==================================================================
Published by INEWS. Freely distributable if unaltered and complete. 
See end of document for info on free E-mail trial of INEWS.
INTERNATIONAL NEWS E-WIRE SERVICE All rights reserved. For 
information on receiving a free trial subscription to INEWS 
World News Daily via E-mail send E-mail to INEWS@AOL.COM
==================================================================

                        '96 ELECTION SNAPSHOT
                               VOL.1 #1                     


SUBSCRIPTION INFO/GENERAL INFO - INEWS@AOL.COM
TO REACH EDITOR ---------------- INEWSEDIT@AOL.COM


CONTENTS:
   PUBLIC OPINION POLL ON THE FIRST LADY
   CAMPAIGN '96: INDEPENDENTS
   CAMPAIGN '96: THE MEDIA
   CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT
   CALENDAR OF PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES
   THUMBNAIL INFORMATION ON EACH MAJOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
   MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RETIRING IN RECORD NUMBERS
   CAMPAIGN '96: CAUCUSES AND PRIMARIES
   CAMPAIGN '96: THE ISSUES
   POLL SHOWS FORBES GAINING ON DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE
   AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLITICIANS DISCUSS '96 ELECTION
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: LAMAR ALEXANDER
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PAT BUCHANAN
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DOLE
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DORNAN
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: STEVE FORBES
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PHIL GRAMM
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: ALAN KEYES
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: RICHARD LUGAR
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: MORRY TAYLOR
   WORLD PRESS: 'U.S. ELECTION CAMPAIGN BEGINS
   FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER
  ==========================
   ---------------
   PUBLIC OPINION POLL ON THE FIRST LADY

   VICTOR BEATTIE
   WASHINGTON

   A new national poll finds that half the public does not
believe first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton is telling the truth
about her involvement in the Whitewater affair. However, as The
first lady's standing in public opinion does not seem to be
hurting her husband's re-election prospects.
   The "Newsweek" magazine poll finding is up sharply from a
similar poll taken about Mrs. Clinton in April, 1994. The poll
was released one day after Mrs. Clinton was subpoenaed to testify
under oath Friday before a federal grand jury in Washington
looking into the Clinton's past financial dealings.
   The independent Whitewater prosecutor wants to know how
billing documents from Mrs. Clinton's former law firm, sought for
two years, mysteriously appeared recently at the White House. Mrs
Clinton is also part of a congressional probe into the firing of
the staff of the White House travel office. The Clintons have
steadfastly denied any wrongdoing in either case.
   Senior "Newsweek" editor David Alpern says despite the
public's view of Mrs. Clinton, it apparently has not hurt Mr.
Clinton's chances of re-election:
   "Sixty-six percent say they are not less likely to vote for
(Mr.) Clinton because of Hillary, Whitewater, travelgate. And,
more importantly, 77-percent of Democrats say they are not less
likely to vote for Bill Clinton. And so, I guess, that explains
why he continues to lead in the matchups against the
Republicans."
   In the poll, Mr. Clinton still beats Republican presidential
front-runner Senator Bob Dole by 52 to 49 percent and surprising
runner-up Steve Forbes 49 to 42 percent.
   The Newsweek poll confirmed Mr. Dole has the most support
among all challengers for the Republican party nomination.
However, Mr. Alpern says Mr. Dole, at age 72, remains vulnerable:
   "Forty-one percent say he is too much of an insider. Almost as
many, 37-percent, say he's too old to serve effectively as
president. They're not majorities but it's a significant number
and it's something (Mr.) Dole has to worry about."
   The poll finds Mr. Dole's support down from a November survey
and Mr. Forbes, editor of the New York-based business-magazine
that bears his name, has more than tripled his support in the
last two months.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: INDEPENDENTS

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   Traditionally, U.S. presidential elections are a two-party
affair, Republicans and Democrats. In U.S. politics, it seems,
three is a crowd. In 1992 independent presidential candidate Ross
Perot won 19-percent of the vote, the most by any independent
candidate since the election of 1912. The growing voter
disenchantment with the two established parties and the budding
interest in alternative parties.
   Historically, the United States has been a two-party nation.
Georgetown University professor of government Stephen Wayne says
the two major parties have tended to attract a broad range of
voters through the years, tempering demands for a major
alternative political party:
   "They have been large, broad-based, inclusive parties. And
they have reached out to accept as many voters of different views
as they could get to vote for them. They were able to do it
because the American party system is highly correlated or related
to the federal character of the system. So that a Democratic
Party in New Jersey is very different from a Democratic Party in
Texas. They believe different things. The only thing they have in
common is that they support Democratic candidates."
   But this may be changing. Public opinion polls in recent years
suggest that more Americans are changing their voter registration
from either Democrat or Republican to independent. Professor
Wayne says independents continue to gain as more and more voters
become disenchanted with political gridlock in Washington and
blame the two established parties:
   "Today, if you ask the average American voter are you a
Democrat or a Republican, approximately the same percentage will
say that they are a Democrat a will say that they are a
Republican. And that percentage tends to be a little less than
the percentage of those who claim that they are independent. So
the first thing that we can say is that there are many more
people who identify themselves as independents today than in the
past."
   Historically, third party presidential candidates have, on
occasion, played a crucial role in presidential elections. In
1912, former President Theodore Roosevelt and his bull moose
party helped to defeat Republican President William taft and
elect Democrat Woodrow Wilson. Alabama Governor George Wallace
won 46 electoral votes in 1968 and may have cost Democrat Hubert
Humphrey some votes in the deep south. And in 1992, independent
Ross Perot won no electoral votes but did capture 19-percent of
the popular vote and probably hurt President Bush's re-election
effort in a number of key states.
   This year, Ross Perot is trying to organize a formal third
party challenge. His new reform party is struggling to get on the
ballot in all 50 U.S. states. Mr. Perot says his party may choose
a presidential candidate later this year, though he says for the
moment he is not interested in running again.
   While opinion polls continue to show discontent with the two
existing parties, Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne
says it is still unclear if American voters will get a new choice
of parties in 1996:
   "So here we have an opening for third parties but in a highly
personalized system (of campaigning), no third party candidate.
And we still have broad-based national parties that stand for
many things. So I think there is a yearning (for a third party)
but I am not sure there will be a movement this time around."
   Norman Ornstein watches the U.S. political scene as a resident
scholar and expert at the American Enterprise Institute here in
Washington. He says that a race between Democrat Bill Clinton and
Republican Bob Dole could spawn a flock of independent
challengers eager to meet the public's demand for more choices in
the race for the White House:
   "But a populist ticket on the left. And depending on how the
Republican campaign goes, I think it is not at all inconceivable
to imagine some populist candidate emerging on the right either.
So, (possibly) five candidates in that regard (could be running
for president."
   In his book, the road to the White House 1996, professor
Stephen Wayne argues that voter ties to both major political
parties have weakened during the past 30 years. He says this has
resulted in greater emphasis on the individual candidates rather
than their party affiliation and has also placed more emphasis on
issues rather than party loyalty.
   Several prominent moderates from both parties have been
talking about fielding a candidate in 1996 who would appeal to
voters in the political middle who feel left out in the election
year struggles between Republicans and Democrats.  This group of
prominent moderates includes Democrats like former presidential
candidate Paul Tsongas, retiring New Jersey senator bill Bradley
and former Colorado Governor Dick Lamm as well as the former
independent governor of Connecticut, Lowell Weicker.
   These moderates believe that their mix of conservative views
on the economy and a more liberal outlook on social issues will
appeal to the broad mass of moderate voters, voters who usually
cast the decisive ballots in close presidential elections.
Political success, however, requires a leader with enough name
recognition and personal charisma to carry the message forward.
And so far they have been unable to agree on a candidate.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: THE MEDIA

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   As the 1996 presidential campaign gets under way, more
Americans will follow the election campaign from television
broadcasts than from any other source.
   In 1992, more than two-thirds of American voters cited
television as their primary source of news about the presidential
election campaign. Only 20-percent cited newspapers.
   Television has the power to often set the campaign agenda, to
frame the issues around which the campaign will revolve and to
shape the public perception of the candidates who are seeking
their party's nomination.
   In the 19th century, newspapers played a crucial role in
presidential elections. But they were often dominated by the
major political parties and partisanship within the press was an
accepted hazard of political campaigns. Radio broadcasts began to
play an important role in the mid-1920's and television came
along in the early 1950's.
   Georgetown University professor of government Stephen Wayne
has studied the impact of television on recent presidential
elections:
   "It was not until the 1950's, however, that television was
first used as a vehicle for reaching voters. And beginning in the
1950's, both major political parties began to run advertisements
for their candidates in which their candidates appeared on
television, much as you would advertise a soap or a deodorant or
a cereal that would make you the biggest and strongest and
smartest person in the whole world."
   Even as candidates began to use the medium of television to
sell themselves to voters, they also found it a useful tool to
respond to their opponents. The 1952 Republican nominee for
vice-president, Senator Richard Nixon, went on national
television to make an impassioned plea to voters to keep him on
the ticket with presidential nominee Dwight Eisenhower. Mr. Nixon
used the broadcast to detail his own meager finances and to deny
allegations that he accepted improper campaign contributions. The
speech was a hit with the public and Mr. Nixon stayed on the
Republican ticket.
   Mr. Nixon seemed to turn the broadcast in his favor near the
end when he said he was not going to return a puppy given to his
daughters by a supporter from Texas. The girls named the puppy
"Checkers," and the Checkers speech, as it later became known, is
still considered a watershed event in the integration of politics
and television.
   Mr. Nixon would make effective use of television as a campaign
tool in winning the presidency in 1968. But television also
played an enormous role in galvanizing public opinion and helping
to force him from office because of the Watergate scandal in
1974. In addition to saturated news coverage of the presidential
campaign and its use as a forum for candidate advertisements,
television has also played a crucial role in bringing
presidential debates to the American public.
   The first of these occurred in 1960 when a tanned, telegenic
young senator from Massachusetts, John Kennedy, faced off against
vice President Richard Nixon, who suffered from a painful knee
injury and a bad make-up job.
   Opinion polls showed that most people who watched the first
debate on television thought that Senator Kennedy had won. A
majority of those who listened on radio, however, gave the edge
to Mr. Nixon.
   Television debates have generally benefitted challengers
rather than incumbents. This was true in the 1960 race involving
Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Nixon as well as in Jimmy Carter's victory in
1976, Ronald Reagan's triumph in 1980 and Bill Clinton's win over
George Bush in 1992.
   Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne believes that
being an effective television communicator is now one of the
chief pre-requisites of running for the White House:
   "I think we see that if you have a facility with television as
Ronald Reagan did or a facility with radio, as President Franklin
Delano Roosevelt did, that gives you an advantage. It does not
mean you are going to win. But it certainly gives you an
advantage."
   The money candidates spend on television advertising now takes
up the bulk of their campaign budgets. Each four-year election
cycle brings new techniques to reach mass audiences. In 1992, for
example, the Clinton campaign mailed 25,000 video tapes about the
candidate to New Hampshire Democrats in advance of the primary.
Many local television stations rely on satellite interviews with
various candidates in their campaign coverage. And in 1996, the
explosion of campaign information available on the Internet
worldwide computer network promises opens up yet another frontier
on the political information front.
   All this emphasis on television is a far cry from presidential
campaigns of the past when political parties actually ran the
campaigns, selected candidates at party conventions and waged a
mass media effort through the use of buttons, billboards, banners
and torchlight parades.
   Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne believes that
some of America's most revered presidents would not far: too well
in the television age:
   "Lincoln was a very bright man but his appearance was very
angular and frequently he was melancholy (a bit depressed) and
had headaches, and I am not sure that would have gone over very
well on television. But it was fortunate for him (that he was not
in a television age). As it was for Harry Truman in 1948, a
person who talked like, in jabs (quick bursts) and would react
quickly and not smoothly like Franklin Roosevelt. It was lucky
for him that he was in a radio age and not a television age."
   Even as voters continue to rely on television for campaign
coverage, many complain that the news media focuses too much on
the contest or so-called horse race aspect of the presidential
campaign, and not enough on issues and the character of the
candidates.
   The candidates added a new weapon to their media arsenal in
the 1992 campaign with frequent appearances on television talk
and entertainment programs, capped by Bill Clinton's solo
performance on the saxophone, complete with jazzy sunglasses, on
the Arsenio Hall Show. It is likely that the line between
politics and popular culture will continue to blur in 1996.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96 STATUS REPORT

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   President Clinton's state of the union address and the
Republican response from Senator Bob Dole highlighted this week's
U.S. political news.
   President Bill Clinton seized the moment this week with his
state of the union address. The president offered to work with
Republicans to scale back the federal government but he also
pledged to safeguard government programs which help the poor and
the elderly.
   Public opinion polls indicate the vast majority of Americans
approved of the Clinton speech and welcomed his conciliatory
approach on working with the Republican-controlled Congress.
   The Republican response to the state of the union came from
Senate majority leader Bob Dole. Senator Dole is also the
frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination and much
of his speech was directed at conservative Republican voters in
the early presidential contest states of Iowa and New Hampshire,
saying:
   "President Clinton shares a view of America held by our
country's elites. A nation of special interest groups, united
only by a dependence on government, competing with each for
handouts and held back by outdated values."
   Senator Dole's rivals for the Republican nomination said he
looked old and tired during his speech. And several political
analysts gave President Clinton the clear edge over Senator Dole
in both style and substance.
   On the campaign trail, meanwhile, Steve Forbes continues to
pound away at Senator Dole. A new Boston Globe newspaper poll
this week showed Mr. Forbes only eight-points behind Senator Dole
in New Hampshire.
   Mr. Forbes says he is gaining in the race because his call for
a single tax rate for all Americans, known as the flat tax, is
picking up support among voters:
   "So that is the key, how to get America moving again. The flat
tax is simply the first, most essential, but the first step to
get America moving."
   Political analyst Norman Ornstein is with the American
enterprise institute here in Washington. He says Senator Dole
remains the Republican frontrunner but that there are now
increasing doubts among some Republicans as to whether he could
beat president Clinton in November:
   "Now if you are betting, and if I were betting, I would still
bet on Bob Dole. But there are two other things to watch. The
first is that Bob Dole is an older man and that is a factor. One
little stumble. If Dole, for example, has to take a day off
campaigning because he is not feeling well, or has a few heart
palpitations, things that could happen to anybody, it would
underscore the age issue which makes a number of people nervous."
   Much of the early campaign activity continues to focus on the
early contest states of Iowa and New Hampshire. The voters will
finally begin having their say about the Republican presidential
field when the primaries and caucuses begin next month.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CALENDAR OF PRIMARIES AND CAUCUSES

   REPUBLICAN CALENDAR

   The series of primaries and caucuses that will be held in all
of the states between now and early June will have a two-fold
purpose: a "beauty contest" that will advise the entire world of
the popularity of individual presidential candidates plus, and
even more importantly, the process for selecting delegates to the
political parties' national nominating conventions.
   Rules among the states and the parties vary. The Democrats use
a proportional system, and the percentage of delegates committed
to a specific candidate is relative to his popular vote in each
state. The Republicans use the winner-take-all system of
committing all delegates from a state to the victor of that
specific primary or caucus.
   In the past, the first caucus was held in Iowa, eight days
before the first primary, in New Hampshire. This year, the
schedule has been challenged by several other states which wish
to be part of the early action, and the calendar still has not
been finalized.
   Subject to change, following is the unofficial calendar for
Republican events, during which 1,990 nominating convention
delegates will be selected. Delegates also will be selected in
American Samoa, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. A candidate
needs 996 delegates to ensure the party's nomination.

Date        State                    Type      Republican Delegates

Jan 29      Alaska                   Caucus         19
Jan 31      Hawaii                   Caucus         14
Feb 6       Louisiana                Caucus         30
Feb 12      Iowa                     Caucus         25
Feb 20      New Hampshire            Primary        16
Feb 24      Delaware                 Primary        12
Feb 27      Arizona                  Primary        39
            North Dakota             Primary        18
            South Dakota             Primary        18
Mar 2       South Carolina           Primary        37
            Wyoming                  Caucus         20
Mar 3       Puerto Rico              Primary        14
Mar 5       Colorado                 Primary        27
            Connecticut              Primary        27
            Georgia                  Primary        42
            Maine                    Primary        15
            Maryland                 Primary        32
            Massachusetts            Primary        37
            Minnesota                Caucus         33
            Rhode Island             Primary        16
            Vermont                  Primary        12
Mar 7       New York                 Primary       102
Mar 12      Florida                  Primary        98
            Mississippi              Primary        33
            Oklahoma                 Primary        38
            Oregon                   Primary        23
            Tennessee                Primary        37
            Texas                    Primary       123
Mar 19      Illinois                 Primary        69
            Michigan                 Primary        57
            Ohio                     Primary        67
            Wisconsin                Primary        36
Mar 25      Utah                     Caucus         28
Mar 26      California               Primary       165
            Nevada                   Primary        14
            Washington               Primary        36
April 2     Kansas                   Primary        31
April 23    Pennsylvania             Primary        73
May 7       District of Columbia     Primary        14
            Indiana                  Primary        52
            North Carolina           Primary        58
May 14      Nebraska                 Primary        24
            West Virginia            Primary        18
May 17      Missouri                 Caucus         36
May 21      Arkansas                 Primary        20
May 28      Idaho                    Primary        23
            Kentucky                 Primary        26
June 4      Alabama                  Primary        40
            Montana                  Primary        14
            New Jersey               Primary        48
            New Mexico               Primary        18
June 11     Virginia                 Primary        53
   ----------------
   
   ----------------
   THUMBNAIL INFORMATION ON EACH MAJOR PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

   Lamar Alexander -- The former governor of Tennessee considers
himself an "outsider" candidate even though he has served as
President Bush's secretary of education. Promoting a
down-to-earth image, Alexander, 55, campaigns in casual clothing
and speaks of the values he learned at home, in school and at
church in his small home town. He says if elected he will move
$200,000 million worth of federal programs out of Washington
government and into the nation's communities. He also has served
as president of the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, as a
U.S. Senate aide and as a worker in the Nixon White House. He is
a graduate of Vanderbilt University and the New York University
School of Law. He is married and has four children.

   Pat Buchanan -- The conservative television commentator and
newspaper columnist is making his second attempt for the White
House after his 1992 campaign helped weaken President Bush from
the right. Buchanan, 57, is a one-time speech writer and aide to
Presidents Nixon and Reagan. He represents the party's
isolationist, protectionist, anti-immigrant wings, and is
ardently anti-abortion and sympathetic to the agenda of Christian
conservatives. He is a graduate of Georgetown University and has
his masters degree from Columbia University. He is married.

   Robert Dole -- The Senate majority leader and current
front-runner for the nomination is caught between the
confrontational style that has marked his party and his own past
history of negotiation and compromise in Congress. This is his
third try for the nomination and his supporters feel it is now
his "time" but he has not inspired many other Republicans. He has
served in Congress since 1960, the past 10 years as party leader
in the Senate. Previously he served in the state legislature in
Kansas. In 1976, he was President Ford's vice presidential
running mate in a losing campaign. Since his Senate seat is not
up until 1998, he does not have to lose it in his presidential
bid. At 72, Dole is the only candidate to have served in World
War Two, in which he was wounded and decorated a hero. He is a
graduate of Washburn University and is married and has an adult
daughter from a previous marriage.

   Robert Dornan -- The California congressman and former
broadcast journalist is a fiery, blunt-talking speaker who
occasionally gets embroiled in controversy. With one break in
service in the early 1980s, he has been in Congress since 1976,
building a reputation as a staunch conservative and loyal
supporter of Republican presidents. A former jet fighter pilot in
the U.S. Air Force during the 1950s, Dornan has made defense
issues one of his top priorities. His campaign slogan is "Faith,
family and freedom," three principles that he believes Americans
have begun to neglect. A native of New York, he is 62, married
and has five children.

   Malcolm "Steve" Forbes, Jr. -- The heir to the Forbes magazine
publishing empire is a political novice who is only beginning to
have national recognition through extensive political
advertising. He has written extensively about economics for the
magazine. By far the richest candidate now running for the
presidency, he is spending his own money on the campaign and is
not subject to the limits set on candidates who use matching
federal funds. He has served on the U.S. government's Board of
International Broadcasting, overseeing the operations of the
Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. A graduate
of Princeton University, Forbes, 48, is married and has five
children.

   Phil Gramm -- The Texas senator and former economics professor
says his steady sponsorship of tax cuts and spending reductions
rather than his personality account for his appeal. As a
Democratic congressman, he rankled party members with his support
of President Reagan's tax and budget policies and then switched
parties, successfully retaining his seat as a Republican. A
native of Georgia, Gramm, 53, earned his undergraduate degree and
doctorate from the University of Georgia. He is married and has
two children.

   Alan Keyes -- The political commentator and former assistant
secretary of state and ambassador to the United Nations is the
first African American to seek the Republican presidential
nomination. He is a fiery orator with strong conservative values.
Twice he ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate seat in Maryland.
Keyes, 45, earned his doctorate degree from Harvard University
and has served as president of the activist group Citizens
Against Government Waste. He is married and has three children.

   Richard Lugar -- The Indiana senator, a former chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is the candidate who, in his
campaign, talks the most about international relations. He is a
former mayor of his home town of Indianapolis who has served in
Congress since 1977. He is a graduate of Denison University and
was a Rhodes scholar at Oxford. Lugar, 63, is married and has
four children.

   Maurice "Morry" Taylor -- The president and chief executive
officer of Titan Wheel International, Inc. -- a manufacturer of
rims and wheels for farming and construction equipment -- is a
political unknown who says his main concern is improving the U.S.
economic base through balancing the federal budget and by
creating jobs. A native of Detroit, he attended Michigan Tech and
is a self-made multi-millionaire. Taylor, 51, is married and has
three children.
  -------------

  -------------
  MEMBERS OF CONGRESS RETIRING IN RECORD NUMBERS

   A record number 13 senators and 37 members of the House of
Representatives --  with a cumulative 814 years of experience
in varying committee assignments -- have announced to date that
they will not seek reelection in 1996, citing a variety of
reasons for their decisions. Some said they no longer have the
passion for the job and want to spend more time with their
families; some have lost faith in party politics. Eleven of those
in the House are stepping down to run for a Senate seat.

   In the Senate, where the record had been 12 retirees a century
ago in 1896, the numbers include eight Democrats and five
Republicans:

   -- Bill Bradley, New Jersey Democrat, 3 terms member, Finance
      Committee
   -- Hank Brown, Colorado Republican, 1 term member, Foreign
      Relations Committee
   -- William Cohen, Maine Republican, 3 terms member, Armed
      Services Committee
   -- James Exon, Nebraska Democrat, 3 terms member, Armed
      Services Committee
   -- Mark Hatfield, Oregon Republican, 5 terms chairman,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Howell Heflin, Alabama Democrat, 3 terms member, Judiciary
      Committee
   -- Bennett Johnston, Louisiana Democrat, 4 terms ranking
      minority member, Energy and Natural Resources Committee
   -- Nancy Kassebaum, Kansas Republican, 3 terms chairman, Labor
      and Human Resources Committee; member, Foreign Relations
   -- Sam Nunn, Georgia Democrat, 4 terms ranking minority
      member, Armed Services Committee
   -- Claiborne Pell, Rhode Island Democrat, 6 terms ranking
      minority member, Foreign Relations Committee
   -- David Pryor, Arkansas Democrat, 3 terms member, Finance
      Committee
   -- Paul Simon, Illinois Democrat, 2 terms member, Budget
      Committee
   -- Alan Simpson, Wyoming Republican, 3 terms chairman,
      Veterans' Affairs Committee; member, Foreign Relations


In the House of Representatives, the numbers include 25
Democrats and 12 Republicans:

   -- Wayne Allard, Colorado Republican, 3 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Budget Committee
   -- Anthony Beilenson, California Democrat, 10 terms member,
      Rules Committee
   -- Tom Bevill, Alabama Democrat, 15 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Bill Brewster, Oklahoma Democrat, 3 terms member,
      Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
   -- Glen Browder, Alabama Democrat, 4 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Budget Committee
   -- John Bryant, Texas Democrat, 7 terms (running for Senate)
      member, Judiciary Committee
   -- Jim Chapman, Texas Democrat, 6 terms (running for Senate)
      member, Appropriations Committee
   -- William Clinger, Pennsylvania Republican, 9 terms chairman,
      Government Reform and Oversight Committee
   -- Ronald Coleman, Texas Democrat, 7 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Cardiss Collins, Illinois Democrat, 12 terms ranking
      minority member, Government Reform and Oversight Committee
   -- E. "Kika" De La Garza, Texas Democrat, 16 terms ranking
      minority member, Agriculture Committee
   -- Richard Durbin, Illinois Democrat, 6 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Appropriations Committee
   -- Jack Fields, Texas Republican, 8 terms member, Commerce
      Committee
   -- Pete Geren, Texas Democrat, 4 terms member, National
      Security Committee
   -- Steven Gunderson, Wisconsin Republican, 8 terms member,
      Agriculture Committee
   -- Mel Hancock, Missouri Republican, 4 terms member, Ways and
      Means Committee
   -- Jimmy Hayes, Louisiana Republican, 5 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Science Committee
   -- Andrew Jacobs, Indiana Democrat, 15 terms member, Ways and
      Means Committee
   -- William Jefferson, Louisiana Democrat, 3 terms (running for
      Senate) member, National Security Committee
   -- Tim Johnson, South Dakota Democrat, 5 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Agriculture Committee
   -- Harry Johnston, Florida Democrat, 4 terms member,
      International Relations Committee
   -- Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas Democrat, 2 terms member,
      Commerce Committee
   -- Jan Meyers, Kansas Republican, 6 terms chairman, Small
      Business Committee; member, International Relations
   -- G.V. "Sonny" Montgomery, Mississippi Democrat, 15 terms
      ranking minority member, Veterans' Affairs Committee
   -- Carlos Moorhead, California Republican, 12 terms member,
      Judiciary Committee
   -- John Myers, Indiana Republican, 15 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Pete Peterson, Florida Democrat, 3 terms member, National
      Security Committee
   -- Jack Reed, Rhode Island Democrat, 3 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Judiciary Committee
   -- Patricia Schroeder, Colorado Democrat, 12 terms member,
      Judiciary Committee
   -- Gerry Studds, Massachusetts Democrat, 12 terms member,
      Commerce Committee
   -- Ray Thornton, Arkansas Democrat, 6 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Robert Torricelli, New Jersey Democrat, 7 terms (running
      for Senate) member, International Relations Committee
   -- Barbara Vucanovich, Nevada Republican, 7 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Robert Walker, Pennsylvania Republican, 10 terms chairman,
      Science Committee
   -- Pat Williams, Montana Democrat, 9 terms member, Economic
      and Educational Opportunities Committee
   -- Charles Wilson, Texas Democrat, 12 terms member,
      Appropriations Committee
   -- Dick Zimmer, New Jersey Republican, 3 terms (running for
      Senate) member, Ways and Means Committee
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: CAUCUSES AND PRIMARIES

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   The 1996 U.S. presidential campaign begins for real with the
Iowa party caucuses on February 12th and the first-in-the-nation
New Hampshire primary election eight days later on February 20th.
In the fourth part of his series on the U.S. election process.
   There was a time when candidates for president were chosen at
the national party conventions. But beginning in the 1960's and
1970's the state primaries assumed the major role of deciding
presidential nominees.
   Now the candidates are put through a rigorous schedule of
state caucuses and primaries which begins in early February and
lasts until June. In caucus states like Iowa, Republican voters
gather in precinct meetings around the state and declare their
preference for the Republican nominee. Delegates are awarded to
the candidates later on a proportional basis.
   In some primary states like New Hampshire the voting is open
to both Republicans and Democrats. Presidential candidates form
their own slates of delegates before the primary and new
hampshire's 16 delegates to the Republican convention are
allocated to the candidates on a proportional basis reflecting
the percentage of the popular vote each candidate won in the
primary.
   New Hampshire's 16 delegates represent a small percentage of
the 996 delegates necessary to clinch the Republican nomination
(one-half of the one-thousand, 990 [1,990] delegates plus one).
But New Hampshire is the most important primary because it is the
first and because of the intense media scrutiny. The new
hampshire primary has one other distinction, since 1952 every
Republican who has become president has first won the new
hampshire primary.
   Georgetown University government professor Stephen Wayne says
the emphasis of personalities over the political parties and the
influence of television in campaign coverage have boosted the
importance of state primaries in the last 35 years:
   "John Kennedy tried to demonstrate in a presidential primary
in 1960 that the American people were ready to elect a Roman
Catholic as president. And Richard Nixon later used primaries to
prove that even though he lost in 1960, he could still win in a
subsequent election (1968)."
   Primaries and caucuses also serve an important role in helping
voters get to know the candidates running for president. That is
especially important in a year like this one when several
Republican candidates are running who are not well-known
nationally. Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne says
all the candidates focus on making a breakthrough with the voters
as early as possible in the primary process:
   "Since the candidates nominate themselves and run for office
themselves and many of them are not that well known to the
political party, it is very important that they achieve
recognition early. And so they have tended to spend most of their
money on the early contests to try to present themselves to the
voters. This has given increased importance to the Iowa caucus
which is traditionally the first caucus and the New Hampshire
primary held on February 20th, is the first presidential
primary."
   This year, several states have moved up the date of their
primary in a bid to have more impact on the nominating process
and to attract more candidates to campaign in their states. In
fact three states, Louisiana, Alaska and Hawaii, are actually
holding their caucuses before Iowa.
   This frontloading of the 1996 primaries means that the vast
majority of the Republican delegates for the August convention in
San Diego will be chosen by the beginning of April, far earlier
than in previous years. Professor Stephen Wayne says the aim of
every candidate is to develop momentum early in the primary
season with a good showing in either Iowa or New Hampshire:
   "And states have found that the longer they wait the less
interest there is in their primary and caucus because somebody
has taken the lead and created a bandwagon and is mobilizing
support and money tends to follow a winner. So the states have
basically what we call frontloaded the process, they have moved
up their primaries earlier and earlier. And today about
80-percent of the Republican delegates will be selected in a
44-day period from February 20, 1996 (New Hampshire) to March 26,
1996 (California)."
   The challenge is to keep the momentum going through the new
England primaries on March 5th and the March 12th primaries
featuring Florida, Texas and other southern states. That is known
as super Tuesday because of the vast number of delegates
selected. The campaign then moves into the Midwest primaries on
March 19th and then to the California primary on March 26th. The
primary season draws to a close with the Montana, New Jersey and
New Mexico primaries on June 4th.
   The individual states determine the details of delegate
selection but they also must conform to guidelines put forward by
the two major political parties. Democrats have made a number of
changes to their party rules for delegate selection in recent
years in a bid to ensure more representation from women and
minorities.
   Democrats also reserve about 20-percent of their delegate
seats at the national convention for so-called superdelegates,
including members of Congress, governors and high-ranking party
officials. Republicans do not set aside seats for superdelegates.
But they do differ from Democrats in that they allow some states
to hold winner-take-all primaries where the top finisher gets all
the delegates from that state. Democrats on the other hand
require that delegates be divided proportionally for each state
reflecting the candidates share of the primary or caucus vote.
   There have been suggestions to hold a national primary but
Georgetown University professor Stephen Wayne argues that that is
unlikely as long as the early contest states like Iowa and new
hampshire fight to maintain their first-in-the-nation status.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   CAMPAIGN '96: THE ISSUES

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   Four years ago, voter anger over a weak U.S. economy helped to
drive George Bush from the White House. But identifying the
pivotal issues in the 1996 presidential race figures to be a bit
more difficult.
   In 1992 Clinton campaign workers closely followed the advice
of political guru (sage) James Carville who kept the Clinton
campaign on track with his slogan, "it is the economy, stupid."
   But in 1996, things may not be so clear. Presidential
elections tend to be a referendum on the record of the incumbent.
President Clinton's record is decidedly mixed, but a downturn in
the U.S. economy or mounting casualties among U.S. troops in
Bosnia could seriously hurt his re-election chances.
   Elections can also turn on voter reactions to the results of
the previous election. For example, some moderate voters
disappointed in President Clinton's promise to govern as a new,
more centrist Democrat supported Republican congressional
candidates in 1994. That election produced the first Republican
majorities in both houses of Congress in 40 years. In 1996,
Democrats are counting on some of those same moderates to support
the president in the face of what they see as an extremist
conservative agenda put forward by the Republican-controlled
congress.
   Historically, presidential elections have featured debates
about the power and responsibilities of the federal government.
Georgetown University government professor Stephen Wayne says the
Democratic Party's traditional emphasis on the power of the
federal government is sure to clash with Republican calls to
return more power to the states and local communities:
   "Then, in 1992, President Clinton came in and he sought to
maintain the government's large role. And there was a reaction to
that in 1994 after the defeat of his health care program. And the
Republicans now seek to devolve federal responsibility back on
the states. So there is a pendulum that swings back and forth in
the domestic area over what the federal government should be
doing, how involved the federal government should be, how many
regulations should emanate from the federal government."
   What decides who wins presidential elections? Many things, of
course. There are the personalities of the candidates and their
relative popularity. Domestic issues, especially the strength of
the economy, are usually deciding factors. The relative weakness
of the economy for incumbents Jimmy carter in 1980 and George
bush in 1992 were crucial elements in their defeats.
   But foreign policy can play a big role as well as it did in
the case of the Vietnam War in the 1968 campaign and Iran's
seizure of American hostages which damaged President Carter's
re-election hopes in 1980. By contrast, the easy victory over
Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War did not help President Bush's
re-election effort much in 1992.
   Political analysts are already consulting their crystal balls
(they are looking ahead) for 1996 trying to determine which
issues will be decisive. Analyst Norman Ornstein of the American
Enterprise Institute here in Washington says the strong
Republican tide which elected a Republican Congress in 1994 may
not dominate the 1996 election cycle:
   "The final possibility to consider which may be the most
likely is that we will have no large national tide here that
would favor either party or would go dramatically against both
parties. That voters are not terribly happy with what is going on
but will pick and choose, will think carefully, or think, at
least, about individual (election) contests."
   Differences between the president and Republicans over how to
balance the federal budget will likely be a pivotal campaign
issue in 1996. Republicans will argue that President Clinton is
the last obstacle to a seven-year balanced budget plan and
enactment of the legislative program they call a contract with
America.
   Democrats will cite Republican demands for a large tax cut
benefiting the wealthy and curbs on the growth of the Medicare
health care program for elderly as fatal flaws in the Republican
plan. They will also argue that losing control of the white house
will remove the last check that Democrats have to prevent what
they view as dangerous Republican proposals from becoming law.
   Republicans are expected to launch new attacks on President
Clinton's character. They will also continue to raise questions
about the Clinton's roles in the Whitewater affair involving the
first family's financial ties to a failed Arkansas savings and
loan association.
   But also look for heated debate on a host of other issues
which usually come up in presidential elections years. Issues
like welfare reform, abortion, affirmative action, education,
health care, crime and the environment.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   POLL SHOWS FORBES GAINING ON DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   A new poll among voters in New Hampshire shows Republican
presidential candidate Steve Forbes may be closing in on
frontrunner Bob Dole. The poll comes less than one month before
New Hampshire holds the first presidential primary February 20th.
   The poll of New Hampshire Republican voters was conducted by
the Boston Globe newspaper. Frontrunner Bob Dole led the nine-man
Republican field with 30-percent. Magazine publisher and
political novice Steve Forbes came in second with 22-percent and
appears to be closing the gap with Senator Dole.
   Commentator Pat Buchanan and Texas Senator Phil Gramm tied for
third place with 10-percent each while former Tennessee governor
Lamar Alexander trailed with five-percent. The rest of the
candidates remain in single digits, but 19-percent of those
surveyed said they were undecided about their presidential
preference. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus
four-percent.
   Steve Forbes has made a splash in the race by spending
millions of dollars of his own money on television advertisements
and making tax reform the centerpiece of his campaign. Mr. Forbes
is proposing a so-called flat tax, changing the tax code to a
single 17-percent tax rate for all taxpayers, a plan he believes
would stimulate growth in the U.S. economy.
   But some political analysts are questioning just how strong a
challenger Mr. Forbes is to Senator Dole. Norman Ornstein watches
U.S. politics for the American Enterprise Institute in
Washington. He says the Forbes phenomenon is partly driven by the
news media's desire for a competitive race among the Republican
contenders:
   "So that is why we are seeing this week cover stories in
"Time" and "Newsweek" on Steve Forbes before he has really done
much of anything, because they (reporters) want a contest. And if
there is not a contest out there, they will find a contest. And
so Bob Dole's ability to steamroll through to the nomination will
be hurt in that way."
   Mr. Forbes and Senator Dole have been attacking each other
with negative television advertising. The attacks are expected to
increase in the weeks leading up to the New Hampshire primary
February 20th.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   AFRICAN-AMERICAN POLITICIANS DISCUSS '96 ELECTION

   RODRICK MURRAY
   WASHINGTON

   1996 is an election year in the United States, and
African-American political organizations want the black community
to have its say at the polls. The seventh National Policy
Institute is holding a conference this month discuss issues
facing black Americans.
   The National Policy Institute is a group of African-American
elected officials. The group meets every four years, coinciding
with an election year, to develop strategies for the future.
Representatives from the public policy, civil rights, and
religious fields will hold forums about issues such as education,
welfare reform, poverty, job development, and voter registration.
The sponsors say they want black Americans to be represented in
the debate of issues that directly affect them.
   The police commissioner of Memphis, Tennessee, Shemp Wilburn,
says creating jobs is essential for economic growth. But he says
the black community can no longer rely on Washington for help:
   "Clearly we have got to be creative and innovative in coming
up with ways to create jobs for ourselves. It is often said that
the climate that we are in now is one where the African American
community is being told that we must now pull ourselves up by our
bootstraps. And so we have got to figure out how to create those
jobs that will give our people an opportunity, that will give
them a chance to take care of themselves and be prosperous,
contributing citizens in this economy and this country."
   The president of the Washington-based Joint Center for
Political and Economic Studies, Eddie Williams, highlighted some
issues to be discussed during the conference:
   "One is the national leader's forum, bringing together
representatives from these three cadres: Elected officials,
religious leaders, and the civil rights community. Our goal in
that discussion is to provide an opportunity for some significant
discussion about strategies for 1996 and beyond. Then there are
the subsidy panels, dealing with the economic issues, education
issues, welfare, and poverty issues. There will be a concluding
panel on civil society and that will deal with race relations and
a number of other subjects."
   This month's conference will also include a success showcase
to highlight some of the accomplishments that have already been
made in the African-American community.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: LAMAR ALEXANDER

   DON HENRY
   WASHINGTON

   Former Tennessee governor and State University President Lamar
Alexander remains a distinct dark horse as the Republican
presidential nomination campaign nears the crucial primary voting
phase (February-March).  Mr. Alexander is hoping his self-styled
image of Washington outsider and down-to-earth executive will
catapult him to the top.
   Though he served as a U.S. Senate aide, worked in the Nixon
White House and was education secretary in the Bush
administration, Lamar Alexander calls himself a Washington
outsider who will return power to American neighborhoods. He says
his outsider status is a major reason why he ought to win the
nomination against such Washington insiders as veteran senators
Bob Dole and Phil Gramm.
   When Mr. Alexander declared for the presidency last year in
his hometown of Maryville, Tennessee, he wore a plaid flannel
shirt and talked fondly about his high school years and church
upbringing as a boy:
   "My teachers at that high school taught me more than algebra
and music. I learned the importance of the pledge of allegiance,
of the greatness of this country and our civilization. Of the
value of working and being on time, and of the difference between
right and wrong. And across the street was the Presbyterian
church; if the church doors were open, we were there."
   Son of a school teacher, Lamar Alexander was a popular
student, a good pianist, a talented athlete. In 1966, he helped
moderate conservative Howard baker become the first Republican
from the state of Tennessee to win a U.S. Senate seat, and
traveled along to Washington as a Senate aide.
   Mr. Alexander worked in the Nixon White House in the 1970's,
and achieved political prominence in 1978 by winning the
governorship of Tennessee after walking across the state in a
homespun political campaign that stressed the virtues of a small
town upbringing. He has continued to promote a populist image in
presidential campaign appearances around the nation the past
year:
   "Where I came from has almost everything to do with where I
stand. Because I believe that parents and teachers in Maryville
and Nashville and across this country know more about their
children than anyone in Washington D.C. I would abolish the
United States department of education and give you the
responsibility for making the decisions for your children
(cheers). We know what to do. I would not just fix welfare in
Washington D.C. I would end it, and move the dollars back to you.
We know what to do."
   Mr. Alexander ticks off a list of 200-billion dollars worth of
federal job training, law enforcement, and other programs he
would transfer from Washington to the states.
   He repeatedly calls the federal government the problem, saying
state and local politicians and individual citizens know better
how to handle their problems than anyone in Washington does. Once
considered a moderate conservative, he has moved to the right the
past few years and consistently speaks of lifting the yoke of
government off the backs of farmers, teachers, business men and
women:
   "We need a president who has the courage to say clearly and
forcefully as long as anyone will listen, that we know what to
do, and it is up to us to do it if we want to put our country
back on the right track."
   But political observers question whether many people have been
listening to Mr. Alexander. He was close behind Senator Gramm in
the battle for second place in a 1995 test vote among Florida
Republican activists, with Senator Dole well out in front. But on
national polls, the former head of the University of Tennessee
languishes below the 10-percent mark.
   Still, backers hope Lamar Alexander's populist appeal will
attract voters who may be torn between senators Dole and Gramm,
or others of the more outspoken primary contenders.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PAT BUCHANAN

   JANE BERGER
   WASHINGTON

   Conservative commentator Patrick Buchanan is mounting his
second bid in four years for the Republican party's presidential
nomination. Mr. Buchanan's controversial opinions on domestic and
foreign policy matters have influenced debate among the
candidates about the future direction of the Republican party.
   Pat Buchanan has always been a staunch conservative, but in
recent years, he has moved even farther to the right. He no
longer advocates free trade policies, and instead has embraced
what he calls a policy of economic nationalism as one of his
major campaign themes.
   Mr Buchanan supports cancellation of the North American free
trade agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade,
along with a series of protectionist trade measures to prevent
job losses to other countries. Mr. Buchanan says his policies
will put America first, where it should be in the 21st century:
   "The battle for the future is not any longer between the
United States and the Soviet Union, America and the evil empire,
freedom and communism. I think the struggles that are taking
place for the future in the 21st century is a battle over who
will control markets, who will be the greatest manufacturing
power on earth, therefore the greatest economic power, therefore
the greatest political and military power."
   Mr. Buchanan also favors sharp curbs on immigration, and an
end to American foreign assistance programs:
   "I think the Republican party should phase out foreign aid
completely over the next three years. In so doing, they could
save something like 60 billion dollars over a seven year period.
That money could be used to virtually eliminate the corporate
income tax on every small business in America."
   Patrick Buchanan was born and reared in Washington, DC, the
son of an accountant, and he has always had a combative
personality. He proudly recalls his fistfights and run-ins with
the law as a rebellious teenager. And although he was suspended
from college for one year, he graduated from Georgetown
University and later attended Columbia University's graduate
school of journalism.
   Mr. Buchanan began his political career as a speechwriter for
President Richard Nixon. He later launched a national newspaper
column, and in the mid-1980's returned to the White House as
director of communications for President Ronald Reagan.
   Mr. Buchanan then became a regular conservative commentator on
a series of television talk shows that focused on American
politics. His television appearances served him well when he
challenged incumbent President George Bush for the Republican
party's presidential nomination in 1988.
   Mr. Buchanan claimed that President Bush was too moderate, and
he shocked the country's political establishment when he came in
a strong second to Mr. Bush in the first presidential primary
contest. Many political commentators believe Mr. Buchanan's
strong showing in the New Hampshire contest fatally weakened Mr.
Bush in his campaign against Democrat Bill Clinton.
   On domestic issues, Mr. Buchanan is firmly anti-abortion, and
he has campaigned against federally sponsored programs that
guarantee blacks and other minorities opportunity for school
admissions and government contracts. He sharply condemns
homosexual rights, and says America's moral values have sharply
declined. Mr. Buchanan now claims that the Republican party is in
the firm control of conservative forces, and that there is no
place in it for moderate Republicans:
   "If you take the Republican platforms of the last four
Republican conventions, we are against affirmative action because
that is government discrimination based on race. It is wrong. It
is antithetical (contrary) to what we believe. We are pro-life.
We are a pro-life party. I've worked my whole life to make this
party a Conservative Party. It is. That's why we won America in
1994 and we are not moving back to a (moderate) Rockefeller
Republicanism. That is going backwards. This country wants to go
forward to conservative government at all levels, including Mr.
Clinton's White House."
   At 57-years-old, Pat Buchanan this year is fighting to
maintain a voice in the presidential campaign among a field of
better-financed candidates. Nevertheless, his firm opinions have
shifted the general political debate to the right, and as long as
he stays in the race he will at least force the other Republican
contenders to heed the conservative message.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DOLE

   JIM MALONE
   WASHINGTON

   The generally-acknowledged frontrunner for the Republican
presidential nomination is the majority leader of the United
States Senate, Senator Bob Dole. He is making his third and
probably last try for the White House, having failed in 1980 and
again in 1988.
   In many ways Bob Dole is the quintessential American success
story. Born in 1923 in the small Midwestern town of Russell,
Kansas, Mr. Dole faced his greatest challenge early in life.
   As a 21-year old army lieutenant he led a group of American
soldiers toward a heavily-defended German-held hill in Italy's Po
Valley in April of 1945. As he climbed out of a foxhole after
helping a wounded comrade, an exploding shell or bullet ripped
into his body, shattering his shoulder, piercing his spine and
leaving him temporarily paralyzed. Mr. Dole spent more than
three-years in veterans hospitals recovering from his war wounds.
Today he does not use his withered right arm and keeps a pen
firmly clenched in his fingers to ward off those who want to
shake his right hand.
   He was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1960, the same year
John Kennedy was elected president. He won a Senate seat in 1968,
became Senate majority leader for two years in 1984 and took over
as majority leader again when Republicans won back control of the
senate in 1994.
   This is his third run for president. He did poorly in 1980,
but put up a spirited fight for the 1988 Republican nomination,
losing to then-vice President George Bush.
   In announcing his third run for president last year, Senator
Dole made it clear he will emphasize his long experience in
congress and a record of getting things done in the presidential
campaign:
   "My friends, I have the experience. I have been tested and
tested and tested in many, many ways. I am not afraid to lead and
I know the way." applause)
   His way is the conservative way, though more in the tradition
of Richard Nixon than Ronald Reagan. Senator Dole wants to reduce
the power of the federal government and transfer it to the
states. But it was government medical care which helped him
recover from his war wounds. Senator Dole believes the government
does have a role in helping those who cannot help themselves,
something which differentiates him from a younger brand of
conservatives who look to Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich as
their idols.
   His age could be a factor in the campaign. He is 72 and would
be the oldest candidate ever elected to the presidency (at the
age of 73) if he wins in November. But Senator Dole says his age
could be an asset. He sees himself as one of the last politicians
from the World War II generation, someone who has served his
country well but who has one last call to duty to answer:
   "That maybe America needed someone from this generation,
someone who sort of crossed all generations that are out there
now. Somebody who understood hard times and good times and being
tested and being on your back and being on your feet and facing
whatever you might have to face in life, as all of you have
faced, I think with a very positive attitude."
   Senator Dole first came to national attention in 1976 when
President Gerald Ford chose him as his vice-presidential running
mate. He quickly gained a reputation as a slashing campaigner
which carried through to his 1988 race against George Bush. After
a particularly bitter loss to Mr. Bush in the 1988 New Hampshire
primary, Senator Dole lashed out at the vice-president, urging
him to, in his words, stop lying about my record.
   Today, Senator Dole says he has mellowed and matured
politically and he has learned some valuable lessons from past
campaigns:
   "I said things I should not have said. I have never been more
relaxed about what I am doing now. I mean, it seems to me that I
am sort of at peace with myself. I know what I want to do. I am
not going to be around criticizing anybody out there running on
the Republican side. I have never personally attacked president
Clinton or Mrs. Clinton. I gave that up. I had a round of that
several years ago."
   He is well respected in the Senate, not only by fellow
Republicans, but by Democrats as well who admire his character,
his patriotism, and his biting sense of humor. Senator Dole
places a premium on loyalty and keeping his word. Despite his
bitter loss to Mr. Bush in 1988, Senator Dole fought hard for
numerous Bush administration initiatives against a hostile
Democratic Congress, right up until Mr. Bush's defeat in the 1992
election.
   On foreign policy, Senator Dole believes in a strong U.S.
defense and in maintaining American leadership in international
affairs. He was a strong supporter of the Persian Gulf war and
memories of the Nazi march through Europe in the late 1930's
spurred his call for a more aggressive policy to help Bosnian
Muslims by lifting the international arms embargo.
   Senator Dole describes himself as a traditional conservative,
but also as someone willing to compromise to get things done. His
record indicates he prefers practicality over ideological purity.
His willingness to compromise with Democrats gives him problems
with some conservative Republicans, but his long record of
service in congress and his impeccable political instincts and
skills make him the clear favorite for the Republican
presidential nomination.
   They would also make him a formidable opponent for president
Clinton in November.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: BOB DORNAN

   JOHN PITMAN
   WASHINGTON

   Congressman Robert Dornan is running well behind his fellow
Republicans in the race for their party's presidential
nomination, but he continues to campaign.
   Robert Dornan's congressional career began as Democratic
President Jimmy Carter's was ending. Mr. Dornan won his first
congressional bid in 1976, representing a district in the western
part of Los Angeles.
   During the next 12-years, he built a career and a reputation
in the House of Representatives as a staunch conservative, and a
loyal supporter of Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George
bush.
   In the 1950's, Mr. Dornan flew jet fighters in the U.S. Air
Force. In Congress, he has made defense issues one of his top
priorities. He sits on the national security and intelligence
committees, and has been a vocal supporter of the campaign to
obtain information about American servicemen missing in Vietnam.
   During the 1980s, he supported controversial military projects
like the strategic defense initiative, "star wars", and the B-1
bomber. He has also resisted efforts to integrate homosexuals
into the military, and has vigorously opposed participation of
U.S. soldiers in U.N. peacekeeping missions.
   But defense is not the only issue Robert Dornan is passionate
about. Like other conservative politicians, he believes the
United States has entered a period of social decline, and, as he
hinted in a campaign speech, he blames the Democrats for causing,
and perpetuating it:
   "I will tell you that if somebody is not publicly indignant
about the bankruptcy policies of this, the richest country ever,
destroying the American dream economically, and if somebody is
not publicly indignant and saying, "stop this!" With our cultural
meltdown and moral decline, then I will show you somebody who
does not understand the facts. I will show you somebody who is a
bystander."
   His campaign slogan is "Faith, Family and Freedom". Three
principles he believes Americans have begun to neglect. Mr.
Dornan is an unapologetic opponent abortion rights. He supports
much of the welfare reform package included in the Republican
party's "Contract with America".
   In fact, his campaign platform is similar to most of his
Republican competitors. What sets him apart from other
Republicans seeking the nomination is his commitment to campaign
finance reform and term limits.
   But Congressman Dornan is not best known for his skills as a
legislator. Rather, he has risen to national prominence by making
scathing public attacks on other politicians. One of his favorite
targets has been President Bill Clinton. From the floor of
Congress and on the air, as a radio talk show host, Mr. Dornan
has pursued the president on issues ranging from his
participation in anti-war protests during the 1960's to adultery.
According to Dornan:
   "He is a world class womanizer. He is a draft dodger.
Character is the most important thing for the White House."
   For the most part, the White House and other critics have
written Mr. Dornan off, as little more than an annoyance. On
occasion, even his friends have urged him to tone down his
rhetoric. But other observers say he would never have achieved a
national following without his fiery speeches.
   Mr. Dornan has attracted a small segment of the middle class
with his speeches about the loss of the American dream. It is
impossible to count the exact number of supporters he has around
the country. But a look at his fund-raising ability gives an idea
of the measure of his popularity. Last year, he had one of the 10
largest campaign budgets in Congress, amassed almost entirely
through small-scale personal donations.
   ---------------
   
   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: STEVE FORBES

   NICK SIMEONE
   WASHINGTON

   One of the candidates hoping to be elected president of the
United States next November is a man whose family name is known
around the world, but he is far from being a household name in
the United States. He is Malcolm Forbes Junior, heir to the
Forbes fortune and the man behind the empire that publishes the
influential business magazine bearing his name.
   The name Forbes has long been synonymous with success in
business. Steve Forbes, as he likes to be called, is now hoping
success in politics will follow.
   The multi-millionaire candidate is hoping to tap into a
sentiment among many voters who want a leader from outside the
Washington establishment, someone who is more interested in
getting things done than getting re-elected. Says Forbes:
   "Let us face it, the Washington political class has been an
obstacle for the past 30 years. The American people know when the
election is not there, these people are back to business as
usual."
   The good news is Steve Forbes, unlike other candidates, can
truly claim outsider status: The 48-year-old head of the Forbes
publishing empire has never held elected office. The bad news is
most Americans would probably have trouble identifying him among
the field of Republican hopefuls and would likely have even more
difficulty if they were asked to recite his ideas for governing.
So, his chances of winning the Republican party's presidential
nomination appear to be a longshot.
   Steve Forbes grew up among wealth and privilege, in a world
where private jets are as common as private schools. He took over
as head of the Forbes empire when his flamboyant father, Malcolm
Forbes, Senior died in 1990. He now runs the Forbes publishing
group along with his three younger brothers. The Forbes empire is
estimated to be worth as much as one-billion dollars, making
Steve Forbes by far the richest Republican running for president.
   That wealth is being used to keep his campaign apparatus well
oiled. He has spent several-million dollars of his own money
trying to get his name and ideas known to voters as he competes
for attention in a crowded field of Republican candidates.
   Through the widely-read business magazine he publishes, Steve
Forbes has been able to articulate his economic and political
views. If elected, he says his goal would be creating more growth
in the American economy. He is most outspoken on the need for
what he says is a flat tax of 17-percent for all Americans
earning more than 36,000 dollars a year. He attacks the current
complex tax law, which he refers to as legalized cheating and a
monstrous dead weight on the U.S. economy. He criticizes the
Republican party's interest in a multi-billion dollar tax cut as
falling short of what is needed to produce real economic growth:
   "The tax cut is inadequate. The growth rates that they assume
are utterly inadequate to get America moving again. I think it
may be a good start, but it is absolutely inadequate to get the
future that we know we must have."
   He also backs term limits for elected politicians and has
spoken out against President Clinton's decision to deploy troops
to Bosnia-Herzegovina.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: PHIL GRAMM

   JERRY MCKINNEY
   WASHINGTON

   Republican presidential hopeful Phil Gramm is working to
convince his party he is the only true conservative who has a
chance of beating Bill Clinton in November.
   Those who know Texas Senator Phil Gramm well say he has been
preparing to run for president for most of his life.
   He was born in the southern U.S. state of Georgia but later
moved to Texas. At the time the Democratic Party dominated Texas
politics, so Mr. Gramm was a Democrat. He was elected to the U.S.
House of Representatives in 1978 as a Democrat and won
re-election twice as a member of that party. But in 1983 he was
disciplined by fellow congressional Democrats for helping
Republican President Ronald Reagan craft his economic package.
   Mr. Gramm then resigned from the Democratic Party and
Congress. He went back to Texas where he was elected as a
Republican to serve the same district. The next year he ran
successfully for the U.S. Senate and in 1990 he was elected to a
second term. He is seeking a third term this year at the same
time he is seeking his party's presidential nomination.
   In the Senate, Mr. Gramm has built a record as a solid
conservative on most issues. He has long sought to de-centralize
government, balance the budget and reduce taxes. He was co-author
of the Gramm-Rudman Act which was one of the first congressional
efforts to reduce the budget deficit.
   When he announced his candidacy Mr. Gramm said he is seeking
the presidency because he believes the nation needs a strong
leader:
   "We need a leader that has the courage to tell our people the
truth. We need a leader who has the vision to define solutions to
our problems. Solutions that people can understand and can
believe in. And we need a leader who is tough enough to get the
job done."
   Mr. Gramm says he is the Republican party's best chance to
beat the incumbent president. He says his record means voters
would have a clear choice in a race between Phil Gramm and Bill
Clinton.
   The 53-year-old Texas senator began the race as one of the
best-ever financed presidential hopefuls. He raised more than
four-million dollars at a fund-raising dinner the night before he
formally announced his candidacy and funds have continued to come
in since.
   But the money has done little to help Mr. Gramm mount a true
challenge to front-runner Robert Dole, who also has had little
trouble raising money.
   Mr. Gramm is working to convince Republicans it would be a
mistake to nominate Mr. Dole:
   "Bob Dole can not beat Bill Clinton. Bob Dole can not tell our
story in terms that working people can understand it. I can."
   Mr. Gramm continues to run second or third in most public
opinion polls, despite efforts on his part to break out of the
pack and move to the lead.
   Those close to his campaign say he hopes to score strong
second-place finishes in the early contests in Iowa and new
hampshire and then break into the lead when states in his native
south and west choose. He also is hopeful Mr. Dole will make a
major mistake and lose his lead, as he has done during past
campaigns.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: ALAN KEYES

   MELISSA WINKLER
   WASHINGTON

   Alan Keyes is the first African American to seek the
Republican nomination for the U.S. presidency. He is one of the
least-known of the nine Republican contenders, and polls show him
with no chance of winning. But he and his ardent conservative
message are nonetheless capturing interest among Republican
voters.
   Alan Keyes jumped into the Republican presidential race in
March of 1995 and immediately grabbed attention with his
conservative zeal.
   Virtually no one really believes the 44-year old political
commentator has a chance of winning the nomination. But his
campaign theme advocating family values has brought the party
faithful to their feet at Republican gatherings across the
country:
   "We should stop talking about voting for this winner and that
winner and start talking about voting for what is good for the
country. And I think right now we know that this country is beset
by ills and we know in our hearts where those ills come from,
they come from the breakdown of the social system, the breakdown
of the family unit, the breakdown of the building block of this
society and we had better put that at the top of our agenda. If
you vote for somebody who puts it second third or last then this
country will loose no matter who wins and I think its time we
started to look at this election in those real terms. (Applause
and cheers)."
   Mr. Keyes insists that America's budget problems are all
linked to the country's moral crisis. The root of that crisis, he
says, is abortion and he has made that issue the focus of his
campaign:
   "We have defined freedom in a corrupt and licentious way that
contradicts the heart of commitment and love and loyalty and
obligation that is needed to sustain family life. Abortion is the
issue that epitomizes that corrupt concept of freedom. We are
destroying our families and destroying this nations moral and
material fabric."
   Alan Keyes was brought up in a devout Roman Catholic family
and, as a child of a military man, spent his youth on army bases.
But his conservative political ideals developed while studying
government at Cornell and Harvard universities.
   He went on to work for the Reagan administration, serving as
ambassador to the U.N. economic and social council and as an
assistant Secretary of State. He later ran unsuccessfully for the
U.S. Senate from (the state of) Maryland, losing to Democrats
Paul Sarbanes in 1988 and Barbara Mikulski in 1992. In recent
years he has worked as a radio-talk show host in Baltimore, and
as a writer and commentator.
   Mr. Keyes faces many hurdles in his candidacy, starting with
his relative political obscurity and lack of finances.
   He is also a black man in a political party whose 20th-century
history has been mainly white. And he has alienated many
potential black voters with his opposition to affirmative action
and other social programs that often assist African Americans. He
also angered blacks during the apartheid era with his opposition
to economic sanctions against South Africa.
   Perhaps his biggest hurdle is that the other Republican
candidates have already laid claim to most of the positions he
holds dearest. Pat Buchanan, for example, is equally outspoken
against abortion and homosexuality and Bob Dole has also stressed
problems in the U.S. education and welfare systems.
   However, none of the other candidates appear to be able to
match Alan Keyes' passionate political rhetoric. Despite trailing
in the polls, Mr. Keyes has become one of the leading American
voices of social conservatism.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: RICHARD LUGAR

   ERIN BRUMMETT
   WASHINGTON, D.C.

   Among the Republicans contesting the party's presidential
nomination, Indiana Republican Senator Richard Lugar is
considered a seasoned politician who is well-respected in
Washington for his accomplishments in foreign policy. But the
four-term moderate conservative is not as well-known outside the
nation's capital and his lackluster style and foreign policy
emphasis appear out of step in an era dominated by domestic
politics.
   Mr. Lugar is campaigning on his long government service with
expertise in foreign, military and agricultural policy. He
asserts himself as a straight shooter and truth teller, tested at
all levels for four decades.
   Mr. Lugar's first attempt at elective office was in the race
for president of the student body at Denison University in Ohio.
He tied with another student, Charlene Smeltzer, and they shared
the office. Now they share the same home after 39 years of
marriage.
   Mr. Lugar began his political career in 1964 on the
Indianapolis school board. Three years later he was elected
mayor. He even became known as President Richard Nixon's favorite
city leader for supporting federal and state power-sharing
policies.
   After eight years leading Indianapolis, Mr. Lugar ran for the
U.S. senate and was defeated. In 1976 he succeeded in his
senatorial bid and has been re-elected three times since.
   Mr. Lugar gained foreign policy recognition in rallying votes
to override a presidential veto of sanctions on South Africa. He
also persuaded President Reagan to stop supporting Philippine
dictator Ferdinand Marcos and he won congressional endorsement of
the Persian Gulf war. His long service on the senate foreign
relations committee have made him among the most respected voices
on foreign policy in congress.
   Mr. Lugar says the United States needs a president adept at
foreign policy:
   "Something must happen for the president to command trust and
confidence, that when the president speaks about moral issues in
this country or about commitments necessary for American security
and world peace abroad, he is respected."
   But Americans are preoccupied with domestic issues.
   So the Indiana senator decided to push for a tax overhaul
plan. It abolishes personal and corporate income taxes and
replaces them with a 17-percent national sales tax. Food, drugs,
rent and other items are exempted.
   Mr. Lugar says this means bigger savings for Americans:
   "The scheme I am suggesting increases the investment pool from
two-and-a-half-percent savings in our economy to seven (percent).
That is a huge new pool for investment. That means new jobs,
investment as Americans try to make money and keep the money they
make."
   But some Republicans argue Mr. Lugar's tax plan and focus on
foreign policy are not enough to set him apart from the other
Republicans.
   And what some describe as a dull, stiff campaign style may
also prevent Mr. Lugar from moving to the front of the Republican
field.
   He also lacks the money and organization of his major rivals.
   Even so, he has advanced himself as the candidate of substance
and straight talk over appearance and pandering.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE PROFILE: MORRY TAYLOR

   IMANI CROSBY
   WASHINGTON

   Multi-millionaire and businessman Maurice, or Morry, Taylor is
one of several Republican candidates for U.S. president. He is
given almost no chance in the contest. At a debate before the
(U.S.northern state of) New Hampshire's primary, Mr. Taylor said
he is not at all concerned about his lack of political experience
as he competes for the highest political office in America. He
says he is also not concerned about what is described as his
outspokenness on issues:
   Morry Taylor says his main concern is improving the U.S.
economic base through balancing the federal budget and by
creating jobs. He says America needs more high-wage jobs because
it is hard to compete with a trading partner like China, where
wages are much lower but the work force is much larger:
   "I'm the only candidate who has started from scratch and
created thousands of good-paying jobs. I'm also the only
candidate here who has worldwide trade (experience). It's time to
get tough with America's trading partners, and, we've got to do
that before we let all the jobs slip away."
   One way Mr. Taylor proposes to protect U.S. jobs is through
what is considered protectionism, a step that could put the
United States in violation of the recently signed world trade, or
GATT, accord. He cites an example of a change he would make in
international trade if elected president:
   "The first thing you have to do is become a fair trader, not a
free trader. If you look at what's happened in our aerospace
(industry), we've lost an awful lot of jobs. (For example),
Boeing right now is laying-off. When you stop and look, did a new
company in Europe take over? Yes, but it was backed by France,
England, Germany and the Netherlands, (it was) called Airbus.
It's wrong. We've got to start protecting our own job base
because we are the market. If we don't protect the market, we're
going to lose."
   As for social issues, Morry Taylor issues such as gun control
and abortion rights should be enforced at a state, not federal,
level. He says he would seek repeal the ban on assault weapons if
he were president.
   Mr. Taylor says abortion is an issue for a woman, her doctor,
and her religion. Although Mr. Taylor says states should have the
power to legalize abortions for minors with parental consent, he
says the federal government should not subsidize abortions under
any circumstances.
   In international affairs, Mr. Taylor says U.S. troops should
not be part of the NATO peacekeeping force in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
He says Europe has enough countries to police what he calls a
religious conflict:
   "We should not be over there. It's a war. It's actually a
religious war, and, it's territorial. You've got everyone else
over there. You've got Germany; you've got Italy next door;
you've got France; you've got England, they're all big enough to
get together and take care of it (Bosnia)."
   Mr. Taylor says the United States must stop being the police
force for the world, and must scale back its participation in
global affairs when there is no direct benefit for America
engagement.
   Mr. Taylor sees his lack of political experience but wealth of
business experience as an asset. He says its time to elect a
president who knows how to manage, not just legislate, and he
feels that president should be him, a Republican, not a Democrat
nor an independent.
   ---------------

   ---------------
   WORLD PRESS: 'U.S. ELECTION CAMPAIGN BEGINS

   GAIL HAMER BURKE AND PAT MCARDLE
   WASHINGTON

   As the election campaign heats up in the U.S., foreign
observers examined factors which they believe will have a
significant impact on President Clinton's chances for
re-election--mainly, the budget crisis, the controversies
surrounding Whitewater and the White House travel office firings
and Mrs. Clinton's ability to refute the allegations being made
against her.

   BUDGET BATTLE--Writers bemoaned the long-term effects of the
budget crisis:  more political gridlock in Washington and
increased voter frustration and ire.  Commentators attributed Mr.
Clinton's rise in the opinion polls to Americans' fears that the
spending cuts proposed by the Republicans would result in an
"enormous social upheaval" that would sharpen the divide between
the haves and the have-nots, and create desperation among
America's youth who are in search of jobs and a future.  Many
suggested that the president's stance--which had "helped solidify
his image as a man of principle"--was an attempt to hold firm
against an assault on 50 years of America's commitment to social
programs.  A Belgian writer suggested, however, that Mr. Clinton
is less the "heir of Roosevelt's New Deal than the manager of a
gradual liquidation of that heritage."  The writer characterized
the Republican Party as representing "the most ferocious aspect
of the wealthy's selfishness."  Some pundits turned their
attention to Washington's political climate, with a few wondering
whether the growing list of congressional members who have
decided not to run again would turn into an "exodus."  Centrist
Stuttgarter Zeitung observed, "The hardliners on both sides are
setting the tone, and it is difficult for voices of reason to be
heard."

   WHITEWATER ET AL--Commentators suggested a Republican
"offensive" behind the revival of the Whitewater and White House
travel office cases, with many appearing sympathetic to Mrs.
Clinton's predicament.  Some suggested that the charges against
the first lady persist not because of wrongdoing but because she
is "too intelligent, too well educated, too much of a
protagonist" and because she and the president have openly upset
the traditional division of roles between men and women. 
Norway's independent Dagbladet quipped, "In the land of the
Barbie doll, the working, educated and successful woman
contradicts the religious right wing's agenda for debate in
society."  Analysts concluded, nevertheless, that Mrs. Clinton
may have to appear before Congress to answer the charges leveled
against her.  Such an event, they predicted, might actually
backfire against her critics.  In the words of London's
independent Financial Times, "Even Mr. Safire conceded that she
could probably run rings round the senators."

   This survey is based on 26 reports from 17 countries, January
   11-18.

   EUROPE

   BRITAIN:  "Hillary Clinton Fights Onslaught"

   The independent Financial Times commented (1/16), "The first
lady of the United States is Joan of Arc to her fans and Eleanor
Roosevelt to her husband, President Bill Clinton, but she is Lady
Macbeth to her critics and 'a congenital liar' to a New York
Times columnist, who once wrote speeches for that paragon of
truth, Richard Nixon.  It now appears impossible for her to cross
the road without controversy....  It is also impossible to know
the truth of the allegations against her, other than to note, as
President Bill Clinton did last week, that an allegation 'is not
a fact.'  But it is undeniable that, again, she has become an
issue in a presidential election campaign that had appeared
recently to be turning in her husband's favor....
   "She is fighting back....  She has not ruled out appearing in
person in front of the D'Amato committee, a prospect that has
Washington salivating in expectation.  Even Mr. Safire conceded
that she could probably run rings round the senators
and...Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah hoped over the weekend that
such a confrontation would not take place.  However, the onus is
probably on Mrs. Clinton to lay out all she knows with the force
of argument of which she is eminently capable.  That will not
stop the steady flow of denigration that appears her lot, but it
could reduce it to a manageable drip."

   GERMANY:  "Both Parties Are To Blame"

   Manfred Rowold said in an editorial in right-of-center Die
Welt of Berlin (1/18), "This is not business as usual.  This time
not only figures are at issue but basic views on the role of the
central government and the acceptable limits of the welfare
state....  Both parties are to blame for the situation.  The
basic decision that resulted in the increase in costs were made
when the Republicans Nixon and Reagan sat in the White House and
the Democrats dominated Congress.  Under Reagan, the annual
budget deficit exploded from $70 billion to almost $280 billion,
while it reached almost $340 billion under George Bush.  But the
$160 billion of last year were already a step back into the
future."

   "Difficult For Voices Of Reason To Be Heard"

   Washington correspondent Juergen Koar filed for centrist
Stuttgarter Zeitung (1/18) regarding the number of senators who
do not want to run again, "Five Republicans and eight Democrats
have thrown in the towel in frustration and are fleeing from the
political climate in Washington....  An exodus of less dramatic
proportions will take place in the House of Representatives.  The
hardliners on both sides are setting the tone, and it is
difficult for voices of reason to be heard....  The U.S.
governmental system requires the willingness to make
compromises...and politicians who are able to build bridges are
necessary to achieve a consensus.  This may not be very likely in
view of the current situation, but maybe it is also not
desirable.  However, this situation can be changed in November."

   "Whitewater Affair Is Grist For Republican Mill"

   Business Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf contended (1/17), "The
Whitewater hearings...are creating mounting embarrassment for the
White House.  There is a reason as to why, under pressure,
President Clinton is trying to distract attention from the affair
by traveling to Bosnia and by focusing on the budget controversy
with Congress.  Right from the outset it has been President
Clinton's battered credibility...that has been his biggest
handicap.  But now he is also being confronted with the marred
image of his wife, whose reputation has been damaged because of
her contradictory statements....  Little helpful in this
politically explosive election year is the decision of the 8th
Appelate Court which declined to grant the president immunity in
the Paula Jones case.  It goes without saying that the president
will appeal this decision.  But in connection with the
never-ending series of scandals, this is a development which will
result in a decline of his popularity ratings and will be grist
for the mill of the Republicans who want to recapture the White
House."

   RUSSIA:  "Clinton More Stubborn Than Congress"

   According to a commentary in reformist, business-oriented
Kommersant Daily (1/16), "Clinton has proved much more
hard-headed than his Republican opponents in Congress....
   "It may be that those calling the current conflict in
Washington 'nonsense' are not all that far from the truth. 
Standing behind that 'nonsense' are quite real problems, but
people prefer not to talk about them in public.  One of those
problems is the size of the federal government."

   ITALY:  "Hillary's Intelligence Is Frightening"

   An analysis in the (1/13) issue of PDS (former Communist
party) organ L'Unita' said, "Hillary is considered too active,
too intelligent, too well educated, too much of a protagonist. 
In addition, she is testy....  What she is really accused of is
not the legitimacy of her past tasks, but the aggressive way in
which she has carried them out and the weight of her political
and intellectual influence over President Clinton.  The same
accusation is being thrown at Clinton.  Several people, and
several authoritative journalists, believe the president is
giving Americans a very bad example of what a good American
husband should be....  He is accused of openly upsetting the
traditional division of roles between men and women....  All
these themes, in ordinary times, would be relegated to the
margins of a normal electoral campaign.  This time things will go
differently, since the Republicans do not have many other cards
to play....  Therefore, they have decided to attack the president
on what they consider his weak point, i.e. his wife.  Perhaps
that won't be all negative.  If Clinton manages to make it on
these terms, and to impose Hillary's rights and intelligence over
all the cliches and the small provincial jealousies, he will
probably accomplish a revolution in the American public spirit
even more important than any other social or political revolution
he has in mind."

   "Hand Of Republicans Behind Accusations"

   Furio Colombo's analysis in left-leaning, influential La
Repubblica (1/11) said, "Concentrating all their resources on
these kinds of alleged scandals should be considered humiliating
by American journalists at a time when the United States is
without a budget, American soldiers are in Bosnia against the
will of the Congress, authoritative sources predict a new
economic recession, and the number of the unemployed does not
seem to be diminishing.  Yet the press and television seem to
enjoy the game.  The unpleasant saga continues."

   "Everybody Against The 'First Liar'"

   Washington correspondent Ennio Caretto wrote (1/11) in
centrist, top-circulation Corriere della Sera under the headline
above: "The electoral campaign has de facto begun.  Defeated in
foreign policy (Clinton has obtained a green light for the
deployment of U.S. troops in Bosnia) and in the dispute over the
budget (Newt Gingrich pushed too hard, according to a majority of
Americans), the Republicans are now playing the scandals card. 
And they seem to have a few aces up their sleeves.  The White
House saga, in fact, more and more resembles a comic-strip.  But
it may have serious political repercussions, so much so that
Clinton has already scheduled a 'wide-ranging' press conference
for tonight."

   CANADA:  "Why No Budging On U.S. Budget?"

   Business columnist Peter Cook asked in the leading Toronto
Globe and Mail (1/12), "Why no budging on the U.S. budget?  The
answer is political.  It lies in the partial support that both
sides muster on Capitol Hill, and the nature of that support. 
Mr. Clinton wants a deal....  He has already offended his party
and cannot afford to alienate it....  On the other side, Mr.
Gingrich has said that he will not do a deal unless 200
Republican members in the House support it.  Mr. Dole cannot do a
deal that his conservative rivals, such as Phil Gramm, will
attack him for. Having left things to the 13th hour, a solution
is as much entangled by election politics as by the ideological
differences that divide Republicans and Democrats....  What,
then, is the likely outcome?  Either there will be a deal because
financial markets are in revolt and the polls show it is needed,
or there will be no deal this year.  Politically, it is possible
to get a budget through with the backing of Republicans and
conservative Democrats.  That may have Mr. Clinton's blessing or,
if it does not, may force him to make more concessions.  What is
clear is that it is Mr. Clinton who stands to lose most and has
least room to maneuver."

   "The Legal Problems Of Bill And Hillary"

   A commentary in French-language La Presse observed (1/16),
"Whitewater...has something in common with Watergate....  Every
time you think you know everything, a new revelation rekindles
doubts....
   "For Bill Clinton there is not even the possibility of
challenging those who are attacking his presidency.  Because this
is a political campaign against him...(which) rests on
presumption of guilt by association....  There is not much time
left for the president to convince (American voters) that
Whitewater and his at times tumultuous past in Arkansas have
little importance for a president who has cut the deficit by half
and who had a happy hand in defending American interests
abroad....  Whitewater is not Watergate, but presidents have lost
their race to the White House for much less." 

   BELGIUM:  "U.S.Election Campaign Has Virtually Begun"

   In socialist La  Robert Falony wrote (1/16), "The
U.S. election campaign has virtually begun.  For Bill Clinton as
for the Republicans...the problem is to position oneself
vis-a-vis the middle class in view of the November election,
either in the role of swashbuckler of the state deficit, or in
the role of protector of the social security system.  But there
is an element of fiction in all this.  Looking for compromises,
President Clinton constantly yields ground and there will be
further cuts in social benefits as well as in Medicare.... 
Clinton is less the heir of Roosevelt's New Deal than the manager
of a gradual liquidation of that heritage.  Of course, the
Republican Party represents the most ferocious aspect of the
wealthy's selfishness."

   "Like Joan Of Arc Facing Her Judges?"

   Columnist Franis Unwin wrote in conservative La Meuse/La
Lanterne (1/13), "Everything is possible with Hillary Clinton,
capable--like her husband--of endlessly reinventing herself.
Before finally returning to her favorite reincarnation:  Don
Quixote, minus his naivete."

   NORWAY:  "Hillary As Controversial As Eleanor Roosevelt"

   Independent Dagbladet opined (1/16), "Bill Clinton says
Hillary is as controversial as Eleanor Roosevelt, and he says it
as a compliment.  The right wing, who dislikes the two first
ladies equally, disagrees....  In the land of the Barbie doll,
the working, educated, and successful woman contradicts the
religious right wing's agenda for debate in society.  Many women
in America don't intend to be forced back into the kitchen, and
will continue to defend the right to abortion and other gains
women have made in the last 25 years."

   POLAND:  "So Far Clinton Is At The Top"

   Military Polska Zbrojna ran this article (1/11) by  Maximilian
Berezowski, senior foreign correspondent:  "Who is going to pay
for all the disorganization and mess (of the paralysis of the
federal government)?  It seems that it should be paid for by both
the Democratic president and the Republican majority in Congress.
But that isn't so.  So far, Clinton is winning....  He is winning
mainly because of his veto of the drastic budget cuts for
education and social welfare proposed by the Congress.  By
appealing to the American sense of justice, the president forced
the Republican Party, so triumphant until now, into the
defensive."

   SWITZERLAND:  "The President's Advantage"

   Right-of-center Journal de Geneve observed (1/17), "The
suspension of public services in November and December has, in
effect, worked to the president's advantage.  Clinton is now seen
as the victim of arrogant Republican legislators who brought the
administration to its knees....  (Congressman) Kasich recognized
that the tug-of-war could last until the November elections.  The
two adversaries--practically neighbors in Washington--are miles
apart on their projects to reduce the budget deficit to zero by
2002.  The entire question revolves around the seven-year issue.
Clinton's refusal to commit to this deadline--if it hurts
America's most vulnerable--has helped solidify his image as a man
of principle, undaunted by his adversaries.  Such a boost is just
what he needed during this electoral period."

   EAST ASIA

   AUSTRALIA:  "Clinton's Hold On Presidency Begins To Firm"

   In an op-ed column in the national, conservative Australian,
former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser commented (1/17), "Wherever
there has been a major problem it is the United States alone that
has ultimately made effective international action possible.  I
have sometimes been critical of U.S. actions, particularly in
relation to trade.  But in straight political matters that affect
the future of the world, the United States is, and remains, the
world's best hope for a sensible outcome....  Clinton has
conducted an effective foreign policy with increasing maturity.
The president seems also to have largely won the propaganda war
in his battle with the Republican Congress....  If he wins the
second term, which at this stage must be regarded as not only
possible but probable, he will have earned it."

   "Clinton Leads But Scandals Loom"

   The regional West Australian (1/16) editorialized, "U.S.
President Bill Clinton has started this election year on an
unexpected wave of popular support resulting from his budget
brawl with hard-line Republicans....  By re-asserting the role of
the White House in the face of an all-out political assault, Mr.
Clinton has preserved the constitutional balance between the
President and Congress.  In doing so, he showed the leadership
qualities that American voters found attractive three years
ago--but of which they have seen little evidence in the
meantime....  The budget battle has exposed huge differences in
policy and philosophy between the Democrats and Republicans.
Electors will have a clear choice between parties that at times
have seemed to be different in little more than names....  Mr.
Clinton was politically deft in saying that the budget battle
should be postponed and left to the people to resolve at the
ballot box.  But all his political style and acumen may not be
enough for victory if continued scandals convince the American
people that he is not fit to continue in office."

   CHINA:  "When Will This Ever End?"

   Jin Canrong held in the official, Communist People's Daily
(1/12), "This budget war actually started in early 1995.  The
test of will over whose budget cutting plan would prevail was a
major political topic last year....  The 1996 election
complicates matters.  Both sides are using the budget conflict as
a warm-up electoral contest.  Neither side put a real solution on
the table....  The two government shutdowns have caused major
inconvenience to Americans and difficulties in the operation of
the U.S. economy.  The image of the United States overseas has
also been damaged.  This naturally aroused strong public
dissatisfaction.  At present, the public is criticizing the
Republican party more than the president.  In the long-term,
however, this issue has illustrated a lack of political control
that will not benefit the major political parties.  A third party
movement will undoubtedly profit from it.
   "Since the government has financing only through January 26th
and the parties are still far apart on the concrete measures to
reduce expenditures, one cannot discount the possibility of a
third shutdown.  Nevertheless, the leaders of the two parties are
anxious to turn their attention to the election.  Therefore the
budget impasse may end in concessions."

   PHILIPPINES:  "Bigger Issue Is Legacy Of Reagan Revolution"

   Adrian Cristobal commented (1/17) in the anti-Ramos
administration Philippine Daily Inquirer on statistics cited by
Secretary of Labor Reich during his January 3 news conference on
the ill effects of the furloughs:  "Although [Secretary Reich]
noted an air of both optimism and cooperation affecting Congress
and relationships between Congress and the Clinton
administration, the quick conclusion is that the Republican Party
leadership will hear it from the voters this year.  However, the
truth is that Clinton is not regarded as an effective leader
himself.  The bigger issue is the legacy of the Reagan
revolution, which exalted the withdrawal of compassion from the
poor as a moral value."

   MIDDLE EAST

   EGYPT:  "Contract With America"

   Mohamed Safar Eid, pro-government Al Akhbar held (1/17) that
for President Clinton "1995 was a year for foreign victories and
domestic defeats.  For the people it was a year of change, where
Congress fell into the hands of the Republicans...and Internet
fever became overwhelming....  The Republicans carried out a
legislative coup that destroyed the achievements of 25 years....
Its real leaders...support the interests of billionaires....  The
year ended with a clash on the budget that shut down the Federal
government in a way that scared the Americans."

   SOUTH ASIA

   INDIA:  "Conflict Of Ideas"

   An editorial in the independent Statesman (1/14) said, "A
fundamental conflict of ideas is involved in the confrontation
between President Bill Clinton and Republican leaders Bob Dole
and Newt Gingrich over balancing the budget in seven years....
But frankly, President Clinton cannot really be blamed for
rejecting the Republican demands as being too radical.  A drastic
cut in social security would normally result in an enormous
social upheaval--of the kind witnessed in France, recently--that
might push even more high school students into the back alleys
looking for drugs and violence.  According to the Republican
plan, the complaint is that the spending cuts will affect the
poor and tax cuts benefit the rich.  Such a budget strategy can
only lead to a sharpening of the divide between the haves and the
have-nots especially if growth is not sufficient to push up
income levels.  No wonder a majority of Americans seem to
prefer...Clinton's moderate stance to hardline Republican
revolutionary fervor."

   PAKISTAN:  "Developing Democracies Can Learn From U.S.
               Controversies"

   Karachi's independent, English-language Dawn (1/15) commented,
"Blizzards of all kinds have been hitting the U.S. capital in the
past couple of weeks.... The president will have to face sexual
harassment charges....  The first lady has been accused of being
a congenital liar....  A serving general criticizes the Clinton
administration's strategy to check the flow of drugs from Latin
America....  The Congress shows its muscle against the president
and the budget for the financial year beginning October, 95, has
not yet been passed in full.
   "But in the middle of all these major political developments
there is no panic, no uncertainty of any kind and no doomsday
prophet predicts the fall of the government or the collapse of
the system.  In fact, the responses that are emerging could serve
as lessons in political tolerance for developing democracies
around the world, especially the Third World.  The lessons for
emerging democracies are...not in taking refuge behind the excuse
that democracy was new and had not yet taken roots."

   BANGLADESH:  "Hillary A Liability"

   The independent Bangladesh Observer opined (1/16), "Hillary is
a liability in the eyes of many.  The problem is compounded by
the fact that she is married to the president, which means she
will be there.  It is not a situation where a president can dump
his vice president and go for a new running mate.  That is where
Clinton's feelings come in.  And feelings must be respected."

   LATIN AMERICA

   PANAMA:  "So Who's To Blame?  The U.S. Public"

   Independent El Universal asked (1/16), "In the days leading up
to the Congressional elections, voters backed the Republicans
over the Democrats.  Then the Republicans committed a fatal
error: They tried to do what they promised....  So who is to
blame for the lack of public maturity?  The U.S. public is to
blame, for wanting one thing and authorizing another."
   ---------------

   ---------------
   FREE OFFER FROM PUBLISHER

          "CLIP" NEWS SERVICE

          INEWS DAILY IS NOW AVAILABLE THROUGH E-MAIL

          FREE TRIAL

          LOW COST ROYALTY FREE REPRODUCTION RIGHTS AVAILABLE

   International News E-Wire Service (INEWS) is an English
language daily, covering news of the world.  INEWS provides
up-to-date and accurate world news.  It also includes many
features and interviews covering such topics as current events,
politics, economics, science, medicine, history, technology,
agriculture, religion, and music.

   Low cost republication rights are available allowing articles
to be used on BBSs, in newsletters, advertising, LANs, weeklies,
community newspapers, school newspapers, brochures, media kits,
presentations, church bulletins, and more.

   Every day, INEWS gathers reports filed by correspondents
stationed at 26 news bureaus throughout the world.  INEWS relates
first-hand coverage of stories from news bureaus in Abidjan,
Bangkok, Beijing, Berlin, Bonn, Cairo, Chicago, Geneva, Hong
Kong, Islamabad, Jerusalem, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles,
Miami, Moscow, Nairobi, New Delhi, New York, Paris, Prague, Rio
de Janeiro, San Jose, Tokyo, Vienna, and Washington, D.C.

   Daily INEWS service is available for less than $4.00 a month.

   Delivered through E-mail in one of two versions, plain text or
a DOS/VGA version.  The DOS/VGA version is sent either through
E-mail, encoded, or through file transfer on America Online,
Compuserve, or Prodigy.

   A free two week trial can be received by sending E-mail
containing E-mail address, name and address to:

   INTERNET: INEWS@AOL.COM 
   AOL: INEWS
   COMPUSERVE: 76725,3622
   --------------
   ***END OF FILE***