tv PBS News Hour PBS February 28, 2019 3:00pm-4:00pm PST
captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening, i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight, a summit stalemate, talks betweenr president p and north korea's leader kim jong-un collapse, as the two are unableg to come to aement over sanctions relief and denuclearization. then, a closer look at michael cohen's testimony. at the president's forme lawyer reveals about how the trump business organization operat. plus, money can't cy happiness, it? making sense of how income inequality affects personal well-being. >> if you and i have equ education, the same incomes, the same wealth, the same social ass. if you live in a more equal society than i do, everything about your wld is going to be better. >> woodruff: all that and more
on tonight's pbs newshour. >> maj funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> on a cruise with american cruise lines, you can experience historic destinations along the american cruise lines fleet of small ships explore american landmarks, local cultures andlm aterways. american cruise lines, proud sponsor of pbs newshour. >> babbel. a language app that teaches real-life conversations in a new language, like spanish, french, german, italian, and more.
and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> carnegie corporation of new york. supporting innovations inra education, demc engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoinort of these institutions: and individuals. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.
>> woodruff: today in hanoi, a summit designed to achieveno progress towarh korea's denuclearization, as well improve ties with the united states, collapsed suddenly when the u.s. rejected a north korean offer. and tonight, the u.s. and north korea are publicly disagreeingt over wactly that offer was. nick schifrin begins our covera from hanoi. >> schifrin: after flying 8,000 miles and holding hours of high- stakes meetings with aorth korean leader he considers a friend, president trump chose to drive away from the hanoi summit empty handed.ha >> you alway to be prepared to walk. i could have 100% signed something today. we actually had papers readyo be signed. but it wan't appropriate. i want to do it right. i'd much rather do it right than do it fast. >> schifrin: the u.s. says it asked north korea to cse the yongbong nuclear facilities that produce plutonium and uranium, seen here in 2005, and what the u.s. suspects is a second
uranium plant a few miles away. but president trump and secretary oftate mike pompeo also eyed a rollback of kim jong-un's entire program. >> we asked him to do more. he was unprepared to do that. even that facility, even the yongbon facility, and all of its scope, which is important, for sure, still leaves missiles, warheads, and weapons systems. dn'tof those things, we co quite get there today. >> schifrin: the u.s. says north korea agreed to closbong, but wouldn't go any further. and they demanded what president trump called excessive sanctions relief. >> basically they wanted the sanctions lifted, in their entirety. and we couldn't do that. they were willing to denuke a large portion of the areas that we wanted, but we couldn't give up the sanctions for all of that. es>> schifrin: but in a prs conference 10 hours later, north korean foreign minister ri yong ho refuted the president's claim and said north korea was only looking for relief from a handful of sanctions on the korean economy.
>> ( translated ): if the u.s. removes partial sanctions, we will permanently and completely dismantle all thnuclear material production facilities in the yongbong area, including eutonium and uranium, in presence of u.s. experts. this proposal was the biggest denuclearization measure we could take at the present age, >> schifrin: north korea said it offered to permanently halt nuclear and missile testing. and today kim jong-un said he was interested in denuclearizing. >> ( translated ): if i'm notwi ing to do that, i won't be here right now. >> that's a good answer.mi t have been the best answer you've ever heard. >> schifrin: president trump maintained his focus on his personal connection wi, and extended those warm feelings to the north korean people,e saying huldn't increase sanctions for fear they would suffer. >> i don't want to talk about increasing sanctions. they're strong. they have a lot of great people in north korea and they have to live also. and that's important to me. schifrin: but for president trump what was less important-- punishing north korea for the
case of otto warmbier. in 2016 he was arrested in caongyang. the next year, he home to ohio on a stretcher with severe neurological injury and extensive ss of brain tissue, and died. president trump said kim jong-un wasn't responsible. >> i don't believe that he woule llowed to happen. it just wasn't to his advantage to allow that to happen. ose prisons are rough. they're rough. and bad things happened. he tells me, he tells me that he didn'tnow about it, and i will take him at his word. >> schifrin: despite cutting the summit short, president trump rsid he hoped dialogue with the longtime u.s. ady, would continue. >> this wasn't a walk away, like you get up and walk out. no, this was very friendly. we shook hands. there's a warmth that we had. i hope it ays, i think it will. >> schifrin: andet the u.s. delegation left without realizing its stated goals: no
agreed definition of denuclearization; no roadmap for next steps; no mutual liason offices. those phased steps were advocated earlier this month by the u.s.' top north korean negotiator steve biegun. >> we need to advance our diplomacy alongside our plans for denuclearization in a manner that sends that message clearly to north korea as well. we are ready for a different future. it's bigger than denuclearization. >> schifrin: instead, as national security advisor john bolton sat at the end of the table, the u.s. demas ed major stepward denuclearization. and the hanoi summit ended with a banquet table for a d working lunch that was never used, d a planned shared signing statement, that never occurred. fothe pbs newshour, i'm ni schifrin in hanoi. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, president trump's former personal attney, michael cohen, was back on capitol hill for a third day. is time, he testified behind closed doors before the house intelligence committee. earlier, before leaving the summit in vietnam, president
trump blasted cohen's public testimony from yesterday, wiof the exceptione part. >> i think having a fake hearing like that and having it in the middle of this very important summit is really a terrible thing. he lied a lot. but it was very interesting because he didn't lie about one thing. he said no collusion with the russian hoax. >> woodruff: yesterday cohen testified that he was suspicious of coordination between the trump campaign and russia. but he acknowledged he didn't have any concrete proof. we'll have more on cohen's revelations later in the program. israel's attorney general today diok the highly unusual step of recommending an ment of prime minister benjamin netanyahu on corruption charges. netanyahu has denied wrongdoing, and called the move a "witch hunt." we'll take a close look at the allegations later in the program. in pakistan, prime minister
imran khan said he will release aa captured indian pilot "peace gesture" toward india. tensns between the two countries have reignited over the disputed territory of kashmir. khan made the announcement in an address to the pakistani parliament. t his peace overture did not come without a warning >> ( translated ): today i am telling india, don't take thgs further, because whatever you will do, pakistan will be compelled to retaliate.at i also hope nternational community will play its part, so that the situation does not escalate from here. >> woodruff: meanwhile indian officials welcomed pakistan's announcement. but one indian major general insisted his forces ll remain on guard for any further escalations along the international rder, or "i.b." sector. >> our ground-based air defensep s systems have been put on high alert all along the line of i wish to assure the nation thre weully prepared and in a heightened state of readiness.
la>> woodruff: this week'ses between india and pakistan were in retaliation for a suicide bombing earlier this month that killed 40 indian soldiers in indian-controlled kashmir. back in this country, floodwaters in california's wine country are slowly beginning to recede after days of heavy rainfall. authorities discovered the body of a man in ferndale who had been swept away in the deluge. some 2,000 homes and businesses are partially under water, after the russian river burst its banks overnight. sscal ofcials said the town of guerneville "has eentially become an isla." new england patriots owner robert kraft pleadedot guilty today to misdemeanor charges of soliciting prostitution. kraft was among hundreds of men charged in a sting operation on a day spa in jupiter, florida. law enforcement officials believe the facility was operating a sex-trafficking ring.
e 77-year-old kraft has requested a non-jury trial. republican senator lamar alexander of tennessee today called for psident trump to re-assess his national emergency declaration for a southern border wall. alexander warned on the senatefl r that the act would weaken the separation of powers, and suggested there are other ways to fund a wall. a "yes" vote from alexander would mean democrats may have enough votes to block the declaration when it comes up for a senate vote, but still not a large enough majority to override a presidential veto. the senate today confirmed president trump's nominee to run the environmental protection agency, andrew wheeler. the vote was largely along party lines. wheeler is a former coal lobbyist and had been serving as the agency's acting administrator. former e.p.a. head scott pruitt resigned in july ove.ethics concer stocks were down on wall street today on word that the u.s.
economy slowed at the end of last year, and joblesss rose slightly last wk. the dow jones industrial average lost 69 points to close at 25,916. the nasdaq fell 22 points, and the s&p 500 slipped eight. still to come on the newshour: wcloser look at what went wrong at the second summh the leader of north korea. what michael cohen's testimony reveals about the trump business organizati. israel's prime minister benjamin netanyahu faces criminal charges. the u.s. house passes the first major gun control legislation in decades, and much more. >> woodruff: we return to our top story, the collapse of talks at the second summit betweentr
presidenp and kim jong-un. we're joined by two people with broad experience dealing with north korea. h jung pd senior positions at both the c.i.a. and withinth the office odirector of national intelligence, dealing okth east asia. she's now at the bgs instution. and frank jannuzi was a state department analyst and supported the u.s. delegation for talks withorth korea during the clinton administration. he's now pre maureen and mike mansfield foundation. and we welcome both of you back frank jannuzi, i'm going to start with you. what is your overall assessment ofhat happened wh the collapse today? >> well, on the plus side, the two leaders avoided what i would call a catastrophic succetr. presidenp did not agree to a deal which might have included a partial limitation ona' north konuclear program in exchange for widespread sanctions relief. i think that would have left the u.s. in a negotiation that was
weak to accomplishcl derization. on the plus side, the two parties narrowed some of their differences. we know north korea is prepared to take meaningful steps tow denuclearization in exchange for partial sanctions relief.k but i that happened here was perhaps a lit bit of a u.s. overreach of trying to put facilities beyond yongbyon on te negotiating table for the first time in a way that may have taken the north bysu rise, and also a north korean miscongratulation about trump's willingness to get a deal at any cost. >> woodruf jung pak, imiscalculation on bothdes? >> i do think it's a miscalculation on both sides. i think both men were so confident in their relationship and their ability to go into that room and strike a deal that would be beneficial to both of them, that they really did not anticipate the other side not giving in. and i think what happened was
that kim also overreached and that he has fa his first diplomatic fairly of sorts. >> woodrf: frank jannuzi, president trump has placed a lot of hope over the last number of months coming up with some kind of dl withorth korea. no matter whose responsibility it was what happened, of a disappointment is this for the united states? >> well, i think the president, for certain, is massively disappointed. helew 7,000 miles, he ended up with a fizzle of a summit, but what will be important is what happens next, and kim jong un has alreadsignaled just in recent minutes his continued uttimism abohe process, and he anticipates another meeting t with presidemp. and i think, for president trump, he should avoe the mistake s. made in 2002. at that time, at a time of p,nsion in the relationshe u.s. pulled back from dialogue and negotiations with north korea, and it set in
motion a period of north korean escalation of their nuclear program. so we nmd to reain engaged. w druff: jung pak, is there an appetite to do that the part of the united states after this spectacular disappointment? >> i think so. the president left the door wide open for additional conversations, and i thin at's a good thing. he said it wasn't a hostile walk ay but that it was a friendly walking away. the north koreans' statement so far indicate they're interested in talerk fur >> woodruff: how much does it e matter, frank frank, the two different explanation from the two sides about what >> eth not so uncommon, when you have a new team on the u.s. side, to have disagreements about what has just transpired. but i think what is more important than the diffeonnt interpretaof whether the offers reached or whether the north koreans insisted on too much sanctions relief, i think
what t critical e moment is we have a narrowing of the differences over whichre facilitiesrucial. the u.s. basically said we need to get a handle onall fissile production. we have the basics for a deal. >> reporter:. >> woodruff: buter if were basics for a deal, the question ld they notk, why cou make progress when they were together? >> i think what's stg rik me is that the two sides had a convergence of interest, and th was in the peace treaty or peace declaration and the liaison office, and kim wal fked awom that, and so what that suggests to me is kim is not interested in peacend normalization as he is in sanctions removal. >> woodruff: so but wt does that mean? that for all the conversation
about that, he's not leveling? how do you explain? >> i think what that says is that kim wants to drag this process on so that he can further cement his status, his claim status as a nuclear weapons power. it boo ists legit masand also increases the standing in the international community as wel as the strategic relevance. >> this final point is critical that jung pak has made. for president trump, the summit izationbe about denucle but for kim jong un it's about prestige and security. this is why he will have thrd, fourth, fifth summit because each summit bestows additionalgi macy and stature upon this north korean dictator. >> woodrf: but is that the interest of the united states to have summit after summit if it's not going anywhere? , only if it leads to concrete
steps, which is why i should ho this summit would have been better prepared in having an agreement before the two meit, an there's going to be a third, you should be sure the working level talks wll nail down what happens before it happens and maybe that's the learning curve for this president. >> if there's a next summit, we let the work discussions move forward and advance the conversation rather than have the two leaders in thom tusin so we have another sta quo situation. signing the lesson learned is the elp-leadership conversations are good, they're okay for maintaining good will and momentum, but the working-level processes are just as important if no more. >> woodruff: quickly, bottomm line frth of you, you believe the will is there to make progress, to get something accomplished. >> nawaz: to get an agreement? yes, i do. i think kim is interested inn getting the ions removal and the fact he pointed to the sanctions from 2016 and017
t ints to the fact that that's our leverage pond, without the military option out of the picture, sanctions are our only options and leverage. >> and i agree. i think for presidentrump, he nts it as a reelection accomplishment. he wants some form of pea and denuclearization and he cannot afford thisto let this nuclear threat linger indefinitely. >> woodruff: frank frank, jung pak, we frank jannuzi, jung pak, we thank you both. -u woodruff: the man who was central in a covto silence potentially damaging information aiout the president laid out a litany of damning in public yesterday. william brangahm explores whats michael cohestimony may reveal about the inner workings of the trump business organization. >> brangham: it was the first cttime the public heard di from a key figure in the trump
organization about howhe family business operated. cohen's testimony touched on a series of threads about how the president and his coany operated before, during and after the campaign. two people who have spent an extensive amount of time reporting on the trump biness join me now. andrea bernstein is the co-host of the "trump inc." podcast. and david farenthold of "the washington post." welcome to you both. andrea, to yourst, yesterday one to have the pieces of evidence that michael cohen showed was this big check tore $35,000 signed by donald trump when he was president. what was that check allegedly for? >> so this had a startling impact, this check. i was in the courtroom with chael cohen when he described this scheme where he says he was directed by the person we now know to be donald trump to make is payment, to keep some women
quiet who had e allegations of having had an affair with then candidate for presint donald trump. >> reporter: this was an eat ier court evth michael cohen in new york? >> right. so this happened when he plead guilty. but what was so startling is we have not actually seen th check that we saw yesterday when michael cohen turned it over to the house oversight committee from donald trump written while donald trump ws president and cohen described in his opening statement how he had been on a tour of the oval office and was look ag in awethe white house, and the president said, oh, don't worry, your payments t are comingey're a little delayed because it takes a while for a fed ex from new york tge through the white house security. so all of that shoo lines between the presidency, the business, the white house andth president signing a check for what u.s. attorneys havsce bed as a criminal schem
to violate campaign finance laws. >> reporter: david, touching on this, thereas a second reimbursement check signed by one of the financial offers within the trump organization and donald trump, jr. as well for the hush money pameys. as andrea has been saying, what do you think about how we arned about how the opration works. >> two things. the small size of the birksz it's a reay small oration, so small that one man, alan wieselberg, the financial officer you mentioned earlier s involved in everything. this one guy who was trump c.f.o. touched on all thi everything cohen described as a potential violation of the law wieselberg happened to be involved. the other thing, we saw the way trump exam rated his net worth not just to journalistsut to
people he was doing business, with lenders and insurers. cohen brought out documents that he said were inflated trump handed over to the folks to get a better deal byg misleadem about how much money he had. >> reporter: there are so man fferent interesting threads that came up yesterday. another one that came up was the revelation about the attempts to build a trump project in mocow. the question always was did donald trump tell michael cohen to l to congress to mislead congress about thosene tiations in russia. let's listen to what cohen had to say yesteay. >> mr. trump did not directly tell me to lie to congress. that's not how he operates. in conversations we had during the campaign, at the same time i was actively negotiating in russia for him, he would look me in the eye and tell me there's no russianusiness and tn go on to lie to the american people by saying the same thing.
in his way, he was telling meo lie. there were at least half a dozen time between the iowa caucus and january 2016 and the end of june, when he would aske, how's it going in russia? referring to the mcow tower project. mr. trump knew of and directed the trump-moscow neotiations throughout the campaign and lied about it. >> woodruff: andrea i'm struckhe byay in which he talks about. this i think you referred to it elsewhere yesterday as the code, the understood way that members of the organization would talk about thisng they knew would be against the law. >> this is one of the most startling things yesterday to see it laid out by a formerde in that thengua franka on the trump organization was lying and eveknew it was a
lie, and it's consistent with the way people dedescrt e me abe way things worked. michael cohen said you didn't need to tell me to lie. i would be riding an elevator, mr. trump would say how's moscow doing? then he would say to aa rlly, no russia, no collusion. so the distwjunction ben what was actually happening and what trump was telling the american people was startling. cohen also saidhat president trump lawyers reviewed his testimony before he presented it to congress and he also said explicitly that he briefed donald trump and his family members, beyond, jr. and ivanka trump, about the moscow oject while it was gong on. at one point, he said, mr. trump knew everything tt was gog on in the trump organization, what was happening he knew and his family newel david, before you mentioned anieselberg, michael cohen 30 times mentioned
this name he's clearly laying flares outth e saying alan wieselberg is the guy to talk to. rememberhy he's so central i all this. >> he's probably other than do tld trump seniore most important person in the trump organization. wieselberg has been with theor nization since 1980s, risen through the ranks to be trump c.f.o. that sounds like a position of great power, but really donald trump, sr. made all the decisions and wieselberg made it all wor she seems to have been involved in a number of strong transactions both for his business and charity, which is a small charity. anything donald trump was bringing i, alan wieselberg touched it and was there. that's why wieselberg is so important to an arrival of congressional and prosecutorial inquires are. he knew what was happening behind the scene. >> reporter: david farenthold,
andrea bernstein, thank you very much. >> thanks for having us. >> woodruff: he has blasted the investigation into his administration as a "witch hunt," and claimed the probe was tainted even asome of his top aides turned against him to work with prosecutors. as john yang reports, the long- awaited decision to indict israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu comes just weeks before an election that could give him another term. >> yang: just weeks before israeli elections, amid a white- hot campaign, israel's attorney general recommended that netanyahu be indicted for bribery, fraud aus breach of trt. at an evening press conference netanyahu blasted the decision: >): the left is doing this because they know they can't beat us in the ballot box. for three years, they have been carrying out a political pursuit ainst us, an unprecedent
hunting expedition with one goal, to topple the right-wing governme led by me. >> yang: attorney general heichai mandelblit led the two- year investigationnce served as a top aide to netanyahu. it's the first time in israeli history that a sitting prime minister has been indicted. prosecutors allege netanyahu eased regulations and approved deals for two media companies in exchange for more favorable press coverage. in addition they say netanyahu and his wife, sara, accepted $280,000 worth of gifts in exange for political favor corruption allegations have dogged netanyahu for much of his time as prime minister. but today's charges are a vere blow to his outsized political ambitions, and standing, says former u.s. ambassador to israel martin indyk: >> there's going to be this steady drip of revelations about what he said to various people that will sou very
corrupt.an i think that'll be a real challenge for him as he heads into this election on april 9. >> yang: formal charges will be filed, or dropped, at a hearing after israel's april 9th election. still, the indictment itselfs threatens election in an already-overheated political atmosphere. he faces a major challenge from former army chief of staff benny gantz, who's formed a centrist political party ah take on netas right-wing likud party. >> there'shis sense that a former general who has strong security credentials linked to a with him provides for the first time in over a decade a serious amallenge to netanyahu before the indictment ce out. >> yang: a "times of israel" poll shows netanyahu leads gantz 41 to 39%. but when asked if an indictment wo,d affect who they vote f a majority said they would suort gantz in elections. gantz pounced on netanyahu's troubles:
>> ( translated ): i call on you, benjamin netanyahu, from here tonight, to come to your senses, show responsibility, and resign from your post. >> yang: netanyahu said today he will not resign, and he got a major boost from a key ally; president trump spoke in hanoi >> he's done a great job as prime minister. rt, he'sgh, he's s strong. >> y longstanding and long-suffering issue of the israeli-palestinian peace process, and the comingan rom the trump administration. indyk says the prosp for that plan could actually be improved if netanyahu lo g if there is a more centrist government, there ater prospect that the trump "deal of the century" more warmly embred by the next governmen >> yang: that plan is now reportedly coming after the israeli election, one that netanyahu said today he intends to win. for the pbs newshour, i'm john
yang. >> woodruff: stay with us, ming up on the newshour: congresswoman pramila jayapal on hemedicare for all bill. plus, the connection between happiness and economic inequality. but first, in a major victory for house democrat a bill mandating universal background checks for gun sales is on its way to the senate. it's the first significa piece of gun control legislation to pass the house in over 20 years. lisa desjardins joins me now to dig into the details. hello, lisa. so another busy day at e capitol after yesterday. what would these two measures do? >> all rht, one pased yesterday and one passed tonight. first, the one that passed
yesterday, this bill would basically require bacround checks for almost every gun sale or transfer in america, allowi exceptions for family members, hunting, sporting, if you want go to shooting arrange, and law enforcement, that would not necessarily require background checks. this in the background check bill that passed today would allow 20 days total for a background check. that's a big change, judy, from the current, which is just three days. now, that's considered the charleston loophhee. that'situation in which the massacre in charleston inn which e churchgoers were killed was because e background check did not come back for thr dys. they want to raise that to 20 days. legislators say the 20-day window for a background check is too long for victims of domestic
violence, women in particular who may want to get a weapon to protect themselves, and that argument was raised on the floor today right before the votto counter that, a very passionate eech from michigan democrat debby dingell. i want to play some of what she said. >> i had to hide in that closet with my siblings, wondering if we would live or die. one night i kept my father from killing mother. he shouldn't have hada un. my mother went out and bought a gun, and then al ul were scared to death about her gun and my father's gun. we had two guns to worry about. no child, no woman, no man should ever have to go thgh that. >> she said her father was mentally ill and should not have access to any gun at all, so that's the argument democrats have made about that. it was a very powerful speech and that bill did pass in the house today. >> woodruff: very powerful,
lisa. these two measures passing the t house now go te senate where, the last time, there was an attempt at major exansion of background check. after the newtown school massacre, the senate voted. what does it look like now >> it did fail in 2015, it was a tose vote. looks lihings are farther apart on this issue. even republicans like susan collins who supported man are lukewarm on this bill. we they it has more restrictions than in the pas they're taking temperatures. there's a chance something happs in the senate. and one of the reasons is gun statistics. last year the number of gun deaths increased to over 39,000. the majority of those two-thirds are suicides, of course, but it's notable that gun violence in this country have the second leadg cause of death among our
children. so here's what's considering, judy h when i askuse democrats who are pushing this legislation how do you get it through the senate, they pointed to the children of parkland, florida. of course, theylost 17 people last year in gun violence. they said these kids have been focused on us, the house.w ey will pay all their attention on the senate. they think that will be a relentless effort. ehey have a steep hill to climb. >> woodruff: what olls saying about the public view on this ideof universals backgr tnd checks? re is a disconnect. the polls say 92% of public support e idea of universal background checks, 6% opose. usually there's a partisan divide,. no on this issue. so you're seeing something wre the public agrees, the senate does not. one issue might be the amount of importance the public places on this. just 2% of americans think that gun violence is the top issue in
this country right now. sadly, that spikes when we see large headlines about gun violence, like after parkland, florida. we'll see what happens, but,gh rit now, there is agreement but maybe not momentum from the public. >> woodruff: it's so important to follow this. lisa desjardins, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. >> woodruff: speaking of the democratichearty's agenda, th care is a big part of it. and specifically, a push to expand health care coverage and lower costs. but there are many different ideas within the party of how to do that, and just how far to go. many are loosely referred to asd are for all". even so, there's a new bill inth house that is considered the most comprehensive version of "medicare for all." amna nawaz explores what it might do and how it may affect the political conversation. >> nawaz: you might remember
medicare for all from the 2016 platform of senator bernie nders. but there's an even more ambitious plan now in the house. it wouldove the u.s. to a single-payer, government-run healthcare system. every american wouldle to go to the doctor, or the hospital, or get prescriptions ofthout paying anything ou pocket. hospitals would be paid lump sums to manage, not paid b patient visits or procedures. care for people with disabilities or home health services would be covered. and the plan for this total healthcare overhaul in just two years. there's no price tag yet, but some estimate a cost of trillions or tens of trillions over 10 years.n congresswoamila jayapal, of washington state, is the lead co-sponsor of the bill and she joins me now. tongresswoman, welcome bac the "newshour". let's start about what minister think of your plan.y broaeaking, there's a lot of support. over 70% say they like the idea. when you drill into details, you
ask people about delays in care or higxes, that support drops significantly down to 25% and 37%. so what is your message to theth people who likidea but don't like the details or the impact? >> well, here's the thng that is so important about this, it is not a government-run system, number one, because we use the same existing system of doctors and hospitals that is already there, and i think sometimes people confuse what is in our plan. all we're saying is you can see the doctor and the hospital of your choice, in fact more choice than you have right now with insurance plans -- private insurance plans that continueo limit that. the only thing we are changing is who pas for that. so instead of having five insurance plans, instead of having to argue with the insurance company about what's covered, not cover, which facility is in or out of that network, you can see anyone you want and get comprehensith care. second thing is medicare is a very popular system, and itre
y exists today for our seniors, and what we've done is we've expanded and improved upon that medicare system. so instead of having to buy an additional medicare advantage than for vision, hearing and dental, we coveret for everybody, same thing with mental health and substance abuse. and we say, instead of just liesying to seniors, it app to everyone, so ex planned and improved healthcare. and in terms of the transition, i would remind people two years seems so hard to imagine, but, in fact, sial security was implemented within one year, and there were no computers, nothing existed there to actually be able to do that. so this plan is about making sure that every american gets guaranteed universal healthcare, and that is something that every major peer country of ours already has and it is affecting our people, people are dying --
dying -- >> reporter: congresswoman, let me ask you about what the people a saying, in the plan, they say they don't want toay higher taxes for it. how would you paw for it? >> we already cover about twthirds of peoplrough medicaid and medicare. so two-thirds of the costs arere y taken care of. the other third, we have a y mber of different ways in which you could it, including that employers areal ady paying enormous premiums to insurance companies, they could pay just a fraction that into this plan and create some of that money that we need, and then we can have on millionaires and billionaires. we can roll back tax loopholes. rev never had really a conversation about why it's so important to keep t cosf our healthcare system down. right now, 19% of g.d.p., that's double what any her industrialized country in the world pays already. >> reporter: one to have criticisms is that your plan doesn't include any efforts to ofng down the co healthcare before the government
would essentially take over the system, so are you worried aout that? i mean, there are people who will say, look, it's alreadyy cost so much, not work to do that first? >> no, actually, that's the beauty of our plan, sit has cost containment built into it through ung something called global budgets which is a really important tool for buiing in cost containment and it allows, pharmaceutical drugs, dramatically brings down the price, probably to 50% of wat pharmaceutical drugs now cost, and we do that through reuired negotiation of drug prices, which we already have in the v.a. but not in the medicare system. >> reporter: there is the situation of having t transition over 150 million americans who are currently privately insured tos thi single-payer system. i want to run by something alth and human services secretary alex azar was askedy tohen asked about medicare for all plan. or said the best dowill jump out of the program, they
will be paid undermarket r to get quality care, you will go outside the system if you have the money the do so. my question is, is it a concern you make a two-tier system wherc people wn afford to go out of it do. >> it's the opposite. we cover everybody and not lal ow duplicative care, which is how we operate with medicare now, we believe the majority of doctors will get paid the same or a little bit more.so specialty doctors might have to earn wil a little less. you don't have to be rich or poor but you get qualityca heal. that's one of the benefits we have proposed versus the system we have now. million people uninsured, 40 million people underinsured. two-thirds of all bankruptcies in this country because of medical costs.th >> wrong and we need to end that. t's fair to say you have an uphill legislative battle. some of your own party members
don't likely love this plan. there's nothing inc about this plan. is the idea that you change the eonversation so that mor incremental steps are maybe more palatable? >> no, we're all about passing the plan. it sounds ambitious on the because healthcare in this country is so broken, but the reality is every ind country in the world provides this. why is it that the united ldates, the richest country in the worcannot guarantee healthcare for every single person in this country? right now, wnde speouble what dother countries spend, a we have more mothers dying in childbirth, we have more dybies who arg in terms of our infant mortality rates, and our life expecty is the lowest all our peer countries. again, this is not a particularly ambiplan in the sense that so many others have done it. the united stateshould be leading on this issue, and i think this is the plan that et cetera us there. f >> reporter: seconds left here, congresswoman. i want to ask you about the idem
ofhing being medically necessary, the things covered as n.rt of this pla wouldn't that changed based on who's in charge, what people deem necessary and not? >> no, we actually specify very clearly what is covered. so, you know, dental, vision, comprehensive cae, reproductive care, substance abuse, all of those thinu are detailed in or bill. it's over 150 pages, we've put lot of thought into it and it real will you is a real transformation of our healthcare system so that everybody in the united states does ve to go to bed worrying about where they get their care. >> reporter: congresswoman pramila jayapal, thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> woodruff: anger over inequality and its effects are important themes running through our national politics in both parties now. but just how you gau true
espacts on health and happ is a bit more nuanced than you might think. our economiccorrespondent, paul solman, dives into some of those distinctions, part of our weekly segment, "making sense." >> reporter: as a record number of private jets descended on davos last month for the wor economic forum, the anti-povoxty nonprofit fam released its annual inequality statistics. according to oxfam, the 26n richest peoplerth, just a bit over the seating capacity of the bombardier 7500, have the essame net worth as the po half of the world's population, some 3.8 billion people. but a major discovery of medical research in recent years has been that inequality doesn't just weigh on those below. >> the biggest effects are on the poor but the vast majority of the population does less weli if they'a more unequal society. >> reporter: epidemiologists richard wilkinsoand kate
pickett document this claim in their latest book, "the level." yes, economic growth drives eater contentment," happiness," but only to a point. >> in the rich, developed world, economic growth is no longer buying us gas in health and ppiness. >> reporter: and so as poorch countries get ... >> things get better. >> reporter: and then if you have inequality or increasing inequality in that country then you' going-- >> you will not be doing as well as the other rich countries. >> reporter: it's the difference between the u.s. and scandinavia, says pickett. >> if you and i have equal education, the same incomes, the same wealth, the same social class, if you live in etmore equal sothan i do you are more likely to live longer, your children to be healthier, le likely to do drugs or drop out of school. everything about your world is going to be better >> reporter: consider mental illness, which pickett wilkinson first linked to
inequality a decade ago. >> since then, i think we're seeing an epidemic of mental illness in the most unequal rich developed countries. about 80% of our young people feeling incredibly stressed, many of them suicidal, many of them hurting themselves. >> reporter: and of course it's not just the young, says pickett's husband. >> in britain, three-quarters of the population feel overwhelmed by stress and unable to cope. >> reporter: three quarters? >> three quarters. >> reporter: this is a large sample? >> yes. >> from the mental health undation. a third of the population have had suicidal thoughts in the last year. and the figures in the u.s. are pretty similar. y about 20% r population have diagnosable mental illness oe any one time. >> reporter: howit work? >> so we judge each other more by status in a more un society. and with that goes mt e worries abw we are seen and judged. >> the effects are biggest among the poor. but they gright across to the
top tenth, tenth percent of the income distribution. it affects our physiology, our hormones, the way we think, the behave and those changes have been linked to a range of mental inesses that we know are related to income inequality.r: >> reporccording to goodrx.com, depression and d xiety prescrtions are on the rise in the u.s., ey track income very closely. of course richer people can afford more anti-depressants and the like. but the we-off sure do consume a lot of them. and if depression isn't the functional definition of cohappiness, what is? after all, i askedmists betsey stevenson and justin wolfers, doesn't everyone know that more money doesn't make you happier? you hear it everywhere. after about $70,000 a year of household income, maybe it's a little more in san francisco or something, people are no happier making more than that, than the people who make that amount.
true? no? >> it's a truism, but it's false. >> reporter: wolfers cautions that wilkinson and pickett have taken e inequality argument too far. >> rich people are happier than poor people, and that's true all the way along the income distributing. people earalf a million are happier than those earning a quarter of a million. ppier than people earnin 100,000, happier than people earning 50,000, all the way. >> reporr: now wait a minute. what about 40 years worth of happiness research on lottery winners, going back to a widely trumpeted 1978 study >> so that original study was a study of, i think, 30 lottery winners. >> reporter: actually, just 22 lottery winners. but a muchore recent study tracked hundreds of lottery atnners in sweden. >> it turns out olks who won big lotteries are much happier than folks who won smaller lotteries, are much happier than folks who won no lottery whatsoever. >> reporter: just as their cats may be, this swedish lottery ad suggests.
>> so it turns out, big bump in income, big bumpn happiness. >> reporter: the pickett- wilkinson response? don't put too much stock into self-rated health and happiness reports. >> so the united states has a very high level of good self- rated health; about 80% of americans say their health is great. but their life expectancy is at the bottom of the international ague table among the developed countries. now japan which has the highest life expectancy in the world --v peoplethere longer than anywhere else-- only about half of them think their health is good.om so there's aete mismatch between subjective and objhetive measuresit comes to health. >> so you have to be very careful with that data. reporter: so when peopl report greater subjective happins as a function of having great kidding themselves? >> no, they're not kidding themselves, but we find that these things are rated to equality. so you're much more likely to
say that you are fabulous if you live in a more unequal society.o >> so you think you're a better driver than most americans? >> reporter: i think i'm worse. >> do you think your i.q. is higher? t do ynk you're more attractive? do you think you're more generous? >> reporter: so you think that the reason that, i can't remember the percentage, but 70, 80% of americans think that they're i think much better than average drivers. >> 96% >> reporter: 96% think they're better than average. >> in sweden it's 66%. that is strongly linked to income inequality. >> reporter: in the enthough, while the two couples disagree about the effects of wealth happiness, they're on the same page regarding inequality. that's because, says bet stevenson... >> increases in income keep making you happier, but th're making you happier at aea deng rate. it's just that that rate never goes to zero and that's an idea of diminishing returns, right? i'm looking at a millionaire to get the same boost in happiness for them, i'going to
need a lot more dollars than for somebody who is pretty low income, because the relationship is with a percentage change. >> reporr: in other words, say these liberal economists, you can give one millionaire 10% more money, make him or her 10% happier, or you can divvy up that $100,000 ong lower income people to make each of them 10% happier. just foundou may hav the logic of redistribution. right? take that $100,000 and find 20 people on $50,000, move them from 50, to 55,000, you've made 20 people get the same boost in happiness. >> so we've sacrificed one person with one decreasen happiness that's been offset by an increase in happiness that's 20 times the size. >> reporter: and if redistribution doesn't happen and inequality continues to grow? >> if that whole society becomes very unequal happiness and measures of well-being will decline. >> reporter: and that's the essence of what you're saying. >> yes.
>> reporter: for the pbs wshour, this is economic correspondent paul solman. >> woodruff: finally tonight, we remember the life of versatile conductor, composer andor per andre previn. he played jazz with some of thel greats, ing ella fotzgerald and benny carter. and he won oscarcomposing, conducting or performing music in films such as "gigi fair lady" and "porgy and bess." aevin became well known t the director of some of the world'leading orchestras, including the london symphony orchestra. he was marri five times including to mia farrow. he won 11 grammys d many other honors. here he is both conducting and performing mozart's "p concerto number 17" in 1976. ♪ ♪
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> woodruff: andre previn was 98 years old. and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> babbel. a language app that teaches real-life conversations in a new language, like spanish, french, german, italian, and mor m babbel's 10-ute lessons are available as an app, or online. more information on babbel.com.
>> american cruise lines. >> and with the going support of these institutions >> this program was made possib by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned by media cess group at wgbh access.wgbh.org >
llo, everyone. and welcome to manpour & company" from hanoi. here is what's coming up. face to face again as trump and kim ff their second nuclear summit in hanoi, the former u.s. pnt man on north korea joins me. are we in for a show piece or a genuine breakthrough. the split screen features explosive testimon against the president. his former lawyer tells congress that trump is a con man and racist. i will talk to filmmaker and historia ken burns and t aop former vietnamese diplomat on what this means decades after the vietnam war. plus, the comedian behind hit shows like