The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

[TEXT OMITTED FROM SOURCE] Funding for this program has been provided by this station and other public television stations and by grants from American Telephone & Telegraph Company and the Corporation aid he would have recommended delaying the Challenger launch if he had known that engineers opposed it. The Supreme Court said cities may impose rent control without state approval. Details of these stories in our news summary, coming up. Jim?

JIM LEHRER: After the news summary our attention goes once again to the two top stories of the day. First the Philippine upheaval; we have interviews with Hawaii Governor George Ariyoshi and Senator Jesse Helms, a dialogue between Jerry Falwell and George McGovern, and a look at the economic rebuilding job that lies ahead in the Philippines. Then the Challenger investigation; Elizabeth Brackett has a complete report on NASA's tough day in the witness chair.News Summary

LEHRER: Ferdinand Marcos is now in the United States. He arrived in Hawaii late this afternoon from Guam and there are indications he may settle there. Marcos' wife and 90 other family members and close associates traveled with him. Marcos reportedly owns two large estates in Hawaii. Marcos was helped down the ladder from the Air Force C-141 transport plane that brought him and his party to Hawaii. When he left the Philippines he was carried on a stretcher to board the plane that took him to Guam, but he walked aboard for the last leg of his journey. Marcos has been reported to be suffering from a debilitating disease called lupus and a kidney ailment. Once he got his feet on the ground at Hickam Air Force Base his steps were firm as he walked to a greeting by Governor George Ariyoshi, an old friend, and Mrs. Ariyoshi. He received the traditional Hawaiian wreath of flowers and went on to meet Air Force General Robert Basely, commander in chief of the Pacific air forces.

Back in the Philippines, new President Corazon Aquino appointed her cabinet and got to work as life there began a return to normal. Our report from Manila is by Brian Barron of the BBC.

BRIAN BARRON [voice-over]: Having gained the presidency far quicker than she or anyoneexpected, Mrs. Aquino started her first full day in office. There was a brief balcony appearance with Premier Salvador Laurel, whom she also appointed foreign minister. Such is the public good will, President Aquino could decree just about anything, but she began by crisply reassuring the Americans about their bases.

CORAZON AQUINO, President of the Philippines: I will respect the military base agreement until 1991, and I am keeping my options open.

BARRON [voice-over]: But that's one of the president's easiest decisions: no change from Marcos. Today she's immensely popular, but as an amateur female politician in the treacherous macho world of Philippine ambitions the obstacles are formidable. The country's broke, the expectations sky-high, and the Marcos faction can still cause damage.

Fen. FIDEL RAMOS, Army Chief of Staff: Influential people associated with the former government are still trying to spirit money out of the country.

BARRON [voice-over]: In another odd incident, 13 boxes of newly printed Philippine money worth two million pounds turned up. Police found the currency in a van owned by the driver of Mr. Marcos' brother-in-law.

LEHRER: Mrs. Aquino also said she would not seek to have Ferdinand Marcos extradited back to the Philippines to stand trial for any crimes. Robin?

MacNEIL: NASA officials today denied putting pressure on the builders of the rocket boosters to approve the launch of the Challenger shuttle despite fears of a safety risk. It was NASA's day to answer charges leveled at yesterday's public hearing of the presidential commission investigating the shuttle disaster. George Hardy, deputy director of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, denied that risk had been subordinated to launch schedule pressures.

GEORGE HARDY, Marshall Fligth Center: I would hope that simple logic would suggest that no one in their right mind would knowingly accept increased flight risk for a few hours of schedule. I can say certainly not the dedicated men and women with whom I am associated with, many of whom have literally put their blood, sweat and tears in the shuttle program. And I'll only say one other thing on that subject, and that is that I believe to suggest that flight safety was disregarded or not properly regarded in the discussions of the night of January 27th in my opinion does a great disservice to many dedicated, committed professionals.

MacNEIL: But Hardy also told the commission that he would have recommended delaying the Challenger launch had he known that engineers at Morton Thiokol remained opposed on grounds that the cold weather could endanger the spacecraft and crew.

LEHRER: President Reagan will make a nationally televised pitch later tonight for his new defense budget. He gave a quick preview of it to reporters at the White House this morning.

Pres. RONALD REAGAN: A strong national defense for the United States is not only indispensable to arms control but for the security, freedom and peace of the entire world. A real and secure peace depends on us, on our courage to build it and guard it and pass it on to future generations. George Washington's words ring just as true today. To be prepared for war, he said, is one of the most effective means of preserving the peace. American strength is a sheltering arm peace and freedom in an often dangerous world. And strength is the most persuasive argument we have to convince our adversaries to give up their hostile intentions for to negotiate seriously and to stop bullying other nations.

LEHRER: The President's spokesman, Larry Speakes, also shot back today at Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on arms control. Gorbachev said yesterday the timing of the next Reagan-Gorbachev summit meeting was dependent on arms control progress. Well, Speakes said such linkage simply will not work. Gorbachev made his summit comment in a speech yesterday to the 27th Soviet Party Congress in Moscow. Today in Washington the Soviets did a most unusual thing concerning that Congress. They held a press briefing about it and denied they were backing out of a 1986 summit meeting.

VITALY CHURKIN, Soviet Embassy: The General Secretary does not -- did not say we do not want to have a meeting this year. As a matter of fact, we are open to any timing of the meeting if there is preparedness on the part of the U.S. administration.

SPOKESMAN: We do hope to have meeting.

Mr. CHURKIN: Yes, we want to have the meeting. We think in general -- we think the meetings of leaders -- the leaders of our two countries are very important historically. Extremely important results have been reached at such meetings, and of course we would like that practice of important results at important meetings to continue.

MacNEIL: The Supreme Court ruled today that cities may impose rent controls without waiting for state legislators to act. By an 8-1 vote the court upheld a Berkeley, California, rent control law. Landlords had claimed it was a price-fixing conspiracy that violated federal antitrust law. Justice Thurgood Marshall for the court said that because it was imposed by the city government, the Berkeley ordinance did not involve any concerted action by property owners to fix prices. The court also ruled unanimously that businesses may not escape paying retirement benefits by withdrawing from multi-employer pension plans.

LEHRER: There is another Tylenol story; it comes from Nashville, Tennessee, where a 32-year-old man was found dead this morning. Early tests showed he had cyanide in his body and an almost empty bottle of extra-strength Tylenol was found under his bed. But police and federal drug investigators have yet to figure out what it all means. One official even suggested it could be a most bizarre kind of suicide. Late today Tennessee officials banned the sale of Tylenol capsules in the state and the FBI joined the investigation.

MacNEIL: Thousands of Egyptian security police mutinied today, provoking battles with government troops that left 15 dead and 300 wounded. There was fighting in six locations, including the pyramids tourist area and a wealthy Cairo suburb. President Hosni Mubarak sent troops to crush the mutiny and put Cairo under a curfew. It was the most serious incident since Mubarak took power after Muslim extremists assassinated President Anwar Sadat in October, 1981. Soldiers in tanks patrolled the deserted streets of Maadi, a wealthy suburb just across the Nile from downtown Cairo. The muntineers set fire to a number of luxury hotels in Maadi and around Giza, where the pyramids are. Some guards at the hotels and nearby shops were killed, and many automobiles were destroyed by fire. The rioting began when draftees at a security force camp near the pyramids heard a rumor that they would have to serve four years instead of three. Actually a government source said it was planning to reduce the term by a month to save money.

Back in this country a Los Angeles judge today dismissed the indictment against Congresswoman Bobbie Fiedler and a top aide. They've been charged to bribe a campaign rival to stay out of the Republican Senate primary. The judge said there was too little evidence.

And in Washington, a court martial found Commander Billig, a Navy surgeon, guilty of involuntary manslaughter and negligent homicide in three open-heart operations at Bethesda Naval Hospital. Billig was acquitted of charges in two other deaths. He faces maximum sentences totalling 11 years and nine months in prison and dismissal from the Navy.

LEHRER: That's it for the news summary; now it's on to more on the Philippines story with the governor of Hawaii, Senator Jesse Helms, Jerry Falwell, George McGovern and businessman Lewis Burridge. And more on the explosive shuttle hearings about NASA's decision to go ahead with the launch of Challenger. Philippines: After the Fall

MacNEIL: Our first and major focus tonight is the aftermath of the change of power in the Philippines. As we reported, former president Ferdinand Marcos and a large retinue arrived in Hawaii, apparently for a long stay. That prospect has provoked two reactions. The governor, George Ariyoshi, urging Hawaiians to make an accommodation, half of the state's [TEXT OMITTED FROM SOURCE] supporting a resolution urging President Reagan to deny Marcos sanctuary in the U.S. Governor Ariyoshi, a long-time friend of Marcos, greeted him at Hickam Air Force Base today, and is with us now by telephone from Honolulu. Governor, are you there?

Gov. GEORGE ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Yes, I'm here. Aloha.

MacNEIL: What did Mr. Marcos say on his arrival?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Well, he was very grateful that the things went along peacefully, and he is a very strong nationalist, Philippines nationalist, and feels very strongly about his country, and he expressed to me the hope that things will not become violent, that things will work itself out.

MacNEIL: How long did you spend with him today?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Oh, half an hour.

MacNEIL: How is he feeling physically?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Physically he feels very good. He had a fever and he was not feeling very well when he left the Philippines; he had not had very much rest. But he told me that just as he got on the plane and started to come to Hawaii, the fever had disappeared and he came here feeling relatively good but expressed a hope that he could get some rest.

MacNEIL: I see. As a friend of his, do you know how ill he actually is? I mean, for instance, does he need immediate medical treatment?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: No, I do not know the circumstances of the -- or how ill he is.

MacNEIL: I see. How long will he stay at Hickam Air Force Base?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Initially they were talking about spending at least 24 hours there, and the family will get together. And they have not really decided what they want to do.

MacNEIL: Is staying in Honolulu, in Hawaii, permanently a possibility?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Oh, that's a possibility but that is not a decision that they have already made. The family will get together, they'll talk about this and then they'll decide what they want to do. Mr. Marcos told me that his initial reaction at the time that they were leaving Malacanang Palace, his desire was to go up north. But the family all felt that they should be together.

MacNEIL: Up north in one of the other Philippine islands, you mean?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Laoag, where his home province is.

MacNEIL: What other alternatives to Hawaii are there for him now?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: I don't know, because I did not discuss this with them and they were not certain about what they wanted to do. Of course, they indicated to me that they like Hawaii and Hawaii is a very attractive place to them.

MacNEIL: Does he own property in Hawaii?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: I do not know.

MacNEIL: I see. If he did stay there after leaving Hickam Air Base, would he stay with friends?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: I have no idea, and that kind of decision has not yet been made.

MacNEIL: I see. You say the family is going to meet and decide; what are the factors that will influence their decision?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Well, I guess the family wants to come together and talk about many options and many opportunities and what it is that they really want to do. The future is still -- you know, they just decided to leave the Philippines very fast and they have not had a chance to really talk too much about the future.

MacNEIL: How do you feel? Do you feel ambivalent yourself? You are a friend of his of long standing, but you're also the governor of a state where some people at least don't like the idea of him coming there. How does that make you feel?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: I'm not ambivalent on this question. I have stated very definitely that being a part of the United States and part of the effort of the President of the United States was to try to bring about the peaceful resolution of these difficulties in the Philippines. Part of that was to bring them into our country. And as a part of the United States I feel that this state must take the position that they are willing to make accommodations. Otherwise, the President of the United States would not be able to meet his commitment to the Marcos family, if every governor in every state took the position that they did not want to see the family stay in their state. So I'm not ambivalent on this question. I have indicated in no uncertain terms that I feel if he desires to stay in our Hawaii that we will welcome him.

MacNEIL: I see. Half of your state senate is reported supporting this resolution to urge President Reagan to deny asylum in the United States. Is that going to create a problem in Hawaii for you?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: I was at a national governors' meeting. I just returned last night. I have not had a chance to talk to any of the senators, and I do not believe that that's an accurate statement. The resolution -- and I was a member of the legislature for many years, too. We signed resolutions without knowing what the full impact was, and the fact that resolutions are signed and that's what it is, it is not an indication of the real support. And I've looked at some of the names of the people on the resolution and I'm not sure that all of those people are going to be taking that position.

MacNEIL: Is the federal government going to assume all security responsibilities?

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: For the moment the federal government has indicated that they will provide Secret Service protection. I do not know the extent and the duration of that protection.

MacNEIL: Well, Governor Ariyoshi, thank you very much for joining us from Honolulu.

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Okay, I appreciate the opportunity to chat with you.

MacNEIL: Thank you.

Gov. ARIYOSHI [by phone]: Aloha.

MacNEIL: Aloha. The Philippines may have a new government, but its economic problems and the gap between its few rich and many poor is still immense. Some of America's biggest companies have a big stake in whether the new government can begin to heal the ailing economy. According to Business Week magazine, American business investment in the Philippines, including assets of some of this country's major banks, runs to more than $3 billion. American companies made $2 billion in profits there in 1984. Even in the U.S. companies were growing increasingly concerned by the economic decline in the final Marcos years. Our team of correspondent Charles Krause and producer Susan Mills spotlighted the Philippine economic woes in their reporting last summer -- problems that contributed to Marcos' downfall and now constitute his legacy to the new government.

CHARLES KRAUSE [voice-over]: Even last July and August it was evident that growing poverty, government corruption and military abuses had turned a majority of Filipinos against Ferdinand Marcos. The urban poor suffered largely in silence, but students, organized union workers and professionals, many of them influenced by the Catholic Church or by the left, protested openly against the Marcos regime. By last year it was also evident that many of the Philippines' richest businessmen, the elite, had concluded that Marcos must go. None was more outspoken than the chief executive of the Benguet Mining Corporation, Jaime Ongpin, now President Aquino's minister of finance.

JAIME ONGPIN, Benguet Corporation [1985]: Last year the economy had negative growth for the first time, minus 6 , in our postwar history. This year, in spite of the government's insistence, we're going to have another negative growth rate. All our foreign creditors refuse to lend us one more penny. We've had to declare a moratorium on paying on our foreign debts. Inflation last year was raging at around 65 . In fact, I certainly believe that the reason why we are in this mess is because of the manner in which he has on the one hand mismanaged the economy, and on the other hand I guess abused all these powers that he has created for himself, you know, to create this present crisis that we find ourselves in.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Nowhere was the Philippines' festering economic and political crisis more apparent than in Manila, in neighborhoods like Leberisa where two to three thousand families live in desperate poverty. During the Marcos years there was never enough rice, never enough work, never enough medicine for the children. It was in Leberisa that we met Sister Christine Tan, a lifelong friend of Mrs. Aquino, who lives and works among the poor.

Sister CHRISTINE TAN [1985]: One thing I've learned in Leberisa is, sadly, we have no class mobility. Not like in the States. So you can work yourself hard, hard, hard, hard and you can be a genius, but you'll never move. You're born poor, you die poor.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: There are no toilets in Leberisa and at times the stench can be overpowering. Last year unemployment was estimated at 80 . Few men had regular jobs. For them, gambling, drinking and drugs had become a way of life. More often than not it was Leberisa's women who provided for their husbands and their children. They took in washing, earning about $3 a day. But according to Sister Christine, it was not enough.

Sister CHRISTINE: Well, you know when the people are starving they have to resort to any kind of vending or any kind of casual job to put food in the stomachs of their children.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: When we were in Manila last year President Marcos defended his economic record, claiming that he and his policies would prevail over what he saw as his principal threat, communism.

FERDINAND MARCOS, former Philippines president [1985]: The difference between the other Asians and our ideology is that we emphasize human resources development, uplifting the lower classes, instead of lowering them into mediocrity which some Asians do bring about.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: But the reality was inescapable. On Mabini Street young teenagers from Leberisa, girls and boys, were often forced to sell their bodies to earn money. Under Marcos Manila became a sex capital catering to foreigners. Wide, open prostitution was just one of the many reasons why the Catholic Church in the Philippines was so determined to end 20 years of rule by the Marcos family.

Sister CHRISTINE: I hate their deceitfulness, their sham, their greed, their avarice, their lies, their deliberate trouncing of our rights and the burying of our souls. They have been the greatest scandal in our history, and they have given us the darkest ages. The darkest age.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: In rural provinces like Negros Occidental, the economic crisis was in some ways even worse than in Manila. We found farmworkers at one sugar hacienda harvesting rocks. Their families were eating roots and grass, the same food they fed to their pigs. World sugar prices, coupled with economic mismanagement, favoritism and corruption had reduced Negros to an impoverished island where many, many people blamed Marcos for their problems. One of them was Fred Pfleider, a sugar planter who by last year had joined the opposition.

FRED PFLEIDER, opposition leader [1985]: I believe that the problem between the rich and the poor, the constant sense of hostility, especially on the part of the poor, comes not so much from the fact that they are poor and that there are rich people, but that the government prevents them from becoming rich even if they tried their damnedest to be rich. They can't. The system defeats them.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: That was seven months ago. Now Filipinos are celebrating their people's revolution. But the economic and political problems left behind by the old government may prove for more difficult to overcome than Marcos himself. Today in Manila Mrs. Aquino said she was determined and optimistic.

CORAZON AQUINO, President of the Philippines: The challenges and difficulties that our people and I face are daunting. But I am fortunate to be the president of a people who have demonstrated the courage, the tenacity, the idealism and the self-sacrifice to meet any goal and overcome any obstacle.

MacNEIL: For a U.S. business perspective we turn to Lewis Burridge, who recently completed a three-year term as president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Manila. Mr. Burridge spent 17 years in the Philippines with the Asian subsidiary of the Sterling Drug Corporation. He joins us tonight from public station WGBH in Boston. Mr. Burridge, how would you assess the economic crisis or problem that Mrs. Aquino faces?

LEWIS BURRIDGE: Well, I think there are enormous problems to be addressed as she takes her office. However, I think that one advantage she now has is she does not have to contend with a business community concerned about political uncertainties. I suppose she will also have political problems as her government goes into office and as time moves on, but at least she can assure herself of the business cooperation, both the private sector of the foreign community and the Philippine community, who have looked forward for at least three years for this opportunity.

MacNEIL: Reuters news agency polled bankers and businessmen in Manila today and found them by and large very optimistic that business confidence is going to be restored there. What do you think about that? Are you?

Mr. BURRIDGE: I think the simple fact of political change generates that confidence, and I think the confidence will continue and result in economic recovery if she can organize a government that can work closely with the private sector. I think this is the main problem over the last three years is the disillusionment of the private sector and disillusionment over special privileges given to specific people in institutions close to the administration.

MacNEIL: How extensive were corrupt business practices under Marcos?

Mr. BURRIDGE: I don't think corruption itself describes the complete picture. I would say certainly there was corruption. But special privileges was overwhelming.

MacNEIL: Describe what you mean by that.

Mr. BURRIDGE: Businessmen -- and I'm speaking now of Philippine businessmen, let alone foreign businessmen. Philippine businessmen had a very difficult time fighting those who had access to patronage, access to the financial institutions, to loans, access to land grants, protection of the military and other favors their to the closeness to the administration. And there was almost no way to oppose this under the conditions that existed the last two or three years.

MacNEIL: Some industries, like pineapple crops and sugar, were reportedly in the hands of Marcos cronies who ran virtual monopolies. Was that rampant throughout the economy, or was that confined to just a few industries?

Mr. BURRIDGE: Not too many industries but certainly the most important and the largest industries. The American Chamber made many representations to President Marcos and to his cabinet officers in respect to these abuses, and usually got a very pleasant hearing but nothing much happened to correct them.

MacNEIL: Do you expect Mrs. Aquino to be able effectively to take on these monopolies? I mean, are they going to disband themselves or give in easily?

Mr. BURRIDGE: Well, it's probably not an easy problem to address, especially those very large ones, the coconut and the sugar, which provide --

MacNEIL: Was I wrong about pineapples? It's coconuts I meant. I'm sorry.

Mr. BURRIDGE: It's coconuts. -- that provide a large part of the foreign exchange, and of course you're dealing here with world market prices. Sugar as an industry might be considered a twilight industry. There is an awful lot that has to be done to make that industry competitive, yet 65 of the Philippine population is rural and largely dependent on sugar and coconut. The newer, non-traditional industries will prosper more rapidly, I think, but there are serious basic problems that a simple change in administration won't be able to cure completely.

MacNEIL: Among the Marcos opposition were people who claim, or continue to claim, that the Philippines is still a feudal economy. We just heard Krause's report that wealth is in very few hands -- some say in even fewer hands under Marcos than it was -- and that poverty is widespread and that there's no chance of bridging the gap. How do you assess that problem and the difficulties of overcoming it?

Mr. BURRIDGE: Well, I would never agree that there is no chance of bridging the gap. Other countries in Asia have made progress, and the Philippines itself was making progress until five or six years ago. It was impacted very heavily by its debt load and by oil prices, but of course most of all politically by the assassination of Mr. Aquino.

MacNEIL: What difference is failure to deal radically with that basic problem of the division between rich and poor going to create problems down the line; for instance, to make the communist alternative more appealing to the poorer Filipinos?

Mr. BURRIDGE: It seems to me that the growth of NPA was probably equally due to political unrest as well as economic unrest. I think if Mrs. Aquino can answer the political question and reinstitute the democratic institutions in the country, the economic problems can be gradually solved. It is not an impossible situation, but certainly it's going to be very difficult, and I think all Filipinos expect the United States to be very forward in assisting them in that effort.

MacNEIL: How do you think it should do so, briefly?

Mr. BURRIDGE: Well, for one thing I think they are going to have to address their debt load. It's killing them now. I think there will have to be some modification of the terms of the IMF-World Bank agreement on rescheduling their debt. Secondly, I think U.S. aid and perhaps trade is something to be evaluated and re-evaluated. Certainly all of Asia is looking at us now and will be making up their minds as to the viability of our relationships, their relationships with us, based on how we react to the Philippines situation in the next few months and few years.

MacNEIL: Well, Mr. Burridge, thank you very much for joining us.

Mr. BURRIDGE: Thank you.

MacNEIL: Jim?

LEHRER: We move the discussion to the politics, internationally and other, of what is happening in the Philippines. American conservatives have been among the last to join the chorus calling for the removal of Ferdinand Marcos. Now that it is done, most have applauded the way the Reagan administration handled the situation. But what of Jesse Helms? Well, until today the acknowledged leader of the most conservative wing of the Republican Party in the Senate had not been heard from. Judy Woodruff talked to him this morning, and he said the key word now is hope.

Sen. JESSE HELMS, (R) North Carolina: I hope that Mrs. Aquino is for real when she says now that she's not going to have anything to do with communism, they're going to give them amnesty and that sort of thing. But more importantly, who is going to be actively advising her? Because, taking nothing away from the lady, I've never met her, she's going to have to have some experts in the art of government. And if she gets the right people who are anticommunist, then it'll be blue sky for the free world. If she gets people around her who are persuasive to her that, oh, well, we ought to take some of these communists in and let them help us run this government, then it's Katy-bar the door down the road.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you think the administration was too hard on Marcos at the end?

Sen. HELMS: Oh, I thought the administration made clear that he was a friend and ally. I know it was not an easy thing for the President to do, but I don't know what the State Department did throughout all this. I seldom understand what the State Department is doing anyhow. But in any case, the Senate in my judgment made a mistake when it addressed this thing because, how would we have felt if in 1960 when it was pretty well understood that the presidential election was stolen in this country -- if Great Britain or the Parliament had approved a resultion condemning corruption in U.S. politics?

WOODRUFF: You're saying that even though there was widespread evidence of fraud and abuse on the part of the Marcos campaign?

Sen. HELMS: There is widespread evidence, I understand, on both sides. And you don't hear anything about the corruption in the election on the other side. But that's a fait accompli and I don't think we ought to bother ourselves about that. We ought to concentrate on preventing a communist takeover of the Philippines as happened in Nicaragua, Cuba, Zimbabwe.

WOODRUFF: But without pursuing that, I mean, but just to pursue it for a moment, you are convinced that there was fraud on the Aquino side? I mean, from what you've heard?

Sen. HELMS: I wasn't there, but there have been reports that have not been released that I'm not privy to discuss publicly. But there was fraud on both sides generally, yeah, right here at home.

WOODRUFF: What do you think this Marcos experience says about how this administration, how this government treats its friends overseas?

Sen. HELMS: I would have hoped, just as one senator and as one American, that all along we would have been more forthcoming in our help in making clear what the problems of Marcos were. Now, I'm not defending Marcos. I'm certainly not defending any corruption in any election or anything else. But I'm saying that if he had communists orchestrating upheaval and revolution using innocent people, unknowing people, then he had a real problem, and if our intelligence people knew that, and they did, then they ought to have done something about it, or we ought to have done something about it. It's sort of like, Judy, in Nicaragua. Maybe Somoza was not your dish of tea or my dish of tea, but he was sure as heck a lot better than what was in second place.

LEHRER: We continue the discussion now with political opposites, the Reverend Jerry Falwell and George McGovern. Reverend Falwell is the head of the Liberty Federation, once called the Moral Majority. He joins us from Lynchburg, Virginia. Mr. McGovern was the United States senator from South Dakota and the 1972 Democratic nominee for President. Senator McGovern, do you share Senator Helms' concerns about the possible communist influence down the line over Mrs. Aquino and her new government?

GEORGE McGOVERN: I think that danger has been greatly lessened now that Marcos is gone. The real danger of communist growth in the Philippines was a bad reaction to Marcos. That's what gave them their opportunity. Obviously the communists are there, even though Marcos is gone, but you now have a government under Mrs. Aquino that has the support of the overwhelming majority of the people of the Philippines. It has the support of the business community; it has the support of top military leaders; it has the support of rank and file people. And I think what we have seen in the last few weeks is the most inspirational triumph of a people seeking to assert their democratic aspirations that we've seen in many, many years. It's my own view that the steady growth of that kind of freedom in the Philippines and a government that will be more sensitive to the political and economic and social concerns of the people is the best safeguard we have against communist growth in that country.

LEHRER: Reverend Falwell, what's your view of that?

JERRY FALWELL: Well, obviously we have two responsibilities. One, we need to be praying for a very successful transition. We can be thankful to God for the fact that this was virtually a bloodless revolution. And I would concur with Senator McGovern that it has been most inspirational to watch that from both sides. From Mr. Marcos and from Mrs. Aquino there has been a commitment to non-violence. I particularly applaud President Reagan, because he did not attempt to interfere early on. He waited until the very last moment, when it became clear that the will of the Filipino people was being made known, that at that time called for Mr. Marcos to step down and at the same time did what is American precedent -- there's much precedent for, and that is not only attempted to prevent Mr. Marcos from hurting his opponents, but removed him from the scene, offered him sanctuary. And in the long haul, if Senator McGovern is correct and if the concerns of my friend, Senator Helms, are not fulfilled, and that is that there is not an overwhelming amount of influence on the part of the NPA and the Marxist insurgents upon Mrs. Aquino, this could turn out to be a very positive thing in the final analysis. It is only in -- and the President has not erred in being a friend of Mr. Marcos because in a right-wing, autocratic regime like the one in the Philippines, it has given way to democracy, as was the case in Argentina, Brazil, Guatemala, Greece, Portugal, Spain. And that never happens even in the weakest Marxist regime such as Poland; democracy is forever gone whenever there is a Marxist takeover. So we -- the President has not been wrong in being a friend to those who are friends of us, even if they are right-wing dictators, but he also has been very right in working for a peaceful and bloodless transition, and I would commend him as well and the governor in Hawaii for giving to Mr. Marcos and his family an opportunity for refuge.

LEHRER: Senator?

Sen. McGOVERN: Could I just say a word about Senator Helms' earlier observation about giving the State Department a bad rap? That's very popular, to blame the State Department when things go wrong. But I think this is a clear triumph for the State Department. I think Secretary Shultz and the professionals in the State Department saw some time ago that Marcos had lost his popular base, and that for us to cling to him simply on the grounds that we had bases, military bases in the Philippines, was a no-win proposition. And so they cautioned him and persuaded the President to caution him that reforms had to be carried out. They urged these elections which President Marcos, to his credit, agreed to. They also insisted when those elections were clearly won by Mrs. Aquino, with Senator Lugar and others on the scene testifying to the widespread corruption on the part of the Marcos team, that he step aside. I think in this case you can't really fault the way the State Department weighed in. The one lapse was President Reagan's unfortunate comment about there being fraud on both sides. I don't see the evidence of fraud on the Aquino side.

LEHRER: Let's move to the politics in this country. It's been suggested that only a conservative president like President Reagan could have actually given the nudge to a man like Marcos. Do you agree, Senator McGovern?

Sen. McGOVERN: Well, that may have been true to some extent, but I do think the American people as a whole were ready for this. I want to give the President credit. When the crunch came he stood on the right side of the issue, urging President Marcos to step down. It's quite possible that there would have been a louder outcry from conservative elements in this country if that position had been taken, let us say, by former President Carter or Kennedy or Johnson or some of the other Democrats. So there's something in what you have to say. It's a kind of an interesting paradox that in the last month President Duvalier in Haiti and President Marcos in the Philippines, two of the less popular governments in the world, have both gone. And I give the Reagan administration a couple of points on that. I think by and large they handled both of those things rather well.

LEHRER: As a conservative, Reverend Falwell, how do you feel about this thesis that only a conservative like President Reagan could have done this? Include Duvalier. Duvalier and Marcos, the way that he did.

Rev. FALWELL: I think there's some value to that statement, some merit to it. However, I think that Senator McGovern is correct, that clearly -- when I was in the Philippines just a couple of months ago, just after Senator Laxalt was there, we both urged Mr. Marcos -- we first commended him for calling for elections, but we also urged him to see to it that those elections were honest and above reproach, so that there could be a clear mandate in this country that the people, the Filipino people wanted him. Obviously he didn't pay any attention to that, but I think while we're passing out accolades that Paul Laxalt deserves a great deal of commendation, not only because of his first visit there, his visit with Mr. Marcos, and clearly articulating President Reagan's wishes, and Mr. Marcos explained to me that Mr. Laxalt had in fact told him very clearly and up front what was expected from this side of the waters, his phone call with Mr. Marcos urging that he step down and that he cut cleanly. I think that had quite an impact on his not using military might when he was in the position to do it. There was a point, and I was listening to Enrile and Ramos last night say that there was a point when they were very, very weak and had Mr. Marcos wished to do it, there could have been a real bloodbath. And so to Senator Laxalt I think the American people and the Filipino people owe a great debt of gratitude.

LEHRER: Neither of you gentlemen are concerned at all about the President of the United States interfering in any way in the change of government in another nation?

Sen. McGOVERN: Not at all. When you consider that all we were asking for were fair elections and for the government that we'd been backing out there over the years with generous amounts of American foreign aid to heed that election, I think it was perfectly proper that we weighed in dipomatically and politically to urge that those election results be heeded.

LEHRER: But what about Senator Helms' point that in the 1960 election if Great Britain had said, "Hey, you had a fraudulent election in the United States, go away, President Kennedy," we would have been -- we wouldn't have liked that.

Sen. McGOVERN: I don't think anybody takes that seriously. First of all, I've never heard the man who was defeated in 1960 say that the election was stolen from him. If he felt that way he didn't challenge it in any way. No one's ever accused President Nixon of not pressing his advantage politically. So I think this charge is a specious one. It seems to me that the big lesson of what happened in the Philippines, and it was something the State Department understood in this case, is that American foreign policy -- the dominant note in American foreign policy can't simply be anti-Russian or anticommunist. Basically, the dominant note ought to be pro-liberty. It's important what the United States stands for.

LEHRER: You agree with that, Reverend Falwell?

Rev. FALWELL: I do, indeed, and I would hope now that what we have seen happen in the Philippines can be an example for us as we approach the totalitarian government in Managua, Nicaragua, so that we might get behind President Reagan's efforts to give assistance to those courageous freedom fighters, the contras in Central America, to bring down another totalitarian regime that allows no free press, no freedom of religion, where our missionaries are killed. And, you know, even in the worst days of Mr. Marcos in the Philippines our missionaries there who represent JesusChrist were never one time challenged as to their right to preach the gospel, and I believe that Mrs. Aquino will follow that same example. So I hope that in our support for Jonas Savimbi in Angola and our support for --

LEHRER: All right, okay.

Rev. FALWELL: -- freedom fighters worldwide --

LEHRER: I hear you.

Rev. FALWELL: -- we'll give the same kind of support.

LEHRER: All right, thank you very much, Reverend Falwell, Senator McGovern.

Rev. FALWELL: Thank you. NASA: On The Stand

MacNEIL: Finally tonight, the on-going investigation into what caused the space shuttle Challenger disaster. Yesterday engineers of Morton Thiokol, the maker of the shuttle's booster rocket, said they felt pressured by NASA to approve the launch despite their fears that cold weather might pose a risk. Today it was NASA's turn to reply. Elizabeth Brackett again covered the hearings for us.

BRACKETT [voice-over]: NASA officials came back hard today. Lawrence Mulloy, NASA's top solid rocket booster man, flatly denied that NASA had changed its philosophy on flight safety.

LAWRENCE MULLOY, Marshall Space Center: I assure you, sir, that there was no reversal of the tradition of NASA which says "prove to me why you can't fly" versus "prove to me why can you can."

BRACKETT [voice-over]: Mulloy said that he had received a recommendation not to launch from Morton Thiokol, the firm that makes the solid rocket boosters, but he denied that he had put pressure on Morton Thiokol to change that decision.

Mr. MULLOY: That was an engineering conclusion which -- I found this conclusion without basis and I challenged its logic. Now, that has been interpreted by some people as applying pressure. I certainly don't consider it to be applying pressure.

ROBERT HOTZ, commission member: You were quoted as saying, "Do you expect us to wait 'til April to launch?"

Mr. MULLOY: Yes.

Mr. HOTZ: Is that an accurate statement or not?

Mr. MULLOY: It's certainly a statement that's out of context, and the way I read the quote, sir, and I've seen it many times, too many times, the quote I read was, "My God, Thiokol, when do you want me to launch, next April?" Mr. McDonald testified to another quote that says, "You guys are generating new launch commit criteria." The total context, I think, in which those words may have been used is, "There are currently no launch commit criteria for joint temperature. What you are proposing to do is to generate a new launch commit criterion on the eve of a launch after we have successfully flown with the existing launch commit criteria 24 previous times."

WILLIAM ROGERS, commission chairman: It's pretty clear that you were -- you and Mr. Hardy were very unhappy about the recommendation of the engineers, and as we understand it, the recommendation of the engineers was don't launch. And you expressed your displeasure. And somewhere along the line they decided to have what would seem like a five-minute recess, which seemed very odd to me the first time I heard it. Why five minutes on a matter of such major importance? Why would anybody say let's have a five-minute recess? I would have thought they would have had a five-hour recess on a matter of such major importance. But in any event I want the record to be clear. I don't believe there's any contradiction of testimony on that point.

Mr. MULLOY: Yes. I hope that I have not said that I was upset by a recommendation not to launch. What I was challenging were conclusions that were drawn. The recommendation not to launch or to launch at that time wouldn't upset me one way or the other. What I was --

Mr. ROGERS: But that was for the purpose of the discussion, whether you would launch or not.

Mr. MULLOY: Yes, sir. The end result would be that, but the purpose of the discussion was to understand the data and the logic of conclusions being drawn from those data. And that's what I was working for.

BRACKETT [voice-over]: Mulloy's superior, George Hardy, issued his own denial of a change in NASA's safety philosophy.

GEORGE HARDY, Marshall Space Center: I categorically reject any suggestion that the process was "prove to me it isn't ready to fly" as opposed to the traditional approach of "prove that this craft is ready to fly." I would hope that simple logic would suggest that no one in their right mind would knowingly accept increased flight risk for a few hours of schedule. I can say certainly not the dedicated men and women with whom I am associated with, many of whom have literally put their blood, sweat and tears in the shuttle program.

SALLY RIDE, commission member: Normally contractors are in the position of trying to prove to both of you that they're ready to fly, that their systems are safe to fly and they're used to having to defend that point of view. This time they were in the other position. They were so concerned that they in fact recommended not to launch. I think that you might argue that they were so used to hearing you say, you know, "Are you sure it's safe?" that when you both said, "Are you sure it's not safe?" that they were so taken aback that they perceived that as pressure. And I guess I'm wondering whether it's possible that you didn't realize that you could have been generating this reaction just because of the reversal of their normal position relative to you.

Mr. HARDY: Well, of course first of all -- I don't think you implied this, but we didn't ask them, "Are you sure it's not safe?" You know, there was no discussion that I'm aware of where that question was asked like that. Now, as to whether or not someone else could perceive a line of questioning to try to understand the data and in fact probe the data and in fact challenge certain points on the data, but I maintain you're not really going to understand it sometimes unless you challenge it. And then I [TEXT OMITTED FROM SOURCE] -- I have found that in most cases engineers, managers or whatever else who have a true conviction in the data that they're presenting to you will hang tough. I can't imagine who could pressure me in what way to get me to accept some -- any significant increase or any increase in safety of flight. I can't imagine who could do that.

Ms. RIDE: I think the indications from the testimony that we heard yesterday were that the engineers did, in your terminology, hang tough, that the engineers at Thiokol were still arguing the points that they had been arguing at the beginning.

Mr. HARDY: Well, I'm not aware of that part of the discussion or the facts that took place.

Mr. ROGERS: I think all of us feel that there's been a breakdown of sorts in the process. You said that you would not have approved of the launch if Thiokol had recommended against it. That's correct, isn't it?

Mr. HARDY: Yes, sir.

Mr. ROGERS: Now, suppose that Mr. Kilminster had said to you, "I'm sending the telefax and this represents management's decision -- three or four of us -- but all the engineers are still opposed to the launch." How would you have reacted to that?

Mr. HARDY: I would not have accepted it.

BRACKETT [voice-over]: It was the system of communication that bothered panel members all day, not only from the Thiokol engineers to NASA, but within NASA as well.

DONALD KUTYNA, commission member: If this were an airplane, an airliner, and I just had a two-hour argument with Boeing on whether the wing was going to fall off or not, I think I'd tell the pilot, at least mention it. Why didn't we escalate a decision this important?

Mr. MULLOY: I did, sir.

Mr. KUTYNA: You did?

Mr. MULLOY: Yes, sir.

Mr. KUTYNA: Tell me what levels above you knew.

Mr. MULLOY: As I stated earlier, Mr. Reinartz, who is my manager, was at the meeting, and on the morning, about 5:00 in the operations support room where we all are, I informed Dr. Lucas of the --

Mr. KUTYNA: But Dr. Lucas is not in the launch decision chain.

Mr. MULLOY: No, sir, he is not.

Mr. KUTYNA: What was the highest level --

Mr. MULLOY: Mr. Reinartz is in the launch decision chain.

BRACKETT [voice-over]: In the afternoon it was Stan Reinartz's turn to tell General Kutyna what he had done with the information.

STAN REINARTZ, Marshall Space Center: Based on the results of the meeting and the conclusions out of the meeting, Mr. Mulloy and I informed the director of Marshall, Dr. Lucas, and the director of science and engineering, Mr. Kingsbury, on the 28th of January, about five, of the initial Thiokol concerns and engineering recommendations, the final Thiokol launch recommendation --

Gen. KUTYNA: Stan, can I interrupt for a minute?

Mr. REINARTZ: Yes, sir.

Gen. KUTYNA: You informed Dr. Lucas. He's not on the reporting chain.

Mr. REINARTZ: No, sir.

Gen. KUTYNA: If I can use an analogy, if you want to report a fire, you don't go to the mayor. You know, in his position as center director, Dr. Lucas was out of the reporting chain, much like a mayor. If it was important enough to report to him, why didn't you go through the fire department and go up your decision chain?

Mr. REINARTZ: Based on my assessment of the situation as dispositioned that evening, for better or worse, I did not perceive any clear requirement for interaction with level two as the concern was work and disposition with full agreement among all responsible parties as to that agreement.

Mr. HOTZ: Mr. Reinartz, are you telling us that you in fact are the person who made the decision not to escalate this to a level two item?

Mr. REINARTZ: That's correct, sir.

BRACKETT [voice-over]: Over the last two days the commission has heard detailed analysis from both sides on what the data meant. Thiokol engineers thought the data meant it was too cold to launch. They feared the cold would hurt the ability of the rubber O-rings to seal the joints on the shuttle solid rocket booster. NASA admitted to the problem with the O-ring seals and to numerous warnings about the problem, but they did not think the cold would have made it worse. Commissioners wondered if NASA had stopped to ask the bigger question, was the shuttle safe to fly with a joint seal problem they already knew could destroy the mission and the crew, a problem that could have been made more critical when the weather was bad? Tomorrow the commission will reconvene with the focus once again on the weather.

MacNEIL: Once again the main stories of the day. Ferdinand Marcos arrived in Hawaii, apparently for a long stay. A NASA official said he would have recommended delaying the Challenger launch if he had known that engineers opposed it. And President Reagan said cuts in his defense budget would be reckless, dangerous and wrong. He spoke from the White House this evening.

Pres. RONALD REAGAN: The past five years have shown that American strength is once again a sheltering arm for freedom in a dangerous world. Strength is the most persuasive argument we have to convince our adversaries to negotiate seriously and to cease bullying other nations. But tonight the security program that you and I launched to restore America's strength is in jeopardy. Threatened by those who would quit before the job is done, any slackening now would invite the very dangers America must avoid and could fatally compromise our negotiating position. Our adversaries, the Soviets, we know from painful experience, respect only nations that negotiate from a position of strength. American power is the indispensable element of a peaceful world. It is America's last best hope of negotiating real reductions in nuclear arms. Just as we are sitting down at the bargaining table with the Soviet Union, let's not throw America's trump card away.

MacNEIL: President Reagan tonight. Good night, Jim.

LEHRER: Good night, Robin. We'll see you tomorrow night. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.