perot or Buchanan, but Ralph Nader, the high profile consumer
advocate running on the Green Party-ticket for presidency this
fall....  The Democrats may not be worried about Nader in a
national setting but they have to factor him in California.  What
Perot did to George Bush in 1992 has not been forgotten, even if
this is going to be on a limited scale this time around
from...Nader.  And this is all because...Clinton has to have this
state if he is going to continue occupying the White House for
four more years."

   IRAN:  "U.S. At Head Of Countries That Violate Human Rights"

   Official Tehran Radio maintained (4/7), "One of the issues
that arises frequently in the American community, and at times
attracts world opinion, is the systematic violation of human
rights and the rights of minorities in that country, which is
carried out by the government, racist individuals or groups, or
organized criminal outfits....
   "It seems that at the moment the mistreatment of these
minorities by the U.S. police has become a trend and the norm. 
Once in a while the disclosure of the discriminatory and criminal
behavior by police or judiciary in one of the states inflames the
minority communities.  The beating last week of a Mexican couple
by the Californian police and the broadcast of the shocking
scenes of that atrocity by one of the state's television stations
provoked extensive anger and protest by minorities and
immigrants, particularly Mexicans....
   "On the whole, cases of violation of human rights and violence
against minorities in America are such that to put America at the
head of the countries that violate human rights and the rights of
minorities is no exaggeration....  American affairs observers and
experts believe that the recent beating of two Mexican
nationals...can end in a similar riot to that in 1991 (after the
beating of Rodney King), which would engulf the whole of
America."

   LATIN AMERICA

   MEXICO:  "Abuse Of Mexican Nationals In U.S.:  Not The First
             Time"

   All Mexican media highlighted the beating of two Mexican
nationals by two deputy sheriffs in Riverside, California, with
Televisa's major newscast "24 Horas" according it an unusual
16-minute coverage.  An editorial in nationalist Excelsior said
(4/4), "This is not the first time that U.S. law enforcement
agencies, the Border Patrol and other repressive U.S.
institutions have abused of and have even killed Mexican
nationals.  The crimes against undocumented (Mexicans) are large
in number and indicate the little respect for human rights and
the abuse of power by the U.S. institutions responsible for
surveilling the border....
   "The beating was taped.  A similar incident against Rodney
King brought about a series of riots, fires and unrest costing
millions of dollars.  Hopefully, the Hispanic community will not
react as vehemently.  However, it is imperative for the Los
Angeles authorities to implement strict sanctions that would
prevent the brutality of those supposedly in charge of
maintaining order."

   ARGENTINA:  "A Disrupting Third Option"

   Pro-government La Prensa commented (4/3), "The possible
entrance of a candidate who does not belong to the traditional
parties is perhaps the most important fact of the upcoming
elections.  It will deepen the bipartisan crisis...initiated by
the last electoral campaign, and will emphasize the fatigue of a
great part of the citizenry toward that oscillating kind of
political activity.  Nevertheless, everything leads one to
suppose that it will be unlikely that someone who is not a
Republican or a Democrat will triumph.  But the presence of an
independent candidate is a fact that should be considered owing
to its future implications."

   COLOMBIA:  "Social Issues Will Dominate Campaign"

   Second-leading Liberal Party-oriented El Espectador commented
(3/26), "The social situation in America will have to be,
unavoidably, a mandatory issue in the current electoral campaign,
and Senator Dole will have to direct his rhetoric in that
direction if he doesn't want to be defeated by his opponent....
The average American is not pleased with the fact that his
government and his captains of industry decided, because they
wanted cheaper labor, to produce in other countries with their
designs and their technology.  Blaming the immigrants is just a
distraction."

   ECUADOR:  "Illegal Immigrants:  Challenge To U.S."

   Leading, centrist El Comercio commented (4/5), "Legal action
against the authors (of the beating), members of the California
police (sic), has been initiated.  Regrettably this isn't an
isolated case.  This time the abuse became public but, how often
is behavior of this sort directed against such vulnerable groups?
The challenge is to avert the...consequences of a permanent
invasion of illegals while at the same time maintaining the ideal
of respect for human rights, part of the tradition of the
greatest country of this epoch."

   JAMAICA:  "Campaign Drama, Entertainment In Months Ahead"

   The top-circulation, moderate Daily Gleaner held (3/29), "Pat
Buchanan's intent is, as he puts it himself, to win the heart and
soul of the Republican Party if not its nomination.  That is to
say, he wants to drive the party further to the right, and will
try to prod it in that direction at the summer convention.  If he
succeeds in doing so, he will jeopardize Bob Dole's chances at
winning the November election by saddling him with an unpopular
platform.  If he fails, he may run in the election as an
independent candidate, thereby drawing Republican support from
Dole.  Equally disturbing to Dole is the prospect that
billionaire businessman Ross Perot may enter the race.  It is
difficult to say how this will affect the vote, but Perot is more
likely to draw support from Dole than from President Bill
Clinton, the Democratic candidate.  As for President Clinton, he
has to contend with the powerful Republican Party machine.  He
must also hope no dramatic revelations emerge from the ongoing
Whitewater investigation.  Even if Clinton were found legally
innocent, but guilty of bad judgment and questionable ethics, it
could do serious harm to his campaign for reelection.  So, the
coming months herald much drama in the U.S. presidential
election.  If nothing else, it will be an entertaining campaign."
   ---------------

   ---------------
   FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER

          "CLIP" NEWS SERVICE

          INEWS DAILY IS NOW AVAILABLE THROUGH E-MAIL

          FREE TRIAL

          LOW COST ROYALTY FREE REPRODUCTION RIGHTS AVAILABLE

   International News E-Wire Service (INEWS) is an English
language daily, covering news of the world.  INEWS provides
up-to-date and accurate world news.  It also includes many
features and interviews covering such topics as current events,
politics, economics, science, medicine, history, technology,
agriculture, religion, and music.

   Low cost republication rights are available allowing articles
to be used on BBSs, in newsletters, advertising, LANs, weeklies,
community newspapers, school newspapers, brochures, media kits,
presentations, church bulletins, and more.

   Every day, INEWS gathers reports filed by correspondents
stationed at 26 news bureaus throughout the world.  INEWS relates
first-hand coverage of stories from news bureaus in Abidjan,
Bangkok, Beijing, Berlin, Bonn, Cairo, Chicago, Geneva, Hong
Kong, Islamabad, Jerusalem, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles,
Miami, Moscow, Nairobi, New Delhi, New York, Paris, Prague, Rio
de Janeiro, San Jose, Tokyo, Vienna, and Washington, D.C.

   Daily INEWS service is available for less than $4.00 a month.

   Delivered through E-mail in one of two versions, plain text or
a DOS/VGA version.  The DOS/VGA version is sent either through
E-mail, encoded, or through file transfer on America Online,
Compuserve, or Prodigy.

   A free two week trial can be received by sending E-mail
containing E-mail address, name and address to:

   INTERNET: INEWS@AOL.COM 
   AOL: INEWS
   COMPUSERVE: 76725,3622
   WORLD WIDE WEB: http://members.aol.com/inewscirc/inews.html
   --------------
   ***END OF FILE*** 