Campaign 1980, Race for the Senate; Chuck Grassley And John Culver

Hello I'm jolly and Davidson and it has been my pleasure to serve on the governing board a viable public television for the past 10 years and as president for the last six. I've worked on many projects for the network but the one I'm putting most of my energy into now is a new home for Iowa Public Television and I'd like to ask you to help many corporations and foundations have shown their support for the building for I was future campaign by contributing substantial dollars. But now we need you our viewers to put the campaign over the top. So please send your check of one hundred dollars fifty twenty five or whatever amount you feel you can contribute to help future TV worth watching. For all Iowans the new home town of Iowa Public Television in Johnston is badly needed to help our network continue to be the finest in the nation. Make your check payable to building for Iowa's future and then send it to Iowa

Public Television. Post Office Box 1758 Des Moines Iowa 5 0 3 0 6. Thank you so much. Ready. OK. Just all right. OK fine. Oh all right. I will try to do that. Hello I'm jolly and Davidson and it's been my pleasure to serve on the governing board of Iowa Public Television for the past 10 years. And as president for the last six. I've worked on many projects for the network. But the one I'm putting most of my energy into now is a new home for Iowa Public Television and I want to ask for you to help. Many corporations and foundations have shown their support for the building for I was future

campaign by contributing substantial dollars. But now we need you our viewers to put the campaign over the top. Please send your check of one hundred dollars fifty twenty five or whatever amount you feel you can contribute to ensure future TV worth watching. For all Iowans the new home a viable public television in Johnston is badly needed to help our network continue to be the finest in the nation. Make your check payable to building for I was future and then send it to Iowa Public Television. Post Office Box 1758 Des Moines Iowa 5 0 3 0 6. Thank you so much CA. There are efforts not connected with it but nonetheless beneficial to John Coltrane and

other words when we call on those union members solemn of got the gall to say that they don't want to be registered participate in this democracy. They are political action committees two from oil companies or labor groups who have staked out their turf with their money piling more than a quarter of a million dollars into the campaigns of the Democrat and the Republican. An analysis of the Federal Election Commission records by United Press International shows that oil and allied energy interests alone have contributed one hundred sixty thousand dollars to the Grassley campaign or eleven and one half percent of the 1.4 million dollars he had raised through October 1st. The same analysis showed also that labor groups had donated a similar amount to Culver's one point three million dollar effort suggesting that in addition to its philosophical fight the race for the Senate in Iowa must be viewed as a major skirmish between vested interests seeking to enhance their political clout in Washington.

The evangelical Christian community is the largest bloc in this country over 16 million strong. We intend to help our voice heard throughout this land. We are concerned with the great moral issues of the day. Issues like abortion and school. Are not afraid of so-called gay rights. And of course the increasingly steady encroachment of the federal government upon our right to worship freely as we please. The race must also be viewed as a skirmish between those who believe that politics has no place being preached from a pulpit and those who say that it does. The new right fundamentalist religious groups who have been registering voters in their churches and whose very active presence in the state has allowed previously disparate

elements to hold together their single issue or philosophical opposition to John Calder and place it under an umbrella labeled Christian. And our ratings. Chairman Culver that is zero Chuck Grassley got a hundred percent there couldn't be a greater contrast. So these people who call themselves Christians for Grassley suggest that they are a sleeping giant in electoral politics inferring that they are part of the great social reawakening that only happens to be led by conservatives like Chuck Grassley. The skirmish that this Senate race represents is not over their cause but instead is over their methods and fundamental fundamentalists for about translated into political crusading especially of the condom condemning story single issue variety is not in my judgment. Sound religion politics to the extent of the new right leaders are encouraging this. All too easy blurring of essential distinction

political wife was deprived of that restraint and rationality. We so badly need. The Senate race can also be viewed as a test of the strength of certain issues issues that while they are substantive the nature and are often viewed by the public and used by politicians as symbols. Individual tiles that give a singular texture to a complicated philosophical mosaic with all of this the media the money the outside interest the tangential issues it's fair to ask what are we voting for. The answer is simple. We'll be voting for a person one of five men in this case each with deeply set convictions. Each of whom will shape our futures by their judgments to a candidate they are believers in their causes in the correctness of their positions and in the notion that they are best able to represent the so-called real views of

the Iowa electorate. Our first report on the Senate candidates tonight comes from Norman Sandler. A union hall in Fort Dodge the last stop of a Saturday that began 10 hours ago and 10 hours from now will become of Laura like all the rest. The room is filled with people. The people Vanguard liberals recent political recruits and are loyal Democrats are filled with chili and beer. John Calder is in his element. Well I want to tell you in the 16 years in public life I'm as proud of the enemies I've made as the friends I've made. And if the big oil companies don't consider John Paul over one of their friends they're absolutely right. And in this election tonight he is at his bombastic best. He stares into what has become the Colbert trademark a speech filled with emotion and it are laced with liberal ideals freewheeling attacks and a challenge to those out to end his political career through speeches heavy on detail and couched in the shop rhetoric of a fight for political survival.

He has worked for two years to knit together a following whose strength lies in the traditional base of the Democratic Party. One shaken in 1980 by a troubled economy and a loss of confidence in government. His efforts suggesting that color's is not a political campaign as much as it is a political crusade 1:40 not only by inner drive but by haunting memories memories of the political ghost of Dick Clark. Ousted two years ago because of complacency among the same democrats Culver is working so hard to mobilize it this year so like you acknowledge there's a feeling of discontent of negativism toward government. Why won't the same feeling of discontent that ended Dick Clark's career in John Culver Senate career are the great we see this year is a great deal of intensity and passion in this election. I anticipate a very substantial turnout. I think there's a recognition of the important stakes that are at issue in this campaign I think there's a determination among a

majority of people in Iowa not to let the outcome that occurred in 78 it happen again. You think he is an imposing figure as tough in the political arena as he once was on the gridiron at Harvard. A trait exploited by his image makers. But with a trace of political hyperbole have dubbed him John Culver a fighter for Iowa. The message driven home on the campaign trail is equally blunt. In 1980 the stakes are high and the consequences far reaching for us. Iowa goes Calder says. So the union may go as well. You know Ben Bernanke you know you're very very you know back on. Political campaigns often consist of two distinct components. On one hand the candidate concerned with personal contact and imagery will let all the other the nuts and bolts operation that

molds perceptions and move voters to the polls. But this campaign is different it is being waged against an unknown opponent in Iowa and myriad unseen enemies outside the state. Because of that John is the campaign the cause is inseparable from the candidate. One of the most stunning OTOH would just be in the New Right coming into this state forcing the negative campaign exploiting the apathy of the majority knitting together a single issue constituency. Nothing in common with your brain you could know that you know she or there are Flat Earth Society positions I'm sure she would question. The attack from the far right has given symbolic purpose to call her campaign and handed him a tailor made weapon for use against grassland for LA Culver has portrayed himself as David facing a hydra headed Goliath. Nothing has done more to aid his

campaign. With It. He has created an enemy larger than Chuck Grassley a threat not only to his own survival but to the political system as well. In doing so he injects a fear not unlike that which fuels a campaign against him. This is your issue. I didn't bring up the issue that you write. They came on a Friday and I need to do the interview. Wrap me in your bonnet happens here and I want to hear the philosophy is directed toward party regulars to the general public. Culver pitches accomplishment never letting voters forget he is the incumbent. He has tapped the powers of incumbency announcing federal grants holding field hearings if you're bringing into Iowa administration officials like transportation secretary Neil Goldschmidt someone's name on them. You should look very carefully at our rail legislation and the new tools that it gives us and that one of the people principally responsible for that is Senator Coburn for which I might add a while maintaining a

distance from the record of his party's president. Can I have a record of a new shooting legislation in persuading the Congress to pass it. The rhetoric is permeated by specifics. His fight against the B-1 bomber and government red tape his support for the Equal Rights Amendment and higher taxes to fund a higher social security benefits are protected there were chinks in Calder's liberal veneer of opposition to gun control and support for the MX missile among them. No matter if there was consistency even in a record marked by such philosophical imperfections. And that consistency along with a backlash against the New Right that has drawn support from moderate Republicans has helped him raise doubts about Grassley. You don't share this campaign by trying to tackle fog. It also has given color something more valuable. The power to set the agenda of the campaign and deflect attention from his own points of vulnerability. One of those is the economy. He has set forth a modest economic

package calling for targeted tax cuts a balanced budget and reduced energy dependence. But covers found even more profitable to hammer away at Grassley. Liking his opponent with what he calls inconsistent and reckless policies like the Kemp-Roth tax cut you voted for three times you know that to date. I said Mr. President Reagan is moving away from Pepperall talk about you know not me I'd stay in Iraq. You must've gone to Harvard you don't understand how this works. The most they're going to the university. Mars because these are dead now we're still part of Grassley success has been tapping Litan voter discontent Culver says by educating Iowans about the complexities of the problems they face. They will reject politically popular solutions offered by others. On that point John Culver is betting his political life. People are seen through that rhetoric. They're looking for results. People are smarter than just taking slogans and cliches. They're looking at genuine achievement

and solid accomplishment. Are you telling people that look take a look at my record. By all standards it's a liberal record over the years. But that's what the people of Iowa want. Well first of all I think these labels are really nothing but a substitute for song. What does a liberal mean if you look at a dictionary definition in any dictionary I've ever seen. What liberal means is is open to new ideas. Tolerant of diversity and free of prejudice. That's what liberalism means as it's not a it's not a US program Lazcano it has connotations many of them are offered in a pejorative sense but it's not a program of action it's more a philosophical attitude. And I certainly feel that I share those definitions of what liberalism consists of but I think you've got to look at the record and I think the extent to which it's a cliche or a slogan that conjures up certain images that may or may not be accurate.

At no point in history has Iowa been represented in the Senate for two full terms by a Democrat. But that's statistical achievement is only part of what is at stake in the race for the Senate seat cover has held since 1974. The real issue in Iowa and across the country may not be which party prevails but which idiology but do people really lessen. A poll recently showed that more than 90 percent of the people in this country said that government is intruding too far into their lives that it's too big. It's a simplistic view but that's also one that's fueling the campaigns of a lot of Republicans as your including your opponents. I think if you look at these polls about they want less government. But if you also in the same poll there's a real ambivalence there is a schizophrenia there because if you say the side by side with one of the problems we face and who should do something about these problems of course it's government. And so that whether we like it or not it is necessary for government to play a positive role. But who knows what government is going to protect the environment is going to protect against fraudulent drugs or monopolistic

price fixing or these kinds of problems. Ride for the national security clean water clean air soil conservation. These are all important areas where government has to play a vital part. Feisty words a lot of feisty campaign one that's been distinguished throughout by its tough language and by its repeated themes it's a campaign whose candidates are noted for the singularity of their purpose for their intensity for their steadfast pursuit of the votes that will be cast on November 4th. It's a measure of the stakes involved in this race that one candidate admits that the election has been the single most important thing on his mind in the last six months. The candidates name Chuck Grassley and I report on his race against John Calder comes from Dan Miller. Allocator Iowa September 27 1980 in the basement of this church said the kind of people that Chuck Grassley calls his own people who are patiently awaiting the arrival of a man they believe can help restore what is right to

their government. It is to be an arrival that will in an instant provide a picture of what Chuck Grassley his year long campaign is perceived to be all about. The story of this is told in its trappings for example a man who is uncomfortable with Onward Christian Soldiers being played at a political event. Indeed it appears to be appropriate accompaniment for a campaign conducted by a Baptist minister of a campaign that has more certitude about it with underpinnings that appeal to traditional values that Grassley and many of his supporters believe for too long have been ignored. We have seen this position. We see our military story. He threw out our standard and our repeated often before veterans groups before other supporters too. GRASSLEY complains about America's quote weakening

military possession charging directly that his opponent is soft on defense and by implication that the Democratic Party's defense policies have encouraged what Grassley calls quote the expansionism of the Soviet Union and China not to mention by the way Marxist involvement in South America and Mexico too. Tolerance of such behavior is according to this Republican a measurement of the weakness of American society. No more and no less than that. Any notion of changing world politics that make it difficult if not impossible for the United States to continue to police the world are summarily dismissed. Heroes are the kind of broad brush claims that seem to play well all over Iowa this year especially well with people whose convictions run as deep as their roots in the Iowa land that they follow

people whose rule lifestyle has in it a built in disdain for weakness and a built in notion that the simple is always better. They like Chuck Grassley because in him they see one of their own. We thank you lord for Congressman Grassley bless him as he campaigns and help us to remember him in our prayers. Now and in the future too whether by accident or by design. GRASSLEY captures quite well the mood of voter discontent that is chiseled on the faces of his rural Iowa supporters faces that suggest that these people are afraid feeling hard pressed to hold on to what they have scared to death even that they'll lose everything they have worked for. Their common enemy is government demands too much of their time too much paperwork and too much of their money. A government that has become a convenient hook on which people can hang their feelings about a society whose complexities have become confusing and overbearing.

They are feelings that Chuck Grassley mirrors the feelings he tries to mold into political action with incessant repetition of three singular thing. Short simple phrases that seek to characterize John as an ultra liberal and a big spender who is inexorably tied to Jimmy Carter. And when he sets out to sell them Grassley approaches his task with an evangelical fervor that would make even some of his evangelical supporters wash with envy. This case will be everywhere because these things are ours. There they are words used often in this campaign by both sides suggesting that its principals actually believe that the choices involved in the race are black and white. That there is no tolerance for Gray whatsoever.

That though is the perception. Within the Grassley campaign itself there is a willingness to live with something less than clear definition. Take the Equal Rights Amendment for example I think where you are yes. We're in Europe and I'm going to stay here until overcomes what brings this up you usually stand on your rights. You have any reason why and why you don't want to take a stand. It's because a state really the importance of this interchange does not lie in its answer for from the start of this campaign. Grassley has made it clear that he will not involve himself in what he considers a state issue. What is significant instead is that he does nothing at all to dissuade people from believing one thing or another just by taking no position. He leaves people like the supporter who raise the question at this breakfast and often free to believe what they want to believe. Among his conservative followers like those Grassley left behind at that breakfast discussing ways

to distribute literature Gresley silence on the issue is often interpreted as a tacit endorsement of their cause and among Republican moderates without whose votes he cannot win this election. His neutrality is more easily forgiven than would be his opposition to an issue that many hold dear to their hearts. The issue is a lobster tip of the fine line that the Grassley campaign must walk where its positions must be conservative enough to hold on to the active support of its loyal following broad enough to attract the votes of moderates and independents. My night. She read the trick is accomplished by an aggressive personal schedule that takes advantage of the candidates. Aw shucks down to earth style. Just wondered aloud Chuck Grassley to drive home only the themes that his campaign organization has outlined in a simple phrase. The message is that John Calder is out of touch. And the reason he is is because he is an ultra liberal and a big spender.

And it happens that people the grassroots the very same people you're talking about seem to be concerned about that today. They don't like it that the John callers have voted him 44 percent of their income to be paid in taxes. They don't like the deficit spending. They don't like the big government in the on do government regulation and those are the principles that I have been fighting because they run contrary to the things that I believe are best for government and best for society. Let me play devil's advocate for a moment. There are some who would say who argue that what you are offering is in their words simplistic. You say that if you like Chuck Grassley electronic Reg and elect a Republican Congress that taxes will be lowered. You'll balance the budget curb inflation restore strength to the dollar restore strength to the United States position overseas and read the Department of Agriculture of cheap food advocates. Now is that fair. You know that affairs well.

Can I say yes it is a fair thing to say but let me say that that those goals cannot be reached in a short period of time. They'll have to be reached over a long period of time. But no overnight miracles then and it mission that is sometimes hidden behind Grassley is eager rhetoric on the stump. And while many people might see his notions about economic restructuring as catering exclusively to the needs of narrow self-interests. GRASSLEY maintains that their purpose is the exact opposite that their goal is to restore to this country some of its basic values values whose destruction he argues was helped along by misguided economic programs. His point is not just that the federal government and its bureaucracy are economically inefficient. It also includes a notion that suggests that with its growth over the years the government has gradually usurped the roles the authority really of a person's family his home or his church. The result according to Chuck Grassley is that

we are no longer a nation undivided. That in the last 10 or 15 years the forces that are there aren't easy to define I think you have polled the population groups in America hard economic groups in America part maybe racial groups in America part maybe not so much religious groups with maybe to some extent religious groups apart. And we aren't pulling together as a nation as we used to. And I think we have to rebuild that that rebuilding process begins Grassley says with his election and has as its cornerstone economic policies that by enhancing the private sector. Well allegedly restore confidence in the public and Sujoy. Although you say it is in this way that economics become a tool for achieving social strength one more weapon to be used to fight the weakness that allegedly permeates American society a weakness of America's traditional institutions its touchstones its military might.

Please rhetoric suggest that the Klein of each is caused by an illness. The cure for which can only be found in a diet of the basics prepared by a person who preaches the essential ality of change. So we are in a battle of the mind in the sense to show the people of our country and in particular the people that what we Republicans have long stood for a Sound Economy is what is going to take to turn this country around. The language and the quiet intensity with which it is delivered suggests that despite their philosophical extremes a certain similarity exists between the campaigns of Chuck Grassley and that of his opponent for they both are true believers leaving their troops in a battle that was once referred to as a holy war. There are alternatives in the Senate race that are not reflected by the philosophies of John Calder

or Chuck Grassley. They are the alternatives offered by the so-called minor party candidates people whose mere presence in this electoral process gives renewed testimony to the notion that politics is truly a marketplace of ideas. To be sure their philosophies are extreme and their approaches to government are unconventional but those characterizations should not capriciously rule out an explanation of their ideas for each has something to offer. Witness for example the campaign of John Ingram Henderson the person who once told us that he might have to hop a freight for transportation to a debate in Ames. His is a campaign that despite its financial poverty has a wealth of ideas. As Rene de Razzo explains in this report. High powered is not a word that suits the senatorial campaign of John Ingram Henderson. Because right now you are looking at the extent of Henderson's

campaign resources. A bicycle. One that stuck in low gear. But that doesn't bother Henderson. The bike still serves as its primary mode of transportation when he's on the so-called campaign path. Now needless to say the bike and a severe lack of money haven't allowed Henderson to do the kind of campaigning necessary to win an election. But then winning is not what Henderson's campaign is about. Raising issues is. Through his candidacy. This 29 year old unemployed construction worker and part time cook from Muscatine hopes to focus more attention on a problem that has for the most part been largely ignored by government policymakers and as an issue in this year's campaign ignored not because it is unimportant but because of the issue just has not been placed on the quote list of government or political priorities. That issue the focus of Henderson's campaign is world hunger and meeting the needs of lesser developed countries.

The World Development Programme is the primary problem nobody presidential candidates are expressing on that as far as I can tell. And I think the two major candidates John clover and Charles Grassley. Are not purposely ignoring but do not realize and if. I do get my point across to some of the media the winner I hope whoever is the winner of the Senate campaign in November 4th will. Recognize. My beliefs and. Hopefully help express them to the world. A fourth ride but admittedly naive request as last to good intentions no doubt as are the specifics of his program to develop world nations but suffering perhaps unfortunately from practical acceptability. One of the specifics of your World Development Programme. There are three basic. Points that have to be applied. One is modern housing facilities

as good. As anywhere in the world. To farming technology enabling every nation to feed itself without another nation. Giving food. 3 would be various energy production such as windmills solar converters oil wells and lakes or tunnels. If we could. So put these in all the lands of the world. That would be the World Development Program. There are other even more implausible aspects to Henderson's program. For example he wants to turn the armed forces into an operation similar to the Peace Corps. Although Henderson maintains that he's not advocating the dismantling of our defense. Instead he says he's merely proposing a more versatile role for the military jack of all trades army. Yes. I can shoot that the easiest thing to do is shoot a gun. I mean in the army that is so easy. So why waste time proving you're going wherever you go when you could be

getting some other stuff done at the same to them. Less to those who argue that this country's military is already having a tough enough time filling its primary responsibility trust. Anderson answers that is World Development Program will roll out any nation's concern for its military preparedness all together. That it will erase in a single sweep the problem that has plagued mankind since the dawn of time. The World Development Program is the cure all to world everlasting peace is a problem we have not reached and the World Development Program if applied will get us to everlasting peace. A far fetched myopic notion. Well everlasting peace may be myopic but Henderson's notion is not without at least a seed of cretinous especially in light of a recently released government study entitled The Global 2000 report a study which suggests that of the developed nations of the world continue to ignore the pressing economic problems of underdeveloped countries. The world can expect to see an increasing amount

of political and military turmoil especially in the more impoverished sectors of the grome. The kind of turmoil that usually in one way or another touches the security of this country or that global Specter is of no small concern to many groups groups who like John Henderson feel that government should play a stronger role in solving world resource and development problems. But if Henderson's views are in good company in that area they are truly unique in most others. Take for example Henderson's notion about the role of government in today's society. Something often debated on the campaign trail and on Henderson's campaign path. It would be an understatement to suggest that Henderson's notion about the proper place of government is quote unconventional for it is completely without precedent. What role do you think government should play in people's lives what role should government play in society. Relaxation to set up a department of relaxation. No not necessarily the secretary Secretary of

athletics maybe wouldn't have a great deal to do if they really would. Show people the various offerings in life available. A relaxed person is not. Getting in trouble or is not worried about anything. There is no reason to worry if. Everything is peaceful. A lot of goal no doubt and most certainly an interesting definition for the role of government. One that's fair to say may take a while before its acceptance becomes widespread. There are other notions about government floating about in this campaign that have more let's say possibility to them than those of John and Graham Henderson notions that nonetheless arise out of the same kind of frustration that sparks nearly every third party candidacy. One of them is libertarian a political thought as much as it is a political party a thought that has succeeded in placing a nominee for president on the ballot in all 50 states and has fielded three candidates for federal offices in Iowa.

The most active of which is the candidate for the U.S. Senate. I don't think a third party is viable in the United States. What's happening to John Anderson is a good illustration that we have inherently in this country on a national level a two party system. Those are words spoken by a man who has never lost faith in his party who has never lost faith in its usefulness. Right. These people have they are disenchanted former Republicans disenchanted Democrats even independents all of whom gathered in Ames recently in a sense to prove Gerald Ford wrong. What these people are attending is a Libertarian Party fund raiser a closed circuit telethon fundraiser. All in an effort to break this country's two party mindset and to establish a viable third party a party based on the notion that

individual initiative and private enterprise are the best caretakers of society not the government. That is a notion born out of public frustration say the libertarians frustration over government its size its influence its average his appetite for taxes and perhaps above all its proclivity to cause rather than solve problems. Now I sort of go here and I will of raising here today $4000. But all these frustrations add up to according to libertarians is a growing public support for a significant reordering of the way society functions in the United States government's priorities its operations and its overall role in society. In the Libertarian view should be minimal at best. Libertarians say that given the chance they would be the ones to administer that restructuring one that would phase government out from all its present responsibilities from providing welfare to conducting foreign policy. All

that is except for one. And that's the protection of individual rights and individual freedoms. The basic protections by the way that lead to the growth of government in the first place. Fifty two year old Robert hinderer is a true believer in that singular government role. He is also the Libertarian Party's candidate for the U.S. Senate. Although we have been trained throughout our lives to feel that the government is a benign fatherly being with that's permeated by good intentions and superior vision and wisdom I think in practice they've proven that these things are not so that fatherly Why is image no longer applies. Says the father now looking anger because government has proven to be the primary cause of everything that is basically wrong with this country. No doubt an extreme notion in the minds of even those who would advocate less government in our lives no matter if people want evidence of government

culpability. Anger asks the public to look only at inflation and at this country's energy fix. To problems that in the Libertarian view have been sculptured strictly by government policies. The federal government has pursued cheap energy policy since 1954 when the Federal Power Commission assumed the power to regulate interstate rates on natural gas and we've had a consistent cheap energy policy which has discouraged production and encouraged waste and consumption and has resulted in the energy fix we're in today. When you speak of what causes and. Place in. The first place I think you should look as the dictionary the dictionary any dictionary will tell you that inflation is the undue expansion of the money supply. So in any situation where you have inflation you can look to see who is in charge of the money supply who is in charge of regulating the

value of our money in this country. It's the federal government as the more perfect simplistic or narrow approaches to extremely complex problems. Hunger is used to hearing that criticism. It is one that this advertising copywriter Eldridge answers with yet another volley of facts and figures aimed at chastising government growth an ill fated policy. Facts and figures that inevitably lead to the same libertarian conclusion government has to be reduced state party members reduced in size and more importantly in influence. The only question is by how much. This really divides itself into two questions One is how far would you go in the long run and the answer to that is I would go as far as possible on the grounds that private alternatives are far more efficient and effective means of handling any kind of community or national problem than the federal government. The other

question is what will we do right away. And Clark has presented very detailed proposals on what we would do right away and that would result in a reduction in federal expenditures of two hundred and one billion dollars. It would eliminate the Departments of Energy and Education entirely cut make take major cuts out of the Department of Labor budget the Department of Commerce and a number of others going down and the Bureau of specific bureaus like the cut until those departments and bureaus are phased out completely but left begging is who or what will take their place. Who will provide education. Maintain our highways subsidize the nation's farmers or provide unemployment insurance. Most certainly not the government. For libertarians you see you have a lot of faith and confidence in the private sector and in free enterprise. Not to mention in the individual's own ability to take care of him or herself as the libertarians like to say.

Listen for example to how the private sector will handle the problems of unemployment in the first place to be very many fewer people who are unable to take care of themselves if we have a free educational system and people are able to get a good education. There will be more people qualified to work. There are no shortage of jobs today what there is a shortage of people qualified to take these jobs and in many cases it's because they've been through public school systems which haven't provided them even with basic literacy. When hunger refers to free education he does not mean cost free education. He's talking about education free of government control. In other words private education. But again less begging is what happens to people who can't afford the education to get a good job. Well since we're going to be cutting. Personal income taxes in half. At least half. And not

putting in an income tax on people earning seventy five hundred dollars or last. People have a great deal more resources for their own savings and investment programs and there are more and more questions left begging. What happens to those for example who are unable to work because of the disability. What happens to the elderly who have no other source of revenue except the Social Security pension a pension by the way that a libertarian administration would abolish. Well this country over the years has been very reliant on charities and volunteer agencies says Hendren. He hopes those interests coupled with a lot of goodwill will take up the slack. They are true believers the libertarians are in what they consider the fundamental right of all individuals to operate freely in society unfettered by government's influence. They began their trek with that message in an organized fashion seven years ago primarily because they

found the traditional two party structure unresponsive to their viewpoints. In other words they felt they weren't being listened to. A feeling of frustration that's common to all minor party candidates. One this is especially prevalent in the cat of the sea of an activist named Gary De Young a person who believes that he alone possesses the kind of awareness that's necessary to cure society's ills. Our report on the Young's one man campaign for the Senate comes from Renee to razzo. 57 year old Gary D calls himself a poet farmer teacher printer publisher even a philosopher. But if you were to run across people who know Gary Dion you know his background chances are they wouldn't think of him as the poet philosopher farmer or even the teacher in you. Right. Chances are they would think of as the ardent atheist the missionary atheist the some say the Gary De Young who as a resident of whole Iowa force that Sioux County town's public elementary school to obey the law and ban prayer is in the classroom. Or people might know him as the Garrity young

who while living in Duluth Minnesota forced a public school there to ban the singing of religious Christmas carols. He has had other battles too with John called her last night or battles over bible readings in public schools. Two battles basically over the separation between church and state over what the Young says is his constitutional right to live as a nonbeliever. Live free from discrimination free from religious intrusion. The fights while not easy have been necessary says the young so necessary that they propelled him an unknown into the race for Senate. It's the awareness that sometimes you're the only person that has the background to be able to do it properly. Flashes back to some of the actions I've taken previously. Those are very touching. Church state issues which make her very unpopular very difficult to address because of the huge backlash that you always you know you're going to receive from the community. And

yet if you understand the principles that are involved the constitutional principles and if you know that no one else is going to raise those challenges then it's your responsibility to raise those challenges and then just this is part of it. And then raising those kinds of challenges has been costly. Young says that both he and his wife have lost jobs over their anti-religious stance and lost a good deal of their earnings in savings and legal battles to get one of the jobs back before physical disability prevented the young from working full time. He along with his wife and two sons live off his pension. The earnings he picks up from a small printing operation and the salary his wife earns as a social worker combined the income is just enough to support the Young's family and a less than modest home one that doesn't have any hot running water something he suggests gives him an awareness about social problems and social injustices that regular politicians cannot understand. What does your campaign stand for. There's a message that you're trying to get across to voters. What is it.

My message is trying to get across that in our society at the present time there are grave injustices that are not being addressed. I'm talking about the injustices through the courts I'm talking about the injustices through the environmental neglect. I'm talking about the injustices caused by the high interest rates. Talk about the injustices caused by the high cost of fuel I'm talking about the injustices involved in our tax structure I'm talking about the injustices that are involved when we commit ourselves to providing huge subsidies to people who don't need them and insult people who do need money by not providing with the assistance that they do need. So would it be accurate to say that that Kerry campaign stands for the little guy. For the powerless of course of course. So how would be young rectify all of those injustices. Well he would rely primarily on an entity that right now is in the public's mind anyway is perceived more as creating problems

than cure. He would rely on the federal government to take energy for example the Senate Candidate contends that this country's oil crisis is not a crisis of supply one of deception or manipulation. I think it's contrived. I don't think there is a shortage at all in fact from everything that I have read many sources. I feel that we have a glut of oil that there's an oil surplus. So if the oil companies persist in what do young calls their hope he would nationalize them if necessary. If we can't do it any other way. Private industry is going to continue taking advantage of the public then we will have to just take them over and say OK we're going to have cheap energy for the United States. There are to be sure many people who wish that the cause and solution to the energy crisis were that simple. Given the very real questions of dwindling supplies given OPEC's control over world oil prices and supplies given the tangle of political interests involved in arriving at any one solution there are also those who wish that the

Young's cure for inflation were as easy as he suggests a cure that again involves the strong hand of government. What about inflation. What to what's what's causing it right now in your view and how you're going to solve that problem. Well there are of course many causes but I think one of the primary causes is are our money system the Federal Reserve system the high interest rates that are assessed. And for which all of us must pay in one form or another. And any businessman who goes into business. With rare exception must use credit and on this credit he has to pay high interest. When people buy their homes they have to pay high interest when you buy your car you have to pay interest. And what I'm saying is that as a federal reserve system in the first place as unconstitutional it should not exist it should be abolished and in its place the young wants the Department of Treasury which he believes will set interest rates more equitably for consumers instead of for what he calls quote the benefit of big bankers. His opposition to quote

big banks as he puts it to big business to big oil companies to the Trilateral Commission suggest that Jared Young's political concerns are consistent with the philosophical concerns that govern his opposition to prayer in schools or as fights against Christmas carols at Christmas parties concerned one would believe it is for the so-called quote little god. The one whose voice is never heard from our young Gary Young independent candidate for the United States Senate. It is the small businessman that he says isn't listened to and the small farmer whose absence he says will alter the very structure of society as we know the most important issue by far really is the demise of this family farm in the United States the erosion of our total agricultural base. It produces an erosion in the mental health the physical health the physical well-being the financial well-being the entire security internal security and

external security of the United States. We're rushing towards that kind of situation where you're going to destroy the very moral fiber fiber the very soul of people the souls of people are destroyed when they are forced to live in the cities in congested areas where when he cast the blame for that erosion the young predictably rattles off a number of culprits. Chief among them beggar a pharmacist on agricultural use of farmland and outside investment in an ownership of farmland just working to counter those threats. Young says he would work for stronger controls on land use and strongly promote farm educational programs. But as laudable as are those goals it is doubtful that Kerry will ever get a chance to promote them except through his occasional campaigns for public office. After all he has no campaign organization no finances. Little if any popular support which taken together mean that Kerry will have to continue to wage his battles for the little guy. His fights over the separation between church and state

outside the state rather than inside. Raising questions in no small sense that is the true function of independent candidates people who believe that the two party system forces candidates to push for the middle wear in their efforts to corral votes. They leave begging some very fundamental questions about politics and about government. The most basic of which is the question we raised at the beginning of this program. What is it that we're being asked to vote for. For a comment on that we turn to John McCormack. John Fish. So you Million Dollar Senate campaign is entertaining enlightening you Josh. Did an exasperated. It is also raised a question about American government which we've yet to answer. Are we electing a United States senator or a state senator. Do we send someone to Washington to confront national problems and meet global threats or are we simply grub staking a prospect or to go east and find what goal he can for us in their goals.

The campaign code words are he doesn't represent Iowa that translates into a complaint that the senator or the congressman for both sides use it has sometimes voted benefits for others in the nation or the world rather than limiting its effort to getting all the goodies he can for us. It is a crucial charge you say all about apathy taking precedence over whether the candidate is Christian enough for food or one hour for bright now the very worst thing that can be said about him is that he doesn't represent Iowa represent I was what I generosity or I agreed affluence or I need our inward self centered isolation or our demonstrated willingness to help others. Why did a free to slaves feed the starving C'mere save the distant cities or endanger U.S. shores when we salute the flag we call ourselves one nation indivisible. But do we mean it

or do we really see ourselves as separate competing states parochial in Cadiz with narrow geographic concerns. The U.S. Senate is the most powerful governing body on earth. Its influence goes beyond bridge building or coin prices or post offices in Iowa. The right of the peace is kept the starving lay of the planet survives. Unlike the House which is rooted in the special needs of its small constituencies answerable to them every two years the Senate is a national body. Its members given six year terms to allow room for statesmanship its constituency the nation and the world. The great senators have been those who put principle above parochialism who risked calumny at home to provide leadership abroad who went beyond client service to carve out profiles in courage for an avi illustrates the question in this campaign with millions starving in Africa and Asia

and private agencies running short of funds. We spend 4.8 billion on foreign aid and 31 billion on booze. One of the worst showings of any which a nation. It isn't all the candidates fault. This campaign is less inspiring and uplifting then they should be. They must be asking the question we still need to ask myself. Are we sending a senator to Washington. Can the nation's jails or to protect our interests. What I don't what he could do for the country which can shine only for what the country can do for us. Dave thank you back with that our coverage of the races for federal offices in Iowa is complete. Over the past four weeks we've taken you inside the campaigns of 23 people each of whom feels well qualified to plead for our hopes. Fight for our aspirations and defend our dreams. Collectively they have invested months and

millions of dollars in their efforts all repayment comes when we vote on November 4th. Next week we'll bring you the results of our choices live reports mixed in with healthy doses of information and entertainment. We'll have an election night party. And we'd like you to attend. Until then for John McCormack. I'm Dean Borg. Thank you for joining us. Good night. The preceding program was a public affairs presentation of the Iowa Public Broadcasting Network

and was made possible by a grant from friends of our PTA.