Skip to main content

tv   PBS News Hour  PBS  April 12, 2021 6:00pm-7:01pm PDT

6:00 pm
♪ judy: good evening. tonight, use of force. another police killing in minnesota sparks protests and focuses attention on the testimony of george floyd's brother at the murder trial of derek chauvin. then, attack in iran. iranian officials blame israel for destroying a power generator at an underground nuclear facility as contentious international negotiations continue. and empire of pain. a new book exposes how some members of the secretive sackler family amassed of their menorahs -- their enormous fortune and helped trigger the opioid crisis.
6:01 pm
>> they launched this campaign to target and attack and stigmatize the very people who were overdosing and becing addicted to their own drug. judy: all that and more on tonight's "pbs newshour." ♪ >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> before we talk about your investments. >> what is new? >> audrey is expecting. >> twins. >> we want to put money aside for them. so change in plans. >> let's see what we can adjust. >> change in plans. >> are you painting again? you could sell these. >> let me guess. change in plans? >> at fidelity, a change in plans is always part of the plan. >> consumer cellular.
6:02 pm
johnson & johnson. bnsf railway. the william and flora hewlett foundfation, promoting a better world. at hewlett.org. the chan zuckerberg initiative, working to build a more healthy, just, and inclusive future for everyone at czi.org. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. ♪
6:03 pm
this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. judy: as the trial of derek chauvin went into a third week of testimony in minneapolis today, a police killing of a black man in a neighboring community has once again left the region reeling. a warning, viewers may find some of the images disturbing. amna: in a community already on edge, police released body camera footage of yesterday's fatal police shooting. what began as a traffic stop in a suburb of minneapolis. ended with the death of 20-year-old. the police chief said today he believes the officer accidentally drew her handgun
6:04 pm
instead of her taser. >> as i watched the video, it is my belief the officer had the intention to deploy their taser but instead shot him with a single bullet. amna: please previously said he was being arrested on an outstanding warrant. the unnamed officer described only as a senior officer is currently on administrative leave. mayor mike elliott called for more action. >> we cannot afford to make stakes that lead to the loss of life of other people in our profession. i do fully support release of the officer of her duties. amna: even before the video was released, protesters already gathered at the scene on sunday afternoon. at the brooklyn center police department, demonstrators were met by rubber bullets and tear
6:05 pm
gas as authorities tried to disappear -- dispersed the crowd. >> i just want my baby home. i don't want everybody out here chanting and screaming and yelling. i just want him home. amna: the minnesota national guard activated it already on alert for potential unrest for the trial of former police officer derek chauvin for the may 2020 killing of george floyd. 10 miles away in minneapolis. guard presence will increase today with more protests planned. the twin cities area it was placed under a state of emergency this afternoon and a curfew was called for tonight. >> we have the ability to hold two things at the same time. the ability to create a space for peaceful protests and no tolerance for those who wish to do are more destruction. those things can happen
6:06 pm
together. amna: president biden addressed the shooting this afternoon. >> our prayers are with the family. it is a really tragic thing that happened. the question is was it an accident or intentional. that remains to be determined by a full-blown investigation. but in the meantime i want to make it clear again that there is absolutely no justification, none, for looting. no justification for violence. peaceful protests, understandably. amna: over the weekend, another video showing police use of force cut the country's attention over 1600 miles away. video released from a december traffic stop in windsor, virginia showed two police officers drawn their weapons on a driver and military uniform after pulling them over. they claim he was alluding police but army secondly tony and, who is black and latino somma -- says he waited to pull
6:07 pm
into a gas station because it is well lit. >> what is going on? amna: one of the officers threaten sam. >> -- threaten sam. then --threatens him. then uses pepper spray on his face. that officer was later fired after an investigation found department policy was not followed. this video was made public after he filed a lawsuit earlier this month alleging the officers violated his constitutional rights. for more on the impact and why they continue to happen, we are joined by two guests closely following them all. an activist, data scientist and cofounder of the groups campaign zero and mapping police
6:08 pm
violence. welcome to you both and thank you for beg here. lisa, i want to start with you. the police chief believing this was accidental. what was your reaction to that what has been the reaction you ground? >> i was sad for both sides once i heard it was an accidental shooting. but i knew that out at the scene last night, my focus when i am at the scene is on the grief and the trauma, the historical trauma my people are experiencing, continuing to experience with the police. my focus was on the family and not on the police or video. but i had that information last night when i was at the scene. >> this news it was accidental, how do you think that will go down with people who were clearly very upset over the weekend and last night? >> we have a great divide in our community. i think those who the police are
6:09 pm
wrong the matter what. the other side will say she didn't mean to do it. but a life was lost and we have to address that. >> you track police violence and at all of this nationwide. a lot of people are wondering, how did this incident that began as a traffic stop and up with amanda? -- a man dead? >> sadly this is all too common in this country. last year we didn't analysis where we found 1127 cases where police killed people last year. of that, 121 people were killed by police after being stopped for a traffic violation. 121 people over the course of a year. this is not isolated. this is not uncommon. this is the rule and not the
6:10 pm
exception. when you look at police violence overall, the majority of cases in this country where the police end up killing people, tse cases began as either a traffic stop, a mental health crisis, a domestic disturbance, or novel -- another low-level offense. these low-level issues actually result in hundreds of people killed by police each year. and we have to think about this systemically. it is not just an accident on part of one officer. they should not have had an armed officer on the scene in the first place. so we have to zoom out because we have seen case after case in video after video, example after example that this is systemic and a crisis across the country. this is something that will require a lot more than just simply addressing individual officer in this case. this is about the system as a
6:11 pm
whole continuing to kill people for the smallest things. and in many cases, for nothing at all. >> and you are a former police officer. this is an officer who was armed. with both a gun and a teaser. the police chief believes she meant to draw her taser and accidentally drew her gun. how easy is it for something like that to happen and as that raise concerns about training and experience? >> i think training and experience is key. it does happen. but that is still inexcusable. police officers are going to make traffic stops and they will continue to make traffic stops. but i think a bigger part of this is fear factors on both sides. and i don't think anything will change until we start talking about that fear and being realistic about that fear on both sides.
6:12 pm
that young man should not be that afraid to be arrested, regardless of whatever the charge was against him. and i say that about george floyd as well. he should not have been that afraid to be arrested. so there are some things that need to change. some big things. but on both sides. >> lkisa, specific to your community, what are some things that need to change? you are just miles from where george floyd was killed last year. >> some about four the black community is this unchecked trauma, or this historical trauma that continues to re-traumatize us. we have not been able to unpack one event before there is another event behind it. the biggest factor is the trust factor that is not there on either side.
6:13 pm
>> we look to a state like maryland that just passed a police overhaul. is it something like that that needs to change? >> obviously this is a complex issue that requires a multifaceted solution. we do know they brought out ways of the types of sanctions that need to be implemented across the country. first of all we know that we need to dramatically restrict the overall scope and role of the police in society. and so that means we are not thinking about police. as the defective response to issues of homelessness or substance abuse or mental health. since the past year since police killed george floyd, a number of cities in part based on pressure, have begun to pilot
6:14 pm
some alternative models. >> a lot of people playing -- paying a lot of attention to these issues and to minnesota tonight. thank you to both of you for joining us tonight. judy: minnesota prosecutors are nearing the end of their case against derek chauvin. it's now the third week of testimony, and as special correspondent fred de sam lazaro reports, today included emotional testimony from george floyd's brother. and another warning that viewers may find some of the images disturbing. fred: the eleventh day of testimony began with defense attorney eric nelson asking judge peter cahill to sequester the jury, with news headlines dominated by the fatal police shooting of a black man in a minneapolis suburb on sunday. >> the problem is that the emotional response that that case creates sets the stage for
6:15 pm
a jury to say i'm not going vote “not guilty” because i'm concerned about the outcome. but the judge denied the motion. >> this is a totally different case. fred: and the prosecution called cardiologist dr. jonathan rich to the stand. jerry blackwell: have you formed any opinions in this case to a reasonable degree of medical certainty as to a cause of mr. floyd's death? dr. rich: yes i have. jerry blackwell: tell us your opinion or opinions. dr. rich: sure. in this case mr. george floyd died from cardiopulmonary arrest. it was caused by low oxygen levels and those low oxygen levels were induced by prone restraint and positional asphyxiation that he was subjected to. fred: after reviewing george floyd's medical records, video from the arrest, and the autopsy report, dr. rich put the defense's argument -- that pre-existing health conditions or drug use led to floyd's death -- to the test. dr. rich: i can state with a
6:16 pm
high degree of medical certainty that george floyd did not die from a primary cardiac event and he did not die from a drug overdose. jerry blackwell: do you have an opinion to a reasonable degree of certainty as to whether mr. floyd's death was preventable? dr. rich: yes, i believe that mr. george floyd's death was absolutely preventable. fred: and for the first time, the prosecution called a member of the floyd family to the stand. philonise floyd: in may 24, i got married and my brother was killed may 25. fred: philonise floyd, tenderly recalled growing up with george floyd. philonise floyd: he was so much of a leader to us in the household. he would make sure we had our clothes for school, he made sure we all were going be to school on time. like i told you, george couldn't cook but he'd make sure you'd
6:17 pm
have a snack or something in the morning. fred: the state of minnesota then called former police officer and use of force expert seth stoughton. seth stoughton: if you think of someone who is laying face down where the head or face is against the ground and the chest is against the ground, the neck is like a suspension bridge. so it's generally accepted in policing you do not put weight down on the neck in that position. fred: judge cahill said he anticipates closing arguments will begin one week from today. for the pbs newshour, i'm fred de sam lazaro. vanessa: good evening, i'm vanessa ruiz in for stephanie sy. we'll return to judy woodruff and the full program after the latest headlines. updating our top story on use of force, in brooklyn center, minnesota, the city council
6:18 pm
voted to give mayor mike eliot control of the police deparment and then eliot fired the city manager. and in virginia, the state attorney general has asked the windsor police department to release records involving use-of-force from the past 10 years. a police chase in georgia left three officers wounded and an alabama man dead. the man's brother was taken into custody. the chase began outside atlanta, when state troopers pulled a car going 111 miles an hour. they say the driver took off again, and the other man opened fire on pursuing police. a shooting erupted this afternoon at a high school in knoxville, tennessee. police say one male student was killed and an officer was wounded. state officials say the student reportely opened fire when confronted by the officer, who fired back. there's no word on a motive, but three students from that high school were killed in separate off-campus shootings over a period of three weeks in
6:19 pm
february. on the pandemic, new numbers show 28% of the u.s. population is now fully vaccinated for covid-19. at the same time, infections are rising again -- especially in michigan. governor gretchen whitmer is pressing for more vaccine doses. but today, the cdc said that won't solve the problem. >> when you have an acute situation, extraordinary number of cases like we have in michigan, the answer is not necessarily to give vaccine. in fact, we know that the vaccine will have a delayed response. the answer to that is to really close things down, to go back to our basics, to go back to where we were last spring, last summer, and to shut things down. vanessa: meanwhile, the drugmaker regeneron reported its antibody cocktail is 93% effective after one week of being administered.
6:20 pm
the company is seeking u.s. regulatory approval. president biden ramped up his push today for a $2.3 trillion jobs and infrastructure package. he met with bipartisan lawmakers and said he's open to compromise with republicans who've criticized the plan's spending and tax hikes. we'll dig deeper into the plan later in the program. president biden has also issued a raft of new nominations to top government jobs. the police chief of tucson, arizona, chris magnus, is the pick for commissioner of customs and border protection. former pentagon official christine wormuth will be the first woman tapped for secretary of the army. and anne milgram is being nominated to lead the drug enforcement administration. still to come on the "newshour," israel is suspected of destroying a power generator at a nuclear facility in iran. a new book exposes how the sackler family became a catalyst for the opioid crisis. congress returns to business
6:21 pm
with the president's infrastructure bill on the table. plus, much more. >> this is the "pbs newshour" from weta studios in washington and from the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism. judy: yesterday, a major explosion disabled parts of iran's uranium enrichment facility at natanz, south of tehran. iran quickly blamed israel. as john yang tells us, this also comes as indirect talks between the u.s. and iran over the 2015 nuclear deal are set to resume later this week. john: the facility was knocked off line just hours after launching its new advanced centrifuges. tehran said sunday's blackout at the natanz facility -- considered a centerpiece for
6:22 pm
iran's uranium enrichment program -- had caused a fire. they called the attack an act of nuclear terrorism and blamed israel. >> various sources confirm that the zionist regime was behind this incident. john: iranian foreign minister mohammad javad zarifarned natanz would be rebuilt to more quickly enrich uranium. state media quoted him as saying, the zionists wanted to take revenge against the iranian people for their success on the path of lifting sanctions and that iran will take revenge for this action. in israel, media widely reported the country's spy agency orchestrated the sabotage -- even as officials have not claimed responsibility. but, speaking in jerusalem today, prime minister benjamin netanyahu said israel would never permit iran to have a nuclear weapon. >> i will never allow iran to obtain the nuclear capability to carry out its genocidal goal of eliminating israel. and israel will continue to defend itself against iran's
6:23 pm
aggression and terrorism. john: hostility between the two countries has played out in recent years through a series of clandestine attacks. from a mysterious explosion at natanz last july, to the killing in november of the iranaian scientist who launched the nuclear program decades ago. and iran, in turn, has carried out its own attacks on at least two israeli-owned cargo ships. israel has been critical of attempts by the biden white house to revive the iran nuclear deal, that would, in part, ease sanctions on iran. secretary of defense lloyd austin in israel this weekend said attempts at diplomacy would not be overshadowed by recent events. >> and i'm very obviously supportive of the president's efforts to negotiate aay ahead there. john: indirect talks between the u.s. and iran resume wednesday
6:24 pm
in vienna. but european officials acting a mediators voiced concern. >> what we are hearing from tehran at the moment is not a positive contribution to this. john: in a letter to the un secretary general today, zarif called on the u.s. not to use the attack as leverage in negotiations and asked for an end to sanctions that have been in place since president trump abandoned the nuclear deal three years ago. at the white house today, press secretary jen psaki said the united states was not involved in repeated the administration's focus remains on diplomacy. henry rome is senior analyst at the eurasia group, a political risk consulting company. h focuses on iran and israel. thank you for joining us. in this case, what would israel 's motive be, or motives plural? henry: first and foremost we have to say the israelis are keen to degrade randian
6:25 pm
capabilities by any means. the first motive is clearly to make it harder for the iranians to enrich uranium at large quantities and ensure the iranians are focused on securing their own facilities instead of doing nuclear research. i think there is another important motive here, the negotiations ongoing, returning this week in vienna. which is to say either the iranians will retaliate, which could have unintended consequences and make those negotiations more difficult, or iran internally the domestic politics so toxic right now, might decide now is not the time to contemplate concessions to the west. john: the iranian foreign minister said he expects the talks to go on. iran would not be pulling out of the talks. as you say, what does this do to their negotiating position, their leverage at the table? henr i think the incident happened amid a very contentious
6:26 pm
domestic environment inside tehran when the negotiators returned from vienna at the end of last week, which is a huge amount of skepticism about whether the u.s. will follow through with its commitments to lift sanctions. i think the broader environment is one of skepticism about whether the u.s. and iran can make progress before the iranian presidential elections in june. so this is one more factor that adds onto the challenges faces both the iranian government and the biden administration in reviving the nuclear agreement. john: you mentioned the biden administration. clearly the u.s. and israel agreed that they do not want iran to have a clear capability. but they may disagree on how to get there. was taking this action while the u.s. secretary of defense was in israel, do you think that was a signal to the biden administration? henry: yeah. i think it is quite provocative that you have as the negotiations were just getting
6:27 pm
underway an incident like this. it also follows an incident last week where israel was accused of attacking an iranaisan spy skhi -- an iranian spy ship in the red sea. they are trying to send a clear message that not only are the unsatisfied with the way things are going from a diplomatic point of view but also they are willing to take overt steps to try and make diplomacy more difficult. john: and by naming israel, you talk about the domestic political essures within iran. does that increase the pressure on iran in a bigger way than they had in the past with these attacks on israeli shipping? henry: i think it does in the sense that the iranian government is being very clear that this was not in their view
6:28 pm
the u.s.. it is a way of saying to the domestic detractors, we are still talking with the u.s. indirectly but they were not the ones involved in conducting this attack. you asked about retaliation. the iranians are quite nimble in contemplating and carrying out retaliations to attacks like this. i would expect that to go forward at some point. but i think the assumption is that the iranians will be careful not to conduct a retaliation that would be so provocative that would make negotiations more difficult for the u.s. to say we are contemplating giving sanctions relief in exchange for nuclear constraints. john: was this a cyber or was this the old-fashioned way, hands-on? henry: it is a great question. short answer is we don't know. we know there was an explosion at a power unit. if we recall back and you mentioned in your report the incident explosion at the advanced centrifuge facility back last summer, it appeared
6:29 pm
to be a physical old-fashioned bomb. there could be a cyber component, there could be a physical component. it kind of ranges on a spectrum. so we don't quite know at this point. but there was an explosion and that is not easily repaired so far as we can tell. john: henry rome, thank. -- thank you very much. judy: the sackler family is one of the richest families in america, donating millions to some of the world's most prestigious museums and universities. but the source of that wealth was for many years something of a mystery. some members of the sackler family own purdue pharma -the company that makes and markets oxycontin, the addictive
6:30 pm
painkiller considered one of the initial sparks for the nation's opioid crisis. a crisis that's already left more than 450,000 americans dead, and continues today. william brangham talks with the author of a new book that sheds light on this secretive dynasty. >> it's a story about a family with tremendous ambition. people who set out to really leave a mark on the world. and they did, an enduring mark that we're all living with now. but i happen to think that it is a sordid mark, and one that will be a great and longstanding source of shame. william: patrick radden keefe spent several years investigating the sackler family. he's a staff writer for the new yorker magazine, and is just out with a new book, "empire of pain, the secret history of the sackler dynasty." the book starts with the family patriarch, dr. arthur sackler, man celebrated for his creativity, and who first made his name treating mental illness
6:31 pm
in the 1940's. patrick: he was a polymath. he was incredibly brilliant. he worked at an insane asylum in queens, new york. and he had a notion that someday there might be a pill that could help people who were psychotic or schizophrenic who had other afflictions. and so he became very much a proponent of pharmaceutical innovation, of drugs, but then also of advertising, pharmaceutical advertising. and many people credit him with really being the father of pharmaceutical advertising in the united states. william: and when you look at how, back in the 1960's, arthur first marketed and sold early tranquilizers, i mean, in some ways it follows a very similar template to the accusations that have been made about purdue in the modern era, about how they marketed and sold their drugs. patrick: this is what's so uncanny about this story, is that arthur dies in 1987.
6:32 pm
he dies before oxycontin is ever introduced. but the game plan that purdue and the sacklers used to roll out oxycontin in the 1990's is in many ways a game plan that arthur sackler invented. and so he came up with a real kind of almost "mad men"-type series of very seductive tricks in order to try and persuade doctors that they should be prescribing his products. the side effects of a drug or the potential downsides of a drug were downplayed, the therapeutic benefits of a drug were way overplayed. william: purdue pharma initially made millions selling the morphine drug, ms-contin, used mainly with cancer patients. after his deh, arthur sackler's heirs sold off their stake in the company, but his two brothers -- mortimer and raymond -- remained involved. purdue's real blockbuster came in the late 1990's with oxycontin, which contains the addictive opioid oxycodone. purdue sealed the pills in a slow-release coating, which the company claimed would make them
6:33 pm
far less addictive. patrick: this was a hypothesis, a hypothesis that they didn't actually have any any real persuasive proof for. but it became a signature element of the marketing of oxycontin. william: another detail that you report was that the family and purdue pharma recognized also that if you were just marketing these drugs for cancer and end-of-life care, that that was a relatively small market, but that if you could market these to the masses, and make these pain pills for everybody, that was a huge market. patrick: this for me, was one of the most striking discoveries in the research for this book was a trove of internal emails from senior executives at purdue pharma when they were talking about introducing oxycontin. they talk about this very explicitly -- you know, we don't want to niche oxycontin for cancer is what they would say. and they did focus groups, and they realized that oxycodone, in the minds of doctors, was not as strong as morphine, it wasn't as
6:34 pm
threatening, it didn't have that same stigma attached to it. the crazy thing is oxycodone is actually significantly stronger than morphine. it's not weaker. but doctors had this misapprehension that it was a weaker drug. and there are all these emails in which these senior purdue executives, and at least one of the sacklers is actually copied on some of these emails, have these conversations in which they say explicitly, let's not do anything to make doctors realize they have this wrong. william: the development and the rollout of these drugs also coincided with what seems to be a very genuine movement in the medical community to treat pain more effectively and more aggressively in patients. patrick: exactly. it was a perfect storm. and doctors had what i think is is probably an appropriate skepticism about the use of, the aggressive use, of strong opioids for just about anybody because of a fear that these drugs could be potentially quite addictive. and so the drugs were used, but doctors were often hesitant to
6:35 pm
prescribe them. and so there's a very conscious campaign by purdue, a campaign that that recalls in many ways, arthur sackler's earlier campaigns on behalf of other drugs, to change the mind of the medical establishment in the united states, to persuade them that actually all these fears about opioids are overblown, that they're not as addictive as people have said. and in fact, the claim with oxycontin was that it's addictive less than 1% of the time when it's prescribed by a doctor, which is a wild claim with no basis in fact, but one which purdue's army of sales representatives made to doctors across this country. william: when oxycontin hit the market, problems soon started emerging. pills were diverted, stolen, abused, sold illicitly, and people began developing addictions. keefe repeatedly documents in his book how purdue executives and salespeople were monitoring all this in real time. patrick: this, to me, is the most interesting moment in the
6:36 pm
story, because confronted with this new information, what do the sacklers do? what does purdue do? the company went very hard after journalists who tried to tell these stories, something they're still doing today. and they also effectively claim that the problem isn't the dr at all, that the drug is every bit as perfect as it was when we described it initially. the problem is the abusers. and so they launched this campaign to target and attack and stigmatize the very people who were overdosing and becoming addicted to their own drug. william: representatives of the sackler's say they've not read the book, but claim keefe's earlier reporting about them in the new yorker had mistakes. the family and purdue argue they weren't alone believing these opioids could be used safely, and assert they were just a fraction of overall opioid sales during this period. they note that federal regulators approved their practices and products all
6:37 pm
along. and they also argue, many of the people who abused oxycontin were doing so illegally, and to blame that on a company, or its owners, isn't fair. david sackler: while i believe i conducted myself legally and ethically and i believe the full record will demonstrate that, i still feel absolutely terrible that a product created to help, and has helped so many people, has also been associated with death and addiction. william: two members of the sackler family -- david and kathe -- testified before congress in december. while acknowledging the severity of the opioid crisis, they said there wasn't much they could've done. kathe sackler: i can't -- there is nothing i can find that i would have done differently based on what i believed and understood then.
6:38 pm
patrick: this is a complicated story, but it's actually not that complicated. you sometimes need to back up and not lose sight of the basic contours here. it's a family saga. it's a story about the opioid crisis and big pharma, but it's also a crime story. this is a company that pled guilty to federal charges in 2007 and then again pled guilty to new charges, but a similar kind of claims of fraud about the fraudulent marketing of drugs in 2020, just a few months ago. and that was something i very much wanted to capture -- that the it may be that we don't end up with a satisfying version of accountability, but let's not lose sight of just what went down he. william: alright, the book is "empire of pain, the secret history of the sackler dynasty." patrick radden keefe, great to have you on the newshour. thank you. patrick: thank you. judy: the sacklers have agreed to pay more than $4 billion as part of a proposed nkruptcy restructuring plan. it would end thousands of lawsuits against the company,
6:39 pm
but a number of states have argued the plan is not tough enough on the sackler family itself. congress returns from recess this week, and as we reported earlier, the first stop for a bipartisan group of lawmakers was the white house -- invited by the president as he works to sell his american jobs plan on infrastructure and climate. lisa desjardins joins us for an update. hello, lisa. lisa, this was not the usual cast of bipartisan characters we see going to the white house. what are we learning from this? lisa: we know that this is a huge effort for the biden administration. this is something they see as a once in a generation investment in this country. $2.4 trillion, none of it really did to the covid crisis. all just about infrastructure,
6:40 pm
jobs, different elements of american life. let's look at the photo of who was there. it was republicans and democrats. you can see two senators on the couch, house members on the left. for social distancing you cannot see all of them. but i can tell you those members were generally people involved in transportation in some way or another in congress. i noticed something else important about this group. the president does not just need to sell this to members of congress. he has to sell it to the country. look at a map of where the eight members of congress who were at this meeting are from. the blue and red represent democrats and republicans who were in the meeting. you see this is a geographic spread. not just republican and democrat. the president here is clearly trying to bring together the whole country and point out one thing all these lawmakers have in common is need for infrastructure, water, all of this stuff.
6:41 pm
it is a very high-stakes negotiation here and he is trying to bring in people from all ends of the spectrum. judy: where do things stand? what does it look like for this proposed measure? lisa: this meeting told us a lot. we know that president bide, one of the representatives in the meeting told me and other reporters that he was actually very open to many different ideas for this large plan, including potentially an increase in the federal gas tax. president biden mentioned five cents as a possibility he did not stick to it, but said something would consider. also raising fees perhaps for elected vehicles, which now don't pay into a gas tax. that is something republicans liked. but at the end of the day there was still a clear difference in size. republicans think the proposal is way too large. president biden wants to go big. but everyone came away from this meeting saying they dfeel the president was sincere in trying
6:42 pm
to get some kind of agreement going between both parties. it will be hard to do. overall i think we are still months away from really knowing exactly how this shapes up. they are deciding the menu here. it is like they are figuring out the menu of a very large fa. they are not yet even cooking on the stove yet. these are early days very important once. judy: -- important ones. we like the analogy. thank you very much. here to analyze the politics of the jobs and infrastructure package and more, our regular politics monday duo. amy walter of the cook political report and tamara keith of npr. hello to both of you. let's pick up where we left off with lisa. we know it is early in the process. she set a few more months at least. but what does it look like the president faces in terms of getting this through congress? tamara: it is early yet and he
6:43 pm
faces multiple challenges. one is will he be able to get any republicans on board. it seems as though the white house is willing to let that play out, at least for the next month or so. beyond that, can they keep democrats together is anothe question. some progressive democrats really wish they would not split this in two with college affordability and childcare and a second package to come later. other democrats are concerned with how it would be funded. and so there is a lot for them to figure out, but clearly president biden said in this meeting has been signaling he wants to talk. at least for now. then eventually it could become like the covid relief package where they stop talking and just start pushing it through. judy: amy, how do you size up
6:44 pm
the politics on both sides? amy: it sure seems likely to me that the white house is trying to redefine bipartisanship, which they have been doing from the beginning. which is bipartisanship is not how many republicans we have to vote on this. bipartisanship is how popular is it. that means there are republican voters across the country who may agree with joe biden on what he is putting forward. and so more likely this will go through undemocratic votes only. the question to me is just how popular is this going to be if indeed this is still in the early stages, we are not even boiling the water yet. what does it look like if this goes through in july or august or september? and how much time if republicans feel like they are not part of the decision-making, how much time do they have to change the focus, to make this about, as
6:45 pm
was discussed, being too much spending? spending on things that are not traditionally seen as infrastructure. it is getting paid for by taxes raised, even if they say he will only be on certain types of people and businesses. so that is the danger for democrats going forward. if you're going to make bipartisanship based on how popular it is, if republicans in congress do not feel a buy-in, then they will not feel particularly open-minded to making this become more popular as we go through the year. judy: does it look to you as if the two sides are really listening to each other and talking to each other? because for the longest time it felt like we did not have any of that going on in this city. tamara: this is a more traditional approach where the white house puts out a proposal and then congress discusses it and there are conversations with
6:46 pm
the white house. so there really are conversations happening. whether they lead to something is an entirely different question. and president biden today insisted these talks were not just window dressing. but let's see what happens in late may, early june, as sender -- as summer drags on. another consideration they may end up dealing with is they could become a victim of their own success if the economy ends up back strong. that is a big if, but there's some fuel in there. if the economy keeps coming back strong, making this as a jobs bill rather than just roads and bridges, becomes more challenging because people will make the case there are jobs. judy: we are seeing more indications the economy is coming back. the chairman of the federal reserve said we are going to see a big growth. i want to specifically zero in
6:47 pm
on republicans. over the weekend, republican donors got together down in florida. they heard from former president trump who among others took after mitch mcconnell, the senate majority leader. one of the nicer things he said about him was he is a stone cold loser. does this reflect something seriously going on in terms of division inside the republican party, or is this just a surface playing out name-calling? amy: this is the same division we have seen now for the last five years between the so-called establishment republicans and the trump republicans. it is not as big of a problem now for the folks who are in congress or up next year because trump is not in the white house can they do not have to respond to everything he does like they did before. the real problem could be for someone like mitch mcconnell is donald trump decides to play in primaries and these must-win races.
6:48 pm
but mostly in senate races. and chooses a candidate who is most like him and that candidate is not the best candidate to win in a swing state like pennsylvania, for example. so it puts mitch mcconnell's chances to get the majority on the line. tamara: i would add that today, former south carolina governor nikki haley was asked if she would run for president in 2024 ifrump was running, and she said absolutely not. so he is casting a large shadow. his name is also still gold when it comes to small dollar donors. you have fundraising appeals coming from the republican party that basically should -- basically say show your loyalty to trump, keep giving us money. so he is still this huge outsized player. he has a piece of the base that
6:49 pm
supports him strongly. but republicans need both the trump part of the base and the more establishment part of the base to win these senate seats for mitch mcconnell to have a chance of getting leadership back. judy: is this the kind of thing that could affect their -- effect were republicans land on the jobs and infrastructure built? amy: it is about where money is going and that will be critical. donald trump is saying send it to me, not to the party committees tasked with reelecting folks. judy: a lot going on right now. thank you both. ♪ judy: researching masculinity has been a life-long interest for andrew reiner, and it took on a new urgency when his son,
6:50 pm
macallah, was born in 2011. tonight, riner gives his brief but spectacular take on confronting an outdated model. his latest book is called “better boys, better men”. andrew: the environment that i grew up in it was pretty fraught with tension. at seven years old, i got into this brutal fistfight with a neighborhood boy. i was scared. i was bloodied. and he kept hitting me. so i got up and i ran away. later that afternoon i do go home through the back door and i hear my oldest brother, yelling and screaming. he's such a black sheep. he's such an embarrassment, he's a coward. and he's talking about me, of course. that really kind of began a smear campaign in terms of shaming me. and so for years i just try to find my way, i realized out of my shame. it's how we talk and how we don't talk to boys that really
6:51 pm
is the beginning of the problem. if we are depriving boys of a language of an emotional awareness, clearly, that's going to have huge repercussio for them and for the rest of us as they get older. one of the things i'm really hopeful about is that there's been a huge upswing in the number of men's groups that have been going on in this culture. you basically have a formation of guys getting together and talking about their lives in ways that maybe they wouldn't have done that before. and so i started teaching a college seminar called the changing face of masculinity. and that was kind of one of the next big step in terms of my awareness of is on this, just this idea of what healthy masculinity can and should look like. and then the birth of my son, of course, because if i had a reckoning when i was young, this was really kind of the second big reckoning because it was no longer just my crusade. it really forced me to face a lot of questions in terms of how i was going to raise a boy.
6:52 pm
>> masculinity to me means that you always can cry when you feel like crying and you always should have your emotions when you want them. when my dad was a kid, boys weren't supposed to cry. makes me feel kind of sad that he had to go through that. to the boys out there might be struggling, you're not alone. and i just want to tell you, it's always okay to share your motions and to cry because that will help you on the way to being a healthier man in your future. i'm andew reiner. and i'm makala reiner. and this is our brief but spectacular take on being better boys and better men. jusy: and you can find all of our brief but spectacular
6:53 pm
segments online at pbs.org/newshour/brief. later tonight, the pbs newshour presents “prince philip: a royal life." with our partners at itn, we explore prince philip's life and legacy after his death last week at the age of 99. that's "prince philip: a royal life" tonight. and also tonight on pbs, independent lens presents "down a dark stairwell." the documentary explores the criminal justice system after an incident in new york in which a chinese american police officer killed a black man. that's "down a dark stairwell" later tonight on pbs. and a passing of note, before we go tonight, sergeant ray lambert died this past friday night, at age 100. the army medic was in the first wave that assaulted omaha beach on d-day. the then-23-year-old had already
6:54 pm
earned awards for valor, and was wounded twice, invading north africand sicily. all that before june 6, 1944, and the allied invasion to liberate europe. two years ago on the 75th anniversary of d-day, he spoke with our malcolm brabant beside the concrete block where he saved many lives that fateful day, all while severely-wounded himself. it came to be called "ray's rock." ray: i had obligated myself for fighting world war ii and i felt if i was the right kind of husband and man and father that i would put my life on the lawn for my family. many times you hear people say well, i am willing to die for my country. they are not really saying that. what they are saying is they are willing to fight for their familes and their country. judy: the very best among us.
6:55 pm
we remember him tonight. and that's "the newshour" for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the "pbs newshour," thank you and see you soon. ♪ >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. consumer cellular. johnson & johnson. bnsf railway. the kendeda fund, committed to meaningful work through investments in transformative leaders and engagements. more at kendedafund.org. >> the alfred p sloan foundation. driven by the promise of great ideas. >> supported by the john dee and
6:56 pm
catherine t macarthur foundation, committed to booted -- building a more peaceful world. more information at macfound.org. and wit the ongoing support of these institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.] >> this is "pbs newshour" west from weta studios in washington and from our bureau at the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university.
6:57 pm
6:58 pm
6:59 pm
7:00 pm
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ -welcome to "america's test kitchen" at home. today, i'm making perfect pan seared salmon steaks. jack is going to talk to us all about salt. adam has a roundup of the best seafood tools,

98 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on