evening and welcome. on the newshour tonight, the january 6 hearing. the committee investigating the capital insurrection subpoenas former president donald trump. >> we are obligated to seek answers directly from the man who set this in motion. every american is entitled to those answers. so we connect now to protect our republic. >> data shows inflation remains stubbornly high despite the federal reserve efforts to stabilize costs. stoking fears of a recession. and border enforcement. the unit states' new pn to

stem the surge of migrants from venezuela. all that and more on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by. >> it was like an aha moment. this is what i love doing. early-stage companies have this energy that energizes me. these are people who are trying to change the world. when i volunteer with women entrepreneurs, i'm helping people reach their dreams. 'm thriving by helping others every day. people who know no bdo. >> the kendeda fund committed to advancing restorative justice

through investments in transformative leaders and ideas. more at kendeda fund.org. carnegie corporation of new york, supporting innovations in education, democratic engagement , and the advancement of international peace and security at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. this program was made and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. amna: in an unexpected move

today the house select committee investigating the events of january 6 voted to subpoena former president donald trump. the move will likely be the last major action from the panel before the upcoming midterm elections. the committee's aim is to question the former president about his actions leading up to the attack on the u.s. capitol two years ago. the move will also likely set off a new court battle. to help us make sense of all this, i'm joined by our congressional correspondent, lisa desjardins. let's dart with the news out of today's hearing. the subpoena of the former president. what do we know and why did the committee choose to do this now? >> they voted nine-zero to subpoena the former president in relation to january 6, all part of the case the committee has been focused on since the beginning centering around the former president. they have laid out that case throughout these hearings and today again as they say a

president who planned months ahead of time to claim the election would be stolen from him and then encouraged a mob to attack the capital and tried to bring other u.s. officials in line with him to try to overturn the results of the election. here is representative liz chey laying out the argument as she sees it for the case against the former president and for a subpoena. >> this leads us to a key question. why would americans assume our constitution and our institutions and our republic are invulnerable to another attack? why would we assume those institutions will not falter next time? a key lesson of this investigation is this. our institutions only hold when men and women of good faith make them hold. regardless of the political cost. we have no guarantee these men and women will be in place next time.

any future president inclined to attempt what donald trump did in 20 has now learned not to install people who could stand in the way. >> the committee does expect a legal fight from the former president but in a practical sense, the committee's work and the committee itself ceases to exist at the end of this congress in early january. only if democrats retain control of the house does it seem the subpoena will live past the end of this year. meanwhile former president is reacting. he took to true social, he questioned the timing in particular of this subpoena. i want to show what he wrote. he wrote, why did they wait until the very end, the final moments of their last meeting? because the committee is a bus that has only served to fully divide -- further divide our country. the former president also repeated lies, known falsehoods that do not have evidence about the 2020 election. those on the committee say why

now? they tell me because all the evidence led them here. they did not start here. >> we know what the committee showed today was previously shown, but there was new footage as well. tell us what we saw and what we learned from that material. >> it was about what president trump did before and during the january 6 attack. before we heard new words from cassidy hutchinson who said she heard former president trump say he had lost the election. that was in december but the most riveting testimony, riveting footage, was new footage not seen by the public before from inside the capital of congressional leaders. i want to show you a few minutes of that. it begins after house speaker nancy pelosi was whisked away from the house floor. >> there has to be some way we can maintain the sense people have there is some security or some confidence that government

can function, that we can elect a president of the united states. do we go back into session? >> we did go back into session but now everyone on the floor is putting on masks to prepare for a breach. >> they are putting on -- >> tear gas masks. >> we need an area for the house members walking over now. >> i'm going to call up the secretary of dod. we have some senators who are still in their hideaways. we need massive personal now. can you get the maryland national guard? >> it is just horrendous. we are trying to figure out how to get this job done today.

he was not -- is not in the room but he was here earlier and said we want to expedite this. just move forward with the rest of the state. the overriding wishes to do it at the capital. -- overriding wish is to do it at the capitol. what we are being told is it will take days for the capitol to be ok again. it is from a security standpoint , making sure everybody is out of the building, and how long will that take? >> powerful footage in the room. especially because sitting in the front row of the hearing room, i watched as capitol police officers who withstood

the attack watched thafootage, struggling to watch it. you see one who was personally injured in the attack, watched footage not seen before. congress did reconvene but as we know january 6 and all that footage is very much a part of life in the capital here day today. >> the committee subpoenaed the secret service and got thousands of emails and other documents of communications. what did the committee show in today's hearing? >> those thousands of documents from those, there was a picture of a secret service that new months ahead, had clear warning signs an attack was coming. i want to highlight something raised by represented of adam schiff. he said a tip the secret service got. >> the source went on to say the plan is to literally kill people. please take this tip seriously and investigate further. the source made clear that the

proud boys had detailed their plans on multiple websites like the donald. the secret service had advance infoation more than 10 days before hand regarding the oud boys' planning for january 6. >> there were clear conversations from emails the committee pointed out which means secret service members indicating they believe president trump did want to come and was planning to come to the capital that day. then within a very quick span, secret service high up officials say no, we will not be going to the capitol. >> today's hearing was the ninth public hearing. what happens next? >> this is the question everybody has. we don't know. the committee has not announced its last hearing. we do know the committee is working on its final report. i expect that to happen after the midterms. we may get documents before then but the main report we expect to come after. i want to point out one short

piece of sound we heard. something significant that could be in that report. here is are presented of pete aguilar today. -- representative pete aguilar today. >> obstruction on this issue, including testimony about advice given not to tell the committee about this specific topic. we will address this matter in our report. >> that is a not-so-subtle reminder among the purposes of this committee has been to get the attention of the department of justice. obstruction obviously a federal crime. many on this committee hoping their work leads to charges. we do not know if it will. >> that is lisa desjardins reporting from capitol hill tonight. thank you. for more analysis of today's hearing, i'm joined here by the director of georgetown university's institute for

congregational -- constitutional advocacy and protection. she's also a former justice department official. and jamil jaffer, a law professor at george mason university and former associate counsel to president george w. bush. welcome to you both. mary, let's start where lisa left us off. we heard represented of aguilar mention possible investigation of obstruction. what did you hear related to that from today's hearing? mary: we did not have the details of what exactly they are going to be investigating, but it does certainly sound like some of the new evidence they have obtained since the last hearing suggests the secret service knew far more than it had led on previously about the danger, the threats of violence to members, to the capital, to vice president pence. that was a significant amount of today's new evidence. it has appeared by that teaser that the congresswoman gave us that that might be inconsistent

with what they potentially heard with -- from some secret service they have spoken with. that is i think what he was indicating to us. amna: when you hear obstruction, what are you thinking? jamil: we heard earlier in the hearing is that some folks had been advised not to talk to the committee, or had been advised, i know you are with me, or with the president. we want to see how you are doing. if people around the president or the president himself or making phone calls, people going to testify before congress can lead obstruction charges, that is a problem for the president and those around him. >> one of the questions has been what could merrick garland do after all these hearings? he is watching federal prosecutors are watching. does the committee decision to subpoena president trump change that calculation? jamil: if the president does testify before congress there is a lot of jeopardy he could be in.

he could run himself into lying under oath. he could create legal trouble for himself. almost certainly lawyers will tell him do not go and if you do take the fifth amendment. assert executive privilege. if the former president does decide to testify he is unlikely to do that. he is likely to put himself out there in front of the american people to say i was not wrong, the election was stolen. things he has said on twitter or truth social now. it is not obvious to me he will not in fact testify. amna: are we likely to hear from the president this way? mary: he has been saying all along i have not had a chance to give my side of the story. i agree, lawyers would tell him don't do this. it is not only jeopardy he might make false statements. have more evidence of obstruction. if he testifies, he also will waive those privileges so he will not be able to draw the lines he might want to draw. you know, i think -- i think it

will remain to be seen. he may decide in the middle of the night to tweet out i'm going to testify. that would not surprise me. amna: i also wanted to ask, you pay close attention to ongoing threats to democracy early on and throughout the hearings, the committee has message those ongoing threats are a central part of their work and why they are doing this work right now. what did you hear in today's hearing and pulling together the last eight? what did you hear that tells you how serious those threats are and what could be done to address them? mary: what you just played at the top of the hour with liz cheney talking about our institutions that held because of the men and women of good faith who made them hold, and what we know now is throughout 2020, 2021, even before the elections, we had lies, falsehoods, misinformation about a stolen election. we knethat before but we had

that confirmed today. that's what was driving the violence. we know from things like what roger stone said, even before election day, f the vote, let's get to the violence, violence was always a possibility. our institutions held because as liz cheney said, men and women in places like local election officials, state election officials, governors, secretaries of state, they refused to capitulate to the president's wishes. right now we have a continuance of the disinformation. we have donald trump doubling down, tripling down on the stolen election from almost two years ago. again fueling violence. i will give you an example. the extremist social media says county over country. take york county, take a few, capture your state -- take york county -- your county, take a

few, capture your state. we see threats to public health officials, teachers. they are leaving the office being replaced by election deniers. we have election deniers running for positions that will have responsibility over the next election. that is the threat liz cheney was foreshadowing. amna: the committee set out with big goals. it would correct the historical record but also hold people accountable. did they meet their goals? jamil: the committee laid out a credible argument for the case that the president knew what was happenin on january 6, knew what was likely to happen and encouraged it to happen. the committee has had a slamdunk on that. there was no question the president wanted things that happened on january 6 to take place and he bears responsibility for it. the question is will it matter at all? will the electorate care? how does the electorate feel

about what happened? what really this turns on is what will be republican party do? donald trump will almost certainly be a candidate for the nomination. what do republicans do? be the party of national security, law enforcement, and those things, and a party that believes in legitimate elections and attempts to fight voter fraud, right? what did they do when they have a president who leads -- a former president is leading their party who denies the results of an election, continues to tell stories of election fraud, and encouraged insurrection at the capital? amna: what will they do, what will the public do, and watching what the department of justice will do,f anything. on this ninth public hearing with january 6 select committee, thank you for joining us. you can watch today's entire hearing on our website, pbs.org/newshour. and on our youtube page.

vanessa: i am vanessa ruiz in for stephanie sy with newshour west. we'll return to the full program after the latest headlines. five people are dead including a police officer and at least four our wounded following a shooting in a raleigh, north carolina neighborhood according to the city's mayor. police say a suspect has been contained at a residence in the area. a jury in florida has spared the parkland school gunman from the death penalty. he will face life in prison without parole, as state law requires unanimous agreement to impose a death sentence. nikolas cruz admitted killing 17 students and staff members in 2018. after today's court session, parents of the victims called the outcome devastating. >> it wasn't even a doubt in my mind that this would be the death penalty. i'm beyond disgusted with that

-- with what happened, what occurred. again, what is the death penalty for if not for the murder and killing of 17 people? >> the judge will formally impose the sentence in november. relatives and others will be allowed to speak at that hearing and we will return to this after the news summary. the u.s. supreme court refused former president trump's request for an independent arbiter to examine classified white house documents. they turned up when the fbi searched his mar-a-lago estate in florida. the justice department argued there's no legal basis for a "special master" to review classified material. separately, published reports today said mr. trump had staffers move some of the material at mar a lago, before and after the fbi search, and that surveillance footage showed it being done. the u.s. labor department turned in another tough report today on inflation at the retail level. consumer prices rose 0.4% in

septemr, sharply higher than in august. the closely watched core rate excluding food and energy jumped 6.6% from a year earlier, the most in four decades. the inflationary surge mns social security recipients will get their biggest cost-of-living adjustment in 40 years. it amounts to 8.7%, and it means that come january the average recipient will get an additional $140 dollars or more each month. we'll look more closely at this, later in the program. in ukraine, russian missiles and drones again struck cities in revenge attacks for the bombing of a bridge in crimea. ukrainian officials reported at least 13 people killed and nearly 40 wounded over 24 hours. in the southern city of mykolaiv rescuers combed through the rubble of a wrecked apartment building. survivors told of close calls when the missiles hit.

>> i was in my bed. this saved my life. the explosion threw me out of the bed. i was asleep and i was thrown on the ground. i guess the blast through me there. now i don't have a home anymore. >> street confrontations erupted across east jerusalem overnight in the worst unrest in months. israeli police fired stun grenades, tear gas and live rounds. palestinians threw stones and fireworks. burning debris littered the streets. the trouble started after a suspected palestinian gunman killed an israeli soldier this week. a bus bombing in syria has killed 18 government soldiers, on the outskirts of damascus. state media reported at least 27 others were wounded. the attack came as violence has been increasing in government controlled areas. there was no immediate claim of responsibility. also the u.s. and saudi arabia traded tough talk today over sharp cuts in oil output.

the saudis said a u.s. request to put off the cuts would have destabilized the oil market. the white house denied it was trying to delay the resulting gas price hikes until after the mid-term elections. instead, national security council spokesman john kirby said the saudi move means more oil revenue for russia, fueling its war in ukraine. still to come on the newshour, the factors behind a life sentence in prison for the parkland gunman also, will the large bump in social security benefits be enough to offset inflation? and we visit wisconsin for a close look at a critical senate race that could determine control of congress. much more also. >> this is the pbs newshour from weta studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. >> as we reported, a florida

jury has recommended life in prison without the possibility of parole -- rather than the death penalty -- for the gunman behind the parkland school shooting. 17 people were killed at marjory stoneman douglas high school in 2018. john yang has our report. >> amna, the seven men and five women on the jury unanimously agreed that cruz's massacre was premeditated and in the words of the law especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel. but the jury foreman told a miami tv station that three jurors said that those aggravating factors did not outweigh the mitigating factors. in the courtroom, some families of those cruz killed sok their heads in apparent disbelief. afterward, the father of 14-year-old gina montalto expressed his anguish. >> my beautiful gina, the other sons, daughters, spouses, and fathers, they were the victims here. our justice system should have

been used to punish this shooter to the fullest extent of the law. not as an act of revenge, but to protect our nation's schools. >> to help us understand the verdict, david weinstein, who is a florida defense attorney, and a former state and federal prosecutor. were you surprised by the verdict? >> i was shocked especially given how quily it was within a day of deliberations that they came back. usually that signifies it is going to be a verdict in favor of the state. i was as shocked as anyone they came back with a life recommendation. >> the jurors who said the aggravating factors did not outweigh the mitigating factors, the major mitigating factor the feds presented was that the shooter had what is called fetal alcohol spectrum disorder because of his mother's heavy drinking while she was pregnant.

here is public defender melissa mcneil that her closing statement -- mcneil in her closing statement. >> he did n have control over who his biological mother was. he had no control over how he was conceived. he had no control over how much colt 45 brenda drank when he was growing in her belly. >> what is your reaction to that argument? >> it resonated enough with at least one and as many as three of these jurors. it gave them enough to say we believe that mitigating factor, the fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, outweighed those aggravating factors is entered by the state. in their mind, justifying their decision to vote for life is imprisonment -- instead of the death penalty. she asked them to take that into

consideration, and for those people, that is what resonated. >> how much of a challenge did that present to the prosecution team in getting a unanimous verdict for the death penalty? >> i think it was a task that they saw was going to be difficult. they put forward a significant number of aggravating factors. and that the jury agreed to. but the way the statute is written, the way the law requires, it has to be unanimous. they had to convince all 12 of those people that the mitigation was not going to be enough to outweigh the aggravating factors and they were unsuccessful at doing that. in some sense the defense new during the presentation of their case they had hit a chord with one or more of those jurors because they stop short in the number of witnesses they are going to present. >> explain why the sentence was not imposed today. sentencing was put off until

november 1. how much latitude does the judge have when she imposes that sentence? >> let me answer your second question first. she has no latitude. because the jury has recommended a life sentence, that is the sentence she must imposend that is why she was going to impose it this morning. there are two different portions of law, it victims rights act that is part of our state constitution and a statutory provision that requires that a judge here at sentencing from victims and next of kin before the judge imposes a sentence. that is why she could not impose a sentence today and that is why november 1 will be the day she hears from the 17 victims who survived, the next of kin of the 17 victims who died, and they will tell her what they think the sentence should be, but she has no choice. she is going to have to impose a life sentence. she cannot override this decision. >> we heard a lot of anger,

anguish, frustration from the families of people who were killed in this massacre about the outcome. as a prosecutor -- you work with these people during the trial. what do you say to them after something like this? >> this is the worst situation at all possible. these people have suffered in a way none of us can really tell unless we have lost a loved one. you have to tell them from the beginning to the end that this is a system and a process we have all put our faith in. and to the extent there is even a small sliver of a silver lining in this very dark cloud for them, this will end the process. there will be no appeals. they will not have to relive the death of their loved one through the appellate process. and the potential that a resentencing could have occurred. in terms of finality, although it is not the finality they hoped for, it is going to be

finality for them as far as the court system goes. there is no way to tell someone who has lost a loved one that they know how they feel. you have to simply be there for them, offer them support, and tell them you have done and will do the job they have asked and enabled you to do to t best of your ability and that they have to put their trust in these 12 people and a system we have put in place to make sure everybody gets their fair day in court. >> one more difficult day out of so many for these families. david weinstein, thank you very much. >> you are welcome. amna: no matter how you slice it, the latest inflation numbers today are not good. inflation is still above 8% and at a 40 year high with prices rising for housing, medical care , new cars, air travel, and

more. it will almost surely mean another significant interest rate hike in a few weeks . economist diane swonk is here to look at what's behind this persistent inflation. she's with the professional services firm, kpmg. welcome back to the newshour. thank you for joining us. that inflation increase was more than what many expected even as the fed is taking aggressive actions to slow the economy down , try to bring down price increases. help us understand what is driving that inflation increase and why is it so hard to get under control? >> sadly it reflects inflation in the service sector, which is more tied to the labor market, which gets to this difficult issue the federal reserve is in. that it is actually targeting the labor market with rate hikes. they are trying to bring demand down to be in line with a very supply constrained global economy. a supply constrained economy in

the united states as well and a supply constrained labor market. we do not have enough workers. we want to have workers and jobs in line with each other, more in balance so they can have wages that exceed inflation rather than wages that are chasing inflation. but the kinds of inflation we are seeing out there in health-care care costs, covid was costly and it is now having a legacy impact on health insurance costs. we are seeing the shelter cost rise that we saw again triggered in part by the frenzy of everyone wanting to buy a home. when interest rates plummeted, now those costs showing up in the cost we see out there. the high demand for rentals. the shortage of hoing. all of those things together are coming together and giving us this really bad inflation stew. >> it is a complicated economic picture. jobs are plentiful. wages are rising. unemployment is low.

consumer demand is strong. anyet we see this inflation increase. how should people make sense of these factors? >> it is really hard. the reality is the average consumer has lost everything they have gained and then some to inflation on wages. wages went up and that was terrific as the economy reopened . inflation accelerated so much it left them scorched in their wallets. that is important to understand and it is why most americans, even though we created over 3.8 million jobs year to date, which is more than the second most we would create in any year since 1984, really it stunning amount of jobs. even though we have created those paychecks, people in their individual lives feel like they are losing ground. hence they feel like we are already in a recession. the problem is we do have demand stalling out despite 3.8 million new paychecks being generated.

looks like consumer spending is growing less than 1% in the current quarter and likely will stall out as we move into 2023. they are going to have to see a cooler chilled to demand to bring inflation down and that is hard. you have to remember inflation is kind of like cancer. if you do not deal with it now, with something that may be painful, you could have something metastasized and become more chronic later on. that is something they are trying to avoid. that does not mean the treatment is very easy. amna: we know so many americans are already struggling. that is economist diane swonk joining us tonight. thank you. and for older americans and retirees, there was helpful news to accompany the latest inflation report. americans receiving social security will see a sizable bump in their benefits, 8.7%. that's starting in january, thanks to the 2023 cost of living adjustment, known as the

social security cola. that comes as medicare premiums dip just a bit too. but how much will it help? economics correspondent paul solman breaks that down. >> the increase will be the largest and if it adjustment in 40 years -- largest benefit adjustment in 40 years. >> the cola is based on the cpi w, the inflation pressure from the third quarter of this year. it tracks the actual inflation for wage earners. reporter: unless it rises above 8.7% next year. today's increase will go to 52 million americans above age 65, an average increase of $1700 per year, more than $4000 for those

getting social security's maximum. >> there is a reduction in the medicare premium. that comes out of your social security check if you are taking social security. >> yes, so medicare is taken out of your social security check. last year there was a big increase in the premium with the expectation the drug would be up for -- and that would be a big expense for medicare. reporter: it will go down compared to last year. >> that is right. >> non-seniors get theenefit, too. right? >> if they are survivors or children, they get benefits, they would receive the cola. reporter: so who does not benefit? >> i don't think there are folks who will not benefit. it is a question of the extent of the benefit. reporter: for renters, as jennifer belinsky. >> they have less control over

their rent and that has been rising. it will chip away at that rise in rent. will it solve their housing problems? no. reporter: how does this affect renters? renters tend to have lower incomes and social security makes up a bigger share of their income. nationally last year, asking rents were up 11.6% from the first quarter of 2021 to 2022. some places, particularly areas of the west, prices rose 20% and rents are still growing. reporter: even more concerning is the widening income gap. >> when you think about low income renters who are already reliant on social security to a greater degree than their higher income peers, this is a big concern. >> for older americans there is the difference between single family households because of

widows and widowers compared to not so old americans. >> more older adults tend to live alone. the rate reaches into the high 57, 58 percent among those who are 80 and older. and increases with age. reporter: what about racial disparities? >> there are vast homeownership gaps in this country. the gap between black and white homeownership in a 30 year high for older people. more older households of color are renters and more likely to have lower incomes and to be reliant on social security. but unfortunately to be also vulnerable to rising rent that are outpacing the cost-of-living increases. >> social security's cost-of-living adjustment will provide serious protection against inflation to tens of millions of us. in the end, the cola supports a suggestion i helped push as part of a social security guidebook years ago.

wait until age 70 to take your benefit if you can afford to. as that book's main author convinced me. >> your big problem in retirement is outliving your savings. if you wait until 70 to take benefits, your benefit is going to start 76% higher adjusted for inflation. if other things are taking away your resources through inflation , inflation is wiping you out otherwise, you have secure real income that is higher and will continue until you die, which could be 100. reporter: so social security is insurance. still i was skeptical when larry told me this. but if i die early, i will leave money on the table because there are benefits i could have taken but didn't, right? >> dying early is not a problem because you are not going to regret anything when you are dead. the concern is living 80, 90, 100, running out of money. reporter: speaking of money and

a potentially patient grim reaper, today's benefit bu will materialize in social security checks starting january 1. amna: the biden administration announced a plan to allow a legal pathway into the country for more than 20,000 venezuelan migrants, but at the same time potentially thousands of others who entered the u.s. illegally will be sent back to mexico. white house correspondent laura barone lopez is here to explain this shift in policy. let's start with a plan for the administration. what do we need to know? reporter: this is a joint action between the u.s. and mexico. it is supposed to, the administration says, reduce the number of people arriving at the border, the number of venezuelans arriving at the border.

the first part of this is a narrow legal pathwayor venezuelans that did not exist before. what this human parole program would do, the way venezuelans would qualify for it, it requires a financial sponsor in the united states. they have to pass a national security background check. they have to have complete vaccinations. this is also modeled after the ukrainian humanitarian parole program which we saw the administration enact earlier this year. the big difference is it is much more narrow than the ukrainian parole program. homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas talked about it today. he said the new process is something that makes good on a promise president biden made during the campaign. >> our program is based on a core principle of the biden administration, which is when individuals are so desperate to leave the country that is their home, they are placing their life savings and their lives in the hands of smugglers who

exploit them for profit, it is our responsibility to build safe, lawful and human pathways -- humane pathways that create opportunities for them so they do not need to avail themselves of the more desperate and dangerous measures that the perilous journey involved. >> now mayorkas went on to say this is part of that joint agreement with mexico and a piece of that, the second big piece, is that it expands the title 42 deportation policy which we know was first enacted under donald trump. due to the covid-19 pandemic. president biden expanded that for a very long time to the dismay of a lot of democrats. under that expansion of title 42, venezuelans will now be able to be sent back into mexico. mexico is saying they will take them from the u.s.. mexico had already been taking a

lot of migrants from the u.s. who had come from the northern triangle countries like guatemala, honduras, el salvador. this is an expansion of the title 42 deportation. amna: why are they providing it specifically for venezuelans and also on the timing, why now? laura: venezuelans are four times more likely to cross the border this year than prior years. the venezuelans countered at the u.s. mexico border, we have the numbers. in 2021 there were 48,343. that jumped in 2022 to 152,938. many of those venezuelans who have made that journey already either going into mexico to try to get to the united states, they may now not qualify for this new mandatory program. what will make venezuelans ineligible from the new program, the white house laid that out. the key points are if they have been removed from the united states in the past five years, they will not qualify.

going forward, if they cross the border illegally, they will not be able to qualify and if they regularly enter mexico or panama from this point forward, they will not be able to seek relief through that program. homeland security has stressed over and over that if at any point mexico decides they don't want to be part of this agreement, the entire program goes away. amna: i think it is fair to say immigration for this administration like many before it h been a struggle to get under control. we are at record high encounters at the border. president biden has faced a lot of criticism for keeping and placed some policies his predecessor put into place like title 42 -- keeping in place some policies his predecessor put into place like title 42. laura: you are right because president biden ran saying he was going to take away title 42 and presiden -- vice president harris said it was unconstitutional.

there has been mixed preys on this announcement. democrats and immigrant rights advocates have been saying they are glad there is now this narrow legal pathway, this humanitarian parol pathway. they are not happy about the expansion of title 42. i spoke to angela kelley, a former homeland security official hunter biden -- official under biden. she said she is disappointed. >> i give the administration an a for building on the program for ukrainians and providing an opportunity for venezuelans to come to the u.s. but it is two thumbs down the fact they are now applying title 42 which is essentially an expedited expulsion to the same population they are trying to protect. they got half the equation right. they should have spent a lot more time building that up. recognize that the limitations and the harm that come with title 42. laura: a lot of immigrant

advocates are also saying they would love for humanitarian parole program like this to be exteed, expanded not just to venezuelans to other western hemisphere countries. the issue is that again, border migrations, migrations are up from not just the northern triangle countries, but from haiti, from cuba, nicaragua, countries where you are seeing communist regimes causing migrants to flee. amna: all of this as we see record migration across the planet more so than any time in modern history. laura barone lopez, thank you so much. amna: the 2022 midterm elections are less than one month away and a handful of states will be critical in deciding the balance of the u.s. senate.

one of those states is wisconsin, where democratic lieutenant governor mandela barnes is looking to unseat the republican incumbent senator ron johnson, who has a slight lead in the latest polls. the two candidates face off in their second debate tonight. judy woodruff recently visited the badger state and has this report. reporter: in wisconsin's columbia county, about an hour north madison, neighbors rick donovan and peter grimm ha plenty in common. >> ok fetch. reporter: they're both avid hunters. they're both catholic. they even grew up within minutes of each other in milwaukee. but when it comes to politics, and specifically this year's u-s senate election, these friends of almost a decade disagree. >> ron johnson has just been rubber stamp republican policies. mandela barnes at least is is talking about unifying the state, talking about working for every city in this state. every person. and i like that message a lot more.

>> i tend to worry about some of the things with barnes more than at the other end with johnson. i worry about safety in our country. reporter: the republican incumbent ron johnson, a 67-year-old oshkosh businessman, is seeking his third term in the senate. his democratic challenger, 35 year old mandela barnes, is wisconsin's milwaukee-born lieutenant governor, and a former community organizer. >> barnes and johnson are about as different as you could get in terms of their personal backgrounds, their life experience, their positi on the issues. reporter: barry burden is a political science professor at the university of wisconsin-madison. he says interest in this senate race isn't necessarily about enthusiasm for either candidate. >> i think it is fear about the

other side winning. democrats are so eager to have ron johnson out of office. they have seen him move in a more radical direction, the kind of governing style trump was engaged in. barnes is raising concern among those who don't want to see what they do as a radical agenda. reporter: wisconsin is often described as a purple state. with the results shifting from republican to democratic from election to election. in reality you might say it's more of a tapestry in red and blue, with urban areas like the capital city here, madison, voting predominantly democratic. the rest of the state essentially republican. and with these midterm elections drawing closer, voters tell us they feel the divisions are growing even deeper. >> in a state like wisconsin, there aren't many undecided voters. the swing voters or split ticket voters probably amount to less than 10% of the people who will participate this fall. so the campaigns maybe view that as a riskier strategy to try to win over those people, and they

would rather generate excitement or enthusiasm or fear from their own supporters and use that to get to the votes they need to win. reporter: with that strategy has come tens of millions of dollars in campaign spending. much of it from outside groups , and an onslaught of negative advertisements. >> johnson even supported a ceo in oshkosh who's taking 1,000 new jobs to south carolina. when asked why, johnson said wisconsin has enough jobs. >> barnes wanted to abolish ice and open our borders to illegal immigrants, and release violent felons without bail. mandela barnes, dangerously liberal on crime. reporter: johnson attacked barnes over rising crime during the candidates' first debate last week in milwaukee. >> he has a record of wanting to defund the police. now, i know he doesn't necessarily say that word, but he has a long history of being supported by people that are leading the effort to defund. he

uses codewords like reallocate, over bloated police budgets. he says it pains him to see fully funded police budgets. reporter: barnes responded to that criticism when we spoke at a milwaukee campaign stop. >> it's important that we make sure communities have the resources they need to prevent crime from happening in the first place. and ron johnson should be so bold as to talk about crime when he voted against the american rescue plan. our administration invested $100 million into law enforcement, public safety and crime prevention initiatives, and ron johnson voted against it because he'd rather play politics than do the right thing and keep people safe. reporter: meanwhile, barnes and democrats nationwide have made abortion a centerpiece of their campaigns, following the supreme court's overturning of roe v. wade. >> we are going to hold ron johnson accountable for his dangerous record on abortion. he celebrated the dobbs decision. he said it was correctly decided. he said that if women don't like the laws in their state like our 1849 criminal abortion ban, they could just move. it's callous, it's out of touch. reporter: johnson's campaign did not respond to our repeated

requests for an interview or information about his public schedule. on abortion, johnson says he wants voters to weigh in through a referendum. and he's tried to re-direct attention to the economy. >> we've added $7.5 trillion of new deficits over just the last three years. that is the greatest threat. that is what has also sparked inflation, 40 year high inflation. do you realize that a dollar you held at the start of the biden administration is only worth 88.3 cents? reporter: johnson supporter michelle hoppe, who lives near madison, says inflation is critical. >> people are feeling it and they are hurting. and it is a direct result of overspending and overstimulating an economy that they didn't need to do. that is what creates inflation is all of this unnecessary spending. it's got to stop. reporter: while milwaukee's sydney lee says what's driving her vote is a fear her rights would be threatened if johnson wins re-election. >> i want to make sure we have

abortion access because reproductive rights are human rights and everybody needs to have access to them. i want to make sure we get somebody in office who is going to do what they need to do to make sure that rights are protected and people are protected. the university of wisconsin's barry burden says abortion has fallen some as an issue as almost four months have passed since the roe decision. he also says bnes has been hurt by republican attacks over crime. >> there hasn't been much in the way of a full throated defense from barnes. he has said mainly that johnson and his allies have distorted his positions on crime and on ice and policing and all of those related issues. but he has not really put together a clear, proactive message about what he would do about police violence or criminal justice more generally. reporter: at the same time, burden says johnson's potential vulnerabilities -- like his actions around january 6 and ties to former president trump have gone relatively little attention.

put all this together, and democrats are concerned even in this effectively tied race, where fear seems to be driving voters on both sides like columbia county neighbors peter grimm and rick donovan. >> i just don't trust what'll happen with barnes. i think he'll ignite a lot of things. >> do you think people are less safe if barnes is elected to the senate? >> i believe so. >> i just know the republicans, they've done so much too far to the right. i'm afraid of them. i'm afraid that they'll hurt me. reporter: grimm and donovan say they still try to keep their friendship above politics. but as election day nears, they wish others in this fiercely divided state could do the same. amna: online right now, a look at the future of electric vehicles and what it means for the automotive industry as the biden administration pushes car makers and car buyers into new

territory. that is at pbs.org/newshour. that is the newshour for tonight. i'm amna nawaz. join us online and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us at the pbs newshour, thank you and see you soon. reporter: major funding for the pbs has been provided by. >> for 25 years consumer cellular has been offering no contract wireless plans designed to help people do more of what they like. our u.s.-based customer service team can find a plan that fits you. to learn more visit consumer cellular.tv. >> the ford foundation working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. and friends of the newshour including leonard and normal clarifying. and patricia ewing.

and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the newshour. this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. this is the pbs newshour from w eta -- studios in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university.

-"jacques pépin: heart & soul" is brought to you by... for those who cook with heart and soul, we present a kitchen made with passion. introducing the completely reimagined suite of appliances from kitchenaid. you can see more at kitchenaid.com. oxo good grips -- thoughtfully yours. vine connections, proud importer of luca, boutique argentine wines from fourth-generation wine maker laura catena. bertolli -- proudly crafting olive oil since 1865. -viva bertolli! -riedel, the wine glass company. -oceania cruises -- worldwide destinations, fine dining, personalized service. your world. your way.