DOCSLIB.ORG

Election 2000

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Election 2000 Picture credits: Rallypoint ​ WE PARTIED LIKE IT’S 1999: ELECTION 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from the Committee Directors 3 The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal 3 Foreign policy of the Clinton administration 5 The Democratic Party 7 The Democrats in the House: 10 The Republicans in the House: 19 Letter from the Committee Directors In American politics, no two election seasons are the same. Each election is uniquely driven by the political climate of the time, the candidates running for the respective parties, the possibility of third-party candidates and of course, the ever-changing landscape of national and international relations. At the turn of the Millennium, the United States is once again shaping up for an election year of twists and turns. Sitting President William J. Clinton, or Bill Clinton as he is more commonly known, has had his two terms in office and has no more races to run. Fresh off of the unprecedented Lewinsky Scandal, the Republicans hold the majority in both the House and the Senate at this time and are looking strong for a new millennium. The Democrats, though they hold the highest office in the country and indeed showed a far stronger foot forward in the 1998 midterms than most pundits had anticipated, are definitely the underdogs going in. Which party comes out of 2000 as the winner is anyone’s game and up for you to decide. The Election 2000 Joint Crisis Committee will be run slightly differently than many JCCs. Time stops on February 23rd 2000, just a day after the South Carolina Republican Primary that would go down in infamy as some of the nastiest presidential campaigning seen in a primary. From there until Super Tuesday, March 7th, the committees will be mostly internally focused on finalizing a candidate. We anticipate that after Super Tuesday, the candidate from each party will be clear and the others will concede the race. After that, it’s all out cross-committee campaigning until November 6th. Best of luck delegates. Best, Lauren Meyers and Sourojit Ghosh Election 2000 Committee Directors The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal On November 5th, 1996, Bill Clinton acquired the historic privilege of being the first Democrat since the legendary Franklin D. Roosevelt to be reelected President of the United States as he defeated Republican candidate Robert J. Dole, or Bob Dole, by a vote of 379-159 in the electoral college. However, his re-election represented an immediate and recurring challenge to him, as the Speaker of the House of Representatives Newton “Newt” Gingrich persisted with sending welfare reform bills through Congress and to his desk. After having vetoed two such bills, Clinton finally signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), a bill aimed at substantially reconstructing the welfare system authored by Republican John Kasich. With the House and the Senate both in Republican hands as they retained their unified control of the Congress from 1994, the second term of the Clinton presidency looked to be long and arduous. In the summer of 1995, a young woman accepted an unpaid summer internship at the White House. This woman soon transitioned to a full-time, paid position in the White House Office of Legislative Affairs in December of that year. Monica Lewinsky soon caught the attention of President Clinton, as the two supposedly developed intimate relations. Perhaps wary of this development, Lewinsky’s bosses at the White House sought to distance her from the President. To this end, she was relocated to the Pentagon in April 1996. Looking back at those four months, Lewinsky would later testify that she and the President had nine sexual encounters in the Oval Office, performing fellatio and other sexual acts short of intercourse. At the Pentagon, Lewinsky worked under chief spokesperson Kenneth Bacon, and soon befriended a fellow employee by the name of Linda Tripp. The two grew close, with Lewinsky sharing details of her involvement with Clinton to Tripp. Sensing the gravity of the situation, Tripp asked Lewinsky to keep the gifts that Clinton had given her and famously, not to dry clean a semen-stained garment that would later be known as the “blue dress”. Unbeknownst to Lewinsky, Tripp began recording these details in their phone conversations since September 1997. In December 1997, Lewinsky left the Pentagon. At the time, President Clinton was involved in the Paula Jones case, where Jones had accused him of sexual harassment. Lewinsky’s involvement with Clinton was brought up in the course of this case in January 1998. On April 1, 1998, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Webber Wright granted summary judgment to Clinton. At the time, an independent counsel by the name of Kenneth Starr was investigating Clinton’s misconduct in office under the Whitewater controversy. Sensing the opportunity, Tripp handed over the tapes of her conversation with Lewinsky to Starr in what later was the basis for the Lewinsky Scandal. With evidence of Lewinsky’s relationship with Clinton, Starr broadened the scope of his investigation to include Lewinsky and her possible perjury in the above-mentioned case. Clinton initially denied the allegations, saying in a January 26 speech while standing beside his wife Hillary Clinton, “I want you to listen to me. I'm going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” However, this outright denial would come under fire when Lewinsky was granted transactional immunity on July 28th in an exchange for a grand jury testimony and the handing over of the famous “blue dress”. With the DNA analysis from the dress, there was irrevocable evidence of the affair. Soon after, in a taped grand jury hearing on August 17th, Clinton admitted to having an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. In December 1998, Clinton was deemed to have committed obstruction of justice and perjury when he lied in his testimony in the Jones case that he had no relations with Lewinsky. Since both Houses of Congress were controlled by the Republicans at the time, these two offenses were deemed as impeachable. The House of Representatives voted to issue Articles of Impeachment against him which was followed by a 21-day trial in the Senate. However, the Senate failed to convict him as all Democrats and 10 Republicans voted for his acquittal. An attempt to censure his powers was also pursued by the House, but that too was unsuccessful. Thus, Clinton retained both his office and the full powers that came with it. His actions were, however, not without consequence. Judge Wright held him in civil contempt of court in April 1999 due to misleading testimony about the affair in the Jones case, fining him $90,000. With under a year left until the next Presidential election, campaign trails were starting up, and the scandal could be playing a part in how people voted. Foreign policy of the Clinton administration The Oslo Accords The Oslo Accords were a set up agreements between the state of Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1993 and 1995 that aimed to create a peaceful future between these two conflicting groups. The Oslo Accords reflected efforts of mediation, communication, and negotiation between the Palestinian Liberation Organization in efforts of fostering peace and security for both Palestine and Israel as well as settling the disputed areas of West Bank, the Gaza Strip for Palestinians and gradually withdrawing Israeli force from these regions as well as the creation of a Palestinian interim self-government called the Palestinian Legislative Council. Regardless of their long-term success, the Oslo Accords have been considered to be a momentous event in Israeli-Palesitnian history as it has been the first time through decades of conflict that the two have formally recognized each other and made formal agreements to strive for peace in the future. Although the Oslo Accords were an agreement between Israel and Palestine, the United States played an instrumental role in making this feat possible. Bill Clinton’s administration played an instrumental role in both formalizing and sponsoring these peace agreements. Clinton had meetings with many of the key players in writing up the Oslo Agreements and his actions symbolized positive relations with both Palestine and Israel by representing the needs and desires of both. Additionally, the successful signing of the Oslo Accords reflected skills of communication, mediation, and knowledge on the regional politics on the part of Clinton as he was a part of orchestrating the agreement. The iconic photo of Bill Clinton standing proudly behind Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as they shake hands in Washington D.C. upon signing the peace accords leave a positive image around Bill Clinton and his accomplishments in being an instrumental piece of this unprecedented step towards peace. The Rwandan Genocide The Rwandan Genocide was a mass genocide occuring during the Rwandan Civil War in 1990 between the ethnic groups of Hutus and Tutsis. The genocide went on for one hundred days, leaving an estimated amount of between 500,000 and one million dead, constituting 70% of the minority Tutsi population. The genocide reflected a long-building conflict and hatred between the Rwandan Hutus who held the majority and government power over the Tutsis. The genocide was brutally carried out with machete’s being the main weapon and little safety for the targeted peoples. The Clinton Administration faced huge backlash for the Rwandan Genocide for having not intervened while thousands of civillians were being slaughtered. The failure of Bill Clinton to direct any U.S. involvement in Rwanda throughout the one hundred days of mass genocide continues to be considered one of his largest foreign policy failures while in office.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Www. George Wbush.Com
    Post Office Box 10648 Arlington, VA 2221 0 Phone. 703-647-2700 Fax: 703-647-2993 www. George WBush.com October 27,2004 , . a VIA FACSIMILE (202-219-3923) AND CERTIFIED MAIL == c3 F Federal Election Commission 999 E Street NW Washington, DC 20463 b ATTN: Office of General Counsel e r\, Re: MUR3525 Dear Federal Election Commission: On behalf of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard B. Cheney as candidates for federal office, Karl Rove, David Herndon and Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc., this letter responds to the allegations contained in the complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission (the “Commission”) by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc. The Kerry Campaign’s complaint alleges that Bush-Cheney 2004 and fourteen other individuals and organizations violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 197 1, as amended (2 U.S.C. $ 431 et seq.) (“the Act”). Specifically, the Kerry Campaign alleges that individuals and organizations named in the complaint illegally coordinated with one another to produce and air advertising about Senator. Kerry’s military service. 1 Considering that no entity by the name of Bush-Cheney 2004 appears to exist, 1’ Bush-Cheney ’04, Inc. (“Bush Campaign”) presumes that the Kerry Campaign mistakenly filed its complaint against a non-existent entity and actually intended to file against the Bush Campaign. Assuming that the foregoing presumption is correct; the Bush Campaign, on behalf of itself and President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, Karl Rove, David Herndon (the “Parties”), responds as follows: Response to Allegations Against President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Intolerable Acts 2016 Democratic National Committee
    DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS 2016 Democratic National Committee The Intolerable Acts BACKGROUND GUIDE BACKGROUND GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from the Dias…………………………………….…………. 3 Overview………………………………………………………….….5 Topics of Debate………………………………………………….….6 Policy Issues…………………………………………………….……8 Blocs and Positions………………………………………………….11 References………………………………………………………..….16 Letter from the Dais Dear Delegates, Letter from the Dais Firstly, thank youLetter so much for from taking part the in this Dais challenge in being a part of the 2016 Democratic National Committee - SciMUNC 2021 Specialized Committee. On behalf of all the staff running this committee, we hope that you will enjoy being a part of thisLetter, as we all lookfrom forward the to learning Dais from each one of you. Krish Shah My name is Ryan Ahmed and I am thrilled to serve as your chair for this Secretary-General 2016 DNC committee. I am a rising junior at the Bronx High School of Science. Byul Sak Outside of my work with SciMUN, I am a former GOTV Organizer for the Bernie 2020 campaign and an award-winning novelist of works such as A Wonderful State Directors-General of Mind. I am also the founder of the non-profit organization, Finxerunt, where I run the largest socioeconomic laboratory network in the world with publications Omar Darwish USG of Administration from researchers in twenty countries. My organization’s efforts have gained an official commendation from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, as I Vincent Harwood hope to provide the world with a better understanding of the need for expansion in Deputy-USG of Administration democracy and a more equitable education system.
    [Show full text]
  • Nominations, Conventions, and Presidential Campaigns
    Nominations, Conventions, and Presidential Campaigns Presidential nominating conventions are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, but they play a key role in American politics. Conventions mark the transition between two key periods of a presidential campaign: the nominating process and the general election. Both major parties nominate their presidential candidates much differently than they did in the 19th century. In fact, presidential candidates did not even attend conventions until 1932. The motivation for modern reform occurred in the second half of the 20th century, when the McGovern-Fraser commission, established by Democrats in the wake of the 1968 convention, created a way for voters to participate directly in the nominating process. Republicans followed with reforms of their own, but in a more incremental and cautious fashion (mostly because Republicans won most of the presidential contests in that period and saw no need to change their processes). The convention is the body that nominates candidates for president and vice president. It also creates a party platform, outlining the party’s positions on the major issues in the presidential campaign. Convention delegates serve as the “legislature” because they make major decisions on behalf of the party. In the years between conventions, party chairs make these major decisions for the party. National party conventions serve many functions. First, they allow different groups within a political party to debate and resolve their conflicting positions on major issues (economy, social issues, foreign policy). They also serve as a major political rally, bringing thousands of party elites and rank-and-file members together in one location.
    [Show full text]
  • The Big Ideas the Campaign the Vote
    KennedyJOH NF.KENNEDYSCHOOLOFGOVERNMENTBULLETINHARVARDUNIVERSITYSchoos u m m e r 2l 0 0 8 The Big Ideas The Campaign The Vote Our faculty weigh in Students assess primary Electoral college season Voting machines Alumni on campaigns Leon Loeb mpp 1972 Jacob Frenkel Ann Kaplan Kennedy School Board of Directors of the Women’s Leadership Board Kent Lucken mpa 2001 Daniel Glickman Laurel Karabian hks Alumni Association Executive Committee JOHNF.KENNEDYSCHOOLOFGOVERNMENTBULLETINHARVARDUNIVERSITY s u m m e r 2 0 0 8 J. Michael McGinnis mpp 1977 Steven Green Dato Fawziah Abdul Karim Roxanne Mankin Cason, Chair Executive Committee Patricia McGinnis mpa 1975 Clifford Gundle Margaret Kavalaris Barbara Annis, Chair Elect Rudy N. Brioché mpp 2000, Chair Robert Metzger bcsia Hani Habbas Lou Kerr Haifa Fahoum Al Kaylani, Rosario Calderon mpa 1988, Marcia Morris mpa 1993 Azadeh Hariri Sung Joo Kim Vice Chair, International Vice Chair Ajay Nagpal mpp 1992 James Harpel Julia Hobbs Kivistik Renee White Fraser, Vice Chair, Jacquelyne Weatherspoon Robert Olian mpp/jd 1977 Robert Hefner III Peggy Klaus Domestic mpa 1991, Treasurer Anthony Otten mpp 1981 John Incledon Patricia Kouba Laurie McDonald Jonsson, Farahnaz Karim mpa 2001, Howard Paster mcrp 1979 Tasso Jereissati Roelfien Kuijpers Secretary Member-at-Large Anne Reed mpa 1981 Nicholas Josefowitz Renee LaBran Margaret Traub, Treasurer Paul Hodge mpa 2000, Ex-Officio Jorge Rosenblut mpa2 1985 Maha Kaddoura mpa 2000 Alison Lawton Members Sean Rowland mpa 1997 Norman Kaplan Corporate Members Catherine Lee The Election Issue Gayane Afrikian mpa 2005 Danny Sebright mpa 2001 Joseph Kasputys Jennifer Allyn Robin Leeds Jeff Amestoy mpa 1982 Daniel Sheffey mpp 1989 George Kellner Mary Bennett Francine LeFrak-Friedberg Marilyn Averill mpa 2000 Harry Sherr mpa 2003 Jamileh Kharrazi Beth Brooke Amy Levine Michael O.
    [Show full text]
  • Read the Full PDF
    The Permanent Campaign and Its Future The Permanent Campaign and Its Future Norman J. Ornstein Thomas E. Mann Editors American Enterprise Institute and The Brookings Institution WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000 Available in the United States from the AEI Press, c/o Publisher Resources Inc., 1224 Heil Quaker Blvd., P.O. Box 7001, La Vergne, TN 37086-7001. To order, call 1-800-937-5557. Distributed outside the United States by arrangement with Eurospan, 3 Henrietta Street, London WC2E 8LU, England. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The permanent campaign and its future / Norman J. Ornstein, Thomas E. Mann, editors. p. c. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8447-4133-7 (cloth: alk. paper)—ISBN 0-8447-4134-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1. Political campaigns—United States. 2. Democracy—United States. I. Ornstein, Norman J. II. Mann, Thomas E. JK2281.P395 2000 324.7N0973—c21 00-058657 ISBN 0-8447-4133-7 (cloth: alk. paper) ISBN 0-8447-4134-5 (pbk.: alk. paper) 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2 © 2000 by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C., and the Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without permission in writing from the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution except in the case of brief quotations embodied in news articles, critical articles, or reviews. The views expressed in the publications of the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the staff, advisory pan- els, officers, or trustees of AEI or Brookings.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 “Moving Voters in the 2000 Presidential Campaign: Local Visits
    “Moving Voters in the 2000 Presidential Campaign: Local Visits, Local Media” David C. King & David Morehouse Harvard University, Institute of Politics Running for office. That phrase, with an emphasis on the word running , conjures for us memories of candidates darting among cities in the closing days of a campaign, of klieg lights on tarmacs, of caffeinated staffers and the tangible yearning among candidates to have their voices heard, to connect with voters, and to be a hundred places and on a million minds simultaneously. Candidates want to reach potential voters, but more than reaching voters, they want to move them. This difference between reaching potential voters and actually moving voters to be supporters is crucial in campaigns, and it is at the heart of our proposition in this chapter: there is a poorly understood trade off between spending money on television commercials and having candidates make campaign appearances. Local campaign appearances generate tremendous free local media coverage, which often offset the “costs” of appearing before relatively small audiences in out-of-the-way parts of America. Indeed, in many instances, local campaign appearances likely move the vote more than higher priced advertisements. Running candidates from place to place and running commercials in various places are mainstays of presidential campaigns. We expect, though, that on a dollars per vote basis, candidate trips to key regions are very often a more effective way to move voters than blanketing an area with television advertisements. This chapter explores the effects of Vice President Gore’s 1 August 2000 Mississippi River trip on moving voter preferences.
    [Show full text]
  • 1992-93 1993-94
    1992-93 1993-94 Institute of Politics John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University PROCEEDINGS Institute of Politics 1992-93 1993-94 John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University FOREWORD The Institute of Politics participates in the democratic process through the many and varied programs it sponsors: a program for fellows, a program for undergraduate and graduate students, training programs for elected officials, conferences and seminars and a public events series of speakers and panel discussions in the Foriun of Public Affairs of the John F. Kermedy School of Government. The program for fellows brings individuals from the world of politics and the media to the Institute for a semester of reassessment and personal enrichment. The program for students encourages them to become involved in the practical aspects of politics and affords them an opportunity to participate in both planning and implementing Institute programs. This edition oi Proceedings, the fourteenth, covers academic years 1992-93 and 1993- 94. The Readings section provides a glimpse at some of the actors involved and some of the political issues—domestic and international—discussed at the Institute during these twenty-four months. The Programs section presents a roster of Institute activities and includes details of many aspects of the student program: study groups and twice- weekly suppers, Heffernan visiting fellows, summer internships and research grants, the quarterly magazine Harvard Political Review, awards for undergraduate political writing, political debates, brown bag lunches, and numerous special projects. Also provided is information on the program for fellows, conferences and seminars, and a list of events held in the Foriun.
    [Show full text]
  • With Andrew Sullivan
    Theodore H. White Seminar on Press and Politics with Andrew Sullivan 2011 Table of Contents History of the Theodore H. White Lecture .........................................................5 Biography of Andrew Sullivan ............................................................................7 Biographies of Thomas Frank and David Nyhan .............................................9 Welcoming Remarks by Alex S. Jones ...............................................................11 Awarding of the David Nyhan Prize for Political Journalism to Thomas Frank ...........................................................................................11 The 2011 Theodore H. White Lecture on Press and Politics “Conservatism and Its Discontents” by Andrew Sullivan ......................................................................................16 The 2011 Theodore H. White Seminar on Press and Politics .........................33 Alex S. Jones, Director of the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy (moderator) Tad Devine, Democratic media consultant for presidential campaigns; founder, Devine Mulvey; IOP Fellow Thomas Frank, 2011 Nyhan Prize recipient; author and columnist, Harper’s magazine Nia-Malika Henderson, national political reporter, The Washington Post Jill Lepore, David Woods Kemper ‘41 Professor of American History, Harvard University; staff writer, The New Yorker Mark McKinnon, Republican communications strategist; columnist, The Daily Beast; Reidy Fellow, Shorenstein Center Andrew Sullivan, blogger
    [Show full text]
  • Resume Wizard
    Class details Campaign Strategy and Media in Domestic and International Campaigns (POL-UA 9994) Thursdays: 9 AM – 12 PM Spring 2014 B203 Instructor Tad Devine Details Devine Mulvey Longabaugh, Inc. 2141 Wisconsin Ave, NW Suite H Washington, DC 20007 e-mail: [email protected] Class The goal of this course is to understand the factors that shape campaign strategy and how Description campaigns influence and persuade voters through advertising, speeches and debates. The course will combine theory and practice, and will examine case studies from both domestic and international campaigns. Through presentations and a multi-media framework, we will examine campaign strategy and media in practice and the key factors and events that are part of a successful strategy and campaign that moves voters. The format of the course will be multi-dimensional including lectures, discussions, interactive activities, documentary films, television commercials, insider campaign video, and other media sources. The instructor will use a keynote presentation format to review the material and present video clips and commercials to lead and inform class discussions. Additionally, this course will focus on the following areas: The integration of research and strategy The creative process of television ad production Campaign message development Debates and major set piece events like speeches and interviews Understanding and mobilizing voters The nexus between money and strategy in politics Technology and how it has shaped strategic decision-making The future of strategic decision making in political campaigns Assessment Components Each student is required to complete three written assignments and to attend class and participate in class discussions. The first written assignment is a 2 to 3 page outline of the strategy memo which is ungraded.
    [Show full text]
  • New IOP Director Jim Leach with 2008 Student Advisory Committee Leaders
    JANUARY 2008 “No Vote, No Voice” “Campus Voices” Heard New Board Members New Mayors Gather Fall Survey Released New IOP Director Jim Leach with 2008 Student Advisory Committee leaders (left to right) Jay Lundy, Ana Mendy, and Tejas Sathian aboard C-SPAN’s Campaign 2008 Bus at the Kennedy School in December. Welcome to the Institute of Politics at Harvard University James A. Leach, Director As many of you know, in mid-September I joined the Institute of Politics as its Director after former New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen left the post to run for the U.S. Senate in that state. I want you all to know how very appreciative I am to have this opportunity come to the IOP. In addition to welcoming new fellows and hosting fantastic forums and special events, we have launched two new exciting projects designed to put America’s youth on the front lines of the 2008 presidential race: “Campus Voices” and “No Vote, No Voice.” It is our goal to help increase youth participation in the 2008 primaries and caucuses, as well as the general elections in November. The new web-based initiative, “No Vote, No Voice” focuses initially on the 2008 presidential primaries. It is designed to be both a “one-stop shopping” center for information about this year’s election and a cyberspace platform for political discourse and civic activism in the future. You may check out the project’s homepage at www.novotenovoice.com. This fall, the Institute created a unique opportunity for students to experience the 2008 presidential campaign and the final “100 Days” of the 2008 New Hampshire Primary firsthand: the “Campus Voices” project.
    [Show full text]
  • Shrum, Robert – Complete Video, Compressed
    The Election of 2004 – Collective Memory Project Interviewee: Robert Shrum Current: Warschaw Chair in Practical Politics, University of Southern California In 2004: Senior Advisor, John Kerry Presidential Campaign Interviewer: Dr. Michael Nelson Fulmer Professor of Political Science, Rhodes College Fellow, SMU Center for Presidential History Disclaimer: This transcription has been prepared according to the strictest practices of the academic and transcription communities and offers our best good-faith effort at reproducing in text our subject's spoken words. In all cases, however, the video of this interview represents the definitive version of the words spoken by interviewees. December 11, 2013 Q: OK. I doubt there’s ever been anything that’s the equivalent of what came to be called the Shrum Primary in the lead up to an election, as there was in 2004. What’s the Shrum Primary, and why would there be such a thing? SHRUM: Well, it was a journalistic artifact. It was because I had previously worked for John Kerry, I had previous worked for John Edwards, I had previously worked for Joe Lieberman. And so, there was this whole sense -- the press created it. You know, I found it annoying, actually. Q: Obviously there’s a back story to this, which is your long involvement in multiple Democratic campaigns for president, as well as senator, governor, and so on. SHRUM: Yeah, well, I’d done the John Edwards campaign in 1998, when he came out of nowhere to get elected to the Senate in North Carolina. Thought he was immensely [00:01:00] talented. I had been a friend of John Kerry’s for almost 40 years, and in 1996, when he faced a really tough race against [Bill] Weld, I’d been brought into that race in the beginning of September.
    [Show full text]
  • PROCEEDINGS Institute of Politics
    1990-91 1991-92 Institute of Politics Jnliii i}\ KeHHech- School of Gcivernnient Harvard University PROCEEDINGS Institute of Politics 1990-91 1991-92 John R Kennedy School of Government Harvard University FOREWORD The Institute of Politics continues to participate in the democratic process with the many and varied programs it sponsors: a fellows program for individuals from the world of politics and ihe media; a program for undergraduate and graduate students encouraging them to become involved in the practical aspects of politics; training programs for elected officials including newly-elected members of Congress and newly-elected mayors; a variety of conferences and seminars; and a dynamic public events series of speakers and panel discussions in the Forum of Public Affairs of the John F. Kennedy School of Government. This edition of Proceedings, the thirteenth, covers two academic years—1990-91 and 1991-92—and shows the range of activities through which the Institute addressed the major political issues and events of the day, from the war in the Persian Gulf to the 1992 presidential election. The Readings section provides a glimpse at some of the actors involved and the issues discussed. The Programs section provides details of the many undertakings of the student program—study groups, twice-weekly suppers, intern­ ships, summer research grants, the quarterly Harvard Political Review, political debates and many special projects. There is also information on the program for fellows, on conferences, seminars and meetings, and a list of events held in ttie Forum. On October 25 and 26, 1991, the Institute celebrated the 25th anniversary of its founding with an exciting schedule of events including a traditional lOP supper, a debate between Ron Brown and Clayton Yeutter, chairmen of the Democratic and Republican National Committees and a 1960s dance.
    [Show full text]