The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. Leading the news this Monday, Israeli forces moved into South Lebanon to attack PLO bases. Polish police arrested Solidarity leaders as labor unrest spread. Federal investigators found evidence of metal fatigue in the Aloha Airliner that lost part of its fuselage. The government reported rising factory orders, construction spending and productivity. We'll have details in our news summary in a moment. Jim? JIM LEHRER: After the news summary, we look at Dukakis vs. Jackson with an Elizabeth Brackett report from Ohio and two leading Ohio Democrats. Then, it's the U. S. vs. the Soviets on nuclear testing with a Jeffrey Kaye report from Nevada, and an American and a Soviet official. And we close with a Jim Fisher essay about a bit of Americana that's fading from the scene. News Summary LEHRER: There are reports tonight that a major Israeli army force crossed into Southern Lebanon today. A lebanon police officials told the Associate Press the troops were led by tanks. He said they came in hot pursuit of Palestinian guerillas. An Israeli Army statement acknowledged the incursion. It said the troops were responding to increasing attempts by guerillas to infiltrate into Israel. There was no comment on an NBC report that some 2000 Israeli troops were involved in the operation.There was also more death and violence in Beirut today. Factional fighting between Palestinians in refugee camps and Shiite Moslems left 12 people dead and 35 others wounded. There was no word on what touched off the fight. Robin? MacNEIL: Polish police rounded up leaders of the outlawed Solidarity Movement as labor unrest spread. Workers at the Lenin Shipyard in Gdansk, where the Free Union Movement was born in 1980, went on strike. The biggest labor resistance in seven years began with a call by Solidarity leader Lech Walesa for nationwide action to back 16,000 steelworkers on strike in the city of Krakov. Opposition sources said all of the 12,000 workers at the Lenin shipyard joined the strike today. Several thousand were reported to be occupying the yard. Chanting workers draped a large banner across the main entrance, proclaiming Opposition Strike. And several hundred sympathizers stuck flowers in the gate before the police drove them away. The steelworkers are demanding a 50% pay hike and other benefits to offset big price increases imposed under the government reform policies. A Solidarity spokesman said at least nine of the 13 members of the union's National Executive Commission were held in different cities. Two others, including Chairman Lech Walesa, remained at liberty, while the whereabouts of the other members was not known. The U. S. Government criticized the use of force against Polish demonstrators and called for a genuine dialogue between government and society. LEHRER: The focus of the Hawaiian Airliner investigation is on cracks found in the jetliner's metal fuselage. A National Transportation Safety Board official told NBC today what appears to be fatigue cracking has been found in six rivet holes on a metal running the length of the Boeing 737. A flight attendant was killed and 61 passengers were injured, when 20 feet of covering over the plane's forward fuselage ripped off last Thursday. Another airliner had another kind of problem this morning. A United Airlines 747 with 258 people onboard lost power to three of its four engines on its way into Tokyo on a flight from Los Angeles. It landed at Tokyo International Airport without incident, and there were no injuries. MacNEIL: The government issued a series of reports today indicating an economy that is continuing to grow. Factory orders rose in March by 1. 6%, the largest monthly gain since December. Construction spending in March rose 1. 5%. And productivity for the first three months of the year rose at an annual rate of 9/10ths of 1%. In other economic news, oil prices fell today after OPEC failed to get producers outside the cartel to reduce production. In four nights of hard bargaining, the 13 OPEC ministers could not achieve a joint response to the offer by the non OPEC countries to cut exports by 5% if OPEC nations also made new cuts to reduce present oil surpluses. In the wake of the conference, crude oil prices fell today by up to a dollar a barrel. LEHRER: President Reagan kept the heat on today about the trade bill. He told a Washington convention of the U. S. Chamber of Commerce he still intended to veto the legislation that passed the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. He said again that his major objection was to a provision that forced business with 100 or more employees to give 60 days' notice on plant closings or layoffs.

Pres. RONALD REAGAN: For America, plant closing restrictions are like playing Russian Roulette with a machine gun. A sure loser. I've said it loud and clear again and again. I want to sign the right trade legislation this year. For example, greater protection for intellectual property and greater negotiating authority in the current round of international trade negotiations are good ideas and they're in the bill. But they don't make up for so much else. In the form it was passed, I will veto the trade bill. MacNEIL: The Supreme Court today handed down an important antitrust ruling. It ruled that Sharp Electronics Corporation did not violate Federal Antitrust law when it stopped doing business with a retailer selling at discount prices and favored another. In the six to two decision, the court said that such action was illegal only when the agreement specific prices or price levels. LEHRER: A new three story wing on a children's hospital on Northern India collapsed today. One report said 14 people were killed, another put the death toll at 30. Most reports said at least 50 people were still unaccounted for. Authorities said the three floors collapsed pancake style, and they believe it was caused by a foundation failure. And that's it for the news summary tonight. Now it's on to the Democrats in Ohio. U. S. and Soviet differences on nuclear testing, and an essay by Jim Fisher. Looking Ahead MacNEIL: We turn first tonight to Campaign '88 in the battle for the Democratic nomination. Tomorrow's primaries in Indiana, Ohio and the District of Columbia will select the last major block of delegates until June. Michael Dukakis has a commanding lead in the polls in both Indiana and Ohio. Jesse Jackson is far ahead in the District of Columbia. Two more wins by Dukakis would reinforce the view of many observers that he is the inevitable Democratic nominee. We'll get the view of two key players in the Jackson and Dukakis camps in Ohio. But first, correspondent Elizabeth Brackett has a report on how Democratic voters in Ohio feel about a possible Dukakis nomination.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: It's different now. The crowds are bigger and more enthusiastic. Still not a match for the crowds Jesse Jackson draws, but Michael Dukakis is beginning to create his own kind of electricity. Part of it is the candidate's new willingness to poke fun at himself. And part of it may be the staff work that softens the candidate's image, with kids and balloons. LITTLE GIRL: What good things have you done as governor that would help you to be president? MICHAEL DUKAKIS, presidential candidate: What good things have I done as governor that would help me be president? Well, for one thing, I've very charismatic, I'm lovable -- The thing that I'm proudest of, Crissy, is that I believe that I've helped to make a real difference in the lives of real people. And that's why I'm in public life.

BRACKETT: Those who were motivated enough to come to this downtown rally in Dayton, Ohio last week came away impressed. SUSAN MANN: Every time I've seen him on television, he didn't strike me as being a particularly charismatic speaker. And after having the chance to see him today, he came across to -- I thought the group of us -- with much more power and enthusiasm than I really had anticipated. JACK WEBSTER: Well, the American people are probably much more mature than the press in particular gives us credit for being. I don't think we have to act like we're at a rock concert to support a candidate. So I think Dukakis's support probably is like still water, it probably runs deep through the American people. But that'll show up this fall I think.

BRACKETT: Dukakis has begun to point for the fall. He barely mentions rival Jesse Jackson in his speeches. Instead, he attacks Republican policies and stresses traditional Democratic issues, jobs and the economy. Gov. DUKAKIS: You know, 60 years ago, Franklin Roosevelt asked the Congress for a minimum wage of 25 cents an hour. And the Republicans opposed it. Twenty eight years ago, John Kennedy asked the Congress for a minimum wage of $1. 25 an hour. And the Republicans opposed it. Today, after the longest period in recent American history without an increase of one dime in the minimum wage, the Republicans are still opposed to it. They haven't changed. And they won't change. And that's why we need a change in Washington, D. C.

BRACKETT: Much of the battle in the fall will be for the highly prized swing voters, voters Ronald Reagan has pulled in for the last two elections. If voters we talked to are any indication, this time it could be different. CHRISTINE NYSTROM: I voted for Reagan. BRACKETT: And this time? Ms. NYSTROM: It'll be Dukakis probably. RICHARD NYSTROM: I agree with what she has said. I came here having -- I voted for Reagan four years ago, too. And I had heard that this was not a very exciting candidate. I was impressed. This is a very competent, very solid -- and yet at the same time, he got me excited. Because I was hearing things that made me proud to be associated with those ideas and feel good about what he would do and what he could do for this country. And that's the kind of person I was looking for. ANDY LEE: Many of us started out as Democrats when we were younger and have moved to the Republican Party. And now we're being pushed or pulled in different directions. BRACKETT: Is this the first Democrat in a number of years that you could think about supporting on a national level? Mr. LEE: Oh, yes. Yeah. At least 12 to 16 years anyway.

BRACKETT: Still Democrats, particularly party leaders, worry that he Michael Dukakis style does not inspire the kind of enthusiastic committed supporter that once fueled the campaigns of a John F. Kennedy, or today of a Jesse Jackson. JACK THOMAS: I mean, he hasn't got the drive and real zing in his speeches the way I look at it. I don't know, maybe he'll get -- toughen up later on. But it seems to me like he's not -- you know -- I don't know -- you're gonna have to look -- act more hardened to me when you start dealing with them people overseas and stuff like that.

BRACKETT: Aware of those concerns from voters, Dukakis frequently tries to reach back for some of that Kennedy magic. Gov. DUKAKIS: When he began his race for the presidency, they said he was too young and he wasn't presidential enough, that he was unemotional. He spoke too fast. And he couldn't win in the South. And you couldn't understand his accent. Remember? All that talk about vigah -- it took us about six months, we in New England, to translate for you what vigah really meant. And he had it, didn't he? Lots of it. EVONNE CARRANZA: When he mentions John Kennedy, he doesn't compare. But I think we need an intelligent leader and I think he has that. And I think he -- since he's been able to do things in Massachusetts, I think maybe he's got what it takes to do things nationally.

BRACKETT: Dukakis says he is not surprised that his support has grown slowly. Gov. DUKAKIS: I think I'm somebody who tends to grow on people over time. And now that the field is narrowed and people have a chance to take a look at us and really focus in on who we are and what we're saying, and what our values are and what our hopes and dreams and aspirations are for this country, it's getting stronger and stronger and better and better.

BRACKETT: The co chairman of Dukakis's Ohio campaign says there is one clear reason why he has picked up support here. PAULA MacILWANE, Dukakis Ohio Co Chair: People here always like to be behind a winner. And I think they're sensing a momentum from New York and Pennsylvania. It's been very hard for Democrats. There's been some splits in so many different ways with so many candidates this year. I see a real trend in rallying around this guy to be our nominee and we're going to get behind him and show total support.

BRACKETT: The desire to go with a winner has even brought in some Jackson supporters. KEN THOMAS: A lot of my friends who were originally supporting Jesse Jackson are now switching over, because it's looking like Dukakis is going to win. So they're just -- they want to go with a winner. BRACKETT: When did that switch start to take place, would you say? Mr. THOMAS: Pennsylvania primary. Right around the Pennsylvania primary. BRACKETT: When Jackson started losing, you say people started switching? Mr. THOMAS: Well, when it looks like he was just winning in big urban areas and like he really couldn't win against George Bush.

BRACKETT: A slowly growing consensus for Dukakis is seen in the results of recent New York Times/CBS exit polls. In last month's Wisconsin and New York primaries, only about 45% of Dukakis voters said they strongly supported him. By last week's Pennsylvania primary, that number had risen to 52%. This growing support is allowing the usually cautious candidate to now openly reflect on becoming his party's nominee. Gov. DUKAKIS: I mean, here I am a first generation American, and I may well be my party's nominee and the next President -- and that's a terrific feeling. BRACKETT: Was there a moment when it dawned on you? Gov. DUKAKIS: Kitty and I were walking up Fifth Avenue on that beautiful spring day. A couple of us, very close, walking together, people waving at us, we waving back. And I remember turning to her and saying, ''Here we are, a couple of kids from Brookline, Massachusetts, running for the presidency. ''

BRACKETT: So in Ohio, Democrats have begun to coalesce around their frontrunner. But California lies ahead, where Jackson could give Dukakis a fight. Even more critical for the Dukakis candidacy is taking this initial enthusiasm and broadening it as he heads toward the convention and the race in the fall. MacNEIL: For Jesse Jackson, the race is far from over. Campaigning yesterday in Cleveland, he told a rally that he and President Reagan defined national leadership differently. Rev. JACKSON: And I believe a good leader must defend the poor. Deliver the needy. Have mercy on the motherless and the fatherless. I would argue their case tonight. Most poor folks can't argue their own case. Reagan don't call them and ask their opinions. TV don't ask their opinions. I will argue their case tonight. The President don't call them after the ballgame. I will argue their case tonight. The Plain Dealer don't call them, but I'm going to argue poor folks case tonight. (unintelligible) more working poor people since Reagan began. Profits up. Wages down. Plants closed. Workers abandoned. I've done more for domestic policy than my competitors. I've done more with less. I've negotiated with the great major corporations. Ford and General Foods and (unintelligible), Coca Cola. I've built brick without straw. MacNEIL: For a further look at how the Democratic race is shaping up, we turn now to two key players in Ohio politics. Joining us from studios in Columbus are Lt. Gov. Paul Leonard, a Dukakis supporter. And state representative Ray Miller, one of the chairmen of the Ohio Jackson campaign. Gov. Leonard, has Dukakis got it wrapped up, or can he still lose it? Did you hear me? You're not hearing me. I see. Well, let me just ask the question again and hope that they can get it to you. Lt. Gov. PAUL LEONARD, Dukakis supporter: Now we can hear you. MacNEIL: Can you hear me now? Gov. Leonard, I was asking, has Dukakis got it wrapped up in your view, or can he still lose it? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, we're being real cautious. He certainly does not have it wrapped up in the state of Ohio. You can't discount Jesse Jackson. He's a formidable candidate. His campaign manager was our campaign manager in 1986, and he's a good campaign manager. So the election ain't over until it's over. MacNEIL: I see. How does it look to you, Mr. Miller? Could Jackson still have a chance? How would it work for him to have a chance at the nomination now? RAY MILLER, Ohio state representative: Well, one thing for sure is that we can't give up. We're well organized in the state of Ohio. The dollars are coming in much faster. We've been able to put our television spots on throughout the entire state. And all one has to do is continue to work hard. And Rev. Jackson is doing just that. MacNEIL: Mr. Leonard, what could cause Dukakis to lose it? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, I think complacency among our supporters and voters could be the number one enemy that we face on election day. Everywhere we go in the state of Ohio we are impressing upon people how important it is for them to get out and vote tomorrow. We're going to have a beautiful day in the state of Ohio tomorrow. It's going to be sunny and about 80 degrees. And now it's our job to make sure that we get the voters to the polls. So complacency right now is something that we're fighting minute by minute. MacNEIL: Representative Leonard (sic), what could happen to Jackson to give him a realistic chance at the nomination now? What kind of calculation do you see down the line that could give you optimism that he could actually get it? Rep. MILLER: We have a number of states left before the convention. There are approximately 850 delegates that can be had in the other states. We will be heading into California. You know that California has a majority minority population, with a large number of blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Jewish people, very liberal state. And we think that we're going to do extremely well there. We're already starting to focus attention, our volunteers and our financial resources in that area. And if we take California, that will change the momentum in this campaign substantially. MacNEIL: Is that something you worry about, Gov. Leonard? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: I don't think there's any question we're concerned about it. We're not overly worried because we have a good organization in New Jersey and in California. Our job is to keep the momentum going. Starting tomorrow in the state of Ohio and continuing through New Jersey and California. Again, we're not overly confident, but we've got a good organization in California, good indications of support both in the north and in the southern part of the state. We're going to win tomorrow and I think we're going to finish this campaign with a win in California. MacNEIL: Mr. Miller, if the Dukakis people are a bit worried about complacency, about a sense of inevitability of his nomination, making people relax too early, what about the other side of the coin? You just heard a young man in Ohio who was a Jackson supporter saying that after the Dukakis win in Pennsylvania he'd switched because he wanted to be with a winner. Is that beginning to happen to some Jackson supporters? Rep. MILLER: Well, that young man was not a loyalist. He sounded like an individual who would switch basketball teams at half time. So those kinds of individuals you don't worry about. But I think that the Jackson candidacy will continue right until the convention. And we will arrive at the convention in very good position. We can't afford just to give up the race at this point. I think that Rev. Jackson's working much too hard for us to sit back and say, Well, things are not looking good for us right now, so we'll have to give it up. MacNEIL: If you were advising Jackson nationally -- you may be, for all I know -- if you are or were advising Jackson nationally, would you -- how long should he continue to make a fight of it? For his own interests and his supporters, but also for the party's interests? Rep. MILLER: I think it's important for our party and for our nation for Rev. Jackson to continue right until the convention. Once again, he can't afford to give up. The position, the issues that he is speaking to are far too important for Rev. Jackson to give up. He would be giving up on so many people. There are so many individuals who are looking to Rev. Jackson to again state his case, to argue the case for those who are traditionally left out of the mainstream of American life in this country. And we can't afford again for our candidate to back off at this point. MacNEIL: Does it look that way from the Dukakis camp? Is it good for the party as a whole to have it contested right up to the convention, Gov. Leonard? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, I think as long as both men treat each other professionally -- and they've been able to do that in this campaign -- then it doesn't hurt. Because Jesse Jackson is stimulating a lot of interest in this campaign, and he's bringing some new voters into the fold. And we're quite confident if Michael Dukakis is the nominee that he's going to be able to pick up those new voters and that support. So as long as it's a professional debate, as long as they remain friends, as long as we keep open lines of communication between two campaigns -- and we're doing that -- I think it's positive for the Democratic Party and positive for the nation. MacNEIL: Is it positive if Mr. Jackson continues as he has the last few days in Ohio to be hitting pretty hard at Gov. Dukakis for not being, as Jackson claims, specific enough on certain issues? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, as long as the campaign doesn't get personal, he's got every right to draw whatever distinctions he thinks are important in this campaign. As long as the campaign doesn't get personal and doesn't get divisive, as long as both candidates focus on the issues, I think it's positive for the party and positive for the campaign. MacNEIL: He complained in a speech in Cleveland today that the media and the whole operation are allowing Dukakis to get away with being the teflon candidate. He can be vague and unspecific about everything, where he's being pressed to be extremely specific. How do you feel about that? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, I think both candidates are being pressed to be extremely specific. The press is no longer a powder puff in this nation. I don't see them allowing any candidate for political office to get away with vagaries. I think that both candidates are being specific. Both of them are being pressed. And I think both of them are responding well. And those of us in the Democratic Party are proud of both Jesse Jackson and Michael Dukakis. MacNEIL: Representative Miller, do you think Mr. Jackson's being held to a different standard in -- for instance right now in Ohio? In terms of specificity? Rep. MILLER: I think the Rev. Jackson has been asked right from the very beginning from all of the media and the public to have more specifics, to have a grander plan, to have a specific budget even. And he has just -- he has developed that. And it'sbeen to his advantage. Now he can draw a clear distinction between his candidacy and that of Gov. Dukakis and also helps the nation to focus at George Bush -- who has not done much of anything in his entire tenure. as Vice President. MacNEIL: Let me ask you another question -- looking down the line a little bit. There's a lot of talk already about how to satisfy the enormous aspirations that Mr. Jackson, Rev. Jackson's candidacy has aroused among his supporters if he is not on the ticket. What do you think if he's not on the ticket would best keep them inspired and active and out voting for the party? Rep. MILLER: A lot of that has to do with Rev. Jesse Jackson himself. If Jesse Jackson is bitter and backs away from the Democratic Party, then I think you'll find that whole coalition of individuals, blacks and Hispanics, women, large number of farmers now, a large number of people will be disenchanted and will not go to the polls. We have enough of a problem with that already. In the state of Ohio, our Secretary of State is projecting that only one half of all the registered voters will go to the polls tomorrow. So we can't afford for voters to back off in the general election. We need to come to the general elections certainly united, regardless of who our nominee is of the Party. MacNEIL: Well, Gov. Leonard, what does the party do with and for Mr. Jackson and all his supporters to keep them inspired down the line if he doesn't end up on the ticket? Lt. Gov. LEONARD: Well, I think in the final analysis, if we present a realistic hope that we can beat George Bush in November, that we can move this country in a different direction, we can have economic vitality, we can address the challenges facing the homeless, the AIDS epidemic in this country, if we can offer the promise of a new America on the doorstep of the 1990s, we're going to keep most of those voters involved in the system. No matter who the nominee for the Democratic Party might be. MacNEIL: Even, Mr. Miller, if there were a white Southerner, like Sen. Sam Nunn as has been discussed, as the running mate? Rep. MILLER: Well, we don't believe that Sen. Sam Nunn will support those issues that we're most concerned about. That is, issues around social justice issues, economic development issues and so forth. Ending apartheid in South Africa, looking at a strong Supreme Court. Those kinds of issues. If we don't believe that Sam Nunn or any other candidate will stand strong, then we cannot support him. MacNEIL: I see. Well, we'll see how it turns out in Ohio tomorrow. Gov. Leonard and Representative Miller, thank you for joining us. Jim? LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, nuclear weapons testing and an essay by Jim Fisher. No More Tests? LEHRER: The debate over banning nuclear weapons tests is where we go next. There are separate private and official worlds involved in this discussion. The official world is mostly at the tables, where U. S. and Soviet arms negotiators sit. The private one is where U. S. and Soviet scientists engage in experiments in each other's country. We will sample both, beginning with a report on the trip of a group of Soviet scientists to the desert near a Nevada test site in Nevada. The reporter is Jeffrey Kaye of Public Station KCET, Los Angeles.

JEFFREY KAYE, KCET, Los Angeles: Friday morning, just before 11:00, a group of Soviet scientists in a remote Eastern California desert finished rigging up test equipment. Then they waited anxiously for the start of an experiment they hoped would pave the way for a treaty to ban the testing of nuclear weapons. Two hundred and thirty miles away in Northern Nevada, their colleagues prepared to set up an underground explosion. A blast meant to mimic the shock of a nuclear test. At 11:00 exactly, ten tons of chemical explosives rattled Black Rock Desert. At the listening post in California, it was quiet. It seemed that the measuring equipment had not detected shock waves. American scientists working with the Soviets rushed to the phones in both states. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: I'm up here in Deep Springs, and we didn't see anything. I was wondering if the shot went off at 11:00 as planned. UNIDENTIFIED MAN: We want to find out if our seismic sequence were recorded on our equipment. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: So we'll wait and hear what you have to say from the tape playback.

KAYE: When the scientists carefully examined their computer tape, they realized their sensors had picked up the main signals from the blast. RUSSIAN MAN: We see some very weak signal.

KAYE: Despite the initial confusion, the seismologists successfully monitored three explosions set up in the Nevada desert Friday and Saturday, not far from the U. S. nuclear test site. The experiment closely resembled tests conducted by American scientists eight months ago in the Kazakhstan region of the Soviet Union. Both groups have been trying to determine how well seismic monitoring might detect underground nuclear explosions. The American effort was organized by the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private Washington based group that believes the superpowers should ban all nuclear weapons tests. THOMAS COCHRAN, Natural Resources Defense Council: These are extremely small explosions, and if we can detect them several hundred miles away with this modern equipment, then we can verify that one side cannot cheat under a comprehensive test ban by conducting clandestine explosions. We can catch them, there's a high probability that we can catch them.

KAYE: The other sponsor of the experiment was the Soviet Academy of Sciences, a government run organization. The group's vice president, Evgeni Velikhov, a highranking arms advisor to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, flew in for the tests. He said the scientists here were furthering a key Soviet objective. The Soviet scientists arrived in Reno, Nevada, to begin the experiment on April 6. This journey, delayed by American red tape, was two years in the making. The Soviets combined work with a taste of decadent American culture, in a town that offers round the clock legalized gambling. Scientist Nikolai Yukhnin found the diversion therapeutic. NIKOLAI YUKHNIN, Soviet scientist [through translator]: People need some kind of release in this age of stress.

KAYE: But there was little time scheduled for bright lights. The group soon made its way to Deep Springs, California, in a valley just east of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, and 120 miles west of the U. S. underground nuclear test site in Nevada. Nine Soviet seismologists came to test the geology of this desolate spot. They particularly wanted to learn how the shock waves, or what seismologists call propagation characteristics, might be distinguished from earthquakes. The experiment used a combination of American equipment sunk deep in boreholes, and Soviet surface seismometers. Mr. YUKHNIN [through translator]: There are three seismic stations with American equipment which is identical to the equipment in the three stations surrounding the Nevada test site.

KAYE: Soviet and American scientists here share the conviction that seismic testing can verify a test ban. But the Reagan Administration remains unconvinced. Unlike Kremlin leaders, U. S. officials believe seismic measurements by themselves are unreliable, and would allow the Soviets to cheat on a test ban. Superpower rivalries seemed far from the minds of this binational group of scientists. They worked and played at what became the Soviets desert outpost, sustained by ample helpings of borscht. After lunch, team leader Nikolai Yukhnin said with seismic monitoring, superpowers would not be able to misrepresent the intensity of nuclear tests. Mr. YUKHNIN [through translator]: I think that a well organized system of seismic verification with an optimal number and distribution of seismic stations, using many different types of apparatus, such as high and low frequency apparatus, will not permit anybody to hide or to lessen the yield of a nuclear test. KEITH PRIESTLY, University of Nevada: The possibility of cheating in the Soviet Union is actually -- certainly in the area of their test site -- is probably more difficult than it is to cheat here in Nevada if someone wanted to. Just because of the difference in propagation characteristics in the two countries. BORIS KAZAK, Soviet scientist: It's a problem of confidence between the two great powers. And each step that we make in that direction lessens the possibility of conflict. Because let's remember what we are doing. We are making whole efforts to evade nuclear war. LARRY MAY, University of California: This project has taken part with a lot of opposition from the U. S. Government, and whether it's direct or hidden, it's something we've encountered the whole way through. So although I think there has been gradual acceptance of the project and acceptance of its value --

KAYE: However, unlike the American scientists, the Soviets here did represent the official position of their government. And although Washington has no connection with this private project, the U. S. clearly tolerated it by allowing the Soviets to conduct their experiments on federally owned land. In the nearby community of Big Pine, where the Soviets stayed and shopped, townspeople viewed the Soviets as a curiosity. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: They come in and they always laugh. UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: One just came in an said Good Morning. But he stopped, he goes, Oh, good evening. I'm sorry. They're really nice.

KAYE: In the evenings, the Soviets practically took over the Bristle Cone Motel in Big Pine. One night, they and the Americans dined on shyashlyik in typical Soviet style. Mr. YUKHNIN [through translator]: And the end of this -- the final result will be friendship and close relationship. So I'd like to drink to that.

KAYE: But as the toasts continued, Nikolai Yukhnin soon saw the need to fulfill his obligation as the group's leader. Mr. YUKHNIN [through translator]: Concerning the fact that we have a great struggle in the Soviet Union against the misuse of alcohol, I would be pleased if you would not shoot so much.

KAYE: But our cameras were welcome for the tests. On Saturday, the third blast, 14 tons of explosives, rocked Broken Hills, Nevada. It quickly registered at the Deep Springs Seismic Station 130 miles away. American equipment also detected this and the other explosions and transmitted signals by satellite to the University of California at San Diego. One key finding of this experiment was confirmation that the rock formationsaround the Soviet and U. S. nuclear test sites are quite different. In Nevada, unlike the Soviet Union, the geology is complex. Shock waves weaken with distance, making underground explosions here more difficult to monitor than in the Soviet Union. Soviet and American scientists are planning further experiments this summer. Only this time they will be conducted on an official level at each other's nuclear test sites. In the meantime, Thomas Cochran of the Natural Resources Defense Council says his group will continue to pressure the U. S. Government to support a test ban treaty. Mr. COCHRAN: We're trying to educate the Congress, the Administration, if we cannot get negotiations toward a low threshold, a comprehensive test ban treaty in this administration, we will have educated the next president, whoever he may be. And hopefully we can get on with the negotiations next year if not this year.

KAYE: The Soviet scientists plan to spend another two weeks in the United States working with seismologists from the Universities of California and Nevada. They'll analyze the data they've collected. The next step will be political. An effort to persuade unconvinced American officials that underground nuclear explosions can be effectively monitored, using seismic measuring. LEHRER: And that brings us to Evgeni Velakhov and Lynn Hansen. Mr. Velakhov is a vice president of the Soviet Academy of Sciences and advisor to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on arms control issues. We saw him in Jeffrey Kaye's piece in Nevada. Mr. Hansen is director of Multilateral Affairs at the U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Mr. Hansen, are you one of those unconvinced American officials about seismic monitoring of nuclear tests? Amb. LYNN HANSEN, U. S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency: Well, Jim I am. Certainly, based upon the advice we get from a range of experts, there's a lot of convincing to be done. And we're convinced in fact that we are on the right path in our relationships with the Soviet Union in negotiating first the verification provisions required for effective verification of the two treaties which are in being, to be followed by negotiations on interim limitations with the idea of progressing to an ultimate ban on nuclear testing -- in the context of an effective disarmament program. That is, one which actually does away with nuclear weapons. LEHRER: And that would, of course, make nuclear testing obsolete. Is that what you're saying? Amb. HANSEN: Well, it's a question of establishing security and stability on a step by step basis, rather than the way that it's been proposed by some of doing everything at once. We think it is the reason and the rational way to progress. That is, doing one hurdle at a time, and seeing where it takes us. So that we're able to reduce weapons in this process. You will remember that President Reagan has from the outset felt that the reduction of nuclear arsenals was an important element of his overall arms control strategy. And in fact we've had one step in that direction and we're looking forward to another. And if this progresses the way we hope it will, then one can look at progress in the context of the nuclear testing negotiations as well. LEHRER: In the meantime, though, to continue to test weapons to put in the arsenals, correct? Until they -- as they're being reduced or being eliminated? Amb. HANSEN: I think that we all recognize that modern technology is something that has to be tested. I think there is ample proof in our own experience in such things as the shuttle, our efforts in the nuclear negotiations, remembering that in the INF Treaty for example, there is a provision that allows us to have some surety about Soviet compliance inasmuch as they cannot test. And when you cannot test equipment, it becomes unreliable. And that is one of the basic problems here, and one of the basic reasons why we continue to test. Is that we must have assurance in our nuclear deterrent. LEHRER: Mr. Velikhov, why is that wrong? If you're going to -- as long as we still have nuclear weapons in this world, why not continue to test them to make sure they work? EVGENI VELIKHOV, Soviet Academy of Sciences: First of all, I think we mix two problems. One problem is verification of test ban. Comprehensive test ban. And we working with the American scientists on verification of comprehensive test ban. In such case we try to measure the small limit, lower limit, of explosion. And in the official negotiations, speaking of the limit of 50, 70 kilotons. We're speaking of limit of 10 tons. And the (unintelligible) experiment. And experiment in Nevada. We measure from distance in (unintelligible) like 600 kilometers, in Nevada 300 kilometers. Different rate. Measures with confidence. The explosion 10 tons. In such case we establish a base for comprehensive test ban. The (unintelligible) experiment has nothing to do with this. From point of view -- your question, why we're interested in -- my personal view? LEHRER: Right. Mr. VELIKHOV: If we speak of the future, what is the goal for testing of nuclear weapons? One goal is producing third generation of nuclear weapons. If you project this third generation for future, it is only my view, my analysis, increase the unsafety and instability of both countries. Because it is produced more futuristic, more uncertain, futuristic nuclear weapons. From point of view reliability testing, in my knowledge -- LEHRER: In other words, if you stopped testing, you would have to obviously stop making them, and that would be a kind of reverse way of -- another way of banning nuclear weapons would be to ban their testing. Is that? Mr. VELIKHOV: Not exactly. Because if you stop testing, you stop program of development, and producing new type of nuclear weapons. But (unintelligible) forever for the old types. Because for the reliability testing, you're not need the fullscale nuclear tests. LEHRER: In other words, the ones that Mr. Hansen's talking about, the ones that are already in the arsenals, they could continue to be tested, is that right? Or they don't need to be tested? Mr. VELIKHOV: They don't need to be tested. LEHRER: Mr. Hansen, you don't need to test the ones you already have, we already have? And the ones the Soviets already have? Amb. HANSEN: Well, I think that we do. In fact, there's a body of evidence that suggests that we need to test er perhaps. The fact is -- LEHRER: We won't tell anybody, Mr. Velikhov -- Amb. HANSEN: What they have done in Nevada -- Now, Mr. Velikhov is a member of the Supreme Soviet. That's very difficult to characterize as a private citizen. But in Nevada, what they did was show that you could seismically detect exploss was one which after a year of negotiations both sides agreed this would be the plan of action that we would both proceed on this step by step basis. So it's a little difficult to understand exactly what the objective of this undertaking in Nevada really is. Mr. VELIKHOV: The objective of Nevada experiment is to give basis for comprehensive test ban. LEHRER: How would that give basis for the comprehensive test ban? Mr. VELIKHOV: Because we -- 25 years ago, when President Kennedy negotiated the test ban, you remember it was agreement to stop testing in atmosphere, space, and ocean. But it is not agreement to stop testing under the ground. Because of problem of verification. AfterSo the problem is not just detection of something happening. It's the ability to determine what that something is. LEHRER: Because a seismograph records only the disturbance. It doesn't say what caused the disturbance. Is that what you were saying. Amb. HANSEN: That's correct. I'm saying that the problem is one of discrimination. You can tell, yes, something's happened, either an earthquake, a chemical explosion, a mining explosion. Those kinds of things. But they don't tell you whether or not there was a nuclear device involved. LEHRER: He's right, isn't he, Mr. Velikhov? Mr. VELIKHOV: In two years, we exactly addressed this problem. And in the Semipatalinsk, for example, we're very happy. LEHRER: That's the Soviet test? Mr. VELIKHOV: Yes. Soviet test site. Three minutes before our chemical explosion, it happens to measure earthquake. And demonstrates the possibility of discrimination. Which is old hand. Because the frequency spectrum and the picture of the -- spectrum picture of the explosion and the seismic (unintelligible) is completely different. LEHRER: But you can't -- you can't do it now. You're still working on it, is that right? Mr. VELIKHOV: We're working -- No, we can do. Point of view of the earthquake, it is possible. From point of view of the difference between chemical explosion and nuclear, of course it's very rare you have chemical explosion of one kiloton. I never listen to this. It's very rare, yes? In such case, chemical explosion generally ten tons. In such case it's possible to discriminate by this limit. But after this, it's possible to discriminate by other means. An example in Nevada, we measure not only the seismic waves, we measure the response of atmosphere. And this gives us -- LEHRER: Why is that important? Mr. VELIKHOV: Because it is possible to discriminate between surface explosion. Which is mostly industrial explosion. And the underground. And with all the national means, satellite, atmospheric measurement, seismic means, I am sure it is possible not only measure very low, but discriminate too. LEHRER: Mr. Hansen, is it your position, is it the U. S. Government's position that these folks are just wasting their time? That what they're doing is going to have no effect on policy or going to change anything? Amb. HANSEN: I think the government's position is that this is -- from the American side certainly -- a group of private citizens, private scientists, who are pursuing an interest they fundamentally have. From the government's point of view, we think the approach taken by the Administration is a much more productive one. And doing a much more credible work. Keeping in mind that we are about to have with the Soviet Union some verification experiments where we will have Soviet scientists on our site. They will have put their devices in places right on the sites. We will do the same at a site in the Soviet Union. There will be exchanges of information. And this we feel is the better way to pursue this endeavor. This is something the President has offered to the Soviet Union since 1984. And each year has repeated that. And finally, in the summit meeting, the plan of action was agreed by both sides. LEHRER: And that's going to happen? I mean, that's not longer -- I mean, that's in the works, Mr. Velikhov, where they're actually -- Soviet scientists are going to come on the site of U. S. nuclear explosions and vice versa. It won't be guesswork 100 miles away. Amb. HANSEN: The importance of this is -- this is a government sanctioned activity that is a result of negotiated agreements where the details have been negotiated and worked out, and agreed by both governments. So the import of it is significant. LEHRER: I have agreed to stop the discussion at this moment and say thank you both very much for being with us. Final Sale MacNEIL: Once upon a time, the traveling salesman was a fixture of American life. But like most things, that's changed a good deal over the years. And that's the subject of tonight's essay by our man in Kansas City, Jim Fisher.

JIM FISHER: Meet Mark Newman. He sells Campbell's Soup -- tomato, chicken noodle, the chunky kinds. If you live on the Great Plains, had a bowl of Campbell's in the past three decades, it's likely Newman's had a hand setting it on your grocer's shelf. This day, Newman's heading out from his South Kansas City home. To Wichita, to Topeka, Kansas, then Joplin, Missouri, and points east. Close to a week on the road. Peddling. One thing, this is Newman's last trip. At 62, he's retiring. And with him, in a sense, part of the American scene will vanish. Traveling salesmen like Newman are vanishing from the landscape. The traveling salesman, a powerful enough icon in the American imagination, so that he became the subject of Arthur Miller's tragedy, Death of a Salesman. A common enough presence on the American landscape so that a whole category of jokes would rise up about him. Do you remember? MARK NEWMAN, salesman: When I first started with the company, there were literally thousands and thousands of sales people on the road in those days. They knew you, you knew them. They helped you. As a matter of fact, I used to write orders for products that weren't even mine. Some other company in those days, to help a guy -- maybe he was sick, couldn't make it. We'd take his orders, a lot of us would take his orders as we went along. And the customer understood it, I understood it. The company didn't know anything about it, because if you told them that you were writing an order for somebody else, some other company, they probably wouldn't have liked it too much. But that's the way it was --

FISHER: Not that Newman's the last of the breed. There are still plenty of salesmen. Look in any busy airport. Yet more and more of those salesmen hit only the big cities and the trade shows. Or they work the computers. Come as disembodied voices over the telephone, selling this or that. Salesmen talking of doing deals, of 800 numbers. Home shopping networks. Cold calls. And numbers. It used to be simpler. And maybe more human. Mr. NEWMAN: You could visit with a customer in those days. Today there's very little visiting. Everything is (unintelligible). You'd sit back there and they'd cut off a sandwich from a big stick of bologna, and sit there with a coke and talk about his family and what he'd been doing. How his business was. You knew the customers well. You knew their families. What his wife's name was. What his kids names were. The kids were out there in the store. The kids were helping out, stocking shelves. And the older kids ran the cash register. It was a family operation. But times have changed, and the little stores are commercially gone nowadays. You don't have time to be friends with the grocers today like you did 35 years ago. It's more of an impersonal thing nowadays.

FISHER: Newman understands. The Mom and Pop stores are gone forever, victims to efficiency, to centralized buying, warehousing and distribution. Mr. NEWMAN: When I first started with the company, there was a thing called core stock. You'd go down to the wholesaler in the morning, you'd pick up five or six cases, or seven cases, of different kinds of product. And you'd take it around to the small grocers and sell him three cans or six cans, or twelve cans. You'd find some joker'd buy a case, and that was a big sale for the day. Today, a guy buys a truck of chicken noodle. He'll buy a truckload of mushrooms, a truckload of tomatoes. The computer spits out how many cases you need, based on the trend of what you sold last year, or whatever you sold last month. The computer is a cold machine. It only knows one thing, if you sold 20 cases today or last week, then you get 20 more.

FISHER: Now comes the ultimate in efficiency in Middle America. The new Hypermart Store in Topeka, Kansas. Everything under one roof: 220,000 square feet, harbinger of other such stores that are in the planning stages all over the country. Herds of shoppers. Automated checkouts. Stock clerks needing rollerskates to get around. Even an ambassador to greet the customers. The buyer has become the salesman. And Mark Newman is making his last trip into the country where the old small hotels the peddlers stayed in have long since been boarded up. And where the road seems emptier than ever of salesmen cars. Recap LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Monday. Israeli Army troops with tanks crossed over into Southeast Lebanon in pursuit of Palestinian guerilla forces. Polish authorities arrested more leaders of the Solidarity movement as labor unrest continued to spread. And Federal investigators in the Hawaii Airliner incident have found evidence of metal fatigue caused cracks in the plane's fuselage. Good night, Robin. MacNEIL: Good night, Jim. That's the NewsHour tonight. And we will be back tomorrow night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.