>> ifill: colorado prepares to roll out a new way for residents to get health insurance. betty ann bowser reports on the challenge of getting people to buy in. >> there's 800,000 uninsured in this state. probably 600,000 to 700,000 of those will need to be educated by september. i think it's a monoutilityal task. ♪ when i'm gonna go back home >> brown: and we close with singer and actress audra mcdonald: her recent whirlwind of new career challenges, and the one place that keeps calling her back. >> i felt much better on stage. for me it's the rush of being forced to be so in the present. ♪ concentrating sloppy haired actor ♪ >> brown: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> the william and flora hewlett foundation, working to solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: it's considered one of the most important pieces of civil rights legislation ever passed. but by 5-4, the u.s. supreme court today took the teeth out of a law enacted nearly 50 years ago. newshour correspondent kwame holman begins our coverage. chief justice john roberts writing for the five-member majority said the law between states that have used barriers to minority voting and had low voter turnout and those that had not. but he wrote "today the nation is no longer divided along those lines yet the voting right acts continues to treat it as if it were." edward blum, speaking for officials in shelby county, alabama, welcomed the outcome. >> this decision restores an important constitutional order to our system of government and that requires that all 50 states and every jurisdiction have the laws applied equally to them. >> reporter: the decision leaves the heart of the law-- section 5-- on the books. it requires states mainly in the deep south to get federal approval before changing voting procedures or districts. but the court majority said it cannot be enforced until congress comes up with new rules for getting that approval. thus moving the responsibility across the street to the capitol share lynn ifill, president of the n.a.a.c.p. legal defense fund said that's now where he organization will focus. >> we believe that congress is in a better position than the supreme court to determine how voting discrimination plays out in this country. we're disappointed but now the ball is in congress's court. >> reporter: in a statement, president obama said he was deeply disappointed with the court's decision and urged congress to restore federal oversight. in the meantime, attorney general eric holder insisted the justice department will continue to monitor changes in state and local voting laws. >> let me be very clear: we will not hesitate to take swift enforcement action using every legal tool that remains to us against any jurisdiction that seems to take advantage of the supreme court's ruling by hindering eligible citizens full and free exercise of the franchise. >> reporter: still, today's decision apparently clears the way for several high-profile laws to take effect, including stricter voter i.d. requirements in alabama, mississippi, and texas that drew objections from civil rights groups. >> brown: back with us tonight is marcia coyle of the national law journal. so tonight, marcia, justice roberts speaking for the court saying ins sense world has changed but the law has not:. >> he has, jeff, and here's how he explained his ruling. he read a summary of it from the bench this morning. he began by saying how the voting rights act is a dramatic departure from certain fundamental principles in the constitution and in our government. for example, states are given broad powers under the constitution to regulate elections and also fundamental to the structure of government is a belief, a commitment, to the equal sovereignty of the state. so the voting rights act, he said, when it imposes current burdens as it does has to be justified by current conditions and the coverage formula does not do that. >> brown: just remind us of that formula. it's the so-called pre-clearance right? where they have to apply to say what they're going to do? >> well, there are two sections of the voting rights act that operate in tandem: the coverage formula determines which states or just dictions have to conform to section 5 which is is pre-approval. any coverage jurisdiction has to get approval of any voting changes from the justice department or the federal court in washington, d.c. it was the coverage formula, not the pre-approval process for that the supreme court struck down today. >> brown: so the question for the court-- and you said justice roberts is looking at whether racial minorities continue to face voting discrimination. what evidence was he citing? >> he agreed there is still discrimination today but the rub here is the coverage formula. he said when congress designed the formula it was meant to capture voting tests like literacy tests and also states in which there was low minority voting registration and turnout. well, he said, voting tests have been eradicated and registration and turnout of minorities in some of the covering states is is actually much higher than even in states that are not covered. so the formula, he said, was not meeting current conditions, it was based on data and practices from the 1960s and 1970s. he also discounted the government's argument that will congress had created this enormous record 15,000 pages in 2006, to justify the reauthorization. incidents of current and past discriminatory practices. he said that congress didn't use that record to shape a formula that responded to those current conditions. >> brown: the dissent from from justice ginsburg and she referred to what she called second generation -- what are called second-generation barriers to voting. >> yes, she had two points. on that she said the court really didn't -- the majority didn't really engage congress's record here. she said congress had overwhelming evidence of current recent discrimination in voting that was egregious by the covered states. it wasn't, she said, the voting practices, the tests and registration and turnout. it was second generation discrimination. it's more subtle. it can involve moving a polling place to a location where minorities have no transportation or even racial gerrymandering of redistricting. so she felt that the majority really didn't address what congress did here. but her second point was she said fundamentally this case comes down to who should decide? a court or a congress which is explicitly empowered by the 14th and 15th amendment to enforce the anti-discrimination mandates in those amendments. and she said where congress has produced 15,000 pages of legislative findings the court should defer to congress. >> brown: now, that is decision that has almost immediate practical effect, right? >> it does judging by what some of the comments have been by some governors, the governor of texas said that the -- the photo i.d. law for voter registration will go into effect immediately. it's considered the most stringent in the country. also some of the redistricting plans that have been pending. there is no reason now, it would seem, unless the states and jurisdictions that have been covered by section 4 want to see what the justice department thinks to actualally is the justice department or federal court whether they're violating the voting rights law. >> brown: but authority short of that, the court is saying "back in your hands, congress." >> it's up to congress, the chief justice said, to craft the formula that responds to current conditions. >> brown: all right, now i want to ask you about another decision today. this was the so-called baby veronica case and it involved adoption and indian child welfare acts. >> right. this was a custody dispute, a single mother had a child of indian heritage, cherokee, a member of the cherokee tribe and the biological father was not involved in supporting the pregnancy even though he wanted to marry her she declined. when she decided to put the child up for adoption he asserted his paternity, the dispute went into court, south carolina court found that the indian child welfare act-- which is designed to protect the integrity indian families. >> it's based on a lot of past bad history. >> bad history of indian children being removed. they awarded custody to the father after finding he would be a fit father. the court today in another divided opinion, this one by justice alito, parsed two provisions of the indian child welfare act, words to the effect of continued custody of the child and a provision designed to prevent the breakup of india families it said the act doesn't apply here. the father never had continued custody and there was no india family being broken up so the case was sent back to the south carolina courts to determine who under south carolina law, probably, who should get the child. >> brown: so the practical impact is it goes back to the lower court but it's not clear what will happen to the child at this point? >> it's not because the cherokee tribe as well as the father could again try to assert their rights under that law. >> brown: as you said, this was another 5-4 decision, right? >> yes, it was. the court split ideologically as well as in the voting rights act. >> brown: is there a different ideology? >> it's slightly different. justice breyer joined the majority in the india child welfare act. justice scalia joined the dissenters. he said the father is the biological parent and wants custody, he's fit, he could have it. >> brown: all right. and now we know that we are going to see you tomorrow, right? >> yes, tomorrow is the last day of the current term and we're expecting to see how the court wraps up the two same-sex marriage laws and then there's another case that probably nobody will have any interest in whatsoever tomorrow. >> but a lot of interesting to see what comes out of tomorrow and we'll see you and we have a cot down the hall if you want to stay overnight. we'll see you tomorrow. marcia coyle, thanks. >> thank you, my pleasure. >> ifill: we'll have more on next steps for the voting rights act shortly. still to come on the newshour, president obama's call to combat climate change; colorado struggles to expand health insurance coverage; and audra mcdonald at home on the stage and screen. but first, with the other news of the day, here's hari sreenivasan. >> sreenivasan: the diplomatic dispute over edward snowden escalated today, as russia rejected american appeals to hand him over. instead, the confessed leaker of secret surveillance programs remained at a moscow airport terminal. snowden himself remained out of sight for a second day but russian president vladimir putin confirmed his whereabouts during a news conference in finland. >> ( translated ): mr. snowden definitely visited moscow. for us, this is totally unexpected. he has not crossed the boarder and therefore does not need a visa and in the accusations against russia are ravings and rubbish. he's in the transit hall as a transit passenger now. >> sreenivasan: in essence, putin argued unless snowden passes through immigration procedures at the airport he's technically not in russia. putin also denied russian intelligence has talked to snowden and he refused to send the fugitive back to face u.s. charges of espionage. >> ( translated ): as for extradition, there is no possibility. we can hand over foreign citizens to country with which we have an appropriate international agreement on the extradition of criminals. we don't have such an agreement with the united states. >> sreenivasan: earlier in saudi arabia, u.s. secretary of state john kerry acknowledged there's no extradition treaty with russia but he said that's no obstacle. >> we're not looking for a confrontation. we're not ordering anybody. we're simply requesting under a very normal procedure for the transfer of somebody just as we transferred to russia seven people in the last two years that they requested that we did without any clamor, without any rancor, without any argument. >> sreenivasan: u.s. officials have complained that hong kong let snowden leave on sunday even though it does have an extradition treaty with the u.s. today chinese officials said the complaints are baseless. in the meantime, snowden was apparently in limbo waiting for word on whether ecuador will grant him asylum. in afghanistan today, taliban militants stormed the presidential palace compound in kabul. the raid set off a 90-minute gun battle. video from the scene showed smoke rising above the heavily guarded area. all eight assailants and three guards died. afghan officials said president karzai was there, but was unharmed. the attack came despite the taliban's recent commitment to join peace talks with the u.s. government troops in lebanon have secured the complex of a hard-line sunni cleric after two days of fighting. the clashes took place in the port city of siden. officials say at least 17 soldiers and 20 militants were killed. the sunni cleric, sheik ahmed al-assir, has preached against hezbollah. that shiite movement is aiding the syrian government in its war with sunni rebels. a lone lawmaker in the texas state senate mounted a one-woman filibuster today to block strict new abortion curbs. democrat wendy davis plans to talk for 13 hours without sitting or taking a bathroom break. if she makes it till midnight, a special session of the state legislature will automatically adjourn. her target is a republican bill that bans abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. the day's economic news was mostly positive. a series of reports found consumer confidence at its highest level in more than five years; home prices up by the most in seven years; and factory orders for big-ticket goods higher for the third month in a row. it all sounded good to wall street. the dow jones industrial average gained 100 points to close at 14,760. the nasdaq rose 27 points to close near 3348. the chicago blackhawks celebrated today after winning the national hockey league's stanley cup with a stunning comeback. the blackhawks trailed in game six last night with just 1:16 left on the clock, when they scored two goals within 17 seconds to beat the boston bruins, 3-2. hours later, they returned home, with the cup, for the second time in four seasons. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to jeff. >> brown: and we return to our coverage of today's supreme court ruling on the voting rights act. ray suarez examines how the law has shaped voting across the country. >> suarez: we turn to edward blum of the project on fair representation. he helped shelby county bring its challenge to the voting rights act. and sherrilyn ifill is president and director-counsel of the n.a.a.c.p. legal defense and educational fund. you saw both of them earlier outside the courtroom in kwame's report. and full disclosure: sherrilyn ifill is gwen's cousin. let's start with the basics. did the voting rights act, edward blum, do what it was passed to do in 1965? >> thank goodness it did. it ended the widespread and insidious acts of racial disenfranchisement throughout the deep south and elsewhere and it's a great testament to the evolution of our nation that the court today felt that the voting rights act had done its thing and was no longer necessary. i think that's a good thing for the country and i think it speaks well to the character of the american people. >> suarez: sherrilyn ifill, same question. >> the voting rights act has been called the crown jewel because it has been so effective. has it completed its work? by no means. that's why in 2006 when congress was looking at whether to reauthorization the voting rights act they went through almost a year of hearings and heard testimony and looked at racial discrimination and voting in this country. they amassed a 15,000 page record that demonstrated the ongoing problem of racial discrimination in voting in jurisdictions throughout this country and, of course, the 15th amendment to the constitution says that congress has the power to enforce the ban on voting discrimination that's set out in the 15th amendment. not the supreme court so it hardly matters where the supreme court feels that things are good enough to get rid of the voting rights act. what matters is what did congress determine and did they do their job responsibly? >> suarez: but section 4, which was specifically struck down today, didn't apply to the nation as a whole, it applied to certain sections of the country that were single out for extra scrutiny from congress could you imagine a time when those place cans come out from under that? >> sure, i can imagine a time and i don't have to imagine it. the law also includes a provision called bailout that allows just dictions that have not run afoul of the voting rights act over a ten-year period to be removed from the requirements of the law and every jurisdiction that has sought bailout since the enactment has been granted bailout. all shelby county, alabama, had to do and all the state of alabama has to the is not discriminate against racial minorities in voting for ten years to get out from under the provisions of the voting rights act. so there's a door out but the door out is premised on a jurisdiction that ensures that its voting processs are equal, open, and fire. >> suarez: edward blum, of all of the places not under the scrutiny of pre-clearance, do they belong there? have they, as sherrilyn ifill suggests, earned their way out? >> i think many of them have earned their way out and i feel that it was congress's responsibility back in 2006 not just to examine those jurisdictions that were put into this coverage back in 1965 but also to look outside of these jurisdictions and places like ohio and indiana and illinois and michigan. congress failed to do that. congress assumed that because these were bad actors bad in 1965 that they are continuing to be bad actors. in congress had cast a wider net looked carefully at those states that were covered, made a determination-- some perhaps should stay in, some perhaps should come out-- but also looked at the rest of the country i don't think we would have this decision today. congress failed to do that even though in 2009 the supreme court warned them that something like this could happen. >> brown:. >> suarez: so you could have countenanceed a section 4 that swept in more widely in the united states. >> victim countenanced one that swept out bad actors and swept in good actors. that means if parts of alabama were to be swept out that parts of illinois and massachusetts would be swept in, i can live with that. i think most of the supporters of the voting rights act could. congress failed to do that. >> brown: >> if mr. blum could live with that, he wouldn't have been behind the effort to challenge the voting rights act because, in fact, i just described a bailout provision in the voting rights act. the voting rights act has a bail-in provision. it allows jurisdictions that are not covered by section 5 of the act who have engaged in discrimination and who have been found by a judge to engage in discrimination to be bailed in. arkansas was bailed in for a time. new mexico was bailed in for a time. so any jurisdiction, including the jurisdictions you've identifyed who have engaged in voting practices that have been found by a judge to discriminate in voting can under the structures of section 5 be bailed into the voting rights act. the genius of the statute is that it has a door that goes both ways. the problem is that jurisdictions, many jurisdictions not v not simply done the job they need to do in order to be permitted to get out. >> suarez: but as you heard mr. blum point out, congress was also not using the mechanics that's right there in the law to separate the good and bad actors. >> well, i'm not sure exactly what that means. the mechanics that are in the law are the provisions that allow jurisdictions working with the justice department and federal judges to allow jurisdictions to either exit or to compel jurisdictions to enter the provisions of the act. congress made a statute that it thought was going to survive precisely because it had this ability to move states in and out. what congress did in 2006 was it looked at the current states that were under the provisions of section 5 and looked at voting discrimination in those states to determine whether they should still be covered and what it found to its surprise, i should say was that there was an overwhelming evidence of voting discrimination continuing in those covered jurisdictions. as a result, congress reauthorized the formula to cover those jurisdictions and maintain the bailout and bail-in provisions that allow some states to come in and jurisdictions to come in and jurisdictions to go out. >> suarez: now the action moves to congress, mr. blum. can they design a successor to the struck-down part of the law that will do the things you want and also provide the protections? >> well, i was on another panel earlier today with congressman bobby scott of virginia and he was quite clear about this. -the-thinks there is mow men numb congress across the aisle to do a do-over if you will. congress can systematically look at voting conditions for minorities from coast to coast, from maine to california, florida to washington. and do thorough analysis of what is happening today. they can identify repeat offenders who are intentionally disenfranchising or deluding the votes of minorities then those jurisdictions can be targeted by congress and section 5 will have an opportunity to prevent phlegm doing that in the future. >> suarez: now that it's moved across the street the supreme court to capitol hill, what do you think the chance chances are? >> we feel confident. the voting rights act has been reauthorized several times and always with a bipartisan congress signed the reauthorization in 192 by president ronald reagan. the reauthorization signed by president george w. bush in 2006. it's never been a democratic statute or republican statute. it's always been bipartisan. it's always been about democracy. i think the real question on the table is really people like mr. blum and is a majority of the united states supreme court willing to allow congress to do the job that the framers of the civil war amendment said congress should do, which is that congress should have the power to make the judgment about how best to do it. sure they can come up with another formula but are we willing to credit the united states congress with the authority that it has under the 15th amendment to do precisely that? >> suarez: sherrilyn ifill and edward blum, thank you both. >> brown: online, you can listen to stories collected through our oral history hotline. we asked what people remember about the voting rights act. and the court will hand down its final decisions tomorrow, including the highly anticipated rulings on california's proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage and a challenge to the federal defense of marriage act. we will carry live coverage from scotusblog beginning at 10:00 a.m. on our home page. while you're there, you can review our full supreme court coverage from this term. >> ifill: the president today renewed a pledge he has been making since 2008 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global warming. this time, he plans to exert executive authority to force action. with today's announcement, the president zeroed in on the new and existing power plants that burn coal and turn out 40% of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions. >> as a president, as a father and as an american i'm here to say we need to act. >> reporter:. >> ifill: it's the heart of his plan unveiled at georgetown university in washington to fight climate change. >> right now there are no federal limits to the amount of carbon pollution that those plants can pump into our air. none. zero. we tliplt amount of toxic chemicals like mercury and sulfur and arsenic in our air our our water but power plants can still dump unlimited amounts of carbon pollution into the air for free. that's not right, that's not safe and it needs to stop. >> reporter: mr. obama also called for letting wind and solar energy projects use public lands to generate more power. >> the plan i'm announcing lead to help us double again our energy from wind and sun. today i'm directing the interior department to green light enough private renewable energy capacity on public lands to power more than six million homes by 2020. >> ifill: without announcing a decision, the president singled out the proposed keystone pipeline which would transport crude oil extract fad canadian tar sands to the gulf coast. he said it should only be approved if it doesn't worsen carbon pollution. the overall planned joined the administration's earlier initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions from implementing new fuel efficiency standards for american vehicles to the recent agreement with china to reduce hydro fluorocarbons. today's actions would allow the president to side step congress and act by executive order but lawmakers could still try to thwart him. even before the speech, senate minority leader mitch mcconnell took to the senate floor in opposition. >> americans want common-sense policies to make energy cleaner and more affordable. the opposite phrase being common sense because americans are deeply concerned about jobs and the economy. that's what the president should be focused on and it appears to be the further rest thing from his mind. >>. >> ifill: but the president said climate change skeptics missed the point. with w the 12 hottest years on record all happening in the past 15 years it's time to tend global warming debate. >> i don't have much patience for anyone who denies that this challenge is real. we don't have time for a meeting of the flat-earth society. (cheers and applause) sticking your hand in the sand might make you feel safer but it's not going to protect you from the coming storm. >> ifill: today's announcement drew a cautious response from the power industry while environmental groups mostly endorsed the president's approach. we >> ifill: we get two views about these plans and the potential impact. frances beinecke is the president of the natural resources defense council, or n.r.d.c., an environmental advocacy group. and scott segal is a lobbyist and partner with firm of bracewell & giuliani. the firm represents a number of big utilities that have coal- fired power plants as well as companies pushing for the keystone extension. frances beinecke, the president said that he was going direct e.p.a. to work with the states to establish pollution standards for new and existing plants. at first blush it doesn't sound like a lot. >> well, actually our power plants are 40% of our carbon emissions so if we want to get on the president's plan to reduce our carbon emissions by 17% we have to take the carbon pollution coming from our power plants head on and by directing e.p.a. under the clean air act the president can put in standards to reduce those significantly. n.r.d.c. says we can reduce the emissions by 26%, 10% of our carbon footprint right now. so it's the single most important thing the president can do to get us on a trajectory towards a safer climate future. >> ifill: is a that a reasonable or laudable goal? >> well, the president raised the profile of the issue which is laudable. in terms of suggesting new proposals or moving us in new directions i think a lot of what constitute it had president's plan are strands that had already been on the table and he perhaps accentuated them a little bit in order to move them forward. with respect to power plants i think what most americans know is that the local power company is already an intensely regulated organization and even in this administration some of the most expensive rules in the history of environmental protection agency have come down in the last couple of years regulating these facilities. as far as the cost concern with reducing carbon from power plants, we don't know exactly what the president is going to do or what the e.p.a. will do at the end of the day but if we look, for example, to the cost estimates that were done last time congress debated significant limitations on power plants we saw a very credible assessment that talked about hundreds of billions of dollars in lost gross domestic product and several million in net lost jobs even when you take into account any new jobs that might be created. >> ifill: let me ask frances beinecke about it. there was this cost aspect on whether there were more jobs created or lost. which is so? >> well, actually, it's a lively debate. what we've seen in the last several years is the unleashing of renewable energy, the commitment to investing in efficiency create large numbers of jobs. the single fasters-growing part of energy regeneration is in the renewable sector in solar and wind so jobs are being created in the clean energy sectors and we've seen more and more opportunity. what the president really focused on was we need to invest in american innovation, invest in the clean energy future, invest in the things that will make this most cost effective which is investing in efficiency. >> ifill: what some people heard was the president declaring a war on coal. >> well, i think that's focusing on the wrong thing. this is not a war on coal. this is a commitment to the future of our children and a safe climate future. for those of us that experienced extreme weather events in the last year. for example, i live in new york, hurricane sandy i can assure you was devastating. over $140 billion was spent in the united states on extreme weather events, drought, fire, hurricanes. we can't afford that as a nation. we have to invest in the clean energy future that reduces that threat. >> ifill: is it possible to invest in a clean energy future with fossil fuels? >> absolutely. the president mention it is need to invest in clean coal. fortunately he also embraces a proposal for new power plants, carbon emissions that would potentially discourage investment innovation. if i was sure or even a little bit sure that we could reduce severe weather events because of anything announced today this would be an a different debate. the unfortunate reality is this: today was about unilateral action and frankly putting the international leadership with rhetoric at the end of the speech. that's exactly backwards. if we undertake unilateral action of this sort they actually give away our ability to negotiate comprehensive international agreement and worse yet by increasing energy prices in the united states we export manufacturing facilities overseas and then have to import those goods back to the united states! we have the potential of actually increasing a bonn emissions unless we approach these regulations very, very carefully. >> ifill: is executive action a unilateral action? is that the way to approach this? >> i they the president is demonstrating and what he said very clearly particularly regarding international is the united states has to lead. it's our responsibility as the largest economy and second-largest emiter to show how we can have a future that's safe for climate -- for our future. >> ifill: the president or congress? >> the president has to lead. he has the executive authority. we know we cannot get -- there's no path through congress right now yet the climate scourge is increasing and increasing. so the president is demonstrating his commitment. he made that commitment in the inaugural address. he made hit in the state of the union and what he did today was told the american public the path he's going to follow using his authority. it's an important moment. the president said today also in this stage that he would not approve the keystone pipeline, much-debated keystone pipeline if it added to carbon emissions but it's unclear whether it does or not. did you read that as good news or bad news? >> it was a change from what the president said from the printed text to what he actually said at georgetown. what he actually said was very fascinating. he said it wouldn't occur that there were a significant net increase in carbon emissions. well, that question when it's already been asked and answered, the state department has said there's not a significant net increase in carbon emissions because the canadians might have been born last at night but they weren't born last night and that oil sands, that bit you men from oil sands is going to find its way from the united states and other international markets where there's a k.s.l. pipeline or not. as a result the irony is if you don't build a state-of-the-art pipeline you increase carbon emissions. >> ifill: i've heard the opposite. >> i think that's wrong. i think the president was setting a very high bar. he was showing his bar for addressing and making a decision on the keystone pipeline was different from what he said? the past. he was saying this can't be more dill tears you to climate. e.p.a. in reviewing the state department document said carbon would increase as a result of this. the canadians turned down one of their routes, the route through british columbia. so they can't get it out through our country, why should we take it through ours? >> we're already taking that bit you minute into railroad traffic. >> woodruff: you both heard good news is >> i heard good news. >> the supporters of the keystone pipeline actually regard the president -- what frances called the high bar as a bar that's already been met. i must say it's difficult to put the pieces together. i agree with. that. >> ifill: we'll wait and see what the announcement is but thanks for helping us understand today. >> ifill: and you can watch the president's full speech on our youtube page. >> brown: next, spreading the word about the new health reform law. it's a crucial challenge for the federal government and states creating so-called "insurance exchanges." last week, an independent arm of congress, the government accountability office, reported that work is running behind. yesterday, h.h.s. secretary kathleen sebelius told reporters she still believes seven million people will enroll in the first year of the program. but, she acknowledged, "the most daunting aspect is that people still don't know enough about what's going to change in the law, and still have some misinformation." newshour health correspondent betty ann bowser reports on colorado's efforts to tackle the problem. >> reporter: the employees at confluence kayaks in denver make it look easy. they slip their boards and boats through the white water rapids where the platte and cherry creek rivers come together. but "no fear" is no substitute for insurance when one of them gets hurt. >> i have an employee who was injured last fall in a kayaking accident, and that kind of opened all of our eyes that we're not invincible. >> reporter: and it brought home to owner john kahn how important health insurance can be when something goes wrong in a dangerous business he's owned for 18 years. >> i have a small business with three or four full-time employees, and adding health insurance was just cost- prohibitive. >> reporter: but now kahn is hoping he may be able to offer health coverage to his workers, because colorado is one of 16 states that is going to run an insurance exchange. the other states will partner with a federally managed marketplace. the idea is to get millions of people who currently don't have health insurance to be able to buy it at affordable prices. the new insurance marketplace, called connect for health colorado, starts enrolling individuals and small businesses on october 1. >> i don't know a lot about it. i have definitely gotten health plans quoted from the major companies, and i think the exchange might make that easier to compare the plans, but i don't know a whole lot beyond that. >> reporter: and that's the problem. state internal polling found only 10% of coloradans know about the new marketplace. national surveys mirror similar findings. so health officials all across the country are scrambling to get private and federal grants to help get people educated and enrolled. under the affordable care act, almost every american must buy health insurance or pay a penalty beginning in 2014. >> at connect for health, you can shop, pick, and prepare for the health plan that is right for you. >> reporter: colorado has become the first state to reach out to residents with a $12 million ad campaign. >> so what happens when dozens of plans compete for your business? you win! >> reporter: patty fontneau, the c.e.o. of connect for health, knows she has her work cut out for her. >> it's really going to be a two-part discussion, which is, what's going on? what is this? what does the law require? what's going to be available to me? and then the second is, how do i do it? and how do i get it done? and how do i make sure it's the best thing for me? >> reporter: in addition to advertising, the exchange will spend at least another $12 million trying to reach the public directly using newly hired employees called "navigators" or "guides." >> what the health coverage guide will say is, let's sit down and take a look at the number of plans that are available. who is your physician? let's make sure your physician is in the network. what hospital will you use? what kind of a deductible might be feasible for you and your family? what are the kinds of costs you're able to pay on a monthly basis? >> reporter: that's not exactly a ten-minute discussion. >> we don't expect it to be a ten-minute discussion. health insurance can be confusing. >> i think it's a huge, huge project. >> reporter: john keunning is vice president of the metro community provider network, which operates 19 clinics in the denver area, serving people who have little or no insurance. >> the numbers we're hearing are there are 800,000 uninsured in the state. probably 600,000 to 700,000 of those will need to be educated by september so they can make decisions in october about what to enroll in. i think it's a monumental task. and i'm not sure how they're going to pull it off. >> reporter: he's also worried about the confusion and stress that his patients are feeling about the upcoming changes. >> i'd love to have more information. ever since this health care reform, they keep talking about it, but they don't give any details about how it's going to affect us. >> reporter: michelle bledsoe doesn't make enough money to afford health insurance and makes too much money to qualify for medicaid. that's why she comes to the clinic, where care is offered on a sliding scale. when the new federal law kicks in next year, many people who come here will likely qualify for a government subsidy that will make coverage affordable. 13 insurance companies have agreed to participate in the colorado exchange. they will offer more than 240 different plans. like all the other states, there will be various levels to choose from. in colorado, a bronze or basic package for a 40-year-old non- smoker starts at $177 a month. more generous plans go up from there: silver, $232; gold, $273; and the most generous of all, platinum, which would cost $311 a month for an individual. >> i think that it will be very overwhelming, from not having any kind of choice, just accepting what you can get, to all these choices. it's overwhelming. >> reporter: in order to make the exchange eventually pay for itself, the outgoing insurance commissioner has said the exchange will need to sign 800 people a day in the first six months. >> it is a high number. it's better than some states and not as bad as others. but it is a heavy lift. >> reporter: dede depercin is a health consumer advocate who says it's unlikely the exchange will meet that target, but thinks over time people may be persuaded just as they were to use seat belts. >> i was arguing with somebody about this, and they said, "the fines aren't high enough, people are never going to buy it." and i said, "seat belts." i'm 53 years old, and my mother just threw her hand across my chest. the reason why i wear my seat belt now is not because of a fine; it's because we had a cultural shift. we can argue that about a number of other things: drunk driving. it takes a while, but we get there. i think there's going to be a really, really big push to make a habit about this, because it's important to everybody. the cost just to build the ground floor is enormous. >> reporter: colorado has asked the federal government for $125 million for the first year and a half. and that's what has some fiscal conservatives like dr. mike fallon worried. a father, emergency room physician, and the republican- appointed board member to the colorado exchange, he has serious questions about whether all that federal money is being spent wisely. >> the bigger the thing we make now, the harder it is to sustain. we have to be fiscally independent with no further federal money in another year. anything we add now adds future cost which, if we're not careful, will raise the cost to the consumer. and the whole idea of this was to actually bring down the cost of health insurance. i'm worried by building such a large bureaucracy. >> reporter: colorado exchange officials dismiss such worries and say they are on track for the program to pay for itself this time next year. but-- and this is a very big "but"-- they acknowledge this is only going to work if they reach enough people and get them to sign up. >> ifill: there's more health care reporting online, from austin, texas, where musicians have one less reason to sing the blues: an organization that connects its members with affordable health care is helping artists without insurance. you can watch that report on our home page. >> brown: finally tonight, a leading lady of musical theater, and much more. ♪ lying on the road, i'm thinking ♪ starring at the stars i wonder ♪ john john when audra mcdonald sings of going back home in a sock by january kandor and fred eastbound she means it. ♪ when i'm gonna go back home new york is her home, but she spent much of the last four years in los angeles playing the dramatic role of a doctor in the television series "private practice." >> you don't like me? >> no. no, i don't. >> brown: it was just the latest of what's become a whirlwind career of work in films and opera and serving as host in "live from lincoln center" on pbs. >> welcome to the best seat in the house. >> brown: then there's her true artistic home: musical theater. at just 42, mcdonald is one of the most honored performers in broadway history. >> i found the theater and i found my home. i love you. thank you so very much. thank you. >> brown: the winner of five tony awards, including for "carousel" in 1994 and "a raisin in the sun" ten years later. last year she won for her acclaimed role as bess in a new production of the gershwin's porg give and bess. we talked recently at sidney harmon hall in washington, d.c. as she just released her first solo album in seven years. titled "go back home" it celebrates her love of musical theater. >> i feel most at home on stage. since i was a little girl. since i started in the dinner theater in fresno, california, and there was something about, you know -- look, performers are needy. we're needy beasts so, you know, there's -- you get from the audience and for me it's the rush of being forced to be so in the present. ♪ avoid naval contemplating sloppy haired actors ♪ originally from baltimore (laughter) ♪ who excel at mime, still play straggo and have issues with their mom ♪ >> brown: mcdonald has been known as a champion of contemporary songwriters and what usually attracts cher the story it tells. >> ♪ yes do avoid r.e.o. speed wagon loving christopher walken imitating thespians originally from baltimore ♪ >> brown: one example, the song "baltimore" by the song of goldrich and heisler. >> the song talks about how you shouldn't fall for men from baltimore. while i've not had an experience from men in baltimore --. >> brown: no knock on baltimore. >> no, no, but i certainly can relate to the type of men that the song describes. so for me i had an immediate reaction. i know that story. i can sing that. >> brown: in the liner notes for the album, mcdonald explains the presence of the song "idle vice" from "the sound of music." she writes she needed a song with her first audition for a professional theater group fresno. she performed it with her father who died six years ago and clearly had a huge influence on her life. >> i practiced it with my dad playing the piano. we went down to the theater not realizing they'd have an accompanyist there but i didn't know that accompanyist. i didn't know that person so my dad -- huge hulking dad got down and sat down. >> brown: you're telling the story as though you remember it extremely well. >> i do. i do. absolutely. every bit of it. i remember -- my dad was 6'6, huge guy, hue among us go hands and he put his hands down on the piano to play and you could hardly see the rest of the keys. he was so big. and i just felt very safe, you know? >> brown: you also describe yourself in those notes a young girl with a little pot belly, hyperactive and overly dramatic. >> yes. yes, yes, and yes. (laughs) i was all of those things. and some of them still today. (laughs) >> brown: i won't ask which ones. but the theater was the outlet for that. but i'm thinking of the overdramatic part. >> absolutely, the hyperactivity and the overdramatic part. i was very insecure and had been diagnosed as hyperactive and was a drama queen and, you know, i was sort of famous in my family not just my immediate family but the rest of my family, too. my aunts use to say "oh, that one." everybody knew that i was this child. "we're having a thunderstorm! we're all going to die!" you're nine, don't think about this. >> brown: somebody said "put this girl on a stage." >> so literally it was like let's channel this energy before we kill her. something before she drives us crazy. >> brown: i was wondering if this hyperactivity explains all the different things you do. >> hopping back and forth? probably. probably. it's interesting because my hyperactivity i think what the theater did for me in terms of channeling that energy is that it doesn't feel like hyperactivity to me now, just "i've got this to do. i've got this to do." and "oh, i've got to do more concerts, i'm curious about being on television, acting in front of the camera. maybe i should work on an opera. time to do more shakespeare." >> brown: this is the conversation in your head all the time? >> all the time. and laundry and the kids and someone needs to feed the dog. those would be the other things. >> brown: do any of these different forms scare you at this point? >> all of them. >> brown: all of them? >> every single day they all still scare me, you know? i think i read somewhere that barbra streisand started to develop more and more stage fright as the years went by and i understand that. they all still scare me very much because i'm afraid i'm going to fail and so that's why --. >> brown: really? >> absolutely. >> brown: so what do you do? >> i stay hyperactive and go back out there and maybe i fail at times. but there's -- i have to say there is a drive that just -- that's in there somewhere that says get back out there. get back out there. every time. ♪ maybe someday i'll get lucky >> brown: audra mcdonald will get out there this summer performing in concerts throughout the country. ♪ take a train and go back home ♪ >> brown: >> brown: online you can watch more of my conversation with audra mcdonald, where she discusses the stamina required to play "bess," and how hard it was to "leave her" at the theater. >> ifill: again, the major developments of the day. the u.s. supreme court struck down a key provision of the voting rights act, effectively blocking enforcement of the landmark civil rights measure. president obama announced executive action to force reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, especially from coal- fired power plants. and russian president putin rejected u.s. appeals to hand over edward snowden, the man who leaked news of secret surveillance programs. he apparently remained at a moscow airport. >> brown: also online today, journalists and members of congress come to blows, all for a good cause. hari sreenivasan has more. >> sreenivasan: the annual congressional women's softball game pits members of the d.c. press corps against members of congress, and playing right field for the "bad news babes" is newshour's own christina bellantoni. watch a video previewing the intense competition, which raises money for breast cancer awareness. and on art beat, get a sneak peek at an interview with phish lead man trey anastasio. we'll be releasing video clips each day this week, and you can watch the full segment next week on the newshour. and tonight on "frontline," examining charges of sexual assault on the job for hundreds of migrant women. find a link to "rape in the fields" and more on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. jeff? >> brown: and that's the newshour for tonight. on wednesday, we'll look at those two major decisions from the supreme court on same-sex marriage. i'm jeffrey brown. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. we'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening. thank you, and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> 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 >> rose: welcome to the program. we begin this evening with a look at the global economy with ian bremmer and nouriel roubini. >> our point is this situation is not a stable eck lip-- equilibrium, take for example the eurozone, you can't have just a monetary union without banking, political economic systems, either you move towards more integration or you will have fragmentation with integration. so the situation we are faced right now in the global economy, say the eurozone is not unstable equilibrium therefore a new abnormallal that cannot be sustained. >> rose: we conclude can colum mckan without won a book award for his novel, hiw