captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> ifill: officials ramped up the fight today against wildfires burning out of control in colorado and new mexico. good evening, i'm gwen ifill. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight, we have the latest on the fires that have destroyed buildings, charred wilderness areas and caused hundreds of people to evacuate. >> ifill: then we turn to europe's debt crisis and the $125 billion deal to rescue spain's troubled banks. >> woodruff: ray suarez examines pledges by insurance companies

to keep offering benefits mandated by the new health care reform law, even if the supreme court strikes it down. >> ifill: paul solman poses some tough moral questions to harvard professor michael sandel raised in his new book, "what money can't buy." >> when almost everything in our public life is sold off to the highest bidder, something is lost, money comes to matter more and more in our society, and that takes a toll on the commonality of our civic life. >> woodruff: we update the violence in syria as the rebels battle government forces with increasingly sophisticated weapons. >> ifill: and we close with an encore look at the story of "porgy and bess," as the revival of the classic opera wins two tony awards. >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

>> this is the at&t network-- a living, breathing intelligence bringing people together to bring new ideas to life. >> look, it's so simple. >> in a year, the bright minds from inside and outside the company come together to work on an idea. adding to it from the road, improving it in the cloud, all in real time. >> good idea. >> it's the at&t network. providing new ways to work together, so business works better. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you.

>> ifill: fire managers in colorado and new mexico spent the day calling in major new manpower and hoping for help from nature. the developments underscored that fire season has set in with a vengeance in the southwest. thick clouds of smoke drifted across the northern colorado sky as flames consumed more and more of the forest below. the high park fire is believed to have been sparked early saturday by a lightning strike 15 miles west of fort collins. since then, the big blaze has covered more than 60 square miles, with nothing to slow it down. >> we're still at 0% containment. so, obviously very significant growth over the night. it's a very aggressive fire. it's fuel driven, wind driven and so the conditions have not been favorable. it's grown in a number of different ways. >> ifill: the fire has damaged

or destroyed more than 100 homes and other buildings so far. one person is missing. 78-year-old velma hudson and her husband jim were among hundreds of people forced to flee saturday. they left their pooder park home with only the clothes on their backs. >> everything is still there. we walked out with nothing. i grabbed my purse, he forgot his glasses which we have to get. that's it. we're here. we're alive and we know we're okay. the roar of that fire and movement of the wind was atrocious. i've never seen or never heard it and we've lived in colorado most of our lives. >> ifill: the larimer county fairgrounds in loveland provided shelter for humans as well as horses and livestock rescued from the fire. for those who left their homes, there was only anguished waiting. >> shell-shocked. i was telling my friend, i feel like there is no solid ground beneath me right now.

>> very worried. i don't know if we have a place to go to or not. it's right in the middle of it. >> ifill: meanwhile, crews in southern new mexico battled a 54-square-mile fire near the town of ruidoso. helicopters carried huge buckets of water to douse the flames, as crews battled for advantage on the ground. in some places, it was already too late. >> we have a lot of faith. my faith is so deep that i know that whatever happens it's not that it's god's fault. >> ifill: on sunday night, new mexico governor susana martinez deployed scores of additional national guard troops to help with evacuations. at the same time, an even larger wildfire continued burning in southwest new mexico. the whitewater-baldy blaze has

charred 450 square miles since mid-may, mostly in remote areas. the other fires are closer to populated areas. in colorado, 400 firefighters are already deployed against the high park fire, with 200 more due in the next 24 hours. fire team leaders warned today, they've got a long, hard job ahead. >> even though that fuel looks green, normally wouldn't burn this time of year, but it's burning very well. that's why we're getting this aggressive and active fire behavior that we are. then you mix the winds and the low humidity that we had yesterday, for example, we're going to have a lot of fire growth in this situation, in this terrain. >> ifill: add to that this year's chronic drought, and officials say the prescription is perfect for the southwest's worst fire season in many years. >> woodruff: still to come on the "newshour": the bail-out for spanish banks; health care benefits no matter how the supreme court rules; what money can't buy; arms for the rebels

in syria and tony awards for a musical and a lead actress. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: from fire in the southwest to heavy rain in the deep south. new donwpours moved across the gulf coast and florida panhandle today inundating already flooded areas. that was on top of record rain over the weekend. in pensacola, more than 13 inches fell on saturday, followed by two more on sunday. entire apartment complexes were flooded, cars were stranded in high water, and riptides were forecast along the coast. one person drowned in the rough surf on sunday. the sexual abuse trial of a retired penn state football coach began in earnest today. prosecutors branded jerry sandusky a "predatory pedophile" who molested ten boys over 15 years. the defense suggested the alleged victims had a financial motive. one man-- now 28 years old-- testified that sandusky repeatedly abused him during showers, starting in 1997. and, he said, the former coach

sent him creepy love letters. violent crime reported to police fell in 2011, for a fifth straight year. the f.b.i. reported the 4% drop today. it said the decrease was seen in all four regions of the country. property crime was down for the ninth straight year, falling nearly 1%. commerce secretary john bryson is under investigation for two traffic accidents in the los angeles area on saturday. police said today he has been cited for felony hit-and-run in the crashes, that happened within minutes of each other. commerce department officials said he suffered a seizure while driving. a los angeles county sheriff's spokesman said officers found bryson alone in his car after the second collision. >> when he struck that vehicle he was basically unconscious behind the wheel. los angeles county fire dept paramedics did respond and treated him at the scene however he was transported to a local hospital where he was admitted for observation. >> sreenivasan: bryson is now back in washington. the people who were hit were treated for minor injuries.

hosni mubarak-- the former president of egypt-- faced a new health crisis today, in a cairo prison hospital. security officials said doctors had to revive him twice with a heart de-fibrillator, when they could not find a pulse. mubarak is 84 years old, and suffers from high blood pressure, depression and breathing ailments. he is now serving a life sentence for failing to event the killing of protesters in last year's uprising that forced him from office. u.s. negotiators are leaving pakistan, after failing to get a deal that reopens military supply routes into afghanistan. white house officials confirmed the move today, following a month of fruitless talks. they said the next move is up to islamabad. pakistan closed the supply routes last november, when a u.s. air strike killed two dozen pakistani troops. on wall street, a bank bailout in spain did little to encourage investors. the dow jones industrial average lost nearly 143 points to close at 12,411. it had been up 100 points in early trading. the nasdaq fell 48 points to close at 2,809. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to judy.

>> woodruff: and we turn again to the european economic crisis and the problems it poses here and globally. one of europe's larger economies in spain is especially threatened. this weekend, leaders announced a major bailout of its troubled banks. but once again, there are questions about the latest rescue package. markets around the world initially soared today on hopes that a new rescue package would go a long way toward bolstering spain's ailing bank sector. but the early optimism was overtaken by worries that the bailout isn't enough. >> ( translated ): spain's problems have not been solved. they have just been moved. the clock for the eurozone has turned back from five-to-12 to 10-to-12 so we won a little bit of time. but the main problem is still the spanish economy and its inability to carry out reforms and that is something that needs to be worked on. >> woodruff: on saturday, spain's economy minister formally asked for aid. the 17-nation eurozone responded, approving a loan of

up to $125 billion. spanish prime minister mariano rajoy: >> ( translated ): i would like to thank the spanish people as they understand some of the decisions that we are taking. they have been difficult, hard and complicated, but believe me that it is vital that these decisions are taken to get out of this situation. >> woodruff: spain has the fourth largest economy in the euro-zone, but the country's banks have been saddled with toxic assets since the real estate bubble collapsed. and high borrowing costs have curtailed the spanish government's ability to help. still, the rescue package triggered mixed reaction in madrid. >> ( translated ): i trust the government we have now much more than the previous one. they seem to be more prepared. >> ( translated ): i do not feel totally safe because after this bailout, we don't know how this is going to end up, and how are we all going to end up. how are we all going to end up

paying for this? >> woodruff: the uncertainty underscores spain's perilous state, stuck in its second recession in three years, with one out of every four people unemployed. three other debt-stricken european countries have already sought international aid-- greece, portugal and ireland. but if greece's anti-bailout left-wing syriza party wins sunday's elections, greek membership in the euro-zone could be in jeopardy. that prospect would put even more pressure on spain, which may be why madrid acted now, to avoid the potential market chaos. some analysis now of the latest efforts and what was behind the urgency of it. it comes from douglas rediker. he represented the u.s. on the executive board of the i.m.f. from 2010 to the beginning of this year, he's now a senior fellow at the new america foundation. and jacob kirkegaard, who closely watches european matters

for the peterson institute for international economics. jacob kierkegaard, let me start with you. all of this stems from the collapse of the real estate bubble in spain and the banks holding the bag. >> basically. i mean what you have on a national scale in spain is essentially what we've seen in some of the regions of the united states, in nevada, south florida, south california, where essentially you have an enormous increase in housing prices and a subsequent bust. and the bust breaks the back of the banks. that needs to be a bailout. unfortunately, the spanish government has been in denial about the true state of its banks for pretty much since the crisis began. but you could say that finally they have run out of options so what happened over the weekend was really the end of denial. >> woodruff: douglas rediker, what caused them to change their minds? because as we have just heard they have been saying for days and days that this wasn't necessary. >> not just days and days.

they've been saying it for a lot longer than that. at the end of april there was a report issueded, a preliminary report but a report nonetheless, by the i.m.f., which gave their financial assessment of the financial sector of spain. that highlighted the weakness of one of the large banks. that set in motion a chain of events in which the government had to put money on the table to save it. where was the money coming from not just for the bank but for the broader financial system in spain as a whole? that's the step that led to what we saw this weekend. >> woodruff: just to be care, jacob kierkegaard, this is a bailout that's different from what happened with greece, with portugal with ireland, is that right? explain how. >> basically some people have used the expression bailout-light about this. there's some truth to that because basically what this is, it's a loan to the spanish government with the intent... an earmark loan that basically goes towards the sole purpose of recap tallizing the spanish banking system which is quite

unlike the three other bailouts or the traditional i.m.f. bailout where basically you finance all of the financing needs from the entire government including deficits and everything else is covered by, you know, the i.m.f. or the euro area combined. this is not the case here. it's solely for the purpose of recap tallizing the banks. >> woodruff: douglas rediker, how solid a deal is this? i saw a quote today from the nobel prize-winning economist joseph stiglitz who said this isn't going to work because the government is bailing out the banks that have bailed out the government by buying government debt. how do you see that? >> that's not the problem here. because that's an issue that we've got which is a dynamic that has pervaded the entire european crisis for years. that relationship between the banks and the sovereigns is one of the dynamics that needs to be broken. so the cycle being broken... >> woodruff: being? the governments. the problem is the first part of your question which is how

solvent is the deal? that's why the markets responded as they did today because there are a lot of ambiguities and uncertainties here, not the least of which is where the money coming from and who is it going to and on what terms? most people would consider that could be a rather soft deal if those basic parameters are not defined. >> woodruff: let's take those questions one by one. where is the money coming from? i'll ask you that one. >> it's unclear yet. the money is supposed to come from either of the e.f.s.f. which is the establishedded mechanism for the europeans. the european financial stability fund. or the e.s.m., the european stability mechanism which doesn't exist yet. it's going to exist assuming ratification at the end of this month. it's actually a much more stable entity once it is ratified. but it isn't in existence yet. let's be clear. it doesn't have any money yet because, of course, it doesn't exist yet. it's supposed to be funded by the european governments and the markets, a combination. but it hasn't happened yet.

>> woodruff: does that explain why the markets were less than confident today? >> i think thisas a lot to do... i think the bigger implementation risk is what doug also mentioned which is where is the money going because we still don't know where precisely. he with haven't heard from the spanish government other the independent auditors that they have hired to basically audit the spanish banks. how much money needs to go to which bank? and what are the conditions under which they would be injected into these banks? will existing shareholders be wiped out or not? what will happen? all of these are details we don't know. >> woodruff: why was this announced, douglas rediker, if they haven't have all these details worked out? we foo there's the greek election coming up this weekend. >> i think we've seen in the last several years that the europeans have done a very good job of rhetorically announcing things with details to follow. even the e.f.s.f. or the e.s.m., those entities that are the big

bayingout mechanisms, they have been announced over the years in a very rhetorical way with the bureaucrats and technocrats and central bankers and others to fill in the gaps later. the markets want to see... the european policy makers makers come together and make a commitment. whether it turns out to be as real as they think is less important than actually showing that they can actually spend a weekend, come together, and make an announcement that appears to actually demonstrate in cohesive commitment. so far they've done a pretty good job with that. >> woodruff: at the same time you're saying that there's less than a complete confidence that the money, if it is found, if they can pull this money together from these entities, we've been hearing about, that it's going to be spent in the way that it needs to be spent. >> the key issue here is that the spanish government has lost all credibility in the financial markets. they're basically in my opinion quite worried that this is the same spanish government that will be overseeing the

disbursement of all this money to individual spanish banks. how is it going to be done? is the spanish government going to look out for their political friends in some of the spanish regions or not? there's just a lot of uncertainty about that. and then also coming back to your question about why did it happen now? i think a major reason was this significant pressure both by the european central bank whom we should remember the spanish government just a few weeks ago were trying to convince to buy their bonds so they wouldn't have to take this more public bailout. there was a lot of pressure for them basically to get ahead of the spanish, sorry, the greek elections. >> woodruff: just to conclude at this moment, what does one look for next to know whether is going to work or not? >> i think what you're going to have to see is where is the money coming from? this sounds simple. where is the money really coming from? and who is going to actually receive it? more importantly, the third part, on what terms?

even today we saw the finance minister of spain basically say that this was very, very little in terms of conditionality, in terms of the terms. at the same time an hour or two later you heard the german finance minister say, no, we are looking for real conditionality that would be imposed by some combination of the european central bank, the european authorities and the i.m.f., and that really remains an outstanding uncertain term. i think it's a pretty major one to be outstanding at this point. >> woodruff: more clarity needed. >> indeed. woodruff: thank you, both. douglas rediker, jacob kierkegaard, we appreciate it. >> thank you. >> woodruff: find "newshour" economics correspondent paul solman's "pain-in-spain" tweets on his "making sense" page, including a viral version of the lord's prayer. >> ifill: now, major health insurers announced today they plan to keep some provisions of the federal health reform law

intact, whether the supreme court rejects it or not. ray suarez has the story. >> suarez: much of the coverage about the supreme court's impending decision has focused on the political stakes. but it's being watched just as closely by the health care industry-- doctors, hospitals, insurers and employers among them. and of course, by patients. today, the country's largest health insurer, united healthcare, which serves 36 million members, said it would uphold several provisions even if the court overturns the law. aetna and humana followed with similar anuncemes this afternoon. for more, we turn to susan dentzer, editor in chief of the journal, health affairs. she's an analyst for the "newshour." susan, remind us where we're at right now. not all the provisions of the affordable care act have taken effect. but which ones have and which ones have proved to be popular? >> the ones that united said today it was keeping and that other insurers echoed are exactly those that have already gone into effect.

first of all, for example, coverage of certain preventive measures. mammographies, colonoscopies without any cost-sharing or copayments or deductibles by individuals. coverage of dependents, adult children, up to the age of 26 another very popular provision. most insurers have already implemented. in addition to that, a requirement that there be a very expedited, very clear appeals process. abolition of life-time limits on insurance policies so you can't max out at a any... million dollars of total coverage and then have no insurance. no more life-time limits. then in addition a rule against rescissions of policies so that, for example, if you sign up for a policy, you testify that you're healthy but then it's suddenly discovered that you have cancer, it used to be the case that insurers could actually rescind the policy. now many of them have essentially decided not to do that. in fact under the law they don't do that, they cannot do that.

and instead they will only basically cancel a policy if it's found that you somehow applied for it on a fraudulent basis. those are the core provisions that are already in effect and that these insurers have said that they will continue. >> suarez: so, conversely, are there any big parts either still to come or already in place that either united health care or any of the other major insurers have said they're not so sure about or they haven't included in these announcements? >> one of the big ones that united pointed to -- and of course the other companies echoed this -- that they could not move on by themselves is the requirement that children be covered up to the age of 19 without having preexisting condition restrictions held against them. so that, for example, your child with congenital heart disease. under the law you're going to have to be offered... your family will have to be offered a plan and your preexisting heart disease as child cannot be excluded from that. the insurers would have liked to

have been able to say that they could move on their own without this. think about it. if you are an insurer and you say i'm going to cover all children who are very, very sick, you're a magnet for families who are affected and will enroll in your policy. it's known as adverse selection. no insurance company can do this on its own. the industry would have to do it jointly. if the provisions of the affordable care act for some reason stricken down, united said it wants to have this discussion with the industry. could we keep this going? in fact i think that if the court does strike down that provision or other provisions, you'd see the industry trying to coalesce around a plan to cover it. they think that these things are now woven into the fabric of coverage is the phrase that some of them are using. they've already adapted to these changes. they think these are popular. they think these this are good for health and they want to maintain them. >> suarez: are there parts of this law that, without the mandate, if, let's say, that

were to be struck down, would become very uneconomic? does the economics of the whole law hang together because of the mandate? and would it, would the insurance companies be able to do some of the things that are required by the law? >> well, to go back to the example of coverage of the children with preexisting conditions, that's one that is very difficult to have insurers offer without a mandate. again, even if a bunch of insurers said we're all going to do this, typically if you had those kinds of policies, it would be families with ill children who would tend to sign up and maybe families who didn't have ill children would not sign up. you get this same phenomenon of adverse selection. that's part of the reason the insurers wanted this entire package and saw all of these reforms as very positive but only with the addition of the individual mandate. if everybody, if every family has to have insurance, you can't decide not to have it because i

got lucky and my child was not born with a preexisting condition and i can stay out of insurance. instead, everybody is in the pool. the costs of treating the sick people, children or adults, are spread across the very broad pool of healthier individuals because everybody is in insurance coverage. that's the way the system works. >> suarez: quickly. now that a bunch of big insurers have said yes we're going to keep these provisions whether the law survives or not, are they still holding their breath to see what's going to happen to their business model come decision day? what's still pending that really is important? >> well, in spite of the fact that these provisions already in effect are very important we know that the bigger pieces are yet to come. for example, the broader move to offer coverage through health insurance exchanges, to couple that with federal subsidies and really move to closer to universal coverage. that's where the mandate piece is of great interest to the companies. the companies have said they do

not see how the system will work if the individual mandate is struck down by the court. they would have to revis it the entire law at that point. >> suarez: susan dentzer, thanks a lot. >> great to be with you, >> suarez: online, we have much more on the health care reform law, including a primer on the coming supreme court ruling from the "national law journal's" marcia coyle. >> woodruff: now, is it wrong to pay to get to the head of the line? "newshour" economics correspondent paul solman explores that question and some related ones in a conversation with the author of a new book. it's part of paul's regular reporting, "making sense of financial news." >> do i think i should be able to bid for a baby. i'm not sure! it's a market, i mean... >> reporter: michael sandel has been called one of the most

prominent college professors in america for his course justice, now online after having been taken by some 25% of all harvard undergrads over the past two decades. sandel orchestrates a discussion among the courses one thousand students, mixing case studies with moral stalwarts from aristotle to john rawls. early in the term, sandel asks students if everything should be for sale-- mediated by the marketplace, that is. like the value of a human life, which posited at $200,000 in one case study, student julia roto thought far too low. >> what do you think would be a more accurate number? >> i don't think i could give a number. i think this sort of analysis shouldn't be applied to issues of human life. >> reporter: and thus the theme of sandel's new book, what money can't buy. or shouldn't be able to buy, as he explained in an interview at

harvard's student-run phillips brooks house. michael sandel, welcome. >> good to be here. >> reporter: what bothers you about what's been happening to our market economy? >> over the last three decades, we've actually drifted without quite realizing it, from having a market economy to becoming a market society. and the difference is this: a market economy is a tool, a valuable and effective tool, for organizing productive activity; but a market society is a place where almost everything is up for sale. it's a way of life where market values seep into almost every sphere of life and sometimes crowd out or corrode important values, non-market values. >> reporter: let's get down to cases. queuing, buying your place in line. >> right. >> reporter: what's wrong with that? >> well, it's interesting to notice that over the past three decades there are many aspects of life where you can pay your way to the head of the line.

in airports, those long lines of security check points, if you're flying on an expensive ticket you can go to the head of the line. even if you're flying coach, the airlines will sell you, as an a la carte perk, the right to go to the head of the line for the security check. >> reporter: hey, at logan airport i have a gold passport card right here, where i think it was $200 and i get to park on the third level of central parking and i have to confess i love that. >> okay. but here's the question. is there a difference between paying for a service, a better parking place, or even paying to board the airplane first so you get access to the overhead bin-- that's a service-- and paying to go to the head of the queue for security checks which after all are to provide for national security to prevent terrorism on

airplanes? is that paying for a service or is that paying for a public good? >> reporter: so you're the moral philosopher, is it okay for me and members of the audience to buy the v.i.p. pass that gets me special access to parking at boston's airport? >> yes, it's fine paul. i'm not here to give a moral sermon about every instance of, of paying more for a servi. but, it's happening in other parts of our social life where it does matt. take a small example. in washington d.c., there are line standing companies, they've arisen because the seats are limited for congressional hearings, often the lines are long, lobbyists want to attend but they don't like standing in a very long line maybe overnight. >> reporter: well, their time is very valuable. >> so what they do is they go to line-standing companies and they, those companies hire

homeless people and others, pay them an hourly rate to stand in those long lines until just before the hearing, the lobbyists arrive, take their the same line standing companies will get you a line stander to, at the supreme court if you want to hear an oral argument that's very popular. now, different isn't it from a preferred a parking place or boarding the plane early? >> reporter: all right, i have an intuition that it's not right somehow to sell tickets to congressional hearings but i'm not exactly sure why it's wrong, only that it sounds sort of distasteful. >> it's wrong for two reasons. one is about equal access. in a democratic society everyone should have equal access to representative government, to congressional hearings, to supreme court arguments. the other reason its wrong is that it demeans representative government. it's demeaning to the whole idea of government in the name of the

public good to have ticket scalpers hawking seats in the appropriations committee. >> reporter: in his book, ndel mentions an episode on h.b.o.'s curb your enthusiasm where larry david is stuck in traffic. >> i'm not going to use the car pool lane by myself. >> reporter: at this point, opportunity knocks. >> hey, daddy, you want a date with mama? >> get in the car. >> and he got there on time! this was a novel use of a market mechanism to gain access to a car pool lane but today in many cities larry david would not have to bother hiring a prostitute to ride in the seat next to him, he and everyone else can simply pay to ride in

the fast lane solo provided you pay the fee. >> reporter: you have a problem with that or not? you'd outlaw that or you wouldn't? >> i don't think it's objectionable by itself. i would not ban it. but the question that worries me is when almost everything in our public life not just access to the fast lane is sold off to the highest bidder, something is lost, money comes to matter more and more in our society, and against the background of rising inequality that takes a toll on the commonality of our civic life. >> reporter: and that's where you're coming from with all of this? >> yes, my concern is with the accumulated effect. are we cheapening important social goods and civic goods that are worth caring about? >> reporter: michael sandel, thank you very much.

>> thank you, paul. >> woodruff: check back to our website tomorrow, when we'll have more from paul's conversation with michael sandel, including a look at online bets that only pay out once someone dies. >> ifill: next to syria, where violence is spiking in the 15-month conflict as both sides turn to increasingly lethal weapons. activists in the syrian city of homs posted this video today-- rows of the wounded, seeking help at a school-turned- makeshift treatment center. for many, it was also a refuge. >> ( translated ): they shell the people. the injured are in a school. this is all the medical aid that we have. the injured cannot be sent to hospitals, there are no doctors and no specialists. >> ifill: outside, smoke drifted into the morning sky-- evidence

of continued shelling in homs, which reportedly killed 38 people on sunday. dozens more died today as fighting spread nationwide, in what looks increasingly like civil war. opposition groups spoke of intensified shelling across homs and hama, and in the northern province of aleppo. the suburbs of damascus, daraa to the south, and deir el-zour in the east were said to be under government fire as well. kofi annan-- the u.n. special envoy to syria-- said in a statement he is gravely concerned. he demanded that u.n. military observers be allowed into the coastal town of al-haffa, where large numbers of civilians are believed to be trapped. that's given rise to fears of a new massacre. in washington, state department spokeswoman victoria nuland said there's no telling what the syrian regime might do. >> what government voluntarily uses helicopters and fires from

them on their own civilians if they are not desperate. what kind of government depends on a bunch of thugs in trucks, irregulars, if they are not desperate. so, clearly the government is under threat. ( explosion ) >> ifill: indeed, syrian helicopter gunships launched an aerial attack today on the rebel-held town of rastan, north of homs. opposition groups said government forces face growing losses on the ground. so, they're resorting to air strikes instead. that comes amid reports that the rebels are stepping up attacks with anti-tank missiles-- a sign of their improved military capability. >> ifill: for more on the growing prospects for civil war in syria, we turn to andrew tabler of the washington institute for near east policy. he lived in syria for most of the last decade and founded an english-language magazine there. and mona yacoubian, she lived in syria as a fulbright scholar during the mid 1980s. during the 1990s, she was an analyst at the state department. she's now with the stimson

center, a washington research organization. andrew tabler, who are the rebels? >> well, there's the civilian opposition, of course. the ones who you're seeing concerning the tax, those are the free syrian army and their affiliates. those include defectors from the syrian army who went to turkey, defekors from the syrian army who now operate within the country, with the opposition. and sort of local affiliates with sort of like the equivalent of minutemen during the american revolution who protect protestors. they are increasingly carrying out attacks against the assad regime throughout the country. >> ifill: na yacoubian, when we have seen another regime fall or attempt to be overthrown we've seen these rebels spring up. how do we know they're not fighting each other? >> we haven't had reports of rebels fighting each other at this point in syria. it's also clear that there's no

centralized command and control. the situation on the ground frankly appears to be getting increasingly chaotic as noted by your report. >> ifill: is there a sectarian split at work here? >> clearly there's a sectarian issue at play in syria today. the regime is is a minority regime. the rebels are largely sunni. so we're seeing increasingly that the battles on the ground take on a sectarian character. we've had massacres, for example, in the recent weeks of civilians largely sunni. it is alleged that government para-military forces that are alowti tevment have undertaken those. there's a sectarian dimension and it appears to be growing. >> ifill: andrew tabler there has been much discussion here in washington about what the u.s. or other countries should do to remove assad. where do we think the money is coming from or the aid is coming

from to help that happen by supporting these rebel groups? >> the money is coming from the arab gulf. qatar and saudi arabia's names are often put forward as well as of that of curbing key. the exact trail is is unclear. the kind of weapons entering syria are growing increasingly sophisticated. it seems there's a lot more light arms and the kinds of opposition that the f.s.a. is putting across to the regime is increasingly effective. it's like the carnival game where elite divisions try to go into areas, reassert their control, they do temporarily. they have to chase the mole and then of course the protestors and the armed elements come back up in those areas. that's why the regime is resorting to shelling, helicopter gunships and the situation is worsening and more people are dying. >> ifill: the regime is frustrated with this strategy but is it the kind of support that these rebel groups are getting from outside syria, is

it enough to overthrow the regime? >> well, it can certainly wear it down. but the russians and iranians continue to resupply the regime. the regime can hold on for some time but not like before. sort of like the regime today in algeria in the '90s. but it's not at the center of the middle east, doesn't have all that oil revenue. of course you have a lot of rebels receiving a lot of support from the outside. we're in for a very, very long fight in syria in the coming months and perhaps even years. >> ifill: so far the united states' role has been limited to nonlethal said. there has been no effort to get in the battle directly. but should there be more? is there more that the u.s. can be doing or that we know that they are doing? >> i think given the chaotic soition the ground inside syria, it does not make sense to either arm the rebels or undertake broader military intervention. i think we're looking at a situation that is increasingly unpredictable. it would be very difficult, for example, to assert that arms are

getting in the right hands. there are increased reports of jihaddist elements that have made their way into the syrian arena. my own sense is that i think the u.s. needs to continue on a diplomatic track. >> ifill: andrew tabler, on the other side, the flip side of this, you're shaking your head. you don't agree that the diplomatic track is a good idea. >> the diplomatic track is not working. it doesn't mean we have to abandon it. the annan plan is not working. the russians are not bending yet. i agree with mona that i think we should continue but plan-b, supporting the opposition within syria, has us getting the hoping of plan-a. otherwise, i don't really see the russians bending. now, regardless of all of this, i think we're very limited in how we can effect the outcome. this hurricane is gathering on the eastern mediterranean. i really don't know what we can do to stop it. we can deal with the effects of it but the most important thing is that... is for the united states to achieve president obama's policy objective of

getting president assad to step asigh. if the russians want to help us with that, that's great. if not we have to prepare for that and prepare an alliance that will achieve that objective. >> ifill: mona yacoubian, how does this compare to what we have seen and watched in places like libya like egypt in which opposition rose up, removed someone from power and then it wasn't really clear what the next step was? >> this is so much more of a protracted situation. certainly than what we've seen in egypt and even in libya. the opposition is still in a state of disarray. it doesn't hold any territory firmly. there's no syrian been ghazi, for example. the opposition has remained often at odds within itself. there have been all kinds of rivalries inside the syrian opposition so it's a much more difficult situation, i think, for foreign intervention. the one point i would sort of push back on with andrew is in some ways we may very well be at that tipping point into a long

and drawnout sectarian civil war. this may be the last best chance for diplomacy. it may well be that the russians and the united states come together and work out a plan that, in fact, put syria on a track toward a more stable transition. >> ifill: andrew tabler, do you see there's a successor perhaps in line or is there any clear plan if suddenly this nonlethal aid were to work and the rebels were to triumph? >> i don't think we're quite there yet. i mean you'd have to... if you really want to put a yemen plan in place, you have to think about who could step into that. i don't think that we're close to that situation. the problem is that it seems like this regime is going to go very, very bloodily. and i hope that there is a negotiated transition in syria, but the handover of power, because it's a minority dominated regime it makes it resilient against those kinds of splits, trying to convince the military, for example, to oust the assad family.

it think it will be extremely difficult even if the russians decide to really throw their weight behind the idea. >> ifill: thank you both very much. >> woodruff: finally tonight: a reworked version of george gershwin's opera "porgy and bess" garnered two tony awards last night for best musical revival and best lead actress in a musical, audra mcdonald. we reported on the new interpretation of the classic in september when it was in a pre- broadway run in cambridge, massachusetts. our encore look comes from pbs station wgbh in boston. the reporter is jared bowen. >> reporter: "porgy and bess," much like the tale of tortured romance it tells, has been mightily tossed by storms during its 76-year history-caught in tempests over creative license and charges of racism. now it is once again at the

american repertory theater in cambridge which is staging a new adaptation. >> bess, you is my woman now. >> reporter: the show is set in catfish row-- a fictionalized enclave of charleston, south carolina where drugs and violence are pervasive. it's after a murder that the drug-addled bess lands in the arms of the crippled beggar porgy. this view of african american life in the 1930s came fm the shows white creators-- george and ira gershwin and dubose heyward. david alan grier plays sporting life, a drug dealer. >> it was a different time. you know, the outlet of black voices, black intellectuals to tell our story was different. >> reporter: from the moment george gershwin chose to adapt dubose heywards novel porgy into an opera, there's been controversy.

controversy that he'd dare to create anything but popular music. that he'd dare write music solely for african american performers at a me when much of the country was segregated. and that he'd presume to be able to tell the story of a black community. audra mcdonald plays bess in this production. >> when people say is porgy and bess racist, i say no just because i really feel that he had the best intentions when he wrote it. he wanted to get in and be inside of a community, this african american community and show their wants, their desires, their hopes, their dreams, their fears as opposed to just the >> reporter: when it debuted in boston in september, 1935 and on broadway shortly after, porgy and bess was punctuated with pointed stereotypes and grossly derogatory terms. adapting the opera today for the american repertory theater musical is pulitzer prize- winning playwright suzan-lori parks. >> i didn't approach it like it's a racist show so i have to make it politically correct. not at all!

>> ♪ there's big money. >> from the very beginning we were setting out to make sure that this is about these people. and their struggles and their story and really focusing on the dramatic story as opposed to look at all those black uses stereotypical accent people up there. boy, they sing well and oh, they get passionate and you know and then they kill and they drink the whiskey and the smoke, the whatever, so i don't feel like i've had to stress about that in any way. ♪ >> the mammy, a large woman with the hand on the hip doing that, the aunt jemima type kind of thing.

characters and so instead of a mammy moment, i made a mamma moment or a mommy moment in which i said, "well, how could this moment work in the real world. what would mariah have on i thought, "oh, she knows his mother." and any tough guy we know, all tough guys, if you start saying hey i know your mother and i'm going to tell on you. then they're like, "oh, come on. don't be telling my mama what i'm up to. ♪ >> reporter: the a.r.t. says it was the gershwin estate that when it handpicked the theater's artistic director diane paulus to create a musical from the original opera. >> to make "porgy and bess" into more of a musical, it's about breathing, stopping, letting silence play a role. and also letting there be dialogue. >> sometimes i need to add words, sometimes whole new

scenes, sometimes take a new scene and turn it inside out, and make it new. ♪ >> reporter: but it's these types of changes that have riled some. stephen sondheim delivered the most thunderous criticism in august when, in learning of the changes but without having seen the show, he wrote the "new york times." "there is a difference between reinterptation and wholesale rewriting. advertise it honestly as diane paulus's "porgy and bess." and the hell with the real one." >> ♪ summertime. >> the purists have the right if that's how they want to spend their energy. it's such a great opera and if they want to see it in its purist state, if they want to see shakespeare done in the globe, with bear-baiting and people who haven't bathed recently and all men on stage, i'm sure there are places that will provide that opportunity for them.

>> i've never done shakespeare in 30 years where they didn't cut, snip, change this, get rid of that, hamlet's speech is too long. let's do this. that's just ibsen, chekhov, everybody. >> reporter: in its storied history, "porgy and bess" has evolved since the original boston opening night-from the opera to film to the musical. after the boston debut, gershwin immediately cut 45 minutes from the show. and two years later, after george's untimely death, ira gershwin also began changing the opera. >> there were things that were still in motion. not to say that the work we have by gershwin isn't a masterpiece. it is. but then there was potential in there that was being wrestled with. >> people have been trying to put it in a box for all these years, i don't mean put it away, but shove it into you know it's an opera, it's a musical, it's-- i think, it just continues to defy. it's this sort of big large squid that just plopping out that's like no, i'm all of these things.

>> reporter: most notably-an american story that continues to resonate and provoke. >> ifill: again, the major developments of the day: fire crews ramped up the fight against wildfires burning out of control in colorado and new mexico. the sexual abuse trial of a retired penn state football coach jerry sandusky began in earnest. he's accused of molesting ten boys over 15 years. prison doctors in egypt had to revive former president hosni mubarak-- twice-- after they could not find a pulse. and weekend news of a bank bailout in spain did little to encourage wall street. the dow jones industrials lost more than 140 points. on our website, we profile a tuskeegee airman. hari sreenivasan has the details. >> sreenivasan: floyd collins shared his experiences of the discrimination the famous black pilots faced and how the bonds they formed remain decades later.

that's on the rundown. on our art beat page, jeff talks to lou beach, the author of a book of very short stories, "420 characters." and we launch a special series today with our partners at globalpost on how washington d.c. officials are learning important lessons about the fight against aids from their counterparts in africa. you can watch ray suarez's conversation with reporter john donnelly about washington's struggle with high rates of h.i.v. infection. here's an excerpt. >> what happened in africa was something that hasn't happened in the u.s. except for the very beginning of the aids epidemic. there was a huge amount of energy put into fighting aids there. in the domestic epidemic, it was really stagnant. so that energy came back from africa, from many americans, also from africans, to sort of teach cities like d.c. how to fight aids. >> that sounds totally counterintuitive. given what's happened over the last 20, 25 years of the epidemic. did people even realize that was

happening? >> i think the u.s. lost its way. >> sreenivasan: that was ray speaking with john donnelly of globalpost. you can find the entire video of that on our health page. all that and more is on our web site: newshour.pbs.org. >> woodruff: and again, to our honor roll of american service personnel killed in the afghanistan conflict. we add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. here, in silence, are ten more.

>> ifill: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. on tuesday, from our food for six billion series. japan re-thinks its food system as it faces an aging population, free trade agreements and the demise of small, family farms. i'm gwen ifill >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. we'll see you online and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs

newshour has been provided by: and the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org