tv PBS News Hour PBS July 23, 2010 6:00pm-7:00pm PDT
captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> lehrer: good evening. i'm jim lehrer. tropical storm bonnie made landfall in south florida today, drawing closer to the gulf oil spill zone. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the newshour tonight, spencer michels reports on the evacuation efforts at the rig site, and storm preparations underway in and around new orleans. >> lehrer: then, we talk to deborah solomon of "the wall street journal" about today's report from the administration's pay czar on executive bonuses given out at the height of the financial crisis. >> brown: judy woodruff reports on disillusioned democrats a year and a half into the obama administration.
>> if you are elected as moses who is going to take everyone to the promised land, then you're bound to disappoint people. >> lehrer: mark shields and david brooks present their weekly analysis. >> brown: paul solman wraps up his series on europe's economic woes with a look at spain's unemployment problem. >> lehrer: and ray suarez interviews robert mccrum about how english has become the first worldwide language. >> if you said in say 800 or 900 b.c. in 2010 people would be discussing a global language, they would have looked at you in disbelief. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:
and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> lehrer: the storm system named bonnie took direct aim today at the oil spill in the gulf of mexico.
it lost some strength on the way, but its approach triggered movements at sea and on land. newshour correspondent spencer michels reports from louisiana. >> reporter: bonnie was already churning the waters in the gulf of mexico, with 40-mile-an-hour winds pushing waves to five feet and more. even before the storm crossed south florida this afternoon, watches went up from destin, florida, on the panhandle to morgan city, louisiana. bonnie was expected to gain strength and reach the oil spill site by sunday as it continued toward louisiana. in the gulf, dozens of vessels began moving away from where the "deepwater horizon" rig once stood, after evacuation orders were issued last night. but in new orleans, retired coast guard admiral thad allen-- overseeing the spill response for the government-- said he does not expect the flotilla to be gone very long. >> the intention right now is to put the vessels in a safe place, so they can return as quickly as
possible to resume their operations. we're probably looking at a very limited window, something around 48 hours. >> reporter: the well-cap that's harnessed the gushing oil for eight days will stay on and ride out the storm a mile below the surface. and while bonnie passes, work has temporarily halted on the relief well designed to stop the oil for good. once the sea is calm, b.p. crews plan to try filling the blown well in two stages-- first, through the cap, pumping in mud and cement from the top. that could improve chances for the relief well to finish the job from the bottom, channeling more filler material into the main well shaft. >> given the fact that they're on scene and ready to go, it will take about 48 hours to lay the casing. and then 48 hours after that, we could proceed with the hydrostatic kill and the mud going in the top. and then five to seven days after that, we could proceed
to begin the bottom kill. >> reporter: the storm is not expected to do much damage on land, but many along the coast were worried it will amplify the damage from the spill. and in new orleans, with memories of katrina still lingering, people were preparing for a worst-case scenario. parish officials, concerned with rising waters from the approaching storm, decided to close locks on several canals near new orleans. boats that had been skimming oil off gulf waters had to scurry back to port before the floodgates closed. many boats here in st. bernard parish have been idle since the spill began, but the stoppage of work in the gulf has made things even worse. lloyd braud and his son have been among the few that have tried to fish despite all the hassles with the spill and almost no access to fishing water. >> last year, you know, it was great days fishing. today, it's not so great.
it saddens my heart. >> reporter: marian alphonso runs in a marina in chalmette. >> we have no shrimp boats going out, because they can't go shrimping. so shrimp boats don't buy, so we can't sell fuel, and so we have a lot of people that won't go fishing because of the oil out there. >> reporter: in new orleans' french quarter, the approaching storm didn't seem to disturb very many residents. at jazz joints like vaughn's, where a joyous crowd rocked to the music, signs of the oil spill were everywhere. drummer derrek freeman, bearing a shirt that said, "wetlands, not oil," sounded sanguine. >> i think its just more testing of the resolve of the people of new orleans and the gulf coast. >> reporter: but trumpeter kermit ruffins sounded a note of optimism. >> let's help clean up the oil spill, y'all.
that gulf coast, baby. >> reporter: so the beat goes on for new orleans and the coast as it prepares for yet one more long weekend. >> brown: and still to come on the newshour: "egregious" executive compensation; dissatisfaction on the left; shields and brooks; spain's economic woes; and english around the globe. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan in our newsroom. >> sreenivasan: crews in northeastern china struggled again today to contain the country's largest oil spill on record. it was caused by a pipeline explosion a week ago at the port of dalian on the yellow sea. the pipeline has been repaired, but thick crude oil has contaminated nearly 165 square miles of water. thousands of chinese troops are trying to capture the oil, but with buckets, shovels and even their hands. widespread flooding paralyzed the milwaukee, wisconsin, region today. storms dumped more than seven inches of rain in just two hours last night. milwaukee's main airport was closed for much of today as
crews cleared water off runways. dozens of flights were canceled. near the downtown, a giant sinkhole that measured 20 feet deep and 15 feet wide swallowed an entire cadillac escalade. the city's public works commissioner said there was too much water, too fast. >> it was a result of the -- essentially a manhole collapse. once that happens, the soil scours away, becomes like a big drain. just like in your sink. water just keeps draining in there, wiping out more and more soil, pavement finally buckled. >> sreenivasan: another wave of thunderstorms was forecast for southern wisconsin today. wall street closed out the week with another rally. it was fueled partly by upbeat reports on european banks and u.s. corporate earnings. those included ford's profit of $2.6 billion in the second quarter. the dow jones industrial average gained 102 points to close at 10,424. the nasdaq rose 23 points to close at 2,269. for the week, the dow gained 3%; the nasdaq rose 4%. north korea today threatened the
u.s. and south korea with a "physical response" over naval exercises planned for this weekend. the threat came as u.s. secretary of state hillary clinton was in vietnam, attending a regional security forum. >> it is distressing when north korea continues its threats and causes so much anxiety among its neighbors and the larger region. but we will demonstrate once again through our military exercises as we did when bob gates and i visited in seoul together two days ago that the united states stands in firm support of the defense of south korea. >> sreenivasan: the u.s.-south korean exercises this weekend come four months after a south korean warship was sunk. international investigators found a north korean submarine torpedoed the ship. the north koreans have denied it. long-time reporter and commentator daniel schorr died today at a washington hospital. he spent 23 years with cbs news,
and in the 1970s, his reporting on the watergate scandal landed him on president nixon's "enemies list." in 2001, he spoke with terry smith on "the newshour", and recalled learning about the list at the senate watergate hearings. >> you know, i was handed a copy, live on the air. i had never seen it before. read it. there it was, from john dean to h.r. hadderman, subject on screwing our political enemies. this is a priority list of 20, and i read down the list, at 17 came to my own name with the notation next to it, a real media enemy. i read it without comment. i tossed it right back. i wanted to collapse. >> sreenivasan: schorr also worked for a time at cnn, and later became senior news analyst at npr. daniel schorr was 93 years old. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to jeff. >> brown: the treasury department's so-called "pay czar" today rebuked 17 wall street banks for paying what he called "ill-advised" bonuses during the financial crisis.
in his report, ken feinberg said the firms paid top executives $1.6 billion in late 2008 after the companies had received government bail-out money, but before congress imposed curbs on their pay practices in early 2009. feinberg told the "nightly business report" the banks were wrong to do so. >> they were too big, some individuals were getting in excess of $10 million in bonus payments over a five-year period. there was severance payments where individual companies after they received t.a.r.p. were paying people walking out the door, no longer working at the company. >> brown: but feinberg's report also made clear that the banks had not violated any laws and that he could not recoup the money. joining me now is deborah soloman of "the wall street journal." deborah, some background first. remind us, this was a brief window of time. what was feinberg's assignment?
>> basically, he was asked to look at the window in which banks were taking t.a.r.p. money, but before they had passed some tough executive compensation rules, so they weren't playing by any rules but were getting government funds. he was asked to see whether the banks and the financial firms had made any payments that were inconsistent with the public interest. >> we have a graphic to show our audience, but it includes the likes of bank of america, citigroup, j.p. morgan chase, big guys. >> yeah, the biggest firms. you'll remember back in october of 2008 when t.a.r.p. was first passed, goldman sachs, they took money from the government. some needed, some didn't. they were making big payments. >> ken feinberg said that they were unwarranted and ill advised but he says he can't get the money or won't get it. what strictures is he working under? why not go after the money?
>> he has very limited authority. congress gave him the ability to go back and look and look at the payments that were inconsistent with the public interest. he didn't designate any of these as being inconsistent in part because there were no rules applying at that time. so the banks were making huge payouts but they were allowed to. secondly a lot of these firms, most of the big one, goldman, j.p. morgan, morgan stanley they paid back the t.a.r.p. funds so he has little leverage to say give us the money back because they'll say back to him, we already did. >> a lot of the banks that did pay back the t.a.r.p. money, some of them made presentpy -- pretty clear they were doing it to avoid the pay strictures. >> oh, yeah, they made no bones about it. the banks immediately contacted treasury and said we want out. i mean, some of the banks couldn't get out, b & a and citi, they had problems and they had to stay in.
but some of the others couldn't live under the strictures. >> now ken feinberg didn't name any particular names, but he said that citi was pretty egregious. >> and there was a man named andrew hall who made $100 million, he was contractually obligated to be paid the money, and it was a big fight between feinberg and citigroup earlier this year -- last year, basically, when he was trying to get that money back. citi wound up selling this unit to get rid of it. but in 2008, they made that payment, and, you know, he found it to be unwarranted. >> now, ken feinberg did provide sort of a proposal for the future looking maybe toward the next time, next crisis. explain what he wants to happen. >> one of the problems that he ran into, a lot of the companies had contractual agreements to
pay them big bonuses, and he did not feel he could wrip them up because they were entered into in good faith. but he wants for boards of companies to have the power during a crisis, which is not really well defined, but gurg -- but during times of stress to either renegotiate, reduce or just completely cancel contracts with people that guarantee sums for bonuses and other, you know, stock option agreements. >> but that would be up to companies and shareholders presumably or a voluntary plan? >> yes, it was voluntary and some said they'd never adopt this, but it's something that the companies would do on their own, and their boards would basically set the parameters. >> they already told you no way, so they'd fight that one? >> well, they don't feel like they're legally able to do this, but they feel like it will hamstring them and people won't come work at a bank or financial firm if they know if -- if the firm goes through rough times their guaranteed payment is no longer guaranteed. >> now n the meantime, bring us up to date. two years later, what's
happening with executive pay on wall street? >> well, i mean, the banks are back to profitability, they're doing really well. so they're paying their people handsomely. there is some change in that a lot of banks have voluntarily started to link pay to performance. in other words, instead of rewarding them for short-term gains they're rewarding them if the banks prospers by giving them stock options and the fed has come out with rules to govern pay. not setting pay levels but they're making it tougher on banks, you know, setting tougher rules for banks. so there is this moment here where the rules have toughened a little bit, but nothing preventing basically the banks from making big payments. nobody is capping what they can pay the employees. >> all right, deborah solomon, thank you. >> lehrer: next tonight, some mid-term election politics. with barely 100 days to go, democrats are concerned about a lack of enthusiasm among their
most ardent supporters. judy woodruff reports. >> woodruff: on that warm night in november 2008, as it became clear barack obama was going to the white house, the air was full of promise, especially for progressive voters and their ambitious agenda. now, a year and a half after the new president took office, some of the interest groups that are the backbone of the democratic coalition are grappling with the fact that not all the change that was promised has yet come to pass. take latinos. they voted two-to-one for mr. obama over republican john mccain, due in part to his pledge to push for comprehensive immigration reform. >> for eight long years, we've had a president who made all kinds of promises to latinos on the campaign trail, but failed to live up to them in the white house. and we can't afford that anymore. we need a president who isn't
going to walk away from something as important as comprehensive reform when it becomes politically unpopular. >> woodruff: but it wasn't until this month that he delivered his first major address on immigration reform since becoming president. and it came amid a heated national debate, sparked by a controversial new arizona law that proponents said was a response to the failure of the federal government to act on the issue. democratic representative raul grijalva of arizona, co-chair of the house progressive caucus, says he expected the administration to deal with immigration sooner. >> the effort put into energizing latino voters, the effort put into getting the endorsements of significant organizations across this country, the commitments made in front of national organizations that deal with immigration reform-- all those indicated to
me that it was a priority, and that it was going to be a priority not just in the first term, but in the first year. >> woodruff: many gay rights advocates say they feel the obama administration has given short shrift to their issues. as a candidate, mr. obama promised to end the military's ban on letting gays serve openly in the ranks, known as "don't ask, don't tell." he also said he would push to repeal the defense of marriage act or "doma," and expand the employment non-discrimination act to include sexual orientation and gender identity. kerry eleveld is washington correspondent for "the advocate," a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender news magazine. she credits the president for progress on "don't ask," but says the effort on the other priorities has been lacking. >> his administration has not pushed on those. "don't ask, don't tell" is still in the making; we're going to see where that goes.
but he has not pushed in any way other than in some speeches, if you look at him coming in, what he talked about, what he promised again and again, and also the majorities he came in with, i would say he is woefully behind, at this point. >> woodruff: one core part of the democratic base that remains a steadfast ally of the administration is organized labor, despite the fact that little progress has been made on one of the group's top priorities-- the employee free choice act, also known as card check. >> if a majority of workers want a union, they should get a union. it's that simple. let's stand up to the business lobby that's been getting their friends in washington to block card check. it is time to pass the employee free choice act in the senate, and i will make it the law of the land when i'm president of the united states of america.
>> woodruff: the new head of the service employees international union, mary kay henry, acknowledges all of labor's priorities are still not met, but says given what mr. obama is up against in congress, he deserves credit for passing health care reform and signing a fair pay act. >> here's what i think. i think that the president has made incredibly wise choices about priorities and focusing in a moment where there is this wall of opposition that has grown more intense over the first 18 months of his presidency. and so we support and back this president, and we want to hold him accountable and we want to push him. >> woodruff: environmentalists, meanwhile, are withholding judgment on the president, disappointed at the failure by the senate to pass a clean energy bill. implementing an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions was one of candidate obama's top
domestic priorities. >> no business will be allowed to emit any greenhouse gasses for free. businesses don't own the sky, the public does. if we want them to stop polluting it, we have to put a price on all pollution. >> woodruff: last year, the house approved a climate bill, which included a cap on carbon emissions, after a fierce lobbying effort by the president. gene karpinski, with the league of conservation voters, is not giving up. he says president obama needs to take the same steps now to revive the bill in the senate. >> well, the jury's still out, quite frankly, because while he's given a lot of great speeches in the last six months about the need for a comprehensive bill, about needing to put a cap on carbon pollution, we need more of his leadership at this moment to get the job done. >> if you are elected as moses, who is going to take everyone to the promised land, then you are bound to disappoint people. >> woodruff: "washington post" columnist and brookings institution scholar e.j. dionne
contends part of the frustration with the president is that expectations of him were too high, especially given the weak economy. >> if unemployment were at 5%, 6%, even 7% instead of over 9%, the mood would be better. i think the left is no different than the rest of the country in being affected by this overall mood. and then, the specific grievances that people have, i think, are magnified because they look around and say, "gee, this hasn't worked as well as we all had hoped it would." >> woodruff: david axelrod, senior adviser to president obama, says he wants democrats to know, despite the economic crisis, much has been accomplished. >> so, while we were handling that, we were passing comprehensive health insurance reform that we've been fighting for for a century. while we were doing that, we passed the credit card bill of rights and other financial
reforms. you know, we've done myriad things that will make a difference. we haven't completed all our work in all these areas, but we've made progress in all these areas, and we're going to keep working at that progress. >> woodruff: representative grijalva makes it clear the disappointment is still tangible. >> we all knew it was going to be contentious. we all knew it was going to be difficult. we knew health care was going to be difficult. we knew passing the stimulus bill was going to be difficult. we know reforming education is going to be difficult. there is nothing easy about these big issues. so, you know, by avoiding them, doesn't make them go away. when you avoid them, they become worse. >> woodruff: with the 2010 midterm elections now three and a half months away, many democrats worry obama voters turned off by stalled priorities could stay home. that, coupled with the rise in
enthusiasm on the right, could lead to significant democratic losses in both houses of congress. representative grijalva says democrats should be worried. >> i think we've taken the progressive community for granted. i think we've been good soldiers for this administration and for our leadership, consistently taking the tough votes, even when we had to swallow. and i think the progressive community has been appropriately supportive of this president and this majorities in congress. i think they need to be worried because it's their base. it keeps our party erect and we need them in elections. if they don't show up, we're going to have bigger problems than people think. >> woodruff: "the advocate's" eleveld points out there could also be a financial impact for democrats. >> there is a fair amount of money that flows from the l.g.b.t. community to the democratic national committee, to the president, to democrats
in general, and i think what you're really wondering is what's going to happen to that flow of money. are people going to start saying, "why are we giving to democrats? why are we giving to the democratic national committee? why are we giving to the president? maybe we should just be picking individual candidates." >> woodruff: axelrod asserts democrats need to focus on the real choice facing them. >> the republican party hasn't been subtle at all. congressman sessions, the leader of the democratic... the republican campaign committee, said last weekend "we want to go back to doing exactly what we were doing before this president was elected." i don't think that people want to go back to that. so, rather than arguing whether the president has not achieved every single item on the list of people's hopes and aspirations, we ought to focus on what we stand to lose in this election. and we've made so much progress
in these 18 months that is threatened by what's in front of us. i think, rather than make the perfect the enemy of the good and lamenting that, though we've achieved historic things, we haven't achieved all of the things that we wanted to achieve, i think people better focus on what's in front of them. we have a battle about whether we're going to continue making progress or whether we're going to go back. and we need all hands on deck to make sure we're still moving forward. >> woodruff: democrats will argue that, if the base doesn't turn out in november, it will be even harder to bring about changes that matter to the progressive community. >> lehrer: and to the analysis of shields and brooks-- syndicated columnist mark shields, "new york times" columnist david brooks. mark, are all hands gonna be on deck for the democrats? >> i think judy's piece really identified what the problem is for democrats across the board, jim. the democratic party is a
coalition, it's a coalition of interest groups, caucuses and with people tend to believe the same things and oftentimes look alike. it was probably best pete by p.j. orourke who said that the democratic party believes that government will make you taller, smarter, richer and cure your crabgrass on your lawn while the republican party doesn't work and then gets elect and proves it. but the -- >> p.j. orourke said it? >> p.j. orourke said it. but democrats have the high level of what government can do. remember it's been a generation since there was a democratic president and a democratic congress at the same time. go all the way back to 1992 and bill clinton. so the hopes were high, and barack obama as we listen to the speech, hope and change are great themes. you can read a lot into it. you know, when you're sitting there in the audience and cheering and say he's obviously
talking about the kind of change i want. but i don't think there's any question, if unemployment were at 6% or 7% or 5% right now, there would not be that sense of malaise and dissension in the ranks. given the rather remarkable legislative achievements that obama has accomplished already. >> how do you read this thing? >> we all look alike. i'm thinking about that. ann coulter and i look alike. i'm mystified be that. >> mist ystified? >> i'm mystified, you have 22% where you have faith in government and if you're a liberal it's tough and you should expect that. it's tough for people on the right too. because they don't get what they want either if you're a say libertarian. so you have the country against you. nevertheless -- >> so you're always working against the majority that is against you? >> there's the basic mathematics.
20% liberal, 40% conservative t rest moderate. so it's tough. nevertheless, you get a president who passes the stimulus act, money going through the state. you get, you know, the nationalization of healthcare, whatever you want to call it. >> health care reform. >> the nationalization of the means of production. i think you have the trotsky agenda -- no. you get a lot of stuff. i think from any perspective, that is a pretty good step from left. by the way, it's such an aggressive expansion of government that you've scared the middle so they're swinging over to the republicans. so i think from a liberal perspective, they have moved as fast as hue nanly possible and achieved as much as humanly possible in a year and a half, immigration got pushed behind, but wide-scale disappointment i don't understand it. >> how serious is this, mark?
i mean, does it -- does the progressive community as it's called, if it doesn't rally, does it really mean serious losses for the democrats? >> yes, it does, jim, and i would remind david that barack obama did get a higher percentage of votes than anybody has in this country in 20 years. i mean, it was a resounding victory. i mean, whether his core constituency was 20%, his electoral constituency which is how we measure elections was 53% which was, you know, historically high. the highest of any democrat other than franklin roosevelt and lyndon johnson. which is -- >> how bad is this for them? >> it's bad in this sense, jim. all about midterm elections is turnouts and turnout is measured by intensity and president obama -- candidate obama had it on his side in 2008, the democrats had it on their side in 2006.
the enthusiasm, the intensity, the passion was all on their side. right now by a measurable gulf, sometimes 18 to 20 points it's on the republican side. so you've got to get your people out and if they're indifferent, if they're cranky, if they feel neglect and there's some criticism, let's be honest about it, legitimate criticism they don't feel the administration has gone the distance. whether it was on the public option on healthcare, whether they waited too long on pushing the senate on climate change, time and again, but there was a sense that they didn't give that sense of urgency. >> ohio, visit indiana, i mean, if you're in berkeley maybe the public option is an easy thing to do. but if you're trying to govern the whole country it's hard thing to do. i mean, president obama won a big electoral mandate because a lot of people thought he transcended partisan and ideological barriers, so he was
able to get a lot of moderates and independents. and so those are the people who are disappointed because they see him as far too left. the democratic party who say it's too liberal has risen by 22 percentage points. if you think of this election, well, they won't lose house seats in berkeley or austin, texas, they're going to lose how was seats in ohio, in central pennsylvania, indiana, places like that. >> let's be specific for a moment. the death of the declaration of the death of the energy bill by the senate, what happened? what caused that to happen? >> well, this was always going to be a tough fight and we have talk about this. you had the republicans who didn't want to raise the energy taxes and you had the midwest and places like that who didn't want to punish coal producers. so it was going to be a tough fight and i guess the one thing that sort of frustrates me is that we have had a lot of
information about global warming from al gore and many others. and while that has happened -- >> and an oil spill. >> and an oil spill, but while all that has happened, support for the response to global warming has gone down in the american public. that's because a lot of the global warming information including by al gore was very partisan. so it pushed people away who were not liberal democrats. to me that was a mistake. that's been a mistake for 15 years. they should have made it much less partisan global warming campaign and i think -- i'm not sure you would have got people in the near term, but you would have had more public support. >> i'm sorry, i have to dissent here. we have gone through david's own paper, this document -- documented it this week. the first decade of the 21st century the hottest we have ever had. we have been living through the hottest summer. we have an enormous oil spill in the gulf and also in china. >> we reported that in the news --
>> i don't care how many overtures you make, there wasn't a single republican in the senate who moved on it. i mean, you know, do you have to pass everything with nothing but democratic votes? i mean, the republicans do not breathe the same air? do they not worry about their children's lungs as much? this has become a partisan issue. it's so obvious. i mean, its has to be. we're in washington, d.c. right now, it was 101 on my car thermometer as i drove over here today. that wasn't what it was 20 years ago. i mean, this is a serious problem and this was a serious effort to do something about it. the house did act on it. i don't think quite honestly given the political climate at this point that it would be tough to pass it in the house today. but jim, i don't know what the atmosphere is going to be necessary to get the senate to vote on the climate change. >> let's separate the broad global warming. i think it's real, but there are
two ways to push legislation. there's what i think of as a way al gore did it which is sort of partisan way. then there's the way bono, for example, has pushed some of his foreign aid legislation. and he says if i'm going to be a democrat, i'm going to be a republican. if i'm going to talk to a liberal democrat, i will make friends with jessy helms and bono has made friends with jessy helms, or he did while he was still alive. he took an issue that was partisan and made it less partisan. that's to me a much better way to pass legislation. if we're going to get global warming in the long term and it will be a long term thing, to me, that's what you have to do. >> al gore has not been involved in this fight. with all due respect, in recognition of his work, nobel prize and everything else, this hasn't been his fight. this has been the administration's fight. >> we are talking about the global -- big debate and why there's much more work for global warming in general. >> two final things, what's your reading of the impact if any on the midterm elections to the
ethics problems of charlie rangel? >> well, just one more sign that the public appreciation for congress hit a historic low this week, 11%. people see another guy taking advantage of privileges to maybe hide a little money, do other things. so it's just another corrosion of trust in the institution. >> mark? >> the reality is that the ethics record of this congress surpasses any in my lifetime. i mean -- >> in a positive or negative way? >> positive. outside ethics panel, over the republican opposition, over democrat opposition, can't take gifts any longer and in addition to that we have every earmark you have to put your name on it. no more profit. and i agree that this is -- that this hurts. i mean, charlie rangel and -- i'll be up-front about it, i
like him, i think he's been a good public servant and it's an american tragedy. because it's great american, he was an 18-year-old high school dropout, who was about to be drafted, he joined the army, went to korea, came back a staff sergeant, went to high school, college, and law school and the g.i. bill. he beat a man who was there -- who was in trouble because of his hubris and because of his own sense of grandeur and 40 years later there are charges against charlie. >> i want to ask you about the shirley sherrod thing. do you have something you could say? >> you have to be loyal to people beneath you. >> yeah, loyalty goes up and down in the obama administration, and they did not demonstrate that this week at all. and shame shame shame on the new media or whatever they call it. >> time's up. thank you both. >> brown: next, europe's economic turmoil.
today, regulators released the results of a "stress test" designed to check the strength of europe's banking system. though much skepticism persists, the majority of banks passed. seven did not, including five small savings banks in spain. and that is where newshour economics correspondent paul solman wraps up his week- long series. it's all part of his reporting on "making sense of financial news". >> spain. whose mounting debts, public and private, now vie for attention with the views here in the world's second most touristed country. but while the tourists in barcelona and madrid eagerly preserved their trip investors are running scared. millions are out of work here. more and more young people are thinking of immigrating or dropping out of the economy entirely. spain's most prosperous region is again pushing secession. in short,
will spain hold together? or will the music stop for the world's ninth largest economy? unemployment first. it's higher than in greece. at 20%, near depression levels. even long, prosperous barcelona, capital of the catalonia region is hurting. david rodriquez -- >> there are a lot of good people who could work and right now they're here standing on the street. >> in the past decade, immigration to spain, mostly from latin america, africa and eastern europe grew by over 500% to more than 12% of the population. mostly drawn by the construction boom. >> people who came since ten years ago, the unemployment rate is extremely high. close to 40%. people from latin america used
to work in construction, used to work building homes. that's why so many people from latin america are right now unemployed. >> unemployed due to the collapse of spain's key industry -- real estate. these men are from the dominican republic. >> i'll try go back to the dominican republic because the situation here is bad. >> in a more upscale square, the bursting of the real estate bubble has stranded a higher but no less worried stratum of jobless. jordy gonzalez lost his construction job in march. no work by next year and he'll be living on 400 euros and unemployment insurance a month. $6,000 a year. can you live on 400 euros per month? impossible?
for spain's younger generation, unemployment tops 40%. suburban madrid, this person has a job. >> i'm lucky, thank you. >> but she is only one of four in her class with a job since graduating college two years ago. from a class of 35. >> all of us who have tried and looked for work and jobs and stuff, but they can't seem to find anything. >> her boyfriend eduardo despite several advanced degrees had to lower his sights. >> he's a physical therapist, but since he can't find a job and we have to pay rent he's working in a post office. >> you're a mailman? their friend paula lost her job as a tv camera person last year. she is also lucky, to work at a clothing store. >> i was behind the camera and now i sell things. >> but the vast majority of the
classmates are unemployed. >> most of our friends live in their parent's houses, because they can't pay rent. they're even thinking of going to london or somewhere else. because they can't find anything. >> we found jordy perez practicing french, because he plans to emigrate. >> quebec and camden in general are much better here in spain. not only in the short, but the long term, i think. >> but you're from barcelona? >> yeah. >> but you want out? >> yes. >> one spanish industry is hiring these days. business has taken off for costumed debt collectors like these who don 17th century monk attire to get maintenance. this was hired by local unions
to persuade a bankrupt company to pay back their workers. meanwhile, some in spain are giving um on the system completely. boxes of unused food, foraged by folks from several local communes. this woman is a teacher. she doesn't take pay. >> we can eat from what people throw away. and we consume more -- >> i see. so this is like -- what we call in america down shifting? >> yeah. >> others, older and less able to find community, shun the camera. while many were disillusioned and discouraged by the dragging economy, barcelona by day looked like a thriving city. its main attraction -- the gaudy theater begun in the 1880's is still under construction. it's vast as is the city itself.
we asked british economist and long-time barcelona resident edward hugh to make sense of the contrast. >> this is a rich city. for reasons of what just happened. but it's where we're going that's going to be the crisis. >> the reasons for what just happened, like greece or the u.s. housing bubble, easy money, easy regulation. and spain's first response was the same too. stimulate the economy with shovel-ready projects. like widening barcelona's sidewalks. but now, to avert a debt crisis, spain like so much of europe is cutting back. salvador garcia ruiz is a banker. >> how can you explain to people that you're gonna freeze their pensions? that you're going to decrease their salaries? while at the same time, you're spending the money. >> the shovel readiest project
of all -- removing madrid's statue of christopher columbus from one spot and re-erecting it to the middle of the rotary. the top union leader is longing for longer-term stimulus. >> this country needs a strategic strategy plan and it was superficial. >> so it was stupid to move the statue? >> yes. it was stupid. >> finally, earlier this month, more than a million catalonians, long disillusioned with the government, newly energized by the current problems urged dropping out of the government and forming their own. >> doesn't it make sense to be part of spain, that spain has so many problems, why? by the way, we are paying so much in taxes and we are getting the taxes back. >> driving through barcelona, there's ample evidence of
catalonian commerce, which accounts for about a fifth of spain's economy. whereas investors in other countries like germany are rethinking their investment in spain, ruiz argues that catalonians should rethink their connection to spain. >> for many years the gentlemen have been helping out with spain. they are saying so many catalonians feel the same -- the gentleman like ruiz. >> a catch word wherever we he want. spain has been a patient place. for example, the sacred family isn't due for completion till 2026. but with us asker thety cut bac, empty real estate on which banks hold shaky loans, what's next?
>> lehrer: finally tonight, how and why english went global. and to ray suarez. >> the british empire's high water mark came in the late 19th century but england's most durable contribution to the world may be the english language itself. so argues robert mccrum in his new book. he's the associate editor at the london observer. was this an accident, or after the british empire gave way after the first world war to american dominance, was it almost an inevitability? >> i think what's accidental is that one empire using one sort of language and values and cultural reference points gave away to another empire, using essentially the same. this is the first time in human history this has happened. so you have a succession, one -- from one to the other. what i'm arguing here is that
both of those phases, the british fade and the american phase, which are both quite distinct were associated with colognism and what's happened is the first censure manifestation is somehow value free. people can now use it with a sense of liberation. rather than being oppressed by it. it's a facilitator and gives people the opportunity to develop their careers and express themselves in a way they they wouldn't in the past. >> it's funny at the beginning at the book, it's not altogether clear that english is even going to be the dominant language in england. >> no, it's a skin of the teeth, it's a thriller. i mean, for thousands of years -- or about a thousand of years, it was -- if you had said in 800 or 900 a.d. in 2010 people would be discussing a
global language, they would have looked at you in disbelief. the odds on that happening were thousand to one against. >> now, you talk a lot about technology and what it makes possible and if you go on the web, you can find efforts to keep tiny and struggling languages alive. at the same time as you find that same technology ramming home english to every corner of the world. >> technology is part of the -- this third phase, globalish phase it's the story of the i.t. technology and global capitalism. those two go together. so the blackberry, microsoft, dow jones all add up to a globish phenomenon, i would say. >> if you look around the history for parallels, one that comes to mind certainly is latin. latin had a certain primacy throughout western europe and the mediterranean world, but over time it turned into italian and portuguese and spanish
and cat alon and romanian and everything else. is latin going to break up into separate worlds? >> the academic consensus amongst many of the scholars we talked to was that english was likely to break up into variety, such as scotten english and singapore english would diverge from the standard where they'd become separate languages. what i have described is the reverse. the second language and becoming this global phenomenon. >> but not enough time has passed. they took like -- it took like a thousand years. >> and who knows what will happen in the next 50 years? if global capitalism were to change, who knows? but at the moment, i would say the bet -- the odds are pretty good that globish will become the default position for anybody who is stuck in a means of communicating and a crisis.
>> is english just easier to learn than some of the other aspirants to being the world's second language? >> i think it's easier than chinese because it doesn't require the acquisition of some characters. i even some chinese find it difficult. the illiteracy in china is quite profound. it's become quite simple. the core of our conversation is anglo-saxon, you can construct it in anglo-saxon or old english and still get your meaning across. the impurities give it the vitality. >> and its attraction, you talk about a 1,500 world vocabulary that's workable version of english? >> shakespeare had a vocabulary of 30,000, king james bible has 9,000. so you get it down to five or
four, it works. and president obama he's a globish president. origins in kansas, kenya, hawaii, his speeches are very simple. and his campaign slogans flow like yes we can, change we can believe in, they're globish. globish is not my word, he took the first inaugural address and he tried to turn it into globish and he couldn't because it already was. >> so what happened to allow this to be uncoupled from politics? people learn english now and it opens doors rather than putting up walls. >> i think it has to do with the end of the cold war and the boom in the economy, the american economy particularly n the 1990's, combined with the i.t. revolution. you have three things, a perfect storm of change. plus, a new generation.
young people growing up who have not really lived through the traumas of the past 50 years. for them, language does not have -- is not loaded in the way that had been for the previous generation. >> robert mccrum, fun speaking globish with you. >> thank you very much. >> brown: again, the major developments of the day: tropical storm bonnie crossed south florida and headed toward the oil spill zone in the gulf of mexico; and wall street closed out the week with another rally. the dow jones industrial average gained more than 100 points. the newshour is always online. hari sreenivasan, in our newsroom, previews what's there. hari. >> sreenivasan: on "newshour connect," we talked to reporter scott shafer of kqed, our pbs partner station in california, about the legal battle over prop 8, the law blocking gay marriage we have an update on border tensions between venezuela and colombia from a global post reporter in bogota. you can find out how liberal bloggers at the netroots nation conference in las vegas this
week feel about democratic party leaders. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. jeff. >> brown: and that's the newshour for tonight. on monday, we'll look at the americans with disabilities act 20 years later. i'm jeffrey brown. >> lehrer: and i'm jim lehrer. "washington week" can be seen later this evening on most pbs stations. we'll see you online, and again here monday evening have a nice weekend. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:
and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org