PBS NewsHour - 2009-03-03

Channel: malgent

Transcript

Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)

[0:09] Good evening. I'm Jim Lara. On the

[0:11] NewsHour this Tuesday, the lead story,

[0:14] the government's continuing struggle to

[0:16] turn the economy around. The other news

[0:19] of the day, including the global

[0:21] financial crisis as Britain's Prime

[0:23] Minister Brown meets with President

[0:25] Obama. the arguments at the US Supreme

[0:28] Court about judicial ethics and the

[0:31] infighting in the Republican party.

[0:36] Major funding for the NewsHour with Jim

[0:38] Ler is provided by

[0:42] the world is changing and how we use

[0:45] energy today cannot be how we'll use it

[0:48] tomorrow. There is no one solution. It's

[0:52] not simply more oil, more renewables or

[0:54] being more efficient.

[0:56] It's all of it. Our way of life depends

[0:59] on developing all forms of energy and to

[1:03] use less of it. It's time to put our

[1:05] differences aside. Will you be part of

[1:08] the solution? Chevron, human energy.

[1:11] >> What has made Grant Thornton a truly

[1:13] global accounting organization with

[1:15] access to resources in more than 100

[1:18] countries? Is it their global

[1:20] capabilities or is it their passion for

[1:22] how they serve their clients? Grant

[1:25] Thornton,

[1:27] >> the Atlantic Philanthropies,

[1:31] and with the ongoing support of these

[1:33] institutions and foundations.

[1:39] And this program was made possible by

[1:42] the Corporation for Public Broadcasting

[1:45] and by contributions to your PBS station

[1:48] from viewers like you. Thank you.

[1:52] Government

[1:55] leaders led by President Obama defended

[1:58] their economic recovery plans today.

[2:01] They urged the public and the markets to

[2:03] be patient in the face of another daily

[2:06] barrage of bad news. NewsHour

[2:09] correspondentWami Homeman has our lead

[2:11] story report.

[2:13] >> The president acknowledged the here and

[2:16] now looks grim a day after the stock

[2:18] market took another big dive. He told

[2:21] workers at the transportation department

[2:23] the economy shows little promise of

[2:25] improvement during the first quarter.

[2:28] Later at the White House, joined by

[2:29] British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, he

[2:31] said his policies are built for the long

[2:34] term.

[2:34] >> I'm absolutely confident that they will

[2:36] work. Uh, and

[2:40] I'm absolutely confident that

[2:44] credit's going to be flowing again, that

[2:47] businesses are going to start seeing

[2:48] opportunities for investment. They're

[2:50] going to start hiring again. People are

[2:52] going to be put back to work. Uh, and

[2:55] you know, the stock market is sort of

[2:57] like a tracking pole in politics. You

[3:00] know, it bobs up and down dayto day. Uh,

[3:02] and if you spend all your time worrying

[3:04] about that, then you're probably going

[3:06] to get the long-term strategy wrong.

[3:09] >> Still, amid freezing weather in

[3:11] Washington, the administration's

[3:13] handling of the economy was a hot topic

[3:15] at the capital. Treasury Secretary

[3:17] Timothy Gitener told a House hearing the

[3:19] president's policies would help, not

[3:21] hurt. He sparred with Michigan

[3:23] Republican Dave Camp over taxes. The

[3:26] president's budget increases taxes on

[3:28] every American and does so during a

[3:31] recession. And let me also point out

[3:33] that what the president gives in some

[3:35] tax relief, he more than takes away in

[3:37] his new energy taxes. That means higher

[3:40] prices for Americans for food, for gas,

[3:43] uh for electricity, and in a state like

[3:46] Michigan for home heating, pretty much

[3:47] anything that they buy. The overwhelming

[3:50] priority for the country today, and this

[3:52] is what the recovery act does, is to get

[3:56] people back to work and stimulate

[3:57] private investment. And this the

[3:59] recovery act does that by reducing in a

[4:02] very substantial way the overall tax

[4:04] burden on the American economy as we go

[4:06] through this recession. That's good

[4:08] economic policy. It's necessary economic

[4:10] policy. There is broad-based support for

[4:12] doing that. During this period, while

[4:14] we're still going through recession

[4:15] before recovery comes, we do not raise

[4:17] any taxes.

[4:18] >> Republicans also charged the economic

[4:21] forecasts in the budget are far too

[4:23] rosy.

[4:24] >> In fact, my worry is looking at this, it

[4:27] looks like, and not you, looks like

[4:29] someone's cooking the books to hide a $2

[4:31] trillion deficit for this year and much

[4:33] higher deficits in the future. Now, it

[4:35] is true that in some ways it does

[4:38] predict a somewhat more rapid recovery

[4:41] than some private forecasters predict,

[4:43] and that's because we are committed to

[4:45] and we are confident that the recovery

[4:47] act and the range of other measures

[4:48] we're going to take to address this

[4:49] crisis are going to be effective.

[4:51] >> On the Senate side, Federal Reserve

[4:54] Chair Ben Bernani got an earful about

[4:56] giving another $30 billion to insurance

[4:59] giant AIG. I just hope that in the days

[5:02] ahead the Fed is going to come clean as

[5:06] to why this is so essential. I think

[5:08] this is setting a precedent. I mean, AIG

[5:10] is not an investment company. It's an

[5:12] insurance company. Insurance companies

[5:14] in Oregon don't take these kinds of

[5:15] risks. And people want to know how we

[5:18] got into this situation and specifically

[5:20] what's being done to turn it around. I

[5:22] think if there's a single episode in

[5:24] this entire 18 months that has made me

[5:28] more angry, I can't think of one in AIG.

[5:31] AIG exploited a huge gap in the

[5:33] regulatory system. It's a terrible

[5:35] situation, but we're not doing this to

[5:36] bail out AIG or their shareholder.

[5:38] Certainly, we're doing this to protect

[5:40] our financial system and to avoid a much

[5:42] more severe crisis in our global

[5:44] economy. Bernani also warned again that

[5:47] any recovery hinges on stabilizing the

[5:50] financial system and the Fed launched

[5:52] another new program, the TAL or term

[5:55] assetbacked securities loan facility. It

[5:58] provides up to $200 billion for

[6:01] companies and investors to make loans

[6:03] for education, credit cards, and cars.

[6:07] The announcement came as General Motors

[6:09] and Ford reported sales fell roughly 50%

[6:13] last month. Chrysler was off 44%.

[6:17] Japanese auto sales in the US were down

[6:19] nearly 40%. The slump drove Toyota to

[6:22] ask a Japanese governmentbacked bank for

[6:25] a $2 billion loan. On top of the auto

[6:28] losses, sales of existing homes hit a

[6:31] record low in January. The National

[6:33] Association of Realtors said its index

[6:35] of sales fell nearly 8%. After digesting

[6:39] the day news, Wall Street ended with

[6:41] another loss. The Dow Jones Industrial

[6:44] Average slipped 37 points to finish at

[6:47] 6726.

[6:49] The Nasdaq was down just under two

[6:51] points to close at 1321. The Standard

[6:54] and PORs 500 finished below 700 for the

[6:58] first time since 1996.

[7:01] The US Senate will keep thousands of

[7:02] earmarks in a huge spending bill. a bid

[7:06] by Republican John McCain to remove the

[7:08] special projects failed 63-32.

[7:12] The bill includes $410 billion to fund

[7:15] government operations for the rest of

[7:17] the current fiscal year. President Obama

[7:21] has opposed air marks, but White House

[7:23] officials said this bill is leftover

[7:26] business from last year, so he will sign

[7:28] it. President Obama denied today he

[7:32] offered Russia a deal on a planned US

[7:35] missile shield. The offer was said to be

[7:37] contained in a letter to Russian

[7:39] President Medvade. The New York Times

[7:43] reported Mr. Obama suggested giving up a

[7:45] missile defense system in Europe if

[7:48] Russia helps stop Iran from developing

[7:50] nuclear weapons. In the Oval Office, the

[7:53] president said the letter was not some

[7:56] kind of tit fortat deal. I think that

[7:59] the report uh that was in the New York

[8:01] Times uh didn't accurately characterize

[8:04] uh the letter. It was simply a statement

[8:06] of fact that I've made previously which

[8:08] is is that the missile defense uh

[8:11] program to the extent that it is

[8:13] deployed is designed to deal with uh not

[8:16] a Russian threat but a Iranian threat.

[8:19] In response, the Russian leader

[8:21] reaffirmed Moscow's opposition to the

[8:23] missile shield, but he said Iran's

[8:26] nuclear program is a separate issue.

[8:32] We are in constant contact. We have

[8:33] spoken several times on the phone. We do

[8:36] write to one another, and it is

[8:37] senseless to deny this, but as for any

[8:40] trade-offs or exchanges, I can say the

[8:42] question wasn't put in such a way as it

[8:44] would be unproductive.

[8:46] The two leaders are scheduled to meet at

[8:49] an international economic summit in

[8:51] London next month. There's been another

[8:54] American death in Iraq. A soldier was

[8:56] killed when mortar fire hit a US Iraqi

[9:00] base in Mosul. 16 Americans died in Iraq

[9:03] in February, the same number as in

[9:06] January. Gunmen in eastern Pakistan

[9:09] launched an attack on Sri Lanka's

[9:11] cricket team. It happened in Lahore as

[9:14] the team was driving to a stadium before

[9:16] their match. At least a dozen armed men

[9:19] attacked with rifles and grenades. None

[9:22] of the team members was killed, but six

[9:25] policemen and a driver died. Police said

[9:28] all of the attackers got away. The US

[9:31] has given the clearest signal yet that

[9:33] it wants better relations with Syria.

[9:35] Secretary of State Clinton said two

[9:37] American envoys will go to Damascus for

[9:40] preliminary conversations. She spoke in

[9:43] Jerusalem.

[9:44] We have no way to predict um what the uh

[9:49] future um with our relations uh

[9:53] concerning Syria might be. Again, uh we

[9:56] don't engage in discussions for the sake

[9:58] of having a conversation. There has to

[10:01] be a purpose to them. there has to be

[10:02] some perceived uh uh benefit acrewing uh

[10:07] to the United States and our allies and

[10:09] our our shared values.

[10:11] >> Clinton also met with Israeli leaders

[10:14] and pledged support for a Palestinian

[10:16] state. She said the inevitability of

[10:19] working toward a two-state solution is

[10:22] inescapable.

[10:30] And next, another wave of global fallout

[10:33] from the financial crisis. Judy Woodruff

[10:36] has that story.

[10:38] >> In Washington to meet with President

[10:41] Obama, British Prime Minister Gordon

[10:43] Brown pressed for international

[10:45] cooperation to address the economic

[10:47] meltdown. There is the possibility in

[10:50] the next few months o of a global new

[10:52] deal that will involve all the countries

[10:55] of the world in sorting out and cleaning

[10:58] up the banking system. And there is the

[11:01] possibility of the international

[11:02] institutions for the first time being

[11:03] reformed in such a way that they can do

[11:05] the job that people want them to do and

[11:07] deal with the some of some of the

[11:08] problems of the that exist in the

[11:10] poorest countries of of the world. The

[11:13] leaders met against the backdrop of a

[11:15] second phase of the financial storm now

[11:18] sweeping through Britain and Europe.

[11:20] Markets there and throughout Asia have

[11:22] taken crushing blows of late, especially

[11:25] yesterday,

[11:28] where in the US the Dow closed below

[11:30] 7,000 for the first time in 12 years.

[11:34] Monday's bad news impacted both sides of

[11:37] the Atlantic as American insurance giant

[11:40] AIG and Europe's largest bank HSBC each

[11:45] reported record losses spurring huge

[11:48] market sell-offs. Europe is swiftly

[11:51] sliding into recession. Businesses are

[11:54] closing and banks are struggling with

[11:56] huge losses.

[11:58] The financial crisis has even sparked

[12:00] unrest in some countries over measures

[12:03] to deal with the downturn. But the scope

[12:06] of what ails the continent varies

[12:08] greatly from country to country and from

[12:11] Western to Eastern Europe. That has left

[12:13] the 27 member European Union struggling

[12:17] to find unity. Just prior to a meeting

[12:20] of European Union leaders this weekend

[12:22] in Brussels, the Hungarian prime

[12:25] minister called for an EU fund of $240

[12:28] billion to aid former communist

[12:31] countries in the region. He warned that

[12:34] the failure to do so would create a new

[12:36] breach in Europe as bad as the one of

[12:39] the cold war. It means that we should

[12:42] not allow that new iron curtain uh uh uh

[12:46] uh would set up and divide Europe into

[12:50] two parts.

[12:51] >> But the meeting ended in discord when

[12:54] Germany which has Europe's largest

[12:56] economy rejected a general bailout

[12:59] package for struggling countries. German

[13:02] Chancellor Angala Merkel

[13:05] >> I would not recommend talk about huge

[13:07] amounts of money. Rather, we have

[13:09] already shown and especially by the

[13:10] example of Hungary that we help

[13:12] countries that are in need and we will

[13:13] of course continue to do this. But I do

[13:16] not think that we can use the same

[13:17] measures for all Eastern and Central

[13:19] European countries.

[13:22] >> Back in Washington today, Gordon Brown,

[13:24] the man who for 10 years managed

[13:26] Britain's Treasury, was trying to set

[13:29] the tone for international action.

[13:31] >> We we we've had a global banking failure

[13:33] and it's happened in every uh part of

[13:36] part of the world. Uh it's almost like a

[13:38] power cut that went right across the

[13:40] financial uh system and we've got to

[13:42] rebuild that financial system. We've got

[13:44] to isolate the bad assets. Uh we've got

[13:47] to underwrite the financial uh system so

[13:49] that loans can start again to businesses

[13:52] and and families and we've got to get

[13:54] enough lending into the economy so that

[13:56] people enough credit so that people are

[13:58] able to go about the normal business

[14:00] again. Uh the prime minister and

[14:02] President Obama will meet again next

[14:04] month in London for a summit of the

[14:06] world's top 20 economic powers.

[14:09] >> For a closer look at what's behind the

[14:11] latest wave of problems overseas and its

[14:14] relationship to our troubles in the US,

[14:16] we talked to three people following this

[14:18] story. Simon Johnson is a former chief

[14:21] economist at the International Monetary

[14:23] Fund. He's now a professor at the MIT

[14:25] Sloan School of Management. Xany Mitten

[14:28] Bettos is economics editor at the

[14:30] Economist magazine. She covers the

[14:33] global economy and Shahara Zad Raymon,

[14:36] director of the European Union Research

[14:38] Center, a professor of international

[14:40] finance at George Washington University.

[14:43] Thank you all three for being here.

[14:45] Simon Johnson, I'm going to start with

[14:46] you. How bad are things in in Great

[14:49] Britain and Europe?

[14:51] >> They're very bad. East Central Europe is

[14:53] is in serious trouble. The banks,

[14:54] they're under pressure. Those banks are

[14:56] owned by by Western Europe. It all comes

[14:58] back to Western Europe. And at the same

[14:59] time, there's a big property downturn in

[15:01] Ireland, the UK, and Spain. They're

[15:02] being hit from all sides.

[15:04] >> And what would you add to that, Shahara,

[15:05] Raymon? And and and divide the divide

[15:08] between Eastern Europe and Western

[15:10] Europe.

[15:11] >> Yeah, I think I think Simon is

[15:12] absolutely right. Things are going to

[15:13] get a lot worse. The next six months to

[15:15] a year are going to be dire. Uh it's a

[15:17] trickle effect. It happens here. It goes

[15:19] to Western Europe and it goes to Eastern

[15:21] Europe. this iron curtain that prime

[15:23] minister uh from Hungary is talking

[15:24] about, it really started with the euro.

[15:26] This is not an iron curtain between east

[15:28] and west. It's countries that belong to

[15:30] Euro or the Euro land. They're safe.

[15:33] Everybody outside is not safe anymore.

[15:35] >> What would you add to that picture,

[15:36] Annie Mitten Bettos?

[15:38] >> Well, I think the the real issue in

[15:39] Eastern Europe, and I I agree that

[15:41] there's a big problem in Western Europe,

[15:42] too, particularly with the property

[15:43] markets, but I think the real focal

[15:44] point now is Eastern Europe, and that's

[15:46] the shoe that hasn't yet dropped, but is

[15:48] likely to drop and in my view almost

[15:49] certainly going to drop. And the problem

[15:51] is these countries um were basically

[15:54] running huge deficits. They were

[15:55] borrowing massively from abroad. And

[15:56] they were doing so in a way that would

[15:58] be deemed suicidal for most ordinary

[16:00] emerging economies. But they were deemed

[16:02] to be okay because they were part of

[16:03] Europe. They were converging with

[16:05] Europe. They were joining the European

[16:06] Union. The bet was that if trouble hit,

[16:08] they would be assisted by Europe. And

[16:10] trouble is hit in three very profound

[16:12] ways. They've been hit by the recession

[16:14] in Europe, so their exports have

[16:15] slumped. There's a banking crisis

[16:17] because banks have fled from them. and

[16:20] they've had a balance sheet crisis.

[16:21] Their currencies have fallen but their

[16:23] people have been borrowing in euro and

[16:24] so suddenly they face much much higher

[16:26] payments. Add those two together and

[16:28] these countries are in serious serious

[16:29] trouble. And as Simon said the problem

[16:31] is that their bankers are West European

[16:33] bankers. So a crisis and a default in

[16:35] Eastern Europe very rapidly becomes a

[16:37] serious banking problem in Western

[16:39] Europe if you will. It's the kind of

[16:40] subprime of Europe and that hasn't yet

[16:42] hit as much as it's going to. Sam

[16:44] Johnson, help us in the United States

[16:46] understand how what's going on over

[16:48] there is different from what we we have

[16:50] uh happening here in the US.

[16:52] >> Well, in the US, we obviously have a

[16:53] problem with the banking system and that

[16:55] is really holding up the entire uh

[16:57] recovery effort. Uh what we're seeing in

[16:59] in Europe is is a much more broad-based

[17:02] uh repricing of risk. Um it's in

[17:04] property, it's in banking, it's in

[17:06] manufacturing exports are falling all

[17:08] all across Europe. And and while I I

[17:10] agree with with what the others are

[17:11] saying about the the centrality of

[17:13] Easter central Europe, I do think

[17:14] Western Europe is in very big trouble.

[17:16] And that itself comes back to uh

[17:18] American banks, it makes our banking

[17:20] problem even more uh severe.

[17:22] >> How so?

[17:23] >> Well, if you take for example the stress

[17:25] scenario which the government is going

[17:26] to use to assess which banks have enough

[17:28] capital to get through the recession,

[17:30] that scenario is in my view predicated

[17:32] on a pretty good um global e economic

[17:35] performance. That's inconsistent with

[17:37] what we're seeing these last days coming

[17:39] out of Europe.

[17:41] >> How do you see that?

[17:42] >> I think we're we're much more tied in

[17:43] with the UK than we are with continental

[17:45] Europe. I'll give you an example. And

[17:47] Gordon Brown's here for a reason. The UK

[17:49] and the US financial markets are

[17:51] interconnected. Uh for example,

[17:53] Cityroups, all their offshore trust

[17:55] business is done with the Royal Bank of

[17:57] Scotland, which was bailed out by Gordon

[17:58] Brown for over $300 billion. So there is

[18:01] interconnectivity there, but mostly with

[18:03] the financial markets in the UK. uh

[18:05] these two markets have to adjust first

[18:07] and stabilize first and then we worry

[18:09] about continental Europe.

[18:11] >> If someone is looking at this picture uh

[18:13] Zany Betos and they're saying all right

[18:16] who is or what is is the greater

[18:18] responsibility here is it the US and

[18:21] it's spilling over to Europe or is it

[18:23] more Europe spilling over to the US?

[18:26] >> Well, I think I would put it a slightly

[18:28] differently and I'd say why is there a

[18:30] reason to be even more worried about

[18:31] Europe than the US right now? And the

[18:33] real reason is political. it it you have

[18:35] very profound economic problems that

[18:37] we've discussed but the real problem is

[18:38] that the Europeans cannot get their acts

[18:41] together to react in an appropriately

[18:43] comprehensive and bold manner. Europe is

[18:45] still a lot of different countries. They

[18:47] have the European Union. They have the

[18:48] single market. They have the euro. Some

[18:50] countries have the euro, but they don't

[18:52] they're not all they're all sort of at

[18:53] different levels in that. And there's no

[18:55] single fiscal authority. They can't do a

[18:57] euroide stimulus. They can't even get it

[18:59] together to have a euroide rescue

[19:01] package. And so the problem, the reason

[19:03] I'm kind of more worried about Europe

[19:05] than I am even about the US right now is

[19:07] not that the underlying problems are

[19:08] necessarily economic problems are that

[19:10] much worse, but that there is an

[19:12] incapacity to deal with them with the at

[19:14] the kind of pace and boldness that I

[19:16] think is necessary to avert really

[19:17] serious problems. So how does that

[19:19] affect solution? Gordon Brown comes to

[19:22] Washington uh this week today. He's

[19:25] presented what I guess they're calling a

[19:27] global New Deal. Help us understand what

[19:30] that's all about, Simon Johnson. Well,

[19:31] it's a bit vague to be honest. I I think

[19:33] it's it's a promise of further

[19:35] regulatory reforms. It's the idea

[19:37] they're going to clamp down on some of

[19:38] the activities that banks were able to

[19:40] do off their balance sheets before.

[19:41] These are important problems, but

[19:43] they're things that you need to fix sort

[19:44] of down the road before to preempt the

[19:46] next crisis. There's very little

[19:48] concrete on the agenda been put on the

[19:50] agenda by Mr. Brown or yet by the Obama

[19:52] administration that really address the

[19:54] severity of the problems that that we're

[19:55] talking about right now in in Europe um

[19:58] and and around the world.

[19:59] >> Why is that? Well, I I think the the

[20:02] problems are exactly as Annie said that

[20:04] it's we talk about as a global crisis,

[20:06] but really the epicenter at this moment

[20:08] um is is in Europe and there's this

[20:10] political problem. It's there's a great

[20:11] deal of awkwardness. Of course, Mr.

[20:12] Brown, who is here today, doesn't speak

[20:14] on behalf of the Euro zone and the

[20:15] problems are very much Euro zone

[20:17] problems. The European Central Bank, for

[20:18] example, is running what in in in my

[20:20] view, in the view of many is a monetary

[20:22] policy that's too tight under these

[20:23] circumstances and that makes life very

[20:25] difficult for some of the weaker members

[20:26] of the Euro zone. At the same time,

[20:28] Germany doesn't want to help the weaker

[20:30] members. Very tough standoff right now.

[20:32] >> So how do how is there going to be or is

[20:35] there going to be shahara rayman

[20:36] cooperation or coordination within the

[20:39] European countries? I agree with Zany. I

[20:41] think that they don't have the

[20:42] institutional structure to do something

[20:44] that we are doing. I I said on the show

[20:46] two months ago, I much rather be us than

[20:49] them. At least in in the medium term, we

[20:52] are in a deeper hole, a larger hole, but

[20:54] we will eventually get out. they are

[20:56] going to stumble around for quite some

[20:58] time because structurally they are tied

[21:00] up and you know and Gordon Brown and and

[21:02] he may not speak for continental Europe

[21:04] but I do believe he speaks for Europeans

[21:06] at large when he's coming here to

[21:08] actually convince not convince us but

[21:10] tell us look call a horse a horse we are

[21:13] to some degree looking like the European

[21:15] financial landscape and we are not

[21:17] admitting it we don't like the word

[21:19] nationalization but we are headed there

[21:21] at least for for at least 5 to seven

[21:23] years to come

[21:24] >> how much does it matter to the United

[21:26] States whether and how fast this gets

[21:28] resolved. Annie even better.

[21:30] >> Oh, enormously. I mean, I the world

[21:32] economy is in an extraordinarily fragile

[21:34] position. We have the worst global

[21:36] recession since the 1930s. If you have

[21:38] another big shock, particularly one

[21:40] that's avoidable, and I think at this

[21:42] stage, this really nasty scenario in

[21:44] Europe is still avoidable. But if you

[21:46] fail to avoid it, then we have another

[21:48] downward kick to a world economy that's

[21:49] already reeling. So, it seems to me that

[21:51] we're in a we're in a fantastically

[21:53] dangerous position. And it's one where,

[21:55] you know, Gordon Brown is absolutely

[21:56] right. We need leaders to come together.

[21:58] We need a global New Deal, if you will.

[22:00] But the risk is that they have a new

[22:02] deal that focuses on, you know,

[22:03] improving the fire station and not one

[22:05] that focuses on putting out the fire

[22:07] right now.

[22:07] >> So, what should they be doing, Simon

[22:09] Johnson?

[22:10] >> They they they need a European solution.

[22:12] They need a European uh stability fund

[22:14] of the kind actually the Hungarians are

[22:15] proposing. Nobody wants to hear it from

[22:17] the Hungarians. Obviously, they're in

[22:19] big trouble, partly of their own making.

[22:21] But they were also encouraged by Western

[22:22] Europe, by the rest of the European

[22:24] Union, you've joined the European Union.

[22:25] You're going to be rich. You can have

[22:27] extraordinary fast credit growth. Go for

[22:29] it. Don't worry about the risk. We'll

[22:30] take care of you if something goes

[22:31] wrong. Now, they're saying to them, oh

[22:33] no, not our business. You go see the

[22:34] IMF. That's a very tough thing to say to

[22:36] your friends and neighbors.

[22:37] >> I hear you all describing the problem.

[22:39] What I don't hear is is that there's a

[22:41] realistic, politically realistic

[22:43] solution out there. I think the only

[22:45] realistic answer right now is to

[22:48] understand that anyone who belongs to

[22:50] Euroland or the Euro zone is safe.

[22:52] Everybody outside, it's a gamble.

[22:54] >> And you have this uh not just this

[22:56] meeting this week to to look ahead, but

[22:59] you have the in the next few weeks a

[23:01] meeting of the so-called G20, the top 20

[23:06] uh I guess most economically powerful

[23:08] countries. Does it matter what comes out

[23:11] of that meeting? How important is it? Is

[23:12] it just another meeting? Sander Johnson.

[23:15] No,

[23:15] >> I think it's very important. I think

[23:16] what will come out of it is another

[23:17] meeting. They'll agree to meet again. I

[23:20] I'm not very optimistic in terms of

[23:21] concrete deliverables that will really

[23:23] address today's problems. They'll talk

[23:24] about a medium-term regulatory agenda,

[23:27] but that's I think largely a smokeokc

[23:29] screen at this point.

[23:29] >> And how important um to use Annie

[23:32] Mittenb's leadership from the United

[23:34] States in all of this?

[23:36] >> Oh, enormously important because in the

[23:38] end, everybody looks to the United

[23:39] States for leadership. The rest of the

[23:41] world is crying out for American

[23:42] leadership in terms of what to do about

[23:44] this global problem. And and I wish the

[23:47] Europeans would get their acts together

[23:49] to to show leadership themselves, but

[23:50] the sorry truth is that right now they

[23:52] can't even get it together to sort out

[23:54] the problem in their backyard. Never

[23:55] mind come together more globally. I

[23:57] think no, I'm not cataclysmically de

[24:00] depressed because I think that in the

[24:01] end

[24:03] they will come together, but it's going

[24:04] to take a very nasty crisis and they'll

[24:06] do it 10 minutes too late. And right now

[24:09] we still have time to prevent a really

[24:11] nasty outcome in Eastern Europe. But I I

[24:12] fear that action won't be taken in time.

[24:14] And so we'll be picking up the pieces of

[24:16] another downward leg in what is already

[24:18] a huge global mess.

[24:19] >> Quick last comments.

[24:20] >> I don't think they're going to come on

[24:22] 10 minutes later. I think it's too late.

[24:24] I think the the the ugly head of

[24:25] protectionism is there. Um it's happened

[24:28] in France just now. $6 billion for the

[24:30] French automobile industry. It's not

[24:31] going to stop and that's going to hurt

[24:33] the poorest of the East European

[24:34] countries. Oh, not a particularly

[24:36] uplifting conclusion, but the way it is.

[24:40] Shahara Raymon, thank you. Simon Johnson

[24:43] and Zany Mitten Meadows, we appreciate

[24:44] it all three of you. Thank you.

[24:47] >> And still to come on the NewsHour

[24:49] tonight, judges stepping aside and what

[24:52] now for the Republican party. But first,

[24:55] this is pledge week on public

[24:56] television. And we're taking a short

[24:58] break now so your public television

[25:00] station can ask for your support. That

[25:03] support helps keep programs like ours on

[25:06] the air.

[25:08] >> These are challenging times, but each

[25:10] week the NewsHour helps you meet these

[25:12] challenges. Helps you make sense of

[25:14] what's happening around you here in our

[25:15] region, across the nation, and around

[25:17] the world. Hello, I'm Vince Patton from

[25:20] Oregon Field Guide here with John Bell

[25:22] from OPB Membership. The NewsHour

[25:24] provides in-depth coverage you just

[25:26] can't find anywhere else. And with

[25:28] programs like Frontline, Moyers, and now

[25:31] we tell those stories that wouldn't be

[25:32] told if not for an independent public

[25:34] television system. But that independence

[25:37] comes at a price. OPB isn't owned by a

[25:39] deep pocketed corporation. It's owned by

[25:42] you. Life is better with OPB. It's more

[25:45] curious, more informed, and more

[25:47] community-minded. And OPB is better with

[25:50] you. It's your support that secures the

[25:52] future of OPB tonight. It's one of the

[25:54] most important investments you can make,

[25:56] reflecting your values and ensuring the

[25:59] continuation of intelligent, balanced

[26:01] news and information in our region. Your

[26:04] gift of financial support of 35,50,

[26:07] $120 or more will help ensure that there

[26:09] is always a place on broadcast

[26:11] television for news and information

[26:13] programs that go beyond the sound bites

[26:15] to tell the whole story so that you can

[26:17] make up your own mind.

[26:19] >> And we have some special thank you gifts

[26:21] to encourage your support of OPB. Now,

[26:23] contribute $60 or more and we'll thank

[26:25] you with our brand new Oregon Icon

[26:28] Series coffee mug. You'll have a

[26:29] wonderful souvenir of your support and

[26:31] the satisfaction of knowing that you are

[26:33] doing your part to keep programs of this

[26:35] quality available for everyone. Or make

[26:39] a contribution of $90 and we'll thank

[26:41] you with our new OPB stainless steel

[26:43] water bottle. It's perfect for your

[26:45] daily workout or your weekend outings

[26:47] and it helps keep a few more plastic

[26:48] bottles out of the landfill. Make that

[26:51] important call of support right now to 1

[26:53] 800-245-2346

[26:55] or visit our safe and secure

[26:57] contribution page at opb.org.

[27:00] Digging deep into a story takes a lot of

[27:02] time and frankly a lot of money. Not

[27:04] every station out there is willing to

[27:06] dedicate the resources required to

[27:08] create a program like this. But here at

[27:10] OPB, we think that a program like the

[27:12] NewsHour is not only worth the effort,

[27:14] it is also our responsibility to our

[27:17] community. We believe that public

[27:18] television exists to serve citizens, not

[27:21] just consumers. The emphasis is not on

[27:24] sensationalism, but on stories that

[27:26] matter, reported on by people with

[27:28] experience and dedication to getting the

[27:30] story right. And this is how it works.

[27:33] We come to you a few times a year and

[27:35] ask you directly to decide whether you,

[27:37] your family, and your community benefit

[27:39] from the programs that only OPB

[27:41] provides. And then we ask you to do your

[27:43] part to help pay for it. 70% of the

[27:46] funds we raise come directly from

[27:47] individuals like you. And those funds

[27:50] allow us to purchase, produce, and

[27:52] broadcast the very best news,

[27:54] documentary, arts, and history programs

[27:56] available. So, please make your call now

[27:59] 1 8002452346

[28:02] or online at opb.org. You'll benefit not

[28:05] only yourself, but everyone who finds a

[28:07] home here at OPB. Every contribution

[28:10] makes a difference. Our membership

[28:12] starts at $35 a year. just $25 if you're

[28:15] a senior or person with disabilities.

[28:18] You'll receive a one-year subscription

[28:19] to the OPB member guide with schedules

[28:21] for all three OPB digital TV channels,

[28:25] plus behindthe-scenes information and

[28:26] member onlyly discounts. Every gift is

[28:29] important. And I'd like to ask you to

[28:31] consider making a gift of $1,000. Now,

[28:34] that comes to just $83 a month, and

[28:36] you'll be welcomed into our cornerstone

[28:38] society with invitations to special

[28:40] station events and our salon series. OPB

[28:43] is a service that is here to serve

[28:44] everyone in our community regardless of

[28:46] their ability to pay. And your generous

[28:49] cornerstone gift will make sure that

[28:51] continues. Whether it's news and

[28:53] documentaries, arts and performance, or

[28:55] how-to and children's programs, OPB is

[28:58] dedicated to serving the needs of all

[29:00] our viewers. That is our mission. That

[29:02] is our passion. We can only do this with

[29:05] your help. Please make your call right

[29:07] now. 1 8002452346

[29:11] or online at opb.org. And thank you.

[29:22] And now Ray Suarez has our Supreme Court

[29:25] and the judges story. At issue at the

[29:28] high court today, when must elected

[29:31] judges recuse themselves from cases

[29:33] because of the appearance of bias? And

[29:35] here to walk us through the arguments is

[29:37] Marcia Coyle of the National Law

[29:40] Journal. And Marca, this West Virginia

[29:42] case came to the high court today. What

[29:43] was it issue?

[29:45] >> Hugh Capertton owned a coal mining

[29:47] company in West Virginia. He won a $50

[29:50] million jury award against another coal

[29:54] mining company owned by a fellow by the

[29:56] name of Don Blankenship. basically

[29:58] because of the way in which Blankenship

[30:01] put Capertton's company out of business.

[30:05] Between the time of that jury award and

[30:07] a widely anticipated appeal by

[30:10] Blankenship, there was an election for a

[30:12] seat on the West Virginia Supreme Court.

[30:15] Blankenship contributed $3 million in

[30:18] direct and indirect contributions to an

[30:21] attorney named Brent Benjamin in in

[30:24] order to defeat an incumbent judge on

[30:26] that court. Benjamin won. Uh the appeal

[30:30] came up before him and other judges on

[30:33] the court. Caperton asked Benjamin to

[30:36] recuse himself, step aside because of

[30:38] the campaign contributions connection.

[30:41] Benjamin refused to step aside,

[30:44] ultimately ruled in a 3-2 decision in

[30:47] favor of blankenship. Capertton brought

[30:49] the appeal to the Supreme Court saying

[30:52] due process which protects our right to

[30:54] fair trials by an impartial decision

[30:57] maker among other things demanded that

[31:00] Benjamin should have stepped aside

[31:01] because of the appearance of bias.

[31:04] >> Has the Supreme Court ever been asked to

[31:07] rule on when a judge should recuse him

[31:10] or herself?

[31:11] >> Oh yes, absolutely. But never in this

[31:13] context of campaign contributions to a

[31:16] judicial campaign. The court has said

[31:19] basically that a judge should recuse him

[31:22] or herself in two types of cases where

[31:24] the judge has a financial interest in

[31:27] the outcome of the case and in

[31:29] proceedings related to a judge's

[31:31] issuance of a contempt order.

[31:33] >> So what happened in today's argument?

[31:36] How did the justices break down? Where

[31:37] did the questioning go?

[31:39] >> It was really a very good argument by

[31:41] two very experienced Supreme Court

[31:43] lawyers. And my sense was that there are

[31:46] a number of justices who feel that

[31:50] Justice Benjamin in this case should

[31:52] have stepped aside. But what dominated

[31:54] the arguments was the more difficult

[31:56] question of what kind of standard or

[31:59] test do we offer judges that'll enable

[32:03] them to know when campaign contributions

[32:06] in in their campaigns create a due

[32:09] process problem? when does it rise to

[32:11] the level that it implicates the

[32:13] constitution? Uh Ted Olsen, Theodore

[32:16] Olsen represented Mr. Capertton in the

[32:19] arguments and he told the justices that

[32:22] he felt that the appearance of bias was

[32:25] something that could trigger the

[32:27] constitution and that the test here

[32:29] really should be what would a reasonable

[32:32] person faced with all the facts believe

[32:35] would that person believe that the judge

[32:37] could be impartial. The court also uh

[32:40] had problems with this. Um uh Chief

[32:43] Justice Roberts uh Justice Scalia was

[32:46] the most vocal skeptic here. They felt

[32:48] that this appearance or probability of

[32:51] bias standard was too vague, would

[32:53] require case byase determination.

[32:56] Justice Scaliz said that's no way to run

[32:58] a system.

[33:00] >> So they were trying to figure out when

[33:02] the possibility of bias crosses the line

[33:05] and becomes probability.

[33:07] >> Exactly. In fact, Chief Justice Roberts

[33:09] said, "What percentage? 50% or more?"

[33:12] And Mr. Olsen said, "Well, look, you

[33:14] know, uh, probability is not as is no

[33:18] looser a term than probable cause under

[33:21] the Fourth Amendment for police

[33:22] searches." And again, he repeated that

[33:25] the reasonable person test is a test

[33:27] that courts have used, including the

[33:29] Supreme Court, in other areas of the

[33:31] law, and could work here. his he also

[33:34] was faced with a question well what is

[33:37] the political process in the states

[33:39] working to deal with this problem this

[33:41] was justice sudtor's question because

[33:43] justice Sudter explained if the states

[33:45] were were trying to resolve it then the

[33:47] supreme court should stay out of it and

[33:49] uh he noted a brief that was filed by

[33:52] three states I believe that said look

[33:54] the states are dealing with this we're

[33:56] enacting campaign uh contribution limits

[33:59] uh we have recusal statutes uh Mr. Olson

[34:03] said the conference of chief justices of

[34:06] the state supreme courts has said that

[34:09] they need something. They need the due

[34:11] process standard to uh uh reach the

[34:15] extreme cases and he said the political

[34:18] process was actually spiraling out of

[34:20] control and the trend is in the opposite

[34:22] direction. His opponent Andrew Fry who

[34:26] represented Mr. Blankenship though he

[34:28] said that the political process is the

[34:30] place to deal with this and the Supreme

[34:32] Court has said legislatures judicial

[34:35] cannons of ethics they can deal with it.

[34:38] >> A lot of amicus briefs were filed from

[34:40] outside on

[34:41] >> a lot of interest in this particular

[34:43] case.

[34:43] >> Well 39 states elect judges. So when the

[34:46] justices rule on this question, will it

[34:50] just narrowly have to do with West

[34:51] Virginia and this particular coal mine

[34:54] case or will the 39 states that elect

[34:56] judges have to take some notice of the

[34:59] ruling in this case? The court could

[35:01] rule narrowly in terms of this

[35:04] particular case, but it seemed as though

[35:06] the court felt that there was enough of

[35:09] a problem here that if it's going to say

[35:12] that the appearance of bias can trigger

[35:15] constitutional due process, it needs to

[35:17] come up with some kind of standard to

[35:19] give guidance to judges throughout the

[35:22] country on on when contributions require

[35:25] them to step aside.

[35:27] >> Marsha Coyle, thanks for helping us out.

[35:29] My pleasure, Ray.

[35:37] >> Next, what now? What next for the

[35:39] Republican party and a Gwen Eiffel?

[35:44] After losing political ground in

[35:46] Congress, in the nation's state houses,

[35:48] and especially at the White House, the

[35:51] Republican party is at a crossroads. But

[35:54] who is speaking for the GOP? radio talk

[35:57] show host Rush Limbaugh.

[35:59] >> This notion that I want the president to

[36:00] fail.

[36:02] Folks, this shows you a sign of the

[36:04] problem we've got.

[36:05] >> Or newly elected party chairman Michael

[36:08] Steel.

[36:08] >> Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush

[36:11] Limbaugh his his whole thing is

[36:13] entertainment. Yes, it's incendiary.

[36:15] Yes, it's it's ugly. Limbball was

[36:17] cheered over the weekend when he

[36:19] appeared before a conservative political

[36:21] action conference

[36:23] and Steel after being chided by Limbbo

[36:26] for his critique apologized telling the

[36:28] political newspaper there was no attempt

[36:31] on my part to diminish his voice or his

[36:34] leadership. Democrats, including the

[36:36] president himself and White House chief

[36:39] of staff Rahm Emanuel, have fanned the

[36:41] flames of the apparent conflict. And

[36:44] >> it's our desire that the Republicans

[36:46] would work with us in trying to be

[36:48] constructive rather than adopt the

[36:50] philosophy of somebody like Rush Fill

[36:52] who's praying for failure.

[36:53] >> Who do you think now speaks for the

[36:55] Republican party? Just you just uh named

[36:58] him. It was uh Rush Limbbo. He is the

[37:00] voice and the intellectual force and

[37:02] energy behind the Republican party. What

[37:04] did they say to 3.5 million jobs?

[37:06] >> No.

[37:07] >> What did they say to tax cuts for?

[37:09] >> Americans United for Change, a liberal

[37:11] group aligned with the Democratic Party,

[37:13] repeated that theme in a campaign style

[37:16] ad.

[37:16] >> So, who are Republican leaders listening

[37:18] to?

[37:19] >> I want him to fail.

[37:21] >> Much is at stake for the GOP, which

[37:23] gained ground in only four states in the

[37:26] 2008 election. West Virginia, Tennessee,

[37:30] Louisiana, and Arkansas.

[37:33] Joining us to venture an answer to that

[37:35] question are two longtime Republican

[37:37] activists, former Minnesota Congressman

[37:39] Vin Weber and Grover Norquest, president

[37:42] of Americans for Tax Reform. Welcome to

[37:44] you both. So, u Vin Weber, what are we

[37:48] to make of all this internal back and

[37:50] forth going on in your party these days?

[37:51] Well, I I want to start by making a

[37:53] distinction that I think a lot of your

[37:55] viewers may not quite know, but in the

[37:58] the conservative movement as a whole is

[38:01] really quite distinct from the

[38:02] Republican party in a way that I would

[38:03] say the progressive movement or liberal

[38:05] movement is not quite distinct from the

[38:06] Democratic party. And that's partially

[38:08] because back in the 1970s when we saw

[38:10] the formation of a lot of the

[38:11] organizations that we today call the

[38:12] conservative movement, it was very

[38:14] directly because of frustration with the

[38:16] Republican party, Richard Nixon and

[38:18] Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller and

[38:20] wage price controls and all sorts of

[38:21] other things. So there is a when we talk

[38:24] about Rush Limbbo, we we are talking

[38:26] about a genuine leader of the

[38:27] conservative movement, but it is quite

[38:30] different than leadership of the

[38:31] Republican party as a whole. And I think

[38:33] that Rush Limbbo would be the first to

[38:35] say that. So we're we're seeing really

[38:37] played out a distinction that has

[38:40] existed for a long time but wasn't quite

[38:42] as clear when the Republicans held the

[38:43] presidency.

[38:44] >> Let me ask Rover Norquist about it.

[38:46] Would you be the second to agree after

[38:47] Rush Limbbo that this is so?

[38:50] >> Well, look, there's a very important set

[38:53] of projects that need to be done in the

[38:54] next two and four years. There isn't one

[38:57] leader for either the conservative

[38:59] movement or the Republican party, and

[39:01] there's certainly no one person who's

[39:03] the leader of both. Steel is head of the

[39:05] Republican National Committee, which is

[39:07] important, but there's a congressional

[39:08] committee, there's a senatorial

[39:10] committee, there 50 state committee,

[39:12] there 3,000 county committees. Uh Rush

[39:15] Limba is a very important spokesman for

[39:17] modern conservative thought, but there

[39:20] dozens of and maybe even hundreds of

[39:22] writers and and commentators. A properly

[39:25] organized movement and a properly

[39:27] organized party have thousands of people

[39:30] being very active. Someone will be

[39:33] nominated for the presidency, but even

[39:35] he isn't the leader of the party and the

[39:37] movement. He's one of many.

[39:39] >> So, Vin Weber, tell me, explain to us

[39:42] then what's we've been seeing unfold

[39:43] this week. There seems to be friction

[39:45] about who gets to speak and and how one

[39:48] establishes one one's opposition to

[39:51] someone like President Obama. We

[39:52] >> we we do see, I think, a tension here.

[39:55] the the Republican party in the last two

[39:57] election cycles saw itself uh reduced uh

[40:00] to a fairly regional party, an enormous

[40:03] weakness in the Northeast and the

[40:04] Northwest, considerable weakness in

[40:07] parts of the Midwest, and they want to

[40:08] expand their footprint substantially and

[40:10] in different parts of the country. You

[40:12] know, not all Republicans are exactly

[40:14] alike. Um, you also have a great

[40:17] frustration on the part of conservative

[40:19] leaders with the direction the party has

[40:20] taken over the last eight years that we

[40:23] were in control basically on

[40:24] particularly issues of spending and the

[40:26] size of government and they are saying

[40:28] we need to go back to our conservative

[40:30] roots even more purely. Well, that those

[40:32] those are not necessarily inherently in

[40:34] conflict, but there is a little tension

[40:36] between the desire to uh reestablish the

[40:38] party in places where it has almost

[40:40] cease to exist like New England and the

[40:42] desire to reinvigorate our base and

[40:44] reestablish the Republican brand on

[40:46] issues that are core to our identity

[40:48] like taxes and spending and the size of

[40:50] government.

[40:50] >> Grover Norquist, does Michael still

[40:52] represent one one side of this argument

[40:54] and Rush Limbaugh another?

[40:56] >> I think this is a false argument between

[40:58] the two of them. uh both of them play

[41:01] important roles in the modern

[41:02] conservative movement and the modern

[41:04] Republican party broadly uh speaking.

[41:07] What what the House Republicans have

[41:09] done I think is exactly right. They've

[41:11] said no to the president's stimulus

[41:13] spending package which will hurt the

[41:15] economy and they've put forward an

[41:17] alternative that will actually help the

[41:19] economy grow. The Republicans are quite

[41:21] correctly putting forward alternatives

[41:23] that would be useful and positive and

[41:25] constructive and saying no to damaging

[41:29] things. I mean, the Obama

[41:30] administration, the Democratic Congress

[41:32] are driving the stock market into the

[41:34] ground with their very bad proposals.

[41:37] The Republicans are right to say no to

[41:39] that. But it's also important that

[41:41] they're putting forward good ideas.

[41:43] >> Is it are the Republicans also right to

[41:45] say, as Rush Limbbo has, that they hope

[41:47] that the president fails.

[41:48] >> Only the president book only President

[41:51] Obama equates himself with the nation.

[41:54] When people say, "I hope that Obama is

[41:57] stopped in his effort to raise taxes and

[41:59] spending," that's opposition to Obama's

[42:01] policies. We want the country to

[42:03] succeed, which is why we oppose the bad

[42:06] things, the damaging taxes and spending

[42:09] and regulations and trial lawyer stuff

[42:11] that Obama and the Democrats are putting

[42:13] forward. He is not Louis the 14th. They

[42:16] taught Samwa. It the nerve of Obama to

[42:19] say that criticism of him is

[42:21] disrespectful to the country. He isn't

[42:24] the country. He is not fearless leader.

[42:26] He's the head of the executive branch of

[42:28] government,

[42:29] >> but he's an awfully popular president

[42:31] right now, Finn Weber. So, what does the

[42:33] party do to establish its opposition

[42:35] without seeming as if they're on the the

[42:38] wrong side here?

[42:39] >> Well, you're right. He's a popular

[42:41] president and they they have to treat

[42:43] him with great respect and difference.

[42:44] And the phrasing of how you oppose his

[42:47] programs has to be done so that you

[42:49] don't want America to fail. even if

[42:51] that's the interpretation that he seems

[42:52] to put on it sometimes. But the

[42:54] Republicans can't simply embrace a

[42:56] left-wing agenda, which is increasingly

[42:58] what we're seeing out of this

[42:59] administration, not a centrist

[43:00] bipartisan agenda, but a leftwing agenda

[43:03] without losing their soul.

[43:04] >> So you're when you say a leftwing

[43:05] agenda, you're speaking particularly,

[43:07] pardon me, about about um spending about

[43:11] spending, taxing, regulating, and the

[43:13] most substantial expansion of the size

[43:15] of government uh certainly in any of our

[43:17] lifetimes. president's doing because he

[43:20] believes in it. He campaigned on it. His

[43:22] party believes in it. But it's not what

[43:23] Republicans believe in. And as Grover

[43:25] pointed out, we the reason we don't

[43:26] believe in is because we think it's bad

[43:27] for America. Republicans didn't vote

[43:29] against the so-called stimulus package

[43:31] because they just wanted to try to

[43:33] embarrass President Obama. They voted

[43:34] against it because they thought it would

[43:36] hurt the economy, drive people out of

[43:37] work, drive down the stock market.

[43:40] >> Grover Norquist, there the Republicans

[43:42] are at a crossroads. You you did lose

[43:45] ground in in the in the Congress this

[43:47] year. You lost ground obviously in the

[43:48] White House and governor's mansions. So

[43:51] what how does the Republican party now

[43:53] get itself back on track? This is the

[43:55] same dilemma Democrats faced not very

[43:58] long ago.

[43:59] >> Well, step one is we've removed the boat

[44:01] boat anchor that we were carrying around

[44:03] for the last eight years and that was

[44:04] President Bush and his failure to focus

[44:07] on running the government and and

[44:10] keeping it limited in what in its costs

[44:12] and what it's doing. Uh, and so no

[44:15] longer having to defend the indefensible

[44:18] in some of Bush's spending programs and

[44:20] regulatory regimes and new ideas that we

[44:23] were all going to pay for um is step

[44:26] one. And step two is to focus on

[44:29] limiting the power uh and cost of

[44:32] government. Uh and the House and Senate

[44:34] Republicans are doing a pretty good job

[44:36] of uniting around Ronald Reagan's view

[44:39] of limited government and a strong

[44:41] national defense. Does do the rep does

[44:44] the Republican party van Weber have to

[44:46] kind of work this out among within

[44:47] itself first before it goes on to take

[44:49] on uh the other side?

[44:50] >> Oh, sure. All I would say to put this in

[44:52] perspective, I it's it's an interesting

[44:54] fight to watch. We're only a few months

[44:57] away from election defeat. Parties have

[44:59] to go through a period of rethinking

[45:01] where they've been. Maybe they go go

[45:02] through a period of a little bit of

[45:04] bloodletting even and that and we're

[45:05] going through that. But remember the

[45:07] point of where we are in time. A few

[45:09] months from now, I think you'll see the

[45:11] Republican party coming together with a

[45:12] much more positive attitude about

[45:14] things. But you have to go through some

[45:15] of this sorting out. You know, Grover

[45:17] just talked about the problems that

[45:18] we've had with our own administration

[45:20] over the last eight years. That has to

[45:21] sort of be aired. We elected a new

[45:23] chairman of the party, Michael Steele,

[45:24] after a very spirited contest. But, uh,

[45:27] I I'm pretty actually optimistic about

[45:30] the ability of the Republican party to

[45:32] bounce back. I have seen better morale

[45:34] than I certainly would have expected at

[45:35] this stage after what has to be our

[45:37] second, you know, serious defeat at the

[45:39] polls last November.

[45:40] >> Former Congressman Vin Weber and uh

[45:43] Grover Norquist, thank you both very

[45:44] much.

[45:45] >> Thank you.

[45:53] >> And finally tonight, creating jobs while

[45:56] overhauling the nation's infrastructure.

[45:59] That was the subject of a recent debate

[46:01] by the Miller Center of Public Affairs

[46:03] at the University of Virginia conducted

[46:06] with the recent National Governor's

[46:08] Conference in Washington. The moderator

[46:10] was our own Robert McNeel. The

[46:12] participants included California

[46:15] Governor Schwarzenegger, energy

[46:17] consultant Doug Foy, and former GAO

[46:20] official Jayetta Hecker. Here's an

[46:22] excerpt.

[46:24] In the present economic crisis

[46:26] atmosphere when in short-term needs like

[46:29] creating jobs are obviously so much in

[46:31] everybody's mind. Can we also tackle the

[46:34] long-term goals all the other priorities

[46:37] like reducing emissions, traffic

[46:39] congestion? Can you do that now or for

[46:42] the next few years has it got to be

[46:44] jobs?

[46:45] >> Well, I think that you can do all three.

[46:47] You can protect the environment, you can

[46:49] protect the economy, create jobs and

[46:51] also go and build the infrastructure

[46:53] that you need down the line. The

[46:55] important thing is that we now put as

[46:57] much money behind infrastructure as

[46:59] possible. So that was the only

[47:00] disappointing part about the last

[47:02] stimulus package was that we all felt as

[47:05] infrastructure fanatics that we would

[47:07] get like 300400 billion dollars because

[47:10] infrastructure since we know as you

[47:12] could hear that there's $1.7 trillion

[47:14] dollars of infrastructure that needs to

[47:15] be done within the next 5 years because

[47:18] for every billion dollars that you spend

[47:20] on infrastructure you create 18 to

[47:22] 25,000 jobs. Do you agree uh Doug Foy

[47:26] that all these other priorities can be

[47:29] pursued while the huge emphasis is on

[47:31] jobs right now?

[47:32] >> Actually the one of the interesting uh

[47:34] statistics around fix it first if we

[47:36] repair what we already have is it

[47:38] produces more jobs and work faster than

[47:40] building anything new because you don't

[47:42] spend a lot of money on lawyers and

[47:43] permitting and environmental review. You

[47:45] just fix the bridge. Um and so it's all

[47:47] jobs and it's all labor and it's all

[47:49] materials. So actually you'll get way

[47:51] more jobs out of a fix it first agenda

[47:53] in the next two years than doing

[47:54] anything else.

[47:55] >> Jod to Hecker.

[47:56] >> I'm not so sure that it's so easy to do

[47:58] both. And while people have always

[48:00] talked about how public um

[48:02] infrastructure is this uh double win

[48:05] that you get the infrastructure and you

[48:07] get jobs, jobs is actually the worst

[48:10] possible proxy for a good investment.

[48:13] It's it is um not about what's

[48:16] efficient. It's not about performance.

[48:18] You know, a big part of existing uh

[48:20] infrastructure isn't just fixing the

[48:22] potholes. It's managing it. It's

[48:24] optimizing its performance. And that's

[48:27] not very job inensive. It's use of

[48:29] technology. It's simple things like uh

[48:32] synchronizing uh lights, traffic lights.

[48:36] >> Every job that you can save right now is

[48:39] important. Every job that you can create

[48:43] is very important. And then like I said,

[48:45] it should not be the number one reason

[48:47] why we invest in infrastructure to

[48:49] create jobs. But I think since we all

[48:51] know that we need infrastructure and we

[48:53] need it really badly, this is a perfect

[48:55] situation where we can put the two

[48:57] together, create jobs and also build

[48:59] great infrastructure for the future and

[49:01] also protect the environment at the same

[49:03] time.

[49:05] >> You can watch that entire Miller Center

[49:07] debate on many public television

[49:09] stations this month. Just please check

[49:11] your local listings for the time.

[49:21] And again, the major developments of

[49:22] this day. President Obama said he's

[49:25] absolutely confident his economic

[49:27] policies will work despite stock market

[49:30] sell-offs. He said he's focused on the

[49:32] long term. Auto sales plunged in

[49:35] February. GM and Ford sales were down

[49:38] roughly 50%. And President Obama denied,

[49:42] suggesting he'd give up a missile shield

[49:44] in Europe if Russia helps block Iran

[49:47] from building nuclear weapons. We'll see

[49:50] you online and again here tomorrow

[49:52] evening with an interview with Homeland

[49:54] Security Secretary Janet Npalitano among

[49:57] others. For now, I'm Jim Lara. Thank you

[50:00] and good night.

[50:06] Major funding for the NewsHour with Jim

[50:09] Ler is provided by

[50:12] Oil, Energy, the environment. Where are

[50:17] the answers? This isn't a liberal or

[50:19] conservative issue. It's a human issue.

[50:23] As an energy company, Chevron has a

[50:25] great responsibility.

[50:26] So, we've improved our own energy

[50:28] efficiency 27% since 1992. And now we

[50:32] ask you to join us in one of the most

[50:34] important efforts of our time using

[50:37] less. Will you join us? Chevron Human

[50:40] Energy,

[50:43] Grant Thornton,

[50:46] and the National Science Foundation

[50:49] supporting education and research across

[50:51] all fields of science and engineering.

[50:57] and with the ongoing support of these

[50:59] institutions and foundations.

[51:05] And

[51:06] this program was made possible by the

[51:09] Corporation for Public Broadcasting and

[51:11] by contributions to your PBS station

[51:14] from viewers like you. Thank you.

[51:43] We are PBS.

[51:48] Jim Ler has said he has the best job in

[51:50] American journalism thanks to the

[51:52] editorial freedom he has at PBS. And

[51:55] during his 30 years in public

[51:56] television, he's become one of its most

[51:58] honored and respected voices. We're

[52:00] proud to bring you the program's

[52:01] award-winning news coverage. But we

[52:03] can't do it without your help. Good

[52:05] evening. I'm John Bell here with my

[52:06] co-host Vince Patton. This is one of the

[52:09] few times each year that we come to you

[52:10] and ask for your support. So please call

[52:12] us right now with a contribution in the

[52:14] amount that's right for your budget.

[52:16] Programs of this quality don't happen

[52:18] without the support of our viewers who

[52:20] become supporting members. So, please

[52:22] make your call right now to 18002452346

[52:26] or contribute online at opb.org.

[52:30] We're asking you to decide how much an

[52:32] informative, intelligent news program

[52:34] like this one is worth, especially at a

[52:36] time when so many global issues deserve

[52:38] the kind of coverage they get only from

[52:40] the NewsHour. It's been a year of

[52:42] unprecedented news and OPB has been here

[52:45] all along to make sure that you are in

[52:47] the know. You can pay with your Visa,

[52:49] Mastercard, American Express or Discover

[52:52] Card or have your sustaining installment

[52:54] come right out of your checking account

[52:56] each month with an electronic funds

[52:57] transfer. And your contribution will go

[53:00] right to supporting all the programs

[53:02] that you find here on OPD. Your

[53:04] participation at any level will help

[53:06] make sure that everyone in Oregon and

[53:08] Southwest Washington has access to the

[53:11] kind of programs that only OPB provides.

[53:14] Our basic membership starts at just $35

[53:16] a year, 25 if you're a senior or person

[53:19] with disabilities. And every

[53:21] contribution helps. Consider making a

[53:23] contribution of $60 or more. That's only

[53:26] $5 a month. And we can thank you with a

[53:28] brand new OPB ceramic mug featuring a

[53:31] new image from our Oregon Icon series.

[53:33] or consider adding a bit more to your

[53:35] contribution and we'll send you the OPB

[53:37] stainless steel water bottle for $90.

[53:40] Economical and eco-friendly, it's a

[53:43] great investment and a terrific way to

[53:44] show your support of OPB. The number to

[53:47] call is 1 8002452346

[53:50] or contribute online at opb.org.

[53:54] For a democracy to survive, citizens

[53:56] must have access to information about

[53:58] the issues that affect each and every

[54:01] one of us. With so many commercial

[54:03] networks reducing their news coverage or

[54:05] even eliminating their news altogether,

[54:07] it's more important than ever that

[54:09] public television is here to make these

[54:11] programs available to everyone,

[54:13] regardless of their ability to pay for

[54:15] cable or other news sources. Your

[54:17] contribution right now is not just for

[54:19] yourself. It's for everyone who depends

[54:21] on OPB to provide programs that inform.

[54:24] >> Not even close.

[54:25] >> No, not even close.

[54:26] >> A Remington 870 shotgun to be exact.

[54:30] He just sent a ride to the store for a

[54:31] shotgun and come back with a turtle.

[54:34] They took it to the police station where

[54:35] the gun is being taken as evidence.

[54:37] Police are checking to see if it was

[54:38] stolen or involved in a crime in any

[54:39] way. One policeman said it may have been

[54:41] thrown in the lake by somebody mad at

[54:43] their spouse for hunting too much.

[54:45] >> But there could have been shells

[54:47] involved. So that's

[54:50] >> Yeah, that's bad. I've been hanging

[54:52] around.

[54:52] >> That's good though. See, folks,

[54:55] >> Fisher Communications.

[54:58] There has always been in this nation a

[55:00] spirit that just plain knows what's

[55:02] necessary when faced with a challenge,

[55:04] judgment, some courage, but most of all

[55:07] a willingness to act, to move forward.

[55:11] During the Great Depression at AT&T, we

[55:13] built the most sophisticated phone

[55:15] system in the world. Sure, it created

[55:17] jobs, but it also created a future no

[55:21] one had dreamed of. We've just built the

[55:23] world's first 40 Gbit data network, a

[55:26] faster and more advanced broadband

[55:28] network than any other in the world. In

[55:30] 2009, we plan to invest billions of

[55:34] dollars into infrastructure. And we're

[55:36] bringing home over 5,000 American jobs

[55:40] with 3,000 home already.

[55:43] If what we do stimulates the economy,

[55:45] that's critical. But if it stimulates an

[55:48] even stronger future for all of us, even

[55:51] better.

[55:52] We're AT&T. Your world delivered.

[56:00] Knowledgeable people doing the right

[56:03] things,

[56:04] the right way,

[56:07] on purpose.

[56:10] If that's your formula for business

[56:12] success,

[56:13] have we got a business bank for you.

[56:18] Sterling Savings Bank.

[56:21] Now more than ever.

[56:27] This is more than my easy button. It's

[56:29] my save so much on ink. We could stop

[56:31] shaking the cartridges button.

[56:36] >> It's my save so much we can bring back

[56:38] the morning donuts button.

[56:41] >> Hooray. It's my save so much my boss

[56:44] will be eternally grateful button.

[56:46] >> Good job, Helen. Karen,

[56:48] >> it's Kathy.

[56:50] >> Now, recycle any brand of Inkor toner

[56:53] and get $3 back in Staples rewards.

[56:55] Staples. That was easy.

[57:07] for thy gilded contrivance, for I am a

[57:11] night OF FUN. THOU SHALT not play scribe

[57:14] whilst thy friends PARTAKE IN MERRYNT.

[57:16] GRAB THEE A CAR AND LET ye mirth making

[57:19] commence.

[57:20] >> You deserve a night of fun with Kino now

[57:21] in a smokefree environment.

[57:23] >> Heavy well.

[57:23] >> Lottery games are based on chance and

[57:24] should be played for entertainment only,

[57:26] not investment purposes.

[57:28] >> By now you've heard that antenna TV is

[57:30] going all digital and the nationwide

[57:32] switch to digital TV has moved to a new

[57:35] date, June 12th. But you don't have to

[57:38] wait until June 12th to enjoy free

[57:40] digital TV. Upgrade your antenna TV with

[57:43] a converter box or buy a new digital

[57:45] set. Use the right antenna and start

[57:47] enjoying free digital television now.

[57:50] Visit dtvancers.com

[57:52] or call 888 call to learn more about the

[57:55] June 12th switch to digital TV. Tomorrow

[57:58] morning, start your day with K2 News

[58:00] this morning.