---

School Board Journal
March / April

---

ON THE STUMP
Is this any way to elect a president?

By PETER WEBER

Another candidate, Bill Clinton, was in New Hampshire proudly telling voters how well Americans were doing. He wasn't making headlines, but considering the recent history of presidential press coverage (Whitewater, Paula Jones, Travelgate, McDonalds and the resulting flabby thighs), he probably wasn't overly distraught.

The political experts of the news media were too busy extracting vital information from the Republican hopefuls to pay much attention to the virtually unopposed Clinton. Voters concerned about the background, philosophies and issue priorities of the emerging candidates in the Grand Old Party were shocked to learn that Lamar Alexander demonstrated complete ignorance of one of today's most pressing social questions, "How much does a dozen eggs and a gallon of milk cost?"

Personally, I am much more interested in knowing whether the candidates understand the economic consequences of changing demographics on federally funded programs like Social Security and Medicaid. Are they prepared to put forward a plan to salvage what is left of these and other social programs? Do they have a specific proposal for balancing the budget and eliminating the deficit and the resulting $360 billion our government pays in interest each year on the national debt? What ideas do they have for curbing the violence that threatens our culture? What ideas do they have for bringing children to school ready to learn and sending them home to a loving, supportive family?

Who knows for sure? What we do know is that the other candidates immediately issued press releases to allay our concerns that they might not know the answer to the all-important milk and egg question and the news media duly reported them.

The news media today focuses too much on the irrelevant and sensational, rather than pressing candidates to clearly express their ideas and proposals for addressing social and economic issues. It is illuminating to compare the coverage of this year's presidential race with that of an earlier race. A few minutes of research provided me with newspaper accounts detailing significant policy positions outlined by candidates for the 1860 presidential election. Although not without its own pernicious motivations, the press demonstrated greater restraint and political relevance in one of the most important presidential campaigns in United States history.

The Lincoln-Douglas debates, although held during their contest for election to the Senate, were actually the onset of the historically critical 1860 presidential election. Thousands of people travelled hundreds of miles by horse and wagon and made great social events out of listening and participating in these lengthy exchanges between the two men who would later represent their political parties in the race for president. And the newspapers of the day provided substantive reports of the event. It is possible to reconstruct, from newspaper accounts, Lincoln's clearly stated key positions.

For example, commenting on the Massachusetts Act of 1859 that provided that no foreign-born naturalized citizen could hold office or vote until two years after his naturalization, Lincoln wrote, "I am against its adoption in Illinois, or in any other place, where I have a right to oppose it." This position was consistent with his more famous efforts in behalf of the rights of people of color. Lincoln laid down the gauntlet in September of 1859 when he held that the spread of slavery was the only thing that had ever threatened the Union.

He also addressed practical matters of concern to voters. At the 1859 Wisconsin State Fair, Lincoln spoke of his visionary approach to farming. "I have thought a good deal, in an abstract way, about a Steam Plow. . . .The soil has never been pushed up to one-half of its capacity." He demonstrated his unique insight when he recommended "deeper plowing, analysis of soils, experiments with manures, and varieties of seeds, observance of seasons."

Newspapers faithfully reported these important policy statements and by and large refrained from the trivial and sensational reporting that goes on today.

Newspapers did overtly demonstrate loyalty to particular candidates. The Chicago Press and Tribune, for instance, ran excerpts of Lincoln's speeches while the Chicago Times printed excerpts of speeches made by Stephen Douglas. And, to be fair, unfriendly newspapers did occasionally engage in the ridiculous and irrelevant. For instance, newspapers did estimate Lincoln as "a third-rate country lawyer," and say that he lived "in low Hoosier style;" he "could not speak good grammar;" he "delivered course and clumsy jokes;" and he was descended from "an African gorilla."

By and large, however, the newspapers focused their coverage on issues and positions of substance. We owe much of our knowledge of the political history of this time to the quality of news coverage of the political campaign.

It's amazing how much we can learn from newspaper accounts of historic presidential races. It's disturbing how little we can learn about the current candidates for our nation's highest office by following news media coverage. Sure, we know that Bob Dole looks old and delivers a dull speech. Steve Forbes inherited his fortune from his father. Pat Buchanan has campaign staff who have been tenuously linked to white supremacist groups. Lamar Alexander wears silly red flannel shirts. Bill Clinton and his wife have a hard time finding papers in their big house. We are also aware of constantly changing polls that are about as accurate as our local meteorologist.

But I challenge anyone to read their newspapers, listen to their radios, and watch their televisions and tell me you can learn as much about the important policy positions and plans of any of these candidates as I did in a few minutes of research about Abraham Lincoln.

I spend considerable time contemplating political issues and solutions. I have lost sleep thinking about the economic and social future of this country. I haven't, however, spent much time worrying about whether presidential candidates are aware of the price of a loaf of bread or whether our president needs to go on a diet.

It's time to bring this presidential campaign back to the issues that will determine our future, just as the future of the Union was threatened by the issues that faced Lincoln and Douglas. As voters and as patrons of the news media, we must demand equally substantive reporting. We must demand an end to the silliness. Let's return our energy and attention to what's important.

Peter Weber is IASB assistant executive director for governmental relations.