Washington Week; No. 3329; 1994-01-14

<v Paul Duke>President Clinton gives strong support to Boris Yeltsin. <v Paul Duke>Tonight on Washington, Week in Review. <v narrator>This is Washington Week in Review for Friday, January 14, nineteen <v narrator>ninety four. <v narrator>Ford Motor Company, worldwide manufacturer of automotive products, has provided <v narrator>funding for this program. <v narrator>At Ford, quality is job one. <v narrator>Funding has also been provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by annual <v narrator>financial support from viewers like you. <v narrator>Now here's moderator Paul Duke. <v Paul Duke>Good evening. President Clinton is winding up his European trip, a trip that's produced <v Paul Duke>some new steps to reduce the threat of nuclear war.

<v Paul Duke>The White House has bowed to political pressure and agreed to a special investigation <v Paul Duke>into a controversial Arkansas land and banking affair. <v Paul Duke>More good news on the economic front. <v Paul Duke>Inflation remaining low as business picks up. <v Paul Duke>But on the health front, it's more bad news. <v Paul Duke>Smoking still claiming 400000 lives a year. <v Paul Duke>This. Three decades after the surgeon general said smoking causes cancer. <v Paul Duke>Around our table tonight, Charles McDowell of the Richmond Times Dispatch, <v Paul Duke>Alan Murray of The Wall Street Journal, Gwen Ifil <v Paul Duke>of The New York Times, Steven Roberts of U.S. <v Paul Duke>News and World Report and reporting directly from <v Paul Duke>Moscow on the president's trip. Doyle McManus of the Los Angeles Times. <v Paul Duke>The president has made his diplomatic debut in Europe, Steve, and apparently the <v Paul Duke>trip is gone rather well.

<v Steven V. Roberts>Well, you're right, Paul it is his first trip to Europe as president. <v Steven V. Roberts>But what became apparent during the week was that the biggest success of the last two <v Steven V. Roberts>years, which is the decline of communism, the collapse of the Soviet Union, also, in a <v Steven V. Roberts>way, presented him and the Western allies with their biggest problem, because it was so <v Steven V. Roberts>clear that there was a lack of unity and a lack of clarity <v Steven V. Roberts>in terms of their policies toward East-West relations. <v Steven V. Roberts>And you saw this in a number of areas. For instance, in terms of NATO, the former <v Steven V. Roberts>countries of Eastern Europe, part formerly of the Soviet bloc, a Czech Republic, <v Steven V. Roberts>Hungary, Poland, were offered a partnership in NATO, but not full membership, <v Steven V. Roberts>not the protection that full membership would involve in terms <v Steven V. Roberts>of the Ukraine today. Presently in Kravchuk of the Ukraine promised again, <v Steven V. Roberts>he's done this before to dismantle all of the nuclear weapons that are based <v Steven V. Roberts>there. Eighteen hundred warheads targeted to the United States <v Steven V. Roberts>promised to dismantle most of them, but there's no guarantee that the Ukrainian <v Steven V. Roberts>parliament will go along. A lot of nationalists in that parliament still very much afraid

<v Steven V. Roberts>of soviet power. <v Steven V. Roberts>And then, of course, the situation in Bosnia, which the United States did not want to <v Steven V. Roberts>talk about very much in, in Russia. <v Steven V. Roberts>But you have a situation there where there's a lot of talk <v Steven V. Roberts>about renewing this threat of airstrikes, but no one really believes <v Steven V. Roberts>the threat is very credible or that it would make much difference. <v Steven V. Roberts>You have a picture of a president who's had reasonable success, made some progress, <v Steven V. Roberts>but left a lot of questions unanswered. <v Paul Duke>Was there any sign that he had those words we use? <v Paul Duke>A doctrine that we could begin to see what in his foreign affairs adventure. <v Paul Duke>Is there a Clinton doctrine emerging? <v Steven V. Roberts>I think there isn't a Clinton doctrine, but there are certain benchmarks that have <v Steven V. Roberts>emerged. For instance, the importance of stopping nuclear proliferation. <v Steven V. Roberts>And this is something that was true in terms of North Korea. <v Steven V. Roberts>There can be a lot of murkiness in terms of perceiving American national interest <v Steven V. Roberts>in a place like Bosnia. There's no doubt that America's national interest is clear when <v Steven V. Roberts>you're talking about nuclear weapons.

<v Steven V. Roberts>I think we saw very clearly one of the key points of his doctrine is let's not upset the <v Steven V. Roberts>Russians. Let's be very careful about them that this is <v Steven V. Roberts>one of the pollsters. I think it's also true that he focused <v Steven V. Roberts>very much on economics as part of the Clinton doctrine, that this and Bill Clinton's view <v Steven V. Roberts>is the key to the future. It's not military strength, it's the economy. <v Paul Duke>And on the other hand, I think we should say, Steve, that there's been a lot <v Paul Duke>of talk about a new role for for NATO and America asserting its leadership <v Paul Duke>and forming a new role. And yet and yet it's not clear <v Paul Duke>at all what NATO's future is going to be. <v Steven V. Roberts>Well, that uncertainty threaded its way through everything this week. <v Steven V. Roberts>I mean, the the the sort of compromises and half measures I've talked about really <v Steven V. Roberts>do reflect the uncertainty in the middle of Europe today, because NATO, of course, <v Steven V. Roberts>was crafted to oppose the Soviet threat. <v Steven V. Roberts>And so when you go, for instance, on this issue of expanding NATO, why <v Steven V. Roberts>did they not go farther? Well, the main reason was they are afraid that they

<v Steven V. Roberts>would encourage the nationalists within the Soviet Union, former Soviet Union, that <v Steven V. Roberts>Russia would be upset. In fact, today, Boris Yeltsin in Moscow made the point <v Steven V. Roberts>to President Clinton, who is one of the key sources of disagreement between the two of <v Steven V. Roberts>them, where he said, we don't really think the Russians don't really think that the the <v Steven V. Roberts>former satellites should be allowed into into NATO. <v Steven V. Roberts>But. <v Paul Duke>They were talking about what Poland and. <v Steven V. Roberts> Czech Republic, Hungary. <v Steven V. Roberts>But you even have countries like Lithuania and the Baltics who are anxious <v Steven V. Roberts>for membership. But just before they went to Europe, I had breakfast with Secretary <v Steven V. Roberts>Christopher, who made two other very interesting points about this. <v Steven V. Roberts>One was that they're not really sure whether. <v Steven V. Roberts>These other countries, such as Poland, are ready for NATO membership, whether they're <v Steven V. Roberts>their troops are at the right level, whether the military is firmly under civilian <v Steven V. Roberts>control. And another very important point. <v Steven V. Roberts>We're now in this country at a moment of contracting foreign commitments. <v Steven V. Roberts>That's a part of the doctrine, as a matter of fact.

<v Steven V. Roberts>And Christopher is very uncertain as to whether any expansion of NATO <v Steven V. Roberts>course that would mean moving the front lines hundreds of miles east, defending a <v Steven V. Roberts>lot more territory. <v Steven V. Roberts>This is at a time when we're withdrawing troops from the middle of Europe. <v Steven V. Roberts>So there's very uncertainty where the American public and American Congress would go <v Steven V. Roberts>along. <v Alan Murray>Steve, Bosnia, you mentioned the lack of credibility <v Alan Murray>surrounding the commitment. The president said let's not threaten airstrikes <v Alan Murray>again unless we mean it, and then they threaten airstrikes again. <v Alan Murray>Did they mean it? <v Steven V. Roberts>No, they did exactly what he warned them against. <v Steven V. Roberts>The fact is, the President Clinton did not want to talk about Bosnia. <v Steven V. Roberts>Gwen, knows that that all the briefings before the trip, they said this is this meeting <v Steven V. Roberts>is not about airstrikes. It's not about Bosnia. <v Steven V. Roberts>The French insisted it be discussed. <v Steven V. Roberts>And the truth is, as someone said to me today, and then Helmut Sonnenfeld is a great wise <v Steven V. Roberts>man in Washington who said it in terms of Bosnia. <v Steven V. Roberts>Everybody feels guilty. <v Steven V. Roberts>Everybody feels frustrated. And no one knows what to do about it.

<v Paul Duke>Well, let's go from cold Washington to cold Moscow now where Doyle McManus is <v Paul Duke>standing by. And Doyle, you've been with the president every inch of the way <v Paul Duke>on this trip. What is your impression about how he has <v Paul Duke>done, how he's fared? <v Doyle McManus>Paul, it's been fascinating watching Bill Clinton on this trip. <v Doyle McManus>He had a bit of a rocky start, as Steve mentioned, at the NATO summit. <v Doyle McManus>He ended up talking about Bosnia because the allies, the French and the British <v Doyle McManus>wanted that subject on the table. He didn't. <v Doyle McManus>He was stuck with it. But as he went along, he actually seemed to pick up <v Doyle McManus>some confidence. He managed in the middle of the trip to conclude the <v Doyle McManus>details of that very important agreement with Ukraine <v Doyle McManus>to get rid of Ukraine's nuclear weapons, which, if it holds a big if, will <v Doyle McManus>be a considerable accomplishment for the administration. <v Doyle McManus>And then finally here in Moscow, I think you can say he hit his stride because <v Doyle McManus>here he knew what it was he wanted to do.

<v Doyle McManus>There's one theme that I would add to those that Steve mentioned about the Clinton <v Doyle McManus>foreign policy that's been consistent from the start, and that is support for reform in <v Doyle McManus>Russia. Bill Clinton has always said that if Russia goes bad, <v Doyle McManus>he's not going to be able to accomplish the domestic priorities that he has at home. <v Doyle McManus>So he's always focused an important word, I think, focused on Russia. <v Doyle McManus>And when he got here, one of the things he wanted to do was demonstrate support for Boris <v Doyle McManus>Yeltsin, send a signal to the Russian people that following <v Doyle McManus>ultranationalists like Mr. Zhirinovsky is not in their interest. <v Doyle McManus>I think he did a good job at that. <v Gwen Ifill>Doyle this is Gwen. It seems that from our pictures that we saw back here in Washington, <v Gwen Ifill>we saw pictures of the president wearing big fuzzy hats and drinking beer on page one of <v Gwen Ifill>the newspaper and having just a grand old time. <v Gwen Ifill>How was he really received not only in Russia, but in the other countries that he visited <v Gwen Ifill>while he was there? <v Doyle McManus>Well, in the early part of his trip, again, people were focusing on that question of <v Doyle McManus>NATO. Both the Western Europeans and the Eastern Europeans wanted to know how

<v Doyle McManus>that was going to come out. The Eastern Europeans wanted their place in NATO. <v Doyle McManus>They didn't get it. So they weren't happy. <v Doyle McManus>But here in Russia, the Russians saw the Bill Clinton, the campaigner <v Doyle McManus>whom we all know from the United States, and especially today, he went <v Doyle McManus>and did one of those trademark Clinton events, a town meeting with something like <v Doyle McManus>350 young people. <v Doyle McManus>And it was a smash. He had a 13 year old kid come up on the stage and ask to shake <v Doyle McManus>his hand the same way the young Bill Clinton had shaken the hand of John F. <v Doyle McManus>Kennedy years ago. He played the crowd like a violin. <v Doyle McManus>Some of those Russians thought this is a little slicker than we're used to seeing. <v Steven V. Roberts>Doyle, Doyle, you know, the other thing that he said today that really impressed me and I <v Steven V. Roberts>wondered what your reaction to it was. He seemed to be going out of his way as much, even <v Steven V. Roberts>though he was shoring up Yeltsin. Also talking about this is a partnership <v Steven V. Roberts>and as a relationship of equality, he seemed to be responding to some <v Steven V. Roberts>of the commentary in Russia that the United States was acting paternalistically

<v Steven V. Roberts>and toward Russia. <v Steven V. Roberts>How did that play? <v Doyle McManus>That's that's exactly right. That played very well. <v Doyle McManus>That was something Yeltsin had personally talked to him about beforehand. <v Doyle McManus>There was an interesting a couple of moments in their press conference today <v Doyle McManus>where Yeltsin went out of his way to disagree with Clinton on some issues, <v Doyle McManus>in part to demonstrate that he still has the independence that a leader of a great power <v Doyle McManus>should have. Clinton's aides said they knew Yeltsin was going to do that. <v Doyle McManus>They were comfortable with it. It was important that they put this on the level of a <v Doyle McManus>partnership. The other theme that Clinton hit that was very interesting, he took some <v Doyle McManus>of his domestic themes on the road. <v Doyle McManus>He told the Russians, listen to these words, they're going to be familiar to you. <v Doyle McManus>He told the Russians that they're going to have to embrace change and they're going to <v Doyle McManus>have to get ready for a more competitive economy and that their government is there to <v Doyle McManus>provide a basic safety net for them. <v Doyle McManus>But it's really their future to embrace. <v Doyle McManus>The Russians hadn't heard this before.

<v Doyle McManus>It hasn't quite sunk in. It's going to take a longer campaign than just one week. <v Alan Murray>Doyle, back here there is is a growing group of critics who are asking <v Alan Murray>the question of whether the Clinton administration is is wrapping itself too <v Alan Murray>much around Russia. <v Alan Murray>And President Yeltsin, a country that whose future is still <v Alan Murray>very much in doubt, both in terms of democratic reform and economic reform and distancing <v Alan Murray>itself too much from the countries of Eastern Europe that have been very successful in <v Alan Murray>moving towards democratic and economic market reforms. <v Alan Murray>What's the White House response to those criticisms? <v Doyle McManus>Well, in terms of getting too close to Yeltsin in Russia itself, we saw some movement <v Doyle McManus>on that this week. Clinton and his aides spent a lot of time with other potential <v Doyle McManus>successors to Yeltsin, including the prime minister here, Mr. Chernomyrdin. <v Doyle McManus>And the president made a point of holding a very large reception, inviting <v Doyle McManus>many of the younger political leaders, including one man from Mr. Juranasaki's <v Doyle McManus>ultranationalist party. He was making a point there that he could work with those people,

<v Doyle McManus>but not with Mr. Juranaski on your larger point, though. <v Doyle McManus>You're absolutely right. There is no question. <v Doyle McManus>And this trip brought it home. <v Doyle McManus>Bill Clinton's number one foreign priority is Russia. <v Doyle McManus>Eastern Europe takes a bit of a backseat. <v Paul Duke>Thank you, Doyle. Have a good trip home. <v Doyle McManus>Thank you Paul. It's been good being with you. <v Paul Duke>One of the things that bedeviled the president on this trip was the little matter <v Paul Duke>of Whitewater Gewn. <v Gwen Ifill>It turned out to be a much bigger matter than the president had anticipated. <v Gwen Ifill>By now, most people are familiar, if not with the details of this case, with the whole <v Gwen Ifill>idea of the fact that there was a failed Arkansas real estate deal <v Gwen Ifill>that has come back 10 years later to dog the president and the first lady. <v Gwen Ifill>They. There have been a lot of questions raised, not so much about the Clintons <v Gwen Ifill>involvement, but about the people they were involved with and their involvement with with <v Gwen Ifill>the way they managed the institution. <v Gwen Ifill>Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan and the way they manage the investment. <v Gwen Ifill>There's nothing that captured the president's frustration better this week than a little

<v Gwen Ifill>news clip bought by our colleague Jim Miklaszewski from NBC News interviewed <v Gwen Ifill>the president on the day that in Washington, the president was finally announcing that he <v Gwen Ifill>was going to seek a special counsel and. <v Paul Duke>He interviewed the president in Moscow,. <v Gwen Ifill>In Moscow. And he asked him twice to run in questions about whether, <v Gwen Ifill>you know, about Whitewater, about this issue, this domestic issue that the president just <v Gwen Ifill>didn't want to talk about. He thought he was there to talk about foreign policy. <v Gwen Ifill>And after the second question, the president rose from his chair, snatched off his <v Gwen Ifill>microphone. His press secretary had to duck into the shot to catch it and said, I'm <v Gwen Ifill>sorry, you don't want to talk about the trip. And he stormed out. <v Gwen Ifill>He was very rattled by this. The president is very unhappy. <v Gwen Ifill>The first lady is equally unhappy. They insist that they had done nothing wrong. <v Gwen Ifill>There have been no allegations, serious allegations, credible allegations of criminal <v Gwen Ifill>wrongdoing on their part. And why, in that case, should they be expected to appoint an <v Gwen Ifill>investigator to investigate themselves when they're innocent? <v Charles McDowell>First semi question, why didn't they do it earlier if they could get it over with? <v Charles McDowell>But let me. I've heard a lot of people talking like you described the Clintons.

<v Charles McDowell>I have two phone calls at home for no reason, denouncing the press and accusing <v Charles McDowell>me of doing terrible things about Whitewater. I've done nothing. <v Gwen Ifill>That's what Clinton said. <v Paul Duke>Nothing that we know nothing. <v Charles McDowell>But this story, contention from our pretty good lawyer was that we had written day after <v Charles McDowell>day after day about the circumstances that could have produced evil <v Charles McDowell>circumstances, circumstances, circumstances. <v Charles McDowell>Have we written any of those days about credible evidence of <v Charles McDowell>wrongdoing? <v Gwen Ifill>I think we've write about it every single day. I think it's profitable. <v Gwen Ifill>And I think no, we don't. We don't. We are saying there is no credible and knows every <v Gwen Ifill>day. And I think we make that point. I think the problem, however, is that we have a <v Gwen Ifill>situation where politics becomes reality as happens all the time around this <v Gwen Ifill>table. And the political reality was that the Clintons there were so many <v Gwen Ifill>questions that they were answering poorly that they were answering in part that they were <v Gwen Ifill>answering not at all, that eventually the cloud that that Rosen stayed over <v Gwen Ifill>the White House was that they were being evasive and that the quickest way politically

<v Gwen Ifill>to clear this would be to put this in the hands of someone independent who could if the <v Gwen Ifill>Clintons say that there's nothing wrong there, can prove that. <v Paul Duke>But there is no question you still come back to that basic question, though, and that is, <v Paul Duke>why didn't they agree earlier? <v Paul Duke>Why did they at least give the appearance of stonewalling? <v Gwen Ifill>They just handled it badly. The president admits now he handled it badly. <v Gwen Ifill>His his his famed. Control team, if they handle it badly, Mr. and Mrs. Clinton <v Gwen Ifill>felt very strongly on a matter of legal, legal legality and principle that they had <v Gwen Ifill>done nothing wrong and shouldn't have to say anything more. <v Alan Murray>There is more going on here than just politics. <v Alan Murray>I mean, you have a very strong appearance of conflict of interest where the governor is <v Alan Murray>in a business investment with a man who runs a regulated <v Alan Murray>business and savings and loan. And then you have the first lady as a lawyer representing <v Alan Murray>that business with the man she's in a business. <v Gwen Ifill>At point before regulator who regulates the bank. <v Gwen Ifill>[inaudible] first lady's law firm? It's fair. <v Alan Murray>And she is the first lady is at the center of it.

<v Alan Murray>Is it going to hurt her ability to be an effective spokesman for that number one <v Alan Murray>priority this year? Health care? <v Gwen Ifill>It depends what happens in the next several weeks. Janet Reno has promised to move very <v Gwen Ifill>quickly in appointing a special counsel to appoint someone who even Republicans can agree <v Gwen Ifill>is a good person. And if the White House has it the way they want, this will then. <v Gwen Ifill>This will then drop off the face of the earth and they'll be able to at least get health <v Gwen Ifill>care off the ground in time for the State of the Union speech on January 20. <v Steven V. Roberts>What can you tell us about the stories that are circulating around town for a week that <v Steven V. Roberts>really there was a tremendous fight in the White House between the Hillary forces and the <v Steven V. Roberts>bill forces, that they the president wanted this all to come out and that Mrs. <v Steven V. Roberts>Clinton, in part because of the involvement she had that Allen talked about, was <v Steven V. Roberts>very reluctant and the two of them disagreed. <v Gwen Ifill>I don't know that that's the case. I do know that the White House says it was absolutely <v Gwen Ifill>not the case, that both Clintons disagreed. I think if you gauged the president's <v Gwen Ifill>reaction to it, you can tell that he was bitterly opposed to his as she was. <v Gwen Ifill>The fact of the matter, however, is that whenever anything involves or touches on the <v Gwen Ifill>east wing of the White House, where the first lady has her offices, everybody freezes up. <v Gwen Ifill>Nobody wants to talk about it. Nobody wants to make an enemy of Hillary Clinton.

<v Paul Duke>Well, the president has to be happy about one thing this week here at home, Alan, <v Paul Duke>and that is the additional encouraging news we've had about <v Paul Duke>the economy. <v Alan Murray>Well, there were inflation numbers out this week. <v Alan Murray>I think this is sort of the silver lining of the slow economy we've had for the last <v Alan Murray>couple of years. Inflation in the past year grew at a <v Alan Murray>two point seven percent rate, which is which is very low. <v Alan Murray>Something we haven't seen in quite a while. In fact, if you take the oil and food prices <v Alan Murray>out, which tend to be volatile, the core inflation rate is the lowest it's been <v Alan Murray>since Richard Nixon was president. So it's it's quite an accomplishment <v Alan Murray>and it's still coming down. We've been in an economic recovery now for almost <v Alan Murray>three years. The inflation rate is still coming down. <v Alan Murray>That's very unusual. It probably also means that this is an economic <v Alan Murray>recovery that can last for some time. <v Alan Murray>And that's very important to President Clinton. <v Alan Murray>It may well last right through right through the 1996 election. <v Steven V. Roberts>The same paper, Europe, your paper this morning reported this also reported

<v Steven V. Roberts>that health care costs had dropped significantly. <v Steven V. Roberts>Inflation rate of only about five point four percent, much lower than in the past. <v Steven V. Roberts>And that there is this growing drumbeat in town, including some Democrats <v Steven V. Roberts>are saying there really isn't a health care crisis. <v Steven V. Roberts>Is these kinds of numbers going to be a political problem for the president <v Steven V. Roberts>in trying to convince people to do radical surgery on the? <v Alan Murray>I think it could be. I mean, there are two forces driving the push for health care <v Alan Murray>reform. One is the concern about those people who don't have insurance or have the threat <v Alan Murray>of losing their insurance. And the other is this concern about costs. <v Alan Murray>And there was a big change this year. <v Alan Murray>The health care cost inflation came down all year long. <v Alan Murray>There are signs that companies with their managed care plans are finally sort <v Alan Murray>of getting some control over health care costs. <v Alan Murray>The government is getting some control over its Medicaid and Medicare costs. <v Alan Murray>Those numbers are coming down as well. <v Alan Murray>It's still far faster than overall inflation.

<v Alan Murray>There is still a very serious cost problem. <v Alan Murray>But it does look like, as Senator Moynihan, Moynihan said a week ago, that <v Alan Murray>the crisis in health care costs may not be as bad as it was. <v Gwen Ifill>This is to say that if then president, Mrs. Clinton come and propose a health care plan, <v Gwen Ifill>which will cost people even in the short run, more than it saves them, <v Gwen Ifill>that slows the economy down, does it? <v Alan Murray>Well, not necessarily. But I do think these numbers create a problem for the Clinton <v Alan Murray>plan. Remember how important it is to them that they be able <v Alan Murray>to say that we don't have to raise taxes to pay for this. <v Alan Murray>Part of the way they were going to do that was by bringing down the costs. <v Alan Murray>Then they use that money to extend coverage to more people if the costs are coming down <v Alan Murray>anyway. You don't have that savings and it's a serious problem in <v Alan Murray>the financing. <v Paul Duke>Speaking of costs, oil prices keep coming down, too. <v Paul Duke>And of course, we all remember that mighty battle on Capitol Hill to try <v Paul Duke>to raise the gasoline tax by a dime, which was which was a flop <v Paul Duke>it, didn't it? I think the lawmakers raised it.

<v Paul Duke>What, about four cents a gallon. <v Alan Murray>Four point three- four point seven, four point three. <v Paul Duke>That was regarded as a big deal, a very small deal. <v Paul Duke>But our oil price is going to keep coming down, too? <v Alan Murray>Well, I don't know if oil prices. Keep coming down. <v Alan Murray>But just the fact that they've dropped the 25 percent that they've dropped since October <v Alan Murray>means that 1994 is gonna be another very good year for inflation. <v Alan Murray>We will continue to have a low inflation, if only because energy prices <v Alan Murray>are so low. <v Paul Duke>The war against smoking goes on, Charlie, as it has now for 30 years, ever since <v Paul Duke>the surgeon general declared smoking to be hazardous to your health and <v Paul Duke>to be one of the country's biggest killers. <v Charles McDowell>It was a sort of awesome thing to think it was 30 years ago. <v Charles McDowell>It has changed our lives, changed our country, and not just some of us who smoke <v Charles McDowell>cigarettes. That was 1964. <v Charles McDowell>Now, they celebrated its 30th anniversary and seven surgeons general came <v Charles McDowell>in to a meeting in Washington. And people from the various health groups came <v Charles McDowell>and they talked about some of the big hit, big things that occurred 1966, two years

<v Charles McDowell>after the decision that there's something bad here. <v Charles McDowell>The health warning labels were required on the packages. <v Charles McDowell>That was a big thing. If you remember, 1971, cigarette ads were barred on radio and <v Charles McDowell>television. That's a pretty big thing. <v Charles McDowell>1988. Smoking banned on most domestic air flights. <v Charles McDowell>The short ones. And in 90 on all of them. <v Charles McDowell>Well, it went on like that. And and at the end of this 30 years, with the <v Charles McDowell>concern had gotten more sophisticated and moved on now to little kids and second- <v Charles McDowell>dary recipients of this smoke and people that weren't smoking. <v Charles McDowell>And we've begun to see this familiar scene of people standing around outside office <v Charles McDowell>buildings at 10 minutes of the smoking. <v Charles McDowell>And you can tell something's changing the percent of smokers in America. <v Charles McDowell>And those 30 years did change from about 42 percent of the population to about <v Charles McDowell>26 percent of the population. <v Charles McDowell>There were more, man. They've reduced more. <v Charles McDowell>There were fewer women who smoked. They haven't gotten well as fast with it. <v Charles McDowell>Young people are a real problem.

<v Charles McDowell>But the government just keeps pointing out the same thing. <v Charles McDowell>After all this work. Four hundred and twenty thousand deaths <v Charles McDowell>a year in which cigarettes are said to have played <v Charles McDowell>a part. <v Gwen Ifill>Charlie, I wonder about the behavioral implications here. <v Gwen Ifill>I heard a story on the radio this morning that there was a local jurisdiction, school <v Gwen Ifill>jurisdiction, where students were objecting to the fact that they were asked to sign a <v Gwen Ifill>pledge not to smoke, drink or do drugs in order to participate in extracurricular <v Gwen Ifill>activities. Well, they're not old enough to smoke, drink or do drugs. <v Gwen Ifill>I don't think they didn't realize that. <v Gwen Ifill>Is anybody reminding them of this fact? <v Charles McDowell>they're they're after them about smoking, drinking and doing drugs. <v Charles McDowell>These people wanted us to get after a more what really gets them, whatever the correct <v Charles McDowell>or incorrect approach to those kids was. <v Charles McDowell>The big statistic that stunning is that 85 <v Charles McDowell>percent of people who smoke start before they're 19 years old. <v Charles McDowell>And this group is sort of zeroing in on it. <v Charles McDowell>You know, we're trying to get principals to get after those kids.

<v Charles McDowell>We're trying to get the federal Food and Drug Administration to start controlling <v Charles McDowell>cigarettes just like it controls medicine. <v Charles McDowell>Because if we could just stop people from smoking between 16 and 19, <v Charles McDowell>you could cut this thing drastically. <v Steven V. Roberts>Because you have these tobacco lobby, which is an important political force and important <v Steven V. Roberts>economic force, particularly in certain states like your home state of Virginia. <v Steven V. Roberts>Have they still have the clout to try to stop the government from really <v Steven V. Roberts>doing the sorts of things you're talking about? For instance, in advertising in areas <v Steven V. Roberts>like that. <v Charles McDowell>They they work almost all day, every day trying to protect their interests, which they <v Charles McDowell>regard as terrifically economic. <v Charles McDowell>They used to say, we disagree completely. <v Charles McDowell>There's no causal effect. Cigarettes don't cause cancer. <v Charles McDowell>Now they say something else. They concede. <v Charles McDowell>Now they say cigarettes are a risk factor, like being overweight, <v Charles McDowell>like being having a bad diet, like living a bad life. <v Charles McDowell>So they're beginning to concede. But they are given ground very slowly in all <v Charles McDowell>this thing. And they're getting their manufacturing system so much faster that they're

<v Charles McDowell>making more and more money selling cigarettes to a smaller <v Charles McDowell>percentage of Americans. <v Paul Duke>I heard that only 10 percent of smokers ever succeed in giving it up. <v Paul Duke>But you were one of the 10 percent, right? <v Charles McDowell>I was. And I had this table here giving me a hard time. <v Charles McDowell>The other thing I had was the luxury of being a small bore hero on television. <v Charles McDowell>And that didn't come to everybody. <v Paul Duke>We don't have the luxury of more time at this juncture because time <v Paul Duke>has passed us on by. <v Paul Duke>That's it for this edition. I'm Paul Duke. <v Paul Duke>Good night for all of us here on Washington Week. <v narrator>Washington Week in Review was produced by WETA, which is solely responsible

<v narrator>for its content. <v narrator>Ford Motor Company, worldwide manufacturer of automotive products, has provided <v narrator>funding for this program. <v narrator>At Ford, quality is job one. <v narrator>Funding has also been provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by annual <v narrator>financial support from viewers like you. <v narrator>For a transcript of this program, send four dollars to Washington Week in Review <v narrator>Journal Graphics. Fifteen thirty five. <v narrator>Grant Street. Denver, Colorado. <v narrator>Eight 02 03. Or call three. <v narrator>Oh three eight three. One nine thousand. <v narrator>This is PBS <v Paul Duke>Back to old business at the White House this week on Washington, Week in Review.