The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight, Ray Suarez reports today's U.S. decision to ease sanctions against Iran; Margaret Warner interviews Bertie Ahern, the prime minister of Ireland; Kwame Holman chronicles the House of Representatives' unrest over a new chaplain; Mark Shields and Paul Gigot analyze the week of politics; and Poet Laureate Robert Pinsky offers some poetry for this St. Patrick's Day. It all follows our summary of the news this Friday.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: The United States eased sanctions on Iran today. Secretary of State Albright announced the decision in Washington. It lifted the ban on some luxury imports from Iran, including carpets, caviar, and pistachios. Albright also pledged to settle outstanding legal claims. She pointed to Iran's moves toward democratic reform.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: The dramatic social and political developments in Iran merit from us a broader and more forthcoming approach. At the same time, we have to continue to take into account what has not changed, and that includes our very serious concerns about proliferation and about Iran's support for terrorism and its impact on the Middle East peace process. If we are truly to move forward from here, the U.S. and Iran must do so together in a balanced and mutual way.

JIM LEHRER: Iran said the U.S. announcement was a positive development. We'll have more on this story right after the News Summary. On this St. Patrick's Day, President Clinton met separately with key players in the Northern Ireland peace process. Britain suspended the provincial government last month when the Irish Republican Army refused to disarm. Mr. Clinton saw Irish Prime Minister Ahern first. He gave the President a traditional bowl of shamrocks. We'll talk with the prime minister later in the program tonight. There was a major agreement today on gun safety involving the nation's largest gun maker. Smith & Wesson will include safety locks with handguns. It will also place new restrictions on sales. In return, state and local governments will drop liability suits, and the federal government will drop a threat to file its own suit. In Washington President Clinton said this.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: This agreement is a major victory for America's families. It says that gun makers can and will share in the responsibility to keep their products out of the wrong hands. And it says that gun makers can and will make their guns much safer without infringing on anyone's rights.

JIM LEHRER: The agreement would not affect the other gun makers in the U.S.. Police in Atlanta searched for the former H. Rap Brown today. He was a leader of the Black Panthers in the 1960's. Last night he allegedly shot two sheriffs deputies who tried to arrest him in a theft case. One of them died today. Brown is now a community activist known as Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin. Police said they think he was wounded in the shoot-out. The rising cost of fuel oil and gasoline had an inflationary effect on the economy last month. The Labor Department today reported consumer prices rose 0.5%, the most in ten months. Analysts expect the Federal Reserve now will raise short-term interest rates again next week as an anti-inflation move. A tentative agreement was reached today in the Boeing engineers' strike. It would end a walkout by thousands of workers in seven states. They've been off the job for 38 days. Union leaders said the deal guarantees pay raises of at least 9% over three years. The engineers vote on the agreement Sunday. And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to a gesture toward Iran, the prime minister of Ireland, the House's chaplain problem, Shields and Gigot, and a bit of St. Patrick's Day poetry.

FOCUS - THAWING RELATIONS

JIM LEHRER: The Iran story, and to Ray Suarez. (Applause)

RAY SUAREZ: The Secretary of the State's appearance before the America- Iranian Council had been talked about for weeks. It was clear from the buildup it was meant as a response to recent elections in Iran.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: Spring is the season of hope and renewal, of planting the seeds for new crops, and my hope is that both in Iran and the united states, we can plant the seeds now for a new and better relationship in years to come. And that is precisely the prospect that I would like to discuss with you today.

RAY SUAREZ: Last month's parliamentary elections in Iran brought a new moderate majority to the Majlis, and bolstered the position of the Iranian president, Mohammed Khatami, elected two yearsago. His reform efforts had been attacked by entrenched and still powerful conservative clerics from Iran's revolutionary era and parts of the army and state security system. But the results left no doubt that Khatami is still ascendant. Secretary of State Albright conceded the power struggle is still under way.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: As in any diverse society, there are many currents whirling about in Iran. Some are driving the country forward, others are holding it back. Despite the trend toward democracy, control over the military, judiciary, courts, and police remains in unelected hands, and the elements of its foreign policy about which we are most concerned have not improved. But the momentum is in the direction of internal reform, freedom, and openness is growing stronger.

RAY SUAREZ: But Secretary Albright was frank about the years of animosity that lead Iran and the United States to this moment.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: It is no secret that for two decades most Americans have viewed Iran primarily through the prism of the U.S. Embassy takeover in 1979, accompanied, as it was, by the taking of hostages, hateful rhetoric, and the burning of the U.S. flag. Through the years, this grim view was reinforced by the Iranian government's repression at home and its support for terrorism abroad, by its assistance to groups violently opposed to the Middle East peace process, and by its effort to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

RAY SUAREZ: But that historic resentment, the secretary concluded, is not a one-way street. She acknowledged that the U.S. had made mistakes in its historic dealings with Iran.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: In 1953 the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh. Moreover, during the next quarter-century, the United States and the West gave sustained backing to the Shah's regime. Although it did much to develop the country economically, the Shah's government also brutally repressed political dissent. As President Clinton has said, the united states must bear its fair share of responsibility for the problems that have arisen in U.S.-Iranian relations.

RAY SUAREZ: Secretary Albright spoke of Iran's strategic position in its region, noted the Tehran's government's aid to international efforts to control the drug trade. She took positive note of President Khatami's desire to break down the wall of mistrust between the two countries, while declaring that in America's desire for official contact with Iran, it has no secret conditions or hidden agendas.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: As a step towards bringing down that wall of mistrust, I want today to discuss the question of economic sanctions. The United States imposed sanctions against Iran because of our concerns about proliferation and because the authorities exercising control in Tehran financed and supported terrorist groups, including those violently opposed to the Middle East peace process. To date, the political developments in Iran have not caused its military to crease its determined effort to acquire technology, materials and assistance needed to develop nuclear weapons, nor have those developments caused Iran's revolutionary guard corps or its ministry of intelligence and security to get out of the terrorism business. Until these policies change, fully normal ties between our government will not be possible, and our principal sanctions will remain. The purpose of our sanctions, however, is to spur changes in policy. They are not an end in themselves, nor do they seek to target innocent civilians.

RAY SUAREZ: At that point, the secretary announced her removal of embargoes on a range of Iranian exports, including dried fruits, nuts, caviar, and Iranian crafts. This loosening follows earlier easings of restrictions on trade in food and American medicines and civilian airplane parts. The secretary also declared an American intention to increase contacts between American and Iranian scholars, professionals, artists, athletes and non-governmental organizations. Secretary Albright announced America's intention to help settle outstanding legal claims between the two countries, many dating back to the Iranian revolution. After the speech, Albright met with reporters at the State Department.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: I have to say, I have just been shown the initial responses out of Tehran, and they're generally positive. But I think it was a long speech, I said a lot of different things in it. And they have to analyze it. And we're not expecting any rapid kind of response to it. It's there on the table -- we have to see.

RAY SUAREZ: She was referring to a statement from an Iranian foreign ministry spokesman which said: There were positive and negative points in the speech. On the one hand past accusations are repeated, but on the other Albright has tried to admit America's past mistakes and present a new and different attitude toward the Islamic Republic of Iran. Despite the Secretary's olive branch, Iran remains one of seven nations on earth on the State Department's list of terrorist-supporting countries, and its oil remains on the embargo list.

NEWSMAKER

JIM LEHRER: Now a Newsmaker interview with Bertie Ahern, the prime minister of Ireland. He and other Irish and British leaders are in Washington this week for talks with President Clinton about how to rescue the Northern Ireland peace process. Here's what the President had to say after his meeting with Ahern today.

PRESIDENT CLINTON: We are conscious that Ireland, along with the other parties to the Good Friday Accord, made fundamental and principled compromises in the effort to secure a lasting peace. That agreement remains the very best hope we have ever had for achieving peace, and I still believe it will succeed. And the model of the Good Friday Accord represents not just hope for Northern Ireland but hope for so many stricken areas all across the earth now suffering from sectarian violence. As extraordinary as Ireland's record is in exporting peace and peacekeepers for troubled areas of the earth, nothing will compare to the gift Ireland gives the world if you can make your own peace permanent.

JIM LEHRER: Now to our interview, and to Margaret Warner.

MARGARET WARNER: Prime minister Bertie Ahern played a major role in producing the 1998 Good Friday Accord that was to bring peace to neighboring Northern Ireland. He helped persuade Catholic Republican leaders in the North to come to the table. And, to sweeten the deal for the Protestants, he persuaded the voters of his republic of Ireland to give up their constitutional claim to Northern Ireland. But last month, the British government suspended Northern Ireland's new power-sharing, home-rule government between the Protestant Unionists and Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Irish Republican Army. The issue: the IRA's continued refusal to disarm. I spoke with Prime Minister Ahern this morning before his meeting with the President.

MARGARET WARNER: Welcome, Mr. Prime Minister. Thanks for being with us.

BERTIE AHERN: Thank you very much.

MARGARET WARNER: Explain to us why Sinn Fein and the IRA weren't able tostep up to the plate on disarmament.

BERTIE AHERN: Well, I think we've had five years on the issue of disarmament, saying to the IRA that if there they were to be part of the system of government, disarmament had to be a central part of it. They interpreted that as surrender. Their view would be that no army that was undefeated surrenders. So... and they were not going to give in their arms. And our argument is, under the Good Friday Agreement, decommission was part of the process. We would argue that it is in nobody's interest that a party, Sinn Fein, who would be in government, that those associated to them would be armed or would still have their arms -- and even for the purpose of that they would drop into criminal hands or could be used by somebody else and accepting that the IRA has no intention of using them. There are the differences. If it's put into terms of surrender, the IRA will not move. If it's put into terms of what is right for a growing democracy, I think we have some prospect of success.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you think that the Protestant Unionists' fears and objections to having the IRA retain its arms are legitimate?

BERTIE AHERN: Well, you know, I think if the IRA don't use their arms, I think that's a huge plus, if there's a cease-fire and an ongoing cease- fire. So that's a huge confidence measure. But there is some legitimacy, I think, in the argument that, if an organization has an enormous amount of an arsenal, that then somewhere along the way they could use them. In Ireland it's considered "guns under the table" philosophy. So I think that has to be addressed. Now, how it's best addressed -- everyone accept that the decommissioning of arms is a voluntary act by the various paramilitary groups, it's not only the IRA, but the Sinn Fein would be the only group that would be in government that would be linked in any way to a group that have arms -- so therefore, it is best if something could be negotiated where the IRA themselves agree to put their arms beyond use in a verifiable way in a period to be agreed. That would be the ideal situation.

MARGARET WARNER: David Trimble, the Ulster Unionist leader, was on our show a couple of nights ago, and said that he felt he had taken a big risk by going ahead and going into self-rule, the shared - power-share government, without a promise from the IRA on decommissioning or disarmament. And he had taken on essentially the extremist elements in his party, or the hard-liners. And he didn't feel that Gerry Adams, the Sinn Fein leader, had done the same with the hard- liners in the IRA. Do you think that's a valid criticism, or do you think that Adams has done everything he can to pursued the IRA to give up its arms?

BERTIE AHERN: Well, you know, I think you can take it both ways. I think both of them in the last few years have done an incredible amount to carry their people. Both Gerry Adams, with his own organization and equally persuading the IRA, and David Trimble certainly has done an enormous amount with his party - and -- but that doesn't end the picture. I think both of them at different times perhaps would have liked to go forward if it had not been... David Trimble really had to bring in a new deadline on the 31st of January, which was not part of the mutual review. That antagonized Gerry Adams, so Gerry Adams could not convince the IRA. At other times, Gerry Adams has done things that has not been good enough for David Trimble. So I think, you know, they must continue to work together and work out work with their own organizations. We need them singing from the same hymn sheet as best we can, because otherwise, that creates major difficulties for the process.

MARGARET WARNER: Now, the reports in the Irish press and in the British press were that you were unhappy with the British government's decision to suspend the Northern Ireland government. Did the British government have any choice, given the threat that David Trimble had made, to resign otherwise?

BERTIE AHERN: Well, we had two difficulties. I mean there's been lots of recriminations and lots of arguments and lots of talk, which won't really get us anywhere, so we want to stop that. And, you know... but the reason we were upset about it was, were two-fold: One, we had changed our constitution and suspending institutions and the way it happened...

MARGARET WARNER: The Republic of Ireland, your country?

BERTIE AHERN: The Republic of Ireland; that created a constitutional problem for us, and still does. That was the first thing. And secondly, it was in breach of the Good Friday agreement. So it wasn't just a, you know, an argument in isolation. It was for those two very specific reasons that we were upset about it. Now, we know that the British government had difficulty because they had public commitments to David Trimble and they had to honor them. But the way it was done-- remember, we spent years trying to put it all together, and then in five minutes it all came down, and of course that creates enormous ripples through the Republican movement, through the Nationalist movement, all over the island of Ireland. And that was the reason we were upset. But those two particular reasons were the stated reasons for our problems.

MARGARET WARNER: You have said in recent speeches there might be a way to resolve this by getting beyond the disarmament issue. Can you explain that?

BERTIE AHERN: We have to take into account... when I say beyond that, we're talking about the other issues that are outstanding in the Good Friday Agreement, which are the criminal justice issue, the equality issues, the policing issue. And if we can put all of the outstanding issues together and come to an agreement on how we deal with all of the outstanding issues, I think we perhaps - also we can get an agreement on how we deal with the arms issue. So they must be taken, you know, collectively. If they take them separately, we will not find a solution.

MARGARET WARNER: But are you thinking that there's a possibility of doing this without disarmament? I mean do you have any indication from the Protestant Unionists that they would accept that?

BERTIE AHERN: Well, I think they won't accept that the arms issue is not clear, that they need absolute clarity of what's going to happen. It has to start somewhere, it has to end somewhere. The idea of getting arms up front is an unlikely possibility. It is, in our judgment, not going to happen. But if it is a voluntary act and if it's the essential part of the Good Friday Agreement and if the Good Friday Agreement is fully implemented, then it has to happen. So I think what could be negotiated is the time scale that it happens. And I think that would give confidence to the Unionist people that it is going to happen, but perhaps not in the short time scale that we envisaged.

MARGARET WARNER: Everyone from Gerry Adams to Joe Lockhart, the White House press secretary, have said this week they don't see a prospect of a breakthrough here in Washington. Do you agree with that?

BERTIE AHERN: I agree with that. I think it's... what we're doing now is having very good engagement and, again, focusing together. Yesterday, the speaker's lunch, which the President attended, and it was the first time we were all there together, all of the groups were together since January -- so that was useful. There was bilateral discussion with all of the groups. The President was meeting the various leaders. So that I think all - you know -- builds back up the political process, rather than what, frankly, we've probably all been guilty of the last five weeks. It's five weeks today since the suspension of the executive -- and that's recriminations and everyone shouting at each other. At least, I think, it's a big part. The President has succeeded in having everybody here, everybody talking to each other, and again, I think focusing on how we get out of this. So I don't... we're not going to get a resolution of it, I don't underestimate the value of it. It's very useful.

MARGARET WARNER: Ulster police this week seized 500 pounds of bomb-making explosives reportedly being transported to Belfast by some Republicans with ties to Irish Republican splinter groups. How long do you think this stalemate can continue without really courting the threat of renewed violence?

BERTIE AHERN: Well, you know, I think the answer to that is fairly simple, because we can base it on the experience over the last 30 years. Whenever we had stalemates, whenever there was no political progress, violence almost became inevitable from somebody somewhere. The new millennium, I think, means that that's from splinter Republican groups or splinter loyalist groups, and unfortunately there's a number of them. And they thrive in a vacuum, in a political vacuum. We'd had an attempt at blowing up of an army station in Derry recently. We've had a number of punishment beatings again. We've had shooting incidents, removing of arms, all by paramilitary and loyalist groups. And so as soon as they see an opportunity that there is no political progress, then they move. And that's why a few days like this in Washington is very important, because, again, the news is political activity, political action, concentration on the issues. And that's why sometimes it's talking and people say, "well, talking never gets you anywhere." Well, it does focus people on it's politics we're involved and not an armed struggle again.

MARGARET WARNER: Well, thank you, Mr. Prime minister very much. Good luck.

BERTIE AHERN: Thank you very much.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, chaplain problems in the House, Shields and Gigot, and a St. Patrick's Day poem.

FOCUS - HOLY WAR

JIM LEHRER: Now a look at a House divided by religion. Kwame Holman reports.

KWAME HOLMAN: The November elections are approaching. All 435 seats in the House of Representatives are open to challenge and majority control of the House is a close call. Yet two questions of more immediate concern are who will be selected as the new House chaplain, and can a selection be made without causing a religious schism in the House?

REP. HENRY HYDE: Well, I think it's an example of politics at its lowest level, interjecting religion where it doesn't belong.

REP. ANNA ESHOO, (D) California: For anyone to suggest that this is partisan? No. This is not making room, in my view, for Catholicism within Christianity.

REV. JAMES FORD, House Chaplain: I don't think the argument necessarily is about religion per se, but about procedures and things like that.

KWAME HOLMAN: During 21 years as chaplain of the House of Representatives, Reverend James Ford, a Lutheran minister, has made it a practice not to involve himself in legislative or partisan political affairs. He has involved himself in other ways.

REV. JAMES FORD: The chaplain has the unique role of being able to walk around the building, and walk up to people and say, "how are you doing?" Or get to know them. And I, over the years, have gotten to know some people well, and I... They expect the chaplain to ask how you're doing. And then if it's a concern or a counseling situation, I invite them to my office and we can talk more confidentially.

KWAME HOLMAN: Reverend Ford also should be well known to regular watchers of C-Span. He, or a guest chaplain, has opened each daily session of the House with a prayer.

REV. JAMES FORD: We are privileged and thankful, o God, that we can begin a new day with these words of prayer -- with gratefulness for the wonder and beauty and glory of your creation, with appreciation for friends who care for us and support us in our every need.

REV. JAMES FORD: They're short, they're not long. They're not always relevant to the issues of the day, but they're relevant to the issues of the soul.

KWAME HOLMAN: More than a year ago, Reverend Ford announced his intention to retire from the $140,000-a-year position he has held since 1979.

REV. JAMES FORD: Tip O'Neill was the Speaker when I came. There was a committee when I was named. You have to be elected eventually, but Speaker O'Neill told me at one point, he said, "I..." His words were, "I was getting pressured to name someone or to suggest someone." And I used to kid that he really liked me because he thought I was an Irish priest from South Boston. "I'm a Swede from Minnesota." And he said, "you look like an Irishman, you act like an Irishman, so I always have that pleasure."

KWAME HOLMAN: But selecting a chaplain to replace Reverend Ford has not been as pleasant an experience. Some critics say the selection process simply was mishandled, while others contend it smacked of outright religious bigotry. Whatever the charges, they're being aimed at House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

REP. DENNIS HASTERT, Speaker of the House: You know, the chaplain search had never been opened up. We've only had five chaplains in the last century, and every one of those had been appointed by the Speaker of the House. The last chaplain was appointed by Tip O'Neill, and he sent a letter to Mr. Rhoades and said this is going to be the chaplain. I thought, you know, this House deserves a little bit better than that.

KWAME HOLMAN: So Hastert created an 18- member committee to begin the search for a new chaplain-- a bipartisan group, nine Republicans, nine Democrats. California Democrat Anna Eshoo was one of three Catholics to serve.

REP. ANNA ESHOO: It was a great deal of work. I mean, we literally spent, I think, hundreds of hours engaged in this. And we attracted, I think, 60- some candidates nationally.

KWAME HOLMAN: By October the committee had narrowed its list of candidates and members cast ballots for their top three choices. Father Timothy O'Brien, a Catholic priest from Marquette University in Milwaukee, received the most votes.

REP. ANNA ESHOO: Father O'Brien received 14 out of the 18 votes, which represents 78%. He had the most... He drew the most support from both sides, Republicans and Democrats.

KWAME HOLMAN: The Reverend Robert Dvorak, regional director of the Evangelical Covenant Church, placed second and the Reverend Charles Wright, a Presbyterian minister, was third. The names of the three finalists were sent to Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Dick Armey, and Minority Leader Richard Gephardt for final selection. But the committee sent the names without any ranking.

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: That's what they decided to do, that's how they decided to come down with the three unranked people to pass on to us. So, you know, they were... That explanation was never given to us. That was their internal system of coming and choosing three people.

REP. ANNA ESHOO: They have said the names were not ranked. In my view that is, at best, a lame excuse, because again, everything we do here is by vote. The chairman of our committee, Mr. Bliley, whom I salute because I think he did an outstanding job, along with Earl Pomeroy, the co-chair, Democratic co-chair. Both have publicly stated over and over again that when they met with the leaders, they told them what the work of the committee was. So to say today in March of the year 2000, that they never knew what the vote was, is ludicrous. The Speaker's staff person counted the votes.

KWAME HOLMAN: After interviewing the three finalists, Gephardt eventually settled on Father O'Brien. But Hastert and Armey voted for Reverend Wright.

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: My experience, in just that short period of time, looked like he was the person that was most willing to reach out, to work with families, to be involved with members.

KWAME HOLMAN: And Hastert said he was not influenced by the fact that, since the first House chaplain was selected 211 years ago, no Catholic has held the post, nor has any woman, or rabbi

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: Well, you know, one of the things that I think probably that we want to stay away from is intimidation. You know, because we've never done this, we have to do that.

KWAME HOLMAN: Only after the selection of Reverend Wright did some Democrats publicly complain about the process.

REP. ANNA ESHOO: Now, does the Speaker have the right to, or the power to do whatever he wants to do? Of course, he does. He should have just done that from the beginning. Why use a bipartisan committee as window dressing?

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: Whether it was sour grapes and somebody's person didn't get picked or whatever, I think we had one of the most vicious times that I have ever seen in this Congress, because all of the sudden there's this whole thing of division. You know if you didn't choose this person, you're a bigot.

KWAME HOLMAN: But Minority Leader Gephardt said concerns were expressed to him early in the process.

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT: And I tried to talk to the leadership on their side many times, and did many times, and told them that there were real concerns among the Democratic members on the search committee as to how this was being done.

KWAME HOLMAN: Those concerns included questions committee member Steve Largent, an Oklahoma Republican and a Protestant, asked of Father O'Brien. But Illinois Republican Henry Hyde, a Catholic himself, suggested Largent's questions should be considered in the context in which they were asked.

REP. HENRY HYDE: I know questions were asked about would Father O' Brien wear the Roman collar? And how can he be a successful chaplain if he doesn't have a family and have endured the problems of being a parent? Those are not off-the-wall questions, but they indicate a lack of, let's say, sophistication concerning the Catholic Church. But I don't think they indicated any bigotry or any anti-Catholicism -- just a curiosity from people who don't know a lot of Catholics.

KWAME HOLMAN: Hyde believes some democrats have taken on the chaplain issue in hopes of scoring points with Catholic voters. The issue does come on the heels of the rhetoric that followed George W. Bush's visit to Bob Jones University, an institution whose leaders have expressed strong anti-Catholic sentiments.

REP. HENRY HYDE: I think that people who study the situation or spend any time understanding what actually happened. I think there might be a backlash against people who try to exploit this because it is a non-issue.

KWAME HOLMAN: But it's not just Democrats taking issue with the chaplain selection. Some 40 Catholic House Republicans took their concerns to the Speaker. One of them, Iowa's Greg Ganske, took his concerns to the House floor.

REP. GREG GANSKE: I know Denny Hastert and Dick Armey personally, and they are not anti-Catholic. But there is no question that this is a mess. Coupled with the Bob Jones University fiasco, Catholics in my district and around the country are shaking their heads in dismay.

KWAME HOLMAN: What should the Speaker do?

REP. HENRY HYDE: That's the $64,000 question I don't know the answer. Almost anything he does has a down side to it. If he were to dismiss the pastor that he selected, he is capitulating to the other side in a political decision. On the other hand, if this chaplain can't be respected and listened to by the minority, then he is only half a chaplain. He is chaplain to half the House. That's no good.

KWAME HOLMAN: In fact, Speaker Hastert himself indicated that the House has been so torn by this issue it's unlikely the selection of Presbyterian Minister Charles Wright will stand.

REP. DENNIS HASTERT: I'm not sure that Rev. Wright can come in and take over for a House divided, nor would he want to. So we're trying to work through this. I think it is a very bad situation that has been created here by the demagoguery that's taken place on this. But we'll eventually... We do have a chaplain. It' the old chaplain. He still serves our needs and we'll find a solution to the problem, eventually.

KWAME HOLMAN: Reverend Ford said when he announced his retirement, he gladly would help out until a new chaplain was found. That was 13 months ago. Ford says no one has approached him about how much longer he may be asked to stay on.

FOCUS - POLITICAL WRAP

JIM LEHRER: And that brings us to Shields and Gigot. Syndicated columnist Mark Shields, Wall Street Journal columnist Paul Gigot.

Paul, first on this House chaplain story, what do you make of that? What do you think is going on there?

PAUL GIGOT: I'd put in the category of no good deed goes unpunished, Jim. I mean, Denny Hastert, the Speaker, could have done what all the previous Speakers had done and just unilaterally made a decision and made his choice. Instead, he opened it up, bipartisan basis and then when he went against the wishes of the 14-9 vote or whatever it was, they... he found himself under criticism and sandbagged. And he's now got a very big mess. And I think that probably, in light of Bob Jones and in light of this uproar, he probably should go ahead and name the first Catholic chaplain of the House.

JIM LEHRER: And it sounded, if you read what he said there to Kwame at the end, Mark, that that's probably what he's going to do and maybe not appointing a Catholic, but he isn't going to the Presbyterian man that he had selected isn't going to make it.

MARK SHIELDS: Reverend Wright.

JIM LEHRER: Reverend Wright.

MARK SHIELDS: No. That's right, Jim. Jim, there's a larger political context for this, as well. I don't disagree with Paul's point about Denny Hastert; I don't think Denny Hastert is anti-Catholic. Henry Hyde, whom I interviewed in the only interview he ever gave on this subject before the one I think with Kwame tonight -- I presented him with the facts last November, that the committee recommendation of Father Timothy O'Brien had been overruled by Majority Leader Hastert -- and Speaker - I mean, Majority Leader Armey and Speaker Hastert -- he said, "I hate to think of it as anti-Catholic bigotry, but I do not know what other conclusion to draw." That was Henry Hyde, who is probably - you know -- the most respected Republican conservative in the House. And I think that it has taken on -- Greg Ganske from Iowa in that piece, Congressman Greg Ganske, put it well. It's taken on a larger context. For the first time in the "Wall Street Journal"-NBC News Poll, George W. Bush has fallen behind Al Gore. He trails Gore, does Bush, by ten percentage points among Catholics. That is a drop, a dramatic precipitous drop since December. And the two intervening... the principal intervening event in the campaign was Bob Jones University. And Greg Ganske said, look, what if Catholics in the country heard about the Republican Party, Bob Jones university -

JIM LEHRER: And now this.

MARK SHIELDS: -- and now this? And it's what we don't need. And they're - it's a very important swing group and I think Denny Hastert will be well-served to probably try and extricate himself from the problem he's in.

PAUL GIGOT: It has nothing to do with the fact that Democrats are perhaps amplifying that message and trying to underscore that. I mean, Henry Hyde was walking back from that segment. He said, in fact, it had nothing to do with anti-Catholic bigotry and I don't believe it did either.

JIM LEHRER: Okay. Well, let's move on, speaking of George W. Bush. Paul, what do you think of... Bush said in this interview with the "New York Times" this week that he really didn't learn anything from John McCain and he wasn't going to adopt any of his issues, any of McCain's issues, and he got hammered for that by some. What do you think? Does he deserve to be hammered?

PAUL GIGOT: No, I don't think so. I read that whole interview, and I don't think that's what he said. I mean the story, what the "New York Times" pulled out of that interview was, you know, George W. Bush doesn't take our advice. You know, he wins the election; he's not taking John McCain's policies. Incredible. I mean how shocking. I mean Al Gore doesn't take Bill Bradley's health care plan, and that's not a big story. If you read the whole context of the interview, I think what he said was, "I am reaching out to McCain; I'm just not going to surrender on the issues that I just won a primary over."

JIM LEHRER: How do you see it?

MARK SHIELDS: Opposite, totally opposite. Jim, there's an old rule in politics: Humility in victory, pride in defeat. George Bush should be humble. George Bush, one of the wisest hands in Washington today said to me. I said what do you think he's up to -- and he said, it's an entitlement mentality, that this was his nomination and John McCain, son of a gun, intervened, complicated it, was a pain in the neck -- and why the hell should I be nice to him? And that comes through. I mean when asked about the turnout, the enormous turnout increase, well, then how come he didn't win it? I mean the only thing the "New York Times" did was quote him. I don't know anything that was in that interview that he didn't say and was in the transcript of what he did say. He said it exactly as said. And I think that the other thing, there's either a tone deaf politically... I mean he... John McCain and his people need time. They need time. They need a little comforting. The wounds are still open. The pain is still there. And that's what George W. Bush has to be mindful of now.

PAUL GIGOT: Well, he does have to be mindful of it. But if you read the whole tone and texture of that interview, he was making real outreach to McCain and saying, "look, I want to sit down with him, I want to deal with his voters." But you know, "and I need to reach out for him. McCain isn't around today -- this week - he can't do it - he's on vacation. If you read another interview, the context of another interview that they with a Texas newspaper they came away saying, "Bush wants to reach out to McCain." So I just... in reading the whole transcript, I don't see that sense of entitlement there at all.

JIM LEHRER: Okay, another development, Al Gore has taken the initiative on campaign finance reform. How do you read that, Mark?

MARK SHIELDS: Jim, I don't mean to sound skeptical or cynical, but George W. Bush and Albert Gore have all the credibility on campaign finance that Madonna has on celibacy. I mean, I've got to tell you, both of these guys come impaired to this issue. Now, what Gore has tried to do is to identify himself, associate himself with McCain, say that John McCain went through this catharsis after the Keating Five experience -- and comparing his own fund-raising at the Buddhist Temple with the Keating five and the phone calls, that somehow, you know, I've seen the light. This was the Paul on the road to Damascus or whatever. But I don't think it's an issue that either one of them brings great credibility to the American people on. If it's an important issue, its probably going to be un-addressed by each of these candidates in voters' eyes.

JIM LEHRER: So it just goes away, then? They just talk about it for a while and then boom?

PAUL GIGOT: Well, I think the Bush people would love to have Al Gore talk about it. I mean he should... They'd be happy if he'd talk about campaign finance from here to November because every time he does, it gives them an opportunity to come back and say, remind people this happened, this happened. He went to the Buddhist temple, he made those phone calls, and you're really going to believe this guy? And it makes Gore look worse for reminding people of that. If I were Gore, I'd just forget about it because... Bush does not want to make this, the campaign reform a theme. Just forget about it.

JIM LEHRER: What about the specific thing that Gore keeps saying? He said it in the interview with us earlier this week several times, that, let's do away unilaterally with soft money. Let's agree to run no campaign ads on television, and we will debate all the time instead, that sort of thing. Is that not going to have any traction?

PAUL GIGOT: I don't think so because it's so unrealistic. I mean it sounds gimmicky because it is gimmicky. I mean I hope they have a lot of debates, and if I were George Bush, I'd want to have a lot of debates. I wouldn't wait for one or two in the autumn. But you know, how are you going to communicate on a national campaign to people without television advertising? I mean frankly, if you had two debates a week between now and October, most of the country would not be paying attention until we got to September or October.

JIM LEHRER: Mark?

MARK SHIELDS: Jim, I think this is going to be an awfully long campaign. I thought it was going to be a long campaign last week. Since Tuesday, I think it's going to be an eternity.

PAUL GIGOT: It's already been six months.

MARK SHIELDS: I mean George Bush said six times in the interview, "I don't trust Al Gore. Al Gore's not to be trusted. I don't trust the man. I believe he'll say anything to get elected." Now, usually in a campaign you begin it -- and while Al Gore always accused him of selling snake oil in his economic policy...

JIM LEHRER: Risky tax game.

MARK SHIELDS: Risky tax game. Usually you begin a campaign by saying, this is our guy, he's pretty good, this is where he went to school, this is what he believes, this is what he's accomplished. We've just skipped over the "let us tell you the good things about our guy stage of the campaign and gone directly to "the other guy would steal a hot stove and go back for the smoke. And that's where we are. And this is March, Jim. This is the 17th of March.

JIM LEHRER: Tell me about it.

PAUL GIGOT: This could be the first campaign where you have to have three different versions of your attack lines because they're worn out, you know, after a month. People say the risky tax scheme isn't going to work after a month.

MARK SHIELDS: The Buddhist Temple - the Buddhist Temple is not going to last beyond Memorial Day.

PAUL GIGOT: They're going to have to come up with something else.

MARK SHIELDS: Come Memorial Day -

JIM LEHRER: All right. Another thing, just the other day the new independent counsel said after a four-year investigation, Hillary Clinton did not do anything wrong on the Filegate, the White House files and neither did anybody else at the White House. What do you think of that?

PAUL GIGOT: Well, I think it's good news for the White House. In many respects, that was one of the worst at least fact accusations that were laid out there because it's very serious to look into FBI files.

JIM LEHRER: There were files that they had and some of them on Republicans who had worked at the White House in prior administrations, that sort of thing.

PAUL GIGOT: That's right. That's right. And Chuck Olsen in the Nixon administration went for jail for misusing just a single file. So this was serious, and what the independent counsel said is, "I can't investigate a misdemeanor, which is a violation of the Privacy Act. And there were no felonies that I found." So this is good news for the White House.

MARK SHIELDS: Very good news, Jim. I mean I think there's a sigh of relief, but I wouldn't exhale because still hanging out there is the Travel Office. And the Travel Office remains very troublesome. The firing of the people in the Travel Office and Mrs. Clinton's own involvement in it, which of course triggered at least in part the suicide of Vince Foster, a really personally tragic and publicly unanswered chapter in the administration. But I think this has to be considered, you know, a burden lifted and a suspicion dispelled. I mean she certainly should feel good.

JIM LEHRER: You can't help but wonder, on which side you're on, as far as Hillary Rodham Clinton is concerned, or whatever, you wonder why it took four years to come to this conclusion?

PAUL GIGOT: Well, one reason is very clear: Janet Reno assigned it to Ken Starr. Ken Starr should never have been given this. Starr should never have taken it. He already had more than he could handle in the Whitewater business, but instead of naming a new special counsel, they decided, "well, we'll just throw it in the same one." And that was a terrible decision. Had they given it to somebody -- that discreet responsibility, it would have been solved with much more dispatch.

JIM LEHRER: Paul, Mark, thank you both very much.

MARK SHIELDS: Thank you, Jim.

FINALLY - ST. PATRICK'S DAY

JIM LEHRER: Finally tonight, a poem for St. Patrick's Day. Here's NewsHour contributor Robert Pinsky, the Poet Laureate of the United States.

ROBERT PINSKY: We think in this country of the immigrant Irish. Here's a poem by the Irish poet, Evan Boland, called "The Emigrant Irish." "The fortitude and hardship of that generation are seen in a way that is different, yet not different. They are like oil lamps, she says. The emigrant Irish. Like oil lamps, we put them out the back of our houses, of our minds. We had lights better than, newer than, and then a time came, this time and now, we need them. Their dread makeshift example. They would have thrived on our necessities. What they survived, we could not even live. By their lights now, it is time to imagine how they stood there, what they stood with. That their possessions may become our power. Cardboard, iron; their hardships parceled in them. Patience, fortitude, long- suffering in the bruise-colored dusk of the new world, and all the old songs, and nothing to lose."

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Friday: The US announced it's easing some of the sanctions on Iran, and Smith & Wesson agreed to new gun safety measures. In return, state and local governments will drop liability suits against the company. We'll see you on-line, and again, here Monday evening. Have a nice weekend. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you, and good night.