[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 15 (Tuesday, February 22, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
          WHO'S WORSE: 60 MINUTES OR REPRESENTATIVE GUTIERREZ

                                 ______


                         HON. MICHAEL G. OXLEY

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 22, 1994

  Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I recommend to the attention of Members the 
following article by a well-respected, long-time Congress watcher, Norm 
Ornstein, concerning the lamentable episode of ``60 Minutes'' which 
recently aired regarding the U.S. Congress.
  Mr. Ornstein correctly points out that the public's misunderstanding 
of Congress and the legislative process was manipulated by CBS News to 
reflect poorly on the institution. In addition, the freshman 
Representative interviewed for the story made several factual errors, 
including the statement that members received a pay increase for 1994. 
If Members will refer to their paychecks this month, they will see that 
this was a total misrepresentation on the part of ``60 Minutes'' and 
the gentleman from Illinois.
  The gentleman from Illinois also expressed the opinion that we ought 
to get rid of all of the limousines on Capitol Hill. In fact, it is 
only a handful of Members of the congressional leadership who have at 
their disposal some town cars, and these are provided chiefly for 
reasons of security.
  Again, I recommend the following column to the attention of my 
colleagues:

                  [From the Roll Call, Feb. 14, 1994]

          Who's Worse: 60 Minutes or Representative Gutierrez?

                        (By Norman J. Ornstein)

       A New York-based writer who covers the media was stunned 
     recently at a Congressional retreat to see the deep hostility 
     lawmakers felt toward the press. How could these Members of 
     Congress, veterans in the public eye and accustomed to the 
     rough-and-tumble of politics, not be inured to the press 
     criticism that comes with the territory?
       To be sure, some Members may be as thin-skinned as Bobby 
     Ray Inman, but that does not explain the rancor they feel, 
     the deep sense of unfairness at the treatment of Congress and 
     Congresspeople by the national press.
       Most lawmakers feel the way they do because the phenomenon 
     is real; when it comes to reporting about Congress, all the 
     normal rules of fairness and scrupulousness go out the 
     window; cheap shots are common and increasingly so for 
     network news shows and newsmagazines as for sleazy tabloids 
     on TV or at the supermarkets.
       Attack almost any institution in America, including Big 
     Business or Wall Street, or any individual from Michael 
     Milken to Amy Fisher, Lorena Bobbitt, Lyle Menendez, Michael 
     Jackson, Woody Allen, or Tonya Harding, and you will find 
     substantial numbers of credible people who will come to their 
     defense. Burned by the instances of outrageous manipulation 
     in ``investigative'' journalism, like the alleged expose of 
     GM trucks by ``Dateline: NBC,'' networks and other major 
     journalistic outlets try to present at least the pretense of 
     fairness, showing the other side, or giving an ``on the other 
     hand.''
       But Congress is different. Playing to the public hostility 
     towards Congress, Washington, and politicians in general is a 
     no-lose situation for the press; it's like throwing red meat 
     to hungry dogs, and getting full credit for it.
       The irresistible impulse is triggered by the fact that it 
     is so easy, and with no price whatsoever to pay--no lawsuits, 
     no embarrassing retractions, no need to think about fairness 
     or balance. After all, no matter how cheap the shot, there 
     are few if any defenders of Congress outside the institution 
     itself--and those inside the institution can always be 
     dismissed as self-serving. What's more, a reporter or 
     producer can always find one or more self-serving Members 
     eager and willing to join in the bashing.
       There's no lack of examples. But the most recent 
     illustration of this dynamic, and the most vivid in months or 
     years, came a week ago on ``60 Minutes,'' long the flagship 
     of CBS News, resident for years at the top of the Nielson 
     ratings. And of all correspondents, Morley Safer, the urbane 
     and sophisticated veteran reporter, was the prime offender. 
     If ``60 Minutes'' ever stood above the fray as the epitome of 
     tough-minded fairness--unlike its competitors or imitators--
     it can't claim that lofty perch any more.
       The ``60 Minutes'' idea was typical, if trite: do a modern-
     day version of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, showing a 
     freshman who came to Congress with a romantic and utopian 
     vision of public service but who was quickly jolted by the 
     reality of awful politics, smarmy politicians, and lobbyists 
     who work to bring him to his knees. While his colleagues are 
     too weak to stand firm, he suffers all the slings and arrows, 
     emerging stronger, sadder, and wiser.
       The self-serving freshman in this case was Democratic Rep. 
     Luis Gutierrez of the South Side of Chicago. Gutierrez, with 
     prompting and help from a smirking Safer, portraying himself 
     as a cross between Mr. Smith and Mother Teresa who tried to 
     reform Congress and was slapped down by its leaders and 
     stabbed in the back by his fellow freshmen; who tried to 
     stick with his principles by voting against NFTA despite 
     threats and intimidation by President Clinton and business 
     lobbyists who made it clear that the campaign spigot would be 
     shut off if he didn't toe the line. The result, he suggested, 
     was retaliation by the leaders through poor committee 
     assignments consigning him to obscurity.
       Mr. Gutierrez's imitation of Mr. Smith was bought hook, 
     line, and sinker by Morley Safer. But to anyone knowledgeable 
     about the contemporary Congress, he was more like Eddie 
     Haskell, the friend of Walley Cleaver known for his 
     transparent insincerity in ``Leave it to Beaver.''
       Reform, to be sure, is a major theme of the freshman class, 
     but the heavy lifting on reform issues, and not without 
     controversy, was led by Members like Karen Shepherd (D-Utah), 
     Eric Fingerhut (D-Ohio), and Jennifer Dunn (R-Wash).
       ``Who is this Guy Gutierrez?'' was the comment of an active 
     Republican member of the Joint Committee on the Organization 
     of Congress. ``He never asked to testify before our 
     committee, and I've never seen him when we put together 
     reform proposals.''

                           *   *   *   *   *


                          ____________________