captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> the affordable care act is here to stay. >> ifill: a big win for obamacare, and a big day at the supreme court justices preserve nationwide tax credits for insurance and protections for fair housing. good evening, i'm gwen ifill, judy is away. also ahead this thursday, overcoming tough odds and raising the bar, a seattle high school under threat of closure, adopts rigorous international standards to turn students towards success. >> these kids are so smart and a student can read you if you do not think that they can do something they will perform to your expectations. >> ifill: plus, misbehaving markets, how to make smarter

economic choices in a complex and irrational world. >> people love deals. they can be driven to purchase things that they don't really want if the deal is good enough. >> ifill: those are some of the stories we're covering >> ifill: those are some of the stories we're covering on tonight's pbs "newshour." >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century.

>> and with the ongoing support of these 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. >> ifill: for the second time the president's signature health care program has survived a potentially life-or-death legal challenge. today's supreme court decision created waves of relief at the white house and beyond. >> aca is here to stay! >> ifill: supporters of the "affordable care act" erupted in cheers outside the court, as the news reached the marble steps. an hour later, president obama and vice president biden stepped into the white house rose garden to savor the victory. >> there can be no doubt that this law is working. it has changed, and in some cases saved, american lives.

it's set this country on a smarter, stronger course. and today, after more than 50 votes in congress to repeal or weaken this law, after a presidential election based in part on preserving or repealing this law, after multiple challenges to this law before the supreme court, the affordable care act is here to stay. >> ifill: the law had survived a previous supreme court challenge. this time, opponents challenged the federal subsidies that underpinned its health coverage, specifically in 34 states that did not set up their own insurance exchanges. by six to three, the court said: the subsidies do apply. had the decision gone the other way, more than six million people could have lost their health coverage. chief justice john roberts took note of that potential, in his majority opinion, saying:

but justice antonin scalia's dissent read aloud from the bench, was scathing. he said, in part, "we should start calling this law scotus care," alluding to the court's 2012 decision to uphold the law for a different reason. the high court also sided with civil rights activists in a high-profile challenge to housing law. in a case from texas, the justices voted 5 to 4 that discrimination lawsuits can be brought even if the action was unintentional. but it was the a.c.a. decision that dominated the day. ron pollack of "families usa," which favors the law, was at the supreme court and welcomed the outcome. >> it means that the millions of people who have been receiving subsidies that make all the difference in terms of whether health insurance is affordable, people will continue to receive those subsidies and they will continue to have health insurance.

>> ifill: those on the losing side lamented the decision. sam kazman is with the competitive enterprise institute, a member of the plaintiffs' legal team. >> today's ruling is a tragedy for the rule of law in this country. in a 6-3 decision, the supreme court has twisted and somersaulted on traditional rules of statutory interpretation and essentially allowed the irs to rewrite the very statute that congress enacted. >> ifill: many republicans meanwhile, vowed to continue their effort to roll back the whole law. >> obamacare is fundamentally broken. it's raising costs for people it's pushing people out of the ability to afford health insurance. and it needs to be dealt with. but as we know, it's very difficult to deal with it when you have a president that fundamentally disagrees with us. and so the struggle will continue. >> ifill: among those vowing repeal, several candidates now running to succeed mr. obama.

>> ifill: we'll have more on the health care and housing decisions, after the news summary. state lawmakers in california moved today to impose one of the nation's strictest vaccination laws. the state assembly voted to require that nearly all public school children get their shots, or be home-schooled. the bill gained momentum after a measles outbreak that started at disneyland and killed more than 100 people. congress has completed work on a major trade package sought by president obama. the house gave final approval today to renewing a job training program. it's meant to aid americans who lose jobs to overseas competition. the vote clears the way for the administration to return to negotiating an asian free-trade deal. the deadline for finishing a nuclear deal with iran is tuesday, but 18 leading national security figures have their doubts. in an open letter, they are pressing for a tougher line on inspections and sanctions relief. otherwise, they say, the talks

"may fall short of the administration's own standard of a good agreement," a warning that brought this white house response. >> the letter essentially lays out the kind of criteria that is broadly consistent with the framework that was announced back in april and the president was crystal clear that the only kind of final agreement we would reach is one that fulfills the principles that have previously been agreed to. >> ifill: u.s. officials suggested the june 30th deadline could slip "by a short bit" if that's what it takes to get a good agreement. greece also faces a looming deadline, for a new bailout deal, but negotiations appear stuck. euro-zone finance ministers met with greek officials in brussels and adjourned without agreement. that sets up a last-ditch effort on saturday. >> the door is still open for the greek side to come with new proposals or to accept what is on the table. the institutions are going to

look at the last proposals, as i said. if anything of that is useful we will use it of course but we are very, on a number of issues, quite far apart so it is going to be difficult. i think that european history is full of disagreements, negotiations, and then compromises. so after the comprehensive greek proposals, i am confident that we will reach the compromises that will help euro zone and greece to overcome the crisis. >> ifill: greece's creditors say they need an agreement by monday. otherwise, the athens government is likely to default on a major debt repayment. a heat wave in southern pakistan has now killed more than 1,100 people, even as temperatures ease down. in karachi today, morgues ran out of space, and hospitals were still struggling to handle an influx of patients with heat-related ailments. volunteers turned out across the city, setting up relief camps to hand out water. in syria today, "islamic state"

fighters struck back, after losing ground to kurdish forces in recent days. militants attacked the kurdish- held town of kobani, along the turkish border, killing at least 35 people. footage shot from the turkish side of the border showed demolished homes, and thick smoke rising from buildings. sporadic fighting continued through the day. isis attackers also staged a separate assault in northeastern syria. in france, taxi drivers staged a nationwide strike to protest the ride-hailing service uber. strikers blocked traffic attacked uber vehicles and in places, even clashed with police wearing riot gear. they accused the ride-sharing service of stealing their livelihood. >> ( translated ): uber, it's illegal work. it, you can't tell whether they have a driver's license, you know nothing about them and they have no license, they're not taxis, they're not professionals, they don't have training, we just don't know who

they are. the frerchg government has band uber from running the lowest cost service but so far with no success. >> ifill: back in this country attorneys for james holmes began presenting their case in the 2012 movie theater shootings in aurora. the attack at a midnight showing killed 12 people and wounded 70 others. holmes has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity. another big auto recall is in the works. mitsubishi announced today it's calling in 460,000 cars in the u.s. in some cases, when the air bags deploy they can jam the sun visors into a passenger's face. five injuries have been reported, and two of the victims lost sight in one eye. the models affected include the eclipse, and some chryslers and dodges from the early 2000's. on wall street today, the dow jones industrial average lost 75 points to close at 17,890. the nasdaq fell ten points, and the s-and-p slipped six. and, spanish-language

broadcaster univision is dropping all ties with donald trump, including the miss u.s.a. pageant, that he partly owns. the network said today it's because of remarks that the republican presidential candidate made about mexican immigrants. trump shot back that he may sue univision. still to come on the newshour; digging in to today's big decisions from the supreme court; including president obama's health care victory; and fighting housing discrimination; then, why more american schools are adopting international standards for success; and rethinking economics, why markets misbehave when humans make irrational choices. >> ifill: now to a momentous day at the supreme court. we begin our coverage with the long-awaited ruling on the president's health care law. marcia coyle of the national law journal was in court and joins me now. marcia, 6-3 a pretty-- a pretty

definite ruling. what was the rationale for the court? >> it was a very straightforward ruling, and done in only about 21 pages by the chief justice. the challenge before the court was to examine the meaning of a provision in the affordable care act that explains how subsidies are to be used. the provision says that subsidies are available to purchases on exchanges established by the state. the challengers here said "established by the the state" means what it stays-- state exchanges, not subsidies available on the 34 federally created exchanges. the chief justice said initially that when you look at can the established by the state "the words seemed pretty plain, but when you look at that phrase and how it's used in other part of the act, along with other provisions in the act dealing with federal exchanges it's not so clear.

and since it's not so clear, you've got to examine the words in their context, as well as within the whole structure of the statute. >> ifill: so he was ruling on the intent of the law writers as opposed to the specific words, which justice scalia said was turning the words on their head. >> he examined the intent of what congress did, but he also explained how the act operates, that these subsidies were an integral part of the act being workable. under the challengers' interpretation he said, the act would not work. in fact it would send insurance markets into a death spiral and that is not what congress, he said, wanted to do here. he said they wanted to improve and asset health insurance markets, not destroy them. and the court has a responsibility to pay attention, to be sensitive to the legislative plan, and so it adopted the interpretation that it did because of that. >> ifill: now, there are some observers, i guess we can call them who were surprised at this

and surprised that the chief justice's definitive language especially because he also wrote the ruling upholdings the last challenge to the health care law. >> he did. the chief justice didn't say much during the oral arguments in this case. he was considered possible vote to strike down the subsidies but also to uphold them. and i think his very straightforward, clear opinion makes it very clear that he felt this was the best interpretation of the act. justice kennedy joined him in the 6-3 majority. justice kennedy voted in 2012 to invalidate the entire act because of the individual coverage requirement. but even during the arguments in the current challenge justice kennedy had some problems with what the challengers were saying. so he was considered "gettable" as well. >> ifill: justice scalia use the opportunity to read his very

strongly worded dissent from the bench. >> yes, he did. he summarized it from the bench which is always an indication that a justice feels very strongly. and he said that the words "established by the state" couldn't be marine. it means established by the state. and he said that the court was engaging in pure apple sauce interpretation. he even said "interpretive jiggery pokery." >> ifill: wasn't that a harry potter phrase? >> it actually has a scottish derivation, and j.k. rawlings tweeted about it saying she stopped using that phrase something like 20 years ago. but it was a very colorful dissent. but also he went step by step through the statute with his own interpretation of how the provisions worked, and obviously, was very unhappy. he was joined by justices thomas and justice alito in his dissent. >> ifill: i'll tell you it was an interesting big day and we're going to talk about it

some more and we'll get back to you on the next case in a moment. >> ifill: so is that the end of the fight? for more on what happens next, i'm joined by two experts who helped shape the offense and defense. neera tanden is president of the center for american progress. she helped write the health care law. and michael cannon of the cato institute was a leading force behind its challenge. michael cannon you say the supreme court was intimidated by this. >> well, yeah. i think there are a couple of things that are important to keep in mind here. one of them it's not just subsidies that we're talking about. there are taxes that are tied to those subsidies that are being imposed on 70 million americans in those states. and had the challengers won those taxes would have disappeared, too. so they're challenging both the tubs dees and taxes as illegal. another important thing to keep in mind is nine supreme court justices said all nine said you know what, the challengers have the case. the plain meaning of the statute here does do what they say event plain meaning of the operative part of the statute does do what it says. it does mean establish by the

state. but they thought the purpose of the statute would not be served by the way congress wrote it, they decide to rewrite it. >> ifill: neera tanden. >> no, i don't see it that way as well. i think justice roberts and kennedy, and the other three justice expooz i will note two of those were appointed by conserve presidents -- have a very strongly worded opinion which is very definitive. they had an option which is to say they could have interpreted it in a way that would have allowed a future president to interpret it differently. they made a definitive statement about cha this law was intend to do what this language means in the statute and found that the plaintiffs were wrong to gring bring this case, that they were wrong, and i think the best part about this is the nature of the decision makes it harder to bring future claims one they-- >> ifill: that was my next question. is this the end of the road? we heard a lot-- clbl john boehner, almost every republican candidate for president came out

today and said this is not the end of the road. >> i don't think it's the end of the road for the opposition to this job. the majority, plurality of the public opposes it as they have for six years and this decision doesn't eliminate the law's high cost. it just hides them. and that's yet administration fought this case so vigorously. but i think it's important to note-- >> ifill: is there another way in, other than outright repeal, after this kind of ruling? >> there are a couple of cases making their way through the courts right now. the house of representatives has filed a suit whose impact would be very similar to a ruling for the challengers in "king versus burwell." they will have a difficult time establishing standing. >> in cases are getting dismiss pd. there was a case today that got dismissed. look, my view of this is this is the second time the supreme court has found in favor of the government and, you know we are now spending a lot of resources, federal resources, to keep re-litigating this issue. people had to defend this case. at some point, i think the vast

majority of americans would like to move on from this debate. this isn't about improving the law or maixing fixes. this effort is really to undo the law and at some point we have to move on. >> ifill: but there are a lot of governors who are still resistant to this and who were fighting medicaid expansion fighting all kind of bits of this law. how can you say move on when the debate is still going on? >> actually what, has been dr. tring-- people should debate the law. but what's interesting about the last couple of years is we have seen republican governors in states like michigan, et cetera, ohio-- john kasich is running for president and he's actually talking about his medicaid expansion glsm but not in florida or indiana or 30 other states. >> there are debates. governors are trying to push in states like indiana. discussions are happening in conservative states. that is on the medicaid expansion itself north on the exchanges. but i think you'll see-- you see in polling today the vast majority of americans would like to see how we can improve upon

the law but not engage in these legal maneuverings. >> ifill: since it's very confusing for people you said most american want this law rolled back and you said most want it fixed. is there a fix? is there a common ground? >> i think what american people want is health care that is better and more affordable and more secure. the problem i think the centerpiece of this law, guaranteed issue of community rating provisions or preexisting provisions, make health care less secure for people we care about the most which is the sickest americans. the problem is that you can't make health care more secure for them until you get rid of that centerpiece of this law so i think the debate gl for a long time. >> i just disagree with that. justice roberts recognized this. you can have preexisting conditions requirements, making sure that people no longer face-- you know, face the situation where they can't get health insurance because of preexisting conditions. you can do that, but you have to ensure that everyone has health

insurance. justice roberts articulated how we work together, how all these section work together, why the subdz dees were so important to that and that's a center part of this decision and the law itself. >> ifill: i have cost questions for you. health care continues to rise and premiums continue to go. for you, i want to know how do you speak to people who feel like this law is costing them more in and in your case, how do you tell people we're going to take something away from you that you've already had for a couple of years. i'll start with you. >> clearly there will be political resistance to that. i think the easiest way to reduce premiums for people is get rid of the preexisting conditions provisions and other regulation nghtz a.c.a. that increase the cost of care. >> ifill: isn't that the most popular part of the a.c.a.? >> yes. >> only if you ask about the benefits. if you ask people about the cost, including how it erhodes the quality of care for the sickest people then the support for that flips to five to one

opposition. >> ifill: neera tanden. >> on the issue of rising cost, we have a challenge which is employers have been shifting costs to employees. that was before the a.c.a. that's been a long-term trend, deductibles are going up, et cetera. it has nothing to do with the a.c.a., and it's hitting people who have never been in the insurance market in the a.c.a. itself. that's a problem we should deal with and we should make it clearer, more transparent what's happening. i think ibelieve that question will be the next generation of health care ideas, reforms, debates and the presidential context and elsewhere. because i think people are concerned about that. but i hope tanow that we've had two supreme court cases 50 attempts in the house we can actually move on to a debate about health care costs at large. >> ifill: neera tanden for the center for american progress and michael cannon of the cato institute, thank you both very much. >> thanks for having me. >> ifill: the justices also ruled on another significant

aspect of american life, housing segregation. as we mentioned earlier a closely-divided court found that housing discrimination, whether it occurs by zoning or home sales, does not have to be intentional for plaintiffs to sue. again, we turn to marcia coyle. tail us about that case. >> okay the fair housing act of 1968 makes it illegal to refuse to sell or rent a house an apartment dwelling when there's been a legitimate offer because of someone's race national origin color. it's been clear for a long time that you can bring intentional discrimination claims under that act. but intentional discrimination is very difficult to prove if, getting to somebody's motive or mind. what's not been so clear to some is whether you can bring another kind of claim, what we call a disparity impact claim. >> ifill: my first definition i want. explain what that is. >> that's a claim that says a policy or decision that appears

neutral on its face has a discriminatory effect on someone. >> ifill: give me an example. >> well, in this case, all right, the claim is that the texas department of housing and community affairs is giving tax credits federal tax credits to developers to develop low-income housing but it's giving most of those tax credits to develop low-income housing in predominantly black low-income neighborhoods and not trying to steer more tax credits to development in predominantly white suburban neighborhoods. is the department intentionally discriminating? well, again that's very difficult to prove. but if you look at statistics, chicago is how you usually prove disparity impact claims, they're saying what the texas department is doing has a discriminatory effect. >> ifill: justice kennedy was a strong voice in this case as

well. >> he wrote the majority opinion. it really turned on two things i think for justice kennedy. one, there was a long line of federal appellate court rulings finding that you could bring a disparate impact claim under this federal housing law. and secondly n1988, some 20 years after congress enacted the law, congress amended the law. and at the time it knew that nine federal appellate courts had said that you could bring this type of claim and it did nothing to change that understanding. not only did it do nothing, justice kennedy said but it created exemptions from that type of claim. >> ifill: we're going to talk about this some more, but i also want to ask on a big day like today when long-awaited cases come down, how dramatic is ited in that chamber? >> you can feel a lot of public tension excitement. it was crowded. the press-- there was overflow in the press section-- >> ifill: you don't know until it comes down. >> you don't know which decision it's going to be.

had they started with the housing case, justice kennedy read-- they read by seniority, so we knew it was going to be something important because he has a lot of seniority. and then it goes right to the chief justice, and again we knew it was going to be a big case. >> ifill: we'll be watching for more dramad from and perhaps monday as well. >> perhaps monday as well. >> ifill: thank you very much, marcia coyle as well. >> ifill: for more reaction on this second big case, we go to hari sreenivasan in our new york studios. >> sreenivasan: joining me now for a look at the housing issues this case addresses, and which remain unresolved, are ralph kasarda of the pacific legal foundation. he filed an amicus brief in this case and olati johnson, a law professor at columbia university who has worked for the naacp legal defense fund. so ilana, i want to start with you it's been illegal to discriminate under the fair housing act for the last 45 years. why was today important? >> today was important because the supreme court made clear that practices that have the practical effect of excluding groups, even without a showing

of intentional discrimination had the practical effect of excluding people based on an arbitrary characteristic, like race jirnd disability. but those are prohibited by the fair housing act. as was mentioned before, this has been the law as it's been understood for more than four decades, from the lower courts but it's still an important pronouncement from the supreme court at a time when there's a lot of concern about housing discrimination and residential segregation in this country. >> sreenivasan: but, ralph kasarda, you said this leads to race-conscious decision making. did you find any clarity in the opinions that were written and handed down? >> actually i did find some clarity, and just to reiterate, our objection to disparate impact is that it causes-- it lead to race-conscious decision making, and as justice scalia said in another decision, that it causes decision makers to have their tum thumb on the racial

scales and to make sure their decisions have an outcome comebased on some predetermined racial quota, in order. other words. in this decision, justice kennedy recognized that there is a constitutional concern here. as a matter of fact no justice wanted to that. all the justices would agree that there is a constitutional concern. and to address that concern, justice kennedy identified, reiterated some safeguards to ensure that disparate impact claims could be brought without fear of constitutional concerns. >> sreenivasan: olati, i want to ask, what about this idea that motive or intent is taken out of the equation now and we're just looking at effect? >> yeah, i think it's important to emphasize especially in light of the last comments, that this has been the law. it's been understood. it's true north just in the fair housing act. it's true in other statutes.

dealing with employment, for example. i think there is a lot of misunderstanding of disparate impact. a lot of times people think you can just bring a claim that it has an impact on a group, and that's enough for you to win. but first for those who are statisticians it's important you have to show statistically significant impact. but more than that if the policy is justified if the policy is one that a local government can say, "we're doing this for health reasons for safety reasons for traffic reasons" then it's going to be okay under the fair housing panth we call it an unjustified disparate impact standard and that's why it hasn't been leading to rampant racial quote expaz constitutional questions haven't been an issue here. >> sreenivasan: mr. kasarda will this change how perhaps business gets done? >> it may in that this decision touches on housing decisions by local governments, zoning decisionsdecisions. in one previous case it touched

on efforts by a city to enforce its housing code. it doesn't touch on lenders, on insurance companies, and those areare governed-- those entities are governed under the fair housing act. so this may cause concern among the business community by the fact that it was not addressed in this case, and their concerns were not addressed. ask this may lead to further litigation against those entities. >> sreenivasan: miss johnson does this change any of the underlying behavior, or perhaps what could be structural patterns? >> well, the hope is that it will. i mean, it's part of increasing efforts to do more around enforcement of fair housing. some of this is litigation done by private actors. some of it has to come from the government. an important part of this is the department of housing and urban development has made renewed efforts to implement disparate

impact and other provisions the fair housing act that say you have to affirmatively further fair housing. the hope is it would change things on the ground. and i just want to mention here the purpose of the fair housing act was to address government practices, as well as private practices. and that requires addressing, sometimes, local government practices. and kennedy really reaffirms this element of the fair housing act when he says that questions like discriminatory zoning when you have zoning barriers that are not justified by any other kind of policy, even if you can't smoke out discrimination if they have a disparate impact they exclude people based on family status or based on race that's not promoting the integrative purposes of the fair housing act. so that's important, and the hope is that public and private enforcement will continue to have an impact on this. >> sreenivasan: mr.ica sard areading the opinion, were there other openings for future challenges here, or do you see the possibility that this could be interpreted narrowly, just in

this case? >> i think the opportunity would be on a case-by-case basis. and that is whether an outcome does create a constitutional problem that decision would have to be attacked individually. it's pretty clear the fair housing act encompasses claims for disparate impact. that issue is closed. so it would be on a case-by-case basis. >> sreenivasan: all right ralph kasarda and olati johnson thanks so much for joining us. >> ifill: now, how a college prep program helped turn around a failing city school, and the lessons that may offer. since 1971, the international baccalaureate program has been used in both public and private schools across the nation. once considered solely for the elite, the two-year curriculum is considered part of the

prescription for improving high school education. the newshour's april brown has that story from seattle, part of our american graduate series, a public media initiative funded by the corporation for public broadcasting. >> reporter: for many seniors like danny segi at seattle's >> you're going to learn something about a profession where it wasn't what you thought. >> reporter: for many seniors like danny segi at seattle's rainier beach high-school, the journey toward graduation has been a long one. he's overcome tough odds at a school in one of the city's most violent neighborhoods. so tell me what it was like when you got here four years ago? what was the atmosphere? >> so it was really a wild environment. definitely nobody followed the chain of command, students really just had their own way of going about things, students just disrespecting teachers, talking back to teachers, there was no sense of respect, you see a lot of students over here drinking alcohol, smoking weed, a lot of them smoked cigarettes >> reporter: danny admits he initially ran in that crowd as well, and he wasn't alone. in 2011, only about half of students here were graduating on

time and the city was threatening to close the school. today, rainier beach is dramatically different: nearly 80% of students are now graduating on time and enrollment has nearly doubled. >> it's a beautiful, beautiful afternoon. thanks for spending a couple of hours with us this turnaround is attributed to an ambitious and costly plan hatched by parents and community leaders: to make rainier beach an international baccalaureate school offering a globally recognized college preparatory curriculum. the international baccalaureate, >> the international baccalaureate is international education. the international baccalaureate or i.b., program has been around for more than 45 years and early-on was very popular for the children of diplomats. >> the children of the affluent you know the students who were expected to be leading were given this education where they are allowed to explore, they are individual thoughts are valued you know they are treated as if the decisions they make are

informed by something special in them. >> reporter: colin pierce is the i.b. coordinator at rainier beach and helped bring that attitude toward learning to the school during the three-year certification process. with a federal school improvement grant of more than $3.5 million and additional state funding, rainier beach hired new staff and re-trained teachers. it also began offering a more rigorous course load to focusing heavily on critical thinking and problem solving to develop young adults who can compete and succeed in a global economy. but the staff knew this turnaround plan wouldn't work without buy-in from students. >> it's redefining how we set and support our expectations and there is a belief element of it. these kids are so smart and a student can read you if you do not think that they can do something they will perform to your expectations. >> reporter: expectations for i.b. students are high, similar

to the more well-known, advanced placement program, and it also offers an opportunity to earn college credit. in order to earn a full i.b. diploma they must pass tests in six subject areas including language and literature, science, math and the arts. students are also required to write a 4,000 word research essay, and study the nature of knowledge, how we know what we claim to know. >> approaching the world in the way we've been approaching it, is this worth our time or is it a waste of time? >> reporter: pursuing a full i.b. diploma usually means several hours of homework a night and rainier beach principal dwane chappelle realized that kind of commitment and focus wasn't realistic for many of his 600 students. but he wanted at least part of the program to be mandatory. >> some students who at first were saying you know this isn't

for kids of color, these are for the rich students and so you know just hearing that voice right there from a kid a young person just basically made our staff say you know what we know that they can do it and we just and that's where we are now where every kid that is a junior or senior they have to take at least one i.b. class. >> reporter: since rainier beach adopted i.b., the make-up of the student body hasn't changed much roughly 95% are minorities but many subjects at are different. foreign language offerings now include mandarin. and there is more skill-based instruction too. like this class that partners with cisco and teaches students to build and fix computers, cell phones and other mobile devices. >> not just more knowledge but how to understand knowledge. >> reporter: at the heart of the program, though, is an aim to help students, like junior ifrah abshir who is on track to complete the full diploma, recognize the world beyond high- school. ifrah plans to become a doctor

but the curriculum has sparked another interest that she also >> syria is having a crisis i would go to syria and i will work with their like doctors without borders type of thing but i also like a big part of me also wants to be an activist for human rights like black lives matter and like muslims lives matter. >> reporter: ifrah is one of ten kids from a family that immigrated from somalia. her mother hamdi barre, says the program has been a blessing, both for the fact that it is free but also because students become more serious about their studies. >> ( translated ): ifrah is my oldest daughter and i've always advised her to become somebody and to help others and she listened, she's a good daughter and i hope she succeeds and reaches her dreams. >> reporter: while ifrah seems to be on the road to success, steep challenges remain at rainier beach. funding for the program only goes through 2017, and the cost of just one i.b. test alone is more than $700, though right now, those fees are covered by grants.

and some parents, like lacretia claytor, who helped bring the program into the school have other concerns: >> we don't have enough african americans in the i.b. program, the full i.b. program. certainly some are taking some classes and yay thankfully they are at least brave enough to attempt you know one or two classes but there needs to be a lot more. we need to increase the latino community, hispanic community, the pacific islander community the native community, we need those numbers to increase. >> reporter: of the 19 students who originally began working toward a full i.b. diploma, only seven were on track to earn one on graduation day. results won't be known until july, but i.b. coordinator colin pierce says that attrition rate is typical for a first cohort, and he says 21 juniors are currently on track to complete it next year. he admits though these changes have not been easy. >> all of our students have struggled with this. our teachers have struggled with this and i think that's part of the value of it because they are not struggling alone, they are

struggling with a lot of support, they are struggling with people who believe they are going to make it to the other side. >> reporter: across the nation the i.b. program is now in more than 1,600 schools. many in urban districts. rainier beach pursued i.b. after seeing the results of a report that followed graduates at 13 chicago-area high-schools that adopted i.b. a 2012 university of chicago study found students who completed the diploma program there were 40% more likely to attend college, and were more likely to stay in their first two years there. while rainier beach is working toward those kinds of outcomes too, the i.b. program has already done a lot to change the culture and reputation of the school. >> we started getting better books, better textbooks, history books and stuff like that and actually felt like an actual you know good outstanding high school. >> reporter: senior dajaun rose was both stabbed and shot in his first two years at rainier beach, but he was able to stay on track through it all and recently graduated with his senior class. >> i just feel amazing. i feel like there is nothing i can't overcome. >> reporter: as for danny segi, he eventually plans to go to a

university in new zealand and hopes to one day become a teacher. he credits both pierce, and the i.b. program, for helping him get to graduation. >> mr. pierce took that initiative and really told us you know i could see you doing this, you know this is who you are going to be you know i see you being this and it really just gave us motivation if he >> reporter: rainier beach is currently asking the state will for an additional $250,000 to keep the program going and parents and community leaders have also started a foundation to support it beyond 2017. for the pbs newshour, im april brown in seattle. >> ifill: economics correspondent paul solman spends a lot of time trying to explain and assess why markets, individuals, consumers, and businesses behave the way they do. but there's a growing school of thought that says the traditional answers to those questions may not be the correct ones. paul caught up with one of the

leading thinkers changing the way we look at economic behavior, as part of his series "making sense," which airs every thursday on the newshour. >> reporter: millennium park richard thaler an academic revolutionary, who thinks his field economics, has a weirdly distorted view of human behavior that we're all rational maximizers, mathematical machines, who use our unusually big brains to wisely calculate every decision as we strive to get to the top, thus creating perfect markets to make us better off. yet, says thaler-- >> after the '87 crash, when the market fell 20% in a day, and the internet bubble, when the nasdaq went from 5,000 to 1400, and then the real estate bubble, which led to a financial crisis from which we're still trying to

extricate ourselves the idea that markets work perfectly is no longer tenable. >> reporter: thaler is running his revolution from inside the belly of the beast-- the university of chicago, which boasts 28 nobel laureates practiced in traditional economics. collectively, they've created what's known as the "chicago school," pred predicated on the perfect efficiency of markets in which prices rationally reflect all available information. but at a lunch with star students thaler offered his latest favorite example of markets behaifg badly. -- behaving badly. a closed end stock fund called the herzfelled caribbean basin fund-- >> ticker symbol c.u.b.a. now, needless to say, it cannot and does not invest in cuba. that's against the law. ( laughter ) and there wouldn't be anything to buy, anyway.

there are no traded securities in cuba. >> reporter: now, typically the shares of closed end funds, which simply own a basket of stocks, shouldn't be worth more than the stocks themselves. otherwise, you could save money by just buying the stocks yourself. >> nevertheless the day that president obama made an announcement that relationships with cuba would be eased tthis this fund shot to a 70% premium and is now selling at about a 40% premium. >> reporter: now, to be fair, the fund does invest in firms likely to benefit from economic development throughout caribbean, including cuba, but that doesn't explain why shairms of the fund are now worth a whopping $140 for every $100 worth of actual stocks in the fund. >> cuba-- good. price goes up. would you say that's consistent with a rational efficient

market? >> reporter: thaler started noticing such market anomalies early in his career as an economist. >> want market would be up in january, up on fridays down on mondays it would go up on the days before holidays. none of this made any sense. >> reporter: so he began challenging economic orthodoxy. today his version of economics, behavioral economics has finally taken hold pain story that he tells in his new book "misbehaving." it's a hit, even here in orthodox chicago where the book's very price is an example of economic irrationality. >> my book is 30% off and people love deals. they can be driven to purchase things that they don't realliment. if the deal is good enough. >> reporter: by contrast chicago school economists long argued that if someone chooses to buy thaler's book, say or anything else, that's proof enough that they want it at the price being paid. deal or no deal. all human behavior, says

thaler,s was reduced to similar absurditys. usually, accompanied by mathematical equations. >> marry the optimal wife. get divorced when the utility of being married turned negative. >> reporter: but it was only when thaler began doing experiments and published them the doctrinaire economists who he calls e-cons began to admit some of the error of their ways. take the concept of sunk costs -- time and money already spent. an e-conassumes everyone knows when to quit cut their losses, move on. this group of cameroonian students at first seemed to get that. >> let's suppose you bought tickets to go to a concert over here at this bandshell. 40 bucks each. the group is okay but then it starts to rain. how long do you think you're going to stick around this concert? >> not much. >> not much? >> not much. >> reporter: what if the sunk

costs suddenly swell. >> how many of you would have a different decision about staying or leave leaving if it was $500 as opposed to $40. every single one of you. >> i have to make my money worth it. >> reporter: you have to make your money worth it. >> yeah. >> reporter:and your point here? >> well economists would say how much you paid for the ticket, tough luck. if it's $40 or $500-- >> doesn't matter. >> you should just decide whether the music is worth the annoyance of the rain. >> reporter: then there's the way most people value their time. as when riley gaunt is shopping for a $40 pair of shoes learns they're on sale for 30-- >> but it's another store 10-minute drive away. >> okay. >> would you go? >> probably. >> okay. >> reporter: but what if she's shopping for a $200 dress that she learns another store is selling for $190. >> do you think you'd go? >> no. >> reporter: but you see the

point, right? if 10 minutes is worth $10 to you, it doesn't matter how you're saving the $10, no? >> yeah, that makes sense. >> reporter: now that you've heard this explanation, would you change your answer? >> no, probe not. >> so, charlie-- >> her boyfriend, charlie ellis had his own distinctly non-e-con approach to personal finance. >> are you pumped about the finals? >> i'm so pumped. i'm ready. >> reporter: we take this on the eve of the stanley cup finals eventually won by the chicago black hawks. >> suppose i told you i have two tickets to the first home game about 10 rose behind the penalty box. >> i would be so excited. >> now let's suppose i gave you those two tickets. >> reporter: how much would he demand to sell those tickets? >> phew man maybe $500 if i could get that. >> 500 each. >> a pop, yeah. >> reporter:and how much would he pay if he had to buy the tickets? >> maybe $200. >> okay so about half.

>> yeah. >> reporter: now an e-con would say the price to buy or sell should be about the same, but not a human and not our cameraman, a diehard black hawks fan himself who heard the entire previous exchange and then gave exooctly the same answers. >> i would not pay as much as i'm going to sell it for. >> reporter: and this is after he heard you do this already. >> yeah, you know, teaching the principles doesn't make people do it. >> reporter: after nearly four decades of trying to prove just how crazy economics can be, richard thaler is now running the asylum as president of the american economic association. his behavioral economic theories have been put into practice by governments around the world including ours, in so-called "nudge units," based on his previous bestsaler. not bad for a guy who thought he'd never get tenure for such unconventional work. and how does he now feel about

being called the inventor of behavioral economics? >> one guy can't create a field, but you can get people thinking. >> reporter: and so he has. this is paul solman reporting for the pbs newshour from ever-more-sensible and unorthodox, chicago, illinois. >> ifill: we end with another look at "brief but spectacular," our series of interviews featuring personal insights from artists, authors, leaders, and thinkers, telling us, briefly, what they are passionate about. today producer steve goldbloom hears from the creators of the comedy central hit show "broad city." abbi jacobson and ilana glazer explain how youtube and the improvisational group "upright citizens brigade" shaped their success.

>> so we were on this improv team for, like, two years. >> it's funny to lose money on improve. >> we lost money. the "broad city" stories came because we were struggling to get more recognition more, like, stage time at u.c.b., and were not able to. >> we just wanted to send a link on our parents of what it is we're spending all this time on. >> we kind of think of it as grad school. >> abbi came up with the name broad city. you did. i'm like, come ocome at me. and she's listing names-- >> yeah, we were coming up with a name. >> we were like "girl city." "broadville." it was like "broad city," and we were like that's it. this is "broad city." >> we did the web stories for two years before he pitched it as a tv show. >> just fair long time it was, like 2,000, 2500 people. >> we felt like it was the same people. >> it was-- >> we should invite all those people to a party or something. and we decided that we were

going to write a expielt go to l.a. and pitch this as a tv show purpose we were going to do our last web episode and we never really had any celebrities and through a friend, she was like "what about amy poehler. and i was like oh, my god. she runs u.c.b. which we came out of would she ever do this? >> she did. she wanted to be in an episode. i quick my job. >> yeah, ilana quit her job. and then had we shot with her we just hit it off. we held our breaths and asked her in that e-mail, "hey, this is the episode. we love it. would you ever consider being an executive producer? we're planning on going to pitch this?" and she wrote back the next day, and she was just like "i would love to. i didn't want to step on any toes." >> i have chills. >> and we were like, "what toes will?" >> and also when you called me we're like aaah! we call our parents our parents are like aaah. we called each other back and we're, like, panting. >> we're like our parents died

i go not understand what you were saying. >> like-- >> yeah, yeah, yeah. >> we acted as every potential had in the web series but on this tiny scale. we were the line producers, and now having those people is-- it's such a privilege. the response has been so beyond, so surreal and incredible. we definitely have been more in our heads than ever before. >> there is, without a doubt a pressure of we have to keep thup. the fact that new york is such a big part of the show, having the confidence in the characters to leave new york is something that i think we are figuring out in the third season. >> where is "broad city"? new york city is its own city and "broad city" is its own city. what is that inspect. my name is glaze. >> and my name is abbi jacobson. >> and this is our brief and spectacular take on-- >> our television show "broad city." >> ifill: get a first look at

our series "brief but spectacular" every thursday on the pbs newshour page on facebook. on the newshour online, it's a go-to dish on many a sushi menu but we're about to make you think twice about spicy tuna rolls. it turns out, one of the roll's main ingredients, the tuna scraped from the bone of the fish has been linked to hundreds of illnesses in the u.s. hear all about it on "shortwave," the newshour podcast. find out how to listen, on our homepage. that's at pbs.org/newshour. tune in later this evening on charlie rose, get more analysis and reaction to the supreme court's ruling on the affordable care act. and that's the newshour for tonight. on friday, president obama delivers the eulogy at the funeral of the south carolina pastor and state senator killed in the church shooting. i'm gwen ifill, we'll see you on-line and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us here at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

♪ ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> and with the ongoing support of these 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.

captioning sponsored by newshour productions llc captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

>> this is "bbc world news america." >> funding of this presentation is made possible by the freeman foundation newman's own foundation, giving all profits from newman's own to charity and pursuing the common good, kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs, and mufg. >> build a solid foundation and you can connect communities and commerce for centuries. that is the strength behind good banking relationships, too. which is why, at mufg, we believe financial partnerships