looked at me and she said, ok, we have insurance now, where do you want to start? >> woodruff: those are just some of the stories we're covering on tonight's pbs newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> ifill: charges and counter- charges flew back and forth today over the stalemate in the syrian peace talks. secretary of state john kerry accused the syrian government of stonewalling after negotiations broke off saturday. kerry spoke in indonesia. >> they have refused to open up one moment of discussion legitimately about a transition government. and it is very clear that bashar al assad is continuing to try to win this in the battlefield rather than to come to the negotiating table in good faith. >> ifill: the secretary also accused russia of enabling assad by giving him weapons and other aid. but in moscow, foreign minister sergei lavrov said the real blame lies with the u.s. and others backing the syrian rebels on the battlefield. >> in other words, they leave the peace talks and once again faying a military option. they won't get the strong support from outside as was the case in libya. >> ifill: there's no word on when a third round of the syrian peace negotiations might take place. >> ifill: the pakistani government called off its talks with the taliban today, after militants executed 23 paramilitary troops. a faction of the pakistani taliban announced the soldiers' deaths last night. they said the troops were kidnapped in 2010. it was unclear if the faction acted with the approval of the taliban central command. >> ifill: a suicide bomber was behind sunday's deadly attack on tourists in egypt. the interior ministry said today the bomber pushed his way onto a bus. at least four people were killed, the egyptian bus driver, and three south korean tourists. the bus bombing was the first to target foreign tourists in the sinai in nearly a decade. no one has yet claimed responsibility. >> ifill: a u.n. committee warned north korean leader kim jong un today that he could face prosecution for crimes against his own people. after a yearlong investigation, the three-man panel found evidence of executions, torture, abduction and mass starvation. the chair of the investigation, michael kirby, says the committee wrote to kim, putting him on notice. >> we indicated that he should be aware of this. he should be aware of the international crime of aiding and abetting, crimes against humanity, even if not himself involved in the actual perpetration of those crimes. and we informed him that he himself may be responsible in any subsequent prosecution that occurs. >> ifill: north korea refused to cooperate with the investigation and said it categorically rejects the findings. the number of troops dismissed from the u.s. army for drugs, alcohol and other misconduct has soared in recent years. the associated press reported today that 11,000 enlisted soldiers were forced out last year, nearly double the figure from 2007. there were 387 officers expelled last year, triple the figure from 2010. the army chief of staff, general ray odierno, says the service may have overlooked character issues in the push to fill the ranks during ten years of war. air pollution in china has gotten so bad that state media actually criticized the government today. over the weekend, fireworks celebrations in beijing helped push air quality well into hazardous territory. today, the english-language "china daily" said the failure to take emergency steps was indefensible. it said the inaction flies in the face of earlier promises. at the winter olympics in sochi, russia, a week of warm weather gave way to heavy fog, forcing organizers to shuffle the schedule. the men's biathalon race and snowboard-cross were postponed until tomorrow as fog made visibility extremely low. a top official with the international ski federation said delay was the only option. >> yes, it's a pity and the fog didn't move the whole day, it was always staying the same. now in the afternoon, now really late, it cleared up but this is too late for any competitions. for tomorrow the weather forecast is: the fog will leave but unfortunately rain will come in. >> ifill: as for the competition, you might want to tune out for a moment, if you don't want to know results just yet. it was a golden moment for meryl davis and charlie white as the u.s. won the ice dancing competition for the first time. and americans steven holcomb and steve langton took bronze in two-man bobsled, the first u.s. medal in that sport since 1952. >> ifill: still to come on the newshour: secretary of state john kerry's urgent call to combat climate change; the murder trial reviving the "stand your ground" debate; an alternative to medicaid expansion in arkansas; the aftermath of a coal ash spill in north carolina; and what does it take to be a u.s. ambassador? >> woodruff: the earth is absorbing more heat than expected, that's according to a study published today in the proceedings of the national academy of sciences. it found the arctic is losing ice, creating more open water and less bright, white surfaces to reflect sunlight back into space. this latest scientific evidence comes a day after secretary of state john kerry issued a call to arms to combat climate change while visiting indonesia >> the science of climate change is leaping out at us like a scene from a 3-d movie. it's warning us, it's compelling us to act. >> woodruff: secretary of state john kerry on sunday urged indonesians and citizens of other developing nations to face the perils of climate change. speaking in jakarta, kerry warned that city could, someday, sink under rising sea levels. he argued the problem has become the world's most fearsome weapon. think about this: terrorism, epidemics, poverty, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. all challenges that know no borders. the reality is that climate change ranks right up there with every single one of them. >> woodruff: because of massive forest removal, indonesia is now the world's third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind china and the u.s. the main cause is massive removal of forests. kerry met with chinese president xi jinping, in beijing, on saturday, and they agreed on the need to work together on the issue. but getting beyond pledges has been a problem. last november, at a u.n. conference in warsaw, much of the conversation pitted developed nations against developing nations in asia and elsewhere. christiana figueres was executive secretary of the convention. >> industrialized countries with a larger historical responsibility must take the lead. but that doesn't mean that everybody else is off the hook. >> woodruff: now, kerry is urging the world's largest economies to reach agreement on cutting carbon emissions. and in his jakarta speech, he blasted those who question climate change. >> we should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists and science, and extreme ideologues to compete with scientific fact. nor should we allow any room for those who think that the costs associated with doing the right thing outweigh the benefits. >> woodruff: the secretary will have to do his own weighing of climate costs and benefits as he considers whether to endorse building the hotly debated keystone pipeline across the u.s. >> he is president and ceo of the world resources institute, an environmental research organization in washington. and scott barret a professor at columbia university's earth institute. and we welcome both of you to the program. scott barret, this speech that secretary kerry gave in jakarta is just a series that he's giving to say to developing nations you too have a role in addressing climate change. how do you read what he's trying to do? >> well, it's true that all these countries do have a role. the way that negotiations started was that there's a focus on a concept called comment with differentiated responsibilities, and this is interpreted to mean that the rich countries need to move first and the poor countries can act later after they develop. what we've learned is the poorer countries particularly the large size growing countries don't act now, then we'll be holding up a huge amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. the actions that will be taken by the richer countries really won't matter very much. this is particularly true not just because of the scale, but also because of globalization which makes it very easy for emissions to move around as it were. so it's very important therefore to address this problem fundamentally that we need to have a comprehensive effort at the global level to cut emissions. >> woodruff: andrew steer, how do you hear what he was saying. he seems to have a real urgency in his voice yesterday. >> i think this was a more passionate speech than i've heard before. i think it's a wonderful thing because quite frankly unless we address this issue, we're in very deep trouble. the world has set itself a target to limit temperature increases, to 2 degrees celsius worldwide. we're now past 3 or 4 degrees that will result in agricultural yields in africa by 30%, will have sea level rise that will threaten more than a billion people. it will result in massive changes in the psychological cycle so feed will be much more difficult. if you care about your grandchildren, you have to take this seriously. >> woodruff: andrew, i should say scott barret, as you hear what he's saying, how, let's talk about the political reality here because the united states secretary of state to be saying to these countries whether it's indonesia, china or india, do something about your emissions, what are the political challenges he's facing in each one of these countries. >> i think the key problem, what he's trying to draw attention to is all countries need to act together. it won't be possible to address this problem if only some countries act. however, the individual countries to be willing to act, they have to believe that others are going to act with them and that together they are going to make a difference to the climate. i think the problem up in this point is that that kind of assurance that is needed has been absent. so i think a key challenge for the secretary of state for that states, for all the negotiators is going to be to come up with a strategy how to make these connections among all these different key countries so that when each one moves forward, they can have confidence that the others will move forward and this problem will be addressed. >> woodruff: andrew steer, is that how you see the challenge facing the united states. how do you see, do you see it a matter of getting countries to work together? >> well, that's going to be essential but i think we would be misspending the issues if the notion is we've got it right and we have to persuade them. most of these countries understand much better than we do it's a problem because they're much more affected by it. five years in indonesia for example, very recently, the president understands it's a very serious issue, he has a target of 26% reduction in greenhouse gases from what they were before by 2020. he said it will go up to 40%. we need some help. these countries don't have the resources we have so we're going to have to have some kind of deal where we support them. but china also the notion that we've got to persuade china to act is not true. this year's china's introducing a cap and trade system on itself. it's a very very difficult situation as we just saw on air pollution but in addition to that, it knows it's going to be much more threatened by climate change than we are here in the united states. >> woodruff: so scott barret, if it requires some kind of a deal from appealing arrangement, what do you see coming together? are the outlines of something visible or knowable at this point? >> it's a bit hard to tell. i should say all this is really leading up to paris in 2015, december 2015. >> woodruff: this is the next conference. >> that's the next big conference. this is the next copenhagen, as it were. and i think one of the thing that has been absorbed biology the parties is that the approach that has been tried in the past hasn't worked. i think there's still some fumbling around about what's the best way forward. there seems to be focus right now on what countries can declare they will be willing to do on their own and some kind of attempt to compare, to make sure that countries that are equal in some respects are making equal sacrifices. and also that all this as u addp to something that's useful and meaningful. however, this may bring about some kind of agreement. it's not clear to me it would improve very much on what countries might do on their own. i think the key thing is going to go and always has been, how to bring about some enforcement of a collective effort to act. and there are some signs that people are paying little attention to that but i'm afraid that the overall need for strategy and enforcement is so far getting less attention than it deserves. >> woodruff: how much do you see and how much clout do you see the u.s. having in all of this. >> i think the u.s. has huge clout and i think over the last year president obama has laid out a strategy of getting to a 17% reduction of greenhouse gases by 2020. i think the u.s. has even more clout. in cept this year, ban ki-moon is hosting and the idea is we're going to try to change the debate. most people look at the challenge of climate change and it's going to be costly. it turns out that so too is the economics turning out. if we do it right, we can have a transition to a low carbon future that actually has more jobs, more technology and actually benefits people. now indonesia is one of the spawshessponsors of something ce global commission on the climate. international efforts on the nobel prize winze winners wrushn this with a system. you got mayors of cities, leaders of corporations saying actually the current situation we don't really know what's going to happen isn't going to work for us. and so change in the debate is extremely important and the u.s. obviously has a central role in that. >> woodruff: discussion's not just at the national level but across cities and across other organizations. andrew steer, scott barret, we thank you both. >> thank you. >> ifill: now, the reaction to a florida case raising national attention again over concerns about race and self-defense laws. a jury on saturday convicted michael dunn, 47, on three counts of attempted murder. but it deadlocked over a charge of first-degree murder. in november 2012, dunn pulled into a gas station where teenagers were parked in a s.u.v. listening to loud rap music. ar after an argument there were fires ten bullets. the teens unarmed were not hit but davis was and later died. we take a closer look at the verdict now with judith browne dianis a civil rights lawyer and codirector of the advancement project, a civil rights organization. and david weinstein, a former state and federal prosecutor in miami-dade county. he's now a partner at the clarke silverglate law firm in miami. why did this verdict cause such a stir. >> because it was a mixed bag, right. we did get some on some convictr the attempt murder and charge and the initial charge. but the fact that another person in florida has been able to kill an innocent unarmed young black teenager is where there's a problem. there's no conviction on it. it's a mistrial and you know at the end of the day, there's large concern that so-called loud case really was missing in that. in fact it's loud thug music and what underlies thug music and how they described it where the defendant mr. dunn described it. because that is really important and that evidence of what was really going on in his mind really was not explored in the case. >> ifill: david weinstein, help us explain why there was an attempted murder conviction but not a first degree murder conviction in the same case. >> i think it's because of the break in time between really two independent acts that occurred. the first act that occurred was whatever prompted dunn to fire his gun into the car the first time. you heard the gunshots recorded from the convenience store. he fires off an additional six or seven rounds. the jury was able to remind or at least from where i'm sitting to differentiate between those two independent acts. they are unable to reach a verdict on the murder charge because some of the people in the jury room believed that there was a self-defense that was portrayed by the defendant and was not broken by the prosecution. however the actions dunn took afterwards, shooting into that car by taking reckless disregard for the lives of the yuk men wh- young men in that car the jury didn't have a problem with that. it was not premeditated but a reckless act and he should be punished for that. that's why they came back with a verdict on that. although there are two separate verdicts there were really two distinct acts taking place. >> ifill: do you think there were type different tacts in that what you said earlier is the case that his perception there was a threat was the outcome of the case. >> well clearly he got on the stand you know, you rarely see the defendant getting on the stand but he was the only one that could talk about why he defended himself. that's where the problem lies with us and it's really a bigger issue than this case. it's about how do we bring race into these kinds of cases when we know that he not only said the thug music comment but then also racially charged letters from his jail cell. so the jury doesn't get the benefit of that evidence. the jury doesn't get to understand where his mind was at the time. at the same time, this is a systemic issue because you think about the fact that the jury didn't get to hear it, the jury credited his evidence over the other young black teenagers, that the judge didn't have this kind of information come in. the prosecutor didn't try to get this information in. and so you know, this is where we have a problem because our criminal justice system should have the benefit of all of the evidence that is important to making a decision in a case. >> ifill: david weinstein, what about that idea? there were other people who testified obviously, the defendant but also the other teenagers who survived the shooting. what is your sense of what we just heard jute other browne dianis say that there was a different weight put on their testimony. >> i would think so because the jurors are instructed you don't give anymore weight or any more credibility of one witness over the other. you evaluate each witness independently and you assign whatever weight you want to assign to that witness. it's not a matter of numbers, it's 15 people who come in and testify one way but only one person testifies another way. you're entitled to give each of those groups of people the same weight. i think what the jury focused on here was do we believe what dunn said from the stand and did the prosecution poke enough holes in his testimony for us to disbelieve that he was in fear for his life when he fired off that first shot. somebody in that jury room, one or two or more of those jurors believed what he said was self-defense. now you don't have to take into account that what the other men in the car had to say because no one other than done testified that he thought he saw the muzzle of the gun. it comes down to dunn. there was no other weapon found, there was no additional evidence. >> ifill: may i ask, could i ask a different question about something that judith browne dianis said do you think race was a factor and who was more credible in this case? >> i don't think so. you have a mixed component on the jury. there were all different races and ethnicities and genders represented on the jury. there was nobody that was saying this young men attacked him. there was certainly evidence that there was loud music that was being played. he was offended by in his words the loud music, and yes after the fact and in letters that he wrote he referred to it as thug music. but what his testimony was, was that he was offended by the loud music and he asked them to turn it down. i don't think they wanted race to become an issue because it was do you believe the defendant in what he said or do you think that he was defending himself. >> ifill: self-defense is important judith browne dianis because we became familiar withstand your ground law that was in this case except in jury instructions. do you think that had indianapolis effect in the outcome. >> sure. stand your ground becomes a cover for racial bias. what it does is that it allows the person, you know, all threats are in the eye of the beholder, right. and self defense is about what you felt at the time. and so to disregard the fact that this again was not just loud music, but loud thug music. we just had a similar incident with richard sherman, the football player being called a thug which is now becoming the code word for the n word. >> ifill: except in this case, david weinstein i want to ask you about stand your ground because it didn't actually come up in the trial. >> it didn't because this was not a stand your ground case. this was a self-defense case and i think we're all getting lost in this that there's a distinct difference between stand your ground and self-defense. stand your ground has now become a cloa cloakism for stand your ground. he was defending himself. stand your ground was a term inserted in legislation in 2005 in the florida legislature that allowed people to extend the castle doctrine the right to defend yourself in your own home from an aggressor to outside of your home. that's what stand your ground is. he didn't argue that he was standing his ground, he argued that in his mind, what he believed he saw subjectively was that was going to inflict some serious injury on him and so he reacted. it's not, it's a subjected relief it's only in his mind. he's the only important that it's important for the jury to decide if he's telling the truth or not. it's not as if the other young men were the aggressors against him. that's where stand your ground would come into play and somebody would stand their ground. here is the subjective impression in his mind somebody's trying to kill me, i'm going to react. there's no standing his ground. >> ifill: i think you both agree on the subjectivity of what is at the heart of this debeat. judith browne dianis, david weinstein thank you both very much. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> woodruff: ever since the supreme court ruled that states do not have to expand medicaid as part of the affordable care act, there have been big battles over that issue. one bipartisan alternative has emerged in arkansas that appeals to some other red states as well, most recently virginia. it allows medicaid dollars to be used to buy private insurance for low-income residents. but now the arkansas program is facing a crucial vote in the state senate this week and its fate may be jeopardized. hari sreenivasan has our story. >> it's not bad. >> okay. >> it's been a while since mary francis perkins last visited the green bins on the family farm. >> what's it made out of grass. >> this is grass. >> seems to help out with almost everything on this strip 06 land in carlyle arkansas but after a recent diagnosis of parkinson's even basic cures became too much. >> get awe hold of him. >> like many family farmers he didn't have access to health insurance. and a preexisting condition meant he was denied repeatedly when she tried to buy her own plan. >> i was out here with no health insurance whatsoever. i spent days and weeks in the bed. couldn't walk. went to different doctors throughout little rock, had to pay cash for everything. slowly paid off the debt. a little each month until it was paid off. had different tests that cost five, $6,000. paid it all off. but kind of held back from what i really needed to do because number one they couldn't figure out what was wrong and number two it cost so much money. i had an mri. >> sreenivasan: at first the affordable care act didn't help much either that's because perkins fell into a coverage gap that's opened up in states refusing to expand traditional medicaid. she didn't make enough to qualify for a subsidized plan, and too much to enroll in the existing medicaid program. but then came an unexpected twist from the state capital, a new program would allow arkansas to use federal medicaid dollars to purchase private health plans for low income residents. perkins was among the first to sign up and her new insurance kicked in at the start of the year. >> the first thing i did was go to my general practitioner and i walked in the room and she looked at me and she said okay we have insurance now, where do you want to start. even my doctor knew how much care i needed and she was happy for me that i had insurance. >> sreenivasan: it's known as the private option and it's designed to pay the 3r5e78 -- premiumians of nearly 250,000 uninsured americans who make less than 130% of the federal poverty level and did not already qualify for medicaid. >> passage house 1219. >> sreenivasan: the idea became law last spring overwhelming bipartisan support in the house and senate. >> cast the ballots 70-78. house comes to order vawps sreenivasa.>> sreenivasan: foly the an order to pay for it. immediately after passage it was championed after a health reform approach that both parties could tolerate. conservatives liked the idea that private option patients would access their healthcare through insurance plans like blue cross blue shield as opposed to the traditional government run medicaid program which many republicans feel is inefficient in first poor quality care. supporters say it achieves the same results as traditional medicaid expansion by saving hospitals and taxpayers millions in uncompensated care costs. and bringing billions of federal dollars into the state economy. the federal government will pick up 100% of the cost in the first three years with states essentially paying 10% thereafter. about 100,000 people have enrolled so far. at the non-profit arkansas advocates for children and families, anna strong and her team say the expansion has gone well in the state which has some of the lowest percentages of insured residents in the country. and some of the worst health outcomes. >> i consider our state a big leader in trying to say you're going to do what's right for our state, we're going to maybe do it a little bit differently than folks would have expected this is good news for arkansas. >> sreenivasan: while the state is alone among conservative neighbors expanding a version of medicaid the idea is catching on elsewhere. iowa has passed its own form of the private option and lawmakers in new hampshire, pennsylvania and utah are looking into it as well. part of the appeal comes from the fact that so many young people, including students like 28 year old tyler pearson are signing up. since their enrolling in private plans rather than a separate medicaid program, the influx of young healthy people expands the general risk pool and keeps costs down for everyone else. the way pearson sees it, the fact that more than half of new private option patients are under 40 helps prove that young people do care about insurance. >> i consider myself a very healthy individual. i'm in good shape, i exercise frequently, i eat right, i take care of myself. but i've still had things that i've had to go to a doctor for. i still need to have my teeth cleaned, check ups. i could still break my arm at any moment, you know and i know that. >> sreenivasan: while pearson received his new insurance card at the beginning of february, he knows he may lose it again soon if the legislature doesn't renew funding for the up coming 23eus 23eus -- fiscal year. the prospect of that happening is looking increasingly cloudy. under state law appropriations must be reapproved every year by a three fourths majority. the votes in the senate that puts the private option over the top last year are now in jeopardy. one was lost after a supporter of the private option resigned recently and was succeeded by john cooper who won a special election last year on a platform opposing the affordable care act. around the same time, center irvin changed her yes vote to a no in part due to the disastrous roll ought in the new law. if no one changes the currents position the private option in arkansas would be dead. governor said that would be a shame given the overwhelming support. >> we don't have a problem with the majority of the legislature being for this. we don't have a problem for the super majority of the legislature being for this. we don't have a problem with the majority of republicans and democrats being for this, they are. but it takes 75 out of a hundred house members and 27 out of 35 senators. so one senator or one house member could sway the entire effort. >> sreenivasan: but in the prosperous northwest corner of the state home to world headquarters for companies like wal-mart and tyson foods, republican state senator hes tempt r says the federal government simply can't afford it. he believes states like arkansas will end up paying more than expected or sit by and watch the federal government pile up debt. the real answer to wide spread coverage he says is jobs and business policies not the government give away. as proof he points to companies like manufacturer redman and associates which is in the process of bringing jobs back to his district from china. >> for the country that's already $17 trillion in debt each child born in america has $50,000 debt associated with their social security number. so i think we as a society have to be conscious of that and have to understand at some point those debts will come due. >> sreenivasan: with federal dollars coming in and the private option expected to save the state money arkansas passed $85 million in tax cuts last year. if the plan loses funding, the state will be millions in the hole, and that could mean big cuts for other programs. but many say the personal impacts will be deepest of all. >> do you want a cookie. >> mary francis perkins says she's just starting to get the proper treatment for her parkinson's and cannot emergency losing ground. >lose -- emergency losing imagi. >> it would be a nightmare. >> sreenivasan: without money for the profit option the insurance and everything that comes with it will end june 30th. >> woodruff: a major spill of toxic coal ash is raising questions again about the safety of water and the regulators overseeing industry. this time, the accident was reported in north carolina on february 2, specifically in the dan river in the city of eden. duke energy said more than 50,000 tons of coal ash had leaked from a containment pond into the river. as seen in these photos taken by the waterkeeper alliance, parts of the river look like a gray sludge. the ash, which contains arsenic and other dangerous metals, is produced from burning coal. today at a state hearing, duke officials apologized for the spill and said they would clean it up. but big questions remain, including about coal ash containment ponds elsewhere. michael bisecker has been covering this for the a.p. and joins us from raleigh. michael bisecker, first of all, tell us what caused this spill. what is known about that? >> duke energy says that a stormwater pipe from its cole-fired power plant went under the cole ash pond, the sunday before last february 2-7d. that pipe collapsed without warning and the coal ash drained into the river. they estimated it anywhere between about 73 olympic size swimming pools of coal ash into the river. it was clearly one of the largest spill in the nation's history of its kind. >> woodruff: is the spill stabilized. >> they have managed to plug it. there's concerns about a second pipe that state inspectors are concerned may collapse. duke energy is down playing those concerns but they say they will plug that second pipe as well. >> woodruff: what are the concerns about this spill into the receiver? >> well, the concerns immediately after the spill were about water quality in the down treatment community, dan ville, virginia which is 20 miles down stream gets its drinking water from the river. fortunately these metals can be filtered out, the arsenic, the leads from the water through regular water treatment methods. so the city's drinking water is considered safe. now the chern shifts t concern e long term ecological effects on aquatic life, fish and people who use the receiver. >> woodruff: and other spills and other locations where the coal ash is stored. >> duke has other sites in north carolina that have a total of 30coal ash pounds. environmentalists have been concerned about these pounds for a long time. duke thus far has said it plans to close some of those ponds just not yet specified exactly what it means by close. its plans may not include actually moving the coal ash away from the river bank it could be just putting a tarp over it. >> woodruff: wood you've been reporting on environmental groups in north carolina and elsewhere raising questions about whether state regulatory agencies were tough enough on the duke energy company and how it monitored this coal ash. what have you been able to find out. >> well the concerns have been among the virallal group enviros but they intensified the last year since the election of november 2012 of governor pat mccory a how can who worked at duke energy for 28 years before retiring to run for governor. the company had been very generous in its contributions to both governor mccory's campaigns and groups that support him including the republican governor's association about 1.1 million in donations are tolled. and the governor continues to be a shareholder in the company though he has declined to say exactly what the extent of his holdings of duke stock are. >> woodruff: but the governor himself is saying no conflict of interest. but what is it that these environmental groups are questioning? because decisions were made, there were environmental groups that were going to file suit against duke energy. the state regulatory agency from what i understand stepped in and says no we will handle it. >> that is correct, judy. for many years environmentalists reported groundwater contamination through its testing to the state. the state had not done anything so in january of this year, of last year right when governor mccory was inaugurated, groups gave notice that they intended to tbiel sui file suit in federt after one of duke's sites. the state intervened using its regulatory authority under the clean water act to take the case to state court. they did that with two additional suits nield by -- fid by citizens groups before they went ahead and said they would file violations in state courts againstal all of duke's facilities. the environmental group says this effectively brought them from taking duke to federal court with far more extensive penalties. the settlement initially proposed over duke's first two locations would have charged the company just $99,000 in fines and included no provisions requiring duke to clean up its groundwater contamination. >> woodruff: i was going to say the environmental groups are saying that's a small amount considering what they say has taken place. >> duke is worth $50 billion so $99,000 fine, the environmental groups argue is not an effective deterrent for duke to stop its pollution. >> woodruff: meanwhile the environmental groups are saying this needs to be looked into. there's also a federal investigation. >> that's right. we received word last week that federal prosecutors of the eastern dis district of north carolina are conducting a criminal investigation of the spill and subpoenas on environmental agency and duke energy seeking documents. >> woodruff: michael by sector what happens next, what are you and other reporters following this story looking at right now. >> we're continuing to look at the state's vovment i involvemee negotiations with duke energy. other examples where duke seems to have been able to arrange or lobby for environmental regulations or the enforcement of those regulations that seem to be to its benefit. we're also going to be looking at what science says will be the long term effects on its rivers. will people be able to canoe in the river this summer, will kids be able to swim in it. there are two large drink reservoirs down stream that people use for water skiing, recreation, boating, fishing. what impact this spill will have on people's ability to use that for recreation remains an unanswered question. >> woodruff: michael bisecker who saab reporting on this story since early february. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> ifill: next, a crop of recent ambassadorial nominees, several of them big money obama supporters, have raised fresh questions about who gets to represent the united states abroad. >> and here's what i would add. mr. mamet, have you been to argentina? >> senator, i haven't had the opportunity yet to be there. >> ifill: that response from noah mamet, president obama's choice to be ambassador to argentina, raised eyebrows at a senate confirmation hearing this month. mamet generated more than $500,000 dollars for the president's re-election, and he's one of a handful of key supporters rewarded with overseas posts. another is colleen bell, the soap opera producer tapped to be envoy to hungary. in january, she struggled to respond to senator john mccain at her own confirmation hearing. >> what do you think are-- what are our strategic interests in hungary? >> well, we have our strategic interests, in terms of what are our key priorities in hungary, i think our key priorities are to improve upon, as i mentioned, the security relationship and also the law enforcement and to promote business opportunities, increase trade-- >> i'd like to ask again what our strategic interests in hungary are? >> ifill: the ambassador- designate to norway, chartwell hotels c.e.o. george tsunis, also ran into trouble when mccain asked about norway's anti-immigration "progress party." >> thank you, senator. it's a very seminal question. >> such a value on free speech is that you get some fringe elements that have a microphone, that spew their hatred. and although i will tell you norway has been very quick to denounce them, we're going to continue to work with norway to make sure-- >> the government has denounced them? the coalition government, they're part of the coalition of the government. >> well, i would say, you know what? i stand, i stand corrected. >> i seriously-- >> i have no more questions for this incredibly, highly qualified group of nominees. >> ifill: the gaffes have revived questions about what it takes to become a u.s. ambassador. according to the "american foreign service association," 37% of president obama's ambassador picks have been political. that's the highest proportion since ronald reagan's figure of 38%. and it's well over the percentages during the bush and clinton presidencies. in fact, in mr. obama's second term, the figure tops 50%. but white house press secretary jay carney defends the decisions. >> being a donor to the president's campaign does not guarantee you a job in the administration, but it does not prevent you from getting one. and the fact of the matter is, the president has made nominations to ambassadorial posts and other posts from the ranks of the private sector, from government service and has put in place qualified nominees across the board. >> ifill: the foreign service association says it plans to make recommendations this month on setting qualification requirements for future nominees. >> ifill: for more on this i'm joined now by nicholas burns, a career foreign service officer and former ambassador to n.a.t.o. and walter russell mead, editor at large of the american interest magazine and a professor of foreign affairs and humanities at bard college. mr. burns i believe i can call you by your former title ambassador burns. people purchasing ambassadorships. >> well, i think in recent decades the big question at both parties have asked is how much of this person raised my campaign were they bund hers did they raise money from other people and that seems to be the major criterion to collect ambassadors. presidents have done when they've asked another question, is this person qualified. do they have some experience in the country, do they speak the language of the country, have they done business in that country and there are very good political ambassadors in the past from abraham when he was fdr's soviet union, edwin, the great at harvard whom president kennedy appointed ambassador of japan. we had tremendously qualified people in our country but we ought to be looking at the skills required to be successful in the job and that's language and experience and deep knowledge of history and economics and increasingly that is not the question but a lot of our presidents are asking. >> ifill: russell mead, are those questions being asked. >> i think you can look at the last group of people being confirmed and you can say at least they weren't very well prepared for the confirmation hearings. i do think there are a lot of different qualities that make sure good ambassadors. shirley temple black was an example of someone who actually contributed to richard nixon's campaign and got an ambassadorship a lot of eyes were raised. by the end of her career in diplomacy she was pretty well regarded. carolyn kennedy our ambassador to japan at the moment is somebody who doesn't have all the qualifications you might want ideally an ambassador to have on paper. but the japanese were very very happy to have her, and saw her as a sign of japan's importance in american eyes. i think we have to look tbleksably aflex beat what the . >> ifill: is there any value inherent in being close to the president, having raised moneys for him that carries it with you into a foreign capital where people think hey it's the big guy. >> we have a lot of embass ease. we have diplomatic relations with 180 countries in the world. and the president doesn't have 180 best friends. it sometimes can be helpful. but frankly ambassadors are really reported to the president but they'r they're reporting thh the secretary department and getting their constructions. where they have to work to get things done. i do think the prefsdz also hav- presidents have the foreign service. we have tremendously qualified wriewomen and men who trained tr entire adult lives to be ambassadors, they do speak the language, they have these countries, they've got the skills to be effective in government which sometimes is very different atmosphere than being effective in business. so i'm not against political appointees and i would agree very much for instance that carolyn kennedy was an excellent choice by president obama. but in the main, we ought to have the great majority of our ambassadors ought to be career foreign officers, the historic average is 70%, i would like to see at 80%. we need to take care and not gainable with people from the private sector and outside the government who may not be qualified and the presidents need to do their homework before they select the ambassadors or nominees. >> ifill: is the balance right in your opinion when you say that 70% of the ambassadors of the foreign service officers do they have the right to be frustrated when they see political friends or allies going to these plum posts. >> being an american diplomate working in the foreign service is quite frustrating in a lot of different ways. and people like ambassador burns who certainly earned all of his advancement and appointments by just really superb work in the foreign service are aware of this. that in many countries, the foreign service is almost autonomous. and when there's a change of government, maybe two or three people at the very top change. in the u.s., it isn't just the ambassadors where we bring in political appointees, but to all kinds of levels, even deep inside the state department. in some ways, that's a defect because at key decision-making positions in the state department are being filled by people who are appointed for political reasons, don't know how the department works and sort of every four to eight years there's kind of a seizure of the government and it takes a long time for people to be confirmed. on the other hand, that system does allow in a sense for our state department, our foreign policy is closer to, is in closer touch with what's going on inside the country. there are advantages and disadvantages. but i do think whatever the number of ambassadors is, we do have to give, the great thing about a political ambassador, political appointment is this is somebody who in theory is close to the president. when the president has dozens of bundlers, a bundler is not necessarily the president's best friend, wasn't the college roommate or something like that. and so i think the real question for me is not a numerical quota system but it's fundamentally one of quality. we do need very very intelligent thoughtful people as ambassadors. i don't think in every case we've had them. >> ifill: nick burns has this come up in thought after hardship poses for diplomats. do they ever send the prime political appointees to, i don't want to name a name because i'll get in trouble but to a tough country. >> very rarely. in fact, if you look at where we send political appointed ambassadors it's mainly wealthy countries, nice places to be if you want to be a tourist, western europe. but the toughest assignments, countries experiencing civil war are countries with which we were at war when iraq and afghanistan invariably going to the career foreign service and the foreign service was ready for anything. these are people who spend their entire lives working for this opportunity and rising through the ranks so i really think it's time that our presidents turn back the american foreign service and congress would fully fund the service because we just don't have enough career diplomats to do the job with the greatest power in the world. we have enormous influence in the world. we want to have our best people as ambassadors for the united states of america. >> ifill: nikola nicholas burd walter mead, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> woodruff: again, the major developments of the day. secretary of state kerry accused the syrian government of stonewalling at peace talks that broke off saturday. but russia said u.s. support for syrian rebels is the real problem. and a u.n. committee warned north korean leader kim jong un that he could face prosecution for crimes against his own people, ranging from executions to mass starvation. >> ifill: on the newshour online right now, with the mid-term elections on their way, some internet providers are hoping to get in on the action by selling political ads targeted to specific cable boxes and satellite receivers. the new tool allows advertisers to pinpoint their message to individual homes, based on information about the household, like voting history, magazine subscriptions and even credit scores. read about this emerging technology on our homepage. plus, last night on the weekend newshour, hari had a bit of a history lesson for us. many believe today's the day where we celebrate george washington and abraham lincoln, but despite all the ads and sales, it's technically not presidents day. >> ifill: all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. >> woodruff: and that's the newshour for tonight. on tuesday, we'll look at president obama's upcoming trip to mexico and get an update on the winter games in sochi. i'm judy woodruff. >> ifill: and i'm gwen ifill. we'll see you on-line and again here tomorrow evening. for all of us here at the pbs newshour, thank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. >> supported by the john d. and catherine t. macarthur foundation. committed to building a more just, verdant and peaceful world. more information at macfound.org >> 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 . this is "nightly business report" with tyler mathisen and susy gearing. brought to you in part by -- >> the street.com, an independent source for stock market analysis, it's home to his multimillion dollar portfolio. learn more at thestreet.com/nbr. good evening, everyone. welcome to a special holiday edition of i'm tyler mathisen. suzie garding has the night off. we begin with presidential trivia. under which president was the first peacetime income tax imposed. it was under president grover cleveland back in 1984, but that time it didn't last. but thanks, or maybe no thanks, to the 16th amendment,he