captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. >> sreenivasan: and i'm hari sreenivasan. >> woodruff: on the newshour tonight: then there were three. donald trump is now the republican party's presumptive nominee for president, as bernie sanders scores a win against hillary clinton in indiana. >> sreenivasan: also ahead this wednesday, on the ground in iraq, after isis fighters kill a member of the u.s. navy seals in a large-scale attack near mosul. >> woodruff: plus, are today's kids addicted to their digital devices? we hear from the creator of the new documentary, "screenagers." >> i knew as a mom that every day, there was tension in the house, and i felt completely out of control on what to do, what kind of limits to set, how this was affecting them. >> sreenivasan: all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour.

>> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> ♪ love me tender ♪ love me true we can like many, but we can love only a precious few. because it is for those precious few that you have to be willing to do so very much. but you don't have to do it alone. lincoln financial helps you provide for and protect your financial future, because this is what you do for people you love. lincoln financial-- you're in charge. >> fathom travel-- carnival corporation's small ship line. offering seven-day cruises to three cities in cuba. more at fathom.org. >> bnsf railway. >> genentech.

>> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> 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. >> sreenivasan: the republican presidential race is effectively over, as of tonight, and the party's new leader is looking ahead. at the same time, detractors now face a decision: how to reconcile with the new reality. john yang has our report. >> reporter: on his first day as the apparent republican nominee, donald trump said he's confident

the party would fall in behind him-- but that some were welcome to leave. >> i don't think it's imperative that the entire party come together. i don't want everybody. i don't even want certain people that were extraordinarily nasty. let them go their own way. >> reporter: trump, who rails against politics as usual, said he's looking for a running mate with a political background to help him navigate washington. he spoke again, late today, on cnn. it took just a little more than 300 days for the outsider to demolish a field of 16 rivals, including current and former officeholders with more than a century of combined government experience. late today the last opponent standing, ohio governor john kasich, made it official: >> as i suspend my campaign today, i have renewed faith, deeper faith that the lord will show me the way forward and fulfill the purpose of my life.

>> reporter: ted cruz quit last night after trump routed him in the indiana primary: >> we gave it everything we've got but the voters chose another path. >> reporter: party chairman reince priebus said it's time for the party to get behind trump and start working toward the november election. >> we've got to unify, we need time to unify. and -- and we will unify. but this is what today starts, which is this unification process. >> reporter: but a parade of prominent republicans are heading for the exits. their voter registration cards. freshman senator freshman senator ben sasse of nebraska said he could never vote for trump, tweeting last night: "reporters keep asking if indiana changes anything for me. the answer is simple: no." and one-time trump rival senator lindsey graham tweeted: "if we nominate trump we will get destroyed... and we will deserve it." despite losing indiana, democratic frontrunner hilary

clinton now claims 93% of the delegates needed to clinch her party's nomination. but bernie sanders made clear last night he's not going anywhere. >> i understand that secretary clinton thinks that this campaign is over. i've got some bad news for her. ( applause ) >> reporter: clinton, meanwhile, turned her attention to trump, as she did today on cnn: >> i've seen the presidency up close from two different perspectives, and i think i know what it takes. and i don't think we can take a risk on a loose cannon like donald trump running our country. >> reporter: already launching a general election campaign, as she still works to secure her own nomination.ñi for the pbs newshour, i'm john yang. >> sreenivasan: we'll explore the new lay of the land on both sides of the presidential race, after the news summary. >> woodruff: in the day's other news, a wildfire burned its way

into canada's main oil sands city-- and forced almost 90,000 people to flee. everyone was ordered out of fort mcmurray, alberta, in the province's largest evacuation ever. the fire has raged across tinder-dry woodlands since sunday, and consumed entire suburbs. many people headed south, others sheltered in nearby camps, and some criticized the way it was handled. >> well, it's a disaster, and i find that it is not fair, they didn't even let us take our things when we asked them, so we have lost everything now. >> woodruff: prime minister justin trudeau said today the country's military stands ready to help if needed. >> sreenivasan: from fire to water. president obama made a long- awaited visit to flint, michigan today, where the drinking water has been contaminated with lead. william brangham has the story. >> brangham: the president was greeted by gray skies and a line of michigan officials-- including republican governor rick snyder and flint mayor karen weaver.

he urged parents in flint to have their kids tested for lead exposure-- and to use filters on their tap water. then, he took a drink himself. >> generally, i have not been doing stunts here, but... and this used a filter, the water is flint water that was filtered. >> brangham: this visit was prompted in part by a letter from mari copeny, an eight-year old girl in flint. >> "i am one of the children that is affected by this water, and i've been doing my best to march in protest and to speak out for all the kids that live here in flint." >> brangham: known as "little miss flint", she and other residents had the chance to meet with the president today. >> you should be angry, but channel that i thinker. you should be hurt but don't sink into despair. and most of all, do not somehow communicate to our children here in this city that they're going to be saddled with problems for

the rest of their lives, because they will not. they'll do just fine. >> brangham: all of this comes two years after the city's water source was switched to the flint river, to save money. after months of complaints of tainted water, officials acknowledged the river water wasn't treated properly and had leached lead from old pipes into people's water supply. the city has stopped using the river, and lead levels are gradually falling as the lead pipes build up a protective coating again. but questions persist about who knew what-- and when-- about the lead contamination. julie mack is a reporter at michigan-live, a state newspaper consortium. she was part of an investigative team looking into emails and documents from governor snyder and his inner circle. >> there was something obviously seriously wrong with the water. people are coming to showing off jugs of brown water for a year. you know, 17 months before they did anything. and that remains a puzzle of why did it take so long for there to be action? ( booing ) >> good afternoon.

>> brangham: snyder himself was heckled and booed today at his speech in flint, and he apologized again, saying, "your government failed you." looking ahead, the mayor of flint estimates it'll cost $55 million to remove and replace flint's old lead pipes. the michigan legislature has approved $67 million since october, but so far, it's been slow to reach residents. a congressional package of $100 million for the water system, and $50 million for health care needs associated with lead poisoning, is still awaiting action. for the pbs newshour, i'm william brangham. >> woodruff: the u.s. justice department warned north carolina today not to enforce a new l.g.b.t. law. the statute limits protections for gays, lesbians, bisexual and transgender people. the justice department said itñi violates federal civil rights laws. the department notified republican governor pat mcrory that the state could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding. >> sreenivasan: the biggest automotive recall in u.s. history will get even bigger.

japan's takata corporation is adding up to 40 million additional air bag inflators-- on top of nearly 30 million already recalled. in some cases, the devices can fire metal shards when they go off. but federal regulators acknowledged today that replacing all of them is a huge job. >> there is already concern about supply being available. part of the issue here is to make sure we accelerate and as quickly as possible get the replacements, but we do not want to introduce new safety risks by pushing too fast too hard. >> sreenivasan: the takata airbags have been linked to at least 11 deaths. >> woodruff: in syria, the government and moderate rebel factions have agreed to restore a fragile cease-fire in aleppo, after days of fierce fighting. the u.s. and russia worked out the agreement, on the heals of similar deals in damascus and latakia province. the syrian military said later that the aleppo truce is good for only 48 hours. >> sreenivasan: the global tobacco industry was dealt a double blow today. the european union's highest court upheld requirements that

cigarettes be sold in plain packages covered mostly with health warnings. the rules also limit advertising for e-cigarettes. separately, india's supreme court ordered that health warnings cover 85% of a cigarette pack's surface. >> woodruff: back in this country, the federal transportation security administration is moving to address long lines at the busiest u.s. airports. officials said today they're adding more screeners and bomb- sniffing dogs to expedite the screening process. airlines have voiced concerns that growing wait times will affect the peak summer travel season. >> sreenivasan: and on wall street, stocks sagged after a private survey of job creation turned in disappointing numbers. the dow jones industrial average lost 99 points to close at 17,651. the nasdaq fell 37 points, and the s&p 500 slipped 12. still to come on the newshour: will the g.o.p. finally rally around donald trump? we get takes from political reporters and former presidential candidate ben carson; the u.s. role in fighting isis, under fire after a navy seal is killed in iraq;

why half of all teenagers say they're addicted to their phones, and much more. >> woodruff: on this day with >> woodruff: on this day with more than its share of political tumult, the questions abound: how exactly did donald trump up-end the republican party to become it's presumptive nominee for president? and how does bernie sanders' decision to stay in the race affect hillary clinton? for some answers, we turn to susan page, washington bureau chief for "usa today;" and karen tumulty, national political correspondent for the "washington post." and welcome to both of you. so, i think it's fair to say that a year ago, hardly anybody thought donald trump would have sewn up his party's nomination by now, susan, much less before

hillary clinton sews up hers. how did he do it? >> you know, he didn't have the best campaign organization. he didn't have experienced people around him. he didn't have the best pollsters the best ad, he didn't spend the most money. he had a message. he understood the mood on the part of the american electorate that almost no one else did, how angry and frustrated and how much a desire of a different kind of politics that group of republicans in the primaries, the kind of politics they were ready to embrace. >> woodruff: karen, what would you add? >> i think not only did he have that. he had it early. the fact is, donald trump, six days after the 2012 election, filed the paperwork to trademark the phrase that would become the signature of his campaign which is "make america great again." he not only had a sense of the electorate, but he had it early, and he had it at a time when the republican party elders thought that thereue know, what they needed to be doing was sort of softening the edges of the

party, you know, appealing to women and hispanics and young people. donald trump sensed that what would win this primary race was exactly the opposite. >> woodruff: so here we are now, he's sewn it up. all y long, i think, we've been watching a parade of republicans, conservativesxd otr either saying never donald trump, they're not going to go with him, susan, or some of them gradually falling in line. how serious opposition is-- is the opposition that he faces in his own party? >> i think the opposition is not serious in terms of getting the nomination. i think that battle is over, and he is now the face of the republican party. but you do see some fervent supporters, most of them not elected senior republicans in the electorate. you see a couple of people saying they won't vote for him. but you know the favorite lines of the republicans running for the senate this year, "i'm going to summit the nominee" without saying donald trump's name. this is a distinction that i think democratic ad makers, democratic opponents aren't

going to recognize. it's an effort to not break with the expaert yet not get too close to donald trump. while he succeeded in winning this nomination, he is at odds with the kind of coalition that we think you need to have to actually win the presidency. >> woodruff: karen, you actually interviewed donald trump last night as the results from indiana were coming in. what are the challenges that he faces now heading into this general election? >> well, i think that the challenges are going to be presenting himself to an electorate that goes beyond the most fervent grass-roots republicans. it is going to be transforming himself into something and somebody who the broader swath of the electorate can actually imagine in the oval office. the other thing-- and what he told me in the interview-- he has decided what he has to do is make hillary clinton unacceptable to them, and he plans to do, that he told me, not by focusing on her ideas and what she would do for the

country, but rather her past, that he thinks that that is a lot of fertile territory. >> woodruff: and, susan, how does she counterñr that? she said in an interview today on cnn, she views him as a loose cannon. she used that term expoafebr ovr again. what are we looking at? >> so we're look at two candidates who are each going to spend their time talking about the how terrible the other one is, right. this is what i think you do in an election where both candidates have negative ratings of above 50%. there's limits to how much they can persuade people that theatre optimistic candidate of the future they ought to embrace. but they ed to make the case that the other guy is simply unacceptable. donald trump talkin talking abot hillary clinton that way, hillary clinton describing donald trump as not an acceptable commander in chief. i think that's a particular theme we're going to see her hit over and over again, and someone who doesn't have the temperament you need to be president. >> woodruff: meantime, karen, hillary clinton still faces a challenger in her own party, bernie sanders, as weñr know, wn the indiana primary. he's likely or expected to win

some of the primaries coming up between now and the convention. how much of-- how does that affect hillary clinton's path from now until the convention in philadelphia in. >> you know, it probably doesn't affect her chances of winning the nomination. what it could affect-- and this ball is very much in bernie sanders' court-- what it could affect is how enthusiastic bernie sanders supporters are about supporting her, about turning up and voting for her in the fall. and this is a choice as, you know, the clinton campaign has said, but it's a real choice, as to, you know, what kind of tone he takes for the remainder of the primary, whether it's talking about his ideas and how he wants to shape the democratic agenda or whether it is beating up on the most likely nominee. >> woodruff: how do you see that democratic contest, susan? >> well, you know, i think it's a constant reminder of some of hillary clinton's weaknesses.

to have bernie sanders not only out there running but beating her in primaries, as he did last night. and it prevents her from doing what we traditionally see candidates do which is move a little bit to the middle after securing their party's nomination. she is, i think, not awbl to do that. she's been pulled a little bit to the left, tugged to left by him, particularly, say, on the another of trade. it's going to keep her there and that's a battle i think we'll see fought out over the platform when you come to the democratic convention in july. >> woodruff: meantime, karen, still, so much attention on donald trump and what he has been able to pull off and what he needs to do. from your conversation with him, what kind of sense did you get of how he sees his own challenge in the next months-- in the months to come? >> you know, he-- he sounded pretty happy with the kind of campaign he has run, and seems to believe that he can continue to do that. i think, however, that a general election campaign is going to require a different kind of

campaign operation. a lot of people are worried that he may not have-- because he's been self-funding, he may not have the fund-raising capacity that he will need to go into what one-- stewart stephens, mitt romney's former strategist described to me the billion-dollar buzz saw the democrats are preparing for him. trump said they spent all this money already in the republican primary and it didn't do a thing. >> woodruff: a lot of people think he is a billionaire and he can do it himself but it's of it's not that simple. >> hillary clinton is in ohio, which will be a swing state. she is already laying the groundwork there. >> woodruff: susan page and karen tumulty, we thank you. >> woodruff: and there's more to come: we'll be back a little later in the program to talk with trump rival, turned supporter, dr. ben carson.

>> sreenivasan: there were more details today about the death of navy seal charles keating in a firefight yesterday with isis militants in northern iraq. the u.s. has moved in more troops and materiel recently to support iraqi military efforts against the group. at the same time, there is political turmoil in baghdad, where the government of prime minister haidar al abadi is facing challenges from rival shia groups. for more i'm joined now by the "washington post's" baghdad bureau chief loveday morris. she just returned from the frontlines in northern iraq. loveday morris, thanks for joining us. you were near the front liewns of this battle. describe the situation there. what did you see? >> reporter: what we are seeing on the front lines at the moment is an increased u.s. troop presence outside of the more established iraqi bases. the line where i was at, south mosul, now there's añi u.s. artillery base, which is relatively close to the front

lines. and the problem with these front lines are that, thatxd scrappy lines you have suicide bombers penetrating the lines regularly. so as we see more troops,ñi more u.s. troops coming, there were more announced by the president, there is an increased risk for them. >> sreenivasan: what do you know now about how this seal died? >> well, the pentagon is saying that at around 7:30 a.m., a large-scale isisñi attack broke through the kurdish peshmerga. the navy seals came-- this seal sadly died while trying to assist them. >> sreenivasan: yesterday, the secretary of defense said that this was a combat death. but then the white house said this soldier wasn't on a combat mission. how would you describe what u.s. forces are doing on the ground inñi iraq?

>> i think a lot of people are confused, and i can see why. the problem is, if you have u.s. forces dopted along front lines that are scrappy front lines, and getting entangled when there are isis attacks, calling for assistance, and then becoming involved in firefights, i mean, is that-- do you classify that as combat, or as sales are and assist? the iraqis-- when this incident happened on tuesday, they actually seemed to be under the impression that the seals were assisting them take back the town. they seemed to think that they were part of a counter-offensive to take back the town. >> sreenivasan: we've seen quite a bit of protests and demonstrations against the iraqi government due to corruption and lack of services. what's the political situation like, and how is that affecting what's happening on the battlefield? >> at the moment, the political situation is a big worry.

there's a worry that it's going to delay plans for any mosul offensive. the prime minister, prime minister haidar al abadi, he is the commander in chief of the armed forces. he's america's main partner had when it comes to fighting isis on the ground in iraq. his position is in question. he's fighting for his polical survival. everyone's very worried about the potential for a political vacuum that would have a huge impact on the u.s.' campaign here at the invitation of the iraqi government. what happens if you have a power vacuum here? it's definitely a big concern for them. >> sreenivasan: loveday morris of the "washington post," joining us via skype from baghdad. thanks so much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: stay with us.

coming up on the newshour: a shocking number of deaths attributed to preventable medical errors; the life of james brown-- a metaphor for our struggle with race and class; and we talk to former rival turned trump supporter ben carson about the now-presumptive g.o.p. nominee. but first, a new report looks at how digital devices are taking a toll on kids and families. the report, put out yesterday by common sense media, found: half of all young people feel they are addicted to their devices, and nearly 60% of adults think their kids are addicted too. and, a third of parents and teens say that they argue daily about screen time. now, a new documentary explores this topic, and offers ideas about what families can do to navigate these waters. william brangham is back with our look. >> brangham: the documentary is called "screenagers," and in it, dr. delaney ruston explores the

complex relationship teenagers have with their screens. both the pleasures they take in sharing their lives online, with their friends, as well as the darker side-- those who lose control of their digital habits, and spiral into damaging behavior. >> i hugged him and felt the bones sticking out of his back. that was scary. >> brangham: the film also profiles the latest research about the impact all this screentime has on the brains of young people: >> you have a brain that is wired for what in psychology is called seeking behavior, the kind of thing that a google search gives you. something new, something stimulating, something different. >> brangham: throughout the film, ruston also turns the camera on herself, exploring the real and all-too-common conflicts that flare up as she and her family haggle over screen time.

>> it's not like i'm on it 24/7. >> you're always checking it and don't you think-- >> well, if you put this in front of me, yes, i will go on it, and yes, i will find something to do on it. >> tessa, why are you so mad? another just get dressed. i'm sorry you're crying. >> brangham: i met with delaney ruston last week in washington d.c. what was it initially, what made you want to do this film? >> well, i was having a really hard time as a mom with my two kids. you know, my son wanted to play video games a lot and my daughter really wanted more and more social media, and i felt completely out of control. and as a doctor, i was thinking, "what is the impact of all this screen time?" i knew as a mom that every day there was tension in the house and i felt completely out of control on what to do, what kind of limits to set, how this was affecting them. >> brangham: now that you've done all this research, what was it-- i'm curious-- that most

surprised you that you found? >> well, i think one thing that really helped me to start being a better parent around this is to learn that the dopamine that's secreted in the brain's pleasure center when we get new bits of information and we look at the screens-- that center of the brain is most activated when we're kids and we're teenagers. so knowing that they are so pulled into these in a way that we can't even understand has made me not be as angry at them but realize there's a lot more i need to do in my parenting. >> brangham: so these are little electronic drug delivery devices? i know that's a crude way to put it, but that's what you're saying. >> absolutely. i mean, it's amazing that there's many studies that look at m.r.i. scans of the brain of kids who play a lot of video games, 20 hours or more a week. and when they compare them to people who are addicted to, say, drugs or alcohol, their brains scans are similar.

so something is really happening on the physiological level, it's not just psychological. >> we exposed young mice to switching sounds and light. >> brangham: in the film, ruston talks with researchers who are studying what multi-tasking-- switching rapidly back and forth between digital devices-- does to the brain function of mice. >> afterwards, we looked at the effect on learning and found that the ability of these young mice to learn new things was very much compromised. it took them three times longer or more to learn how to go through a maze than the non- exposed young mice. we are exposing a whole generation of children to this rapid-paced media and we have no clue what it does to the brain and if it's the same as we see in the mice, this is very shocking news. >> brangham: does that kind of stuff terrify you? or do you think this research is not necessarily analogous? i mean, how are people supposed to process this information? >> you know, i think it's a question about how much we're giving kids full potential in

everything that they do. and to me a big issue is how much time they have with all sorts of skills that they're learning offline-- social engagement, competency, talking to people face to face. i think if we're giving them a lot of those situations that even if there's some concern about attention span and possibly some changes in the brain, i think that humans are resilient enough and already we're seeing that people are not, you know, dropping like flies from screen time. i don't think we're at that place yet where we need to be really alarmist. >> brangham: let's say i'm a parent and i come to you and i say, "i have a young kid. maybe a 10 year old daughter. when should i get her a phone?" what would you tell this parent? >> i think you know-- obviously, every kid is different, and that's really important. and every situation in the home is different. but i do worry that it is getting younger and younger. and when we bring them, start having them in elementary school, we have to start to

wonder, when is it too young that they're not going to be ready to resist the impulse to check or to post. >> you know, this is all about teaching kids self control, and what we've learned through the research is that it's absolutely teachable. so i would really discourage a family from getting a child a device when they don't think they'll be able to control themselves from when they use it. >> brangham: ruston has beençó taking her film across the country recently-- holding screenings in dozens and dozens of cities-- encouraging parents and kids to come, watch, and to then continue the conversation at home. >> you know what's really

exciting? its that kids and teenagers actually want to talk about these issues, and i think it doesn't take that long in homeroom or in some other setting to ask these questions about "what are you struggling with, with your screen time?" or "what do you see happening on social media?" and once we say we want to hear from you, then they care-- as opposed to what i see so often, this message of zero tolerance, let's just take everything away and get mad at you. that's not going to get kids to open up and make them comfortable to be a part of this, and that's really what this is going to take. >> brangham: for the pbs newshour, i'm william brangham in washington d.c. >> sreenivasan: for the better part of two decades, there's been a growing recognition that medical errors kill too many patients in the u.s.

while exact numbers are elusive, a new analysis and estimate portrays an even grimmer picture. the new paper finds that as many as 250,000 people die each year from errors in hospitals and other healthcare facilities. that would make it the third leading cause of death in the u.s., ahead of respiratory disease, accidents and stroke. dr. martin makary, a professor of surgery at the johns hopkins university school of medicine who led the research, joins me now. so, how did we get to this number? what did your research find? >> welly, we took the best available studies, the data from the medical literature, and we basically came up with a metaanalysis point estimate and asked where would that fall if medical error were counted as a disease? it turns out that we learned that the c.d.c. does not consider medical error to be a cause of death in listing our national health statistics each year, even though the point estimate comes right in between number two and number three on the the list, which means

medical error is the number three cause of death in the united states. we're just not measuring it. >> sreenivasan: let's talk a little bit about the methodology. if the numbers are scarce, are these studies representative enough sample sets to be able to extrapolate this quarter million? >> these are studies of hound of hospitalizations in the top medical journals, and they are updating the 1999 institute of medicine report, and there's broad consensus that the range is somewhere between 200,000 and 400,000. our analysis came up with 251 on,000. no matter what number you pick, it is well above the currently listed number three cause of death. and it turns out the reason it's not being counted is that the system relies on billing code to compile our national health statistics. but people don't always die of a billing code. they can die from diagnostic errors, fragmented care, preventable complications. these are not things that are capturecaptured in national heah

statistics. that list of most common causes of death in united states. that list is a big deal. it informs all of our research funding priorities as a country, all of our public health campaigns. we spend a lot of time and money on heart disease and cancer, but we haven't even really recognized that the third leading burden on health in america in terms of death is medical error in its many forms. >> sreenivasan: so how do systems change to try to adapt for this? i remember there was a book written a while ago about the checklist, and actually preventing surgical errors just by something as simple as that. are there systemic improvements we can make to try to decrease this error rate? >> there are so many great home grown ideas by doctors around the country, hospital associations, but the work they're doing is vastly underfunded and underappreciated. our large research center and patient safety at johns hopkins has applied for numerous federal grants and we keep getting

message back, "this is not within the scope of the n.i.h. this is not within the scope of the national cancer institute." and all of these grants are relegated to a very small agency with a fraction of the budget-- $300 million for the entire agency, including the grants. if you look at the number of people that die from breast cancer, it's about a fourth or a fifth of the number of people that die from medical care gone wrong. and yet, they have billions more because the great lobbying efforts and the vocal advocacy work of that group. well, it turns out that it's not proportional to the burden of prevent abandon health in america. >> sreenivasan: how do you capture the number of people who might not be killed by a medical error but might be with some serious negative health outcomes when they leave the hospital? >> well, studies in-- even in the "new england journal of medicine" show as many as one in four patients in the hospital will have some medical error that they experience, almost always nonconsequential. and it's estimated about half of 1% to a little more than 1% of

these errors could actually be fatal. if you extrapolate the numbers to all u.s. hospitalization, that's where this 250,000 estimate comes from. that's not even counting people that die at home or sometimes through limited insurance networks or cracks in the system that result in daight. it doesn't include outpatient office deaths or ambulatory surgery deaths. so we think the estimate is a solid estimate. there's broad consensus in the field. it's in that range. and it doesn't even include a lot of ug types of medical errors that lead to death. >> sreenivasan: all right, so i'm a patient. how do i figure out the hospital i might be tan to or i'm already in is kind of the lowest that it can be on these error rate? or what do i do to inform myself? what kind of questions do i ask a doctor or a hospital about my care? >> on a national level this is exactly why we need to measure the problem. on a bedside level, you should always go into your office visit or your hospitalization with a loved one or family member.

they're an important safety net. and certainly patients that we see that come in with that support system are often critical in coordinating care. also, ask about a second opinion. if you're going to have something major like an operation or start a medication, sometimes it's worth getting a second opinion because about 20% of second opinions are different than the first opinion. so it's good to know all the treatment options, be well read, and come in with a loved one. >> sreenivasan: all right, dr. martin makary of johns hopkins, thanks very much. >> great to be with you. >> woodruff: we return to the presidential race, and a man who once challenged donald trump, but now supports him: dr. ben carson. today, it was announced he will assist the trump campaign in selecting a running mate. for the record, i knew dr. carson before he was a candidate, when he was the doctor for one of my children. he joins me now from palm beach

gardens, florida. welcome back to the newshour, dr. carson. now that donald trump has sewn up this nomination, what do you expect from him? do you think he will change the message he's been giving to the american people, change his presentation, or do you think it the stay the same? >> well, you know, getting to the process of gaining the nomination involves a mud fight. so that's been largely taken care of. and now you can turn your focus a little bit more to some of the issues. and some of the innovative solutions that really haven't been talked about before. and really trying stabilize the economic situation of our country. and i think you're going to see a lot of pivoting there. that doesn't mean there won't be some more mud fighting when the actual election comes up with hillary clinton. but right now, i think you're going to see a little bit

different. >> woodruff: do you expect to see him take a position or positions that will surprise the american people? >> i think people will be very pleasantly surprised by what he really has an opportunity to explain because many have said, "ah, he doesn't have any understanding of foreign policy, doesn't really truly understand how the system works." i think they'll be surprised at that. i think people will also be surprised at some of the individuals who will be selected for different positions. they'll be, i think, very pleasantly surprised when they see the list of supreme court possibilities. >> woodruff: as you know, a number of prominent republicans are saying-- yes, some are saying they will support him, but there are a number of prominent republicans saying they will never support him. we heard again today from the senator from nebraska, ben

sasse. he said, "i stick with my view that i've expressed before that donald trump is a destructive force bent on dividing the country." does donald trump try to change the minds of people like senator sasse, or does he just move on? >> well, you know, early on, you'll hear a lot of that. as you've always heard when there's controversy in a selection, over the course of time, that tends to melt away. as people begin to consider the alternative. now, there may be some republicans who, you know, prefer a more progressive ideology, prefer, you know, more debt, prefer withdrawal from the world and allowing our enemies to multiply and destruction ofoy should-- should move on. >> woodruff: do you think it's significant, dr. carson, that both former presidents george h.w. bush and george w. bush are saying today that they don't

plan to get involved in this election. they don't plab to express their view one way or another. in other words, they're not going to get behind this candidacy, they're saying. >> well, again, we must recognize that, you know, what donald trump represents is really quite alien to the traditional political system, democrats or republicans. un, they're used to having people who are part of the system who have obligations to this group or this group. to have somebody who is completely uncontrollable is a very difficult thing for the system to adjust to. but hopefully they will. the people have adjusted to it. and the people have decided that they will supersede the system and vote in such numbers that it wouldn't be thrown into a contested situation. >> woodruff, of course, you're referring to some or most of those who voted in these republican primaries. i know you're familiar with the polls, dr. carson, that show

donald trump has a problem with different groups of voters-- hispanics, african americans, women-- how does he begin to win those important part of the electorate over? >> well, i think he's going to begin to address those. certainly going to begin talking about the kind of programs that provide ladders of opportunity that will give a person the ability to climb out of a state of dependency, utilizing their own god-given talents and strengths and hard work. and we will do things to try to facilitate that. we will be talking about how we can make education more widely available. and i'm talking about good education. you look at our inner cities, you look at some of those high schools, we have more than 50% of people dropping out. not because they don't want to be educated, but because they're not being educated and they say, "what's the point in being here?" we have to change that because we need all of those people. we only have 330 million people.

we have to compete with china with 1.3 billion. we can't afford to lose any of our people. we need to start talking about, you know, our justice system and how we prevent such an influx of people because we can't afford to be losing all these people. this is great talent. >> woodruff: i saw another comment today, this one from the former governor of utah, republican mike levitt. he said, "donald trump is going to have to demonstrate he has the temperament to be president." how does donald trump do that? >> i think he-- you know, we all have our weaknesses. there's no question about that. and, you know, he has sometimes had a little difficulty letting something go when somebody insults him. but i think he realizes that this will be a trick that his opponents will use to try to get him off track. and i think he's much smarter than people think. and he's just not going to fall for that.

>> woodruff: finally, you mentioned supreme court names. glad to have you share any of those with us. and, also, as i mentioned, he said that donald trump-- donald trump said you're going to be on the committee looking at a possible running mate. are you interested in that position yourself? >> i prefer to work from the outside. and i also recognize that myself as a running mate would just start the feeding frenzy again on behalf of some of the media who just couldn't stand the thought of me doing anything, rather than become a distraction in that sense. you know, i'd rather help from the outside. >> woodruff: and are there some names of individuals you think would make a good running mate hea for him. do you have people in mind? >> i think there's a whole host of terrific people. upon and, you know, i'd rather allow, you know, donald trump

himself to reveal those names. >> woodruff: and you're going to be working closely with him during the this campaign, during the remawrnd of this campaign? >> we'll be working during the campaign to do everything we possibly can-- you know, my goal is to make sure that we have a thriving and vibrant america for the next generation. you know, my whole life has been about children and making things better for them. and that's mott going to happen unless we fix the economy and create a safe environment. >> woodruff: dr. ben carson, we thank you for joining us. >> thank you so much, judy. >> sreenivasan: now, a new look at the "hardest working man in show business." a man of many contradictions, highs and lows, whose musical legacy opened doors and influenced black and white musicians alike.

jeffrey brown has this newest addition to the newshour bookshelf. who was james brown the man and what shaped him? those questions are taken up by musician and writer james mcbride known for "the color of water" and his national book award winning novel. mcbride's new book is "kill 'emsprks and leave." we talked recentlyt howard theater in washington, d.c. and a historic hall where james brown. i asked about the power of prown's music. >> there's no music in america

that you can listen to that doesn't have some james brown in it. the whole creation of the synthesizers and these guitar parts and the beat-- that was james brown. elvis presley shook america up, and james brown shook the world up because his whole persona was that of someone whose consumed by this music, this sound. so he was a phenomena-- he was really seen as a kind of scream at the end of the dial where black radio lived >> brown: a scream at the end of the dial? >> yeah, because he would go like, "ow," but musically he was very sophisticated; there is a lot of counter point in james brown's music. >> brown: this is not a traditional biography though, that you have written, right? the subtitle says its searching for america's soul and that means taking us to some deep places? >> yeah, well, i think james brown's life is really a metaphor for how america evolved.

and how it is a metaphor for how we can't talk about the business of race and class. and north and south, because in many ways james brown was much more a southerner than he was a black man. >> brown: and what does that mean? >> everything about the way he lived, everything about his lifestyle and the choice-- personal and professional choices, were dictated by the decorum, the pride, and the honor and integrity of southern life. so, you know the whole business of him doing his hair, for example, you know, always being proper, and not showing his pain. the whole business of trust in the south. this whole james brown world, and when you talk to southerners there is this whole mentality of "if we trust you with our life, but if you betray that trust our journey is over." and james brown really typified that in many ways.

♪ i feel good >> brown: but you also talk about the idea of putting on a face; not presenting your true self, partly out of fear as a black man in the south. >> well, that is right, he had a lot of fear in white people as well because he grew up in a segregated part of the world where there was a lot of cruelty, in a world where everyone had to stay in their own lane. and, i think his fear of white people, and his fear of being broke and people try to take what he had, including the i.r.s., the government almost twice, made him a very lonely and fearful person. but he never showed that to people, his face was of pride and smile, he never wanted to show, he never wanted people to know him.

♪ mean world >> brown: yeah that comes through. i mean he's very high bent, even those you talked to who were very close to him. >> well, you know, he compartmentalized people. you know he had his black friends, he had his white friends. he had his manager he trusted with his money, he had his accountant he trusted with his money. he had this promoter he trusted and that one he didn't. he lived in a world of many rooms, i don't know if he is that different from any of us. but he is an exaggeration of all of us. because he doesn't know how to fit comfortably in any one place. >> brown: and what about the way he was treated, seen, i mean you are talking about him rocking the universe. elvis presley, of course, got much more attention. >> of course, well the whole business of the evolution of black music in america is a difficult subject to talk about without sounding like a racist malcontent. >> brown: but you'd made it part

of the story here in james brown. >> i had to. you can't avoid it, it is the elephant in the room. i mean, most black musicians, including james brown, walked through department stores and heard ninth chords borrowed from their history. there is no pension for the guys that play. >> brown: you mean the music they hear, yeah? >> yeah, the music they hear back to them is their music. yeah, they are living lives of relative poverty and anonymity. and i mean, history has gobbled up most of black people's contributions. i never thought it would eat james brown alive, but somehow it did. >> brown: so did he ever get his proper due? >> i don't think so.

i don't think he has gotten his just due because i don't think he's seen as, he is such a phenomena that people remember him as just that he gave them such a good time, they forget that musically he was brilliant. and that personally despite his personal struggles which were painful to him and to others. that he'd put that aside and he would try to make people happy, and try to make people, most importantly, get along. >> brown: was it an easy story to tell? was he an easy man to find? >> no, this is the hardest book i've ever done. because even after finishing this book, i really don't feel i know him completely. i mean, i don't think he wanted-- it's clear he didn't want to be known. but i have enough of the ghost of the man, the nub of the man, to tell the story in a way that i think people would relate to. it is hard to know someone who spent his entire life, not wanting to be known. well, you know, michael jackson was the same way. in fact, a lot of the celebrities are the same way. they have this penchant for privacy because they don't want to show you the pain that powers them. but the story, you know, the story is the pain that powers them. it's the fuel, you know, it is the motor in the car. and so dissecting that with

james brown, you realize, a lot of what motored him along was the desire for people to see beyond the color of his skin. and that is something we still have a hard time working out in this country. >> brown: all right, the book is "kill 'em and leave: searching for james brown and the american soul." james mcbride, thank you. >> thank you. >> woodruff: on the newshour online right now, tens of thousands of online readers have taken charles murray's "bubble quiz," in order to see how culturally isolated they are from "mainstream" americans. the problem, according to economist gerald jaynes? so-called mainstream america doesn't actually exist. read his full critique on "making sense." all that and more is on our web site, www.pbs.org/newshour. >> sreenivasan: and again, to our honor roll of american service personnel killed in iraq and the afghanistan conflict.

we add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. here, in silence, are two more. >> sreenivasan: tune in later tonight: on charlie rose, a look at new york's museum of modern art's new exhibit of the works of edgar degas. >> woodruff: and that's the newshour for tonight. on thursday, making sense of great vacation deals using budget airlines. i'm judy woodruff.

>> sreenivasan: i'm hari sreenivasan. join us online, and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> lincoln financial-- committed to helping you take charge of your financial future. >> fathom travel-- carnival corporation's small ship line. offering seven-day cruises to three cities in cuba. more at fathom.org. >> genentech. >> supporting social entrepreneurs and their solutions to the world's most pressing problems-- skollfoundation.org. >> supported by the rockefeller foundation. promoting the wellbeing of humanity around the world, by building resilience and inclusive economies. more at www.rockefellerfoundation.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and individuals.

>> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. 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 to charity and pursuing the common good. kovler foundation, pursuing solutions for america's neglected needs. and aruba tourism authority. >> planning a vacation escape that is relaxing, inviting, and exciting is a lot easier than you think. you can find it here in aruba. families, couples, and friends can all find their escape on the island with warm sunny days, cooling tradewinds, and the