UNDERHILL: You’ve got a rep as a political savant in America. What are you doing in Britain?

MORRIS: Lafayette helped us get our independence from the British. Now I’m helping the British to get their independence from France. A cursory glace at the political map shows that the English Channel is wider than the Atlantic Ocean. The economic policies of Britain and the United States have much more in common than those of Britain and the EU. Britain has a unique role as the intermediary between the United States and Europe, and I would hate to see Britain lose its identity in a continental omelet.

Wouldn’t it play that role better from within?

Not if it loses control over its foreign and military policy, as the new European Constitution would indicate.

Surely the British economy would suffer.

Let’s remember that Britain sells the Continent twice as much [as] it buys in trade. So if Britain were to leave, the EU would be knocking on its door the next day. The key point is this: at the time the Common Market was established, average tariff barriers were 12 percent. Now they are down to 3 percent. If Britain was locked out of the EU, it would probably make no difference to its trade numbers.

Your party doesn’t have single member in Parliament. What makes you think it can have any impact in the European elections?

A perfect storm is coming together, with all the elements coalescing to increase sentiment in favor of pulling out of the EU–rising migration from the Continent, a negative balance of trade with the Continent, high unemployment on the Continent and low unemployment in Britain, high taxes on the Continent and low taxes in Britain, the sense of stagnation on the Continent versus the growth in Britain, the tremendous regulation imposed on all areas of British life.

How do you rate Blair’s chances of persuading the British to vote ‘Yes’ on the constitutional referendum?

Elton John put it best: “Too low for zero.”

So why would Blair take the risk?

He was taking a lot of negatives for refusing a vote, and the only way to fight that was to give in. But the vote will be held after the next elections, so he won’t have to suffer defeat until after he is re-elected.

What would a defeat mean for the EU?

I suspect that the Constitution will just fall apart. Once Britain rejects it, many other countries will follow suit. Then we will be back to the old idea of a trade community rather than a political union.

How do you rate Sen. John Kerry’s chances in November?

By about 50 to 30 [percent], pollsters report that the American public would prefer Bush over Kerry as a war leader. By about 50 to 40 [percent], they think Kerry would be better at creating jobs. If the American people are thinking about Iraq and the war on terror when they vote, Bush will probably win. If they are thinking about anything else, Kerry will.

So what advice would you give Kerry?

I think he’s waging an awful campaign, as bad as the Dukakis campaign in 1988. He needs to make issues that have nothing to do with terror. He needs to talk about the underfunding of the Social Security system, the dangers of Medicare, the shortcomings of the prescription-drug benefit, the environment and global warming.

What would a Kerry victory mean for the so-called war on terror?

Clinton and Kerry both see terrorism as a crime. Bush sees it as a war. Kerry would be aggressive about going after Al Qaeda but not about going after rogue nations, and in my view that will be a negative.

Clinton’s memoir comes out this summer. How will that play in the campaign?

I have always maintained that Bill Clinton does not want Kerry to win, because then Hillary can’t then run in ‘08. The guy he chooses as vice president probably runs in 2012 and probably in 2016, and by 2020 Hillary is 73 years old. And the way he’s jamming the Kerry campaign is by publishing his book in June. There is no earthly reason why he could not have waited until Christmas.