captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc >> woodruff: good evening, i'm judy woodruff. on the newshour tonight... >> will all senators now stand or remain standing, and raise their right ha? >> woodruff: ...the impeachment for the third times. history, senators are sworn as jurors ithe trial of a u.s. president. then, after nafta. a sweeping trade agreement between the u.s., mexico, and canada passes the senate and is sent to the white house. and, virginia becos the final state needed to add the equal rights amendment to the constitution, but legal and, outbreak.. in the democratic republic of congo a powerful vaccine is

stemming the spread of tbola. re is no doubt in anybody's mind that the outbreab would han much, much worse and much, much more extensive had it not been for the use of the vaccine. >> woodruff: all that and more on tonight's pbs newr. >> major funding for the pbs newshour haseen provided by: >> on a cruise with american cruise lines, you can experience historic destinations alonthe mississippi riverriver and across the united states. american cruise lines fleet of landmarks, local cultures and calm waterways. erican cruise lines, pro sponsor of pbs newshour.

>> twins. >> we'd be cler to the twins. >> change in plans. >> carnegicorporation of new york. supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement, and the advancement of international peace and security. at carnegie.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions: and individuals. >> this prograwas made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you.

thank u. oo >>uff: senator suicide an collins of maine has become the first republican to call for witnesses in the upcoming impeachment trial for predent trump. the omaening waked by solemn ceremonies. it was only the third such proceeding in the naon's history. seven democratic house members, named managers, formally delivered the articles of impeachment to the senate chamber. >> house resolution 755: impeaching donald j. trump, esident of the united states for high crimes and misdemeanors. >> woodruff: house intelligence committee chaiadam schiff, who d the impeachment investigation, read aloud the two charges:.

abuse of power >> president trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, ukraine, in the 2020 united states presidential election. >> woodruff: and obstruction of congress: >> donald j. trump has directed the precedented, categorical and indiscriminant defiance of subpoenas sued by the house of representatives pursuent to its sole power of impeachment. >> woodruff: two hours later, john roberts, e chief justice the united states, arrived at the capitol and was sworn in to >> senator, i attend the senate in conformity of your notice for joining wir you in the tial of the president of the united states. i am now prepared to take the >> will you place your left the capitol and waersworn in to e the trial, by republican chuck grassley of iowa, the president pro tem of the senate> oodruff: roberts, in turn, swore in 99 senators, who said "i do" in unison, agreeing to deliver impartial justice in

their service as jurors in the trial. at the other end of nnsylvania avenue, president trump offered his own view of the day's events. >> i think the trial should go quickly. its a complete hoax, the whole thing with ukraine. >>oodruff: meanwhile, the government accountability office concluded today that the trumpe white housdecision to withhold congressionally approved military aid from ukraine for a time was illegal. it said, "faithful execution of the law does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that congress has enacted into law." the white use budget office fired back, saying the decision to withhold the funds was "constent with the president priorities and with the law." back at the capitol,se speaker nancy pelosi said the finding fits a broader pattern of abuse by the trump administration.

>> the o.m.b., the white house, the administration broke, i'm saying this, broke the law. >> woodruff: republicans, like senator lindply graham, doed the g.a.o. opinion. >> i don't know why it, i mean, they got the money. they got the money on september 11. >> woodruff: the senate now begins a four-day holiday weekend. the impeachment trial resumes on tuesday, with party leaders still sparring over whether to call witnesses. here with me now with more on what is going on behind the scenes our capitol hill correspondent lisa desjardins, and our white houset correspondmiche alcindor. hello to both of you on this thursday. so, lisa, let me start withou. give us a sense of what the senators were saying as they began this solemn procedure. and then we have the news just literally a few minutes ago that senator susan collins is calling for witnesses. >> it isignificant. i also talked to another

republican, senator ted cruz, who is trying toker a deal overi esses and he seemed to indicate there was room for witnesses well, without going as far as susan collins. there is a change of momentum on that today, wohl see. as to wahat ilike in that chamber, it was extraordinary. this was not a dramatic room but it was an incredibly focused room. profound, a goose bump moment len you see every senator raising their hae that. and, judy, something people might not realize from tvo one in that room had any kind of device, no fo of communication with the outside wld. everyone was focused on what was happening in that trial in a way i have nev seebefore. one other note: security is at the most tight have ever seen in the u.s. senate. there were very few protestersy, relatively tout they are taking the threat of anything very seriously right now. >> woodruff: so whey go into that chamber they can't bring a smae,rtphhey bring

anything else. >> and we received extra credentials to get into that partitf the cap for the impeachment trial. >> woodruff: yamicheyou you have been talking to your sources at the white hse all day lon how are they processing this? >> president trump and the white house are processing his by lashing out at democrats at the start of what the president-- what will be the historal tri to see whether or not the president will be removed from office. many said the president will be acquitted. today reminded me that the white house and president trump understand optics and understand his legacy istill at stake here. entering into this new phase of his presidency, where he will be trial and have to defend himself against these allegations in a way he hsn't done before. he has social media and whitede house alking on the lawn. this is different. there was a sense today the white house was taking this very, very seriously. a word on susn collins-- i have

been hearing for several days now that the white hou is gearing up for republican senators, enough republican senators to back the idea of havi witnesss. so the white house thinks there will be witnesses at this senate trial. >> woodruff: interesting. separately, yamtoicday other right on the eve of this trial, you have the government accounting office coming out with this detailed statement saying what the president did in withholding aid to ukraine was illegal. what is the white house ying about that? >> well, we have to really explain to people the idea that this government accountability office, it's a nonpartisan watchdog group is saying president trump broke the law, and that's because $391 million the president and the white house chose to freeze was ready appropriated by congress. so the white house now is pushing back on that. there was of course that statement you had in your piece from theen office of manag

and budget. i have also been talking to ofe cials. and he what one person told me: so what you have is the office of management and budget saying that this notcnpartisan og group is actually wanting to insert itself in the impehment fight. that person also told me it would be irorigin to listen to this government office and the government office's opinion what you have is the white house really, really pushing back hard on this. >> woodruff: we hear you on that. meanwhile, separately from all this, thhas been another devepment in impeachment investigatn over questions about how much president knew-- president trump knew efforts to pressure ukraine's president to open an investigation into rmer vice president joe biden. lisa looked at those claims today. >> his name, lev parnas, has long in impeachment stories. last night, in an interview with

msnbc's rachel maddow we heard his explosive claims in his voice. >> it was never about corruption. >> parnas worked inne ukror and with presiden president he says the mission was in part to dig up dirt on former vice president joe biden and his son huer's business dealings. now parnas says president trump was directly involved. >> president trump knew exactly what was going on. he was aware of all of my movements. i wouldn't do anything without the consent of rudy giulni or the president. >> desjardins: those allegations are at the center of president trump's upcoming impeachment trial in the senate. the articles of impeachment charge the president abused power by tryg to use that wer to force ukraine to investigate the bidens. but the president's allies point out that parnas' motives are suspect-- he has been indicted campaign on finance violations. white house press secretary stephanie grisham said in a

statementoday that parnas was "desperate to reduce his exposure to prison" and added he president did nothing wrong." parnas is implicating more than the president. he claims vice president mike pence, attorney general bill barr and republican congressmann devin nune about and had roles in the ukraine scheme. all three officials have peatedly denied that. house speaker nancy pelosi said parnas' claims should be investigated, but the trump justice department is biased and won't act. >> under other circumstances, forward and there idence-- there was reason to believe some wof that was factual, theld be a special prosecutor appointed. >> djardins: parnas handed over hundreds of pages of text messages, notes and letters to house officials in recent days, something senatorsitting in the impeachment trial are just seeing themselves as well.

>> woodruff: so, lisa, yiewfd looked at this. what would you say the most significant allegations for parnas? and does he have evidence t back it up? >> those are two very different questions. on some of the most siificant allegations it's not clear what the evidence is, and that includes other sitiating off in t trump administration. let's take a look at who he is implicating. y e vice president, secret state, the attorney general, as well as the top republican, devin nunes, on this house intelligence committee. parnas says all of them were involved in the scheme. but he hasn't presented much evidence about that yet, jus his word. however, there is evidence he's saying and some notes that he has , at, for examp trip pat vice president pence was to take to visitresident zelensky was canceled specifically tosu pr ukraine to get these investigations. that is new infore tion. and thre some notes he wrote to himself that might back that up. that is incredibly serious.

one other thing i don't wat overlooked in this, though, woe have a text message from rudy giuliani that bearshe philosophy of impeachment. giuliani wrote to parnas, "bribery is universally defined as offering something of value to effect official action." i want to hold that up for a second. talking about whther joe biden or hunter biden or someone in the obama administration had used bribery to try to help the biden family. but here, if you apply this definition-- this is a definition democrats are usng about president trump and rudy giuliani's own actions in trying to, democrats' words, extort something from ukra ae. know it's very interesting notion of how rudy giulian describes bribery in his own text. >> woodruff: yamiche, at does the whiteoe see as the most potentially damagg here. >> the most damaging thing lev parnas is doing is implicating

everyone around president trump. including himself opinion theid prt maintains and people around the president says lev parnas does not say directly thate told rudy giuliani, or he never heard the prellsident udy giuliani, "i need you to make sure ukraine does these investigations or we will not give thatilitary aid." that said, there is a lot of information lev parnas iser turning to congress. there is one page that really sticks out that can beth problematic fopresident, and that's a letter that rudy giuliani sent to the president of ukraine on m 1ay0, 2019, and he's a part of that letter. he ss: now, that's problematic because president trump and rudy giuliani have always been saying they were doing is work because they were looking into corruption in ukraine and looking into iorrupti-- on the part of possibly joe biden and hunter biden, an as a result they had to be look at this stuff. when we'rseeing now is rudy

giuliani saying, "actually, i'm acting in the private interest of president trump as a private citizen." i have been texting with rudy giuliani all day. he doubled down onat sayingis always acting as a private counsel. he is saying this letteris something he would back. he hasn't actually reld theb lettert anything rudy giuliani wrote i would beack because he's a good lawyer anhed a good person. >> woodruff: so much to follow every single day. yamiche alcindor, lisa desjardins, thank you boh. oo >>uff: in the day's other news, before taking up ndimpeachmt, the senate president trump a policy win: it overwhelmingly approved a t wide-ranging nde agreement among the s., mexico and canada, 89 to 10. the deal as to boost auto oduced in the u.s. and to

improve conditions for workers in mexico. we'll take a closer look, after thnews summary. the president moved today toio give rel groups easier access to federal programs, and to reaffirm the righto pray in public schools. nine cabinet departments proposed rules to enre faith- based orgazations are not discriminated against, in the competition for grant funding. >> we have rules to roll back discriminatory regulations on religious service organizations and earlier this afternoon my white house released a new memo to make sure federal funding is never used to violate the first amendment. >> woodruff: the president also directed that states provide ways to file complaints against schools that limit prayer. in syria, the united nations reports some 350,000 people have fled a new government offensive in the northwest. e,e assault on idlib provi backed by russia, has pushed

families to the turkish border region. most are sheltering in tent encampments.u. the says about 80% are women and children, and many arf short d and wate there's word that talibanve negotiators ade a temporary cease-fire offer in ssghanistan. the associated peports it calls for a trven to 10-day e, and was given to a u.s. envoy last night. it rains unclear if the proposal is enough to revive stalled pee talks. the president of iran now says his government no longer faces t any barrieenriching uranium under the 2015 nuclear deal. the u. quit the deal in 2018. iran withdrew this month, after general qassem soleimani was killed in a u.s. air strike. president hassan rouhani spoke today, to bank executives in tehran. >> ( translated ): today, as i

stand here in front of you, we have no limits about the nuclear energy, absolutely none. today our daily enrichment is more than before we signed the j.c.p.o.a., the 2015uclear deal. >> woodruff: iran is now enriching uranium 4.5% purity. weapons-grade is 90%. back in this country, the f.b.i. today arrested three white supremacists who allegedly built an illegal machine gun and were headed to a gun rally in richmond, virginia. court documents say they ordered hundre of rounds of ammunition. just yesterday, virginia's governor ralph northam banned weapons near the state capitol for monday's rally. on wall street, stocindexeshi hit nes, partly on news of the dow jones indu average gained 267 points to close at 29,297. the nasdaq rose 98 points, and, the s&p 500 ad, closing above 3,300 for the first time.

and, a cheating scandahas claimed another major league baseball manager. the new york mets parted waysra with carlos betoday, after hiring him last november. an investigation found he was involved in stealing signs when he played for the houston astros. houston and the boston red sox already fired their manage in the scandal. still to come on the newshour: after nafta-- a new trade agreement between the u.s., canada and mexico. the umpire-- the role of chief justice john roberts in the impeachment trial of president trump. reviving the e.r.a.-- over 40 years later, can the equal rights amendment become the law of the land? and much more.

>> woodruff: just before the senate opened the impeachment trial of president trump, itra passed a new agreement between the u.s., mexico and canada. amna nawaz tells us, th u.s.m.c.a. accord, as it's now called, is meant to replace nafta.ge and it does chr replace some important provisions. but many say it's hardly the overhaul that was once advertised. >> nawaz: the senate sent the u.s. mexico canada agreement t president trump's desk after voting for it in rare bipartisan fashion. >> the yays are 89, the nays a 10. the bill is passed. >> nawaz: the 1,800-page-plus signed into law by presidentrst bill clinton. and it does keep much of nafta intact. but there are important differences as well, including: requiring automobiles to have

75% of their components nufactured in north america.'s thp from roughly 63% under nafta. it also says 40 to 45% of automobile parts must be made by workers paid at least $16 an23 hour by and it strengthens labor laws, particularly in mexico, by allowing inspectors into facilities to investigate violations of workers' rights. republican sator lindsay graham: >> it allows north america to bs one of theprogressive free icade zones in the world and to our friends in mand canada today and our economy will be stronger going forward because of this new trade deal. >> nawaz: the u.s.m.c.a. als f gives americmers more access to canadian dairy markets. before the final agreement was rehed with democrats, ther were blows to some corporate interests. for example: one rule: providing biologic drugs with 10 years of pate exclusivity, was withdrawn. for his part, president trump had long pledged to overhaul nafta, blaming it for the loss of u.s. manufacturing jobs to

mexico. >> i'm going to renegotiate nafta, one of the worst trade isdeals ever signed in thery of our country, perhaps the worst ever signed in the >> nawaz: while the new deal includes money to address pollution and overfishing, it's been criticized for not tackling emissions noclimate change. leading nators bernie sanders, chuck schumer and kirsten gillibrand all voted against it. >> we had a huge once in a lifetime opportunity to actually address global climate change, and we chose not to, so whilere the ent did make progress, it didn't make enough, and it'sn az: the deal will not go into effect until canada approves the pact. lawmakers there are expected to vote on the deal in coming weeks. some perspective on what's significant about this deal, as well as its limitations and drawbacks, from a longtime critic of nafta.lo wallach has been working to change the trade deal for more than 25 years.is shhe director of public citizen's global trade watch. welcome back to the newshour.

>> thank you. >> nawaz: so overwhelming bipartisan support for this deal. let's starts with what you see as good in thi deal. what are the improvements, especially when it comes to u.s. workerin te economy? >> so the original deal that presidt trump signed in 218, nafta 2.0, wasn't better than the original.gh but after ng for a year with the democrats who made him reopen it and tenegott, the final deal that gopassed improved laborndstads and environmental standards, and ends up whacking a variety of corporate protections that woofng bad for mee con and the environment. >> nawaz: we saw one of the biggest criticisms the fact that it didn't address climate. the modest improvements are better than none. what do you say to that? >> there's a real difference between what youo to fix a really bad agreement that's causing ongoing damage. over a million u.s. jobs have

been government certified lost to nafta with more being outsourced to mexico every weekl because ages, they are now 40% lower than manufacturing in. ch so what you do to stop that flow of job outsourcing or attacks on environmental policies is different than what you would do from scratch to wite a good agreement. so stopping a bad areement's ongoing damage is different than a real good agreement that youim put e standards and you fix all the things that didn't get fixed in nafta. >> nawaz: there's another specific, a mechanism under which corporations could sue countries if they felt like nafta had been violated, andld that we at taxpayer expense. that went away in this new deal. i understand that you're happy about tht. but are there othethings that would fall under a similari category of s that the corporations would be happy to see in the deal that you thought should go away or that were new in this deal? >> so one of the best things that happened in the last year is the democrats fortoced trum

remove new goodies he had added for big farm aandhose new monopolies would have locked in high medicine price prices and exported our hih-price policies to mexico andanada. the things that didn't get fixed it's agreement still has limits on buy ameca, buy local, buy green policy. should why a trade agreement even tie the hands of congress or legislators vis-a-vis government procurement the agreement still requires to us import food that dosn't meet u.s. safety standard. and they added one bad, really bad new thing, ich is limits of the regulations on the big online mnopolists, consumer privacy. >> nwaz: it's worth noting we're in a week where president trump signed the first phase of a trade dl with china. you have this new northerican

trade agreement m.s.p.c.a. moving frward. both have been fought hard over. when you take a step back look at those how dramatically has that landscape changed whent it comes t overall u.s. economy and also for the average u.s. consumer? >> tese trade agreements that were done this week aren't going to be a big change for consumers. in the long run, if the revised nafta works, given the rewrite of the democrats, make trump add new labor standards, hopefully wages will increase in mexico, and that will basically slow the outsourcing of jobs to the u.s. but is not going to bring back hundreds of thousands of jobs the way theen preshas claimed. nothing makes that clearer than a lot of the u.s. auto companies have announced relocation to mexico since the agraseement done. so the upside is that basically there could be less outsourcingb there wiless corporate attacks on environmental and labor laws. that's a bi improvement.

to see it enforced.m proposition >> nawaz: do you think any lrade deal could bring back a of those manufacturing jobs that were lost? >> i think that the right kindre of trade agent that takes into account the climate crisis, th takesnto account income inequality, would distribute production more bradry around the . you have to do that anyway to avoid then log-distance shipping and the unified production that is threatening the climate. the rules of trade were being written. generally, the tariffs are cut unless there's a penalty put in place. the rules decide where the investments will happen and who the winners an losers are. moving forward, this nafta is i the template for a new agreement. it's the new floor frm where we'll fight that puts people on the world first. >> nawaz: thanks for being here.

>> woodruff: 100 senators were sworn in as jurors in the president's impeachment trial today,y chief justice john roberts. john yang examines the role roberts has in the proceedin. >> the constitution mentions the supreme court chief justice only once, spec filinghat he-- and so far they've all been men-- shall preside over impeachment o tria presidents. john roberts will be only the third person in history to be in that role. what exactly are hires onsibilities and how is he likely to carry them out? we're fortunate to have two observes, joan biskupic. and marcia coyle is chief washinon correspondent for "the national law journal" and author of "the roberts court, the struggle forhe

constitution." joan and marcia, thanks so much for being with us. marcia, what do we know about why the writers of the constitution put impeachnt trials in the senate and put the chief jemustice of the su court as the presiding officer? >> well, johs it'rt of usual. initially, they would pu th impeachment trial in the supre court. there were a couple of plans that would do that. but alexander hamilton in federalist papers-- number 65-- made a very strong argument against keeping impeachment in the supreme court for a number of reasons. first of all, he said impeachment is inherently a polical process, and the senate was confident enough and independent enough to take on this kind of a task. and because they were elect representatives, they were more likely to reconcile the public t any decision that was made. he also saidhat the require more flexibility andg discretion than a court of law

and judges could give and should be decided by a much larger body than a small number of judges.an finally, and maybe most importantly fa president were convicted in the impeachment trial and lateraced criminal charges, was convicted, it would be justy terrifair to make that former president fa the same judges who convicted him in an impeachmentrial. >> yang: joan, what's his role? is he liri the judge, a tal judge at a criminal trial? >> no, not at all. it's a wholif dferent animal. the senators themselves sit as a court, juror/judges themselves. and the chief has a distinctly fferent role thanas across the street when he presides at the supreme court. he is a presiding officer he will not have a vote. he will make the train run. he'll follow the leaof senate of senate majority leader can

the mitch but he is there in more of a ministerial role than a constitutional one. the sete has a set of rules, most recently revised i1986, which says he could make determines on questions o witnessewitnesses and evidence,a majority of the senate would overrule himif it so desired. >> yang: each of you both know about john roberts very well. you've both written books about john robts. marcia, what's your sense of how-- what his approach is going to be? how is he likely to bein approathis job? >> i say, first, will be thoroughly prepared. and, seco, he will be scrupulously fair. he is-- fre om what i'en of him, he's very cautious. if there is a controversial that is presented to him to rule upon, and if he has the on of sending it to the senate, full senate, to vote on, he doll that. because, i think, he cares

tremendously about how the public views the institution of the supreme court and that it not be viewed as a prtisan institution. i say "thoroughly preusred" bethat's how he has been since he was an appellate lawo r and arguments he would make to the supreme court. and "scrupulously fai because of it's how he rules or how he spresides over the u.. supreme court. >> the other thing is he happens to be mentored by the maon wh presided over the bill clinton impeachment tal, william rehnquist. he was a law clerk to then-associate justice rehnquist in 1981. rehnquist famously took a page from gilbert & sullivan, "i didn nothinarticular, and i did it very well." so the former chi had rlly tried to narrow his role. and i think current chief

justice john roberts would want to do the same. he does not want to get into a oosition of tipping things one way or another or against president trump. because the other thing we need to remember is, indeed, coming g in march, just a feer weeks aft this trial, will be the supreme court looking atre thdifferent cases involving president donald trump and his tax returns and financial records that have been subpoenaed. so he has enough responsibility over the fate of president trump that he does not want that to be in his hands in the senate. >> yang: joan, you mentioned the supreme court cases pending involving the president, that he is a party in. the president and the chief justice have also in the past exchanged some rather pointed words. >> yes. they have a public relationship actually to 2012 after johndacy that upheld the affordable care

act. then-businessman donald trump took to twitter and said, "take a look at him ," you know, "he's just trying tvor the georgetown set," or something like that. d he's attacked the court and chief justice roberts on twitter before and most recently, though what, most people will remember is that back inovember of 2018, president trump derided a judge who had ruled against him in a case as an "obama judge." and john roberts dimething unusual. he issued a public statement that said, "there are o noama judges. there are no trump judges. what we have are a group of men and women wearing roabz committed to impartial justice." to picup a line he used during his 2005 senate confirmation hearings, "we're just umires calling balls and strikes," and that's what he'll want to do at the senate trial. >> yang: and he'll be behind home plate at the senate ial.

joan biskupic and marcia coyle, thank you very much. >> pleasure, john. >> thank you, john. >> woodruff: stay with us, coming up on the newshour: outbreak-- the race to develop a vaccine to stop ebola. and the woman who became a symbol of the vietnam war ves her brief but spectacular take and forgiveness. this year marks the 100th right to vote in this country.he people may not know it, but thei t to instill equal rights rerdless of sex in our u.s.ti consti is nearly as old. that fight became a big part of 1970s.tional conversation in the yesterday, all these years later, virginia's legislature voted to ratifthe eql rights amendment, making it the 38th state to do so. that means three-quarters of als stave ratified, as the constitution requires.

but therare legal challenges still ahead, including the question owhether states had to ratify the amendment by a 1982 deadline. kate kelly is an attorney for equality now and worksn the e.r.a. she joins me from new york. kate kelly, welcome back to the newshour. so, as we said, the e.r.a., here we are, it was introduced in the 1920s, there was a big push in e 1970s, but it's20 before you get the 38th state to ratify. why has it takeno long? >> well, the equal rights amendment had a lot of momentumt anas supported by both political parties up until 1972. and there wered inly 30 states that ratified right as soon as ngress passed it and it had this huge momentum. becauso the culture wars and the group "st."op e.r.a the

momentum slowedown towards the end and got to the harder states, the states with lesstu infrastr for women's rights. and the opposition ramped up and the 1982 deadline came, and we fell three stateshort. >> woodruff: so now you finally have the 38th state-- that means three-fourth of the states legislatures ve rated by. but you still can't be sure this is going to be part of the constitution. >> as susan b. anthony said "failure ism ipossible." so i feel comfort we will get the equal rigmehts ame into the constitution. there are still some procedural hurdles. the deadline i talked about earlier was put in by congress. in fact it was 1979, and then they extended it 1982. congress can now remove the deadline. d there are two bills already pending in the current congress to remove that deadline-- one in the spoe, jackie spibierses'

, and another bipartisan bill to integrate the three stat we already have, nevada, illinois, and notice virginia. >> woodruff: you're calling is a ocedural challenge here, procedural issues. but even if you cnt the deadline issue clarified, there are pill othtential problems out there, thrnt? i mean, there are still people making the political argatent he e.r.a. is going to be more harmful for women than helpfu >> a lot of those old arguments against the equal rights have now died. now gone away, in the 1970s, for example, would have to sve in themen military. well, now we know wom serve in the military with distinction at every level. and in fact, a federal judge has already said if there to be a draft reinstated that it could not be a gender-segregated draft. and the pentagon has also

recommended that women wll eligibleigible for selective service. tactics from theriginal mightare are now completely moot. really the only thing that people are fighting against the equal rights amendment really care about is keeping women away from legal equality and constitutional eqawment, and that's just no longer going to fly. >> woodruff: there is the argumentthough, we're hearing out there, the concern that it will-- those who oppose abortion, people who are prolife-- that if this passes it will undo the state-by-state restrictions on abortion. have restrictions.nal rights can there is right that's d.mpletely unrestric the government just has to have a reason to make that distinction. there isn't any state with total, unadulterated access to abortion, and there are disix

2006 states that havate e.r.a.s already. really, the antichoice movement what they want is to take away rights that we already have under the constitution. so thoe abrtion access already exists under our constant constitional regime under t right of privacy. what they want is to take away that right and we already have that under th constitution. >> woodruff: so at ts point, what's your expectation? because you still hae some states out there that said they want to rescind thir ratification. >> five states attempted to rescind ck in the 1970s, but there's a real legal question as to whether or not states can even rescind for example, with the 14th amendment, two states tried to rescind, but they were never counted. there is a queion, can states even rescind? will those be counted? that still ha to be resolved in the courts. but i think the precedent is clear, once a state istified

it is ratified and will be listed. so now we are at 38th state. >> woodruff: still waiting andwa hing for court action. kate kelly with equality now. thank you. >> tnk you so much. >> woodruff: last month, the food and drug administration formally approved the first vaccine to prevent ebola.a it comes aucial time: an outbreak in the democratic republic of congo has infected more than 3,000 people since earllast year. and yet, the situation could be much worse. wh has prevented it from burning out of control is five years of incredible scientific progress. with the second our series, again in partnership with the global health reporting nter, here's special correspondent monica villamiza >> reporter: ever since ebola was first discered in 1976,

it's been mysterious, terrifyingly deadly. peter piot, a belgian doctor, was part of an international team that was called to yambuku, in the heart of the democratic republic of coo. >> and what we found was that there were very few survivors. very few, and that indeed that what we call case fatality rate was over 90%. >> theatients fled the hospital. >> reporter: jean-jacques muyembe, then a young doctor ano the d.r.c.'s head of ebola response, was also part of that flash forward to 1995. muyembe had to contain ebola in kikwit, a city of almost 400,000. to stop the spread, traditional funeral rituals had to be discarded.an >> ( ated ): we didn't have coffins. we'd put them in trucks. we'd dig a hole and throw them in. that shocked people. >> reporter: in 2014, came the

worsebola outbak in histor >> the ebola outbreak that started in the wesy african coun guinea has now spread. >> our people know nothing, there is no cure. >> reporter: without ati prevenve vaccine or a treatment, the virus spread across six west afcan countries even jumping to europe and the u.s. soka moses, a physician in liberia, recalls the sense of desperation. >> the patients are vomiting, bleeding, meanwhile, there werew still patientsting outside the gate. and they are begging. every time you go to the gate, they are begging to come in. this is a serious situation. >> reporter: in the end ebola infected over 28,000 people globally. more than 11,000 died. but that catastrophe also spawned a wave of scientific collaboration and discovery. today, as doctors struggle to contain the outbreak in d.r.c., set of tools, from genomicented sequencing to rapid on-spot diagnostic tests, from wildlifee

bioslance to see-through plastic treatment bubbles specially designed to help prevent the spread of th disease. but the most dramatic change bya far tunning development: ebola is now both preventable and curabl me the last five years, scientific devels get an a-plus. no doubt about that. in>> reporter: before headto the outbreak zone, i went to the national institutes of health, study to receive thislinical experimental shot-- an ebola vaccine. not long ago, this would have been impossible. there was no vaccine against ebola. but in a little ov five years, two vaccines and two drugs have been developed. for no other disease has a treatment, and a vaccine, appeared in such a short period of time. in the hunt for an elusive treatment, muyembe's work, starting in kikwit, in 1995, was critical. >> ( translated ): we performed

a blood transfusion from an ebola survivor to eight patiente with acu ela. out of the seven who were treated with thiexperiment, ven survived. >> reporter: that original survivor, who lost 15 members of his family, donated his blood to muyembe's team, and in 2006, gave samples to the n.i.h. researchers. those samples led to the creation of a treaent called a monoclonal antibody. s name right out of a sp novel: m.a.b.-114. >> you get infectewith any nd of a virus or bacteria, your body starts to nske prothat are called antibodies that ultimately p suppress thogen. we have been able to create antibodies that are very, very specific. >> reporter: the treatment is based on the original disease- fighting cells from a patient, purified and modified to fight even more efficiently against the virus. >> a what it does, it blocks the ability of the ebola virus to attack s target cells.

>> reporter: foudrugs were tested in the midst of the current outbreak. the trial was called off in august, when it became clear that two of these treatments were saving lives. the others didn't make anim ct. in prior outbreaks, about two- thirds of the patients died. 34%. m.a.b.-114, it was just a different drug, from regeneron, brought the death rate down to 29%. >> i was at the origin of the discovery of the virus. i have also development of a molecule that can treat ebola patients. >> reporter: the treatment was a breakthrough. but with a third of the patients still dying, the vaccine was critical; a way to protect millions from being infected in the first place. 9/11 world.reas born in a post- search targeted viruses, like ebola, that could be used in bioterrorist attacks. early research was led by canada's health agency.

but when ebola erupted in west africa, the vaccine wasn't woady. the d health organization o and governmeicials called kennneth frazier ic.e.o.merck. >> it wasn't the typical situation where you're developing a vaccine from scraenh. a lot of sfic work had gone on for a number of yearser and weasked to come in and finish the resderch and the velopment and the formulation and the manufacturing. >> reporter: theerck vaccine was first tested at the very end of the west african outbreak. it was over 90% effective. in eastern congo, more thaa quarter million people have gotten the merck shot. these people say they it made them feel safe. >> ( translated ): my wife's friend and son died of ebola. they called me a high-risk contact because i took pt in the funeral. >> ( translated ): i saw people dying, and as a nurse, i understood that i had be vaccinated. >> reporter: every health-care

worker on the front nes gets the protective shot, allowing for much better patient care. it's a game-changer. >> there i no doubt in anybody's mind that the outbreak would have been much, much worse and much, much more extensive had it not been for the use of the vaccine. >> reporter: a second vaccine, made by johnson & johnson is now being used in the border region between d.r.c. and rwanda. to help build trust, jean- cques muyembe got the sh himself. >> i am exposed to the disease, that is why i can receive these vaccines. now we have the vaccinhave treatment. >> rorter: do you think this is a happy story, where science won the fight in this case? >> yeah. yes, yes. >> i think theevelopment of an effective vaccine and the development of sensitive, easy to use dgnostics is a resounding scientific success story. >> i think the key to this was

an unprecedented amount of partnership and collaboration, and it was the spirit of t people who were on the ground out in those places where the disease was endemic. those are e real heroes. >> reporter: the crisis here is decidedly not over, but there is reason to hope. for the pbs newshour, i'm monica villamizar, in kinshasa, d.r.c. >> woodruff: tonight, we have a special episode of our brief but spectacular series produced in association with the canadian broadcasting corporation. onic photo of phan thi k phuc as a nine-year-old surviving a napalm attack becami a definige of the vietnam war.ou kim phuct political asylum in canada nearly 30 years ago and now lives outside of toronto.

and a warning, some viewers may find graphic images in this dagment unsettling. >> i remember thjune 8, 1972. i saw the ailane and it's so loud, so close to me, suddenly the fire everywhere around me. the fire burned off my clothes and i saw my arm got burned with the fire. i thought, oh my goodness, i get burned and people will me different way. nine years o, i became a victim of war.di 't like that picture at all. i felt like why he took my picture? when i was agony, naked, so

ugly? t i wisht picture wasn't taken. i went through 17 operations. i had to deal with the painer single day. i used to compare my scars with buffalo skin. and because my skin wasn't have any pores i cannot sweat. s make me fetired, so headache. it built me up with hatred, bitterness, and anger. i just living with the question, why me? in 1982, i wanted to te my life, because i thought aftei die, no more suffering, no more pain. eventually i found the new

testament in the library in saigon. in christmas, 1982, i became a christian. that faith it helped me a lot. since i have faith, my enemies list became my prayer list. i realized myself, wow, kim, you pray for your enemies? it means you love. forgiveness set my heart free. suffering.everyone who caused my even the pilot, commander, people controlling me. when i became mother, i have full time to take care of my baby. i just slowly, slowly to tell him why mommy has a scar. he touched my arm saypicture. "mom hurt" and he kissere, he kiss me right here. my work with the children who

has trauma like me. i know how they have pain and nol,only the pain with physi but nightmare and traumatized. most of them they justsk me "why you are naked? why you crying?", and i say yes because the bomb drop and i got burned. i also show them my scar on my back and they say "oh it'so painful, i don't want that you suffer that much," and they love me and they kiss my scar. all my journey i help children building school, building hospital, orphanage home, it's about relationship. now m working not because of my duty, not because of my mission, but because of my love. >> what do you see when you look at that photo of the girl in the picture? >> now, i can see the picture.

am so thankful. my name is kim phuc phan thi.my this irief but spectaculin take on nd forgiveness. >> woodruff: wow, what a remarkable story. thank you. you can find all our brief but spectacular segments online at s.org/newshour/brief. and that's the newshour for tonight.f. i'm judy woodr for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

>> the ford foundation. working with visionaries on the ontlines of social change worldwide. fr >> and by the p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> and with the ongoinsupport of these institutions and friends of the newshour. >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. station from viewers like you. thank u. captioning sponsored by newshour productions, llc captioned ce media group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

hello, everyone and welcome to "anpour and company." here is what's coming up. >> the president violated h oath of office. >> as impeachment articles head to the senat and democrats debate, we get reaction from two key swing states. and rry's future.ges over meghan frank discussion. then, a french intellectual on living withsh kurdiorces fig fighting isis.