captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> woodruff: good evening. i'm judy woodruff. the full court press by democrats to pass health care reform legislation. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. on the "newshour" tonight, ohio congressman dennis kucinich said he's been persuaded, but what about others? we'll get the latest from david herszenhorn of "the new york times." >> woodruff: then, the charges of sexual abuse of children by catholic clergy in the pope's homeland of germany, and in ireland. john allen of "national catholic reporter" explains. >> ifill: and jeffrey brown

looks at the administration's proposal to overhaul the controversial "no child left behind" education law. >> there are far too many perverse incentives in the current law. it allows and even encourages states to lower standards. it doesn't measure growth. it doesn't reward excellence. >> woodruff: that's all ahead on tonight's "pbs newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> what the world needs now is energy. the energy to get the economy humming again. the energy to tackle challenges like climate change. what if that energy came from an energy company? everyday, chevron invests in people, in ideas-- seeking, teaching, building. fueling growth around the world to move us all ahead. this is the power of human energy. chevron.

monsanto. producing more. conserving more. improving farmers' lives. that's sustainable agriculture. more at producemoreconservemore.com. bank of america-- committed to helping the nation's economic recovery. and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. 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. >> woodruff: president obama and house democratic leaders got a boost today in their drive to pass health care reform. "newshour" congressional correspondent kwame holman begins our coverage. >> reporter: the push to pass the health care overhaul in the house claimed momentum today when ohio democrat dennis kucinich made this announcement. >> even though i don't like the bill, i've made a decision to support it in the hope that we can move to a more comprehensive approach once this legislation is done. >> reporter: the veteran liberal long has favored a medicare-for- all approach. in fact, he voted against an earlier house bill because it lacked a public option.

but he said today president obama's authority is at stake. >> one of the things that's bothered me is the attempt to try to de-legitimize his presidency. that hurts the nation when that happens. he was elected, and even though, as this gentleman pointed out, i've had some serious differences of opinion with the administration, this is a defining moment. >> reporter: the president lobbied kucinich hard, including having him aboard air force one on a trip to ohio on monday. the lobbying campaign also won over anti-abortion democrat dale kildee of michigan. he said today he concluded the bill that passed the senate last december would indeed bar federal funding of abortions. but another michigan congressman -- bart stupak-- and about a dozen other anti-abortion democrats-- have balked at approving the senate bill. and latino members have complaints of their own. they say the measure denies

undocumented immigrants the opportunity to purchase health insurance. as a result, house majority leader steny hoyer was not ready to say if he has the 216 votes to pass the bill, on a.b.c. this morning. >> well, i'm not going to... i don't have a precise number. and if i did, i probably wouldn't give it to you, we think we'll have the votes when the roll is called. >> reporter: to get the votes, the president and house speaker nancy pelosi divided their time today between st. patrick's day observances and trying to convince more democrats to vote yes. it remains unclear when a final vote will be scheduled. first, democratic leaders must settle on final funding provisions for the health care legislation. those cost estimates then will go to the congressional budget office for verification. and democrats have pledged the bill will be online for 72 hours prior to a vote. in the meantime, republicans stayed firm in their opposition, saying they wanted to keep democrats from using a procedural measure that would

allow them to approve the overall changes to the health care system without actually voting on the senate bill. david dreier is the top republican on the rules committee. >> democrats and republicans alike have recognized this process that has never been utilized for something of this magnitude and the american people deserve much, much better. >> reporter: the fight continued away from the capitol as well. staffers at the democratic national committee used social media to push the pro-health care message. >> it's happening everywhere. health insurance companies jacking up premiums, crashing small businesses and working families a and interest groups on both sides ramped up advertising campaigns all to sway votes in congress. >> americans still losing jobs, more businesses struggling. >> reporter: the campaign for media analysis reported groups trying to sink health care reform have spent $5.5 million

in the past 30 days. it said supporters have spent less than 10% of that amount. >> woodruff: for a closer look at all this, i am joined by david herszenhorn-- he covers congress for "the new york times" and has been following developments closely. thank you for joining us fresh off the hill. >> great to be with you. >> woodruff: so they need 216. how many do they say they have? >> well, the democrats don't want to pinpinpoint a number right now. they're officially saying they're cautiously optimistic, "but by most counts between 195 and 205 and they're look for 11-- what most people believe are 40 or so democrats who haven't committed one way or the other. >> woodruff: who are truly gettable, 40 or so? >> well, they're undecided for different reasons. the abortion issue, obviously, is a controversial one. there are fiscal conservatives, members of the so-called blue dog coalition who haven't said how they might vote. they didn't-- a lot of them didn't like the house bill in november because it

didn't do enough in terms of cost cutting, but now that the base bill is the senate bill they might like it a lot more sglad sglooud today they got a lot of prominent yess. dennis kucinich who vote against it before. how big a deal was that? >> remember, dennis kucinich his criticism comes saying it doesn't go far enough. so republicans are trying to minimize that and to some degree you can understand why. what they're looking for are the democrats at the center who may have more reservations rather than wanting to do this bill and a whole bunch more. still, representative killdee, saying that the abortion restrictions are sufficient for him, he studied to be a priest, he's a popular guy guy in the house. that will certainly help encourage some of the other abortion foes on the other side of the aisle. >> woodruff: that could signal they made some headway with others who are prolife. >> we hear from the white house. they're talking to bart stupack. they're trying to work out something. it will probably have to be done

in a separate bill. the democrats are confident they can do it with the existing bill. the argument from the leadership is that should work for other abortion opponents as well. >> woodruff: david herszenhorn, what argument is the leadership in the white house making at this point? we heard dennis kucinich say in effect he's worried about the authority of the president, the efforts to de-legitimize the president. how much of it is that? >> they're talking about both but one of the main thrusts right now is the notion democrats need to show that they can govern. this is a deft of whether democrats can govern, whether they chalk up some success on the board or get criticized throughout the midterm elections having failed, having spent all this time on legislation and come up short. so on the one hand, there's are the 31 million people who would gain coverage, and according to the congressional budget office it would

reduce future federal defenses. overall the thrust is get the advantage of put something points up on the board as opposed to being branded a failure for the last year. >> woodruff: do you have a sense of how stark the trermz that they're using? i mean, are they saying we are going to look awful here if we don't do that th? what do they say? >> i think the message varys from member to member. you have veteran house members like the chairman of the armed services commit whoa says he's a no on this. he's probably not going to be overly wowed by a visit to the oval office, but some of the freshmen democrats are being called in to meet with the president one on one. certainly that has a big impact. >> woodruff: and what about on the other side, the republicans. any new argumenters that using or is it pretty much what we've been hearing? >> you're hearing, again, a lot of the procedural fight-- will the house have an up-or-down vote on the senate bill itself? house democrats say, look, the senate bill is not the final product we're going for here. again air, lot of procedural maneuvering, and the same thrust

of the argument you heard from mitch mcconnell and republicans all along which is there are too many tax increases in bill, medicare cuts. they think it's the wrong-- just too big at this point. >> woodruff: there's always suspicion or talk about whether there are deals being cut. what are you hearing about that? >> well arct this point it seems too late in the game for too many deals. they're really looking to finalize this legislative language that-- remember, the final rerevisions happen on a budget reconciliation bill and there are careful rules around that that changes have to be aimed at reducing the deficit. there's not a whole lot of wiggle room for offering people anything on this bill. certainly they could be looking ahead to other legislation , favors to be named later. but on this bill itself, the parameters are pretty well known although we're waiting for the final language. >> woodruff: you talk to a lot of people on the hill, members and staff. are you getting a gut-check feel or is it truly up in the air.

>> the capitol is like any other workplace. it has a rhythm, a vibe. certainly the place is abuzz. there's a lot of activity going odemocratic aides skrampbling behind scenes to nail down the language. the republicans are in high gear they have news conferences schedule forward tomorrow morning. everybody is out there day after day. you get the sense that the democrats are optimistic that this is within their grasp. that wasn't the case after the election in massachusetts, after scott brown was elected. there was a lot of pessimism . so this is a real change in the feel from a few weeks ago. >> woodruff: and republicans optimistic they can defeat it? >> they are convince the the public doesn't like this bill. they're making that case, but, again, in the rhetoric you sense an understanding that the democrats could pull this off. i mean, they're not back down. they're fiercely out there opposing it, walking to the capitol today, you saw demonstrators with signs "kill the bill," on all front. the advertising is up. >> woodruff: david herszenhorn

we're going to let you rush back to the hill so you follow what's going on. thank you very much. >> ifill: now, with the other news of the day, here's hari sreenivasan in our newsroom. >> sreenivasan: amid the health care battle, a jobs bill won final passage in the u.s. senate today with some bi-partisan support. it includes about $18 billion in business tax breaks and $20 billion for highway and transit programs. 11 republicans voted for the bill, and later, president obama voiced his thanks. >> i appreciate their willingness to work with dems in a bipartisan fashion to get america moving again. and as i said, i hope that on a series of future steps we take to help small businesses get financing, to help improve infrastructure around country, to put people back to work that we're going to see more progress on that front. >> sreenivasan: jobs bills on a larger scale are also in the works. wall street took heart from a drop in wholesale prices last month keeping inflation in check. the dow jones industrial average gained more than 47 points to close at 10,733.

its best finish in 18 months. the nasdaq rose 11 points to close at 2,389. the securities and exchange commission is now investigating several large financial firms involved in the wall street meltdown. the agency's chairman-- mary schapiro-- confirmed it today at a house hearing. she did not name the companies. a federal bankruptcy examiner has reported lehman brothers used an accounting gimmick to hide bad debts, before it collapsed. the chairman of the federal reserve urged congress today not to scale back the fed's oversight role. a financial reform bill in the senate would strip the fed of authority over smaller banks. but ben bernanke told a house hearing it's crucial to know what's happening at all levels. >> smaller and medium-sized banks are very valuable to us. they provide irreplaceable information both in terms of making monetary policy in terms of us understanding the economy, but also in terms of financial stability. >> sreenivasan: the fed has faced criticism that lax oversight helped cause the financial crisis in 2008.

bernanke said the agency is taking steps to improve. a court in pakistan has indicted five young american muslims on terror charges. the men are all from the washington, d.c. area. they were taken into custody last december in punjab province. the court charged the five with plotting attacks inside pakistan and, afghanistan and on u.s. territory. their trial is set to begin on march 31. in afghanistan, the top nato commander said today initial operations have begun to get control of kandahar, birthplace of the taliban. general stanley mcchrystal said the campaign is a gradual effort, not one main military assault. also today, the british military announced two of their soldiers died tuesday in a bombing in helmand province. and up to 35 afghans died when a bus smashed into other vehicles and caught fire in a mountain pass north of kabul. shi-ite rebels in yemen released at least 170 government soldiers today under a truce. the hostages were handed over in

the northern province of saada, where most of the fighting has taken place. the release came a day after the government charged the rebels were not living up to the terms of the truce. state prison populations in the u.s. have dropped for the first time since 1972. a report by the pew center on the states found more than two dozen states cut their number of inmates last year. california and michigan led the way, together they reduced their populations by 7,500 fewer inmates. according to the report, the decreases are due in part to budget cuts. those are some of the day's main stories. i'll be back at the end of the program with a preview of what you'll find tonight on the "newshour's" web site. but for now, back to gwen. >> ifill: now, apologies and explanations in ireland, germany and the vatican, as catholics revisit unfinished business. allegations of child sexual abuse are once again rocking the roman catholic church. this time across europe with revelations that reach into the inner-most sanctum of the vatican. at his weekly general audience

before crowds in st. peter's square, pope benedict the 16th said he would soon speak specifically to mounting concerns within the irish church. >> as you know, in recent months the church in ireland has been severely shaken as a result of the child abuse crisis. >> ifill: 15,000 cases of sexual, physical and emotional abuse over 60 years have been uncovered in ireland. cardinal sean brady, the leader of ireland's roman catholics has been accused of covering up sex abuse in the 1970s. some are calling for him to resign. brady told parishioners: "i apologize to all those who feel that i've let them down. looking back, i am ashamed that i haven't always upheld the values that i profess and believe in." abuse scandals are also benedict's "pastoral letter", to be sent friday, is expected to focus on the scandal in ireland as well as the broader issue. >> i ask all of you to read it for yourselves, with an open heart and in a spirit of faith.

my hope is that it will help in the process of repentance, healing and renewal. >> ifill: that "healing" is yet to come in germany, where several hundred cases of child abuse have now been uncovered-- some of it decades old. the german scandal is an especially delicate matter for the pope, who was archbishop of munich 30 years ago, before leaving for rome in 1982. his former archdiocese has said the pontiff, then known as cardinal joseph ratzinger, was involved in a 1980 decision to move a priest accused of sex abuse into therapy. the same priest, peter hullerman, returned to the clergy and was later convicted of abuse in german court in 1986. even after that episode, he returned to a clerical role suspended again this past monday after new reports surfaced that he was back working with children. the vatican has forcefully denied that benedict had any role in handling the hullerman

incident. >> ( translated ): the pope, then archbishop, had absolutely no part in the decisions that led to the placing of this priest in a pastoral position. therefore, there is no reason to accuse him. the pope is a person whose >> reporter: benedict discussed the widening scandal last week with german archbishop robert zollitsch. the archbishop said the pope >> ( translated ): the holy father has received my report with vigilance, great dismay and great distress and we had a very deep conversation about this. we want to unveil the truth and we want an honest clearing up of this. >> ifill: the "clearing up" will include the pope's brother, monsignor georg ratzinger. he has admitted to hitting choirboys in an abbey infamous for beatings and sex abuse. today, german chancellor angela merkel told parliament that there should be a full accounting. >> ( translated ): i think that we all agree that sexual abuse of minors is a despicable crime and the only way for our society to come to terms with it is to look for the truth and find out everything that has happened.

>> ifill: merkel suggested that victims be compensated, and that the statute of limitations be extended for filing abuse claims. for more on how the church is coping with this fresh crisis, we turn to john allen, senior correspondent for "national catholic reporter" and author of "the rise of benedict the 16th." welcome back, john. have these allegations, these concerns, have they been percolating for a while now? >> well, if you mean by that the revelations in ireland and germany, i think the answer to that would be yes. as you know, at a sort of big-picture level in some ways, these crisiss are a replay of what happened in the united states in 2002, 2003, a very similar trajectory to the story. i think what tend to happen is that in any catholic community in the world, there is an awareness that there's the potential for this kind of crisis.

what it takes is some kind of triggering incident in each place to sort of kick start it and to bring it out into the open. that's why i think that senior officials in the church roare looking at this are aware as bad as it was in the states and as bad as it presently is in some countries in europe this story is probably far from over because there are other areas where a similar crise could erupt. >> ifill: we heard the pope saying the church in ireland being severely shaken. is it fair to say the vatican is also severely shaken by these latest allegations? >> oh, i think so. i think any time there is a catholic nation in crisis, that's going to be of deep concern to the vatican, and then you add to that the fact that the scandals currently unfolding in germany for, for the first time, at least in an indirect way, suggested a link to the pope himself and to his record as an assistant bishop in munich from may of '77 to february of '82. obviously, that link to the pope

himself is of extraordinary concern to the vatican. the concern, of course, would be this it might erode his moral authority, particularly his ability to help lead the church out of this crisis. >> ifill: and the vatican has pushed back pretty vigorously about any suggestion that there's connection between the pope's behavior in munich and anything else that we're now learning about what happened there. >> yeah, that's right. the argument coming both from church officials in munich and from the vatican is that even though this priest came into munich on then-cardinal joseph ratzinger's watch, that the cardinal was not involved, the man who is now the pope, was not involved in any of the decisions about him, including the decision to put him back into the field as a priest, which actually came a few mongss after cardinal ratzinger had already left for rome. on the other hand, you know, what critics will say is that even though he may not have

been aware of it, that he should have been-- that is, that ultimately , the buck in the a.of munich stopped on his desk and in the ben hit of hindsight it should have been sure this priest could never again function in the field in a place he could abuse others. the other fear in the vatican, i think, is that this play not be an isolated case. people are combing through the records from the years carol rats ratsinger was in munich. the concern would be that in dripz and drabs we might hear of other such cases. >> ifill: john, whether it's in ireland or austria or germany or the netherlands, or the united states, these investigations, are they more about the priests who may have committed these crimes or about the bishops or the cardinals who may have been looked the other way. >> well, i think you put your finger on what many people would see as the unfinished business

of the sex abuse crise in the church because from the beginning, this crisis has been composed of two interlocking but distinct problems, the problem of priests who abecaused and the problem of bishops who failed to clean it up. i think to date, most people would give the church generally, and this pope particularly, fairly high marks for the way they've dealt with that first problem. today, it is abundantly clear, if a priest abuses someone, who he is going to be pulled out of ministry, probably expelled from the priesthood and probably report to the police. it is the second piece of the puzzle, the managerial failure of the bishops when they should have known better to step in and stop this , that there, i think, many people would have question marks and that, of course, is what makes the story out of munich so potentially damaging to the pope, because particularly if there are other cases, if a pattern emerges in which guys were simply moved around on his watch, then i think some people might ask the question, "will the pope credibly be able to discipline other bishops if it turns out

that during his time as a bishop he had many of the same problems? >> ifill: does the vatican have the resources and, as important, the seriousness of purpose to investigate this flood of allegations which have now been coming in for years and years to rome? >> well, i think in terms of the infrastructure in the vatican, they do. it's worth noting that it is only been since 2001 that it was the policy of the catholic church that these cases had to be referred to rome. in the initial stages after that edict, particularly at the height of the american crisis, the official in charge of the rome end of things has said there was an avalanche of cases. the vatican did during that time find itself overwhelmed. i think now they have sort of geared up to the point where they have the personnel to review the cases and to move them through in reasonably speedy fashion. i think the-- and they certainly have the

new awareness of the gravity of this crisis and the need to project an image of dealing with it aggressively. i think what critics, however, would ask is at the end of the day, until there are new accountability measures for bishops so that we are sure the kind of lapses in judgment that we saw decades ago cannot be repeated, then i think there are still going to be many people who are not convinced that ultimately, the problem has been solved. >> ifill: john allen of "national catholic reporter," thank you so much for joining us again. >> you're welcome. >> woodruff: still to come on the "newshour": the administration's fix for the nation's schools. but first, this is pledge week on public television. we're taking a short break now so your public television station can ask for your support. that support helps keep programs like ours on the air. >> ifill: for those stations not taking a pledge break. the "newshour" continues now with the story of how one

snowboarder beat the odds to place 7th in this year's olympic games. tom bearden has our encore report. >> reporter: the snowboarder emerged from the fog at aspen highlands, groaning with the effort to carve tight turns around the slalom gates on the steep hillside. this is 37-year-old chris klug, training for his third olympic games. klug has been riding since he was 10-- one of the pioneers of the sport. he was there in nagano, japan in 1998 for the first olympic snowboard competition. he placed sixth in the giant slalom. but there was a cloud hanging over him even then. >> i was diagnosed in the early '90s through a routine physical and after we finally pinpointed what it was, they told me that one day i'd need a liver transplant. and i'll never forget when they told me that. i was looking around the room going, "who are you talking to? you can't possibly be talking to me. >> reporter: klug's liver continued to deteriorate after his first olympic appearance. his wife missy remembers.

>> chris was on the transplant waiting list at a critical stage for three months, but he was on years before that, they just kind of move you up as you get sicker. so watching him get sick was really tough because he's so active, so energetic, so positive, and to see him kind of lose a little bit of that was tough. >> reporter: by 2000, klug and his doctors realized they couldn't wait any longer. >> and i did everything in my i was scared for the first time. i'll never forget when i was in the pre-op and the anesthesia was about to take effect and my family was in the room with me. i was looking up at them going, "am i going to make it through this?" it was scary. >> i definitely was kind of the strong person going through this whole process, and always positive, and you know, didn't want to give him any bleak outlooks or possibilities of death or anything, but you know, it's in the back of your mind. and when he was rolled away for surgery was really the first time i completely broke down,

and just hysterically lost it, and i thought in my mind, it was like i might not see him again. >> after i woke up from that six-hour surgery that a new engine got dropped in me. it seemed like i was running around with a four cylinder and i got a brand new v8 dropped into and i wanted to go out and test drive that new engine right away. >> reporter: but most people thought he would never ride a snowboard again. klug proved them wrong. he was back on the slopes only seven weeks after the surgery. in 2002, he took the bronze medal at the salt lake city games. rob roy is klug's longtime coach and mentor. what changes did you see in him after the operation? >> well, it's incredibly dramatic. i suspect that chris was suffering from his disease for a number of years before it was diagnosed. he probably weighed 160 to 175 pounds, had a hard time eating. but now he's a guy who's had a liver transplant who weighs 220

pound. his body fat is so low it's incredible so we're talking about muscle mass, only it's all been muscle mass. >> reporter: since his recovery, klug has started his own foundation focused on educating the public about organ and tissue donation. but like a lot of times in his long career, klug had to climb one more giant hurdle before he could make this year's olympics. he didn't make the 2006 games because of a dispute over olympic qualification rules. he spent the last four years training and competing with the expectation of returning to olympic competition in vancouver. but last year, klug slipped to 25th in the world rankings. the u.s. ski and snowboard association announced it would no longer provide him with financial support, thinking he wouldn't qualify for the games. so klug started his own team.

>> and i think chris realized that maybe there is more than one way to skin a cat when it comes to getting snowboarders to the olympics. and so he as you know went out and found sponsors, hired coaches including me, and put himself on the olympic team one more time. >> reporter: this year, klug finished high enough in the five qualifying races to earn a spot back in the olympics. klug plans to continue competing on the world cup circuit until the end of the season. after that, he says he'll think about hanging up his board and retiring. >> ifill: the finals for that world cup competition will be in la molina, spain this weekend. you can watch more of tom's interview with coach rob roy on our web site. >> woodruff: now, the obama administration spells out its plan for changing public education. jeffrey brown has the story.

>> brown: when the federal law known as "no child left behind" was signed by president george w. bush eight years ago, it was heralded by both republicans and democrats. >> if we want to make sure no child is left behind, every child must learn to read. and every child must learn to add and subtract. >> brown: "no child"-- one of the signature policies of the bush administration-- focused on standardized tests for reading and math; grade-level proficiency and holding schools accountable for measurable yearly progress. the strategy was credited early on with bringing new attention to boosting scores for minority and low-income students. but it also drew increasing criticism for forcing schools to "teach to the test"-- narrowing the curriculum, and more. this week, president obama and his secretary of education, arne duncan, rolled out their plan to reauthorize and re-think the law.

>> we all recognize that no child left behind had its flaws. the time to fix those problems is now. >> brown: duncan described some of those flaws on capitol hill today. >> there are far too many perverse incentives in the current law. it allows and it even encourages states to lower standards. it doesn't measure growth. it doesn't reward excellence. it prescribes the same interventions for schools with very, very different needs. >> brown: for the nation's 50 million public school students, duncan said, the new plan represents a shift in emphasis. >> we're calling for more than $1 billion to fund a complete education, so the whole child will be a successful adult. we want schools invested in the arts, history, sciences, physical education, and all the learning experiences that contribute to a well-rounded education. >> brown: under the plan, students will be tested in those other subjects, along with continued testing in math and science. but school districts would have greater flexibility in how they

measure a student's progress. the plan would also require schools to verify that all students are on a path toward college and career readiness" by 2020. and, the nations 100,000 schools would be divided into categories, based on test results. low-performing schools would require state intervention, and could face strong penalties, including teacher firings and a complete shutdown. duncan said the administration hopes congress will pass the measure this year. >> brown: we sample two among many reactions to the president's plan now, with: bob wise, president of the policy group, "alliance for excellent education." he served as the governor of west virginia from 2001 to 2005. and diane ravitch, an education historian, official in the education department of the first bush administration, and author most recently of "the death and life of the great american school system."

bob wise, starting with you as a general matter first, does the approach of president obama and secretary duncan make sense judge it's a significant upgrade require of no child left behind. no child left behind, 10 years almost, did some positive things forced us to look at the standardss, and forced us to use data in a significant way and for the first time focused a clear eye on the achievement gaps of many of our students. having said that, it also has a number of shortcomings that have increasingly become revealed. it does not provide the flexibility needed to deal with many of these situations, and from my organization's standpoint tdid not deal with high school. we have a third of our kids dropping out of high school every year and yet no child left behind had very limited ability and means to help that situation. >> first, as a general proposition, diane ravitch, what do you make of the president's plan? >> i think it's an improvement over no child left behind whichis believe was, in retrospect, has been a disaster. but i don't think that it's gone

far enough in separating itself from no child left behind. it's very closely tied, in many of its assumptions, to no child left behind. the strictures applied to the lowest performing schools is very punitive and provides very little in the way of support for low-performing schools, only punishment. >> brown: you were known, miss ravitch, as a supporter of no child left behind and spoke against it, as you just did so. what did you learn along the way that made it not work and that needs to be addressed now? >> well, no child left behind did encourage schools to teach to the test, only the basic skills, and it created a disincentive for teaching about history and the arts and science and geography, civics-- anything except the basic skills. the actual improvement as a result of no child left behind testing was very slight. in fact, there was much more progress made before no child left behind was adopted and since it was enacted.

>> brown : and, bob wise, i want to draw out a little bit more about what you see the gains here from no child left behind? >> it's very interesting. dr. ravitch and i come from different points of view originally, because she was a proponent of no child left behind and i was an opponent who as governor seriously considered filing suit, decided not to, and i'm glad i did. what no child left behind did i think was force us to come to grips with some things we were able to ignore. what it also did was set up today's discussion, which is critically important, because what it showed was when you gave states the ability-- each state to set its own standard, we got, as we expected, 50 different sets of standards and they're moving in different directions. the statess have come together-- 48 at least-- said what we need is a common set of standards. no child left behind also did not provide enough tools, did not provide the flex eblt to deal with the numbers of situations, particularly in the low-performing schools-- i agree with dr. ravitch that there's

still some limitation in the president's proposal. but i also want to say there are a lot more tools in the toolbox in the blueprint issued than previously under no child left behind. >> brown : let me stay with you on one area. one of the things we said in the setup, the emphasis is on what they are calling a complete education-- that is, beyond math and science for one thing-- and more freedom for the school districts to measure what is progress. is that a good idea? is that a good approach? >> i think it is, and i think it's also important that the blueprint envisioned, as i read it, that not just schools are held accountable , recognizing everybody needs to be in the pool therefore, school districts and states will be part of this instead of honing in on the school and saying you're good or bad. >> brown: diane ravitch, what do you say in terms of the more flexibility? it's not completely clear how that works yet, but the idea of giving more flexibility to the school districts to measure the progress. >> they

think schools that are doing a good job, that have high test scores in math and read ago not math and science, in math and reading-- because everyone will continue to be tested in basic skills. in that sense it's still no child left behind. the higher performing schools will be left alone, which will make a lot of people happy. the lower performing schools, particularly those in the bottom 5%, and an additional five to 10 to 15%, are going to be very unhappy because they're going to worry about falling into the bottom 5%. the punishments there are draconian. what the federal government is saeg is the lowest performing schools, regardless of the relationships for their low performance, will fire the principal, close school, turn the school into a charter school turn the school over to the state, turn it over to a private management organization . all these very punitive approachs have no basis in experience. there's no district that's done these things. we have no example for the state takeover that has reduced a successful school. the charter schools

range from excellent to absolutely awful, and on average are no better than regular public schools. so the federal law, as they're proposing, offers no remedies. it just offers punishment. and i think they should be offering support and evaluate the specifics of each school-- why is this school low performing? maybe the kids dent speak english and need more help in learning to speak english and not have the principals fired, the staff laid off and the schools closed. >> brown: what do you think about this, bob wise, for the lower performing schools, especially the emphasis on very strong measures taken by the state, and the one that's got a lot of attention is the firing of teachers. the president got into a little cur if you havele over this a few weeks ago. >> first let's recognize when we're talking about the 5% of the lowest performag schools this is an improvement over no child left behind. even with these four measures referred to here, those provide more flexibilities than n.c.l.b.

and my guess is when this all comes out , there will be more flexibility. ting also ought to be point out that this blueprint envisioned for these schools and others , following up on the race to the top proposal that's in the stimulus package in which you can also have innovation grants. you can have other measures that are positive in incentives. so, yes, certainly, lots to be discovered-- lots to be reviewed yet on the bottom 5%, but as we work on that second 5% that dr. ravitch referred to, there's a third category, the middle performing schools, and then the top-performing schools, a lot more flexibility. if no student comes to the school the same no two schools are the same. i believe this blueprint at least starts us in the direction of recognizing those differences. >> brown: you're sense though, is they're striking the balance of car its rot and stick is pretty close? >> it's a lot more carrot than it used to be. in in terms of high school where's we work so much, with

only 10% of title i dollars going to high schools , we found there were effectively no carrots for the high school schools. we think this proposal far improves what is in or not in no child left behind. >> brown: diane ravitch, some of the teachers' unions came out very critical right off the bat. is part of your critique supporting what they're worried about that-- i think it was randy weingarten of the american federation of teachers. he said it appears to place 100% responsibility on educators and give them 0% authority. is she right? >> i'm not sure if she's right or not. what i do think is it will create a disincentive for anybody to teach on a low-performing school because those schools will be on the chopping block and no good teacher is going to want to teach in a school target forward closure or being turned sbi privately managed school. i think these are the all the wrong sticks.

it's nice to have carrots but there are pay waytoo many sticks and not the way to improve education, especially when none of these measures have any track record of success. >> brown: you both know there are many voices here. a lot of people are going to weigh in on this. what's going on happen next? is it possible to change the system? >> i think it essentially has to because if no child left behind is permitted to exist after 2010 swhapz we keep the same law and we keep what we all agree is a structure that significantly needs upgrading. no child left behind is a exact disk in an ipod world. it significantly needs an upgrade. if we don't, the nerbtives, some of which are very positive and provide carrots, such as the race to the top initiative, of which 40 states have applied for the incentives, they will go away. so this is the only way we can continue in a much more positive direction by changing no child lefd behind, reauthorization the elementary and secondary education exact working on some

of the issues dr. ravitch and i have talked about here. >> brown: we'll leave it there. bob wise and diane ravitch, thank you both very much. >> ifill: finally tonight, does the u.s. need more college graduates in its workforce to remain competitive in the global economy? that was the central question at the kickoff of a new season of national debates hosted by the university of virginia's miller center of public affairs. former secretary of education margaret spellings and michael lomax, president of the united negro college fund, argued that we need more college graduates. george leef, director of research at the john william pope center for higher education in raleigh, north carolina, and richard vedder, professor of economics at ohio university argued that many jobs being created today don't require college degrees. here's an excerpt, moderated by "newshour" economics correspondent paul solman. >> is it not the case that the united states needs to

have a more and more sophisticated workforce? isn't it the case if other countries with whoum we're compete regular becoming more sophisticated that that's a challenge to us, george? >> oh, it's a challenge. by putting more people through college is not the way to meet it. at the margins-- remember, we're not talking here about are we going to educate most of the american s who have high skills and high aptitudes, the high s.a.t. kids, the motivated students-- they're going to go to college. the question is are we going to get a few more at the margin into college? that's what we're debating. >> well, more than a few. >> the united states economy is going to remain exceptionally vibrant, whether we have a few more marginal students who have gone through college or not. what we depend upon are the engineers and doctors and the lawyers , those people are going to go to college. getting a few more people through college at the margin is not going to affect anything in

our economic competitiveness. >> secretary spellings. >> what i'm worried about with that line of reasoning, if i'm a hispanic parent and in my home state of texas we're going to be a minority-majority workforce by 2020, helping americans today have a-- let's have a few more, what, we should have 12% chance of having a college education in this country if you're hispanic? that's just wrong. and i don't-- you know, especially in a place where you're trying to build a vibrant economy with that kind of a demographic. >> why is it wrong? >> because we will not be able to compete with the world. we will have an undereducated group of folks, the majority of our people will be undereducated in the global knowledge economy. >> reporter: and what will they wind up doing for a living? >> they'll be the service workers for our intellectual property that lives in other parts of the world, i fear. we don't know yet, in fact. >> reporter: so you, a cabinet member of the george w. bush administration are, worried

about increasing inequality? >> i am. >> reporter: michael lomax-- >> that's why we're on the same side. ( laughter ) >> reporter: were you surprised to find this out? >> you know, we-- >> we've met before. >> i don't view this as a democrat or a republican issue. i view this as a national issue. my of is-- and we see this, many conservatives, people who call themselves republicans, democrats, independents-- believe that it's in our nation's interest to ensure that low-income kids of color who come from household where's no one has obtained an advanced educational degree, that we've got to invest in ensuring that they have the same educational opportunities as young people who come from a more privileged background. and they have the same capacity. they have the capacity to work hard and to learn and to excel

if we hold them to high expectations, if we give them rigorous academic course work, and if we put good teachers in their classrooms. these kids that you want to write off as not having aptitude i believe have the same capacity as any other child. >> reporter: the reality is, let's talk about the real world, not a hypothetical world. the real world is-- and this is from inside higher education, a publication in the field of only a week ago-- the graduation rate-- five-year graduate rate, in the stem discipline, science, technology, engineering, mathematics, among latinos or hispanics is 22.1%. it's 18.4% for blacks. that isn't to say we should write off these people and maybe it means we need to do more remedial work and so forecast, but the reality is the way colleges are operating today , we

aren't getting that. i'm fear itself we mindlessly push go into college and especially go into science and technology because that's where the futurealize, we're going to have more students huge student loan debts-- $40 thourks 50 thourks 60 thourks $80,000 taking it will den-an-hour jobs and failing. >> you think it might exexacerbate the problem. >> ifill: check the listings of your local public television station to see the entire debate. >> woodruff: again, the major developments of the day: the president and house democratic leaders picked up two votes in their drive to pass health care reform. a $35 billion jobs bill won final passage in congress with bipartisan support. and a court in pakistan indicted five young american muslims on terror charges. the "newshour" is always online. hari sreenivasan, in our newsroom, previews what's there. hari? >> sreenivasan: you can watch ads, for and against the health care reform bill, from interest groups around the country.

that's on "the rundown." also there, author deborah amos discusses the plight of iraqi refugees and her new book "eclipse of the sunnis." and on that miller center debate about college graduates, you can watch all of it by following a link on paul solman's making sense page. plus, find a lesson plan for teachers to lead debates in their own classrooms. that's on "newshour" extra. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. judy? >> woodruff: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. we'll see you on-line and again here tomorrow evening. thank you and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: every business day, bank of america lends nearly $3 billion to individuals, institutions, schools, organizations and

businesses in every corner of the economy. america-- growing stronger everyday. ♪ ( laughter ) >> not funny. >> we are intel, sponsors of tomorrow.

>> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy productive life. 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 >> thank you for joining us for

another "pbs newshour" is here i'm paul anthony here with chief operating operator. we're we encourage you to call us in support of "the newshour." you always know when you tune in the "pbs newshour" you'll receive your news in an intelligent and respectful way and we're proud to produce the very best news and public affairs programs right here on weta. but to do this member support is critical. and you can become a supporting member by dialing the number on your screen right now. >> when you watch pbs, the world comes to your doorstep. history comes to life. mysteries unfold. and the arts come home. when you support pbs, your gift helps everyone from all walks of life explore the wonders of the world. simply call the number on your screen. you can give by check or credit card. it's that easy. so please support your pbs station today. thank you.

>> when we talk about "the newshour" on quality and respect a poll came out about a week or so ago and had some good things to say about public television and "the newshour" too. >> it certainly did. in fact for the seventh straight year the poll has found public broadcasting is the most trusted media institute in the united states. and we're very proud of that. but we also understand that's something that's tested every day and it's tested with programs like "the newshour" and we try to provide quality programming that will be trusted by the american people. and it's gratifying that, in fact, they do trust us. >> indeed, indeed. we've talked about the civility and other times that prevail on this program even when people have opposite persuasions. the best is your and my favorite program is brooks & shields program which is done under british rules. >> i don't know if it's british rules or not, paul, but it certainly is.

and unlike a lot of other television programs where they have people with opposing points of view and all they do is shout at each other and you really can't understand their points of view, with brooks & shields and everything that's on "the newshour" it's done with a certain intelligence and civility where people really can understand the variety of points of view around a particular issue. >> yeah. absolutely. programs like "the newshour" reflect the values that weta holds in high esteem. programs like this are honest and of high quality. programs like this enrich lives. and programs like this elevate the impact television can have in our communities. programs like this can provide and re-enforce the value of lifelong learning. if a community resource like public television fits in with your values, then help make sure that it continues to grow and thrive. you can do that by dialing the number on your screen and becoming a member right now. joe, this program has endured for more than 30 years now. to what do you owe the success

over the years besides the issues we've already talked about already. >> the reason for its success is twofold. first of all, it has maintained the kind of quality that we were talking about before. and i think that's the essential element in spite of the fact that technology has changed, it at its core remains the same. and the second is that its gotten this wonderful support from members of local stations like members of weta who give us the means to keep the program going. >> let's talk about the operating budget here. how important are individual contributions to the operating budget of both this program and the overall stang itself? -- station itself. >> people don't know that the individual donations is the single most important element. we do receive a relatively amount of money from corporations and foundations. we do receive a grant every year from the corporation of public broadcasting. but by far and away the most

important and the largest portion of contributions comes from individuals who make the decision to write a check or go to the internet and pledge online which is sort of our favorite way to get it now. but we'll take it any way they can deliver it. >> uh-huh. people have said to me, why are you pledging for "the newshour" when all those corporate sponsors are there? >> well, these corporate sponsors are very important. putting together a nightly news program is an expensive proposition and requires a lot of resources. but the corporations only provide about 40% of the support for "the newshour," which is broadcast every night on public broadcasting. the remaining funds come from pbs and from local viewers >> thanks, joe for being here. >> thank you paul.

vo:geico, committed to providing service to its auto insurance customers for over 70 years.

more information on auto insurance at geico.com or 1-800-947-auto any time of the day or night.