The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault in New York. After the News Summary, we go first to the man who would no go away, Ross Perot. Will he or won't he run again? And we hear from a once GOP solid voting block, young, white, and Southern, but no longer solid. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: Clinton and Bush campaign officials met with Ross Perot in Dallas today. The question is whether either side said the right things to keep Perot from launching a full scale race for President. Perot said he would not decide until Thursday. He met first this morning with the Democrats and said afterward heand his supporters found a lot of common ground with the Clinton economic program. But he said there were also a number of differences. This afternoon, he met with a Republican group. He said it was a very productive meeting and that many of their ideas overlapped. Before today's meetings, Gov. Clinton talked about Perot's economic plan on NBC's Today Show.

GOV. BILL CLINTON: His approach has much more in common with mine than with Mr. Bush, particularly when it comes to investing in education, and when it comes to limiting the influence of lobbyists and Political Action Committees, and that whole business designed to end the gridlock in Washington. And we have some differences, but I think, you know, it's a good thing for me to send our folks down there and make our case. We're not going to plead our case. We're just going to say, here's where we are, here's where we agree, here's where we disagree, and why, and do you have any questions. And I think it's an appropriate thing to do.

MR. LEHRER: President Bush was in East Dallas this afternoon, but he did not meet with the Perot people. At a campaign appearance, he attacked the Clinton economic program.

PRESIDENT BUSH: If Gov. Clinton is elected, by next year we will have hundreds of billions of new government spending, higher taxes on the middle class, and no restraints on federal spending, and even more pressure on the federal deficit. Gov. Clinton claims he knows a way to reduce the budget deficit by increasing taxes on the middle class and giving Congress more of your money to spend. And I believe the way to reduce the deficit is by making tough choices and cutting government spending.

MR. LEHRER: We'll have much more on the parole story right after this News Summary. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The government of South Africa released four political prisoners today. They were the first of five hundred set to be freed as part of a weekend agreement between the government and the African National Congress to restart power sharing talks. Jeremy Thompson of Independent Television News reports from Johannesburg.

JEREMY THOMPSON: ANC freedom fighter Robert McBride walked to freedom amid tight security following death threats and an attack by fellow prisoners yesterday. But the man whose car bomb killed three white women in an attack on a Durbin bar six years ago emerged through the prison gates to a hero's welcome from ANC supporters. McBride's original death sentence was commuted to life earlier this year. Some whites have already threatened to kill McBride. Four hundred miles away in Pretoria a family at the opposite end of the political spectrum prepared for an equally controversial release, that of Barence Stratum, a right winger known as the "white wolf," convicted three years ago of gunning down seven blacks and an Indian in a racist shooting attack. Many have questioned whether his rampage was really politically motivated. But members of the Afrikaaner resistance movement were ready to greet Barence Stratum as a hero. The release of these killers is bound to cause anger and controversy in some quarters. But it's part of a calculated trade-off between the government and the ANC designed to improve the climate of reconciliation.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: A resumption of full scale negotiations on a new multi-racial constitution is not expected until later this year, or early 1993.

MR. LEHRER: More than 150 people have been arrested for alleged involvement in an eight-nation drug ring. U.S. and Italian officials made the announcement today. They said the Italian mafia and Colombian cocaine cartels were behind the operation. Most of the arrests were made in the United States in the past three days. Officials said more than $44 million in assets and 529 kilograms of cocaine were seized.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Violent storms caused new flash flooding in Europe this weekend. Raging torrents of water ripped through streets in Genoa, Italy, sweeping away cars and everything else in their path. A young boy and his grandmother drowned when their apartment was inundated by floodwaters. In Southwestern France, at least three people were also killed by floods. The rains eased before reaching areas battered by flooding last week which killed 38 people. A Pakistani jet carrying 157 people crashed in Nepal today. Rescue officials said they found no survivors. The Airbus A-300 was on its final approach to the airport in the capital, Katmandu, when it went down. Most of the passengers were European tourists, but at least one was American. It was the second fatal jetliner crash in Nepal in less than two months.

MR. LEHRER: As many as 3,000 Bosnian Muslims were reportedly slaughtered at Serbian-run detention camps in Bosnia earlier this year. State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher said in Washington today the United States had received two new eyewitness accounts of the mass executions from the town of Brcko in Northeastern Bosnia. He called reports the most credible to date.

RICHARD BOUCHER, State Department Spokesman: What we have received in recent days are two accounts from former prisoners in a brick factory. They claim to have witnessed the spontaneous murders of up to 50 prisoners at a time. One of the prisoners has said that on several occasions he helped transport bodies of dead prisoners to a local animal rendering plant, where they were cremated. The two prisoners independent have estimated that some 3,000 men, women and children were executed in Brcko in the May/June period.

MR. LEHRER: Boucher said the information was turned over to United Nations officials for further investigation. He said the administration was pushing the United Nations Security Council to create a war crimes commission. And that's our summary of the news this Monday. Now it's on to the possible second coming of Ross Perot and the political preferences of a key block of voters. FOCUS - PEROT - WILL HE OR WON'T HE?

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The Perot factor is back and is our led story tonight. More than two months after H. Ross Perot shelved plans to run for president, he's back in the limelight because he says he wants his volunteers to tell him whether he should re-enter the race. Today representatives from the Bush and Clinton campaigns went to Dallas to court Perot and his state organizers from around the country. We'll talk with six present and former Perot supporters, but first this report on the proceedings in Dallas from Betty Ann Bowser of public station KUHT in Houston.

BETTY ANN BOWSER: Perot called the gathering of his volunteers and delegations from the Clinton and Bush camps historic. "Democracy at its finest," he said, "a real town hall meeting."

ROSS PEROT: First, the purpose of today is to give each party a full opportunity to explain to our volunteers their positions and have a very thoughtful discussion on the issues, and their objective, obviously, would be to get the volunteer organization to join one of their parties. But this will all be done on the issues. This, in effect, will be a town hall.

MS. BOWSER: The Democrats went first, briefing the Perot volunteers on their candidate's ideas about thedeficit.

SEN. LLOYD BENTSEN, [D] Texas: And I would say that we spoke about those issues honestly and with great candor, those issues in which we were agreement, and those issues in which we were in disagreement. Overall, we certainly agree that there has to be a major reduction in the deficit.

MS. BOWSER: Economist Felix Rohatyn says there was some disagreement about the deficit.

FELIX ROHATYN, Investment Banker: Gov. Clinton's plan brings the deficit down by 50 percent over four years. Ross's plan brings the deficit down to zero in five years. The difference between these two plans is an issue of judgment, is how hard you want to step on the brakes at a time when the economy is very slow, as opposed to how much growth are you trying to create in order to bring these two plans into balance.

MS. BOWSER: Perot called the whole process fantastic for his volunteers.

ROSS PEROT: I can speak for the volunteers in saying they were energized and stimulated by this experience. To me, it's further confirmation of the validity of the town hall concept. And with modern technology, we can go back to the town hall. So today was a very worthwhile experience for us.

MS. BOWSER: But some Perot volunteers said they weren't so sure.

SHIRLEY HAMM, Idaho Volunteer: It was very interesting.

MS. BOWSER: Was there anything new?

SHIRLEY HAMM: No.

MS. BOWSER: You heard all this before?

SHIRLEY HAMM: Yes.

MS. BOWSER: Were you disappointed?

JIM POPE, Washington, D.C. Volunteer: No, because I didn't expect them to come before an audience of about 50 people and make any proposal.

PAT MUTH, Florida Volunteer: I felt there was a lot of campaign talk. I felt that we heard a lot about what the Republicans are not doing.

MS. BOWSER: Were any specific proposals presented as to what should be done about the deficit?

PAT MUTH: No.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: This afternoon Perot and his followers went back for more meetings with representatives from the Bush/Quayle team. A pool camera was briefly allowed in the room to record the scene. Campaign Chairman Robert Teeter led the delegation. He was joined by Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Jack Kemp, National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and Phil Gramm of Texas. At the end of that session, Perot and his visitors talked to reporters.

SEN. PHIL GRAMM, [R] Texas: Where is our program similar to Ross Perot's and where is it different? It's similar in that we want to put the federal government on a budget like everybody else. It's similar in that we are for the balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and Bill Clinton and the Democrats are against it. It's similar in that we want a spending freeze, and the Democrats want to increase spending. It's similar in that we want to put the government on a budget like everybody else, and the Democrats want to raise taxes, increase spending, and expand regulations. It's different in some areas. We're against massive tax increases on gasoline. We're against cutting Social Security benefits. But in terms of trying to straighten out the economy by straightening out the government, that is an area where we're in agreement with many of the people that are very unhappy about government, and they showed their unhappiness by supporting Ross Perot.

REPORTER: Would you prefer that Ross Perot stay out of the race now?

ROBERT TEETER, Chairman, Bush/Quayle Campaign: I think that's entirely up to him to make that decision. And we don't have anything to do with it.

REPORTER: Early on the Democrats, the Clinton representatives,had lots of nice things to say about Mr. Perot and his programs. It seems that both you and the Democrats, both the Bush campaign and the Clinton campaign, seem to have lots of nice things to say and very positive things to say about the Perot program. It seems that maybe that's the one thing the two campaigns agree on.

ROSS PEROT: I've been telling you guys for months to know me is to love me. [laughter in room]

ROBERT TEETER: That's exactly how we feel.

ROSS PEROT: No. Here's the key. Excuse me one second. Well, here's the key. I just think it's terrific that we're all personalities and on the issues. And I think it's a great thing for the American people that we're onto the issues. And everybody in this room can have an enormous impact on this country's future if in the last days and weeks of this campaign, day after day after day, you go into saturation bombing on the issues with great precision so the American people know where each candidate stands. Then they can make a great decision.

MR. LEHRER: Now, six perspectives on the question of now what on the question of Ross Perot's mounting a full campaign for President. Joining us from Dallas are two people who sat through today's sessions. Orson Swindle is the national chairman of United We Stand, America, an organization that was started by Perot's supporters after his decision not to run in July. Joan Vinson is the chairman of the Maryland chapter of United We Stand, America. William Meyers is the former vice chairman of the Perot Petition Committee in California. He's now president of the Owners of America Incorporated, a clearinghouse for information on Perot's economic plans. It is not affiliated with United We Stand, America. Carrie Cramlich was the county coordinator in Colorado for the Colorado Perot Petition Committee. He's currently a member of the state chapter of the United We Stand, America. Joe McCutchen was a Perot supporter before he pulled out of the race. McCutchen -- Mr. McCutchen writes a political newsletter and is a radio talk show host in Elijah, Georgia. David Charlson was the chairman of the Illinois Citizens for Perot Committee. He's now a senior adviser to the Clinton/Gore campaign and to the Illinois Democratic Party. First, to you, Ms. Vinson there in Dallas. How did it go from your perspective? Was this a successful day?

MS. VINSON: Oh, I think it was an extraordinarily successful day. I think that all of us that were here found it to be, you know, a very exciting time to be involved politically. And I believe that it was a high honor and an awesome responsibility to listen to the presentation of the Democrats and the Republicans, and then to digest what they have to say, to separate the wheat from the chaff and go back to the volunteers in Maryland, and present to them what I have -- I took copious notes so that I hope that I have a very good analysis to present to them so that they can tell me what they wish Ross Perot to do.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Swindle, what happens next? Ross Perot says this thing is now up to the volunteers. How do you find out what the volunteers want?

MR. SWINDLE: Well, that won't be very difficult to find out. We have a fairly sophisticated for a bunch of amateurs, a system of communications that we use, fax machines. We use telephone networks. We have meetings, word of mouth, a lot of telephone polling of our volunteers and supporters and people at random. We will initiate that tomorrow, and the state coordinators will be going back, as Joan said, and discussing what she heard as she interprets it relating it to the people in Maryland and public coordinators with their states. And we'll get feed back from them by probably Thursday evening or early Friday morning.

MR. LEHRER: Now, what form would the feedback take?

MR. SWINDLE: Probably, go Ross go, or don't go.

MR. LEHRER: And then it's going to be counted by state, and then it will be delivered to Mr. Perot, and if it's 26 states say yes, he goes, 26 say no he doesn't?

MR. SWINDLE: Well, we'll -- we'll present him with the evidence, so to speak, and the results, and we'll make a decision from that point on.

MR. LEHRER: But who's going to make the decision, Mr. Swindle?

MR. SWINDLE: Well, Mr. Perot has said it over and over, that he will yield to the demands of the volunteers after we've given the whole process a chance to work and gotten as much information as we can. I think the evidence of information that we're going to convey or the reception of the information that we will convey this week will be coming back to us, as I said, Thursday evening, Friday morning. I will have it -- will tabulate it in some form, and I'll present it to Mr. Perot.

MR. LEHRER: Ms. Vinson, how are you going to ascertain what the volunteers, the Perot volunteers in the state of Maryland want Ross Perot to do?

MS. VINSON: Well, we are very well organized in Maryland, and we have a coordinator in every county. And they will reach out to the volunteers in that county. We have got very good fax and telephone information. We had interviewed or polled 3,000 people prior to my coming to Dallas. I will anticipate doing that again upon my return. You know, I would like to say that I think we have all been so very energized by Ross Perot's entry into the campaign in this political year and that it -- I think that the energy, the participation of citizens of Maryland, will always be indelibly etched in my mind, because it truly is democracy in action, and I think that, you know, people have put the public interest ahead of their own personal desires.

MR. LEHRER: Well, how are you going to count -- in other words, how are you going to measure this thing? I mean, are you going to report to Dallas to Mr. Swindle and his folks, and to Ross Perot, look, my -- there are -- we talked to 3,000 Perot volunteers in Maryland, and a certain number feel this way, and a certain number feel that way, or are you just going to report it as the person in charge of feeling what the deal is and say, look, this is how Maryland feels?

MS. VINSON: I will do it the best I can. I mean, I realize I do not have a capability to do a thorough, scientific poll, but we did put some information out on the radio asking people to call into our office. I will do that again, and I hope that people are already calling to the Annapolis office, because I want this -- I don't want to, you know, to slant this any way, to weight it any way. We went out before as much as we could -- did a random selection. We went to shopping centers and to Metro stations and had people calling in. And we also, you know, as I said, called our county coordinators and they called our volunteers. But I will make the most genuine effort that I can to get a response from the people in Maryland, and those that were Perot supporters, and I'm sure that I will get some that were not, because I do want them to call in and give me their answers.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Swindle in July, when Ross Perot said that he was not going to mount an active campaign for president, he did not consult with the volunteers before making that decision. What has changed?

MR. SWINDLE: Well, I think, No. 1, he said that he didn't have time to consult due to circumstances that were somewhat beyond his control, as I understand it, however, the thing that's changed now -- there's a considerable number of things that have changed. No. 1, as you recall, back in those days, the media was rather tough on him for not having a plan. They didn't give him time to get the thing out, or it was delayed in getting out. He's come out with a grand plan that has been widely accepted by economists and political pundits as quite a step toward correcting the deficiencies of the country, albeit a tough one. The other thing that has, of course, received wide attention and is on the best seller list -- in fact, I think it's still No. 1 -- another thing that has happened, we've had the Democrat and Republican Conventions. The two candidates have had the chance to address these issues seriously. And up until the last few days we've heard little in the way of serious discussion of the issues we think are important. That's changed. The third thing that's changed, we've had a lot of people because of the book and Mr. Perot's position come into the movement with a great deal of enthusiasm that we have not heard from before. That's quite impressive. And the fourth thing that's changed, the two parties and their candidates sent their representation down here to Dallas today and we had an extraordinary session with them, extremely good communications, excellent presentations by them, some very high class people, and we listened attentively, asked a lot of tough questions, and found it very informative.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Mr. Charlson in Chicago, you were a Perot supporter. Now, you are a Clinton/Gore supporter. What do you think is going on in Dallas? What do you think that this Perot meeting and all of these things today were all about?

MR. CHARLSON: Well, it's -- I find it interesting that we continue to refer to them as volunteers. I have the FEC report issued last -- issued I guess the end of August. And I noticed that Ms. Vinson was paid some twenty-five or twenty-six hundred dollars in the form of salary, and I also noticed that Mr. Swindle was paid some thirty-one hundred dollars in the form of salary, as was about fifteen or eighteen other so-called "volunteers." As a Marxist once said, "If you frame the question, you can control the answer." So it really doesn't matter what the answer is. It only matters whether you can control the question. It seems to me that what Mr. Perot has done is, in fact, controlled the question. The answer obviously from his volunteers is going to be that they want Mr. Perot to run. I think the best thing Mr. Perot can do for the American electorate in terms of not confusing the issue anymore is at least stay true to the commitment that he made on July the 16th, which was to withdraw from the race in order not to cause any more confusion in the American electorate than there already is. I -- certainly the view that the people in Dallas hold and United We Stand I think is wonderful. And I think trying to influence the platforms of the two major parties is great. But quite frankly, I think Mr. Perot should sit this one out and do the best he can to -- to make his voice heard, but not become a candidate. It will serve no useful purpose and it very well may throw the entire election one way -- tilt the entire election in a manner that could cause one candidate or another to win a state purely by accident.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. McCutchen, you were a Perot supporter. Now you are a Bush/Quayle supporter. Do you agree with Mr. Charlson, that Mr. Perot's re-entry would serve no useful purpose?

MR. McCUTCHEN: Well, I think, Jim, I think Ross Perot has to make that decision for himself. Personally I'd like to see him endorse George Bush. I've come to feel that George Bush is real serious about cutting the capital gains tax. I've been convinced by Paul Kuberdel, who's running for Senate, that George Bush would not make the mistake again of ever capitulating to the Democrats on taxes. And since Ross Perot and President Bush both come from a business background, I would love to see Ross Perot endorse President Bush. I think that would be wonderful.

MR. LEHRER: But do you smell the same thing coming out of the Dallas meeting today that Mr. Charlson does, that the whole thing is -- it's clear that the volunteers are all going to go back, and that he's going to run, they're going to ask him to run at least?

MR. McCUTCHEN: Well, I think they'll ask him to run. And I want to give Ross Perot a lot of credit. He's energized a lot of people. And he's got a lot of fine people working for him like Mr. Swindle and the fine lady in Texas. He's gotten a lot of good people and done a great service to the American people. He's brought attention to the deficit, and we all know we've got a terrible problem with the deficit. We must solve that. So I want to pay a tribute to Ross Perot and all his followers, and I'd like to see him join President Bush.

MR. LEHRER: You don't want him to run?

MR. McCUTCHEN: Well, I think it'll help President Bush if he runs.

MR. LEHRER: Okay.

MR. McCUTCHEN: I think the polls show it would help him, help President Bush if [Perot] Clinton does run, in my opinion.

MR. LEHRER: Ms. Cramlich in Denver, what do you think Ross Perot should do?

MS. CRAMLICH: Well, I'd like to remind the two gentlemen that just spoke that he's on the ballot in 50 states already. So it may be beyond anybody's control, other than the people that choose to vote for him in November at this point in time. He may by jumping back in cause more people to vote for him, but he's already on the ballot. I think that it's pretty much going to be up to the people in the United We Stand organization that are going to say whether they think he should run at this point in time or not, plus his individual preference. But he has stated -- and I believe that he says that he will follow their directive.

MR. LEHRER: Well, what do you -- what's your reading of -- you're involved with that organization in Colorado.

MS. CRAMLICH: I'm a member. I haven't really been terribly active in the past couple of months.

MR. LEHRER: Well, how -- how are the volunteers in Colorado going to be contacted, No. 1, and how are -- do you know?

MS. CRAMLICH: I do. I do, because I took probably at least fifteen to eighteen phone calls over the weekend from -- there's an enormous amount of activity, and I heard today from several people that I have not talked to since July when Mr. Perot withdrew. And some of them were very key people in the petition drive that were calling to say what's going on, I think -- I think I might be healed, if they felt hurt when he withdrew, and unlike me, weren't able to continue on for various reasons. Everybody had a different special reaction. And what Mr. Swindle said about the telecommunications network is true. I -- we communicate with each other. It sounds -- it may sound hokey but it works. Telephone communication --

MR. LEHRER: Sure.

MS. CRAMLICH: Telephone --

MR. LEHRER: But is there any question in your mind just based on what you know about thesituation in Colorado that the answer from Colorado to Mr. Perot is going to be run, Ross, run?

MS. CRAMLICH: I don't think that's a foregone conclusion because as I stated previously, there are a number of people that don't feel so strongly about Ross Perot running particularly. His ideas and what he stands for and the fact that he is the first public figure on a real large scale that has voiced what a lot of people believe needs to be voiced is important. And so I don't think it's a foregone conclusion. I think there's probably more support for it. But there certainly are people that have mixed emotions about him running again.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Meyers, what's your reading of the situation in California? Is it a foregone conclusion there that the volunteers are going to say yes?

MR. MEYERS: I don't know what the volunteers are going to say. I think the issues go beyond Ross Perot. I believe the issue is what Ross Perot initially got involved with, initially said on his National Press Club speeches, on Larry King's show, on your show, et cetera, that we need to be looking at the federal deficit, we need to be looking at the -- the national debt. We need to be correcting these problems. I still haven't heard a great deal of discussion from either Clinton or from the Bush campaign regarding the issue of the deficit and how we're going to alleviate it by eliminating pork barrel issues that are before the House now, which people have tried for four or five years to get pushed through, and they're still pushing through, i.e., a new solid rocket for NASA which has been proven by the NASA people and the scientists to have negligible effect over what they have now. I think what we need to concentrate here is on the issues and keep the issues before the people and have the people keep giving their direction to their elected representatives. Now, Ross Perot being involved again with this election can do no harm. He's holding the Clinton and the Bush people's feet to the fire, keeping the issue before the public. And that's what we need to continue to do. I see no harm with him doing that. He is on in all 50 states. If he can be elected President, so be it. There's a lot of people who were irritated that are disenchanted with Ross Perot personally, but when you ask these same people what are they going to do come November the 3rd, are they going to vote for Bill Clinton, or are they going to vote for George Bush, they are completely befuddled and have no answer because they can't bring themselves, like myself, to vote for either Bush or Clinton. So that leaves us only one choice. And if it comes down to a protest vote of voting for Ross Perot merely to send a signal, an additional signal to Washington, that we need to keep the issues before the President, before the Congress, and before the Senate, then that's what we should do.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Charlson, do you agree with Mr. Meyers, that voting for -- or that an active campaigning -- an active campaign by Ross Perot could do no harm? Do you think otherwise?

MR. CHARLSON: I disagree. I don't think it can -- it can help. I think it can only hurt. I think you have to look at some of the key pivotal states. Certainly if Mr. Perot were to continue to run -- and we have asked him to withdraw, No. 1, from the ballot in all 50 states. And No. 2, and I think even more important, we've -- we've asked Mr. Perot to examine Gov. Clinton's economic plan. You don't have six Nobel Prize Laureate economists, including Paul Samuelson, and endorse an economic plan, and yet continue with the rhetoric that the man does not have a way to deal with the deficit. Obviously, six Nobel Prize Laureate economists think he does. Secondly, and relative to Mr. Perot running, if you take a look at the state of Texas, if he runs and he gets 18 or 20 percent of the vote, that could well tip it away from the President and into Gov. Clinton's hands, which would obviously make us very happy. On the other side of the coin, if he runs in California, if he chose to run, and in California he gets 18 or 20 percent of the vote, it certainly could hurt the Clinton/Gore ticket. I think both candidates could get hurt in Florida and in New York. Certainly in Illinois, where I'm an adviser to the Illinois Democratic Party, we really don't see Mr. Perot hurting us a great deal. He will probably hurt the Bush camp more than he is going to hurt us. But I don't think that's the issue. I think the issue is the man has withdrawn. I admire him for -- for speaking out on the issues, and as one of the gentlemen said, holding his feet -- holding the candidates' feet to the fire about the issues, but let's face facts, folks. This is a two-way race. We've got 30 days or 31 days left, 32 days left until the election, whatever the number is. And more importantly, the man announces on Thursday, as been rumored he will. It will happen to be October the 1st, and I find it very interesting that he won't have to file an FEC report until after the election, therefore, he can do pretty much what he wants to do. So I guess I see a little dichotomy here.

MR. MacNeil: Yeah. Mr. Swindle, how do you respond to that, that it's only a month before the election, he had his chance, as everybody says, he decided not to do it, that -- you heard what Mr. Charlson said, others have drawn similar things, going through the various states, where all he could do is be a spoiler for various - - for one of the two candidates in various states. How do you respond to that?President

MR. SWINDLE: Well, again, I think as Mr. Charlson has just spoke, I find it almost ludicrous that the two major complaints we've heard here are one, that -- an allegation about an FEC report, which I think is absolutely ridiculous, and the gentleman should know better than that. Mr. Perot will be a factor if he chooses to run. The gentleman -- I've forgotten -- earlier who alleged that these weren't volunteers, I would say probably 99.9 percent of the people involved in this movement on an active basis are for Mr. Perot volunteers. And I would respectfully suggest that the man has got some sour grapes in his mouth. Mr. Perot, if he runs, is going to run a first class campaign, and we're going straight to the people. We won't be talking about personalities of candidates. We'll be talking about issues facing the American people and the tough times we have ahead of us if we don't start creating more jobs, giving people security at home, better education, better health care, the real gut issues that neither Mr. Bush, nor Mr. Clinton to date have been willing to discuss. They've got a conspiracy of silence going on on the subject of the debt.

MR. LEHRER: Ms. Vinson, did they discuss them with you all today, the representatives of the two candidates discuss these things with you?

MS. VINSON: They did. They did discuss it, yes, except that when it got down to the specifics of what they were going to do about the revenue and the expenditures, and there was a considerable shortfall, and I don't think that they addressed that, but I would like to say that I am an unpaid volunteer, and I am very glad that I have been involved ona seven-day a week, sixteen hour a day basis since March. I'd also like to say that I think that Ross Perot has really created a mandate for change, and I am really thrilled that we have seen the Democratic process working, and that there is citizen participation, and we are -- and today we did talk about the issues. All of the people that came to talk to us talked about nothing but the issues. And there was no peripheral things brought up.

MR. LEHRER: Let me ask you about this, Ms. Vinson. The Wall Street Journal said today -- there was a story in one of its news columns -- "This looks more like an ego-driven attempt to save face than an effort to save the nation," as far as Ross Perot personally, not the volunteers, not the movement, but Ross Perot personally. How do you feel about that when you read that or hear that?

MS. VINSON: Well, I do not believe that there is any truth in that at all. I think that Ross Perot is driven by his concern for the country. And I think that that -- that that's why there has been such an extraordinary response to him. You know, I think that the television screen really portrays a person's character. And Ross Perot has come across to the American people as a very courageous, valorous man, who -- with uncommon common sense. And that is what they hear from him and what they see. And I think he analyzed the situation. You know, I really cannot get into his mind. I don't know why he did not campaign actively. But he also said from the very beginning that he would run for President if he was on the ballot in all 50 states. That only occurred about a week ago. I think that he is only driven by his -- his real patriotism and his concern for his country. And he has looked at all of us and said, if you want this country to function, look at yourself, you are part of the problem, and get involved, see that the process works. And that's what we're doing. And that's what millions of Americans have done.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. McCutchen, as somebody who is now supporting President Bush, do you feel that a -- a serious run by Ross Perot would -- would hurt President Bush and thus hurt the cause of what you consider to be the best cause in this election?

MR. McCUTCHEN: Well, Jim, I'm hoping after the people here in Texas hear what President Bush has been like -- Phil Gramm had to say that they will join the Bush campaign -- that's what I'm hoping for and endorse President Bush.

MR. LEHRER: Well, I know, but let's for discussion purposes say that that does not happen, that Ross Perot runs. Is it going to hurt -- do you agree with the Clinton man that this is going to hurt the election process?

MR. McCUTCHEN: Jim, I really don't. I would rather see -- see Perot endorse Bush, but if he doesn't, I think, I think President Bush can still win. I think the Bush background in his capital gains tax cuts and that type thing will -- will help him. I think in the final analysis President Bush will be re-elected.

MR. LEHRER: Ms. Cramlich, how do you feel? Is this -- if he runs would this hurt the process or help it?

MS. CRAMLICH: I continue to be amazed by the fact that we're -- we're focusing still on how it might hurt the other two campaigns. If this is something that a large number of Americans want and they indicated by putting him on the ballot in 50 states that they do, I don't -- I don't see how it can possibly hurt the process. Right now, and what occurred today, and you look at the cover of Time Magazine and you look at the focus that we're having right now on some very important issues, and it's Ross Perot that's driving this. Even if his face or his name isn't even mentioned, he's the one that is pushing a lot of this discussion. How can that be -- how can that be harmful in any way, shape or form?

MR. LEHRER: All right. We have to -- I'm sorry. We have to leave it there with your question to all. Thank you, Ms. Cramlich, Ms. Vinson, gentlemen. SERIES - '92 - VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Finally, presidential politics from the voters' perspective. A new Time Magazine/CNN poll shows Gov. Clinton continuing to lead even if Perot re-enters the race, with Clinton drawing 43 percent to President Bush's 32 percent, and 17 percent for Perot. According to a recent poll by the Times Mirror Center for People and the Press, Clinton is even winning support among those who have traditionally voted Republican, chief among them young white Southerners who gave Bush strong support in 1988. Throughout this campaign with the help of the Times Mirror survey we've been sampling a wide array of voter attitudes. This time I spoke with three of the voters who were a part of that Republican block. I found them last week in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Allen Ramsay is in his second year studying for a master's degree in business administration at Wake Forest University in Winston- Salem, North Carolina. He has already spent three years in the business world as a marketing representative for a gas company and wants to return to the private sector after he gets his MBA. At 26, he is married but has no children. A native Southerner, this is his third time voting in a national election.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What was it about the Republicans that appealed to you?

ALLEN RAMSAY: It was really in the era of Reagan that turned me onto Republicans because it was such a strong economic time for the United States.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And what turned you off?

ALLEN RAMSAY: Well, it's really the economic downturn. I'm in a pretty unique situation that I'm going to be looking for a job in eight months. And I'm concerned about the economy. I think Bush is perceived as a creature of the establishment more so than an agent of change, and Clinton has been able to position himself as a real agent of change.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: It's interesting you voted for Reagan/Bush, then for Bush/Quayle, and their philosophy is so different, has traditionally been so different from the Democrats. They have accused Democrats of being tax and spend, you know, and they're now saying that the values of the Democratic Party aren't the same as the Republicans.

ALLEN RAMSAY: I don't perceive the values, as you mentioned -- it's a real intangible and a non-starter for me. They continue to talk about family values, and it's -- it's so nebulous that I can't -- no one I even know can grasp it. I mean, everybody's for education. Everybody's for family values. But how can you define family values for each individual? I think the government's -- in another case, actually in the abortion issue, they're trying to create policy to govern personal morality decisions. And I don't think that's the government's job. I think the government should focus on economic issues, foreign policy issues.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But there are fundamental differences between Republicans and Democrats. How can you now vote for Democrats whose philosophies are so very different?

ALLEN RAMSAY: I don't perceive that there's such an ideological difference between the Republicans and Democrats anymore. They both seem to be heading in the same direction. Clinton is even more mainstream, you know. And I perceivehim to be a better candidate because he is more middle of the road, versus left wing, or right wing.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What specifically is it about Clinton that pulls you in his direction?

ALLEN RAMSAY: I think it's probably that he seems to be such a people's president, or presidential candidate. He -- he's made a real effort to be accepted by the people. He -- almost to an extreme, to the point where it would worry you because he's for everything. He's pro economy, pro business, pro labor, pro -- you know, it just goes on and on. And I worry about that. The thing that really attracted me to Clinton is his policy of there's going to be change and I'm going to make it happen.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The labels that the GOP puts on Clinton, that he's a tax and spend liberal, a failed governor from a small state, those kinds of things don't bother you?

ALLEN RAMSAY: I'm concerned about his slick demeanor, being all things to all people. I don't think you can do that without an eventual catastrophe, not on the same scale as say, "Read my lips," but it's going to be tough for him to keep all his promises to every person. That troubles me. I'm troubled about the deficit, and I don't want to spend the United States into oblivion. But at the same time, I'm concerned that there needs to be that change.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, what has he said about the economy that gives you more confidence in him at this point than Bush?

ALLEN RAMSAY: He's just got a specific outlined plan. I think Bush has been real hazy about where he wants to go. And he knows he wants to change, but he doesn't know -- he's not as equipped to do that, I don't think. He's -- Clinton just seems to project an air of confidence that says he knows where he wants to go, how he wants to get there.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is it possible that Bush could do something that would decisively turn you back to him?

ALLEN RAMSAY: Sure, sure.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What would it take?

ALLEN RAMSAY: I think he's going to have to take a real strong position toward his -- and real pragmatic approach to how he is going to improve our economy, our competitive position in the world, without -- I don't want to become a protectionist state, but he needs to -- I mean, I think that he's going to even have to figure out how we're going to kind of grow out of this recession. But it's going to have to be a specific plan. And to this point, it's been very nebulous.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What about the draft issue that the President is making a lot out of these days, does that bother you at all?

ALLEN RAMSAY: It doesn't bother me that much. I can see Clinton's point. He was a Rhodes scholar and Rhodes scholars are particularly leaders of the future. He -- my real issue with the draft is that he made several contradictory statements as to his situation, and how he's handled that has been a little inappropriate I think for a presidential candidate.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Who do you think is going to win?

ALLEN RAMSAY: Clinton has created such a strong campaign that right now I think Bush is going to have a hard time to come from behind.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And you're going to vote how?

ALLEN RAMSAY: I can't say. I don't know.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But you're leaning --

ALLEN RAMSAY: I would say I'm leaning toward Clinton because of the -- because of his stance as an agent of change.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Allen Ramsay, thank you.

ALLEN RAMSAY: Thank you.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Robin Ganzert, 27-years-old, is the chief accountant at Wake Forest, which is also her alma mater. She is originally from Virginia, has been married for two and a half years and has no children. Like the rest of her family, some of whom are conservative Democrats, she supported Bush in '88, and the Reagan/Bush team before that. Yesterday she explained why the turnaround.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Robin Ganzert, when you voted for Bush in 1988, what did you like about him at the time?

ROBIN GANZERT: I voted for Bush in '88 because we were coming off the Reagan mystique, as I like to call it. Everything was going good. Everyone had a job. If you were coming right out of college, you were pretty much guaranteed of finding some position that was in your field. Things were going great, no -- no complaints.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What was your life like then?

ROBIN GANZERT: In '88, I had a job. My friends had jobs. We were all what we considered very well employed, not under employed. We were making a decent wage. We were seeing our friends who graduated earlier, great jobs, great careers, houses. They were able to buy homes which were amazing, cars, et cetera. And now it's different. Now it's very different.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: When and why did you start to sour on President Bush?

ROBIN GANZERT: After the '88 election, I just didn't see anything that Bush was able to do for the domestic front. Things declined tremendously after Reagan was out of office. The economy problems were surfacing everywhere, and they were being totally ignored by Bush. My husband was in and out of jobs for two years while he was searching for a teaching job. My sister, for example, she was out of Wake Forest for a couple of years with an undergraduate degree, in and out of a couple of different areas. Finally, she's with a financial services company now, but she was under employed for a good 18 months. And by under employed, I mean, here she is cashiering, waitressing, hostessing, doing things that quite frankly she could have done with a high school diploma. It's been terrible. It's been terrible.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Do you blame Bush for that?

ROBIN GANZERT: I blame Bush for ignoring the problem. Bush always tries to address -- he's very reactive in my opinion. He's not pro active at all. He always addresses the symptoms. He never looks at the root causes.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But the President says that he has an economic program, he has incentives, tax incentives, plans for a balanced budget, a whole variety of things that haven't been put into effect, because the Congress won't allow it. It's not his fault.

ROBIN GANZERT: I disagree. I disagree with that. If the President could always use the excuses it's not my fault because no one will cooperate, then to me that's a sign that he has a problem with leadership. He calls the vision leadership, the vision thing, and that to me is quite disturbing. You can't see someone who's the head of a Fortune 500 company saying that he has a problem with the vision thing and getting away with it. It's just not an excuse.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Are there any other sort of cutting edge or decisive issues that have caused you to turn off Bush?

ROBIN GANZERT: Most definitely. The abortion issue. In '88, I did not feel like the right to choose was a threatened issue. Now I do, particularly with his choices of nominees to the Supreme Court, as well as his party platform planks, very frightening, and all the family values issues. Bush really lost it with me when defined family as being a very traditional family role. And quite frankly, I think that's a little bit insulting to working women, single parents, both single mothers and single fathers, anyoneoutside that traditional role. It should be insulting to them.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is there anything Bush could do at this point that could win you back?

ROBIN GANZERT: We've had a lot of debates over this, over kitchen tables, my in-laws' kitchen tables, my parents' kitchen table, my own kitchen table. And quite frankly, in my opinion, there's not anything that Bush could do to bring me back. He didn't do anything during the four years. He didn't keep his promises during those four years. And had he, then it might have been a different story now. But I'm interested to see how this election turns out.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How do you think it's going to turn out?

ROBIN GANZERT: I think it's going to be overwhelmingly towards Clinton. I think America's ready for a change. I think Bush has been afraid of all the "isms," he's separated people so much, racism, genderism, you know, sexism, whatever, all the "isms." He's separated people so much and I think they're a little bit tired of that. America is so diverse, and I really believe that they're ready for a change.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Today, or eight weeks from now, you're going to vote for --

ROBIN GANZERT: Clinton.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: No doubt?

ROBIN GANZERT: No doubts.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Robin Ganzert, thank you.

ROBIN GANZERT: Thank you.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Jason Conley, a Wake Forest sophomore, is one of the young Republicans whose support for President Bush remains firm. Conley, who turns 19 next month, is a politics major from West Virginia. He is also managing editor of "The Critic," a privately funded conservative newspaper which Jason edits in his dorm room.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Jason, this is the first year you're going to be voting. I understand you initially were interested in maybe Ross Perot.

JASON CONLEY: Yes, I was. I was a bit disgusted with the entire political process. And I'm sure a lot of people were early on with Congress, with inaction on the part of Congress and the President. But as I learned more about Ross Perot and I learned about his tax increases and his economic plan and his general wavering on a lot of issues, I -- I quickly fell back in favor with the President. So I'm planning on voting for President Bush.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What do you like about Bush?

JASON CONLEY: I like Bush's economic ideas. I totally believe in free trade, and I don't like the economic ideas of Gov. Clinton wanting to raise taxes $220 billion. And I foresee economic growth just bottoming out with Bill Clinton in office.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: This is the argument that President Bush makes about why his economic proposals haven't been enacted, and he blames the Congress. You agree with that?

JASON CONLEY: Right. The thing is the President does not have the votes in Congress he needs. He does not have the votes that Ronald Reagan did when he passed through all of his reforms in the 1980s to spur the economic growth. What we need really is an overturning of the Congress. A Republican Congress and a Republican President would give us economic growth.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Why is the economy and what happens to it important to you?

JASON CONLEY: Well, I am going to be in the job market in a couple of years, and I want there to be a job for me, I think -- and everyone's talking about we need to cure all these social ills. Well, the only way you can do that is if we have increased tax revenues, and if you increase taxes, then tax revenues are going to drop. And I think the only way to increase tax revenues is to increase the business, the business community, the business base. And that's why the economy is very important.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: We talked to another student at Wake Forest, a graduate student, who also is concerned about the economy for the same reason, that he's going to be in the job market very soon, and he said that he felt that the problem with the President's plan or the President's attitude about the economy is that he's a preacher of the establishment, and therefore, you know, is not going to do anything creative enough or new enough to really get the economy moving again.

JASON CONLEY: I don't think that Clinton represents change at all. He represents the government intervention that plagued the economy in the 1970s, the Keynesian economic theory, which has been proven to -- to have failed. And he supports the great society which further burdened the American economy, and was really blamed for a lot of the economic slowdown that occurred in the '70s.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What else do you think is important in this election and that you think Bush has proved himself at?

JASON CONLEY: Well, international relations is paramount. I believe that President Bush has the ability and the foresight to handle international events with care, the Gulf War being -- being a prime example of the way he handled that, I think trade negotiations, I think family values, even though it's been ridiculed in the media so much, I think that a certain moral tone needs to be set in America, and I don't see Bill Clinton setting that moral tone.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How important to you is honesty in this campaign?

JASON CONLEY: Paramount. I think it is of the greatest importance. And I think an honest President is the only President the American people can trust. And I have my own suspicions as to whether Clinton is -- has been honest on a number of issues.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Like --

JASON CONLEY: Like the draft, his wavering on coming out with using marijuana. I think that in trying to act as a conservative when he is definitely a blatant liberal, I think that the American people expect and they need a little bit more than that in a President.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Critics say that the President calling Clinton dishonest about some of the things that he has said is like the pot calling the kettle black, that the President has some things to answer for too, like Iran-contra, and the reports are coming out each day on that. If it turns out that the President was not telling the truth, would that affect you in any way in your evaluation of him?

JASON CONLEY: Of course, but I don't see any forthcoming evidence saying that the President was lying. I believe the President was telling the truth, and if the President says he was telling the truth, I'll believe him.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Who do you think is going to win?

JASON CONLEY: Oh, I am fairly confident that the President will win. It's going to be a closer race than in past elections, but I think the President will win. And if Ross Perot gets back in the race, then there's no doubt that the President will win.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Jason Conley, thank you.

JASON CONLEY: Thank you very much.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: For the record, both Robin Ganzert and Allen Ramsay say that if Ross Perot does re-enter the race, they would still support Clinton. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Monday, Ross Perot met with Bush and Clinton campaign officials but said he would wait until Thursday to decide if he will re-enter the Presidential race. And the government of South Africa began releasing political prisoners as part of an agreement with the African National Congress to re-open power sharing talks. Good night, Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Good night, Jim. We'll be back tomorrow night with a Newsmaker interview with Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate Al Gore. I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Good night.