The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

Tone from Bars and tone (NewsHour opening music) I'm Charlene Hunter-Gault, worries over safety and security at nuclear weapons plants. Why the presidential candidates aren't talking about AIDS and what the candidates are talking about on the stump, all on tonight's McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour. (silence and tone) (NewsHour opening music) (Lehrer) Good evening, leading the news this Tuesday, a government report said foreign agents

have had access to U.S. nuclear weapons facilities. AIDS demonstrators trying to shut down the Food and Drug Administration offices in suburban Washington and an international bank holding company was indicted in Florida for laundering drug money. We'll have the details in our news summary in a moment, Charlene Hunter-Gault is in New York tonight. Charlene. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) After the news summary, our first focus is on the safety and security problems at nuclear weapons facilities. We'll talk with two top energy department officials and get a response from Senator John Glenn. Then correspondent Spencer Michaels reports on why the presidential candidates aren't talking about AIDS. And finally, continuing our series of stump speeches, we find out what both candidates are talking about.

(music underneath) Funding for the McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour is provided by AT&T, combining everything people like about telephones with everything they expect from computers to make everything about information easy. AT&T. Additional funding is provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, a catalyst for change, and this station and other public television stations, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. (Lehrer) Agents from Iran and the Soviet bloc have been allowed inside sensitive U.S. nuclear weapons facilities. That charge came today in a report from the General Accounting Office. The GAO said the fault lay with lack security measures employed by the U.S. Department of Energy. The visits were to nuclear weapons facilities at Los Alamos and Sandia in New Mexico and at the Livermore Laboratory in California. The report said nuclear specialists from China, India, Pakistan, Israel, Brazil, Iraq, and Argentina were also allowed access.

The disclosure was made at a Senate hearing this morning. Senator John Glenn began by summarizing key points in the report. (Senator John Glenn) The GAO will tell us this morning about instances involving suspected foreign agents of communist nations that have obtained access to our nuclear weapons labs. Of the 181 visitors from communist countries that were surveyed by GAO, DOE failed to obtain necessary background information on 65 percent of those visitors. 65 percent of those visitors from communist nations. We will be told the DOE obtained even less information on visitors from other sensitive countries, including several nations suspected of developing nuclear weapons. (Lehrer) As spokesman for the Energy Department told the hearing there are deficiencies in its security system. He said they were working to rectify the problems. Also this morning, this morning, Energy Secretary John Harrington held a news conference to talk about nuclear plant safety.

He said this weekend shut down of the Rocky Flance Facility in Colorado and the August closing of the Savannah River Plant in South Carolina show the department is committed to safety. (John Harrington) I think our facilities are safer today than they were four years ago and the Department of Energy's commitment to safety is greatly improved where it was. But I'd like to say this morning that much more needs to be done. President Reagan and myself as Secretary of Energy will not operate unsafe reactors, in this complex. Number two, we will meet the defense needs of this country, in a safe manner and an environmentally sensitive manner. You have our commitment. (Lehrer) At that same news conference, another energy department official said the department would slowly restart the Savannah River Plant using new safety procedures. That plant was closed after numerous reports of operating violations, Charlene.

(Charlene Hunter-Gault) Nearly a thousand AIDS protesters surrounded the food and drug administration headquarters in Washington this morning and tried to close it down. The demonstrators were protesting the federal government's response to the AIDS crisis. The group wants wider access to experimental drugs for people suffering from AIDS. Several entrances to the FDA were blocked by demonstrators, keeping some employees away. Dozens of protesters were arrested and placed in waiting buses. When authorities attempted to transport them, other protesters blocked the roadway. This was the second straight day that AIDS protesters had demonstrated at a federal building in the nation's capital. (Lehrer) One of the world's largest bank holding companies was indicted today in Tampa, Florida. The charge, laundering money for Colombian drug dealers. The charged company is the Luxembourg-based bank of credit and commerce international. Three of its subsidiaries and nine of its officers were also indicted.

The company operates banks in 72 countries. It was the first time an international financial institution was indicted for money laundering offenses. The indictment charges the bank took a portion of $32 million in drug money, placed it in certificates of deposit, then loaned it back out to the drug dealers, paying off the loans with the CDs. Today's announcement followed the arrest of nine people in Tampa on Sunday. They were lured to the site of their arrest by an invitation to a fictitious wedding. Today in Tampa, the head of the U.S. Customs Service spoke to reporters about the operation. (US Customs person) The most significant aspect of this case is the incredible international cooperation that has developed. This was a two-year undercover operation, was run primarily by Customs and IRS, but very, very significant to it was the involvement of the British Customs Service and the Fresh Customs Service. This really is the first fruits of the initiative that has been put together by international

customs and their efforts to combat money laundering. (Lehrer) In Michigan, an Air Force tanker plane crashed this afternoon at Wurtsmith Air Force Base. Authorities said six people died, ten others were injured. Reports said the plane crashed at the end of a runway as it was landing. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Israeli soldiers and Arab mourners clashed in the occupied West Bank today, leaving one teenage protester dead from wounds from a plastic bullet. Residents of the area said soldiers entered the camp and took the body of another Palestinian teenager who reportedly died today after being hit by a plastic bullet two weeks ago. An army spokesman told the Associated Press that the body was taken to halt a large demonstration and that it would be returned later. In another incident, the Israeli army said two of its soldiers were slightly injured in Gaza City when Palestinians threw a hand grenade at a patrol.

It was one of the few times live weapons have been used against Israelis since the Palestinian uprising began last December. (Lehrer) Pope John Paul II came out in favor of a common political structure for Europe today. He did it in a speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. The event was interrupted by Northern Ireland Protestant leader Ian Paisley. We have a report from David Chatter of ITN. (David Chatter)The Pope had just started his speech to the European Parliament when the Reverend Ian Paisley began shouting, I renounce you as the Antichrist. (shouting in background) Mr Paisley was promptly set upon by furious fellow Euro MPs. Appeals for him to be silent fell on deaf ears. This was the first time the Pope had been so close to Mr Paisley. His bright orange protest leaflets were torn from his hands. Mr Paisley said he was then beaten, punched and dragged from the chamber. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) In Yugoslavia, thousands of workers ended their strikes today, as the government heightened

security measures. But protesters continued to press demands for economic and political changes. And in Algeria, people went back to work and shops reopened today, as calm returned to Algiers after five days of demonstrations and conflict. President Bendjedid's office said the state of emergency would be lifted shortly after dawn tomorrow. That means the troops and tanks will be removed from the streets of Algiers after a show of force that lasted six days. Reports from hospital, doctors and police indicate that at least 400 people were killed and more than 1,000 injured in clashes with soldiers and police. (Lehrer) And finally in the U.S. presidential campaign today, both candidates headed west for Thursday nights debate in Los Angeles. Before he left, Governor Dukakis spoke at Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts. He said better science education is needed to keep high technology jobs in this country. Vice President Bush spoke to students at Seattle University Business School this afternoon.

He accused Dukakis of protectionist demagoguery. He said the governor was scaring people by focusing on the issue of foreign investment in this country. (Charlene Hunter-Gault)That's our news summary. Still ahead, problems of safety and security at nuclear weapons plants. Why the presidential candidates aren't talking about AIDS, and Bush and Dukakis on the stump. (NewsHour music) (Lehrer) We go first tonight to two stories involving the Department of Energy, one that charged from the general accounting office that lacks DOE security measures at U.S. nuclear weapons facilities have allowed foreign agents access to sensitive information. The other, the DOE announcement of new safety procedures at a South Carolina plant that produces nuclear weapons materials. Two energy department officials are here, along with Senator John Glenn for newsmaker interviews to discuss these developments.

On the security issue first, it came out today at a Senate hearing when the GAO charged there were lapses at U.S. facilities. (new speaker?) Although studies have shown that classified and sensitive information can be derived from unclassified access to its facilities, most foreign visits occur with little DOE oversight or approval. As a result, suspected foreign agents in persons from facilities involved in nuclear weapons activities have obtained access to the laboratories without DOE's knowledge of their backgrounds. (Lehrer) Do you have an estimate on how many visitors went through these labs during this long revision process? (new speaker) Given that the revision has taken about two years, it would probably be close to 40,000 visitors at all DOE laboratories for the three particular laboratories included in our review. It would be about 8,000 in the two-year period. (Lehrer) Do you believe the security of these labs was fully protected against possible intelligence

collection during that period? (new speaker) No, we do not, (Lehrer) Obviously not. (Lehrer) May we ask you, comparing what you knew before this study with what you have found since, would you say the chances are more or less likely that information was compromised? (new speaker) Given the significant weaknesses in DOE's program and the breakdowns that we occurred, I would have to say that it would be more likely to have occurred than not occurred. (speaker 2) I think it's important to, to recognize access to one of our weapons laboratories is not access to classified information. We have a very rigorous access control program and a very rigorous need to know program within the laboratory. (Lehrer) I understand that, but I also think you would not have these security plans and require them unless you think they're important, is that correct? (speaker 2) That is correct. (Lehrer) And why are people allowed into the labs without the security plan being completed? (speaker 2) That is a breakdown in the system that we have already moved to correct.

That is a deficiency which we recognize as the GAO is right. (Lehrer) What have you done to correct it? We have included in our appraisals this past year with the field offices a special item with regard to emphasizing security plans and we've insisted that security plans are required for all foreign visitors and assignments. (Lehrer) Are they not permitting people in the front gate right now unless a security plan approval has been obtained from headquarters prior to the visit? (speaker 2) I can't tell you right now, but I can tell you, sir, that as a result of the new order that's about to come out, that certainly will be the case. (Lehrer) (garbled)- you just told me You just told me we've been correcting this over the past year. That's a very simple question. Are people clear? Are they not clear to get into the lab? That's very straightforward. It seems to me you'd know the answer to that one. (speaker 1) I can assure you that the laboratories are sensitive more than ever now to this matter. (Lehrer) Not talking about sensitivity. Are people getting in the front gate today without security plans being in place. That's the question. (speaker 1) There are security plans in all laboratories prior to any foreign visitor coming in. I can make that a factual statement sir. Absolutely. That's not...

(Lehrer) Nobody's getting in now unless their security plan is approved. Is that correct? (speaker 1) Yes, sir. (Lehrer) Now to Troy Wade acting Assistant Secretary for defense programs at the Department of Energy. Mr Secretary. First, what is your general reaction to this charge from the GAO that your security policies and your security procedures have been lax? (Troy Wade) Well I think it simply pointed out some things which we already knew. The GAO report covered the period January 86 through August of 87, as I recall. We knew that we had to tighten some things up and we've had plans and procedures underway to do that. We think we're in far better shapes than the GAO believes we are. (Lehrer) What, do you agree that agents from Iran, the Soviet block, and other countries, intelligence agents were given access to our facilities? (Troy Wade) Well let me start a slightly different way, if I may. The national laboratories, the three national laboratories are truly international in their

reputation for science. (Lehrer) These are the ones at Los Alamos, Sandia, and New Mexico, and in Livermore in California. (Troy Wade) That's correct. They are laboratories with international reputations. They do classified work for the US weapons program and they do a lot of other basic research on a lot of things that are unclassified and have agreements with other countries and universities around the world to exchange information. So the, people coming to the labs from foreign countries is certainly not unusual or unexpected. What we have to do, is to the best that we can, protect the classified information from either accidental or deliberate disclosure to those visitors. (Lehrer) And that has not been done, up until recently, is that right? (Troy Wade) Well it perhaps hasn't been done as well as it should have.

(Lehrer) Why? Was there just a lack of, well you tell me, why, why was it not done before? (Troy Wade) Well to begin with, sir, we have, there is no evidence that any classified information was compromised as a result of these visits. There is evidence that some of the foreign visitors who were allowed into the unclassified parts of the laboratories, may indeed have had ties to intelligence gathering agencies in their own countries. It's regretful that we didn't know that in advance, and prevent that. But I think an important point is that access to the national laboratories does not de facto mean access to classified information. We have lots of other barriers between walking in the laboratory and gathering classified data. (Lehrer) One of the reports I read today was that a KGB agent, of the Soviet Union, was allowed access to one of the laboratories for several weeks.

I mean, clearly nobody knew it was a KGB agent until after he left. Is that, can you confirm that, is that true? (Troy Wade) I can't confirm the KGB agent. I will confirm that there are very often, Soviet scientists at the three laboratories in question and others, other laboratories of the DOE that are part of the, for example, the International Fusion Agreement between this country and the Soviet Union. Having a Soviet scientist there would not be unusual. (Lehrer) And whether or not he or she was also a KGB operative would be something that there would be no way to find out about in advance? (Troy Wade) Well we would hope we have in place procedures that would find that out for us. It's not impossible that we did not know. (Lehrer) Is it, are these new procedures such that you are confident that these kinds of things are not going to happen again or what? (Troy Wade) Well the new procedures that we have been putting in place over the past year will certainly tighten up.

There is a requirement for a generic security plan for any foreign visit to the military. (Lehrer) A security plan, what does that mean? A check? I mean somebody wants to go to Livermore, say, and from a Soviet scientist, what does that person have to do before they can actually, as Senator Glenn said, on the tape walk through the gate, walk through the building? (Troy Wade) Well if it's a, if it's a visitor from a Soviet block country, the new procedures require a special security plan for that particular visit that will very tightly control where that individual goes and the kinds of information to which he has access. Those individuals security plans have not been in place until very recently. There has always been a generic security plan and that hasn't been good enough. (Lehrer) Generic security plan, what does that mean? (Troy Wade) Well to assure that any foreign visitor, whether they're from a sensitive country or not, do not have access unless they make a covert effort to the classified parts of the laboratory.

And finally, I think one must remember that the strength of our security system at the laboratories and elsewhere is really not in procedures and security plans. It's in the individual people that we have at those laboratories, our U.S. citizens who are employed there to assure, that, there is proper attendance, proper guidance and that people just don't have access to information that they should not see. (Lehrer) Is it, is it you're feeling that too much is being made of this, or is this something that this has been a serious, a serious breach of U.S. security on something that really matters, but what's your overall feeling about it? (Troy Wade) I honestly do not believe it's, there has been a serious breach. I think, Senator Glenn's concern is legitimate. And certainly a concern we have, the three laboratories in question, as the preeminent weapons

laboratories in this country, clearly are of interest to people who don't have our best interests in the United States. We've known that for a long time. We've had procedures, we are improving upon them, but I don't believe there's been any big security violation. (Lehrer) Mr Secretary, thank you very much. (Troy Wade) Thank you. (Lehrer) Charlene? (Charlene Hunter-Gault) The other development today is the news that the Department of Energy issued an emergency order to shut down operations in a second nuclear fuel plant near Boulder, Colorado. The order came on Saturday and followed an accident at the Rocky Flats plant in which two workers were contaminated with radioactivity. The men entered an unmarked room, which held contaminated equipment. Rocky Flats is the country's only plant to shape plutonium into components for nuclear warheads. The Savannah River plant in Aiken, South Carolina was completely shut down this past August for safety concerns.

At a hearing two weeks ago, it was revealed that the plant has suffered a series of 30 accidents since the 1950s. Those accidents contaminated 25 workers and included a near meltdown and the leaking of contaminated water. This morning, the energy department announced that it is adopting new safety procedures for nuclear weapons plants. Here to tell us more is Richard Sterets-Stecky, the Energy Department's top safety expert. Mr. Sterets-Stecky, this morning, a DOE spokesman at a press conference said that you have a moral obligation now to rectify past sins. What sins exactly is he talking about and how bad were they? (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, I think people are referring to the fact that there have been an awful lot of incidents that have occurred over the 38 years of operations with these reactors. We need to recognize that those incidents are indicators that we ought to be taking some lessons from and recognizing that for the next 10 to 15 years, these same reactors have to continue

supplying the materials that we need. Therefore we should not look back to assign blame for why these events occurred, but more appropriately look at them for lessons learned and strengthen the safety of the operations. When you look at the history of the commercial industry, human performance and people, procedures, the like that control these activities, are really of paramount importance. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) You said, excuse me, you said it wasn't important to look back and assign blame, but isn't there a lot of concern about the fact that over these 38 years, particularly with the Savannah River plant, 30 years of things going on were kept secret. (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, I think if you look back over the history, you have to put in perspective that in the 40s and 50s, this was an emergent technology that grew out of the Manhattan project that developed the nuclear bomb, so it does not surprise me that in the early years of

the program, there was a great deal of secrecy. And with the advent of commercial nuclear power and these times have evolved, the Congress and the people demand to know more about what this technology is, and the risks it poses, so there are fair questions being asked. Furthermore, increased scrutiny is really necessary to assure proper safety because after many years of operation, we all tend to become complacent and very sure of ourselves. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Well, one of the hearing, one of the members of the House, I think it was Representative Sinar, said that that was one of the big problems, complacency, and unless that could be changed, that we were really facing the prospect of a disaster on the order of Chernobyl, TMI, and the challenger. (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, I think clearly the frequency with which events occur and the types of events, one can look to the future and say, if uncorrected, those kinds of situations might develop,

but what's more important is the fact that we have over the last several years been trying to look at, very critically, what does this experience tell us, and where do we need to be making some improvements? So we have, in fact, just within the last year established within the Department of Energy an advisory body of outside experts to take a look at some of these technical issues. The Congress has recently passed legislation and the President has signed a bill that calls for a defense nuclear safety board that will truly be independent from the Department of Energy to similarly look at and critically assess the safety of our operations. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) How are the new measures that you are putting into effect going to address some of the problems or some of the lessons that you've learned from these incidents? Let's take, for example, the Savannah River one where apparently some of the most serious problems were chronic equipment, of, failure and poor operational procedures.

(Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, when you look at the issue, there's really two basic problems. One of them dealing with the technical issues, and some of those can be resolved by putting in some modified designs, upgrading the hardware. The other issue deals with human performance, and that's a more difficult one to resolve. Clearly we need to go re-examine the procedures in place and make sure they're still valid, upgrade them where they are found to be deficient. Similarly, we need to improve the technical vigilance of the Department of Energy. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) How much of an improvement is needed there? (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, the National Academy of Sciences last November did tell the Secretary in response to a requested study that there is a clear need for both our field offices and the headquarters staff to be more technically oriented, to be more sensitive to safety so that we can do a better job of overseeing what the contractors are doing. Keep in mind that these are contractors that operate the facility for us and in Savannah

River, DuPont has been doing that for 38 years. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Is that where part of the problem lay with DuPont and weren't they just not reporting or was DOE just not following through on what the information they were getting, or what? (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) I'm not going to sit here and say DuPont wasn't reporting. They were. DuPont was in fact reporting information and diagnosing some of it. What has happened is that some of that information has not been distributed within the Department of Energy on a timely basis. Today we have an organization within the Department of Energy that is charged to look at operating history and take action based on what we find. It is for that reason that we are in fact uncovering these problems and taking the remedial actions we have instituted. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Some of the new measures are, apparently you're going to delay restarting one of the three reactors at the Savannah River plant until December. What do you think is going to turn around in the next two months, all of the problems that you've laid out, that have been in existence for over 30 years?

(Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, the first message I have to tell you is I don't think we're going to turn these problems around in two months. It's going to take a number of years to deal with the real underlying problems. But what we can do in the next two to three months is put into place compensatory measures that we will keep in place for six months to a year that will give us improved oversight by having more eyes and ears there, by improving the training of the operators, and by increasing the number of operators involved. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) All right, we're going to have to move on, but I just very quickly want to ask you about Rocky Flats and what made you shut down that plant over the weekend and does that reflect any new procedures here? (Mr. Sterets-Stecky) Well, the Rocky Flats situation reflects a history of many years. Rocky Flats as early as 1971 was identified by the department as one of the weakest facilities in the complex from a safety standpoint. And a decision at that time was made to replace the building. That building, to replace this particular facility, has not been completed.

And in fact, in 1986, we did a technical evaluation that indicated to us that the procedures for protecting workers in the public from a health physics standpoint were weak and needed to be upgrading. This incident that occurred about two weeks ago was another symptom and indicative of what I consider an adverse trend in controlling radioactivity at the facility. And as a precautionary measure, recognizing that we have other workers in the facility who could be exposed to these kinds of hazards, we elected to shut the facility down and clean it up. And within a matter of one or two months, we'll be able to resume operations in a cleaner environment with more control over contamination. (Charlene Hunter-Gault) All right, Mr. Sterets-Stecky, stay with us, Jim. (Lehrer) Now to Senator John Glenn, chairman of the Senate Government Operations Committee, which held today's hearings on security and which has oversight on several nuclear energy issues he joins us from Capitol Hill.

Senator, let's start with safety and work back to security. The first of all, do you agree with what Mr. Stecky has said, that the energy department is now moving in the right direction, has gotten a handle on the safety problems of Savannah River, Rocky Flats, and the others as well? (Senator John Glenn) I don't know exactly what kind of handle they have on them, but I think they are moving finally in these areas. It's been a long time that the whole nuclear weapons complex was kept under secrecy. And where it came to a question of production goals, which we saw in years earlier, or safety, safety got short-shrift in a case like that. And so it's gone on for too many years. We're finding out a lot of things now that happened back over 30 years where there could have been near disasters, and finally they've moved. We started putting some pressure on and I had legislation wanting to put an independent outside advisory board in place. The Secretary countered that by forming his own board with Mr. A. Hern, and then this as a head of it, and then in this last instance, Mr. A. Hern and his board had to find out about the problems by being asked by a Washington press reporter about it.

So, we find things like that still going on. I think they are sensitized to the need for safety now, but it's going to be an enormous job cleaning these plants up and making them truly safe. (Lehrer) On the security issue, you heard what Mr. Wade said. He said the first of all, there was no evidence that any classified information got out and his opinion, there was no serious breach here. What's your response to that? (Senator John Glenn) Let me say there are three different kinds of classifications at these labs. One goes from the two communist visitors coming to the plant for, maybe, as Mr. Wade said, legitimate purposes. Another is to the other sensitive countries, those that we think may be trying to develop nuclear weapons. Now for these people coming in, they have what they call, as he said, a security plan. And that means a plan that is supposed to be approved by headquarters before these people are permitted to visit the labs. Let me give you the figures, of 181 communist visitor surveyed, 176 were deemed to require background checks. But of those 176, 65 percent of them, or 119, got no checks.

Of the remaining 57, only six were completed before the visit or the assignment. And DOE got background data for 51 visitors during or after the visit had been completed. That's for the communists, coming from the Soviet Union or communist countries, the same kinds of figures go for the other sensitive countries. And so it just hasn't been an adequate security situation at all. (Lehrer) Is there any evidence that any harm has been done, other than the fact that these people were allowed in there? In other words, did they get any information that has been harmful to the United States? (Senator John Glenn) I don't know what they did, but I certainly couldn't certify they did not. We know that some of them were later identified as probable KGB agents, and I was testified to this morning. And so, we also have visitors from other sensitive countries who are out of 637 visitors that were supposed to be surveyed, only 12 percent of them were surveyed. (Lehrer) Senator, what is it, you you heard I asked Mr. Wade this question, let me ask you the question, why do you think

this has been allowed to happen? I mean, what went wrong in this system that these, your figures that these checks were not made and these people were allowed in there? (Senator John Glenn) Well, they had an adequate security plan system. But when we had a number of visitors to the plan, they apparently said, well, here's the man out here from a foreign country, the Soviet Union or wherever, and he's staying in a motel, and he thought he was going to get in. We don't have the clearance yet from the field officer or from headquarters to let him in. And so we'll go ahead and let him in, I don't think he'd be any harm, and so they just sort of went at it on an attitude on a basis like that, and that's unacceptable. We've had an increase in weapons activity at these design laboratories, and corresponding to that have been increasing visits from the proliferating countries of the world, or those we suspect of proliferation of wanting to get into nuclear weapons, and also more visits from communist nations. So it's been a leaky sieve of out there, and they haven't taken action soon enough to do something about it.

This is something that should have been looked at a long time ago and not wait for us to ask for a GAO study last year. (Lehrer) Did you hear anything today on the hearing or from Mr. Wade tonight that makes you feel any more comfortable about it? (Senator John Glenn) Well, what they tell me is that they now have tightened up on this, but we'll just have to see. You know, I just took it at face value that the system was a pretty good system to begin with, but it turns out the system hasn't been lived up to.... by people running it, and that's tragic. We don't know what information we may have gotten out. The question, as it's always asked, is do we know of anything that got out? Well, no, but we don't know that a lot did not get out, that we haven't found out about yet either. (Lehrer) So when you asked the GAO to look into this, you had no idea, wasn't a loaded question from your perspective. (Senator John Glenn) Well, it was to some extent. We knew that there had been some problems in the past, and we asked them to look into this, but we had no idea when I asked for this, that it was going to result in this kind of a situation. Let me say this. My looking into the security breaches at these laboratories go clear back to 1979 when we found that a student that had come to us had found a lot of things in the library

at Los Alamos, and that library wound up being closed for over a year while they went through and found quite a number of documents that never should have been placed in the open stacks in the library. So we've been following this matter of security ever since then, so that I had no idea that it's as bad as it's been. (Lehrer) All right. Senator Glenn, thank you very much for being with us. (Senator John Glenn) Thank you. NewsHour music (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Our next focus is about AIDS. As we heard earlier, demonstrators in Washington took to the streets trying to get the government to pay more attention to the AIDS crisis. But the demonstration comes at a time when there was virtually no attention being paid to the problem in one of the most visible forms in the country, the presidential campaign. In this next report, Spencer Michaels of Public Station KQED in San Francisco tells us why. (Spencer Michaels) The outpatient clinic at San Francisco General Hospital acknowledged as the leader and innovator in AIDS research and treatment.

It is here that the alarming national statistics become human reality. 70,000 Americans have AIDS. 40,000 have already died. And by the time the next president finishes his term, more than a quarter of a million Americans will have succumbed to the disease. J.B. Mulligan, a nurse practitioner, has seen the trend firsthand. (J.B. Mulligan) Just in my tenure here, in four years, I've taken care of 1,300 people with AIDS, personally. So I've been able to see that in the early days we were seeing 300 patient visits a month and now we're seeing 1,800. (Spencer Michaels) For Mulligan, the politics of AIDS is a very practical matter. (Mulligan) I know what it's like being at the front lines. I know how we've had to increase our staffing, how we've had to increase our resources in just a four-year period. (Spencer Michaels) Here and at other AIDS centers around the nation, there were early expectations that the presidential candidates would talk a lot about AIDS, and place the issue on the nation's front burner.

(Dr. Paul Volberding) I think that I think the issue of the president being a spokesperson for the major problems that our country faces is something that we should expect. (Mulligan) Dr. Paul Volberding, a nationally recognized expert, is Chief of the San Francisco General AIDS Clinic. He is concerned that President Reagan has not exercised enough leadership on AIDS, and that has set the tone for the current campaign. (Dr. Paul Volberding) Reagan has said almost nothing about AIDS, even though the whole thing has happened in his administration. It requires a fair amount of financial support and obviously demands compassion and coordination, and that's the sort of thing that I think many of us look to the President for evidence that there is an understanding of the needs at the highest levels. That's been absent. (Mulligan) In the recent candidate debates, the men who would be president talked briefly about AIDS, but the discussion was bland and non-controversial. (Dukakis) In this particular area, I think the Vice President and I are in general agreement on what

we have to do, the Special Federal Commission made good solid recommendations, I think we're both supportive of them, and I would strongly lead in that area as I have in my state as governor. (new speaker) Mr. Vice President, a minute, rebuttal. (George Bush?) Well, we're on the right track. NIH is doing a good job in research. The surgeon general is doing a good job in encouraging the proper kind of education. I noticed the governor did not mention any testing, but we got to have a knowledge base. Testing should be confidential, but we have to have a knowledge base. We can't simply stick our heads in the sands in terms of testing. (Mulligan) Bush's advisor on AIDS, Dr. Burton Lee, says there's a reason why neither candidate has spoken out more forcefully. (Dr. Burton Lee) When you talk AIDS, you talk sex, you talk drugs, you talk poverty, you talk class, loaded gun, loaded gun.

(Mulligan) Lee acknowledged to reporters Suzanne Allard that while AIDS needs to be talked about, the candidates regard the controversies over testing, education and confidentiality as sticky wickets. (Dr. Burton Lee) I can understand why the tricky emotional issues aren't brought up freely in campaign debate. People, there are too many people in their mess trapping you, and both candidates stay away from it. (Mulligan) Dukakis's principal aide, spokesman Congressman Henry Waxman, has pushed for AIDS legislation. Yet Waxman isn't concerned he told reporter Keenan Block about Dukakis's failure to highlight the issue. (Waxman) There really is very little difference between Vice President Bush and Governor Dukakis, both are supporting the president's commission, both are supporting the recommendations of the health community. I think both men have come to the conclusion that when you have as serious an issue as AIDS, it's best to follow the recommendations of the health advisors and to stay as far away from making this a political and certainly a partisan issue.

(Mulligan) But many of those who have closer contact with AIDS are angered by the candidates' refusal to emphasize it. For 38-year-old computer software designer Kit Zellmo Herman seriously ill with an AIDS-related brain infection, the absence of AIDS on the political scene is devastating. (Herman) Just because I'm sick and lying in a hospital bed doesn't mean that I'm not aware of the political ramifications, especially when it comes to money. Just money. Who gets the money? A tiny nick out of Defense would easily fund all of AIDS care and research. (Mulligan) What have you seen on AIDS so far? (Herman) Between Dukakis and Bush? Zip, nothing. I don't think they've mentioned it once. It's, they're not mentioning it because it's not being asked of them. It's a big issue and any politician will tell you the best way to handle a big issue is

to let it disappear. (Mulligan) Kit Zellmo Herman died a week after this interview. Others involved in the AIDS crisis have also spoken out. Two years ago, the National Academy of Sciences called the government's response to the epidemic dangerously inadequate and called for more presidential leadership. Although the president's critics claim his response was too late and too little, President Reagan did become more outspoken. (Reagan) Our battle against AIDS has been like an emergency room operation. We've thrown everything we have into it. We've declared AIDS public health enemy number one. (Mulligan) But the battle against AIDS has become more than raising funds and doing research. As the president hinted, it is loaded with social issues. (Reagan) But let's be honest with ourselves. AIDS information cannot be what some call value neutral. After all, when it comes to preventing AIDS, don't medicine and morality teach the

same lessons. (Mulligan) The president appointed a commission to search for answers to how to deal with AIDS. But members soon found themselves mired in several social and moral controversies, including how to warn or educate the public. Who should be tested for the AIDS virus? And who should find out the results of those tests? The commission recommended federal laws to prevent discrimination against those infected, proposals the administration ignored, but which were endorsed by the medical establishment. George Bush found out when he spoke to scientists at a World Health Organization conference last year that some AIDS issues, particularly testing, could mean political trouble. (George Bush) Ultimately, we must protect those who do not have the disease. And thus we made the decision that there must be more testing. And as the President said last night, the federal government will soon require testing for prisoners, immigrants, and aliens seeking permanent residence. Free speech.

That's what it's all about. (new speaker, PSA) Unsafe behavior is unsafe behavior. The issue of education has its political pitfalls as well. Public service announcements reflect a policy to encourage the use of condoms. (PSA) Condoms can be most effective when they use correctly, and there is a right way and a wrong way to using one. (Mulligan) Conservatives, however, object, saying messages like that encourage premarital sex. Despite the political risks, some members of the medical establishment, like Dr. Lawrence White, President of the California Medical Association, say politicians and sex educators must speak out bluntly to prevent spread of the disease. (Dr. Lawrence White) Reagan says abstain. I think we've never succeeded in convincing anyone to abstain from sex. We're not going to now. We can't make sex safe, you can just make it less dangerous. And condoms are one way of doing it. But the best way of doing it is to make sure who you're having sex with. We ought to tell kids when they're eight, nine, and ten years old to stay out of rectums. We talk sort of gingerly about sexual intercourse.

We ought to talk using words that kids understand. (Mulligan) But politically, the candidates have shied away from such talk. And instead, speak in generalities about education. (Governor Dukakis) And of all the things we can do at the present time, broad public education done cooperatively, done sensibly, done thoughtfully, done with an understanding of where our resources will do the most good, is the most important thing we can do. (Mulligan) Dukakis did initiate a major education program in Massachusetts, and his wife visited an AIDS treatment center in San Francisco. Actions that activists, like San Francisco's Cleve Jones, say they hope are clues to how he will act if elected president. (Cleve Jones) Governor Dukakis, I think in Massachusetts, has at least made an effort to make the resources available. The trouble now is that we're not hearing anything current from either of these candidates. (Mulligan) Jones heads the names project, an organization that has been piecing together quilts, each

in memory of an AIDS victim who died. The finished quilt, as large as 10 acres when assembled, is being displayed in the nation's capital just prior to the election, in hopes of getting the candidates to exert more leadership on the issue. (demonstrators yell) Other activists have been more combative. When Republican Vice Presidential candidate Dan Quail campaigned in New York Harbor, he got this treatment from a group of anti-AIDS activists. (demonstrators) And in San Francisco, when George Bush spoke at a fundraiser last month, the same group ACT NOW, picketed his appearance, complaining of too little effort by the Reagan administration to solve the AIDS crisis. But Bush's advisor, Dr. Burton Lee, says Bush will not duck the AIDS issue if he is elected. (Dr. Burton Lee) A more visible leadership for this media-oriented society is what they're looking for. I am sure that George Bush is going to give him more than President Reagan gave him.

Why President Reagan backed away from this, I'm not sure. But as I said, there are elements in our country that do not like this disease. They just assume it went away. We have extreme right-wingers in this country that are trying and have tried for several years to use the AIDS epidemic for their own political purposes. I'm pleased that both the Vice President Bush and Governor Dukakis have risen above that and rejected those kind of appeals. (Mulligan) The debate over AIDS takes various forms across the country. In California, conservatives have placed a restrictive initiative on the November ballot that would require people who test positive for the AIDS virus to be reported to health officials, a measure being fought by the medical establishment and the gay community. But on the national political scene, while the candidates for President expressed their concern, and followed the lead of their health advisors, they steer clear of the potentially

damaging controversy, that the AIDS issue carries with it. (Demonstration sounds, NewsHour music) (Lehrer) Finally tonight, campaign stumps speeches from those two major presidential candidates, Michael Dukakis's first, he spoke yesterday in Levitown, New York, his subject was housing. (Michael Dukakis) Republicans and Democrats alike, rolled up our sleeves, we went to work and we made a great national promise. A promise to provide affordable housing for all Americans. That's what we did in 1948 and 1949. But the administration that Mr. Bush has been a part of, broke that promise in the early 1980s. Remember what he said about housing and the debate we had in Winston-Salem? We had that discussion about housing and homelessness, and I said, look, you've cut back by 90 percent, on our commitment to affordable housing.

As Stanlandine has already said, remember what he said he said, housing is up? And he's right. My friends, housing is up. It's up so much, it's almost out of sight for the average American family. (applause) Price of housing in this country has raced ahead of young people's wages and has made it impossible for them to buy homes in the communities that they grew up in. Mr. Bush and his friends have done something worse. They brought us something that we've never had before. Two and a half million homeless people all across this country, men and women and children, and a third of them are veterans. One third of them are children. We see them sleeping in cars and alleyways and on heating grates in communities all over America. We did not have that kind of homeless problem when this administration took office.

And we're going to solve it. (applause) And we're going to solve it, before Lloyd Benson and I leave office. (applause and cheers) Last July, the day after the Atlanta Convention, the first thing we did was to go to a home and a community in Atlanta, and call for a national partnership for affordable housing that will involve everyone in the housing community. And today we're announcing a new initiative that we call Home Start. It's aimed at giving young families a chance to buy their first home. Our start on the ladder of opportunity and security that home ownership represents. Now what is Home Start?

It's a simple but a very important proposal. No new bureaucracies, no red tape. What it will do is permit first-time home buyers to invest their IRA savings or their tax-deferred pension plans to make their down payments on a home. (applause) That's simple, isn't it? (applause) And it's a natural extension of what IRAs are all about. Encouraging savings and providing more security and old age. Interestingly, under current law, young families can use their IRAs to speculate on stocks or gold or agricultural futures. Home Start will let them make the best investment they can in a home for their families, in a home for their families. (applause)

Now Lloyd Benson and I know, as you do, that local communities are always the best judge of the solutions they need. So this is going to be an effort rooted in communities and states. But in the Dukakis Benson administration, we will be there with you, because an America where the rich-get richer. And the middle class gets squeezed and the poor gets homeless, is not Mike Dukakis' idea of America. (applause) And I know it isn't yours. (applause) (Lehrer) George Bush was in Trenton, New Jersey yesterday. His subject was crime. (George Bush) I have laid out some proposals, for how I believe we can work to keep fighting crime in this country. And the reason I have made fighting crime such an integral part of this campaign is simple. Safe streets are absolutely essential to the continued economic growth of this country.

And my point is, that a tough approach to crime, isn't a Republican issue or a Democrat issue, it's vital for all Americans. (applause) For many years, for many years, liberal thinkers, and I use the term loosely, thought it was compassionate to lighten up on sentencing, to allow early releases and furloughs. We know now that it was not compassionate, but rather the greatest indictment to further crimes is the hope of going free. And after all, the victims of crime are given no furlough from their pain and suffering. I've spoken at length about the differences I have with my opponent on this fundamental issue. And that's not my purpose today.

I'm going to keep on doing that. I might add until the election, but not today. Suffice it for sale. (applause) But let me sum it up here. I think there is something very wrong, when there is so much sympathy for the criminals and very little left over for the victims of crime. (applause) So I would like to strengthen the rights of victims, and I have some ideas for how we can do just that. Here are a couple of them. First, I call upon the Congress to reauthorize as soon as possible the victims of crime act. That bill enacted under our administration allows victims to be compensated from the penalties charged to criminals. And they have that right and it should not be jeopardized. And second, (applause) second, I believe that the victim should have the statutory right, to be informed or to be present and be heard at every critical stage of the criminal

justice process. (applause) This was recommended by the task force, and it is time to spell it out in our laws. And third, victims should have the right to full restitution, and they shouldn't have to go back to court to get that right. If financial circumstances of a convict change, and in that same vein, although the federal government, unlike most states' devotes all criminal fine money to victims, I believe we should consider raising the fees charged defendants upon conviction so that more money can be channeled to the victims of crime. (applause) Our public safety officers who are killed in the line of duty, our police. (applause) Our policemen put their lives on the line every day and this seems to me is the least we can do.

And finally, I'm going to meet with the U.S. attorneys and look closely to make sure they're doing everything possible to give victims and witnesses a fully fair shape under the victim and witness protection act. In short, I am going to bring an attitude to the White House that has more sympathy for the victims of crime and much less for the criminals themselves. (applause) (Lehrer) We will continue our series of stump speeches as the campaign continues. (NewsHour music) (Charlene Hunter-Gault) Once again, a last look at Tuesday's top stories, a congressional report says foreign agents were admitted to U.S. nuclear weapons facilities in New Mexico and California. Near 1,000 people surrounded the headquarters of the FDA in a protest over the government's response to the AIDS crisis.

And an international bank holding company was indicted in Florida for laundering Colombian drug money. Good night, Jim. (Lehrer) Good night, Charlene. We'll see you tomorrow night. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night. (announcer) Funding for the McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour is provided by AT&T, combining everything people like about telephones with everything they expect from computers to make everything about information easy, AT&T. Additional funding is provided by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, a catalyst for change, and this station and other public television stations. And the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.