The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. It's all politics on the NewsHour tonight, "Where They Stand" speeches by Bob Dole and President Clinton [Series - Where They Stand], the economic growth issue [Focus - Growth Matters] as explained by Paul Solman, a report on three House freshmen going for a second term, and a [Focus - Issue of Control] debate between the two congressmen in charge of winning control of the House for their side. It all follows our summary of the news this Wednesday. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: The Gross National Product dominated the presidential campaign today. The Commerce Department reported the GDP slowing down to an annualized rate of 2.2 percent from July through September. That was less than half the rate of growth in the second quarter of this year. And consumer spending was the weakest it's been in five years. President Clinton spoke about the report at a rally in Michigan.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Today we received some more good news. Our economy is continuing to grow steady and strong, with an annual growth rate of nearly 3 percent. Real incomes for American workers, after being stagnant for virtually 20 years, are rising at nearly 5 percent, with no inflation in this economy. [applause] What we are trying to do, of course, goes beyond economics. But when the economy improves, it makes our other common endeavors more likely to succeed.

MR. LEHRER: But Bob Dole said today's figures showed the economy was barely afloat. He told a crowd in Clarksville, Tennessee, the President's 1993 tax increase and big government policies were to blame. He also said the economy would grow under his 15 percent across-the-board tax cut plan.

SEN. BOB DOLE: Now this is a real economic slowdown. And I might say it's disastrous news for American workers and businesses and even worse news for low- and middle-income American who have been squeezed and squeezed and squeezed by lower wages and higher taxes in this administration. So all this false and empty talk about the so-called Clinton recovery comes to an end. It ended today with today's announcement--take off the mask, it's not Halloween, but take off the mask. The economy is not good.

MR. LEHRER: We'll have more on the campaign later in the program. The Republican National Committee went to court today to block further campaign spending by the Democrats. The Republican suit filed in Washington wants the Democratic National Committee to file a formal report on pre-election campaign contributions and expenses. Republicans also filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission. Yesterday, the DNC released a partial list of campaign contributors and spending. Officials said a full report could take a few days to assemble. A former senior FBI official pleaded guilty today to obstructing justice in the Ruby Ridge case. E. Michael Kahoe admitted he destroyed an internal agency report on the 1992 confrontation in Idaho with survivalist Randy Weaver. The report was critical of the FBI's handling of that nine-day standoff. Weaver's wife and son were killed after a federal marshal died in a shootout at Weaver's cabin. Weaver and a friend were acquitted of charges they killed the marshal. Kahoe entered his plea before a judge in Washington. He now faces up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Auto workers at two General Motors truck plants went on strike today. Some 7500 union members left their jobs at factories in Indianapolis and in Janesville, Wisconsin. GM's national contract expired Sunday, and talks have been going on ever since. Workers at UAW plants which did not have local contracts were free to walk out. In China today, a pro- democracy activist was found guilty of plotting to subvert the government. We have more in this report by Peter Morgan of Independent Television News.

PETER MORGAN, ITN: Wang Dan speaking out for democracy in Tiananmen Square, an act which left him labeled as No. 1 wanted student. The 27-year-old spent four years in jail for the Tiananmen protest. After being released in 1993, he renewed contacts with political reforms but was detained again last year. Today, a four- hour trial at the Beijing People's Court found him guilt of plotting to overthrow the government and sentenced him to a further 11 years in jail. Wang Dan's mother, Wang Lin Yun, who presented her son's defense, said they planned to appeal. In China, state- run television did not report the trial or its verdict.

MR. LEHRER: The Vatican confirmed today a Roman Catholic archbishop was killed during an attack by Rwandan troops in Zaire yesterday. Church sources said he was ambushed in a battle between Zairean troops and Rwandan soldiers in the city of Bukavu. The fighting erupted several days ago between ethnic groups on the border between Zaire, Rwanda, and Burundi. Hundreds of thousands of refugees have been trying to escape. Aid workers said today one camp was overflowing with 400,000 refugees and faced the coming of 115,000 more. And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to politics, Dole and Clinton speeches, the growth issue, three House races, and controlling the House next time. SERIES - WHERE THEY STAND

MR. LEHRER: We begin again tonight with "Where They Stand" campaign speeches by candidates Clinton and Dole. President Clinton spoke this afternoon to women business owners at Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Women are establishing businesses and creating new jobs at twice the national rate of business and job growth. One third of all the businesses in our country, about 8 million companies now, are owned by women. They employ one in five of American workers. Here in Michigan, over 1/4 million women-owned businesses employ over 1/2 million people. In 1992, women-owned businesses contributed $1.6 trillion to our economy. Today, in only four years, that number has grown to 2.3 trillion dollars. [applause] I might say there are a very, very few companies-- countries in the world that have an annual output of more than $2.3 trillion. We know that increasingly more and more and more of our jobs are coming from our small businesses. And I'd like to talk a little bit about that. We have doubled the loan volume of the SBA in the last four years, while reducing the budget. We have cut the regulations by 50 percent in the SBA. For loans, applications of $100,000 or less, we've gone from an application form that is one- inch thick to a form that is one page-- [applause]--in four years. [applause] The White House Conference on small business asked us to do a number of things. We have now in two different bites, in 1993 and 1996, increased the expensing for small businesses who invest more in their own business from $10,000 a year all the way to $25,000 a year, the number one recommendation we got out of the White House Conference. The second thing that we were asked to do was to make it easier for people who own small businesses and for their employees to take out 401-K pension plans and to move those plans when they change from job to job, and we have done that. I am very proud of that. [applause] I signed regulatory reform legislation which will make it more difficult in the future for government to do things that are dumb to small businesspeople without giving small businesspeople a chance to stop it in the first place. We established a network of community development banks, each with a mission, to have a micro-enterprise loan program like those which many of you have experienced around here. If you think about it, micro-enterprise loans have helped to revolutionize the culture of poverty in countries far poorer than America all over the world. Why couldn't we revolutionize a culture of poverty in our inner cities and other isolated areas with micro- enterprise loans in America to bring free enterprise? [applause] Women can lead the way in this. [applause] And in general, I'm proud of the fact that we have reduced the size of government by about 250,000 to its smallest point in 30 years. We have reduced 16,000 pages of regulations. We have eliminated hundreds of programs. We have privatized significant chunks of the federal government that belonged in the private sector, more reduction in size regulation and programs and more privatization in these four years than in the previous twelve years combined, giving you a smaller, less bureaucratic government but one still committed to investing in education, protecting the environment, and moving this country forward together, giving everybody a chance to live up to the fullest of their own capacities. [applause] I got--I was a little amused today--my distinguished opponent said that we had the worst economy in 20 years. Now, two weeks ago, he said it was the worst economy in a hundred years, so we're making progress. [laughter among audience] And I feel good about that.

MR. LEHRER: President Clinton speaking in Ypsilanti, Michigan, this afternoon. Bob Dole was in Tennessee today. He spoke this morning at a rally at Austin Pea University in Clarksville.

SEN. BOB DOLE: As we left Washington, D.C., today, I told Elizabeth let's drive by the Lincoln Memorial, I need a little inspiration, I need to reflect about America and about the Republican Party and maybe have a word or two of silent prayer. And so we did. We are going to win this election, Mr. Lincoln. [applause] We are--we are the party of Lincoln, and I'm proud of it. I've read a lot about Lincoln. I know the good times, the bad times, the doubtful times. But he never lost his focus, and he did what he set out to do, and that's to save the union, keep us together. That's what I have, in a different sense, been trying to do, keep America together, honor the public trust in America, honor the public trust in America. [applause] Understanding when you're elected President of the United States, you have a special obligation to all the people to keep your word--keep your word. [applause] And I'm sorry the President could not be here today because he's missing his own retirement party right here in Clarksville. [cheers and applause] There are a lot of differences between Bob Dole and Bill Clinton, and one is I'm getting ready to move in, and he's getting ready to move out of the White House. [cheers and applause] And I wouldn't say a thing to offend the media. No. But I want to--I want to stress--because a lot of the people in the media don't understand the economy very well--report on it--and they've been reporting all these--oh, this is a great economy, it's tough for Bob Dole because the economy is so good. Well, let me tell you. Today, I'm afraid, the truth about the Clinton economy is getting easier to see and easier to understand because let me tell you what happened. This morning, we learned that our economy is slow and getting slower and slower and slower because third quarter growth has fallen to a paltry 2.2 percent, 2.2 percent. It has dropped in half since the second quarter. Now, this is a real economic slowdown, and I might say it's disastrous news for American workers and businesses and even worse news for low and middle-income Americans who have been squeezed and squeezed and squeezed by lower wages and higher taxes in this administration. It doesn't take a team of economists to tell you what happens when you mix slow growth with increased taxes. That's a recipe for economic collapse. And for three years, we have seen the so-called Clinton recovery. Now, if other Presidents had known all you had to do to make the economy grow is to raise taxes, don't you think somebody would have discovered it before. President Kennedy said we've got to cut taxes. Ronald Reagan said we have to cut taxes. Governors, Republican Governors say you have to cut taxes. It's your money. Give people more of their money back and let them decide how to spend it. Let them decide how to spend it. [applause] So if this is a recovery, I can hardly wait for the recession, if this is a recovery.

MR. LEHRER: Bob Dole speaking today in Clarksville, Tennessee. FOCUS - GROWTH MATTERS

MR. LEHRER: Now that issue of economic growth. There were two ready responses today when the Commerce Department announced the U.S. economy grew 2.2 percent last quarter. Good steady growth, said the Clinton administration, not enough growth, answered the Dole campaign, as we just heard. Our business correspondent, Paul Solman of WGBH-Boston, explains this key debate between the two candidates.

MR. LEHRER: Welcome to the 1996--

MR. SOLMAN: It's been one of the biggest disagreements of the current campaign over how fast the American economy can grow. On the Republican side, Vice-Presidential Candidate Jack Kemp has made the case in greatest detail.

JACK KEMP: Our biggest debate with this administration on domestic policy is that they think we're at our fullest capacity, that we've reached our potential, and that 2 1/2 percent growth is enough for America. Frankly, that's just not good enough for this country.

MR. SOLMAN: The Democrats' response is becoming mantra. The Republican remedy would cut taxes more than spending, thus raising the deficit and stalling, not revving the economy.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: It's a $550 billion tax scheme that will cause a big hole in the deficit which will raise interest rates and slow down the economy and cause people to pay more for home mortgages, car payments, credit card payments, college loans, and small business loans. It's not good to raise the deficit. We've worked too hard to lower it.

MR. SOLMAN: Growth during the Clinton administration has averaged just over 2 1/2 percent. The President seems pretty proud of that achievement. By contrast, the Republicans have countered with a number of possible growth rates, all higher. Bob Dole has talked about 3 1/2 to 4 percent growth. Jack Kemp has promised 5. Now, because of all the numbers in this debate and despite the risk of the Ross Perot infomercial folks suing us for plagiarism, we'll take this slow, one chart at a time. So first, why does growth matter that much anyway, or "Don't Cry for Me, Argentina." Consider this: In the 1890's, as economist Lester Thurow likes to point out, the United States generated about the same of income per person as Argentina. The centuries since, U.S. income per person grew a mere 1 percent a year faster than Argentina's did, but over the course of 100 years, that 1 percent makes all the difference in the world. Today, with average U.S. income per person of about $25,000 a year, most of us can afford marvels unimaginable in the 1890's.

MAN SINGING: Born in the USA. I was born in the--

MR. SOLMAN: In Argentina, by contrast, an average person's income is now just $8,000 a year.

WOMAN SINGING: Don't cry for me, Argentina.

MR. SOLMAN: Consider this: Say you and I each earned $50,000 a year starting today. My income grows 2 1/2 percent a year, yours 5 percent. At those rates, in 20 years, I'll be making $82,000 a year in today's dollars, not bad. You, however, will be making $133,000, inflation-adjusted. So the rate of growth certainly does matter. For one final example, here's Jack Kemp again.

JACK KEMP: We should double the rate of growth, and we should double the size of the American economy.

MR. SOLMAN: At the 5 percent growth rate that Jack Kemp's projecting, his goal of doubling the economy would be reached in about 14 years. By contrast, at the current growth rate of 2 1/2 percent, it will take about 26 years to double the size of the U.S. economy. And that brings us to a second critical question. What exactly is growth anyway, or thing one and thing two? Well, at the simplest level, growth is just a measure of how much more an economy produces in goods and services every year. Last year, say it was this much. This year, the same, plus a little bit. No value judgment as to whether the new stuff is good or bad--just that there's a little more of it. But for our purposes the point is that growth comes in two completely different ways is really two different things entirely. Thing one is simply more people who as they join the work force produce more stuff. In the U.S., the work force is currently growing about 1 percent a year. So just by adding workers like this welder, the economy is growing a percent a year. But workers tend to drive off with as much as they produce, so as a whole, we're no better off. That's why a healthy economy does not grow by one thing alone. As Nobel Economist Robert Solow points out, you need something more than just labor.

ROBERT SOLOW, Nobel Economist: The thing you would like to do by way of accelerating growth is getting more production per person, per person in the labor force and ultimately per person in the population.

MR. SOLMAN: Thing two then is production per person, better known as productivity. That's what we're really after. So when you hear numbers like 2 1/2 percent growth or 5 percent growth, take away that 1 percent growth in the labor force right off the top. Productivity is what's left and what makes an economy rich. Under President Clinton, it's running about 1 1/2 percent a year. By contrast, the Republicans are promising almost 4 percent growth in productivity. And they're clear about how they do it--by cutting taxes and letting people keep more of their income. As a mantra of Bob Dole's puts it--

SEN. BOB DOLE: It's your money. It's your money. It's your money. [applause]

MR. SOLMAN: Republican Nobel Laureate Gary Becker explains a key purpose of tax cuts, providing the right economic incentives.

GARY BECKER, Nobel Economist: If I earn the income and I keep the income that I earn, I have more incentive to work harder. And this takes many forms--hours you work, the energy I put into work, the effort I put into thinking of new ways to be creative and, and make money. If I was a private businessman, would I have an incentive to start my own business, with the heavy risk involved in starting your own business, the 16-hour days that you have to work for years before you can begin to make it, the high chance that you will fail.

MR. SOLMAN: So the argument is basically if we tax you less, you will work harder?

GARY BECKER: If you tax me less, I'll work harder. I mean, there are a lot of these subtle effects that when you add 'em up have a big effect on the economy.

MR. SOLMAN: A big effect? Well, says Professor Solow--

PROF. SOLOW: You have to be realistic about how much investment you get and--or how much harder people will work. We do not observe a lot of, uh, of extra work coming from the size of incentives that we are able to, to give.

MR. SOLMAN: So that brings us at last to the main question: How fast can we grow, or the Brady Bunch slowdown. Well, for a little bit of perspective, let's take a brief look at American history. From the beginning, say Eve to Pocahontas, the U.S. economy grew something like this--hardly at all--a pretty stable population so no labor growth, living pretty much the same way century after century so no productivity growth. Then along came the Europeans. And both the work force and productivity headed up a bit. Total growth looked something like this--say a percent or two until 1800, and the Industrial Revolution--when it began looking more like 3 percent, all the way to World War II, with the typical ups and downs of a modern economy. After the famous "Life" Magazine end- of-war kiss, growth skyrocketed and was the fastest ever, better than 4 percent a year right through the era of "flower power." And then, since the early 70's, marked in our family by the advent of the Brady Bunch, growth has slowed back down to something like 2 1/2 percent a year, where, my friends, it remains today. Now, if you take out increases in the labor force, you get productivity gains that look very roughly like this--1 1/2 percent or so from the 1800's to the Great Depression, 2 1/2 percent from the war to about 1970, 1 1/2 percent or so since. To economists who study the numbers over time, the key question is: Which of these rates of growth can we maintain without overstimulating the economy and triggering inflation?

PROF. SOLOW: We want to capture that idea of a trend. We want to capture the idea of a smooth path that the economy fluctuates not so much around as just under. You want to think of, of the capacity of the economy to produce stuff that we want. And we don't always use all that capacity. We have recessions, and sometimes we overuse the capacity. We overheat the economy. It's that path in-between that we're after, and that's the growth path of the economy.

MR. SOLMAN: Robert Solow and probably most economists think America's current growth path is likely to average around 2 1/2 percent a year for a while, that is, 1 percent more workers each year, at least till the baby boom reaches retirement, 1 1/2 percent more productivity. But Professor Becker thinks otherwise.

PROF. BECKER: I think it would be a sad commentary if we all said because we've been growing slower, therefore, let's give up on the idea that we can grow faster, that there's no evidence that we can't grow faster.

MR. SOLMAN: Gary Becker's estimate for greater growth is between 2.7 and 3 percent--the 1 percent by which everyone agrees the work force will grow, plus 1.7 to 2 percent productivity growth. Now, a difference of .3 percent may not sound like much, but it's huge. You have $100 billion in the next four years alone.

PROF. SOLOW: That's like saying of one of my--of a newborn grandson, this kid could grow up to be six feet tall or seven.

MR. SOLMAN: How unlikely is a seven-footer in the Solow family- -the professor's equivalent of 3 percent total growth?

PROF. SOLOW: It is wildly optimistic. And that's a pipedream.

MR. SOLMAN: So Solow doubts Becker's low number of 2.7 percent, disbelieves his high of 3 percent. As for Bob Dole's 3 1/2 to 4, or Jack Kemp's 5, well, those to Solow are simply fantastic, especially a few years from now when the work force is pretty much expected to stop growing. At that point, nearly all growth will have to come from productivity alone. Is unprecedented productivity growth plausible? That turns out to be the key economic question of this year's presidential campaign. FOCUS - ISSUE OF CONTROL

MR. LEHRER: Now, a two-part look at the battle for control of the House of Representatives. We begin with this report from Special Correspondent Hedrick Smith.

HEDRICK SMITH: Two years ago, 73 new Republicans swept into the House of Representatives promising a revolution. They were bold- they were different they vowed to shake the government to its very foundations. Their leader was Speaker Newt Gingrich, their political bible, the Contract with America. But today that Republican class of 1994 is under fire from Pennsylvania to Kansas to here in Seattle. They're fighting for their political lives. And Speaker Gingrich has told them to do whatever it takes to get re-elected. Some are running as true believers in the revolution, but many more, facing criticism, are toning down their rhetoric, and still others have moderated their positions and declared their independence from Gingrich and the revolution. No battleground is more sharply contested than Washington State, a swing state in recent congressional elections. After going strongly for the Democrats in 1992, the state went Republican two years later, electing six GOP freshmen.

ANCHOR: We are seeing sea changes in both sides of Congress tonight.

HEDRICK SMITH: The question now is will the pendulum swing back this year? Five of the state's Republican freshmen are vulnerable, none more than Randy Tate, from a blue-collar district south of Seattle.

RANDY TATE: It was John Sweeney, the head of the AFL-CIO, giving a speech at their national convention, and he went through this speech, and he said, "We've got to get rid of Newt Gingrich and flick Armey and Tom Delay and Randy Tate." and I thought to myself, we're gonna be in the election of our lives.

REP. NEWT GINGRICH: It takes two elections to make the revolution real.

HEDRICK SMITH: The stakes are so high in Washington State that already both parties have rolled tn their heavy artillery.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I'd like to ask him to come up here and just say a word of hello to you Adam, come here.

ADAM SMITH, Democratic Candidate: I want to get back to Congress, and I want to help them stand up for working families.

HEDRICK SMITH: Democrat Adam Smith, Randy Tate's challenger, is running ahead by tying Tate to Speaker Newt Gingrich.

HEDRICK SMITH: What is this election about?

ADAM SMITH: I think it's gonna be about a referendum on the Republican Congress. The election is about whether or not people want to re-elect Newt Gingrich speaker and re-elect the Republican Congress.

HEDRICK SMITH: Do you see this then as a kind of a referendum on the Republican revolution itself?

RANDY TATE, [R] Washington: No, I don't--I don't see that my race is a referendum on the Republican revolution. I think it's a referendum on two individuals that have two different views of what the government should be doing.

RANDY TATE: And we promised you that, if we went back there, that we would balance the budget, that we would change the way Congress does business and not let it change us

HEDRICK SMITH: Randy Tate represents the hard-core of the freshman class, the driving force of the revolution.

RANDY TATE: I'm here to report tonight that we have kept our word. [applause]

RANDY TATE: We, the freshman class of 1995, were sent to Washington--

HEDRICK SMITH: Tate has voted ninety-five percent of the time with the Republican leadership, and the leaders have repaid his loyalty, singling him out for help in this election. In an extraordinary move, House Republican Whip Tom Delay sent a letter to political action committees who had supported Tate's democratic opponent in 1994. The letter said, in part, "while I was surprised to see you oppose Randy Tate, you now have an opportunity to work towards a positive future relationship."

RANDY TATE: It's not a threat. Give me a break. It's encouraging them to donate to my campaign and keep the Republican majority.

HEDRICK SMITH: With this boost from Delay, Tate became a top freshman fund-raiser. But there was also a down side to Tate's close ties with the leadership. Gingrich's appearance at a Seattle fund-raiser touched off protests.

PROTESTERS: More kids, not Newt.

HEDRICK SMITH: And Tate's votes to cut the growth of Medicare, roll back environmental and worker protections and block efforts to raise the minimum wage have angered his working class constituents, many of whom work at the mammoth Boeing plant here.

AD SPOKESMAN: Last year, Congressman Randy Tate voted to make it easier for corporations to raid other pensions without notifying workers.

HEDRICK SMITH: Smelling blood, outside interests led by the AFL- CIO mounted a massive ad campaign.

WOMAN IN AD: It should be illegal to--to do something like that.

RANDY TATE: The national AFL-CIO and the trial lawyers and other environmental groups, they spent over a million dollars in the last twelve months in my district alone running lies about my record.

ADAM SMITH: This Congress, this Republican Congress, has raised more money than any majority party in Congress in the history of this country. My opponent, Randy Tate, raised four hundred thousand dollars before he even got in the race. He's raised over a million now.

HEDRICK SMITH: Steve Rosenthal is national political director for the AFL-CIO.

STEVE ROSENTHAL, AFL-CIO: We've got somewhere in the neighborhood of--uh--thirty-five to forty thousand union members who--who live and work in that district, and we intend to let them decide this year if this is a guy who they think adequately represents them in Washington.

HEDRICK SMITH: Like many other workers, Chuck Bixby, a member of the Teamsters Union, voted for Randy Tate two years ago.

CHUCK BIXBY, Smith Supporter: Being new, I thought maybe he'd go and make a change. Well, my vote this year is going to Adam Smith. I do not like the way that things have gone. I think he could've voiced opinions as to really represent the working people, the people in the northwest, and I--I--just don't think that's been done.

HEDRICK SMITH: Despite the heat, Tate is staying true to the revolution.

RANDY TATE: Why should I be embarrassed to come back two years later and say, "I did exactly what I said I was going to do"? I'm not gonna run away from my record when 80 percent of the public wants a balanced budget, 80 percent of the public wants welfare reform.

HEDRICK SMITH: Tate has energized Republican activists like Shirley Thompson.

SHIRLEY THOMPSON: He's a very honest man; he's a very hard worker. He's very much of a family man; he goes to church on a regular basis, but he doesn't beat you up with the Bible, so to speak. He lives what he believes.

HEDRICK SMITH: And if Tate survives, he's likely to interpret his reelection as a mandate to resume the revolution.

RANDY TATE: Well, I think that'll--it'll reinforce what the public told us two years ago. And, if I'm re-elected, which we believe we will, and the Republicans control Congress, we'll continue down the path of--of--uh--standing up for taxpayers.

HEDRICK SMITH: In the suburban, high-tech district on the Puget Sound, north and west of Seattle, Rick White is struggling to hold his seat with a more pragmatic strategy.

RICK WHITE: Yes, Josh, I'm doing just great. How's everybody doing there? Out of the two hundred and thirty-six Republicans we have in the House, probably a hundred and seventy-five of them have a safe seat--we're not in that category.

HEDRICK SMITH: In 1994, White, a Seattle attorney and political novice, Road the anti-Democratic tide into Congress--and embraced the Contract with America. He was a fiscal hawk bent on balancing the budget. White lives on Bainbridge Island, a ferry ride from Seattle. Like many people in his picturesque, affluent and environmentally sensitive district, White moved here with his family to enjoy nature and to climb the nearby Olympic mountain peaks.

RICK WHITE: Can chop a little--uh--step out, you know, if the snow is too hard to step in it.

WOMAN: We did vote for change, yes. We did not vote to see the rollback of the laws that protect our air, that protect our water.

HEDRICK SMITH: But ironically, it was White's votes to reduce environmental protection, especially his vote to remove obstacles to logging tn old growth forests, that raised astorm of protest back home.

SPOKESMAN: And I also believe, as a conservative, that we need to preserve the heritage of wilderness, forest, wildlife and rivers for our grandchildren.

HEDRICK SMITH: His opponent, Jeff Coppersmith, has pinned his hopes on painting White as an extremist on the environment and social issues and on casting himself as a moderate, pro-business, tough-on-crime Democrat. At a recent meeting with the editorial board of the Seattle Times, Coppersmith took the offensive.

JEFF COOPERSMITH, Democratic Candidate: The voters in this race face a clear choice, a choice between moderation and extremism. My opponent, Rick White, has voted with the Gingrich agenda ninety- three percent of the time.

HEDRICK SMITH: But, unlike Tate, White points to specific votes where he's broken with his leadership.

RICK WHITE: And then, you know, starting on May 16th and continuing with the environmental riders--you know, where they wanted to zero out seventeen environmental programs in a big budget bill--I voted against that three times. I voted against that when it was a tie, when my vote would've made the difference for the party winning or not.

HEDRICK SMITH: White's argument has made an impression. The Seattle Times, which backed White's Democratic opponent two years ago, has endorsed him this year.

JONI BALTER, Seattle Times: I think that--that Rick began to realize--ah--maybe when many of them began to realize, say, last February, that the Republicans had gone too far. But as--as the year went on, he did start to vote much more moderately on the environment.

HEDRICK SMITH: But voters like these neighbors, who know White as a fellow member of a father-daughter camping group, are slower to accept that White has been the district's true voice in Congress.

JOHN MUENSTER, Neighbor: He seemed to be a thoughtful person, and I had the impression that he might turn out to be a moderate. But he turned out to be a Gingrich right-wing conservative.

HEDRICK SMITH: In June of 1996, they wrote a letter protesting White's vote to repeal the assault weapons ban.

HEDRICK SMITH: Some of the criticism comes from people that are really very close to you. How do you answer that one?

REP. RICK WHITE, [R] Washington: Well -- uh -- I mean, I have to answer them on the issues and I--frankly, I--I'd be surprised if any of them really thought I was unreasonable on these things. They may disagree with me, but I don't think many of them will think that I haven't thought very seriously, with an open mind, about each and every one of these issues.

MICHAEL SCOTT, Neighbor: The irony is that--uh--in this election, I'm very uncomfortable with the Democratic challenger. And, had it been--that Rick had--had reconsidered his vote on the assault weapons ban, had given a thoughtful response to--uh--some of his other votes, I would definitely be--uh--considering supporting him in this election--uh--but I am not. I think his views have been too consistently with that extreme group of the Republican Congressmen.

RICK WHITE: Hi, guys, I'm Rick white, I'm trying to --

HEDRICK SMITH: If White does win over enough skeptics, he'll return to Congress with lower expectations for major change.

RICK WHITE: I think people are a lot more realistic than they were in the past I think that we've recognized, you know, we can't do it all by ourselves--uh the Constitution has the Senate in there. The Constitution's got the President. And I think there's been a, um, a learning process, and--uh you know, I think we are a little sadder but wiser.

PHIL ENGLISH: [in parade] How're you doing? Good to see you guys.

HEDRICK SMITH: Across the country, in northwest Pennsylvania, another freshman in a tight race, Phil English, is running a very unusual ad.

AD SPOKESMAN: Even President Clinton thanked Phil English for his independent action on behalf of working families. The president signed into law the minimum wage bill, originally coauthored by Phil English.

HEDRICK SMITH: In a debate, English made this claim

PHIL ENGLISH: I was praised by the butler eagle a few weeks ago for having not signed on with the Dole tax plan without seeing more details.

HEDRICK SMITH: In a freshman class whose early hallmarks were party loyalty and ideological unity, English represents a faction that have distanced themselves so far from their own leaders that at times they sound almost like Democrats.

PHIL ENGLISH: I think clearly that the freshman class was depicted as being much more ideologically monolithic than it--it really was in the final analysis. We are a diverse class, but the way we were portrayed--the way we portrayed ourselves to the public, I think, tended to paint us in very much of--of one shade, and I don't think that's accurate.

HEDRICK SMITH: Nonetheless, his Democratic opponent, Ron Dinicola, a lawyer from a union family and a former amateur boxer, keeps punching away at his opponent's links to Newt Gingrich.

RON DINICOLA, Democratic Candidate: I know Phil English's first vote is qonna be to re-elect him Speaker of the House. We got to stop that. We got to change the direction of this country; we need a Congress that's gonna work with the president, no gridlock--no shutdowns, let's have a dynamic political center. I mean people are concerned about Newt Gingrich. He's an issue.

HEDRICK SMITH: Despite qualms about some elements of the Republican revolution, English went along with party leaders in 1995, when they loaded their budget plan with cutbacks in programs like job training, worker safety, Head Start, and environmental protection.

PHIL ENGLISH: I think there were some situations where we probably could have left labor issues out of the--the appropriations process. When you get into it, I think we would have been better off if we hadn't led with those changes.

HEDRICK SMITH: His vote to make seniors pay more for Medicare stirred an angry response.

ELDERLY MAN: So take care of it. Fix it. But don't -- don't say well, we've gotta take it out of the backs of the senior citizens today. See, that isn't right.

HEDRICK SMITH: English got the message and began to moderate his Votes to suit his rust belt industrial district. Last spring, he was one of twenty moderate Republicans joining Democrats to push for a raise in the minimum wage, a vote which he is now using to advantage.

PHIL ENGLISH: I am politically independent, and, if my leadership takes a position contrary to my district on issues like minimum wage, I'm going to represent my district,

DEBATE MODERATOR: The winner of the coin toss will be allowed to either speak first, or speak last. Do you understand that?

HEDRICK SMITH: In a recent debate, both candidates focused on English's loyalties.

RON DINICOLA: There is the philosophy on the one hand that says all government is bad, everything that's bad in society can be traced to the federal government. That's the philosophy of Newt Gingrich and his extremist friends, my opponent signed a contract with Mr. Gingrich and voted with him over ninety percent of the time.

PHIL ENGLISH: I found when I researched this that I vote more often with Jim Traficant, my colleague over in Youngstown, Ohio, who's a pro-labor Democrat, than I vote with Newt Gingrich.

RON DINICOLA: We have two Phil Englishes here; we have the one that it's the politics of expediency. I think what we have here is, you know, St. Paul on the road to Damascus. I mean, we have a conversion going on here. We have an election coming up. We need to move quickly or we're going to lose the seat.

HEDRICK SMITH: Back in '94 you were running hard against the Democratic president with the party program. And now here we are in '96. Your presidential candidate's running behind there's controversy about the republican program in congress and you're running away from the party a bit, right?

PHIL ENGLISH: No. I think the agenda of issues has changed, and I've had an opportunity to move from being a candidate to be an elected office holder who listens within the district. I'm not gonna move back. I am where I'm going to be. As I've learned more about some issues, sure, some of my views have changes, but not radically.

HEDRICK SMITH: By shifting his stance, English has made himself a more difficult target.

JANET BALL, English Consultant: Mr. English's opponent slams his--his position on Medicare at every opportunity. I think that Mr. English--uh--is trying very hard to do his best for--for northwestern Pennsylvania.

AD SPOKESPERSON: Ever wonder what happened to American government?

HEDRICK SMITH: And, helped by a late wave of political ads funded by pro-Republican business interests, English has gained a slight edge in his race.

AD SPOKESPERSON: --working families and to protect Medicare.

HEDRICK SMITH: In the campaign home stretch, Phil English and other embattled Republican freshmen are doing what their party leaders have told them--forget about Republican solidarity and the Contract with America--hang on to your seat any way you can. Much rides on their campaigns. For how these Republican freshmen fare next fall and which ones of them survive will help set the tone for the next Congress and decide whether the Republican Revolution is over or just about to get a new lease on life.

MR. LEHRER: Now an overview at what is at stake in these and the other House races. It comes from the two House campaign committee chairmen, Republican Bill Paxon of New York, Democrat Martin Frost of Texas. Congressman Paxon, do you agree, first of all, that these House races should be seen as a referendum on the Republican Revolution?

REP. BILL PAXON, Republican Campaign Committee: [New York] Well, I think that it's very clear that as people now in the final days of this campaign are focusing on what really happened in Washington versus the labels that were placed on our Congress the past two years, they like what they see. And they're looking at it in terms, Jim, of Congress that has fulfilled its commitments, to take a look at things like balancing the budget, uh, trying to provide tax relief and welfare reform. They're contrasting it with the last Congress that brought about an 18 percent approval rating two years ago today, the lowest approval rating in American history under the last Democratic Congress. This is a choice between going back to the failed policies of the last Congress and a Congress, a majority that has done its job and moved ahead. And, you know, the three races you just pointed out, in all three of those races, as of today, our Republican incumbents, after being attacked unmercifully by organized labor and the Democrats, now enjoy double digit leads in terms of the reelection. So I think we're on track. I think that voters are now focusing, and it's one of the reasons, it's 60 percent of the Democrat consultants recently surveyed by the hotline in Washington say the Republicans are going to keep control of the House.

MR. LEHRER: So you're comfortable with people voting on the record of this Congress, correct?

REP. PAXON: Darn right. Two years ago today, the approval ratings for the Democrat Congress was 18 percent, the lowest in American history. Today, according to three independent polls, including Gallup, it's the highest approval rating in a decade or more. People are focusing on what's really gone on. And, you know, we've just seen the Democrats and their labor boss allies do too much negative advertising too soon. And the American people are fair. And they say, we've listened for a year at millions of dollars worth of attack advertising, now we're looking at the other side, and they're getting the right message. You've got in those three races, for example, our members are up by at least double-digit leads. And as you look around the country, whether it's the Northeast, whether we're on offense, going to gain seats here in the Northeast, Phil English will hold his in Pennsylvania, we'll gain seats in New Jersey, in New York, in Massachusetts, in the south where there's 19 open Democrat seats, 30 total Democrat seats that are open, we're going to win a majority of those.

MR. LEHRER: All right.

REP. PAXON: In the state of Washington where for a year now I've listened to Democrats say they're going to beat all our six freshman incumbents, all six of them are now ahead. And let's just take a look at Seattle, where Rick White and Randy Tate had almost $3 million worth of attack ads run against them by their labor unions and their allies, and they now enjoy double-digit leads going into the final week of the election.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Congressman Frost, it's all going against the Democrats?

REP. MARTIN FROST, Democratic Campaign Committee: [Dallas] Well, of course, what Bill doesn't tell you, those candidates, his candidates are under 50 percent. And if you--an incumbent is under 50 percent, chances are that incumbent is going to lose. Let's take another example. Newt Gingrich, the speaker, came to this city, Dallas, Texas, about a week and a half ago to raise money for the Republican Party. None of the Republican candidates would appear with him. They didn't want to be photographed with him. Newt is poison. And I'm glad Bill is reminding people that is candidates are running on the record of the last Congress. This was a record, and it's interesting, I spoke to a college class today, and I reminded that class that this Congress, these Republicans tried to cut student loans by $10 billion, and they were appalled. These Republicans tried to kill the AmeriCorps program. These Republicans tried to cut Head Start. I mean, this is an extreme group. There is a reason why Republicans have not won back-to-back elections for Congress in the last 70 years. It's been since 1928 on the eve of the Great Depression that the Republicans have been able to string two elections for Congress. They held the Congress from 1946 to 1948, from 1952 to 1954. And now they've held it for two years. We're going for the three-peat. We think it's two years and out for this crew.

MR. LEHRER: Do you believe, Congressman Frost, that the--that the record of this Congress, of the Republican Congress, is enough to run against, and is it working from one part of the country to the other--

REP. FROST: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: --for Democrats?

REP. FROST: Absolutely, Jim. And, in fact, I'm not sure where Bill comes up with his numbers--we have a number of candidates who are leading in the Northeast. We have a number of candidates who are leading on the West Coast. There are three states in the Midwest that have traditionally had Democratic congressmen, they don't have a single Democrat in their delegation, Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa. There will be Democrats elected from those states, and we have a number of Democrats in the South who are leading against Republican incumbents. We think we can pick up two seats in North Carolina. There are two Republicans in Texas we think we can beat, a couple of Republicans in Georgia we think we can beat. We've already picked up a seat in Louisiana, because you have two Democrats in a runoff. We think that we can pick up enough seats in the South to offset any losses that we have in open seats and that we'll pick up seats in all the other regions of the country.

MR. LEHRER: And all--all attributed or mostly attributed to a negative view of the Republican Congress?

REP. FROST: And a negative view of Speaker Gingrich. Now I want to reiterate, Speaker Gingrich was in this city, Dallas, less than two weeks ago. Not a single Republican candidate would appear with him.

MR. LEHRER: Everybody's running against or away from Newt Gingrich, Congressman Paxon?

REP. PAXON: Oh, Jim, everybody's running in support of a Congress that's accomplished its goals. Look at USA Today's story says that there is less anger toward Congress today than in recent history. As a matter of fact--

MR. LEHRER: What about Gingrich? What about Gingrich?

REP. PAXON: 62 percent of Americans are going to vote to reelect the incumbent to Congress. The fact is Newt Gingrich is running in one district in the state of Georgia. He's our leader. He's--let me tell you this--you give the people a choice between a Republican Congress that has accomplished the goals that we set out to accomplish, working to balance the budget, family tax relief and welfare reform, versus the policies of nationalized medicine and higher taxes and lack of welfare reform under the last Congress, it's not even a close call, and--

MR. LEHRER: All right. Let's--go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead and finish.

REP. PAXON: I have to comment because--

MR. LEHRER: Sure.

REP. PAXON: --Martin has said, well, you know, you're in trouble if you're below 50 percent. Well, then he's got a real problem because I just look to the numbers. John Over--these are Democrat incumbents--Over--Massachusetts, Rivers in Michigan, Ward in Kentucky, Browne in California, Orton in Utah, Voekmer in Missouri--all below 50 percent. Those are just some of many. The Democrats have the problem. They have not said a single positive thing in this campaign, except vote against Republicans, and the fact is as we get down to the wire, poll after poll shows the American people like what they see. We've taken the approval ratings from 18 percent to 50 percent or more. We're still not-- still not high as we'd like to be.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Let me--

REP. PAXON: It's the highest it's been in at least a decade.

MR. LEHRER: Let me try to move it to the next two years. What's the positive reason, Congressman Frost, for people wanting a Democratic--why should they want a Democratic Congress? Why should the House become Democratic-controlled for the next two years?

REP. FROST: They should want a Congress that protects education, that protects the environment, and that protects Medicare and that doesn't try and cut Medicare by $270 billion. They should want a constructive centrist Congress. The Republicans had a golden opportunity two years ago to move to the center. They chose to stake themselves out on the far right. It's very interesting--I don't know that Bill will want to talk about this--but Dick Armey, the Majority Leader, was quoted a week ago as saying he needed to elect some more right-wing Republicans so they could outvote the moderates in their own party. This is not a revolutionary country. This is a country that wants gradual responsible change.

MR. LEHRER: Congressman Paxon, why should the Republicans continue to control the House of Representatives?

REP. PAXON: We will continue to control--

MR. LEHRER: Why--

REP. PAXON: We'll attain our majority of seats based on a positive agenda of common sense reform. We're the party that initiated balancing the budget after 26 years. The Democrats couldn't do it, and we're going to keep our pledge. We're the party that's promised to appeal the tax increases that Martin and the Democrats passed in '93. We're keeping our word. The party that promised welfare reform that the President promised he wouldn't deliver. We did illegal immigration reform, telecommunications reform, health care reform, a market-oriented farm bill--this has been the most productive Congress of my lifetime, and I think it's very clear the American people are now starting to respond. Those approval ratings of Congress are up. The reelect numbers are up in polling. The fact is that again and again and again the Democrats have tried a negative approach with their labor allies, spending unprecedented sums of money. And today--as we approach the election a week from today, we're on the ascent, the Democrats have stalled out after September, and the numbers are moved in our direction dramatically, based on a positive agenda of real change. And by the way--

REP. FROST: If Bill will let me get a word in--

MR. LEHRER: Congressman Frost.

REP. FROST: --the ABC tracking poll shows us up by 12 points on the generic question of would you vote for a Democrat or a Republican for Congress, and they were only up by 5 points when they captured all those seats last time. We're going to take control of the House. We're going to have a net gain of 30 seats in this election.

MR. LEHRER: What's the connection, Congressman Frost, between the presidential race and the House races?

REP. FROST: I don't think there's a direct one-to-one relationship, but the better the President does, the better we will do. I've been on the other end of this. I remember 1984, when Walter Mondale was our nominee and doing very poorly and how difficult it was for us, and how we lost a lot of seats that year. This is going to be better. It's better to be winning the presidential election. It's not a one-to-one coattail relationship, but it does help.

REP. PAXON: Jim--

MR. LEHRER: How do you see the connection, Congressman Paxon?

REP. PAXON: I can't help but comment. Martin is a little selective. The Hotline and Reuters both have generic ballot questions.

REP. FROST: Reuters shows us up by three.

REP. PAXON: Republican or Democrat--

MR. LEHRER: We've got to--

REP. PAXON: --for Congress in your district--and they're both even. They're both within the margin area.

MR. LEHRER: Let me ask you the connection--

REP. PAXON: It's interesting--the Roper Organization says that when we're even in the generic ballot, we actually enjoy an 8 percent lead. So I feel very good about where we are.

MR. LEHRER: Quickly, the connection between the presidential race and the House races, Congressman Paxon.

REP. PAXON: Oh, well, first of all, we're--unlike the Democrats, who don't want to talk about Bill Clinton, uh, we're very proud to run on a ticket that says Bob Dole--

MR. LEHRER: All right.

REP. PAXON: --next year will signed the balanced budget and tax relief and make--

MR. LEHRER: So there is a--

REP. FROST: That's why they're running ads. That's why they're running ads saying vote for a Republican Congress to offset--

REP. PAXON: No, we're not running those--no, no, no--that's not- -

REP. FROST: --to offset--

MR. LEHRER: --terrific--

REP. PAXON: We're running ads reminding folks what a Democrat Congress did two years ago.

MR. LEHRER: We--we have to go, gentlemen. Thank you very much.

REP. FROST: They're conceding the presidential election.

MR. LEHRER: Thank you both very much. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Wednesday, campaigning in Michigan, President Clinton pointed to new Commerce Department figures showing the economy grew at a 2.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter. He said that showed the U.S. economy is strong. But Bob Dole used the same figures while campaigning in Tennessee to say they showed the growth was too slow. Dole said his proposed 15 percent tax cut would provide a needed boost. And the FBI official charged with destroying an internal agency critique of the Ruby Ridge incident pleaded guilty in federal court in Washington. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.