The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro

ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. There was good economic news this Monday evening. The gross national product is sprinting ahead at an annual rate of 7.5%. Israelis voted in record numbers; exit polls show the Labor Party in an early lead. Miss America of 1984, Vanessa Williams, yielded her crown as the glamour pageant demanded. And there was another major Amtrak crash, this one outside New York City, leaving one dead, dozens injured. Jim Lehrer is off tonight; Charlayne Hunter-Gault's in Washington. Charlayne?

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Foreign and domestic stories fill out the NewsHour tonight. In Israel the voting is over, but the political jockeying is just about to begin. We take a look at what's ahead with Israeli journalist Wolf Blitzer of The Jerusalem Post. In Argentina, where the inflation rate is 580% and the international debt close to $45 billion, we look at what's happened to that country now. Charles Krause has a documentary report. We find out more about today's train collision and other recent Amtrak accidents, and we look at what's being done to prevent them. And, prompted by the fatal heart attack of sports author James Fixx, we take a renewed look at the pros and cons of strenuous exercise.

MacNEIL: It was another day of economic news that made the White House jubilant but Wall Street anxious. The Commerce Department reported that once again the strength of economic recovery had surprised the government's economists. The GNP, or gross national product, grew at an annual rate of 7 1/2% in the second, April-to-June, quarter of the year. That is substantially higher than the first estimate last month with 5.7%. The government also revised the figures for the first quarter of the year, showing that the economy actually grew at a rate of 10.1%, also higher than earlier estimates. What pleased the Reagan administration was that this growth was accompanied by declining inflation -- 3.2% inflation for the second quarter, compared with 4.4% in the first. White House Press Secretary Larry Speakes called it "exceptionally good news"; Treasury Secretary Regan said he was elated, and Commerce Secretary Baldrige said, "I don't know how you could write a script for a better recovery than you have right now. He predicted the news could have a good effect on interest rates.

MALCOLM BALDRIGE, Secretary of Commerce: As we shift gears to a slower and sustainable growth rate in the second half and the recoveries abroad gain strength, I think we'll see an easing of upward pressures on interest rates and the dollar. The large drop in interest rates and the dollar, however, will be contingent on further measures enacted next year to reduce the budget deficit.

MacNEIL: Foreign money markets took the latest U.S. figures to mean that interest rates would move up and the dollar surge to new highs against the German mark, the French franc and the South African rand. But stock markets were depressed in Europe and on Wall Street. The Dow Jones average plunged 12 points in the first hour of trading, but improved, finally closed down 4.75 points at 1096.52.

One factor that has contributed to lower inflation is restraint in wage demands since the recession. That phase may be about to end. The long-awaited showdown between the United Auto Workers and two of the nation's leading automakers kicked off in Detroit today. The UAW began negotiations with General Motors over a new contract. Ford and the unions sit down tomorrow. Fireworks aren't expected immediately, but some analysts predict a strike by autoworkers when their old contract expires on September 14th. Major sticking points center on workers' calls for job security as well as wage and benefit hikes.

Charlayne? Israeli Voting Over -- What's Ahead?

HUNTER-GAULT: Israeli voters went to the polls today and gave what appeared to be a narrow victory to the opposition Labor Party of Shimon Peres. According to a computer projection by Israeli state television, the Labor Party will win 47 seats, and Prime Minister Shamir's ruling Likud bloc 42. For weeks a Labor victory had been predicted. The big question was whether the margin would be large enough to form a cabinet. Although the Israeli television projection gives Labor a slight advantage, Likud officials, who had feared a worse defeat, were jubilant. Because of Israel's parliamentary system and its many small political parties, today's vote in many ways marks the start instead of the end of the political wheeling and dealing that lead to a new government. Here to explain that and help interpret the returns, we have Wolf Blitzer, Washington bureau chief of The Jerusalem Post. Wolf, those projections that I just gave were of course unofficial. As I understand it, the numbers are going up and down and changing. What's the latest figure that you have?

WOLF BLITZER: The latest figures show that the gap may be narrowing and that this could be really a much less a victory for Labor that it appears to be according to those early projections. We won't know for several hours, until the official ballots are counted.But at this stage it looks like it could be a prolonged period of uncertainty as both the Labor and Likud parties try to get together some potential coalition partners.

HUNTER-GAULT: What projections have you got as of this moment that are different --

Mr. BLITZER: As of this moment, Israel Radio, only a few minutes ago, was saying 45-45, 44-44, and one guy even was saying 46-44. So it's still uncertain. I have a feeling these straw polls, these exit polls are going to change considerably between now and the time the official results emerge. It could be that the army votes, the soldiers, who are spread out all over the country and whose ballots take a little bit longer to count than the regular citizens'; it could be that they would be decisive in determining one or two seats among the big parties.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, those won't be in for days.

Mr. BLITZER: They count them pretty quickly. I don't think it'll be days; it'll just be hours more.

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, as I said earlier, everybody was expecting -- all the projections were that Labor would win. Is that still likely to be the outcome?

Mr. BLITZER: At this stage it seems that Labor, based on those early exit polls, does have a slightly better chance than the Likud of forming a coalition because, if, let's say, it's 47-42, then the Likud physically probably couldn't form a coalition that could get maybe 58 or 59 seats, and under Israel's 120-member Knesset, or parliament, you need at least 61. But it will be difficult, if Labor will be able to attract, let's say, some of the small left-of-center parties like the Shinui Party of Amnon Rubinstein and Shulami Galoni's party, the Civil Rights Party, which has projected about three seats, and then Ezer Weizmann's two seats. And if it can then go ahead and negotiate with the National Religious Party, a traditional coalition partner in the old days, which is projected to get about five seats, then Labor could in fact form a coalition. But it will be very difficult, and certainly the Labor people, Shimon Peres and the others, must feel very, very disappointed that the earlier projections of 50, 51, 52 seats do not appear to be taking shape.

HUNTER-GAULT: In fact, the wire services were quoting the Likud officials today as being jubilant over the spread, even the one that I gave, which is wider than some of the ones that you gave.

Mr. BLITZER: Well, certainly, when you consider the shape of Israel's economy, the criticism of the war in Lebanon and some of the other issues -- the fact that Menachem Begin was not an issue in this campaign; he has retired, as we all know -- it certainly does represent a comeback, a dramatic comeback for the Likud, given the early polls only days ago that showed Likud suffering a humiliating defeat, and now Labor appears to be neck and neck. So while Labor may yet in fact emerge as in a better position to form a coalition, it certainly will not be a very strong coalition at this stage, and it looks like there could be a period of prolonged uncertainty within Israel until all of this settles out. I know that the Likud people would very much like to form a national unity coalition government with Labor, and that certainly is an option, although how realistic remains to be seen.

HUNTER-GAULT: You think Peres will invite the Likud in?

Mr. BLITZER: The only way that would happen is if Labor emerges in a worse shape than even now appears to be the situation --

HUNTER-GAULT: Well, can they govern without Likud? I mean, wouldn't it be awfully difficult?

Mr. BLITZER: The numbers, of course, are the most important factor. If they can get 61 or 62, it will be a weak, fragile coalition which will -- of course they'll be able to govern, but how many bold, decisive steps either in terms of domesticeconomic issues or on foreign policy issues? Certainly the situation in Lebanon and the West Bank -- all of that will of course remain up in the air if there isn't a stronger coalition. What Labor very much would like to do is go to the Liberal Party, which is a member of the Likud, try to wean them away, convince them to leave the Likud and form a new coalition government with Labor. Now, whether the Liberals will agree to that, of course, is unclear. My sense is that at this stage they probably will not.

HUNTER-GAULT: Just very, very briefly, what do you see as being -- if Labor does manage to get its act together and form a government, what is going to be the major difference that we'll see from what there is now?

Mr. BLITZER: In terms of the peace process, Labor will be much more aggressive in trying to court Jordan's King Hussein into getting involved in some sort of negotiations with Israel over the future of the West Bank. I think there will be a freeze on Israeli settlement activity in the heavily Arab-populated areas of the West Bank, although Labor will not dismantle existing Israeli settlements. In terms of the domestic economic issues, I think there will be increased governmental controls. And in Lebanon Labor has promised to remove Israeli troops from Lebanon within three to six months. The Likud says that it wants to get those soldiers out as quickly as possible, but has not even projected a target date. So there will be some substantive as well as stylistic changes.

HUNTER-GAULT: All right, thank you, Wolf Blitzer, for sharing those insights with us. Robin?

MacNEIL: The Reagan administration today pooh-poohed a congressional report saying the readiness of U.S. conventional forces may be getting worse, dispite increases in defense spending. The report by the staff of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee said the U.S. could not successfully wage sustained global warfare against the Soviet Union with conventional forces. White House Press Secretary Larry Speakes said the report amounted to "rehashing a lot of old stuff they put out traditionally." "They" referred to the committee's Democratic majority, which released a censored version of the report. And Defense Secretary Weinberger called a news conference to refute it.

CASPAR WEINBERGER, Secretary of Defense: The potential danger is that people, our foes and some of our friends, will get the wrong and incorrect impression of both our capabilities and our resolve. And that, in this kind of world, wherein that's an essential part of deterrence, is, I think, a dangerous disservice to the United States. The data on which some of the -- much of the material is based may be accurate, but that the conclusions that are drawn from that -- that we are -- that we are less ready in the sense of having less operational capability, less war-fighting capability now than we did in 1980 is not only wrong, it is dangerously wrong. And it is a mistake which could have very serious consequences, and it's vital that the American people recognize that our operational capability, our war-fighting capability, by every measure of common sense, has increased markedly since 1980, but still needs a ways to go.

MacNEIL: There are three stories today about U.S. relations with countries whose internal behavior Washington's trying to influence -- Poland, El Salvador and Argentina. The White House said today that President Reagan is considering whether to further ease economic sanctions against Poland following the Communist government's release of hundreds of political prisoners. The amnesty for 652 prisoners has been welcomed as a positive move by the U.S. State Department. The U.S. did ease some sanctions last winter when the Jaruzelski government lifted martial law. White House spokesman Larry Speakes said the President would probably decide in the next few days whether to go further. The U.S. still bans scheduled Polish airline flights, refuses to back Poland's admission to the International Monetary Fund, and restricts trade with Poland. President Reagan has said the sanctions would remain in effect until martial law was ended, political prisoners freed and a dialogue opened with the Solidarity union movement, which remains banned.

El Salvador's new president, Jose Napolean Duarte, said today a treaty with Nicaragua is possible if the Sandinistas stop sending arms to leftist guerrillas in his country. Duarte made the statement after seeing President Reagan at the White House.

JOSE NAPOLEON DUARTE, President of El Salvador: I am ready to sit down with Nicaragua. I am ready to dialogue with Nicaragua. I am ready to sign a treaty with Nicaragua if they are ready to stop sending arms to El Salvador.

MacNEIL: Meanwhile, the Reagan administration is in negotiation with the nation that has recently thrown off dictatorship but is struggling with severe economic problems. The foreign minister of Argentina, Dante Caputo, had talks today with Secretary of State George Shultz, then saw the head of the International Monetary Fund, Jacques De La Rosiere. Argentina wants to reschedule repayments on its massive $45-billion foreign debt. The political and social pressures behind that effort are described in this documentary report from our special correspondent Charles Krause, who is in Buenos Aires. Argentina's Economic Woes

CHARLES KRAUSE [voice-over]: Nacha Guevara is a symbol is Argentina's new democracy and freedom. She's one of thousands of political exiles who has now returned home. She sings a song that was banned here during eight years of military rule.

NACHA GUEVARA, singer: ["Don't Cry For Me, Argentina," in Spanish version]

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Almost a decade of disappearances, bombings and terror is over now. "Don't Cry For Me, Argentina" is just one sign of the hope and reconciliation that's become so evident here since the country returned to democracy last December. The rule of law and the respect for human rights have replaced torture and political repression. Congress is back in session. But Argentina's elected leaders see no way to repay the foreign debt and bring an end to the country's deep internal economic crisis, which is the issue that could ultimately determine the success or failure of democracy here. Already there are strikes and demonstrations. Jobs are scarce, salaries low. The standard of living is declining while inflation has risen to 580%, the highest in the world. The government hasn't been able to reach agreement with Argentina's international creditors because it fears a political backlash. Tens of thousands of students and workers took to the streets just last month, demanding the government repudiate its $45-billion debt and end negotiations with the International Monetary Fund.

[on camera] The IMF is demanding that Argentina accept the same austerity measures the IMF has already imposed on a number of other countries in Latin America. In Argentina's case that means cutting the government deficit, which means more unemployment. It also means cutting real wages, which means a further decline in the country's standard of living. The austerity measures would hit hardest at Argentina's blue-collar workers and the middle class.

[voice-over] So far, President Raul Alfonsin has appeared far more willing to risk a confrontation with the IMF and Argentina's foreign creditors than with the voters who elected him.

RAUL ALFONSIN, president of Argentina [through interpreter]: It's evident that the salary increases we're proposing are very small, if you take into account the fall in real wages and the expectations of our people after a long period of authoritarian government. The people expect democracy to provide the basic requirements of social justice. What I'm saying is that we're not providing, nor are we close to providing the increases which our people really need.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Everywhere we went in Argentina, from demonstrations to supermarkets, people told us they're worried -- worried about inflation and worried the foreign bankers may force a further decline in their standard of living. Housewives cope with inflation by buying as much as they can at the end of each month, before prices rise at the beginning of each month. A bottle of Coke, for example, cost almost four times more last month than it did at the beginning of the year. Meanwhile, a 1,000-peso note lost most of its value between January and June, dropping from $40 to $13.40. Many Argentinians told us they want an end to inflation and to economic chaos. Mario Brodersohn is president of a government bank and one of President Alfonsin's chief economic advisers.

MARIO BRODERSOHN, bank president: It will be very difficult to combine democracy, social stability, political stability if we continue to keep going down in the economic situation. Because this is not a situation for one or two years. This is the economic situation for the last 10 years in the Argentine economy.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Already there are signs of trouble in Argentina, the kind of trouble that's brought down many Argentine governments in the past. These shipyard workers, for example, recently demonstrated in front of the presidential palace in Buenos Aires. Their cry: "We want work." The demonstrators came from the Rio Santiago shipyard, which is owned by the government. The yard is currently building five frigates for the Argentine navy. But it's received no new orders since Alfonsin became president. Jose Alberto Montes joined the demonstration in front of Alfonsin's office because he's worried he'll soon be laid off.Montes, a 34-year-old pipefitter, was already laid off once last year from another job nearer his home. He must now spend four hours a day just getting back and forth to work.He passes the time playing truco -- not for money, he says, but for the prestige. He told us that he and his wife have one dream for their children -- that they'll be able to finish school. But even if he keeps his job, Montes doubts that will be possible. He earns only about $30 a week. Over a cup of Argentine tea called mate, we asked him what he thinks would happen in Argentina if it were forced to accept drastic austerity measures.

JOSE ALBERTO MONTES, shipyard worker [through interpreter]: What would happen is what's already happening in the rest of South America and Latin America. That is, the crisis in all the countries is continuing to get worse. There are fewer jobs, workers' salaries keep getting lower. Misery is increasing everywhere in Latin America.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: We asked him what he thinks the Argentine government should do.

Mr. MONTES [through interpreter]: I believe it ought to do what Bolivia already did -- suspend payments on the debt. All the taxes, lower salaries, the increased unemployment and misery among the workers, all of this is already going to pay some of the foreign debt in Argentina. Which means it's not going to benefit the country, which means that we're sacrificing for nothing. There's no benefit for the country accepting the IMF's demands.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: When Alfonsin became president last December, he inherited a country on the verge of economic collapse. Beginning in 1976, a series of repressive military governments began to borrow heavily, running up a foreign debt of close to $40 billion by the end of last year. Much of the money was used for trips abroad, luxury imports, to buy military hardware and to prop up private companies, like airlines, that went bankrupt. In addition, untold billions found their way to secret bank accounts in Switzerland and New York. The money was either stolen or wasted.

ALDO FERRER, bank president: All over Latin America the foreign debt has three responsible parties -- the countries themselves, the debtors, which made many mistakes, as within Argentina; but those are the bankers which lend the money without following the essential rule of a good banker, which is to ask to the debtor, "What you are going to do with the money I gave you?" because that is how you know if a debtor is going to pay you at the end of the loan; they didn't do that.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Aldo Ferrer is president of the state-owned Bank of the Province of Buenos Aires.He's also considered one of Argentina's most influential economists.

Mr. FERRER: And then, of course, you have the responsibility of the United States and the industrial countries, which have a responsibility for increasing the interest rate due to the deficit in the budget of the United States.So, while you have three responsible parties for the crisis, only one, the debtors, are paying the full cost of it. That is not possible any longer.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: The Alfonsin government has already implemented some austerity measures along lines suggested by the IMF. The state-owned petroleum company, YPF, has raised its prices. The government has cut military spending almost in half, and has restricted all non-essential imports. But Alfonsin is unwilling to impose the kinds of austerity measures the IMF forced on the Dominican Republic and Brazil, measures that led to food riots and other social unrest. Even if the Argentine government were to risk political upheaval by agreeing to the IMF's austerity plan, Argentina could never export enough grain and beef to cover the $20 billion in principle and interest it's scheduled to repay this year. The government's position is that it has every intention of eventually honoring its foreign debt, but President Alfonsin told us that first the IMF must compromise and then the banks must agree to far more lenient terms.

Pres. ALFONSIN [through interpreter]: We are going to need a grace period and also interest rates that reflect our country's ability to pay. I believe that Latin America has actually produced a kind of Morshall Plan in reverse. It's quite incredible to see how developing countries like ours, with such acute problems -- misery, erxtreme poverty -- are exporters of money that goes directly to solve the problems of the developed countries.

Mr. FERRER: The only ones that can create a debtor collapse in Latin America are the bankersin the North. If they become too aggressive, I think that what they will find is a stronger answer from a group of countries which have the resources to survive. We cannot submit our democratic process and our right to self-determination and well-being to irrational criteria in the North.

MacNEIL: The perspective of American and European bankers is different from that found in Argentina. Western banks are owed more than half of Argentina's $45-billion debt.Privately, many bankers say the Alfonsin government could do more to meet their debt payments. A number of banks have already reported substantial losses on their loans to Argentina. The next deadline for an Argentine payment to the Western banks comes in September. Charlayne?

HUNTER-GAULT: There's more to come in the NewsHour. We ask why the recent rash of train accidents, and, in the wake of sports author James Fixx's fatal heart attack, we examine the pros and cons of a strenuous exercise as a prescription for good health.

[Video postcard -- Kisgralik River, Alaska]

HUNTER-GAULT: Vanessa Williams, Miss American of 1984, surrendered her title this afternoon. The 21-year-old New Yorker yielded to the demands of pageant officials who insisted that she step down for posing in the nude in sexually explicit photos.The pictures will be in the September issue of Penthouse magazine, which has been rushed to many newstands today. For Vanessa Williams there were two firsts. She was the first black to win the title and the first Miss America to give it up. She appeared at a jammed news conference in Manhattan to announce her decision.

VENESSA WILLIAMS, Miss America, 1984: I am a fighter. I will fight for what I believe is right, and so will my family and friends. I appreciate the millions of Americans who have been so thoughtful, encouraging and supportive over the past several days, and, I wish I could retain my title as Miss America. However, the potential harm to the pageant and the deep division that a bitter fight may cause has convinced me that I must relinquish my title as Miss America. I was shocked, surprised and deeply hurt, as I am sure many American people were. I didn't exactly see the pictorial until Sunday morning. After viewing the photos I was enraged, and I felt a deep sense of personal embarrassment.

HUNTER-GAULT: Penthouse officials said they expect Miss Williams to sue the magazine, but they insist that they have a signed release for the photos, taken before she was a Miss America contestant. Miss Williams insists that she has never signed a consent form. Her title will now go to the first runner-up, Suzette Charles, Miss New Jersey, who is also black. Her reign will last two months, until a new Miss America is chosen in the annual pageant. Robin? What's Behind Train Wrecks?

MacNEIL: Two Amtrak passenger trains collided head-on today, just minutes from midtown Manhattan's Pennsylvania Station, killing one person and injuring at least 125 others. The trains were carrying some 500 to 700 passengers when they crashed on an elevated trestle. Eight cars jumped the track. Six people were seriously injured, another 60 were taken to hospitals. Scores of others were treated at the scene. Service between New York and Boston was interrupted for nearly two hours as firemen cleared the wreckage of the Boston-bound, the New England Zip, and the Shoreliner headed for New York City. There were several tracks where the crash occurred; one had reportedly been closed for maintenance. But both trains had been routed to acollision course. It was the third major accident on the passenger rail line this month. Two people died July 11th when a train hit a tank truck in South Carolina, and five passengers died when a train plunged off a trackbed July 7th in Vermont. To tell us more about today's accident and railroad safety in general, we turn to Ross Capon. Mr. Capon is executive director of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, a Washington-based consumer group with 11,500 members. Mr. Capon, can you tell us a bit more about what happened today?

ROSS CAPON: Today we had a one-in-a-million-type of accident. It's a double-track railroad, but one track was out of service for maintenance work. All traffic was then using the other track. The other track is only signaled in one direction, which means that trains in the opposite direction depend on train orders. It's probably foolish to speculate this early, but my guess is that there was some foul-up in which either a train order was incorrectly given to that train or the engineer proceeded without one.

MacNEIL: Seems mystifying in this day of marvelous high-technology, electronic signaling and computer operation and everything else that two trains could get on the same track heading for each other.

Mr. CAPON: I will confess that I was a little bit appalled to learn that so-called manualblock signaling, which means that there's no electronic safeguard, is still in use on the Northeast corridor, which after all, is one of the most heavily travelled passenger lines in the country, and I think one of the problems is that the Northeast Corridor Improvement Project has been steadily whittled back since its original inception. What we need is centralized traffic control throughout the length of this corridor, which would have averted this kind of accident.

MacNEIL: What is manual-block control?

Mr. CAPON: Essentially either the complete absence of signals or the absence of signals in one direction. In other words, if the track simply has signals facing in one direction because you normally drive on the right. That means that one of the trains today was facing no signals and was relying on, in effect, the judgment of a dispatcher and signal operators to give him a proper train order. I should emphasize that this is a multiple-step procedure that is followed day in, day out in many situations without the slightest problem. But obviously it's not an electronically failsafe method, and we saw what happened today.

MacNEIL: Why have the improvements in the Northeast corridor been whittled back, as you put it?

Mr. CAPON: It's a combination of inflation and, basically, I think there has been a tremendous amount of pressure to keep spending on railroad passenger service down. We see a big increase in the past couple years in federal highway spending, but federal Amtrak spending is going in the other direction.

MacNEIL: The accident in South Carolina, where two people were killed after an Amtrak train last week plunged into a gasoline tank truck that was stopped on the tracks, that was a level crossing with no gates or warning signals, apparently.

Mr. CAPON: Right. And our -- I think it's important to understand that there are different categories of accidents. You have the grade crossing collision, which is largely beyond the ability of the railroad itself to control. You have the flash-flood-alert type of situation in Vermont, on July 7th, and two years ago in Iowa --

MacNEIL: Where the flood washed away an embankment, right?

Mr. CAPON: Right. That latter problem has a very simple solution, we believe, and that is to require the railroads to continuously monitor the weather and get the emergency information to their engineers. We now have three Amtrak derailments, two of them fatal, in which the engineer was unaware that a flood alert had been issued hours before the derailment.

MacNEIL: Is there, to your way of looking at it, any pattern to these recent Amtrak accidents? Can you assign blame in one place?

Mr. CAPON: In the case of the flood situation, we had two accidents on May 29th near Connellsville, Pennsylvania, which was not fatal, and then in Vermont. We have called upon the federal railroad administrator to issue regulations requiring the railroads to monitor the weather continuously and get that information out to their engineers, and to have special inspections of track which is known to be at risk in high-water situations. In 1982, after the Burlington-Northern had an Amtrak derailment at high speed in a flood, they did change their procedures, and they now monitor the weather very closely, and we think it's tragic that apparently only one railroad learned from that particular mishap.

MacNEIL: On the whole, since Amtrak came into existence -- how many years ago is it?

Mr. CAPON: Thirteen years.

MacNEIL: Thirteen years ago. What has its safety record been, and is it improving or declining, or what?

Mr. CAPON: The safety record has been quite good. They have averaged -- they are roughly 50 times safer than it is to drive your own car. They're roughly equivalent to the intercity bus, and slightly safer than the airline. In 13 years they have experienced 23 passenger fatalities, which is the same number that Air Canada burned up in one day last summer.

MacNEIL: I see. Well, is it improving, or what would you say about the attitude of Amtrak to safety and what it's doing about things that could improve it?

Mr. CAPON: Well, I think Amtrak has a good attitude, and I think that they ought to be commended for bringing to the world's attention Gwinnette County, Georgia. What's special about Gwinnette County is that they dealt forcefully with the grade crossing safety program by instituting a $50 fine for anyone who violates those flashers, and also by putting gates and flashers at virtually all of their crossings, and they have not had one fatality or accident this year. And I think that the most important railroad safety issue is treating grade crossings with respect and getting the police everywhere to treat them with respect.

MacNEIL: Well, Mr. Capon, thank you for joining us.

Mr. CAPON: Thank you.

MacNEIL: Charlayne? Capping the Fervor

HUNTER-GAULT: After most of the dust has settled from the 1984 Democratic convention, one of the remaining unanswered questions has to do with why there wasn't more dust, particularly outside the convention hall, where a wide assortment of demonstrators, sometimes numbering in the thousands, threatened the uneasy peace being forged inside. Spencer Michels, of public station KQED, filed this report on the scene outside the Moscone convention Center.

SPENCER MICHELS [voice-over]: It was the specter of angry demonstrators marching through the San Francisco streets clashing with police that frightened some Democrats when the national convention site was announced.

TOMMY ALLEN, Louisiana delegate: San Francisco is a unique city, and everyone tries to influence you. It's everything from gay rights to labor to you name it, they've got it here.

MICHELS [voice-over]: There were thousands who wanted to march, to rally, to demonstrate for peace and the environment and gay rights, and against nuclear weapons and U.S. foreign policy.

MICHAEL LENT, peace activist: We were trying to gain the attention of the media, obviously, and we were also trying to gain the attention of delegates inside.

MICHELS [voice-over]: And there were the police, under orders from San Francisco officialdom to keep the lid on and not to let the demonstrators embarrass the city and the Democrats.

Capt. CHARLIE BEANE, San Francisco police: Well, we're not trying to make anyone afraid of us. We're attempting to be a friendly police department assisting people; however, as we've said, don't take our friendliness for a weakness.

MICHELS [voice-over]: The activists and the police started practicing last April, when demonstrators and police confronted each other while Henry Kissinger spoke nearby on Central America. Then, right before the convention, another skirmish. This time, when protestors rallied against Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell, police claimed they were pelted with debris. The police used force to clear the streets, force that may have sent a message to groups planning protests at the convention.

Capt. BEANE: There are people in this particular area that are anti-police, some that are probably anti-American. They come to cause disruptions. We told them what would happen, and that's what we did. We cleared the scene, we cleared the streets, we gave them an idea of what they could and couldn't do. nd when they got out of line we put them in jail.

MICHELS [voice-over]: On the eve of the convention more demonstrations, a massive solidarity march by organized labor along Market Street, 150,000 people.And 100,000 gay men, lesbians and supporters marching and rallying.

PAUL BONEBERG, gay organizer: It was always the intention to make a militant statement, which a march is, to have it be a very forceful statement, but to have it -- have it instead not be something that deals with violence or not be something that threatens the Democratic Party, but rather that something that challenges the Democratic Party and the American people to respond.

MICHELS [voice-over]: Those marches were the vanguard. More demonstrations were planned and anticipated.

[on camera] San Francisco police fenced off a large city block across the street from Moscone Center and designated it the official space for demonstrations. Skeptics said protestors would never be fenced in. But this barrier proved effective.

[voice-over] The fense and the massive show of police force kept the activists a long half-block away from the hall, practically out of sight, sometimes out of mind for the delegates they were trying to influence. Even when tensions were high between the police and demonstrators, as they were on the final day of the convention -- 367 people were arrested -- hardly anybody inside the convention hall noticed. The TV cameras did, however, and so did the American Civil Liberties Union, which accused the police of unnecessary brutality and arrests of peaceful demonstrators throughout the week. It wasn't by accident that San Francisco, cradle of the nation's anti-war demonstrations in the '60s and '70s, appeared tame in 1984.

HADLEY ROFF, San Francisco deputy mayor: We're from San Francisco. We knew many of the groups that wanted to demonstrate, worked closely with them over the year. The police worked closely with them over a period of months, negotiating, setting down the ground rules, making clear the parameters of wherethey could demonstrate, for what hours, and making clear that there'd be no -- you know, trying to eliminate any possibility of misunderstanding. The ground rules were perfectly clear, and again I think that paid off.

MICHELS [voice-over]: Not embarrassing the party gained the city the party's gratitude.

HUNTER-GAULT: That report was by Spencer Michels of public station KQED in San Francisco. Robin? The Running Writer: How Safe is Exercise?

MacNEIL: Next tonight, some thoughts prompted by the weekend news that Jim Fixx, one of the great symbols off the running movement, has died at 52. Fixx was a marathon runner who ran 80 miles a week and thought himself in perfect condition. But last Friday the author of two best-selling books on running died of a heart attack while running alone on a Vermont road. And his death has reawakened fears about the safety of the sport he did so much to popularize. Relatives said Fixx had no idea he was suffering from heart disease. But an autopsy showed that two of his coronary arteries were completely blocked. Fixx had been a dedicated runner for 15 years. Five years ago on this program I asked him about the possible dangers.

[September 21, 1979] You advise people, you have in your book and elsewhere, to take tests before they start running, especially if they're middle-aged and leading sedentary lives, and examinations. What if those tests aren't foolproof?

JIM FIXX, runner: Well, I think that what we're talking about is a matter of averages. Now, there's a very, very good epidemiological study that's been done at Stanford University that shows that if people as a whole progress from leading sedentary lives to running 20 miles a week -- that's about three miles a day or four miles every other day -- they reduce their chances of having a heart attack by 64%. See, one of the problems, I think, and one of the reasons we're all sitting here discussing this question, is that some really outrageous claims have been made for running. There is one doctor who says that if you run a marathon in under four hours or something, that you have -- his word -- "immunity" to heart attack for six years. Now, that simply is not so. There are many, many documented cases of people who have run marathons had heart attacks.

MacNEIL: Are people, to your knowledge -- you must observe a lot of runners -- you run with them. Are people, by you cult that you have helped a great deal to popularize yourself, are people being sucked into running who shouldn't be and who are attracted by claims like that?

Mr. FIXX: I think in general, no. I think what people are being sucked into doing is doing much more than they ought to be doing at a particular point. For example, right now there's a kind of marathon fever. The marathon -- 26 miles and 385 yards -- is the big glamour race. So people go out, they take up running, they get up to the point where they can run a mile and a half or two, and they say, "Hey, I think I'm going to train for the New York marathon. Now, that's absolutely silly. It's just as rewarding to run 10,000 meters, which is 6.2 miles or work up to 10 miles. I think that's the problem, that people are doing much more than they ought to be able to be -- ought to be doing.

MacNEIL: But do you find some people running who just shouldn't be at all and two don't know it?

Mr. FIXX: Well, I think there are certain medical conditions that suggest that people -- that people should not run -- heart abnormalities, obviously, orthopedic problems. But most people who have those problems know about it. And the case of people who are extremely overweight it's a good idea to get your weight down and do some walking first. The thing is to ease into it. Most people who are taking up running now are well out of school. They haven't been active for a long, long time, and they say. "Hey, I'm going to get in shape." They go out to a track and they remember the way they were able to run in high school, and they try to do that now. The only difference is that they're 50 years old or 55 years old, and you just can't do it.

MacNEIL: Jim Fixx was 52 years old. Here to tell us more about the connection between running and heart disease is Dr. George Sheehan, a heart specialist in New Jersey who is also an avid marathon runner. He is the medical editor of Runner's World magazine and was a friend of Jim Fixx's.

Obviously, from what we know now, Jim Fixx himself was in a high-risk category but didn't know it. Now, should be have?

Dr. GEORGE SHEEHAN: He did know it because he knew that his father had his first heart attack at 35 and then died at 43. So that he had the worst of all risk factors, which is the hereditary factor. There was a study done in Salt Lake City using the Mormon genealogical tables which showed that 50% of the heart attacks occurred in only 5% of the families. So Jim was at risk. The second thing he had, and this is common to everyone who collapses and dies on the road, was that he had severe coronary artery disease, almost invariably that's present. And the third thing -- and I believe this is hypothetical to a degree -- I believe he had a warning. I spoke to one reporter who said that in the previous four to six weeks he had noticed some tightening in his throat when he ran and reported that to a member of the family. One other --

MacNEIL: What is that a sign of?

Dr. SHEEHAN: That would be a form of angina. And anything that's brought on by effort and relieved by rest -- promptly by rest, whether it's a heaviness in the chest or a tightening in the throat or actual pain, the manifestations of heart disease need not be excruciating, but they are different. The well body just doesn't have these symptoms, and people who read their bodies well are aware of these changes. And most people who have heart attacks have a change within two to three weeks of the episode, of shortness of breath, some feeling in the chest, fatigue. There is an indication, a warning of what's coming on.

MacNEIL: Now, if knowing that in a man like Jim Fixx, knowing that there was heart disease in the family, if he's had regular EKGs and stress tests, would they have given him a foolproof clearance to go ahead and exercise as heavily as he did?

Dr. SHEEHAN: I believe, with the amount of coronary disease he had he would have had a positive test. Stress tests are peculiar. The more likely you are to have coronary disease, either through risk factors or symptoms, the more likely it is to give you the correct information, positive or negative. On the other hand, if you're asymptomatic, which is a real population we're concerned about, if you have no indication you have heart disease, then it's likely to give you false information.

MacNEIL: The stress test is?

Dr. SHEEHAN: The stress test. It's likely to tell you you don't have heart disease when you do, or you do have heart disease when you don't.

MacNEIL: Well, what is somebody to do who is in his middle life, as Jim Fixx was, and wants to exercise and possibly believes that by exercising he will improve his general health and condition. How is he to be sure that he isn't putting himself at much greater risk?

Dr. SHEEHAN: All right. I think the problem comes down to go jog or not to jog if you're asymptomatic.

MacNEIL: Asymptomatic, meaning having no symptoms.

Dr. SHEEHAN: No evidence, no clinical evidence of heart disease. The study done in Seattle, where it's almost impossible to die without being recorded as a sudden cardiac death -- everybody in Seattle has learned CPR. They found that if you're asymptomatic and you have high-intensity leisure time activities, you are less likely to have sudden death. However, I still believe that you're more likely to have that death, should it occur, when you're jogging. So I think that what we need to know, with this sort of problem, is whether or not people respond to the symptoms. The tests are not going to tell us. Unless we do what Dr. Friedman[?] suggests, which is everybody over 35 should restrict themselves to billiards unless they have arteriography to prove whether or not they have coronary disease. We can't submit everyone to arteriograms. The stress tests are not going to tell us. I think we are definitely at a point now where we have to know the truth about this and be able to advise people directly --

MacNEIL: You mean the truth that people who are -- take the case of runners, who feel symptoms but ignore them, you mean?

Dr. SHEEHAN: I think we have to know the truth about exercise, that it is dangerous. It is dangerous to certain people, but only at certain times. For instance, here is Jim Fixx having run 10 years, but this specific day he was at this great risk.

MacNEIL: Having just play a game of singles tennis the day before.

Dr. SHEEHAN: But we do not know what was going inside of him, what he felt. I have another report from a friend of his that a month ago he was down at Ken Cooper's clinic in Dallas and was offered a stress test and he refused to take it. Now, I'm not sure why someone would want to do that, why they would refuse that. I was down there; I accepted it gladly. I wanted to wreck their machine. I wondered then whether Jim had some inclination, indication that things weren't quite right with him.

MacNEIL: Do you think that because of the nature of running, giving people that high and that sense of being able, perhaps, to prolong their lives, do you think tha some people and trying to run symptoms out?

Dr. SHEEHAN: Oh, I believe so. As a matter of fact, I get telephone calls indicating that people report to me that they've gotten pain in their chest, and unbelievably they run through it. They court death. And so that's going on all the time.

MacNEIL: But doesn't running have some effect on improving blood circulation so that if somebody had coronary disease and had limited circulation through clogged coronary arteries the running would open up new pathways or improve?

Dr. SHEEHAN: We have no proof of that.

MacNEIL: No proof of that.

Dr. SHEEHAN: The truth about exercise and the case for exercise is that it makes you fit. What running does is give you great legs. That's all. It doesn't give you a great heart or great lungs or any other organs. The main -- 95% of the effect of training is on the muscle cell.

MacNEIL: Are there are lot of people out there running now, of whatever age, who shouldn't be, and who would -- what would you advise people who are running now to do?

Dr. SHEEHAN: I think that it's like everything in life. I just drove up here from New Jersey, and driving is dangerous. You have to drive defensively. Running is dangerous. Running is dangerous, if, a) you have serious heart disease, whether you know it or not, if you have high-risk factors, and whether you've had some indication that things aren't right in your body. Now, if you run defensively, if you run in the comfortable range, you're not going to get in any trouble. Unfortunately, and I'm sure you've observed it yourself in looking at joggers. None of them look like they're comfortable. They look like they won't make it to the next corner. They're not supposed to look that way unless they have a number on their chest. Training should be done at a thinking pace. The best protection, it seems to me, is to take a friend with you so you can have a long conversation on the road and run at a pace that's sensible, humane and gentlemanly. And I think, 2) there's a -- people get highly competitive in their running, even with themselves. And people, I believe with Friedman, that type A personality man is not only impatient, but they are very competitive, and they try to do better and better, even with their digital clock on the road.

MacNEIL: Okay, Dr. Sheehan, we have to leave it there.Thank you. Charlayne?

HUNTER-GAULT: Finally now a last look at today's top stories. Some good economic news from the Commerce Department. The gross national product was up 7.5% this spring. That was almost two points higher than had been expected.

Two Amtrak trains collided in Queens, New York, this morning. At least 125 people were injured and one death has been reported in Amtrak's third accident in the last three weeks.

Israeli voters appear to have given the Labor Party a slight edge over Prime Minister Shamir's Likud coalition.

The president of El Salvador, Jose Napoleon Duarte, was in Washington to meet President Reagan. Duarte accused Nicaragua of continuing to ship weapons to the rebels in El Salvador.

And 21-year-old Vanessa Williams surrendered her Miss America crown today following the publication of nude photos taken before she won the beauty contest last year. Robin? Book Review: The Engineer of Human Souls

MacNEIL: To close tonight we have a book review. The writer is a Czech emigre named Josef Skvorecky, now living in Canada. His book is called The Engineer of Human Souls. Our reviewer is A. C. Greene.

A. C., who is the writer, Josef Skvorecky?

A. C. GREENE: He is a Czech writer, but he's been in Canada, been in the Western world, since 1968 -- Prague Spring sprang him, you might say. And he teaches at University of Toronto in Toronto. And yet he's adapted very nicely to English, or his translator has, because I found his use of the English language very, very commendable.

MacNEIL: So what's the setting and the story for this novel?

Mr. GREENE: This is -- this novel -- I don't like the title, The Engineer of Human Souls. It sounds like it's almost a prophetic thing. It's a very interesting book in that it contains humor and it contains poignancy and nostalgia. It cuts back and forth between Europe and Canada, or, one might say North America. It goes from World War II under the Nazis in this little Czechoslovakian town. It cuts immediately then to 1980s in Toronto. It cuts back to the little town under the Reds. All these things and these mini-characters are mixed in. And if it were a film you would say it was snap-cut, or whatever the term for rapid cutting is, because it goes back and forth, back and forth, back and forth.

MacNEIL: Is it easy to read?

Mr. GREENE: Very easy to read.I've made it sound more difficult than it is. It's very simple to read.

MacNEIL: Well, is it a political novel?

Mr. GREENE: Well, of course, when you have an emigre Czech writer writing about his days in Czechoslovakia, it naturally has to be political. A lot of American readers are going to find the book very conservative, because he has nothing good to say about Communism or Nazism, either, but of course he's got nothing good to say about Communism, except he says that in a kind of an amused, flat tone. As a novel it's very fascinating. Has a nice plot, has nice characters.Most of the characters, of course, have this Czech background, but not all of them.

MacNEIL: So what really emerges as the theme, would you say?

Mr. GREENE: The theme -- I would say the theme of the book, and it's very hard to describe the plot because it's so circular, but the theme of the book is freedom. It's freedom -- not freedom to speak, freedom to write. It's the freedom of facing your human -- fellow humans on equal terms. And not in racial terms, but on equal terms. For example, when Czechs visit him in Toronto -- he's banned in Prague. And when they visit him he doesn't know what to say when they first call because it may be an agent. It may be a Red agent. And he makes a very powerful statement without making a statement that what we don't recognize about freedom -- we being North Americans -- is that it certain parts of the world you don't have any friends, because you don't dare even say the air conditioning too cold because that may be Comrade So-and-so's -- you may be endangering his career and so forth. And it's very subtle. It's a very subtle book, and at first one thinks, "Oh, I'm not sure that I can relate to these people. They're Czechs; they're from Central Europe. They're this and they're that." You can, because it's a very human book.

MacNEIL: Is it a heavy read? The title suggests a heavy read.

Mr. GREENE: Incidentally, the title comes from Joseph Stalin, according to the author, who said that socialist writers must be engineers of human souls. And no, it's not. It's not nearly as heavy as the title. It's a long book; it's a complicated book. But it's the kind of complication -- it's like a road map. They got little towns and all that sort of thing, and little blue lines and little red lines. But he wraps everything up. You want to finish the book because there's not a single character left stranded. There's no plot string -- no plot strings untied or left dangling.

MacNEIL: It's a good summer read?

Mr. GREENE: That's a little heavy. Physically it's a little heavy to say a good summer read. Yes, it is light reading in that it's amusing. It's ironic. It's -- there's a lot of satire in it. And one has to get into that frame of mind to really appreciate the book. Incidentally, it's -- I think it's fairly autobiographical because the book uses an emigre Czech writer as its narrator. Danny Boy, they call him, jokingly. And of course if fits the Skvorecky -- I believe it fits him very neatly.

MacNEIL: A. C., thank you very much.

Once again, the book we've been discussing is Josef Skvorecky's The Engineer of Human Souls, published by Knopf.

Good night, Charlayne.

HUNTER-GAULT: Good night, Robin. That's our NewsHour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow night. I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Thank you, Good night.