DOCSLIB.ORG

Abc News/Washington Post Poll: One Year to Go – 11/2/03

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Abc News/Washington Post Poll: One Year to Go – 11/2/03 ABC NEWS/WASHINGTON POST POLL: ONE YEAR TO GO – 10/29/03 EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE AFTER 9 a.m. Sunday, Nov. 2, 2003 With Bush Weaker on Issues, The Economy Looms Large A year before the 2004 presidential election, George W. Bush is displaying significant weaknesses in his political and personal ratings. But the Democrats who seek to replace him continue to labor in his shadow – and the economy looms large over it all. Bush’s ratings on a range of issues – from Iraq to taxes to health care and beyond – are at or near new lows. On dealing with Iraq, he’s dived from 75 percent approval in late April to 47 percent now; for the first time a bare majority, 51 percent, disapproves. Fewer than one in 10 say he’s made the nation more prosperous. And in a result that can pack a punch, 58 percent, a new high, say he doesn’t understand their problems. But Bush still tops his Democratic rivals in head-to-head match-ups, by margins ranging from nine to 18 points. Even most Democrats don’t know much about the leading challengers’ personal qualities or positions on the issues. And their current preferences are exceedingly weak; three-quarters of Democrats are still shopping for a nominee. The next presidential Election Day, Nov. 2, 2004, is a year to the date from the release of this ABC News/Washington Post survey. 80% Bush's Handling of the Situation in Iraq ABC News and ABC News/Washington Post polls 70% Approve 60% 50% Disapprove 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 4/30/03 6/22/03 7/10/03 8/11/03 8/24/03 9/7/03 9/13/03 9/29/03 10/13/03 10/29/03 ECONOMY – The importance of the economy in the election can hardly be overstated. It’s the most-cited issue in importance to vote choices, especially among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents. The key question, given the strong third-quarter GDP numbers, is whether the economy recovers in a way that’s felt on Main Street, and soon enough to boost Bush’s weak ratings for dealing with it. The big jump in GDP is potentially huge for Bush, and for incumbents more generally. But it can take years for recovery, particularly a “jobless recovery,” to make itself broadly felt; people tend to see the economy in terms of jobs and income, not GDP. Political ill will from the 1990-91 recession lingered through 1994, damaging not only George Bush in 1992 but also Bill Clinton and his fellow Democrats two years later. Today 45 percent of Americans approve of the way Bush is handling the economy; 53 percent disapprove. And the public by a wide margin, 62-35 percent, continues to rate the economy as a more pressing problem than terrorism. Just 22 percent say their personal finances have improved since Bush took office – precisely what it was for his father in August 1992, shortly before he lost re-election under the weight of economic discontent. That compares, unfavorably, to highs of 42 percent under Ronald Reagan and 34 percent under Clinton. 60% Economic Expectations ABC News/Washington Post polls 50% 50% Getting Better Getting Worse Staying the Same 40% 37% 38% 32% 31% 30% 20% 12% 10% 0% Now Nov. 1991 HOW BAD? – Still, while economic discontent is real, it’s not remotely as severe as it was at this point before the 1992 election. Today two-thirds say the economy’s in bad shape; it was 88 percent in November 1991. Today 31 percent say the economy’s getting worse, while 32 percent say it’s getting better; but at this time in 1991, 50 percent said it was still worsening, and just 12 percent saw improvement. A bad economy fuels political discontent. Most people, 57 percent, are now dissatisfied or even angry with the federal government, the most since 1997. But again, it was much higher – 80 percent – amid the deeper economic straits of 1992. (The number who are “angry” is now 15 percent, up from single digits the last few years. The peak was 24 percent in April 1992.) Discontent is an equal-opportunity emotion; Bush’s ratings have suffered, but so has Congress’. Just 40 percent now approve of how Congress is doing its work, down from 57 percent in late April and the lowest since 1997. IRAQ – A stronger economy would be tonic for Bush, especially given some second- guessing on the war in Iraq. Most Americans, 54 percent, say the war was worth fighting – the same as in early September, but down from 70 percent in late April. Fifty-eight percent are determined to stick with the occupation until civil order is restored, despite the casualties; but that’s down from 72 percent in July. Sixty-two percent, a new high, say the level of U.S. casualties is unacceptable (54 percent of men, and 70 percent of women). Concern about getting bogged down is broad and steady; 53 percent remain “very” concerned about it, more than double what it was in April. And the cost is a concern: More than six in 10 oppose the $87 billion in additional U.S. aid for Iraq; this has been steady since Bush brought it up. 100% Views of U.S. Casualties in Iraq 90% ABC News and ABC News/Washington Post polls 80% 70% Unacceptable 60% 50% 40% Acceptable 30% 20% 10% 0% 3/27/03 4/3/03 4/9/03 6/22/03 7/10/03 8/11/03 9/7/03 9/13/03 10/13/03 10/29/03 Sixty-one percent of Americans do accept Bush’s argument that the U.S. presence in Iraq is part of the war on terrorism – again, the same as in early September, but well down from 77 percent in April. As has been the case, there is strong partisanship in views on Iraq. Eighty-one percent of Republicans and 71 percent of conservatives say the war was worth fighting; that falls to 48 percent of independents and 54 percent of moderates, and further to 30 percent of Democrats and liberals alike. There’s a racial split as well; whites, by 61-37 percent, say the war was worth fighting. Nonwhites, by 70-29 percent, say it wasn’t. 100% Stay in Iraq or Withdraw? 90% ABC News/Washington Post polls 80% Stay 72% 69% 70% 65% 60% 58% 50% 40% 38% 32% Withdraw 30% 26% 27% 20% 10% 0% 7/10/03 8/24/03 9/13/03 10/29/03 TERRORISM – More than anything, Bush’s popularity since Sept. 11, 2001, has relied on his response to terrorism, and it remains his best area – 63 percent approve. But that’s a new low, down from 79 percent in April and from a high of 92 percent just after 9/11. Similarly, 62 percent of Americans say the war on terrorism is going well – most, but also down to a new low. It was 83 percent in April. ISSUES/QUALITIES – Bush’s approval ratings on other issues are weaker, and also well off their highs. Sixty-one percent disapprove of his work on the budget deficit; 63 percent disapprove on health insurance, a new high; 53 percent disapprove on taxes, a new high. More disapprove than approve of how he’s handled prescription drug benefits and Social Security. He gets 55 percent approval on education, long a domestic strong point for Bush, but that’s a career low. His overall approval rating is 56 percent; it was 53 percent earlier this month, but 68 percent as recently as June. In terms of personal qualities, the number of people who think Bush understands the problems of average Americans has slid from 61 percent in January 2002 (part of his post-9/11 boost) to 40 percent today, with a corresponding 21-point jump in the number who say he doesn’t get it. Does Bush Understand the Problems 100% of People Like You? 90% ABC News/Washington Post polls 80% 70% 60% Yes 50% 40% No 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 0 1 /99 /00 0 0 0 /03 2/99 6 7/ 2/ 2/ /14/99 9/ 31/99 /15 16/00 2/ 2 11/00 4/ 11/00 /23/00 2 30/01 /27/02 15/02 15/02 30 13/03 29/03 3 1/ 2/ 3/ 6/ 7 4/ 7/ 1 7/ 4/ 9/ 10/ 12 12/ 10/ Only majorities of Republicans and conservatives now think Bush understands their concerns. Eighty-four percent of Democrats, 65 percent of independents and even 29 percent of Republicans say he doesn’t. That’s a clear trouble sign: Empathy is a crucial quality in a political leader, especially when the going gets rough. It was a fatal weakness for Bush’s father, and a source of strength for Clinton. Bush’s ratings for leadership and honesty are higher, but down as well. Sixty-two percent call him a strong leader; the peak during his presidency was 75 percent in 2002. Fifty- nine percent call him honest and trustworthy; the peak was 71 percent, also in 2002. MATCH-UPS – These views describe a weakened president, but not a weak one. If the 2004 election were today, 48 percent of registered voters say they’d support Bush, 47 percent the Democratic nominee. But Bush will run against an actual Democrat, not a generic one, and here he fares better. He gets between 51 and 56 percent support among registered voters in head-to-head match-ups against any of five leading contenders for the Democratic nomination; they get anywhere from 38 to 43 percent support.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Questionnaire for Voters on Presidential Primary
    YOUR ANSWERS ARE CONFIDENTIAL Please check only ONE response for each question. VERSION 2 [A] Are you: [G] To which age group do you belong? 1 Male 2 Female 1 18-24 4 40-44 7 60-64 2 25-29 5 45-49 8 65-74 [B] Are you: 3 30-39 6 50-59 9 75 or over 1 White 4 Asian 2 Black 5 Other [H] Which ONE candidate quality mattered 3 Hispanic/Latino most in deciding how you voted today? (Check only one) [C] In today's Democratic presidential 1 He cares about people like me primary, did you just vote for: 2 He stands up for what he believes 1 Wesley Clark 3 He has the right experience 2 Howard Dean 4 He can defeat George W. Bush 3 John Edwards 5 He has a positive message 4 John Kerry 6 He would shake things up in Washington 5 Dennis Kucinich 7 He is a loyal Democrat 6 Joe Lieberman 7 Al Sharpton [I] Is your opinion of Wesley Clark: 9 Other: Who?_____________________________ 1 Favorable 0 Did not vote 2 Unfavorable [D] When did you finally decide for whom to vote in the presidential primary? [J] Is your opinion of Howard Dean: 1 Favorable 1 In the last three days 2 Unfavorable 2 In the last week 3 In the last month [K] Is your opinion of John Edwards: 4 Before that 1 Favorable [E] Which comes closest to your feelings 2 Unfavorable about the Bush administration: 1 Angry [L] Is your opinion of John Kerry: 1 Favorable 2 Dissatisfied, but not angry 3 Satisfied, but not enthusiastic 2 Unfavorable 4 Enthusiastic [M] Is your opinion of Joe Lieberman: [F] Are you of Hispanic or Latino descent? 1 Favorable 1 Yes 2 No 2 Unfavorable PLEASE TURN THE QUESTIONNAIRE
    [Show full text]
  • National April 26, 2004
    Marist College Institute for Public Opinion Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Phone 845.575.5050 Fax 845.575.5111 www.maristpoll.marist.edu National Poll: Campaign 2004 The Candidates and the Agenda FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday April 26, 2004 Contact: Dr. Lee M. Miringoff Dr. Barbara L. Carvalho Marist College 845.575.5050 This Marist College Institute for Public Opinion poll reports: • Voters divide: George Bush and John Kerry are closely matched nationwide among registered voters. Bush has the support of 47% of the national electorate compared with 44% for Kerry. 9% are undecided. In the 17 battleground states, Bush receives the support of 44% of registered voters and Kerry receives 47%. 1 Question Wording: If November's presidential election were held today, whom would you support if the candidates are: George Bush John Kerry Registered voters Republican Democrat Undecided April 2004 47% 44% 9% Battleground states 44% 47% 9% March 2004 46% 45% 9% November 2003 48% 42% 10% • Minds made up: 69% of registered voters strongly support their choice for president and 22% say they somewhat support their candidate. Just 8% say they might vote differently on Election Day. 1 The battleground states include 17 states. Nine of the battleground states were carried by less than seven points by Former Vice President Gore in 2000. The Gore states include Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. Eight of the battleground states were carried by less than seven points by President Bush in 2000. The Bush states include Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and West Virginia.
    [Show full text]
  • NATO's Secretary General Javier Solana and the Kosovo Crisis
    Ryan C. Hendrickson NATO’s Secretary General Javier Solana and the Kosovo Crisis > Introduction Analysts have already devoted consid- erable attention to NATO’s post-Cold The evolution of North Atlantic War evolution, and the literature on Treaty Organization (NATO) since NATO’s military initiative in Kosovo, the Cold War and its mission in pro- Operation Allied Force, continues to viding European security has under- grow rapidly. Within both bodies of gone profound change following research, however, very little analysis is the Soviet Union’s collapse. NATO devoted to NATO’s political leader, its was created originally to protect Western Secretary General, and how this position Europe from a Soviet invasion. Now the has evolved with the Alliance’s new objec- Alliance plays a substantially different tives. During the Cold War, the Secretaries role in providing transatlantic and, in- General generally played a limited role in creasingly, global security. The founda- NATO, as their influence and powers tions for this evolution were set at were severely constrained by the biggest NATO’s Rome Summit in 1991, where powers in the Alliance. In the post-Cold the Alliance agreed to a new strategic War era and as NATO’s strategic mission concept. In Rome, the Allies agreed to go broadens, however, Secretary General Javier beyond NATO’s traditional and strictly Solana occupied a highly visible and instru- defined Article V’s purpose of collective mental position for the Alliance in Allied defence, and accepted a broader array of Force. Solana’s leadership and authority security objectives. The Rome Summit granted during the bombing campaign noted that security risks had become was considerably different from NATO’s multi-faceted and multi-directional, and Cold War Secretaries General.
    [Show full text]
  • 2003-III-13 Research Director
    behavior research center’s Latino Poll NEWS RELEASE Contact: Earl de Berge LTLP 2003-III-13 Research Director DEMOCRAT LATINO VOTERS IN ARIZONA FAVOR WESLEY CLARK. HOWARD DEAN AND JOE LIEBERMAN CLOSE BEHIND Phoenix, Arizona, October 2, 2003. Half of registered Latino Democrats in Arizona have a preference for who they will support in the upcoming Democratic presidential primary in Arizona. And, while Howard Dean and Joe Lieberman are close on the tail of Wesley Clark, Clark is ahead despite only recently entering the race. Among those with a preference, Clark has 25 percent of the Latino vote, a six-point lead over Howard Dean who is at 19 percent and eight points ahead of Joe Lieberman, who claims third place with 17 percent. Dick Gephardt is in fourth place with 14 percent of the vote, while John Edwards attracts roughly ten percent. Further behind is John Kerry at six percent. At the bottom with less than five percent each are Bob Graham, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kucinich and Carol Mosely Braun. The strength of Wesley Clark is impressive considering he has only been in the race a few weeks and his number one position among Latino voters may be a reflection of the generally conservative and the patriotic/pro-military profile of many Latino voters. At the same time, the fact that 48 percent of Arizona’s Latino voters remain uncommitted suggests with months of campaigning ahead, the outcome is anything but certain. Not all Latino voters are Democrats and each year the proportions are shifting gradually toward the GOP.
    [Show full text]
  • Air Force Command and Control the Need for Increased Adaptability
    AIR UNIVERSITY AIR FORCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE Air Force Command and Control The Need for Increased Adaptability LT COL JEFFREY HUKILL, USAF, RETIRED (TEAM LEADER) COL LARRY CARTER, USAF, RETIRED COL SCOTT JOHNSON, USAF, RETIRED JENNIFER LIZZOL, DAF CIVILIAN COL EDWARD REDMAN, USAF DR. PANAYOTIS YANNAKOGEORGOS, DAF CIVILIAN Research Paper 2012–5 Air Force Research Institute Air University Press Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112–6026 July 2012 Disclaimer Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Air Force Research Institute, Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency. Cleared for public release: distribution unlimited. Air Force Research Institute (AFRI) papers and other scholarly Air University studies provide independent analysis and constructive discussion on issues impor­ tant to Air Force commanders, staffs, and other deci­ sion makers. Each paper can also be a valuable tool for defining further research. These studies are available electronically or in print via the AU Press website at http://aupress.au.af.mil/papers.asp. To make comments about this paper or submit a manu­ script to be considered for publication, please e­mail AFRI at [email protected]. ii Contents List of Illustrations iv CSAF Tasking Letter v About the Authors vii Executive Summary ix Introduction 1 A Framework for Analyzing Command and Control Structures 2 Analytical Model 2 Results
    [Show full text]
  • 42, the Erosion of Civilian Control Of
    'The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the US Air Force, Department of Defense or the US Government.'" UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY Develops and inspires air and space leaders with vision for tomorrow. The Erosion of Civilian Control of the Military in the United States Today Richard H. Kohn University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill The Harmon Memorial Lectures in Military History Number Forty-Two United States Air Force Academy Colorado 1999 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Lieutenant General Hubert Reilly Harmon Lieutenant General Hubert R. Harmon was one of several distinguished Army officers to come from the Harmon family. His father graduated from the United States Military Academy in 1880 and later served as Commandant of Cadets at the Pennsylvania Military Academy. Two older brothers, Kenneth and Millard, were members of the West Point class of 1910 and 1912, respectively. The former served as Chief of the San Francisco Ordnance District during World War II; the latter reached flag rank and was lost over the Pacific during World War II while serving as Commander of the Pacific Area Army Air Forces. Hubert Harmon, born on April 3, 1882, in Chester, Pennsylvania, followed in their footsteps and graduated from the United States Military Academy in 1915. Dwight D. Eisenhower also graduated in this class, and nearly forty years later the two worked together to create the new United States Air Force Academy. Harmon left West Point with a commission in the Coast Artillery Corps, but he was able to enter the new Army air branch the following year.
    [Show full text]
  • New Hampshire October 2003 COUNTY N
    New Hampshire October 2003 COUNTY N= 400 100% Belknap ........................................ 01 ( 1/ 31) 15 4% Carroll ........................................ 02 10 3% Cheshire ....................................... 03 25 6% Coos ........................................... 04 12 3% Grafton ........................................ 05 23 6% Hillsborough ................................... 06 128 32% Merrimack ...................................... 07 44 11% Rockingham ..................................... 08 88 22% Strafford ...................................... 09 41 10% Sullivan ....................................... 10 14 4% Hello, my name is $I and I'm conducting a Presidential Survey for 7NEWS/ Suffolk University and I'd like to get your opinions on some political questions. Would you be willing to take five minutes answering some questions? N= 400 100% Continue ....................................... 1D ( 1/ 49) 400 100% S2. Are you presently registered as a Democrat, Republican, Independent/ Unenrolled, or Other? N= 400 100% Democrat ....................................... 1 ( 1/ 50) 200 50% Republican ..................................... 2 0 0% Independent/Unenrolled ......................... 3 200 50% Other .......................................... 4 0 0% S3. At this point how likely are you to vote in the Democratic Primary for President on January 27th? N= 400 100% Very Likely .................................... 1 ( 1/ 53) 296 74% Somewhat Likely ................................ 2 104 26% Somewhat Unlikely .............................
    [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]
  • Democratic Candidates Still Tightly Bunched
    The Harris Poll® #64, October 31, 2003 Democratic Candidates Still Tightly Bunched Lieberman, Clark have small lead over Dean, Kerry and Gephardt. _____________________________________ by Humphrey Taylor No front-runner has yet emerged in the race to be nominated as next year’s Democratic candidate for the presidency. The latest Harris Poll conducted among a sample of 596 Democrats and independents finds that Senator Joe Lieberman and General Wesley Clark have a small lead over Governor Howard Dean, Senator John Kerry and Senator Richard Gephardt. However, at this stage nobody has started to move away from the pack. This survey, which was conducted by Harris Interactive by telephone between October 14th and 19th, finds that Joe Lieberman is the best known of all the candidates, with 81% of all Democrats and independents having heard of him. He is followed in terms of familiarity by Al Sharpton (70%), Richard Gephardt (68%), John Kerry (63%), Howard Dean (58%) and Wesley Clark (53%). Only 50% or less of all Democrats and independents have heard of Senator John Edwards, former Senator Carol Moseley- Braun or Congressman Dennis Kucinich. None of the presidential aspirants have succeeded in attracting the support of more than the 13% of Democrats and independents who currently support Joe Lieberman. He is closely followed by Wesley Clark with 12%. Right behind them come Howard Dean (11%), John Kerry (10%), and Richard Gephardt (8%). The pattern of responses is broadly similar among Democrats and independents who voted in the 2000 elections with Joe Lieberman leading the field with 14%, followed by Wesley Clark with 13%.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 108 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 149 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2003 No. 147 House of Representatives The House met at 12:30 p.m. and was the fiscal year ending September 30, civil rights issue has touched my no- called to order by the Speaker pro tem- 2004, and for other purposes,’’ requests tion of fairness in government policy in pore (Mr. ADERHOLT). a conference with the House on the dis- very profound ways. Since I chaired the f agreeing votes of the two Houses there- Oregon Legislature’s first hearing on on, and appoints Mr. STEVENS, Mr. nondiscrimination some 30 years ago, I DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO COCHRAN, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. DOMENICI, have observed the ebb and flow of the TEMPORE Mr. BOND, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. BURNS, debate on gay rights, attended hear- The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be- Mr. SHELBY, Mr. GREGG, Mr. BENNETT, ings, and learned the stories of real fore the House the following commu- Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CRAIG, Mrs. people. I have also developed a wide nication from the Speaker: HUTCHISON, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. circle of friends and have many col- WASHINGTON, DC, BROWNBACK, Mr. BYRD, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. leagues who are gay and in committed October 20, 2003. HOLLINGS, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. HARKIN, Ms. relationships. I have come to under- I hereby appoint the Honorable ROBERT B. MIKULSKI, Mr. REID, Mr. KOHL, Mrs. stand the equality for gays and les- ADERHOLT to act as Speaker pro tempore on MURRAY, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Extensions of Remarks E1407 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS
    July 29, 2002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E1407 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS FAREWELL TO CONGRESSMAN Mr. HALL and the Hunger Committee received people in all seasons and form a rich legacy TONY P. HALL the 1992 Silver World Food Day Medal from for generations to come. the Food and Agriculture Organization of the PRELUDE: SPEECH OF United Nations. Mr. HALL is a recipient of the Mrs. Judy Snopek, Pianist. INVOCATION: HON. RUSH D. HOLT United States Committee for UNICEF 1995 The Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, Chap- OF NEW JERSEY Children’s Legislative Advocate Award, U.S. lain, United States House of Representa- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AID Presidential End Hunger Award, 1992 tives. Oxfam America Partners Award, Bread for the REVEREND COUGHLIN: Members and Thursday, July 25, 2002 World Distinguished Service Against Hunger staff and friends, today we gather to remem- Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, today I am both Award, and NCAA Silver Anniversary Award. ber, memorialize and celebrate the life and Despite the number of awards he has won, service of Dr. James David Ford as Chaplain pleased and saddened to be in a position to to the House of Representatives for over 21 present these remarks about TONY HALL. TONY HALL’s impact can be felt not by the years. I wish also to acknowledge the Parlia- Pleased because I have had the opportunity to number of plaques and awards in his office, mentarian, Charlie Johnson, and Reverend serve with TONY for the past four years, and but by the number of men, women and chil- Ron Christian, both very close friends to Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Wesley Clark
    , . __. .: ..D e = YW dm 4 Iv W -0 October 2 1, 2003 ._. .. w .. .. r Office of General Counsel Federal Election Commission 999 E Street, Northwest Washington, District of Columbia 20463 Re: Potential Federal Campaign Finance Law Violations by Presidential Candidate Wesley K. Clark, the University of Iowa, the University of Iowa College of Law, the University of Iowa Foundation, and the Richard S. Levitt Family Lecture Endowment Fund Federal Election Commission Office of General Counsel: The purpose of this letter is to report potential federal campaign finance law violations by Presidential Candidate Wesley K. Clark, the University of Iowa, the University of Iowa College of Law, the University of Iowa Foundation, and the Richard S. Levitt Family Lecture Endowment Fund regarding a paid public lecture by Presidential Candidate Clark at the University of Iowa on Friday, September 19,2003. BACKGROUND On September 17,2003, in Little Rock, Arkansas, retired United States Army General and former NATO commander Wesley K. Clark announced his candidacy for president of the United States. (See attached media stories.) Two days later, Clark delivered the University of Iowa College of Law’s 2003 Levitt Lecture (“Lecture”). (See attached University news releases.) University of Iowa College of Law Dean N. William Hines and Clark agreed in writing that the University of Iowa College of Law would pay Clark and his agent $30,000 plus travel expenses for two to deliver the Lecture. (See attached copy of contract.) Prior to announcing his candidacy, Clark served as an investment banker, a board member for several corporations, and a pundit on the cable network CNN.
    [Show full text]