annenberg media ♪ by:

ya verás las sorpresas que te esperan cuando despiertes, roberto. primero, conoceremos a nuestro abuelo. narrador: bienvenidos a destinos: an introduction to spanish. primero vamos a ver algunas escenas de este episodio. ¿cómo era rosario? bueno, mi madre... era una mujer llena de vida, afectuosa. a veces tenía momentos de tristeza y yo no entendía por qué. tú eres el esposo de raquel, ¿verdad? no, carlitos yo soy soltera. entonces ¿son novios? carlos: mi hijito, ¿por qué preguntas esas cosas, eh? en este episodio vamos a aprender el vocabulario relacionado con el dinero y los asuntos financieros.

y aquí está la lista entera de gastos. muy bien. ¿y los recibos? están en este sobre. tuve que cargar mucho a mi tarjeta de crédito para no gastar todo mi efectivo. muy bien. ay, luis, ¿cómo estás? bien. quería decirles que ya he comprado mi pasaje para méxico. raquel se pondrá muy contenta de verte. ¿sabe ella que voy por allá? no, no, no, no. será una completa sorpresa. hasta luego. captioning of this program is made possible by the annenberg/cpb project and the geraldine r. dodge foundation.

ramón: bueno, arturo nos gustaría saber algo sobre tu mamá. consuelo: sí. tenemos mucha curiosidad por saber de ella. sí. comprendo perfectamente. ¿cómo era rosario? bueno, mi madre... era una mujer llena de vida, afectuouosa. a veces tenía momentos de tristeza y yo no entendía por qué. desde niño, me di cuenta que trataba angel... irosario! irosario!

ya verás las sorpresas que te esperan cuando despiertes, roberto. primero, conoceremos a nuestro abuelo, el padre de papá. ¿recuerdas que él creía que su padre había muerto? pues, iestá vivo! y vive aquí en méxico. dicen que es un rico y que tiene una gran hacienda. ( suspira ) angela: hablando de dinero... tengo que ver cómo está mi situación económica. en mi cuenta de ahorros en san juan, no tengo casi nada.

¿cómo es posible que en mi cuenta de ahorros tenga solamente diez dólares? ¿en qué he gastado todo mi dinero? el banco también me ha mandado esta cuenta. iah...! ahora recuerdo. saqué trescientos dólares con mi tarjeta de crédito. ¿cómo voy a pagar esta cuenta si no tengo dinero en mi cuenta de ahorros? tengo que admitirlo: manejo muy mal el dinero. mamá y papá tenían razón. yo soy un poco... impráctica. pero tú... el hijo inteligente... el hijo responsable. me imagino que tienes todo muy bien organizado, ¿no?

roberto, siento mucho la pelea que tuvimos.

¿me vas a perdonar? arturo: y desde que mi madre murió nunca supe más nada de angel. iqué triste! pero gracias a raquel he podido conocer a mis sobrinos los hijos de angel. consuelo: ahora tendrán tiempo para conocerse mejor, espero. sí, por supuesto. ¿y es la primera vez que vienes a méxico? sí, es la primera vez. y tengo muchas ganas de conocer el país. debes regresar para las fiestas patrias. pronto vamos a celebrar la fiesta de independencia. ¿contra españa? bueno, en méxico celebramos varias fechas: la independencia, revolución y algunas batallas importantes. sabes, arturo, como en todos los países de américa latina

también nosotros celebramos el aniversario de la independencia de españa. el dieciséis de septiembre se dio el grito de independencia. en ese día en el pueblo de dolores el padre miguel hidalgo supo que los españoles habían descubierto los planes de independencia del grupo de patriotas. el padre miguel hidalgo era uno de estos patriotas. entonces en la madrugada de ese día el padre tocó las campanas de la iglesia llamando a todos los habitantes del pueblo. cuando llegaron hidalgo les habló otra vez de la igualdad entre los hombres. les habló de cómo los indígenas, mestizos y criollos deberían tener los mismos derechos que los españoles que gobernaban las colonias. dijo que era el momento de ser una nación independiente. y así empezó la lucha por la independencia.

por ese motivo cada dieciséis de septiembre hay grandes celebraciones en todo el país. como dice ramón, debes regresar para celebrar estas fiestas con nosotros. ime gustaría! consuelo: pero, mercedes no has dicho nada del cinco de mayo. tienes razón. otra lucha importante que celebramos es contra los franceses. como ya sabrás, arturo en mil ochocientos sesenta y uno los franceses invadieron méxico. napoleón tercero siempre había soñado con poseer territorios en américa. en esa época, benito juárez era presidente de méxico. pero nuestro país estaba dividido. había un gran conflicto entre los conservadores y los liberales. llegaron las tropas francesas y con la ayuda de los conservadores napoleón pudo instalar a maximiliano de austria como emperador de méxico. pero el imperio de maximiliano no duró mucho.

pues, las batallas con juárez continuaban. en mil ochocientos sesenta y siete maximiliano fue capturado y fusilado. benito juárez asumió su autoridad una vez más. una de las batallas más importantes ocurrió el cinco de mayo de mil ochocientos sesenta y dos en la ciudad de puebla. allí el general zaragoza venció a las tropas francesas. aunque la lucha contra los franceses duró varios años más la batalla de puebla representa el espíritu y la valentía con que los mexicanos luchaban. cada año celebramos el cinco de mayo como un ontecimiento muy importante. también en muchas partes de california se celebra el cinco de mayo. para nosotros es una fiesta tan importante como el cuatro de julio. incluso en muchas escuelas públicas de los angeles

se celebra el cinco de mayo. yo no sabía eso. bueno, claro, en miami no hay mucha gente con ascendencia mexicana. el cinco de mayo no es muy importante allí. carlos: si tienes tiempo, arturo debes de visitar el museo de las intervenciones en esta ciudad. somos el único país que tiene un museo de este tipo. es verdad, méxico ha sido invadido varias veces. es algo de lo que estamos muy conscientes. arturo, ¿sabrás algo sobre nuestra revolución de mil novecientos diez? sí, un poco. sé quién es pancho villa... arturo, nuestra revolución de mil novecientos diez fue mucho más que pancho villa. tienes que entender que entonces el país pasaba por una época muy difícil. porfirio díaz era el presidente y muchos lo acusaban de proteger sólo a los ricos. el iniciador de la revolución fue francisco madero.

madero convocó al pueblo mexicano a la lucha contra porfirio díaz y así en mil novecientos diez comenzó la revolución. además de pancho villa también emiliano zapata fue muy importante. el era un campesino que luchaba contra los ricos en el sur del país. la revolución duró diez años desde mil novecientos diez hasta mil novecientos veinte. murieron más de un millón de mexicanos y el país tardó muchos años en recuperarse social, política y económicamente. es verdad. por eso, muchos mexicanos se establecieron en los estados unidos. mis abuelos, por ejemplo se fueron a vivir al sur de california en mil novecientos doce. muy comprensible, eso. ah... ¿y cómo está don fernando? pues, débil. sin embargo, él quiere regresar a la gavia.

tal vez eso le haría muy bien. es cierto. y con él allí podríamos tener una gran reunión con toda la familia. pedro: naturalmente. raquel también debería estar presente. por supuesto. espero que no pienses regresar a los angeles todavía. no, no, voy a pasar unos días más en méxico. mis padres vienen de visita. carlitos: ipapá! ipapá! carlos: perdón. con permiso. sí. hijito ¿qué te ocurre? ¿tuviste una pesadilla? sí. bueno, pues quédate con nosotros y verás como se te pasa. sí. ya se siente mucho mejor. ¿verdad? sí. iqué rápido se ha recuperado, carlitos! es que estuvo enfermito, con gripe. pero ahora se le ve muy bien. tú eres el esposo de raquel, ¿verdad? no, carlitos yo soy soltera.

entonces ¿son novios? carlos: mi hijito, ¿por qué preguntas esas cosas, eh? porque sólo los novios o los esposos se besan en el jardín ¿no es cierto? ( consuelo ríe ) ( suspira ) hombre: pero, maría... ¿y si raquel se enoja? ¿no es mejor preguntarle si desea ver a luis? ihace años que ya no son novios! ay mira, tú ve a ver tu televisión, como haces siempre y déjame a mis asuntos. yo conozco a mi hija. iyo también conozco a mi hija! pero yo creo que... ( teléfono suena ) hello? iay, luis! ¿cómo estás? bien. quería decirles que ya he comprado mi pasaje para méxico. justamente estábamos hablando de eso. ¿cuándo sales?

mañana. tengo solo unos días de vacaciones más y quiero aprovecharlos. raquel se pondrá muy contenta de verte. ¿sabe ella que voy para allá? no, no, no, no. será una completa sorpresa. tengo tantas ganas de verla. yo creo que a ella también le gustará verte a ti. bien. entonces nos veremos en méxico. sí, sí, está bien. nos vemos. ibuen viaje! gracias. también para uds. hasta luego. anda, viejo. vete a sentar allí. tengo que terminar de pagar estas cuentas. mujer: bueno, la última cuenta. ihíjole! todo está tan caro. icaramba! pagué cinco cuentas y ya no me queda nada en la cuenta corriente.

tengo que transferir dinero de la cuenta de ahorros a la cuenta corriente. narrador: como muchas personas mayores de la clase trabajadora maría rodríguez se preocupa por el dinero. como todo el mundo los mayores tienen sus gastos: la casa... el teléfono... el agua... y el gas. pero a diferencia de los jóvenes sus ingresos son fijos. los ingresos son el dinero que entra en una casa. es lo que gana una familia. los gastos son el dinero que sale.

hay gastos para mantener la casa la salud y comprar la comida. en fin, hay muchos gastos en la vida diaria. los ingresos de los mayores son fijos porque ya no trabajan. dependen de la seguridad social o de otro sistema. pero las cuentas y los precios no son fijos a causa de la inflación. y mientras los ingresos de otras personas suben los ingresos de los jubilados no cambian.

pancho... parece que vamos a méxico. y aquí está la lista entera de gastos. muy bien. ¿y los recibos? están en este sobre. tuve que cargar mucho a mi tarjeta de crédito para no gastar todo mi efectivo. muy bien. mañana le daré tus recibos a mi secretaria y le diré que te haga un cheque. eso sería muy conveniente. tengo que hacer cuentas en mi oficina de los angeles. si puedo regresar con un cheque, tanto mejor. tenemos una secretaria que siempre grita "ihay muchos gastos y pocos ingresos! ¿cómo me van a pagar a mí?" tu secretaria no tiene de qué preocuparse ni tú tampoco. mañana tendrás tu cheque también. gracias, pedro.

quiero que me des cuanto antes los documentos que tienes de rosario y angel. tendremos que mostrárselos a fernando. por supuesto. en el hotel tengo fotos de angel un certificado de nacimiento y mañana estarán reveladas las fotos que tomé durante mi viaje. ¿fotos de qué? de la tumba de rosario también de la de angel. tengo fotos de las casas donde vivieron. muy bien. esos papeles son muy importantes para fernando... y para nosotros también. bueno, tendremos que regresar a la sala. los otros nos estarán esperando. arturo, ya estoy lista. ¿nos vamos? arturo: cuando quieras. los llevo al hotel. ah, gracias, ramón pero no es necesario que te molestes. no es molestia. de veras. tenemos carro. entonces podemos aprovechar para hablar de nuestros asuntos

esta misma noche si no estás muy cansado. de acuerdo tío pedro. ¿mañana vendrán a ver a fernando? bueno, a primera hora tenemos que ir a ver a roberto. si le den el alta podemos ir todos juntos a ver a don fernando. ojalá así sea. estoy segura que sí. uds. tienen que preparar a don fernando para la visita. claro, será una emoción muy fuerte pero se pondrá muy feliz. bueno. ha sido un placer conocerlos a todos. raquel encantado. adiós. todos: adiós. hasta luego.

trescientos siete, por favor. con gusto. ¿estás muy cansada para una copa? no. la verdad, yo también estaba pensando lo mismo. bien. entonces, tengo una pequeña sorpresa para vos. vuelvo en seguida. bueno, aquí estoy, esperando a arturo. acabamos de llegar de la casa de pedro. iqué bien lo pasamos con la familia! creo que tuvimos un buen encuentro. la familia le pidió a arturo que hablara de alguien. ¿de quién querían que hablara?

¿cómo era rosario? bueno, mi madre... era una mujer llena de vida, afectuosa. la familia quería que arturo hablara de rosario. después, seguimos conversando y la familia le dijo a arturo que debería regresar a méxico. ¿por qué le decían que regresara a méxico?

como dice ramón, debes regresar para celebrar estas fiestas con nosotros. me gustaría. querían que arturo regresara para conocer más el país. como arturo no conoce méxico muy bien la familia empezó a hablar de las fiestas nacionales y algo de la historia de méxico. después seguimos conversando y carlitos, el hijo de carlos y gloria, bajó. había tenido una pesadilla. pero carlitos también dijo algo que a arturo y a mí nos dio mucha verguenza. ¿recuerdan qué dijo carlitos? carlitos dijo que nos vio a arturo y a mí besándonos en el jardín. iqué verguenza!

¿qué pensará la familia de mí? ( suspira ) después revisé las cuentas con pedro. le di los recibos de todos los gastos de mi viaje. el prometió darme un cheque por los gastos y otro por mis servicios. entonces, pedro me pidió algo. el quería que yo le diera algo importante. ¿qué quería pedro que yo le diera? quiero que me des cuanto antes los documentos que tienes de rosario y angel.

tendremos que mostrárselos a fernando. pedro quería que yo le diera unos papeles muy importantes de rosario y angel. estos papeles pueden ser importantes para comprobar que angela y roberto son los nietos verdaderos de don fernando. es un poco tarde pero tengo ganas de seguir conversando con arturo. esta noche en el jardín... ( suspira ) no sé. el va a bajar en cualquier momento con una sorpresa para mí. ¿qué puede ser? la trescientos dieciocho por favor.

con gusto. hay un mensaje para ud. gracias. ¿te acordás? ipor supuesto que sí! iay arturo, qué bonito marco le has puesto! iah, no tan linda como la modelo! ¿qué es? ¿un mensaje? sí, a ver. ies de pedro! dice que lo llame en cuanto llegue al hotel. pero, isi acabamos de llegar de su casa! ¿será un mensaje atrasado? no, mira la hora. llamó hace unos minutos. ¿le habrá pasado algo a don fernando? captioned by the caption center wgbh educational foundation

annenberg media ♪

for information about this and other annenberg media programs call 1-800-learner and visit us at www.learner.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 ♪ captioning is made possible by the annenberg/cpb project