The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro ROBERT MacNEIL: Good evening. Leading the news today, congressional investigators reportedly decided to give immunity from prosecution to Admiral John Poindexter. Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis said he will run for President. Democratic Congressman Mario Biaggi of New York was indicted on federal bribery and conspiracy charges. We'll have details in our news summary in a moment. Judy Woodruff is in Washington tonight. Judy? JUDY WOODRUFF: After the news summary, transportation makes up two of our three main focuses on tonight's News Hour. Starting with airline delays, we get three different views on who is to blame and what's being done to make the planes fly on time. Then bus travel. We look at what's ahead for the bus industry in a documentary report. And finally, an expert joins us to talk about the star the astronomers are wild about.News Summary WOODRUFF: Investigators for the House and Senate committees looking into the Iran contra affair have agreed on the timing of a grant of immunity from prosecution for former National Security Adviser John Poindexter. The Reuters News Service reported today that the chief counsels for the two committees came up with a plan that would have Poindexter testify around the middle of June. If so, that would give Lawrence Walsh, the independent counsel who was appointed to investigate the affair, the delay that he requested to collect his own evidence. The plan has yet to be ratified formally by Walsh and the members of Congress who sit on the select committees. Poindexter's testimony is considered vital to uncovering the White House role in the matter. At the White House today, spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said President Reagan will hold a news conference soon. Other sources say it's likely to be this Thursday. It would be Mr. Reagan's first since November 19. Robin? MacNEIL: Today was the second anniversary in captivity for American hostage, Terry Anderson, the former Associated Press bureau chief in Beirut. That makes Anderson the longest held of the more than two dozen foreigners, including seven Americans, now captives in Lebanon. One group of captors, the so called Revolutionary Justice Organization, threatened over the weekend to execute a French hostage today unless the French government changed its Mideast policy. There was no information late today on whether that threat had been carried out. Relatives, colleagues, and friends of Terry Anderson attended a prayer service today at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. Relatives of other captives joined in the services at the American Baptist Center following a day of prayer for the hostages by American Baptist congregations. One of those who spoke afterwards at a news conference was Anderson's sister, Peggy Say.

PEGGY SAY, sister of Terry Anderson: I don't know that we'll not celebrate another anniversary next year at this time. But I have to have faith that the many prayers that have gone out and the works of the church in the involvement with the hostages will bring us to resolutions. MacNEIL: Teheran Radio said today that Iran had promised to help find the Anglican Church envoy, Terry Waite, who had been missing in Beirut since January 20, when he was trying to negotiate the release of other hostages. The Iran agreement followed a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Runcie, offering to help find an Iranian captured by Christian militiamen in 1982. Teheran Radio said that offer had been accepted. WOODRUFF: Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis did today what many expected and announced that he plans to run for the Democratic nomination for President next year. At a Boston news conference, Dukakis acknowledged he is a long shot.

Gov. MICHAEL DUKAKIS (D) Massachusetts: The odds against winning are very, very long and, as a sitting governor, I have a schedule which already is very tough. I wouldn't be doing it if I didn't think that the prospects were at least reasonably good, assuming that we can put together a strong campaign and communicate effectively and do the kind of job that I believe that I can and I must if I'm going to be a serious candidate for President of the United States. WOODRUFF: Dukakis said he was not formally announcing his candidacy, only his intention to run. His formal declaration is scheduled for May 4. MacNEIL: Democratic Congressman Mario Biaggi, a much decorated former New York City policeman, was indicted today on federal charges of bribery and conspiracy. Indicted along with the 69 year old Biaggi was Meade Esposito, former Brooklyn Democratic leader. The charges against the two involved alleged efforts to win favorable treatment for a ship repair firm at the Brooklyn Navy yard. Biaggi, who is head of a House subcommittee on Merchant Marine affairs, was accused of accepting a $3,000 Florida vacation in 1984 in return for steering government business to the repair firm which had connections to Esposito. An FBI official had this comment about the indictment.

THOMAS SHEER, FBI: By now, in the area of public corruption, the message should be clear. The federal government, from my perspective, the FBI, for the last three years has made a commitment to attack corruption in every form in every level of government. New York City is like a patient with cancer. I like to look at us as the doctors. I hope someday the three of us will be able to stand here and tell you the patient is in remission. MacNEIL: Late this afternoon, Congressman Biaggi held a news conference to respond to the indictment.

Rep. MARIO BIAGGI (D) New York: I maintain my total innocence of all charges and reiterate that I have engaged in no criminal wrongdoing. I fully expect this to be proven in a court of law. Throughout these months, the Department of Justice has been holding the cards. They have build a case on allegations, innuendos, and irresponsible leaks to the media. It is time for the cards to be put on the table for everyone to see. Fortunately, in this instance, a jury will be responsible for separating fact from fiction. WOODRUFF: Representatives of dozens of airlines got together in Washington today to begin to adjust their schedules so as to cut down on flight delays. The federal Department of Transportation told the airlines it was their last chance to head off a record number of delays this summer. Most of the focus was on flights out of Atlanta and Chicago, but Dallas, Newark and Philadelphia were also due for review. Also today, corporate raider Carl Icahn acknowledged that he the target of an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission for possible securities law violations. Icahn, who heads TransWorld Airlines, made the disclosure in a required filing with the commission. At the same time, Icahn said he is temporarily abandoning his efforts to take over U. S. Air. That wraps up our summary of the news. Still ahead on the News Hour, airline delays -- who's to blame, and what's to be done about them? The future of bus travel, and supernova excitement. Stacked Up MacNEIL: First tonight, the growing delays at the nation's biggest airports. Today in Washington, some 50 airlines met at an industry conference requested by the Department of Transportation. It wants the airlines to coordinate their flight schedules to cut down on peek hour congestion. The Federal Aviation Administration estimates there are over 1,000 delays each day at the nation's busiest airports. Correspondent Tom Bearden reports on the problem.

TOM BEARDEN [voice over]: Airline departure delays increased by 25% last year. 367,000 flights left at least 15 minutes late. Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole says most of those holdups are caused by the airlines' scheduling practices, trying to cluster flights in the most popular times. Here at the nation's busiest airport, O'Hare in Chicago, there are 63 scheduled arrivals between 9:00 and 9:30 a. m. That leaves passengers fuming, stuck aboard airliners waiting for clearance or missing connections for their next flight. And it costs the airlines millions in lost revenue. Denver's Stapleton Airport, fifth busiest in the world, has similar morning and evening congestion. But officials here say scheduling is only part of the problem. Like other airports, bad weather cuts Stapleton's capacity to handle traffic by more than half. George Doughty is the city's director of aviation. GEORGE DOUGHTY, aviation director: The airlines try to operate as close to the capacity of the airport in Denver's case as they can. And that's a good weather capacity. Bad weather capacity is much less. So if you spread them out in the morning and in the evening, it may help a little bit. But it won't solve the major delay problems that we have, which are weather related. In order for us to be able to operate relatively normally in bad weather, we would have to cut the airline schedules by almost half. BEARDEN [voice over]: Airport officials would welcome schedule changes to ease the crush, and they believe federal assistance is crucial to the process. But they don't want mandatory regulations. They believe a voluntary approach is the best solution. WOODRUFF: With us to discuss today's airline conference and ways to unclog the nation's air force is Jim Burnley, the Deputy Secretary of Transportation. He is joined by William Bolger, the president of the Air Transport Association, a trade group representing the nation's air carriers. Mr. Bolger, we just heard in that report that Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole says that most of these delays are caused by the airlines. How much of this conference is going to cure that? WILLIAM BOLGER, Air Transport Association: We don't agree. We're talking -- this conference has confined itself to summer scheduling. And they made some progress, and there are some adjustments possible to help the delay situation. The biggest problem is the air traffic control system. And the airport operations have not kept pace with the growth in aviation. They're woefully behind. And if we're going to really correct the delays, we're going to have to do something about that -- modernize the air traffic control system and do something that will make our airports -- give them more capacity. WOODRUFF: Secretary Burnley, it sounds like the problem is in your jurisdiction, rather than with the airlines. JIM BURNLEY, Deputy Transportation Secretary: Well, to a very large extent, neither is correct. And I'm sorry to start out by saying that theintroductory piece was wrong, but it is wrong. Secretary Dole does not say and has never said that most of the problem is caused by airline scheduling. In fact, as the gentleman from Denver indicated, nationally, year in and year out, two thirds of all delays are caused by weather problems. And I think it's very important that we keep this in perspective. Now, as to the other -- WOODRUFF: But of the delays that are not caused by the weather -- Mr. BURNLEY: Yes, as to the other one third, there are a variety of factors that we think can -- and we are, at this point, trying to address. One of which, one significant factor, is airline scheduling practices at a handful of our major, most intensively used airports. But I do want to keep it in perspective. And again, this is one exercise among many. We have a variety of other steps underway right now to address the delay problem. WOODRUFF: But you heard what Mr. Bolger just said, that it's not the scheduling that's the biggest problem, it's the air traffic control problem. Mr. BURNLEY: Well, with all due respect to Mr. Bolger, that's not quite right either. In fact, Secretary Dole told the FAA administrator many months ago that, as to the number of controllers, he could have as many as the system could use. We have sent proposals to the Congress to continue the national airspace plan. Mr. Bolger implied in his answer that we ought to get about the business of replacing the hardware and modernizing equipment. In fact, we're halfway through a ten year plan, as he knows, to spend over $12 billion to do exactly that. And we have a number of other steps underway as well. WOODRUFF: What about that, Mr. Bolger? Mr. BOLGER: Well, five years into the plan they're about a year and a half behind. That's not a very good record. I think we have to do something to get that accelerated. And one of the things that's been happening is the moneys have been collected from you and I as we travel, the 8% ticket tax has been held captive and the -- WOODRUFF: Ticket tax. Mr. BOLGER: Ticket tax. The 8% -- every time you fly, you pay an 8% ticket tax on the top of your fares, and that goes into a thing called the aviation trust fund. And the aviation trust fund has a surplus of about $5. 3 billion currently. That money was collected for airport improvements, for the modernization of the air traffic control system; it should be spend for those purposes. WOODRUFF: $5. 3 billion. That's a lot of money, Mr. Burnley. Mr. BURNLEY: It is a lot of money. And one reason we have that much is because over the last six years, Mr. Bolger's members -- the airlines -- had been successful convincing the Congress that the general taxpayers ought to spend $7. 5 billion paying most of the operational cost of the FAA versus having the 8% ticket tax and certain other taxes on fuel that are paid into the trust fund used. So, during that period of time, when 85% of the costs to the system are generated by general aviation and commercial flights, only 57% of those costs were paid out of the trust fund. So there's a little bit of smoke and mirrors here on the arithmetic. WOODRUFF: Smoke and mirrors? Mr. BOLGER: Not really, because when we agreed to the 8% ticket tax, when it was raised from 5% to 8%, the idea was we would be pay about 50% of the operational cost of FAA, not that they're looking for us to pay -- WOODRUFF: So, what is your point then? Mr. BOLGER: My point is that the excise tax, the ticket tax, that we're collecting was supposed to be spent for airport improvements and for the modernization of the air traffic control system, not for its operations. WOODRUFF: All right, let's get back to what this whole report was triggered by, and that is this conference on scheduling. Are you saying that the scheduling is really going to make very little difference, if any, in the delay problem? Mr. BOLGER: It's not going to make a major contribution to resolving the delay problems. We have to look at the long term in this. We haven't looked over the last 20 years. It's time we get started to do what ought to be done. Jim is absolutely right -- they have made some progress in getting the announced plan into operation but it's still woefully behind schedule. We can't wait. We're losing out. We're running out of time. WOODRUFF: All right, if scheduling isn't going to make much difference, Mr. Burnley, why did the Department of Transportation order this conference? Mr. BURNLEY: It is one of a series of steps. We also are reviewing all of the procedures by which we handle air traffic in this country to make sure that -- absolutely no change in the safety margin we've got to have; that we're as efficient as we can be. We have, as you know, in the last month, put into place something called the east coast plan. And, while it's too short a period to draw bottom line conclusions in the first three weeks of its operation, we reduced delays in and out of New York by 16%. So there are a number of steps on the way. But, to come back to the scheduling exercise, I differ again with Mr. Bolger about the significance of it. At the five airports where we're focusing our discussions, it is going to make a difference. And we are already, in fact, seeing that difference because, as you may recall, we had originally asked for information and said we were considering these exercises at 13 airports. Well, the very act of asking for the information seems to have had a salutary impact on some of the schedules for next summer, and we found only 5 of the 13 were airports where we needed to go forward. WOODRUFF: He says it's going to make a difference. Mr. BOLGER: Well, it makes some differences. There's no denying that they have made some agreements today to adjust schedules at some of these airports would make a difference. I'm saying it won't make the significant difference it takes 'cause it's only for the summer season. What comes after the summer? I applaud the FAA and their employees. They're doing a marvelous job. They keep the airways safe every day. The professional staff of FAA is marvelous. The east coast plan, why it took so long to put phase one in, I don't know, but it is doing a great job. And Jim's absolutely right on that. It has reduced delays by about 17%. They have a phase two of it I wish they would accelerate and put that in, so we will reduce delays even further. WOODRUFF: All right, gentlemen. We'll come back to Mr. Bolger and Mr. Burnley. Robin? MacNEIL: Yes. Here with a different approach to the problem is Senator John Danforth, who recently introduced a bill aimed at cutting down on delays. First of all, Senator Danforth, you've been listening to this. Who's right in the argument, the government or the airlines? Sen. JOHN DANFORTH (R) Missouri: Well, I think Mr. Bolger is clearly right that we're going to have to spend more out of the trust fund. We have an overload now in air transportation in this country. We've had a major increase after deregulation of the airlines in air transportation -- something more than 50% of an increase in air transportation since 1978. And yet, we have essentially the same system that we created to accommodate the old system. So I do think we're going to have to spend out of the trust fund, both to improve our airports and to improve the equipment. And also that we're going to have to hire more air traffic controllers. In addition to that, my legislation would propose that more information be available to consumers. I think when people call up the airline in order to book a flight and they're told that the flight is going to leave, say, at 8:00 in the morning and arrive at 10:00 at the destination and the flight 50% of the time in the last month has been late, that the traveling public should be informed on that. MacNEIL: What should the ticket agent tell the public? Sen. DANFORTH: Well, I think he should tell them that, for example, over the last month, this flight has been cancelled three times, this flight has been delayed a third of the time. And the average amount of the delay has been whatever it's been -- 15, 20 minutes. I think that this would put the airlines in the business not only of competing on the basis of price, but also on the basis of the efficiency of the airline, of getting the public there on time. MacNEIL: And the aim of it would be what, to get the airline to steer or the customer to go for flights out of the busiest times that tend to be more on schedule? Sen. DANFORTH: I think that really the object is to give the public more information, so that the public can get in on the act of determining what the -- what their future is. I don't propose re regulation of air transportation. But I do think that there has to be some control over the present system, where an airline will just book for the most popular time in order to make a sale. And I think that the best antidote to that is not re regulation, but rather, for the public to be informed as to the likelihood that the flight will be there on time. MacNEIL: Well, are you -- do you go as far as to say that the airlines are actively misleading the public if four or five of them all schedule flights leaving an airport at 8:00 in the morning? Sen. DANFORTH: Of course they are. I mean, when -- I think your piece said that 63 flights were scheduled to arrive at O'Hare at the same time, 73 flights were scheduled to either arrive or leave at Hartsfield in Atlanta in the same 15 minute period. Obviously, those planes are not going to do it. And what the airlines are doing is to sell the public on a flight that's supposed to leave at, say, 8:00 in the morning or 5:00 in the afternoon and whatever, when 10, 15, 20 flights may be scheduled to leave at precisely the same time. There's no chance that that will happen, in fact. MacNEIL: In addition to modern -- you want the airlines to do that under your bill. You also want the government to spend more of the trust fund on modernizing the system. You have a third point. And that is, you want more air traffic controllers. How do you reply to Secretary Burnley, who said that Secretary Dole told the industry recently they could have all the air traffic controllers they needed? Sen. DANFORTH: Great. Then the administration supports the legislation. MacNEIL: And you say that they don't mean what they say, that they are not supplying enough air traffic controllers? Sen. DANFORTH: Well, the fact is, we now have about 15,000 air traffic controllers. That's down from what it was before the strike in 1981. At that time, there was less traffic than there is today. So since 1981, we've had two things happen. One is a reduction in the number of air traffic controllers, and the second is an increase in the number of traffic -- the amount of traffic. The point is that, from the standpoint of both manpower and facilities, there is clearly an overload of the existing system. And I think we should face up to that. MacNEIL: Thank you. Judy? WOODRUFF: Secretary Burnley, the question comes back to you. The senator just said -- you heard him -- that we've got an overload in air traffic, and the federal government has not responded by providing more traffic controllers, more equipment, better runways and so on and so on. Mr. BURNLEY: Well, let's just recite what the administration has done. Over the last two years -- the last two fiscal years; '86 and the one we're in now, '87 -- we have proposed and are in the process of hiring an additional 800 controllers. We've asked the Congress for a 20% increase in the FAA budget for the fiscal year '88 that begins October 1. We have asked the Congress for a 68% increase in the funding for modernizing the hardware and the software which, I might add, the Congress has underfunded in terms of what Ronald Reagan and Secretary Dole have requested over the last six years by a billion dollars. So there are a lot of things that are underway. WOODRUFF: But what about the trust fund -- Mr. BURNLEY: Well, with respect to the trust fund, again, as I mentioned earlier, there have been some smoke and mirror games played with the arithmetic there. And the general taxpayers have been asked to subsidize expenditures that we think ought to be paid for by the trust fund. Because the users ought to pay for it. But again, there's no disagreement at this table or elsewhere among those who are interested in this issue that we're going to have to continue to dedicate ever more resources to the air traffic control system. And that's why the administration's proposed doing so. WOODRUFF: Senator Danforth, come back to you. He says that the taxpayers ought to be paying for these improvements, not dipping into the trust fund. Sen. DANFORTH: Well, the trust fund is there to pay for the system. That's why it was created in the first place. It's been building up funds to a very large extent in the last few years and now has a surplus of over $5 billion, which money was collected from people who travel by air for the purpose of paying for the system. And my point is -- and Mr. Bolger's point is -- that that fund has to be spent. It's there for a purpose. Nobody likes to spend money. But when you have an obvious overload of the existing system, an obvious need for better airports and for more personnel, this is the time to use the trust fund for the purpose for which it was created. Mr. BURNLEY: Let me, if I may -- I believe you misunderstood me. What I said was just the opposite of the way you stated the question to Senator Danforth. It's not that we want the general taxpayers to pay for it. That, in fact, is what has been happening over administration objections the last six years, to the tune of a total of $7. 5 billion from the general taxpayers. The trust fund has been sitting there with these balances building up. That's our point. WOODRUFF: So that's the reason you don't want to use the trust fund. Mr. BURNLEY: No, ma'am. Just the opposite. We want to use the trust fund instead of having the general revenues subsidizing the use. The trust fund is where the taxes that the users pay their money into go. We think that the cost ought to be paid out of the trust fund. The reason the balance is there, again, is that that has -- WOODRUFF: Can anybody clear this up in about 30 seconds, and we can move on to another part of -- Mr. BOLGER: The deal made for this tax to support improvement of the airport improvements and also the modernization of the air traffic control system. It was not meant to be spent on the operations of the air traffic control -- Sen. DANFORTH: He wants to use it for operations, not for improvements. WOODRUFF: The other point Senator Danforth made is that if the administration thinks there ought to be more air traffic controllers, as Secretary Dole said, why don't they support the legislation? Mr. BURNLEY: Well, because the way we're adding to the work force is we're using the experience that we've got, and we're also depending on the expertise of the FAA leadership to tell us how many we need and then to get them into the system, get them trained and got them out there working. When you pick a number, as Senator Danforth's bill seems to do, out of the air -- 500 controllers; just add 500 controllers -- that does raise some questions about exactly what the staffing needs are. But -- WOODRUFF: Did you pick a number out of the air, Senator? Did you pick a number out of the air? Sen. DANFORTH: No. Well, we relied -- actually, the number we picked, I believe, was your number, wasn't it? Mr. BOLGER: That's correct. Sen. DANFORTH: The ATA's number. Obviously, any number is out of the air, but I think that's a reasonable guess. Mr. BOLGER: Let me explain. The FAA's been operating the staffing with the idea that the NA plan would in on a scheduled basis. WOODRUFF: Which plan? Mr. BURNLEY: National Airways Improvement Plan, where they were supposed to modify the air traffic control system. It's behind schedule. We're saying if they don't put some more air traffic controllers into the pipeline, they're going to be in more serious trouble a couple years out. It takes three or four years to get fully qualified controller. WOODRUFF: Let me ask you, Mr. Bolger, about another point that Senator Danforth made. And that is that the airlines ought to be willing to tell people when they go up to the counter to buy a ticket, ''This flight has been delayed X number of times in the last few weeks or months. You have a right to expect you may have a problem with the flight. '' Why aren't the airlines willing to disclose that information? Mr. BOLGER: Well, basically, we're not unwilling to disclose the information. These are our customers, and we want to keep them satisfied in this competitive environment. I can't take sides with any particular airline. I'm not sure yet we can assemble that information -- WOODRUFF: But the airlines don't disclose it now. Is that correct? Mr. BOLGER: Well, if you ask us, we do. If an airline is asked if it operated on schedule, are flights going to operate on schedule, they'll tell you. But there is no mechanism in effect at the present time where the airlines report to any particular central location to give that information. WOODRUFF: Senator Danforth, is that a sufficient explanation for what's happening? Sen. DANFORTH: Well, I think that what we have to do is have a systematic way of making the information available to the public. It really doesn't do any good if you call up the airline and book a flight that you think is going to be, say, in Kansas City at 10:00 in the morning, and the fact is that the chances are about 50 50 that it won't be in until 11:00 or so. WOODRUFF: What about the basic -- Mr. BOLGER: Most of our reservations are made through a third party -- travel agents. If we're going to have this type of disclosure, we have to see if we can assemble this information and disperse it to these travel agents, so they can understand it and give it to the American public. WOODRUFF: But what about the basic point that the airlines tend to bunch so many flights together, because they don't want to lose a sale. Mr. BOLGER: We're trying to meet the marketplace. If people want to fly in those hours -- WOODRUFF: But physically, you can't get 60 or 70 flights out of an airport -- even O'Hare or Atlanta -- in a 30 minute -- Mr. BOLGER: The engineer standards they're talking about, I can disprove some of those too. They had one 15 minute segment I examined in Atlanta. They said their engineer standards, the capacity was 31. We were scheduling about 57 flights over the period of time. And no more than six were delayed at any given time. So what is the capacity, 31 or 51? WOODRUFF: Well, how do you answer that? Senator? Sen. DANFORTH: All you have to do is go to the airport, and you realize the problem. I mean, anybody who travels by air and goes to the airport recognizes the problem. All you have to do is to be on a few planes where it pulls out of the gate and you sit there on the tarmac for 15 minutes, 30 minutes, until the plane pulls out. And you recognize that clearly there's a problem in capacity, and there's a problem in scheduling. Mr. BURNLEY: Let me, if I may, add the number one -- the standards that Mr. Bolger referred to are standards based upon practical experience at these airports. And when you've got in many cases, as we've found, twice as many flights scheduled to arrive or take off as the system can handle and the airport concrete can handle in a given 15 minute period, obviously, there's something to be done. But the other point that the senator needs to keep in mind is that we've got 70% of the problem year in and year out, out of our hands and everybody else's, the weather. WOODRUFF: Okay. So take that, weather forecasters and the airline industry. Thank you all for being with us. Mr. Burnley, Mr. Bolger, Senator Danforth, thank you. Robin? MacNEIL: Still ahead on the News Hour, how has deregulation hit the bus industry, and the star that is wowing the astronomers. But first, this is pledge week on public television, and we are taking a short break now, so that your local public television station can ask for your support. That support helps keep programs like this on the air. [pledge break] End of the Line WOODRUFF: Next, we focus on the bus business -- or rather, what's left of the bus business five years after the industry was deregulated. Many people who live in remote areas are struggling to cope with the fallout of deregulation: little or no bus service. Now, as correspondent Tom Bearden reports, the industry itself is struggling to survive. TOM BEARDEN [voice over]: Since deregulation hit the bus industry in 1982, more than 3,700 communities have lost their bus service. Most of them have been towns with populations under 10,000. There are fears that trend will continue, that tens of thousands of small towns will be virtually cut off from the rest of the country. It has also raised concerns about the future of the entire 70 year old bus industry. Buses first appeared in American cities and towns just before World War I. Thousands of bus companies were started by pioneers willing to take a chance on the new form of transportation. During the Depression, competition forced many of those companies to merge. And, eventually, two national systems were formed: Greyhound and Trailways. The glory days of the transcontinental bus started during the Second World War. FRANK NAGEOTTE, Greyhound Corporation: There were literally times during the Second World War when the advertising dollars that were spent by the bus line had to be spent to discourage travel. There were actually posters you'd see around, you know, ''Travel is restricted. Be patriotic. Don't ride a bus or a train. '' And I rode both myself, as a military person and saw how crowded they were. And there were times when the bus company just couldn't handle all the people that had to be transported. BEARDEN [voice over]: After the war, growth continued, aided by gradual cutbacks in railroad passenger service. Through the '50s and '60s, bus lines thrived in a regulated environment, supervised by the Interstate Commerce Commission and the public utilities commissions of various states. The bus companies were often required to operate unprofitable routes -- mostly small towns well off the main highways. In return, they were protected from competition on profitable runs. All of that changed radically in the early '80s. The federal government moved to deregulate most forms of public transportation. Bus companies could now drop unprofitable routes after petitioning state public utilities commissions. And even if permission was denied, appeals to the ICC were usually granted. But bus lines also lost the protection they had enjoyed on moneymaking routes, opening the door to sometimes cutthroat competition. But the biggest threat came from the also newly deregulated airlines. Mr. NAGEOTTE: Deregulation of the bus industry, in and of itself, I don't think hurt the bus business. Deregulation of the airline industry hurt the bus business. Particularly the end of short haul airlines and the People's Expresses and the Southwest Airlines and the American Wests and the PSAs, the things like that. They came right over the bus lines. If you'll stand in one of their lines today, you'll see a lot of tennis shoes and dungarees -- jeans I guess they call them now. Those are our folks. You know, they were our passengers for years. ANNOUNCER: This is your first call for Trailways' Silver Eagle Service to Dallas, Texas. BEARDEN [voice over]: Passenger traffic, particularly long haul traffic, began to dry up. The bus lines began a long period of retrenchment. Nearly 4,000 towns lost their service. Thousands of people lost their jobs. That retrenchment continues today. Last August, Trailways petitioned state authorities to entirely abandon service in parts of eight western states. The company also planned to reduce or abandon service in four other states. Trailways has since modified some of the petitions, indicating that it wants to continue service, but only on interstate highway routes between major cities. Ralph Knull runs the transportation of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission which rejected Trailways' petition to cease operations. The ICC is expected to overturn that decision. Knull says vast areas of the state will be without public transportation of any kind if Trailways pulls out as planned on April 1. RALPH KNULL, Colorado official: It's a serious prlblem. There are so many elderly people that can not drive or do not want to drive or should perhaps not be driving. There are the younger kids who are going to colleges different places and don't have any transportation other than the bus. BEARDEN [voice over]: Small towns would also lose vital freight service. The buses often provide the only way to deliver time sensitive freight like fresh flowers or parts for automobiles. In Colorado, the Bonfils Blood Bank in Denver uses buses to deliver blood all over the state, particularly for emergencies that occur on weekends. There is no alternative service in hundreds of communities. Canyon City, Colorado, is one of those towns. A large number of elderly, retired people live here, and some of them say continued bus service is literally a matter of life and death. Orville Million has cancer. Unable to work full time anymore, he spends his spare time in a small greenhouse he put together this fall out of scrap, nursing seedlings. He uses the bus to get to the VA hospital in Denver, 120 miles away, for chemotherapy. ORVILLE MILLION, veteran: It's very life threatening to me, yes, because when we have to get there, we have to get there. And the appointments are very crucial at that hospital. If you don't make it in time, you may be another 30 days before they're able to see you, so an appointment is very important to you. BEARDEN [voice over]: Million is one of about a dozen veterans who have no other way to get to the VA hospital for treatment and no means to pay for private medical care. TOM CARR, veteran: I thought that the bus service always ran, because I went to the army on the bus, I come back on the bus. Now, I won't be taken to the grave on the bus for sure. DENNIS ELLIOTT, Veterans Service officer: Forty percent of the 29 million veterans in the United States are now over the age of 65. This county will have, in my estimation, at least 100 to 120 veterans in this same position, within the next ten years. Public conveyance is an absolute must for those veterans. BEARDEN [voice over]: Veterans' groups explored the possibility of buying a van to shuttle people to the VA hospital, but quickly discovered they couldn't afford the liability insurance. JACK LINDLEY, veteran: I personally feel that Trailways has had it mighty good here for the last umpteen years or however long they've been here. Now, all of a sudden, they're in a slack period and they say, ''Okay, we're going to abandon that area out there. '' I really don't feel that 's quite right. They have a commitment to public utilities commission and I believe they have a bigger commitment to the people that they've been dealing with for the past 25 or 30 years. JEFF KERRIGAN, Trailways Corporation: People want to pose the problem that Greyhound and Trailways and the bus company are the bad guys. They're not. They're the good guys. They've been subsidizing the service, even though it's been losing, and asking the states to step up to their responsibility. BEARDEN [voice over]: James Kerrigan is board chairman and chief executive officer of the Trailways Corporation. He says towns like Canyon City can keep their service if tax dollars are used to subsidize unprofitable routes. Mr. KERRIGAN: What needs to be done immediately is the congressmen and senators and elected representatives need to look at what's happening in rural America and not ignore their need. Somebody living in White City, Kansas, has the same right to public carrier transportation as somebody living in Philadelphia. FRED CURREYinvestor: How's business? TICKETING AGENT: Good. Ticket sales are up about 45% for the month over last year. Mr. CURREY: Terrific. BEARDEN [voice over]: This man is betting millions of dollars that inter city bus lines can continue to serve millions of Americans. He is Fred Currey, a former chief executive at Trailways, now in the process of purchasing the nation's largest carrier -- Greyhound lines. In late January, he concluded an agreement with the Amalgamated Transit Workers that includes a major overhaul of work rules and compensation rates, similar to agreements reached in the deregulated airline industry. He sees deregulation as a challenge. Mr. CURREY: If we're not responsive to change, we will, in fact, disappear. The whole market environment has changed, and we are responsive to change. And I might add, in our conversations with the Amalgamated Transit Union, I think they're as aware of that change as I am. BEARDEN [voice over]: Currey believes the years of decline are finally over; that new kinds of services, perhaps using smaller vehicles, may be established in some rural areas through joint ventures with local governments. And, despite all the problems, both Currey and Trailways' Kerrigan believe buses will be around for a long time to come. Mr. KERRIGAN: The fact is, there isn't anything like the bus in terms of what it can do for America. The planes can serve 500 destinations. The trains, a limited number of destinations. So the bus will always be with us. Mr. NAGEOTTE: So, a friend of mine still lives in Cleveland I can remember one night sitting with him on a bar stool in 1948 when he said I was crazy to join that company, because that business wasn't going to last five years. Well, you know, he's wrong by 35 already. BEARDEN [voice over]: But for towns like Canyon City, the fact is, time is running out. The Interstate Commerce Commission is expected to grant Trailways' request for abandonment soon. And the last bus will likely pull out of town sometime next month. Superstar MacNEIL: Finally tonight, the star that scientists are calling the opportunity of a lifetime. On February 23, a star in the southern sky over Chile began to glow more brightly. It was identified as a supernova, like a superstar, and nothing like it has appeared so close to the earth since the 1600s. Some scientists say it could offer a whole universe of new clues about life and matter. With us to explain what scientists are so excited about is a top astronomer, Richard Berendzen, president of American University in Washington, D. C. First of all, what is a supernova? RICHARD BERENDZEN, American University: A supernova is one of the death phases of a usually very massive star. It's almost at the end of the life of the star. All things, whether they're people or civilizations or planets or even stars, die. Our sun will too, someday. And the reason that stars die is that they use up all their nuclear fuel. And ultimately, the radiation out will not balance the gravity in. In that final, traumatic moment, there is an implosion. And that causes one final burst of nuclear reaction. And that causes the final explosion that we see as a supernova. MacNEIL: And how big is this thing? I mean, in some terms we can understand. Is it as big as our sun? Mr. BERENDZEN: First of all, you start with a star that's maybe five, ten, twenty times the size of our sun, the mass of our sun. MacNEIL: Twenty times the size of our sun. Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, nobody knows what the mass of this one is, and that's part of the peculiarity here. But it could even be 100 times the mass of the sun. And then when it explodes, that outer shell of gas, of course, expands and becomes larger than the solar system and becomes very big. MacNEIL: Larger than our whole solar system. A distance from us to Neptune or Pluto. Mr. BERENDZEN: Oh, it will become much bigger than that. MacNEIL: Bigger than that. One star will be bigger than that whole distance. Mr. BERENDZEN: The outer shell will be. And then the star that's left will collapse in upon itself, possibly forming a neutron star, or maybe even that bizarre thing known as a black hole. MacNEIL: Now, how close -- everybody's talking about how wonderfully close it is. How close is it, compared to our sun, for instance? Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, our sun is right next door -- only 93 million miles away. This is 163,000 light years. Now, a light year is almost 6 trillion miles. Now, that seems terribly far away. But by astronomical terms, it's almost next door. The event that we saw three weeks ago, in fact, occurred 163,000 years ago, and the light has been traveling here to us at 186,000 miles per second. MacNEIL: Let's look at your pictures, starting with the -- where is the supernova in that picture? Mr. BERENDZEN: Right in the center. And here you see an object that before looked just like any other star and now, as you can see, it's extraordinarily bright. In fact, it will become brighter, or as bright as an entire galaxy. MacNEIL: And it has been found where? Mr. BERENDZEN: It's in the Southern Hemisphere. And in the next slide, you'll see the large Magellanic cloud. This is the site where it's located. It was named after Magellen, who was the first person from the Northern Hemisphere to see it. And that's the object that's -- MacNEIL: And that is a galaxy itself. Mr. BERENDZEN: It's a companion galaxy. It's a satellite to our own. MacNEIL: And you have an illustration of the last time man saw one as close as the supernova. Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, next to the last. The last time was actually 1604. Telescopes weren't invented until 1609. So this one today's exciting. This woodblock comes from 1572. You see the object in the upper right. And that's the way they depicted it in Europe. MacNEIL: Was the star in the Bible a supernova -- that very bright star that was reported above Bethlehem? Mr. BERENDZEN: Very unlikely, because the wise men, after all, followed that star for the order of many months in order to get from Persia or from India to the Holy Land. But a supernova's bright for only a period of a few days or a few weeks. MacNEIL: I see. How did that one in the 1600s affect people? Mr. BERENDZEN: Oh, very traumatically. And that one that we just saw led to many of the changes in science that came at that era. And the one in 1604, called Kepler's Supernova, affected Kepler and then later Galileo. It's part of the renaissance of science, in fact. MacNEIL: Because up 'til that time people thought that the universe was all fixed, that nothing changed in it, and -- Mr. BERENDZEN: That was part of it. Aristotle -- indeed, the church -- was suggesting that the heavens were there for our benefit, for our enjoyment and that they basically did not change. No one understood, of course, in 1604 that we were seeing the death of a star. No one understood that stars went through a cycle. MacNEIL: What is going to happen to this supernova now? So far, is it continuing to get bigger? Mr. BERENDZEN: Oh, yes. The outer shell is. And we go on to the next slide here, you see the effect. This is one thatwas seen in 1937, right below the arrow. And then one year later, you see this view. You can see the huge cloud of gas that's beginning to expand out. And then in the next view, four years later, and I suppose that if we look back at this one five, ten years from now, we'll see a ball of gas as well. MacNEIL: And what happens after that? Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, if we go to the next slide, you'll get an indication. This is what the ancient Chinese saw. As a matter of fact, it's a remnant that we pick up from what they detected on the 4th of July in the year 1054 A. D. For some odd reason, there's no record of a Western astronomer seeing it at all. It's in the constellation of Taurus. It's called the Crab Nebula. It's one of the most exciting things in this -- MacNEIL: Well, is that the whole nebula there, that whole mess of stuff, is that the result of a supernova blowing up? Mr. BERENDZEN: That's right. That's the outer part of it. And then the object itself collapsed down to become a neutron star, a very, very highly compressed star, the density of which is so high, if you had a piece of it the size of your thumb, the mass would be greater than that of Mount Everest. MacNEIL: Now, what can scientists learn from this one? Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, you can learn several things. One of the things that you can learn is about the death of a star, and maybe even the formation of the final stage of the death of a star, such as a black hole. We have theorized that black holes are there for some time. We think we've even found some. But this would be the first time we could see a star actually becoming a black hole -- a thing so dense, it will collapse out of the universe. Second thing you can find -- and I think even perhaps more exciting -- is about chemical evolution. The iron in your body, the carbon in mine as well, were not in the original universe. Astronomers know that really pretty well. If we look at a very distant object, a very faint object, very old object, you don't find the lines in the spectra indicating those elements. Those heavy elements were formed inside of stars. In the twinkling of time of the explosion in a supernova eons ago, heavy elements were made, shot out into space. They congealed down to make a new star. We call it the sun. Around it was some debris. Piece of debris number three we call the earth. Around that earth and in that earth were some of the materials made in the supernova. In short, we are made of a supernova. We couldn't be alive, but for the fact that a star died. We are linked with the cosmos. This supernova that we just detected a few weeks ago is enriching the interstellar medium. And who knows, perhaps in a million years, a new stellar system will form, a star, planets, maybe even life. MacNEIL: Oh, I see. So it could conceivably happen. We're not going to be around for that kind of thing. And so the very chemicals and elements that this earth is made up of that we're on and the life that is on it was blown out of some other exploding star, you believe. Mr. BERENDZEN: The heavy elements, many of the things which make life here so possible, that make life what it is here on earth, indeed, apparently came from a supernova. MacNEIL: You say this is so close, and it's the first time anybody's been able to look at one through telescopes, through big, modern telescopes. What can you actually see through the telescope that is so exciting? Or is it done through other instruments? Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, one of the things is that today you can use so many different kinds of telescopes. Not only optical telescopes, which is the first thing that you perhaps would normally think about, but you can also use radio telescopes, which obviously were not around in 1604. You can also use space technology. You can look in ultraviolet light. You can even detect things called neutrinos by using observatories which are down in mine shafts under the surface of the earth. They permit us to study the interior of the supernova. So for the first time ever, we're able to see a supernova relatively nearby and look at it in all these different wavelengths, and therefore study all parts of it, from its core to its outer shell. MacNEIL: I was intrigued briefly by something you told our reporter, Suzanne Allard -- that 100 years from now, after North and Poin -- well, tell me. That this is going to be the story of 1987. Mr. BERENDZEN: Well, I commented that I suspect 100 years from now, as caught up as we are with North, Poindexter and the rest, that you'll have to find a fairly thick history textbook maybe even to find their names. The Iran affair, perhaps, but their names I'm not sure. But this event will be there. Why? Because it's historic. It's been almost four centuries since it was seen when so nearby. And it may even tell us about the death of the cosmos. MacNEIL: Thank you for redefining the news for us, Dr. Berendzen. WOODRUFF: Turning now to a recap of the day's top stories. Congressional Iran contra investigators reportedly are ready to offer immunity to former NSC Adviser Admiral John Poindexter. Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis prepared to enter the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. And major airlines began talks aimed at reducing travel delays at major airports. Good night, Robin. MacNEIL: Good night, Judy. That's the News Hour tonight, and we will be back tomorrow night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.