CBS Has Designs on 2 Women : Television: Producers Diane English and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason helped put the network at the top. But can they work more magic?

On the verge of wrapping up its third consecutive prime-time ratings championship next weekend, CBS is hoping for some new program magic from two women who helped the network reach the top rung.

As the 1990s began, the new pairing of Diane English’s “Murphy Brown” and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason’s “Designing Women” began to lift the long-dormant CBS, providing the base for a Monday lineup that soon would be a powerhouse, accompanied by such other series as “Northern Exposure,” “Major Dad” and “Evening Shade.”

When the 1992-93 prime-time season began, the two producers were red-hot and well-represented on CBS. English now had two series as “Love & War” joined “Murphy Brown.” Bloodworth-Thomason had three: “Hearts Afire,” “Evening Shade” and “Designing Women.”

In addition, both had acquired high public profiles. English had duked it out verbally with former Vice President Dan Quayle, who raised the family values issue over the character of Murphy Brown, a single woman, deciding to have a baby. Bloodworth-Thomason and her producer-director husband, Harry Thomason, meanwhile, were becoming known for their friendship with, and significant TV assistance to, Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary.

But back at CBS, the magic of their new comedy efforts wasn’t quite what it used to be. Both “Love & War” and “Hearts Afire” took salvos for their risque tones, yet failed to generate real excitement and became erratic in the ratings. Both series did well enough if you go by the final ratings last season, but the success of “Love & War” has owed much to its choice spot after “Murphy Brown.”

“Designing Women” eventually left the air. “Evening Shade,” which stars its co-executive producer, Burt Reynolds, is still doing well, but Bloodworth-Thomason says that while she’s proud of the show, she is not active in it creatively.

As for “Hearts Afire,” in which she is very active and which stars John Ritter and Markie Post, it was revised--moving from a Washington setting to a small town--and has been bounced around the schedule this season, currently making a critical bid for fall renewal with a brief return to the Monday lineup.

Its first Monday outing on March 28--replacing “Love & War” in the coveted post-”Murphy Brown” slot--was a success as it ranked No. 11, although it is No. 84 for the season overall. And this coming Monday, “Hearts Afire” will have Rush Limbaugh as a guest, playing himself.

English, of course, would like her own “Love & War” to retain its slot after “Murphy Brown” next season.

But, while waiting to see just what CBS decides when it announces its fall lineup later this spring, English and Bloodworth-Thomason are also working on new projects.

English’s company has a situation comedy candidate, “Double Rush,” which she says is about a “bicycle messenger service in Manhattan. It’s about people who live on the fringe of society, outsiders. It has a very MTV sound and feel to it.”

Bloodworth-Thomason, meanwhile, is also working up a situation comedy candidate called “Women of the House,” set in Washington, which, of course, means that it would be bound to command at least initial attention from viewers for its content and attitude, given the producer’s closeness to the White House.

“Women of the House,” says the producer, is like “ ‘Designing Women’ set on the Potomac.” It is, she says, about a woman who comes to Washington, a representative “taking over her deceased husband’s seat. She comes with her adopted daughter and her retarded brother and she gets into a lot of trouble because she’s very politically incorrect.”

The women working for her are a legislative aide, a press secretary and an office manager: “These women are the dregs of Congress. They’ve lost their jobs in other offices.”

Bloodworth-Thomason, working on the script this week, says she sent CBS “the first 30 pages” and aims to stir things up “without being partisan. Look, the President understands that everyone who’s friends with him had other jobs before he became President. I’m a writer, and I’m going to keep on writing what I’m going to write. He would fully expect me to lampoon him. I think he would be disappointed if I didn’t.

“This is not a show about Republicans and Democrats. I’m interested in Washington. A small group of people in that town set the agenda for the American people. I want to take a look at them. A lot of them are in the press corps. Maybe I’m wrong that this will be fun, but I’ll try.”

If the show does make it to CBS next season, “I’m not saying it will be right down the middle,” says the producer. “In ‘Designing Women,’ I expressed my opinions all the time. I’m a liberal, but I’m very supportive of the death penalty. One of the best parts in the pilot (of ‘Women of the House’) is a speech on behalf of (the late) Pat Nixon. This show would be lousy if it didn’t have any opinions in it. I’ve already told the President a few things that are in it and he laughed.”

While English is awaiting a fall-season decision on “Love & War” and Bloodworth-Thomason is likewise trying to win a “Hearts Afire” renewal, Peter Tortorici, executive vice president of CBS Entertainment, makes clear that the producers’ new projects must also prove themselves.

English said this week that “Double Rush” was in rehearsal. As for “Women of the House,” Tortorici, noting that Bloodworth-Thomason was working on the script, said that “something that comes in at this point normally won’t make (the fall lineup),” but he added that she has the reputation of being able to turn out shows fast.

Asked whether her involvement with the Clintons had affected her output as a TV producer, Bloodworth-Thomason says: “I know people have suggested that before. No, I really don’t think it did. I know somebody at CBS might suggest that or think that, but my honest opinion is that it’s just not true. You might be a little more tired.”

She said that she has written 30 of the 39 scripts thus far for “Hearts Afire” and that her husband has directed 36 of the episodes.

English, meanwhile, disagreed with the notion that the Quayle flap had taken some of the zip out of “Murphy Brown” because of the national debate over family values that it touched off. Although she turned the series creatively over to others in 1992 and it continued to draw audiences, it somehow lacked the same comedy pizazz for a while.

“As an observer,” she acknowledges, the problem revolved around how to handle Murphy Brown and her baby: “When I left the show, I left the people a very difficult assignment, to integrate that baby into a series that essentially was about a single woman with no attachments. And I think the people who were there would admit it wasn’t done in a way that people felt comfortable with, and the public sensed that. But this season, there was a marked improvement.”

Noting that “Murphy Brown,” now in its sixth season, has a commitment for two more years, English says: “The fifth season dropout rate was due in a sense to the fact that it wasn’t the same show. There were a lot of shows that were just about Murphy and the baby, and other (episodes) that totally ignored that she had had a child.

“Mothers out there said this just isn’t realistic--she’s coming to work on time and doesn’t seem to have household help. And others felt there was too much about her being a mom.

“This last season was more realistic. There were less programs that featured the baby at the center of the show but as someone else (Murphy) was accountable to. Most important, it was not about a mother who happened to have a job, but about a woman who had a job who also wanted to be a good mother.”

In the end, did Quayle’s attack wound “Murphy Brown” at all, as some observers think? “I don’t believe there was any real moral judgment by the tried-and-true ‘Murphy Brown’ audience,” says English. In retrospect, was it a plot mistake to introduce the baby? “Absolutely not,” says the producer.