The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday, the unemployment rate dipped to 6.7 percent last month. President Bush said he was encouraged by the news and repeated his plan to veto a jobless benefits bill. The President also said he was reluctant to use force in Haiti, unless American lives are at stake. We'll have details in our News Summary in a moment. Judy Woodruff's in Washington tonight. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: On the NewsHour tonight, we go first to the battle brewing between the White House and Congress over unemployment benefits as seen by Budget Director Darman and Senate Majority Leader Mitchell. Then Robert Gates winds up his public testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. Charlayne Hunter-Gault talks to the deposed president of Haiti, and Gergen & Shields analyze all the week's politics. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MacNeil: The nation's unemployment rate dropped slightly in September, down 1/10 of a percent, to 6.7 percent. The rate had held constant in July and August at 6.8 percent. President Bush said the news was one more sign that the economy is strengthening. He made his comments at a White House news conference where he also repeated his intention to veto a bill passed by Congress earlier this week that would extend unemployment benefits by up to 20 weeks beyond the current 26 week limit.

PRES. BUSH: Although I believe that the economy is on the right track, let me be the first to say all is not well. I'm deeply concerned about those who are out of work. Unemployment benefits are important. Congress should provide a responsible extension of such benefits. The bill that we've been for for some time, the Dole Bill, does just exactly that. And I'll sign a bill that helps people, and also protects the overall economy by keeping to the budget agreement. As I said, there is a bill in Congress to do that right now. And if Congress gives me that bill, I will sign it immediately.

MR. MacNeil: The Dole Bill, which the President endorses, would extend benefits up to 10 weeks. It would pay for itself through the sale of government-owned radio frequencies and collection of overdue student loans. Democrats in Congress criticized the President for his position and they had a different interpretation of today's unemployment news. Sen. Al Gore of Tennessee made these comments on the Senate floor.

SEN. GORE: We're in a recovery, we're told. But the problem is Americans don't see any difference between the recovery and the recession. How do we tell the difference? The unemployment rate continues at this very high level. And while the administration has insisted that the current recession is -- and I use their words - - short and shallow, the same could be said for their statements, and for the President's domestic economic agenda, short and shallow.

MR. MacNeil: We'll have more on the unemployment figures right after the News Summary. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: A nine-member delegation from the Organization of American States arrived in Haiti today. Their mission is to convince military coup leaders to step down. Haiti's deposed President, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, said he hoped that such diplomatic efforts succeed so that military force will not be needed. Aristide met with President Bush at the White House this morning. Mr. Bush today froze all Haitian government assets in this country. He said the U.S. was committed to restoring democracy in Haiti and returning Aristide to office. President Aristide told the NewsHour that his sources in Haiti told him this morning that the death toll has reached 500. He also said that he expects the coup to be over in a matter of hours or days. We'll have that interview later in the program.

MR. MacNeil: CIA Director Designate Robert Gates faced another round of questioning from the Senate Intelligence Committee today. The Committee continued to inquire about Gates' alleged slanting of intelligence reports for political reasons and what he knew about the Iran-Contra affair. At his news conference, President Bush dismissed the accusations that Gates had slanted intelligence estimates.

PRES. BUSH: I think it's an outrageous assertion against a very honest man, a thorough going professional, and that's the worst charge that can be leveled against an intelligence officer, and I know Bob Gates, and I know he would never cook the estimates.

MS. WOODRUFF: The President also today denied reports that a date for the Mideast Peace Conference had been set. He said diplomatic efforts in the next few weeks would determine the timing and chances for a conference. Israeli Prime Minister Shamir said in a statement that obstacles to the talks remained, in particular, agreement on who may belong to a joint Jordanian-Palestinian delegation. United Nations inspectors detained in Baghdad last week said today that the Iraqis were just twelve to eighteen months away from full scale production of nuclear weapons. Inspection Team Leader David Kay arrived in Vienna to report to the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency. He said his team also found evidence that Iraq was testing a missile capable of carrying nuclear weapons.

MR. MacNeil: Fighting in Yugoslavia continued today, despite new diplomatic efforts to stop it. The federal army pressed its offensive across the breakaway Croatian republic and was reported to be closing in on its capital, Zagreb. We have a report narrated by Vera Frankel of Worldwide Television News.

MS. FRANKEL: By late Friday afternoon, the fighting in Croatia had assumed its own set of dynamics and was virtually a civil war. Federal forces announced a partial mobilization and continued to launch ground and air attacks on Croatian positions, this long after an agreement in the Hague that they be suspended. Croatians now believe they're engaged in a war for survival. As ground forces closed in on Croatia's capital, Zagreb, federal air force planes have been busy in the skies above the city. Jets rocketed a TV tower just five miles outside, taking broadcasts off the air. Air raid sirens sent people running for shelter. Federal troops were reported within 20 miles of the approaches to Zagreb and locked in fierce battle with Croatian national guardsmen. Popupsko, South of the city, was the scene of some of the bloodiest fighting with local hospitals overflowing. Some way to the East in the town of Noska, this local police station received a direct hit from the air. It had been used as a local command center for the Croatian national guard. It was the last major town in the area still under Croatian control. By late in the day, the agreement in the Hague to halt the fighting looked increasingly irrelevant. Neither side on the ground appears any longer willing to listen to the politicians, either their own or the EC's. Back in Yugoslavia, federal, air, and sea assaults are now focusing on the historic adriatic town of Dubrovnik. The army is threatening to attack Croatian forces which have retreated into the medieval walled city.

MR. MacNeil: There was also fierce fighting in the Soviet republic of Georgia. It happened in the capital, Tblisi, where rebel members of the Georgian national guard fought troops loyal to the republic's president. At least one person was reported killed. It was the worst clash in more than a month of unrest against the rule of President Zviad Gamsahurdia, who has been accused by his opponents of imposing a dictatorship in the republic.

MS. WOODRUFF: Japan's prime minister, Toshiki Kaifu, has decided not to seek re-election. Close colleagues said that Kaifu would step down at the end of this month. The prime minister's decision came after leading party members withdrew their support for a key political reform package. Kaifu proposed the package in August, in response to a series of political and financial scandals in Japan. In Madrid today, 26 nations signed a landmark agreement banning oil exploration and mining on Antarctica for the next half century. The accord also regulates marine pollution and waste disposal. Up to 3,000 people, mostly scientists, live and work in Antarctica each summer. Environmentalists hailed today's agreement as a major victory. That's it for our summary of the day's news. Just ahead on the NewsHour, the fight over unemployment benefits, the Gates confirmation hearings, Haitian President Aristide, and Gergen & Shields. FOCUS - PINK SLIP

MR. MacNeil: First tonight, the unemployment story. The percentage of Americans out of work dropped slightly last month, down by 1/10 of a percent to 6.7 percent of the work force. Despite the nearly 8 1/2 million Americans out of work, President Bush told reporters he saw encouraging economic signs.

PRES. BUSH: Well, today's unemployment figures show the economy is moving in the right direction. The drop in unemployment is one more sign that the economy is strengthening. Data released just this week showed new car sales were up, housing sales were up. Purchasing Managers Index was bullish on the manufacturing sector, and people should take note of the fact that interest rates are falling to levels that we haven't seen since 1977.

MR. MacNeil: President Bush, heartened by the improved unemployment figure, repeated his threat to veto the Democratic bill to help the long-term unemployed. On Tuesday, Congress passed the bill to increase the current 26 weeks of unemployment benefits by up to 20 additional weeks. The estimated cost, $6.4 billion, would be paid for by existing moneys in a federal trust fund. Instead, the President favors a more limited measure sponsored by Sen. Dole that has not passed the Congress. Sen. Dole's bill would add up to 10 weeks of benefits at a cost of $1.9 billion. That would be financed in part by the sale of unused radio frequencies.

HELEN THOMAS, UPI: What should 10 million people who are out of work and the 95,000 people in Michigan who were taken off welfare roles, what should they do now to survive until the economy does rebound?

PRES. BUSH: They should demand of their Congress to pass a bill that the President can sign. And I'm committed to such a bill to extend unemployment benefit compensation, and I'd like to have it passed and sent down here. And if it means vetoing a bad bill so that the people that are working and the people whose families are hurting but are just making ends meet so that they can have a better shot, and I'm talking about not breaking the budget agreement,t hat's what I want to do. I'm for unemployment benefit extension and doing something about it, and I'm also for protecting all those that aren't working and that are working who pay taxes. And one way to do that is to keep the Democratic Congress from busting the budget agreement.

MS. THOMAS: Will that feed the people, pay the rent and help them to get jobs --

PRES. BUSH: Yes, my --

MS. THOMAS: -- at this particular point?

PRES. BUSH: -- program will, yeah.

MR. MacNeil: At a hearing this morning, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics did not interpret the latest figures as a strong sign of recovery.

JANET NORWOOD, Bureau of Labor Statistics: While there has been no further worsening in either measure since spring, we have yet to see any sustained signs of a rebound in the labor market.

MR. MacNeil: Democrats believe that argues for overriding the President's veto when and if he makes good on his threat.

SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY, [D] Massachusetts: This morning, new unemployment figures confirmed what the country already knows, this recession is not over. The economy is still in trouble. Workers are still hurting. Unemployment continues at unacceptable levels, with no significant change.

SEN. JAMES SASSER, [D] Tennessee: Those who are out of work today through no fault of their own, who want to work, who are actively looking for jobs, are paying for the failure of this administration's economic program.

MR. MacNeil: For more debate on the unemployment situation, we have Richard Darman, Director of the Office of Management & Budget, who joins us from a studio on Capitol Hill, and Senate Democratic Majority Leader George Mitchell, who joins us from Portland in his home state of Maine. Mr. Darman, the President says he feels deeply concerned for the unemployed. How does it help them to veto a bill which would give them 20 more weeks of benefits?

MR. DARMAN: Well, let's first make clear what the President said he's for and what would help them directly. He said he's for the Dole bill, and that would immediately get additional benefits to unemployed in all 50 states, a minimum, an additional six weeks of benefits on a basis that is paid for. The problem with the alternative approach is that it is simply not paid for, and because it's not paid for, it could actually make things worse over the long-term. It could lead people to believe that that's the way we're going to continue to finance things, much in the way that the House of Representatives has run the House Bank, never paying for things. If that is the way we're going to do business, then long- term interest rates are going to stay high and unemployment will be higher than it should. So what we need is the Dole bill, and we also need measures to increase economic growth, many of which the President has proposed, and many of which are available to the Senate to enact and the President to sign.

MR. MacNeil: Sen. Mitchell, the President, Mr. Darman has just repeated it, says the $6.4 billion your bill, which incidentally he's now the alternative bill, would, would cost, would bust the budget.

SEN. MITCHELL: Well, first off, the President wasn't worried about the budget when he declared an emergency to help people in Turkey, to help people in Bangladesh, to help people in Iraq, to help people in Israel. He's only concerned about the budget when it affects Americans. He's ready, willing, and eager to help people overseas, but never willing to help Americans. Secondly, Mr. Darman used the word "paid for" four times in less than a minute. The President's proposal to pay for it is as phony as a $6 bill. And let me explain. Under the law now, if a person takes out a student loan and defaults on it, the government can collect by withholding from any income tax refund that person may be entitled to. That law expires in 1994. The proposal by the President to "pay for it" is to pass a law now extending that law in the future, '94, '95, '96. Not one cent will come in under that until 1994. What Mr. Darman does is because it's a loan program, it goes under something called "credit accounting reform" and they impute a current cash value of a billion dollars on money that will not be received until 1994. It's as phony as you can come up with. There isn't any payment for it. And they'll borrow the money just as under any other proposal. Third, there is an existing trust fund, it's got $8 billion in it; it's for this purpose, extended benefits. The administration doesn't want to pay benefits, even though the trust fund is for that purpose. And fourth, and finally, the President's plan is woefully inadequate. It would provide benefits to only 14 percent of those eligible under the so-called "reachback provisions," that is, people who have previously unemployed way back to March, and it would actually reduce benefits by restricting eligibility for veterans. It's a very inadequate, unfair plan.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Darman, how would it bust the budget to take $6.4 billion out of a trust fund that is there for that purpose, to pay unemployment benefits?

MR. DARMAN: The trust fund is simply an accounting measure. The money would have to be borrowed. And that borrowing is borrowing like any other Treasury borrowing. We're running a deficit. This would increase the deficit, increase borrowing, increase interest burden for the present and for the future generation. That's the problem with our current financing system. And it has to stop. If I might, may I comment on the question of whether the President's, Sen. Dole's proposal is paid for. Sen. Mitchell said that it -- I think he said -- was phony. I think, if I may say, Senator, that's an unfair characterization. I believe the Congressional Budget Office, which is frequently viewed with respect by the Senator, I believe the Congressional Budget Office, itself, would score the proposal as being paid for. In any case, the provision you talked about, we score it zero. That isn't what we say pays for it. What pays for it a change in law that would improve existing enforcement right away for debt collection by toughening the current system, not just extending current law, but more importantly, as suggested in the introduction to this program, selling portions of the electromagnetic spectrum that the government now uses but doesn't need, selling it on the private marketplace, and getting real dollars in the door to cover the expenses. And I know the argument is sometimes made that that could be sold more slowly for more. The reality is we've asked and asked to have that sold by the Congress and the Congress doesn't allow it to be sold so the government ends up giving it away. This is a way to get money for something that the government controls and should get money for.

MR. MacNeil: Gentlemen, I don't think we're going to get agreement on the funding in this time we have available. Let's go on to the other aspect of this. Sen. Mitchell, when it passed in the Senate, your bill didn't get a 2/3 majority. If you can't override the President's veto, will you accept the Republican bill, the 10 weeks' provision?

SEN. MITCHELL: Well, we'll deal with that when we get to it, but we think that the plan that we proposed should be adopted. We've already had several Republican Senators switch one way. What's to prevent them from switching back the other way, particularly if they'll just go to their states and talk with the unemployed people, visit unemployment offices and see what we're doing. Let's be clear, Robin. This plan by the administration is not a serious step to deal with this problem. It wasn't proposed until after the Democratic plan had been drafted, introduced, and passed. All it is is an effort to prevent a serious solution to the problem from being enacted by the Democratic majority and enable Republicans to say, well, we really are for something, even though it won't deal at all with the seriousness of the problem. And I might comment on the spectrum, the sale that Mr. Darman referred to, he, of course, identified the weakness of the argument in advance by pointing out that they're going to force the sale of this spectrum.

MR. MacNeil: You mean radio frequencies, the spectrum is radio frequencies?

SEN. MITCHELL: That's right, but by next July, and thereby create a fire sale situation where if it did occur in that period of time, they would return probably 1/3 of the actual value. Talk about a giveaway. That really is a giveaway just to create the political posture of appearing to deal with a very serious problem, which the administration until now has ignored and refused to acknowledge. It was, after all, the President and Mr. Darman who said for several months first we weren't in a recession, then when the figures were indisputable, they said it was short and shallow. Well, now it's in its 14th month. Two more months it'll be the longest recession since the great depression of 1933. And now they're saying, we're in a recovery, 24,000 jobs were created last month, and most economists will tell you in a recovery in this country, there's between 150,000 and 200,000 jobs a month being created. The recession is not over, we're not in a recovery, and this administration proposal, I think, is wholly inadequate to the task.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Darman, isn't the Senator right that you didn't have a proposal on extending the benefits until after the Democratic bill had gone through and been vetoed by the President? Then, just very recently, Sen. Dole came up, on the Republicans' behalf, with this bill. I mean, the President says he's concerned about the unemployed, but you didn't have a proposal to extend their benefits until, as he says, the Democrats came up with this, right?

MR. DARMAN: Yes, that's a fair point. In fact, what we said early on was that the economic statistics were very favorable in May, that the economy looked as though it had turned. And, indeed, most economists continue to say that, that it looks as though the recession ended in May. The problem since then has been that the recovery has not been as strong as we would have liked. It has been almost as strong as predicted, but not as strong as we would have liked. And so in this context, we agreed to support this alternative. I may say we could end the debate immediately and get benefits to everyone tomorrow morning if the Senate would send down the Dole bill, and in all 50 states, the unemployed would receive at least an additional six weeks of benefits. And if that turns out not to be enough, then we can review the matter at some subsequent point. But it could end the debate right away. I should emphasize also that in the context of growth that is not as strong as we all would like, it also is an argument for enacting measures to spur this economy, such as measures to encourage greater savings and investment in home ownership and research and development, things that will make more jobs for more people over the long-term.

MR. MacNeil: Senator, what ideas do the Democrats have that the White House isn't using to get the economy moving faster?

SEN. MITCHELL: We have a seven point program which we've proposed, and if we had any cooperation in the White House, we could enact, including reform of the unemployment insurance system as we proposed, lower interest rates, which I say the Federal Reserve is doing. And we commend them for that. They ought to go even lower. Dealing with the credit crunch, the President just discovered it last week. Where has he been for the past nine months? Banks aren't making loans. I had a meeting with Sec. Brady way back early this year at which we urged action. We've gotten nothing from the administration on that. Middle class tax cut, the President today repeated his old bromide that we'll cut taxes primarily for those making more than $200,000 a year. We say we ought to cut taxes for people in the middle, not those at the top. The President wants to cut taxes for a family making $300,000 a year. We say why not cut taxes to 10 families making $30,000 a year? We want to speed up action on the highway program. The President does want that. He's asked for that. We also want to reform health care. He's said nothing on that. Education, that's a photo op proposal by the President. And we want to increase savings and other investment incentives as well. We've got a good comprehensive program. Robin, if I might make just one additional point, Mr. Darman acknowledged the President didn't have a plan here and their proposal is only a reaction to ours. Contrast that with when there's a crisis overseas. The President came up with a plan on Iraq. The President came up with the plan on Turkey. The President came up with the plan on Bangladesh. When someone is in need overseas, the President is right there with a plan right out of the box. When Americans are in need, it's unwilling, reluctant, no, we can't do this, we can't do that. Suddenly, the budget, which doesn't seem to matter when it's spending overseas, is a big hurdle. I think this demonstrates the lack of concern for what's occurring in this country, with this economy. It's in serious trouble. We've got to act on it.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Darman, with the -- the President quoted the most optimistic signs of recovery today, new car sales, recent home sales, and so on. There are a whole lot of very negative statistics, which if somebody wanted to make the other case about the slowness of the recovery could be made, orders for durable goods falling severely in August, the Gross National Product falling 1/2 percent in the second quarter, consumer spending rising only a tenth of a percent in August, factory orders down 1.9 percent in August and so on, the -- here's what I want to ask -- are you now beginning to think in the White House that simply getting, encouraging the Fed to lower interest rates, which it's done, and now exhorting the banks to lend more, isn't going to be enough and that something unusual and extraordinary will have to be done, given the slowness of the recovery?

MR. DARMAN: No. Right now, put us aside and put congressional forecasters aside, and look at private forecasters. Over 50 private forecasters, known as the Blue Chip forecasters, all, every single one of them, are now predicting that economic growth will be positive right straight on through the next, at the end of next year. So the recovery, I think, will be secure if the credit crunch is properly addressed and the Federal Reserve follows appropriate policies. The problem is that growth won't be as strong as it should be. We should all want to be stronger than merely just 1 or 2 percent real growth, or 2 1/2 percent real growth. To get it to be as strong as we would like it, we need additional measures of the type that I and the President have already spoken about. And we have a fundamental difference there as to approach with Sen. Mitchell, and we've been unable to resolve that, not just Sen. Mitchell.

MR. MacNeil: We are unable to resolve things further this evening. But, gentlemen, thank you both for joining us. Judy.

MR. DARMAN: Thank you.

MS. WOODRUFF: Still ahead on the NewsHour, Robert Gates on Capitol Hill, the President of Haiti, and Gergen & Shields. FOCUS - PERSUASIVE PERFORMANCE?

MS. WOODRUFF: We turn now to the Senate Intelligence Committee's hearings on whether Robert Gates should be confirmed to head the CIA. Gates returned to the witness stand today for what may be his last public appearance in a hearing which has shifted from his knowledge of the Iran-contra arms deal to his performance as deputy director of the CIA. Today's session had a surprise start. Correspondent Roger Mudd reports.

MR. MUDD: The hearings began this morning as no other hearings do. The chairman, Democrat David Boren, decided to serve as a witness for the nominee. Boren, troubled by Sen. Ernest Hollings' announcement that he would oppose Gates, said he wanted Hollings to know what he knew about Gates.

SEN. DAVID BOREN, Chairman, Intelligence Committee: You know, I can tell you from my personal experience that the person who was most forceful in all the intelligence community in the executive branch in advocating full cooperation and full access to the new audit unit of this committee of any information we ever wanted was the nominee, Mr. Gates. We know who made the most forceful in-house arguments, taking on some of the others of the President's top advisors to argue on behalf of the independent statutory inspector general for the CIA. It was this nominee, Mr. Gates. And I know, again, he was the most forceful advocate for this committee and for the oversight process and trying to explain even to the President of the United States, who was DCI when the oversight process was not in place, why it's important and why it is appropriate is this nominee, Mr. Gates. So I'd just say to my colleagues I felt I wouldn't be fair to you since in a sense I have the best witness on this particular point in terms of commitment to the congressional oversight process, which I think is an important matter and one which certainly should be weighed among others. And I don't think it would be fair to the nominee to close the public record without putting that into the public record this morning.

MR. MUDD: Boren's comments obviously warmed the hearts of the Republicans but had no visible effect on his fellow Democrats. Sam Nunn of Georgia now says he's moved from favoring Gates to being neutral, and his questioning today, though quiet and not confrontational, was very pointed.

SEN. SAM NUNN, [D] Georgia: Do you believe that President Reagan was misled by intelligence in 1985 and 1986 on the assessment of what was occurring in Iran and on the assessment of the desirability of U.S. arms sales?

ROBERT GATES, CIA Director Nominee: I do not believe he was misled by CIA intelligence, Sen. Nunn. I think that information was -- my personal opinion is that information was provided through the channel of another country to which the White House paid more attention than it did to American intelligence during that period.

SEN. SAM NUNN: But you don't believe there was even inadvertent misleading of the President by the CIA, or by the intelligence community?

MR. GATES: Well, we clearly erred in the May 1985 assessment in saying that the Soviet, in our characterization of the degree of instability in Iran, but I guess what I'm trying to say is that if he was misled, it was because we were in error, not because we were trying to mislead.

SEN. NUNN: Well, let me just read you a couple of quotes from Sec. Shultz in his Iran-contra testimony. Mr. Belnick says, Mr. Secretary, in that battle royal to get out the facts which you waged and which the record reflects that you waged, who was on the other side? Sec. Shultz, while I can't say for sure, I feel that Adm. Poindexter was certainly on the other side. I felt that Director Casey was on the other side of it, and I don't know who else, but they were the principals, end quote. So you're sandwiched all around, the Sec. of State, the findings of the committee later on, which was after the fact, but during that time, your own people felt that the President was being misled, you did not, is that correct?

ROBERT GATES, CIA Director Nominee: Senator, two points. First of all, there is no secret that Mr. Casey and Sec. Shultz disliked each other intensely. In fact, I think during that fall period in 1986, Mr. Casey even tried to get the Sec. of State fired. Second, it's also, I think, no secret that Mr. Casey did not draw as bright a line as he should have in terms of his own role between providing intelligence and trying to influence the policy.

SEN. NUNN: With that one, Mr. Gates, did you ever go and tell the President that, watch out for Mr. Casey? Because you said yesterday, we have to pull him back all the time. Mr. Whipple said he had to stay over here and correct the record after he got through testifying. You were there with him for six years, in one position or the other. Did you ever go tell the President, watch out, the boss means well, but he goes too far and he misstates things and he misrepresents things, and he distorts the record, did you ever tell him that?

MR. GATES: No, sir, and I don't think either one of my predecessors did either.

MR. MUDD: Democrat Howard Metzenbaum's questions about Gates' failure to remember certain conversations and events got a rare rise from the witness.

SEN. HOWARD METZENBAUM, [D] Ohio: Mr. Gates, I thought a little bit in the last 24 hours about your 20 points, and I kept coming back to the 33 non-recollects that you gave this committee and the 40 don't knows. Why didn't you give this committee more full answers than you did?

MR. GATES: Sen. Metzenbaum, I gave this committee in those interrogatories the most honest answers that I could. The way I was able to put together the statement that I hand wrote and read here yesterday morning was through research into the record. Now there is no such record like that in some of the aspects of Iran-contra. As deputy director for Central Intelligence, I had an enormous number of things going across my plate. And one of the things that I found interesting, for example, about October 1986 is that in the course of these hearings I've discovered that not only were all the things I've talked about going on in October 1986, I discovered that there's a major change in Iraqi policy and policy toward Iraq liaison in October. I discover I did the Soviet memo in October. October, those first two weeks in October were a heck of a time, it turned out. And all I'm trying to tell you is that -- and I guess that I am responding with some passion because I am a little annoyed at this notion of selective memory, or selective amnesia to take the other side of it. And the fact of the matter is that I don't, I don't think it is unreasonable that somebody is not going to remember the details of the conversation that took place five or six years ago, or even five or six weeks ago, if there is no written record made of it, and if it falls in the middle of a variety of other things that are going on.

MR. MUDD: At midafternoon, the hearings, which had been openly partisan in a way the committee was not expecting, finally ended with Gates being given the last word.

MR. GATES: This confirmation process, while long -- after all the whole Soviet empire is falling apart in the course of these things -- has been fair, thorough and professional. And for that I thank the committee and its staff. I will close by, again, thanking the President for nominating me, and I will say that I hope that this committee and the full Senate will see fit to return me once again to the agency I love and to which I dedicated my life a long time ago. Thank you.

MR. MUDD: The committee vote, two weeks hence, will not be unanimous. Bradley, Hollings, and Metzenbaum have guaranteed that. NEWSMAKER

MR. MacNeil: Next tonight, a Newsmaker interview with the ousted president of Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Aristide was in Washington today getting President Bush personally to back his return to power. Aristide was forced into exile on Monday, following an insurrection led by elements of the military. Widespread violence in the wake of the coup left more than 150 dead and hundreds wounded. But the military quickly imposed a dusk to dawn curfew and set up patrols in the streets of the capital city, Port Au Prince, to suppress further rebellion. Aristide is president of the first democratically-elected government in Haiti's history. A Roman Catholic priest, he had strong appeal among the nation's many poor citizens, and easily won election last December, with nearly 70 percent of the vote. He inherited the worst poverty in the Americas, the legacy of the dictatorships of the Duvalier family and the military that had strangled the country since the 1930s. It was just last Wednesday that Aristide came to the United Nations seeking massive foreign aid, five days before he was ousted by the coup. Instead of going into quiet exile, he returned to the United States and appealed for help from the Organization of American States. Last night, he also addressed the United Nations Security Council which, like the OAS, urged the restoration of democracy in Haiti and began imposing sanctions against the coup leaders. The Bush administration said that intervention was justified. Today, the President ordered the Haitian government's assets in this country frozen and repeated his call for the restoration of Haiti's democratically-elected government.

REPORTER: Are you willing to go beyond economic pressure to the use of multinational military intervention to defend democracy?

PRES. BUSH: Well, I am very hopeful that this matter can be resolved without such a multilateral force. The United States has been, and properly so, very wary of using U.S. forces in this hemisphere. There's a lesson out there for all presidents. And the lesson I've learned is that you've got to be very, very careful of using United States forces in this hemisphere.

MR. MacNeil: Charlayne Hunter-Gault talked with the Haitian leader after his White House visit.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. President, thank you for joining us. You met with President Bush this morning. Can you just briefly tell me what you asked for from the President and what you got in response?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: I am really happy to meet him, and together we see how we can continue to give life to democracy. In Haiti today, you have one general and a small group of militaries trying to kill democracy. Today a delegation from OAS will be in Haiti to see how they can convince this small group of criminals to stay killing people, because we already have more than 500 people killed, and thousand of others are in danger.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Where do you get that number?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: This morning, I got it from Haiti by phone and Washington first talk about 350 people already killed. So with President Bush, with OAS, with this international community, we continue to say yes to democracy, no to dictator, yes to life, no to killing people.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But what is the leverage? What did you and President Bush talk about that this delegation is going to say to Gen. Cedres to get him to do what you want him to do? What can they say?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: We try through this delegation to let him understand how he cannot go that way, killing people to impose dictator after a democratical process was going on. Since December 16, '90, we got for the first time free elections in Haiti,and it was also in communion with this international community when we realize those elections. And now one general, with this small group of soldiers, cannot say no to this international community that way.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But if that fails, Mr. President, are you prepared to sanction a military option?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: I believe we will be able to convince him. That's why I'm waiting for the result today.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Where do you think resistance inside the country will come from?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: All over the country.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is that what you're counting on?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: When that happened on 20 of September, in Port Au Prince, General issued a food tax, weapons, militaries, killing people, and meanwhile, Haitian people stay home. All over the country, you realize how Haitian people saying no to this coup when they stay home; they want to go out to look for food to buy food, but they prefer to stay home instead to say yes, because if they say yes through the streets, they can get killed. That's why they choose this kind of peaceful strategy, non-violent strategy.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: At this point, the OAS, as I understand it, has endorsed sanctions against Haiti, economic sanctions against Haiti. Sanctions take time, and we all know that Haiti is the poorest country in this hemisphere. And the people will be hurt by sanctions. How long are you prepared to wait to allow sanctions to work before some other steps are taken?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: It's a question of hours. It's a question of days. I hope it will not be a question of weeks, because when you imagine from Sunday to today, you are talking about 500 people killed. When now it's question of weeks, that should be worse. And we have to do all what we can to save life.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The opposition has claimed that what triggered this coup was your exhortation to your supporters to take violent action against your political opposition and also your formation of a presidential militia. What do you have to say to that?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Let me explain to you. It's a false choice. Let me explain. Haitian people need justice and they always are looking this or asking for justice. Now, when they didn't get justice, they tried to do justice, themselves, using, for instance, these things which they call pere le boins. That means tires.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Tires.

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Tires. And I say no to that. I will continue to say no to that. And at the same time, I say we have to put institution of justice. To give justice to Haitian people that way, they will not try to look for doing justice, themselves.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How much has this whole episode set back the course of democracy?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: The Haitian people, as I said several times, want democracy and is ready to die for democracy. Unfortunately, we have an army with structures of dictator instead to have structures of democracy.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Structures of dictatorship?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Yes. That's why during seven months from February '91 to September '91, we could celebrate a very big feast between the army and Haitian people. I mean, we got married. It's a way to say how close we are today. Some of the same country, army and Haitian people, we were together because of love, love of everybody, because of respect, we could love and respect, they have to go together, because of justice, justice, respect, love, they go together with democracy. If they respect love in the army, that will help the army and all to don't be under the structures of dictatorship.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: You think most of the army remains loyal to you?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Sure, sure, sure. It's going to see Cedres with this small group of soldiers trying to kill people and killing democracy, when now the general ordered the army to kill, of course, it's a general, until now, we can understand how it's easy for the army to don't obey even if that should be better for them to obey, because when you are military, you are military to protect life, not to kill people.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. President, where will you wait this out, and how soon do you think you'll be home as President?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: I think it's question of days. I hope it will not be question of weeks.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And you will wait where?

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Somewhere.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Mr. President, all the best. Thank you for being with us.

PRESIDENT ARISTIDE: Thank you to you. FOCUS - GERGEN & SHIELDS

MS. WOODRUFF: Finally tonight, the events of the week as seen by our regular Friday team of Gergen and Shields. That's David Gergen, editor at large at U.S. News & World Report, and Mark Shields, a nationally syndicated columnist. He joins us tonight from Raleigh, North Carolina. Well, gentlemen, back to the story that we led off our program tonight with, and that is the unemployment benefits debate we heard. You all heard the comments of Budget Director Richard and Senate Majority Leader Mitchell. Mark, just back again to what the President said earlier today that the economy is on the right track despite all these new figures. Is the public buying the White House line on what's happening? Are they buying the President's argument that it's the right thing not to go along with 20 weeks' extension in unemployment benefits?

MR. SHIELDS: I don't think that optimism, Judy, is there yet in the country. I think the President stands almost as an island of optimism at this point, and the 300 votes that the Mitchell proposal, the Democrats' proposal, one in the House of Representatives this week, indicates a lot of Republicans share that assessment that the recession is far from over and relief is needed for people who are out of work, who have exhausted their benefits.

MS. WOODRUFF: David.

MR. GERGEN: Well, I think that Mark is right that most Americans don't feel that the recession is over. For most of them, a so- called "recovery" feels very much like a recession. They are living from paycheck to paycheck every two weeks. It's not as clear whether they also feel strongly that the unemployment benefits ought to be extended. I think that the Democrats happen to be on the right side of this issue politically. The White House thinks at the moment, Judy, that the issue is not yet resonating in the country, even though the Democrats may have the better edge politically.

MS. WOODRUFF: What do you mean, you don't think the issue's resonating, not enough people are thinking about it, or --

MR. GERGEN: That people are certainly very concerned about the economy and don't think it's coming around. And I think that shows up in various ways. And I must say, Mark foresaw a couple of weeks ago that there was going to be some erosion in the President's support because of the economic conditions. I think we're starting to see that. I think the White House is beginning to feel that, and I think that's why you began to see some defensiveness on the part of the White House now about economic conditions and about the domestic agenda. But the unemployment issue, itself, and the compensation question hasn't really struck deeply in the public psyche.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, Mark, if the President vetoes this extension bill, which he says he's going to do, how is that going to be felt out there?

MR. SHIELDS: Well, I think the argument that you heard George Mitchell, the Senate Majority Leader, made today is the argument the Democrats will be making, that is, George Bush has declared an emergency in the case of aid to Turkey, aid to Bangladesh, aid to Israel, but when it comes to helping out of work workers in Michigan or North Carolina, there's a reluctance to declare a budget emergency which would be required. And I think that that is going to be an argument that George Bush and the Republicans find themselves very much, as David put it, on the defensive. It's a day late and a dollar short. They denied there was a problem before. Now they've come up with sort of a half a loaf solution. And I think they find themselves really playing defensive politics on this issue.

MS. WOODRUFF: What's the White House comeback on this one, that the President pays, is right up front and early when it has to do with problems overseas, but not on domestic problems?

MR. GERGEN: Well, I frankly think that the White House comeback has not yet been strong enough from both a substantive point of view and a political point of view. I mean, the White House is blaming the press this week. Today, the President blamed the press in the press conference for not talking about, you know, his domestic agenda. You know, but the fact is the President had a meeting this week of the Democratic leadership and the issues of domestic policy never came up. They talked about the nuclear proposal last week. They talked about Iraq, and then the President wanted to talk about Haiti, all important subjects, but the Democrats argue they haven't had a serious conversation with him about domestic issues, the leadership hasn't, since last year's budget agreement. So I think that the -- I do think that the President is starting to show more attention. I think he's starting to show more concern about it, and he's starting to come up with some proposals, pushed capital gains again today. But it seems to me if he's going to convince people he's serious about the domestic agenda, about the unemployment problem in the economy, they're going to have to do a lot more out of the White House.

MS. WOODRUFF: We had two Democrats speaking of politics jump into the Presidential race this week. Sen. Kerrey of Nebraska was one of them. Mark, what sets Sen. Kerrey apart from the rest of the field?

MR. SHIELDS: I think a couple of things, Judy. For 20 years, the Democrats have been losing. As Democratic candidates have grown more sensitive, more vulnerable, more expressive, more anti-macho, more nurturing, they've continued to lose the votes of American males, many of whom questioned the ruggedness, toughness, commitment of Democrats. There's no rational person in America who's going to question either their commitment to America, the toughness of the patriotism, of Bob Kerrey, whose citation for the Congressional Medal of Honor reads like something out of the Eniad, it was such a heroic act. I think he brings to it in a strange way his strengths or his weaknesses. Bob Kerrey is Ed Rollins', Ronald Reagan's 1984 campaign manager, thinks out loud, and he does -- he's quite candid in taking his positions, and at the same time, the strength of him is that he is not a conventional politician. He is someone who is seen as speaking his mind and speaking with a passion.

MS. WOODRUFF: David, is he someone that the Republicans need to worry about? It's awfully early. Talk about him and about Bill Clinton, who announced yesterday.

MR. GERGEN: Well, I think Bob Kerrey has a real take-off potential, but he's also got the potential to take a real dive fast. He is -- he's got an aura about him. He is, as I think Mark has indicated, he does have a remarkable biography. He's running on that so far. And I think a lot of people find not only his war record but his relationship with Deborah Winger will bring him a certain amount glamor, but beyond that, it's not at all clear that he's thought about what kind of country he would like to see. He seems to have decided he wants to run for President later to make up his mind about what he'd like to do as President. I think that's a shortcoming he has to watch.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is Bill Clinton --

MR. GERGEN: Bill Clinton is a man who's really been in the trenches as a governor for a long time. He's been cited on many occasions as the most single and most effective governor in the country, immensely likeable man. I think he had a somewhat different theme yesterday when he declared. What he really would like to emphasize is the idea of a new American compact in which the government provides opportunities, but individuals have to take advantage of those opportunities on their own. That's something new for Democrats. They used to talk about that 30 years ago. And Bill Clinton's trying to revive that theme.

MS. WOODRUFF: That's a different message, Mark, is it not, from what we're hearing from other Democrats this year, at least some of the Democrats?

MR. SHIELDS: Yes. I think in fairness to Bill Clinton, he has probably thought more intimately and intensely about the domestic question, such as education and welfare, than any Presidential candidate of the last generation. He's, after all, been governor. He was first elected in 1978, even though he was 45, which led to Sam Nunn introducing Bill Clinton as the only American who's been a rising young political star in three different decades, which is really a rather remarkable achievement. He, by contrast, Clinton, enjoys the privilege of lowered expectations based upon his 1988 disastrous nominating speech of Michael Dukakis which really left the impression that he is not a good speaker. He's a very, very good speaker. He will be an interesting candidate. Just in fairness to Bob Kerrey, Bob Kerrey I think has come out with a national health proposal. You can't be two minutes in any focused group of voters anywhere in the country before the cost and availability of health comes up as an issue. Kerrey has advanced a plan, and I would compare his advancing of that, which is a controversial proposal, I admit, very much to what Ronald Reagan did in 1980 by advancing Camp Roth. I mean, this was a -- it's a specific, controversial idea.

MR. GERGEN: Well, it maybe it's more comparable to what Reagan proposed when he asked for the $90 billion cut. This is a health care plan that calls for a 5 percent increase in the payroll tax. I think there are going to be a lot of Americans looking at that and wondering about it. I think the problem with Bob Kerrey, he's done a lot of good things, but when you look beyond health care, it's hard to see what he stands for. Bill Clinton has got some disadvantages. He's not as well organized as Kerrey. Bob Kerrey's got an edge on that and he has some geographic disadvantages. Kerrey's going to be in some early states which are contiguous with his own.

MS. WOODRUFF: Okay, Mark, jump in, then I want to move you all to something else real quick.

MR. SHIELDS: Okay. One thing about Bob Kerrey that shouldn't be overlooked. He is a divorced father of two and his former wife, Beverly Higby, told Steve Daley of the Chicago Tribune this week, "I wish he could be elected President. I think as a citizen he would do very positive things for the country; we're great friends." Very few candidates can get their undivorced spouses to speak as highly of their candidacies as Kerrey can from his --

MS. WOODRUFF: Much less their divorced --

MR. GERGEN: Wait to see what Hillary Clinton does in this campaign. She'll be one of the most quoted women in this campaign.

MS. WOODRUFF: That's the wife of Bill Clinton. Just quickly, gentlemen, I'm going to force you guys to move on from Presidential to Congressional matters, and that is these two more stories out of the House of Representatives this week; $300,000 worth of unpaid House restaurant bills on top of the bounced check story. They voted this week to close the bank. David, where is this one going?

MR. GERGEN: Well, last week, we said, close the bank; they did it. Now they ought to start cutting out the rest of these perks, Judy. I mean, they've got a pharmacy up there that's dispensing free medicine. They've got their own ambulance service. They've got a lot of other perks. It was one thing for the Congressmen to say look, we need a few extras, when they weren't being paid very well. Their salaries have been raised to $125,000 apiece in the Senate and the House. They really need to reform across-the-board, cut the perks, cut this staff, and, indeed, cut the number of terms they serve, as Mark even began to recognize last week.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, in all fairness, the restaurant charges they're no longer permitted to do. Mark.

MR. SHIELDS: No. Judy, I think in this case what we have is the Democrats or the Congressional Party, whatever Bill Clinton or Bob Kerrey does is not helped by what the Democrats on the Hill are doing. It appears from the House Bank and the other perks that they have been enjoying and seemingly out of touch that, that members of Congress want to live like John Sununu.

MR. GERGEN: He was looking for that line.

MR. SHIELDS: If you're going to start talking about perks, David, what about the way the White House lives? They all live like Mexican generals down there.

MS. WOODRUFF: All right.

MR. GERGEN: They've cut back in Mexico, Mark, but if the Congress would only do half of the things the executive branch is doing, it would be living much more properly.

MR. SHIELDS: There's no question, Judy, it does hurt.

MS. WOODRUFF: All right.

MR. SHIELDS: It's wrong.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mark Shields, David Gergen, you've spoken. Thank you both. RECAP

MR. MacNeil: Again, the main stories of this Friday, the nation's unemployment rate dropped slightly, to 6.7 percent in September. President Bush said he was encouraged by the news, but renewed his vow to veto a jobless benefits bill. The President also said he was reluctant to use force to reverse the coup in Haiti, unless U.S. lives were threatened. Good night, Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: Good night, Robin. That's our NewsHour for tonight. We'll back Monday night with a look at the Supreme Court's new term. I'm Judy Woodruff. Thank you and have a good weekend.