The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday, the U. S. promised to pursue any avenue, including an international conference, to achieve Arab/Israeli peace talks. Defense Minister Rabin said Israel was too divided to accept an international conference until after the November elections. President Reagan toughens terms of trade with South Korea and several other nations. We'll have details in our news summary in a moment. Judy Woodruff is in Washington tonight. Judy? JUDY WOODRUFF: After the news summary, peace efforts in the Middle East are our lead focus. We have two newsmaker interviews with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek, and with Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin. We follow that with another in our series of stump speeches by the presidential candidates. Tonight, Republican Pete du Pont. And finally, sports essayist Mike Lupica looks at the hype surrounding the Super Bowl. News Summary MacNEIL: Israel eased some restrictions in the occupied territories as political moves towards Arab/Israeli negotiations gained some momentum. Scattered protests, but no major incidents, were reported. In Jerusalem, security forces were out in force to discourage violence after Friday Muslim prayers. About 100 Arab demonstrators appeared, but dispersed peacefully.The government announced several moves to reduce tensions, including the release of 100 prisoners in the Gaza Strip and the jailing of soldiers for excessive beatings. But Arabs and a United Nations relief worker reported that Israeli police beat more than 60 Palestinians in a West Bank refugee camp overnight. Judy? WOODRUFF: Secretary of State Shultz said today the United States will pursue any avenue to bring about direct negotiations between Israelis and Arabs. He said that included an international peace conference. Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir today appeared to soften slightly his opposition to such a conference. And in an interview with the NewsHour, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarek welcomed the Shamir remarks. He said, ''That is very good, and I thank him very much. '' But Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin, a member of the Labor Party, in a separate NewsHour interview, said the Israeli government was still divided over the idea.

YITZHAK RABIN, Minister of Defense, Israel: I believe that Israel -- the Arab/Israel conflict can be solved only by negotiations. MacNEIL: Will it wait -- have to wait until the November election in your country to come up with a policy that can cope with this new situation? Mr. RABIN: Well, if the way to bring about peace is negotiations with Jordan, within the framework of the international peace conference, I doubt if a decision can be made before our coming elections in November this year. WOODRUFF: We'll have the entire Mubarek and Rabin interviews later in the NewsHour. MacNEIL: Nicaragua's Sandinista government and contra rebels adjourned their first direct talks without agreement on a cease fire, but with plans to meet again next month. The two days of talks held in a Catholic seminary in San Jose, Costa Rica, were described by a Catholic mediator as very positive. Bishop Bosco Vivas, representing the Nicaraguan Church, told reporters that the will exists on both sides to seek a cease fire in Nicaragua. The two delegations agreed tentatively to meet in Guatemala February 10 to 12. In the talks, the Sandinistas offered to revise cease fire proposals. The army would halt offensive operations on March 1 to give the contras time to move into three cease fire zones where they could retain their arms and receive humanitarian supplies. WOODRUFF: Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega got a lecture from Pope John Paul II today, according to a spokesman for the Vatican. The Pope reportedly greeted Ortega, whom he has not seen in four years, in a businesslike manner, and proceeded to a private meeting where the Pontiff did most of the talking. The Vatican officials said the Pope lectured Ortega on the need for democracy in Nicaragua, and on the importance of implementing the Arias Peace Plan for Central America. InWashington, the White House announced that President Reagan will make a nationally televised speech next Tuesday to appeal for aid to Nicaragua's contra rebels. The speech will occur the day before Congress is expected to vote on the aid package. On another Central American matter, a spokesman said the White House knows nothing about reports this week that the FBI conducted surveillance of domestic groups that oppose Reagan policy in Central America. Marlin Fitzwater said the President is concerned about the report, because he thinks there should be no investigation of Americans for their political beliefs. Fitzwater said Mr. Reagan has asked the new FBI Director William Sessions for a report. MacNEIL: President Reagan today stripped special trade privileges from four Asian nations which have enjoyed growing trade surpluses with the United States. Next January, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan will stop getting trade preferences that will affect nearly $10 billion worth of imports to the U. S. The preferences permit certain imports from developing economies to enter the United States duty free. The White House said these countries were being dropped from the list because their economies had advanced and they were more competitive. WOODRUFF: Iraq today claimed still another attack on ships in the Persian Gulf, this time boasting of an accurate hit on what was apparently a large tanker located off the coast of Iran. Already this week four people have been killed as a result of other Iraqi raids. Searchers using advanced U. S. Navy scanning gear have located the wreckage of a South African Airways jumbo jet which crashed two months ago deep below the Indian Ocean. The broken fuselage of the Boeing 747 was found some 100 miles north of the island nation of Mauritius; 159 people were killed in the crash which is believed to have followed an onboard explosion. South African Airlines officials say it will be months before they can begin to try to recover any part of the plane. MacNEIL: At least 24 passengers were injured early today when an Amtrak train was derailed in Pennsylvania when it ran onto the wrong track and struck a maintenance machine. A railroad worker who should have switched the tracks fled from the scene and is missing. The accident happened just after midnight near Chester, Pennsylvania. The train, called the Night Owl, was carrying about 100 people, some of them in sleeping births, from Washington to Boston. None of the injuries was serious, and by midday, all but one of those hurt had been treated and released. WOODRUFF: In economic news, the stock market ended the week on a positive note, closing up more than 28 points at 1958. 22. Advancing stocks led decliners by better than two to one. Analysts say the upturn may have been caused by optimism that interest rates are headed downward. The Veterans Administration said today that they were lowering the maximum rate charge for VA home mortgages by one full percentage point, from 10. 5 to 9. 5%. MacNEIL: That's our news summary. Ahead on the NewsHour, two major interviews as we focus on Israel's Palestinian crisis, Pete du Pont's stump speech, and a Mike Lupica essay on Super Bowl hype. Hosni Mubarek Interview WOODRUFF: We begin our Middle East coverage tonight with a newsmaker interview with the President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarek, who is here on a state visit. Mr. Mubarek came with a peace plan for the Israeli occupied territories that include a six month cooling off period in the territories, a halt to Jewish settlements there, and an international peace conference. I talked with the President this morning at the hotel where he is staying, and asked if his visit had brought a peaceful resolution for the occupied territories any closer. HOSNI MUBAREK, President, Egypt: I could tell you frankly, when I proposed my initiative before I came here, I found the situation very dangerous. But the (unintelligible) in the West Bank and Gaza give you very strong alarm that something should take place for the peace process to go ahead. Otherwise the sequences we would never protect, because it may turn over to very dangerous actions not only internally but outside the area. So I proposed a moratorium for violence, for six months, to give room for thinking and preparing for international conference. I know that some of these points may be rejected by the Israelis, but anyway I'm just making everybody work and think of peace and the preciousness of peace in the area. WOODRUFF: Did you make any progress on this while you were here in Washington? Pres. MUBAREK: Oh, in Washington here they understood everything, and I think they started working now to do something for the peace process. WOODRUFF: What did they say they're willing to do? Pres. MUBAREK: They are thinking of a new proposal. How to work at the peace process, how to keep the momentum. The details are being discussed right now. WOODRUFF: Just to begin with, your plan, one of the things you talked about was the six month's cooling off period. We understand the United States is willing to help you out on that. How will they do that? What can they do to bring that about? Pres. MUBAREK: Whenever we agree to these points, that means that we are giving hope to the people of the West Bank and the Gaza there is hope for the solution. I think they will respond for ceasing violence. This is the only way. If you just tell them cease violence, or moratorium violence without giving them hope that there will be a solution, believe me, nobody will respond to that. WOODRUFF: Among other things that you talked to the American officials about was this business of having no more Israeli settlements, Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. The administration didn't say that it was willing to go along with that, or to push that at this particular time. What did they say about that? Pres. MUBAREK: I know that the settlement activity is being ceased now. There is no activity as far as they heard from some Israeli officials. And even here, I just understood from the Administration this could be managed. WOODRUFF: What do you mean? Pres. MUBAREK: This could be stopped. This activity could be stopped. Such things, stopping these activities, declaring international conference is approved, I think these elements will give hope to the people. There are other elements certainly that should be an international mechanism to secure the Palestinians -- I know the Israelis will never accept that. But I'm giving something to reject. Frankly speaking. WOODRUFF: What do you mean by that? Pres. MUBAREK: They will reject something in the initiative, so I'm giving something to be rejected by them, other things to be accepted. WOODRUFF: But you're saying most everything you talked to the Administration about they've agreed to. Pres. MUBAREK: They agreed on the whole conception of the initiative, and they are now sensitive and they are keen on trying to put any kind, some kind of proposal to push the peace process. WOODRUFF: But whenan administration official talked to reporters yesterday about this, all he would say was that we are willing to go along with this -- pushing for a cessation of the violence on the West Bank. They wouldn't commit to go along with anything else, the international conference yet, stopping the Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. Are there two different perceptions from this -- Pres. MUBAREK: No, it's no different (unintelligible) contents of this generality is they should do it. Without an international conference I think peace will never be fashioned. WOODRUFF: We understand just this morning that Prime Minister Shamir said in an interview that he may be thinking more favorably toward the idea of an international conference. Pres. MUBAREK: That's very good. And I thank him very much. And I'm asking him to be flexible. I'm even begging him, please be flexible. The international conference will not superimpose any condition on the parties. We are going to sit, start international conference, be divided into different groups, and we'll discuss all the issues and whenever we finish it, nobody will veto it. Nobody has the right to veto it. If there's a problem, mediators (unintelligible) will interfere. The United States (unintelligible) peace process also, as it happened with us. WOODRUFF: How soon do you think an international conference could get underway? Pres. MUBAREK: It could happen within six months, and should be very good. But you know, humans in this kind of thing, all the year of the election, and here it's the year of election in Israel, (unintelligible) year of election in France, year of election anywhere -- before going to look at this. We can't wait with this violence going on because of elections. No (unintelligible) for the elections. We are going to go through a fair solution. WOODRUFF: But, Mr. President, you're realistic, you know a great deal about American politics, and I'm sure you understand that big solutions normally don't happen in an election year, because you're right in the process of transition. Pres. MUBAREK: We should be very practical in this sense. We should pursue the Israelis to understand the situation. The violence will not stop until. We tell them stop violence, we have elections in America. You can't stop violence by order! And you can never predict what will be the sequences of this violence. We don't want to wait and then regret. That's why we should work. Prime Minister Shamir, I think, he has good experience, and he could understand and realize that a solution to reach peace or to achieve peace is very, very important for all of us. WOODRUFF: What specifically does the United States need to do now to move this process along? WOODRUFF: Persuade the Israelis to accept international conference. And go ahead for that is the most important point. WOODRUFF: I don't want to keep coming back to this same point, Mr. President, but again the impression many of us received from what we were told by Administration officials yesterday was that there was something less than a total embracing of what you were talking about. Are we getting a different picture from what you got in your private meetings with the President and others? Pres. MUBAREK: I didn't have a different picture, but I could feel that they are pushing -- are going to push forward with the peace process by other means. WOODRUFF: What do you mean by other means? Pres. MUBAREK: I can't tell you because they are still cooking it now, so I can't tell you things which I'm not sure of 100%. There are discussions concerning what to do, what are the steps to be taken. Right now at the time we are meeting here, they are meeting there and discussing it. WOODRUFF: What result do you look for? I mean, Prime Minister Shamir and some other Israeli officials have talked about reviving the autonomy talks, as they are addressed in the Camp David Accords. Is that -- Pres. MUBAREK: Look, the word Camp David is very sensitive to the Arab world. So from the psychological point of view, we should find another format. Putting aside the word Camp David. So another format may be acceptable by the Arab countries which will lead to the settlement. WOODRUFF: Do you have an idea now of what that other formula will be? Pres. MUBAREK: Many formulas could be proposed. Having another name. Not leading to the same target as the settlement of our problem. WOODRUFF: What is the target you would like to see? Pres. MUBAREK: Peace. Solving the Palestinian problem. WOODRUFF: And what does that mean? Pres. MUBAREK: That means just returning back territories that have been occupied by the Israelis in the West Bank and the Gaza to the Palestinians and it would be (unintelligible). This is my conception. WOODRUFF: In other words, a Palestinian state. Pres. MUBAREK: I didn't speak for an independent Palestinian state as such. I would like just to return it back as it was before the 1967 war and (unintelligible) the Jordanians. Then if it is something else, I think it will be discussed after that. WOODRUFF: Do you think the Israelis would accept that? Pres. MUBAREK: It's better than keeping the situation of violence and bloodshed every day, every month. WOODRUFF: But the Israelis, as you know, would be very worried about their own security in that situation Pres. MUBAREK: We have also (unintelligible) secure borders for everybody, for Israelis, for all the other countries. We are not asking the Israelis to do miracles. We are asking them to find -- to discuss the way to have their security borders and bearing in their mind that (unintelligible) Palestinians who have been occupied for about more than 15 (unintelligible). WOODRUFF: If you'll forgive me, Mr. President, you sound very optimistic. I mean, given what has happened over in the occupied territories in the last few weeks, and couple of months, we've seen a lot of violence, we've seen at least 38 Palestinians killed, very high state of tension. And you're talking very optimistically. How do you make the leap from what's happening now to this optimism? Pres. MUBAREK: Look, I'm by nature very optimistic. But such violence, I think it is never (unintelligible) to stay in such violence and the bloodshed and shoot the people and killing them for a long time. If they are going to stay like this, this will arouse the feeling against them more and more. Not only in the Arab world, but all over the world. They will create a very bad position situation against them. Everybody's against bloodshed. Everybody's against killing. So nobody -- you, the media -- I just see your television every now and then -- all of you are against this bloodshed, this kind of violence. This violence will never lead except to hatred, much more violence. The violence may spread all over to other places. Now is is limited in the West Bank and Gaza. My fear is if we don't give them hope to reach any kind of solutions, violence may start outside the West Bank and Gaza. Which is really dangerous. WOODRUFF: So what's at stake? If we don't have progress towards some kind of a peace settlement, what's at stake here? Pres. MUBAREK: We have to be responsible for what's going to happen afterwards. I don't think the violence will stop. It will be much more wider. I don't say (unintelligible) on the television, because it may be some kind of persuasion for more violence in other places. WOODRUFF: And how much of the responsibility for that would lie with the United States? Pres. MUBAREK: You know, the United States we consider a full partner in our area. The United States has so many friends in the area. And everybody will be blaming the United States if nothing's been taken towards this violence. (unintelligible) the demonstrations all over the Arab (unintelligible). It's against that. Everybody's sympathetic with the Palestinians because they are losing only stones, and they're being shot down by guns. There's something very heavy for the Administration and most of the countries all over the world now. Your media -- everybody -- is against that. And in Israel itself there are people who are against this bloodshed and this violence of this effort. There are people who are very kind and look for peace and asking for putting an end to this violence. Such violence will not give any kind of stability in Israel. No tourist will go there. No immigration will take place. There are so many points. Israel will be put in a very difficult situation. And I hope that the logic will play a good role in this and that they understand that the international conference is the best hope for the people, and it will not hurt them. WOODRUFF: Mr. President, we thank you for being with us. Yitzhak Rabin Interview MacNEIL: Earlier today we also talked by satellite to Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin in Israel. Rabin is responsible for the policy of putting down the Palestinian demonstrations and for the tactics used by troops and police. A former Prime Minister, Rabin is the Labor Party member of the Likud Labor Coalition Government. Mr. Defense Minister, thank you very much for joining us. Does your government have any formal reaction to the Mubarek plan? YITZHAK RABIN, Minister of Defense, Israel: Well, I don't believe that there is any formal position by the government. Basically I believe, personally, that there is one element which is positive in its initiative -- I wouldn't call it a plan or a program -- is a calling for a cooling period for six months in the territories. I would not say that I am in agreement with his other parts of initiatives referring mainly to any introduction of any international elements to the territories. Israel is responsible to the territories in accordance to the international law, and no doubt linking it to conditions that are related mainly to the ultimate solution when peace talks will start between Israel, Jordan and the Palestinians who will represent those who reside in the territories. MacNEIL: And what about the provision that if the Palestinians stop demonstrating for six months that Israel put no new Jewish settlements in the occupied territories? Mr. RABIN: Well, I don't believe that this can be accepted by the government of Israel, even though for practical purposes I am not aware about the plans at least for the coming few months to settle any new settlement, but this is our decision that we have taken by ourselves. MacNEIL: What happens, Mr. Rabin, if and when you restore order in the occupied territories, which is your goal -- what happens then? Mr. RABIN: Well, let's distinguish between two basic issues in coping with the problem in the territories and in the overall issues that we have to face in our search to bring about peace in -- on our Eastern border. Peace can be achieved only by political means. It is to say negotiations with Jordan, the Palestinians who reside in the territories that we hope that will bring about peace. In the meantime, since we can not by military means only to impose peace, we can not accept that the Palestinians by violent activities of all kinds -- terrorism or big demonstration -- violent demonstration or small demonstrations, or roadblocks, or setting tires on fire, or throwing stones -- will impose on us their political will. Therefore, what I'm dealing with as Minister of Defense, using the armed forces of Israel, the border police, and other security branches, is to restore tranquility, to make it clear that there will be no use of violence that can bring about political results. The political problems should be solved by diplomatic means. It is to say by these talks. MacNEIL: But what plans does your government have when tranquility is restored to move forward with that process? What practical steps will be taken? Mr. RABIN: The national unity government of Israel is ready to negotiate without prior conditions with Jordan and Palestinians who are not declared members of the PLO peace between Jordan and Israel within which the Palestinian problem will be solved. MacNEIL: That has been -- Mr. RABIN: -- Jordan refused to do it directly on a bilateral basis. Jordan refuses to do it the way that Egypt and Israel negotiated with the participation of the United States only. Jordan demands that these bilateral direct talks will be conducted within the framework of an international peace conference. On this the government of Israel is divided to two parts and therefore, no one part of our government can impose its own will on the other one. MacNEIL: But in other words, the disturbances and the attention they have brought from the rest of the world have not changed the position of your government? The position you just outlined was the position before the disturbances began, right? Mr. RABIN: So far, I can not say that I see a change on any one of the two parts of the government of Israel in regards to the framework within which negotiations can start. MacNEIL: The Rabbi Arthur Herzberg, the Vice President of the World Jewish Congress, said here this week, ''This occupation is now politically and morally bankrupt and it has to end. '' What is your reaction to that statement? Mr. RABIN: I would not deny that the developments started in -- on December 9th brought about a different problem to Israel, not only to Israel, If I had to give a main significance to what has developed, I would say that the Palestinians that reside in the territories as an act of despair -- despair from the Arab countries -- forty years, efforts that led nowhere from their point of view, from twenty years of PLO terrorism that failed, from the lack of interest on the international community -- and they started to lead the struggle for their case by violent demonstrations. I believe that Israel basically has three options -- how to cope with it. Option number one: to run away. I believe any running away, any giving in to violence will invite more violence and will lead nowhere and will undermine any chance to bring about a political solution. The second, more extreme, way is to crush the demonstrations by unlimited amount of fire power. The way that theSyrians or the Jordanians cope with uprisings in their own countries. It's inconceivable to me that an Israel -- Israeli government will do so. Therefore, we have decided to cope with it with a different way, use of force including beating whenever we face, and while we face, the violent activities -- like demonstration, block roads, stone throwing, petrol bottle throwing -- and curfew and other means in coping to bring down violence while on the other hand offering to those who are ready to do so to continue their daily activities. I don't see any fourth way how to cope with the problem. MacNEIL: You just said a government of Israel would never use unlimited fire power and yet as you must be well aware, the methods you have used which you just described to quell the disturbances have brought about a feeling of revulsion in many parts of the world as the pictures were shown, and it seems that reverting to the beatings instead of shooting has produced just as much unhappiness -- for instance in the American Jewish community -- if not more than the shootings. How do you react to that reaction? Mr. RABIN: Well, I believe that shooting is the worst. What I said, it's not a policy of beating -- it's a policy that every police that has to cope with international problem -- which is not the case between us and the Palestinians who reside in the territories -- is a confrontation. I would say a very sharp confrontation between two different entities politically, religiously, nationally, and what the police in Paris, whenever there are students in riot, or in Seoul, allow me to say, even in the United States, police using force -- what does it mean to use force -- to embrace those who throw on you stones or put against you knives or throw on you petrol bottle? You use force, including beating. Therefore, the policy is useable against violent action and against those who carry out violence while they are doing so, and in hot pursuit of them. MacNEIL: As the man responsible for this policy, how would you reassure Americans and particularly American Jews who in the last week or so have expressed deep concern about seeing pictures of Jewish -- Israeli soldiers and police, apparently doing to Palestinians what Russians and Germans and Poles used to do to Jews, and for which the state of Israel was created to give you a place to escape from that. You follow my point? Mr. RABIN: My answer will be simple. We give the Palestinians like other Arab countries neighboring to Israel, with the exception of Egypt, the open way to negotiate. We do not -- we don't -- we did not -- we will not initiate user force against them. The real problem is that they have started to use violence and in response and only in response to violent activities by them against us, we use force to prevent it. Our purpose is to avoid violence, once we have to face violence is to bring it down. We do not initiate violence against tranquil community or tranquil individual. MacNEIL: You are the former Chief of Staff of the army. You had a very distinguished career as a general in the Six Day War. You're the hero of the Six Day War. Are you concerned what this civil riot duty is doing to your army? The general in command of the forces in the West Bank said yesterday, General Mitzna, that he and his troops are deeply troubled by this, that it is damaging to the army to do this. What is your feeling about that? Mr. RABIN: Allow me to say since you mentioned that I had a long military service and I have known the real face of any kind of war, of any kind ofconfrontation, believe me. They are ugly, ugly and no doubt whoever has participated in any war, in any fighting against terrorism carries with him some scars of his own experience. No doubt that when our young soldiers have to confront civilians, sometimes including women, children, I'm proud that they feel the certain difficulties and certain soul searching of themselves, but I believe that they understand why they are doing so. They know that they are forced to do so, they know there is no better way to cope with it as long as the other side is not ready to solve it around the negotiation table. MacNEIL: You aren't concerned that it is damaging your army's morale and making it a less effective fighting force? Mr. RABIN: Allow me to say the armed forces of Israel is geared, trained, educated to defend Israel against the armed forces of the Arab countries that stress that they are at a state of war with us, against terrorists armed with weapons and much less to carry out some kind of police activities the way they are carrying it now. And no doubt it's a problem, but we have to do it, and no doubt everyone first and foremost myself, would prefer that it will be over. MacNEIL: You mentioned the change of mood in the Palestinian community. In Israel itself, do you believe that the riots have created a psychological watershed, and if so, how would you describe that watershed, that change of heart? Mr. RABIN: It's very difficult for me to comment now on the sixth, seventh weeks after they have started to try to describe to you in accurate way what has happened in Israel. I believe that basically the country was and is divided about what should be the ultimate solution. I believe that most of the people of Israel realize that even though it's very difficult to us to see the pictures, to see our young soldiers coping with civilians -- violent civilians -- but at the same time people realize that to give in to violence, to withdraw, to vacate the territories or part of them, will be in the long run a major mistake that will endanger the security of Israel and will reduce the prospects to achieve peace on our Eastern border. MacNEIL: An Israeli editor said here this week that the 1973 war produced in Israel the realization that peace was possible and essential and he thought that these events might also create a mindset that some change in the status quo is not only possible, but essential. Do you agree with that? Mr. RABIN: I was for negotiations before the ninth of December last year. I will continue to be for negotiations. I believe that Israel -- the Arab/Israel conflict can be solved only by negotiations. MacNEIL: Will it wait -- have to wait until the November election in your country to come up with a policy that can cope with this new situation? Mr. RABIN: Well, if the way to bring about peace is negotiations with Jordan, within the framework of the international peace conference, I doubt if a decision can be made before our coming elections in November this year. MacNEIL: Mr. Rabin, thank you very much for joining us. Mr. RABIN: Thank you. On the Stump WOODRUFF: Now we continue our series of basic stump speeches by all the presidential candidates. Tonight, it is the turn of Republican Pete du Pont, former governor of Delaware. He spoke Tuesday to residents of Peterborough, New Hampshire, at the Convale Regional High School there. The frequent flashes of light that you will see reflect the presence of an enthusiastic wire service photographer in the audience.

PETE DU PONT, presidential candidate: I view this campaign very differently from the other five Republicans who are running. And I think the differences are important. I don't think this is a campaign about who the next president of our country's going to be. I think it's a campaign about where our country's going to go, and when we the people of the United States of America have decided the direction we want to take our nation, why it'll be easy to decide who we want to lead us in that direction. So I think this campaign is about where we're going to go. George Bush doesn't think that. If you ask George why it is he wants to be president, he'll tell you that he's got this wonderful resume, which he unrolls -- like a windowshade. And it's a pretty good resume. He's done a lot of things, and he's gone them well. Well, I've got a resume, too. Husband. Father. Three and a half years helping to defend the country in the United States Navy, living right across the border in that state of Maine. Quality control engineer in a production plant. Lawyer. State Legislator. Congressman serving on the Foreign Affairs Committee. Governor for eight years. That's a good resume, and if that had anything to do with running for President, we could talk about it. Bob Dole takes a different approach. Bob says it's not resume that's important, it's record. It's all the things you've done while you're a congressman and a senator. Well, I've got a record, too. Every single family in the state of Delaware had at least a 30% tax cut in the eight years I was governor. We had eight surplus budgets out of eight. The day I left office there were 20% more jobs in Delaware than the day I came into office. Now, that's a pretty good record. And it might be interesting. And I'm proud of it. But I don't think presidential campaigns are about records. Jack Kemp takes a different view entirely. Jack says, No, it's not record or resume, it's ideas you've had in the past. Well, Jack's had some good ideas. I agree with some of them. So do I. A constitutional amendment that limits the mount of money the legislature can spend. Wouldn't hurt to have that in Washington, would it? Another one to make it almost impossible to raise your taxes. That wouldn't hurt in Washington either. A special program for high school kids. Perhaps like some of you young men and women who maybe aren't going to college and don't know what you're going to do, and without a little motivation and guidance and counseling you join the ranks of the unemployed when you get out of school. That's a lousy way to start a life. So we put together a program to help kids like that transfer over to jobs in the real world, like all of you work in. It worked so well in our home state that we formed a national nonprofit and today that's being operated in 13 states across America. So if you want to talk about ideas from yesterday, we can do that. And we've had some good ones. But I don't think presidential campaigns are about records or resumes or yesterday's ideas, or even today headlines. I think they're about the future. And I'd like you to go home tonight with just one sentence in your mind. And that is that this campaign of 1988 can be reduced to a single idea: How are we going to create more opportunity in your family in the next decade than you had in the last decade. We've offered some proposals in this campaign to increase the opportunity for your family. One of them has to do with school. Has to do with letting you choose the school your youngsters go to. You know we have an educationalmonopoly in America. The government tells us which school we're going to go to, who's going to pay us, how much he's going to -- who's going to teach us, how much he's going to be paid, what the curriculum's going to be. A study was done out in Iowa recently, and that's another state where I spent a little time. You'll be happy to know it's the only place I've ever been that's colder than here. They did a study and discovered that the state of Iowa had the best high school education of all 50 states in America. That was the good news. The bad news was it was 10th best in the world. We're not going to be number one in opportunity very long if we're number 10 in education. And we're number 10 in education because we are not utilizing the skills and the advantage that American has in educating young people. We're an ingenious bunch of people, we Americans. We thrive on competition. We thrive on trying one thing, if it doesn't work trying another. And yet we're not doing that in education, and I think we should if we want to be number one and get back up to the top. So instead of the government telling you which school your child is going to go to, why don't you tell the government to compete for your business, and let's give you a little piece of paper called a voucher, worth one fifth grade eduction in the greater Peterborough School District, or whatever it's called. And you take that voucher in one hand, and your fifth grader in the other, and you get the very best education for your son or your daughter that you can find here. One teenager in four uses drugs in high school, one truckdriver in six uses them at 85 miles an hour out on the highway. Forty percent of the young doctors in America who practice in hospitals are recreational drug users, 2/3 of the people outside of Washington, D. C. who signed up to be policemen failed the cocaine test, $100 billion a year lost in productivity and absences in American industry because of drug and alcohol abuse -- we got a problem. And the place to start straightening that problem out is in our school system, so that we don't tell the next generation of Americans that drugs are okay, like we told the last couple. We came up with an idea that maybe will help. It's that little piece of plastic called the driver's license. And to the A,B,C's in school, we're going to add a D. Don't do drugs or you won't drive, because we won't give you a driver's license. We propose getting rid of farm subsidies -- $26 billion a year we spend of your money to artificially set the price of corn and wheat and cotton in the marketplace. That's a bad policy. It robs farmers of opportunity, it spends your hard earned bucks in a way we don't need to, and we ought to get rid of it. Let's phase it out over five years and get back to the marketplace and give the farmer a chance to get lower food prices and save you $26 billion off that deficit. Now, Bob Dole and George Bush and Jack Kemp are like peas in a pod on that issue. Oh, we want to keep things the way they are. Rubbish. It's a bad program. Let's get rid of it, let's save the money. We proposed overhauling a welfare system in America that's denying opportunity to people who are poor. Thirty billion dollars a year we've spent in the last 10 years giving out -- sending out welfare checks in the mail. There are more people living in poverty tonight than there were ten years ago tonight. The system has failed because it's undermined the American family. And it's destroyed the American work ethic for a whole bunch of people who need help more than anybody. You know this country was built on the idea of work? And the Pilgrims, the pioneers, everybody worked. I think the policy for people on welfare ought to be if they're able bodied they work too. Not because we want to be tough about it, but because a job is the only thing that gives you dignity and a sense of worth, and a sense of belonging to the community, and a little hope for tomorrow. So for able bodied people, let's stop welfare checks and start pay checks. Back the year I was born, America invented something called social security. It's a wonderful system. It takes the poverty out of old age, and allows our older Americans to live in some dignity. It works, it's good, we want to keep it. Today it's working for 34 million Americans. And god bless the program because it's helping those 34 million people. But there's a cloud on the horizon, and you know what it is. It's called the baby boom generation. There are 77 million of them. Social security's not going to work for 77 million the way it works for 34. Because it works for the 34 today because all the rest of us are paying in. We've got a problem, and we ought to solve it right now by guaranteeing social security benefits for every one of you in the system, and by giving these young people a chance to set aside some IRA type accounts. We'll give you tax credits for the money you put in so everyone regardless of income in America can join. And for the benefit of getting those tax credits, you give up some of your social security benefits when you retire. You still pay your taxes, but you give up some benefits, and they're made up by that little next egg that you've got that's growing at market rates, that you control, that you own when you get to be 65, that may give you twice the income social security ever would. If you start at a young age, there's a good way to solve a problem without doubling taxes on kids, or having benefits on grandmothers. If you believe America can do better, I want you to go home tonight knowing that I do, too. And that's why I'm running for the presidency. WOODRUFF: That was a sample of the stump speech being given by Republican Pete du Pont. Monday we will hear a stump speech from another presidential candidate. Super Bowl Hype MacNEIL: On Sunday, the Washington Redskins will take on the Denver Broncos in Super Bowl 22. For the last four days, our sports essayist Mike Lupica of the New York Daily News has been covering the pre Super Bowl activities in San Diego. This is his story.

MIKE LUPICA: People always come up to me and say, ''Mike, what's it really like to be a big time sports columnist?'' And what I do is I tell them about the (unintelligible). I tell them about the World Series or the Final Four, or that rush of adrenalin you get when you've really got a good story to write on deadline. But there are some bad parts, too. There's late nights and long plane rides, bad games, a whole lot of boring athletes to talk to. But there's nothing in my job that I hate more than going to the Super Bowl. And every once in a while they put the Super Bowl in a great place like San Diego. And I can wear my tennis shorts and hang out by the pool. But believe me, there's not enough good weather in this world to make me ever want to come to a Super Bowl. MAN: To me in sports there's nothing bigger or better than the Super Bowl. MAN: The Super Bowl is the biggest game in the world for any football player, big or small, or whatever.

LUPICA: Now, that's what everybody says. But the reality, especially for sports writers is quite different. Now, I know what you're thinking. You'd love to get off a plane and find yourself in the middle of the excitement, hoopla and all American fun that's Super Bowl week. Oh, okay then, come along with me and be my guest. First we'll rent a car. After all, this is California. And then we'll be off. Well, maybe not quite yet. First we have to stand. No, make that sit, in line. But once we get the car, the fun will begin. Day One, Super Bowl 22: This is sort of as close as we're going to get to real football before the game on Sunday. We have football players in uniforms on a football field. Golly, this is exciting. Those are the Broncos back there. I've been walking around this morning trying to match up their names and faces with their uniform numbers. I've got the offense done. The sad thing about this is not that the week of pre game activities are insipid, occasionally degrading and a waste of time. It's that newspapermen and media folk in general go along with the mega NFL PR operation. There are almost 2500 of us here this week writing stories, shooting stories, beaming stories from satellite dishes to who knows where. Journalists from Japan and England and Iowa and New Hampshire cover what is increasingly becoming the number one theatre of absurd in professional sports. Not just in America, but in the world. I asked Los Angeles Times sports columnist Jim Murray, who's covered 20 Super Bowls, if he remembered any news ever coming out of a Super Bowl Week, at least since Joe Namath guaranteed a Jet victory over the Colts in 1969. JIM MURRAY, L. A. Times: No (laughter).

LUPICA: I will say this, though. Super Bowls do provide a test of patience that belong in some triathlon competition. You spend a great deal of time getting on buses. Off buses. Buses which take you to the next press conference or from the last press conference back to the press hotel. There, when you finish testing the outer limits of patience, you work on the old creativity, looking for a new and different story angle you think might pique the interest of readers back home. Some days it's the fact that Washington's Doug Williams is the first black quarterback to start a Super Bowl. This week, Williams actually heard a reporter preface a question this way: ''Obviously, Doug, you've been black your whole life --'' Here's another question I liked: A reporter asked one Redskins player what his former teammate John Riggins was up to. I think the reporter worked for Better Homes & Gardens, or maybe Architectural Digest. REPORTER: (unintelligible) -- working on his house, finishing his garage into another room and building another garage --

LUPICA: Oh, boy, baby, get me rewrite, this is hot! Day Two, Super Bowl 22, and I've got to admit there's a certain sense of deja vu, because today's beginning the same way yesterday did with player interviews. Except this time the players aren't on a field or in uniform, they're seated at tables under a circus tent. Which if you think about it is just about right. Now, I know I sound like a curmudgeon about this Super Bowl stuff. But you caught me on a particularly bad year. That's because this Super Bowl year is different. This year there was a football strike. And the NFL is doing its best to make the month long strike of September and October go away like it never happened, like it was some Orson Welles hoax concocted by the country's newspapers. But it did happen, and replacement football, scab football if you will, became the football of the NFL on the major networks for three games. And that more than anything that will happen this Sunday is how pro football will be remembered for 1987. The scab games cast a shadow of unreality over this NFL season. And Super Bowl 22 just can't make it go away. Day Three, Super Bowl 22. Today begins with player interviews. My thoughts begin to drift back to other sports. Bowling perhaps. Big Time wrestling. Anything. I think back to October and what the Metrodome sounded like when the Twins are beating the Cardinals in the World Series. I think of last season's NCA basketball final, (unintelligible) unforgettable last second jumper to beat Syracuse for Indiana. I mean, no other sport does what the Super Bowl does. Makes you spend two weeks writing about a game before it's played. Day Four, Super Bowl 22. It's Friday. Thank God it's Friday! Means there are only two days left in sports writer hell. It looks like I'm going to make it now. You know, go the distance. And I think the reason are the palm trees. Because the palm trees speak to me of the fact that 20 days from now, in warm weather places like Florida and Arizona, athletes are going to begin reporting for another sport in another season. It's called baseball. Recap WOODRUFF: Taking a final look at the main stories of this Friday. Secretary of State Shultz said the U. S. would pursue any avenue to bring about direct talks between the Israelis and Arabs. He said that would include an international peace conference. However, Israel's Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin told the NewsHour that Israel is too divided to accept such a conference at this time. Good night, Robin. MacNEIL: Good night, Judy. That's the NewsHour tonight. And we will be back on Monday night. Have a nice weekend. I'm Robert MacNeil.