The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington. After our summary of the news this Labor Day, Elizabeth Brackett talks with swing voters in the swing state of Michigan. Labor Secretary Lynn Martin and Steelworkers President Lynn Williams have a Bush versus Clinton political debate. Tom Bearden reports on two Florida towns trying to rebuild after Hurricane Andrew, and Charlayne Hunter-Gault has another of her "Can We All Get Along?" conversations. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: This Labor Day was Harry Truman Day in the Presidential campaign. Both President Bush and Governor Clinton invoked Truman's name in campaign speeches. President Bush began the day by joining thousands of people in Michigan for the annual Labor Day walk across Mackinaw Bridge. Later, he told a rally in Wakishaw, Wisconsin, he had voted against Harry Truman in 1948, but they did have some things in common. That was not true for Bill Clinton he said.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here." And on issue after issue, Gov. Clinton says, first, let's blame George Bush, and then I'll get back to you later with an answer. [applause] I'll tell you, if the buck stops there, then Gov. Clinton's offering devalued currency. Harry Truman was a man of decisiveness, not equivocation. He'd find little in common with Gov. Clinton, the man who hedges or ducks on almost every tough issue. Many people thought Harry Truman would lose in 1948. But he said what was on his mind. He didn't worry about the press. And he never lost faith in the United States of America. And I stand before you with the same passion and that same faith.

MR. LEHRER: Bill Clinton was in Harry Truman's home town of Independence, Missouri, today, for a rally on the courthouse steps. He turned the same Truman analogy against Mr. Bush.

BILL CLINTON: Today is the beginning of this general election campaign in earnest. And I hope to goodness that today is the end, the beginning of the end of George Bush's presidency of broken promises. Harry Truman had a sign on his desk. You remember what it said? "The buck stops here." But when George Bush became President, he put that sign in the basement and put another sign on his desk. It said, "The blame begins here." [applause] He has blamed his failures on everything from the Federal Reserve to Saddam Hussein, from Congress to consumers, to the press. He says the recession is really over, we just don't know it. And if it's not really over, it's because we have an attitude problem. The buck doesn't stop with George Bush. It doesn't even slow down there.

MR. LEHRER: Baseball Commissioner Faye Vincent resigned today. Major League baseball owners had overwhelmingly passed a resolution of no confidence in his leadership four days ago. He said in a letter to them, he was leaving to avoid a long legal battle over the role of the commissioner. The owners had criticized him for his handling of labor negotiations and the realignment of the National League, among other things. A twin engine plane crashed today in a soybean field near Hinkley, Illinois. All 12 people on board were killed. Reports said the victims were members of a sky diving club. Hinkley is 50 miles West of Chicago. In the South African homeland of Ciskei, at least 24 people were killed when security forces opened fire on supporters of the African National Congress. Two hundred others were wounded. The crowd had gathered to protest Ciskei's military government. We have a report from Jeremy Thompson of Independent Television News.

MR. THOMPSON: As the ANC masses streamed across the border into Ciskei, peaceful protests turned into carnage. Without any warning, the Ciskei defense forces opened up with automatic weapons. It was a relentless fusillade, not aimed over the heads, but right into the terrified and seemingly unarmed crowd. As we laid huddled on the ground, bullets whistled inches above it, and not only gunfire, but grenades and tear gas too. All around, we saw people hit, heard their screams. There were bodies everywhere, dead, dying, injured. It was a field of blood. The military ruler of Ciskei, Brigadier Gakuza, heavily guarded in his nearby office, had warned that he would use all force at his disposal to stop the ANC's campaign to topple him from power. True to his word, the brigadier's troops had mown down scores of innocent victims.

MR. LEHRER: The ANC said South African President DeKlerk shared responsibility. DeKlerk said he was deeply shocked by the incident, but he criticized the ANC for organizing the march. The President of the former Soviet republic of Tajikistan resigned today. Rockman Nabiev was headed to the airport in the republic's capital when his motorcade came under fire. He later signed a letter of resignation at the airport after talking with other government officials. The former communist leader won election in November, but opponents said he had failed to stop ethnic fighting or to institute needed reforms. And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to some voters in Michigan, Labor Sec. Martin versus Steelworkers President Williams, recovering from Hurricane Andrew, and "Can We All Get Along?". FOCUS - REAGAN DEMOCRATS - '92 - SWING VOTES

MR. LEHRER: Labor Day, the labor vote, and Clinton/Gore versus Bush/Quayle is our lead story tonight. We begin with a report from suburban Macomb County, Michigan, outside Detroit. It's an auto industry area where Democrats voted overwhelmingly for Reagan and Bush in the last three elections. Times and the unemployment rate have changed since then, but will the votes? Correspondent Elizabeth Brackett reports.

MS. BRACKETT: Small homes with well kept yards make up the neighborhoods of blue collar Macomb County, just North of Detroit. Many county residents once lived in Detroit, but fled in the 1960s because of increasing taxes, race riots, and a belief that the city was deteriorating. Those city Democrats came to an already Democratic county. Macomb voted more heavily for John F. Kennedy than any other suburban area in the country. But the nearly all white county moved strongly toward the Republicans in the following presidential elections and when Ronald Reagan ran, Macomb County became the national example of the newly defined Reagan Democrats, conservative Democrats, who stuck with the party for state and local offices, but voted for Republicans at the top of the ticket. President Bush held on to these Reagan Democrats. He took the county with over 60 percent of the vote. But the recession hit this area hard. The auto industry dominates the economy here, and jobs in that industry have continued to disappear. This year, signs are growing stronger that the Democrats may reclaim some of those Reagan Democrats. We asked seven Macomb County voters to talk with us about their thoughts on this year's presidential race. All of you voted for Bush the last time around and some of you voted for Reagan the time before that. And probably two years ago, maybe right after Desert Storm, when Bush's ratings were up around the 98 percent level, you probably would have voted for him then too. Some of that seems to have flipped. Can you tell me what's happened?

STEVE VERBRUGHE, Building Inspector: I don't like the fact that he didn't go in there and finish it. And I don't like the fact that he hasn't performed the same things that he's probably very capable of right here at home in our own country. As far as I'm concerned, I believe that charity starts at home. We need to take care of America before we start taking care of the other country -- the rest of the world.

MS. BRACKETT: Ann, what about you?

ANN IVESON, Housewife: You know, really in mine Desert Storm was not a big factor. Being from Michigan, it's the economy. You know, we're just seeing people laid off for a year and a year and a half. And no one's addressing it.

TONY DINOTO, Firefighter: Well, sure. George Bush did. He allows Willow Run and then he makes a free trade agreement with Mexico. Now, wait a minute. We're putting 60,000 people out of work here and giving it to Mexicans for, what, 1/10 the wage?

MS. BRACKETT: Tell us what Willow Run is.

TONY DINOTO: Willow Run is a General Motors assembly plant that had a big confrontation with General Motors management in regards to production and pay cuts and negotiating contracts. General Motors had a plant in Texas, right next to the Mexican border, all the while in their pocket that they knew would do the same job for less. They took Willow Run and just said good-bye. They went to Mexico. When Ronald Reagan was elected, there were -- 35 percent of the country was union. Now there's 17 percent. They have a catch phrase. They call it competition, whatever they use, but it's just basically union busting is what they're doing. They're destroying the unions. I've seen layoffs in just about every union around here, cuts, cuts, cuts.

TED KOPER, Retired Truck Driver: I agree with that, because our fathers fought for the union. A lot of these young people don't realize everything they have is from a union.

MS. BRACKETT: Now, Ted, you were a Teamster, right?

TED KOPER: Yeah.

MS. BRACKETT: Still a Teamster?

TED KOPER: Retired Teamster. I still get my paper. I get my pension from the Teamsters. And I feel that the unions got the death blow when Reagan, the Controllers Union, he outlawed them, and that was the signal, look out, unions are fair game, and that's when all the Republicans went straight for the union's throat.

MS. BRACKETT: Yet, you supported Bush, correct?

TED KOPER: Bush, when he first came in, I thought, man, this guy has got guts; he's got smarts; I thought he was better than Reagan.

MS. BRACKETT: And did you support Reagan?

TED KOPER: Yes, twice. Like I say, to this day, I'm sorry I did. But like I was saying, Bush was fine up to Desert Storm. Then I don't know if his advisers are blind or if he's blind. It's the middle man is the one that needs the help and he keeps on beatin' the band for corporate America and the rich Americans. The people that carry this country need the help.

MS. BRACKETT: What have you heard President Bush or Bill Clinton say that would make you think that they can keep jobs in this country, or create new jobs? Who speaks to you on that?

DON IVESON, Retired Salesman: President Bush has come up and trying to even lower some of the gas standards, mileage standards, where Clinton and Gore have come right out and want to change it from 27 to 40 miles a gallon. If they do, there are going to be more jobs lost and Michigan is going to be one of the hardest hit because of the automotive.

TONY DINOTO: I think you're being taken by a bunch of lies. I really don't believe that because if they have to from 27 to 40, it's just going to be another facet of the automobile industry.

DON IVESON: Eventually.

TONY DINOTO: I don't think it's going to put people out of jobs. What's going to put people out of jobs is George Bush signing the free trade agreement. That's putting people out of jobs.

DON IVESON: Granted, granted.

DONNA DINOTO, Secretary: I understand what you're saying. I really do understand what you're saying, but now I want you to tell me what you think Bill Clinton's going to do. What has he done in 12 years as a governor? What has he done? Ninety thousand jobs in twelve years.

TONY DINOTO: We just went through this at home.

DONNA DINOTO: Yes, we did.

TONY DINOTO: I don't know what Bill Clinton's going to do, but I do know what George Bush has done.

MARDI STEVENS, Retired Secretary: I heard them say this morning that he's opening up the Air Force base down in Florida, and, was it, 30,000 jobs --

TONY DINOTO: Homestead, rebuild it.

MARDI STEVENS: Going to rebuild it. Now, that's 30,000 jobs right there.

STEVE VERBRUGHE: Let's take a look at something else though. I just got back from a vacation in Myrtle Beach. There's an Air Force base in Myrtle Beach that they're closing. Why in the world will you spend $30 million to rebuild an Air Force base that could very easily be transferred over to facilities that exist, and take $30 million and create some permanent jobs that could benefit people elsewhere in the country, or in that same area?

MS. BRACKETT: Why do you think they're talking about reopening Homestead Air Force Base?

TONY DINOTO: Well, it's because of what George Bush has been doing ever since the polls showed him 20 points down. He's been giving everybody anything they want. So what's he doing? He's pandering. Yes, he is.

DONNA DINOTO: That's not fair. They're both doing the same thing. That's --

TONY DINOTO: George Bush is obvious and he's doing it with my tax dollars. Clinton, let's give him a chance and then throw him out in four years.

MS. BRACKETT: How do you think George Bush in the most recent domestic crisis we've had, Hurricane Andrew, what did you think of George Bush's response, the administration response to that crisis?

DON IVESON: Well, he, he went down there and -- saying that, you know, okay, he's going to spend $30 million to reopen Homestead Air Force Base. Lawton Chiles, who is the governor of Florida, said it was a tremendous idea because it's such a crutch to fight the drugs coming in. This is where they're flying from, right there, you know.

MS. BRACKETT: So you liked that?

DON IVESON: That I did, yes. I don't -- political, yeah, there's -- sure, there's got to be a certain amount of it political for him, yes.

MS. BRACKETT: But you thought overall the administration response was good?

DON IVESON: I think so. I think so. I think they got the stuff there as quick as possible and this is --

MS. BRACKETT: So is he looking better to you? Is George Bush looking better to you after the response of Hurricane Andrew than he was three weeks ago?

TONY DINOTO: Yeah. I think any President would have done exactly what he did. I mean, anybody with any kind of compassion would have done that. Not to take anything away from him or give him anything, but I think -- I really don't think that's an issue. I just think whoever happened to be sitting in that chair would have done the identical thing. They'd have the same problems and the same suggestions.

MS. BRACKETT: But, Ann, you felt better about him after this response?

ANN IVESON: Yeah. And they said it would vary normally -- of course, it was an election year, but normally a President doesn't get that involved. Yeah. And he -- he's seemingly very interested in them.

MS. BRACKETT: If you can just define for me -- let's go around the room -- what you think the key issue that -- that made you wonder about the -- whether or not you could support President Bush again.

STEVE VERBRUGHE: I can tell you that I think it's more than just the economy. As I said before, Bush is not taking care of America. And I believe that that was one of the things that Clinton did bring out a number of times at the convention, that he wanted to take care of the American people. I need more information from both of them. Certainly, we need to do something for the American people that will improve the economy, that will help the health care, that will give people the freedom, the pro-choice that we need.

MS. BRACKETT: Could you still vote for George Bush?

STEVE VERBRUGHE: Possibly.

MS. BRACKETT: Ann.

ANN IVESON: If we had been talking yesterday, I could have given you an entirely different answer. No, it was very funny. Tonight I was reading the paper. They did a survey and they did '69, '79, and '89 wages. Each one of these categories of these young people getting out of school have dropped $3,000 a year. We're not advancing. We're not going anywhere. We have gone down since '69. I could not believe this. And so now I couldn't tell you who I'm going to vote for. No one has said anything to me -- I don't know.

MS. BRACKETT: You remain pretty undecided?

ANN IVESON: I remain very undecided.

TED KOPER: If Perot was running, he'd have my vote. I really don't know yet, but eventually, before I pull the lever, I will know. But like I say, I got to keep reading the paper and listening to these guys.

MS. BRACKETT: Could you vote for George Bush again?

TED KOPER: Possibly, but it seems that he's leaning a lot towards corporate America and he wants to keep giving all these favors to the rich.

MS. BRACKETT: So, again, could you vote for George Bush again?

TED KOPER: Not really. Today, no. I don't think so.

MS. BRACKETT: Changed your mind from 30 seconds ago. You really are undecided.

TED KOPER: I am. But if I had to vote today, no.

DON IVESON: Primarily like the rest of 'em. It's a very big decision and I'm not there yet. I'm still waiting for somebody to say something.

MS. BRACKETT: Could you vote for Bush?

DON IVESON: Yeah. Before I could vote for Clinton, yes.

MARDI STEVENS: I think I'm leaning towards George Bush. I'm sorry. I just feel that Clinton is playing pass the fire. Whoever he's with, he's -- you know -- I'll give you this. The next group I'm with -- you know -- he's going to give everybody everything.

DONNA DINOTO: I just don't like him. I don't like -- I don't get a good feeling about him at all. I really truly believe they tacked a real good nickname on him.

MS. BRACKETT: Which one was that?

DONNA DINOTO: "Slick Willie." I think it fits. I don't trust him.

TONY DINOTO: Every time i come up with a reason to vote for George Bush, I come up with two why I shouldn't. You know, so I just can't up with any reasons or enough reasons to vote for him. So I know I'm not voting for him. Who I --

MS. BRACKETT: At the moment you're voting against someone, not for someone?

TONY DINOTO: I'm not -- right -- I am not voting for George Bush. I do not know who I'm voting for. FOCUS - BUSH - CLINTON - '92 - LABOR'S CHOICE

MR. LEHRER: We continue the dialogue now with an old-fashioned political debate about what's at stake for working people in this presidential election. Thedebate is between Lynn Williams, president of the 600,000 member United Steelworkers Union, and Lynn Martin, the Secretary of Labor, who joins us tonight from Chicago. Mr. Williams, why have the leaderships of the AFL-CIO and most of the international unions endorsed the Clinton/Gore ticket?

MR. WILLIAMS: Well, because we think we desperately need a change in America. These last 12 years have been absolutely devastating for working people. Average wages have gone down. Family income is now going down. The number of people living in poverty has increased by 3.5 percent just in the last year or two. It's -- it's just a desperate circumstance. And what Clinton and Gore represent is some change. What they represent is some real understanding of what needs to be done in this economy. Now, they want to do things like establish an Economic Security Council. So we look at what happens in the economy the same way that we look at national security. And there's nothing more important for national security today than to rebuild the American economy and be strong economically. They have ideas like doing something about the infrastructure, which is in desperate condition across America, and investing some real money in that. They're very -- they're very correct about the whole education and training circumstance. We can't have a world class economy going forward in the future without being serious about investing in training and training our work force. They have concerns about the whole health care circumstance which we'd simply have to get the costs for health care under some kind of control. It puts all of our corporations and all of our industry at a disadvantage in terms of dealing in a global economy. And we have to find a way that we can look after the 35 million people who have no health insurance at all in this country. We spend more of our GNP on health insurance than any other advanced country and yet, we have all these desperate circumstances in terms of the high cost and desperate circumstances in terms of the people who aren't covered. They want to establish the civilian agency that does something about technology, that makes sure we continue to be in the leading edge of technological development in our society. So they have a great many ideas about how we should put this economy together and how we should move forward. And that's precisely what we need to be doing in the '90s. We need to change this business of so many people being unemployed and there being so much uncertainty out there. We need to get back to thinking that we need basic industries in America. We've seen our basic industries devastated. We were misled by President Reagan 12 years ago into thinking that you didn't need to worry about the ability to make things or produce goods. You could forget about what he scathingly described and others did as the rust belt and all of middle America. And we were going to survive on a service economy and an information economy and high-tech, and it all turned out to be ridiculous, just a myth. If you can't make something in the beginning, of course, you need service jobs. You need an information economy. You need a high-tech economy. But you need as a basis for all that to be able to produce goods and make things in our society. And I think -- I think Gov. Clinton and Sen. Gore really understand these issues going forward. They're of a new generation. They're not mired in the past. They're looking towards the future.

MR. LEHRER: Sec. Martin, from the other side, what is your analysis of why organized labor is supporting Clinton/Gore and not supporting Bush/Quayle?

SEC. MARTIN: Well, first of all, it is organized labor's right, of course, to make a choice. And with Lynn Williams, I suspect many Americans will agree on goals that they want. Everyone wants to see more job production. Everyone wants to see an improvement in training. But you really do have to ask the question about how we get there. And although this may be a new generation of Democratic leaders, they're leaders that are in, regrettably, the kind of old mind set that isn't going to produce new jobs and, indeed, isn't going to help Americans. And just -- we have two candidates who've spent their life in government. Everything that Lynn Williams talked about was a government program. Somehow it was going to be paid for, but guess who? I think -- I'm sure we're going to hear more about we're going to tax the rich. There aren't enough rich to do everything that Bill Clinton claims he wants to do. Now, I will give him this. He has said honestly and forthrightly that he will have huge new tax increases. And this is where Lynn Williams and Lynn Martin and George Bush and Gov. Clinton are going to disagree a great deal. We don't think you get there by just government jobs that are short-term and in the long- term don't help anybody, except cost the taxpayer. We think you have to rejuvenate the private sector. And it isn't true that Ronald Reagan ever spoke in a sneering way about the rust belt. He was from Illinois, and during the Reagan/Bush years, we produced 22 million new jobs. But what we have now -- and both candidates have to face it, if for a moment I can take off the partisan hat - - we have a recovery and recession where there is not the usual new surge of jobs. That means, if as Lynn Williams and the unions want us to do, we would add new taxes on small and medium business, we can assure, we can assure that people won't be rehired and that new jobs won't be created. I think we do need new generations of leaders, but you don't necessarily just get them by a new person from a state where the average income is the lowest for a family of four -- is the lowest in the country. The AFL-CIO have some wonderful people. Personally I can tell you Lynn Williams is one of them. But you can't go back to 1950. The answer isn't somehow going to create just new unions. New jobs are coming from small and medium businesses, not big businesses. And we have to -- we have to make sure that more Americans have a chance. You don't have a new training program and then put a tax on small business to pay for it. There won't be the jobs if the training is there. You listen in this case to President Bush and to the kind of things I think Lynn Williams underneath would also say he agrees to, and that's, let's move forward on training with the biggest, single leap in a training program ever talked about through the Bush presidency. We can and we must do better. But you don't do it by the kind of a Carter/Mondale redox of higher taxes on smaller and medium businesses. Unions too are going to have to change. I listened to those very wise Americans and I thought maybe they weren't totally right, but listened to what they were saying. They wanted to be assured that they had a future, not necessarily a guarantee. There have been a lot of things spread about NAFTA that aren't true. The reason that NAFTA was important for --

MR. LEHRER: That's the treaty --

SEC. MARTIN: Yes. North American Free Trade --

MR. LEHRER: -- Trade Treaty --right.

SEC. MARTIN: And we don't know where Clinton stands on it. He's going back and forth, back and forth and back and forth. But this, according to the union, was a terribly important thing. And yet, they didn't even ask their candidate where he is on it. I think George Bush has taken difficult issues and taken positions. And one of the reasons you vote for a person, not that you always agree with them, I don't always agree with President Bush, but at least you know where the man stands, you know that that same kind of person is the kind of president he's going to be. And that becomes, I think, important.

MR. LEHRER: Sec. Martin, let me ask you, just as a practical political matter, does it matter what Lynn Williams and the leadership of his union and the leadership of the other unions, and the AFL-CIO do, as far as endorsements are concerned?

SEC. MARTIN: Well, I suppose on one hand, as a former member of Congress, it's always nice to have support from any group. But realistically, the AFL-CIO has always been for Democrats. It really doesn't seem to matter what they do. Nor does it matter what Republicans do. They're interested in their agenda. The difference is that in the -- in days gone by --

MR. LEHRER: You mean, a labor agenda -- organized labor agenda?

SEC. MARTIN: Yes, right. And in days gone by I think it was far more representative of what its membership wanted. There's been separations. Most members of unions don't necessarily want more welfare, don't necessarily want more taxes, even though that may be a position that leadership takes. Nonetheless, labor unions, I think, have not just a bright history, but if they can change, if they can involve in this world, they can -- they can still be a really dynamic force representing many working men and women. So I never deride labor unions.

MR. LEHRER: Do you --

SEC. MARTIN: I think sometimes they're wrong but I don't deride them.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Williams, do you agree with the secretary, that you all need to change as well as everything else that needs to - - that you were listening to a while ago -- needs to change?

MR. WILLIAMS: We're changing all the time and I think our endorsements do matter. I think they're part of the political process and all the rest of it, but -- but in terms of what the agenda that I described is an agenda for America. It's not an agenda just for working people. It's important to working people and that's the heartland of the country, the ordinary citizens out there. But we're not --

MR. LEHRER: Do you consider the Bush/Quayle administration anti- labor?

MR. WILLIAMS: Certainly. They've been very difficult. They wouldn't support, for example, the most fundamental right that workers have, which is the right to withdraw their labor. They wouldn't support labor on the Workplace Fairness Act, and Madame Secretary, for all her understanding --

SEC. MARTIN: Well, first of all --

MR. WILLIAMS: -- of many of these circumstances --

SEC. MARTIN: -- it's called the Striker Replacement Bill, not - -

MR. WILLIAMS: -- is determined to be opposed to that.

SEC. MARTIN: -- the Workplace Fairness Act.

MR. WILLIAMS: And the President was insisting on vetoing that if the Act had come to that stage.

MR. LEHRER: Hold on one second. Let's stop right there. The striker replacement thing, which is a big issue to organized labor --

MR. WILLIAMS: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: And the Bush administration is opposed to --

SEC. MARTIN: That's correct.

MR. LEHRER: -- to that. Now why is that, Sec. Martin?

SEC. MARTIN: We've had the same law since 1939, just as we will, of course, always protect the striker's right to strike, I mean, the worker's right to strike. What the unions wanted was a change in this 50 and 60-year old case law to change the balance of power. I know this is difficult for members of unions and the leadership, because they wanted to use it as an organizing tool, and it -- it just was probably one of the more frustrating battles. In a way, we won because it was foolish to change it. But we should have been spending that time -- Lynn Williams and Lynn Martin should have been spending their time trying to work to create jobs not on issues that are 50 and 60 years old. That's what I mean by the kind of change that has to occur. If that were the only thing that unions were making their decision on, then I would still say that President Bush knew where he was; he was very clear on it; and he said there's going to be an even playing field. I'm not going to give too much to business; I'm not going to give too much to organized labor; we're going to --

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Williams.

MR. WILLIAMS: That's very -- that's very misleading, Madame Secretary. As you know very well, this interpretation of the law has been on the books for a long time, but it was not applied until Mr. Reagan was president and encouraged with the PATCO thing, as was mentioned earlier in the discussion, encouraged union bashing throughout his and the succeeding administration. So this -- this application of the law was not faced until the last 12 years when corporation after corporation has been invited to use the striker replacement issue. It involved -- it required members of ours, for example, in Ravenswood, West Virginia, to be locked out and struggle for 20 months before they were able to achieve the kind of a settlement they should have had without being locked out at all.

SEC. MARTIN: Well --

MR. WILLIAMS: Madame Secretary is quite right that her energies and mine and the energies of all of us should be used to be putting the country together and be used as they are in many other countries in a positive and constructive way. But so long as we have an administration which encourages this kind of interpretation and encourages people to use it and stands by when workers are out there for 20 months suffering and struggling with this kind of an issue, because there are a bunch of permanent replacements that have taken their jobs, it took us 20 months to get them out of that plant. We succeeded in the end, but that's terrible --

SEC. MARTIN: And if I may, there were not --

MR. WILLIAMS: -- and that's not the way to be using our energies --

SEC. MARTIN: There were --

MR. LEHRER: Sec. Martin.

SEC. MARTIN: There were permanent replacements -- were not hired. Your membership did get what it wanted in the long run. Lynn, you and I know collective bargaining isn't always a pretty process, but you don't lay it to one side or the other. And in this case --

MR. WILLIAMS: There's no other advanced country in the world has this kind of legislation -- has this kind of legislation that permits people to go in and steal other people's jobs, Lynn, and you know that.

SEC. MARTIN: And first of all, you don't go in and steal other people's jobs.

MR. WILLIAMS: Sure you do. You go in and you're permanently replaced and you take --

SEC. MARTIN: If I may, if I may, just for a second, the few companies that have tried that have been disasters. No management worth its salt would ever look at them as an example of how to run a company.

MR. WILLIAMS: Oh, come, come.

SEC. MARTIN: But the point --

MR. WILLIAMS: Companies are --

SEC. MARTIN: Oh, that's true.

MR. WILLIAMS: -- threatening us all across the country every day, Madame Secretary.

SEC. MARTIN: Well, and --

MR. WILLIAMS: And you must know that and you're insisting in your administration --

SEC. MARTIN: A union member must threaten --

MR. WILLIAMS: -- on encouraging it.

SEC. MARTIN: No. But even if we for a moment agree to disagree on that and to say what's worked, has seemed to work, I still think, and I hope you would agree, Lynn, when I go to the AFL-CIO governing council and meet some outstanding leaders, nonetheless, it's quite true that a new generation that's perhaps more representative of what America's workers look like will eventually permeate the AFL-CIO. There has to be some changes.

MR. WILLIAMS: Let's go back to the sort some things --

SEC. MARTIN: You know, we talk about the United States Senate. We need some changes in labor too. I'd like to see --

MR. WILLIAMS: Let's go back to the sorts of things we need to do in this economy. Let's go back to the kinds of investments that are needed to make in the economy. I'm not talking about spending a lot of money and so on. It's the President --

SEC. MARTIN: You're not?

MR. WILLIAMS: -- who talks about doing things the old way. It's the President who talks about giving more tax advantages to the rich. And that created investment only in Germany, with people over here buying Mercedes, or investment in Japan. It didn't create investment here in America. Investment in infrastructure will be here. Investment in education will be here. It will contribute to the growth and success of this economy.

MR. LEHRER: I want to thank both of you -- I'm sorry -- for living up to the billing both of you Lynns, Sec. Lynn Martin and President Lynn Williams, thank you both for being with us. Happy Labor Day to both of you. And still to come on the NewsHour tonight, rebuilding in Florida and a conversation about getting along. UPDATE - REBUILDING LIVES

MR. LEHRER: It was two weeks ago today that Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida. Tom Bearden reports on the progress being made in two of the hardest hit communities, Homestead and Florida City.

MR. BEARDEN: English teacher Arline Margolis visited her classroom at Homestead High for the first time yesterday after the hurricane.

ARLINE MARGOLIS, Teacher: All gone.

MR. BEARDEN: The Navy spent of the last two weeks tearing out ruined carpet and ceiling tiles. Classes are supposed to resume next Monday. Margolis wonders how.

ARLINE MARGOLIS: I don't know what we're going to do. I don't know. The kids here have tough lives ordinarily under the best of circumstances from the migrant camps and the ghetto kids. And it's -- it's like hitting the worst -- the weakest people are the ones who have been hurt the most.

MR. BEARDEN: How long lasting do you think this kind of damage is going to be on the community?

ARLINE MARGOLIS: We were talking about that. We don't know how many people will come back or come back, or how many people will stay here, what it's going to do to South Dade County on a long- term -- so, you know a lot of people have said they just don't want to stay, don't want to rebuild. But then other people say, we will.

MR. BEARDEN: Homestead High School is just one example of the kind of effort it will take to rebuild this community. Two weeks after the storm, basic needs are finally being met. People are being fed, clothed and sheltered. That's happening because the military is here in force, unlike earlier disasters where most services were supplied by traditional civilian agencies. The damage here is justto extensive. Too many people are affected.

CHRIS BERZUKI, Homestead Assistant City Manager: If you had to estimate where the help is coming from, I'd say about 80 percent of our help is coming from the Army in this locale. The only agency that could respond with the type of help that we needed immediately is the Army. And is that what we're going to see the next time around? Is the Army going to start assuming some sort of relief for the next community that is as hard hit as ours?

MR. BEARDEN: This weekend, the effort began evolving from immediate relief to long-term rebuilding. The vast fleet of planes and helicopters continues to shuttle material from warehouses and Navy ships to the stricken towns. But the cargoes are changing. Army Colonel Tom Greene.

COL. TOM GREENE, U.S. Army: We know things are changing, for instance, because a while ago it was bring food or bring water, and now it's bring a specific type of item. And so we know that they've gotten enough of general supplies and now they're looking for more specifics.

MR. BEARDEN: Insurance adjusters are moving through the neighborhoods. They're greeted with the kind of enthusiasm children normally reserve for the Good Humor man.

INSURANCE ADJUSTER: Yes, sir. This'll get you started.

MAN: I appreciate it.

INSURANCE ADJUSTER: Help you out for a while.

MAN: Thank you guys very much.

INSURANCE ADJUSTER: We'll jump right on it, okay?

MAN: Thank you very much.

MR. BEARDEN: People are using the insurance checks to begin repairs and for temporary living expenses. Others aren't so fortune.

WOMAN: Hi, how are you? Have you already filled out a disaster application?

MR. BEARDEN: Federal Emergency Management Agency representatives like Debby Schmidt and Stuart Schlutzsky are beginning to fan out through residential areas, helping people fill out applications for assistance. This outreach program has been put in place to supplement the several disaster assistance centers that were set up last week. Yesterday, the New York Times reported that very few checks had been issued so far, even though FEMA had been taking applications for almost two weeks. The agency says it has issued nearly 1500 checks, totalling $3 million, but has yet to deal with over 43,000 applications. One official said FEMA was distributing money as quickly as it could, short of shoveling it out the back of an airplane. Transportation Secretary Andrew Card is heading the presidential task force overseeing the operation.

ANDREW CARD, Secretary of Transportation: We are trying to get the money out as quickly as we can. We want all of the federal agencies to do a better job, and I'm going to work hard to see that they do it. Our job is not to defend bureaucracy or defend governments. Our job is to help people. And that's what the President wanted me to do.

MR. BEARDEN: The economy of South Florida will need a lot of help too. Getting people back to work is critical to rebuilding. The problem is that Andrew destroyed the businesses that provided most of the jobs. Housing repair and construction will provide a temporary boost. The biggest employer was the now shattered Homestead Air Force Base. The President has promised that it will be rebuilt to provide an economic magnet to generate jobs and allow people to stay. The other big employer was agriculture. It may take five years or more to restore some of the groves. Some farmers are hesitant to replant, worried that the migrant workers who do most of the labor won't be around because their homes have been destroyed. Dade County's Chappy Pro.

CHAPPY PRO, Dade County Official: If the migrants don't come because they hear that there's no housing, that's why the farmers are meeting up at city hall and saying, look, we got to order our equipment, we got to order our plants, and if we don't have assurances that there's going to be housing, we don't have assurances that there's going to be labor and, therefore, we can't plant. Now if they don't plant, this place is wiped out.

MR. BEARDEN: FEMA and county officials are visiting the camps, trying to coordinate the rebuilding process.

SPOKESMAN: We need it sooner. We need it like yesterday.

MR. BEARDEN: Sec. Card acknowledges rebuilding will take a long time and a lot of money.

SEC. CARD: The President has made a commitment to put a supplemental budget before Congress as soon as Congress comes back. I've been working on that supplemental budget with the people at the White House and the Office of Management & Budget and the other agencies affected. We think that the response will be entirely appropriate and there will be as much money as it takes to get this community back on its feet to the road to reconstruction. And you'll find that our commitment will not wane. We only hope that the rest of America will maintain its interest and help to restore this community, because government alone cannot solve this problem.

MR. BEARDEN: But will people in the tent cities, people who have lost literally everything but the clothes on their back, want to stay and rebuild? Or will they simply move out?

MARCIA CHAPPELL: Ain't no citizens just packin' up, movin' out, sayin' you ain't gonna never come back if you can come back, but right now, it ain't no place to stay.

MR. BEARDEN: Do you think it can come back, given the massive devastation here?

MARCIA CHAPPELL: Well, the way things is goin' now, the town can't rebuild itself, but everything will have to be pushed down and then started from the top. I believe --

MR. BEARDEN: Kathy Hale isn't so sure.

KATHY HALE: I hope it doesn't turn into a ghost town. I don't know. I guess it depends on how many people probably, you know, had insurance on their houses, getting assistance so they can help rebuild, I imagine, because there's a lot of -- you know, like I say, this is I guess -- I think this is the poorest county in Florida, I think. I don't know. I hope some's rebuilt -- I hope it's rebuilt back.

SPOKESMAN: During the last 24 hours we've served a little over 20,000 mills at the mobile kitchen sites.

MR. BEARDEN: Every morning, federal, state and local officials meet to coordinate the continuing effort to rebuild.

OFFICIAL: So I'm not aware of any water problems. Everybody's being provided plenty of water. If you're not, let me know, because we've got plenty.

MR. BEARDEN: Progress is being made. But 108,000 people are still without electricity. For more than half of them, it'll continue to be off indefinitely. And they're still shoveling debris out of Homestead High. You can see the sky through much of the roof. The massive, unprecedented federal response to the worst disaster in American history is helping, but it will take much more help to restore what Andrew destroyed here, the very structure of society in South Florida. CONVERSATION - CAN WE ALL GET ALONG?

MR. LEHRER: Finally tonight, another answer to the question: "Can We All Get Along?" It's the one Los Angeles motorist Rodney King asked during the Los Angeles riots last April. Those riots followed the acquittal of four police officers accused of being King during an arrest. Charlayne Hunter-Gault asks it this time of Atlanta talk show host Neal Boortz.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Talk Show Host Neal Boortz has been a controversial figure on Atlanta's radio call-in scene for more than 20 years. Boortz runs to not from controversy. Take the response to rapper Ice-T on a magazine cover after weeks of protest over his new song "Cop Killer."

NEAL BOORTZ: We've got a picture of Ice-T on the cover of "Rolling Stone," "Rolling Stone" this week. He's wearing a policeman's uniform. Isn't that cute? That's like putting Adolf Hitler on the front page of the "Jewish Times" wearing a yamaka.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Since 1983, Boortz has been holding forth for three hours a day at radio station WGST, where he is No. 1 among Atlanta's adult male listeners, an audience almost equally mixed, black and white. This summer he moved over to television, co- hosting a daily one-hour point/counter point program on station WXIA called "Back Talk" where we caught up with him for a conversation.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: In your show, you talk to a wide variety of people. What is your sense of what the real problem is?

NEAL BOORTZ, Talk Show Host: I think -- and I'll address that from the side of my white listeners, if I might -- I think there's a sense, somewhat of a sense of betrayal. And let me explain it this way. In the 1950s or in the 1960s, when the civil rights movement was the story in this nation, the -- the general goal there was equal treatment under the law. This is a nation of law and each and every citizen should be treated equally under that law, and that was the goal of the movement. And any rational person in this country, barring, you know, locking their emotions out, had to say, yeah, yeah, that's the way it should be, not separate and equally, but equally. Well, we had the 1964 Civil Rights Act and equal treatment under the law became more and more of a reality, and then there is a perception that the movement started changing gears, that instead of equality, the word was preference. Equal treatment isn't enough. We need redress for past grievances. Equal treatment isn't enough. We need systemized discrimination through affirmative action. Equal treatment isn't enough. We need affirmative government programs in this area and that area. And then a lot of people jumped back and said, wait a minute, wait a minute. I was perfectly willing to support and work with this concept that all Americans should be seen as equal under our law, and now that's not enough. Now, now many Americans want to be seen as entitled to preferences under our law, and the stronger this got, the quota systems, or the perception of quotas, the stronger that movement got, the more alienated a lot of people felt from the concept of civil rights.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is it people who have access to real information, hard information, or is it just gut feeling, emotion?

MR. BOORTZ: It's a feeling. They're not dealing with statistics or data. They're just dealing from their gut emotions, from last night's TV newscast and this morning's newspaper, from yesterday's radio talk show, from Oprah, from Phil, whatever. They're just dealing with gut reactions to things they've seen in the media.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And how do you deal with this?

MR. BOORTZ: Well, dependent upon who's doing the calling and who's doing the complaining, one, one response that I have that frankly I fear is probably becoming a little bit old with some of my listeners, is we need to acknowledge that there are certainly problems in this country. If you're going to solve a problem, you have to identify it. And I think that in many cases we totally misidentified the racial problem in this country. The word "racism" I think instead -- instead of describing an attitude or describing a system, the word "racism" now is merely a word that is used as a weapon to bludgeon somebody else over the head with during conversation.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is this mostly white people or mostly black people?

MR. BOORTZ: Black and white. Black and white. The average person that uses the word "racism" couldn't begin to define the word. I dare say that the average network newsman or woman that uses the word "racism" in their story, if you said hold it, stop the camera, why don't you define racism for me, they'd look at you with somewhat of a blank stare, and would be unable to do so from any good dictionary definition. There is racism but there's a lot more bigotry than racism. And there's a lot more prejudice than racism. And each one of these things is based in a different idea and a different concept.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Your callers, who are the most egregious offenders, whites or blacks?

MR. BOORTZ: The worst offenders -- and if we're talking about the worst offenders and misidentifying the problem and using the word "racist" or "racism" as a weapon, I would have to say that the black callers are far more likely to do that than are white callers, and I guess that's only because you very seldom hear white callers accusing other white callers of being a racist. I think that the worst inclination on the part of the white callers is the inclination to believe that they're watching TV news and they see a drug bust or they, they read of a kidnapping or a murder, or a robbery or something, and then the suspect was identified as a black male and so forth and so on, or they see a story on welfare or welfare mothers and what have you and inevitably it seems that they're going to feature a, a black woman with a couple of children. The worst inclination on the part of the white callers is to believe that this is a norm for black society. And they need to understand that it is no more a norm for black society than Jeffrey Dahmer is a norm for white society.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is this problem getting worse?

MR. BOORTZ: I actually think -- I think that the Rodney King situation and the riots in Atlanta and Los Angeles and elsewhere certainly created for a couple of weeks some very intense feelings. And you could look at the situation and say things are rough, things are getting bad, but I think after that, it also started opening up a great deal of dialogue, just the type we're having right now, where people have -- where finally it has become socially acceptable -- and for a while it was as if it was not socially acceptable -- it's socially acceptable now to sit down and have honest, open discussions regarding race relations with a goal of trying to -- trying to eliminate some barriers, trying to drop some walls, trying to build some understanding, trying to kill some misconceptions, the comments that just send a chill through me when I hear 'em, you want to go reach into the phone, pull 'em into your side of the telephone and speak some sense at 'em, things like "They should know their place," that's one of the big ones, or "They shouldn't want to live where they're not welcome." These are the people that will just, you know, flat tell you that, well, there is no way that black people match up to white people, they don't belong on the same society, they don't belong in the same schools, they don't belong in the same neighborhoods. And these people are so far gone I don't even care to talk to 'em. I mean, you just hit the "off" switch and go on to another caller with them.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But how representative are they, because I'm told by some that things are better in the South? On the other hand, I'm told there are entrenched attitudes that haven't changed for generations.

MR. BOORTZ: These entrenched attitudes, I would say, are almost wholly in the older white population in the South that just will not change. These entrenched racist attitudes are being replaced in younger populations by other attitudes that might be based, for instance, in a sense of resentment, resentment that I had to work hard to get where I am, why can't they work hard to get -- I stayed in school, I didn't drop out, why should I pay because they didn't stay in school? I waited till I could afford to have a baby. Why should I pay this woman to have a baby that she can't afford? These -- these attitudes are based, you know, more or less in a resentment of what they see happening and how the government is requiring them to respond.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How much of the fear of black crime do you think is at fault here?

MR. BOORTZ: I wonder if it's an excuse or a reason. I wonder if they truly are worried about crime, or if that is, in their minds, a socially acceptable objection to the integration of neighborhoods. But from what I hear, from what I hear from the callers on my radio program, there is clearly a perception -- I can almost go so far as to say that with some of them there is a perception that the black culture is basically our criminal culture.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Do talk shows like yours help or hurt the divide?

MR. BOORTZ: Totally depends on the host. Some talk show hosts that I have heard definitely add fuel to the fire. I think that the only honest way is to point out when the -- when the time is right -- to point out that, you know, the majority of crimes being committed in this country are not being committed by minorities, are being committed by white males. The majority of people on welfare are not black; they are white, and that you need sometimes to go out of your way to illustrate and show positive models on the side of minorities just to show people that your perceptions are based upon a 30-second film clip on last night's news, not on reality.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: In some quarters, you're perceived as a kind of right winger. You, yourself, call yourself a radio grump. But you're associated with Lester Maddox, the ax-wielding former governor of Georgia, who was taking a stand against integration in its restaurants. What accounts for your attitudes today, and do you feel you've undergone some kind of metamorphosis?

MR. BOORTZ: I had an unusual bringing up. I was raised in a Marine Corps family, most of the time living on Marine bases. And there is an environment where race doesn't matter. From one military base to another, my next door neighbor might be black, or my next door neighbor might be white, or my next door neighbor might be Korean or what have you, and it, it never occurred to me that it was any big deal. It was really a very sheltered way to be raised. So my metamorphosis was one from just being totally incredulous -- I couldn't understand what this problem was all about because I'd been so sheltered raised up -- during my upbringing -- and so really then over a period of years and especially in talk radio, watching these groups interact with each other, I -- I just came to where I am right now, which is sort of the Rodney King thing, why can't people get along? We all have problems andenemies to face that are much greater than each other.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, can we all get along? That's the Rodney King question.

MR. BOORTZ: It's not something that can be legislated. It's not something that can be mandated. Unfortunately, it is something that takes time. But I think -- I think that it's happening. And, yes, we can get along. And there's -- Charlayne, there's things that have to be done on both sides, both sides of this issue. You travel internationally a lot. Do you notice how when, if you as an American are in Austria or Greece or Italy or what have you, and you meet somebody else from your home town in the states, and they happen to be black and you're white, or you're black and they're white, that racial difference doesn't mean anything, because you're two Americans from Atlanta, Georgia, that bumped into each other on the streets of Zermot, Switzerland. And racial differences don't matter, because you're both -- we need to start seeing -- seeing each other in that same light within the confines, within the boundaries of our own country.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Neal Boortz, thank you.

MR. BOORTZ: It's my pleasure. I hope some of this made sense. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Labor Day, George Bush and Bill Clinton both attended traditional holiday campaign rallies and in South Africa, at least 24 protest marchers were killed when security forces opened fire on them in the black homeland of Ciskei. Have a nice holiday evening. We'll see you tomorrow night. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.