The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MAC NEIL: Good evening. I'm Robert MacNeil in New York.

MR. LEHRER: And I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington. After our summary of the news this Thursday, we have a report and an interview with Defense Sec. Perry on the helicopter tragedy in Iraq, a congressional debate on the crime bill, the story of North Carolina's state effort to fight crime, and an interview with Henry Kissinger about his mediation efforts in South Africa. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MAC NEIL: Two U.S. helicopters were shot down by two U.S. jet fighters in Northern Iraq today, killing 26 people, including 15 Americans. The incident occurred this morning near the town of Irbil in Iraq's northern no-fly zone, the zone designated by the United Nations in 1991 to protect the Kurdish people from Iraqi attack. According to official reports, the two F-15 jet fighters mistakenly identified the U.S. Black Hawks as Iraqi Hind helicopters. The Black Hawks were carrying senior U.S., British, French, and Turkish officers to a meeting with Kurdish leaders. At the White House this morning, President Clinton expressed his sorrow over the incident and promised a full inquiry. He also had this to say.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Three years ago our armed forces joined in a multinational mission to provide humanitarian relief to the oppressed Kurdish minority civilians in Northern Iraq. Those who died today were a part of that mission of mercy. They served with courage and professionalism, and they lost their lives while trying to save the lives of others. The important work they were doing must and will continue.

MR. MAC NEIL: Defense Sec. Perry said that today's attack took place in daylight and that both jets fired their missiles after making visual contact with the helicopters. A U.S. AWACS reconnaissance plane was overseeing the helicopters' flight. We'll have a Newsmaker interview with Sec. Perry after this News Summary. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: Serbs, backed by tanks, surrounded two U.N. compounds near Sarajevo today. They demanded the return of weapons they surrendered in February under a NATO ultimatum. The Serbs also banned all U.S. media from their territory and detained more peacekeepers. The actions appear to be retribution for the NATO air strike on Serb positions around Gorazde earlier this week. We have a report from Geoffrey Archer of Independent Television News.

GEOFFREY ARCHER, ITN: Getting Serb and Muslim heavy weapons under U.N. control was the key to bringing peace for Sarajevo at the end of February. Now the Serbs are threatening to grab back some of their guns in a serious escalation of the tension that has been growing since last weekend. Earlier, at another weapons connection point, Serb soldiers took a number of Canadian U.N. troops prisoner. Altogether over 150 U.N. soldiers are detained by Serbs in some way or another. These Swedish U.N. troops and their vehicles were stopped by a Serb roadblock from entering Sarajevo on Sunday. The Serbs then put mines at the back of the convoy to prevent them from returning to a safer area. Effectively, the Serbs are now holding a large number of U.N. soldiers hostage. Using force to try to free them is considered far too dangerous, and the U.N. commander is still hoping to use negotiations to defuse the current tension and to prevent the Serbs from putting their big guns into action in Sarajevo again. But Gen. Rose still faces Serb anger at his decision to bomb some of their troops attacking Gorazde. His plans to move British light dragoons into the town to protect it will stay on ice if there is no political solution soon.

MR. LEHRER: President Clinton delivered a warning to the Serbs today. He did so at his news conference this morning.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I would remind the Serbs that we have taken no action, none, through NATO and with the support of the U.N., to try to win a military victory for their adversaries. What we have done is taken military action in Bosnia through NATO with the approval of the United Nations to get them to honor the U.N. rules and to encourage them to do what they say they wish to do, which is to engage in negotiations. I think the Serbs will be making a mistake to start treating the United Nations and NATO forces as adverse combatants. That is not what we are doing. We are trying to get them to honor their word, and this is -- they would be making a mistake to do that.

MR. MAC NEIL: Belgian troops came under fire in the capital of Rwanda today. Rockets also exploded at the city's airport, threatening efforts to evacuate remaining foreigners from the African nation. Belgian paratroopers and some of the last westerners in Rwanda were at the airport preparing to flee the country's ethnic fighting. It was unclear whether the airport was still safe for evacuation. We have a report from Andrew Simmons of Independent Television News.

ANDREW SIMMONS, ITN: No sooner had United Nations monitors announced a fresh cease-fire, the third in a week of violence, that it collapsed again. These are Belgian U.N. troops running the gauntlet of Rwandan government forces and rebel fighters, under fire, yet attempting to evacuate foreign nationals like this Belgian woman. It is mainly aid workers who are left behind, trying to help refugees under extreme personal danger. Ten Belgian soldiers and six civilians have been killed so far, and the country is withdrawing its troops. The U.N. is in yet another dilemma, whether to withdraw altogether or reinforce with fresh troops. A decision is expected later this week.

BOUTROS BOUTROS-GHALI, Secretary General, United Nations: And I hope that you take a decision so that you will be able to continue our mission in Rwanda, and we will try to contain the, the confrontation.

ANDREW SIMMONS: Latest reports in the Rwandan capital, Kigali, say rebel forces are trying to advance on the city. Aside from the battle, tribal slaughter goes on with tens of thousands dead. One U.N. commander has said the killers are like demons in human form. Many people are so scared they will kill anyone don't recognize. And there are now real fears that conflict would spread to neighboring Burundi. This embassy in Kigali has already been evacuated.

MR. MAC NEIL: The Red Cross today suspended its medical relief efforts in Rwanda after six injured people were dragged from a Red Cross truck and shot. Red Cross officials also said at least 30 of its workers had been killed in the unrest over the last seven days. An international effort to solve South Africa's political crisis collapsed today even before it got underway. Henry Kissinger and a team of other foreign mediators cut short their mission after the political parties refused to agree on an agenda for talks. The Zulu-dominated Inkatha Freedom Party wanted to discuss delaying this month's all-race elections. The government and the African National Congress said they would not consider it. We'll have an interview with Henry Kissinger later in the program.

MR. LEHRER: The House continued debate on the crime bill today. It would, among other things, add 70 crimes to the list for which the death penalty could be used. They include drive-by killings, murders committed during carjackings, and murders committed by federal prisoners. The House today rejected an amendment to change the death penalty provisions to life in prison without parole. That vote was 314 to 111. We'll have more on the crime bill later in the program.

MR. MAC NEIL: Senior executives of the seven largest U.S. manufacturers told Congress today that cigarettes were not addictive and did not need to be regulated. And they rejected recent charges that their companies manipulated nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked. They were questioned at a congressional hearing.

REP. RON WYDEN, [D] Oregon: Do you believe nicotine is not addictive?

WILLIAM CAMPBELL, Philip Morris USA: I believe nicotine is not addictive, yes.

REP. RON WYDEN: Mr. Johnston.

JAMES JOHNSTON, RJR Tobacco Company: Congressman, cigarettes and nicotine clearly do not meet the classic definitions of addiction. There is no intoxication.

REP. RON WYDEN: We'll take that as a "no."

UNIDENTIFIED SPOKESMAN: I don't believe that nicotine for our products are addictive.

SECOND UNIDENTIFIED INDUSTRY SPOKESMAN: I believe nicotine is not addictive.

THIRD UNIDENTIFIED INDUSTRY SPOKESMAN: I believe that nicotine is not addictive.

FOURTH UNIDENTIFIED INDUSTRY SPOKESMAN: I believe that nicotine is not addictive.

FIFTH UNIDENTIFIED INDUSTRY SPOKESMAN: And I too believe that nicotine is not addictive.

REP. RON WYDEN: I am just struck by how the chairman other experts pile up this mountain of evidence, report after report, the Surgeon General, the American Medical Association, the World Health Organization, report after report, after report, after report. Your companies, who have a vested financial interest in saying otherwise, are the only folks who make the contention that is contradicted even by your customers that smoking is not addictive.

MR. MAC NEIL: One executive told the committee that anti-smoking advocates were seeking prohibition of cigarettes and in their eyes, the industry could do nothing right short of firing its employees and going out of business. A research team in Utah has discovered a gene linked to a wide range of cancers. Doctors say it may somedaylead to better treatment and early detection. The gene was found in a high percentage of patients with brain or breast cancer. But scientists warned more research was needed before it could be used to identify specific cancers. That's it for our News Summary. Now it's on to the helicopter shootdown, the crime bill, crime in North Carolina, and Henry Kissinger on South Africa. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: We go first tonight to the Washington explanations of what happened to those two U.S. helicopters in Iraq and why. Kwame Holman reports.

MR. HOLMAN: Some early reports have implicated the Iraqis in the shootdown, but shortly after 11 this morning, a somber-sounding President Clinton confirmed that missiles from two U.S. F-15 fighters had destroyed the American helicopters carrying the U.N. officials.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: According to initial reports, two American helicopters were mistakenly identified as Iraqi helicopters and shot down by United States aircraft. I have met with Sec. Perry this morning. I have talked with him and with Gen. Shalikashvili, and I have instructed him to lead a full inquiry into the circumstances of this terrible incident. We will get the facts. We should join together in terrible sorrow and also in honoring the high purpose for which these individuals serve and in which they lost their lives. The nation and the world should remember them in gratitude. Thank you.

MR. HOLMAN: Minutes after the President spoke, Defense Sec. William Perry gave the first details of what happened.

WILLIAM PERRY, Secretary of Defense: At about 3:30 in the morning Eastern Daylight Time, two U.S. Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters assigned to the Provide Comfort combined task force, approximately 35 miles north of Irbil in Iraq, were shot down by two U.S. Air Force F-15-C aircraft, also assigned to the task force. Apparently, the U.S. helicopters were mistakenly identified as Iraqi Hinds helicopters operating in the Northern no-fly exclusion zone North of the 36th Parallel. U.S. search and rescue teams have been deployed to the site. Finally, let me say that the U.S. contribution to Provide Comfort efforts is ultimately under my supervision, therefore, I take full responsibility for today's tragedy, and I pledge that I will make -- take a direct role in ensuring that the investigation is conducted as thoroughly, quickly as possible. Let me ask Gen. Shalikashvili to make additional comments.

GEN. JOHN SHALIKASHVILI, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff: Let me begin by expressing my deepest sorrow and regret over the tragic incident that occurred this morning. And let me assure that as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff I feel a sense of personal responsibility for the strategy -- for this tragedy and the loss of so many lives. As Sec. Perry pointed out, those were individuals who were on such a noble mission, to protect the people of Northern Iraq.

MR. HOLMAN: Central to the incident was how a U.S. Black Hawk helicopter like this one could be mistaken for a Hind helicopter used by the Iraqis.

REPORTER: Were the jets that shot down the helicopters in visual contact with the helicopters?

SEC. WILLIAM PERRY: Yes.

REPORTER: They were. So the jets, themselves, misidentified them as Hinds.

SEC. WILLIAM PERRY: I don't want to come to conclusions yet about the full details of the misidentification, but it is factually correct that this was daylight weather and that the pilots did go in to make a visual identification.

REPORTER: Do the helicopters routinely have friend and foe identification capability? Are the Air Force jets patrolling the area required to try to squawk them, to communicate with aircraft?

GEN. SHALIKASHVILI: The helicopters do routinely have identification, friend or foe, and the procedures, again, I don't wish to go in to in too much detail, but it is my judgment if procedures were followed, they, in fact, would be squawking.

MR. HOLMAN: The people killed today were part of a United Nations mission that has provided aid to the Kurdish minority who have fought against Saddam Hussein's government since the end of the Gulf War. This afternoon, the U.S. commander in charge of the no- fly operation confirmed by phone to reporters at the Pentagon that no one aboard the helicopters survived.

GEN. RICHARD KELLER: They had 26 air crew and passengers embarked. We have no report of survivors. This total includes fifteen U.S. personnel, three Turkish officers, one French officer, two British officers, and five Kurdish passengers. At approximately 7:35, 07:35, Greenwich Mean Time, two F-15-C aircraft visually identified what they thought were two Iraqi Hind helicopters. One F-15-C aircraft fired one AIM, one 20-M RAM Missile, and the other F-15 aircraft fired one AIM 9 Sidewinder Missile, downing the two UH-60 helicopters. At the time of the incident, a U.S. Air Force AWACS airborne early warning aircraft was airborne and monitoring air space north of the 36th Parallel. The whole thing has been rehearsed a day ahead of time. The normal squawk procedures are in place. Positive identification by AWACS is required and so on. Where those procedures failed in this case we're not sure yet.

MR. HOLMAN: Gen. Keller said once next of kin are notified, the names of the dead will be released.

MR. LEHRER: And then a short while ago I interviewed Sec. Perry from the Pentagon. Mr. Secretary, welcome.

WILLIAM PERRY, Secretary of Defense: Thank you, Jim.

MR. LEHRER: Sir, what is the latest that is known about what went wrong this morning?

SEC. PERRY: Well, let me tell you the results first of all, which are, indeed, tragic. There were twenty-six people killed in that accident, fifteen Americans, five Kurds, three Turks, two British, and one French, a total of twenty-six. Their bodies have been recovered. They're being flown to Turkey, and tomorrow morning we will fly them to Frankfurt, and then eventually the Americans will be flown back to the United States.

MR. LEHRER: The -- the investigation, I assume, has not turned up -- what has the investigation turned up exactly as to what caused those two American jets to, to destroy these two American helicopters?

SEC. PERRY: Jim, at this stage I would just be speculating if I would try to guess what happened there. But I can assure you that as the secretary I feel the full responsibility for this action and that I will be accountable for following up on it to be sure that the proper, first of all, full disclosure is made to the President, the Congress, and the public, and that we take the proper actions to correct any errors we discover in it.

MR. LEHRER: Have the, have the two pilots, the jet pilots been interviewed?

SEC. PERRY: Yes, they have been interviewed, but the investigative board is just appointed. I have directed the commander in chief of our forces in Europe, Gen. Jalwan, to convene an investigative board. He has done that. It's -- the president of that board is going to be Maj. Gen. Andres, who's the commander of the third air force in Europe. They're going to be on that board, army aviation experts, F-15 experts, AWACS experts. We've also invited representatives from the other countries that were involved, Turkey, France, and the United Kingdom.

MR. LEHRER: Did these two pilots, were they convinced that these were -- these were Iraqi helicopters, rather than American helicopters?

SEC. PERRY: Yes. Yes, they were. They both during the time of the incident and in their post action report, they reported a positive identification of Hind helicopters. Evidently, they were wrong. One of the things I'm doing besides appointing this investigative board is I've requested Gen. Shalikashvili to immediately review the procedures that we're using not just in the Northern Iraq no-fly zone but in the three areas in the world where we're now conducting no-fly operations -- that's in Northern Iraq, Southern Iraq, and Bosnia -- so that we have a complete -- so that I get with him in a matter of a few days detailed recommendations on how we might want to revise our procedures.

MR. LEHRER: The procedures that exist now, Mr. Secretary, allow pilots on their own to make this kind of determination and just, just take action and shoot down two unarmed helicopters, whether they're Iraqi or whatever.

SEC. PERRY: Jim, first of all, I can't comment. I can't describe the operating rules of engagement we have for these operations. I can tell you though that they're different in Bosnia from the ones that we're using in Iraq, and they are going to be -- all three of them are going to be re-evaluated. But I also can say that on the basis of what has happened, even in a preliminary examination of what has happened it is clear that there were some serious errors made. What we have to do in the investigation is to distinguish between human errors and process or procedural errors. It may have been some of both. And we want to get to the bottom of all of it.

MR. LEHRER: Have you -- is anything being done, any procedures being stopped, any operations being stopped while this thing is being investigated to make sure that something like this doesn't happen somewhere else, or even right there again in Iraq tomorrow?

SEC. PERRY: Yes. I've asked Gen. Shalikashvili to make a modification in our procedure in the case of the Iraq no-fly zone that would minimize the risk of something like this happening again. That is pending the review that he is making where we should have a complete revision or complete consideration of revision in just a few days.

MR. LEHRER: And the way the procedure worked this morning and until this tragedy occurred, as I say -- to come back to my question earlier -- those pilots who were flying those jets, did they make the decision all by themselves to go ahead and shoot at those two helicopters?

SEC. PERRY: Jim, the -- in the operation there were two pilots there but there was also an AWACS and the AWACS and the pilots were in communication at the time of this mission. Beyond that, I can't give you specifics about the, the detailed event by event occurrence. We have tapes of the conversations, we have detailed records which we're now studying, and within a day or two, we will have a very complete picture.

MR. LEHRER: Within a day or two you will know what happened?

SEC. PERRY: Within a day or two we will know -- we will have a sequential picture of the events. We can answer the kind of question you just asked. That is a long way though, Jim, from being able to determine the full cause of the error and the full, whether there were systematic or human errors or both.

MR. LEHRER: Mr. Secretary, there was a report a few moments ago that you have cancelled your trip to Asia, to Japan, and Korea, because of that, is this correct?

SEC. PERRY: That's not quite correct, Jim. I have postponed it for a few days. The Korea trip is very, very important to me, and I plan to go through with that trip, but I have several things that have come up, this being one of them, which meant that it just made it impossible for me to leave tomorrow, which is when I had planned to. We have to -- I have to be absolutely sure that we get these investigations launched, that we get the procedures that I've talked about reconsidered very quickly, and that we have a whole set of actions we need to take to ensure that the families receive adequate assistance. All of those things I have to do in the next few days, and as a consequence, I've postponed my trip to sometime next week.

MR. LEHRER: All right, Mr. Secretary, thank you.

SEC. PERRY: Thank you, Jim.

MR. MAC NEIL: Still ahead on the NewsHour, the crime bill, crime in North Carolina, and Henry Kissinger on South Africa. FOCUS - CRIME WATCH

MR. MAC NEIL: Now the politics of federal crime legislation. Debate continued today in the House of Representatives on a $15 billion comprehensive crime bill. The omnibus package incorporates 24 bills with a mixture of programs to prevent crime and punish criminals. Key elements include $7 billion for prevention programs, including a jobs program targeted at high crime areas, model prevention zones, and midnight sports programs; $3 billion in grants to states to help build new prisons or expand existing ones; almost 3 1/2 billion for 50,000 new police officers. The measure would also limit the number of Death Row appeals, mandate the so- called "Three Strikes and You're Out" law, which would mean life in prison for anyone convicted of a third violent felony, establish dozens of new federal crimes subject to the death penalty, including drive-by shootings, and carjackings resulting in death, allow juveniles 13 or older to be tried as adults in federal court for crimes such as murder, assault, rape, and robbery. We join the debate now with three key members of the House Judiciary Committee, New York Democrat Charles Schumer, Florida Republican Bill McCollum, and Virginia Democrat Robert Scott. They join us from studios on Capitol Hill. Congressman Scott, to a layman this bill appears to have something for every view of crime in the political spectrum. Can you support this bill?

REP. SCOTT: I can support a lot of it, but I intend to vote no in the end. The first screen of initiatives that you mentioned will actually reduce crime. We know how to reduce crime, and we also know how to play politics. The many provisions in this bill provide the youth development programs to keep young people out of trouble, provide cops on the beat, provide alternatives for incarceration, boot camps, and what not. There are a lot of provisions in the bill. The other provisions in the bill, the dozens of death penalties, and it's been shown that the death penalty does not provide a deterrent against crime, and there's serious problems with the applications of the death penalty, whether it's discriminatory, whether it's done by mistake, and also the three times and you're out law, quite frankly, provides no deterrent effect, does not protect society. It's very expensive and uses money that could go to other ways of reducing crime. We have an incarceration rate in this country that is No. 1 in the world. In some areas, inner cities, it's 30 times worse than, than the average country and 10 times worse than the country that's in second place. We're locking people up but we're not preventing crime, and that's where the focus really needs to be.

MR. MAC NEIL: On the death penalty questions, you and people who think like you were defeated today, were you not? I mean, you tried to eliminate the death penalty provisions, and you were voted down three to one.

REP. SCOTT: The death penalty is very popular, but it has been shown to have no deterrent effect, and I proposed it for a number of reasons; one, I'm just morally opposed to it. It doesn't deter crime, and we make mistakes. And it does nothing to reduce crime, and it also diverts attention from the real things that will reduce crime. And that's where we need to focus our attention, on the better parts of the bill. It's an excellent provision that will have the effect of reducing crime.

MR. MAC NEIL: Let me ask Congressman McCollum on the same question, this bill that has so many things in it, does it contain what you need as an individual, Congressman, to vote for it?

REP. McCOLLUM: Well, I think it depends upon what is changed in the bill over the next couple of days when it's considered next week. There are provisions that are very good in this bill. There are some very bad provisions in it. The ones that I'm most concerned about right now concern the death penalty in the sense that if they stay in the bill, the expert opinions from the prosecutors and the attorney generals around the country is that there will never be another death penalty carried out in the United States. And so when Henry Hyde's amendment comes up to strike the so-called habeas corpus reform, that needs to succeed, because incorporated in the bill right now is a provision that would reverse a Supreme Court decision, and that Supreme Court decision is terribly important to allowing death penalties to be carried out. In the short-hand of it, it means that if right now somebody is on Death Row, they may not take a decision of the Court that comes down in criminal procedure and use that as an excuse to go in and appeal and say, we need to change our death penalty situation, we need it reversed. If this bill survives in its present form, that Court decision will got out the window, and every time the Supreme Court comes down with a new ruling, then the, the death penalty opportunity or the opportunity to appeal will go to a Death Row inmate. Anyone on Death Row now, anyone in the future, and since the Supreme Court comes down with one or two of these type decisions every term, it would mean with the months of appeal involved in each case that no one would, as a practical matter, ever be executed again. So if we remove that and change the Racial Justice Act, which also would eliminate the death penalty through a statistical device, I, I don't think the rest of bill is adequate. I think it's much like what we've seen in the past where say somebody has a disease that can be cured, it takes fourteen days of medicine to do it, you're only going to take two days' worth of it, feel better, and go off the medicine. I think you've got something that's not going to harm anything and will help in the rest of the bill but there's a lot more that needs to be done in this bill that is not there presently. But if we change those two provisions on the death penalty that I just described to you, I think that this bill can be supported by Republicans for the most part.

MR. MAC NEIL: Congressman Schumer, as one of the Democratic floor managers for this bill whose responsibility is to get something through the House that a majority can vote for, what do you regard as essential to keep in? You've heard what your two colleagues object to.

REP. SCHUMER: Yes. And that is why the objectives you've heard are why we've never been able to really pass a comprehensive crime bill, but I think this bill has found the right place. You know, Robin, there are many on the left who say we should just prevent and not punish. And then there are some on the right who say we should only punish and not prevent, or that the mix is wrong. What this bill does is both. It metes out very tough punishment, particularly for repeat, violent criminal offenders. But it also aims for the first time a significant amount of resources, more than ever that the federal government has done, at prevention in terms of keeping schools open so kids have a place to go after 3 o'clock and on weekends, in terms of drug treatment, in terms of job training. I think it's a very balanced bill. And I think at the end of the day, while there will be the usual tug and pull, some trying to pull the bill a little further over one way, some trying to pull the bill a little further the other way, that this bill will pass. It's the first time that we have really found an adequate blend. And there's one other thing that is the first time. It's the first time the federal government isn't going to be just debating the ideological issues, but the main thrust of this bill is to provide to the localities the assistance that they need, whether it be to put cops on the beat, whether it be to build new prisons, or whether it be to provide the kinds of prevention and treatment programs that have been sorely lacking in our politics, state, local, and federal thus far.

MR. MAC NEIL: Mr. McCollum, what do you think about the balance between prevention and punishment?

REP. McCOLLUM: I don't think it's balanced right at all. I disagree with Chuck completely on that point. I think it's skewed entirely too much to the prevention side. And I would say up front that we all would agree, Republicans and Democrats alike, that you need some balance. But the top priority in America today is to take the 6 percent of the criminals who are committing 70 percent of the violent crimes and serving only 1/3 of their sentences off the streets, lock them up, and throw away the keys. In other words, we want to see these criminals put away. The state laws are what we're most concerned with there, and that's why truth in sentencing is so important and why when we offer money for prisons, we need to offer enough. $3 billion in this bill is not nearly enough from the studies we've done. You need about $10 billion, and we're going to be offering amendments to try to get it there. But they put --

MR. MAC NEIL: And get it out of the prevention provisions?

REP. McCOLLUM: Well, if it takes taking some of it out of the prevention stage, we should. We were not allowed to offer an amendment to this bill to set up a trust fund like the Senate has in which we hoped we could use the personnel reductions that have already been voted on by Congress in order to save the money and put it over into prisons. So wherever we can get it, I think the first priority has to be on building the prisons and on strengthening that truth in sentencing area, because the bill as it's now written has no teeth in it in this area. It does not require that states change their laws to require that those who are violent repeat offenders serve at least 85 percent of their sentences before the money for those prisons is going to go there. So those two are big deficiencies; the money and the fact that there's no eligibility requirement in this bill for the states to make the changes for truth in sentencing.

MR. MAC NEIL: Congressman Scott, how does the prevention/punishment balance strike you?

REP. SCOTT: I think the prevention initiatives are very strong, but let me just react to some of the disparaging remarks that have been made about some who do not support the three time loser bill and do not support some of the other initiatives that increase incarceration. We have an incarceration rate -- the incarceration rate in China, for example, is 111 per 100,000, South Africa is No 2 at 311. There are several jurisdictions in my district that have incarceration rates in excess of 3,000 per 100,000, ten times worse than South Africa that's in second place. I support that. What I have suggested is if we're going to spend more money, then it ought to go to initiatives that will make a difference. When you talk about truth in sentencing, I think we ought to have truth in legislation. We have to look at how much it's going to cost to make any meaningful difference in, in incarceration. We're spending -- we have studied abolishing parole in Virginia; that price tag, to abolish parole and have people essentially serve their whole sentence, at $2.6 billion just for Virginia. Interestingly, if you abolish parole, the people that are not affected at all are the most dangerous criminals that couldn't make parole. So you've spent $2.6 billion, and the most dangerous criminals don't get to spend another day. The only people you punish are those that were less of a risk. So I think if you're going to use incarceration as an initiative to try to reduce crime, you ought to be honest with the people and tell exactly what you're going to spend. Since we don't have an infinite amount of money, if you spend it on incarceration, you couldn't spend it where it made some difference. Let's look at the job corps, for instance.

REP. SCHUMER: Well, let me just say about that what we've tried to do is not only spend some more money on prisons for the violent criminals, although not as much as Bill McCollum likes and more than Bobby Scott would want, we've also tried to rationalize the system so that all too often because of certain minimum mandatory sentences -- in some areas I think minimum mandatories are appropriate -- but for instance, we've said any person who uses a small amount of drugs would get a five-year minimum. And so the prisons fill up with first-time, non-violent drug offenders, and then I think, as Bobby Scott correctly points out, some of the violent criminals go free. And what we've done is we've reduced the mandatory minimum for the first-time, non-violent drug offender. We've provided an escape valve, so that we might focus the existing prison resources on those who commit the most violent crimes. As I said, you know, I think this debate is sort of classic. Each side is not totally happy with the bill, and each side would restructure it their own way.

MR. MAC NEIL: Let me just ask Congressman --

REP. SCHUMER: But that's what's led to the deadlock, Robin, in the past, and we've tried to find a middle way with the President's proposal.

MR. MAC NEIL: Okay. Let me ask, in addition to getting a bill through the House, you're going to have to reconcile a bill with the Senate. The Senate wants to spend even more money, $22 billion, I think, and it is -- it wants 100,000, double the number of policemen your bill proposes, and goes into areas like banning a whole category of assault rifles and so on. How are you going to - - how are you going to accommodate that kind of thing?

REP. SCHUMER: Well, the Senate has put together one provision that I think is very good, that the President supports and that I will support in the Conference Committee and I think so will the majority of our conferees, which is a trust fund. How are we going to pay for this? Is this going to be more talk out of Washington and no dollars? The answer is no, because for the 265,000 first federal employees that retire their positions are not going to be refilled. They're going to attrit. And the money for them, that would have paid their salaries, is going to go directly into this trust fund. It's $22.5 billion. And then we will use that money to divide up among the various, among the various needs. It isn't enough, but that will happen.

MR. MAC NEIL: Is that designed to answer the objections some have raised that the Congress is about to mandate and offer the largess of say fifty or a hundred thousand new policemen for now but then won't go on funding that in the future?

REP. McCOLLUM: Well, let me say --

REP. SCHUMER: Let me just answer that. For five years -- we pay for 75 percent of those for five years. And I know some localities are saying pay for 100 percent of it forever. I think a match is important so that every locality -- that a locality applies --

MR. MAC NEIL: Let me just give Mr. McCollum time to get back in here, because --

REP. SCHUMER: It will be renewed, is all I want to say, after five years.

REP. McCOLLUM: There's something missing here from this bill as well. I agree with Chuck on the trust fund, and we've got to do that, but this bill does not have some things in it because we're not allowed to offer amendments to do these things. For example, police have been asking all over the country that we do a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule to let more evidence in to get convictions instead of letting people off the hook on technicalities. We have passed that in the House three or four times, but we're not allowed to offer it. I'll tell you something else that's missing. This bill doesn't address the criminal alien question and the 25 percent of the population in our prisons today are aliens. Chuck's going to tell me that we're going to eventually address those --

REP. SCHUMER: We're going to do an amelioration bill.

REP. McCOLLUM: We ought to be doing it now because we have a limited amount of time. This bill also doesn't address all the things on the stalking issue and the child issue. There are things like -- for example, many of us would like to have what's in the Senate bill --

MR. MAC NEIL: Congressman, I hate to --

REP. McCOLLUM: -- in the House.

MR. MAC NEIL: I hate to do this.

REP. McCOLLUM: That doubles the punishment.

MR. MAC NEIL: Our time is more limited than yours right now. So I thank you very much, all three Congressmen. FOCUS - SPECIAL SESSION

MR. LEHRER: Now anti-crime legislation at the state level. While Washington was drafting its crime bill, legislatures in a number of states were also responding to the public outcry about crime. The state legislature in North Carolina recently completed a special seven-week session called solely to consider anti-crime measure. We have a report from John Bason of the University of North Carolina Center for public television in Raleigh-Durham.

REBEKAH CRISP, Crime Victim: He stabbed me one last time for the twenty-third time, and he left me for death.

MR. BASON: Rebekah Crisp's story and hundreds like it led North Carolina Governor Jim Hunt to make a televised address announcing a special legislative session on crime.

GOV. JIM HUNT, NorthCarolina: Good evening. A few months ago, a woman pumping gas just three blocks from this Executive Mansion was abducted, brutally beaten, raped.

MR. BASON: One month later, Hunt addressed the special session on opening day and told lawmakers the public was calling for action.

GOV. JIM HUNT: They will not tolerate excuses. They will not tolerate wasting time and money. They will not tolerate destruction by other issues, and they will not tolerate inaction.

MR. BASON: The governor presented the legislature with an anti- crime package that included an ambitious statewide after school program.

GOV. JIM HUNT: To give middle school kids something positive and constructive to do in the afternoons, a safe place to be with adults who can teach them values and discipline.

MR. BASON: For the convicted criminal, he advocated a "get tough" approach like no parole for first degree murderers.

GOV. JIM HUNT: They should get the death penalty, or they should get life without parole, period. They should never get out. It means three strikes and you're out for violent felons in our state.

MR. BASON: Lawmakers took the opportunity to talk tough with their constituents and warn criminals that they would be facing hard time in North Carolina's prisons.

DAVID BALMER, North Carolina State Representative: We stacked our sailors five and six high in our battleships and in our destroyers, and I think we can stack our prisoners at least three high in existing cells that we have.

MR. BASON: The rise in violent juvenile crime led to a debate over stiffer penalties for youngsters.

RICHARD CONDOR, North Carolina State Senate: These people know that they can get by with it, and they're going to do these crimes, because they know that 'till they get to 16, they might be safe.

MR. BASON: Advocate prevention and rehabilitation programs also weighed in. They said their approaches should not be short changed in the rush to get tough. Mike Roark lobbied for early intervention.

MIKE ROARK, Prison Reform Activist: We all want to be safe, and there are some people who need to be locked up for long periods of time. But that's not going to stop the person from getting there in the first place.

MR. BASON: Roark and other like-minded supporters of prevention programs backed a bill to put more social workers and psychologists in the public schools. Advocates of gun control hope to cash in on momentum from congressional passage of the Brady Bill. One lawmaker, who is also a member of the National Rifle Association, worked for weeks to make a gun bill palatable to his organization. The NRA could not be convinced, leaving the legislator frustrated and angry.

BILLY RICHARDSON, North Carolina State Representative: We'll go ahead forward with the bill with or without the NRA. They don't run the general assembly; we do. And they've had plenty of input in this bill, and I think it's time to go on forward.

MR. BASON: However, this bill and all others opposed by the gun lobby did not go forward. House Speaker Dan Blue, who supported some gun control bills in this special session, said the NRA used misleading tactics to scare gun owners and lawmakers.

DAN BLUE, North Carolina House Speaker: And you focus all of the resources of that national organization on a small state like us and a legislature that's not used to having tens of millions of dollars trained at the representatives or the members a month before an election, and so that makes for some difficulty. And I think that that's what we've experienced.

MR. BASON: When the crime session was in full swing, North Carolinians were stunned when a young black man described by his friends as kind and mild-mannered was arrested for a string of rape-murders.

LISA COOLEY: The city of Charlotte is still a city in shock.

BOB INMAN: Police say he's a serial killer who has been walking our streets, killing young women for nearly two years.

MR. BASON: Twenty-eight-year-old Henry Louis Wallace allegedly killed 10 women in the Charlotte area, all of them young, all of them black, and all of them known to Wallace. The first was in May of 1992. Four of Wallace's victims had died since the special session convened. Ironically, get tough measures, even if they'd already been in place, would not have prevented the killing the spree. The legislature passed a three strikes and you're out bill, but Wallace had not been convicted of enough violent offenses before he began strangling women in Charlotte to have been caught by that law. Legislators enacted a life without parole sentence for some especially violent crimes but Wallace would not have fallen under that law either. Although he'd been charged with previous sexual assaults, he had never been convicted. But one measure which passed during the session might have made a difference had it been in place. Currently, police departments, courts, corrections, and counties all keep separate records, which makes it very difficult to get a complete picture of an offender's past. Better communications might have identified Wallace before he killed so many victims.

MIKE ROARK, Prison Reform-Activist: One of the things that the General Assembly has done in the special session is to appropriate moneys that will be used by the Department of Correction to upgrade their computer facilities. You have to know the person's record, because the nature and the length, and the seriousness of the punishment depends upon prior record to an extent.

MR. BASON: The goal of the new measure is to combine all records on a network and open it to all state and local law agencies. They will also be linked to FBI records in Washington. Rebekah Crisp favored a few of the get tough laws but she told lawmakers that there's no substitute for attacking crime at its root causes.

REBEKA CRISP: One of the things that angered me about my assailant was that he is a statistic. He was a young black man high on crack and unemployed. He had recently lost his mother. What I came face to face with, what I defended my life against that night was a hopelessness, anger, hatred, and uncontrollable rage.

MR. BASON: In the special session on crime, North Carolina lawmakers spent about $90 million for punishment and about 66 million for prevention. They made room for more inmates in the prison system in part by setting aside money to rent prison space in other states. They appropriate money to expand substance abuse treatment for prisoners, and they increased some penalties. They might have increased a lot more penalties had it not been for a new computer program that calculates the cost of any change in sentencing policy.

DAN BLUE: The governor modified many of his proposals based on what these projections indicated the inmate population would be, because it became rather obvious that it could cost us another $1/2 billion just to accommodate the increased population that we would generate with some of these special bills in this session.

MR. BASON: One bill that had to be changed was the governor's proposals to add five years to the sentence of anyone using a gun while committing a crime.

SPOKESMAN: Once they ran the figures on that, theydetermined that that would call for at least 5,000 new beds at a cost of millions of dollars in the foreseeable future, and they backed away.

MR. BASON: The bill was changed to apply to only a handful of offenders. House Speaker Dan Blue says that although the computer program may have caused lawmakers some discomfort, it underscored the need for fiscal responsibility.

DAN BLUE: And so we're using those computer models to more reasonably allocate our resources, and I think it's a tremendous model, and as we make those projections, everybody accepts them. And so as you make those decisions, you make them with a lot more information and so the decision ends up being one a lot more intelligent.

MR. BASON: Lawmakers ultimately spent even more money than the governor requested to help prevent youngsters from getting into crime in the first place.

DAN BLUE: I think that those in the long run will prove to be some of the most valuable investments that we have made. It's much like a story that I used to tell about a fellow sitting on the bank of the river, and as he sat on the bank of the river, he saw a man go by who was drowning.

DAN BLUE: And he reaches in and pulls him out, and he looks up and he sees two more people coming down the river drowning. He dives in and pulls them out. He looks down and he sees a family coming down the river drowning. He and the friend that he had saved reach in and pull the family out. And after two or three other people floated down the river drowning, the thought hit him and he looked over at his friend and he said, you know, it's time that one of us went up to the head of that river and find out why so many people are still falling in.

MR. BASON: After seven weeks, the session ended. Lawmakers had spent more money than they'd expected to, more than half the state's discretionary funds for the coming year. When they return to Raleigh in May for their regular budget session, they'll see what getting tough on crime really costs. The governor has hinted at how he might try to handle the situation. He's asking all state agencies to draw up plans for a 2 percent cut in their budgets, a cutback in state spending of about $180 million. NEWSMAKER

MR. MAC NEIL: Next tonight, a Newsmaker interview with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. As we reported, the mediation effort led by Dr. Kissinger in South Africa collapsed today. The mediators were trying to resolve a political crisis over demands by the Zulu-dominated Inkatha Freedom Party for an autonomous state. To press their demands, Inkatha has boycotted the country's first all-race elections taking place in just two weeks. Charlayne Hunter-Gault spoke with Dr. Kissinger in Johannesburg.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Dr. Kissinger, thank you for joining us.

HENRY KISSINGER, Former Secretary of State: Glad to be here.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: What went wrong? Is there one specific thing on which all of this turned, because that's what's been suggested, for example, by Mr. Buthelezi?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: Formally it turned on whether the issue of elections should be included in the mediation or not. The parties could not agree on that.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Who said it should and who said it shouldn't?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: Well, the curious thing is that the two parties changed their position in the course of the entire negotiation. At one point Inkatha said it should be included and the ANC said it shouldn't be, i.e., a few weeks ago. Now it was reversed. We, the mediators, took a very strong position on the issue, but whether or not there are elections, and especially the date of elections, is not an appropriate subject for mediation. That is a political decision which does not lend itself to compromise. And so we said from the beginning, even before we came, that we would not get involved in the issue of when elections should take place. The elections are now established by law. Of course, they can be changed, but outsiders have no standing in that debate, so we were never going to be involved in any discussion on elections.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So is this some mischief going on here, because there's been the suggestion --

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: No --

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: -- that the reason that there was an agreement on Sunday, and then suddenly a new document was written that had language in it that allowed Mr. Buthelezi to object to the document. Is there something going on here that we can't see?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: Well, the South African government which had been on the sidelines entered the mediation as a party so they had some ideas they wanted to put into, into the document. I think it's a mistake to look at it only in terms of the immediate issue because if you look at the ANC problem, they have a long way, through a lot of suffering, within sight of election. So to have elections postponed is a very painful thing to them. As Mr. Mandela said in one of his speeches, to postpone one's freedom is something that one shouldn't ask. One the other hand, the Inkatha having removed itself from the campaign -- and maybe they made a mistake from their point of view in doing this -- but any rate they now face the problem that whatever happened would take place in a parliament in which by their own choice they're going to be represented.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But in light of the failure of this mediation to get off the ground, how do you assess the prospect of a free and fair election and the prospect of a peaceful transition?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: Well, I rate the prospect of a free and fair election in most parts of the country very high. Of course in the areas in which there may be violence, it will be more complicated.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And a peaceful transition?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: Sooner or later this issue between the parties has to be settled. The Zulus are the largest single ethnic group in the country. And their relationship with their neighbors will sooner or later have to be regulated. And, indeed, the ANC has made some proposals in that direction by special recognition to the Zulus, by offering special recognition and the special status to the king of Zulus.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, even before you came, there was very little optimism here on the ground that this mediation could be successful. Do you have any second thoughts about having come?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: No. Everybody felt that if we refused, something that was called a consolidated term of reference, consolidated agenda, and therefore, it would then take out the other nine people from eight countries, that South Africans might try to blame us for -- for blame the international community for having failed them by giving them a hand at the last minute. And so I rated the chance of success much less than 50/50. But, nevertheless, we all felt that we had an obligation to try this to see whether we could bridge these gaps. We are not sorry we came.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But at the same time, having said what you just said, are you now saying that if this doesn't work out that the South Africans have only themselves to blame?

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: No. I'm saying they have history to blame, and they have circumstances to blame. They can also take credit for having come a long, long way. When I first came here as secretary of state, bringing an American African foreign service officer was considered a somewhat courageous or extraordinary thing. Now black leadership will take over in this country with the cooperation of the white community, and they have formally dedicated themselves to a non-racial, non-sexist democratic society. I think this is a historic achievement compared to which our mediation is a blip and which can be resumed either by us or by others at an appropriate moment because these issues will remain.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Dr. Kissinger, thank you.

DR. HENRY KISSINGER: A great pleasure to be here. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Thursday, two U.S. helicopters were accidentally shot down by two U.S. jet fighters in Iraq's northern no-fly zone. Twenty-six people were killed, including fifteen Americans. On the NewsHour tonight, Defense Sec. Perry said he has asked the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to review procedures for the no-fly zones in Iraq as well as Bosnia. And Serb forces surrounded two U.N. compounds near Sarajevo. They demanded the return of weapons they surrendered in February under a NATO ultimatum. Good night, Robin.

MR. MAC NEIL: Good night, Jim. That's the NewsHour tonight. We'll see you tomorrow night with al analysis from Shields and Gigot among other things. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.