The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news this Monday, both sides continue to claim victory and accuse the other of vote fraud in the Philippine eslection, and an aviation magazine reported new word on the cause of the space shuttle Challenger tragedy. The details are in our news summary, coming up. Robin?

ROBERT MacNEIL: After the news summary our major focus tonight is the uncertainty following the Filipino election. We have a report from correspondent Charles Krause, then extended interviews with President Ferdinand Marcos and his challenger, Corazon Aquino. Then the editor of Aviation Week, Donald Fink, gives us the latest theory on what caused the space shuttle disaster. Finally essayist Jim Fisher will have some closing words about a farming success story. News Summary

LEHRER: The Philippine election remained in a muddle today with claims and accusations aplenty but still no firm results. President Reagan was asked about the confused and explosive outcome. In a White House session with regional news editors Mr. Reagan said there are hopeful signs from it all, even now.

Pres. RONALD REAGAN: I think that what we have to watch for is that in spite of all these charges there is at the same time the evidence of a strong, two-party system now in the islands, and we certainly are accustomed to that. We want to help in any way we can, that once the election is over that the results of the election then go forward and that the two parties can come together to make sure the government works, and that we can retain the historic relationship that we've had with the Philippine people and the Philippine Islands. But actually the election, that is for the people of the Philippines to decide and not for us to interfere.

LEHRER: Mr. Reagan said he would be getting a full report on the election in the morning from Senator Richard Lugar and other members of the official U.S. observer team. Senator Lugar has been highly critical of the way the election has been conducted, particularly in the slowness of the count. In Manila, the Philippine National Assembly met for four hours to try to resolve the count question. They made no final decision. As the debate went on a large crowd of both Marcos and Aquino supporters gathered outside. There were some angry shouting matches. The police turned out in force and restored order before there was any serious violence.

MacNEIL: In the confusion, neither President Marcos nor Corazon Aquino conceded any ground. In separate interviews with the NewsHour, both claimed victory and both charged fraud by the other side, but Marcos said he would accept the result approved by Parliament while Mrs. Aquino said she would only accept a result that made her president.

CORAZON AQUINO, Philippines presidential candidate: It is about time that the president clearly gives up because he asked for the snap elections; he called for the snap elections, and he said he wanted a fresh mandate. And since the people have definitely stated that they do not want to give him another mandate, then he should be man enough to accept this and to agree to concede.

CHARLES KRAUSE: Would you accept any results other than those that confirm your victory?

Mrs. AQUINO: No, definitely not because clearly, even in the early results that we had gotten -- this had also been tainted with fraud, and yet I was still maintaining my lead. So this just confirms what I said before the elections that there will be a landslide in my favor and that will definitely help to offset whatever cheating Mr. Marcos intends and his supporters intend to do.

MacNEIL: In his interview Marcos said he was leading by a substantial margin, and I asked him how he knew that.

FERDINAND MARCOS, incumbent Philippines President: Well, because all the election returns are probably now in the hands of the election registrars and the governors and the mayors know this return; they have reported in to our headquarters. And we can verify them as they're brought into the Batasang Pambansa, our parliament. We have done so. And we think we are leading by a substantial margin.

MacNEIL: President Marcos, what would persuade you that you should concede this election? What would convince you that --

Pres. MARCOS: Oh, come on!

MacNEIL: -- you should concede?

Pres. MARCOS: Whatever is the proclamation of the Batasang Pambansa. If they proclaim my opponent I will agree to the verdict.

MacNEIL: The Marcos and Aquino interviews will constitute most of tonight's focus sections after this news summary.

LEHRER: The first apparent authoritative word on what caused the explosion of space shuttle Challenger was out today. It came in the form of a leak to Aviation Week and Space Technology, a leading space industry trade magazine. Aviation Week said the spaceship's right rocket booster pivoted into the main fuel tank, pressing the tank and triggering the explosion. The report gave no source for the story other than NASA investigators. The presidential commission investigating the accident met in secret today in Washington, specifically to explore an internal NASA memo which had warned last July about faulty seals on the booster rockets. The New York Times reported the existence of the memo yesterday. Commission Chairman William Rogers said today NASA had been forthcoming in handing over memos and other information. He said more on the NASA memo question may come out tomorrow at a public meeting of the commission.

MacNEIL: The new ruler of Haiti today promised elections, a new constitution and a real working democracy. The interim military-civilian governing council, which took power after the flight of Jean-Claude Duvalier, was sworn in today. Its president, Lieutenant General Henri Namphy, also announced the banning of the feared secret police known as the Tonton Macoutes which the Duvaliers had used to stay in power. The council relaxed the curfew as calm returned to Haiti after two days of looting and violence that left as many as 300 dead, including dozens of Tonton Macoutes. We have a report from Ken Rees of Worldwide Television News.

KEN REES, Worldwide Television News [voice-over]: The police arrived just in time to save one man's life. He was a member of Duvalier's brutal Tonton Macoutes who'd sought refuge in the police station. The machine gun he'd been using against his attackers, once his neighbors, had run out of ammunition. The police came just as the mob realized he was at their mercy. They managed to beat back the crowd and send for reinforcements. Inside the Macoutes, who locals claimed had personally killed many people during Duvalier's violent rule, cowered on the floor. Not all were as fortunate as that man. An hour later, in a side street, our car was stopped by a mob carrying sticks and rocks. They had found another Macoutes. They were his neighbors, but today, clutching rocks, they stoned the man who had threatened them for so many years until he appeared to be dead. Shots rang out, the crowd moving to take cover. It was the army firing in the air to disperse them, and coming too late to save the Macoutes from the revenge of the mob.

MacNEIL: In Washington the State Department said the new government of Haiti was off to a good start by releasing political prisoners and restoring freedom of the press.

LEHRER: And the Reagan administration has ordered another series of air and naval exercises off the coast of Libya. Air traffic controllers in the Tripoli area were notified planes from two U.S. carriers would be flying within their control area from tomorrow morning until Friday night. These latest maneuvers will occur at the same time Libyan planes and ships are conducting their own exercises in the same area.

MacNEIL: That's our summary of the news. Coming up, Charles Krause reports from Manila on the Philippines election confusion, and we have extended interviews with President Marcos and Corazon Aquino. Then the latest theory on the shuttle tragedy. We talk to the editor of Aviation Week, Donald Fink. Finally, essayist Jim Fisher tells us about a success story down on the farm. Philippines: Election Update

LEHRER: The Philippines election. It's become the election that won't end. Friday the people went to the polls. Did they vote to continue in office Ferdinand Marcos, or replace him with Corazon Aquino? Today there is still no answer to that question, as special correspondent Charles Kraus reports from Manila.

CHARLES KRAUS [voice-over]: It was a weekend of claims and counterclaims by opposition candidate Cory Aquino and President Ferdinand Marcos. It was a weekend of delayed and conflicting vote counts at the government Commission on Elections and at NAMFREL, army patrols in Manila. And finally, it was a weekend when Filipinos on all sides prayed their nation would not be torn by even more violence as a result of Friday's election. At municipal buildings in the capital, Mrs. Aquino's supporters stood vigil, guarding election returns they feared might be tampered with or stolen. But as the votes were counted there was clear evidence that election day irregularities may have cost Mrs. Aquino as many as 300,000 votes in Manila alone. By law each precinct in the Philippines has at least 250 registered voters, yet in Aquino strongholds where there was a heavy turnout, only an average of 180 voters in each precinct had been able to vote.

ELECTION OFFICIAL: Marcos, 62; Aquino, 116.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: On Saturday, amidst growing confusion, both Mrs. Aquino and President Marcos publicity claimed victory.

Mrs. AQUINO: Tensions are high, and I hope that once Mr. Marcos recognizes that my victory is irreversible he will, in the best tradition of democratic politics, concede rather than prolong a period of uncertainty.

Pres. MARCOS: We claim that we have won by two million, and they claim that they have won without any figures.

KRAUS [voice-over]: But on Sunday the tide began to turn. Jaime Cardinal Sin, the archbishop of Manila, celebrated mass with Mrs. Aquino. In his homily the cardinal praised NAMFREL, lending credibility to the citizens group and its indep/fndent vote count which showed Mrs. Aquino ahead.

JAIME SIN, Archbishop of Manla: I praise the NAMFREL for what they have done!

KRAUSE [voice-over]: Then Sunday night there was a dramatic defection. About 30 About 30 computer technicians walked out of the government Commission on elections, charging that Comelec's vote count, showing President Marcos ahead, did not conform to election returns fed into the computers.

Comelec WORKER: We have walked out for purely professional reasons. Now we feel that we have been used.

KRAUSE [voice-over]: The walkout forced Comelec to shut down its operations. Today the official delegation of U.S. election observers named by President Reagan held a press conference before returr criticized the Marcos government for its handling of the vote, but he stopped short of saying the fraud had been so widespread as to totally invalidate the election.

Sen. RICHARD LUGAR, (R) Indiana, election observer: Sadly, however, we have witnessed and heard disturbing reports of efforts to undermine the integrity of the process both during voting and the vote-counting process which is still underway. Even within the last 24 hours serious charges have been made in regard to tabulation systems. The count is at a critical moment. We share the concern expressed to us both by government officials and citizen monitors that the remainder of the Comelec and Namfrel quick count operations proceed to credible conclusions and without further delays. Charging Fraud

LEHRER: The two candidates' attitudes toward the results and the future are critical to what happens next, and we have in-depth interviews with both of them. First, Ms. Aquino, conducted by special correspondent Krause at her home in Manila early this morning, U.S. time. He asked if she thought vote-tampering was responsible for the delay in reporting the election results.

Mrs. AQUINO: I am convinced of that because there is really no reason to delay sending in those results. But again I hope that enough fraud has been committed. So many have been injured and wounded, and some have even died in this election. It is about time that the president clearly give up because he asked for the snap elections; he called for the snap elections, and he said he wanted a fresh mandate. And since the people have definitely stated that they do not want to give him another mandate, then he should be man enough to accept this and to agree to concede.

KRAUSE: Would you accept any results other than those that confirm your victory?

Mrs. AQUINO: No, definitely not, because clearly even in the early results that we had gotten, these had also been tainted with fraud and yet I was still maintaining my lead. So this just confirms what I said before the elections, that there will be a landslide in my favor and that will definitely help to offset whatever cheating Mr. Marcos intends, and his supporters intend to do. But I guess I thought the cheating would end, you know, after election day, or at least a few hours after election day. But it's been three days since the election, and people are still calling in reporting that they are still being intimidated. So it just goes to show that they are still trying to manipulate the returns.

KRAUSE: How far are you willing to go, if necessary, to force Mr. Marcos out of power?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, I have always stated that I am against violence, and while I will be calling for protest rallies if the Batasang rules me out, then I am prepared to go as long as possible leading peaceful demonstrations. But definitely I will not allow myself to be a party to any violence which other people may think of as a necessary pressure on Marcos.

KRAUSE: Have you talked with President Reagan, Ambassador Bosworth or any other U.S. government official since Friday?

Mrs. AQUINO: No, I have not, but people close to me have talked to Ambassador Bosworth and I think some have also talked to some of the foreign observers who came here.

KRAUSE: And what is the nature of those discussions?

Mrs. AQUINO: Nothing really definite, and I think it was just to let us know that they are indeed convinced that there was a lot of fraud because many of them were witness to the actual commitment of this fraud and violence. So I hope that Mr. Reagan will really have an accurate picture of what went on here and that clearly the Filipino people indicated that they wanted a change. And I hope this will matter a great deal when Mr. Reagan makes his decisions regarding the Philippines.

KRAUSE: This morning there was a press conference at which the U.S. delegation read a statement and answered questions. Do you think -- it was a fairly diplomatic reading of the situation, and they were even reluctant to blame the government for the fraud which they acknowledged had occurred here. Are you satisfied that that is a sufficient statement by the United States delegation?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, I hope that they were being diplomatic because they were still in the host country, but once they have returned to the United States I would hope that they would fill in all of the details, which they themselves were witness to. I would like the United States to be more decisive because now that they have -- the observers have witnessed what before probably were just fears expressed to them, now there can be no doubt in their minds that here we were trying to restore democracy through the electoral process and yet we were so prevented from doing so because of threats or actual deeds of violence.

KRAUSE: Do you think the Reagan administration is afraid that if you become president the situation here will get out of hand and that's one of the reasons that they may be reluctant to go too far on your behalf?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, I hope that they have a more accurate thinking of the situation, because definitely things will go worse if I will not be allowed to assume office because, as I said earlier, President Marcos had called for the snap elections and saying that he wanted a fresh mandate from the Filipino people. So you can imagine how many millions of Filipinos will feel so frustrated and so angry that they have not been allowed to freely express their choice.

KRAUSE: If Namfrel does declare you the winner, would one possible scenario here be that you would then declare yourself president and seek international recognition for a government --

Mrs. AQUINO: Maybe it wouldn't be me myself declaring myself the winner, but I guess there are other persons or entities who could do that.

KRAUSE: For example?

Mrs. AQUINO: Right now I really think I should not answer that question.

KRAUSE: During the campaign obviously President Marcos made an effort to discredit your candidacy by saying you were inexperienced, and my question is whether you feel ready and confident enough to form a government.

Mrs. AQUINO: Oh, yes. And the 56-day campaign where I had really close contact with the Filipino people and I could not only see and hear their support of me but, as I said, that there was this personal commitment to the country, not just to Cory Aquino, but they saw in me the hope to change things in this country and definitely they had given up on Marcos and they knew that another six-year reign of Mr. Marcos would be disastrous and no way could our country recover. So I am prepared, as I indicated and as I stated when I announced my candidacy, that I am ready to serve our country and I am ready to run the government.

KRAUSE: Are you at all worried about a military coup or any other action by the military, as Mr. Marcos himself kept talking about during the campaign?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, of course there has been a lot of talk about that, but I think the military have also seen and heard that the Filipino people have already clearly indicated who they want to run their government. So I think the military -- and I believe there are many decent elements in the military who will respect the wishes of the Filipino people.

KRAUSE: What do you think the final outcome will look like in terms of votes or percentages?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, first of all, it's really very clear that so many people were not able to vote so the original projection of me having 23 million voters is no longer an accurate projection, and many of our people are inclined to believe that the actual number of voters could be anywhere between 16 to 18 million because, as our leaders are now coming to Manila and explaining to us what happened in their respectives towns and provinces -- witness Metro Manila itself. We figure something like 350,000 to 400,000 were not able to vote. So Monching Mitra of Palawan also came to report that something like I think as much as 50,000 or 50 were not able to vote. And this is repeated almost everywhere. So this was something I have to admit we in the opposition did not expect. I guess while all of us were so busy campaigning, Marcos and his staff, since they did not campaign as much as we did, they must have been meeting morning, noon and night planning out all of these different strategies and how to prevent us from getting our supporters to vote for us.

KRAUSE: So then what do you think the final outcome will look like?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, much as I would like to be a fearless forecaster, Charles, I'm afraid I honestly don't know what will be forthcoming. All I know is that I have to keep on continuing to appeal to our people not to resort to violence, but instead to keep on with these peaceful demonstrations. And at the same time I would like Mr. Marcos and his supporters also to refrain from any further cheating and terrorism. I think now is the time, you know, to start healing all wounds.

KRAUSE: But do you have any fears that he may, or his people may, attempt to provoke violence as a way of then legitimizing martial law or some other crackdown on the opposition?

Mrs. AQUINO: Well, I guess anything is possible, Charles. But so long as we in the opposition do not -- are not guilty, you know, of initiating these things then we will still be able to control whatever Mr. Marcos intends to do. But I hope at this point -- after all, as I say, it's been almost seven -- well, close to 72 hours now since the polls closed. It is time for Mr. Marcos and his supporters to reflect on the people's wishes. And as real leaders they should just -- he and his supporters should just think of ways and means of how both factions can sit together and talk together so that we, as I said, can have a peaceful transition of government.

KRAUSE: Do you deep down believe that Ferdinand Marcos is simply going to recognize what you say are the results of this election, come to an inauguration and hand the presidency over to you?

Mrs. AQUINO: Maybe it won't be as simple as that. He's been in office for 20 years. What we have just gone through is really such a unique election and unfortunately an election which is far from fair and free. So maybe we cannot go through the normal transition process which is done in other democratic countries, but it doesn't really have to be according to the book, so long as there is no further bloodshed. Then I think that will be good enough not only for me but for the rest of the Filipino people. A President's Denial

MacNEIL: Now the other side. President Marcos also talked with us earlier today from the Presidential palace in Manila. I asked what he could do to dispel the growing impression from observers in Manila that this was not an honest election.

Pres. MARCOS: If I can assure you that there is no intention to manipulate at all. Now, on the question of fraud. That's an easy thing to say, and the opposition has been saying that in order to prepare for a political debacle. They knew they were beaten, and so they have been spreading this. But if they have any evidence I suggest that we now settle this in court.

MacNEIL: Let us discuss Senator Lugar's charge. He says the delayed vote count is deliberate, that he believes that your party is holding back votes from areas you control in the Philippines in order to manipulate the results in those areas in order to win. Is that what you are doing? Are you deliberately slowing down the count in order to manipulate?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, of course not! That is our complaint. It is our complaint because the count by the opposition does not include the bailiwicks where my votes are high. That's why they're trying to project a picture of me losing.

MacNEIL: Thirty members of that government election commission walked out of the count there last night, charging that they were being forced to put false results into their computers. What is your reaction to that?

Pres. MARCOS: That's easy to check. And so did some from NAMFREL. The results are [unintelligible] from NAMFREL. Now, why don't we just go through the tabulation and check the sources as against the authenticated and certified election returns. That should be easy to do.

MacNEIL: What did you --

Pres. MARCOS: And all this talk can be settled immediately.

MacNEIL: What did you do when you heard that 30 members of the government commission had walked out, charging fraud?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, I immediately asked exactly how this happened, and it turns out that this was a conspiracy cooked up several days ago, and apparently what drove them away was the heckling and the danger to their lives, because the hecklers were throwing things at them and there was no possibility of working at all. Well, and the same thing is true of Namfrel. Somebody walked out, or some people walked out.

MacNEIL: Why, after nearly four days since the election, have fewer than half the votes been counted?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, for instance, Manila is still being canvassed up 'til now. Why? Because in elections the elections registrar has to see and witness the canvassing of every precinct, and that takes time. Not only that, in some places the precincts are so far away and the weather has turned foul. It is not true that the weather is good in, say, 1,000 miles southeast of here or 500 miles north of here in the mountains. The weather is foul there. Our helicopters could not go through and the votes would not go through. So we are having problems about bringing all the precincts. But I can tell you, yes, probably the procedure needs a little improvement.

MacNEIL: How is it possible that Mrs. Aquino did not get a single vote in several large cities, for instance, Laoag City in Ilocos Norte?

Pres. MARCOS: No, in some precincts. But --

MacNEIL: How is that possible?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, I received zero in some precincts. Why don't you ask her the same thing? It's possible where you are completely in control of a precinct, for instance, and it is not the town, it's a precinct of 300 voters. All of them are your relatives. And very close relatives. So they cannot even appoint an inspector or a watcher. They have to get an inspector or watcher from another town. But before the inspector or watcher comes to their polling they vote already in the other town, so they cannot vote in the precinct which they are inspectors of and watch results and watch the results. That probably has happened. This has happened before, and it will happen again.

MacNEIL: But my information is that in Ilocos Norte Mrs. Aquino did not get a single vote in the city, which would mean that even her own campaign manager -- which would mean -- just a moment -- that even her own campaign manager did not vote for her. Is that credible?

Pres. MARCOS: That's a falsification. That's a fabrication. That's not true. She got votes in Laoag. Whoever reported that falsified the whole news. I'm abiding by the constitution, and the constitutional processes while my opponent has stated that she won't consider any decision which does not proclaim her as the winning candidate. In short, she is opting out of the constitutional processes. I will abide by the result, whatever it may be.

MacNEIL: The count now goes to the National Assembly for the official ratified count, is that right, the parliament?

Pres. MARCOS: Yes, like your United States House of Representatives.

MacNEIL: How will --

Pres. MARCOS: It is the official body --

MacNEIL: Yes.

Pres. MARCOS: -- that canvasses and processes the results.

MacNEIL: How will the Philippine people and international observers and other countries interested in this election, how will they find it credible if a body in which you contain large -- you retain large control decides who won this election?

Pres. MARCOS: No, no, no, no, no, no. The canvassing committee is composed of equal numbers of the opposition, four, and an equal number of the majority. That's it. So they are not representative of our control over the Batasang Pambansa, the parliament. They are evenly divided, four-four.

MacNEIL: You said you would not -- you just referred to Mrs. Aquino saying she would not accept the result. She said that if you refused to begin preparations for a transfer of power within a week, that she will begin leading demonstrations to force you out. What would your reaction be to that?

Pres. MARCOS: That's funny. They can go through the demonstrations. We can do the same thing. Let's see who gets the bigger crowds.

MacNEIL: How would you --

Pres. MARCOS: And not only that. Look. Our people are law-abiding citizens. You think that she can get the Filipino people to join her to violate the constitution? I seriously doubt it.

MacNEIL: Representative Stephen Solarz, Democrat of New York, who is the chairman of the House of Representatives committee which deals with the Philippines, says if this election is simply stolen and the will of the people is thwarted it could bring the Philippine nation to the brink of civil war. What is your reaction to that?

Pres. MARCOS: He is quoting my opponent, and they are just like that. They are false. So I do not blame Mr. Solarz for talking like Cory Aquino.

MacNEIL: He also said that such a situation would be a bonanza for the communists.

Pres. MARCOS: Yes, and they are bringing it about. I am fighting the communists. They are not. This is one of the issues that we brought into the campaign, and I am glad we won.

MacNEIL: How do you know you've won?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, because all the election returns are probably now in the hands of the election registrars, and the governors and the mayors know those returns. They have reported them to our headquarters, and we can verify them as they've brought them to the Batasang Pambausa, our parliament. We have done so. And we thinkwe are leading by a substantial margin.

MacNEIL: Well, if those officials know the returns, why aren't those returns published?

Pres. MARCOS: They are being published, but they have to go, first of all, to the Batasang Pambansa, the parliament, and a copy to be given to the Comelec. Now, the proof of the matter is that NAMFREL refuses to print or tabulate any of the returns coming from my bailiwick like the north, the Ilocos region, Cabanatuan [Cagayan Valley], eastern Visayan region 12, which is a Moslem region. All the Moslem regions, nine and 12, are my bailiwick --

MacNEIL: Well, why --

Pres. MARCOS: And we don't know why.

MacNEIL: Why doesn't the official government commission publish those returns? They've only reported about seven million votes so far. And you -- and in that count -- excuse me just a moment. And this morning, the New York Times, in the official government commission's count, Comelec's count, you are leading by 200,000 votes. If all those votes are not being reported, where are they?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, that's what I want to know, but what I think is happening is what is happenig here in Manila, that the election registrar cannot give an authentification or certification unless all the precincts are in. And not all the precincts are in. That is what is happening right here in Manila. I wish your informers would go and visit the board of canvassers of Manila, Quezon City -- those are very close to here, but a few kilometers away only. Why don't they do that?

MacNEIL: Whatever the final count turns out to be and is issued, if the perception is that the opposition has been frustrated and that the count has been manipulated, if the perception is that, how will you govern your country if more than half of the Filipinos think that the election has been stolen from them?

Pres. MARCOS: But I don't think the Filipinos can be fooled by anyone like even NAMFREL or any observer who comes in here. We think that the Filipino people are mature politically, and we feel that with all the safeguards that we have taken, including even membership in the canvass body of tellers, in the parliament. Why, I don't think there is any possibility whatsoever, look, the election of changing election returns. The election returns are signed by all the members of the board of inspectors, and that includes the representatives of my opponent. And they are thumbmarked. Now, how can you change them? How can you change them without the collusion of everybody? And you cannot do that. You cannot get to change, say, precincts amounting to millions. I know that they're holding back on hundreds of thousands of votes in my favor. Now, while we are going to take all the precautions against any anomaly or manipulation of the returns, I don't think that anyone can change those returns. I have to see for myself.

MacNEIL: Senator Lugar, the head of the U.S. official delegation said, "If this is perceived as a fraudulent election, it will have a serious impact on U.S. policy towards the Philippines." What is your reaction to that?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, my reaction to this is yes, there is no fraud committed by the majority party which would be sufficient to change the result. There may be some; I don't deny that in this country the two parties in the lower rung are often guilty of some kind of anomaly, just like in the United States. But certainly what I say is we can control our people. We have controlled our people. Now, has the opposition controlled their people? Well, you see that we are getting all kinds of reports of vote-buying. Well, you see that some of our mayors are killed. Why is it that some of our voters will refuse to vote?

MacNEIL: Do you believe that you may have a perception problem in Washington about the honesty of this election?

Pres. MARCOS: Well, considering what the foreign media has been reported, I would suppose it's the same thing. It's a smear campaign. It's a part of the dirty tricks that the opposition has done. It's unfortunate because it has involved an ally, the United States of America, and it might involve the relationship between the two countries, especially with respect to the bases, and especially with respect to the military alliances. That would be unfortunate.

MacNEIL: What did you mean when you said the other day, you talked the other day about possibly creating a modus vivendi with another power in the region?

Pres. MARCOS: No, if you tell us that you don't want us anymore, there is no other alternative except to, say, have a modus vivendi with China and the other powers so that we can stop this fissure in Asia. Otherwise there will be a war here.

MacNEIL: Is this --

Pres. MARCOS: But I --

MacNEIL: Is this a threat to Washington that you're making?

Pres. MARCOS: No, no, no, no. No. Because I was told in the questioning, what do you think of the bases being transferred? What do you think of America changing its foreign policy and not -- and distancing itself from you and the Philippines? And the answer was, well, of course, you can get out any time. That's your privilege. But the moment you get out we are in trouble. And probably all of Asia is in trouble because you wouldn't be able to project your naval and air power to the South China Sea, to the Malacca Straits or the Indian Ocean, to Hormuz Straits and to the Middle East. That will endanger everybody here, including Middle East and Europe. And that is what I meant.

MacNEIL: President Marcos, what would persuade you that you should concede this election? What would convince you that you should concede?

Pres. MARCOS: Oh, come on! whatever is the proclamation of the Batasang Pambansa. If they proclaim my opponent I will agree to the verdict.

MacNEIL: It may be several days before Parliament's verdict is known. The National Assembly has 15 days to complete the canvass of vote tally sheets from 137 locales. One official said that could be done in 48 hours if all the tallies were on hand. But only 60, less than half, had been received today. New Disaster Theory

LEHRER: Next, and again, tonight, space shuttle Challenger and the search for answers. NASA and a presidential commission have yet to speak officially as to what caused the tragedy, but there are now an increasing number of people talking and leaking to news organizations. The New York Times reported yesterday from internal NASA memos in July warning about faulty seals in the shuttle booster rockets. Today Aviation Week and Space Technology, a leading aerospace trade publication, said investigators now believe they know the cause of the explosion that killed the seven crew members aboard. Donald Fink, editor-in-chief of Aviation Week, is here to tell us about that story.

Mr. Fink, in the simplest possible terms, tell us the content and the theory of your story.

DONALD FINK: We have pieced together a story that, based on data that the NASA investigating team is assessing right now, that the failure occurred in the right solid booster. Looking at the space shuttle from the orbiter side, that would be the long white booster that's attached to the external tank on the right-hand side.

LEHRER: We have a picture of it up now.

Mr. FINK: Yes, that's right. That's right. And that there was a rupture in the lower part of that solid booster. Where that rupture was precisely is not quite known, what caused it, what mechanism triggered this, is not quite known. But there was a rupture that allowed some of the very hot gases that normally would be exited out of the exhaust cone at the base of the rocket to exit on the side, and in effect impinge on the external tank and on the attachment point that holds the solid booster to the external tank. There are two attachment points, one at the lower part of --

LEHRER: What do you mean by an attachment point?

Mr. FINK: This is a structure, this is a piece of structure that actually hooks the solid booster to the external tank.

LEHRER: I see.

Mr. FINK: Makes it an integral structure. And the orbiter then rides on the tank. There is evidence that indicates that structure linking, the bottom structure linking the solid booster to the external tank, broke loose, allowing the booster to pivot around the top attachment point, which then thrust the nose of the solid booster into the external tank, cr structure and breaking the two tanks that are inside of it. There's the liquid oxygen, which is the oxidizer, is contained in the upper tank, and the hydrogen, which is the fuel, is contained in the lower tank. The solid booster nosecone came into the structure at that point, rupturing the outer portion and breakingthe inner tanks, mixing the two fluids, and when these two fluids are mixed they are explosive.

LEHRER: And there is no evidence, though, to determine what caused it to tilt in the first place, right?

Mr. FINK: Well, what caused it to tilt was the fact that the lower structure, the lower attachment point, failed. Now, what triggered the failure in the booster itself and caused that sheet of hot exhaust gases to come out of the side of the booster is not presently known.

LEHRER: Now, your story is based on sources within the NASA investigation? is that correct?

Mr. FINK: Our story -- we had several stories. The main story is based on interviews we've had with a lot of people. We have sources in industry, we have sources in the agency, we have sources in flight safety foundations. You name it, you know, we have not depended on one particular source for this. We have pulsed a lot of people, talked to a lot of people.

LEHRER: All right. Now, how does this theory jibe with the New York Times story yesterday about faulty seals on the booster rockets?

Mr. FINK: Well, the New York Times story could be very well speaking to the trigger mechanism that caused this thing to start in the first place.

LEHRER: Explain that, please.

Mr. FINK: Well, the solid boosters are not one long integral structure. They are brought to the Cape in pieces, in segments. The boosters are 149 feet long, and you couldn't have a solid propellant grain in something that long and transport it in that length. So they are built in segments, in sections. These are assembled at the Cape and then put up, stacked up vertically, and they're closed with special seals and they are enclosed with outer rings, then with many bolts through them and so on so that this is supposed to be an integral seal, if you will, that will allow the solid propellant to burn the full length and not allow any of the gases to escape. Obviously you want to channel all the gases out through the exhaust nozzle.

LEHRER: All right, now, what do you make of that Times story? Obviously you've read it. Your own folks have done somereporting on it. What does that mean to you?

Mr. FINK: Well, it raises an issue; certainly it raises an issue that has to be looked into. The New York Times article says that someone within NASA raised a question, if not an alarm, saying there was a problem with the seals between the segments of the solid booster. If this is indeed the case, then that is a topic that should have been looked into.

LEHRER: Is there any evidence that NASA did in fact react to the alarm and did in fact look into it?

Mr. FINK: I know of none, but that doesn't mean that there wasn't any action. I know of no action that was taken.

LEHRER: Why is it that suddenly all of this information is coming out to leak to you, to leak to the New York Times and other publications? Why are people suddenly talking and revealing documents and that sort of thing?

Mr. FINK: Well, I would object to the use of the word leak in our case.

LEHRER: Okay.

Mr. FINK: We have a dedicated corps of professional reporters who are dealing in their element. They know these people, they know the agency. They are well-versed in the technology that goes into this system. They know it as well as some of the astronauts know it and as well as some of the engineers know it. So it was a long and painstaking process. We've had a couple of weeks to work on this story now. We have been very close to a lot of people through a long period of time and we have worked this story very, very hard. And it is out of this effort that we have gained the story that we have.

LEHRER: It's not the result of somebody within the NASA organization with an axe to grind or a motive of some kind who is getting this information out at this point?

Mr. FINK: Well, that makes it sound like a passive role on our part as if someone comes to us in the dark of that's not the way we got the story.

LEHRER: Yeah, but -- but Mr. Fink, there's an official investigation going on by a presidential commission. There's an investigation going on by NASA, which is an official government agency. And yet outside these two official or simultaneous investigations, your publication, the New York Times and other publications are printing what the investigations are turning up, at the same time these meetings are being held in secrecy and all of that. So, I mean, something's happening. I'm just curious as to what it is, or do you have a theory about it?

Mr. FINK: Well, it's hard to say what motivates people to talk to us or to you, for that example -- for that matter. What motivates people to come to news organizations with information is a topic that we could discuss for a long, long time. The fact is we worked the story very, very hard, and we found people who have faith in us, who trust what we represent as far as the magazine is concerned. They know that if they give us technical detail it will be treated accurately.

LEHRER: More so, maybe, than the investigations themselves? Is that -- maybe that's what I'm trying to get at. Is there some suspicion that maybe these investigations aren't being thorough enough?

Mr. FINK: I couldn't really comment on that. I have to say I don't know what motivates them to come to us.

LEHRER: Okay, well --

Mr. FINK: In this case they have brought it to us.

LEHRER: Well, having planted the seed, I will leave it there. Mr. Fink, thank you very much.

Mr. FINK: You're quite welcome. Farming Inc.

MacNEIL: Finally we have an essay. Most of the news about farmers these days is bad, dominated by low prices, falling land values and bank foreclosures. But our regular essayist, Jim Fisher of the Kansas City Times, has been visiting a farm region where the picture is very different. It's a seven-county area in southeastern Missouri along the Mississippi River known as the Bootheel.

JIM FISHER, The Kansas City Times: It's midwinter now in the Missouri Bootheel, the intermezzo between fall harvest and spring planting. Time to work on equipment, check the markets, or to spend a few minutes over coffee at the local cafe. Nothing new. Such pursuits are any farmer's winter occupation. Only here there's a difference. Fifty percent of Missouri's crops are grown here on only 9 of its land, and two-third of the fresh vegetables. And here, on land called short on pretty but long on production, farmers have prospered and grown in a time that's been dismal for their brethren.

Why? Why in a time when foreclosures seem the norm, when any farm news seems to be bad news? Some of the answers are obvious, other not so evident, and in them we can see part of the future. Burke Dodson farms 3,000 acres.

BURKE DODSON, farmer: I think as we look at what's going on, I think the thing that stands out in my mind about this area, the Bootheel, and this county is the first thing is we have very good land, and under this land is a lot of water; in fact, it's unlimited water. We have very aggressive, business-minded people, and with a river right here next door, and all the river transportation we have, I think put all those things together, that can make the difference in what we've been able to do and not to do in comparison with other areas. I think the people here take a deeper look at the business end of farming than they do in a lot of areas. I know all my neighbors do. And the fact that they do, that kind of keeps me on my toes and makes me do it, too, 'cause I don't want to be the one that goes out.

FISHER: There's precious little romanticism here. Farming here is a business, one you put a pencil to. It's not a good way of life, not something great granddaddy did, not the yeoman agrarian ideal of Jefferson and the Founding Fathers, where man would find an inner solace in the tradition of working the land. The tradition here is making money. Oh, there have been a few here who have overextended, but to give an idea of how successful farmers here have been even in bad times, a local Production Credit Association here has loaned $1.6 billion over the last 50 years. Of that, only $123,000 worth has gone sour.

This is 20th-century land, productive, efficiently laid out by the men who drained the swamp it was 70 years ago. Those men shifted around more land than was moved in the building of the Panama Canal. Generally land hasn't been bought here as a hedge against inflation, a way to borrow more money and a way to create the big problems a lot of farmers are having in the mid-1980s. Land here, when it's sold at all, has been bought to make money farming. Cash flow, at least in the Bootheel, is almost a religion.

The Bootheel, in short, is a factory, a big agricultural machine. And just maybe that is part of the future, where super-efficiency will be the only way to farm, where land broken for marginal pasture in the frenzy of the 1970s will revert to what it was, not with the shouting of "No sale, no sale," and movie-staged farm auctions, but quietly, the bigger operators taking over, where the economies of scale prevail, where the future won't be idealized farmsteads on every half-section of land; where the gingerbread dreams of our past, no matter how much we want them to stay the same, will fade amidst flat fields, black land, big machines, and amid businessmen called farmers. And amid, like it or not, what we call efficiency, something measured with money, not recollections of times past.

MacNEIL: Once again, the main stories of the day. Both sides in the Philippines continued to claim victory in the presidential election. And an aviation magazine reported a new explanation of the cause of the space shuttle disaster. Good night, Jim.

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