in iraq from rod nordland of the captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> lehrer: good evening. i'm jim lehrer. rescue efforts were on hold tonight at the west virginia mine, where an explosion claimed the lives of at least 25 miners. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. on the newshour tonight, it was the deadliest mining accident in the u.s. in 26 years. we'll get the latest on the blast and the rescue effort and look at the state of mine safety. >> lehrer: then, jeffrey brown

gets two views on the obama administration's call for new limits on nuclear weapons. >> this review describes how the united states will reduce the role and numbers of nuclear weapons with a long-term goal of nuclear free world. >> ifill: paul solman explores small community banks versus institutions deemed too big to fail. >> size does matter but you don't need to be a large institution in order to be successful as a financial institution today. >> lehrer: and we get an update on the deadly wave of bombings in iraq from rod nordland of the "new york times" in baghdad. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by:

>> 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. >> ifill: officials don't know whether four missing miners at a west virginia coal mine are still alive, and the effort to find them will take time. the explosion, blamed on methane gas, killed at least 25 other miners. rescuers were forced to call off the recovery operation

early this morning as flammable gases began filling the mine. hope remains dim for the missing miners, but crews today drilled holes deep into the earth to release those gases and make it safe for searchers to return. west virginia's governor joe manchin said that may not happen before tomorrow evening. but families of the missing were still hopeful. >> any still hold out for that miracle. four of them are still missing. they understand the challenge we have and the horrific nature of this blast and the situation that we're dealing with is very tough. >> ifill: the explosion tore through the upper big branch mine in montcoal, west virginia, about 30 miles from the state capital in charleston around 3:00 yesterday afternoon. investigators say the blast, which caused the nation's deadliest mine disaster in more than a quarter century erupted a mile-and-a-half from one of the mine's entrances. some miners who were leaving

from their afternoon shift said they felt the explosion's force directly behind them. >> before you knew it, it's just like your ears are stopped up, you couldn't hear. the next thing you know you're just like right in the middle of a tornado. >> ifill: as emergency vehicles rushed to the scene family members began to get called. >> i was just start getting all these phone calls. they told me that he was working the evening or the day. that's all they said. when i told them evening , they told me there had been an explosion. >> ifill: at night fall members of this small mining community held a vigil at a local church. rescuers reached safety chambers where stock piles of food, water and oxygen are stored to sustain miners for up to four days. rescuers found one such chamber empty. but quickly retreated as a mix of methane and carbon monoxide began to build up within the mine. this morning at an easter

prayer breakfast at the white house the president offered his condolences and support. >> there are rescue teams that are searching tirelessly and courageously to find them. i spoke with governor manchin of west virginia last night and told him that the federal government stands ready to offer whatever assistance is needed in this rescue effort. >> ifill: the website of massey energy company the mine's operator posted the 2009 safety record but the company was hit with nearly $900,000 in fines for 458 safety violations last year alone. and the company paid out $4.2 million in penalties last year following a 2006 fire at massey's aracoma mine also in west virginia. a federal mine safety and health administration official said this afternoon that yesterday's blast should have been preventable. >> we put minimum parameters in place that a mine operator would need to follow to ensure

that he has enough air and enough ventilation to keep an explosion from occurring, not only an explosion, an ignition. it's quite evident that something went very wrong here for us to have the magnitude of this explosion. so it's apparent that something was wrong. i would just ask to give us an opportunity to conduct a full investigation. we'll leave no stone unturned . >> ifill: late this afternoon senator jay rockefeller spoke in west virginia. >> a lot of us worked on the mine act in 1977 and 1997 there or 2007 there hadn't been any federal mine regulations or statutes in 30 years. i was just rereading that statute as i was coming over . there are some empty places in there. so we've got to find a way to bring closure not just to the grief of these families but to the sometimes the problems that they face but they don't

know that they face it. by laws that allow situations to continue. >> ifill: west virginia was also the site of a similar tragedy four years ago. that's when 12 miners were killed in a methane explosion at the saga mine 130 miles away. and then federal regulators had installed new safety requirements including the sealed safety chambers and additional gas monitoring. mine safety has improved in the u.s. dramatically. since the passage of the 1977 mine act, fatalities dropped from 272 deaths that year to a record low of 35 in 2009. >> lehrer: more now >> lehrer: more now about the accident in west virginia, and the dangers of coal mining. it comes from frank langfitt of national public radio. he's been reporting for npr from the scene in montcoal. and ellen smith. she's the owner and managing editor of "mine safety and health news," a trade publication. she's won many awards for her reporting on mining issues.ca-

rank, where does it stand right now? what's the situation? >> well, the scene right now now, jim, is they are trying to drill some bore holes deep into the mine to vent it. right now as you are hearing, it's too perilous for rescuers to go in there. so that's really on hold. you have many many families here, of course, who are just stunned by this. 25 dead already. that's a huge mining accident. sago, as you mentioned earlier, was 12. that was terrible back in 2006. people are reeling. i think you have the mine safety and health administration beginning to try to figure out what caused all this. >> lehrer: the drilling of holes, how physically do they go about that? is that done by heavy machinery and how big are the holes? >> it is. they have to go in with bulldozers and clear away a lot of rock. and then they drill down. they have to go down about 1200 feet. that's through rock and earth. so it takes a very

long time. they have to measure very carefully so they have to come within about 10 feet of where they want to go to vent. then later they put sensors down to try to see if people are still alive. >> lehrer: the vent. they want to get that gas out of there so it doesn't explode again. is that the whole point here? >> exactly. see, right now the methane levels are so high that if there's a spark, that can actually create another explosion. in years past rescuers have gone back into mines and it's been dangerous. you've actually lost more people. i think, you know, the rescuers here want to be very, very careful. they don't want to lose anybody else. >> lehrer: ellen smith, explain what causes these explosions. when frank says spark, where would that spark come from? >> you can get a spark from the cutting equipment actually that is used to create the long wall panel. it cuts huge swaths of coal. you can get sparks on the face. you can get sparks from equipment. i mean you've got a lot of

electricity down there. obviously we've got the regulations in place so these things don't happen. when methane levels get high, the equipment is supposed to automatically shut down. if everything works right. other things that can happen is a roof fall can release a large amount of methane and also cause an explosion. so there's several areas of concern of how an explosion can start. in a mine. but we also see that this mine had ventilation plan violations as recently as march 30. the government had cited them six times this year for ventilation violations. so it's a concern. i'm sure we'll look at this. >> lehrer: what does that mean ventilation problem? >> they have to ventilate the mine and keep the methane out and keep the coal dust levels down. so they actually have very, very large fans that air is brought in to the mine and it goes through the tunnels and it goes back out.

it carries away and it dilutes the methane so it's at safe levels. what the company was charged with-- and again this is an alleged violation. we don't know if this violation will be sustained. but the company had been charged with ventilation plan violations. so they weren't bringing in enough air to dilute and carry away that methane. >> lehrer: frank, this must be hell for the families as you mentioned. specifically, what is being done with them and for them at this moment? >> i think that the mine safety health administration, governor manchin is trying to stay in very close touch with them. as you would remember four years ago in sago there was misinformation and many many people had thought that their loved ones had actually survived. it was a terrible moment about two or three in the morning when they realized all hope was lost. they're being very careful about that. for families members, i talked

to someone earlier today who lost her father who was about to retire after five weeks in five weeks he was about to retire after 30 years. . i think he had a sense that he had done this very dangerous jobs but he eat it out and beat the odds. it was terribly painful for them right when he was getting ready to retire go on a cruise, enjoy his grandchildren that this happened. >> lehrer: ellen, it's true, sit not, that misinformation is often a common mall dein these kinds of accidents, is it not? >> it is. we saw the same thing at the canyon. the first information was that an earthquake caused the mine to fail and the roofs and walls to collapse. that just wasn't so. then at crandall lake.... >> lehrer: tell us where that was. >> that was in utah. and then at crandall canyon there were hopes that the miners were still awhiv when in fact this was a huge collapse. it was highly unlikely that those miners survived the initial collapse. that's why we are very, very

careful in what we say during these mine accidents. you don't want to give false hope and you don't want to dash hopes either. >> lehrer: sure, yeah. ellen, put this accident in perspective in terms of the state of mine safety generally right now in this country. >> you know, jim, two weeks ago we were all down at the department of labor in washington d.c. celebrating the 40-year anniversary enactment of the coal mine safety act. we were also celebrating the fact that last year we saw the least amount of fatalities ever in the history of mining in the united states. and the department of labor was filled with attorneys from the mining industry and mine operators, attorneys from the labor department, members from the united mine workers, and the press. we all felt good, we felt like something had really been accomplished, that the mine regulations over the years had worked. i think we left there with a

spirit of good will and that things were coming around, that we were not going to see disasters like this. this just comes as a shock to the entire community. >> lehrer: frank, is that true on the ground there too, that people thought, hey, this doesn't happen anymore? we've taken care of this problem? >> i think ellen makes an excellent point here. the thing that i think is so frustrating in a way sort of shocking is that they made all these changes, as you mentioned earlier, with the safety chambers and more air packs underground. but the explosion was so tremendous that it didn't matter. people couldn't get to those safety chambers. that's what's so frustrating is even with all this legislation you had a huge mine disaster that took many many lives. >> lehrer: is the feeling, frank, among the families and in that small community like all communities where there are mining and miners that this is... that risk... heavy risk like this, a risk of death is just part of the job and it goes with it? or is that pretty well been leveled out before now because

of new safety regulations and just the history ? >> i think ellen makes a great point that these mines are much much safer than they were generations ago. but they're still among the most dangerous jobs in the united states. you do take a risk. i think these people all take a risk whenever they go underground. they are still very well paying in this area. you talk to miners who will say, yes, i know it's risky it's the best opportunity i have. i want to... i love west virginia. i want to stay here. i think that's one of the reasons that people continue to go underground. >> lehrer: do you agree with that, ellen? >> i don't totally agree with that. i think that the majority of the mines in this country work safe every single day. the bottom line is the majority of miners go home safe to their families everyday. and i just don't buy the argument that ... is it risky? yeah, there's a lot of jobs that are risky. farming, the agricultural industry is risky. but we see mines day in and day out

with safe operations and guys go home and the women go home to their families every day. >> lehrer: all right. ellen, frank, thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> ifill: still to come on >> ifill: still to come on the newshour, limiting the use of nuclear weapons; big banks versus small banks; and the deadly bomb blasts in iraq. but first, the other news of the day. here's kwame holman in our newsroom. >> holman: the afghan military reported a new offensive killed 27 taliban militants today. the operation is targeting a western province that has emerged as a taliban stronghold in the last three years. meanwhile, in southern afghanistan a nato air strike killed four civilians, as well as four insurgents. nato and afghan officials said they have launched a joint investigation into the strike. in india, government forces came under heavy attack from maoist rebels. 76 indian troops were killed in what was the deadliest strike in a 43-year-long insurgency. the soldiers had been patrolling a dense forest in eastern india when hundreds of insurgents

ambushed them with explosives and gunfire. the indian government recently launched a new offensive against the rebels to flush them out of their forest hideouts. tug boats arrived at a grounded ship off australia to try to stabilize it and prevent further oil spills. the giant coal-carrying ship threatens the great barrier reef, the world's largest coral habitat. fuel oil leaked after the chinese vessel struck the reef saturday. a boom was being placed around it while workers try to keep it from breaking apart. australian prime minister kevin rudd said the carrier never should have been in the protected waters. >> it is frankly outrageous that a vessel this size could find itself 12 kilometers off course in the middle of the great barrier reef. it's time we got to the bottom of how this could have occurred and to hold those who are responsible for this accountable.

>> holman: australian authorities are investigating whether the ship was taking an unauthorized shortcut through the reefs. more than 80 people died today in heavy flooding and landslides in brazil. torrential rains swamped rio de janeiro, paralyzing traffic and closing most businesses and schools. the mudslides hit rio's hillside sls the hardest, where at least 50 people died. the rain fell for 15 hours straight, and more rain is expected in the next few days. britain began preparations for a general election set for may 6. prime minister gordon brown's labor party is trailing in opinion polls to the conservatives, led by david cameron. we have a report from gary gibbon of independent television news. >> reporter: the queen hopped back to buckingham palace from windsor only minutes before the prime minister set off to see her. brown said the may 6 election date was the worst kept secret. his roots to the palace no secret of conservative campaigners trying to catch the helicopter's eye. when gordon brown returned to number 10 with the queen's

formal permission to announce the election date the cabinet was lined up behind him for his declaration. >> the queen has kindly agreed to a general election that will take place on may 6. i'm asking the british peel, i'm asking you the british people for a clear and straightforward mandate to continue the urgent and hard work of securing the recovery, building our industries for the future, and creating a million skilled jobs over the next five years. the future is within our grasp. it is future fair for all. now, all of us, let's go to it. >> reporter: david cameron launched his campaign across the names, pointing back at parliament as if he was an outsider. his first words, a very personal attack on the prime minister. >> you don't have to put up with another five years of gordon brown. >> yeah!

>> i want to tell you who i'm fighting this election for. it's the people i call the great ignored. they may be black or white. they may be rich or poor. they may live in the town or the country. they work hard. they set up businesses. they work in factories. they teach our children. they keep our streets safe. they obey the law. they pay the taxes. they do the right thing. they're the honest, hard-working people of our country. they're desperate to know that in this great country we can still achieve great things. >> reporter: where you go first on day one is a big statement at a moment like this. gordon brown wanted a photo opportunity to show off some shiny new infrastructure but also to show he didn't consider himself a vote-killer in the south. david cameron visited birmingham and then went to the leads. the conservatives' recovery in the north of england has lagged well behind its improvement elsewhere and mr. cameron must make headway

in this campaign if he's to win a majority. >> holman: brown's labour party has been in power for 13 years. but labour lost seats in 2005, in part because of its support of the u.s. led invasion of iraq. a federal appeals court in washington dealt a blow to government regulation of the internet today. it said the federal communications commission cannot require broadband service providers to treat all internet traffic equally. the f.c.c. is working on "net neutrality" rules to prevent phone and cable companies from favoring some online content with better access. the ruling was a victory for comcast corporation, the nation's largest cable company. a man in washington state was charged today with threatening to kill democratic senator patty murray. charles alan wilson, who is 64, is accused of targeting murray over her support for health care reform. he allegedly left voicemail messages at her office in seattle, saying, "it only takes one piece of lead." f.b.i. agents said wilson is a registered handgun owner, and

has a valid concealed-weapons permit. it was a mixed day on wall street. the dow jones industrial average lost more than three points to close at 10,970. the nasdaq rose seven points to close above 2436. the duke blue devils spent today celebrating their new status as champions of men's college basketball. duke beat the butler bulldogs 61-59 for their fourth national title. a potential game-winning half- court shot by butler barely missed at the buzzer. the women's n.c.a.a. championship gets decided tonight when stanford faces the university of connecticut. 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 website. for now, back to gwen. >> ifill: the obama administration rolls out its nuclear weapons strategy. jeffrey brown has that. >> brown: it was one year ago in prague that president obama pledged to work towards a

nuclear-free world, a move that helped him win the nobel peace prize in december. >> the united states will take concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons. >> brown: today the administration took another step toward that goal, spelling out current risks and new policies in a document called the nuclear posture review or n.p.r. >> the n.p.r. provides a road map for implementing president obama's agenda for reducing nuclear risks to the united states, our allies and partners. and the international community. this review describes how the united states will reduce the role and numbers of nuclear weapons with a long-term goal of a nuclear-free world. >> brown: the review required by congress is the first by this administration but the third since the end of the cold war. when the u.s. and soviet union faced each other with thousands of nuclear weapons on high alert. officials today emphasized that current threats are different. >> the review rightly places the prevention of nuclear

terrorism and proliferation at the top of the u.s. nuclear policy agenda. given al qaeda's continued quest for nuclear weapons, iran's ongoing nuclear efforts, and north korea's proliferation, this focus is appropriate. indeed essential. it's an essential change from previous reviews. >> brown: among other changes, a declaration that the u.s. will neither use nor threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear countries. but the u.s. reserves the right to make any adjustment to this policy in the case of biological weapons threats. and the new policy does not apply to any countries out of compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty or n.p.t.. >> if there is a message for iran and north korea here, it is that if you're going to play by the rules, if you're going to join the international community, then we will undertake certain obligations to you. that's covered. in the n.p.r. but if you're not going to play by the rules if you're

going to be a proliferator, then all options are on the table in terms of how we deal with you. >> brown: the review also declared that the u.s. will not develop new nuclear weapons. while increasing investment to maintain the current arsenal. it stopped short of declaring deterrence from nuclear attack to be the sole purpose of the u.s. nuclear arsenal, a move pushed by some arms control advocates. today's release is the first of three major events over the coming days that will focus on nuclear policy. on thursday president obama and russian president med ved will meet again in prague to sign a new arms treaty scale back the number of deployed long range war heads by 30%. that treaty will require two- thirds senate vote for ratification. next monday and tuesday president obama will host a washington summit on nuclear security with more than 40 world leaders.

he's written extensively on nuclear issues. steven rat amaker has served in the administration of both bushes focusing on arms control and proliferation issues. welcome to both of you first on the issue of assessment of the nuclear threat today, shifting this emphasis. do they have it right? >> i think they have it exactly right. we no longer live in a world where the main threat is global thermo nuclear war with the soviet union. the soviet union is gone. the new threat is chilling but on a different scale, a different order of magnitude, the threat of nuclear terrorism, al qaeda with a nuclear bomb or new nuclear states. what sort of transformational about this review is orienting on nuclear strategy toward defeating these threats. this is a lens that we will now look through to judge, do we need these weapons? what's their purpose?

are they helping to reduce the nuclear risks to the united states. >> brown: to make the right policy. do you agree that's the right lens, this new emphasis? >> i think the emphasis is correct at least in terms of what the primary threat is. but i do think it's important to note that the implications of that are less than suggested. if you look at the document itself, the vast majority of it is directed toward policies that the united states would pursue vis-a-vis other countries not toward terrorist groups so it's all well and good to recognize that increasingly you need to worry about weapons of mass destruction and particularly nuclear weapons fall ing into the hands of terrorist groups but the policy, the types of weapons we deploy in nuclear areas will not be used against terrorist groups. we'll use them against other countries. as a result the vast majority of the verbiage in the report is about the way we structure or forces for use against other countries. >> brown: what about this

emphasis on trying to limit the use and narrowing the over all role of nuclear weapons in our military capability and arsenal? >> this is the pivot at this posture is making. they have these weapons. as long as we have them they're going to be the best in the world. we're going to make them safe and secure and as modern as we need them to be. we don't need as many anymore. we have 10,000 nuclear weapons now. half of those are in the active stock pile. about half of those are actually deployed ready to use. for what? what nuclear mission requires 2,000, 3,000 weapons? you can take those down and change the mission. you no longer need to be targeting these weapons on states that don't have nuclear weapons or that have become our allies over the last 10 to 20 years and are no longer adversaries. that's the pivot they're making towards this new direction. >> brown: i mean, those are the key... when you boil this down to some of the key questions, what are nuclear weapons for? when would they be used? what do you think of this

effort to kind of limit the potential uses of them? >> again, the principal purpose of nuclear weapon s is to deter states. al qaeda is not too worried if they attacked us, we would use a nuclear weapon against them. we wouldn't know where to find them probably and whatever target there was would not be suitable for attack by a nuclear weapon. it would be a different type of target. the purpose of nuclear weapons is to attack the kinds of targets that state adversaries would present to us. to my mind, you know, there's a lot less change in this report than meetses the eye. i think a lot of ways it was drafted to suggest greater change than is really there when one parses the exceptions and the exceptions to the exceptions that are found ... that are embedded.... >> brown: you mean there's enough wiggle room or whatever room to make decisions? >> joe, for example, just talked about the changes in nuclear policy.

thoos say, the situations in which we say we might consider using nuclear weapons against another country. when you parse it, it looks like really the only change is whereas in the past we held out the possibility that we would retaliate against chemical weapons used against us with nuclear weapons we're no longer doing that. but for biological weapons that threat remains on the table. we say we would only use these weapons against other nuclear- armed countries with the exception of countries that are not in compliance with the npt and in iran and north korea are obviously on that list. there are other countries that may be on that list. if i were syria, i wouldn't really know whether i'm in the orbit of risk or not. >> if i were syria, i would be checking with the iaea to see if i'm in compliance or not. steve is right. it narrows the list down. iran and north korea are the only states we might target a don't have nuclear weapons or

a significant nuclear.... >> brown: did you see these definitions are important changes. >> i do. here's the difference particularly when compared to the previous nuclear posture view done in the bush administration. that saw expanded missions for nuclear weapons. we were going to use these things to go against bunkers, trucks, mobile targets, unexpectedly military developments. they wanted low-yield weapons, reliable replacement weapons. it was an expansion of the goals and mission. this is night and day. this is exactly the opposite. this is what the military wants. they see these weapons as basically obsolete with fewer and fewer rationales, reasons for existence. fewer and fewer places where they would actually use them. if we shrink their roles, shrink their numbers we build up the kind of international cooperation we need to go after the real threats. that's what's going to happen next week with the security summit. secure the nuclear materials and build up the barriers to stop other states from getting them. that's the new security agenda .

>> brown: what about the decision not to build new nuclear weapons while investing in the current? >> my personal opinion is is that the review goes too far in that direction. there's a lot of wiggle room embedded in the position taken in the nuclear posture review. we will not develop new ones but refurbish existing ones and potentially replace components. in replacing components, you know, i think there's a lot of opportunity to make changes to the weapons themselves. i think people like joe are probably uncomfortable with the drafting of the report. >> brown: it doesn't sound like it. >> i think that this is the kind of consensus that you need to move forward on national security. >> brown: you would like them to have gone further in terms of limiting.... >> sure, sure, absolutely. i've written draft nuclear posture reviews that say the sole purpose of nuclear weapons is to defer nuclear attack. it could have gone further and faster but this is the real world. you have to make compromises.

this is the new nuclear security consensus that the military is completely behind. the secretary of defense today and the joint chiefs of staff are now solidly behind the ratification of a comprehensive test ban treaty. vice chairman cartwright couldn't have been clearer. no new nuclear weapons. no new testing. no new missions. do you build in things in case the unexpected happens? of course. that's only sensible national security policy. i think that's why this is such a middle of the road document. but that middle of the road has moved a long way from where we were ten years ago. this is a road that's lead to go the future of fewer nuclear weapons, maybe eventually their elimination. >> brown: we just mentioned this is one of three big events over the coming days. do you see the kind of transformation when you put them altogether? or do you see a continuation of policy? >> i think certainly we will have much more continuity than change. the nuclear security summit next week will be a good event.

i think we will see from that a renewed international commitment to protecting material sources from diversions to terrorist purposes. that's a worthy objective we've been pursuing for nearly two decades now. the renewed commitment to it will be fine. i would be surprised if any new programs emerge, any new policies really. maybe some self-imposed deadlines for achieving goals but, you know, basically it will be a recommitment to what's already been happening. >> thank you both very much. >> thank you. >> lehrer: next, what's behind a campaign to move money out of big banks and into smaller ones. newshour economic correspondent paul solman has the story. it's part of his ongoing reporting on making sense of financial news.

>> that's george bailey. that's him when he was 12. >> reporter: an on-line video gone wildly viral, with more than half a million hits in its first two months. a mash-up of "it's a wonderful life." >> enter the martini castle. joy and prosperity may reign forever. >> reporter: george bailey and his small bank versus mr. potter. >> a lot of those people are.... >> foreclose. >> these families have children. >> they're not my children. >> reporter: the on-line video also cuts in clips from the current evening news. >> so what you're saying is those 14 are too big to fail. >> i don't think that i want to use those words. >> reporter: but this video, brain child of among others money manager turned political activist rob johnson doesn't just sit there. it wants us to do something. >> move your money. >> reporter: move your actual money, that is, out of the

"too big to fail" beely moths and into smaller community institutions. >> i hope it sent the warning to the big banks that their sociopathic behavior is not acceptable any longer. >> reporter: it can be argued sociopathic is over the top but with their hidden fees, toxic securities, off-balance sheet vehicles and bursting bonuses to boot, the big banks have surely earned some public skepticism. meanwhile the obama administration has proposals to pare the big banks down to size sh as tax the bigger ones more, require more capital and less risk , ban risky trading for banks that receive federal support. but moving your money is more direct, and all you have to do says johnson so start at move your money dot-info. >> you can watch the movie. then you can put in your zip code. i gives you a list of small banks where you can put your money safely. >> reporter: johnson says the list of banks is being searched 45,000 times a day. and that the move your money

movement is gaining political momentum all over country. in los angeles the city council is holding hearings on withdrawing all city funds from "too big to fail" banks. >> the city has got to meet the challenge. >> reporter: in new mexico, a similar bill would move billions of state dollars into small banks and credit unions. >> we're going to hopefully send a message that we support the community banks and the credit unions what support our communities. >> reporter: one candidate for governor of oregon has made moving the state's money a center piece of his campaign. >> big banks have proven they cannot be trusted to act in the public's interest. >> reporter: but what's it's actually like to move your money to a local bank? on the website i found one very close to home. >> good morning. >> hi. >> reporter: it was friendly enough. >> how are you? >> reporter: and neighborly though i don't really know scott wilson. >> you live down the block from me. >> that's right. >> do you most of your banking here?

>> all of it. >> i like this bank. i've been with this ban be for over 30 years. >> reporter: you're also a customer of this bank, obviously. >> yes, i am. >> reporter: you like it? >> love it. >> how much do you want? >> it's your own money. >> reporter: by this point, jimmy stewart was getting a run for his money. which reminded us of the economist who first sent me the move your money video, larry. his new book, however, is is called jimmy stewart is dead and personal experience suggests why. >> the large banks will gobble up the small banks. my own experience is i started an account a long time ago with bay bank. >> reporter: four mergers later small bay bank is bank of america. >> when i went into refinance my house a few months ago i saw a clerk who knew nothing but me, nothing about my family. had just arrived into that job from some other state. that is what we're dealing with here. we're not teaming with jimmy stewart.

he's dead. >> reporter: village bank ceo ken brennan is trying to impersonate him. without the stammer, of course. >> i'm getting a library card for the new community library. >> reporter: the local library, closed by budget cuts, it's reopening made possible by the support of local businesses including village bank. >> we're very grateful for that support. >> reporter: did you use your library when you were a kid? >> i did. i grew up here. this was my branch library. >> reporter: are you indulging a kind of ceo's prerogative here? >> maybe you could call it that, yes. most of our employees work and live here in the community. their families can take part and use this as well. >> reporter: it was getting a little sweet for a jaded journalist. but fortunately i move in various circles. so i asked a really big banker why shouldn't i move my money? >> if you think you can get other products and services that are superior to a large

bank, go for it. >> reporter: robert kelly, ceo of bank of new york mellon who suggests thinking back just 25 years. >> we had 20,000 banks in this country. now we have 8,000 banks. my guess is ten years from now we'll have 5,000 banks or 4,000 banks. good to have lots of competition. but the reality also is that bigger banks offer generally better products and services at generally really competitive prices. the longer-term trend will be fewer smaller banks in the nation for that reason. >> reporter: as nobel laureate economist paul krugman reminded us recently small is not necessarily beautiful. >> it's possible to have a banking crisis even without too big to fail. it was a lot of small banks that collapsed the financial system in the 1930s. >> reporter: indeed 140 banks failed in the past year with another 702 just added to the fdic's problem list.

moreover, says robert kelly.... >> we also have a gigantic economy which you can't run with a lot of really small banks. you need big, successful sophisticated, profitable banks. >> reporter: but the village bank is a $600,000 million says ceo brennan, big enough to offer almost anything i would need. >> size does matter but you don't need to be a large institution in order to be successful as a financial institution today. >> how often do you use your a.m.t.? are you local? do you travel a lot? >> i use my a.m.t. a lot. and i travel aate low. >> reporter: no problem says the village bank's claire me sign a but how about new technology? at my big bank? >> i can deposit a check and it takes a picture of the check and then gives me the deposit slip with the picture. so i feel as if i had my deposit verified . >> we don't have as advanced

technology as that. that is a great feature. however, the extra feature that i like that we have that the bigger banks don't have is we're going to call you if your deposit is incorrect so you know. >> reporter: you mean if i make a mistake, you're going to call me? >> um-hum. because we're a tight knit group. this is what we do for our customers. >> reporter: after all, it's a community bank. >> 90% of the deposits that we take in, we lend back out into the community in form of home mortgages, consumer loans and small business loans to local businesses operating within our community. >> reporter: we asked the ceo to show us a couple. >> i used to play golf here as a kid growing up. the buckles usually go on the outside. >> reporter: larry smith lives across the street from me. rents canoes and kayaks a mile away in the summer, cross country skis and snow shoes this time of year. >> lift up your right foot and put it down.

lift up your left fight and put it down. that's your lesson. >> reporter: larry has been a village bank borrower for nearly 30 years to keep the snow in shape, for example. >> i did a line of credit quick advance that worked out very nicely. >> his success is our success. i think we have a great partnership and have had for a number of years. >> reporter: last stop, a nearby group home for developmentally disabled adults. >> how are you? ken brennan. nice to see you. >> reporter: this is one of a dozen or so such projects financed by the village bank. >> good to see you again. >> reporter: the bank's advantage coming up with quick cash for a downpayment, says nonprofit developer josephine mcneil. >> we wait 6-8 months to get the money together. >> reporter: again the bank says it's because it knows its borrowers like nancy who runs the group homes. >> how many years have you been working with the village ban snk. >> 30 years. >> 30 years? >> 30 years. >> our clients, people who

live in this house and in our other homes, do their banking with staff at the village bank. >> reporter: go you bank at the village bank also. >> yeah. >> reporter: you guys do too as well? >> for over 40 years. >> this is begin to go seem like a complete put-up job. i mean really. this is like ridiculous. nobody is going to believe this watching this on camera. you don't believe it? no, i believe it. literally everywhere we go, are these ringers? what have you done here? >> no ringers. these are our customers. >> reporter: so that's the case for moving your money to a community bank. the case against? >> that it's a future i'll if feel-good effort to turn back the clock. we'll see. >> lehrer: for the record one of the banks paul mentioned in his report, bank of america, is a >> lehrer: for the record, one of the banks paul mentioned-- bank of america-- is a newshour underwriter. >> ifill: violence is on the upswing again in baghdad, where

at least 35 people were killed in a string of bombings today, after five days of upheaval across iraq. for more on political and security setbacks as the u.s. prepares to leave, we turn to rod nordland of the "new york times." i spoke to him earlier from baghdad. rod, thanks for joining us. is this what it looks like, a steady, growing uptick in the violence in baghdad? >> well, more of a sudden uptick in the last five days especially. but there has been a gradual increase as well in small incidents. but in these spectacular attacks, the last five days have been pretty out of the ordinary. today we had a lot of shiite civilian targets attacked. the day before yesterday we had embassy targets. five days ago it was a bunch of sons of iraq militiamen who were executed. and it's really a consorted campaign. the most striking thing about it is that they've been able to attack all over the city in widely different neighborhoods in a very concerted fashion.

>> ifill: when you say they, are we talking about a certain group that is responsible for all of this, a coordinated attack? or is it just breaking out all over? >> i think it's probably al qaeda. i think most people would agree with that. al qaeda in mesopotamia or in iraq. they haven't claimed credit yet. sometimes they do. sometimes they don't. if it serves their interest they may not even claim credit. it has all the hallmarks of an aal qaeda attack. there's no points in attacks like this unless somebody thinks you did it. that's what everybody thinks here. with pretty good reason, i think. >> ifill: the difference this time at least in these latest attacks today seem to be that they were targeting civilians. >> what they were doing is just shifting their tactics which we've seen them do now for the last year. they'll attack one sort of target and then when they see that that kind of target is well defended they'll shift to another one. it is true for quite a long time they've avoided attacking purely civilian targets, attacking instead the security

forces or government ministries and so on. this is the first time they've attacked a purely civilian target in, i think, pretty much a year. but they've done it before. nobody was expecting it. the last thing they expected were bombs to be placed in people's apartment buildings. it's just, you know, other targets are well enough defended that they shift their tactics and choose something that isn't. >> ifill: is there anyway to know whether there's any connection between these aattacks, this latest spurt of attacks and the political upheaval we have seen with the outcome of the most recent elections? >> we can only assume that with the government and the politicians in the middle of intense negotiations now at putting together a coalition that can rule the country after the election that these attacks are timed to coincide with that. to have some sort of effect on that process or at least to attempt to do so.

what's very striking now is despite the attacks and despite the way they practically paralyzed the city because they've... they were so widespread, despite that, high-level meetings have continued to go on at a very rapid pace. i think partly if anything politicians now feel galvanized that there's a need to put together a government so that their security forces especially but the government generally don't feel that they're no longer in control of this situation. >> ifill: rod, you'll recall when there was debate going on in the united states about whether to sell a set a timetable for withdrawing american troops one of the arguments against that was that there would be an uptick in violence as enemies saw what was about to happen. is there any concern on the ground there that this is what this is connected to. >> there is concern. people see that, see one of their aims probably is to try to provoke the americans into staying.

that would be highly unpopular and give them, you know, another reason to exist here. there's no sign so far that that's happening. the americans have been very quiet. actually conspicuous by their quietness in the face of all this. really are leaving it to the iraqis to handle. even to the point where a lot of people are wondering if they shouldn't take a more active role at least temporarily. i think it's if these kinds of attacks go on, that may well happen. for the moment mum is the word. we're hearing hardly anything from the american military and from the american embassy here. >> ifill: rod, on a related subject, there has been some discussion, some controversy here about the release, the leak of a video of a apache attack helicopter killing among other people some reuters employees in 2007 in iraq. has that video been circulated widely there and has there been reaction at all on the ground? >> it has circulated widely here but i think there was a

somewhat muted response here even compared to other arab countries. sad to say most of the iraqis have a pretty cynical attitude toward the americans. in terms of this sort don't surprise them as much as maybe it does ourselves. >> ifill: so there is no reaction at all from the u.s. officials on the ground or from iraqi officials about this particular incident. >> the iraqi officials have been pretty pre-occupied with the bombs going off today. american officials it's one that they don't want to touch. >> ifill: there is certainly plenty enough going on there. rod nordland of the "new york times" thanks again for joining us. >> you're welcome. >> lehrer: again, the major developments of the day. a build-up of poison gases at a mine in west virginia delayed rescue attempts for 4 miners. 25 others were killed in an explosion there yesterday. and the obama administration released new guidelines limiting the use of nuclear weapons. the u.s. geo logical survey

reported that an earthquake hit the islands of sumatra and indonesia. it had a magnitude of 7.8 and a local tsunami watch was in effect. the newshour is always online. kwame holman, in our newsroom, previews what's there. kwame? >> holman: our reporting on the mine disaster continues. we have an interview with a former coal miner, now a professor at the west virginia university, and a chart showing how the industry has changed over the last century. on the banks, more from economist larry kotlikoff on making deeper, structural changes to the banking system. on nuclear weapons, there's a lesson plan for teachers explaining past efforts to reduce stockpiles. that's on newshour extra. on the rundown, we talk to ken vogel of politico for the latest on the shake-up at the republican national committee. all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. >> lehrer: and again, to our honor roll of american service

personnel killed in the iraq and afghanistan conflicts. we add them as their deaths are made official and photographs become available. here, in silence, are nine more.

>> ifill: and that's the newshour for tonight. i'm gwen ifill. >> lehrer: and i'm jim lehrer, we'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening. thank you, and good night. major funding for the pbs newshour is provided by:

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. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org