tv PBS News Hour PBS December 11, 2018 6:00pm-7:01pm PST
captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening.dy i'm oodruff. on the newshour tonight: >> i'm going to shut it down for border security. >> but we believe you shouldn't shut it down.n >> woodruff:traordinary exchange in the oval office. president trump spars with nancy pelosi and chuck schumer over a government shutdown and fundingr the bord wall. then, the trump administration proposes to rolls back clean water rules designed to protect streams and wetlands. and, we go behind the scenes of a new broadway play offering a unique look realities of raising a bi-racial child. >> there was so much about the that i'd never seen or heard before, that i thought, "yes, this has to be part of our
country's theatrical tradition." >>,oodruff: all that and mo p on tonightbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> kevin. >> kevin! >> kevin? >> advice for life. life well-planned. learn more at raymondjames.com. >> bnsf railway. >> consumer cellular. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: >> this program was made possible by the corporation for
public broadcastin and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> woodruff: a televised tussle over a borll. president trump got into it today with the top two congressional democrats, nancy s pelosi and chuumer. toe fight may push the federal government close shutdown later this month. congressional correspondent lisa desjardi begins our coverage. >> 20 times, you have called for shut >> desjardins: welcome to divided government in the era of trump. the esident, as he has done before, opened a tense, high- stakes and traditionally private meeting to the cameras. >> i'd like to not to see a government closing, shutting down. >> desjardins: but never before have we seen this kind of real- f me look at negotiations between branchesvernment,
with president trump looking to press his case for billions in funding for a border wall. >> we need border security. the wall is part of border security. you can't have very good border security without the wall. >> that's absolutely not true.ti that is a pol promise. border security is a way to effectively honor our sponsibility-- >> and the experts say you can te border security without a wall, which is wl and doesn't solve the problem. >> it totally solves the problem-- >> desjardins: and democrats looking to highlight mr. trump't threo partially shut down government over this. >> one thing we can agree on, we shouldn't shut down the government over a dispute, andwa that's what yo. >> yes, if we don't get what we want one way or the other, whether it's to you or a military, i will shut down the government. and am proud to shut down th government for border security, chuck, because the people in this coury don't want criminals and people that have lots of problems and drugs
pouring into our cl ntry. so i wke the mantel, i will be the one to shut it down. not going to blame you f it, the last time you shut it down, it didn't work. i will take the mantle of shutting down, and ing to shut it down for border security. >> but we believe you shouldn't shut it down >> desjardins: congress has a long to-do list before the december 21 deadline to pass a budget. but the most stubborn block on that goal is the president's demand for a wall along the u.s.-mexico border. in the next spending bill he wants $5 billion for the wall. democrats currently are offering $1.3 billion, not for the wall, but for border security. m but the reh problem is about votes. any funding bill needs support of democrats in the senate, led by chuck schumer.t use democratic leader pelosi questioned if mr. trump's plan even has enough republican
support in the house. i if i needed the votes for a wall in the hous have them in one session. >> well then, go do it. >> it doesn't help because we need ten democrats in the senate. >> don't put it on the senate. put it on the negotiating. >> let me ask you this. ryd we're doing this in a friendly manner. it doesn't help for me to take a vote in the house, where i will win easily with the republicans... >> you will not wi >> it doesn't help to take that vote, because i'm not going to get the vote in the senate. i need ten sheators. that'sroblem. >> mr. president, you have the white house. you have thee enate. >> i he white house; the white house is done. and the house will give me the vote if i wanted it. i can't, because i need ten tes from chuck. >> let me just say one thing: the fact is, you don't have the votes in the house. >> nancy, i do. we neeborder security. >> let's take the vote and we'll find out. >> nancy, nancy. we need border security. >> of course we do. >> desjardins: and the politics are even more complicated. as democrats prepare to take over the house of representatives, pelosi is vying to be speaker of the house, though she has yet to clearly clinch all the votes needed. presidentrump seemed to nod to that, evoking fast response.
>> i also know that nancy's in a situation where it's not easy for her to talk right now, and i understand that. and i fully understand that. we're going to have a good discussion, and we're going to see what happens. >> mr. president, mr. president, please don't characterize the strength that i bring to thisg, meets the leader of the house democrats who just won a big victory. >> elections have consequences, mr. president. >> desjardins: while few ppublicans echoed the president's shutdoh, they did charge that democrats are not serious about border security. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell reacted: >> it wo them to decide they prefer a partial government shutdown to reasonable funding fri national se. i would seems as through their party is more committed tol politiite for the president, than to the public interest. >> desjardins: mr. schumer and ms. pelosi reconved outside the white house after their white house meeting:
>> the bottom line is simple, the president made clear that he wants a shutdown. if he sticks to his position for a $5 billion wall, he will get no wall and he wl get a shutdown. >> desjardins: that shutdown would impact about a quarter of u.s. government agencies, including the state department, u.s.d.a., it would mean the closure of national parks and would mean forced time off for thousands of u.s. federal >> woodruff: and lisa joins me now, along with our white house correspondent yamiche alcindor. hello to both of you. tithink we've just been watching a white house me that went off the rails. yamiche, how do you understand that the president was so willing to air his strong differences with democrats in front of the-- the public, the american people? >> well, the president wanteto make his position cristal clear, and he wanted transparenc he wanted to look strong before cameras. and this is a president who undetands the mia. he understands those moments are going to be played over and over again,nd he was hoping he
could punch hard and he could then come out on top and look like he was someone fighting hard fororder scurity. of course, what he got instead was democrattings who wereg pushck just as hard. i think the key moment was when he was talking to nancy pelosi, and mocking her, almost saying, "look, you're not speaker of the house yet,and you can't be candid." instead of being candid, nancy pelosi said, gus what, we had a big election victory, and that went to the president's heart and i think the president is feeling a little wounded tonight as he thinks about how this verage-- how this really affects his white house. >> woodruff: lisa, what was the reaction from theit cap from republicans and democrats? >> there's plenty of it. let's start with rep.ublica interesting, judy, there's only one republican i've spoken to on the hill, lindsay graham who is on the side of the president in everything he iins say graham is saying, yes, he should talk about the shutdown. it is worth it. otherwise, judy, republicans, very oa spectrum i would say ranges from stoic observation ot the hat the president operates like this often.
two, those who are openly uncomfortable with the president taking blame as a republican for a potential shun td christmas. now, they also ait he's someone who operates outside of space and time politically so perhaps this is a case ere the base is happy, unclear. democrats, judy, they think this is a win universally for them. but, however, they have to make some real strategic decisions coming oft the-- thahey think the fact the president talked about owning a shutdown. thf's what they wanted out this meeting, and they got it. >> wmdruff: yahe, we noted the president said he would be proud to own a shuwetdown. nderstand his thinking there. and is he willing at all to consider compromise? >> the president thinks a government shutdown will help him politically. he is not willing to back down from all the sourcing that i've been able to gather today. the president has been pitting americans against immigrants.ai today heover and over again, immigrants are going to bring drugs to this couthntry. are going to be criminals. he said, "they're going to bring
diseases to this country." so this is a president that is hoping if he takes jobs from thousands of people and shuts down the government that he can do it in the name of pitting americans versus immigrants. and this is something that worked at times during the midterm. yok of what he said in florida during the midterms and this idea that he ran that ad that was deemed almost too racist for both fox news and cnn and other netrks to really put on their networks. so what you have is a president who is doubling down on hisst tegy and hoping that this political bet is going to pay off. >> woodruff: and, lisa, i knowdo you've beeg some reporting on with whether there's room-- if there's any rm for compromise around the capitol. what are you hearing? >> well, think heabout strange situation we're in, jeweled nepargument is over $3.5 billion which is a fraction of 1% of the total federal budget. seats really mostly a symbolic battle. we also heard the president perhaps tip off what many people, both parties think, would be the pivot point here-- what defines wall funding. today in this meeting he said,
"wall funding is important." and then he stopped and said, but let's say border security funding is important." so if the money goes to something li fencing or cer technology, those are the kinds of things that democrats are happy to pay for and very likely, i think, to increase the funding for. one more thing, judy-- one x.factor next week. already members of congress are leaving town for good. i spe to one member who took her final vote today. so it's not clear who woeuld evn be voting on this bill. and i also think to e president's assertion that he has the votes to pass, $5 billion in wall funding, it is not clear he does and speaker ryan himself would not directly say if the repuicans have those votes in the house. so that's another problem forpr thsident. >> woodruff: lease there was significant movement and announcement from mitch mcconnell that he is willing to putm criminal justice ref up for a vote. tell us just quickly what happened there. >> this could move very quickly. this is historic reform on
criminal justice. it does omdeal with sentencing. ing it not as far as many n mocrats would like to go, but it is farther twe've seen congress to go than ever before. expect it to move fast andct exs to talk about it more on this show. >> woodruff: all ridiht, lisa desj, and yamiche alcindor, watching all these important things. thank you all, thank you both very much. and now for the republicans'fr point of vie the capitol is representative doug collins from georgia. he is also the house republican conference vice chair. representative collins, thank you so much for joining us. we heard the president saidd today he's pro own a government shutdown. are congressional republicans proud to own ithe shutdoit happens? >> let's frame this the way the president did. when he was confronted by chuck schumer who didn'want responsibility for putting american citizens below a caravan and immigrants who were willing to go under and over
walls, ihe sa willing to have the argument about who is being what here in he said i' putting american citizens first. i'm putting security first. i'm putting e willingness to negotiate and find a deal. and mr. schumer said we're not going any further. we made our last remarks. the president said i'll have this argument, but chuck schumer, like he did back in january, he has to reae'lize putting americans below folks who are trying to basically break into thicountry. >> woodruff: what about your k n view, though, congressman collins, do you th government shutdown-- that it's harth a government shutdown to get $5 billion--ver the president is asking for, for a border wall? >> i think it's a time for us th come ts table and say we need a serious discussion about this issue. we've punted on this one for a while. we've talked about this before. this is one piece about what is broken about our immigration stem. you cannot have a fix, whether it be issues of daca, issues of guest workers, issues of other thing we need in our immigration system that are viable, legal
functions without having to deal with how we handle our security. this has become an important part. nfortunately, we have had a discussion on onr the other but not both. i think this is something that is now time to have. intprovides a discussion po to jum off to. nobody would say the best way to dohis would be to d shutdown. but at some point in time we have to come up to the reality these are deadlint need to be met and if they're not met, the president is saying we needi havediscussion now. >> woodruff: even if it means a shutdown? >> at some int i think that's what we're leading to. i don't think anybody wants that. let's remember, this is the first round of them sitting down. this is the first round of president who is a negotiator, who is a deer, whout things out there. look, everybody wants to have a they want to have a clock saying the shutdown is so much. it's the way, unfortunately, this town ha t learn operate. i'm ready to see us break out of this and have honest discussions abouissues and i think th president laid that on the table today. and it was sort of interesting mr. schumerw that was the one willing to negotiate
while miss pelosi was wanting move the cameras out. that's not transparency. >> woodruff: let me ask you sbout what the president i saying. he's saying he wantaise wall. he wants $5 billion, give or take, for that wall. the democrats are now saying and we did an interview with steny hoyer, saying heethinks th could be movement on money-- in other words, for border security-- but not for a wall. would that be acceptable to congressional republicans? >> i think the president has made his-- you know, need the wall. we need that security. this is about border security. let's keep it where it's at. if that's the wall part of it, if that's the othfunctions of it, we're glad to see mr. hoyer the table to come and discuss the fact that security is needed. at this point in time i thinkto what we nee focus on is we're in the phase where it's time to fix this, it's time for the president-- as he has done today-- to say here's my negotiating point. where do we go from here?f the democrats come to the table and say, no, we're not going to doha
and if miss pelosi is worried about her position, are we're not goinat it fm a position of strength from either side. we need makeure the president, who has made it clear what he wants we're standing behind him. we have done in the house and it's time for the senate to decide who they're going to support as >> woodruff: do i hear you saying this is all the democratics' doing? the president doesn't bear responsibility for what transpired today? >> how many times have the media said we would love to know what goes on behind closed doors. why don't you tell us. and what was really interesting for me today ise president made his position. this is not something that's normal. th president likes to tal about it. he likes to have it out in public. what i noticed was intesting, as we discussed this, these are valid things to discuss. once the press left, they hadss more disns about that. what was interesting to me they discussed this back and forth yet at a cerin time there were some-- mispelosi in particular-- saying shouldn't we have this off camera? there are always negotiations that need to be in private. thnge are thi but i think laying out the framework of where parties are
was important in this part.k and i the president was right for that. >> woodruff: i'm thinking of the musical "hamilton" and the songi want to be in the room where it happened." but just very quickly, do you see compromise coming here? >> i think there's room for an opening. the president has always been one-- i mean, it's sort of been histrademark througho career-- it's the art of the deal, trying to find that way forward to make sure that we get-- his first commitment was always to border security and americans and making sure we have wt we need to then fix the other problems. i think there is room here. i think we're going to see the administration work toward this. i know the folks on capitol hill are willing to work toward that. we need to make sure we're puttrig the amen people first. i believe the president is. it's now time for congresto get on in its negotiations. >> woodruff: reppist doug collins, thank you verh. >> always good to see you, judy, take care. >> woodruff: as we just heard, for the democrats' perspective,i i spoke a shor ago to maryland congressman steny hoyer. he's nancy pelosi's deputy, and
the incoming majority leader. we went over where tgo from here, after today's ovalce ofeeting. >> he likes theater. he likes playing for the camy a. and vdifficult to have any serious negotiations when you're, in efct, speaking to millions of people as opposed to just the president or the person you're negotiating with. but it's a-- it's a tactic of his, and i think it's not particularly productive. i >> woodruflooks as if this is at an impasse in the last minute. is that wat's going on now? >> well, it appears to be. you know, the president has said last year, he's repeated ths year, and he repeated three times today how he would be proud to shut down the government, that he was looking forward, and he woulshut downtown government. and if he didn't get what he wanted, he would shut downtown government. i think that's awfully unfortunate for a president of the united states, who is responsible for the executive department, saying, "i'm going
to shut dun dn government if i don't get exactly what i want." none of us get w exactlyhat we want, and shutting down the government should not be an and as a matter of fact, i think almost every republican leader has urged the president not to shut down the government. we are prepared to fund border security. we believe in bor security. we need to make our country safe. what we don't believe iis at the wall that the president proposes to bud, which he said was going to be paid for by the mexican government,on't believe that's a very effective tool. and as a matter of fact, we think there are a lo republicans who share that view. so it is very-- unfortunately. >> woodruff: if i could disrupt intrupt. there is a significant gap between what the president is asng for, $5 billion. democrats are saying 1.something billio democrats have a responsibility here, too, as you said, both sides. y not give more in order to reach an agreement? >> well, i think, frankly, if we
had those discussions about "give me some mor,"e monf that would be focused on border security and making sure the border is secure-- i mean, he sent thousands of troops to the border to make it secure, which was very, very costly. so i think that would be a discussion we could have.t ader schumer and leader pelosi made it very clear that the wall is not an option that we're going to vote for. now, he-- his party controls the house of representatives. it controls the united states senate. and if they can pass it, fine. that's-- they're in the majority. but if they can't pass it, or ia wet pass something, then we need to compromise. >> woodruff: i do want t quote something that leader pelosi said i a report back to colleagues at the capitol aftere meeting. it's been reported she was talking about the president. he said it's like ad "manh thing for him, as if manhood
could ever be associated with him." end quote. were you there when this was said? >> i was not there, judy. i didn't hear that quote. >> woodruff: if she said this, is this the kind of thing do you think affects the working relationship between demprats ansident? >> well, i think there's nobody who uses rhec ton a harsher way than the president of the united states and makes it more difficult to reach compromise, frankly, than president trump. but having said that, hopefullyb this iger than nancy or bigger than the president. this is talking about the united states government staying operative, se aving trican people, staying on guard for the people's safety and service. and we ought not-- we ought not to get into that rhetoric. what weute to get into is you said he can't pass this bill because he can't get enough votes in the senate. i agree with that. that's correct. he's correct on that point.
therefore, he wants something, and it's necessary for him tomp mise. he says he wants something to keep the borders secure. we are for that. i'm sure we will agree to additional-- additis to the budget to better secure the borders. what we don't believe is the wall is goo policy. and it won't work. and experts mae that point to us. and, therefore, we are prepared to compromise on money, but we're not prepared to compromis on the end that he wants to seek. and if he had the votes, he could do it. heoesn't have the votes. he needs to compromise. >> woodruff: house minority whip representative steny hoyer. thanyou very much. >> thank you very much, judy. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, the u.s. sate passed a farm bill worth $867 billion over ten years, after months of stled negotiations. it includes billions for farm
subsidies, and it reauthorizes conservation programs. but, it also rejects stricter limits on food stamps. the house could vote as soon as tomorrow. the environmental protection agency called today for rolling back federal protections for thousands of waterways and wetlands. farmers, developers and energy companies had sought the move. environmental groupsondemned it. it is aimed at obama-era rules that greatly expanded ach of the "clean water act." we will have the details, later in the program. in charlottesville, virginia, a jury recommended a life sentence, plus 419 years, for a man who killed a counter- protester and injured dozens at a white supremacist rally. james fields was conviast week of first-degree murder. he drove a car into a crowd at the 2017 rally. the mother of heather heyer, the protester who was killed, spoke outside the courtroom today. e i'm kind of running through about 50 differetions all
at once. bottom line is: justichim where he needs to be, and i orughter is ll not here. and the other survstill have their wounds to deal with. so we've all been damaged permanently, but we do survive, we do move forwa. >> woodruff: a judge will issue the final sentence at a hearing in march. british prime minister theresa may began a mission today to rescue her bret deal in parliament. it faces strong opposition over a so-called "backstop" provision that could leave britain subject to european union customs rules indefinitely. may sought reassurances on thata point from dutch, german and e.u. leaders. james mates of independent television news reports. >> reporter: stop three on a frantic, some might say even a desperate, diplomatic dash across europe.al in a parl universe, this evening, she would have been celebrating victory in parliament and a triumphant, orderly brexit instead, she is now pleading
with leaders in brussels for something, anything, they can give her to stave of humiliation. >> whaver outcome you want. whatever relationship you want with europe in the future. there's no deal avaithat doesn't have a backstop in it. but we don't want the backstop to be used, anwe want to be certain that it is only temporary. >> reporter: at crack of dawn this morning, prime minister mark rte had jumped on his bike and peddled over to meet her. it's fair to say no one had quite been expecting to be daaling with brexit again the greeting from perhaps britain's most sympathetic ally on the continent was warm, but usttle was on offer. "well, you can't rsomeone a cup of coffee," said the country's foreign minister, rather pointedly. by lunchtime, it was berlin, and a red carpet hastily rolled out by the german chancell angela merkel. the message from the germans as relayed through their europe minister: it's gd to talk, but they definitely won't be open ti
neions. at the european parliament in strausburg, almost word for word the same from the commission president.he >> is no room whatsoever for renegotiation. but of course, there is room, if used intelligently, there is room to give further clarification. >> reporter: if the british strategy is once again to try to win concessions in other european capitals that they have failed to win in bru it's likely to be met with the same failure as it's done throughout this two-year brexit deal process. when they all meet together in a single room in the summit on thursday, mrs. may seems certain to face onceore a e.u.-27 speaking with a single voice. >> woodruff: that report from james mates of independent televisionews. d france, a gunman killed at least four people unded 11 near a world-renowned christmas market in strasbourg. ambulances rhed to the scene and police spread out looking for the gunman.
they identified him as a possible eremist with a criminal record. the united statetoday returned three revered churchells to the philippines, 117 years after they were seized during the philippine-american war. they were taken from a church in balangiga in 1901, after villagers killed8 american soldiers. the u.s. army killed thousands of filipinos in retaliation. today, a u.s. military cargo plane unloaded the bronze bells at a base in manila.do the u.s. ambasthere said it closes a "painful chapter." >> the bells of balangiga are now home in the philippines, where they belong. secretary lorenzana, please take them to the peopto of balangiga, he church of san lorenzo.y ey ring in peace and bear testament to the ties and values which bind our two great nations for generations to come. >> woodruff: the u.s. captured the philippines in 1898,
during the spanish-american war, but filipinos fought for independen for several more years. the country gained independence finay in 1946. a canadian judge granted bail today to meng wanzhou, chief financial officer of chinese tech giant huawei. she now faces possible extradition to the u.s. for allegedly violating sanctions on iran. the judgset bail at $7.5 million and ordered meng to surrender her ssport and agree to electronic monitoring. meanwhile, canadian officials confirmed th a former canadian diplomat has been detained in beijing, apparently in retaliation. and, back in this country, wall street had another see-saw day. in the end, the dow jones industrial average lost 53 points to close at 24,370. the nasdaq rose 11 points, and the s&p 500 slipped one point. still to come on the newshour: the c.e.o. of google faces congressional questions about
ivacy and its relations with china. the e.p.a. moves to drastically roll back water pollution regulationpa how the ment of education aims to correct paperwork errors that left teachers with thousands in deb and, a look behind the scenes of a new play about the challenges aising a biracial child america. >> woodr of a year, lawmakers have been waiting for a chance to question the head of google, much like they've done with facebook and other tech giants. that moment until today, when as john yang reports, he faced a grilling on capitol hill. >> yang: when the house judiciary coittee finally had a chance to question google c.e.o. sundar pichai, lawmakers from bh parties quickly hit
him with a wave of criticism. from the rightallegations of anti-conservative bias affecting google's search results. and from the left: questions about the tech giant's mmitment to stopping foreign misinformation and hate speech. in his opening statement, pichai quickly fought back against accusations of bias. >> i lead this company without political bias, and work toha ensureour products continue to operate that way.rw to do ote would be against our core principles and our business interests. >> yang: but republicans weren't buying it. steve chabot of ohio described looking up articles:
>> i googled "american healthcare act." virtually every article s an attack on our bill. it wasn't until the third or fourth page you would find anything remotely good about our bill. how do you explain this apparent bias on google's part against conservativeagoints of view, nst conservative policies? >> what ismportant here is, we use a robust methodology to reflect what is being said about any given topic,t any particular time. >> yang: committee chairman bob goodlatte pushed pichaabout the way google handles political ads. television and radio stations must give political candidates their lowest ad ras, but internet advertising is not subject to those rules. >> should competing political candidates be charged the same effective ad rates to reach prospective voters? >> our advertising products are built without any bias, and the rates are comparative, set by a live auction process. >> reporter: pichai seemed to struggle at times to persuade lawmakers.pa for thei, democrats had their own line of questioning. eric swalwell of california
focused on efforts to st misinformation. >> mr. pichai, part of russia'sk atur democracy in 2016, it used ads on your platform, on facebook's platform, o twitter's platform. and money was provided in rubles and from rsian addresses. at has google done to make sure this doesn't happen again? >> we did see limited improper activity and learnedrom that, have been very transparent in our findings. >> yang: pichai downplayed bipartisan concerns th google is exploring ways to re-enter the chinese market. the company is working on a search engine that would reportedly allowor chinese censorship of the web. >> are any employees having product meetings currently on this chinese project? >> we have uertaken an internal effort, but right now, launch ae no plans t search service in china. >> yang: privacy concerns were also very much on the minds of hawmakers, especially apps allow location tracking. ted poe is a republican from texas.
>> so google knows that i am moving over there. it's not a trick question. you know, you make $100 million year. you ought to be able to answer that question. does google know, through this phone, that i am moving over there and sitting next to mr. johnson? >> i wouldn't be able to answer without lookg at the iphone. >> you can't say yes or no?ho >> not w knowing more details, sir. >> yang: the hearing ends a year in which lawmakers have scrutinized several of the bignt tech g and indications are, it appears that will continue next year. for the pbs newshour, i'm john yang. >> woodruff: the trump administration proposed thell biggest ck today in water protection since the clean water act was passed in 1972. ve would reduce safeguar to millions of acres of wetlands, and thousands of streams as well. this follows an expansion of
water regulations under president obama that was hugely controversial. under the prior administration,t the governmexpanded the type of waterways that fall under federal protection to include smaller streams and tributaries that feed into larger bodies of water. farmers, ranchers and developers say that resulted in essentially a federal land gra the new rules will limit oversight substantially, so that it will protect large bodies of water, the rivers that drain into them and nearby wetlands. environmentalists are responding that this is a big blow against clean water. coral davenport has been following the latest velopments for the "new york times" and joins me now. welcome back to the news, ur. so, cormind us what were ns undernded regulat president obama. >> so the obama regulation, it was called "waters of theu.s.," would have extended federal protections beyond sest the large bodies of water to pretty
much every wetland, to small streams, to streams that didn't run year round, and iwould have required the users of land around that water to-- it would have put a lot of restrictions on what they could do with that land. it would have created new restrictions on using chemicals, fertilizers, and pesticides for farmers and land developers because those things, of course, can run off into the water eodies. it would have cred limitations on certain kinds of plowing that farmers could do, how deeply they could plow, what kind of cro they could plow. it would require farmers to get permits from the e.usp.a. to their land in certain ways. so farmers, rural land owners, real estate developers, all of them kind of said, "ok this is-- this puts a big, you know, burdenfederal regulation on how we do business." >> woodruff: so
environmentalists liked it but there was a lot of pussoh-back. what exactly is the trump administration doing? how much of all that are they pulling back? >> so the new trump it's proposed trump repalacementer rule would keep in place federal protection for major bodies ofwa r like the chesapeake bay or mississippi river. that's still covered t so a major rivers that drain into it. and as you mentioned befor large wetlands that are directly adjacent to these large bodies of water so a wetland that is, you know, rig next a beach on the atlantic ocean would be protected. stripped away, removed from federal protection, are millions and millions of acres of wetlands that don't meet that criteria. and many of these smaller streams that don't run year round be that sort of fill up when there's a rainfall, dry up, none of thosere subject to federal protections anymore. ks woodruff: and so, the fol who were critical of what happened under president obama, what are they saying right now? >> they are overjoyed. you know, farmers and lurl land
owners who als mo, of course up president trump's political base, this is exactly what they asked for.we and they said, feel like now we can do what we want with our land. we don't he to go to the federal government and ask for permission of." so they got exactly what they asked for, and they're really happy. c woodruff: now, environmentalisting from a different perspective, they are saying not only is this a rollback of what president obada but it's taking it back to what both presidents bush had do under their administrations. how do you explain that? >> yeah, so something the first president bush in particular doesn't get a lot of credit for he did pas lot of environmentalist initiatives. and he ancampaigned-- he wa avid fisherman, and he campaigned on protecting wetlann , and he put iplace some policies that were designed to make sure that, specifically, that the was no loss of wetlands protection. and that policy was sort of further strengthened by his son, esident george w. bush.
this strips away all of those protections. >> woodruff: so including what happened under george h.w. bush and his son. >> yes, and obama. so it's a very significant rollback that lifts federal protections, particularly on wetlands. yu know, back to what it was more than ears ago. >> woodruff: so what happens now? this is a prop hal. whpens next? >> right. so this is a proposal. it's open for public comment for 60 days. the trump administration will then take that public comment under consideration. it could revise or make changes to the rule. xd at some point t year, they are expected to then issue a final rul i and ths done. and then i would expect the moment that it'ets com, probably in the first half of 2019, we will start to see major lawsuits on behalf ofgr environmentaups, states, you know, groups saying, "this is going to lead to major pollution of wetlands and waterways." >> woodruff: and you were telling us the trump
administration expects that to happen. do they expect they can win in court? >> they absolutely do. but e timing of thiule is not accidental.e pectization they want to, you know, put out the final rule in 2019. lawsuits get filed then. first it will go to a federal court. and th i expectati that it will go before the supreme court some time in 2020, and this administration very much wants that to happen during the first term of president trump. they want to be able to-- this administration wants to be able to be the ones tdefend this in front of the supreme court. but there is an eectation that this current supreme court, now with jtices selected by president trump and a conservative leaning, you know, there is a confidence that they will uphold this rollback, and a lot of other similar environmental rollbacks thate we've >> woodruff: interesting that they're thinking it through. >> yes. >> woodruff: to 2020. >> the timing, the timin timingt absolutely a f the think.
>> woodruff: coral davenport with the "new york times." thank you so much. >> great to be here. >> woodruff: across the country, teachers have been protesting for better working conditions and better pay. teaching still ranks ang the lowest-paid professions in america. back in 2007, the department of education launched a program to set the cost of college or graduate school for teachers. but, as william brangham reports, that program instead turned into an economic trap. it's part of our weekly education series, "making the grade." >> brangham: the program is called the "teach grant program," and the idea was simple. teachers get a grant to pay for college orraduate school, and in exchange, they agree to teach for four years in places where'r thneeded. but according to an investigation by national public
radio earlier this year, some inflexible rules turned those free gras ernt vsttocoy ly thousands of teachers suddenly found themselves facing potentially ruinous de. one of the npr reporters on that series, ry turner, joins me now with an update to their reporting.y, cohank you so much for being here. before we get to the update, idplain a little bit more what was theea behind the teach grant program? >> sure.me n, when congress passed and created this program, the intentthns were good. point was to try to get more young, talend teachers into schools that need the most, low-income schools. so what the program did was to offer federal grants to asp teachers to help pay for college or a master's degree. and in return, these teachers promised to do a couple of things: to each a high-needs subject like math or science in a school that serves lots of low-income fthily. an'd have to do it for
four years. the trick is there was one requirement that has really caused a lot of the trouble, and that was the teachers also had to prove they were doing this every year by submitting paperwork. >> brangham: and, roughly how big were thse grants? >> so, we're talking about, generally, for a year, roughly $4,000. we talked to a lot of teachers, some got 1 or 2 t. ked to several teachers who got 4. so we're talking $16,000. but once they're connverted the from grants to loans, interest is added on. so oftentimes, teachers would find themselves suddenly instead of grad nts, they wo in debt to the education department $20,000. >> brangham: so you featured one teacher in tennessee, kaitlyn mccullum, who had this, took out these graunnts, whicknownst to her turned into grants. tell us about her. tell us whatappened with her.
>> kaitlyn lives in columnia, tennessee, and she had a problem that thousandof teachers had which is, as i said,itis paperwork it had to be sent in often time. often it was due, though, in the middle of summer, when principals who have to sign it are away on vacation. the paperwork was really fairly complicated. we even found an internal memo from the ed department where they called it cplicated and confusing. sometimeses reminderses to fillw it oe sent to the wrong address. kaitlyn, when she did the paperwork, she faxed it from her school. the loan servicing company said they never got it. she iled it in, but the mailed in copy arrived several days late. she appealed. she even got her principal to write her a letter saying, "we faxed is paperwork in on time," but these rules are really infl. they always have been. the program has been in place eal a decade, and so her app was denied, and suddenly she found herself indebtedded more
than $20,000. and she's been in forbearbece, use she and her husband who-- you know, they're rule followers. he used tchbe a tea, too. they're doing their best. they just couldn't afford to pay this back. so they went into forbearance. we said in our story, they event soeir house because they did the math. they couldn't afford it. they downsized, even though they have a 19-month-old, because they wanted to be able to pay this back. >> brangham: let's listen to a little bit of how she described the feeling of this debt. >> >> brangham: your reporting showed that this was really-- really opened the floodgates of teachers all over the complaining about this happening to them. and the department of ed promised that they were fix it. what did they do? >> yes, so the department of ed has offered a number of different fixz here for teachers like kaitlyn-- again, she had to
serve four years. do. all she made it three years filing her paperwork. she got converted in her last year. teachers like kaitlyn, as long as they can pro that they met the teaching requirements of the program, regardless of what happened t the paperwork, they will be made whole. if they paid terest, the ed department assures us the interestill also be refunded. we should also say teachers who can maybe only prove retroactively one, two, or three years of service, as long as there is still time form, they can get back on track and potentially be made whole as well. so a couple of days another as we-- as we learn this news, my reporting partner, chris arnold, and i, we acty ualled kaitlyn mccullum up because we wanted to share the news. she was the first teacher we called. ( crying )
>> brangham: that really is a wonderful-- wonderful outcome to all of your good, hard journalism. r teachers who are curious how they might proceed, where do they go? what do they do? >> first, they need to be patient.de the educatioartment is still ironing out the details of this fix. they have assureus they will post them on their website by january-- by the end o i think the best thing to do would be to go to our website npr.org/teachgrant. in our latest story we actually have a link to the ed department pageo where they're going tpost all of this information. teachers, iurage you want to go through this reconsideration process, share your sthry with us. e is a link in our story fur to do that as well. we'd love to hear from you and follow you as gutough this
process. >> brangham: all right, cory turner of national public radio, thank you so much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: a new play on broadway is drawing lots of attention this winter, and not just because of its famous leading star. it's a new drama that explores big issues about race, class, criminal justice and what it's like to raise a black son in america. jeffrey brown has a look at the intense story of "american son." >> brown: 4:00 a.m. the waiting room of a miamili station. a storm raging outside.al >> jdammit, where are you? i've been calling you four times, now five. you can't text me ba call me.
dr brown: as the play, "american son," opens, kellis-connor is desperately seeking news of her missing 18-year-old son, jamal. >> there's almost liage element, it's this room that we're trapped in. trapped in the nightmare of the play. >> brown: kerry washgton plays kendra, a psychology professor, and a mother who's long lived rswith the fear of the dan facing young black men in america today. >> grow up! >> brown: washington ibest- known for her role as the political fixer olivia pope in the long-running tv series, "scandal." she's also known for her off- camera activism, speaking out on violence against women and other issues.in tawith her recently at the famed sardi's restaurant on broadway, washingtonaid she felt a need to take on the role after reading the script by playwrig christopher demos- brown. >> i know kendras. i've been a version of kendra. but i've never seen her, you
know, in our canon. there was so much about the play that i'd never seen or heard before, that i thought, "yes, this has to be part of our country's theatrical tradition." >> brown: co-star stevenwh pasqualeplays kendra's estranged husband, scott, an f.b.i. agent, also sees higher- than-usual stakes in this play. >> in america, i want to be dog work that sparks a conversation politically, you know, because i think we're on the wrong track. and i thk this play asks all the right and hard questions of everyone who sees it. >> brown: "american son" unfolds all one sparse room in the police station. it's a story of anger and pain
now all-too-familiar. there's been a confrontation between a young black man and police. something bad, very bad, may have happened. and, as in this early scene between kendra and a young officer played by jeremy jordan, the racial divide is ever- present. >> do you have a black son? >> oh, are we really going there? >> we've been there a while. "we've been there a while." >> brown: "we've been there." that's what you're saying.lw it'ss there, we don't often talk about it. >> that's right, that's right. and i think the play is such a great opportunity to be able to talk about it. this thing with the audience where you can really hear kindhi of the audience, and you can hear the african american or other-identifying audience, at times. because people laugh a different things, and the way that the character of jamal is
written-- >> brown: we never see jamal, of course. >> we don't,ut he belongs to eryone. we actually are reminded that in him, we all have a placen this story, of this american son. >> brown: it's a complicated place, though. with an interracial marriage that's fallen apart, husband and wife brought together out concern for their son, but tangled in old tensions.y >> the pn't succeed if you don't believe that the marriage was real. >> and good, at some point.d >> yeah, gr a long time. and that the wheels come off when dealing with this issue of how to parent a child, a biracial child, in america. >> brown: also here, as we learn more about jamal and the events of that night: the values of both black and blue lives. we won't give away more here. the play is directed by tony award-winning broadway and filmi rector kenny leon, with a
of producers, including shonda rhimes, a top tv producer, of "scandal" and other series. reviews so far have been mixed, with some critics praising the performances and timeliness, while others have cited weakness in the writing and str. for these two actors, though, "american son" taps something more personal. >> i've been working on and off broadwayor 20 years, and broadway is really changing, and it's scary to me the direction it's going. tends to be more family friendly, it tends to be a lot more, sort of "light," and so to be in something that feels like a serious piece of work, that asks serio questions, in a serious venue, feels really important to a tater artist. >> brown: in the bio in the playbill, it says "actor, producer, and activist." do they go together for you? are they all of a piece? >> i've always found a very organic connection between the s rk that i do as an actor, and
the work that i do activist. i think probably because our jobs involve stepping into somebody else's shoes, and and that exercise of is what leads to greater empathy, and respect for humanity. that respect for humanity comes with the desire to make the world a better place for all. >> brown: "american son" is scheduled to run through january 27. for the pbs newshour, i'm jeffrey brown on broadway. w atuff: finally tonight, author margareod has just announced she's writing a sequel thto her blockbuster novel handmaid's tale." ur this preview from "that moment when," news weekly facebook watch show, atwood s speaks about her parametr writing the origal work. >> the rule that i set miles for
the "the handmaid's tale" is nothing goes in this that doesn't have a precedente somewhn history or in real life right now. and typically, they'd like to get their hds on the labors of democracy, and then cancel thm or subvert them. hitler was elected, but that was kind of it for elections. >> ve heard you shat before, that there had to be a precedent for everything, that this had to be within the man smorgasbord of things to do. >> that's right. >> why was that an important rule for you? >> because i wasn't writing science fictio tasy. i was writing speculative fiction like "1984." i made it a rule for myself that i wasn't going to make stuff up. >> woodruff: find all episodes of "that moment when" on facebook, @thatmomentwhenshow. and that is the newshour for tonight. w i'm judruff. join us online, and again right here tomorrow evening.fo
all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you, and we'll see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> consumer cellular. >> financial services firm raymd james. >> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the frontlines of social change wodwide. >> carnegie corporation of new york. supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the adent of international peace and security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing supporte of tnstitutions and individuals.
♪ - this week we travel to umbria in italy to find out how to make porchetta at home. then we do smashed potatoes with horseradish with a drizzle of spicy oil. d, finally, a foolproof chocolate crostata with the flavor of chocolate and hazelnut. so, stay tuned for the perfect winter meal right here on milk street. - funding for this series was provided by the following.