The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight: Our summary of the news; some perspective on President Bush's announcement of a commission to look at pre-Iraq war and other intelligence; a round-up of what the Democratic presidential candidates did today; a report on Michigan's Internet voting experiment; the analysis of Mark Shields and David Brooks; and a John Feinstein look at the court decision to let everyone play in the NFL.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: President Bush formally named a bipartisan commission today, to investigate the pre-war intelligence on Iraq's weapons. The co-chairmen will be former Democratic Senator Chuck Robb, of Virginia, and retired federal Judge Laurence Silberman, a Republican. In addition, Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona is on the commission. He was in Germany today, at a NATO meeting. He said the panel would examine how the intelligence was used but dismissed talk that the public was deliberately misled.

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: The president of the United States, I believe, would not manipulate any kind of information for political gain or otherwise. In order for that -- it would have to be proven to me. Perhaps mistakes were made and we have to look at that in a broad variety of areas but there's no massive conspiracy that I have seen and that's why we're going to look at all the act facts.

JIM LEHRER: The president named four others to the new commission. They are Lloyd Cutler: A former White House counsel to Presidents Carter and Clinton; Patricia Wald, a former federal judge; Richard Levin, the president of Yale University; and Admiral William Studeman, a former deputy director of the CIA. The president said he has not yet chosen the final two members of the commission. The panel is to report its findings by March of 2005. We'll have more on this story right after the news summary. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld ordered an investigation of alleged sexual assaults among troops in Iraq and Kuwait. There are reports that 37 women say they have been attacked by male counterparts. Rumsfeld said he wants findings and recommendations within 90 days. The NATO defense ministers talked about expanding their peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan today. Secretary Rumsfeld said a number of countries volunteered to send troops, but he gave no names. The meeting ended without a final decision. So far, the NATO security force has been limited to Kabul, the Afghan capital. The U.S. Unemployment rate fell last month, to the lowest level in two years. The Labor Department reported today it was 5.6 percent in January, down 0.1 percent. Businesses added 112,000 new jobs. That was the most in three years, but still, less than many experts had expected. On Wall Street, stocks were higher on the news. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 97 points to close at 10593. The NASDAQ rose 44 points, or 2 percent, to close at 2064. For the week, the Dow gained 1 percent. The NASDAQ fell a fraction of a percent. John Kerry won the endorsement of Dick Gephardt today, in the Democratic presidential race. Gephardt ended his campaign last month after he failed to win in Iowa. He announced his support for Kerry in Michigan. It's one of three states voting this weekend, along with Washington State and Maine. We'll have more on the Democrats later in the program tonight. An explosion ripped through a Moscow subway train today, killing at least 39 passengers. More than 130 others were wounded. We have a report narrated by Darshna Sony of Independent Television News.

DARSHNA SONY: The twisted metal and charred remains of an underground train -- an ordinary Friday morning, the commute into work. It's the rush hour, the tube is jam packed, there's a huge explosion. Carriages ripped apart. Terrified passengers have to walk a mile along the tunnels to escape. Those who made it are carried away to safety -- over 100 people injured; they're the lucky ones. Dozens of others were killed. Outside there is chaos, trembling, bloodied faces everywhere. The police are investigating several theories: One, that a bomb could have been left in a rucksack in one of the carriages. Another, that it was the work of a female suicide bomber. They may not know how it was done, but everyone seemed to agree who.

PRESIDENT VLADMIR PUTIN, Russia (Translated): We do not need any indirect confirmation. We know for certain that Maskhadov and his bandits are linked to this terrorism.

DARSNA SONY: Aslan Maskhadov, the man being blamed, is the fugitive leader of the Chechen separatists. He's denied any involvement and condemned the atrocity, but his words are not enough to appease the president.

SPOKESMAN: (Translated ): Russia does not talk with terrorists, Russia exterminates them.

DARSHNA SONY: Tonight, dozens of people are still being treated in hospital. 21 are in a serious condition.

JIM LEHRER: Today's attack was the worst in Moscow since Russia began its second war in Chechnya in 1999. NASA announced today that one of its mars rovers is back in perfect working order. The robotic vehicle had computer memory problems that crippled it for two weeks. Today, scientists released images showing how the rover had dusted off the surface of a rock before drilling into it. They also released images from a second rover. It moved 11 feet yesterday, toward the rim of the crater where it landed. General Motors announced a recall of nearly two million cars today in the United States and Canada. The company said the ignition switches could overheat and cause a fire in the steering column. The affected models included Chevrolet Cavaliers, Pontiac Sunfires and Grand Ams, Oldsmobile Achievas, and Buick skylarks. All were built between 1997 and 2001. Retired Admiral Thomas Moore died Thursday at the Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. The announcement today did not give the cause of death. Moore was chief of naval operations during the height of the Vietnam War. President Nixon made him chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1970. He was 91 years old. That's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the presidential commission on intelligence, the democrats today, a Michigan experiment, Shields and Brooks, and the right to play in the pros.

FOCUS - INTELLIGENCE PROBE

JIM LEHRER: The intelligence commission. We begin with excerpts from president bush's announcement at the White House.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction. Last week, our former chief weapons inspector, David Kay, reported that Saddam Hussein's regime had weapons programs and activities in violation of United Nations Security Council resolutions and was a gathering threat to the world. Dr. Kay also stated that some pre-war intelligence assessments by America and othernations about Iraq's weapon stockpiles have not been confirmed. We are determined to figure out why. We're also determined to make sure that American intelligence is as accurate as possible for every challenge in the future. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction poses the most serious of dangers to the peace of the world. Chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists or terror regimes could bring catastrophic harm to America and to our friends. And now as we move forward in our efforts to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction, we must stay ahead of constantly changing intelligence challenges. The stakes for our country could not be higher, and our standard of intelligence gathering and analysis must be equal to that of the challenge. The commission I have appointed today will examine intelligence on weapons of mass destruction and related 21st century threats, and issue specific recommendations to ensure our capabilities are strong. The commission will compare what the Iraq survey group learns with the information we had prior to Iraq Operation Iraqi Freedom. It will review our intelligence on weapons programs in countries such as North Korea and Iran. It will examine our intelligence on the threats posed by Libya and Afghanistan before recent changes in those countries. Members of the commission will issue their report by March 31, 2005. I've ordered all departments and agencies, including our intelligence agencies, to assist the commission's work.

JIM LEHRER: And to Margaret Warner.

MARGARET WARNER: What are the prospects for this latest inquiry getting to the bottom of intelligence failures in Iraq and elsewhere? For that, we turn to two men with longtime experience in intelligence and investigations of intelligence. Senator Pat Roberts, Republican from Kansas, the current chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee; and the committee's former chairman, Senator Bob Graham, Democrat from Florida. Welcome to you both. Senator Roberts --.

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: Yes ma'am.

MARGARET WARNER: What is your reaction to what the president did today?

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: I liked it. Basically I said before if this commission was going to be successful, it would have to be bipartisan and independent. If you look at the makeup in the panel in terms of politics and difference of opinion, I'm not too sure they would order everything from the same menu at lunch but I do think that they have a great deal of experience. I know most of panel members. The mission is a little broader than the one we have right now before the Senate Committee on intelligence. It gets into the whole issue of weapons of mass destruction and the countries that are involved -- in my view we certainly overestimated the WMD situation in Iraq but we underestimated the situation in regards to Iran and in regards to Libya. So I think they are going to take a broader look at what we face in terms of our national security with WMD, countries like North Korea. We have some systemic challenges, I think. I think Senator Graham also would agree with that. He has been talking at some length about reform measures or things we can do, real recommendations for improvement in our intelligence capability.

MARGARET WARNER: Senator Graham, what was your reaction to what the president did today? Do you think this will get to the bottom of intelligence problems in the WMD area?

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Like Senator Roberts I know many of the people who have been announced thus far and I think it's an excellent group of commissioners. There are issues that are going to have to be dealt with from the standpoint of the perception of the American people that this is a totally independent group. One is, it should be made clear, that they will have the authority not only to look at the capabilities of intelligence community but how the product of the intelligence community was used by decision makers. Second the commission should have the power of subpoena and there should be a commitment by those actions such as the FBI that they will enforce the subpoenas. We had a situation with our 9/11 review in which legally authorized subpoena was issued and the FBI refused to deliver it: Third, accountability. I don't think that we can put off until March of 2005 determining who was responsible for the intelligence lapses that have recently occurred, and finally intelligence reform. It will be three and a half years after Sept. 11, when we reach March of 2005. There's been a series of commissions including ones led by Paul Bremer, by Senators Hart and Rudman, by Governor Gill Moore as well as our 9/11 report which indicated where reforms were needed. We can't wait another 14 months to put those into effect -- another 14 months Putting the American people at unnecessary vulnerability.

MARGARET WARNER: Senator Roberts, do you think that the deadline is too far in the future - and obviously part of that is the scope of inquiry because it is looking beyond Iraq but do you think it should be shorter and more tightly focused on Iraq?

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: I think it should be broader than that. Both the House and Senate Committees and the president's foreign policy board, all the services, there's the Kerr Report for the Defense Intelligence Agency. Right now we have six, seven, eight, nine, possibly ten different panels investigating or certainly making an inquiry in regards to the planning of prewar intelligence. I hope there's somebody left at the CIA that will fight the war on terrorism. I think Senator Graham made a very important point when he pointed out that the House and Senate Intelligence Committee investigation of the previous year, of the previous Congress made quite a lengthy list of recommendations to the intelligence community. Some of those have already been done. It isn't that we have just simply stood still. The FBI has literally turned around in regards to its priorities being a law enforcement agency to that of counterterrorism, so some of those recommendations have already been taking place. Now as to whether they are done properly and whether they are done completely why that's -- certainly remains to be seen. Sen. Graham wrote me a letter and wrote a letter to Sen. Rockefeller who is our distinguished vice chairman. He urged the Committee on Intelligence to take a look and have a hearing on all of those recommendations and to ask the appropriate agencies to come in and say all right what do you feel about these recommendations and what have you done since the 9/11 investigation. And I credit Sen. Graham for that contribution.

MARGARET WARNER: All right. Let me ask you both to just follow up with something you both talked about. You said you know most of these commissioners, you think highly of them. Sen. Graham, as you know, Sen. Daschle, the Senate Minority Leader, and Sen. Rockefeller and others signed a letter to the president earlier this week saying essentially a commission he said appointed and controlled by the White House will not have the independence or credibility necessary to investigate these issues. I'm wondering whether you think that the fact that the president appointed all these members does in any way compromise either the independence or credibility of this group.

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes, I think it does create a cloud over the commission's work and therefore steps to try to remove that cloud need to be taken, such as the two that I have mentioned. One was to be assured that the commission will have the authority not just to look at the capabilities of the intelligence community but how the intelligence community's information was then utilized by decision makers and second, that it needs to have a full array of legal capabilities including the power to subpoena witnesses, the power to subpoena documents and the understanding that the appropriate federal investigative and law enforcement agencies will comply with and if necessary enforce those subpoenas.

MARGARET WARNER: Well, the president did say that he was directing all the agencies to cooperate but more on the make up of the commission. There are really only three people out of the seven names so far who have any real background on intelligence. Secondly there's one the sitting member from the House or the Senate, Sen. McCain on the committee. There's no Democrat. Does that concern you? Were you asked?

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: If that question is directed at me, the answer is no. But I think John McCain is a person who is seen as being very independent and willing to take on tough issues. I do not know the president of Yale but he certainly has a distinguished background and as an economist he has developed the skills of probing complex issues to determine what is the truth.

MARGARET WARNER: And how about you, Senator Roberts, how do you feel about the makeup of the commission, in terms of not having people involved a lot with intelligence or military matters?

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: Well, you have the former deputy director of the CIA. Let me say a word for Chuck Robb, he is a recent member of the Senate. I served with him on the Armed Services Committee. He was very bipartisan and very aggressive in behalf of military and had a very strong interest in regards to intelligence -- had a lot of background in it -- knows it very well. He may not be a sitting senator but he certainly will add a great deal to the effort and in terms of independence how can anybody say that John McCain is not independent.

MARGARET WARNER: I'm sure the White House would agree with that. Sen. Roberts go ahead now and comment on the point that Sen. Graham has raised a couple of times having to do with whether this commission will be able to and should look not only at intelligence gathering and analysis by the agencies involved but at how the White House used it. Sen. McCain did say today over in Munich, he did think everything would be looked at but the president did not mention it? Do you think this commission should look at that aspect?

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: We have the same kind of situation in regards to the Senate Committee on Intelligence where there's been a lot of talk about the use of intelligence. As a matter of fact there was a memo that was talked about quite a bit several months ago about the vague notion of use. If that simply means you do a Lexus Nexus search of public statements by top administrations officials and then you take a look at the intelligence and you say wait a minute doesn't back it up - and you simply ask people to explain that that's been done by a host of administration officials. On the other hand, I have told all of my colleagues on the Intelligence Committee that as we read the report, the 310-page report we study it and understand it, if something really pops out from a policy standpoint that is egregious we will certainly take a look at it. Our staffs are now trying to work that out and I think that is probably what will happen with the president's commission as well.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you want to give us -- I know there's a draft report of your committees report circulating privately. Do you want to tell us what was your bottom line assessment about what was underneath the intelligence failure in Iraq or whether it was an intelligence failure.

SEN. PAT ROBERTS: I would love to tell you. I don't think I can do that. Right now it is embargoed for members only. And we're asking members a, to read it - and I'm sure they will -- and b, to educate themselves and then to come back Thursday with suggestions for improvement -- any area they would like to go into. Any expansion they would like to go into. They'll have another two weeks. This is very tough reading. It's very dense but it's very important. It lays out in the most comprehensive way the timeliness and credibility of intelligence in regards of WMD and regards to the connection to terrorism, regional stability i.e. the threat that Saddam had in regard to the stability of area and then lastly the tragedy in regards to human rights which I think everybody knows. So we're -- I can't tell you anything about the report now but I will promise you that we will make it public. We will redact our report. We'll work with the agencies so that there's nothing classified in there that would endanger any sources or names or methods and we'll have an open hearing.

MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Graham, because to you on this presidential commission, do you agree with Sen. Roberts that it's a good idea that this commission is going to look more broadly at other intelligence, intelligence performance in other weapons of mass destruction areas such as Libya, Iran and North Korea?

SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes, part of accountability is not only to sanction people who performed at an unacceptable level but also to recognize people within the agencies who gave beyond the call of duty performance. I would think that some of those people would be identified in that kind of a wide ranging look. But what the American people are interested in -- they are interested in their own security. They are concerned about the series of rise in attacks. They are concerned about what happened today in Moscow where 39 people were blown up in a subway. They want greater security for themselves and this country. That means not waiting three and a half years after the wake-up call of 9/11, the shockwaves that that emanated to start the process of making reform. I'm very pleased that Sen. Roberts indicated there will be a hearing of Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to take up the agenda of reform items that have been recommended. I hope that 19 - that 2004 will be the year in which we will move to implement the reforms.

MARGARET WARNER: Sen. Graham and Sen. Roberts, thank you both.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, today with the democrats, voting by computer in Michigan, shields and brooks, and a football rights court decision.

UPDATE - CAMPAIGN 2004

JIM LEHRER: Kwame Holman has today's report on the campaign.

KWAME HOLMAN: The already front- running democratic candidate, John Kerry got an additional boost in warren Michigan today, from former rival Dick Gephardt.

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT: John Kerry has the life experiences, the personal character and strength, and the great ability to be a great president of the United States of America. Ladies and gentleman, greet the next president of the United States, john Kerry.

KWAME HOLMAN: The Massachusetts senator wants labor union support, something Gephardt had a lot of before he dropped out of the race two weeks ago. In his speech, Kerry praised the Missouri congressman.

SEN. JOHN KERRY: I understand how difficult it is because I've lost before in my life, to turn around, come back, and just pick up the pieces and recognize that the whole deal is bigger than your individual hopes and your individual ambitions, aspirations, and particularly the investment of time. No one has invested more time more diligently, with more commitment, with more passion about his roots, about working people, about the possibilities of this country, and about how politics can be better and our country can be better than the man who just endorsed me, Dick Gephardt. (Applause) He is one of the most extraordinary public leaders.

KWAME HOLMAN: The latest polls show Kerry with a commanding lead in Michigan, Maine, and Washington State. All three hold caucuses this weekend. Tomorrow, Kerry will campaign in the south, ahead of primaries in Tennessee and Virginia on Tuesday. North Carolina Senator John Edwards has spent considerable time in both of those southern states, campaigning little for the northern contests. Today he told supporters in Tennessee he would beat president bush in the South.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS: The Democrats have never elected a president, never elected a president who didn't win at least five states. This is what you tell your friends about that: The South is not George Bush's backyard. It's my backyard, and I will beat George Bush in my backyard, and you tell your friends that. (Applause )

KWAME HOLMAN: Retired General Wesley Clark also has targeted Virginia and Tennessee this week. Appearing at a diner in Nashville today, he told reporters his recent comments about Edwards and Kerry are not attacks.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK (Ret.): These aren't swipes, these are differences, and I think elections are about choices. The voters have to know what the differences are between the candidates. I'm an outsider, I'm not part of that Washington culture of money, access, influence and special interests that my other two opponents in the race are. I'm a son of the south, I'm a veteran. John Kerry's a good man. He says that Democrats don't have to carry the south. I beg to differ. I don't think we've had a Democrat who's won the presidency without carrying the south in 40 years.

KWAME HOLMAN: Recent polls show former Vermont governor Howard Dean trailing Clark and Edwards in the South, and well behind Kerry in Michigan. Last night, Dean said Wisconsin's primary in less than two weeks will be his last stand.

HOWARD DEAN: When you have momentum people vote for you even if they don't know anything about you. Our decision to fight here and to win here was made because we believe that people are voting for Senator Kerry without knowing anything about him. This is going to be a fully contested, fully fought out primary the first one since Iowa and New Hampshire.

KWAME HOLMAN: Congressman Dennis Kucinich and the Reverend Al Sharpton both campaigned in Michigan today.

JIM LEHRER: Now, media correspondent Terence smith looks at Michigan's new twist in voting.

TERENCE SMITH: Michigan state freshman Kevin Smith is voting for the first time in a national election, online in his dorm room. And with a click of her mouse, sophomore Emma Ward is casting a ballot for her choice, john Kerry.

EMMA WARD: It was easy and it was fun. We're so used to clicking on things and continuing, it was like second nature.

TERENCE SMITH: At the Detroit headquarters of the powerful American federation of state, county and municipal employees, union members displayed their chosen candidate, Howard Dean, on their shirtfronts as they voted, also online. They are among tens of thousands voters who are participating in the largest and most ambitious experiment in Internet voting to date in this country. An estimated one-third of those who cast ballots in tomorrow's Michigan caucuses will do so over the Internet. Earlier this week at the Michigan Democratic Party headquarters in Lansing, state executive chairman mark brewer discussed this exercise, unique in the primary season.

MARK BREWER: We've been very pleased with the results so far. Nearly 120,000 people have applied to vote by mail or over the Internet. That alone makes it the third largest caucus we've ever held in this state, and we haven't even gotten to caucus day yet.

TERENCE SMITH: Internet voting is not entirely new: It was tried on a smaller scale in primaries in Arizona and Alaska four years ago. But the stakes are much higher this year in Michigan's caucus: 128 delegates, the largest bloc of any primary so far, are up for grabs. Senator John Kerry is comfortably ahead in the polls here, but other campaigns, including that of early front runner, Howard Dean, have been going door-to-door urging voters to boot up.

HOWARD DEAN: I need you to vote. ( Applause ) I'm going to tell you how to vote. I want you to vote on the Internet and I want you to do it right now and I want you to get all your friends to do the same thing. (Applause)

SPOKESMAN: Within seven days you should get that package in the mail.

TERENCE SMITH: For some voters, that requires an education process. The Service Employees International Union, for example, went to this geriatric center to train workers to vote electronically for the union's choice, Howard Dean. Bob Allison is communications director for SEIU in Michigan.

BOB ALLISON: The Internet to us has basically just been another tool that we've been able to use to get out and organize our members. I mean, ten years ago, we were going to work sites and we were getting people registered to vote. Today, we're able to go with laptops and we're able to essentially have them cast... get registered right there on the spot.

TERENCE SMITH: And leading up to tomorrow's vote, the union has been working the phones to ensure that the members who registered to vote online follow through and cast their ballots. And the state Democratic Party, which is running the caucus, has been fielding hundreds of calls about how to vote with a click. Voting online is a two-step process in Michigan. Since New Year's Day, voters have been able to apply over the Internet for a ballot, which arrives in the mail, bearing a unique user number and password. Voters can mark that and mail it, or designate their choices from the comfort of their own computer.

KATHLEEN GRAY: For some people, it's been very easy. They've been excited about it. I've talked to a lot of people who have already cast their votes.

TERENCE SMITH: Kathleen Gray, political reporter for the "Detroit Free Press," says online voting offers a major convenience for Michigan's rural residents.

KATHLEEN GRAY: In more than half the counties in Michigan, there is only one caucus site. So there are people who will have to drive quite a long way. Up in the upper peninsula, that drive could be 60 miles one-way. So I think it'll certainly benefit those folks, who have only a limited amount of caucus sites they can go to.

TERENCE SMITH: To encourage online voting, the Michigan Democratic Party has directed voters to some 1,500 sites around the state where they can get free Internet access. Here at the Detroit Public Library, voters can cast computer ballots up to 4 o'clock tomorrow, when the regular polling places close. That public access is partly designed to close the so-called digital divide. Nationally, only 39 percent of households with incomes of less than $25,000 a year have Internet access, while 94 percent of households that earn over $75,000 a year are wired. That discrepancy prompted seven of the nine Democratic campaigns to protest the Michigan online voting scheme to the Democratic National Committee when it was first announced. Only the Dean and Wesley Clark campaigns embraced it from the outset.

JOEL FERGUSON: I think the Internet voting is something that is, for Michigan, ahead of its time.

TERENCE SMITH: Lansing developer Joel Ferguson, a Kerry backer and member of the democratic national committee, argued before the DNC that online voting is fundamentally discriminatory.

JOEL FERGUSON: I feel that there's a tremendous digital divide, where we have half, 46 percent, of the White Households have Internet capability, only 23 percent of minority households.

SPOKESMAN: Are you planning to vote online or go to a caucus site?

TERENCE SMITH: The DNC rejected the protest and now all the campaigns, like that of Senator John Edwards, are pursuing online votes. Edwards' state director, Derek Albert.

DEREK ALBERT: If we are going to do Internet voting, let's make it fair for everybody. There's a great digital divide in this state, there's a great digital divide in America, and that's not something we should play with at this time, because this election is so crucial.

TERENCE SMITH: Albert Garrett, the president of the Assume Council 25 in Detroit, downplays the concerns over the digital divide.

ALBERT GARRETT: I think that it's exaggerated. I think that there are ample opportunities throughout Detroit and Michigan if a person wanted to vote by the Internet. The fact of the matter is, while every home in Michigan may not have a computer, most workers are exposed to computers.

TERENCE SMITH: Some of the complaints about the online voting process have been technical. Alex Sagady, a computer-savvy environmental consultant, said he received what he described as a "hostile message" when he tried to vote.

ALEX SAGADY: "This page must be viewed over a secure channel. The page you are trying to access is secured with secure sockets, layer SSL." This is a very unfriendly looking thing, this message you get back here. The average person is just going to throw up their hands and wonder.

TERENCE SMITH: Security is a major concern and the party is depending on an electronic database to prevent fraud. But just this week, the pentagon dropped plans to use Internet voting for U.S. citizens overseas out of concern for the security of the system. Nonetheless, the Michigan experiment got a top-level vote of approval yesterday when the Democratic governor, Jennifer Granholm and her husband cast their ballots electronically.

FOCUS - SHIELDS & BROOKS

JIM LEHRER: And to politics and other matters with Shields and Brooks. Syndicated columnist mark Shields and "New York Times" columnist David Brooks. First the week in caucuses a potential sweep for Kerry, David?

DAVID BROOKS: Looks like it. I think what's happened this week is the general election started do to the president's reaction to politics and how badly he's been doing. And I think they are thinking November now.

JIM LEHRER: Mark?

MARK SHIELDS: The Kerry argument has moved from electability to inevitability. And the train is leaving. You better get on seems to be the message to leading Democrats. It's interesting in two respects. One, for the first time a Democratic candidate for president is telling a constituency in a major state what it doesn't want to hear. In Michigan John Kerry has long been an advocate of increased automobile mileage standards strongly opposed by both the Auto Workers Union and the auto industry. And yet, he is leading in that state. So I think it's taking on the look of a Kerry thing and I think David is absolutely right. I mean, perceptions frequently pass for reality in politics, and there's a perception now among both Democrats and Republicans that George W. Bush is in trouble.

JIM LEHRER: Where do you think that comes from?

DAVID BROOKS: It comes from him having a bad week and dropping 11 points in his approval rating. He had one of the worst state-of-the-unions in recent memory. The trip to Mars didn't really seem to go anywhere. We didn't find weapons of mass destruction.

JIM LEHRER: Not the trip. You mean his proposal. The trip to Mars is doing fine - the other trip --

DAVID BROOKS: The two rovers. Karl Rove wishes he was up there right now.

JIM LEHRER: Let's move right along, please.

DAVID BROOKS: Okay. So the president does something radical and agrees to go on Tim Russert's show on Sunday, on "Meet the Press," which is a high risk gamble but it's a gamble, a sign that they think they have to turn things around.

JIM LEHRER: And, Mark, today he announced this bipartisan independent commission to look at intelligence. He had said earlier he wasn't going to do this. Everybody said the president wasn't going to do it. What changed his mind?

MARK SHIELDS: Well, just picking up exactly where David was, Jim, I think the president's greatest vulnerability and Republicans will privately concede this. George W. Bush's strength was never his mastery of substantive detail or his deep and strong experience in the area. It was always I'm a straight shooter unlike my predecessor, you won't have to worry. I'm direct, I'll level with you. And you have got weapons of mass destruction. Now you have his budget which is a shell game at best -- a bait and switch at worst. You've got him changing his tune and his position and I think -- I really think that for the first time there's a question of his credibility being eroded. As far as this was concerned because the idea came from John McCain, somehow there was an initial negative response from the White House. I mean, in many respects it's the most shrewdly political thing for the White House to do. Any further revelations that come up embarrassing details that got public, hey, the commission is looking at it -- we can't comment on that; the commission is looking at it.

JIM LEHRER: What do you think of the commission idea, David?

DAVID BROOKS: I think it's a good idea and I also think the people he named are great. First, they are independent people. Nobody is going to push these people around -- let alone John McCain. The second thing and the most important thing to me is that they are not in the tank for the intelligence community. He could have gone out and picked a bunch of ambassadors and Council on Foreign Relations types -- people who are born in the mentality of intelligence community with the methodology of the intelligence community, but in my view that's the problem. He needed smart independent people who could take a look at not only the intelligence and the details but the way people in the intelligence community think and who are not part of that social science mentality that really is endemic to the intelligence community. So I think this is a root and branch look at the way we have done this.

JIM LEHRER: There are have been rumors, I'm sure you all know, that the reason this has been delayed is because they had trouble getting any Democrats to agree to serve. How do you read that? They still have two seats they haven't filled yet.

DAVID BROOKS: I think they're available. (Laughter).

JIM LEHRER: Okay.

DAVID BROOKS: I think, you know it's a partisan year and a lot of Democrats were understandably worried they would be part of a white wash -- an effort to cover this whole thing up. In the people they got there's no possibility for that. Hershel Wall, a very prestigious lawyer -- Rick Levin the president of Yale -- independent and extremely well thought of at Yale, these are people that are really not questionable.

JIM LEHRER: How do you read the fact that there are no Democratic senators, serving senators? Chuck Robb is a former senator and he's a former marine and he's on the Armed Services Committee, knows intelligence and all of that but it is not a current senator?

MARK SHIELDS: Well, the only current officeholder is John McCain.

JIM LEHRER: He is a Republican.

MARK SHIELDS: He is a Republican, although the White House sometimes questions that. I mean, John McCain is - generous -

JIM LEHRER: Excuse me is the tension between John McCain and the White House as strong as it has ever been? I thought that had gone away, no?

MARK SHIELDS: I think it's fair to say that maybe the principals are friendly or formerly friendly but at the level of most loyal lieutenants at both sides open hostility and mistrust I think it's fair to say.

JIM LEHRER: Do you agree with that, David?

MARK SHIELDS: Basically, yeah.

JIM LEHRER: Go ahead. Story to interrupt you, sir.

MARK SHIELDS: That's all right. Jim. I mean, Bob Graham, who was on Margaret's segment with Pat Robertson, would have been logical. Lee Hamilton in many respects - Jim, this is the 7th commission. You have eaten up a lot of people. That's one of problems. I mean, this isn't an issue. This isn't something that somebody just came up with. This really is -- they are looking for people and they go to the rolodexes and an awful lot of them are spoken for.

DAVID BROOKS: The great and good is a limited supply.

JIM LEHRER: The great and the good. Never mind. George Tenet's speech yesterday, what did you think of that?

DAVID BROOKS: I thought he made some good points. I think the best point he made was that this weapons of mass destruction program was not as we thought it was but it was not dead either. It was in remission but it could be sprung up at any moment. He made some good points that the CIA did get some things right. I think the fundamental problem is he did not grasp the reality that we now understand was the Iraqi reality, which was this was a regime that was decomposing. You had scientists; you had military leaders; you had a dictator and sons in total chaos. And you look at that speech. There's no understanding of how they got it wrong. They got it wrong because they imposed a false order on Iraqi reality. They thought it was a regime like any other. But it was not a regime like any other; it was a regime teetering near anarchies, and the CIA never understands disorder because they impose a rational framework on it.

JIM LEHRER: I think he would be a great commission member, don't you, Mark?

MARK SHIELDS: Jim I disagree.

JIM LEHRER: On --

MARK SHIELDS: I thought what Tenet did was interesting. This is a fellow who came to the CIA as a staffer from the Hill.

JIM LEHRER: As a Democratic staffer.

MARK SHIELDS: A Democratic staffer on the Hill under Bill Clinton and what he did yesterday was defend his agency and said look, we never said there was an imminent threat. I mean, he was pretty blunt about that. What was truly impressive this week was to see this administration that has always spoken with a single voice many discordant contradictory voices, many voices contradicting themselves. Colin Powell flip flopping in 24 hours but wouldn't have gone to war. The president made the right decision to go to war. George Tenet, I thought made the case for his agency and you said, you know, the unstated conclusions of his remarks and everything this week is if you are going to have a preemptive war that demands a level of certitude that the intelligence must be so good on the part of president who asked the nation to go to war in a preemptive war. That obviously has not been the case here. John McCain said that.

JIM LEHRER: Imminent. Use of the word imminent -- George Tenet said we did not say there was an imminent threat. Where did that come from?

DAVID BROOKS: It came from pundits. If you look at what George W. Bush said, he said grave and gathering. He was always careful to say grave and gathering. His whole main argument leading up to the war was we can't wait for it to be imminent and that is the problem because we're in a bind here. And when you have terrorists and weapons of mass destruction, you can't wait until they are on top of you. But as it stands now with our intelligence community we can't act first because we can't have confidence in our intelligence.

MARK SHIELDS: When the national security adviser to the president of the United States goes on national television and says we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud, that isn't imminent - I mean -

DAVID BROOKS: That was the point; we can't wait for imminence. We have to -- when it's grave and gathering.

MARK SHIELDS: We're talking mushroom clouds -- you are talking about nuclear weapons for goodness sakes. It turns out what Colin Powell said a year ago at the U.N. when he made the case to go to war and it was probably the most conclusive expert witness in behalf of that case, you know, it's totally contradicted but everything that has happened since.

DAVID BROOKS: It's mostly contradicted. One thing we know is we do a terrible job of measuring proliferation. As Sen. Roberts said earlier, we underestimated the Iraqi program in 1991. We underestimated Libya, we underestimated Iran. We underestimated in the Iraqi case. Now we overestimated but we just have no idea what is going on with proliferation.

JIM LEHRER: Before we go. I can't leave the most exciting subject. I got to talk about the budget -- the president's budget. You heard what Mark Shields just said. He said it was a shell game the president was playing. What do you think?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, there's some truth to that. I don't know how you measure the relative dishonesty of all the different budgets. Every year there's - involved - but I will say one thing, which a lot of Republicans are upset at and it goes into -- when they sold the Medicare and prescription drug, they sold it as a $400 billion bill. Two months later we discovered they were off by 33 percent. That is a$530 billion bill. And they must have known. There's a lot of unhappiness on the Republican side as well as the Democratic side that somehow the numbers are not coming out straight.

JIM LEHRER: Should it be seen as an election year document and dismissed or do you think --.

MARK SHIELDS: Presumably what happens is going to be based on this budget and it's a budget that has Republicans outraged. The level of domestic spending increasing is just off the charts.

MARK SHIELDS: They are playing fast and loose with the president's credibility. It's his most precious and most perishable political resource. That budget is just replete with --

JIM LEHRER: Give us the worst example -- if your opinion the Medicare thing?

MARK SHIELDS: Medicare. Here is the perfect example - the President said we were going back to pay as you go - Pay as you go -- it was a system adopted in 1990s to balance the budget which was if you and I come up with a new expenditure we have to come up with taxes to pay for it or cuts to pay for it. The president says that is what we're going to. In any increases in Medicare, any increases in Social Security you have to have cuts out there and the taxes to pay for it -- except tax cuts. Tax cuts are sacrosanct; tax cuts don't have to be justified in any way. Any tax cuts they don't have to be.

JIM LEHRER: In other words you can cut the revenue but you don't have to cut the spending to match it.

MARK SHIELDS: Not at all. When Bill Young, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee a Florida Republican says the numbers don't add up - I mean, he wasn't talking Democratic jargon.

JIM LEHRER: Our numbers do add up and they say good night and thank you both.

FOCUS - CHANGING THE RULES

JIM LEHRER: Finally tonight, opening professional football to one and all. Ray Suarez has that story.

RAY SUAREZ: Ohio state football star Maurice Clarett finally got the opening he was looking for. Yesterday a New York federal judge gave the sophomore running back and other high school and college football players the opportunity to jump to the pros. The judge declared the National Football League's 1990 rule that players must be out of high school for at least three years violates antitrust law and she said "must be sacked." The 20-year-old Clarett sued the NFL last September to challenge its rule. At a press conference yesterday, he reacted to the news.

MAURICE CLARETT: I was pleased that the rule was brought down. It gives a whole lot of kids an opportunity to choose a different path if they may. Just as well as every other sport.

RAY SUAREZ: The 6', 230-pound Clarett declined to say whether he would enter the April draft. Other sports including basketball, baseball, and hockey have long allowed players to join right from high school. The NFL promised to fight the ruling issuing a statement saying: "We believe today's ruling is inconsistent in numerous respects with well-established labor and antitrust law, and we will seek review of the ruling in the Court of Appeals." If the ruling is overturned, Clarett will barred from entering the draft until 2005. More now about the potential fallout of court decision and the case that sparked it. It comes from sport writer and commentator John Feinstein.

John, welcome. Why did the NFL have that rule in place keeping high school and college players out?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Well, Ray, from a competitive standpoint it's a good idea to try to protect youngsters from the greed of their families, agents, people who would push them to turn professional, as we see occur frequently inother sports, before they are 20, 21 years old particularly in a sport like football that it is so physical, where the development of your body is so important in terms of your potential to play at the professional level. It's very possible you can get hurt playing football or you are not ready physically. So from a competitive standpoint, the rule makes a lot of sense. The question, though, is the legality of the rule.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, Maurice Clarett had terrific early career games as an Ohio State Buckeye. How did he end up becoming the test case?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Well, the reason he became the test case, ray, is because he was declared ineligible to play football this past season by the NCAA and you are correct as a freshman he showed great potential. He is very big and strong for a young man of his age; he is 6'1", 235 pounds. But even so, he was injury prone as a freshman at Ohio State. I don't think there's any way he would have taken this case to court if not for the fact that he was unable to play college football this past season.

RAY SUAREZ: Other sports have long signed people out of high school or very early in their college careers. When basketball made the switch, how did it change the game and the relationship with the college teams?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Well, again, go back to the 1970s the Spencer-Haywood ruling, which may go down as being very much the same as what will be known as the Maurice-Clarett ruling. When Spencer Haywood challenged the NBA rule at the time, which said you couldn't go into the NBA draft until you were four years out of high school. He won that court case. Since then, as the years have gone by, we now have 30 years to look back on it, we see more and more players turning pro straight out of high school, but even more significant than that, you frequently see players leaving after one or two years of college, and very few of the best players stay in college for four years. That does two things. The one that's obvious is it means that a lot of players never graduate. But beyond that it means a lot of players never develop their game at the college level because they're going straight into the pros, and in effect, having to go through on-the-job training as professionals.

RAY SUAREZ: One director of a large college program said a lot more young men are going to think they are ready for the NFL than really are going to be ready. What do you think?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: I think that's a very good point. That's the danger, and that's what has happened in basketball. You know, you have players like Kevin Garnett and Kobe Bryant who go into the NBA straight from high school and are huge successes and become very wealthy young men. But for every one of those there are young men who come straight out of high school or leave college early who are abject failures who can't go back to college at that point and who end up kind of wandering around the world looking for a place to play. I know a lot of football experts are saying today, "Well, the kids will know that they're not ready to play in the pros and they'll stay in college for three or four years." I don't think that's going to be true. I think there are going to be a lot of cases where youngsters, particularly quarterbacks, running backs, wide receivers, defensive backs, those who don't play the power positions, who play the speed positions, are going to think they are ready and going to be told that they are ready by agents who are eager to prey on them. And that's going to be, I believe, long term a huge problem for football if this ruling is not overturned.

RAY SUAREZ: Some of the football people who've commented after the decision said that all it will take is a couple of really high profile washouts, people who either hurt or never develop their promise to cool some kids' jets and keep them in college. Does that sound right to you?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: It may cool some kids jets, ray, but not all kids jets. I mean, again, the N.B.A. has had its share of washouts. Back in the '70s the first two guys to turn pro were Moses Malone, who became a huge star, and Bill Willaby, who never became anything as a professional. And yet that didn't stop the gradual increase to players turning pro younger and younger to the point where a year ago, Lebron James actually considered challenging the NBA rule that says you can't go in the draft while in high school, and thought about turning pro while he was still in high school. That may be the next step in these sports.

RAY SUAREZ: John, some current players have said, "well, if these young fellas want to take a shot at the money, that should be their right to do so."

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Well, I think legally speaking, based on what the judge said about anti-trust, that's got to be true. The NFL's defense of the rule has always been that it was agreed to in the collective bargaining agreement. But the case that Clarett's lawyers made is Maurice Clarett's not a part of the player's union and therefore isn't represented by the players union. So legally speaking, I think the players are 100 percent right that Maurice Clarett should have the opportunity to play professional football. The question is, in a football sense, is this what's right for future football players? I would say the answer to that is no. But the courts have spoken, and as with basketball and hockey, football will have to abide, for the moment, by what the courts have said.

RAY SUAREZ: And what of Maurice Clarett himself? What are his chances?

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Well, having missed a year of football, that certainly doesn't help him. And most of these so-called experts are projecting him to be a second round draft pick -- again, because he is injury prone, because he did miss a season, and he is learning to play the position. I think that regardless of what round he goes in-- whether it's late first, second, third-- he will get a good look from some team and will have a chance to be a good, perhaps great, college football player-- excuse me, professional football player-- but we know if this ruling is upheld, he will be remembered more for what happened in court than whatever happens to him on a football field.

RAY SUAREZ: John Feinstein, thanks a lot.

JOHN FEINSTEIN: Thank you, Ray.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of the day. President Bush named a bipartisan commission to investigate the pre-war intelligence on Iraq's weapons. The Labor Department reported unemployment was 5.6 percent last month, the lowest in two years. And a bomb blast killed at least 39 people on a Moscow subway train. A reminder, that "Washington Week" can be seen on most PBS stations later this evening. We'll see you online, and again here Monday evening, when we'll have the first of two reports by Elizabeth Farnsworth on the Israeli security barrier. Have a nice weekend. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.