The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday, an American army officer was killed in a terrorist attack in the Philippines, Iran said it broke up a spy ring in its armed forces that was working for the U.S., 100,000 students and workers demonstrated in China for democracy. We'll have details in our News Summary in a moment. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: After the News Summary, we have a News Maker interview with King Hussein of Jordan as we continue our series of key interviews on the Middle East, then a week's end look at the Jim Wright story, with an Elizabeth Brackett report from Ft. Worth, the Speaker's hometown, the views of Gerry Warren of San Diego, Lee Cullum of Dallas, Clarence Page of Chicago, and Ed Baumeister of Trenton, New Jersey, and analysis from our regulars, David Gergen and Mark Shields.NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MacNeil: One of the top American military officers in the Philippines was killed today in a terrorist attack. Fifty-one year old army colonel James Rowe was shot dead by two hooded gunmen who sprayed his car with gunfire at the military compound in Manila. Rowe's chauffeur was wounded in the ambush. No one claimed responsibility, but Philippine officials believed Communist rebels carried out the attack. Five days ago, Communist insurgents threatened such attacks unless the U.S. closed its bases there and stopped aiding the Aquino government. Rowe was a highly decorated Vietnam veteran who survived five years in a cage as prisoner of the Viet Cong before escaping. America's Ambassador to the Philippines had this reaction to Rowe's murder.

AMB. NICHOLAS PLATT: If anyone thinks that killing this brave officer will alter in any way U.S. policy in support of Philippine democracy, they are wrong. On the contrary, this act will only strengthen American resolve to stand with the government and the people of the Philippines led by President Aquino.

MR. MacNeil: At least 23,000 U.S. servicemen are stationed in the Philippines at Clark Air Force Base and Subic Bay Naval Station, the two largest U.S. military installations not on American soil. In 1987, Communist rebels killed two American airmen and a retired U.S. serviceman near Clark base. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: There was a ceremony today for the 47 Naval men who died in the U.S.S. Iowa disaster. It was held in Norfolk, Virginia, home port of the battle ship. The Iowa is on its way back to Norfolk from Puerto Rico, where the tragedy occurred. The Navy released back and white photos today. They show the crew fighting the fire in the ship's forward gun turret. It was there that the 47 men died. At the Norfolk Memorial Service, a wreath of 47 carnations was dropped into the Elizabeth River. An official service will be held their on Monday after the Iowa returns to port. President Bush will attend. Today he ordered flags at all government facilities be flown at half mast until Tuesday evening.

MR. MacNeil: Jordan's King Hussein said today there is a better chance to achieve a Mid East settlement than in many years, but that time is short. In an interview with the Newshour this afternoon, Hussein was asked whether there was pressure on PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat to show results to the Arab world.

KING HUSSEIN: I feel very strongly that he has to show results and has to show them soon.

MR. MacNeil: How soon?

KING HUSSEIN: I can't give a certain time limit, sir, but I don't think that time is with us. There is this opportunity and we can't miss it.

MR. MacNeil: Does Mr. Bush see it that way?

KING HUSSEIN: I believe that the President is aware of the need to move.

MR. MacNeil: We'll have the rest of that interview after the News Summary. While the king has been visiting the United States, there have been riots back in his country. At least eight people have been killed since Tuesday, after the government increased prices on several goods to secure new loans from the International Monetary Fund. To curtail the violence, authorities prohibited people from going to mosques for Friday prayers, an unusual step in a Muslim country. But the riots spread today to several more cities. King Hussein has cancelled his visit toBritain, which was scheduled for tomorrow, and will return home instead.

MR. LEHRER: There were two spy stories to report today. Iran claimed it had cracked an American spy ring within the Iranian armed forces. The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament said a large number of American spies had been arrested. He said they were involved in plots to overthrow the government of the Ayatollah Khomeini. White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said in Washington, "We don't really know what they're talking about.". The second spy story occurred somewhere in the South China Sea. A U.S. Air Force Black Bird spy plane crashed. An air force official said the two crew members aboard the super fast, super secret plane were rescued by helicopter. No further details were told.

MR. MacNeil: In Beijing, more than 100,000 people gathered at the city's main square today to demand democratic changes. It was the biggest turnout in six straight days of demonstrations which were triggered by the death of a reformist leader. Nick Gowing of Independent Television News reports from Beijing.

NICK GOWING: The emotions created by the death of former Party Secretary Hu Ya Bang, the discredited symbol of liberalization and move towards democratic reforms have not been diminished by the government threats of a severe clamp down. Wreaths continued to arrive in Tiananmen Square, buoyed above the heads of many thousands of mourners. The flower decked monument to revolutionary heroes has become not just Mr. Hu's impromptu shrine. It's also an assembly point for intellectuals and students mourning radical reforms which appear to have passed away with Mr. Hu. The government are not trying to suppress the outpouring of grief; it is the use of Mr. Hu's death for political purposes, calling the Chinese leaders dictators and pushing the democratic message. Tonight tens of thousands of students from eight universities bluntly defied the authorities' stern warning of a severe clamp down if demonstrations went ahead. Their numbers overwhelmed the security forces. The broad boulevards and narrow streets of the Chinese capital were filled with a message the Chinese leadership seems determined to ignore.

MR. LEHRER: There was a report today Soviet troops used poisonous chemicals and sharp instruments to break up the Georgian demonstrations April 9th. Amateur video of that protest was made available today. Twenty people died in the demonstration calling for Georgia's independence from the Soviet Union. The report in today's edition of the government newspaper Izvestia said medical experts had confirmed sharp instruments and poisonous chemicals were the cause in any of those deaths. A foreign ministry spokesman said yesterday the troops used a compound similar to tear gas. Also in the Soviet Union today, Soviet dissident and human rights activist Andrei Sakharov was elected to the Soviet Parliament. He was freed from six years of internal exile in 1986. Sakharov said today he would use his seat in the congress of people's deputies to work for the Gorbachev reform programs.

MR. MacNeil: Back in this country, a California winery worker who admitted killing seven people was extradited from Mexico to the U.S. last night. Ramone Salcido said he killed his wife, two of his children and four other people last week. Salcido told reporters he committed the murders because he thought his wife was having an affair. He said he had no remorse.

MR. LEHRER: And that's it for the News Summary. Now it's on to a News Maker interview with King Hussein of Jordan, and the Jim Wright story asseen by his home folks, four editors and Gergen & Shields. FOCUS - SPEAKER UNDER FIRE

MR. LEHRER: Now the Jim Wright story. The Speaker of the House of Representatives is in trouble. Monday a unanimous bipartisan House Ethics Committee charged he violated official House rules of conduct 69 times. The specifics range from allegations he failed to report thousands of dollars in gifts to sidestepping speaking fee rules through bulk sales of a book. The Committee and the full House have yet to decide what action, if any, to take against the Speaker, but out there in the land of the public, the editorial writers and the pundits, verdicts are already in flow. We begin our sampling of those early returns with a report from Ft. Worth, Texas, Wright's hometown. Elizabeth Brackett is the reporter.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: There's not much doubt about how the folks here feel about Jim Wright. Cowboy Songster Dave Day has already caught the feeling. The Speaker may be under fire in Washington, but this is home, this is Ft. Worth, Texas, not as fancy as nearby Dallas, but a town that is still proud of its cowboy heritage and proud of its politicians. [DAVE DAY SINGING]

MS. BRACKETT: Most here are not happy about the Washington investigation of a man who has been their Congressman since 1954.

FT. WORTH RESIDENT: I think those folks ought to get off the Speaker's back.

MS. BRACKETT: Angriest of all are Wright's friends, some of them caught up in the investigation, themselves, people like real estate investor George Mallick. The Ethics Committee report prepared by the Committee's Counsel, Richard Phelan, alleges that Mallick formed a company with Wright mainly to funnel money to him. The report says one way this was done was to give the Speaker's wife, Betty, a salary for work that was never done.

GEORGE MALLICK, Real Estate Developer: Mr. Phelan's report is flawed. It's inaccurate in so many, so many different cases. His basic thesis is wrong. His thesis is that Mrs. Wright did not earn her money, that's wrong. He has testimony that disproves that. His thesis is that I had an interest in legislation. I've never had an interest in legislation. I've never asked Jim Wright to intervene on my behalf on any matter in the 30 years that I've known him. And I've never, I've never approached his staff. So my overall impression of this report is that as I read it it's much like a trashy novel. I can't hardly put it down, but I've enjoyed some trashy novels much more than I've enjoyed this trashy report.

MS. BRACKETT: Restauranteur Kay Snyder says she can't understand how anyone could say Betty Wright did not earn her salary. Snyder says she and Wright met for long hours in 1984, when Wright was trying to determine if Snyder's proposed winery would be a good investment for the Mallick/Wright partnership.

KAY SNYDER, Restaurateur: We would start, you know, early in the morning from 10 o'clock and go to 5 or 6, and so those were long hours. And then it would take preparation time before the meeting and then it would take study time after the meeting, with papers and pro forma reports and so forth.

MS. BRACKETT: So what did you think when you heard the allegations that Betty Wright did not work?

KAY SNYDER: Well, I was surprised. I was surprised that, that someone would be accused of something from the Congress and from a Committee like that without facts.

MS. BRACKETT: Equally surprised was the man who set up Jim Wright's blind trust, Attorney Tom Law. He read the report and now believes Counsel Phelan got his facts wrong when he said Betty Wright's company car was a gift from Mallick.

TOM LAW, Lawyer: Actually, Betty Wright bought the car. It was, the money was furnished by the James Wright Qualified Blind Trust. The trust never owned the car, as Mr. Phelan says that it did. He said that the trust had no business owning a car. They never owned it. What they did was to pay the money to buy the car and put it properly in Betty's name, register it in her name.

MS. BRACKETT: Here in the district it is not just those personally involved in the Speaker's troubles who defend him. A new newspaper poll showed that eight out of ten surveyed thought that Jim Wright was still doing a good job. One of the reasons for that is that Jim Wright is very good at bringing in federal dollars to the district. A study showed that close to $5 billion in federal funds flows into this district every year, making it one of the top urban districts in the country in terms of federal funds received. And those federal dollars have helped Ft. Worth add an affluent gloss to its cow town image. Military bases and defense plants ring the city, thousands of workers stream into the General Dynamics plant each morning to build military planes like this F-16 jet fighter. Union leaders give Wright much of the credit for keeping the plants busy.

PAT LANE, International Association of Machinists: The people really feel, believe and know that Jim Wright has been the single most instrumental factor in bringing these defense dollars into this area.

MS. BRACKETT: From radar to rawhide, Jim Wright's influence has been felt. The historic stockyards district have been restored with the help of federal funds. Tourists now flock to this once dilapidated area. Louis Zapata represents the stockyards in Ft. Worth's City Council. He says Wright's help will continue to be critical.

MS. BRACKETT: How much of a loss would it be if he was no longer Speaker to his area?

LOUIS ZAPATA: I shudder at the thought of it frankly, that if we were to lose the Speaker, then I think the City of Ft. Worth will probably lose its most viable spokesperson in the United States.

MS. BRACKETT: At Texas Christian University, political scientist James Riddlesperger says Wright's long political history may be what's gotten into him trouble in an era of new age politics.

JAMES RIDDLESPERGER JR., Professor, Texas Christian University: Jim Wright is a throwback in many ways to another generation of politicians. He was honed in the era of Sam Rayburn and Lyndon Johnson in politics. I would say that pre-Watergate if a Congressman took a bribe or explicitly misused public funds or was caught in an immoral act that he would be held to the ethical standards of Congress. Now a person's finances and his indirect associations and his choice of friends and the activities of his spouse are also ethical questions, and that opens it up to a new dimension.

MS. BRACKETT: But Councilman Zapata, who has his own problems with ethics violations in the Ft. Worth City Council, says it will be a long time before Texans see any ethical problem in choosing or helping friends.

COUNCILMAN LOUIS ZAPATA, Fort Worth, Texas: People have a hard time understanding that in Texas a friend is a friend, and that's a very hard thing to understand unless you're from Texas.

MS. BRACKETT: There are very few here who don't consider themselves a friend of Jim Wright's. His last serious opponent got little more than 30 percent of the vote in 1986, and the Chairman of the Republican Party in the county says he still thinks running a candidate against Jim Wright would be a lost cause.

STEVEN HOLLERN, Tarrant Co., Republican Chairman: I'm not sure I would advise a solid candidate that had standing in the community to go out and become a sacrificial lamb just in order to do that. Yes, we would like to win the district because I think the position that Congressman Wright holds is very significant in the democrat leadership, and every seat that we can gain would put more conservatives in Congress, but to run just to run, boy, that's asking someone to charge the machine gun nest, and unless we have a reason to believe we can be successful, I...

MS. BRACKETT: So here at home, most of Wright's constituents will be cheering on their Congressman as he battles to hold onto his office and his seat. The music coming from this district is loud and clear. [DAVIS SINGING ABOUT WRIGHT]

MR. LEHRER: Now to the views of four newspaper editors all familiar to Newshour viewers, Lee Cullum, editor of the editorial page of the Times-Herald in Dallas, just a few miles East of Fort Worth, she is in the studios of public station KERA; Gerald Warren, editor of the San Diego Union, who is at public station KPBS; Clarence Page, editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune; and Ed Baumeister, managing editor of the Trenton, New Jersey Times. How serious do the Speaker's problems look to you from San Diego, Gerry Warren?

GERALD WARREN, San Diego Union: [San Diego] Very serious, Jim. The letters we have received at the paper, especially since the report came on Monday, are pretty much unanimous that he should go as Speaker, that he's gone across the line.

MR. LEHRER: How about in Trenton, Ed Baumeister?

ED BAUMEISTER, Trenton Times: Well, we've not had a letter on it yet, interestingly, but the people I talked to up and down the street say that these troubles really are serious, and the reason that they're interested in the troubles, of course, is that he's second in line for the Presidency.

MR. LEHRER: Serious in what way?

MR. BAUMEISTER: Serious in that we have someone of true national stature whose leadership is pretty much as one fellow said to me "in fine print". Jim Wright is asking people, listen, read the fine print, you'll see I didn't do anything wrong, and the question is, can leadership be posited on fine print, and the answer I get is, no, it can't.

MR. LEHRER: Clarence Page, what answer would you get to that question in Chicago?

CLARENCE PAGE, Chicago Tribune: [Chicago] Well, in Chicago, Jim Wright has few friends. He doesn't represent this area. He does represent the Fort Worth and Texas area and does a very good job of it there, doesn't bring in much for folks around here, so here we have to look at how well he is serving as Speaker. Our paper editorially has probably said it would be best to step down, rather than continue the sort of cloud that now stands over the Speaker's chair. As far as the actual charges, themselves, folks haven't gotten really too excited about it here. Unlike the John Tower case, there's no sex here, no booze, there are some questions about friends and favors. Those words in Chicago politics for a long time has meant the same as bribes. We have a high tolerance for corruption among public officials who serve the public well in other ways. I'm sure that may be the case in Texas too, but Jim Wright won't get much support around here, and I think if it were up to the folks here, he'd go.

MR. LEHRER: If it were up to the peopLe in Texas, Lee, what would Jim Wright do?

LEE CULLUM, Dallas Times-Herald: [Dallas] Jim, the people in Texas are feeling considerable anguish about Jim Wright. The superconducting supercollider is a very high stakes project, high stakes project for a state in trouble. Jim Wright is considered absolutely central to that effort, so there is a fervent hope to keep him in office, however, the SSC people are beginning to be worried. They do sense that these are serious charges and they're concerned that at some point Jim Wright will become a liability.

MR. LEHRER: Lee, let me ask you about this. David Broder quoted Neil Pierce in his column in the Washington Post this week and he said, in effect, that Wright is a product of a Texas political culture that draws no line even in theory between private interest and public responsibility. Does that make sense to you?

MS. CULLUM: Jim, it makes sense for the '60s. I think that Broder was really quoting Neil Pierce in a book he wrote called "The Mega States" published in 1972. They were talking about the '60s of Lyndon Johnson, John Connolly, Ben Barnes, Johnson in the White House, Connolly in the State House, Ben Barnes as Speaker. Those were, those were unusual days, there's no question. I saw them up close, there's no question what I'm talking about. However, there's a new day in Texas, and I think that Jim Wright's misfortune is that he's on the cusp between two worlds.

MR. LEHRER: Does that add up to you, Gerry Warren, that Jim Wright is caught up in this transition period?

MR. WARREN: I think it's absolutely right, Jim. I think Speaker Wright must be asking himself why, me, others have done this, and I've done no worse than they. But that's the same question that could have been asked by President Nixon or John Tower or Lynn Nofsiger or any number of others who have been caught in-between the old ethics and the new ethics.

MR. LEHRER: What has he been caught doing, Gerry Warren? I mean, if you had to summarize the awfulness that you would see in what Jim Wright has done, do it.

MR. WARREN: Well, I would summarize it this way, saying, in effect, the Speaker is saying these rules don't say that I can't accept money from a friend. Well, I think the new ethics do say you can't accept money from a friend. The old rules used to be that friends would help you get going and friends would help sustain you in office. I don't think that's possible anymore.

MR. LEHRER: Clarence, I read a poll the other day, yesterday to be exact, which said that nationally only 58 percent of the American people were not even aware of the Jim Wright problem and that when told of what the problem was, when the pollster summarized what the problem was, 59 percent said, well, that's too bad. Does that jive with what you're hearing in Chicago, that this is not something that's generating this kind of activity?

CLARENCE PAGE, Chicago Tribune: Well, that sounds like one of those polls where you ask people have you heard these words before and you read off part of the Constitution, and most people haven't heard the words, or else a lot of people here I think may wonder what the Speaker of the House really does. In those terms, this is kind of an inside the beltway story, a Washington story, one involving internathine politicking on Capitol Hill, and the folks back here kind of look back on with a vague sense of amusement. We just got through with a very exciting Mayoral race here in Chicago. That's what's dominated the headlines. Only after that began to fade away did Jim Wright begin to get on Page 1 at all. And I think Mike Royko today in our newspaper wrote a column that kind of summarized the way Chicagoans view that question of what did Jim Wright do that was so wrong. He compared it to a legendary policeman here in Chicago years ago who used to carry pencils in his pocket and when he stopped somebody for a traffic offense would say, I've got a $5 pencil, a $10 pencil and a $25 pencil; I think you ought to buy a $10 pencil from me today. That's what Jim Wright has done with these books. He's gotten around the honorarium regulation by saying, I think you ought to buy a truckload of these books from me today. And I think folks around here see what the game is. It's a bribe. It's a question of whether or not it should be tolerated. Is that a sign of changing ethics? Well, that's kind of an inside Washington story.

MR. LEHRER: Inside Washington story, Ed Baumeister, or are your folks in Trenton, do you feel -- I mean, even you personally or you at the paper -- feel a sense of outrage or this is just business as usual in Washington, another one of those Washington corruption stories?

ED BAUMEISTER, Trenton Times: Well, I think those of us who have taken the time or have been paid to read the detail of it have a good deal of concern, if not outrage. We don't want to prejudge and our editorial so far hasn't. But what you get outside the beltway is how many varieties of this kind of behavior do we have down there? The attorney general, the former attorney general was charged after he left. There was the pay raise. It all gets lumped together along the streets in New Jersey as one big pot of bad behavior. And the new ethics that we're talking about are really no more than the children of the old ethics, people having been discovered doing things that people in general feel are wrong.

MR. LEHRER: And they always felt they were wrong, so there's no new morality. You don't feel that Jim Wright's been caught in some kind of new trap, right?

MR. BAUMEISTER: No, not I.

MR. LEHRER: All right, let's finally into this mix, let's bring in the views of our regular Friday team of Gergen & Shields. That's David Gergen, Editor at Large of U.S. News & World Report, and Mark Shields, Political Columnist for the Washington Post. Mark, to you first, the view from Washington, is there a clear outcome down the Jim Wright tunnel right now?

MARK SHIELDS, Washington Post: No, but there will be a lot clearer picture emerging next Tuesday and Wednesday, when members return from their home districts. They've been on break. They're coming back. They'll have talked not simply to their constituents who may or may not raise the issue, but they'll be talking as well to their supporters and opinion leaders. And I think we'll have a lot better sense of the kind of support that he'll have.

MR. LEHRER: You think that's going to be crucial.

MR. SHIELDS: I think it'll be --

MR. LEHRER: In other words, outside the beltway is a lot more important than inside on this issue?

MR. SHIELDS: I hate to admit it, but it's absolutely true.

MR. LEHRER: David, that's, will you go along with that?

DAVID GERGEN, U.S. News & World Report: Well, I'm outside the beltway of course.

MR. LEHRER: Yeah. You're in New York tonight.

MR. GERGEN: I'm in New York tonight.

MR. LEHRER: Right.

MR. GERGEN: [New York] I think Mark is right. I think that the first test that Jim Wright faces is the level of intensity of feeling outside the beltway. And that's what members are going home and checking out. The editors we've had here tonight seem to me to be suggesting that it's not yet very intense. There's a feeling, yes, he probably ought to go, but that the members back home are probably not going to have their phones ringing, they're probably not going to be people looking him up on the streets, so it sounds to me as though he may well pass this initial test. But I would argue that there are two additional very important tests ahead. If he gets through this test in the court of public opinion, he still has to go back to committee. And then the question is what the committee will find and recommend. Of course, they have not yet found him guilty. They have essentially indicted him or accused him.

MR. LEHRER: Let's clarify the process here so everybody understands that. What they essentially did on Monday was return an indictment and now the same committee will then consider with a hearing, they'll hear from Jim Wright, himself, from his lawyers, et cetera, and then they will render a judgment which then goes to the full House to really finally decide, right?

MR. GERGEN: Absolutely. That's exactly it. And what Jim Wright would very much like to do, his supporters would like to do, is come out of that committee with simply a letter of admonition to him rather than a recommendation of a reprimand or of a censure. If he comes out with a letter of admonition, and within the committee he may well pay back the money that he gained on the book, because that's the charge that many Congressmen find the most serious and he perhaps could win some sympathy if he paid the money back and said, yes, I agree, this is an error of judgment or whatever, but if he can get the letter, then he may well survive the second test. If the committee, on the other hand, recommends censure or reprimand, I think his days are quite short. But let me say beyond that I think there is a third test. If he survives the first two, and it's iffy on both those still, or at least on the second one to committee, I think there's a third test, and that is should he survive in the short run, what we're going to find probably on the part of the Republicans is an effort to turn the heat up this summer and later on, and gradually escalate this issue into an election issue for 1990, and try to hang it around the necks of Democrats. Now if Democrats, particularly in the South, find that it's playing badly over time, then I think there'd be a lot of pressure on him to retire and say, I'm not going to run as Speaker in the next Congress. So I think he's got really three tests that are still ahead.

MR. LEHRER: What's your feeling on that, Mark?

MR. SHIELDS: There isn't a fourth one, David? I think he's in trouble. I mean, one real Wright loyalist said to me today, I think the best shot right now is 50/50 that he can make it.

MR. LEHRER: That he can make it.

MR. SHIELDS: That he can make it.

MR. LEHRER: Make it in that he would be forced, I mean, the situation would just get to a point where he would just have to step aside?

MR. SHIELDS: And nobody knows how that happens, who comes in with a message or whatever. I think there are a couple of things that he has to do in the short run tactically that he hasn't done. I mean, Jim Wright's at a disadvantage. Nobody in the country knows Jim Wright.

MR. LEHRER: Why is it that nobody knows who this guy is?

MR. SHIELDS: Tip O'Neill became an issue and an item in the campaign of 1980, the Republicans ran against him, and when Ronald Reagan won the Presidency, Tip O'Neill as the leader of his party became a major figure of his party and was such for four years until the Democrats nominated a President. Jim Wright became Speaker in 1987, immediately we're into Presidential politics and campaigns and primaries, and he sort of was eclipsed by the Presidential process. So there's no real Jim Wright persona known to the nation. If there's a case to be made for Jim Wright, Jim Wright has to make it. And I think that it's pretty clear by now that it's not going to be made effectively by surrounding himself by colleagues at a press conference or having Texas loyalists in the delegation from that Lone Star state go out and issue threats to other members, recalcitrant Democrats in the House. He's got to make it, and he's got to make it based upon not defending the Speakership but for 40 years I've had a record of achievement, this is who I am, I'm not a smiler, I'm not schmoozer, I'm a loner, and that's what he is. But he's been an immensely effective loner. And if the case is going to be made, it's got to be made by him.

MR. GERGEN: Can I disagree with that respectfully?

MR. SHIELDS: Sure.

MR. LEHRER: Yes, sir, you're free to.

MR. GERGEN: I think television is not kind to Jim Wright, and the more he is out there making his case, the more he's apt to hurt himself. I personally believe that the case could be made extremely well for him, ironically enough, by the man who's his would-be successor, if Wright resigns, and that's Tom Foley. I think that when Tom was on this show, for instance, the other night, he made a very very strong argument for fairness and caution and being responsible on behalf of Wright and I would suggest there are those around Wright who may be more helpful to him than Wright, himself.

MR. LEHRER: What about this theory that I read about Foley that one of the real problems Wright has going for him is that Foley is so popular and so respected and everybody assumes that he would take Wright's place that the Democrats think, hey, well, we'd be in better shape with Tom Foley than we would be with Jim Wright?

MR. SHIELDS: Well, it's the opposite of what was known around town 15 years ago as the Gerry Ford syndrome. Richard Nixon, always a rather shrewd political operator, when he had to pick a successor for Spiro could I have the envelope please Angnew chose Republican House Leader Gerry Ford with the idea stated apparently by Mr. Nixon that they'll never impeach me with Gerry Ford there. And this is, of course, the other side of that coin, because Tom Foley is an attractive, appealing figure. I just came back from Wyoming, three days in Wyoming, where there's a special House race next Wednesday for Dick Cheney's seat.

MR. LEHRER: Right.

MR. SHIELDS: And up until now we've talked about what members are going to hear when they go home, up until now in that race, which is a 50/50 race between a Democrat, John Vinich, a state senator, and Republican State Rep. Craig Thomas, they had a statewide debate last night, televised statewide, and for the first time, Thomas raised the Jim Wright issue and raised the question of ethics and integrity in Washington, and when asked what he thought his biggest advantage would be in the House, the Republican Thomas answered sarcastically that he wouldn't be able to serve on the same side of the aisle with Jim Wright. So that's the kind of zings and if it starts to get in politically, then it could hasten the --

MR. LEHRER: Yeah. Look, I want to bring the editors back in and I want to read or characterize and then read a quote from Charles Krauthamer's column this morning and your fellow colleague in the Washington Post, and get all of you to comment on it. He said that history will remember the 1980s as a time when the Soviets had a revolution, East Asia emerged as a world power, Latin America turned toward democracy, and the American Congress dwelled on the drinking habits of a former Senator and "engaged in a mighty debate as to whether the Speaker of the House of Representatives sold books by the pound to the Fertilizer Institute.". What does that make you want to say, Ed Baumeister?

MR. BAUMEISTER: Well, it's pretty yeastily put, I suppose. But I think in comparing these global movements, Asia, the Soviet Union, and so forth, to the Washington situation, it minimizes the concern people really have about the quality of people down there. The average person doesn't monitor every day, doesn't read the Congressional Quarterly reports, but expects broadly that the people down there are moral and honest. And what's happened in the '80s is that they have questioned that, and the question is will there be some sort of revolution in this country in reaction to that.

MR. LEHRER: David Gergen, is Washington getting a bad rap here? Is Ed reading this right? Are the people that he feels that he's speaking for in Trenton who just look down here and say, my goodness, they are all this way?

MR. GERGEN: Well, I think that the Jim Wright story and the John Tower story, I think they do come together, and I think in this situation more than Jim Wright is on trial. I think that the Congress, itself, is on trial and Washington to a degree is as well. There's sort of a stink pot quality about all of this with regard to this city, and so it seems to me Washington needs to move on beyond Jim Wright, has to resolve this in a fair and responsible way, but then the Congress has to move on and adopt an ethics code. It has to clear its own name.

MR. LEHRER: Stink pot, do you smell any stink pot from Washington, Lee Cullum?

LEE CULLUM, Dallas Times-Herald: [Dallas] Oh, yes, I think to some extent you have to say that's true. And I do see a relationship incidentally between Tower and Wright. I think that people in Texas who were very angry about the way Tower was treated now want Jim Wright scalped. I have to say I wish it had been a better book. I think that would help a bit and might improve Mr. Krauthamer's point of view; it would improve mine. I do want to say from where we see it at the Times-Herald, the problem is the oil deals, the problem isn't the book, and the problem isn't Mrs. Wright. Keep an eye on the oil deals. We ran a story today on Del High Oil that bears watching. There's not necessarily something bad, but it bears watching.

MR. LEHRER: Well, we have to leave it there. Sorry I didn't get back to you, Clarence and Gerry and Mark and Bill and Bob and whatever. Thank you all very much. NEWS MAKER

MR. MacNeil: Now the third in our series of interviews with Middle Eastern leaders, this time with Jordan's King Hussein. The king has been in the United States, the last in a procession of Mid East leaders to visit President Bush as the new administration begins crafting a Middle Eastern policy. But as King Hussein was visiting such tourist sites as Mt. Vernon, there were riots in his country protesting recent price increases. He's expected to go directly from the United States back home and skip a planned stopover in England. In Washington, a key topic of discussion was an Israeli proposal for local elections in the occupied West Bank, territory controlled by Jordan until the 1967 Middle East War. We interviewed the King this afternoon in New York.

MR. MacNeil: Your Majesty, welcome.

KING HUSSEIN: Thank you very much.

MR. MacNeil: You are going back to Jordan without going to Britain as you had planned, because of the food riots in your country. Some observers see this as the most serious challenge to your rule for at least a decade. Do you see it that way?

KING HUSSEIN, Jordan: It's a challenge to all Jordanians. We are passing through difficult times. Our economy's sound and the promise of the future is great, but, nonetheless, we have had to devaluate the Jordanian dinar, and recently engaged the International Monetary Fund in talks, and that providing us with the potential to reschedule our foreign debt, half of which is military and half economic. This is a result of the awful situation we found ourselves in when promises of the Arab states did not materialize as a result of the Baghdad summit, and the size of this foreign debt is equal to the commitments that were not forthcoming. So the situation developed in such a way that it has posed a strain on people, maybe a lack of adequate comprehension of the challenge that we have to face. But I believe that the overwhelming majority of Jordanians are facing it well and I'm sure that our conditions will return to normal very shortly.

MR. MacNeil: It was reported today that in some cities in the South you had closed the mosques for Friday prayers, which sounds like a drastic step, evidence of the gravity of the situation as seen by your government. Is that --

KING HUSSEIN: I'm not aware of any such actions. I know that the Friday prayers went extremely well today and there was no problem whatsoever. More recently, in the afternoon, there was and probably still is going on some disturbance in the City of Sol. But it has been bad in terms of the people involved, and of course, the authorities are doing whatever they can to handle the situation with much patience and compassion as possible.

MR. MacNeil: The Crown Prince Hassan, who is in charge when you're not there as Regent, suggested to reporters that the motivation was not strictly unhappiness over food prices but that some Islamic fundamentalists may have been organizing these disturbances. Do you believe that?

KING HUSSEIN: I hope that anyone who's interested, rest assured, that as soon as I get back I will try to find out exactly what has happened and what caused it. It is sad that this should be the impression of Jordan, a country that is both stable and has been over a long period of time, and has always faced up to challenges adequately through the will of its people. I am obviously saddened by what has happened and at the same time I will get to the bottom of it when I get back, but I am proud, on the other hand, that the overwhelming majority of the people of Jordan, despite the difficulties that all of us are passing through, are for law and order and for Jordan to continue to move ahead and contribute its share for stability in the entire area.

MR. MacNeil: Turning to the general Middle East situation and your trip here, you've been saying, you said yesterday that you are more optimistic than you have been in many many years. Why?

KING HUSSEIN: There is a compilance of events that the world has seen in the recent past. There is a mood, there is a sense of direction. There is a determination to resolve problems, wherever they exist in this world, wherever they jeopardize regional stability or pose a threat to peace. I believe that developments in our part of the world have also been positive. Our disengagement with the West Bank provided the opportunity for the PLO to meet all the demands ever made of it, to assume its responsibility as a legitimate representative of the people of Palestine, and to accept Security Council Resolution 242, and 338, denounce violence, and indicate readiness to negotiate resolution of the Palestinian/Israeli problem and obviously all of us are hopeful as well that a comprehensive peace will be achieved and achieved soon. As far as my visit to the United States is concerned, I feel happier now than I have felt throughout the many visits that have brought me to the this great land in the past, ever since the time of the late President Eisenhower. I feel that our friends here appreciate the need for movement and positive movement to resolve the problem that otherwise could threaten not only all concerned in the area, but maybe this whole tendency we have seen, which has given us such optimism in the world as a whole.

MR. MacNeil: Do you mean that President Bush sees it more clearly than it has been seen recently?

KING HUSSEIN: I believe he does see it very very clearly. He's a man I respect and admire and an old friend. And I've had a chance to meet with the Secretary of State and with other top officials in Washington, and with the representatives of the American people. And I have the impression that there is a determination to move and to contribute towards resolving this problem.

MR. MacNeil: In addition to the steps you've mentioned, your withdrawal from the West Bank or disengagement from the West Bank, the PLO saying it was it was willing to recognize Israel and fill the other conditions, the United States now opening talks with the PLO and now Israel coming forward with a suggestion for elections on the West Bank, who takes the next step?

KING HUSSEIN: I believe that the requirement is for a view of an entire process that we need to be engaged in to arrive at the comprehensive peace. The foundations are there, 242, 338, land for peace, renunciation of violence, resolving the Palestinian problem in all its aspects, peace between Israel and all her neighbors under international auspices. But on the other hand, I, for example, cannot with regard to the suggestion over the elections contradict myself. My position and whatever else my brethren adopt is a position of support to the PLO as the front party, importantly a question, and certainly in regard to that stance, the PNC and before the United Nations to encourage a dialogue with Washington to be substantive, and at the same time, it is their constituency that we are talking about in the West Bank and Gaza, not mine, so on the other hand, I don't believe that elections per se are a solution to the problem, elections under whose auspices, who's eligible to run in these elections or to vote in these elections and for what purpose. But if we look at the suggestion, and obviously, the PLO will do that before us, and our friends in Washington equally and elsewhere in the world, the question of Palestinian self-determination in some form or another, the PLO is definitely the recognized leader of the Palestinian people, in any event, this particular dimension could be an element in a process. We have to know where we are going.

MR. MacNeil: Does that mean you would support the Israeli plan, the Shamir plan, for a two stage progress towards self- determination and a permanent solution?

KING HUSSEIN: I've had enormous difficulty, sir, with supporting the concept of the so-called "transitional arrangements".

MR. MacNeil: Which is what he proposed the elections for, isn't it?

KING HUSSEIN: As far as I'm concerned, you transit from one point to another. One would certainly like to know what the final point is. As far as I'm concerned, and I'm committed to it, it is a just, comprehensive peace. We must take into account the Palestinian dimension, the interests of all parties to the conflict, including Israel, and a solution of the problem totally, so then we begin to see what needs to be done to get us there. And obviously the PLO is ready to do that.

MR. MacNeil: The PLO is ready to do that. Do you think that Israel has yet given the PLO sufficient recompense for its having said, yes, we recognize the right of Israel to exist?

KING HUSSEIN: Not as far as I can see and I hope that the Israeli position will change and change rapidly. We have a golden opportunity now to contribute for the betterment of our people, both sides to the conflict, and for a better future of peace and dignity and the preservation of people's rights to the resources towards building something that they've never had. Everybody's ready. It's Israel's turn to be ready. What we understand is that there are sizable, a portion of the Israeli population that is also eager to receive progress, so let's hope that the message reaches the leadership in Israel whichever it be and for it to make its contribution.

MR. MacNeil: Do you hope, expect that President Bush will play a role in seeing that that message reaches Israel?

KING HUSSEIN: I certainly hope that this will be the case. It is in our interest, all of us, to see progress and to see a solution before despair leads to extremism taking over on both sides, and we can't in this world remain hostage to the narrow mindedness of extremists on either side.

MR. MacNeil: On either side. Is there a time pressure for Mr. Arafat to show to other factions of the PLO and the more radical people in the Arab world the results he has achieved for the concessions --

KING HUSSEIN: I feel very strongly that he has to show results and has to show them soon.

MR. MacNeil: How soon?

KING HUSSEIN: I can't give a certain time limit, sir, but I don't think that time is with us. There is this opportunity and we can't miss it.

MR. MacNeil: Does Mr. Bush see it that way?

KING HUSSEIN: I believe that the President is aware of the need to move.

MR. MacNeil: Would you agree with this statement, that it is the intefada, the uprising in the occupied territories, that has been the catalyst that has caused these various movements to happen so far?

KING HUSSEIN: I believe it has indeed, and people rising after so many years of occupation and oppression to cry out to the world to notice their predicament, and to help them has contributed much. And there have been many many losses, but let's hope that in the end they will be justified and that they will be in the course for peace and for a peaceful solution to the problem.

MR. MacNeil: Do you think it will take continued action by the uprisers, the demonstrators on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, to put increased pressure on Israel to bring results?

KING HUSSEIN: I don't know what may or may not happen, but I believe that people in the occupied territories are continuing the intefada and are determined to be heard.

MR. MacNeil: Do they have your support in that, I mean, moral support?

KING HUSSEIN: They certainly have my admiration and respect. I have no influence over them. They rose by themselves to defend their identity and their rights. And what they seek is what their leadership does, justice and peace.

MR. MacNeil: On the Israeli Shamir election plan, it was reported that when you and Mr. Mubarak when you were together found agreement, you both thought that it was just a maneuver to avoid real peace talks, is that correct? Is that correctly reported that you believe that?

KING HUSSEIN: Well, if you take it in abstract, it doesn't make any sense; it is totally out of context with the needs of the situation. But one would certainly hope that this is not the case and one would hope that all of us would be aware of a need to move and move rapidly forward towards peace and its establishment.

MR. MacNeil: Are there circumstances under which you would or conditions under which you would endorse the Shamir election plan?

KING HUSSEIN: Sir, for me to endorse it or otherwise object to it, it is a Palestinian dimension and we will consider to support the PLO and its positive stance and readiness to assume its responsibilities on behalf of the Palestinian people and on the other hand, I cannot, as I said, contradict myself by speaking of conditions. I would not like anyone to impose restrictions on the PLO or their ability to move in whichever way they could to secure peace supported by all of us.

MR. MacNeil: Since you have disengaged from the West Bank administratively and said the PLO is the representative and you don't want to be confused with them as a representative of the Palestinian people, are you just a spectator now?

KING HUSSEIN: No, I am not. Jordan has a longer border and cease- fire line with Israel than any Arab state; it has longer borders and cease-fire lines than the West Bank and Gaza put together. We are totally committed to the cause of peace and to resolving the Palestinian problem through support for the Palestinians, in what we believe is a very positive and constructive mood and stance that they have taken and all of us are ready. I mean, no solution can be reached unless all of us are involved. And we certainly will be and we will do everything we can to help, to help the Palestinians, to help our friends in the United States, to cooperate with all in the world to bring peace to our area.

MR. MacNeil: As we understand it, Mr. Bush's plan and the Reagan administration's before him, of land for peace, does not mean that the United States favors a Palestinian state per se, but would more favor a confederation with Jordan. You and Mr. Arafat were reported last year, last fall, to have agreed in principle on a confederation. Does that agreement still stand?

KING HUSSEIN: As far as I know, the Palestinians and the PLO in particular and President Arafat has repeatedly stated that the future is one of a link with Jordan on a confederal basis. But for a confederation to come to be, you have to have two sovereign people, two free people, who decide to put it together, so all in good time and at the proper moment, and we are certainly ready. And we know that the ties between us and the Palestinians are extremely close and we're ready.

MR. MacNeil: So is that Jordan's role in this to -- I'm putting this crudely -- is that Jordan's role, to make some form of Palestinian state palatable at some stage and the United States to guarantee it, but through a federation?

KING HUSSEIN: Before the disengagement, we were engaged in talks with the PLO, and the federation dimension came up and we wanted it as a way to enable the Palestinians to participate in resolving the Palestinian problem. We can't resolve that without the Palestinians and they are the prime party concerned. Since the disengagement, the Palestinians have continued to suggest that they would like a confederate arrangement and I believe that the foundation of trust and confidence that exists now gives us more of a chance to build in the future a relationship that is meaningful and which may be to the satisfaction of all in the area and in the world and be a means to securing greater stability and certainly progress in that part of the world.

MR. MacNeil: Do you connect your present troubles at home, the so-called "food riots", with -- you said that as a result of the Baghdad summit, the other Arab states failed to follow up on promises of aid to Jordan -- you connect that directly with your efforts to find a solution to the Israeli problem, do you, this is your punishment, Jordan's punishment for it?

KING HUSSEIN: I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that this is the case. Libya, Libya never came through from the beginning. Algeria was able to help for a year and then had its own problems. But we had another summit in Aman and we were assured by the rest that they will make up for the short fall of some. However, we face reality, and in any event, I do believe very much that Jordan has had to pay a lot for its beliefs, for its freedom, and probably it is the destiny of Jordan to continue to do so.

MR. MacNeil: You seem to have a particularly warm relationship with Mr. Bush. Do you think it's realistic that he could be the President that achieves what so many other Presidents have tried to do?

KING HUSSEIN: If he can't, probably no one will.

MR. MacNeil: Well, Your Majesty, thank you very much for joining us. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Friday, an American army colonel was shot and killed in the Philippines by suspected Communist rebels, the Iranian government said it has uncovered a U.S. spy ring inside Iran's armed forces, and in China, an estimated 100,000 students and workers demonstrated for democratic reforms. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Jim. That's the Newshour tonight and we'll be back on Monday night. I'm Robin MacNeil. Good night.