|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
| COLUMNISTS REACT | |
 November 14, 2000  |
|
|
How do the people who write opinion pieces view the presidential election controversy? Terence Smith talks with four columnists. The NewsHour Media Unit is funded by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts.
|
|
|
TERENCE
SMITH: Joining us are columnists Clarence Page of the Chicago Tribune,
Anthony Lewis of the New York Times, John Leo of U.S. News &
World Report, and Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post. Welcome
to you all. Tony Lewis, we just heard Senator Simpson say that this is
inevitably going to the Supreme Court and then another question as to
whether or not it would even be accepted there. What do you think?
|
||||||||||
| Balancing legalities with legitimacy | |||||||||||
|
TERENCE SMITH: In the state courts. John Leo, what is your view of that and do you look at this as a legal battle or is it really a political battle in the courts?
TERENCE SMITH: Clarence Page, what do you think?
TERENCE SMITH: That's what would bring an early end to it. CLARENCE PAGE: That's right. TERENCE SMITH: Jim Hoagland, is that to be desired?
TERENCE SMITH: As a strength rather than a weakness. JAMES HOAGLAND: Absolutely. TERENCE SMITH: Tony Lewis. ANTHONY LEWIS: May I say here, here to that. When Jim Baker spoke about all the terrible things that were happening in the world and so on, I just laughed out loud. This is actually working out fine. The courts are essential for guidance for the officials. The secretary of state of Florida needed a court to tell her how to behave and so on. There's no way of keeping the courts out of this. But in the end, it is a political process. It's working as it is supposed to work. And there's nothing to be alarmed about. |
 |
||||||||||
| Resolving to everyone's satisfaction | |||||||||||
|
JOHN LEO: Yes, of course. The "we was robbed" rhetoric of theft and illegality came from the Democrats up until about the weekend because it looked like Bush had won. And when the corner was turned over the weekend, the same rhetoric started to appear among Republicans. I do think it is poisonous, as the Washington Post said the other day. The one point I wanted to make, to change the subject, the subjectivity of the hand count. Now, remember, the Republicans who were arguing that you have too much subjectivity, they did knock down that sunshine rule of looking, appearing like Karnack the magician into the ballot to find some sunlight to find a vote could be counted. Now there are suits by Democrats saying that the pregnant chad should be counted, which is not what has ever been done in these counties. I think you have to worry about the subjectivity of changing the standards. We should do the recount by the standards these counties have always had. TERENCE SMITH: Clarence Page, the Senators also raised the question of what if the secretary of the state of Florida declined to accept those recounts. Where would we be then? CLARENCE PAGE: Well, you know, there's so much speculation going on here, Terry, that I think we're entering into kind of dangerous territory because the whole question of count and recount, a dimpled Chad, a pregnant Chad, I don't believe for a minute that those pregnant shads are going to be counted but everybody is talking about them. You know, you can tell the intent if a shad is broken through -- even if it's dangling. You know, we can see that. But there's so much of minutia being debated back and forth and speculating as to what the courts are going to think -- what the secretary of state is going to do. I hope that some reasonable minds can prevail at some point because the public is looking on and seeing a spectacle that looks kind of like a contested high school homecoming queen popularity contest. And, you know, that "we was robbed" on one side or another has floated through American politics since the beginning and yet we go on. In Chicago, "we was robbed" has hung over many elections in the past and we have gone on and gotten some of the cleanest elections actually in the country. But, you know, the question is the leadership of the people who assume the office after all the dust settled. |
 |
||||||||||
| A weakened presidency? | |||||||||||
|
JAMES HOAGLAND: Terry, I think there's very little in life that's inevitable and particularly not in politics. American politicians that I know tend to be very pragmatic people. While this was going on today you had the Congress meeting here in Washington. They passed a bill that they had to pass on trade to avert a trade war with Europe. And then they said, okay, let's back off this. Let's adjourn our lame duck session until later, until this is settled. I think that's the line that runs through. We do face potentially a serious problem. Half of the country seems to consider the person, Governor Bush, who at this point looks like he's ahead in the electoral college count based on the Florida votes, they consider him to be incompetent. And he is going to wind up running the country in that view. They consider Al Gore to be a person with an attitude problem, something of a bully. And under this scenario he's going to wind up being a sore loser and having a deeper attitude problem. I don't think either of those things will happen. I don't think either of those are those kinds of men. And I think you'll find that American politicians will after this is over, after there's a legitimate ending to it, will come together and exercise their talents. It will depend on their talent and their skill and their attitude. TERENCE SMITH: Tony Lewis, when is that moment? When is it appropriate for one side or the other to bring it to closure?
TERENCE SMITH: John Leo, do you agree with that? Is that the way it should be handled? JOHN LEO: Absolutely. It was a centrist election. I think you have a Democrat and a Republican both leaning toward the center. It seems the consensus has been fulfilled here, but I do think that after every heavyweight fight where the judges are deemed suspicious, you talk about the rematch right away. I think talk about the rematch and the congressional elections of 2002 will begin immediately. I think there will be a very short honeymoon period. |
 |
||||||||||
| Win by losing? | |||||||||||
|
TERENCE SMITH: Very quickly, Clarence, you suggested that Vice President Gore could win by losing? What did you mean?
TERENCE SMITH: We have to leave it there. Thank you, all four of you, very much. |
|||||||||||
The NewsHour Media Unit, including this site, is funded by grants from:   |
 |
    
|
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
ANTHONY
LEWIS: I love Senator Simpson. But I don't think he's right. I have
not seen so far any federal question -- the only kind of question the
Supreme Court can consider. And, in fact, the decision of the district
judge in Florida yesterday, the federal district judge, made it pretty
clear that he didn't see any federal question either. I think it's a
question for the Florida courts. It's going to end up and be settled
in the Florida Supreme Court. I've thought all along and I think now
that there's no way to keep this out of the courts as all the Senators
said. But I think that it's going to be in Florida courts. 
JOHN
LEO: I hope it doesn't become a purely legal one. I think the American
people do not want a solution cobbled together out of obscure legalities.
I think they want a transparent decision that's political and respects
the will of people. I think the Republicans have got themselves in a
tough spot here. They're the party that respects states and states'
courts and rushing into federal court and the party that believes in
standards and playing by the rules is challenging those playing by the
rules for the hand counts. So I think they're not in a good spot for
themselves right now. 
CLARENCE
PAGE: Well, it's both political and legal, Terry. It has moved into
the courts already, but it hasn't moved into the courts in that kind
of a high-profile way that has a big impact on the political mainstream
of America -- and, by that, I mean O.J. Simpson level, I mean the level
where we're all hanging on this contest of lawyers. This hasn't gone
that far, and I think that we can still recover, Terry. I remember in
1960 after Richard Nixon graciously withdrew and John Leo is referring
to the party of standards and all that, while he personally withdrew,
other Republicans went ahead with court challenges, recounts in Cook
County and some other states. It went right up to the electoral college
vote in December, but you didn't read about it. You didn't hear a whole
lot about it. It was just background noise. And I think we may have
court fights going on. But it is conceivable that we could go ahead
with the electoral college vote and the inauguration and all the rest
of it just recede if the candidates make the declaration, if one of
them concedes, one of them decides that this is all over now, let's
let it move forward politically -- the legal side will just fade away.
JAMES
HOAGLAND: Well, I think there's a lot of doomsday rhetoric that exaggerates
the plight of the nation. If you look at this, you see a lot of what
is really good about the American system. And it falls well within our
traditions and within the system that our forefathers, the founding
fathers brought forth. This will be decided, I think essentially-- I
hope-- by local officials. That scene that Senator Simpson decried,
the canvassing board, meeting outside so that people could join in and
watch them, I think that's terrific. I think the rest of the world looks
at that and says there's really something remarkable about American
democracy. I think former Secretary of State Baker today in saying that
the people abroad began to get a sense of global instability are deeply
concerned, apprehensive was the word he used, I think he's making his
case as a lawyer and a partisan but not really paying attention to what
people think about America. I think this will not change people's attitudes.
It will confirm pre-existing opinions about America. The people who
blew up the U.S.S. Cole are not sitting around right now and saying,
see I told you that's why America has to be attacked. They have another
analysis on American society. Those who believe American society represents
something fundamentally decent in the world, I think, will see this
as confirmation. 
TERENCE
SMITH: John Leo, Senator Bumpers also mentioned that in his opinion
there's no way to resolve this to everyone's satisfaction and that you
may be left with this "we was robbed" attitude on the losing
side. Is that a concern? 
TERENCE
SMITH: The other question, Jim Hoagland, this notion that the inevitable
weakened president or weakened presidency. Is that inevitable? Is that
what comes out of this since one side must lose eventually? 
ANTHONY
LEWIS: Well, I hope it is after the recounting is finally done. I think
it should include the hand count for the reasons that the Senators canvassed,
and, of course, the overseas ballots, which have to be counted by Friday
midnight. We don't know whether it will be Saturday or Sunday. But there's
a possibility still then of lawsuits over the nature of the ballot in
Palm Beach County, as we know. What you can hope is that at least the
Florida vote is settled before the electoral college casts its votes
on December 18. I'd like to add one thing, Terry, to what Jim Hoagland
just said, and that is that whoever is elected president is going to
have a reservoir of doubt from half the country. There's no doubt about
that. I think it's obvious that many-- and many have said it-- whether
it's Gore or Bush, he would be very well advised-- and I think will--
taken advice to and will take in members of the other party into his
cabinet and try very hard to look as if he's being centrist, encompassing
everybody in his administration. It's a centrist election. You have
the country divided right down the middle. The only place to govern
that country is from the middle. I think that will have to be the result.
CLARENCE
PAGE: I think now... I don't know about that last week but now. Either
one of them could win by losing or lose by winning precisely because
of what we've been talking about, the fact that whoever concedes graciously
now will be a great relief factor and much praise and many speeches
at the end of the year commencement ceremonies and a really good chance,
as John Leo was just saying to start thinking about four years from
now and also two years from now when Congress is likely to lose seats
for whatever party happens to be occupying the White House. This is
never over. Politics is always a continuum in this country.