A Public Television Special ; Interview With Senator S. I. Hayakawa

If. You were a senator as I hire a Republican from California has recently been making many national news headlines because of the keen interest in this Senate seat in 1982 his role in the Senate is of added importance because of the capture of the Senate majority by Republicans. We now present an exclusive interview with the senator in Washington for public television. Now here's host Jim Cooper. Why is this man is this a scholar and educator and for the past four and a half years has been a politician both his friends and his critics agree that he's one of the most colorful senators the U.S. Senate. We'll talk to him now about some issues of concern to everyone in the United States. Here in Washington D.C.. Senator I'd like to start with the concern everyone has had about the confrontation between the Polish government and the Polish people and of course the

overriding concern about the Russian. Divisions all around Poland and what it means to us what it means to international peace. It really is a threat to international peace. I doubt very very much at the sea side bets are going to actually attack Poland with military force although the recent maneuvers. Are great clearly a threat that they might to keep the POWs in line. That threat may be sufficient and certainly. Is the inhibiting factor on the stuff he had said. If they really attack Poland where they're going to are they going to get in trouble with East Germany Czechoslovakia Hungary and other satellite nations. I think especially of the Baltic nations like you Tweeny Latvia Estonia they're. Very very unhappy under Soviet rule you can have trouble in all those places. If the cyber start going to rough I think on the other hand I suppose the Russians have

concerns about the domino effect if they let Poland. And that's why I have a lot of the liberal treatment a liberal a liberalization and so in the end. So it is hard to predict what's going to come of our life and yet you have a unique vantage point having served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and being privy to a lot of information about international relations. What about our problems with the Soviet Russian certainly the the central foreign relations question of our time. What do you see ahead for detente What do you see ahead for SALT talks again. Well I I think that detente is something we believe Americans took seriously. But I don't think it's obvious every day that it was it was a sort of trap and. We exercise great restraint about armaments and bombs and so on tanks. They're so obvious we're building up their nuclear stockpile. They were also adding.

By a factor of three or four times to the to their store of tanks. You know. Chip use your ships and they've got a navy that goes around the world now. It reminds one of the British Navy at the height of the height of the power the British Empire and they got these ships around the world and so they taught is something that we have kidded ourselves with. But these obvious don't seem to give themselves the toll they just kept right on going increasing their military strength. Do you see a different posture a different climate in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee now with the Republican leadership as you saw before when you were in the minority party in the Senate under President Carter. Is there a different mood a different approach to these problems of dealing with the Russians. Well on the whole we are backing up the president

and our president. Reagan has different policies from those President Carter and insofar as we do BACK BACK UP THE PRESIDENT We certainly have a different atmosphere within the Foreign Relations Committee. But the difference is not dramatic as it is in budget committee or in number of other committees because foreign relations has always been very much a by a bipartisan matter. And we may have some quite severe disagreements about let's say South Africa or policy towards Middle East and so on. We read don't we we don't fight seriously. With in foreign relations. What about the other problem areas we know of. Salvatore we know of Lebanon. What about some of the other tension spots. Well if you want to start with

Salvador that's well at home. Salvatore time Salvatore you have a choice to read difficult impossible situations supporting one side which is imperfect and another side which is also quite quite imperfect. And we are taking choosing the lesser of two evils here. And I don't know what I don't know exactly what else you can do in this situation except support the side that seems to have the best chances of restoring some kind of order more moderate more moderate government. Yes and as the orders are stored then a number of present injustices can be cured. But you cannot restore justice and an orderly society unless he was established peace first and so I think that we're trying to back side this most most like without stablish peace and

the same thing in Lebanon. What about Lebanon I want you approach. Drinking the whole the whole question of the Near East. Yes well as you recall. Secretary Alexander Haig has talked about using American forces along with forces from allied nations to help keep the peace in the Sinai. Well I think that the presence of American troops in the Near East without actually using them may be coming back to their IT SAID it says very very vividly we do have an interest in peace in the Middle East. And to say so not by ourselves but in company with other nations and having actual troops there in company with other nations would be I think a very valuable contribution to peace.

You served under a Democratic president you're now serving out a Republican president President Reagan. Do you feel that our whole relationship these of these the Russian government is going to be better under the regular ministration. And if so why. It's going to be very very much better because the Soviets under. When we had Carter for president felt that they could get away with practically anything that is really pushed to push to surrounding. Africa Ethiopia and elsewhere. They were quite unhesitating about using Zambia as a center for for the proper organization the South West African peoples organization which is certainly communist dummied organization Everett's its headquarters a swap of once in

in Zambia. I was just amazed to see all of the world these great big posters showing the hammer and sickle and pictures of Lenin and things of that kind. It's a communist rule in school that we have been nothing but nice to them. So under the Carter administration we're not going to be that nice to them in future and we're going to keep the best guessing and you think a tougher approach is actually better for world peace. I think it is. Let's take a look at domestic questions to anyone that's been on everyone's mind that has to do with the budget the Reagan budget the mandate that came from years of the Reagan administration. Recently the United States Senate voted 88 to 10 to back the president's budget cuts I mean also back the president's tax cuts in three years a 10 percent each for tax cuts a total of 30 percent over three years and yet the house. Budget Committee honor Congressman James Jones James Jones has voted to do away with the other two years of the tax cuts at least now we need to have a one year tax cut and only

have a very small tax cut relatively speaking. Fifty four billion dollars as I asked for in the new tax cuts by the president and only 38 billion recommended by the House Budget Committee. What does that mean if we have the budget cuts. What happens if we have the budget cuts and we don't get the tax cuts along with it. What happens to that. Well in the first place that 88 to 10 vote covered only the budget cuts did not and did not offer any. They did not offer the tax cuts yet and were going to have a big fight on the tax cuts. But it is significant that there is that any 8 to 10 vote. That means that we've only got 53 Republicans after all that mean an awful lot of Democrats joined with us in those budget cuts so that there is a real change in attitude on the Democratic side as well as the Republican side so that

that promise is well for the future. Now the budget cuts are fine but the tax cuts have got to go along with them in order to achieve the total purposes this economic package which is to reduce inflate the inflation rate. Now what happens then if the US Senate is saying we're going to go along with the president on his tax cuts. What happened to that. You have at the same time the House of Representatives are saying they're not going to give the president all of the tax cuts that he's asking for. Well I'm not sure that that's likely to happen. That is if you go back to 88 to 10 vote saying supposing. A number of Democrats defect to the Republican philosophy over in the house and I think quite a large number like just as they did in the Senate. You see perhaps not the same degree but I think it would be to a sufficient degree so we can get tax cuts as well because people understand that the two things

go together and the whole plan rests upon both the budget cuts and tax cuts going along side by side. Senator a question from your colleague Senator Cranston who voted against the proposed cutbacks at the Reagan administration in voting no. Senator Cranston said he believes that the Reagan tax cuts and the budget cuts constitute a cruel abandonment of America's commitment indeed America's obligation to help those most in need. And that's what other critics have said it will hurt the poor the elderly the handicapped etc. What is your response to that. It means that they have not got over the kind of. Condescending and actually humiliating ideology of the past generation or more in which we thought that these souls proffer the solution to the problem the poorest and laid lot more money to them on

Medicare more food stamps more this more that. And of course if you start stopping this today I'll scream and say You're being very cruel to the poor the elderly to cripple children house and so on. And we've been trying this for almost two generations and what's the result. We've got just as much poverty now as we started with and so so that you don't regard it as an effective argument. No it's not effective I mean just show that Cranston has ideas but at least one generation. Oh and the whole point of last November's election. This is an entire public is sick and tired of that lawsuit too. And they're buying President Reagan's idea is that the way to solve the problem of problem poverty is to permit savings to permit tax cuts so the business is going to expand and as business expands people get jobs and they become self-sustaining. And that's the

history of American prosperity throughout the 19th century. That's why millions we're going to came over from Europe and Asia to find a future in this country and they came over without a cent in their pockets and they didn't get a cent of welfare when they got here. The really really on their own but they climbed out of poverty they climbed out of ignorance they climbed out of inability to speak English language and in a generation or two they were part of the middle class and disappeared. There's no doubt the hip history of your family's history my family the history of many of us right there in the United States Senate and the creation of economic opportunity. Has been the pyre for all. Dynamic this culture not helping those who are not willing to help themselves. For those who are really not able to help themselves then as President Reagan said he wants to put a safety net. So he's not taking them off.

But of course this is a matter that's going to be debated for many many months between now and you know but would you be prepared to protect right now that the final package as it will be approved by both the Senate and the house any negotiation will be very close to what the president is asking for. Yes I'd be much more that we're seeing now from the house. I believe the final the final will be very close to what the president asked for all along because this is the kind of mail we're getting from my constituents and I'm not talking simply about my mail and the mail of the Republicans the Democrats again the same kind of mail saying cut taxes cut the budget etc. etc. and the only exception to this kind of a letter to say don't cut my program in other words special interest concern special interest concerns yes. We've seen a tragic episode in the last week the whole nation has been shocked by this latest shooting episode that took place with the president being wanted in three of them and you know there's been a lot of talk now about a new clamor for gun control. Have you been

contacted about that and what are your views about it. Well. I know there's a great clamor at the time of the Kennedy assassination. Gun control or gun control after the Martin Luther King assassination after the attempted assassination of George Wallace. Right down to the recent Just attend to these fascinating John Lennon and so on. And each time he ran for gun control goes up. But in the intervening years since the assassination of Kennedy the number of guns in private hands as tripled quadrupled. I don't know how much but because the streets are becoming increasingly unsafe more and more responsible citizens and peace loving citizens feel that they have to have guns for their own protection. And so the problem of gun control is I would say four times more difficult now than it was then and now.

It seems to me. That. The solution of this problem is extraordinary difficult because of the enormous pressures coming from. The anti-gun control people who. Have a large number of legislators simply intimidated. And therefore it seems to me a entirely new approach is necessary and I myself. Believe that the possession of. Handguns is something that is psychologically and perhaps actually necessary to millions of people this country now under present conditions and they must be deprived of them. But I do believe that everyone with a handgun ought to have adequate course of training in how to handle it. Because if you had training in how to handle it you don't use it irresponsibly. And I think that the

present laws that prohibit the sale of handguns to people who have criminal records or who are mentally unstable. The present law forbids plans answer them but. This law is ignored in most jurisdictions the DTR will simply say who got a criminal record you say knows of you you mentally unstable to say no and so he ends the gun you pay him money so you know I think there should be something like 30 days interval between the time the gun was ordered and the time the gun was delivered. Bio you'll find out the truth about whether or not he does have a police record whether or not he has a history of mental illness and so on. So you aren't talking tougher laws about buying guns books right. But you would not take guns away you know I do misunderstand me. I simply don't countenance that as a solution but. Certainly greater care and greater vigilance in the question

of to whom you sell these guns. That's very important. A question of particular concern to people in California is the fact that some 200000 Southeast Asian refugees yes who have been brought to the United States live by the federal government have wound up living in California and have wound up being a very big burden to the state government and to county agencies to schools. So one of these people are asking for some extra help and see just the federal assistance runs out in 36 months for thousands of Asians. What actions have you taken or what action do you intend to take toward trying to get some federal reimbursement for all of these agencies because California has a disproportionate number of those Southeast Asians who are living there. I'm not sure I intend to take any action. Why is that. Well. Let's turn your question around the other way. Supposing Lee were refugees. People. Online in a strange country who don't speak their language.

Would we get the kind of support for three years that the refugees from Vietnam have had. Quite generous support in terms of not only food and shelter and medical care and education. Who wouldn't have got it if we'd been if they refuse to leave America to landing let's say we had more were a guy or Rumania or whoever else would have done the same for us no we wouldn't. What we've done with Vietnamese is to give them three years to get to get themselves on their feet. And a surprising number of them have done so already. And so if we continue this dependency then we're going to create among the Vietnamese the same kind of mentality that we already have among many welfare recipients people who are determined never to go back to work because. Because. Uncle Sam will take care of you.

So you're responding as if you feel that after three years they should somehow make it on their own. I should think so but they don't make it entirely on their own as it is because after all certain kinds of locational training certain kinds of educational help mandated to continue. Nevertheless your critics have tried to paint an image of you sleeping Sam or dozing off and that kind of thing and that has been perpetuated and now that you're going into re-election and I want to talk about the election that kind of charge will be made you want to respond to that. No I don't think it's worth responding to is widely exaggerated. I work a 10 to 12 hour day on top of that I often have to go to ceremonial dinners and cocktail parties afterwards. And I am far more energetic than most people. Half my age do so sometimes of Fido's it's because some person. You usually get a

hearing is taking 30 minutes to say what can be said in seventh. And towards the end of that 30 minutes. My energy is giving out giving. Let's pick up on that. You referred to your age and you have a very rigorous schedule I know 10 hours a day you think you're a good tool and you're 74 to be 70 75 would be when you run for re-election now. 875. What about now. Yeah what about your vitality I think it's a fair question that constituents want to know what about your vitality level heading into a re-election. It just happens that. I got the report of my federal medical examination this morning and I am better suited than I was a year ago when I was in pretty good shape years ago. And. My mother is alive and well and.

Into my CD 97 years old. Yours is 97. That means that if I served in the United States Senate for fourth terms I want to be 94 ceased to live a nice seven so I guess that unless I think you worry about it you should see our interview let's talk about your race. You've created a lot of headlines and that because of your position and this Senate seat that you occupy has been sought after by such people as on the Democrat side Governor Brown time Hayden even John Tani and Darva Dahl more recently all of these have made headlines on the Republican side. People like Pete McCloskey Congressman Mike McCloskey Maureen Reagan Congressman Barry Goldwater Congressman Bob Dornan Congressman Russell Oh all of them have been mentioned as seeking your office. How do you feel about that the fact that so many people seem to be making a race for this Senate seat that you occupy.

Well I think about it. It certainly doesn't worry me. It's not keeping me awake nights. Are you looking forward to this with absolute certainty going into this with the all out race. I'm having such fun now. I remember the majority party. I can get past a lot of things I couldn't get past so long as I was in the minority. I get things done. That's why I look forward not only to the coming two years. But I look for very much to my next term of office where I can get even more done. During my first. Four years in office I've learned the ropes. My first my first venture in politics and after having learned the ropes I find myself a member of the majority party. That's no time to quit. Goodness me this is a time when things are really getting exciting. What is your assessment. There have been some polls that say that you haven't risen as high for example as Senator Goldwater and I mean as I look I'm going to do that until the years before when is the election.

It's in November November 82 and yes and this is where this is when people run in April anyone prove nothing about what's happening in June 82 into say the primary so the timing and they can prove even less about what's going to happen now. So you of Amber you feel confident as you state as you sit here today that you're going to make this race and you're going Oh absolutely certain of it. A lot less than when somebody runs over with an automobile or something. Let's talk about your conscience we have a little time left. What do you regard as the chief contributions you've made to this office the Senate in the four and a half years that you've been sitting in this in this office now. Well I would say that. Among the things that I have accomplished are a large number of rather small unspectacular but potentially valuable things that I've done for California agriculture like the increasing the sale of council of agricultural products

to people abroad whether it's Japan or Belgium or France that has resisted those sales in the past. I took that and in a considered part in fighting the Mediterranean fly problem and. Helped to establish the. Foundation. Facility in Hawaii that will produce a sterile fruit flies which are the ultimately the best weapon against you make train fly but sum total of all these things and you know essentially not terribly newsworthy and they're not big sexy stories that make the headlines the front page. But I when I meet kind of proud I was a number of things I voted against and often I voted against them in vain and sometimes Everard's against them successfully for example. This is been a consistent philosophy that with

all the pressures that existed to make for example a national scenic area out of Big Sur. Yes I thought it and I thought it and I thought it successfully. And so I said in effect it's the people who live there can conserve it for generations. Why should the government step in and take over the problem of conservation. And I learned that life and the victories I had negative victories in the sense I stop something not that I passed on. I think we're going to move along our time is about up now. Thank you very much Senator for chatting with us and giving us your perspective of the days to come to play this special broadcast for US Senator as I hired a college Republican in the state of California. I'm Jim Cooper. Thanks for being with us.