The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Intro

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. In the headlines this Monday, President Reagan said the bump on his nose was a minor form of skin cancer. Investigators continued the search for why the Delta Airlines plane crashed in Texas. The Justice Department raided marijuana facilities nationwide, and the baseball strike is still on for midnight. Robert MacNeil is away tonight; Judy Woodruff is in New York. Judy?

JUDY WOODRUFF: After a rundown of the day's news, we have two focus segments, a newsmaker interview and a profile on the NewsHour tonight. First, a skin cancer specialist gives us some background on the President's latest ailment. Then Attorney General Edwin Meese joins us to describe today's nationwide marijuana crackdown. Next, a closeup look at the efforts to find out what caused that airplane crash near Dallas on Friday. And, finally, a profile of the baseball great they call "Charlie Hustle." News Summary

LEHRER: The bump removed from President Reagan's nose last week was cancerous. The word came today from Mr. Reagan himself. He called it a pimple and said it turned out to be a basal-cell carcinoma, a minor form of skin cancer. Mr. Reagan explained it this way to a group of five reporters this afternoon at the White House.

Pres. RONALD REAGAN: There can be fluctuation. It is true, I had -- well, I guess for want of a better word, a pimple on my nose, and the doctors have a word, pampule, that sounds nicer than the first one. But I violated all the rules; I picked at it and I squoze [sic] it and so forth, and messed myself up a little bit. But it seemed to be getting a little better when I went into the hospital and then, after the operation, when they put that tube in through my nose and down to my innards, they taped on the side of my nose quite heavily to hold that in place. I happen to have an allergy to adhesive tape. I can wear a bandaid maybe overnight or something, but not that kind. And when finally they took it off and removed the tube, why, I was quite swollen and inflamed all around here, and then my little friend that I had played with began to come back. When I went over to the doctor for my weekly allergy shot I called attention to this matter and it was snipped off. But I did not know until this weekend at Camp David I was informed that it had been examined and it was indeed a basal-cell carcinoma, which is the most common and the least dangerous kind. They come from exposure to the sun. Nancy had one removed above her upper lip some time ago. They're very commonplace. They do not betoken in any way that you are cancer-prone. It is a little heartbreaking for me to find out, though, because all my life I've lived with a coat of tan, dating back to my lifeguard days. That's why I didn't have to wear makeup when I was in movies. But now I'm told that I must not expose myself to the sun anymore.

LEHRER: We'll have a further explanation of basal-cell and other forms of skin cancer later. Mr. Reagan also said in today's session he remained committed to his policy of constructive engagement in South Africa and said he welcomed the recently passed congressional budget compromise, even if it did not have all he wanted. We will show a longer portion of what the President said later in the program. Judy?

WOODRUFF: The largest effort ever to wipe out marijuana in this country got underway today with a series of raids across the country carried out by federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. Some 2,200 officials were involved in the massive drug sweep led by the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration, and Attorney General Edwin Meese, who traveled to a small town in Arkansas where one of the raids was being carried out. At a news conference, Meese outlined the purpose of the raids.

EDWIN MEESE, Attorney General: The campaign will continue until every available known plot of marijuana has been eradicated. The marijuana has been increasingly cultivated in the United States because of the pressure that we have put on the interdiction of marijuana coming from other countries. In the past, a much greater amount of marijuana was coming from foreign nations. Because of the interdiction efforts, there has been an increased activity within the United States. This effort is to eradicate the production of marijuana within this country, and we feel that the eradication program will be a very successful way of increasing the cost to the drug traffickers and reducing their opportunities to produce marijuana crops within this country.

WOODRUFF: Attorney General Meese will join us later for a newsmaker interview. Jim?

LEHRER: The evidence continued to point today to wind shear as the cause of the airliner crash at the Dallas-Fort Worth airport, although no final conclusions can yet be drawn. One hundred and thirty-three persons were killed in the Friday night crash, which occurred as the Delta Airlines jumbo jet was landing in the middle of a thunderstorm. Accident investigators said a flight controller had told the pilot of the plane to abort the landing, but by then the plane may have already hit the ground at least once. Authorities have ruled out the possibility of the plane's being struck by lightning, and a Delta official said he was now sure it was wind shear, a weather condition that has been blamed for 16 airliner accidents in the last 20 years. We will look at wind shear and the Delta crash in a focus segment later in the program.

WOODRUFF: The first of four men accused of being part of a family spy ring that sold naval secrets to the Russians went on trial today in Norfolk, Virginia. Prosecutors said that Arthur Walker was paid $12,000 for information they claim could have helped the Kremlin determine the readiness of all the U.S. Navy ships. Walker is charged with seven counts of espionage for his role in passing documents from his employer, a defense contractor, to his brother, John Walker, who is an alleged Soviet agent.

LEHRER: Another 14 persons were arrested in South Africa today under state of emergency powers. The government said the latest arrests brought the total to 1,426 since the emergency was declared in 36 towns and cities 16 days ago. The head of the union representing 230,000 black miners said yesterday his members will boycott all white businesses if the emergency is not lifted this week. And in Natal Province, 16 anti-apartheid activists went on trial for treason. Here is a report from James Robbins of the BBC.

JAMES ROBBINS, (BBC) [voice-over]: The 16 accused of treason arrived at the Natal Supreme Court in groups. They are not in custody, but stringent bail conditions amounting to limited house arrest have largely prevented their anti-apartheid campaigning. A small crowd of sympathizers waited opposite the court, and there was no attempt at a demonstration. This is one of the most important political trials held in South Africa, and has assumed greater significance after the murder four days ago of one of the defense lawyers, Mrs. Victoria Mxenge. And, this afternoon, sporadic violence in three black townships of Durban, including the area where Mrs. Mxenge was murdered. Buses were stoned by students and school children, apparently attempting to organize a school boycott in protest of her killing. The police say no one was hurt, but these were the most serious disturbances in the city in recent months.

WOODRUFF: In South Lebanon, word that three Lebanese guerrillas and two Israeli soldiers were killed overnight in the biggest clash there since Israel's official withdrawal last June. The two soldiers were the first Israelis to die there since the pullout. Israeli spokesmen said the gun battle took place about three miles from the Israeli border.

LEHRER: Fannie Mae tightened some rules on home mortgages today that will make it more difficult for some homebuyers to get mortgages. Fannie Mae is the acronym for the Federal National Mortgage Association, the country's largest supplier of mortgage credit. Fannie Mae Chairman David Maxwell said homebuyers wishing to put up less than a 10 down payment will be the ones most affected. The changes tighten the ratio a buyer's gross monthly income must be to the housing cost.

WOODRUFF: The latest word on the baseball strike is that it looks like it's still on at midnight tonight. Chief negotiators for both sides met for about an hour and a half today, but afterwords the spokesman for the American League said, "It did not look good." The head of the players union gave an equally pessimistic assessment.

And finally, on that special congressional race in East Texas over the weekend, the one we reported to you on last Friday. The Democrat, Jim Chapman, won, 51 to 49 for the Republican, Edd Hargett. National Republican Party leaders had predicted victory, claiming the contest would prove massive party-switching to the GOP in the Deep South. They spent a million dollars and ran saturation TV ads featuring President Reagan. Today the losing Republican candidate said it was a victory just to come so close, and presidential spokesman Larry Speakes said the White House did not view it as a setback for Mr. Reagan. Reagan's Health

WOODRUFF: Our first focus section looks at President Reagan's revelation today that the small growth he had removed from his nose last week was cancerous. The President was quite casual today when he broke the news. He was quick to point out that the condition was both mild and extremely common and no cause for alarm. For more about this kind of cancer and what it's likely to mean for the President's health, we have Dr. Bijan Safai, who is chief of dermatology at the Memorial Sloane-Kettering Cancer Center here in New York, and a professor of medicine at Cornell University.

Dr. Safai, first of all, just how serious is this?

Dr. BIJAN SAFAI: Basal-cell carcinomas are not usually serious skin cancers. They can be easily detected and cured using various techniques.

WOODRUFF: How common is it? The President indicated it was very common. Was he being overly optimistic?

Dr. SAFAI: No, he's correct. He's very correct. There are approximately 400,000 new cases of basal-cell carcinoma recognized in the United States per year.

WOODRUFF: How -- go ahead, I'm sorry.

Dr. SAFAI: It is the most common cancer in Caucasian.

WOODRUFF: How did the President know, or how would anyone know, unless they had it examined? Does it just look like any other --

Dr. SAFAI: Normally basal-cell appears as a raised skin growth which stays clear skin color for many months or years. And it becomes ulcerated, either due to irritation like in the case of the President, which was a tape, or if the tumor grows to a bigger size. So you see an ulcerated wound, a non-healing wound.

WOODRUFF: The President said he was told that it was caused by exposure to the sun. He has spent so much time in the sun over the years.

Dr. SAFAI: Yes. Basal-cell carcinoma is the commonest skin cancer which is due to the exposure to the sun and the effect of sun is cumulative; it's not one -- one-time exposure. Fifteen to 20 years' time exposure to sun will cause a skin cancer in individuals when they have fairer skin.

WOODRUFF: Is that the only cause?

Dr. SAFAI: There are some chemicals that can cause skin cancer, including basal-cell carcinoma. The most common cause of basal-cell in the world is sun.

WOODRUFF: But, again, this is the least dangerous form of skin cancer, is that correct?

Dr. SAFAI: Although this is skin cancer, it doesn't metastasize so it can be easily removed --

WOODRUFF: It doesn't spread.

Dr. SAFAI: It doesn't spread.

WOODRUFF: Is there any connection at all -- the President indicated there was not, but is there any connection at all to the other form, the colon cancer, that was discovered in the President?

Dr. SAFAI: No, there is no connection between basal-cell carcinoma and other internal cancers. And when one has a skin cancer it doesn't mean the person is going to get internal cancer, so the other way around is not also correct.

WOODRUFF: What is the treatment? What does the President now have to do?

Dr. SAFAI: There are at least four or five different ways of basal-cell carcinoma, and these include cutting it out and using sutures to stitch it, scraping and cauterizing the base, using radiation and using cryosurgery. So many different ways, and these are all effective and they give very high cure rates. And I believe that it's very simple to do it because the lesions are small and visible, and it's easy to take care of them.

WOODRUFF: Why is it called cancer if it doesn't spread? I mean, most people think of cancer as cells that grow.

Dr. SAFAI: If you do not remove it on time it can slowly invade to the subcutaneous tissue, to the fat, to the muscle, to the bone, and in a very, very rare, rare occasion it can spread. So it does behave not like a regular benign growth, like a wart, which is a benign growth.

WOODRUFF: But it's much more slow.

Dr. SAFAI: Much slower, yes.

WOODRUFF: What advice do you give -- you're a specialist. What advice do you give to people who may be concerned that they've been out in the sun for many years and they want to be on guard for something like this?

Dr. SAFAI: As I have mentioned before, the effect of sun for developing a skin cancer is cumulative, so you can accumulate as much sun exposure needed in 10 years or do it in 30 years. So the best is to expose your skin to as less much sun as possible, go out when the sun is not as strong like middle of day, before 10:00 o'clock and after 3:00, use sun screen to protect your skin from the ultraviolet light which destroys the skin and produces cancer, and especially if you live in a sunny climate, on the equator or down in the South, it is better to be more careful. Another point that one can make is that there are individuals who are cancer prone, skin cancer prone. These are individuals that have light color skin, light color of eyes, blue eyes, green eyes, and so they are at higher risk because they don't have the pigment, the color protection for the sun.

WOODRUFF: But it's not only people with the fair skin --

Dr. SAFAI: No, it's not. Even darker skin can get skin cancer.

WOODRUFF: But in general your advice is to people, if you're out in the sun do so in moderation.

Dr. SAFAI: Moderate exposure, use of sun screen, avoiding the sun in the middle of the day.

WOODRUFF: Dr. Safai, we thank you for being with us.

Dr. SAFAI: Thank you. It's a pleasure.

WOODRUFF: Jim?

LEHRER: President Reagan was asked about more than his health today. There were questions about the budget, South Africa and his November meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, among other things. Here is a portion of those other things.

Pres. REAGAN: 1985 is shaping up as a year of progress. The economy is in good health, America at peace and helping to push forward the frontiers of freedom. At Geneva we're in the best position in more than a generation to achieve real reductions of nuclear weapons. All we need is a serious approach by the Soviets. I look forward to my meeting with General Secretary Gorbachev in Geneva this November.

REPORTER: Do you think real deficit reduction is possible without getting into the entitlement area, which you have put off the table with the Speaker?

Pres. REAGAN: Well, now, let me point something out about the entitlement area. One of the reasons -- I didn't put it off. We had a meeting out here on the patio outside the office one day with the leadership of both houses and both parties. And at that meeting the Democrat leadership made it plain that as far as they were concerned Social Security was off the table, non-negotiable. But let me point out something else about Social Security. Social Security as a part of the deficit is nothing but a bookkeeping gimmick. Social Security runs a surplus. By incorporating it in the budget, you then add to the budget the outgo and the income. But with that surplus this apparently reduces the size of the deficit. But the Social Security payroll tax goes into a trust fund and cannot be used for anything else. Not one penny of it can be used to reduce the deficit in the overall management of government. To continue to say that this could somehow reduce the deficit by reducing Social Security benefits is a snare and a delusion. And that's why I believe that we shouldn't even wait 'til 1992, when it is slated to be taken out of the budget and made a separate program. It originally was, and it was during the Johnson years that Social Security was incorporated into the budget for the very purpose of making the deficit then looksmaller than it was.

REPORTER: Mr. President, a question about South Africa.

Pres. REAGAN: All right.

REPORTER: Do you intend to continue your policy of constructive engagement, or do you think the time is quite near when you might have to take some action such as sanctions?

Pres. REAGAN: I believe the results that we've had in this constructive engagement with South Africa justifies our continuing on that score. Obviously, and as we've made very plain, we all feel that apartheid is repugnant. This is the actual participation on a more equitable basis of the black citizens of South Africa. But if you look at the gains that have been made so far by our so-called constructive engagement, the increase in complete bi-racial education; the fact that American businesses there have, over the last several years, contributed more than $100 million to black education and housing; the fact that the ban on mixed marriages no longer exists; that some, I think, 40-odd business districts have been opened to black-owned businesses; labor union participation by blacks has come into being. And there's been a great desegregation of hotels and restaurants and parks and sport activities and sports centers and so forth.

REPORTER: So would it be fair to say that there'll be no change in U.S. policy, nothing to get tougher?

Pres. REAGAN: Well, it depends on what you mean by change. If you mean by turning to the thing of sanctions and so forth, no. But there can be fluctuations in your conversation and your relationship with another government.

WOODRUFF: That was an excerpt from the President's news conference today. Still to come on the NewsHour, an interview with Attorney General Edwin Meese, a closeup look at the investigation into that fatal airline crash near Dallas, and a profile of a baseball great they call "Charlie Hustle." Cracking Down

WOODRUFF: Our next focus section zeros in on today's massive marijuana raids across the country, and Attorney General Edwin Meese joins us for an interview, but first a background look at the fight against the drug which has come into such widespread use in this country.

[voice-over] The Justice Department is calling today's attack on marijuana fields across the country the largest in the nation's history. The three-day effort, which comes at the beginning of this year's harvest, reportedly will involve more than 2,200 federal, state and local officials. This year the administration will spend $2.9 million trying to eradicate the marijuana crop. That's a drop from $3.4 million last year. Federal and state law enforcement agencies have been working to destroy marijuana fields since the late '70s when they started targeting fields in just two states, Hawaii and California. In 1982, 2.5 million cannabis- or marijuana-producing plants were destroyed. in 1983, the number rose to use under four million. In 1983 the number rose to just under four million and then jumped to 13 million plants in 1984. Included in that figure are some nine million low-potency plants which were not cultivated and grow wild in many states.

Today's all-out effort was designed to send a signal to other marijuana-producing countries that the United States was serious about its efforts to eradicate marijuana. But critics like Kevin Zeese, director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, says the raids are more style than substance.

KEVIN ZEESE, National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws: This is nothing new. This has been tried before. This is a marketing ploy by the government to try to makepeople believe that the war on marijuana is being fought and being fought effectively when in reality it's been lost.

WOODRUFF [voice-over]: The timing of today's crackdown was one of Washington's worst-kept secrets. Reports about the raids have been appearing since Wednesday, when news of the planned raids was leaked to the Associated Press. No one knows how many growers may have been alerted by the advance reports. Last year, law enforcement agents arrested more than 4,900 individuals. They could be sentenced to 15 years in jail, fined $500,000 and forced to forfeit their land. But Kevin Zeese says the penalty is usually a lot less severe.

Mr. ZEESE: Most of those cases are being plea-bargained out to a pretty minor offense. Some people are spending time in jail but not very many. Some people's property got forfeited, but even that's not very common.

WOODRUFF [voice-over]: Zeese says that the eradication effort has merely encouraged growers to come up with new methods to grow marijuana undetected.

Mr. ZEESE: Last year between 15 and 25 percent of the marijuana grown in the United States was grown indoors under grow-lights. That makes law enforcement's job impossible. People can grow enough marijuana for themselves in their closet, and what is law enforcement going to do about that? The other thing is they've grown smaller plots. Rather than growing a plot of 100 plants, they'll grow six plots of 15 or 20 plants and expect to lose one or two of those plots, but get four or five of them.

LEHRER: Attorney General Meese is with us now for a newsmaker interview on today's marijuana raids. First, Mr. Attorney General, what was accomplished today?

EDWIN MEESE: Well, today was the kickoff of a nationwide program that involves all 50 states to begin the process in the growing season of marijuana to eradicate the plants. And I think it was a very successful start. We've had a few reports from around the country; we'll get more in the course of the next 24 hours. It looks like the enthusiasm and the energetic activities of law enforcement agents throughout the country is going to be successful.

LEHRER: Several states, I noticed in the roundup I read awhile ago, for instance Delaware, said forget it, they weren't interested in participating. There were several states said they didn't do anything special today at all. The state of Washington, a whole list of them.

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, a whole lot of them have already started, of course, and are in the process of it. Today was a day in which we, in effect, made sure that something was going on in all of the states and, so far as I know, all the states are participating in one way or another.

LEHRER: But what was actually accomplished?

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, I think several things were accomplished. First of all, it was the actual law enforcement activity of eradicating the plants.

LEHRER: Well, that's what I mean. I mean, how much was destroyed?

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, that we don't know. We'll only know when the reports come in. But secondly I think a very important part of today's activity was drawing public attention. One of the things that was accomplished, for example, in Arkansas, where I was, was that citizens were phoning in to the state police reporting plots of marijuana that had not previously been discovered, because the citizens when they heard about what was going on wanted to contribute their efforts as well.

LEHRER: What do you say to Mr. Zeese's point that all this was was a marketing ploy, that you want everybody in the country to believe there is a big war going on, and yet nothing's happening.

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, I think poor Mr. Zeese and his organization is really hurting right now. For one thing, they know that marijuana use in this country is tending to go down, particularly among young people. Secondly, they know that we are making record seizures of marijuana and, thirdly, they know that it's becoming more and more costly for the major drug traffickers to grow and cultivate marijuana in this country because of efforts like today. And so they're trying to minimize the effect but, I'm afraid, to no avail.

LEHRER: How much of the marijuana that's consumed in the United States now is actually grown here in the United States?

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, I don't think it's possible to give you a direct answer to that because unfortunately these people don't file crop reports and the people who use marijuana don't file consumer reports. But I think you can say that an increasing amount of the marijuana use in this country has come in the last few years from domestically produced marijuana because of the success of our interdiction campaign against the marijuana that used to come from other countries. At one time virtually all the marijuana came from other countries such as Colombia and other South American countries.

LEHRER: Is it a big, organized effort? Is it organized crime involved in this, or are these just a group of entrepreneur individuals doing all this growing?

Att. Gen. MEESE: I think it's a combination of both. I think you have some organized activity. The lengths to which the people are going to, say, set up booby traps and that sort of thing, and some of the organized crime rings that have been cracked show that there is some organization. At the same time, there are also perhaps individuals, small groups, or even individual entrepreneurs.

LEHRER: What about the point that Zeese also made that this is just going to force people to come up with new ways of doing it, doing it inside with lights and all that sort of thing?

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, don't forget. Every time you force people to do that it means you've made it a lot harder for them, it's much more costly for them, it's much less productive for them, and therefore you'e making it harder for these traffickers to have enough marijuana to try to entice other people into the business of using it.

LEHRER: Why was this leaked in advance?

Att. Gen. MEESE: I don't know. When you have that many people working on something, when you have 50 states involved, 300 law enforcement agencies, 2,200 law enforcement officers, it's bound to -- purely innocently somewhere it might have gotten out, and you always have reporters trying to find information.

LEHRER: Did it hinder things today?

Att. Gen. MEESE: I don't think so. I know it caused some apprehension among some law enforcement officers about their possible safety or about the fact that some of the marijuana growers might have tried to harvest their crop earlier. But one of the things that happened was as soon as the word got out publicly the date for starting the effort was accelerated by many police departments and sheriffs' departments and the DEA, and so I think as a result we just had the drive get off to an earlier start.

LEHRER: As Judy reported, 4,900 people were arrested last year for marijuana offenses like involving, growing of marijuana. Are those people going to be prosecuted and sent to jail?

Att. Gen. MEESE: They are indeed. As a matter of fact, this year we've already gotten reports from several sections of the country showing that, contrary to what was stated earlier by the NORML people, the so-called NORML organization, which is in favor of marijuana use, these people are starting now to get longer sentences. A judge, for example, in California recently meted out sentences of two, three and five years in prison to people who wree involved in the growing of marijuana.

LEHRER: What do you say to other critics who suggest that if the federal government is really interested in decreasing the use of marijuana, then it ought to put its money in education to the young people who are actually smoking this stuff?

Att. Gen. MEESE: We are doing this. As a matter of fact, I would say that to a greater extent law enforcement agencies throughout the country, including the Drug Enforcement Administration, are looking at a two-pronged approach -- enforcement, including the eradication like today, and education and prevention and concentrating on the health aspects. Not long ago Jack Long, the administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, did a nationwide movie that was circulated among high school athletic coaches. And a few weeks ago I attended the National Association of High School Athletic Coaches to use them as a vehicle to get the word across.

LEHRER: What is the word that you're trying to get across?

Att. Gen. MEESE: The word is that taking drugs of any sort is dumb, and that using marijuana has tremendous serious health effects. As a matter of fact, the more research that is done, the more serious a danger marijuana is shown to be. And that the smart kids in high school are turning away from marijuana and other narcotics and are exerting positive peer pressures among their fellow students not to use marijuana.

LEHRER: Why then, Mr. Attorney General, have the funds for both the eradication effort, as Judy reported, and the education effort been cut this year over last year?

Att. Gen. MEESE: Well, I don't know about the funds for the education effort. We have more activity on education than ever before on a government-wide basis. And as far as the eradication effort, this is a bookkeeping problem. Last year there just happened to be a half a million dollars included in this fund for some activities in California which will be included instead in the Forest Service funds. So actually, if the supplemental appropriation that we've asked for goes through, we'll actually have more funds this year than we had last year.

LEHRER: So this is a serious effort?

Att. Gen. MEESE: It is a serious effort, it will continue to be a serious effort. We think that the most important thing we can do to contribute to the health of Americans today, particularly to young people, is to get across the message that using marijuana is injurious to their health and has no positive benefits. It's all negative. At the same time we think that a strong enforcement effort to decrease the amount of marijuana being grown in this country is absolutely necessary both for the benefit of our own citizens and also to show our cooperation with foreign governments that we're asking to do the same.

LEHRER: Attorney General Meese, thank you very much for being with us.

Att. Gen. MEESE: Thank you. Looking for Reasons

WOODRUFF: As we reported earlier, federal investigators continued today to sift through the wreckage of the Delta airlines jumbo jet which crashed at the Dallas-Fort Worth airport last Friday, killing 133 people. While it's still not known exactly what caused the crash, investigators said yesterday they're exploring the role of wind shear, a severe downdraft which can force low-flying aircraft into the ground. That possibility was given additional credence with reports that an alarm system warning pilots of wind shear went off minutes after the Delta flight crashed. Many experts say wind shear is the most serious safety hazard confronting the airline industry today. It is blamed for 28 crashes since 1964, accounting for almost 500 deaths and hundreds of injuries. Correspondent Kwame Holman has prepared this report on the perils of wind shear.

KWAME HOLMAN [voice-over]: In the past when planes crashed during bad weather, investigators could only guess as to the specific cause. Then, two years ago, increasingly sophisticated wind-detection technology pointed to the culprit in many air crashes, a phenomenon called wind shear. Dr. Robert Serafin is an expert on wind shear.

Dr. ROBERT SERAFIN, atmospheric researcher: There is a generic term used by meteorologists to indicate a change in wind speed or direction with distance. For example, if you have an east wind at one end of a runway and a west wind at the other end of a runway, you have wind shear.

HOLMAN [voice-over]: Recently, a new and especially dangerous kind of wind shear has been discovered.

Mr. SERAFIN: The microburst is a specific kind of wind shear associated with, generally, summertime thunderstorms.

HOLMAN: What happens when this microburst forms?

Mr. SERAFIN: Generally we have precipitation falling out of a cloud. Here in Denver oftentimes that precipitation never reaches the ground. The rain never gets to the ground. It evaporates. The evaporative cooling causes the air to come down rapidly. The air gets heavier than the surrounding air. So it simply falls. The pilot would always experience first a head wind, then possibly a downdraft, then a tail wind.

HOLMAN [voice-over]: The knowledge of these sudden violent winds has led most major airports to install the so-called low-level wind shear detection system. Denver's Stapleton Airport uses the most sophisticated version of this technology. Walt Flood of the Federal Aviation Administration in Denver explains how it works.

WALT FLOOD, Federal Aviation Administration: Actually our system is comprised of towers just like this one. There's 11 of them around the airport, and there's also some at the center field location, which is right in the middle of the airport. And the way the system works is, if it detects a difference in the wind at one of these boundary locations it will generate an alarm. We would then issue to the aircraft the center field wind and also the boundary wind is alarming.

HOLMAN [voice-over]: That alarm is sounded here in the control tower. An air traffic controller then radios the wind shear alert to pilots.

Mr. FLOOD: It's up to the pilot to make a decision as to whether or not that's going to affect his particular operation. He may elect to delay his departure somewhat if one of those is detected, or he may elect not to complete a landing if he thinks it's severe enough.

HOLMAN [voice-over]: But even this most widely used wind shear technology has flaws and may be inadequate to detect microbursts, and so a new generation of wind shear research is being conducted.

Dr. SERAFIN: Low-level wind shear alert system, which is a surface-based anemometer system, or wind-measuring system, was not designed for microburst detection. It was always late in forecasting the microburst at the surface, usually two to four minutes late.

HOLMAN: The most recent in-depth research on airport wind shear took place here at this National Center for Atmospheric Research facility outside Denver, where two months last summer scientists using new Doppler radar technology studied wind shear at Denver's Stapleton airport. The results, they say, strongly suggest that airport wind shear detection would be significantly improved if Doppler radar technology were used in addition to current detection systems.

Dr. SERAFIN: Our Doppler radar is one which can measure not only the intensity of the precipitation but also the motion of the particles, whatever it is that happens to be scattering the energy. So they're very sensitive. They measure the motion, and it's that motion measurement that is necessary in order to measure the strength of the wind shear.

HOLMAN [voice-over]: Researchers for the National Center for Atmospheric Research have urged the FAA to adopt the new Doppler radar technology, but Dr. Serafin says the Doppler technology is expensive and it could be some time before even major airports get it.

WOODRUFF: For more on the dangers of wind shear and what's being done to cope with the problem, we talk with two top safety experts. Donald Engen heads the Federal Aviation Administration, the federal agency which regulates the nation's airlines. And John McCarthy is the director of wind shear research for the National Center for Atmospheric Research based in Boulder, Colorado.

Mr. McCarthy, let me begin with you. There was a Delta Airline official who was quoted today as saying that he believed wind shear was definitely the cause of the crash. What do you think, based on what you know?

JOHN McCARTHY: Well, based on what I know -- which is relatively little compared to the investigation is being conducted by the NTSB -- the conditions were reminiscent of a wind shear situation. I cannot say that it was a wind shear accident, although there are indications that it's the kind of situation where I would expect microburst wind shear to have been present, and we'll simply have to wait for the investigation to be completed to confirm that kind of an indication.

WOODRUFF: Mr. Engen, what about the information you have at this point?

DONALD ENGEN: I'd have to agree with Dr. McCarthy in that Member Burstly of the NTSB recently said you don't want to close out any options while you're investigating an accident, and it would be not proper to guess what caused it right now. But I do think that you can focus on wind shear as one of the contributing factors.

WOODRUFF: Well, looking at wind shear at this point, Mr. Engen, what is the government doing at this point to improve the detection of wind shear?

Mr. ENGEN: We've had underway for some time now a number of programs. Two years ago we doubled the number of low-level wind shear alert systems that were going into the United States when Secretary Dole authorized the purchase of 51 additional systems. We have spent almost $100 million in research and development on weather-related radars and associated systems since 1982. And these are coming to fruition. We are going into the next generation weather radar now, which will cover the United States, and Dr. McCarthy can talk about the terminal Doppler here. But we hope that terminal Doppler radar would grow out of that next -- or the new radar that we're developing now.

WOODRUFF: Well, Mr. McCarthy, we just heard in the report that the experts are not satisfied that the low-level detection system that is currently in effect at many airports is adequate. Do you agree with that?

Dr. McCARTHY: Yes, I do. I think that the system was designed for wind events which are not microbursts, which are the most serious and lethal hazard. I think the system can be improved. I think we can increase the number of sensors and we need to do serious work on how that information is conveyed to controllers and pilots. It's quite less than adequate now. So we must improve that system and I think because of the expense of Doppler radar we have to recognize that there'll be many airports in the United States that we can't afford to put Doppler radar in. So that system is less than adequate now and needs improvement, but not to ignore the very importance of Doppler radar.

WOODRUFF: What do you think should be done? You're saying Doppler is too expensive. I mean, just how significant a problem are we talking about, and how quickly do you think we need to move to do something about it?

Dr. McCARTHY: Well, I think that Doppler radar systems at airports -- I really can't give you an exact number, but it's in the number, like, two to three million dollars a set, and that's really expensive. We can't put thousands of Dopplers at the airports, for example, where all commercial flights are occurring. But we can pick the Dallases, the Denvers, Chicago and the major hubs where weather has a major impact. And what Bob Serafin didn't mention in the piece before is that it's not only looking at wind shear, it's looking at weather hazards in the terminal area. It could be a thunderstorm, it could be a wind shift, so that Doppler radar at major airports gives you an enormous capability that's not just safety but efficiency of traffic movement, and I think that we showed that last summer at Denver in our program there.

WOODRUFF: So you're saying Doppler is the most effective device that we know of at this point?

Dr. McCARTHY: Absolutely.

WOODRUFF: Mr. Engen, I read todaythat the Federal Aviation Administration cut off money for the development of the Doppler system. Is that correct?

Mr. ENGEN: No, that's not correct, really. We are moving ahead with the next generation of radar, and from this will come our terminal Doppler system, we hope. We are betting that we will develop the 139 sites in the United States, which will cover the entire United States, and from that we will develop the terminal Doppler. Dr. McCarthy mentioned the cooperative effort that we had in Denver last year. That was a very fine effort and right now, today, this summer, we're conducting experiments at Memphis as well, and working with terminal Doppler radar.

WOODRUFF: But you're saying that the administration did not cut back funds for the Doppler system?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, the administration did not cut. We're still coming on line with the next generation of radar. The administration has not funded the terminal Doppler system yet, but we hope to fund that when we develop the next generation of radar.

WOODRUFF: Well, how much time are we talking about, Mr. Engen, and how serious a problem do you think this is?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, it's a very serious problem, and we want to be sure to support everything that Dr. McCarthy says, because I believe as he does that we need to provide the best systems for those who fly in the United States, and we % will. I think it's important to realize that it takes a little time to do this. We have two companies bidding right now, working on the next generation of radar. And those contracts will be due in this next year, and in about 1987 I think we will probably have pretty well zeroed in on the type of radar that we're going to use. Now, I realize that's hard to take in 1985, but I don't want you to believe that it all turns just on Doppler alone. Doppler is a wonderful adjunct, and we need it, but it is indeed safe out there today.

WOODRUFF: What else is there, other than Doppler?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, we have the low-level wind shear alert system right now --

WOODRUFF: But we've just heard the report that that's not adequate, and Dr. McCarthy said he agreed that it was not adequate.

Mr. ENGEN: Well, in the best of all worlds we want to have the best we can possibly get, which is indeed Doppler radar. And we will move that direction, but you know, as Dr. McCarthy says, we can't afford, at about $3.4 million per copy, to put these at every airport in the United States. We will put them where, as he says, we can enhance the traffic flow. That will be very important. And enhance the safety of those that fly to those important airports.

WOODRUFF: Dr. McCarthy, what should be done? I mean, we had a pilot -- there was a pilot quoted in USA Today as saying that if he had been trapped or were ever trapped by wind shear that he'd be helpless, there'd be nothing he could do to control the plane. Is that how serious a situation we're talking about?

Dr. McCARTHY: It's a very serious situation. Let me elaborate on that slightly. Microbursts, which we think is the worst form of wind shear, which was described a little bit earlier, this downdraft and outflow, probably something like 75 or 60 percent of microbursts probably can be flown successfully and it raises an important issue with respect to the pilot's comment. One of the most important things that we are working on now, and Mr. Engen and I and a number of other people are working very hard on trying to improve pilot awareness and developing new training scenarios that, should you be unable to avoid a wind shear, there are techniques that can be applied that will in many cases save an airplane. So a pilot is not absolutely helpless in one of these things. The thing that's important to recognize is that, where training and improved training techniques can help in many cases, there are wind shears that no airplane can fly through, and those are the ones that we have to go after with Doppler.

WOODRUFF: But is the point we're getting at is that there are some severe thunderstorms out there that pilots, any type pilot, shouldn't be flying into at all, and now, as I understand it, it's primarily the pilot's decision as to whether he goes into that sort of weather. Is that correct?

Dr. McCARTHY: It's called prudent judgment, and there are situations that no pilot wants to be in. A severe thunderstorm is one of them, and -- but another point is that there are many of these wind shears that occur in much more benign clouds that conventional judgment may not apply, so we have to look at the whole thing.

WOODRUFF: Mr. Engen, I want to ask you the same question. Is it -- do you feel comfortable now with the situation that it's pilot's decision? I mean, does there come a point when the government or when some regulatory agency should set down a set of rules that say when the weather's this bad we don't want you flying into it?

Mr. ENGEN: I do indeed feel comfortable because it must rest with the pilot's judgment. And Dr. McCarthy mentioned training, and we are going about our training role and we are doing everything we can to instill within all those who fly an awareness of wind shear. I've flown with United Airlines in their simulator. I've also visited other airlines and seen their training simulators, and they are indeed doing some marvelous things with training simulation. I've been flying in this system now for 43 years, and I've always gone by the rule that if the sky looks too black, I think I'd go around it or maybe circle a little bit and come back again.

WOODRUFF: But is that -- is that going to be the policy of most pilots in a situation like this?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, the only reason I said that, really, was to say that, you know, it is the pilot's option, and we train the pilots to the nth degree. And I feel very confident in the training that our airlines are giving their pilots.

WOODRUFF: I know the sense is here that we seem to be focusing on the few tragic incidents when most of the airline experiences have been safe ones. But still it seems to me the question comes back to, if there is a bad weather situation, a serious, violent thunderstorm, why isn't there a system in place that says, no, nobody's going to fly into this?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, that system is provided to provide the pilot with the information that he needs. The pilot is the one who has the authority. The pilot has the responsibility. We've tailored our entire air space system concept this way, and we must rely upon that pilot's judgment, and he is the one who should know.

WOODRUFF: Even when there is not adequate radar and whatever?

Mr. ENGEN: Well, he should be provided adequate warning, and that's what we're working towards. We really are, through the low-level wind shear alert system and the development of Doppler radar.

WOODRUFF: Dr. McCarthy, what is your advice to Americans, to airline passengers who are nervous, who are worried about flying under any circumstances, but flying especially in bad weather conditions?

Dr. McCARTHY: Well, that's a tough question. The U.S. aviation system is very safe. In bad weather it's safe. In good weather, of course, it's safer. My advice to air travelers is simply that there are hazards out there that are very rare that can get you. But the great majority of the time it's a very safe system. And I think the comforting thing is that we are doing a great deal to try to improve the safety of the system in these few instances where things get very tough. And that's the direction we're going. We've been working closely with FAA, with NASA, with the Transportation Safety Board. We're trying to deal with the rare events down to distribution that unfortunately still cause problems. But I agree with Mr. Engen. It's a safe system. We are trying very hard to make it safer.

WOODRUFF: Well, Dr. John McCarthy, we thank you for being with us, and Donald Engen, with the FAA. Thank you both. "Charlie Hustle"

LEHRER: Finally tonight, major league baseball, which may be over for awhile tonight, if all goes as threatened. The players say they are going on strike at midnight unless a settlement is reached with the owners. The issue, as always, is money, with the players wanting more and the owners saying they can't have it because there isn't any more to have. Our words of concern about the possible strike come from one of baseball's best-known household names, Pete Rose, the player-manager of the Cincinnati Reds, who tonight is only 24 hits away from tying Ty Cobb's all-time hit record of 4,191 hits. Correspondent Tom Bearden has this profile.

PETE ROSE, baseball player: I hate to lose, and you get in trouble sometimes when you say that at Little League groups and stuff. You know, it's not how you play the game -- or, it's not if you win or lose, it's how you play the game. That's a bunch of toro poohpooh. Because if you don't win the game you haven't accomplished anything.

TOM BEARDON [voice-over]: Over the last 22 major league seasons, Pete Rose has accomplished a great deal. He holds almost every major record there is to hold. That includes the most games played in, the most singles, the most doubles, the most seasons with 200 or more hits. The only record that has eluded him so far is now within his grasp. Rose began spring training only 95 hits away from breaking Ty Cobb's monumental record, a record few people thought could be broken. Rose's success and continued longevity in the game aren't due to exceptional physical gifts, but to an intense enthusiasm for a sport he has never considered a game. Ty Cobb was like Rose in many ways. He, too, was a player-manager, for the Detroit Tigers in the early '20s. Before he retired in 1928, Cobb had also built a reputation as an aggressive and enthusiastic player. But, unlike Rose, he was considered irascible and belligerent.

[on camera] Do you think much about him? Do you think he's up there looking down on you approaching his record?

Mr. ROSE: No, because from what I heard from him he might not be up there; he might be down there. And that's all hearsay, but I don't know about that. I try not to think about that because, you know, I've convinced myself that if he was on this earth today that he would respect and understand the way I approach the game and the dedication I put into the game.

BEARDON [voice-over]: It is Rose's dedication that has kept him playing long after others his age have retired. But by last season the press and many baseball experts were wondering if Rose at 43 was too old to play big-league ball. He'd been let go by the Philadelphia Phillies, who had signed Rose in 1978, following a salary dispute with Reds management. And, although the Montreal Expos finally picked Rose up for the 1984 season, he wasn't playing very much. It looked like time was running out for Rose and his assault on the record.

Mr. ROSE: Realistically I'm not supposed to still be playing. You know, if I'm going to be dumb like some of the press -- and I say some of the press. And you have to look into an individual. You can't just look at his birth certificate. If you just look at my birth certificate I'm not supposed to be playing today because no one ever has.

BEARDON [voice-over]: But in August of last year the fiercely independent Rose was rescued by a flamboyant, 56-year-old car dealer who had just bought a controlling interest in the Reds. Her name is Marge Schott. She is colorful and a shrewd businesswoman. She and her St. Bernard trademark pet Schottsie are now as familiar to Cincinnati fans as Rose. She had been determined for some time that Pete Rose ought to come home to Cincinnati, the town he was born and raised in, where he played most of his career.

MARGE SCHOTT, team owner: And I said if ever we do anything, I said, I really feel we should bring Pete Rose back so that he can get his record in the Reds uniform and where it belongs.

SPORTSCASTER: Base hit! Pete Rose has a base hit!

Ms. SCHOTT: The night he came back it was like a World Series night. You could just feel the vibes and the excitement.

SPORTSCASTER: And this crowd goes bananas!

BEARDON [voice-over]: Rose claims to be an unemotional man, but the night he put on a Reds uniform and returned to Riverfront Stadium clearly moved him.

Mr. ROSE: Let's see. It was about as exciting as it was a downer leaving, and that was the biggest downer I ever had in my life. And probably the most exciting time in my life, when I walked out of the dugout to go up to bat for the first time. I could have been blindfolded and I'd have got a hit. I mean, because I was, you know, a couple of feet off the ground.

Ms. SCHOTT [TV commercial]: All right, Pete. Let's go over it one more time. We have hitting.

Mr. ROSE: Check.

BEARDON [voice-over]: This odd yet dynamic couple have rejuvenated the slumping Reds, partly because of commercials like this one.

Ms. SCHOTT: Excitement.

Mr. ROSE: Check.

Ms. SCHOTT: Dog food?

Mr. ROSE: Dog food!

Ms. SCHOTT: Why, hey, Pete. This baby's got to eat.

Mr. ROSE: Check.

BEARDON [voice-over]: Attendance is up 27 , but the fans are turning out to see more than Rose's shot at the record. The Reds are winning a lot of ball games, and are National League, Western Division contenders. Much to the surprise of many observers, Rose is turning out to be a pretty good manager, and being manager lets Rose determine the Cincinnati lineup, which gives him considerable control over his own destiny. But he says his top priority is not the batting record, but his team's record.

Mr. ROSE: Winning always has been more important. The record is just something that's in the way, or it's a plateau to overpass this year. All it's going to mean is I'm going to be the guy with the most hits, and if you placed yourself in position to become the all-time hit leader you might as well go do it.

BEARDON [voice-over]: About the only thing that stands in Rose's way is the threat of a strike. Although it would delay his assault on the record, and despite the fact that he is a manager, Rose has sided with the players.

Mr. ROSE: We've fought against the owners every four or five years for the last 20 to try to get different things, and they've always in the end said, "Okay, we'll give it to you." Now all of a sudden they've decided they want all that stuff back. So, you know, if you're out there in my place, what do you say? You know, "Okay, we don't want none of that stuff we struck for in '81 and this and that. You can have it all back now. Let's just do it your way."

BEARDON [voice-over]: The 1981 baseball strike delayed Rose's breaking another milestone batting record.

Mr. ROSE: You know, I tied the National League record for hits the night before the last strike, and broke it the first game after the strike. If that's the way it's going to be, that's the way it's going to be. I mean, there's nothing I can do about it.

BEARDON [voice-over]: And, in a nutshell, that pretty much summarizes the Rose philosophy. He doesn't worry about things he can't control. He's built one of the most successful careers in baseball on that simple tenet.

Mr. ROSE: I wish every kid in America could go through what I went through in baseball, or what I'm going through in baseball, because it's -- you know, it's the best of both worlds, my whole life. I mean, getting paid well to do something that you love to do and being able to do it for a long period of time. Yeah, sure, certainly. I hope my son's son does it, or I hope my son does it. I hope my other son does it. Because it sure in hell beats working.

LEHRER: That report by Tom Beardon. Judy?

WOODRUFF: And now for a final look at the day's top stories. President Reagan revealed that the small growth he had removed from his nose last week was cancerous, but experts say it poses no further danger and has no connection to his colon cancer, removed last month. Attorney General Edwin Meese said here on the NewsHour that today's nationwide raids on marijuana growers were the most successful ever. One more body was pulled from the wreckage of that L-1011 that crashed near Dallas last Friday, as investigators continued to search for clues to the cause of the crash. And officials say it's looking more and more as if a baseball players' strike will become reality. Good night, Jim.

LEHRER: Good night, Judy. And we'll see you tomorrow night. I'm Jim Lehrer; thank you and good night.