captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight: kids at the border amid a growing outcry to end the separation of immigrant families, president trump defends his policy. then i sit down with lim sungnam, the man at the center of south korea's foreign policy to talk what's next in a global strate to de-nuclearize the north. and portland, oregon, one of the most gentrified cities in america. we ask if a housing program can make a dent in the massive displacement of black families. >> they want to live in the same thneighborhood their grand lived in. they want to live in the same neighborhood where their barbershop or their beauty salons still is. >> woodruff: all that and more on tonight's "pbs newshour."

>> major funding for the pbs newshour has been pvided by: >> consumer cellular believes that wireless plans should reflect the amount of ta t, text and dat you use. we offer a variety of no- contract wireless plans for peop who use their phone a little, a lot, or anything in between. to learn more, go to consumercellular.tv >> financial services fis. raymond jame for more than 50 years, advancing ideaand supporting institutions to promote a better world. at www.hewlett.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. >> woodruff: there's been more tough talk from the trumpmi stration today over separating children and parents who illegally enter the u.s. but the outcry is growing, on both sides of the political aisle. white house correspondent yamiche alcindor begins our coverage. >> the united states will not be a migrant camp and it will not be a refugee holding facility-- won't be. >> alcindor: president trump

began the day defiant, pushing back on criticism er his administration's family separation policy. in new orleans, the secretary of homeland security, kirstjen neilsen, also rejected the backlash. >> there has been much outcry, coternation and, frankly, misinformation for many in the press, in congress and advocacy groups over the last few weeks that we at d.h.s. are intentionally doing things that are un-humanitarian, that are cruel, immoral and disgraceful. we are doing nonof those things. we are enforcing the laws passed by congress >> alcindor: but the outcry grows with every new report. border patrol released video shot over the weekend of a facility in mcallen, texas. it showed people held in fenced "cages," and children lying onma covered in foil "blankets." outside, democratic politicians joined with protesters. what we're doing as a nation is inflicting enormous harm a these ki on the parents.

>> this is not the texas i know, this is not the america that i grew up in. >> alcindor: federal officials say about 000 children were separated in april and may alone. and increasingly, republicans are joining in eressing outrage. t "the washington post" l night, formefirst lady laura bush called the policy "cruel" and "immoral" and said, "it breaks my heart." she went on, "these images areem eerilyiscent of the japanese american inrnment camps of world war ii." current first lady melania tatmp said in a ent that she "hates to see children separated from their families." some congressional republicans toe also objecting, including on sunday, maine se susan collins. what the administration has decided to do is to separate children from their parents to try to send a message that if you cross the border with your children, your children are going to be ripped away from you. that's traumatizing to the children, who are innocent

victims, and it is contrary to >> alcindor: collins, along with wrllow republican senator jeff flake of arizonae to the trump administration requestingt clarificion on the asylum process and separati and in a lengthy facebook post, nebraska's republican senator ben sasse defended efforts to curtail illegal immigration.t said of the separations, "this is wrong. americans do not take childrene, hosteriod."ho today,h, president trump again-- falsely-- blamed democrats for his's administratiolicy. >> if the democrats would sit down insteadf obstructing, we could have something done very quickly. goodor the children, good fo the country, good for the world. we're stuck with these horrible laws, they're horrible laws, what's happening is so sad-- is so sad. a indor: the roots of the current fervor go back to at least march of lt year.

then d.h.s. secretary john kelly said then family sepn might be a way to curtail border crossings. >> in der to deter more movement along this terribly dangerous network. i am considering exactly that. they will be well cared for as we deal with their parents. >> yes, we are pursing a zero tolerance prosution policy at the border. >> alcindor: last month,.s. attorney general jeff sessions announced "zero tolerance," prosecuting anyone illegally crossing the border. as a result, accompanying children are separated from their parents. in new orleans today, secretary nielsen argued it all stems from a 2015 court settlement. >> we cannot detain children with their parents, so we muster eielease both the parents and the children-- this is theic histget out of jail free" practice of the previous administration-- or the adultan minor will be separated as a result of prosecutinadult. those are the only two options.

indor: opponents insist blaming the policy on democrats or existing law or the courts is an outright lie. and today, house minority leader nancy pelosi said the separation policy leaves a "dark on our nation." she visited a detention center near the border in california. the debate promises to keep growing, with president trump set to meet with house republicans tomorrow, as they grapple over immigration bills. >> woodruff: and yamiche alcindor joins me now,de along with lisardins, who's been covering congressional action on immigration. test test test test yah welcome to b you, so yamiche, whether are the politics, what is the political thinking behind the white house policy here? >> well, the picy is separating a political calculation ancultural calculation. on the political side president trump think this is something that will play well wih republicans.

there are polls that are just released from the quinnipiacty univerhat said the majority of republican, 55 to agree with the policy of separating families, the same pollmound majority ofericans 66% of americans overall without political affiliations, that they don't back. idis but at the end of the day this is about prt trump saying you elected me to take a hard line stance on immigration policies and that is what i am doing. cnn found internal dowments, that said the administration made a calculation that said if they separated families, thatde this witer other families from coming to the border. unfortunately, we have seen an yup tick in illegal border crossing so that has not tually happened. >> as you mentioned sarah sanders the white house press secretary had that briefing la this afternoon. lisa, the white house, the department, the secretary of homeland security was say today is that this is in congress, congress should be doing somethin is tell us what is the state of play, two bills now before the house of representatives.

>> well, you think the planets were aligns because this is immigration week in the house or entatives however right at this moment republicans are trying to figure out what is inh compromise bill. they are tweaking language in the republican compromise that they say with deal with this issue of family separation. how they wouldeal with it is they would have these families be detained together. however, judy, that bill right now does not look like it's going to pass. that could change. ion.he senate is taking act we're seeing multiple senators, ted cruz just moments ago unveiling their own stand alone legislation to deal with this issue. we're going to be watching overl the next cof days as to what those different issues do. but at the same time we see a fference in that we are seeing some long time senators today, republicans come out with some strong statements about this. senator pat roberts a statement to the newiour, he said whle i firmly support enforcing our immigratiom laws i against using parental separation as a deterrent to illeg

immigration. my concern is the protection of the children, that is quite a statement from a long time veteran senator . >> woodruff: yame, they say-- do they vay pln b, are they talking about an alternative here themselves. >> that is the question. senator neil sen briefed from the white house which isare she doesn't usually come to the white house briefing. she was asked abo tat. she shoad no signs of backing down. i visited the white house and talked about white house officials about that. they ahso say tere are no plans to say this. it that is pretty remarkable because as lisa mentioned there are a number of republicans, former first lady laudra bush all these other people coming out basically saying that they are very bothered by th but when you go back to the culture portion of is, president trump is casting this as the future of the america, that he doesn't want united states to be a my grant cam he wants this to be a country where the future is american.

so and what he ran on was america first. so in this wayba, he'ssically following the line the administration has ha. secretary chief of staff johny kece said a lot of immigrants can't assimilate well, theye o mot havills. so as we look at the course of this administration they have been talking about immigrants as some people say is really criminal size-- criminalizing them and really lacks at them as a way that inot as americans or potential americans. >> woodruff: back on congressk you have been talking to a lot of house members, the actions on the republican side, where are you seeing the division there. >> this goes to another cultural issue, religion in theic repu party and the christian right there is a real divide. we have sen some christian leaders come, reverend graham come out and say they vay real problem with. this but also some in the prolife antiabortion community having a tough time with what policy they have. we were the first to get the statement from the susan b anthony list, a group that is antiabortion, very well-known, t me read you with at they came out today.

we are dedicated to protectinge rst right, the right to life, therefore we refrain from pub rick comment on immotigratin anher topics that impact famili. they are compartmentalizing. they are saying we are focused on abortihe. but atame time many in their community say this is harming the families that we're trying to protect. >> woodruff: so just about 20 seconds left wa, does it look like congress is headed towards. ishere is what no one saying, there say real problem down the road because republican solutions of this is t otain families together. democrats in the senate will never go for that. they have different bills that would keep families together but that would allow them to go through the 30 ses-- process outside of detention and i'm worried for thiprb because i don't see how thoses two sides come together any time soon. >> con undrum, certainly. at least at this point. lisa desjardins and yamiche alcindor, thank you. >> woodruff: we'll talk to a man

ndwho once ran the customs border patrol agency, after the news summary. in the day's other news: the u.s. supreme court sidestepped definitive rulings on partisan redistricting. the justices ruled against wisconsin democrats who claimed republics gerrymandered state legislative districts. the court said the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to sue. a secoing, in a case from maryland, went against a preliminary challenge by republicans against a district drawn by democrats. the cases now return to lower courts. democrats and republicans jousted today over last week's report on the f.b.i.'s probe of hillary clinton's e-mails. it happened at a senate judiciary hearing with the justice department's inspectorae general mihorowitz and f.b.i. director christopher wray. republican chair chuck grassley and democrat patrick leahy d cused on the president's claim that the f.b.i. sp his campaign. >> if the inspector general had not discovered their anti-trumpe s, they would still be with mueller's team. they would still be investigating the trump

campaign. remember these facts every time you hear the press, friends on the other side of the aie, claim no bias. >> irony doesn't begin to deisribe president trump and allies exploiting this report for partan gain. clearly some of mr. rzok's text messages were inappropriate, but if thf.b.i. were trying to throw the election to hillary clinton, it .iuld not have done a worse job. >> woodruff: the f director, christopher wray, said again that nothing in the report impugns the integrity of the bureau as a whole. in afghanistan, scores of peace marchers arrived in kabul today, after a nearly 40-daurney. many of the activists traveled more than 300 miles by foot, demanding an end to 17 years of wr. their calls came a day after the taliban rejected a government offer to extend a cease-fire. all of this, on the heels of a

violent weekend farther east. in jalalabad, suicide bombings on saturday and sunday killed 55 people. the newly elected conservative president of colombia is promising unity, after a deeply polarizing election.-y r-old ivan duque beat out gustavo petro-- a leftist former guerrilla-- in sunday's runoff. duque celebrated his victoryn last niggota. he called again for changing a peace deal with marxist rebels, but he also talked of conciliation. >> ( translated ): this election is the opportunity we were waiting for, to turn the page of polazation, the page of grievances. i do not recognilo enemies in ia. i will not govern with hatred, nor will i have hate against any colombian. it is about looking to the future for the good of all colombians. >> woodruff: duque is the protege of colombia's former president alvaro uribe.

he remains broadly popular, but is also blamed for thousands of civilian deaths during a campaign against the rebels in the early 2000s. se trade war of words between the u.s. and chiwed no sign of abating today. secretary of state mike pompeo charged beijing's claims of openness are "a joke." in a speech in detroit, he said china practices "predatory" economics. the two nations have announced plans to impose steep tariffs on each other, starting next month. worries about trade tensions kept wall street on edge today. the dow jones industrial average lost 103 points today to closeat 4,987. the nasdaq added less than a point. and the s&p 500 slipped five. the man who has been acting head of the drug enforcement administration since october is retiring. robert patterson told his staff today it's become "increasingly challenging" to serve in a fill- in capacity.

also today, president trump genominated kathleen krann today to run the consumer finaial protection bureau. she is currently an associate director at the office of managent and budget. the world healthrganization now says excessive video game playing qualifies as a mental health condition. the u.n. agency reported today on "gaming disorder," believed to affect 2-3% percent of players. the agency said formally defining the problem will help families and health workers. still to come on the "newshour," the former head of border protection on the ongoing immigration debate. the south korean view of president trump's dealings with north korea. portland, oregon, tries to make amends for gentrification. and much more. >> woodruff: we return now to

the immigration deband a rare view from inside the agency tasked with securing the country's borders. john yang has more. j >> yany, u.s. customs and esrder protection-- or c.b.p.-- is the nation's lafederal law enforcement agency. it handles border security andin trade issuesuding dealing with immigration. gil kerlikowske was the head of c.b.p. under president obama, serving from 2014 until the trumadministration took over last year. he's now a professor at northeastern university. he joins us now, mr. kerlikowske thanks for joining us. >> thanks. >> i wt to start the propublica said this was recorded last week in the border protection detention facility, they won't say where, the person, we don't know woman orso man, the pwho made the recording is asked not to be identified. the person gave it to a civil

rights attorney in texas. so let's taie a lsten to that tape >> the man who once ran the agency in charge of that fa sirlt, how do-- fau lity, how do act to that. >> those things are absolutely heartbreaking and its' heartbreaking not only to tear these children away from their

moth ares and fathers but i'm very concerned about the affect it would he on these border patrol agents. i saw them in the toughest of times taking care of in the summer of 14, 68,000 unaccompanied children. and for them to be put thi position is unconscionable also. >> and the period were you talking about in4 201en you took over customs and border protection, there were a lot of unaccompanyiac chern coming ss the border or coming to the border. today secta of homeland security chrisen nielsen said the obama administration did what the trump adminispation did, sarating families. what is your response to that? >> so if someone was arrested for some criminal charges f the were smuggling drugs also f they were wanted on warrants, if they are going to be prosecuted, then certainly the family is going t. be separa but that number would be absolutely minute sceul when yu

looked-- minutes cool when you look at that summer of 2014 wit all of thildren and all of those families. so keeping them together and then giving them an opportunity to go to a heagring, is the riht thing to do. not carrying kids away from their parents. >> when you say go to a hearing, the administration, the trump administration is saying that they a going to prosecute every one who comes into the country ilegally. is that the reason they're separating them? >> there is a group of unitedor states ays that represent the border of u.s. attorneys and i would meet with them regularly. none of the u.s. attorneys from san diego across to texas would even begin to think that theyve would nough resources to prosecute now up to 50,000 people a month. so to say that we're doing this just because they're going to be prosecuted, you know, i clearly agree with what a lot of other people have said. thiss just being done to try and be some what of a deterrent

effect. but eite frankly i can'te it being a very effective deterrent affect because we ha de beenown that road before. >> and your policy was not to prosecute everyone. you would only prosete those who had other charges gebs them, were carrying drugs >> customs and border protection has a narrow mission and they are not the proesecutor, and t are not part of the department of justice so if they had cases where people wereanted on warrants, smuggling drugs, maybe even being human tkeaff, that would be up to the department of jution tis. -- justice. but the mere misdemeanor of crossing the border particularly with a family is not going to result in anyone that has the resources to effectively criminally prosecute. >> secretary nielsen also said a ng donethis was b because they couldn't prove a family relationship. that they were worried about human smugglers. they were worriedbout protecting the children. they were doing this to protect the children. that's your response in. >> so i sat down in those

senators many many times. not only mcallen but brownsville and those plce as long the border. quite frankly i think we're giving a lot of credit to the smarts and sophistication if that is what did is going on. experienced border patrol agents, myself having a long career in law enforcement, we never even began to detect that these young people, tsee families coming across were doing it for somioe nef purpose of being able to get into the country by using children. i mean it was very clear, these are family units. >> nd she also saat the current law encourages families to put children in the hands of human smugglers. >> i think the potential of coming across the border and making a claim of credible fear, making an asylum claim and having your family ur children with you cank can be enhanced some what by that. i don't see it though as the cae, i see it as the fathat

people are leaving these three countries for a variety of reason, not just crime but also economic reasons, also. you know tey're kooming with their families. >> she also said if someone wanted to legitimately claim asylum they should go to a port of entry an not just cross the border at anpla. >> well, ports of entry could be a little more helpful. what iw certainly rkz and i think what we see in many aces, whether its in san ysidro or places in mcall texas, ports of entry are incredibly busy. remember it's not just people coming through, st allf the cargo that we depend on, all of the trade that we depend on ism also cg through the prt. >> gil kerlikowske, thanks somu . >> thank you. >> woodruff: it has been a week since president trump met with north korean leader kim jung un.

they signed a document that laid out broad principles in which the united states would provide security guarantees to north korea and north korea committed to eliminating its nuclear weapons. but the agreement did not have a time line or provide any specific detls of what comes next. so, what are the next steps? for that we turn to south korean first vice minister of foreign affairs lim sung-nam. d he's a veterlomat and has dealt extensively with north korea. m r. lim, thank you very much for being here. so your presint, mr. moon, called this summit a great victory. he said it is ae huep forward. and yet i number of american officials who dealt with north korea in the past said they didn't see very much in the way of specifics. they don't really understand th north korea has made a serious commitment to denuclearize. what makes your president so

positive. >> well, you should first think about the history of the relationship between the dpi and the united states. for more than 70 years there has been no summit meeting between the two countries. and for more than 70 years, there has not been any kind of meaningful agreement between the two countries at the level of the heads of state. and w tht the singapore deck laration had set-- declaration set out big principles for going ahead with denuclear glairks i think the two leaders leaders hd a meaningful foundation on which to build the process of denuclearihetion. >> are dangable signs that you have-- tang i believe sains you have seen that north korea is serious about carrying through. i ask because the issue they made at the end of the summit was one and a half pages long. and some of the diplomatic language in there was the same language that had been in previous statements.

so what is new? what is tang i believe? >> well,-- tangible. >> well, for instance, they have actionsking unilatera such as shutting down their nuclear testing sites. and they vowed to dimantle the key rocket engine testing site well. and they also released three americanostages without getting any kind of a concession from the u.s. side. so these actions do support the sincerity of the north koreans in going ahead with denuclearization down the road. >> so what do you see as the next steps? what is going to happen next. the north koreans put out a statemented after the summit. they describe what they see unfolding next.u what do e? >> wel, we see carefully the singapore documents, the two leaders, fullly and speedily implement the agreement and they also agreed on the nd for the smeedy followup of negotiationsm

sourend and i do hope that in the very near future there wille followup negotiations at the working level to implement-- implemente the singapgreement. >> are there working level meetings going on now? >> right now idon't think so. but in the near future, i do believe there will be some meetings. >> will south korea be involved in those. are those just between north korea and the.s >> those will be working level negotiations between the united states and the dpik but we also have th interkorean talks with pyongyang. >> the leader of north korea has indicated that he is prepared to denuclear-- denuclearize, at least in gener terms. president trump is saying the fuk leer threat is gone, it's behind us. do you have that confidence? o >> welcourse the nuclear weapons stll exists but if you compare the situation compared to a year ago, then i nk the clangs haúe been very positive,

about a year ago wwere talking about the sheer number of thee missunches by the dpik. and we were afraid that there could be another nuclear tng in north korea. but now we are talking aout how we can go ahead with the. dialog and as claimed by eastern churches, it is better than world war. >> so you trust the north korean leader, chairman kim, to go ahead with denuclearization. you have confidence he will do that? >> well, we believe so.. and we hope and always new historyan be made only with optimistic assumptions. >> we saw after the summit, president trump spoke about the suspension of what he called wargames. joint mileitary exercisesween the united states and your country and south korea. he said thse are very

expensive. he said that's something i have wanted to do away with for a long time. is your country, is your vernment comfortable with that? >> both south and washington are on the same page regarding the important issues like the joint military exeises. having said that, the u.s. was also very clear that as far as the talks with north korea go in good faith, we can't afford to have the milesitary exerce used to have in the past.su >> pr yoprised, did your government know ahead of time that president trump was going to declare that these wargames were stopping?e >> oain i would like to emphasize that our two cou have been on the same page on an important issue like that. >> so you weren't surprise. >> i was not sur pri >> i want to ask you also about security guarantees.

from the u.s. going forward. what else do you seehat the u.s. could do for the north to make it more possible for the north to go ahead with denuclear ization. >> well, at the end of the day i suspect that the normalization of the relationship between pyongyang and washington might be one w of providing pyongyang with a kind of a-- guarantee. but on the way to the kind of guarantee eich we might able to provide for pyongyangi think thtwo koreas and the u.s. might be able to dec that war is over on the korean peninsula. that could be the kind n the stephich we can further build the permanent peationful regime on the korean peninsula. >> woodruff: do you think that should be done bore north korea dismantles its nuclear program. >> those kind of detai can be further discussed between south korea and the united states, as

well as between the united ates and north korea. >> you mean, you're saying it is a detail b that say pretty major detail, isn't it, whether there is peace, whether the wara tallly come to an end, the conflict? >> wel i think what i am talking about is a political declaration, i'm not talking about the kind of the legal buement for creating peace regime. at one point you might be able to benefit from the kind of the poitical declaration .egarding the situation on the korean peninsu >> do you think reunification can come in your lifetime? >> i hope and believe. so once again, only with optimism visions we might be t abturn a dream into a reality. >> and one other thing. what you have learned about chairman kim in these most recent round of negotiations that you didn't already know? about h what is he-- how is he presenting himselfs a leader

and what do you think hises priorire. >> i think he is a leader different from the previous leaders of north korea. he was old eoh to come to a meeting with the u.s. president, face to face. and i believe he has made a rategic decision to get out of the self-imposed isotion. an plus, in the past north korea was talking aout the-- the policy of pursuinthe nuclear and missile capabilities as well as the economic. prosperi but they declared in april this area that their policy foc is now on the economy progress. so with all i those change believe he's coming to the mpeting with president tru with a determination to go aheae with dnuclearization of the korean peninsula. >> this potentially historic moment.

>> yes, of course. >> the foreign minisr vice foreign minister lim sung-nam, thank you very much. >> thank you for having me, judy. thank you. >> woodruff: stay with us. f ming up on the "newshour," the political stakese white house policy to separate families at the border. and remembering the life of one of the newshour's own. portland, oregon is known as a hub of liberal and progressive thought, but it's also one of the whitest big cities in the country. now, an ambitious new program, which some experts are calling e first of its kind, aims to atone for the repeated displacement of thousands of african-american families from north and northeast nd. in a city with soaring home prices and a steady pattern of gentrification, can it make a difference?

amna nawaz and produce fritz recently traveled to portland to see firsthand how it'sll playing out. >> nawaz: for giovanni bates and ashley rollins, this part of portland has always felt like home. you were just surrounded by eamily? >> oh, that's it, everyone knew someone. you would drive by my grandmother's house on any day and you'd see five to people, cousins, everybody out there. and it would, you know, just turn into an impromptu barcue. >> nawaz: ashley was raised by her mother and grandparents--la trairs in their time. >> she was actually the first, african-american woman judge in portland and then my gasndfather he w actually a tuskegee airman. >> nawaz: ashley and giovanni's roots here may run deep, but when the former high school sweethearts looked for a place to raise their sons, the neighborhood they once called home was out of reh. >> this is our neighborhood. we went to high school in this neighborhood. this is what feels like home and comfortable for us, so our hope was to live here, but things have just, like, changed drastically. >> nawaz: that change traces back decades to the displacement of thousands of african american families from north and northeast portland since the

1960s-- forced out by waves of city development and gentrification. portland's policies that led to that exodus are deeply rooted in the state's past according to walidah imarisha, who studies oregon's racial history, >> the oregon territory passed laws like the black exclus4 n law in 1at outlawed black people fm living in oregon. it also included the lasch law that said black people would be publicly whipped every six months up to 39 lashes until they left the state. >> nawaz: the few who stayed in thrtland were mostly relegated to the north and nst. by 1960, home to more than 80%it of the cs black population. for years, the area saw little to no investmentnd ignored by s and developers.al propertys plummeted. by by the 1970s. but then a series of city projects-- incding a basketball arena, a new highway, and a proposed hospital expansion-- took onsr huge sectiof land, razing hundreds of houses in the way.

private money poured in. o so did new homeowners whuld afford to live here. many existing residents were priced out. fast forward and the neighborhood that s 68% black 1990, was just 28% black by 2010. >> so, when folks say, "well, why aren't there more black people in oregon, why aren't rhere more communities of co in oregon?" it's important to recognize that's the foundation of it. >> nawaz: today just 6% of all portland residents are black, and the average home price in north and northeast portland is more than $500,000. but to ashley and giovanni'ssu rise, the same city that played a role in driving out so many of their friends and, famiw stepped in to help them buy their first home, through a preference poly that's been dubbed by many as "" right to return." t >>nk acknowledging a wrong is done is the first step, and i want to thank them for the opportunity we took advantage . >> nawaz: started in 2015, thepr ram set aside $20-million for current and former residents

of north and northeast portland, offering down payment assistance to 65 new homeowners, more affordable rental units, and home improvement loans to help residents stay in the area. families who could prove theirr grandparentsrents were displaced from these neighborhoods got priority, but not everyone wantso return. >> i've never walked from 15th to 17th since we left th neighborhood. >> naz: these two blocks? >> yeah, these two blocks. i mean, i don't feel welcome here. >> nawaz: germaine fleroy grew up on this northeast portland ock. he left in 2001 as his family's rent spiked and the neighborhood began changing. >> back then white people wouldn't come in this neighbhood. they would not come in this neighborhood at all, but then all of a sudden you just started to see little pockets, and then you started like seeing you ow" the hipsters," and then you started seeing community gardens and y were like, "what a doing?" >> nawaz: today, he qualifies for the city's right to returnm, prograut the area, he says, is no longer home. there's nothing here for me.

i still don't understand, what are we returning to? >> i talk to people every single day that want to move back into northeast portland >> nawaz: leslie goodlow is the portland housing bureas equity and business operations manager. >> they want to livee same neighborhood their grandmother lived in. they want to live in the same neighborhood that their church is still in,nd they want to shve in the same neighborhood where their barber or their beauty salons still is. >> nawaz: but three years in to 'sa five year plan, portla right to return program is not hitting its markop 1,000 applied to buy homes. the city's goal was to fill 65 slots. date, they've only moved in six new homeowners. those nuers led portland's mayor to call the program "an abject failure." >> getting a mortgage is not easy. and if you're only making, you know, $40,000 a year, you can't afford, you know, a $200,000 or $300,000 mortgage. >> nawaz: how did you not know

that the same people that had been disenfranchis for so long and moved to the bottom of the priority list for so long wouldn't immediately be available and ready to make that kind of leap? >> some people could get ready in six months and some people might take three years. and do we hold a slot for somebody that's three years out, or do we move somebody else up that's going to be ready sooner? and, so, that's en the strugg >> nawaz: meanwhile, home prices in portland continue to rise. property values over the course of the last 10-15 years are up somewhere in the range of 4, 5, 600%., which is whyxine fitzpatrick says, these rental units could offer the city some success. wher nonprofit is workingith portland to build more low- income rentals as part of the right to the return program. >> our whole thinking around rental property is that it allows them an opportunity to stabilize so they don't have to worry about being up a bit, youg know, at ten will of the landlord. >> nawaz: but experts say the

key to building wealth is owning a home, and that's where the program is failing. >> the program very much needs to be retooled and rebooted to face the realities of the market nawaz: portland state university's lisa bates examined the right to return program earlier this year, and she gives the city credit for putting it in phece. but whor not it makes a difference, she says, is something the rest of the country will be watching. similar efforts to bring back families with ties to gentrifie neighborhoe now underway in new york, philadelphia,an austin andrancisco >> when it comes to a history of racial segregation of exclusion of sort of containment of theri n-american community into ervery small neighborhood followed by the dil of those same exact white families with gentrification, this is a very basic story of urban history and urban planning in pretty much every cithe country. >> nawaz: that's a historyiu cornswart has spent years

documenting. his new film, "priced out," tracks the dramatic change in northeast portland. he first moved here in the 1990s. >> we've spoken to folks who had said that when the neighborhood first started gentrified ohat first wawhich i was a part of, folks were conscious that i black neighborhood. now, the last five or six years there's been this erure of histor the people moving here and they don't even know it used ig be a black orhood. >> that use be something. nt>> nawaz: for germaine fy, walking these streets today is a reminder of everything he had to leave behind. >> i try not to come back here because i don't feel welcome here. we feel angry about this. we feel like this was stolen from us. at least m personally i feel angry about this. >> we're talking about a community that was basically bulldozed, and we're going to be able to maybe bring back maybe

2,000 families if we're lucky. there's no way to fix what the city did.>> awaz: some people will say portland had an image problem it was trying to fix. >> that's probably some of it. but it is a way for the city to demonstrate. we recognize what we did. want to try to do something. , nawaz: the neighborhood isn't what they remembt giovanni and ashley say they're now focused on making new memories. >> the best feeling is knowingth we set a foundation for our kids, you know. owning a home is the first step into stepping up in economic class. so, that's honestly the best feeling i have is knowing that my kids have somethi >> nawaz: a first step towards a future... still firmly rooted in their past. for the pbs newshour i'm amna nawaz in portland. >> woodruff:ack to politics

>> woodruff: back to politics now. lots to talk about this monday, and r that we are joined by amy walter of the "cook political repoen" and stu rorg of "inside elections." politics monday, welcome to both of you. the border story, separated families, parents from children, amy, first and fore most, this is a human story, it's about human beings and what isin happin people's lives. but let's talk about the political consequences of t administration, of president trump, doing this and the democratic response. o right now what affect u see this having? >> judy, i'm glad that youen it like that. because it is actually a political and human story together. and that's what makes it even more challenging. politicay for reublicans who are out there, obviously they're on the ballot in 2018. the president is not. he made immigration enforcement

the centerpiece of his election 16. a lot of republicans did not. and what we're seeing as i'm watching this unfold throughout the day, the number of republicans in con aess w coming out and saying this isn't okay, we have to stop this policyof separating children from their parents continues to beow. especially from me who are in swing districts, who again might have a tough re-election in 2018. the head of the national republican capaign committee steve styburss that tells you something when he comes out in a tweet and says i don't like this polis . it seem th an unsustainable situation that republicans find e emselves in. the president, ifntinues to defend this, republicans, legislatively are not going to back him up, and politically they will distance themselves from this policy or at least try eo. >> how do you see republican tactic. >> i understand why the white house might feel at it obligated to push this immigration agenda, that theg ye

play the base, that they promised us. this is what they're going tove de what i don't understand is how audio andd vieo of children crying, screaming, apoto of mothers of children blg takew , i don't understand how that is going to play to there blicans benefit t seems to me just politically like ago disaster, i wang to say waiting to happen but a political disaster and humanst di. but happening right now. i mean it puts republicans in the awful position of having to defend these acts that lk unfeeling. >> woodruff: but do you have the base of the republilin party, stened to steve bannon yesterday on one of the sunday shows talking about how the president is simply fulfling what he sad he was going to do he is yun holding the law. >> it's interesting. if you look at the polls that are coming out rate now, yeah, a majority of the republicans say

they support it. but only 55% of repnsubli this is not a 90% republican issue. and i think steve is exactly right. this idea that the white house and those around the president have had for a long time is ife we mae story about all these criminal elements at the border, we makit about drugs, about ms-13 gangs than we wine beca make democrats have to defend the indefensible. but the image of children andch the audio ofdren is going to beat all of those other images nine times out of ten. and just listening to that audio to steve's point earlier in the show, could you see this coming up in every campaign ad that goes out in 2018. it's a situation that i think republicans are going to have to get. >> two thoughts. one is the republicans are still worried about the base. this tells you somseething bec the democrats are working on swing voters and independents and people will descend-- decide some of these elections. and when you look at the

quinnipiac poll in terms of separating children and parents, it's not only 66% of all voters oppose that, but it i 68% of independents, 68% of whites with a college degree and as amy points out, one inree republicans disagree on what the president and their party doing. >> but amy, this thinking on the part of the white house, that they still need to focuon the base. >> right. >> is that smart. >> that is going to take them all the way t victory in november. >> exactly. this is what 2018 will show us. this is ah presidento has done everything just for the benefit of the base and it worked for him in 2016. when everybody toll him it couldn't because he had to expand the university, he was leaving out too many swing voters, now he satid worked for me then, it will work in 2018, but when you see wheree thumbers are not just on this issue but we have been talking about this a lot. just wngre the swi voters are in this election. white women who have a college hgree, just imagi this issue is going to play with these voters, if you are trying

to lose those voters, youco dn't do worse. >> here's a prediction, donald trump will do really well with trump voters in the mid term. >> but that's not enough. >> that's my question muf, in enough districts. >> it might be enough to hold the senate. it might be enough to hold north dakota and west virgia but it's not enough to hold the house. >> different story, supreme court ruled today-- actually didn't rule. they sent it back to the states, both wisconsin, amy and maryland had come forward with these cases challenging redistricting, herry mannedderring, what does all this mean,t the foact longer term. >> the reality is that the supreme court is not really interested or they haven't found the right case to come out and definitively say this is okay when you are redrawing lines, this is not okay. here is the standard that the supreme court now endorses. estead we're going to states do what they do, legislatures do what they do which is they are goi to draw

district lines. they may get sued it will go to a lor r court. a lourt is going to decide and then the lower court'ss decisione one in which we move from rather than the preme court or i think more likely we're going to see the lower court decisions find their way back up to the supreme court. we may see rth carolina, for example, come out next year. a debate over the north carolina lines, so i think it means we're in a constant flux on this. but fundamentally, if you are decrats, your number one concern right now has to be winning enough legislative and gubernatorial seats so when the next round of redmeistricting around in 2020 you have the necessary number of members who can draw these lines.y >>estion is what is the precise political fallout. >> i think amy and i and others have been assuming that the lines that we have nol be the lines that we have in november. we have been handi capping races based on that. so i think we don't have to change our analysis so th

trajectory of the election isn't changed. if the courted had acted and eck are political german deringt would have a-- but right now the way we look at them yesterday will be the way we lo at them next six months and maybe the next few years. >> does that benefit democrats or republicans. h >> if the coud recognized there was partisan jerrymandering it would have helped democrats in ohio, wisconsin and but it would have helped the republicans in maryland and illinois. depends which state. >> woodruff: and i don't think. >> i dnts think of this would have occurred before the 2018 election it really would have been looking forwarto 2020. >> woodruff: we're always looking ahead, 2018 to 2020, even beyond. amy walter, stu rothenberg, thank yo >> thank you, judy.

>> you're welcome. >> woodruff: finally tonight, remembering the work and life of a longtime correspondent for newshour. >> the question people are now asking is, "what will the long term effect on their community th?" >> woodruff: elizarackett once said she wouldn't take no for an answer, and it trait that came to define much of her 40-year career inin journalismuding more than 25 years as a special correspondent based in midwest for the newshour. rn>> these three acres of re all that boyer has left of the 800 res he planted this year he's completely wiped out, ais >> woodruff: whether she was i covering theact of devastating floods in iowa... the space shuttle "challenger" disaster... or families fleeing after huicane katrina, elizabeth's reports stood out in the way she captured the vois of those affected. >> we've been walking since yesterday. we've had people that have beena

ing for three days. everybody's out on the bridge. nobody gave us nothing. >> woodruff: she was competitive, and as one of her producers at theewshour, merill schwerin, put it: "she always pushed for more-- more interviews, more phone calls, more perspective." >> woodruff: elizabeth wanted to be at the front of a breaking story, as was the case when she covered the heated battles over an abortioclinic in wichita, kansas in 1991. >> three hours after patients had gotten into the clinic, those who had not been arrested from operation rescue were stile on the s >> woodruff: elizabeth was a true chicagoan at heart. she worked for several stations, most notably with our colleagues at wttw for two decades where hoe was a correspondent an for "chicago tonight." she often focused on education and the deadly toll of gun violence, but she loeld politics as and illinois was a

eat place to focus on th she reported extensively on the downfall of former governorod blagovic and she wrote a book about it. >> the calls for impeachment are growing. there is now a bill introduced into the illois legislature lling for impeachment in the house. >> woodruff: she recved numerous awards during her career, including national and regional emmys as well as a peabody award. she retired, so to speak, in 2014, but still was reporting ten stories a year for wttw. remarkably, she completed her first triathlon at age 50 and went on to five global titles in her age group. elizabeth died sunday after anap rent bike accident while riding along the lakefront path in her beloved hometown of chicag she was 76-years-old.

all that and more is on our web sis.org/newshour. we are heartbroken. and that's the newshour for tonight.oo i'm judyuff. join us on-line and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us athe pbs newshour, thank you and see you on. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> consumer cellular. >> financial services firm raymond jas. >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. suppting science, technology and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century.

>> suppo 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 tse institutions >> this program was made possible by the corporation for 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 wgbhss acgbh.org >> you're watching pbs.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ -today on " america's test kitchen"... brthget and julia share secrets to the ultimate beef tenderloin... jack challenges bridgetto a. and dan makes julia foolproof turkey breast en cocotte with pan gravy. it's all coming up right here on "america's test kitchen". "america's testchen" is brought to you by the following. -i've always been a big believer in knowing