New Hampshire Institute of Politics - America's Youth Forum 2004

Primary Chat 2 Questions and Responses

Jill Lawrence
Jill Lawrence is a political writer at USA TODAY and has covered every presidential campaign since 1988. Before joining the newspaper in July 1996, she was a columnist for The Associated Press and a free-lance magazine and newspaper writer. She won a National Headliner Award for her AP columns in 1995, and taught journalism at American University in 1997.

Q. As a reporter for USA TODAY, how has the election thus far been similar/different to ones you have covered in the past? Are there any topics/stories about a presidential candidate that are considered off limits and so, go unreported?
Duxbury High School, Duxbury, Massachusetts

A. I’ve covered presidential elections since 1988, and this one is different in at least a couple of ways. First off, there’s the backdrop of terrorism and war. This has led some experts to suggest this election will be a “foreign-policy” election rather than the usual referendum on the economy. Whether or not that turns out to be true, it’s already clear that foreign policy and national security issues are playing a larger role than usual in political debates and in how people are judging candidates. Another difference is that it’s difficult to say at the moment who are the strongest Democratic candidates. In late 1999, the consensus in much of the Republican Party was that George W. Bush was “the one,” and he was way out in front in terms of money and endorsements. This time around, no one is predicting who will end up as the Democratic nominee.

In my view there are no stories about candidates that are “off limits.” That’s not to say some stories don’t get written. You have to use your judgment about, for instance, affairs in the distant past that don’t seem relevant to a person’s current life and record. Also, newspapers have limited space, so you have to use a kind of triage system to determine what you will write about. That means some stories go unreported, but the ones we consider most important get their due.

Q. Do states like New Hampshire and Iowa have too much power in the primary process? Should states that are not representative of the country be that important? Are there any proposals to rotate the primary among various small states, based on such things as turnout in the national election?
Keene State College, Keene, New Hampshire

A. New Hampshire and Iowa probably do have too much power in the primary process, and they are certainly unrepresentative of the country from a demographic standpoint. That said, voters in these two states take their roles very seriously and they are very well informed. When a candidate visits either of these states, you can bet lots of people show up and the Associated Press covers the visit. It’s a big part of the states’ identity and a staple of news coverage. Attendance and coverage have been much spottier in some of the newer early states, such as South Carolina and Arizona. It would probably be a good thing for other states to take on the vetting responsibilities now handled by Iowa and New Hampshire. But it would probably take years before voters elsewhere got as deeply involved in the primary process as those in Iowa and New Hampshire.

There are lots of proposals on the table for how to change the primary system. Some involve rotating regional primaries. I haven’t heard much about rotating among small states. I’m not sure what will get the parties out of their ruts on this. Sen. Joe Lieberman and retired general Wes Clark both are skipping Iowa this year. If one of them ends up as the Democratic nominee, that may spur the parties to change the system. It would at the very least change the conventional wisdom that you’ve got to compete in Iowa to win the presidency.

Q. What are Hillary Clinton’s chances if she were to come into the race late and what effect would it have on the other candidates?
North Canyon High School, Phoenix, Arizona

A. If Hillary Clinton came into the race at this point, she might galvanize a lot of Democrats and attract instant financial support. She might even win the nomination, but other candidates who have been campaigning for years would no doubt be furious and resentful at such big-footing. Also, she is such a polarizing figure nationally that it’s not clear she could win a general election. People who like her really like her, but people who hate her really hate her – and polls show there are quite a few of them. It’s a moot point in any case. She has made it clear she is not going to run – this year.

Q. Why are Americans still not receptive to a female president? When will they be?
Sterling High School, Sterling, Colorado

A. I’m not sure that Americans are not receptive to a female president. The real problem in my view is bench strength. Few women have held the types of jobs that normally lead to the presidency. The most common resume entry is governor. Women are just now starting to move into those jobs, and there are a couple of rising stars – Democrat Janet Napolitano of Arizona is one of them. The Senate is another common jumping off point for candidacies, and women are just starting to be present there in significant numbers. There are few veterans and even fewer who have toyed with the idea of a presidential race. Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California considered it but walked away from it. But Hillary Clinton and other younger women may be more inclined to plunge in.

Few senators have gone on to win the presidency. It’s even more difficult to win the White House from the House. Former Rep. Patricia Schroeder of Colorado floated a presidential candidacy in 1987 and ended up not pursuing it. I would not attribute that to unreceptiveness on the part of America. Look at the circumstances and the individual. She was a liberal with a quirky personality, and she was a congresswoman known well only to the people in her district in Denver. Maybe I’m overly cheery, but I think gender is increasingly irrelevant. We’ll test that proposition as more women become more qualified and take their ambitions to the highest level.

Q. Why does President Bush continue to push war when the economy is in such deficit?
North Canyon High School, Phoenix, Arizona

A. A president’s most important responsibility is to keep the nation safe. President Bush would tell you that he is “pushing the war” because it’s necessary for national security. In his calculation, Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States. His would-be Democratic rivals for the presidency disagree. They say Bush’s policies have created new problems, such as tensions with allies and an environment more hospitable to terrorism in Iraq. It comes down to a matter of judgment. This may well be the core issue of the 2004 election.

Q. Because the Bush Administration has sent millions of dollars to Iraq to fix their economic problems, our economy is suffering from the lack of funds. Is there a point where we have sent them too much money for non-essential funds such as building museums and memorials? Should the government cut back on the funding for the reconstruction of Iraq?
Keene State College, Keene, New Hampshire

A. I’m not sure your cause and effect are correct. Our economy is suffering from lack of funds because of a lingering economic downturn and, economists say, the big tax cuts Bush pushed through. In Bush’s view, these tax cuts were necessary to stimulate the economy and he credits them with the recent uptick in some indicators. Again, Democrats disagree. Some want to loan rather than give money to Iraq. Many want Bush to finance a loan or grant by repealing tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, rather than adding to the federal deficit.

All that said, most people in both parties understand it is to our long-term advantage to make sure Iraq has enough money to create a functioning modern society with democratic ideals. Some people would also say that if we destroyed or failed to protect their museums and memorials, we should pay to restore them. But I think you are already seeing, and will continue to see, politicians making points off the comparison between the major reconstruction we are financing in Iraq and the crumbling state of U.S. schools, roads and the like.

Q. We read recently in USA TODAY that soldier suicide rates are high in Iraq. My question is what is the government's role in ensuring the mental welfare of our soldiers? How do you think this issue will affect the election?
Chester County Middle High School, Exton, Pennsylvania

A. The government has a huge interest in making sure soldier morale is high. You don’t want a bunch of depressed troops trying to fight a war. The military goes to great lengths to keep morale at a reasonable level, but it’s difficult in a situation like Iraq. Troops there are staying longer than they expected, and it’s unclear when they will get to come home. The environment in some parts of Iraq is extremely dangerous. There could be a point at which Bush loses the support of military families who have lost loved ones or whose loved ones are away for long periods of time in a nerve-wracking assignment. That doesn’t appear to have happened yet, nor is it clear what impact that might have on the general election.

Q. What will happen if no candidate comes out of the primaries with a majority of the delegates for the Democratic convention?
Keene State College, Keene, New Hampshire

A. If no Democrat comes out of the primaries with a majority of delegates needed to win the nomination, you can bet there will be intensive negotiations during the period between the primaries and the convention -- maybe even bargaining involving the vice presidential slot on the ticket. If no agreements are reached, the convention could be a throwback to old times when delegates voted over and over again until someone got to the magic number. That would be exciting, but it would also rob Democrats of an early chance to unite around a nominee and take on President Bush.

Q. How do the Democratic candidates plan to unite and win the presidency after one gains the nomination?
North Canyon High School, Phoenix, Arizona

A. The classic symbol of party unity is when the whole field gets on the convention stage after one of them has just been nominated. Sometimes it’s strained. Bill Bradley didn’t get out on the hustings much for Al Gore in 2000, nor did John McCain campaign much for George W. Bush. But sometimes the losers work hard for the winners and all give lip service to the idea of defeating the candidate of the other party. Some of the Democratic exchanges this year have been fairly personal, but most of the candidates agree on policy basics and are very much focused on ousting Bush. That suggests most of them will try to do what they can to unify the party and win back the White House.

Q. Do you feel that any of the candidates are taking extreme positions to win primary voters that might hurt the party's nominee in the general election? If so, which candidates and what positions?
Dana Hills High School, Dana Point, California

A. Some of the candidates do have positions that might be labeled “extreme” by Republicans or even other Democrats, but they don’t seem to be positions taken just to get primary votes. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio wants to establish a Department of Peace and pull U.S. troops out of Iraq immediately -- both of these positions are longstanding and consistent with his political philosophy. Rep. Dick Gephardt of Missouri has always been a prominent critic of free-trade agreements such as NAFTA. This is very appealing to labor unions and he’s got a lot of support from them, but again it’s a longstanding position. It’s also a position that could draw some fire in a general election, but not sure if most voters have strong feelings one way or the other. And it could work to Gephardt’s advantage, given the loss of manufacturing jobs in big swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Q. Is it likely that universal health care will be top priority for every candidate in this year's presidential race?
St. Thomas Aquinas High School, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

A. Health care already is a priority for all of the Democrats. Their main thrust is expanding coverage to the uninsured, through employers and government programs for children and seniors. With a Wes Clark speech on Oct. 28, all the major candidates have put forth plans. President Bush is focused on trying to get a prescription drug benefit added to Medicare and to check overall Medicare costs by increasing competition between Medicare and private insurance plans. Members of Congress are negotiating on the Medicare bill right now and it’s not clear that they’ll come out with a product that can pass.

Q. Do you think the election of Arnold in California is good for George Bush as a Republican, or bad, because voters rejected an incumbent?
Deer Valley, Glendale, Arizona

A. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory gives Bush an opening to expand the base of the Republican Party in California, but it’s no guarantee a Republican -- even Bush -- can win there. Arnold is an unusual Republican -- he’s very liberal on issues like gay rights and abortion rights, for instance. He supports both. He also rose to the governorship in unusual circumstances -- he didn’t have to run in a Republican primary. Odds of him winning a Republican primary would have been steep. Republicans in California generally nominate very conservative statewide candidates who then go on to lose. As for the rejection of an incumbent,Bush has nowhere near the problems Gray Davis had. In short I don’t think you can really read anything into the Arnold election. It was utterly atypical.

Q. Can you explain exactly how Richard Gephardt's Universal Pension plan would work? Where is the money going to come from to fund the program?
Chester County Middle High School, Exton, Pennsylvania

A. The gist is that people should be able to have portable pensions -- pensions they take with them from job to job. He calls them universal retirement accounts. Employers would be required to make contributions to them in exchange for salary reductions, and would receive a refundable tax credit for contributions up to $2,000. Further information on this plan can be
found on Dick Gephardt’s web site, http://www.dickgephardt2004.com/plugin/template/gephardt/39/220