Gregory A. Fossedal, Direct Democracy in Switzerland, 2002.

15
Press

Thomas Jefferson is often quoted as saying he would rather live in a country without elections than in a country without newspapers. Jefferson said this to emphasize his belief in the importance of the free exchange of information and ideas. In fact, the two, far from constituting a kind of either-or choice, tend to go together.

Newspapers in and of themselves provide a kind of freedom by enabling the people to keep track of what their leaders are doing and, knowing this, to keep those leaders in check. A free press helps make elections meaningful by enabling people to cast an informed vote, intelligently directed toward the ends they want. In this sense, they have a similar effect to that of direct democracy. And newspapers help ensure the fact of elections in any case, as those who read them insist on having that voice in the way their country is governed. Newspapers and elections thus are each vital by themselves and they support one another.

Switzerland has plenty of both. The typical Swiss surely casts more votes every year than the citizen of any other country. And the people read more newspapers per capita than in any other country in the world. (With a respectful nod to Norway, first by some measures.) In fact, if we may suppose that the Jefferson relationship applies incrementally -- if an improvement in degree in the free press equals and causes an improvement in democracy, while a decline in the state of the free press weakens that democracy -- then Switzerland must have an excellent press corps. After all, its democracy is in a refined, balanced, and advanced state. It is hard to believe this would be the case if the press in Switzerland were not highly effective at informing people. This is, in fact, the case, whether one judges by the quantity or the quality of the Swiss journals.

One reason for this strength and diversity is structural. The political division of the country into small but important units creates a demand for local news. Thus there are at least two strong newspapers in the capital of Bern, two in Zurich, and two (again) in Geneva, as well as important papers serving Basel, canton Aargau, Vaud, Luzern, and three major Italian-language papers in the Ticino.

Yet because of Switzerland's size, such papers can be available almost anywhere in the densely populated Northern tier of Switzerland within roughly two hours. Switzerland's language groups, which are concentrated regionally but also cut across the cantons, also help provide a national market for these largest urban papers. The French-speaking Swiss of Zurich may well take the Tribune de Geneve -- not out of necessity but from a natural affinity for his first tongue. Likewise the German-speaking resident in Geneva may subscribe to Tages Anzeiger or the Neue Zürcher Zeitung. It appeared to me that many Swiss elites take newspapers in more than one language, both to achieve a balance of subjects and coverage and to keep their first two or three languages polished.

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung, the newspaper of record as The New York Times is in the United States, appeared to be more widely available and read in French-speaking Switzerland than the leading French papers in German-speaking Switzerland. If this is so, it probably reflects somewhat the size of Zurich, as well as the tendency for a national newspaper of record to form, much as the world seems to gravitate toward a main currency and one main language of international business. Although the NZZ isn't the first or second leading newspaper in terms of raw circulation, it is read widely by political and business elites. Even so, if accurate, this appears to be a rare exception to the tendency to emphasize the French portion of Swiss culture. Figure 15.1 shows this graphically by comparing the number of newspapers, radio stations, and television stations by language. There is a preponderance of French and Italian radio stations over German, and an even stronger one among television stations -- of which there are more in Italian than either French or German. This progression may reflect the fact that television has a strong entertainment component, while newspapers are more information based, and radio lies somewhere in between.

As well, the Swiss culture of openness to foreign ideas and persons opens Swiss newspapers up to significant foreign exposure and competition. Since the Swiss newspapers are of a high and serious quality, there is remarkably little penetration by the major French and German dailies, but there is some. English newspapers, on the other hand, are highly popular, considering the language is not an official one. London's Financial Times, the "pink sheet," is widely available, and one sees it being read on the train between Zurich and Geneva; less so as one ventures South of the main, and highly cosmopolitan Northern line. Naturally The Wall Street Journal, being both a serious English language paper and the newspaper of financial record for the world-dominant U.S. markets and dollar, is widespread. The New York Times is not nearly as visible as one might expect, but this is partly because of the availability of the Herald-Tribune, which offers copy not only from the Times but from other newspapers and wire services. The Washington Post, a powerful but somewhat less global paper, is virtually invisible in Switzerland. By contrast, one does see the London, Manchester, and other major dailies from England, on occasion.

Compare two reporters of international news -- or of merely "economic" news, which all recognize is increasingly global in nature. One reporter is fluent in French, German, and English, or at least two of the three, and can perhaps stumble by in Italian as well. The other is fluent in one of these, and may have studied another in college, or even reported from a foreign-language country for a time, but is not integrated from the day she or he is born right up through the present in that other language. Swiss newspapers, from the Blick tabloid up to and including Neue Zürcher Zeitung, generally contain significantly more international news than one would find in a U.S. paper. It is obvious that the multilingual reporter would have certain advantages in keeping up with daily events and trends. More than this, however, the Swiss reporter has a certain multicultural advantage, a facility for seeing certain events through the eyes of a different language and an alertness to developments or ideas that may, for a time, be present only in some culture different from his own. Both American and British reporters have enjoyed a portion of this advantage over the last fifty to one-hundred years, and this in part may account for why English-language journalism is relatively distinguished, even considering the "size" of the English language in world culture.

A portion of this is natural and somewhat misleading, considering Switzerland's size and position. A news story in the Chicago Tribune about events in Cleveland, some six hours away, would be a domestic story. In Switzerland, events comparably distant are usually foreign. As well, the Swiss, being European, are affected by the rulings of the federal government of Brussels, and the central bank in Bonn, as the people of the U.S. are influenced strongly by events in Washington, D.C.

Domestic news is most noticeable not for its difference in quantity from the American press, but for its different focus and tone nature. News about the culture outside of politics and business is roughly equal in volume, but different in character. The typical Swiss newspaper has somewhat more news about cultural events, such as operas or even movies, and somewhat fewer pieces about personalities or "megatrends." Within the Swiss press, the Romance language newspapers place more emphasis on the arts, and treat them more seriously than do the Swiss German papers. If one wanted to follow fashion trends, or read a serious essay about Fellini's technique or the latest American action films, one would be more likely to find it in Corriere del Ticino than in the German papers. The German papers, especially Neue Zürcher Zeitung, treat movies, ballet, and literature somewhat in the manner of the Financial Times -- more space and broader coverage than in, say, The Wall Street Journal, but far less than one would find in The New York Times or Le Monde. Since Switzerland is fully integrated into three major language cultures (Italian, French, and German) and at the same time is as or more fluent in English, its analysis of cultural matters, as with politics, is often revealing and sophisticated. It is surprising, in a sense, that Swiss scholars and journalists have not established themselves as a more dominating presence in European literary culture.

Switzerland has fewer crime stories both in print and in the press, and the stories there have a less sensational tone and photographic coverage. Of course, Swiss crime rates, particularly murder, are lower than in the United States and even much of Europe, so part of this difference reflects a difference in social conditions. One gets the sense, however, that for similar incidents, there is a greater restraint in the Swiss press.

During one of my visits, a story broke in the Aargauer Zeitung about an ugly child custody battle between a husband and wife involving outright seizure and what could be called kidnapping of the children, international rescue and extradition attempts, and allegations of violence and abuse. One of the parents was a well-known and respected official in the Aargau government. Yet the paper had declined to report the story for more than two years because of possible repercussions for the children, allowing the legal battle over their status to be concluded without adding to it a media circus to add to the confusion and heighten the bitterness.

Konrad Stamm, editor of der Bund, the venerable Bern daily, notes that Swiss newspapers make more than 95 percent of their sales to subscribers. This is a much higher proportion than one sees in most of Europe or in comparable parts of the United States -- namely, large cities. 'There is less pressure to sell a paper every day by having the most glaring photograph or headline, under this system," he notes.

Swiss political news contains relatively fewer stories about maneuverings in parliament or the administration. This reflects partly the fact that these institutions have less concentrated power than in the United States or Europe. There is also, however, a visible tendency in the press to be somewhat less confrontational. In 1999, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution surveyed more than 150 news stories on the issue of Swiss participation in the European union that appeared in major Swiss newspapers in February and March. A majority of these articles referred to one or another leading participant in the debate. Among these were Christoph Blocher, a leading opponent of Swiss entry, and Ruth Dreifuss or Flavio Cotti -- both supporters of European union entry and the country's presidents in 1999 and 1998, respectively; Cotti was also foreign minister for several years in the 1990s. But in only seven of the articles, or about 4 percent of the sample, was there a strong element of personal confrontation described. The Swiss stories portrayed the European debate as a substantive debate, more than a clash between special interests. Here again, it is difficult to isolate completely which differences in coverage occur because the Swiss press does its job differently, and which differences simply reflect the fact that their society is different. For instance, money appears to play a significantly lesser and different role in Swiss elections than in other democracies; the parliament and the administration are of a completely different character. The Swiss capital, being that of a country not as "great" as others in terms of sheer might and economic size and weight, does not attract as many ambitious and venal fortune seekers as one might expect to find in Washington, Moscow, or Berlin. But there are clues that the Swiss press, if it could somehow be transplanted into the major cities of the United States, would probably cover the same events much differently. When Switzerland did have a major scandal involving one of its federal council members in the 1980s, the result was a flurry of stories for several days and a resignation. The index of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, the year of her resignation, contained more entries having to do with guest-workers and asylum-seekers than it did about the greatest scandal in the history of the Swiss presidency.

This is not to say that Swiss people are somehow never confrontational, competitive, greedy, or unethical in politics as in other spheres. As a matter of emphasis, however, the culture tends to muffle rather than amplify these traits -- the political system in part, but the press as well. The Swiss journalist seems to be, if one may use a word that has almost become pejorative at times, rather patriotic compared to his counterpart in many other Western countries.

"It's our system," Giancarlo Dillena, the editor of Corriere del Ticino told me, smiling. "We have to like it." One used to hear this more often among citizens and journalists of the representative democracies, and still does at times. One hears it, however, less often than among the Swiss, and it has less personal feeling or immediacy to it. If a reporter from some advanced country made a comment like that, he would feel somewhat trite, and speak of the "system" being "ours" more in the manner of an absent landlord discussing a property he does not tend or even often visit. In Switzerland, even among a highly cynical group of professional scoffers, a sophisticated journalist such as Dillena says such things unself-consciously, in a matter-of-fact tone.

In contrast to the lesser emphasis on elite maneuverings, Swiss political journalism, as might be expected, places somewhat more emphasis on popular trends. The initiative and referendum tools makes the people themselves an integrated part of the legislative process, and thus, a natural and indeed inevitable part of the story. Thus, for example, the lead story about a law passing or a treaty agreement being reached will frequently refer prominently to the prospects for its being challenged by a facultative referendum -- especially, of course, if the change was in any way controversial. In October of 1999, for example, parliament wrestled with the issue of medical insurance premiums, which late in the decade began to rise at un-Swiss-like rates exceeding 5 percent a year in many cantons. The president at that time, Ruth Dreifuss, proposed a measure to enact progressive rates -- charging the rich more money for their insurance. In announcing the government's annual adjustment in rates, Madame Dreifuss made front-page news across the country. The stories covering this event in Aargauer Zeitung, Corriere del Ticino, Le Temps, Neue Zürcher Zeitung, and Tages Anzeiger all made mention of the likely referendum battle within the first four paragraphs.

It is tempting to attribute all of these differences to the difference in political structure -- popular access, a restrained federal center, and others -- and its important and pervasive cultural impacts. The emphasis on popular wisdom, however, and the tone of respect for it by editors and reporters goes beyond what these structural political factors can account for. There is a subtly different spirit in the Swiss news room and in the Swiss journals. It is a feeling of citizens communicating with other citizens -- who, if not precisely equal in economic or educational terms, are nevertheless of a rough sort of equality or level of judgment.

In the summer and fall of 1999, for example, Le Temps ran a number of articles that either focused on Blocher or that discussed him at length in the course of some broader discussion of an issue such as taxes or European integration. Blocher is not reflective of the paper's editorial policy, which is centrist and internationalist. Still less is he a natural favorite of the Geneva voters, who tend to be liberal and, if not anti-German, certainly suspicious of a cultural conservative German Swiss such as Blocher. Yet Le Temps made it a frequent point to mention Blocher's intellectual seriousness and contrasted him favorably with other politicians who were less forthright in advancing their beliefs. One article solicited a brief summary of the Blocher phenomenon from Uli Windisch, a Geneva sociology professor. Windisch obviously didn't agree with most of Blocher's policy positions. Yet the professor warned of the tendency to demonize Blocher, and spoke of the need to "detoxify" him.

The result of this approach, and of the relatively objective approach taken to reporting on Blocher's party in news stories in Le Temps, was not only to arm Genevans against dismissing Blocher lightly but also to provide valuable insight to domestic and foreign observers. Blocher's efforts to strengthen his party in Western (French-speaking) Switzerland was one of the more important stories in Switzerland in 1999. Without such support, he and his party's ideas were reaching natural limits of growth in Zürich and the East. With inroads into Vaud, Fribourg, Geneva, and the Ticino, by contrast, Blocher's party, the "SVP," seemed likely to continue its growth and eventually overtake one or more of the three established parties with two seats on the executive council. By treating Blocher seriously, even respectfully, Le Temps provided more fodder to both his opponents and supporters alike -- because it was supplying important information about him.

Oddly enough, the political parties as such seem to receive substantially more political coverage in Switzerland than in other democracies. After all, in many political theaters, such as the operations of the parliament and the voting for seats, partisan considerations appear to be less important than in the rest of Europe and North America. The coverage, however, treats the parties primarily as vessels for ideas. A typical story in Le Temps in the fall of 1999 tracked how the social conservative parties were trying to attract voters through tax cuts and other such measures, while Mrs. Dreifuss and others on the center left were offering social benefits. But since many of the organs of representation are proportional in nature, the result was not the series of bitter fights to the death in district after district, but a relatively civil debate about ideas. Every politician naturally wants to see his or her party and their ideas do well, but few politicians need to defeat some personal rival in order to survive. Here again the line between what reflects the press's choice in coverage and what reflects its mere reflection of a different style of politics, is blurry. But there is at least a strong element of press choice.

There was little of class-war coverage in these stories, treating news and policy changes as if the main job was to determine who was "hurt more" -- the rich, the poor, owners of automobiles, renters of apartments, or any other group. Instead, policy debates were described and conducted in the press, relatively, as if most members of society were blindfolded from such consid-erations or could see them or wanted to see them only dimly. During interviews, journalists showed little interest or inclination to pursue issues like this very hard. As one example, when asked which groups of people entry into the European Union would tend to help or hurt, editors and reporters at CASH, the financial weekly, and at Tages Anzeiger, Le Temps, and Corriere del Ticino all reacted blandly.

"I don't think we've done anything on that," former CASH editor Markus Gisler said. "And I don't think it's been a major issue.... It's probably true that there is more support for integration among higher-income and well-edu-cated people, and less support lower down. But most people are for or against the EU because they think it will be good or bad for the country, not because it will be good or bad for them." Gisler now heads one of Switzerland's first, and largest, online news and trading sites, "Moneycab." In the United States, by contrast, an economic treaty with much narrower ramifications for America's vast economy -- the 1993 trade pact with Mexico -- was debated largely in class or special-interest terms. Moreover, the press in the U.S. -- and, one might add, in Britain as well -- appears to be keenly alert to such matters. In Switzerland, while there are some class conflicts, journalists tend to amplify them only slightly, or even muffle them.

One obvious difference is a kind of populist optimism among Swiss journalists. Hugo Butler, editor of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung, traces much of this to the evolution of the Swiss press itself in the early nineteenth century. Although many conservative forces opposed the establishment of referendum, first in the cantons in the 1830s and 1840s and then nationally, Butler's paper favored many such revisions and, in fact, added Neue (or, "new") to its name after the revision of 1830. Like many Swiss, he refers to the culture of consensus as an important explanation for the press's nonhostile tone and lack of "gotcha"-style reporting.

"Most of the important forces in society have a role in government," he notes, thanks to such institutions as the executive, proportional voting in parliament, and the direct democracy. "Therefore the opposition equals the people, and all are a direct participant in the state." Again we see how the somewhat mystical "culture of consensus," far from being an inexplicable force of nature or a function of climate or genetics, results in large part from the institutions of the Swiss.

The Swiss system, unlike many democracies, empowers the people continuously and particularly, as opposed to sporadically and indirectly. The Swiss voters may veto laws and initiate new ones in an ongoing and item-by-item process. In most other democracies, the voters make policies only by means of an election every few years, with candidates running on the basis of hundreds of votes they've cast. This difference leaves the Swiss citizen somewhat more relaxed about his or her own voice in the process; there is less need to fight or make noise to be heard. As well, because particular officials and institutions have less power, "there is less need for institutions other than the people" to hold them in check, as Butler put it.

Naturally, the press reflects many of these attitudes and response to them as well. This feeling of greater affinity with the people's institutions, Konrad Stamm of Der Bund argues, probably has something to do with the relative degree of respect that the press shows for the executive council's deliberations.1

"Our readers are very intelligent," echoes Esther Girsberger. "They need information, not a tutor." Girsberger, now at Weltwoche, but the editor of Tages Anzeiger at the time of our interview, explains her paper's handling of the European integration issue to me. Likewise, Girsberger treats her editors and reporters with a greater measure of decentralization than one is used to seeing in the American press. "We have people with many different views on the abortion issue, for example," she notes. "People at Tages Anzeiger differ." The paper, she says, is "flexible" in style and substance about the issue, allowing somewhat different approaches to flourish. This would be highly unusual at an American newspaper, many of which have issued instructions on whether various groups may be called "pro-life," other "pro-choice," and so on. (Girsberger's tenure at Tages Anzeiger ended, however, partly due to this flexibility. Upper management wanted more sensational stories to compete with Swiss and European tabloids. Girsberger declined.)

If we look at matters the press covers outside of politics, it becomes clear that this nonconfrontational culture does not merely extend to the government itself. Accordingly, it is not just a function of the Swiss political system, although the system helps to inculcate these attitudes of mutual respect. Swiss banking secrecy, or "banking privacy" as the Swiss prefer, is a good example. Despite the vast wealth of the country's institutions, which would seem to offer a temptation, the details of personal or corporate banking are seldom revealed in the press. This is true even in the case of foreigners, whom the Swiss would obviously have less reason to favor or protect.

"One factor is, people don't want to go to jail," as Markus Gisler of Moneycab points out. This is certainly an element: the Swiss banking laws are strict. Still, one senses a different attitude among Swiss journalists. Among American journalists, and to a large extent the French and British, the fact of any secret is almost a standing insult to the press. Among the Swiss, there is greater acceptance of such privacy. Swiss journalists view themselves as part of "the system" -- not because they have been coopted by special interests or other elites, but because the entire system is accessible.

This does not mean that Swiss newspapers do not perform investigative reporting, and with some impressive scoops. Jean Ziegler, the social critic and author of several books about the role of Swiss banks and politicians in World War II and in the present too, credits the press with a "significant change" over the last ten years. Ziegler notes that after years of what he considered a too-reticent approach to the controversy, the Swiss press began breaking stories about private accounts, government archival material, and more recent activities by the Swiss military. Ziegler believes a major factor is simply the competition with Swiss tabloid papers, such as Blick. Blick, although not highly respected by other Swiss press, has broken a number of stories, and put the heat on more traditional papers to follow suit. Not all Swiss, of course, consider these trends wholesome.

Even the investigative reporting, though, has a more substantive edge to it. When Tages-Anzeiger broke the story of Elisabeth Kopp's involvement in her husband's financial woes in the late 1980s, the story concerned her actions as a government official -- not petty financial activities she was unaware of, or a politician's bedroom paramours. Kopp was federal councilor and the head of Switzerland's Justice Department, in charge of leading an investigation into a firm -- and then telephoned her husband to give him a head's up on the gathering storm.

Likewise, Swiss media, led by Urs Paul Engeler of Weltwoche, played a key role in breaking the story of Switzerland's P26 and P27 brigades. These were secret Swiss armies that had been organized, trained, and operated without the public's knowledge.

Reports like the above have, in the words of Tages-Anzeiger's Markus Somm, "established new strength in the Swiss press." They have also made some political and journalistic careers. The parliamentary investigation of surreptitious surveillance, for example, was headed by Moritz Leuenberger, later a federal councilor and president of Switzerland. The investigation lifted him to prominence.

Swiss radio and television, like the newspapers, have a serious tone. This reflects the general preferences of Swiss audiences for solid content. In the case of the broadcast media, however, structural and economic factors play a role as well. Even today, Swiss public television and radio enjoy an audience share of roughly 50 percent -- a figure unheard of in developed countries.

Part of this has to do with the high quality of both the services. Part is due to Switzerland's small audience, divided further by four national languages, which makes private stations less tenable. A French radio service in Switzerland, for example, appeals to only about a third of the country's 7 million people -- and must compete with nearby broadcasts from France which enjoy a large domestic base to begin with. There are also numerous natural barriers to effective broadcasting -- Switzerland's mountains break up signals as well or better than a drive through West Virginia. The largest factor, however, is simply legal. Paradoxically, in this generally pro-market country that values competition and diversity, private TV and radio were essentially outlawed until a few pilot programs were launched in 1981, followed by licensing of private stations in 1984.

The man who brought private radio and television to the country, more than any other, is Roger Schawinski. A maverick and rebel in the mode of Bill McGowan (or maybe William Tell), Schawinski began his career as a consumer journalist. In the late 1970s, he began broadcasting from the mountains of Italy, near the Swiss frontier in the Ticino, beyond the reach of Swiss authorities, aiming his message at the lucrative Zürich audience. In the battle to keep him off the airwaves, Swiss authorities seized more then 200 retransmitters in and around Switzerland, which were needed to provide a clean signal. Undeterred, the self-styled "Radio Pirate" kept broadcasting. Within a few years, Schawinski had won a political and economic following, as the Swiss began to wonder why they shouldn't benefit from some media diversity. "He broke the monopoly," as Marco Farber, chief editor of Swiss Radio's German news broadcasts, nods in credit. Today Schawinski's Radio 24 and Tele 24 in Zurich are still struggling to catch up with the public services, but are already making their presence felt in both markets.

Thus, to understand Swiss radio and television news and news-related talk and programming, you have to imagine an entire country where half the people listen to NPR or watch the News Hour with Jim Lehrer. "We're not in NPR's league as far as what we can produce; we're a level, maybe two, below," Farber concedes, athough from my observation, the Swiss radio and television news are, in fact, quite close in quality to their larger American counterparts. There are, to be sure, differences of scale and funding that give other national media services an advantage. On the other hand, the Swiss public television and radio services are so respected that they do not face such a great competitive disadvantage in gathering news against private news sources.

Perhaps the most popular news broadcast in Switzerland, in fact, is a 12:30 radio news broadcast. Radio listenership actually spikes up over the lunch hour to its highest levels of the day, in contrast to the "drive time" spike and low rates of listenership during mid-day in the United States. The Swiss used to go home for lunch, at which time the family listened to the noontime (12:30) broadcast. But even with changing family and work patterns, the broadcast remains huge. Many Swiss tune into the broadcast during their lunch break or at their desk. From noon to 1 p.m., an average of about 17.5 percent of all Swiss over age fifteen are listening to their radios, exceeding 20 percent at 12:30. More than half are tuned into the news. The main evening radio news, anchored by Casper Selg, a former correspondent in the United States, in German at 6 p.m. and repeated at 7 p.m., draws fewer listeners as the audience for radio declines in the evening. But it may be as or even slightly more influential than the noon-time broadcast in content and impact, since there is more time for reporting and features. "Selg in the evening is something of an institution," comments Hans Barenbold, of the German-language television news service. "He's one of the most respected broadcast journalists in Switzerland."

Television lacks the broad selection of U.S. or European offerings, even in the news and news-related programming areas. There are, however, interest-ing selections. The evening news show, "10 vor 10," which comes on at 9:50, is a kind of info-tainment hybrid combining the news reporting of "20-20" with electronic magazine-tabloid material. "Arena" is a cross between debate shows like "Crossfire" on CNN, and the kind of electronic town hall popularized by Ross Perot, ABC's "Nightline," and others. An "Arena" debate, aired just before a June 2001 referendum on the military, enjoyed a huge audience, pitting Blocher and a leader of the pacifist Gruppe fur eine Schweiz ohne Armee against the federal councilor Samuel Schmid, minster of defense. The notable feature of Arena is the co-participants, several dozen of them, who are both well-informed and well-mannered enough to take meaningful part in the discussion without the show dissolving into a shouting match.

Like its broader political culture, then, the Swiss press and broadcast media are highly serious, but non-confrontational, and investigative in some sense, but not highly invasive of personal privacy. Critics of the regime question its actions, but not, in general, its fundamental legitimacy.

"People are basically satisfied, and we are part of the people," as Weltwoche's Girsberger notes. The journalism of Switzerland reflects the country's ongoing search to refine and perfect itself, but it is not bitter or on a search for powerful figures -- Robert Bork, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Bill Gates -- to cut down to size. It is creative, even aggressive, but not deconstructionist. One has the feeling that this is what Thomas Jefferson was talking about.


Note

1. Despite having a seven-member executive composed of representatives of different parties with disparate ideologies, the Swiss executive's deliberations, and even who votes how on major decisions, is only leaked on rare occasions. See Chap. 6, "Executives."