Iowa Public Television

Borg: LESS THAN FIVE MONTHS REMAIN UNTIL THE IOWA PRESIDENTIAL PREFERENCE CAUCUSES OF 2000. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE BILL BRADLEY DISCUSSES HIS CAMPAIGN FOR THE WHITE HOUSE ON THIS EDITION OF IOWA PRESS.

FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION, EIGHTY THOUSAND MEMBERS SUPPORTING QUALITY PUBLIC TELEVISION PROGRAMMING.

THIS IS THE SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 12th EDITION OF IOWA PRESS. HERE IS DEAN BORG.

Borg: ON WEDNESDAY OF THIS PAST WEEK IN HIS HOMETOWN OF CRYSTAL CITY, MISSOURI, BILL BRADLEY TOOK A BIG STEP IN HIS JOURNEY DOWN THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL. MR. BRADLEY MADE HIS CANDIDACY OFFICIAL, FORMALLY ANNOUNCING THAT HE IS SEEKING TO BECOME THE 43RD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. THE BATTLE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION AGAINST VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE WILL BE DIFFICULT. MR. BRADLEY'S SUPPORTERS, AND THEY'RE GROWING IN NUMBER, ARE ENCOURAGED BY THE SUPPORT THE FORMER NEW JERSEY SENATOR IS FINDING OUT ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, INCLUDING HERE IN IOWA. MR. BRADLEY HAS IMPRESSED MANY IN THE POLITICAL COMMUNITY WITH HIS LEVEL OF FINANCIAL BACKING AND ALSO BY THE DEPTH OF COMMITMENT SHOWN BY HIS SUPPORTERS, FROM PARTY REGULARS TO HIGH-PROFILE ENDORSEMENTS. BUT BILL BRADLEY KNOWS THE GAME IS FAR FROM OVER. AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT MR. BRADLEY, TODAY ON IOWA PRESS.

Bradley: THANK YOU.

Borg: ACROSS THE TABLE, PEOPLE YOU KNOW: DAVID YEPSEN OF THE DES MOINES REGISTER AND MIKE GLOVER OF THE ASSOCIATED PRESS.

Glover: SENATOR, GIVE US YOUR CAMPAIGN MESSAGE. WHY SHOULD DEMOCRATIC ACTIVISTS DENY THE NOMINATION TO A SITTING VICE PRESIDENT? WHAT IS THE MESSAGE BILL BRADLEY BRINGS?

Bradley: I THINK THERE'S ONLY ONE REASON TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND ONLY ONE REASON FOR PEOPLE TO SUPPORT YOU, AND THAT IS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE YOUR LEADERSHIP WILL IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR MILLIONS OF AMERICANS. I DON'T THINK IT'S A COMPLICATED QUESTION. I THINK THAT'S THE BASIS UPON WHICH DEMOCRATIC ACTIVISTS AND, MORE IMPORTANTLY, PEOPLE IN THE FALL, WILL VOTE. I THINK THERE'S ALSO A QUESTION OF WHAT ARE THE POSITIONS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO STAND FOR AND ALSO A QUESTION OF HOW THEY REACT TO YOU PERSONALLY.

Glover: HOW DO YOU -- WHEN A DEMOCRATIC ACTIVIST COMES TO YOU AND SAYS, "OKAY, SELL ME," HOW ARE YOU DIFFERENT FROM AL GORE?

Bradley: WELL, I THINK, CLEARLY WE'D BE VERY DIFFERENT PRESIDENTS. I THINK I'VE HAD MORE VARIED LIFE EXPERIENCE. I GREW UP IN THAT SMALL TOWN IN MISSOURI, LIVED THERE 18 YEARS, REPRESENTED NEW JERSEY FOR 18 YEARS, ONE OF THE MOST DIVERSE STATES IN THE UNION. HAD A LIFE BEFORE I GOT INTO POLITICS, LIFE AFTER I LEFT THE SENATE. I'VE GONE TO WORK MANY YEARS IN MY LIFE AND NEVER THOUGHT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND IN THAT SENSE, I THINK I'M LIKE MILLIONS OF OTHER AMERICANS. AND I THINK THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT HAS HAD A LIFE PRIMARILY BASED IN WASHINGTON, AND I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENCE. THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF WHAT WE SEE THE COUNTRY IS. I THINK THAT'S ONE THING. I ALSO THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME ISSUE DIFFERENCES THAT HAVE ALREADY EMERGED. FOR EXAMPLE, I STRONGLY SUPPORT REGISTRATION OF ALL HANDGUNS IN AMERICA, AND HE DOES NOT. AND I'VE LAID OUT A PROGRAM FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM THAT WAS VERY SPECIFIC: ABOLISH SOFT MONEY; PUBLIC FINANCING OF GENERAL ELECTIONS; FREE TELEVISION TIME. HIS CAMPAIGN ATTACKED ME FOR MAKING THAT PROPOSAL. THERE WILL BE OTHER DIFFERENCES IN THE COURSE OF THE FALL THAT WILL EMERGE SO THAT BY THE TIME WE GET TO JANUARY, WHEN THE DECISIONS ARE GOING TO BE MADE BY THE PEOPLE, THAT THEY WILL HAVE A CHOICE IN THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY. AND MY HOPE IS THAT THEY'LL SEE THAT THE LEADERSHIP I'M OFFERING IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'D SUPPORT.

Yepsen: HANDICAP THIS RACE FOR ME, IF YOU WOULD, SENATOR. HAS THERE EVER BEEN A TIME WHEN A POLITICAL PARTY IN AMERICA HAS DENIED ITS PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION TO A SITTING VICE PRESIDENT? I DON'T THINK IT EVER HAS OCCURRED, HAS IT?

Bradley: WELL, YES, IT DID OCCUR ONCE... 1808, WHEN THOMAS JEFFERSON DECIDED HE'D RATHER HAVE JAMES MADISON AS THE PERSON TO SUCCEED HIM AS OPPOSED TO GOVERNOR CLINTON OF NEW YORK. BUT THAT'S THE ONLY TIME SINCE THEN. BUT THERE'S A KIND OF FLIP SIDE TO THAT QUESTION, AND THAT IS, OF VICE PRESIDENTS WHO HAVE GOTTEN NOMINATIONS, HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE WON THE GENERAL ELECTION. AND SINCE GEORGE BUSH, THAT WASN'T SINCE -- BEFORE THAT IT WAS MARTIN VAN BUREN IN 1842. SO, THE POINT IS HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGES ARE BASICALLY IRRELEVANT HERE, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. EVERY ELECTION IS NEW. EVERY ELECTION IS SHAPED BY THE DYNAMICS OF THAT TIME: THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN IT AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE LIVING UNDER. Yepsen: IS PART OF YOUR MESSAGE THAT AL GORE CAN'T WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION? I HEAR THAT FROM YOUR PEOPLE. I MEAN THERE ARE MANY DEMOCRATS WHO ARE SUPPORTING YOU, AND THEY SIMPLY SAY, "WE DON'T THINK AL GORE CAN WIN." IS THAT PART OF YOUR MESSAGE?

Bradley: DAVID, I DON'T THINK I'D BE IN THIS RACE IF I COULDN'T SEE MY WAY THROUGH 270, THE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL VOTES THAT YOU NEED TO WIN THE PRESIDENCY, WHICH ALSO MEANS THAT I CAN SEE MY WAY THROUGH TO GETTING THE NOMINATION, WHICH ALSO MEANS I THINK I HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT WINNING THE GENERAL ELECTION. SO, YES, I THINK THAT'S VERY MUCH A PART OF IT. AND I ALSO BELIEVE THAT IF YOU'RE RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU ALSO WANT TO HAVE IS YOU WANT TO HAVE A DEMOCRATIC HOUSE AND A DEMOCRATIC SENATE. AND SO RUNNING IN WAYS THAT STRENGTHEN THAT POSSIBILITY, I THINK, IS ANOTHER PART OF THIS EQUATION.

Glover: WELL, WALK US THROUGH THIS WHOLE NOMINATING PROCESS AND TELL US A SCENARIO THAT BILL BRADLEY GETS THE NOMINATION. DO YOU BREAK THROUGH IN IOWA? DO YOU DO WELL IN IOWA? WIN NEW HAMPSHIRE? WHERE DO YOU BREAK THROUGH?

Bradley: I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN EXPECTED IN IOWA. I'M UP AGAINST ESTABLISHMENT POWER. I'M UP AGAINST TREMENDOUS RESOURCES, AND ALL I HAVE IS REACHING OUT TO PEOPLE, WHICH I REALLY FEEL IS SUCCEEDING. BUT IT'S STILL A LONG FIGHT. BUT I HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN EXPECTED IN IOWA. I THEN HAVE TO DO WELL IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. AND THEN THE TAKE-OFF POINT IS MARCH 7, WHICH IS WHEN OVER 50 PERCENT OF ALL THE DELEGATES WILL BE SELECTED.

Yepsen: SENATOR, MUCH OF ORGANIZED LABOR IN IOWA IS LINED UP BEHIND AL GORE. WHAT DO YOU SAY TO LABOR LEADERS, TO LABOR ACTIVISTS WHO SEE THEIR MOVEMENT GOING FOR AL GORE? WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THEM?

Bradley: WELL, I SAY TO THEM THAT I WANT THEM TO LOOK AT EACH CANDIDATE AND MAKE THE JUDGMENT AS TO WHO THEY THINK COULD WIN, WHO THEY THINK WOULD BEST REPRESENT THEIR INTERESTS AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. AND I THEN TELL THEM THAT WHATEVER THEIR LEADERS DECIDE, THAT I'M GOING AFTER THE VOTES OF WORKING FAMILIES. AND I'M GOING AFTER THE VOTES OF WORKING FAMILIES WITH A VERY DIRECT APPROACH AND, IN TERMS OF LABOR, MAKING IT EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO ORGANIZE. THAT'S VERY MUCH A PART OF WHAT I BELIEVE. AND I'M NOT GOING TO SHY AWAY FROM THAT SIMPLY BECAUSE I MIGHT NOT GET EVERY UNION'S OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT FROM THE LEADERSHIP. I STILL BELIEVE THAT. IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WORKERS IN THIS COUNTRY HAVE ADEQUATE HEALTH CARE -- THERE'S STILL 45 MILLION PEOPLE IN AMERICA WITHOUT ANY HEALTH INSURANCE. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT. I'M GOING TO PRESENT A PROGRAM TO ACHIEVE THAT. AND I THINK THAT WHEN PEOPLE SEE WHAT I'LL PROPOSE DOING FOR WORKING FAMILIES, THAT IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT THE INDIVIDUAL VOTER WILL RESPOND TO.

Glover: IF YOU DON'T GET THE OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT OF THE LEADERS OF ORGANIZED LABOR, IF MUCH OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S ESTABLISHMENT IS SORT OF UNOFFICIALLY IN VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE'S CAMP, WHERE IN THIS CONGLOMERATION OF INTEREST GROUPS THAT IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY DO YOU BEGIN TO GET TRACTION?

Bradley: YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT YOU CAN CONCEIVE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AS A SEQUENCE OF INTEREST GROUPS, WHICH IS INTEREST GROUP POLITICS. OR YOU CAN CONCEIVE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AS COMPOSED OF INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SEEKING CHANGE AND WHO WANT A CLEAR DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE. AND THEN THAT MEANS YOU APPEAL TO THEM ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND THAT'S THE WAY I'M DOING THIS CAMPAIGN. I'M DOING IT THAT WAY IN IOWA. I'M DOING IT THAT WAY IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. I'M DOING IT THAT WAY IN EVERY STATE THAT I'M CAMPAIGNING IN. AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A MORE PERSONAL WAY TO SHOW RESPECT. IN OTHER WORDS, PART OF MY CAMPAIGN IS TRYING TO SHOW RESPECT FOR THE VOTER, TO ELICIT IN THE VOTER THE BELIEF THAT THEIR INVOLVEMENT CAN ACTUALLY CHANGE THE WAY WE DO POLITICS... CAN ACTUALLY GET, FOR EXAMPLE, CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, WHICH MOST PEOPLE KNOW, IF WE DON'T GET, WILL MAKE ANYTHING ELSE WE WANT TO DO AS DEMOCRATS INCREDIBLY DIFFICULT.

Glover: LET'S GET BACK TO THIS CALENDAR FOR A SECOND. YOU MENTIONED TAKE-OFF DAY FOR YOU IS MARCH 7, WHEN A LOT OF STATES, CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK, ARE HOLDING THEIR ELECTION. WHERE DO YOU BREAK THROUGH? WHERE DO YOU WIN ON MARCH 7?

Bradley: WELL, MY GOODNESS, YOU HAVE TO WIN A NUMBER OF PLACES ON MARCH 7. I MEAN YOU HAVE WASHINGTON; CALIFORNIA; MISSOURI, MY HOME STATE; OHIO; NEW YORK; CONNECTICUT; MOST OF NEW ENGLAND, MY MEDIA MARKET FOR 30 YEARS; MARYLAND; GEORGIA; AND SOUTH CAROLINA. SO I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO WIN A NUMBER OF THOSE.

Borg: YOU'RE BANKING ON SUPPORT COMING OUT OF VOTERS WHO ARE MAYBE DISCOURAGED OR FATIGUED WITH CLINTON ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE, OBVIOUSLY, THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN PUSHING AL GORE FROM INAUGURAL DAY. IS CLINTON FATIGUE REAL, AND CAN YOU TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT?

Bradley: I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT WORD MEANS. I DO THINK MANY PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY WANT A FRESH START. I DO THINK THAT PEOPLE ARE LOOKING, MORE IMPORTANTLY, TO THE FUTURE AND WHO'S GOT A PROGRAM FOR THE FUTURE. SO I DON'T -- THERE'S NO CALCULATION TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HOW PEOPLE MAY OR MAY NOT FEEL ABOUT THE PRESIDENT. THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO TURN THE PAGE AND MOVE ON TO A NEW TIME IN OUR POLITICS AND TO A NEW PRESIDENCY. AND THAT'S THE WHOLE APPROACH THAT I'VE MADE TO THIS.

Yepsen: SENATOR, I WANT TO SWITCH GEARS AND MOVE ON TO SOME ISSUES FACING THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW... EAST TIMOR. WHAT SHOULD U.S. POLICY BE IN EAST TIMOR?

Bradley: WELL, I THINK THE MESSAGE OUGHT TO BE SENT VERY CLEARLY TO THE INDONESIANS THAT THEY AGREED TO A REFERENDUM IN EAST TIMOR, A REFERENDUM CALL FOR DEMOCRACY. THEY HAD SAID THEY WOULD PROTECT AND HOLD ORDER IN EAST TIMOR. THEY FAILED TO DO THAT. AND WE OUGHT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR TO THEM THAT IT'S THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO THAT. IF THEY FAIL TO, THEN, AS YOU KNOW, COUNTRIES IN THE REGION -- THE PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND -- HAVE SAID THEY'D BE PREPARED TO SEND A MULTILATERAL FORCE TO THE AREA.

Yepsen: SHOULD THE U.S. BE PART OF THAT?

Bradley: I DON'T THINK THE UNITED STATES SHOULD BE A PART OF THE MULTILATERAL FORCE IN TERMS OF TROOPS. I THINK THAT IF THE SECURITY COUNCIL PASSES THE RESOLUTION TO SEND THAT FORCE, THEN WE CAN BE SUPPORTIVE IN TERMS OF LOGISTICS AND OTHER THINGS. BUT I DON'T THINK WE NEED AMERICAN TROOPS. IT'S ALSO INCONCEIVABLE TO ME THAT IF THE INDONESIANS THEMSELVES DON'T REASSERT ORDER, THAT THE IMF AND THE WORLD BANK ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO BE HELPFUL TO THE INDONESIAN ECONOMY. SO I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LEVERAGE POINTS HERE OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL WEEKS.

Glover: LET'S STEP BACK A SECOND AND GO BEYOND EAST TIMOR. WHAT IS THE UNITED STATES' ROLE IN THE WORLD WHEN ISSUES LIKE THIS POP TO THE SURFACE? IS THE U.S. THE WORLD'S COP?

Bradley: MIKE, I DON'T THINK THE UNITED STATES IS THE WORLD'S POLICEMAN. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT. THERE ARE 32 ETHNIC WARS IN THE WORLD TODAY, FOR EXAMPLE. AND THE QUESTION IS COULD WE BE INVOLVED IN ALL OF THEM. IF WE WERE THE WORLD'S POLICEMAN, THEN, YEAH, PEOPLE WOULD SAY YOU SHOULD BE INVOLVED.

Glover: WELL, WHAT'S THE CRITERIA?

Bradley: I BELIEVE THE WAY WE HAVE TO SOLVE THESE ISSUES IS WE HAVE TO DO THIS THROUGH MULTILATERAL INSTITUTIONS, SUCH AS REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS -- NATO IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE -- OR BETTER, IF IT'S DONE THROUGH THE U.N. AND WE HAVE TO INTERVENE IN ETHNIC DISPUTES MUCH EARLIER, MUCH EARLIER THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST. IN TERMS OF TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE UNDERLYING TENSIONS IN A REGION, ECONOMIC, ET CETERA, THAT LEAD TO A FLAIR-UP OF THESE AGE-OLD, ETHIC RIVALRIES INTO VIOLENCE. I THINK THAT'S THE WAY WE OUGHT TO PROCEED.

Yepsen: WACO, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THAT WHOLE EPISODE? DO YOU TRUST THE FBI TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE TRUTH ANYMORE?

Bradley: WELL, THE REVELATIONS OF THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS HAVE BEEN VERY DISTURBING. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, ANYTIME -- I BELIEVE ANYTIME AN OFFICIAL OF THE GOVERNMENT LIES THAT IT'S A VERY SERIOUS MATTER. I HAVE GREAT CONFIDENCE, HOWEVER, IN SENATOR JACK DANFORTH OF MISSOURI. HE HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS, AND I BELIEVE HE WILL GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT. SO I WILL WITHHOLD FINAL JUDGMENT UNTIL HE'S HAD A CHANCE TO DO HIS INVESTIGATION.

Glover: WHAT'S YOUR CONFIDENCE LEVEL WITH ATTORNEY GENERAL JANET RENO? ARE YOU CONFIDENT IN THE WAY SHE'S HANDLED THIS?

Bradley: WELL, I'M NOT CALLING FOR HER RESIGNATION. I THINK THAT SHE'S APPOINTED JACK DANFORTH, AND I THINK THAT'S A GOOD APPOINTMENT.

Glover: THERE WAS A STEP TAKEN LAST WEEK BY THE PRESIDENT WHO ISSUED CLEMENCY FOR A SERIES OF PUERTO RICAN TERRORISTS, AND GOT INTO A DISPUTE WITH HIS WIFE, WHO TOOK A DIFFERENT VIEW ON THAT. WHAT'S YOUR VIEW ON WHAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE DONE WITH THOSE TERRORISTS WHO ARE IN PRISON FOR CHARGES OF RUNNING A SERIES OF EXPLOSIONS?

Bradley: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, ON ISSUES RELATED TO CLEMENCY, ONLY THE PRESIDENT HAS THE CLEMENCY REPORTS. ONLY THE PRESIDENT HAS ALL THE FACTS. SO EVERYONE ELSE IS OPERATING WITH INCOMPLETE INFORMATION.

Glover: INCLUDING MRS. CLINTON?

Bradley: WELL, HOW DO I KNOW WHAT MRS. CLINTON AND THE PRESIDENT TALK ABOUT? THERE'S NO WAY I CAN KNOW THAT. SO I THINK THAT'S THE MAJOR POINT THAT YOU WANT TO MAKE HERE. I'D ALWAYS FELT THAT WITH THE INFORMATION THAT I'D HAD, WHICH WAS PUBLIC, AT THE TIME I HAD IT, I THOUGHT THAT CLEMENCY WAS NOT IN ORDER. BUT, THEN, I DIDN'T HAVE THE FULL AMOUNT OF INFORMATION, SO MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING THAT I DIDN'T KNOW. AND I AGREED WITH SENATOR MOYNIHAN ON THAT, WHO BELIEVED THAT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE.

Yepsen: SENATOR, I WANT TO SWITCH TO MORE DOMESTIC ISSUES. EDUCATION IS ALWAYS MENTIONED BY DEMOCRATS AS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE THAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IN THEIR NEXT PRESIDENT... SPECIFICALLY THE VOUCHER QUESTION. THE GORE PEOPLE ARE MAKING A BIG DEAL OUT OF THE FACT THAT YOU ONCE VOTED FOR SCHOOL VOUCHERS. TELL US ABOUT THAT. AND WHAT IS YOUR POSITION TODAY ON SCHOOL VOUCHERS.

Bradley: WELL, DAVE, MY POSITION IS THE SAME THAT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN, AND THAT IS I DO NOT BELIEVE VOUCHERS ARE THE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION IN AMERICA. AND YOU KNOW THAT IF YOU SIMPLY LOOK AT THE NUMBERS. THERE ARE ABOUT 6 MILLION CHILDREN IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS. THERE ARE 47 MILLION PEOPLE -- CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. TO SAY THAT THE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS IS TO CREATE A SEPARATE SCHOOL SYSTEM IS, I THINK, A NONSTARTER. I MEAN, IT'S RIDICULOUS. IF YOU WERE THE CEO OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM AND YOU HAD PEOPLE LEAVING AND YOU WERE UNDERUTILIZING THEIR PHYSICAL INVESTMENT AS MUCH AS -- IF THAT WOULD BE THE CASE, YOU'D BE SUED IF YOU WERE CEO, BY YOUR SHAREHOLDERS. IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE WHATSOEVER. HOWEVER, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, I VOTED FOR EXPERIMENTS WITH VOUCHERS IN SIX URBAN AREAS IN AMERICA. AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY I DID THAT. I REPRESENTED NEW JERSEY IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE. IT HAS THE SECOND HIGHEST PER CAPITA INCOME IN THE COUNTRY, BUT IT HAS FIVE OF THE POOREST PLACES IN THE COUNTRY... NEWARK, JERSEY CITY, PATERSON, AND OTHERS. AND I WOULD REPRESENT NOT JUST SUBURBAN NEW JERSEY, BUT ALSO URBAN NEW JERSEY. SO I WOULD HAVE MY MEETINGS IN URBAN NEW JERSEY. AND AFTER A TOWN MEETING PARENTS WOULD COME UP TO ME AND THEY WOULD SAY, "WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO HELP US WITH OUR CHILDREN? THEY GO TO SCHOOLS WHERE THERE ARE DRUGS, WHERE THERE ARE GUNS. THEY CLOSE AT 3:00 IN THE AFTERNOON. THERE ARE NO EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO HELP?" AND FOR 13 YEARS WHAT I WOULD TELL THEM IS, "WELL, YOU NEED TO GO TO WORK ON A SCHOOL BOARD AND THEN BUILD THE SUPPORT ON THE SCHOOL BOARD TO CHANGE THE SCHOOL SYSTEM SO IT WILL WORK BETTER." THEY LOOKED AT ME AS THOUGH I HAD JUST DROPPED FROM MARS. THEY SAY, "LOOK, I GO TO WORK AT 6 A.M. IN THE MORNING. I GET HOME AT 9:00 O'CLOCK AT NIGHT. I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO TO THE SCHOOL BOARD. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO FOR ME?" AND SO I VOTED, BECAUSE OF THOSE STATEMENTS AND THOSE INTERACTIONS, FOR AN EXPERIMENT IN SIX PLACES IN THE COUNTRY TO SEE IF THE ADVOCATES OF SCHOOL CHOICE ARE RIGHT IN THEIR CONTENTION THAT VOUCHERS WOULD NOT ONLY PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT, BUT IT WOULD ALSO, THE COMPETITION, IMPROVE THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. THAT'S WHY I VOTED FOR IT. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS THE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS WITH PUBLIC EDUCATION. I THINK THE ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IN THE NEXT DECADE, WHEN 2.2 MILLION TEACHERS RETIRE, THAT WE HAVE THE BEST YOUNG PEOPLE GOING INTO TEACHING, AND WE GIVE THEM THE GREATEST RESPECT AND SUPPORT WE POSSIBLY CAN, BECAUSE LEARNING TAKES PLACE IN A CLASSROOM BETWEEN A TEACHER AND STUDENTS. THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, I BELIEVE, THAT WE CAN DO.

Glover: DAVE MENTIONED THAT THE VICE PRESIDENT LIKES TO CRITICIZE YOU ON SCHOOL VOUCHERS. THE VICE PRESIDENT IS ALSO CRITICAL OF YOUR POSITION ON ETHANOL. HE ARGUES THAT AS A SENATOR YOU VOTED AGAINST ETHANOL SUBSIDIES. WHAT'S YOUR POSITION ON ETHANOL?

Bradley: I SUPPORT ETHANOL. I'VE BEEN IN IOWA FOR NINE MONTHS, AND I'VE HEARD A LOT FROM FARMERS. I SEE THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY OF THIS COUNTRY, AND I SUPPORT IT. I VOTED AGAINST IT IN THE PAST, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE INCREASED COSTS FOR NEW JERSEY CONSUMERS.

Glover: THE FARM ECONOMY RIGHT NOW IS IN PRETTY SAD SHAPE. WHAT ARE ONE OR TWO THINGS THAT YOU COULD DO AS PRESIDENT TO JUMP-START THIS FARM ECONOMY?

Bradley: I THINK THE FIRST THING IS PASS THE EMERGENCY AID BILL FOR FAMILY FARMERS IMMEDIATELY. GET THE MONEY TO FAMILY FARMERS BEFORE THEY GO UNDER BY THE END OF THE YEAR. THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU CAN DO. THEN IN THE LONG TERM, I THINK THAT YOU CAN TAKE ANOTHER SERIES OF STEPS. ONE IS -- AND I READ ABOUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPER TODAY, AN EXAMPLE OF IT, VALUE-ADDED PRODUCTION. I WAS DOWN IN DELAWARE COUNTY NOT SO LONG AGO, AND I MET WITH A GROUP CALLED "DELAWARE COUNTY MEATS" THAT ARE HOG PRODUCERS. AND THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY TAKING THE HOGS TO THEIR OWN BUTCHER, BUTCHERING IT, AND SELLING THE PRODUCT IN THE GROCERY STORES IN THE AREA. AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE COULD BE A LABEL CALLED "FAMILY FARM." AND WHEN YOU GO TO STARBUCKS, YOU PAY $4 FOR A STARBUCK CUP OF COFFEE. WHEN YOU HAVE IT AT THE COFFEE SHOP, IT COSTS A DOLLAR. WHY DO YOU DO THAT? BECAUSE OF THE LABEL. I THINK FAMILY FARM LABELS HAVE A REAL POSSIBILITY. I THINK INCREASING EXPORTS IS IMPORTANT. I'D GET THE ANTITRUST DIVISION TO LOOK AT SOME OF THESE PACKERS AND BREAK UP SOME OF WHAT LOOKS TO ME LIKE A PRETTY GOOD MONOPOLY GOING ON HERE.

Borg: IN WHAT WAY? WHAT MONOPOLY?

Bradley: WELL, THE PACKERS, THREE OR FOUR PACKERS CONTROLLING MOST OF THE PACKING OPERATIONS IN THE COUNTRY. AND I THINK THAT YOU NEED TO PUT SOME TEETH IN THE PACKER STOCKYARDS ACT, THE ONE THAT WAS PASSED IN 1921. YOU NEED TO MOVE IT FROM THE AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. YOU NEED TO GO AFTER THEM. I ALSO THINK THAT IT WOULD MAKE SOME SENSE TO LOOK AT INSURANCE -- INCOME KIND OF INSURANCE FOR FARMERS AS A KIND OF SAFETY NET. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ANOTHER IMPORTANT THING THAT WE COULD DO. ALL OF THOSE THINGS, I THINK, WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO IMPROVING THE FARM ECONOMY. I ALSO THINK PUTTING MORE ACREAGE -- GOOD ACREAGE IN A CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL. BUT THE KEY POINT NOW IS ACT NOW. ACT NOW. AND THE SECOND POINT IS TO RECOGNIZE ALL THE LEVELS OF THIS FARM CRISIS ON THE IOWA ECONOMY AND ON FAMILIES. I WAS IN DAVENPORT, FOR EXAMPLE, NOT SO LONG AGO, AND I WALKED OUT OF THE BEST WESTERN MOTEL WHERE I WAS STAYING, AND I SAW FOUR WOMEN SEATED AROUND A TABLE. I WALKED UP TO THEM AND I SAID, "HELLO, I'M BILL BRADLEY." AND THEY SAID, "WHO?" I SAID, "I'M BILL BRADLEY. I'M RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT." THEY SAID, "OF WHAT?" I SAID, "PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES." AND AS SOON AS I SAID THAT, ONE WOMAN SAID, "LET ME TELL YOU A STORY." SHE SAID, "MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE FARMED FOR 39 YEARS. OUR SONS NOW FARM. WE HAVE A FAMILY FARM. LAST YEAR WE ALMOST LOST IT, AND THIS YEAR WE MIGHT VERY WELL LOSE IT. AND DO YOU KNOW WHY I'M HERE AT BEST WESTERN?" I SAID, "WHY?" SHE SAID, "I'M HERE TO TRY TO GET A JOB SO THAT I'LL GET HEALTH COVERAGE FOR MY FAMILY." SO FAMILY FARMS ALSO NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTH COVERAGE FOR THEIR FAMILIES, IN ADDITION TO THIS EMERGENCY INFUSION OF MONEY AND LONGER TERM CHANGES THAT WILL HELP THEM SELL THEIR PRODUCTS.

Yepsen: SENATOR, ANOTHER ISSUE FACING THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL BE THE QUESTION OF WHAT TO DO WITH THE BUDGET SURPLUSES THAT ARE FORECAST. WHAT WOULD PRESIDENT BILL BRADLEY DO WITH BUDGET SURPLUSES?

Bradley: WELL, THE FIRST THING PRESIDENT BILL BRADLEY WOULD DO IS HAVE A LITTLE HONEST ACCOUNTING. THEY SAY THE BUDGET SURPLUS IS THREE TRILLION DOLLARS OVER THE NEXT DECADE. WELL, I WOULD, FIRST OF ALL, TAKE OUT OF THE BUDGET THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST MONEY THAT'S THERE NOW AND THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST MONEY THAT WILL BE PAID IN OVER THE NEXT DECADE. AND I'D PUT IT OVER ON THE SIDE, WHICH IS WHERE IT WAS UNTIL 1967, WHEN LYNDON JOHNSON, WHO WANTED TO FINANCE THE VIETNAM WAR WITHOUT GOING INTO DEFICIT, TOOK THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND, WHICH WAS THEN IN SURPLUS, AND PUT IT INTO THE BUDGET. I'D TAKE IT OUT OF THE BUDGET NOW. THEN WE'D HAVE A SURPLUS ESTIMATED AT AROUND A TRILLION DOLLARS. IF WE HAVE ECONOMIC GROWTH MORE THAN 2.5 PERCENT, WE'LL HAVE MORE THAN THAT -- LESS, WE'LL HAVE LESS, BUT LET'S ASSUME IT'S A TRILLION DOLLARS. WHAT I WOULD DO AS MY FIRST PRIORITY WOULD BE TO USE THAT MONEY TO MAKE SURE MORE AMERICANS WERE COVERED BY HEALTH INSURANCE. SECOND, I WOULD USE IT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN WHO ARE IN CHILD POVERTY. AND THIRD, I WOULD USE IT FOR SOCIAL SECURITY IN REDUCING THE NATIONAL DEBT. AND THEN LAST, I'D HOLD A LITTLE BIT BACK IN CASE WE GOT INTO A RECESSION AND ALAN GREENSPAN COULDN'T GET US BACK OUT OF THE RECESSION BY LOWERING INTEREST RATES. AND I WOULD HOLD IT BACK FOR A TAX CUT FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE PROSPERITY TRAIN. I WOULD NOT GO ANYWHERE CLOSE TO THE TAX BILL THAT WAS PASSED BY THE CONGRESS, 792 BILLION EATING THE WHOLE -- EATING THE WHOLE SURPLUS UP; 78 PERCENT OF THE BENEFITS GOING TO PEOPLE THAT MAKE MORE THAN $100,000 A YEAR. THAT WOULD NOT BE WHAT I'D DO. I'D GET THE MONEY AND ANY KIND OF A TAX CUT TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO NEED IT.

Glover: SENATOR, AN IMPORTANT CONSTITUENCY FOR DEMOCRATS ARE WOMEN. MANY WOMEN ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE ISSUE OF ABORTION. WHAT IS PRESIDENT BILL BRADLEY'S POSITION ON ABORTION RIGHTS?

Bradley: MIKE, I THINK ON THIS ISSUE YOU HAVE TO BE VERY CLEAR TO PEOPLE. YOU HAVE TO RESPECT ALL PEOPLE'S VIEWS AND STATE YOURS FORTHRIGHTLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY. I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO PROTECT THE REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS OF WOMEN. AND I HAVE SUPPORTED THAT THROUGHOUT MY ENTIRE PUBLIC LIFE, AND I CONTINUE TO BE PRO-CHOICE WHEN IT COMES TO ABORTION.

Glover: ARE THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU CAN SEE YOURSELF FAVORING ON ABORTION BEYOND WHAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE LAW?

Bradley: NO, I CAN'T.

Yepsen: SENATOR, ANOTHER ISSUE -- AND YOU MENTIONED IT -- FACING THE COUNTRY IS GOING TO BE HEALTH CARE AND WHAT WE DO ABOUT THOSE PROBLEMS. BE MORE SPECIFIC. WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT THE PROBLEM THAT MANY AMERICANS DON'T HAVE HEALTH CARE, CONCERNS ABOUT RISING COSTS OF HEALTH CARE?

Bradley: I'LL BE LAYING OUT A VERY SPECIFIC PROGRAM LATER THIS FALL THAT WILL LAY OUT, I THINK, A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO HEALTH CARE IN AMERICA. I THINK THAT THE WAY YOU WANT TO -- PRINCIPLES THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET IS THAT YOU HAVE TO ASSURE COVERAGE FOR, IF NOT ALL AMERICANS, AS CLOSE TO ALL AMERICANS AS YOU CAN POSSIBLY GET. THERE'S STILL 45 MILLION WHO DON'T HAVE ANY HEALTH INSURANCE, PROBABLY 20 MILLION WHO ARE UNDERINSURED. NEXT, YOU HAVE TO PUT THE DOCTOR BACK IN CHARGE OF THE CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING AND NOT HAVE HMO'S THAT ARE DISTANT MAKING THOSE DECISIONS. SOME BUREAUCRAT WITH A COMPUTER RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM DETERMINING HOW A DOCTOR SHOULD TREAT HIS PATIENT WHO IS IN A CLINICAL SITUATION WHO SEES AND HAS A PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT THAT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT THAN THE DISTANT BUREAUCRAT. AND THIRD, YOU HAVE TO PUT THE COST OF ACCOMPLISHING THIS OUT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO SEE SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER THIS IS THE DIRECTION THAT WE WANT TO GO. IF WE ARE IN A PROSPEROUS ECONOMY, WITH THE FARM ECONOMY A NOTABLE AND SAD EXCEPTION THAT WE CAN HELP, BUT IF WE'RE IN A PROSPEROUS ECONOMY DRIVEN BY GLOBALIZATION AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE, IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THIS NOW, WHEN WILL WE DO THIS?

Borg: HOW MUCH INVOLVEMENT, IN THE BRADLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, DOES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE?

Bradley: WELL, I HOPE YOU'LL STAY TUNED AND WE CAN DO A WHOLE SHOW ON IT, IF YOU WANT.

Glover: SENATOR, YOU HAVE MENTIONED CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT SOME SPECIFIC PROPOSALS YOU'VE LAID ON THE TABLE ELIMINATING SOFT MONEY AND PUBLIC FINANCING, FREE TV AND ALL THAT. BE A PRAGMATIST FOR A SECOND. HOW DO YOU GET TO THAT KIND OF A SYSTEM WITH POLITICAL LEADERS WHO ARE ELECTED WITH OUR OLD CAMPAIGN FINANCE SYSTEM? HOW DO YOU GET OVER THAT HURDLE? THAT SEEMS TO STAND IN THE WAY EVERY TIME PEOPLE MOVE ON THIS.

Bradley: MIKE, ONE OF THE WAYS YOU DO THAT IS YOU MAKE A CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAVE, AS ONE OF ITS MAIN PLATFORM PLANKS, CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. AND YOU BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT YOU MEAN. AND I MEAN BY THAT, ELIMINATION OF SOFT MONEY. I MEAN BY THAT, PUBLIC FINANCING OF GENERAL ELECTIONS FOR CONGRESS AND SENATE. I MEAN, WE SPEND $900 MILLION A YEAR PROMOTING DEMOCRACY ABROAD. FOR ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY, WE COULD TAKE ALL SPECIAL INTERESTS OUT OF CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS. AT HOME, WHAT AN INVESTMENT WORTHWHILE. AND THEN I WOULD PROVIDE FREE TELEVISION TIME FOR CANDIDATES. NOW, I THINK THAT IF YOU PUT THIS OUT THERE AND YOU CAN CONVEY TO PEOPLE THAT WHILE -- ON A LIST OF QUESTIONS: WHAT ARE YOUR MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES? PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TAKE A GOOD JOB, GOOD HEALTH CARE, GOOD EDUCATION, GOOD PENSION. AND NATURALLY DOWN THE LIST WILL BE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. BUT IF PEOPLE REALIZE THAT THEY ARE PAYING HIGHER TAXES THAN THEY OTHERWISE WOULD PAY BECAUSE OF THE WAY WE FINANCE POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS, THEY COULD SEE THAT ALL THE LOOPHOLES, ALL THE SUBSIDIES THAT ARE PUT IN FOR CORPORATE WELFARE COULD BE ELIMINATED, AND WE COULD END UP HAVING LOWER TAXES, NOT HIGHER TAXES. AND I THINK YOU MAKE THIS AS AN ISSUE IN YOUR CAMPAIGN. AND THEN IF YOU WIN BY A SIZABLE MARGIN, THE PEOPLE HAVE GIVEN YOU A MANDATE TO DO THIS. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S THE KEY TO GETTING IT PASSED.

Yepsen: SENATOR, WE'VE GOT LESS THAN A MINUTE LEFT. WHAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING YOU WANT DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS GOERS TO REMEMBER ABOUT YOU AS THEY GO TO CAUCUS ON JANUARY 31ST?

Bradley: WELL, I HOPE I'M GOING TO FILL THAT PICTURE IN BETWEEN NOW AND JANUARY 31, BUT I HOPE THAT THEY KNOW THAT I BELIEVE THE AMERICAN DREAM SHOULDN'T BE JUST FOR THE LUCKY AMONG US. THAT'S NOT AN IDEAL TO WISH ON. IT SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO EVERYBODY.

Glover: ARE YOU THE LIBERAL IN A DEMOCRATIC FIELD?

Bradley: I'M THE CANDIDATE WHO'S OUT RUNNING, STATING HIS ISSUES FORTHRIGHTLY. THE PEOPLE WILL BE THEIR JUDGE WHERE I FIT. I THINK I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FUTURE, QUITE FRANKLY, THAT PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN.

Borg: THANKS FOR BEING OUR GUEST TODAY ON IOWA PRESS.

Bradley: THANK YOU.

Borg: AND THAT'S IT FOR THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF IOWA PRESS WE CONTINUE WITH OUR 29TH SEASON HERE ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION NEXT SUNDAY. THAT'S AT NOON AND 7:00. I HOPE YOU'LL WATCH. UNTIL THEN, I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY.

FUNDING FOR THIS PROGRAM WAS PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION, EIGHTY THOUSAND MEMBERS SUPPORTING QUALITY PUBLIC TELEVISION PROGRAMMING.