captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> lehrer: good evening. i'm jim lehrer. the senate approved fixes to the new health care law and sent it back to the house for a final vote. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. on the "newshour" tonight: both democrats and republicans denounced threats and vandalism against lawmakers who voted for the measure. >> lehrer: we'll talk to white

house chief of staff rahm emmanuel and a republican leader in the house, mike pence of indiana. >> brown: then, judy woodruff updates the home foreclosure crisis: who's being helped and who's losing out? >> a lot of people are being foreclosed upon in the process of just trying to get in the process. and that's a problem. >> lehrer: margaret warner interviews the president of yemen about the battle against al-qaeda. 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 $62 million 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.

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 the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world.

and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> lehrer: there was a last extra lap today on the road toward health reform. the senate passed a bill reshaping parts of the new overhaul law. it is set for final approval in the house sometime tonight. ray suarez has our report on the end game and the continuing aftermaths. >> reporter: after working late into the night, the senate was back this morning, to take up dozens more republican amendments. those ranged from protecting doctors doing pro bono work from lawsuits... >> we talk about making health care more affordable.

well, one of the ways to do that is to encourage people to give away healthcare. >> reporter: ...to allowing americans to purchase insurance across state lines. >> the laws of land have created state by state monopolies that have not been responsive to american people and have run up costs. >> reporter: all those amendments all failed with the democratic majority. >> on this vote, there are 56 yeas 43 nays. >> reporter: the final vote on healthcare-- along party lines-- came early in the afternoon. >> on this vote, there are 56 yeas 43 nays. the bill as amended is passed. >> reporter: senate majority leader reid heralded the passage moments after. >> it's a healthcare bill, but it was also a jobs bill, an anti

discrimination bill, an economic recovery bill and now it's the law of the land. >> reporter: the changes the senate passed today are revisions to the bill president obama signed tuesday. they include: expanded medicaid funding for the states; higher taxes on upper-income americans and improved drug coverage under medicare. >> reporter: the bill was then returned to the house for final approval. after sunday's climactic house tally another vote was necessary after republicans identified parliamentary problems with at least two provisions. house republicans-- including minority leader john boehner-- stayed on message continuing their resistance to the reform law they still call a bill. >> the tax hikes, the medicare cuts and job killing mandates, the accounting gimmicks, the backroom deals, we're going to fight to repeal them at every single turn. the fact is this bill should be

repealed and replaced with common sense steps that will >> reporter: and democrats, led by house speaker nancy pelosi, responded. >> you have insurance, you get sick, you get dropped. that's not called insurance. they can't rescind your policy on the way to the operating room. >> reporter: at the same time the senate passed the bill, president obama was in iowa city, iowa today, rallying support for the overall reform. >> today health insurance is the today, the president responded to republicans who've vowed to run on a platform of repealing the law in the midterm elections. >> this is the reform that some folks in washington are still hollering about, still shouting about. now that they passed it, now that we passed it, they're already promising to repeal it. they're actually going to run on a platform of repeal in november. you've been hearing that. and my attitude is, go for it. ( cheers and applause )

>> reporter: protesters were out in force. >> i'm tired of what obama is doing to our country. >> it's trying to take our private property and i'm not okay with that. >> reporter: that anger has caused some to take it a step futher. several democratic lawmakers had rocks and bricks thrown at their local offices. this afternoon, there were reports rep. anthony weiner's office in new york received a letter containing white powder. at least 10 democratic house members have been offered stepped up security. >> congressman stupak, you baby killing mother ( no audio ). i hope you die. >> reporter: democratic congressman bart stupak was one of the targets. he and six others provided the votes to pass healthcare reform. and even on sarah palin's facebook page-- rifle cross hairs mark the districts of 17 democratic members of congress she wants to see defeated. >> those expressions, those acts of vandalism and those threats of more have no place in place in this civil debate our

country. >> reporter: tim kaine, the democratic national committee chair and former governor of virginia, asked supporters in an email today for $25 or more to help defend lawmakers from the threats. republican eric cantor surprised people when he said today that last week, he said shots were fired into the unmarked offices of two of his longtime strategists. >> let me be clear. i do not condone violence, there are no leaders in this building, no rank and file members in this building that condone violence period. i've received threats since i assumed elected office. it is reckless to use these incidences as media vehicles for political gain. >> reporter: the bill is expected to pass the house this evening. >> lehrer: and now, our interview with rahm emanuel, the white house chief of staff. i spoke with him a short time ago.

rahm emanuel, welcome. >> thank you. >> lehrer: how do you read the seriousness of these threats against members of congress? >> well, i think first of all i think we should all know that we can have disagreements without being disagreeable. this was a long debate, a lot of heat, sometimes not a lot of light, but a lot of heat around it. i think it's important for every elected official, regardless of party or where you are in the issue, to speak to the country about calming and setting things down. we all have a collective interest, a vibrant democracy is a good thing. but this is a debate with a level of civility that should be around it and that debate now about health care is over. we'll have a continuing debate about health care, etc., role of government, etc., but not one that i think obviously endangers... brings forth any sense of violence or threat. and so every elected official, regardless of where they are on the political spectrum or where they were on the issue of health

care has a responsibility to help calm the waters. >> lehrer: do you personally blame the republicans for this? >> i don't blame... first of all, i don't blame the republicans. >> lehrer: okay. >> i think... >> lehrer: i mean fanning the flames of threats and all that stuff. >> that's not... what i think everybody and what i think the president wants to see is basically we all have a responsibility to help our constituents and our fellow citizens understand it's good that there's passion around a debate but not one that obviously crosses a line into threats and violence. and i think elected leaders have a role in calming it down. the only person... the only time i would ever say... i don't want to say blame or point fingers, but i would say a responsibility not to incite it or encourage it as some have recently. >> lehrer: there's no question, though, is there, that there is legitimate and serious division about this whole issue, health care and the legislation, right? >> there's no doubt about it.

>> lehrer: it really divided the country. >> well, part of that is because i mean let's go back, though, jim. part of that is because people talked about death pepbls. people talked about it as being armageddon. there was rhetoric used that was not... as i said just a second ago, that was more heat than light. >> lehrer: okay. >> now, you can... you know, i lived through health care debate in '93 and there's a lot... what i think the president's a little taken aback or also surprised, walk through just the issue of the individual mandate. in '93, president clinton was for an employer mandate, republicans, the big difference, senator chafee's bill, the republican bill that had 33 republican senators on that was the dividing line was about an employee mandate. i.e. an individual mandate. that, today, is the basis of why the republicans oppose this bill. but it was the foundation of the disagreement where republicans in '93 were for it. so there's a lot of angst that went into. you should... i think if you go through history-- whether it was

in president roosevelt's time or president kennedy's time-- there has been during difficult economic and other stressful times a reaction when there is big change and discussion of big change for the country. that doesn't mean we don't all have the responsibility of calming things down and making sure our fellow citizens can be involved, interested, have emotions without it crossing the line into threats. >> lehrer: the dust, obviously, has not quite settled yet. but looking at in the retrospect, was it a mistake to push and push and push and pass something this sweeping, this changing with no votes on the republicans? >> no. i mean, the president... he said out a goal and today's... he set out a goal and he went back to iowa city where he announced almost three years ago what he wanted to see in health care reform. and it was a health care plan

that provided by people cost control, expanded coverage, and real choice and competition. and you have a health care bill that does all that. i will tell you as somebody who went through this somewhat in another time in '93, this bill is very similar to the bipartisan bill that senator dole and senator daschle and senator mitchell and senator baker, all former democrats and republicans, supported. it's very similar to the bill republicans advocated in '93. and if you look at mr. frum's piece, former bush speech writer, he noted-- which is something some of the things i've said before and others-- that this is very similar to policies advocated back in the '90s by republicans. not individual policies, the basic approach, which is a free market, market-based system approach. >> lehrer: is it true that as some published reports have said that you advocated actually going a little bit slower, a little smaller for health care and not go for the whole nine

yards as the president ended up doing, the democrats? >> yes, first of all. >> lehrer: you did advocate? >> i said that a job of the chief of staff is to provide the president with a sense of options and to weigh those equities. and it's his strength is that he wanted that, looked at that and it was one of the things that he said thin this is why i think it's so important to spend the political a capital to get that done. he didn't want a bunch of yes people. he asked for a constant debate about stuff and he said the importance of getting health care reform, of finally putting a basis in place that can finally control cost, change the incentives in the system, provide people who don't have health care because they're caught between the public and the private system, the coverage they need, it's worth doing. and that is the real leadership of this president. what i provided by him was here's a way to do it without the political kind of cost. he was willing to spend that political capital to get something done. that's what leadership is made of. >> lehrer: you just made sure

he understood there was going to be a political cost. >> or that you had... >> lehrer: and he's paying it right now. >> no, he had to spend political capital but what i think is important is the president wants... this president in particular wants not a bunch of yes-people but looking at all the options and then making the decision that he thinks is right and he was willing to spend capital. i think if you asked him he'd spend more political capital to get done what he wants, what he thinks is right for the country. that's the qualities of leadership the country asked for and they got. >> lehrer: now, the famous "now what" question. what's the president going to do next? health care reform is done, at least as it sits here now. financial reform? is that going to be a priority? is immigration? cap and trade? energy? what's next. what's the next big one. >> well, they all fit together. they're all about moving the economy forward and getting the economy on a stronger footing. if you go back to his georgetown

speech almost a year ago that he gave in march in georgetown, he talked about the new foundation, putting our health care system in order so we don't overspend when we shouldn't. we're sending a trillion dollars more than our competitors and getting worse outcomes. putting finally the financial banking regulatory reform structure in place so we do not repeat the crisis that we had before. and obviously an educational system and an energy system that we are making ourselves competitive for the future. this bill not only passes health care reform but also has fundamental reforms and funding and affordability for higher education. banking reform is next. we've passed in the the house, we feel very good about the opportunities in the senate to getting that done and then also one of the things that... two things i would add is an energy bill... an energy bill, as you said e, but also dealing with what we see as the loopholes for allowing special interest money into campaigns. the supreme court decision. and so those are going to be at

the domestic front. i will, as you know... we just had an election in iraq which is key to the responsible withdrawal of our forces from iraq. we are on target to achieving what the president pledged for this august. and also constantly pursuing the war on terror and ourers in afghanistan. so there's a... both foreign policy as well as at home and i think that if you look at his vote on health care, it strengthens our hands both on the legislative front as well as internationally. >> lehrer: you say it strengthens your hand and yet senator john mccain and many other republicans are saying because of the way you and the democrats and the president handled health care reform there's not going to be anymore cooperation. all those things you just listed. forget it. can you cover it? can the united states govern itself that way? >> well, you can cite and that and i understand that's what senator mccain may have said, that's his choosing. i don't think that's what the country wants. the country did not ask for that attitude or tone.

they asked us to come here to cooperate. we're going to continue to do that. as you also saw just yesterday-- and i can cite a different tape-- senator corker, republican from tennessee, noted on financial regulatory reform there's going to be a bipartisan bill. they noticed the democrats have the high hand here and they... both he and senator gregg predicted we're going to make progress on that. so while senator mccain may have take than tone and tenor, i think the american people want something else and i think some of his colleagues know that that's right and the test will be both on education and financial or banking reform to join us in moving this country forward and not get... act out of anger or pique of anger and somehow say that you're going to stop cooperating. i'm not in the business of giving political advice to republican bus that would not be what the american people want and if that's the tone you adopt, there's a price to pay in november and there's a price to pay for the country when you decide you're going to cooperate on behalf of the country. >> lehrer: in response to that, would the president continue to do what he did on health care reforms? okay, you don't want to play?

we'll go democrats all the way. >> jim, you say that, but first of all, the president started this process with a bipartisan meeting at the white house about a year ago. this bill includes fundamental ideas advocate bid the republicans. on wellness, on prevention, on the exchange, on the individual mandate, on buying plans across state lines. in fact, just the other day after the bill is passed, senator grassley, appropriately and correctly, noted that the bill includes one of his ideas on hospitals. in the bill! and so as the president always said, it will have republican ideas even if it doesn't have republican votes. and embedded in this bill-- both the big ideas as well as individual amendments and smaller ideas-- are republican policies and republican initiatives advocated. whether they voted for it or not was up to them. it was a choice they made where we can continue across the waterfront of issues. you will see in the the renewal of the reauthorization of the

leave no child behind legislation as well as in the banking reform legislation. we will solicit ideas from republican because we think that's the best thing to do to find common ground. >> lehrer: are you happy as white house chief of staff? >> yes. not as happy as i am being on this show, but yes, i'm happy. >> lehrer: you're going to stick around for a while? >> yes. >> lehrer: there's a lot of stories about you, you know. >> you and my mother have read them all. (laughter). >> lehrer: you're at ease? you're comfortable being white house chief of staff for barack obama? >> yeah. first of all i very much enjoy the job. i'd be less than honest if i didn't tell you it was a stressful 14 months in the sense of you come in and you have a financial meltdown, an economic recession, two wars, three wars, one in iraq, one in afghanistan as well as the war on terror. it took a lot to not just get to this point but to continue to push on. but i find if you were to do public service-- which is what

i've done with my adult career and my professional career-- i've been fortunate enough to work in the white house, fortunate enough to get elected to congress, and then fortunate enough to work in the white house again as chief of staff. this is tremendously rewarding. it's what i've chose on the do with my life. i find it very rewarding, and i find rewarding the opportunity the president has given me to help him to enact the policies he sees in place. it is a... you're in the cockpit everyday and you get strafed at a lot but that's the life i've chosen and it's... when you get things like we've just done on health care or on what we've done on education, just to note those two, that's why public service is so rewarding and hopefully other people, as i've talked to, when i was a member of congress when i used to teach kids in high school in my district i would teach a social studies class, i told them somewhere in their life they've got to do public service because you've got to be able to do something that's more important than yourself but for your country and this is an extremely rewarding and i'm honored to have that opportunity in my life

to do it. >> lehrer: rahm emanuel, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> brown: and now to the view of a leading house republican-- mike pence of indiana. he's the chair of the house republican conference. welcome to you. i'd like start where jim started with rahm emmanual: how seriously do you take the threats against members over this vote? what if anything can or should be done? >> well, let me say that there's no excuse. regardless of how strongly people feel in opposition to this health care legislation, there's no excuse for bigotry or threats or acts of violence. we condemn them in the strongest possible terms. people who engage in that behavior are undermining any cause that they purport to believe in and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. i mean, this is part of what goes with being in public life. i've received threats and had to

make referrals to capitol hill police and to the f.b.i. in the past. but i'm pleased to see leadership in both political parties condemning threats, vandalism, and acts of violence against democrats and republicans' offices. >> brown: but what do you see going on out there in the country? is the rancor, the anger, the divisiveness in some danger of spinning out of control? >> well, you know, i... i don't believe it is. look, the american people don't support a government takeover of health care. they don't support this bill. the president probably should have taken rahm's advice and tried a more incremental approach rather than ramming through with back room deals this massive expansion of government into one-sixth of our economy. i think there are millions of americans that are angry about what's happened and on the far

fringes of that frustration you have people that are expressing themselves in improper ways and you have one or two people apparently who have taken improper if not illegal actions. but i want to be very careful here about defending the rights of law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights under the first amendment of freedom of speech and freedom to peaceably assemble. >> brown: you just heard rahm emanuel, though, talk about aspects of this bill that prominent republicans in the past have advocated. that still relies, in essence, on the private health insurance market. in spite of the way you just characterized it. >> well, i think that's a complete mischaracterization of this legislation. what we have here is a mandate that every american purchase health insurance whether they want it or need it or not.

$569 billion in job-killing tax increases during the worst recession in 25 years. and then we have the creation of a massive government-run insurance exchange which will dictate what health insurance companies can offer and ultimately very likely what the rate structures and benefits will be. this has very little to do with the free market. you know, i heard rahm referring to letting people purchase across state lines. well, you know, there were bills on capitol hill to allow americans to purchase health insurance across state lines like we buy life insurance, like we buy car insurance. this massive government-run insurance exchange is not that. it's not a free market system, it's a government-run system and i think that's why it's being rejected by deice may have skwror tease of americans, even at this hour. >> brown: well, there are polls still a majority against it but there are some polls that suggest even in recent days

since it passed some swing in support of it. >> well, you know, i expect that... i expect that that's the case. i mean, that, you know, there will be americans who see one or two small items in the bill that sound attractive to them. but i think as the country continues to digest this legislation the enormous tax increases that are contemplated here, the idea... again, i go back to... mandating that every american purchase government-approved health insurance whether they want it or need it or not and creating incentives for businesses to cancel the health insurance they have and send people to a government-run insurance exchange, i think the more the american people look at this, the more they're going to know what we ought to do is repeal obamacare and immediately start over with the kind of reforms that will be built on individual choice and not more government. >> brown: well, will there now

be a major repeal effort? mr. boehner said it early in that clip we saw, but on the show earlier this week senator john kyl said while he would like a repeal, he said he didn't see it quite in the cards because the votes aren't there and he suggested it might be a waste of time. what do you see going forward? will there be a major effort? >> well, i believe there's already a major effort under way across this country. i saw a survey that said some 55% of americans want to repeal this bill and start over. and i think that's where the american people are at. they know we can do better. and house republicans are going to be taking our case for repeal and starting over to the nation. we obviously have to retire this majority on the first tuesday in november and after that immediately go to work on preventing this massive government takeover of health care from being put into effect and ultimately achieve the gel of repealing it and

replacing it with the kind of reforms that will give americans more choices instead of more government in health care. >> brown: what about the question that jim asked rahm emanuel, the "what next" question. are there some policy initiatives going forward where you could see republicans working with democrats? >> well, you better believe it. you know, i talked to senator ron widen about his bill that will allow americans to purchase health insurance across state lines. he was pretty much shut out of bringing that bill in the senate. but whether it's that, whether it's efforts to cover americans with preexisting conditions. you know, there was a lot of room here for an incremental step-by-step approach that would have been fiscally responsible and could have represented bipartisan consensus. but we got instead a massive expansion of the federal government's role in our health care economy rammed through the house and senate with sordid back-room deals. i think the process and the

policy has really turned off millions of americans and that's why we're going to focus on giving them a better choice. it's going to have to take an election to put us in a position to do that. but we're going to campaign on repealing and starting over with the kind of health care reform that will square with the common sense and the common values of the american people. >> brown: well, does that kind of language you're using now, is that what we can expect to hear? taking it to people and making it part of the next campaign to make this the issue? and if so, you heard the president in our earlier clip saying if that's what you want, bring it on, essentially. >> (laughs) no, i think george w. bush said "bring it on." president obama has ... >> brown: he said "go for it, you're right. ". >> he said "go for it." it must be presidential prerogative to be provocative, which is fine. look, the american people are going to go for it. they don't want this government takeover of health care ani think you're going to see a

concerted effort across this country to say no. not just to a massive expansion of the federal government's role in health care but, frankly, of this long business of borrowing and spending and bailouts and takeoversovers that have happend under republican and democrat administrations. i mean, you know, the last administration doubled the national debt, passed a massive wall street bailout, set into motion a bailout and takeover of the domestic automotive industry. democrats in congress in this administration have put runaway federal spending on steroids and launched this government takeover of health care. i think the american people have had it. they know this country is headed toward bankruptcy and those issues, i believe, in totality will be exactly what drive this election year and i think republicans are going to offer a bright line choice with the borrowing, the spending, the bailouts, and the takeovers of the recent past. >> brown: congressman mike

pence of indiana, thank you for joining us. >> thank you. >> lehrer: still to come on the "newshour": relief for homeowners in trouble and an interview with the president of yemen. but first, the other news of the day. here's hari sreenivasan in our newsroom. >> sreenivasan: the pentagon issued new orders for enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" law that bans gays from openly serving in the military. the new guidelines put higher- ranking officers in charge of inquiries and dismissals. and impose tougher requirements for evidence used to out gay service members. defense secretary robert gates said the new rules are effective immediately, and will not be retroactive. but current cases under review will be re-examined under the new regulations. >> i believe these changes represent an important improvement, in the way the current law is put into practice, above all by providing a greater measure of common sense and common decency, to a process for handling what are difficult and complex issues for all involved.

>> sreenivasan: president obama has pressed congress to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law. at least 13,000 people have been discharged from the military under the statute. a new audio tape reportedly of osama bin laden surfaced today with a new threat. the short, 74-second long message was aired on al jazeera. in it, bin laden threatened al qaeda would kill any captured americans if the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks is executed. khalid sheik mohammed is in u.s. custody at guantanamo bay, cuba. the obama administration is still considering whether he will face a military tribunal or civilian trial. president obama is wrapping up final details on a new nuclear- arms deal with russia. it replaces a 1991 deal that expired in december. white house press secretary robert gibbs said the president plans to speak with russian president dimitry medvedev in the next few days. it was widely reported the deal will sharply reduce the nuclear arsenals of both countries, cutting the number of long-range nuclear weapons for each to about 1,500.

the vatican came under fire again today for its handling of sex abuse cases. the latest to come to light is from wisconsin, where as many as 200 deaf boys were allegedly molested beginning in the 1950s. "the new york times"-- citing church and vatican documents-- reported top vatican officials ignored warnings from bishops and failed to defrock the accused american priest, father lawrence murphy. the vatican officials said the alleged abuse happened too long ago and the priest should repent rather than face trial. murphy died in 1998. in milwaukee, wisconsin one of the deaf abuse victims and his daughter spoke to reporters. >> he couldn't enjoy his childhood. everything was stolen from him. and now he's 61 years old and he's still fighting for this. and now it's carried on to me, my family, now my niece, his grandchildren, they all know about this and it continues on down the family that he hurt all of us and this is what we deal with every day, what father murphy did to my father.

>> sreenivasan: the vatican denied any cover-up and denounced it as a smear campaign against pope benedict the sixteenth. at the time the case emerged, benedict was the vatican's top doctrinal official and was reportedly informed of the matter. the countries that use the euro reached agreement on a financial safety net for greece today at a summit in brussels. the bailout would draw funds from the 16 nations in the eurozone and the international monetary fund, but only as a last resort. at the summit, german chancellor angela merkel insisted a bailout should only be used if greece could not borrow money from financial markets. >> ( translated ): i propose that we consider a combination of i.m.f. help and bilateral aid as a last resort, if there is a situation in which greece can't obtain money itself. for me, it's important that this focuses on that last resort, after that we should consider what we have learnt from this situation, because really, we didn't want to even be in such a situation. >> sreenivasan: the support

package is likely to be worth between $27 billion and $29 billion. on wall street today, stocks changed very little. the dow jones industrial average gained five points to close at 10,841. the nasdaq fell more than a point to close at 2,397. 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 jeff. >> brown: and we go to the continuing crisis in home foreclosures. the government's record on helping those most in need came in for new criticism at a congressional hearing today. judy woodruff has our report. >> reporter: lawmakers got right to the point this morning-- trying to convey the magnitude of the growing foreclosure problem across america. democrat edoplhus towns, the chair of the house committee on oversight and government reform, held up a box of keys from homes lost over the past year. >> this is a disgrace. this is just too much to take.

the families are being destroyed, children are being moved from place to place, because of the fact that the mortgage is not being paid. and a lot of them, if they could get modifications, they would be able to work it out, and they just need a little support, a little help. >> reporter: the committee met to discuss why the government's efforts to reduce the number of foreclosures has had limited success. last year, 2.8 million homes were lost to foreclosure and experts say that number may rise to four million this year. after taking office last year, the obama administration launched its own plan to help stave off as many as three to four million foreclosures. but so far, just about 170,000 households have been able to obtain what are known as "permanent modifications" to their loans. a new report by the special inspector general for federal bailout money contends that the administration's $75 billion

program has had "disappointing results." so far, only a small fraction of the money has been spent. and today, inspector general neil barofsky placed much of the blame on the treasury department. >> we believe it is unacceptable that treasury still failed to identify goals for permanent modifications for people to stay in their homes. >> reporter: the treasury department has been trying to get banks and other lenders to give their customers a break, by cutting interest rates to as little as 2%, or extending loan terms up to 40 years. but banks were not asked to reduce the size of the borrower's principal loan as some consumer advocates wanted. and today barofsky told the committee that treasury officials administered the plan in such a way that it led many people to apply for relief who don't earn enough money to qualify.

>> we've found it to be essentially counterproductive-- it's led to a huge backlog of trial modifications and more importantly diverted scarce resources that could otherwise be devoted to permanently converting modifications and perhaps worst of all, it may have actually harmed the people this program was intended to help, borrowers, who are put into hopeless modifications with no chance to succeed. >> reporter: the government's acting comptroller general gene dodaro told the committee that treasury's efforts may improve if given more time. but that did not pass muster with the committee's ranking republican, darrell issa of california. >> if we continue doing what we've been doing that has failed, then only insanity explains why we'd continue doing what we know doesn't work. >> well, i think in terms of making sure that the program has a fair opportunity, it needed to be set up to have some stability, to be managed properly and i still think that if treasury proceeds, there will have to be better decisions made.

>> reporter: today, assistant treasury secretary herb allison came to explain why the pace wasn't faster, saying it is a large and complex effort, requiring the cooperation of banks. but democrats are frustrated as well. elijah cummings is from the baltimore area. >> the pain is still there. people have been thrown out of their houses. so i'm just trying to figure out, how do you deal with that? >> this is a vast program. we're reaching out to millions of people. there are cases and fortunately the complaints are declining these days, we monitor that very closely, but we still get complaints, there are still problems. i fully agree with that. >> reporter: allison also announced new protections by the government to make sure lenders do not foreclose on borrowers while they were still in the process of being evaluated for help. and he said a new program by bank of america to reduce the

size of some borrowers' principal is in the lender's best interest. for the record, bank of america is an underwriter of the "newshour." >> there's nothing that prevents a bank right now from writing down the value of a mortgage that's on its books and helping that person stay in their home because in most cases we're finding there's a higher present value for keeping that person in the home than foreclosing which is just painful for everybody, not just the homeowner, but the bank. but in some cases, they have been slow to do that. i applaud what bank of america is doing, it's time for other banks to recognize reality and >> reporter: the treasury department is reported to be working on similar efforts with other lenders. those may be announced next >> lehrer: now, margaret warner continues her reports from yemen. today, her interview with yemen's president. >> warner: mr. president, thank you for having us. how do you think the fight against al qaeda is going, your fight?

are you winning? >> ( translated ): we are considering our fight against the elements of al qaeda here in yemen because of their terrorist actions either against the u.s. interests or against the yemen interests, such as the attack on the u.s. embassy in sanaa, against the tourists in hadrawmat, in mareb and in shebwa, and in sanaa. we are not going to retreat, never, and we will continue our fight against them unless they fight against al-ounce their repentance or stop, or abandon or relinquish completely the acts of terrorism or acts of violence. >> warner: washington is very pleased that you have stepped up your fight against al qaeda here on the security side. what prompted you to do that? >> ( translated ): actually our actions against al qaeda are not new. we have been doing this since

long time ago but we doubled our actions recently, because the pressure on us, on our security apparatus and authorities were reduced after the war. in sadah has come to a halt in the north of this country. we were busy completely with the war in sadah, but our actions against al qaeda are continuing. and, of course, the halt of the war in sadah will increase our efforts against al qaeda. >> warner: washington has been concerned that in the past, your commitment has been episodic, intense at times, then less so. are you saying it's different now? that you really are going to stick with this? >> ( translated ): the decision to follow-up and to hunt down the elements of al qaeda is a decision taken in the past, in the present and the future. we are going to follow up these elements until they surrender and demolish them completely.

because they caused very severe acts of violence against the tourists and the yemeni authorities, also they damaged the security and stability, the economy of yemen, so our political position is the same in the past, the present and in the future. we are not going to retreat. >> warner: now recently however you did also offer to talk to al qaeda or negotiate with al qaeda, what did you mean by that? what's your intention there? >> ( translated ): actually we are, we have not closed the door of dialogue, but at same time we are not seeking for dialogue with al qaeda, but if the elements of al qaeda came to us, they want to surrender of course there will be no problem. >> warner: that isn't a negotiation. >> ( translated ): if they come to us surrendering, then handing themselves over. even the united states of america is negotiating for some elements in afghanistan with taliban.

if they are going to revert to peace, there is no reason to stop dialogue with them, and if they are going to relinquish >> reporter: now the relationship with the united states, there's been a doubling of military aid just in the past year, 10 fold since 2008. are you getting what you need from the u.s.? >> ( translated ): the u.s. assistance to yemen and aid are symbolic. it focuses on the exchange of information, in the field of training providing some, equipment, military equipment and modern equipment to the yemeni military because of about $150 million u.s. dollars. this is a good thing, a good cooperation, but, of course, such assistance and aid does not resolve the economic problem in yemen. >> warner: you had an interview friday night with al arabiya, arabic satellite television,

where you made a point of saying there are no u.s. troops here in yemen. why? why was that important to say? >> ( translated ): this is normal, because there are no u.s. troops on yemeni territories neither offshore or onshore. there are some elements who are going, making training for yemeni personnel. i wanted to confirm to the world, to the yemeni people, that there was no u.s. troops sent out. at the same time, we have no agreement, we have no treaty with the u.s. on the presence of u.s. troops in yemen. >> warner: what would be the consequence if the yemeni people thought there were u.s. troops either here or on the way? >> ( translated ): actually there's no reason that u.s. troops be here, here in yemen. and we don't have any intention here in yemen and we believe the same with the u.s. they don't have any intention to have their troops here in yemen because there is no justification for their presence

here in yemen. >> warner: now some of these military strikes that you've been able to target at al qaeda hideouts, militant figures, have those been all yemeni airstrikes, or have there also been american airstrikes? >> ( translated ): there is cooperation in the field of information exchange. these airstrikes are almost, most of them, are yemeni. >> warner: so most of the airstrikes, but not all of them, have been done by yemeni forces? >> ( translated ): i say, most of the strikes are yemeni, because all what i'm aware of is the yemeni strikes that we launched. >> warner: as you know, there is great concern about the degree of corruption here, and that's one reason why the aid that was agreed to several years ago by the international community, most of it never came here. what are you doing about that perception, at least in the view of most international observers,

the reality that a lot of money that is given here to the system is not spent for the purposes it was intended, and it does go to benefit the private interest of people in the government and inner circle? >> ( translated ): these are mere lies! these information are baseless and it is not true. it's within the framework of a campaign of lies against yemen, unfair campaign against yemen, against the security and stability and democracy of yemen >> warner: do you see the united states, how do you see the united states? is it an advisor now? is it a partner? what word would you use? >> ( translated ): we look at it on two tracks. the u.s. is a partner in

combating terrorism and we are satisfied for the cooperation and coordination having with them. at the same time, we value the consultations the u.s. is providing yemen with in the fields of development, in the field of politics and we welcome such consultations. >> warner: mr. president, thank you very much. >> ( translated ): thank you >> brown: margaret left yemen last night. i talked to her in dubai a short time ago. margaret, many the middle of that interview, you talked about-to-the president about the air strikes aimed at al qaeda. what more condition k you tell us? >> i've been able to confirm at the highest level of the u.s. and yemeni government one air strike in september in southern yemen in which civilians were killed was, in fact, the work of the u.s. now, the yemen government has said consistentedly opposite, they have said they used u.s. intelligence assets but that

yemeni air force did the raid. the yemeni government-- that is the saleh administration, in fact-- told the parliament that. and a few weeks ago in fact even publicly apologized to the families of some 40 or so civilians. but privately they say it's a "open secret" that they need u.s. air power to do these kind of precision raids, even though that one, which was on a training camp, doesn't sound terribly precision. and one person in the president's office the day of that interview said, yes, everyone knows it but we deny it the u.s. administration at the same time, of course, doesn't want to be known that u.s. planes were used or u.s. assets were used in raids like this. but it is... i think it's... i know for a fact that it is the case. >> brown: this is clearly a very sensitive subject there in yemen and here in washington, as you say. why? what are the stakes? what's going on?

>> warner: well, jeff, in my reporting in yemen what became clear is that the bargain the u.s. has made with the yemenis to fight al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, the sort of new offshoot or newly revived offshoot of al qaeda, the bargain is the yemenis need the u.s. help but it can't have a u.s. face. and so as we reported last night, the u.s. is there and they admit the u.s. is there with training and equipment and intelligence but they want it perceived that there is no more. now, for the u.s., of course, in addition, the u.s. is trying very, very hard, say, in afghanistan to reduce civilian casualties because of the blowback. for the saleh government in yemen, it's also very complicated. he has an opposition which, as i said, after this raid really raked him over the coals and said "you're letting americans kill yemenis." and that's when his government flatly denied it.

and he has a complicated past himself with islamists. but right now this party, this opposition party which has fundamentalist elements in it, is, of course, using it to kind of bludgeon him. and i think it points to the complications more broadly of fighting al qaeda in some of these countries. >> brown: so as you look at this, your reports yesterday and today, this sort of high-wire act vis-a-vis the u.s., i wonder, as you've been able to talk, you were talking to yemenis both in and out of government, what are their attitudes towards the u.s. and towards americans? >> >> warner: actually, jeff, on a personal level, they are perhaps the friendliest and most interested in americans of any people that i've reported from or hrapdz that i've reported from recently in the muslim world. i didn't pick up any sort of undercurrent of hostility toward me. at the same time, people tell me

they don't want u.s. forces there. and as you heard in that interview, president saleh went on television last friday night on al arabiya to tell not only his own constituents but the whole muslim world-- or the whole arab world-- that u.s. forces weren't there. and that's for a reason. and as i said, he has a complicated past. he used the sort of root stock of al qaeda, which were the mujahadeen that came back from afghanistan after fighting with bin laden against the soviets, he used them in his civil war 16 years ago in the south. so everybody's got all these come complicated interwoven alliances and pasts and i think it is really less about what the average yemeni on the street thinks. and i don't think they're thinking a lot about the fight against al qaeda. they're worrying about their next meal. but it's very much part of the complicated politics in a country like yemen that having a u.s. face on this alliance could be very damaging. >> brown: all right. margaret warner talking to us tonight from dubai.

thanks again. we'll see you soon. >> warner: thanks, jeff. >> lehrer: again, the major developments of the day: the senate passed a bill reshaping parts of the new health care law and sent it to the house for final approval. and, on the "newshour" tonight, white house chief of staff rahm emanuel said elected leaders should work to calm down the threats against lawmakers who voted for health care reform. and republican congressman mike pence of indiana said those making the threats should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. the "newshour" is always online. hari sreenivasan, in our newsroom, previews what's there. hari? >> sreenivasan: on health care, find out about the law's provision requiring some restaurant chains to post calorie counts on menus. and on "newshour extra," there's a lesson plan for teachers to help students understand the basics of the u.s. health care system. plus, the story of new fossils found in siberia. maybe pointing to a new human ancestor. 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 mark shields and david brooks, 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. ♪

( laughter ) >> very funny. >> we are intel, sponsors of tomorrow. the national science foundation. supporting education and research across all fields of science and engineering. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations.

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