annenberg media ♪ by: narrator: welcome to destinos: an introduction to spanish. in this episode, you'll begin hearing and experiencing a different variety of spanish as raquel interacts with natives of argentina. así que ¿ud. anda buscando a la señora rosario? sí. ¿ud. la conoce? claro que la conozco. muy buena la doña. lástima que se ha mudado para la capital. you should not be concerned if you do not completely understand the conversational spanish. getting the gist of the conversation by relying on actions and context is fine.

no tengo ninguna doble disponible para hoy. ud. no es de aquí, ¿no? no. soy de los angeles. este es mi primer viaje. ilos angeles! yo tengo un amigo en los angeles. se llama carlos lópez. claro, ud. no lo conocerá, ¿no? aside from the story itself, in this episode you will learn how the numbers 100 through 1,000 are expressed in spanish. cien... doscientos... trescientos... cuatrocientos... quinientos... seiscientos... setecientos... ochocientos catorce. aquí estamos en el novecientos... y mil. you will get a glimpse of argtinian history. and now, destinos: an introduction to spanish.

captioning of this program is made possible by the annenberg/cpb project and the geraldine r. dodge foundation. narrador: en méxico, don fernando todavía espera recibir noticias de rosario. raquel, la abogada que hace la investigación para la familia de don fernando hace un viaje a madrid y habla con la señora teresa suárez. la señora sabe dónde está rosario y gracias a la señora suárez raquel ahora tiene su dirección en buenos aires, argentina.

¿son cartas de rosario? sí. en ellas está la dirección. "estancia santa susana". el avión pasa por la costa africana cruza el océano atlántico y hace una breve escala en río de janeiro con destino a buenos aires capital de la república argentina. buenos aires es un puerto--

el puerto más grande de la argentina. aquí viven muchos descendientes de inmigrantes de europa: españoles, ingleses, franceses, alemanes y sobre todo, italianos. como buenos aires es la capital aquí se encuentra el congreso nacional y también la casa rosada, donde vive el presidente. la república de argentina es una democracia pero la democracia es frágil y en varias ocasiones hubo gobiernos militares. esta es la zona céntrica de buenos aires. y muy cerca está el hotel alvear.

es aquí donde llega raquel después de su largo viaje transatlántico. raquel baja del taxi en frente del hotel. está cansada y quiere subir a su habitación para descansar. buenas tardes. buenas tardes, señorita. tengo una habitación reservada. ¿a nombre de quién? raquel rodríguez. un momento, por favor. sí... aquí tengo su nombre, pero la reserva no es para hoy. ¿cómo? lo siento, señorita la reserva es para pasado mañana. ino es posible! mire ud. vengo de muy lejos, de madrid. estoy muy cansada. no es posible que... lo siento, pero así es.

veamos qué tengo. ud. pidió un habitación doble con cama matrimonial ¿no es cierto? sí, señor. no tengo ninguna doble disponible para hoy. ¿qué hay entonces? un momento, por favor. sí, andrea. ¿está disponible la habitación trescientos catorce? ¿y la cuatrocientos catorce? no. ¿y las suites? pues, ¿cuál está disponible? la quinientos catorce... la seiscientos catorce... la setecientos catorce... y la ochocientos catorce.

gracias. tengo una suite. pasado mañana, si lo desea se cambia a la doble. ¿y cuánto cuesta? es económica. doscientos dólares por día. está bien. la tomo. raquel sube directamente a su habitación. le da una propina al botones. iah! ( suspira ) aunque está muy cansada, raquel decide contar el dinero que le queda de su viaje a españa. cien... doscientos... trescientos... cuatrocientos... quinientos... seiscientos...

setecientos... hocientos... novecientos... y mil. bueno. ahora no tengo por qué preocuparme por dinero. pedro: gracias, raquel. esto es muy importante para mí. raquel: ud. le dice que rosario tuvo un hijo. suárez: sí, angel... angel castillo. raquel: ¿son cartas de rosario? suárez: sí. en ellas está la dirección. ( zumbido ) ( explosiones ) ( sirena de ataque aéreo ) don fernando: rosario. ( campanas de iglesia suenan ) raquel: "estancia santa susana". al día siguiente, raquel sale en busca de rosario

en la estancia santa susana. ¿ud. conoce la estancia? sí. conozco toda la zona. ahora estamos por escobar, cerca de los cardales. ud. no es de aquí, ¿no? no. soy de los angeles. este es mi primer viaje. ilos angeles! yo tengo un amigo en los angeles. se llama carlos lópez. claro, ud. no lo conocerá, ¿no? no hay ninguna señal. no se preocupe. falta poco. la estancia santa susana ahora es un lugar para turistas.

los turistas escuchan la música folklórica disfrutan de una comida especial y miran los juegos de los gauchos. ♪ llegando está el carnaval quebradeño mi cholitay ♪ ♪ llegando está el carnaval quebradeño mi cholitay... ♪ por fin, raquel llega a la estancia santa susana. en la estancia raquel se encuentra con un señor joven. el señor le dice que rosario no vive allí y que la única persona que posiblemente sepa algo de rosario es cirilo. tal vez cirilo la sepa. bueno, moza. a mí me gusta conocerla. así que ¿ud. anda buscando a la señora rosario?

sí. ¿ud. la conoce? claro que la conozco. muy buena la doña. lástima que se ha mudado para la capital. ¿y ud. sabe la dirección? bella moza, ella vivía con el hijo, el doctor... ¿el hijo es médico? iclaro! y muy buen hombre. vivía en la calle gorostiaga... al novecientos, eso. una casa blanca-- muy linda casa. la calle gorostiaga... número novecientos. pues, muchas gracias, señor. por nada. como en sevilla, una vez más raquel busca el número de una casa. pasan por el cien... doscientos... trescientos... cuatrocientos... quinientos...

seiscientos... setecientos... ochocientos. finalmente, llegan al novecientos pero no saben el número exacto. bueno... tampoco en el novecientos cuarenta ni en el novecientos cincuenta ni en el novecientos sesenta. todos abogados y dentistas. sigamos adelante, por favor. voy a preguntar en esta casa a ver si conocen a angel castillo.

buenas tardes. ¿está el doctor? sí, por supuesto. pase. tome asiento. gracias. ( golpes a la puerta ) siga adelante. tiene una paciente, doctor. bueno. buenas tardes. adelante, por favor. pase. bien. por allí.

tome asiento. ¿quién la envía? perdone ud. mi nombre es raquel rodríguez. soy abogada y vengo de los angeles. estoy buscando a una persona. iah! disculpe. pensé que era una paciente. bien. ¿y en qué la puedo servir? mire ud. mi cliente, un señor de méxico me ha enviado a buscar a su primera esposa: una señora llamada rosario del valle de iglesias. tengo entendido que su hijo angel castillo, es médico y vive, o vivía, en esta calle. ( suspira ) perdone que lo haya molestado pero pensé que siendo colegas tal vez ud. podría conocerlo. señorita, ud. está hablando

de mi madre y de mi hermano. ¿su hermano? sí. angel. bueno, quiero decir el... mi medio hermano. lleva el apellido de su padre pero el primer esposo de mi madre murió. debe haber un error. el murió en la guerra civil española. este señor de méxico no puede ser el padre. el doctor duda de la historia de fernando y rosario. entonces, raquel le da la carta de teresa suárez; la carta en que la verdad se revela. suárez: rosario no murió. gracias a dios escapó de esa tragedia pero ella creía que fernando había muerto.

necesito hablar con su madre. tengo una carta para ella de parte de teresa suárez. ¿está en casa? señorita... mis padres... murieron hace años. lo siento mucho. ipobre don fernando! pero al menos podrá conocer a angel. ¿dónde vive? no lo sé. perdimos contacto hace mucho años. ¿perdieron contacto? iqué lastima! ¿y puedo saber lo que pasó? más tarde, arturo lleva raquel al cementerio a la tumba familiar. esta es la tumba familiar. aquí están enterrados mis padres. ¿puedo tomar una foto para mostrársela a don fernando?

sí, por supuesto. ( obturador chasca ) ¿le molesta que hablemos de esto ahora? no. allí, arturo le cuenta de la triste historia de su hermano angel castillo. arturo: mi padre era un hombre muy estricto. quería que angel estudiara ciencias económicas. pero angel tenía otras inclinaciones. mi madre sentía un afecto muy especial por mi hermano. angel fue su primer hijo. una vez, mis padres y yo vinimos

a buenos aires a visitar a angel. en esa visita, mi padre descubrió que angel había abandonado sus estudios. una escena horrible, pues mi padre estaba furioso. ( sin sonido ) esa misma noche, mi padre sufrió de un ataque cardíaco. yo nunca perdoné a angel. dicen que angel se embarcó como marinero y que se fue a buenos aires. un día llegó una carta para mi madre.

pero angel nunca volvió a buenos aires. raquel: ud. sabe que yo tengo que buscar a su hermano, ¿verdad? sí, claro. y por mi parte, creo que ya es hora que yo perdone a mi hermano... que resuelva este asunto. señorita rodríguez ¿podría ayudarla en su investigación? su ayuda será indispensable. bien. salgamos de aquí. y pensemos en nuestra tragedia. esta es mi ciudad-- la ciudad de los porteños... una ciudad de inmigrantes. ¿y la familia de su padre, doctor? por favor, basta de "doctor". arturo. podemos tutearnos. yo te trato de "vos", como hacemos aquí y vos me tratás de "tú", como dicen uds.

ide acuerdo! si me permitís tengo que hacer una llamada importante. está bien. bueno. mi viaje a buenos aires está lleno de sorpresas. primero llegué y no habían reservado mi habitación. el recepcionista me ofreció otra habitación. ¿recuerdan? tengo una suite. pasado mañana, si lo desea se cambia a la doble. ¿y cuánto cuesta? es económica. doscientos dólares por día. está bien. la tomo. subí directamente a mi habitación porque estaba exhausta y no hice nada anoche. conté mi dinero y descansé. cien... doscientos... trescientos...

pero esta mañana, fui a la dirección que me dio la señora suárez, la estancia santa susana. cuando toqué a la puerta, ¿quién contestó? ¿rosario? no. rosario no contestó la puerta. contestó un hombre joven. el joven creía que rosario se había mudado a la capital pero no sabía su dirección. ¿quién sabía la dirección de rosario? cirilo sabía la dirección. según cirilo, rosario se mudó a la ciudad para vivir con su hijo, un doctor. cirilo me dio el nombre de la calle pero no sabía el número exacto.

entonces, volví a la ciudad. el chofer y yo buscamos el número novecientos. entonces, pregunté por angel en una casa. voy a preguntar en esta casa a ver si conocen a angel castillo. ¿y qué descubrí en ese momento? iqué sorpresa y qué coincidencia! arturo y yo fuimos al cementerio

y allí él me contó la historia de rosario y de su hijo, angel. ¿y qué pasó? angel se fue a la capital a estudiar ciencias económicas. ¿completó sus estudios, o abandonó sus estudios? angel abandonó sus estudios y se dedicó a pintar. rosario y su segundo esposo, martín, no sabían nada de esto. cuando martín descubrió la verdad hubo una escena horrible. y poco después, ¿qué pasó?

@@ bueno, ¿y cuál es la información más importante para mi cliente, don fernando? ¿vive rosario en buenos aires o no? no. rosario no vive en buenos aires. rosario murió en mil novecientos ochenta y siete. iqué triste para don fernando!, ¿verdad? ay... esta investigación no es fácil. primero, voy a españa y tengo dificultades en hablar con la señora suárez. ahora estoy en la argentina, ¿y qué pasa? rosario ya ha muerto y angel ha desaparecido.

si angel se fue de buenos aires, no será fácil encontrarlo. ¿dónde estará? te traje un poco de agua. isalud! isalud! vení que te quiero mostrar mi ciudad. aquí es la torre de los ingleses frente a la estación retiro. y ésa es la plaza san martín y la avenida del libertador. y allí es la zona del puerto de buenos aires. mañana comenzaremos la búsqueda de angel.

captioned by the caption center wgbh educational foundation

annenberg media ♪ with additional funding provided by: for information about this and other annenberg media programs call 1-800-learner and visit us at www.learner.org. mujme casé, trabajé, unacrié tres hijos.ena. trabajé mucho y lo planeamos todo. todo menos la degeneración macular de los ojos. me ha robado mi vista y mi independencia. y esta enfermedad de los ojos será una epidemia para cuando mis hijos alcancen mi edad.

llame al 1-800-437-2423 para información gratis de la organización de investigaciones de la degeneración macular. tu palabra también es 'sipc'. ¿podría tenerla en otra oración, por favor? en el evento improbable de que su firma de corretaje cierre, sipc está ahí para protegerlo. s-i-p-k. ¿no conoce a sipc - securities investor protection corporation? no importa. se lo deletrearemos. visite nos www.sipc.org.

annenberg media ♪ public opinion plays an influential role. it represents the pulse of the nation, and there are strong ties between public opinion and how government and politicians behave. today, public opinion reflects an american paradox -- on the one hand, we express a common faith in our democracy. on the other, we express cynicism about government and politics. for those trying to assess and use public opinion, it is a daunting challenge. i'm renee poussaint.

whatever public opinion may be on an issue, it has become an important tool for citizens to influence the government. no one should underestimate the power of a poll or a letter-writing campaign or any avenue by which public officials can discover what americans are thinking. our voices are heard, even at the highest levels. [ sirens wail ] the shock waves from the terrorist attacks on september 11th rolled through american society. in addition to destroying thousands of lives and millions of dollars in property, the terrorists had grounded the nation's airlines.

because they had slipped past airport security, the saboteurs shook americans' faith in the safety of air travel. fearing more attú!ks, the government shut down the airports and kept the skies empty of commercial traffic. for days, the only people walking the halls of the nation's airports were maintenance workers, marshals, and other security forces. america's economy had come to a screeching halt and congress was under pressure to get it moving again. for veteran republican pollster william mcinturff, the shock of september 11th caused historic shifts in american public opinion. right after the attack, 6 out of 10 americans said they were worried about flying. a month later, still almost a majority of americans said they were worried about flying. i think that people believed and the members of congress believed you had to take action to demonstrate something was being done to make sure that people could fly and be safe.

our challenge was, is to say we've got to do something to get this economy going. now this is where public opinion played a serious role. poussaint: what was the best way to convince americans to get back on the plane in order to jump-start the economy? democrats wanted to make 28,000 airport screeners federal employees, with training and pay equal to law enforcement officers. republicans did not want any more federal employees. they wanted to remove supervision of the screeners from the airline companies but leave the hiring and training in the hands of private contractors. congressman james oberstar, ranking democrat on the transportation and infrastructure committee, had long advocated upgrading the screening process at airports. they, the traveling public, see the lack of attentiveness. they also know that these are minimum wage workers.

they know that there was a huge turnover every two or three months in that screener workforce. poussaint: on october 11th, the senate passed an aviation security bill unanimously. checkpoint personnel at the 142 largest commercial airports would be federal employees, but without the right to strike. the white house was trying to tiptoe around the issue of federal workers. transportation secretary norman mineta told congress the president would accept federal workers if they could not strike and were exempt from civil service protections. but that infuriated conservative house republican leaders who saw the federalization of screeners as a boost to unions, who would organize them, and democrats, who would recruit them. mcinturff: the people who are in the leadership of our party were saying, you can't convince me that just because there are going to be federal union members that they are really going to be safer at the airport -- that's not the standard.

we have lots of stuff to do in terms of training, in terms of screening, but we can do all those things under a private system and do them better. poussaint: but while the leadership was digging in its heels, public opinion stood firm in favor of federalizing screeners. initial polls by the washington post and time/cnn found overwhelming public support r federal takeover of airport screening. because if you're a member of congress, from the tim you step off a plane when you go back to your congressional district, the people in the cabs, the people in the airport, the people you meet in town meetings, your donors, your friends, your neighbors, you know what they all say is, "hey, what are you going to do about..." fill in the blank. and when they get those kind of issues where everywhere they go and everyone they talk to is saying, "what are you going to do about x?" they come back and say, "wow, guess what, people are really riled up and they want us to do something." and guess what, congress acts. poussaint: despite the clamor for federalizing employees, the republican leadership of the house refused to budge. they succeeded in passing a bill that would keep screeners

in the private sector. and they did what was right. and it wasn't an issue that mr. delay or mr. armey pushed, it was an issue, i think, that members felt basic comfort with having a good combination of the federal government with its particular role and then the private sector, which does such a good job with its role. poussaint: after the house vote, the legislation went to a conference committee to resolve differences with the senate version. but the battle over making screeners federal employees created a stalemate, and the american public was still not returning to air travel, despite the president's order to increase the number of national guard troops patrolling terminal corridors. public opinion continued in favor of federalizing screeners. an abc/washington post poll found 55% in favor of a government takeover

while only 36% wanted private companies in charge. on capitol hill, the stalemate continued. clearly, after the vote that did not include a federalized screener workforce resulted in a reaction from the public, and that outcry of public opinion came into play as we went into conference with the senate. [ siren wails ] poussaint: public anxiety spiked again when an american airlines jet crashed after takeoff on the outskirts of new york city. although not linked to terrorism, it came amid news reports about more breaches in airport security. these events forced a compromise on capitol hill. soe did act, we got it done, buried our differences. we bring to this body a bill that will substantially enhance security

and restore airline finances. poussaint: events and public pressure had moved both sides to agreement, compromising to make screeners federal employees, but only on an interim basis with an option to privatize them later. man: on this vote, the yeas are 410, the nays are 9, the conference report is agreed to. poussaint: the post-vote analysis pointed to a disconnect between republican party policy and public sentiment on this issue. oberstar: they were pursuing their own ideological bent and they misjudged what the public wanted. poussaint: on november 16th, president bush and a delegation from congress went to the airport for the signing ceremony. today, we take permanent and aggressive steps to improve the security of our airwa. poussaint: and so, because of public opinion, there was a dramatic shift by republicans

from private to federal control of airport screeners. we are all aware that public officials, political candidates, and media outlets are generating a mountain of polls to gauge public opinion and that they use these polls to guide their actions. however, while polls can be a useful measure, poorly designed polls provide inaccurate and misleading findings. who is polled, what they're asked, and how they are asked a question can make all the difference. it is important for people who rely on polls to make judgments to understand the basics. every four years, there's a national contest -- the presidential elections -- who's up, who's down? americans wonder. public opinion polls,

a barometer of that national contest, help us keep track of the changing fortunes of candidates. ♪ out of sight ♪ ross perot will carry the fight ♪ ♪ something's gotta give, bush has gotta go ♪ ♪ the people want perot poussaint: polling, the modern day scientific method of measuring public opinion, first drew national attention with two colossal failures to predict presidential outcomes. in 1936, alf landon was proclaimed the winner and lost. and in 1948, harry truman was picked to lose and won. man: you've watched the debates -- learn anything new? did you decide? express your opinion tonight at debates.org. poussaint: what elements make up a good poll? carefully crafted questions arranged in a precise order. and a sample that accurately reflects

the makeup of a larger population -- that's the scientific part. analyzing and interpreting the results is more of an art. the ordinary person would think if you have 1,000 respondents, it would not be as accurate as if you have a million respondents. but the truth of the matter is, if you have 1,000 adults selected properly and the interviewing done well, then you're going to have a more accurate sample than if you just go out and interview a million people "at random." poussaint: during and after the 1992 presidential campaign, polling numbers were watched with close attention. a third party candidate, ross perot, threw his hat into the ring with george bush, the incumbent republican candidate, and bill clinton, the democratic nominee. americans wondered, would perot's candidacy succeed? and if not, would it cause a shift in the fortunes

of the other two candidates by fragmenting the vote? i saw the perot movement as, initially, as being able only to kind of fire a shot across the bow of the status quo and shake things up. and nobody was more surprised than myself that for some period of time, 30 or 45 days, he had a chance to actually be president of this country. as you and i know, we are in deep voodoo. man: perot himself did not use any polling data at all for planning his behavior in the campaign. he considered that immoral. i mean, it was an issue campaign for him, it was a campaign of principle, and he thought that trying to shape your campaign with polls was not something he was going to do. if i could have one wish for the two parties, it would be to stop taking polls and go talk to people. washington doesn't listen. washington takes a 1,900-person poll sample

and makes a decision affecting 250 million people. poussaint: the league of women voters asked perot to participate in the presidential debate because he was polling at 10% or better of the projected vote -- he got a huge boost from that inclusion. but elation soon turned to sorrow when the votes were counted on election night. man: we asked on the exit polling, "would you have voted for ross perot if you thought he could win?" and it turned out he would have gotten 40% of the vote. it's extraordinary. but because people discounted it and they didn't believe he had a chance of winning, he ended up getting 19% of the vote. poussaint: perot and the party he helped form, united we stand, did not give up. they started planning for the 1996 presidential campaign. their strategy included buying national airtime on nbc

for a series of infomercials. we're going to vote on 17 vital issues that face our country and we will send the results directly to your congressmen and senators so that they can know exactly how you feel about government reform. poussaint: during the broadcast, ross perot asked viewers to respond to a poll he had placed in tv guide. the poll questions mirrored his agenda -- cutting federal spending, reducing the federal debt, a presidential line item veto, and shutting out special interest groups. 1.4 million americans responded to this survey. the polling community had nothing but harsh words for the methods used to create this poll. hart: his questions were biased, they were loaded to get certain answers. secondly, he put this questionnaire in tv guide, which is fine, i suppose, as a place to go,

but that's not a cross-section of america, and it's self-selecting who sends this in. it's not the fact that a million people answered, it's the fact that you don't have any sample at all. poussaint: perot, feeling the heat from the polling community, yet still wanting legitimate polling results on these questions, sought out gordon black, president of gordon black corporation, to re-administer the poll. black: he approached me through his son-in-law to ask us if we would be willing to poll for him. my condition was that we had to rewrite the questions to be real polling questions. poussaint: perot agreed to all of black's conditions. how did the black corporation poll differ from the tv guide poll? poussaint: the black poll asked, "which of the following deficit reduction approaches

would you prefer?" a. a program that relies entirely on tax increases with no spending cuts? b. a program that requires $1 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases? or c. a program that requires at least $2 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increases? the results of the black poll, arrived at by using a representative sample, and the tv guide poll differed. on the question about making bigger federal spending cuts, 97% of the respondents answered yes to the tv guide poll question. on the black poll, 5% favored a tax increase with no spending cuts, 27% favored a dollar-for-dollar cut on taxing and spending, and 60% favored a $2 cut in taxes for every $1 of spending cuts.

it's easy to see from this example that the black poll had more depth and gave a more precise measure of opinion than did the tv guide poll. perot: if we simply keep asking the question, "is it right or wrong?" then we can get our country back on the track. poussaint: knowing something about good polling practices makes us appreciate that getting reliable polling results is trickier than it looks. it's time to pick up a shovel and clean out the barn. let's get to work -- it will be tough, but it will be fun. although it is evident that public officials and political candidates use polls to guide their actions, that does not mean that their decision-making is guided solely by poll results. in assessing public opinion, politicians use polls as only one form of feedback.

they also talk with their constituents, they read their mail, listen to interest groups, they interpret election results, and they rely on their own political instincts and values. man: you're looking at the house chamber in the vermont statehouse and what is once again an extraordinary turnout. poussaint: it was an issue that brought more people to vermont's state capitol than any other in memory. i've been working here for 20 years, and there's never been an issue like this one. poussaint: david moats won a pulitzer prize for his editorials in vermont's rutland herald about the state's passage of a so-called "civil unions bill." it was the most volatile and heated and divisive issue i've ever covered. poussaint: the civil unions legislation was passed by vermont's general assembly in the spring of 2000. woman: well, there you go. poussaint: it gave this state the distinction of becoming

the first to give gay and lesbian couples the same legal rights as married couples. and by the end of today, we will be, believe it or not, legally connected to each other. well, civil unions is about sex, morality, marriage. it's about how society organizes itself. it's about equal rights. it's about the dignity of people and tolerance. poussaint: and it's also about public opinion and the role it played or perhaps didn't play in decision-making by vermont lawmakers. man: they weren't listening, they didn't want to listen. poussaint: reverend craig bensen was and is an ardent opponent of civil unions. he says there's absolutely no doubt that the majority of vermont's electorate opposed civil unions. the majority opposed both same-sex marriage, civil unions, and comprehensive domestic benefits,

as high as 3-to-1 against, specifically when polled in the spring of 2000 at the vermont town meetings. poussaint: supporters of civil unions dispute that 3-to-1 margin of opposition, but they still concede that the majority of vermont voters did not want to see civil unions become law. talk to the people. a majority of them, according to the polls, do not support marriage for homosexuals. poussaint: public hearings were overflowing, and broadcast live by vermont public television, rallies were huge, and a letter-writing campaign jammed the mailboxes of legislators. there is no doubt that lawmakers knew they were treading in dangerous political waters. i give my own personal poll of what the people, hundreds and hundreds, are saying and feeling about the homosexual marriage debate and of how upset they are with their elected officials

and how they will put them out of office if they vote yes. poussaint: there's no doubt that mark macdonald was fighting a strong current of public opinion. macdonald: i'm a history teacher, and all change that is worth doing has opposition. poussaint: these days, when mark macdonald isn't teaching middle school civics and history, he's tending to his small cattle farm in orange county, vermont. fading election signs spotlight a time when macdonald wore a third hat, that of vermont state senator. he was one of the legislators who voted to pass the civil unions bill, despite the public will. macdonald: i don't know how you do something that's against what you think is right and your conscience and your oath of office and then look people in the eye and say,

"i did the wrong thing because you asked me to." poussaint: macdonald says vermont's supreme court virtually forced the legislature to pass civil unions. the supreme court ruled that the current statute, which provided a host of benefits and privileges for married people, was unconstitutional because it denied the same benefits and privileges to others who were willing to make the same commitment. poussaint: regardless of the supreme court ruling, many vermont voters were outraged when the civil unions bill was enacted into law. their own districts were 2-to-1 opposed to it, and they still would say, "i don't care what my people are saying about this." moats: public opinion shifts with the wind. it can be one thing one day and one thing the next. we elect leaders to think about what the right course is, to consider the public opinion, take it into account, and consider the constitution. i think depending upon the significance of the issue,

there is an expectation in the public mind that there are some areas where the representative is free to use their best judgment, and there are some areas where the representative had best pay very careful attention to who they're representing. poussaint: reaction to passage of civil unions was immediate. a grassroots campaign sprang up almost overnight. people expressed their contempt during rallies and took to the streets to show their disapproval. "take back vermont" signs were everywhere, and at election time, civil unions became the hot button issue. a lot of legislators who supported civil unions lost their seats -- it was a dozen or 15 house members lost their seats because they voted for civil unions, and so the house went republican. it had been democratic, it went republican. one democratic senator lost his seat, but the senate retained its democratic majority. poussaint: that single senator who lost his seat was mark macdonald.

moats: he knew it would be dangerous for his re-election if he voted for it. i believe the democrats told him that, "we have enough votes, you can vote against it if you think you need to to save your seat," but he decided his conscience wouldn't allow him to do that. he voted for civil unions and lost his seat. so he's one of those profiles in courage that people talk about. courage was only something for a few of the folks who voted. defiance was the message that usually came across. poussaint: so depending on who you talk to, mark macdonald was either a courageous legislator or a lawmaker who didn't listen to public opinion. by voting macdonald and his colleagues out of office, civil unions' opponents say they reacted the only way they could. that was the only option we were given in the process that we have, because vermont does not have a referendum or a popular-vote way of coming at issues.

poussaint: so while public opinion may not have tipped the scales in the legislative debate over civil unions, in the general election, it was the only thing that mattered. no democratic government can afford to simply ignore public opinion, and political leaders in a democracy who disregard it do so at their peril. the term for those who too often ignore public opinion might be "former leaders." we know what we want the government to do. what's the problem? why doesn't it simply follow the public will? the problem is, there isn't one public, there are many. people seldom think alike or even about the same things. in this vast and varied nation, differences in religion, education, region, class, gender, race, and ethnicity

produce a broad spectrum of views about the political world. even when people have similar backgrounds, they often have different opinions. we wish everyone would just think like us, but they don't. as a wise old saying puts it, "never talk politics with someone you just met." for those trying to implement the public will, this great diversity of opinion makes it difficult to even define public opinion -- which public are we talking about? of course, none of this stops political leaders from engaging in a constant search for public opinion, employing ever more sophisticated and expensive methods. the truth seems to be that this search is like the quest for the holy grail. as soon as sometng that can be called public opinion is identified, it changes. for "democracy in america," i'm renee poussaint.

annenberg media ♪ for information about this and other annenberg media programs call 1-800-learner and visit us at www.learner.org.

annenberg media ♪ this program has been edited in sequence. captioning is made possible by the annenberg/cpb project from the birthplace of the constitution, national security versus freedom of the press. it's been my experience that lying increases the closer you get to the top.