The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I`m Jim Lehrer.

On the NewsHour tonight: the news of this Monday; analysis of the intelligence report linking a rise in terror to the U.S. presence in Iraq; plus, a different view in a Newsmaker interview with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani; then, a Choices `06 report on a rematch contest for an Indiana congressional seat; a conversation with New Orleans Times-Picayune columnist Chris Rose about the comeback of the Superdome; and some thoughts from essayist Anne Taylor Fleming on the leadership of women.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: The president of Iraq today disputed a report the war has put the United States at greater risk. Weekend news accounts said a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate found the war has created waves of Muslim radicals.

But Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, told the NewsHour he disagrees. He said, "I think the liberation of Iraq reduced the danger of terrorism on the United States because all terrorist groups are now concentrating on Iraq." We`ll have more on this story right after the news summary.

The U.S. Army announced today it`s keeping another brigade in Iraq longer than planned. The decision affects some 4,000 troops operating near Ramadi. They were slated to go home in early January, but they`ll stay six more weeks. Last July, the Army extended the tour of another brigade to help secure Baghdad.

Three U.S. Marines will face military trials for the alleged murder of an Iraqi man. The Marine Corps announced that today. The case involves a man who was shot to death in Hamdaniya last April. Four Marines and a Navy corpsman are still under investigation.

In Iraq today, factional leaders delayed dividing the country into autonomous states in a federal system until 2008. Sunnis oppose the move, and the delay gives them more time to try to amend the constitution.

Also today, a suicide bomber in Ramadi killed seven policemen, as violence marred observances of Ramadan.

And British forces said they killed Omar al-Farouq, a top al-Qaida leader. He escaped from a U.S. prison in Afghanistan last year.

A key U.S. senator raised questions today about a compromise on handling terror suspects. The deal was worked out between the president and other Senate Republicans. NewsHour congressional correspondent Kwame Holman has our report.

KWAME HOLMAN: This morning, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter made clear he still has concerns about last week`s agreement on interrogating and prosecuting terror suspects.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R), Pennsylvania: It is inexplicable to me how someone can seek to divest the federal courts of jurisdiction on constitutional issues, just inexplicable to me.

KWAME HOLMAN: At issue: a provision that would strip enemy combatants of their right to habeas corpus, the ability to challenge their detention in federal court.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: Many don`t know about it, but habeas corpus can be suspended only in time of rebellion or in time of invasion, and neither is present here.

KWAME HOLMAN: But John Cornyn of Texas questioned whether enemy combatants deserved the same rights as American citizens.

SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R), Texas: ... I`d like to hear from the witnesses why they would make the distinction that they`re entitled to the constitutional provision allowing writ of habeas corpus or prohibiting a suspension but they wouldn`t be entitled to the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination or the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures. Are we going to apply that to unlawful combatants of the United States?

KWAME HOLMAN: Witnesses called for a hurriedly arranged hearing, including attorney Bruce Fein, who argued that habeas corpus would not give detainees the same rights as Americans but instead provide the basis for a fair trial.

BRUCE FEIN, Former Associate Deputy Attorney General: Habeas corpus does not establish any constitutional right to the Fifth Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, or otherwise. It simply permits a detainee an opportunity to make arguments to be ultimately decided by an impartial judge as to whether various rights ought to be acknowledged.

KWAME HOLMAN: Chairman Specter is likely to offer an amendment on habeas corpus when the full Senate takes up the tribunal`s legislation this week.

JIM LEHRER: Both the Senate and the House hope to complete action on the legislation before Congress adjourns at week`s end.

The president and foreign minister of Pakistan said today they have no information on Osama bin Laden. Over the weekend, a French newspaper said he may have died of typhoid in Pakistan last month. It cited a leaked intelligence document; French authorities have denied any knowledge of such a claim.

Pope Benedict met with Muslim diplomats in Italy today. It was his latest attempt to quell anger over remarks linking the spread of Islam to violence. The meeting was at the pope`s summer residence near Rome.

He told the group he had a "total and profound respect" for all Muslims. Afterward, Iraq`s ambassador to the Vatican asked Muslims to look to the future.

ALBERT EDWARD ISMAIL YELDA, Iraq Ambassador to the Vatican: He stated on many occasions that he respect the Islam and the Muslim religions, and he wished them all the best in this holy month of Ramadan. And I think it is time now to put what happened behind us and let us build bridges among all the civilizations.

JIM LEHRER: The pope has stopped short of retracting his earlier statements. He has said he regrets any misinterpretation of those remarks.

Liquids and gels will be allowed back on airliners in the United States, but with some restrictions; the Transportation Security Administration announced that today. It said travelers will be allowed to carry on travel-sized toiletries from home if they`re in plastic bags. Other liquids and gels may be carried on board if they`re purchased from secure airport stores.

The head of the TSA, Kip Hawley, made the announcement at Reagan National Airport in Washington.

KIP HAWLEY, Transportation Security Administration Administrator: Experts from around the government, including the FBI and our national labs, have analyzed the information we now know and have conducted extensive explosives testing to get a better understanding of the threat.

While this novel type of liquid explosives is now an ongoing part of the terrorist playbook and must be dealt with, we now know enough to say that a total ban is no longer needed from a security point of view.

JIM LEHRER: Hawley said the threat has eased since liquids and gels were banned in August. That`s when British authorities broke up an alleged plot to bomb transatlantic airliners with liquid explosives.

A federal judge in New York City allowed a class-action suit today over "light" cigarettes. He ruled up to 60 million people may pursue the legal action. It charges cigarette makers falsely claimed "lights" carried a lower health risk. R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris USA said they`ll appeal the ruling.

On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained more than 67 points to close above 11,575. The Nasdaq rose 30 points to close at 2,249.

The Superdome in New Orleans made ready today for its first pro football game in more than a year. The Saints will host the Atlanta Falcons tonight. The stadium was badly damaged during Hurricane Katrina 13 months ago. It`s now considered football-ready, but a major rebuilding project is continuing. Ultimately, the work will cost more than $180 million, and we`ll have more on this story toward the end of the program tonight.

Also ahead: Iraq and terrorism; the president of Iraq; a Choices `06 report from Indiana; and an Anne Taylor Fleming essay.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: That new intelligence report on terrorism and Iraq. We begin with some background from NewsHour correspondent Spencer Michels.

SPENCER MICHELS, NewsHour Correspondent: The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq is fomenting Islamic radicalism around the world and is increasing the threat of terrorism; that`s the assessment revealed in newspaper reports about a classified National Intelligence Estimate.

Excerpts from the document said Iraq is serving as a training ground for would-be terrorists who are determined to fight against the West. The intelligence estimate said the threat has evolved, changing from a core of al-Qaida fighters and related groups, to a new and wide-ranging body of cells acting independently of Osama bin Laden. And radicals have spread their ideology with the help of the Internet, according to the intelligence analysis.

TERRORIST RECRUITING VIDEO NARRATOR: ... after the crimes of the administrations of the U.S., and Britain, and Iraq, we have chosen our future.

SPENCER MICHELS: It says they have made the war in Iraq an effective tool for recruiting more Islamic extremists willing to act. Details of the report, which is a consensus view of the CIA and 15 other United States intelligence services, appeared in major newspapers over the weekend.

Democrats were quick in responding to the news. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement that the report is, quote, "further proof that the war in Iraq is making it harder for America to fight and win the war on terror."

But the director of national intelligence, John Negroponte, in an e- mail sent to news organizations yesterday, said the published reports missed many of the nuances of the complete estimate. He said, "While there is much that remains to be done in the war on terror, we have achieved some notable successes against the global jihadist threat." He continued, "The conclusions of the intelligence community are designed to be comprehensive, and viewing them through the narrow prism of a fraction of judgments distorts the broad framework they create."

Today, Senator Pat Roberts, the Republican chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said the administration would bolster its case by declassifying the full report.

JIM LEHRER: We get two additional views now of the intelligence report. The first is from former CIA official Paul Pillar, a 28-year veteran of the agency. He was national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia, and, before that, deputy director of the CIA`s Counterterrorism Center.

There was an unnamed intelligence official quoted in the Washington Post story that said what this actually did was state the obvious. How would you characterize it?

PAUL PILLAR, Former Deputy Director, CIA Counterterrorism Center: I would characterize it the same way, Jim. One of the things noted in your report was how the war has served as a sort of recruitment poster and recruiting device. Well, that`s something that`s plain for all to see. The videotapes and audiotapes from the likes of Zawahiri, and bin Laden, and the other terrorist recruitment efforts has made that quite clear.

The other major thing, Iraq as a training ground, well, that`s something that our military is dealing with every day, has been for the last three and a half years. And we`ve seen a progression of tactics during that time getting more skillful, whether it`s the improvised explosive devices or anything else.

So the evidence, if you will, both on the recruitment side and on the training ground side, has been all too plain.

JIM LEHRER: So it didn`t take a bunch of intelligence experts to figure this out? Anybody could have figured this out, is what you`re saying?

PAUL PILLAR: It certainly didn`t take that. Now, no doubt, behind this estimate there were many other batches of intelligence reporting that lay behind whatever judgments the community came up with. But on those key aspects in which the Iraq war has influenced the nature and degree of terrorist threat, that is stating the obvious.

JIM LEHRER: Now, tell us about this National Intelligence Estimate. Every once in a while, one of them gets leaked. This one is said to contain 30 pages of information. Is that pretty much what they are, about 30 pages?

PAUL PILLAR: Well, they vary greatly, Jim, over the years. They used to be much longer ones about Soviet strategic forces in years past. There`s always been an emphasis to try to make them shorter and punchier, because shorter, punchier things tend to get read more by the consumers. But that would be a typical length, yes.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Now, who writes these estimates?

PAUL PILLAR: They are written by analysts inside the intelligence community, possibly from the CIA, possibly from the Defense Intelligence Agency, possibly from the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at the State Department.

They are all part of the community in whose name the National Intelligence Council Underdirector Negroponte speaks when they produce these estimates. So you draft -- drafting talent wherever it happens to be inside the community.

JIM LEHRER: So somebody, either Negroponte or somebody under Negroponte, takes all of this information that comes in from the CIA and 14 other intelligence agencies, and then decides what goes in it, what`s relevant, what isn`t relevant, what supports a case, what doesn`t, you know, whatever?

PAUL PILLAR: Well, National Intelligence Estimates, we should remember, are just one of many different analytic products that the community produces, both as a community and as individual agencies, be it CIA, DIA, or what have you. They are a distillation of things that the analysts throughout the community have been studying and pronouncing on, probably in dozens of other products in the previous year or two.

The director, Mr. Negroponte, is in charge of the whole thing. He has a National Intelligence Council, led by Mr. Thomas Fingar, who used to head the intelligence operation at the State Department.

And under them are the kinds of jobs that I used to hold, national intelligence officers, either for a particular region or for particular issues. And that is the person, the so-called NIO, who actually manages the process, recruits the drafter, oversees the coordination.

JIM LEHRER: Now, you talked about consumers. Who are the consumers for this report?

PAUL PILLAR: Everyone from the president on down, and this varies greatly with the particular topics, in terms of what gets read. On the more sensitive things, the more politically sensitive things, in particular, you can assume that the higher ranking policymakers will read them. But there are many other topics where it`s more at the working level, in the military or among our diplomats, who actually may find the judgments most useful.

JIM LEHRER: Who makes the decision as to who sees any given estimate?

PAUL PILLAR: Most estimates have a fairly wide distribution within the government. They may be classified at the top-secret level, but a lot of people have top-secret clearances, after all. There are a few sensitive ones that get a more restricted dissemination.

JIM LEHRER: Yes. Is it unusual for one of these to be leaked to the press as widely as this one was?

PAUL PILLAR: Oh, Jim, it seems like we`ve had a succession of topics related to either Iraq or terrorism that, because they are politically sensitive and politically charged, bits and pieces get leaked. You may recall there was another National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq around 2004 that got partly leaked.

We never like to see that happen. I use the "we," going back into my previous incarnation. It`s a complication, certainly, for the people who produced them.

JIM LEHRER: Why? Why?

PAUL PILLAR: Well, I think Director Negroponte made one of the most relevant points in the quote that you put on the screen, that when you have a bit or piece of an estimate that`s only a piece -- that might be, you know, two pages out of your 30-page paper -- it does give a distorted impression.

In this case, I would guess -- and not knowing the substance of this particular estimate -- but I would guess that any estimate that purported to be an overall look at the state of international terrorism today would have a lot of good news stories in it, too.

For example, the extent of foreign cooperation by our allies and others on counterterrorist matters which has improved, I think, over the last several years, or the fact that many of the al-Qaida operatives at the mid- and even senior levels have been either killed or incarcerated over the last few years. No doubt there are other parts of the estimate that addressed those.

JIM LEHRER: Does your smell tell you that what somebody did was go through the 30 pages and find a couple of sharp points and leak those?

PAUL PILLAR: Well, Jim, you`re a Washington veteran. You know that that`s exactly the way it works.

JIM LEHRER: Yes.

JIM LEHRER: Do these estimates normally have sharp edges within them? Are they usually kind of "on the one hand" this and "on the other hand" that?

PAUL PILLAR: One of the objectives of intelligence community management is to try to keep them sharp. One of the criticisms through the years of many estimates have been that it is the lowest common denominator, that they aren`t sharp enough.

So the people who hold those positions that I mentioned before, from Ambassador Negroponte on down, are always trying to make them sharp. Now, there`s a trade-off there, because, if you have the sharp judgments, then you have these little tidbits, if you will, that do make tempting fodder for would-be leakers.

JIM LEHRER: For the record, has anybody ever gone to jail for leaking one of these things, that you recall? I couldn`t find one anywhere today.

PAUL PILLAR: Not that I`m aware of, no.

JIM LEHRER: Yes. Is it within the community, the intelligence community, when you sit down to write an intelligence estimate, do you assume that eventually it`s going to get out?

PAUL PILLAR: That`s always at least in the backs of people`s minds who are involved in these things. And it would be naive to think that estimates or any other intelligence community products are written in the assumption that it`s never, ever going to become public.

And I think there have been experiences -- I`ve had experiences in the past in which certain things were tread on lightly, shall we say, either in the sense of not venturing a judgment where we didn`t have to venture a judgment, because there would be no way of making it without providing that kind of tempting fodder for would-be leakers. Yes, it is in the backs of one`s minds all the time.

JIM LEHRER: Back to the substance, at least as far as we know it at this point, and what Iraqi President Talabani told Ray Suarez in an interview we`re going to see in a moment, he said that he doesn`t agree with the finding that it increases the terrorist threat on the United States because the terrorists are on all now focused on Iraq. Does that make sense to you?

PAUL PILLAR: No, it doesn`t. Well, it makes sense for the president of Iraq to say it because the president of Iraq has to have Iraqi interests uppermost in mind, and evidently President Talabani have concluded, as have many other Iraqi officials, that keeping the U.S. presence there longer rather than shorter amount of time is in Iraqi interest.

But his point about all the terrorists in the world are being attracted to Iraq -- this is the flypaper theory -- and therefore they`re going to stay away from the United States, the flaw in that is we don`t have a fixed number of terrorists in the world. I think the more appropriate comeback to that was what Secretary Rumsfeld raised the question in another leaked memo, a year or so ago, as you may recall.

JIM LEHRER: I do.

PAUL PILLAR: And the question was, "Are we breeding more terrorists faster than killing or incarcerating the ones we already have?" That`s really the issue that is at stake here with the Iraq war.

JIM LEHRER: And if what`s been in the press is correct, this intelligence estimate appears to suggest that we are breeding more than we`re catching, is that right?

PAUL PILLAR: It does. And that`s my judgment, as well.

JIM LEHRER: Yes, OK. Mr. Pillar, thank you very much.

PAUL PILLAR: You`re quite welcome.

JIM LEHRER: And as I said, we now get a second and different opinion on that intelligence estimate, and it comes in this Newsmaker interview with the president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani. Ray Suarez talked with him this morning at his hotel in Washington.

RAY SUAREZ: Mr. President, welcome back to the program.

JALAL TALABANI, President of Iraq: Thank you.

RAY SUAREZ: Have you heard about this report? And what do you think of its conclusions?

JALAL TALABANI: I don`t agree with this. I don`t agree at all. I think the liberation of Iraq reduced the danger of terrorism on the United States of America because all terrorist groups are now concentrating on Iraq, focusing in Iraq, sending their troops to Iraq, busy with Iraq; otherwise they`re concentrating their efforts against the United States of America.

RAY SUAREZ: So it made America safer, but it made Iraq more dangerous?

JALAL TALABANI: Well, it made America safer, and it make Iraq as a country struggling for peace and democracy in the Middle East under the threat of terrorism. But it was something normal. After the collapse of a dictatorship, which was in a good relation with terrorism, the international terrorism lost a big friend in Iraq, with Iraqi dictatorship.

They came to revenge and concentrate in Iraq, preventing the progress of Iraqi democracy, preventing the democratic process of the Iraqi people, which will be a great danger on terrorism all over the area.

RAY SUAREZ: But if you`re just an average Iraqi, a storekeeper, a housewife, a taxi driver, is Iraq a more dangerous place to live in today than it was in 2002?

JALAL TALABANI: Which Iraq? If you look to Iraq, you see many provinces in Iraq now calm, quiet, secure. We have problems in three provinces in Iraq.

If you look to that Iraq, Iraq was under the danger of a dictatorship, which was launching a war of annihilation against the people. This dictatorship left behind mass graves, with hundred thousands of innocent Iraqis who were buried in the desert of Iraq without any kind of trail.

This dictatorship was a real danger for Iraqi people of all, especially in the north, against Kurdish people in Kurdistan, and in the south against Shias. And even it killed hundreds of Sunni Arabs in Iraq.

The dictatorship was the same time a great threat for peace and stability in the Middle East. This dictatorship invade Iran, invade Kuwait, and was ready to repeat these crimes again. So I think that liberation of Iraq has been a big, important, historical achievement for Iraqi people, for Middle East, and for the peace and stability in the area.

RAY SUAREZ: You say the violence is pretty much limited to three provinces, but that includes the capital.

JALAL TALABANI: Yes.

RAY SUAREZ: And in the year since the last time we spoke, Iraq has had two of its most dangerous months -- July and August -- for civilians in your country. Nearly 7,000 were killed.

JALAL TALABANI: Yes, no, I recognize that. There is still the danger of terrorism. But compared with last year, it`s reduced.

Now many places which were under the control of the terrorists has liberated. It`s now under the control of Iraqi government. Even in Baghdad, five months ago, there you had between 10 to 12 car bombs; nowadays, we have daily between one to two to three car bombs, which means that the number of car bombs are reducing.

What we suffering from it is these car bombs and this assassinations, suicide, then extremists from both Sunni and Shia groups are -- months ago started to kill each other. But nowadays, also these crimes also reduced, and we hope that it will be finished after the national reconciliation started to go forward.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, Americans have put more troops into Baghdad. And some of the battles that are going on in the capital are between the national army of your country and militias that are tied to members of your own cabinet. It`s a strange situation.

JALAL TALABANI: You see, we have decided that there is no room in new Iraq for militia. There will be only one regular army, which must belong to the government. Some militia sometimes committing some kind of violation of law. Iraqi National Guard is obliged to go to arrest them or to go to punish them. So this is the reality. But in general, the main militias are now calm and not acting against the regime as the terrorists are acting.

RAY SUAREZ: As president, have you been able to push the prime minister to be more active in trying to disarm those militias?

JALAL TALABANI: Well, I have complete agreement with the prime minister. I don`t think prime minister is needed to be pushed. The prime minister is convinced. He believes that he must stop the violation of law from everyone, and he must stop the activities of militias, and he must oblige militias to obey the law.

So prime minister is not in need to be pushed by me. I have full trust on him, and I think he is doing his job very well.

RAY SUAREZ: But, for instance, the party that`s tied to the Mahdi Army also has six members of the cabinet.

JALAL TALABANI: Three.

RAY SUAREZ: Three, OK.

JALAL TALABANI: Three. They have three members of the cabinet, and they promise to obey the law. And Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr, the leader of the Mahdi Army, also promised that he will avoid any kind of confrontations with American forces and with Iraq forces. He ordered his followers to obey the law.

Some people, disorder people, are making sometimes this kind of violation of law, but in general we have agreement with the leadership of the Mahdi Army to stop any kind of interference in internal affairs of Iraq.

RAY SUAREZ: The top commanders of the United States forces in your country have recently said that they don`t see many troops leaving before next spring. Does their continued presence also make it more difficult to calm the country down? That`s part of the debate right now in our country.

JALAL TALABANI: No, I don`t think -- I think what your generals said is correct, perhaps in next spring they can leave the country gradually, because until next spring we`ll be able to retrain our army, prepare it for replacing coalition forces.

Now we`re starting each month to take responsibility of the security of one province. We are replacing -- the Iraqi army are replacing the coalition forces in many places in Iraq. At the end of this year, we hope that the majority of provinces will be under the control of Iraqi security forces.

RAY SUAREZ: Because right now we`re having an election in the United States. And there`s arguing between different candidates about what would happen if we left quickly. Some candidates are saying, "Let`s make a plan and leave, because that will force the Iraqis to take care of their own country." While some are saying, "If we leave quickly, we would leave behind a very dangerous Iraq."

In your view, what would happen if the United States left quickly?

JALAL TALABANI: Personally, I do not want to interfere in the debate among Americans. I don`t want to interfere with the internal affairs of the United States of America.

But I think leaving Iraq without final success will be catastrophe for American prestige, and influence in Middle East, and for Iraqi people, and for democracy and peace in Middle East, will help terrorism to grow and even to control some places in the area.

RAY SUAREZ: You are the president of a unified country, but you also spent much of your life struggling for the rights of the Kurds to live in peace and not be targeted by their own government. Meanwhile, in your country, people are being even more, let`s say, open about their desire to live on their own and not take any orders, guidance from Baghdad. Are you being pulled in two directions?

JALAL TALABANI: I think we achieved our goal, our aims. Now Kurdish people live in peace, and stability, and prosperity in the area. They have the right of federation (inaudible) country, participating actively in the center of government. And they are enjoying all democratic rights.

And because the area is calm and quiet, there`s prosperity. There is reconstruction. There is development of agriculture, of our economy, of culture, everything. And the Kurds, within the framework of a united, democratic Iraq, are happy, they voted for a constitution.

I think there is now a good example in Iraq for others that a multination can live in peace and stability if there will be democracy and human rights and federation for all (inaudible)

RAY SUAREZ: Right now, the parliament is debating a plan to give a great deal of autonomy to the different regions, split the country up in administration. And your own people support that. Do you discourage it?

JALAL TALABANI: You know, according to the constitution of Iraq, which was approved by Iraqi people in a referendum, which more than 10 million and half a million voted for in, the constitution -- first article say that Iraq is a federative, democratic, independent, united country. It means that federation is decide by the constitution.

But how to implement it, how to give rights to the different parts of Iraq to form regional government? It is up to the desire of the people of that area. Now we are Iraqi parliament discussing a law to formulate this article of constitution to give the right to people to choose if they want how to rule in their areas.

RAY SUAREZ: Mr. President, thanks for talking to us today.

JALAL TALABANI: Thank you.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: Now, a Choices `06 report. It`s on Indiana`s Ninth House District. NewsHour congressional correspondent Kwame Holman reports.

KWAME HOLMAN: The fall festival in Comisky (ph) brings out hundreds from the local communities of southern Indiana, but this also is one of the most closely contested congressional districts in the country, so the festival also brings out the major party candidates, even though it`s only September.

INDIANA CITIZEN: Hi there. Hi.

KWAME HOLMAN: Republican Mike Sodrel, a local businessman who built a large trucking company from the ground up, is finishing his first-term representing Indiana`s Ninth District, after winning a razor-thin victory two years ago.

REP. MIKE SODREL (R), Indiana: I think the average person here in the Ninth District is just starting to become a little interested.

KWAME HOLMAN: So Sodrel already is running hard, knowing that polls nationally show that voters focus most of their displeasure about the Iraq war, gas prices, health care, and a not-so-great economy on President Bush and the Republican majority in Congress.

HELEN HASHMAN, Indiana Citizen: It`s a worrisome time. There`s just so much going on, with the car bombings and all of that, that it just worries me.

BILL KENDRICK, Indiana Citizen: I don`t think the economy is good. The stock market`s going up, but I still don`t think the economy is good. And I think the Democrats could do a better job with it.

REP. MIKE SODREL: The problem I have with both of these programs is they draw a bright line some place and say, "Well, if you`re over here, you get something. And if you`re over here, you get nothing."

KWAME HOLMAN: Sodrel says he knows the anti-incumbent feelings will make his job a little harder this time.

REP. MIKE SODREL: I trust the voters will make the right decision in November. I think they`re just kind of starting this process right now thinking about, "Well, is this the fault of this president, this Congress, or, you know, what about my member? Is he part of the solution or part of the problem?" You know what I mean? I think they`re just now starting to go through that process.

KWAME HOLMAN: The people of the Ninth District inhabit mostly small town and rural agricultural communities along Indiana`s border with Kentucky.

BARON HILL (D), Indiana Congressional Candidate: It`s been about five polls taken here lately, and I`m ahead in all of them.

KWAME HOLMAN: Democrat Baron Hill held the district seat for six years before losing to Sodrel in 2004. Now, he wants it back.

BARON HILL: Hello there. How are you?

KWAME HOLMAN: Hill, once a local high school basketball star, who, at 53, still runs several miles a day, is running in an area that overwhelmingly voted for President Bush in 2004 but elected Democratic congressmen for decades before Sodrel.

BARON HILL: I hope you`ll vote for me in November.

INDIANA CITIZEN: I will.

KWAME HOLMAN: But he says neither the Ninth Democratic history nor the national polls suggesting Republicans may be on the ropes make him overconfident about their rematch.

BARON HILL: This district is always on the margins, and it`s going to be close every single time. You don`t have Republicans dominating; you don`t have Democrats dominating. And so you would think that it would be easy for me, since it is a marginal district, because of what`s going on in the world. But it`s not going to be easy; it`s going to be difficult to get this seat back.

KWAME HOLMAN: Still, Hill says he senses voters` desire for change and draws on it every chance he gets.

BARON HILL: My basic message is this: If you think the country is moving in the right direction, you don`t want change, you want a member of Congress in the Ninth District in Indiana who is going to basically vote for the president 96 percent of the time, then I would agree vote for my opponent. But if you want change, and want to move this country in a different direction, and somebody who`s going to be an independent voice for southern Indiana, I`m your man.

(APPLAUSE)

KWAME HOLMAN: Talking to supporters, he continues to hit on the overall wave of public unhappiness about the Iraq war.

BARON HILL: When I hear people talk -- well, the Republicans at least -- talk about the Democrats won`t stand up for any ideas, that`s a bunch of malarkey, folks. Let me tell you what we stand for: We stand for getting our boys and girls out of Iraq sooner rather than later and doing in an honorable way. And we can do this.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

KWAME HOLMAN: Hill says almost everywhere he goes he hears from Republican voters that they are ready to change.

INDIANA CITIZEN: I think the Democrats have a chance. I`m going to vote straight Democrat. I don`t care who knows it. I did vote for Bush.

KWAME HOLMAN: And Democrats hope two other close House races in Indiana, the Second and Eighth Districts, could combine with the Ninth`s to signal a nationwide wave of Democratic victories.

But Brian Howey, who produces an influential Web site on Indiana politics from his home in Indianapolis, says that would mean upending voter support for Washington`s Republican leadership.

BRIAN HOWEY, Howey Political Report: It`s going to be kind of an emotional, personal journey for a lot of people. Do they leave the president? Do they leave an earthy guy like Mike Sodrel because they`re so upset about what they`re seeing out of Baghdad or what they`re paying at the pump? And I think that`s what this election is going to come down to.

REP. MIKE SODREL: Mike Sodrel, hi.

KWAME HOLMAN: Indeed, Mike Sodrel and the Republican Party still have a strong base of support in the Ninth District.

INDIANA CITIZEN: I`m a Democrat, but he`s got my vote.

REP. MIKE SODREL: Well, thank you.

ANNETTE KIMBERLIN, Indiana Citizen: I like Mr. Sodrel, so I have no problem with him. I think he`ll get elected again. I like Mr. Bush. You know, I know that things are bad. Things are starting to look better, I think, with the gas prices -- and I hope it`s not because of the election - - but they are looking good.

KWAME HOLMAN: While rallying his troops before a door-to-door walk, the first-term incumbent, Sodrel, makes his own claim for change.

REP. MIKE SODREL: Well, somebody the other day said, "Well, people of this district want change." I said, "I am change."

(LAUGHTER)

KWAME HOLMAN: Sodrel makes sure his supporters know about the differences between himself and his Democratic opponent.

REP. MIKE SODREL: He said that marriage is sacred, but he voted against the marriage protection amendment. I voted for the marriage protection amendment. He thinks people should respect the flag, but he voted three times against the flag protection amendment. I voted for the flag protection amendment.

INDIANA CITIZEN: Good morning. You look familiar.

REP. MIKE SODREL: I`m Mike Sodrel.

INDIANA CITIZEN: I see you on television.

KWAME HOLMAN: Sodrel is taking that message from neighborhood to neighborhood.

INDIANA CITIZEN: If you believe the way we believe, we`d sure appreciate you voting for him. And we`re just for traditional values.

INDIANA CITIZEN: I think that`s a good thing.

REP. MIKE SODREL: I`d be happy if you`ve got any questions. I`d answer them or...

(CROSSTALK)

INDIANA CITIZEN: I hate to say this, but are you a Democrat or a Republican?

REP. MIKE SODREL: I`m a Republican.

INDIANA CITIZEN: Oh, good. OK.

(LAUGHTER)

KWAME HOLMAN: And he doesn`t complain about the political environment he finds himself in.

REP. MIKE SODREL: I think it`s not as bad now as it was two months ago. I mean, I really felt more of that uneasy feeling about something really isn`t going right here a couple of months back. It seems to me that it`s gotten better.

I remember getting up in the morning and saying, "Gee wiz, I wish I (inaudible)." That`s just part of it. I mean, it`s part of governance. So, hey, I`m OK with it. We`ll run as hard as we can in the environment we have to run.

The president of the United States, the honorable George W. Bush.

KWAME HOLMAN: Unlike some Republicans, Sodrel has not run away from President Bush, who, along with the vice president and first lady, have appeared with him in Indiana.

REP. MIKE SODREL: He`s my president. You know, I may have to tell people, I don`t agree with him all the time. And when I don`t agree with him, I don`t mind telling him I don`t agree with him. My wife and I have been together 38 years now, and we don`t agree on everything, but she`s my wife. He`s my president.

KWAME HOLMAN: At this time of year in Indiana, Friday nights are reserved for high school football. Here in Floyds Knobs, many voters credit Sodrel for his loyalty to the president.

ROEBIN TYLER, Indiana Citizen: I do appreciate his backing the president and doing that. So that`s probably at this stage of the game would be the main thing that would be having me to vote for him.

BARON HILL: What`s your name?

INDIANA CITIZEN: Catherine Farrell (ph).

BARON HILL: Hi, Catherine. Nice to meet you.

KWAME HOLMAN: But the outcome between Sodrel and Hill this year could portend whether Democrats take majority control of the House of Representatives. Hill has tried to ignite his campaign with an appearance by former President Clinton, and Hill says he feels a different atmosphere from two years ago.

BARON HILL: There`s just some angst out there that people have, and that`s the reason why I think they`re looking towards the Democrats. I think, in the final analysis, they`re going to say, "You know, I don`t know if the Democrats can do it any better than the Republicans or not, but let`s give them a chance."

KWAME HOLMAN: Brian Howey says whatever happens in Indiana will send an early signal about the rest of the country.

BRIAN HOWEY: You`ve got to remember that the Indiana polls are some of the first that close in the country. They`ll shut down at 6:00 p.m. And I fully expect that, you know, by 7:00, 7:30, 8:00 on election night, you`re probably going to know where these three congressional races are stacking up. And I do think that that may, you know, be the first inklings of the bellwether of what kind of change is going to happen here.

KWAME HOLMAN: Right now, many Indiana voters are paying more attention to football than politics, but soon an expected explosion of political ads will signal them that November is inching closer and closer.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: The New Orleans Saints return to the Superdome tonight, and it`s much more than a football story. Gwen Ifill has it.

GWEN IFILL: Little more than a year ago, the Superdome was a singular metaphor for the misery that consumed post-Katrina New Orleans. The shelter of last resort housed 30,000 evacuees, but its roof leaked, its electricity and plumbing failed, and it was left a wreck.

Tonight, the Louisiana Superdome is back in business after a $184- million-dollar renovation; the city`s beloved New Orleans Saints football team returns home. Chris Rose, a columnist at the Times-Picayune, says this is about a lot more than football. He joins us now from the Superdome.

Hi, Chris.

CHRIS ROSE, New Orleans Times-Picayune: Hello, Gwen. Please pardon the business casual outfit today, but it was decreed by the powers that be that we`re supposed to dress in black and gold, so I`m doing my best.

GWEN IFILL: You`re doing your best. Well, you know, when the saints come marching in tonight at the Superdome, how will they be received?

CHRIS ROSE: Well, the Saints will be received by a bunch of crazy fans who have been partying all weekend. It`s almost like Mardi Gras meets the Super Bowl down here.

I suspect it will probably be one of the emotional capstones of what`s happened since this all began last August. You know, we`ve had big events. We had Mardi Gras; we had Jazzfest, many things that have brought us together. But nothing has ever put 67,000 people in one room to sort of celebrate who we are, and our hopeful recovery, and bring in the "Star- Spangled Banner," and the Saints, and all that stuff. It`s going to be a night like no other here, I can tell you that.

GWEN IFILL: How much of this is about the game? And how much of this is about the symbolism of revival, I guess?

CHRIS ROSE: Well, a little bit`s about the game. We`re 2-0. Of course, everyone wants to win, and that would be the nice cap if that happens, if we win. But obviously what this is about, this building is such a symbol for what happened here, our sort of national and local shame.

So to have it return for the purposes for which it was built is very reassuring, very comforting. I know a lot of people elsewhere are probably thinking the money could have been used somewhere else to build houses for folks, but you have to realize what drives the economy here.

The two buildings that had to be put online before any others, after Emeril`s restaurant, of course, would be the Superdome and the Convention Center. They drive our economy.

Football games isn`t the only thing that happens in this building. Although I think they`ve started with a football game for the symbolic purposes, I think having a boat show or a gun show or a home show probably would have been a sort of irony that we didn`t want to project tonight.

GWEN IFILL: Well, this turns out, I guess I read, to be the biggest re-roofing project ever in history, at least in the United States. So what does this mean? Did anybody really expect for this Superdome ever to reopen again after the way it was left?

CHRIS ROSE: I don`t think so. I think, in the early days, I guess they thought we were going to have to tear this thing down. And I think it could be said that the NFL and Saints ownership actually wanted to tear this thing down for a long time and get a new stadium.

We`ve resisted it. This odd building that looks more like a nuclear reactor than a football stadium has somehow wound its way around our hearts. But it was a heck of a roofing job, and it`s dry so far.

GWEN IFILL: And so far it seems to be holding. What about the parts of New Orleans that we still read and see, the huge swaths of the city which have not come back?

CHRIS ROSE: Well, they`re there, and they`re huge, there`s no question about it. You know, it`s kind of an odd mixed message that we have to send out here.

Tonight, the images that go out in the football game are going to have all the cliches, the saxophone player in Jackson Square, the oyster shuckers, the beignets, the drinking on Bourbon Street, and that`s all there. That`s very real. It`s still happening.

The old part of the city is here and functioning. There is a reason it`s the old part and it`s functioning, because it`s on high ground. Now, what happened is about 75 percent of this city took two feet or more -- a lot more - for about three weeks out there. So that`s what we`re still working on.

It`s coming on painfully, excruciatingly slow. It`s a brutal process, and it`s made life very difficult here. And I think that`s one reason that the celebration is amped up here. It could be argued that we haven`t had a heck of a lot to party about or a heck of a lot to cheer about in the last year.

But we`re very resilient, and celebratory, and community-oriented folks, so I think that`s what`s got a lot to do with tonight. It`s completely exaggerated. It`s out of control. I suppose most of America is wondering, "What the hell are they doing in New Orleans?" But they`ve been asking that question for 50 years, so...

GWEN IFILL: If 80 percent of the city is still on affected, and you`re a tourist, and you come to New Orleans, is it possible to go to the Superdome, to go to the Convention Center, to basically go to the old tourist haunts and never see that other side of the city?

CHRIS ROSE: It is. The truth is, you could come and spend a week here and see very few manifestations of the storm and the damage, because the places that tourists usually go -- the Convention Center is now open for conventions; the dome is fixed, the French Quarter, the Garden District, uptown, the music clubs, the restaurants, almost without exception, the Audubon Zoo.

There`s a few places, a few local hideaways that were out in neighborhoods that are either inaccessible or not open yet, but for the most part the old part of the city that tourists identify with is here and functioning. The rest of it happens quietly behind the scenes while we slowly and painfully put our lives back together.

GWEN IFILL: So, Chris, in the end, after all is said and done tonight after this game is over, does it matter who wins the game?

CHRIS ROSE: Does it matter who wins the game? Now, therein really is the great philosophical question about this event. No, you know, I`ll give you the cliche: No matter what happens on the field tonight, New Orleans wins big.

It`s going to send a huge message out, the one we`ve been trying to get out forever -- and I`d love to speak to the power of this program and all the others -- but "Monday Night Football," baby. We`re going to reach a lot of homes tonight. And that`s what we need to get out.

So the city wins either way. Now, my prediction for the game, like I said, the city wins either way.

(LAUGHTER)

GWEN IFILL: I think I`ll take that as your prediction. Chris Rose, thanks a lot for joining us again.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: And finally tonight, essayist Anne Taylor Fleming talks about whether Americans are ready for a woman president.

ANNE TAYLOR FLEMING, NewsHour Essayist: Is something wrong here? Where have all the women gone? On op-ed page after op-ed page of the country`s major newspapers, they have largely disappeared from view. As someone who used to write regularly for these pages, it is disturbing.

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D), New York: This is not a time for partisanship.

ANNE TAYLOR FLEMING: It comes at a time when the country is also having a debate about whether or not it`s ready for a female president. It`s late for all this, isn`t it? After all, other countries have had female leaders long since.

And there is an attention-getting new trio of them in Michelle Bachelet of Chile, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia, and Angela Merkel of Germany. Shouldn`t we be chagrinned, we Americans, who think of ourselves as the beacons of enlightenment?

Yes, the country still has lingering daddy issues.

CBS ANNOUNCER: This is the "CBS Evening News" with Katie Couric.

KATIE COURIC, "CBS Evening News" Host: Hi, everyone.

ANNE TAYLOR FLEMING: It came up again when Katie Couric was appointed to an anchor chair, the first such solo woman. "Did she have the gravitas to deliver us our daily dose of sobering news?" men and women all asked. Wasn`t that a job for a man, a father figure, a Brokaw or Cronkite?

There`s also the paltry number of elected female leaders in this country: eight women governors out of 50; 14 women senators out of 100. Is it possible that we women selected ourselves out of the fray, out of the dialogue, didn`t fight hard enough for our turf? Sure, it is.

The work-family juggling act has always been daunting, and those business and lawyer careers often turned out to be less satisfying than we thought when we didn`t have them. Being a hands-on mom has seemed the better option for many women, but that`s what the feminist movement was about; it was about the choice being ours to make.

For women writers, we, too, have our choices, and maybe we have spent too much time thinking about and writing about our private lives, ceding the public arena to men. Abuse and anorexia, an abandonment by lovers and husbands, sex and hormones, and infertility, we wrote book after book after book. I did it, too.

Of course, there were, there are legitimate wounds to air, to address and redress, but maybe the personal wasn`t political or not political enough. We backed out of civic skirmishes, too many of us, so that the voices we hear now on radio and TV, and read about Iraq and immigration, and, yes, Hillary`s potential candidacy, are predominantly male.

Recently, in the "Style" section of the New York Times, there was a piece questioning our readiness for a woman president and also an essay by a woman bemoaning the fact that she is a love addict who fell apart and had to be hospitalized when her boyfriend left her. I winced at the inadvertent juxtaposition: It is time, I found myself thinking, past time to refocus on something bigger than ourselves.

I`m Anne Taylor Fleming.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of this day. The president of Iraq dismissed a U.S. report the war in Iraq has made the overall terror threat worse.

Pope Benedict met with Muslim diplomats in Italy. It was his latest attempt to quell anger over the remarks linking Islam to violence.

And the Transportation Security Administration announced liquids and gels will be allowed back on airliners in the United States, but with some restrictions.

(BREAK)

JIM LEHRER: And, once again, to our honor roll of American service personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. We add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. Here, in silence, are 15 more.

JIM LEHRER: We`ll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I`m Jim Lehrer. Thank you, and good night.