The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight, Margaret Warner, with House Majority Leader Dick Armey and White House economic chief Gene Sperling, update the federal budget dispute; Ray Suarez looks at the mysteries about the runaway jet crash in South Dakota; Gwen Ifill examines the troubled peace plan for the African nation of Sierra Leone; and Elizabeth Farnsworth umpires a World Series debate between essayist Roger Rosenblatt and poet laureate Robert Pinsky about winners and losers. It all follows our summary of the news this Tuesday.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: Congressional Republicans today repeated their determination to cut federal spending across the board, and democrats said again that would be disastrous. Kwame Holman reports.

KWAME HOLMAN: Congressional Republicans today were confident they could reach agreement with President Clinton on the remaining spending bills that fund the federal government.

REP. J. C. WATTS, [R] Oklahoma: We are down to where the rubber meets the road, and we're down to finishing this commitment out and making sure that we find the dollars needed.

KWAME HOLMAN: Sofar, President Clinton has signed into law eight of the thirteen spending measures, but the President also has vetoed three bills, and threatened to veto two others, citing inadequate funding of several important programs. Beyond what to fund, there are differences over where the money will come from. Republicans say they can resolve that problem with a 1.4 percent across-the-board cut in each of the 13 spending bills.

REP. JOHN SUNUNU, [R] New Hampshire: We're willing to work with the administration, with all the agency- and cabinet-level heads, to find 1 percent of waste and abuse that they can squeeze out of their budgets, and do that in order to fund priorities that the administration may think are important, and we're willing to work with the President on those priorities.

KWAME HOLMAN: Democratic leaders meeting with White House budget negotiators today rejected the Republican proposal.

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT, Minority Leader: They're talking about a 1.4 percent across-the-board cut that they say makes no difference. Well, ask the Defense Department whether it makes any difference. We're talking about having to lay off as many as 29,000 or 30,000 people in the Defense Department.

SEN. TOM DASCHLE, Minority Leader: If there is waste, we can find it, and we ought to deal with it. But to say we are going to cut across the board and assume that you are going to be cutting out the waste is fallacious at best.

KWAME HOLMAN: Yesterday, President Clinton agreed to sign another temporary spending extension to keep government agencies operating beyond Thursday's midnight deadline, while Congressional and white house negotiators continue to work toward a budget agreement.

JIM LEHRER: We'll have more on this story right after the News Summary. Investigators said today there would be no quick findings about the jet crash that killed golfer Payne Stewart. His Lear jet flew pilotless for several hours yesterday before it nose-dived into a cow pasture in South Dakota. The four and possibly five others onboard also were killed. National Transportation Safety Board officials said it would take time to remove the thousands of pieces of wreckage from the site without damaging evidence. We'll have more on the story later in the program tonight. There was a major school bus accident in Indiana today. About 70 people, most of them special education high school students, were hurt when a semi- trailer rig slammed into two school buses. It happened 25 miles south of Terre Haute, Indiana. Three people were injured seriously. Authorities said the buses stopped at a railroad crossing when the truck smacked into the rear of one bus, driving it into the other. The buses were carrying the students to a children's museum. Consumer confidence fell sharply this month, the Conference Board said today. The index was down for the fourth month in a row. Americans reported feeling business conditions were bad and jobs harder to come by. Despite the findings, the Board forecast a strong holiday shopping season. The Conference Board is a private business research group in New York. There will be some changes beginning Monday in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Chevron, Goodyear, Sears, and Union Carbide will be out; Home Depot, Intel, Microsoft, and SBC Communications in. The Dow Jones Company announced those changes today. They are meant to better reflect the modern economy with its emphasis on technology; 30 companies make up the 103- year-old index, which is considered the main measure of the stock market. Unusual and, in some cases, severe weather iscoming this winter. Weather experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration made that prediction today. They blamed it on La Nina, the periodic cooling of the tropical Pacific Ocean. NOAA chief James Baker commented in Washington.

JAMES BAKER: We expect this to cause warmer and dryer weather in the southern half of the country and more snow and rain in the Pacific Northwest. The Northeast, where we are, is less clear. It's a little harder for us to anticipate. We certainly anticipate all the variation, all the severe changes that we have seen. We should be getting some warmer than average weeks in the central northern and eastern states but we certainly expect bouts of colder than normal temperatures and considerable rainfall and storminess.

JIM LEHRER: More Americans are getting fat and dying from obesity- related diseases, so said several new studies announced today. The research will be published in the "Journal of the American Medical Association" on Wednesday. One report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows one in five adults is obese. Another study found obesity- related diseases kill some 300,000 people a year. There was also a new government report today on teenage motherhood. It said births to girls ages 15 to 19 dropped 2 percent , and pregnancies among high-schoolers hit a 40-year low. Among the reasons cited for the drop: Fewer teens are having sex, and those who are, are using reliable forms of birth control. In Sierra Leone, fighting has broken out for the first time since the government and rebels signed a peace accord in July. Newspaper reports said as many as 100 soldiers may have been killed. We'll have more on Sierra Leone later in the program tonight. The United Nations formally assumed control of East Timor today. More than 9,000 U.N. troops will replace a 16-nation security operation. That Australian-led force arrived last month to restore order. Pro-Indonesian militias had gone on a rampage in response to an independence referendum. Thousands of East Timorese are still displaced. The U.N. Security Council unanimously approved the takeover last night. And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to wrestling toward a budget, the runaway jet, a troubled peace for Sierra Leone, and Pinsky and Rosenblatt on winners and losers.

FOCUS - DUELING FOR DOLLARS

JIM LEHRER: Margaret Warner has the budget story.

MARGARET WARNER: For more on the conflict over completing the year 2000 federal budget, we turn to two key players in the ongoing negotiations: Republican Congressman Dick Armey of Texas, the House Majority Leader; and Gene Sperling, President Clinton's national economic adviser. Congressman Armey, you're nearly a month into the new fiscal year and there's still no final budget. What is the hang-up?

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: Well, actually this is an... this is a wonderful time for us, quite frankly. We have an opportunity of a lifetime to save every dime of Social Security, to use it for debt reduction, to prepare the stage to save the system and make it work for our children. None of us ever thought we'd get such an opportunity. We went to the White House. The President of the United States has finally accepted our priority here. He's agreed with us. We're not going to spend Social Security. It's tough to work out the bills when you have that kind of a hard barrier against spending increases. We've made a lot of tough trade-off decisions but we're getting there and we will complete the last bill this week and we will prove that we can, in fact, complete the entirebudget for next year without spending a dime of Social Security for any purpose other than Social Security, and that quite frankly will be the first time in 30 years that Congress has done that.

MARGARET WARNER: Gene Sperling, do you agree there's no real hang-up or difference here? You all agree on all the priorities?

GENE SPERLING: [Laughing] Well, we are glad that after the President put forward his State of the Union that said they ought to pay down the debt, use Social Security surplus to pay down the debt and use the benefits for Social Security, Republicans have at least decided they want to mouth the same words the President has. Unfortunately, their actions don't quite match up to the rhetoric. They've really ended up, I think, Margaret, in the worst of all worlds budget. First of all they're saying that we ought to do an across-the-board cut that would have everything from education to nutrition to veterans to air traffic control, at the same time... at the same time they're raising their own pay and including unprecedented pork and earmark projects. That's one bad part. The second bad part, that doesn't even prevent them from going into the Social Security surplus. The Congressional Budget Office, their scorekeeper, shows that they pay or are spending about 18 to 20 billion from the Social Security surplus. Their across-the-board cut would only cover about a fourth of that. So what they've done is come up with a plan that is going to cut across the board at the same time they're raising their own pay and still probably spend $15 billion from the Social Security surplus. So I think that we need to do is start being willing to admit the truth, which is that their plan is going into the surplus. We need to make some tough choices -- maybe be willing to raise tobacco prices, make polluters pay for some of the Super Fund problems and do some of the tough choices so we can honestly say to people that we are protecting Social Security surplus and doing it without having to do these across-the-board cuts or not funding smaller class sizes or more cops on the street or a stronger environment.

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: Well, gee, Margaret, let me just respond. I'm frankly amazed at Gene Sperling. It is only less accurate than it is less charitable. The fact of the matter is when the President proposed his budget it's a matter of record. He said he wanted to spend 40 percent of the Social Security, Margaret, on other things. He asked for....

GENE SPERLING: That is not so.

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: I can show you the tape of the speech, Gene.

GENE SPERLING: Margaret, I'd like to reply.

MARGARET WARNER: Let's just let Congressman Armey finish, and then, Mr. Sperling, I'll get back to you.

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: Gene, Margaret, first of all, I listened to Gene with a lot of patience although some amusement. The President wanted to spend 60 percent. His budget asked for $157 billion increase in budget. We, in fact, do save every dime for Social Security. Gene Sperling knows very well when he says the Congressional Budget Office says we're spending Social Security, he's referring to their response to a hypothetical letter, not their measurement of our plan. We have a letter and he knows full well we have a letter that says our plan does not cut Social Security. Now, here's the difference....

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman, congressman, let me ask you to clarify one thing though. Are you all determined to go ahead with this across-the-board spending cut that you talked about but so far has not been introduced?

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: All right. Let's go back. It's the across-the-board reduction in spending for administrative waste and inefficiencies over the discretionary part of the budget and, yes, indeed, Gene Sperling, it does apply to our own salaries. I mean, I cannot remember ever having heard one person in this town speak for such a limited amount of time with so much inaccuracy as I just heard from Gene Sperling.

MARGARET WARNER: All right. Let's stay on the subject if we can.

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: It's really disappointing because I know the President wants to work with us. He's eager to work with it, and he really needs better support from his staff than what he's getting from Gene Sperling tonight.

MARGARET WARNER: Gene Sperling, what is wrong -- now let me just ask you this. What is wrong with a 1 percent or 1.4 percent across-the-board spending cut as a way to resolve this situation?

GENE SPERLING: Margaret, there's two things wrong. First of all, it perpetrates a fraud that all they need to do is do a 1 percent across the board to not have to spend Social Security surplus. This isn't just us. Margaret, I'm going to show this. I'll cover my face with it. It says the GOP spending bill taps Social Security surplus. You can find headlines like this in every major paper in the country. This is what the Congressional Budget Office shows, Margaret. And so it's really terrible that the leader comes on and suggests that when we are saying what the "New York Times," the "Washington Post," the "Wall Street Journal" have all reported, that's wrong. Now, a 1 percent across-the-board cut would cover about four or five billion. You have right there the "Washington Post" showing that the Republicans are spending $18 billion. So, first of all, it's not going to prevent them from spending the Social Security surplus. Second of all, it's a failure in governing and priorities. Let's think about it. We think that they would need a 9 percent across-the-board cut to not go into Social Security. They say 1.4 percent. Let's take one example, Title 1. That gives extra reading and science and extra help to children in high poverty schools. Under our estimate, a million less children would get that help. If you take their 1.4 percent, Margaret, it would be about 160,000. Whether you buy theirs or ours, what kind of governing is it to do an across-the-board cut that will hurt education for hundreds of thousands of children when they're giving themselves a pay increase when they could go through a budget in an intelligent way and take out projects we don't need like an LDH-88, amphibious ship, that happens to be in the State of Mississippi that costs $500 million and is not requested this year by any part of our military.

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman Armey, could you take it out of what the President is calling pork barrel spending - in effect, Senator John McCain said this weekend that he thought there was $20 billion in the defense budget of pork that, you know, could be pulled out and you wouldn't have this problem.

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: We worked very hard on these bills. The fact of the matter is, again, I'll say this is 1 percent reduction in administrative budgets of the different agencies. The agencies are not going to shut down programs of personnel. Certainly the President wouldn't allow that. The fact is the President's political advisor here, Gene Sperling, just made an interesting political discussion here. But we will prove when we complete this work that the CBO will score this as not touching Social Security. The President has pledged to work with us. I hope we can get his staff to support him in that effort. This is a wonderful opportunity, and I really I guess it's kind of a shame to see Mr. Sperling on national TV raining on a parade that's going to result in so much good for the American people and will be the result of so much hard, decent, honest work by so many people to, for him to just sit there and mischaracterize and disparage motives as he's done as been a real disappointment for me. I really quite frankly expected better from somebody in the White House in light of the President's commitment to work with us to complete this job.

GENE SPERLING: You know, Margaret....

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Sperling, let me ask you something...

GENE SPERLING: That's ludicrous for the following reasons.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Sperling, explain this to us: Why -

GENE SPERLING: After the leadership -

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Sperling.

GENE SPERLING: The only person who broke the pledge to not start doing Social Security was Congressman Armey. He went up with a little credit card. You know it's really terrible that you can be the third-ranking member and come on TV and try to suggest these types of things. Your own Congressional Budget Office in every major paper has suggested this. John McCain, a Republican member of congress, Senator, candidate for President, said yesterday how can you possibly cut everything across the board including Meals on Wheels and not do something -- more intelligent form of cutting? Margaret, why would we want to make tough choices? Why would we want to stand up to environmental polluters the tobacco industry? Those aren't easy. The reason we want to do those things is that we are trying to be constructive in finding real resources so that we don't have to tap into Social Security surplus. Why would we want to make all those tough choices if we didn't honestly believe that that was the credible way to present a balanced budget that doesn't spend Social Security surplus?

MARGARET WARNER: Congressman, if in the minute-and-a-half we have left we could avoid ancient history let me ask one bottom-line question: Is it the case, however, that really the differences between you two aren't that huge and that however you resolve this particular dispute, there is going to be about $100 billion extra surplus that will not be spent and will go toward the national debt?

REP. RICHARD ARMEY: Absolutely. We have it from the Congressional Budget Office. We'll have about $137 billion worth of real debt reduction. We did a hundred and ten last year; we did about fifty the year before. This is something that the American people waited for decades to see. I'm excited about it. I'm enthusiastic. I'm encouraged by the work at the White House and we're going to get this job done. And what does that mean? It means to me that we have an opportunity as a generation of legislators to honor our children's payment of their Social Security taxes on behalf of the retirement security of their grandparents, what a wonderful opportunity we have. And we're going to get it done. And I have to tell you it's very, very exciting; and I hope the White House will learn to really enjoy and share in this enthusiasm that we have going for this opportunity we have before us.

MARGARET WARNER: Gene Sperling, do you agree with that conclusion, that however you work out this current altercation, you are going to put away at least $100 billion -- if not more -- toward the national debt?

GENE SPERLING: Margaret, because in the 1998 State of the Union the President said hold it, let's save Social Security first, let's save the surplus first, because the President's leadership we have that commitment in this town to save Social Security surplus to pay down the debt - because the reason we're in the situation we are is quite simple. The President did not allow a large and exploding tax cut to be passed that would have drained these surpluses. Because he did, because he both stood up to those who wanted to use the surplus for the highway bill and those who wanted to use the surplus for large, exploding tax cuts, we are now going to be able to probably pay down about $140 billion in debt over two years. That's a remarkable achievement. And it is due, and let me say one thing, it is due in part to the 1997 balanced budget agreement that was done in a bipartisan way between the administration, the Congress. It was largely due to the 1993 debt reduction plan that this President and Democratic members had.

MARGARET WARNER: Thanks, Mr. Sperling. All right. Thank you, gentlemen, we'll leave it there.

FOCUS - RUNAWAY JET

JIM LEHRER: Now Ray Suarez follows up on yesterday's strange air crash.

RAY SUAREZ: Early today, state and federal investigators returned to the site where a jet carrying golf champion Payne Stewart and at least four others crashed into a cow pasture in South Dakota after four hours of unexplained, uncontrolled flight.

ROBERT FRANCIS, Vice Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board: We're in the initial stages now of the investigation here. We have a full team here, but I would emphasize that what we have here is only part of the investigation. We are obviously investigating the wreckage and the on-site, but concurrent with what we are doing here, we also have teams in Florida who are dealing with air traffic control issues, dealing with issues of ownership, maintenance, and records of the aircraft. So that we will be looking at that; we will be looking at records from Learjet, we'll be looking at records from FAA, and NTSB, and we'll be integrating all that during the course of the investigation.

RAY SUAREZ: The twin-engine Learjet 35, which can carry eight passengers and a crew of two, left Orlando International Airport shortly after 9:00 yesterday morning. It was supposed to be a routine trip from Orlando to Dallas, but the pilots stopped responding to controllers soon after heading out. The jet's last radio contact came 25 minutes later, when the plane was just northwest of Gainesville, Florida. The FAA asked for help from the military. An Air Force F-16 was first to reach the jet, just after 11:00 AM. Although no contact had been established and the F-16 pilot reported no movement in the jet's cockpit, the aircraft continued its path, reaching over 48,000 feet at close to 1:00 PM. Less than 30 minutes later, after running out of fuel, the plane crashed just outside of Mina, South Dakota. Today the National Traffic Safety Board stressed how comprehensive and how difficult the investigation will be.

ROBERT FRANCIS: The primary wreckage came in and I would judge that we are talking about an area 30 to 40 feet, or something like that. The depth to the top of the hole in the earth is about ten feet, but there is a lot of wreckage in there. The earth is quite soft out here, so that for us to deal with how we approach the recovery of the wreckage is a fairly complicated issue. The total wreckage sort of dispersion I would say is probably another 150 feet from the central impact area. We are very interested in finding the cockpit voice recorder. We thought that we saw it when we first went out there this morning, and it turned out that that wasn't it, that there was another orange box. It clearly is buried in the mud and wreckage, and, again, the recovery of that will be a function of the systematic recovery of the wreckage of the aircraft. As many of you know, the cockpit voice recorder runs on a cycle of a half an hour, so given what happened during this flight, I think it's unlikely that we will be getting voice information from this CVR. We can hope maybe in some it will be recoverable, but as it records over, the chances are we will not get that.

RAY SUAREZ: With us to discuss the crash are James Burnett, former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board-- he is now a transportation consultant based in Arkansas-- and James McKenna, transport and safety editor at "Aviation Week" and "Space Technology," a magazine that covers the aerospace industry. James Burnett, some of the more obvious tools -- the plane is in a couple of thousand pieces. As you heard, the tape isn't going to be of very much help. Even the special investigator said the bodies can't be tested for death from lack of oxygen. This is a steep hill to climb for an investigator.

JAMES BURNETT, Former Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board: Yes, it is a very difficult. Learjet accidents have been very tough to investigate because they're typically from very high altitudes. The plane is relatively small but even when you pack it into a 30 by 30 by 10 area, it's quite a bit of devastation. However, I think the investigators will be looking very closely, and in this case they have some tips. They can look for the valves that operate the aircraft pressurization system. They can try to examine seals if they have not been destroyed by fire so those things will be priorities with them.

RAY SUAREZ: Is time crucial at this point, or the fact that the crash scene is exact and most of the substance in that hole, is that kind of working in your favor?

JAMES BURNETT: Well, I think it probably gets into some sifting jobs when you have an aircraft compacted the way you do. You don't know where to look for things. Therefore they will have to be examining it almost like archeology in this case.

RAY SUAREZ: James McKenna, the image of something as big as a Learjet flying halfway across America by itself is a pretty striking image. How does this happen?

JAMES McKENNA, Aviation Week: It happens simply because the airplane is equipped to fly on its own. Most modern jets are. And if for some reason the pilots become incapacitated, there's nothing to stop that airplane from continuing its flight until it runs out of fuel.

RAY SUAREZ: Given the way auto pilot works the original course was for Texas. It ended up in the northern plains. Did the plane fly itself there, or was this a possibly declining pilot setting it in that direction?

JAMES McKENNA: The plane most likely flew itself there. Flying a course on auto pilot is a sequential activity. You program in specific compass headings and altitudes and then activate them for the auto pilot to fly. The heading that this airplane was on, which was about 320 degrees on a compass heading, is probably the compass heading from Orlando up to the Panhandle of Florida. It appears at that point clearly that the pilots are incapacitated so the airplane continued on that heading.

RAY SUAREZ: And, James Burnett, let's talk a little bit about what the choices are for people on the ground. It seemed like they weren't very good.

JAMES BURNETT: You mean once they knew that this plane was a run-away airplane?

RAY SUAREZ: Absolutely.

JAMES BURNETT: Well, there really were not any choices. Some of the things that can be done if, for instance, the pilots might have been not alert for some reason, sometimes a plane can get their attention, maybe help them arouse from something that may have distracted them. But that's a faint hope in a situation like this.

RAY SUAREZ: This plane apparently had been rising and falling during this flight quite precipitously. I think it's called dolphining.

JAMES BURNETT: Or porpoising. The auto pilot was maintaining its air speed and direction but it was not a consistent flight level.

RAY SUAREZ: James McKenna, there have been some reports that this plane had gotten the attention of regulators in the past because of problems with maintaining cabin pressure, and that owners were notified to pay special attention to this.

JAMES McKENNA: That's true. As the St. Petersburg Times reported today, the FAA four years ago ordered Lear 35 operators to replace what is called the outflow valve, and that's the prime valve on the airplane that is used to regulate the cabin pressure. It's just a big, old valve the size of a coffee can or a large soup can that moves in and out of a hole of about the same size in the fuselage of the airplane, thus allowing a measured amount of air to escape or... in the full-close position plugging it up and allowing the engine air to pressurize the cabin. If that fails, you lose the ability to pressurize the cabin and the ability to safely climb above about 12,000 feet.

RAY SUAREZ: And, James Burnett in a plane this size, if there were pressure problems, they would manifest themselves very quickly. There would be very little reaction time?

JAMES BURNETT: Yes the reaction time is short. I think one of the things that may have to be considered for the Learjet, perhaps some other aircraft, is the possibility that one of the crew members should fly on oxygen at all times.

RAY SUAREZ: Are these planes equipped with the kind of masks that if you fly a commercial jetliner the flight attendant may show you at the beginning while you're waiting to take off?

JAMES BURNETT: Yes, they are.

RAY SUAREZ: And do they engage in much the same way?

JAMES BURNETT: Well, I don't know exactly the differences in the system but they are a similar concept.

RAY SUAREZ: Is it quite possible, James McKenna that we'll never really know what happened because of the particular story behind this crash?

JAMES McKENNA: It's very possible. We may never know. Let me say before I touch on that, the pilots have a different type of mask which is designed to force oxygen into their lungs as opposed to the ones that we would see on an airliner, which is simply just the supply of oxygen without any pressure directed into our lungs. So the pilots of... naturally we want them to be able to fly the airplane so they have a system more capable of keeping them alert.

RAY SUAREZ: But, are they required to wear those masks?

JAMES McKENNA: They're not required to wear them but they're required to have them at hand within a arm's reach. And they are clipped-on masks. It's reach over, pull the mask and put it on and the oxygen begins to flow. A preflight check item is always to check whether that functions. One of the areas of focus for the investigators will clearly be when was the last time that system was serviced? Is it clear that it was working properly? Did the pilots routinely check the oxygen system before they departed? Did they in fact turn the oxygen system on before they departed? It would do the pilots little good if they put the masks on after a loss of cabin pressure only to have no oxygen coming out. And, as we've seen, it's really a matter of seconds between doing that and discovering the error and you discover the error essentially by passing out.

RAY SUAREZ: James Burnett, is that going to bedevil the investigators, just this circumstance that Mr. McKenna described?

JAMES BURNETT: Yes. I think the only break that they have in this situation is that they know there was an incapacity of the pilot and passengers, and it appears that there was no external damage to the aircraft. And those are clues that in some accidents we would not have but we do have in this situation. I think the evidence is strongly suggestive, from what they have now, strongly suggestive of a decompression problem but not conclusive of that. And, certainly they will also have to consider the possibility of some sort of environmental contamination.

RAY SUAREZ: James Burnett, James McKenna, thank you both.

JAMES BURNETT: Thank you.

JAMES McKENNA: Thank you.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, the Sierra Leone story, and Rosenblatt and Pinsky talk baseball.

FOCUS - FORGING PEACE

JIM LEHRER: A peace plan for an African country. Gwen Ifill has the story.

GWEN IFILL: Late last week, the U.N. Security Council voted to send 6,000 peacekeeping troops to the West African nation of Sierra Leone, part of a negotiated plan to quell a vicious eight-year civil war.

IBRAHIM KAMARA: The people of Sierra Leone are grateful to the Security Council for the decision about to be taken to provide what I more durable security blanket for them.

GWEN IFILL: The peace agreement the U.N. will be enforcing is a controversial one. Signed in July, it's goal: To end fighting that left at least 20,000 dead, thousands more severely wounded in mass amputations, two million homeless. But the agreement also gives new power to the very rebel forces accused of hacking off the limbs of men, women, and children. U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, visiting Sierra Leone last week, was visibly shaken by the remains of that war. Albright supports the painstakingly negotiated accord, which calls for blanket amnesty for those rebels while not ruling out future U.N. war crimes prosecutions. Sierra Leone, which gained independence from Great Britain in 1961, is among the poorest countries in the world, ranked last in the U.N.'s Human Development Index, with the lowest life expectancy in the world-- only 37 years-- the highest maternal mortality rate, and an adult literacy rate of 33 percent. The latest conflict began in 1991, when former army photographer Foday Sankoh took up arms and created a rebel force.

SPOKESMAN: This is for anti-tank.

GWEN IFILL: Enlisting men from the countryside, he preached economic justice and class struggle. Aided financially by Charles Taylor, the military leader in neighboring Liberia, Sankoh and his men gained a reputation for brutality, including mass civilian killings. In 1997, the rebels, joined by Sierra Leone's army, staged a coup, overthrowing democratically elected President Ahman Tejan Kabbah and looting the capital of Freetown. It took another year for the deposed president to fight his way back to power, backed by a Nigerian-led coalition of West African troops. But the rebels continued their offensive, raiding villages, burning homes, killing and maiming thousands. It took foreign governments from Africa and the West to bring the two sides to the bargaining table last July. In nearby Togo, they hammered out a power-sharing agreement. In addition to the blanket amnesty, under the deal, Sankoh, the rebel leader, is now vice president and head of the government's powerful commission on minerals; the rebels have been given four cabinet posts; and the U.N. peacekeeping force was established. Two weeks after the peace deal, two U.N. monitors rolled into the town of Makeni, which had been under rebel control. Children chanted and adults rejoiced.

SPOKESMAN: We are happy about this peace, about this peace accord, because for quite some time now we have suffered greatly, and inasmuch as we have these two parties, the government of Tejan Kabbah and Foday Sankoh have come to one.

GWEN IFILL: The full peacekeeping force is expected to arrive within 60 days, and stay in place for one year.

GWEN IFILL: Late today, there were reports of new fighting in the northern part of the country, with perhaps as many as 100 soldiers killed. For more on Sierra Leone we turn to Ezekiel Pajibo, a policy analyst at the Africa Faith and Justice Network, a nonprofit organization-- he is a Liberian citizen-- and William Reno, professor at Northwestern University and author of "Corruption and State Politics in Sierra Leone." Gentlemen, welcome.

Mr. Pajibo, the U.N. is on the ground. There's a peace agreement in place. It's lasted now for three months. What are the chances that it's going to last any longer?

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: Well, the Sierra Leone peace accord provides an opportunity for international community to make right by Africa. We know that in the past, 1994 Rwanda incident, that did not happened. We also know that in Liberia it is a similar war situation; it did not happen. So we are hoping that this time around the international community -- especially the United States of America -- has an opportunity to do right by Africa. What needs to happen right now as we speak is the whole question of demobilization, disarmament, and the relocation of former citizens. That has not happened. There is a form for this to happen, and right now we must understand that at least $1 million has been committed to that fund. Those who have made significant contributions include Great Britain, Canada, and the War Bank, but the United States has not made any contribution to those fundings. The Security Council approved last Friday the deployment of 6,000 troops for Sierra Leone. We hope that the deployment can be expedited. We understand a few days ago from the U.S. special military presence in Sierra Leone that of the 6,000 troops, 4,000 will be Nigerians. They are already on the ground. So we hope that the U.N. bureaucracy can be speeded up so that they can begin to do the work.

GWEN IFILL: Are you saying with this kind of international aid, the kind of fighting we're hearing which is still going on in northern Sierra Leone would stop?

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: Well, the part of the matter is once the peace agreement was first announced and some people begin to commence the process, over 300 former soldiers willingly surrendered themselves into the authorities....

GWEN IFILL: Being the Western African governments who have been taking part in the peace keeping.

ELIZABETH DREW: That's correct. Over 300 of them were prepared but there was nothing in place to accommodate them because the program has not been put into place. Certainly, if we are genuinely interested in seeing peace come to Sierra Leone, the major issue has to be the question of disarmament of these people and demobilization, and the reintegration. And this has not happened.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Reno, what is your thought on this? Do you think there's any chance that a peace agreement like this one that has been hammered out is going to be anything more than a ceasefire or even ever a peace?

WILLIAM RENO: Well, I'm a bit more skeptical about the capacity of the agreement to be able to last very long. Certainly I've got high hopes and I wish that it would, but I think a couple things that you have to look at in this situation. First of all, Sierra Leone is in a very rough neighborhood. Just Saturday before last, the front page of the "Washington Post" carried a story about continuing diamond mining deals and timber operations and things like this based in places like Liberia that continue to contribute resources to this conflict or at least make renewed conflict a much higher possibility. And then the second thing is the nature of the rebel organization itself or I would say organizations because it seems that once the agreement is signed, there are all sorts of other groups that say, "hey, wait a minute, we've been left out of it" - and particularly when the agreement seemed to be cemented together not but some sort of agreement on politics or ideology but rather this cutting up of the pie, of cutting up the resources of Sierra Leone and then saying to one rebel leader, okay, well, this guy gets to decide who is going to be in line to get opportunity to mine diamonds in the country.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Reno, can I just follow up on that?

WILLIAM RENO: Sure.

GWEN IFILL: Can it work for these rebel factions that you just referred to? They now have seats in government. Can that work?

WILLIAM RENO: I think as long as the United Nations' forces are there that probably there will be a high degree of order at least compared to what the country has had in the recent past, but part of my fear is that a similar type of agreement that was concluded in Angola in the early 1990s fell apart. And we see a lot of the same patterns that the rebel leader was promised -- a cut of resources and so forth -- but what this did was this allowed the rebel forces to rearm and eventually as they concluded that they were in a good position to go back to war, we saw the peace agreement in Angola fall apart and then return to war.

GWEN IFILL: And you can see the same thing possibly happening here?

WILLIAM RENO: I can see it possibly happening. I hope that it does not, but I think we have ample precedent particularly in the case of Angola.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Pajibo, this is not only a case in which the rebel leaders were given a place in government but the people who committed the war atrocities which we saw in the taped peace were also given amnesty. They're not going to be prosecuted for their crimes. It doesn't look that way.

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: Yeah, importantly - I mean, interestingly, the war crimes are not... there is not a statute of limitations on war crimes so they can be prosecuted any time down the line. Additionally they may not be prosecuted in Sierra Leone but if they left Sierra Leone one could take them on. We know the case of Pinochet of Chile. That is happening in London right now -- and then also the United Nations itself has said that it won't be a respecter of that element of the agreement. And when Mary Robinson, the head of the U.N. Commission for Human Rights, visited Sierra Leone she stated quite clearly that crimes against humanity were committed in Sierra Leone, so somebody will be held accountable. But right now what we are interested in seeing is the whole question of implementing the part of the peace accord, the course for demobilization and disarmament of the various warring factions in the country. I think that all of this is in place because when it comes to Africa, it is the neglected continent, and these people are expendable but at the same time we begin to see that the concern of several to have this nightmare behind them has been amplified in certain quarters, and we hope that those who have the necessary authority will begin to find some common ground and make the necessary commitment and provide the necessary logistics and the necessary money that is required so that peace can come to Sierra Leone. It is not an impossibility. It is actually the lack of political will on the part of the international community, specifically the United States and other countries that is responsible for the lack of the implementation of the accord.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Reno, Mr. Pajibo obviously believes that the bulk of the responsibility here lies on the international community. And it's only with that kind of intervention that this can hold. Do you agree with that?

WILLIAM RENO: Yes, I agree. Insofar as that's correct, I agree with a lot of what the other guest has said. I think there's also a problem of international involvement here too. And it's one of principle that... I mean, really I'm quite baffled as to how one justifies politically an agreement that leaves open the possibility that some members of this coalition government can be prosecuted for war crimes later on down the line yet the agreement provides them with critical places inside the government itself. I mean, in my view, looking at Sierra Leone in the long term, the primary problem is a lack of the rule of law. This is really what the country needs is to rebuild government institutions, to give people... what most people on the street I believe want, which is some kind of long-term order and stability in their lives. And I think that the best way to do that is through the rule of law. On the other hand, inviting in rebel leaders who seem to make a profession out of enriching themselves and involving themselves in all of these mineral trades and....

GWEN IFILL: I'm not sure how you accomplish this idea of getting the rule of law in place when the people who were considered to be lawless, Mr. Pajibo, are the ones who are often now in power.

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: Yeah, but at the same time we have to recognize that the rule of law does not fall from the sky. It has to be built. We have to have a beginning point. For the most part, the question of government is a question of politics, which is possible. So I think that what is required is peace where people are able to know that tomorrow they can wake up from their bed without any kind of firing over the head. And I think once that is done and we can move on the whole question of disarmament, demobilization and the reintegration of ex-combatants, then we move on step by step. I think that I agree with Professor Reno that the whole question of the air of impunity will force a climate of injustice but at the same time we have to recognize that we have had a ceasefire that has been in place for three months. Without that, perhaps the war would be ongoing, more people would have died than has been reported --

GWEN IFILL: So this was as good as you could have gotten right now and then you move on.

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: In the scheme of things, yes, because like I said Africa is not one of those places in the world people are most concerned about. So that does not mean it is justified but at the same time what it means is that we have to make the situation in Africa just as important as everywhere else. But since that is notthe case we have to ensure that whatever peace is on the table get implemented that the necessary logistics are put into place to speed up the process so that this can be behind them.

GWEN IFILL: Mr. Reno, who does it fall on, the international community or the government of Sierra Leone?

WILLIAM RENO: Ultimately it falls on Sierra Leonians themselves. I think that my colleague is correct in that, you know, certainly there's the old saying, there's no liberty without order. And the first requirement is to get people to stop shooting at each other. And in that regard, I think that the agreement is critical. On the other hand-- and this may be where we differ-- I really question the extent to which what I see as an essentially at this point economically motivated, private sort of association or a set of associations can really be organized into being a government and to adopt the kind of viewpoints that would require.

GWEN IFILL: Thank you very much, Mr. Reno and thank you, Mr. Pajibo.

WILLIAM RENO: Thank you.

EZEKIEL PAJIBO: Thank you.

FINALLY - WINNERS AND LOSERS

JIM LEHRER: Finally tonight, a special look at winning and losing in baseball and literature, and to Elizabeth Farnsworth in San Francisco.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: In New York tonight, it's game three of the last World Series of the century, with the Yankees leading the Atlanta Braves two games to none. The Yankees destroyed the Texas Rangers and Boston Red Sox to get here, and have won nine of ten games in post-season play this year-- all this from the team that has already won more pennants and World Series than any other team ever. And this record inspires strong feelings in fans, including among our NewsHour regulars, as we hear now from essayist Roger Rosenblatt of the "New York Yankees," and poet laureate Robert Pinsky, once of the Brooklyn Dodgers, now with the Boston Red Sox. Robert Pinsky, why not love and admire the Yankees for all those wins?

ROBERT PINSKY: These are excellent athletes. Anybody who doesn't love Derek Jeter, Paul O'Neill, El Duke. They're wonderful players. Yankee fans sometimes make the mistake of gloating about what is really a privilege. And the dignity in defeat, going back to the era of Robinson and Hodges and in the present era of Garcia Parra is something I admire. And imagination that gets us involved in things like sports teams has finer food than victory. Even the Yankees lose more World Series than they win. They don't win the World Series more often than not. As with any other form of affection or involvement, one has to realize that these-- though they're the excellent, best athletes imaginable-- they're mortal and fallible.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Roger, do you love them because of all the wins?

ROGER ROSENBLATT: I don't know. Maybe I'm in danger of gloating because of my privileges. By the way the Yankees actually do win more World Series than-- it's getting into the World Series that they don't do in a majority but no team does. As for the fans, I'm trying to think of the times that I've enjoyed the civility of the Mets fans or the Red Sox' fans or the Cubs' fans or any of the fans that are associated with teams that don't win as much. And I'm sort of at a loss to do so. I just love the Yankees. The whole idea of the demonstration of excellence in anything, there seems to be only a penalty in sports. I wouldn't want to hear an opera singer hit a wrong note. I'd hate to see a ham actor come out on stage. Why should I lower my standards or anybody for that matter in the matter of baseball?

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: RobertPinsky, you just happen to have a poem on this subject.

ROBERT PINSKY: I think it's said that Roger falls into the fallacy of confusing excellence, which is such a beautiful value, with the more paltry value of success. It reminds me of the public figure or politician who gloats or crows about starting a successful business and is complacent about the fact that the family had money... his father had a successful business or the family had a lot of associations. The privilege of having a rich market and of having a lot of money should be something that's not vaunted. The poem you're thinking of is Yates' wonderful poem to a friend whose work has come to nothing. And the lines I'm thinking of begin "bred to a harder scene than triumph." I think we're all as mortals bred to a harder thing than triumph. In the end the players all get fat, weak, and we all get old. You don't win in the end. Yates says, to a friend whose work has come to nothing - "Bred to a harder scene than triumph turn away and like laughing string where our mad singers play amid a place of stone, be secret and exult because of all scenes known, that is most difficult."

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Roger, have you got a dueling poem or can you refute this in prose?

ROGER ROSENBLATT: I don't know if reputation is what I would achieve but I would like to add the words of at poet Laureate, Tennyson who talked about Ulysses at the end saying "Although we are not now the strength that in old days that moved heaven and earth, that which we are, we are. One equal temper of heroic hearts made weak by time and fate but strong and will to strive to seek to find and not to yield."

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Robert Pinsky, do you think success is just not as interesting as losing? I'm thinking of a line in your poem, the Night Game, that refers to Whitey Ford. You say about whitey ford, quote, never a player I liked or hated, a Yankee, a mere success. "Mere success"?

ROBERT PINSKY: Well, one needs an awful lot of successes. Success for all of us is temporary. Transitory thing. I do thing there are values in sports and in life that are more interesting than success. The most moving athletic events are the ones after which the players-- the players who have a code for the most part, certainly in baseball if not gloating-- the players say it's a shame anyone had to lose. It was a shame that anyone had to lose that one. I thought Roger read those Tennyson lines beautifully. And they're quite germane. Ulysses is well on in life. He's seen a lot of heroes. The Victor Achilles goes down the same way the loser Paris goes down. Hector goes down. Success is not as interesting as striving, as in the Tennyson lines. And success does seem to me a paltry value. When we have it, we should be humble about it.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: Roger?

ROGER ROSENBLATT: Well, it's hard to be in the position of having the braves down two zip and yearn for humility. I'll try to do it on a general virtuous basis, but I often find that the people who say it's too bad somebody had to win this game are the guys who won it. As for the beauty of defeat or effort, even in tragedy, you know, Hamlet wins before he loses his life. I'm kind of stretching to make something great and noble out of the beauty of sport whose simplicity as a matter of fact is defined by whether someone does win or lose since most of the rest of life is too complicated or too nuance to show us that. The beauty of games, for those of us who play them or those of us who watch them, is that there is a winner or loser and there are clean things to make it up. If you make an error, you are likely to lose, as the Red Sox made several errors in the series against the Yankees. If you don't, you are likelier to win. So there is-- Robert may wish to make a distinction between excellence and success, but in most cases, certainly in sports, the more excellent, the more success.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: All right. Roger Rosenblatt, Robert Pinsky, thanks a lot.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Tuesday: Congressional Republicans repeated their determination to cut federal spending across the board, and Democrats continued to say that would be disastrous. Investigators said there would be no quick findings about the jet crash that killed golfer Payne Stewart and others. And consumer confidence fell sharply for the fourth consecutive month. We'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.