Bill Moyers Journal; 604; Campaign Report #4: See How They Run

Thirten

Bill Moyers' Journal

Campaign Report #4 "See How They Run"

October 3, 1980

[Woman instructor from the Congressional Workshop, Washington, D.C.]

WOMAN: Did you ever hear of Everett Dirksen? A lot of people thought he got elected because of his great legislation, because of his wonderful constituent service, because he was concerned and had projected concern. He might have. I have my own theory. Every time he saw me he kissed me. And he did that to every woman he ever saw. And they all voted 'I know I'm a Democrat, but oh, Evvie's so cute.' He got elected in landslides every time, because he gave them something to remember.

BILL MOYERS: I'm Bill Moyers. Tonight we'll see how they run, with symbols and images from kisses to commercials.

MOYERS [on camera]: President Carter this week galloped to the rescue of the steel industry, which, like one American industry after another, now openly flings itself upon Uncle Sam as Little Orphan Annie did upon Daddy Warbucks. What the president's announcement did not emphasize was that the new policy would boost his re-election bid in certain states and that it will also raise the price of steel and the products you buy that require steel. It's unlikely that the huge audience that saw or read about the White House ceremony in which the policy was announced will know about its inflationary impact until safely after Election Day. The image carried the day. Reality will have to catch up later. It made some of on the 'Journal' think that if there were a truth squad in this campaign sorting out rhetoric from reality, keeping at least the voters honest, this is about the time it would be making a midterm report. Here are some cases the truth squad might object to. Case number one: Ronald Reagan during the recent debate.

[Film clip of Reagan]

RONALD REAGAN: But there are other things that we can do with the inner cities. We could have an urban homestead act. We've got thousands and thousands of homes owned by the government, boarded up, being vandalized, that have been taken in mortgage foreclosure. What if we had a homestead act and said to the people, 'For one dollar we sell you this house. All you have to do is agree to refurbish it, make it habitable, and live in it,' just as a hundred or more years ago we did with the open land in this country, urban or country renew- homesteading.

MOYERS [voice-over]: Good idea. Good enough for Congress to have acted on it six years ago, when it passed the Urban Homestead Act of 1974, under which thousands of people have now taken over old homes and rebuilt them. Try again, Governor. Surely there's something the government hasn't already done. [Film clip of President Carter campaigning] Case number two: campaigning in California, Jimmy Carter may have run afoul of the truth squad for this statement.

JIMMY CARTER [at podium]: Six weeks from now the American people will make a very profound choice, a choice not just between two men or two parties but between two futures, and what you decide on that day you and those who listen to your voice will determine what kind of life you and your families will have, whether this nation will make progress or go backward, and whether we have peace or war.

MOYERS [voice-over]: Maybe. But who's to know which choice is peace and which is war?

Film of political commercial- 1964]

-

LITTLE GIRL [tearing petals from flower]: Six, six, eight, nine, nine—

SPEAKER [counting down]: Ten. Nine. Eight. Seven.-

MOYERS [voice-over]: Remember 1964? Lyndon Johnson painted Barry Goldwater as the warmonger.

SPEAKER: -Two. One. Zero. [Shot of nuclear explosion]

LYNDON JOHNSON: These are the stakes: to make a world in which all of God's children can live, or to go into the dark.

MOYERS [voice-over]: While Johnson declared he wanted no wider war. So, 43 million voters voted for peace, and got - guess what? [Film clip of Reagan campaigning] Case number three: the truth squad would undoubtedly take Ronald Reagan to task for suggesting that the United States is responsible for the war between Iran and Iraq.

REAGAN: What is happening in Iraq and Iran is the consequence of policies this administration has followed during the last three and a half years. A vacillating foreign policy and a weakened defense capability are largely to blame.

MOYERS [voice-over]: Shame on you, Richard Allen, foreign policy adviser to the Republican campaign, for not telling Governor Reagan that the Arabs and Persians have been at each other's throats since Haran al Rashid ruled Baghdad during the 1,001 nights. Hard to blame Jimmy Carter for the bad blood of centuries or the logic of Ayatollah Khomeini. The truth squad sentences you, Richard Allen, to four more years of graduate school. [Film of Carter commercial] Case number four: in one of his new commercials, Carter shows American citizens speaking on his behalf. Here's farmer Dude Haynes.

[Commercial]

DUDE HAYNES: I think that President Carter, when he decided to put the embargo into effect, he knew that it was a just decision, to do it. I know a lot of people think the farmers kind of took it on the chin, but we didn't get into war over it. And so what monies we might have lost really is a very cheap price to pay for freedom, really.

MOYERS [voice-over]: We're here asked to believe that in standing up to the Russians Carter courageously asked loyal citizens to sacrifice. But the government actually took steps to prevent the embargo from hurting the farmer. Billions of taxpayers' dollars were used either to buy grain or to put it into reserves and keep it off the market, thus driving up the price. Gerry Rafshoon, the president's TV wizard, went to the wrong school. Instead of the University of Texas, he should have studied at its rival, Texas A&M - Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College. Nice try, Gerry, for a city-slicker. [Film of Carter at press conference] Case number five: Jimmy Carter in the dock again for a press conference where, like St. Peter to the crowing of the cock, he three times denied accusing Ronald Reagan of racism.

CARTER: I do not think that my opponent is a racist in any degree.

CARTER: So I was asked later by a newsperson as I was getting on the plane, 'Do you think that Governor Reagan is a racist?' And I replied, ‘No.' And I do not.

CARTER: I am not blaming Governor Reagan, that's just exactly the point.

MOYERS [voice-over]: Now let's look at what Jimmy Carter did say in Atlanta.

CARTER: You've seen in this campaign the stirrings of hate, and the rebirth of code words like 'states' rights' in a speech in Mississippi, and a campaign reference to the Ku Klux Klan relating to the South. That is a message that creates a cloud on the political horizon. Hatred has no place in this country. Racism has no place in this country. [Applause]

[Still photograph of Leon Jaworski]

MOYERS [voice-over]: The last case concerns not a politician but a lawyer, the eminent Leon Jaworski of Houston, Texas. Endorsing George Bush last spring, Jaworski called Ronald Reagan 'an extremist whose simplistic remedies and shopworn platitudes trouble the informed voter.' This week, endorsing Reagan, Jaworski said he would 'rather see a competent extremist in the White House than an incompetent moderate.' [Interior, Moyers in studio] Which reminds me of a young man in-Texas who during the Depression applied for a job teaching in a small rural school. In the interview the principal asked him, 'And how do you teach the world, round or flat?' 'Sir,' replied the supplicant, desperate for a job, 'I can teach it either way.'

[Bumper title Bill Moyers' Journal]

MOYERS: For the remainder of this hour, we're going to school, but not a school most of us have attended or even know exists. It's a school for candidates. The students, all winners of primaries, are running for Congress. They're eager, idealistic, and in some cases, downright naive. In four days, if the school succeeds, they will have been divested of their naivete and taught to tame their idealism. For the teachers are expert political tacticians, the pollsters and media merchants who package and market the candidates as they would Rolaids or Calvin Klein jeans. Part of this package involves the candidates' spouses, in this case wives, for whom there is special instruction in image awareness and the role they play in campaigns. In other classrooms the candidates will be attending their courses: Elements of Victory, Values and Rhetoric, Sharpening Skills, and Issue and Opposition Research. But in spite of the fancy titles, every course in this school points to one single objective: winning on Election Day. We're going to a school for Republican candidates, but the Democrats have their schools as well. Both parties know that campaigning can no longer be left to the amateur, that winning has become a highly complex business. No report the 'Journal' has ever done illustrates more clearly the current state of American politics. The title is 'See How They Run,' but the subject is about what's happening to the way we govern ourselves.

ANNOUNCER: The chairman of the National Republican Committee, Guy Vander Jagt.

GUY VANDER JAGT: Thank you. Thank you, Steve, and welcome, candidates and spouses comprising the Republican majority of 1980. We're delighted to have you here. I honestly and sincerely believe that you, the ladies and gentlemen in this room, are the most important group in America today. You are part of the second of the two national elections that will be taking place November 1st. There are two, you know, not just one. The first national election, the presidential, everybody knows everything about that one. But the second and equally important national election is an election for which party will control the Congress. And so it is an exciting opportunity and it is an awesome responsibility that rests on the shoulders of each and every one of you who is running for Congress. I can also tell you, though, that there is no endeavor in the world that provides greater personal exhilaration than winning that first election to the United States House of Representatives. Emerson wrote, 'So nigh is grandeur to the dust, so near is God to man. When duty whispers low, thou must.' Republicans answer, 'We can.' I know you can, and you will.

INSTRUCTOR: How do you like my

MAN: No, I don't, it's not firm. handshake?

INSTRUCTOR: It's a little weak. Is that a little weak?

MAN: Yes.

INSTRUCTOR: All right. Will all of you turn and shake hands with somebody right now and practice your campaign handshake? [Candidates shake hands with each other] They're all winners out there. [Laughs] When you see another candidate, shake hands and let him tell you how your handshake is. Now, if it's weak and limp now, you may only shake hands with a voter once. That may be the only impression they have of you, and if it's weak and limp, fishy, think about that wonderful impression.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Let's hear his spiel, and everybody listen to what he says.

CANDIDATE: Hi, I'm Dan Firedling. I'm running for Congress, and I hope you'll vote for me.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Thank you, Dan.

CANDIDATE: Thank you.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: That's all right. Next row.

CANDIDATE: I'm running for Congress, second district in Indiana. Sure appreciate your vote. Can you vote for me?

MAN: Where do you live?

CANDIDATE: I live in Lowell, Indiana.

MAN: Well, that's near my home. I'll think about it.

CANDIDATE: Thank you very much, sir. [Laughter]

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Next row, next row.

CANDIDATE: My name's Jack Tyler and I'm running for the U.S. Congress, and I'd appreciate your consideration on Election Day. Thank you. [Shakes hands with a woman for a long time]

[Dinner party]

MOYERS [voice-over]: These men and women are all candidates for the Congress of the United States. They have come to Washington from across the country. Nowhere will you find more eager students. Many are awkward at the game of politics; many are innocent, taking their first hesitant steps into the political arena. There may be among them a future Carter or Reagan. This may be the last moment we see them untouched by the political imagemakers. Husbands and wives together have come here with one idea in mind: to learn to win. The courses awaiting them will teach organization, tactics, and above all, image. There will be little time to discuss the issues in the long uphill race about to begin—just time enough for a final huddle with the pros, men like Guy Vander Jagt, who at thirteen years in Congress, knows a lot about the business of getting elected.

MOYERS: What's the purpose of a school like this?

VANDER JAGT: Well, the real purpose of the school is to teach the candidates how to win, and that's really what it boils down to: how can they get elected. I mean, the utilization of television, the utilization of polls, the targeting, knowing where your voters are, which ones you have to go over, which ones you have to convert. It's become a very complicated and sophisticated business. In the old days, the Lyndon Johnsons and the Guy Vander Jagts sort of did this by the seat of our pants, and we sort of lucked out. But hopefully we've made it more of a science than a seat-of-the-pants operation.

[Interior, classroom]

1st INSTRUCTOR [in class]: First rule. The odds of answering a question wrong and/or poorly are increased in direct proportion to the length of the answer beyond 30 seconds. Example: 'Mr. Snelling, is it true that you recommended the current indicted bingo commissioner for his job?' Mr. Snelling answers: 'No. It is not true. But, then I did actually have a long conversation with him in my office prior to the well, prior to the time he got recommended for the job by the mayor, but of course it had nothing to do his job of bingo commissioner. Of course, his wife and my wife play cards together on Thursday night—' The longer you go, the worse you get.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: The second rule goes: If the fact and/or statistic supporting your answer doesn't get a 'Gee, whiz,' then there's a better fact or statistic out there. And I'm suggesting to you that in this campaign there are 10, 20, sometimes even 30 standard questions that you're going to get lots of times that probably require you to say something factual, if you will, to support your argument. Something that, 'Goodness, I didn't know that.” Probably your answers have a better chance of being long remembered, perhaps quoted around, even.

1st INSTRUCTOR: Rule number three: the candidate who says funny things will be long remembered.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: But the biggest single thing that'll win the most votes consistently is actually meeting voters. It produces more bang for the buck, more votes for the handshake than any other campaign activity. True fact.

1st INSTRUCTOR: Did you ever hear of Everett Dirksen? A lot of people thought he got elected because of his great legislation, because of his wonderful constituent service, because he was concerned and had projected concern. He might have. I have my own theory. Every time he saw me, he kissed me. And he did that to every woman he ever saw. And they all voted 'I know I'm a Democrat, but oh, Evvie's so cute.' He got elected in landslides every time, because he gave them something to remember.

MAN [in class]: Somehow you're after something. I think people are so tired of politicians. What I sense from that public out there is revulsion against the existing political structure. You can just simply come up to them in a wife warm way, tell them you're running for Congress. I love the shopping plazas, I love the factories, and will tell you, I get turned on. It's the political debating that I tire of. But the meeting people I just love. [Session: "Roles To Play In The Campaign"

(spouses only)]

Mrs. TRENT LOTT, Congressman's wife: I'm not really politically inclined. Trent and I can read the Washington Post and we'll completely cover it and not read the same articles. So, that can tell you how different our interests are. But when you're married to a politician, it's more important to keep the home fires burning, and that's what I kind of like to do. He likes the smooth sailing, and as long as his meal is on the table and the children are happy and you don't really rock the boat too much, I think, you know, that helps him more than anything. If he comes home with his stomach in a knot after a long day or two or three days on the campaign trail, he likes to at the time, I can't really remember how old settle into a little normal routine. We have two children that were they were, they were little and that is an advantage. All of you that do have small children, they are a definite plus. Anyway, I've gotten to be a little bit better, but if you get nitpickin', I don't know what I'm talking about, so I leave all that up to him. And I think most of the wives will agree that most of us don't really discuss the issues.

WOMAN: If you do speak, always try to make the topic something other than 'my husband's foreign policy."

Mrs. DICK SCHULZE, wife of congressman: Now, I very much enjoy people, and I like to go to coffees and speak to one-on-one, two, three, four, five. But you get up above ten, up to 200, that's not my thing. So, if you enjoy speaking, go to it. But, as I think was pointed out before, you're not going to be expected to know the issues. Don't be intimidated; do your own thing. And one other thing, please be supportive of your husband from now until November, because he's going to need a great deal of support and love and tender loving care and all that, and just give him all you have.

[Session: "Values and Rhetoric”]

INSTRUCTOR: Compassion. It's important to tell voters how you know what their problems are. You have heard of a variety of techniques for doing this. Walks are one. Some people say that walks are now a passe gimmick. I don't believe it; I think that there are circumstances where walks are very effective devices because they show a commitment that the person came to that town, took the time to talk to people, and learned what was on their mind. There are a whole variety of things that you can do, but the point of doing them is to show that you know what the voters are thinking. And what they're going through. Just a couple of thoughts on techniques for preparing issues. There is lots of material out there. You do not have to develop the exquisitely virgin concept on tax policy. There are things out there that you can use. When you're in the heat of the campaign and dealing with issues, practice technique. Don't study issues, practice those techniques.

if MAN [in class]: In 1980, with many of us new to politics, is there an answer that might be given this year that, on a particular difficult question, I am not in a position to answer with the kind of detail that I would like to answer, in fact I had the 22-person staff that the incumbent had. What I'm saying is, it is an answer of, 'I'm not certain of the answer, but this is my intrinsic or my inherent response as a conservative Republican.' Will I get into trouble with that kind of an honest answer in 1980, in a year when it seems that many of us are coming into politics without having ever been in politics before at this time?

INSTRUCTOR: Let me separate that a little bit. One of the biggest mistakes incumbents make is giving too much information in their answers. Get your answer down so that you can give it briefly. That doesn't mean that you don't answer the question, but if it's not your issue, if it's not what you really want to talk to the group about, you want to get that answer out of the way and move on to the next question in the hope that you get into more fertile territory. There is a tendency to have longer answers to questions that you're less sure about, because you begin to debate with yourself. Avoid that. Get the language down, get it out, and get it over with.

[Session: “Image Awareness”]

INSTRUCTOR: A mirror is the best friend, not only for you but your husband, and really consult it. How short are his socks? You know those meetings that they're sitting in and they're trying to make a good impression on stage, and they're going like this, and all you get is bare leg here? Cute! I mean, it's cute, but it doesn't do a thing for a lot of the women voters out there.

[Laughter] Okay. Also, black, since it's the most powerful color and the most threatening color, you've got to be careful with it. When I go in in my laid-back personality, quiet and, you know, not very secure and all that kind of stuff, and then I wear a black suit and a white shirt, which is the toughest combination, and black boots, I'm missing one thing. Say it.

WOMAN: The whip.

INSTRUCTOR: You got it! The whip. And so I wouldn't do that. I'm not going to come in here and teach in that kind of color combination. But there are other times, when I go to AT&T or something, that I would definitely put the entire power outfit on. Remember you audience. I like a little bit of red, but an entire outfit like that— I have one congresswoman who I dress, and you've got to be very careful that when she walks in you can see her, but not to the point where she's going- you know, she's not Doris Day.

WOMAN: Can you wear a red blazer if you've got a dark skirt it would look nice with?

INSTRUCTOR: Oh, yeah, I think that's a good idea, but I think an all-red suit sometimes is a bit— it can be a bit but it's- the bright. Another thing that would be distracting is dangle earrings. I know I'm hopping around now, best thing to do is just to get as much information to you as possible. No, loops are fine, but not dangles. So that when you're talking to somebody the earrings are going like this and they're not paying attention to you but they're watching the earrings. Another thing with makeup, you know. Too much blue, too much green. What'll happen is, as you're going like this, or doing something, they're looking at your eyes and they're not paying but you don't want attention. If we wanted to have people look at our belly buttons, we'd put big rubies in them, anywhere else on you body but around your face.

[Session for men: “Image Awareness”]

MAN: When do you wear long sleeves and roll them up, when do you wear jeans? You know, I'm from a rural farm district, it's got some, you know, small towns. I'm just curious as to the dress code.

INSTRUCTOR: There's a little bit of thought that has to go into it. You're running for Congress, that's a pretty big deal. People expect you to be kind of looking like it.

MAN: Sure.

INSTRUCTOR: I'm not saying pinstripe suit, I think that's wrong. But I mean, you gotta look like somebody they― and part of it's they've finally got to say I'm proud of this guy. I mean, I could be proud of him to be my congressman. Well, a lot of that's dress.

MAN: Right.

INSTRUCTOR: You gotta dress like it.

MAN: Any key where I can get some ideas on that, the best way to do it?

INSTRUCTOR: On the other side of it, there's lots of times when you want to be kinda casual.

MAN: All right, you go to a sale barn in my district and go to a sale barn and they got hogs and, you know—

INSTRUCTOR: In a suit, they'd laugh you out of there, I agree with you.

MAN: Sure they would. You know, just fit it right. Then you goI'm from Independence, and it's a pretty medium-income town, and— Sure, you would have to be pretty casual there, not overdressed, not underdressed. Short sleeve and a tie.

INSTRUCTOR: But I tend to be sports coat like you got on. I suppose I'd wear a tie around. Times to take it off, obviously. Take off the jacket, roll up the sleeves. But I'd wear a long-sleeved shirt, certainly. And the whole thing is you just kinda want to look like you're going to be somebody they can be proud of.

[Session: "Foreign Policy As An Issue'']

Rep. ED DERWINSKI: All of you want to get in touch with me, you just drop me a note afterwards, I'll be happy to send you any information along the way, and there's gold in those hills, because too many of the ethnic groups have a tendency to vote Democrat. You go in there and grab a few votes, you're getting converts. And you have to make the number of basic points, which would you be able to separate yourself from you Democratic opponent in the administration, is that appeasement never wins. They will agree with you, because appeasement was tried by Roosevelt after World War II, and wherever they tried coalition governments they failed. You make that historic point, you've got an entree.

MAN: What can be done by me as a Republican candidate to make that historic suspicion amongst the minority community in particular, with respect to increased defense spending, more acceptable to the black and to the Hispanic community within my district?

DERWINSKI: In my judgment, especially in the black community, you've got a lot of self-appointed leaders who really do not speak for the public. And I re-emphasize that, self-appointed leaders. But you also have the type, the flamboyant performer type, who you- you know, listen to him, you'd think that he really does speak for five or ten or 15 or 20 thousand people. The rank and file black American is just as defense-orientated as anybody in any other segment of the community. The fact that there's a greater percentage of blacks enlisting is an economic reality. It also shows that there's no aversion to military service. Defense spending means more jobs. More jobs means you break the unemployment pattern among blacks. And that, you know, is a way to wrap up the whole ball.

[Session: "Issue And Opposition Research”]

INSTRUCTOR: And the reporters will ask you questions. Now, these aren't going to be easy questions, because these reporters have been sitting around for two weeks doing their homework and thinking up really tough questions, not because they care what you think but because they want to impress the boss with how smart they are. But there probably will be an editorial that says, 'We met with candidate X, and he seems to have a good grasp of the issues, and while we don't agree with everything he says, he's a worthy challenger,' or the editorial will come out saying, "We met with candidate X, and he doesn't seem to even know where the district is, much less what to do about the problems of the day,' and right then your campaign's over. Because while the people will never know exactly what you said, they will read that you came across as somewhat of a dolt and you're not going to get the kind of attention by the media or the people that you need to establish a candidacy. So if only for that reason, it is very important that you know about the issues. And to help you in that area

- and I know many of you already have this, we've sent some out, and some of you have been around the committee, but we have a list of those who don't we will be providing you with our Issues '80 book and bring you up to speed on those, and we'll be sending you updates.

[Session: "What Are The People Thinking?"]

\

INSTRUCTOR: Name recognition, good old name I.D. You've got to have that first. The old saying that 'They'll vote for a devil they know before they'll vote for a devil they don't know. So that's pretty classic. We're not looking at anything unusual. Also keep in mind the qualifications background. You've got to have in a court sense or a judicial sense, standing. Some people don't wear well, and it's their personality, it's not the issue. We are not electing issues, we're electing candidates. So issues are a conveyor belt to candidates. And they can be basically as conveyor belts that will talk more or less about sensitivity of that candidate. They will talk more or less abot the relevance of that candidate to his district. Politics is not the only thing for the voter. They have at least 20 other filtering processes going on, whether they want to even pay attention to you. And many times, just like we found in California on some of our issues, they don't read the issue until the night before the election. Which makes it really rough on survey research firms.

[Outside classroom]

MAN: What can you expect from being on side or the other of the issue?

SPEAKER: Well, a lot of grief on both. That social issue called abortion is relatively balanced in this this country. In fact, it's what we call a bipolar issue, there's no bell-shaped curve to that one. On the other hand, if you're

MAN: Anytime you find yourself in front of people, you'll find that three out of five questions hinge on a single issue. If you're on the radio, that's what gets called in over and over again.

SPEAKER: One single issue, whether it's abortion or whether it's Mickey Mouse cartoon regulation, is going to elect somebody or not elect somebody. In other words, it's part of a constellation of issues that tell us a lot about but you. there are many ways to answer that question, whether you take a very strong approach toward abortion one way or the other, or you simply say that's something that, as Jimmy Carter has done, that I don't believe in, 'I'll honor the Supreme Court ruling.' That's a way of getting both houses satisfied. Jerry Ford did the same thing. Some people split it in their own family. Say my wife's against it and I'm neutral, that's not really an answer, but I'm just saying abortion is a question that continually comes up in campaign tactics, but in terms of strong strategy it is not a cutting issue yet.

[Session: "Press Conference"]

1st INSTRUCTOR: Would you like to ask the first question and pick the first-

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Okay, now, I need to see the hands of candidates again, so I know who we're asking. [Laughter] Okay.

1st INSTRUCTOR: Start across the front row, and I remember this hand went up. On your personal finances, what is your net worth?

CANDIDATE #1: My net worth is de minimus.

[Laughter from class]

1st INSTRUCTOR: What's de minimus? Do you know what de minimus is?

2nd INSTRUCTOR: I have no idea.

1st INSTRUCTOR: What's de minimus?

CANDIDATE #1: De minimus is not very much.

[Laughter]

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Thank you. Okay. What are your long-term goals in getting elected to Congress?

CANDIDATE #2: My long-term—

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Beyond getting elected to Congress. What are your long-term goals?

CANDIDATE #2: Well, essentially I'm a frustrated, angry businessman, and I wanted to reduce the size of government and its influence in our lives.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Okay.

1st INSTRUCTOR: Next candidate.

2nd INSTRUCTOR: If you're elected, what will you do to keep from getting Potomac fever?

CANDIDATE #3: Well, that's simple. I'll do unlike my predecessor and spend as much time in my home district as I can.

1st INSTRUCTOR: If you're elected, how much will it cost the taxpayers to keep you in office?

CANDIDATE #4: As much as I can get out of them. [Laughter]

[Session: "Elements of Victory"]

MAN: The single biggest thing people are looking for, with the possible exception of New Jersey, is honesty, honesty, honesty. I mean, in New Jersey, you can be a crook and still get in. Yes.

CANDIDATE: What is you opinion on the Abscam issue as to what my approach should be to it? I asked twelve people and I get six of this and six of that.

INSTRUCTOR: I think that Philadelphia deserves a congressman who's honest.

CANDIDATE: Would you attack it frontally?

INSTRUCTOR: That's all I say.

WOMAN: Well, for the first time in my district, we have become really receptive to the idea that Republican is not a dirty word. And we have the chance now to really gain the seats.

MAN: Are you going to get their support?

WOMAN: The problem is that Ronald Reagan, to fight that image, it's hard to fight an image. How do you think I should go about fighting that?

MAN: If Governor Reagan is going to be the president, if that's the perception as you go into October, then I would think that you might well gain some mileage with an argument that they need a black Republican representing that black community to keep Reagan from really creating major problems within the community, and you might even be able to turn it around. I've not thought of that, I'm not working for a candidate like yourself, but if you think that through, you just might be able to come up with a theme there that would be really appealing.

[Cocktail party - we hear bits of conversations]

CANDIDATE: What part of Missouri?

CANDIDATE: Independence. My home is in Independence, which is right next to Kansas City, which are separate districts. That's the drawing line.

VANDER JAGT: That's the only way you can repay us, is to win.

[Laughter]

CANDIDATE: Blow everybody down, I talk too loud. I can be very loud. I have to be very careful.

CANDIDATE: Well, I've been told that my enthusiasm can get out of hand I have to restrain my old ardor, let's say for the same reason. I don't have the resonant tones that you have.

MOYERS: The key question in the South is, what are the blacks going to do?

CANDIDATE: I think they're going to stay home.

MOYERS: And not vote.

CANDIDATE: If they do, then I think Ronald Reagan's got a good chance to win.

MOYERS: Isn't it lonely running as a Republican in Arkansas?

CANDIDATE: Lonely! All my friends say, 'You crazy?'

CANDIDATE: One of these days I'm going to be totally wrong. But right now I haven't been.

CANDIDATE: I want to apologize, I didn't get a chance to meet you when I was up in February.

VANDER JAGT: Oh, I'm sorry. That was my loss.

1st WOMAN: I like your similes and your synonyms and your antonyms.

VANDER JAGT: Thank you very much.

1st WOMAN: It's beautiful because I'm going to have a tough time.

VANDER JAGT: I know you are. I know you are, but I think, number one, you'll be a great candidate. I do believe that.

1st WOMAN: I will. I will.

VANDER JAGT: But I also think there is a tide coming our way.

1st WOMAN: I do, too.

VANDER JAGT: You can catch the crest of the wave.

1st WOMAN: My secret weapon is James Earl Carter.

VANDER JAGT: Where are you running? Good for you!

2nd WOMAN: I have a question for you.

VANDER JAGT: Yes.

2nd WOMAN: But I don't know if you really want this on tape or not.

VANDER JAGT: Oh, that's all right, we're very open here.

2nd WOMAN: All right, well, I'm really sort of upset. I was talking to one of the guys about getting money, funding, for our district. The Republican Party is trying to widen their base, right?

VANDER JAGT: Right, of course, that's one of our major goals.

2nd WOMAN: Right. So I asked him what would you do to help us what about funding-- can you make recommendations to the bank group? And he said, well, we only make recommendations to those districts we think that we can win. Well, financially my district's going to be a high-risk area, because it's a Democratic stronghold. But if we don't make no effort to try to conquer it, then, you know, my efforts are in vain.

VANDER JAGT: There is no way I could argue with the point that you have just made. And I think that some of them would be interested in that kind of education.

2nd WOMAN: Right, but I want to address you to the issue of you as being the chairman of the committee as making a strong push to help us.

VANDER JAGT: We are. We are.

2nd WOMAN: Well, you ought to inform one of your workers of that, because, you know, I was upset.

MOYERS: How much money do you think it will take for you to run?

CANDIDATE: Well, we talked in our campaign that if, for example, J.J. Exxon was elected governor of Nebraska and spent less than $20,000, so we figure that we can run a good race, outside chance of winning, if we can raise $20,000.

MOYERS: Gee, that sounds very low. I'm told been told around here that it takes about a quarter of a million dollars to run a good congressional race these days.

CANDIDATE: Well, those are the sessions that when we get to the financing and the generating of money and how to go about prospecting for donors, that's why I'm here, and if they can teach me how, the more the better. But we're hoping we can do something positive with a little bit less.

[Session: "What Really Worked For Me"]

Rep. MICKEY EDWARDS: In my first campaign I raised $31,000. Tremendous amount of money. And I decided after that campaign that I was never again ever going to be outspent by anybody, and I never will. In my second campaign I raised $600,000. Finally, we ignored issues a lot. Most people in your district are not going to vote for you because of whether or not you want to go back to the gold standard, they're going to vote for you because they like you. You smile a lot, you have a good personality, or they feel they can trust you. Look at the Carter campaign. They feel they can trust you. That's how you win elections. You want to get up and give great oratorical speeches, you want to be a great orator, wait till you get up here and get on the floor of the House. You know, first you get out and sell yourself to the community, and that's how you win.

[Outside classroom]

MOYERS: How much do you think you'll have to spend in your race?

WOMAN: $350,000, at least.

MOYERS: [Whistles] How will you raise it?

WOMAN: [Laughs] That's the big question.

MOYERS: Isn't there something invidious in this system by which you have to raise $350,000?

WOMAN: An incumbent has a built-in $500,000 of taxpayers' money that he's using for his side of the race. So somewhere you have to get money so you can challenge him.

MAN: They've been able to take advantage of the perks of office in regard to franking, direct mailouts, you know, almost daily visibility, House TV and radio studios, and the list goes on and on and on.

WOMAN: And it's really an incumbent's law.

MOYERS: Which does what?

WOMAN: Which gives them all of the perks, breaks, and they can do mailings to their constituents and all of that. And we have to-

MOYERS: What's the figure, 94 percent of all the incumbents every year—

WOMAN: Are re-elected.

MOYERS: Are re-elected.

WOMAN: Right.

2nd MAN: I find fundraising to be very distasteful. I don't like to ask people for money. It's the worst part.

MOYERS: Why is it distasteful?

3rd MAN: It's tough to walk up to someone and ask for money. I think for most of us, especially those of us who've just gotten into running for the first time, it's a very difficult thing to walk up and look someone in the eyeball when they say, 'Bill, I need $1,000 from you,' or 'I need $100.' It's very, very difficult.

MOYERS: How do you do it, John?

3rd MAN: I haven't learned to do it well yet. [Laughter]

[Women's session]

WOMAN: Have any of you had to handle the problem of your husband's running and odds are really stacked against him? I'm from a very Democratic state, and when you are discouraged by the odds, and yet he keeps saying, 'Oh, we've got to do it, we can do it, honey,' and yet you are discouraged, how do you remain positive? 2nd WOMAN: Don't get discouraged at the same time. [Laughter]

1st WOMAN: That is a problem that I have experienced personally, that— and what do you do?

Mrs. DICK CHENEY, wife of congressman: It will hurt as much to lose whether you count on that possibility or not, so don't count on it. You see what I'm saying? Be completely positive. Don't think, ‘Gee, I better prepare myself inside to lose,' because it will hurt just as much. So don't prepare for it. Be completely and totally positive. I think that's so important. You can't let anyone around you sense, smell, detect in any way at all that you don't feel good. Because that just spells down. Barbara and Fran here are involved in Senate campaigns right now, and I—

2nd WOMAN: With the primary that we've just been through, which turned out to be a breeze, but I tell you, two days before that happened, Chuck was just a basket case, and I said, 'Look, you've done all you can. It's really in the hands of the Lord now, and you've got to have faith,' and he has a sister who is— she hangs crepe from the word go. [Laughter] And so I just was there, just bucking him up the whole time, and I was out that last three weeks, my feet haven't recovered yet. But I do all of this, and I campaign on my own. They say, ‘Oh, where's your husband?' I say, 'Hey, we can't both be in the same place at the same time.' And if you have to go out and make a speech when you're just quaking in your shoes, you get up there and you hang on to that podium and you do it.

[Session with candidates]

Rep. JOEL PRITCHARD: We want you to win. This is a selfish thing on our part. We want to be committee chairmen, we want to have position and power-

PRITCHARD: -and all those, and the perks I've never figured out what the perks were, but we want those things. We've been out of power so long we don't even know what we're missing. And physically, this is a marathon. This is not a 100-yard dash. And you may feel that by working terribly hard and just knocking yourself out that you're helping the campaign. Well, you are, but if you look that way you won't get any credits. People want you to look vigorous, they want you to be tanned. Women have ways of putting things on their faces, but for you men, why, I find that if you have a tan, you have one of those whatever it is you do to get a tan, why, people will say, 'Gosh, you know he's really taking to that campaigning, you can just tell he likes it.' The campaign, it's so exhausting, and in so many ways, it's pulling on you in so many ways, you get your rest so that you're giving yourself the best chance to win.

CANDIDATE: I do all my work, I do all my polling, and if in mid-September I see I've pulled even with my opponent, then at that point, if I do lose, I would have a sense of great letdown.

2nd CANDIDATE: Losing is part of the downside risk, before you ever decided to enter. You should have kinda figured that one out—

3rd CANDIDATE: No, no. You show me anybody that's prepared to lose, and I'll show you a guy that's going to be good at losing 'cause he's done it lots. Now, I'm not trying to tell you that I'm going to win, but if you tell yourself at any point, you're just preparing yourself psychologically for the end result. You caught anybody on my baseball team talking about losing, and I bloodied their nose for them.

2nd CANDIDATE: I didn't say you had to talk about it, I just said that should be a downside risk factor when you decided to run, because there's no sure thing in politics, let's face it.

1st CANDIDATE: In my own life, it's an upheaval. I've got two children, age two and age four. Luckily, my wife, Lorraine, is strong, and she can put up with a lot of upheaval within our lives. I don't really— I don't know how to lose. I've got no reason to think I can win. But I feel compelled. It's- if I come to Washington, it's not because I want to. It's not something I'm enjoying. I'm exhilarated by it. But mostly it's anger from inside, and it just isn't good to sit home any longer complaining to my friends, complaining to my family, my business associates. I have to get out here and start fighting.

[Session: "Speech Making"]

SPEAKER: You will see no more than 30 to 45 seconds of Teddy Kennedy. Or of Ronald Reagan, or of Jimmy Carter, or of you. That's all they're going to take. So if you have a message that you want delivered to the audience itself, include somewhere in your speech, in addition to the long dissertations and the thoughtful analysis that I know you all go through when you prepare a speech, add one segment that is 45 seconds long or less that encapsulates everything you said in 25 minutes. And then turn directly to the camera and give that 45 seconds so that they can get it, clean and neat, as nice as possible, so that they can edit later. What you are doing is doing his editor's job for him. You are making it easier for that editor when he reviews the film or the videotape later in the day, to go through and say, 'Now, what was this guy really trying to say?' And you're going to come up he's going to come up with 45 seconds. Hopefully it's the same 45 seconds that you want him to come up with. But if it isn't, it's not his fault, it's yours.

CANDIDATE: How much of a manuscript do you use, or do you ever use a manuscript as a candidate?

SPEAKER: You are going, during the course of the campaign, to give the speech a thousand times. And once you've given it 150 times it will no longer be necessary to refresh your memory on it. You will become so bored with the speech.

2nd CANDIDATE: If you have a concerted group of hecklers, like has happened to Ronald Reagan on occasion, what do you do?

SPEAKER: Invite the hecklers in, and then play off of them. 'Is that what you want? Is that the kind of a society you want? Look at those. Look at them.” [Laughter]

SPEAKER: Of course, you could always pull a Nelson Rockefeller. [Laughter]

SPEAKER: [Motions with hand] That's a half-Nelson. [Laughter, applause]

SPEAKER: In fact, you might want to use that. "That's a half-Nelson, you don't deserve a whole one.' [Laughter]

CANDIDATE: I understand my press is right here, or is my press the whole room?

INSTRUCTOR: The whole room.

CANDIDATE [being taped by camera]: Oh. All right. Well, I'd like to begin by thanking everyone for coming today. As you certainly know, I'm Steve Gunderson, Republican candidate for Congress. The purpose of this press conference is to announce publicly my farm program for the farmers of western Wisconsin and the entire country for not only two years ahead but what we believe is the decade ahead. And with that, I'd like to open up for questions. You have copies of the statement.

INSTRUCTOR: What is your farm program, sir?

CANDIDATE [watching himself on TV monitor]: Well, we laid out a five-point program that we think deals with the immediate problems and also the long term. The first thing that we think is most important to the farmers of western Wisconsin is maintaining a stable dairy program, but to be honest, we have more cows in western Wisconsin than we have people or citizens, and as we look at it, what is happening in Washington, as we look at the fact that we're finding that there is increasing concern in Washington to cut or revise the parity system.

INSTRUCTOR: Sir, you've outlined a five-part plan and you've identified inflation on it--

2nd INSTRUCTOR: Can you stop that? [Motions to monitor] I shouldn't say this, but see when you—— everybody does it, everybody crosses their arms. But it's the most defensive gesture that you have. And when you're looking down at a reporter and use your arms crossed the way you were, it looks like you're saying, 'Okay, buddy, what kind of smart question you going to come up with now?' You're better off to have your hand like you did, you had your one hand in the pocket and you were using the other hand for gestures. It's much, much better than to have your arms crossed like that, because it just looks terrible.

CANDIDATE: Is it natural to put your hands, you know, rest them on the lectern, is that acceptable?

INSTRUCTOR: Well, let me throw it back at you. Is that natural for you?

CANDIDATE: Yeah.

INSTRUCTOR: And if you feel natural doing it, do it. It is much better than crossing your arms.

2nd CANDIDATE: What do you men think about a chair? I know I've done that quite a bit, just sort of lean on a chair, stand behind it, just for a little prop, such as an impromptu press conference such as this.

INSTRUCTOR: You are a candidate for the Congress of the United States, and that does not mean you're slouching in a chair or hanging over a chair. How many times have you watched on television and there is somebody on a television talk show, and, you know the large wing-back chairs, and he's got his arm draped over and he's sitting back like this, and it just looks atrocious. One other observation, I counted you used the word 'concern' eight times.

CANDIDATE: Terrible habit I have. There was also, I think, 'certainly' I used about four times in that one answer. And I do that. And if you can give me a way of breaking that habit, I'd appreciate it.

INSTRUCTOR: There are more politicians in this country who have concerns about problems in this country than there are dairy cows in western Wisconsin. And that's- I don't know whether it's a professional observation or a personal pet peeve that I've got, but everybody gets up and talks about concerns, and nobody talks about solutions.

[Republican Party commercial]

PASSENGER IN CAR: Congressman, I think we're running out of gas.

ANNOUNCER: It's not as if the Democrat Congress didn't have a warning. The last three presidents warned them.

PASSENGER: Congressman, we are running out of gas.

ANNOUNCER: But the Democrats, who have controlled Congress for 25 years, ignored them. They just went blindly down the road.

DRIVER: Hey! We're out of gas!

ANNOUNCER: The Democrats are out of gas. Vote Republican, for a change.

[Laughter from class]

MEDIA CONSULTANT: Now, media is very important in a campaign. People are used to buying cars via television, buying life insurance via television, buying their clothing via television. It's where they get their information. That's how they're going to find out about you. We've decided the people we have to reach are a very specific demographic. There are 40 million of them out there. They are between the ages of 18 and 40. They're making $25,000 or less, family income. They have 14 years or less education. And most importantly, they've dropped out of the system. They feel that the political system doesn't work. How do we know that? They haven't voted in the last four years. We want to reach these 40 million Americans who've dropped out and tell them the Republican story.

[Speaker plays TV commercial on monitor]

ANNOUNCER: Morris Udall isn't our representative anymore; he's running for president, not Congress. He's above Arizona. He's national now. He doesn't even think like us anymore.

Rep. MORRIS UDALL, (D) Arizona: --and I'm for socialism because I think the owners of public lands ought to be paid something-

ANNOUNCER: Arizona needs representation. We need a congressman, someone to represent us in Washing- ton. Someone like Tom Richey.

TOM RICHEY: Representing you, your viewpoint, and that of Arizona, that's what this job is all about. I'm Tom Richey, candidate for Congress.

[In class]

MEDIA CONSULTANT: That commercial did what we intended it to do. I mean, it was one of those quick hits. Put it on for three days and pull it off. After that commercial ran, Tom Richey had no further problem with name identification. His name identification went to something like 95 percent from about 25 percent. The bad news was that in the immediate wake of that attack his approval rating went two-to-one against him, and it's awfully hard to explain, gosh, things went really well, we got him just where we want him, when you've got a two-to-one negative rating. But of course that faded off and we ended up almost pulling that one out within about, I think, 2,000 votes, and Udall outspent us two and a half to one. We did an independent expenditure earlier this year against Franck Church. I had to realize that while we had some good issue things involving Frank Church, the average viewer was not necessarily going to understand that issue or, frankly, care that much about the issue. So we designed these commercials so that if someone was just passing through the room, that person got an impression: that number one, we had things very documented, and number two, Frank Church was either, one. not telling the truth, or secondly, not voting the same way most people in Idaho would want him to vote. So here are a couple of those commercials.

[TV commercial]

ANNOUNCER: Senator Frank Church voted with environmental extremists against the completion of a federal dam because of the possible effect on the tiny snail darter minnow. This was exactly opposite his stated position on dam construction. Quote, 'I am anything but an enemy of dams. Whenever evidence shows a dam will do more good than harm, I'll vote for it.'

[Congressional Record, October 22, 1965] Evidence did, Church didn't. With today's crisis in energy, that vote may have been snail-darter smart, but it was dam foolish. [Laughter from class]

MEDIA CONSULTANT: Sophisticated strategy that you hear about in seminars like this become sort of not nearly as important in closed cases where you sort of reach way down or turn mother's picture to the wall and have at it. You've got to understand the tactical use of the media. One of the reasons that print media doesn't work very well currently in politics is it requires somebody to read it. And there are very few people out there that have enough interest in politics or in the issues to go to the trouble to read it. Now, that may be a terrible indictment of our political system or our electorate, but our job is not to conduct a civic exercise, our job is to win elections. So we have to understand that as we put together commercials in other parts of the campaign. A political campaign can't educate anybody. You're not going to change any

attitudes in the course of a campaign. What you can change is the perception.

CANDIDATE: You have to become some sort of a Shake 'n' Bake image that's up there that they're going to perceive you as being able to effect change, and that's what the whole thing of the national media—

2nd CANDIDATE: This is a marketing school.

3rd CANDIDATE: And we're the product.

2nd CANDIDATE: That's right. You learn how to talk and how to walk and how to present yourselves. Maybe it's cheating, maybe it's not. But when you get reduced to something that's eight inches high and you're in two dimensions, you've got to be able to cut through, especially if you're going up against an incumbent.

4th CANDIDATE: So many of these superficial attributes add to your popularity. I wonder in the advent of television if Abraham Lincoln would have been elected today. And he would have had to go to a school like this and learn how to appeal to the media, smile into camera, wear the right clothes. I'm wondering.

[Women's session]

Mrs. DAN LUNGREN, wife of congressman: My husband ran four years ago against an incumbent and was defeated. He received 49.3 percent of the vote, and we decided after that campaign to try again, and we did and we were successful in 1978. And so, all I can tell you is that if you lose, don't be too discouraged, because it really I have to say in all honesty, even though I wasn't too crazy about the idea of his running for Congress at that particular time in our lives, it was the most exciting thing that we did or have done or I expect to ever have been able to do.

MOYERS: What about being an appendage of someone else? Since 1960 there has been women's lib, so-called, and women are supposed to stand in their own sunlight, not in somebody else's shadow. What is that? Do you feel an appendage?

LUNGREN: I feel very fortunate to be where I am, because if I hadn't met Dan, I would not be exposed to all of these things that I'm exposed to now, and so I realize that it's through his efforts and his work that I am where I am today, and I would not have had that opportunity otherwise.

MOYERS: Mrs. Vander Jagt, could I ask a question of you?

Mrs. GUY VANDER JAGT: Oh, please.

MOYERS: What is the price you pay in being the wife of a congressman, in terms of privacy?

Mrs. VANDER JAGT: What is that, privacy? [Laughter] Oh, it's not that bad, it really isn't. You develop a lifestyle. I'm leaving this afternoon for Michigan for the summer, so I get a little privacy there. Of course, I don't see my husband, but— it's a neat life. Is he asking off the record, Peggy? [Laughter] I don't know as there's anything to be reconciled. I suppose sometimes you dream of the good old days when you just had this normal life, but that wasn't as exciting, either. This is a much richer life, and you do feel as though you're doing something greater than yourself. I don't think there is that much disadvantage to it.

[In class]

VANDER JAGT: The hour is late, and America may not have many more chances. I know that some of you are beginning long political careers this year. Careers that will lead to the House and beyond. Who knows? Maybe for somebody in this room a career is beginning that will lead all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But even if it does, I can tell you that there will be no thrill that surpasses the thrill of the first election to the House of Representatives, and no sacrifice is too great to make that personal exhilaration come true. And I look forward to welcoming you to the House in January 1981, and what a glorious day that will be, not just for you, but for America. Thank you. [Applause]

MOYERS: The graduates of that school are now out on the campaign trail, putting into practice the techniques they learned from the experts. [Picks up “Issues '80' book] Each candidate went home with one of these, a summary of the issues of the day. A book, as one of their teachers said, 'to bring them up to speed on the issues.' But what they really learned is that you don't win on the issues. Issues are the smoke of a campaign, not its fire. A top Reagan advisor put it frankly this week when he said, 'Issues are simply a vehicle to build images.' So they are. But in a hall of mirrors the image is king, and what you see is almost never what you get. It's what enables Jimmy Carter to come to New York on Monday, assuring cheering garment workers that he's on their side, and then goes upstairs to an assemblage of bankers, brokers, and realtors - the people who own the city - and woo them with the flattery of 'no one could find finer friends.' John Anderson emerges as a third force with almost no one knowing anything about his record or beliefs. It's what enables Ronald Reagan to run for the presidency as if it were one more Hollywood role: And it delivers to us a Congress more adept at media images than coping with the realities of defense, inflation and energy. There is little accountability in American government any more, because the process asks not whether men or women can govern but whether they can win. The experts can teach one but not the other; that comes from living, which is hard to do if you're always running. The rest of us, the governed, are left to wonder what is real and what is not, while we are constantly fawned over by men who seem to think the difference is not worth knowing.

I'm Bill Moyers.