Iowa Public Television

ANNOUNCER: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" WAS PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS; AND BY THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF IOWA... THE PUBLIC'S PARTNER IN BUILDING IOWA'S HIGHWAY, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.

STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION IS CELEBRATING THE 30TH ANNIVERSARY OF "IOWA PRESS," NOW SERVING THE STATE AS IOWA'S LONGEST RUNNING NEWS INTERVIEW PROGRAM. THIS IS THE FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 22 EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS." HERE IS DEAN BORG.

Borg: BY ANY MEASURE, CHALLENGING AN INCUMBENT IS AN UPHILL BATTLE, SO THAT MAKES IT DOUBLY DIFFICULT FOR SENATORIAL CANDIDATE BILL SALIER OF NORA SPRINGS, WHO WANTS DEMOCRAT TOM HARKIN'S SEAT IN THE U.S. SENATE. WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE IOWA CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE OF DES MOINES ALSO WANTS THAT SENATE SEAT, SO TO RUN AGAINST SENATOR HARKIN, SALIER MUST FIRST WIN THE JUNE 4 REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION. SO BILL SALIER ACTUALLY IS TAKING ON TWO INCUMBENTS, ONE AT A TIME: FIRST GANSKE, WHO'S COMPLETING HIS FOURTH TERM REPRESENTING CENTRAL IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES; AND THEN, IF HE WINS THERE, HARKIN, WHO'S SEEKING HIS FOURTH TERM IN THE SENATE. BUT SALIER IS UNDETERRED BY INCUMBENTS. HE'S AN EX-MARINE, NOW A FARMER, DESCRIBING HIMSELF AS A STRICT "ORIGINAL INTENT CONSTITUTIONALIST" AND THE MOST CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE IN THE CAMPAIGN. MR. SALIER, WELCOME TO IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION.

Salier: I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

Borg: AND ACROSS THE TABLE, I THINK TWO REPORTERS YOU KNOW WELL: "DES MOINES REGISTER" POLITICAL COLUMNIST DAVID YEPSEN; "ASSOCIATE PRESS" POLITICAL REPORTER MIKE GLOVER.

Glover: MR. SALIER, WHEN WE BRING A NEW CANDIDATE OUT HERE, WE LIKE TO GIVE HIM A CHANCE TO GIVE THEIR COMMERCIAL. GIVE YOUR COMMERCIAL. WHY SHOULD BILL SALIER BE ELECTED FIRST AS A REPUBLICAN NOMINEE AND THEN TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE?

Salier: IN A NUTSHELL, A QUICK BACKGROUND... WHEN I JOINED THE MARINE CORPS, I SWORE AN OATH TO UPHOLD AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION FROM ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC. THAT'S NOT JUST AN OATH THAT YOU SWEAR FOR WHILE YOU'RE IN THE MILITARY. THERE'S NO CODICIL AT THE END OF THAT, THAT LIMITS YOU TO YOUR ACTIVE DUTY TIME. SO FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE, I FEEL LIKE YOU'RE HONOR AND DUTY-BOUND TO STEP UP AND PROTECT OUR NATION'S FREEDOMS AND LIBERTIES. WHEN I LOOK ACROSS THE COUNTRYSIDE, I DON'T SEE THE SAME THING MOST POLITICIANS SEE. THEY SEE A BUNCH OF PROBLEMS FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE. I SEE A BUNCH OF PROBLEMS THE GOVERNMENT HAS CREATED. SO THERE'S A KEY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MYSELF AND THE OTHERS IN THE RACE IN TERMS OF THE PHILOSOPHIES THAT WE BRING. I BELIEVE IF YOU LIMIT THE SCOPE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PUT PEOPLE BACK IN CHARGE OF THEIR OWN LIVES AGAIN, THEN THE GREATEST DAYS OF THIS NATION LIE AHEAD, NOT BEHIND.

Glover: DO YOU DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN GREG GANSKE AND TOM HARKIN, OR DO YOU THINK THEY'RE CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH?

Salier: WELL, THERE'S CERTAIN DIFFERENTIAL PRODUCTS THAT COME OUT OF THEM, BUT FOR TOO MANY THINGS, THEY'RE ON EQUAL PAR. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT I'D SAY THEY'RE DIFFERENT ON. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT CLEARLY THEY'RE NOT.

Yepsen: WE WANT TO GET TO SOME OF THOSE IN A MINUTE. TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF. WHO IS BILL SALIER?

Salier: WELL, I WANTED TO BE A MARINE SINCE I WAS SEVEN YEARS OLD, AND I WANTED TO FARM SINCE I WAS SEVEN YEARS OLD. SO I JOINED THE MARINE CORPS AND DID SOME TIME UP AT CAMP DAVID WITH PRESIDENTIAL SECURITY FORCES UNDER FORMER PRESIDENT BUSH, REQUESTED ORDERS TO GO TO THE FLEET, BECAUSE I ALWAYS JUST WANTED TO SLOG MY WAY THROUGH THE MUD IN THE MARINE CORPS. I DID THAT IN OKINAWA. I WAS TEN DAYS SHY OF BEING OUT OF THE MARINES WHEN MY UNIT WAS ASSIGNED TO GO TO SOMALIA, SO I EXTENDED MY CONTRACT FOR SIX MONTHS AND WENT WITH THEM TO SOMALIA. WHEN I LEFT THE MARINE CORPS, THEN I FINISHED MY DEGREE AT IOWA STATE AND WENT BACK TO THAT FARM.

Yepsen: WERE YOU IN COMBAT IN SOMALIA?

Salier: YES AND NO. IT WAS NOT THE TYPE OF THING THAT YOU'RE SEEING ON "BLACKHAWK DOWN." WE HAD OVERWHELMING FIREPOWER AND OVERWHELMING SUPPORT, SO THEY REALLY COULDN'T MOUNT THE TYPE OF THING THAT THEY MOUNTED -- THAT YOU MIGHT SEE IN THAT MOVIE THAT THEY DID AGAINST THE RANGERS.

Borg: YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE, AND I WANT TO EXPLORE THAT NOW. WHY NOT CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE? WHY BILL SALIER RATHER THAN CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE?

Salier: WELL, IN MY OPINION, HE'S BECOME TOO LIBERAL SINCE HE BECAME ELECTED. REMEMBER, IN 1994 HE BEAT NEAL SMITH AND RAN ON THE CONTRACT WITH AMERICA, STRICT CONSERVATIVE. I WAS EXCITED -- I WAS DOWN AT IOWA STATE WHEN HE WON. I WAS REALLY HAPPY AND SUPPORTIVE AND FELT GREAT THE WHOLE DAY. THE PROBLEM IS IN THE INTERIM, HE HAS WALKED AWAY FROM A LOT OF THE PHILOSOPHIES OF THE GRASS ROOTS OF MY PARTY, AND THAT'S WHY I DON'T BELIEVE HE'S GOING TO BEAT TOM HARKIN.

Borg: SPECIFICALLY, GIVE ME A COUPLE OF INSTANCES.

Salier: WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, HE RATES A "D-" FROM THE NRA, AN "F" FROM THE GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA. HE SAID RIGHT ON THIS PROGRAM HE SUPPORTS FEDERAL FUNDING OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD. THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHERE HE BELIEVES HE CAN TAKE YOUR MONEY AND SAY IT'S BETTER SEVERED IF I PUT IT OVER HERE. REGARDLESS OF YOUR OPINION ON ABORTION, THAT'S NOT EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL FOR HIM TO SAY, "MR. GLOVER, YOU DON'T KNOW WHERE YOUR MONEY IS BEING SPENT. I'M GOING TO TAKE IT AND GIVE IT TO THIS GROUP." SO THERE'S CERTAIN EXAMPLES LIKE THAT. HIS VOTING RECENTLY TO RESTRICT OUR FREE SPEECH WITH THIS CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, I'M DEAD SET AGAINST IT. IT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF HOW I THINK HE'S OVERSTEPPED HIS CONSTITUTIONAL BOUNDS.

Glover: MR. SALIER, A LOT OF REPUBLICANS WILL ARGUE, LOOK, WE'VE RUN SOME TOUGH CONSERVATIVES AGAINST HARKIN IN THE PAST AND HE'S BEAT THEM. HE'S PAINTED THEM AS OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM, TOO EXTREME. LET'S RUN A MODERATE AGAINST HIM AND SEE HOW THAT WORKS. WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT THINKING?

Salier: WELL, WHAT'S WRONG IS WE'VE NEVER WON IN THE STATE WHEN WE GO TO THE MIDDLE. I MEAN REAGAN CARRIED THIS STATE BECAUSE HE RAN AS A CONSERVATIVE. HE SAID WHAT HE BELIEVES, HE LED ON WHAT HE BELIEVED, AND HE WAS VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND HONEST ABOUT IT. AGAIN, WHEN GANSKE CAME UP, FOR EXAMPLE, IN '94, HE RAN AS A CONSERVATIVE. HE CARRIED EVEN INSIDE POLK COUNTY. THE IDEA THAT A THIRD OF US ARE LIBERAL AND A THIRD OF US ARE MODERATE AND A THIRD OF US ARE CONSERVATIVE I DON'T BELIEVE IN. I THINK THAT FOR THE MOST PART, 99 PERCENT OF US ARE CONSERVATIVE, BUT 66 PERCENT OF THEM MAY NOT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS THAT WHEN THEY WALK IN THE VOTING BOOTH. THEY CONSIDER THEMSELVES INDEPENDENT OR DEMOCRAT. SO WE HAVE TO RUN A CAMPAIGN TO WIN HEARTS AND MINDS. AND WHEN YOU TELL PEOPLE I DON'T BELIEVE A GOVERNMENT POLITICIAN CAN TAKE BETTER CARE OF YOU THAN YOU CAN TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF, THEY INSTINCTIVELY BELIEVE THAT.

Glover: THEN, HOW DO YOU ENERGIZE THOSE CONSERVATIVES?

Salier: WELL, BY STICKING TO WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN. YOU SEE, WHAT -- SO MUCH IS HAPPENING BEHIND THIS CAMPAIGN IS BECAUSE WE ARE JUST HONESTLY ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY, AND WE'RE LEADING ON THE PRINCIPLES OF FREEDOM THAT WE BELIEVE IN. THAT IS HOW YOU BEAT TOM HARKIN. IT'S NOT THAT WE'VE RUN CONSERVATIVES AGAINST HIM. IT'S THAT WE HAVE RUN SEATED POLITICIAN AFTER SEATED POLITICIAN AFTER SEATED POLITICIAN. TOM HARKIN IS A PROFESSIONAL AT TAKING A VOTING RECORD, SLICING AND DICING IT, AND MOLDING IT INTO THIS GIANT FEAR TAG. HE HANGS IT AROUND YOUR NECK, AND THEN HE DEFINES YOU, HIMSELF, THE TERMS OF THE DEBATE. IN ESSENCE, HE'S ON OFFENSE, WE'RE ON DEFENSE, GAME OVER, WHICH IS WHY I RESISTED RUNNING FOR POLITICAL OFFICE PRIOR TO THIS. I DON'T WANT TO FEED THE SAME AGENDA TO HIM THAT HE'S USED TO BEATING.

Yepsen: WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE, MR. SALIER. YOU'RE A FARMER. YOU'VE SERVED IN THE MARINE CORPS. THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO MANY PEOPLE LIKE THAT'S A WHOLE LOT TO BE ASKING -- TO BE OFFERING YOURSELF NOW AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE. I MEAN SHOULDN'T PEOPLE WHO GO TO THE U.S. SENATE HAVE A LITTLE EXPERIENCE IN LIFE?

Salier: WELL, IF YOU WANT EXPERIENCE IN RAISING TAXES AND TAKING YOUR MONEY AND GIVING IT TO PLACES THAT YOU DON'T WANT IT TO BE AND CUTTING THE MILITARY BACK UNTIL ONCE AGAIN OUR NATION PRESENTS ITSELF AS A PAPER TIGER -- WE BURIED 2,500 OF OUR OWN. THERE'S PEOPLE OUT THERE WITH ALL KINDS OF EXPERIENCE IN DOING THAT. BUT IN TERMS OF WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO BE A U.S. SENATOR, YOU'VE GOT TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION AND YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO STAND UP FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN AND WHAT YOU SAID YOU WOULD DO AND NOT BECOME INFECTED WITH POTOMAC FEVER ONCE YOU GET THERE. THAT'S REALLY THE KEY TO BEING A SUCCESSFUL UNITED STATES SENATOR.

Yepsen: YOU SAID IN A FUND-RAISING PIECE THAT GANSKE'S RECORD WAS VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO TOM HARKIN'S. I LOOKED UP THE RATINGS. THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION IN 2000 GAVE GANSKE A 73, HARKIN A 4. THE AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION, A LIBERAL GROUP, GAVE GANSKE A 15 AND HARKIN A 95. NOW, HOW IS GREG GANSKE'S VOTING RECORD VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO TOM HARKIN'S?

Salier: WHAT WE'RE SAYING WHEN WE'RE SAYING THAT HE IS TOO MUCH LIKE TOM HARKIN IS THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE SUPPORT OF EMBRYONIC EXPERIMENTATION WITH YOUR MONEY, THE SUPPORT OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD WITH YOUR MONEY. RATING A "D-" FROM THE NRA; TOM HARKIN RATES AN "F." THAT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENCE. WRITING AN OP ED PIECE IN "THE DES MOINES REGISTER" AGAINST THE PRESIDENT'S TAX CUT AFTER OUR NATION WAS ATTACKED, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT THE CONGRESSMAN DID. THERE'S SUPPORT, BOTH OF THEM, WITH THIS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD, SHAYS-MEEHAN RESTRICTION OF FREE SPEECH IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE. WHEN YOU COME OUT AND PEOPLE LIKE -- FOR EXAMPLE, THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS RESISTS ENDORSING GANSKE, BECAUSE THEY SAY HE'S ABANDONED SMALL BUSINESS TOO MUCH. WELL, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO ENDORSE TOM HARKIN EITHER. THESE ARE EXAMPLES THAT WE CAN CITE YOU THAT SHOW THAT THEY'RE BOTH RUNNING ON THE SAME SHEET OF MUSIC TOO OFTEN.

Glover: ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE GREG GANSKE IN THIS RACE? ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE CAMPAIGN DEBATES WITH HIM? ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET JOINT APPEARANCES WITH HIM? CAN YOU GET HIM ENGAGED DURING THIS PRIMARY CAMPAIGN?

Salier: THE ONLY TIME HE IS EVER SHOWING UP FOR ANYTHING IS IF WE'RE BOTH INVITED TO A REPUBLICAN FUND-RAISER SOMEWHERE AND I HAPPEN TO BE THERE WHEN HE COMES IN. HE IS AVOIDING DEBATES. HE IS AVOIDING STRAW POLLS. HE'S AVOIDING EVERYTHING HE POSSIBLY CAN. YES, WE WANT TO HAVE A DEBATE. WE THINK THERE SHOULD BE THREE OR FOUR OF THEM, IN FACT, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWO PEOPLE WHO ARE VYING FOR THE NOMINATION TO BECOME YOUR NEXT UNITED STATES SENATOR. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO SIT SIDE BY SIDE AND BOTH OF THEM SAY AND DEFEND WHAT THEY BELIEVE, AND HE'S AVOIDING US. I THINK IT'S WRONG. HE SHOULD HAVE THE CONFIDENCE IN HIS BELIEFS TO GET IN FRONT OF A CAMERA. AND IF HE CAN'T TAKE ON SOME IOWA FARMER, HOW'S HE GOING TO BEAT TOM HARKIN?

Yepsen: MR. SALIER, LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE ISSUES IN THIS CAMPAIGN. WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON ABORTION?

Salier: I'M PRO-LIFE.

Yepsen: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Salier: I'M PRO-LIFE. I DON'T SUPPORT FUNDING OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD. I DON'T SUPPORT PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION. I DON'T BELIEVE ROE VERSUS WADE WAS CORRECT.

Yepsen: YOU SAID IN ONE CAMPAIGN PIECE THAT YOU OPPOSED ABORTION WITHOUT EXCEPTION. DOES THAT MEAN YOU OPPOSE ABORTION IN THE CASE OF RAPE OR TO SAVE THE LIFE OF A MOTHER?

Salier: I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE BRING UP ALL THE TIME AS A REASON TO KEEP ABORTION LEGAL. WE HAVE ABORTION BEING UTILIZED AS A BIRTH CONTROL DEVICE. TOO MANY PEOPLE -- IT'S JUST TURNING OUT TO BE A SITUATION WHERE I DON'T WANT TO BE PREGNANT ANYMORE AND ABORTIONS ARE LEGAL. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE GOT TO GET ADDRESSED FIRST. IF I WERE MARRIED, FOR EXAMPLE, AND MY WIFE HAD BECOME PREGNANT THROUGH SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH THE INSTANCES ARE VERY, VERY RARE, I WOULD SUPPORT MY WIFE AND SUPPORT THAT CHILD WHICH HAS BEEN CREATED. AND LIFE OF THE MOTHER, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT TOM HARKIN SPINS ON ALL THE TIME: "WE HAVE TO HAVE PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION FOR THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER." WELL, YOU'RE NOT DOING THIS IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM, WHERE THE LIFE OF THAT WOMAN IS HANGING IN THE BALANCE. TOO MUCH OF THE TIME WE'RE UTILIZING THAT AS SPIN.

Yepsen: SO LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT. IF A WOMAN IS RAPED AND BECOMES PREGNANT, YOU WOULD NOT ALLOW HER TO HAVE AN ABORTION?

Salier: NO, WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT IN MY LIFE, I WOULD NOT WANT MY WIFE TO HAVE AN ABORTION IF SHE WAS RAPED.

Yepsen: I'M TALKING ABOUT OTHER WOMEN HERE BESIDES YOUR OWN SPOUSE.

Salier: I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS CORRECT TO HAVE AN ABORTION. NO, I DON'T.

Glover: LET'S TURN TO ANOTHER ISSUE. YOU MENTIONED IT BEFORE, GUN RIGHTS. WHAT SHOULD THE LAW SAY ABOUT GUN OWNERSHIP?

Salier: WELL, IT ALREADY SAYS IT. IT'S THE SECOND AMENDMENT: THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

Glover: SHOULD THERE BE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON GUN OWNERSHIP?

Salier: THERE SHOULD BE RESTRICTION WITH WHAT YOU DO WITH ANY WEAPON. MURDER, RAPE, ARMED ROBBERY, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE ILLEGAL. I DON'T CARE IF YOU USE A WEAPON, I DON'T CARE IF YOU USE A BUTTER KNIFE, I DON'T CARE IF YOU USE A CHAIR. WE NEED TO HAMMER THE PEOPLE WHO STEP OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW. BUT IN TERMS OF SHOULD THERE BE CERTAIN LAWS THAT CURTAIL YOUR RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE SHOULD. IT HAS PROVEN ITSELF TO BE A FAILURE. IF YOU GO INSIDE WASHINGTON D.C. WHERE SOME OF THE STRICTEST GUN CONTROL LAWS IN THE NATION ARE AND YOU COME RIGHT BACK OUT THE OTHER SIDE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THAT IT'S ONE OF THE MOST WILD PLACES AND ONE OF THE MOST HEAVY MURDER CAPITALS. WHEN BILLS ARE BEING PUT FORTH FORTH TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO OWN WEAPONS EVEN INSIDE THEIR OWN HOME -- TO PROTECT THEMSELVES INSIDE THEIR OWN HOME -- GANSKE, FOR EXAMPLE, IS VOTING AGAINST THIS. I DON'T AGREE WITH THAT PHILOSOPHY.

Glover: DO YOU SUPPORT CURRENT LAWS WHICH BAN FELONS FROM OWNING GUNS?

Salier: OH, ABSOLUTELY.

Glover: SO YOU WOULD NOT CHANGE CURRENT GUN CONTROL LAWS, YOU JUST WOULDN'T ADD NEW ONES?

Salier: WELL, THERE'S SOME THAT I WOULD CHANGE. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FELONS OWNING WEAPONS. THEY'RE GIVING UP THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WHEN THEY COMMIT FELONIES, SO THEY LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE AND ET CETERA. SO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT, WELL, SHOULD FELONS BE ABLE TO CARRY WEAPONS? NO, THEY'VE GIVEN UP THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

Yepsen: YOU'RE A FARMER. WHAT SHOULD WE HAVE FOR OUR NATION'S FARM PROGRAM?

Salier: OUR FARM PROGRAM IS IN A MESS BECAUSE WE ARE CONCENTRATING ON TRYING TO PROP UP SOMETHING WHEN WE'VE DESTROYED THE FREE MARKET. NOW, IF YOU LOOK INSIDE MY OWN BUSINESS WHEN I'M SELLING FEEDER PIGS, WE DO A REAL GOOD JOB BECAUSE THE FREE MARKET IS LEFT IN EFFECT. SOME YEARS ARE BETTER THAN OTHERS, WE ROLL WITH IT, AND THE FREE MARKET WORKS. WHEN YOU GO INSIDE THE GRAIN SIDE OF MY BUSINESS, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THAT THERE'S VERY LITTLE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FREE MARKET BECAUSE THE SUBSIDIES AND THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS HAVE DESTROYED IT OVER THE YEARS. LOOK, IF CARGILL CAN BID $1.50 FOR CORN AND YOU, THE TAXPAYERS, ARE GOING TO MAKE UP THE DIFFERENCE TO $1.80 OR SO, ROUGHLY MY BREAK-EVEN, WHY WOULD CARGILL OFFER TO BID MORE?

Yepsen: SO WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? DO YOU WANT TO DO AWAY WITH FARM SUBSIDIES?

Salier: WHAT I WANT TO DO IS CONCENTRATE ON THE SECTOR THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE IN CHARGE OF, AND THAT'S BUSTING OPEN FOREIGN MARKETS SO WE CAN GET THIS CROP OUT. STOP CONCENTRATING ON CREATING A CYCLE WHERE YOU'RE LOCKED INTO THE SAME CROPS. IF I SEE THAT BEANS ARE THE LOW PRICE NEXT YEAR, I'M NOT GOING TO GROW THEM AND HAVE LESS MONEY THAN WHAT I STARTED WITH. I MIGHT BE TEMPTED TO PUT SOME LAND INTO PASTURE. I MIGHT BE TEMPTED TO RUN A FEW HEAD OF HOGS ON IT. BUT IF I DO THAT, NOW THAT LAND HAS NO SUPPORT UNDERNEATH IT. WE'VE CREATED THIS GLUT.

Borg: YOU TALK ABOUT BUSTING OPEN FOREIGN MARKETS. THAT'S BEING PURSUED RIGHT NOW, BUT HOW WOULD YOU DO THAT? HOW DO YOU BUST OPEN?

Salier: I THINK THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN DEGREE OF HARD-NOSED MENTALITY THAT YOU HAVE TO GO WITH WHEN YOU GO INTO TRADE NEGOTIATIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE A LARGE ADVANTAGE RIGHT NOW WHEN EVERYTHING THAT YOU TRY AND BUY IS MADE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY, PARTICULARLY IN CHINA, WHICH MEANS THOSE COUNTRIES NEED OUR MARKET WORSE, ACTUALLY, THAN WE NEED THEIRS. USE THAT TO YOUR ADVANTAGE? GOING TO THEM AND SIMPLY SAY, "LOOK, I BELIEVE IN FREE TRADE. I BELIEVE WE CAN OUTCOMPETE ANYONE OUT THERE. IF YOU DO LOWER YOUR BARRIERS TO TRADE AND LET US GET IN THERE AND COMPETE, WE'LL LOWER OURS, BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN BEAT THEM IN TRADE NEGOTIATIONS."

Yepsen: WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE NORTH AMERICAN FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND ON TRADE WITH CHINA?

Salier: AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN GO ONE-ON-ONE WITH THESE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AND WE CAN USE MORE OF AN ADVANTAGE THAT WAY RATHER THAN TYING OURSELVES INTO MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.

Yepsen: SO YOU DON'T SUPPORT NAFTA?

Salier: NO, I DID NOT.

Yepsen: AND WHAT ABOUT TRADING WITH CHINA? SOME CONSERVATIVES DON'T LIKE TO TRADE WITH CHINA BECAUSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. IS THAT --

Salier: THERE'S BEEN OTHER ENEMIES THAT WE'VE TRADED WITH IN THE PAST. I DON'T TRUST THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CHINESE PEOPLE, BUT I DON'T TRUST THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT. WE'VE HAD OTHER ENEMIES -- POTENTIAL ENEMIES THAT WE'VE TRADED WITH IN THE PAST, BUT I DO NOT SUPPORT EXTENDING PERMANENT MOST FAVORED NATION STATUS TO THEM.

Borg: LET ME JUST ASK, ON THIS FARM BILL, ONE MORE QUESTION, MIKE. CHUCK GRASSLEY, IN THE CURRENT FARM LEGISLATION THAT'S NOW GOING TO A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, HAD A BIG PART IN THAT ALONG WITH SENATOR HARKIN. CHUCK GRASSLEY -- ARE YOU DISAGREEING WITH THE WAY THAT CHUCK GRASSLEY HELPED CRAFT THIS CURRENT FARM LEGISLATION?

Salier: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SENATOR GRASSLEY PUT IN THERE WAS ATTEMPTING TO LIMIT BACK THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT COULD BE REIMBURSED SO THAT WE COULD HELP OUT THE SMALLER FARMERS INSTEAD OF PROMOTING THE CORPORATE FARM. I THINK THAT WAS A GOOD PART OF IT. I THINK WE NEED TO ENFORCE THAT, THOUGH, AND NOT LET IT TURN OUT THAT YOUR PUPPY FARM IS ONE FARM AND YOUR WIFE FARMS ANOTHER AND YOUR COUSIN FARMS ANOTHER AND IT ALL STILL FUNNELS BACK INTO YOU.

Yepsen: IF WE TRADE WITH CHINA, WHY CAN'T WE TRADE WITH CUBA?

Salier: YOU KNOW, THAT'S A SOUND ARGUMENT AND I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A REASON THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE EXPORTING OUR PRODUCTS TO CUBA. I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO BUY THEIRS, BUT IF THEY WANT TO BUY OURS, THAT'S FINE.

Glover: OKAY, SO WE WON'T GET ANY CUBAN CIGARS UP IN IOWA. BUT LET'S TURN TO AN ISSUE THAT SPLITS AMERICANS ACROSS GENERATIONS; IT'S CALLED SOCIAL SECURITY. MY DAUGHTER IS 27 YEARS OLD, AND SHE THINKS THAT MORE LIKELY SHE'LL RUN INTO AN ALIEN THAN COLLECT A SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK. TALK TO HER FOR A SECOND AND TELL HER WHY SOCIAL SECURITY WILL BE THERE FOR THE NEXT GENERATION.

Salier: THE PROBLEM WITH SOCIAL SECURITY, GENTLEMEN, IS THAT TOO OFTEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS SKIMMING OFF THE EXCESS MONEY THAT COMES INTO SOCIAL SECURITY. RIGHT NOW THERE'S MORE COMING IN THAN WHAT THERE IS GOING OUT. BUT THERE IS NO LOCKBOX BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLS THE KEY. THEY CONTINUE TO SKIM OFF THE EXCESS THAT'S SPENT IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND AN IOU IS WRITTEN BACK IN TERMS OF TREASURY BONDS. NOW, WHEN WE GET TO THE POINT AS THE BOOMERS KEEP COMING ONTO RETIREMENT, WHERE YOU'RE NO LONGER BRINGING IN MORE BUT YOU'RE ACTUALLY BRINGING IN LESS THAN WHAT YOU'RE SPENDING, WE HAVE TO PAY BACK THOSE IOU'S. WELL, "WE" ARE THE PEOPLE. THE GOVERNMENT GETS THE MONEY FROM THE PEOPLE. NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU SLICE IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY IT BACK. ONCE THOSE IOU'S ARE PAID BACK, YOU HAVE TO, WHAT? CUT -- OR RAISE TAXES, CUT BENEFITS, WHATEVER, SO THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK. WE'VE GOT TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION NOW. WITH THE EXCESS MONEY THAT'S COMING INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU PUT THE PEOPLE IN CHARGE OF THE KEY TO THAT LOCKBOX, NOT THE GOVERNMENT POLITICIANS. SO THE PAY-AS-YOU-GO SYSTEM CONTINUES WITH PART OF IT, SO WE FULFILLED A PROMISE THAT'S BEEN MADE. WITH THE EXCESS MONEY, INSTEAD OF LOSING IT IN THE BUREAUCRACY IN THE GENERAL FUND, YOU LET THE PEOPLE START TO CONTROL THEIR RETIREMENT.

Glover: UNDER THE BUSH TAX CUT PLAN, THE ADMINISTRATION NOW CONCEDES THEY'RE GOING TO START SPENDING SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS. ARE YOU CRITICAL OF THAT?

Salier: YEAH, I DON'T AGREE WITH SPENDING THE SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS.

Glover: WHAT SHOULD THEY HAVE DONE?

Salier: THEY SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THE KEY OVER TO THE PEOPLE AND LET THEM CONTROL THEIR OWN RETIREMENT.

Borg: YOU SAID EARLIER, YOU TOOK AN OATH EARLIER IN YOUR LIFE TO PROTECT OUR NATION'S FREEDOMS AND LIBERTIES, AND THEN YOU MADE ANOTHER STATEMENT ABOUT BURYING 2,500 OF OUR OWN. IT LEADS ME TO BELIEVE YOU HAVE SOME STRONG VIEWS ON THE WAR ON TERRORISM. IT IS BEING PURSUED THE WAY THAT YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE?

Salier: I THINK ON FOREIGN GROUND, THE WAR ON TERRORISM IS BEING PURSUED VERY WELL. I BELIEVE THAT OUR NATION'S MILITARY MUST BE STRONG AT ALL TIMES. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ALL ENEMIES ARE GONE, THEREFORE WE CAN CUT OUR MILITARY AND FUND A SOCIAL AGENDA THAT SOME PEOPLE WANT TO IMPLEMENT UPON OUR LIVES FROM WASHINGTON. I THINK THE ONLY WAY THROUGH PEACE IS THROUGH STRENGTH.

Borg: SHOULD IT BE FINANCED THE WAY THAT IT'S BEING FINANCED, THAT IS, WITH DEFICIT SPENDING NOW?

Salier: WELL, AGAIN, NOW THAT YOU'VE SLICED AND DICED YOUR MILITARY AND CUT IT DOWN TO A SMALLER SIZE AND NOT HAD THE AMOUNT OF TRAINING EQUITY OUT THERE THAT NEEDED TO BE OUT THERE AND WE DON'T HAVE THE PLANES BUILT THAT NEED TO BE BUILT AND SHIPS ARE GOING OUT SHORT OF THEIR FULL COMPLEMENT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REBUILD IT. THAT'S THE PRICE YOU PAY FOR HAVING SHORTSIGHTED LEADERSHIP IN WASHINGTON.

Glover: WHAT IS THE CONDUCT OF THIS WAR ON TERRORISM AND THE MILITARY'S PERFORMANCE IN THAT WAR? YOU'RE A MILITARY MAN -- A PREVIOUS MILITARY MAN. WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT THE CONDITION OF AMERICA'S MILITARY? IT STRIKES ME THE MILITARY HAS CONDUCTED ITSELF FAIRLY WELL, SO ALL THESE DIRE TALES ABOUT THE MILITARY NOT HAVING THE TOOLS IT NEEDS MAY NOT BE TRUE.

Salier: NO, YOU'RE NOT CORRECT ON THAT. THE REASON IS WE'RE USING A LOT OF SPECIAL OPS FORCES IN THE MILITARY. THEY WERE STILL BE TRAINED TO THE N'TH DEGREE. BUT ON A WIDE SCALE, CLEARLY, WHEN OUR NAVAL SHIPS ARE GOING OUT UNDER COMPLEMENT, WHEN WE'RE HAVING TO ROB PARTS OFF OF ONE BIRD TO KEEP ANOTHER ONE FLYING, WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THE BEANS AND BULLETS TO JUST GET THE BULLETS DOWN RANGE TO TRAIN YOUR MEN ON A CONSTANT BASIS TO WHERE THEY CAN BE USED TO THE CRACKS AND THE BANGS AND THE BOOMS OF CLEARING BUILDINGS AND GOING THROUGH THE FIELDS WITH LIVE FIRE, WITH JETS MOVING OVERHEAD, AND ATTACK CHOPPERS COMING IN, AND SHIFTING FIRE FROM TANKS OR FROM ARTILLERY, YOU NEED TO BE USED TO THIS AND YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO THIS ON THE BALL. WHEN YOUR MILITARY IS AT THE TOP OF ITS GAME, LOOK AT WHAT OUR PEOPLE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE MIDDLE EAST IN THE GULF WAR WHEN WE CAME IN AT A TOP LEVEL. SO WE DO NEED TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE A STRONG MILITARY, AND WE DID CUT IT TOO FAR.

Yepsen: MR. SALIER, I WANT TO GO BACK TO SOME OF THE CRITICISMS THAT CONGRESSMAN GANSKE AND HIS PEOPLE ARE MAKING OF YOU. THEY SAY BILL SALIER IS A NICE GUY BUT HE'S SPLITTING THE PARTY. SECONDLY, WHY DIDN'T HE RUN FOR CONGRESS OR THE STATE LEGISLATURE FIRST? WHY THE U.S. SENATE RIGHT OUT OF THE BOX? WHAT DO YOU SAY TO THOSE TWO THINGS?

Salier: THE REASON FOR RUNNING FOR U.S. SENATE IS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TOM HARKIN TO BE SERVED UP WITH THE SAME CONTINUOUS ROUTE TO A WIN THAT HE'S ALWAYS HAD. I DON'T WANT TO GIVE HIM A VOTING RECORD TO SLICE AND DICE AND CUT UP INTO A FEAR TAG. I WANT TO FORCE HIM TO RUN AGAINST THE FREEDOM-BASED PRINCIPLES THAT I HOLD TRUE TO MY HEART. MAKE HIM EXPLAIN WHY IT MAKES SENSE TO BURN 75 PERCENT OF OUR MONEY IN WASHINGTON'S EDUCATION BUREAUCRACY, GET A QUARTER BACK, AND THEN HE GETS TO TELL OUR TEACHERS HOW TO TEACH. MAKE HIM DEFEND HIS PRINCIPLES. LET ME DEFINE THE DEBATE, NOT HIM. AND IN TERMS OF EXPERIENCE, YOU KNOW, GREG GANSKE RAN AGAINST NEAL SMITH, AND SMITH TRIED TO TALK ABOUT EXPERIENCE. IT DIDN'T FLY BECAUSE GANSKE WAS RUNNING THEN AS A CONSERVATIVE. IN TERMS OF SPLITTING THE PARTY VOTE, IT'S NOT MY PROBLEM THAT CONGRESSMAN GANSKE WALKED AWAY FROM HIS PARTY BASE. IT'S NOT ME WHO'S SPLITTING THE BASE.

Yepsen: AND "CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY" MAGAZINE, WHICH IS A PRETTY NONBIASED SOURCE OF INFORMATION, HAS RATED CONGRESSMAN GANSKE AS ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEMBERS IN WASHINGTON. SO WHY WOULD REPUBLICANS WANT TO NOMINATE AN UNKNOWN CANDIDATE WHEN THEY CAN NOMINATE A CANDIDATE WHO AT LEAST HAS A RECORD OF EFFECTIVENESS IN WASHINGTON?

Salier: WELL, THEY ALSO -- I HEARD HIM QUOTE THEM THE OTHER DAY WHEN HE WAS DEFENDING HIMSELF. HE SAYS, "THEY SAY I'M CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH." WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH IS IN "CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY'S" TERMS, BUT HE'S NOT CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH IN MY TERMS. IN TERMS OF EFFECTIVENESS, I DON'T CARE FOR HIS STYLE OF EFFECTIVENESS. I DON'T WANT FEDERAL FUNDING OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD. I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY WHO RESTRICTS MY FREE SPEECH. I DON'T WANT SOMEBODY WHO'S FORCED THE PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS UPON US, WHICH SAYS LET'S SUE THE INSURANCE COMPANIES. LOOK, IF I SUE YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY, YOUR PREMIUMS ARE GOING TO GO UP. PHIL GRAHAM HAS THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE ON THIS. HE SAYS WE NEED TO PUT THE PATIENT AND THE PHYSICIAN BACK IN CHARGE OF THEIR OWN HEALTH CARE AGAIN BY REVERSING THE FLOW OF THE MONEY. INSTEAD OF A CORPORATION WHO HIRES YOU PAYING A BENEFIT ON YOUR BEHALF, THEN THAT CORPORATION BECOMES THE CUSTOMER OF THE HMO OR THE INSURANCE COMPANY, NOT YOU, YOU'RE OUT. WE NEED TO GIVE YOU THE TAX DEDUCTABILITY OF PURCHASING YOUR OWN HEALTH CARE SO THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A SPECIAL TEST OR PROCEDURE THAT YOU AND YOUR PHYSICIAN HAVE DISCUSSED AND WANT AND YOU GO TO THE INSURANCE COMPANY, THEN YOU ARE THE ONES IN CHARGE OF YOUR HEALTH CARE AGAIN, BECAUSE AT THE INSURANCE COMPANY, YOU'RE NOW THE CUSTOMER OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY. IF THEY VOICED OFF BAD LAWS UPON YOU OR BAD RULINGS UPON YOU, YOU TAKE YOUR MONEY AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE. THE FREE MARKET PULLS BACK INTO LINE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IN TERMS OF INSURANCE WITH KEEPING PATIENTS IN CHARGE OF THEIR OWN HEALTH CARE.

Glover: MR. SALIER, IT WOULDN'T BE AN OFFICIAL "IOWA PRESS" SHOW IF WE DIDN'T SPEND A LITTLE TIME -- A FEW MINUTES JUST TALKING ABOUT PURE POLITICS.

Salier: OKAY.

Glover: ONE OF THE THINGS THAT A PRIMARY ELECTION IS ALL ABOUT IS THE ELECTORATE OF A POLITICAL PARTY PICKING THE BEST CANDIDATE TO RUN AGAINST THE CANDIDATE OF THE OTHER PARTY. TALK TO THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTER NOW ABOUT WHY BILL SALIER IS THE BEST CANDIDATE OVER AN INCUMBENT REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN TO RUN AGAINST TOM HARKIN. PURELY PRAGMATIC.

Salier: PURELY PRAGMATIC. THE ONLY WAY YOU'RE GOING TO BEAT TOM HARKIN IS TO LEAD. YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO BE ABLE TO OUTSPEND HIM, BECAUSE HE'LL HAVE THE UNION AND THE DEMOCRAT MONEY BEHIND HIM. WE'LL HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO RUN THE CAMPAIGN, BUT YOU'LL NEVER OUTSPEND HIM.

Glover: WHERE WILL YOU GET IT?

Salier: LOOK, THERE ARE SOURCES THAT ARE ALREADY COMING TOGETHER FOR THE PRIMARY. AND WHOEVER THIS NOMINEE IS, THE MONEY IS GOING TO FLOW FROM NOT ONLY INSIDE IOWA FOR THE PEOPLE WHO REALLY DO NOT CARE FOR TOM HARKIN AT ALL AND HIS LIBERAL POLICIES BUT FROM AROUND THE NATION. TOM HARKIN IS CLEARLY THE MOST -- ONE OF THE TOP TWO OR THREE MOST LIBERAL SENATORS INSIDE THE UNITED STATES SENATE. THERE ARE CONSERVATIVE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO SEE HIM OUT. THE SUPPORT WILL BE THERE. MONEY IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE AND IT'S NOT TREND LINES, ALTHOUGH WE'VE BEEN MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WHAT THIS BOILS DOWN TO IS THE SIMPLE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE LEADERSHIP AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO OUTMESSAGE HIM. IF YOU WANT THAT, THEN CLEARLY I CAN BEAT HIM.

Yepsen: MR. SALIER, YOU TOLD ME THE OTHER DAY WHEN WE WERE CHATTING THAT YOU HAD JUST RAISED -- BROKEN $100,000 IN YOUR FUND-RAISING. NOW, YOU'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR THREE YEARS. WHY DON'T WE TAKE THAT AS EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN'T RAISE THE MONEY THAT YOU NEED TO BEAT TOM HARKIN?

Salier: BECAUSE THERE'S TWO WAYS TO BUILD A CAMPAIGN, GENTLEMEN. YOU CAN EITHER BUILD THE BASE FIRST -- IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO LOOK LIKE THE PYRAMID -- AND THEN PUT THE PEAK, WHICH IS THE MONEY ON TOP; OR YOU CAN BUILD A PEAK, LIFT IT UP, AND TRY TO CRAM A BASE UNDERNEATH IT. NOW, CONGRESSMAN GANSKE AND I HAVE DONE THIS IN TWO DIFFERENT WAYS. HE BUILT A PEAK. I BUILT A BASE. THE REASON HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY TRACTION UNDERNEATH AND EVERYBODY IN THE COLUMNS, "WHY ISN'T CONGRESSMAN GANSKE GETTING THE GRASS ROOTS?" BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE THEM. THIS CAMPAIGN DOES. SO WE BUILT THE BASE. NOW WE'VE TURNED OUR ATTENTION TO THE FUND-RAISING. WE WERE SITTING AT ABOUT $30,000 THE BEGINNING OF NOVEMBER,. NOW WE'VE PUSHED RIGHT THROUGH $115,000 AND CLIMBING. SO WHEN WE TURNED OUR ATTENTION TO FUND-RAISING, IT CAME.

Glover: YOU'VE BEEN OUT THERE FOR A LONG TIME DOING THIS. YOU'VE BEEN DOING A LOT OF TOWN MEETINGS, A LOT OF COUNTY FUND-RAISERS, A LOT OF COUNTY STRAW POLLS, COUNTY CENTRAL COMMITTEES, STUFF LIKE THAT. WHAT'S YOUR SENSE OF WHAT'S DRIVING THE ELECTORATE THIS YEAR?

Salier: EVERYTHING CONTINUES TO COME BACK TO THE SAME COMMON BASE, AND IT'S NOT JUST REPUBLICAN ELECTORATE. IT'S ACROSS THE BOARD. PEOPLE DO NOT RUN -- OR PEOPLE DO NOT LIVE THEIR LIVES, I SHOULD SAY, THINKING THAT THE FEDERAL TAX CODE SHOULD MANIPULATE THEM, THINKING THAT SOCIAL SECURITY IS GOING TO BE THERE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO RUN THIS SYSTEM WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CONFISCATES THE EXCESS MONEY THAT COMES IN. THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THE GOVERNMENT INSIDE OUR CLASSROOM. THEY WANT TO LET THEIR TEACHERS TEACH. IN A NUTSHELL, THEY BELIEVE IN PERSONAL RIGHTS AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITIES. AND THEY BELIEVE TRULY, IF YOU DO LIMIT GOVERNMENT, THE GREATEST DAYS OF THIS NATION LIE AHEAD AND NOT BEHIND. AND IT'S NOT JUST LIMITED TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Yepsen: WHAT SHOULD THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BE IN EDUCATION?

Salier: I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A ROLE FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN EDUCATION. THE REASON FOR THAT IS THIS, AGAIN, IF YOU ARE BLOWING 75 PERCENT OF YOUR MONEY IN WASHINGTON'S BUREAUCRACY, THAT IS WHY YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY LEFT HERE IN THE STATE TO PAY YOUR TEACHERS MORE. IT'S BEING BURNED IN D.C. I DO NOT WANT A SOCIAL AGENDA FROM EITHER SIDE OF THE AISLE FORCED UPON OUR TEACHERS. I DO NOT WANT ANYONE TO TAKE AWARE THEIR ABILITY TO TEACH. AND WASHINGTON ALWAYS TAKES THE COOKIE-CUTTER MENTALITY. WASHINGTON HAS A "ONE SIZE FITS ALL," EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE THE SAME, LOOK THE SAME ACROSS THE ENTIRE NATION.

Borg: YOU'D ABOLISH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION?

Salier: I WOULD WORK TOWARDS ITS END MEANS, YES. NOW, EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE IS A PHASE-THROUGH. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT COMING IN AND JERKING OUT SUBSIDIES FROM UNDERNEATH FARMERS, BECAUSE ALL OF US WOULD GO BROKE, OR A THIRD OF US ANYWAY. YOU DON'T STOP THE FLOW COMING BACK TO OUR SCHOOLS BEFORE YOU STOP REMOVING IT FROM THE STATE. EVERYTHING IS A GIVE AND TAKE, SO YOU'VE GOT TO LET THE STATE GET UP AND RUNNING WITH ITS OWN FUNDING BEFORE YOU REMOVE THE --

Glover: PRESIDENT BUSH IS SCHEDULED TO BE IN THIS STATE NEXT WEEK RAISING MONEY IN DES MOINES FOR CONGRESSMAN TOM LATHAM, NOT CONGRESSMAN GREG GANSKE. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT?

Salier: WELL, CONGRESSMAN GANSKE IS IN A PRIMARY. I KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT A GOOD STRONG AMOUNT OF SUPPORT OUT THERE. I DO NOT KNOW WHERE THE PRESIDENT STANDS IN TERMS OF THIS RACE. I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME GOOD SUPPORT BROUGHT ON OUR BEHALF FROM NOT ONLY WITHIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HERE WITHIN OUR OWN STATE, BUT ALSO SOME OF THE CONSERVATIVE GROUPS INSIDE WASHINGTON. AND I KNOW THAT WE'VE BUILT A GOOD POLITICAL AGENDA FOR OURSELVES. AND CONGRESSMAN GANSKE HAS WALKED AWAY TOO MANY TIMES FROM WHAT THE PRESIDENT WAS TRYING TO DO. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PRESIDENT'S WISHES ARE, BUT I KNOW HE'S HERE TO CAMPAIGN FOR CONGRESSMAN LATHAM.

Glover: IS IT YOUR SENSE THAT THE STATE PARTY IS NEUTRAL IN YOUR CAMPAIGN?

Salier: THE STATE PARTY HIERARCHY IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE. A LOT OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE -- ONE OF MY CAMPAIGN -- MY CAMPAIGN MANAGER SITS ON THE STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE. A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE ARE HELPING US ALONG THE WAY. LEON MOSELY, COCHAIR OF THE PARTY, HAS BEEN VERY OPEN WITH HIS SUPPORT OF US.

Glover: BUT YOU'RE CONFIDENT THAT THE STATE PARTY IS NOT WEIGHING IN WITH GREG GANSKE?

Salier: NO, NO, THEY'RE NOT.

Yepsen: MR. SALIER, WE'VE GOT ABOUT THIRTY SECONDS LEFT IN THE PROGRAM. I WANT TO GIVE IT TO YOU. WHAT'S THE ONE THING YOU WANT A REPUBLICAN PRIMARY VOTER TO REMEMBER ABOUT YOU AS THEY GO INTO THE VOTING BOOTH IN JUNE?

Salier: I WILL NEVER, EVER ABANDON THE PRINCIPLES OF OUR PARTY THAT SAY WE WANT A LIMITED GOVERNMENT, WE BELIEVE IN PERSONAL RIGHTS AND PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. AND YOU HAVE MY FLAT GUARANTEE THAT I WILL NOT GO TO WASHINGTON AND BECOME INFECTED WITH POTOMAC FEVER AND START TO RESEMBLE, TOO OFTEN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE RUN, SAYING WHAT THEY WANT PEOPLE TO HEAR AND THEN THEY GO AND DO SOMETHING ELSE.

Glover: WILL YOU DO A TERM LIMIT PLEDGE?

Salier: I WOULD BE VOTING FOR TERM LIMITS, YES. BUT I WILL NOT SELF-REMOVE MYSELF WHEN PEOPLE LIKE HILLARY CLINTON ARE STILL OUT THERE.

Borg: WE DO HAVE TIME LIMITS ON THIS PROGRAM, AND WE'VE COME TO THE END OF THAT.

Salier: WELL, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME VERY MUCH, AND I'D APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S VOTE IN JUNE.

Borg: THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. ON OUR NEXT EDITION OF "IOWA PRESS," WE'LL CONVENE POLITICAL REPORTERS HERE AT THE "IOWA PRESS" TABLE TO DISCUSS PRESIDENT BUSH'S VISIT TO DES MOINES ON FRIDAY, MARCH 1. THAT AND OTHER POLITICAL NEWS FROM THE IOWA LEGISLATURE WILL BE OUR TOPICS. AND ALSO, A PROGRAM NOTE NOW: TO MAKE ROOM FOR SPECIAL FRIENDS FESTIVAL PROGRAMMING NEXT WEEK, "IOWA PRESS" WILL BE AIRING ONLY ONCE. THAT WILL BE AT 6:30 FRIDAY NIGHT, MARCH 1. I HOPE YOU'LL WATCH. I'M DEAN BORG. THANKS FOR JOINING US TODAY.

ANNOUNCER: FUNDING FOR "IOWA PRESS" WAS PROVIDED BY FRIENDS OF IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS; AND BY THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF IOWA... THE PUBLIC'S PARTNER IN BUILDING IOWA'S HIGHWAY, BRIDGE, AND MUNICIPAL UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.