Transcripts For KQED PBS NewsHour 20110106

the new chairman of the house ways and means committee, dave camp about spending, taxes and health care reform. >> lehrer: fred de sam lazaro reports from pakistan on communities still under water five months after the epic floods. >> by official estimates, half a million people are still in tent camps. an occasional farmer can be seen sewing the land, but the land is nowhere near ready to grow food. >> woodruff: and ray suarez talks to joel achenbach of the "washington post" about early findings of the oil spill commission including a warning that a similar disaster could happen again if reforms aren't made. >> lehrer: that's all ahead on tonight's "newshour." major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> okay, listen. somebody has got to get serious. >> i think... >> we need renewable energy. >> ...renewable energy is vital to our planet. >> you hear about alternatives, right? wind, solar, algae. >> i think it's going to work an a big scale. only, i think it's going to be affordable. >> so, where are they? >> it has to work in the real world. at chevron, we're investing millions in solar and biofuel technology to make it work. >> we've got to get on this now. >> right now. >> 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. >> lehrer: the u.s. military will undergo a new round of belt-tightening. defense secretary robert gates laid out the plan today. the announcement came at a time that u.s. troops are still engaged in wars on two fronts. but with federal deficits soaring, gates moved to address growing demands for savings and possibly, to stave off even deeper cuts. >> a major objective beyond my hope and expectation is that as a result of these changes over time what had been a culture of endless money, where cost was rarely a consideration, will be a culture of savings and restraint. >> lehrer: all told, the gates plan is supposed to save $78 billion in the pentagon budget through 2016. the defense budget will still grow each year, but more slowly. as part of the plan, the pentagon will cancel a $13 billion program to build the new expeditionary fighting vehicle for the u.s. marines. it was meant to ferry troops from ship to shore while under attack. the secretary also said he will cancel the marines' version of the f-35 joint strike fighter jet unless its problems are fixed within two years. gates had already announced $100 billion in cuts last year, saying the money would be reinvested in troops and weapons. that first round included closing the u.s. joint forces command based in norfolk, virginia-- a move that was met with stiff resistance. the number of generals and admirals was to be reduced as well, along with senior civilian positions at the pentagon. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mike mullen defended the effort today. >> we can't hold ourselves exempt from the belt-tightening. neither can we allow ourselves to contribute to the very debt that puts our long-term security at risk. this isn't about just cutting or saving. it is about readiness. not only do reforms, these reforms, preserve essential capabilities, which is the highest priority of this process, but i believe we'll actually improve our readiness. >> lehrer: the military's budgets for operations in iraq and afghanistan are not affected by the cost savings. and just today, a pentagon spokesman confirmed another 1400 marines will be heading to afghanistan. and now to secretary gates. i spoke with him earlier this evening. >> lehrer: mr. secretary, welcome. bottom line, even with some cuts, the overall spending on the military is going to remain the same, at least for a while? >> we will have modest growth in the defense budget for the next three fiscal years, and then the last two years of the five year period, we will be protected against inflation, but not have real growth. so this is really all about a reduction in the rate of growth, not actual dollars in defense. >> because of inflation and low rates of growth, we will get more mon nefiscal year 13 than we did in '12 and so o. at the same time we've conducted this entire effort to ensure that the important parts of the defense budget, the structure, planes, ships, and strengths in soldiers, airmen and marines, modernization investments, taking care of our people -- those are going to grow robustly at two to three percent per year through the whole period because of the cuts in overhead that we've identified, and the savings of overhead that we've identifyed and transferred to those meaningful accounts. >> lehrer: isn't it unusual to be able to reduce costs in some way and save that mony and reallocate it somewhere else, rather than give it back to the federal government overall? >> two things. first of all, there tends to be a very short memory in washington about things. last year we capped or cut programs that had been built to conclusion would have cost the taxpayers $330 billion. this budget for the next five years does return about another $78 billion to trying to tackle the budget deficit and the debt problem, -- >> lehrer: those are real cuts? >> those are changes in the expected dollars that we thought we were going to have when we prepared last year's budget. so we project all five years. we're the only plagues in town that budgets for a five year period. we have the amounts we look at for that entire five year period, and those amounts are going to be lower than we expected last year n. this sense, it's a cut, but in terms of actual dollars, as i indicated, we're going to see very modest growth year on year. >> lehrerbut the real growth co the account that is matter, the weapons account, the troop accounts and that kind of thing. >> lehrer: and you're maintaining that by switching money you're not going to spend and spend it in those areas? >> well, we're finding that money by reducing overhead, what people refer to as waste or fat or whatever you want to call it, but the services, the military services have done an incredible job of going into their jobs and going into the way they do business, and identifying consolidations, eliminations and various other things to cut their overhead, and they were incentivized to do that, because they were assure whad they saveed in overhead they could invest in military capabilities. >> lehrer: the new chairmans of house armed services committee talked to reporters after your announcement today. he said i am not happy. he said the cuts were more dramatic than he had expected. is dramatic a word you would use to describe what he suggested? >> first of all, i think that we presented these members of congress kind of cold before the announcement, and we only met for 45 minutes or so. i think provided a huge amount of money. my hope is we go through the hearings for the fiscal year 12 budget, that we will be able to show those who are interested in protecting difference that we have done that, and those who think defense ought to contribute to reducing the deficit, that we have done that as well. >> lehrer: you really do believe that your suggestions -- suggested budget does what needs to be done to koinld coin with the need to reduce federal spenlding? >> indeed. i would remind people of last year to the tune of $330 billion over a period of years. but the other aspect of this is, that i k that people need to remember is that providing for the common defense is an unambiguous federal responsibility. and the truth of the matter is, if you cut the defense budget by $fiftd billion, that's $i50 billion on a $3.1 trillion deficit, i would argue that difference is not the problem when it comes to the deficit, and if you look at defense as a percentage of federal expenditures or as a percentage of gross national product, we're at a lower level, particularly for war time than we have been at any preaches war, and as a percentage of the overall federal budget, about where we've been for a number of years. >> lehrer: you use the term culture of endless money. to talk about how people talk body it in the past at the pentagon and elsewhere. how close are you to ending that? >> this is a deeply ingrained culture. i think this is the second year we've been at this, and i think that people are beginning -- people in the department of defense are good citizens and literate citizens. they understand what we're facing. admiral mullen has said a huge national debt is a nation wool security problem. so the people in the department of difference understand that this issue has to be dealt with and that we have to do our part. >> lehrer: you don't think the pentagon should be put in the same category as the department of education or the department of state or whatever, that the pentagon should be a special category because of it's mission? >> i believe so. i think we have to do our part, and i think we have to expect serious scrutiny in terms of how we spend our mony and make sure we're not wasting taxpayer dollars, and make sure we're making smart decisions. but the united states faces a very complicateed and dangerous world. we face -- we're engage ?d a major war in afghanistan. and have 50,000 troops in iraq. we have to deal with regimes in iran and north korea that are unpredictable and developing weapons of mass destruction. they have strategic modernization programs going on in russia and china. there's a real world out there that has to be dealt with, and the idea that the united states can turn inward and ignore the developments and pretend that al-queda doesn't exist anymore or any of these other challenges department exist is not consistent with the real world. and my argument is that ever since world war i when we've come to the end of wars we've dramatically reduced military spending, cut forces and ended up in another war. and what we have to understand is that a strong military is a deterrent to war, not a cause of war. when we've had to rebuild quickly to deal with threats, the cost in blood and treasure has been very high. >> lehrer: part of your proposal calls for reducing the number of troops on the ground by 47,000 by the year 2015. how does that fit in to what you just said? >> first of all, the marine corps has been thinking for a couple of years that they need to come down. i authorized in 2007 an increase of 27,000 in the marine corps from 175,000 to ep 202,000. and an increase in the army from 65,000. and the reductions that we're talking about are projected to begin in 2015. the marine corps has been thinking about a reduction of 15 to 20,000 for some time. they will still have between 7 and 12,000 more marines in 2015 than when i became sktd secretary. if the army cuts 27,000 in 2015 and yaunld, they will still have somewhere in the neighborhood of 35 to 40,000 more troops than when i became secretary. so i think it's important to keep it in perspective. >> lehrer: but that depends if there's new troops in iraq and very few in afghanistan by 2015, correct? >> we brought 120,000 troops out of iraq. we put half of that number into afghanistan. we have another 50,000 that are going to be coming out of iraq this year. so i think that the army is still going to be robust. >> lehrer: you mentioned china. you're going to china this weekend, and you said in the press conference that you're interested in encouraging military to military relationships between the united states and china. what are you talking about? what do you mean? >> i think one way-eye think there are two aspects to this. one is to open a dialogue issues where we have common strategic interests. where we have instability or provocative behavior on the part of north korea or iran developing nuclear weapons. piracy, terrorism. and what i'm hoping we can do is look at opportunities where we have common interests, where we have piracy or humanitarian assistance and disaster relief where the militarys can work together and get to know each other. and i think that kind of collaboration creates the opportunity with partners to do some constructive things, and i also think it helps build a stronger relationship. >> lehrer: do you think it's wise, though to, keep china in mind as a potential competitor of the united states on a military level? >> well, we obviously have to be mindful, and i refered to a minute ago -- of the chinese military modernization programs. ships and cruise ballistic missile that is potentially could putted our aircraft carriers at risk. new fifth generation aircraft. there's been new storys about that. so they have a lot of capability that is they're building. but we need to be mindful of that. we need to be in a position to deal with those capabilities in the future. china, there's no reason for china to be an adversary, and particularly in a military sense, with the united states. so i think looking for ways to be constructive and be more open, and to better understand what each other's intentions are with some of these capabilities, this is the way that sovereign nations deal with each other. >> lehrer: due read what they're doing militarily as being more defensive or offensive? >> i think they're creating xaibltd capabilities to be able to particularly project naval power furthered and power from mainland china. partly that's to protect their own shipping. they've become increasingly dependent on energy imports, and imports of minerals and various kinds of ores. obviously their economy is deeply dependent on imports and exports, and so part of that is a presence that has influence with it, and part of it is in protection of their own shipping. >> lehrer: what's the time table now for implementing don't ask don't tell repeal? >> l i see the implementation in three segments. the first that has to happen is defining clearly what the benefits issues are, and what are the changes in regulations and policies, and the uniform code of military justice that has to be made. the second is preparing training materials for the foerts, and the biggest piece of this is training 2.2 million men and women in the military. >> i have given instructions to try to accelerate the first two pieces thf, getting the policies and regulations pieced out quickly, getting the training materials quickly so we can move on and start the problem, address the challenge and the physics of how you get 2.2 million people trained. our objective is to do this as quickly as we responsibly can, but we're going to do it right. >> lehrer: finally, mr. secretary, the captain honors case. the commanding officer of the u.s.s. enterprise was relieved of command because of these videos. they came out in 2006 and '07. what happened? why was there not disciplinary action before now? >> i think wofr the the things the navy is looking into is who was aware of these things and what actions shoul should h been taken and what actions ought to be taken now. i personally think that the navy has handled this entire matter quite appropriately. >> lehrer: were you a part of the decision to relieve him of command? >> no. that was all done by the navy. >> lehrer: but you think it's the right thing to do? >> yeah >> lehrer: speaking of leaving command, you were set to leave this year. there's a report, to be specific thaw might stay for the whole year. you mile state for another year to the end of 2011. is that in the karpds? >> well, we'll just see. >> lehrer: okay. all right. mr. secretary, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: still to come on the "newshour": a civics lesson at the capitol; ways and means chairman camp; pakistan still struggling after the floods and new findings from the oil spill investigation. but first, the other news of the day. here's kwame holman. >> holman: president obama has a new white house chief of staff. he named political veteran william daley to the position this afternoon. daley served as commerce secretary under president clinton. he's currently an executive at investment bank j.p. morgan chase. the president said all that experience will help. >> he has led major corporations. possesses a deep understanding of how jobs are created and how to grow our economy. and needless to say bill also has a smidgen of awareness of how our system of government and politics works. you might say it is a genetic trait. >> holman: daley's father was the late chicago mayor richard daley. his brother is the city's current mayor. the new chief of staff thanked the president today for selecting him to replace pete rouse, who's served on an interim basis. >> you, mr. president have proven your strength your leadership your vision during a most difficult time for our nation and for the world. you have also shown through your example that public service is an honorable calling and i am pleased to answer your call. >> holman: daley is expected to start in his new job in the next couple of weeks. there was a raucous welcome in iraq today for shi-ite cleric moqtada al-sadr. he's been living in exile in iran for four years, but returned home to najaf on wednesday. today, hundreds of supporters rallied near sadr's compound and waited to catch a glimpse of him. he made no public appearances, but issued a statement urging followers to show discipline. sadr's militia once battled u.s. and iraqi troops. now, his political movement is part of iraq's new government. in pakistan, the government bowed to political pressure and agreed to repeal a 9% hike in fuel prices. the increase took effect a week ago, and within days, a major political party quit the governing coalition in protest. pakistan imposed the fuel increase in a bid to cut its deficit and to qualify for continued loans from the international monetary fund.] fresh rainstorms rolled across the flood zone in queensland, australia today. despite the new rain, the overflowing fitzroy river in rockhampton began to recede. thousands of flood victims were anxious to get home, as officials warned it could take up to a year to recover. prime minister julia gillard promised help. >> we're not going to know the true dimensions of the damage until floodwaters recede and we can see what's happened with roads, what's happened with bridges, what's happened with vital infrastructure like schools. but i can say we will be working every step of the way with the queensland government. >> holman: the total cost of the flooding still is to be determined, but estimates already have reached $5 billion. more americans applied for unemployment benefits for the first time last week. the number had reached a two- year low the previous week. the news was enough to hold wall street in check, waiting for tomorrow's december unemployment report. the dow jones industrial average lost 25 points to close at 11,697. the nasdaq rose seven points to close near 2,710. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to judy. >> woodruff: it was a busy second day for the new congress, beginning with a symbolic gesture in the house. it was a first on the floor of the house. the new republican majority had the u.s. constitution read aloud -- in a nod to tea party supporters-- reaffirming a commitment to founding principles. house speaker john boehner began, reciting the document's preamble. >> we the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic >> woodruff: democrats joined in, although some had wanted to read the constitution as originally ratified, to show how it changed over the years. those changes included the 13th amendment, recited by former civil rights leader and georgia democrat john lewis. >> neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the united states, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. >> woodruff: the proceeding was interrupted at one point as new jersey democrat frank pallone was reading the section on presidential qualifications... >> no person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the united states, at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president. >> woodruff: a visitor had yelled that president obama did not meet the requirement. it was a reference to claims he was actually born abroad, despite his birth certificate from hawaii. in the end, it took 84 minutes to read the seven articles and 27 amendments, with the parties taking turns. the two sides also joined to slash the operating budgets of house offices and committees by 5% or $35 million. it passed easily, 410 to 13. but partisan divisions returned over talk of more sweeping spending cuts. senate democrats accused house republicans of exempting more than $1 trillion dollars in costs over the next decade from their pledge to reduce the federal deficit. new york's chuck schumer: >> the new republican congress looks a whole lot like the last republican congress, that doubled the national debt and turned bill clinton's surpluses into record deficits. republicans said they learned their lesson and would get serious about deficits this time, but this $1 trillion cost to the deficit in the very first week makes you just shake your head and say, "there they go again." >> reporter: democrats were emboldened by a new projection by the non-partisan congressional budget office. it found repealing the health care law would cost in the vicinity of $230 billion over the next ten years. that contrasted with a report issued by speaker boehner's office that said the health care law would add $701 billion to the deficit. boehner argued that's why republicans don't see any reason to account for the cost of repeal. >> if you believe that repealing obamacare is going to raise the deficit, then... then you would have to have some way to offset that spending. but i don't think anybody in this town believes that repealing obamacare is going to increase the deficit. >> woodruff: health care repeal also dominated a house rules committee meeting. republican steve king of iowa said congress needs to start from scratch. >> i suggest that we pull obamacare out by the roots... root and branch, lock stock and barrel, irradicate it completely and leave not one vessage of its dna left behind. because it is a malignant tumor in the spirit of america's vitality and constitutionality. and if it's allowed to have any particle left, it will regrow again and it will matasticize like a tumor, and grow back and it will consume the liberty and the vigor of the american people. we must pull it out by the roots. this congress has been elected to do so. >> woodruff: massachusetts democrat jim mcgovern argued the repeal effort reneges on g.o.p. promises to cut the deficit and make government more transparent. >> the campaign's all about reducing the debt and yet we have a preliminatey c.b.o. score that said this is going to cost a great deal of money to repeal, but that doesn't matter. and no hearings! there was no-- this was not a thoughtful process! and then you're all telling me that you want a closed rule. bring it to the floor with no amendments, no input-- so much for the open process. there's none! >> woodruff: the full house is slated to vote on the rule for debating health care repeal tomorrow. the repeal vote itself is set for next wednesday, but democrats in the senate have pledged to turn back the effort. now, the first of several conversations with members of the new house republican majority. last week, we talked with three democrats defeated at the polls in november. tonight, we are joined by the new chairman of the powerful ways and means committee, representative dave camp of michigan. >> woodruff: congratulations. >> thanks, judy >> woodruff: due feel you've gotten your arms around this powerful committee? >> no. day two, i'm working on it. we did organize, and hope to get the democrats and republicans together next week. we're beginning our week >> woodruff: we just heard, and i want to talk about spending first, we just heard in an interview with robert gates about cuts that the pentagon wants to make. $78 billion. is that a number that satisfies you? >> we've got to begin a discussion between republicans and democrats about reducing spending, and everything has to be on the table. i'm not prepareed to commit to any particular number tonight, but we need to reduce spending significantly. and we made a start, as you suggested, by cutting our own budget >> woodruff: in fact, speaking of cuts, the republicans publicly pledged you were going to cut a hundred billion dollars from spending in this year, but now that congress convened chairman, we're already seeing numbers a lot smaller than that. is that turning out to be a pledge that can't be met? >> if you look at what the president's budget suggested and what we'll end up with, i think you'll see we cut a hundre billion dollars. that's the goal. and we'll do it one step at a time. we started with ourselves and we're going to continue >> woodruff: so you're saying the hundred billion is a number that republicans can reach. >> we'll have a hundred billion dollars in cuts when you compare the president's budget with where we end >> woodruff: talk about the federal debt limit. the bush administration notified congress it's going to be asking for an increase in the debt limit. you have said you don't want to see this happen unless there are serious cuts. are you talking about different cuts or the same cuts you were just referring to a moment ago? >> i think by the time we get to the debt limit, which at the earlier will be the end of march, we're also going to need progress made on a budget, and i think this is going to be about a package of ideas, how we regain fiscal sanity in this country. how we begin on a path, and also make real cults and reductions in the def kit in connection with the debt limit. the debt limit is not something to be dealt with by itself or on its own. it needs to be part of a package of efforts we need to make >> woodruff: is there a number you have to reach in order to let an increase in the debt limit go through? >> we haven't. we're beginning those upon discussions. that's a consensus among a lot of people in our party, and we hope the democrats will join with us in that, and obviously, as we hear from the american people on that issue >> woodruff: i'm asking you because the president's economic adviser said over the weekend, it would be catastrophic if the debt limit were not increased. are you and other members of your party prepareed to let that happen if you can't get the cuts that you just described that you think are necessary first? >> well, i think it has to be a total package, a total agreement obviously the seriousness of the debt limit isn't lost on anybody. that's going to be an important thing to address. we want to make sure we address it together together. not one or the other, but both of them together. wx+*fr repealing health care reform. today you and other republicans, of course, have said that this is a top priority today as we just heard in that report, and the congressional budget office said, however, if it were repealed. it would cost the federal government $230 billion over 10 years. our speaking of the house, john boehner dismissed that. my question is how can you and he and others be so sure that the c.b.o. is wrong about that? >> well, the c.b.o. is bases assumptions on all the gimmicks in the health care bill we know of. double counting, pushing the policy into late years to gain the costs of this bill. the bottom line is we know the health care bill increases deficit and increases people's health care costs. it also is going to make it very difficult for employers to hire people and create jobs. we really have to repeal the bill and start over. we had a bill that the republicans introduced in advance that would have actually reduced peoples' premiums by $3500 for the average family. this bill increases their premiums. what we need to do is ma health care more affordable, not more costly. so this is a key priority, and it really has to be looked at. this and deficit and tax reform which i hope to work o. all of those have to look at how do we create jobs and get the economy moving again. unemployment is far too high. the economy is anemic. these are steps in trying to get a jobs agenda >> woodruff: you're going to get the democratic majority because the president -- nobody believes the president would sign that even if it were passed by the congress. so there's discussion among republicans about defunding health care. how far along the road are those talks? >> i think those are -- that's obviously one path to take. we also need to look at parts of the health care bill, and the courts will have a say in the health care bill. we need to do everything we can to stop a bill that actually increases health care costs, costs jobs and increases the deficit. that's a problem. and the american people spoke loudly on that issue in the election, and that's why we're moving forward the way we are >> woodruff: and finally, mr. chairman, tax reform. you worked closely with the bush administratio the obama administration. have you gotten signals with the obama administration that they're willing to work with you and republicans on a serious tax reform this year? >> i thought it was critical to prevent the tax increases from going into effect at the begins of the year, and they didn't, and i think we made good progress there. the president is saying positive things about tax reform, and the secretary of the treasury has. senator baucus, chairman of the senate finance committee. my counterpart in the senate is also saying he'd like to address tax reform. we've had two presidential commissions report on tax reform as well. there seems to be a lot of movement. we need to change the tax code, we're not competitive from a business perspective. the taxpayer advocate issued a remitted, the national taxpayer advocate says it takes 6.1 billion hours for americans to comply with the tax system. that would be one of the country's largest industries if it were a private industry. that's inefficient, very difficult to comply with, and we need to reform this code. and i look forward to trying to work on that with the administration, with the senate and with republicans and americans and small business owners and people across the coincidentry to get a better way of funding the government. >> that's a conversation we'd like to continue with you at some point. for now, thank you to the new chairman of the how ways and means committee >> thank you. >> lehrer: tomorrow night, we'll report on freshman republican jim renacci of ohio's arrival in washington. >> woodruff: more than five months after floods swamped pakistan, the process of recovery is barely beginning. we have a report from sindh province by special correspondent fred de sam lazaro. >> reporter: vast swaths of pakistan's southern sindh province remain inundated, in some places under ten feet of water. half a million of families are still in tent camps. an occasional farmer can be seen sewing the land, but the land is nowhere near ready to grow food, says the government's top advisor on water and agriculture issues. >> the ability of the land to absorb the water is not there any more. it's not a sponge any more, the sponge is full, plus we're in the winter so the evaporation is not that great. >> reporter: kamal majidulla says its just one of the challenges that will slow the recovery from floods that blanketed almost all corners of pakistan. a lack of international aid is another, which he blames on a distorted image of pakistan as a refuge for terrorists. >> we needed ten billion to start with; the effect of the damage is something within the region of 50. we haven't gotten close to ten. and i think that a fair bit of that has to do with the kind of coverage pakistan gets around the world, which is sadly quite untrue because you can't take specific little areas where a conflagration is taking place and its serious conflagration and it needs to be eradicated no question about it, but there are 180 other million people living here. >> reporter: ironically, even within pakistan, there's an image problem that's slowed aid to the regions associated with militancy and conflict. we traveled to the province of khyber pakhtunkwa along the afghan border, thought to be a haven for taliban militants who've been targets of the pakistani military and u.s. drones. like most of the northern areas of the flood zone, the waters have receded here. but much of the farmland is still smothered under five feet of silt. these farmers say people are down to selling what little assets they have like livestock that survived the floods. >> initially, some groups did come with rations and food, but after a while that disappeared. one of the reasons is this location of this area is location of tribal troubled, so people are not very willing to come and work in these parts. >> reporter: maqsood alam who works with a quasi government although extremists live in the area, they've caused no trouble after the flood. >> i have been working in this district for the last four months but i have not seen any trouble with any. >> reporter: but people in normal sort of aid agencies are very reluctant to come here because of the history of militancy, is that true? >> yes, strategically it is placed at such a junction of tribal agencies, nobody dares to come to this part, that is, you are right, i think. >> reporter: his group is one of few working here, with a grant from the new york based open society institute to help restore the farmland and irrigation canals, which were also washed away. 95% of the families here are without their only source of income, he says, and it will be a while before they'll harvest a crop. >> how many people are you talking about totally? how many families? >> probably 500 in this area alone and the surrounding put together it comes to more than half a million have lost their source of income. >> reporter: outside of the main areas of conflict in the northern khyber pakhtunkwa province, where waters have receded, life is marginally better. kala khan is a bit farther ahead in rebuilding his livelihood. a bit. he received a $220 grant from the government, along with some seeds and fertilizer from a private pakistani aid group to replant the one and a half acres he rents to grow wheat. but he also borrowed about $2,000-- twice this family's annual income-- from neighbors and relatives to help rebuild the simple dwelling that houses an extended family of ten. it's far from done. >> this is where we my wife and i used to sleep. it was completely destroyed. >> reporter: for now, his wife shares a finished room with their two daughters. next door he shares this space with the family's prized possession: a water buffalo. >> my biggest burden is to pay back that loan. our biggest expense is food and rations. it would be easier if we got more rations. we have to decide how much to spend on living, how much to pay back. after all, my stomach is important, my children's stomach is important. it will take some time. >> reporter: spartan as life seems, khan says he's better off than many others. >> ( translated ): i saw on tv that some places the floods were so drastic, not only did peoples crops and homes get washed away but also their children. so i'm thankful to god for sparing our lives, our buffalo was safe. okay, our crops will come back but there are people who've lost a lot more. >> reporter: for these worst affected flood victims, most in the downstream sindh province- life is likely to remain on hold for several months, even years. >> i think problems that we have to deal with are basically over the next year or two, help people back on the land, help them stay away from diseases as much as they can, help with their food needs, help gets the kids to school help them get over this winter. >> reporter: and ironically-amid all this flooding, kamal says pakistan faces a water shortage over the long term-thanks to inefficient use of groundwater on its farmsland and the accelerated melting of himalayan glaciers that feed its rivers. at stake is not just the fresh water supply she says, but the very food security of this large, complex nation >> lehrer: fred's report was a partnership with the pulitzer center on crisis reporting and the undertold stories project at saint mary's university in minnesota. >> woodruff: finally tonight, some early findings in an investigation of the gulf oil spill. ray suarez has the story. >> suarez: this image of the "deepwater horizon" oil rig-- on fire in the gulf of mexico-- is now a memory, but the president's commission warns it could all happen again. the final report is not due until next week, but a 48-page excerpt was released publicly today. the panel concluded that: "absent significant reform in both industry practices and government policies, a disaster might well recur." all three companies involved with the well b.p., transocean and halliburton were cited for cutting corners to save time or money. the report said those choices led to the flooding of the gulf with more than 200 million gallons of oil. last november, the commission's lead investigator had testified he found no evidence of wanton wrongdoing. >> we see no instance where a decision-making person or group of people sat there, aware of safety risks, aware of costs, and opted to give up safety for cost. >> suarez: instead, the report says the problem was much bigger than any individual, and that the root causes are systemic. as evidence, the commission counted nine decisions on engineering that it said increased the risk of a blowout, many of them regarding the well's cement job, done by halliburton. but the new report also cites b.p.'s decision to cut the number of centralizers used to center the well pipe during the cement work. the panel referred to this email from a b.p. engineer who wrote: "who cares, it's done, end of story, we will probably be fine and we'll get a good cement job." in a statement issued wednesday, b.p. said it's working with regulators to improve operations. but halliburton and transocean, the rig owner, again faulted b.p. engineers for bad decisions. questions remain about the blowout preventer, which failed to stop oil from spewing into the gulf. an analysis of why it failed may not be ready until next month. for more on what we learned from the commission's early excerpt, we are joined by joel achenbach of the "washington post." looking over this early release, what would you say is the key finding? >> i think they're saying this was not really an accident in the classic sense of a freak event. they're saying there wasn't just one bad actor. >> this tragic incident emerged from a system. it's a systemic failure. if you go back to early may, late april, i think it was one of the senior people for bp said what we had here with the deep water horizon disaster was a failed piece of equipment. bp blamed the blowout preventer on top of the well. and what the commission is saying is no it's not a single piece of equipment or each one company, which is music to bp's ears. this is halliburton, transocean, it's the government regulators, it's the industry which allowed this event to happen. >> what are some of the examples of the kind of corner cutting identified by this early commission report? what do they say wasn't getting done? >> when bp had to make a tough decision, it went with the decision that either saved time, every day a million dollars goes out the door, whether it's drilling or not. so they made decisions to save time. such as they didn't run a cement bond log test to test the cement job. they chose not to do that. they also didn't wait for additional centralizers to come out to the rig. they could have said we don't like the ones we have in place, we'll wait and get some more. they didn't do that. they would have taken time. it would have cost money. >> they took other steps that they said the commission feels -- the pattern they potentially risked the raise of a blowout. >> and what's a centralizer? >> you have a pipe that goes down in the l. it keeps is centered in the well for when you do the cement job. the cement will come up evenly around the pipe. if you don't have the centralizer, the pipe can go one way or the other in the well bore, and that could potentially lead to an imperfect cement job, and channeling which could allow gas to flow up the well. >> and while this is popularly thought of as the bp oil spill. the commission talks about three companies. transocean, halliburton and bp itself. was that a functional relationship in >> l keep in mind, transocean is a contractor with these huge drilling rigs, and they work for lots of oil companies. hal burtdon goes back to 1923 in the earl halliburton oil well cementing company. the fact they're saying it wasn't just bp. it was also these other companies and the government regulator creates a pictured and raises the question of is the industry broadly ready to drill again in the deep water? >> how was the government cited for its shortcomings? what did they say it should have been doing that it didn't do? >> l the government comes off as fairly useless. i think the government comes off with the minimal management service ass being a weak border line feeble regulatory agency that didn't have enough people to do all the work it needed to do, and people flying out on a hx+*ltd to land on a rig to inspect the rig in a matter of hours. these are huge contractions. they're 25 stories tall or 35 stories tall. the blowout preventers are at the bottom of the sea. how you going to inspect that? this is a tough job. the pay isn't as great for these regulators as it would be in private industry. so you're getting out of school, and you want to go work for the government for 45, $50,000 a year or make twice that or much more with the industry? i think the government agency does want come off well in the commission report. >> does the report cite specific violations in the code or regulations, or was it more the idea they were just take think risks that weren't against the law, but a finger crossed approach toward building the rigs? >> l it worked before. they gradually went into deeper and deeper water, and as they did this, they didn't stop for a catastrophic event. and you keep going into deeper water, anda the macondo l they were drilling at 5,000 feet. but the cools they had were the same tools that they had used in the shallow water. the tools to control the well, and the tools to try to plug the well after the blowout. and somewhere along the line, i think the industry needed to realize we've gone to a different planet here. this is a different environment. maybe we need a more robust set of truements, and tools and hardware and robotdic submerseibles and just need a different skill set in dealing with the deep waters. i think one lesson is that depth matters. >> joel achenbach of the "washington post", thanks for joining us. >> thank you, ray. >> lehrer: again, the other major developments of the day: pentagon officials targeted $78 billion in spending cuts, including future reductions in troops and weapons programs. on the "newshour", defense secretary gates said the cuts protect defense capabilities, but also help to downsize the deficit. and president obama named william daley as the new white house chief of staff. and to kwame holman, for what's on the "newshour" online. kwame? >> holman: you can watch all of today's reading of the constitution on the rundown blog and judy filed a post on the brewing debate over citizenship and the 14th amendment. we follow up on the oil spill story with a look at a new scientific study on how bacteria in the gulf gobbled up methane gas released in the leak. plus on art beat, watch an interview with kevin kallugher, the longtime editorial cartoonist for the economist known to readers as kal. all that and more is on our web site: newshour.pbs.org. judy? >> woodruff: and that's the "newshour" for tonight. i'm judy woodruff. >> 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: >> well, the best companies are driven by new ideas. >> our history depends on new ideas. we spend billions on advanced technologies. >> it's all about investing in the future. >> we can find new energy-- more cleaner, safer and smarter. >> collaborating with the best in the field. >> chevron works with the smartest people at leading universities and tech companies. >> and yet, it's really basic. >> it's paying off everyday. 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 announcer: find your voice and share it. american greetings-- proud sponsor of "the electric company." - beaches resorts is a proud sponsor of "the electric company," connecting bright ideas and countless outlets for high-energy excitement. from the u.s. department of education's ready to learn grant, and... - ok, so here are your 5 words. wicked. if someone is wicked, they are not good at all. they're actually really mean and bad,

Related Keywords

New York ,United States ,Australia ,Iran ,Afghanistan ,China ,Minnesota ,Russia ,Michigan ,Washington ,District Of Columbia ,Pakistan ,Najaf ,Az Arbayjan E Sharqi ,Mexico ,Iraq ,Massachusetts ,Iowa ,North Korea ,Ohio ,South Korea ,Rockhampton ,Queensland ,Chicago ,Illinois ,Hawaii ,Americans ,America ,Afghan ,Chinese ,Iraqi ,Pakistani ,American ,Korea ,Chuck Schumer ,Earl Halliburton ,Norfolk Virginia ,Frank Pallone ,Jim Lehrer ,Alfred P Sloan ,William Daley ,Ray Suarez ,Richard Daley ,Macneil Lehrer ,Steve King ,Mike Mullen ,Judy Woodruff ,Jim Mcgovern ,Kwame Holman ,Sam Lazaro ,John Boehner ,Julia Gillard ,Jim Renacci ,Maqsood Alam ,