JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
On the "NewsHour" tonight:
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: When you prosecute the parents for coming
in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We are on the ground at the U.S.-Mexico border, as President Trump doubles
down on his policy of excluding all immigrants who try to cross without documentation.
Then: tit-for-tat on trade -- what escalating tariffs between the U.S. and China means for
America's economy.
And when does pre-kindergarten not work?
Why some Tennessee students who get an early start on their education don't do as well
in school later on.
MARK LIPSEY, Vanderbilt University: The kids who didn't go to pre-K actually are doing
better than the kids who did go to pre-K on the state achievement tests.
JUDY WOODRUFF: All that and more on tonight's "PBS NewsHour."
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: The storm over separating migrant children from their parents at the U.S.-Mexico
border rages on tonight.
President Trump is insisting that his only choices are separating out the children or
releasing whole families without penalty.
Amna Nawaz is in El Paso, Texas, and begins our coverage.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: So, what I'm asking Congress to do is to give
us a third option.
AMNA NAWAZ: In a Washington speech this morning, the president defended his policies and called
for Congress to act.
DONALD TRUMP: We have been requesting since last year the legal authority to detain and
promptly remove families together as a unit.
We have to be able to do this.
This is the only solution to the border crisis.
AMNA NAWAZ: His legislative director, Marc Short, weighed in at the White House.
MARC SHORT, White House Director of Legislative Affairs: None of us is pleased with the situation
at the border.
We have been asking Congress to give us the resources, to give us more judges, so that
we can adjudicate these cases faster, and we have asked for a resolution on the floor
settlement that would give us the ability to keep children and parents together.
AMNA NAWAZ: Last night, Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz announced emergency legislation to
do just that.
He proposes keeping families together as their cases proceed and increasing the number of
immigration judges from roughly 335 to 750.
SEN.
TED CRUZ (R), Texas: We can together.
We ought to all be united and say of course kids should be with their parents.
And if we speed up the adjudication, that solves the problem.
AMNA NAWAZ: But, today, the president appeared today to reject the option of hiring more
judges.
DONALD TRUMP: I don't want judges.
I want border security.
I don't want to try people.
I don't want people coming in.
Do you know if a person comes in and puts one foot on our ground, it's essentially,
welcome to America, welcome to our country.
You never get them out.
AMNA NAWAZ: Democrats again insisted that the family separations are of the president's
making and within his power to stop.
REP.
ELIJAH CUMMINGS (D), Maryland: Even if you believe people immigration should be halted
entirely, we all should be able to agree that, in the United States of America, we will not
intentionally separate children from their parents.
We will not do that.
We are better than that.
AMNA NAWAZ: The pressure also kept building among Republicans, including Alaska Senator
Lisa Murkowski.
SEN.
LISA MURKOWSKI (R), Alaska: Short of legislation, I think that, administratively, the secretary,
the attorney general, the president, they could move on this tomorrow.
There are multiple individuals in the administration that can fix it.
And, yes, legislation is one avenue, but it is not the only avenue.
AMNA NAWAZ: Utah Senator Orrin Hatch said he was sending a letter to Attorney General
Jeff Sessions, asking him to halt family separations at the border until Congress does take action.
Meanwhile, the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Thomas Donohue, condemned family
separations, saying, "This is not who we are, and it must stop now."
Several governors of both parties announced they will no longer send National Guard units
to help along the border.
All told, Border Patrol officials said today that, since April, more than 2,300 children
have been separated from their families, with some held in makeshift tent cities and warehouses.
In Miami, Florida Democratic Senator Bill Nelson tried to visit one of the deportation
centers, but said he'd been turned away.
SEN.
BILL NELSON (D), Florida: They are obviously trying to cover up.
They don't want us to see it.
PROTESTERS: Free our children now!
AMNA NAWAZ: In El Paso, Texas, hundreds of protesters marched in the desert heat.
WOMAN: I can't imagine a parent bringing their kid to this country, fleeing from murder,
from rape, to come and try to find salvation for their kids.
It bothers me, because I love my children, and I would do anything to protect them.
WOMAN: The majority of the people that come across this border come because of grave,
serious reasons.
You don't leave your family, you don't leave your country, your culture, your language,
even the work that you did before just because you -- just because you feel like taking advantage
of somebody else's system.
AMNA NAWAZ: Amid the storm over separations, the president met late today with House Republicans
at the U.S. Capitol.
The House is set to vote on two immigration bills this week.
And Senate Republican leaders said all of their members would now support legislation
to keep migrant families together.
Of course, here in El Paso, on the border, just a couple hundred yards or so from Mexico,
this a community that has long been dealing with immigration policy on the front lines
of it.
But, really, when it comes to the family separation policy, this is also a community that was
ground zero.
This is where the government first test-ran the family separation policy for months before
officially rolling it out across the country.
And that, Judy, was back in November of 2017.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, Amna, if they have been dealing with it there longer, what do they
tell you they have learned about it?
AMNA NAWAZ: Well, Judy, folks who work on the front lines here basically say they're
still learning.
It's a complicated process.
It is overwhelming for them.
And the system, they say, is completely overwhelmed.
There are not enough legal advocates to make sure that every adult who is being criminally
prosecuted has legal representation.
There aren't enough beds for the children who are now being separated from their parents
and either moving through El Paso to other parts of the country or being housed here.
And that's why you're seeing reports and hearing about places like Tornillo, which is a temporary
tent city that has popped up just about 20 miles east of here.
There are already a few hundred minors housed there, and we're told that they could house
a few hundred more if necessary.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And, Amna, what about people on the ground, people in the community?
What are they telling you their reaction to all this is?
AMNA NAWAZ: Well, you know, Judy, folks here have long been dealing with immigration, and
a lot of people here have a very strong opinion on it.
There aren't any local polls to tell us exactly how everyone feels specifically about family
separation.
But you saw it.
There were a few hundred people that showed up at a protest to march to on the detention
center here earlier today.
And those people were saying the same things we're hearing across the country, that this
is not a representation of who we are as a country.
I will also tell you the advocates who have been navigating this process for a very long
time say that it is more complicated now than ever.
Lawyers say, if we, as lawyers, don't know how to navigate the system, how to reunify
parents with their children, how are people who don't speak the language, how are children
who are left without any information and stuck in the system supposed to navigate it?
And I'll also tell you, as a journalist, it's incredibly complicated.
There is very little transparency.
We have all seen the media tours that the government has been allowing people on.
They're very restricted.
They're very controlled.
We have requested access to the four detention centers for children in El Paso.
We have been told there are no tours scheduled.
And so we're waiting to see if the government can provide any more information on those.
JUDY WOODRUFF: It certainly is complicated.
Amna Nawaz on the ground for us in El Paso, thank you, Amna.
In the day's other news: Trade tensions with China spiked again after President Trump called
for tariffs on another $200 billion worth of Chinese goods.
Beijing had matched an earlier round of tariffs, and Mr. Trump blamed that retaliation for
his new action.
The Chinese today called it blackmail.
GENG SHUANG, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson (through translator): China doesn't want to
fight a trade war, but it is not scared of one.
We will continue to take effective steps to resolutely defend the country's interests.
We advise the U.S. side to return to reason, and stop words and actions that harm itself
and others.
This is the only way.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The president's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, said today the U.S. remains
open to talks to resolve the dispute.
The trade trouble put Wall Street on the ropes.
The Dow Jones industrial average lost 287 points to close at 24700.
The Nasdaq fell 21, and the S&P 500 slipped 11.
The U.S. and South Korea today formally called off joint military exercises that had been
planned for August.
President Trump had initially announced the move after his summit with North Korean leader
Kim Jong-un.
Meanwhile, Kim traveled to China for a two-day visit.
He met with President Xi Jinping, reportedly to discuss the results of his talks with President
Trump.
The United States is pulling out of the United Nations' Human Rights Council.
Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley announced it today, alongside Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo.
Haley charged the Council has long ignored real abuses while targeting Israel, and she
said it's continuing this year.
NIKKI HALEY, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations: The Human Rights Council passed five
resolutions against Israel, more than the number passed against North Korea, Iran and
Syria combined.
This disproportionate focus and unending hostility toward Israel is clear proof that the council
is motivated by political bias, not by human rights.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The announcement comes a day after the U.N. human rights chief called the
policy of separating children from parents at the U.S.-Mexico border unconscionable.
Nearly 69 million people around the world were forced to flee their homes last year.
The U.N. Refugee Agency reported the figure today in Geneva.
It said more than 16 million of the refugees were newly displaced last year, especially
in Congo, South Sudan and Myanmar.
FILIPPO GRANDI, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees: This is because of protracted
conflicts, lack of solutions for those conflicts that continue, continuous pressure on civilians
in countries of conflict that pushed them to leave their homes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Syrians make up the largest displaced group, with some 12.6 million.
In Indonesia, rescuers spent this day searching for at least 128 people missing after a ferry
sank last night.
The vessel capsized in rough water on Lake Toba on the island of Sumatra.
The lake is 1,500-feet-deep.
By this morning, authorities had found only 18 survivors, who reunited with loved ones.
The Transport Ministry says the ferry was badly overloaded.
Back in this country, the White House deputy chief of staff for operation, Joe Hagin, is
stepping.
Hagin led planning for President Trump's summit with North Korea's Kim Jong-un in Singapore.
He says he plans to leave next month to work in the private sector.
And the U.S. Labor Department has announced a new health insurance option for small businesses
and the self-employed.
The plans begin this September.
They will allow multistate combinations of small companies to negotiate more affordable
rates.
They also provide fewer benefits and waive some of the mandatory coverage under the Affordable
Care Act.
Still to come on the "NewsHour": children at the border -- the view from the White House
and from Obama's head of homeland security; the president of the Koch brothers' political
arm on the ongoing international trade battle; is diabetes treatment giving patients false
hopes?; and much more.
The outcry over President Trump's policy of separating immigrant families has reached
a crescendo that extends beyond party lines.
Earlier this evening, I spoke with Mercedes Schlapp.
She's the White House director of strategic communications.
And I began by asking if Mr. Trump is hearing the criticism, including from inside his own
party.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP, White House Director of Strategic Communications: Well, absolutely.
I mean, the president, as he mentioned before, he hates seeing the separation of families,
and even though the separation of families is only for a very brief period of time.
But the reality here is, one of the reasons why President Trump is in Congress and speaking
to these House members is coming up with a permanent solution, coming up with a fix to
this.
Only Congress can fix this issue that we're dealing with in terms of ensuring that we're
able to secure the border, that we're able to keep families together, because right now,
Judy, we only have two options.
The two options are when that adults basically cross the border illegally, they will be prosecuted.
The second option is it's either -- so it's either the prosecution, and the second option
is releasing these family units into the U.S. interior, which in essence equates to open
borders.
So we want that third option.
We want the option that Congress is going to come and fix this, and ensure that they're
able to keep families together, so that they could be detained and then swiftly removed
back to their country unless they qualify for asylum.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But it was a change in approach to this policy, a change in policy by the
Trump administration, when this started happening.
It was six weeks ago the administration said, we're no longer going to keep these families
together.
We are going to prosecute the parents.
That's the change, isn't it?
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Well, the change is, is because we're actually enforcing the law.
The law wasn't being enforced beforehand.
It was actually more of a subjective case or prosecutorial discretion.
At this point, it was clear by the Department of Justice that it wanted to move in order
to -- those individuals who are crossing the border illegally.
We have to remember that.
There are ports of entry where these individuals can come in through a legal process and apply
for asylum.
And when they go through those ports of entry -- there's 26 of those along the 2,000-mile
border -- that's an area where you won't have your -- be separated from the family.
But, as we know, in American law, is, when you are -- commit a crime, you can be an American
citizen, you will be separated from your family.
And this is the case in this situation, which means that, if you commit a crime, meaning
you cross the border illegally, not through these ports of entry, you will be prosecuted.
Yes, you are separated from the family for a brief period of time during the hearings
itself and then reunited.
But that is where we are at this point.
And what we need is, we need Congress to take action to fix this problem.
This is very simple.
This is about ending a legal loophole.
This is something that the president has pushed forward, was ending catch and release, where
you're able to keep these families together and then be able to either -- either hear
their cases or remove them from the country.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But you're saying -- so it was an administration's decision to enforce
something.
But my question is, it sounds like you're saying the president, the only thing he will
accept now is having the entire family sent back across the border.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Well, again, if they go through these ports of entry and they are
able to -- we talk about credible fear, and apply for asylum, their cases will be heard.
We have a very large backlog of cases, based on our limited resource, but their cases will
be heard.
So, you have these ports of entries where these families can go through, in essence.
What we are seeing, though, is these individuals who are coming between these ports of entry.
What you're also seeing is that smugglers and human traffickers are exploiting these
children.
You're having parents who are basically sending their children alone, many in the hands of
smuggler, to get through into our country.
And that's not acceptable.
(CROSSTALK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Let me just ask you this.
You know that what is going on in these countries is, there is a dangerous situation.
These families are coming because they are being set upon.
They have seen violence inflicted on them and family members and loved ones by gangs.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Right.
JUDY WOODRUFF: There's a lawlessness.
They're coming here seeking safety.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Right.
So, let me ask you, is it your safe to put your child in the hands of a smuggler?
Is it safe, Judy?
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, is it safe to stay in a place in either Guatemala or Honduras or
El Salvador where you're dealing with those -- living with those conditions?
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: And what is amazing about America is that we have the most generous
immigration laws.
There is a legal way to apply to come into our country.
In addition to that, if those individuals are doing this dangerous trek into the United
States, they need to go through the ports of entry, which then they won't be separated
from their family.
They can apply for asylum.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And there is some backlog at those ports of entry.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Exactly, because of the fact that we have had such limited resources
and funding that is coming from Congress.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Let me just quickly ask you two other things.
One is, a number of people are saying the president chose to do this, to enforce this
policy six weeks ago, in order basically to leverage this in order to get more money for
a border wall.
Is that what's going on?
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Look, this is -- the only political play that's being made right now
is the Democrats showing up to these detention centers and making this into this big political
issue.
We want to have solutions.
We want to work with Congress.
We want to work with both parties to ensure, as the president did back in October of last
year, when he came up with a comprehensive and generous bill on immigration.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Finally, Mercedes Schlapp, as the mother of young children yourself,
what's your reaction when you see these pictures and hear the sounds of these children crying?
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Look, as I have mentioned before, and for the president and the first
lady, we hate seeing this.
It's sad.
It's tragic.
It's so tragic, especially when you have smugglers exploiting and taking advantage of these children.
It's absolutely heartbreaking.
And so this is the type of what we need to stop in terms of ensuring that individuals
who want to come to America apply safely, if they're going to go and they're going through
ports of entry, which is through a legal way, where you don't separate families.
But breaking the law in a country, that, in and of itself, is -- it's harmful.
It's harmful to them, and it's harmful to their children.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mercedes Schlapp at the White House, thank you very much.
MERCEDES SCHLAPP: Thank you so much.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And for an opposing view on the immigration crisis, Janet Napolitano.
She was secretary of homeland security under President Obama and she was instrumental in
immigration decisions, including signing the policy that created the Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals program, better known as DACA.
She's now the president of the University of California system.
Janet Napolitano, welcome back to the program.
You hear what the Trump administration is arguing, that they have no choice, that once
people come across the border without documentation and they don't do so at a port of entry, the
administration has no choice but to enforce the law, take the parents, prosecute, begin
to prosecute them, and take their children away.
JANET NAPOLITANO, Former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security: Of course the administration
has a choice.
And the choice is not to do it, and not to do it this way.
When somebody crosses the border illegally between a port of entry and is apprehended,
that is a federal misdemeanor.
Under the Obama administration, because of all of the consequences that occur, we would
keep those individuals in the civil immigration courts.
They would be given a deportation hearing and perhaps deported, but they would be kept
together with their children.
These are not cases of children being brought across by smugglers.
Those are unaccompanied children.
And that's how we treated them, as unaccompanied children.
These are children coming across with their family members.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, the administration, again -- you heard what Mercedes Schlapp -- we heard
it today from the president.
They -- what they are saying is that the law as it's written now requires them either to
accept the whole family and just let them come into the country and become, you know
-- not be followed, or to prosecute the parents.
Where is the misunderstanding or the disconnect here in understanding what the law says?
JANET NAPOLITANO: Well, you know, the disconnect is in how the law is enforced.
In the Obama administration, we enforced the law, but we enforced it using the immigration
courts and the deportation process.
What the Trump administration has decided to do is to charge each of these adults as
criminals, to prosecute them as criminals.
Therefore, you have assistant U.S. attorneys, federal prosecutors along the border being
taken away from drug smuggling cases and gun-running cases and human trafficking cases to handle
these misdemeanors.
And once the adult is in the criminal justice system, and because then they go under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Marshals, they don't have the capacity to keep children and parents
together.
And that's where the separation occurs.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And that's where that rationale comes from.
So, you have heard the president's argument.
He is saying there have been so many illegal immigrants coming into this country.
He says the numbers are off the charts.
He said -- he cited some numbers again today about how many hundreds and hundreds and thousands
of people have come in over recent administrations.
He said, at some point, we have got to draw the line.
JANET NAPOLITANO: Well, all I would say is that, in the previous administration, illegal
migration across the U.S.-Mexico border was driven to 40-year lows.
And, as far as I can tell, that was the product of enforcement policy that made sense, as
well as a strategy of working with the countries of origin to try to deter the source of the
illegal migration to begin with.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, when the president says -- and talks about smugglers -- and you mentioned
this a minute ago -- he said they are exploiting the law as it's written now.
He said there has been a 435 percent increase in smuggling or attempted smuggling of not
just minors, but families, as well as minors.
JANET NAPOLITANO: I don't know where he gets those statistics.
Frankly, I don't know where the president gets many of his statistics.
And I would have to look, and I would have to verify those.
But what I will tell you is that this is a humanitarian crisis on the border.
When you see several thousand children now in six weeks taken from their Parents, Housed
in an old Wal-Mart, housed in tents, no system established before they started this policy
to figure out, well, how will parents get reunited with their children, thereby opening
the door to lengthy separations, that is just wrong.
That's just not how the border needs to work and it's not how our immigration policy and
law actually works.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Let me quote one of the things the president said today.
He said: "Democrats love open borders.
Let the whole world come in."
He said they view them as potential voters who are going to go on and vote for Democrats
for office.
JANET NAPOLITANO: That's so cynical.
I think what the president's statement overlooks is that so many of these migrants are indeed
fleeing desperate circumstances.
They have made a treacherous journey to get to the United States, in the hopes of achieving
a better life for themselves and for their children.
And as a nation who likes to say repeatedly we are nation of immigrants, sometimes, that
means that, yes, those who cross illegally are not criminally prosecuted; they're handled
through the administrative immigration process.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Just very quickly, Janet Napolitano, you had meetings on Capitol Hill today about
DACA, the minors issues that we have -- immigrant minors coming off without documentation.
Any progress on that front?
JANET NAPOLITANO: Not that I could see, but this is yet another decision that the president
could resurrect with a stroke of his pen, and withdraw his order, rescinding the DACA
program, and thereby allow the 700,000 or so dreamers in this country, students at places
like the University of California, to remain here safely and securely.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Janet Napolitano, former secretary of homeland security, thank you.
JANET NAPOLITANO: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The trade battle between the U.S. and China, the world's two largest economies,
is escalating to new levels today.
President Trump has directed his administration to prepare major new tariffs on Chinese imports.
Nick Schifrin looks at the potential consequences of this move, including how China may retaliate.
NICK SCHIFRIN: For months, the U.S. and China have traded tit-for-tat trade threats, and
they have escalated again in just the last few days.
On Friday, President Trump authorized tariffs on $50 billion of Chinese goods, such as industrial
machinery.
Those are set to take effect next month.
In response, Chinese officials vowed to retaliate with their own $50 billion of tariffs on American
goods, such as beef, cars, and soybeans.
That response prompted President Trump to threaten an additional $200 billion of tariffs.
And now the president is warning the U.S. may impose tariffs on a total of $450 billion
of Chinese goods.
That's 90 percent of everything China exports to the U.S., from electronics, clothing, toys,
tools, you name it.
Edward Alden watches all this closely for the Council on Foreign Relations, and joins
me now.
Edward Alden, thank you very much.
The administration says that China is trying to maintain a permanent and unfair advantage.
China protects its companies in many sectors, especially high-tech.
China forces the U.S. to -- U.S. companies to give some of its information to China.
So, doesn't the administration have a point?
EDWARD ALDEN, Council on Foreign Relations: Yes, no question.
I mean, if you look at the document that the U.S. trade representative's office put together
that is at the heart of this investigation, it makes a pretty much compelling case on
all of these.
U.S. companies that are trying to invest in China have to work with joint venture partners.
They are often forced to transfer their best technologies to their partners.
The Chinese use licensing and other regulatory discrimination to make it hard for U.S. companies
to operate freely in the Chinese market.
China has a very restrictive investment regime, which is intended to help its companies get
the next leg up in terms of the technologies of the future.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Is your notion, though, that the means by which the U.S. is addressing
that is less effective than it could be?
EDWARD ALDEN: Oh, I think it's much less effective.
I mean, the United States has spent the last 75 years building a system of global trade
rules, culminating in the creation of the World Health Organization.
There are a lot of tools available through the WTO that the U.S. hasn't used fully in
trying to go after some of these Chinese practices.
And we're not working with our allies to put pressure on China.
These are problems that face not just U.S. companies, but Japanese companies, German
companies, British and French companies.
But, instead, President Trump has been picking trade fights with those countries as well.
So, tactically, this is highly questionable and I think undermines a lot of the credibility
of the United States as a leader in setting and maintaining global trading rules.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Well, as you say, this isn't only about China.
The administration says that it's trying to rebalance trade deficits and also trying to
seize advantages that it says the U.S. has given up.
So what's wrong with trying to seize those advantages, as the administration puts it?
EDWARD ALDEN: Well, I don't think there is anything wrong, but you have to pick your
battles.
OK?
So, President Trump doesn't like the large trade deficits.
Fair enough.
There are things that can be done to correct that, at least to help it, a lot of those
outside the realm of trade policy.
The China issues we have been talking about are kind of very real and very front and center,
but if you're going to deal with those, you need allies.
If what you get into is fights with all your trading partners because some of them run
trade surpluses with the United States, then you are going to have no coherent strategy
to actually get anything done.
You can see this in the talks with China.
The United States is lurching back and forth between saying, look, we need a real response
to the technology transfer issue, to the intellectual property theft issue, to cyber-espionage,
to regulatory discrimination.
It lurches back and forth between that position and saying, well, if China would just buy
more soybeans and natural gas and reduce the trade deficit, then the United States will
be fine.
That's not a coherent strategy, and it is not going to be effective.
NICK SCHIFRIN: The president's trade adviser, Peter Navarro, told us in a phone call today
that China has more to lose than the U.S. because China exports, four times more, than
the U.S. exports to China.
Does China have more to lose than the U.S.?
EDWARD ALDEN: No, I don't think that is true at all.
That's a kind of simple arithmetic that says, because we buy more from them than they buy
from us, they're more vulnerable.
China has a lot of ways to hurt the United States, to hurt U.S. companies that are invested
over there.
They hold a huge amount of our treasury holdings.
They could reduce those and cause U.S. interest rates to rise.
They can manipulate their currency, as they did in the 2000s, to hold down the value,
which would increase their export advantage into the United States.
And they can target their retaliation, as they're already planning to do, against sectors
that are going to hurt the president, go after farmers, go after, you know industries in
swing states.
Both sides will hurt, but I think China can actually in many ways do more damage to the
United States than vice versa.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Edward Alden, thank you very much.
EDWARD ALDEN: Good to be with you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The rising U.S. trade tensions, not only with China, but also those with longtime
U.S. allies Canada, Mexico and the European Union, have sent ripples across the political
landscape in this country.
John Yang gets reaction about all of this from one of the biggest and most influential
forces in Republican politics, as the midterm elections approach.
JOHN YANG: Americans for Prosperity, a conservative libertarian political advocacy group funded
by David and Charles Koch, is undertaking a multimillion-dollar campaign opposing President
Trump's trade policies.
Tim Phillips is the group's president.
He joins me now.
Mr. Phillips, thanks so much for joining us.
TIM PHILLIPS, President, Americans for Prosperity: Absolutely.
JOHN YANG: You supported the president on his tax cuts.
TIM PHILLIPS: Right.
JOHN YANG: You were full of praise, the letter to the president before the G7, full of praise
for what he's done with the economy.
TIM PHILLIPS: Right.
JOHN YANG: What's the message on trade to the president?
TIM PHILLIPS: The president rightly deserves a lot of credit for this economy taking off.
The data clearly indicates it's doing much better.
But his trade or his protectionist policies, his tariffs, risk undermining the economic
recovery that the tax cuts and tax reform and the elimination of a lot of job-killing
regulation and red tape, it risks undermining that.
So, we're urging him to drop these tariffs, embrace free trade, and let's keep this economic
recovery going that's helping a lot of Americans improve their lives.
JOHN YANG: Have you heard back from the White House?
Do you talk at all with the people within the Trump administration?
TIM PHILLIPS: We do.
We have consistent discussions with them.
Obviously, they disagree so far.
They feel -- initially, they were saying, well, these potential tariffs are more of
a negotiating tool.
But now they have actually begun taking effect.
And now we're seeing retaliation from other folks, including some of our allies, like
the Canadians, for example, on most issues are allies of ours, and obviously with the
Chinese.
And these tariffs, they sound good.
A lot of politicians, John, like them.
They sound tough, you know, when you're doing tariffs.
But they're being tough on American businesses and consumers.
A lot of American companies, like saw the coverage of American-made lockers, steel is
the number one ingredient.
Well, the price of steel is going up because of these tariffs.
That is hurting American jobs.
JOHN YANG: You -- there seems to be some disagreement within the administration, though, as well,
that there's some factions in the administration apparently would agree with you.
Have you been hearing from those -- those voices?
TIM PHILLIPS: Larry Kudlow, the president's chief economic adviser, prior to going into
the administration, just a few short weeks ago, was very much in agreement with us that
tariffs are a bad idea, that free trade, embracing free trade is better.
Once he entered the White House, he still talked about how the tariffs are a negotiating
tool.
So, there is -- we do think there's a lot of disagreement within the administration.
And we're hopeful the president -- you know, he said at the G7 summit that he would love
to see all the tariffs gotten rid of.
We take him at his word on that.
We would urge him to embrace that, because this trade war that is already happening -- it's
not being discussed anymore -- it's now happening -- it risks undermining the very good work
that his administration is doing with the tax cuts and tax reforms and the other steps
they have taken that have helped get the economy moving again.
We don't want to see that.
JOHN YANG: You have differed with the president, your organization has differed with the president
on other policies, particularly on immigration.
What's your view or your group's view of the current debate over separating children at
the border?
TIM PHILLIPS: This current situation that we're seeing is not good.
And, frankly, both parties deserve blame.
It's been kicked around like a political football for well over a decade.
I remember George W. Bush as president putting forward a serious immigration proposal that
Congress rejected.
President Obama had Democrat majorities his first two years.
He did nothing on immigration to really fix this.
President Trump early on made some moves to the Democrats.
We applauded those.
But this is something, John, that both parties deserve blame for.
JOHN YANG: This campaign focusing on trade issues, trade and tariff issues, as we go
into the midterm elections, does this represent a shift in the -- sort of the strategy of
the Koch brothers, moving from talking about specific candidates -- the Koch brothers'
contributions were very influential in cementing the House majority for the Republicans -- to
turning more to issue-oriented campaign?
TIM PHILLIPS: We want to work with folks across the board to pass policies that will help
improve people's lives.
Immigration -- and you mentioned that -- is one example of that.
We believe that trade is another one.
A lot of folks on the far left, like Bernie Sanders, they embrace protectionism and tariffs.
So, we want to work with folks across the board.
We just did that on an issue, right to try, which you have covered, that allows terminally
ill patients to -- access to new treatments.
That was a bipartisan effort.
We thanked Democrats openly.
You know, Senator Heitkamp, who is in an election this year, we thanked her for the work she
did helping roll back portions of Dodd-Frank, which was harming community banks and loaning
to small businesses.
So, we're not an appendage of any political party.
We have made that clear.
And we're not going to be.
And we're going to thank Democrats or Republicans when they do the right thing.
And, frankly, we're going to hold them accountable when we think they're going the wrong thing.
That's the best way to do it.
And we -- that's the process we're going to follow.
JOHN YANG: How active will the organization be in the midterm?
TIM PHILLIPS: We have said we're going to be very active across the board.
Now, that includes at the state level and the federal level.
But we will be active.
And we, though, look at every individual candidate as just that, an individual candidate.
We try not to look at party and other things like that.
We look at who are genuinely putting forward policies, championing policies that will help
improve people's lives.
JOHN YANG: And, of course, the news within the last week about David Koch, because of
health reasons, stepping back from both his businesses and his political activities, is
that going to make any change, do you think, in your organization?
TIM PHILLIPS: It's a blow.
David Koch has provided sterling leadership from the very beginning as the chairman of
the Americans for Prosperity Foundation.
And you don't replace a David Koch.
You work together to do the best you can.
But we wish David and Julia and his family all the best.
But it's absolutely a blow to lose a leader of his example and capability.
JOHN YANG: Tim Phillips, president of Americans for Prosperity, thanks for joining us.
TIM PHILLIPS: You bet.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Stay with us.
Coming up on the "NewsHour": What is the successful recipe for giving children an early leg up
on their education?
But first: Around 30 million Americans, one-tenth of the country's population, live with diabetes.
Medical guidelines for treatments include a healthy diet, exercise and regulating blood
sugar levels.
As with many diseases, there are also unproven treatments that have produced anecdotal success
stories.
From inewsource, an independently funded nonprofit media organization, Cheryl Clark reports.
CHERYL CLARK: Dillon is a small rural town of about 4,000 people in Southwestern Montana's
Beaverhead Valley.
Here, everyone knows everyone, including Ron and Julie Briggs.
Four years ago, Ron, the county coroner, was ready to give up on his longtime fight with
diabetes.
We spoke with them in December.
RON BRIGGS, Diabetes Patient: I have been a diabetic for 55 years.
I have heard from everybody under the sun.
Everybody's got a cure for diabetes.
CHERYL CLARK: His diabetes was so severe, he often landed in the local hospital in a
diabetic coma.
But Ron's wife, Julie, wouldn't give up hope.
JULIE BRIGGS, Co-Owner, Trina Health of Montana: And I thought, we have worked really hard,
and I don't want my husband to die now.
CHERYL CLARK: At a particularly low point in 2014, Julie started searching online for
diabetes treatments.
She discovered a national network of clinics called Trina Health.
It was founded by Sacramento lawyer G. Ford Gilbert, who said he had developed a miraculous
procedure to treat diabetes.
G. FORD GILBERT, Founder and CEO, Trina Health: When you have extra insulin...
CHERYL CLARK: Gilbert insisted in a February interview with us that his treatment stops,
even reverses the complications of diabetes.
Here's how he explained the results.
G. FORD GILBERT: You get your brain functionality back.
You get eye functionality back.
You get kidney functionality back.
You resolve unhealing wounds that have been unhealing and weeping for years.
CHERYL CLARK: The four-hour procedure involves infusing insulin into a patient's bloodstream
through an I.V. Gilbert says the infusions, as shown in this Trina video, help patients
better metabolize carbohydrates, and that restores their health.
G. FORD GILBERT: Any person who truly understands what we do is wildly impressed and enamored
with the outcomes we achieve.
CHERYL CLARK: But many in the medical community are not convinced.
Dr. John Buse, a former president of the American Diabetes Association, was blunt in his criticism
of Trina when he spoke with us.
DR.
JOHN BUSE, Former President, American Diabetes Association: The pitch was pretty slick and
compelling, whereas the evidence that I could find was pretty much nonexistent.
CHERYL CLARK: In 2016, at the request of a potential Trina investor, Buse spent hours
reviewing Gilbert's materials.
DR.
JOHN BUSE: I would sort of characterize it more on the scam end of the spectrum of business
opportunities.
CHERYL CLARK: Medicare and at least one major insurance company say they have found no sufficient
that the Trina treatments actually benefit patients, so they won't pay for them.
But Gilbert had a work-around.
Instead of billing the Trina treatments as one all-inclusive claim, his company submitted
claims for each of the services separately.
Ron Briggs began receiving Trina treatments in 2014.
He and his wife thought they had found an answer, if only for a while.
RON BRIGGS: I found something that would help with my situation, and it wasn't that I thought
would help.
I knew would help.
CHERYL CLARK: Ron traveled every week to a clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona, to get the
infusions.
JULIE BRIGGS: After the fourth time, Ron kind of called me up on the phone and he said,
"I don't know what we're going to do, but I have to do this the rest of my life."
CHERYL CLARK: So, Ron and Julie rallied support in Dillon to open their own clinic.
They said they paid Ford Gilbert about $300,000 for fees and equipment.
The couple tried to persuade Dillon's local hospital and its doctors to oversee it, including
Dr. Sandra McIntyre.
DR.
SANDRA MCINTYRE, Barrett Hospital: And part of that conversation was, would one of you
in this organization be the medical director if we -- if the Briggs chose to move forward?
And we pretty much said the same thing, which is, why would we be medical directors over
a service that we don't think has scientific merit?
CHERYL CLARK: The doctors recommended the hospital not get involved.
McIntyre said when patients like Ron have a chronic disease, they look for anything
they think will make them feel better.
DR.
SANDRA MCINTYRE: And when someone offers something that really is painless, essentially, and
cost-free to you, with this promise of a miracle, it -- it hooks patients.
It hooks them.
CHERYL CLARK: Without the support of hospital doctors, Ron and Julie opened their clinic
anyway in 2015.
They hired nurses to perform the insulin infusions and treated as many as 15 patients.
Two of those patients said Trina was miraculous, and even extended their lives.
But not all thought their health improved.
Some, like Ruby Montie, suffered severe side effects from the treatment process.
RUBY MONTIE, Former Trina Patient: It was more than severe diarrhea.
And I just couldn't handle it.
I was getting dehydrated, and I would come home, and my husband would tell me that I
just looked washed out.
CHERYL CLARK: Over the past five years, more than two dozen Trina clinics have opened in
17 states.
But, by early 2017, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana was questioning the Dillon clinic's
reimbursement claims.
And the private insurer and federal authorities were investigating Gilbert's billing practices.
Gilbert told us he nothing wrong.
G. FORD GILBERT: There's no fraud.
There's nobody a bad actor here.
CHERYL CLARK: But Blue Cross Blue Shield had already been refusing to cover Trina treatments
in Alabama.
Eventually, the insurance company stopped payments in Montana.
That decision led Ron and Julie to close their clinic.
RON BRIGGS: I have invested $750,000 in this whole thing.
We were told that the insurance companies were in line.
JULIE BRIGGS: You see -- on TV, you see all of these things about, this medication, if
you take this medication, your legs are going to fall off and your arms are going to fall
off and your nose is going to turn blue, and it's going to kill you.
And the insurance companies are covering all that.
But something...
RON BRIGGS: That helps.
JULIE BRIGGS: ... that helps and has saved my husband's life, they don't even want to
look at.
CHERYL CLARK: But Ron's life wasn't saved.
In late December, he told his wife he didn't think he'd last the night.
He wound up in a hospital with kidney failure, heart disease and a blood clot, all possibly
related to his diabetes.
Days later, Ron died.
When we spoke with Gilbert weeks later, he remain committed to expanding his network
of clinics.
G. FORD GILBERT: We will achieve remedial treatment for hundreds of millions of people.
And I say that without a worry in this world.
CHERYL CLARK: But, in April, Ford Gilbert was arrested this month on federal public
corruption charges in Alabama.
He is accused of fraud and bribery in a failed scheme prosecutors say was intended to get
a state law passed to force coverage of Trina infusions.
RICHARD JAFFE, Attorney for Gilbert: And very adamantly and respectfully pleaded not guilty.
CHERYL CLARK: A state legislature and lobbyists were also arrested.
All three have denied the charges and await trial.
The clinic in Dillon remains closed.
So are clinics in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana and California.
Others have shut down their Web sites or stripped away the name Trina.
But some clinics continue to offer the unproven Trina treatment and to advertise that insurance
and Medicare are covering it.
How long that will continue is unknown.
For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm inewsource reporter Cheryl Clark in Dillon, Montana.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Roughly 1.5 million American children attend state and federally funded
pre-kindergarten in 43 states and Washington, D.C., but research shows quality and access
vary across states, even from one classroom to the next.
A number of states want to improve the quality of pre-K classes, and that's been playing
out in Tennessee.
John Yang is back with this report he filed from Memphis for our weekly segment Making
the Grade.
JOHN YANG: In Deanna Raynor's pre-K classroom in Memphis, the lessons go beyond just the
ABCs.
DEANNA RAYNOR, Teacher: I really want them to know how to get along, socialize well,
you know, learn how to problem-solve, learning how to stay in control, understanding themselves,
understanding that other people have feelings just like they do.
JOHN YANG: For Raynor's students, that means learning to settle my glitter.
Settle my glitter, what does that mean?
DEANNA RAYNOR: That's just like when I'm just all out of whack and I'm just like, oh, my
goodness.
And so, you know -- so, when you're settling your glitter is just calming down.
In order for the children to really do well in school, in society, at home as a whole,
that, you know, we need to be rooted and grounded socially and emotionally.
JOHN YANG: Porter-Leath, a nonprofit group, designed this state-of-the art early childhood
academy to not only teach children, but also teach teachers, hoping to improve pre-K education
across the area.
Here, social-emotional skills are an essential part of learning, skills, educators say, that
will help children in kindergarten, elementary school and throughout life.
In Tennessee, debate over pre-K has been sparked by a study that suggests the benefits may
not be lasting.
Mark Lipsey, a professor at Vanderbilt University's Peabody College of Education, studied children
the state's voluntary pre-K program, which targets low-income families
MARK LIPSEY, Vanderbilt University: The kids who didn't go to pre-K actually are doing
better than the kids who did go to pre-K on the state achievement tests, for example.
In third grade, there are significant differences favoring the group that didn't go to pre-K
on the math and science measures.
JOHN YANG: Lipsey says more research is needed to figure out why that is: Are pre-K programs
lacking, or are elementary schools not reinforcing the benefits of pre-K?
Experts say the expectations for long-term effects from pre-K come from two model programs
in the 1960s and '70s.
Studies found that, as adults, participants had higher graduation rates, better wages
and more stable marriages.
But Lipsey says those programs served a small number of children beginning at infancy.
He says nine months of pre-K on such a large scale today are unlikely to have similar results.
MARK LIPSEY: I frankly don't think we're going to see the life-changing kinds of long-term
outcomes.
There's just no real evidence of -- no real convincing evidence of that for contemporary
pre-K programs.
JOHN YANG: Early education advocates say that doesn't mean pre-K programs have no value.
KAREN HARRELL, Vice President, Porter-Leath: We don't have teachers who are just babysitting
children.
JOHN YANG: Karen Harrell is vice president at Porter-Leath, which educates children from
low-income families who are heading to first grade in Shelby County Public Schools.
It is not part of the state pre-K program.
KAREN HARRELL: They're actually teaching children and they're challenging children.
They're helping to grow our children, so that they can in turn be productive citizens.
JOHN YANG: DeAnna McClendon is director of early childhood programs for public schools
in Shelby County, where 47 percent of the children live in poverty.
She says, in her district, students who had pre-K outperform those who didn't through
the third grade.
DEANNA MCCLENDON, Shelby County Public Schools: Without the nine months in pre-K, I think
that our children and our families in this community almost never catch up.
And so nine months can be a deal-breaker for the children and families in our community.
They can either make you or break you.
JOHN YANG: Tennessee's voluntary pre-K program began in 2005.
Now almost every school district in the state has at least one full-day pre-K classroom.
Enrollment is more than 18,000.
Tennessee ranks in the middle of state pre-K programs on most measures, including per child
spending and access.
Proposals for state-funded universal pre-K are an issue in this year's Tennessee governor's
race.
Opponents are citing the Vanderbilt study.
MAN: Current pre-K does have mixed results, the data shows.
JOHN YANG: As at this candidates forum earlier this year.
WOMAN: They need to be high-quality programs, not just baby-sitting.
JOHN YANG: Improving quality is the idea behind Porter-Leath's teacher training project, the
first in the state for pre-K instructors.
Some classrooms are set up for monitoring.
Playgrounds aren't just for children to play.
They're places for teachers to observe.
Porter-Leath, which is funded by federal Head Start money and private donations, not only
trains its own teachers and classroom assistants; it offers training for others, including those
in public schools, free of charge.
And Porter-Leath takes a holistic approach.
Family case workers help parents with housing, jobs and their own education.
County School administrator DeAnna McClendon:
DEANNA MCCLENDON: This is a way for single parents, working moms, families who are trying
to get themselves established, and they're young families.
I think this is a way of supporting them as a family.
JOHN YANG: The Vanderbilt looked at standardized test scores as the measure of math and language
skills.
But what about the kind of social-emotional skills that Deanna Raynor teaches?
Is there an easy way to measure the other part, the getting along, the behaving, the
sort of knowing how to interact and all work together?
DEANNA RAYNOR: Absolutely.
Absolutely.
As far as measuring it, we have had children who first came in who were very feisty, you
know, I'm with my hands, you know, I'm using my hands inappropriately, my words inappropriately.
So, now, when I'm getting upset, you know, I feel -- you know, I'm keeping myself together.
I'm not reaching out.
We go over those rules.
JOHN YANG: You talk about helping the whole child.
Do standardized test scores miss something?
KAREN HARRELL: I think it absolutely misses something.
We need to be in a position to whereas we're educating our children on, how do I self-
regulate?
How do I calm myself down when I have a situation or a conflict comes up?
If children cannot listen, if they cannot follow instructions, then they're not going
to be able to learn.
JOHN YANG: All important skills, early education advocates say, for a child's long-term education.
For the "PBS NewsHour," I'm John Yang in Memphis.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So important to follow these education stories.
And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
Join us online and again here tomorrow evening.
For all of us at the "PBS NewsHour," thank you, and we'll see you soon.
For more infomation >> ММ 5X5 С ПОДПИСЧИКАМИ НА PANORAMA UI В CS:GO // ОБНОВЛЕНИЕ КСГО - Duration: 13:18. 
For more infomation >> Dez Vezes Melhor - Azart x Kiniso l Bala no Inimigo #7 (Vídeo Oficial) - Duration: 2:03. 
For more infomation >> ¡MI HERMANA mayor JUEGA FORTNITE por PRIMERA VEZ! *¿Juega mejor que yo?* - Duration: 10:08. 
For more infomation >> Clemson students braving the heat to dig up the past - Duration: 1:20. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét