The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight: A summary of the news; a look at today's hearing in the Moussaoui terrorism case; coverage of opening day at the Catholic Bishops' sex abuse meeting in Dallas; an interview with David Gunn, the new boss of Amtrak, America's troubled passenger rail service; and a report from California about high school students learning how to turn speaking into success.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: Zacarias Moussaoui denied today he played any role in the September 11 conspiracy. He is the only person directly charged in the plot. He made his denial before a federal judge in Alexandria, Virginia. He said the government knew he'd had no contact with the hijackers. Moussaoui did win a ruling that he was mentally competent to represent himself at the trial. He had claimed his court-appointed lawyers were actually working against him. They denied it at a rain-soaked news conference outside the courthouse.

FARNK DUNHAM, JR.: Obviously, we were working as hard for this man as we know how to do as defense attorneys. And as you heard the judge, we put together an experienced team with nationally recognized experts in death penalty litigation. We don't know why Mr. Moussaoui believes the way he does. It's that belief that caused us to question his mental status and ask for the exam.

JIM LEHRER: Jury selection in the Moussaoui case is expected to begin in late September. We'll have more on this story in a moment. U.S. Roman Catholic Bishops met in Dallas today to deal with sexual abuse by priests. Their leader said the crisis was "perhaps the gravest" the American Church has faced. Bishop Wilton Gregory promised action to restore the faith of American Catholics. The Bishops Conference is expected to decide tomorrow on mandatory national rules for dealing with priests who molest children. We'll have more on this story in a moment. We'll have more on this story in a moment. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld today called for direct talks between India and Pakistan. He said they should agree to halt all fighting along the border in disputed Kashmir, except in self-defense. Rumsfeld met today with Pakistan's president in Islamabad, a day after meeting with India's prime minister. He said the threat of nuclear war between them has lessened somewhat. Afghanistan's interim leader, Hamid Karzai, will be the country's new president. The grand council of tribal leaders, the Loya Jirga, overwhelmingly elected him today in Kabul. We have a report from Tara Ogden of Associated Press Television News.

TARA OGDEN: Voting by secret ballot for three candidates, including Hamid Karzai, the leader of the interim Afghan administration, extended into the evening. In the massive, air conditioned tent where the meeting took place, people waited near the 16 voting booths to get their ballot papers and cast their vote. The gathering of 1,650 delegates across the spectrum of Afghan society was a historic moment for many, as participants in Salwar Kameez and turbans mingled with those in business suits. In his nomination speech earlier on Thursday, Karzai, who was a shoo-in to win after his two major opponents withdrew from the race, underscored the massive challenges ahead. He also made a call for national reconciliation, even with some members of the former ruling Taliban. "I am very proud and very happy that after many long years of suffering Afghanistan has again become the home of Afghans," he said. But the election hasn't been without its critics, with some delegates accusing the U.S. and other powerbrokers of cutting deals to circumvent the Loya Jirga process.

JIM LEHRER: Karzai will serve as president for 18 months until Afghanistan can hold parliamentary elections. Back in this country, the Environmental Protection Agency today recommended easing air pollution rules for utilities. The agency wants to let coal- burning power plants modernize and enlarge, without having to install costly new emissions controls. A White House spokesman said existing rules discourage plants from making upgrades that reduce pollution, but the National Environmental Trust and other groups said the changes mean older plants will never clean up. The EPA recommendations now go to the President. Another 400 firefighters began arriving outside Denver today to battle a huge wildfire. The reinforcements will join nearly 1,000 firefighters trying to contain a blaze that has burned nearly 100,000 acres. Today they took advantage of improved weather that slowed the fire's advance. A spokesman for the U.S. Forest Service warned the fight is a long way from being over.

MIKE SMITH, Spokesman, U.S. Forest Service: This fire could take off again and run 14 miles in one day, given the right weather. Right now, we're not predicting that kind of weather for today or tomorrow. But if we have weather similar to what we had last weekend, only five to ten percent of the fires contained -- with -- if the weather this weekend becomes like last weekend, it could easily take off and run several miles.

JIM LEHRER: The fire is already the worst in Colorado's history. Forest service officials said it could take two to three months to extinguish. In economic news today, the Labor Department reported wholesale prices fell 0.4% in May. It was the biggest drop in five months, mostly because of lower energy costs. Separately, the Commerce Department said retail sales were down 0.9% last month, the most in six months. The House today approved permanent relief from the so- called "marriage penalty." Married couples who don't itemize would get the same deduction as two single people. The provision was included in last year's tax cut package, but it expires after 2010. House Republicans have passed a series of bills to extend various tax cuts. Just yesterday Senate Democrats defeated an effort to make repeal of the estate tax permanent. Fashion designer Bill Blass is dead. He died last night at his home in Connecticut of cancer. Blass helped define American style in a career lasting six decades. He designed clothes, especially evening wear, for many famous women, including former First Lady Nancy Reagan. Bill Blass was 79 years old. That's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to: The Moussaoui hearing; the bishops in crisis; the head of Amtrak; and speaking for success.

FOCUS - THE MOUSSAOUI CASE

JIM LEHRER: Gwen Ifill has the Moussaoui story.

GWEN IFILL: The alleged 20th hijacker, Zaccarias Moussaoui, can represent himself. We get more from "New York Times" reporter Philip Shenon. He was at the federal courthouse in Alexandria this afternoon. Welcome, Phil.

PHILIP SHENON: Good evening.

GWEN IFILL: So, Phil, help us -- why would Moussaoui want to represent himself?

PHILIP SHENON: Well, there are two explanations. One is -- he thinks he can do a better job than his court-appointed lawyers. Or secondly, in the alternative, that many trial lawyers fear, is that he wants to turn this into a show trial where he can make the courtroom a platform for his fundamentalist beliefs.

GWEN IFILL: Take us inside the courtroom today. What did he actually say to the court?

PHILIP SHENON: Many things. Much of the hour, forty-five-minute hearing was a back and forth between the judge in the case and Moussaoui, explaining why he felt he was competent to represent himself and the strategy that... or at least giving a preview of the strategy he would follow, which is he is insisting that he had no contact with any of the other 19 hijackers on September 11, and he says there is physical evidence that proves that he's been under surveillance for a very long time and that the United States government knows he's not involved in the conspiracy.

GWEN IFILL: Did he present any of that physical evidence?

PHILIP SHENON: He attempted to. The judge stopped him, and said that was an issue for another day.

GWEN IFILL: So what would be the meaning of that? We have no way of knowing whether he was just making that up or talking out of his head, or did his lawyers have anything to add to that?

PHILIP SHENON: They had nothing to add to it. But we should be clear, we have no reason to believe we are being told the truth at this point. He does say that in 1998, a house in which he was living in London was raided by British agents and that he says that in August of last year, when he was arrested, there was physical evidence that would show that he was under surveillance or had been under surveillance since his earliest days in the U.S. by the U.S. Government, presumably by the FBI. If any bit of that is true, it's pretty alarming, but again, we don't have any reason at this point to believe it is true.

GWEN IFILL: Now, even though the judge is going to allow him to represent himself, he has had representation up until this point -- public defenders or people who were appointed by the court to defend him. What did they have to say about this request today?

PHILIP SHENON: They had urged the judge strongly not to allow Moussaoui to represent himself. They say on the basis of their many hours spent with him, that he believe that he may well be mentally ill. And we should point out that all three men are well-respected in the Virginia district in which they work, and one of them is a nationally renowned expert in defending people accused of crimes that carry the death penalty. He had a very experienced team, a team he's now fired.

GWEN IFILL: So how did the judge decide that he was not mentally ill?

PHILIP SHENON: Well, the judge had a report from a court-appointed psychiatrist, an experienced psychiatrist, who said that on the basis of a two-hour interview with Moussaoui and review of the courthouse and the jailhouse records, it appeared to him that Moussaoui was mentally competent and was acting knowingly.

GWEN IFILL: Was it based on that report that the judge decided today to allow Moussaoui to represent himself?

PHILIP SHENON: Largely, yes.

GWEN IFILL: So what happens next? Well, take us back inside the courtroom. We'll get to what happens next in a minute. What was he like in court? What was that like?

PHILIP SHENON: He is a very intelligent man, very articulate, he has a very strong command of English. He speaks in heavily accented English, but it is very clear. And he has an understanding of an awful lot of the vocabulary of the legal community and demonstrated that he's done an awful lot of reading about the law. In many ways, he is more intelligent than a lot of lawyers we see practicing in a lot of courthouses around the country. He was perhaps less agitated at this hearing than he was at the last hearing. You'll recall that in April, when he made this request to fire his lawyers, he called for the destruction of the United States and Israel and made clear that he embraced a lot of the what would be considered Muslim radicalism.

GWEN IFILL: And wasn't that part of the reason why his lawyers were asking for further psychological tests?

PHILIP SHENON: They did indeed. You know, they were obviously offended by the concept that Mr. Moussaoui was presenting, that they were working hand in glove with the government to see him executed. They said that was probably evidence of mental illness on his part.

GWEN IFILL: So who else was in the courtroom today -- any relatives of Moussaoui, any supporters of his cause or detractors?

PHILIP SHENON: There was his mother. His mother traveled here from France. She brought along with her a lawyer, an American lawyer, an Arab American lawyer she had wanted her son to take on as his counsel. Her son has refused to do that. He won't even meet with this lawyer. There was one moment in the courtroom that was an interesting moment between mother and son when Moussaoui turned and smiled at her -- the only moment he showed any hint of affection in the courtroom today.

GWEN IFILL: Earlier this week, the same judge ruled that he would not have access to classified evidence in order to mount his own defense or for anyone else to mount his defense. How much more difficult does it make it for him to defend himself?

PHILIP SHENON: An awful lot more difficult, and the judge reminded him of that repeatedly in the courtroom today. You know, he will not... he's a terrorism suspect. There's no way he's going to get a government security clearance, so there's no way he's ever going to be able to see classified evidence against him, even if that evidence might be exculpatory, it might prove that he's not guilty of these crimes.

GWEN IFILL: So from what Moussaoui said in his own defense today, could you tell whether he is basically assuming that he's not going to get a fair trial here?

PHILIP SHENON: I think on the basis of his belief about the American criminal justice system and the American government and the American people, I think we are certainly led to believe he is going into this believing he's not going to get a fair trial. He's going to do whatever he can however, he says, to try to save his own life.

GWEN IFILL: Does he sound like he's a martyr for his cause?

PHILIP SHENON: I don't know if I'm capable of saying that. He does sound like a very committed radical.

GWEN IFILL: I just mean using his words. I don't want to you read his mind. But let's talk about this. Has he ever, while he was in court, been asked or responded to the question, for instance, of why he was taking those flying lessons?

PHILIP SHENON: No. No, there's been no discussion of that. There's been no opportunity for him to discuss that. We did, at the last court hearing, get from him a 15-minute discourse, sometimes rambling, but sometimes very coherent, in which he did explain his religious beliefs, however, and his deep devotion to Islam.

GWEN IFILL: Now back to that what happens next question. Do we expect the judge to rule, for instance, on the death penalty issue?

PHILIP SHENON: That's the next big question in front of us, and that will probably be decided in the next several weeks, and the judge said she heard all she needed to hear on that issue and she'd provide some written decision in the near future. The next big court filing may be one for Moussaoui himself -- we can expect that probably in the next couple of days -- in which he will outline this physical evidence that he says shows that he's been under surveillance for a long time and that the government knows he's not part of the September 11 conspiracy.

GWEN IFILL: Okay, Phil Shenon, thanks a lot pour helping us out.

PHILIP SHENON: Thank you.

FOCUS - CATHOLICS IN CRISIS

JIM LEHRER: Margaret Warner has our report on the Catholic bishops meeting in Dallas.

MARGARET WARNER: There were protestors demonstrating outside as some 300 American Catholic bishops gathered in a Dallas hotel this morning to address the sexual abuse scandal in their church. (Singing ) Bishop Wilton Gregory, president of the U.S. Conference of Bishops, opened the session by admitting failure and promising to take action to restore Catholics' faith in their leadership.

BISHOP WILTON GREGORY, President, U.S. Conference of Bishops: The crisis in truth is about a profound loss of confidence by the faithful in our leadership as shepherds, because of our failures in addressing the crime of the sexual abuse of children and young people by priests and church personnel. What we are facing is not a breakdown in belief, but a rupture in the relationship - in our relationship as bishops with the faithful. Both what we have done and what we have failed to do has contributed to the sexual abuse of children and young people by clergy and church personnel.

MARGARET WARNER: The new wave of scandals began in January in Boston, where Cardinal Bernard Law and his archdiocese were accused of ignoring the abuse of minors by John Geoghan, a convicted pedophile priest. Since then, more than 250 U.S. priests have resigned or been removed for sexual abuse, as well as four U.S. bishops. Yesterday, the "Dallas Morning News" greeted conference attendees with a report that two-thirds of all U.S. bishops have let priests and other church leaders accused of abuse remain on duty. The bishops' goal at this conference is to come up with a new policy on handling sexual abuse complaints that will be binding on every Catholic diocese. A preliminary draft released last week calls on every diocese to: Respond to all allegations of sexual abuse and report them to civil authorities; ask the Pope to defrock any priest who abuses a child in the future, and any priest who abused more than one child in the past; establish diocese review boards of mostly lay people to examine abuse claims. The early draft did not address what do to about bishops who had let abusive clerics remain in the priesthood. At an open session this morning, the bishops heard directly from victims of abuse. Craig Martin, who referred to himself as John Doe, told of being sexually assaulted by a priest who'd taken him on a fishing trip.

CRAIG MARTIN: John remembers the motel that night, with the priest, but hardly anything else. John has no idea how he got home. It is only 35 years later that John is starting to remember that horrible night.

MARGARET WARNER: Martin said his anguish was compounded by the unresponsiveness of the church.

CRAIG MARTIN: I feel church has decided the rules and how the game is to be played. The church also tries to avoid damages caused by its own clergy. Finally, the church wants authority to heal its own members and then make payments as to what they feel is appropriate to John Does.

MARGARET WARNER: Michael Bland, himself a former priest, said he was ostracized after he revealed he'd been sexually abused by another priest as a child.

MICHAEL BLAND: After two years, I felt that a separation from the religious community became not an option but a necessity for my own spiritual good, moral integrity, and psychological well-being. I chose no longer to be re-victimized and left religious life. The priesthood lost me but kept the perpetrator. Perhaps he's not saying public Mass, or allowed to be alone with minors, but he has the privilege to wear the collar -- being called Father or baptize, marry, and bury his family. The church has taken care of him.

MARGARET WARNER: The bishops also heard from Catholic thinkers, who urged the bishops to give lay Catholics a greater voice.

SCOTT APPLEBY, University of Notre Dame: Bishops and priests must trust the laity, appropriately share authority with them, and open their financial, legal, administrative practices and decisions to full visibility. They must give a compelling account of the faith that is within them and address controversial issues directly.

MARGARET WARNER: Margaret Steinfels, editor of "Commonweal" Magazine, told the bishops they had a long way to go to restore Catholics' faith in them.

MARGARET STEINFELS, Editor, Commonweal Magazine: Bishops are among other things guardians of truth. Today you are badly handicapped in this role. How much has been due to an active intent to obscure or deceive? How much to responses made without adequate preparation? The fact remains that, in too many instances, some of you have said things that later proved to be contradicted by the facts; you said things that were not true. But not all of you did all that. And, yet, like the undifferentiated blur of dark deeds that we see in the paper every day, all of you are subject to the same undifferentiated suspicion, the same loss of trust.

MARGARET WARNER: After discussing the policy behind closed doors, the bishops are due to publicly debate and vote on it tomorrow.

MARGARET WARNER: And for more on today's meeting, we turn to Tom Roberts, editor of the "National Catholic Reporter," an independent weekly that covers the Catholic Church. It was one of the first publications to report on pedophilia in the priesthood, more than 15 years ago.

And welcome, Tom Roberts. How unusual...

TOM ROBERTS: Thank you.

MARGARET WARNER: ...was this spectacle we saw today and we just saw a little bit of here, where you had survivors and non-priest church thinkers openly challenging the bishops in an open way like this, televised?

TOM ROBERTS: I've been covering these meetings since about 1985, and this was the most unusual meeting I have ever been to. This was a... I think an unprecedented event. I think Dallas may... this meeting in Dallas may be seen historically as a marker, as some sort of point at which things began to change a bit. I talked to a lot of old hands who have covered a lot of these meetings, and everyone said this was just a distinctly different moment.

MARGARET WARNER: Listening to the survivors today, just here from a distance on television, they were incredibly moving. How did the bishops respond?

TOM ROBERTS: I talked to one bishop in the middle of the afternoon, and I said," you heard a lot of difficult things today." He said," yes." I said," This must be a difficult time." And his response was, "This is hell." I think that bishops have heard these stories in the past, they've read about them. But as this one bishop said," referring to September 11," You know, you read all the stories about people losing loved ones, but it's when you come face to face with sun that you really appreciate the depth of loss." And I think in the same way, all of them together in that room hearing the stories, the deep pain and anguish that goes on in a life where that kind of trust has been abused, has to have an effect. And I understand that the victims' meetings behind closed doors with the bishops were even more powerful and more wrenching. They're getting at least a chance now, some 15 years after this really broke open, to tell their stories face to face in an unedited version, and I think it may have an effect.

MARGARET WARNER: All Right. But what is the mood of the victims, the survivors? There are even some of the organized groups there. I mean are they... is it angry? Is it demanding? How would you characterize them?

TOM ROBERTS: Well, I haven't talked to all of them, but I think that David Clohesi could probably, he's a leader of the SNAP Organization, and I think he could probably be a good gauge for their mood. And we spoke last night, and he said... he's beyond anger at this point. He was exhausted. He said when he went into the room to have the private meeting with the bishops yesterday, he didn't even feel elated because they had fought so long to get there. And then last night, he received the news that he would get fifteen or twenty minutes before the bishops today, and he went off to figure out what he was going to say. They're powerful moments. I think there is a sense of having taken a significant step. But the victims also made clear to the bishops during their talks that they weren't counting on great change. They weren't trusting yet because they had been through this process once before, and some of them several times before. And so they were going to wait and see. I think that was the caution that they gave very clearly.

MARGARET WARNER: Well, you said that you thought they might be having an effect. What's your sense-- and I know the meetings are still going on behind closed doors-- but of where the bishops are moving on, particularly the key point about what to do about abusive priests?

TOM ROBERTS: What I hear is that the movement has been clearly to some form of zero tolerance. Exactly what paranormal that... form that takes, we don't know yet. One bishop I talked to in the middle of the afternoon said that they were still really discussing. And I talked to someone earlier today who has been very close to the negotiating process for the last couple of months, or in the last couple of weeks at least, on where this policy would go. And his feeling was that they certainly were settled on zero tolerance, that one strike and you're out.

MARGARET WARNER: Let me just interrupt you there. You mean not only for priests in the future, which is what the originally proposal, but also for priests in the past?

TOM ROBERTS: Right. He thought that... he seemed to think, especially after these... the private meeting with the victims yesterday and the public session today, that his words were something along the lines of, anybody who walked out of that room thinking that there was going to be any shading on this or case-by-case consideration just was fooling themselves. It was so powerful, and I think that also, the public demand for accountability and for a very clear policy at this point has taken the possibility of viewing cases one at a time off the table. Now, what they are, he said, considering are options to... they're using the term taking someone out of ministry, which I think may help avoid some canonical, problems with church law and also problems with Rome, because anything they ultimately approve ultimately will have to be approved in Rome. And they're under that category taking someone out of ministry, I understand, are considering at least three options: One would be sending someone to a place of penance, essentially the option would be to go to a monastery and I guess in a way disappear for the rest of your life. The second option would be to seek laicization. There's the person who's been accused. And the third -

MARGARET WARNER: That's defrocking?

TOM ROBERTS: Well, defrocking, yes. Yes. In other words, he would be removed as a priest. And then the third would be would be canonical, or a legal process, which the church would take against someone aiming towards laicization, but that would be a longer process.

MARGARET WARNER: Now, what about this other issue that the survivors and even some of these lay leaders are talking about -- about holding bishops accountable, bishops who've let abusive priests remain, have transferred them without telling the new diocese, so on?

TOM ROBERTS: Yes. I was told that this was going to be another point of debate in the room today. I don't know if the bishops got to that. We haven't heard anything from them. But that's a strong point, and I think it's not only survivors; you will find among Catholic groups, and Catholic groups who would not have ventured near this kind of a statement six months ago, saying someone... that they can't come away from this meeting with a policy that only addresses abusive priests. Something has to be in there about bishops, you know, who have overseen the process, who have moved priests knowing they were pedophiles and abusers from one parish to another.

MARGARET WARNER: And finally on Scott Appleby's point, from Notre Dame, who said you really have to give more authority to the laity, to lay leaders, the laypeople, do you see any movement in that direction from this meeting?

TOM ROBERTS: That's a difficult one to predict. And it's difficult because in all of the lay movements that we're seeing growing out of this scandal, there are groups gathering in Boston and New York and elsewhere around the country saying," we have to insert ourselves into the governance of the church. We are not going to let this kind of thing happen again." The problem is where to insert themselves. It's the same problems the bishops face with moving from the way they have done business in the past to these new ideas, new words like accountability and clarity. There's really no mechanism at this point for getting from one point to the next. But there is an incredible amount of pressure, and the example today that they would invite, you know, unedited or laypeople who... lay speeches deeply critical of them -- I mean all the speakers, including the victims, went very quickly beyond sexual abuse as the problem to the problem of governance. Scott Appleby used the arrogance of power. Peggy Steinfeld said that this was only the beginning. They had to get around to seriously looking at including people, getting back to the business of renewal that started at the Vatican Council in the 1960s, that renewal council. Everyone used that as a kind of a touch point. So it's going to be interesting to see what happens after this meeting. I think that they have two constituencies, the broader public, which is demanding accountability, as well as the people inside the church. But there's a deeper question inside the church, and some bishops have already begun to talk to this, of accountability to the faithful, of reentering that community in a new way. So it's going to be interesting to see what comes out of it.

MARGARET WARNER: Tom Roberts, thanks very much.

TOM ROBERTS: Pleasure to be here.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight: The new head of Amtrak, and speaking for success.

NEWSMAKER

JIM LEHRER: Now, to David Gunn, the new president of Amtrak, the nation's passenger rail service. He took over a month ago under a continuing congressional mandate to wean Amtrak off federal subsidies. Last year its losses from serving some 60,000 passengers on 265 trains each day was more than $1 billion. A congressional panel, known as the Amtrak Reform Council, recently recommended breaking up Amtrak's operations and allowing private companies to take over individual routes. David Gunn is the former head of transit systems in New York City, Washington, and Toronto.

Mr. Gunn, welcome.

DAVID GUNN: Thank you. Glad to be here.

JIM LEHRER: One of the first things you did was to announce that, if Amtrak didn't get $200 million by July 1, you were going to shut it down. Now, that's just not very far away. Is that still on the table?

DAVID GUNN: Oh, what that is, if you do a cash flow for Amtrak, the revenues minus expenses, we have a negative cash flow for July, August and September. And we need to borrow $200 million in order to sustain operations through the rest of the fiscal year. And that is... and that's not a threat; that's just the way that...

JIM LEHRER: The reality?

DAVID GUNN: The reality of the situation.

JIM LEHRER: Do you have it yet?

DAVID GUNN: No, sir, we don't.

JIM LEHRER: Where are you going to find it?

DAVID GUNN: Well, we're negotiating with banks. We have a credit facility, we've had one and we have borrowed before. But obviously, times are a little tougher right now, and we're trying to get a loan from our bankers.

JIM LEHRER: Well, how serious... how serious is this threat? I mean how...

DAVID GUNN: It's not a threat. This is not a threat. And I guess...

JIM LEHRER: Well, let me -- how serious is the potential reality of Amtrak closing down on July 1?

DAVID GUNN: Well, I alternate between being optimistic and pessimistic. You know it depends on the moment.

JIM LEHRER: Sure.

DAVID GUNN: But I think we probably have a 50-50 chance of getting the loan.

JIM LEHRER: But you're serious?

DAVID GUNN: I'm dead serious.

JIM LEHRER: ...That if you don't have the money, all the trains are going to stop.

DAVID GUNN: What will happen, if we don't have the cash, is we will have to say we're going to close down and do it in an orderly fashion. I mean that's what'll happen.

JIM LEHRER: All right. How did Amtrak come to this?

DAVID GUNN: Well, this is a result, I think, of... there's two people... or two groups that can accept responsibility for this. One is Congress -- the politicians. They created Amtrak, and they put Amtrak on this fanciful search for self-sufficiency. There's not a rail passenger system in the world that doesn't require government subsidy for some either capital or operating or both. Now, that's the first thing they did. The next thing that happened is management attempted to do what the law required, which was to achieve self-sufficiency. And I think they tried far too long. They should have cried "uncle request can "a long time ago.

JIM LEHRER: And said forget, this isn't possible?

DAVID GUNN: Well, they should have said," this is going to fail," because what's happened now is we have a company that has run out of cash and that has... it has incurred enormous amounts of debt on its balance sheet. We now have $3.7 billion of debt on our balance sheet. We added $700 million last year alone, last fiscal year. We have undertaken a number of initiatives, which have not proven successful. And so we have... and we've deferred a large amount of maintenance in trying to keep going under this mandate of self-sufficiency.

JIM LEHRER: So you can't... you don't have the power, even you don't have the power to him NATO the mandate, so what are you going to do about it?

DAVID GUNN: Well, I can't eliminate the mandate, but I can clearly tell people what's going to happen. And hopefully, you know, sanity will prevail and the...

JIM LEHRER: Where? Where does it need to prevail?

DAVID GUNN: Well, at this point, it is either... either we convince our bankers to loan us the money, and I think they should, by the way, because we'll be able to pay them back in the fall. I mean we will.

JIM LEHRER: Because you will have brought in enough money through the summertime...

DAVID GUNN: Well, no. We will get next year's appropriation -

JIM LEHRER: Oh, I see.

DAVID GUNN: -- and we can pay them back. So I mean in a sense, it's a sure deal. But the thing that should actually happen is, I think that the Administration and Congress should at least, they should... and we've had a lot of support from Congress, actually. We've been getting a lot of support on several appropriations, which would... it wouldn't solve the problem, but it would keep us going for a good period into the next year. And we've had support from a lot of... 160-plus Congressman have signed a letter supporting us, 40, almost 50 Senators have signed a letter. The Administration so far has been silent in terms of what they want to do with this. But we need, at this point, we... we don't expect them to say that they have a long-term faith in Amtrak in all cases, but at least say they want us to make it into the fall.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Let's say there's somebody watching you right this moment who hasn't been on... lives some place where there are no Amtrak trains. You know, they're mostly on the East Coast and on the West Coast and then about every three days through some place in the middle.

DAVID GUNN: No. A little more frequent.

JIM LEHRER: But basically the middle part of the country, there are not very many trains.

DAVID GUNN: No, that's right.

JIM LEHRER: It's not an integral part of people's transportation lives for the most part in large parts of this country.

DAVID GUNN: Yeah, that's true.

JIM LEHRER: So why should their tax money go to subsidize the federal...

DAVID GUNN: Well, we provide - we provide an essential service in certain areas. I mean I think if you start on the West Coast, for example, like between Los Angeles and San Diego, we have a fairly frequent service there and move a lot of people. We operate commuter services in that area, for example, a peninsula commuter service. We operate the service to Sacramento, which is a pretty heavy and growing service, and we operate a service in the Northwest, an inner city service from Portland -- Seattle, that corridor. We operate three transcontinentals, transcontinental trains, which actually provide... in some areas it is a totally different sort of service, but it does provide mobility to some areas that don't have a lot of options. So you can ask the question: Does... when you go into a small town in Montana, you have a four-lane interstate even though there's only a few people there. Government has a role, I think, to provide mobility generally. But then when you get to the East Coast, I mean if you lose the Northeast corridor, I think all of a sudden Amtrak will mean something to an awful lot of people because we are the dominant carrier between Washington and New York and a big carrier north to Boston. And we operate the commuter service in Boston, the New Jersey transit operates over our tracks and into Penn Station, which we used to own until we mortgaged it to try to stay afloat. Geez, that's another thing they did. But so I mean I think...

JIM LEHRER: Okay.

DAVID GUNN: I think there's a real role. Plus, the potential is there for rail passenger service, I think.

JIM LEHRER: Is the need there?

DAVID GUNN: Yes. Well, I think... I believe in this thing. I didn't come from Nova Scotia to Washington to... because I

JIM LEHRER: You were in kind of retirement, right?

DAVID GUNN: Yes, I was.

JIM LEHRER: Not kind of. You were.

DAVID GUNN: I was.

JIM LEHRER: Okay. Well, is there... when you look at the long-range... I mean what you call inner city passenger service, particularly the transcontinental, I read something today that they only haul 18% of your passengers, but account for 75% of your loss?

DAVID GUNN: No. You've got to be very careful. There's a lot of mythology about Amtrak's economics. Everything loses money. In other words, people will say it's the long-distance trains, and if you got rid of them, the corridor would be a profitable company. Not so. The passenger movement or transportation market in the United States is thoroughly subsidized, whether it's highway airlines or rail. And what's happened, like the basic structure of Amtrak is the northeast corridor covers most of its operating costs, the costs of the train crews and maintenance of the cars and so forth, but it does not cover its capital expenses. And we have an enormous deficit in that area. Long distance trains have little capital needs, but they have big operating subsidy.

JIM LEHRER: Finally, what do you think of this idea of breaking up Amtrak?

DAVID GUNN: I think it's absolutely... you want to buy it?

JIM LEHRER: No. No. (laughing)

DAVID GUNN: I'm authorized to give you a real good deal.

JIM LEHRER: A real good deal. But that's all right. I'll tell you, I'll get back to you on that.

DAVID GUNN: And I also have a bridge.

JIM LEHRER: Okay. No. Is that just really a bad idea, from your point of view?

DAVID GUNN: It makes no sense. What that is, is people who won't... who are avoiding the basic issue, and that is: Do you want passenger rail service? I mean what we should do, and we haven't done a great job of it, is run the most efficient system and network that we can, and then the question is: Look, USAir wants $1 billion just to keep "afloat," right, just for operating subsidy. What you have to do is decide: Do you want... how do you want to move passengers in these various markets, particularly the Northeast Corridor.

JIM LEHRER: Mr. Gunn, good luck to you, and if you'll leave your card here, I'll get back to you.

DAVID GUNN: You'll get back to me. Good.

JIM LEHRER: Yes, sir.

DAVID GUNN: I'll give you a good price.

JIM LEHRER: All right. Thank you very much.

FOCUS - SPEAKING FOR SUCCESS

JIM LEHRER: Now, a dramatic success for speech and debate students at high schools in California. Spencer Michels reports.

SPENCER MICHELS: This large, multi- ethnic high school in Union City-- a working class suburb of Oakland, California-- is an unlikely place for a powerhouse team in speech and debate, otherwise known as forensics.

STUDENT: Spare a little change. Your luck might change. I do believe in luck.

SPENCER MICHELS: But James Logan High School has won the state championship for four out of the last six years, and this spring, the speech team was preparing to defend its title.

STUDENT: The moon is larger when it is near the horizon, but as it floats up the sky, it shrinks. This mystery has baffled many.

STUDENT: Act One, Scene One. Lights upon a dreary, depressing, but with middle class aspirations, tenement slum.

SPENCER MICHELS: These days, forensics includes dramatic interpretation of written material, as well as the more traditional debate categories.

STUDENT: Poem.

STUDENT: By Sam Art Williams.

SPENCER MICHELS: Coach and teacher Tommie Lindsey started this program 13 years ago, and he has become almost legendary in the world of forensics for molding at-risk kids into champions.

STUDENT: Who has everlasting grace in the eyes of God?

TOMMIE LINDSEY: I told you guys yesterday when you make the turn, you're supposed to be talking when you make the turn.

SPENCER MICHELS: Here Pierre Clark and Latoya Johnson practice a ten minute sketch about coming of age.

PIERRE CLARK: I love the land. I love touching crops. When you hold a crop, you can feel the heartbeat of god. I love the land, won't ever leave. And I love how you...

LATOYA JOHNSON: Seafus Junior, put on your Sunday clothes and your new straw hat.

SPENCER MICHELS: Most of Lindsey's students relate to him as a role model. He grew up poor, in Oakland, one of nine children in a single parent family. He started teaching speech at Juvenile Detention Hall before coming to Logan.

PIERRE CLARK: I'll be with you...

LATOYA JOHNSON: I can't grow old and fat, burdened with babies and looking like I'm 90 by the time I'm 30.

PIERRE CLARK: You grew up in that dusty old farmhouse. Who do you think you are?

PIERRE CLARK: My turning point was the first the first tournament, when I took first in the J.V., and that was the greatest feeling in the whole world to me, because I had played football all my life, whatever, and, like, all that didn't add up to nothing until I won that first place trophy. And everybody clapping for me felt good, and after that, I was hooked.

SPENCER MICHELS: When Pierre realized that more forensics students go to college than football players, he quit the football team. In fact, in a school where only 40% of the students go on to four-year colleges, about 90% of Lindsey's students do. According to Lindsey, there are other benefits to this program as well.

TOMMIE LINDSEY: You'll see a lot of, you know, kids that are hurting, but they are not in a situation where they know how to express, you know, that kind of hurt at this particular time. But then you also look at the program as being kind of a stabilizing force for them.

SPENCER MICHELS: 18-year-old forensics student Robert Hawkins, who grew up with an alcoholic and abusive father, credits Lindsey with helping him rise above his upbringing.

ROBERT HAWKINS: He has brought out everything that I'm feeling. He lets me know that it's okay. You know, if I'm feeling sad, or if I'm depressed about something, it's okay to release that. It's kind of like a cathartic therapy, kind of, but he brings out a lot of what I have going on inside.

SPENCER MICHELS: Because of troubles at home, Robert spent part of his youth living with his grandmother. He is one of 20 grandchildren, and will be the first to graduate from high school. In the fall he'll head to San Francisco State University on a full scholarship, based partly on his forensics success.

ROBERT HAWKINS: My family doesn't really push for that kind of a thing. I mean, I guess they're more pragmatic, Army or just get a job right out of high school. But I didn't... I've never actually pushed for a higher education, but being in forensics, it's the norm to go to college. Everyone's doing it, and if you're not getting good grades and you're not, you know, succeeding in life, then you're really not cool, you're not fitting in. I don't know if that makes sense.

ROBERT HAWKINS: My turn. They don't like being reminded of how low a life can get.

SPENCER MICHELS: In his performance this year, Robert decided to play a panhandler, a role he chose because, he says, he could relate to the character.

ROBERT HAWKINS: This morning this guy asked me, he told me, "why don't you get a job?" Well, I told him, I said, "this is my job. I'm a panhandler by trade."

SPENCER MICHELS: Robert says he's gained great self-confidence through his work in forensics.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: It's our wad repellant, and this is what it does.

SPENCER MICHELS: For Di'Jonn Grizzell, the confidence he's gained in forensics even helps him at his after-school job selling athletic shoes.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: Look what it does. That's the protected side, that's the unprotected side. So if you didn't have anything on your shoes, they'll get all messed up.

SPENCER MICHELS: He's is hoping his speech skills will help him get into UCLA.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: I have, like, a 3.4 right now, so I guess I'm a pretty good student. And, like, I used to be, like, loud in class, but now, I think I calmed down because of forensics. It shifted my energy in a new source.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: Ain't that enough for me to deal with, hum-a-hum-a-hah? Ain't that enough?

CHERIE MURPHY: Son, wipe your feet.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: I want to dream. I want to be somebody.

SPENCER MICHELS: Di'Jonn and Cherie Murphy have been working on an edgy piece called "Colored Museum."

CHERIE MURPHY: That's a good boy.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: Boy! I don't want to be nobody's good boy! I want to be my own man.

CHERIE MURPHY: I know, son, I know, and God will show you the way.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: God!? When has your god ever done a damned thing for the black man, hum-a-hum-a-hah?

SPENCER MICHELS: Cherie and Di'Jonn were among the 41 Logan team members who arrived en masse at the state championships in Fresno this spring. As usual, they were all dressed meticulously; the clothing chosen with care and sometimes paid for by Tommie Lindsey.

TOMMIE LINDSEY: You guys have about five minutes, ten minutes to get to your rounds.

SPENCER MICHELS: Unlike many more affluent schools, no parents accompanied this team. And Lindsey insists his students stay at a hotel away from the other schools, so they aren't distracted from the job at hand.

TOMMIE LINDSEY: People see that kind of unity and that's something they want to emulate, and that's where success starts.

SPENCER MICHELS: Students from other schools invariably take notice of the Logan team.

DAVID GARBER: They're intimidating sometimes. I saw earlier a group of 20 of them, walking together, like dressed in all black, and they looked really serious when they're walking in.

SPENCER MICHELS: Even here, all but the final round take place in cluttered classrooms. (Fog horn)

STUDENT: Welcome aboard celebrity slave ship. Hi. I'm Miss Patt and I'll be serving you here in Cabin A. We're going to be crossing the Atlantic at an altitude that's pretty high, so you're going to want to wear your shackles at all times. To put on your shackles, take the right hand and close the metal ring around your left hand, like so. Repeat the actions using your left hand to secure the right. If you have any trouble bonding yourself, I'd be glad to assist.

STUDENT: God created black people, and black people created style.

SPENCER MICHELS: Logan students know that provocative sketches like "The Colored Museum" may not resonate with all the judges, and that could cost points, which upsets Coach Lindsey.

TOMMIE LINDSEY: That's why we have to work much harder. We have to work really much harder than, I think, a lot of the other schools, because your judging pool is mostly, you know, a middle-class group. (Applause )

SPENCER MICHELS: Word of who won, and who lost, who would advance and who was eliminated, was posted in a courtyard. (Squealing kids) For whatever reason, "Colored Museum" was eliminated in the semi-finals. It was a tough blow for Cherie and Di'Jonn, but they'd been trained to try to take it philosophically.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: They didn't understand.

CHERIE MURPHY: That can be the only thing.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: They didn't comprehend.

CHERIE MURPHY: The judges just didn't, they were looking for the wrong things, in my opinion. So... you know, it happens.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: It always happens. It's alright.

CHERIE MURPHY: You move on, take the good with the bad.

SPENCER MICHELS: Di'Jonn and Cherie figured all along the words in their performance would be hard for some people to take.

CHERIE MURPHY: Things that we say are supposed to make you think.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: ..think...

CHERIE MURPHY: They're supposed to make you a little uncomfortable. But that's the good part about it, because we're able to make fun of ourselves, but at the end, we come back and say it's okay to laugh at us sometimes, it's okay to be uncomfortable. That's how it's supposed to be.

D I'JONN GRIZZELL: Because we're here on the inside. It's not about the show, it's about what you have in here, so, you know.

SPOKESPERSON: Now what's that?

SPENCER MICHELS: Among the other team members: Pierre Clark and Latoya Johnson advanced to the finals, but didn't win. Robert Hawkins, last year's champion, also made it to the finals, but came in seventh. The Logan team, last year's all -around winners, failed to repeat. Some students did win, but overall, Lindsey's team came in number three.

STUDENT: I went out the way I wanted to go out. I gave everything I had, and I don't know what happened.

STUDENT: I didn't rise to the occasion this time, but the future holds new things.

STUDENT: What those judges say doesn't take away from what makes us truly great, and that's family, and that's dignity.

STUDENT: I just want to jump up and yell and cry and scream all at the same time, because I love you all. I love James Logan forensics. I love this team, because it's my family. It's my family, right here. (Applause)

SPENCER MICHELS: Now the Logan team is preparing and raising funds for the national forensics competition this summer in Charlotte, North Carolina.

FINALLY - FATHER'S DAY

JIM LEHRER: And finally tonight, something to think about Sunday, on Father's Day, from former Poet Laureate Robert Pinsky.

ROBERT PINSKY: A lot of the fathers and mothers that I know are writers or artists. Compared to our contemporaries who work in offices or at plants, we sometimes have the luxury of seeing our children at different times of day. There may even be times when from a child's viewpoint, it may seem we never really work. In other ways, the poet or painter is always at work, always liable to drift off or become distracted or suddenly leave for the studio or the study, away from family life. Poets have no weekends or days off in this sense. They've been known to slink off, scowling and muttering to themselves at the oddest moments. Or they nearly slink off, then decide to stay with the kids and family after all. In the 11th century, the Chinese poet, Su Tung-Po wrote a charming, poignant poem about his family and the way they seduce him back into the actual life of a moment. Here, for father's day, from the year 1075, is Su Tung-Po's poem entitled "Children" in Bertrand Watson's translation.

Children. "Children don't know what worry means. Stand up to go and they hang on my clothes. I'm about to scold them but my wife eggs them on in their silliness. 'The children are silly, but you're much worse. What good does all this worrying do?' Stung by her words, I go back to my seat. She rinses a wine cup to put before me. How much bitter than Leu Leung's wife grumbling at the cost of her husband's drinking."

Lee Leung's wife alludes to a poem written some 700 centuries before... 700 years before this happy, domestic moment. The very act of that allusion is like a smiling acknowledgment that the poet has his mind on work, even while giving in to his boisterous family. I wish us all, whatever our occupations and preoccupations, some joy of that kind today.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of the day: Zacarias Moussaoui denied he played any role in the September 11 conspiracy, and he won the right to represent himself at trial. U.S. Roman Catholic bishops opened their meeting in Dallas on sexual abuse by priests. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called for direct talks between India and Pakistan. And Afghanistan's interim leader Hamid Karzai was elected the country's new president. We'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening with Shields and Brooks, among others. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you, and good night.