amna: good evening. i'm amna nawaz. geoff: and i'm geoff bennett. on the “newshour” tonight, the u.s. supreme court sounds skeptical as it hears arguments about whether colorado can bar former president donald trump from the state's primary ballot. amna: the justice department says president biden willfully withheld classified documents but will not seek charges. geoff: and a new report details the destruction of the ukrainian

city of mariupol, and accuses russian forces of war crimes. >> this operation really stands out as one of the worst chapters of russia's full-scale invasion of ukraine so far. ♪ >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. the kendeda fund, committed to advancing restorative justice and meaningful work through investments in transformative leaders and ideas. more at kendedafund.org. carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security, at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of

these individuals and institutions. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. amna: welcome to the “newshour”" the justice department has declined to prosecute president joe biden for his handling of classified obama era documents found in his former office in washington, d.c. and at his home in delaware. geoff: in a 345-page report, special counsel robert hur wrote, we conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.

president biden offered his first public comments about the report earlier this evening. >> the special counsel acknowledged i cooperated completely. i did not throw up any road blocks. i sought no delays. in fact, i was so determined to they needed i went forward with a five-hour in-person interview over the two days of october 8 and october 9 last year even though israel had just been attacked by hamas on october 7. i was especially pleased to see the special counsel make clear the stark difference between this case and donald trump. bottom line is the special counsel in my case decided against moving forward with any charges. this matter is now closed. geoff: let's bring in oona hathaway, a professor at yale law school and former special counsel at the pentagon. thank you for being with us. this investigation found that president biden had willfully retained classified material after finishing his term as vice president and that he had shared sensitive information with a ghost writer who helped him with his 2017 memoir.

the president is not facing charges in what would typically be considered a felony. does this outcome comport the facts and evidence in the case? oona: i think it does. i think that this report is balancing on a very thin line. it includes, as you say, that in the opinion of investigators that he did act willfully. but they determined that they do not believe they would be able to persuade a jury of that. there are a number of reasons they do not think a jury would be inclined to believe he believed that she behaved willfully -- inclined to believe that he behaved willfully. that is why they declined to prosecute. it is why the report sometimes reads like on the one hand he act -- that is the distinction. geoff: the separate investigation into donald trump

gaza resulted in 40 criminal counts against temperate remind us of the significant differences, why donald trump is being prosecuted and president biden is not. oona: the main difference is that when former president trump was asked to return these documents by the national archives several times, he declined. it was demanded and he again declined. he was told he was unlawfully retaining classified information and documents and again declined. and it took a raid of mar-a-lago to excavate those documents and bring them back into government custody. by contrast when president biden was notified that he may have retained classified documents and it was his own staff that discovered the possibility that there may have been retained documents at his office at the university of pennsylvania they disclosed to the government

directly and he fully cooperated. as he said in that clip that you played, he sat for a five-hour interview. he opened up his homes for searches pretty he turned everything over that he had. that was a very different response. he did not mean to be holding the classified information and the government took that into account in determining whether they thought they could persuade a jury that he meant to be unlawfully retaining classified information. geoff: on that point, the special counsel in this case said he chose not to bring charges in part because mr. biden would likely present himself to a jury as he did during our interview with him as a sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. in response to this the white house counsel wrote a letter where they took issue with that and said that the report uses

highly prejudicial language to describe a commonplace occurrence among witnesses which is a lack of recall of years old events. does this cross the line into excess? oona: when you read the report it is clearly written for a public audience. it is not written like a normal legal document. it is not written in legalese. certainly the beginning summary is written with an audience in mind. it is written with a public audience in mind and certainly with reporters in mind. and it does characterize some of these events in ways that are striking. that was one of the lines in particular that jumps out. one way to read that and say that differently is to say this is many years later. he does not remember the exact contents of the documents. they explain later that one of the reasons may be that he may not have even known exactly what

documents were removed from his office because he did not actually pack many of these boxes himself. he did not really pack any himself. so the extent to which he actually knew classified documents were in his office is hard to determine. so when they were asking him these questions he was not recalling all the details. that makes it hard to prove because you have to show there was intent, that he knew he had classified documents and he removed and intentionally retained them and he knew that he was acting unlawfully and that is what you have to prove to convince a jury to convict. and i think rightfully that the special prosecutor decided they just did not have the information they would need to be able to convince a jury of that. geoff: oona hathaway, thank you so much for your insights. we appreciate it. oona: thanks for having me. ♪

amna: the u.s. supreme court today heard arguments in a landmark election case looking at whether former president donald trump's actions on january 6 should disqualify him from appearing on the republican primary ballot in colorado. for over two hours, the justices scrutinized an obscure provision in the 14th amendment at the center of this case. that provision says that former elected officials should be barred from holding office if guilty of insurrection. former president trump weighed in after the arguments concluded. >> you're leading in the country by a lot and can you take the person leading everywhere and say we're not going to let you run. i think that's pretty tough to do, but i'm leaving it up to the supreme court. geoff: -- amna: our own william brangham and marcia were at the court today. just remind us what is the main

argument in colorado's case. william: a group of republican voters in colorado watched january 6 happen and said that was an insurrection and donald trump was responsible. so they petitioned their state to say that under section three of the 14th amendment, which is the so-called insert election -- insurrection clause, he should be disqualified from running and becoming president again. section three basically says if you are elected to office and you swear an oath to the constitution but then commit insurrection, you are ineligible to be in office again unless two thirds of congress wipes that stain away from you. they argued this all the way up to the colorado supreme court, sided with them, that is the case argued today. amna: in listening to this, which i have to say is so cool to be able to do, but it does not sound like it broke along partisan lines. one major question was about the power of states in enforcing the

insurrection clause. chief justice john roberts actually said this. >> in very quick order i would expect, although my predictions have never been correct, i would expect that a goodly number of states would say whoever the democratic candidate is you are off the ballot, and others for the republican candidate, you are off the ballot. and it will come down to just a handful of states that will decide the presidential election. that is a pretty daunting consequence. amna: what exactly are his concerns here? marcia: the key issue that justices did appear to be most interested in, and that's across the bench, was weather the states have a role to enforce section three against non state candidates like the president, and mr. trump's attorney argues that they have no role at all absent congressional legislation giving them authorization. the colorado lawyer argued that

the states have broad power under article two, the electors clause in order to run elections and that includes enforcing qualifications for the ballot. so the chief justice took it a step further, he asked the hypothetical, assuming states do have the power to do this, is this what's going to start happening? you're going to have different states with different standards, different definitions of, for example, insurrection, and different rules for holding a trial on that, and it's just going to become very political. there is going to be retaliation if they throw a republican off the ballot. estate upset about that might throw a democrat off ballot. that is when i felt the arguments started to turn quite a bit against colorado and in favor of donald trump. that is what the chief justice was basically saying and it was

picked up by other justices voicing similar concerns. william: to that point, what you are saying about how this really did not split along theological lines print another issue that came up is whether section three actually applies to the presidency. in the section itself it lists all the different offices that could be disqualified if you commit insurrection. the president is not mentioned in that list. everyone assumes they meant that book a ton g brown jackson picked that up today -- but ketanji brown jackson picked that up today. >> why did they not put the word president in the list? the thing that is troubling to me is i totally understand your argument but they were listing people that were barred and president is not there. >> this came up in the debates in congress over section three where they said why didn't you include president and vice

president in a language and center more response, we have. look at the office any office says. >> doesn't that at least suggest ambiguity? this ties into justice kavanaugh's point. we had a person at the time saying what i am saying. the language here does not seem to include president. why is that? so if there is ambiguity, why would we construe it to come as justice kavanaugh pointed out, against democracy? amna: it is fascinating, the language at play here. did they ever address that central point, that january 6 was an insurrection that donald trump was responsible for? william: you would have thought that would be a central line of questioning but it really was not. the point about was others -- about whether this was an insurrection or not barely came up. the lawyer from colorado kept trying to insert that into his answers but the justices get to choose what parts of these laws

and rulings they want to talk about. they are not relitigating the entire case. but it was surprising how little that came up. we both felt that. i want to play this one bit where justice kavanaugh was questioning the lawyer representing colorado about this where he was arguing to the point that marcia was making that if you allow colorado to basically dictate who sits on the presidential ballot, that that in and of itself is antidemocratic. listen to this exchange. >> in trying to figure out what section three means, what about the idea that we should think about democracy? think about the right of the people to elect candidates of their choice, of letting the people decide. because your position has the effect of disenfranchising voters to a significant degree. >> this case illustrates the danger of refusing to apply

section three as written because the reason we are here is that president trump tried to disenfranchise 80 million americans who voted against him and the constitution does not require that he be given another chance. william: that is about as close as they got to putting this case before the justices about whether january 6 was an insurrection. amna: meanwhile this is all playing out as the public watches at. there were calls for justice thomas to recuse himself because of his wife's involvement in january 6. he did not. now they have an enormous decision before them about whether or not a former president should be on a primary ballot. when are they going to make this decision? they also have to figure out whether to take -- take up the case regarding the former president's immunity. marcia: as far as the case argued today i expect they may move fairly quickly. they moved quickly to schedule a briefing in arguments in this case. they are very aware there are primary election downlines --

deadlines approaching. and the question of former president trump's immunity is something he has to actually take the next step, since he lost in the lower court, no immunity. he has to appeal to the supreme court by monday in order to stop the lower court's ruling from moving forward, to the trial judge, and the trial actually taken place. so we will see more of that. and i think the court is very aware of all of this as well as how it is viewed as an institution and what is ruling can be. in a lot of ways the case today is lose lose. whoever loses there will be criticism of the court and probably political criticism. so it is tough but that is what they get paid to do. amna: thank you both so much. marcia: thank you. william: thank you. ♪

amna: in the day's other headlines, israel stepped up air strikes on rafah, along gaza's border with egypt, a city packed with refugees. hospital officials reported at least 13 people were killed as the assault on hamas moves south. survivors denounced the attacks that left their homes in ruins. and the white house warned against an all-out israeli drive into rafah. >> any major military operation in rafah at this time, under these circumstances, with more than a million, probably more like a million and a half palestinians who are seeking refuge and have been seeking refuge in rafah without due consideration for their safety, would be a disaster and we would not support it. amna: in central gaza, heavy fighting continued in khan younis. a senior israeli military official said hamas forces there are largely destroyed, but senior leaders might have escaped through tunnels. meantime, secretary of state antony blinken is heading home from israel.

he failed to make much headway toward a ceasefire, but said there's still room for negotiations. iraq is warning that u.s. strikes on iranian-backed militias will fuel demands for the u.s. coalition to leave the country. an attack on wednesday killed the leader of one militia group that the u.s. blamed for targeting american troops. the white house said today that discussions with baghdad are going forward. ukraine's president volodymyr zelenskyy announced a major military shakeup today, facing a stalemate in the war with russia. he removed his top general, valerii zaluzhnyi, saying the time for such renewal is now. the country's ground forces commander, oleksandr syrskyi, was promoted to take over as army chief. in pakistan, they're counting votes tonight in parliamentary elections marred by surging violence. on wednesday, 30 people died in twin bombings, and 12 more were killed today. voters faced long lines and a

shutdown of mobile phone services to head off disruptions. some said they want to see an end to deep divisions. >> now we should hope for the best. we have to decide on matters ourselves through elections. god willing, pakistan's future is bright if the decisions are made according to the opinion and aspirations of the people. amna: the ousted former prime minister imran khan was banned from running. he's now serving prison terms for corruption and other charges. the prime minister of haiti, ariel henry, appealed for calm today after three days of violent protests and demands that he resign. fiery demonstrations have erupted across the country this week. gang violence, poverty, and a refusal to hold general elections spurred the protests. back in this country, the fcc has ordered an immediate end to using voices generated by artificial intelligence in automated phone calls. today's unanimous ruling cited fears that the technology can misinform voters. robo-calls circulated in new

hampshire ahead of last month's primary, with audio impersonations of president biden. military teams worked today to recover the remains of five u.s. marines killed when their helicopter crashed in southern california. the super stallion helicopter went down tuesday night during a rerd-breaking storm in the mountains just east of san diego. officials said cold, snowy conditions have slowed the operation. on capitol hill today, senators pressed pharmaceutical companies to explain why drugs cost so much more in the u.s. than other countries. ceo's of johnson & johnson, merck, and bristol meyer appeared at a hearing to defend their pricing. committee chair bernie sanders cited the merck drug that costs four times more in the u.s. than in japan. >> will you commit to lowering the price of keytruda in the united states to the price of japan? >> senator, i think, first, i acknowledge the prices in the

united states are higher than they are in many of the countries you said, not for all drugs but for many drugs, and that's the reality we face. but i think it's also important to point out that you get access in the united states faster and more than anywhere in the world. amna: the drug company executives blamed middlemen, among other factors, for driving up prices to consumers. and on wall street, stocks edged a little higher. the dow jones industrial average gained 49 points to close at 38,726. the nasdaq rose 37 points. the s&p 500 added about three points. still to come on the "newshour," millions of americans face a cost of living crisis as spiking rental prices make housing unaffordable. saint paul, minnesota makes history as the first major american city to elect an all-female city council. and a social media creator matches images of sporting highlights with classic works of art.

>> this is the "pbs newshour" from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. geoff: after days of stops and starts, the u.s.enate today moved toward giving ukraine, israel, and other allies billions in aid. this is a major step, though far from the final one. it's all unfolding as ukraine is running out of supplies and time to fend off russia's advances. here to break this all down are lisa desjardins, laura barron lopez, and nick schifrin. welcome to all three of you. where do things stand on the hill? lisa: to remind people, where the situation was was house and senate republicans demanded and pushed for this border security and also national security foreign aid bill together. then they decided they were going to block that, senate republicans. so democrats said we will take out the border portion which you said you cannot agree to. then senate republicans also

blocked the bill with that portion stripped out as they said they wanted. this morning senate republicans could not figure out what they wanted to do. at lunch time a group of 17 senate republicans broke with the rest of their party and voted to advance that national security bill over the key senate hurdle. 67 votes in the end for over this obstacle. let's look at this bill. it is a $95 billion bill in total. $60 billion in aid to ukraine, the highest dollar figure $14 billion for israel. $9 billion for several places including gaza. includes -- what is important here is that this is now a bill that has the votes to make it through the senate. we do not know when it will because of course the senate takes its time. but sometime by early next week it looks like the bill will clear the senate. geoff: what happens in the house?

is mike johnson amenable to any of this? laura: we don't know. i have been told that johnson has said he wanted this bill separated into different pieces. his office said no. this will be a test for mike johnson. if he brings the bill up in a bipartisan forum it could risk his speakership because the hard right has a problem with bipartisan bills. geoff: remind us how we got here. laura: when we go back to the fall, president biden introduced this national security package with the border security in it because republicans asked for that. then republicans wanted more. they wanted real substantive changes to immigration and asylum policy and the white house came to the negotiating table, albeit some democrats think they came a little too late in december. they conceded a lot, more than any prior democratic administration has before.

typicay democrats ask for a pathway to citizenship for dreamers in exchange for giving republicans more on border security. this one did not have that. then donald trump entered the chat. and he tweeted on january 17 that he did not think there should be a border deal unless republicans couldet everything. then again just this week in addition to repeating over and over that this bill was a gift to democrats and a death wish to the republican party, i spoke to senator chris coons of delaware today who said he was talking to a lot of gop senators in recent days who said they were getting phone calls from donald trump saying, why are you trying to help joe biden? i need this issue to get elected. senator james lankford also repeated this, essentially saying he was intimidated by a conservative commentator saying that if lankford supported in moved this bill forward, that he would be destroyed. geoff: so how is president biden

responding to the demise of this border deal and more ukraine funding? laura: the white house is using those facts on the timeline i just laid out to essentially jewel the gop -- cudgel the gop. they are citing the border patrol labor union has endorsed the border deal they struck with republicans. senator coombs also told me he thinks biden should go down to the border, have the bill in hand, waving around and say he was willing to sign it. other democrats say they think the president should strike that contrast, making clear he was willing to buck some progressives in his own party to get this bill over the finish line and sign it. as for ukraine, national security council spokesperson john kirby said that the president is not giving up on trying to get some gop support for this. >> the president believes that support for ukraine is critical,

particularly right now as russia continues to hit their defense industrial base. it is vital. and he is confident. based on the meetings he has had with leaders on capitol hill and the discussions he has had over recent weeks, again, that the leadership even on the house side, the leadership is solidly in support of supporting ukraine. laura: democratic hill sources have told me they have asked the white house if there is anything the president can do on his own outside of congress to get aid for ukraine. i asked john kirby about that and he said those are private conversations and that the president will continue talking to leadership on the hill and republicans on the hill. but some democrats also said that if the president were to even take solo action to help ukraine, they think that there might be some options there. even if he does it will not be at the scale ukraine needs. geoff: officials say the lack of funding has real consequences

for kyiv's ability to hold off russian advances. nick: it is already seen on the front line right now. ukraine failed in its own goals for the counteroffensive last year. it has begun to ration on the front line this year because of the lack of u.s. military support. and it knows as long as this debate goes on, it will continue to have to ration. and that means that russian artillery up and down the front is already outnumbering ukraine and ukraine is about to lose control of a major city in the east. and as dire that sounds as there is even a bigger problem. u.s. officials believe that as this deay continues, ukraine will run out of air defense. what that means is ukraine's ability to shoot down russian drones, russian missiles, that are currently attacking ukrainian critical infrastructure. that is to keep the power going, the lights on in ukraine. in addition to that it is ukrainian air defense that

prevents russian jets from being able to fly over ukrainian territory, not only the front but even western ukraine. and so the bottom line is it is hard to imagine ukraine holding onto its own territory today, let alone trying to recapture some of that 20% territory that russia occupies right now. as for a plan b that laura was talking about, there certainly are discussions about what could come next. but the bottom line, national security advisor jake sullivan yesterday said there is no alternative to these funds. these funds that provide ammunition that go to ukraine immediately, within weeks. that is what ukraine needs, and right now they are not getting it. geoff: our thanks to all three of you. ♪

amna: one of the most brutal russian attacks against ukraine took place in mariupol two years ago. today human rights watch, in collaboration with two other organizations, released a report detailing what happened and who in russia was responsible. nick schifrin is back with this report. and a warning, some of the images in this report are disturbing. nick: they made a desert in called it peace. mariupol is the crucible of russian cruelty, and the symbol of ukrainian sacrifice. russia's bombardment defiled the city named for the virgin mary and reduced it to dust and debris. it stole dignity from the dead. mass graves. roadside burials. a city steeped in sorrow, where fathers waited for the unspeakable. and the victims were the most vulnerable. killing even those who had never

lived. >> this operation really stands out as one of the worst chapters of russia's full-scale invasion of ukraine so far. nick: the crisis and conflict director at human rights watch, and one of the lead authors on today's report in collaboration with digital investigations team center research. >> this research was incredibly difficult given that the city is still under russian occupation. so we had to rely on interviewing people that were able to escape and then corroborate that with our imagery analysis. nick: nowhere is mariupol's suffering more visible than in the cemeteries. the report examined five sites counted individual graves, and mapped newly dug graves in red to confirm the russian campaign killed at least 8000 people. >> we recognize this is likely a significant underestimate, given that some o the graves may contain multiple bodies.

some buried in makeshift graves may have never been transferred. the remains of others might still be in the rubble. the numbers that we came to our already horrifically high, but really just a minimum. nick: the report also documents the depth of russia's destruction. 93% of all high-rises in red, damaged in the city center. 86 of 89 schools and universities, all of mariupol's 19 hospitals. >> in these attacks we did not find evidence of ukrainian military presence, or very limited ukrainian military presence that would not have justified the attacks on civilian targets. these attacks were apparently unlawful and amount to war crimes. nick: war crimes did buy 10 specific officials starting with vladimir putin and the defense mr., but also using social media posts and award ceremonies, the report identifies military units that destroyed mariupol. >> we are calling for these 10

individuals and potentially other commanders of the 17 units we have identified to be investigated and prosecuted. >> without gas, without water, without power. we are isolated from civilization. no internet, nothing. nick: the report features survivors such as this man, who filmed his open-air kitchen and the destruction of everything he had ever built. >> look around. completely destroyed. completely gone. nick: and he filmed his descent into the heart of darkness. he emerged to horror. there's no happy ending here. the report finds russian occupation forces are erasing their own crimes and mariupol's ukrainian culture. >> they are forcing a russian school curriculum and requiring

residents to obtain russian passports to be elbow for certain jobs, get social welfare payments to have access to health care. nick: today in kyiv, mariupol's chamber orchestra played at the report launch. the authors hope they help find justice and ensure that what has been lost is not forgotten. for the "pbs newshour," i'm nick schifrin. ♪ geoff: now a look at rising rental prices and the struggle to find affordable housing. stephanie sy has the story. stephanie: rental prices are unaffordable for a record number of americans, with half of all renters paying more than 30% of their income on rent and utilities. that's according to a new report from harvard's joint center for housing studies that examined 2022 census data.

we reached out to renters across the country to hear how these soaring prices are impacting their lives. >> my name is kathleen haun. i am almost 46 years old. i live outside of atlanta, georgia. i am probably paying about two thirds of my income, my monthly income in rent. >> my name is duane precise. i am 62 years old and i live in tucson, arizona. my rent is about 75% of my income. >> my name is taisha ford. i live in caldwell, idaho. i am 35, almost 36. for percentage of my income on rent, i spend about roughly 42% between rent and utilities. >> my name is jade gielecki. i am 26 years old in charleston, south carolina. i estimate that i spend about 60% of my monthly income on rent and utilities. >> my name is dennis layton.

i'm 34 and i live in panama city, florida. when your rent is, you know, taking up a third or more of your budget, the first thing that you have to get rid of is your entertainment budget. the things that give you relief. >> in one year, i had a $300 price hike. and then just this last year, it was a $700 price hike. if it keeps going up we're going to have to reevaluate a lot of things. we're going to have to reevaluate family members being to have their own space. >> the only option that would be cheaper really, is a trailer. and get a double wide trailer for between $600 and $700, which is still more than half of my income, but it's less than 75%. >> in order to make up for the additional cost of rent, we do have to every once in a while go to food pantries to even subsidize our grocery budget, which is abysmal at this point.

>> at the end of the day when you are paying that much you can really only a form -- afford your utilities, rent, gas and stuff like that. and that is it. >> i cannot see myself going without having roommates. in my current situation i actually lived with a couple who is no longer a couple anymore. but we cannot afford to live elsewhere. so we have three people in a two bedroom, two of whom are no longer in a relationship, and sharing a room because of how hard it is to find housing. >> it's nerve wracking. there's no real way to prepare for it, especially if you're going to be low. and there are times when i have to think about, in the next couple days do i need food for me or for the pets more? >> there are times when money is so tight that we'll all go out as a family and do doordash together.

so, you know, it's embarrassing. it's not fun. especially, you know, since i have a professional job and things like that. i have an mba and i'm out delivering doordash on the side. and so, my kids, they're aware of the financial pressures, but at the same time, it's like, we take those opportunities to spend time together as a family. >> i think i'm going to be renting my whole entire life, and that's sad. it's really sad because i make a good i make a good living. i'm a middle of the road american and i should be able to buy a house. >> it is a constant hamster wheel of working. just to go to sleep at night somewhere, and it's hard. stephanie: and joining me now is whitney airgood-obrycki, the lead author of a new report from harvard's joint center for housing studies that has been tracking u.s. rental prices. whitney, thanks for joining the "newshour." so those renters we just heard

from, they're all described as cost burdened in housing market lingo. that means they're paying more than 30% of their income toward rent. your study found that in 2022, 22.4 million americans were in that boat. tell us more about what was behind that. whitney: that's correct. we saw a record high number of cost burdened renters in 2022. part of this came from record high rent growth that came at the end of 2021, in early 2022. and that was really from a surge in rental demand in a period where we just weren't building enough, so we weren't getting enough supply. we were seeing a huge increase in the number of renter households. that drove vacancy rates really low, and it really pushed rents up, and it made it much harder for people to afford their housing. stephanie: and i understand that this was something you saw across income levels, correct? whitney: that's correct. we saw a large increase in cost burdens from 2019 to 2022, an additional two million households and an increase of about three percentage points, pushing the total cost burden rate up to about 50%. we saw this across every single income category we looked at, with especially large increases

among middle income renter households. but even among the lowest income households who make less than $30,000, their cost burden rate increased by a percentage point and a half to another record high of 83%. stephanie: we can all imagine what that might mean for someone already making low wages. for how many americans did that mean homelessness or sacrificing essentials? whitney: lower income households who are severely cost burden, meaning they spend more than half of their income on rent and utilities, are less likely to spend on things like food, health care, or retirement. and so we see significant differences between those who are severely cost burden and those who are not cost burden. so there's certainly tradeoffs that are involved when you live in unaffordable housing. this year, we've also seen a record high number of people who are experiencing homelessness. and so certainly this lack of affordable housing is pushing people into these situations where they just can't afford anything and they end up in shelters, or they end up in places like in cars, on the streets, where it's a more visible form of unsheltered homelessness.

stephanie: how much of that in 2022 was sort of due to the pandemic and the burdens on families from that? whitney: the rise in homelessness really came at a time when we saw pandemic relief measures ending. rents were also increasing at some of the fastest rates we've ever seen. so it really put a lot of households in a bind. stephanie: whitney, i do understand that in the last year, rental prices have been slowing. does that mean things are getting better for renters? whitney: what we're seeing in some of the rent data is that there's a slowing of rent growth, and in some markets there's actual declines in rents. but what we saw during the pandemic were such significant increases. so in some quarters, rents were increasing by more than 20% year over year. and so we're really in a situation where things are much less affordable than they were pre-pandemic. we are seeing some of that market cooling, some deceleration of rent growth. but in most places rents are in fact still growing. stephanie: when you talk about supply, the supply of low rent units, according to your report, has precipitously declined in the last decade.

so those renters, i assume, will continue to feel the squeeze. what are effective ways to address that problem and rent affordability overall? whitney: we're really going to need every tool that we have in the toolbox. and so, a lot of policy momentum right now is just around increasing supply with the idea that a lot of supply at the higher end will filter down and provide rent relief further down the market. and so we're seeing a lot of zoning reform across the country. what we're really going to need though are increased subsidies. things like public housing or housing choice vouchers and a much broader commitment from our federal, state, and local levels toward really addressing the affordability crisis, both toward increasing affordable options and toward really addressing this problem of rising homelessness we're also seeing. stephanie: whitney airgood-obrycki with harvard's joint center for housing studies. thank you so much. whitney: thank you. ♪ amna: in the last election, the

city of st. paul, minnesota, did something it had never done before -- elect an all-female city council. the state's capital became one of the largest -- if not the largest -- american city to hold that distinction. special correspondent fred de sam lazaro reports. fred: for two days last month he st. paul city council retreated from its chambers. it was a chance for counselors and their staff to go over policy priorities for the coming year. but with four new members on the seven person council, some get to know yous were in order place. the magnitude of this moment, the first time st. paul has had an all-female city council, is far from lost on this group. >> what budget impacts would we anticipate? fred: she was first elected in 2018. now, she is the president. >> i think the significance is

we still live in a time when there are sony barriers to women and women of color especially being in power. and suddenly this moment for showing people that this is the normal that we are fighting for it should not be notable. it should just be what people have been used to because what we should be doing is getting worked on for our communities. fred: on their to do list, tackling a lack of affordable housing in the city, a task that may include changes to the city's rent control ordinance. and the council is responsible for passing a city budget to pay for things like -- >> that is real to us. that is not just like, that happened to someone over there. i need this for my cousin, for my parents, my neighbor. all of that is connected. fred: not only is this the first time st. paul elected an all-female -- and the oldest member is just 39.

all the first were on display during a swearing-in ceremony last month in front of a packed crowd at a local concert hall. she said she's had female constituents of all ages. >> i get to be a part of this moment in history that is impactful for younger generations to not just see themselves but notice that it is possible and their perception of the world i think is shaped by being able to witness this moment, as is for some of our older generations where they have never seen something like this happen. and to be able to see in their own lifetime the progress we have made feels really special. fred: for the first black mayor, the occasion represented an important step for the city's politics. >> we bear a profound responsibility to expand the set of decision-makers, to ensure the city we build is one we

build together. each voice, a vital thread woven into the vibrant fabric of our community. fred: st. paul was incorporated in 1854, but it took more than 100 years for the first woman to be elected to the city council. and it was not until 2018 that the council had more than three women. but last fall, members of the group endorsed each other, campaigned together as an informal block, and swept every seat. their professional experiences range from teacher, to nonprofit director, to civil engineer. members say the council's diversity will help address st. paul's challenges, including the twin cities areas persistent racial inequities, some of the sharpest in the nation. >> we have more first-hand experience on this counsel was systemic racism, with disparities, with barriers that were created by public policy and can be remedied by public policy. it will not happen overnight it

is possible to change it. that is what i think this counsel is here to do. >> women have been left out of not just the rooms but the policymaking systems that are intentionally meant to keep us out. spaces of power that of course are constructed to keep us out. so to me, knowing that there are so many women on the council that knows exactly what that feels like means we will be much more inclusive and are policymaking. fred: an entrepreneur and community organizer is one of the new counselors. she represents ward one in the heart of the city and her city -- family has lived in st. paul for almost a century. >> not only we are making history but we are in the driver's seat of history. and we get to continue telling this longer story. it is not just we all have an all women counsel period, but comma, that we did so many amazing things. fred: among them, building a

climate resilient city with more housing, but also tending to voters everyday concerns like filling potholes. for the "pbs newshour," i'm fred de sam lazaro. amna: fred's reporting is a partnership with the under-told stories project at the university of st. thomas in minnesota. ♪ geoff: more than 100 million viewers in the u.s. are expected to tune into the super bowl this sunday. these days, major live sports events are often a two-screen experience. but one unusual fan puts a different lens on the moment, exploring the symmetry with sports and arts through social media. jeffrey brown looks at this viral phenomenon for our arts and culture series, canvas. jeffrey: a contemporary football celebration juxtaposed with this painting from 1305. a player taunting his opponent with the martyrdom of st.

matthew. sports highlights, arts masterworks, sit side-by-side and gaining hundreds of thousands of social media views in a digital project launched in 2019 called art, but make it sports, created by a 34-year-old new york sports fan. >> i try to see things through sports lens, even if it is a piece of fine art. trying to figure out what could that moment in art be in sports, what could i compare it to image-wise that might make somebody look at it and say, yeah, i get it, i can see the parallels here. i think that is part of why the account resonates with people, because they are not often used to seeing art and sports talked about, or put next to each other visually. jeffrey: why is it obvious to you they belong together? >> there are a lot of parallels when it comes to the emotion that you find in fine art and

that you find in the sporting arena. there is obviously the visual component with limbs and people moving around in a frame. oftentimes you will see on social media people post a photo from a sports event and say, hang it in the louvre, as an indication that they can see something that is artistic about it. then i come in and actually find the piece of art that the sports image actually resembles. jeffrey: his day job is with a sports data and technology firm, but his passion is curating his collection of thousands of photos taken at museums. he took a grand total of one art history course in college, but he is a long time amateur art lover. >> the true starting off point is when i go to museums and galleries and take photos. i put them all in one photo on my phone. and so i have this massive folder of all these images i have taken and have come to memorize. jeffrey: you have memorized

thousands of images? >> maybe it is not directly memorizing every detail, but it's knowing certain patterns that exist, certain themes within a museum, and then a good chunk of actual paintings that i kind of know how they are composed. so that when i see something in sports, oftentimes i can go in my mind's eye and say, oh, that reminds me of such and such painting. jeffrey: and it is not just the more obvious match of a body or specific image. he gets his biggest pleasures out of more abstract connections. >> there's one i did, milwaukee brewers players sliding into home plate, and the catcher in the umpire both have their arms out at the same time. and i was trying to think through what that could be. and tried to match on hopefully that moment, may the colors of the composition. i landed on a painting where a

very similar position. the more abstract ones tend to get people really excited because it is not something that thought of directly. jeffrey: so there is a bit of art in putting these things together. >> yeah, i guess artistry, maybe cure should. i don't quite know what to consider myself. but yeah, i think it sort of takes, maybe not to an elevated level, but an extension of what the original intention might have been. and i think that in itself, there's some artistry to it. jeffrey: some have wondered aloud whether he is relying on artificial intelligence to make his matches. but other than using ai to help organize his pictures, he says -- >> it is really just me. jeffrey: we have the super bowl coming up.

do you watch in a way that is different than the rest of us, images rather than touchdowns? >> i think i watch the same as the average sports fan but maybe in the back of my head when i see a moment, sometimes it just immediately clicks to what that could be in the art world. jeffrey: how about a prediction for the game? some people might predict the winner. you're looking at what, patrick mahomes and picasso? >> something happens where i can make that parallel. i think the chiefs have been really good for inspiration over the course of the season and the playoffs. so maybe i'm pulling for them just so i can potentially do a mahomes and picasso. i did jason kelce and the feast of bacchus. but yeah, hoping for good content to come out of it. jeffrey: art but make it sports. thank you very much. >> thanks for having me.

♪ amna: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm amna nawaz. geoff: and i'm geoff bennett. thanks for spending part of your evening with us. >> major funding for the "pbs newshour" has been provided by. the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions, and friends of the "newshour," including leonard and norma klorfine, and the judy and peter blum kovler foundation. >> cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations, and immersive experiences. a world of leisure, and british style. all with cunard's white star service.

>> the ford foundation, working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the "newshour." this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.]

>> you're watching pbs.

wow, you get to watch all your favorite stuff. it's to die for. now you won't miss a thing. this is the way. the xfinity 10g network. made for streaming. ♪ hello, everyone, and welcome to "amanpour and company." here's what's coming up. there's a lot of work to be done, but we are very much focused on doing that work. >> the u.s. secretary of state in israel, as hamas responds to a hostage and cease-fire proposal. former top state department official richard haass joins me. then -- missile strikes across ukraine including the