aptioning sponsored by&x- acneil/lehrer productions >> lehrer: good evening. i'm jim lehrer. presidents obama and medvedev signed a landmark arms treaty today. it calls for shrinking nuclear arsenals by one-third. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the "newshour" tonight: the next step is a debate in the senate over ratification. we have our own debate with senators kyl and feinstien. >> lehrer: then, judy woodruff reports on day two of the bloody uprising in kyrgyzstan. >> brown: we'll talk to the chairmen of the commission studying the causes of the financial crisis on a day they heard apologies from former citigroup executives. >> let me start by saying i'm sorry. i'm sorry that the financial crisis had such an impact on country.

>> we all bear responsibility for not recognizing this and i deeply regret that. >> brown: we have the first of two reports on what members of congress are hearing about the new health care law. tonight, spencer michels follows a california republican back in his district for the spring recess. >> the notion that somehow we can provide free health insurance for 32 million people without adding to the deficit or costing tax payers is simply absurd. >> brown: and, we close with a look at the many stories concerning the return of tiger woods with sports writer john feinstein. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's "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. ♪ >> very funny. you got me. >> we are intel, sponsors of tomorrow.

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. >> lehrer: russia and the u.s. today formalized the most sweeping nuclear arms deal in a generation.

they also opened a potential new era in relations between the two old cold war enemies. president obama was welcomed to the sprawling hilltop prague castle-- a landmark in a nation once occupied by soviet troops, and now a member of nato. it was here, one year ago, that mr. obama outlined his vision for a nuclear-free world. today, one stepping stone toward that goal was reached: a new strategic arms treaty with russia that draws down u.s and russian nuclear arsenals by about a third. the two presidents signed the agreement with great ceremony. then, they hailed the accomplishment-- reached after a year of negotiations-- in remarks that echoed across the castle hall. >> this day demonstrates the determination of the united states and russia-- the two nations that hold over 90% of the world's nuclear weapons-- to pursue responsible global leadership.

>> ( translated ): this is a win-win situation. no one stands to lose from this agreement. i believe that this is a typical feature of our cooperation. both parties have won. and taking into account this victory of ours, the entire world community has won. >> lehrer: if ratified, the treaty would replace the 1991 strategic arms reduction treaty -- or "start"-- which expired last december. and, the u.s. and russian arsenals would drop to levels last seen in the 1960s. under the deal, both countries must cut their deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 apiece. ballistic missile launchers and bombers will be capped at 800 for each nation. and of those, only 700 could be deployed. the two countries would also be responsible for verifying each other's cuts. the presidents also marked the deal as a major step forward for

u.s./russian relations-- strained since russia's brief war with georgia in 2008. >> when the united states and russia are not able to work together on big issues, it's not good for either of our nations, nor is it good for the world. together, we've stopped that drift, and proven the benefits of cooperation. >> lehrer: in another sign of cooperation, they pledged to seek new sanctions on iran, if the islamic republic fails to halt its nuclear program. and they agreed to work toward further cuts in their own arsenals. first, though, the new treaty must be ratified-- something the russian parliament is expected to do without much opposition. the road in the u.s. senate could be tougher, because a two- thirds majority is required. >> i'm actually quite confident that democrats and republicans in the united states senate, having reviewed this, will see that the united states has preserved its core national security interests, that it is

maintaining a safe and secure and effective nuclear deterrent, >> lehrer: in fact, today's next week, leaders from more than 40 nations will gather in washington for a summit focusing on securing their nuclear materials. and in may, the u.s. will join in a united nations conference to step the spread of nuclear weapons. now the views of two members of the u.s. senate-- senator dianne feinstein, democrat of california, chairs the senate select committee on intelligence. senator jon kyl, republican of arizona, the minority whip of the senate. i spoke to them a short time ago. senators, welcome. senator kyl, do you support the ratification of this treaty? >> well, it's a little early to say, i haven't read it yet and it's complete with hundreds of pages of annexes which obviously are the operational details. we'll want to review all of

that, have constructive discussions with the administration officials in charge of implementing it and then obviously talk to experts, have hearings and debate in the senate and there's one other factor that will bear on my support for this treaty, and that is the modernization plan that the president must submit to the congress to help take care of our nuclear weapons complex and our nuclear deterrent. those two things go hand in hand >> lehrer: senator feinstein, what is your position on the treaty at this point? >> i very much support it. both senator kyl and i in november went to geneva. we met with the american negotiation team headed by rose gutmuller and with the united nations team we head an opportunity to discus various aspects such as verification, different kinds of weapons systems. so since then i've certainly been following it. the... it's a 17-page treaty, so it isn't too long. read it this morning. i think it's a step forward.

i think people have to remember that the start treaty that was in effect went out of effect in december. there is no treaty today. there are no restrictions today. there is no verification today. and absent a treaty, there will be nothing. essentially what this treaty does is seek to reduce warheads by 30% over moscow treaty levels and launch vehicles by 50% over start levels. it is a step forward. in terms of arms control, it certainly is not the sun, the moon, and the stars. but what it aims to do is begin a level of trust and confidence building between two powerful nations. nations which have never been fighting enemies but which, in fact, have in the past been adversaries. and so to change that adversarial relationship, to build the trust and build the

confidence and also over time seek to reduce what are huge, huge still and very large nuclear weapons i think is a significant step forward. >> lehrer: senator kyl, conceptually do you disagree with what senator feinstein laid out as to why she sports it at this point? >> first of all, it's not like we've been adversaries for the last many years. we've been working with each other verifying the old start treaty. it's not as if all of a sudden we have to begin doing this with the russians. secondly, the real threat, as the president said a couple days ago when he announced the npr, is proliferation of nuclear weapons and the terrorism... >> couric: that's the nuclear... explain what the npr is. it's not a public radio network. >> no, the nuclear posture review. and as the president pointed out, the real threat today is proliferation and terrorism. this treaty, of course, doesn't have anything to do with that.

third, i think you have to examine three documents together: the nuclear posture review and many of the presidential intentions as expressed in there, like when we would use our nuclear weapons and how we're going to modern size them. second, the start treaty itself and, third, the documents i referred to earlier which is the plan the president must submit that details how we will modernize both the facilities, the manhattan project era facilities that are now very old and aging and the weapons themselves so that we will have a credible deterrent in years to come. >> lehrer: senator kyl, would bit correct then to state that your position going in is one of concerns and you are... you're not a sure vote for this. is that correct? >> well, i can tell you this. i think the senate will find it very hard to support this treaty if there is not a robust modernization plan as called for by section 1251 of the national defense authorization act of last year. that i think is a sin i don't

know non. and with respect to the treaty itself, i know colleagues are going to look at missile defense issues and verification issues as well as the numbers themselves. on the missile defense part, we were thrown a bit of a curveball it seems and i know colleagues have expressed some interest in that. >> lehrer: we'll come back to missile defense in a moment but senator feinstein, does not earnization... well, you heard what senator kyl said. do you share that concern? >> no, i do not. it all depends on what you mean by modernization. if you mean changing some of the chemicals that are now in the nuclear warheads to make those... make the warheads safer for workers, that's one thing. if it means building new nuclear warheads, that's another thing. if it means building new bunker busters or tablgt cal nuclear weapons under five kilotons, that's another thing, too. i actually think it's a mistake to mix the two together.

the point ishis. >> we have nothing now. this is a step forward. you've had all of our military people say it does not affect our military prowess, you have both presidents, medvedev and obama, saying that this is what they want to do to begin to work together as two nations. i think that's an enormous step forward because the adversaries that we face in the future are not... it's not going to be russia, in my judgment. it's going to be asymmetric act ors. it's the building of a nuclear weapon by iran, it's income. and here... it's north korea and here help from russia, a partnership with russia could be very important and significant. so i'm for developing better relations. i'm very seeing that we get a treaty in place. and as i'm sure john knows,

there's seven years before the reductions in the treaty have to be in place. and during that period of time-- particularly within five years-- there will will be other negotiations on the next step forward. this is an easy step to take, it seems to me. we've got everybody for it, all our defense establishments, the administration, it's an easy step to take. and i believe we should take it and do so promptly. >> lehrer: you don't see it as an easy step, senator kyl, i take it? >> well, i'm just saying there is a connection between this treaty and the modernization program. as senator feinstein said, we are dramatically reducing the number of both launch vehicles and weapons. and when you get down to a relative view, you've got to make sure that they will do what they're intended to do. there are 31 other countries that rely on our neel nuclear deterrent as well. so it has to be credible. as secretary gates himself has said and as the perry/schlesinger commission recommended, we're going to have to test our weapons unless we

develop a new modernization program. and we are not talking about developing new weapons, bunker-busters or anything of that sort. but we are talking about making sure that these weapons that were never designed to last for 20 or 30 or 40 years can be extended. that their lifetime can be extended and that they will both be secure and safe and reliable in that... when we intend them to go off they'll, in fact, do that. >> lehrer: senator kyl pick up on the earlier statement that you think you were thrown a curve on missile defense. what do you mean? >> well, we were told repeatedly that the preamble would say there's a connection between missile defenses and strategic offensive weapons and that is true, and that that would be it in the treaty. but it turns out that there is another section that actually defines several terms relating to missile defense, including missile defense launchers and says specifically that we can not use any of the offensive strategic systems if we retire them for missile defense programs.

that's a limitation that some within the defense establishment say we really weren't going to take advantage of anyway, but it does limit our actions in doing so. and my only point there was that... and the russians are very insistent that the treaty actually provides a legal, binding link between missile defenses and strategic offensive weapons. so the extent that that could cause a president in the future intoer to pull back from some development of new missile defense technology or deployment thereof just because the russians say they're going to pull out of the treaty if we do that, that's troubling. >> lehrer: is that a deal breaker or just troubling? >> it's troubling. i think, as i said, all of these things go hand in hand. and my only point was that it will be more difficult for the senate to pass the treaty if, for example, the modernization program is not approved and funded by the congress and some of these other questions aren't at least answered. >> lehrer: senator feinstein, clearly we're not going to be able to negotiate this right

here now, the details. but just overview, looking at it from your perspective, do you see this could be trouble in terms of getting this ratified? i've looked at the record. there's never been a start treaty that wasn't ratified. it takes 67 votes in the united states senate. not going to do it without republican votes. what's your reading of it at this point? >> if any treaty should be able to be ratified it is this treaty. this treaty is a step forward. it is not a giant step forward. it does not in any way, shape, or form incapacitate the offensive or defensive position of this country. so i have a very hard time. i would really hope that members would not hold the treaty hostage to if you don't do this. we all believe that our nuclear weapons should be safe. i've spent a lot of times on this because i happen to sit on the energy appropriations subcommittee that provides the money for this kind of thing.

and what i found is that our weapons are safe and they do not need testing. and the whole purpose of the national ignition facility was to avoid testing. and so i believe that we can go a substantial period of time-- and by that i mean decades-- before the nuclear weapons are in any kind of, you might say, less than safe position. and during this period of time i think the point is that we should look at the replacement of certain items. and that will certainly be done. mr. bag and seen the know, who heads the nuclear security administration is very good on this. i've had a number of classified briefings and we will work together with him to try to see... >> lehrer: as i say, we can't go through all the details. i just want to get back to senator kyl before we end our time here. do you think it's conceivable, senator kyl, that this thing

could be not ratified? could be rejected by the united states senate? >> again, my inclination is that if you take all three documents together-- the national posture review, the modernization plan yet to be submitted and yet to be approved by the congress and the start treaty-- we can evaluate them all together. and it is possible that all three of them could represent positive steps with the ultimate end that the start treaty could be ratified. if, on the other hand, the modernization program is not adequate or the congress chooses not to adequately fund it, then it could be trouble. >> lehrer: okay. we'll leave it right there. senators, thank you both very much. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> brown: still to come on the "newshour": the uprising in kyrgyzstan; the roots of the financial crisis; health care feedback in california and tiger woods at the masters. but first, the other news of the day. here's kwame holman in our newsroom.

an tollly dobrynin has died. he was the ambassador during the cue man missile crisis. he was ambassador to the u.s. from 1962 to 1986. many historians have said he helped resolve the cuban crisis in october of 1962 with his behind-the-scenes diplomacy. anatoli dobrynin was 92 years old. rescue crews in west virginia tried and failed today to get into a coal mine where 25 men died on monday. four other men have been missing in the mine since then. the day began with hopes of ending the four-day drama at the upper big branch mine. but search teams ran into dangerous levels of lethal gases. and with that, mine safety officials ordered them to turn back. kevin stricklin of the u.s. mine safety and health administration said there was no choice. >> this is a setback. it's not something that they won't get back in. we're going to continue to monitor that borehole number one. they are in danger and that's the whole intent of evacuating them from the mine.

>> holman: once the crews were out, drilling resumed for a second, larger hole to allow more ventilation, and stricklin said the teams might try again tonight. west virginia governor joe manchin said there still was a slight chance the missing miners took refuge in an airtight safety chamber, containing four days of food, water and oxygen. >> if we have any hope of survival and they're in that rescue chamber, they're okay. i mean, that's the sliver of hope we have. it's a long shot, everyone's been up front about that because this was a horrible blast, but if they're there, they're okay. >> holman: in the meantime, the long wait continued for the families of the missing and of those confirmed dead, but whose bodies have not been recovered. >> it's a roller coaster for these people. it's very emotional. you can only imagine what it would be like. and it's... they're very understanding. they understand and as much as

>> holman: the mine owner, massey energy, had been cited repeatedly for safety violations. today, the company c.e.o.-- don blankenship-- went on the social media site twitter, and urged prayers for both victims and rescuers. he also criticized news coverage of the disaster. president obama ordered mine safety officials to report next week on the west virginia disaster and on how to prevent a repeat. two american soldiers were killed today on patrol in northern iraq. and a nato servicemember died in fighting in eastern afghanistan. the taliban also released video of a u.s. army private first class bowe bergdahl. he's been missing in afghanistan since last june. in the message, bergdahl pleaded to be sent home. meanwhile, afghan police said they arrested five would-be suicide bombers in kabul early this morning. they found explosives stashed below the engine block of the men's vehicle. heavy rains overnight triggered massive mudslides near rio de janeirio in brazil. at least 200 people were buried

and feared dead. rescue workers searched for victims in a slum that was built on top of a landfill. officials said that made the ground especially unstable, under recent heavy rains. mudslides earlier this week already had killed at least 153 people and left thousands homeless. united airlines and u.s. airways may try again to merge. it was widely reported today the two carriers are in talks to combine-- creating the nation's second largest carrier. delta is the largest. united and u.s. airways also considered merging in 2008, but ultimately shelved the idea. wall street made modest gains today after news that sales at major retailers were up 9% last month. the dow jones industrial average gained 29 points to close at 10,927. the nasdaq rose five points to close well above 2,436. scientists have publicly unveiled two skeletons of a creature that may open a new chapter in human evolution. the fossil remains were found in

south africa. they're nearly two million years old and may have been a transitional species between apes and man. the find was detailed in the latest issue of the journal "science," published today. 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. for now, back to jim. >> lehrer: the situation in kyrgyzstan remained unsettled today. the opposition claimed it was in charge, but the country's president insisted he had not given up. the outcome in the central asian nation worried officials in washington, because of a key american air base located there. judy woodruff has the story. >> reporter: the scenes of yesterday's chaos in the kyrgyz capital, bishkek, became sites of curiosity today for onlookers, young and old. but late in the day, crowds took flight as the sounds of renewed gunfire were heard across the city.

dalton bennett-- a freelance journalist and contributer to "the atlantic"-- spoke with me earlier from bishkek via skype. >> we hear intermittent gun shots. there are rumors of clashes with the militias. >> reporter: earlier, fires were left to burn out on their own with no sign of fire crews to douse them. and the shells of military vehicles littered the city. special military units opened fire on protesters yesterday. the health ministry reported at least 74 killed and 400 hurt. the opposition claimed many more dead. hospitals treated an influx of patients today-- many with gunshot wounds.

>> ( translated ): the government has changed, and i hope it will be a better one. the blood was not shed in vain. what i can't understand is why they started shooting at people. >> reporter: overnight, the private residence of president kurmanbek bakiyev was looted and burned. the kitchen was ransacked and books lay scattered across the library. bakiyev fled the capital, and was said to be in his stronghold in the south. still, he told a russian radio station: "i do not acknowledge any defeat. i do not yet intend to resign my authority as president." but back at the parliament building, roza otunbayeva announced she was the leader of an interim government and she urged bakiyev to resign. >> certainly, we want to locate him and we want to negotiate with him, negotiate just regarding the resignation not about other things. and so the appeal like now, ex-

speaker appeal that he should resign. his business is finished in kyrgyzstan and so all those >> reporter: and the new interim defense minister made this pledge to the people of kyrgyzstan. >> ( translated ): the armed forces will not be used to resolve internal issues. this is very important. why? personnel of the special units and personnel of the armed forces were used against civilians in the cities of bishkek, talas and other places. this will not happen in the future. >> reporter: throngs of people converged on the central square in bishkek today. they ripped up white material to wear as armbands to show support for the interim government. russian prime minister vladimir putin was the first foreign leader to recognize that government, but he also denied that russia had anything to do with the turmoil. alisher khamidov is from kyrgyzstan originally and teaches at the john's hopkins school of advanced international studies.

he said russia has significant leverage over its central asian neighbor. >> russia has long been trying to keep kyrgyzstan within its orbit of influence. and so the russians, their immediate goal is to stability, in the country which they consider an important ally. the longer term russian goal is to see kyrgyzstan be closer to russia geopolitically and wants the u.s. base out. >> reporter: meanwhile, the u.s. air base just outside bishkek stopped humanitarian missions and suspended other trips. manas air base is a key transit point for troops and supplies flying in and out of afghanistan. today, there were unconfirmed reports the new kyrgyz government aims to close the base or shorten the length of the lease. in washington, state department spokesman p.j. crowley said it was all premature speculation. >> i think we are getting way

ahead of ourselves. we have an existing agreement with the government of kyrgyzstan. it is an important transit center that contributes significantly to stability within the region including afghanistan. it continues to operate. >> reporter: and late today, a white house statement appealed for calm in kyrgystan and looked forward to a renewal of the democratic path. >> brown: next: to the search for answers on what led to the financial crisis. >> i don't know that you can have it two ways. either you were pulling the levers or asleep at the switch. >> brown: it was a blunt confrontation today on capitol hill, as two titans of wall street were called on to explain their role in the near collapse and subsequent bailout of their one-time employer, citibank, during the financial banking

crisis. former c.e.o. charles prince and former board member and treasury secretary robert rubin apologized, but claimed to be unaware of the depths of citi's problems, which would eventually lead to a $45 billion taxpayer bailout. >> i'm sorry that the financial >> almost all of us, including me, who were involved in the financial system, that is to say financial firms, regulators, rating agencies, analysts and commentators, missed the powerful combination of factors that led to this crisis and the serious possibility of a massive crisis. we all bear responsibility for not recognizing this and i deeply regret that. >> brown: prince and rubin later >> reporter: today's grilling came from members of the

'financial crisis inquiry commission', a bipartisan panel created by congress to determine the multiple causes of the financial crisis and prepare a report by december 15. and the session was one of three this week, focused on risky mortgage lending. yesterday, the committee questioned former fed chairman an greenspan about his failure to crack down on abuses in the subprime lending market. and take a stronger regulatory stance as financial institutions sank deeper and deeper into trouble. greenspan acknowledged some mistakes but also blamed housing giants fannie mae and freddie mac for pushing risky loans and said congress shares blame as well. >> if the fed as a regulator tried to thwart what everyone perceived in, i would say, fairly broad consensus that the trend was in the right direction, home ownership was rising, and that was an unmitigated good, then congress would have clamped down on us.

>> brown: today, commission chairman phil angelides and his colleagues honed in on the responsibility of citigroup executives and the compensation they received even as the bank was falling apart. he questioned rubin to explain why he didn't know more about citi's problems as a member of the board. >> the executive committee of the board which you just referred to my being chairman of was an administrative body. it didn't have a decision, what it did was it met between board meetings, infrequently, and it was not a substantive part of the decision making process of the institution. >> you are not a garden variety board member, you are chairman of the executive committee. you can characterize it, but to most people, chairman of the executive committee board of directors implies leadership. surely $15 million a year guarantees, and implies leadership and responsibility. >> brown: tomorrow, the committee will hear from former executives of housing finance giant fannie mae and the former regulators who supervised it. and joining me now are the two

men who head the commission. chairman phil angelides, a democrat and former state treasurer for california. and vice chair bill thomas, a republican and former congressman from california who served for 28 years. welcome to both of you. >> good to be here. >> lehrer: either you were pulling the levers or asleep at the switch. that's how you put it, mr. angelides, were you satisfied with the answers you got? >> well, i'll let the record speak for itself. but what we're trying to do here is determine what happened, what brought our financial system to its knees. so for the last two days we've been scrubbing what happened at citigroup and today we met with the key executives and i was struck by the extent to which they did not know what was going on and did not assume responsibility for what was going on. >> brown: were you struck by that, mr. thomas? >> no, not really. after six years as chairman of the ways and means i've had a number of people come before us. i think the point people have to realize is it was a multiple multiple-factor cause for this

and depending upon which perspective you had you thought-- as you heard from these individuals-- that they were the ones who were at fault. it's going to take a very in-depth examination. we're in the middle of that process. and to draw any conclusions at this point i think is clearly premature. >> brown: and yet you in particular were pushing them pretty hard today on the compensation. and that's an issue that americans are up in arms about and you were asking about the notion of taking all that money, bonuses, et cetera, at a time when these banks were almost failing. >> it wasn't so much taking the money because i believe you can get reward. i'm a republican. nibble the free enterprise system. although that was awfully free and an awfully big amount. but i believe behavior has consequences and what's most startling to me is despite the tens of millions all these people made, no one dollar in claw bach. not one dollar based upon abject failure and the near collapse of not only the economy but a way of life in terms of owning your own home.

i think behavior should have consequences and it was clear there wasn't any down side to what they were doing. >> brown: and that was a big emphasis as i listened to to. that behavior has consequences. but what does that translate to. mr. prince, for example, resigned. what more should he do? what should mr. rubin do? >> so here's... i'm not after apology. what i want to see and i think what we're trying to find is what happened. and i do believe that certainly in these institutions it starts with an acknowledgment of error and responsibility so the self-examination can begin. you know, this country's suffered terribly. 27 million people out of work, can't find full-time work. two million people. families have lost their homes and if we're going to avoid these mistakes, it really starts with an honest assessment of what's happened and what we did here today, we heard about a lot of mistakes at citigroup, big errors. yet we hear that we did the best we could when, in fact, i think what's required is a deep self-examination of what

happened on wall street and what happened here in washington. >> lehrer: is it your sense that that examination is taking place absent you calling them in to discuss it or congress calling them in at this point? do you sense that this kind of examination, apologies and beyond, sort of thinking about what happened and what should happen is happening? is taking place? >> well, as you indicated, mr. prince lost his job and a number of other people have. again, it isn't out for retribution, but when you sit and listen to these people who were supposed to be quote/unquote masters of the universe and able to perceive and therefore make great amounts of money, they pointed the finger at everything under the sun: rating agencies, state mortgage regulators because they produced a lousy product that they couldn't turn into a source of money for themselves. it went on and on and on and it has with virtually every group that we've talked to, including some of those very famous

people. it was always someone else. at some point, you'd like to have them say-- and you heard it, yes-- "it was my fault and i'm sorry." >> brown: i was just going to say... >> that works for a three-year-old. >> brown: these are people who are... have been lionized in the past. alan greenspan... just in the last two days you've heard from robert rubin, alan greenspan, we all probably remember that "time" magazine cover of the committee to save the world. that's two-thirds of the committee. you're suggesting now what? >> we were created by congress to do the very thing that congress has a difficult time doing, and that is pull together as best we're able to facts that the american people would like to have to understand first of all what happened. this isn't a commission to come up with solutions to assist congress in the policies so that it doesn't happen again but as you know if you don't know the past you may, in fact, be required to repeat the past. no one wants to repeat the past

and it starts with knowledge and understanding of what happened. >> brown: well, tell us more about... i'm sorry. go ahead. >> as to your question, i don't believe there's the kind of examination that is required. i mean, there is... this has been a disaster for the country. and, by the way, the crisis is not over. i mean, it's being lived by families and communities across this country everyday. and the fact is that our commission may be the last and best chance. the best forum for the american people to have the questions asked that they want to have asked and answered. and that's our mission. and we hope the do work as ten americans from different walks of life that take a critical eye, look at how we came to the financial precipice so hopefully we can learn the lessons of this tragedy. >> brown: all of this, of course, is happening as congress is in the midst of this debate over financial reform. you spent many years there yourself. now, is there a way for your work here to have an impact on that? you're... as we said, you don't have a report until december 15. >> no but the committees doing the work are committees with

narrow jurisdiction. this was a multifaceted problem, cross disciplinary or interdisciplinary, if you will affecting the government regulators, affecting a product, housing to a very great extent, but other products, wall street. no one committee in congress can focus on all of the facts that need to be looked at. and as you well know, based upon resent examples, it takes congress even whennedly there's a strong desire to do something an extremely long time. a major bill with major changes in it has as we used to call in the business a bunch of trailer bills following it because you never get it right the first time. so i think it's timely. i think it's appropriate. if we were charged with coming up with solutions, i wouldn't be here and the chairman can speak for himself. we're simply going to try to get the facts. will we get all the facts? of course not. it's going to be an ongoing search. but we are going to compile both through research, investigation,

interviews, and the hearings that we are presenting get a pretty good handle in a relatively short time as to what happened. >> and let me add that a piece of legislation does not constitute reform. in the end, if things are going to change, it goes to what's considered acceptable behavior. mr. thomas pointed out today how people view compensation. we had regulators. we had regulatory boxes. and i think what's important is that we have a full understanding so that we not only change the laws if we need to and as we need to we change how regulators look at the marketplace but also how people behave and participate and the standards by which people conduct themselves in the marketplace. that's a values and behavior change. >> and a useful service will be to get americans to understand this is not just a national problem it's an international problem. this is a very complex world.

it is a very difficult one to deal with and that you simply don't throw up your hands and say "there isn't a way to deal with this." because if we reach that point, then these people who can tell you almost run the world. and we sue what happened when they did. >> brown: bill thomas and phil angelides, we'll watch as the work goes on. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> lehrer: now, reaction to the new health care law from voters. this week, our correspondents spent time with two members of congress who went home during the spring recess. tonight, "newshour" correspondent spencer michels reports from california. >> reporter: the old gold mining town of rough and ready lies in the heart of one of california's most conservative congressional districts. in these parts, health care reform is a hot topic. republican tom mcclintock-- who

represented a southern california district in the state legislature-- today represents this northern california district in congress, winning a close race in 2008. home from washington, the congressman traveled to rough and ready's grange hall to see what his constituents were thinking about the new health care reform law, and to explain his own opposition to it. >> let me just get a straw poll here. how many of you are in favor the bill that just passed the congress and was signed into law? how many of you are opposed? that's pretty much the reaction we are getting all across the district. >> reporter: mcclintock's district runs from suburban sacramento east to lake tahoe, and north to the oregon border. it's mostly rural, growing faste

at the tn ll meeting, h re much.>> absurd. >> reporter: the congressional audience members, many on medicare, were concerned that provisions in the new law designed to cut wasteful spending in medicare could actually cut their benefits. >> so where does that leave the people-- and there's a fair majority in this room-- where does that leave them? >> as a matter of simple practical fact, they are not going to cut a half a trillion dollars out of the medicare system because the medicare system cannot begin to bear such a cut. what they are going to do is take it out of the national treasury, which means your pocket as a tax payer. >> reporter: mcclintock says

he's encouraged by what he's been hearing from his constituents. >> the first town hall that i did was in august and i'd say the audience split about 25% in favor of obama care and about 75% opposed. as the summer entered the fall, uh those numbers in support of the obama plan dwindled to the point that as you saw today we had one or two people in support and everybody else in opposition. >> reporter: rough and ready residents don and edith davis were part of that opposition. they said they feared a government health czar would deny them medical treatment, even though the law has no such czar, and proponents say it won't deny treatment. >> don has had two knee replacements. i immediately thought when healthcare passed, thank god, he had them now because when the obama health care comes into you know being, would he by some health czar say, "uh-uh, he's too old. we can't spend that kind of money."

>> reporter: this wasn't the first time that residents of rough and ready have been frustrated with government. in 1850, rough and ready seceded from the union, in protest over taxes on gold mines. four months later, they re- entered the union. this time it appears the divide over health care reform won't heal that quickly. there are plenty of reform supporters, even in this republican district. at an urgent care clinic in nearby grass valley, director dr. roger hicks said he sent emails and called mcclintock's office during the health care debate and received no response. at the clinic, he says, he gets a different sampling of opinion than the congressman does. one third of his patients are uninsured. >> 99 out of 100 of the people i talk to here are in favor of this health care reform, and i talk to everybody about it because it comes up frequently when i'm seeing patients.

you know, i say, "well this is what you need. you need this test," and they say, "well, i can't afford it." >> reporter: hicks is convinced the new law will make a difference. >> it is going to change because 32 million people that were uninsured are now going to have insurance. so, you know they won't be making decisions about, whether they should go to the hospital because of their chest pains based on money. >> reporter: doctor hicks says he is also a small businessman and health reform will save him money with tax credits for insurance premiums. but at the nearby nevada county contractors association, congressman mcclintock talked with builders who didn't share that optimism. >> you know the cost of health care is so uncertain; it's created a lot of angst and anxiety out in the community. a lot of our clients are holding back on making investments because they just don't have security in what's going to come

down what we saw happen in washington d.c. was disheartening. >> so what is your outlook on how this healthcare situation is going to affect the elections here come next november? >> well, i think republicans are going to get a second chance and republicans are beginning to realize that this time we have to be worthy of it. >> reporter: mcclintock is facing a poorly financed opponent in the republican primary, and a little-known democrat in november. based on what he's seen and heard this week, he believes his constituents support his position on the new health care law and that, he thinks, can only help him win re-election. >> brown: tomorrow night, betty ann bowser gets the view from a democratic district in virginia. >> lehrer: finally tonight, the many layers to the return of tiger woods. the world famous golfer played in the opening round of the masters tournament in augusta, georgia today.

the married father of small children had not played since the news broke of his secret sexual life with many women. today was a major media event broadcast live in 3d on espn. sportswriter and author john feinstein joins us from augusta now. he's the author of several golf books, including the upcoming "moment of glory." john, welcome. >> thanks, jim, good to be with you. >> lehrer: does today's event justify all the attention it received today? >> jim, i'm not sure anything justifies the attention that tiger woods has received in the last couple of months. but certainly the day itself has been spectacular in every possible way. tiger woods is playing very good golf. he's four under par, still finishing his round. a couple of shots behind the leader fred couples right now. tom watson, who's one of the great players of all time, is only one shot out of the lead. but you would think... there are 96 players this this field jim but you would think there was

just one player in this field. >> lehrer: what was the affect of tiger woods' absence on golf up until today? >> well, very simply, jim, everything in golf doubles when tiger woods is involved. quite literally. television ratings double. corporate involvement doubles. overall fan interest, ticket sales double. there are two groups of people who watch the game of golf in the tiger woods era. one are the golf fans who just want to see whomever is playing and whomever is on the leader board. the other are people who only want to watch tiger woods and since this all began on november 27 it's interesting that people have sort of broken into two camps, the golf fans want to know what he did, why he did it, how it came about. the tiger woods fans just want to see him doing what he was doing today-- which is playing golf. >> lehrer: if he's going to have... is it... comeback 0, of course, is the word here. is his comeback dependent on his continuing to play great golf?

>> absolutely. because that's what made him rich and famous. and his golf game is what made him be billionaire. he's the first athlete billionaire ever and if he's going to continue to be a major figure in sports and out of sports, he's got to be a great golfer. if he becomes just an okay golfer or even a very good golfer then the interest in him will go down and people will assume that the events off the golf course affected the way he played on the golf course. so for him to remain a superstar in the pantheon of sports and outside of it, he's got to continue to be a dominant player, not a good or very good player. >> lehrer: is it... can he play golf well enough to overcome what got him to this difficult situation? in other words, the scandal. that can really ever go away in the minds of most americans? >> well, i think the scandal's going to stay there.

i think this is part of his resume. much the same way monica lewinsky will always be part of bill clinton's resume no matter what he did as president, no matter what great work he and president bush the first have done together as ex-presidents. this will be part of tiger woods' resume whether he breaks jack nicklaus' record of 18 major championships tk + *s he's at 14 right now-- and goes on and wins 25 or not. but having said that, i think he can continue to be a great golfer for the simple reason that one of his great strengths as an athlete is his selfishness. that's... tiger woods has always only cared about tiger woods and about his golf. that's probably the reason he acted the way he did away from the golf course, but it's also the reason why he can go out today having not played in five months and play as well as he's played. >> lehrer: and the legacy of tiger woods is dependent on how he plays from this point on, though, is it not? >> the golf legacy is. but his legacy as a human being is totally changed by what's

gone on these past few months. his father once claimed that tiger could be as important a figure in the world as gandhi. i think that ship has sailed. >> lehrer: that ship has sailed. what about the simple issue of money? what is now on the table that wasn't on there until this morning at tee time... sorry, this afternoon at... yeah. >> he teed off at 1:42 this afternoon. he's lost a lot of sponsors during this period. many of them have gone away. his number-one sponsor, however, nike, has stayed with him because he's so important to them. and as you probably know, released a new commercial last night that's very controversial in which tiger is standing silently looking into the camera while you hear his father's voice asking him what the you thinking? what have you learnd from this? and a lot of people think the timing of the commercial was terrible and the tone of the commercial is terrible. that the time to stop selling tiger woods as a great person has long passed and they should

simply sell him as a golfer. but you know as well as i do, jim, the way corporate america works. if he starts winning, if he win this is week, the sponsors will come running back to him. >> lehrer: just like nothing ever happened. >> exactly right. because they want to sell product and tiger woods has always been to sell product. >> lehrer: john feinstein, good to talk to you again, thank you. >> thank you, jim. >> brown: again, the major developments of the day: president obama and russian president medvedev signed an agreement to cut nuclear arsenals by roughly a third. rescue crews in west virginia tried and failed to get into a coal mine where four miners are missing. and new violence erupted in kyrgyzstan, as the opposition claimed it was in charge of the country. the "newshour" is always online. kwame holman, in our newsroom, previews what's there. kwame? >> holman: on the nuclear arms story, we have three views on what the pact means for the u.s. and other countries. there are more details on the new species of hominid discovered in south africa. and on "newshour" extra, a young

woman in sudan describes her hopes for the future, two years after fighting forced her and others to leave their village. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. jeff? >> brown: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm jeffrey brown. >> lehrer: and i'm jim lehrer. we'll see you on-line and again here tomorrow evening with david brooks and ruth marcus among others. 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.

when someone you count on is not responsive, bad things could happen. grant thornton believes it's important to be responsive, through direct client access to our partners. grant thornton. >> 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. s- - acneil/lehrer productions a- - edia access group at wgbha- ccess.wgbh.org