INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. These are also available as one exposure on a standard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic printan for additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

UMI University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600

Order Number 9006183

Press coverage of selected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts

Stone, Kirk Shelton, Ph.D.

The American University, 1989

Copyright ©1989 by Stone, Kirk Shelton. A ll rights reserved.

UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106

PRESS COVERAGE OF SELECTED MEMBERS OF THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE AND HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE IN THEIR STATES AND DISTRICTS by Kirk Stone submitted to the Faculty of the School of International Service of The American University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree o f Doctor of Philosophy i n International Relations Signatures of Committee:

Chair: _

ÙJL —ÜA.LM cO Q rtrv i Dean of the School of International Service

Date 1989 The American University Washington, D.C. 20016 1 0 ) ^

THB AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 0 Copyright

By

Kirk S. Stone

1989

All Rights Reserved PRESS COVERAGE OF SELECTED MEMBERS OF THE SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE AND HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE IN THEIR STATES AND DISTRICTS by Kirk S. Stone

ABSTRACT

This research analyzed the foreign affairs news coverage of 18 members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in newspapers back in their home states and districts. The study drew on previous research in two areas— Congress and the news media, and the international flow of news. Data was generated by three sources; a content analysis of news in 18 daily newspapers around the country, plus one national newspaper, the Washington Post; a content analysis of the news releases distributed by members of the two committees: and interviews conducted with press secretaries, journalists, and others. The study found the foreign affairs coverage to be a mere trickle rather than a genuine flow with much more attention going to domestic issues. Members and journalists agreed that the public is more interested in news about domestic issues that could be more

11 111

easily related to such everyday concerns as jobs, pollution, and crim e. The foreign affairs coverage that did appear was not well rounded. It emphasized only a few countries and issues. National security concerns dominated the coverage—wars in Nicaragua and the Persian Gulf, the loss of intelligence secrets to the Soviet Union, weapons sales to foreign countries, and covert operations. Other important issues on the world agenda went uncovered—for example, environmental deterioration and the disease, poverty, hunger, and other ills that beset the developing countries. The coverage reflected a strong East-West orientation. One key to generating press coverage back home was to find a local angle to foreign affairs in one of three ways: issues that combined domestic and international dimensions (intermestic issues), especially trade with its emphasis on jobs; issues of special interest to ethnic groups in the community; and initiatives by local organizations and individuals—for example, interest groups that try to influence a senator's vote on a foreign affairs issue. For a number of reasons, the coverage of members of Congress in newspapers back in their home states makes only a minimal contribution toward creating an informed public on foreign affairs. To My Father and My Wife ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was completed thanks only to the generous contributions of many people. Congressional press secretaries, legislative aides, journalists serving newspapers from around the country and others candidly shared their revealing insights about press coverage of foreign affairs. They also provided newspaper clippings and news releases that provided valuable data for the study. Professor Hamid Mowlana, Director of the International Communications Program in the School of International Service at The American University in Washington, D.C., deserves special recognition. Professor Mowlana not only ably chaired my dissertation committee. In course work leading up to the , reseach. Professor Mowlana also impressed upon me, as upon many other students, his own deep sense of excitement about international communications and its potential contributions to a better world. Professor Duncan Clarke, Director of the United States Foreign Policy Program in the School of International Service, and Susan Hammond, a professor in the Department of Government in the School of Public Affairs at American University, teamed up with Professor Mowlana to provide insights into three areas integrated for this research— international communication. United States foreign policy,

i V and Congress. The trio of advisers forced the author to rethink everything from misplaced modifiers to the contemporary meaning of the social responsibility of the press. Over the years, Dean Louis Goodman and the School of International Service faculty consistently insisted on high quality work from their graduate students. Although not always fully appreciated at the time, their demands certainly made this a better work than it otherwise would have been, despite any shortcomings that remain. Special thanks must also to George Jones Jr., whose extraordinarily meticulous attention to detail was matched only by his patience as he consented to my requests to input "just one more" set of revisions on the computer. George was what every writer needs most, a good humored confidant who listened while the author thought aloud about the interaction of Congress, the press and foreign policy, offered unfailingly perceptive advice on how to solve a myriad of technical problems, always printed the latest version of the manuscript much more promptly than anyone has the right to expect, and perhaps most importantly, encouraged the author to persevere because, indeed, the end was in sight. Others helped. The staff at the newspaper reading room at the Library of Congress provided a pleasant, cooperative environment to read the many out-of-town newspapers used in this research. The genesis of this study stretches back more than 15 years when the author worked as political writer for the Fort Wayne Journal- VI

G azette, and watched Indiana's two senators and the area's 4th District congressmen. A second chance to learn about Congress and the news media came in 1981-82 when the American Political Science Association offered the wonderful opportunity to come to Washington, D.C., and see from the inside how the House and Senate operate. My experiences as a journalist in Fort Wayne and a Congressional Fellow in Washington provided an excellent complement to the formal academic training offered at the School of International Service. While many contributed in various ways to this research, none sacrificed more than my wife, who endured a seemingly unending string of lonely nights and solitary weekends as her husband disappeared yet again to the library. Farzaneh watched with alternating amusement and amazement as her husband poured newspaper clippings from their folders and carefully spread them on the living room floor for yet another inspection. With this project at last behind us, Farzaneh, perhaps now we can get on with our lives. Thanks for waiting.

Kirk S. Stone Washington, D.C. June 1989 TABLE OF CXDNTENTS

Abstract i i Acknowledgements I v

Part I: The Framework ...... 1 Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 2 Chapter 2 Past Research on Congress and the News Media ...... 3 7 Chapter 3 Past Research on International News Flows ...... 64 Chapter 4 Propositions and Methodology ...... 87

Part II: The Findings...... 106 Chapter 5 The Trickle of Foreign Affairs News ...... 107 Chapter 6 Factors Affecting the Flow of Foreign Affairs News...... 1 30 Chapter 7 Coverage of Individual Members ...... 172 Chapter 8 Localizing Foreign Affairs News ...... 198 Chapter 9 Issues and Countries in the News ...... 233 Chapter 10 Conclusion ...... 311

Appendix 1 Senator Brock Adams News Releases ...... 336 Appendix 2 Profiles of Coverage of Individual Members...... 339

Bibliography ...... 455

Illustrations

Illustration 1 Communication Process 1 ...... 13 Illustration 2 Communication Process 2 ...... 14 Illustration 3 Communication Process 3 ...... 16

Charts

Chart 1 Percentage Breakdown of National Press Coverage ...... 108 Chart 2 Percentage Breakdown of Home-State Press Coverage ...... 108

VII Chart 3 Percentage Breakdown of District Press Coverage ...... 109

Tables

Table 1 Member/Newspaper List ...... 9 Table 2 National Press News Mentions of Individual Members...... 11 0 Table 3 Home-State Press News Mentions of Individual Members...... 111 Table 4 District Press News Mentions of Individual Members...... 11 2 Table 5 Combined Foreign Affairs Coverage of Senators and House Members in Individual Newspapers.114 Table 6 Combined Foreign Affairs and Intermestic News Coverage of Senators and House Members in Individual Newspapers ...... 11 5 Table 7 News Mentions of Domestic Issues in the Home- State and District Press ...... 11 7 Table 8 Member Foreign Affairs Coverage ...... 173 Table 9 Member Combined Foreign and Intermestic Coverage ...... 174 Table 10 Foreign Affairs News Mentions by Seniority 182 Table 11 News Releases Distributed...... 185 Table 12 Ideological Ratings ...... 190 Table 13 House-Senate Comparison: Foreign Affairs News Mentions...... 193 Table 14 House-Senate Comparison: Intermestic News M entions...... 193 Table 15 Combined Senator and House Member Coverage on Intermestic Issues...... 202 Table 16 Breakdown of Foreign Affairs News ...... 239 Table 17 Countries Covered and Number of Mentions...... 244 Table 18 Regions Covered and Number of Mentions...... 245 Table 19 Middle East News Mentions...... 252 Table 20 Central American News Mentions ...... 263 Table 21 Soviet Union News Mentions...... 272 Table 22 Far East News Mentions ...... 280 Table 23 Scandinavia/Western Europe News Mentions 289 Table 24 Africa News Mentions...... 295 Table 25 North American News Mentions...... 300

VIII Table 26 Caribbean News Mentions ...... 302 Table 27 South American News Mentions ...... 304 Table 28 Eastern Europe News Mentions ...... 306 Table 29 South Asia News Mentions ...... 307 Table 30 Senator Dodd News Mentions...... 341 Table 31 Senator Helms News Mentions...... 350 Table 32 Senator Lugar News Mentions ...... 356 Table 33 Senator Kerry News Mentions...... 360 Table 34 Senator Kassebaum News Mentions ...... 366 Table 35 Senator Moynihan News Mentions...... 372 Table 36 Senator Cranston News Mentions...... 379 Table 37 Senator Adams News Mentions...... 384 Table 38 Senator Evans News Mentions...... 391 Table 39 Congressman Miller News Mentions...... 397 Table 40 Congressman Gejdenson News Mentions...... 410 Table 41 Congressman Bonker News Mentions...... 417 Table 42 Congressman Solomon News Mentions...... 422 Table 43 Congressman Levine News Mentions...... 429 Table 44 Congressman Burton News Mentions...... 435 Table 45 Congresswoman Meyers News Mentions...... 442 Table 46 Congressman Studds News Mentions...... 447 Table 47 Congressman Clarke News Mentions ...... 453

I X PART I THE FRAMEWORK Chapter 1 Introduction

The average voter doesn’t pace up and down in his living room thinking about the balance of power or the conven­ tional force advantages of the Warsaw Pact over NATO. This seems too abstract to the average voter. It doesn’t seem to affect their lives; they can’t plug in to

On August 7, 1987, North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms made an important speech on the Senate floor, revealing that the Soviet Union had deployed mobile Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). The Washington Post gave the news prominent display the following day in a front-page article, “Soviets Said to Deploy Mobile ICBMs," that included an accompanying photograph of Helms and cited his concerns that the Soviet missile deployment violated pro­ visions of the un ratified SALT II treaty.2 But a foreign affairs development regarded as major news in the nation's capital did not make news for Senator Helms back in Asheville, North Carolina. On the same day that the Washington Post printed its front­ page story on Helms and the Soviet missiles, the Asheville Citizen-

11nterview with Dan Amon, press secretary to New York Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., December 23, 1987. 2 r . Jeffrey Smith, “Soviets Said to Deploy Mobile ICBMs," Washington Post, August 8, 1987, 1A. Times carried its own front-page story mentioning Helms, but on an entirely different subject. The North Carolina newspaper headlined its story, “Brewer: PTL Probe Cost Him Job,”3 reporting allegations that former U.S. Attorney Charles Brewer had been forced to leave office because he pushed for a federal investigation of the Char­ lotte-based PTL ministry headed by televangelists Jim and Tammy Bakker. A Helms aide, Tom Ashcraft, was named to replace Brewer and the paper reported that in January Brewer had said Helms recom­ mended Ashcraft for the U.S. attorney position. The Citizen-Times did not quote Helms in the story, but it did include a great deal of background information about him. As the Helms ICBM speech demonstrated, members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee are strategically placed to inform constituents about vital foreign affairs issues. Yet as the Asheville Citizen-Times coverage reveals, major foreign affairs news emanating from Congress may not reach readers back in the states. The purpose of this research is to determine how members of these two committees contribute to the flow of foreign affairs news back in their home-state and dis­ trict newspapers and why. It also tries to illuminate the reasons why certain foreign affairs issues and countries are covered, but not others. This study examines only those news items that mention the specific members monitored in their home-state and district news­ papers. A news story printed in Connecticut about Soviet-American

^Associated Press, "Brewer: PTL Probe Cost Him Job,"Asheville Citizen-Times, August 8, 1987, 1. nuclear missile negotiations would not be included in the findings unless it mentioned either Senator Christopher Dodd or Congressman Sam Gejdenson, the two Connecticut members followed for this study. From the perspective of members of Congress and the press back in their home states, foreign affairs news is different from do­ mestic issues. Foreign affairs cannot easily be made salient to peo­ ple back home. Salience, according to Cecil V. Crabb, Jr., reflects the degree to which the public sees a direct connection between events abroad and their normal preoccupation with personal and family con­ cerns such as health, prosperity, security, and welfare. Crabb added, "Citizens normally perceive a difference between internal and ex­ ternal policy: they have been much more involved and interested in the former than the latter."4 The source of the quotation that opened this chapter, Dan Amon, press secretary to New York Congressman Gerald Solomon, perceptively pinpointed the salience problem in an interview for this study: The Warsaw Pact/NATO force balance does not seem relevant to the everyday lives of constituents in upstate New York. They have difficulty plugging in to those issues, as Amon phrased it, just as they have difficulty relating Soviet ICBM deployments to their ev­ eryday concerns. Higher taxes. Social Security benefits, and crime in the neighborhood, on the other hand, seem extremely relevant. Voters can plug in.

4Cecll V. Crabb, Jr.,American Foreign Policy in the Nuclear Age, 3d ed. (New York: Harper and Row, 1972), 149. This research explores the nature of this home-state and dis­ trict news coverage of these members by drawing on two streams of previous research not usually linked—research on the interaction between Congress and the news media, and studies on the flow of international news. Analysts writing on Congress and the news me­ dia have given very little attention to foreign affairs. When men­ tioned at all, it is in the context of national, not local, news cover­ age. The commentary is sometimes quite negative in describing the baneful consequences that ensue when the national media turn to Congress and foreign policy. I.M. Destler, Leslie Gelb, and Anthony Lake, for example, in their provocative work. Our Own Worst Enemy: The Unmaking of American Foreign Policy, charged that Congress and the press have engaged in a “new irresponsibility,” making debate more ideological and more unreal.s Too often, they claim, political candidates use foreign policy to obtain national press attention in 30-second news bites that make it impossible to explore the depths of complicated international issues. Francis O. Wilcox briefly touched on the subject in his 1971 book. Congress, the Executive and Foreign Policy, again citing the dangers. “So far as foreign policy is concerned,” Wilcox wrote, “the relationship of news-hungry correspondents and publicity-hungry Congressmen has an inherent potential for mischief.”® Members of

®I.M. Destler, Leslie Gelb and Anthony Lake, Our Own Worst Enemy: The Un­ making of American Foreign Policy (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), 129. ® Francis 0. Wilcox, Congress, the Executive and Foreign Policy (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1971), 110. Congress and the press, according to Wilcox, stir up conflict, while the U.S. State Department seeks to promote agreement. Despite such observations, the more important story is that those writing on Congress and the news media have devoted very little attention to foreign affairs coverage, while those interested in the flow of international news have ignored Congress. The research, discussed here briefly, is presented in two parts. Part I, chapters 1-4, describes the framework of the research and Part II, chapters 5-9, reviews the findings. Chapter 10 provides a conclusion. Chapter 1—Introduction: Provides the background for under­ standing the chapters that follow. Chapter 2— Past Research on Congress and the News Media: The previous research has some important limitations for this analysis of Congress, the press, and foreign affairs. The bulk of that past re­ search focuses on the national news media, while this study looks at coverage back in the members’ states. The previous research did not examine what issues emanating from Congress are covered. This study, however, is keenly attuned to issues, especially foreign af­ fa irs .

Chapter 3—Past Research on International News Flows: Schol­ arship on international news coverage has concentrated on the work of foreign correspondents, usually Americans. News is deemed to be foreign affairs because it occurred in foreign countries. Unfortu­ nately, this approach risks seriously distorting the overall foreign affairs news picture, much like watching half a television screen. Instead of focusing on the work of foreign correspondents, this study highlights the news presented by another group of journalists, those working in the United States for American newspapers. They are housed in the National Press Building and elsewhere in Wash­ ington, D.C,, as national correspondents for their home newspapers located in communities throughout the country. They are also back in their newsrooms in Asheville, North Carolina, Santa, Monica, Cali­ fornia, Seattle, Washington, and other cities. These journalists most likely do not often think of themselves as part of the flow of foreign affairs news, but they are. Foreign affairs news can be made by a congressman speaking in Indianapolis, Indiana, as well as by a prime minister speaking in London. In some ways, the topic of this study is not international news; it is intranat\ona\ news about foreign affairs, news generated within the United States, not abroad. Montague Kern has elaborated on this connection between two parts of the foreign affairs news equation. Foreign affairs coverage has two dimensions: the foreign story that deals with events abroad and the domestic story that concerns the U.S. role and reaction to world events.7

Chapter 4—Propositions and Methodology: Data for this re­ search were obtained from three sources—a content analysis of 18

^Montague Kern, “The Invasion of Afghanistan: Domestic vs. Foreign Stories,” In Television Coverage of the fJiiddie ed.East. William Adams (Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Co., 1981), 106. Also see Montague Kern, Patricia W. Levering, and Ralph B. Levering, The Kennedy Crises: The Press, the Presidency, and Foreign (Chapel Policy Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1983). 8

daily newspapers in 8 states, plus one national newspaper, the Washington Post; a content analysis of news releases distributed by 18 members of Congress, 9 serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and 9 sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee; and interviews with press secretaries, legislative assistants for foreign affairs, administrative assistants to the members, four House members themselves, and journalists working at each of the 18 newspapers examined. The members and newspapers studied ap­ pear in Table 1. Chapter 5—The Trickle of Foreign Affairs News: Compares the quantity of foreign affairs news mentioning the 18 members of Congress at three levels—national, home-state, and district press. Chapter 6—Factors Affecting the Flow of Foreign Affairs News: Explores the reasons why the flow of foreign affairs news about members of these two important congressional committees back home is merely a trickle.

Chapter 7—Coverage of Individual Members: Discusses why certain members obtain more foreign affairs coverage back home than others, looking particularly at news releases, subcommittee chairmanships, and House-Senate differences. Separate profiles ap­ pearing in Appendix 2 examine how each of these 18 members was covered in his state and district. Table 1. Member/Newspaper List*

state Senator Congressman State Paper District Paper

North Jesse James Charlotte Asheville Carolina Helms (R) Clarke (D) Observer Citizen 225,000 50,000

Connecticut Chris Sam Hartford New London Dodd(D) Gejdenson (D) Courant Day 226,000 37,000

Massachu­ John Gerry Boston New Bedford setts Kerry (D) Studds (D) Globe Standard - Times 503,000 47,000

New York Daniel Gerald New York Glens Falls Moynihan(D) Solomon (R) Times Post-Star 1,023,000 36,000

Indiana Richard Dan Indianapolis Anderson Lugar (R) Burton (R) Star Herald- Bulletin 231,000 33,000

Kansas Nancy Kasse­ Jan Wichita Kansas City baum (R) Meyers (R) Eagle-Beacon Times 125,000 278,500

Washington Brock Don Seattle Vancouver Adams (D) Bonker (D) Times Columbian 237,000 47,000

Washington Dan Evans (R)John Miller (R) Seattle Post- Bellevue Intelligencer Journal- American 207,000 27,000

California Alan Mel Los Angeles Santa Monica Cranston(D) Levine (D) Times Outlook 1,113,000 25,000

*On Sundays, theSeattle Times andPost-Intelligencer publish jointly. Any news item appearing in that Sunday paper was counted in the tabulations for the four Washington State members. OnKansas Sundays, City theTimes does not publish, soKansas the City Star was used on those days. SantaThe Monica Outlook does not publish on Simdays, but another Copley chain newspaper in the area servesThe readers. Breeze. Data from theBreeze Sunday editions is included in the data for the two California members. Senator Cranston and Congressman Levine. On weekends, theAsheville Citizen andAsheville Times publish jointly. Circulation data represent average weekday totals. The source Editoris & Publisher Yearbook (New1988 York: Editor & Publisher Co., 1988). Chapter 8—Localizing Foreign Affairs News: Points out that foreign affairs can readily attract news attention back home when it takes on a local angle. This local connection makes foreign affairs seem more directly relevant to the everyday concerns of people in the state or district. Trade is perhaps the most obvious example of 10

this phenomenon. The sale of Washington State timber is important news to members of Congress from that state because foreign pur­ chases means jobs for constituents. Localizing foreign affairs news, however, can occur several other ways. Chapter 9—Issues and Countries in the News: Focuses on the foreign affairs issues that receive attention through home-state and district press coverage—war, human rights abuses, trade, and many more. This chapter also analyzes why certain countries are covered. Chapter 10—Conclusion: Key findings are reviewed and press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee is set in the larger context of the public’s role in foreign policy making. The research centers on several key propositions to be tested: (1) Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee receive little foreign affairs cov­ erage in their home-state and district newspapers. Members fear the election day wrath of constituents who believe that too much time devoted to foreign affairs means too little time spent on issues closer to their everyday concerns, issues of salience. Journalists for the home-state and district press believe that their readers prefer news on domestic issues over foreign affairs. Thus for their own reasons, members and journalists want to minimize foreign affairs coverage in the home-state and district press. (2) Trade, drug trafficking, and other topics that combine in­ ternational and domestic elements receive considerable coverage because they relate more directly to the everyday lives of con­ 11

stituents and readers. These hybrids are neither fully foreign nor fully domestic. Members of Congress and the home-state and district press localize foreign affairs, too, in response to pressures from ethnic groups in their areas, especially the American Jewish com­ munity deeply concerned about the fate of Israel. (3) Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee and the journalists who cover them for the press back in their states say they accept a responsi­ bility to inform the public about foreign affairs. The truly important question, however, is whether this professed sense of responsibility leads to coverage of foreign affairs. (4) Much of the foreign affairs coverage these members re­ ceive back home stems from their press releases. Coverage also gravitates toward those members who are actively trying to influ­ ence the direction of U.S. foreign policy by sponsoring legislation. Serving as a subcommittee chair generates coverage. Senators re­ ceive more press attention back home than House members. There is no difference in the foreign affairs coverage for liberals and conser­ vatives.

(5) Conflict on the international scene, especially conflict in which the United States, is actively and conspicuously involved, draws coverage. The emphasis is on such crisis topics as war, inter­ nal turmoil, terrorism, and disasters. (6) Countries covered are those involved in crisis, plus the So­ viet Union because of its role as the world’s other superpower. The majority of humanity in the Third World goes virtually unnoticed ex­ 12

cept when their home countries become the site of a war or internal tu rm o il. 1. The Communications Process. Communications is an ongoing, not a static process. It encompasses a series of steps, not just one. This research is based on a simple communications framework. Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House For­ eign Affairs Committee act as primary, not sole, sources of the news items analyzed. Sources can also be interest group spokesper­ sons, individual citizens, elected officials, and others commenting about these members. News bureau writers stationed in Washington, D.C., by their newspapers, and reporters, editorial writers, columnists, and other journalists headquartered in newspaper offices around the country transmit the sources’ messages through the channels of their home- state and district newspapers. The channels link the source with the receivers in the reading audience who interpret the messages.

Yet it is not enough to say that communication is a process that involves transmitting a message from a source by means of a channel to a receiver. This process does not occur in a vacuum. A series of controls, some actual and others merely perceived, influ­ ence how the process functions. These controls sometimes impede, and at other times promote, the flow of reported news on foreign affairs. A visual display of the process and a hypothetical case in­ volving Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar may make this framework more understandable. 13

In the hypothetical case, assume that Senator Lugar, who had been urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture to promote grain sales to the Third World, receives word that 10 Latin American countries have agreed to spend millions of dollars on U.S. grain. Pleased at the news, Lugar directs his press secretary, Andrew Fisher, to prepare a news release outlining details of the anticipated grain sales.

illustration 1. Communication Process 1

Sources Channel Audience/ Members of State, Receiver Foreign — ► District Relations Newspapers Newspaper Committees Readers i I Controls Factors that influence Lugar and the journalists

The news release is sent by Lugar’s office to Doug McDaniel, the Washington-based reporter for the Indianapolis Star. McDaniel agrees with Lugar that this is important news for Indiana readers, especially since Hoosier farmers stand to earn a great deal from their share of the grain sales. He writes a story based on the news release and transmits it to Indianapolis where editors approve it and assign the story for publication. The next morning, Indiana grain farmer Wilbur Wilson reads McDaniel’s story while enjoying his 14

morning ham and eggs. The communication source thus connected with his audience. In deciding whether to write the story, McDaniel was acting as a communications gatekeeper, an important social science concept often applied to communications research. McDaniel and his editors decided to open the gate and let Lugar’s message about the grain sales travel through the channel, the Indianapolis Star, to the audience, newspaper reader Wilbur Wilson. McDaniel or his editors could have rejected the Lugar news release, thus closing the gate and preventing the message from reaching its intended destination. Now the communicat process looks like this: Illustration 2. Communication Process 2

Sources Channel Audience/ Receiver Senator Indianapolis Richard — f Farmer Lugar Star Wilbur Wilson

i L À Controls Factors that influence Lugar and the journalists

If the gate is kept closed, the foreign grain sales story may be news, but it only becomes “reported” news, an important distinc­ tion, when it appears in the newspaper. In mass communication, un­ like face-to-face conversations, items do not move directly from the source to the audience. The gatekeeper is thus a crucial person 15

empowered to make decisions about the flow of messages from source to audience. Part of this study seeks to determine some of the factors at work that persuade the press to open or close the gate to news on foreign affairs that mentions members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. The research also seeks to understand why senators and congress­ men serving on the two committees initiate certain messages, and seek publicity in the home-state and district press, on certain is­ sues, but not others. This study examines the source and channel, as well as the content of the message transmitted from the source to the audience through the channel, but it focuses only indirectly on the ultimate consumers of the information contained in that message, the audi­ ence of newspaper readers. Yet the communications process has meaning only because the audience participates in the form of pro­ viding feedback. Feedback is simply the response sent by the audi­ ence to the original source and others in society. The audience, in

effect, becomes the new source through feedback. The Indianapolis Star news story on the grain sales to foreign countries could affect farmer Wilson’s mental map of the world and thus his behavior. Assuming that his income might increase as Latin Americans bought some of his grain, Wilson might decide he could afford to buy a new tractor. Or he might decide to show his appreci­ ation to Senator Lugar by donating money to his next campaign. In this way, feedback gives the communications process its dynamic, self-righting quality. 16

Newspaper articles do not affect the behavior of all readers all the time. But newspaper content is worth examining only because we assume that it affects at least some readers some of the time. We know, of course, that some stories may travel from the source, in this case. Senator Lugar, through the channel, the Indianapolis Star, but are never consumed by someone in the audience. In this hy­ pothetical instance, farmer Wilson may not have read the newspaper the morning of the McDaniel story on grain sales. Obviously, if he did not read the news item, he could not provide feedback based on it. The addition of feedback adds another dimension to the communica­ tions process: illustration 3. Communication Process 3

Feedback

Sources Channel Audience/ Senator Receiver Indianapolis Richard —» — f Farmer Lugar Star Wilbur Wilson

▲ A Controls Factors that influence Lugar and the journalists

1. Rationale for the Research. The rationale for devoting at­ tention to this dissertation topic rests on three assumptions: 1 7

(1) The conduct of U.S. foreign policy is important, especially for Americans, of course, but also for billions of other people throughout the world. Lives are profoundly affected by exports and imports, human rights abuses, pollution of the oceans, multibillion dollar spending on weapons, and the rest of a seemingly unending list of challenges on the foreign affairs agenda. (2) The public must have adequate information in terms of both quantity and quality if it is to play a constructive role in influencing the course of U.S. foreign policy; that is, if feedback is to play its intended role in the communication process. This ideal of the in­ formed citizenry is a cornerstone of classical democratic theory. Doris Graber, for one, has made explicit the connection between an informed citizenry and an effective foreign policy: “The quality of U.S. foreign policy and the effectiveness of U.S. relations with other countries are crucial to the welfare of people throughout the world. Sound policy and relations require a solid information base."8 (3) Newspapers, through their coverage of members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee, can serve as useful channels to transmit important foreign affairs information to the public. Newspapers are not the only means to learn about foreign affairs. The public can also learn by watching television news, reading specialized foreign affairs journals, trav­ eling to foreign lands, listening to grandmother’s tales of life in “the old country," taking university courses, and through many other

8Doris A. Graber, Mass Media and American Poiitics (Washington, D.C.: Con­ gressional Quarterly, Inc., 1984), 334. 18

means. Yet, although other channels of information are available, the printed media certainly merit our attention. More than local radio and television stations, the printed media can cover members of Congress thoroughly. News media coverage helps determine how people see their world. This perception, in turn, influences their behavior. In his 1922 classic. Public Opinion, political commentator Walter Lipp- mann wrote that people act not on the basis of some objective real­ ity, but according to the mental pictures of the world they carry around in their heads.9 Bernard Cohen, in The Press and Foreign Policy, attempted to link these mental pictures to the journalist’s work. He wrote, “For most of the foreign policy audience, the really effective map of the world—that is to say, their operational map—is drawn by the re­ porter and the editor, not the cartographer.If Cohen is correct and these mental maps are important in determining how people see the world, and newspaper coverage contributes to shaping those maps, then it is valuable to know more about that coverage, includ­ ing coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts. Analysts, however, are far from agreed about the public’s role in foreign policy making. Over the years, much animated discussion has centered on the question: Should we expect the mass public to

^Walter LIppmann, Public Opinion (New York: Penguin, 1922; reprint ed.. New York: Free Press, 1965), 3-20. ‘'^Bernard C. Cohen, The Press and Foreign Policy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963), 13. 1 9

play the same role in deciding foreign policy as domestic policy? Those who believe that the answer to the question is yes are more likely to see the merits of this research than those who do not. According to one school of thought, foreign affairs is too com­ plex to be grasped by the broad American public. Lippmann, like most of the “realist” school of United States foreign policy, is an ex­ ponent of this viewpoint, who argued that the ideal of an informed citizenry was not an undesirable ideal, but merely an unattainable one. It was, according to Lippmann, “bad only in the sense that it is bad for a fat man to try to be a ballet dancer.”ii No matter how ad­ mirable in theory, it was unrealistic, Lippmann believed, to expect the mass public to take the time and trouble to acquire the neces­ sary information to play an enlightened role in foreign policy mak­ ing. Writers often distinguish among various foreign policy publics. For W. Phillips Davison, the public includes a very large mass public, a relatively small, but still numerically substantial, attentive public that follows foreign affairs closely, and an even smaller group, the active public, that regularly makes its voice heard.■'2 Cohen claimed that the basic audiences for foreign affairs news are policy and opinion elites, the active public who represent only a small percentage of the population, and a somewhat larger.

11 Walter Lippmann, The Phantom Public (New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company, Inc., 1925), 39. l^w. Phillips Davison, Donald R. Shanor, and Frederick T.C. Yu, News from Abroad and the Foreign Policy Public, Headline Series 250 (New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1980), 58-59. 20

but less active attentive public. Cohen strongly urged the media to write for the elites rather than the broad mass public. Treating for­ eign affairs as a matter for mass consumption, Cohen continued, may ostensibly be intended to promote democracy through publicity “but in reality serves the interests neither of intelligent policy-making nor intelligent public participation.^ Many analysts may believe, as Ralph B. Levering does, that public opinion guides U.S. foreign policy, but Cohen is not among them. Levering has written: “The foreign policy of a democracy can­ not be successfully carried out for very long unless the policymak­ ers continually consult public opinion.4 Cohen is impatient with such wide-ranging claims, insisting that it is “the classic irrele­ vancy” to state, as Levering does, that American foreign policy is determined by the American people without providing any evidence to back the assertion.

It is sometimes suggested that the truly important connection is between the press and Congress directly, rather than through the broad American public that influences Congress. One of the nation’s leading post-World War II journalists, James Reston of the New York Times, has written, “What influence the press has on the conduct of

iSCohen, The Press and Foreign Policy, 270. l^Ralph B. Levering, The Public and American Foreign Policy 1918-1978 (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1978), 9. ^8Bernard 0 . Cohen, The Public's Impact on Foreign Policy (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1983), 9. 21

foreign policy usually comes indirectly, not through the mass of people but mainly through the Congress of the United States.6 Expanding on that theme, Hamid Mowlana has argued that American media influence on U.S. foreign policy is primarily exerted through Congress and nongovernmental interest groups rather than through the mass audience. Congress frequently launches investigations, according to Mowlana, because of me­ dia coverage of such issues as human rights, foreign aid, arms sales, foreign trade and intelligence matters.17

Obviously, those who regard foreign affairs as concerns only for elites may question the wisdom of a study that focuses pri­ marily on nonelite newspapers written for the mass public. Critics could argue that it makes little sense to study newspapers published in Wichita, Kansas, Anderson, Indiana, and Glens Falls, New York, be­ cause most readers of those newspapers do not make foreign policy; few of them are elites. This research, however, is founded on a con­

trary view that is much more sympathetic in its appraisal of the public’s ability to understand American foreign policy. While Lipp­ mann was dubious about the public’s abilities, former Senator J. William Fulbright, longtime Chairman of the Senate Foreign Rela­ tions Committee, represents a contending school of thought. My own belief, built upon 32 years of public life, is that the basic issues of foreign policy—as distinguished from

iSjam es Reston, The Artillery of the Press (New York: Harper and Row Pub­ lishers, 1967), 71. 17 Hamid Mowiana, "World's Best informed Public?" SAIS Review 6, no. 1 (Winter/Spring 1986): 185. 22

its details and technicalities—are well within the grasp of ordinary citizens, provided these issues are explored clearly and accurately by competent and reliable lead­ ers.is

3. Responsibility to Inform. Notice that Fulbright believes the public can understand the basics of foreign policy only so long as competent, reliable leaders explore the issues clearly and accu­ rately. Fulbright would like for members of Congress to assume this leadership role in presenting foreign affairs to the public, although he is concerned that too often they seem more interested in im­ pressing an image than in conveying an idea. Another former senator, Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., of Maryland, makes a similar point about the opportunity for congressional leadership in communicating with the public. Although senators and representatives do not usually have a national forum, they have ready access to their constituents and there is nothing in the book of rules that prevents them from being leaders as well as follow­ ers of public opinion.19

The Social Responsibility Model of the news media spells out the journalist’s duty to inform the public. This model stresses the mass media’s obligations to inform the public in the hope that this informed citizenry will then make wise decisions on policy matters.

18j. william Fulbright, “The Legislator as Educator,"Foreign Affairs 57, no. 4 (Spring 1977): 21. I^Charies McC. Mathias, Jr., "Ethnic Groups and Foreign Policy,”Foreign Affairs 59, no. 5 (Summer 1981): 997. 23

This responsibility is perhaps best summed up in the American Soci­ ety of Newspaper Editors’ Statement of Principles adopted in 1975. Article I forthrightly declares: “The primary purpose of gathering and distributing news and opinion is to serve the general welfare by informing and enabling them to make judgments on the issues of our times."20 The statement of principles does not divide the public into mass and elite audiences. The mass media are expected to inform a ll readers, viewers, and listeners. Likewise, the statement of princi­ ples implies that the responsibility extends to all news, foreign af­ fairs as much as domestic issues. According to the Social Responsibility Model, press freedom entails simultaneous obligations to carry out essential functions in contemporary society. In many ways, these functions are the same as for the older Libertarian Model, another Western concept of the press role in society. Theodore Peterson has listed six such func­ tions in the important work. Four Theories of the Press, coauthored with Fred S. Siebert and Wilbur Schramm. Those tasks are • to service the political system by providing information, discussion, and debate on public affairs • to enlighten the public so as to make it capable of self-gov­ ernment • to safeguard the rights of the individual by acting as a watchdog against government

20Wllliam Rivers, Wilbur Schramm, and Clifford Christians, Responsibility in Mass Communication (New York: Harper and Row, 1980), 289-91. 24

• to service the economic system, primarily by bringing to­ gether the buyers and sellers of goods and services through the medium of advertising • to provide entertainment • to maintain its ovi/n self-sufficiency so as to be free from

pressures exerted by special interests .21

Peterson noted that the Social Responsibility Model accepts the need to service the political system, enlighten the public, and safeguard individual rights, but is based on the premise that the me­ dia have been deficient in doing so. Servicing the economy is consid­ ered a lower priority than meeting the priority needs mentioned above. The model, he added, is committed to the idea that its role is to provide not just any entertainment, but rather “good” entertain­ ment. The Social Responsibility Model also attaches less importance to financial self-sufficiency. The media, in other words, have obli­ gations that far transcend mere money-making.

The Libertarian Model, which traces its intellectual roots to John Stuart Mill and others, is based on the free marketplace of ideas in which many newspapers and other media outlets provide

21 Theodore Peterson, “The Social Responsibility Theory of the Press," in Four Theories of the Press, ed. Fred S. Siebert, Theodore Peterson, and Wiibur Schramm (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1956), 73-103. Siebert et al. discuss the Social Responsibility, Libertarian, Authoritarian, and Communist models of the media. William Hachten analyzes two other models, the development model prominent in the Third Worid and the revoiutionary model, in his chapter, “Clashing Ideologies: Five Concepts of the Press,” in The World News Prism (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1981), 60-77. For a discussion of a comparative and cross-cuitural framework for anaiyzing the media, see Hamid Mowiana, “A Paradigm for Comparative Mass Media Anaiysis,” in International and Intercuitural Communication, ed. Heinz-Dietrich Fischer and John C. Merriii (New York: Hastings House Publishers, Inc., 1976), 4 7 4 - 8 4 . 25

many different points of view. Those times are gone in the era of newspaper mergers and one-newspaper communities. The model emerged in the years immediately following World War II, stimulated particularly by the work of the Commission on Freedom of the Press headed by Robert 0. Hutchins and the publica­ tion of its findings,A Free and Responsible Press. The commission, Peterson reported, expected five things of the news media: • to provide a truthful, comprehensive, and intelligent account of the day’s events in a context that gives them meaning (fact is to be identified as fact and opinion as opinion) • to act as a forum for the exchange of comment and criticism • to project a representative picture of the constituent groups in society • to present and clarify the society’s goals and values • to provide full access to the day’s intelligencers

Lewis W. Wolfson of The American University is among the news media analysts calling for a more sophisticated approach to government reporting. The thesis of his book 'Is that it is time for the news media to move boldly beyond reporting mainly on breaking news, personalities, and confrontations, to tell people more about how government works, how it affects them, and how they can in­ fluence it.”23 Wolfson’s challenge to the news media suggests how the Social Responsibility Model should be applied in today’s news-

22peterson, “The Social Responsibility Theory of the Press”: 87-92. 23Lewis W. Wolfson, The Untapped Power of the Press: Explaining Government to the People (New York: Praeger Publishers, Inc., 1985), 2. 26

rooms. News media coverage of foreign affairs, however, often falls far short of the Wolfson ideal for a variety of reasons. Hamid Mowlana, for example, in his analysis of the media role in the U.S.-

Iranian conflict, cited numerous problem s.24

Despite its many champions, the Social Responsibility Model has its detractors as well, perhaps foremost among them John C. Merrill, who contends that the press is no longer free when others outside the media, no matter how well-intentioned, decide what is socially responsible news coverage. Merrill, who has written widely on the subject of press freedom, has argued: “If freedom of the press is to have any real meaning—the kind that has to do with autonomy— then it means freedom from outside (nonjournalistic) forces and nothing more.”25

In addition to the American Society of Newspaper Editors’ statement on social responsibility, the United States joined 145 other nations in endorsing a UNESCO resolution that called on jour­ nalists to become advocates and apply their talents to solving cer­ tain world problems. This document, approved in 1978, is the “Declaration of Fundamental Principles Concerning the Contribution of the Mass Media to Strengthening International Understanding, the

24Hamld Mowlana, "The Role of the Media in the U.S.-lranian Conflict,” in The News Media in National and International Conflict, ed. Andrew Arno and Wimal Dissanayake (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1984), 86. For other treatments of the problem, see Abbas Malekzadeh, The New York Times, U.S. Foreign Poiicy and the Iranian Revolution, unpublished dissertation (Washington, D.C.: The American University, 1984), and James Trezise, James Glen Stovall, and Hamid Mowlana, Watergate: A Crisis for the World (New York: Pergamon Press, 1981). 25john C. Merrill, “Freedom of the Press: Changing Concept?” In International and Intercuitural Communication, ed. Heinz-Dietrich Fischer and John C. Merrill (New York: Hastings House Publishers, 1976), 135. 27

Promotion of Human Rights and to Countering Racialism, Apartheid and Incitement to War."26

Deeply influenced by the Third World view of the news media's role, the declaration calls on the world’s journalists to draw atten­ tion to the problems of disease, poverty, and the other “great evils” that affect humanity. The UNESCO declaration proposes a demanding standard of responsibility. It is not enough to provide information about apartheid, exploring various viewpoints as would be expected under the Social Responsibility Model. The news media, according to the UNESCO declaration, are called on to counter apartheid. The pri­ mary targets of this declaration are Western foreign correspon­ dents, but at least theoretically, it could be used as a guide by re­ porters covering members of the Senate Foreign Relations Commit­ tee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. 4. The Enlarged Congressional Foreign Policy Making Role. Two pressures for change in the congressional foreign policy making role bear directly on this research, one at the national level and the other at the international level. They converged in the 1970s and 1980s to give Congress substantially more clout in developing U.S. foreign policy. The national level change has been a dramatic reassertion of congressional power vis-à-vis the president, while the international level change has been a growing interdependence among the world’s nations. These changes provide an important context for this re­ search.

28jim Richstad and Michael H. Anderson, eds..Crisis in Internationai News: Policies and Prospects (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), 446. 28

The Challenge to the Imperial Presidency: In 1973, Capitol Hill Democrats and Republicans, despite their sharp differences on many other issues, generally agreed that the presidency had accumulated too much power in the crucial area of foreign policy. Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., dubbed this accretion of presidential power The Imperial Presidency in his book published that same year. According to Schlesinger, the contemporary presidency had appropri­ ated powers historically reserved to the Congress by the Constitu­ tion, an appropriation made all the easier by congressional acquies­ cence. This shift in the constitutional balance, according to Schlesinger, was most pronounced in foreign affairs. But the imperial presidency received its decisive impe­ tus, I believe, from foreign policy: above all, from the capture by the presidency of the most vital of national

decisions, the decision to go tow ar.27

In response. House Speaker Carl Albert declared that Congress must check and reverse what he termed “the accelerating usurpation of power by the Executive Branch—these wholesale invasions of leg­ islative power and responsibilities.”28 The immediate grievance was

President Nixon’s decision to intensify the bombing of North Viet­ nam and mine the port of Haiphong without consulting the congres­ sional leadership. Then came news of the secret bombing of Cambo-

27Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Imperial Presidency (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Publishing Co., 1973), ix. 28cari Albert, speech to the 50th Anniversary ofTime Inc., inserted in the Congressional Record, February 5,1973. Quoted by James L. Sundquist, The Decline and Resurgence of Congress (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings institution, 1981), 1. 29

dia and the national trauma stemming from the embarrassing Water­ gate revelations. Animated by these myriad abuses of presidential power, Congress moved boldly and decisively to regain some of its lost power in the foreign policy arena, despite vociferous objections from the White House. In the future. Congress would more carefully scrutinize Executive Branch initiatives in foreign policy, demanding more detailed information and more frequent and meaningful con­ sulta tion . Even a partial list of the assertive congressional actions since 1973 reveals a body no longer willing to be merely a presidential rubber stamp in foreign affairs: 1973—Adopted the War Powers Resolution over President Nixon’s veto in an attempt to curb the Chief Executive’s unilateral authority to commit American troops abroad. This resolution, per­ haps the centerpiece of the congressional foreign policy challenge to the imperial presidency, requires the president to consult with Congress if U.S. military forces are sent to regions where hostilities are imminent. Forces are to be withdrawn at the end of 60 days un­ less Congress has declared war, enacted some other specific autho­ rization, extended the 60-day period, or is physically unable to meet. Debate on this controversial legislation has been the source of re­ curring White House/Capitol Hill antagonisms since adoption. 1974—Approved an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act to require the president to substantially reduce or terminate aid to governments that systematically violate human rights. 30

1974—Approved the Hughes-Ryan amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act to control covert Central Intelligence Agency activ­ ities by requiring reports of such activities to be made to the appro­

priate congressional committees. 1974—Approved the Jackson-Vanik amendment to the Trade Act to deny the Soviet Union important trade benefits unless Krem­ lin leaders allowed more Soviet Jews to emigrate. 1976—Approved the Clark Amendment to prohibit the use of any funds involving Angola, either directly or indirectly. 1977—Approved several amendments to the Panama Canal treaties negotiated by the Carter administration. 1978—Displayed serious misgivings in the Senate to the Pro­ posed Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT) II with the Soviet Union. The proposed treaty was later withdrawn from congressional consideration after Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan. 1981—Only very narrowly defeated, 52-48, a proposal to disap­ prove the sale of Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS), sophisticated military technology, to Saudi Arabia.The White House applied intense pressure on behalf of the controversial sale after the House had earlier voted overwhelmingly to prohibit it. The Arms Control Export Act permitted Congress to vote its disapproval of such a sale. 1982—Passed the Boland amendment to the Intelligence Au­ thorization Bill to prohibit support for military activities designed to overthrow the government of Nicaragua. 31

The legislation mentioned here supported the congressional foreign policy powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution—the power to declare war, to ratify treaties, to approve ambassadors and other high-level appointees, and to control federal spending on foreign policy. Analysts disagree, often vehemently, whether this resurgence of congressional power helps or hinders the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. One advocate of this larger congressional role, Indiana Con­ gressman Lee Hamilton, a respected member of the House Foreign

Affairs Committee, has written: “My judgment is that a strong and independent foreign policy role for Congress remains our best hope to prevent one-man decision making on the crucial issues of war and peace.”29 Former Texas Senator John Tower claims that the two branches struggled for power after the Vietnam war for control of U.S. foreign policy: “To a certain extent Congress won, and the bal­ ance between Congress and the President has swung dangerously to the legislative side with unfavorable consequences for American foreign policy.”3° Hamilton and Tower may disagree about the ad­ vantages and disadvantages of this expanded congressional role, but on one overriding point they would agree: Congress today is an ex­ tremely active participant in shaping U.S. foreign policy, much more active than pre-1968-69.

29Lee Hamilton, “Congress and Foreign Policy," Presidential Studies Quarteriy 12, no. 2 (Spring 1982): 133. 30john Tower, “Congress Versus the President: The Formulation and Imple­ mentation of American Foreign Policy," Foreign Affairs 60, no. 2 (Winter 1981): 230. 32

An Interdependent World and Intermestic Issues; Congress made a conscious decision to challenge the imperial presidency. Congress did not create international interdependence, but the mem­ bers have had no choice but to respond to its consequences. In this case. Congress backed into a larger foreign policy role. No country, not even the United States, can any longer hope to solve its many problems acting alone. In this increasingly interdependent world, what were formerly just domestic problems to be handled solely within a national context now have important international dimen­ sions as well. Bayless Manning, former President of the Council of Foreign Relations, coined a useful concept in a 1977 Foreign Affairs article that illuminates the changed nature of issues on the international agenda. According to Manning: These new issues are thus simultaneously, profoundly and inseparably both domestic and international. If I may be permitted a coinage whose very cacophony may help provide emphasis—these issues are "intermestic."31

This intermestic quality of foreign policy is most vividly demonstrated in the growing role of world trade in the American economy. Top government leaders in both parties cite statistics to emphasize the importance of this trade. President Reagan, for exam­ ple, told a national audience on January 25, 1983, that the state of

31 Bayless Manning, “The Congress, the Executive and Intermestic Affairs; Three Proposals," Foreign Affairs 55, no. 2 (January 1977): 309. 33

the union was more closely entwined with the state of the world than ever before and added: Every American has a role and a stake in international trade. One out of every five jobs in our country depends on trade. We export over 20 percent of our industrial pro­ duction, and 40 percent of our farmland produces for ex­ port.32

When President Carter imposed a grain embargo on the Soviet Union following that country’s 1979 invasion of Afghanistan, the matter may have seemed an international one for the U.S. State De­ partment, but it was certainly a domestic concern for the Kansas farmer who hoped to sell his grain to the Kremlin. International trade has what Manning calls "inter-local" con­ sequences. As Manning noted: Interruption in the flow of a particular exported or im­ ported commodity may or may not seriously disrupt the economy of a nation as a whole, but it is certain to raise hob with particular domestic regions, industries, farm­

ers and workers.33

John Spanier and Eric Usianer, in their book American Foreign Policy Making and the Democratic Dilemma, pinpointed some of the major distinctions between intermestic and more traditional foreign policy concerns. Intermestic issues can become highly contentious

32presldent Reagan speech, January 25, 1983, quoted inTrade: U.S. Policy Since 1945 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 1984), 1. 33|viannlng, 309. 34

and deeply political as members rise to defend the interests of their states. It is one of the verities of American political life that a sen­ ator must speak out for the industries and workers in his or her state. The Michigan senator who does not try to stem the import of Japanese-made automobiles into the United States may soon be a former senator defeated by angry workers bitter that they can no longer produce American-made automobiles. For intermestic issues, interest groups, public opinion, and the news media are aroused much as they are on domestic issues. And, as Spanier and Usianer point out, the more a foreign policy decision affects domestic interests, the greater will be the congressional

ro le .34 For purposes of this research, it is also important to stress that the larger the congressional role, the more attention the issue will receive from the home-state and district press. Douglas Bennet, Jr., has described the vital link between intermestic issues and con­ gressional political ambitions: When Americans work or not, depending on the condition of OECD economies, when U.S. farm prices depend on sales to the Soviet Union and China and when U.S. fuel prices are set in places like Riyadh, no member of

Congress can ignore foreign policy decisions and expect to be reelected. He cannot say, “That’s up to the Presi­ dent and Congress can’t do anything about it."35

34john Spanier and Eric Usianer, American Foreign Poiicy Making and the Democratic Dilemma, 4th ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985), 18. 35Douglas Bennet, Jr., “Congress in Foreign Policy: Who Needs It?," Foreign Affairs 57, no. 1 (Fall 1978): 43. 35

From the perspective of members of Congress, intermestic is­ sues are primarily domestic, and only incidentally international. The driving force that elevates their visibility is the domestic angle. The Michigan automobile worker is interested in jobs, and only in­ directly in Japan because that country can affect jobs in the United States. Intermestic issues reflect the domestic roots of American foreign policy analyzed by James Rosenau.^® While the pressure to protect and create jobs is the most ap­ parent evidence of a domestic push to foreign policy, other impor­ tant problems have dual domestic and international components. The 1973 Arab oil embargo carried obvious intermestic implications when American motorists waited, often angrily, in long lines to pur­ chase gasoline. Wealthy foreigners who buy skyscrapers and other properties confront members of Congress with issues that involve domestic and international elements. The much-publicized efforts to control international drug trafficking really deal with a domestic problem—drug abuse. These intermestic issues are not the great is­ sues of war and peace, but as interdependence accelerates on the world scene, it appears inevitable that intermestic issues will command more attention from U.S. policymakers, especially those in Congress, and from the American news media. Long Term Changes: Both these streams of change described here—the challenge to the imperial presidency and the growth of in-

36james N. Rosenau, Domestic Sources of Foreign Po//cy (New York: Free Press, 1967). Also helpful in illuminating the domestic roots of foreign policy is the book edited by Charles W. Kegley, Jr., and Eugene R. Wittkopf, The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988). 36

termestic issues—seem to be long-term features of American for­ eign policy making. It is unlikely we will return to presidential as­ cendancy in the area of foreign affairs anytime soon. According to the pendulum theory, power swings toward the president only to swing back to Congress as times change. But the larger congres­ sional foreign policy making role seems to be more than a passing swing of the pendulum. Thomas Franck and Edward Weisband make this point well: "There is persuasive evidence that the present pe­ riod of Congressional ascendance is not just a swing of a pendulum; that what we are experiencing is a revolution that will not be un­ m a d e ."^7 Bennet makes the same point about intermestic issues. Their impact seems long-lasting, not evanescent. He writes: “We are in the midst of a fundamental change in the foreign policy agenda, which seems certain to keep Congress permanently in foreign af­ fairs.”3® Congress will play an expanded role in foreign policy regard­ less of who or which political party controls the White House. The bipartisan consensus that undergirded the conduct of American for­ eign policy from about World War II until about 1968-69 is gone. The result is a much different environment for fashioning U.S. foreign policy, an environment that suggests a need for more attention to news media coverage of Congress on foreign affairs.

37Thomas M. Franck and Edward Weisband, Foreign Policy by Congress (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), 6. 3®Bennet, 42. Chapter 2 Past Research on Congress and the News Media

The types of bills a Senator introduces, the committee assignments he cherishes, how he votes on roll calls, and what he defines as an “issue” are influenced by antici­ pated press reactions. 1

A growing body of research has explored the Congress/ news media connection, producing many provocative findings and engen­ dering several disagreements. This chapter examines some of these findings, while later chapters discuss how they relate to the im­ mediate topic—press coverage of selected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts.

1. National vs. Local News Media. Political scientists have em­ phasized that reeiection is the primary goal of most members of Congress. Empirical research done on Capitol Hill has found that con­ gressional press secretaries regard coverage in the iocal press, rather than the national news media, as the key to reelection.

1 Donald R. Matthews, U.S. Senators and Their World {New York: Vintage Books, 1960), 203. 37 • David Mayhew contended that the principal motivation for senators and congressmen is reelection: “Congressmen are in­ terested in getting reelected—indeed, in their role here as ab­ stractions, interested in nothing else.”2 This overriding concern, in turn, affects their behavior; members stress matters that will per­ suade voters to return them to Washington for another term. This electoral incentive, according to Mayhew, becomes the proximate goal—the one that must first be achieved before members move on to other goals. They cannot be statesmen and promote sound policies for the country unless they are first successful politicians. • Richard Fenno, Jr., identified three basic goals for all House members—reelection, good public policy, and influence within the chamber, a committee chairmanship, for example. Each member has a mix of these goals and this mix may change over time.® Reelection, for example, will become less important as a motivating factor for the member who plans to retire and wants to leave a mark on the history books with an innovative, although highly controversial, bill bearing his name.

• Susan Miller found that different members, as we would ex­ pect from Fenno’s book, had a different mix of goals and thus ap­ proached the news media differently. Their strategies differed de­ pending on what they hoped to achieve.

2 David R. Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), 13. 3Richard J. Fenno, Jr.,Congressmen In Committees (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1973), 1. People with material to leak picked the time and medium carefully. Those seeking contact with the local elec­ torate favored home town media. Those with senatorial or presidential ambitions tried for television. Those with legislative programs to sell wanted the Post or the N e w York TimesA • Political scientist Timothy Cook has also done some valuable research that draws on Fenno’s trinity of congressional goals— reelection, good public policy, and influence within the House or Senate—relating it to news media coverage of Congress. Cook found, for example, that national news media coverage does not effectively promote a member’s reelection chances back in the home state. Cook declared: Despite allegations to the contrary, there are no indications that national media visibility helps get members reelected; if anything, it may only attract stronger challengers (as occurred

in 1980) and indirectly create electoral vulnerability.® In one research project. Cook sent questionnaires to House press secretaries and learned that they regard the national news media as the least helpful in accomplishing their jobs. Dailies in the district rated at the top with national dailies such as the W a sh in g ­ ton Post and New York Times ranked far down the list, below week-

^Susan H. Miller, "Congressional Committee Hearings and the Media: Rules of the Game,” Journalism Quarterly 55, no. 4 (Winter 1978): 660. ®Timothy E. Cook, “P.R. on the Hill: The Evolution of Congressional Press Operations.” in Congressional Politics, ed. Christopher J. Peering (Chicago: Dorsey Press, 1989), 70. 40

lies published in the district, local television, and targeted mail. Cook found the following ranking among the press secretaries in re­ sponse to the question: “Please rate how valuable each is in getting your job done (on a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being very low and 10 being very high).”® 1. Local Dailies 2. Local Weeklies 3. Press Releases 4. N ew sletters 5. Local TV News 6. Targeted Mail 7. Radio Actualities 8. Recording Studio 9. Weekly Columns 10. Washington Post 11. Network Television News 12. New York Times 13. Televised Floor Proceedings

Not only the House offices, but Senate offices, too, concen­ trated their press operations almost exclusively on the home-state media. Only a few of the 535 members can regularly attract the N ew York Times or CBS no matter how much their press secretaries work at it. It is not surprising, then. Cook found, that press secretaries

®Timothy E. Cook, "Determinants of Media Strategies in the House: Democrats in the 98th Congress.” Paper prepared for delivery at the 1986 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 28-31, 1986, 5. 41

print media. He perceptively summarized the situation this way: “Most members of Congress then really do not matter much to the national media. And by and large, the national media does not really matter much to most members.”^

The local press, on the other hand, matter profoundly because they have long been regarded as important to winning elections. Thus, despite the growing sophistication of Capitol Hill press oper­ ations, they still go about it “the old-fashioned way,” according to Cook, by catering to the media in the state and district, and through print, not electronic, media. Only 15 percent of the House press secretaries in his study disagreed with the statement, “I’d rather get in the front page of my hometown daily any day than in the N ew York Times or Washington Post anytime.”® House press secretaries may prefer both local and national coverage for their bosses, but forced to choose one, they consistently opt for the local exposure. The local media priority will likely continue because members are interested in reelection and the home-state and district daily news­ papers are the best way to reach the voting audience regularly. The New York Times may be an effective vehicle for achieving the other two goals outlined by Fenno—influencing the course of national pol­ icy and advancing within the House or Senate—but it reaches few constituents back in the home state. A senator interested in commu­ nicating a message to the U.S. State Department, the White House,

7cook, “P.R. on the Hill: The Evolution of Congressionai Press Operations," 77. ®Cook,“Determinants of Media Strategies in the House: Democrats in the 98th Congress," 16. 42

embassies, and important interest group headquarters will under­ standably be delighted by coverage in the Times, a channel for reaching the attentive and active publics. Yet, the Tim es, powerful as it is, is not regarded as central to the member’s reelection hopes. • Just as members of Congress regard the national and local media differently, so the national and local media approach members differently. The national press tends to be issue-oriented, focusing on Congress as an institution and its influence on national policy. The Washington Post, for example, will be keenly interested in how the Senate as a body deals with a U.S.-Soviet treaty on the place­ ment of intermediate range nuclear missiles, but considerably less interested in any single senator. Indianapoiis Star reporters based in Washington, on the other hand, are member-oriented, not issue- oriented, and so they search for the local angle to any story. They, like other home-state and district press reporters, want to know what the home-state senator, in this case, Richard Lugar, thought of the INF treaty. As Stephen Hess has noted: “The regional media cover Senators; the national media cover the Senate.’’® Media critic Ben Bagdikian also contrasted the approach of the big-name national press figures focusing on the landmark issues that make history, and the more numerous local press corps that comes to Washington to write local angles to national stories. Bagdikian wrote of this local coverage:

^Stephen Hess, The Ultimate Insiders: U.S. Senators In the National Media (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1986), 97. 43

It tells of dredging obscure creeks in Florida, of federal contracts for nuts and bolts in Connecticut, of slums cleared in Birmingham at central government expense, and the prospects for higher tariffs on Hong Kong

s h irts .10

• And in pursuit of these stories, the local press covering Congress is always interested in “the member from back home.” Wisconsin Congressman Les Aspin has distinguished two types of stories—source stories and information stories.ii Source stories are news because of who said it. Information stories are news because they convey information, irrespective of who said it. Congressmen may not be the basis for source stories in the national media, but they are for the home-state and district press. A congressman may not be too important in the Capitol, but he is back home, important enough to merit coverage even when he is not the first or most com­ plete source of information about a matter. 2. Presenting the Best Face Back Home. Numerous Congress watchers have contended that members, especially those in the House, are portrayed in the news media back home much as they wish, often through self-serving news releases prepared by the member’s press secretary and printed in the local press without change.

l®Ben Bagdikian, “Diggers and Toilers,” Columbia Journalism Review 2, no. 2 (Summer 1963): 36. 11 Katherine Winton Evans, "The News Maker: A Capitol Hill Pro Reveals His Secrets,” Washington Journalism Review 3, no. 5 (June 1981): 28. 44

• Bagdikian claimed that members of Congress and the local press act as “partners in propaganda" to dupe constituents/readers, presenting an all-too-favorable picture of the member’s work. Ac­ cording to Bagdikian, Most of the media are willing conduits for the highly se­ lective information the member of Congress decides to feed the electorate. This propaganda is sent to newspa­ pers and broadcast stations and the vast majority of them pass it off to the voters as professionally col­

lected, written and edited “news.’’i2 In support of his claim, Bagdikian pointed out that when Wis­ consin Congressman Les Aspin mailed a news release on natural gas prices to his newspapers back home, it was reprinted word-for- word in several small dailies in the district, the Blair Press, Argyle Agenda, Denmark Press, and Cadott Sentinel. Readers of all four newspapers read the same opening paragraph, printed verbatim as submitted by Aspin’s office: At least one producer has given up its efforts to triple the wholesale price of natural gas that eventually is piped to consumers in 132 Wisconsin communities, ac­ cording to Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis).

Veteran journalist Lou Cannon has described a symbiotic rela­ tionship that flourishes between congressmen and correspondents representing the back-home press. This relationship, Cannon

l2Ben Bagdikian, “Congress and the Media: Partners in Propaganda," Columbia Journalism Review 12, no. 1 (January/February 1974): 4. 45

claimed, is based on mutual need and sometimes mutual laziness. He added, “This permits the typical invisible congressman to become visible in a highly selective way in his home district."i ® • Former Congressman Clem Miller said of the member of Congress/district newspaper relationship: The key to this relationship is that it is a one-way street. The exchange almost always starts at this end, the Washington end, and flows out to the local newspa­ per. It is an arm’s-length affair. It is dominated by the mimeographed press release, which, in my case, has to be mailed to every newspaper in the First District. 14

• Some analysts claim that this tight congressional control over press coverage back home goes far to explain why House mem­ bers in particular are overwhelmingly reelected. Fenno was struck by a paradox he explored in his article, “If, As Ralph Nader Says, Congress Is the ‘Broken Branch,’ How Come We Love Our Congressmen

So Much?’’i® The paradox arises because Congress, as an institution, is judged on the basis of national policies—the federal budget deficit, for example. Individual congressmen, on the other hand, are judged on the basis of personal characteristics and constituency

l®Lou Cannon, Reporting: An Inside View (Sacramento: California Journal Press, 1977), 182. I4ciem Miller, “A Newcomer's View of the Press,” inCongress and the News Media, ed. Robert Blanchard (New York: Hastings House Publishers, 1974), 160. 1 ®Richard J. Fenno, Jr., "If, As Ralph Nader Says, Congress Is the ‘Broken Branch,' How Come We Love Our Congressmen So Much?”, inCongress in Change: Evolution and Reform, ed. Norman J. Ornstein (New York: Praeger, 1975), 286. Also see Glenn R. Parker and Roger H. Davidson, "Why Do Americans Love Their Congressmen So Much More Than Their Congress?” Legislative Studies Quarterly 4, no. 1 (February 1979): 53-61. 46

service. Instead of asking, “Did my congressman help solve the fed­ eral budget deficit problem?,” the constituent asks of the individual member, “Did he help me get veterans' benefits?" • Michael Robinson expanded on this theme.1® The local press treats the local congressman kindly. The national press is issue-ori­ ented, not member-oriented, and covers Congress on national policy. This national news coverage is often highly critical of Congress as an institution. Longtime newsman David Brinkley once observed, for example: “It is widely believed in Washington that it would take

Congress thirty days to make instant c o ffe e ."1 7

With little unfavorable information about them reaching vot­ ers, Robinson wrote. House members are safe. It is not unusual for more than 90 percent of incumbent House members to win reelec­ tion. Senators, because they receive more critical national press coverage than House members as part of the coverage of Congress as an institution, are less highly regarded than their House counter­ parts and thus less likely to be reelected. As Robinson summarized the situation:

The national media, which reach everyone with their critical coverage of the institution, and the local media, which reach constituents and accommodate members, to-

l®Michael J. Robinson, “Three Faces of Congressional Media,” inThe New Congress, ed. Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein (Washington, D.G.: American En­ terprise Institute, 1981), 55-96. I70avid Brinkley, NBC “Nightly News,” February 3, 1976, cited in Robinson, “Three Faces of Congressional Media,” 73. 47

gether serve as the single best explanation for the para­ dox of public opinion toward Congress. • Despite the widely held perception that members of Congress and the news media act as partners in propaganda, one study found no support for Bagdikian’s hypothesis. Leslie Polk and others exam­ ined the use of congressional news releases in fifty Wisconsin weeklies and concluded, contrary to what Bagdikian claimed, “Editors are not so gullible and do not passively accept Capitol Hill news re leases.”1 ® • In another study, Diana Yiannakis did a content analysis of House members' news releases and newsletters and concluded that

some are nationally oriented and others locally oriented .20 Members

who are locally oriented used press releases/newsletters to stress their efforts to solve parochial problems, and those who were more nationally oriented, tried to use this communication to take posi­ tions on national and international issues. 3. Coverage of Committees. Researchers have determined that nationai news media coverage of Congress tends to be coverage of committee actions. Some committees are more newsworthy than others with the national television networks focusing primarily on policy rather than constituency committees, especialiy the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Yet despite that national limelight.

l®Robinson, Th ree Faces of Congressional Media," 90. 1®Leslie Polk, John Eddy, and Ann Andre, “Use of Congressional Publicity in Wisconsin District,"Journalism Quarterly 52, no. 3 (Autumn 1975): 546. 2®Diana Evans Yiannakis, “House Members' Communication Styles: Newsletters and Press Releases," in Journal of Politics 44, no. 4 (November 1982): 1049. 48

members do not regard service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee as important to their reelection campaigns. • Researchers have found that members of Congress seek seats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Af­ fairs Committee because they want to influence national policy—in this case, foreign policy—not because they want to promote their re- election campaigns. Congressional scholars distinguish between policy committees and constituency committees. Steven Smith and Christopher Deering, for example, refer to four types of House com­ mittees—prestige committees, policy committees, constituency committees, and undesired committees. They list four types of Sen­ ate committees—policy committees, mixed constituency/policy committees, constituency committees, and undesired committees. In both chambers, foreign affairs is a policy committee. Service on constituency committees allows members to do special favors for their states and districts. Smith and Deering wrote: The classic constituency committee is agriculture. Its members distinguish themselves as "cotton men,” “tobacco men,” “wheat men,” “cattle men," and “dairy men,” mirroring the dominant agricultural products of

their districts.21

It is much more difficult to serve narrow state and district interests from the policy committees, especially those dealing with

21 Steven Smith and Christopher Deering, Committees in Congress (Washington, D.C.; Congressional Quarterly Press, 1984), 105. 49

foreign affairs. According to Smith and Deering, the House Foreign Affairs Committee attracts members almost exclusively for foreign policy-making reasons. Members want to serve because they want to decide the great issues that make history, issues of war and peace, international law, and international diplomacy. These are the issues that involve America’s standing around the world. The member’s in­ terest in foreign affairs, however, is not thought to be matched by a corresponding constituent interest. As Smith and Deering noted, “Most Foreign Affairs members see the committee’s agenda as stim­

ulating little interest in their home districts.”22

The situation is much the same for the Senate where Smith and Deering found that of the five policy-oriented committees, the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee is the most exclusively policy-ori­ ented. Fenno, in his research, found that members serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee did not cite reelection as a rea­ son for joining the committee. From a political standpoint, it was deemed to be a disadvantageous assignment. As Fenno was told: It’s a political liability....You have no constituency. In my reelection campaign last fall, the main thing they used against me was that because of my interest in foreign relations, I was more interested in what happened to the people in Abyssinia and Afghanistan than in what hap­ pened to the good people of my state.23

22smith and Deering, Committees in Congress, 101. 23Fenno, Congressmen in Committees, 141. 50

Similarly, others have found the foreign affairs committees to be poor forums to advance the interests of one's constituents. They w rote: Service on the House Foreign Affairs Committee is not a prized assignment for most members because it provides little opportunity to influence legislation which is of di­ rect benefit to constituents. The Senate Foreign Rela­ tions Committee has more prestige, but is still not seen

as a desirable assignment by most m em b ers.24 Senators and House members alike recognize that three recent chairmen of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee have been defeated in reelection bids. Democrats J. William Fulbright and Frank Church, and Republican Charles Percy, an indication that, de­ spite its importance in Washington, the chairmanship does not guar­ antee easy reelection back in the home state. • The nature of congressional committees merits attention be­ cause research has found that at least for the national news media, the coverage of Congress tends to be largely coverage of commit­ tees. Michael Robinson and Kevin Appel found that committee action accounts for the bulk of television coverage of Congress, 35 percent, compared to 20 percent for presidential campaigns conducted by members, and 14 percent for floor action. Robinson and Appel con-

24john W. Sewell, William E. Heiiert, and William Garber, “Foreign Assis­ tance,” in The President, the Congress, and Foreign Poiicy, ed. Edmund 8. Muskie, Kenneth Rush, and Kenneth W. Thompson (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1986), 271. 51

eluded, “Perhaps we should not have been too surprised. Committee action still represents the heart of the congressional process."2® • Susan Miller determined that coverage of Congress tends to be primarily coverage of committees. The best way to obtain news coverage. Miller found, was to serve on a committee dealing with important matters. As she put it, “The primary factor determining committee coverage was jurisdiction over newsworthy topics."2® • Stephen Hess found that national press coverage inexorably gravitates toward the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as part of a pattern in which policy committees make the most national news followed by the mixed policy/constituency committees. The constituency committees generate the least coverage. According to Hess, “For most of the national media, the Foreign Relations Com­ mittee, as its name implies, is the locus of congressional activity in the area that Washington journalism finds most newsworthy.”2 7

Hess counted the number of network television cameras covering the various committees and learned that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee had more than twice the number of the next most- covered committee—Judiciary—522 to only 252. Other committees attracted far fewer cameras with the Indian Affairs Committee at the bottom with no coverage.2®

25Michael Robinson and Kevin Appel, “Network News Coverage of Congress,” Political Science Quarterly 94, no. 3 (Fall 1979): 411 2®Susan H. Miller, “News Coverage of Congress: The Search for the Ultimate Spokesman,” Journalism Quarterly 54, no. 3 (Autumn 1977): 465. 27Ress, The Ultimate Insiders, 30-31. 28 Hess, The Ultimate Insiders, 32. 52

To stress his point, Hess added, “One need not state this as a chicken or egg proposition: the Foreign Relations Committee has as magnetic an effect on the media as has the White House for Sena­ tors. ”29

4. Who Gets Covered: Mavericks or Ultimate Insiders? Much of the writing on the Congress/news media reiationship has centered on the seemingly simple question: Who gets covered? Yet, two schoois of thought have emerged. According to one, younger members of Congress, more interested in publicity to advance their politicai careers than in sharing an idea, receive too much attention. Others, however, argue a contending position that news coverage focuses on members in formal positions of power within Congress—the House Speaker and Senate Finance Committee chairman, for example—and those who have developed reputations as spokesmen on major issues already in the news. Thus, the news media, according to this schooi of thought, looked to Florida Congressman Claude Pepper for com­ ment on issues involving the elderly.

• Michael Robinson represented the advocates of the first school when he wrote: “On both sides of the Capitol, the changes in the media have given younger members and maverick members more political visibility and consequently greater power than ever be­ fo re .”3°

29 Hess, The Ultimate Insiders, 36. 30 Robinson, “Three Faces of Congressional Media," 95. 53

• Others who share Robinson’s concern that news coverage is moving toward “show horses" in Congress and away from “work horses"3i are: • Lewis W. Wolfson: Television has created a new breed of Senator and Con­ gressman—the carefully coiffed show horse who pushes a few favorite causes but scorns legislative chores and se­ rious homework.32

• Austin Ranney, a much-published political scientist: The networks have discovered that individual con-gress- men—not only the leaders but also the more colorful and maverick junior members—make for good interviews.33 • Other researchers, who doubt the wisdom of the maverick or show horse position, instead emphasize “spokesmanship." Susan Miller examined four major newspapers in 1973-74 and concluded that the key to coverage is ties to topics in the news. This means that the best way to get covered is to become the best and most complete source of information about topics already being c o v e re d .34 Congressman Pepper was just that on senior citizen issues.

31 For a full discussion of show horses and work horses, see James Payne, “Show Horses and Work Horses in the United States House of Representatives,”Polity 12 (Spring 1980): 428-56. 32Lewis W. Wolfson, The Untapped Power of the Press (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1985), 40, cited in Hess,The Ultimate Insiders, 4. 33Austin Ranney, Channels of Power: The Impact of Television on American Politics (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 145, cited in Hess,The Ultimate Insiders, 4. 34susan H. Miiier, “News Coverage of Congress: The Search for the Ultimate Spokesman,” 465. 54

• Joe Foote’s findings similarly support the work horse or ul­ timate insider position. Foote analyzed television network evening newscasts for the 99th Congress (1985-86) and found that almost half the House members were not mentioned a single time, and that only 5 percent of the members accounted for almost one-half the ex­ posures during this two-year period. Far from finding that show horses dominate the news coverage, Foote claimed, “Network preoc­ cupation with familiar sources erects a formidable barrier which is difficult for younger members with new and unconventional ideas to penetrate.”3®

Foote established three categories of members in terms of their national television coverage: anointed ones who receive a great deal of network time on a range of issues because they are key lead­ ers; the untouchables, who rarely make the national evening televi­ sion programs either because they do not want to or do not know how; and the surfers, who obtain coverage on a particular issue by riding the crest of a wave already in the news.

• Cook, too, found that the national news media seek out mem­

bers of Congress in positions of authority.36 The rules of the media, he wrote, tend to encourage member specialization on a narrow range of issues as a means to coverage. • Hess likewise found that congressional workhorses achieve more coverage in the national news media than the show horses—

35“Network News Underplays House, According to Survey," Broadcasting 113, no. 8 (August 24, 1987): 73. 3® Cook, “P.R. on the Hill: The Evolution of Congressional Press Operations,” 66. 55

that is, the ultimate insiders dominate the attention, not the mav­ ericks with the blow-dried hair to make them attractive on televi­ sion. Hess observed: Neither good looks nor clever views can compete with the aphrodisia of a leadership position. So long as the Senate lives by seniority. Senator Blowdried will never be able to compete with Senator Mandarin for sustained attention on the network evening news or in large-cir­ culation newspapers.37

• Proponents of these conflicting viewpoints also disagree about the consequences of the coverage. Those concerned about ex­ cessive attention to mavericks claim that while they may obtain headlines, these younger members lack the power within Congress to make policy. By diverting attention, according to this position, the mavericks contribute to the fragmentation of political power and thus make it more difficult to achieve effective congressional leadership. That is, the mavericks make it more difficult for

Congress to legislate in the collective national interest. • Hess and others who subscribe to the ultimate insider view­ point claim that the coverage has just the opposite effect of that described by those who lament the news attention that focuses on the mavericks. Hess claimed that the media are not causes of desta­ bilization in Congress. The media, he argued, do not fragment power within Congress and make it more difficult to fashion a coherent approach to national problems. The media, according to Hess, tend to

37Hess, The Ultimate insiders, 97. 56

exert a centripetal effect, moving coverage of Congress away from the edges and toward the center—that is, toward those in formal po­ sitions of power. As a result, he added: Most senators, between 80 and 90 percent, receive so little attention from the three television networks and other elements of the so-called prestige press that the national news media are irrelevant in affecting their elections or promoting their policies.®® 5. Who Gets Covered: Senators or House Members? Researchers have found that the national press corps is more attracted by sena­ tors than congressmen. Hess reported: In newspapers, senators receive only 5 percent more at­ tention than House members; but on television network evening news programs, 73 percent of the legislators mentioned are senators. Clearly, most House members lack the glitter that attracts a visual medium.®® • Eileen Shanahan found a strong Senate orientation even among editors at her newspaper. The New York Times. Shanahan de­ scribed the differing attitudes among editors toward the two cham­ bers:

It’s very hard to get a story about representatives on page 1 because our editors don’t know their names.... Ed­ itors think: It’s just the House....Every editor knows who

®®Hess, The Ultimate Insiders, 5. ®®Stephen Hess, The Washington Reporters (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1981), 102. 57

[Maine Senator Edmund] Muskie and [Pennsylvania Senator Hugh] Scott are. They assume their readers do too. Names make the news. That’s an oversimplification. But there’s something to it.^o

• It is this greater national news media attention to senators that accounts in part for the fact that House seats are much safer than Senate seats. Senators get more coverage in the large-circula­ tion newspapers and the television networks, and much of this cov­ erage tends to be critical of Congress as an institution. Senators have less intimate relations with local news media than do House members because Senators must serve an entire state with many newspapers, television stations, and radio stations. House members often are closely attuned to the local newspapers in their districts because they are many fewer than the Senator must deal with for the state as a whole. The national press corps, which according to Michael Robinson, tends to be “hard" on Congress and the local media that tend to be “soft” on individual congressmen, create a situation that makes senators more vulnerable at election time than House members.41

6. Who Gets Covered: Liberals or Conservatives? Previous re­ search has not conclusively demonstrated whether liberal or conser­ vative members of Congress receive more news coverage.

40Eileen Shanahan, cited in Susan H. Miiier, “News Coverage of Congress: The Search for the Ultimate Spokesman,” 463. 41 Robinson, “Three Faces of Congressional Media,” 91. 58

G. Cleveland Wilhoit and Kenneth S. Sherrill found that state population, member seniority, and committee prestige correlated positively with wire service coverage of senators. Two other vari­ ables, safety of the member’s seat and liberalism, appeared uncor­ related with visibility in the wire services. “Conservative sena­ tors," they reported, “appear just as often in this study as ‘liberal’ senators.”42 Their data suggested that the wire services devoted more attention to senators from large states because these legis­ lators are more vocal on the Senate floor and have greater chances for presidential nomination. They also found that chances for wire service coverage increase as the senator’s seniority increases. • Eric Veblen concluded that liberal members receive more extensive coverage by nonlocal newspapers than do conservatives when he looked at five nationally prominent dailies in the 1970s.43 7. How Much Is Congress Covered, and Is That Coverage Posi­ tive or Negative? Researchers have found that Congress is often lit­ tle covered by the news media and even that coverage usualiy por­ trays the institution negatively. • Norman Ornstein and Michael Robinson monitored network television news in September 1985 and concluded: “What we saw met the conventional standards of responsible journalism. It was

42q . Cleveland Wilhoit and Kenneth S. Sherrill, "Wire Service Visibility of U.S. Senators,” Journalism Quarterly 45, no. 1 (Spring 1968): 48. 43Eric P. Veblen, “Liberalism and National Newspaper Coverage of Members of Congress,” Polity 14, no. 1 (Fall 1981): 158-59. 59

what we didn’t see that troubles us. How do the networks cover

Congress? The answer, sadly, is: not m u c h .”44 • This concern about the relative paucity of coverage is par­ alleled by a concern that so much of the coverage portrays Congress negatively. Charles Tidmarch and James Pitney, Jr., completed a content analysis of ten metropolitan newspapers and discovered that much of the news about Congress is neutral, but that a considerable amount is negative. The press on the whole has little good to report about Congress and its membership. The editorials, and coinci­ dentally the occasional editorial cartoons, refer to a va­ riety of wrongdoings and failings by our lawmakers, in­ cluding the expenditure of too much money, disordered priorities, ethical insensitivity, lack of courage, greed,

laziness, obstructionism, rubber-stamping and m o re .4 5

• Michael Robinson and Kevin Appel found 86 percent of the stories were coded as neutral toward the institution or membership.

But all the other stories were coded as negative. “Although the bulk of the network stories about Congress ‘took no position’—were neu­ tral—not a single story on any network during our entire month placed Congress in a positive light.’’^®

44Norman Ornstein and Michael Robinson, “The Case of Our Disappearing Congress: Where's All the Coverage," TV Guide, January 11, 1986, 5. 4®Charles M. Tidmarch and John J. Pitney, Jr., “Covering Congress,"Poiity 17, no. 3 (Spring 1985): 481. 4®Michael J. Robinson and Kevin Appel, “Network News Coverage of Congress,” 447. 60

Summary. The previous research on Congress and the news me­ dia suggests some important lines of inquiry for this study. Cook’s work provides empirical evidence that congressional press secre­ taries attach great importance to how their bosses are portrayed in local daily newspapers. These newspapers, recall, ranked at the top when the press secretaries were asked to rate how valuable differ­ ent means of communication are for achieving their goals. This study focuses on just such newspapers. Analysts have emphasized, too, that regional reporters cover members and national reporters cover issues and Congress as an institution. The regional reporters look for local angles to national news out of Washington, D.C., while the national media seek national news. Yet as several authors have found, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee are very much p o l­ icy committees. They make national news and as Hess found, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee attracted far more television cameras than any other committee. But these were largely cameras for national television organizations, not the stations back home. The regional press covering Congress searches for local news that is not readily found in the two foreign affairs committees. Similarly, the past research shows that members sitting on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee sometimes regard the seats as political liabilities. Mem­ bers know that political opponents may accuse them of caring more about foreigners in Abyssinia and Afghanistan than about the good people of their state. This suggests one of the most important 61

propositions to be tested in this research: If members of Congress are keenly interested in reelection and if assignments on the foreign affairs committees may hurt their reelection chances, then it seems that they will want little publicity back home about their service on Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs. While the pre­ vious research on Congress and media inevitably leads to the proposition just cited, no one has investigated the hypothesized link before. Members instead will seek to emphasize their work on con­ stituency committees. David E. Price has claimed that members of the House Com­ merce Committee have the strongest incentives to get involved in policy areas, such as health research, where salience is high and conflict is low.47 Constituents can readily associate their everyday concerns with medical advances in cancer prevention and treatment. In other areas, he observes, such as communications regulation, salience is low, but conflict is high. This is the terrain of political danger and here members have the weakest incentive to get involved. While not focused on foreign affairs. Price’s insights can be applied to this study.

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee seek to minimize foreign affairs cover­ age back home not so much because the issues are deeply divisive, but because they are not regarded as salient by constituents. Price

did not look at news coverage, but it seems likely that issues with

47David E. Price, "Policy Making in Congressional Committees: The Impact of ‘Environmental’ Factors," American Political Science Review 72, no. 2 (June 1978): 5 4 8 -7 4 . 62

little incentive for member involvement will also be the issues with little incentive for member press coverage. This line of thought sug­ gests another proposition: Members of these two committees will put out relatively few news releases on foreign affairs. Instead, they will use their releases to highlight their work to solve local problems, the kind that receive attention in the constituency com­ mittees—for example, farming in agricultural states. They can be ex­ pected to exert source control on the flow of foreign affairs mes­ sages in the most effective way possible—simply by not sending a message in the first place. Previous research has examined which members receive press attention, the maverick versus ultimate insider debate, but the con­ cern was national, not local, media coverage. And no one looked specifically at foreign affairs coverage. Joe Foote distinguished among three types of members in terms of coverage on national television—untouchables who are almost never mentioned; anointeds who are covered on a broad range of issues stemming primarily from their positions of power in the congressional system; and surfers who attract attention because they are recognized experts on an is­ sue in the news.48

This trichotomy suggests another avenue for investigation: Is it possible for a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee to be a much-covered anointed in the national news media, but receive little foreign affairs men­ tion back home because foreign affairs is regarded as not salient to

4®“Network News Underplays House, According to Survey," 73-74. 63

constituents and readers? Is it possible for a little-known member who is an untouchable to the national news media, someone never mentioned on the nightly network news, nevertheless to be a regular newsmaker on foreign affairs back home? Likewise, the research has found that senators receive more national press coverage than their House counterparts, but does this difference hold for foreign affairs coverage back in the state? This research, then, builds on the previous research on Congress and the news media, suggesting how the earlier insights of others can be usefully adapted to an analysis of home-state and district, rather than national, press coverage of members of Congress in a certain issue area—foreign affairs. Chapter 3 Past Research on International News Flows

If it were possible to convert news content into calories, today’s daily foreign news diet served by most U.S. news­ papers and broadcast outlets would waver on the border­ line between undernourishment and starvation. 1

At times, students of international communication seem to be competing with one another to voice the most damning criticism of American mass media coverage of foreign affairs. The critics decry both the insufficient quantity and poor quality of the coverage. In terms of the diet analogy cited above, the dual problem is skimpy portions of foreign affairs news too often composed of selections that may cause indigestion at best or poisoning at worst. Others have been equally critical. • Walter Laqueur: "The quality is worse than it was before and just after the Second World War. It is definitely not as good as in most countries that have a free press."2

1 Frank L. Kaplan, “The Plight of Foreign News In the U.S. Mass Media: An Assessment,” Gazette 25 (1979): 233. ^Walter Laqueur, "Foreign News Coverage: From Bad to Worse.” Wastiington Journalism Reviews, no. 5 (June 1983): 32. 64 65

• Jim Richstad and Michael Anderson: “The news media of the United States present a sketchy, distorted and clouded picture of the world, a simplistic picture and perhaps a very dangerous picture.''^ • Hamid Mowlana: “In general, American coverage of inter­ national news tends to be shallow and oversimplified.”4 This coverage, especially the quantity, has been the subject of a virtual explosion of international news flow studies in the 1970s and 1980s. Mowlana, in his UNESCO-sponsored works. International Flow of Information: A Global Analysis, and International News Flow: An Annotated Bibliography, reports a near-geometric progression in news flow research during these two decades.^ News flow research examines, for example, how Country A is portrayed for readers, viewers, or listeners in the news media of Country B—coverage of India that reaches an American audience through the coverage of American journalists working in India. As we approach the 1990s, Mowlana pinpoints two distinct categories of research on news flows: (1) studies that focus on the actual flow and content of the news; and (2) studies that examine the factors that determine the news flow. After discussing these two categories, this chapter re­ views the major findings in specific studies relevant to an exami-

3jlm Richstad and Michael H. Anderson, “Looking Ahead," InCrisis in In­ ternational News: Policies and Prospects, ed. Jim Richstad and Michael Anderson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981), 406. ^Hamld Mowlana, “World's Best Informed Public?” SAIS Review 6, no. 1 (Winter/Spring 1986): 181. ®Hamld Mowlana, International Flow of News: An Annotated Bibliography (Paris: UNESCO, 1985), 6. Also see Mowlana, International Flow of information: A Global Analysis, Reports and Papers on Mass Communication, No. 99 (New York: UNESCO Press, 1985). 66

nation of press coverage of selected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Mowlana divides his first category—studies on news flow and content—into four lines of investigation, one of which is important for this research. The flow and content of news from one country to another on a comparative basis. In the 1950s and 1960s, this research was characterized by an East-West focus that has since shifted to a North-South emphasis as developing countries have insisted on cov­ erage more attuned to their special needs. This previous research explored balances and imbalances in news flows—for example, how much news about Country A flowed into Country B compared to how much news about Country B flowed into Country A. It also looked at different categories of news—for example, crisis and non-crisis news—and the different levels of attention given to certain kinds of events.

Virtually all the research completed in these four lines of in­ quiry has relied on content analysis as a source of data. Researchers have analyzed what is published in a newspaper or aired on a televi­ sion program. The individual news story is usually the basic unit of analysis. Stories are counted and categorized—for example, to see which countries are mentioned in news stories appearing in a par­ ticular newspaper during a particular period. In addition to these studies on the actual flow and content of news, Mowlana also identified research that examines the factors 67

that determine the flow. This research, in turn, follows two lines of inquiry: (1) studies dealing with news media factors that influence the flow; and (2) studies examining extra-media factors that deter­ mine the content and news flow. The placement of foreign corre­ spondents around the world is a news media factor contributing to the news flow. Mowlana, for example, studied foreign journalists covering the United States.6 Bias on the part of reporters is also a news media factor determining the flow as, for example, when for­ eign correspondents reflect their own country’s viewpoint in their coverage. The extra-media variables concentrate on political econ­ omy, culture, and factors outside the news organization’s control. Changes in technology, such as the development of satellite commu­ nication, for example, has dramatically altered international news flo w . While studies in the first category relied heavily on content analysis as a methodology, most of the research examining the fac­ tors that affect the flow depend on survey research. In his summary of the work on international news flows, Mowlana developed four major findings:

1. The flow is largely vertical, from the developed countries of the North to the developing countries of the South. The Big Four in­ ternational news agencies in the West—Reuters, Associated Press, United Press International, and Agence-France Presse—are the pri­ mary channels for transmitting messages from North to South.

®Hamid Mowlana, "Who Covers America?"Journal of Communication 25, no. 3 (Summer 1975): 86-91. 2. Proximity in many guises, physical, psychocultural, and po­ litical, are major factors in determining coverage. The news media select items regarding their own geographical regions. Latin Ameri­ can news organizations, for example, use wire service copy about Latin America. 3. Western Europe and the United States receive the greatest amount of coverage. The Socialist World is less well covered and the Third World is covered least. 4. Horizontal flows do exist within the developing and devel­ oped worlds, but they are much less than the flow vertically from North to South. That is, news does flow from one African country to another, for example, but that flow is less than the North-South flo w .7

Specific studies highlight Mowlana’s broad categorization scheme and suggest research questions to be examined in this work. These studies on international flows have focused on various news media—newspapers, television, and magazines. Some of them have

emphasized the United States, and others have looked at other coun­ tries. Much of this research is comparative. 1. Researchers have consistently found that the news media offer readers and viewers only a small amount of foreign affairs news. This inattention to foreign affairs news is sometimes pre­ sented in absolute terms, such as the number of television evening newscast minutes devoted to the subject. It may also be presented relatively by comparing the amount of foreign affairs news coverage

7Hamld Mowlana, International Flow of information: A Global Analysis: 27. 69

relatively by comparing the amount of foreign affairs news coverage with that for domestic issues. The results clearly Indicate that the American news media devote much more time and space to domestic news than to foreign affairs. • Doris Graber found: “In noncrisis periods, foreign affairs stories average 11 percent of all stories in American newspapers and about 16 percent of the stories on national newscasts.”8 • Herbert Gans concluded: “Most news in America, as else­ where, is domestic; in 1967, 14 percent of all television news in my sample was foreign, as compared to 28 percent of all front-of-the- book magazine news.”^ • AI Hester studied 180 newscasts from 1972 to 1976 and found that slightly less than 22 percent of the news time was de­ voted to foreign affairs. 1 ° • Vernone M. Sparkes, in an article, “The Flow of News be­ tween Canada and the United States,” studied ten Canadian and American newspapers and found that foreign affairs news accounted for 27.6 percent of the total coverage in the Canadian newspapers, but only 11.9 percent for the United States newspapers.11 2. In addition to assigning news stories to one of two cate­ gories—foreign affairs or domestic issues—some researchers have

®Doris A. Graber, Mass Media and American Poiitics, 3d ed. (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1989), 328. ^Herbert J. Gans, Deciding What's News (New York: Pantheon Books, 1979), 31. ^°AI Hester, “Five Years of Foreign News on U.S. Television Evening Newscasts," Gazette 24, no. 1 (1978): 89. ^ 1 Vernone M. Sparkes, “The Flow of News between Canada and the United States, Journaiism Quarterly 55, no. 2 (Summer 1978): 260-68. 70

refined their analysis by distinguishing between two types of for­ eign affairs news—that focusing on countries and issues in which the United States is actively and conspicuously involved, and those in which it is not. This research has determined that active, con­ spicuous U.S. foreign policy involvement converts into greater news coverage. Wars in which American troops are involved are covered much more intensively than wars in which those troops are not in­ volved. • Adnan Almaney developed three categories of news: national new s, referring to news within the United States national bound­ aries and in which no other country is involved—for example, a sen­ atorial election; international news, focusing on events in which the United States and (an)other country (countries) are actively and con­ spicuously involved—for example, the Vietnam war; and foreign af­ fairs, highlighting events in which the United States is not playing an active, conspicuous role—for example, a border dispute between the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. Almaney found that national affairs accounted for most of the coverage, followed by international affairs, and finally by foreign affairs. “National television,” Almaney wrote, “basically is a domestic news medium in the sense that the dominant element in the news picture is na­ tional affairs . 2 • According to Herbert Gans, “Foreign countries also become newsworthy when their activities affect Americans or American

12Adnan Almaney, "International and Foreign Affairs on Network Television News," Journal of Broadcasting 14, no. 4 (Fall 1970): 509. 71

interests—for example, if individual Americans are imprisoned or killed, and if American firms are harmed.”i3 Not surprisingly, American media are thought not only to de­ vote more attention to American-connected foreign affairs, but to do so with a bias toward the home country. As Mowlana claimed: In international conflicts, the media often side with the perceived na­ tional interests of the systems of which they are a part, making it difficult to maintain journalistic independence and “neutrality” in the face of patriotism and national loyalties.14 3. Researchers, recognizing that foreign affairs news can deal with a wide array of subjects — wars, trade, ocean pollution, human rights, and much more—have established various content categories to reflect these differences. Analyses based on these categoriza­ tions show that crises—wars between countries and coups/power struggles within countries, for example—account for much of this foreign affairs coverage. A country at war is much more likely to make news than a country at peace. Iraq was virtually invisible in the American news media prior to its war with Iran.

• James Larson based his research on the dichotomy of cri­ sis/non-crisis variables. Content analysis coding was done ac­ cording to nine thematic categories: Crisis News Non-crisis News

1. Unrest/Dissent 1. Political/Military Issues 2. War/Terrorism/Crime 2. Environment

■'^Gans, Deciding What's News, 32. l4|viowlana, “World’s Best Informed Public?” 183. 72

3. Coups/Assassinations 3. Economics 4. Disasters 4. Technology/Science 5. Human Interest Larson concluded that the data corroborated the notion that “commercial television is attracted to crises because of its ap­ petite for dramatic visual material.’’^ s • AI Hester found that coverage centered on three topic areas: military/defense; domestic government/politics; and crime/terrorism. Hester, looking at the period 1972-76, reported that race relations, medicine, science, culture, religion, agriculture, and education received only a minuscule amount of tim e/6 • William Adams developed a four-part categorization scheme: Thoroughness vs. Superficiality based on a news organization’s high or low priority to foreign affairs news; U.S. vs Global Vantage based on the amount of attention devoted to stories in which the United States is deeply involved; Left vs. Right examining treatment of the Soviet Union and comparing coverage of Left/Right regimes; and

Pangloss vs. Hobbes looking at whether a news organization presents a cooperative or conflictual view of the world.17 4. News media attention focuses on only a relatively few of the world’s many countries, largely the Soviet Union and America’s

isjames F. Larson, Television's Window on the World: International Affairs Coverage on the U.S. Networks (Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Co., 1984), 6 9 -7 1 . ‘'®AI Hester, “Five Years of Foreign News on U.S. Television Evening Newscasts,” G azette 24. no. 1 (1978): 94-95. I7willlam 0 . Adams, "Covering the World In Ten Minutes: Network News and International Affairs,” In Television Coverage of international Affairs, ed. William C. Adams (Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Co., 1982), 3-14. 73

Western European allies. The rest of the world is covered only spo­ radically, when countries are involved in a war, hijacking, or flood, for example. The Third World is especially likely to be covered only when involved in conflict. • Hamid Mowlana claimed: “The more an event concerns ‘elite’ nations—the United States, Western European countries and the So­ viet Union—the more likely it is to become a news item.’’^® Accord­ ing to Mowlana, the rest of the world makes news only when coun­ tries meet the criteria of negative news—revolutions, disasters, and threats to the superpowers. • James Larson, in his study of network television news, 1972-81, concluded that foreign affairs focused on a few world powers with the Soviet Union receiving more attention than any other, except for the United States.^® • George Gerbner and George Marvanyi, in their look at newspa­ pers around the world, reported, “What can we conclude from these findings? Readers of all press systems know most about Western Europe.”20

• Doris Graber wrote that evidence shows coverage is largely of America’s closest political allies and major communist coun-

Mowlana, “The World's Best Informed Public?" 181. James Larson, Television's Window on the World: international Affairs Coverage on the U.S. Networks, 55-57. 20Qeorge Gerbner and George Marvanyi, “The Many Worlds of the World's Press," In Crisis in International News: Policies and Prospects, ed. Jim Richstad and Michael H. Anderson, 195. 74

tries, with the rest of the world mentioned only when involved in hostilities.21

• Coverage of Western Europe is usually attributed to cultural affinity or cultural proximity between those countries and the United States. AI Hester found this cultural factor at work when he interviewed two Associated Press wire editors: Both men believe that U.S. editors are more interested in news from foreign countries which share a common cultural and ethnic background with the United States— mainly Western Europe. They both indicated they would give first priority to stories from developed Anglo- Saxon nations over items from non-Anglo-Saxon devel­

oping countries if news values were held constant .22 Hester, in another article, presented a “pecking order” theory to explain why certain countries are covered more than others. The pecking order is based on hierarchies of power among nations. “The perception of various nations’ places in the hierarchy or ‘pecking or­ der,”’ Hester wrote, “of national systems determines in part the types of information flow, direction and volume.”23 People want to know more, according to this theory, about dominant or aggressive nations that may threaten them. Thus Country A, a small nation, may feel threatened by Country B, a larger, more powerful nation, and

21 Doris A. Graber, The Mass Media and American Poiitics, 3rd. edition, 341. 22ai Hester, “An Analysis of News Flow from Developed and Developing Countries,” Gazette 17 (1971): 37. 23ai Hester, “Theoretical Considerations in Predicting Volume and Direction of International Information Flow,” Gazette 19 (1973): 241. 75

therefore want a considerable amount of information about B. B, on the other hand, not feeling threatened by the smaller, less powerful A, may be satisfied with relatively little coverage of A. 5. Negative portrayal of the Third World in the Western news media prompted vocal criticism and demands that the media con­ centrate on the special needs facing the developing countries, rather than emphasizing coups and other types of internal turmoil.

Third World leaders see the world through a North/South lens, not an East/West lens. They often still see themselves as former colonies of Western imperialist powers struggling against huge odds to bring economic development and a better life to hundreds of mil­ lions of people in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Theirs is a daily battle against the evils of poverty, hunger, illiteracy, and overpopu­ lation. • Mustapha Masmoudi, former Tunisian representative to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), has been among the most outspoken voices in the chorus of critics who deride Western news coverage. Masmoudi, like others,

directs his wrath at twin targets—the inadequate volume of news flow about Third World countries and the media's distorted empha­ sis. After condemning the dearth of news stories, Masmoudi added: “Moreover, [the Western news media] present these communities— when indeed they do show interest in them—in the most unfavorable 76

light, stressing crises, strikes, street demonstrations, putsches,

etc., or even holding them up to ridicule.”24

• Masmoudi and other Third World leaders want Western news coverage to report on the slow, incremental changes occurring in the less developed countries. Unfortunately, from the Third World per­ spective, Western-oriented news is event-centered. This approach prompted criticism from the International Commission for the Study

of Communication Problems, a multinational group established by UNESCO in 1977 to investigate the state of international communi­ cation. The commission, usually referred to as the MacBride Com­ mission after its leader, Sean MacBride, noted that this event-cen­ tered reporting causes distortions. “For instance,” the commission pointed out, “hunger is a process, while a hunger strike is an event; a flood is an event, a struggle to control floods is a p ro c e s s”2s . The Western news media, in other words, were accused of paying atten­ tion to hunger strikes while ignoring the more serious problem of hunger and of waiting to cover floods while ignoring efforts to pre­ vent flooding. • Western journalist Mort Rosenblum, former editor of the In ­ ternational Herald-Tribune, touched on the same problem when he explained:

24Mustapha Masmoudi, “The New World Information Order,” In World Com­ munications: A Handbook, ed. George Gerbner and Marsha Slefert (New York: Longman, Inc., 1984), 15. 25|nternatlonai Commission for the Study of Communication Problems, chaired by Sean MacBride, Many Voices, One World (New York: UNESCO, 1980), 157. 77

Western newsmen contend that slight improvement on the status quo is not news; violent change is. Coups, up­ heavals, and economic failures, therefore, must be re­ ported fully. Stories on peaceful development must take their place with other world stories in the selection pro­ cess.26

• Third World complaints about Western news coverage was one tributary to the stream of criticisms that crystallized in the form of a call for a New World Information Order, an order in which the poor developing world of the South would gain some power at the expense of the developed North. While they were interested in com­ puters, satellites, and other forms of international communication, perhaps their sharpest criticisms were aimed at the Western news media, especially those in the United States. While the West advo­ cated a free flow of information, those in the Third World argued for a balanced flow. These developing world pressures led to the activation of the World Press Freedom Committee in the West to unify the “free world" against the perceived threats. What those in the Third World saw as the need for more sensitive coverage, journalists in the West regarded in a markedly different light. According to one proponent of the Western viewpoint, “Whether from the Right or the Left, those who fear public opinion seek to destroy it by controlling the media.

26|\/iort Rosenblum, Coups and Earthquakes (New York: Harper & Row Pub­ lishers, 1981), 13. 78

It Is as simple as that.”27 They saw it as an attempt by those in power to ensure favorable foreign news coverage. Third World pro­ posals to license foreign correspondents, for example, were thought to be merely a means to punish journalists who wrote critical sto­ ries about governments in the Third World. • Largely in response to this often deeply acrimonious debate, scholars have conducted a number of studies on international news flows out of the Third World to Western audiences. AI Hester, in his examination of the use of Associated Press coverage in 15 small and medium size dailies in Wisconsin, found that Africa, Asia, and Latin America were much neglected. News concerning wars and military-defense activities predominated in items from both developing and devel­ oped countries, but a higher percentage was devoted to this subject category in the news concerning developing countries.28

• C.B. Pratt looked at news coverage in Time, Newsweek, and other magazines, and concluded that they all portrayed Africa as a conflict-ridden area in which the United States and Soviet Union compete for allies in the Cold War.29

27Kenneth Gordon, “It's Those Who Fear Public Opinion Who Want Controls,” in The Media Crisis..A Continuing Chaiienge (Washington, D.C.: World Press Freedom Committee, 1982), 40. 28 Hester, “An Analysis of News Flow from Developed to Developing Nations,” 3 5 . 29c.B. Pratt, “The Reportage and Images of Africa in Six U.S. News and Opinion Magazines: A Comparative Study,” Gazette 26, no. 1 (1980): 35-49. 79

• This tendency to present Africa and other parts of the devel­ oping world as nothing more than pawns in the superpower rivalry has been an especially sore point for Third World critics of Western coverage. Thus following the 1978 coup in Afghanistan, according to Narinder Aggarwala, Western correspondents immediately began asking, “Is the new leadership in Kabul pro-West or pro-Soviet?”3 0 They demonstrated little interest, Aggarwala found, in the central question from a Third World perspective: What did the change of gov­ ernment mean to the Afghanistan people? • Tony Rimmer analyzed DPI reporting during a week in 1977 and described the coverage as superficial, emphasizing violence and disaster, rather than positive developments in the Third World.31 • G. Cleveland Wilhoit and David Weaver found a “funnel ef­ fect" at work in which the wire services present a relatively rich mixture of news, but news editors select from that mixture a set of stories that leave readers with a portrait of the Third World as a vi­ olent place.32

• Gary D. Gaddy and Enoh Tanjong tested for geographical bias Tianted against the Third World and found, contrary to some claims, that the human and physical consequences of earthquakes, not geo­

graphic origin, determined coverage. The news media, the authors

33Narinder K. Aggarwala, “A Press for the People," in Development Forum 6 (October 1978): 5. Quoted in Kaplan, “The Plight of Foreign News in the U.S. Mass Media: An Assessment,” 237. 81 Tony Rimmer, “Foreign News on UPl's Wire in the U.S.A.,” G azette 28 (1981): 35-49. 82q. Cleveland Wilhoit and David Weaver, “Foreign News Coverage in Two U.S. Wire Services: An Update,”Journal of Communication 33, no. 2 (Spring 1983): 147. 80

claimed, devoted more attention to earthquakes in the Third World simply because most of the earthquakes of geological significance occurred in those countries. They concluded that “care must be taken in assigning the term ‘bias’ to unequal coverage without first ex­ amining the underlying news events themselves. Sometimes unequal events demand unequal coverage."33 • William C. Adams found, however, that the severity of earth­ quakes and other natural disasters explains less than 10 percent of the variation in the amount of attention they are given in nightly U.S. television newscasts. Adams concluded that it makes a big differ­ ence where earthquakes occur in terms of the news coverage. “Overall," Adams wrote, “the globe is prioritized so that the death of one Western European equaled three Eastern Europeans equaled 9

Latin Americans equaled 11 Middle Easterners equaled 12 Asians.”84 • Robert Stevenson and Richard Cole are among other scholars who have examined “coup and earthquake" coverage. While they con­ cluded that much of the Third World coverage concentrates on politi­ cal disruption and social instability, the Western media do not focus much attention on earthquakes in that part of the w o rld .85

• Jeff Charles et al. concluded that the New York Times p ro ­ vides little coverage of Equatorial and Lower Africa, but when this

88Qary D. Gaddy and Enoh Tanjong, “Earthquake Coverage by the Western Press,” Journal of Communication 36, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 112. 84wiillam 0 . Adams, “Whose Lives Count? TV Coverage of Naturai Disasters," Journal of Communication 36, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 122. 8®Robert Stevenson and Richard Cole, “Patterns of Foreign News," inForeign News and the New World Information Order, ed. Robert Stevenson and Donald L. Shaw (Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1984), 88-97. 81

part of Africa makes the front page, the news usually concerns a do­ mestic political situation that has flared into violence^® 6. Foreign correspondents have been criticized for focusing too much attention on world “hot spots," those places where the crisis of the moment is occurring. One week, it could be the tiny country of Grenada after U.S. troops are sent there and the next week, it could be a plane hijacking in the Middle East. This kind of reporting pro­ vides little context for understanding events. • Mort Rosenblum has claimed that this tendency for countries to be covered intensely on front pages for a few weeks and then dropped into oblivion, suggests the need for a rethinking of the idea of news flows: "What is commonly referred to as the world flow of information is more a series of trickles and spurts."87 Rosenblum has also written that Third World coverage is often deficient be­ cause Western journalists "parachute" into a country, cover the erupting crisis, and then leave, not staying long enough before or after the event to investigate its most important aspects—the causes and consequences of what happened.38

• Frank Kaplan suggested a remedy to hot spot journalism through more well-rounded attention:

This means reporting not only from the perpetual hot spots, such as the Middle East and Northern Ireland, and

86jeff Charles, Larry Shore, and Rusty Todd, “The New York Times Coverage of Equatorial and Lower Africa,” Journai of Communication 29, no. 2 (Spring 1979): 1 4 8 -5 5 . 87|viort Rosenblum, “Reporting from the Third World," in Crisis in Inter­ national News, 224. Reprinted from Foreign Affairs 55, no. 4: 814-35. 88Rosenblum,Coups and Earthquakes. 11. 82

such world news hubs as London, Paris, Tokyo, Rome, Moscow and now Peking, but also from the regions where the universal struggle for existence and simple gratifi­ cation is waged on a daily basis.39 7. A considerable amount of research on international news flows has sought to establish correlations between population, trade. Gross National Product, and other factors with the amount of news coverage a country receives in the mass media. These factors encompass political, economic, geographic, and other characteris­ tics. • Karl Erik Rosengren, in his research on these extra-media variables, found that much of the foreign news coverage in three European newspapers could be attributed to gross national product, trade, population, and geographic distance/o • Gertrude Joch Robinson and Vernone M. Sparkes concluded that trade was not a good predictor for the level of news flows, al­ though it was a better indicator than population. The authors found that Japan, Canada, and Mexico received relatively little news at­ tention, while other nations and regions with little trade—France, North Africa, and Israel—received proportionately more coverage.4i

8® Kaplan, “The Plight of Foreign News in the U.S. Mass Media,” 233. 4®Karl Erik Rosengren, “International News: Methods, Data, and Theory,” Journal of Peace Research 11, no. 2 (1974): 145-56; and “Four Types of Tables,” Journal of Communication 27 (1977): 67-75. 41 Gertrude Joch Robinson and Vernone M. Sparkes, “International News in the Canadian and American Press: A Comparative News Flow Study,” Gazette 22, no. 4 (1976): 203-18. 83

8. It is sometimes suggested that news media coverage of for­ eign affairs is influenced by the ethnic composition of the com­ munity in which the media operate. News from “the old country” is deemed to be more important than other foreign affairs news in some cases because readers or viewers can relate that news to their own lives. Researchers, however, have not done the empirical inves­ tigations necessary to test the proposition of a relationship be­ tween ethnicity and coverage. • Barry Rubin wrote: Jews read and write about the Middle East, Blacks are beginning to respond to coverage of Africa (although there has been little apparent interest in the past), Boston newspapers play more news on Ireland and Miami media do more on Latin America because of the special interests of local groups. Editors seem to be quite con­ scious of their audience mix and it helps shape their choice of stories.42

Ethnicity is important to many Americans. Abdul Aziz Said has pointed out the scope of ethnicity. At the present time one out of six Americans is either born—or has a parent born—out of the United States. At least 30 million Americans claim a language other than

English as their native to n g u e.4 3

42Barry Rubin, International News and the American Media, The Washington Papers: 49 (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, inc., 1977), 18. 43Abdul Aziz Said, ed.. Ethnicity and U.S. Foreign Policy, 2d ed. (New York: Praeger, 1981), v. 84

Much has been written about the political power of the Jewish lobby with its passionate devotion to Israel, especially its links to Congress. One Jewish leader has explained the strategy: “Our tech­ nique was always to rouse the constituents to mobilize the Members of Congress to press the administration that this or that policy was what the American people wanted.”44 This meant that much of the lobbying was conducted in the members’ states and districts rather than in Washington. Several analysts have claimed that Israel receives enormous news media attention. Daniel Pipes has written that American jour­ nalists are interested in only two topics in the Middle East—Israel and the United States. “Whatever takes place that is related to these countries," according to Pipes, “is amplified and broadcast to the

world; whatever does not is virtually ignored.”45

Summary

The previous research on international news flows examined the foreign affairs coverage provided by foreign correspondents. Building on that previous research, this study seeks to determine if the home-state and district press coverage of members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee highlights the same issues and countries as the coverage

44|.l . Kenen, cited In William J. Lanouette, ‘The Many Faces of the Jewish Lobby In America," National Journal 16, no. 19 (May 13, 1978): 751. 45Danlel Pipes, “The Media and the Middle East," Commentary 77, no. 6 (April 1984): 29. 85

generated by these journalists working abroad. It is hypothesized here that the home-state and district press coverage of foreign af­ fairs will closely parallel, but not completely mirror, the foreign correspondents' coverage. • Previous research has determined that the news media pro­ vide readers and viewers with little foreign affairs news, preferring instead to emphasize domestic issues. In its coverage of members of the House and Senate foreign affairs committees, does the press back home also give little attention to foreign affairs, instead stressing domestic issues? • Previous research has found that foreign affairs coverage is drawn to areas in which the United States is actively and conspicu­ ously involved. Is this also true for home-state and district press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee? • Previous research has established a series of categories for foreign affairs news and then concluded that war and other crises account for the bulk of coverage. Is the home-state and district press also oriented toward crises in its coverage of members of these committees?

• Previous research has determined that relatively few coun­ tries receive coverage—the Soviet Union, America’s Western Euro­ pean allies, and others only when they become the site of crises. Does home-state and district press coverage of members of the Sen­ 86

ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee also gravitate toward the same few countries? • Previous research has suggested that the ethnic composition of a community may affect the foreign affairs coverage in that community’s newspapers. Does a community’s ethnic makeup influ­ ence the coverage that certain countries receive when the home- state and district press report on members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee? While this study follows quite closely the previous research on international news flows, it is based on one important re­ finement. In the past, analysts have distinguished foreign affairs and domestic news. But for coverage of members of Congress, it is useful to establish a third category—intermestic issues, those that are simultaneously, profoundly, and inseparably both international and domestic.

Useful as it is, this past research on international news flows provides only part of the framework for investigating press cover­ age of members of the Senate Foreign Relations committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. A complete picture is possible only by combining this research with the work on Congress and the news media, the subject of Chapter 2. Chapter 4 Propositions and Methodoiogy

Given the obvious importance of verbal and written communication in politics, it should hardly be sur­ prising to find considerable effort applied to developing systematic techniques for analyzing the content of these communications/

Past research on international news flows and on Congress and the mass media provides a valuable context for understanding the research propositions described in this chapter. These proposi­ tions are analyzed using evidence from three sources—a content analysis of press coverage of 18 members of Congress in 18 home- state and district newspapers, plus one national newspaper, the Washington Post; a content analysis of the press releases dis­ tributed by the selected members; and interviews with some of the key people involved in the press coverage of Congress on foreign affairs issues—primarily press secretaries to the members and the reporters who cover them. But others were also interviewed in­ cluding legislative assistants for foreign affairs, administrative assistants, and four House members. Most of the interviews were

1 Philip M. Burgess, James E. Harf, and Lawrence E. Peterson,International and Comparative Politics: A Handbook (Boston: Ailyn and Bacon, Inc., 1979), 46.

87 88

conducted face-to-face in Washington, D.C., but several were done by telephone. Before examining the research propositions and the methodology to test them, it is useful to discuss the research strategy. Selection of Members and Newspapers. The data set is com­ posed of members representing states in which at least one person from that state served on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and another on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Nine states met that criterion with Washington State being the only one with both senators sitting on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and two House members sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee. Illinois was not included in the study although the state had a senator, Paul Simon, serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a House member, Henry Hyde, sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The two Illinois legislators were dropped from the study because Simon was a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination during the period covered in this research and Hyde was a member of the congressional Iran-

Contra committee. The selection of senators and House members from the same state made it possible to compare foreign affairs coverage for Senate and House members in the same newspaper. Some states had more than one senator, or more than one House member serving on the foreign affairs committees. In those cases, members were cho­ sen largely to provide a partisan balance between Democrats and

Republicans. Because the Democrats controlled both the Senate and 89

House during this research period, the sample includes five Democrats and four Republicans in both the Senate and House. North Carolina, for example, was represented on the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee by both Jesse Helms and Terry Sanford. Helms, rather than Sanford, was selected for the sample because he is a Republican and helped provide partisan balance. The party break­ down for the 100th Congress in 1987 was: Senate—54 Democrats and 46 Republicans and House 257 Democrats (59 percent) and 177 Republicans (41 percent), plus one vacancy. Next, two newspapers were selected in each of the states— Massachusetts, North Carolina, Indiana, New York, Connecticut, Kansas, and California. Four papers were used from Washington State. One, the home-state paper, was in most cases the largest circulation daily published in the state. In New York, the New York Tim es was used in the study because of its attention to foreign affairs. The other was a district paper that circulated widely in the House member’s district. The sample of members and newspa­ pers was listed earlier on page 9 and brief biographical informa­ tion about the members appears in their profiles appearing in Ap­ pendix 2. Although this research is interested primarily in home- state and district newspapers, the Washington Post was examined to offer a national level comparison.

Unit of Analysis. The unit of analysis was the individual news items appearing in these newspapers around the country. The re­ search focuses exclusively on news items that mention the 18 members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the House 90

Foreign Affairs Committee. The Charlotte Observer, for example, could print a long front-page story on a Senate hearing on emer­ gency relief for Ethiopia, but unless Senator Helms from North Car­ olina was mentioned in the article, it would not be analyzed be­ cause this research examines coverage of specific members, not Congress as a whole. The data were collected by reading each newspaper and look­ ing for news items that mentioned the selected Senator or House member from the state in which the paper is published. The news items included news stories, columns, editorials, and others. It encompassed stories by Associated Press and other wire services as well as articles written by the paper’s own staff. News items were not used in the data set if they mentioned the Senator or House member in a very minor way—for example, stories that identified someone as having formerly worked for Senator Helms. Stories that simply mentioned how a Senator or House member voted were not included. Letters to the editor from readers were not used, but those written by the 18 members were. Cartoons were not included. A few of the news items dealt with both domestic and for­ eign affairs issues. In those cases, the item was coded as domestic or foreign affairs according to the dominant theme. An interview story, for exampie, could include a member’s comments on taxes, Soviet-American relations, and AIDS research.

The data are based on a content analysis of about 2,200 newspapers around the country. Reading at a rate of one per day. 91

that represents more than six years of newspaper coverage. It is important to acknowledge that this is a fallible process. It is pos­ sible, even likely, that a researcher will overlook stories that should be included in the data. To minimize the problem of missing data, other sources were asked to help. Press secretaries were asked for their clipping files from the newspapers being analyzed in their states. Reporters, too, were asked. Numerous telephone calls were made to newspaper offices, asking for information about news items that mentioned these members. Often, staffs in these offices eagerly cooperated. Some even supplied computer printouts. Some of the larger newspapers in the sample, the N e w York Times, for example, prepare indexes that detail stories on members examined in this study. A great deal of time and effort was devoted to making the data set as complete as possible, but despite those efforts, some news items were undoubtedly over­ looked.

Research Period. Data were collected on news items ap­ pearing between May 1 and August 31, 1987.

Categorization. After they were collected, the individual news items were next categorized in one of three ways—domestic news, intermestic news, or foreign affairs news. Domestic news items are those that involve matters solely within the United States. Foreign affairs items involve foreign countries as well as the United States and intermestic items involve both foreign and domestic components. 92

Next, the news items were further categorized into topics within these broad categories.

Domestic News Topics

Health/Safety Crime/Legal System Economics Education/Museums Environment/Wildlife Veterans W elfare Energy Transportation Agriculture Politics/Inside Congress [Inside Congress repre­

sents coverage of committee assignments, financial disclosure statements, and other news items related to congressional operations.] Housing/Urban Affairs/Social Issues/Programs [help for elderly, abortion, etc.] Miscellaneous 93

Foreign Affairs Topics

Wars Intelligence Weapons Sales Nuclear Missile Negotiations/Nuclear Proliferation Internal Turmoil [attempted coups, serious charges of electoral fraud, violent protest demon­ strations against the government] World Debt Foreign Trips Covert Operations T errorism Hunger/Population Environment

Science/Technology Human Rights Miscellaneous

Intermestic Topics

Trade

Military Local [military issues focusing on local concerns, especially jobs created by military contracts] Drug Trafficking 94

Immigration Foreign Investment [purchase of land, corporations, etc., in the United States] Constituent Service [problems of and requests by individual citizens that involve foreign af­ fairs dimension] Cultural Affairs Miscellaneous

Next the foreign affairs and intermestic news items were ex­ amined to determine the countries they mentioned. Some news items did not mention any country. In many cases, news items mentioned more than one country. Very minor mentions were not included in the data. News Releases. The news releases distributed by the commit­ tee members studied were coded into one of the three categories— domestic news items, foreign affairs, and intermestic affairs. Interviews. The interviews, ranging from ten minutes to more than an hour, were based largely on the propositions elaborated on in the following section of this chapter. Interviewees were encour­ aged to offer examples from their own experiences in the area of press coverage of Congress on foreign affairs. These recollections provided revealing insights into this process. 95

The following people were interviewed for this research.

Press Secretaries

S enate

1. Barbara Lukens for North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms [Lukens is not officially called press secretary, but she handled press in qu irie s] 2. Larry Carpman for Massachusetts Senator John Kerry 3. Jason Isaacson for Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd 4. Brian Connolly for New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan 5. Larry Shainman for Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum 6. Andrew Fisher for Indiana Senator Richard Lugar 7. Barbara Smith for Washington State Senator Brock Adams 8. Lee Keller for Washington State Senator Dan Evans 9. Murray Flander for California Senator Alan Cranston

House

1. Dennis Clark for North Carolina Congressman James Clarke 2. Steve Schwadron for Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds [Schwadron also served as administrative assistant] 3. Chip Partner for Connecticut Congress Sam Gejdenson

4. Dan Amon for New York Congressman Gerald Solomon 96

5. Michael Murray for Kansas Congresswoman Jan Meyers 6. Kevin Binger for Indiana Congressman Dan Burton 7. Mark Murray for Washington State Congressman Don Bonker 8. Anna Perez for Washington State Congressman John Miller 9. Patricia Allison for California Congressman Mel Levine

House Members

1. Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson 2. Washington State Congressman John Miller 3. New York Congressman Gerald Solomon 4. California Congressman Mel Levine

Legislative Assistants and Other Who Handle Foreign Affairs for the Eighteen Members of Congress

1. Tom Boney, aide to Senator Helms 2. Richard McCall, aide to Senator Kerry 3. Carol Grundberg, aide to Congressman Bonker 4. Jim Atterholt, aide to Congressman Burton 5. Chris Dawson, aide to Senator Evans

Administrative Assistants

1. Ed Silverman for Senator Dodd 2. Ellen Globokar for Senator Adams 97

Journalists for the Eighteen Newspapers

1. Bill Arthur, Charlotte Observer Washington bureau 2. Mark Barrett, Asheville Citizen-Times in Asheville 3. John Robinson, Boston Globe Washington bureau 4. Pam Glass, New Bedford Standard-Times Washington bureau 5. John MacDonald, Hartford Courant Washington bureau 6. Bill Stanley, New London Day in New London 7. Linda Greenhouse, New York Times Washington bureau 8. Greg Moran, Glens Falls Post-Star in Glens Falls 9. Steve Fehr, Kansas City Times Washington bureau 10. Angela Herrin, Wichita Eagle-Beacon Washington bureau 11. Doug McDaniel, Indianapolis Star Washington bureau 12. Ken de la Bastide, Anderson Herald-Bulletin in Anderson 13. Joel Connelly, Seattle Post-Intelligencer Washington bureau 14. Judy Hucka, Bellevue Journal-American in Bellevue 15. Linda Keene, Vancouver Columbian Washington bureau for States News Service 16. Eric Pryne, Seattle Times Washington bureau 17. David Lauter, Los Angeles Times Washington bureau 18. Dori Meinert, Santa Monica Outlook Washington bureau 98

Other Journalists

1. Chet Lunner, Norwich Bulletin Washington bureau (Connecticut) 2. AI May, Raleigh News & Observer Washington bureau 3. John Machacek, Saratoga Springs Saratogian Washington bureau (New York) 4. Christopher Callahan, Massachusetts and Connecticut delegations in Washington bureau States News Service

Propositions and Methodology

1. Foreign affairs would account for little of the home-state papers' coverage of the selected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. It would be even less in the district papers. Foreign affairs news coverage, however, wouid account for a substantiai part of the to­ tal news coverage of these same members in the Washington Post, a national newspaper.

The foreign affairs coverage was measured two ways—ab­ solutely in terms of the number of news items and relatively as a comparison to the number of news items that mention these mem­ bers on domestic and intermestic issues. The home-state and district newspapers would emphasize do­ mestic issues and local angles to national news. Members would want to stress these local news angles because attention to prob­ 99

lems back in the state and district is deemed essential to reelec­ tion. They would fear that constituents would penalize them if they devote too much attention to foreign affairs. At the same time, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee and the home-state and district newspaper staffs would have little incentive to emphasize foreign affairs news! It was anticipated that members of Congress and journalists for home-state and district dailies would regard the public as largely uninterested in foreign affairs. For the senator or House member, the public is voters/constituents; for journalists, the public is newspaper readers. Because voters and newspaper readers often are the same people, both members of Congress and the home-state and district press would try to minimize foreign affairs news coverage. The district newspapers, more than the usually much larger circulation home-state dailies, would emphasize local angles to the news. Because foreign affairs is more difficult to localize than domestic issues, the district press would devote less attention to foreign affairs than would the home-state papers. Methodology. Evidence to test this proposition was derived from a content analysis of 19 newspapers—one national paper, the Washington Post, 9 home-state dailies, and 9 district dailies. 1A. Interviews were expected to reveal that legislators and journalists regard constituents and readers as iittie interested in foreign affairs news because this broad public sees little immedi­ ate, direct connection between events abroad and their normal pre- 100

occupations — taxes, Social Security benefits, crime, job security, etc. Interviews explored such questions as: Why is so little cov­ erage of members of these two committees in the home-state and district press devoted to foreign affairs? Do the legislators and journalists see the public as largely uninterested in foreign af­ fairs? Are members reluctant to get foreign affairs coverage back home? 2. The domestic roots of American foreign policy promote home-state and district press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in two ways, through intermestic and ethnic pressures. Together, these factors would account for an important part of the coverage. Intermestic issues, those combining international and domes­ tic elements, receive coverage back home because they relate di­ rectly and immediately to the lives of the member’s constituents and the journalist’s readers. They have salience. Trade means jobs. Similarly, the Jewish, Greek, and other ethnic lobbies apply pres­ sure that encourages members to get involved in certain foreign policy questions—Soviet Jewish emigration, for example. For many American Jews, the fate of Israel is a priority concern on the long foreign affairs agenda. Often, they have friends or relatives still living in these foreign countries. Methodology. A content analysis of the newspapers would indicate the number of intermestic news items published during this period. The ethnic factor is determined by checking news 101

items for references to ethnic groups—the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, for instance. Interviews with press secre­ taries, reporters, and others would also indicate if the ethnic com­ position of an area contributed to coverage in the home-state and district press. 3. The selected members examined and the home-state and district journalists would claim to accept a ieadership respon­ sibility in presenting foreign affairs issues to constituents and readers through the channel of the daily newspapers analyzed for this study. It is possible that members may profess a deep sense of com­ mitment in informing the public on foreign affairs, yet show little evidence of such commitment. Journalists, too, can easily profess a reverence for the social responsibility model of the press, yet produce little coverage of Congress on foreign affairs issues. It is also possible that members fulfill their responsibility to inform in other ways, through other channels—television, newsletters, arti­ cles in scholarly journals. Methodology. Members and journalists were interviewed about their sense of responsibility to inform on foreign affairs news. Their comments were then examined in light of the foreign affairs news coverage during the period of this research. 4. Members of the two committees would largely control the foreign affairs press coverage of themselves through the news re­ leases they distribute. The press would rely heavily on the members with exceptions for crises when the press calls members 102

of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Foreign Affairs Committee for reaction. 4A. Yet while news releases would be crucial for coverage, positions of power, especially foreign affairs subcommittee chairmanships, could marginally promote coverage back home. 4B Members active on major foreign affairs issues, espe­ cially those already in the news, would draw news coverage, those sponsoring iegislation, making key motions in committee hearings, or filing suit in federal courts etc. 4C Seniority would help somewhat to attract press attention. 4D. Senators wouid receive more news coverage than House members. 4E. There would be no difference in the amount of coverage for liberals and conservatives. Democrats and Republicans. The previous research on the newsworthiness of the mav­ ericks versus ultimate insiders discussed in Chapter 2 looked at the national media. But because member-local media relationships differ from member-national media relationships, members with little seniority and little influence on foreign policy could be ma­ jor newsmakers back in their states and districts. Members of Congress are source stories back home even when they are not in­ formation stories in Washington, B.C. Methodology. Content analysis revealed the number of news releases dealing with foreign affairs. Then, the news releases were compared to the coverage to determine if the members dis­ tributing releases were those receiving foreign affairs coverage. 103

The data would also indicate if, as expected, senators get more coverage than House members; if senior members receive slightly more than junior members; and if liberals and conservatives. Democrats and Republicans, receive about the same amount of cov­ erage. The liberal-conservative dimension was based on a ranking developed by William Schneider in a National Journal article that examined voting records for 435 House members and 100 senators in three areas—economic issues, social issues, and foreign affairs.2 Interviews supplemented the content analysis data. 5. The coverage would center on American national security concerns, such as wars, intelligence iosses, and weapons saies. Little coverage would be devoted to nonconflict, nonmiiitary for­ eign affairs issues—for exampie, hunger, environment, agriculture. The coverage would focus overwhelmingly on foreign affairs situ­ ations in which the United States is actively and conspicuously in­ volved.

National security concerns would receive coverage because they involve American interests. Foreign aid, Third World hunger, and other issues would receive less attention because the empha­ sis is on the well-being of foreigners, rather than Americans. h/lethodology. Content analysis of news items. Foreign affairs news items were assigned to one of several categories. Then it was determined if the item involved a situation in which the United States was actively and conspicuously engaged.

^William Schneider, “A Year of Continuity," National Journal IB, no. 20 (May 17, 1986): 1162-91. 104

6. Countries caught in conflict, the world’s “hot spots,” would receive press coverage. The Soviet Union would be well cov­ ered, but the Third World and Western Europe would get little at­ tention. The sparse coverage of the Third World that does appear would highlight negative themes, especialiy war and internal tur­ moil. Trade would be an important factor in determining which countries are covered on intermestic issues. The most populous countries, however, would not be those receiving the most cover­ age.

As this research project began, Nicaragua was in the news as a country at war, one in which the United States was playing an active and conspicuous role. It was expected that Nicaragua would be the source of considerable coverage during the period of this re­ search. Nevertheless, it was impossible to predict all the countries that would make news because hot spots, almost by definition, come and go quickly.

The Soviet Union would receive considerable coverage stem­ ming from its role as the world’s other superpower. In a break with the previous research on international news flows, however, the press coverage of members of the two foreign affairs committee back home would give little notice to Western Europe. Foreign cor­ respondents may write a great deal about Western Europe because Americans are thought to share a cultural proximity with Western Europeans and therefore be more interested in reading about them. Much of that foreign correspondent coverage, however, is fea­ ture-oriented, background pieces. This would not translate into 105

coverage of these members of Congress back home. The home-state and district press cover the issues before Congress, and Western Europe does not generate too many of them. Methodology. A content analysis of the news items revealed the countries covered. It also indicated if the coverage went to the world’s most populous countries and those with the greatest vol­ ume of trade with the United States. PART II THE FINDINGS Chapter 5 The Trickle of Foreign Affairs News

Question: Is it important for the press back home to cover members of Congress on foreign affairs? Answer: You bet it is. Foreign policy does affect us and it's up to the media to make it appealing.^

1. Domestic Issues Dominate the Coverage Back Home Content analysis of news items in 18 daily newspapers around the country clearly shows that the home-state press and district press, as expected, devote iittie attention to foreign affairs in their coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. The analysis also reveals that the national newspaper, the Washington Post, gives a substantial per­ centage of its coverage of these members of Congress to foreign affairs, much higher than either the home-state or district dailies. The data indicate, too, that the home-state newspapers print more foreign affairs news items than the district newspapers.

Three charts demonstrate the different emphases. For more detailed information on the breakdown of coverage at the nationai.

1 interview with Lee Keller, press secretary to Senator Dan Evans, Washington, D.C., January 19, 1988.

107 108

home-state, and district newspapers, see the three tables on pages

110- 112.

Chart 1. Percentage Breakdown of National Press Coverage* Paper: Washington Post

56% 1

0 Domestic @ International m Intermestic

"Note: These percentages are derived by totaling the mentions of all 18 members— nine in the Senate and nine in the House—in the Washington Post from May 1 to August 31, 1 9 8 7 .

Chart 2. Percentage Breakdown of Home-State Press C o verag e* Papers: Charlotte Observer JÜ21 Hartford Courant Boston Globe 0 Domestic New York Times ■ International Indianapolis Star C3 Intermestic 19% Wichita Eagle-Beacon Los Angeles Times Seattle Times Seattle Post-Intelligencer

Note: The numbers are based on the combined mentions of the 18 members in these nine newspapers between May 1 and August 31, 1987. 109

Chart 3. Percentage Breakdown of District Press Coverage* Papers: Asheville Citizen New London Day

New Bedford Standard-Times 0 Domestic Glens Falls Post-Star B International Anderson Herald-Bulletin 0 Intermestic Kansas City Times Santa Monica Outlook Vancouver Columbian Bellevue Journal-American

Note: The numbers are based on the combined mentions of the 18 members in these nine newspapers between May 1 and August 31,1987.

The figures for the national newspaper examined, the W ash­ ington Post, are striking—41 percent of all news items that mention these 18 members deal with foreign affairs, almost one out of two. The comparable numbers are only 19 percent in the home-state press and even less, just 14 percent in the district press. The actual num­ ber of news items printed in these sets of newspapers were: Post— 132 domestic issues (56%), 98 foreign affairs (41%), and 7 inter­ mestic (3%). Home-State Press—548 domestic issues (71%), 146

foreign affairs (19%), and 75 intermestic (10%); and District Press- 333 domestic issues (76%), 63 foreign affairs (14%) and 41 inter­ mestic (10%). The sparse coverage of foreign affairs news in the home-state and hometown press is perhaps even more revealing when the absolute totals are examined. 110

Table 2. National Press {Washington Post) News Mentions of Individual Members

F o re ig n Senate Intermestic Domestic T o ta l A ffa ir s

Jesse Helms North Carolina 4 2 1 1 4 5 7 John Kerry Massachusetts 6 0 5 1 1 Christopher Dodd Connecticut 1 5 0 3 1 8 Daniel Moynihan New York 8 3 3 2 4 3 Richard Lugar Indiana 7 0 6 1 3 Nancy Kassebaum Kansas 3 0 1 0 1 3 Alan Cranston California 7 0 31 3 8 Dan Evans Washington 2 1 6 9 Brock Adams Washington 2 1 5 8 Senate Totals 92 6 112 210

House James Clarke North Carolina 0 0 0 0 Gerry Studds Massachusetts 0 0 8 8 Sam Gejdenson Connecticut 0 0 6 6 Gerald Solomon New York 1 0 0 1 Dan Burton Indiana 0 0 0 0 Jan Meyers Kansas 0 0 2 2 Mel Levine California 4 0 2 6 John Miller Washington 0 0 1 1 Don Bonker Washington 1 1 1 3 House Totals 6 1 2 0 2 7 Combined Totals 9 8 7 1 3 2 2 3 7 111

Table 3. Home-State Press News Mentions of Individual Mem bers

F o re ig n inter- Senate Newspaper Domestic Total Affairs m e s tic Jesse Helms Charlotte North Carolina Observer 1 7 3 3 2 5 2 John Kerry Boston Massachusetts Gbbe 1 5 4 2 9 4 8 Christopher Dodd Hartford Connecticut Courant 2 4 1 0 5 9 9 3 Daniel Moynihan New York New York Times 9 3 5 0 6 2 Richard Lugar Indianapolis Indiana Star 1 3 7 3 2 5 2 Nancy Kassebaum Wichita Kansas Eapie-Beacon 9 0 2 9 3 8 Alan Cranston Los Angeles California Times 8 5 3 4 4 7 Dan Evans Seattle Post- Washington Intelliaencer 3 7 7 9 8 9 Brock Adams Seattle Washington Times 6 8 7 2 8 6 Senate Totals 1 04 4 7 41 6 567

House James Clarke Charlotte North Carolina Observer 0 0 3 3 Gerry Studds Boston Massachusetts Globe 2 1 1 7 2 0 Sam Gejdenson Hartford Connecticut Courant 9 1 1 3 9 5 9 Gerald Solomon New York New York Times 1 0 1 2 Dan Burton Indianapolis Indiana S tar 2 1 6 9 Jan Meyers Wichita Kansas Eagle-Beacon 3 0 4 7 Mei Levine Los Angeles California Times 3 0 1 8 21 John Miller Seattle Post- Washington Intelliaencer 1 4 6 1 9 3 9 Don Bonker Seattle Washington Times 8 9 2 5 4 2 House Totals 4 2 2 8 1 3 2 2 0 2 Combined Totals 1 4 6 7 5 5 4 8 7 6 9 112

Table 4. District Press News Mentions of Individual Members

F o re ig n inter- N ew sp ap er D om estic Total S e n a te Affairs m e s tic Jesse Helms Asheville North Carolina Citizen 5 0 3 9 4 4 John Kerry New Bedford Massachusetts Standard Times 1 0 1 2 1 3 Christopher Dodd New London Connecticut Dav 9 1 1 4 2 4 Daniel Moynihan Glens Falls New York Post-Star 1 0 7 8 Richard Lugar Anderson Her­ Indiana ald Bulletin 4 3 6 13 Nancy Kassebaum Kansas City Kansas Times 6 0 1 3 1 9 Alan Cranston Santa Monica California Outlook 2 0 1 5 1 7 Dan Evans Bellevue Washington Jni.-American 1 3 2 7 31 Brock Adams Vancouver Washington Columbian 1 1 21 2 3 Senate Totals 3 0 8 1 154 1 92

House James Clarke Asheville North Carolina Citizen 0 0 24 2 4 Gerry Studds New Bedford Massachusetts Standard Times 1 1 0 3 2 4 3 Sam Gejdenson New London Connecticut Day 5 1 4 29 4 8 Gerald Solomon Glens Falls New York Post Star 7 0 24 31 Dan Burton Anderson Her­ Indiana ald Bulletin 4 1 1 2 1 7 Jan Meyers Kansas City Kansas Times 4 0 4 8 Mel Levine Santa Monica California Outlook 4 0 21 2 5 John Miller Bellevue Washington Jni.-American 3 2 8 1 3 Don Bonker Vancouver Washington Columbian 5 6 25 3 6 House Totals 3 3 3 3 1 7 9 2 4 5 Combined Totals 6 3 1 4 1 333 437 113

Spread among nine senators and nine House members over the four-month period, the home-state coverage means that once every two weeks a newspaper reader found a news item that mentioned his senator or congressman on a foreign affairs topic. Mentions in the press are often very brief. The New Bedford Standard-Times mentioned local Congressman Gerry Studds in only two paragraphs of one foreign affairs story during the 124 days of this project, “Many in Area Give Col. North Praise and Money for Defense.” Steven Schwadron, a top aide to Studds, told the newspaper that calls to Rep. Studds' office appeared to be favorable to Col. North, but not overwhelming so. The paper reported Schwadron's comments. “I'd say we've gotten a fair amount of calls,” said Mr. Schwadron. “They have run the gamut. Many people were stirred, particularly by his second day of testimony. Beyond that, it has been much more mixed.”2

The data reveal that the home-state press and district press do offer readers some information about foreign affairs through their coverage of members of Congress sitting on the two commit­ tees most involved in foreign affairs. But what could be an impor­ tant contribution to the flow of international communication is, in reality, a trickle. Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Commit­ tee and House Foreign Affairs Committee are mentioned in news items back in their states. As expected, however, coverage of do-

2Alan Levin, “Many in Area Give Col. North Praise and Money for Defense," New Bedford Standard-Times, Juiy 11, 1987, 7. 114

mestic issues, not foreign affairs, accounts for a heavy majority of that press attention. The findings also show that eight of the nine newspapers printing the most foreign affairs news items mentioning the House and Senator members were the larger circulation home-state dailies. The only exception was the New London Day. Eight of the nine newspapers were again the home-state dailies when intermestic news items were added to the foreign affairs items for a composite to ta l. The two tables indicate the rankings for the 18 newspapers in terms of the combined coverage they gave to the senator and House member from that state. The numbers in Table 5 for the H a rtfo rd Courant, for example, represent the combined number of news men­ tions the paper gave to Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Sam Gejdenson. The numbers in Table 6 show the combined number of new mentions in the same newspaper for both foreign and domestic issues.

Table 5. Combined Foreign Affairs Coverage of Senators and House Members In Individual Newspapers Newspapers Number of Mentions

1. Hartford Courant 33 2. Seattle Post-lnteiligencer 1 7 Charlotte Observer 1 7 Boston Globe 1 7 5. Indianapolis Star 1 5 6. Seattle Times 1 4 New London Day 14 8. Wichita Eagle-Beacon 1 2 115

9. Los Angeles Times 11 10. New York Times 1 G Kansas City Times 1 G 12. Glens Falls Post-Star 8 Anderson Herald-Bulletin 8 14. Vancouver Columbian 6 Santa Monica Outlook 6 16. Asheville Citizen 5 17. Bellevue Journal-Amerioan 4 18. New Bedford Standard-Times ___2 Total 2G9

Table 6. Combined Foreign Affairs and Intermestic News Coverage of Senators and House Members In Individual New spapers Newspapers Number of Mentions 1. Hartford Courant 54 2. Seattle Times 31 3. Seattle Post-Intelligencer 30 4. New London Day 29 5. Indianapolis Star 23 6. Boston Globe 22 7. Charlotte Observer 20 8. Los Angeles Times 16 9. New York Times 13 Vancouver Columbian 13 11. Anderson Herald-Bulletin 12 Wichita Eagle-Beacon 12 New Bedford Standard-Times 12 14. Kansas City Times 10 15. Bellevue Journal-American 9 16. Glens Falls Post-Star 8 17. Santa Monica Outlook 6 18. Asheville Citizen 5 Total 325 116

There were no exceptions to the rule that no matter how influ­ ential and active a member may be on globally important foreign affairs questions back in Washington, D.C., he is nevertheless cov­ ered much more on domestic issues than foreign affairs back in the home-state and district newspapers. This is true for New York Sen­ ator Daniel Patrick Moynihan in the New York Times just as it is true for Congressman John Miller in the Beilevue Journal-American, just as true for Massachusetts Senator John Kerry in the Boston Globe as for North Carolina Congressman James Clarke in the Asheville Citi­ zen. The bulk of this domestic news highlights matters of direct, immediate impact on readers. Broad national policy concerns—for example, the controversial nomination of Robert Bork to a U.S. Supreme Court seat—receive some coverage, but less than the cover­ age of local judges nominated for higher federal court positions. These are more familiar names to readers. What, then, are the cate­ gories of domestic news items that produced the most coverage? The home-state and district press may demonstrate little in­ terest in foreign affairs in their coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee, but they are infatuated with politics; Is our senator going to seek reelection? Who might run against him? How much money has our congressman raised for the next campaign? What special interest groups have endorsed the incumbent? 117

Table 7. News Mentions of Domestic Issues in the Home State and District Press*

Categories Number of Mentions 1. Politics/Inside Congress 295 2. Energy 116 3. Environment 100 4. Legal System/Crime 76 5. H ealth/S afety 47 6. Economics 39 7. Housing/Urban Affairs/ Social Programs 30 8. Education/Museums 23 9. W elfare 1 9 10. Transportation 19 11. Veterans 18 12. Agriculture 14 13. Miscellaneous 85 Total 881

*Note: These numbers are derived by adding the number of news Items In the home-state and dis­ trict press, 18 newspapers In all, that mention members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee examined for this research.

The following news items represent only a small part of the Politics/Inside Congress coverage generated during the period from May 1 to August 31, 1987. • New York Times, “Manager for Moynihan”: The undeclared manager for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's undeclared reelection campaign is the New York Democrat's wife. 118

Elizabeth Moynihan, who is already hiring staff and looking for office space, said in an interview yesterday that she didn't know when, or whether, the official title would actually be bestowed. “I'm just it," she said. “We're going to run a mom and pop campaign."3 • Charlotte Observer, “Task Force Seeks to Raise Helms's Rat­ ing' The National Congressional Club has created a committee to boost what it says are Sen. Jesse Helms's sagging ratings in public opinion polls.^ • Hartford Courant, “Dodd May Be Favorite Son in '88 Primary": With Gary Hart's presidential campaign self-destroyed, U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd could become Connecticut's favorite son in its presidential campaign next March.s • Seattle Post-Intelligencer, “Who Now Can Win the West?", a report on Senator Evans' views on Democratic chances to win in that region in the presidential campaign: “If Senator Hart, for whatever reasons, withdraws, the Democrats will certainly find it more difficult to make any penetrations in the West," said Evans. “Gary Hart has

3No byline, "Manager for Moynihan,” New York Times, May 14, 1987, B12. ^No byline, “Task Force Seeks to Raise Helms's Rating," Charlotte Observer, May 15, 1987, B4. ^Charles F.J. Morse, “Dodd May Be Favorite Son in '88 Primary," Political Thoughts Column, Hartford Courant, May 11, 1987, B1. 119

talked about Western issues and been the only Democrat with a significant chance.”6

• Seattle Post-Intelligencer, “Evans Gears Up to Run in '88— But Isn't Sure He Will," part of the recurring speculation about Evans' own political plans for 1988—Was he or wasn't he going to seek another term and if he did, which Democrats would challenge him: Sen. Dan Evans said yesterday that he has begun organiz­ ing, polling and raising money for a 1988 Senate cam­ paign “based on the fact I will run," even though he will not make a final decision until the fall.7 Many of the 18 members received Inside Congress coverage after filing the required financial disclosure reports. One such piece was the Indianapoiis Star story, “Lugar, Quayle Bring in Extra Cash with Speeches."® Appointment to leadership positions within Congress also merited coverage. The Bellevue Journal-American, for example, car­ ried an article, “Evans Named Deputy GOP Senate Whip."® Energy ranked behind Politics/Inside Congress as the second

major source of domestic news items. Most of that coverage came in the four Washington State newspapers where the Hanford nuclear

®Joel Connelly, “Who Now Can Win the West?" Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 8, 1987, A1. 7Joel Connelly, “Evans Gears Up to Run in '88, but Isn't Sure He Will,"Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, June 23, 1987. ®Doug McDaniel, “Lugar, Quayle Bring in Extra Cash with Speeches,"Indianapo­ lis Star, May 24, 1987, B3. ^Associated Press reports, “Evans Named Deputy GOP Senate Whip,"Bellevue Journal-American, July 8, 1987, A12. 120

power plant brought together clashing concerns about jobs, energy, environmental quality, and safety. • Seattle Times, “Report Could Aid Congressional Foes of N Reactor,” reported that two key safety systems at the 23-year-old nuclear facility could not be relied upon until they underwent fur­ ther evaluation and improvement. Otherwise, the danger existed that a hydrogen fire could burn out the filters in the confinement system. “The report is just another indication that the nuclear reactor is not safe," Barbara Smith, spokeswoman for Sen. Brock Adams, D-Wash., said. “The question is, does the need (for plutonium) outweigh the risk. We just don't know and we want to make sure that safety comes fir s t."1 0 • Hartford Courant, “Gejdenson Urges Ouster of Nuclear Chief," discussed Congressman Sam Gejdenson's efforts to force the re­ moval of the head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission: “These are not the actions of a man who is qualified to make the critical deci­ sions that will affect the future of nuclear power in this country,” Gejdenson wrote ReaganJi The Legal System/Crime also provided many of the news items in the domestic coverage, looking primarily at the appointment of federal judges and U.S. attorneys. These news items were especially

^®Elouise Schumacher, “Report Could Aid Congressional Foes of N Reactor,” Seattle Times, August 28, 1987, E1. ^^Gidget Puentes, “Gejdenson Urges Ouster of Nuclear Chiefs,"Hartford Courant, June 19, 1987, A14. 121

important in the overall news coverage for senators Helms, Evans, and Lugar. • Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, “Evans Gets Tough on Dwyer Nomination,” informed readers of Senator Evans's work to persuade the U.S. Justice Department to approve the nomination of Seattle lawyer William Dwyer for a federal district judgeship .12

The next largest domestic news category was the Environment. Many of the stories appeared in newspapers serving coastal areas of the United States such as Massachusetts, California, and Washington State. Other environmental topics, however, also generated coverage back in the home-state and district press. • Seattle Times, “Offshore Oil Leases: Hodel's Latest Hurry-up Blunder," an op-ed piece authored by Congressman Don Bonker, pre­ sented his strong opposition to offshore drilling: The administra­ tion's “Drain America First" strategy will leave little oil for future generations.13 Health/Safety ranked as the fifth largest category of domestic news, much of it stemming from a growing concern about AIDS. • Bellevue Journal-American, “Miller Pushes His Bill to Help AIDS Victims," reported on Congressman John Miller's legislation. “Providing federal money for testing, ensuring privacy, and making it illegal to discriminate against persons with the AIDS virus are

I2steve Miletich, “Evans Gets Tough on Dwyer Nomination,"Seattle Post-lntel­ llgencer, June 12, 1987, A1. l3pon Bonker, Opposite-editorial “Offshore Oil Leases: Hodel's Latest Hurry-up Blunder,” Seattle Times, June 12, 1987, A9. 122

key elements to federal legislation introduced Thursday, Rep. John Miller, R -lst District,” said Friday.i^ The remainder of the domestic coverage focused on such other categories as Education, Agriculture, and Economics.

2. Coverage of Intermestic Issues As expected, the data indicate that intermestic issues account for part of the total news coverage of members of the Senate For­ eign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in the home-state and district press. These issues, however, represent only a small portion of the coverage of these same members in the national press, the Washington Post. The number of intermestic news items, those combining inter­ national and domestic components, printed in the home-state and district press is impressive because relatively few stories on the foreign affairs agenda can be localized and given that domestic ele­ ment. Indiana Congressman Dan Burton, for example, would be hard pressed to find an Indianapolis connection to the war in Mozambique, despite his own intense interest in the subject. Similarly, California Congressman Mel Levine would be challenged to find a Santa Monica connection to his legislation intended to prevent Pakistan from de­ veloping a nuclear weapons capability. Given the fewer opportunities to localize foreign affairs, it is apparent that intermestic issues

1 ^Christopher Jarvis, “Miliar Pushes His Bill to Help AIDs Victims,"Bellevue Journal-American, August 1, 1987, A3. 123

are an important part of the overall congressional news mix in the home-state and district press. The charts showed that intermestic news items account for about the same percentage of the coverage in both the district and home-state newspapers. The Washington Post presented the news from a national, not state or local, perspective. In its coverage of the 18 members of the two committees, the P ost thus gave trade less attention than did the home-state and district newspapers. No­ tice the different emphases on intermestic news: 1. District newspapers 10 percent 2. Home-state newspapers 10 percent 3. National newspaper 3 percent The intermestic coverage in the home-state and district press represented several categories. This coverage is explored in detail in Chapter 8.

3. Responsibility to Inform the Public about Foreign Af­ fairs Press secretaries to members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee agree that their bosses accept a responsibiiity to piay a special leadership role, by virtue of their position, in informing the public on important foreign affairs issues. Many of the Journalists interviewed saw their re­ sponsibility somewhat differentiy—to report on members repre­ senting their newspaper circulation areas. This kind of générai ver­ bal commitment on the part of members and press does not auto­ 124

matically convert into coverage on foreign affairs in the home-state and district newspapers.

Press secretaries were asked, “Does the member you serve ac­ cept a special responsibility to inform the public on foreign affairs, given his seat on the committee?” Virtually all the press secre­ taries said the senators and House members they work for feel a special responsibility to inform on foreign affairs. Journalists fol­ lowing the 18 members for the home-state and district press were asked, “Do you feel a sense of responsibility to inform the public on foreign affairs?” The journalists’ answers fell into three categories: Four said they felt such a responsibility to inform on foreign a ffa irs . Eight said they felt a responsibility to cover the members representing their areas, and if those members were involved in for­ eign affairs, it would be covered. Two said they felt a responsibility to report on foreign affairs with a direct connection to the communities they served-for exam­ ple, such intermestic issues as international trade. Three said they felt a responsibility to report on foreign af­ fairs with a direct local connection to the communities they served and to cover the members representing their areas. One did not answer. Three reporters for the larger circulation home-state dailies said they felt a responsibility to inform on foreign affairs, while only one reporter for the smaller circulation district newspapers 125

did. Most of the district press reporters said they saw it as their re­ sponsibility to cover what members do, especially on local issues of immediate concern. Press secretaries said their bosses eagerly accepted a respon­ sibility to inform on foreign affairs with their enthusiasm for this mission reflected in the words: If members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee don't do it, then who will? Murray Flander, press secretary to Senator Cranston, said the California senator certainly does his best to in­ form on foreign affairs, but cautioned against the idea that members of Congress “educate" the public. That word, Flander said, is too pedagogical. 15 Ed Silverman, administrative assistant to Senator Dodd, said “absolutely” the Connecticut lawmaker feels a special obligation to help constituents understand U.S. foreign policy as one of his roles as a member of the most important committee in the foreign policy

making process, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “It is im­ portant to him,” Silverman said, “that his constituents understand the U.S. role in the world.”i ® Similarly, New York Congressman Gerald Solomon said when interviewed that he accepts a responsibility to inform on foreign affairs “because my hand is in all the foreign policy set in this

15|ntervlew with Murray Flander, press secretary to Senator Alan Cranston, Washington, D.C., October 23, 1987. I6|nterview with Ed Silverman, administrative assistant to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., May 6, 1988. 126

country and the people are entitled to know what their government

is doing in foreign a ffa irs . While most members professed a general willingness to inform on foreign affairs, three conservatives. Senator Helms and Con­ gressmen Burton and Solomon, emphasized a special kind of respon­ sibility, one aimed at thwarting communism around the world. Sen­ ator Helms has a sharply honed approach to informing the public. Thomas Boney, a Helms aide, explained the senator's rationale: The threat of communism in the 1980s is not as real in the minds of some people as it used to be. The places it's happening are not places that people usually think about, places like Nicaragua. People need to be more aware of

the communist d a n g e r / ®

Interviews with congressional staffers on Capitol Hill con­ vincingly suggest that lawmakers want to serve on the Senate For­ eign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee out of a genuine urge to contribute to an effective U.S. foreign policy. Often, they are deeply fascinated by foreign affairs. Press secre­ taries insisted that their bosses wanted to sit on the foreign affairs committees because they want to fashion policy, not because the po­ sitions contribute to reelection. The members often do not regard their work in halting nuclear proliferation or stopping a communist advance in Mozambique as essential to another term in Congress. A

I^Telephone interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. l®lnterview with Thomas Boney, aide to Senator Jesse Helms, Washington, D.G., August 27, 1987. 127

seat on a constituency committee—the Agriculture Committee, for example—may be a forum to promote one's reelection, but many of the press secretaries agreed that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee serve no such function. Mark Murray, press secretary to Washington State Con­ gressman Don Bonker, summarized this good government motive for sitting on the two committees: “In general, foreign affairs work is something you do because it's the right thing to do.”i® Publicity back in the home state is sought primarily to promote an effective U.S. foreign policy, not because it enhances a member's reelection chances.

Don Meinert, a Washington-based reporter for the Santa Mon­ ica Outlook, a Copley-chain newspaper, summarized the journalist's verbal commitment to play a constructive role in policymaking when she said she strives to provide “enough information so they [constituents] can hold their elected officials accountable and un­ derstand major issues.’’^®

Yet, the data show that despite verbally accepting a responsi­ bility to inform, the member/press relationship does not generate much coverage in the home-state and district press on foreign af­ fairs. Dennis Clark, press secretary to Congressman Clarke of North Carolina, said his boss strongly believes that legislators sitting on the House and Senate committees focusing on foreign affairs should

l®lnterview with Mark Murray, press secretary to Congressman Don Bonker, Washington, D.C., April 29, 1988. 20|nterview with Dori Meinert, reporter for the Santa Monica Outlook, Wash­ ington, D.C., January 28, 1988. 1 28

make a committed effort to inform constituents about major issues in that area. Despite the verbal commitment to inform, Clarke was not mentioned in a foreign affairs news item in the Washington Post, Charlotte Observer, or Asheville Citizen during the period of this re­ search. This is not to say that Congressman Clarke never tried to obtain foreign affairs coverage, only that accepting a responsibility to inform was not in itself enough to guarantee coverage. Obviously, more than an abstract, generalized commitment to inform the public is needed to transmit many foreign affairs mes­ sages from members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee through the channel of home-state and district newspapers to constituents. The communications pro­ cess is more complicated than that. Pressures on members of Congress and journalists close the gates to many foreign affairs news items. Linda Greenhouse, a reporter for the New York Times, elabo­ rated on the dilemma when she expressed her support for a social responsibility approach to news as a guide to quality journalism, and then added: “But a sense of social responsibility does not extend to making a member out to be something he isn't.”2i Greenhouse was making the point that giving attention to an obscure senator or House member could leave readers with the erroneous impression that the member's activities carried great weight in foreign policy­ making. Greenhouse was, in effect, saying, “yes, but..."; yes, it is im-

21 Telephone Interview with Linda Greenhouse, reporter for theNew York Times, Washington, D.C., September 1987. 129

portant for journalists to give readers full information, but many factors come into play in deciding what to cover. The next chapter explores the “yes, but...” phenomenon by ex­ amining factors that keep messages on foreign affairs from reaching the newspaper-reading audience. The press, for various reasons, of­ ten holds up the “stop” sign that prevents messages from passing through the gates. At other times, members of the two committees exert source control and simply decide not to initiate messages on foreign affairs. Together, these factors account for the fact that foreign affairs news is a mere trickle. Chapter 6 Factors Affecting the Flow of Foreign Affairs News

In domestic areas, you can point to things that relate to the state. Arms control is very important, but it’s ab­ stract and difficult to point to. it’s not like a bridge or a judgeship.1

1. Salience vs. Significance: The Tension in Foreign Affairs C overage As expected, the difficulty of showing how foreign affairs connects directly and immediately to the everyday lives of constituents and readers is the major factor impeding the flow of foreign affairs news about members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee to constituents and readers through the home-state and district press. Interview findings with both congressional staffs and Journalists underscore the importance of salience in determining coverage.

Foreign affairs receives relatively little attention in the home-state and district press coverage of these members because

11nterview with Ellen Globokar, administrative assistant to Senator Brock Adams, Washington, D.C., May 2, 1988.

130 131

most of the issues are regarded as “abstract.” Dan Amon, press secretary to New York Congressman Gerald Solomon, in the quotation beginning this research, said the average voter does not pace up and down in his living room worrying about the Warsaw Pact/NATO conventional force balance because the matter seems too abstract. The issues are distant from their everyday concerns. As Amon put it, “They can’t plug into it.”2 Nuclear arms control is important, perhaps even a life-and-death matter, but it is also abstract. Salience is the ticket that permits a congressman’s message to pass through the newspaper gates and reach constituents/readers. Doris Graber, a perceptive analyst of the American mass media, has discussed five criteria most often used in selecting news stories. Two of those criteria reflect the importance of salience—high im­ pact on readers and listeners; and closeness to home. Local news is a priority because it is assumed that people are most interested in what happens near them. Graber said of the high impact criterion:

A major earthquake in China would receive less coverage than a minor tremor in California because of its lesser impact on American audiences. People want to read about things relevant to their own lives. Stories about health hazards, consumer fraud, or a sick youngster’s lost dog make more of an impact on people than unfamiliar hap­ penings with which they cannot identify.®

2|ntervlew with Dan Amon, press secretary to Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D. 0., December 23, 1987. ®Dorls Graber, Mass Media and American Poiitics, 2d ed. (Washington, D.C.; Congressional Quarterly, Inc.), 78. 132

Rounding out the five criteria of newsworthiness were vio­ lence, conflict, disaster, or scandal; familiarity of people or situa­ tions; and timeliness, novelty. Domestic news is much more likely than foreign affairs news to encompass familiarity. The president of the United States and the mayor are much better known to con­ stituents/readers than the president of some African country that they have never heard of. Foreign affairs, however, easily satisfied the other two criteria. Much of the coverage focuses on conflict, much of it violent conflict, and it is just as timely—that is, it oc­ curred just as recently—as domestic news. And it can be just as novel. In one survey mentioned by Graber, television and newspaper editors were asked which of 64 fictitious stories they would use and why. “Conspicuously absent from their choice criteria was the story’s overall significance,” Graber noted.4 Foreign affairs, then, may be significant, but significance is not as important as salience in determining newsworthiness. Yet significance does play some role in determining news coverage; otherwise the amount of foreign af­ fairs news on members of the two foreign affairs committees would be even less back in the home-state and district press. The findings analyzed in chapter 9 reveal that the coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in the home-state and district press emphasizes national security concerns. Events around the world generate coverage when they reach a certain high level of significance, even if they are not

^Graber, Mass Media and American Poiitics, 2d ed., 79. 133

salient to constituents/readers. In terms of attracting attention, it helps if the event involves violence, conflict, disaster, or scandal. The Iraqi attack on an American vessel, the Stark, was just such an event, creating the agonizing possibility that the United States would be drawn into a war in the Persian Gulf, a very significant m atter. Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee are often subjected to conflicting pres­ sures. To be reelected, they know it is wise to obtain coverage in the home-state and district press that shows they are attentive to matters with a high impact on constituents, matters close to home. They may want to demonstrate they are locally and state-oriented, that they are working hard to improve highway conditions, attract new industry, guarantee the best medical care, and provide many other services that affect the quality of everyday life. To promote their reelection chances, members of Congress

want credit. They can achieve this credit much more easily on do­ mestic and intermestic issues than foreign affairs. David Mayhew cites “credit claiming” as one of the activities that members of Congress engage in for electoral reasons. He defined credit claiming as acting in a way to generate belief in a relevant political actor that the member is responsible for causing the government to do something that the actor regards as desirable.® Foreign affairs, un­ fortunately, involves broad national policy concerns, so it is diffi-

®David R. Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection (New Haven: Yale Univer­ sity Press, 1974), 5 2-53 . 134

cult for a House member or Senator to make a convincing case that he is responsible for changing that policy. How does a freshman per­ suade anyone that he forced the administration to change its foreign policy toward the Soviet Union in the light of Mikhail Gorbachev’s new openness? Obviously, it cannot be done. Credit claiming by a member of Congress is especially difficult in foreign affairs be­ cause the public knows that the president and the executive branch agencies play leading roles in this area. It is easier to make a credible case for obtaining “particu­ larized benefits” for the state or district. These benefits, according to Mayhew, can be given out to a specific individual, group, or geo­ graphical constituency.® The benefits of an enlightened U.S. foreign policy toward the Soviet Union, as significant as they may be, cannot be given to a specific individual, group, or geographical con­ stituency. The benefits are national; they extend to every American. It helps if the particularized benefits are highly visible. A senator cannot point to nuclear arms control. He can point to a new bridge in the state. A bridge is salient to constituents in a way nuclear arms control is not.

The tension occurs because while the need to be salient some­ times drives members of Congress away from foreign affairs cover­ age, so a sense of responsibility to inform nudges them toward cov­ erage. The findings contained in this study clearly reveal that the centripetal push of salience as a means to reelection is stronger

®Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection, 54. 135

than the centrifugal pull of responsibility to inform on matters of great significance. Both members of Congress and the home-state and district press want to please their audiences. Members want to please voters and the press wants to please readers. They both assume that voters and readers are more interested in domestic news than foreign af­ fairs. Therefore, they both are motivated to stress domestic news. Contrary to what was expected, members of Congress and the home- state and district press did not necessarily perceive the public as uninterested in foreign affairs. The press secretaries and journalists were asked how inter­ ested in foreign affairs (excluding intermestic issues) they thought the public in their areas to be, using a scale of 1-10 with 1 the low­ est and 10 the highest. A heavy majority of the press secretaries and journalists who answered the question rated public interest in foreign affairs as lower than that for domestic issues. A few rated public interest in domestic and foreign affairs the same. Only one rated public interest in foreign affairs as more than in domestic is­ sues.

The press secretaries, on average, rated the public interest in foreign affairs at 5.9 compared to 7.5 for domestic issues. The jour­ nalists, on average, rated the public interest in foreign affairs at 4.5 compared to 7.2 for domestic issues. 136

Murray Flander, press secretary to California Senator Alan Cranston, said, “California is very foreign-affairs oriented."^ His high regard for the public on matters of foreign affairs attention was not matched, however, by others. Lee Keller, press secretary to Washington State Senator Dan Evans, was among those who per­ ceived a public apathetic about foreign affairs. “They’re turned off by anything having to do with foreign policy," she declared. “It’s hard to get John Doe in Centralia, Washington, hyped-up about for­ eign policy.”8 Mark Barrett, reporter for the Asheville Citizen, said he assumed that his readers were more interested in pocketbook is­ sues than foreign affairs.9 Larry Shainman, press secretary to Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum, observed, “Senator Kassebaum is interested [in foreign affairs] but the people in Coffeyville don’t care that m u c h .”io Anna Perez, press secretary to Washington State Congressman John Miller, said, “The press is not interested because it knows the public is not interested. Foreign affairs doesn’t sell newspapers."11

Some of the interviewees who said the public was interested in foreign affairs added “yes, but...” or “not as much as...." The qual­ ifying words suggest the limits to the perceived public interest in

^Interview with Murray Flander, press secretary to Senator Cranston, Wash­ ington, D.C., October 23, 1987. ^Interview with Lee Keiier, press secretary to Senator Dan Evans, Washington, D.C., January 19, 1988. ^Telephone Interview with Mark Barrett, reporter for the Asheville Citizen, Asheville, North Carolina, September 3, 1987. I9|nterview with Larry Shainman, press secretary to Senator Nancy Kassebaum, Washington, D.C., September 1987. 11 Interview with Anna Perez, press secretary to Congressman John Miller, Washington, D.C., December 11, 1987. 137

foreign affairs. It was not that the public was totally uninterested, just that it was not as much interested in foreign as domestic is­ sues. • New York Congressman Gerald Solomon said it straightfor­ wardly, “Unfortunately, the public is not as interested in foreign affairs as in domestic affairs.”i 2 • Doug McDaniel, reporter for the Indianapolis Star, observed, “Yes, readers are interested in foreign affairs, but I’m not sure they’re interested in a daily story on the INF [Intermediate Nuclear Forces]."18 • Stephen Fehr, reporter for the Kansas City Times, said of Kassebaum, “She knows that people aren’t as interested in foreign affairs as in farming."i4

• William Stanley, reporter for the New London Day, said the public is not entirely parochial, but added, “Yes, but they are not as concerned about foreign affairs as about district issues; they don’t care as much about foreign affairs as about issues that directly af­ fect their neighborhoods."i5

Believing that the public wants more domestic news than for­ eign affairs news, members of Congress and the home-state and district press are locked in a symbiotic relationship. It serves both

12Telephone interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. iSjeiephone interview with Doug McDaniel, reporter for theIndianapolis Star, Washington, D.C., November 24, 1987. l^Telephone interview with Stephen Fehr, reporter for theKansas City Times, Washington, D.C., January 5, 1988. ISTeiephone interview with William Stanley, reporter for the New London Day, New London, Connecticut, September 25, 1987. 138

their needs to provide just that kind of domestic news coverage. As discussed in greater detail in the next chapter, members distribute many more news releases on domestic issues, for example, than on foreign affairs. Most reporters for these newspapers devote most of their efforts to gathering and reporting domestic news. Hamid Mowlana examined a series of broad areas that affect the mass media communication process. Part of his discussion fo­ cuses on types of controls at work with controls defined as the pro­ cess of deleting or limiting the content or distribution of any of the media of communication. Controls, Mowlana points out, constitute not only legal, economic, and other restrictions, but also mental processes at work on the individual and organizational level. Mowlana distinguishes four types of controls: (1) Internal Actual. Specific rules and regulations such as edu­ cation, professional qualification, internal rules, and hierarchy cre­ ated and institutionalized formally by the mass media system itself.

(2) Internal Perceived. Social control in the newsroom, peer group pressure, perceived gatekeeping functions, and unwritten, but understood, rules of the internal conditions of the organization. (3) External Actual Control. Direct censorship, licensing, and other external legal, professional, governmental, or external insti­ tutionalized factors. (4) External Perceived Controls. Not all demands and influenc­ ing factors have their major locus inside the institutional system of mass communication. Important factors in determining the outcome of both the production and distribution stages of a media system 139

stem from constraints and unwritten rules of the environment. Pre­ dispositions and wants of readers and audiences, reactions to per­ ceived political preferences and idiosyncrasies, and pressures exer­ cised by elites and organizations in the society are examples of this type of control.16

For purposes of this research, the most important of Mowlana’s controls are the external perceived ones, particularly the "predispositions and wants of readers.” The member of Congress, of course, is concerned about the predispositions and wants of voters. Readers and voters are presumed to want news about matters that directly and immediately affect their own lives. Research for this project, however, indicates that it is wrong to believe that members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Af­ fairs Committee want no foreign affairs coverage back in their home-state and district newspapers. Factors stemming from the way newspapers function also af­ fect the home-state and district foreign affairs coverage. The N e w York Times and Los Angeles Times, for example, are national, not just home-state, newspapers. Their approach to congressional cov­ erage is thus somewhat different from that of the other newspapers analyzed for this research. These two national newspapers tend to be more issue-oriented than member-oriented in their foreign af­ fairs coverage emanating from Congress.

i6Hamid Mowlana, “A Paradigm for Comparative Mass Media Analysis," in International and Intercuiturai Communication, ed. Heinz-Dietrich Fischer and John 0. Merrill (New York: Hastings House Publisher, 1976), 474-84. 140

The Indianapolis Star is member-oriented and will highlight Senator Richard Lugar’s role. The Los Angeles Times, on the other hand, does not accord Senator Cranston the same advantage. David Lauter, a Los Angeles Times reporter, said being from California is not enough to guarantee coverage for Cranston. “The fact that a local person is involved is not enough for us,” Lauter continued.17 The Boston Globe, according to reporter John Robinson, is committed to a “two-track philosophy,” covering both nationai affairs and congres­ sional members from the region.18

A small staff, and a small amount of space each day for news also inhibit coverage of members of Congress, but unlike the salience factor, staff size and news hole size could minimize do­ mestic as well as foreign affairs coverage. Larger papers, too, can have inadequate staff to cover members of Congress thoroughly. The large-circulation dailies, such as the Los Angeles Times, obviously employ more writers than the smaller-circulation Santa Monica O utlook, but the Tim es also follows more members from California in keeping with its role as the state’s largest paper. The Santa Mon­ ica paper, on the other hand, closely monitors only the congressmen representing the Santa Monica area. Patricia Allison, press secretary to California Congressman Mel Levine, who serves Santa Monica con­ stituents, said the Los Angeles region has so many members of Congress that it is difficult to obtain coverage in the Los Angeies

I^Telephone interview with David Lauter, reporter for theLos Angeles Times, Washington, D.C., February 16, 1988. 18|nterview with John Robinson, reporter for theBoston Globe, Washington, D.C., November 23, 1987. 141

Times. “Unless someone is directly involved in a major matter,” Al­ lison said, “he’s not likely to get covered much.”i9 Reporters working for some of the district newspapers face special problems trying to cover members of Congress because they are not on the scene where the news is being made. Mark Barrett, a reporter for the Asheville Citizen, described the frustrations that accompany the long-distance coverage. “It’s a real problem for us,” Barrett declared. “Jaime Clarke is in Washington and I’m here in Asheville.”20

2. Striking a Baiance between Domestic and Foreign Affairs Coverage Press secretaries often made convincing cases that they want more foreign affairs coverage for their bosses back home than they now receive. But sometimes they cannot get the coverage because

reporters and/or editors refuse to print their messages on foreign affairs. The press secretaries are understandably annoyed when the

gates slam shut and their messages die. It is more often the case that a member wants foreign affairs coverage back home that he cannot obtain than that he is avoiding foreign affairs press coverage from an aggressive press regularly pressuring him for more foreign affairs news. Senator Brock Adams, for example, diligently tried to get coverage back home on his efforts to apply the War Powers Act in the Persian Gulf, but with only limited success.

19|nterview with Patricia Ailison, press secretary to Congressman Mel Levine, Washington, D.C., January 14, 1988. 20Telephone interview with Mark Barrett, September 3, 1987. 142

Yet, the situation is considerably more complex than this. While it is true that a number of press secretaries said the members they serve want more foreign affairs coverage back home than they now get, it is also true that members usually want this expanded foreign affairs coverage only within limits. The press secretaries become concerned about the political dangers posed by “coverage imbalance.” Some foreign affairs coverage is desirable. It satisfies a sense of responsibility to inform the public on matters of great signifi­ cance to long-term American interests. Like any other coverage, it helps promote name identification with voters. It can even help, some press secretaries believe, when constituents take pride in the fact that their Senator or congressman is a major actor in Wash­ ington, D.C., on a vital foreign policy matter. From the standpoint of reelection, however, some press sec­ retaries believe it is best that foreign affairs coverage be presented as part of a balanced mix of news along with domestic issues and intermestic issues. A press secretary or member may be a bit con­ cerned to learn that the home-state paper has mentioned him in 20 news items on foreign affairs in the past two months and only two on domestic issues. Such an imbalance could leave readers with the impression that the member has become so involved with human rights abuses in Latin America or food shortages in Ethiopia that he is neglecting the salient concerns of unemployment in Anderson, In­ diana, or teenage drug use in Seattle. 143

The same senator and his press secretary, on the other hand, could rest a bit more comfortably if the home-state paper mentioned him in 20 stories on foreign affairs and 80 stories on domestic is­ sues. In both cases, the newspaper has run 20 news items on foreign affairs mentioning the senator. But readers are more likely to as­ sume the member is insufficiently attentive to state problems when they see 20 foreign affairs items balanced by only two domestic stories, than when they see 20 foreign affairs stories balanced by 80 domestic stories. This member and press secretary sensitivity to a for­ eign/domestic news imbalance back in the state extends only to the possibility that the press will print too many stories proportionally on foreign affairs. There is no corresponding concern that heavy coverage on domestic issues will upset voters who come to think their senator or congressman is spending too much time on social security, taxes, crime, and jobs for the state and district and not enough on foreign affairs. That is, some congressional offices may worry that the press back home may cover them 80/20 on foreign affairs; they do not worry that the press will cover them 80/20 on domestic issues. This research found no widespread fears in congressional of­ fices that members were running serious political risks by getting too much foreign affairs coverage back in their home states. Far from it. Press secretaries were asked: "Does the member you serve try to avoid foreign affairs coverage back home?” They answered 144

almost unanimously that they did not. Two press secretaries said their bosses sometimes tried to avoid coverage on foreign affairs. As a check on what the press secretaries said, reporters for the home-state and district papers were asked, “Do the members you follow try to avoid foreign affairs coverage?” Virtually unani­ mously, they said no. But no wonder members of the Senate Foreign Relations Com­ mittee and House Foreign Affairs Committee are not concerned about the political repercussions of too much foreign affairs coverage. The amount of foreign affairs coverage is usually less than 20 percent for members. It is apparent that many members would feel no political threat if the amount of their foreign affairs coverage back home in­ creased. One key way that members seek to ensure balanced foreign affairs/domestic coverage is through their choices of committee and subcommittee assignments. No one serves only on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee. To protect themselves politically, members choose their committees and subcommittees very carefully. These other committees—that is, other than foreign affairs—are seiected precisely because they allow the member to highlight the salience connection, to show voters how he is working in Washington, D.C., to solve problems that relate di­ rectly to their lives back in the states. The home-state and district press, seeking to serve readers with local news, are eager to provide coverage on these topics. Members are understandably eager to have 145

the home-state and district press report on their efforts on behalf of the home folks through the other committee assignment. Mark Murray, press secretary to Washington State Congressman Don Bonker, expressed what is an axiom for most on Capitol Hill— make yourself absolutely unassailable politically by effectively representing the district’s interests, by attending to the home fires first. Then, constituents will more readily accept the time and en­ ergy devoted to foreign affairs. Murray said, "If you’re doing your job and protecting yourself on domestic issues—if you’re in there pitch­ ing for your constituents—then you won’t get hurt on foreign af­ fa irs .”21

In one reelection campaign, Murray recalled. Banker’s opponent accused the incumbent Democrat of being excessively involved in foreign affairs, of being more concerned about suffering in the Third World than about suffering in the district. Similarly, Bonker had been charged with being more interested in the Port of Mombasa in Kenya than in the Port of Gray’s Harbor in Washington State. Such attempts to stir up voter resentments against Banker’s foreign pol­ icy work failed, Murray claimed, because Bonker had tended to those home fires. “The charges didn’t wash," Murray observed, “because

Don could point to dozens of accomplishments in the a rea."22 Others interviewed described the crucial link between careful attention to domestic issues in the state and district and the free-

21 Interview with Mark Murray, press secretary to Congressman Don Bonker, Washington, D.C., Aprii 29, 1988. 22|nterview with Mark Murray, April 29, 1988. 146

dom to become involved in foreign affairs without fear of political damage. Greg Moran, reporter for the Glens Falls Post-Star, said Congressman Gerald Solomon is able to be so active on foreign af­ fairs because he is popular and politically securely entrenched back in his western New York district.23 Chip Partner, press secretary to Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson, summarized the primacy of domestic news coverage when he said, “The things a congressman are best known for in the district should be things that directly affect the district.”24 Politi­ cally, in other words, it is best, especially for House members, to be known back home for what they are doing in the other committee rather than on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The other committees are constituency committees. The Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee are policy committees, dealing with the broad sweep of U.S. foreign policy. They have a national focus. Constituency committees, by contrast, do not affect all parts of the country, and interests within the country, equally. The right constituency committee for one member may be wrong for another member. Moynihan would find it difficult to represent his State, New York, with its heavy urban concentrations, by sitting on the Senate Agriculture Committee. But Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms, and Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum can do a great deal from seats

23Telephone interview with Greg Moran, reporter for the Glens Falls Post-Star, Glens Falls, New York, September 2, 1987. 24|nterview with Chip Partner, press secretary to Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., November 12, 1987. 147

on that committee to advance the interests of the many farmers in their states. A content analysis of the data indeed shows that many of the news items stem from members’ activities in the other committees. Pamela Glass, Washington bureau reporter for the New Bedford Stan- dard-Times, illuminated how important these other committees can be with an example from the career of one member she covered closely, Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds. Studds, she said, has a “perfect marriage" of committee assignments with the Mer­ chant Marine and Fisheries Committee, his “bread and butter com­ mittee," the one especially important to his fishing-oriented dis­ trict, balancing his work on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.2 5 Glass noted that Studds could have become chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, the one with jurisdiction over legislation invoiving Central America, a hot foreign affairs is­ sue, but decided it was more important politically to remain as chairman of the Merchant Marine’s Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildiife Conservation where he could carefully monitor legislation that affects his district’s important fishing and shipping interests.

For Congressman Clarke, it was politically important to sit on the subcommittee that oversees legislation related to the Smoky Mountains National Park, a major attraction in his district. As his press secretary Dennis Clark explained, “The Interior Committee is his major assignment and after getting it in order to take care of

25Telephone Interview with Pamela Glass, reporter for the New Bedford Stan- dard-Times, Washington, D.C., November 20, 1987. 148

the home folks, he sought a seat on the Foreign Affairs Commit­ tee."26 Constituency committees are also important to senators. By protecting his state’s tobacco and furniture interests from his po­ sition on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator Helms is free to become actively engaged in foreign affairs issues. Tom Boney, one top Helms aide, said, “His constituents know that Senator Helms will defend their interests in these areas; with his political bases well covered, they are much more willing to let him get involved in foreign affairs."27 Their work on the constituency committees helps ensure a balanced press coverage with foreign affairs coverage off­ set by even more attention in the home-state and district press to domestic issues, especially those with salience for the people they represent. The other committee is politically valuable because it permits the member to take credit for particularized benefits. Clarke is one of 435 House members voting on aid to Nicaragua, but he is the

member most actively defending the interests of the Smoky Moun­ tains National Park, so it is much more credible for him to claim credit for his constituency efforts than for his 1/435 contribution to national foreign policy. The Smoky Mountains National Park is also important to his district newspaper, the Asheville Citizen, because it involves issues of salience for readers. It is in Clarke’s political interests for the paper to report frequentiy on his efforts on behalf

26|ntervlew with Dennis Clark, press secretary to Congressman James Clarke, Washington, D.C., August 19, 1987. 27|ntervlew with Thomas Boney, aide to Senator Jesse Helms, Washington, D.C., August 27, 1987. 149

of the Smokies and it is in the paper’s interest to print stories that directly and immediately affect readers. Clarke thus is careful to keep the Asheville reporters informed on this work and the reporters are eager to be kept up-to-date.

3. Making Choices and Selling Stories In the real world of limited time, energy, and newspaper space, press secretaries and reporters must set priorities. For both of them, when it comes to congressional news coverage back home, foreign affairs is a weak rival to domestic news. Certainly for most members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee, domestic issues coverage back in the home-state and district press is regarded as essential, while foreign affairs coverage is often only an extra. Given a choice between a story about their work on domestic issues and a story about their work on foreign affairs issues, members, ac­ cording to their press secretaries, would prefer the domestic news coverage. Reporters reflected this same priority. • Patricia Allison, press secretary to Congressman Levine, said his district press, the Santa Monica Outlook, highlights sewage spills and other environmental concerns with a direct impact in the district he represents. “There’s a tendency," Allison declared, “to get coverage on pork barrel issues. ‘What are you doing for us that affects our day-to-day living?”’28

28|nterview with Patricia Allison, press secretary to Congressman Mel Levine, Washington, D.C., January 14, 1988. 150

Don Meinert, who writes for the Santa Monica paper out of Washington, confirmed Allison’s analysis, acknowledging that she would cover Levine on sewage spills in the district rather than Cen­ tral America, if forced to make a choice. "I’d definitely take the story on sewage spills,” Meinert said. "I know the papers won’t get it from the wires or some other source. I know it’s important to our readers; it’s something happening in their own backyards.”29 • Christopher Callahan, who covered the Massachusetts and Connecticut delegations for Associated Press, was asked which of three hearings would get his attention: Congressman Studds in a House Merchant Marine Committee session on dumping plastic debris into the oceans, a serious environmental concern; Congressman Gej­ denson in a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing considering his resolution to block the sale of U.S.-made fighter jets to Honduras; or Gejdenson in a House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee meeting on the dangers posed when employees drink on the job at nuclear power facilities.30 Callahan did not hesitate in his answer. Obviously, he re­ sponded, the hearings on ocean dumping and nuclear power plant safety would get his attention because they have salience for readers back in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Studds represents a coastal district so ocean issues have important economic as well as environmental consequences. Gejdenson serves a Connecticut

29|ntervlew with Dori Meinert, reporter for theSanta Monica Outlook, Wash­ ington, D.C., January 28, 1988. 30|nterview with Christopher Callahan, reporter for Associated Press, Wash­ ington, D.C., September 1987. 151

district with nearby nuclear power facilities. The Honduras jet sale offered the local congressman’s role as the local angle for news coverage; ocean dumping and nuclear power plants, however, offered both the local congressman’s role and a local angle to the story. Forced to choose, Callahan opted for the hearings with salience; the Honduras jet sale, despite its importance for long term U.S. foreign policy interests, simply could not compete. • Eric Pryne, Washington-based reporter for the Seattle Times, was asked if he would choose a story on Washington State Senator Brock Adams’s concerns about the application of the War Powers Act to the reflagging in the Persian Gulf, or the award of a federal grant to improve sewer facilities in Seattle. “I’d probably take the sewer grant,” Pryne said.3i Sewer grants could be directly and immediately related to the lives of his readers; the War Powers Act could not. • Pamela Glass, who covers the Massachusetts delegation for the New Bedford Standard-Times, was asked to choose between a story featuring Senator John Kerry on the well-being of the area’s fishing industry or a story on the iatest developments in the fighting in Nicaragua. The papers she writes for. Glass said, would always prefer the fishing story over the Nicaragua story “because it has the most local impact. Unless, of course, someone from Massachusetts was killed in Nicaragua.”32

31 Telephone Interview with Eric Pryne, reporter for theSeattle Times, Wash­ ington, D.C., November 30, 1987. 32Telephone interview with Pamela Glass, November 20, 1987. 152

Domestic and intermestic news items can be sold by the press secretary to the home-state and district reporter and by the re­ porter to the editor on the basis of salience to readers—thousands of Seattle homeowners will have better sewer service if a federal grant is approved. Foreign affairs, on the other hand, must be sold on the basis of significance, not salience. This a real mismatch. The press secretary must convince the reporter working for the Indianapolis Star or Anderson Herald-Bulletin that the struggle between competing forces in Mozambique is important for U.S. for­ eign policy interests and thus merits coverage. The press secretary cannot sell the story on the basis of salience; he cannot easily con­ vince the reporter that the unfolding events in faraway Mozambique have a direct impact on readers. Press secretaries with reporters and reporters with editors must be much more persuasive in trying to sell foreign affairs news than in selling domestic or intermestic news.

This word ‘sell’ and the concept behind it were mentioned sev­ eral times in interviews with press secretaries and journalists. In terms of the communication process, a news item sells if it passes through the gate and on to readers. Otherwise it dies. Just as press secretaries lament their problems in trying to sell reporters, so re­ porters cite comparable complaints about their editors. The re­ porter, after all, is not the only gatekeeper; a press secretary can convince a reporter to write a story, but after making it through that first gate, it could be killed by an editor in the newsroom back in Indianapolis or some other city. 1 53

• Kevin Ginger, press secretary to Indiana Congressman Dan Burton, observed, “It’s really hard to get the papers in the district to carry stories on Africa. A domestic story is always easier to s e ll.’’33 • Barbara Smith, press secretary to Washington State Senator Brock Adams, said, “It takes much more effort to get a return on foreign affairs stories than domestic ones.”34 • Glass knows what the editorial gatekeepers at her papers want to emphasize in their congressional coverage and it is not for­ eign affairs. “If I write stories on foreign affairs,” she declared, “and they don’t run, it takes the wind out of my sails. I say, ‘why waste the tim e?’”3s

• Stephen Fehr, Washington-based reporter for the Kansas City Times, elaborated on the problems posed by the double set of gate­ keepers. It is true, Fehr said, that Kansas Congresswoman Jan Mey­ ers did not try to sell him on foreign affairs stories, but even if she did, Fehr would have a difficult time selling his office back in Mis­ souri.36 Thus, Fehr continued, perhaps Meyers, knowing that Fehr could not sell a foreign affairs story to his editors even if she sold it to him, might decide it was not worth the effort to try to sell Fehr on the foreign affairs story in the first place. The frustrations suggest the wisdom of Ben Bagdikian’s pungent observation that

33|ntervlew with Kevin Binger, press secretary to Congressman Dan Burton, Washington, D.C., August 21, 1987. 34Interview with Barbara Smith, press secretary to Senator Brock Adams, Washington, D.C., December 4, 1987. 35Telephone interview with Pamela Glass, November 20, 1987. 36Telephone interview with Stephen Fehr, January 5, 1988. 154

trying to be a first-rate reporter on the average American newspa­ per is like trying to play Bach on a ukelele.37 As the interviews reveal, press coverage back home flows nat­ urally to domestic issues because they are regarded as more ger­ mane to readers’ lives than foreign affairs. But there is another rea­ son for the dominance of domestic news coverage in the home-state and district press—the desire of reporters and editors to provide readers with news they cannot obtain from national news organiza­ tions. They know that N ew sw eek, CBS, the Washington Post, and other news giants will cover the Persian Gulf tensions in ample de­ tail. More than that, they know that their own newspapers will offer extensive coverage on those tensions through Associated Press and other wire services. All the 18 home-state and district newspapers examined for this research subscribed to at least one wire service. Therefore, the Washington-based reporter for a home-state newspa­ per may easily conclude it makes little sense to duplicate that wire service coverage by spending long hours in Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings. This, too, makes it difficult to sell a story. • Keller described the situation from her vantage point. "Here’s what I get over and over when I try to ‘sell’ them [the Seat­ tle dailies] on a foreign affairs story,” she said. ‘We’il let the wires cover it.’”38 The wire services, however, are issue-oriented, not member-oriented, and while Associated Press may report on the

37Ben H. Bagdlkian, The Effete Conspiracy (New York: Harper and Row, 1974), 15. 38|ntervlew with Lee Keller, January 19, 1988. 155

Persian Gulf situation, it may not mention Senator Evans’s ideas on how best to diminish tensions. The wire services, after all, cannot present the views of 435 House members and 100 Senators on every foreign affairs matter. They must be selective. • Pryne, stationed in Washington, D.C., by the Seattle Times, said the domestic issues that he writes about are too local in scope to receive much, if any, attention from the national news media. One such local concern is the fate of the Hanford nuclear power facility in Washington State. As Pryne phrased his approach to the news, if readers do not learn from him what Congress and the executive branch agencies are doing about Hanford, then they will not learn at all. It is not an important enough issue to generate much attention from CBS and the other national news organizations. Nor will Asso­ ciated Press cover it in great detail as a national story. “Our strength,” Pryne said, “is in our local and regional reporting. The pa­ per has me here [in Washington, B.C.] to cover things of interest to the state.”39 As a result, foreign affairs is infrequently covered. Other reporters expressed the same determination mentioned by Pryne to cover the local angles to congressional news that will go un reported altogether unless reported by them. Dori Meinert said, “We try to establish a niche and provide something not available through the wires.”4o

If all news were national news, the country would need only one newspaper read by everyone from New York to Los Angeles. Obvi-

39Telephone Interview with Eric Pryne, November 30, 1987. 40|ntervlew with Dori Meinert, Washington, D.C., December 17, 1987. 156

ously, that is not the case. The home-state and district press are attracted to domestic news and intermestic news because they do not need to compete. The Hanford nuclear power plant is news to the Seattle Times, not to the Charlotte Observer. Likewise, the C h a r­ lotte Observer, not the Seattle Times, reported on tobacco sales to foreign countries.

The press secretary’s selling challenge is exacerbated because journalists, especially those in the smaller, district newspapers, often lack a deep knowledge of foreign affairs and feel a bit intimi­ dated covering it. Dennis Clark, press secretary to North Carolina Congressman James McClure Clarke, spoke of the frustrations. “Foreign affairs is difficult to get good coverage on," he said, “because we must spend so much time to educate the reporter and the paper to the importance of the issue. Reporters know domestic issues much better.’’^ i

Dori Meinert, reporter for the Santa Monica Outiook, acknowl­ edged that she understands domestic issues much better than for­ eign affairs, and sometimes perhaps does not write on foreign af­ fairs because she does not appreciate the significance of certain legislation.42 Editors, too, admit the problem. Judy Hucka, city editor at the Bellevue Journal-American, declared, “We’re just a small, suburban paper. Our staff tends not to be well versed in foreign af­ fa irs .”43

41 Interview with Dennis Clark, August 19, 1987. 42|nterview with Dori Meinert, January 28, 1988. 43Telephone interview with Judy Hucka, an editor for theBellevue Journal- American, Bellevue, Washington, September 1987. 157

While the perception that readers are less interested in for­ eign affairs than domestic issues acts as an external perceived control on the flow of news, reporters’ lack of knowledge about for­ eign affairs acts as an internal actual control, according to Mowlana’s paradigm. The problem is compounded because just as some reporters know less about foreign affairs than domestic issues, so readers are thought to know less. Just as the press secretary sometimes must make a greater effort to inform a reporter about a foreign affairs bill, so the reporter must make a greater effort than usual to inform readers. The news items need more context, more background infor­ mation to make the material understandable. Angela Herrin, Washington-based bureau reporter for the W i­ chita Eagle-Beacon, said it is much easier for her to write about Medicare than Africa because she assumes readers know much more about the former than the latter. She said, “When Senator Kassebaum visited the Front Line States, I had to explain what the Front Line States were.’’44 [They are the states located closest to South

Africa—Angola, Botswana, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zim­ babwe.] While the discussion thus far has contrasted the cover­ age of domestic and foreign affairs news, it is useful to analyze the intermestic coverage as well. In terms of how it is approached by both members of Congress and the home-state and district press, intermestic news is a twin to domestic news. It shares little in

44|ntervlew with Angela Herrin, reporter for the Wichita Eagle-Beacon, W ash­ ington, D.C., January 4, 1988. 158

common with foreign affairs news. Intermestic news permits the Senator or House member as well as the home-state and district dailies to focus on matters directly relevant to the lives of con­ stituents and readers. Intermestic news is as salient as domestic news. As we saw, foreign affairs suffered in the competition for home-state and district press attention because the issues, although extremely significant, such as nuclear arms control, are often deemed too abstract to attract the media. This is not true for inter­ mestic news. The relationship between foreign trade and local jobs, as described in detail in chapter 8, is very real. Readers may not care that African leader Robert Mugabe has been chosen to head the Non-Aligned Movement, but they are deeply concerned when hundreds of jobs in New York could be lost if a sugar refinery is forced to close or reduce the work force because Congress refused to approve a special tax break in the trade bill considered in 1987.

Not surprisingly, selling a trade/local jobs story is much eas­ ier than selling most foreign affairs stories. In fact, the stories sell themselves.

4. ‘Junket’ Is a Hated Word In addition to being interested in the quantity of foreign af­ fairs coverage they receive back home, members are also interested in the content of this coverage. They do not want to read news items that portray them negatively. Foreign travel can be a lightning rod for criticisms of members of Congress. Not surprisingly, many of 159

them are very sensitive to the way their trips abroad are portrayed in the home-state and district press. Their fear is that a political opponent or a newspaper reporter will tell voters that the member has been wasting precious tax dollars on an expensive foreign vaca­ tion of little or no value to anyone but the member. The political danger, of course, is that constituents will become angry as they read in their home-state and district newspapers about this con­ gressional travel and decide that the best way to keep the member at home is to vote him out of office. As Chip Partner, press secre­ tary to Congressman Gejdenson, put it: “Constituents want to think that if the member is not in Washington, he’s in the district.’’45

Press coverage of North Carolina Congressman James Clarke’s trips to Turkey and Alaska shows why at least some members fear the political side-effects of taxpayer-financed travel. The A sh eville Citizen, Clarke’s district newspaper, headlined an Associated Press story out of Wilmington, North Carolina, “Carolina Congressmen off on Free Trips.” The tone of that headline condemned the travel as a waste of money. The opening paragraph noted that congressional for­ eign travel averaged about $12,000 per trip and that taxpayers were financing Clarke’s visit. The newspaper informed its readers, Clarke’s constituents, who vote on the area’s congressman: Leaving hot and sticky Washington during Congress’ fa­ vorite travel month are Rep. Tim Valentine, D-NC, and Rep. James McClure Clarke, D-NC. Valentine is headed for

45|nterview with Chip Partner, press secretary to Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., August 13, 1987. 160

Europe; Clarke is traveling to Alaska with the House

Committee on Interior and Insular A f f a i r s / 6

The paper also noted in the same story that the Alaska trip was Clarke’s second since joining Congress in 1987. “He has already been on a week-long visit to Turkey with the House Foreign Affairs Committee," the paper continued. This same Associated Press article appeared in Clarke’s home- state newspaper, the Charlotte Observer, “2 N.C. Congress Lawmak­ ers to Take Tax-Paid Trips in Recess.” This news item in the O b ­ server even included photos of Valentine andC la r k e .4 7

A few days later, the Asheville Citizen printed a letter to the editor from an angry writer sharply denouncing Clarke’s trip to Turkey. The writer noted that Clarke had earlier defended that Turkey trip as valuable in helping him understand Turkey's impor­ tance in protecting NATO’s southeastern flank. The letter to the editor writer, Charles Kelly of Weaverville, North Carolina, was very unimpressed by Clarke’s justification, observing: “If Clarke did not know the location of Turkey, a trip to the county library to look at a map would seem to be a better c h o ic e .”48

Often, stories on congressional travel concentrate heavily on the cost to taxpayers rather than on what members learned from their trips. Christopher Callahan, a Washington-based Associated

46Assoclated Press, “Carolina Congressmen off on Free Trips," Asheville Citi­ zen, August 8, 1987. 47Associated Press, “Two N.C. Congress Lawmakers to Take Tax-Paid Trips in Recess,” Charlotte Observer, August 10, 1987, B1. 48charles Kelly, letter to the editor, “He Finds Clark Explanation Unconvinc­ ing,” Asheville Citizen, August 20, 1987, A4. 161

Press reporter following the Connecticut and Massachusetts delega­ tions, said he recognizes that congressional foreign travel is a very delicate matter for members concerned about reelection. “When I write a travel story," Callahan said, "I know people get hyper.”49 His approach, then, Callahan continued, is to present the facts and let readers decide for themselves if the trip was worthwhile. Callahan reported on congressional trips in an article that appeared in the New London Day, "Congressional Delegation’s Travels Listed.” Calla­ han informed readers: Members of Connecticut’s congressional delegation have traveled to Brazil, China, Poland, and dozens of other countries in recent years on a series of government-fi­ nanced fact-finding missions, congressional documents show.50 Because they are frequently leery about how their foreign trips are portrayed for home-state and district readers, members have developed several strategies for avoiding or at least minimizing ad­ verse political repercussions. They often try to exert source control over the news in an effort to protect themselves. Here are some of their strategies: 1. Emphasize that the trip to a foreign country could directly benefit constituents. The aim is to present the travel as an inter- mestic, not a foreign affairs, news story.

49|nterview with Christopher Callahan, September 1987. 50Chrlstopher Callahan, Associated Press, “Congressional Delegation's Travels Listed, " New London Day, August 23, 1987, A3. 162

This intermestic approach, so important in establishing the crucial link of salience between the member’s work and solutions to constituents’ problems, was evident when Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson attempted to present his trip to Canada. His district newspaper, the New London Day, carried a story, “Gejdenson Leads House Delegation to Canadian Meeting.” The news item reported that the local congressman was to head a group of 14 members to discuss trade, acid rain, and energy, all issues of salience in his district.® 1 As Gejdenson said during an interview for this research, the Canada trip focused on subjects vitally important to his constituents. “There are a lot of important issues that deal with jobs in the Northeast,” he said, "environmental issues in the Northeast, and power issues in the Northeast.”®^

Gejdenson could go to Canada at taxpayers’ expense without running much political risk because high on the list of agenda items was the possibility of Canadian purchase of American-made nuclear submarines. For Gejdenson, submarines are the epitome of salience. His district is home to Electric Boat, a manufacturer of nuclear- powered submarines. If Electric Boat could sell submarines to the

Canadian government, that would translate into thousands of new jobs for Gejdenson’s constituents. As his press secretary explained, “We tried to put a local spin on the trip to Canada.” There is a small chance that someday Canada

®l Christopher Callahan, Associated Press, "Gejdenson Leads House Delegation to Canadian Meeting,” New London Day, June 1, 1987, A3. ®2|nterview with Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., March 29, 1988. 163

would sign a contract to buy Electric Boat submarines. In discus­ sions with the press, the goal, then, was to emphasize the subma- rine-jobs connection. “Submarines," Partner continued, “could play as a local issue, not a national one. This would be easy to sell back home.”®® Other lawmakers try to highlight the potential benefits of for­ eign travel for the people back home. Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, for example, stressed that agricultural issues would be discussed during his visit to Europe, certainly news of interest to Indiana's many farmers. Given the growing importance of international trade, it is becoming increasingly easy for members to justify their travel abroad as a means to promote trade. This trade, in turn, means more jobs and higher incomes for constituents. Lugar emphasized the agricultural theme in his news release, “Kohl and Thatcher Pledge to Oppose EC Tax on U.S. Oils and Fats."®^ 2. Stress the trip’s importance for the member’s Senate For­ eign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee work, especially on the subcommittees. Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd, for example, points out that he chairs the Senate’s subcom­ mittee on Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs and there­ fore needs to make regular visits to Central America if he is to keep

®®lnteiview with Chip Partner, Washington, D.G., November 12, 1987. ®^Senator Richard Lugar, news release, “Kohl and Thatcher Pledge to Oppose EC Tax on Oils and Fats," June 30, 1987. 164

abreast of fast-breaking developments in that turbulent area of the w o rld .55 3. Remind constituents and the press that the member is not going to some glamorous spot for an agenda of parties and sun­ bathing. Jason Isaacson, press secretary to Senator Dodd, said his boss found it easier to justify trips to Central America because the public knows he travels to dangerous locations in Central America, places such as Nicaragua where people are being killed in the San- dinista/Contra fighting. As Isaacson said, “He [Dodd] mostly goes to places where people wouldn't want to visit."®® A trip to war-ravaged Nicaragua may be an easy public rela­ tions challenge for a press secretary, but the demands are more challenging when Dodd travels to balmy Cancun, Mexico, one of the world’s premier tourist attractions. Isaacson said he did not want a great deal of coverage back in the Connecticut press on the Cancun visit, although it was intended to deal with important issues, be­ cause readers might assume Dodd simply wanted a warm climate to relax at taxpayers’ expense. To prevent that from happening, Isaac­ son, in his discussions with reporters, stressed the long, boring agenda facing Dodd, and the fact that he would be in meetings virtu­ ally full time with no chance for fun-in-the-sun and that he had taken the trip on a weekend to guarantee that he did not miss votes back on Capitol Hill. By making the trip sound, as he put it, “dull.

55senator Christopher Dodd, news release, “Dodd Makes Fact-Finding Trip to Panama," June 18, 1987. 56|nterview with Jason Isaacson, press secretary to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1987. 165

dull, dull," Isaacson hoped to avoid home-state and district press coverage that made Cancun seem an enjoyable experience. Clarke, too, attempted to emphasize the rigors of his contro­ versial trip to Alaska, downplaying the idea that he was away having fun. In the final two paragraphs of an Asheville Citizen article, Clarke tried to tell constituents that the Alaskan travel had been a very grueling experience. The vast distances to be covered made the tour anything but a vacation, according to Clarke, who added, “We spent five or six hours a day in an airplane. I think somebody on the trip said he got in and out of planes 24 times."®^ Patricia Allison, press secretary to California Congressman Mel Levine, said the press gives the wrong impression when it emphasizes the costs of the trip without pointing out that the mem­ bers were on an extremely fast-paced schedule discussing vital for­ eign policy issues. On Levine’s trip to several Middle Eastern coun­ tries, Allison said, “He was not floating in some heated pool or playing golf. It was a very busy trip to the Middle East and he came back tired. ”58

4. Overcome any constituent’s irritations about spending tax money by pointing out that the trip was financed by a private organi­ zation. But even this strategy sometimes causes problems. The let- ter-to-the-editor writer mentioned earlier, for example, was not pleased with Congressman Clarke’s defense that the trip to Turkey

57Mark Barrett, “Clark Urges Compromise on Alaska Oil Drilling," Asheville Citizen, August 27, 1987, Cl. 58|nterview with Patricia Allison, January 14, 1988. 166

had been financed by a Turkish group. The letter writer asked, “Is accepting gifts or trips from groups that are obviously lobbying for more U.S. tax money not clearly a conflict of interest?”®® 5. Emphasize that the member did not decide on the trip him­ self. Instead, he was asked to go by someone in higher political of­ fice—the president or House Speaker, for example. The trip is por­ trayed, in other words, as a duty, not a vacation. Tom Boney, a high ranking aide to Senator Jesse Helms, explained this approach: Senator Helms is opposed to junkets. This means he doesn’t go on taxpayer-financed trips except once or twice when the President asked him to go as part of a funeral delegation or some other capacity representing the United States.6° Indiana Congressman Dan L. Burton used the “I was asked to go” strategy to portray his trip to Central America. The Indianapolis S tar news story about the visit, based on Burton’s news release, re­ ported in the second paragraph: Burton said he was asked by the Republican congressional leadership to be part of the group which will visit Hon­ duras and Nicaragua Sept. 4-7.81 Burton also sought to shine the best possible light on the financing of the trip. The final paragraph noted:

5®Charles Kelley, lettter to the editor, "He Finds Clark Explanation Unconvinc­ ing," Asheville Citizen, August 20, 1987. 80|nterview with Thomas Boney, August 27, 1987. 81 Patrick J. Traub, “Rep. Burton to Be Part of Central America Talks,"In d i­ anapolis Star, August 27, 1987, D3. 167

Burton, who has toured several foreign nations on trips paid for by private lobbying groups, said the Central American visit is an ‘official’ trip and will be paid for by federal tax dollars.62

6. Highlight the local impact of the trip by taking along con­ stituents. This gives private industry folks an entree to foreign gov­ ernments that they might not otherwise have. This indicates it is a serious working trip. 7. Travel with at least one member of the opposing political party. A Democratic senator will want to be joined for the foreign trip by a Republican senator, and vice versa. If criticisms arise at the next election, the senator can simply respond to an opponent, “Yes, I took that trip, but so did Senator from your party." 8. Stress the trip’s importance to the conduct of U.S. foreign policy. Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee sometimes want press coverage of foreign travel when the issues at stake are so vital. California Sen­ ator Alan Cranston, for example, was mentioned in the Los Angeles Tim es while on a high level trip to Moscow to discuss intermediate range nuclear missiles. 9. Take the home state or district press along. This can convert the story into a helpful theme, “Our local congressman is so impor­ tant that he is meeting with leaders in Central America," for exam­ ple. Readers assume the member will be on his best behavior during

62|bld. 168

the trip simply because the local press could report on any indis­ cretions. 10. Do not travel at all. This is the ultimate way to ensure that the member is not politically damaged by junketeering articles back home. At least some members have decided it is best to travel only occasionally. One Capitol Hill staff member reported that his boss intentionally has not traveled extensively during his first three years in the Senate, but expects to do more as he becomes more es­ tablished. Several people interviewed for this research said they are convinced that some members of Congress refuse to make foreign trips because they do not want to run the risk of harmful publicity back home. 11. Time foreign travel to the election cycle. One interviewee said it is widely assumed on Capitol Hill that foreign travel by members will decrease as an election nears. He called this relation­ ship the swing of the election cycle. 12. Even if a member takes a foreign trip, it is often wise not to draw attention to it by putting out news releases and otherwise trying to notify the press. Several press secretaries insisted that the fear of adverse coverage back in the home-state and district press does not deter their bosses from making foreign trips deemed necessary. Steven Schwadron, press secretary to Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds, said, “If the trip is worth making, he goes. The decision is always based on professional judgment. We don't assess the politi- 169

cal consequences/^® Murray Flander, press secretary to Senator Cranston, declared, “We don’t let the press dictate what Alan should do as part of his responsibilities as a Senator.’’®^ It is also true that a number of the 18 members of Congress studied for this research made foreign trips during the period May 1-August 31, 1987. Cranston was in the Soviet Union. Senator Helms visited South Africa. Congressman John Miller went to the Philippines. And other members traveled to other countries. Yet, as this research found, many press secretaries devote considerable attention to presenting congressional foreign travel to the home-state and district press. The worst fear is that the mem­ ber’s travel could become a political joke as happened to Washington State Senator Dan Evans. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer story, “A Handicapper’s Guide on Likely Challengers to Sen. Dan Evans," re­ ported that the senator’s travels were the source of amusement. The paper noted that one joke asked the question: “What’s the difference between Sen. Dan Evans and God?" and follows with the answer: “God is everywhere and Dan Evans is everywhere but the state of Wash­ ington.”65 It is a political truism that members are most vulnerable to criticism on foreign travel if they are thought to be spending too little time back home.

6®lntervlew with Steven Schwadron, press secretary to Congressman Gerry Studds, Washington, D.C., August 19, 1987. 64Interview with Murray Flander, October 23, 1987. 65joel Connelly, “A Handicapper's Guide on Likely Challengers to Sen. Dan Evans,” Seattle Post-lntelllgencer. May 4, 1987, D10. 170

Illinois Senator Paul Simon has been among the most vocal critics of press coverage of congressional foreign travel. In his 1984 book, The Glass House: Politics and Morality in the Nation’s C apital, Simon decries what he calls "the appalling insensitivity" to the international dimension in both news stories and editorials. He w rote: One of the subjects most poorly covered is congressional foreign travel. The assumption that foreign travel is an abuse of public privilege is near the surface of most stories. When there is abuse of public travel, it should be covered and denounced. But most congressional travel is not abused.66

The real concern, according to Simon, an unsuccessful candi­ date for the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination, should be that members do not travel enough to foreign countries. They vote too often on matters with far-reaching consequences without suffi­ cient understanding of the background involved, Simon said. He added, “I have yet to see a news article or an editorial criticizing any member of Congress for not traveling, yet that is by far the greater a b u s e /6 7

Simon is convinced that fear about press coverage deters some foreign travel. It is as if the member is loading a gun, then handing it to a political opponent to fire. Simon wrote:

66paul Simon, The Glass House: Politics and Morality In the Nation's Capital. (New York: Continuum Publishing Co., 1984) 121. 67Simon, 123. 171

I have had dozens of colleagues tell me they would like to travel in order to understand some area of the world better, but they fear the kind of news coverage and edi­ torial criticism they will receive. There is absolutely no fear of not traveling, for as far as I know that criticism has never occurred.®8

The Hartford Courant printed a column by one its writers, Don Noel, doing what Simon said had not been done, urging members of Congress to travel more often. That article, “Congressmen Abroad: An Education, Not a Boondoggle,” referred to the Associated Press story mentioned earlier reporting on foreign travel by members of the Connecticut delegation. Noel, obviously displeased with the arti­ cle, wrote: It probably left many readers with the feeling that most

such travel is mere boondoggling at taxpayers' expense. I dispute that notion. We live in a complex world; too few, in or out of Washington, have a visceral, intuitive sense of what’s going on out there.69 Noel, however, is the exception. Until his view becomes more widely accepted, members of Congress, even those serving on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee, will continue to be very sensitive anytime a reporter begins asking questions about trips to foreign countries.

68simon, 123. 69Don Noel, “Congressmen Abroad: An Education, Not a Boondoggle,” Hartford Courant, August 28, 1987, D13, referring to Associated Press story, “Kennelly Leads Region's Legislators In Foreign Trips," Hartford Courant, August 23, 1987, D1. Chapter 7 Coverage of Individual Members

If they are voices in a crowd, just 1 of 40 on a commit­ tee, it’s not worth a lot of my time to do a separate story. But when they play a major role in crafting legis­ lation or in response to a presidential action, then they can receive some coverage. 1

1. One of the surest routes to foreign affairs coverage for members in the press back home is to be a major actor on important foreign policy issues being considered in Congress. The evidence for this study generally supports the proposition that it is the insiders who attract news coverage, those with formal positions of power and recognized expertise, it helps to sponsor key legislation and take other actions that could influence the course of U.S. foreign policy.

Yet this is not the only route to coverage back home. Obscure members with little clout or standing in Washington may nonetheless receive extensive news coverage in their states and districts under certain circumstances; specifically, when they become involved in a significant controversy with direct local

1 Telephone interview with Eric Pryne, reporter for theSeattle Times, Wash­ ington, D.C., November 30, 1987. 172 173

connections. A member, in other words, can be covered for what he does in Seattle as well as for what he does in Washington, D.C. It was no surprise when Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd received more foreign affairs coverage in his home-state and dis­ trict press than any of the other eight senators monitored for this study. (For a more detailed look at the coverage for each member, see Appendix 2, page 339.) Dodd, after all, was chairman of the Senate subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over Central America, a region torn by a bitter and bloody war in Nicaragua. Dodd was the congressional ultimate insider, someone who commanded national as well as home-state and district press attention because of his deep understanding of Central America and his role as the subcommittee chairman.

Table 8. Member Foreign Affairs Coverage*

Senate and House members and their combined home-state and dis­ trict foreign affairs press coverage were:

Senate Mentions

Christopher Dodd—Connecticut 33 Jesse Helms— North Carolina 22 Richard Lugar— Indiana 1 7 John Kerry—Massachusetts 16 Nancy Kassebaum—Kansas 15 Daniel P. Moynihan—New York 10 Alan Cranston—California 10 Brock Adams—Washington 7 Dan Evans—Washington 4 174

House John Miller—Washington 1 7 Sam Gejdenson—Connecticut 14 Don Bonker—Washington 13 Gerald Solomon—New York 8 Mel Levine— California 7 Jan Meyers— Kansas 7 Dan Burton— Indiana 6 Gerry Studds—Massachusetts 3 James Clarke—North Carolina 0

Also see the tables on pages 110-12 of Chapter 5.

Table 9. Member Combined Foreign and intermestic Coverage

When the foreign affairs and intermestic news coverage are added together, the order changes only somewhat:

S en ate M entions Christopher Dodd—Connecticut 4 4 Richard Lugar—Indiana 27 Jesse Helms— North Carolina 25 John Kerry— Massachusetts 20 Brock Adams—Washington 1 6 Nancy Kassebaum—Kansas 1 5 Alan Cranston—California 1 5 Dan Evans—Washington 1 4 Daniel Moynihan—New York 1 3 175

House Sam Gejdenson—Connecticut 39 Don Bonker—Washington 28 John Miller—Washington 25 Gerry Studds—Massachusetts 14 Gerald Solomon—New York 8 Dan Burton— Indiana 8 Mel Levine—California 7 Jan Meyers— Kansas 7 James Clarke—North Carolina 0

Little could have been more surprising, however, than to find that Washington State Congressman John Miller was the House mem­ ber most covered on foreign affairs back home. Miller, a former tele­ vision and radio commentator in Seattle, seemed to be the epitome of obscurity on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. He joined the committee only in 1987, just a few months before this study began. How then do we account for Miller's coverage? Miller was mentioned because he became embroiled in two major foreign policy controversies back in his district, both with important local news implications. One was Central America and the other Soviet human rights violations. Miller’s foreign affairs coverage serves as a graphic reminder that local and national press coverage can differ dramatically, that a member can be much covered at home while being ignored in the Washington Post. It also points up the fact that much of the foreign affairs press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee is written by re­ 176

porters and columnists back in the states, not by Washington, D.C., bureau personnel. Despite the evidence from Miller that an obscure member can be a major newsmaker back home, it is apparent that the press is likely to give more coverage to insiders on the assumption that what they say and do is more likely to affect the course of foreign policy than what others say and do. Indianapolis Star reporter Doug McDaniel, for example, touched on this factor when he explained why he devoted more foreign affairs attention to Indiana Senator Richard Lugar than to Congressman Dan Burton, who represented much of the Indianapolis area. “Burton is a relatively minor player in the foreign policy game,” McDaniel said during an interview for this study. “He’s in the minority and it’s only his second term on the committee.”® Lugar, too, was a Republican in the minority, but, McDaniel empha­ sized, Lugar had served as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when the Republicans controlled the Senate. He had vast experience in foreign policy and was highly respected as a major player, giving him an aura of importance that Burton could not match. Reporters are more likely to allow a foreign affairs message from a senator or House member to pass through the gate and reach readers if they believe, as McDaniel put it, that the member is a “player.” This is not the only factor that reporters use in deciding whether to cover a member, but it helps. Sometimes reporters sur-

^Telephone interview with Doug McDaniel, reporter for theIndianapolis Star, Washington, D.C., November 24, 1987. 177

vey the local delegation for reaction to a breaking news story—for example, Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North’s Capitol Hill testi­ mony on thé Iran-Contra episode, or the Iraqi attack on the U.S. frigate S ta rk. Those with little influence as well as insiders are contacted on these reaction stories. This is precisely the point that Pryne made in the quotation that opened this chapter. Voices in a congressional crowd are un­ likely to receive much coverage. Attention goes to those who are major actors on major foreign policy questions. Asked during an in­ terview for this study if a reader could know what Washington State members are doing on foreign affairs by reading his newspaper, Pryne answered: “Probably not. Because it is not that often that they are key actors."® It is more likely, of course, that important actions will lead to press coverage when those actions are taken in public. Angela Herrin, reporter for the Wichita Eagie-Beacon, said Kansas Senator

Nancy Kassebaum strives to find compromise and conciliation rather than conflict. “Nancy Kassebaum does not like to polarize debate," Herrin said.4 Kassebaum’s desire to work behind the scenes may help develop effective solutions to problems in U.S. foreign policy mak­ ing. It does not, however, necessarily lead to press coverage.

®Telephone interview with Eric Pryne, November 30, 1987. ^Interview with Angeia Herrin, reporter for the Wichita Eagle-Beacon, Wash­ ington, D.C., January 4, 1988. 178

2. Subcommittee chairmanships often can help members generate foreign affairs press coverage back home. Four members studied for this research, all Democrats, headed subcommittees: Senator Dodd, Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs; Senator John Kerry, Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications; Senator Alan Cranston, East Asian and Pacific Af­ fairs; and Congressman Don Bonker, International Economic Policy and Trade. These members had the power to schedule and preside at hearings, take international trips to examine situations firsthand, introduce legislation important to the subcommittee, and talk with the press. But not all subcommittee chairmanships are equal in terms of generating press coverage back home. It helps to head a subcommittee monitoring a problem or region in the midst of crisis, a “hot spot” of the moment. Crises, of course, shift over time to different parts of the world. A senator regarded as a leading con­

gressional expert on Vietnam could have received lavish press coverage in 1967, but not 20 years later in 1987 when that country was no longer at war. Senator Dodd was clearly the foremost congressional spokesman on Central America, but no matter how formidable his power or how impressive his knowledge of the embattled region, Dodd would not have received extensive press coverage if Central America had been tranquil during this period. If the Nicaraguan war had ended, Dodd’s press coverage on Central American would have di­ minished dramatically. Yet at the same time, it seems likely that a war in Nicaragua would have stimulated less press coverage back in 179

Hartford and New London if Dodd had not been the subcommittee chairman. It was necessary to be at the right place at the right time. Because of his status as the ultimate spokesman on Central America, the home-state and district press came to Dodd for com­ ment. He did not seek it out. It did not depend on his news releases. But there can be some disadvantage in being so closely identified with a single region or issue. The foreign affairs coverage of Dodd dealt overwhelmingly with Central America. He received virtually no press attention on the other regional hot spot in the news during this period, the tensions in the Persian Gulf. Similarly, Bonker was covered back home primarily on trade, much of it stemming from the revelations that a Japanese firm, Toshiba, and a Norwegian firm, Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, had sold sensitive military technology to the Soviet Union. The technology could be used to help the Soviets build quieter submarines making them more difficult for the United States to track, an important advantage in case of war. The press came to Bonker, especially when his subcommittee on trade began investigating the matter. The concern was both the intelligence loss that threatened American national security and the possibility that Congress would impose trade sanctions on the Japanese and Norwegians to protest the sale. Between August 14 and 23, 1987, the Seattle Times printed four stories that mentioned Bonker in connection with the Toshiba case. One of the articles, “More Illegal High-Tech Sales Bared," reported that other military 180

sales jeopardizing American security had probably occurred.® Infor­ mation about these and other sales surfaced when representatives from the Central Intelligence Agency briefed Banker’s subcommittee. With Americans already deeply concerned about a growing drug problem, Kerry was strategically placed to make news when an in­ formant charged in an appearance before his subcommittee that the Contras in Nicaragua were selling drugs for arms. Although the drug trafficking story generated less press coverage for Kerry than did Central America for Dodd and trade for Bonker, the story, neverthe­ less, was followed closely by the Boston Globe. Senator Cranston’s subcommittee chairmanship sparked less coverage than the other three, but that area was not as hot as Nicaragua, trade, or drug trafficking.

Even senators and House members who are not subcommittee chairmen or recognized congressional ultimate spokesmen on a for­ eign policy problem can still make news back home by "feeding in” to the big news story of the moment. Senator Dodd was the ultimate spokesman on the war in Nicaragua, but others made news by taking an action that related to this story. For example, • Congressman Mel Levine introduced legislation to ban private military assistance to the Contras while U.S. government military aid was prohibited. According to Levine, the proposal, if enacted earlier, could have prevented the kind of problems revealed by the Iran-Contra hearings.

®Sylvia Nogaki, “More Illegal High-Tech Sales Bared,” Seattle Times, August 15, 1987, A1. 181

• Congressman Dan Burton filed suit in U.S. District Court to have the Boland amendment declared unconstitutional. The amend­ ment was intended to stop the flow of U.S. aid to the Contras. • Senator John Kerry presided over hearings of his Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications Subcommittee investi­ gating allegations that the Contras had tried to trade drugs for arms. • Congressman Sam Gejdenson introduced a resolution to block the sale of F-7 jet fighters to Honduras, claiming it would only in­ crease the level of militarization in the volatile region and perhaps provoke more Soviet aid for the Sandinistas. • Gejdenson also called for an investigation of a man who falsely claimed to be a Roman Catholic priest when he came to Capitol Hill to solicit aid for the Contras. • Senator Jesse Helms revealed that he and New York Con­ gressman Jack Kemp would seek an additional $300 million in aid for the Contras.

3. Senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee re­ ceive more foreign affairs coverage back home than do their junior counterparts. The pattern was not as clear, however, among House Foreign Affairs Committee members. The following table lists the years in which members joined the committee along with the number of foreign affairs news items that mentioned them in their home-state and district press. 182

Table 10. Foreign Affairs News Mentions by Seniority* Senate Mentions 1. Richard Lugar and Jesse Helms (1979) 19.5 3. Alan Cranston, Christopher Dodd, and Nancy Kassebaum (1981) 19.3 6. John Kerry and Dan Evans (1985) 10.0 8. Brock Adams and Daniel Patrick Moynihan (1987) 8.5 House 1. Don Bonker (1975) 13.0 2. Gerry Studds (1976) 3.0 3. Sam Gejdenson (1981) 14.0 4. Gerald Solomon and Mel Levine (1983) 7.5 6. Dan Burton (1985) 6.0 7. Jan Meyers, James Clarke, and John Miller (1987) 8.0 'When one or more members joined the committee the same year, the number of news mentions represents an average.

4. As expected, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee distributed many more news releases on domestic issues than foreign affairs. Contrary to what was expected, however, the members could not control their cover­ age through their press releases. The home-state and district press reporters used relatively few of them. Senator Jesse Helms distributed no press releases, yet his foreign affairs coverage back home ranked only behind Senator

Christopher Dodd. Congressman Dan Burton put out more releases than any other House member examined for this study, yet received 183

little foreign affairs attention in his Indiana home-state and dis­ trict press. Congressman James Clarke followed just behind Burton in the number of releases among House members, but was not men­ tioned in a single foreign affairs news item in either the A s h e v ille Citizen or Charlotte Observer. Congressman Clarke did not introduce any major foreign af­ fairs legislation that prompted debate in Congress. He led no chal­ lenges to Reagan administration policies. He ranked far down the House Foreign Affairs Committee seniority roster and he headed no subcommittees. Clarke clearly was not a leader, not an insider on foreign affairs. His news releases dealt with important foreign af­ fairs subjects, but the unwillingness of reporters to use them pointed out the fact that making a statement alone is usually not enough to create coverage. His releases included • "Congressman Clarke Calls for Tough Measures on Embassy Security” after it was revealed that the Soviets had bugged the U.S. embassy in Moscow^

• "Congressman Clarke Joins Condemnation of Toshiba Sale to Soviets” criticizing the Japanese firm, Toshiba, for selling sensi­ tive military technology to the Soviets and thus threatening U.S. na­ tional security^

^Congressman James Clarke, news release, "Congressman Clarke Calls for Tough Measures on Embassy Security," June 16, 1987. ^Congressman James Clarke, news release, "Congressman Clarke Joins Con­ demnation of Toshiba Sale to Soviets," July 24, 1987. 184

• “Soviet Jews Must Not Be Forgotten” calling on the Kremlin to grant exit visas so Jews can leave the Soviet Union® Clarke’s office sent these news releases, but journalists at the Charlotte Observer and Asheville Citizen, acting in their capaci­ ties as gatekeepers, decided not to print the material. Clarke, in ef­ fect, initiated messages on foreign affairs that were never allowed to reach readers in North Carolina through the channel of the home- state and district press. Bill Arthur, Washington bureau reporter for the Observer, believed that Clarke and his news releases had no im­ pact on foreign policy making in the nation’s capital. Specifically, Arthur said during an interview for this study that he was very reluctant to use such news releases because Clarke lacked stature on foreign affairs; he was a junior member with lit­ tle influence on policy. Arthur added, “If I thought Congressman Clarke was an expert on Most Favored Nation treatment for Romania, I would be more inclined to cover him. Really, Clarke is not an expert on anything in foreign affairs.”9 Mark Barrett, who covered Clarke for the Asheville Citizen, was equally unimpressed by the news re­ leases. It does not mean much when Clarke cosponsors legislation on Soviet Jewish emigration, according to Barrett, because hundreds of members can add their names to the proposals.

^Congressman James Clarke, news release, “Soviet Jews Must Not Be Forgot­ ten,” July 9, 1987. ^Interview with Bill Arthur, reporter for the Charlotte Observer, Washington, D.C., October 28, 1987. lOTelephone inten/iew with Mark Barrett, reporter for the Asheville Citizen, Asheville, North Carolina, September 3, 1987. 185

News releases serve as a useful barometer of congressional priorities for news coverage because members distribute releases only on those subjects that they want covered in the news media. The Senate and House tables that follow, based on information pro­ vided by the press secretaries, indicate the primacy of news re­ leases on domestic issues.

Table 11. News Releases Distributed

S e n a te *

Member Foreign intermestic Domestic Jesse Helms 0 0 0 John Kerry 2 6 9 Christopher Dodd 5 0 5 Daniel P. Moynihan 5 1 6 Richard Lugar 3 4 1 0 Nancy Kassebaum 0 0 7 Alan Cranston 5 2 20 Dan Evans 3 1 1 9 Brock Adams 3 5 1 7 Total 26 19 93 'The Senate data are incomplete for several members. The numbers for Senators Kerry and Cranston represent only May and June, while the totals for Senators Lugar and Kassebaum do not include all the domestic issues news re­ leases. The Senate news releases were distributed approximately as follows; 67 percent on domestic issues, 19 percent on foreign affairs, and 14 percent on intermestic issues. 186

House'

Member Foreian Intermestic Domestic James Clarke 6 2 21 Gerry Studds 0 0 11 Sam Geidenson 2 2 14 Gerry Solomon 2 1 1 1 Dan Burton 8 1 9 Jan Meyers 0 0 0 Mel Levine 4 2 6 John Miller 1 0 8 Don Bonker 2 0 6 Total 25 8 86 *The House totals are also only partially complete. They Include Studds’ releases only through mid-June 1987. The House news releases were distributed approximately as follows: 72 percent for domestic Issues, 21 percent for foreign affairs, and 7 percent for Intermestic Issues.

Washington State Senator Brock Adams is an example of a member who showed a marked preference for domestic issues in his news releases distributed between May 1 and August 31, 1987. Fif­ teen dealt with domestic issues, five with intermestic issues, pri­ marily trade, and three with foreign affairs, ali of them on the Per­ sian Gulf. A brief description of the releases appears in Appendix 1. Members do not necessarily distribute news releases on even some of the most important foreign affairs issues before Congress. On May 6, 1987, for example, the House voted to require United States compliance with the unratified SALT II treaty on nuclear missiles negotiated by the Carter administration with the Soviet Union. The Reagan administration opposed such forced compliance and House Republicans generally favored a proposal to require com­ pliance only if the president decided that the Soviets had adhered to 187

all treaty provisions, something Reagan contended the Soviets had not done.

Despite the importance of the issue, apparently none of the House members monitored for this research sent out a news release on the SALT II vote. On that same day, however. Congressman Sam Gejdenson distributed a news release on a domestic issue salient for his constituents, “Committee Approves Gejdenson Groundwater Bill." Gejdenson pointed out that more than half of Eastern Connecti­ cut depends on groundwater for drinking and other uses. Gejdenson said: My home state of Connecticut provides an alarming ex­ ample of how fast the groundwater problem is growing. When I first introduced this bill in December 1985, one thousand wells had been closed because of contamination in Connecticut. Since then, 200 more tainted wells have been discovered in Connecticut, adding up to a total of 1,200 wells closed across the state. 1 ^ While it was true that reporters did not print many of the for­ eign affairs news releases, they did use some of them, especially those describing a member in action rather than simply making a statement—for example, introducing an important bill. On May 15, 1987, Senator Lugar distributed a news release on his amendment to

deal with bugging of the American embassy in the Soviet U n io n .12

Congressman Sam Gejdenson, news release, “Committee Approves Gejdenson Groundwater Bill,” May 6, 1987. l2Senator Richard Lugar, news release, “Lugar's Embassy Security Amendment Goes to Senate Floor,” May 15, 1987. 188

The following day, the Indianapolis Star printed a news story, “Lugar Amendment Seeks Embassy Security Decision,” that included quota­ tions from Lugar identical to the ones provided in the previous day's news release, “Lugar’s Embassy Security Amendment Goes to Senate Floor”—for example, “We cannot afford a repeat of the regrettable situation at the embassy in Moscow.''^ ^ Distributing news releases is not a totally ineffective means to obtain foreign affairs coverage back in the home-state and dis­ trict press. The evidence, however, does not support the claim of Ben Bagdikian and others that Congress and the news media are “partners in propaganda” providing readers with an unrealistically favorable portrayal of the members at work in Washington, D.C., by printing their news releases verbatim.■< 4

5. The data, as expected, support the proposition that foreign affairs coverage for members in the home-state and district press is not a function of ideology. The number of news items mentioning Democrats and Republicans was basically the same. There was no advantage to being a liberal or conservative.

The ten Democrats, five in the Senate and five in the House, were mentioned in 113 news items in the home-state and district press, an average of 11.3 per Democrat. The eight Republicans were

Doug McDaniel, “Lugar Amendment Seeks Embassy Security Decision,"Indi­ anapolis Star, May 16, 1987, 44. l^Ben H. Bagdikian, “Congress and the Media: Partners In Propaganda,” Columbia Journalism Review 12, no. 1 (January/February 1974): 4. 189

mentioned in 96 news items in the home-state and district press, an average of 12 per Republican. The National Journal, in collaboration with The Baron Report, launched a project to develop a congressional ratings system based on three issue areas—economics, social matters, and foreign

a f f a i r s . 15 Based on voting during 1985, the members were ranked on a scale of liberalism and conservatism. Lobby groups helped decide what had been the key votes during the period. A vote to reaffirm the approval of $1.5 billion for the purchase of 21 MX missiles was con­ sidered a vote for the conservative position, while a vote to impose economic sanctions against the government of South Africa was re­ garded as a vote for the liberal position. Each member was given two scores: more liberal than ___ percent of the House or Senate; more conservative then percent of the House of Senate. The National JournaFs ratings for the members examined in this study appear in Table 12. A moderate. Congressman John Miller, received substantial foreign affairs coverage back home, while Senator Dan Evans, an­ other moderate from the same state and same political party, re­ ceived little. Conservative Senator Jesse Helms got less foreign af­ fairs coverage than Senator Christopher Dodd, but more than the other senators. Liberal Congressman Gerry Studds received very lit­ tle foreign affairs attention, while liberal Senator John Kerry from the same state and political party received much more attention.

15William Schneider, “A Year of Continuity,” National Journal 18, no. 20 (May 17, 1986): 1162-91. 190

Table 12. Ideological Ratings Senate

More Liberal More Conserva­ Member Than tive Than Alan Cranston California 88 percent 0 percent John Kerry Massachusetts 88 percent 0 percent Christopher Dodd Connecticut 74 percent 23 percent Daniel Patrick Moynihan New York 70 percent 28 percent Nancy Kassebaum Kansas 54 percent 44 percent Richard Lugar Indiana 22 percent 70 percent Dan Evans Washinoton 45 percent 52 percent Jesse Heims North Carolina 12 percent 80 percent Brock Adams Washinoton (Did not serve in 1985.1

House

More Liberal More Conserva­ Member Than tive Than Gerry Studds Massachusetts 92 percent 0 percent Sam Gejdenson Connecticut 85 percent 8 percent Mel Levine California 85 percent 8 percent Don Bonker Washington 85 percent 15 percent John Miller Washington 46 percent 52 percent Jan Meyers Kansas 40 percent 60 percent Gerald Solomon New York 0 percent 76 percent Dan Burton Indiana 0 percent 76 percent James Clarke North Carolina (Did not serve in 1985.1 191

The only suggestion that ideology might influence coverage came from Congressman Solomon and the staff in Helms's office. Solomon said during an interview; The New York Times is a liberal newspaper and most of its writers are liberals. They tend to go to liberals for their stories. They would go more often to a [New York Democratic Congressman] Steve Solarz than to a Gerry Solomon because Solarz has a liberal bent.16 Solomon may believe that the New York Times virtually ignores him because he is a conservative and the paper's reporters are liberals, but reporter Linda Greenhouse saw it differently. “1 wouldn't seek

out Solomon because he isn't a major player."i7 Two Helms aides,

Barbara Lukens and Thomas Boney, complained that the C harlotte O bserver treats their conservative boss unfairly, but their criti­ cisms were directed primarily at the quality rather than the quan­

tity of the coverage.18 For most press secretaries and reporters,

however, ideology was not mentioned as a factor affecting the coverage.

6. The data only partially support the proposition that senators re­ ceive more foreign affairs coverage than House members. The find-

ifileiephone Interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. l^Telephone Interview with Linda Greenhouse, reporter for theNew York Times, Washington, D.C., September 1987. I8|ntervlew with Barbara Lukens, press aide to Senator Jesse Helms, Washing­ ton, D.C., November 5, 1987, and Interview with Thomas Boney, aide to Senator Helms, Washington, D.C., August 27, 1987. 192

ings are dramatically different as one moves from the national press to the home-state press to the district press with the relative at­ tention to senators decreasing as one moves down these three lev­ els. All the press secretaries and reporters who cover them who answered the questions said they anticipated that senators would receive more foreign affairs coverage than their House counterparts. Often, they cited the larger senatorial role spelled out in the U.S. Constitution including the power to ratify treaties and approve the administration's ambassadorial nominees. The Senate was often mentioned as the more prestigious body in the area of foreign af­ fa irs . Linda Keene, a Washington-based reporter for the States News Service, captured the widely held perception when she said simply that senators carry more weight than House members on foreign af­ fairs.19 Jason Isaacson, press secretary to Connecticut Senator

Christopher Dodd, said the public expects senators to be more in­ volved in foreign affairs than House m e m b e rs.20 Bill Arthur, reporter for the Charlotte Observer, expanded on that theme when he said that he expected the Senate to be more covered than the House on foreign affairs because it serves as a "bully pulpit.”2i Andrew

Fisher, press secretary to Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar, ob-

l^Telephone interview with Linda Keene, reporter for theVancouver Columbian, Washington, D.C., September 1987. 20|ntervlew with Jason Isaacson, press secretary for Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1987. 21 Interview with Bill Arthur, October 28, 1987. 193

served, “People want their senators to be senatorial and this means getting involved in foreign affairs, especialiy peace and security is­

sues .”22

Despite these expectations, however. House members received more foreign affairs coverage in the district newspapers than the senators did. Compare the striking differences in foreign affairs news mentions in the national, home-state, and district press.

Table 13. House-Senate Comparison Foreign Affairs News Mentions

House Senators Members Ratios Washington Post 92 6 15:1 Home-state Papers 104 42 2.5:1 District Papers 30 33 1:1

The same dynamic is at work on intermestic issues.

Table 14. House-Senate Comparison Intermestic Issues News Mentions

House Senators Members Ratios Washington Post 6 1 6:1 Home-state Papers 47 28 1.5:1 District Papers 8 33 1:4

This study found the Washington Post coverage to be heavily Senate-oriented. North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms alone ac­ counted for 42 news mentions, seven times as many as the nine House members combined. Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd also

22|nterview with Andrew Fisher, press secretary for Senator Richard Lugar, Washington, D.C., January 4, 1988. 194

received more foreign affairs attention in the P o st than the nine House members combined. So did New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, California Senator Alan Cranston, and Indiana Senator Richard Lugar. Massachusetts Senator John Kerry’s six news men­ tions equaled the total for the House members. Senators also received more foreign affairs coverage in the home-state papers than did the House members, but the ratio was much less—just 2.5 to 1 compared to 15:1 in the Post. Senators must be more attentive to home-state than district papers because these dailies reach a much larger slice of their constituency. In turn, the home-state papers tend to be Senator-oriented more than House-ori­ ented because more of their readers are constituents of the state’s senator than of each House member. In North Carolina, for example, virtually all the Charlotte Ob­ server's readers are constituents of Senator Jesse Helms, but only a small percentage are constituents of Congressman James Clarke, who represents the Asheville area in the western part of the state, far from Charlotte. It makes sense for the O bserver to be more at­ tentive to Helms than Clarke and for Helms to be more attentive than Clarke to the Observer. Seven of the nine senators received more foreign affairs cov­ erage in the home-state press than the House member from that state. The only exceptions were congressmen Don Bonker and John Miller who received more coverage in the Seattle Times and Seattle Post-Intelligencer than the state’s senators, Brock Adams and Dan Evans. 195

Members have different relationships with the district press than the home-state press, again because of the newspapers’ circu­ lation distribution. The Glens Falls Post-Star, for example, is not very important for New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who must deal with the New York Times, other New York City dailies, and the large circulation newspapers in Buffalo, Albany, Rochester, and elsewhere. The Glens Falls Post-Star reaches only a tiny fraction of Moynihan’s constituents. The situation is much different, however, for Congressman Gerald Solomon who represents Glens Falls. He was little noticed by the New York Times, which gave considerable attention to Moynihan. Solomon, as one of the state’s 45 House members, serves only a tiny fraction of the New York Times’s total readership. For Solomon, the P ost-S tar is more important than the New York Times. As Solomon said during an interview, “The Glens Falls paper is a major newspa­ per within my district. Its circulation covers one-third of the entire district; so it is extremely important.”23

P ost-S tar reporters know they have ready access to Solomon, but not Moynihan. Greg Moran, one Glens Falls writer, for example, observed, “We don’t touch the senators. I don’t think I’ve ever spoken with Moynihan. I doubt he knows we exist.’’24

Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson said during an inter­ view for this study that his district newspaper, the New London Day,

23Telephone interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. 24Telephone Interview with Greg Moran, September 2, 1987. 196

has some advantages for him. It is a useful vehicle to transmit his views to constituents, Gejdenson said, “because it's the local paper

and focuses more on my point of v i e w . ”2 s The Hartford Courant, on the other hand, as a much larger circulation daily, reports on all the Connecticut members of Congress, not just him. As Chip Partner, Gejdenson’s press secretary, said, the Hartford Courant is the sena­ tors’ paper, and the New London Day is more the congressman’s

p a p e r . 2 6

The data also reveal some interesting House-Senate differ­ ences on intermestic issues. While senators were mentioned in 59 more foreign affairs news items back home than House members, 134 to 75, the nine House members received more intermestic affairs news coverage than their Senate counterparts, 61 to 55. The differences in intermestic coverage are even more dra­ matic in percentage terms. In the larger circulation home-state dailies, 14 percent of the news items for the House members dealt with intermestic issues compared to only 8 percent for the senators. In the smaller circulation district newspapers, 13 percent of the coverage of the House members dealt with intermestic issues com­ pared to just 5 percent for the senators. The House dominance on intermestic issues was especially striking on local military projects. In Connecticut, for example. Con­ gressman Sam Gejdenson was widely covered on federal contracts

25|ntervlew with Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., March 2 9 , 1988. 26|nterview with Chip Partner, press secretary to Congressman Sam Gejdenson, November 12, 1987. 197

for Electric Boat to build new Trident submarines in his district, an extremely important matter because so many jobs depended on this defense work. The submarines and jobs were important to Connecti­ cut Senator Christopher Dodd too, but less important for the statewide constituency that he represented than the smaller con­ stituency that Gejdenson represented. Proportionally, in other words, jobs in Gejdenson's district would be more affected by the loss of the submarine contract than would jobs statewide. For his district newspaper, the New London Day, the fate of Electric Boat, in its circulation area, was proportionally more im­ portant than it was for the Hartford Courant oriented more toward the state's largest city, Hartford, and to Senator Dodd. Chapter 8 Localizing Foreign Affairs News

Take the point of a compass in Hartford and draw a circle 150 miles in diameter. You’ll find about half a million jobs directly dependent on the existence of export mar­ kets. The economy of our region is as dependent on ex­ ports as any in the country.i

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee are more likely to be covered on foreign affairs in their press back home when the news can be connected directiy to the lives of constituents. This localizing of the news takes three forms: intermestic issues such as the export of North Carolina tobacco; ethnic constituencies such as the Filipino commu­ nity in Seattle much concerned about the future of the Aquino gov­ ernment in the Philippines; and local organizations and individuals that become involved in foreign policy making such as the former University of Washington student killed in Nicaragua. Because each state and congressional district has its own distinctive mix of intermestic issues, ethnic constituencies, and in-

1 Senator Christopher Dodd cited in David Lightman, “U.S. Jobs, Security Threatened by Crisis in International Trade," Hartford Courant, August 23, 1987, A1.

198 199

different subjects. Often, this localized foreign affairs news touches on topics very different from those receiving attention on Capitol Hill. Much of this news is made in the states and districts, not in Washington, D.C. Almost two-thirds of the intermestic news items, for example, were generated by staffs back in the states and districts, not by Washington, D.C., bureau correspondents. Members often have little control over the localized foreign affairs news—for example, the Kansas constituents who tried to persuade Senator Nancy Kassebaum to oppose Contra aid. This news can be initiated by labor union leaders and other local figures about members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House For­ eign Affairs Committee. They are the sources of the communication, not the members themselves. Members sometimes do not regard this localized foreign news coverage as beneficial. This “Main Street U.S.A.” kind of foreign policy is a growing phenomenon that is likely to generate more news in the future. More than 900 local governments passed resolutions on the nuclear freeze and a number of cities registered their opposition to apartheid in South Africa by ending their investments in firms that do substan­ tial business in that country. The number of communities with sister city programs can be expected to grow in the years ahead, creating numerous opportunities for locally generated foreign affairs news that involves a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee. As Michael Shuman has written, “How far America’s municipal foreign policies will go is unclear, 2 0 0

but they can no longer be dismissed as simply aberrant, trivial, or unconstitutional.”2

The local angle to foreign affairs news can come in the most obscure ways, as when a North Carolina judge became linked to the Reagan administration’s proposed ambassador to Mozambique. The episode points out the primacy of domestic over foreign affairs is­ sues for the home-state and district press. Senator Jesse Helms was tenacious in his opposition to Melissa F. Wells to be ambassador to Mozambique. According to Helms, she was too sympathetic to the Marxist government there and not sympathetic enough to the rebels, described by the senator as freedom fighters, challenging that African government.

To the Asheville Citizen, it was no news at all— that is, until the foreign affairs story became linked to an important local story, the nomination of North Carolina Judge David Sentelle to the U.S. District Court of Appeals. Helms strongly endorsed the Sentelle nomination. The local angle surfaced when Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy decided to play political tit-for-tat with Helms: If Helms continued to delay the Wells nomination of the ambassador to Mozambique, Kennedy would retaliate by holding up the Sentelle nomination which Helms wanted.

The Asheville Citizen reported on the Mozambique ambassador­ ship only as it affected the judgeship. The newspaper’s emphasis

2Michael H. Shuman, “Dateline Main Street: Local Foreign Policies,”Foreign Policy 65 (Winter 1986-87): 155. 201

was reflected in its headlines, “Helms, Kennedy Spar on Sentelle''^ and “Senators Spar over Sentelle Nomination.”4 The Charlotte Ob­ server the home-state paper, also stressed Sentelle, not Wells. Its headline read: “Kennedy Strikes Back at Helms, Blocks Nominee.”^ It was deemed newsworthy that the controversial ambassadorial nomi­ nation was holding up the judicial nomination, not vice versa. The Citizen reported: “The Democrats are holding up the Sen­ telle nomination, he [Helms] said, because they believe he is holding up the nomination of Melissa Wells, nominated as ambassador to Mozambique.”6 Thus, in this case, foreign affairs made news in the district press in North Carolina only through the backdoor, only after it became localized. This localization occurs in many guises as demonstrated in the following discussion of intermestic issues, ethnic constituencies, and local organizations and individuals involved in foreign policy making.

GPaul Clark, “Helms, Kennedy Spar on Sentelle," Asheville Citizen, June 12, 1987, 1. 4paul Clark, “Senators Spar over Sentelle Nomination," Asheville Citizen, July 15, 1987, 1. 50111 Arthur, “Kennedy Strikes Back at Helms, Blocks Nominee," C hariotte Observer, June 12, 1987, B5. 6Paul Clark, “Helms, Kennedy Spar on Sentelle," Ashevilie Citizen, June 12, 1987, 1. 2 0 2

1. Intermestic Issues

Table 15. Combined Senator and House Members Coverage on intermestic Issues

Intermestic News Mentions 1. Trade 59 2. Military Local 26 3. Cultural Activities 13 4. Constituent Service 10 5. Immigration 7 6. Other 1 Total 116

Trade

From the perspective of the member of Congress, trade means jobs. To those in the White House and State Department, trade may be a foreign affairs issue, but not to the member of the Senate For­

eign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee and to the home-state and district press. As New York Congressman Ger­ ald Solomon said when interviewed for this study, “Here in Wash­ ington, it’s [trade] a foreign affairs issue, but back home in the dis­ trict, it’s a domestic issue.”^ It is an intermestic issue as portrayed back home because jobs touch constituents’ lives directly. Anna

^Telephone Interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.D., April 20, 1988. 203

Perez, press secretary to Washington State Congressman John Miller, observed, “It means money in constituents' pockets.”8 The coverage parallels the special economic interests of the area represented by the Senator and House member and served by the home-state and district press. Different member/newspaper combi­ nations focus on different products involved in international trade— apples in Washington State, grain in Indiana, fish in Massachusetts, and tobacco in North Carolina. Several members tried to impress upon constituents the vital role that trade plays in the economic prosperity of their states. Washington State Senator Brock Adams emphasized the point in an opposite-editorial page article in the Seattle Times explaining his vote for the trade bill: Washington is a trading state. We can serve as the gate­ way to the Pacific Rim and create new markets for our airplanes, wheat, apples, and timber. Our high-technology and other industries need fair-trade laws to compete in today’s marketplace.®

Farm ing

Senator Jesse Helms pushed a $39 million benefit for tobacco farmers, many of them his North Carolina constituents. His proposal was designed to open foreign markets to U.S. tobacco products

8Interview with Anna Perez, press secretary for Congressman John Miller, Washington, D.O., December 11, 1987. 9Brock Adams, Opposite-Editorial, “Here's Why I Voted for the Trade Bill,” Seattle Times. August 7, 1987, A15. 204

blended with foreign leaf. The amendment would have required that at least 75 percent of the shipment be U.S. tobacco and only that portion of the blend would be given export credit.i ° Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar made news in his home state when he addressed a Farmers Day celebration at the Fulton County Fairgrounds, warning the agricultural audience that American farm­ ers must become even more efficient to meet the changing world market demands.

“Our ability to produce agricultural goods and services all over the world has gone beyond the population in­ crease. And most nations now have the technical ability to be self-sufficient,” the senator said.n

Sugar Refiners New York senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Alfonse

D’Amato advocated legislation to grant a $365 million tax break for American sugar refiners. The Amstar Corporation operated a refinery that makes Domino sugar in Brooklyn. Under the Moynihan-D’Amato proposal, the company would have received a $135 million tax break, and without it, company officials warned, the plant might shut down. If that happened, of course, some of Moynihan’s constituents would lose their jobs .12

I ^Associated Press, “Helms, Rose Disagree on Tobacco Export Provision," Charlotte Observer, June 12, 1987, A3. II No byiine, “Lugar: Farming a New Bail Game,” Anderson Herald-Bulletin, August 14, 1987, AS. l2jonathan Fuerbringer, “Senate Aids Sugar Refiners,” New York Times, July 18, 1987, 37. 205

High Technology Massachusetts Senator John Kerry introduced a $25 million measure to train Chinese workers on U.S.-made equipment in the hope that this would eventually lead to greater sales of U.S. technol­ ogy to the People’s Republic of China. Kerry’s legislative assistant for foreign affairs, Richard McCall, said the bill originated when a constituent visited the PRC as part of a U.S. trade delegation and be­ came concerned when he noticed that the Europeans and Japanese had training programs for the Chinese in high technology. The constituent feared that the European and Japanese tech­ nology that the Chinese trained on would be the equipment they pur­ chased. Following the trip, McCall said, the constituent asked Kerry’s office, “Why didn’t we [in the United States] do this?’’i 3 From that question came Kerry’s bill designed to help Massachusetts businesses sell in China. In a news release discussing his proposal, Kerry said:

My amendment will open a whole new market for Mas­ sachusetts businesses. Our state’s manufacturing and high-tech companies will now be on a more level playing field since all of our major trading partners—from Bel­

gium to Canada to Japan—already provide this type of prog ram. 14

I3|ntervlew with Richard McCall, aide to Senator John Kerry, Washington, D.C., September 1987. 14john Kerry, news release, "Kerry Says China Trade Bill Will Help Mas­ sachusetts Businesses," June 4, 1987. 206

This was important news, of course, in Boston with its many high-tech firms and research-oriented universities/s

Airplane Manufacturing Washington State senators Brock Adams and Dan Evans tried to help their state’s largest employer, the Boeing Company, sell more airplanes in the Third World with the hope of creating jobs for con­ stituents. Congress was considering the Reagan administration’s re­ quest to authorize U.S. participation in the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), providing insurance against the political risks of expropriation and war when these companies do business in the Third World. Adams and Evans supported the administration. Boeing officials hoped that the MIGA guarantees would encour­ age wary overseas airplane-leasing firms to do more business in Asia, Africa, and South America. This was major news in Seattle when a Boeing official explained that if the leasing companies do

more business in the Third World, they will likely buy more Boeing- made airplanes.16 According to one estimate, the Third World market for leased airplanes could approach $50 billion by the end of the century.

1 ^Washington Bureau, “Kerry Bill to Boost U.S. Sales to China," Boston Globe, June 5, 1987, 9. i6Erlc Pryne, “Teamup of Adams, Evans Didn't Save Program Eyed by Boeing, " Seattle Times, June 6, 1987. 207

Ballpoint Pen Makers The Connecticut-based Pilot Pen of America Corporation in­ vited Senator Dodd to its dedication ceremonies for a new $6.5 mil­ lion manufacturing and distribution center. The occasion was im­ portant because the following month Pilot Pen was scheduled to pro­ duce its first pens labeled “Made in U.S.A." Until then, the corpora­ tion had been importing ballpoint pens manufactured by its parent company, the Japanese conglomerate Pilot Pen Company, Limited. Addressing some 300 guests, Dodd was one of several speakers to stress the importance of open markets, the employment of American workers by foreign manufacturers, and the falling dollar that made it cheaper to produce domestically. The company's U.S. and Japanese executives saluted the American flag, denounced protectionism, and then dined on sushi.

Home Heating Lobby

The Citizen/Labor Energy Coalition opposed a tax on imported oil claiming that Connecticut residents would pay 13 percent more for home-heating oil if Congress approved a $5-per-barrel fee. Sen­ ator Dodd declared, “The oil-import fee would have disproportionate impact on Connecticut and the rest of energy-dependent New Eng- Iand."i8

l^Robert Welsman, “Pilot Pen Embarks on a Milestone," Hartford Courant, June 13, 1987, D1. l^Gldget Fuentes, “Oil Study Called Flawed," Hartford Courant, June 24, 1987, AS. 208

Labor Unions More than 300 United Automobile Workers attending a confer­ ence protested Indiana Congressman Dan Burton's vote against the omnibus trade bill before Congress. Burton, according to the UAW workers, had, in effect, voted against the idea of America remaining an industrial nation, something desperately needed to insure the na­ tional defense.19

Local Military Projects

Military spending is often presented to constituents by mem­ bers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee not as an important part of overall defense strategy, but as a source of jobs for the local economy. Military spending produces lucrative, often multibillion-dollar contracts, that in turn create jobs. Constituents understand this relationship, so local military projects are highly salient. They affect con­ stituents’ lives. Therefore, members are under enormous political pressure to attract new defense industries to the state and district and protect those already located there. As one analyst of this rela­ tionship has observed, "For members of Congress—whose job it is to represent the interests of their constituents—the economic impact of the defense budget is simply too large to ig n o r e ." 2 o

19no byline, “UAW Assails Quayle, Burton for Trade Measure Opposition," Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 23, 1987, B8. 20Rlchard A. Stubbing, The Defense Game (New York: Harper and Row, 1986), 90. 209

An “Iron Triangle” alliance affects the defense policy-making process as defense contractors, Defense Department bureaucrats, and members of Congress work together to promote their special interests. Contractors want more government contracts to build more planes, submarines, tanks, and other military hardware. The Defense Department wants to guarantee its share of the federal bud­ get. Members of Congress compete to see that defense contractors and military bases in their states and districts get a handsome share of the defense tax dollars. Gordon Adams has claimed: The activities that keep defense spending high, that protect new weapons, and that inhibit discussion of al­ ternative national security policies are played out in a highly political arena in which defense contractors, de­ fense bureaucrats, and the Congress are linked. This arena can be described as an “Iron Triangle," linking the

three sectors .21

One clear indication that the real concern is jobs, not defense strategy, is the fact that the news items never mentioned a foreign country.

In his research in the 1950s, Lewis Anthony Dexter found the House Armed Services Committee to be largely a real estate committee, one concerned with the location of military installations. Members wanted to protect military bases already located in their districts and obtain new ones. Dexter wrote:

21 Gordon Adams, "The Iron Triangle: Inside the Defense Policy Process," inThe Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence, ed. Charles W. Kegley, Jr., and Eugene R. WIttkopf (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988), 72. 210

"Congressmen interviewed generally indicate that they have little tendency to raise or consider questions of military policy in terms of its meaning for some national or international political objective or goal."22

For Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson and his con­ stituents, it was vitally important that General Dynamics Corpora­ tion’s Electric Boat plant continue to receive contracts to manufac­ ture Trident missile-carrying submarines that compose the Ameri­ can nuclear triad along with bombers and land-based missiles. For Gejdenson, whose district depends on Electric Boat jobs, it was welcome news when the Hartford Courant headlined its story, “Navy Awards 14th Trident Pact to EB.” The final paragraph sug­ gested why Gejdenson should be concerned with the contract and why local military projects are portrayed as intermestic news: Each Trident contract provides Electric Boat with about 10,000 production jobs in Groton and at a hull cylinder factory in Quonset Point, Rhode lsland.23

For Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds, it was banner front-page news when he joined Senator Edward Kennedy to keep an artillery shell casing plant open in his district. His district newspa­ per, the New Bedford Standard-Times, headlined its story, “Army

22Lewis Anthony Dexter, "Congressmen and the Making of Military Policy," in New Perspectives on the House of Representatives, ed. Robert L. Peabody and Nelson W. Poisby (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963), 306. 23John F. Fitzgerald, "Navy Awards 14th Trident Pact to EB,"Hartford Courant, May 27, 1987, F7. 211

Pumps $11.8 Million into Chamberlain to Modernize Ammo Plant.”24

Without the federal government’s money, the plant would have been forced to reduce its work force, meaning fewer jobs and less money pumped into Studds’ district, or perhaps even close. Studds, understandably, praised the U.S. Army’s change of heart to spend the money to repair the Chamberlain Manufacturing Com­ pany’s aging equipment so it could bid on Pentagon contracts. The pa­ per praised Studds profusely in a follow-up editorial that showed that the real issue was jobs, not military strategy or national secu­ rity. The editorial said, “Sen. Kennedy and Rep. Studds deserve credit for keeping the Pentagon’s feet to the fire on this one and for pre­ serving all those jobs.”25 The press interest in local military news, including its support for the area’s military contracts, suggests that the iron triangle may be an “iron quadrangle” with the press joining contractors, defense bureaucrats, and members of Congress to pro­ mote their own interests. The U.S. Air Force ran into some stiff community opposition in Acushnet, Massachusetts, when it attempted to construct a 300- foot-high radio tower to be used as part of a communications net­ work in case of nuclear war. Congressman Studds was again in the news in his district newspaper, the New Bedford Standard-Times, when he joined efforts to attempt to persuade the Air Force to se­ lect another site.

24jack Stewardson, “Army Pumps $11.8 Million Into Chamberlain to Modernize Ammo Plant,” New Bedford Standard-Times, July 22, 1987, 1. 25Edltorlal, “Revival of Two Manufacturers Is a Display of Sharp Contrasts,” New Bedford Standard-Times, July 24,1987, 8. 2 1 2

The town hoped to build a tournament-quality golf course on the site targeted for the Air Force's Ground Wave Emergency Net­ work (GWEN) tower. The paper quoted Studds: “In my view, it is much easier, and makes far more sense for the Air Force to identify another tower site. To meet its needs, Acushnet has far fewer options," Rep. Studds,

D-Mass., wrote to Air Force officials.26

In view of the deep citizen concern, a local elected official an­ nounced that he was calling an extraordinary public meeting to dis­ cuss the tower. An aide to Studds attended the meeting at which 200 residents voted almost unanimously to oppose construction on the site favored by the Air Force. The resolutions endorsed by the citi­ zens carried no official weight but they demonstrated their objec­ tions to the decision.

It was news in Indiana when Senator Lugar tried to keep a bomb contract in his state. The Indianapolis Star reported, “U.S. Sen. Richard Lugar, R-lnd., said Friday he has asked the Army to scrap its plans to consider moving the production of 2,000-pound bombs from southern Indiana's Crane Army Ammunition Factory.”27 Lugar’s dis­ trict paper, the Anderson Herald-Bulletin, reported on another local military story. A Lugar spokesman. Lane A. Ralph, was pleased when the U.S. Army awarded a $97,000 contract to a group of Indiana citi-

26Nataile White, “Studds Backs Opponents of Tower Site," New Bedford Stan­ dard-Times, August 19, 1987, 5. 27|sjo byline, “Lugar Wants Bomb Contract Kept,” Indianapolis Star, June 13, 1987, BIO. 213

zens to study the possible risks of incinerating up to four million

pounds of outdated nerve agent stored at a plant near their h o m e s .28

Cultural Activities

Several Soviet-American cultural activities led to home-state and district press coverage for members of the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Vancouver, Washington, for example, rededicated the Chkalov Monument named for Soviet pilot Valeri Chkalov, who 50 years earlier had completed the world's first transpolar flight. Chkalov was killed in a 1938 plane crash, but the granddaughter of his copilot, Georgi Baidukov, attended the Vancouver ceremony marking the flight that landed at what is now a local airpark. Even cultural activities, however, can cause friction for the superpowers. The State Department ruled that Vancouver was in the

“red zone”—areas in the United States off-limits to Soviet diplo­ mats and personnel based here. The State Department's action was based on reciprocity. Marie Pampush, speaking for her boss, Wash­ ington State Congressman Don Bonker, explained: They apparently felt the Russians keep our people out of some of their cities. They'll keep the Russians from Van­ couver. It's a shame. We wanted to encourage the cultural

28|sjo byline, “Citizen Group Studies Nerve Gas,"Anderson Heratd-Bulletin, Juiy 14, 1987, BIO. 214

side of things. We hoped it wouldn’t become political.

Unfortunately, that's what happened.zs

Sports competition accounted for some cultural coverage com­ bining international and domestic elements. The Washington State House delegation was caught off guard and lost a narrow 203-201 vote to delete $1 million from the State Department authorization bill to fund cultural exchanges planned in connection with the 1990 Goodwill Games scheduled in Seattle.3° Again, it was foreign affairs with a local angle. A nonprofit committee headed by Seattle Univer­ sity President William Sullivan was organizing the Goodwill Games, but the vote was aimed at broadcaster Ted Turner, who owned the broadcast rights for the 1990 competition. Later, the House voted 230-180 to restore the money, but not before critics had accused Turner of allowing the Soviets to use the 1986 games for propaganda purposes.3i Because of the local angle, the Seattle press followed the de­ velopments closely, but as Anna Perez, press secretary to Con­ gressman Miller, said, “If the Goodwill Games were being held in Tuscaloosa, you wouldn’t find one line about it in the Seattle pa- p e r s . ”3 2 The Indianapolis Star covered the Pan American Games, an­ other international sports competition, reporting that Senator

29shelby Scales, “Soviets Can't Come to the Party, Says State Department," Seattle TImes/Post-lntelllgencer, July 12, 1987, E2. 39Eric Pryne, “Goodwill Games Cut by $1 Million," Seattle Times, June 19, 1987, A1. 31 Joel Connelly, “Goodwill Games Cash Restored,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, June 24, 1987, A1. 32|ntervlew with Anna Perez, December 11, 1987. 215

Richard G. Lugar would run with the torch to mark the beginning of the games.33

Constituency Service

Constituents sometimes approach their senators and con­ gressmen with requests for help in solving individual problems. Usu­ ally, they are strictly domestic matters—for example, complaints about the size of a Social Security check. Occasionally, however, constituent problems incorporate international as well as domestic elements. When that happens, the problem is an intermestic one. Usually, senators and congressmen are eager to help. Some­ times, however, intermestic constituency service creates dilemmas as Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson learned from Robert Dumas, who had spent 37 years searching for his brother, Roger, a soldier missing since the Korean War. Dumas, a constituent, ap­ proached Gejdenson with a major request—to head a U.S. delegation to North Korea to try to learn the fate of the Connecticut man. Gejdenson’s home-state and district press was understandably interested in the matter because it involved local people. Gejdenson, however, was caught in a bind. Obviously, he wanted to help a con­ stituent, but he was concerned that his involvement might interfere with his national responsibility to fashion U.S. foreign policy. As Gejdenson said during an interview, “You can’t trade U.S. interests in

33no byline, “‘500’ Driver to Carry Flames on Wheels," Indianapolis Star, July 14, 1987, 33. 216

a region for constituent gain as politically helpful as that might be."34

Gejdenson wanted time to weigh the potential impact on U.S.- North Korean relations if he headed a delegation to explore the missing-in-action problem still lingering some 35 years after the Korean War ended. Gejdenson’s mixed emotions were reflected in an article ap­ pearing in his district newspaper, the New London Day, “Gejdenson

May Lead Trip to N. K o r e a .”35 The story reported that Gejdenson de­ clined to commit himself to lead such a delegation until the North Koreans indicated that it would be productive. Gejdenson was shy about press coverage, but it kept coming, thanks to aggressive ef­ forts by his constituent, Robert Dumas. His home-state paper, the Hartford Courant, ran three stories, including a key article, “Gejdenson Noncommittal on North Korea ROW Trip.” The story described a “sometimes-stormy” half-hour meeting between Gejdenson andD u m a s .3 6 Gejdenson would not make a firm commitment to go until the North Koreans indicated that such an expedition might succeed. Dumas was disappointed, but later was informed that a Gejdenson aide would meet with North Korean offi­ cials in New York to discuss the matter.

34|nterview with Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., March 29, 1988. 35wi[llam A. Stanley, "Gejdenson May Lead Trip to N. Korea," New London Day, August 28, 1987, B1. 36Roger Catlln, “Gejdenson Noncommittal on North Korea ROW Trip," Hartford Courant, August 28, 1987, D4. 217

Reporters were not allowed into the Gejdenson-Dumas meeting held in Gejdenson’s office, but they occasionally heard raised voices while they waited outside. The D ay reported, "The congressman seemed clearly annoyed by Dumas’ inviting more than a dozen re­ porters, photographers, and broadcasters to Gejdenson’s o f f i c e . ”3 7 in this case, Gejdenson wanted to approach the problem quietly behind the scenes, at least until some progress was made, but home-state and district press interest made that impossible. Gejdenson received another intermestic constituency service request from Elizabeth Dougherty, who asked him to back her efforts to honor the 250 men killed in Beirut in 1983, including the 241 who died in a truck bomb attack at the Marine barracks, with a commem­ orative stamp. At her urging, Gejdenson sent a letter to the U.S. Postal Advisory Committee asking that the stamp be issued in light of the “supreme sacrifice” made by the Americans who died in Beirut. The matter made news in the district press as “Durham

Woman Seeks to Honor M arines.”38 This request did not create the serious foreign policy concerns posed by the Dumas case, but it, too, points out that members can feel pressured to act on constituency requests with foreign affairs implications because of potential ad­ verse local press coverage if they do not. Chip Partner, Gejdenson’s

37Roger Gatlin, "Gejdenson Noncommittal on North Korea ROW Trip,"Hartford Courant, August 28, 1987, D4. 38Associated Press, "Durham Woman Seeks to Honor Marines,"New London Day, June 5, 1987, A3. 218

press secretary, summarized the concerns when he said, “It’s hard to be against dead Marines and MIAs.”39

Immigration

Not surprisingly, California, with its heavy influx of immi­ grants from Mexico and Central America, accounted for most of the immigration news items—items combining international and domes­ tic components. The state’s farm interests pressured the Reagan ad­ ministration to speed the processing migrant farm workers, who could help harvest perishable crops. Agricultural growers were not the only constituents concerned about immigration rules. The Catholic Church and immigration orga­ nizations were also involved. The Los Angeles Times reported, for example, that Senator Cranston would discuss what an aide called “farm worker problems and other defects in the legalization bill" with the Most Reverend Roger Mahony, archbishop of the Los Angeles Roman Catholic Archdiocese, and Father Luis Oliveras, chair of the Coalition for Human Immigration Rights in Los Angeles.^o

In 1986, Congress approved the Immigration Reform and Con­ trol Act that created new concerns that families would be split if some members, a husband, for example, qualified for legal status, but his wife and children did not. Cranston was pushing the Immi­ gration and Naturalization Service to act administratively to resolve the problem. Linda Wong of the Mexican American Legal Defense and

39|nterview with Chip Partner, press secretary to Congressman Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., November 12, 1987. 40Paul Houston, “INS Agrees to Ease Entry Regulations for Farm Workers,” Los Angeles Times, June 30, 1987,Part 1, 3. 219

Educational Fund called for a national policy backing family reunifi­ cation and said it is the first priority.41

2. Ethnic Factors

Ethnic factors made only a modest contribution to the foreign affairs press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Ethnicity was much less important than intermestic issues as a domestic source of foreign affairs news.

Je w s Daniel Pipes has claimed that excessive press attention to Is­ rael distorts the way Americans see the Middle East, giving the er­ roneous impression that Israel is the key factor in Middle East poli­ tics. “Whatever the issue—oil prices, Persian Gulf security, U.S. and Soviet relations with the Arabs—Israel always seems to have a lead role,” Pipes has written.42

Yet during the period of this study, three other Middle East countries, Iran, Iraq, and Kuwait, received much more coverage than Israel as a result of the Persian Gulf war. (See Chapter 9 for de­ tails.) Instead of being a news-making superpower, Israel was well down the list of countries covered. Restrictions on emigration of

41 Lee May, “Slow Allen Registration Tied to Fear of Splitting Families," Los Angeles Times, July 16, 1987, Part 1, 15. 42oaniel Pipes, “The Media and the Middle East," Commentary 77, no. 6 (April 1984): 30. 220

Soviet Jews prompted some mention, but the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was cited in only two news items. Sometimes, the ethnic push for coverage comes from a con­ stituent’s call for assistance with a special problem. For Lev and Yelena Pevzner, it was a dream come true when they learned that their son and daughter-in-law had been granted permission to leave the Soviet Union and soon would be joining them in Indianapolis. The son and his wife, both electrical engineers, had applied repeatedly over the years to leave the Soviet Union, but with no luck. Pevzner praised Senator Lugar for his work in support of Soviet Jewish emi­ gration, noting that Lugar had pursued the family’s cause for years, even after other officials had lost interest in their case.43 Concern for Israeli security was at the heart of efforts by Senator Cranston and Congressman Levine to block the Reagan ad­ ministration’s proposed sale of Maverick antitank missiles to Saudi Arabia. Cranston introduced a resolution in the Senate to block the controversial sale, while Levine sponsored a House version of that resolution. Cranston justified his opposition on the grounds that such a sale would threaten Israel, a friend and democracy in that troubled region of the world.44 Although Cranston received some coverage of the Maverick missile sale controversy in the Los Angeles Times, he was the only member mentioned on this issue in the press back home.

43Howard M. Smulevitz, “Soviet Family a Step Closer to Reunion,” Indianapolis Star, July 21, 1987, 10. 44paul Houston, “Saudi Arms Deal Is Off, Reagan Says," Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1987, Part 1, 1. 221

Public officials and scholars often cite the political power wielded by the Jewish lobby, especially the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AlPAC). Former Maryland Senator Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., for example, has described how AlPAC works when an issue important to Israel comes before Congress. The lobby does not stop providing members with data and documentation to support its cause. Mathias added: Beyond that, signs of hesitation or opposition on the part of a Senator or a Representative can usually be relied on to call forth large numbers of letters and telegrams, or visits and phone calls from influential constituents.45 If that kind of lobbying campaign was being conducted between May 1 and August 31, 1987, it did not stimulate coverage of mem­ bers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts. Not only was Israel little covered, but part of that attention raised questions about American support for Israel and the political influence of AlPAC. From the perspective of the American Jewish community, it was un­ desirable coverage. The Hartford Courant raised the question in its news item on congressional financial disclosure reports. The story noted that virtually all the honorariums received by Congressman Gejdenson, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, had come from Jewish organizations. The paper reported that Gejdenson was paid

45charles McC. Mathias, Jr., “Ethnic Groups and Foreign Poiicy,"Foreign Af­ fairs 59, no. 5 (Summer 1981): 993. 222

$2,000 each for speeches to the Jewish Federation of Sacramento, the Atlanta Jewish Federation, the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, and the United Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh. After reporting the amounts, reporter David Lightman probed for the potential impact on the congressman’s voting behavior in Congress. Asked if speaking to so many Jewish groups could hurt his objectivity on the committee, Bruce Partner, Gejden­ son’s spokesman, thought not. "The congressman makes decisions on foreign affairs independently,” he said. Partner said Gejdenson received so many requests from Jewish groups because “the congressman is Jewish, and he is the first child of Holocaust survivors to serve in Congress. He also speaks Yiddish, and therefore is

asked to speak to a number of Jewish g r o u p s .”4 6 Had he sought reelection, Washington State Senator Dan Evans may have found his opponent bolstered by a big campaign donation from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. Seattle Post- Intelligencer columnist Shelby Scates described Evans’s political predicament:

Word is out from Jerusalem to Pioneer Square that AlPAC, the Israeli lobby, has the state’s ex-governor and senior senator targeted for political extinction next year.

46David Lightman, “Four in State Deiegation Near Limits on Outside Earnings,” Hartford Courant. May 22, 1987, A4. 223

AlPAC Is regarded as the toughest lobby on Capitol Hill. It can dump or channel hundreds of thousands of dollars into the hustings with a Senate seat at stake. It is both feared and courted.47

Evans said AlPAC objects to some of his attitudes, although he strongly supports Israeli independence and security. Evans had warned in the past that the United States should be more careful to distinguish its own interests from those of Israel.

B lacks Barry Rubin has written that blacks are beginning to respond to coverage of Africa, but this study found no evidence to support Rubin's claim.48 There was very little coverage of Africa in the dis­ trict and home-state press, and most of that treated Mozambique as a battleground in the Soviet-American rivalry. It did not focus much on the serious developmental problems facing the continent or look at the status of apartheid in South Africa. There were no black orga­ nizations mentioned in the news as pressuring the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee about issues affecting Africa. Martin Weil has suggested that blacks have had no visible impact on U.S. policy toward Africa because they feel less kinship with overseas forebears than do those in the Polish, Jewish, and other ethnic communities across the

47shelby Scates, “Evans, Swift Would Send Dirty Politics to the Cleaners,” Seattle TImes/Post-lntelllgencer, July 5, 1987, F2. 48Barry Rubin, International News and the American Media, The Washington Papers; 49 (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, Inc., 1977), 18. 224

country. According to Weil, black Americans are centuries removed from their African ancestors, across a cultural and historical divide that dampens the sense of sharing a common heritage.49 For what­ ever the reasons, this research found that black Americans are not generating attention that gets members of Congress in the news on issues affecting Africa.

Lithuanians, Latvians, and Estonians About fifty people gathered at the Veterans Memorial Chapel in Seattle to remember the Nazi-Soviet Pact that divided Eastern Eu­ rope between Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union. The Seattle Peace and Freedom Coalition sponsored the memorial "to mourn vic­ tims, both dead and living,” of the pact. Ken Gorshkow of the Seattle Estonian Society said 48 years later. Eastern Europe is still under Soviet rule. It was important, Gorshkow said, to pay attention to what the Soviets are doing in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, the three Baltic nations “swallowed” by the Soviets at the end of World War 11.50

Congressman John Miller told the memorial remembrance, “At every exchange we must say to the Soviets, ‘When will you let these people be free?”’ The Soviets, he added, have never repudiated the 1939 pact and continue to dominate these three nations. “We must be very careful, very cautious when we deal with the Soviets,”

49Martin Well, “Can the Blacks Do for Africa What Jews Did for Israel?,"F o r­ eign Policy 15 (Summer 1974): 123. sopaul Swortz, “Mourning a 1939Pact's Victims,” Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, August 24, 1987, D1. 225

Miller said before the memorial. “It forces one to remember the ca­ pacity for evil in men.”5 i

Miller had been keenly concerned about Lithuanian human rights, telling the Seattle Post-Intelligencer for another news item: I’ve been doing more on Lithuanian Catholics lately. Our goal is to increase awareness in the United States that it’s not just Jews in the Soviet Union who are denied freedoms. You can go to jail for organizing a Christmas celebration in Lithuania. You cannot train for the priest- hood.52

Miller, whose father was Latvian, headed the congressional caucus that monitors persecutions of the Baltic peoples.

Portuguese Congressman Gerry Studds’s Massachusetts district includes a sizable Portuguese constituency that stimulated some press cover­ age. The Feast of the Blessed Sacrament, with an anticipated crowd of 175,000-200,000, has been called the largest Portuguese feast in the country. Studds marched in the parade that highlighted the cere­ monies and then addressed the crowd. His district newspaper, the New Bedford Standard-Times, covered the feast and reported: Rep. Studds promised after his election in 1972 to learn

to speak Portuguese, noted master of ceremonies Jack

51 Paul Swortz, "Mourning a 1939 Pact's Victims,"Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, August 24, 1987, D1. 52joei Conneiiy, "State's GOP Congressmen Must Scramble to Make Themselves Felt,"Sea«/e Post-lntelllgencer, Juiy 31, 1987,A6. 226

Nobrega. The promise was fulfilled. The congressman ad­ dressed the crowd in Portuguese.53

To help his Portuguese constituents, Studds announced a month before the feast that he was providing a four-page fact sheet on the new immigration law written in Portuguese. The Immigration Re­ form and Control Act requires employers to verify that job appli­ cants are U.S. residents and allows illegal aliens in the country since 1982 to apply for legal status. Studds said that the fact sheet

was translated because of confusion about the details of the new law .54

F ilip in o s

Seattle has an active Filipino community. The leader of the National Federation of Sugar Workers in the Philippines visited the city under the sponsorship of the Philippine Workers Support Com­ mittee and the Pacific Rim Task Force of the Church Council of Greater Seattle. Congressman John Miller made a trip to the Philip­ pines during the period of this research and later told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that land reform is "a political necessity for preserving and encouraging the fragile democracy they h a v e .”55

53Megan Secatore, “Sun Breaks Through to Shine on Feast Parade,"New Bedford Standard-Times, August 3, 1987, 3. 54staff, “Studds Offers Translated Fact Sheet," New Bedford Standard-Times, July 4, 1987, 3. 55Evelyn Irltanl, “Aquino's Land Reform Doomed, Unionist Fears," Seattle Post- lntelllgencer, August 1, 1987, A2. 227

Rom anians Human rights violations prompted the Senate to vote to sus­ pend trade concessions to Romania for six months. Romania had been one of four communist countries to enjoy the Most Favored Nation treatment. Senators were especially upset by the continued denial of religious freedoms in Romania and voted 57-36 to add an amendment to the sweeping trade bill denying these MFN trade advantages. The Hartford Courant, in its story, “Senate Votes 57-36 to Suspend Romania’s Favored Trade Status," mentioned Connecticut Senator Dodd’s deep concerns: Dodd cited one instance in the late 1970s where the Ro­ manian government confiscated 20,000 Bibles, which were to be delivered to Hungarian churches in Romania,

and pulped them into toilet p a p e r .56

Dodd termed the action an incredible sacrilege. This kind of coverage served two functions, according to Dodd’s administrative assistant Ed Silverman. It helped Dodd with the small Romanian constituency in Connecticut and allowed him to counteract any impression that he was weak on communism in Cen­ tral America. By criticizing Romanian human rights violations, Sil­ verman noted, “He’s beating up on the communists.’’^?

sSQidget Fuentes and John MacDonald, “Senate Votes 57-36 to Suspend Romania's Favored Trade Status," Hartford Courant, June 27, 1987, AS. 57|nterview with Edward Silverman, administrative assistant to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., May 6, 1988. 228

3. Making Foreign Affairs News Back Home

• Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee can make foreign affairs news back home by bringing foreign affairs into the community. Senator Jesse Helms did just that when he showed up at the North Carolina Republican Party Convention in Asheviile with an unexpected guest, a key figure on the international scene at the time, Nicaraguan Con­ tra leader Adolfo Calero. After finishing his remarks to the partisan audience. Helms introduced Calero who was waiting in the wings of the convention hall. Calero called for continued U.S. aid to the Con­ tras and told the audience that his friendship with Helms and others had reinforced his determination to struggle against “any form of tyranny, against any curtailment of freedom.”58 The Asheville Citi­ zen and the Charlotte Observer reported on Calero’s speech, some­ thing that would not likely have happened had Calero delivered the same remarks outside of North Carolina. As Mark Barrett, who cov­ ered the Republican convention for the Citizen, said, "The story was ‘Adolfo Calero comes to Asheville.”’59

• Foreign affairs came to Indianapolis when the city hosted the Pan American Economic Leadership Conference that brought more than 100 delegates to the Indiana capital to discuss Latin American economic problems. James Baker, Secretary of the Treasury, at-

58Mark Barrett, “Calero: Hearings Help Contras," Asheville Citizen, May 31, 1987, A1. 59|ntervlew with Mark Barrett, September 3, 1987. 229

tended, representing the Reagan administration. Senator Richard G. Lugar was in the forefront of the newsmaking in his capacity as cochair for the conference covered extensively by his home-state paper, the Indianapolis Star. In a major address, Lugar urged the con­ vening of an international summit to deal with the burgeoning inter­ national debt problem to discuss how both the losses and opportuni­ ties would be shared.60 Indiana Lieutenant Governor John Mutz explained why it was important that the conference was being held in Indianapolis: Any time you can assemble an internationally rec­ ognized conference in Indiana, it focuses attention and tells people in the rest of the world that we do more than hold a race once a year and that we have an interna­ tional perspective. It also communicates to the Midwest that we are not an island, we are part of an international economy.

It’s not so easy for the average Hoosier to see that if the Latin-American economies were at the level they were, say, eight years ago, there could be 15,000 more people in Indiana employed right now.^i By doing his part to bring a major foreign affairs conference to his state, Lugar helped guarantee press coverage that Latin-American debt problems would not otherwise have received in the Indianapolis

fiOEric B. Schoch, "Lugar Urges Summit on Latin Debt,”Indianapolis Star, June 15, 1987, 1. 61 Eric B. Schoch, “Meeting to Key on Latin-American Economic Woes,"Indi­ anapolis Star, June 14, 1987, A20. 230

Star. Just as the North Carolina story had been “Adolfo Calero Comes to Asheville," so the Indiana story was “Major International Confer­ ence Held in Indianapolis.” • Similarly, Cuba became local news in a most unexpected way in Indianapolis when that city hosted the Pan American Games, giv­ ing Senator Lugar an opportunity to comment on Fidel Castro’s human rights record. Cuba requested permission to fly its athletes to Indi­ ana on charter planes. Lugar said he found it ironic that Cuba was seeking special charter flights for its athletes yet prohibiting such flights for American diplomats. “I wish the Cubans were as accom­ modating in regards to charter flights for our diplomats...and in the area of human rights in their country,” he s a id .6 2 • The tragic death of 24-year-old Benjamin Linder in

Nicaragua provided the unexpected catalyst for a heavy outpouring of unwanted foreign affairs press coverage for Congressman John Miller. Although from Oregon, Linder was a University of Washington graduate and regarded as something of a hometown boy in Seattle. He was the local link to the war when he was shot and killed by Contras while in Nicaragua. Different accounts appear concerning the cir­ cumstances in which Linder was killed. According to one version, he was helping build a hydroelectric plant in a small Nicaraguan village. But whatever the circumstances, Linder’s death made the war a local story.

62unda Graham Caleca, “U.S.-Cuban Relations May Have Impact on Pan Am Competition,” Indianapolis Star, May 11, 1987, 1. 231

Some in his district held Miller responsible for Linder’s death because he had voted for continued American aid to the Contras. The Seattle-based Central American Peace Campaign and church groups sharply criticized Miller. The Reverend Robert Schmidt, Lutheran campus pastor at the University of Washington, wrote in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer: “If Washington Rep, John Miller and his col­ leagues continue to support such aid, let them be shunned, avoided,

ignored, and treated as if they are already politically d e a d / 6 3

In his study of television network coverage of earthquakes and other natural disasters, William C. Adams concluded that the nation­ alities of those killed made a great deal of difference in terms of generating news coverage. All earthquake victims were not the same. A hierarchy was at work. Adams found: “Overall, the globe is prioritized so that the death of one Western European equaled three Eastern Europeans equaled 9 Latin Americans equaled 11 Middle Easterners equaled 12

A s i a n s . "64 Linder’s death showed that in terms of generating press coverage back home, the death of one local person may be more im­ portant than the deaths of thousands of Nicaraguans. • A Soviet-American Sister City Summit in Seattle provided a forum for Congressman John Miller to criticize Soviet human rights abuses, much to the chagrin of the Soviet visitors and some Ameri­ can organizers of the conference. In one discussion. Miller said the

63Robert Schmidt, column, “‘Lcw-intenslty’ Warfare Backed by U.S. Is a Crime against God and Humanity," Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 9, 1987, A4. 64willlam 0 . Adams, “Whose Lives Count?: TV Coverage of Natural Disasters,” Journal of Communication 36, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 122. 232

United States should improve trade relations only if the Soviets im­ prove their record on religious freedoms and the right to emigrate. Vladimir Chibirev, an official of the Soviet Trade Ministry, said it was absurd to try, as Miller had, to link trade and human rights, but the Seattle-area congressman was adamant. “They don’t want me to bring up the subject, but that’s the way it is,” he declared.ss Rosanne Royer, who served as chairwoman of the Sister City Sum­ mit, said sister city relationships were designed for cultural rather than political purposes, and thus human rights should not have been on the official agenda.66

• Sometimes, constituents come together to lobby a member of Congress on a specific vote. This happened to Senator Nancy Kasse- baum when Kansans against Contra Aid targeted her as a key swing vote on Contra aid. The result was a number of news stories that Kassebaum had not sought and no doubt preferred not to have gotten.

65pete McConnell and Scott Malar, “Visiting Soviets Blast Miller,”Seattle Post- Intelligencer, May 23, 1987, A1. 66Mltch B. Hughes, letter, “Initiative 30 Outlaws Politics In Any Sister City Relationship,” Seattle Post-inteiiigencer, May 28, 1987, AID. Chapter 9 issues and Countries in the News

You should be able to take a year’s coverage and make a brochure which would give a pretty good picture of the country—politically, geographically, culturally.1

New York Times diplomatic correspondent Flora Lewis, author of the above lines, presents a demanding standard for judging the quality of foreign news. She terms her ideal a “do-it-yourself mo­ saic” in which individual news stories over a period of time fit to­ gether to form a larger picture, one that reflects a society in its many dimensions. As expected, however, this research found that coverage of selected members of the Senate Foreign Relations Com­

mittee and House Foreign Affairs Committee falls far short of this ideal of well-rounded news coverage. Instead of the clear snapshot that Lewis hopes for, the result is a series of disjointed pieces that highlight a few issues and countries. Lewis wants a newspaper reader to be able to absorb the coverage of France for a year and then find no surprises upon visiting the country. The sensation, she writes, should be the same as that of the person who sees the Mona Lisa original for the first time after seeing reproductions. The au-

1 Flora Lewis cited In Mort Rosenblum, Coups and Earthquakes (New York: Harper and Row, 1981), 57.

233 2 3 4

thentic painting will leave a special Impact, but the first-time viewer will not be surprised by the picture. Foreign correspondents are more likely than journalists cov­ ering members of Congress to present a foreign country in its many facets because they concentrate on a country’s domestic as well as foreign policies. The discussion that follows shows how little read­ ers learn from the home-state and district press coverage of mem­ bers of the two foreign affairs committees about conditions inside the world’s many countries. Often, it is not enough for an issue to be important to get cov­ erage. It must come before Congress for a vote. Apartheid, the much- criticized policy of racial separation practiced in South Africa, was in the news when Congress voted sanctions against the Afrikaner government in 1986, then reaffirmed those sanctions by overriding President Reagan’s veto. Between May 1 and August 31, 1987, how­ ever, Congress did not vote on highly controversial anti-apartheid legislation; therefore, the topic, despite its importance, obtained little coverage.

Trade is always a major concern, but it was perhaps even more in the news when Congress was considering the omnibus trade bill, including the Gephardt amendment introduced by Missouri Congress­ man Richard Gephardt. Trade, however, will make news with or without major controversial legislation simply because members of Congress are so concerned about creating and protecting jobs in their states and districts. 235

The findings are presented in a region-by-region format, high­ lighting the issues and countries that made home-state and district press news. Based on a content analysis of the news items that ap­ peared in the newspapers examined, this discussion describes how countries within each region were covered on foreign affairs and intermestic issues. Before turning to that region-by-region analysis, however, it is helpful to understand some of the key findings on countries and issues in the news. 1. As expected, coverage of members of these two committees in their home-state and district press was coverage of U.S. foreign policy, not world politics. The content analysis reveals that the fo­ cus is almost exclusively on foreign affairs with a United States role. Thus, much of what happened on the world scene did not result in foreign affairs news coverage of members of these committees back home. The substantial attention to the fighting in Nicaragua where the United States was deeply involved stands in marked con­ trast to the absence of coverage of members in the home-state and

district press about the fighting in Afghanistan where the Soviet Union was deeply embroiled. This emphasis on U.S. national interests, understandable though it is in coverage centering on senators and congressmen who make U.S. foreign policy, is reflected, too, in the fact that in one im­ portant way the news is not genuinely international. The home-state and district press, in its coverage of these selected members, rarely gives a balanced presentation because they very rareiy seek a foreign point of view. Members do not add it either. Often the local 236

congressman or senator is the only one quoted in a foreign affairs story carried back home. Balanced reporting means at best that a Democrat viewpoint is balanced by a Republican viewpoint about how best to promote U.S. national interests. The district newspaper may quote the local congressman on the situation in Nicaragua, but never include a Nicaraguan point of view; it may quote the local congressman on the Iraqi attack on an American ship, but never contact an Iraqi source for a response. This foreign viewpoint, of course, can reach readers through the coverage provided by foreign correspondents stationed in Moscow who do have much better access to Soviet officials. Yet, this does not always happen, and when it does, the Soviet viewpoint does not usually ap­ pear in the same news item with the local congressman’s assess­ ment. Other analysts have noted that the standard of balanced news coverage is adhered to much more often in domestic than foreign affairs news. Herbert Gans, in his provocative work. Deciding What’s N ew s, found that foreign affairs news is usually treated with less detachment than domestic news and “explicit value judgments that would not be considered justifiable in domestic news appear in sto­ ries about the rest of the world, particularly from communist coun­ tries."2 Reporters back home are not concerned about offending Mikhail Gorbachev.

This inattention to the foreign country’s point of view also oc­ curs in the intermestic news coverage. Growing international eco-

2Herbert J. Gans, Deciding What's News (New York: Pantheon Books, 1979), 31. 237

nomic interdependence offers the possibility that Americans will widen their horizons and become more internationally oriented as they see that what happens in Japan and other countries affects

their lives in very powerful ways. Yet this research suggests a po­ tential danger as well. Coverage of the trade issue in the home-state and district press as it reports on members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee risks blurring that snapshot because complex economic issues are por­ trayed as how foreign countries are affecting the United States, not how the United States is affecting them. A tax on imported oil may affect Americans in northeastern states as they confront higher winter heating bills, but it also affects the Middle East and other countries that supply the oil. 2. As expected, military issues dominated coverage of mem­ bers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts, while important matters that did not involve conflict, crises, and supposed threats to national security received scant attention. The world as projected by senators and congressmen back home is a Hobbesian place, not a Panglossian one.

The data clearly reveal the strong national security dimension of foreign affairs news. Wars in the Persian Gulf, Nicaragua, and Mozambique accounted for 100 news item mentions, more than three times as many as the next most numerous category. The period of this research. May 1-August 31, 1987, was one marked perhaps by more war coverage than is sometimes the case.Covert operations, 238

specifically the Iran-Contra hearings and reaction to the alleged arms for hostages deal engineered by Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, followed with 30 mentions. Another military matter, the sale of U.S.-made jet fighters to Honduras and Maverick antitank missiles to Saudi Arabia produced the next highest number of news mentions. The inner turmoil items focused on protests and other forms of dissent aimed at leaders in South Korea, the Philippines, and Panama. The major intelligence story to surface during the period of this research was the sale of military technology by the Japanese and Norwegians to the Soviets, touching off an angry reaction among members of Congress irritated that the Soviets could use the tech­ nology to develop quieter submarines. Human rights violations, primarily in the Soviet Union, also accounted for a number of mentions in the home-state and district press. No other category, with the exception of Miscellaneous, reached double figures. See Table 16 for the complete breakdown on foreign affairs coverage by categories. 239

Table 16. Breakdown of Foreign Affairs News

Foreign Affairs Categories and Number of Mentions 1. War 100 2. Covert Operations 30 3. Weapons Sales 1 6 4. Inner Turmoil 1 2 5. Intelligence 1 2 6. Human Rights 1 1 7. Foreign Trips 8 8. Nuclear Missile Negotiations/Proliferation 7 9. World Debt 4 10. Population/Hunger 3 11. Terrorism 2 12. Science/Technology 1 13. Miscellaneous 1 1 T o ta l 2 1 7

Note: These numbers are derived by adding the number of foreign af­ fairs news items in the home-state and district press, 18 newspapers in all, that mention members of the Senate Foreign Relations Com­ mittee and House Foreign Affairs Committee monitored for this re­ search. The total includes a few news items coded as domestic issues that contained some foreign affairs information. Members of these two committees rarely tried to use the home-state and district press to discuss other kinds of foreign af­ fairs concerns that lacked the distinctive military quality. Notice the lack of attention to ozone depletion, desertification, and other pressing international environmental concerns. There was virtually nothing in this content analysis about what foreign countries are doing in the areas of science, medicine, religion, arts, education, and housing. 240

The inclusion of the intermestic stories gives a slightly dif­ ferent picture, but, again, the military is prominent, although in a different context. The issue is contracts and jobs for constituents rather than broad military strategy. We notice, too, that trade is presented as an intermestic issue, rather than a foreign affairs one. Trade was far and away the most-mentioned intermestic news topic. With 59 news items, trade was second only to war as a source of foreign affairs and intermestic news. There were no intermestic news items on drug trafficking or foreign investment in the United States. (See page 202 of Chapter 8 for a breakdown of the intermes­ tic news items.) 3. As expected, instead of the rounded picture that Flora Lewis hoped for, members highlighted the “hot spots” of the moment. These hot spots shift from year to year. Had this research been con­ ducted in the early 1970s, Vietnam, as the hot spot of the moment, would have dominated the foreign affairs press coverage out of Congress. Not so in 1987. The Soviet Union was much covered, giving the news a strong East-West orientation.

Mort Rosenblum, former editor in chief of the International Herald Tribune, has outlined the “shadow theory" to explain foreign affairs news coverage: “Societies are concerned about those nations that cast a shadow over them rather than those over which they cast a shadow. ”3

3Mort Rosenblum, cited In Michael Rice with Jonathan Carr, Henri Pierre, Jan Relfenberg, and Pierre Salinger, Reporting U.S.-European Reiations (New York: Perga- mon Press, 1982),xxll. 241

The Soviet Union represents the major military threat to the United States, so it is not surprising that the Soviet Union was the second most-mentioned country in the home-state and district press coverage analyzed here. But we need to refine the shadow theory to note that countries that do not directly cast a shadow over the United States can, nevertheless, capture widespread press attention when they become part of the Soviet-American rivalry. Thus, Nicaragua does not directly threaten the United States, but there is much concern that an unfriendly Nicaragua aligned with the Soviet Union could pose a danger. Charles William Maynes made the point well in a 1988 article in Foreign Poiicy, "America's Third World Hang-ups," in which he wrote: Few areas in the Third World raise by themselves serious security considerations for the United States; it is the presumption or fact of a Soviet role that transforms set­ backs in the Third World into geopolitical crises for U.S. policymakers.4

This emphasis on the U.S.-Soviet rivalry, an emphasis espe­ cially prominent during the Reagan administration, gave a strong East-West flavor to the press coverage of Congress back home. The North-South dimension was virtually invisible. Steven Spiegel has w ritte n :

There are differences between those who see relations between industrial and Third World states as critical to

^Charles William Maynes, “America's Third World Hang-Ups,” Foreign Poiicy 71 (Summer 1988): 132-33. 242

world politics and those who still believe that the con­ frontation between communist and capitalist states is central.5

4. As expected, the Third World was presented as a region in turmoil, when it was portrayed at all.

The findings parallel those of William Hachten and Brian Beil: It was our hunch that the often-repeated “accusation” that the Western media carried too much “bad news” about the Third World had diverted attention from an­ other and perhaps more serious charge: that the Western media had been progressively ignoring the developing nations. The problem then perhaps was “too little news,” rather than “too much bad news.”® Third World critics of Western media coverage have aimed their criticisms at foreign correspondents in the past, but this re­ search shows that congressional press coverage of members of the

Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee reflected the same emphases on the negative, when it emphasized anything in the developing world. The home-state and district press reported on the actions of Congress and as long as that action ignored the problems of poverty, disease, and illiteracy, the press ignored it.

SSteven L. Spiegel, At Issue: Politics in the World Arena (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988), 3. SWiiiiam C. Hachten and Brian Beii, “Bad News or No News? Covering Africa, 1965-82,” Journalism Quarterly 62, no. 3 (Autumn 1985): 626. 2 4 3

The emphasis on conflict suggests why Western Europe, as ex­ pected, received so little attention in the home-state and district p re ss. Other writers, focusing on the work of foreign correspon­ dents, have found Western Europe to be well covered, largely because of cultural affinity between those countries and the United States. But cultural affinity does not generate news in Congress and there­ fore these nations account for few of the mentions back home. Changes of governments through peaceful elections in Great Britain, for example, do not become news through the Congress, al­ though American correspondents located in London may report on them lavishly. This inattention to Western Europe is a reminder that foreign affairs as filtered through Congress is not the same as for­ eign affairs reported by foreign correspondents. 5. As expected, few countries were mentioned in the home- state and district press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Only 45 of the world’s 187 countries (this includes the Palestinian Libera­ tion Organization) were mentioned, and 18 of them were mentioned in only one or two news items. What Rosemary Righter said of the Third World seems to hold true for many other countries as well: “Countries fortunate enough to escape a coup d’état, a major natural disaster or a hijacking inci­ dent may vanish from the media of their neighbors and the industri­ alized world for months on end.”^

^Rosemary Righter, Whose A/ews?(New York: Times Books, 1978), 38. 2 4 4

Occasionally, the same news items mentioned both the senator and House member from the state. In those cases, the items were counted only once. Many news items mentioned more than one coun­ try. The countries, ranked from most-mentioned to least-mentioned, are listed in Table 17. The numbers represent the composite total of foreign affairs and intermestic news items for the 18 members in the 18 home-state and district newspapers. Table 17. Countries Covered and Number of Mentions

1. Nicaragua 76 2. Soviet Union 65 3. Iran 57 4 . Japan 30 Kuwait 30 6 . Iraq 2 6 7. Canada 1 2 8. Honduras 1 0 Mozambique 1 0 10. Great Britain 8 Panama 8 12. South Africa 7 Philippines 7 14. El Salvador 6 West Germany 6 Israel 6 Norway 6 China 6 19. Guatemala 5 North Korea 5 2 1 . South Korea 4 Taiwan 4 Cuba 4 2 4. Costa Rica 3 Mexico 3 Saudi Arabia 3 France 3 28. Portugal 2 Colombia 2 Vietnam 2 PUO 2 Lebanon 2 Romania 2 Bahamas 2 Angola 2 245

3 6 . Brunei Chile Pakistan East Timor Indonesia Ethiopia Spain The Netherlands Laos Cambodia Total 436

Table 18. Regions Covered and Number of Mentions

Middle East 126— 29 percent Central America 108—25 percent Soviet Union 65— 15 percent East Asia 63— 15 percent Western Europe/Scandi­ navia 27— 6 percent Africa 20—5 percent North America 15— 3 percent Caribbean 6—1 percent South America 3 f Eastern Europe 2—\ Less than 1 percent South Asia 1 I Total 4 3 6 6. The home-state and district press coverage did not usuaily go to the world’s most populous countries nor to those with the highest dollar volume of trade with the United States.

Daniel Pipes has introduced a useful concept to emphasize that sometimes countries with small populations can receive enormous news media attention. He calls this phenomenon a country’s “per- capita fame quotient.” Pipes explains: “In brief, Israel has what may be termed the highest per-capita fame quotient in the world. (India has perhaps the least.) No country of comparable size— Benin, Laos, 246

Norway, Paraguay—commands even a fraction of Israel's familiarity in the U.S.”8

For this study, however, the per-capita fame leaders were Nicaragua and Kuwait. Nicaragua ranked first in the amount of cover­ age, but 111th among 187 countries with its 2.6 million people.^ Tiny Kuwait ranked fourth in the amount of coverage, despite a pop­ ulation of only 1.55 million, 122th in the world. In the congressional news coverage examined, four of the world's ten most populous countries (excluding the United States) were not mentioned in a single news item in any of the 18 newspa­ pers—India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nigeria. Two others were men­ tioned just once—Pakistan and Indonesia. The list of the world’s ten most populous countries is much different from that for the 10 most covered countries in this research. Most Populous Most Covered 1. China 1. Nicaragua 2. India 2. Soviet Union 3. Soviet Union 3. Iran 4. Indonesia 4. Japan 5. Brazil Kuwait 6. Japan 6. Iraq 7. Pakistan 7. Canada 8. Bangladesh 8. Honduras 9. Nigeria Mozambique 10. Mexico 10. Great Britain Panama

8Danlel Pipes, “The Media and the Middie East,"Commentary 77, no. 6 (Aprii 1984): 29. ^George Thomas Kurian, New Book of World Rankings (New York: Facts on File, 1984), 13-14. Source:U.N. Demographic Yearbook. 247

Only two countries, the Soviet Union and Japan, among the world’s ten most populous were also among the ten most covered. Three of the top trade leaders with the United States ranked among the ten most covered—Japan, Canada, and Great Britain. Japan and Canada, by far the most important trading partners for the United States, were covered on many trade-related news items during this period.10 Canada was the leading purchaser of American exports followed by Japan. The Canadian total was more than four times the amount for the third largest purchaser of American exports. West Germany. Japan was the leading importer into the United States with Canada second. The Japanese exports totaled almost three times as much as the third largest importer, again West Germany.

Leading Purchasers Most Covered of U.S. Products 1. Canada 1. Nicaragua 2. Japan 2. Soviet Union 3. United Kingdom 3. Iran 4. West Germany 4. Japan 5. The Netherlands K uw ait 6. South Korea 6. Iraq 7. France 7. Canada 8. Taiwan 8. Honduras 9. Belgium/Luxembourg Mozambique 10. Ita ly 10. Great Britain Panama

107/76 World Almanac and Book of World Facts (New York: World Almanac, 1987), 183. Source: Office of Industry and Trade Information, U.S. Department of Com­ merce. 248

Leading Sellers to the United States 1. Japan 2. Canada 3. West Germany 4. Taiwan 5. South Korea 6. United Kingdom 7. Ita ly 8. France 9. Hong Kong 10. China

7. Legislation approved by Congress since 1973 intended to re­ strain the powers of an “Imperial Presidency” provided the basis for much of the coverage between May 1 and August 31, 1987, creating a “story-within-a-story” phenomenon. The debate was not oniy what U.S. foreign policy should be in Nicaragua, the Persian Gulf, and elsewhere, but also who should have the constitutional power to de­ cide that policy.

The 1973 War Powers Act was the focal point for much of the debate on U.S. Persian Gulf policy after President Reagan announced his administration’s intention to reflag Kuwaiti oil tankers and pro­ vide a naval escort as protection against Iranian assaults. Many of the news items reflected the intensity of that debate. In early August 1987, 107 members of Congress, all Demo­ crats, filed suit asking the courts to order the Reagan admin­ istration to comply with the War Powers Act and notify Congress when U.S. forces entered into hostilities or situations of imminent hostilities. Washington State Senator Brock Adams spearheaded the 249

drive to force the Reagan administration to acknowledge the risk of imminent hostilities. Adams and others accused the administration of usurping congressional foreign policy-making power. Yet, others disagreed. New York Congressman Gerald Solomon, for example, in a P o st-S ta r article, “Lawmakers Eyeing War Powers Act,” criticized his colleagues for filing the suit, calling them “100 congressmen acting like little presidents.’’^ 1 The Iran-Contra hearings that also generated so much coverage stemmed directly from legislation aimed at the Imperial Presidency, the Boland amendment, named for Massachusetts Congressman Edward Boland. That amendment to the Intelligence Authorization Bill prohibited support for military activities designed to overthrow the government of Nicaragua. The Iran-Contra hearings were based on alleged violations of the Boland amendment restrictions on the president’s Central American policy. In June 1987, Indiana Congressman Dan Burton joined Califor­ nia Representative Robert Dornan to file a suit in U.S. District Court seeking to have the Boland Amendment declared unconstitutional. “We have filed this lawsuit so the power granted the president by the Constitution will not be usurped by the Congress, now or in the future,” Burton said.i 2

New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, on the other hand, found fault not with the Boland Amendment, but with President Rea-

11 Tim Ahern, Associated Press, “Lawmakers Eyeing War Powers Act,"Glens Falls Post-Star, August 7, 1987, A1. l2Ken de la Bastide, “Burton Files Suit against Amendment,” Anderson Herald- Bulletln, June 8, 1987, A3. 250

gan’s unwillingness to comply with its provisions. Reagan was wrong, Moynihan said, to assume the White House was exempt from

provisions of the Boland Amendment. "Never can a president assert that the law does not apply to him," Moynihan told a news confer­ ence. 13

Regional Review

News coverage of specific countries and issues is not evenly distributed, either among the 18 members or the 18 home-state and district newspapers. Coverage of Africa was overwhelmingly coverage of Senator Helms in two North Carolina newspapers, the Charlotte Observer and Asheville Citizen. Four countries, Mozambique, South Africa, Angola, and Ethiopia, were mentioned in 16 items in 18 newspapers over a four-month period. (Some of these items mentioned more than one of the African countries.) Helms, who took a trip to South Africa during this period and also enthusiastically backed RENAMO, a group op­

posed to the Marxist government in Mozambique, accounted for 12 of the 16 items on Africa, 75 percent.

North Korea was mentioned in five news items, all of them fo­ cusing on Congressman Sam Gejdenson in two Connecticut newspa­ pers, the Hartford Courant and the New London Day. Gejdenson be­ came involved when a constituent asked him to help locate his

i3Assoclated Press, “Contra Leader to Criticize "inquisition,"'Glens Falls Post- Star, May 19, 1987, A3. 251

brother who had been missing in Korea since the end of the Korean War. Japan was mentioned 11 times in perhaps the most important intelligence loss story of the period, the sale of advanced military technology to the Soviet Union by the Japanese firm Toshiba. Yet all the coverage occurred in just one state, Washington, primarily in one newspaper, the Seattle Times. The coverage was also skewed toward just one member. Congressman Don Bonker, who headed the House

subcommittee on trade. Norway was mentioned in six news items, all of them con­ cerning a Norwegian company that had joined with Toshiba to sell the military technology to the Soviet Union. All six items appeared in the Seattle Times and all six mentioned Congressman Bonker. All four mentions of the world debt problems appeared in just one newspaper, the Indianapolis Star, and mentioned just one mem­ ber, Senator Richard Lugar, who helped organize a conference to look

at the situation. Panama was cited in eight news items with six of them men­ tioning only one member. Senator Christopher Dodd, in theH artford Courant and New London Day.

Honduras made the overall top 10 list of most-mentioned countries, but all of the 10 news Items ran in the two Connecticut papers, the Hartford Courant and New London Day. The coverage stemmed from legislation introduced by Senator Dodd in the Senate and Congressman Gejdenson in the House to block the sale of modern jet fighters to Honduras. None of the other 16 members were men­ 252

tioned in connection with Honduras in the 16 other home-state and district newspapers. The region-by-region discussion that follows is intended to illustrate the coverage. It does not include every news item about that country that appeared in the home-state and district press. Coverage was well distributed among newspapers and members in only three regions, Central America because of the Nicaraguan war, the Middle East because of the Persian Gulf war, and the Soviet Union because of its superpower status.

The Middle East

The Middle East accounted for more news coverage than any other region, coverage overwhelmingly oriented toward military topics—war and weapons sales.

Table 19. Middle East News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Iran 57 0 57 Kuwait 30 0 30 Iraq 24 2 26 Israel 6 0 6 Saudi Arabia 3 0 3 FLO 2 0 2 Lebanon 0 2 2 Totals 122 4 126 253

Iran

Members of Congress were deeply concerned that the I ran-Iraq war would threaten American oil supplies and perhaps even drag the United States into an unwanted war in the Persian Gulf. The Reagan administration decided to protect oil shipments by flying American flags on 11 Kuwait oil tankers. How would the United States react if the Iranians attacked those vessels? At one point, Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar said he saw lit­ tle threat of war between the United States and Iran, but the Repub­ lican lawmaker did recognize another threat. “I think the threat of Iran is terrorism to shipping,” Lugar declared, in an article printed in the Anderson Herald-Bulletin, his district newspaper, “Lugar Says ‘War Powers’ Not Violated.”14

Washington State Senator Brock Adams registered his serious misgivings about reflagging in opposite-editorial articles appearing in the Washington Post, Seattie Times, and Vancouver Columbian. Adams raised questions about the administration’s reflagging plan and its possible consequences; “Will American security interests be promoted if Iran responds to our involvement by launching terrorist attacks on American interests throughout the world?”is Robert

Healy, Associate Editor of the Boston Globe, reported the concerns of Senator John Kerry that Iran might mine the Kuwaiti harbors. The

14no byline, “Lugar Says 'War Powers’ Not Violated,” Anderson Herald-Bul- letln, August 12, 1987, DIO. 15Brock Adams, Opposite-editorial, “Reagan Hasn’t Laid Foundation for Expedi­ tion into Gulf,” Vancouver Columbian, July, 1987, A9. 254

headline captured the tone surrounding the increasingly tense Per­ sian Gulf situation, “The Dangers That Loom If the US Gets Involved in the Gulf War.”i6

Iran had no Capitol Hill friends among either Democrats or Re­ publicans. The members differed only in the intensity of their criti­ cism of the Islamic Republic's foreign policy, a policy portrayed as inimical to American interests. Part of the coverage stemmed from questions about the le­ gality and wisdom of trading arms for hostages, what became known as the Iran-Contra hearings in Congress. The hearings thrust Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North into the news limelight with ardent supporters praising him as a patriotic soldier and others damning him as someone who should be indicted for directing the covert op­ eration. A number of home-state and district newspapers phoned congressional offices for reaction to the North testimony, asking for a report on the number of constituent calls for and against North. Some offices reported strong support for North. The Charlotte Observer, for example, reported the news that North Carolina Sena­ tor Jesse Helms’s office had received a heavy phone traffic, over­ whelmingly supporting North’s efforts. The paper reported: “Every single call was in favor of North,” said press aide Barbara Lukens.

“Some of the callers wanted to know where to send m o n e y .”i7

16Robert Healy, “The Dangers That Loom If the US Gets Involved In the Gulf War," Boston Globe, June 26, 1987, 15. 1 ^Louise Llone, “Ollle's Code of Conduct Laid Bare: Televised Testimony Sets Off Wave of Public Sympathy," Charlotte Observer, July 12, 1987, 1. 255

California Congressman Mel Levine, however, was not im­ pressed by North’s performance and said so emphatically when con­ tacted by his district newspaper, the Santa Monica Outlook. Levine said North, like everyone else, must abide by the country’s laws. "While he obviously Is a true believer and perhaps even a zealot, he should be much more sensitive to the law as it’s written,” Levine said.18

The Seattle Times devoted two pages to the priority of covert operations in a questionnaire mailed to the state’s senators and House members. The article, "Covert Actions: Can They Be Con­ trolled?” included excerpts, often detailed, from their answers to such questions as “Should the United States ever engage in covert operations, which by their very nature contradict the concept of open government?”^®

Kuwait

The Reagan administration decision to fly American flags on 11 Kuwait oil tankers to protect them from attack stimulated a great deal of interest on Capitol Hill, much of it leading to home- state and district press coverage for members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee.

l8Dori Meinert, “Reaction to North Split along Partisan Party Lines," Santa Monica Outlook, July 14, 1987, A5. 1 9No byline, "Covert Actions: Can They Be Controlled?" Seattle Tlmes/Post-ln- telllgencer, August 2, 1987, A16-17. 256

Some members rallied to the president’s cause. The A nderson Herald-Bulletin headlined a news item, “Lugar Supports Reflagging.” The story began: Recent U.S. efforts to protect Kuwaiti oil vessels in the Persian Gulf are succeeding and could someday effect an end to the Iran-1 raq war, U.S. Sen. Richard G. Lugar, R - Ind., said Sunday.®® Washington State Senator Brock Adams, meanwhile, accused the administration of failing to comply with the requirements of the War Powers Act in its reflagging policy. Eventually, more than 100 Democratic members of Congress filed suit asking the courts to force the Reagan presidency to abide by the War Powers Act. A res­ olution cosponsored by Adams would have ended the reflagging of any foreign vessel without congressional authorization. Concerns mounted when a Kuwaiti supertanker flying an American flag struck a mine in the Gulf. The Charlotte Observer printed an Associated Press news item, “U.S.-Escorted Tanker Hits Mine in Gulf,” quoting Senator Helms on the situation. Helms, who supported the reflagging, acknowledged the risks involved, but added: "I’m not going to cut off the president’s legs. He made that judgment. The question is: Do you want to keep the Gulf open?”®i

2®Ted Buck, “Lugar Supports Reflagging," Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 27, 1987, A1. 21 Associated Press, “U.S.-Escorted Tanker Hits Mine in Gulf,"Charlotte Ob­ server, July 25, 1987, A1. 257

Ira q

Congressional concerns about the I ran-I raq war intensified after the May 17 Iraqi missile attack on the USS Stark, an American vessel in the Persian Gulf, killing more than 30 sailors. Mas­ sachusetts Senator John Kerry insisted that the Iraqi attack demon­ strated the need to invoke the War Powers Act as required in the event of “imminent hostilities." At a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Kerry asked Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Armitage about the Iraqi missile attack on the S tark: “Doesn’t that, simply on its face, say there is the possibility of imminent hostilities? Who are we trying to kid? ’’22

Indiana Congressman Dan Burton demanded retribution: “Iraq should provide compensation to the United States for the attack and to the families who lost loved o n e s .”23

Like Iran, Iraq was sharply criticized by both Democrats and Republicans. At a time when it was being portrayed so negatively in the American news media in connection with the war, Iraq was the source of good news in Seattle when it was announced that this Mid­ dle East country would buy $20 million worth of Northwest lumber.

22Fred Kaplan, “Reagan Affirms US Role In Gulf,” Boston Globe, May 30, 1987, 1. 23Ken de la Bastide, “Burton Asks Investigation of Skipper,"Anderson Herald- Bulletin, May 20, 1987, A1. 258

The Seattle Times reported the news in its story, “Iraq Is First of NW’s New Lumber Markets.”24

Is ra e l

California Senator Alan Cranston cited his concern for Israeli security as a major reason for his efforts to defeat a Reagan ad­ ministration proposal to sell sophisticated antitank missiles to Saudi Arabia. The Los Angeies Times, in its article, "Saudi Arms Deal Is Off, Reagan Says,” described Cranston's resolution, coau­ thored with Oregon Senator Robert Packwood, to kill the projected sale of 1,600 Maverick missiles. Faced with certain defeat in Congress, the president withdrew the missile sale, much to Cranston’s delight. Cranston said he objected because the sale would threaten Israel “our only certain friend and democracy in the re­ gion."25

The most appropriate level of American support for Israel was discussed in a Los Angeies Times article, “Israel: An Economic Ward of U.S.,” written by a Times economics correspondent in Jerusalem. The news story pointed out that U.S. public and private assistance amounts to $1,000 per year for each Israeli, making Jerusalem by far the world’s leading recipient of American assistance. While some are concerned that a powerful Israeli lobby in the United

24polly Lane, “Iraq Is First of NW's New Lumber Markets," Seattle Times, Au­ gust 1 2 , 1 9 8 7 , All. 25paul Houston, “Saudi Arabia Arms Deal is Off, Reagan Says,” Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1 9 8 7 , Part 1, 1. 259

States may distort American policy, Senator Cranston was not among them. The Los Angeles Times quoted Cranston on the Israelis; They are the most powerful military force in the region, it is of vital importance for our country to keep them that way, and I would say our relationship with Israel is wholesome.26

Saudi Arabia

When it agreed to sweep Persian Gulf waters for Iranian mines that threatened Kuwaiti oil tankers, Saudi Arabia became a part of the Iran-1 raq war story. The Los Angeies Times reported that even California Congressman Mel Levine, a harsh critic of U.S. weapons sales to the Saudis, praised the Saudis, describing the mine-sweep­ ing agreement as “constructive action bn their part [which] will be welcome.”27

The Los Angeles Times reported on Senator Cranston’s suc­ cessful effort to block a Reagan administration plan to sell sophis­ ticated antitank missiles to Saudi Arabia. Reagan withdrew the $360 million sale of 1,600 Maverick missiles after Cranston and Senator Packwood lined up sufficient votes for their resolution to kill the deal. The Tim es, in its article, “Saudi Arms Deal Is Off, Reagan Says,” quoted Cranston: “The administration hasn’t made very many

26Robert W. Gibson, “Israel; An Economic Ward of U.S.,” Los Angeles Times, July 20, 1987, Part 1, 2. 27 Jam es Gerstenzang and David Lauter, “Saudis to Sweep Gulf for Iranian Mines off Kuwait,” Los Angeles Times, June 24, 1987, Part1,1. 260

wise decisions lately, but they made a good one today when they backed off from a bad idea."28 This major Middle East power made district newspaper news in Glens Falls, New York, in the story, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid.” The article reported that New York Congressman Gerald Solomon had sought aid for the Nicaraguan Contras from several countries, in­ cluding Saudi Arabia. P o s t-S ta r reporter Greg Moran wrote: “Not only did Ronald Reagan seek aid from those countries,” Solomon told a luncheon of the Glens Falls Rotary Club, “but Jerry Solomon did, too.”29 Accord­ ing to the news item, Solomon was referring to published reports that President Reagan had approached countries urging them to do­ nate money to the Contra cause.

Palestine Liberation Organization

Many in Congress regard the PLO as a major instigator of world terrorism. In a front-page story provided by the Associated Press, the Asheville Citizen informed readers that Senator Helms was dis­ tressed that Nicholas Platt, nominated to become ambassador to the Philippines, had once recommended letting United States payments to the United Nations reach the PLO.

28paul Houston, "Saudi Arabia Arms Deal Is Off, Reagan Says,” Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1987, Part1,1. 29Qreg Moran, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid,” Glens Falls Post-Star, July 3, 1987, A1. 261

Helms branded the PLO as one of the most vicious terrorist groups of all time and noted that Platt had served as the State De­ partment’s counter-terrorism chief. “How can U.S. anti-terrorism policy be credible to anybody if our counter-terrorism chief is an advocate of funding the PLO with taxpayers’ money?” Helms a s k e d .^ o

Lebanon

Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson was asked by a con­ stituent to help her persuade the U.S. Postal Service to issue a com­ memorative stamp honoring the 250 servicemen killed in Beirut, Lebanon in 1983. Most of them died in a truck-bomb explosion at the Marine barracks. The Hartford Courant reported on the constituent’s efforts in its news item, “Durham Woman Campaigns for Stamp Hon­ oring Marines.”31

Latin America

The serious Latin American debt crisis received extensive at­ tention in the Indianapolis Star’s coverage of the Pan American Eco­ nomic Leadership Conference held in June 1987. Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar cochaired the conference and urged President Rea-

30Associated Press, “Helms: Platt Called for PLO Support," Asheville Citizen, May 29, 1987, 1. 31 Marlene Clark, “Durham Woman Campaigns for Stamp Honoring Marines,” Hartford Courant, June 4, 1987, Cl 3. 262

gan to call a multinational summit of creditor and debtor nations to deal with the international debt crisis. With Latin America’s external debt estimated at more than $360 billion, a series of speakers from the region was given a forum to bring their grievances to an American audience. Antonio Ortiz Mena, president of the Washington-based Inter-American Develop­ ment Bank, said Latin Americans were approaching “the end of our

endurance’’ over the region’s debt problems.32 Other speakers discussed other aspects of the problems. Sergio Molina, professor of economics at the University of Chile, said pop­ ulation in Latin America and the Caribbean could grow from about 421 million now to 542 million by the year 2000.

Central America

The Sandinista-Contra war thoroughly dominated the home- state and district press coverage of this region. With the exception of the Pan American Economic Leadership Conference cochaired by Senator Lugar, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee did not attempt to obtain news coverage on the serious economic problems plaguing Central Amer­ ica.

32Eric B. Schoch, “Lugar Urges Summit on Latin Debt,"Indianapolis Star, June 15, 1987, 1. 263

Table 20. Central American News Mentions Country Foreign Inter mestic Total Nicaragua 76 0 76 Honduras 10 0 10 Panama 8 0 8 El Salvador 5 1 6 Guatemala 5 0 5 Costa Rica 3 0 3 T otals 107 1 108

Nicaragua

Publicity focused primarily on how much aid the United States should supply to the Contras fighting the Sandinista government and how to fashion the best peace plan to end the bitter conflict. The Asheville Citizen used an Associated Press story, "Contra Aid Plan Criticized,” reporting that Senator Jesse Helms had pre­ pared legislation to provide $300 million to the Contras. "It gives the agreed-upon time for the peace plan to work,” Helms said in a written statement. “But if the plan does not work, then the freedom fighters will be able to count on the support of the United States in their courageous battle.”33

Other members were covered in their home-state and district press on other aspects of fighting in Nicaragua. The Seattle Post-In­ telligencer headlined an article, “Miller Supports Peace Talks in Nicaragua,” reporting that Congressman John Miller endorsed peace

33Assoclated Press, “Contra Aid Plan Criticized,”Asheville Citizen, August 6, 1 9 8 7 , 1. 264

efforts initiated by President Reagan and House Speaker Jim Wright, although it had been criticized by some conservative Republicans as a sellout of the Contras.34

Nicaragua, of course, was in the spotlight during the congres­ sional Iran-Contra hearings with much of the interest focusing on Marine Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North’s role in the arms-for- hostages deal designed to help the Nicaraguan Contras. The Charlotte Observer phoned Senator Helms’s office, and learned that North Carolinians strongly backed North. The paper re­ ported, “Every single call was in favor of North," said press aide Barbara Lukens. “Some of the callers wanted to know where to send money.’’35

Helms regarded the Iran-Contra hearings as nothing but a waste of time. He told a Republican rally in Asheville that Congress should shut down what he called this "television circus" and move to solving the country’s problems. Helms said of the Iran-Contra committee hearing testimony on Capitol Hill: “What we have are a bunch of legislative monkeys climbing a flagpole and you know what is most visible when a monkey climbs a f l a g p o l e . ’’3 6

The Seattle Times examined the propriety of covert operations in a questionnaire on the Iran-Contra episode sent to the Washington State congressional delegation. The paper then printed the members’

34Joel Connelly, “Miller Supports Peace Talks in Nicaragua,”Seattle Post-ln- telllgencer, August 18, 1987, D3. 3 5 Louise Done, “Ollie's Conduct of Conduct Laid Bare; Teievised Testimony Setts Off Wave of Public Sympathy,” Charlotte Observer, Juiy 12, 1987, A1. 3®Tim Funk, “Director of Contras Speaks,” Charlotte Observer, May 31, 1987, B1. 265

responses to such questions as: “Is the president ever justified in keeping such operations secret from Congress and/or from the American public?” Washington State Senator Brock Adams answered that the Iran-Contra affair “involved a series of acts that are dan­ gerously close to an insurrection by government employees who put themselves above the law/'S? The Reagan administration's plan to sell F-5 jet fighters to Honduras would only escalate the region’s arms race, according to Senator Christopher Dodd, who introduced a resolution to block the sale. The administration insisted that Honduras needed the U.S. planes to replace their 1950s-vintage fighters. The New London Day reported, however, Dodd’s concerns: But Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., sponsor of the res­ olution said the F-5s would “ratchet up the level of so­ phistication” of the Honduran forces and encourage Nicaragua to seek Soviet jet fighters.38

Honduras

This country made news as an adjunct to the war in Nicaragua and the Soviet-American rivalry in that troubled region. While Hon­ duras was mentioned in several news items in conjunction with the fighting in Nicaragua, it was the lead news item only when Senator

3?no byline, “Covert Actions: Can They Be Controlled?” Seattle Tlmes/Post-ln- telHgencer, August 2, 1987, A16-17. 38Dave Skidmore, Associated Press, "Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane Sale,” New London Day, June 3, 1987, D12. 266

Dodd and Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson sought to block the Reagan administration’s proposed $75 million sale of 12 F-5 jet fig h te rs. Administration sources claimed that Honduras needed the planes as protection against the constant aggression from neigh­ boring Nicaragua. Dodd disputed the claim. Instead, Dodd argued that the sale to Honduras would only escalate the arms race in the region, even encouraging Nicaragua to approach the Soviet Union for sophis­ ticated jet fighters. El Salvador and Guatemala, too, might want to buy advanced aircraft in response to the F-5 sale to Honduras. The result, according to Dodd and Gejdenson, would be to escalate mili­ tarization in Central America, making an already-dangerous region even more dangerous.

As one of Nicaragua’s four Central American neighbors, Hon­ duras made news as the country’s leaders sought to promote peace between the Contras and Sandinistas. In August 1987, the Honduras president joined presidents of the other four countries in developing a tentative peace agreement. The Hartford Courant in its story, “Proposal Raises Prospects for Peace in Central America," informed readers that Senator Dodd immediately greeted the tentative agree­ ment as the best news he had heard in seven years as a U.S. sena­ tor.39

39john A. MacDonald, “Proposal Raises Prospects for Peace in Central Amer­ ica," Hartford Courant, August 8, 1987, A2. 267

Panama

Coverage of Panama centered on the country’s internal turmoil, especially the mounting U.S. criticisms of Manuel Antonio Noriega, sometimes identified as a military strongman. A group of senators announced plans to introduce legislation to continue the freeze on foreign aid to Panama for another year unless democracy was re­ stored. The list of allegations against Noriega was long; that he had rigged the country’s elections; ordered the murder of political ad­ versaries; and participated in widespread corruption including pro­ tecting drug traffickers in exchange for a share of their immense profits. The Hartford Courant reported on Senator Dodd’s efforts to apply pressure on the Noriega regime, "Dodd Joins Seven Other Sen­ ators in Seeking End to Aid in Panama” : “There is a very strong feeling that Gen. Noriega has got to go,” Dodd said Thursday after he and other senators attended a closed briefing by administration officials. He said the United States should give support to the growing opposition to the Noriega regime.^o

And more of the same in another Courant article, “House, Sen­ ate Panels Will Not Be Hearing Abrams,” that highlighted Panama’s internal turmoil:

The subcommittees want more information on the ten­ sions in Panama. There was rioting last week after Col.

^OQIdget Fuentes, “Dodd Joins Seven Other Senators In Seeking End to Aid In Panama,” Hartford Courant, July 31, 1987, A8. 268

Robert Diaz Herrera, former second in command, accused Gen. Manuel Antonio Noriega, of masterminding two slayings and 1984 electoral fraud. Noriega controls the government.4i

In testimony before the Senate subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications, a one-time accountant for a Colombian drug cartel said the narcotics operation flourished because officials were bribed in several countries, including Panama. Details were provided in the Boston Globe news story, “Drug

Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas.”42

El Salvador

The home-state and district press mentioned El Salvador occa­ sionally as part of the peace efforts in Central America. The coun­ try’s leaders joined with leaders of the region’s other countries to develop a peace plan that caught the attention of Senator Dodd. The Hartford Courant reported in its article, “Proposal Raises Prospects

for Peace in Central America,’’ that Dodd regarded word of the pro­ posal as the best news he had heard during seven years in the U.S. Senate .43

41 David LIghtman, “House, Senate Panels Will Not Be Hearing Abrams," H art­ ford Courant, June 17, 1987, A3. 42 Stephen Kurkjian, "Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas,"Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 43john A. MacDonald, “Proposal Raises Prospects for Peace In Central Amer­ ica," Hartford Courant, August 8, 1987, A2. 269

Senator Dodd made news again when he opposed the sale of F-5 jet fighters to Honduras, arguing that it would encourage El Sal­ vadoran officials to seek jets, too. The result, he believed, would be further militarizing of an already-tense situation in Central Amer­ ica. Senator Helms strongly disagreed, provoking a heated exchange with Dodd at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. Helms contended that El Salvador would not ask for U.S. jets if the Hon­ duras sale were approved. The New London Day, in its news story, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane Sale,” reported: “Helms, plunking a quarter on the committee table, said, ‘I’m not a betting man, but...,”’ and challenged Dodd to prove his assertion. “There’s a lot more at stake than a quarter and someday maybe you’ll realize it,” Dodd replied, shouting, “You’re determined to get us involved in a conflict....Putting quarters on the table doesn’t cut

it, Jesse/44

The serious problems in El Salvador also generated an inter- mestic news item on immigration for California Senator Alan Cranston. Salvador Sanchez fled El Salvador when his life was threatened, but in the United States, he faced new problems. It ap­ peared that he would qualify to remain here under the new immigra­ tion law, but his wife and children would not. Senator Cranston, as reported in the Los Angeles Times, “Qualifying for Amnesty—A House

44Dave Skidmore, Associated Press, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane Sale,” N ew London Day. June 3,1987, D12. 270

Divided by Law,” introduced a resolution directing the Immigration and Naturalization Service to resolve the problem administra­ tiv e ly .45

Costa Rica

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias Sanchez generated home- state and district press coverage for his country by authoring a plan designed to bring peace to the embattled region. The Arias Plan called for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Central America followed by free elections. The period produced various peace proposals including one that urged an immediate cease fire and an end to outside military assis­ tance to both the Nicaraguan rebels and the government. The H artford C ourant interviewed Senator Dodd, chairman of the Senate subcom­ mittee on the Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs, about the proposal and learned that Dodd had spoken with Arias by phone on the matter. According to Dodd, Arias was “pretty optimistic” about the revised version of the proposal.46

In testimony before the Senate subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications, a one-time accountant for a Colombian drug cartel said the narcotics operation flourished by bribing officials in other countries, including Costa Rica. Details

45Marlta Hernandez, “Qualifying for Amnesty—A House Divided by Law,” Los Angeles Times, May 25, 1987, Part i, 1. 46john A. MacDonald, “U.S. Offers Nicaraguan Peace Pian,”Hartford Courant, August 6, 1987, A1. 271

were provided in the Boston Globe news story, “Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas/'*?

G uatem ala

Leaders of the five Central American countries tried to ham­ mer out their own peace strategy in a document called the Guatemala City Plan, named for the city where they met. The plan was designed to end fighting in war-torn Nicaragua. The H a rtfo rd

Courant, in its story, “Proposal Raises Prospects for Peace in Cen­ tral America,” reported that Senator Dodd hailed word of the tenta­ tive agreement as the best news he had heard in seven years as a U.S. senator.48

The proposed sale of U.S. F-5 jet fighters to Honduras prompted concerns that this would only encourage Guatemala to seek jets, too. Senator Dodd said he had spoken with Guatemalan officials and pre­ dicted that they would also seek sophisticated planes if Congress approved the administration’s proposed sale to Honduras. Senator Helms, on the other hand, claimed the presidents of both Guatemala and El Salvador had said publicly that they would not ask for U.S. jets.49

4?Stephen Kurkjian, "Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas,” Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 48john A. MacDonald, “Proposai Raises Prospects for Peace in Centrai Amer­ ica,” Hartford Courant, August 8, 1987, A2. 49oave Skidmore, Associated Press, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane Sale,” New London Day, June 3,1987, D12. 272

Soviet Union

Table 21. Soviet Union News Mentions Country Foreign Intermestic Total Soviet Union 57 8 65

Some countries were covered in the home-state and district press solely on the basis of a single crisis—for example, Kuwait and the reflagging episode in the Persian Gulf; others were covered on the basis of a single facet of a complex bilateral relationship—for example, Canada and trade with the United States. The Soviet Union, on the other hand, was covered on a broad array of topics. Kremlin foreign policy was mentioned by many of the 18 members and in many of the 18 home-state and district newspa­ pers. The composite picture of the Soviet Union emerging from those news items was that of a menacing giant. The Soviet Union was portrayed as a global rival that steals America’s sensitive intelligence secrets, aims its deadly missiles at the United States and Western Europe, seeks a larger role in the Persian Gulf that could undermine American oil supplies and secu­

rity, foments trouble by backing Marxists in Nicaragua and else­ where, and denies fundamental human rights to its own citizens. Back home, however, members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee were not covered on the larger American foreign policy concerns regarding the Soviet Union—how to respond to the important changes initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev under the rubric of "perestroika,” or restructuring. Pere­ stroika is a process, not an event, and therefore represents pre- 273

cisely the kind of larger story that eludes the press. There is no in­ dication from an examination of the news items published or the news releases that members tried to obtain coverage on American responses to perestroika. Gorbachev, in his book. Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, emphasized the historic importance of the changes he hoped to promote in the Soviet Union: Perestroika is an urgent necessity arising from the pro­ found processes of development in our socialist society. It has long been yearning for it. Any delay in beginning perestroika could have led to an exacerbated internal situation in the near future, which, to put it bluntly, would have been fraught with serious social, economic and political crises.so

Soviet expert Robert Legvold is among American scholars who have suggested that the “new political thinking” that Gorbachev talks about has already produced some modification of Soviet posi­ tions on Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) and other areas. Legvold has also highlighted the essential task for Americans: “New politi­ cal thinking in the East requires new policy thinking in the West.”51 The United States suffered a serious intelligence loss when news surfaced that the Toshiba Corporation, a giant Japanese elec­ tronics firm, and Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, Norway’s state-owned

soMikhall Gorbachev,Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World (New York: Harper and Row, 1987), 17. 51 Robert Legvold, Gorbachev's Foreign Policy: How Should the United States Re­ spond? Headline Series Number 284 (New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1988), 31. 274

arms operation, had sold propeller milling machines to the Soviet Union. The machines would allow the Soviets to manufacture quieter submarines making it much more difficult for the United States to track the subs. Congress was understandably sensitive about intelligence losses to the Soviet Union, especially security problems at the new U.S. embassy in Moscow. To deal with the concerns, Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar introduced an amendment to prevent embassy con­ struction in communist bloc countries until the United States de­ termined how to stop security breaches. The Indianapolis Star re­ ported on Lugar’s serious misgivings: “Until we have a concerted effort on the part of various U.S. government agencies to address the special circum­ stances of building embassies in potentially hostile ar­ eas, we will be unable to effectively stem the tide of sensitive information to the communists,” Lugar re­ marked.52

New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan offered a proposed solution to another intelligence problem. Moynihan recommended that long distance telephone companies put into code some telephone calls now often transmitted by satellite. Moynihan, according to the New York Times item, “When to Scramble,” feared that the Soviet

52Doug McDaniel, “Lugar Amendment Seeks Embassy Security Decision,"Indi­ anapolis Star, May 16, 1987, 44. 275

Union could intercept the calls and obtain valuable intelligence in­ formation that could jeopardize American interests.ss

The possible sale of American-made submarines to Canada was aimed at thwarting the Soviet Union. Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson strongly advocated such a sale. Canadians feared a poten­ tial security threat from Soviet submarine-launched cruise missiles from submarines operating in the region. The New London Day ex­ plored the topic in detail in its article, “Gejdenson Raps Stance on

Canadian S u b s ." S 4

The possibility that crisis in the Persian Gulf might lead to a much-expanded Soviet role in the region, one jeopardizing Western oil supplies, prompted deep concern on Capitol Hill. The area repre­ sents one of the world’s geopolitical jewels, reason enough for Sen­ ator Moynihan and Lugar, among others, to express their misgivings. Lugar observed; “I think we finally must take the position that we are not prepared to turn that area over to the Soviets, and we are not prepared to see our own energy disrupted."ss

Senator Dodd said he feared that the Reagan administration’s proposed sale of F-5 jet fighters to Honduras would only provoke the Soviets to provide more arms to the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Dodd claimed that the result would be to escalate the militarization of Central America, creating more problems for American interests.

53no byline, “When to Scramble," New York Times, May 4, 1987, B8. s^Marla Hileman, “Gejdenson Raps Stance on Canadian Subs,"New London Day, July 15, 1987, 01. 55Ted Buck, “Lugar Supports Reflagging," Anderson Heraid-Builetin, Juiy 27, 1987, A1. 276

The F-5 sale, according to Dodd, would "ratchet up the level of so­ phistication” of the Honduran forces and encourage Nicaragua to seek aid from the Soviets.®6

Conservatives stressed the Marxist nature of the Nicaraguan government, virtually ensuring that some of the home-state and district press coverage would mention the Soviet role in the fight­ ing. An Indianapolis Star editorial quoted Indiana Congressman Dan Burton: “By passing the Boland amendment. Congress has allowed the Soviet Union and its surrogates to operate freely in Central America. In 1986, the USSR sent more than 23,000 metric tons of military aid to Nicaragua in its efforts to Sovietize Latin America.”®? Republicans and Democrats alike were interested in nuclear missile negotiations with the Soviets. Indianapolis Star reporter Doug McDaniel interviewed Senator Lugar for his article, “New Agreement May Be Key to Missile Pact, Lugar Says.” According to Lu­

gar, the Intermediate Nuclear Force (INF) agreement in Europe repre­ sented the best chance to determine whether the superpowers could agree on long-range missiles. Lugar noted that the Soviets had about 1,300 missiles targeted on Europe, and the United States had more than 300 Europe-based Pershing II and cruise missiles aimed at the Soviets.®®

®®Dave Skidmore, Associated Press, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduras Plane Sale,” New London Day, June 3, 1987, D12. ®?Editorial, “Trojan Horse," Indianapolis Star, June 4, 1987, 16. sSDoug McDaniel, “New Agreement May Be Key to Missile Pact, Lugar Says,” Indianapolis Star, June 4, 1987, 16. 277

News items about Soviet infringements of human rights ap­ peared in the coverage of several senators and House members. • The Charlotte Observer, in its story, "Soviet Seaman's Re­ lease Violated Law, Panel Says,” reported that congressional inves­ tigators had concluded that the Reagan administration had made nu­ merous errors when it let Soviet seaman Miroslav Medvid leave the country in 1985 after jumping his Soviet ship apparently hoping to find asylum in the United States.®® At the time of the incident, Senator Helms tried to subpoena Medvid to appear before the Senate Agriculture Committee that Helms chaired to determine what the seaman wanted to do. The Rea­ gan administration, however, refused to enforce the subpoena and let Medvid's ship leave with him aboard. • The Hartford Courant reported on the reaction of Bolshoi Ballet dancers who visited Congress and noticed that tourists were watching from the galleries as the Senate did its business. Senator Dodd was host for the visit. The Courant informed readers:

"The dancers seemed shocked,” Dodd said, when he told them with the help of an interpreter that anyone can watch floor proceedings from the gallery or on television at home.

®®Bill Arthur, “Soviet Seaman's Release Violated Law, Panel Says,” Charlotte Observer, May 15, 1987, A2. 278

“There was stunned silence," Dodd said. “They could not believe that people could sit there and watch the government, day in and day out."®® Washington State Congressman John Miller generated a great deal of coverage back home about Soviet human rights abuses. Typi­ cal was the following paragraph in a Seattle Post-Intelligencer news story, “Miller Reaps Praise for Stand on Soviet Rights”: A year ago, Alexei Magarik, a cellist, poet and Jew, was imprisoned in a Siberian labor camp on drug charges. He claims the charges were trumped up and his real crime was applying for an exit visa in 1983, which authorities denied.81 Superpower cooperation rather than rivalry, however, was the rare theme in a letter from California Congressman Mel Levine printed in the Los Angeles Times, “U.S.-Soviet Union Venture to Mars,” praising the paper’s recent editorial. Levine wrote: The Times is correct in urging policymakers in Washing­ ton to commit themselves now to a Mars expedition. The best option would be for the United States and the Soviet Union to go there together. But, cooperatively or indepen­

dently, we must go to M a r s .6 2

GOjohn A. MacDonald, “Gejdenson Studies Use of Alaska Forest," Hartford Courant, August 16, 1987, A8. 81 Susan Lindauer, “Miller Reaps Praise for Stand on Soviet Rights,"Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 25, 1987. 82Mel Levine, letter to the editor, “U.S.-Soviet Union Venture to Mars,"Los Angeles Times, June 16, 1987, Part 2, 4. 279

Far East

The Far East was covered largely on the “2 Ts," turmoil and trade. The Philippines, and South Korea were the sites of turmoil, while Japan, the People’s Republic of China, Taiwan, and South Korea made news because of their potential impact on American jobs. The sensitive U.S. trade relationships with these countries sometimes sparked very harsh criticism, but at other times gener­ ated sympathy among members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Congressman Bonker, for example, denounced a pending textile trade bill then before Congress as “the most blatant protectionist legislation I have ever seen.”83 The bill, he said, singled out Asian countries in an attempt to reduce the competition for the American textile industry. Textiles, Bonker added, already represented the most protected industry in the United States. Perhaps just as important as what did make news is what did not make news during this four-month period. None of the 18 mem­ bers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee was mentioned in a single news item about China’s role as a world power. How, if at all, should United States diplomacy try to use China as a counterweight to Soviet power in the region? Should the United States sell the Chinese sophisticated military technology? What policies should the United States pursue

83svein GIlje, “Speakers Blast Trade Protectionism,"Seatr/eTimes, May 22, 1987, D12. 280

to maintain good relations simultaneously with two antagonists, the Chinese and the Taiwanese? The coverage provided no answers to these questions.

Table 22. Far East News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Japan 15 15 30 Philippines 7 0 7 China 2 4 6 North Korea 0 5 5 South Korea 1 3 4 Taiwan 0 4 4 Vietnam 0 2 2 Brunei 1 0 1 T im or 1 0 1 Indonesia 1 0 1 Laos 0 1 1 Cambodia 0 1 1 T otals 28 35 83

Japan

Not surprisingly, Japan, because of its growing importance as one of the world's economic giants, was the most covered country in the Far East. As Japan sought markets in the United States, members of Congress, their constituents, and their newspapers back home all took note. News that the Japanese high technology firm, Toshiba, had sold highly sensitive military information to the Soviet Union stimulated a flurry of concern on Capitol Hill, including a proposal to bar the 281

company from selling anything in the United States for two years. By penalizing Japan, Congress hoped to prevent intelligence losses. In this case, the sophisticated military technology could be used by the Soviets to build quieter submarines, making them much more difficult for the United States to track. At the same time, sev­ eral members of the Washington State delegation were deeply con­ cerned that penalizing Toshiba would also mean penalizing many American firms and workers. Congressman Bonker, for example, out­ lined the potential dangers posed by congressional overreaction, dangers that threatened economic prosperity in his region. The Seat­ tle Post-Intelligencer reported: But Bonker said angry congressional colleagues seeking a way to prevent future technology from falling into Soviet hands, may destroy efforts to get provisions in pending trade bills that would remove unnecessary export re­ strictions and red tape that hampers sales by Pacific Northwest high-tech firms.84

Yet other members of Congress were deeply upset by Japanese trade practices. Senator Lugar, for example, cosponsored a confer­ ence in Indianapolis to deal with what the Indianapolis Star re­ ferred to in its editorial as "the parts impasse." Specifically, Lugar was concerned that Stant, Inc., of Connersville, Indiana, one of the largest makers of radiator and fuel tank caps, was being shut out of the Japanese market at a time when $3.6 billion of Japan’s trade

84Evelyn iritani, “U.S. High-tech Firms Could be Victims, Too,"Seattle Post- Intelligencer, July 3, 1987, B6. 282

surplus was in auto parts. The paper pinpointed the problem from the state’s point of view: “That imbalance is of particular concern to In­ diana because of Stant and the other auto parts manufacturers lo­ cated in the state.’’®® Similarly, Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson accused the Japanese of “dumping” during an appearance before an Old Lyme High School economics class in his district. By dumping their prod­ ucts on the American market, the Japanese, he said, can keep their own employment up and eliminate competition. To make his point, Gejdenson compared the Japanese selling price for a well-known item with its price at a local store the students knew. As an example of this price undercutting, Gejdenson told the students he priced a Sony Walkman when he was in Japan and found it selling for $130 there, compared to the $90 price it carried at a Caldor’s in Connecticut.®® While trade accounted for the bulk of Japan’s coverage in the home-state and district press, several members urged Japan to play a larger role in protecting Persian Gulf oil supplies, especially in view of the enormous dangers posed by the Iran-lraq war. Those dan­ gers were dramatized by attacks on American and other ships. Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum was among the congressional voices calling on the Japanese to do more to help.

®®Editorial, “The Parts impasse,” Indianapolis Star, May 10, 1987, F6. 6®Bea Andrews, “Trade Protections Urged by Gejdenson,” New London Day, May 5, 1987, D1. 283

Reviewing trouble spots around the globe, she said that the cost of adding more U.S. ships to patrol the Persian Gulf should be shared by European allies and Japan who depend heavily on that source of oil.®?

Philippines

Members were concerned that the Philippines government headed by Corazon Aquino was being threatened by a group of military officers. The Indianapolis Star printed a news item that reflected this theme, “Lugar Urges Review of Aid to Philippines.” The Associated Press article began: “The coup attempt in the Philippines underscores the need to consider increasing U.S. economic aid to a fledgling democracy plagued by poverty, Sen. Richard G. Lugar said Friday.”®® Senator Helms made news back in his home state when he questioned Nicholas Platt’s fitness to serve as the American ambas­ sador to the Philippines.®® Helms was concerned by reports that Platt had once recommended letting United States payments to the United Nations reach the PLO. Later, however. Helms withdrew his opposition to the Platt nomination.

®?AI Polczinskl, "Bush Elbowing Challengers Aside," Wichita Eagie-Beacon, May 31. 1987, 01. ®®Lawrence L. Knutson, Associated Press, "Lugar Urges Review of Aid to Philip­ pines," Indianapoiis Star, August 29, 1987, A14. ®®Associated Press, “Helms: Platt Called for PLO Support,”Asheviiie Citizen- Times, May 29, 1987, 1. 284

China

The United States imports women’s cotton coats and jackets from China, so Larry Mounger of Seattle, Chief Executive Officer of Pacific Trail, Inc., sportswear, was upset to learn that his imported jackets had been embargoed by the U.S. Customs Service. It seems that the United States had already accepted its quota of the Chinese jacket imports for the year and no more would be permitted entry. When he received the notice, Mounger told the Seattle press, “Chaos broke loose."?® At the time, his company had ordered 75,000 of the Chinese-made jackets. Mounger and the other textile im­ porters found themselves in a battle with the American textile and apparel industries that wanted to limit imports. China made district press news when New London Day colum­ nist Steven Slosberg wrote about the death of Chin Chee Nui, who left China from a farming commune by horse-drawn cart. The woman arrived in the United States at age 84 for a visit with her son, Ken Lee, a Groton, Connecticut, restauranteur. Slosberg recalled the ef­ forts of Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd, at the time in 1979 the area’s congressman, to bring her to the United States. Slosberg, in his column, “Showpiece of Détente: A Life Ends," said the mother/son reunion symbolized the growing normalization of Sino- American relations.?1

?®Sylvia Nogaki, “The Quota Massacre," Seattle TImes/Post-lntelllgencer, Au­ gust 2, 1987, D1. ?1 Steven Slosberg, “Showpiece of Détente: A Life Ends,"New London Day, June 26, 1987, B1. 285

A much different subject generated coverage for China in the Wichita Eagie-Beacon where an editorial noted Senator Kassebaum’s efforts to control world population growth. The Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee had repealed the ban on U.S. financing for the United Nations Fund for Population Activities. That agency, accord­ ing to the editorial, had been denied U.S. money because it helped support family planning In China, where officials had been accused of coercing people into having abortions.?2

North Korea

Congressman Gejdenson was considering a constituent’s re­ quest to head a U.S. delegation visiting North Korea to discuss the status of American servicemen listed as missing in action and pris­ oners of war.?3 The constituent, Robert Dumas, had been searching for 36 years for his brother, Roger, missing there since the Korean War. A Gejdenson aide even met with North Korean officials in New

York to discuss the possibility of such a trip.

?2Editorlal, "Congress Should Defuse ‘Bomb,’ Reverse Reagan Population Pol­ icy,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon. May 24, 1987, 02. ?®Roger Gatlin, “Gejdenson Non-committal on North Korea POW Trip," Hartford Courant, August 28, 1987, D4. 286

South Korea

Sometimes-violent protests and harsh police suppression demonstrated the serious internal turmoil facing the South Korean government headed by President Chun Doo Hwan. The Los Angeles Times reported the concerns of California Senator Alan Cranston, chairman of the East Asian and Pacific Af­ fairs Subcommittee. The real danger, according to Cranston, was that the Reagan administration would appear to be too friendly with an unpopular regime in S eo u l.7 4

A few trade-related news items also mentioned South Korea, although always in a cursory way.

Taiwan

Members of Congress want to help local businesses sell their products to Taiwan. The Anderson Herald-Bulletin alerted readers to just such an effort by the state’s senior senator. U.S. Sen. Richard G. Lugar, R-lnd., welcomed to the United States a purchasing mission from the Republic of China on Taiwan earlier this week.

^^Norman Kempster, “U.S. Plan to Coax S. Korea to Democracy Shattered by Chun's Halting of Reform,” Los Angeles Times. May 2, 1987, Part 1, 12. 287

The delegation is here to discuss buying Indiana products, including $2.5 million in medical and pollution control equipment.75

Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos

Indiana Congressman Dan Burton was among 21 congressmen who joined representatives from conservative groups to pledge a $2.4 million reward to anyone from Laos, Vietnam, or Cambodia who brings out any American serviceman still missing and imprisoned in Southeast Asia.^e The legacy of the Vietnam War generated coverage for Indiana Senator Richard Lugar who worked to reunite the family of Sen Trang, a 48-year-old Vietnamese woman, who came to Plymouth, In­ diana, after the w a r .7 7

Brunei

This tiny country made news when Senator Dodd criticized leading State Department officials for their handling of the Iran- Contra affair. Dodd targeted much of his wrath at Assistant Secre­ tary of State Elliott Abrams. Among other things, Dodd was upset

75no byline, “Lugar Greets Taiwan Group,” Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 31, 1987, A10. 76 Associated Press, “$2 Million Reward Posted for POW or Mi A,” Indianapolis Star, July 16, 1987, 6. 77jane Puentes Ruiz, “For Refuge Family, Viet War Isn't Over,” Indianapolis Star, July 19, 1987, B1. 288

that Abrams had not been fully candid about soliciting $10 million from the government of Brunei for the Contrasts

East Timor/Indonesia

Fighting between Indonesia and East Timor prompted Senator Moynihan and 39 other senators to write Secretary of State George Shultz to express. their concern. According to some estimates, 150,000 East Timorese, about one-fifth of the island's population, had died from warfare and famine since 1975.79

Western Europe/Scandinavia

America’s Western European allies received very little press coverage, and even then, these countries were the secondary not primary sources of attention. Norway, for example, received cover­ age only when it became part of the Soviet-American superpower ri­ valry after one of its companies sold sophisticated military tech­ nology to the Soviets. The tense situation in the Persian Gulf prompted some of the members to call for a joint effort with Western Europe to protect the flow of vital oil. Senator Cranston, for example, said:

78David LIghtman, “Dodd Raps Abrams, Shultz for Handling of Iran-Contra Af­ fair,” Hartford Courant, June 11, 1987, A3. 79Richard Halloran, “Forty Senators Voice Concern for Timor Fighting,”N e w York Times, August 9, 1987, 29. 289

I believe the current problem in the Persian Gulf must be met not just by the United States acting alone but by all the maritime nations of the world. Certainly the coun­ tries that use the Persian Gulf oil, and most certainly the nations of Western Europe and Japan which are so de­ pendent on that oil, should participate in a joint effort.so A country as important as France was mentioned in only a few news items, and a number of Western European nations, including Greece and Italy, were not mentioned in a single item over this four- month period.

Table 23. Scandinavia/Western Europe News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Great Britain 5 3 8 Norway 6 0 6 West Germany 4 2 6 France 1 2 3 Portugal 0 2 2 Spain 0 1 1 The Netherlands 1 0 1 T otals 17 10 27

Great Britain

Following a four-day trip that included stops in West Germany and Great Britain, Senator Lugar tried to reassure the Europeans

soSenator Alan Cranston, Letter to the Editor, “Cranston Finds Situation Changed in the Persian Gulf," Santa Monica Outiook, August 20,1987, A12, 290

about a Soviet-American agreement to eliminate virtually all medium-range missiles In Europe. The Soviets would give up 1,300 missiles aimed at Europe and the United States would relinquish more than 300 Europe-based Pershing II and cruise missiles targeted at the Soviet Union. Lugar told the Indianapolis Star: I tried to make the point to the European press that President Reagan would not sign a bad treaty, but if for some reason he were to err and sign a treaty that is not so good, it still needs 67 votes in [the] Senate.si The Glens Falls Post-Star, in a story, “Solomon Solicited Con­ tra Aid,” reported that New York Congressman Gerald Solomon had sought aid for the Nicaraguan Contras from several countries, in­ cluding Great Britain. “Not Only did Ronald Reagan seek aid from those countries," Solomon told a luncheon of the Glens Falls Rotary

Club, “but Jerry Solomon did, t o o . ”82 According to the news item,

Solomon was referring to published reports that President Reagan had approached countries urging them to donate money to the Contra cause. Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson hoped to sell sub­ marines manufactured in his district to the Canadians, but the U.S. Navy opposed the transfer of such submarine secrets. Gejdenson was concerned that unless the United States helped its ally develop a submarine fleet, the Canadians would simply go elsewhere for the

81 Doug McDaniel, “New Agreement May Be Key to Missile Pact, Lugar Says," Indianapolis Star, July 2, 1987, 11. 82Qreg Moran, "Solomon Solicited Contra Aid,"Glens Fails Post-Star, July 3, 1987, A1. 291

technology. Gejdenson said, “Then, instead of getting American-de­ signed subs from the British, they should get them from us. The American taxpayers have an incredible burden defending the free w o rld ."83

Senator Lugar was optimistic that American reflagging of Kuwaiti oil tankers in the Persian Gulf would succeed because other countries, including Great Britain, were providing ships in the area.84

Norway

Many in Congress were outraged by the news that a Norwegian firm, Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, had worked with the Japanese man­ ufacturing giant, Toshiba Corporation, to sell the Soviets $17 mil­ lion worth of sophisticated milling machines. As a result, the Sovi­ ets will be able to build quieter submarines and the United States will be forced to spend billions to offset this loss. Most of the attention centered on Japan, but Kongsberg, the state-owned Norwegian arms firm, was also mentioned in such sub­ marine technology stories as one appearing in the Seattle Times, “Bonker Warns of Stiff Penalties for Selling Sub Technology to Sovi­ ets. "85

83Maria Hlleman, “Gejdenson Raps Stance on Canadian Subs,"New London Day, July 5, 1987, D1. 84Ted Buck, “Lugar Supports Reflagging,"Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 27, 1987, A1. 85Associated Press, “Bonker Warns of Stiff Penalties for Selling Sub Technology to Soviets," Seattle Times, July 1, 1987, A8. 292

West Germany

Washington State Senator Dan Evans was miffed at the incon­ sistency of Germans expressing their concerns that the Soviets and Americans were moving toward an agreement for removing ground- based nuclear missiles from Europe. Evans observed: “It is interest­ ing to see some of the same European politicians, who so recently were screaming objections to putting U.S. medium-range missiles into Europe, now saying, ‘You can’t take ’em out.”’86

France

This major European power unexpectedly became a part of the Contra-Sandinista story unfolding in Nicaragua in a news item in the

Glens Falls Post-Star, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid.” The article reported that Congressman Solomon had sought aid for the Nicaraguan Contras from several countries, including France. The pa­ per informed readers: “Not only did Ronald Reagan seek aid from those countries,” Solomon told a luncheon of the Glens Falls Rotary Club, “but Jerry Solomon did, too.”87 According to the news item,

Solomon was referring to published reports that President Reagan

GGpwight Schear, “Simply impossible to Satisfy Europeans," Seattle TImes/Post-lntelllgencer, May 31, 1987. 87Qreg Moran, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid,"Glens Falls Post-Star, July 3, 1987, A1. 293

had approached countries urging them to donate money to the Contra cause. Congressman Gejdenson wanted to sell submarines manufac­ tured in his district to the Canadians, but the U.S. Navy opposed any such transfer of any submarine secrets. This created the possibility that Canadian leaders would go shopping for submarines in other countries, meaning the United States would lose an important sale. The New London Day editorialized that the United States should be pleased that Canadians wanted to help defend the waters of the Northwest territories. The paper warned that unless the Navy re­ versed its position, the Canadians would go elsewhere for submarine technology, either to France or Great Britain.8® Senator Lugar hoped that the presence of ships from many countries would help ensure that the American reflagging of Kuwaiti ships in the Persian Gulf succeeded. The French provided some of those ships.89

Portugal

Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds was attentive to the special needs of his sizable Portuguese constituency. On August 2, 1987, the congressman attended the Feast of the Blessed Sacrament

®8Editorlal, “Canada: Secrets among Friends,"New London Day, July 21, 1987, A1. 8®ted Buck, “Lugar Supports Reflagging,"Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 27, 1987, A1. 294

in New Bedford, an event sometimes called the largest Portuguese feast in the nation.Qo Studds earlier had demonstrated his concern about his Por­ tuguese constituents by providing a Portuguese-translated version of a new U.S. immigration law.Qi

The Netherlands

Senator Lugar said he was optimistic that reflagging of Kuwaiti ships in the Persian Gulf would not provoke problems, thanks partly to the presence of ships from other countries, includ­ ing The Netherlands. Lugar declared: I think they are likely to go smoothly. I think there’s sufficient military force. Plus, there are British war­ ships, French, Dutch, even Soviet—in a way everybody right now is committed to a peaceful movement in the g u lf.92

Africa

Only a handful of Africa’s many countries were mentioned in the home-state and district news coverage of members of the Sen-

99Megan Secatore, “Sun Breaks through to Shine on Feast Parade,”New Bedford Standard-Times, August 3, 1987, 4. 91 No byline, “Studds Offers Translated Fact Sheet," New Bedford Standard- Times, July 4, 1987, 3. 92jed Buck, “Lugar Supports Reflagging,"Anderson Herald-Bulletin, July 27, 1987, A1. 295

ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee. Nigeria, the continent's most populous country and certainly one of its most powerful, was not mentioned at all. The coverage presented Africa as the site of an American ef­ fort to prevent the spread of communism. The serious problems that concern many Third World leaders did not surface at all in the Africa coverage, concerns about economic development, disease, hunger, and illiteracy.

Table 24. Africa News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Mozambique 10 0 10 South Africa 7 0 7 Angola 2 0 2 Ethiopia 1 0 1 T otals 20 0 20

Mozam bique

As portrayed to readers, Mozambique was a country beset by a divisive power struggle between a Marxist government and RENAMO,

the Mozambique National Resistance Forces. Senator Helms described the resistance forces as freedom fighters determined to thwart communist control of the country.

His spirited defense of RENAMO brought Helms into conflict with a State Department policy that he believed to be too sympa­ thetic to the Marxist Government. In one Associated Press story 296

printed in Charlotte, “Rebels Protecting Captives, Helms Says,” Helms claimed that the anticommunist rebels were detaining an American nurse and six other missionaries to protect them from government troops, not holding them hostage as the State Depart­ ment insisted.93 Helms was again at odds with the State Department when he vigorously opposed the nomination of Melissa Wells to be the U.S. ambassador to Mozambique.

South Africa

In its report, South Africa: Time Running Out, the Study Com­ mission on U.S. Policy toward Southern Africa emphasized the dan­ gers that loomed if South Africa did not move quickly and forcefully to dismantle apartheid. The commission declared: “If genuine progress toward meeting the grievances of South Africa’s blacks is not made soon, it will intensify and spread. Time is running out.”94 Despite that warning. South Africa received very little attention during the four-month period of this study. Mentions of South Africa sometimes referred to the 1986 cru­ cial vote in Congress on sanctions aimed at the Afrikaner govern­ ment in order to register disapproval of apartheid. Tensions mounted when the Reagan administration adamantly opposed sanctions but

93Associated Press, “Rebels ‘Protecting’ Captives, Heims Says,"Charlotte Ob­ server, July 19, 1987, A17. 94The Report of the Study Commission on U.S. Policy toward Southern Africa, South Africa: Time Running Out (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981), xxii. 297

many leading Republicans, including Senate Foreign Relations Com­ mittee Chairman Lugar, favored them. In a profile of Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum, chairperson of the Senate's subcommittee on Africa at the time of that vote, the Wichita Eagie-Beacon reported: “She voted for a sanctions package, saying that South Africa’s refusal to negotiate or to alter apartheid practices had proven that the administration’s policy of ‘construc­ tive engagement’ did not work.”9s The only negative mention of apartheid not based on that 1986 congressional vote was a brief N ew York Times article, “Lining Up on Divestment,” that listed Senator Moynihan as one of the Senate regents for the Smithsonian Institu­ tion who favored an end to Smithsonian investments in companies doing major business in South Africa.^® Helms visited South Africa in August 1987 as the guest of that country’s agricultural officials and got coverage back in North Car­ olina through an Associated Press article out of Johannesburg. Helms vowed to fight to repeal the sanctions against South Africa passed over President Reagan’s veto. The Associated Press quoted Helms;

I have not found one soul of any race who favors the continuation of sanctions.

95Angela Herrin, “Out of the Limeiight,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon, Juiy 5, 1981, C l. 9®No byiine, “Lining Up on Divestment,” New York Times, May 14, 1987, B12. 298

I am now persuaded that sanctions have had only one beneficial effect: They have virtually united the peo­ ple of South Africa in indignation against them.97

South Africa made the home-state press in North Carolina as part of the story on fighting in Mozambique. With Senator Helms deeply involved in support of the resistance movement in that coun­ try, news items sometimes mentioned the South African role. The O bserver, for example, reported in its story, “Guerrillas Reportedly Kill 380,” that South Africa and Mozambique disagreed about South Africa’s involvement: “South Africa says it stopped backing the guerrilla group in 1984 when it signed a nonaggression pact with Mozambique, but Mozambique insists that South Africa still aids the rebels covertly.”®®

Angola

Senator Lugar focused on the geopolitical rivalry in this

African country when he reminded his state that Cuba had sent more than 30,000 troops to Angola, then in the grip of a civil war.®® Senator Helms made news back home in the Charlotte Observer when he sent letters to 30,000 Chevron stockholders, urging them to bring pressure against oil operations in Angola to protest that

®7Associated Press, “Helms: Repeal U.S. Sanctions,”Charlotte Observer, August 30, 1987, A2. ®®Associated Press, "Guerrillas Reportedly Kill 380,”Charlotte Observer, July 22, 1987, A6. ®®Llnda Graham Caleca, “U.S.-Cuba Relations May Have Impact on Pan Am Com­ petition,” indlanapolls Star, May 11, 1987, 1. 299

country’s Marxist government/o® His political organization, the Con­ servative Caucus Foundation, had been conducting a campaign to per­ suade Chevron to end its $2 billion annual business done in Angola through a subsidiary. Gulf Oil.

Ethiopia

Nationally syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece printed in the Kansas City Star, pointing out that in 1985, Congress passed the Kassebaum amendment cutting United States contributions to the United Nations. In the midst of the Ethiopian famine, Krauthammer noted, the U.N. General Assembly voted $73.5 million for a conference center in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s capital, irritating Congress and contributing to passage of the Kassebaum amendment designed to reduce waste and abuse in the United Nations budget.101

North America

In an article for Foreign Policy, William D. Rogers wrote: “For the United States, only the Soviet Union compares in importance with M e x i c o .”102 The 18 members of the Senate Foreign Relations

ioono byline, "Chevron In Angola,” Charlotte Observer, May 9, 1987, B2. 101 Charles Krauthammer, United Feature Syndicate, Inc., “U.S. Should Ball out of the U.N.,” Kansas City Star, August 23, 1987, K1. I02william D. Rogers, “Approaching Mexico,” Foreign Policy 72 (Fall 1988): 196. 300

Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee monitored for this research, however, demonstrated very little interest in Mexico. Canada, on the other hand, was mentioned much more frequently be­ cause of its importance as America’s leading trade partner.

Table 25. North America News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Canada 0 1 2 1 2 Mexico 2 1 3 T otals 2 1 3 15

Canada

Members of the two foreign affairs committees viewed Canada as a potential purchaser of American-made submarines and a com­ petitor on timber and fishing. Congressman Gejdenson headed a U.S. congressional delegation visiting Canada to discuss a number of is­ sues, including possible Canadian interest in purchasing submarines made in his district. The New London Day described Gejdenson’s position in some detail in its article, "Gejdenson Raps Stance on Canadian Subs." The U.S. Navy opposed sharing submarine secrets with the Canadians, a position that Gejdenson found unpersuasive. The paper quoted the congressman: “We ought not to be provoking our best friend and 301

largest trading partner in the world and the country with whom we share the world's longest unmanned border."i®3 The U.S.-Canada free trade negotiations were expected to have profound economic effects in Washington State, so members of the state's congressional delegation followed the developments

c l o s e l y . 1 0 4 The agreement would scrap tariff barriers between the

world’s two largest trading partners, affecting shipping, the air­ craft industry revolving around Boeing, electric utilities, and much more. Those in the Northwest were especially concerned about Cana­ dian hopes to end U.S.-imposed tariffs on forest products.

M exico

California growers needed migrant workers to harvest perish­ able crops and they needed them quickly. The Immigration and Natu­ ralization Service announced that it would open a new border pro­ cessing center at Calexico, California, and process legalization ap­ plications not only at the U.S. embassy in Mexico City, but also at the U.S. consulates in Monterrey and Hermosillo. An aide to Senator Cranston announced that the senator would discuss farm worker problems and other defects in the legalization bill with representatives of the Los Angeles Roman Catholic Arch­ diocese and the Coalition for Human Immigration Rights in Los An-

lOSMaria Hileman, "Gejdenson Raps Stance on Canadian Subs,"New London Day, July 5, 1987, D1. 104joe Quintana, “State Could Both Benefit, Suffer under a U.S.-Canada Trade Pact,” Seattle Times, July 6, 1987, D8. 302

geles. The Los Angeles Times covered the story in its news item, “INS Agrees to Ease Entry Regulations for Farm Workers.”i®8 In testimony before the Senate subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications, a one-time accountant for a Colombian drug cartel said the narcotics operation survived by bribing officials in several countries, including Mexico. Details were provided in the Boston Globe news story, “Drug Trafficking Leads to Subpoenas."106

The Caribbean

Over four months, eighteen members of the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee produced only one home-state or district press news item that focused pri­ marily on a Caribbean country. The few other mentions were cursory.

Table 26. Caribbean News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Cuba 4 0 4 Bahamas 2 0 2 Totals 6 0 6

lospaui Houston, “INS Agrees to Ease Entry Regulations for Farm Workers," Los Angeles Times, June 3 0,1 98 7 , Part 1, 3. loestephen Kurkjian, "Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas,"Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 303

Cuba

The Pearl of the Antilles was portrayed as working to under­ mine American interests in Nicaragua and Angola. Indiana Senator Richard Lugar said, "In short, Cuba is serving as a Soviet base a mere 90 miles from our shores."i In testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications a one-time accountant for a Colombian drug cartel said the narcotics operation flourished by bribing officials in several other countries, including Cuba. De­ tails were provided in the Boston Globe news story, “Drug Traffick­ ing Leads to Subpoenas.”i°8

Bahamas

In that same testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications, the former accountant for a Colombian drug cartel said the narcotics operation survived by bribing officials in several countries, including the Ba­ hamas.

I67unda Graham Caleca, “U.S.-Cuban Relations May Have Impact on Pan Am Competition,” Indianapolis Star, May 11, 1987, 1. lOSstephen Kurkjian, “Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas," Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 3 0 4

South America

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee gave scant attention to South America. Not a single news item during this four-month period made a South American country its primary focus. Argentina and Brazil, the conti­ nent’s major powers, were not mentioned at all. Likewise, there was no coverage of Bolivia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, Suriname, Venezuela, and French Guiana.

Table 27. South America News Mentions Country Foreign Intermestic Total Colombia 2 0 2 Chile 1 0 1 Totals 3 0 3

Colom bia

A series of sometimes-stunning revelations before Senator John Kerry’s Senate subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and In­ ternational Communications shed a bad light on Colombia. Subpoenas were issued after two days of secret testimony by a self-described former accountant for a Colombian drug cartel based in Medellin. Kerry told the news media, “I’ve been hearing testimony over the past two days that makes my head spin.’’io® The accountant, Ramon-

I09stephen Kurkjian, “Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas,"Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 305

Milan Rodriguez, provided details about how the drug cartel operated in numerous countries by bribing officials or public figures. The Boston Globe carefully followed developments in Kerry’s subcommittee and in one article, “Drug Smuggler Says Contras Traded Cocaine for Arms; Admits Bribing Officials,” reported the testimony of Jorge Morales, a Colombian native, that he supplied weapons, airplanes, and money to the Nicaraguan Contras.n o

Chile

An Evans-Novak column appearing in the Charlotte Observer produced the only news item on Chile that mentioned one of the 18 members being studied. The national columnists pointed out in a small item that Senator Helms wanted Elliott Abrams dismissed as Assistant Secretary of State for Latin America. Novak and Evans wrote that the senator’s dissatisfaction with Abrams began with their differences over Auguste Pinochet’s military regime in Chile.

“Specifically,” according to the column, “the senator blames Abrams for unsubstantiated news leaks that a Helms staffer leaked CIA se­ crets in Chile last year.”i i i

HOvvonne Brooks, “Drug Smuggler Says Contras Traded Cocaine for Arms; Ad­ mits Bribing Officials," Boston Globe, July 16, 1987, 13. 111 Robert Novak and Rowland Evans, nationally syndicated column, "AIDs Demonstrators Anger Reagan," Asheville Citizen, June 7, 1987, 02. 3 0 6

Eastern Europe

Congressional coverage in the home-state and district press provided readers with virtually no new information about the coun­ tries of Eastern Europe—Poland, East Germany, Bulgaria, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Albania, Hungary, and Yugoslavia.

Table 28. Eastern Europe News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Romania 2 0 2

Romania

Human rights violations prompted the Senate to vote to sus­ pend trade concessions to Romania for six months. Romania had been one of four communist countries to enjoy this Most Favored Nation treatment. Senators were especially upset by the continued denial of religious freedoms in Romania and voted 57-36 to add an amendment to the sweeping trade bill denying these MFN trade a d v a n t a g e s.112

South Asia

Only one South Asian country was mentioned in a home-state or district news item during the period of this research and that country, Pakistan, was mentioned only once.

USQidget Fuentes and John MacDonald, “Senate Votes 57-36 to Suspend Roma­ nia's Favored Trade Status,” Hartford Courant, June 27, 1987, AS. 307

Table 29. South Asia News Mentions

Country Foreign Intermestic Total Pakistan 1 0 1

Pakistan

Congressional concerns about nuclear proliferation generated home-state press coverage when a businessman was arrested and charged with trying to export nuclear materials to Pakistan. The 25 tons of special steel could have been used to produce enriched ura­ nium used in nuclear bombs. The Boston Globe quoted Senator John Kerry: “People around here have deep mistrust and misgivings about Pakistan."1 is

SUMMARY

An analysis of the country and issue coverage suggests three clusters of news items: 1. Protecting the national security. The heavy military orien­ tation to the coverage was reflected in the great attention given to wars in Nicaragua, the Persian Gulf, and Mozambique. It also re­ flected a deep concern about the Soviet threat. This national secu­ rity coverage fell into several categories—wars, covert operations.

IlS jo h n Robinson, “Atomic Fears,” Boston Globe, August 2, 1987, 1. 308

intelligence losses, weapons sales, and nuclear missile negotia­ tions/proliferation. Tensions in the Persian Gulf had all the ingredients for a must-cover national security story. The United States became di­ rectly involved in the conflict when the Iraqis attacked an American ship, killing 37 crewmen, and the Iranians planted mines in the Gulf waters. Tensions mounted when the United States decided to reflag some Kuwaiti ships. The stakes were high because United States vi­ tal interests were involved, among them the country’s overall strategic position in the Middle East and continued access to foreign oil. The situation was made all the more newsworthy by the con- flict-within-a-conflict between the Reagan presidency and Congress over who had the constitutional power to chart American policy in the Persian Gulf. 2. Finding the local angle to foreign affairs news. This cover­ age, analyzed in detail in chapter 8, falls into three categories: • Intermestic issues—international trade, military contracts that convert into jobs in the state and district, immigration, cul­ tural activities, and constituency service. • Ethnic factors • Local people and groups involved in foreign affairs—a young former graduate of the University of Washington killed in Nicaragua 3. Monitoring the state’s senators and congressman on foreign affairs issues with no local angle in which they are playing a leading role. Members can generate this kind of coverage back home by intro­ 309

ducing bills, filing suits in federal courts, making major announce­ ments about shifts in policy, and in other ways. Different countries are covered because they fall into differ­ ent clusters of news items. The Soviet Union was a cluster one story because it posed a threat to the national security. Portugal, on the other hand, was covered in the New Bedford Standard-Times as a cluster two story because of the local angle. The community has a sizable Portuguese community. Honduras was covered as a cluster three story in the Hartford Courant and New London Day not because the Reagan administration’s proposed jet sale to that country in­ volved a major national security threat to the United States and not because Hartford has a large Honduran population. Honduras was cov­ ered back in Connecticut simply because two local members of Congress, Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Sam Gejden­ son, had sponsored resolutions to block the sale. It is unlikely that the story would have prompted much if any coverage back in Con­ necticut if another senator from another state had introduced the resolution. But Dodd was the Connecticut senator and therefore merited press coverage in Hartford and New London.

The national security stories tend to be more widely dis­ tributed among members of Congress and their newspapers back home than are the foreign affairs stories with local angles and those concentrating on the work of the local member. This region-by-region review suggests some of the contribu­ tions and limitations in the foreign affairs coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs 310

Committees in newspapers back in their home states. The coverage keeps readers well informed about immediate dangers posed to the national security. By focusing on local angles to foreign affairs news, it helps readers understand how their own daily lives are af­ fected by relations with foreign countries. They can more readily appreciate the growing interdependence at work in the world. Yet the coverage has its limitations, too. It leaves many blind spots. A country as important as India was not mentioned once in the press coverage of 18 members of Congress in about 2,200 newspa­ pers. An issue as important as international environmental deterio­ ration was not mentioned once in the press coverage of 18 members of Congress in 2,200 newspapers. This coverage, because it is written from the point of view of American foreign policy interests, does little to help readers under­ stand the intricate internal dynamics at work in foreign countries. We learn only fragments. We learn that a Norwegian company sold military intelligence secrets to the Soviet Union, threatening United States national security. But that is all we learn about Norway. It is apparent in this region-by-region review that as a one- course meal, as the only source of foreign affairs news for the pub­ lic, coverage of members of Congress in the home-state and district press would leave readers malnourished. When used in conjunction with other sources of information about the world, however, in­ cluding the reports of foreign correspondents, it can potentially serve a useful role as the news equivalent of a vitamin supplement. Chapter 10 Conclusion

The range and nature of today's problems seem to make of foreign policy a fragmented preserve of disparate ex­ perts; but in a democratic country, the policy will be effective only if the citizens support it—which means that they have to understand it, not just submit to ex­ hortation or manipulation.1

Ideally, press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee would con­ tribute to a better public understanding of the world and a more ef­ fective United States foreign policy through a three-step process. First, members would use the home-state and district press as channels to discuss conflict resolution, human rights, international environmental deterioration, international economics, and an array of other important foreign affairs issues. The press, in turn, would do its part to provide readers with a thorough, balanced, incisive, understandable look at foreign affairs news from and about members of Congress.

I Stanley Hoffmann, Primacy or World Order (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1980), xlv.

311 312

Second, the public would use this news to make informed, wise decisions about the course of United States foreign policy. People would act on the basis of what they had learned, communicating their views to government policymakers as well as business leaders, private voluntary organizations, and others involved in foreign af­ fa irs . Finally, members of Congress and others in policy-making po­ sitions would listen to the public's views and then carefully con­ sider their observations when developing policy. This study focused on only the first step in the three-step pro­ cess just described. It looked at how members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee inter­ acted with journalists to produce foreign affairs news back in their home states. It examined message sources (members of the two committees), channels (home-state and district newspapers), and messages (news items that mentioned the members on foreign af­ fa irs ).

The research did not illuminate the second step in the process. It did not study whether constituents read the foreign affairs mes­ sages from and about members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. It did not help us understand the extent to which, if at all, reader attitudes and be­ haviors are shaped by what they learn about foreign affairs through this member of Congress/back home newspaper interaction. Do read­ ers change their voting behavior because of what they have read? Do they send money to flood victims in Africa as a result of reading a 313

congressman's comments about a disaster situation? Do they cancel a planned foreign vacation because they read in the local newspaper that the congressman had warned about more terrorist bombings aimed at Americans? Did they volunteer to work with Amnesty In­ ternational to promote human rights around the world, or join any of the many other foreign affairs-oriented organizations because of something a senator said that was reported in the press? Problems can arise in this second step for a host of reasons— for example, not only because the public is poorly informed on for­ eign affairs, but also because people feel powerless to influence the course of United States policy. The all-important feedback compo­ nent of successful communication could be defective because of what one author has called a sense of "well-informed futility" that modern news consumers experience toward practical problems in society. It is beyond dispute, according to G.D. Wiebe, that the mass media have been successful in disseminating news and information. "But the social arrangements for channeling the energies of in­ formed citizens back into social actions have not kept pace,” Wiebe wrote.2 Wiebe described his own anguish as he watched filmed re­ ports when thousands died during a catastrophic storm in what is now Bangladesh. Wiebe felt a sense of futility about using this in­ formation to help the suffering people. Neither was it the purpose of this research to analyze system­ atically how, if at all, members of Congress responded to the feed-

2q.D. Wiebe, “Mass Media and Man's Relationship to His Environment,” Jour­ nalism Quarterly 50 (1973): 426. 314

back that constituents provided them on foreign affairs after read­ ing the home-state and district press. Did the public's reaction to the news reports somehow eventually affect the attitudes and be­ haviors of members on foreign affairs issues before Congress? If so, how? Did it, for example, affect how Senator Lugar voted on aid to the Contras in Nicaragua or how Senator Helms voted on nuclear arms control negotiations with the Soviet Union? Did the coverage back home influence what Senator Cranston said about Jewish emi­ gration if he had had a private meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev? This study, it is hoped, has contributed modestly to our under­ standing of what foreign affairs issues receive attention in the home-state and district press and why. It did not, however, help us answer an important question at the heart of the third step in the process—did the coverage make any difference? Did it in some way ultimately influence the course of United States foreign policy? Bernard C. Cohen has addressed the difficulty that analysts have had in establishing a linkage between public opinion and foreign policy. We know much more, Cohen has pointed out, about public opinion o n foreign policy than we know about the linkage between public opinion and foreign policy.^ That is, we know more about the percentage of Americans who support aid to the Contras than we know about how the percentage of support affected the direction of policy.

^Bernard C. Cohen, The Public's Impact on Foreign Policy (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1983), 4. 315

What we know, Cohen noted, is bits and pieces. He added, ‘“Bits and pieces’ is another way of saying that our knowledge is partial, unsystematic, disconnected, and discontinuous."4 Similarly, we can say that with this research we may know more about home-state and district news coverage on foreign affairs, but not necessarily about this news coverage a n d foreign affairs. We know more, for example, about what news items on foreign affairs mentioning Senator Brock Adams have appeared in the Seattle Times, but we do not know how, if at all, this coverage influenced United States foreign policy. It is difficult to measure the impact of communications at interpersonal, international, and other levels. It is much easier to measure the number of news items that mention members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in their states and districts. During an interview for this study. New York Congressman Gerald Solomon was confident of the impact if the home-state and district press covered their members of Congress more thoroughly on foreign affairs. Solomon declared: The Democratic party in Congress is far to the left of the

majority in the Democratic party in the United States. If more was known about their positions and votes here in Washington, the majority of them probably would be de­ feated. If they knew they would be defeated, they would move more into the mainstream.^

4 Cohen, The Public's Impact on Foreign Policy, 4. ^Telephone interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. 316

Despite Solomon's clear prediction about the impact, we lack an em­ pirical base to support or undermine his theory. This study, then, did not examine how well steps two and three correspond to the ideal. It did, however, reveal a number of deficien­ cies in both the quantity and quality of foreign affairs news cover­ age available to the public about members of the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee in the home-state and district press. Together, these members and their newspapers back home could provide a rich source of information about the world. Members of these two committees, after all, are important contributors to Untied States foreign policy making and they generally have good ac­ cess to their home-state and district press. They also have an ex­ cellent opportunity to learn about foreign affairs. High-ranking offi­ cials from the State Department, Pentagon, and other departments regularly present testimony before the two committees. Members also talk with foreign embassy personnel stationed in Washington.

They have access to much secret intelligence information. They can use the Congressional Research Service, their own staffs, and others to research foreign policy questions. They have considerable oppor­ tunity to travel and see the world firsthand.

Yet a public that relied solely on this coverage of Congress for its news on foreign affairs would be a poorly informed public indeed. Fortunately, of course, home-state and district press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House For­ eign Affairs Committee was never intended to be the only source of 317

foreign affairs news. Most of it continues to be provided by foreign correspondents stationed around the world. Walter Lippmann, as mentioned in the opening chapter, con­ tended that people act not on the basis of some objective reality in the external world, but according to the mental maps they carry around in their heads. For most people, Lippmann wrote, these men­ tal maps are constructed not by cartographers, but by reporters and editors.6 Ideally, in step one, news coverage of members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee will help the public develop sophisticated mental maps of the world. These maps would then provide a sound foundation for the feedback on foreign affairs that the public offered in step two of the process. Step one, the subject of this research, is a preparatory stage for steps two and three.

The key findings of this research can be summarized in several categories:

1. The quantity of foreign affairs coverage The steady stream of news items on domestic issues provided a sharp contrast to the trickle of coverage on foreign affairs. The 881 news items that ap­ peared on domestic issues represented more than four times the 209 news items on foreign affairs in the home-state and district press. These 209 news items were spread among 18 members of Congress in 18 newspapers over a four month period, meaning that the amount

^Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion (New York: Penguin, 1922; reprint ed., New York: Free Press, 1965): 3-20. 318

of information provided by a single member in a single newspaper was very little both absolutely and relatively when compared to the amount of coverage on domestic issues. The 881 news items on do­ mestic issues is about 2.7 times as much coverage as the combined foreign affairs and intermestic figure, 325. One domestic category alone, Politics/Inside Congress, gener­ ated more news items than all the foreign affairs items combined— 295 to 209. The press seemed considerably more interested in who got elected than in what they did to solve problems in foreign af­ fairs once they came to Congress. The same press that printed almost 300 news items on Poli­ tics/Inside Congress told readers nothing about the Strategic De­ fense Initiative, one of the most far-reaching and controversial is­ sues facing the United States. The Reagan administration proposed SDI as a means to destroy incoming nuclear missiles before they could strike the United States and kill millions of Americans and knock out our own land-based nuclear missiles. Critics, however, have strongly denounced the plan as strategically, technologically, and financially unwise. Important as SDI was, however, it went un­ covered at the same time that the home-state and district press carried about 17 news items each week on Politics/Inside Congress. This fascination with politics focused on several recurring questions: Is the senator going to seek reelection? Who is going to oppose him? How much money has he raised? Who is going to run his campaign? Who has endorsed him? Who is speaking at his next 319

fundraiser? Compare the amount of this Politics/Inside Congress coverage with the coverage on foreign affairs • About 20 items in the home-state and district press on Pol­ itics/Inside Congress for each one item on Africa • About 75 news items on Politics/Inside Congress for each one item on Third World debt problems • About 100 news items on Politics/Inside Congress for each one on world hunger and population problems • About 300 news items on Politics/Inside Congress to none on international environmental problems • More than four news items on Congress/Inside Politics for each one on the Soviet Union 2. Reasons for the trickle of foreign affairs coverage P o llu ­ tion of streams, the quality of education in neighborhood classrooms and other domestic issues are more directly and immediately con­ nected to the everyday lives of people back home than most foreign affairs issues. Members of Congress and the home-state and district press strived to be especially attentive to the special needs of the people they served, to be relevant to their everyday concerns. This inevitably meant stressing domestic issues.

Although both the members and the press regarded the public as not totally uninterested in foreign affairs, they nonetheless thought the public to be less interested in foreign affairs than do­ mestic issues. Press secretaries and reporters who described the public they serve as interested in foreign affairs often also de­ scribed their constituency/readership as well educated. Members did 320

not live in constant fear that the press back home would portray them as excessively preoccupied with foreign affairs, yet they wanted balanced coverage, balanced in a way that left domestic is­ sues as the senior partner in the relationship and foreign affairs as the junior partner. Many of the members were able to emphasize their efforts to deal with special local concerns by serving on other committees. North Carolina Congressman James Clarke, for example, sat on the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee in order to protect his constituents' interests in federal legislation affecting the nearby Smoky Mountains. The very nature of the American political system encourages a state and district orientation among senators and House members. Elected from narrow constituencies—1/435 of the House and 1/100 of the Senate—members are expected to champion the interests in a specific geograhical area of the country. Many members, of course, are nationally, and sometimes even internationally oriented, espe­ cially on specific issues. But the state and district pull is a strong one. At the same time, with the exceptions of the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Boston Globe, the 18 newspapers examined for this research were expected to serve local and regional readers, not a national readership. The United States, in fact, does not have a truly national newspaper similar to those found in many foreign countries. The country's vastness and diversity encourage a local and regional press approach. Just as the home-state and district newspapers exist primar­ ily to cover local news, so they find it much more readily in domes­ 321

tic issues than in foreign affairs. Reporters justify this as the most sensible role for themselves because they know that CBS News, Time Magazine and a host of other national news organizations will provide the public with large quantities of foreign affairs informa­ tion. This, then, is another key reason for the dorninance of domestic issues over foreign affairs in the home-state and district press. In addition to the fact that domestic issues are thought to be more immediately and directly connected to the lives of readers, re­ porters for the home-state and district press ask: Why duplicate the national news which will be provided by someone else? Others will cover Soviet-American nuclear arms control talks, so why should they? Instead, they primarily devote themselves to finding local news which means domestic issues that cannot be covered by the national news operations. Reporters also point out that their own newspapers pay for news prepared by the national wire services, es­ pecially Associated Press, that provide foreign affairs information. Readers can learn about foreign affairs by reading their newspapers even if they cannot learn much about foreign affairs by following coverage of the area's senators and congressmen.

The difficulty that both press secretaries and reporters have in "selling" foreign affairs stories is another factor minimizing the flow of information. Several press secretaries said they found it difficult, sometimes impossible, to sell reporters for papers back home—that is, to convince them to write a story on foreign affairs. Reporters acted as gatekeepers and decided that certain foreign af­ fairs messages from senators or congressmen would not be allowed 322

to pass through the gate and on to readers. Reporters did so because they thought readers back home were not as interested in foreign affairs as domestic issues, because they thought readers would learn about foreign affairs from other sources, especially the wire services, and because they faced their own selling problem. Some reporters believed that even if they thought a foreign affairs news item to be worth covering they could not convince an editor to print it. That is, just as reporters sometimes acted as gatekeepers to block messages from members of Congress, so they believed that their own editors would act as gatekeepers for their stories Just as foreign affairs news items were thought to require more effort to sell than domestic news by press secretaries to re­ porters and by reporters to editors, so they were also thought by some to require more effort to explain, another factor contributing to the mere trickle of news flow. Wichita reporter Angela Herrin, for example, recounted her problems in explaining the nature of the Front Line States in Africa. Her Kansas readers were thought to need much more background information to help them understand the Front Line States than to understand Medicare or taxes. Just as the public was thought to know less about foreign af­ fairs than domestic issues, so reporters sometimes acknowledged that they also knew less about it. This self perception represented yet another reason for the trickle of foreign affairs news. One re­ porter candidly admitted that perhaps her own lack of understanding explained why she had not written about the local congressman's efforts to prevent Pakistan from developing a nuclear capability. 323

About this significant nuclear proliferation issue, she observed, “Sometimes I can't judge if what he is saying is an important new development.”^

3. Responsibility to inform Press secretaries said their bosses believe they have a special responsibility to inform the pub­ lic on foreign affairs by virtue of their seats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Re­ porters were divided: some said they had a responsibility to inform the public on foreign affairs through their coverage of members of Congress; others said they had a more limited responsibility to cover members in their circulation areas and if those members did something newsworthy on foreign affairs, they reported it; and some reporters said they a responsibility to cover foreign affairs issues directly connected to their readers—that is, localized foreign affairs such as trade with Japan that affects jobs in the paper's circulation area.

4. Coverage of individual members When involved as key ac­ tors on issues of major foreign policy importance, especially the "hot spots" in the news, members are most likely to receive cover­ age back home. Yet this is not always true. Senator Brock Adams certainly played a leading role in the debate over the application of the War Powers Act in connection with the dangers in the Persian Gulf, but got little coverage back home because the press there pre­ ferred to concentrate on local news. Senator Christopher Dodd and

^Interview with Dorl Melnert, reporter for the Santa Monica Outlook, Wash­ ington, D.C., January 28, 1988. 324

Senator Jesse Helms made news by being key actors in Washington, D.C., but the most covered House member. Congressman John Miller of Washington State, demonstrated another route to coverage. Miller received press attention because he made foreign affairs news back home in Seattle rather than in the nation's capital. Subcommittee chairmanships can be very helpful in making foreign affairs news. Senator Dodd was the most covered senator largely because he headed the subcommittee dealing with Central America, especially the war in Nicaragua. Subcommittees, however, are not equally helpful. Those focusing on the world's "hot spots" are the most likely to generate coverage. In deciding if the senator or congressman from back home merits coverage on a foreign affairs topic, reporters make judg­ ments about their newsworthiness. It helps if the member is thought to have a formal position of power, a subcommittee chairmanship, for example, or to be regarded as a thoughtful, incisive analyst of American foreign policy whose views are seriously considered by the foreign policy-making community. Indiana reporter Doug McDaniel turned to Senator Richard Lugar for comment on foreign affairs much more than to Congressman Dan Burton because Lugar was a widely respected former chairman of the Senate Foreign Re­ lations Committee. On the other hand, North Carolina reporter Bill Arthur decided not to print news releases on foreign affairs sub­ mitted by Congressman Clarke because he believed that Clarke lacked influence on foreign policy, that he was not an expert on any 325

foreign policy issue. McDaniel obviously believed that Lugar had just the kind of influence that Clarke lacked. Playing an active, leadership role on key foreign affairs is­ sues, sitting as chairman of a subcommittee dealing with a "hot spot" in the news, and developing a reputation as someone whose views are listened to are more important in generating press cover­ age than simply distributing news releases. The data clearly showed that the members putting out the most news releases were not the members getting the most foreign affairs coverage. Just as the press was not much interested in news releases, so they were not much concerned whether a member was a liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. Members of the two parties received about the same amount of foreign affairs coverage. The coverage, however, was much affected by the different Senate and House orientations toward the home-state and district press, and by the different home-state and district press orienta­ tions toward the Senate and House. Senators, elected statewide and serving a much larger number of people, emphasized the larger cir­ culation home-state dailies. House members, on the other hand, elected from smaller areas of the state, stressed the district news­ papers. Representing so many people and faced with so many district newspapers, senators could not concentrate on just one of them. New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan could not devote much atten­ tion to the Glens Falls Post-Star when its circulation reached such a small part of his constituency. Simultaneously, the Glens Falls pa­ 326

per could not expect much access to Moynihan, recognizing that he must devote most of his attention to the state's big city dailies. House members faced a different situation. Congressman Ger­ ald Solomon, for example, who represented Glens Falls, regarded the Post-Star as extremely important because it reached a high per­ centage of his constituents, higher than the Times. Glens Falls re­ porters were attuned to Solomon much more than Moynihan for much the same reason, because their circulation and his constituency co­ incided well. 5. Localizing foreign affairs news Foreign affairs is more likely to be covered in the press back home when it takes on a local flavor. This happens in three way

•Intermestic issues, those that have both international and domestic dimensions, especially trade where the local concern is really jobs not foreign affairs. These intermestic issues also in­ clude local military projects presented as contracts to build weapons that provide jobs rather than as part of military strategy, various kinds of cultural activities such as the Goodwill Games sports competition, constituent service problems, and immigration problems.

•Ethnic issues, those that reflect the special ethnic composi­ tion of a particular city—for example, the Estonians in Seattle. •Participation by local individuals and groups in foreign af­ fairs, activities sometimes not intended to generate coverage—for example, the death of a former University of Washington graduate in Nicaragua. 327

6. Coverage of specific countries and issues This coverage reflected several dominant characteristics especially the tendency to offer readers only a series of disjointed pieces of information rather than a clear snapshot. •U.S. foreign policy was covered, not world politics. Attention went to situations in which the United States was deeply involved— for example, Nicaragua—rather than to situations in which other countries were playing the leading roles—for example, the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. This emphasis on the United States perspective was reinforced because the journalists, with a few exceptions, did not include comments from foreigners in their articles. Usually the coverage mentioned only the senator or House member. Because Japanese, Iranians, and other foreigners were not made a part of these stories, the coverage tended to be the world as seen through American eyes. •Military issues dominated the coverage, while many impor­ tant non-military matters received scant attention or none at all. This national security dimension appeared in news items on wars in Nicaragua, the Persian Gulf, and Mozambique; the Iran-Contra covert operations including the hearings on Capitol Hill; weapons sales to Honduras and Saudi Arabia; intelligence losses to the Soviet Union; and nuclear missile deployments.

•The Third World was portrayed negatively, when it was por­ trayed at all. Africa, for example, was presented primarily as a battleground in Mozambique. The debilitating poverty, disease. 328

hunger, and illiteracy that plague much of the developing world went un reported. •Only 45 of the world's 187 countries were mentioned in the home-state and district press coverage of 18 members of Congress over a four month period. Nicaragua, because of the Contra-Sandin- ista war, was the most covered country. The Soviet Union ranked second because of its superpower status and Japan made the list be­ cause of its trade relationship with the United States. •Coverage did not go to the world's most populous countries. Of the world's 10 most populous countries, four were not mentioned even once—India, Brazil, Bangladesh, and Nigeria. With the exceptions of Japan, Canada, and Great Britain, coverage did not go to countries that engaged in heavy trade with, the United States. •Members were very sensitive to how their foreign trips were portrayed to constituents back home through the home-state and district press and tried to minimize chances that these trips would be viewed as junkets, as nothing more than taxpayer-financed vacations. Members rely on several means to neutralize the political dangers. Some, for example, told constituents that the trips could directly benefit the state or district. Congressman Sam Gejdenson, for example, said his trip to Canada would allow him to discuss the possible Canadian purchase of submarines made in his Connecticut district, something that could mean thousands of well-paying jobs for constituents.

•Legislation approved by Congress to restrain an "imperial presidency" provided the basis for a substantial portion of the cov­ 329

erage, creating a "story-within-a-story" phenomenon. The debate in Congress was not only about what should be United States policy in the Persian Gulf and elsewhere, but also about who was constitu­ tionally empowered to decide that policy. Congress or the president. •The foreign affairs coverage was not evenly distributed ei­ ther among the 18 members of Congress or the 18 newspapers. Just one senator, for example, Jesse Helms, provided the bulk of the cov­ erage on Africa. 7. Important issues that were not covered Perhaps just as revealing as the foreign affairs topics that did receive coverage were those that did not. Members of Congress, in conjunction with home-state and district newspapers, could have, but did not, help constituents understand Mikhail Gorbachev's ambitious perestroika, or restructuring program, and its implications for Soviet-American relations. They could have, but did not, explore ways to deal with the tense situation on the West Bank in the Middle East. They could have, but did not, discuss the meaning for Americans of the development of a closer European community in the years ahead. They could have, but did not, help Americans understand the complexities of the military budget, suggesting priorities and re­ lating them to key American strategic interests around the world. They could have, but did not, discuss how global satellites and other parts of the international communication explosion are re­ making the world. They could have, but did not, look a t whether the 330

United States is a declining world power and, if so, how it should respond to a diminished role on the world stage They could have, but did not, discuss the threats posed by the destruction of the world environment. One writer has warned, “The international community cannot afford to continue to delay elevating the greenhouse effect to the top of the foreign policy agenda.”® De­ spite such dire predictions, the international environment remained at the bottom of the foreign policy agenda based on the coverage provided in the home-state and district press. This was the case although four senators monitored for this study sat on the Senate subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Environment. Even this brief list of what was not covered serves as a re­ minder that what is presented to readers as news is only part of what could have been presented. Think of concentric circles. The larger outer circle represents the foreign affairs topics that might have stimulated coverage. The smaller inner circle represents those that were covered. The messages from and about members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee that reached constituents represented only re p o rte d news, not necessarily all news. It was the smaller circle inside the larger circle. Reporters gave special attention to issues on which their members were playing leading roles. The concentric circles suggest another possible approach. The press could also take the initiative and point key out foreign policy issues on which the mem-

®David A. Wirth, "Climate Chaos," Foreign Policy 74 (Spring 1989): 4. 331

bers did not get involved, information the public needs to know as much as it needs to know about what issues the members are ac­ tively engaged. 8. An eye to the future Many Americans, including those in government as well as the public, were surprised when a revolution toppled the Shah of Iran in the late 1970s. Nothing in the news media coverage of that country had prepared them for that geopolitically very important unfolding of events. An examination of the home- state and district press coverage suggests that members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee were largely reacting to events rather than anticipating the future. While both members of Congress and the press expressed a sense of responsibility to inform the public on foreign affairs, that sense produced coverage largely centered on immediate events As this is written. May 1989, the world watches as millions of Chinese challenge their government to move toward democracy. Per­ haps this government too will be toppled. In view of these historic developments in the People's Republic, it is interesting, but dis­ maying, to review the coverage of China in the home-state and dis­ trict press in mid-1987. Not a single news item would help readers understand events in that populous, vast country, a country very im­ portant to the United States as a balancer to Soviet power in the Far East.

9. The quality of foreign affairs information The suggestion that members of Congress might have done more to help the public understand the complexities of international relations leads to an 332

important question not explored in this research: How much do mem­ bers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign

Affairs Committee know about the problems facing the United States and the world? How creative are they in proposing solutions to the problems? Simply sitting on the committees is no guarantee that mem­ bers are knowledgeable about foreign affairs. They may significantly deepen their understanding by serving on the committee, but most of the members come without broad, rigorous academic training in foreign affairs or vast experience. They are obviously interested in foreign affairs, however, or they would not ask to serve on these committees. Many of them become knowledgeable after serving, but Senator Moynihan, former ambassador to India and the United Nations, is clearly an exception to the rule that members of Congress do not arrive in Washington with impressive credentials in foreign affairs. Most of the others came from backgrounds in law, real estate, insurance, and other non-foreign affairs fields.

Hamid Mowlana is skeptical about the ability of members of Congress to understand the intricacies of late-20th century inter­ national relations. Mowlana has declared Simply sitting on the committee does not make someone an expert. This is a very complex world and it requires tremen­ dous insight to understand it. Unfortunately, these commit­ tees in Congress are only experimental graduate schools in international relations. Members come to Congress to educate 333

themselves on foreign affairs, so what we have now is on- the-job-training.® 10. A shared outlook on the world The reported foreign af­ fairs news provided readers in the home-state and district press represented reality as seen through the eyes of members of Congress and journalists. They seem to share the same basic view of the world. It is overwhelmingly an East-West world, one marked by So­ viet-American rivalry. The heavy coverage focused on military mat­ ters stems directly from this East-West orientation to the world. This shared outlook emphasizes geopolitics. None of the 18 mem­ bers examined for this study emerged in the news coverage back home as an advocate for the South, the developing world of Africa, Asia, and Latin America, among the 18 members. It was still a Cold War world. The range of viewpoints presented to readers by members of Congress is narrow compared to the robust debate that takes place in some European countries with their multi-party political sys­ tems. In Congress, the Democrat and Republican view on key foreign policy questions often are not that much different. Both parties want to expand American trade. They share the same goal. They may recommend different means to achieve that end. They do not, for ex­ ample, always agree on how to reduce the trade deficit with Japan. Immanuel Wallerstein, for example, has proposed a dramati­ cally different framework for analyzing international economics.

^interview with Hamid Mowlana, Director of the International Communications Program at The American University, Washington, D.O., May 3, 1989. 334

not one presented to readers in the press coverage of members of Congress. Wallerstein has described the workings of a capitalist world economy, one in which the strong, including the United States, dominate the weak, primarily those in the developing world. Through a series of unequal exchanges, Wallerstein contends, the strong countries, the core, siphon capital from the weak semi-periphery, and the even weaker periphery.As a result, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Whatever the merits of Wallerstein's analysis, it reminds us that the world can be viewed through many different lenses. It also reminds us how narrow is the range of perspectives on foreign affairs presented to readers through home-state and dis­ trict press coverage of members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. 11. The public role in foreign policy-making This research was based on the fundamental assumption that in a democratic country such as the United States, the mass public has an important role to play in fashioning foreign policy. It is not solely a matter for elites. As Stanley Hoffmann wrote in the quotation that opened this concluding chapter, a foreign policy will be effective only if the public supports it and this demands that they understand it. The evidence stemming from this study suggests, however, that home-state and district press coverage of members of the Sen­ ate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee makes at best only a modest contribution to the kind of citi-

lO|mmanuel Wallerstein, The Capitalist World-Economy (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1979). 335

zen understanding of the world that Hoffmann believes is so essen­ tial to an effective foreign policy. Appendix 1

Senator Brock Adams News Releases

Domestic Issues 1. “Adams Praises Senate Passage of Budget Resolution,” May 7, 1987 2. “Hazardous Materials Transportation Act," May 12, 1987 3. “Adams Appointed to Budget Reform Task Force," May 19, 1987 4. “Statement of Senator Brock Adams in Support of S-2” [campaign finance reform] 5. “Northwest Senators Unhappy with Interim Management Plan for Columbia Gorge,” June 8, 1987 6. “Adams Blasts Department of Energy Repository Plan," June 10, 1987

7. “Adams Joins Federal Government Service Task Force," June 15, 1987 8. “Senate Committee Approves $900 Million for AIDS Research and Education," June 18, 1987 9. “Evans, Adams Introduce Bill to Clean Up Nation’s Defense Waste," June 25, 1987 10. “Morrison, Evans, Adams Introduce Legislation Calling for Early Implementation of Yakima Irrigation Project," June 26, 1987

336 337

11. “Nuclear Waste Program Moratorium Supported by Senate Coali­ tion,” July 1, 1987 12. “Workers Should Know of Plant Closings,” July 9, 1987 13. “Washington State Congressmen Announce Lawsuit against DOE,” July 17, 1987 14. “Adams, Evans Cosponsor Welfare Measure,” July 21, 1987 15. “Senator Brock Adams’ Statement on BPA Rate Decision,” July 21, 1987

Intermestic Issues

1. “Seattle Goodwill Games Receive Early Commitment for Federal Funds,” May 15, 1987 2. “Statement on S. 490, 1987 Trade Bill,” June 24, 1987 3. “Floor Statement on Adams Amendment to S. 1420 on Interna­ tional Consortia,” June 26, 1987 4. “Adams Amendment to Study Improved Trade Ties with China,” July 9, 1987 5. “Export Trading Companies Aided by Adams Amendment,” July 17, 1987

Foreign Affairs Issues

1. "Statement of Senator Brock Adams, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on U.S. Policy in the Persian Gulf,” May 29, 1987 338

2. “Amendment to Trigger War Powers Act in Persian Gulf Adopted by Senate Committee,” June 30, 1987 3. “Adams Joins Lawsuit to Invoke War Powers Act in Persian Gulf," August 6, 1987 Appendix 2

Profiles of Coverage of individual Members

The following 18 profiles discuss the home-state and district press coverage for each of the members followed for this research. The material is based on a content analysis of the member's news coverage and news releases, and interviews with press secretaries, journalists, and others. The nine senators are discussed first and then the nine House members. The members and their news coverage are presented in rank order, according to the number of foreign af­ fairs news items that mentioned them in the home-state and dis­ trict press.

339 34 0

Senate

Senator Christopher Dodd

State; Connecticut Home: East Haddam Born: May 22, 1944 Occupation: Lawyer Party: Democrat Elected: 1980 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Western Hemisphere, and Peace Corps Affairs; East Asian and Pacific Affairs; and In­ ternational Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Environment Other Committees: Banking, Housing, and Ur­ ban Affairs; Budget; Rules and Admin­ istration; Labor and Human Resources

The bubbling cauldron of turmoil in Central America kept Con­ necticut Senator Christopher Dodd's name circulating in the national, home-state, and district press, Dodd was constantly initiating pro­ posals to promote peace in war-torn Nicaragua and to force reforms in Panama where General Antonio Noriega was being widely blamed for his country's role in international drug trafficking. On the one 341

hand, this lavish press attention was gratifying; Dodd had worked for years to establish himself as the leading congressional newsmaker on Central America. Yet on the other hand, this attention created some concern that the Hartford Courant and New London Day might be printing proportionally too many stories reporting on Dodd's role in fashioning U.S. foreign policy toward Central America. Table 30. Senator Dodd News Mentions

Papers Forelan Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 15 0 3 1 8 Hartford Courant 24 1 0 59 93 New London Day 9 1 1 4 24 Totals 48 1 1 76 135

The Washington Post carried numerous stories mentioning Dodd and Central America, but that was not the concern. The senator liked his reputation as the “ultimate spokesman” on that part of the world and was pleased that the Post turned to him for comment on Reagan administration policies. The P o st after all is an excellent vehicle to influence policymakers and opinion elites in the nation's capital. But back home, Dodd's staff wanted press coverage that balanced the Central America stories with others about domestic issues, espe­

cially those linked directly to Connecticut. This was his dilemma: To maintain his stature as the ultimate spokesman for a major foreign policy matter without seeming to overemphasize foreign affairs at the expense of issues directly relevant to the state. Staff sensitiv­ ity to the challenge was reflected in his reelection theme, according to press secretary Jason Isaacson. The Dodd campaign team, Isaac­ son said, made a concerted effort to stress the senator's ties to 342

Connecticut and downplay his extensive involvement in Central America. This concerted effort revolved around the theme, “Chris Dodd—Connecticut’s Senator.”^ The intense coverage stemmed from two factors, and the ab­ sence of either would have kept Dodd out of the news on Central America. First, the region was one of the world's real “hot spots” during the period of this research. The Sandinistas and Contras were involved in a heated civil war. Second, Dodd was recognized as the authoritative congressional source for news on Central America. In April 1983, President Reagan appeared before a joint session of Congress in a nationally televised address asking the public to sup­ port the Contras against the Soviet-backed Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Dodd was selected by the Democratic leadership to present his party's version of events in that country. That response thrust Dodd into the national limelight and he has remained there ever since. His right to the title of ultimate spokesman on Central America was so­ lidified by his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs.

For Dodd, ideal circumstances combined to maximize his press coverage on Central America. Not only was he an expert on a region in turmoil, but he was also a Democrat during the time of a Republi­ can president. The press, in its attempt to give both sides of the story, naturally wanted a Democratic point of view. Most likely.

^ Interview with Jason Isaacson, press secretary to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., July 24, 1987. 343

Dodd would have received less coverage if a Democrat had occupied the White House. The perception of Connecticut voters as more informed, better educated, and more attuned to foreign affairs than Americans in other parts of the country made Dodd willing to get more coverage back home than he otherwise might. But this foreign affairs cover­ age was by no means solely a function of Dodd's behavior. Both his home-state and district papers, but especially the Hartford Courant, were interested in foreign affairs. The C ourant operated a four-per­ son bureau, large for its circulation, with a rotating intern. John MacDonald, who specialized in foreign affairs, drew admiration from Isaacson. “MacDonald is a curious, bright guy,” Isaacson declared. “He just eats this stuff up.”2 The foreign affairs coverage came naturally. The press secre­ tary was not out trying to find reporters to discuss Dodd's latest remarks on Central America. The reporters found him. Dodd's admin­ istrative assistant, Edward Silverman, said, “If he burps on foreign relations, the press covers it.”3 Isaacson's assignment was to “sell” the press on domestic issues. This did not mean that Dodd stopped introducing legislation on Central America because he knew it would lead to more stories emphasizing his foreign affairs work. Nor did he refuse to talk with reporters who had questions about Central America. As MacDonald said, “Certainly when we seek to write about

^Interview with Jason Isaacson, July 24, 1987. ^Interview with Edward Silverman, administrative assistant to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C., May 6 ,1 9 6 8 . 344

them [Dodd and Congressman Sam Gejdenson] on foreign affairs, they show no hesitancy in discussing it with us."^ Yet Isaacson was not constantly calling the C ourant and New London Day, to pursue new angles. He wanted to make voters aware of the other side of Christo­ pher Dodd, the side working on domestic issues. Dodd's chairmanship of the Senate Subcommittee on Children, Family, Drugs, and Alcoholism stimulated some domestic coverage to balance the Central America stories, much to Isaacson’s delight. The C ourant headlined its story, “Dodd Panel Hears of Children's Problems from Parents' Drinking.''^ The New York Times carried an article on the same topic that left Isaacson almost euphoric knowing that many of Dodd's constituents live in the New York City suburbs and read the Times. “It made my day when they did the piece on Dodd and children. That was ideal from our point of view. It was a great story for us. That was exactly what I work for everyday.''^ In fact, Isaacson said his priorities for stories in Hartford and New London were children/family, consumer issues, and trade/jobs with foreign affairs far down the list. Silverman said it was a bit frustrating from his vantage point to see Dodd covered so sparingly back in Connecticut on important domestic issues that benefit con­ stituents. Silverman said Dodd spent as much time on children's is­ sues as on Central America, although no one would know it by read-

^Telephone interview with John MacDonald, reporter for theHartford Courant, Washington, D.C., October 26, 1987. ^David Lightman, “Dodd Panel Hears of Children's Problems from Parents' Drinking,” Hartford Courant, May 13, 1987, A14. ^Interview with Jason Isaacson, July 24, 1987. 345

ing the press. On his Senate Banking Committee assignment, Silver­ man added, Dodd was doing excellent work to help consumers, but with little notice from the press. Most press secretaries said they must work much harder to “sell” reporters on foreign affairs than domestic ones, but Dodd's problem, Silverman continued, is just the opposite.7 This anomaly stemmed directly from the fact that Dodd had achieved ultimate spokesmanship on a world “ hot spot." But be­ ing the authoritative news source on Central America did not mean Dodd was covered heavily back in Connecticut on other foreign af­ fairs stories. Important as it was. Central America was only one of many foreign affairs topics in the news between May 1 and August 31, 1987. Yet the overwhelming majority of the foreign affairs stories that mentioned Dodd in both theCourant and the New London Day focused on Central America. His foreign affairs coverage was lopsided, not well-rounded. In the Washington Post, Central America was the focus of 12 of the 15 foreign affairs stories that mentioned Dodd. He was one of the leaders in the debate on how best to force Noriega from his strongman's perch in Panama, “Senate Urges Ouster of Panama's Strongman.”8 The Post article, “Continued Freeze of Panama Aid Urged," outlined the efforts of eight senators including Dodd to per­ suade the Reagan administration to continue indefinitely the freeze on aid to Panama as a means to protest the military control of that

^Interview with Edward Silverman, May 6, 1987. Ssteve Gerstel, “Senate Urges Ouster of Panama's Strongman,”Washington Post. 346

government.9 He was covered on the latest developments In Nicaragua, “Reagan Unveils Initiative for Peace in Nicaragua.''^ ° And, “Senate Panel Opposes Selling F-5 Jets to Honduras," about a very close vote in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to disapprove the administration's proposed sale of 12 sophisticated jet aircraft to Honduras. The New London Day, like the Washington Post, presented Dodd as the ultimate spokesman on Central America. The paper printed a story featuring Dodd's resolution to block the sale of jet fighters to

Honduras, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane S a le ." i2 With Democrats voting with Dodd and Republicans against him, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee narrowly, 10-9, approved the resolu­ tion to reject the sale advocated by the Reagan administration. Dodd claimed that the sale would simply spark a round of arms buildups that only increased tensions in the region, especially if the Sandin­ istas are encouraged to seek Soviet jet fighters to offset the American support for Honduras. The district paper also carried a photo of Dodd in Panama with the note that the chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Western

^Don Oberdorfer, “Continued Freeze of Panama Aid Urged," Washington Post, July 3 1 , 1987, A20. l^DavId Hoffman and Helen Dewar, “Reagan Unveils Initiative for Peace in Nicaragua,” Washington Post, August 6, 1987, Al. 11 David B. Ottaway, “Senate Panel Opposes Selling F-5 Jets to Honduras,” Washington Post, June 3 ,1 9 8 7 , A14. i^DavId Skidmore, Associated Press, “Senate Panel Votes against Honduran Plane Sale,” New London Day, June 3 , 1987, D12. 347

Hemisphere Affairs was on a fact-finding visit related to the recent riots and violence in Panama/3 The C o ura nt ran a story, “State's Senators File Plan to End Rebel Aid,” outlining efforts by Senator Lowell Weicker and Dodd to end all aid to the rebels. "As each day passes, the folly of the Contra aid program becomes clearer and clearer," Dodd wrote in a letter about the amendment to President Reagan. “It should have been stopped long ago. It must be stopped this year."i4 Another story re­ ported that Dodd decided to bar Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams from appearing before his subcommittee to discuss turmoil in Panama because Abrams had lost his credibility with Congress when in earlier testimony he said he was “fairly certain” that no foreign governments were contributing to the Contras in

N i c a r a g u a .15 Later it was revealed that indeed this had happened in the Iran-Contra episode. There were other news items: “Dodd Joins Seven Other Senators in Seeking an End to Aid in Panama"i® and “Congress Reported Tepid on Plan for Nicaraguan Peace," noting that Dodd was among a handful of leaders who met with President Reagan and Secretary of State Schultz at the White House to discuss the peace plan.17

I^Associated Press, “Dodd in Panama," New London Day, June 22, 1987, A8. 14john F. Fitzgerald, “State's Senators File Plan to End Rebel Aid,” Hartford Courant, June 18, 1987, A4. 15David Lightman, “Dodd Bars Testimony by Abrams,” Hartford Courant, June 16, 1987, A4. IGjohn F. Fitzgerald, “Dodd Joins Seven Other Senators In Seeking an End to Aid to Panama,” Hartford Courant, July 31, 1987, A4. l7john A. MacDonald, “Congress Reported Tepid on Plan for Nicaraguan Peace,” Hartford Courant, August 7, 1987, A12. 348

The press coverage in all three papers showed Dodd as very actively involved; he was not just someone making statements. He was introducing key legislation, meeting with the president, trav­ eling to Panama, holding press conferences and chairing subcom­ mittee hearings. He was in the center of the action, clearly a player. 3 4 9

Senator Jesse Helms

State: North Carolina Home: Raleigh Born: October 18, 1921 Occupation: Journalist, Broadcasting Execu­ tiv e Party: Republican Elected: 1972 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: African Af­ fa irs Other Committees: Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry; Rules and Administration; Select on Ethics

Between May and August 1987, was North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms obsessed with foreign affairs, seeming at times to be running out of fingers to stick in foreign policy pies, spending all his time bashing the Soviets and the U.S. State Department? Or was this same man absorbed in trying to influence the selection of a prose­ cuting attorney and various judges back in North Carolina, and working on the development of the Smoky Mountains National Park? The answer is that either portrait of Helms could be true. It depends on what newspaper one read. In the Washington Post, a ma­ jor newspaper with an influential national audience. Helms appeared 350

deeply Involved In foreign affairs. Back in North Carolina, however, the Asheville Citizen presented Helms as a senator interested pri­ marily in finding the right people for judgeships and prosecuting attorney positions. For the Asheville paper. Helms was a source of news on very local matters, matters of salience to readers; he was not covered as a major foreign policy figure despite his important post as the Republican leader on the Senate Foreign Relations Com­ m ittee. Table 31. Senator Helms News Mentions

Papers Foreian Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 42 1 14 57 Charlotte Observer 17 3 32 52 Asheviiie Citizen 5 0 39 44 T otals 64 4 85 153

The P o s t mentioned Helms in 42 foreign affairs news items compared to only five in Asheville. The relative attention to foreign affairs is striking. The Washington Post printed more than eight foreign affairs news items mentioning Helms for each one carried by the Asheville Citizen. The P o st covered Helms on a broad array of foreign affairs topics— fighting in Nicaragua, turmoil in Panama, human rights abuses in Romania, and much more. In the Citizen, back in North Carolina, on the other hand, 12 news items mentioned Helms on legal system is­ sues, 12 on politics, and five on a very local problem involving the Smoky Mountains National Park located near Asheville. Thus, the

Smoky Mountains generated as much coverage for Helms in the Asheville Citizen as all his foreign affairs efforts combined. 351

The Charlotte Observer printed 17 foreign affairs stories on Helms, ranking him just behind Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd in the amount of foreign affairs coverage obtained in the home- state newspaper. While the O bserver coverage touched on several topics, the bulk of it centered on Mozambique. At least part of that coverage was very critical of the Senator. Helms strongly backed re­ sistance fighters opposing the Marxist government in Mozambique and claimed that the State Department was not doing enough to help them. The O b s e rv e r reprinted editorials from both the New York Times and Washington Post that questioned the Senator's approach to that country's problems. The tone was reflected in the headlines—

New York Times, “Pandering to Jesse Helms in Mozambique"i8 and

Washington Post, “Helms' Favorite Gang of Kidnappers.”19 The Times piece accused the Reagan administration of trying to appease Helms “who thirsts to embroil America in Mozambique's brush wars.” In Charlotte as well as Asheville, however, domestic news items accounted for more of Helms' coverage than foreign affairs. Legal system issues kept Helms in the news in Charlotte. For exam­ ple, the paper printed a story, “Helms Aide to Get Attorney Post,” reporting that Tom Ashcraft would replace Charles Brewer as U.S.

Attorney in the area .20 The O b s e rv e r carried several stories on Helms and politics, including Helms' efforts to install his candidate.

l®Reprlnt of New York Times editorial, "Pandering to Jesse Helms in Mozambique,” Charlotte Observer. July 16, 1987, A21. 19Reprint of Washington Post editorial, “Helms's Favorite Gang of Kidnappers,” Charlotte Observer, July 30, 1987, D3. 200avid Perlmutt, “Helms Aide to Get Attorney Post,” Charlotte Observer, July 29, 1987, B1. 352

Bible College Professor Barry McCarty, as the North Carolina Repub­ lican Chairman .21

The two North Carolina papers, the Charlotte Observer and to an even greater extent, the Asheville Citizen, searched for local an­ gles to news about Helms. For his part. Helms did not assiduously court press coverage. Barbara Lukens, who handled press inquiries for Helms but was not officially a press secretary, said of him,

“Press is not a priority. He is not press h a p p y .”22 Helms clearly ob­ tained coverage by making news. Helms did not rely on news releases and press conferences to convey his message. Helms was active and controversial. The press found him. Lukens said, “He is primarily a legislator and if that generates news, so be it.”23 Helms did not seek to avoid foreign affairs coverage back home, but he and his staff were wary of the treatment he would receive in some of the state's major newspapers, including the Charlotte Observer. For Bill Arthur, who wrote about Helms for the O bserver, the North Carolina senator is difficult to follow; Jesse is a strange case to cover; he almost never tips his hand; he goes to the Senate floor and may speak on any­ thing—Iran, Israel, Central America—and never tell you in advance he's going to do it.24

21 Tim Funk, “Hawke Elected GOP Chairman Unanimously, " Charlotte Observer, May 31, 1987, B1. 22|nterview with Barbara Lukens, press aide to Senator Jesse Heims, Washington, D.C., July 22, 1987. 23|nterview with Barbara Lukens, press aide to Senator Jesse Heims, Washington, D.C., November 5, 1987. 24Interview with Bill Arthur, reporter for the Charlotte Observer, Washington, D.C., October 28, 1987. 353

His remarks on the Soviet mobile missiles, cited in the opening chapter, apparently came as a surprise statement on the Senate floor.

Because he was so actively involved in important foreign af­ fairs issues. Helms attracted a great deal of attention from the Associated Press and other national wire services that supply news to thousands of newspapers and other news organizations. The O b ­ server, the C itizen, and other North Carolina papers subscribe to these wire services. In this way. Helms reached his constituents. Helms, in other words, replaced the North Carolina reporters as gatekeepers with the wire service reporters. Helms did this not by catering to the wire service reporters, but by making foreign affairs news. Helms, however, could not guarantee that editors back in North Carolina would use the Associated Press news stories once they were sent from Washington, D.C. Editors, in their roles as gatekeep­ ers, could decide not to publish news items. During the period of this study. Helms' wire service strategy at least partially succeeded, although in the case of the Observer, he probably got more wire ser­ vice coverage than usual because Bill Arthur was on leave for much of the four months.

Helms had a specific foreign affairs message he wanted to convey to Americans. He was embarked on a crusade against what he regarded as the evils of communism and the threats it poses to 354

American security. As Arthur noted: “Jesse is simple to understand; if it's communist, it's bad, and if it's anticommunist, it's g o o d .''2 s

25|ntervlew with Bill Arthur, October 2 8 , 1 9 8 7 . 355

Senator Richard Lugar

State: Indiana Home: Indianapolis Born: April 4, 1932 Occupation: Agricultural Industries Executive Party: Republican Elected: 1976 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs; East Asian and Pacific Affairs; and International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Environment Other Committees: Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Indiana Senator Richard G. Lugar was no longer chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during the period of this study, but the reputation he made in that capacity from 1985 to 1987 con­ tributed substantially to his press coverage between May 1 and Au­ gust 31, 1987. Numerous articles identified Lugar as the former committee chairman. The Indianapolis Star, for example, cited that role in its article, “Lugar Amendment Seeks Embassy Security Deci­ sion.” Based on Lugar's concerns about security problems at the new U.S. embassy in Moscow, the story quoted him, “We cannot afford a 356

repeat of the regrettable situation at the embassy in Moscow,” said Lugar, former chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.26 Indicative of Lugar's foreign policy stature, a profile of the In­ diana senator in Politics in America: The 100th Congress, said, “At the close of the 99th Congress, Lugar was the dominant congres­

sional voice on foreign p o l ic y .”2 7

Table 32. Senator Lugar News Mentions

Papers Foreian intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 7 0 6 1 3 Indianapolis Star 13 7 32 52 Anderson Herald-Bull. 4 3 6 1 3 T otals 24 1 0 44 78

Lugar made news back in Indiana by initiating a Latin American Economic Leadership Conference held in Indianapolis in conjunction with the Pan American Games, a major international sports compe­ tition. The Indianapolis Star carried a front-page story, "Lugar Urges Summit on Latin Debt,” reporting on Lugar's speech to the confer­ ence. Lugar proposed that President Reagan convene a conference of creditor and debtor nations to deal with the serious debt crisis and fashion a multinational sharing of both losses and opportunities.28

This problem was serious because the region faced $360 billion in external debt. Other speakers at the conference included Antonio Ortiz Mena, President of the Inter-American Development Bank, and

26Doug McDaniel, “Lugar Amendment Seeks Embassy Security Decision,” Indianapolis Star, May 16, 1987, 44. 27Alan Ehrenhalt, Politics In America: The 100th Congress (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1987), 486. 28Erlc Schoch, “Lugar Urges Summit on Latin Debt,”Indianapolis Star, June 15, 1987, 1. 357

Sergio Molina, Professor of Economics at the University of Chile, who predicted a 30 percent population increase in Latin America within the next 13 years. Some of the conference coverage highlighted local connections to the international debt problem. The Indianapolis Star reported that banks were hesitant to make loans they see as uncollectible. Citicorp, the largest U.S. bank company, was among those reluctant to loan more. The paper added, “Other large and medium-size bank companies, including Merchants National Corp, followed suit.”29 Mer­

chants National is an Indianapolis bank. Lugar's foreign affairs coverage in the S tar touched on a num­ ber of key foreign policy issues. Lugar was not an ultimate spokesman on any single concern, as was Senator Christopher Dodd, whose coverage was heavily oriented toward Central America, his area of expertise. Lugar received attention for his trip to Europe, “New Agreement May Be Key to Missile Pact, Lugar Says,” reporting on his efforts to persuade Europeans that President Reagan would not rush hastily into a misguided arms control agreement with the Soviets as a result of the bad publicity from the Iran-Contra hear- ings.30 The Star carried other foreign policy stories on Lugar and the Philippines, the tense situation in the Persian Gulf, and the Soviet bugging of the American embassy in Moscow.

298111 Koenig, “Treasury Chief Says Debt Crisis Plan Still Alive,"Indianapolis Star, June 16, 1987, 1. 30Doug McDaniel, “New Agreement May Be Key to Missile Pact, Lugar Says," Indianapolis Star, July 2, 1987, 11. 358

Despite Lugar's stature in Washington, D.C., on foreign affairs, most of the coverage he received back in Indiana focused on domes­ tic issues, especially those with local angles. The Indianapolis Star mentioned him in several stories reporting on Indiana nominees hoping to fill two U.S. District Court vacancies and a U.S. Attorney position. This was more than all the foreign affairs coverage Lugar got in the S tar during this period. As ranking Republican on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Lugar also made news on farming issues. One article, “Farm Credit System Problems Date to 1970s,” described Lugar's proposal to re­ structure the system that lends farmers money for land, equipment, and other items through the federal land bank and production credit associations.31 Another story, “Lugar Cosponsors Proposal to Stiffen Pesticide Reviews,” outlined Lugar's efforts to mandate reregistra­ tion and Environmental Protection Agency review of almost 600 pesticides used before November 1984.32 Lugar's district press news coverage in the Anderson Herald- Bulietin focused on the Iraqi attack on the Stark and the Kuwaiti re­ flagging in the Persian Gulf. The paper, however, did not report on a number of important foreign affairs issues including Lugar's trip to Europe and his comments about nuclear arms control.

31 Ernest A. Wilkinson, column Indiana Farming, “Farm Credit System Problems Date to 1970s," Indianapolis Star, July 11, 1987, 22. 32washington bureau, “Lugar Cosponsors Proposal to Stiffen Pesticide Reviews," Indianapolis Star, July 22, 1987, 7. 359

Senator John Kerry

State: Massachusetts Hometown: Boston Born: December 22, 1943 Occupation: Lawyer Party: Democrat Year Elected: 1984 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications; East Asian and Pacific Affairs; Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs Other Committees: Commerce, Science and Transportation; Small Business

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry was in an ideal position to make news on foreign affairs during the period of this study. Using his chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Sub­ committee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communcia- tions, Kerry was the ultimate spokesman on international drug traf­ fickin g .

With parents and others deeply concerned about the dangers of drug abuse, this international trafficking had domestic, as well as international, dimensions. As Kerry's press secretary, Larry 360

Carpman, said during an interview for this study, “Kerry claims that it [international drug trafficking] is a combination of foreign policy and domestic issues, a fascinating combination.”33 According to Carpman, “We have attempted to show the people of Massachusetts that foreign affairs can be used to address domestic concerns.”34 Reducing international drug trafficking reduces the supply in the United States and helps alleviate the drug problems in American high schools. The subject was politically sensitive as it became an inte­ gral part of the Sandinista/Contra struggles in Nicaragua. Table 33. Senator Kerry News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 6 0 5 1 1 Boston Globe 15 4 29 48 New Bedford S-T 1 0 1 2 13 Totals 22 4 46 72

This was a national story. The Washington Post carried an ar­ ticle, “Two Hill Panels Probing Alleged Links between Contras and Drug Trafficking,” that used an accompanying photograph of Kerry to highlight his central role in the probe. His subcommittee was gener­ ating news with its investigation emphasizing what Kerry said was “the power of the narco-dollar” to affect governments and poli­ cies.35

33|nterview with Larry Carpman, press secretary to Senator John Kerry, Washington, D.C., November 23, 1987. 34|ntervlew with Larry Carpman, November 23, 1987. 35Davld 8. Hllzenrath, “Two Hill Panels Probing Alleged Links between Contras and Drug Trafficking,” Washington Post, August 8, 1987, A-16. 361

This was also big news for his home-state paper, the B oston Globe. One story, “Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas," reported on secret testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee by a one-time accountant for the Colombian drug cartel. The paper quoted Kerry, “I've been hearing testimony over the past

two days that makes my head s p i n . ”3 6 And another story, “Drug Smuggler Says Contras Traded Cocaine for Arms; Admits Bribing Of­ ficial.” The article quoted Jorge Morales, a convicted drug smuggler who testified before Kerry's subcommittee that he had supplied Contra rebels with weapons and paid off law enforcement offi­ cia ls.37

The G lobe also carried several stories on Kerry's strong, per­ sistent criticism of the Reagan administration's Persian Gulf poli­ cies. Kerry was clearly displeased with Capitol Hill testimony by defenders of Reagan administration Gulf policy: They talk in tough terms, but they don't get specific. I've asked, “How far are you willing to go? Are you willing to go to war? Their answer is, “We don't want to go to war, we want to defend ourselves.” I ask, “What does that mean? What do you do? And what do you do if they re­ spond?” They don't get into the escalatory possibili­ tie s .38

36stephen Kurkjian, “Drug Trafficking Testimony Leads to Subpoenas,” Boston Globe, June 27, 1987, 3. 37yvonne Brooks, “Drug Smuggler Says Contras Traded Cocaine for Arms; Admits Bribing Official," Boston Globe, July 16, 1987, 13. 38pred Kaplan, “Congress Not Expected to Challenge Reagan over Gulf,”Boston Globe, June 21, 1987, 21. 362

But although he received substantial attention in his home- state paper, the Boston Globe, on foreign affairs, that information did not ever reach readers of the smaller circulation district daily, the New Bedford Standard-Times. On June 25, 1987, the paper printed its only article during this period mentioning Kerry on a for­ eign affairs issue, “Three Warships Head to Persian Gulf: Democrats Try to Head Them Off." The story was written by an Associated Press reporter in Washington, not the New Bedford paper's staff. It included a brief comment from Kerry down in the story: “The clock is running clearly, and we haven't got much time, but there's still time if we can get together on something.”39 The New Bedford paper, with its emphasis on local news, did not cover Kerry on the big foreign affairs news story, international drug trafficking, despite the attention it was receiving around the country. New Bedford readers were much more likely to find Kerry covered on issues of salience, those that related to the prosperity of the area, especially fishing issues. Thus, the paper headlined a story, “Fisheries Official: Oil Drilling Not Worth the Risk.” It reported that Senator Kerry, at a hearing before a subcommittee of the Senate

Commerce Committee, had cited New Bedford as the nation's richest fishing port and urged opposition to Reagan administration plans for oil and gas development off the Georges B a n k .^ o

39Associated Press, “Three Warships Head to Persian Gulf; Democrats Try to Head Them Off,” New Bedford Standard-Times, June 25,1987, 34. ^^Mark Gruenberg, Ottaway News Service, “Fisheries Official: Oil Drilling Not Worth the Risk,” New Bedford Standard-Times, May 1, 1987, 1. 363

The Standard-Times followed its news story just two days later with an editorial, “Fisheries Find Some Allies in Offshore Oil Drilling Fight," that lavishly praised Kerry: A gold star goes this week to U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D- Mass., who actually got an Interior Department official, albeit one whose main interest is fisheries, not oil, to admit that oil and gas exploration on Georges Bank prob­ ably isn't worth the threat that an oil spill would pose to the fishery.41

The Kerry coverage in Massachusetts is evidence that a mem­ ber may be covered differently by different newspapers in his home state. Obviously, the Boston Globe perceived its role differently from the New Bedford Standard-Times. The G lobe was attentive to Kerry's work on foreign affairs; the Standard-Times was not. Boston Globe reporter John Robinson said he believes his newspaper writes for a sophisticated audience, one attentive to foreign affairs. Robin­ son mentioned several factors contributing to this audience sophis­ tication: the many outstanding universities in the state; a broadly immigrant population; a regional sensitivity to energy prices; and a heavy dependence on expods 42

According to Robinson, the Globe pursued a “two-track philos­ ophy” in its news coverage out of Washington.43 part is geared to na-

41 Editorial, “Fisheries Find Some Allies in Offshore Oil Drilling Fight,” N ew Bedford Standard-Times, May 3, 1987, 14. 42|nterview with John Robinson, reporter for theBoston Globe, Washington, D.C., November 23, 1987. 43|nterview with John Robinson, November 23, 1987. 364

tional affairs and part to members and issues specifically related to the coverage area. The G lobe is less nationally oriented than the New York Times or Los Angeles Times, but more so than most of the other newspapers in this research. From his perspective, Carpman said it seems the G lob e is about 50 percent interested in Kerry's role in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and about 50 percent in the issues before the committee.44 Certainly Kerry did not try to avoid coverage on foreign affairs issues. Carpman observed, "We don't shun it, but we want balance

[with domestic issues]."4s But being an active participant, even an ultimate spokesman, for important foreign affairs issues may not be enough to bring a message from a Senator to his audience if the newspaper staff, as at the New Bedford Standard-Times, act as gatekeepers and decide not to let foreign affairs information through the news channel.

44|ntervlew with Larry Carpman, November 2 3 , 1 9 8 7 . 45|nterview with Larry Carpman, November 2 3 , 1 9 8 7 . 365

Senator Nancy Kassebaum

State: Kansas Home: Burdick Born: July 29, 1932 Occupation: Broadcasting Executive Party: Republican Year Elected: 1978 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: African Affairs; Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs Other Committees: Budget; Commerce, Science, and Transportation; Select on Ethics

Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum was not a leader in any of the major foreign policy debates on Capitol Hill during this period. And she did not make much effort to generate press attention on foreign affairs back home. The press attention she received stemmed from press initiative, not her own. Reporters who covered her stress Kassebaum's desire to remain in the shadows rather than the lime­ light. In her lengthy profile of Kassebaum, Angela Herrin, reporter for the Wichita Eagle-Beacon, wrote: As Kassebaum nears the middle of her second term in the

Senate—the term she vowed would be her last when she 366

was first elected in 1978—she's become accustomed, if not reconciled, to the idea that her style of making pol­ icy is not geared to making headlines. Kassebaum's dislike for debates or votes cast strictly in terms of party loyalty or ideology has helped keep her political profile blurred—and out of the media spotlight.46

Table 34. Senator Kassebaum News Mentions

Papers Foreian Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 3 0 10 13 Wichita Eagle Beacon 9 0 29 38 Kansas City Times 6 0 1 3 1 9 Totals 1 8 0 52 70

Yet this does not mean that Kassebaum avoided foreign policy coverage back home, according to Herrin and Kansas City Times re­ porter Stephen Fehr. Fehr observed. It's not that she doesn't want publicity on foreign af­ fairs; it's just that Nancy Kassebaum doesn't want to grandstand; she is low-key. She doesn't need the atten­ tion, the publicity. She is already the most popular

politician in the state, more popular than Bob D o l e .4 7

Herrin said Kassebaum worked behind the scenes trying to achieve negotiated compromises, but this was difficult to write about pre-

46Angela Herrin, “A Senator out of the Limelight,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon, July 5, 1987, Cl. 47Telephone interview with Stephen Fehr, reporter for theKansas City Times, Washington, D.C., January 5, 1988. 367

cisely because it was behind the scenes and not in the open. "She is almost never at the barricades on an issue,” Herrin added.48 Her home-state and district press mentioned Kassebaum in numerous stories about the death of the state's former Republican senator and governor, Frank Carlson—for example, in the Eagle-Bea-

con, "Frank Carlson Is D e a d , ”4 9 and the 100th birthday party cele­ bration for her father, Alf Landon, the 1936 Republican presidential nom inee— Kansas City Times, "Reagan Is Planning to Pay Visit to

Landon.”50 Yet there was no theme to the domestic affairs coverage of Kassebaum back home, only an occasional story on airline safety and other topics. Her news releases during the period of this research focused exclusively on domestic issues, especially airline safety and effi­ ciency, and, of course, farming. One news release, for example, de­ scribed her bill to require airlines to provide accurate and reliable scheduling information to passengers.si In another, Kassebaum urged

fellow senators on the Agriculture Committee to approve her legis­ lation to encourage production of low cost generic pesticides.52 As ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee's Subcommittee on Africa, Kassebaum might have gotten some atten­ tion on the turmoil in Mozambique. Yet she did not. Her invisibility on

48|nterview with Angela Herrin, reporter for theWictiita Eagle-Beacon. Washington, D.C., January 4, 1988. 49ai Polczinski, “Frank Carlson Is Dead,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon, May 31, 1987, A1. SOJohn Petterson, “Reagan Is Planning to Visit Landon,” Kansas City Times, August 1, 1987, 06. 51 Senator Nancy Kassebaum, news release on airline scheduling. May 27, 1987. 52Senator Nancy Kassebaum, news release on pesticides, July 30,1987. 368

Africa in the Washington Post as well as the Wichita Eagle-Beacon and Kansas City Times stood in vivid contrast to the extensive cov­ erage that fellow Republican Jesse Helms generated on the topic in the P ost and the Charlotte Observer, his home-state paper. Kasse­ baum received peripheral mention on the subject in the Kansas City Tim es article, “Dole Stance on Mozambique Raises Ire of Kansas Group.” The piece focused on church leaders who believed that the rebels were thwarting the distribution of food to starving people in Mozambique. Kansas wheat farmers were donating grain through these church leaders to ease the suffering in that African country. The paper approached Kassebaum for a comment and she said food distribution should be a matter for the Mozambique government, the antigovernment rebels, and international relief agencies. “It's a mistake for us to get involved politically. We're not involved in the delivery of food. Let [the relief agencies] handle it.”53 Kassebaum had not sought the headlines, but when asked for comment, she cer­ tainly had not avoided coverage. But the initiative had to come from the paper. When she was mentioned back home on foreign affairs, Kasse­ baum's name often appeared far down in the story, as in the Kansas City Times article based on a speech she made not in Kansas, but in Des Moines, site of the Midwest Republican Leadership Conference. The paper reported: “A potential candidate for the vice presidency, Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum, also delivered remarks on foreign

53stephen C. Fehr, “Dole Stance on Mozambique Raises Ire of Kansas Group," Kansas City Times, July 20, 1987, A1. 369

policy to capacity crowds, saying the United States placed itself in the Gulf situation 'through the back d o o r ." '5 4 It was more press initiative that linked Kassebaum to foreign affairs in reaction stories in which Kansas and Missouri legislators were asked to comment on the big news. The Eagle-Beacon surveyed members on the latest developments in Central America—“Kansas

Delegation Supports Peace Plan for Nicaragua,"5s and the Times did the same thing when it surveyed members on the Iran-Contra hear­ ings—“Lawmakers Following Hearings Casually.”56 Initiative by people in her district also generated foreign af­ fairs coverage. The Kansas City Times headlined its story, “Contra Aid Foes Again Focus on Kassebaum," and reported that groups had launched a lobbying campaign to oppose aiding the Nicaraguan Con­ tras, a campaign focused on six senators, including Kassebaum, re­ garded as swing votes. Kit Miller, Media Director of Neighbor to Neighbor Action Fund, a San Francisco-based organization, told the paper: “What we want to do is show her [Kassebaum] that there is no support for Contra aid in K a n s a s . The Eagle-Beacon printed three stories describing pressure to persuade Kassebaum to end Contra aid.

54Rich Hood, “Bush, Dole in Iowa Limelight,’’ Kansas City Star, May 31, 1987, A1. 55Angela Herrin, “Kansas Delegation Supports Peace Plan for Nicaragua,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon, August 7, 1987, A6. 56james Worsham, “Lawmakers Following Hearings Casually,” Kansas City Times. June 3, 1987, A12. 57stephen 0. Fehr, “Contra Aid Foes Again Focus on Kassebaum,”Kansas City Times, August 12, 1987, A8. 370

The coverage clearly demonstrated that members can some­ times receive foreign affairs attention back home despite no effort on their own part, especially if people in the state are actively in­ volved in a foreign affairs issue as was the case with the Kansas church leaders seeking aid for starving people in Mozambique and people trying to generate support to persuade Kansans to contact Kassebaum to oppose Contra aid. 371

Senator Daniel P. Moynihan

State: New York Home: Pindars Corners Born: March 16, 1927 Occupation: Professor, Writer Party: Democrat Elected: 1976 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: African Affairs; Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs; Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Communications Other Committees: Finance; Environment and Public Works; Rules and Administration; Joint Library; Joint Taxation

The New York Times is not just a million-plus circulation newspaper published in New York State; it is also a national newspa­ per. In fact, it is an international newspaper read carefully in em­ bassies around the world. As Moynihan's press secretary, Brian Con­ nolly observed, much of the New York Times readership buys the pa­ per for its foreign affairs news, not despite it.ss

58|nterview with Brian Connolly, press secretary to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Washington, D.C., March 8 , 1 9 8 8 . 372

Yet even Moynihan was covered primarily on domestic news, much of it tied to very local New York themes. He received extensive coverage, for example, on his efforts to keep an Indian museum in New York rather than let it be moved to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. This facility, the Museum of the American Indian, and the political tug-of-war over where it would be located ac­ counted for more news coverage than Moynihan received on all for­ eign affairs stories com bined. The Times praised Moynihan's deter­ mined efforts to "save" the museum. As one editorial, “Romancing the Indian Museum," observed: Especially as New York watches one business after an­ other leave the city, it's surely time for the interested parties to support Senator Moynihan's Customs House Bill. Otherwise, New Yorkers may soon discover that they must travel to Washington to see one of the city's cul­

tural treasures.5 9

Table 35. Senator Moynihan News Mentions

Paoers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 8 3 32 43 New York Times 9 3 50 62 Glens Falls P o st-S ta r 1 0 7 8 T otals 18 6 89 113

Moynihan also made news as the congressional ultimate spokesman on welfare reform with the national media reporting in

59Edilorial, “Romancing the Indian Museum,” N ew York Times, May 13, 1987, A26. 373

some detail on his sweeping legislation. Moynihan, drawing on his position as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy, introduced the welfare reform legislation to require that child support payments be deducted from parental paychecks and that most recipients participate in education, training, or work programs. The Times covered the story extensively. One article, “Sweeping Welfare Revision Plan Makes Parents More Responsible,” quoted Moynihan, “Simply put, this bill turns the present family welfare system on its head.”6o in all, the T im e s mentioned Moynihan in more news items on welfare during a four- month period than on all foreign affairs news items com bined. The Times also showed a great deal of interest in Moynihan's reelection plans. Much of that coverage looked at the possibility that Rudolph Giuliani, U.S. Attorney in Manhattan, might challenge the in­ cumbent Democrat. Giuliani had established a solid reputation stemming from his investigation of government corruption in New York City. He was expected to be a formidable challenger should he decide to seek the Republican senatorial nomination. But Moynihan did make some foreign affairs news, especially in connection with tensions in the Persian Gulf. The former Harvard professor touched off a firestorm of controversy, reported in the Times, when he said that three days after the Iraqi attack on the U.S. frigate S tark, the Senate was refusing to authorize funds for the Navy, although more than 30 U.S. crewmen had been killed. According

60Robert Pear, “Sweeping Welfare Revision Plan Makes Parents More Responsible,” New York Times, July 19, 1987, A1. 374

to the Tim es, “Republicans took the remark as an attack on their patriotism and the air rang with calls for the Democratic side to apologize.”61 Moynihan analyzed the stakes in that pivotal area of the world in an Op-ed piece printed in theNew York Times. Moynihan argued that the secret sale of arms to Iran had threatened the world bal­ ance of power. He wrote; In short, Soviet warships, at Arab invitation, are now on station in the Persian Gulf. If they stay, the West risks losing control of two-thirds of the world's oil reserves. The great geopolitical prize of the 20th century is now in their grasp. We did that.62

That was the unfortunate situation, Moynihan claimed, because Kuwait had turned to the Soviets to protect their tankers in the Per­ sian Gulf. Moynihan distributed three news releases on the Persian Gulf during this period, demonstrating his strong interest, espe­ cially his concerns about Soviet gains in the region. Only two senators, Jesse Helms and Christopher Dodd, received more foreign affairs mentions than Moynihan in the Washington Post. As in the New York Times, most of the Post coverage of Moynihan on foreign affairs focused on the Persian Gulf. The Post, for example, in a news item, “For the Record,” printed Moynihan's remarks made in

61 Linda Greenhouse, “The New, Improved (?) Filibuster in Action,”New York Times, May 21, 1987, E29. 62Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Duplicity in the Persian Gulf,” New York Times, Op-ed article, June 7, 1987, E29. 375

the Senate about the long-term dangers to U.S. security interests in

the G u lf .6 3

Moynihan's substantial coverage in the New York Times, his home-state newspaper and one of the world's premier dailies, and in the Washington Post stands in marked contrast to his sparse cover­ age in the Glens Falls Post-Star, his district paper. Moynihan had regular contact with Tim es reporters, but virtually never with the P o st-S ta r staff. A small circulation newspaper with no reporters in Washington, D.C., and little access to Moynihan, the Post-Star relied almost exclusively on the wire services for its coverage of the state's senior senator. Over four months, the P o st-S ta r carried just one news item that mentioned Moynihan on foreign affairs. The paper ran some wire service copy on welfare reform and on his reelection campaign. Ap­ parently only one story during this period resulted from a direct contact with Moynihan's office and that on a very local matter, not foreign affairs. A local staff writer prepared the article that de­ scribed efforts to obtain $2 million in federal money to help the Town of Moreau in western New York develop an alternate water supply.

The story quoted a Moynihan aide expressing concern that the community might not receive the federal money because of the cost. “It could become a bottomless pit,” the aide said. “It sounds like a

63Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “For the Record," Washington Post, June 2 , 1 9 8 7 , A18. 376

great idea, but when you get down into it, it's difficult to determine

what ‘contaminated water’ m e a n s . ”6 4 Moynihan wanted foreign affairs coverage back home. His press secretary and Linda Greenhouse, who covered Moynihan for the New York Times, agreed that he did not try to avoid foreign affairs at­ tention out of fear of being penalized by the voters. Connolly stressed the need for a mix of stories—“balanced coverage is best.

You can’t have all the stories on foreign policy or domestic p o l ic y .”6 5 Moynihan believes strongly in the public's right to know, Connolly said. “He’ll say, ‘We need to do something on this. It's something the people ought to know about.”’ This mix tends to come naturally ac­ cording to Connolly. Senator Moynihan, like the other members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee, operates simultaneously on three or four fronts, some of them in the area of foreign affairs and others on domestic issues. It is never exclusively domestic or foreign affairs. It is the Persian Gulf one day, but it is also quality of housing in New York City the

next. And welfare reform the next. And reelection plans. And the fate of the Indian museum.

As a former ambassador to India and to the United Nations, Moynihan brought to the Senate a background in foreign affairs. As Greenhouse said, “It's part of his public persona.”®® That background

64Michael Kilian, Solomon Seeks Federal Water Funding," Glens-Falls Post- Star, June 4, 1987, B2. ®5Interview with Brian Connolly, March 8, 1988. ®®Telephone interview with Linda Greenhouse, reporter for theNew York Times, September 1987. 377

helped establish his credentials as someone to listen to on foreign affairs, especially on issues relating to India and the United Nations. On the other hand, Moynihan was not the ultimate spokesman on any of the foreign affairs issues before Congress during this period. 378

Senator Alan Cranston

State: California Home: Los Angeles Born: June 19, 1914 Occupation: Journalist, Author, Real Estate Executive Party: Democrat Elected: 1968 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: East Asian and Pacific Affairs; Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs; and Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs Other Committees: Veterans Affairs; Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs; and Select on Intelligence

California Senator Alan Cranston eagerly sought foreign af­ fairs coverage back home. With more than a million circulation, the Los Angeles Times is a major national as well as a home-state pa­ per. This quality created some problems for Cranston in his attempt to get foreign affairs coverage. The Los Angeles Times, according to Cranston's longtime press secretary Murray Flander, is very foreign affairs-oriented in a state where the people are foreign affairs-ori- 379

ented.67 But this interest in foreign affairs does not mean that Cranston will receive attention on foreign affairs issues simply by virtue of being from California. Like the New York Times, the L o s Angeles Times focuses on issues and if Cranston is involved in im­ portant issues, he can get coverage. Yet, the Los Angeles Times, Flander said, could send a reporter to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing at which Cranston spoke on important issues and perhaps even offered an amendment yet got no mention in the next day's news story.®® Cranston competed in the Los Angeles Times on a near-equal basis with senators from other states. This is not the case at smaller home-state dailies. The indianapolis Star, for exam­ ple, is member-oriented; for its reporters, it is usually enough that Senator Richard Lugar represents Indiana. Table 36. Senator Cranston News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 7 0 31 38 Los Angeles Times 8 5 34 47 Santa Monica Outlook 2 0 1 5 17 T otals 17 5 80 102

Yet, despite this problem, Cranston received some foreign af­ fairs coverage in the Los Angeles Times, the bulk of it related to the Middle East. One article identified the California senator as “one of Israel's strongest supporters in the upper chamber." The story dis­ cussed the amount of American aid being sent to Israel. Cranston de-

®7|nterview with Murray Flander, press secretary to Senator Alan Cranston, Washington, D.C., October 23, 1987. ®8|nterview with Murray Flander, October 23, 1987. 380

scribed that country as a stable democracy and reliable ally. He added, “It shares values Americans hold, natural ties exist between us, and it deserves our wholehearted support."®® Cranston was a leading figure as the Senate considered the resolution he cosponsored with Oregon Senator Robert Packwood to block the sale of Maverick Missiles to Saudi Arabia. The Los Angeles Times quoted Cranston as saying that he and Packwood had lined up the necessary votes to win approval of the resolution to block the deal and then override a presidential veto. “The administration hasn't made very many wise decisions lately, but they made a good one today when they backed off from a bad idea," Cranston said when it was announced that the Reagan administration was dropping its plans for the antitank missile sale to Saudi Arabia.^® Cranston was back in the news on the Middle East as an out­ spoken critic of Reagan administration plans to reflag Kuwaiti ships in the Persian Gulf as protection from Iranian attacks. The L o s

Angeles Times reported that Cranston had accused the administra­ tion of protecting allies who refuse to help.7i Cranston's work on domestic issues was often highlighted in both his home-state paper, the Los Angeles Times, and his district newspaper, the Santa Monica Outlook. A Tim es editorial endorsed

®®Robert W. Gibson, “Israel: An Economic Ward of the U.S.,”Los Angeles Times, Part 1,1. 70paul Houston, “Saudi Arms Deal Is Off, Reagan Says," Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1987, Part 1, 1. 71 James Gerstenzang, “Escort of Kuwait Ships to Begin by Mid-July,” Los Angeles Times, July 1, 1987, Part1,1. 381

Cranston's California Desert Protection Act, which, among other things, would create a 1.5 million acre Mojave National P a r k .7 2 The Santa Monica paper covered Cranston almost exclusively on very local issues with the environment in the forefront of that cov­ erage. For example, the paper printed an editorial, “Cleaner Air, Fuel,” noting efforts to encourage automakers to increase the pro­ duction of methanol-fueled automobiles that decreased air pollution. Again, his efforts were the subject of praise in an editorial: We commend Sens. Pete Wilson, R-Calif., and Alan Cranston, D-Calif., for exhibiting the foresight to pro­ mote different fuels at a time when gasoline is plenti-

f u l . 7 3

The O utlook carried only two news items on Cranston and for­ eign affairs, a column by local staff writer Dan Walters, “Cranston's Mideast Speech Makes Haunting Return,” and Cranston's response. Walters quoted at length from a speech Cranston delivered in 1980 claiming that the United States needed to ensure that sea lanes re­ main open for a continued supply of oil. Walters wrote that Cranston was saying much different things about the Middle East and security of the oil supply in 1988. Walters concluded: "It's the same man who this week roasted President Ronald Reagan for doing precisely what he advocated doing seven and a half years ago under circumstances that have not c h a n g e d”74 . Cranston responded in a letter to the edi-

72Editorial, “Gift to the Future," Los Angeles Times, June 14, 1987, Part 5, 4. 73Editorial, “Cleaner Air, Fuel," Santa Monica Outlook, August 25, 1987, A6. 74oan Waiters, column, “Cranston's Mideast Speech Makes Haunting Return," Santa Monica Outlook, July 5, 1987, A12. 382

tor, claiming that indeed circumstances had changed dramatically and listed 11 reasons why he opposed the latest military adventure. Cranston wrote, “Walters thinks that by taking that stand I have ‘roasted’ President Reagan. I think I have been trying to keep our country from getting burnt."7s The Santa Monica paper's inattention to Cranston on foreign affairs stood in marked contrast not only to the Los Angeles Times, but also to the Washington Post The Post reported on his resolution introduced with Senator Packwood to stop the sale of 1,600 antitank missiles to the Saudis.7® There were other stories on his opposition to the Kuwaiti reflagging in the Persian Gulf. The Post also featured Cranston in a story out of Moscow based on a visit by several sena­ tors to the Soviet Union to discuss nuclear m i s s i l e s .77 The S a nta Monica Outiook, however, printed nothing about Cranston's comments on nuclear missiles made on the visit to the Soviet Union. Cranston's experience shows that a senator heavily involved in some of the most important decisions concerning the direction of U.S. foreign policy is not guaranteed coverage back home.

75Senator Alan Cranston, letter to the editor, "Cranston Finds Situation Changed In the Persian Gulf," Santa Monica Outlook, July 15, 1987, A12. 7®Davld B. Ottaway, “Reagan Shelves Plan to Sell Antitank Missiles to Saudis," Washington Post, August 22, 1987, A16. 77Qary Lee, “Soviets May Bend on Missiles, Cranston Says," Washington Post, August 22, 1987, A16. 383

Senator Brock Adams

State: Washington Home: Seattle Born: January 13, 1927 Occupation: Attorney Party: Democrat Elected: 1986 Foreign Affairs subcommittees: East Asian and Pacific Affairs; International Eco­ nomic Policy, Trade, Oceans, and Envi­ ronment; Terrorism, Narcotics, and In­ ternational Communications

Washington State Senator Brock Adams was mentioned in a large number of news items in the Seattle Times, his home-state newspaper. It is striking, however, that so little of this coverage focused on foreign affairs—just six stories compared to eight on intermestic issues and 72 on domestic issues. This lopsided cover­ age back home in the Seattle Times was paralleled by coverage of Adams in his district newspaper, the Vancouver Columbian which mentioned him in 21 domestic issues articles, but only one foreign affairs news item.

The domestic coverage stressed local angles to the news. It was very revealing that the Seattie Times mentioned Adams in 39 384

news items dealing with energy, especially the future of the highly controversial Hanford nuclear energy producing facility. This amount of coverage on a single member in a single newspaper on a single is­ sue is staggering. The 39 news items, about one every three days, was more than the total number of items on all subjects that men­ tioned Kansas Senator Nancy Kassebaum in the Wichita Eagle-Beacon. It was more than the total number of foreign affairs news items on foreign affairs that mentioned the nine senators in nine district newspapers. It was much more than the combined amount of cover­ age that 18 members received in 18 newspapers on nuclear arms control and much more than they got on population/hunger. Table 37. Senator Adams News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 2 1 5 8 Seattle Times 6 8 72 86 Vancouver Coiumbian 1 1 21 23 Totals 9 10 98 117

Typical of this extensive coverage was a Seattle Times news story, "Adams Welds Coalition to Block Nuclear Waste Plan.” The article reported on Adams's efforts to prevent the Department of En­ ergy from digging the nation's first nuclear waste disposal burial ground in the state at H a n f o r d .7 8

Constituents were thought to be vitally interested in Hanford because it was a salient matter, clearly related to their lives. The press was keenly interested. The home-state and district papers.

78Eric Pryne, “Adams Welds Coalition to Block Nuclear Waste Plan,"Seattle Times, July 1, 1987, F I. 385

however, were much less interested in Adams's work on an impor­ tant foreign policy matter during this four-month period, the appli­ cation of the War Powers Act to the tense situation in the Persian Gulf. Adams eagerly sought press coverage on his efforts. He wanted to become the ultimate spokesman on the War Powers Act, to be rec­ ognized as a key player. His efforts to generate news coverage met with only partial success. The high point of those efforts came when Adams placed an Op-ed piece in the Washington Post, "Invoke the War Powers Act.” Adams questioned the Reagan administration's de­ cision to reflag ships in that region and challenged the president's power to make policy without congressional approval. Adams de­ clared: While no one disputes that risks exist in our reflagging policy, the discussion of those risks has been limited by the administration's refusal to acknowledge a “risk of imminent hostilities”—the term of art which triggers the War Powers Act and requires congressional approval of continued deployment of American forces.79

Other than that important Op-ed article, the Washington Post gave Adams little attention on the Persian Gulf. The V a n c o u v e r C o iu m bia n reprinted the Op-ed that appeared in the P ost with the headline, "Reagan Hasn't Laid Foundation for Expedition into Gulf.”8®

79Senator Brock Adams, “Invoke the War Powers Act," Op-ed article, Washington Post, June 29, 1987, A13. 8®Senator Brock Adams, "Reagan Hasn't Laid the Foundation for Expedition into Gulf," Op-ed article, Vancouver Coiumbian, July 1, 1987, A9. 386

This was the paper's only foreign affairs mention of Adams in four months. Adams penetrated the Seattle Times on a few occasions on the Persian Gulf situation, but much less frequently than he would have liked. He did place another Op-ed article, “Refusing to Acknowledge War Risk in the Gulf.” Adams distributed only three foreign affairs news releases during the period, all on the Persian Gulf, including, “Amendment to Trigger War Powers Act in Persian Gulf Adopted by Senate Committee.The release told of Adams's proposal to invoke the War Powers Act automatically if the administration proceeded with plans to reflag Kuwaiti tankers. Adams also discussed the matter with Seattle Times editors during a visit that led to one of two editorials the paper wrote on his work on the War Powers Act. In one of those editorials, “Easing Gulf Tensions Should Have Priority,” the paper wrote: Adams rightly noted in a meeting with T im es editors

yesterday that the United States had to make some re­ sponse to the Soviet charter of Kuwaiti tankers and that this country's decades-long presence in the Gulf must be maintained.®2

In addition to placing the op-ed piece, distributing news re­ leases, and meeting with the editors, Adams and his staff also tried to persuade Seattle Times Washington reporter Eric Pryne to write

Senator Brock Adams, Op-ed article, “Refusing to Acknowledge War Risk In the Gulf," Seattle Times, June 24, 1987,All. ®2Senator Brock Adams, news release, “Amendment to Trigger War Powers Act In the Persian Gulf Adopted by Senate Committee,” June 30, 1987. 387

about the War Powers Act campaign being waged by the Democratic senator. They had little success. To Adams's staff, this was disap­ pointing because Adams was trying to be responsible and inform his constituents about one of the most important foreign affairs issues facing the country at the time. Yet, despite its significance, the Persian Gulf situation did not relate directly to the lives of Washington State constituents the way Hanford did. Barbara Smith, the senator's press secretary, said that Adams had sought, not avoided, foreign affairs coverage back in the state.®® Pryne said the Adams staff “is constantly beating me over the head" trying to get coverage in Seattle on the Persian Gulf.®4 Despite those efforts, the Times printed only one story dur­ ing this period by Pryne on Adams's extensive involvement in the War Powers Act debate. The two editorials, in fact, accounted for more than the Washington bureau's coverage on the subject. Pryne stressed that it was his role to cover Washington State angles to national news and let the wire services concentrate on foreign pol­ icy. Vancouver, too, reported on Hanford. One story, “Bill Would Pay for Cleanup of Hazardous Waste," reported on an Adams proposal to spend federal money to clean up radioactive and toxic wastes at the Hanford nuclear plant.®® Another article, typical of the Columbian's

®®lnterview with Barbara Smith, press secretary to Senator Brock Adams, Washington, D.C., December 4, 1987. ®4Telephone interview with Eric Pryne, reporter for theSeattle Times, Washington, D.C., November 30, 1987. ®®No byline, “Bill Would Pay for Cleanup of Hazardous Wastes," Vancouver Columbian, June 28, 1987, A2. 388

local news emphasis, concerned the senator's newly opened office in the community, “Sen. Brock Adams' Vancouver Office Opens."®® While Adams struggled to obtain foreign affairs coverage in his home-state and district newspapers, he was well covered on in- termestic issues, primarily trade. The Seattle Times Washington bureau wrote more stories on Adams and trade than on all the for­ eign affairs stories combined about him. The reason is obvious; Washington State is heavily dependent on trade; it is a salient issue. In one story, “Adams, Evans on Opposite Sides of Issue over Trade Protection," the Seattle Times noted that the state's major producers, aircraft, timber, and agriculture rely on trade. The state also has a busy port traffic. As the news item reminded readers: Puget Sound's ports handle billions of dollars worth of Asian-produced clothes, shoes, cars, VCRs, and stereos, the very imports some congressmen want to cut back to preserve jobs in rust and cotton belts and trim the na­ tion's staggering trade deficit.®7

This trade/jobs intermestic coverage of Adams also included an editorial sharply critical of the senator's position on the trade bill, “Adams Votes against State's Trade Interests.” On a per capita basis, the paper warned, Washington State workers would suffer worse than those in any other state if the bill became law. The edi­ torial pointed out:

®®Jlm StasiowskI, “Sen. Adams Opening Vancouver Office,"Vancouver Columbian, July 9, 1987, A3. ®7Eric Pryne, “Adams, Evans on Opposite Sides of Issue over Trade Protection,” Seattle Times, June 27, 1987, D8. 389

Our ports, aircraft and high-technology factories, work­ ing forests, orchards, and farms are heavily dependent on a world trading community that imposes a minimum of impediments to the free flow of products and services.®® Adams defended his vote on the trade legislation in a response to that editorial, “Here's Why I Voted for the Trade Bill.” The bill, according to Adams, would promote, not hinder, the state's role in international trade.®® The Seattle Times' gatekeepers may have de­ cided to cover Adams only sparingly on the War Powers Act, but they were eager to give thorough attention to trade and to the nuclear power plant.

®®Editoriai, “Adams Votes against State's Trade interests," Seattle Times, July 24, 1987, A8. ®®Senator Brock Adams, “Here's Why I Voted for the Trade Bill,"Seattle Times, August 6, 1987, A15. 3 9 0

Senator Dan Evans

State: Washington Home: Olympia Born: October 16, 1925 Occupation: College President, Engineer Party: Republican Elected: 1983 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: International Economic Policy, Trade, Oceans and Environment; East Asian and Pacific Affairs; and Western Hemisphere and Peace Corps Affairs Other Committees: Energy and Natural Resources; and Select on Indian Affairs

Washington State Senator Dan Evans received heavy coverage in his home-state newspaper, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, but very little of it mentioned foreign affairs. Three domestic topics dominated his coverage—controversy over the future of the Hanford nuclear facility, the nomination of Seattle attorney William Dwyer to be a federal judge, and Evans's own reelection plans. The same three topics provided the majority of his coverage in the B e lle vu e Journal-American, his district newspaper. 391

Yet, Joel Connelly, who covered Evans for the Post-Intelli­ gencer agreed with Evans's press secretary, Lee Keller, that the sen­ ator wanted press attention on foreign affairs. "Unless Senator Evans finds a way to bring peace to Central America, I can't get them to cover him on foreign affairs,” Keller said.®® Connelly also de­ scribed Evans as a senator eagerly interested in foreign affairs cov­ erage back in Washington State, a man with a great deal of intel­ lectual curiosity attuned to the details that other senators often prefer to ignore.®^ Keller was insistent that Evans wanted foreign affairs coverage back home. “Senator Evans loves the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,” Keller declared, “and is doing all he can to get foreign policy coverage."®^ Evans is not at all concerned, ac­ cording to Keller, about being penalized by voters upset that he is spending too much time on foreign affairs and not enough on domes­ tic issues that affect their everyday lives. Table 38. Senator Evans News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totais Washington Post 2 1 6 9 Seattle Post-lntellig. 3 7 79 89 Bellevue JnI.-Amer. 1 3 2 7 31 Totals 6 1 1 112 129

The major story for Evans back home, however, was the Han­ ford plant, a topic that combined constituents' concerns about jobs.

®®lntervlew with Lee Keller, press secretary to Senator Dan Evans, Washington, D.C., January 19, 1988. ®^ Telephone Interview with Joel Connelly, reporter for theSeattle Post- Intelllgencer, Washington, D.C., December 18, 1987. ®2|nten/lew with Lee Keller, January 19, 1988, 392

environmental quality, politics, and safety. Columnist John de Yonge summarized the conflicting pushes and pulls in a piece for the Post- Intelligencer: “The fears are that safety and political reasons will close the reactor forever and so wipe out 6,000 jobs in an already- depressed economy of 54,000 jobs.”®® Another Post-Intelligencer news item, “Hanford off Hook under Evans N-Plan,” reported on the senator's bill that would have ruled out Hanford as a possible site for the nation's permanent nuclear repository.®^ Given the overriding importance of the Hanford plant, his seat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee was an ideal place for Evans to watch out for his state's interests. For him, the Energy and Natural Re­ sources Committee linked events in Washington, D.C., with con­ stituents' everyday interests back in Washington State. The Journal-American, too, followed Hanford developments closely and in one news item discussed the reasons why the story merited so much attention. Steve Forrester, in his column, “Hanford Will Be Felt in the Senate Election,” first quoted Evans: It's surprising to me frankly that the issue which has gotten more ink or at least that I get the most clippings on...overwhelmingly on a consistent, month to month ba­ sis is the whole nuclear venture in the state— most of it aimed at Hanford.®®

®®John de Yonge, column, “Risks of Hanford's N Reactor Causing Anxiety," Seattle Post-Intelligencer,, fVlay 20, 1987, AID. ®4Larry Lange, "Hanford off Hook under Evans N-Plan," Seattle Post- Intelllgencer, June 2, 1987, D1. ®®Steve Forrester, “Hanford Will Be Felt In the Senate Election,"Bellevue Journal-American, June 29, 1987, A6. 393

Forrester wrote that he was astonished to find that Evans was surprised at the volume of Hanford coverage. "Hanford is hardly a contrived story,” Forrester wrote. “It has almost every kind of eco­ nomic and environmental impact imaginable on the Northwest.”®® Evans also received very heavy coverage on his efforts to make Dwyer a federal district judge. When it appeared that the Justice Department had refused to grant its approval of the nomination, the Post-Intelligencer, quoted Evans, “l"m tired of talking to the Justice Department and have no intention of continuing to do so. I'll take my case to...[White House Chief of Staff] Howard Baker.”®7 Evans was re­ warded with praise in a Post-Intelligencer editorial, “Go for Dwyer,” that noted his tireless efforts had overcome “stiff-necked opposition from conservative Republicans including Attorney General Ed Meese.”®® The Seattle Post-Intelligencer was deeply interested in Evans's reelection plans—was he or wasn't he going to seek another term? One story, “Democratic Poll Targets Sen. Evans,” reported that the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had hired a top polling firm to conduct a statewide survey to determine if Evans could be defeated.®®

®®Steve Forrester, “Hanford Will Be Felt in the Senate Election,"Bellevue Journal-American, June 29, 1987, A6. ®7joel Conneiiy, “Evans Fights to Save Dwyer Nomination," Seattle Post- Intelligencer, May 22, 1987, A1. ®®Editorial, “‘Go’ for Judge Dwyer,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, July 26, 1987, F2. ®®Joel Connelly, “Democratic Poll Targets Sen. Evans,"Seattle Post- Intelligencer, July 1, 1987, D ll. 394

While his home-state and district newspapers gave Evans lit­ tle attention on many, major foreign affairs matters, they did cover him on trade. The Post-Intelligencer, for example, carried a front­ page news story, "Toshiba to Be Penalized for Sales to Soviets Evans Told,” reporting on Evans's private meeting with Hajime Tamura, Japanese Minister of Trade and Industry.1®® Tamura, according to Evans, promised sanctions as well as criminal prosecutions for Toshiba officials responsible for the sale of vital technology that would make Soviet submarines more difficult to track. Evans had been one of only six senators to vote against the Toshiba ban the preceding week. The Post-Intelligencer endorsed that vote against the giant Japanese company in an editorial pointing out that Evans had ob­ tained assurances from Tamura that the culprits would be punished. The paper concluded that while Americans were understandably very angry with the Japanese, it made no sense to overreact with a ban on Toshiba goods that would damage long-term American interests. The observations were not surprising in a state so heavily dependent on foreign trade. The paper noted: Many U.S. companies depend on Toshiba components for their products. Another reason for congressional pause is the fact that some 4,000 American workers are employed

loojoel Connelly, “Toshiba to Be Penalized for Sale to Soviets, Evans Told,” Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, July 16, 1987, A1. 395

by the parent company, Toshiba Corporation, at 10 pro­ duction plants in the United States.10'* Trade made news in other stories because it involved impor­ tant intermestic concerns. Evans was acutely attuned to the signifi­ cance of the trade bill considered by Congress for the prosperity of his state. In one news item, “Adams and Evans at Odds on Senate Trade Bill," the Post-Intelligencer reported on Evans's concerns that the trade legislation would cause the Washington State economy to falter. “It is naturally dangerous to the State of Washington," Evans claimed. “We are the largest per capita import-export state in the country.'"'02 In the absence of a local link between foreign affairs and con­ stituent concerns, the Post-Intelligencer and Journal-American gave scant coverage to Evans to foreign affairs. Trade could be localized; other happenings in the world arena could not.

101 Editorial, “Toshiba Retaiiation," Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Juiy 20, 1987, A6. I02joei Conneiiy, “Adams and Evans at Odds on Senate Trade Bili," Seattle Post- lntelllgencer, Juiy 2, 1987, D2. 396

House

Congressman John Miller

State: Washington District: 1st; Northern Seattle and Suburbs Home: Seattle Born: May 23, 1938 Occupation: Lawyer Party: Republican Elected: 1984 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Human Rights and International Organization; International Economic Policy and Trade Other Committees: Merchant Marine and Fisheries

Congressman John Miller received so much negative home- state press coverage on the war in Nicaragua that his press secretary, Anna Perez, was concerned it might hurt his reelection chances. Elected for the first time in 1984, Miller was a very minor player on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Yet despite his low visibility on the committee and in the nation's capital. Miller was regularly in the news back home on foreign affairs. Miller did not want it that way. He tried to interest the press in other aspects of his work in Congress, but to his dismay, the Seattle Post-lntelli- 397

g e n c e r shined the foreign affairs spotlight on him. Miller was the prime example of a congressman who gets covered by making foreign affairs news back in the state or district rather than on Capitol Hill. Widely regarded as politically vulnerable, Miller won with only 51 percent of the vote in 1986. The press began emphasizing his in­ terests in Central America even earlier, according to Perez, who said Miller was the only member of the Washington State House del­ egation to cast a key vote in favor of the Reagan administration's request for Contra aid. “This made him stand out," she recalled.' The other four Washington State House Republicans voted against the aid, even though their Republican president wanted it. Until then, Perez said. Miller had been widely perceived as a moderate-liberal Republican, but unexpectedly, he had voted with the conservatives on a major, highly contentious foreign policy matter. “Some people were aghast," she a d d e d . ' what they did not fully appreciate, Perez said, was the strength of Miller's anticommunist convictions. Table 39. Congressman Miller News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 0 0 1 1 Seattle Post-lntellig. 14 6 19 39 Bellevue Jni-Amer. 3 2 8 1 3 Totals 17 8 28 53

From the amount of coverage he received on Central America, Perez said, a reader might think Miller was spending all his time in Congress working on Contra aid, when really it represented only 5-

' o®interview with Anna Perez, press secretary to Congressman John Miller, Washington, D.C., December 11, 1987. 'O^interview with Anna Perez, December 11, 1987. 398

10 percent of his work. Certainly, she was concerned by the impres­ sion left by the stories. “After weeks of seeing these stories, people start to wonder if he is doing anything else," she declared.'®® Frustrations surfaced. Miller was. deeply interested in foreign affairs; yet he felt cross-pressured because his values conflicted; too much attention to foreign affairs might bring defeat at the polls. “I don't think my work on the Foreign Affairs Committee is the key to my getting reelected," Miller said during an interview for this project. “It is potentially a more negative than positive factor."' ®® Stressing the importance of reelection as a first priority, super­ seding all others, Perez said, “You gotta be here to be a states­ man."'®7

Miller's political problems stemmed from the imbalanced cov­ erage. His activism on foreign affairs was not matched by a proven record of accomplishments bn domestic issues. He had violated the press secretaries' rule that the congressman first makes himself politically unassailable by tending to concerns in the district and then gets involved in foreign affairs. Much of the damaging coverage of Miller, a one-time radio and television commentator in Seattle, bluntly charged that he had not achieved much since being elected in 1984.

Steve Forrester, columnist for the Bellevue Journal-American, pointedly described Miller's predicament in his article, “Miller Re-

'®® Interview with Anna Perez, April 26, 1988. '®6|ntervlew with Congressman John Miller, Washington, D.C., April 26, 1988. '®7|nterview with Anna Perez, December 11, 1987. 399

coiling from Contra Backfire." Oregon Congressman Bob Smith faced similar problems, according to Forrester: But the larger reason that Nicaragua could be trouble­ some to both members is their generally nondescript performance as junior congressmen. Except for Miller's speeches and trips to Latin America and Smith's low- visibility work on agricultural matters, neither con­ gressman has distinguished himself. Among the Wash­ ington and Oregon state delegations. Miller and Smith run close to last of the pack as legislators, as experts or by any other measure. When a member has nothing else to advertise to the voters, an incendiary issue like aid to the Contras can be deadly.'®® Again, the same theme in another Bellevue Journal-American news story on Miller's political future, “Miller Stays Close to Home as Lindquist Studies Challenge," emphasizing that the Republican congressman was trying to increase his visibility in the district.

The paper quoted Miller's concerns that many constituents believed he was not doing enough for them, that he was ignoring problems that directly affected their lives.'®® His home-state paper also reported on Miller's efforts to minimize his attention to foreign affairs. Although Miller had won a seat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the paper told readers.

'®®Steve Forrester, “Miller Recoiling from Contra Backfire,"Bellevue Journal-American, May 11, 1987, A6. ' ®®Associated Press, “Miller Stays Close to Home as Lindquist Studies Challenge,” Bellevue Journal-American, June 22, 1987, A3. 400

in the future he would try to demonstrate for constituents how that assignment could benefit their everyday lives. The Seattle Times- Post-lntelligencer Sunday edition said of that committee role: But for the New Miller even that now has a local angle: he made a point of asking for a seat on the trade subcom­ mittee, important to export-oriented Puget Sound and has offered his services to local high-tech companies entangled in red tape over export licenses."® Miller, in other words, would try to convert his Foreign Affairs Committee seat into a place to promote intermestic concerns vital to his district, especially expanded international trading opportuni­ ties. That would reduce the political danger. During the period of this study. Miller made a concerted effort to be visible in the district on domestic issues. He attended the grand opening ceremonies for the Kirkland Senior Center, opened a new field office, and met with constituents at the Clyde Hill Town Hall. Miller appeared in a waterfront parade on Memorial Day to honor crewmen, including two from Washington State, killed when the U.S.S. Stark was attacked by Iraqi planes in the Persian Gulf. He conducted public forums on the proposed expansion of Medicare. His efforts to generate attention on health issues sometimes paid dividends. ThePost-Intelligencer carried an article, "Miller Calls Alzheimer's Insurance ‘Tough Issue,"' in an appearance at the

' ' ®Erlc Pryne, “Close Vote Has Brought Miller Closer to Home," Seattle Times- Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, June 21, 1987, D1. 401

Northwest Senior Center in Ballard.'" And Miller joined fellow Washington State Congressman Don Bonker for an appearance before the International Trade Group of the Seattle Chamber of Commerce to discuss the potential economic ramifications if Toshiba, the giant Japanese corporation, were penalized too severely by Congress for selling sophisticated technology to the Soviets."® His news re­ leases, too, during this period stressed domestic issues, not foreign affairs. He put out only one news release on foreign affairs. Yet despite Miller's assiduous efforts to shine the news spot­ light on domestic issues, factors largely outside Miller's control kept thrusting the Miller/Contra connection before readers' eyes. From Miller's perspective, the Post-Intelligencer, far from acting as a gatekeeper to prevent his messages from reaching the reading au­ dience, was letting too many foreign affairs messages through, mes­ sages initiated not so much by him as about him by others. This unwanted news coverage reminding voters of his involve­ ment in foreign affairs, especially Central American issues, became an extremely heavy burden after Benjamin Linder was killed in Nicaragua. Linder had been trained as an engineer at the University of Washington and had gone to Nicaragua to help build a hydroelec­ tric project. Foreign affairs was no longer an abstract story about unknown Contras fighting unknown Sandinistas in far-off Nicaragua. This young man had Washington State ties. The intense emotional

" 'S .L . Sanger, “Miller Calls Alzheimer's Insurance ‘Tough Issue,"'Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, August 14, 1987, E3. "^E velyn IrllanI, “U.S. High-Tech Firms Could Be Victims, Too,”Seattle Post- lntelllgencer, July 3, 1987, B6. 402

outpouring, reflected in the news coverage of Linder's death and Miller's support for the Contras, showed the importance of a local angle for attracting the home-state and district press. Miller had become the center of foreign affairs attention without trying to. The news stories touched off a new round of coverage in the form of letters to the editor, a few supporting Miller's position on Contra aid, but most angrily denouncing him. One reader, in his letter to the Bellevue Journal-American, “Reagan's Brothers,” wrote that Linder had been his friend and added: I am disgusted with people such as North, Casey, Owen, Abrams, Bush, and Rep. John Miller whom we expected to pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to their country, but who instead are pledging other peo­ ples' lives, other peoples' money and throwing our na­ tion's honor to the dogs of war."® The Post-Intelligencer naturally wanted to report John Miller's reactions to this angry criticism. Joel Connelly, the paper's Wash­ ington correspondent, explored the matter in his column, “A Letter From Washington,” in an article, “Linder Slaying Puts Contra-Sup- porter Miller on the Defensive.” Miller told Connelly, “I won't say the letters haven't made an impact because they have. When you're called a murderer—one letter described me as a fascist—it's hard."' ' 4 Later, in the same story, Connelly pointed out that Linder's death

"®Steve Clements, letter to the editor, "Reagan's ‘Brothers,’"Bellevue Journal-American, June 3, 1987, A8. " 4 jo e l Connelly, “Linder Slaying Puts Contra-Supporter Miller on the Defensive," Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 12, 1987, A4. 403

came just as Miller was desperately attempting to steer coverage to domestic issues. For the congressman, such angry emotions could not have arrived at a worse time. They come when Miller is in the midst of a campaign to identify with local concerns and break out of his reputed preoccupation with foreign af­ fa irs ."® And more stories. The Post-Intelligencer, in its article, “Miller Tells Peace Activists Americans Should Stay out of War- Torn Nicaragua,” reported that six Puget Sound residents had a held a “tense, closed-door meeting" with Miller and heard him say that Americans should stay out of Nicaragua."® The paper also reported that Miller refused to allow the press to attend on the grounds that to do so would inhibit the free flow of information. After the meet­ ing, however, reporter Joel Connelly got comments from the ac­ tivists and Miller, who had hoped to avoid coverage by closing the session to the news media. The Seattle Post-lntelllgencer printed another Miller/Contra news item after the congressman appeared before the paper's edi­ tors in Seattle. After pointing out that Miller favored continued United States economic assistance but not military aid during any cease-fire, the paper reported that Miller tried to turn attention to other issues. “Miller, who has been trying to get voters' minds off

" 5 |b id . "®Joel Connelly, “Miller Tells Peace Activists Americans Should Stay out of War-Torn Nicaragua," Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 28, 1987, AID. 404

Central America, said the war in Nicaragua is ‘not in the top tier’ of issues worrying his constituents in King and southern Sonomish counties.”" 7

Miller found himself in the middle of another foreign affairs controversy in Seattle when it was revealed that an ardent pro- Contra adviser working with his staff, George Weigel, had written a letter claiming that the community had developed “an unsavory rep­ utation" for shallowness and narrowness in its foreign policy de­ bate."® He had also accused the anti-Contra activists in Seattle of spreading disinformation about Central America. Weigel, who had headed the James Madison Foundation, a conservative pro-Contra or­ ganization, left his job with Miller, but not before Miller's name was again connected to the war in Central America, something the con­ gressman did not want. Miller's deep commitment to international human rights landed him in the middle of another controversy. This time, however, in contrast to the Contra coverage. Miller did not try to divert the news media's attention to domestic issues. Miller became a lightning rod for both criticism and praise during a panel discussion held as part of a Soviet-American exchange in Seattle. Vladimir Chibirev, an of­ ficial of the Soviet Trade Ministry, damned Miller's insistence that greater trade between the superpowers depended largely on an im­ proved human rights record in the Soviet Union. Chibirev claimed it

" 7 jo e l Connelly, “Miller Supports Peace Plan in Nicaragua,”Seattle Post- lntelllgencer, August 18, 1987, "®Shelby Scales, “Pro-Contra Adviser Weigel Leaves Rep. Miller's Staff," Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 14, 1987, 405

was “absurd” to try to link trade and human rights. The S e a ttle Post-lntelllgencer reported Chibirev's angry comments in an article, “Visiting Soviets Blast Miller”; “Such an approach is tantamount to interfering into the affairs of the Soviet Union, which is unaccept­ able to us.”"® Miller was primarily concerned about violations of religious liberty in the Soviet Union, especially the Kremlin's unwillingness to allow open emigration for Jews. The episode prompted more letters to the editor, again some supporting Miller and others denouncing him. One letter writer told Post-lntelllgencer readers, “I'm glad my congressman had the courage to speak out at the U.S.-Soviet Sister Cities Conference. In­ creasing trade is good, but we can't overlook human rights viola­ t i o n s . ” ' 20 A Miller detractor, on the other hand, accused him of try­ ing to divert attention from the U.S.-backed terror campaign being conducted in Nicaragua. He wrote: What sort of ethical guidance can we expect Soviet lead­ ers to derive from a man who has been [supporting a pol­ icy of] inflicting rape, torture, murder, and economic distress on the people of Nicaragua—countless thousands who have done not the slightest harm to anyone here?'®' Connelly, who monitored Miller closely for the Post-lntelll­ gencer, also claimed the congressman was using the human rights

"® P ete McConnell and Scott Maler, “Visiting Soviets Blast Miller,"Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 23, 1987, A1. '2®AI Burke, letter to the editor, “Contras' Human Rights Offences Just as Bad as Soviet Offences,"Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 9, 1987. ' 2 ' Ed Hammond, letter to the editor, “It's Easy to Overlook Serious Problems That Divide Countries," Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 28, 1987, A10. 406

violations as a device to force press attention away from his posi­ tion on Contra aid. "He's almost indecently overreaching on human rights to contradict the publicity on Nicaragua," Connelly de­ c la r e d .'22 Yet, Miller seemed genuinely dedicated to improving human rights standards around the world especially in the Soviet Union. His activism was more than just a political ploy. Miller was back in the news on the same subject just two days later when he called a news conference to discuss human rights vi­ olations in the Soviet Union. The story, “Miller Reaps Praise for

Stand on Soviet Rights," reflected a major local angle . ' 23 Soviet-

American Jews joined him for the meeting with the news media and thanked the Republican congressman for insisting that an improved human rights record in the Soviet Union should be a precondition for trade. One of those Soviet Jews, Vladimir Magarik, said the Soviet Union had falsely imprisoned his son Alexei on trumped-up drug charges. While Soviet officials criticized Miller for meddling in their country's internal affairs, this Post-Intelligencer story also noted that some of the Seattle-area organizers for the U.S.-Soviet Sister City Summit were displeased, too. Apparently, they believed the exchange, designed to build cultural bridges between the United States and Soviet Union, was not the proper forum for an attack on Soviet human rights policies. Miller obviously disagreed.

'22Telephone interview with Joel Conneiiy, reporter for theSeattle Post- lntelllgencer, Washington, D.C., December 18, 1987. '23susan Lindauer, "Miller Reaps Praise for Stand on Soviet Rights," Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, May 25, 1987, D1. 407

Miller made news on human rights again. The occasion was the gathering sponsored by the Seattle Peace and Freedom Coalition to

mark the 1 9 3 9 German-Soviet agreement under which much of East­ ern Europe came under Soviet domination. Despite the passage of time, some in Seattle still remember that agreement, often known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Among those who remembered were participants in the Seattle Estonian Society. Miller spoke at the memorial and his appearance was covered by the Post-Intelligencer

in a news story, “Mourning a 1 9 3 9 Pact's Victims.” Miller said Americans must keep the oppressed in mind during negotiations with the Soviets and press the Kremlin to grant freedoms to these areas or at least to the people there. “We must be very careful, very cau­ tious when we deal with the Soviets,” Miller said before the Memo­

rial. “It forces one to remember the capacity of evil in m e n . ” ' 24 The comments were very much in keeping with the values of a congressman who cherished his seat on the House Human Rights Sub­ committee and had made human rights his prime cause as a member of Congress. Miller, for example, said he was doing more to help Lithuanian Catholics. “Our goal,” Miller said, “is to increase aware­ ness in the United States that it's not just Jews in the Soviet Union who are denied freedoms. You can go to jail for organizing a Christ­ mas celebration in Lithuania. You cannot train for the priesthood.”' 25

'2 4 Paul Swortz, “Mourning a 1939 Pact's Victims,"Seattle Post-Intelligencer, August 24, 1987, D1. '25Joel Connelly, "State's GOP Congressmen Must Scramble to Make Themselves Felt,” Seattle Post-lntelllgencer, July 31, 1987, A6. 408

While the Post-Intelligencer covered him closely on foreign and intermestic affairs, the Bellevue Journal-American, his district newspaper, devoted little coverage to Miller in these areas. The pa­ per did phone his office and ask for comment on the Iran-Contra hearings and reported his observations in the article, “Reagan: Mess of Lies, Mistakes.” Miller said he had a good reaction to President Reagan's speech on the matter. “I think the president wants to put the Contra mess behind us,” Miller declared. “I think a lot of us would like to do that. We're tired of hearing about it. We want to

draw the appropriate message and move o n . ”' 26 Even the Journal-American, however, covered Miller more than the national paper, the Washington Post. Miller's foreign affairs in­ volvements made big news in Seattle, but in Washington, D.C., his controversies over Contra aid and Soviet human rights violations went totally unnoticed.

'2 6 Associated Press, “Reagan; Mess of Lies, Mistakes," Bellevue Journal- American, August 13, 1987, A1. 409

Congressman Sam Gejdenson

State: Connecticut Home: Bozrah District: 2d: eastern part of the state; New London is largest city Born: May 20, 1948 Occupation: Dairy Farmer Party: Democrat Elected: 1980 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Western Hemisphere Affairs; International Economic Policy and Trade Other Committees: House Administration; Interior and Insular Affairs; Select on Hunger

If former Washington State Senator Henry Jackson was rightly known as “the Senator from Boeing" for his work in Congress on be­ half of the giant aircraft corporation, then Connecticut Congressman Sam Gejdenson was “the Congressman from Electric Boat.” Gejden­ son received a substantial amount of foreign affairs coverage in his home-state and district press, but in terms of priorities, it was dwarfed by local concerns, including the well-being of Electric Boat, a company that depends heavily on federal contracts to build mis­ 410

sile-carrying submarines. As Gejdenson's press secretary Chip Part­ ner observed, "At home, foreign affairs is only fifth or sixth on the

priority list.”' 2 7

Table 40. Congressman Gejdenson News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totais Washington Post 0 0 6 6 Hartford Courant 9 11 39 59 New London Day 5 14 29 48 Totals 14 25 74 113

Because foreign affairs was a lesser priority, it was not surprising that Partner readily acknowledged that he did not work as hard to “sell” foreign affairs stories to the home-state and district press as he did to sell domestic news items. Much of that domestic coverage stemmed from Congressman Gejdenson's chairmanship of the House Subcommittee on General Oversight and Investigations in the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee. That position allowed Gejdenson to monitor the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an im­

portant, very salient concern, given the fact that Northeast Utilities operates three Millstone plants in Waterford and the Connecticut Yankee Plant in Haddam. Gejdenson fully understood that an important part of his job in Washington was to protect the lucrative Trident submarine con­ tracts. His home-state and district press was also keenly interested in any news out of Congress that could affect the company. As a re­ sult of Gejdenson's work and the papers' interest. Electric Boat ac-

'27|nterview with Chip Partner, press secretary to Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C., August 13, 1987. 411

counted for much of his coverage—nine news items in the New Lon­ don Day, his district paper, and four news items in the H a rtfo rd Courant, his home-state daily. The Trident submarines, a vital part of the American nuclear triad, were discussed in intermestic terms, as economic security for the district, not national security for the country against Soviet missiles. The enemy, it seemed from reading the coverage, was not the Soviet Union, but the rival shipyard in Newport News, Virginia, that someday might win the coveted submarine contract away from Electric Boat. The submarines, presented to readers as federal contracts and local jobs, kept Gejdenson regularly in the news. One news story re­ ported on Gejdenson's bill to prevent the kind of economic upheavals that could occur in southeastern Connecticut if U.S. Defense Depart­ ment contracts to Electric Boat were sharply curtailed or the base c lo s e d .128 The damage would be staggering in a district in which an estimated 19 percent of the jobs are tied to federal defense spend­ ing. A few weeks later, the New London Day printed an article, “EB Finally Awarded Trident Contract,” reporting that the company would receive $615 million for the 14th Trident submarine. But it also noted that this could be the last contract made without compe­ tition because the Navy had asked the Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company to bid on the next ship in the class. Yet, the

i28M arla Hileman, “Congress to Consider Diversification Pian,"New London Day, May 5, 1987, A1. 412

$615 million award seemed to reduce the chance that a rival com­ pany would take the jobs from Connecticut. Gejdenson said, “The more you get into a program, the less likely it is that another ship­

yard will tool up for the prog ram ."129

The Courant also played up Electric Boat news, again stressing the contract/jobs relationship as in the story, “Newport News to Decide on Trident Bidding.” The paper clearly reflected an intermes­ tic approach to the story in a key sentence: In a move that could have a major impact on employment in Connecticut and Rhode Island, a Virginia shipbuilder is expected to announce this week whether it will compete with Electric Boat for lucrative Navy contracts to build Trident submarines.13° As “the Congressman from Electric Boat,” Gejdenson welcomed the extensive coverage of his work to protect the contract, just as he welcomed opportunities to advocate a Navy more oriented toward submarines, rather than other kinds of ships not built in his district. Christopher Callahan, who covered Gejdenson for Associated Press, said of the congressman's outspoken endorsement of submarines, “Sam's attitude is, the more subs the better.”i3i In addition to Electric Boat, Gejdenson made news during the period this research was conducted in connection with his criti-

l29Maria Hileman, “EB Finally Awarded Trident Contract," New London Day, May 27, 1987, A1. l30Assoclated Press, “Newport News to Decide on Trident Bidding,"Hartford Courant, June 2, 1987, A1. 131 Interview with Christopher Callahan, reporter for Associated Press, Washington, D.C., September 1987. 413

cisms of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The New London Day headlined one article, "Gejdenson Blasts NRG for Failures,” and re­ ported the congressman's concerns that the NRC had failed to inves­ tigate accidents and drug-alcohol abuse at nuclear power plants and allowed nuclear utilities to overlook fire safety regulations.122

Eventually, Gejdenson was so angered by the shortcomings at NRC that he called for the removal of Commissioner Thomas Roberts. The story attracted not only home-state and district press atten­ tion, but also the eye of the Washington Post, which printed five stories on Gejdenson's efforts including one news item, "Reagan Urged to Oust Embattled NRC Member.” The story quoted Gejdenson, "The commissioner needs to go and he needs to go rapidly.”i33 As in so many other cases for House members, other commit­ tee assignments besides the Foreign Affairs Committee allowed him to focus intensively on matters of local interest, salient matters that constituents could easily relate to their own lives. Gejdenson's foreign affairs coverage in his home-state and district press centered on Central America, not surprisingly given his seat on the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee. Much of that cov­ erage focused on his resolution, the counterpart to Senator Dodd's resolution introduced in the Senate, to disallow the Reagan admin­ istration's proposed sale of sophisticated jet aircraft to Honduras. Gejdenson's fears that more jets would merely exacerbate existing

l32Laurence Lippsett, “Gejdenson Blasts NRC for Failures,"New London Day, June 12, 1987, A6. I33cass Peterson, “Reagan Urged to Oust Embattled NRC Member,"Washington Post, June 19, 1987, A6. 414

dangers were reflected In his comment printed in theH a rtfo rd C ourant article: There has long been a strong sentiment in Congress against ratcheting up the level of military hardware in Central America. Introducing supersonic fighters to the region at this time only increases the chances that mil­

itary tensions in Central America will exploded 34

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to block the sale, 10- 9, but Gejdenson was unable to persuade a majority on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the bill died on a 6-6 vote. Back home, however, Gejdenson's efforts were endorsed editorially, in­ cluding a New London Day editorial, “Lower the V o lu m e .35 Gejdenson was back in the news when it was revealed that a San Francisco man, paid by the Nicaraguan Contras, had misrepre­ sented himself to Congress as a Roman Catholic priest while solic­ iting support for the Contras. Gejdenson was upset by the revela­ tions and called for an investigation by the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Two years earlier, he pointed out, the man had appeared before the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee in full clerical garb. The Hartford Courant story, “Congress Misled, Gejdenson Says,"i 36 and the New London Day article, “Gejdenson Wants Probe of Man

I34[)avid Lightman, “Kenneiiy on Hand to Help a Student," Hartford Courant, May 17, 1987, A8. l35Editorial, “Lower the Volume,” New London Day, June 5, 1987. I36wire services, “Congress Misled, Gejdenson Says,” Hartford Courant, June 4, 1987, A13. 415

Posing as Pro Contra Priest,"137 presented Gejdenson's concerns in some detail. Gejdenson was involved in foreign affairs during the period of this research and he did not try to avoid coverage; yet as press sec­ retary Chip Partner said, neither did Gejdenson's staff work as hard to promote more foreign affairs attention in the press. The result was balanced coverage with careful attention to Electric Boat, nu­ clear power plants, and other domestic concerns.

l37Assoclated Press, “Gejdenson Wants Probe of Man Posing As Pro-Contra Priest,” New London Day, June 5, 1987, A16. 416

Congressman Don Bonker

State: Washington District: 3d; western and southwestern parts of the state, much of it along the coast; largest city is Olympia Born: March 7, 1937 Occupation: Auditor Party: Democrat Elected: 1974 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: International Economic Policy and Trade; Western Hemisphere Affairs Other Committees: Merchant Marine and Fisheries; Select on Aging

Washington State Congressman Don Bonker was emerging as a key, if not the ultimate, congressional spokesperson on international trade. Banker's newsworthiness was closely tied to his leadership position as chairman of the House Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade. This trade subcommittee assignment was helpful politically because his work could be directly related to the well-being of his constituents. Seattle Times news items regularly linked Bonker, trade, and Washington State jobs. Typical was the T im es story, telling readers, “Washington relies on trade for its 417

economic well-being, more than any other state, and Bonker is one of Congress' acknowledged trade experts.”i38

Table 41. Congressman Bonker News Mentions Papers Foreign intermestic Domestic Totais Washington Post 1 1 1 3 Seattle Times 8 9 25 42 Vancouver Columbian 5 6 25 36 T otals 14 16 51 81

Probably more than anyone else examined for this research, Bonker was able to use his foreign affairs assignment to help his constituents. The political value of his work on the trade subcom­ mittee stood in marked contrast to earlier years when Bonker headed the House subcommittee on human rights. As his press secretary, Mark Murray said. Four years as chairman of the human rights subcommit­ tee did not win him any brownie points back in the dis­ trict. For the past five years, he has headed the trade subcommittee and the reaction back home has been al­ most uniformly positive.139

The home state and district press are keenly interested because trade is a local issue needing local news coverage. His emphasis on trade meant that Bonker received a substan­ tial amount of intermestic news coverage in his home-state and district press. When Bonker voted against the controversial Gephardt

138Eric Pryne, “Who's Running for Senate—and How Fast,"Seattle Tlmes-Post- Intelllgencer, B-2. I39|nterview with Mark Murray, press secretaray to Congressman Don Bonker, Washington, D.G., November 5, 1987. 418

amendment to the omnibus trade bill (named for Richard Gephardt, D- Missouri), James D. Dwyer, Executive Director of the Port of Seattle, sent a letter to the editor, "Protectionism: Delegation Deserves Thanks for Stand in Trade Legislation.” Bonker’s important contri­ butions, Dwyer wrote, could help increase exports for trade-depen­ dent Washington State. This amendment, Dwyer added, “could sub­ stantially reduce trade through the Port of Seattle."i4o

Bonker was again attuned to the dangers posed to his state's economy by protectionism when he spoke out against pending textile legislation designed to reduce Asian competition during remarks to the Puget Sound Maritime Industries Conference. Citing the potential adverse impact in Washington State, Bonker said U.S. textiles were already the nation's most protected industry.i4i His trade subcommittee chairmanship also meant that the press sought out Bonker after news broke that Toshiba, a Japanese company, and a Norwegian firm had sold sophisticated high technol­ ogy to the Soviets, technology that could be used to threaten U.S. national security because it would make it more difficult for the United States to track Soviet submarines. Much of the Congress was furious about the sale. Bonker warned that Congress would respond. “We feel virtually compelled to do something.” “The question is whether that some­ thing is going to be responsible or whether it's going to be irrespon-

140james D. Dwyer, letter to the editor, “Protectionism: Delegation Deserves Thanks for Stand on Trade Legislation," Seattle Times, June 1, 1987, A-11. I4isvein Gilje, “Speakers Blast Trade Protectionism,”Seattle Times, May 22, 1987, D12. 419

sible.”i42 The Vancouver Columbian also devoted some attention to the Toshiba matter, but less than did the Seattle Times. One edito­ rial praised Bonker for opposing efforts to punish the Japanese and Norwegian firms. “Banker's was a lonely but sensible voice calling for temperance and consideration,” the paper declared.143

Reflecting Banker's ultimate insider status on the Toshiba story, the Washington Post mentioned him in two items including one that had a photograph of Bonker with the Japanese Trade Minis­ ter Hajime T a m u r a . i 4 4

Bonker got some always-welcome editorial credit for this ef­ forts on another intermestic story, the sale of Washington State lumber to Iraq. The deal came together only because of new financing arrangements through the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A key sentence in the Seattle Times story stated, “Bonker has been trying to get USDA for two years to consider lumber and forest products, from pulp to veneer, in its p r o g r a m . ”145 His district newspaper, the

Vancouver Columbian, also gave Bonker some trade-related inter­ mestic coverage. While Bonker was known in Washington, D.C., for his attention to trade, in Washington State, he was also known for his work on coastal issues through his other assignment, the Merchant Marine

142Associated Press, “Bonker Warns of Stiff Penalties for Selling Sub Technology to Soviets,” Seattle Times. July 1,1987, A-8. l43Edltorlal, “Congress Asks Revenge for Submarine Spy Loss," Vancouver Columbian, A-8. I44ciay Chandler, “Japan Official Seeks to Soothe Angry Congress,"Washington Post, July 16, 1987, E-1. 145poiiy Lane, “Iraq Is First of NW's New Lumber Markets," Seattle Times,August 12, 1987, A-11. 420

and Fisheries Committee. Bonker was among several coastal members of Congress adamantly opposed to offshore drilling pro­ jects called for by an Interior Department plan. In an op-ed article appearing in the Seattle Times, Bonker was identified underneath a photograph of him as a member of the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee. Bonker wrote, “Washington's magnificent

coast is once again threatened by oil and gas developers."i46

And, of course, the Seattle Times and Vancouver Columbian printed numerous articles about the congressman's campaign plans—

Was he going to seek the seat held by Republican Dan Evans? The content analysis revealed, however, that Bonker was barely notice­ able to newspaper readers on the Persian Gulf and Nicaragua situa­ tions. Being newsworthy on trade did not make Bonker newsworthy on other issues, perhaps equally important.

I460on Bonker, Op-ed article, “Offshore Oil Leases: Model's Latest Hurry-Up Blunder," Seattle Times, June 23, 1987, A-9. 421

Congressman Gerald Solomon

State: New York District: 24th; suburbs of Albany, Schnectady, Troy; largest city is Saratoga Springs Home: Glens Falls Born: August 14, 1930 Occupation: Insurance Salesman Party: Republican Elected: 1978 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Human Rights and International Organization; Inter­ national Economic Policy and Trade Other committees: Veterans Affairs

Congressman Gerald Solomon wanted foreign affairs coverage in his district newspaper, the Glens Falls Post-Star, he did not got much of it. Solomon also wanted coverage on local issues; he re­ ceived a great deal of it, especially on the award of federal money for various projects in the district. Solomon found the P o st-S tar an inadequate channel to discuss foreign affairs. Too often, he said during an interview for this study, the paper did not print his news releases on foreign affairs or use his statements. Solomon said he found this frustrating because he felt an obligation to inform people back in western New York about the country's foreign policy direc­ 422

tion being fashioned in Washington, D.CJ47 Greg Moran, a reporter at the Post-Star, agreed that some of Solomon's comments about the foreign affairs coverage were deserved. Asked if his readers can have an accurate view of what Solomon was doing and thinking about pressing foreign policy issues by reading the Post-Star, Moran an­ swered, “Absolutely not! Our coverage is sporadic at best.”i48 Table 42. Congressman Solomon News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 1 0 0 1 New York Times 1 0 1 2 Glens Falls 7 0 24 31 Totals 9 0 2 5 34

Solomon wanted to carry the message of a conservative com­ mitted to thwarting communism around the world. As his press secretary Dan Amon said, “Gerry Solomon is a staunch—with a capi­ tal S—anticommunist. He regards the Soviets as a serious threat."i49

According to Moran, Solomon was so popular in the district that he could become deeply engaged in foreign affairs without risking vot­ ers' wrath. Certainly, Solomon expressed no concerns that voters back home would read the P o s t-S ta r and conclude that he was spending too much time on foreign affairs and not enough solving their immediate problems. "Solomon really doesn't need the paper,”

i47Telephone interview with Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., April 20, 1988. l48xeiephone interview with Greg Moran, reporter for theGlens Falls Post- Star, Glens Falls New York, September 2, 1987. I49|nterview with Dan Amon, press secretary to Congressman Gerald Solomon, Washington, D.C., December 23, 1987. 423

Moran said. “He's a congressman for life; it's his seat as long as he wants it.”i5o The data show that Solomon was mentioned in several news items on foreign affairs in his district newspaper, but this is mis­ leading. Four of the items revolved around a single speech, a highly controversial speech, it turned out, that prompted Solomon to charge that the Post-Star had misconstrued his comments. The cov­ erage began with a top of the front-page story, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid.” An accompanying photograph of him drew even more attention to Solomon's role in an important foreign policy story. Moran attended the luncheon at the Jade Palace Restaurant where Solomon spoke and quoted the local congressman as saying he had solicited donations from foreign countries to help the Contras fighting the communist-backed Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Moran quoted Solomon: “I defy the press or anyone else to take me to court and find me guilty.isi

That initial story ignited a spark that touched off a spate of follow-up coverage. Just days later, the P o st-S ta r carried another story, “Rep. Solomon Details Stance on Contra Issue,” in which Solomon claimed that he had never solicited money for the Contras as reported by the paper, but that he had spoken with representa­ tives of foreign countries about the possibility of helping the Contra

IsOTelephone interview with Greg Moran, September 2, 1987. 151 Greg Moran, “Solomon Solicited Contra Aid,” Glens Falls Post-Star, July 3, 1987, A1. 424

e ffo r t. 152 Solomon sent a letter to the Post-Star elaborating on the

matter. His goal, he said, was to oppose a Marxist-Leninist govern­ ment. More clarification followed when the paper headlined its arti­ cle, “Solomon; Cash Wasn't Sought to Aid Contras."i53 And on the same day, an editorial, “Just What Was Gerry Solomon Saying?,” ac­ cused the congressman of splitting hairs in trying to explain what he had said at the Jade Palace luncheon. The editorial observed, “Whether Solomon misspoke or got carried away with overheated rhetoric is not clear.”i54

The speech and follow-up coverage prompted an outpouring of letters to the paper, often from angry readers, some supporting and others criticizing Solomon. One letter writer wrote: Gratitude from an independent voter for your illuminat­ ing editorial drawing attention to Congressman Solo­

mon's exotic personal foreign policy. Time and testimony may tell whether Lt. Col. North was a loose cannon, but there can be no doubt that Mr. Solomon is a loose m arble.155

A Solomon backer, however, damned the P o st-S ta r editorial in a strongly worded letter, “Democrats, Not Solomon, Deserve Criti-

l52Michael Kllian, “Rep. Solomon Details Stance on Contra Issue,"Glens Falls Post-Star, July 7, 1987, A1. i53Greg Moran, "Solomon: Cash Wasn't Sought to Aid Contras," Glens Falls Post- Star, July 7, 1987, A1. 154Editorial, "Just What Was Gerry Solomon Saying?" Glens Falls Post-Star, July 7, 1987, AS. 155J.B. Porter, letter to the editor, "Foreign Poiicy Makes Soiomon 'A Loose Marble,'" Glens Falls Post-Star, July 13, 1987, A7. 425

cism.” The letter described Solomon as a dedicated, loyal patriot and said of the editorial writer, "You try to justify your vicious diatribe by stating that you ‘certainly support containing communism.’ I doubt that.”i56

Despite the attention generated by his Jade Palace speech, Solomon was covered in the P ost-S tar primarily on matters of very obvious local concern. The recurring theme was Solomon's efforts to obtain federal money to solve problems in the 24th congressional district. In June and July 1987, the Glens Falls paper carried a num­ ber of such news items; • June 4, 1987, "Solomon Seeks Federal Water Funding," re­ ported that Solomon wanted $2 million from the U.S. government to

help the Town of Moreau develop an alternate water s u p p l y . 157 • June 14, 1987, "Solomon Details Federal Aid to Area," re­ ported Solomon's announcement that several small cities in the dis­ trict had received federal grants, including the $400,000 awarded to Schuylerville to construct a secondary sewage treatment plant. 158

• July 3, 1987, “Housing Agency to Get Funding,” mentioned Solomon in the story reporting that the Glens Falls Housing Author­ ity had been awarded $119,000 for low income housing.159

I56walter H. Isaacson, letter to the editor, "Democrats, Not Solomon, Deserve Criticism," Glens Falls Post-Star, July 15, 1987, A7. l57Michael Kllian, "Solomon Seeks Federal Water Funding," Glens Falls Post- Star, June 4, 1987, 85. 158no byline, "Solomon Details Federal Aid to Area," Glens Falls Post-Star, June 14, 1987, 85. 159no byline, "Housing Agency to Get Funding, Glens Falls Post-Star, July 3, 1987, 81. 426

• July 15, 1987, '“Solomon: Restore Flight Service,” described Solomon's efforts to keep the Warren County Airport's flight service station operating, a facility that the Federal Aviation Administra­

tion wanted to c l o s e d6o

• July 24, 1987, “GF to Receive Block Fund Grants,” reported

that Glens Falls would receive a $493,000 Community Development Block Grant for street paving and other improvements.

• July 25, 1987, “Battle Landmark Funding Sought,” reported

that Solomon supported a $1.5 million federal grant to allow the National Parks Service to repair the Saratoga Battlefield Landmark honoring the site that was the turning point in the War of Indepen­ dence.162

While the Glens Falls Post-Star covered Solomon on a few for­ eign affairs stories and a number of local angle domestic stories, his home-state newspaper, the New York Times, mentioned the Re­ publican congressman in only one foreign affairs news item, an Op­ ed article. 163 por Solomon, the New York Times, a prestige paper

reaching a wide and influential audience, was an ideal forum for a major foreign policy statement on U.S. intelligence operations. It was a much better vehicle than the small circulation P o st-S ta r on foreign affairs, but the Post-Star, read by many of his constituents.

160no byline, "Solomon: Restore Flight Service," Glens Falls Post-Star, July 15, 1987, B1. 161 No byline, "GF to Receive Block Fund Grant,"Glens Falls Post-Star, July 24, 1987, 81. 1 62no byline, "8attie Landmark Funding Sought," Glens Falls Post-Star, Juiy 25, 1987, 81. 163Gerald 8. Solomon and Bruce Fein, Opposite Editorial, "A Tight Plug on Intelligence Leaks,"New York Times, June 10, 1987, A31. 427

was the ideal place to show, through the federal grant news items, that he was taking care of the home folks. 428

Congressman Mel Levine

state: California District: 27th; along the Pacific coastline near Los Angeles; largest city is Santa

Monica Home: Pacific Palisades Born: June 7, 1943 Occupation: Attorney Party: Democrat Elected: 1982 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Europe and Middle East; International Economic Policy and Trade Other Committees: Interior and Insular Affairs; Select on Narcotics Abuse and Control

California Congressman Mel Levine had solidified his reputa­ tion as one of the House leaders on the Middle East and a strong de­ fender of Israel. Yet despite his reputation on Capitol Hill as an im­ portant player on Middle East policy, Levine's home-state paper, the Los Angeles Times, and especially his district newspaper, the Santa Monica Outlook, covered him primarily on a local issue, environmen­ tal protection. Levine protected himself politically by using his 429

other committee, Interior and Insular Affairs, to demonstrate com­ mitment to solving specific problems in the district. Oil drilling was a particular concern in this coastline district. Table 43. Congressman Levine News Mentions Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 4 0 2 6 Los Angeles Times 3 0 18 21 Santa Monica Outlook 4 0 21 2 5 Totals 1 1 0 41 5 2

Levine regularly made the news in stories about sewage spills into the Santa Monica Bay. Levine claimed that the city was not dealing properly with the spills that seriously endangered the envi­ ronment. The Los Angeles Times, for example, reported on his ef­ forts in news items headlined, “Congress Asked to Take Role in Cleanup of B a y ,64 and “Bradley to Spell Out His Offensive on Sewage Spills." The paper quoted Levine as saying that he would ask Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency to limit growth in Los Angeles if the spills continue.iss

These same environmental concerns generated substantial cov­ erage for Levine in the Santa Monica paper. The paper reported that an estimated 300,000 gallons of sewage had floated into Ballona La­ goon and contaminated the waters off Venice Beach. Levine, in his letter to the Environmental Protection Agency, complained that the

164BÜI Boyarsky, “Congress Asked to Take Role In Cleanup of Bay,” Los Angeles Times, July 20, 1987, Part 2, p. 1. l65Kevin Roderick, “Bradley to Spell Out His Offensive on Sewage Spills,”Los Angeles Times, July 21, 1987, Part 2, p. 1. 430

matter had been grossly underreported.166 Levine was again in the environmental forefront when he opposed oil drilling off the coast. The O utlook described his involvement in the story, "Senators Join Forces against Oil, Gas Drilling off Two States.”i67 Levine did get some foreign affairs attention in his home- state and district papers, but he wanted more than he received. His press secretary, Patricia Allison, said, “We would very much like foreign policy coverage of Mel."i68 In an affluent, well-educated constituency, Allison added, there was no political penalty for spending time on foreign affairs, especially if a congressman pro­ tects himself by attending to the issues that concern constituents directly, like the environment. The Los Angeles Times carried news items that mentioned Levine on foreign affairs, but usually in only a minor way, far down in the story. Thus the paper mentioned Levine briefly after many paragraphs in its story, “Saudis to Sweep Gulf for Iranian Mines off Kuwait.” The paper wrote:

Even California Rep. Mel Levine (D-Santa Monica), who has been a harsh critic of U.S. weapons sales to the Saudis, called the minesweeping agreement “constructive action on their part [which] will be welcome." Levine said, how-

l66Anne Morgenthaler, “Unpublicized Spill Irks Agency," Santa Monica Outlook, June 26, 1987, A-3. l67Dori Meinert, “Senators Join Forces against Oil, Gas Drilling off Two States," Santa Monica Outlook, June 27, 1987, A-2. I68|nterview with Patricia Allison, press secretary to Congressman Mel Levine, Washington, D.C., January 14, 1988. 431

ever, that the Saudis have a lot of ground to make up— they have a long way to goJ69 The Santa Monica paper gave him some foreign affairs cover­ age, especially when Levine became involved in major ways in the development of U.S. policy toward Nicaragua. One O utlook story, “Levine Seeks Ban on Private Aid,” discussed his legislation, intro­ duced along with Iowa Republican Jim Leach, to make illegal many of

the Contra supply practices revealed in the Iran-Contra hearings in Congress. The bill would have barred private military assistance so that no citizen could provide money, goods, or services in certain countries when the United States had limited its own power to pro­ vide covert aid to those countries. If enacted two years earlier, Levine contended, “Our nation could have been spared the trauma of the greatest scandal since Watergate.”170 And another O utlook arti­

cle, “Levine, Ex-Contra Chief Say Reagan Fights Peace Plan,” re­ ported on a news conference Levine held at the Century Plaza Hotel in Los Angeles accompanied by former Contra leader Edgar Chamorro. President Reagan was at the same hotel to hear pleas from Contra leaders for more U.S. aid. The paper carried an extensive story along with a photo of Levine and Chamorro. Levine, in his challenge to Rea­ gan administration policy toward Nicaragua, said, “Support for the Contras and support for the peace plan are totally contradictory.”i7i

169jamgg Gerstenzang and David Lauter, "Saudis to Sweep Gulf for Iranian Mines off Kuwait,” Los Angeles Times, June 24, 1987, Part 1, p. 1. i7ûDorl Meinert, “Levine Seeks Ban on Private Aid,"Santa Monica Outiook, May 30, 1987, A-3. 171 Will Thorne, “Levine, Ex-Contra Chief Say Reagan Fights Peace Plan," Santa Monica Outiook, August 28,1987, A1. 432

But it was on the Middle East that Levine seemed to be under­ reported during the period of this research. The National Journal identified Levine as “a member of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East who has become the House point man in opposing arms sales to Middle East countries that have not made peace with Israel."i72 Levine was deeply involved in efforts to block the sale of Maverick missiles to Saudi Arabia. Levine, in a news re­ lease, cited the danger that the missiles would be used against the Israelis, not the Iranians. “Gone was the pretense," Levine said, “the sale was needed to deter the Iranian threat, since it seems clear the

Saudis intended these weapons for use against Israel, not Ira n ."i7 3 Levine was at the center of another major foreign policy de­ bate when he and Michigan Democrat Howard Wolpe introduced a res­ olution to end U.S. military aid to Pakistan unless that country pro­ vided verifiable evidence it was not seeking to produce weapons grade nuclear material or attempting to acquire nuclear technology in the United States. The resolution, intended to help curb the spread of nuclear weapons around the world, was discussed in two news releases distributed by Levine's office during this period. The Washington Post mentioned Levine's efforts in its story, “Pakistan

Spurns Nuclear Inspection."174 Yet the Santa Monica paper did not cover it at all despite the fact he distributed a news release on the

172christopher Madison, “Arms-Sale Armistice,"National Journal, 19, no. 42, (October 17, 1987), 2606. l73Mel Levine, news release, “Smith and Levine Express Satisfaction over Withdrawal of Maverick Missile Sale," June 11, 1987. I74united Press International, “Pakistan Spurns Nuclear Inspection," Washington Post, August 4, 1987. 433

subject. 175 Levine, in fact, was the only one of the nine House mem­ bers included in this research who got as much foreign affairs coverage in the national press, the Washington Post, as in his district newspaper, the Santa Monica Outiook. Unable to find a local angle to nuclear proliferation and other foreign affairs stories involving Levine, the O u tlo o k presented Levine to readers as a congressman diligently at work far away in Washington, D.C., on environmental issues. The O utlook gatekeepers decided not to let certain foreign affairs news items through their channel to readers. Levine, for his part, although interested in foreign affairs coverage, especially the Middle East, made environmental issues his priority for coverage back home.

l75congressman Mel Levine, news release, “Levine Resolution on Pakistan Approved Unanimously by House," August 4, 1987. 434

Congressman Dan Burton

State; Indiana District: 6th; Indianapolis and Anderson; largest city is Indianapolis Home: Indianapolis Born: June 21, 1938 Occupation: Insurance/Real Estate Agent Party: Republican Elected: 1972 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: African Affairs; Arms Control, International Security, and Science Other Committees: Veterans Affairs; Post Office/Civil Service

Indiana Congressman Dan Burton tried diligently to use the

press to alert Americans to what he regarded as the dangers posed by the advance of communism in Africa. For Burton, this was part of his responsibility to inform the public about major issues in U.S. foreign policy. Despite his repeated efforts, however. Burton had little success in making news on Africa. He had hoped to establish himself as someone the national press goes to for comment when Africa is in the news. His soapbox was to be the House African Af­ 435

fairs Subcommittee where he served as the ranking Republican mem­ ber. Burton certainly did not try to avoid foreign affairs coverage back in Indiana. He courted it. As his press secretary Kevin Binger

stated, “Danny doesn't hide on foreigna ffa irs .”176 Doug McDaniel, who covers Burton for the Indianapolis Star, agreed with Binger, and

said he found Burton eager to obtain coverage on foreign affairs.i77

Jim Atterholt, Burton's legislative assistant for foreign affairs, said Burton regarded his subcommittee assignment as an excellent opportunity to monitor breaking news out of Africa and then re­ spond.17S

Table 44. Congressman Burton News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totais Washington Post 0 0 0 0 Indianapolis Star 2 1 6 9 Anderson Herald-Bull. 4 1 12 17 Totals 6 2 18 26

According to Binger, Burton hoped that by getting his message across through the news media, including the national press, he could help affect public opinion and that this opinion would then persuade the president and Congress to adopt a tougher anticommu­ nist line. This press strategy was interesting in the case of Mozam­ bique because Burton was a strongly conservative Republican con-

I76|ntervlew with Kevin Binger, press secretary to Congressman Dan Burton, Washington, D.C., August 21, 1987. l77Telephone inten/iew with Doug McDaniel, reporter for theIndianapolis Star, Washington, D.C., November 24, 1987. I78|ntervlew with Jim Atterholt, aide to Congressman Dan Burton, Washington, D.C., August 13, 1987. 436

gressman trying to bring pressure on what was thought by many to be a conservative Republican hardline anticommunist administration. His target was more often the State Department than the president. As Binger put it, “Danny wants to influence public opinion at the grassroots le v e l."179

But the Washington Post, Indianapolis Star, and Anderson Her- aid-Bulletin acted as gatekeepers for Burton's message on Mozam­ bique. The Post covered the Mozambique turmoil heavily, but turned to Senator Jesse Helms, the top-ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, rather than Burton, for comment. Bur­ ton strongly supported RENAMO, the democratic resistance group, which he called “freedom fighters,” challenging the Marxist govern­ ment there. At one point, Binger said, seven missionaries were being held in protective custody by RENAMO out of concern that they might be killed in the crossfire. Binger reported that Burton hoped inter­ national observers would be dispatched to the scene and deter the Marxists from killing the missionaries and shifting blame to the freedom fighters. Binger said Burton was concerned that the U.S. State Department might want to send the missionaries back to Ma­ puto, Mozambique’s capital, where they would be in danger.i^o

Given Burton’s concerns about the unfolding drama in Mozam­ bique, his staff went to work trying to generate press coverage, but with no luck. Binger had tried to sell the Burton/Mozambique story, but the press gatekeepers flashed the “no sale" sign.

179|nterview with Kevin Binger, August 21, 1987. 180|nierview with Kevin Binger, August 21, 1987. 437

Binger said Burton wanted national and Indiana press coverage for a very specific reason—to signal to Marxists in Mozambique that members of Congress were carefully watching events there. By putting them on notice, Binger continued, the Indiana Republican be­ lieved the missionaries would be in less danger. “Ensuring their safety was his ultimate aim,” Binger added.1 si Burton also wanted to send a pointed message to the State Department that he disap­ proved of the department's handling of the situation in Mozambique. Binger said he fully understood why reporters for Indiana newspapers were reluctant to write stories about civil wars in Africa. “If they ran the story," he observed, “probably no one would read it. Newspapers respond to what they think their readers are interested in ." is 2 Binger recognized that while Burton may be deeply interested in Mozambique, most likely few Indiana readers share that interest. The story may be important for long-term U.S. foreign policy, but readers in Indianapolis, Binger said, cannot see how it relates immediately and directly to their own lives. Binger lamented the realities he faced in trying to sell the story: “The Mozambique situation is very complicated and it's very difficult to get the local media interested, especially when it doesn't affect Indiana."i 83

Burton's office experienced the same reaction when it dis­ tributed a news release outlining his efforts to require the State Department to report human rights abuses committed by the African

181 Interview with Kevin Binger, August 21, 1987. I82|nterview with Kevin Binger, August 21, 1987. 183|nterview with Kevin Binger, August 21, 1987. 438

National Congress (ANC). The ANC is composed of blacks opposed to white Afrikaner apartheid rule in South Africa. Burton drew atten­ tion to what he described as detention camps. “The ANC commits heinous acts of terrorism and torture in these camps. We must make sure that the world knows of these acts and they are stopped."i84

Yet the news release generated no press coverage back in his home- state and district newspapers in Indianapolis and Anderson. Binger accepted the inattention philosophically, “How do you get people interested in the African National Congress?” Obviously, he had not found the answer and was frustrated. i8s

Burton got the same lack of response to another news release, “Burton Protests State Department Muzzling of Radio Marti.” Burton claimed that Chester Crocker, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, had prevented a Radio Marti news director from making a planned trip to Angola to report on Cuban involvement there. Radio Marti, an operation of the U.S. Voice of America, was created to broadcast to Cuba and present a view countering Fidel Castro's version of events. Burton's language was pointed: It is as if Mr. Crocker is trying to hide the fact that more than 400,000 Cuban troops have served in Angola since 1976. The fate of the 35,000 Cuban troops now serving in

Angola is clearly of interest to the people of C u b a .is e

18^Congressman Dan Burton, news release, “Burton Amends State Department Authorization Bill,” June 18, 1987. I85|nterview with Kevin Binger, press secretary to Congressman Dan Burton, Washington, D.C., January 14, 1988. l86congressman Dan Burton, news release, “Burton Protests State Department Muzzling of Radio Marti,” June 25, 1987. 439

Overall, Burton received very little foreign affairs coverage back in Indiana. However, he was able to make news when he joined California Congressman Robert Dornan to file suit in U.S. District Court to have the Boland amendment declared unconstitutional. The amendment was intended to limit the flow of aid to Contras in Nicaragua. Burton was concerned because he regarded the Contras as an important line of defense against the spread of Soviet influence at the U.S. doorstep. Burton spelled out his reasons for filing the suit in another news release, “Danny Burton Files Suit against Boland Amendment”: By passing the Boland amendment, Congress has allowed the Soviet Union and its surrogates to operate freely in Central America. In 1986 the USSR sent more than 23,000 metric tons of military aid to Nicaragua in its

efforts to Sovietize Latin A m e ric a1 . 87

The Boland amendment suit led to stories and editorials back in his congressional district. With his home-state and district press both largely uninter­ ested in his foreign affairs work. Burton was presented to readers during the period of this project as someone primarily concerned with domestic issues. The Anderson paper, for example, carried just as many stories that mentioned Burton on veterans issues as on for­ eign affairs, including one, “Burton Sponsors Bill to Benefit Veter­ ans,” that outlined his legislation to establish outpatient medical

l87congressman Dan Burton, news release, “Danny Burton Files Suit against Boland Amendment," May 27, 1987. 440

care for v e t e r a n s .1®8 With the exception of veterans issues, however, there was no theme to the domestic news coverage that Burton received in Indianapolis and Anderson during the period of this research.

l88tvjo byline, “Burton Sponsors Bill to Benefit Veterans,"Anderson Herald Bulletin, July 5, 1987, A3. 441

Congresswoman Jan Meyers State: Kansas District: 3d; Kansas City, Missouri, suburbs in the far eastern part of Kansas; Kansas City, Kansas, is the largest city Born: July 20, 1928 Occupation: Homemaker Party: Republican Elected: 1984 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: Human Rights and International Organization; Europe and the Middle East Other Committees: Small Business; Select on Aging

Kansas Congresswoman Jan Meyers was a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but constituents would be hard pressed to know it by reading either the Kansas City Times or Wichita Eagle- Beacon. But then, they would not learn much about her work on do­ mestic issues either. Some House members, such as North Carolina Congressman James Clarke, were invisible on foreign affairs, but well covered back home on domestic issues. Meyers was distinctive because she earned so little attention in both categories. Meyers made little effort to generate foreign affairs press coverage in either paper. She and North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms 442

were the only two of 18 members surveyed who did not put out news releases regularly. Her style was low key and she was not a leading actor in any foreign policy dispute. She was a Republican member of a committee controlled by Democrats and she had served only two terms. Angela Herrin, who covered Meyers for the Wichita paper, de­ scribed the Republican congresswoman as very bright and eager to work on important issues. “She's not just there to collect her check," Herrin said of Meyers. “She wouldn’t be satisfied just serv­ ing on the Post Office Committee."189 Yet Herrin noted that Meyers played such a minor, quiet role on the committee and made so little effort to get publicity on what she did do that it was understandable why this research would find so little coverage of her. Stephen Fehr, Washington-based reporter for the Kansas City Times, explained why she received so little foreign affairs attention in his paper: “She could be the person I go to for a local comment on foreign affairs, but she is not a player or leader on anything.” Fehr also said, “I've never gotten a call from her seeking coverage on anything she has done in the [House Foreign Affairs] Committee.”18° Table 45. Congresswoman Meyers News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 0 0 2 2 Wichita Eagie-Beacon 3 0 4 7 Kansas City Times 4 0 4 8 Totals 7 0 10 17

I89|ntervlew with Angela Herrin, reporter for theWichita Eagie-Beacon, Washington, D.C., January 4, 1988. l80Telephone Interview with Stephen Fehr, reporter for theKansas City Times, Washington, D.C., January 5, 1988. 443

The coverage of Meyers on both domestic and foreign issues was episodic; there was no theme or pattern. One article reported; Jan Meyers is one of five members of Congress visiting the Philippines to witness the opening of the Philippine Congress created by its new constitution. The Overland Park Republican said the five-day trip is to ensure Presi­ dent Corazon Aquino and other government leaders of continuing U.S. support of their developing democracy.i8i On those rare occasions when she got a foreign affairs mention, the initiative apparently came from the press, not Meyers. Sometimes Herrin or Fehr contacted Meyers and other area members for reaction to a major foreign policy development. Herrin included a comment from Meyers in her story, “Kansas Delegation Supports Peace Plan.” Far down in the story, after reporting on observations of other Kansas legislators, Herrin wrote, “Rep. Jan Meyers, an Overland Park Republican, said the [Reagan Administration's] proposal was a strong offer and would improve U.S. relations immediately throughout Cen­ tral A m e r ic a .”i82 And the Kansas City Times surveyed Kansas and

Missouri members to gauge reaction from constituents to the Iran- Contra hearings, "Colonel Draws Brisk Support in Area.”i83 in those few stories in which she was mentioned, Meyers was not the leading actor. She was one of several people given attention and her com-

181 AI Polczlnski, “Gephardt, Simon to Send Stand-ins to Topeka Meeting," Wictiita Eagie-Beacon, July 25, 1987, D6. l82Angela Herrin, “Kansas Delegation Supports Peace Pian,"Wichita Eagie- Beacon, August 7, 1987, 6A. I83stephen C. Fehr, "Colonei Draws Brisk Support in Area,”Kansas City Times, July 11, 1987, 1A. 444

ments usually appeared far down in the story. The same was true in the domestic news coverage. Herrin mentioned Meyers, but along with the other Kansas members of Congress, in her story on the fi­ nancial disclosure reports that members are required to file,

“Whittaker's Assets May Be Highest of Kansans in House."i84 Meyers was mentioned in the final paragraph of the story. The newest member of the delegation. Republican Rep. Jan Meyers of Overland Park, reported she had earned $1,500 in speaking fees last year. Meyers listed her as­ sets as more than $25,000 in bonds and her annual inter­ est from stocks and savings accounts as under $25,000.

184Angela Herrin, "Whittaker's Assets May Be Highest of Kansans In House,” Wichita Eagie-Beacon, May 22, 1987, B1. 445

Congressman Gerry Studds

State; Massachusetts District; 10th; largely in coastal area south of Boston; largest city is New Bedford Home; Cohasset Born; May 12, 1937 Occupation: Teacher Party; Democrat Elected; 1972 Foreign Affairs Subcommittees; Arms Control, International Security and Science; and Western Hemisphere Affairs Other Committees; Merchant Marine and Fisheries

Massachusetts Congressman Gerry Studds was often an outspo­ ken, intelligent, and articulate critic of U.S. foreign policy under Ronald Reagan. In fact, the authors of Politics in America said of Studds, "His brashly opinionated style and penchant for sarcasm have made him a key player in the [House Foreign Affairs Committee] hearings and perhaps the single least popular member in the eyes of 446

the Republicans and the Reagan State Departmental ss Yet despite that reputation, Studds, who first came to Congress in 1972 as an ardent anti-Vietnam activist, was little covered on foreign affairs issues during the period examined for this project. During those four months, Studds was not a key player in the foreign policy game on Capitol Hill and his press coverage reflected that minor role. The Washington Post carried no stories that mentioned Studds on foreign affairs and his district paper, the New Bedford Standard- Times, printed just one. The Boston Globe ran just two foreign af­ fairs stories mentioning Studds and in both cases Studds was cited only briefly far down in long stories. In one article, “Reagan An­ nounces New Latin Peace Plan,” the reporter included Studds's com­ ment, “There's nothing in this plan that the administration couldn't have initiated at any time in the last three and a half years.”i 86 The

G lobe also reported that a suit filed by one hundred in Congress against Reagan demanded that he comply with the War Powers Act by notifying Congress that he had introduced armed forces into “imminent danger of hostilities.”i87 in the 23d of 24 paragraphs, the story listed Studds as one of seven Massachusetts members who had joined the suit. Despite the suit's importance, the New Bedford Stan- dard-Times did not print anything on Studds's participation in the litigation.

i85Aian Ehrenhalt, ed.. Politics in America: The 100th Congress (Washington: Congressional Quarterly Press, 1987), 705. l96Adam Pertman, “Reagan Announces New Peace Plan,"Boston Globe, August 6, 1987, 1. 187predKaplan, “100 In Congress Sue Over U.S. Gulf Policy," August 7, 1987, 1. 447

Table 46. Congressman Studds News Mentions

Papers Foreign Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 0 0 8 8 Boston Globe 2 1 17 20 New Bedford S-T 1 10 32 43 T otals 3 1 1 57 71

The inattention to Studds on foreign affairs is all the more dramatic because he was so extensively covered on domestic issues in the district press. The press coverage portrayed Studds as a con­ gressman particularly attentive to his district's special needs. The 32 stories that mentioned Studds on domestic issues in theN e w Bedford Standard-Times were second only to Senator Jesse Helms among the 18 members surveyed in a district paper. Two domestic categories—the health threat posed by AIDS and the well-being of his district's fishing and shipping interests—and one intermestic category—local military facilities—accounted for the bulk of Studds's coverage, far overshadowing foreign affairs.

Studds clearly established himself as the congressional “ultimate spokesman” on AIDS, gaining widespread attention in the Washington Post as well as his home-state and district press, for his caustic criticism of a Reagan administration decision to limit each congressional office to only 1,000 of the government's AIDS booklets. That policy prompted an irate Studds to request and re­ ceive copies for all 268,000 households in his congressional dis­ trict, citing the serious health hazards posed by the illness. The Washington Post reported, “Studds, an acknowledged homosexual and leading advocate of AIDS education on Capitol Hill, had urged his 448

House colleagues to make similar requests, but Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.) and several others who did were turned dow n."188

Boston Globe readers learned of Studds's efforts in stories headlined, “Studds Mails Constituents AIDS Report,’’i89 and “Dispute

Delays Distribution of AIDS Booklets .”200 More of the same in the

New Bedford paper, including an editorial of praise, “Studds Puts AIDS Report Where It Belongs— In the Public's Hands.”2oi The district press usually mentioned the local congressman in its headlines—for example, “Studds Plans to Mail Data about AIDS .”202 and “Studds De­ cries AIDS Panel without Gays."203

The AIDS story, a national policy issue, kept Studds's name squarely before constituents, but even more important for him po­ litically was the substantial coverage he received in Boston and New Bedford on his efforts to protect the fishing and shipping interests so vital to constituents' prosperity. Only infrequently did more than a few days pass without another story in the New Bedford Standard- Tim es detailing Studds's work on fishing and shipping legislation in Congress. For Pamela Glass, Washington-based reporter for the Ott-

l88Associated Press, “HHS Frees Supply of AIDS Booklets,"Washington Post, June 16, 1987, A8. I89judy Foreman, “Studds Mails Constituents AIDS Report,"Boston Giobe, May 19, 1987, 19. 200John Robinson, “Dispute Delays Distribution of AIDS Booklets," Boston Giobe, June 10, 1987, 3. 201 Editorial, “Studds Puts AIDS Report Where It Belongs— In the Public's Hands,” New Bedford Standard-Times, May 20, 1987, 8. 202Associated Press, “Studds Plans to Mail Data about AIDS,"New Bedford Standard-Times, June 5, 1987, 3. 203Associated Press, “Studds Decries AIDS Panel without Gays,"New Bedford Standard-Times, May 30, 1987, 9. 449

away chain that includes the Standard-Times, these issues were extremely salient; they related directly to the lives of her readers as well as to Studds's constituents. The coverage strikingly por­ trayed Studds as a lawmaker diligently working on behalf of their in te re sts. The paper outlined Studds's opposition to Reagan administra­ tion efforts to persuade Congress to impose a user fee on commer­ cial and pleasure boat owners to help pay the costs of Coast Guard services. Certainly his constituents must have been pleased to read, "Rep. Gerry E. Studds, D-Mass., attacked the administration's argu­ ment that users of a specific government service should pay for it. Do you think only families of children in public schools should pay for schools?”204

Another story described Studds's proposal to require fishing boats to carry such safety items as life rafts, radio beacons, and ex­ posure suits.205 As is often the case when members defend the spe­ cial Interests of their districts, the district newspaper cheered in its editorial, "Shellfish Win One in Congress." The editorial writer asserted, “If shellfish could clap, they'd be applauding U.S. Rep. Gerry Studds, D-Mass., and the House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee for voting to outlaw boat paint that's been poisoning th e m . "206 For Studds, this committee was his constituency com-

204Associated Press, “Coast Guard User Fee Pushed,"N ew Bedford Standard- Times, June 5, 1987, 3. 205Brian Seraile, Ottaway News Service, “Fishing Safety Ruies Meet Opposition," New Bedford Standard-Times, June 12,1987, 26. 206Editorial, “Shellfish Win One in Congress," New Bedford Standard-Times, August 6, 1987, 8. 450

mittee, the one that permitted him to accomplish things that are directly, immediately related to the lives of the people he serves. His leverage was solidified by his position as chairman of the sub­ committee on Fisheries, Wildlife Conservation, and the Environment. The Globe, too, covered Studds on fishing and shipping legisla­ tion, although not as extensively as the Standard-Times. One story noted that Studds had joined with congressmen from other coastal states to prevent the Interior Department from implementing an off­ shore oil leasing plan that they claimed could destroy the nation's shores.207 studds was particularly concerned about the future of

Georges Bank in his district. The Giobe carried another story about vessels that throw plastic trash overboard, killing marine life and polluting beaches. Studds was mentioned for working against the idea of using the oceans as a universal garbage dump. 2os

Studds got another opportunity to obtain favorable press cov­ erage on a salient matter for his constituents when the U.S. Army appeared unwilling to release the money to modernize an artillery shell casing plant in Studds's district, the Chamberlain Manufactur­ ing Corporation. This was an intermestic story linking a military de­ cision directly to the district. Studds praised the army's change of heart to spend the money to repair the company's aging equipment so

207Mary Kate Cranston, States News Service, “Coalition Formed to Block Oil Lease Plan,” Boston Globe, May 1,1987,1. 208Mary Kate Cranston, States News Service, “House Panels to Focus on Plastic Debris at Sea," Boston Globe, July 21, 1987, 3. 451

it could bid on Pentagon contracts.209 As reported in New Bedford, the real issue was jobs, not military strategy or national security. In his Weekly Reports mailed to constituents, the Mas­ sachusetts congressman sometimes discussed foreign affairs. Dur­ ing the period of this study, however, Studds did not play a leading role in any major foreign policy issues and apparently did not make foreign affairs coverage back in the state a high priority.

209jack Stewardson, “Army Pumps $11.8 Million into Chamberlain to Modernize Ammo Plant,” New Bedford Standard-Times, July 22, 1987, 1. 452

Congressman James Clarke

State: North Carolina District: 11th; Western North Carolina near Smoky Mountains; largest city is A sh eville Home: Fairview Born: June 12, 1917 Occupation: Foundation Executive, Farmer Party: Democrat Elected: 1986 (also served 1983-85) Foreign Affairs Subcommittees: African Affairs; Arms Control, International Security, and Science Other Committees: Interior and Insular Affairs; Select on Aging

North Carolina Congressman James McClure Clarke's service on the House Foreign Affairs Committee did not convert into any for­ eign affairs coverage. The Washington Post showed no interest in Clarke on either domestic or foreign affairs issues. His home-state newspaper, the Chariotte Observer, covered Clarke very infrequently and then only on domestic matters. His district newspaper, the

Asheviiie Citizen, on the other hand, devoted a great deal of atten­ 453

tion to the hometown congressman, but all of it on domestic issues, usually those with a direct connection to the district. Mark Barrett, a reporter for the C itizen, said his paper was geared to local issues and Clarke's involvement in them, not to for­ eign affairs.210 Asked how often the Asheville paper called him about foreign affairs, Dennis Clark, press secretary to the con­ gressman, said, very rarely. Asked if the O bserver contacted him on foreign affairs, Clark answered, "Not really."211 Table 47. Congressman Clarke News Mentions Papers Forelan Intermestic Domestic Totals Washington Post 0 0 0 0 Charlotte Observer 0 0 3 3 Asheviiie Citizen 0 0 24 24 T otals 0 0 27 27

Clarke was covered in his district newspaper as a member of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, not the House For­ eign Affairs Committee. Clarke used his position on the Interior Committee to promote the Smoky Mountains National Park, a deep concern to constituents. For Clarke and for the newspaper that covered him most com­ pletely, the Asheville Citizen, the Interior Committee was a con­ stituency committee that made news. Clarke introduced legislation, the Great Smoky Mountains Wilderness Act, that generated much of the publicity, part of it stemming from action by the committee.

2l0|nterview with Mark Barrett, September 3, 1987. 211 Interview with Dennis Clark, press secretary to Congressman James Clarke, Washington, D.C., August 19, 1987. 454

One news story that included a photograph of Clarke began, “A bill to designate 90 percent of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park as a wilderness area passed the Interior Committee of the U.S.

House on a unanimous voice vote Wednesday."2i2

Clarke also got substantial coverage in the Asheville Citizen for his efforts on behalf of the area's apple growers, another in­ stance of highlighting congressional actions that relate very di­ rectly and immediately to constituents. The C itizen headlined its story, “President Signs Bill to Aid Apple Farmers," reporting that apple farmers would receive $135 million in emergency assistance. Clarke said he was pleased “because this legislation is urgently needed by so many apple growers whose farms have suffered due to the hard, late freezes last year."2i3

Clarke's office distributed several news releases on foreign affairs, but journalists at the Asheville Citizen and Charlotte Ob­ server, acting in their role as gatekeepers, decided not to print the material. Clarke, in effect, initiated messages on foreign affairs that were never allowed to reach readers in North Carolina through the channel of the home-state and district press. The result was a member of the House Foreign Affairs Com­ mittee covered in the home-state and district press in North Car­ olina as someone concerned about apples and mountains, not wars and international human rights.

2l2staff reports, “Panel Passes Smokies Bill,' Asheville Citizen. July 30, 1987, 21. 213|\/iark Davis, “President Signs Bill to Aid Apple Farmers," Asheviiie Citizen. May 28, 1987, 16. Bibliography

Books and Articles

Adams, Gordon. “The Iron Triangle: Inside the Defense Policy Pro­ cess." In The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, ed. Charles W. Keg ley, Jr., and Eugene R. Wittkopf, 70-78. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1988. Adams, William C. “Whose Lives Count?: TV Coverage of Natural Dis­ asters." Journai of Communication 36, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 113-22. Adams, William C., ed. “Covering the World in Ten Minutes: Network News and International Affairs.” In Television Coverage of international Affairs, 3-14. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 1982. Almaney, Adnan. “International and Foreign Affairs on Network Tele­ vision News." Journal of Broadcasting 14, no. 4 (Fall 1970): 499-509. Babbie, Earl R. The Practice o f Social Research. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing, 1979. Bagdikian, Ben H. “Congress and the Media: Partners in Propaganda." Columbia Journalism Review 12, no. 1 (January/February 1974): 3-10.

------. "Diggers and Toilers." Columbia Journalism Review 2, no. 2 (Summer 1963): 36-38.

------. The Effete Conspiracy. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.

455 456

Barilleaux, Ryan J. “The President, ‘Intermestic’ Issues, and the Risks of Policy Leadership.” In The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, ed. Charles W. Kegley, Jr., and Eugene R. Wittkopf, 178-88. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1988. Bennet, Douglas J., Jr. “Congress in Foreign Policy: Who Needs It?” Foreign Affairs 57, no. 1 (Fall 1978): 40-50. Burgess, Philip M., James E. Harf, and Lawrence E. Peterson. Interna­ tional and Comparative Politics: A Handbook. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1979. Cannon, Lou. Reporting: An inside View. Sacramento, California: Cal­ ifornia Journal Press, 1977. Charles, Jeff, Larry Shore, and Rusty Todd. “The New York Times Coverage of Equatorial and Lower Africa." Journai of Communication 29, no. 2 (Spring 1979): 148-55. Cohen, Bernard C. The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963. Cohen, Bernard C. The Public's impact on Foreign Policy. Lan ham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1983. Cook, Timothy E. “Determinants of Media Strategies in the House: Democrats in the 98th Congress." Paper prepared for delivery at the 1986 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D. C., August 28-31, 1986. Cook, Timothy E. “The Evolution of Congressional Press Operations.” In Congressional Politics, ed Christopher J. Deering, 62-89. Chicago: Dorsey Press, 1989. 457

Crabb, Cecil V,, Jr. American Foreign Policy in the Nuclear Age, 3d ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1972. Crabb, Cecil V., Jr. Invitation to Struggle, 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1984. Davison, W. Phillips, Donald R. Shanor, and Frederick T.C. Yu. News from Abroad and the Foreign Policy Public. Headline Series 250. New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1980. Destler, I.M. “Executive-Congressional Conflict in Foreign Policy: Ex­ plaining It, Coping with It." In Congress Reconsidered, 3d ed., edited by Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, 343-63. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1985. Destler, I.M., Leslie H. Gelb, and Anthony Lake. Our Own Worst Enemy: The Unmaking of American Foreign Policy. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984.

Dexter, Lewis Anthony. "Congressmen and the Making of Military Policy." In New Perspectives on the House of Representatives, 1st ed., edited by Robert L. Peabody and Nelson W. Polsby, 305- 24. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963. Editor and Publisher. Editor and Publisher Yearbook 1988. New York: Editor and Publisher, 1988.

Ehrenhalt, Alan. Politics in America: The 100th Congress. Washing­ ton, D C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1987. Evans, Katherine Winton. “The News Maker: A Capitol Hill Pro Reveals His Secrets." Washington Journalism Review 3, no. 5 (June 1981): 28-33. 458

Fenno, Richard F., Jr. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973. ------. “If, As Ralph Nader Says, Congress Is ‘the Broken Branch,’ How Come We Love Our Congressmen So Much?” In Congress in Change: Evolution and Reform, ed. Norman J. Ornstein, 277-87. New York: Praeger, 1975. Franck, Thomas M., and Edward Weisband. Foreign Policy by Congress. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Fulbright, J. William. “The Legislator as Educator.” Foreign Affairs 57, no. 4 (Spring 1979): 719-32. Gaddy, Gary D., and Enoh Tanjong. “Earthquake Coverage by the West­ ern Press.” Journal of Communication 36, no. 2 (Spring 1986): 105-12.

Gans, Herbert. Deciding What's News. New York: Pantheon Books, 1979. Gorbachev, Mikhail. Perestroika. New York: Harper and Row, 1987. Graber, Doris A. Mass Media and American Politics, 2d ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1984. ------. Mass Media and American Politics, 3d ed. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1989. Hachten, William A., and Brian Beil. “Bad News or No News? Covering Africa, 1965-82." Journalism Quarterly 62, no. 3 (Autumn 1985): 626-30.

------. “Clashing Ideologies: Five Concepts of the Press.” In The World News Prism, by William A Hachten, 60-77. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1981. 459

Hamilton, Lee. “Congress and Foreign Policy.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 12, no 2 (Spring 1982): 133-37. Hamilton, William Maxwell. “Hometown News from the Third World.” The Quill 71, no. 7 (July/August 1983): 17-21. Hess, Stephen, the Ultimate Insiders: U.S. Senators in the National Media. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1986. ------. The Washington Reporters. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1981. Hester, Al. “Five Years of Foreign News on U.S. Television Evening Newscasts.” Gazette 24, no. 1 (1978): 86-95. ------. “Theoretical Considerations in Predicting Volume and Di­ rection of International Information Flow.” G azette 19 (1973): 239-47.

------. “An Analysis of News Flow from Developed and Developing Countries.” Gazette 17, no. 1 (1971): 29-43. Hoffmann, Stanley. Primacy or World Order. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1980.

International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems. Many Voices, One World. New York, UNESCO, 1980. Kaplan, Frank L. “The Plight of Foreign News in the U.S. Mass Media: An Assessment.” Gazette 25 (1979): 233-43. Kern, Montague. “The Invasion of Afghanistan: Domestic vs. Foreign Stories.” In Television Coverage of the Middle East, ed. William C. Adams, 106-27. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 1981. Kern, Montague, Patricia W. Levering, and Ralph B. Levering. The Kennedy Crises: The Press, the Presidency, and Foreign Policy. 460

Chapel Hill, North Carolina: University of North Carolina Press, 1983. Kurian, George Thomas. New Book of World Rankings. New York: Facts on File, 1984. Lanouette, William J. “The Many Faces of the Jewish Lobby in Amer­ ica.” National Journal 16, no. 19 (May 13, 1978): 748-56. Laqueur, Walter. “Foreign News Coverage: From Bad to Worse." Washington Journalism Review 5, no. 5 (June 1983): 32-35. Larson, James F. Television's Window on the World: International Affairs Coverage on the U.S. Networks. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 1984.

Leg VO Id, Robert. Gorbachev's Foreign Policy. Headline Series 284. New York: Foreign Policy Association, 1988. Levering, Ralph B. The Public and American Foreign Policy 1919-78. New York: William Morrow, 1978. Lippmann, Walter. The Phantom Public. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1925.

------. Public Opinion. New York: Penguin, 1922; reprint ed.. New York: Free Press, 1965.

Madison, Christopher. “Arms-Sales Armistice." National Journai 19, no. 42 (October 17, 1987): 2606-8.

Malekzadeh, Abbas. “The New York Times, U.S. Foreign Policy, and the Iranian Revolution.” Ph.D. dissertation. The American Univer­ sity, 1984. 461

Manning, Bay less. “The Congress, the Executive, and Intermestic Af­ fairs; Three Proposals." Foreign Affairs 55, no. 2 (January 1977): 306-24. Masmoudi, Mustapha. “The New World Information Order.” In W orld Communications: A Handbook, ed. George Gerbner and Marsha Siefert, 14-27. New York: Longman, 1984. Mathias, Charles McC., Jr. “Ethnic Groups and Foreign Policy.” Foreign Affairs 59, no. 5 (Summer 1981): 975-98. Matthews, Donald R. U.S. Senators and Their World. New York: Vintage Books, 1960. Mayhew, David R. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974. Maynes, Charles William. “America's Third World Hang-ups." Foreign Policy 71 (Summer 1988): 117-40. Merrill, John C. “Freedom of the Press: Changing Concept?” In Inter­ national and Intercultural Communication, ed. Heinz-Dietrich Fischer and John C. Merrill, 125-35. New York: Hastings House, 1976. Miller, Clem. “A Newcomer's View of the Press.” In Congress and the News Media, ed. Robert O. Blanchard, 160-64. New York: Hast­ ings House, 1974.

Miller, Susan H. “Congressional Committee Hearings and the Media: Rules of the Game.” Journalism Quarterly 55, no. 4 (Winter 1978): 657-63. 462

“News Coverage of Congress: The Search for the Ultimate Spokesman.” JournaHsm Quarterly 54, no. 3 (Autumn 1977): 459-65. Miller, Susan Heilmann. “Reporters and Congressmen: Living in Sym­ biosis.” Journalism Monographs 53 (January 1978): 1-25. Mowlana, Hamid. Global Information and World Communication: New Frontiers in International Relations. New York: Longman, 1986. ------. International Flow of News: An Annotated Bibliography. Paris: UNESCO, 1985. ------. International Flow of Information: A Global Analysis (Reports and Papers on Mass Communication, no. 99) Paris: UNESCO, 1985. — . “A Paradigm for Comparative Mass Media Analysis.” In In­ ternational and Intercultural Communication, ed. Heinz-Diet- rich Fischer, 474-84. New York: Hastings House, 1976. — . “The Role of the Media in the U.S.-lranian Conflict.” In The

News Media in National and International Conflict, ed. Andrew Arno and Wimal Dissanayake, 71-99. Boulder, Colorado: West- view Press, 1984.

— . “Who Covers America?” Journal of Communication 25, no. 3 (Summer 1975): 86-91.

— . “World's Best Informed Public?” SAIS Review 6, no. 1 (Winter/Spring 1986): 177-88. “Network News Underplays House, According to Survey.” Broadcast­ ing 113, no. 8 (August 24, 1987): 73-74. 463

North, Robert, Ole Holsti, M. George Zaninovlch, and Dina Zinnes. Content Analysis. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1963. Ornstein, Norman, and Michael Robinson. “The Case of Our Disap­ pearing Congress: Where's All the Coverage." TV Guide (January 11, 1986): 4-10. Parker, Glenn R., and Roger H. Davidson. "Why Do Americans Love Their Congressmen So Much More Than Their Congress?" Leg­ islative Studies Quarterly 4, no. 1 (February 1979): 53-61. Payne, James. “Show Horses and Work Horses in the United States House of Representatives." Polity 12 (Spring 1980): 428-56. Pipes, Daniel. “The Media and the Middle East." Com mentary 77, no. 6 (April 1984): 29-34. Polk, Leslie D., John Eddy, and Ann Andre. “Use of Congressional Pub­ licity in Wisconsin District." Journalism Quarterly 52, no. 3 (Autumn 1975): 543-46.

Pratt, C.B. “The Reportage and Images of Africa in Six U.S. News and Opinion Magazines: A Comparative Study." G azette 26, no. 1 (1980): 31-45.

Price, David E. “Policy Making in Congressional Committees: The Im­ pact of ‘Environmental’ Factors.” American Political Science Review 72, no. 2 (June 1978): 548-74. Reston, James. The Artillery of the Press. New York: Harper and Row, 1967. 464

Rice, Michael, with Jonathan Carr, Henri Pierre, Jan Reifenberg, and Pierre Salinger. Reporting U.S.-European Relations. New York: Pergamon Press, 1982. Richstad, Jim, and Michael J. Anderson, eds. Crisis in International News: Policies and Prospects. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981. Righter, Rosemary. Whose News? New York: Times Books, 1978. Rimmer, Tony. “Foreign News on UPl’s Wire in the U.S.A." Gazette 28, no. 1 (1981): 35-49. Rivers, William L., Wilbur Schramm, and Clifford G. Christians. R e ­ sponsibility in Mass Communication, 3d ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1980. Robinson, Gertrude Joch, and Vernone M. Sparkes. “International News in the Canadian and American Press: A Comparative News Flow Study." Gazette 22, no. 4 (1976): 203-18. Robinson, Michael J. “Three Faces of Congressional Media." In The

New Congress, ed. Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, 55- 96. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1981. Robinson, Michael J., and Kevin R. Appel. “Network News Coverage of Congress." Political Science Quarterly 94, no. 3 (Fall 1979): 407-18.

Rogers, William D. “Approaching Mexico." Foreign Policy 72 (Fall 1988): 196-209. Rosenau, James N., ed. Domestic Sources of Foreign Policy. New York: Free Press, 1967. 465

Rosenblum, Mort. Coups and Earthquakes. New York: Harper and Row, 1981. Rosengren, Karl Erik. “Four Types of Tables.” Journal of Communica­ tion 27 (1977): 67-75.

------. “International News: Methods, Data, and Theory.” Journal of Peace Research 11, no. 2 (1974): 145-56. Rubin, Barry. International News and the American Media. The Wash­ ington Papers 49. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1977. Said, Abdul Aziz. Ethnicity and U.S. Foreign Policy, 2d ed. New York: Praeger, 1981.

Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. The Imperial Presidency. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1973.

Schneider, William. “A Year of Continuity.” National Journal 18, no. 20 (May 17, 1986): 1162-91. Sewell, John W., Will E. Hellert, and William Garber. “Foreign Assistance.” In The President, the Congress, and Foreign Policy, ed. Edmund S. Muskie, Kenneth Rush, and Kenneth W.

Thompson, 257-83. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1986.

Shuman, Michael H. “Dateline Main Street: Local Foreign Policies." Foreign Policy 65 (Winter 1986-87): 155-74.

Siebert, Fred S., Theodore Peterson, and Wilbur Schramm. Four Theo­

ries of the Press. Urbana, Illinois: Board of Trustees, Univer­ sity of Illinois, 1956; reprint ed., Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1973. 466

Simon, Paul. The Glass House: Politics and Morality in the Nation's Capital. New York: Continuum, 1984. Smith, Steven S., and Christopher J. Deering. Committees in Congress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1984. Span 1er, John, and Joseph Nogee, eds.. Congress, the Presidency, and American Foreign Policy. New York: Pergamon Press, 1981. Spanier, John, and Eric Usianer. American Foreign Policy and the Democratic Dilemma. 4th edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985. Sparkes, Vernone M. “The Flow of News between Canada and the United States.” Journalism Quarterly 55, no. 2 (Summer 1978): 260-68. Spiegel, Steven L. At Issue: Politics in the World Arena. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983. Stevenson, Robert L., and Donald Lewis Shaw, eds. Foreign News and the New World Information Order. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State Uni­ versity Press, 1984. Study Commission on U.S. Policy toward Southern Africa. S o u th Africa: Time Running Out. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981.

Stubbing, Richard A., with Richard A. Mendel. The Defense Game. New York: Harper and Row, 1986. Sundquist, James L. The Decline and Resurgence o f Congress. Wash­ ington: D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1981. Thompson, Margaret, ed. Trade: U.S. Policy Since 1945. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1984. 467

Tidmarch, Charles M., and John J. Pitney, Jr. “Covering Congress." Polity 17, no. 3 (Spring 1985): 463-83. Tower, John. “Congress Versus the President: The Formulation and Implementation of American Foreign Policy." Foreign Affairs 60, no. 2 (Winter 1981-82): 229-46. Trezise, James, James Glen Stovall, and Hamid Mowlana. W atergate: A Crisis for the World. New York: Pergamon Press, 1981. Veblen, Eric P. “Liberalism and National Newspaper Coverage of Members of Congress.” Polity 14, no. 1 (Fall 1981): 153-59. Wallerstein, Immanuel. The Capitalist World-Economy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Warner, Malcolm. “TV Coverage of International Affairs.” T elevision Quarterly 7, no. 2 (Spring 1968): 60-75. Weil, Martin. “Can the Blacks Do for Africa What the Jews Did for Israel?” Foreign Policy 15 (Summer 1974): 109-30. Wiebe, G.D. “Mass Media and Man's Relationship to His Environment.” Journalism Quarterly 50, no. 3 (1973): 426-32, 446. Wilcox, Francis O. Congress, the Executive, and Foreign Policy. New York: Harper and Row, 1971.

Wilhoit, G. Cleveland, and Kenneth S. Sherrill. “Wire Service Visibility of U.S. Senators.” Journalism Quarterly 45, no. 1 (Spring 1968): 42-48.

Wilhoit, G. Cleveland, and David Weaver. “ Foreign News Coverage in Two U.S. Wire Services: An Update.” Journal of Communication 33, no. 2 (Spring 1983): 132-48. 468

Williams, Frederick. The New Communications. Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1984. Wirth, David A. "Climate Chaos." Foreign Policy 74 (Spring 1989): 3- 2 2 .

Wolfson, Lewis W. The Untapped Power of the Press. New York: Praeger, 1985. Womack, Brantly. “Attention Maps of 10 Major Newspapers." J o u r­ nalism Quarterly 58, no. 2 (Summer 1981): 260-65. The World Almanac and Book of World Facts. New York: World Almanac, 1987. World Press Freedom Committee. The Media Game ... A Continuing Challenge. Washington, D.C.: World Press Freedom Committee, 1982.

Yiannakis, Diana Evans. “House Members' Communication Styles: Newsletters and Press Releases.” Journal of Politics 44, no. 4 (November 1982): 1049-71.

N ew spapers

Citizen (Asheville, North Carolina), May 1-August 31, 1987. Columbian (Vancouver, Washington), May 1-August 31, 1987. Courant (Hartford, Connecticut), May 1-August 31, 1987. Day (New London, Connecticut), May 1-August 31, 1987. Eagle-Beacon (Wichita, Kansas), May 1-August 31, 1987. Globe (Boston), Massachusetts), May 1-August 31, 1987.

Herald-Bulletin (Anderson, Indiana), May 1-August 31, 1987. Journal-American (Bellevue, Washington), May 1-August 31, 1987. 469

Observer (Charlotte, North Carolina), May 1-August 31, 1987. Outlook (Santa Monica, California), May 1-August 31, 1987. Posf (Washington, D.C.), May 1-August 31, 1987. Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, Washington), May 1-August 31, 1987. Post-Star (Glens Falls, New York), May 1-August 31, 1987. Standard-Times (New Bedford, Massachusetts), May 1-August 31, 1987. Star (Indianapolis, Indiana), May 1-August 31, 1987. Times (Kansas City, Kansas), May 1-August 31, 1987. Times (Los Angeles, California), May 1-August 31, 1987. Times (New York, New York), May 1-August 31, 1987. Times (Seattle, Washington), May 1-August 31, 1987.

INTERVIEWS

Allison, Patricia. Press secretary to Congressman Mel Levine, Washington, D C. Interview, July 24, 1987; interview, January 14, 1988; and telephone interview April 28, 1989.

Amon, Dan. Press secretary to Congressman Gerald Solomon Washington, D C. Interview December 23, 1987 and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. Arthur, Bill. Reporter for the Charlotte Observer, Washington, D.C. Interview, October 28, 1987 and telephone interview, April 28, 1989.

Atterholt, Jim. Aide to Congressman Dan Burton, Washington, D.C. Interview, August 13, 1987. 470

Barrétt, Mark. Reporter for the Asheville Citizen, Asheville, North Carolina. Telephone interview, September 3, 1987, and April 28, 1989. Bastide, Ken de la. Reporter for the Herald-Bulletin, Anderson, Indi­ ana. Telephone interview October 1987, and April 28, 1989. Binger, Kevin. Press secretary to Congressman Dan Burton, Wash­ ington, D.C. Interview, August 21, 1987, January 14, 1988, and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. Boney, Thomas. Aide to Senator Jesse Helms, Washington, D.C. Inter­ view, August 27, 1987. Callahan, Christopher. Reporter for Associated Press. Washington, D.C. Interview, September 1987 and telephone interview. May 2, 1989. Carpman, Larry. Press secretary to Senator John Kerry, Washington, D.C. Interview, November 23, 1987, and telephone interview. May 8, 1989.

Clark, Dennis. Press secretary to Congressman James Clarke, Wash­ ington, D.C. Interview, August 19, 1987, November 5, 1987, and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. Connelly, Joel. Reporter for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, December 18, 1987, and April 28, 1989. Connolly, Brian. Press secretary to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Washington, D.C. Interview, March 8, 1988, and telephone in­ terview, May 1, 1989. 471

Dawson, Christine. Aide to Senator Dan Evans, Washington, D.C. In­ terview, August 19, 1987. Fehr, Stephen. Reporter for the Kansas City Times, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, January 5, 1988, and May 3, 1989. Fisher, Andrew. Press secretary to Senator Richard Lugar, Washing­ ton, D.C. Interview, January 14, 1988, and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. Flander, Murray. Press secretary to Senator Alan Cranston, Wash­ ington, D.C. Interview, October 23, 1987, and telephone inter­ view, May 17, 1989. Gejdenson, Sam. Congressman from Connecticut, Washington, D.C. Interview, March 29, 1988. Glass, Pamela. Reporter for the New Bedford Standard-Times, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, November 20, 1987, and April 28, 1989. Globokar, Ellen. Administrative assistant to Senator Brock Adams, Washington, D.C. Interview, May 2, 1988. Greenhouse, Linda. Reporter for the New York Times, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, September 1987, and April 28, 1989. Grundberg, Carol. Aide to Congressman Don Bonker, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, August 17, 1987. Herrin, Angela. Reporter for the Wichita Eagle-Beacon , Washington, D.C. Interview, January 4, 1988, and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. 472

Hucka, Judy. City editor for the Bellevue Journal-American , B e lle­ vue, Washington. Telephone interview, September 1987, and May 5, 1989. Isaacson, Jason. Press secretary to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C. Interview, July 24, 1987, October 28, 1987, and telephone interview. May 1, 1989. Keller, Lee. Press secretary to Senator Dan Evans, Washington, D.C. Interview, January 19, 1988, and telephone interview. May 2, 1989. Lauter, David. Reporter for the Los Angeles Times, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, February 16, 1988, and May 2, 1989. Levine, Mel. Congressman from California, Washington, D.C. Inter­ view, April 26, 1988. Lukens, Barbara. Aide to Senator Jesse Helms, Washington, D.C. In­ terview, July 22, 1987, November 5, 1987, and telephone in­ terview, May 1, 1989.

Lunner, Chet. Reporter for the Norwich Bulletin, Washington, D.C. Interview, July 31, 1987.

MacDonald, John. Reporter for the Hartford Courant, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, October 26, 1987, and May 3, 1989. Machacek, John. Reporter for the Saratoga Springs Saratogian, Washington, D.C. Interview, July 31, 1987. May, Al. Reporter for the Raleigh News and Observer, Washington, D.C., May 10, 1987. McCall, Richard. Aide to Senator John Kerry, Washington, D.C. Inter­ view, September 1987. 473

McDaniel, Doug. Reporter for the Indianapolis Star, Washington, D.C. Telephone interview, November 24, 1987, and April 28, 1989. Meinert, Dori. Reporter for the Santa Monica Outlook, Washington, D.C. Interview, December 17, 1987, January 28, 1988, and telephone interview, April 28, 1989. Miller, John. Congressman from Washington State, Washngton, D.C. Interview, April 26, 1988. Moran, Greg. Reporter for the Glens Falls Post-Star, Glens Falls, New York. Telephone interview, September 2, 1987, and April 28, 1989.

Mowlana, Hamid. Director of the International Communications Program in the School of International Service at American University. May 3, 1989. Murray, Mark. Press secretary to Congressman Don Bonker, Washing­ ton, D.C. Interview, November 5, 1987, and April 29, 1988. Seattle, Washington, telephone interview. May 3, 1989. Murray, Mike. Press secretary to Congresswoman Jan Meyers, Wash­ ington, D.C. Interview, December 11, 1987 and Kansas, telephone interview. May 1, 1989. Partner, Chip. Press secretary to Congressman Sam Gejdenson, Washington, D.C. Interview, August 13, 1987, and November 12, 1987. Telephone interview, Rochester, New York, May 2, 1989. Perez, Anna. Press secretary to Congressman John Miller, Washing­ ton, D.C. Interview, December 11, 1987, April 26, 1988, and telephone interview. May 3, 1989. 474

Pryne, Eric. Reporter for the Seattle Times, Washington, D.C. Tele­ phone interview, November 30, 1987, and telephone interview, Seattle, Washington, April 28, 1989. Robinson, John. Reporter for the Boston Globe., Washington, D.C. In­ terview, November 23, 1987, and telephone interview, Wash­ ington, D.C., May 30, 1989. Schwadron, Steven. Press secretary to Congressman Gerry Studds,Washington, D.C. Interview, August 19, 1987, and tele­ phone interview May 1, 1989. Shainman, Larry. Press secretary to Senator Nancy Kassebaum, Washington, D.C. Interview, September 23, 1986, September 1987, and telephone interview. May 1, 1989. Silverman, Ed. Administrative assistant to Senator Christopher Dodd, Washington, D.C. Interview, May 6, 1988. Smith, Barbara. Press secretary to Senator Brock Adams, Washing­ ton, D.C. Interview, December 4, 1987, and telephone inter­ view, May 2, 1989. Solomon, Gerald. Congressman from New York, Washington, D.C. Tele­ phone interview, April 20, 1988. Stanley, William. Reporter for the New London Day, New London, Con­ necticut. Telephone interview, September 25, 1987, April 1, 1988, and May 4, 1989.